Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 25 PageID #: 7895
LYNCH, HOPPER, SALZANO & SMITH P. KYLE SMITH Hawaii Bar No. 9533 970 N. Kalaheo, Ste. A301 Kailua, HI 96734 T:(808) 791-9555
LAW OFFICES OF GERARD JERVIS GERARD A. JERVIS Hawaii Bar No. 2490 354 Uluniu Street, Ste. A205 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 T: (808) 262-2828
Attorneys on behalf of Plaintiffs
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII
JIM AANA et al., on behalf of themselves ) and all others similarly situated, ) ) CIVIL NO.: CV12 00231 –JMS BMK Plaintiffs; ) vs. ) ) PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL, ) DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE INC., a DuPont Business and Iowa ) NO. 1 RE HEALTH EFFECTS; Corporation, GAY & ROBINSON, INC., a ) EXHIBITS 1- 8; DECLARATION OF Hawaii corporation; ROBINSON FAMILY PARTNERS, a general partnership ) KYLE SMITH; AND CERTIFICATE registered in Hawaii; and DOE ) OF SERVICE DEFENDANTS 1-10; ) ) Defendants. ) )
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 25 PageID #: 7896
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
II. ARGUMENT… ...... 2
A. The Health Risks Associated with Pioneer’s Pesticide Use Are Intertwined with Dust Impacts and Relevant to the Nature of the Nuisance and Plaintiffs’ Use and Enjoyment of Their Homes ...... 2 B. Judge Kurren Did Not Bar Discovery Into Health and Environmental Issues, He Barred Further Discovery ...... 7 C. Plaintiffs’ Expert Reports are Directly Relevant to the Claims, Damages, and Defenses At Issue In this Case...... 9 1. The environmental and health aspects of Pioneer’s pesticide use are central to Plaintiffs’ claims ...... 10 2. The environmental and health aspects of Pioneer’s pesticide use are central to Defendants’ defenses ...... 12 3. The environmental and health aspects of Pioneer’s pesticide use impact Plaintiffs’ damages for property and injunctive relief ...... 13 D. Rule 403 Does Not Bar Evidence of the Health Risks and Environmental Concerns Raised by Pioneer’s Pesticides ...... 15 1. There is no unfair prejudice to Defendants ...... 16 2. No confusion will result for the jury ...... 16 3. The of trial is to resolve the issues in dispute, not ignore relevant evidence . 17
V. CONCLUSION ...... 18
ii Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 25 PageID #: 7897
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
Town of Mount Pleasant v. Van Tassell, 166 N.Y.S.2d 458 (N.Y.1957)( ...... 12
Statutes & Other Authority
66 C.J.S. Negligence §23(d)(1966) ...... 4
Hawaii Revised Statutes §149A-31 ...... 10, 11
Hawaii Revised Statutes §149A-2 ...... 11
Hawaii Revised Statutes §165-4 ...... 12
Hawaii Revised Statutes § 508D-1 ...... 14
iii Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 4 of 25 PageID #: 7898
No person shall: …(2) use, store, transport or discard any pesticide or pesticide container in any manner that would have unreasonable adverse effects on the environment. Hawaii Revised Statute 149A-31.
“Environment” includes water, air, land, and all plants and humans and other animals living therein, and the interrelationships that exist among these. Hawaii Revised Statute 149A-2.
“Unreasonable adverse effects on the environment” means any unreasonable risk to humans or the environment, taking into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of the use of the pesticide. Hawaii Revised Statute 149A-2.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 1 asks the Court to exclude five expert opinions – sight
unseen – because they address Pioneer’s use of pesticides and the human health and environmental
risks posed by such chemicals. In support of their motion, Defendants notably fail to attach any of
the five opinions they seek to exclude. Instead, they ask the Court to blindly base its decision on
self-serving snippets taken out of context from discovery, Judge Kurren, and Plaintiffs’ Rule 26(f)
expert disclosures. Because Defendant’s arguments, however, are factually wrong, legally flawed,
and misrepresent the record, Plaintiffs request this Court to deny Defendants’ motion because:
• The public health and environmental impact of Pioneer’s pesticides is directly relevant to Plaintiffs’ claims, Defendants’ defenses, and Plaintiffs’ damages. Indeed, HRS 149A-31 requires consideration of the environmental and human health risks to determine if Pioneer’s pesticide use is unreasonable. The environmental and human health aspects are also relevant to whether Defendants followed “generally accepted agricultural practices” as well as to Plaintiffs’ damages for stigma, loss of use of enjoyment of their property, and punitive damages. • Rule 403 does not bar evidence of the environmental and health risks of Pioneer’s pesticides. Rather, none of Defendants’ reasons justify exclusion of the five reports at issue, which are all directly relevant to the claims, defenses, and damages of the case.
1 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 5 of 25 PageID #: 7899
II.
ARGUMENT
A. The Health Risks Associated with Pioneer’s Pesticide Use Are Intertwined with the Dust Impacts and Relevant to the Nature of the Nuisance and Plaintiffs’ Use and Enjoyment of Their Homes.
The crux of Defendant’s motion is that because “Plaintiffs’ principal claim is that dust from
Pioneer’s farming operations interferes with their use and enjoyment of their property,”1 the
simultaneous drift of pesticides must be irrelevant. This logic is flawed. Contrary to Defendants’
arguments, one cannot neatly separate the “dust impact” from the “pesticide impact” in Waimea
into neat boxes. For example, while pesticides readily drift by themselves, pesticides are also
carried when dust blows from fields.2 Therefore, the impact of dust is a concern not simply
because of the huge imposition to clean it, but because dust carries pesticides along when it blows.
This has been part of this case from Waimea residents’ first petition to Pioneer.3 Even without dust
to carry pesticides into Waimea, however, Plaintiffs experts confirm that Pioneer’s pesticides reach
Waimea4 and that these pesticides pose substantial risks to the health of Waimea residents.5 Thus,
with or without the dust impact, Pioneer’s pesticides constitute a nuisance to Waimea.
1 Motion (ECF 744) at 3. 2 Expert Report of Susan Kegley, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, at 7-8 (“Drift can also occur after pesticides have been applied, from several days to several weeks after the initial application. Post- application drift takes two forms: 1) Drift of pesticide contaminated dust particles; and 2) volatilization drift, where pesticides evaporate off leaf and soil surfaces for several days to several weeks after the application and are transported off-site by prevailing winds.”). 3 Petition for Cleaner Air, Exhibit 5 to Third Amended Complaint(“TAC”) (ECF 331) (“We are concerned this dust may contain pollutants, such as fertilizers and/or pesticides that are used in commercial agriculture, and that the long-term health consequences of continuing present behavior may be severe.”). 4 Ex. 1, Expert Report of Susan Kegley;, at 11 (“There are many studies demonstrating the presence of volatilized pesticides in air both near and far from application sites, with a subset of the data showing concentrations of pesticides in air that are above toxicological levels of concern. In the section below, I present data from these studies to support my opinion that the people of Waimea are more likely than not 2 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 6 of 25 PageID #: 7900
It should also be recognized that the degree of a nuisance in any case turns in large part
upon the nature of the nuisance. One cannot address the nuisance of Pioneer’s pesticides without
recognizing the health risks they pose to Plaintiffs. Nevertheless, Defendants continue to try. For
example, in many of the sixty depositions taken by Defendants, Defendants’ counsel explained that
“off-site impacts” are things like odors…such as the smell of chocolate from the factory in
Hershey, Pennsylvania. As defense counsel explain:
Q. I grew up in South Jersey, and one of the places that people would go on day trips in South Jersey is a place called Hershey, Pennsylvania. There's an amusement park in Hershey, Pennsylvania called Hershey's Park. A. Uh-huh. Q. It was also the headquarters of Hershey's chocolate. And there was a Hershey's chocolate factory there. And from what friends told me, when the Hershey's chocolate factory was making chocolate, you could smell the chocolate smell throughout Hershey, Pennsylvania. So there the off-site impact is the chocolate smell because something that was happening in one place, the Hershey's chocolate factory, had an effect outside the factory in Hershey, Pennsylvania, in that you could smell the chocolate being made. Does that make sense? A. Yep.6
The smell of pesticides, however, is not the same as the smell of chocolate. And while it no doubt
recognized that odor alone may constitute a nuisance even when not “unwholesome or injurious to
health but merely offensive and unpleasant,”7 this does not mean an odor’s “unwholesome and
injurious” nature is thereby irrelevant. Again, there is a fundamental difference between the smell
being exposed to pesticides in air above levels of toxicological concern from Pioneer’s operations.); Expert Report of Camille Sears, attached hereto as Exhibit 2, at 5 (“Similar offsite exposures to Pioneer’s pesticide drift, including pesticides other than chlorpyrifos, can be expected on days with similar pesticide applications and wind conditions to those occurring on the above-listed days.”); see also Pesticide Drift Maps, Exhibit C-G to Sears Report, attached hereto as Exhibit 3, which show the drift of chlorpyrifos into Waimea. 5 Expert Report of Michael DiBartolomeis, attached hereto as Exhibit 4; Expert Report of Lorrin Pang, M.D., attached hereto as Exhibit 5. 6 April 29, 2013, Deposition Excerpt of Lisette Langlois, attached hereto as Exhibit 6. 7 Town of Mount Pleasant v. Van Tassell, 166 N.Y.S.2d 458 (N.Y.1957)(citing 66 C.J.S. Nuisances §23(d)(1966), p.778). 3 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 7 of 25 PageID #: 7901
of chocolate and the smell of pesticides in your home. As Defendants concede, many Plaintiffs in
this case complain of chemical odors in their homes that they attribute to Pioneer’s operations.8 If
these odors posed no other risk beyond mere annoyance, then the analysis might stop there. The
fact of the matter, however, is that Pioneer’s pesticides do pose health risks. And therefore, the
health risks of Pioneer’s pesticides are relevant to the degree of the nuisance forced upon Waimea.
In this case, Plaintiffs also allege claims that arise out of the violation of several statutes
and seek injunctive relief and damages for the diminution in value, impact to their real and
personal property (which includes the cost of cleaning, repair, replacement, and restoration of
finishes), and the injury to Plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment of their property. Neither the injunctive
relief nor damages sought by Plaintiffs are therefore limited to dust as claimed by Defendants.9
Rather, as this Court is well aware, Plaintiffs allege among other things that Pioneer’s pesticides
drift into and impact Plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment of their homes.10 A “single exposure to the
pesticides (or combination of pesticides) used by Pioneer can adversely impact human health.”11
Pioneer’s pesticides are therefore a nuisance that interferes with Plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment not
only because they smell bad, but because they pose actual risks to the health of people who live
within Plaintiffs’ homes.12
8 Motion at 3. 9 See August 4, 2013, Bellwether Plaintiffs’ Supplement to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) Initial Disclosures (ECF 223) at 4-6; see also TAC at 38-39, ¶¶4-5 (Preliminary and permanent injunctive relief…”). 10 See Exhibit 1 to August 4, 2013, Bellwether Plaintiffs’ Supplement to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) Initial Disclosures (ECF 223) at 10-69; see also TAC (ECF 331), at 10, ¶40 (“Because of the inherent risks for pesticide exposure and the potential of pesticide migration, Pioneer has a duty to not apply pesticides in a way that will contact Waimea Residents directly or through spray drift.”), ¶41 (“Despite this duty, Pioneer has failed to apply the pesticides it uses according to the label, which has caused the drift of pesticides into the community.”). 11 TAC, at 10, ¶37. 12 TAC, at 9, ¶35 (Pioneer’s pesticides “are recognized pollutants that present known and unknown risks to human health and the environment associated with acute, sub-chronic, and chronic exposure.”); Ex. 5, 4 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 8 of 25 PageID #: 7902
Defendants’ argument that Plaintiffs have “confirmed their property damage claims relate
to dust, not chemical exposure” should also be rejected. This argument is simply untrue and
ignores discovery that contradicts Defendants’ assertion. 13 While Defendants cite Plaintiffs’:
Itemized Personal Property & Real Property Damage Supplement, they fail to explain that this
supplement simply itemizes out-of-pocket expenses by individual plaintiffs. This supplement is not
the sole initial disclosure supplement provided by Plaintiffs nor does it supplant Plaintiffs’ expert
reports. For example, the supplement cited by Defendants does not include the other categories of
damage claimed by Plaintiffs.14 In Plaintiffs’ primary Damage Supplement, however, the impact of
pesticides to Plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment is addressed. This supplement also makes clear that
there is little to no difference between dust and pesticides in Plaintiffs’ minds because pesticides
travel with the dust as well as by themselves in the air. When Plaintiffs clean, they cleaning the
dust as well as attempting to make their home as safe as possible from pesticides. As Kris Dela
Cruz explains in her Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosure: Damage Supplement, pesticides from Pioneer’s
fields directly impact her family’s use and enjoyment of their home:
II. Loss of Use & Enjoyment of Home
I believe the quality of our lives as well as the ability for us to use and enjoy our home has been significantly lessened because of the dust. We have been robbed of clean air for the past 10 years. Constant cleaning is now a permanent part of our lifestyle; and this is not a good or enjoyable thing. No one should have to spend as much time cleaning their home as we do. I really wish that we could spend more
Expert Report of Dr. Lorrin Pang, at 3 (“DuPont Pioneer’s creation of fugitive dust and pesticide drift constitutes a public health concern for the community of Waimea.”). 13 Motion at 4. 14 Bellwether Plaintiffs’ Supplement to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) Initial Disclosures: Itemized Personal & Real Property Damages (ECF 238), at 2 (“ In addition to the categories of damages disclosed within Plaintiffs’ prior disclosures, Bellwether Plaintiffs provide the following computation of personal property and repairs to real property because of Defendants’ dust and pesticide impact. This disclosure does not include the investigation and reports of Plaintiffs’ experts, which is ongoing and will be produced on or before the relevant deadline.”)(emphasis added). 5 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 9 of 25 PageID #: 7903
time outside, grilling, or enjoying our beautiful yard, but this is impossible because of all the dust and the poisons from the pesticides. I don’t like being outside. When I am out in the yard and the wind blows dust on me, I can feel the pesticides on my skin. Our grandchildren live with us and we are very concerned about their exposure to the pesticides and so I wash and sanitize their toys twice a week in hot water and vinegar.15
As the expert reports of Michael DiBartolomeis, PhD, Susan Kegley, PhD, Lorrin Pang, MD,
MPH, Camille Sears, and Charles Benbrook, PhD, all confirm, Plaintiffs’ concerns about Pioneer’s
pesticides are well-founded. As Lorrin Pang, M.D., explains, “[b]ased on the frequency of
Pioneer’s use of pesticides in combination on its Waimea fields, it is my expert opinion that
Pioneer’s use of pesticides poses a substantial and ongoing public health concern for the
residents of Waimea. Similarly, the drift of fugitive dust into the community of Waimea poses a
public health concern both in its own right (e.g. respiratory impacts to the community) as well as a
carrier of pesticides into the community. By public health concern, I mean that all residents of
Waimea should be aware of their risk of exposure to pesticide drift and fugitive dust and medical
professionals should consider these factors when treating patients.” 16 Thus, Defendants’
representation that Plaintiffs’ have ever “confirmed” that pesticides are not at issue blatantly
ignores Plaintiffs’ complaint, Plaintiffs’ initial disclosures, deposition testimony, and the expert
reports of Plaintiffs’ experts. And because Defendants provide no justification to strike any of
Plaintiffs’ expert reports, Plaintiffs request this Court to deny Defendants’ motion.
15 See Bellwether Plaintiffs’ Supplement to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) Initial Disclosures, Damage Supplement of Kris Dela Cruz, (ECF 223), at 25; see also id, Plaintiffs’ Supplement to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) Initial Disclosures, Damage Supplement of Eric Erdmann, at 29 (“We should be able to live in our home without having to keep all or most of the windows closed. We should be able to breathe fresh clean air that is not tainted with pesticides. We keep our children inside as much as possible so as to limit their exposure to pesticides, but they are young, and like most kids, would rather be outside.”); Id.. Plaintiffs’ Supplement to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) Initial Disclosures, Damage Supplement of Giuseppi Gerek-King, at 37 (“Perhaps most importantly, I should not have to worry about whether or not I am being poisoned from the chemicals that are in the dust from Pioneer’s fields.”). 16 Ex. 5, Expert Report of Lorrin Pang, MD, MPH, at 4. 6 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 10 of 25 PageID #: 7904
B. Judge Kurren Did Not Bar Discovery Into Health and Environmental Issues, He Barred Further Discovery
Defendants also claim that Judge Kurren has barred discovery into health and
environmental issues related to pesticides, which Defendants believe should be used by this Court
to exclude Plaintiffs’ five experts. Once again, Defendants’ representations are misleading at best.
Specifically, Defendants misrepresent both the context and the scope of Judge Kurren’s discovery
order. First, Paragraph 6 of Judge Kurren’s discovery order states that “Plaintiffs’ are not entitled
to any further discovery regarding pesticides, impacts to health, and/or the environment from
Pioneer’s farming operations; all pending requests are outside the scope of this litigation.”17 This
order was issued in response to discovery motions Nos. 227 & 332, which sought particular relief:
• In Motion 227, Defendants requested: 1) “an order precluding Plaintiffs’ from taking further depositions;” and 2) “an order precluding further written discovery by either side absent a showing of good cause; and 3) “an order precluding further discovery against the Robinson entities; 4) an order “precluding discovery at other non-Waimea locations;” and 5) an order precluding further discovery regarding “GMO” and pesticides absent a particularized showing or to produce documents in response to the following requests: G&R RFP 9-15, 33-40 and 43; Robinson Family Partners RFP Nos. 6-9 Motion at 24.18 • In Motion 332, the “RELIEF REQUESTED” was to enter: 1) “an order limiting the scope of Plaintiffs’ Inspection Notice to crops described in Plaintiffs’ TAC, as well as Pioneer’s “wind break” and “dust fence;” and 2) “an order precluding Plaintiff Sue Arquette’s Requests for Production NO. 11-16 to Defendant Pioneer Hi-Bred International dated September 3, 2013, which seek broad categories of information regarding pesticides and health and environmental impacts.”19
Thus, this order did not prohibit all discovery into pesticides nor did it prohibit prior discovery into
the health and environmental risks associated with Pioneer’s pesticides. Indeed, within this same
17 Discovery Order (Doc. 589)(emphasis added) 18 Motion (Doc. 227) at 24 (emphasis added) 19 Motion (Doc. 332) at 18-19 (emphasis added). 7 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 11 of 25 PageID #: 7905
order Judge Kurren allowed depositions of Pioneer’s primary pesticide applicators, Russell Bernat
and Richard Myers, to go forward.20
Defendants’ emphasis that Judge Kurren has refused to reconsider his order is also
misplaced. Judge Kurren refused to clarify his ruling absent formal briefing to reconsider his
decision. Of course, Defendants predictably fail to quote Judge Kurren’s later comments, when this
matter was briefed in greater detail following Defendants’ request for Judge Kurren to strike
Plaintiffs’ experts. As Judge Kurren acknowledged, there is a large difference between the “more
focused inquiry regarding further discovery” of his discovery order and the exclusion of evidence
that is relevant to the claims, defenses, and damages in this case:
THE COURT: You know, my sense of this is that the issues that are raised here go well beyond the discovery rulings and matters that I considered in addressing, you know, a more focused inquiry concerning further discovery and actually impact issues to be decided at trial. So I think the best way to proceed on that, if there is a request to determine or address, you know, who should testify and on what issues at trial, I certainly can't do it by way of a short letter briefing. And, frankly, my view is that it should be done, if at all here, by way of a motion in limine to be addressed to Judge Kobayashi. … MR. GLYNN: Thank you, Judge. This is Clem Glynn, and we actually did not expect that you would be able to completely rule on this, what we were concerned about, and we take your guidance and appreciate it and will follow -- THE COURT: Yeah, this involves -- you know, this involves a consideration of a great deal of evidence that will come into this case, quite frankly, and what, you know, will be required to establish your claims and how you will be able to respond to their defenses. I mean this is really, frankly, all about the trial. So, I mean, it's a much bigger issue. MR. GLYNN: Yes, the reason we thought it was appropriate, at least to flag it for Your Honor's guidance, is that as recently as March 7th, when Mr. Friedenberg was there and plaintiffs' counsel sought clarification, as he put it, you were very emphatic -- THE COURT: Right.
20 Discovery Order (Doc. 589) at 2, ¶3. 8 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 12 of 25 PageID #: 7906
MR. GLYNN: -- and very clear, and very unambiguous, and yet of the nine experts that we need to deal with, the majority are dealing with human health effects and the environment, in direct contravention of what you have -- THE COURT: Well – MR. GLYNN: -- the guidance that you provided. And -- THE COURT: -- you know, I'm not entirely certain of that. I don't -- you know, frankly, we don't need to really get into a discussion of this now, because it's not going to get us anywhere, but, you know, I see what Mr. Smith has raised in opposition to it. I mean there needs -- and I'm not changing my mind about that discovery. I mean that -- you know, and I don't think that needs to be clarified, and I think I've made my point fairly clear, but I mean as to what he may be able to present and not what he's asking for in further discovery here, to respond to some of these defenses and to prove aspects of his claims, you know, that's -- there is a little more complexity, and I think a somewhat different consideration.21
Thus, contrary to the slant of Defendants’ brief, Judge Kurren has not implicitly or impliedly
condoned the striking Plaintiffs’ experts and, if anything, recognizes that Defendants’ attempt to
bootstrap his order into a motion to strike experts goes well beyond the “more focused inquiry
concerning further discovery” addressed by his discovery order.
C. Plaintiffs’ Expert Reports are Directly Relevant to the Claims, Damages, and Defenses At Issue In this Case.
Defendants next spend two pages attacking the expert reports of David Knox, Robert
Stellmacher, and Robert Male, even though none of these experts are challenged within their
motion. Although Defendants comments need no response, it is important to again point out that
Defendants fail to attach the full expert reports of any of these experts. Even the clipped reports of
Stellmacher and Knox, however, are far better than Defendants’ failure to cite or attach any of the
21 April 19, 2014, Hearing Transcript Excerpt, attached hereto as Exhibit 7 at 3:24-6:12 (emphasis added); see also id, at 9: (“MR. SMITH: To be honest, I mean, I think this is – defendants wanting to use that language in your order as a plug to throw out a lot of experts. The pesticide issue and the dust issue has always been a part of the case. We’ve always made that clear. THE COURT: Right.”). 9 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 13 of 25 PageID #: 7907
reports of the five experts they purport to challenge. Instead, Defendants selectively quote from the
unattached reports and proffer no more than their own paraphrased synopsis to ultimately conclude
that “Drs. Benbrook, DiBartolomeis, Kegley, Pang, and Ms. Sears do not offer a single opinion
pertinent to the property damage claims alleged.”22 Such arguments, given Defendants’ failure to
attach the reports, are both humorous and wrong. The fact of the matter is that all five experts’
opinions are directly relevant to the claims, damages, and defenses in this litigation.
1. The environmental and health aspects of Pioneer’s pesticide use are central to Plaintiffs’ claims.
First, the environmental impact of Pioneer’s operations pesticides is relevant for Plaintiffs’
claims. For example, Plaintiffs’ allege that Defendants have violated Kauai Ordinance 808, the
Hawaii Pesticides Law, and the Hawaii Air Pollution Control Act.23 The Hawaii Pesticides Law,
HRS 149A, concerns pesticides. Specifically, HRS 149A-31 mandates that “[n]o persona shall:
…(2) use, store, transport or discard any pesticide or pesticide container in any manner that would
have unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.”24 Thus, it is a violation of Hawaii law to
use pesticides in a way that would have an unreasonable adverse effect on the environment. What
does this mean? Well, HRS 149A-2 defines “environment” to include “water, air, land, and all
plants and humans and other animals living therein, and the interrelationships which exist among
these,” and further defines “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment” as “any
unreasonable risk to humans or the environment, taking into account the economic, social, and
environmental costs and benefits of the use of the pesticide.”25
22 Motion at 10. 23 TAC, at 20-23, ¶¶95-112. 24 TAC at 23, ¶110, quoting HAW. REV. STAT. 149A-31. 25 HAW. REV. STAT. §149A-2. 10 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 14 of 25 PageID #: 7908
Thus, to determine whether HRS 149A-31 is violated, one must address whether the
pesticide’s use poses an unreasonable adverse effect on the environment, which requires
consideration of the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of the use of the
pesticide as well as the risk to humans. Here, Plaintiffs contend that Pioneer’s use of pesticides at
the Waimea Research Center violates HRS 149A-31 and poses an unreasonable risk to the
environment.26 Thus, whether Pioneer’s use of pesticides poses an unreasonable risk to “to humans
or the environment, taking into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits
of the use of the pesticide” is relevant to whether Pioneer has breached HRS 149A. Further, as this
Court has recognized, “Plaintiffs may use evidence of the alleged violations of the Hawaii
Pesticides Law, the Hawaii Air Pollution Control Act, and Ordinance 808 to support their
remaining negligence claims.”27 Therefore, the environmental impact of Pioneer’s pesticide use,
which includes the health risk to humans: 1) must be taken into account to determine breach of
HRS 149A; 2) is at issue due to the private right of action alleged by Plaintiffs; and 3) is also
relevant evidence of Pioneer’s negligence. Accordingly, Pioneer’s claim that environmental and
human health risks associated with Pioneer’s use of pesticides are not at issue is simply wrong.
2. The environmental and health aspects of Pioneer’s pesticide use are central to Defendants’ defenses.
Plaintiffs also have a right to test and challenge Defendants’ defenses. This is particularly
true for Defendants’ affirmative defense under the Hawaii “Right to Farm” Act (“HRFA”), which
does not apply unless Defendants follow “generally accepted agricultural and management
26 TAC, at 23, ¶112 (“Pioneer’s intentional use of inherently dangerous pesticides without consideration of the risks to Waimea Residents and in violation of State law and Pioneer’s own stated practices and policies violates HRS 149A-2. “). 27 Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 224) at 40. 11 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 15 of 25 PageID #: 7909
practices.” (“GAAMP”)28 Like HRS 149A, the HRFA falls within Title 11 of the Hawaii Revised
Statutes, which contains agriculture-related statutes from Chapters 141 to 169 is entitled
“Agriculture and Animals.” Defendants’ violation of 149A, particularly given that it falls under
Title 11’s scope, is therefore relevant to whether Pioneer has followed GAAMP. In other words,
whether Pioneer’s pesticides pose “any unreasonable risk to humans or the environment, taking
into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of the use of the pesticide”
is one consideration whether Pioneer has satisfied GAAMP under the Hawaii Right to Farm Act.
The expert reports of Plaintiffs five experts are also relevant because Defendants deny that
Pioneer’s pesticides reach Waimea. For example, in its opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for partial
summary judgment, Pioneer pointed the finger at other “alternative causes,” which include “other
large agricultural operations that exist in or around Waimea (e.g. DOW and Syngenta) that likely
utilize the same or similar chemicals.29 In other words, Defendants dispute that the positive
pesticide test results found in Waimea possibly come from Pioneer’s operation. To address this
defense (as well as to support Plaintiffs’ affirmative claims that pesticides reach their homes),
Plaintiffs’ experts offer opinions that: a) Pioneer’s pesticides are dangerous;30 b) these pesticides
28 HAW. R. STAT. §165-4. 29 Defendants Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Partial Summary Judgment (ECF 752) at 14-15. 30 See, e.g., Ex. 4, Expert Report of Michael DiBartolomeis, PhD, DABT, at 3 (“Although the residents and community of Waimea face some degree of risk of adverse health effects from ambient levels of chemicals in the environment, it is my expert opinion that the conditions in Waimea as a result of Pioneer’s activities and operations are well above what is ordinarily encountered in daily life. I conclude from my analysis, within a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that the conditions prevalent in Waimea exceed a minimal risk hazard due to the pesticide application activities of Pioneer. Furthermore, I conclude that the principle of beneficence is not satisfied; that is, the residents and community of Waimea receive none of the benefit but all of the risk from these activities.”). 12 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 16 of 25 PageID #: 7910
readily drift in dust and by volatilization;31 c) Pioneer failed to take appropriate steps before using
these pesticides;32 d) that these pesticides drift to Waimea when used as Pioneer claims;33 and that
d) Pioneer’s pesticides pose a public health concern for the community of Waimea.34 Each of these
opinions is therefore directly relevant not only to establish that Pioneer’s pesticides improperly
reach Waimea for Plaintiffs’ claims, but also to refute Pioneer’s defenses.
3. The environmental and health aspects of Pioneer’s pesticide use impact Plaintiffs’ damages for property and injunctive relief.
The environmental and health risks associated with Pioneer’s pesticides are also relevant to
Plaintiffs’ remedies. As the TAC alleges, “excessive fugitive dust and dangerous pesticides from
the GMO Test Fields allowed by Pioneer and the Robinson Entities not only adversely impact the
quality of life and property of Waimea Residents, but also lowers the value of their homes.”35 The
impact to the value of Plaintiffs’ property is called diminution in value. As this Court has
recognized, diminution damages are potentially available in Hawaii.36 It should be obvious that if
Defendants’ dust and pesticides create a public health concern for the community of Waimea, this
will impact the value of property in Waimea. Thus, the public health hazard to Waimea created by
Pioneer’s operation impacts the value of their property regardless of whether individual Plaintiffs
ever pursue claims for personal injury. Stated differently, there is an important distinction between
31 Ex. 1, Expert Report of Susan Kegley, PhD, at 1-2 (In summary, my opinion is that Pioneer’s pesticide applications can result in transport of toxicologically significant amounts of volatilized pesticides onto nearby properties.”) 32 Expert Report of Charles Benbrook, PhD, attached hereto as Exhibit 8. 33 Ex. 2, Expert Report of Camille Sears; see also Ex. 3, Drift Maps. 34 Ex. 5, Expert Report of Lorrin Pang, MD, MPH. 35 TAC at 24, ¶118. 36 Order (Doc. 608) at 32 (“[T]his Court cannot conclude, as a matter of law, that diminution damages are unavailable for continuing torts in the Third Amended Complaint.”). 13 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 17 of 25 PageID #: 7911
health risks that impact real property, and a health impact that creates an individual claim for
personal injury.
As Lorrin Pang, M.D., MPH, Plaintiffs’ public health expert, explains, “DuPont Pioneer’s
creation of fugitive dust and pesticide drift constitutes a public health concern for the community
of Waimea. Specifically, the drift of Pioneer’s use of pesticides poses a substantial and ongoing
public health concern for the residents of Waimea. Similarly, the drift of fugitive dust into the
community of Waimea poses a public health concern both in its own right (e.g., respiratory
impacts to the community) as well as a carrier of pesticides into the community. By public health
concern, I mean that all residents of Waimea should be aware of their risk of exposure to pesticide
drift and fugitive dust and medical professionals should consider these factors when treating
patients.”37
“Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 508D (for residential real property)… a
seller of residential real proper is obligated to fully and accurately disclose in writing to a buyer all
‘material facts’ concerning the real property.”38 A material fact includes “any fact, defect or
condition, past or present, that would be expected to measurably affect the value to a
reasonable person of the residential real property offered for sale.”39 Here, the public health
concern created by Defendants’ dust and pesticides is a “material fact” that would be expected to
measurably impact the value of residential real property in Waimea to a reasonable person. The
health risk for the Waimea community is therefore relevant to Plaintiffs’ diminution damages.
37 See, e.g., Expert Report of Lorrin Pang, M.D., MPH. 38 See Hawaii Sellers Real Property Disclosure, Exhibit 12 to TAC. 39 HAW. REV. STAT. § 508D-1 (emphasis added). 14 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 18 of 25 PageID #: 7912
This same evidence is relevant to the impact of Pioneer’s pesticides upon the use and
enjoyment of Plaintiffs’ homes because it demonstrates that the concerns expressed by Waimea
Plaintiffs are justified. Otherwise, without such testimony, Defendants’ suggestion that Plaintiffs’
concerns about pesticides are unreasonable would have not counterweight.
The health risks of Pioneer’s pesticides are also important for Plaintiffs’ claims for punitive
damages for Pioneer’s willful, wanton, and grossly negligent conduct.40 This is because the nature
of the chemicals at issue is relevant to this inquiry. For example, misuse of a product that expressly
warns you how dangerous it is obviously more egregious than an accidental misuse of an
innocuous product. Pioneer’s misuse of pesticides in the face of repeated warnings about the
environmental and health risks therefore rises to a different level of conduct, which is relevant to
Plaintiffs’ claims for punitive damages.
D. Rule 403 Does Not Bar Evidence of the Health Risks and Environmental Concerns Raised by Pioneer’s Pesticides.
Finally, Defendants contend this Court should exclude evidence regarding the health and
environmental impacts of Pioneer’s pesticides under Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Specifically,
Defendants contend that evidence of environmental and health risks associated with Pioneer’s
pesticide use will result in unfair prejudice, confuse the issues, and delay trial. None of the reasons
proffered by Defendants, however, justify exclusion of the five expert reports at issue. Rather,
presentation of such evidence through experts streamlines trial and will assist the jury to
understand these important issues.
. . .
40 See, e.g., TAC at 39, ¶6 (“Punitive damages for Defendants’ wanton, reckless, and grossly negligent conduct.”). 15 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 19 of 25 PageID #: 7913
1. There is no unfair prejudice to Defendants.
Defendants first argue that evidence of the environmental harm and human health risks
posed by its pesticides would result in unfair prejudice to Defendants because they would be
“confronted with multiple experts asserting that Pioneer’s acts are potentially associated with
health risks.”41 This argument has no merit. Plaintiffs’ provided their expert reports to Defendants
on March 12, 2014, and Defendants provided their expert rebuttal reports on June 20, 2014.
Defendants therefore received more than three months (i.e. more than 90 days) to prepare rebuttal
experts and have suffered no unfair prejudice. In fact, Defendants have now produced their expert
reports in response to Plaintiffs. And, because the environmental harm and risk to human health is
a core consideration in this case, a number of Defendants’ experts address the various issues
surrounding Pioneer’s use of pesticides. Further, because Plaintiffs contend Pioneer’s use of
pesticides is unreasonable under HRS 149A-31, these issues must be addressed to determine
whether Pioneer’s application of pesticides above Waimea is appropriate under Hawaii law. There
is therefore no basis to strike five separate expert reports because Defendants would prefer to not
address a core issue under Hawaii law.
2. No confusion will result for the jury.
Next, Defendants argue that the expert reports on pesticides will confuse the issues and
mislead the jury. To the contrary, Plaintiffs’ expert reports assist the jury to by explaining the
toxicology of the pesticides at issue, how they move through the environment, and whether they
drift to Waimea homes. These are key issues for Plaintiffs’ claims. Likewise, these five expert
reports are relevant to demonstrate that Pioneer’s use of pesticides at Waimea was unreasonable
under HRS 149A-31 because Pioneer failed to take into account the environmental conditions of
41 Motion at 14. 16 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 20 of 25 PageID #: 7914
Waimea and the potential harm to Waimea residents before engaging in its intensive pesticide
applications. Again, such testimony will assist the jury determine to weigh the economic, social,
and environmental costs and benefits of the use of pesticides at the Waimea Research Center.
3. The purpose of trial is to resolve the issues in dispute, not ignore relevant evidence.
Defendants’ final argument that five expert reports should be stricken, site unseen, because
such testimony will increase the length of trial is without basis. If this were the standard, all of the
expert reports and testimony should be stricken. The environmental and health risks of Pioneer’s
pesticides are directly at issue for Plaintiffs claims and also relevant to Plaintiffs’ remedies.
Further, this case has already been carved into a bellwether trial for 10 residences precisely so the
Court will have time to address the key liability issues that can be resolved universally. Whether
Pioneer’s pesticides drift into Waimea homes and create a nuisance is a core issue to be resolved
for trial. Similarly, whether such pesticides pose risks to human health and the environment is a
key determination to resolve whether Pioneer’s use of such pesticides is reasonable under Hawaii
law. Therefore, there is no reason to give short shrift to fundamental issues of this case solely to
shorten a trial for Defendants.
17 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 21 of 25 PageID #: 7915
III.
CONCLUSION
Defendants fail to provide good reason to exclude the opinions of Drs. Charles Benbrook,
Michael DiBartolomeis, Susan Kegley, Lorrin Pang, and Camille Sears. Instead, Defendants’
motion relies upon misrepresenting the scope of Judge Kurren’s order and Plaintiffs’ discovery
responses, while ignoring the direct relevance of the environmental and health risks associated
with Pioneer’s pesticides to the question of whether Pioneer’s pesticide use is reasonable under
Hawaii law. Accordingly, for the above reasons, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court to deny
Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 1.
DATED: Kailua, Hawaii, June 24, 2014.
______LYNCH, HOPPER, SALZANO & SMITH P. KYLE SMITH Hawaii Bar No. 9533 970 N. Kalaheo, Ste. A301 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 and LAW OFFICES OF GERARD JERVIS GERARD A. JERVIS Hawaii Bar No. 2490 354 Uluniu Street, Ste. A205 Kailua, Hawaii 96734
18 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 22 of 25 PageID #: 7916
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII
JIM AANA et al., on behalf of themselves ) and all others similarly situated, ) Plaintiffs; ) CIVIL NO.: CV12 00231 –JMS BMK ) vs. )
) PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL, INC., a DuPont Business and Iowa ) Corporation, GAY & ROBINSON, INC., a ) DECLARATION OF KYLE SMITH Hawaii corporation; ROBINSON FAMILY PARTNERS, a general partnership ) registered in Hawaii; and DOE ) DEFENDANTS 1-10; )
) Defendants. )
1. I am licensed to practice law in the State of Hawaii; 2. I am one of the attorneys of record for Plaintiffs Jim Aana, et al. in this matter. 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the Expert Report of Susan Kegley, PhD. 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the Expert Report of Camille Sears. 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a true and accurate copy of the Drift Maps prepared by Camille Sears. 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit 4 is a true and accurate copy of the Expert Report of Michael DiBartolomeis, PhD. 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit 5 is a true and accurate copy of the Expert Report of Lorrin Pang, MD, MPH. 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit 6 is a true and accurate copy of the Deposition Excerpt of Lisette Langlois. 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit 7 is a true and accurate excerpt of the April 19, 2014, Hearing Transcript with Judge Barry Kurren. 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit 8 is a true and accurate copy of the Expert Report of Charles Benbrook, PhD.
19 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 23 of 25 PageID #: 7917
11. I, Kyle Smith, hereby declare under penalty of law that the foregoing is true and correct, except to those matters stated upon information and belief, and as to those matters, they are believed to be true.
DATED: Kailua, Hawaii, June 24, 2014.
______KYLE SMITH
20 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 24 of 25 PageID #: 7918
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII
JIM AANA et al., on behalf of themselves ) and all others similarly situated, ) Plaintiffs; ) CIVIL NO.: CV12 00231 – LEK BMK ) vs. )
) PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL, INC., a DuPont Business and Iowa ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Corporation, GAY & ROBINSON, INC., a ) Hawaii corporation; ROBINSON FAMILY PARTNERS, a general partnership registered ) in Hawaii; and DOE DEFENDANTS 1-10; ) ) Defendants. )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFFS’
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 1 RE HEALTH
EFFECTS; EXHIBITS 1-8; DECLARATION OF KYLE SMITH; AND CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE, and related documents was served on the parties listed below at their last
known addresses by electronic service through CM/ECF:
GLYNN & FINLEY, LLP. CARLSMITH BALL LLP Clement L. Glynn, Esq. Mike Purpura, Esq. 100 Pringle Avenue, #500 1001 Bishop St. Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
. . .
21 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766 Filed 06/24/14 Page 25 of 25 PageID #: 7919
DATED: Kailua, Hawaii, this 24th day of June, 2014.
______LYNCH, HOPPER, SALZANO & SMITH P. KYLE SMITH Hawaii Bar No. 9533 970 N. Kalaheo, A301 Kailua, HI
And
LAW OFFICES OF GERARD JERVIS GERARD A. JERVIS Hawaii Bar No. 2490 354 Uluniu Street, Ste. A205 Kailua, Hawaii 96734
22 Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Law Offices of Gerard Jervis
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 25 PageID #: 7920 Pesticide Research Institute Legal & Policy Research • Sampling • Data Analysis & Mapping • Technical Writing
March 11, 2014
Mr. Kyle Smith, Esq. Lynch, Hopper, Salzano & Smith Pali Palms Plaza 970 N. Kalaheo, Ste. A 301 Kailua, HI, 96734
Dear Mr. Smith,
I have reviewed the information related to the Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, et al., Case No. CV-12-00231 in the U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii, and evaluated such information with respect to the fate and transport of pesticides applied at thePioneer Hi-Bred International (“Pioneer”) facility, located in Waimea, Kauai, Hawaii. I also draw on the results of my air own monitoring conducted on December 9, 2010 through January 18, 2011. From the data and my experience in assessing the fate and transport of pesticides in the environment, I can draw the following main conclusions related to the case.
