 Forwarded by Hodayah Finman/ DC/ USEPA/ US on 09/ 11/ 02 11: 30 AM  SWAConsult@ aol. com 09/ 10/ 02 01: 37 AM To: Bromide Methyl@ EPA cc: Subject: almond cue 1.

2.

3.

4.

Light Medium Heavy 0 to 2% x 2 to 5 % over 5%

5.

6. Specialty ( check one)

7. agronomic x 8. economic 9. Daytime phone 10. FAX 11.

List an additional contact person if available. Specialty ( check one)

12. agronomic x 13. economic 14. 15. FAX 16. Merced, Calif. 95340 genebeach@ aol. com 209 723 7943 Contact name Address 209 723 7661 E mail Gene Beach 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.

Other geographic factors that may affect crop/ commodity yield ( e. g., water table).

Almond Hullers & Processors Association California Almonds Soil Type:

Organic Matter: Soil type Check the box( es) for the soil types and percent organic matter that apply to your area. If a consortium is submitting this application, please indicate the estimated percentage of consortium users in each soil type.

Consortium name 512 C St, NE Location ( Enter the state, region, or county. Provide more detail about the location if relevant to the feasibility of alternatives to methyl bromide.)

Crop/ commodity ( Include all crops/ commodities that benefit from the application of methyl bromide in a fumigation cycle. A fumigation cycle is the period of time between methyl bromide fumigations.)

Climate ( Individual users should enter their climate zone designation by reviewing the U. S. climate zone map. If a consortium is submitting this application, please indicate the estimated percentage of consortium users in each climate zone. This map is located at the end of this workbook or it can be reviewed online at http:// www. usna. usda. gov/ Hardzone/ ushzmap. html).

9a & 9b. About 12% of the almond production is in zone 9b.

2350 Lecco Way 202 543 4455 202 543 4586 For EPA Use Only ID#

Contact name Address Daytime phone E mail Washington, DC 20002 gludwig@ swaconsult. com Gabriele Ludwig Worksheet 1. Contact and Methyl Bromide Request Information 17. 325,000 lbs.

17a. A units 18. Yes x No 18a.

19.

Pratylenchus vulnus ( Root lesion nematode)

Criconemella xenoplax ( Ring nematode)

Xiphinema americanum ( Dagger nematode)

20. 325,000 Unit of Area Treated Polyphylla decemlineata ( Tenlined June Beetle) Replant Problem  which include pathogens, nematodes, possible exudates, remnant roots, and various unknown factors Meloidogyne incognita ( Root knot nematode)

Armarillaria mellea ( Oak Root Fungus)

Pseudomonas syringae ( Bacterial Canker) 2006 Quantity ai ( lb.) of Methyl Bromide 325,000 Area to be Treated 1000 If yes, please list year and quantity active ingredient ( ai) of methyl bromide requested in the table below and explain why you need authorization for multiple years.

The other contributing factor is variablity in new plantings. Currently ( 2001 season), some 5% ( 29,000 A) of almond acreage is greater than 30 years old. 30 years is considered the maximum productive lifespan of an almond orchard and growers are likely to replace those orchards. Given the current market situation, especially in comparison to other tree crops, almonds ochards remain the likely crop to replace ageing orchards ( other than housing developments). Furthermore, 1974 and 1975 were years where high number of new acreage planted ( 19,000 A) which will reach the 30 year  old stage by 2005  2006 ( NASSUSDA almond acreage statistics).

If a consortium is submitting this application, the data below should be the total for the consortium.

1000 Research on efficacy and best methods for application in perennial crops such as almonds takes much longer to complete. In almonds the first harvest is 3 years after planting and full harvest is not achieved until the tree is 7 10 years old. Thus, even as new methods and/ or materials become available, testing of the efficacy will take 5 10years. How much area will this be applied to? Please list units. 1000 For EPA Use Only ID#

The size of acreage for almond growers in California various from 10 A to 25,000 A. The representative almond grower has 100 A of almonds. Most almond growers own their own land, though some lease additional land. How much active ingredient ( ai) of methyl bromide are you requesting for 2005?

If applying as a consortium for many users of methyl bromide, please define a representative user . Define exactly, issues such as size of the operation ( acres treated with methyl bromide for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications), whether the representative user owns or rents the land or operation, intensity of methyl bromide use ( treat regularly or only when pest reaches a threshold), pest pressure, etc. Target Pest( s) or Pest Problem( s): ( Be as specific as possible about the species or classes of pests relevant to the feasibility of alternatives.) If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for question 17 and 17a. should be the total for the consortium.

In the question below, area is defined as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Are you requesting methyl bromide for additional years beyond 2005?

A A 2007 In the table below, area is defined as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Year 20a.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Explain why this user represents the typical user in the consortium. Methyl Bromide is applied to a given acre with almonds only once in 25 35 years. Based on what was growing in the ground previously, any pest problems that existed in the previous orchard/ crop ( such as bacterial canker, oak root fungus), and on the results from soil testing for nematodes presence and species, a grower will decide whether the soil needs to be fumigated with methyl bromide before planting. New almond plantings typcially follow almonds, other Prunus spp, cotton, walnuts or hay. If the previous crop was a Prunus sp. orchard, that ground will cause replant disorder in the young almond trees. Research and experience indicates that such ground should be fumigated to kill remaining roots which harbor nematodes, disease and the pests that have accumulated over the life of the previous orchard. If cotton was the preceding crop, then a grower will only fumigate if the soil tests indicate high populations of ring and/ or root lesion nematodes, as replant disorder is not an issue. The use of Nemaguard rootstock will allow the new orchard to be planted in the presence of root knot nematode. However, in the majority of the situations, a grower is planting almonds to ground that previous had another tree crop such as almond or peach.

MeBr has been applied broadcast to the whole acreage, in 6 10ft strips along the tree row, and to tree holes before planting at rates of 300 400 lbs/ A. If there was a need to fumigate, then the decision which intensity of MeBr to applied would depend on the seriousness of the pest pressures and costs. Applications to tree holes has been popular because it does not incur the expense of a custom applicator, but provides only limited nematode and disease protection. Individual holes are also treated when individual trees that have died within a young orchard due to soil caused problems are to be replanted. Currently none of the other fumigants have viable means for application to individual holes.

For the CUE, the almond grower who will need to use MeBr is a grower who cannot apply Telone because of township cap restrictions, is replanting land which contained a tree or vine crop previously, and has serious nematode, disease or soil insect issues based on soil testing or history of the orchard. If oak root fungus or bacterial canker are an issue, the grower needs to apply MeBr broadcast at 300 400 lbs/ A. If the concern is only replant disorder/ nematodes then applying MeBr in 8ft strips along the tree line will be adequate. Within the strip a 300 400 lbs/ A rate will be applied which is equivalent to a 99  132 lb/ A application of MeBr.

While the size of almond orchards covers such a wide range of acreage, most growers have some 50 200A of almonds along with several other crops  typically other tree crops. As stated above, it is quite common for a grower to decide to replant almonds into ground that previously grew another tree crop, especially Prunus species. California has ideal growing conditions for peaches, nectarines, plums, apricots, cherries along with almonds. Growers who specialize in tree crops have equipment and skills specific to production of tree crops such as tree shakers, air blast equipment, drip irrigation, etc. Thus, for a tree grower to switch into row crops can mean a significant investment cost. Furthermore, in recent years the market for several of the canned peaches or dried plums has been slowing, while almond prices have remained profitable by comparison.

The representative methyl bromide user for almonds for the CUE is someone who is replanting an almond ochard onto land that previous had almonds, peaches, other Prunus species, walnuts or vines. The ability to kill the roots deep in the soil is critical for preventing nematode populations from exploding on the young tree root systems. Furthermore, a grower who has had a history of bacterial canker or oak root fungus, would need to provide a deep and thorough fumigation of the soil. Worksheet Title Instructions specific to each worksheet are located at the top of each sheet.

2 A Methyl Bromide Use for 1997  2000 This worksheet provides data in actual usage for 1997 2000.

2 B Methyl Bromide  Crop/ Commodity Yield and Gross Revenue for 1997

2000 This worksheet provides crop/ commodity yield and gross revenue for 1997 through 2000.

2 C Methyl Bromide  Crop/ Commodity Yield and Gross Revenue for 2001 This data provides historical information on crop/ commodity yield and gross revenue for 2001.

2 D Methyl Bromide Use and Costs for 2001 This worksheet isolates use and cost data for 2001.

2 E Methyl Bromide  Other Operating Costs for 2001 This data is needed to estimate a baseline for operating costs in order to estimate the impact on operating profit and short run economic viability as a result of not using methyl bromide.

2 F Methyl Bromide  Fixed And Overhead Costs for 2001 This data is needed to estimate a baseline for total costs in order to estimate the impact on profitability and long run economic viability as a result of not using methyl bromide.

Purpose of Data: To establish a baseline estimate of crop/ commodity yields, gross revenues, and costs using methyl bromide. Worksheet 2. Methyl Bromide  Historical Use of Methyl Bromide Col A: Formulation of Methyl Bromide Col B, E, H, K: Actual Area Treated Col C, F, I, L: Actual Total lbs. ai of Methyl Bromide Applied Col D, G, J, M: Actual Average lbs. ai Applied per Area A B C D E F G H I J K L M Total Actual Area Treated Actual Total lbs. ai of Methyl Bromide Applied Average lbs. ai Applied per Area Total Actual Area Treated Actual Total lbs. ai of Methyl Bromide Applied Average lbs. ai Applied per Area Total Actual Area Treated Actual Total lbs. ai of Methyl Bromide Applied Average lbs. ai Applied per Area Total Actual Area Treated Actual Total lbs. ai of Methyl Bromide Applied Average lbs. ai Applied per Area over 95% methyl bromide 20,791.01 893,299.00 42.9656376 14,850.25 551,068.72 37.10838 16,703.24 365,706.75 21.89436 8903.92 164,436.35 18.4678602 over 95% methyl bromide 6,492.72 1,852,812.74 285.367726 4,086.00 972,539.00 238.017376 6,834.00 1,591,687.00 232.907082 4813.83 1,080,438.00 224.444569 All formulations of methyl bromide # DIV/ 0! # DIV/ 0! # DIV/ 0! # DIV/ 0!

