For EPA Use Only ID # ______________ SECTOR _________________________

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

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

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

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

STATE CONTACTS HOW DO I APPLY?

IS MY INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL?

WHEN IS THE INFORMATION NEEDED?

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

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

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

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

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

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

If you have general questions about this application call:

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

WHERE DO I SUBMIT THE APPLICATION?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. To add additional blank worksheets in the Excel file, go to the menu line at the top of the worksheet and select " Insert" then " worksheet" Worksheet 3. Alternatives Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Pest and Crop Information INSTRUCTIONS Each worksheet number corresponds to the tab number in the electronic version of the application. Instructions specific to each worksheet are provided at the top of each sheet. A header row is included on each worksheet to include an application ID number that EPA will assign. EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant If you would like to print all worksheets that are contained in this workbook, go to the menu bar at the top of the screen and select " File" and then " Print." Then in the section of the menu that appears called " Print what," select " Entire Workbook." Yes No X X Cell Fax University of Georgia X Cell Fax OMB Control # 2060 0482 Daytime Phone E mail Address Alternate Contact Contact Name Dr. William Terry Kelley 877 994 3842 cthjr_ asg@ charter. net 706 883 8215 Specialty E mail Address Address Daytime Phone 229 386 3410 wtkelley@ uga. edu P. O. Box 1209 Tifton, GA 31793 If yes, the applicant assumes responsibility for the secure transmission of electronic submissions.

Applicant Name Primary Contact Contact Name ( Check One) Specialty Charles Hall Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association Print Name I certify that all information contained in this document is factual to the best of my knowledge.

Signature Title Signature Date Date Title Information in this application may be aggregated with information from other applications and used by the United States government to justify claims in the national nomination package that a particular use of methyl bromide be considered " critical" and authorized for an exemption beyond the 2005 phaseout. Use of aggregate data will be crucial to making compelling arguments in favor of critical use exemptions. By signing below, you agree now to assert any claim of confidentiality that would affect the disclosure by EPA of aggregate information based in part on information contained in this application. Print Name Agronomic Economic 229 392 5940 229 386 7374 LaGrange, GA 30241 Economic Address Worksheet 1. Contact and Methyl Bromide Request Information The following information will be used to determine the amount of methyl bromide requested and the contact person for this request. It is important that we know whom to contact in case we need additional information during the review of the application.

Is this information Confidential Business Information?

P. O Box 2945 Agronomic EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 324 hours per response and assumes a large portion of applications will be submitted by consortia on behalf of many individual users of methyl bromide. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a current OMB control number. 1. Location 2. Crop/ Crop Grouping 3.

8%

21%

16%

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

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

6. Yes Pounds No X 7. Yes X CUE # 02 0047 No 8.

Year 2005 Acres 2006 Acres 2007 Acres 9.

10.

11. Yes Lbs No X 12. Yes Lbs No X OMB Control # 2060 0482 lbs. 779,210 Please explain why there may be variations in the pounds or acres treated from year to year. 28%

10%

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

1____ 2a____ 2b____ 3a____ 3b____ 4a____ 4b____ 5a____ 5b____ 6a____ 6b____ 7a__ X__ 7b__ X__ 8a__ X__ 8b__ X__ 9a____ 9b____ 10a____ 10b____ 11____ 17%

over 400 acres 5,815 Worksheet 1. Contact and Methyl Bromide Request Information Total Pounds Active Ingredient ( a. i.) of Methyl Bromide 779,210 Total Area to be Treated If yes, please specify amount ( in pounds). If yes, please specify amount ( in pounds).

Do you anticipate that you will have any methyl bromide in storage after January 1, 2005? The current alternatives are not technically feasible to control the range of pests that must be managed.

alternative can be found before 2005 2007. to economically produce tomatoes followed by squash in Georgia and there is no indication that a suitable Do you have access to recycled methyl bromide? 5,815 ( Indicate the soil type and percent organic matter where methyl bromide would be applied.)

Soil Type:

Organic Matter:

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

Tomato Squash ( Enter the state, region, or county.)

Georgia Has this applicant previously applied for Critical Use Exemption of methyl bromide? Range of acres farmed by growers included in this application Is this applicant eligible for Quarantine and Preshipment ( QPS) uses of methyl bromide? 100  200 acres 200  400 acres 25  50 acres 50  100 acres Please explain why methyl bromide is being requested. ( Insert number or percentage of users in each category) 0  25 acres lbs. 5,815 lbs. What is the amount of methyl bromide being requested by this application ? ( Do NOT include QPS amounts)

779,210 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Worksheet Title 2 A Methyl Bromide  Crop & Pest Information If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect the representative user for the consortium.

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

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

This worksheet provides data in actual usage for 1997 2002.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Instructions specific to each worksheet are located at the top of each sheet. Worksheet 2. Methyl Bromide EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 1. Crop/ Crop Grouping or Consortium 2. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec X 2. Fumigation and Crop Timeline Beginning Fumigation Cycle Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 Land Preparation X Fumigation X Planting X X Harvest X X X X Fallow X X Other Key Crop Steps X Other Key Pest Steps X Continuation of Fumigation Cycle ( if needed)

Month 13 Month 14 Month 15 Month 16 Month 17 Month 18 Month 19 Month 20 Month 21 Month 22 Month 23 Month 24 Land Preparation Fumigation Planting Harvest X Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps OMB Control # 2060 0482 Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON) Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Crop & Pest Information Comments:

planted following tomatoes would be cabbage, eggplant, cucumbers or another crop of tomatoes. The Tomatoes are conventionally followed by another crop such as squash. Other crops that might be Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON)

grower is thus able to get at least two crops from the field for each fumigation event. Tomato Squash ( Indicate when fumigation, major crop and pest management practices typically occur by shading the appropriate cells. Show a second crop if part of the fumigation cycle. If the fumigation cycle is longer than one year change the months to an appropriate interval. These tables are for annual crops but more than one crop may benefit from one methyl bromide fumigation. If application covers multiple crops/ crop groupings not grown sequentially, they will need to provide this information for all crops/ crop groupings. Please adjust timeline as necessary. Please provide additional comments or description below or on a separate page. Please begin the timeline with the first land preparation. For perennials, please begin with the year of land preparation and fumigation and indicate the years of production by yield or percentage of full production.)