1) Pesticides are transported away from application sites through the air via several mechanisms. This document provides insights into the airborne pesticide transport processes (“drift”) that contribute to pesticide contamination of adjacent properties: a. Spray drift during the application; b. Drift of pesticide-contaminated dust particles; and c. Post-application volatilization drift, which occurs for several days to several weeks after the application
2) The potential for pesticide drift from application sites is well known. The general phenomenon of pesticide drift through the air and concomitant contamination of nearby properties is well known and well documented. I provide evidence of this fact from environmental monitoring experiments that I have conducted in the past, from California state air monitoring data and from US EPA exposure assessment data used in risk assessment. It is my expert opinion that airborne pesticide drift onto adjacent properties is routine and that Pioneer’s extensive use of pesticides in Waimea has resulted in exposure via offsite drift for the people of Waimea living downwind of the application site. For certain pesticides that are both highly toxic and moderately to highly volatile (e.g., Lorsban®, containing chlorpyrifos), exposure can exceed toxicological levels of concern.
3) Exposure to pesticides in Waimea could occur through several routes. Pesticide drift of all types leaves residues of pesticides on lawns, outdoor furniture, and toys or other objects left outdoors on the lawn. Children crawling on the grass or mouthing objects that may have been contaminated via spray or dust drift are exposed to pesticides through the skin and through ingesting residues from their hands or objects they place in their mouths. People living in areas near pesticide application sites can also be exposed through breathing pesticide-contaminated air from volatilized pesticides. Volatilization drift does not necessarily leave any residues on surfaces, but can be measured in the air for several days to several weeks after a pesticide application and has been
1400 Shattuck Ave, #8, Berkeley, CA 94709 (510) 705-1874 (phone) • (510) 705-1683 (fax) • www.pesticideresearch.com Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 25 PageID #: 7921 2
demonstrated to exceed levels of toxicological concern under conditions that transport drift to locations where people spend time.
In summary, my opinion is that Pioneer’s pesticide applications can result in transport of toxicologically significant amounts of volatilized pesticides onto nearby properties. A more detailed description of these opinions and the data on which they are based is appended.
Sincerely yours,
Susan Kegley, Ph.D. Principal and CEO Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 25 PageID #: 7922 3
Table of Contents
1 BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS ...... 4 1.1 Education ...... 4 1.2 Professional Experience ...... 4 1.3 Other Experience ...... 5 1.4 Information Used to Draw Conclusions in this Case ...... 5 2 PESTICIDES ARE TRANSPORTED AWAY FROM THE APPLICATION SITE THROUGH THE AIR ...... 6 2.1 Spray drift ...... 6 2.2 Post-application drift ...... 7 2.2.1 Drift of pesticide- contaminated dust particles ...... 7 2.2.2 Pesticide transport by fog and rainwater ...... 8 2.2.3 Volatilization drift ...... 9 3 AIR MONITORING STUDIES INDICATE VOLATILIZATION DRIFT CONSTITUTES A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF EXPOSURE ...... 11 3.1 California Air Resources Board Monitoring Studies and Risk Assessment ...... 12 3.1.1 Application Site Monitoring ...... 12 3.1.2 The Reference Exposure Level (REL) and Risk Assessment ...... 13 3.1.3 Ambient Monitoring ...... 14 3.2 Prior Air Monitoring Work Conducted by Kegley et al...... 14 3.3 Waimea Canyon Air Monitoring Study ...... 16 3.4 Other Ambient Air Monitoring Studies of Volatilization Drift ...... 16 4 AIR MODELING DEMONSTRATES MORE BROADLY HOW DRIFT IMPINGES ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ...... 17 4.1 Majewski, et al. Flux Study ...... 17 4.2 US EPA Flux Determination ...... 18 4.3 AERMOD Modeling of Pesticide Drift in Waimea ...... 18 5 SAMPLING ...... 20 6 EXPOSURE TO PESTICIDES FROM PIONEER’S PESTICIDE APPLICATIONS CAN OCCUR THROUGH SEVERAL ROUTES...... 21 6.1 Dermal exposure occurs through contact with pesticide-contaminated surfaces ...... 21 6.2 Oral exposure occurs through hand-to-mouth or hand-to-object-to-mouth behaviors ...... 21 6.3 Inhalation exposure occurs through breathing contaminated air ...... 22 7 CONCLUSIONS ...... 22 8 REFERENCES ...... 23
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 4 of 25 PageID #: 7923 4
1 Background and Qualifications I am a resident of the State of California, County of Alameda. I am Principal and CEO of Pesticide Research Institute (“PRI”), an environmental consulting business specializing in pesticides, and providing risk assessments, environmental monitoring services, data services, and legal and policy research.
1.1 Education In 1982, I received my Ph.D. in Organic and Inorganic Chemistry from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. I did a postdoctoral research fellowship at Colorado State University from 1982–1983.
1.2 Professional Experience I was in academia for 14 years: as a faculty member in Chemistry at Middlebury College from 1984– 1986, Williams College from 1987–1991, and the University of California, Berkeley from1992–1998. I was a visiting research scientist at the University of California, Berkeley in 1986–1987 and a lecturer at the University of California, Berkeley from 1991–1998. In 1998, I joined Pesticide Action Network (“PAN”) as a Staff Scientist and Program Coordinator and was promoted to Senior Scientist in 2003. In January 2007, I founded Pesticide Research Institute (“PRI”), where I am Principal and CEO. Attached as Exhibit A to this declaration is a true and correct copy of my CV.
My academic research at Williams focused on the distribution and fate of PCBs in the Hoosic River ecosystem and development of organometallic reagents for organic synthesis. I taught courses in organic chemistry, environmental chemistry, analytical chemistry and inorganic chemistry.
At Berkeley from 1992–1998, my focus was on environmental chemistry curriculum development and development of analytical methods to evaluate environmental contamination in environmental media such as air, water, food and sediments using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) for organic compounds, liquid ion chromatography (LC) for ionic environmental contaminants , and atomic absorption spectrophotometry for heavy metal analysis. I developed and taught an environmental chemistry course focused on site assessment, sampling, and analytical methods of analysis for environmental samples. I adapted the California Department of Food and Agriculture analytical method for pesticide residues for use by students and developed an instructional module entitled Pesticides in Fruits and Vegetables, published by University Science Books in 1998. I also worked with students conducting environmental monitoring projects, with a focus on evaluating environmental contaminants in air, water, soil and food.
While at PAN, I developed an air monitoring system, the “Drift Catcher” in 2003, for use by communities in California, Florida, Washington, Minnesota, North Carolina, Maine, Indiana, and Colorado to monitor airborne pesticides to determine the scope and magnitude of pesticide drift from applications near rural and suburban agricultural communities. I attach as Exhibit B representative reports from these monitoring projects that I will refer to in the text below. In 2008, I was nominated as a Tech Museum of Innovation Laureate for the Drift Catcher work.
At PAN, I was also the Co-Director of PAN’s pesticide database project (http://www.pesticideinfo.org). In this role, I developed databases to ensure the accuracy of the information on the 6,400 chemicals in the database, including human toxicity assessments, ecotoxicity assessments, pesticide registration information (both U.S. and international), California pesticide use information, identifying information, physical properties, and chemical classification.
Currently, I am Principal and CEO of PRI. My expertise is in risk assessment, fate and transport of pesticides in air and water, environmental monitoring, methods of pesticide sampling and analysis, and
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 5 of 25 PageID #: 7924 5
pesticide data and use trends. At PRI, we have created and maintain a number of databases that we use in our work for clients and to support the PRI Pesticide Product Evaluator (http://www.pesticideresearch.com/site/evaluator), a susbscription-based tool developed for governments, schools, businesses, pest control operators, turf managers, and farmers to help them apply Integrated Pest Management (“IPM”) principles and assess the human toxicity, ecotoxicity and water pollution potential of commercially available pesticide products. PRI has also developed inhalation and dermal exposure assessment algorithms for the Pesticide Risk Mitigation Engine (http://www.ipmprime.org), an IPM tool for farmers to compare pesticides and select the lowest-impact pesticide for their particular location. We also provide free resources for pest management on the PRI web site with our Pest Management and Bee Resource Centers (http://www.pesticideresearch.com/site/?page_id=349).
As part of PRI’s work for clients, I do environmental monitoring for pesticides in air, water, food and plants; conduct risk assessments of pesticides; provide information on pesticide use trends; provide reviews of the scientific literature on specific pesticides; prepare technical comment letters to pesticide regulatory agencies, including US EPA and the CA Department of Pesticide Regulation (“DPR”); and evaluate policy options for pesticide regulation.
1.3 Other Experience I was a member of US EPA’s Pesticide Program Dialog Committee (“PPDC”) from 2005 until June 2013, serving on several Work Groups, including the Spray Drift Work Group (2005–2007), the Comparative Labeling Claims Work Group (2008–2013), and the Pollinator Protection Work Group (2011–present). I also served on the Committee on Hazard Communication for the United Nations Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety in 2002 and 2003.
1.4 Information Used to Draw Conclusions in this Case The bases of my opinions are: • Dr. Michael DiBartolomeis’ expert report • Dr. Camille Sears’ expert report • A report by Dr. Ken Giles on spray droplet size for specific spray nozzles • A report by Qing X. Li, Jun Wang, and Robert Boesch entitled Air sampling and analysis for pesticide residues and odorous chemicals in and around Waimea, Kauai1 • Knowledge of the Waimea site from my visit in December 2010 • Video and photographs of pesticide applications and dust on the Pioneer site, provided by Kyle Smith. • Information about the Nitro sprayer used on Pioneer properties. • The Pioneer spray records documenting pesticide applications between February 2007 and February 2011 • My own past environmental monitoring work and expertise in analytical methods. • Air monitoring work conducted by the California Air Resources Board. • Exposure assessment and risk assessment documents developed by US EPA • The scientific peer-reviewed literature, as footnoted below. • My extensive technical and policy background in the area of risk assessment and the fate and transport of pesticides in the environment.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 6 of 25 PageID #: 7925 6
2 Pesticides are transported away from the application site through the air Pesticides are readily transported from one location to another through the air. Airborne transport— termed “drift”—is comprehensively defined as any airborne movement of pesticides off the target site, including droplets, aerosols, dust, and vapors. There are generally two types of airborne drift: spray drift and post-application drift. Both are possible forms of drift from pesticide applications at the Pioneer Hi- Bred facility in Waimea.
2.1 Spray drift During pesticide applications, winds or application equipment can blow pesticide spray droplets, volatilized pesticide, and/or pesticide-containing dust away from the target site. Fine droplets generated by spray nozzles are the most problematic because they can drift long distances before settling. Once these residues have been deposited onto surfaces, they serve as a source of exposure from contact with the contaminated surface (see Section 6). Figure 1 shows examples of spray drift.
Figure 1: Left: Spray drift from an agricultural aerial application. Right: Spray drift from DuPont Pioneer pesticide application in Waimea, Kauai.
One well-known example of crop damage caused by long-range spray drift is that of the rice herbicide propanil drifting far from rice fields and causing damage to prune trees in the Sacramento Valley.2 A California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) study on propanil drift indicated that aerial applications within 10 miles of prune orchards were correlated with a low background level of residues on tree foliage in the orchards. Aerial applications within six miles, or ground applications within one to two miles, were correlated with substantially higher residues, indicating that proximity plays a major role in contamination processes.
Spray drift typically settles out within an hour unless the air is very still and the droplets are very fine, with the maximum drift occurring during and immediately after the application. A number of parameters affect the amount of spray drift from a given application, including: amount of pesticide applied, wind speed and direction, humidity, and application parameters such as nozzle type. I utilized Dr. Ken Giles’ expert report on nozzle types3 to estimate the percent of an application that is less than 200 microns in size, also known as “driftable fines.”
A National Research Council report summarized the literature on spray drift and bracketed the spray drift component of a pesticide application conducted under "normal" (not defined, but presumably within label restrictions, 3-10 mph) wind conditions as typically 40-60% of the applied mass.4 In an environmental monitoring study of pesticide drift, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation assumed primary spray drift losses of 10-60%.5 Dr. Ken Giles’ assessment of nozzle type and droplet size distribution helps in this specific case to estimate the percent “driftable fines.”
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 7 of 25 PageID #: 7926 7
Dr. Giles used the “Nitro Sprayer Protocol” to determine spray nozzles and other application parameters that determine the spray droplet spectrum used in the application of herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides, as follows:6
“Herbicide Applications. Given the above analysis and the explicit statement in Step 44 of the Nitro Protocol, the most likely nozzle used was the 11006 Air Induction XR Flat Fan nozzle, which, operating at the speed and pressure ranges used, produced a droplet size spectrum of the Extremely Coarse or “XC” category.
Insecticide and Fungicide Applications. Given the above analysis and the explicit statement in Step 43 of the Nitro Protocol, the most likely nozzles used for insecticide and fungicide applications were the 11006 Flat Fan nozzle and the 11006 Twin Jet nozzle. The catalog data for the Flat Fan Nozzle are shown in Figure 1 and catalog data for the Twin Jet nozzle are shown in Figure 3. Inspection of the data sheet shows that a 11006 Flat Fan nozzle, operating at the speed and pressure ranges used, produces a droplet size spectrum of the Medium or “M” category. Similarly, inspection of the Twin Jet nozzle data sheet shows that a 11006 Twin Jet nozzle, operating at the speed and pressure ranges used, produces a Medium or “M” category droplet size spectrum.”
With the XR TeeJet 110 standard flat fan nozzle used at 40 psi for the Nitro Sprayer for applications of insecticides and fungicides, the manufacturer of this nozzle determined that 22% of the spray volume is less than 200 microns,7 indicating that 22% of the total applied is comprised of driftable fines. For herbicide applications using an air induction nozzle, the AI TeeJet 110 flat fan nozzle would produce less than 1% driftable fines. Thus, the applications with the highest drift potential are those of insecticides and fungicides.
Dr. Giles also noted that “droplet size categories are based on the spray measured at 50 cm below the nozzle exit and do not account for any effects of spray adjuvants or products in the tank mix. No consideration for evaporation is reflected in these size categories.” Spray adjuvants in the tank mix can also reduce drift potential. Evaporation of water from the spray droplets can increase drift potential as the droplet becomes smaller and lighter. It is not known whether Pioneer utilizes spray adjuvants. Regardless, spray drift is of definite concern from Pioneer’s Waimea fields.
2.2 Post-application drift Drift can also occur after pesticides have been applied, from several days to several weeks after the initial application. Post-application drift takes two forms: 1) Drift of pesticide-contaminated dust particles; and 2) Volatilization drift, where pesticides evaporate off of leaf and soil surfaces for several days to several weeks after the application and are transported off-site by prevailing winds. The vapor pressure of the pesticide, an inherent physical property of the chemical, is highly correlated with a pesticide’s potential for volatilization drift. The application rate in pounds of chemical applied per acre is also a contributing factor.
Condensation of pesticides from the vapor phase, from pesticide-contaminated dust particles, and from spray drift particles into fog droplets is another phenomenon that contributes to post-application transport of pesticides from the application site to remote locations.
2.2.1 Drift of pesticide- contaminated dust particles High winds can create clouds of dust from pesticide-treated fields, forests and rangeland. This dust may be transported away from the application site to contaminate other property. Both volatile and non-
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 8 of 25 PageID #: 7927 8
volatile pesticides may cling to dust particles and drift in this manner, and dust particles may also be absorbed into water droplets in the air.
One well-known example of crop damage caused by dust and particle drift is that of the herbicide Oust® drifting more than 25 miles from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) pesticide applications to rangelands in Idaho, causing damage to 100,000 acres of sugar beets, potatoes, corn and other grains.8
Dust drift from the Pioneer site into homes in Waimea appears to be commonplace. During my visit to Waimea on December 10, 2010, I observed a ubiquitous red-clay dust on window sills inside homes, stored objects, clothesline covers, the tops of freezers and other flat surfaces protected from rain wash-off in covered garages. Dust drift is also evident in the photographs and videos of farming activity on the Pioneer property provided to me by Kyle Smith. Trucks, tractors, sprayers, and even gusts of wind alone are sufficient to raise dust particles from the bare soil at the site, and wind carries away from the site in the downwind direction. According to Dr. Sears’ assessment of wind data, prevailing winds generally blow from the northeast to the southwest in the area, transporting the dust from the field into the town. In general, the distance traveled by dust particles is a function of both the wind speed and the particle size, with smaller particles transported longer distances than large particles.
2.2.2 Pesticide transport by fog and rainwater Pesticide vapors, droplets or particulates may combine with water droplets (fog or rain) in the air and be transported with fog drift or with rainwater. The figure below depicts the sequence of events: A pesticide application generates spray droplets or particles, followed by volatilization of the pesticide (if applicable), followed by collision of the pesticide vapor or particulate with water droplets in the air and incorporation into the water droplets.
Pesticide application A number of studies have documented the condensation of volatilized pesticides into rain or fog, accompanied by transport of the pesticide away from the application site. Pesticide spray particles 1) In 1987, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and UC Davis (UCD) found 17 different pesticides in Central Valley fog water. Interestingly, the amount of pesticide Pesticide dissolved in fog water was greater than that predicted by the volatilizes water solubility of the pesticides. The authors indicate that these = plants pesticide-saturated fog droplets represent a means of pesticide = pesticide vapor exposure that may transport pesticides some distance from the or particulate target. Because of the greater affinity of the pesticide for plant surfaces compared to water, “ . . . some organic [pesticide] residues may become more concentrated on the [plant] surface as
Pesticide Pesticide moisture evaporates during fog dissipation.” This team of collides with incorporated researchers also measured pesticides in fog in Monterey County, water droplet into water 9 droplet California, with similar findings.
2) A 1989 California Department of Food and Agriculture study conclusively demonstrated that pesticides can be transported in fog and leave residues on vegetation.10 The study measured the concentrations of four organophosphate (OP) pesticides—parathion, diazinon, chlorpyrifos and methidathion—in fog water, vegetation samples, and “drift cards” that detect both wet and dry pesticide deposition from the atmosphere. The study was conducted in January during the “dormant spray” season, where dormant almonds and stonefruit orchards are treated with insecticides to kill overwintering pests. Pesticides were found in all fog water samples collected during the study, and all four pesticides were found in vegetation at monitoring sites.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 9 of 25 PageID #: 7928 9
3) In 1996, USDA measured a number of currently-used pesticides (triazines, acetanilides, organophosphates and organochlorines) as contaminants in seawater, marine ice and arctic marine fog.11 Chlorpyrifos and endosulfan were the most frequently identified contaminants in seawater, chlorpyrifos and atrazine were found in marine ice, and chlorothalonil and trifluralin were found in surface microlayer samples. The researchers found chlorpyrifos, trifluralin, metolachlor, chlorothalonil, terbufos and endosulfan in arctic marine fog at concentrations several times higher than in adjacent waters or ice.
4) In 2003, the USGS released a study on the occurrence of diazinon in rainwater in California’s Central Valley.12 The study demonstrated that 60% of diazinon contributions to a particular watershed were due to diazinon condensation into rainwater, i.e. more diazinon is being deposited into water bodies from rainfall than from runoff. This observation was attributed to volatilization drift from applications to dormant almond and stonefruit orchards. A Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board study of pesticide concentrations in rainwater during dormant spray season
measured concentrations of diazinon in rainwater exceeding the LC50 for the aquatic invertebrate Daphnia.13
2.2.3 Volatilization drift Some pesticides readily evaporate (volatilize) from the leaf and soil surfaces on which they were initially deposited. These volatilized, gas-phase pesticides can then be transported off-site by prevailing winds. Volatilization occurs more readily when the temperature is high, so it is typical for pesticides to volatilize during the day and re-condense at some downwind location as the temperature drops in the evening.
The volatilization potential of a pesticide is related to a physical property called vapor pressure, with chemicals having higher vapor pressures being more volatile. Vapor pressures of substances span a range from completely non-volatile substances like table salt to substances that are so volatile that they exist only as gases at room temperature, like propane. For pesticides with low water solubility, the presence of water in the soil or on the plant leaves accelerates the volatilization process.14
Many pesticides fall in the category of semi-volatile substances, with moderate vapor pressures. Volatilization drift is not a significant contributor to off-site transport for pesticides with very low vapor pressures (less than 0.0000001 mm Hg at 25°C), but this transport pathway becomes increasingly important for pesticides with moderate to very high vapor pressures. Table 1 provides vapor pressures for representative pesticide active ingredients applied to the Pioneer fields, categorized according to their propensity to drift, from high to low. Table 2 provides the vapor pressures of some common household substances for comparison. The pesticide active ingredients used by Pioneer that are of greatest concern in regard to volatilization drift (i.e., volatile enough to result in significant inhalation exposure) are those at the higher end of the “Moderate” volatility ranking in Table 2 below, e.g., malathion (Malathion Aquamul®), chlorpyrifos (Lorsban 4E® or Lorsban Advanced®), and alachlor (Intrro®).
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 10 of 25 PageID #: 7929 10
Table 1: Vapor Pressures of Selected Pesticides Applied to Pioneer Fields
Vapor Pressure (in millimeters of Volatility Pesticide Active Ingredient mercury) Rankinga Malathion 0.000023 Moderate Chlorpyrifos 0.0000221 Moderate Alachlor 0.000022 Moderate Esfenvalerate 0.0000055 Moderate Chlorothalonil 0.000002 Moderate Propiconazole 0.00000042 Low Spinetoram 0.000000397 Low Glufosinate ammonium 0.000000239 Low Imidacloprid 0.0000001 Low Glyphosate, isopropylamine salt 0.000000075 Low Glyphosate, monoammonium salt 0.000000075 Low Permethrin 0.0000000215 Low Chlorantraniliprole Less than 0.000000001 Very low Thifensulfuron-methyl Less than 0.000000001 Very low Pyraclostrobin Less than 0.000000001 Very low Azoxystrobin Less than 0.000000001 Very low aVolatility ranking is based on the following scale: Very high, greater than 0.01; High, 0.0001–0.01 mm Hg; Moderate, 0.0001–0.000001 mm Hg; Low, 0.000001–0.00000001 mm Hg; Very low, < 0.00000001 mm Hg.
Table 2: Vapor Pressures of Common Substances
Physical Vapor Pressure State at (in millimeters of mercury Volatility Compound 25°C at 20–25°C) Rankinga Chlorine Gas 4,400 Very high Methyl bromide Gas 1,800 Very high Rubbing alcohol Liquid 32.4 Very high Water Liquid 20 Very high Iodine crystals Solid 3 Very high Lemon oil Oil 0.950 Very high Para-dichlorobenzeneb Solid 0.4 Very high Naphthaleneb Solid 0.082 Very high Menthol Solid 0.02 Very high DEETc Liquid 0.0056 High Salt (NaCl) Solid Less than 0.000000001 Very low aVolatility ranking is based on the following scale: Very high, greater than 0.01 mm Hg; High, 0.0001–0.01; Moderate, 0.0001–0.000001; Low, 0.000001–0.00000001; Very low, < 0.00000001. bUsed in mothball formulations. cPrimary ingredient in many insect repellents.
Pesticides with moderate vapor pressures might be liquids, oils or solids when applied, but these compounds will evaporate in the heat of the day, drift for a distance, and re-condense when the temperature drops or when they contact a cool surface, just like water vapor in the air condenses on a glass of ice water on a humid day. This process continues until the pesticide is degraded, and volatilization and re-condensation may occur many times as the pesticide is carried away from the application site by prevailing winds. Exposure to volatilized pesticides occurs from breathing contaminated air. Such exposure cannot be measured by assessing residue deposition, since the pesticide may remain in vapor form as it is carried away from the application site. Exposure through inhalation continues for several days to several weeks after the application, with the highest concentrations observed in the first day.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 11 of 25 PageID #: 7930 11
The vapor pressure of a chemical provides a first-tier estimate of volatilization drift and exposure potential. Among the pesticides used on the Pioneer facility (see Appendix B in Dr. DiBartolomeis’ expert report for a list of pesticides used), several stand out as having high volatilization drift potential and high noncancer toxicity via inhalation exposure, as shown in Table 3. My opinion is that, based on exposure potential and toxicity, chlorpyrifos, tefluthrin, mancozeb/ETU, and carbaryl are the pesticides of highest concern for the community. While dimethoate and thiobencarb, are among the more toxic pesticides, they both are only moderately volatile and degrade rapidly in the environment, with an aerobic half-life of two days and 0.6 days, respectively. While spray drift may still be problematic for these pesticides, it can be predicted that exposures to these pesticides through volatilization drift will likely be lower than that from chlorpyrifos, tefluthrin, mancozeb/ETU (because of it s very high vapor pressure) and carbaryl.
Table 3: Vapor Pressure and Reference Exposure Levels (RELs) for Volatile and Semi-Volatile Pesticides Applied on the Pioneer Facility
RELa Vapor Pressure Half-Life Pesticide (µg/m3) (mm Hg @ 25°C) (days) 15 Chlorpyrifos 0.082 0.0000221 30.5 Dimethoate 1.7 0.00000825 2 Thiodicarb 2.3 0.00002 0.7 Tefluthrin 8.4 0.00006 38 Mancozeb/ETU 8.4 16 2/0.5 Carbaryl 18.6 0.00000117 6 Fluazifop-p-butyl 33.8 0.00000405 1 Malathion 43.4 0.000023 3 Chlorothalonil 50.7 0.000002 35 Pendimethalin 56.3 0.0000094 90 Bromoxynil octanoate 67.6 0.00000139 3 Methomyl 595.0 0.000049 46 S-Metalochlor 844.4 0.0000314 38 Alachlor 2533.3 0.000022 20 Azadirachtin LHb 44 26 Methyl anthranilate LHb 0.012 NA a REL = Reference Exposure Level is defined as the concentration or dose at or below which adverse noncancer health effects are not likely to occur in the general human population, including sensitive subpopulations, for specified exposure durations. See Section 3.1.2. A lower REL indicates higher toxicity. b LH = Low Hazard. US EPA has waived toxicity data requirements for these pesticides on the basis of low toxicity.
3 Air Monitoring Studies Indicate Volatilization Drift Constitutes a Significant Source of Exposure There are many studies demonstrating the presence of volatilized pesticides in air both near and far from application sites, with a subset of the data showing concentrations of pesticides in air that are above toxicological levels of concern. In the sections below, I present data from these studies to support my opinion that the people of Waimea are more likely than not being exposed to pesticides in air above levels of toxicological concern from Pioneer’s operations.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 12 of 25 PageID #: 7931 12
3.1 California Air Resources Board Monitoring Studies and Risk Assessment The most significant collection of air monitoring studies is that conducted by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) as part of their mandate under the Toxic Air Contaminant Act.16 A detailed analysis of the ARB data shows that, for semi-volatile pesticides17 post-application volatilization drift typically accounts for 80–95% of the total off-site, airborne movement of these pesticides.18 The ARB conducted both “application site monitoring” studies during the time when a pesticide application was being performed and for several days afterwards, as well as “ambient monitoring” studies in areas and seasons of high pesticide use, but not directly adjacent to application sites. In general, application site monitoring studies show higher concentrations of the applied pesticide in air than the ambient studies, with concentrations frequently exceeding levels of health concern. Nevertheless, even the concentrations measured in the ambient studies did in some cases exceed levels of concern.
3.1.1 Application Site Monitoring Application site monitoring experiments demonstrate that peak concentrations near the application site are usually observed between 8 and 24 hours after the start of application, and the pesticide can continue to volatilize from the site for several days to several weeks, producing measurable levels of pesticides in the air near the application site. A typical concentration vs. time profile for locations 50-75 feet from an application site is shown in Figure 2 below for the insecticide diazinon, but the general shape of the curve with a peak 12-20 hours after the start of the application is common for all semi-volatile pesticides for which data are available.
Diazinon Volatilization as a Function of Time
16,000 North, 75 feet 14,000 East, 48 feet )
3 South, 72 feet 12,000 West, 72 feet Sum, all directions 10,000 = Application 8,000
6,000
Concentrationm (ng/m 4,000
2,000
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Time after start of application (h) Figure 2: In this example, concentrations of the semi-volatile pesticide diazinon peaked approximately seven hours after the end of the application. Volatilization continued for several days after application. (Data source: California Air Resources Board19)
Figure 3 shows a similar concentration vs time profile for volatilization of chlopyrifos for an application site monitoring experiment conducted by the ARB.20 This particular application had to be stopped due to high winds after six hours, but was restarted the next day (the shaded area in the plot). The concentration in air downwind of the field at the end of the sampling period (70 hours after the start of the first application and 50 hours after the start of the second) was 4,900 ng/m3. The time-weighted average concentration over three days ranged from 5,300 ng/m3 to 7,430 ng/m3, depending on the sampler location.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 13 of 25 PageID #: 7932 13
Chlorpyrifos Volatilization as a Function of Time 50,000 North, 57 feet ) 3 East, 42 feet 40,000 South, 30 feet Sum, all directions
30,000 = Application
20,000 Concentration (ng/m
10,000
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Time after start of application (h)
Figure 3: An application site monitoring experiment with monitoring stations 30-57 feet from the application site shows that chlorpyrifos concentrations peak after the application due to the volatilization drift. (Data source: California Air Resources Board20)
3.1.2 The Reference Exposure Level (REL) and Risk Assessment A useful concept for assessment of risk from exposure to airborne pesticides is the Reference Exposure Level (REL). Reference Exposure Levels are concentrations or doses at or below which adverse noncancer health effects are not likely to occur in the general human population, including sensitive subpopulations, for specified exposure durations. The REL is used by the California EPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment in its determination of acceptable levels of exposure to air pollutants21 and is similar to the Reference Concentration (RfC) utilized by US EPA.22 The REL can be adapted for sensitive subpopulations such as children, who breathe more air per pound of body weight and thus have higher exposures to air pollutants. The REL also allows for adjustment of exposure as a function of activity, since a more active person will be breathing more air and thus receiving a higher exposure.
I will use the example of chlorpyrifos to explain the derivation of the REL, since chlorpyrifos is the active ingredient in the Lorsban® products that are used at the Pioneer facility and chlorpyrifos is one of the more toxic pesticides applied by Pioneer.
For chlorpyrifos, the short-term REL for an adult is based on an adult Human Equivalent Concentration (HEC) of 0.0057 mg/m3 (5.7 µg/m3) developed by US EPA from a rodent study23 and adjusted with the appropriate uncertainty factors (10x for interspecies, 3x for intraspecies, and 1x for other), as shown in equation (1).
! ! !"# (!"/! ) !.! !"/! ! ! ���!"#$% = = = 0.19��/� = 190 ��/� (1) !"!"#$%×!"!"#$%×!"!"!!" !"×!×!
The REL for a 1-year-old child is calculated by accounting for the difference in breathing rate and body weight between an adult and a child, as well as incorporating the Food Quality Protection Act uncertainty 3 factor (UFFQPA) child safety factor, as shown in equation (2) below, where 7.6 kg and 4.5 m /day is an average body weight and breathing rate, respectively for a 1-year-old child.24 The adult body weight and 3 breathing rate is 70 kg and 18 m day, respectively. The UFFQPA is equal to one, in this case.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 14 of 25 PageID #: 7933 14
! !.!!"×!"! /!"# ! ���!–!"–!"# = ���!"#$%× ! = 82��/� (2) !"!"#$×!"!"×!.!! /!"#
The short-term REL is a concentration anticipated to be without adverse effects for one day to several weeks and is the appropriate comparison point for the air monitoring studies conducted by the ARB. Thus, the time-weighted-average concentration during the ARB study described by Figure 3 over the 70- hour time period was from 65 to 91 times the REL for a 1-year-old child, substantially above the level at which no adverse effects would be anticipated. These data indicate that those who live, work, or go to school near application sites risk acute nervous system toxicity from airborne exposure to chlorpyrifos The developing fetus, infants and children are especially at risk because their nervous systems are still developing and are more vulnerable to toxic effects.
3.1.3 Ambient Monitoring For ambient monitoring experiments, the ARB located the air monitoring stations in an area and season of high use of the pesticide being monitored, but not immediately adjacent to application sites. While the air concentrations of pesticides for ambient monitoring experiments are typically lower than those measured adjacent to application sites, concentrations still exceeded the Reference Exposure Level for a 1-year-old child for some pesticides during some of the monitoring periods. Figure 4 shows the data from an ARB study of chlorpyrifos concentrations in air in Tulare County during the month of June in 1996.19 Four- and-a-half-week average chlorpyrifos concentrations in ambient air in Tulare County ranged from 33 to 113% of the short-term REL for a one-year-old child. Concentrations occasionally exceeded the child acute REL during a 24-hour monitoring period, with the maximum 24-hour concentration at each site ranging from 48 to 993% of the REL for a 1-year-old child.
Figure 4: Ambient air monitoring for chlorpyrifos in Tulare County, California. Monitoring sites included ARB, the ARB office in downtown Visalia; JEF, Jefferson Elementary School in Lindsay; KAW, Kaweah School in Exeter; SUN, Sunnyside Union Elementary School in Strathmore; UCL, University of California, Lindcove Field Station. (Data source: California Air Resources Board20)
3.2 Prior Air Monitoring Work Conducted by Kegley et al. Studies conducted by me or under my supervision while a Senior Scientist at Pesticide Action Network (PAN) demonstrate drift of volatilized pesticides near apple orchards in Washington State (chlorpyrifos), orange groves in Lindsay, CA (chlorpyrifos), potato and corn fields in Minnesota (chlorothalonil, PCNB, chlorpyrifos, and pendimethalin) and cabbage fields in Florida (diazinon, endosulfan, chlorothalonil, and
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 15 of 25 PageID #: 7934 15
trifluralin). Four representative reports are presented in Exhibit B, and highlights from these reports are summarized below for several of the pesticides that are used on the Pioneer facility in Waimea.
Figure 5 provides a comparison of ambient exposure to the insecticide chlorpyrifos in the town of Lindsay, CA at four different locations in the town during a season of high chlorpyrifos use. The results demonstrate that ambient inhalation exposure can and does result from pesticide applications, with exposure above toxicological levels of concern on some days.
Figure 5: Exposure to chlorpyrifos from the inhalation route is significant and above toxicological levels of concern for people living in areas of chlorpyrifos use. Data sources: Exhibit B.
Figure 6 below shows measured concentrations of the fungicide chlorothalonil in air in agricultural areas, again demonstrating that volatilization drift can be a significant source of pesticide exposure for semi- volatile pesticides.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 16 of 25 PageID #: 7935 16
Figure 12: Chlorothalonil concentrations in ambient air in different locations during seasons of high chlorothalonil use. The lowest comparable short-term Reference Exposure Level from US EPA’s Registration Review Scoping document25 is shown for reference, but a definitive REL based solely on inhalation toxicity data has not yet been determined.
3.3 Waimea Canyon Air Monitoring Study In 2013, Li et al. conducted air monitoring in Waimea Canyon using passive air samplers between June 6, 2011 and June 14, 2012. This type of sampler only collects persistent pesticides that do not readily degrade. Five pesticides (BHCs, DDTs, chlorpyrifos, bifenthrin and metolachlor) were detected in ambient air in Waimea, Kauai. The presence of BHCs and DDTs is likely due to historical use. Because these compounds are extraordinarily persistent in the environment, with half-lives of 15 years, they will be found in areas of past use for many years. The other pesticides found have shorter half-lives (Chlorpyrifos, 30 days; bifenthrin, 90 days; metolachlor, 38 days)15 and the source of these pesticides is more likely than not to be a result of agricultural pesticide use on the Pioneer fields in Waimea or other pesticide use in the local area. These results again demonstrate the potential for off-site pesticide movement into areas of human habitation.
3.4 Other Ambient Air Monitoring Studies of Volatilization Drift The US Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Services (USDA-ARS) has conducted air monitoring for ambient levels of a variety of pesticides in South Florida, with concentrations found to be highest during the growing season in an agricultural area, October through March.26
As part of the National Water Quality Assessment Program, the US Geological Survey has documented the presence of volatilized pesticides in air samples taken in Sacramento27 and along the Mississippi River.28 Several books have been written about the role of pesticide volatilization in long-range transport of pesticides.29
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and others have conducted a number of air monitoring studies for pesticides in air, and in water and Pacific tree frog adults and tadpoles in the Sierra Nevada mountains in
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 17 of 25 PageID #: 7936 17
California, more than 50 miles from farmland in areas downwind of high pesticide use.30 Concentrations and frequency of detections for the pesticides in amphibian tissue follow north-south and west-east patterns consistent with intensified agriculture upwind of the areas with the most serious declines in amphibian populations. Pesticide residue concentrations also decrease with increasing elevation, consistent with dilution of the airborne pesticides as they move further from the source of the pesticide.
4 Air Modeling Demonstrates More Broadly How Drift Impinges on Neighboring Properties The air monitoring data described above provides information about off-site movement of pesticides for the given set of conditions in that specific location on the date the air sampling was conducted. Air dispersion modeling allows prediction of off-site movement under a variety of wind and weather conditions. Dr. Camille Sears used the example of Lorsban (the product containing the insecticide chlorpyrifos) and the US EPA preferred model AERMOD to model the distribution of pesticides from several applications conducted by Pioneer (see Sears Expert Report). Her focus was on volatilization drift, as this type of drift results in longer-term exposure because it takes place over the course of several days to several weeks.
In order to model the off-site movement of a pesticide, it is necessary to know the rate of loss of the pesticide from the applied area, also known as the flux, typically reported in µg/m2-hr. For the modeling conducted by Dr. Sears, I evaluated several studies to obtain a measure of flux for her calculations.
4.1 Majewski, et al. Flux Study Based on work by Majewski et al.,31 for an application rate of 1.5 kg/ha, the measured average rate of chlorpyrifos flux from a soil surface was 14.6 µg/m3-hr over three days, varying as a function of time after application, temperature, and soil moisture. Table 4 provides the rate of volatilization as a function of time, and Figure 6 shows these data graphically. The morning peaks in volatilization rate were attributed to the presence of soil moisture from dew, as the low value of the Henry’s Law constant (0.743) for chlorpyrifos would predict. Table 4: Flux of Chlorpyrifos Over Time
Time Flux, Integrated Horizontal Flux method (mg/m2 h)
9/11/85 10:45 AM 30.4 9/11/85 12:15 PM 12.7 9/11/85 1:45 PM 3.1 9/11/85 3:15 PM 4.3 9/11/85 4:45 PM 2.2 9/12/85 7:15 AM 60.1 9/12/85 9:30 AM 10.7 9/12/85 11:00 AM 1.8 9/13/85 9:30 AM 16.4 9/13/85 11:00 AM 0.9 9/13/85 2:30 PM 3.6 9/14/85 9:30 AM 41.3 9/14/85 12:00 PM 2.1 Average over 3 days 14.6
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 18 of 25 PageID #: 7937 18
Figure 4: The rate of volatilization of chlorpyrifos from soil surfaces changes over time and persists for several days after an application.
4.2 US EPA Flux Determination In 2013 as part of the chlorpyrifos Registration Review, US EPA released its assessment of inhalation exposures due to volatilization drift of chlorpyrifos.32 EPA evaluated two field studies to assess typical flux rates, one from an application to alfalfa and the other from an application to potatoes.
Alfalfa: US EPA utilized data supplied by Dow AgroSciences (the registrant of chlorpyrifos products) to assess the rate of volatilization of chlorpyrifos from a treated alfalfa field. Approximately 30% of the applied chlorpyrifos was emitted from the treated field in the first 24 hours (28% considering chlorpyrifos only; 30% considering chlorpyrifos and the degradation product chlorpyrifos-oxon combined). The flux profile for chlorpyrifos is similar to those generally observed for volatile and semi-volatile pesticides in that there is a peak emission shortly after application during the warmer part of the day. The study measured chlorpyrifos for a period of 72 hours following application.
Potatoes: US EPA also assessed an open literature study in which flux from a chlorpyrifos application to potatoes was measured. The 24-hour flux rate was determined to be 71% of the applied chlorpyrifos. This study only measured parent chlorpyrifos and did not measure concentrations of chlorpyrifos-oxon.
I selected the 24-hour flux rates for Dr. Sears to utilize in her modeling work from these two studies evaluated by US EPA, with the alfalfa study providing a low-end estimate of 28% and the potato study providing a high-end estimate of 71% for volatilization drift.