Comments:

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Formulation of Methyl Bromide Enter the actual total pounds active ingredient ( ai) of methyl bromide applied. Note: This number should be the total pounds ai applied by the individual user or the entire consortium, for the year indicated.

1997 1998 1999 Data from CDPR Pesticide Use Database for Almonds. The database does not differentiate between broadcast, strip and hole applications. The low lbs ai/ A are due to applications of MeBr to holes, that are reported as applied to the total acreage of the orchard. See below for pre plant rates.

The CDPR database also has a category for " soil fumigation/ pre plant" and for " uncultivated ag". The numbers above are derived from those counties with predominantly orchard crops and are thus indicative of the rates applied pre plant for orchards. Carpenter et al. ( 2001) noted that for the Central Valley counties the unspecified MeBr usage was primarily for orchards based on interviews with the County Ag. Commissioner's Offices. Unfortunately, it is not clear how much of the acreage was eventually planted to almonds. For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Use 1997 2000 Enter the appropriate data in Col B M for each formulation, if known, and/ or the totals and averages for all formulations. If you enter only the total and averages for all formulations in the last row of the table, please describe in the comments section the formulations typically used, or the approximate proportions of the formulations used.

If a consortium is submitting this application, all data should reflect the actual data for the consortium.

The average application rates in pounds ai of methyl bromide per area are automatically calculated from the previous 2 columns. 2000 Enter the total actual area treated. Note: This number should be the total actual area treated by the individual user or total actual area for the entire consortium, for the year indicated. For EPA Use Only ID#

A C D E F Crop Year Unit of Crop/ Commodity ( e. g., pounds, bushels) Crop/ Commodity Yield ( lbs shelled/ A) Price ($/ lb) Revenue ($/ A)

Total Revenue for 1997 lbs shelled nuts 1,720 $ 1.56 $ 2,683.20 Total Revenue for 1998 lbs shelled nuts 1,130 $ 1.41 $ 1,593.30 Total Revenue for 1999 lbs shelled nuts 1,740 $ 0.86 $ 1,496.40 Total Revenue for 2000 lbs shelled nuts 1,410 $ 1.01 $ 1,424.10 Average ( 1997 2000) Revenue Per Year $ 1,799.25 Comments:

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 2 B. Methyl Bromide  Crop/ Commodity Yield and Gross Revenue 1997 2000 If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect the actual averages for the consortium.

Enter the average prices received by the users for the year and crop/ commodity indicated ( 1997 2000).

This number is calculated automatically using the values you entered in Cols. D and E. You may override the formula to enter a different revenue. Please explain why the revenue amount is different in the comment section below.

Enter the unit of measurement for each crop/ commodity.

Be sure to enter the year. Use as many rows as needed for each year for all the crops/ commodities in the fumigation cycles from 1997 to 2000. 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/ commodities that benefit from methyl bromide in each fumigation cycle. ( For example, if normally methyl bromide is applied and tomatoes are grown and harvested followed by peppers without an additional treatment of methyl bromide, then both tomatoes and peppers would be part of the same fumigation cycle.) See the Fumigation Cycle Worksheet for a comprehensive definition of the fumigation cycle.

Enter the number of units of crop/ commodities produced per area.

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 grown on the same land, please indicate so in the comments section below.

The purpose of this worksheet is to estimate the gross revenue for 1997  2000 when using methyl bromide. Post harvest and structural users may work with EPA to modify this form to accommodate differences in operations when providing gross revenue data.

Col. A: Year Col. B: Crop/ Commodity Col. C: Unit of Crop/ Commodity Col. D: Crop/ Commodity Yield B Col. E: Price Col. F: Revenue Crop/ Commodity Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Average Revenue per Year: The average revenue per year is calculated automatically using the summary data you enter for each year.

Total Revenue for 1997 2000 Enter the total revenue per year by adding the revenue for all crops for that year.

As MeBr is typically applied 6 months before planting and its benefits accrue over the first 5 years of the orchard's life, it is not possible to make a direct correlation between usage and return for a given year. Almond Almond Almond Almond For EPA Use Only ID#

Col. B: Price Factors Col. C: Unit of Crop/ Commodity Col. D: Crop/ Commodity Yield Col. E: Price Col. F: Revenue A B C D E F Crop/ Commodity Price Factors ( grade, time, market) Unit of Crop/ Commodity ( e. g., pounds, bushels) Crop/ Commodity Yield ( lb/ A) Price ($/ lb) Revenue ($/ A)

lbs shelled nuts 1,580 $ 1.00 $ 1,580.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Total Revenue $ 1,580.00 Comments:

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Revenue is automatically calculated using the data you entered for yield and price. If revenue is not equal to yield times price, you may override the formula and enter a different revenue amount. Please explain why this revenue amount is different in the comment section below.

Enter factors that determine prices ( e. g., grade, time, market). If you received different prices for your crop/ commodity as a result of quality,

grade, market ( e. g. fresh or processing), timing of harvest, etc., you may itemize by using more than one row. Itemize or aggregate these factors to the extent appropriate in making the case that the use of methyl bromide affects these price factors.

Enter the unit of measurement for each crop/ commodity.

Enter the number of units of crop/ commodity produced per area for that price factor.

Almond The purpose of this worksheet is to estimate the gross revenue for 2001when using methyl bromide. Post harvest users may modify this form to accommodate differences when providing gross revenue data. If 2001 was not a typical year for the individual or for the representative user of a consortium, the applicant may provide additional data for a different year. However, all applicants must complete this worksheet for the year 2001 regardless. Please explain in the comment section at the bottom of the worksheet why 2001 is not considered a typical year, if that is the case. Enter all crops/ commodities that benefit from methyl bromide in the fumigation cycle ( interval between fumigations) beginning with the treatment of methyl bromide in 2001. If multiple crops 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 during the entire interval. See the Fumigation Cycle Worksheet for a comprehensive definition of the fumigation cycle.

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 grown on the same land, please indicate so in the comments section below.

Col. A: Crop/ Commodity Worksheet 2 C. Methyl Bromide  Crop/ Commodity Yield and Gross Revenue 2001 Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect the representative user for the consortium.

Enter average 2001 prices received by the users for that crop/ commodity and price factor. Col. A: Formulation of Methyl Bromide Col B: Average lbs. active ingredient ( ai) of Methyl Bromide Applied per Area Cols. C, D, E, G: Prices and Costs Col. F: Actual Area Treated A B C D E F G Formulation of Methyl Bromide Lb. ai of Methyl Bromide Applied per Area ( 2001 Average) Other MBr Costs ( e. g. tarps,

etc.) per Area ( 2001 Average) Total Actual Area Treated in the Consortium Cost per Area 98% MeBr  broadcast application w/ o tarp 325 lb/ A $ 970.00 98% MeBr  broadcast application w/ tarp 325 lb/ A 655 $ 1,625.00 All formulations of methyl bromide $ 0.00 Comments:

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Enter the actual area treated. Note: This number should be the total area treated by all users in the consortium.

970 Price of applying 325 lb MeBr/ A ( 2001 Average)

Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Enter the appropriate data in Col B G for each formulation, if known, and/ or the totals and averages for all formulations of methyl bromide. If you just enter data in the bottom row in the table ( All formulations of methyl bromide), please describe in the comments, the relative usage of the various formulations, to the extent known.

970 For EPA Use Only ID#

If 2001 was not a typical year for the individual or for the representative user of a consortium, the applicant may provide additional data for a different year. However, all applicants must complete this worksheet for the year 2001 regardless. If you provide an additional year's data, please explain in the comment section at the bottom of the worksheet why 2001 is not considered a typical year.

If the methyl bromide is custom applied then put the cost per area in Column G and fill in the average lb ai of methyl bromide applied per area ( Col B) and the Total Actual Area Treated ( Col F).

Worksheet 2 D. Methyl Bromide  Use and Costs for 2001 If a consortium is submitting this application, the data in Cols. B, C, D, and E should reflect the representative user in the consortium. The data in Col. F should reflect the actual area treated by all users in the consortium. Enter the average pounds active ingredient ( ai) of methyl bromide applied per area.