Crops are fertilized through drip irrigation and fungicides and insecticides are applied as needed. Fumigation takes place in the spring or fall. A fall application cycle is shown in this application. Which month does your fumigation cycle start? ( check only one) 3. Target Pest( s) or Pest Problem( s):

Pest 1 Pest 2 Pest 3 Pest 4 Pest 5 4. Pest Economic Threshold Year Pest 1 2003 Pest 2 2003 Pest 3 2003 Pest 4 2003 Pest 5 2003 5. Target Pest Infestation Pest 1 % Pest 2 % Pest 3 % Pest 4 % Pest 5 %

6. Representative User : Treat if present. 1 ( Please estimate the percentage of the consortia's total growing area with a moderate to severe problem with these pests. Describe source of information such as a survey or expert estimate.) Treat if present.

1 ( Please provide the economic threshold information for each pest. Describe year and source of information such as survey or expert estimate.)

Units ( e. g. pests/ sq ft) EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant OMB Control # 2060 0482 Dr. David B. Langston, Jr. Extension Plant Pathologist UGA 100 70 100 70 Dr. David B. Langston, Jr. Extension Plant Pathologist UGA Percentage of Total Growing Area 1 Treat if present.

Treat if present. P. ultimum, aphanadermatum Pythium root and collar rot Cyperus esculentus Crown and Root Rot P. irregulare, myriotylum Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Crop & Pest Information Source Threshold Dr. Stanley Culpepper Extension Weed Scientist Univ. of GA Dr. David B. Langston, Jr.

Dr. David B. Langston, Jr.

Dr. David B. Langston, Jr.

Dr. David B. Langston, Jr.

Describe a few crops that could follow this crop: 500 200 300 Cucumbers approximately 50% of the land he/ she farms. The user will generally grow two or three crops on the same land each year to complete one fumigation cycle. The user will treat with methyl bromide on a regular Meloidogyne incognita Cyperus rotundus ( Please identify the top target pests or pest problems. Provide at least common name and genus and species if possible. Additional pests or pest problems can be provided as an attachment.)

Common Name Genus Yellow and Purple Nutsedge The grower may complete two, three or even four crops in one fumigation cycle. Tomatoes Eggplant ( Please provide descriptive factors regarding your operation.)

Average Farm Size Average acres in this crop Average Area Treated with Methyl Bromide: Acres Squash 40 Dr. David B. Langston, Jr. Extension Plant Pathologist UGA basis since pest pressure will always be high. Dr. David B. Langston, Jr. Extension Plant Pathologist UGA Other descriptive factors regarding representative user:

The representative user will generally grow several different commodities and will rent or lease Acres Acres Treat if present. 1 Phytophthora capsici Source Dr. Stanley Culpepper 1 Southern Blight Sclerotium rolfsii Pratylenchus sp. Nematodes EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

A B C Total Actual Pounds a. i. of Methyl Bromide Applied per Year Total Actual Acres Treated per Year Average Pounds a. i. Applied per Acre per Year 1997 1,370,849 6,217 220.5 1998 1,670,067 7,574 220.5 1999 1,129,700 6,637 170.2 2000 782,040 5,700 134 2001 733,650 5,475 134 2002 779,210 5,815 134 OMB Control # 2060 0482 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant use per acre have declined. Also, the amount of land planted to tomatoes may vary from Comments: year to year due to price fluctuations. Tomato acreage increased in Georgia in the late 1990' s but has leveled off. However, as growers have switched to 67% MBr and price has increased, the rates of methyl bromide If there is a variation ( greater than 10%) in the quantity a. i., the acres treated or average application rate from year to year, please explain the reasons for the variation. What is the frequency of methyl bromide applied per area? ( 1x / year, 2x / year, 1x / 3 years, etc.)

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

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

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

Total Actual Acres Treated per Year Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E:

Column F:

Column G:

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

2000 Tomato Fresh Market 1600 25# Carton $ 7.00 $ 11,200.00 2001 Squash Fresh Market 934 3/ 4 & 5/ 9 bu $ 6.93 $ 6,472.62 2001 Tomato Fresh Market 1667 25# Carton $ 7.46 $ 12,435.82 2002 Squash Fresh Market 1330 3/ 4 & 5/ 9 bu $ 5.73 $ 7,620.90 2002 Tomato Fresh Market 1400 25# Carton $ 5.80 $ 8,120.00 2003 Squash Fresh Market 875 3/ 4 & 5/ 9 bu $ 7.20 $ 6,300.00 OMB Control # 2060 0482 Gross revenue per acre for each market category and or each crop/ crop grouping may be calculated using the data you entered as price times yield. If revenue is not equal to price times yield, you may enter a different revenue amount, but please explain the difference in the comments section below. Gross Revenue Price Enter the unit of measurement for each crop/ species ( lbs, cwt, carton, bin). If not by weight, specify in the comments section the average weight of the measure. Units of Measurement Enter average prices received by the users for that crop/ crop grouping and market category. Average price over all categories can be calculated separately, if needed. Enter marketing categories that determine prices received, for example, grade ( size, color), timeliness ( early season, late season), or end use ( fresh, processing). Itemize or aggregate these factors to the extent appropriate if lack of methyl bromide would effect the yields in each category.