4.3 AERMOD Modeling of Pesticide Drift in Waimea Dr. Camille Sears modeled the transport of chlorpyrifos from the Pioneer fields, using the 1-year-old child REL of 0.082 mg/m3 (82 ng/m3) as a target level of concern to mark the isopleths, and the flux values from the potato and alfalfa studies evaluated by US EPA as upper and lower bounds, respectively. The results indicate that concentrations of chlorpyrifos in air in the town of Waimea will exceed the REL
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 19 of 25 PageID #: 7938 19
for a 1-year-old child when the prevailing winds are blowing from the Pioneer facility to the town, as shown in the maps developed by Dr. Sears.
This conclusion is also supported by US EPA’s recent evaluation of risk from volatilization drift of chlorpyrifos:32
The results indicate that offsite [chlorpyrifos] concentrations may exceed the target concentration established for lung ChE inhibition for many currently registered uses at distances away from the field edge. Concentrations are not expected to exceed the RBC ChE inhibition target concentration under all the conditions that were evaluated in this assessment.
Depending on which percentile of exposure and the field size considered, buffers zones estimated to ensure concentrations of chlorpyrifos (only) are at or below the lung ChE target concentration range from 0 to greater than 4,000 ft away from the perimeter of a treated field. Higher application rates and/or large field sizes lead to higher exposure and, therefore, large buffers. The spray drift buffers for protection of bystanders in sensitive sites currently required on chlorpyrifos labels range from 0 to 100 feet depending on the application method. Consideration of vapor phase chlorpyrifos-oxon in addition to chlorpyrifos (only) increases the estimated buffer distances needed to ensure air concentrations are below the target concentration than those presented for chlorpyrifos only.
Below, I have provided Table 9 from the US EPA document showing the buffer zone distances required to keep the concentration below the adult REL of 190 ng/m3 for chloropyrifos for specific application rates and locations (see Section 3.1.2). The REL for a 1-year-old child is a factor of 2.3 lower than this value at 82 ng/m3, indicating that the US EPA-estimated buffer zones would have to be even larger to protect children. The closest Pioneer fields are approximately 600 feet from homes in the town of Waimea, and within 100 feet of the river and the island from which community members fish and swim, well within range of receiving toxicologically significant exposure to volatilization drift.
It is worth noting that US EPA’s “whole-field” method for calculating buffer zones does not capture a worst case scenario, as it assumes drift is transported away from the application site equally in all directions. This approach does not account for the fact that someone living downwind of an application site will be exposed to substantially higher concentrations of a pesticide in air than someone living upwind of the site. In short, the US EPA “whole field” method does not account for prevailing winds. This approach has been roundly criticized by a California Scientific Review Committee and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation.33 Thus, US EPA’s “whole-field” buffer zone distances are smaller than those that may be protective of human health.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 20 of 25 PageID #: 7939 20
5 Sampling I conducted sampling for pesticides in dust, fish tissue, sediment, and water in the Waimea area on December 9, 2010. The samples were analyzed by Environmental Microanalysis Laboratory (EMA) for a suite of organochlorine, organophosphorus, organonitrogen and pyrethroid pesticides. A list of pesticides analyzed and the results are provided in Exhibit C. No pesticide residues were found in fish, sediment and water samples. Permethrin was found in two surface wipe samples, one at each of the two residences. According to Pioneer application records, permethrin is one of the insecticides used on the Pioneer fields, but it is also used in consumer insecticide products, so the source cannot be definitively determined.
On December 9, 2010, I set up two pilot air monitoring stations in Waimea, Kauai at 9964 Poke Rd and 4707 Alawai Rd and trained a local resident in how to change the sorbent sample tubes, preserve them, and ship them to the laboratory for analysis. The same equipment and methodology was used as for the PAN air monitoring experiments (see Exhibit B): Drift Catcher sampling device, XAD-2 sorbent tubes, flow rates of approximately 2 L/min, and 24-hour sampling times. Air monitoring took place between December 9, 2011 and December 24 and between January 3 and January 12. Samples taken on days with prevailing winds blowing from the Pioneer fields towards the town and with little precipitation were analyzed by Environmental Microanalysis Laboratory (EMA) for a suite of organochlorine,
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 21 of 25 PageID #: 7940 21
organophosphorus, organonitrogen and pyrethroid pesticides (see Exhibit C for a complete list of pesticides). No pesticides were detected in any of the air samples analyzed.
An assessment of pesticide applications to the Pioneer fields during the air sampling periods indicated that, on days when pesticides with moderate to high vapor pressures were applied, winds were predominantly from the south, southeast, or west which would have carried airborne pesticide drift away from the town (see Exhibit C). Based on the low volatility of the applied pesticides during the sampling periods with winds blowing towards the town (See Table 1 above), it is not surprising that no volatilized pesticides were found above the detection limits of the analytical methods for these applications.
6 Exposure to pesticides from Pioneer’s pesticide applications can occur through several routes. Pesticide spray and dust drift leaves residues of pesticides on lawns, outdoor furniture, and toys or other objects left outdoors on the lawn. Children crawling on the grass or mouthing objects that may have been contaminated with pesticide drift are exposed to pesticides through the skin and through ingesting residues from their hands or objects they place in their mouths. People living in residential areas near pesticide application sites are also exposed to volatilized pesticides through breathing pesticide- contaminated air.
6.1 Dermal exposure occurs through contact with pesticide-contaminated surfaces Dermal exposure to pesticides occurs when bare skin comes in contact with a pesticide-contaminated surface, followed by absorption of the pesticide into the bloodstream. The amount of dermal exposure is a function of several parameters, including the skin surface area that contacts the contaminated surface, the amount of pesticide residue that is transferred to the skin on contact with the surface, the fraction of the pesticide on the skin that is absorbed, the frequency of contact with the contaminated surface and the number of hours spent in the presence of the contaminated surface.
6.2 Oral exposure occurs through hand-to-mouth or hand-to-object-to-mouth behaviors Pesticide residues on hands or objects present opportunities for exposure via ingestion from hand-to- mouth (H-T-M) activities. Children are particularly at risk, since they comfort themselves by sucking on their fingers and explore the world around them by putting objects they encounter into their mouths. Hand-to-mouth activities are not just a risk for young children, but may also be a significant exposure route for adults through both direct (H-T-M) and indirect (hands touch food or other object, which goes into mouth) exposures. Direct H-T-M exposure for an adult could occur through touching a contaminated surface (e.g., a toy lying on a lawn that has been contaminated by pesticide drift residues), followed by touching the mouth with the hand, nail-biting, finger sucking, or other H-T-M contact. Indirect exposure can occur for both children and adults when pesticide-contaminated hands are used to eat or otherwise handle food that will be eaten or touch objects that are ultimately put in the mouth such as writing implements, cup edges, eating utensils or cigarettes (for adults).
The amount of exposure from H-T-M activity is a function of several parameters: 1) The amount of pesticide on the contaminated surface. 2) The amount of pesticide transferred to the hands (the loading). For a child crawling on a pesticide-contaminated lawn, loading is continuous, as more pesticide is transferred from the lawn to the child’s hands. “Unloading” of the hands occurs when the hands are placed in the child’s mouth. 3) The surface area of the hand in contact with the mouth or objects. 4) The transfer factor that describes the fraction of pesticide that is transferred from hand to mouth or from object to mouth for any given activity. 5) The frequency of H-T-M or object-to-mouth activity.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 22 of 25 PageID #: 7941 22
6) The time spent on the pesticide-contaminated surface.
Both dermal and H-T-M exposures are a central focus of the US EPA’s risk assessments for pesticides used indoors, on lawns, in wood treatment, and on pets.34
6.3 Inhalation exposure occurs through breathing contaminated air Inhalation of pesticide vapors or droplets in the air provides a direct dose of pesticides to the bloodstream, as the pesticides are absorbed through the alveolar membranes in the lungs. The amount of exposure is dependent on the concentration of the pesticide in the air, the breathing rate (for example, an active person breathes more air per pound of body weight than a sedentary person, and a child breathes about twice the amount of air per pound of body weight than an adult), and the percent of inhaled pesticide absorbed through the lungs.
The air monitoring studies conducted by the California Air Resources Board19 and those I conducted that are included in Exhibit B indicate that inhalation exposures near application sites for some semi-volatile pesticides routinely exceed concentrations that would provide a dose higher than that deemed acceptable by US EPA.
7 Conclusions In summary, it is my opinion that when the prevailing winds are blowing from the Pioneer fields towards the town of Waimea during or after the application of a volatile or semi-volatile pesticide, the Waimea community will more likely than not be exposed through inhalation of ambient air. Spray and dust drift may add to this exposure through contamination of soil, vegetation or objects that people may come in contact on which pesticide residues from spray or dust drift have been deposited. The data from air monitoring studies near pesticide application sites clearly indicates that volatilization drift is one of the major transport pathways for volatile and semi-volatile pesticides. For pesticides like chlorpyrifos with high toxicity35 and moderate to high volatility, the data indicate that exposures for people living near pesticide application sites can and do exceed levels of toxicological concern. Based on my work conducting air monitoring for chlorpyrifos, and evaluation of other monitoring studies, the modeling results of Dr. Sears, and the US EPA’s recent exposure assessment for chlorpyrifos, it is my opinion that applications of chlorpyrifos in particular—one of the more toxic pesticides utilized by Pioneer—can result in the exceedance of levels of toxicological concern when prevailing winds are from the northeast.
This report is a good faith effort to provide my opinions and the information on which those opinions are based. I reserve the right to supplement this report to include additional opinions based on additional information, clarifying data, testimony or comments by other experts or additional discovery.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 23 of 25 PageID #: 7942 23
8 References
1 Qing X. Li, Jun Wang, and Robert Boesch, 2013. Air sampling and analysis for pesticide residues and odorous chemicals in and around Waimea, Kauai. 2 T. Barry and J. Walters, Characterization of Propanil Prune Foilage Residues as Related to Propanil Use Patterns in the Sacramento Valley, California, California Department of Pesticide Regulation, Report #EH 02-04, October 2002, http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/empm/pubs/ehapreps.htm. 3 Pioneer, 2011. Nitro Sprayer Protocol. 4 NRC-National Research Council. 1993. Soil and Water Quality: An Agenda for Agriculture. National Academy Press. 5 CA DPR California Department of Pesticide Regulation. 2010. Kettleman City Community Exposure Assessment, Appendix DPR-B: Pesticide Air Monitoring. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/EnvJustice/Kettleman/default.htm. 6 Giles, K. 2014. Declaration entitled: Droplet Size Analysis – “Nitro” Sprayer Protocol (Pioneer Hi-Bred 25 July 2011). 7 TeeJet Technologies, 2014. Droplet Size and Drift Information. http://www.teejet.com/english/home/tech- support/nozzle-technical-information/droplet-size-and-drift-information.aspx. 8 Sulfometuron (Oust®) blamed for herbicide damage, University of Idaho Pest Management Center, Newsletter, Vol. I , no.3, June 2001, http://www.ag.uidaho.edu/ipm/news.htm. 9 C.J. Schomburg, D.E. Glotfelty, J.N. Seiber, Pesticide occurrence and distribution in fog collected near Monterey, California, Envi. Sci. Tech. 1991, 25: 155-160. 10 B. Turner, S. Powell, N. Miller, and J. Melvin, A Field Study of Fog and Dry Deposition as Sources of Inadvertent Pesticide Residues on Row Crops, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Report EH-89-11, November 1989, http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/empm/pubs/ehapreps/eh8911.pdf. 11 S.M. Chernyak, C.P. Rice and L.L. McConnell, Evidence of Currently-Used Pesticides in Air, Ice, Fog, Seawater and Surface Microlayer in the Bering and Chukchi Seas, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 1996, 32: 410–419. 12 C. Zamora, C.R. Kratzer, M.S. Majewski, D.L. Knifong, Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos Loads in Precipitation and Urban and Agricultural Storm Runoff during January and February 2001 in the San Joaquin River Basin, California, US Geological Survey, Water–Resources Investigations Report 03–4091, 2003, http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri034091/. 13 The LC50 is the concentration known to be lethal to at least 50% of the test organisms. V. Connor, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, as cited in J.P. Fox and E. Archibald, Aquatic Toxicity and Pesticides in Surface Waters of the Central Valley, California Urban Water Agencies, 1997, p. 162, http://www.cuwa.org/pubs/AquaticToxicityAndPesticides.pdf. 14 Majewski MS, Glotfelty DE, U KTP, Seiber JN. 1990. A field comparison of several methods for measuring pesticide evaporation rates from soil. Environmental Science & Technology 24: 1490–1497. 15 DPR, 2012. 2011 Status Report: Pesticide Contamination Prevention Act. March 2012. Report PCPA11. 16 Toxic Air Contaminant Program, California Department of Pesticide Regulation, http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/empm/pubs/tacmenu.htm. 17 Semi-volatile pesticides are those with vapor pressures between 0.001 and 0.0000001 mm Hg at 25°C. See Table 1 for vapor pressures of representative chemicals. 18 a) S.E. Kegley, A. Katten, and M. Moses, Secondhand Pesticides: Airborne Pesticide Drift in California, Pesticide Action Network, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, Pesticide Education Center and Californians for Pesticide Reform (San Francisco, 2003). b) Toxic Air Contaminant Program Air Monitoring Reports, CA Department of Pesticide Regulation, http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/empm/pubs/tac/tacstdys.htm
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 24 of 25 PageID #: 7943 24
19 Toxic Air Contaminant Program Air Monitoring Reports, California Air Resources Board and California Department of Pesticide Regulation, http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/pubs/tac/tacstdys.htm. 20 CA ARB. 1998. Report for the Application and Ambient Air Monitoring of Chlorpyrifos (and the oxon analogue) in Tulare County During Spring/Summer, 1996. http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/pubs/tac/chlrpfs.htm. 21 CA OEHHA. 2013. Adoption of the Revised Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Technical Support Document for the Derivation of Noncancer Reference Exposure Levels, and RELs for Six Chemicals. 12/19/08, updated August 2013. 22 US EPA. 2002. A Review of the Reference Dose and Reference Concentration Processes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC, EPA/630/P-02/002F, 2002. http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/review-reference-dose.htm. 23 US EPA 2011. Chlorpyrifos: Preliminary Human Health Risk Assessment for Registration Review. Docket # EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0025. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D= EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0025. 24 a) Layton D. 1993. “Metabolically consistent breathing rates for use in dose assessments,” Health Phys., 64:23– 36. b) CA OEHHA. 2000. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, Part IV: Technical Support Document for Exposure Assessment and Stochastic Analysis, California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, September 2000, Chap. 3, http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/exposure_assess/index.html. 25 US EPA 2012. Chlorothalonil Summary Document: Registration Review: Initial Docket March 2012. Docket # EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0840. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0840-0009 26 (a) Hapeman C, Harman-Fetcho JA, Potter TL, et al., 2006. Atmospheric transport and deposition of pesticides in South Florida, American Chemical Society Meeting, Agrochemical Division, #231, San Francisco, September 2006, http://oasys2.confex.com/acs/232nm/techprogram/P1013594.htm. (b) Schaffer B, Hapeman C, Rice C, McConnell L, Determining Atmospheric Loadings of Agrochemicals and Other Organic Pollutants to the Everglades and the Greater South Florida Basin, Project No. 1265-12220-003-05, USDA-ARS, http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?ACCN_NO=407716. 27 M. S. Majewski and D.S. Baston, Atmospheric Transport of Pesticides in the Sacramento, California, Metropolitan Area, 1996–1997, Water Resources Investigation Report 02–4100, U.S. Geological Survey, 2002, http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/wri/wri024100. 28 M. S. Majewski, W.T. Foreman, D. Goolsby, and N. N. Kagaki, Airborne Pesticide Residues along the Mississippi River, Envi. Sci. Tech. 1998, 32: 3689-3698. 29 a) M.S. Majewski and P.D. Capel, Pesticides in the Hydrologic System, Vol. 1: Pesticides in the Atmosphere, Ann Arbor Press, Inc. (Chelsea, MI, 1995). b) D.A. Kurtz, ed., Long-range Transport of Pesticides, Lewis Publishing Co. (Chelsea, MI, 1990). c) D.A. Goolsby, E.M. Thurman, M.L. Pommes, and W.A. Battaglin, 1994, Temporal and Geographic Distribution of Herbicides in Precipitation in the Midwest and Northeast United States, 1990-91: in D.L. Weigmann, ed., New directions in pesticide research, development, management, and policy, Proceedings or the Fourth National Pesticide Conference, Richmond, Viginia, Nov. 1-3, 1993. 30 a) L. McConnell, J. LeNoir, S. Datta, J. Seiber, “Wet Deposition of Current-use Pesticides in the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range, California, USA,” Environ. Toxicol. Chem, 1998, 17(10):1908–1916. b) L. Aston, J. Seiber, “Fate of Summertime Airborne Organophosphate Pesticide Residues in the Sierra Nevada Mountains,” J. Envi. Qual., 1997, 26:1483–1492. c) J. Zabik, J. Seiber, Atmospheric Transport of Organophosphate Pesticides from California’s Central Valley to the Sierra Nevada Mountains, J. Environ. Qual., 1993, 22:80–90. d) D.W. Sparling, G.M. Fellers, L.L. McConnell, Pesticides and Amphibian Population Declines in California, USA. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 2001, 20:1591-1595. 31 Majewski MS, Glotfelty DE, U KTP, Seiber JN. 1990. A field comparison of several methods for measuring pesticide evaporation rates from soil. Environmental Science & Technology 24: 1490–1497.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 25 of 25 PageID #: 7944 25
32 US EPA, 2013. Chlorpyrifos; Preliminary Evaluation of Potential Risks from Volatilization. Docket ID# EPA– HQ–OPP–2008–0850. 33 DPR (California Department of Pesticide Regulation). 2009. Methyl iodide—External peer review panel workshop transcript. http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/risk/methyliodide.htm. 34 (a) US EPA, FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel, 1997. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for Residential Exposure Assessments. http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/SAP/meetings/1997/september/sopindex.htm (b) US EPA. 2007. Revised N-Methyl Carbamate Risk Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, September 24, 2007. http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/common_mech_groups.htm#carbamate. (c) US EPA, 2005. V.G. Zartarian, J. Xue, H. Ozkaynak, et al. A Probabilistic Exposure Model Assessment for Children Who Contact CCA-Treated Playsets and Decks (SHEDS-Wood). http://www.epa.gov/heasd/risk/projects_completed/sheds_wood_cca.htm 35 Dibartolomeis, M. 2014. Survey and Toxicology of Pesticides Applied by Pioneer Hi-Bred International in Waimea, Kauai (2007-2013). Expert report for the case Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al.
Kegley Declaration Aana et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International et al. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 152 PageID #: 7945 Camille Sears 502 W. Lomita Ave., Ojai, CA 93023
Tel: (805) 646-2588 e-mail: [email protected]
Expert Report
JIM AANA, et al. v. PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL, et al UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII, Case No. CV-12-00231
Prepared for:
LAW OFFICES OF GERARD JERVIS 354 Uluniu Street, Ste. A 205 Kailua, Hawaii 96734
LYNCH, HOPPER, SALZANO & SMITH Pali Palms Plaza 970 N. Kalaheo, Ste. A 301 Kailua, Hawaii 96734
Prepared by:
Camille Sears March 12, 2014
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 152 PageID #: 7946 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction ...... 4 II. Opinions ...... 4 III. Background and Qualifications ...... 6 A. Education ...... 6 B. Professional Experience ...... 6 C. Other Experience ...... 8 D. Relevant Publications and Presentations ...... 8 IV. Bases of Opinions ...... 8 A. Air Dispersion Model ...... 8 B. Geographical Inputs ...... 9 C. Modeled Emissions and Source Parameters ...... 10 D. Modeled Receptors ...... 12 E. Meteorological Data ...... 12 E.1. Surface Meteorology ...... 12 E.2. Upper Air ...... 15 E.3. AERMET Processing Steps ...... 15 V. Calculated Air Concentrations ...... 16 VI. Analysis of Wind Speeds during Pioneer’s Pesticide Applications ...... 17 VII. Materials Considered and Relied Upon...... 20 VIII. Exhibits to be Used ...... 22 IX. Publications in Last 10 Years ...... 22 X. Testimony in Last Four Years ...... 22 XI. Compensation ...... 22 XII. Concluding Remarks ...... 23
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 152 PageID #: 7947 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 3
Exhibits:
A. Curriculum Vitae
B. Chlorpyrifos Applications and Flux Rates
C. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from December 13, 2009 Lorsban Applications
D. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from March 6, 2010 Lorsban Applications
E. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from March 20, 2010 Lorsban Applications
F. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from April 2, 2010 Lorsban Applications
G. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from May 8, 2010 Lorsban Applications
H. Pioneer-Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
I. Pioneer-Measured Wind Speeds During Lorsban 4E Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
J. Pioneer-Measured Wind Speeds During Lorsban Advanced Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
K. Pioneer-Measured Wind Speeds During Malathion 8 Aquamul Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
L. Pioneer-Measured Wind Speeds During Gramoxone Inteon Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
M. Pioneer-Measured Wind Speeds During Intrro Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 4 of 152 PageID #: 7948 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 4
I. Introduction I have been asked to analyze and characterize the air dispersion of pesticide releases at the Pioneer Hi-Bred International (“Pioneer”) facility, located near Waimea, Hawaii. Pioneer’s activities at this facility are related to developing and producing seed crops. This report presents my opinions on pesticide dispersion from the Pioneer facility, and explicitly describes the technical methodology I used for performing this analysis (the basis for my opinions).
As part of their seed production program near Waimea, Pioneer sprays chlorpyrifos, among other pesticides, to their growing grounds. Pioneer’s pesticide applications result in toxic chemicals being emitted to the air, which is generally known as “drift.” Pesticide drift can cause inhalation and deposition-related exposures to residents and workers surrounding the Pioneer site.
In particular, this report focuses on air emissions of chlorpyrifos resulting from post-application volatilization. Pioneer applied Dow AgroScience’s formulations known as Lorsban-4E and Lorsban Advanced. Lorsban-4E contains 44.9% chlorpyrifos by weight. Lorsban Advanced contains 40.2% chlorpyrifos by weight. Chlorpyrifos air emissions, which result from volatilization of the Lorsban products, are transported in the air by local winds into neighboring areas. Once chlorpyrifos is transported offsite, exposure can occur from inhalation and deposition onto soil, plants, and other surfaces.
My report analyzes air emissions of chlorpyrifos that occurred between December, 2009 and October, 2010. Specifically, I have been asked to assist in calculating chlorpyrifos air exposures to Plaintiffs who reside near the Pioneer facility, as well as determining the exposures of chlorpyrifos to the general surrounding areas.
II. Opinions The purpose of this report is to assist the trier of fact in determining offsite air concentrations of chlorpyrifos resulting from pesticide volatilization drift at Pioneer’s Waimea growing grounds. Using widely-accepted air dispersion modeling techniques, I calculated air concentrations of chlorpyrifos resulting from Pioneer’s applications of Lorsban 4-E and Lorsban Advanced. Based on this analysis, I offer the following opinions of exposures caused by Pioneer’s Lorsban applications:
Pioneer’s December 13, 2009 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the south and west of the Pioneer facility, including part of the town of Waimea;
Pioneer’s January 12, 2010 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the south of the Pioneer facility;
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 5 of 152 PageID #: 7949 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 5
Pioneer’s March 6, 2010 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the south and west of the Pioneer facility, including part of the town of Waimea;
Pioneer’s March 20, 2010 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the south and west of the Pioneer facility, including part of the town of Waimea;
Pioneer’s March 26, 2010 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the south of the Pioneer facility;
Pioneer’s April 2, 2010 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the south and west of the Pioneer facility, including part of the town of Waimea;
Pioneer’s April 18, 2010 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the south and east of the Pioneer facility;
Pioneer’s May 8, 2010 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the west of the Pioneer facility, including part of the town of Waimea;
Pioneer’s October 23, 2010 Lorsban applications produced elevated chlorpyrifos air concentrations to the south and west of the Pioneer facility;
Similar offsite exposures to Pioneer’s pesticide drift, including pesticides other than chlorpyrifos, can be expected on days with similar pesticide applications and wind conditions to those occurring on the above-listed days;
Based on the frequency of pesticide applications reported by Pioneer, routine offsite exposures to neighboring properties, including the town of Waimea, are likely to occur.
Based on Pioneer’s measured wind speeds, many of Pioneer’s pesticide applications are likely to have occurred during inappropriate wind conditions.
I prepared maps showing aerial extents of the calculated exposure regions for Pioneer’s Lorsban applications that affected the town of Waimea (December 23, 2009; March 6, 2010; March 20, 2010; April 2, 2010; May 8, 2010). These maps are shown in Exhibits C though G of this report. The air concentrations I calculated are based on reliable and peer-reviewed methodologies (see Section IV, below).
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 6 of 152 PageID #: 7950 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 6
III. Background and Qualifications A. Education I hold B.S. (1978) and M.S. (1980) degrees in Atmospheric Science from the University of California at Davis. Atmospheric Science is the study of the physical processes that occur in the atmosphere, including the study of meteorology, reflection and absorption of light, dispersion of pollutants, wind patterns, and other phenomena.
B. Professional Experience Since 1982 I have been engaged in research, consulting, and enforcement work in the field of air quality. I have been self-employed since 1992. From 1988 to 1992, I was the Air Toxics Program Coordinator for the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District. From 1987 to 1988, I was a Senior Scientist at URS Consultants. From 1983 to 1987, I served as an Air Quality Engineer for the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District. From 1982 to 1983, I was a Meteorologist with Dames and Moore, a consulting firm.
I specialize in atmospheric dispersion modeling, which uses regulatory-approved computer programs to estimate chemical concentrations in the air and deposition fluxes to the ground. I have prepared well over 1,000 air dispersion modeling analyses requiring on-site or site-specific meteorological data. I have extensive experience with many different air dispersion programs, including the ISC, AERMOD, OCD, MPTER, COMPLEX-I, CRSTER, CAL3QHCR, and other plume models, as well as the MESOPUFF, MESOPUFF II, INPUFF, and CALPUFF puff models. I have written hundreds of FORTRAN programs to assist these modeling efforts.
I have wide-ranging experience with meteorological and air dispersion conditions for Hawaii. In 2003, I recreated 56 years of pesticide drift (1946 through 2001) from over 300 pineapple fields throughout Oahu. I successfully testified on my analyses in trial at the United States District Court, District of Hawaii, Case No. CV 00 00382 BMK (January 2004).
I also sited and specified the requirements for over 30 meteorological monitoring stations while I was employed with the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District. I developed detailed technical protocols for siting these monitoring stations and for ensuring that these data meet regulatory and other air dispersion modeling requirements.
I have extensive experience in the enforcement of regulatory programs for air quality, particularly in the implementation and technical work required for AB 2588, the Air Toxics Hot Spots Act (HSC 44300 et seq.), and Proposition 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (HSC 25249.5 et seq.). In addition to the professional positions referenced above, I have also served as an expert providing testimony, analysis and advice on toxic air pollutants, and in calculating
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 7 of 152 PageID #: 7951 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 7
concentrations of toxins in the ambient air, their dispersion and the pattern and levels of public exposure that would result, and the risks to the surrounding community. My clients included the California Attorney General, the Los Angeles County District Attorney, the California Energy Commission, the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, and business, environmental, and community groups.
In particular for AB 2588, I co-developed the mathematical, computer-based model for predicting community exposures to toxic air pollutants that was distributed by CAPCOA, the California Air Pollution Control Officers’ Association. These measurements of exposure are often called Health Risk Assessments. CAPCOA is a voluntary association of state and local government officials, largely engineers and scientists responsible for air pollution control in California. The computer model I co-developed has been used by air districts throughout the state in evaluating AB 2588 submissions by facilities covered by the law, and used extensively by consultants who prepare AB 2588 submissions for the facilities. I provided technical support on using this model for over 13 years. Recipients of this support included regulatory agencies, industrial sources, and consulting firms.
I have prepared more than 300 health risk assessments of major air toxics sources in California and the United States, many of which included calculation of soil and water concentrations resulting from deposition of toxic air pollutants. In addition, I have reviewed hundreds of submissions under AB 2588, both in Santa Barbara County and throughout the state. These submissions include everything from raw data, through model inputs, meteorological data, Air Toxics Emission Inventory Plans, Air Toxics Emissions Inventory Reports, and draft and final Health Risk Assessments.
While employed at the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, I participated in developing the Guidelines and Regulations used to implement the AB 2588 program. I was a member of the AB 2588 Criteria and Guidelines Technical Guidance Committee. This committee was responsible for developing the AB 2588 Criteria and Guidelines Regulation and the Technical Guidance Document used to implement the Regulation. The Guidelines and the accompanying Technical Guidance Document are required for preparing the emission inventory plans and reports. I was a member of the CAPCOA Risk Prioritization Guidelines, Risk Assessment Guidelines, and Risk Notification Guidelines Committees. These committees created the AB 2588 Risk Prioritization, Assessment, and Notification Guidelines used in the AB 2588 program. I was also a member of the CAPCOA Air Toxics Policy Committee.
I have wide-ranging experience in verifying compliance with the warning provisions of California
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 8 of 152 PageID #: 7952 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 8
Proposition 65. I have performed Proposition 65 exposure assessments for over 120 facilities; I have reviewed scores of other Proposition 65 assessments.
C. Other Experience I have taught several courses on air pollution and toxic chemicals for the University of California at Santa Barbara Extension. I have served as a guest lecturer for the University Extension certificate program in hazardous materials management, and for the University’s environmental studies program. I have taught air toxics risk assessment to university professors through the National Science Foundation Faculty Enhancement Program. I have trained many regulatory agency staff on calculating air pollution emissions inventories, performing air dispersion modeling, and preparing health risk assessments.
On April 23, 2013 I presented a paper to the USEPA Regional/State/Local Modelers Workshop. This presentation included my analysis of proposed “Beta” options to the USEPA AERMOD air dispersion model, and how these revisions will affect model performance.1
D. Relevant Publications and Presentations Please refer to my curriculum vitae, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
IV. Bases of Opinions I used computer modeling to calculate air concentrations of chlorpyrifos emitted by the Pioneer facility. This section describes the air dispersion modeling methods I used in my analysis.
A. Air Dispersion Model I performed air dispersion modeling of the Pioneer facility using widely-accepted and peer-reviewed methods that are based on regulatory protocol and over 30 years of experience devoted exclusively to meteorology, air dispersion modeling, and air toxics exposure analyses.
For assessing the air impacts from Pioneer’s MSMA applications, I used the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Guideline AERMOD dispersion model (version 13350). This is the most recently-approved version of the model. AERMOD is an acronym for the American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model Improvement Committee’s Dispersion Model.
AERMOD contains the necessary algorithms to model air concentrations from a wide range of emission source types, including ground-based area sources such as Pioneer’s ground-based pesticide spraying. From USEPA’s description of AERMOD:
1 http://www.cleanairinfo.com/regionalstatelocalmodelingworkshop/archive/2013/agenda.htm
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 9 of 152 PageID #: 7953 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 9
A committee, AERMIC (the American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model Improvement Committee), was formed to introduce state-of-the-art modeling concepts into the EPA’s local-scale air quality models. AERMIC's focus was on a new platform for regulatory steady-state plume modeling; this platform would include air dispersion fundamentally based on planetary boundary layer turbulence structure, scaling and concepts. AERMOD is designed to treat both surface and elevated sources in simple and complex terrain.2
AERMOD is the current regulatory-approved model for calculating air concentrations from Pioneer’s pesticide applications, replacing the ISCST3 model in November, 2005.3
The AERMOD air dispersion model requires a lengthy list of input values. Key inputs to this dispersion model include local geography, air emission rates of the released pollutant, source parameters (how and where the material is released to the air), receptors (locations where the offsite concentrations and deposition are calculated), and meteorological data (determines how and where the material is dispersed in the air). Each of these inputs is discussed below.
B. Geographical Inputs The starting point for all air dispersion modeling analyses is establishing a coordinate system for identifying the geographical location of emission sources and receptors. These geographical locations are used to determine local characteristics (such as land use and elevation), and also to ascertain source to receptor distances and relationships.
I used the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system for identifying the easting (x) and northing (y) coordinates of the modeled source and receptors. Virtually all air dispersion modeling analyses are based on the UTM system. Specifically for the Pioneer site location, I used UTM zone 4 coordinates based on the NAD83 projection. The coordinates for UTM zone 4 NAD83 are in meters, which are the units required for the AERMOD air dispersion model.
I determined the source and receptor coordinates for my modeling analysis using an aerial imagery map of Kauai, projected to UTM zone 4 NAD83 coordinates. The modeled source and receptor relationship remains consistent, since both the modeled sources and receptors are based on this map.
2 USEPA, Comparison of Regulatory Design Concentrations: AERMOD vs. ISCST3, CTDMPLUS, ISC-PRIME, EPA- 454/R-03-002, June 2003. 3 http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance/guide/appw_05.pdf; Appendix A to Appendix W of 40 CFR Part 51.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 10 of 152 PageID #: 7954 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 10
The modeled source and receptor locations also require terrain elevation data, in meters above sea level. I obtained the terrain elevation data for these locations using the National Elevation Dataset (NED) GeoTiff file for the area which includes Waimea, Pioneer, and the surrounding area. GeoTiff is a binary file that includes data descriptors and geo-referencing information necessary for extracting terrain elevations. I extracted terrain elevations from 1/3rd arc-second (10 meter resolution) NED files using USEPA’s AERMAP program, v. 11103. AERMAP is included in the regulatory-approved AERMOD modeling system.
As part of the processing of meteorological data sets used as input to AERMOD, I developed surface roughness, albedo, and daytime Bowen Ratio values for the subject area. These micrometeorological parameters are described in USEPA’s AERMOD Implementation Guide:
The surface roughness length is related to the height of obstacles to the wind flow and is, in principle, the height at which the mean horizontal wind speed is zero based on a logarithmic profile. The surface roughness length influences the surface shear stress and is an important factor in determining the magnitude of mechanical turbulence and the stability of the boundary layer. The albedo is the fraction of total incident solar radiation reflected by the surface back to space without absorption. The daytime Bowen ratio, an indicator of surface moisture, is the ratio of sensible heat flux to latent heat flux and is used for determining planetary boundary layer parameters for convective conditions driven by the surface sensible heat flux.4
AERSURFACE is USEPA’s non-guideline program that extracts surface roughness, albedo, and daytime Bowen Ratio from the 1992 National Land Cover Dataset. The 1992 National Land Cover Dataset, however, does not include the state of Hawaii. Since AERSURFACE cannot currently be used for Hawaii, I developed surface roughness, albedo, and daytime Bowen Ratio values based on site visits and my experience in preparing scores of such databases. The micrometeorological parameters I used in preparing the meteorological data sets I used are as follows:
Albedo: 0.18 Bowen Ratio: 0.50 Roughness Length: 0.10-0.20m (depending on site)
C. Modeled Emissions and Source Parameters As discussed in Section III above, I calculated air concentrations of chlorpyrifos emissions released from Pioneer’s Lorsban applications. I modeled these emission areas using the AREAPOLY source type in AERMOD. The AREAPOLY source type is ideally suited to modeling irregularly shaped
4 USEPA, AERMOD Implementation Guide, March 19, 2009.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 11 of 152 PageID #: 7955 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 11
polygons, such as Pioneer’s growing grounds.
For my analyses of chlorpyrifos volatilization drift, I modeled nine of Pioneer’s Lorsban application days:
December 13, 2009; January 12, 2010; March 6, 2010; March 20, 2010; March 26, 2010; April 2, 2010; April 18, 2010; May 8, 2010; October 23, 2010.
For Pioneer’s AREAPOLY sources, the following AERMOD inputs are required:
A source identifier number or name; Source Location X (Easting) coordinate (UTM Zone 4, NAD83); Source Location Y (Northing) coordinate (UTM Zone 4, NAD83); Source base elevation (meters above sea level); Emission flux (g/(s-m2)); Release height of the area source (meters); Number of polygon vertices; X and Y coordinates for each polygon vertex (UTM Zone 4, NAD83); Initial vertical dispersion of the area source plume (meters).
I modeled Pioneer’s growing areas using a number of AREAPOLY sources, depending on the field layout and application areas for a given day. I applied a ground level release height (0 meters) and a vertical dimension of the plume equal to 10 meters. From this vertical dimension I calculated an initial vertical plume dispersion input of 4.65 meters (SZINIT = 10 meters/2.15).
Volatilization drift estimates of chlorpyrifos were provided to me by Plaintiffs’ expert Dr. Susan Kegley, Ph.D. Dr. Kegley developed two drift scenarios: a low-end volatilization drift scenario with 28% of the applied chlorpyrifos volatizing to the air in the 24 hours following application; a high- end volatilization drift calculation of 71% of the applied chlorpyrifos volatizing to the air in the 24 hours following application. These volatilization drift amounts provide a range of offsite chlorpyrifos exposures resulting from Pioneer’s Lorsban applications.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 12 of 152 PageID #: 7956 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 12
These drift estimates include only post-application volatilization drift; any spray drift occurring during application is not included.
I obtained Lorsban application locations, dates, and times from records produced by Pioneer. I calculated 24-hour average chlorpyrifos air concentrations using these data, with the 24-hour period beginning with the hour having the most significant Lorsban application amounts.
The Lorsban applications for each day I modeled, including corresponding chlorpyrifos volatilization flux rates, are listed in Exhibit B.
D. Modeled Receptors Receptors are user-designated geographical locations where the AERMOD air dispersion model calculates air concentrations. I calculated air concentrations using an evenly-spaced 100-meter grid of receptors surrounding the Pioneer facility. The receptor grid I used is as follows:
100 meter receptor spacing (UTM zone 4 NAD83): XUTM Range: 426000 to 435000 YUTM Range: 2425000 to 2430500
E. Meteorological Data The meteorological data required by AERMOD is prepared by AERMET. AERMET is part of USEPA’s Guideline modeling system, AERMOD. Required data inputs to AERMET are: surface meteorological data, twice-daily soundings of upper air data, and the micrometeorological parameters surface roughness, albedo, and Bowen ratio. AERMET creates the model-ready surface and profile data files required by AERMOD. This section discusses the meteorological data I prepared and used in my AERMET/AERMOD modeling analyses.
1. Surface Meteorology Surface meteorological data are typically collected at levels close to the ground (as opposed to upper air data which can be collected thousands of feet above the ground). For wind measurements, the instrument height is usually 20 to 33 feet (6 to 10 meters) above the ground surface. For temperature and humidity sensors, the instrument height is usually about 6 feet (two meters) above the ground. Surface wind measurements are used by AERMOD to determine the downwind transport and dispersion of air emissions.
I examined the availability of surface meteorological data for the Waimea area using several data sources. The primary source for surface meteorological data to be modeled with AERMOD are
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 13 of 152 PageID #: 7957 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 13
Integrated Surface Hourly Data (ISHD) files collected at National Weather Service, Federal Aviation Administration, and other airport monitoring sites. On Kauai, there are two main sources of ISHD files: Barking Sands Naval Facility (called PHBK – about 16 kilometers west of Pioneer’s fields) and Lihue Airport (called PHLI – about 32 kilometers east of Pioneer). Of these two sites, PHBK is more representative of meteorological conditions at Waimea.
For the Pioneer Waimea location, however, site-specific wind data are preferable to the ISH data collected at airstrips on either end of Kauai. I made numerous inquiries to the USEPA, the Hawaii Clean Air Branch, the National Climatic Data Center (“NCDC”), and the Western Regional Climate Center (“WRCC”) to determine the available site-specific meteorological data sets in the vicinity of the Pioneer facility. Through this effort, I identified the WRCC Waimea Heights as the most reliable site-specific monitoring data available from these sources. The Waimea Heights station is located about one kilometer west-northwest of Pioneer, collecting wind measurements atop a 20 foot tower.
I also examined meteorological data produced by Pioneer as part of Plaintiffs’ discovery efforts. Based on the files made available to me, it appears that Pioneer collected meteorological data from two systems: A Davis-manufactured monitoring station, which operated from December 2009 through February 2011, and a Western Weather system, which operated from February 2011 through at least December 2012.
Pioneer’s Davis Weather system collected 30-minute averaged measurements of wind and temperature, but the wind data are in cardinal wind directions (west, northwest, etc.), rather than the actual wind direction in degrees necessary for reliable air dispersion modeling. Furthermore, the Davis Weather system failed to collect data for substantial periods of time (February 11, 2010 through April 28, 2010 is missing). To my knowledge, information on instrument type, location, and measurement heights for the Davis weather system were not produced to Plaintiffs.