Enter the average price per pound active ingredient ( ai) of methyl bromide in Col. C and the average cost of applying methyl bromide per area treated in Col. D. In Col. E, enter the average other costs per area associated with applying methyl bromide ( e. g., tarps). Column G will be calculated automatically using the values you entered in columns B E. If methyl bromide is custom applied, enter the cost per area in Col. G and fill in Cols. B and F. price/ lb = $ 1.00 1 year 2 year 3 year 4 year 5 year 6 year 7 year 8 year 9 year 10 year Meat Pounds per Acre 400 750 1200 1580 1475 1800 1680 2000 Planting Costs:

Land Preparation: Backhoe Tree Holes $ 242.00 Land Preparation: Disc & Float 2x $ 17.00 Fumigation MeBr no tarp $ 970.00 Survey and Plant Trees $ 83.00 $ 9.00 $ 4.00 Trees: 110 Per Acre ( 1% replant in 2nd year) $ 479.00 $ 2.00 $ 1.00 Paint and Put Trunk Guards Trees $ 22.00 $ 1.00 TOTAL PLANTING COSTS: $ 1,813.00 $ 12.00 $ 5.00 Cultural Costs:

Training, Pruning, & Suckering $ 39.00 $ 29.00 $ 43.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 Brush $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 Water Sanitation:

Knock Mummies $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 Blow & Rake Mummies $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 Shred Mummies $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 Weed Control  Dormant Strip $ 36.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 Insect Control  Dormant $ 52.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 Disease Control  Shothole/ Nutrient $ 25.00 $ 20.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 Insect Control  Pinkbud $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 Pollination $ 40.00 $ 80.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 Fertilizer  Potassium $ 11.00 $ 13.00 $ 18.00 $ 23.00 $ 23.00 $ 23.00 $ 23.00 $ 23.00 Vertebrate Control  Rodents $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 Fertilizer  Nitrogen $ 9.00 $ 17.00 $ 31.00 $ 39.00 $ 56.00 $ 70.00 $ 70.00 $ 70.00 $ 70.00 $ 70.00 Weed Control  Mow $ 20.00 $ 20.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 Irrigate 7x $ 28.00 $ 53.00 $ 74.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 Weed Control  Spot Spray $ 16.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 Insect Control  Ants $ 19.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 Insect Control  Worms & Mites $ 26.00 $ 51.00 $ 70.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 Weed Control  Preharvest Spray $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 Fertilizer  Boron ( Foliar) $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 Misc. Labor $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 Pickup Truck Use $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 ATV Truck Use $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 Meat Pounds per Acre 400 750 1200 1580 1475 1800 1680 2000 TOTAL CULTURAL COSTS: $ 320.00 $ 473.00 $ 725.00 $ 1,003.00 $ 1,045.00 $ 1,064.00 $ 1,064.00 $ 1,064.00 $ 1,064.00 $ 1,064.00 Harvest Costs:

Pole Trees $ 21.00 $ 12.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 Shake Trees $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 Sweep Nuts $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 Hand Rake $ 21.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 Pick Up and Haul $ 56.00 $ 58.00 $ 61.00 $ 63.00 $ 63.00 $ 63.00 $ 63.00 $ 63.00 Hull Nuts $ 13.00 $ 25.00 $ 60.00 $ 80.00 $ 80.00 $ 80.00 $ 80.00 $ 80.00 TOTAL HARVEST COSTS: $ 111.00 $ 203.00 $ 242.00 $ 264.00 $ 264.00 $ 264.00 $ 264.00 $ 264.00 Interest on Operating Capital @ 10.46% $ 64.00 $ 19.00 $ 43.00 $ 63.00 $ 65.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 TOTAL OPERATING COSTS/ ACRE: $ 2,197.00 $ 504.00 $ 884.00 $ 1,269.00 $ 1,352.00 $ 1,394.00 $ 1,394.00 $ 1,394.00 $ 1,394.00 $ 1,394.00 TOTAL CASH OVERHEAD COSTS: $ 291.00 $ 289.00 $ 289.00 $ 289.00 $ 289.00 $ 289.00 $ 289.00 $ 289.00 $ 289.00 $ 289.00 Costs/ Returns with MeBr Operation For EPA Use Only ID#

A B C D E F Y Operation Material Cost per Area Labor Cost per Area Total Cost per Area Typical Equipment Used See sheet 2 D( 2) $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Total Custom per Area $ 0.00 User Total per area $ 0.00 OMB Control # 2060 0482 The total cost per area is calculated automatically from the values you enter in Cols. C and D.

Col B: Custom Operation Cost If you do not incur custom operation costs, enter the labor cost per area.

Enter all operating costs except methyl bromide costs incurred during the fumigation cycle ( interval between fumigations) beginning in 2001. See the Fumigation Cycle Worksheet for a comprehensive definition of the fumigation cycle. Enter these costs in Col B for custom operations, or in Col C and D for operations done by user.

Identify in Col A the operations ( except methyl bromide) to which the costs apply. For growers, these operations should include but are not limited to ( 1) prepare soil, ( 2) fertilize, ( 3) irrigate, ( 4) plant, ( 5) harvest, ( 6) other pest controls, etc. You must include all other operating costs.

If you incur custom operation costs, enter those costs in Col. B.

Submit crop budgets for each crop, if available. You may submit crop budgets electronically or in hard copy. If your costs are significantly different than the crop budgets, please explain in the comments.

Col A: Operation Col C: Material Cost per Area Col D: Labor Cost per Area Col E: Total Cost per Area Col F: Typical Equipment Used Operation Done by User Worksheet 2 E. Methyl Bromide  Other Operating Costs for 2001 Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Custom Operation Cost per Area If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect a representative user.

Do not include methyl bromide costs. Identify the typical equipment used for operations done by user. Please be specific, such as tractor horsepower. No cost data is required in this column.

If you do not incur custom operation costs, enter the material cost per area. TOTAL CASH COSTS/ ACRE: $ 2,488.00 $ 793.00 $ 1,173.00 $ 1,558.00 $ 1,641.00 $ 1,683.00 $ 1,683.00 $ 1,683.00 $ 1,683.00 $ 1,683.00 INCOME/ ACRE FROM PRODUCTION: $ 400.00 $ 750.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,580.00 $ 1,475.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,680.00 $ 2,000.00 NET CASH COSTS/ ACRE FOR THE YEAR: $ 2,488.00 $ 793.00 $ 773.00 $ 808.00 $ 441.00 $ 103.00 $ 208.00 ($ 117.00 $ 3.00 ($ 317.00 PROFIT/ ACRE ABOVE CASH COSTS: $ 117 $ 317 ACCUMULATED NET CASH COSTS/ ACRE: $ 2,139.00 $ 2,932.00 $ 3,705.00 $ 4,513.00 $ 4,954.00 $ 5,057.00 $ 5,265.00 $ 5,148.00 $ 5,151.00 $ 4,834.00 TOTAL NON CASH OVERHEAD COST/ ACRE: $ 852.00 $ 836.00 $ 843.00 $ 840.00 $ 840.00 $ 836.00 $ 836.00 $ 836.00 $ 836.00 $ 836.00 TOTAL COST/ ACRE FOR THE YEAR: $ 2,991.00 $ 3,768.00 $ 4,548.00 $ 5,353.00 $ 5,794.00 $ 5,893.00 $ 6,101.00 $ 5,984.00 $ 5,987.00 $ 5,670.00 INCOME/ ACRE FROM PRODUCTION: $ 360.00 $ 630.00 $ 1,080.00 $ 1,422.00 $ 1,327.50 $ 1,620.00 $ 1,512.00 $ 1,800.00 TOTAL NET COST/ ACRE FOR THE YEAR: $ 2,991.00 $ 3,768.00 $ 4,188.00 $ 4,723.00 $ 4,714.00 $ 4,471.00 $ 4,773.50 $ 4,364.00 $ 4,475.00 $ 3,870.00 NET PROFIT/ ACRE ABOVE TOTAL COST: ($ 2,991.00 ($ 3,768.00 ($ 3,828.00 ($ 4,093.00 ($ 3,634.00 ($ 3,049.00 ($ 3,446.00 ($ 2,744.00 ($ 2,963.00 ($ 2,070.00 TOTAL ACCUMULATED NET COST/ ACRE $ 2,991.00 $ 6,759.00 $ 10,947.00 $ 15,670.00 $ 20,384.00 $ 24,855.00 $ 29,628.50 $ 33,992.50 $ 38,467.50 For EPA Use Only ID#

Col A: Cost Item Col B: Description Col C: Allocation Method Col D: Cost per Area A B C D Cost Item Description Allocation Method Cost per Area See sheet 2 D( 2) Total $ 0.00 Comments:

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 2 F. Methyl Bromide Fixed and Overhead Costs in 2001 Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect a representative user.

Identify in Col. A the cost items. These items should include, but are not limited to: ( 1) land rent, ( 2) interest, ( 3) depreciation,

( 4) management, and ( 5) overhead such as office and administration.)

Please describe the cost in more detail.

Please describe how you estimated the portion of total fixed cost of the farm or entity that applies to this crop/ commodity.

Enter the cost per area of methyl bromide treated.

Enter all fixed and overhead costs incurred during the fumigation cycle ( interval between fumigations) beginning in 2001. See the Fumigation Cycle Worksheet for a comprehensive definition of the fumigation cycle. Worksheet Title 3 A Alternatives  Technical Feasibility This form is used to obtain information on the chemical alternatives identified by the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee ( MBTOC) that are registered for use in the United States, as well as the non chemical alternatives identified by the MBTOC. Applicants must address the technical feasibility of all the chemical and non chemical alternatives identified on the list.

3 B Alternatives  Pest Control Regimen Costs This form is used to estimate the cost of using alternative pest control regimens.

3 C Alternatives  Crop/

Commodity Yield and Gross Revenue This form is used to estimate the crop/ commodity yields and gross revenues when using alternative pest control regimens.

3 D Alternatives  Changes in Other Costs This form is used to estimate change in any other costs as a result of using the alternatives.

Complete each of the worksheets below ( 3 A, 3 B, 3 C, and 3 D) 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 non chemical 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. Please add a number designation to each worksheet title to indicate a different alternative. For example, for the first alternative pest control regimen label the worksheets as 3 A( 1), 3 B( 1), 3 C( 1), and 3 D( 1). For the second alternative pest control regimen label the worksheets 3 A( 2), 3 B( 2), 3 C( 2), and 3( D)( 2).

Purpose of Data on Alternative Pest Control Regimens: To estimate the loss as a result of not having methyl bromide available. EPA needs to compare data ( yields, crop/ commodity prices, gross revenues and costs) on the use of methyl bromide and alternative pest control regimens.