Enter the yield per acre, or the proportion of total yields, obtained for that category. For perennial crops, please enter yields at full production. Be sure to indicate yields at other stages in the timeline in Worksheet 2 A. Yield Comments:

Since the fumigation cycle starts in the fall, the second crop is always a spring crop in the following year. If this application is for multiple crops/ crop groupings ( e. g. nurseries producing evergreens, deciduous, and forbs) please indicate the proportion of land area allocated to each crop/ crop grouping. Worksheet 2 C. Methyl Bromide  Crop/ Species Yield & Gross Revenue for 2000 2002 Market Categories Be sure to enter the year. Use as many rows as needed for each year for all the crops/ crop groupings in the fumigation cycles from 2000 to 2002. If a fumigation cycle overlaps more than one calendar year, then the year of the fumigation cycle is the year methyl bromide was applied.

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

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

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E: OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 2 D( 1& 2). Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for 2002 Enter all operating costs incurred during a fumigation cycle. Users with a relatively short fumigation cycle ( less than five years) should use version D( 1); users cultivating perennial crops should use version D( 2). Users with multiple crops, either on the same area in a single fumigation cycle or on different areas treated separately, should copy this sheet and provide costs for each crop. If multiple crops are cultivated sequentially following a single fumigation, replace fumigation costs in Pre plant Operations with any additional pest control costs used prior to the following crops. If a fallow season is an important part of the fumigation cycle, include costs incurred ( for example, cultivating a cover crop) as a separate line or as a separate sheet, if costs are extensive. Please fill in the unshaded areas. The shaded areas can be used if the information is known.

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

This field is required only for methyl bromide. However, you may include specific amounts of other inputs or operations if you believe it helps to document the additional costs you would incur by using an alternative fumigant. Operation / Input Quantity Used per Acre Operation / Input for Perennial Crops For perennial crops ( Worksheet D( 2)), we have divided the lifespan into three basic periods: pre production ( including establishment), initial production, and full production. Please ensure that the timeline in Worksheet 2 A indicates the years of each period. Operating costs should be an average of costs incurred during each period. Please consider expected replanting rates and indicate which year dead or poorly performing young trees would be replaced. You may copy columns/ rows as needed if these periods need to be refined for your situation.

For inputs and operations detailed in Columns B and D, total costs can be calculated as Column B times Column D. Otherwise, enter total cost of the input or operation. As a check, you may add up Column E to obtain an estimate of total variable operating costs. These will not include fixed and overhead costs, nor a return to the owners' labor. It should, therefore, be less than gross revenues calculated in Worksheet 2 C. If it is not, please explain ( for example, unusually poor yields or unusually poor prices). For perennial crops, Column E should only be totaled for the years at full production. For all inputs and operations detailed in Column B, please specify the unit cost. Also, indicate all costs of applying methyl bromide, including any material costs, for example, tarps. If custom applied and separate costs are unavailable, write ' custom' and enter total cost in Column E. For all inputs and operations detailed in Column B, please specify the units of measurement.

Yield For harvest operations, indicate average yields or representative yields from Worksheet 2 C.

Harvest costs may likewise be calculated as costs per acre ( Column B) plus variable costs per unit of yield ( Column C) times yield ( Column D). Total Cost per Acre Unit Costs Total Cost per Acre Constant Cost per Acre For harvest operations, specify costs that depend on land area, for example, picking costs, per acre of land.

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

50.00 $

200 pounds lbs/ acre 2.65 $ 530.00 $

250.00 $

50.00 $

415.58 $

348.00 $

322.50 $

297.00 $

58.50 $

467.00 $

250.00 $

135.00 $

27.05 $

365.00 $

320.91 $

3,886.54 $

Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($) 0.90 $ 1,400.00 1,260.00 $

0.20 $ 1,400.00 280.00 $

0.75 $ 1,400.00 1,050.00 $

2.13 $ 1,400.00 2,982.00 $

690.20 $

6,262.20 $ OMB Control # 2060 0482 A Worksheet 2 D( 1). Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for 2002  Tomato Operation / Input Pre plant Operations Land preparation Fumigation product ( methyl bromide)

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

Interest on Operating Capital ( 9%) Fuel / Machine Labor Other Costs ( staking/ tying)

Harvest Operations Labor Hauling Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Total Marketing EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant B C D E Quantity Used per Acre Units ( lbs, hours, etc) Unit Cost ($) Total Cost per Acre ($)

9.75 $

25 gallons/ acre 3.75 $ 93.75 $

25.00 $

50.00 $

175.00 $

195.00 $

157.00 $

43.50 $

157.00 $

250.00 $

135.00 $

27.05 $

118.62 $

1,436.67 $

Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($) 0.75 $ 720.00 540.00 $

0.10 $ 720.00 72.00 $

1.05 $ 720.00 756.00 $

0.65 $ 720.00 468.00 $

504.90 $

2,340.90 $ OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 2 D( 1). Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for 2002  Squash A Operation / Input Pre plant Operations Land preparation Fumigation product ( vapam between crops)

application Irrigation Other costs Cultural Operations Seed / Seedlings Fertilizer / Soil Amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Other Costs Interest on Operating Capital ( 9%) Labor ( manual)

Fuel / Machine Labor Total Harvest Operations Labor Hauling Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Marketing ( 8.5%)

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

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

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

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

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

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

2.

Study # 1 2 3 4 5 3.

Units Units 25# 25# bu bu 4.

X No 5.

6. OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 1400 875 525 Yield with Methyl Bromide Yield With Alternative Describe quality impacts such as: percent smaller fruit, reduced grade, smaller plants, crop damage, disease vector, etc. Refer to market category question in Worksheet 2 C.

Market Category later harvest, smaller fruit smaller fruit Fresh Mkt Tomato Fresh Mkt Squash Details see 2005 application Attached? Study Information For the information in # 1 above list: the study name, authors, publication, date, and if a copy is attached. 5 Enter Average Loss Alternative:

% Yield Loss * 1, 3 dichloropropene Yield Loss & Pest Control When Comparing This Alternative to Methyl Bromide Pest Being Tested Study # ( list below) Provide numerical estimates where possible.