Pioneer’s Western Weather system includes wind instruments that appear to be about 6 to 10 feet above the ground (based on a photo of the station provided to me). The Western Weather system made available to me includes hourly-average wind data from February 25, 2011 through December 13, 2011, but the wind measurements are in qualitative wind direction (west, northwest, etc.). In addition, an hourly-average data file from the Western Weather system for February 25, 2011 through July 13, 2011 was also produced by Pioneer. This data set included wind direction in degrees. This data set, however, does not cover the December 2009 through October 2010 time period corresponding to my chlorpyrifos modeling analyses.
I compared the winds measured at Waimea Heights and Pioneer’s Western Weather station for
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 14 of 152 PageID #: 7958 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 14
March through June 2011 (the period where I had contemporaneous data from both sites). The wind measurements at these two stations are comparable, given the short data period and the low wind instrument height for Pioneer’s Western Weather station.
I also contacted USEPA and the Hawaii Clean Air Branch regarding another potential meteorological data set near the Pioneer facility. From T&B Systems, a company that performs meteorological and other data monitoring:
Gay & Robinson Energy Plantation PSD Monitoring T&B Systems recently established an air quality monitoring station on the island of Kauai designed to comply with USEPA established guidelines for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for a planned 20 mW power plant using biofuel produced from the Gay & Robinson 50,000 acre sugar cane plantation.
Measurables include oxides of nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, surface winds, relative humidity, delta temperature, and a sodar that provides three-component winds at 5 meter increments from near surface to projected plume height. All data is transmitted to T&B Systems where is posted on the internet in real time and quality checked daily.5
Both the USEPA and the Hawaii Clean Air Branch confirmed to me that they had not seen the permit application or any of the data referenced by T&B Systems. When or if the T&B Systems data become available, this could be another data set to consider for modeling Pioneer’s pesticide applications.
I went to Waimea and the areas surrounding the Pioneer facility in June 2013. Based on my observations, distance from the Pioneer facility, site characteristics, and data availability, I determined that the Waimea Heights site represents a reliable site-specific wind data set for modeling Pioneer’s December 2009 through October 2010 chlorpyrifos emissions. For substituting missing hours, and for other parameters necessary for AERMET input, I used the Barking Sands Naval Facility ISH data.
I obtained Barking Sands Marine Corps Airfield 2009-2010 ISH data (AWSMSC = 911620; WBAN = 22501; ID = PHBK) from the NCDC. I obtained these data by downloading the yearly ISHD files from NCDC’s website.6
To maximize the meteorological data available for modeling, I developed 2009-2010 meteorological
5 http://www.tbsys.com/WhatWeDone.htm 6 Available at: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/noaa/
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 15 of 152 PageID #: 7959 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 15
data that incorporate methods to reduce calm and missing hours (e.g. use one-minute data and USEPA’s AERMINUTE program).7 I downloaded these one-minute data from the NCDC and then processed the data into one-hour values using USEPA’s AERMINUTE program, v. 11325.8 As a quality assurance measure, I compared hourly values developed from the one-minute data with the corresponding ISH data file. I processed the Waimea Heights and PHBK ISH data through AERMET Stage 1, which performs data extraction and quality control checks.
2. Upper Air I used upper air data from twice-daily radiosonde measurements at Lihue, HI (WBAN = 22536), which is the closest upper air data site to Waimea. These radiosonde data are in Forecast Systems Laboratory (FSL) format which I downloaded as an ASCII text file from NOAA’s FSL website.9 I downloaded and processed all reporting levels with AERMET.
Upper-air data are collected by a “weather balloon” that is released twice per day at selected locations. As the balloon is released, it rises through the atmosphere, and radios the data back to the surface. The measuring and transmitting device is known as either a radiosonde, or rawindsonde. Data collected and radioed back include: air pressure, height, temperature, dew point, wind speed, and wind direction. I processed the FSL upper air data through AERMET Stage 1, which performs data extraction and quality control checks.
3. AERMET Processing Steps I processed the Waimea Heights, PHBK surface meteorological data, and Lihue upper air data with USEPA’s AERMET program (v. 13350). Processing of these data can be summarized as follows:
I obtained 2009-2010 hourly meteorological data from the Waimea Heights station. These data are readily available from the Western Regional Climate Center. These surface data were processed through AERMET Stage 1, which performs data extraction and quality control checks.
I obtained 2009-2010 PHBK ISHD files from NCDC. These data are readily available by downloading from NCDC’s website. These surface data were processed through AERMET Stage 1, which performs data extraction and quality control checks.
I obtained 2009-2010 PHBK one-minute wind data from NCDC. These data are readily available by downloading from NCDC’s website. These surface data were
7 USEPA, AERMINUTE User’s Instructions, v. 11325, p. 1. 8 Available at: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/asos-onemin/ 9 Available at: http://esrl.noaa.gov/raobs/
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 16 of 152 PageID #: 7960 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 16
processed with AERMINUTE, and the output then processed with AERMET Stage 1.
I obtained twice-daily upper air soundings from Lihue Airport for 2009-2010. These soundings are in FSL format and data are readily available by downloading from NOAA’s FSL website. These upper air data were processed through AERMET Stage 1, which performs data extraction and quality control checks.
I merged the hourly surface (from Waimea Heights, PHBK ISH, and PHBK one- minute data) and upper air data using AERMET stage two. Missing data were not filled.
I processed the merged files in AERMET stage three. I used albedo and Bowen ratio inputs I developed and described above. For PHBK, I used a surface roughness of 0.10 meter and for Waimea Heights, I used a surface roughness of 0.20 meter. AERMET Stage three creates the model-ready surface and profile data files required by AERMOD.
V. Calculated Air Concentrations I modeled the Pioneer AREAPOLY sources with the emission flux rates (in g/(s-m2)) listed in Exhibit B. Using AERMOD v. 13350, I calculated air concentrations at each of the receptor locations described in Section IV.D. above.
I developed exposure isopleths of chlorpyrifos air concentrations for the five Lorsban application days that affected the town of Waimea (an isopleth is a line of equal value – air concentration, for example). Using Golden Software’s Surfer program, I gridded the AERMOD air concentration output file with the Kriging algorithm. I then developed isopleths showing regions where 24-hour average chlorpyrifos air concentrations equal or exceed 0.0832 µg/m3. This level represents the 24- hour average chlorpyrifos air concentration target level developed by Dr. Susan Kegley.
The exposure isopleths of chlorpyrifos air concentrations for the five Lorsban application days that affected the town of Waimea are shown in Exhibits C through G. Each exhibit displays two 24-hour chlorpyrifos isopleths – one for the low chlorpyrifos volatilization flux level (28% over 24 hours) and one for the high chlorpyrifos volatilization flux level (71% over 24 hours). The air concentrations for the high chlorpyrifos volatilization flux scenario were developed by scaling the air concentrations from the low chlorpyrifos volatilization flux modeling analysis by the ratio of 71/28.
The attached chlorpyrifos air concentration exhibits are as follows:
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 17 of 152 PageID #: 7961 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 17
C. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from December 13, 2009 Lorsban Applications
D. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from March 6, 2010 Lorsban Applications
E. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from March 20, 2010 Lorsban Applications
F. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from April 2, 2010 Lorsban Applications
G. Aerial Map of 24-Hour Average Chlorpyrifos Air Concentrations (µg/m3) from May 8, 2010 Lorsban Applications
It should be noted that the levels shown in Exhibits C though G are not zero outside of the isopleth. Outside the isopleth, the air concentration levels will be lower than the value for the isopleth, and will diminish with distance away from the line.
VI. Analysis of Wind Speeds during Pioneer’s Pesticide Applications Pesticide labels include recommendations for application conditions, including wind speed. For example, the labels for Dow AgroScience’s Lorsban 4E and Lorsban Advanced, which contain chlorpyrifos, both state “Do not apply product when wind speed exceeds 10 mph.”
In addition, Pioneer appears to have their own wind speed conditions that restrict pesticide applications to winds of eight miles per hour or less. From Richard D. Myers’ Deposition Transcript, February 6, 2014, pp. 106-107: P. 106 25 Q. What is the allowable wind speed? P. 107 1 A. Eight miles per hour. 2 Q. So anything more, no spray? 3 A. No, no spray. Anything greater than eight 4 miles an hour. If they're spraying and they get a wind 5 gust that's eight miles an hour, they stop. 6 Q. Or greater than eight miles an hour? 7 A. Greater than eight miles per hour, they'll 8 stop. They'll stop and they'll wait until the wind dies 9 down, whatever, according to the readout on that wind 10 meter in the cab. When the wind dies down, whatever, 11 then they'll resume spraying.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 18 of 152 PageID #: 7962 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 18
I examined wind speeds measured by Pioneer during pesticide applications reported by Pioneer. This examination requires two main data components: the time of Pioneer’s pesticide applications and wind speed measurements.
With respect to Pioneer’s pesticide application data, I located records from December 13, 2009 through December 31, 2011 which included both the date and time of pesticide application. In addition, Pioneer produced 30-minute wind measurements for the period February 19, 2009 through February 24, 2011 (from their Davis measurement system). This data set includes 30-minute average wind speed and the peak wind speed measured during the corresponding 30-minute period. Pioneer also produced hourly wind measurements for the period February 25, 2011 through July 13, 2011 (from their Western Weather measurement system). This data set includes 60-minute average wind speed and the peak wind speed measured during that 60-minute period. Of these two data sets, the February 19, 2009 through February 24, 2011 period includes wind reporting (in 30 minute increments) that more accurately reflect conditions during Pioneer’s pesticide application times.
Because of these limitations in application time information and wind speed measurements (the period when both application time and 30-minute wind data are available), I am restricting my wind speed analysis to the period from December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011.
During December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011, Pioneer reported 3,430 separate pesticide applications. Using the times associated with the pesticide applications, I paired the application times with the corresponding 30-minute wind speed data measured by Pioneer. With this data set I examined Pioneer’s measured wind speeds during the times they applied pesticides. As discussed in Section IV.E.1 above, Pioneer’s Davis Weather system did not collect data during February through April 2010.
I prepared a table that examines the times when wind speeds are either less than two miles per hour or greater than eight miles per hour during Pioneer’s December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011 pesticide applications. These wind conditions are based on Pioneer’s high wind speed restriction of greater than eight miles per hour and the low wind speed restriction of less than two miles per hour found on many pesticide labels. This table, which is included as Exhibit H, shows that that many of Pioneer’s pesticide applications likely took place during unfavorable wind conditions.
I also examined wind speeds measured during Pioneer’s application of specific pesticides: Lorsban 4E, Lorsban Advanced, Malathion 8 Aquamul, Gramoxone Inteon, and Intrro. Based on Pioneer’s measured wind speeds, many of these pesticide applications are likely to have occurred during label- restricted wind conditions.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 19 of 152 PageID #: 7963 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 19
Pioneer applied Lorsban 4E, which contains 44.9% chlorpyrifos, 49 times between December 13, 2009 and February 24, 2011. The label for this pesticide states: “Apply only when wind speed is 3 to 10 mph as measured by an anemometer. Do not apply product when wind speed exceeds 10 mph.” Exhibit I includes an analysis of whether wind speeds of less than three miles per hour or greater than 10 miles per hour were measured during Pioneer’s Lorsban 4E applications.
Pioneer applied Lorsban Advanced, which contains 40.2% chlorpyrifos, 90 times between December 13, 2009 and February 24, 2011. The label for this pesticide states: “Apply only when wind speed is 3 to 10 mph as measured by an anemometer. Do not apply product when wind speed exceeds 10 mph.” Exhibit J includes an analysis of whether wind speeds of less than three miles per hour or greater than 10 miles per hour were measured during Pioneer’s Lorsban Advanced applications.
Pioneer applied Malathion 8 Aquamul, which contains 81.8% Malathion, 282 times between December 13, 2009 and February 24, 2011. The label for this pesticide states: “Make aerial or ground applications when the wind velocity favors on target product deposition (approximately 3 to 10 mph). Do not apply when wind velocity exceeds 15 mph. Avoid applications when wind gusts approach 15 mph.” Exhibit K includes an analysis of whether wind speeds of less than three miles per hour or greater than 10 miles per hour were measured during Pioneer’s Malathion 8 Aquamul applications.
Pioneer applied Gramoxone Inteon, which contains 30.1% paraquat dichloride, 26 times between December 13, 2009 and February 24, 2011. The label for this pesticide states: “Drift potential is lowest between wind speeds of 2-10 mph… Application must be avoided below 2 mph due to variable wind direction and high inversion potential.” Exhibit L includes an analysis of whether wind speeds of less than two miles per hour or greater than 10 miles per hour were measured during Pioneer’s Gramoxone Inteon applications.
Pioneer applied Intrro, which contains 45.1% alachlor, 52 times between December 13, 2009 and February 24, 2011. The label for this pesticide states: “Drift potential is lowest between wind speeds of 2-10 miles per hour… Application must be avoided below 2 miles per hour due to variable wind direction and high inversion potential.” Exhibit M includes an analysis of whether wind speeds of less than two miles per hour or greater than 10 miles per hour were measured during Pioneer’s Intrro applications.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 20 of 152 PageID #: 7964 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 20
VII. Materials Considered and Relied On I relied on field production, chemical use, and measurement documents produced by Pioneer to date. It is my understanding that these documents will be produced to Defendants by Plaintiffs’ counsel.
In addition to the footnoted references and materials discussed in the body of my report, I considered and relied on the following materials:
Atkinson, Dennis, and Russell F. Lee, Procedures for Substituting Values for Missing NWS Meteorological Data for Use in Regulatory Air Quality Models, July 7, 1992. California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association, Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Program Revised 1992 Risk Assessment Guidelines, October 1993. California Air Resources Board, HotSpots Analysis and Reporting Program (HARP) User’s Guide, December 2003. California Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, August 2003. California Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, Exposure Assessment and Stochastic Analysis, Final, August 2012. Dow AgroScience, Lorsban 4-E Product Label, June 18, 2012. Dow AgroScience, Lorsban Advanced Product Label, August 7, 2012. Hanna, S.R., Gary Briggs, and Rayford Hosker. Handbook on Atmospheric Diffusion, Prepared for the U.S. Dept. of Energy, Office of Health and Environmental Research. 1982. Lott, J. N., National Climatic Data Center, The Quality Control of the Integrated Surface Hourly Database. Loveland Products, Malathion 8 Aquamul Product Label. Monsanto, Intrro Product Label, 2009. Myers, Richard D., Deposition Transcript, February 6, 2014. National Climatic Data Center, The FCC Integrated Hourly Surface Database, A New Resource of Global Climate Data, November 2001. National Climatic Data Center, Federal Climate Complex, Data Documentation for Integrated Surface Data, April 4, 2005.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 21 of 152 PageID #: 7965 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 21
National Climatic Data Center, Data Documentation for Data Set 3505 (DSI-3505), Integrated Surface Data, April 25, 2008. Syngenta, Gramoxone Inteon Product Label, 2010. Turner, D. Bruce, Workbook of Atmospheric Diffusion Estimates, USEPA, Office of Air Programs, 1970. USEPA, Meteorological Monitoring Guidance for Regulatory Modeling Applications, EPA-454/R- 99-015, February 2000. USEPA, AERMOD: Latest Features and Evaluation Results, EPA 454/R-03-003, June 2003. USEPA, Comparison of Regulatory Design Concentrations: AERMOD vs. ISCST3, CTDMPLUS, ISC-PRIME, EPA-454/R-03-002, June 2003. USEPA, AERMOD: Description of Model Formulation, EPA 454/R-03-004, September 2004. USEPA, User’s Guide for the AERMOD Terrain Processor (AERMAP), EPA-454/B-03-003, October 2004. USEPA, AERMAP v. 11103 Addendum: User’s Guide for the AERMOD Terrain Processor (AERMAP), EPA-454/B-03-003, March 2011. USEPA, User’s Guide for the AMS/EPA Regulatory Air Model - AERMOD, EPA-454/B-03-001, September 2004. USEPA, AERMOD v. 13350 Addendum: User’s Guide for the AMS/EPA Regulatory Air Model - AERMOD, EPA-454/B-03-001, December 2013. USEPA, User’s Guide for the AERMOD Meteorological Preprocessor (AERMET), EPA-454/B-03- 002, November 2004. USEPA, AERMET v. 13350 Addendum: User’s Guide for the AERMOD Meteorological Preprocessor (AERMET), EPA-454/B-03-002, December 2013. USEPA, Revision to the Guideline on Air Quality Models: Adoption of a Preferred General Purpose (Flat and Complex Terrain) Dispersion Model and Other Revisions, Appendix W to 40 CFR Part 51, November 9, 2005. USEPA, AERSURFACE v. 13016 User’s Guide, EPA-454/B-08-001, January 16, 2013. USEPA, AERMOD Implementation Guide, March 19, 2009. USEPA, AERMINUTE User’s Instructions, v. 11325, 2011.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 22 of 152 PageID #: 7966 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 22
VIII. Exhibits to be Used Any of the materials described herein may be used to help illustrate my testimony.
IX. Publications in Last 10 Years Please refer to my attached curriculum vitae (Exhibit A).
X. Testimony in Last Four Years Abarca, Raul Valencia, et al. v. Merck & Co., Inc., et al. United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 1:07-CV-00388-OWW-DLB Phase 1 Deposition: April 13, 2010 Daubert Hearings: October 7, 2010; October 13-14, 2010 Rule 706 Expert Hearing: December 2, 2010 Phase 1 Trial: February 10, 2011 Phase 2 Deposition: September 19, 2012
Commonwealth of Kentucky, Energy and Environment Cabinet, File No. DAQ-41109-048. Sierra Club, Kentucky Environmental Foundation, and Kentuckians for the Commonwealth v. Energy and Environment Cabinet, Division for Air Quality, and East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. Deposition: August 31, 2010
Dorsey, Michael J., et al. v. Mid-Pacific Country Club First District Court, State of Hawaii Case No. 12-1-0158-01 Deposition: November 17, 2013
XI. Compensation My current rate of compensation for this work is $320 per hour for technical tasks. My current rate for deposition and trial testimony is $480 per hour.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 23 of 152 PageID #: 7967 Expert Report – Camille Sears March 12, 2014 Page - 23
XII. Concluding Remarks I calculated chlorpyrifos air concentrations resulting from Pioneer’s December 2009 through October 2010 Lorsban applications. The low and high volatilization drift estimates I modeled provide a range of chlorpyrifos air concentrations, rather than a single point estimate. These air concentrations serve as a reliable basis for determining the offsite exposure areas caused by Pioneer’s Lorsban applications.
In addition, many of Pioneer’s pesticide applications are likely to have occurred during inappropriate wind conditions. This conclusion is based on Pioneer’s measured wind speeds during pesticide applications and associated wind condition restrictions.
This report is a good faith effort to set forth my opinions and the bases thereof. I reserve the right to supplement this report to include further opinions based on additional information, clarifying data, testimony or comments by other technical experts, or additional discovery.
Executed this 12th day of March, 2014, at Ojai, California.
Camille Sears
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 24 of 152 PageID #: 7968
Exhibit A:
Curriculum Vitae
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 25 of 152 PageID #: 7969 Camille Marie Sears 502 W. Lomita Ave., Ojai, CA 93023
Tel: (805) 646-2588 e-mail: [email protected]
Summary I have over 30 years of regulatory and private-sector experience in air quality impact analyses, health risk assessments, meteorological monitoring, and geographic information systems. I specialize in litigation support; I have successfully provided testimony in numerous cases, both as an individual consultant and as part of a team of experts.
Education • M.S., Atmospheric Science, University of California, Davis, 1980. • B.S., Atmospheric Science, University of California, Davis, 1978.
Air Dispersion Modeling • I am experienced in applying many different air dispersion models, including programs still in the development phase. I have prepared well over 1,000 air dispersion modeling analyses requiring the use of on-site or site-specific meteorological data. These runs were made with the USEPA ISC, OCD, MESOPUFF, INPUFF, CALPUFF, ISC-PRIME, AERMOD, COMPLEX-I, MPTER, and other air dispersion models. • I prepared and submitted technical comments to the USEPA on beta-testing versions of AERMOD; these comments are being addressed and will be incorporated into the model and instructions when it is ready for regulatory application. • I am experienced in performing air dispersion modeling for virtually every emission source type imaginable. I have modeled: Refineries and associated activities; Mobile sources, including cars, trains, airplanes, trucks, and ships; Power plants, including natural gas and coal-fired; Smelting operations; Area sources, such as housing tracts, biocides from agricultural operations, landfills, highways, fugitive dust sources, airports, oil and gas seeps, and ponds; Volume sources, including fugitive emissions from buildings and diesel construction combustion emissions; Small sources, including dry cleaners, gas stations, surface coating operations, plating facilities, medical device manufacturers, coffee roasters, ethylene oxide sterilizers, degreasing operations, foundries, and printing companies; Cooling towers and gas compressors; Diatomaceous earth, rock and gravel plants, and other mining operations; Offshore oil platforms, drilling rigs, and processing activities; Onshore oil and gas exploration, storage, processing, and transport facilities; Fugitive dust emissions from roads, wind erosion, and farming activities; Radionuclide emissions from actual and potential releases. • I have extensive experience in modeling plume depletion and deposition from air releases of particulate emissions. • As a senior scientist, I developed the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBAPCD) protocol on air quality modeling. I developed extensive modeling capabilities for the SBAPCD on VAX 8600 and Intel I-860 computer systems; I acted as systems analyst for the SBAPCD air quality modeling system; I served as director of air quality analyses for numerous major energy projects; I performed air quality impact analyses using inert and photochemical models, including EPA, ARB and private- sector models; I performed technical review and evaluating air quality and wind field models; I developed software to prepare model inputs consistent with the SBAPCD protocol on air quality modeling for OCD, OCDCPM, MPTER, COMPLEX-I/II and ISC. • I provided detailed review and comments on the development of the Minerals Management Service OCD model. I developed the technical requirements for and
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 26 of 152 PageID #: 7970 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 2
supervised the development of the OCDCPM model, a hybrid of the OCD, COMPLEX-I and MPTER models. • I prepared the "Modeling Exposures of Hazardous Materials Released During Transportation Incidents" report for the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). This report examines and rates the ADAM, ALOHA, ARCHIE, CASRAM, DEGADIS, HGSYSTEM, SLAB, and TSCREEN models for transportation accident consequence analyses of a priority list of 50 chemicals chosen by OEHHA. The report includes a model selection guide for adequacy of assessing priority chemicals, averaging time capabilities, isopleth generating capabilities, model limitations and concerns, and model advantages. • I am experienced in assessing uncertainty in emission rate calculations, source release, and dispersion modeling. I have developed numerous probability distributions for input to Monte Carlo simulations, and I was a member of the External Advisory Group for the California EPA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, Part IV, Technical Support Document for Exposure Assessment and Stochastic Analysis.
Health Risk Assessment • I have prepared more than 300 health risk assessments of major air toxics sources. These assessments were prepared for AB 2588 (the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act of 1987), Proposition 65, and other exposure analysis activities. More than 120 of these exposure assessments were prepared for Proposition 65 compliance verification in a litigation support setting. • I reviewed approximately 300 other health risk assessments of toxic air pollution sources in California. The regulatory programs in this review include AB 2588, Proposition 65, the California Environmental Quality Act, and other exposure analysis activities. My clients include the California Attorney General's Office, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, the SBAPCD, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, numerous environmental and community groups, and several plaintiff law firms. • I am experienced in assessing public health risk from continuous, intermittent, and accidental releases of toxic emissions. I am experienced in generating graphical presentations of risk results, and characterizing risks from carcinogenic and acute and chronic noncarcinogenic pollutants. • I am experienced in communicating adverse health risks discovered through the Proposition 65 and AB 2588 processes. I have presented risk assessment results in many public settings -- to industry, media, and the affected public. • For four years, I was the Air Toxics Program Coordinator for the SBAPCD. My duties included: developing and managing the District air toxics program; supervising District staff assigned to the air toxics program; developing District air toxics rules, regulations, policies and procedures; management of all District air toxics efforts, including AB 2588, Proposition 65, and federal activities; developing and tracking the SBAPCD air toxics budget. • I have prepared numerous calculations of exposures from indoor air pollutants. A few examples include: diesel PM10 inside school buses, formaldehyde inside temporary school buildings, lead from disturbed paint, phenyl mercuric acetate from water-based paints and drywall mud, and tetrachloroethene from recently dry-cleaned clothes.
Litigation Support • I have prepared numerous analyses in support of litigation, both in Federal and State Courts. I am experienced in preparing F.R.C.P. Rule 26(a)(2) expert reports and providing deposition and trial testimony (I have prepared eight Rule 26 reports). Much of my work is focused on human dose and risk reconstruction resulting from multiple air emission sources (lifetime and specific events).
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 27 of 152 PageID #: 7971 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 3
• I am experienced in preparing declarations (many dozens) and providing expert testimony in depositions and trials (see my testimony history). • I am experienced in providing support for legal staff. I have assisted in preparing numerous interrogatories, questions for depositions, deposition reviews, various briefs and motions, and general consulting. • Recent examples of my work include: DTSC v. Interstate Non-Ferrous; United States District Court, Eastern District of California (2002). In this case I performed air dispersion modeling, downwind soil deposition calculations, and resultant soil concentrations of dioxins (TCDD TEQ) from historical fires at a smelting facility. I prepared several Rule 26 Reports in my role of assisting the California Attorney General’s Office in trying this matter. Akee v. Dow et al.; United States District Court, District of Hawaii (2003-2004). In this case I performed air dispersion modeling used to quantify air concentrations and reconstruct intake, dose, excess cancer risk, and noncancer chronic hazard indices resulting from soil fumigation activities on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. I modeled 319 separate AREAPOLY pineapple fields for the following chemicals: DBCP, EDB, 1,3- trichloropropene, 1,2-dichloropropane, and epichlorohydrin. I calculated chemical flux rates and modeled the emissions from these fumigants for years 1946 through 2001 (56 years) for 34 test plaintiffs and 97 distinct home, school, and work addresses. I prepared a Rule 26 Expert Report, successfully defended against Daubert challenges, and testified in trial. Lawrence O’Connor v. Boeing North America, Inc., United States District Court, Central District of California, Western Division (2004-2005). In this case I performed air dispersion modeling, quantified air concentrations, and reconstructed individual intake, dose, and excess cancer risks resulting from approximately 150 air toxics sources in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, California. I prepared these analyses for years 1950 through 2000 (51 years) for 173 plaintiffs and 741 distinct home, school, and work addresses. I prepared several Rule 26 Reports, and the case settled on the eve of trial in September, 2005. Defendants did not attempt a Daubert challenge of my work. • I have prepared hundreds of individual and region-wide health risk assessments in support of litigation. These analyses include specific sub-tasks, including: calculating emission rates, choosing proper meteorological data inputs, performing air dispersion modeling, and quantifying intake, dose, excess cancer risk, and acute/chronic noncancer health effects. • I have prepared over 120 exposure assessments for Proposition 65 litigation support. In these analyses, my tasks include: reviewing AB 2588 risk assessments and other documents to assist in verifying compliance with Proposition 65; preparing exposure assessments consistent with Proposition 65 Regulations for carcinogens and reproductive toxicants; using a geographic information system (Atlas GIS) to prepare exposure maps that display areas of required warnings; calculating the number of residents and workers exposed to levels of risk requiring warnings (using the GIS); preparing declarations, providing staff support, and other expert services as required. I have also reviewed scores of other assessments for verifying compliance with Proposition 65. My proposition 65 litigation clients include the California Attorney General's Office, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, As You Sow, California Community Health Advocates, Center for Environmental Health, California Earth Corps, Communities for a Better Environment, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Law Foundation, and People United for a Better Oakland.
Geographic Information Systems • ArcGIS: I am experienced in preparing presentation and testimony maps using ArcView versions 3 through 9.3. I developed methods to convert AutoCAD DXF files to ArcView polygon theme shape files for use in map overlays.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 28 of 152 PageID #: 7972 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 4
• I have created many presentation maps with ArcView using MrSID DOQQ and other aerial photos as a base and then overlaying exposure regions. This provides a detailed view (down to the house level) of where air concentrations and health risks are projected to occur. • Using ArcView, I have created numerous presentations using USGS Topographic maps (as TIFF files) as the base on to which exposure regions are overlaid. • MapInfo for Windows: I prepared numerous presentation maps including exposure isopleths, streets and highways, and sensitive receptors, labels. I developed procedures for importing Surfer isopleths in AutoCAD DXF format as a layer into MapInfo. • Atlas GIS: I am experienced in preparing presentation maps with both the Windows and DOS versions of Atlas GIS. In addition to preparing maps, I use Atlas GIS to aggregate census data (at the block group level) within exposure isopleths to determine the number of individuals living and working within exposure zones. I am also experienced in geocoding large numbers of addresses and performing statistical analyses of exposed populations. • I am experienced in preparing large-scale graphical displays, both in hard-copy and for PowerPoint presentations. These displays are used in trial testimony, public meetings, and other litigation support. • I developed a Fortran program to modify AutoCAD DXF files, including batch-mode coordinate shifting for aligning overlays to different base maps.
Ozone and Long-Range Transport • I developed emission reduction strategies and identified appropriate offset sources to mitigate project emissions liability. For VOC offsets, I developed and implemented procedures to account for reactivity of organic compound species for ozone impact mitigation. I wrote Fortran programs and developed a chemical database to calculate ozone formation potential using hydroxyl radical rate constants and an alkane/non- alkane reactive organic compound method. • I provided technical support to the Joint Interagency Modeling Study and South Central Coast Cooperative Aerometric Monitoring Program. With the SBAPCD, I provided technical comments on analyses performed with the EKMA, AIRSHED, and PARIS models. I was responsible for developing emissions inventory for input into regional air quality planning models. • I was the project manager for the Santa Barbara County Air Quality Attainment Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). My duties included: preparing initial study; preparation and release of the EIR Notice of Preparation; conducting public scoping hearings to obtain comments on the initial study; managing contractor efforts to prepare the draft EIR. • I modified, tested, and compiled the Fortran code to the MESOPUFF model (the precursor to CALPUFF) to incorporate critical dividing streamline height algorithms. The model was then applied as part of a PSD analysis for a large copper-smelting facility. • I am experienced in developing and analyzing wind fields for use in long-range transport and dispersion modeling. • I have run CALPUFF numerous times. I use CALPUFF to assess visibility effects and both near-field and mesoscale air concentrations from various emission sources, including power plants.
Emission Rate Calculations • I developed methods to estimate and verify source emission rates using air pollution measurements collected downwind of the emitting facility, local meteorological data, and dispersion models. This technique is useful in determining whether reported source emission rates are reasonable, and based on monitored and modeled air concentrations, revised emission rates can be created.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 29 of 152 PageID #: 7973 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 5
• I am experienced in developing emission inventories of hundreds of criteria and toxic air pollutant sources. I developed procedures and programs for quantifying emissions from many air emission sources, including: landfills, diesel exhaust sources, natural gas combustion activities, fugitive hydrocarbons from oil and gas facilities, dry cleaners, auto body shops, and ethylene oxide sterilizers. • I have calculated flux rates (and modeled air concentrations) from hundreds of biocide applications to agricultural fields. Emission sources include aerial spraying, boom applications, and soil injection of fumigants. • I am experienced in calculating emission rates using emission factors, source-test results, mass-balance equations, and other emission estimating techniques.
Software Development • I am skilled in computer operation and programming, with an emphasis on Fortran 95. • I am experienced with numerous USEPA dispersion models, modifying them for system-specific input and output, and compiling the code for personal use and distribution. I own and am experienced in using the following Fortran compilers: Lahey Fortran 95, Lahey Fortran 90 DOS-Extended; Lahey F77L-EM32 DOS-Extended; Microsoft PowerStation 32-bit DOS-Extended; and Microsoft 16-bit. • I configured and operated an Intel I-860 based workstation for the SBAPCD toxics program. I created control files and recoded programs to run dispersion models and risk assessments in the 64-bit I-860 environment (using Portland Group Fortran). • Using Microsoft Fortran PowerStation, I wrote programs to extract terrain elevations from both 10-meter and 30-meter USGS DEM files. Using a file of discrete x,y coordinates, these programs extract elevations within a user-chosen distance for each x,y pair. The code I wrote can be run in steps or batch mode, allowing numerous DEM files to be processed at once. • I have written many hundreds of utilities to facilitate data processing, entry, and quality assurance. These utility programs are a “tool chest” from which I can draw upon to expedite my work. • While at the SBAPCD, I designed the ACE2588 model - the first public domain multi- source, multi-pathway, multi-pollutant risk assessment model. I co-developed the structure of the ACE2588 input and output files, supervised the coding of the model, tested the model for quality assurance, and for over 10 years I provided technical support to about 200 users of the model. I was responsible for updating the model each year and ensuring that it is consistent with California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) Risk Assessment Guidelines. • I developed and coded the ISC2ACE and ACE2 programs for distribution by CAPCOA. These programs were widely used in California for preparing AB 2588 and other program health risk assessments. ISC2ACE and ACE2 contain "compression" algorithms to reduce the hard drive and RAM requirements compared to ISCST2/ACE2588. I also developed ISC3ACE/ACE3 to incorporate the revised ISCST3 dispersion model requirements. • I developed and coded the "HotSpot" system - a series of Fortran programs to expedite the review of air toxics emissions data, to prepare air quality modeling and risk assessment inputs, and to prepare graphical risk presentations. • I customized ACE2588 and developed a mapping system for the SBAPCD. I modified the ACE2588 Fortran code to run on an Intel I-860 RISC workstation; I updated programs that allow SBAPCD staff to continue to use the "HotSpot" system – a series of programs that streamline preparing AB 2588 risk assessments; I developed a risk assessment mapping system based on MapInfo for Windows which linked the MapInfo mapping package to the "HotSpot" system. • I developed software for electronic submittal of all AB 2588 reporting requirements for the SBAPCD. As an update to the "HotSpot" system software, I created software that allows facilities to submit all AB 2588 reporting data, including that needed for risk prioritization, exposure assessment, and presentation mapping. The data submitted by
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 30 of 152 PageID #: 7974 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 6
the facility is then reformatted to both ATDIF and ATEDS formats for transmittal to the California Air Resources Board. • I developed and coded Fortran programs for AB 2588 risk prioritization; both batch and interactive versions of the program were created. These programs were used by several air pollution control districts in California.
Air Quality and Meteorological Monitoring • I was responsible for the design, review, and evaluation of an offshore source tracer gas study. This project used both inert tracer gas and a visible release to track the onshore trajectory and terrain impaction of offshore-released buoyant plumes. • I developed the technical requirements for the Santa Barbara County Air Quality/Meteorological Monitoring Protocol. I developed and implemented the protocol for siting pre- and post-construction air quality and meteorological PSD monitoring systems. I determined the instrumentation requirements, and designed and sited over 30 such PSD monitoring systems. Meteorological parameters measured included ambient temperature, wind speed, wind direction, sigma-theta (standard deviation of horizontal wind direction fluctuations), sigma-phi (standard deviation of vertical wind direction fluctuations), sigma-v (standard deviation of horizontal wind speed fluctuations), and sigma-w (standard deviation of vertical wind speed fluctuations). Air pollutants measured included PM10, SO2, NO, NOx, NO2, CO, O3, and H2S. • I was responsible for data acquisition and quality assurance for an offshore meteorological monitoring station. Parameters measured included ambient temperature (and delta-T), wind speed, wind direction, and sigma-theta. • In coordination with consultants performing air monitoring for verifying compliance with Proposition 65 and other regulatory programs, I wrote software to convert raw meteorological data to hourly-averaged values formatted for dispersion modeling input. • Assisting the Ventura Unified School District, I collected air, soil, and surface samples and had them analyzed for chlorpyrifos contamination (caused by spray drift from a nearby citrus orchard). I also coordinated the analysis of the samples, and presented the results in a public meeting. • Using summa canisters, I collected numerous VOC samples to characterize background and initial conditions for use in Santa Barbara County ozone attainment modeling. I also collected samples of air toxics (such as xylenes downwind of a medical device manufacturer) to assist in enforcement actions. • For the California Attorney General’s Office, I purchased, calibrated, and operated a carbon monoxide monitoring system. I measured and reported CO air concentrations resulting from numerous types of candles, gas appliances, and charcoal briquettes.
Support, Training, and Instruction • For 10 years, I provided ACE2588 risk assessment model support for CAPCOA. My tasks included: updating the ACE2588 risk assessment model Fortran code to increase user efficiency and to maintain consistency with the CAPCOA Risk Assessment Guidelines; modifying the Fortran code to the EPA ISC model to interface with ACE2588; writing utility programs to assist ACE2588 users; updating toxicity data files to maintain consistency with the CAPCOA Risk Assessment Guidelines; developing the distribution and installation package for ACE2588 and associated programs; providing technical support for all users of ACE2588. • I instructed approximately 20 University Professors through the National Science Foundation Faculty Enhancement Program. Instruction topics included: dispersion modeling, meteorological data, environmental fate analysis, toxicology of air pollutants, and air toxics risk assessment; professors were also trained on the use of the ISC2ACE dispersion model and the ACE2 exposure assessment model. • I was the instructor of the Air Pollution and Toxic Chemicals course for the University of California, Santa Barbara, Extension certificate program in Hazardous Materials Management. Topics covered in this course include: detailed review of criteria and
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 31 of 152 PageID #: 7975 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 7
noncriteria air pollutants; air toxics legislation and regulations; quantifying toxic air contaminant emissions; criteria and noncriteria pollutant monitoring; air quality modeling; health risk assessment procedures; health risk management; control/mitigating air pollutants; characteristics and modeling of spills and other short- term releases of air pollutants; acid deposition, precipitation and fog; indoor/occupational air pollution; the effect of chlorofluorocarbons on the stratospheric ozone layer. I taught this course for five years. • I have trained numerous regulatory staff on the mechanics of dispersion modeling, health risk assessments, emission rate calculations, and presentation mapping. I provided detailed training to SBAPCD staff in using the HARP program, and in comparing and contrasting ACE2588 analyses to HARP. • Through UCSB Extension, I taught a three-day course on dispersion modeling, preparing health risk assessments, and presentation mapping with Atlas GIS and MapInfo. • I hold a lifetime California Community College Instructor Credential (Certificate No. 14571); Subject Matter Area: Physics. • I have presented numerous guest lectures – at universities, public libraries, farm groups, and business organizations.
Indoor Air Quality • I prepared mercury exposure assessments caused by applying indoor latex paints containing phenylmercuric acetate as a biocide. • Using a carbon monoxide monitor, I examined CO concentrations inside rooms of varying sizes and with a range of ventilation rates. Indoor sources of CO emissions included gas appliances and candles. I also examined CO concentrations within parking garages. • I calculated air concentrations of tetrachloroethene inside homes and cars from offgassing dry-cleaned clothes. • I examined air concentrations of formaldehyde inside manufactured homes and school buildings. I also calculated formaldehyde exposures from carpet emissions within homes. • I assessed lead air exposures and surface deposition from deteriorating lead-based paint applications within apartments. I also calculated lead air concentrations and associated exposures resulting from milling of brass pipes and fittings. • While employed by the SBAPCD, I assisted with exposure assessment and awareness activities for Santa Barbara County high-exposure radon areas. • I calculated BTEX air concentrations and health risks inside homes from leaking underground fuel tanks and resultant contaminated soil plumes. I also assessed indoor VOC exposures and remediation options with the AERIS model. • I have assessed indoor air concentrations from numerous volatile organic compound sources, including printing operations, microprocessor manufacturing, and solvent degreasing activities. • I calculated indoor emission flux rates and air concentrations of elemental mercury for plaintiff litigation support purposes. This analysis included an exposure reconstruction (home, school, workplace, outside, and other locations) for 16 plaintiffs who had collected spilled mercury in their village. The study required room volume calculations, air exchange rates, exposure history reconstruction, mercury quantity and droplet size estimation, elemental mercury flux rate calculations (including decay with time), and resultant air concentration calculations. I calculated both peak acute (two-hour) and 24-hour average concentrations. • I calculated emission rates of lead from disturbed paint surfaces. I then calculated indoor air concentrations of lead for plaintiff litigation support purposes.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 32 of 152 PageID #: 7976 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 8
Publications • To establish a legal record and to assist in environmental review, I prepared and submitted dozens of detailed comment letters to regulatory and decision-making bodies. • I have contributed to over 100 Environmental Impact Statements/Reports and other technical documents required for regulatory decision-making. • I prepared two software review columns for the Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association. • Correlations of total, diffuse, and direct solar radiation with the percentage of possible sunshine for Davis, California. Solar Energy, 27(4):357-360 (1981).