Worksheet 3. Alternatives  Feasibility of Alternative Pest Control Regimens 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 fumigation cycle worksheet for a comprehensive definition. Use additional pages as needed.

Alternative: Study:

Section I. Initial Screening on Technical Feasibility of Alternatives 1. Are there any location specific restrictions that inhibit the use of this alternative on your site?

1a. Full use permitted no 1b. Township caps yes 1c. Alternative not acceptable in consuming country 1d. Other ( Please describe) 1,3 dichloropropene & Chloropicrin In this worksheet, you should address why an alternative pest management strategy on the list ( see previous page) is or is not effective for your conditions. This worksheet contains 9 questions. You must complete one copy of worksheet 3 A for each research study you use to evaluate a single methyl bromide alternative. Use additional pages as need.

Summarize each of the research studies you cite in the Research Summary Worksheet.

Whether you conduct the research yourself or cite studies developed by others, it is important that the studies be conducted in a scientifically sound manner. The studies should include a description of the experimental methodology used, such as application rates, application intervals, pest pressure, weather conditions, varieties of the crop used, etc. All results should be included, regardless of outcome. You must submit copies of each study to EPA unless they are listed on the Agency website. The Agency has posted many research studies on a variety of crops on its website and knows of more studies currently in progress. EPA will add studies to its website as they become publicly available. You are encouraged to review the EPA website and other websites for studies that pertain to your crop and geographic area. There are three major ways you can provide the Agency with proof of your investigative work. ( 1) Conduct and submit your own research ( 2) Cite research that has been conducted by others ( 3) Cite research listed on the EPA website EPA must consider whether alternative pest control measures ( pesticide and non pesticidal, and their combination) could be used successfully instead of methyl bromide by crop and circumstance ( geographic area.) The Agency has developed a list of possible alternative pest control regimens for various crops, which can be found at http:// www. epa. gov/ ozone/ mbr or by calling 1 800 296 1996. If you prefer, you may provide the information requested in this worksheet in a narrative review of one or more relevant research reports. The narrative review must reply to Section I and questions 1 through 8 in Section II. A Research Summary Worksheet of relevant treatments should be provided for each study reviewed.

McKenry ( 2000) The Replant Problem & Its Management In addition, EPA acknowledges that, for certain circumstances, some alternatives are not technically feasible and therefore no research has been conducted ( i. e. solarization may not be feasible in Seattle). You should look at the list of alternatives provided by the Agency and explain why they cannot be used for your crop and in your geographic area. For worksheet 3 A you must complete one worksheet for each alternative, for each research study addressed. Please number the worksheets as follows. For the same alternative, first research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( a). For the same alternative, second research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( b). For the first alternative, third research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( c). For the second alternative, first research study, label the worksheet 3( A)( 2)( a). For the second alternative, second research study, label the worksheet 3( A)( 2)( b).

BACKGROUND When completing Section II, if you cite a study that is on the EPA website, you only need to complete questions 1, 5, and 8.

1,3 dichloropropene 1,3 dichloropropene & Metam Sodium For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide COMMENTS If use of this alternative is precluded by regulatory restriction for all users covered by this application, the applicant should not complete Section II. Currently California regulations limit the maximum amount of Telone applications in one year to less than 90,250 " adjusted" lbs of 1,3 dichloropropene in a township ( 36 square miles = 23040 A). At a rate of 335 lb ai/ A ( or 35 gal Telone II/ A) can only be applied to 273 A in a township for perennial crops, only about 1.1% of the township acreage. As more and more growers switch to Telone for nematode control, more growers will be unable to use Telone because other growers have used the allowable amount. Carpenter et al. ( 2001) have estimated that some 47 townships will exceed the township cap, with areas growing strawberries and perennial crops being the most likely areas for the caps to be exceeded. Currently, the County Agricultural Commissioner's Offices are charged with monitoring and accounting for Telone usage in terms of contribution to township caps. Both Telone and Methyl Bromide require that permission be obtained from the County Agriculture Commissioner's office before buying or using the product. Thus, the infrastructure is already in place to have the use of methyl bromide under a CUE be triggered when the township cap has been reached. Section II. Existing Research Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 1. Is the study on EPA's website? Yes x No 1a. If not on the EPA website, please attach a copy. www. uckac. edu/ nematodes 2. Author( s) or researcher( s)

3. Publication and Date of Publication 4. Location of research study 5.

6. Was crop yield measured in the study? Yes No x 7.

8.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 size of tree was measured, because almond trees do not yield the first 3 years.

Telone is generally equally or more effective in control of nematodes, but less effective for plant diseases and weeds. McKenry, Michael California Numerous alternatives are compared The Replant Problem and Its Management Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Currently there is no practical mechanism to apply Telone to individual tree holes, which could lower the acreage application. For EPA Use Only ID#

Discuss how the results of the study apply to your situation. Would you expect similar results? Are there other factors that would affect your adoption of this tool? Describe the effectiveness of the alternative in controlling pests in the study. Name of alternative( s) in study. If more than one alternative, list the ones you wish to discuss. Use additional pages as needed.

Alternative: Study:

Section I. Initial Screening on Technical Feasibility of Alternatives 1. Are there any location specific restrictions that inhibit the use of this alternative on your site?

1a. Full use permitted yes, with buffer zone restrictions 1b. Township caps no 1c. Alternative not acceptable in consuming country 1d. Other ( Please describe)

In addition, EPA acknowledges that, for certain circumstances, some alternatives are not technically feasible and therefore no research has been conducted ( i. e. solarization may not be feasible in Seattle). You should look at the list of alternatives provided by the Agency and explain why they cannot be used for your crop and in your geographic area.

Metam Sodium McKenry ( 2000) The Replant Problem & Its Management EPA must consider whether alternative pest control measures ( pesticide and non pesticidal, and their combination) could be used successfully instead of methyl bromide by crop and circumstance ( geographic area.) The Agency has developed a list of possible alternative pest control regimens for various crops, which can be found at http:// www. epa. gov/ ozone/ mbr or by calling 1 800 296 1996.

There are three major ways you can provide the Agency with proof of your investigative work.

( 1) Conduct and submit your own research ( 2) Cite research that has been conducted by others ( 3) Cite research listed on the EPA website Whether you conduct the research yourself or cite studies developed by others, it is important that the studies be conducted in a scientifically sound manner. The studies should include a description of the experimental methodology used, such as application rates, application intervals, pest pressure, weather conditions, varieties of the crop used, etc. All results should be included, regardless of outcome. You must submit copies of each study to EPA unless they are listed on the Agency website.

The Agency has posted many research studies on a variety of crops on its website and knows of more studies currently in progress. EPA will add studies to its website as they become publicly available. You are encouraged to review the EPA website and other websites for studies that pertain to your crop and geographic area.

When completing Section II, if you cite a study that is on the EPA website, you only need to complete questions 1, 5, and 8.

Summarize each of the research studies you cite in the Research Summary Worksheet.

If you prefer, you may provide the information requested in this worksheet in a narrative review of one or more relevant research reports. The narrative review must reply to Section I and questions 1 through 8 in Section II. A Research Summary Worksheet of relevant treatments should be provided for each study reviewed.

BACKGROUND For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide In this worksheet, you should address why an alternative pest management strategy on the list ( see previous page) is or is not effective for your conditions. This worksheet contains 9 questions. You must complete one copy of worksheet 3 A for each research study you use to evaluate a single methyl bromide alternative. Use additional pages as need.

For worksheet 3 A you must complete one worksheet for each alternative, for each research study addressed. Please number the worksheets as follows. For the same alternative, first research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( a). For the same alternative, second research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( b). For the first alternative, third research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( c). For the second alternative, first research study, label the worksheet 3( A)( 2)( a). For the second alternative, second research study, label the worksheet 3( A)( 2)( b). Section II. Existing Research Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 1. Is the study on EPA's website? Yes x No 1a. If not on the EPA website, please attach a copy. www. uckac. edu/ nematodes & 2000 (# 17)

2. Author( s) or researcher( s)

3. Publication and Date of Publication 4. Location of research study 5. 6. Was crop yield measured in the study? Yes No x 7. 8. OMB Control # 2060 0482 Soil Fumigants Provide Multiple Benefits; Alternatives Give Mixed Results. ( 1994) California Agriculture 48: 22 28 MS at current label rates will not provide adequate kill of old roots below 75 cm soil depths and are not recommended for where root lesion nematode is a problem McKenry ( 2000) IPM Based Guidleines for Replanting Prunus Orchards in 2000 without Methyl Bromide His research has shown that endoparsitic nematodes can live off of and propagate on old roots for several years. Allowing substantial populations of nematodes to develop while the new trees are still very vulnerable to nematode feeding. Old roots also sustain populations of Oak Root Fungus ( Armillaria mellea ) and MS is not recommended where Oak Root Fungus is an issue. Thus, the efficacy of methyl bromide has included its ability to kill remnant roots down to 150 cm ( 5 ft)

Discuss how the results of the study apply to your situation. Would you expect similar results? Are there other factors that would affect your adoption of this tool? California Name of alternative( s) in study. If more than one alternative, list the ones you wish to discuss.

Numerous alternatives are compared MS is currently undergoing a risk assessment at California Department of Pesticide Regulations ( CDPR). Early indications are that CDPR may require increased buffer zones and other use restrictions which may further limit the use of MS in California. size of tree was measured, because almond trees do not yield the first 3 years.

Describe the effectiveness of the alternative in controlling pests in the study.