0 Details % Pest Control *

Feasibility covered in 2002 application. 1 2 3 4 Quality Loss *

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

( If yes, please explain) Label requires 28 day waiting period before planting. 840 Quality Impact Description Soil Restriction 100 Label requires 28 day waiting period before planting.  Label Restriction  Township Caps 11 Cannot be used over Karst topography/ geology Cyperus Sp.

Organic Matter Restriction Off Site Damage ( outgassing) Other Restrictions ( Describe) This information will be used to determine the amount of methyl bromide needed. Restrictions on Alternative Use Regulatory Restriction % of Area Details EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Pest Resistant To Alternative Yes * If no yield or quality loss information is given we will assume no losses. Only provide pest control information if yield or quality loss information is not available. 7.

8.

9.

Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 X X X X X X X X X X X X Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 X Alternative: 1, 3 Dichloropropene First crop is terminated and a burndown herbicide plus Metam Sodium through drip irrigation may be applied Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON)

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

EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Comments:

even greater loss with squash. between crops. Reference for yield loss information: Weed Technology 16: 860 866. Data is for cantaloupe, but would likely be Planting Land Preparation Fumigation Land Preparation Fumigation Planting Harvest Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps ( Indicate when fumigation, major crop and pest management practices typically occur by shading the appropriate cells. Show a second crop if part of the fumigation cycle. If the fumigation cycle is longer than one year change the months to an appropriate interval. These tables are for annual crops but more than one crop may benefit from one methyl bromide fumigation. If application covers multiple crops/ crop groupings not grown sequentially, they will need to provide this information for all crops/ crop groupings. Please adjust timeline as necessary. Please provide additional comments or description below or on a separate page. Please begin the timeline with the first land preparation. For perennials, please begin with the year of land preparation and fumigation and indicate the years of production by yield or percentage of full production.) Alternative Timeline Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON) Beginning Fumigation Cycle # of Applications per Year Active Ingredient ( a. i.) Name of Product and Formulation 1 Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide OMB Control # 2060 0482 In Line Units ( gals, lbs. Etc.) 88.6 118.0 lbs. 1, 3 D + chloropicrin Use Rate of Chemical Alternative Quantity a. i. per Acre # of Acres Treated NA 1, 3 dichloropropene Telone II 1 to 2 1 to 2 1 85.4 135 NA Telone EC Telone C 35 NA NA Non Chemical Pest Control ( please describe) 85 170 88.9 140 lbs. lbs. 1, 3 dichloropropene 1, 3 D + chloropicrin lbs. 1.

2.

Study # 1 2 3 4 5 3.

Units Units 25# 25# bu bu 4.

X No 5.

6.

EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Off Site Damage ( outgassing) Other Restrictions ( Describe) Pest Resistant To Alternative Organic Matter Restriction  Township Caps Soil Restriction Regulatory Restriction  Label Restriction 100 21 day waiting period between application and planting Restrictions on Alternative Use This information will be used to determine the amount of methyl bromide needed.

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

Yes ( If yes, please explain) Label requires 21 day waiting period before planting. Fresh Mkt Squash 875 525 smaller fruit Fresh Mkt Tomato 1400 840 later harvest, smaller fruit Quality Loss * Describe quality impacts such as: percent smaller fruit, reduced grade, smaller plants, crop damage, disease vector, etc. Refer to market category question in Worksheet 2 C.

Market Category Yield with Methyl Bromide Yield With Alternative Quality Impact Description Attached? Details see 2005 application * If no yield or quality loss information is given we will assume no losses. Only provide pest control information if yield or quality loss information is not available.

Study Information For the information in # 1 above list: the study name, authors, publication, date, and if a copy is attached. Enter Average Loss 5 4 3 Feasibility covered in 2002 application. 2 1 Cyperus Sp. 0 Yield Loss & Pest Control When Comparing This Alternative to Methyl Bromide Provide numerical estimates where possible.

Study # ( list below) Pest Being Tested % Yield Loss * % Pest Control * Details OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Alternative: Metam Sodium/ Potassium Sodium 7.

8.

9.

Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 X X X X X X X X X X X X Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 X EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant First crop is terminated and a burndown herbicide plus Metam Sodium through drip irrigation may be applied between crops. Reference for yield loss information: Weed Technology 16: 860 866. Data is for cantaloupe, but would likely be even greater loss with squash. Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps Comments: Fumigation Planting Harvest Fallow Continuation of Alternative Cycle ( if needed) Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON)

Land Preparation Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps Land Preparation Fumigation Planting Harvest Beginning Fumigation Cycle Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON) Alternative Timeline ( Indicate when fumigation, major crop and pest management practices typically occur by shading the appropriate cells. Show a second crop if part of the fumigation cycle. If the fumigation cycle is longer than one year change the months to an appropriate interval. These tables are for annual crops but more than one crop may benefit from one methyl bromide fumigation. If application covers multiple crops/ crop groupings not grown sequentially, they will need to provide this information for all crops/ crop groupings. Please adjust timeline as necessary. Please provide additional comments or description below or on a separate page. Please begin the timeline with the first land preparation. For perennials, please begin with the year of land preparation and fumigation and indicate the years of production by yield or percentage of full production.) Non Chemical Pest Control ( please describe) 1 to 2 1 to 2 Metam Potassium K Pam 174 348 lbs. Metam Sodium Vapam/ Sectagon 160 320 lbs. Alternative: Metam Sodium/ Metam Potassium Use Rate of Chemical Alternative Active Ingredient ( a. i.) Name of Product and Formulation Quantity a. i. per Acre Units ( gals, lbs. Etc.) # of Acres Treated # of Applications per Year OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E: OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 B( 1& 2). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs Enter all operating costs incurred during a fumigation cycle. Users with a relatively short fumigation cycle ( less than five years) should use version B( 1); users cultivating perennial crops should use version B( 2). Users with multiple crops, either on the same area in a single fumigation cycle or on different areas treated separately, should copy this sheet and provide costs for each crop. If multiple crops are cultivated sequentially following a single fumigation, replace fumigation costs in pre plant Operations with any additional pest control costs used prior to the following crops. If a fallow season is an important part of the fumigation cycle, include costs incurred ( for example, cultivating a cover crop) as a separate line or as a separate sheet, if costs are extensive. Please fill in the unshaded areas. The shaded areas can be used if the information is known.