Employment History • Self-Employed Air Quality Consultant 1992 to 2014 • Santa Barbara County APCD, Senior Scientist 1988 to 1992 • URS Consultants, Senior Scientist 1987 to 1988 • Santa Barbara County APCD, Air Quality Engineer 1983 to 1987 • Dames and Moore, Meteorologist 1982 to 1983 • UC Davis, Research Associate 1980 to 1981
Testimony History • People of the State of California v. McGhan Medical, Inc. Deposition: Two dates: June - July 1990 • People of the State of California v. Santa Maria Chili Deposition: Two dates: August 1990 • California Earth Corps v. Johnson Controls, Inc. Deposition: October 26, 1995 • Larry Dale Anderson v. Pacific Gas & Electric Deposition: January 4, 1996 Arbitration: January 17, 1996 • Adams v. Shell Oil Company Deposition: July 3, 1996 Trial: August 21, 1996 Trial: August 22, 1996 • California Earth Corps v. Teledyne Battery Products Deposition: January 17, 1997 • Marlene Hook v. Lockheed Martin Corporation Deposition: December 15, 1997 • Lawrence O’Connor v. Boeing North America, Inc. Deposition: May 8, 1998 • Bristow v. Tri Cal Deposition: June 15, 1998 • Abeyta v. Pacific Refining Co. Deposition: January 16, 1999 Arbitration: January 25, 1999 • Danny Aguayo v. Betz Laboratories, Inc. Deposition: July 10, 2000 Deposition: July 11, 2000 • Marlene Hook v. Lockheed Martin Corporation Deposition: September 18, 2000 Deposition: September 19, 2000 • Tressa Haddad v. Texaco Deposition: March 9, 2001
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 33 of 152 PageID #: 7977 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 9
• California DTSC v. Interstate Non-Ferrous United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. CV-F-97 50160 OWW LJO Deposition: April 18, 2002 • Akee v. Dow et al. United States District Court, District of Hawaii, Case No. CV 00 00382 BMK Deposition: April 16, 2003 Deposition: April 17, 2003 Deposition: January 7, 2004 Trial: January 17, 2004 Trial: January 20, 2004 • Center for Environmental Health v. Virginia Cleaners Superior Court of the State of California County of Alameda, Case No. 2002 07 6091 Deposition: March 4, 2004 • Application for Certification for Small Power Plant Exemption – Riverside Energy Resource Center. Docket No. 04-SPPE-01. Evidentiary Hearing Testimony before the California Energy Resource Conservation And Development Commission: August 31, 2004 • Lawrence O’Connor v. Boeing North America, Inc. United States District Court, Central District of California, Western Division. Case No. CV 97-1554 DT (RCx) Deposition: March 1, 2005 Deposition: March 2, 2005 Deposition: March 3, 2005 Deposition: March 15, 2005 Deposition: April 25, 2005 • Clemente Alvarez, et al, v. Western Farm Service, Inc. Superior Court of the State of California County of Kern, Metropolitan Division. Case No. 250 621 AEW Deposition: April 11, 2005 • Gary June et al. v. Union Carbide Corporation & UMETCO Minerals Corporation United States District Court, District of Colorado, Case No. 04-CV-00123 MSK-MJW Deposition: January 9, 2007 • Alberto Achas Castillo, et al. v. Newmont Mining Corporation, et al. District Court, Denver County, Colorado, Case No. 01-CV-4453 Deposition: February 19, 2007 Deposition: February 20, 2007 Arbitration: March 6, 2007 Arbitration: March 7, 2007 • Jacobs Farm/Del Cabo Inc. v. Western Farm Service, Inc. Superior Court of the State of California County of Santa Cruz, Case No. CV 157041 Deposition: May 8, 2008 Deposition: August 26, 2008 Trial: September 18, 2008 Trial: September 24, 2008
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 34 of 152 PageID #: 7978 Camille Marie Sears, Page - 10
• Environmental Law Foundation et al. v. Laidlaw Transit Inc. et al. Superior Court of the State of California County of San Francisco, Case No. CGC-06-451832 Deposition: July 8, 2008 • Application of NRG Texas Power, LLC for State Air Quality Permit No. 79188 and Prevention of Significant Deterioration Air Quality Permit PSD-TX-1072. State Office of Administrative Hearings Docket No. 582-08-0861; TCEQ Docket No. 2007-1820-AIR. Deposition: February 12, 2009 Hearing: February 24, 2009 • Application of IPA Coleto Creek, LLC for State Air Quality Permit No. 83778 and Prevention of Significant Deterioration Air Quality Permit PSD-TX-1118 and for Hazardous Air Pollutant Major Source [FCAA § 112(G)] Permit HAP-14. State Office of Administrative Hearings Docket No. 582-09-2045; TCEQ Docket No. 2009-0032-AIR. Deposition: September 21, 2009 Hearing: October 16, 2009 • Application of Las Brisas Energy Center, LLC for State Air Quality Permit No. 85013 and Prevention of Significant Deterioration Air Quality Permit PSD-TX-1138 and for Hazardous Air Pollutant Major Source [FCAA § 112(G)] Permit HAP-48 and Plantwide Applicability Permit PAL41. State Office of Administrative Hearings Docket No. 582-09-2005; TCEQ Docket No. 2009-0033-AIR. Deposition: October 9, 2009 Hearing: November 5, 2009 Hearing: November 6, 2009 • Abarca, Raul Valencia, et al. v. Merck & Co., Inc., et al. United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 1:07-CV-00388-OWW-DLB Phase 1 Deposition: April 13, 2010 Daubert Hearing: October 7, 2010 Daubert Hearing: October 13, 2010 Daubert Hearing: October 14, 2010 Rule 706 Expert Hearing: December 2, 2010 Phase 1 Trial: February 10, 2011 Phase 2 Deposition: September 19, 2012 • Commonwealth of Kentucky, Energy and Environment Cabinet, File No. DAQ-41109- 048. Sierra Club, Kentucky Environmental Foundation, and Kentuckians for the Commonwealth v. Energy and Environment Cabinet, Division for Air Quality, and East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. Deposition: August 31, 2010 • Dorsey, Michael J., et al. v. Mid-Pacific Country Club First District Court, State of Hawaii Case No. 12-1-0158-01 Deposition: November 17, 2013
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 35 of 152 PageID #: 7979
Exhibit B:
Chlorpyrifos Applications and Flux Rates
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 36 of 152 PageID #: 7980
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications December 13, 2009
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 12/13/2009 7:38 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 3&4 161 5.9 28994 32 188.8 44.9% 2403.2 28% 2.686E‐07 71% 6.811E‐07 12/13/2009 7:52 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 151 3.04 11477 32 97.0 44.9% 1234.7 28% 3.486E‐07 71% 8.841E‐07 12/13/2009 7:57 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 150 3.47 13456 32 111.0 44.9% 1412.9 28% 3.403E‐07 71% 8.629E‐07 12/13/2009 8:01 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 1 157 0.71 2663 32 22.7 44.9% 288.9 28% 3.516E‐07 71% 8.916E‐07 12/13/2009 8:06 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 1&3 158 7.38 29785 32 236.2 44.9% 3006.6 28% 3.271E‐07 71% 8.295E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 37 of 152 PageID #: 7981
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications January 12, 2010
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 1/12/2010 16:40 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 1 157 0.71 2663 32 22.7 44.9% 288.9 28% 3.516E‐07 71% 8.916E‐07 1/12/2010 17:03 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 3&4 161 5.9 28994 32 224.3 44.9% 2855.1 28% 3.191E‐07 71% 8.092E‐07 1/12/2010 17:07 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 163 0.4 1662 32 14.1 44.9% 179.5 28% 3.500E‐07 71% 8.874E‐07 1/12/2010 17:11 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 172 0.47 1964 32 16.0 44.9% 203.7 28% 3.361E‐07 71% 8.521E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 38 of 152 PageID #: 7982
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications March 6, 2010
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 3/6/2010 6:35 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 1 29 0.29 1167 32 9.3 44.9% 118.4 28% 3.287E‐07 71% 8.336E‐07 3/6/2010 6:47 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 6 0.41 1758 32 14.4 44.9% 183.3 28% 3.379E‐07 71% 8.568E‐07 3/6/2010 6:57 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 4 25 2.14 8721 32 68.5 44.9% 871.9 28% 3.240E‐07 71% 8.216E‐07 3/6/2010 7:02 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 2&3 24 3.44 13599 32 110.1 44.9% 1401.4 28% 3.340E‐07 71% 8.469E‐07 3/6/2010 7:09 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 10A 11 0.09 1064 32 3.5 44.9% 44.6 28% 1.357E‐07 71% 3.441E‐07 3/6/2010 7:09 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 10A 12 0.16 1262 32 7.0 44.9% 89.1 28% 2.288E‐07 71% 5.802E‐07 3/6/2010 7:19 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 10A 10 3.97 14900 32 131.2 44.9% 1670.0 28% 3.632E‐07 71% 9.210E‐07 3/6/2010 7:27 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 10A 9 3.57 13896 32 114.2 44.9% 1453.6 28% 3.390E‐07 71% 8.596E‐07 3/6/2010 7:31 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 10A 8 0.82 3094 32 26.2 44.9% 333.5 28% 3.493E‐07 71% 8.858E‐07 3/6/2010 7:37 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 10A 7 1.94 7412 32 62.1 44.9% 790.5 28% 3.456E‐07 71% 8.764E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 39 of 152 PageID #: 7983
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications March 20, 2010
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 3/20/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 60A 32 3.4 13900 32 108.8 44.9% 1384.9 28% 3.229E‐07 71% 8.187E‐07 3/20/2010 7:55 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 60A 34 3.04 12230 32 97.3 44.9% 1238.5 28% 3.282E‐07 71% 8.322E‐07 3/20/2010 8:25 2200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 40 2.28 9466 32 73.0 40.2% 831.9 28% 2.848E‐07 71% 7.222E‐07 3/20/2010 8:32 2200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 38 2.38 9529 32 76.2 40.2% 868.4 28% 2.953E‐07 71% 7.489E‐07 3/20/2010 8:42 2200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10C 39 0.49 1988 32 15.7 40.2% 178.9 28% 2.917E‐07 71% 7.396E‐07 3/20/2010 9:10 2200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10C&D 41 7.44 30812 32 238.0 40.2% 2712.4 28% 2.853E‐07 71% 7.234E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 40 of 152 PageID #: 7984
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications March 26, 2010
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 3/26/2010 6:25 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10C 36 0.86 3484 32 27.5 40.2% 313.4 28% 2.915E‐07 71% 7.392E‐07 3/26/2010 6:32 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10B 26 2.56 10600 32 81.9 40.2% 933.4 28% 2.854E‐07 71% 7.236E‐07 3/26/2010 6:35 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10B 37 1.13 4672 32 36.2 40.2% 412.6 28% 2.862E‐07 71% 7.256E‐07 3/26/2010 6:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 4 25 2.14 8721 32 68.5 40.2% 780.7 28% 2.901E‐07 71% 7.356E‐07 3/26/2010 6:59 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 3&4 35 3.74 15136 32 119.7 40.2% 1364.2 28% 2.921E‐07 71% 7.406E‐07 3/26/2010 7:04 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 2&3 24 3.44 13599 32 110.1 40.2% 1254.7 28% 2.990E‐07 71% 7.582E‐07 3/26/2010 16:45 3200 Lorsban 4E Akia 10C 33 6.02 24108 32 192.0 44.9% 2443.9 28% 3.285E‐07 71% 8.331E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 41 of 152 PageID #: 7985
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications April 2, 2010
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 4/2/2010 6:59 2200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10B 44 0.4 1644 32 12.8 40.2% 145.9 28% 2.876E‐07 71% 7.292E‐07 4/2/2010 6:59 2200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10B 45 0.05 195 32 1.6 40.2% 18.2 28% 3.030E‐07 71% 7.684E‐07 4/2/2010 15:13 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 40D 42 7.61 30120 32 243.5 40.2% 2775.0 28% 2.986E‐07 71% 7.571E‐07 4/2/2010 15:30 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 43 3.14 13368 32 100.5 40.2% 1145.3 28% 2.777E‐07 71% 7.041E‐07 4/2/2010 15:35 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 40 2.28 9466 32 73.0 40.2% 831.9 28% 2.848E‐07 71% 7.222E‐07 4/2/2010 15:40 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 38 2.38 9529 32 76.2 40.2% 868.4 28% 2.953E‐07 71% 7.489E‐07 4/2/2010 16:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10C 39 0.49 1988 32 15.7 40.2% 178.9 28% 2.917E‐07 71% 7.396E‐07 4/2/2010 16:20 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10C&D 41 7.44 30812 32 238.1 40.2% 2713.5 28% 2.854E‐07 71% 7.237E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 42 of 152 PageID #: 7986
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications April 18, 2010
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 4/18/2010 7:30 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 43 3.14 13368 32 100.5 40.2% 1145.3 28% 2.777E‐07 71% 7.041E‐07 4/18/2010 7:30 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 55 0.18 741 32 6.0 40.2% 68.4 28% 2.991E‐07 71% 7.583E‐07 4/18/2010 7:35 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 38 2.38 9529 32 76.2 40.2% 868.4 28% 2.953E‐07 71% 7.489E‐07 4/18/2010 7:35 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 40 2.28 9466 32 73.0 40.2% 831.9 28% 2.848E‐07 71% 7.222E‐07 4/18/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10C 39 0.49 1988 32 15.7 40.2% 178.9 28% 2.917E‐07 71% 7.396E‐07 4/18/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10C&D 41 7.44 30812 32 238.1 40.2% 2713.5 28% 2.854E‐07 71% 7.237E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 43 of 152 PageID #: 7987
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications May 8, 2010
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 5/8/2010 7:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 52 0.18 690 32 5.8 40.2% 66.1 28% 3.107E‐07 71% 7.878E‐07 5/8/2010 7:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 55 0.18 741 32 5.8 40.2% 66.1 28% 2.891E‐07 71% 7.330E‐07 5/8/2010 7:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60B 43 3.14 13368 32 100.5 40.2% 1145.3 28% 2.777E‐07 71% 7.041E‐07 5/8/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 40A 47 1.3 5192 32 41.6 40.2% 474.1 28% 2.959E‐07 71% 7.504E‐07 5/8/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 40A 48 1.1 4304 32 35.2 40.2% 401.2 28% 3.021E‐07 71% 7.659E‐07 5/8/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 40A 46 1.34 5338 32 42.9 40.2% 488.9 28% 2.968E‐07 71% 7.526E‐07 5/8/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 40B 49 1.2 4708 32 38.4 40.2% 437.6 28% 3.012E‐07 71% 7.639E‐07 5/8/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 40C 51 2.9 13740 32 92.8 40.2% 1057.6 28% 2.494E‐07 71% 6.325E‐07 5/8/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 40C 50 1.67 5100 32 53.4 40.2% 608.6 28% 3.867E‐07 71% 9.806E‐07 5/8/2010 7:45 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 40D 42 7.61 30120 32 243.5 40.2% 2775.0 28% 2.986E‐07 71% 7.571E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 44 of 152 PageID #: 7988
Pioneer Hi‐Bred International Chlorpyrifos Applications October 23, 2010
Reported Chlorpyrifos Chlorpyrifos Reported Modeled Product 24‐hr flux rate 24‐hr flux rate Time Size Size Appl rate applied AI applied Volz % (low volz) Volz % (high volz) Date ending Sprayer Product Location Field (acres) (m2) (oz/acre) (oz) % AI (g) (low) (g/s‐m2) (high) (g/s‐m2) 10/23/2010 12:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10A 1‐2 115 0.51 1990 32 16.3 40.2% 185.8 28% 3.025E‐07 71% 7.671E‐07 10/23/2010 12:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10A 3‐5 116 2.18 9493 32 69.8 40.2% 795.5 28% 2.716E‐07 71% 6.886E‐07 10/23/2010 12:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 10A 6‐7 118 0.81 3422 32 25.9 40.2% 295.2 28% 2.795E‐07 71% 7.088E‐07 10/23/2010 12:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 6 131 6.14 26600 32 196.5 40.2% 2239.4 28% 2.728E‐07 71% 6.918E‐07 10/23/2010 12:00 3200 Lorsban Adv Akia 60A 5‐6 130 1.69 6766 32 54.1 40.2% 616.5 28% 2.953E‐07 71% 7.488E‐07 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 45 of 152 PageID #: 7989 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 46 of 152 PageID #: 7990 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 47 of 152 PageID #: 7991 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 48 of 152 PageID #: 7992 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 49 of 152 PageID #: 7993 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 50 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 7994 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1 12/13/2009 7:52:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 2 12/13/2009 7:57:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 3 12/13/2009 9:14:00 AM DIPEL 9 13 Yes 4 12/13/2009 9:14:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 5 12/13/2009 8:01:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 6 12/13/2009 9:06:00 AM DIPEL 9 13 Yes 7 12/13/2009 9:06:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 8 12/13/2009 8:06:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 9 12/13/2009 9:28:00 AM DIPEL 9 13 Yes 10 12/13/2009 9:28:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 11 12/13/2009 8:50:00 AM DIPEL 10 15 Yes 12 12/13/2009 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 15 Yes 13 12/13/2009 8:38:00 AM DIPEL 10 15 Yes 14 12/13/2009 8:38:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 15 Yes 15 12/13/2009 7:38:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 16 12/13/2009 8:30:00 AM DIPEL 12 16 Yes 17 12/13/2009 8:30:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 12 16 Yes 18 12/14/2009 9:15:00 AM Radiant SC 8 13 Yes 19 12/14/2009 12:30:00 PM Radiant SC 8 13 Yes 20 12/15/2009 4:42:00 PM Dual II Magnum 6 12 Yes 21 12/15/2009 444200:42:00 PM DDualual II MagnMagnumum 6 12 Yes 22 12/15/2009 7:10:00 AM Affinity 7 10 Yes 23 12/15/2009 7:10:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 7 10 Yes 24 12/15/2009 4:11:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 25 12/15/2009 4:22:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 26 12/15/2009 4:22:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 27 12/15/2009 4:22:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 28 12/15/2009 4:18:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 29 12/15/2009 4:15:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 30 12/15/2009 4:05:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 31 12/15/2009 8:11:00 PM TRILOGY 6 9 Yes 32 12/15/2009 4:08:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 33 12/15/2009 4:05:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 34 12/15/2009 4:15:00 PM TRILOGY 7 11 Yes 35 12/15/2009 4:30:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 7 11 Yes 36 12/16/2009 4:20:00 PM LIBERTY 9 13 Yes 37 12/16/2009 5:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 38 12/16/2009 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 39 12/16/2009 5:22:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes
1 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 51 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 7995 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 40 12/16/2009 6:23:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 41 12/16/2009 6:13:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 42 12/16/2009 5:34:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 43 12/16/2009 5:47:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 44 12/16/2009 6:30:00 PM TILT 2 6 45 12/16/2009 6:23:00 PM TILT 2 6 46 12/16/2009 6:13:00 PM TILT 2 6 47 12/16/2009 5:34:00 PM TILT 4 8 48 12/16/2009 5:40:00 PM TILT 4 8 49 12/16/2009 5:47:00 PM TILT 4 8 50 12/16/2009 5:22:00 PM TILT 6 11 Yes 51 12/16/2009 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 52 12/16/2009 6:00:00 PM TILT 4 8 53 12/16/2009 2:50:00 PM LIBERTY 9 14 Yes 54 12/16/2009 2:50:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 9 14 Yes 55 12/16/2009 12:15:00 PM Radiant SC 10 16 Yes 56 12/16/2009 4:47:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 7 11 Yes 57 12/16/2009 4:52:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 7 11 Yes 58 12/16/2009 4:56:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 7 11 Yes 59 12/16/2009 4:56:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 7 11 Yes 60 12/16/2009 445600:56:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 7 11 Yes 61 12/16/2009 6:39:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 5 62 12/16/2009 6:39:00 PM TILT 2 5 63 12/17/2009 7:25:00 AM Affinity 7 10 Yes 64 12/17/2009 7:25:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 7 10 Yes 65 12/17/2009 9:45:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 66 12/17/2009 8:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 8 67 12/17/2009 8:00:00 PM QUADRIS 5 8 68 12/17/2009 8:00:00 PM XENTARI 5 8 69 12/17/2009 8:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 70 12/17/2009 8:40:00 PM QUADRIS 5 7 71 12/17/2009 8:40:00 PM XENTARI 5 7 72 12/17/2009 11:30:00 AM Radiant SC 9 19 Yes 73 12/17/2009 8:24:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 12 Yes 74 12/17/2009 8:24:00 PM QUADRIS 6 12 Yes 75 12/17/2009 8:24:00 PM XENTARI 6 12 Yes 76 12/17/2009 8:36:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 77 12/17/2009 8:36:00 PM QUADRIS 5 7 78 12/17/2009 8:36:00 PM XENTARI 5 7
2 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 52 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 7996 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 79 12/17/2009 8:47:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 80 12/17/2009 8:47:00 PM QUADRIS 5 7 81 12/17/2009 8:47:00 PM XENTARI 5 7 82 12/17/2009 2:50:00 PM LIBERTY 11 20 Yes 83 12/17/2009 2:50:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 11 20 Yes 84 12/17/2009 8:54:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 85 12/17/2009 8:54:00 PM QUADRIS 5 7 86 12/17/2009 8:54:00 PM XENTARI 5 7 87 12/18/2009 4:54:00 PM DIPEL 6 12 Yes 88 12/18/2009 4:54:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 12 Yes 89 12/18/2009 6:20:00 PM BASAGRAN 8 13 Yes 90 12/18/2009 10:45:00 AM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 91 12/18/2009 1:00:00 PM Radiant SC 9 13 Yes 92 12/18/2009 5:42:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 93 12/18/2009 5:33:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 10 Yes 94 12/18/2009 5:36:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 95 12/18/2009 5:29:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 10 Yes 96 12/18/2009 5:50:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 97 12/18/2009 5:46:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 98 12/18/2009 5:39:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 99 12/18/2009 552500:25:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 10 Yes 100 12/19/2009 8:30:00 AM LIBERTY Missing WS Missing WS 101 12/19/2009 10:30:00 AM LIBERTY Missing WS Missing WS 102 12/19/2009 2:30:00 PM LIBERTY Missing WS Missing WS 103 12/20/2009 9:05:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 104 12/20/2009 9:15:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 105 12/20/2009 9:05:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 106 12/20/2009 9:08:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 107 12/20/2009 9:12:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 108 12/20/2009 9:24:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 109 12/20/2009 9:24:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 110 12/20/2009 9:24:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 111 12/20/2009 9:19:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 112 12/20/2009 9:12:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 113 12/21/2009 6:11:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 114 12/21/2009 6:19:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 115 12/21/2009 6:19:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 116 12/21/2009 5:19:00 PM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 117 12/21/2009 4:00:00 PM LIBERTY Missing WS Missing WS
3 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 53 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 7997 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 118 12/21/2009 10:30:00 AM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 119 12/21/2009 1:40:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 120 12/22/2009 6:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 121 12/22/2009 7:05:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 122 12/22/2009 7:14:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 123 12/22/2009 6:18:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 124 12/22/2009 6:37:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 125 12/22/2009 6:26:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 126 12/22/2009 7:00:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 127 12/22/2009 7:05:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 128 12/22/2009 7:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 129 12/22/2009 6:26:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 130 12/22/2009 6:37:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 131 12/22/2009 6:18:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 132 12/22/2009 6:30:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 133 12/22/2009 7:14:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 134 12/22/2009 6:00:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 135 12/22/2009 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 136 12/22/2009 6:54:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 137 12/22/2009 6:54:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 138 12/22/2009 10:30 :00 AM RRditadiant SC Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 139 12/22/2009 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 140 12/23/2009 6:55:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 141 12/23/2009 6:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 142 12/23/2009 6:05:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 143 12/23/2009 6:05:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 144 12/23/2009 5:48:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 145 12/23/2009 5:48:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 146 12/23/2009 6:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 147 12/23/2009 6:00:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 148 12/23/2009 8:30:00 PM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS 149 12/23/2009 6:13:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 150 12/23/2009 6:13:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 151 12/23/2009 8:30:00 PM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 152 12/23/2009 8:05:00 PM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 153 12/23/2009 2:05:00 PM Buctril Missing WS Missing WS 154 12/23/2009 2:05:00 PM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 155 12/23/2009 7:30:00 PM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 156 12/23/2009 7:38:00 PM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS
4 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 54 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 7998 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 157 12/23/2009 7:36:00 PM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 158 12/23/2009 7:57:00 PM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 159 12/23/2009 7:45:00 PM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 160 12/23/2009 7:55:00 PM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 161 12/23/2009 6:42:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 162 12/23/2009 6:42:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 163 12/23/2009 6:27:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 164 12/23/2009 6:46:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 165 12/23/2009 6:46:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 166 12/23/2009 6:27:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 167 12/23/2009 6:45:00 AM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 168 12/23/2009 6:45:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 169 12/23/2009 6:37:00 AM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 170 12/23/2009 6:37:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 171 12/23/2009 6:30:00 AM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 172 12/23/2009 6:30:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 173 12/23/2009 6:34:00 AM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 174 12/23/2009 6:34:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 175 12/23/2009 6:55:00 AM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 176 12/23/2009 6:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 177 12/23/2009 665000:50:00 AM PERMETHRIN Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 178 12/23/2009 6:50:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 179 12/23/2009 6:41:00 AM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 180 12/23/2009 6:41:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 181 12/23/2009 6:26:00 AM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 182 12/23/2009 6:26:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 183 12/24/2009 6:40:00 AM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 184 12/24/2009 6:40:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 185 12/24/2009 6:08:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 186 12/24/2009 6:08:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 187 12/27/2009 3:32:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 188 12/27/2009 2:47:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 189 12/27/2009 4:08:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 190 12/27/2009 3:45:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 191 12/27/2009 7:15:00 AM Buctril Missing WS Missing WS 192 12/27/2009 11:50:00 AM Buctril Missing WS Missing WS 193 12/27/2009 2:47:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 194 12/27/2009 7:15:00 AM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 195 12/27/2009 11:50:00 AM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS
5 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 55 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 7999 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 196 12/27/2009 4:08:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 197 12/27/2009 3:45:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 198 12/27/2009 3:32:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 199 12/27/2009 11:40:00 AM Buctril Missing WS Missing WS 200 12/27/2009 11:40:00 AM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 201 12/27/2009 4:19:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 202 12/27/2009 4:19:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 203 12/27/2009 3:48:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 204 12/27/2009 3:48:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 205 12/27/2009 11:25:00 AM Buctril Missing WS Missing WS 206 12/27/2009 11:25:00 AM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 207 12/27/2009 4:35:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 208 12/27/2009 4:35:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 209 12/27/2009 3:41:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 210 12/27/2009 3:41:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 211 12/27/2009 3:55:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 212 12/27/2009 2:50:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 213 12/27/2009 2:40:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 214 12/27/2009 2:40:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 215 12/27/2009 2:50:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 216 12/27/2009 335500:55:00 PM XENTARI Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 217 12/27/2009 3:04:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 218 12/27/2009 3:00:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 219 12/27/2009 3:08:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 220 12/27/2009 3:08:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 221 12/27/2009 3:08:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 222 12/27/2009 4:04:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 223 12/27/2009 4:04:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 224 12/27/2009 2:13:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 225 12/27/2009 2:13:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 226 12/27/2009 2:22:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 227 12/27/2009 2:22:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 228 12/27/2009 2:28:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 229 12/27/2009 2:28:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 230 12/27/2009 2:25:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 231 12/27/2009 2:25:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 232 12/27/2009 2:05:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 233 12/27/2009 2:05:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 234 12/27/2009 2:09:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS
6 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 56 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8000 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 235 12/27/2009 2:09:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 236 12/27/2009 2:19:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 237 12/27/2009 2:19:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 238 12/27/2009 2:34:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 239 12/27/2009 2:34:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 240 12/28/2009 6:13:00 PM EF 300 9 14 Yes 241 12/28/2009 6:13:00 PM TRILOGY 9 14 Yes 242 12/28/2009 7:28:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 243 12/28/2009 8:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 244 12/28/2009 7:57:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 245 12/28/2009 7:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 246 12/28/2009 8:48:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 247 12/28/2009 8:53:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 248 12/28/2009 8:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 249 12/28/2009 7:57:00 PM TILT 6 11 Yes 250 12/28/2009 7:28:00 PM TILT 8 13 Yes 251 12/28/2009 8:45:00 PM TILT 7 12 Yes 252 12/28/2009 7:20:00 PM TILT 8 13 Yes 253 12/28/2009 8:48:00 PM TILT 7 12 Yes 254 12/28/2009 8:53:00 PM TILT 7 12 Yes 255 12/28/2009 883500:35:00 PM TILT 7 12 Yes 256 12/28/2009 7:09:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 257 12/28/2009 7:09:00 PM TILT 8 13 Yes 258 12/28/2009 7:46:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 259 12/28/2009 7:46:00 PM TILT 6 11 Yes 260 12/28/2009 8:42:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 261 12/28/2009 8:42:00 PM TILT 7 12 Yes 262 12/28/2009 6:36:00 PM EF 300 8 13 Yes 263 12/28/2009 6:30:00 PM EF 300 9 14 Yes 264 12/28/2009 6:33:00 PM EF 300 9 14 Yes 265 12/28/2009 6:40:00 PM EF 300 8 13 Yes 266 12/28/2009 6:46:00 PM EF 300 8 13 Yes 267 12/28/2009 6:36:00 PM EF 300 8 13 Yes 268 12/28/2009 6:30:00 PM EF 300 9 14 Yes 269 12/28/2009 6:43:00 PM EF 300 8 13 Yes 270 12/28/2009 6:46:00 PM EF 300 8 13 Yes 271 12/28/2009 6:46:00 PM EF 300 8 13 Yes 272 12/28/2009 8:30:00 AM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 273 12/28/2009 6:46:00 PM TRILOGY 8 13 Yes
7 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 57 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8001 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 274 12/28/2009 6:33:00 PM TRILOGY 9 14 Yes 275 12/28/2009 6:36:00 PM TRILOGY 8 13 Yes 276 12/28/2009 6:36:00 PM TRILOGY 8 13 Yes 277 12/28/2009 6:40:00 PM TRILOGY 8 13 Yes 278 12/28/2009 6:46:00 PM TRILOGY 8 13 Yes 279 12/28/2009 6:46:00 PM TRILOGY 8 13 Yes 280 12/28/2009 6:30:00 PM TRILOGY 9 14 Yes 281 12/28/2009 6:43:00 PM TRILOGY 8 13 Yes 282 12/28/2009 6:30:00 PM TRILOGY 9 14 Yes 283 12/28/2009 6:07:00 PM EF 300 9 14 Yes 284 12/28/2009 6:07:00 PM TRILOGY 9 14 Yes 285 12/29/2009 11:00:00 AM LIBERTY 9 14 Yes 286 12/30/2009 8:16:00 PM ASANA XL 0 4 Yes 287 12/30/2009 8:46:00 PM ASANA XL 0 3 Yes 288 12/30/2009 7:16:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 289 12/30/2009 8:41:00 PM ASANA XL 0 3 Yes 290 12/30/2009 7:19:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 291 12/30/2009 7:26:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 292 12/30/2009 8:43:00 PM ASANA XL 0 3 Yes 293 12/30/2009 7:10:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 294 12/30/2009 770200:02:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 295 12/30/2009 7:52:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 296 12/30/2009 9:12:00 PM Dual II Magnum 0 1 Yes 297 12/30/2009 9:14:00 PM Dual II Magnum 0 1 Yes 298 12/30/2009 9:14:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 0 1 Yes 299 12/30/2009 9:12:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 0 1 Yes 300 12/30/2009 8:52:00 PM ASANA XL 0 3 Yes 301 12/30/2009 8:55:00 PM Dual II Magnum 0 3 Yes 302 12/30/2009 8:55:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 0 3 Yes 303 12/31/2009 2:47:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 20 Yes 304 12/31/2009 1:50:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 18 Yes 305 1/3/2010 9:45:00 AM ASANA XL 6 13 Yes 306 1/3/2010 9:45:00 AM M‐Pede 6 13 Yes 307 1/3/2010 8:09:00 AM PERMETHRIN 4 10 Yes 308 1/3/2010 8:38:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 309 1/3/2010 8:35:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 310 1/3/2010 8:35:00 AM TILT 5 10 Yes 311 1/3/2010 8:38:00 AM TILT 5 10 Yes 312 1/3/2010 8:09:00 AM TILT 4 10 Yes
8 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 58 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8002 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 313 1/3/2010 7:49:00 AM PERMETHRIN 1 8 Yes 314 1/3/2010 7:49:00 AM TILT 1 8 Yes 315 1/3/2010 7:55:00 AM PERMETHRIN 1 8 Yes 316 1/3/2010 7:55:00 AM TILT 1 8 Yes 317 1/3/2010 9:48:00 AM ASANA XL 6 13 Yes 318 1/3/2010 9:38:00 AM ASANA XL 6 13 Yes 319 1/3/2010 9:38:00 AM M‐Pede 6 13 Yes 320 1/3/2010 9:48:00 AM M‐Pede 6 13 Yes 321 1/3/2010 9:52:00 AM ASANA XL 6 13 Yes 322 1/3/2010 9:52:00 AM M‐Pede 6 13 Yes 323 1/3/2010 8:32:00 AM PERMETHRIN 4 10 Yes 324 1/3/2010 8:32:00 AM TILT 4 10 Yes 325 1/3/2010 10:04:00 AM ASANA XL 7 13 Yes 326 1/3/2010 10:04:00 AM ASANA XL 7 13 Yes 327 1/3/2010 10:08:00 AM ASANA XL 7 13 Yes 328 1/3/2010 10:08:00 AM ASANA XL 7 13 Yes 329 1/3/2010 10:04:00 AM ASANA XL 7 13 Yes 330 1/3/2010 10:08:00 AM M‐Pede 7 13 Yes 331 1/3/2010 10:08:00 AM M‐Pede 7 13 Yes 332 1/3/2010 10:04:00 AM M‐Pede 7 13 Yes 333 1/3/2010 10:04 :00 AM M‐PPdede 7 13 Yes 334 1/3/2010 10:04:00 AM M‐Pede 7 13 Yes 335 1/3/2010 9:15:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 336 1/3/2010 9:15:00 AM M‐Pede 6 12 Yes 337 1/3/2010 9:32:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 338 1/3/2010 9:32:00 AM M‐Pede 6 12 Yes 339 1/3/2010 9:21:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 340 1/3/2010 9:21:00 AM M‐Pede 6 12 Yes 341 1/3/2010 9:29:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 342 1/3/2010 9:29:00 AM M‐Pede 6 12 Yes 343 1/3/2010 9:12:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 344 1/3/2010 9:12:00 AM M‐Pede 6 12 Yes 345 1/3/2010 9:15:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 346 1/3/2010 9:15:00 AM M‐Pede 6 12 Yes 347 1/3/2010 9:21:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 348 1/3/2010 9:21:00 AM M‐Pede 6 12 Yes 349 1/3/2010 9:21:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 350 1/3/2010 9:21:00 AM M‐Pede 6 12 Yes 351 1/7/2010 5:07:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes
9 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 59 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8003 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 352 1/7/2010 6:08:00 PM Assail 70WP 1 6 Yes 353 1/7/2010 6:12:00 PM Assail 70WP 1 6 Yes 354 1/7/2010 5:57:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 12 Yes 355 1/7/2010 6:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 6 Yes 356 1/7/2010 5:53:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 12 Yes 357 1/7/2010 5:14:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes 358 1/7/2010 5:14:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes 359 1/7/2010 5:14:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes 360 1/7/2010 5:11:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes 361 1/7/2010 6:37:00 PM REGLONE 0 5 Yes 362 1/7/2010 5:26:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes 363 1/7/2010 5:35:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 12 Yes 364 1/7/2010 5:41:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 12 Yes 365 1/7/2010 5:38:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 12 Yes 366 1/7/2010 5:20:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes 367 1/7/2010 5:23:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes 368 1/7/2010 5:32:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 10 Yes 369 1/7/2010 5:47:00 PM Assail 70WP 4 12 Yes 370 1/8/2010 6:04:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 0 4 Yes 371 1/8/2010 6:07:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 0 4 Yes 372 1/8/2010 551500:15:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 3 7 373 1/8/2010 6:55:00 PM LANNATE LV 1 4 Yes 374 1/8/2010 5:40:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 1 5 Yes 375 1/8/2010 6:41:00 PM LANNATE LV 1 4 Yes 376 1/8/2010 6:01:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 1 5 Yes 377 1/8/2010 7:09:00 PM LANNATE LV 0 4 Yes 378 1/10/2010 1:45:00 PM ASANA XL 12 22 Yes 379 1/10/2010 2:00:00 PM ASANA XL 12 22 Yes 380 1/10/2010 1:40:00 PM ASANA XL 12 22 Yes 381 1/10/2010 1:20:00 PM ASANA XL 12 23 Yes 382 1/10/2010 2:05:00 PM ASANA XL 13 23 Yes 383 1/10/2010 1:50:00 PM ASANA XL 12 22 Yes 384 1/10/2010 1:35:00 PM ASANA XL 12 22 Yes 385 1/10/2010 1:50:00 PM DIPEL 12 22 Yes 386 1/10/2010 1:35:00 PM DIPEL 12 22 Yes 387 1/10/2010 1:45:00 PM DIPEL 12 22 Yes 388 1/10/2010 2:05:00 PM DIPEL 13 23 Yes 389 1/10/2010 1:40:00 PM DIPEL 12 22 Yes 390 1/10/2010 1:20:00 PM DIPEL 12 23 Yes
10 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 60 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8004 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 391 1/10/2010 2:00:00 PM DIPEL 12 22 Yes 392 1/10/2010 5:25:00 PM EF 300 12 24 Yes 393 1/10/2010 6:25:00 PM EF 300 7 14 Yes 394 1/10/2010 1:55:00 PM ASANA XL 12 22 Yes 395 1/10/2010 1:55:00 PM DIPEL 12 22 Yes 396 1/10/2010 5:42:00 PM EF 300 9 21 Yes 397 1/10/2010 5:38:00 PM EF 300 9 21 Yes 398 1/10/2010 6:20:00 PM EF 300 7 14 Yes 399 1/10/2010 5:15:00 PM EF 300 12 24 Yes 400 1/10/2010 5:10:00 PM EF 300 12 24 Yes 401 1/10/2010 5:05:00 PM EF 300 12 24 Yes 402 1/10/2010 5:00:00 PM EF 300 13 23 Yes 403 1/10/2010 6:00:00 PM EF 300 9 21 Yes 404 1/10/2010 6:15:00 PM EF 300 7 14 Yes 405 1/10/2010 5:53:00 PM EF 300 9 21 Yes 406 1/10/2010 6:10:00 PM EF 300 7 14 Yes 407 1/10/2010 6:08:00 PM EF 300 7 14 Yes 408 1/10/2010 6:05:00 PM EF 300 7 14 Yes 409 1/10/2010 5:57:00 PM EF 300 9 21 Yes 410 1/10/2010 5:50:00 PM EF 300 9 21 Yes 411 1/11/2010 445400:54:00 PM TRILOGY 8 14 Yes 412 1/11/2010 5:34:00 PM Headline 7 14 Yes 413 1/11/2010 5:34:00 PM TRILOGY 7 14 Yes 414 1/11/2010 5:38:00 PM Headline 7 14 Yes 415 1/11/2010 5:23:00 PM Headline 6 12 Yes 416 1/11/2010 6:23:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 4 12 Yes 417 1/11/2010 5:38:00 PM TRILOGY 7 14 Yes 418 1/11/2010 5:23:00 PM TRILOGY 6 12 Yes 419 1/11/2010 5:27:00 PM Headline 6 12 Yes 420 1/11/2010 5:27:00 PM TRILOGY 6 12 Yes 421 1/11/2010 5:02:00 PM TRILOGY 8 14 Yes 422 1/11/2010 5:02:00 PM TRILOGY 8 14 Yes 423 1/11/2010 5:02:00 PM TRILOGY 8 14 Yes 424 1/11/2010 4:58:00 PM TRILOGY 8 14 Yes 425 1/11/2010 6:01:00 PM Headline 7 14 Yes 426 1/11/2010 6:01:00 PM TRILOGY 7 14 Yes 427 1/11/2010 5:54:00 PM Headline 7 14 Yes 428 1/11/2010 5:54:00 PM TRILOGY 7 14 Yes 429 1/11/2010 5:48:00 PM Headline 7 14 Yes
11 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 61 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8005 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 430 1/11/2010 5:48:00 PM TRILOGY 7 14 Yes 431 1/11/2010 5:51:00 PM Headline 7 14 Yes 432 1/11/2010 5:51:00 PM TRILOGY 7 14 Yes 433 1/11/2010 6:07:00 PM Headline 4 12 Yes 434 1/11/2010 6:07:00 PM TRILOGY 4 12 Yes 435 1/11/2010 6:04:00 PM Headline 4 12 Yes 436 1/11/2010 6:04:00 PM TRILOGY 4 12 Yes 437 1/11/2010 5:58:00 PM Headline 7 14 Yes 438 1/11/2010 5:58:00 PM TRILOGY 7 14 Yes 439 1/11/2010 5:44:00 PM Headline 7 14 Yes 440 1/11/2010 5:44:00 PM TRILOGY 7 14 Yes 441 1/12/2010 5:07:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 12 Yes 442 1/12/2010 5:11:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 12 Yes 443 1/12/2010 4:40:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 11 Yes 444 1/12/2010 5:03:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 11 Yes 445 1/13/2010 6:55:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 5 Yes 446 1/13/2010 7:10:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 5 Yes 447 1/13/2010 7:00:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 5 Yes 448 1/14/2010 8:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 0 Yes 449 1/14/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 4 Yes 450 1/14/2010 770900:09:00 PM ASANA XL 0 1 Yes 451 1/14/2010 7:00:00 PM EF 300 0 4 Yes 452 1/14/2010 7:09:00 PM EF 300 0 1 Yes 453 1/14/2010 7:35:00 PM ASANA XL 0 1 Yes 454 1/14/2010 7:31:00 PM ASANA XL 0 1 Yes 455 1/14/2010 7:35:00 PM EF 300 0 1 Yes 456 1/14/2010 7:31:00 PM EF 300 0 1 Yes 457 1/14/2010 7:25:00 PM ASANA XL 0 1 Yes 458 1/14/2010 7:25:00 PM EF 300 0 1 Yes 459 1/14/2010 5:45:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 8 15 Yes 460 1/14/2010 6:35:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 3 16 Yes 461 1/15/2010 6:20:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 0 Yes 462 1/15/2010 6:10:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 0 Yes 463 1/15/2010 6:05:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 0 Yes 464 1/15/2010 6:00:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 0 Yes 465 1/16/2010 4:00:00 PM ASANA XL 4 10 Yes 466 1/16/2010 3:00:00 PM ASANA XL 5 12 Yes 467 1/16/2010 2:58:00 PM ASANA XL 5 12 Yes 468 1/16/2010 3:30:00 PM ASANA XL 5 11 Yes
12 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 62 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8006 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 469 1/16/2010 3:50:00 PM ASANA XL 4 10 Yes 470 1/16/2010 3:55:00 PM ASANA XL 4 10 Yes 471 1/16/2010 4:10:00 PM ASANA XL 3 9 Yes 472 1/16/2010 2:55:00 PM ASANA XL 5 12 Yes 473 1/16/2010 2:05:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 474 1/16/2010 2:40:00 PM Assail 70WP 5 12 Yes 475 1/16/2010 3:30:00 PM XENTARI 5 11 Yes 476 1/16/2010 2:58:00 PM XENTARI 5 12 Yes 477 1/16/2010 4:00:00 PM XENTARI 4 10 Yes 478 1/16/2010 4:10:00 PM XENTARI 3 9 Yes 479 1/16/2010 3:55:00 PM XENTARI 4 10 Yes 480 1/16/2010 3:50:00 PM XENTARI 4 10 Yes 481 1/16/2010 2:55:00 PM XENTARI 5 12 Yes 482 1/16/2010 3:00:00 PM XENTARI 5 12 Yes 483 1/16/2010 3:10:00 PM ASANA XL 5 11 Yes 484 1/16/2010 1:55:00 PM Assail 70WP 7 12 Yes 485 1/16/2010 2:10:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 486 1/16/2010 3:10:00 PM XENTARI 5 11 Yes 487 1/16/2010 6:40:00 AM Affinity 0 0 Yes 488 1/16/2010 6:15:00 AM Harmony GT XP 0 0 Yes 489 1/16/2010 115500:55:00 PM AAilssail 70WP 7 12 Yes 490 1/16/2010 2:18:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 491 1/16/2010 2:15:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 492 1/16/2010 2:18:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 493 1/16/2010 2:18:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 494 1/16/2010 3:45:00 PM ASANA XL 4 10 Yes 495 1/16/2010 3:45:00 PM XENTARI 4 10 Yes 496 1/16/2010 2:30:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 497 1/16/2010 6:50:00 AM Affinity 0 0 Yes 498 1/16/2010 2:39:00 PM Assail 70WP 5 12 Yes 499 1/16/2010 2:25:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 500 1/16/2010 6:25:00 AM Harmony GT XP 0 0 Yes 501 1/16/2010 2:35:00 PM Assail 70WP 5 12 Yes 502 1/16/2010 2:32:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 503 1/16/2010 2:27:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 504 1/16/2010 2:23:00 PM Assail 70WP 6 11 Yes 505 1/18/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 9 Yes 506 1/18/2010 5:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 9 Yes 507 1/18/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 9 Yes
13 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 63 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8007 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 508 1/18/2010 7:15:00 PM Assail 70WP 0 1 Yes 509 1/18/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 4 Yes 510 1/18/2010 7:15:00 PM PERMETHRIN 0 1 Yes 511 1/18/2010 6:45:00 PM Assail 70WP 0 1 Yes 512 1/18/2010 6:45:00 PM Assail 70WP 0 1 Yes 513 1/18/2010 6:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 0 1 Yes 514 1/18/2010 6:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 0 1 Yes 515 1/18/2010 7:00:00 PM Assail 70WP 0 1 Yes 516 1/18/2010 7:00:00 PM PERMETHRIN 0 1 Yes 517 1/20/2010 5:00:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 518 1/20/2010 5:00:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 519 1/21/2010 4:50:00 PM DIPEL 4 10 Yes 520 1/21/2010 6:25:00 PM DIPEL 6 15 Yes 521 1/21/2010 6:07:00 PM DIPEL 6 15 Yes 522 1/21/2010 5:05:00 PM DIPEL 4 12 Yes 523 1/21/2010 6:02:00 PM DIPEL 5 13 Yes 524 1/21/2010 6:10:00 PM DIPEL 6 15 Yes 525 1/21/2010 6:05:00 PM DIPEL 6 15 Yes 526 1/21/2010 5:10:00 PM DIPEL 4 12 Yes 527 1/21/2010 4:40:00 PM DIPEL 4 10 Yes 528 1/21/2010 660700:07:00 PM RRditadiant SC 6 15 Yes 529 1/21/2010 6:05:00 PM Radiant SC 6 15 Yes 530 1/21/2010 5:05:00 PM Radiant SC 4 12 Yes 531 1/21/2010 6:10:00 PM Radiant SC 6 15 Yes 532 1/21/2010 6:25:00 PM Radiant SC 6 15 Yes 533 1/21/2010 6:02:00 PM Radiant SC 5 13 Yes 534 1/21/2010 4:50:00 PM Radiant SC 4 10 Yes 535 1/21/2010 5:10:00 PM Radiant SC 4 12 Yes 536 1/21/2010 4:40:00 PM Radiant SC 4 10 Yes 537 1/21/2010 4:32:00 PM DIPEL 5 12 Yes 538 1/21/2010 4:32:00 PM Radiant SC 5 12 Yes 539 1/21/2010 5:35:00 PM DIPEL 5 13 Yes 540 1/21/2010 5:35:00 PM Radiant SC 5 13 Yes 541 1/21/2010 5:20:00 PM DIPEL 4 12 Yes 542 1/21/2010 5:20:00 PM Radiant SC 4 12 Yes 543 1/21/2010 6:15:00 PM DIPEL 6 15 Yes 544 1/21/2010 6:15:00 PM Radiant SC 6 15 Yes 545 1/22/2010 4:59:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 546 1/22/2010 4:59:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes
14 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 64 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8008 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 547 1/22/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 12 Yes 548 1/22/2010 4:05:00 PM Dual II Magnum 8 16 Yes 549 1/22/2010 4:05:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 8 16 Yes 550 1/22/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 5 Yes 551 1/22/2010 9:58:00 AM Dual II Magnum 12 21 Yes 552 1/22/2010 9:58:00 AM Dual II Magnum 12 21 Yes 553 1/22/2010 9:58:00 AM Dual II Magnum 12 21 Yes 554 1/22/2010 9:58:00 AM Dual II Magnum 12 21 Yes 555 1/22/2010 9:58:00 AM Dual II Magnum 12 21 Yes 556 1/22/2010 9:58:00 AM Dual II Magnum 12 21 Yes 557 1/22/2010 9:58:00 AM Dual II Magnum 12 21 Yes 558 1/22/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 Yes 559 1/22/2010 5:03:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 560 1/22/2010 5:10:00 PM Radiant SC 5 12 Yes 561 1/22/2010 4:53:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 562 1/22/2010 5:03:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 563 1/22/2010 4:53:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 564 1/22/2010 5:10:00 PM TRILOGY 5 12 Yes 565 1/22/2010 5:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 Yes 566 1/22/2010 4:55:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 567 1/22/2010 445500:55:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 568 1/22/2010 5:20:00 PM Radiant SC 5 12 Yes 569 1/22/2010 5:20:00 PM Radiant SC 5 12 Yes 570 1/22/2010 5:20:00 PM TRILOGY 5 12 Yes 571 1/22/2010 5:20:00 PM TRILOGY 5 12 Yes 572 1/22/2010 4:50:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 573 1/22/2010 4:50:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 574 1/22/2010 6:30:00 PM LANNATE LV 1 5 Yes 575 1/22/2010 4:42:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 576 1/22/2010 4:42:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 577 1/22/2010 4:48:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 578 1/22/2010 4:48:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 579 1/22/2010 4:44:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 580 1/22/2010 4:44:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 581 1/22/2010 4:48:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 582 1/22/2010 4:48:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 583 1/22/2010 4:40:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 584 1/22/2010 4:40:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 585 1/22/2010 4:42:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes
15 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 65 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8009 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 586 1/22/2010 4:42:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 587 1/22/2010 7:00:00 AM Affinity 7 13 Yes 588 1/22/2010 7:00:00 AM Ignite 7 13 Yes 589 1/22/2010 4:44:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 590 1/22/2010 7:00:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 7 13 Yes 591 1/22/2010 4:44:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 592 1/22/2010 4:46:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 593 1/22/2010 4:46:00 PM TRILOGY 7 12 Yes 594 1/23/2010 6:30:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 0 Yes 595 1/23/2010 7:00:00 AM Affinity 0 1 Yes 596 1/23/2010 7:00:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax 0 1 Yes 597 1/23/2010 7:00:00 AM Affinity 0 1 Yes 598 1/27/2010 4:58:00 PM ASANA XL 0 1 Yes 599 1/27/2010 5:03:00 PM ASANA XL 0 1 Yes 600 1/27/2010 5:07:00 PM ASANA XL 0 2 Yes 601 1/27/2010 5:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 1 Yes 602 1/27/2010 5:03:00 PM QUADRIS 0 1 Yes 603 1/27/2010 5:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 1 Yes 604 1/27/2010 5:07:00 PM QUADRIS 0 2 Yes 605 1/27/2010 4:58:00 PM QUADRIS 0 1 Yes 606 1/27/2010 550700:07:00 PM XENTARI 0 2 Yes 607 1/27/2010 4:58:00 PM XENTARI 0 1 Yes 608 1/27/2010 5:03:00 PM XENTARI 0 1 Yes 609 1/27/2010 5:00:00 PM XENTARI 0 1 Yes 610 1/27/2010 5:40:00 PM EF 300 0 3 Yes 611 1/27/2010 5:40:00 PM TRILOGY 0 3 Yes 612 1/27/2010 4:50:00 PM ASANA XL 0 1 Yes 613 1/27/2010 4:50:00 PM QUADRIS 0 1 Yes 614 1/27/2010 4:50:00 PM XENTARI 0 1 Yes 615 1/27/2010 5:35:00 PM EF 300 0 3 Yes 616 1/27/2010 5:35:00 PM TRILOGY 0 3 Yes 617 1/27/2010 4:30:00 PM ASANA XL 1 5 Yes 618 1/27/2010 4:30:00 PM TILT 1 5 Yes 619 1/28/2010 6:07:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 620 1/28/2010 6:07:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 621 1/28/2010 5:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 20 Yes 622 1/28/2010 5:47:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 20 Yes 623 1/28/2010 4:52:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 23 Yes 624 1/28/2010 5:10:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 11 20 Yes