Metam is effective for killing nematodes, diseases if it reaches them. Unfortunately it has poor fuming capacity and it efficacy has been erratic due to poor movement within the soil. Addition of water helps move MS through the soil and seals the MS in. However, it requires the appropriate equipment to drench and availability of water to drench soils. More important, is that MS is not very effective in killing roots remaining in the soil, which harbor nematodes and pathogens. McKenry found that MS did not control endoparasitic nematodes below 75 cm ( 2.5 ft) depth because of this issue. When replanting on ground after a previous orchard, being able to kill the roots below 75 cm is critical to succesful growth of the developing trees.

McKenry, Michael The Replant Problem and Its Management. In it see:

If use of this alternative is precluded by regulatory restriction for all users covered by this application, the applicant should not complete Section II.

For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 1. Is the study on EPA's website? Yes No x 1a. If not on the EPA website, please attach a copy. www. uckac. edu/ nematodes 2. Author( s) or researcher( s)

3. Publication and Date of Publication 4. Location of research study 5. 6. Was crop yield measured in the study? Yes No x 7. Describe the effectiveness of the alternative in controlling pests in the study.

j y p g y most successful trial was incorporating the granules in the surface 1 inch then sprinkler irrigating on a 2 hr on, 2 hr off cycle for a total of 14 hr and 6 inches of water. The lethal effect was transported down 5 ft. However, by the end of 1 yr, the nematode control level was 75% compared to the 99% control achieved with a drenching of Vapam at 325 lb/ acre rate in 6 California Name of alternative( s) in study. If more than one alternative, list the ones you wish to discuss.

Numerous alternatives are compared The Replant Problem and Its Management ( 1999)

McKenry, Michael Use additional pages as needed.

Alternative: Study:

Section I. Initial Screening on Technical Feasibility of Alternatives 1. Are there any location specific restrictions that inhibit the use of this alternative on your site?

1a. Full use permitted yes, with buffers 1b. Township caps no 1c. Alternative not acceptable in consuming country 1d. Other ( Please describe)

Summarize each of the research studies you cite in the Research Summary Worksheet.

In addition, EPA acknowledges that, for certain circumstances, some alternatives are not technically feasible and therefore no research has been conducted ( i. e. solarization may not be feasible in Seattle). You should look at the list of alternatives provided by the Agency and explain why they cannot be used for your crop and in your geographic area.

Basamid McKenry ( 1999) The Replant Problem & Its Management EPA must consider whether alternative pest control measures ( pesticide and non pesticidal, and their combination) could be used successfully instead of methyl bromide by crop and circumstance ( geographic area.) The Agency has developed a list of possible alternative pest control regimens for various crops, which can be found at http:// www. epa. gov/ ozone/ mbr or by calling 1 800 296 1996.

There are three major ways you can provide the Agency with proof of your investigative work.

( 1) Conduct and submit your own research ( 2) Cite research that has been conducted by others ( 3) Cite research listed on the EPA website Whether you conduct the research yourself or cite studies developed by others, it is important that the studies be conducted in a scientifically sound manner. The studies should include a description of the experimental methodology used, such as application rates, application intervals, pest pressure, weather conditions, varieties of the crop used, etc. All results should be included, regardless of outcome. You must submit copies of each study to EPA unless they are listed on the Agency website.

The Agency has posted many research studies on a variety of crops on its website and knows of more studies currently in progress. EPA will add studies to its website as they become publicly available. You are encouraged to review the EPA website and other websites for studies that pertain to your crop and geographic area.

When completing Section II, if you cite a study that is on the EPA website, you only need to complete questions 1, 5, and 8.

If you prefer, you may provide the information requested in this worksheet in a narrative review of one or more relevant research reports. The narrative review must reply to Section I and questions 1 through 8 in Section II. A Research Summary Worksheet of relevant treatments should be provided for each study reviewed.

BACKGROUND For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide In this worksheet, you should address why an alternative pest management strategy on the list ( see previous page) is or is not effective for your conditions. This worksheet contains 9 questions. You must complete one copy of worksheet 3 A for each research study you use to evaluate a single methyl bromide alternative. Use additional pages as need.

For worksheet 3 A you must complete one worksheet for each alternative, for each research study addressed. Please number the worksheets as follows. For the same alternative, first research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( a). For the same alternative, second research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( b). For the first alternative, third research study, label the worksheet 3 A( 1)( c). For the second alternative, first research study, label the worksheet 3( A)( 2)( a). For the second alternative, second research study, label the worksheet 3( A)( 2)( b). Section II. Existing Research Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 1. Is the study on EPA's website? Yes No x 1a. If not on the EPA website, please attach a copy. www. uckac. edu/ nematodes 2. Author( s) or researcher( s)

3. Publication and Date of Publication 4. Location of research study 5. 6. Was crop yield measured in the study? Yes No x 7. 8. OMB Control # 2060 0482 Describe the effectiveness of the alternative in controlling pests in the study.

One major difficulty with this product is the lack of data on the dissolution rate of the granules, which vary in size. The most successful trial was incorporating the granules in the surface 1 inch then sprinkler irrigating on a 2 hr on, 2 hr off cycle for a total of 14 hr and 6 inches of water. The lethal effect was transported down 5 ft. However, by the end of 1 yr, the nematode control level was 75% compared to the 99% control achieved with a drenching of Vapam at 325 lb/ acre rate in 6 inches water. Before this product is practical, the granule dissolution rate must be known and predictable or there must be a formulation providing slow release of MITC over a known period of time. Uniformity of distribution of granules to the soil surface also poses a problem.

Discuss how the results of the study apply to your situation. Would you expect similar results? Are there other factors that would affect your adoption California Name of alternative( s) in study. If more than one alternative, list the ones you wish to discuss.

Numerous alternatives are compared McKenry, Michael The Replant Problem and Its Management ( 1999)

If use of this alternative is precluded by regulatory restriction for all users covered by this application, the applicant should not complete Section II.

For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Use additional pages as needed.

Alternative: Study:

Section I. Initial Screening on Technical Feasibility of Alternatives 1. Are there any location specific restrictions that inhibit the use of this alternative on your site?

1a. Full use permitted yes 1b. Township caps 1c. Alternative not acceptable in consuming country 1d. Other ( Please describe)

If use of this alternative is precluded by regulatory restriction for all users covered by this application, the For EPA Use Only Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Summarize each of the research studies you cite in the Research Summary Worksheet.

In addition, EPA acknowledges that, for certain circumstances, some alternatives are not technically feasible and therefore no research has Solarization Soil Solarization as an Alternative to Methyl EPA must consider whether alternative pest control measures ( pesticide and non pesticidal, and their combination) could be used successfully There are three major ways you can provide the Agency with proof of your investigative work.

Whether you conduct the research yourself or cite studies developed by others, it is important that the studies be conducted in a scientifically The Agency has posted many research studies on a variety of crops on its website and knows of more studies currently in progress. EPA will When completing Section II, if you cite a study that is on the EPA website, you only need to complete questions 1, 5, and 8.

If you prefer, you may provide the information requested in this worksheet in a narrative review of one or more relevant research BACKGROUND For EPA Use Only Worksheet 3 A( 6). Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide In this worksheet, you should address why an alternative pest management strategy on the list ( see previous page) is or is not For worksheet 3 A you must complete one worksheet for each alternative, for each research study addressed. Please number the Section II. Existing Research Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 1. Is the study on EPA's website? Yes x No 1a. If not on the EPA website, please attach a copy.

2. Author( s) or researcher( s)

3. Publication and Date of Publication 4. Location of research study 5. 6. Was crop yield measured in the study? Yes No x 7. 8.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Solarization effectivel kills most soil organisms in the top soil layer if the application reaches sufficient temperatures and length of time. The Central Valley has suffient sun and heat for use of solarization in principle.

" Although solarization can be a viable alternative to methyl bromide in orchards, there are limitations to its use. While almond trees do not yield the first 3 Describe the effectiveness of the alternative in controlling pests in the study.

Discuss how the results of the study apply to your situation. Would you expect similar results? Are there other California Name of alternative( s) in study. If more than one alternative, list the ones you wish to discuss.

Solarization with various tarp systems EPA Case Studies  Vol II ( 1996) Use additional pages as needed.

Alternative: Study:

Section I. Initial Screening on Technical Feasibility of Alternatives 1. Are there any location specific restrictions that inhibit the use of this alternative on your site?

1a. Full use permitted yes 1b. Township caps 1c. Alternative not acceptable in consuming country 1d. Other ( Please describe)

If use of this alternative is precluded by regulatory restriction for all users covered by this application, the For EPA Use Only Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Summarize each of the research studies you cite in the Research Summary Worksheet.

In addition, EPA acknowledges that, for certain circumstances, some alternatives are not technically feasible and therefore no research has Biofumigation EPA must consider whether alternative pest control measures ( pesticide and non pesticidal, and their combination) could be used successfully There are three major ways you can provide the Agency with proof of your investigative work.

Whether you conduct the research yourself or cite studies developed by others, it is important that the studies be conducted in a scientifically The Agency has posted many research studies on a variety of crops on its website and knows of more studies currently in progress. EPA will When completing Section II, if you cite a study that is on the EPA website, you only need to complete questions 1, 5, and 8.

If you prefer, you may provide the information requested in this worksheet in a narrative review of one or more relevant research BACKGROUND For EPA Use Only Worksheet 3 A.( 5) Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide In this worksheet, you should address why an alternative pest management strategy on the list ( see previous page) is or is not For worksheet 3 A you must complete one worksheet for each alternative, for each research study addressed. Please number the Section II. Existing Research Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 1. Is the study on EPA's website? Yes No 1a. If not on the EPA website, please attach a copy.

2. Author( s) or researcher( s)

3. Publication and Date of Publication 4. Location of research study 5. 6. Was crop yield measured in the study? Yes No x 7. 8.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 sufficiently to be applicable for the replant situation in almonds. As stated before, as long as live roots exist down to 150

180 cm ( 5 6 ft), the nematodes and pathogens are also present and available to recolonize any newly planted almond tree.

almond trees do not yield the first 3 Describe the effectiveness of the alternative in controlling pests in the study.