Operation / Input The operations/ inputs listed here are not meant to be exhaustive or representative of your specific production system. They are meant to provide suggestions and to help you identify how your operation would change if methyl bromide were unavailable. Be as precise as necessary otherwise you may aggregate operations or inputs. For example, specify herbicide costs if additional treatments would become necessary with the use of a methyl bromide alternative, otherwise you may simply specify total pesticide costs. Please specify only variable operating costs. Alternative: 1, 3 dichloropropene Cost per Unit of Yield For harvest operations, specify costs that depend on amount of product harvested, for example, packing material, per unit of produce.

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

Quantity Used per Acre This field is required only for methyl bromide. However, you may include specific amounts of other inputs or operations if you believe it helps to document the additional costs you would incur by using an alternative fumigant.

Constant Cost per Acre For harvest operations, specify costs that depend on land area, for example, picking costs, per acre of land.

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

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

Total Cost per Acre Total Cost per Acre Harvest costs may likewise be calculated as costs per acre ( Column B) plus variable costs per unit of yield ( Column C) times yield ( Column D).

EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant For all inputs and operations detailed in Column B, please specify the unit cost. Also, indicate all costs of applying methyl bromide, including any material costs, for example, tarps. If custom applied and separate costs are unavailable, write ' custom' and enter total cost in Column E.

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

50.00 $

17.5 gallons 21.00 $ 367.50 $

250.00 $

50.00 $

415.58 $

348.00 $

322.50 $

297.00 $

147.55 $

542.00 $

126.00 $

250.00 $

215.00 $

27.05 $

365.00 $

339.59 $

4,112.77 $

Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($) 0.90 $ 840.00 756.00 $

0.20 $ 840.00 168.00 $

0.75 $ 840.00 630.00 $

2.13 $ 840.00 1,789.20 $

414.12 $

3,757.32 $ OMB Control # 2060 0482 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Worksheet 3 B( 1). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs A Pre plant Operations Alternative: 1, 3 Dichloropropene Tomatoes Operation / Input Land preparation Fumigation product ( 1,3 D)

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

Fuel / Machine Labor Other Costs Interest on Operating Capital ( 9%)

Total Harvest Operations Labor Hauling Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Marketing Costs ( 8.5%)

Total Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E:

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

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

Unit Costs For all inputs and operations detailed in Column B, please specify the unit cost. Also, indicate all costs of applying methyl bromide, including any material costs, for example, tarps. If custom applied and separate costs are unavailable, write ' custom' and enter total cost in Column E. Constant Cost per Acre For harvest operations, specify costs that depend on land area, for example, picking costs, per acre of land.

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

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

Operation / Input The operations/ inputs listed here are not meant to be exhaustive or representative of your specific production system. They are meant to provide suggestions and to help you identify how your operation would change if methyl bromide were unavailable. Be as precise as necessary otherwise you may aggregate operations or inputs. For example, specify herbicide costs if additional treatments would become necessary with the use of a methyl bromide alternative, otherwise you may simply specify total pesticide costs. Please specify only variable operating costs. OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 B( 1& 2). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs Alternative: Metam Sodium/ Metam Potassium B C D E Quantity Used per Acre Units ( lbs, hours, etc) Unit Cost ($) Total Cost per Acre ($)

50.00 $

75 gallons 3.75 $ 281.25 $

250.00 $

50.00 $

415.58 $

348.00 $

322.50 $

297.00 $

147.55 $

542.00 $

250.00 $

215.00 $

27.05 $

365.00 $

320.48 $

3,881.41 $

Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($) 0.90 $ 840.00 756.00 $

0.20 $ 840.00 168.00 $

0.75 $ 840.00 630.00 $

2.50 $ 840.00 2,100.00 $

385.56 $

4,039.56 $ Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Marketing Costs ( 8.5%) Harvest Operations Labor Hauling Other Costs Interest on Operating Capital ( 9%) Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual)

Fuel / Machine Labor Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Fungicide Cultural Operations Seed / Seedlings Fertilizer / Soil Amendments Other costs Fumigation product ( 1,3 D)

application Irrigation A Operation / Input Pre plant Operations Land preparation Worksheet 3 B( 1). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs Alternative: Metam Sodium/ Metam Potassium Tomatoes Harvest costs may likewise be calculated as costs per acre ( Column B) plus variable costs per unit of yield ( Column C) times yield ( Column D).

EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant OMB Control # 2060 0482 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant B C D E Quantity Used per Acre Units ( lbs, hours, etc) Unit Cost ($) Total Cost per Acre ($)

9.75 $

25 gallons 3.75 $ 93.75 $

25.00 $

50.00 $

175.00 $

195.00 $

157.00 $

56.15 $

232.00 $

94.50 $

250.00 $

295.00 $

27.05 $

149.42 $

1,809.62 $

Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($) 0.75 $ 540.00 405.00 $

0.10 $ 540.00 54.00 $

1.05 $ 540.00 567.00 $

0.65 $ 540.00 351.00 $

312.58 $

1,689.58 $ Marketing Costs ( 8.5%)

Total Hauling Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Total Harvest Operations Labor Fuel / Machine Labor Other Costs Interest on Operating Capital ( 9%) Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual) Fertilizer / Soil Amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Cultural Operations Seed / Seedlings Irrigation Other costs Land preparation Fumigation product ( vapam between crops)

application A Operation / Input Pre plant Operations OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 B( 1). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs Alternative: 1, 3 Dichloropropene/ Squash 2nd Crop EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant B C D E Quantity Used per Acre Units ( lbs, hours, etc) Unit Cost ($) Total Cost per Acre ($)

9.75 $

25 gallons 3.75 $ 93.75 $

25.00 $

50.00 $

175.00 $

195.00 $

157.00 $

56.15 $

157.00 $

94.50 $

250.00 $

295.00 $

27.05 $

142.67 $

1,727.87 $

Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($) 0.75 $ 540.00 405.00 $

0.10 $ 540.00 54.00 $

1.05 $ 540.00 567.00 $

0.65 $ 540.00 351.00 $

312.58 $

1,689.58 $ Marketing Costs ( 8.5%)

Total Hauling Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Harvest Operations Labor Fuel / Machine Labor Other Costs Interest on Operating Capital ( 9%) Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual) Fertilizer / Soil Amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Cultural Operations Seed / Seedlings Irrigation Other costs Land preparation Fumigation product ( Metam Na/ K)

application A Operation / Input Pre plant Operations OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 B( 1). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs Alternative: Metam Sodium/ Metam Potassium/ Squash EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 1. 1 4 2 5 3 2. 1 4 2 5 3 6 3. 1 4 2 5 3 4.

5.

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

X X From:

To:

X X 9.

Years Amount ($) 93 03 $ 773,000.00 93 03 $ 1,970,000.00 93 03 $ 9,000.00 10. $

Cost $ 30,000.00 $ 106,500.00 $ 20,000.00 11. OMB Control # 2060 0482 ( Describe each investment and its associated costs. e. g. specialized machinery, etc.) This has already been accomplished.

Custom Drip Irrigation System for research Application Equipment Roundup, Sandea, Dual, Sulfentrazone, fumigants GFVGA University of Georgia Other total investments, if any, made to reduce your reliance on methyl bromide? Formulation Changes ( please specify)

( check all that apply)

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

USDA Tifton Pest Control Unit What is the cumulative amount spent and the types of contributions this consortium has made to fund research to develop alternatives to methyl bromide since 1992? ( e. g. consortium dues, direct research funding, etc.)

Name of Organization / Research Institution Please provide an overview/ timeline of the plan to transition away from using methyl bromide. Currently there is no data to suggest that there is a suitable alternative to transition toward. Obviously, should Sandea + 1,3 D + Pic Formulation Changes Grant requests made to USDA, EPA, state, or other funding group. Methyl Bromide Alternatives IR4 Methyl Bromide Alternatives USDA Investment Plastic, Fumigants, Drip Irrigation How will you minimize your use and/ or emissions of methyl bromide? chloropicrin Metam Sodium would transition away from methyl bromide as soon as feasible. What would be the best currently available alternative if methyl bromide were not available? 1, 3  Dichloropropene + Chloropicrin Prioritize the alternative chemicals or cultural practices to be tested.

Metam Potassium + 1,3 D + Sandea Yellow & Purple Nutsedge Phytophthora capsici Nematodes Provide a list of alternative chemicals or cultural practices that have been tested. Pythium sp. Rhizoctonia solani Worksheet 4. Future Research Plans Please describe future plans to test alternatives to methyl bromide. You may use this worksheet to describe all future plans.

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

__ 98_% methyl bromide, ___ 2_% chloropicrin __ 67_% methyl bromide, __ 33_% chloropicrin Virtually Impermeable Film ( VIF)

Non Chemical Methods ( please specify) Fallow management of nutsedge, crop rotation Will yield/ quality loss be measured? Metam Potassium Methyl Iodide Dual, Sulfentrazone, Reflex, Sandea, Invoke 1,3  dichloropropene a suitable alternative become available and prove technically and economically feasible, Georgia growers Sandea + Methyl Iodide Will economic impacts be measured?

Tarpaulin ( Low Density Polyethylene)

Other EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 1.

2.

3.

4. 2005 5. 2005 6.

2006 779,210 lbs. 5,815 2007 779,210 lbs. 5,815 Not Technically Feasible Not Economically Feasible X X X X X X X X X X X OMB Control # 2060 0482 Resistant Cultivars Does not adequately control nutsedge.

Cover Crops & Mulching Does not adequately control nutsedge. Organic Production Does not adequately control nutsedge.

Biological Control Does not adequately control nutsedge. Solarization Does not adequately control nutsedge.

General IPM Does not adequately control nutsedge. Metam Potassium Does not adequately control nutsedge. Also, has a 21 day waiting period before planting.

Methyl Iodide Does not adequately control nutsedge. Chloropicrin Does not adequately control nutsedge.

Metam Sodium Does not adequately control nutsedge. Also, has a 21 day waiting period before planting. Potential Alternatives Reasons Telone ( 1, 3 Dichloropropene) Product will not control nutsedge, a major pest in GA. Not legal to use this material where Karst topography exists. Area Treated Acres Place an " X" in the column( s) labeled " Not Technically Feasible" and/ or " Not Economically Feasible" where appropriate. Use the " Reasons" column to describe why the potential alternative is not feasible. There is no forseeable alternative to methyl bromide that will be technically and economically feasible for production of these crops by 2006 or 2007. Therefore, requests are being made to cover these years as well.