Discuss how the results of the study apply to your situation. Would you expect similar results? Are there other Name of alternative( s) in study. If more than one alternative, list the ones you wish to discuss. Use additional pages as needed.

Alternative: Study:

Section I. Initial Screening on Technical Feasibility of Alternatives 1. Are there any location specific restrictions that inhibit the use of this alternative on your site?

1a. Full use permitted fenamiphos  no/ oxamyl  yes 1b. Township caps no 1c. Alternative not acceptable in consuming country 1d. Other ( Please describe)

Section II. Existing Research Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide If use of this alternative is precluded by regulatory restriction for all users covered by this application, the For EPA Use Only Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Nematicides McKenry ( 1999) The Replant Problem & Its Summarize each of the research studies you cite in the Research Summary Worksheet.

There are three major ways you can provide the Agency with proof of your investigative work.

Whether you conduct the research yourself or cite studies developed by others, it is important that the studies be conducted in a scientifically The Agency has posted many research studies on a variety of crops on its website and knows of more studies currently in progress. EPA will In addition, EPA acknowledges that, for certain circumstances, some alternatives are not technically feasible and therefore no research has When completing Section II, if you cite a study that is on the EPA website, you only need to complete questions 1, 5, and 8.

If you prefer, you may provide the information requested in this worksheet in a narrative review of one or more relevant research BACKGROUND For EPA Use Only Worksheet 3 A( 4). Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide In this worksheet, you should address why an alternative pest management strategy on the list ( see previous page) is or is not For worksheet 3 A you must complete one worksheet for each alternative, for each research study addressed. Please number the 1. Is the study on EPA's website? Yes x No 1a. If not on the EPA website, please attach a copy.

2. Author( s) or researcher( s)

3. Publication and Date of Publication 4. Location of research study 5. 6. Was crop yield measured in the study? Yes No x 7. 8.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Describe the effectiveness of the alternative in controlling pests in the study.

In the top 18 inches ( 45 cm) 7 apps of 1 lb oxamyl ( Vydate)/ A controlled Pratylenchus vulnus ( lesion nematode). Enzone Discuss how the results of the study apply to your situation. Would you expect similar results? Are there other Name of alternative( s) in study. If more than one alternative, list the ones you wish to discuss.

Enzone; Acrolein, Fenamiphos ( Nemacur), DiTera, Oxyamyl ( Vydate)

FIELD COMPARISON OF 20 POTENTIAL METHYL BROMIDE 1997 Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide California orchards have drip or microsprinkler irrigation systems. These systems supply water only between the trees and to a the top 12 18 inches of the soil only. It does not provide any pathogen or microbial Fenamiphos has been voluntarily cancelled by the registrant as of March 22, 2002 ( Federal Register 3/ 22/ 2002)

Michael V. McKenry*, Tom Buzo, Stephanie Kaku, and David Dougherty Use additional pages as needed.

Alternative: Study:

Section I. Initial Screening on Technical Feasibility of Alternatives 1. Are there any location specific restrictions that inhibit the use of this alternative on your site?

1a. Full use permitted yes 1b. Township caps no 1c. Alternative not acceptable in consuming country 1d. Other ( Please describe)

If use of this alternative is precluded by regulatory restriction for all users covered by this application, the For EPA Use Only Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Summarize each of the research studies you cite in the Research Summary Worksheet.

In addition, EPA acknowledges that, for certain circumstances, some alternatives are not technically feasible and therefore no research has Biological Control, McKenry ( 1999) The Replant Problem & Its EPA must consider whether alternative pest control measures ( pesticide and non pesticidal, and their combination) could be used successfully There are three major ways you can provide the Agency with proof of your investigative work.

Whether you conduct the research yourself or cite studies developed by others, it is important that the studies be conducted in a scientifically The Agency has posted many research studies on a variety of crops on its website and knows of more studies currently in progress. EPA will When completing Section II, if you cite a study that is on the EPA website, you only need to complete questions 1, 5, and 8.

If you prefer, you may provide the information requested in this worksheet in a narrative review of one or more relevant research BACKGROUND For EPA Use Only Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide In this worksheet, you should address why an alternative pest management strategy on the list ( see previous page) is or is not For worksheet 3 A you must complete one worksheet for each alternative, for each research study addressed. Please number the Section II. Existing Research Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 1. Is the study on EPA's website? Yes No x 1a. If not on the EPA website, please attach a copy. www. uckac. edu/ nematodes 2. Author( s) or researcher( s)

3. Publication and Date of Publication 4. Location of research study 5. 6. Was crop yield measured in the study? Yes No x 7. 8.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Flooding and water management  Flooding provided no control of nematodes Biological Control  poor  as we are ignorant of what all the organisms are that cause replant disorder, we are not able to monitored in some studies Discuss how the results of the study apply to your situation. Would you expect similar results? Are there other almond trees do not yield the first 3 Describe the effectiveness of the alternative in controlling pests in the study.

Cover crop & Mulching  poor. They do not alter the soil composition deep enough to control the replant problem.

California Name of alternative( s) in study. If more than one alternative, list the ones you wish to discuss.

Numerous alternatives are compared: Steam  No. 38; Flooding  No. 53, 54;

McKenry, Michael The Replant Problem and Its Management ( 1999) Alternative: Study:

Col. A: Treatment Number Col. B: Treatment Col. C: Rate Col. D, F, H, J, L, N:

Interval Cols. E, G, I, K, M, O: Rating for Interval:

Control of Pests 1 and 2 ( Cols. D  I and Cols. J  O):

Col. J: Yield A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Pest 1 Pest 2 Interval 1 Rating for Interval 1 Interval 2 Rating for Interval 2 Interval 3 Rating for Interval 3 Interval 1 Rating for Interval 1 Interval 2 Rating for Interval 2 Interval 3 Rating for Interval 3 Comments:

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide For EPA Use Only ID#

Treatment Treatment Number Rate ( lbs. or gals. ai per area)

Enter the marketable yield of the crop or commodity and specify the units ( lbs./ acre, tons) in the column header or comments section.

Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications. Yield ( units/ area)

[ Insert Alternative] [ Insert Study Title]

Provide one summary table for each study being described.

Research Summary Table For the target pest( s) in the study list the pest or pest species being rated in the column header or the comments section. For example, a study for nematode control in tomatoes may have looked at sting nematode and stunt nematode. Enter sting nematode for pest 1 in the Col F header below and stunt nematode for pest 2 in the Col. L header below. In the comments section describe the rating system used ( 0 to 100 scale where 0 is no control, number of nematodes per gram of soil, number of colony forming units per gram of soil,

etc.).

Provide a summary table of research information that will allow us compare the impact of methyl bromide and the alternative regimen on such things as pest control, yield or quality of the commodity being treated, or protected.

Ideally, a research study should directly compare methyl bromide and the alternative regimen.

List the treatment number from the research study you are citing.

List what type of pest control method was used.

Enter the pounds or gallons of a chemical used, days of solarization, etc.

Enter the interval after treatment that the rating was taken. Enter the interval ( days, weeks or months) in the column heading or in the comments section. In the comments describe the rating scale ( e. g. 0 to 100 where 100 is complete control).

Use these columns to describe the level of control provided for a specific pest and the time interval at which the rating was taken. For example, a study for nematode control may have looked at nematode population in the soil pre treatment, 3 weeks after treatment, and 6 weeks after treatment. In this example, type over the words " Rating Interval 1" with " pre treatment", type over " Rating Interval 2" with " 3 weeks", and type over " Rating Interval 3" with " 6 weeks." If you are completing the printed version, please define Rating Interval in the comments below. Alternative: Study:

Col. A: Treatment Number Col. B: Treatment Col. C: Rate Col. D, F, H, J, L, N:

Interval Cols. E, G, I, K, M, O:

Rating for Interval:

Control of Pests 1 and 2 ( Cols. D  I and Cols. J  O):

Col. J: Yield A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Sting nematode Stunt nematode Interval 1 Rating for Interval 1 Interval 2 Rating for Interval 2 Interval 3 Rating for Interval 3 Interval 1 Rating for Interval 1 Interval 2 Rating for Interval 2 Interval 3 Rating Interval 3 1 Untreated  pre trt 700 3 wks 700 6 wks 707 pre trt 100 3 wks 111 6 wks 109 5,000 2 Methyl Bromide 300 gal. pre trt 669 3 wks 221 6 wks 120 pre trt 98 3 wks 77 6 wks 36 8,000 3 Iodo methane 150 gal. pre trt 675 3 wks 250 6 wks 125 pre trt 111 3 wks 35 6 wks 32 7,580 Comments:

Ratings are for nematodes per gram of soil OMB Control # 2060 0482 Example Research Summary Table Example Provide one summary table for each study being described.

Provide a summary table of research information that will allow us compare the impact of methyl bromide and the alternative regimen on such things as pest control, yield or quality of the commodity being treated, or protected. Ideally,

a research study should directly compare methyl bromide and the alternative regimen.

List the treatment number from the research study you are citing.

List what type of pest control method was used.

Enter the pounds or gallons of a chemical used, days of solarization, etc.

Enter the intervals ( days, weeks or months) that the rating was taken for each treatment in Columns D, F, H, J, L, and N. For example, a study for nematode control may have looked at nematode population in the soil pre treatment, 3 weeks after treatment, and 6 weeks after treatment. For this example, insert " pre treatment" in the " Interval 1" column , insert " 3 weeks" in the " Interval 2" column,

and insert " 6 weeks" in the " Interval 3" column."