Area Treated Acres Acres Treated with Methyl Bromide 5,815 Acres If methyl bromide is requested for additional years, reason for request: Crop: Tomatoes followed by squash ( or some other second crop) Pounds of Methyl Bromide Requested 779,210 lbs. Consortium Name: Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association Location: Georgia For EPA Use Only ID # _______________ SECTOR __________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

Crop Grouping The applicant can group simliar crops together if: ( i) Crops would experience similar yield and quality losses in the absence of methyl bromide; and ( ii) Crops are grown on the same fumigation and cultivation cycle with similar operating costs. For example, nursery crops including various flower or tree species can be aggregated, with average yields per acre and prices. However, if crops are distinctly different in revenues and operating costs, or the cycles, the applicant may want to present yield, price and operating costs for each crop separately and also indicate the proportion of land area allocated to each crop. Definitions: OMB Control # 2060 0482 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant


[Federal Register: February 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 28)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 7657-7659]
[DOCID:fr11fe08-1]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0212; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-237-AD;
Amendment 39-15368; AD 2008-03-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in
flight * * * and on ground, the FAA has published Special Federal
Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR88) in June 2001.
    In their Letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01-L296 dated March 4th,
2002 and 04/00/02/07/03-L024, dated February 3rd, 2003, the JAA
(Joint Aviation Authorities) recommended the application of a
similar regulation to the National Aviation Authorities (NAA).
    Under this regulation, all holders of type certificates for
passenger transport aircraft with either a passenger capacity of 30
or more, or a payload capacity of 7,500 pounds (3402 kg) or more,
which have received their certification since January 1st, 1958, are
required to conduct a design review against explosion risks.

The unsafe condition is the potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. We are
issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 17, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 17,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
 or in person at the U.S. Department of

Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace
Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on November 21, 2007
(72 FR 65480). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for
the specified products. The MCAI states:

    Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in
flight * * * and on ground, the FAA has published Special Federal
Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR88) in June 2001.
    In their Letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01-L296 dated March 4th,
2002 and 04/00/02/07/03-L024, dated February 3rd, 2003, the JAA
(Joint Aviation Authorities) recommended the application of a
similar regulation to the National Aviation Authorities (NAA).
    Under this regulation, all holders of type certificates for
passenger transport aircraft with either a passenger capacity of 30
or more, or a payload capacity of 7,500 pounds (3402 kg) or more,
which have received their certification since January 1st, 1958, are
required to conduct a design review against explosion risks.
    This Airworthiness Directive (AD), which renders mandatory the
modification [3163] to separate wiring of Fuel Quantity Indication
System [FQIS], is a consequence of the design review.

The unsafe condition is the potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.
Modification 3163 includes re-routing of existing wiring to the FQIS,
installing new wires with shields to the FQIS, and operational and
functional tests of the FQIS. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a Note within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 218 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about 50 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average
labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $1,500
per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs
that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of

this AD to the U.S. operators to be $1,199,000, or $5,500 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Operations office

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2008-03-17 SaaB Aircraft AB: Amendment 39-15368. Docket No. FAA-
2007-0212; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-237-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective March
17, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B
airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28: Fuel.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in
flight * * * and on ground, the FAA has published Special Federal
Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR88) in June 2001.
    In their Letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01-L296 dated March 4th,
2002 and 04/00/02/07/03-L024, dated February 3rd, 2003, the JAA
(Joint Aviation Authorities) recommended the application of a
similar regulation to the National Aviation Authorities (NAA).
    Under this regulation, all holders of type certificates for
passenger transport aircraft with either a passenger capacity of 30
or more, or a payload capacity of 7,500 pounds (3402 kg) or more,
which have received their certification since January 1st, 1958, are
required to conduct a design review against explosion risks.
    This Airworthiness Directive (AD), which renders mandatory the
modification [3163] to separate wiring of Fuel Quantity Indication
System [FQIS], is a consequence of the design review.

The unsafe condition is the potential of ignition sources inside
fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could
result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.
Modification 3163 includes re-routing of existing wiring to the
FQIS, installing new wires with shields to the FQIS, and operational
and functional test of the FQIS.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Within 72 months after the effective date of this AD, unless
already done, do modification 3163 in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service Bulletin 340-28-025,
dated February 26, 2007.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (425)
227-1149. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which
the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI)
in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI,
your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2007-0169, dated
June 15, 2007; and Saab Service Bulletin 340-28-025, dated February
26, 2007; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Saab Service Bulletin 340-28-025, dated
February 26, 2007, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the
AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Saab
Aircraft AB, SAAB Aircraft Product Support, S-581.88,
Linko[auml]ping, Sweden.

    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html
.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 30, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-2357 Filed 2-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2153-2154]
[DOCID:fr14ja09-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2009-0001-N-1]

Notice and Request for Comments

AGENGY: Federal Railroad Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice and Request For Comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Requirements (ICRs) abstracted below have been forwarded to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The
ICRs describe the nature of the information collections and their
expected burdens. The Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collections of information
was published on November 3, 2008 (73 FR 65441).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before February 13, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of Safety,
Planning and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop 17, Washington, DC
20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>), or Ms. Nakia Jackson, Office of
Information Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:
(202) 493-6073). (These telephone numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13, Section 2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised
at 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part
1320, require Federal agencies to issue two notices seeking public
comment on information collection activities before OMB may approve
paperwork packages. 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.5, 1320.8(d)(1),
1320.12. On November 3, 2008, FRA published a 60-day notice in the
Federal Register soliciting comment on ICRs that the agency was seeking
OMB approval. 73 FR 65441. FRA received no comments after issuing this
60-day notice. Accordingly, DOT announces that these information
collection activities have been re-evaluated and certified under 5 CFR
1320.5(a) and forwarded to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5
CFR 1320.12(c).
    Before OMB decides whether to approve these proposed collections of
information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. 44 U.S.C.
3507(b); 5 CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires OMB to approve or
disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and 60 days after the 30 day
notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507 (b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d); see also
60 FR 44978, 44983,

Aug. 29, 1995. OMB believes that the 30 day notice informs the
regulated community to file relevant comments and affords the agency
adequate time to digest public comments before it renders a decision.
60 FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. Therefore, respondents should submit their
respective comments to OMB within 30 days of publication to best ensure
having their full effect. 5 CFR 1320.12(c); see also 60 FR 44983, Aug.
29, 1995.
    The summaries below describe the nature of the information
collection requirements (ICRs) and the expected burden. The revised
requirements are being submitted for clearance by OMB as required by
the PRA.
    Title: Inspection and Maintenance Standards For Steam Locomotives.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0505.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Railroads.
    Abstract: The Locomotive Boiler Inspection Act (LBIA) of 1911
requires each railroad subject to the Act to file copies of its rules
and instructions for the inspection of locomotives. The original LBIA
was expanded to cover the entire steam locomotive and tender and all
its parts and appurtenances. This Act then requires carriers to make
inspections and to repair defects to ensure the safe operation of steam
locomotives. The collection of information is used by tourist or
historic railroads and by locomotive owners/operators to provide a
record for each day a steam locomotive is placed in service, as well as
a record that the required steam locomotive inspections are completed.
Additionally, the collection of information is used by FRA Federal
inspectors to verify that necessary safety inspections and tests have
been completed, and to ensure that steam locomotives are indeed ``safe
and suitable'' for service and are properly operated and maintained.
    Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 314 hours.

    Title: Identification of Cars Moved in Accordance with Order 13528.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0506.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Railroads.
    Abstract: This collection of information identifies a freight car
being moved within the scope of Order 13528 (now codified under 49 CFR
232.3). Otherwise, an exception will be taken, and the car will be set
out of the train and not delivered. The information that must be
recorded is specified at 49 CFR 232.3(d)(3), which requires that a car
be properly identified by a card attached to each side of the car and
signed stating that such movement is being made under the authority of
the order. Sec.  232.3(d)(3) does not require retaining cards or tags.
When a car bearing a tag for movement under this provision arrives at
its destination, the tags are simply removed.
    Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 67 hours.

    Title: U.S. Locational Requirement for Dispatching U.S. Rail
Operations.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0556.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Railroads.
    Abstract: Part 241 requires, in the absence of a waiver, that all
dispatching of railroad operations that occurs in the United States be
performed in this country, with a minor exception. A railroad is
allowed to conduct extraterritorial dispatching from Mexico or Canada
in emergency situations, but only for the duration of the emergency. A
railroad relying on the exception must provide written notification of
its action to the FRA Regional Administrator of each FRA region in
which the railroad operation occurs; such notification is not required
before addressing the emergency situation. The information collected
under this rule is used as part of FRA's oversight function to ensure
that extraterritorial dispatchers comply with applicable safety
regulations.
    Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 8 hours.
    Addressee: Send comments regarding these information collections to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, 725 Seventeenth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503,
Attention: FRA Desk Officer. Alternatively, comments may be sent via e-
mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office
of Management and Budget, at the following address: oira_
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Comments are invited on the following: Whether the proposed
collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of
the burden of the proposed information collections; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    A comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.

    Authority : 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    Issued in Washington, DC on January 9, 2009.
Kimberly Orben,
Director, Office of Financial Management, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-614 Filed 1-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: August 31, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 168)]
[Notices]
[Page 53369-53370]
[DOCID:fr31au10-128]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements Agency Information
Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collection and the expected
burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment

period was published on May 6, 2010 (75 FR 25033-25034).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 30, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725-17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria Vegega, PhD Chief, Behavioral
Research Division, Office of Behavioral Safety Research (NTI-131),
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., W44-302, Washington, DC 20590. Dr. Vegega's phone number is 202-
366-2668 and her e-mail address is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Focus Group Review of Advanced Alcohol Detection Technology.
    Type of Request: New information collection requirement.
    Abstract: In 2008, 11,773 people were killed in alcohol-impaired-
driving crashes. Drivers are considered to be alcohol-impaired when
their blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is .08 grams per deciliter (g/
dL) or higher. These alcohol-impaired-driving fatalities accounted for
32 percent of the total motor vehicle traffic fatalities in the United
States.
    In a continuing effort to reduce the adverse consequences of
alcohol-impaired driving, NHTSA in conjunction with the Automotive
Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS) is undertaking research and
development to explore the feasibility of, and public policy challenges
associated with, use of in-vehicle alcohol detection technology. The
agency believes that use of vehicle-based, alcohol detection
technologies could help to significantly reduce the number of alcohol-
impaired driving crashes, deaths and injuries by preventing drivers
from driving while their blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is at or
above the legal limit. In 2008, ACTS and NHTSA entered into a 5-Year
Cooperative Agreement to ``explore the feasibility, the potential
benefits of, and the public policy challenges associated with a more
widespread use of unobtrusive technology to prevent drunk driving''.
The goal of this research effort, the Driver Alcohol Detection System
for Safety (DADSS) project, is to develop and test prototypes that may
be considered for vehicle integration thereafter.
    As technology development progresses and decisions are being made
about how to integrate such technology into vehicles, NHTSA needs a
better understanding of public preferences with respect to in-vehicle
alcohol detection devices. Optimization of technology and public
acceptance of it once deployed will depend on the extent to which
public attitudes are taken into account during the development process.
Recognizing the need to obtain input from drivers early in the
development process, NHTSA proposes to conduct a total of 24 focus
groups in two stages. The first set of focus groups (12 focus groups)
will obtain information from licensed drivers on public perceptions and
attitudes concerning in-vehicle alcohol detection technology designed
to prevent alcohol-impaired driving. Information from this phase of the
project will be used by NHTSA and the DADSS research team to provide
input to decision making regarding vehicle integration with respect to
the technology under investigation. A second set of focus groups (12
focus groups) will gauge driver reaction to technology prototypes,
obtain input on alternative prototype features, and obtain guidance on
strategies for introduction of the technology into the vehicle fleet.
The information will also be used to identify potential barriers to
acceptance of the technologies.
    Affected Public: Drivers age 21 years and older will be recruited
in four locations to participate in focus groups. They will be provided
with a stipend to reimburse them for expenses and compensate them for
their time in participating in the discussions. Participation by all
respondents would be voluntary and anonymous. All focus groups will be
conducted by a trained moderator.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 288 hours (24 focus groups with
eight participants in each, averaging 1.5 hours).
    Comments are invited on the following:
    (i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection;
    (iii) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
    (iv) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    A comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30
days of publication.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).

Jeff Michael,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-21757 Filed 8-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P