In columns E, G, I, K, M, and O insert the rating ( the level of control provided for a specific pest) for each interval for each treatment described. In this example, for the methyl bromide treatment for sting nematode enter 669 for the " Rating for Interval 1", 221 for the " Rating for Interval 2", and 120 for the " Rating for Interval 3." In the comments section below describe the rating scale ( e. g.,

nematodes per gram of soil, number of colony forming units per gram of soil, etc.).

For the target pest( s) in the study list the pest or pest species being rated in the column header or the comments section. For example, a study for nematode control in tomatoes may have looked at sting nematode and stunt nematode. Enter sting nematode for pest 1 in the Col F header below and stunt nematode for pest 2 in the Col. L header below. In the comments section describe the rating system used ( 0 to 100 scale where 0 is no control, number of nematodes per gram of soil, number of colony forming units per gram of soil,

etc ) Enter the marketable yield of the crop or commodity and specify the units ( lbs./ acre, tons) in the column header or comments section.

Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Treatment Number Treatment Rate ( lbs. or gals. ai per area) Yield ( lbs/ acre) Col. B: Target Pests Col. C: Active Ingredients Col. D: Formulation Col. E, F, G: Application Rate Col. H, I, J: Prices and Costs Col. K: Area Treated Col. L: # of Applications per Year Col. M: Cost per Area in 2001 Dollars Non chemical Control A B C D E F G H I J K L M lbs. ai per Area per Application Units of product per Area per Application Product Unit ( e. g., lbs.,

gals) $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Non Chemical Pest Control Target Pests Description Cost/ area Total $ 0.00 Comments:

If you do not have the quantitative data for additional crops grown on the same land, please indicate so in the comment section.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Enter the cost per area in 2001 dollars. Col. M will be calculated automatically using the data you have entered for a chemical pest control, or, the formula in Col. M can be overridden if the cost per area is known because the product was custom applied. Area Treated at Least Once Enter data near the bottom of the form. Identify the control in Col. A. Enter the target pests in Col. B. Describe the non chemical pest control Col. B L. Enter the costs in Col. M in 2001 dollars. # of Applications per Year Application Rate Formulation of Product Target Pests Active Ingredients ( ai) in Product Worksheet 3 B. Alternatives  Pest Control Regimen Costs for Alternative: [ Insert name of alternative]

Enter the area receiving at least one application of the pesticide.

If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect a representative user.

Enter all alternatives and non chemical pest control that would replace one treatment of methyl bromide throughout the fumigation cycle. See the Fumigation Cycle Worksheet for a comprehensive definition of the fumigation cycle. If multiple crops 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 pesticides that replace methyl bromide for the entire interval. Do not include pesticides that are used along with methyl bromide enter only the additional pest control if methyl bromide were not available.

Be as specific as possible regarding the species or classes of pests controlled by the active ingredient or pesticide product.

Col. A: Name of Product and Non chemical Control If someone other than the applicant previously benefited from the application of methyl bromide in the fumigation cycle and you do not have the quantitative data for the crops grown on the same land, please indicate so in the comments section below.

As a cross check, EPA is requesting both the amount of active ingredient in Col. E and product applied per area in Col. F. Indicate the unit of the product in Col. G.

Use 2001 prices and costs. If the product is custom applied you may enter the total cost in the last column ( Col. M) and override the formula. If a pesticide is applied by the user, enter the price of the product in Col. H and the cost of applying it in Col. I. Enter any other costs associated with applying this product in Col. J, specifying what they are in the comments section at the bottom of this sheet.

Name of Product Price per Unit of the Product Cost of Applying Pesticide per Area Other Costs per Application For EPA Use Only ID#

Use one row for each active ingredient ( ai). For example, if a product contains 2 ai's use 2 rows for that product. Once a row is completed for a given product, then only Col.

B ( if applicable), C, and E need to be completed for additional rows regarding the same product.

Enter the number of applications in a fumigation cycle comparable to methyl bromide for this alternative pest control regimen. Since this number is an average, it does not need to be a whole number.

Enter the formulation or the % of active ingredient. Cost per Area ( 2001$)

Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications. Col. B: Target Pests Col. C: Active Ingredients Col. D: Formulation Col. E, F, G: Application Rate Col. H, I, J: Prices and Costs Col. K: Area Treated Col. L: # of Applications per Year Col. M: Cost per Area in 2001 Dollars Non chemical Control A B C D E F G H I J K L M lbs. ai per Area per Application Units of product per Area per Application Product Unit ( e. g., lbs.,

gals)

Product X Pest Y, Pest Z Chemical D,

Chemical F 90% Chemical D,

10% Chemical F 250 278 lbs $ 10.00 $ 20.00 0 25 1 $ 2,800.00 Product U Pest V, Pest Y Chemical C 100% 150 200 gal $ 5.00 $ 20.00 10 25 2 $ 2,060.00 Vapam nematodes,

pathogens Metam Sodium32.. 7% 78 75 gal/ A Irrigation $ 801A 1/ 30 years $ 500.00 RoundUP Roots Glyphosate Penetrator 41% 50% 4 lb 1 gal/ a $ 29.00 $ 10.00 0 1A of tree stumps $ 0.00 Telone II nematodes 1,3  dichloropr 97.50% 335 lb ai/ A 35 gal/ A 1/ 30 years # VALUE!

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Non Chemical Pest Control Target Pests Description Cost/ area Control P Pest J, Pest K $ 500.00 Total # VALUE!

Comments:

If you do not have the quantitative data for additional crops grown on the same land, please indicate so in the comment section.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 For EPA Use Only ID#

Control P is done 2 times per year according to ____ methods.

None applicable for dealing w. replant disorder and oak root fungus Use one row for each active ingredient ( ai). For example, if a product contains 2 ai's use 2 rows for that product. Once a row is completed for a given product, then only Col. B ( if applicable), C, and E need to be completed for additional rows regardin Enter the number of applications in a fumigation cycle comparable to methyl bromide for this alternative pest control regimen. Since this number is an average, it does not need to be a whole number.

Enter the formulation or the % of active ingredient. Cost per Area ( 2001$)

Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Name of Product Price per Unit of the Product Cost of Applying Pesticide per Area Other Costs per Application per area Worksheet 3 B. Alternatives  Pest Control Regimen Costs for Alternative: Product X Enter the area receiving at least one application of the pesticide.

If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect a representative user.

Enter all alternatives and non chemical pest control that would replace one treatment of methyl bromide throughout the fumigation cycle. See the Fumigation Cycle Worksheet for a comprehensive definition of the fumigation cycle. If multiple crops are grown Be as specific as possible regarding the species or classes of pests controlled by the active ingredient or pesticide product.

Col. A: Name of Product and Non chemical Control If someone other than the applicant previously benefited from the application of methyl bromide in the fumigation cycle and you do not have the quantitative data for the crops grown on the same land, please indicate so in the comments section below.

As a cross check, EPA is requesting both the amount of active ingredient in Col. E and product applied per area in Col. F. Indicate the unit of the product in Col. G.

Use 2001 prices and costs. If the product is custom applied you may enter the total cost in the last column ( Col. M) and override the formula. If a pesticide is applied by the user, enter the price of the product in Col. H and the cost of applying it in Col. I. Enter any other costs associated with applying this product in Col. J, specifying what they are in the comments section at the bottom of this sheet. $ 420.00 $ 525.00 Enter the cost per area in 2001 dollars. Col. M will be calculated automatically using the data you have entered for a chemical pest control, or, the formula in Col. M can be overridden if the cost per area is known because the product was custom applied Area Treated at Least Once Enter data near the bottom of the form. Identify the control in Col. A. Enter the target pests in Col. B. Describe the non chemical pest control Col. B L. Enter the costs in Col. M in 2001 dollars. # of Applications per Year Application Rate Formulation of Product Target Pests Active Ingredients ( ai) in Product For EPA Use Only ID#

Col. B: Price Factors Col. C: Unit of Crop/ Commodity Col. D: Crop/ Commodity Yield Col. E: Price Col. F: Gross Revenue A B C D E F Crop/ Commodity Price Factors ( grade, time, market) Unit of Crop/ Commodity ( e. g., pounds, bushels) Crop/ Commodity Yield ( Units per area) Price ( per unit of crop/ commodity) Revenue ( per area) $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Total Revenue $ 0.00 Comments:

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

Worksheet 3 C. Alternatives  Crop/ Commodity Yield and Gross Revenue for Alternativ [ Insert name of alternative]

If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect a representative user.

In the electronic version, revenue is automatically calculated below using the data you entered for yield and price. If revenue is not equal to yield times price, you may override the formula and enter a different revenue amount. Please explain why this revenue amount is different in the comment section b l Enter the unit of measurement for your crop/ commodity.

Enter all crops/ commodities that can be grown/ treated during the same interval of time comprising a methyl bromide fumigation cycle. Please discuss changes in crop cycles resulting from alternative use in the comments. See the Fumigation Cycle Worksheet for a comprehensive definition of the fumigation cycle.

Enter in Col. B any factors that determine prices ( e. g., grade, time, market). If you received different prices for your crop/ commodity as a result of quality, grade, market ( e. g., fresh or processing), timing of harvest, etc., you may itemize by using more than one row. Itemize or aggregate these factors to the extent appropriate in making the case that the use of alternatives affects these price factors.

Enter the number of units of crop/ commodity produced per area for that price factor identified.

Enter the average 2001 prices received by the users for that crop/ commodity and price factor.

The purpose of this worksheet is to identify the gross revenue for units ( crop, commodity, structure) when using an alternative compared to gross revenue when using methyl bromide.

Postharvest and structural users may modify this form to accommodate differences in operations when providing gross revenue data.

Col. A: Crop/ Commodity 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 grown on the same land, please indicate so in the comments section below. 1 year 2 year 3 year 4 year 5 year 6 year 7 year 8 year 9 year 10 year Meat 274 400 660 948 885 1170 1092 1400 Price/ lb =

Planting Land Prepa #######

Land Prepa$ 17.00 Fumigation #######

Survey and $ 83.00 $ 9.00 $ 4.00 Trees: 110 ####### $ 50.00 $ 5.00 Paint and P$ 22.00 $ 5.00 TOTAL PL ####### $ 64.00 $ 9.00 Cultural Costs:

Training, P $ 39.00 $ 29.00 $ 43.00 ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

Brush $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 $ 19.00 Water Sanitation:

Knock Mummies $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 Blow & Rake Mummies $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 $ 47.00 Shred Mummies $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 $ 7.00 Weed Con $ 36.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 Insect Control  Dorma$ 52.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 Disease Control  Sho $ 25.00 $ 20.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 $ 34.00 Insect Control  Pinkbud $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 $ 39.00 Pollination $ 40.00 $ 80.00 ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

Fertilizer  Potassium $ 11.00 $ 13.00 $ 18.00 $ 23.00 $ 23.00 $ 23.00 $ 23.00 $ 23.00 Vertebrate $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 Fertilizer  $ 9.00 $ 17.00 $ 31.00 $ 39.00 $ 56.00 $ 70.00 $ 70.00 $ 70.00 $ 70.00 $ 70.00 Weed Con $ 20.00 $ 20.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 Irrigate 7x $ 28.00 $ 53.00 $ 74.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 $ 94.00 Weed Con $ 16.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 Insect Control  Ants $ 19.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 $ 21.00 Insect Con $ 26.00 $ 51.00 $ 70.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 $ 90.00 Weed Control  Preharvest Spray $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 Fertilizer  Boron ( Foli $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 Misc. Labo $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 Pickup Tru $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 $ 54.00 Metam Sodium app only Operation ATV Truck $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 Meat Pounds per Acre 274 400 660 948 885 1170 1092 1400 TOTAL CU ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

Harvest Costs:

Pole Trees $ 21.00 $ 12.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.00 Shake Trees $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 $ 61.00 Sweep Nuts $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 Hand Rake $ 21.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 $ 2.00 Pick Up and Haul $ 56.00 $ 58.00 $ 61.00 $ 63.00 $ 63.00 $ 63.00 $ 63.00 $ 63.00 Hull Nuts $ 13.00 $ 25.00 $ 60.00 $ 80.00 $ 80.00 $ 80.00 $ 80.00 $ 80.00 TOTAL HARVEST COSTS: ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

Interest on Operating Capital @ 10.46% $ 64.00 $ 19.00 $ 43.00 $ 63.00 $ 65.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 $ 66.00 TOTAL OP ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

TOTAL CA ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

TOTAL CA ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

INCOME/ ACRE FROM PRODUC ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

NET CASH ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

PROFIT/ ACRE ABOVE CASH COSTS:

ACCUMUL ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

TOTAL NO ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

TOTAL CO ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

INCOME/ ACRE FROM PRODUC$ 39.60 ####### ####### #######

TOTAL NE ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### #######

NET PROFIT/ ACRE ABOVE TOTAL COST:

TOTAL AC ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### For EPA Use Only ID#

Col. A: Operation or Cost Item Col. B: Custom Operation Cost Col. C, D, E: Costs per Area Col. F: Typical Equipment Used A B C D E F Material Cost per Area Labor Cost per Area Total Cost per Area $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Total Custom per Area $ 0.00 User Total per area $ 0.00 Comments:

OMB Control # 2060 0482 Enter custom operation costs that change in Col. B.

Area is defined below as follows for each user: acres for growers, cubic feet for post harvest operations, and square feet for structural applications.

If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect a representative user .

Enter in Col. C and D, material and labor costs per area that change for operations done by user. The total cost per area is calculated automatically from the values you enter in Cols. C and D. Typical Equipment Used Operation Done by User [ Insert name of alternative]

Worksheet 3 D. Alternatives  Changes in Other Costs for Alternative:

Custom Operation Cost per Area Operation or Cost Item Enter data only for costs ( other than the cost of alternative pest control) that change as a result of using the alternatives instead of methyl bromide. Enter the whole cost, not just the incremental changes. Enter the cost in Col. B for custom operation costs, or in Col. C and D for operations done by user.

Identify changes in the typical equipment used by the user as a result of not using methyl bromide. Please be specific such as tractor horsepower. No cost data are required in this column.

Identify the operations or cost items that change as a result of not using methyl bromide. 1. Name of study:

2. Researcher( s):

3. Your test is planned for:

4. Location:

5. Name of alternative to be tested:

6. Yes No X 7.

OMB Control # 2060 0482 For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 4. Alternatives  Future Research Plans Will crop yield be measured in the study? Fungal Replant Disorder Greg Browne Please describe future plans to test alternatives to methyl bromide. ( All available methyl bromide alternatives from the alternatives list should have been tested or have future tests planned.) There is no need to complete a separate worksheet for future research plans for each alternative  you may use this worksheet to describe all future research plans.

If additional testing is not planned, please explain why. ( For example, the available alternatives have been tested and found unsuitable, an alternative has been identified but is not yet registered for this crop, available alternatives are too expensive for this crop, etc.) Butte County Following up to determine if injection of chloropicrin 0.5 1 lb ai into planting hole is effective for controling the fungal component of replant disorder Joe Connell Chloropicrin 1. Name of study:

2. Researcher( s):

3. Your test is planned for:

4. Location:

5. Name of alternative to be tested:

6. Yes No X 7. For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 4. Alternatives  Future Research Plans Please describe future plans to test alternatives to methyl bromide. ( All available methyl bromide alternatives from the alternatives list should have been tested or have future tests planned.) There is no need to complete a separate worksheet for future research plans for each alternative  you may use this worksheet to describe all future Methyl Bromide Alternatives Michael McKenry Contine work on long term efficacy of various alternative methods for controlling replant disorder. Also, see if better method for applying Metam Metam Sodium, various other compounds/ methods such as methyl iodide Will crop yield be measured in the study?

If additional testing is not planned, please explain why. ( For example, the available alternatives have been tested and found unsuitable, an alternative has been identified but is not yet registered for this crop, available alternatives are too expensive for this crop, OMB Control # 2060 0482 1. Name of study:

2. Researcher( s):

3. Your test is planned for:

4. Location:

5. Name of alternative to be tested:

6. Yes No X 7. For EPA Use Only ID#

Worksheet 4. Alternatives  Future Research Plans Please describe future plans to test alternatives to methyl bromide. ( All available methyl bromide alternatives from the alternatives list should have been tested or have future tests planned.) There is no need to complete a separate worksheet for future research plans for each alternative  you may use this worksheet to describe all future Determine if hole injection methods for Telone are effective Greg Browne Joe Connell See if Telone can be effectively used when injected into the planting hole only. This would reduce the amount of Telone needed to treat an replant orchard Butte County 1,3 dichloropropene Will crop yield be measured in the study?

If additional testing is not planned, please explain why. ( For example, the available alternatives have been tested and found unsuitable, an alternative has been identified but is not yet registered for this crop, available alternatives are too expensive for this crop, etc.) OMB Control # 2060 0482 1.

1a. Check all methods you will use Nothing Tarpaulin ( high density polyethylene)

Virtually impermeable film ( VIF)

Cultural practices ( please specify)

1b. Will you use other pesticides to reduce use of methyl bromide? Yes No If yes please specify.

1c. Other non chemical methods: ( please specify):

2. Yes No If yes, how many pounds? lbs.

3. Yes No If yes, how many pounds? lbs.

4.

$

5.

6.

When do you expect these to occur?

7.

0 10 acres 10 25 acres 25 50 acres 50 100 acres 100 200 acres 200 400 acres over 400 acres Range of acres farmed by growers included in this application? ( insert number of users in each category) Other investments, if any, made to reduce your reliance on methyl bromide. Describe each investment and its associated cost. How will you minimize your use and/ or emissions of methyl bromide?

Do you have access to recycled methyl bromide?

Identify what factors would allow you to stop or reduce your use of methyl bromide ( e. g. registration of particular pesticide; completion of research plan; capital outlay). What is the cumulative amount spent to date by the user or consortium on research to develop alternatives to methyl bromide ( beginning in 1992)? Worksheet 5. Additional Information For EPA Use Only ID#

Do you anticipate that you will have any methyl bromide in storage on January 1, 2005? Worksheet 5. Additional Information ( continued)

8.

0  5,000 sq. ft. 5,001  10,000 sq. ft. 10,001  20,000 sq. ft. 20,001  40,000 sq. ft. 40,001  80,000 sq. ft. 80,001  160,000 sq. ft. over 160,000 sq. ft.

I certify that all information contained in this document is factual to the best of my knowledge.

Signature Date Print Name Title Signature Date Print Name Title OMB Control # 2060 0482 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 not 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. For EPA Use Only ID#

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. Range of square feet of the area to which applicants included in this application will apply methyl bromide? ( insert number of users in each category) CUE 02 0043


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 40903]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17473]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. TS11-6-000; OA96-35-001]

Maine Public Service Company; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on June 22, 2011, Maine Public Service Company
submitted a filing notifying the Commission of its relinquishment,
effective December 21, 2010, of the waiver it previously received of
the Standards of Conduct requirements of Order No. 889 in Docket No.
OA96-35-000, Midwest Energy, Inc., et al., 77 FERC ] 61,208 (1996)
(Waiver Order).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on July 27, 2011.

    Dated: July 6, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-17473 Filed 7-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P