16 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 66 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8010 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 625 1/28/2010 4:46:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 23 Yes 626 1/28/2010 5:02:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 23 Yes 627 1/28/2010 5:40:00 PM XENTARI 9 20 Yes 628 1/28/2010 5:47:00 PM XENTARI 9 20 Yes 629 1/28/2010 4:52:00 PM XENTARI 10 23 Yes 630 1/28/2010 4:46:00 PM XENTARI 10 23 Yes 631 1/28/2010 5:02:00 PM XENTARI 10 23 Yes 632 1/28/2010 5:10:00 PM XENTARI 11 20 Yes 633 1/28/2010 6:02:00 PM ASANA XL 9 20 Yes 634 1/28/2010 6:05:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 635 1/28/2010 6:42:00 PM Assail 70WP 11 26 Yes 636 1/28/2010 6:05:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 637 1/28/2010 6:02:00 PM Headline 9 20 Yes 638 1/28/2010 6:03:00 PM ASANA XL 9 20 Yes 639 1/28/2010 6:03:00 PM Headline 9 20 Yes 640 1/28/2010 5:54:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 20 Yes 641 1/28/2010 5:54:00 PM XENTARI 9 20 Yes 642 1/28/2010 6:30:00 PM Assail 70WP 11 28 Yes 643 1/28/2010 6:32:00 PM Assail 70WP 11 28 Yes 644 1/28/2010 6:39:00 PM Assail 70WP 11 26 Yes 645 1/28/2010 661800:18:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 646 1/28/2010 6:18:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 647 1/28/2010 6:22:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 648 1/28/2010 6:22:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 649 1/28/2010 6:14:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 650 1/28/2010 6:14:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 651 1/28/2010 6:22:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 652 1/28/2010 6:22:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 653 1/28/2010 6:20:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 654 1/28/2010 6:20:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 655 1/28/2010 6:18:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 656 1/28/2010 6:18:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 657 1/28/2010 6:14:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 658 1/28/2010 6:14:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 659 1/28/2010 6:11:00 PM ASANA XL 11 28 Yes 660 1/28/2010 6:11:00 PM Headline 11 28 Yes 661 2/1/2010 5:55:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 662 2/1/2010 5:55:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 663 2/1/2010 6:45:00 PM JMS Stylet‐Oil Missing WS Missing WS
17 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 67 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8011 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 664 2/1/2010 6:45:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 665 2/1/2010 6:40:00 PM JMS Stylet‐Oil Missing WS Missing WS 666 2/1/2010 6:40:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 667 2/1/2010 5:40:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 668 2/1/2010 5:45:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 669 2/1/2010 5:45:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 670 2/1/2010 5:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 671 2/3/2010 5:40:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 672 2/3/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 673 2/3/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 674 2/3/2010 6:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 675 2/3/2010 5:30:00 PM DIMETHOATE 400 Missing WS Missing WS 676 2/3/2010 6:25:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 677 2/3/2010 7:00:00 PM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS 678 2/3/2010 6:00:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 679 2/3/2010 6:00:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 680 2/3/2010 7:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 681 2/3/2010 7:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 682 2/3/2010 6:20:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 683 2/3/2010 6:10:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 684 2/3/2010 662000:20:00 PM RRditadiant SC Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 685 2/3/2010 6:10:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 686 2/3/2010 6:15:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 687 2/3/2010 6:05:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 688 2/3/2010 6:05:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 689 2/3/2010 6:10:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 690 2/3/2010 6:15:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 691 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 692 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 693 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 694 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 695 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 696 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 697 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 698 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 699 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 700 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 701 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 702 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS
18 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 68 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8012 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 703 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 704 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 705 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 706 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 707 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 708 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 709 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 710 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 711 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 712 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 713 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 714 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 715 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 716 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 717 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 718 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 719 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 720 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 721 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 722 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 723 2/4/2010 770000:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 724 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 725 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 726 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 727 2/6/2010 4:09:00 PM Oberon 2SC Missing WS Missing WS 728 2/6/2010 4:15:00 PM Oberon 2SC Missing WS Missing WS 729 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 730 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 731 2/8/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 732 2/8/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 733 2/8/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 734 2/8/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 735 2/8/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 736 2/8/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 737 2/8/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 738 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 739 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 740 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 741 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS
19 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 69 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8013 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 742 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 743 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 744 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 745 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 746 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 747 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 748 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 749 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 750 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 751 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 752 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 753 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 754 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 755 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 756 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 757 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 758 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 759 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 760 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 761 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 762 2/8/2010 660000:00:00 PM ASANA XL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 763 2/8/2010 6:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 764 2/9/2010 3:50:00 PM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 765 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 766 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 767 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 768 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 769 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 770 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 771 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 772 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 773 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 774 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 775 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 776 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 777 2/10/2010 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 778 2/10/2010 4:30:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 779 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 780 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS
20 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 70 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8014 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 781 2/12/2010 5:00:00 PM Ultra‐Pure Oil Missing WS Missing WS 782 2/12/2010 5:00:00 PM Ultra‐Pure Oil Missing WS Missing WS 783 2/13/2010 6:00:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 784 2/15/2010 6:15:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 785 2/15/2010 6:15:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 786 2/15/2010 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 787 2/15/2010 6:15:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 788 2/15/2010 5:30:00 PM Oberon 2SC Missing WS Missing WS 789 2/15/2010 4:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 790 2/15/2010 4:55:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 791 2/16/2010 6:25:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 792 2/16/2010 6:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 793 2/16/2010 6:05:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 794 2/16/2010 6:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 795 2/17/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 796 2/17/2010 7:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 797 2/17/2010 5:45:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 798 2/17/2010 5:45:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 799 2/17/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 800 2/17/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 801 2/17/2010 664500:45:00 PM ASANA XL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 802 2/17/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 803 2/18/2010 5:00:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 804 2/19/2010 6:59:00 PM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 805 2/19/2010 6:59:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 806 2/19/2010 6:30:00 PM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 807 2/19/2010 5:55:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 808 2/19/2010 5:55:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 809 2/19/2010 5:50:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 810 2/19/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 811 2/19/2010 5:55:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 812 2/19/2010 5:55:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 813 2/19/2010 5:50:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 814 2/19/2010 5:20:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 815 2/19/2010 5:20:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 816 2/19/2010 6:55:00 PM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 817 2/19/2010 6:55:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 818 2/19/2010 6:45:00 PM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 819 2/19/2010 6:45:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS
21 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 71 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8015 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 820 2/21/2010 10:11:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 821 2/21/2010 10:09:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 822 2/21/2010 10:09:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 823 2/21/2010 10:11:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 824 2/21/2010 9:37:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 825 2/21/2010 9:31:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 826 2/21/2010 9:34:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 827 2/21/2010 9:21:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 828 2/21/2010 9:11:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 829 2/21/2010 9:08:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 830 2/21/2010 9:11:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 831 2/21/2010 9:21:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 832 2/21/2010 9:31:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 833 2/21/2010 9:34:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 834 2/21/2010 9:37:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 835 2/21/2010 9:08:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 836 2/21/2010 10:35:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 837 2/21/2010 10:35:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 838 2/21/2010 10:25:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 839 2/21/2010 10:25:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 840 2/23/2010 664900:49:00 PM EF 300 Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 841 2/23/2010 7:45:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 842 2/23/2010 7:45:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 843 2/23/2010 6:49:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 844 2/23/2010 7:56:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 845 2/23/2010 7:12:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 846 2/23/2010 7:12:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 847 2/23/2010 7:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 848 2/23/2010 7:45:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 849 2/23/2010 6:21:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 850 2/23/2010 6:23:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 851 2/23/2010 6:23:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 852 2/23/2010 6:21:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 853 2/23/2010 7:31:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 854 2/23/2010 7:31:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 855 2/23/2010 6:21:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 856 2/23/2010 6:21:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 857 2/23/2010 6:54:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 858 2/23/2010 6:54:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS
22 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 72 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8016 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 859 2/23/2010 5:45:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 860 2/23/2010 5:49:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 861 2/23/2010 5:49:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 862 2/23/2010 5:45:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 863 2/23/2010 5:57:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 864 2/23/2010 5:57:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 865 2/23/2010 6:14:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 866 2/23/2010 6:14:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 867 2/23/2010 6:01:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 868 2/23/2010 6:01:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 869 2/23/2010 6:09:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 870 2/23/2010 6:09:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 871 2/23/2010 6:01:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 872 2/23/2010 6:01:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 873 2/23/2010 6:17:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 874 2/23/2010 6:17:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 875 2/23/2010 6:14:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 876 2/23/2010 6:14:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 877 2/23/2010 6:09:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 878 2/23/2010 6:09:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 879 2/23/2010 660500:05:00 PM EF 300 Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 880 2/23/2010 6:05:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 881 2/26/2010 5:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon Missing WS Missing WS 882 2/28/2010 7:40:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 883 2/28/2010 7:40:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 884 2/28/2010 7:35:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 885 2/28/2010 7:37:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 886 2/28/2010 7:37:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 887 2/28/2010 7:37:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 888 2/28/2010 7:54:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 889 2/28/2010 7:56:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 890 2/28/2010 7:59:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 891 2/28/2010 7:48:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 892 2/28/2010 8:25:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 893 2/28/2010 8:25:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 894 2/28/2010 8:25:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 895 2/28/2010 8:25:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 896 3/4/2010 7:55:00 AM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS 897 3/4/2010 7:57:00 AM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS
23 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 73 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8017 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 898 3/4/2010 8:12:00 AM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS 899 3/4/2010 7:25:00 AM Harmony GT XP Missing WS Missing WS 900 3/4/2010 6:59:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 901 3/4/2010 6:54:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 902 3/4/2010 6:52:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 903 3/4/2010 6:35:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 904 3/4/2010 6:35:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 905 3/4/2010 6:42:00 AM Round‐Up Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 906 3/5/2010 6:42:00 AM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS 907 3/5/2010 6:48:00 AM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS 908 3/5/2010 6:50:00 AM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS 909 3/5/2010 6:29:00 AM Harmony GT XP Missing WS Missing WS 910 3/5/2010 6:27:00 AM Harmony GT XP Missing WS Missing WS 911 3/5/2010 6:27:00 AM Harmony GT XP Missing WS Missing WS 912 3/5/2010 6:22:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 913 3/5/2010 6:22:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 914 3/5/2010 6:20:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 915 3/5/2010 6:25:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 916 3/6/2010 6:47:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 917 3/6/2010 6:35:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 918 3/6/2010 771900:19:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 919 3/6/2010 7:36:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 920 3/6/2010 7:29:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 921 3/6/2010 7:09:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 922 3/6/2010 7:09:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 923 3/6/2010 7:31:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 924 3/6/2010 8:48:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 925 3/6/2010 7:02:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 926 3/6/2010 6:57:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 927 3/7/2010 10:12:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 928 3/7/2010 10:15:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 929 3/7/2010 10:15:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 930 3/7/2010 10:18:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 931 3/7/2010 10:27:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 932 3/7/2010 11:53:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 933 3/7/2010 11:53:00 AM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 934 3/7/2010 11:53:00 AM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 935 3/7/2010 11:32:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 936 3/7/2010 11:27:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS
24 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 74 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8018 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 937 3/7/2010 9:05:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 938 3/7/2010 9:05:00 AM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 939 3/7/2010 11:21:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 940 3/7/2010 11:23:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 941 3/7/2010 11:14:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 942 3/7/2010 8:56:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 943 3/7/2010 8:48:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 944 3/7/2010 8:48:00 AM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 945 3/7/2010 8:56:00 AM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 946 3/7/2010 11:00:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 947 3/7/2010 11:16:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 948 3/7/2010 11:17:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 949 3/7/2010 11:06:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 950 3/7/2010 11:03:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 951 3/7/2010 10:57:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 952 3/8/2010 6:56:00 PM Purespray Missing WS Missing WS 953 3/8/2010 6:49:00 PM Purespray Missing WS Missing WS 954 3/8/2010 6:56:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 955 3/8/2010 6:49:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 956 3/8/2010 5:59:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 957 3/8/2010 553500:35:00 PM ASANA XL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 958 3/8/2010 5:49:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 959 3/8/2010 5:03:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 960 3/8/2010 5:49:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 961 3/8/2010 5:35:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 962 3/8/2010 5:03:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 963 3/8/2010 5:59:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 964 3/8/2010 5:43:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 965 3/8/2010 5:43:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 966 3/8/2010 5:38:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 967 3/8/2010 5:05:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 968 3/8/2010 5:43:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 969 3/8/2010 5:38:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 970 3/8/2010 5:43:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 971 3/8/2010 7:15:00 PM Purespray Missing WS Missing WS 972 3/8/2010 7:15:00 PM Vineyard Magic Missing WS Missing WS 973 3/10/2010 6:25:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 Missing WS Missing WS 974 3/10/2010 6:25:00 AM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 975 3/10/2010 6:52:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 Missing WS Missing WS
25 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 75 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8019 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 976 3/10/2010 6:52:00 AM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 977 3/10/2010 6:45:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 Missing WS Missing WS 978 3/10/2010 6:45:00 AM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 979 3/10/2010 6:40:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 Missing WS Missing WS 980 3/10/2010 6:40:00 AM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 981 3/10/2010 8:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 982 3/14/2010 8:40:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 983 3/14/2010 8:40:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 984 3/14/2010 8:30:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 985 3/14/2010 9:25:00 AM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 986 3/14/2010 9:25:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 987 3/14/2010 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 988 3/14/2010 8:30:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 989 3/14/2010 8:50:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 990 3/14/2010 8:25:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 991 3/14/2010 7:47:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 992 3/14/2010 7:49:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 993 3/14/2010 8:09:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 994 3/14/2010 8:21:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 995 3/14/2010 8:11:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 996 3/14/2010 881900:19:00 AM M‐PPdede Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 997 3/14/2010 8:11:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 998 3/14/2010 8:23:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 999 3/14/2010 8:21:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1000 3/14/2010 8:19:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1001 3/14/2010 8:15:00 AM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1002 3/15/2010 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1003 3/15/2010 5:42:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1004 3/15/2010 5:37:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1005 3/15/2010 5:21:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1006 3/15/2010 5:13:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1007 3/15/2010 5:17:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1008 3/15/2010 6:22:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1009 3/15/2010 6:14:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1010 3/16/2010 5:35:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1011 3/16/2010 4:50:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1012 3/16/2010 4:40:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1013 3/16/2010 4:45:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1014 3/16/2010 5:15:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS
26 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 76 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8020 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1015 3/16/2010 5:05:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1016 3/16/2010 5:00:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1017 3/16/2010 4:55:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1018 3/16/2010 5:15:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1019 3/16/2010 5:15:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1020 3/16/2010 5:10:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1021 3/16/2010 5:10:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1022 3/16/2010 5:30:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1023 3/16/2010 5:30:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1024 3/16/2010 5:30:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1025 3/16/2010 4:20:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1026 3/16/2010 4:30:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1027 3/16/2010 4:30:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1028 3/17/2010 6:50:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1029 3/17/2010 6:35:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1030 3/17/2010 6:59:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1031 3/18/2010 6:59:00 AM Affinity Missing WS Missing WS 1032 3/18/2010 7:25:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1033 3/18/2010 7:23:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1034 3/19/2010 4:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1035 3/19/2010 443800:38:00 PM PPdrovado 116.6 Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1036 3/19/2010 4:32:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1037 3/19/2010 4:28:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1038 3/20/2010 8:42:00 AM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 1039 3/20/2010 8:42:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1040 3/20/2010 9:10:00 AM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 1041 3/20/2010 9:10:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 1042 3/20/2010 9:10:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1043 3/20/2010 7:55:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 1044 3/20/2010 7:45:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 1045 3/20/2010 8:25:00 AM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 1046 3/20/2010 8:32:00 AM Buctril 4EC Missing WS Missing WS 1047 3/20/2010 8:32:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1048 3/20/2010 8:25:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1049 3/22/2010 5:43:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1050 3/22/2010 5:24:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1051 3/22/2010 5:20:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1052 3/22/2010 5:20:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1053 3/22/2010 5:24:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS
27 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 77 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8021 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1054 3/22/2010 6:47:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1055 3/22/2010 6:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1056 3/22/2010 6:43:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1057 3/22/2010 5:43:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1058 3/22/2010 6:59:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1059 3/22/2010 5:06:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1060 3/22/2010 5:04:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1061 3/22/2010 5:35:00 PM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1062 3/23/2010 5:08:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 1063 3/25/2010 6:20:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS Missing WS Missing WS 1064 3/25/2010 5:45:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS Missing WS Missing WS 1065 3/25/2010 6:00:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS Missing WS Missing WS 1066 3/25/2010 6:10:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS Missing WS Missing WS 1067 3/26/2010 3:55:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1068 3/26/2010 5:25:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1069 3/26/2010 5:35:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1070 3/26/2010 5:40:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1071 3/26/2010 5:45:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1072 3/26/2010 6:15:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1073 3/26/2010 6:05:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1074 3/26/2010 663000:30:00 PM ASANA XL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1075 3/26/2010 6:30:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1076 3/26/2010 5:15:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1077 3/26/2010 5:15:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1078 3/26/2010 6:25:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1079 3/26/2010 6:30:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1080 3/26/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1081 3/26/2010 5:40:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1082 3/26/2010 5:35:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1083 3/26/2010 5:25:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1084 3/26/2010 5:15:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1085 3/26/2010 5:45:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1086 3/26/2010 6:25:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1087 3/26/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1088 3/26/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1089 3/26/2010 6:05:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1090 3/26/2010 6:15:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1091 3/26/2010 5:15:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1092 3/26/2010 5:05:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS
28 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 78 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8022 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1093 3/26/2010 5:05:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1094 3/26/2010 5:05:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1095 3/26/2010 5:05:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1096 3/26/2010 5:05:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1097 3/26/2010 5:05:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1098 3/26/2010 6:32:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1099 3/26/2010 6:35:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1100 3/26/2010 3:50:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1101 3/26/2010 4:45:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 1102 3/26/2010 6:25:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1103 3/26/2010 7:04:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1104 3/26/2010 4:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1105 3/26/2010 6:30:00 PM Actinovate AG Missing WS Missing WS 1106 3/26/2010 7:09:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1107 3/26/2010 6:59:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1108 3/26/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1109 3/26/2010 4:05:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1110 3/26/2010 3:40:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1111 3/26/2010 3:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1112 3/26/2010 7:19:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1113 3/27/2010 665100:51:00 AM BASAGRAN Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1114 3/27/2010 6:51:00 AM BASAGRAN Missing WS Missing WS 1115 3/27/2010 6:48:00 AM BASAGRAN Missing WS Missing WS 1116 3/27/2010 6:45:00 AM BASAGRAN Missing WS Missing WS 1117 3/27/2010 6:48:00 AM BASAGRAN Missing WS Missing WS 1118 3/27/2010 7:07:00 AM BASAGRAN Missing WS Missing WS 1119 3/27/2010 9:30:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon Missing WS Missing WS 1120 3/27/2010 7:03:00 AM BASAGRAN Missing WS Missing WS 1121 3/29/2010 6:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1122 3/29/2010 6:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1123 4/1/2010 7:45:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1124 4/1/2010 7:45:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1125 4/1/2010 7:30:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1126 4/1/2010 7:30:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1127 4/1/2010 7:40:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1128 4/1/2010 7:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1129 4/1/2010 5:55:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1130 4/2/2010 7:06:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1131 4/2/2010 7:12:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS
29 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 79 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8023 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1132 4/2/2010 7:04:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1133 4/2/2010 7:18:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1134 4/2/2010 7:06:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1135 4/2/2010 7:08:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1136 4/2/2010 7:11:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1137 4/2/2010 7:00:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1138 4/2/2010 7:11:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1139 4/2/2010 7:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1140 4/2/2010 5:07:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1141 4/2/2010 4:50:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1142 4/2/2010 5:16:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1143 4/2/2010 4:57:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1144 4/2/2010 4:55:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1145 4/2/2010 4:55:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1146 4/2/2010 4:57:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1147 4/2/2010 4:55:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1148 4/2/2010 4:52:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1149 4/2/2010 5:20:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1150 4/2/2010 5:18:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1151 4/2/2010 4:55:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1152 4/2/2010 445700:57:00 PM TILT Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1153 4/2/2010 4:57:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1154 4/2/2010 5:20:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1155 4/2/2010 5:16:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1156 4/2/2010 5:18:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1157 4/2/2010 5:07:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1158 4/2/2010 4:55:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1159 4/2/2010 4:52:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1160 4/2/2010 4:50:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1161 4/2/2010 4:55:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1162 4/2/2010 4:55:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1163 4/2/2010 4:55:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1164 4/2/2010 6:55:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1165 4/2/2010 6:55:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1166 4/2/2010 6:59:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 1167 4/2/2010 6:59:00 PM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 1168 4/2/2010 6:59:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1169 4/2/2010 6:59:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1170 4/2/2010 6:50:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS
30 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 80 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8024 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1171 4/2/2010 5:32:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1172 4/2/2010 5:28:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1173 4/2/2010 5:28:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1174 4/2/2010 5:24:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1175 4/2/2010 5:28:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1176 4/2/2010 5:22:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1177 4/2/2010 5:22:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1178 4/2/2010 5:24:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1179 4/2/2010 6:50:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1180 4/2/2010 6:50:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1181 4/2/2010 5:32:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1182 4/2/2010 5:28:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1183 4/2/2010 5:28:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1184 4/2/2010 5:22:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1185 4/2/2010 5:24:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1186 4/2/2010 5:22:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1187 4/2/2010 5:28:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1188 4/2/2010 5:24:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1189 4/2/2010 6:47:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1190 4/2/2010 6:47:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1191 4/2/2010 664700:47:00 PM TILT Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1192 4/2/2010 4:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1193 4/2/2010 6:37:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1194 4/2/2010 6:37:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1195 4/2/2010 6:37:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1196 4/2/2010 4:20:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1197 4/2/2010 6:12:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1198 4/2/2010 6:12:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1199 4/2/2010 6:12:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1200 4/2/2010 3:13:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1201 4/2/2010 6:27:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1202 4/2/2010 6:27:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1203 4/2/2010 6:27:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1204 4/2/2010 6:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1205 4/2/2010 6:20:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1206 4/2/2010 6:20:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1207 4/2/2010 3:35:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1208 4/2/2010 3:40:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1209 4/2/2010 3:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS
31 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 81 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8025 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1210 4/3/2010 8:12:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1211 4/3/2010 8:24:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1212 4/3/2010 7:18:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1213 4/3/2010 7:21:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1214 4/3/2010 7:20:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1215 4/3/2010 7:20:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1216 4/3/2010 10:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1217 4/3/2010 10:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1218 4/3/2010 7:27:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1219 4/6/2010 6:45:00 PM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1220 4/6/2010 6:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1221 4/6/2010 6:14:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1222 4/6/2010 6:47:00 AM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1223 4/6/2010 6:47:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1224 4/6/2010 6:20:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1225 4/6/2010 5:58:00 PM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1226 4/6/2010 5:58:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1227 4/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1228 4/6/2010 6:45:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1229 4/6/2010 5:50:00 PM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1230 4/6/2010 555000:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1231 4/6/2010 7:35:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1232 4/6/2010 7:35:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1233 4/6/2010 7:55:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1234 4/6/2010 7:55:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1235 4/6/2010 6:59:00 PM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1236 4/6/2010 6:59:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1237 4/6/2010 6:55:00 PM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1238 4/6/2010 6:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1239 4/6/2010 6:25:00 PM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1240 4/6/2010 6:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1241 4/6/2010 6:08:00 PM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1242 4/6/2010 6:15:00 PM Coragen Missing WS Missing WS 1243 4/6/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1244 4/6/2010 6:08:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1245 4/6/2010 8:09:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1246 4/6/2010 8:14:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1247 4/6/2010 8:14:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1248 4/6/2010 8:09:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS
32 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 82 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8026 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1249 4/7/2010 6:00:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1250 4/7/2010 6:00:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1251 4/7/2010 6:00:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1252 4/7/2010 6:00:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1253 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1254 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1255 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1256 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1257 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1258 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1259 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1260 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1261 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1262 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1263 4/7/2010 6:00:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1264 4/7/2010 6:00:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1265 4/7/2010 6:00:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1266 4/7/2010 6:00:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1267 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1268 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1269 4/7/2010 663000:30:00 PM TRILOGY Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1270 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1271 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1272 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1273 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1274 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1275 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1276 4/7/2010 6:20:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1277 4/7/2010 6:45:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1278 4/7/2010 6:45:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1279 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1280 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1281 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1282 4/7/2010 6:45:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1283 4/7/2010 6:45:00 PM Headline Missing WS Missing WS 1284 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1285 4/7/2010 6:45:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1286 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1287 4/7/2010 6:45:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS
33 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 83 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8027 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1288 4/7/2010 6:45:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1289 4/7/2010 6:45:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1290 4/7/2010 6:30:00 PM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1291 4/8/2010 6:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1292 4/8/2010 6:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1293 4/8/2010 5:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1294 4/8/2010 5:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1295 4/8/2010 5:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1296 4/8/2010 5:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1297 4/8/2010 5:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1298 4/8/2010 5:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1299 4/8/2010 5:30:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1300 4/8/2010 5:30:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1301 4/8/2010 6:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1302 4/8/2010 6:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1303 4/8/2010 6:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1304 4/8/2010 6:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1305 4/8/2010 6:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1306 4/8/2010 6:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1307 4/8/2010 5:05:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1308 4/8/2010 550100:01:00 PM PERMETHRIN Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1309 4/8/2010 5:01:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1310 4/8/2010 5:05:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1311 4/11/2010 10:00:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 1312 4/11/2010 10:00:00 AM Dual II Magnum Missing WS Missing WS 1313 4/11/2010 10:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1314 4/11/2010 10:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1315 4/11/2010 10:45:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1316 4/11/2010 10:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1317 4/11/2010 10:45:00 AM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 1318 4/12/2010 6:50:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1319 4/12/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1320 4/12/2010 7:35:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1321 4/12/2010 7:55:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1322 4/12/2010 7:55:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1323 4/12/2010 7:35:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1324 4/12/2010 7:55:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1325 4/12/2010 7:55:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1326 4/12/2010 7:55:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS
34 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 84 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8028 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1327 4/12/2010 7:55:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1328 4/12/2010 7:35:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1329 4/12/2010 7:35:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1330 4/12/2010 7:35:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1331 4/12/2010 7:35:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1332 4/12/2010 6:35:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1333 4/12/2010 6:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1334 4/12/2010 6:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1335 4/12/2010 8:25:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1336 4/12/2010 8:25:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1337 4/12/2010 8:25:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1338 4/12/2010 8:25:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1339 4/12/2010 8:25:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1340 4/12/2010 8:25:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1341 4/12/2010 8:25:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1342 4/12/2010 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1343 4/12/2010 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1344 4/12/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1345 4/12/2010 6:45:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1346 4/12/2010 6:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1347 4/13/2010 665000:50:00 PM PPdrovado 116.6 Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1348 4/13/2010 6:50:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1349 4/13/2010 6:50:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1350 4/13/2010 6:50:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1351 4/13/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1352 4/13/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1353 4/13/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1354 4/13/2010 6:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1355 4/13/2010 6:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1356 4/13/2010 6:20:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1357 4/13/2010 6:20:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1358 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1359 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1360 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1361 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1362 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1363 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1364 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1365 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS
35 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 85 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8029 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1366 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1367 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1368 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1369 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1370 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1371 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1372 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1373 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1374 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1375 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1376 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1377 4/14/2010 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1378 4/14/2010 4:50:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1379 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1380 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1381 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1382 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1383 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1384 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1385 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1386 4/14/2010 553000:30:00 PM QUADRIS Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1387 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1388 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1389 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1390 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1391 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1392 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1393 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1394 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1395 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1396 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1397 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1398 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1399 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1400 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 1401 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 1402 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM PROWL H2O Missing WS Missing WS 1403 4/14/2010 5:35:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1404 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS
36 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 86 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8030 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1405 4/14/2010 5:30:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1406 4/14/2010 5:35:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1407 4/15/2010 6:30:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1408 4/15/2010 6:30:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1409 4/16/2010 1:50:00 PM Ignite 280SL Missing WS Missing WS 1410 4/16/2010 5:59:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1411 4/16/2010 1:50:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1412 4/18/2010 9:25:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1413 4/18/2010 9:25:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1414 4/18/2010 9:25:00 AM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1415 4/18/2010 9:25:00 AM QUADRIS Missing WS Missing WS 1416 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1417 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1418 4/18/2010 9:25:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1419 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1420 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1421 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1422 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1423 4/18/2010 9:15:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1424 4/18/2010 9:15:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1425 4/18/2010 992500:25:00 AM TRILOGY Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1426 4/18/2010 9:15:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1427 4/18/2010 9:15:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1428 4/18/2010 9:15:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1429 4/18/2010 9:15:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1430 4/18/2010 9:35:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1431 4/18/2010 9:35:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1432 4/18/2010 9:35:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1433 4/18/2010 9:35:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 1434 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1435 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1436 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1437 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1438 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1439 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1440 4/18/2010 8:55:00 AM TRILOGY Missing WS Missing WS 1441 4/18/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1442 4/18/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1443 4/18/2010 6:40:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS
37 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 87 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8031 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1444 4/18/2010 7:30:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1445 4/18/2010 7:30:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1446 4/18/2010 7:35:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1447 4/18/2010 7:35:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1448 4/20/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL Missing WS Missing WS 1449 4/21/2010 5:30:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1450 4/21/2010 5:30:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1451 4/21/2010 10:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1452 4/21/2010 1:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1453 4/21/2010 10:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1454 4/21/2010 8:25:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1455 4/21/2010 5:35:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1456 4/21/2010 5:35:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1457 4/21/2010 5:40:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1458 4/21/2010 8:25:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1459 4/21/2010 5:35:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1460 4/21/2010 5:40:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1461 4/21/2010 5:35:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1462 4/21/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1463 4/21/2010 8:20:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1464 4/21/2010 880000:00:00 PM ASANA XL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1465 4/21/2010 3:20:00 PM Ignite 280SL Missing WS Missing WS 1466 4/21/2010 8:20:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1467 4/21/2010 8:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1468 4/21/2010 6:00:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1469 4/21/2010 5:15:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1470 4/21/2010 5:15:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1471 4/21/2010 5:05:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1472 4/21/2010 5:05:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1473 4/21/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1474 4/21/2010 6:45:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1475 4/21/2010 6:15:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1476 4/21/2010 6:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1477 4/21/2010 8:40:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1478 4/21/2010 8:40:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1479 4/21/2010 6:10:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1480 4/21/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1481 4/21/2010 6:10:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1482 4/21/2010 7:00:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS
38 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 88 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8032 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1483 4/21/2010 7:20:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1484 4/21/2010 7:15:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1485 4/21/2010 7:25:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1486 4/21/2010 7:25:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1487 4/21/2010 7:15:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1488 4/21/2010 7:20:00 PM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1489 4/22/2010 9:45:00 AM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1490 4/22/2010 6:00:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1491 4/22/2010 5:50:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1492 4/22/2010 5:50:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1493 4/22/2010 5:50:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1494 4/22/2010 5:50:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1495 4/22/2010 5:50:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1496 4/22/2010 6:00:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1497 4/22/2010 6:00:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1498 4/22/2010 6:00:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1499 4/22/2010 6:00:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1500 4/22/2010 5:50:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1501 4/22/2010 6:00:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1502 4/22/2010 5:20:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1503 4/22/2010 552000:20:00 PM M‐PPdede Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1504 4/22/2010 5:20:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1505 4/22/2010 5:20:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1506 4/22/2010 5:20:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1507 4/22/2010 5:20:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1508 4/22/2010 5:20:00 PM M‐Pede Missing WS Missing WS 1509 4/22/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 280SL Missing WS Missing WS 1510 4/23/2010 6:40:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1511 4/23/2010 6:30:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1512 4/23/2010 6:05:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1513 4/23/2010 6:05:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1514 4/23/2010 6:10:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1515 4/23/2010 6:15:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1516 4/23/2010 6:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1517 4/23/2010 6:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1518 4/23/2010 10:00:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1519 4/23/2010 5:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1520 4/26/2010 7:15:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1521 4/26/2010 7:15:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS
39 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 89 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8033 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1522 4/26/2010 5:50:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1523 4/26/2010 5:55:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1524 4/26/2010 5:50:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1525 4/26/2010 5:55:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1526 4/26/2010 5:55:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1527 4/26/2010 5:50:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1528 4/26/2010 5:50:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1529 4/26/2010 5:55:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1530 4/26/2010 6:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1531 4/26/2010 6:10:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1532 4/26/2010 6:00:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1533 4/26/2010 6:10:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1534 4/26/2010 7:00:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1535 4/26/2010 7:00:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1536 4/26/2010 7:10:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1537 4/26/2010 7:10:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1538 4/26/2010 6:35:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1539 4/26/2010 6:35:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1540 4/26/2010 6:25:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1541 4/26/2010 6:25:00 PM DIPEL Missing WS Missing WS 1542 4/26/2010 662500:25:00 PM PERMETHRIN Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1543 4/26/2010 6:25:00 PM PERMETHRIN Missing WS Missing WS 1544 4/27/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 280SL Missing WS Missing WS 1545 4/27/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1546 4/27/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1547 4/27/2010 6:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1548 4/27/2010 4:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1549 4/27/2010 4:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1550 4/27/2010 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1551 4/27/2010 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1552 4/27/2010 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1553 4/27/2010 5:55:00 PM Provado 1.6 Missing WS Missing WS 1554 4/28/2010 9:10:00 AM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 1555 4/28/2010 1:45:00 PM Ignite 280SL Missing WS Missing WS 1556 4/29/2010 6:15:00 AM REGLONE 7 15 Yes 1557 4/29/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 13 22 Yes 1558 4/29/2010 1:00:00 PM Radiant SC 14 25 Yes 1559 4/29/2010 11:30:00 AM Ignite 280SL 12 21 Yes 1560 4/29/2010 11:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 12 21 Yes
40 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 90 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8034 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1561 4/29/2010 9:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL 12 22 Yes 1562 4/29/2010 9:40:00 AM Ignite 280SL 11 23 Yes 1563 4/29/2010 9:00:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 12 22 Yes 1564 5/1/2010 6:59:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1565 5/1/2010 6:59:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1566 5/1/2010 6:59:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1567 5/1/2010 6:59:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1568 5/1/2010 6:59:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1569 5/1/2010 6:59:00 AM REGLONE Missing WS Missing WS 1570 5/1/2010 8:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1571 5/1/2010 8:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax Missing WS Missing WS 1572 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1573 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1574 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1575 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1576 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1577 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1578 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1579 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1580 5/1/2010 10:59:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1581 5/1/2010 10:59 :00 AM TILT Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1582 5/1/2010 10:25:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1583 5/1/2010 10:25:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1584 5/1/2010 10:25:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1585 5/1/2010 10:25:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1586 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1587 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1588 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1589 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1590 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1591 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1592 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1593 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1594 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1595 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1596 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1597 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1598 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1599 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS
41 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 91 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8035 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1600 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1601 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1602 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1603 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1604 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1605 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1606 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1607 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM TILT Missing WS Missing WS 1608 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1609 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1610 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1611 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1612 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1613 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1614 5/2/2010 10:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1615 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1616 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1617 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1618 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1619 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1620 5/2/2010 775500:55:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 1621 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1622 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1623 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1624 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1625 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1626 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1627 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1628 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1629 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1630 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1631 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1632 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1633 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1634 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1635 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1636 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1637 5/2/2010 7:35:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1638 5/2/2010 7:35:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS
42 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 92 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8036 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1639 5/2/2010 7:35:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1640 5/2/2010 7:35:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1641 5/2/2010 7:35:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1642 5/2/2010 7:35:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1643 5/2/2010 7:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1644 5/2/2010 7:20:00 AM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 1645 5/2/2010 7:20:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1646 5/2/2010 7:20:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1647 5/2/2010 7:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1648 5/2/2010 7:20:00 AM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 1649 5/3/2010 1:30:00 PM Radiant SC 3 8 1650 5/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Actinovate AG 8 15 Yes 1651 5/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Actinovate AG 8 15 Yes 1652 5/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Actinovate AG 8 15 Yes 1653 5/4/2010 7:00:00 PM Actinovate AG 8 15 Yes 1654 5/4/2010 7:00:00 PM M‐Pede 8 15 Yes 1655 5/4/2010 7:00:00 PM M‐Pede 8 15 Yes 1656 5/4/2010 7:00:00 PM M‐Pede 8 15 Yes 1657 5/4/2010 7:00:00 PM M‐Pede 8 15 Yes 1658 5/4/2010 6:20:00 PM DIPEL 5 13 Yes 1659 5/4/2010 662000:20:00 PM DIPEL 5 13 Yes 1660 5/4/2010 6:20:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 13 Yes 1661 5/4/2010 6:20:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 13 Yes 1662 5/4/2010 7:15:00 PM Actinovate AG 8 12 Yes 1663 5/4/2010 7:15:00 PM Actinovate AG 8 12 Yes 1664 5/4/2010 7:15:00 PM Actinovate AG 8 12 Yes 1665 5/4/2010 7:15:00 PM M‐Pede 8 12 Yes 1666 5/4/2010 7:15:00 PM M‐Pede 8 12 Yes 1667 5/4/2010 7:15:00 PM M‐Pede 8 12 Yes 1668 5/4/2010 6:15:00 PM DIPEL 5 13 Yes 1669 5/4/2010 6:15:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 13 Yes 1670 5/4/2010 2:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 17 29 Yes 1671 5/4/2010 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 17 29 Yes 1672 5/4/2010 6:35:00 PM DIPEL 8 15 Yes 1673 5/4/2010 6:35:00 PM PERMETHRIN 8 15 Yes 1674 5/4/2010 5:20:00 PM DIPEL 9 15 Yes 1675 5/4/2010 5:20:00 PM PERMETHRIN 9 15 Yes 1676 5/4/2010 5:55:00 PM DIPEL 6 12 Yes 1677 5/4/2010 5:55:00 PM DIPEL 6 12 Yes
43 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 93 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8037 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1678 5/4/2010 5:55:00 PM PERMETHRIN 6 12 Yes 1679 5/4/2010 5:55:00 PM PERMETHRIN 6 12 Yes 1680 5/4/2010 5:40:00 PM DIPEL 6 12 Yes 1681 5/4/2010 5:40:00 PM DIPEL 6 12 Yes 1682 5/4/2010 5:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN 6 12 Yes 1683 5/4/2010 5:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN 6 12 Yes 1684 5/5/2010 5:30:00 PM Coragen 10 20 Yes 1685 5/5/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 10 20 Yes 1686 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM Coragen 7 14 Yes 1687 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM Coragen 7 14 Yes 1688 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM DIPEL 7 14 Yes 1689 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM DIPEL 7 14 Yes 1690 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM Coragen 7 14 Yes 1691 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM Coragen 7 14 Yes 1692 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM DIPEL 7 14 Yes 1693 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM DIPEL 7 14 Yes 1694 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM Coragen 7 14 Yes 1695 5/5/2010 4:40:00 PM DIPEL 7 14 Yes 1696 5/5/2010 5:30:00 PM Coragen 10 20 Yes 1697 5/5/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 10 20 Yes 1698 5/5/2010 10:30 :00 AM RRditadiant SC 9 18 Yes 1699 5/5/2010 5:30:00 PM Coragen 10 20 Yes 1700 5/5/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 10 20 Yes 1701 5/5/2010 5:30:00 PM Coragen 10 20 Yes 1702 5/5/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 10 20 Yes 1703 5/5/2010 1:30:00 PM Radiant SC 13 25 Yes 1704 5/5/2010 5:00:00 PM Coragen 7 14 Yes 1705 5/5/2010 5:00:00 PM DIPEL 7 14 Yes 1706 5/6/2010 8:30:00 AM Affinity 5 9 Yes 1707 5/6/2010 1:30:00 PM Radiant SC 9 14 Yes 1708 5/6/2010 9:30:00 AM Radiant SC 7 14 Yes 1709 5/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1710 5/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1711 5/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1712 5/7/2010 12:45:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 1713 5/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1714 5/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1715 5/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1716 5/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes
44 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 94 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8038 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1717 5/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1718 5/7/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 19 Yes 1719 5/7/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 19 Yes 1720 5/7/2010 10:00:00 AM Radiant SC 11 21 Yes 1721 5/7/2010 6:40:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1722 5/7/2010 6:40:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1723 5/7/2010 6:40:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1724 5/7/2010 6:40:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1725 5/7/2010 6:40:00 AM Radiant SC 4 9 Yes 1726 5/7/2010 3:45:00 PM Ignite 280SL 12 23 Yes 1727 5/8/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL 8 14 Yes 1728 5/8/2010 2:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 22 Yes 1729 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 Yes 1730 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 Yes 1731 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 Yes 1732 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 Yes 1733 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 Yes 1734 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 Yes 1735 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 Yes 1736 5/8/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 13 Yes 1737 5/8/2010 770000:00:00 AM LLborsban Advanced 6 13 Yes 1738 5/8/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 13 Yes 1739 5/10/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 5 7 1740 5/10/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 5 7 1741 5/10/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 5 7 1742 5/10/2010 1:00:00 PM Radiant SC 14 19 Yes 1743 5/10/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 11 16 Yes 1744 5/10/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 11 16 Yes 1745 5/10/2010 5:00:00 PM Surround WP 5 10 Yes 1746 5/10/2010 5:00:00 PM Surround WP 5 10 Yes 1747 5/10/2010 5:00:00 PM Surround WP 5 10 Yes 1748 5/10/2010 5:00:00 PM Surround WP 5 10 Yes 1749 5/10/2010 5:00:00 PM Surround WP 5 10 Yes 1750 5/10/2010 5:00:00 PM Surround WP 5 10 Yes 1751 5/10/2010 5:30:00 PM Surround WP 7 12 Yes 1752 5/10/2010 5:30:00 PM Surround WP 7 12 Yes 1753 5/11/2010 5:30:00 PM ASANA XL 8 12 Yes 1754 5/11/2010 5:30:00 PM ASANA XL 8 12 Yes 1755 5/11/2010 5:30:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes
45 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 95 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8039 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1756 5/11/2010 5:30:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 1757 5/11/2010 5:30:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1758 5/11/2010 5:30:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1759 5/11/2010 10:30:00 AM Ignite 280SL 9 19 Yes 1760 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM ASANA XL 8 12 Yes 1761 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM ASANA XL 8 12 Yes 1762 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM ASANA XL 8 12 Yes 1763 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 1764 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 1765 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 1766 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1767 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1768 5/11/2010 5:20:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1769 5/11/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 15 Yes 1770 5/11/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL 8 11 Yes 1771 5/11/2010 6:00:00 PM Headline 8 11 Yes 1772 5/11/2010 6:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 11 Yes 1773 5/11/2010 6:05:00 PM ASANA XL 5 11 Yes 1774 5/11/2010 6:05:00 PM Headline 5 11 Yes 1775 5/11/2010 6:05:00 PM XENTARI 5 11 Yes 1776 5/11/2010 993000:30:00 AM RRditadiant SC 4 11 Yes 1777 5/11/2010 6:00:00 PM ASANA XL 8 11 Yes 1778 5/11/2010 6:00:00 PM Headline 8 11 Yes 1779 5/11/2010 6:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 11 Yes 1780 5/11/2010 3:15:00 PM Radiant SC 10 15 Yes 1781 5/11/2010 3:15:00 PM Radiant SC 10 15 Yes 1782 5/11/2010 5:05:00 PM ASANA XL 8 12 Yes 1783 5/11/2010 5:00:00 PM ASANA XL 8 11 Yes 1784 5/11/2010 5:00:00 PM Headline 8 11 Yes 1785 5/11/2010 5:05:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 1786 5/11/2010 5:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 11 Yes 1787 5/11/2010 5:05:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1788 5/11/2010 5:10:00 PM ASANA XL 8 12 Yes 1789 5/11/2010 5:10:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 1790 5/11/2010 5:10:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1791 5/12/2010 11:00:00 AM Radiant SC 11 16 Yes 1792 5/12/2010 9:30:00 AM Radiant SC 8 12 Yes 1793 5/12/2010 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 8 14 Yes 1794 5/12/2010 2:15:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 15 Yes
46 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 96 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8040 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1795 5/12/2010 6:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1796 5/12/2010 6:25:00 PM TILT 8 13 Yes 1797 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1798 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1799 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1800 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM TILT 4 8 1801 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM TILT 4 8 1802 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM TILT 4 8 1803 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1804 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM TILT 4 8 1805 5/12/2010 7:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1806 5/12/2010 7:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1807 5/12/2010 7:20:00 PM TILT 4 8 1808 5/12/2010 7:20:00 PM TILT 4 8 1809 5/12/2010 5:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 18 Yes 1810 5/12/2010 5:50:00 PM TILT 9 18 Yes 1811 5/12/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1812 5/12/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1813 5/12/2010 6:10:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1814 5/12/2010 6:10:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1815 5/12/2010 661500:15:00 PM TILT 8 13 Yes 1816 5/12/2010 6:15:00 PM TILT 8 13 Yes 1817 5/12/2010 6:10:00 PM TILT 8 13 Yes 1818 5/12/2010 6:10:00 PM TILT 8 13 Yes 1819 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM Actinovate AG 11 16 Yes 1820 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM TRILOGY 11 16 Yes 1821 5/13/2010 5:15:00 PM Assail 70WP 9 14 Yes 1822 5/13/2010 5:15:00 PM Assail 70WP 9 14 Yes 1823 5/13/2010 5:15:00 PM QUADRIS 9 14 Yes 1824 5/13/2010 5:15:00 PM QUADRIS 9 14 Yes 1825 5/13/2010 6:20:00 AM REGLONE 6 11 Yes 1826 5/13/2010 6:20:00 AM REGLONE 6 11 Yes 1827 5/13/2010 6:35:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1828 5/13/2010 6:35:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1829 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM Actinovate AG 11 16 Yes 1830 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM Actinovate AG 11 16 Yes 1831 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM Actinovate AG 11 16 Yes 1832 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM Actinovate AG 11 16 Yes 1833 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM TRILOGY 11 16 Yes
47 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 97 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8041 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1834 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM TRILOGY 11 16 Yes 1835 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM TRILOGY 11 16 Yes 1836 5/13/2010 4:45:00 PM TRILOGY 11 16 Yes 1837 5/13/2010 5:15:00 PM Assail 70WP 9 14 Yes 1838 5/13/2010 5:15:00 PM Assail 70WP 9 14 Yes 1839 5/13/2010 5:15:00 PM QUADRIS 9 14 Yes 1840 5/13/2010 5:15:00 PM QUADRIS 9 14 Yes 1841 5/13/2010 6:55:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1842 5/13/2010 6:55:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1843 5/13/2010 6:55:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1844 5/13/2010 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 13 21 Yes 1845 5/13/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 13 21 Yes 1846 5/14/2010 10:45:00 AM Radiant SC 10 16 Yes 1847 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 9 13 Yes 1848 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 9 13 Yes 1849 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1850 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1851 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 9 13 Yes 1852 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 9 13 Yes 1853 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 9 13 Yes 1854 5/14/2010 553000:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1855 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1856 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1857 5/14/2010 1:30:00 PM Ignite 14 20 Yes 1858 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM DIPEL 8 11 Yes 1859 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 11 Yes 1860 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM DIPEL 8 11 Yes 1861 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 11 Yes 1862 5/14/2010 9:30:00 AM Radiant SC 10 18 Yes 1863 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM DIPEL 8 11 Yes 1864 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 11 Yes 1865 5/14/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 12 19 Yes 1866 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM DIPEL 10 13 Yes 1867 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM DIPEL 10 13 Yes 1868 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1869 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1870 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM DIPEL 10 13 Yes 1871 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1872 5/17/2010 7:00:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes
48 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 98 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8042 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1873 5/17/2010 7:00:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1874 5/17/2010 7:00:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1875 5/17/2010 7:00:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1876 5/17/2010 7:00:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1877 5/17/2010 7:00:00 AM REGLONE 6 9 Yes 1878 5/17/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL 12 23 Yes 1879 5/17/2010 3:10:00 PM Radiant SC 12 18 Yes 1880 5/17/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 12 23 Yes 1881 5/17/2010 5:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 12 23 Yes 1882 5/17/2010 5:10:00 PM Provado 1.6 12 23 Yes 1883 5/17/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 11 19 Yes 1884 5/17/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 12 23 Yes 1885 5/17/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 12 23 Yes 1886 5/17/2010 5:40:00 PM Provado 1.6 12 20 Yes 1887 5/17/2010 10:45:00 AM Radiant SC 12 23 Yes 1888 5/17/2010 6:05:00 PM Provado 1.6 9 18 Yes 1889 5/17/2010 5:55:00 PM Provado 1.6 12 20 Yes 1890 5/17/2010 6:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 12 20 Yes 1891 5/18/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 6 16 Yes 1892 5/18/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 280SL 8 28 Yes 1893 5/18/2010 553500:35:00 PM Coragen 9 19 Yes 1894 5/18/2010 5:35:00 PM XENTARI 9 19 Yes 1895 5/18/2010 5:30:00 PM Coragen 5 11 Yes 1896 5/18/2010 5:30:00 PM XENTARI 5 11 Yes 1897 5/18/2010 5:05:00 PM Coragen 5 11 Yes 1898 5/18/2010 5:00:00 PM Coragen 7 14 Yes 1899 5/18/2010 10:00:00 AM Radiant SC 10 18 Yes 1900 5/18/2010 5:00:00 PM XENTARI 7 14 Yes 1901 5/18/2010 5:05:00 PM XENTARI 5 11 Yes 1902 5/18/2010 5:15:00 PM Coragen 5 11 Yes 1903 5/18/2010 5:25:00 PM Coragen 5 11 Yes 1904 5/18/2010 5:20:00 PM Coragen 5 11 Yes 1905 5/18/2010 5:15:00 PM XENTARI 5 11 Yes 1906 5/18/2010 5:20:00 PM XENTARI 5 11 Yes 1907 5/18/2010 5:25:00 PM XENTARI 5 11 Yes 1908 5/19/2010 1:30:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 22 Yes 1909 5/19/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 10 24 Yes 1910 5/19/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 11 22 Yes 1911 5/20/2010 8:30:00 AM Radiant SC 9 16 Yes
49 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 99 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8043 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1912 5/20/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 12 24 Yes 1913 5/20/2010 12:30:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 24 Yes 1914 5/20/2010 2:45:00 PM BASAGRAN 12 24 Yes 1915 5/20/2010 11:55:00 AM BASAGRAN 14 23 Yes 1916 5/20/2010 2:25:00 PM BASAGRAN 14 27 Yes 1917 5/20/2010 11:20:00 AM BASAGRAN 12 22 Yes 1918 5/20/2010 4:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 24 Yes 1919 5/20/2010 10:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL 11 24 Yes 1920 5/20/2010 12:30:00 PM Radiant SC 13 24 Yes 1921 5/20/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 12 24 Yes 1922 5/21/2010 8:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 12 21 Yes 1923 5/21/2010 8:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 12 21 Yes 1924 5/21/2010 12:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 13 23 Yes 1925 5/21/2010 1:00:00 PM Radiant SC 14 27 Yes 1926 5/21/2010 7:00:00 AM Buctril 10 21 Yes 1927 5/21/2010 10:00:00 AM Radiant SC 13 24 Yes 1928 5/21/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 13 25 Yes 1929 5/24/2010 7:00:00 AM REGLONE 9 18 Yes 1930 5/24/2010 12:15:00 PM Radiant SC 12 24 Yes 1931 5/24/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 13 25 Yes 1932 5/24/2010 990000:00:00 AM IIitgnite 280SL 10 19 Yes 1933 5/24/2010 2:55:00 PM Radiant SC 13 25 Yes 1934 5/25/2010 7:25:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 1935 5/25/2010 7:25:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 1936 5/25/2010 7:25:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 1937 5/25/2010 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 13 28 Yes 1938 5/25/2010 10:30:00 AM Radiant SC 11 22 Yes 1939 5/25/2010 6:30:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 4 9 Yes 1940 5/25/2010 6:30:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 4 9 Yes 1941 5/25/2010 6:30:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 4 9 Yes 1942 5/25/2010 6:30:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 4 9 Yes 1943 5/25/2010 7:00:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 5 10 Yes 1944 5/25/2010 7:00:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 5 10 Yes 1945 5/25/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 11 20 Yes 1946 5/25/2010 7:00:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 5 10 Yes 1947 5/25/2010 7:00:00 AM DIMETHOATE 400 5 10 Yes 1948 5/26/2010 7:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 5 12 Yes 1949 5/26/2010 7:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 5 12 Yes 1950 5/26/2010 6:15:00 AM EF 300 4 10 Yes
50 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 100 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8044 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1951 5/26/2010 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 13 23 Yes 1952 5/26/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 3 8 1953 5/26/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 3 8 1954 5/26/2010 6:15:00 AM EF 300 4 10 Yes 1955 5/26/2010 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 13 23 Yes 1956 5/26/2010 11:00:00 AM Radiant SC 9 16 Yes 1957 5/26/2010 10:45:00 AM Ignite 280SL 9 16 Yes 1958 5/26/2010 8:45:00 AM Ignite 280SL 10 19 Yes 1959 5/26/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 12 25 Yes 1960 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1961 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1962 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1963 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1964 5/27/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 280SL 11 18 Yes 1965 5/27/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 280SL 11 18 Yes 1966 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1967 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1968 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1969 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1970 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1971 5/27/2010 550000:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1972 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1973 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM XENTARI 8 12 Yes 1974 5/27/2010 5:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 9 Yes 1975 5/27/2010 5:15:00 PM XENTARI 5 9 Yes 1976 5/27/2010 5:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 7 1977 5/27/2010 5:50:00 PM XENTARI 2 7 1978 5/27/2010 12:30:00 PM Radiant SC 16 24 Yes 1979 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1980 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1981 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM XENTARI 10 13 Yes 1982 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM XENTARI 10 13 Yes 1983 5/27/2010 1:15:00 PM Radiant SC 14 21 Yes 1984 5/27/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 8 13 Yes 1985 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1986 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1987 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1988 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM XENTARI 10 13 Yes 1989 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM XENTARI 10 13 Yes
51 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 101 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8045 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 1990 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM XENTARI 10 13 Yes 1991 5/28/2010 6:30:00 AM ASANA XL 10 14 Yes 1992 5/28/2010 6:30:00 AM ASANA XL 10 14 Yes 1993 5/28/2010 6:30:00 AM XENTARI 10 14 Yes 1994 5/28/2010 6:30:00 AM XENTARI 10 14 Yes 1995 5/28/2010 6:30:00 AM ASANA XL 10 14 Yes 1996 5/28/2010 6:30:00 AM ASANA XL 10 14 Yes 1997 5/28/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 6 11 Yes 1998 5/28/2010 6:30:00 AM XENTARI 10 14 Yes 1999 5/28/2010 6:30:00 AM XENTARI 10 14 Yes 2000 5/28/2010 9:30:00 AM Ignite 280SL Missing WS Missing WS 2001 5/28/2010 12:20:00 PM Radiant SC 8 12 Yes 2002 5/28/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 280SL 6 12 Yes 2003 5/29/2010 8:10:00 AM Dual II Magnum 3 8 2004 5/29/2010 8:10:00 AM Dual II Magnum 3 8 2005 5/29/2010 8:10:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 8 2006 5/29/2010 8:10:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 8 2007 5/29/2010 7:30:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 12 Yes 2008 5/29/2010 7:30:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 12 Yes 2009 5/29/2010 7:30:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 12 Yes 2010 5/29/2010 773000:30:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 12 Yes 2011 5/29/2010 7:30:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 12 Yes 2012 5/29/2010 7:30:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 12 Yes 2013 5/29/2010 7:30:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 12 Yes 2014 5/29/2010 7:30:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 12 Yes 2015 6/1/2010 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 13 26 Yes 2016 6/1/2010 1:10:00 PM Radiant SC 13 25 Yes 2017 6/1/2010 10:45:00 AM Ignite 280SL 11 21 Yes 2018 6/1/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 12 21 Yes 2019 6/1/2010 10:20:00 AM Radiant SC 11 24 Yes 2020 6/2/2010 6:55:00 AM Intrro 6 15 Yes 2021 6/2/2010 1:30:00 PM Radiant SC 13 23 Yes 2022 6/2/2010 3:15:00 PM Ignite 280SL 13 23 Yes 2023 6/2/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 13 24 Yes 2024 6/3/2010 10:00:00 AM Radiant SC 10 14 Yes 2025 6/3/2010 5:45:00 PM ASANA XL 8 15 Yes 2026 6/3/2010 5:45:00 PM DIPEL 8 15 Yes 2027 6/3/2010 3:10:00 PM Radiant SC 12 19 Yes 2028 6/3/2010 5:45:00 PM ASANA XL 8 15 Yes
52 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 102 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8046 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2029 6/3/2010 5:45:00 PM DIPEL 8 15 Yes 2030 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 6 10 Yes 2031 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 6 10 Yes 2032 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 6 10 Yes 2033 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM DIPEL 6 10 Yes 2034 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM DIPEL 6 10 Yes 2035 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM DIPEL 6 10 Yes 2036 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 6 10 Yes 2037 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM DIPEL 6 10 Yes 2038 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 6 10 Yes 2039 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 6 10 Yes 2040 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM DIPEL 6 10 Yes 2041 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM DIPEL 6 10 Yes 2042 6/3/2010 2:25:00 PM Ignite 280SL 12 19 Yes 2043 6/3/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 13 19 Yes 2044 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 6 10 Yes 2045 6/3/2010 6:45:00 PM DIPEL 6 10 Yes 2046 6/3/2010 12:00:00 PM Radiant SC 12 16 Yes 2047 6/3/2010 5:25:00 PM ASANA XL 11 16 Yes 2048 6/3/2010 5:15:00 PM ASANA XL 11 16 Yes 2049 6/3/2010 551500:15:00 PM ASANA XL 11 16 Yes 2050 6/3/2010 5:15:00 PM ASANA XL 11 16 Yes 2051 6/3/2010 5:15:00 PM DIPEL 11 16 Yes 2052 6/3/2010 5:25:00 PM DIPEL 11 16 Yes 2053 6/3/2010 5:15:00 PM DIPEL 11 16 Yes 2054 6/3/2010 5:15:00 PM DIPEL 11 16 Yes 2055 6/4/2010 6:28:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 15 Yes 2056 6/4/2010 4:57:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 16 Yes 2057 6/4/2010 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 9 20 Yes 2058 6/4/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 16 Yes 2059 6/4/2010 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 15 Yes 2060 6/4/2010 4:48:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 16 Yes 2061 6/4/2010 1:30:00 PM Radiant SC 11 20 Yes 2062 6/4/2010 6:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 15 Yes 2063 6/4/2010 5:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 15 Yes 2064 6/4/2010 6:05:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 15 Yes 2065 6/4/2010 3:15:00 PM Ignite 280SL 10 21 Yes 2066 6/4/2010 5:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 19 Yes 2067 6/4/2010 10:30:00 AM Radiant SC 9 20 Yes
53 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 103 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8047 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2068 6/4/2010 9:00:00 AM Radiant SC 7 15 Yes 2069 6/4/2010 5:21:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 19 Yes 2070 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 3 7 2071 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 7 2072 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 3 7 2073 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 3 7 2074 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 7 2075 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 7 2076 6/6/2010 9:15:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 10 22 Yes 2077 6/6/2010 8:30:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 8 15 Yes 2078 6/6/2010 8:30:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 8 15 Yes 2079 6/7/2010 4:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 12 21 Yes 2080 6/7/2010 4:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 12 21 Yes 2081 6/7/2010 12:15:00 PM Radiant SC 11 20 Yes 2082 6/7/2010 9:30:00 AM Radiant SC 11 19 Yes 2083 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2084 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2085 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2086 6/7/2010 3:10:00 PM Ignite 280SL 14 21 Yes 2087 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2088 6/7/2010 664500:45:00 PM RRditadiant SC 10 19 Yes 2089 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2090 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2091 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2092 6/7/2010 6:30:00 PM ASANA XL 11 18 Yes 2093 6/7/2010 6:30:00 PM ASANA XL 11 18 Yes 2094 6/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Radiant SC 11 18 Yes 2095 6/7/2010 6:30:00 PM Radiant SC 11 18 Yes 2096 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2097 6/7/2010 6:45:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2098 6/7/2010 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 10 15 Yes 2099 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2100 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2101 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2102 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2103 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes 2104 6/7/2010 1:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 9 21 Yes 2105 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2106 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes
54 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 104 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8048 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2107 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2108 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2109 6/7/2010 7:00:00 PM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2110 6/8/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 6 12 Yes 2111 6/8/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 6 12 Yes 2112 6/8/2010 10:45:00 AM Ignite 280SL 9 18 Yes 2113 6/8/2010 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 16 28 Yes 2114 6/8/2010 2:40:00 PM Ignite 280SL 16 25 Yes 2115 6/9/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 13 23 Yes 2116 6/9/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 14 26 Yes 2117 6/9/2010 10:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL 11 24 Yes 2118 6/10/2010 10:45:00 AM Radiant SC 11 20 Yes 2119 6/10/2010 2:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 14 24 Yes 2120 6/10/2010 6:50:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 7 12 Yes 2121 6/10/2010 6:50:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 7 12 Yes 2122 6/10/2010 6:50:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 7 12 Yes 2123 6/10/2010 6:50:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 7 12 Yes 2124 6/10/2010 6:50:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 7 12 Yes 2125 6/10/2010 6:50:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 7 12 Yes 2126 6/10/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 11 19 Yes 2127 6/11/2010 550500:05:00 PM LLborsban Advanced Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 2128 6/11/2010 5:05:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 2129 6/11/2010 4:50:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 2130 6/11/2010 4:50:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 2131 6/11/2010 1:15:00 PM Radiant SC 12 16 Yes 2132 6/11/2010 4:50:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 2133 6/11/2010 4:50:00 PM LANNATE LV Missing WS Missing WS 2134 6/11/2010 9:00:00 AM Radiant SC 5 15 Yes 2135 6/11/2010 4:40:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 2136 6/11/2010 12:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 13 18 Yes 2137 6/11/2010 4:40:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2138 6/11/2010 3:45:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 2139 6/11/2010 1:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 13 19 Yes 2140 6/11/2010 3:45:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2141 6/11/2010 11:00:00 AM Radiant SC 10 15 Yes 2142 6/11/2010 4:15:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 2143 6/11/2010 4:15:00 PM ASANA XL Missing WS Missing WS 2144 6/11/2010 4:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2145 6/11/2010 4:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS
55 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 105 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8049 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2146 6/12/2010 11:00:00 AM Honcho Plus Missing WS Missing WS 2147 6/12/2010 11:00:00 AM Honcho Plus Missing WS Missing WS 2148 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2149 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2150 6/14/2010 11:00:00 AM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 2151 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2152 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2153 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2154 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2155 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2156 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2157 6/14/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL Missing WS Missing WS 2158 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2159 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2160 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2161 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2162 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2163 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2164 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2165 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2166 6/14/2010 331500:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Miss ing WS Miss ing WS 2167 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2168 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2169 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2170 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2171 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2172 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2173 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2174 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2175 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM XENTARI Missing WS Missing WS 2176 6/15/2010 10:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL 8 12 Yes 2177 6/15/2010 2:51:00 PM Radiant SC 11 20 Yes 2178 6/16/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 11 21 Yes 2179 6/16/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 11 21 Yes 2180 6/16/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 11 21 Yes 2181 6/16/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 11 21 Yes 2182 6/16/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 11 21 Yes 2183 6/16/2010 6:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 2184 6/16/2010 6:15:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes
56 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 106 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8050 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2185 6/16/2010 6:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 7 11 Yes 2186 6/16/2010 10:45:00 AM Radiant SC 11 21 Yes 2187 6/16/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 8 19 Yes 2188 6/16/2010 7:05:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 2 6 2189 6/16/2010 1:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 9 21 Yes 2190 6/16/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 15 23 Yes 2191 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM DIPEL 12 19 Yes 2192 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM DIPEL 12 19 Yes 2193 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM DIPEL 12 19 Yes 2194 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 12 19 Yes 2195 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 12 19 Yes 2196 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 12 19 Yes 2197 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM DIPEL 12 19 Yes 2198 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 12 19 Yes 2199 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM DIPEL 12 19 Yes 2200 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM DIPEL 12 19 Yes 2201 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 12 19 Yes 2202 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 12 19 Yes 2203 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM DIPEL 12 19 Yes 2204 6/17/2010 3:45:00 PM PERMETHRIN 12 19 Yes 2205 6/17/2010 224000:40:00 PM DIPEL 11 18 Yes 2206 6/17/2010 2:42:00 PM DIPEL 11 18 Yes 2207 6/17/2010 2:42:00 PM PERMETHRIN 11 18 Yes 2208 6/17/2010 2:40:00 PM PERMETHRIN 11 18 Yes 2209 6/18/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 11 16 Yes 2210 6/21/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 11 24 Yes 2211 6/21/2010 10:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL 9 18 Yes 2212 6/21/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 11 24 Yes 2213 6/22/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 11 24 Yes 2214 6/22/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 11 24 Yes 2215 6/22/2010 10:45:00 AM Radiant SC 11 20 Yes 2216 6/23/2010 12:45:00 PM Radiant SC 13 21 Yes 2217 6/23/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 12 21 Yes 2218 6/23/2010 1:00:00 PM Ignite 280SL 13 21 Yes 2219 6/23/2010 8:45:00 AM Radiant SC 9 20 Yes 2220 6/23/2010 8:30:00 AM Radiant SC 9 15 Yes 2221 6/23/2010 3:06:00 PM Ignite 280SL 9 18 Yes 2222 6/24/2010 6:45:00 AM Radiant SC 6 11 Yes 2223 6/24/2010 6:45:00 AM Radiant SC 6 11 Yes
57 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 107 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8051 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2224 6/24/2010 6:45:00 AM Radiant SC 6 11 Yes 2225 6/24/2010 6:45:00 AM Radiant SC 6 11 Yes 2226 6/24/2010 6:45:00 AM Radiant SC 6 11 Yes 2227 6/24/2010 11:25:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 13 24 Yes 2228 6/24/2010 11:25:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 13 24 Yes 2229 6/24/2010 3:15:00 PM Radiant SC 14 24 Yes 2230 6/24/2010 3:15:00 PM Radiant SC 14 24 Yes 2231 6/24/2010 1:31:00 PM Radiant SC 13 26 Yes 2232 6/24/2010 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 13 23 Yes 2233 6/24/2010 9:45:00 AM Radiant SC Missing WS Missing WS 2234 6/25/2010 6:45:00 AM Harmony GT XP 3 8 2235 6/25/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 3 8 2236 6/25/2010 6:45:00 AM Harmony GT XP 3 8 2237 6/25/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 3 8 2238 6/25/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 3 8 2239 6/25/2010 11:30:00 AM Affinity 10 22 Yes 2240 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2241 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2242 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2243 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM XENTARI 11 19 Yes 2244 6/25/2010 444500:45:00 PM XENTARI 11 19 Yes 2245 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM XENTARI 11 19 Yes 2246 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2247 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM XENTARI 11 19 Yes 2248 6/25/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 12 18 Yes 2249 6/25/2010 1:30:00 PM Radiant SC 13 21 Yes 2250 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2251 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2252 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM XENTARI 11 19 Yes 2253 6/25/2010 4:45:00 PM XENTARI 11 19 Yes 2254 6/25/2010 4:59:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2255 6/25/2010 4:59:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2256 6/25/2010 4:59:00 PM XENTARI 11 19 Yes 2257 6/25/2010 4:59:00 PM XENTARI 11 19 Yes 2258 6/28/2010 5:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 22 Yes 2259 6/28/2010 10:15:00 AM Dual II Magnum 10 15 Yes 2260 6/28/2010 10:15:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 10 15 Yes 2261 6/28/2010 3:00:00 PM Surround WP 9 16 Yes 2262 6/28/2010 3:00:00 PM Surround WP 9 16 Yes
58 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 108 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8052 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2263 6/28/2010 3:00:00 PM Surround WP 9 16 Yes 2264 6/28/2010 3:00:00 PM Surround WP 9 16 Yes 2265 6/28/2010 3:00:00 PM Surround WP 9 16 Yes 2266 6/28/2010 2:30:00 PM TRILOGY 9 14 Yes 2267 6/28/2010 2:30:00 PM TRILOGY 9 14 Yes 2268 6/28/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 13 Yes 2269 6/28/2010 11:10:00 AM REGLONE 11 15 Yes 2270 6/28/2010 11:10:00 AM REGLONE 11 15 Yes 2271 6/28/2010 5:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 13 Yes 2272 6/28/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 13 Yes 2273 6/28/2010 5:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 22 Yes 2274 6/28/2010 5:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 22 Yes 2275 6/28/2010 1:15:00 PM Radiant SC 11 16 Yes 2276 6/28/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 9 16 Yes 2277 6/28/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 13 Yes 2278 6/28/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 13 Yes 2279 6/28/2010 5:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 13 Yes 2280 6/28/2010 10:30:00 AM Radiant SC 10 15 Yes 2281 6/29/2010 10:45:00 AM Radiant SC 11 20 Yes 2282 6/29/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 10 15 Yes 2283 6/29/2010 10:00 :00 AM RRditadiant SC 9 19 Yes 2284 6/30/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 13 23 Yes 2285 7/1/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 9 12 Yes 2286 7/1/2010 6:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 9 12 Yes 2287 7/1/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 9 12 Yes 2288 7/1/2010 10:00:00 AM Radiant SC 12 18 Yes 2289 7/1/2010 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 12 24 Yes 2290 7/1/2010 10:30:00 AM Radiant SC 13 20 Yes 2291 7/2/2010 12:00:00 PM Radiant SC 11 18 Yes 2292 7/3/2010 7:35:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 2293 7/3/2010 7:40:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 2294 7/3/2010 7:45:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 2295 7/3/2010 7:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 2296 7/3/2010 7:30:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 7 2297 7/3/2010 7:30:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 7 2298 7/3/2010 7:30:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 7 2299 7/3/2010 8:15:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 10 Yes 2300 7/3/2010 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 2301 7/3/2010 8:10:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 10 Yes
59 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 109 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8053 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2302 7/6/2010 9:15:00 AM Radiant SC 9 16 Yes 2303 7/6/2010 10:15:00 AM Radiant SC 12 21 Yes 2304 7/6/2010 11:00:00 AM Radiant SC 12 23 Yes 2305 7/6/2010 11:30:00 AM Radiant SC 14 23 Yes 2306 7/6/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 15 25 Yes 2307 7/7/2010 4:40:00 PM Surround WP 11 18 Yes 2308 7/7/2010 4:30:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 11 14 Yes 2309 7/7/2010 4:30:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 11 14 Yes 2310 7/7/2010 4:30:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 11 14 Yes 2311 7/7/2010 4:30:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 11 14 Yes 2312 7/7/2010 4:30:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 11 14 Yes 2313 7/7/2010 4:30:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 11 14 Yes 2314 7/7/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 7 14 Yes 2315 7/8/2010 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 12 24 Yes 2316 7/8/2010 10:00:00 AM Radiant SC 11 20 Yes 2317 7/9/2010 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 15 28 Yes 2318 7/13/2010 4:35:00 PM Surround WP 15 24 Yes 2319 7/13/2010 4:30:00 PM Surround WP 12 20 Yes 2320 7/13/2010 4:25:00 PM Surround WP 12 20 Yes 2321 7/13/2010 4:20:00 PM Surround WP 12 20 Yes 2322 7/13/2010 441500:15:00 PM SSdurround WP 12 20 Yes 2323 7/13/2010 4:10:00 PM Surround WP 12 20 Yes 2324 7/13/2010 4:40:00 PM Surround WP 15 24 Yes 2325 7/13/2010 4:45:00 PM Surround WP 15 24 Yes 2326 7/13/2010 4:50:00 PM Surround WP 15 24 Yes 2327 7/13/2010 4:55:00 PM Surround WP 15 24 Yes 2328 7/13/2010 1:15:00 PM Radiant SC 13 27 Yes 2329 7/13/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 14 26 Yes 2330 7/14/2010 6:45:00 AM Affinity 9 13 Yes 2331 7/14/2010 6:45:00 AM Harmony GT XP 9 13 Yes 2332 7/14/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 9 13 Yes 2333 7/16/2010 5:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 9 13 Yes 2334 7/16/2010 4:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 10 16 Yes 2335 7/16/2010 4:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 10 16 Yes 2336 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2337 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2338 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2339 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2340 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes
60 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 110 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8054 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2341 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2342 7/23/2010 12:00:00 PM PROWL H2O 11 26 Yes 2343 7/23/2010 11:00:00 AM Dual II Magnum 11 19 Yes 2344 7/23/2010 11:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 11 19 Yes 2345 7/23/2010 11:45:00 AM PROWL H2O 11 26 Yes 2346 7/23/2010 11:30:00 AM PROWL H2O 13 24 Yes 2347 7/23/2010 10:20:00 AM Dual II Magnum 11 16 Yes 2348 7/23/2010 10:20:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 11 16 Yes 2349 7/24/2010 6:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 8 13 Yes 2350 7/24/2010 6:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 8 13 Yes 2351 7/24/2010 6:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 8 13 Yes 2352 7/24/2010 6:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 8 13 Yes 2353 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM ASANA XL 12 16 Yes 2354 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM ASANA XL 12 16 Yes 2355 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 16 Yes 2356 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 16 Yes 2357 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM ASANA XL 12 16 Yes 2358 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 16 Yes 2359 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM ASANA XL 12 16 Yes 2360 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 16 Yes 2361 7/25/2010 11:00 :00 AM ASANA XL 12 16 Yes 2362 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM ASANA XL 12 16 Yes 2363 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 16 Yes 2364 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 16 Yes 2365 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM ASANA XL 12 16 Yes 2366 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM ASANA XL 12 16 Yes 2367 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 16 Yes 2368 7/25/2010 11:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 16 Yes 2369 7/29/2010 3:00:00 PM WARRIOR ZT 12 18 Yes 2370 7/31/2010 1:15:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 19 30 Yes 2371 8/3/2010 3:30:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 13 23 Yes 2372 8/4/2010 10:35:00 AM Bird Shield 13 23 Yes 2373 8/4/2010 10:20:00 AM Bird Shield 11 19 Yes 2374 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 1 5 Yes 2375 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 1 5 Yes 2376 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2377 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2378 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 1 5 Yes 2379 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes
61 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 111 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8055 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2380 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 1 5 Yes 2381 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2382 8/4/2010 10:45:00 AM Bird Shield 13 23 Yes 2383 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 1 5 Yes 2384 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2385 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Assail 70WP 1 5 Yes 2386 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2387 8/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Affinity 5 12 Yes 2388 8/6/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 5 12 Yes 2389 8/11/2010 7:45:00 AM Affinity 8 23 Yes 2390 8/11/2010 7:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 8 23 Yes 2391 8/14/2010 11:30:00 AM ASANA XL 13 20 Yes 2392 8/14/2010 11:30:00 AM ASANA XL 13 20 Yes 2393 8/14/2010 11:30:00 AM ASANA XL 13 20 Yes 2394 8/14/2010 11:30:00 AM ASANA XL 13 20 Yes 2395 8/16/2010 4:54:00 PM ASANA XL 12 22 Yes 2396 8/16/2010 4:40:00 PM ASANA XL 12 22 Yes 2397 8/24/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 2 6 2398 8/24/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 2 6 2399 8/24/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 2 6 2400 8/24/2010 664500:45:00 AM REGLONE 2 6 2401 8/24/2010 6:45:00 AM REGLONE 2 6 2402 8/30/2010 4:30:00 PM Surround WP 9 13 Yes 2403 8/30/2010 4:30:00 PM Surround WP 9 13 Yes 2404 9/2/2010 6:45:00 AM Harmony GT XP 8 11 Yes 2405 9/2/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 8 11 Yes 2406 9/2/2010 6:45:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 8 11 Yes 2407 9/3/2010 11:30:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 23 Yes 2408 9/3/2010 11:30:00 AM Assail 70WP 12 23 Yes 2409 9/10/2010 2:00:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 2410 9/10/2010 2:00:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 2411 9/10/2010 2:00:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 2412 9/10/2010 2:00:00 PM EF 300 Missing WS Missing WS 2413 9/14/2010 1:00:00 PM Bird Shield 9 18 Yes 2414 9/16/2010 6:30:00 AM REGLONE 8 16 Yes 2415 9/18/2010 9:10:00 AM Intrro 10 14 Yes 2416 10/1/2010 6:30:00 AM Affinity 6 8 2417 10/1/2010 6:30:00 AM Harmony GT XP 6 8 2418 10/1/2010 6:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 6 8
62 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 112 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8056 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2419 10/3/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite Missing WS Missing WS 2420 10/3/2010 2:30:00 PM RoundUp Orginal Max Missing WS Missing WS 2421 10/3/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite Missing WS Missing WS 2422 10/6/2010 5:30:00 PM Honcho Plus 9 14 Yes 2423 10/6/2010 5:30:00 PM Honcho Plus 9 14 Yes 2424 10/6/2010 5:30:00 PM Intrro 9 14 Yes 2425 10/6/2010 5:30:00 PM Intrro 9 14 Yes 2426 10/8/2010 11:45:00 AM ASANA XL 18 30 Yes 2427 10/8/2010 11:45:00 AM ASANA XL 18 30 Yes 2428 10/8/2010 11:45:00 AM Assail 70WP 18 30 Yes 2429 10/8/2010 11:45:00 AM Assail 70WP 18 30 Yes 2430 10/9/2010 7:30:00 AM Dual II Magnum 4 8 2431 10/9/2010 7:30:00 AM Dual II Magnum 4 8 2432 10/9/2010 7:30:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 4 8 2433 10/9/2010 7:30:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 4 8 2434 10/12/2010 5:30:00 PM Surround WP 8 12 Yes 2435 10/12/2010 5:30:00 PM Surround WP 8 12 Yes 2436 10/12/2010 5:30:00 PM Surround WP 8 12 Yes 2437 10/12/2010 4:45:00 PM Bird Shield 9 12 Yes 2438 10/12/2010 4:45:00 PM Bird Shield 9 12 Yes 2439 10/12/2010 661500:15:00 PM REGLONE 4 10 Yes 2440 10/12/2010 6:15:00 PM REGLONE 4 10 Yes 2441 10/14/2010 6:55:00 PM Dual II Magnum 8 16 Yes 2442 10/14/2010 6:55:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 8 16 Yes 2443 10/14/2010 6:35:00 PM Dual II Magnum 8 16 Yes 2444 10/14/2010 6:35:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 8 16 Yes 2445 10/15/2010 10:50:00 AM Ignite 12 22 Yes 2446 10/19/2010 6:40:00 AM BASAGRAN 10 13 Yes 2447 10/19/2010 6:40:00 AM BASAGRAN 10 13 Yes 2448 10/19/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 10 13 Yes 2449 10/19/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 10 13 Yes 2450 10/19/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 10 13 Yes 2451 10/19/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 10 13 Yes 2452 10/20/2010 7:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 2 7 2453 10/20/2010 7:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 2 7 2454 10/20/2010 7:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 2 7 2455 10/20/2010 7:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 2 7 2456 10/20/2010 7:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 2 7 2457 10/22/2010 6:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 6
63 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 113 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8057 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2458 10/22/2010 6:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 6 2459 10/22/2010 6:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 6 2460 10/22/2010 6:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 6 2461 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Dual II Magnum 12 20 Yes 2462 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2463 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Dual II Magnum 12 20 Yes 2464 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2465 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Dual II Magnum 12 20 Yes 2466 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2467 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Dual II Magnum 12 20 Yes 2468 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2469 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Dual II Magnum 12 20 Yes 2470 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2471 10/26/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 4 8 2472 10/26/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 4 8 2473 10/26/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 4 8 2474 10/26/2010 6:15:00 AM Honcho Plus 5 9 Yes 2475 10/27/2010 6:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 7 12 Yes 2476 10/27/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 13 22 Yes 2477 10/27/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 13 22 Yes 2478 10/27/2010 113000:30:00 PM RRdUoundUp OiOrgina l Max 16 28 Yes 2479 10/27/2010 1:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 16 28 Yes 2480 10/27/2010 7:00:00 AM Dual II Magnum 7 12 Yes 2481 10/27/2010 11:30:00 AM Ignite 14 24 Yes 2482 10/27/2010 11:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 14 24 Yes 2483 10/27/2010 9:15:00 AM Ignite 1 8 Yes 2484 10/27/2010 9:15:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 1 8 Yes 2485 10/28/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 9 19 Yes 2486 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes 2487 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes 2488 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes 2489 10/28/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 9 19 Yes 2490 10/28/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 9 19 Yes 2491 10/28/2010 6:30:00 AM REGLONE 1 6 Yes 2492 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes 2493 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes 2494 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes 2495 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes 2496 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes
64 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 114 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8058 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2497 10/28/2010 5:00:00 PM BASAGRAN 13 23 Yes 2498 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2499 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2500 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2501 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2502 11/2/2010 6:30:00 AM REGLONE 7 13 Yes 2503 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2504 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2505 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2506 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2507 11/2/2010 2:15:00 PM Dual II Magnum 13 19 Yes 2508 11/2/2010 2:15:00 PM Dual II Magnum 13 19 Yes 2509 11/2/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 14 Yes 2510 11/3/2010 6:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 10 Yes 2511 11/3/2010 6:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 10 Yes 2512 11/3/2010 6:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 10 Yes 2513 11/3/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 9 11 Yes 2514 11/3/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 9 11 Yes 2515 11/3/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 9 11 Yes 2516 11/3/2010 5:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 7 11 Yes 2517 11/3/2010 550000:00:00 PM PPdrovado 116.6 9 11 Yes 2518 11/3/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 9 11 Yes 2519 11/3/2010 5:45:00 PM Provado 1.6 4 9 Yes 2520 11/5/2010 6:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 7 18 Yes 2521 11/5/2010 6:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 7 18 Yes 2522 11/5/2010 6:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 7 18 Yes 2523 11/5/2010 6:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 7 18 Yes 2524 11/5/2010 6:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 7 18 Yes 2525 11/5/2010 4:30:00 PM BASAGRAN 8 14 Yes 2526 11/5/2010 4:30:00 PM BASAGRAN 8 14 Yes 2527 11/5/2010 4:30:00 PM BASAGRAN 8 14 Yes 2528 11/5/2010 4:30:00 PM BASAGRAN 8 14 Yes 2529 11/5/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 280 SL 10 20 Yes 2530 11/5/2010 11:00:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 10 20 Yes 2531 11/5/2010 5:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 6 13 Yes 2532 11/5/2010 5:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 6 13 Yes 2533 11/5/2010 5:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 6 13 Yes 2534 11/5/2010 12:00:00 PM Ignite 9 20 Yes 2535 11/5/2010 12:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 9 20 Yes
65 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 115 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8059 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2536 11/5/2010 5:15:00 PM BASAGRAN 6 13 Yes 2537 11/6/2010 10:15:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 2538 11/6/2010 10:15:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 2539 11/6/2010 11:00:00 AM Intrro 8 14 Yes 2540 11/6/2010 11:20:00 AM Intrro 8 21 Yes 2541 11/7/2010 7:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 6 8 2542 11/7/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 15 27 Yes 2543 11/7/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 15 27 Yes 2544 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2545 11/7/2010 7:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 6 8 2546 11/7/2010 7:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 6 8 2547 11/7/2010 7:45:00 AM Dual II Magnum 6 8 2548 11/7/2010 7:00:00 AM Dual II Magnum 7 10 Yes 2549 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2550 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2551 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2552 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2553 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2554 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2555 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2556 11/7/2010 11:00 :00 AM SSdurround WP 14 23 Yes 2557 11/7/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 15 27 Yes 2558 11/7/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 15 27 Yes 2559 11/7/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 15 27 Yes 2560 11/7/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 15 27 Yes 2561 11/7/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 15 27 Yes 2562 11/7/2010 12:00:00 PM Surround WP 15 27 Yes 2563 11/7/2010 6:15:00 AM Intrro 6 10 Yes 2564 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2565 11/7/2010 11:00:00 AM Surround WP 14 23 Yes 2566 11/9/2010 1:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 14 21 Yes 2567 11/9/2010 1:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 14 21 Yes 2568 11/9/2010 2:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 13 20 Yes 2569 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2570 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2571 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2572 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2573 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2574 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes
66 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 116 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8060 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2575 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2576 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2577 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2578 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2579 11/10/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 15 Yes 2580 11/11/2010 8:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 7 10 Yes 2581 11/11/2010 8:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 7 10 Yes 2582 11/11/2010 7:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 2583 11/11/2010 7:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 2584 11/11/2010 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 9 Yes 2585 11/11/2010 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 9 Yes 2586 11/11/2010 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 9 Yes 2587 11/11/2010 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 9 Yes 2588 11/11/2010 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 9 Yes 2589 11/11/2010 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 9 Yes 2590 11/11/2010 8:20:00 PM Dual II Magnum 4 9 Yes 2591 11/11/2010 7:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 2592 11/12/2010 6:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 7 11 Yes 2593 11/12/2010 6:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 7 11 Yes 2594 11/12/2010 6:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 7 11 Yes 2595 11/12/2010 660000:00:00 PM PPdrovado 116.6 7 11 Yes 2596 11/12/2010 6:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 7 11 Yes 2597 11/12/2010 7:15:00 PM ASANA XL 5 9 Yes 2598 11/12/2010 7:15:00 PM ASANA XL 5 9 Yes 2599 11/12/2010 7:15:00 PM DIPEL 5 9 Yes 2600 11/12/2010 7:15:00 PM DIPEL 5 9 Yes 2601 11/12/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 11 22 Yes 2602 11/12/2010 7:00:00 PM Bird Shield 3 11 Yes 2603 11/12/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 9 11 Yes 2604 11/12/2010 7:30:00 PM ASANA XL 5 9 Yes 2605 11/12/2010 7:30:00 PM ASANA XL 5 9 Yes 2606 11/12/2010 7:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 9 Yes 2607 11/12/2010 7:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 9 Yes 2608 11/12/2010 6:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 4 11 Yes 2609 11/12/2010 6:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 4 11 Yes 2610 11/12/2010 7:00:00 AM Dual II Magnum 9 11 Yes 2611 11/12/2010 6:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 7 11 Yes 2612 11/13/2010 4:00:00 PM Ignite 13 21 Yes 2613 11/15/2010 10:50:00 AM Ignite 12 24 Yes
67 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 117 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8061 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2614 11/16/2010 2:45:00 PM Ignite 13 20 Yes 2615 11/16/2010 2:45:00 PM Ignite 13 20 Yes 2616 11/16/2010 2:45:00 PM Ignite 13 20 Yes 2617 11/16/2010 2:45:00 PM Ignite 13 20 Yes 2618 11/16/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 14 20 Yes 2619 11/16/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 14 20 Yes 2620 11/16/2010 2:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 14 20 Yes 2621 11/16/2010 2:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 14 20 Yes 2622 11/17/2010 1:00:00 PM Ignite Missing WS Missing WS 2623 11/17/2010 1:00:00 PM Ignite Missing WS Missing WS 2624 11/17/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 0 4 Yes 2625 11/17/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 0 4 Yes 2626 11/17/2010 2:15:00 PM Ignite 3 8 2627 11/17/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 0 0 Yes 2628 11/17/2010 6:30:00 PM Dual II Magnum 0 0 Yes 2629 11/18/2010 4:50:00 PM ASANA XL 14 26 Yes 2630 11/18/2010 4:57:00 PM ASANA XL 14 26 Yes 2631 11/18/2010 4:57:00 PM DIPEL 14 26 Yes 2632 11/18/2010 4:50:00 PM DIPEL 14 26 Yes 2633 11/18/2010 5:10:00 PM ASANA XL 8 19 Yes 2634 11/18/2010 551800:18:00 PM ASANA XL 8 19 Yes 2635 11/18/2010 5:18:00 PM DIPEL 8 19 Yes 2636 11/18/2010 5:10:00 PM DIPEL 8 19 Yes 2637 11/18/2010 1:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 10 13 Yes 2638 11/18/2010 1:00:00 PM Ignite 10 13 Yes 2639 11/18/2010 1:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 10 13 Yes 2640 11/19/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 2641 11/19/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 2642 11/19/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 2643 11/19/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 2644 11/19/2010 5:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 2645 11/19/2010 6:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 2 5 2646 11/19/2010 6:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 2 5 2647 11/19/2010 6:10:00 PM Provado 1.6 2 5 2648 11/19/2010 3:45:00 PM Ignite 10 15 Yes 2649 11/19/2010 5:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 2 8 2650 11/19/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 280SL 9 13 Yes 2651 11/19/2010 11:00:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 9 13 Yes 2652 11/19/2010 5:45:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 4 Yes
68 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 118 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8062 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2653 11/20/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 7 10 Yes 2654 11/20/2010 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 7 10 Yes 2655 11/20/2010 2:45:00 PM XENTARI 7 10 Yes 2656 11/20/2010 2:45:00 PM XENTARI 7 10 Yes 2657 11/20/2010 2:55:00 PM Radiant SC 7 10 Yes 2658 11/20/2010 2:55:00 PM Radiant SC 7 10 Yes 2659 11/20/2010 2:55:00 PM XENTARI 7 10 Yes 2660 11/20/2010 2:55:00 PM XENTARI 7 10 Yes 2661 11/20/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 9 12 Yes 2662 11/20/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 8 11 Yes 2663 11/21/2010 9:30:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 2664 11/21/2010 9:30:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 2665 11/21/2010 9:30:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 2666 11/21/2010 9:45:00 AM Assail 70WP Missing WS Missing WS 2667 11/21/2010 9:00:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 2668 11/22/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 4 6 2669 11/22/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 4 6 2670 11/22/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 4 6 2671 11/22/2010 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 4 6 2672 11/22/2010 7:10:00 PM ASANA XL 4 6 2673 11/22/2010 771000:10:00 PM ASANA XL 4 6 2674 11/22/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 10 13 Yes 2675 11/22/2010 6:30:00 PM ASANA XL 3 5 2676 11/22/2010 6:25:00 PM ASANA XL 3 5 2677 11/22/2010 6:25:00 PM ASANA XL 3 5 2678 11/23/2010 5:35:00 PM ASANA XL 1 5 Yes 2679 11/23/2010 5:40:00 PM ASANA XL 1 5 Yes 2680 11/23/2010 5:30:00 PM ASANA XL 4 7 2681 11/23/2010 5:40:00 PM Coragen 1 5 Yes 2682 11/23/2010 5:30:00 PM Coragen 4 7 2683 11/23/2010 5:35:00 PM Coragen 1 5 Yes 2684 11/23/2010 5:30:00 PM DIPEL 4 7 2685 11/23/2010 5:35:00 PM DIPEL 1 5 Yes 2686 11/23/2010 5:40:00 PM DIPEL 1 5 Yes 2687 11/23/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 11 18 Yes 2688 11/23/2010 6:20:00 PM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2689 11/23/2010 6:20:00 PM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2690 11/23/2010 6:20:00 PM Coragen 1 6 Yes 2691 11/23/2010 6:20:00 PM Coragen 1 6 Yes
69 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 119 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8063 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2692 11/23/2010 6:20:00 PM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2693 11/23/2010 6:20:00 PM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2694 11/24/2010 2:55:00 PM Ignite 7 16 Yes 2695 11/25/2010 9:00:00 AM Intrro 10 21 Yes 2696 11/25/2010 8:00:00 AM Intrro 6 11 Yes 2697 11/25/2010 8:30:00 AM Intrro 8 21 Yes 2698 11/25/2010 8:00:00 AM Intrro 6 11 Yes 2699 11/26/2010 2:00:00 PM Buctril 4EC 16 26 Yes 2700 11/26/2010 2:00:00 PM Buctril 4EC 16 26 Yes 2701 11/26/2010 10:50:00 AM Buctril 12 21 Yes 2702 11/26/2010 11:10:00 AM Buctril 4EC 11 21 Yes 2703 11/26/2010 3:45:00 PM Ignite 11 20 Yes 2704 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2705 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2706 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 2707 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2708 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2709 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 2710 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2711 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2712 11/27/2010 770000:00:00 AM RRditadiant SC 1 6 Yes 2713 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2714 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2715 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 2716 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2717 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2718 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 2719 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2720 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2721 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 2722 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2723 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2724 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 2725 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 2726 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM DIPEL 1 6 Yes 2727 11/27/2010 7:00:00 AM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 2728 11/27/2010 10:40:00 AM Ignite 16 28 Yes 2729 11/29/2010 1:30:00 PM Radiant SC 9 15 Yes 2730 11/29/2010 4:30:00 PM Radiant SC 8 18 Yes
70 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 120 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8064 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2731 11/29/2010 4:42:00 PM DIPEL 4 11 Yes 2732 11/29/2010 4:40:00 PM DIPEL 4 11 Yes 2733 11/29/2010 4:50:00 PM DIPEL 4 11 Yes 2734 11/29/2010 4:46:00 PM DIPEL 4 11 Yes 2735 11/29/2010 4:30:00 PM DIPEL 8 18 Yes 2736 11/29/2010 4:35:00 PM DIPEL 4 11 Yes 2737 11/29/2010 4:42:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2738 11/29/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2739 11/29/2010 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 18 Yes 2740 11/29/2010 4:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2741 11/29/2010 4:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2742 11/29/2010 4:46:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2743 11/29/2010 4:55:00 PM DIPEL 4 11 Yes 2744 11/29/2010 4:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2745 11/30/2010 7:10:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 12 Yes 2746 11/30/2010 7:15:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 12 Yes 2747 11/30/2010 8:45:00 AM Radiant SC 10 19 Yes 2748 11/30/2010 6:50:00 PM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2749 11/30/2010 8:50:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 8 2750 11/30/2010 6:55:00 PM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2751 11/30/2010 10:45 :00 AM RRditadiant SC 11 22 Yes 2752 11/30/2010 8:40:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 8 2753 11/30/2010 8:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 2 7 2754 11/30/2010 8:35:00 PM Provado 1.6 3 8 2755 11/30/2010 3:15:00 PM Ignite 10 19 Yes 2756 11/30/2010 7:45:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 15 Yes 2757 11/30/2010 8:10:00 PM Provado 1.6 2 7 2758 11/30/2010 7:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 12 Yes 2759 11/30/2010 7:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 8 12 Yes 2760 11/30/2010 8:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 2 7 2761 12/1/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 12 23 Yes 2762 12/1/2010 3:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 12 23 Yes 2763 12/1/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 12 23 Yes 2764 12/2/2010 1:05:00 PM Ignite 12 24 Yes 2765 12/2/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 13 22 Yes 2766 12/2/2010 3:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 13 22 Yes 2767 12/3/2010 1:15:00 PM Radiant SC 14 30 Yes 2768 12/4/2010 2:30:00 PM Buctril 4EC 12 23 Yes 2769 12/4/2010 10:00:00 AM Ignite 12 25 Yes
71 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 121 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8065 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2770 12/4/2010 2:30:00 PM Buctril 4EC 12 23 Yes 2771 12/4/2010 2:30:00 PM Buctril 4EC 12 23 Yes 2772 12/4/2010 7:00:00 AM REGLONE 2 11 Yes 2773 12/4/2010 12:15:00 PM Buctril 4EC 13 29 Yes 2774 12/4/2010 11:05:00 AM Buctril 4EC 14 26 Yes 2775 12/4/2010 3:35:00 PM Ignite 13 24 Yes 2776 12/5/2010 8:30:00 AM Buctril 4EC 11 15 Yes 2777 12/5/2010 9:00:00 AM Buctril 4EC 9 12 Yes 2778 12/5/2010 10:00:00 AM Buctril 4EC 8 15 Yes 2779 12/5/2010 7:25:00 AM Intrro 11 15 Yes 2780 12/5/2010 8:15:00 AM Dual II Magnum 11 15 Yes 2781 12/5/2010 8:30:00 AM Dual II Magnum 11 15 Yes 2782 12/5/2010 7:00:00 AM Buctril 9 14 Yes 2783 12/5/2010 7:35:00 AM Intrro 11 14 Yes 2784 12/5/2010 8:25:00 AM Dual II Magnum 11 15 Yes 2785 12/6/2010 7:40:00 PM Coragen 4 7 2786 12/6/2010 7:30:00 PM Coragen 4 7 2787 12/6/2010 6:30:00 PM ASANA XL 0 6 Yes 2788 12/6/2010 6:30:00 PM DIPEL 0 6 Yes 2789 12/6/2010 7:50:00 PM Coragen 4 7 2790 12/6/2010 775900:59:00 PM Coragen 4 7 2791 12/6/2010 6:59:00 PM ASANA XL 0 4 Yes 2792 12/6/2010 6:59:00 PM DIPEL 0 4 Yes 2793 12/6/2010 6:50:00 PM ASANA XL 0 4 Yes 2794 12/6/2010 6:50:00 PM DIPEL 0 4 Yes 2795 12/6/2010 6:40:00 PM ASANA XL 0 4 Yes 2796 12/6/2010 6:40:00 PM DIPEL 0 4 Yes 2797 12/7/2010 6:50:00 PM BASAGRAN 0 2 Yes 2798 12/7/2010 7:04:00 PM BASAGRAN 1 5 Yes 2799 12/7/2010 7:13:00 PM BASAGRAN 1 5 Yes 2800 12/7/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 8 12 Yes 2801 12/7/2010 3:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 8 12 Yes 2802 12/7/2010 7:46:00 PM BASAGRAN 3 6 2803 12/8/2010 8:30:00 AM Ignite 8 11 Yes 2804 12/8/2010 8:00:00 AM Ignite 9 12 Yes 2805 12/13/2010 6:15:00 PM Coragen 1 7 Yes 2806 12/13/2010 6:25:00 PM Coragen 1 7 Yes 2807 12/13/2010 6:45:00 PM Coragen 0 1 Yes 2808 12/13/2010 6:35:00 PM Coragen 0 1 Yes
72 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 122 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8066 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2809 12/13/2010 6:50:00 PM Coragen 0 1 Yes 2810 12/13/2010 6:52:00 PM Coragen 0 1 Yes 2811 12/13/2010 6:05:00 PM Coragen 1 7 Yes 2812 12/13/2010 5:35:00 PM Coragen 4 9 Yes 2813 12/13/2010 5:45:00 PM Coragen 4 9 Yes 2814 12/13/2010 5:40:00 PM Coragen 4 9 Yes 2815 12/14/2010 6:10:00 PM Coragen 4 8 2816 12/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Coragen 4 8 2817 12/14/2010 6:20:00 PM Coragen 4 8 2818 12/14/2010 3:30:00 PM Radiant SC 13 21 Yes 2819 12/14/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 13 21 Yes 2820 12/14/2010 6:15:00 PM Coragen 4 8 2821 12/14/2010 5:40:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2822 12/14/2010 5:50:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2823 12/14/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 13 21 Yes 2824 12/14/2010 5:59:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2825 12/14/2010 5:55:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2826 12/14/2010 4:45:00 PM Coragen 7 12 Yes 2827 12/14/2010 5:00:00 PM Coragen 7 12 Yes 2828 12/15/2010 3:00:00 PM Ignite 15 27 Yes 2829 12/15/2010 333000:30:00 PM RRditadiant SC 17 24 Yes 2830 12/16/2010 4:30:00 PM Ignite 7 11 Yes 2831 12/16/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 9 12 Yes 2832 12/16/2010 8:00:00 AM Ignite 11 14 Yes 2833 12/16/2010 7:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 1 5 Yes 2834 12/16/2010 7:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 1 5 Yes 2835 12/16/2010 5:25:00 PM Intrro 2 6 2836 12/16/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 9 15 Yes 2837 12/16/2010 7:35:00 PM Provado 1.6 4 6 2838 12/16/2010 2:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 9 15 Yes 2839 12/16/2010 6:50:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 5 Yes 2840 12/16/2010 6:40:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 5 Yes 2841 12/16/2010 6:20:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 0 Yes 2842 12/16/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 5 10 Yes 2843 12/16/2010 11:00:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 5 10 Yes 2844 12/16/2010 6:07:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 0 Yes 2845 12/16/2010 6:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 1 Yes 2846 12/17/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 14 22 Yes 2847 12/17/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 14 21 Yes
73 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 123 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8067 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2848 12/17/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 17 25 Yes 2849 12/17/2010 1:40:00 PM Ignite 17 25 Yes 2850 12/18/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 10 15 Yes 2851 12/18/2010 12:30:00 PM Ignite 9 13 Yes 2852 12/20/2010 2:30:00 PM Ignite 8 16 Yes 2853 12/20/2010 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 8 16 Yes 2854 12/20/2010 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 8 16 Yes 2855 12/21/2010 3:30:00 PM Ignite 8 14 Yes 2856 12/22/2010 4:00:00 PM Radiant SC 3 8 2857 12/22/2010 1:30:00 PM Ignite 6 10 Yes 2858 12/22/2010 1:30:00 PM Ignite 6 10 Yes 2859 12/23/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 5 10 Yes 2860 12/23/2010 11:00:00 AM Radiant SC 5 10 Yes 2861 12/23/2010 3:10:00 PM Radiant SC 10 15 Yes 2862 12/23/2010 11:00:00 AM Ignite 5 10 Yes 2863 12/25/2010 8:00:00 AM ASANA XL 9 11 Yes 2864 12/25/2010 8:00:00 AM LANNATE LV 9 11 Yes 2865 12/25/2010 8:00:00 AM Coragen 9 11 Yes 2866 12/25/2010 12:35:00 PM ASANA XL 8 14 Yes 2867 12/25/2010 12:35:00 PM LANNATE LV 8 14 Yes 2868 12/25/2010 112000:20:00 PM ASANA XL 8 13 Yes 2869 12/25/2010 1:20:00 PM LANNATE LV 8 13 Yes 2870 12/25/2010 1:10:00 PM ASANA XL 8 13 Yes 2871 12/25/2010 1:10:00 PM LANNATE LV 8 13 Yes 2872 12/25/2010 12:15:00 PM ASANA XL 10 18 Yes 2873 12/25/2010 12:15:00 PM LANNATE LV 10 18 Yes 2874 12/25/2010 12:30:00 PM ASANA XL 10 18 Yes 2875 12/25/2010 12:30:00 PM LANNATE LV 10 18 Yes 2876 12/25/2010 12:25:00 PM ASANA XL 10 18 Yes 2877 12/25/2010 12:25:00 PM LANNATE LV 10 18 Yes 2878 12/28/2010 4:30:00 PM Radiant SC 7 14 Yes 2879 12/28/2010 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 11 18 Yes 2880 12/28/2010 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 11 19 Yes 2881 12/29/2010 4:00:00 PM Radiant SC 8 14 Yes 2882 12/29/2010 1:00:00 PM Radiant SC 8 13 Yes 2883 12/29/2010 10:00:00 AM Radiant SC 4 8 2884 12/30/2010 3:20:00 PM Radiant SC 11 20 Yes 2885 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2886 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes
74 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 124 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8068 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2887 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2888 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM QUADRIS 8 13 Yes 2889 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2890 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM QUADRIS 8 13 Yes 2891 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2892 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM QUADRIS 8 13 Yes 2893 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2894 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM QUADRIS 8 13 Yes 2895 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2896 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM QUADRIS 8 13 Yes 2897 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2898 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM QUADRIS 8 13 Yes 2899 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2900 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 2901 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2902 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 2903 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2904 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 2905 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2906 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 2907 1/1/2011 220000:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2908 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 2909 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2910 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM QUADRIS 8 13 Yes 2911 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2912 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 2913 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2914 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 2915 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2916 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2917 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Headline 6 10 Yes 2918 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Headline 6 10 Yes 2919 1/1/2011 12:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 11 Yes 2920 1/1/2011 12:30:00 PM TILT 6 11 Yes 2921 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2922 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Headline 6 10 Yes 2923 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2924 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Headline 6 10 Yes 2925 1/1/2011 12:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 11 Yes
75 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 125 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8069 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2926 1/1/2011 12:30:00 PM TILT 6 11 Yes 2927 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 4 11 Yes 2928 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM QUADRIS 4 11 Yes 2929 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 4 11 Yes 2930 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM QUADRIS 4 11 Yes 2931 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2932 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM TILT 5 9 Yes 2933 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 4 11 Yes 2934 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM QUADRIS 4 11 Yes 2935 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 6 8 2936 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 6 8 2937 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 6 8 2938 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 6 8 2939 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 6 8 2940 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 6 8 2941 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM QUADRIS 6 8 2942 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM QUADRIS 6 8 2943 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM QUADRIS 6 8 2944 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM QUADRIS 6 8 2945 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM QUADRIS 6 8 2946 1/1/2011 993000:30:00 AM QUADRIS 6 8 2947 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 6 8 2948 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Intrepid 2F 8 12 Yes 2949 1/1/2011 9:30:00 AM QUADRIS 6 8 2950 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM QUADRIS 8 12 Yes 2951 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2952 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM TILT 5 9 Yes 2953 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2954 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM TILT 5 9 Yes 2955 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Coragen 8 12 Yes 2956 1/1/2011 2:00:00 PM Headline 8 12 Yes 2957 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 4 11 Yes 2958 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 4 11 Yes 2959 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM QUADRIS 4 11 Yes 2960 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM QUADRIS 4 11 Yes 2961 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM Coragen 5 9 Yes 2962 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2963 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2964 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM TILT 5 9 Yes
76 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 126 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8070 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 2965 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM TILT 5 9 Yes 2966 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM TILT 5 9 Yes 2967 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 4 11 Yes 2968 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM QUADRIS 4 11 Yes 2969 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2970 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM TILT 5 9 Yes 2971 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 4 11 Yes 2972 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM QUADRIS 4 11 Yes 2973 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM Intrepid 2F 4 11 Yes 2974 1/1/2011 10:30:00 AM QUADRIS 4 11 Yes 2975 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 9 Yes 2976 1/1/2011 11:45:00 AM TILT 5 9 Yes 2977 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Coragen 6 10 Yes 2978 1/1/2011 3:00:00 PM Headline 6 10 Yes 2979 1/3/2011 1:40:00 PM Ignite 14 24 Yes 2980 1/3/2011 2:40:00 PM Ignite 15 23 Yes 2981 1/4/2011 8:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 2 7 2982 1/4/2011 8:00:00 PM QUADRIS 2 7 2983 1/4/2011 6:00:00 PM Coragen 5 13 Yes 2984 1/4/2011 6:00:00 PM Headline 5 13 Yes 2985 1/4/2011 335000:50:00 PM IIitgnite 6 14 Yes 2986 1/6/2011 6:30:00 PM Intrro 3 8 2987 1/6/2011 6:30:00 PM Intrro 3 8 2988 1/6/2011 6:30:00 PM Intrro 3 8 2989 1/6/2011 6:30:00 PM Intrro 3 8 2990 1/7/2011 3:15:00 PM Radiant SC 11 16 Yes 2991 1/7/2011 10:50:00 AM Affinity 4 10 Yes 2992 1/7/2011 10:50:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 4 10 Yes 2993 1/8/2011 4:45:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 2994 1/8/2011 4:45:00 PM QUADRIS 11 19 Yes 2995 1/8/2011 4:30:00 PM ASANA XL 10 22 Yes 2996 1/8/2011 4:30:00 PM QUADRIS 10 22 Yes 2997 1/8/2011 4:30:00 PM ASANA XL 10 22 Yes 2998 1/8/2011 4:30:00 PM QUADRIS 10 22 Yes 2999 1/8/2011 4:50:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 3000 1/8/2011 4:50:00 PM QUADRIS 11 19 Yes 3001 1/8/2011 4:50:00 PM ASANA XL 11 19 Yes 3002 1/8/2011 4:50:00 PM QUADRIS 11 19 Yes 3003 1/8/2011 11:40:00 AM ASANA XL 10 19 Yes
77 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 127 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8071 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3004 1/8/2011 11:40:00 AM QUADRIS 10 19 Yes 3005 1/8/2011 12:20:00 PM ASANA XL 10 21 Yes 3006 1/8/2011 12:20:00 PM QUADRIS 10 21 Yes 3007 1/8/2011 2:15:00 PM Radiant SC 10 20 Yes 3008 1/8/2011 12:20:00 PM ASANA XL 10 21 Yes 3009 1/8/2011 12:20:00 PM QUADRIS 10 21 Yes 3010 1/8/2011 8:20:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 8 16 Yes 3011 1/8/2011 4:00:00 PM Radiant SC 12 22 Yes 3012 1/8/2011 10:55:00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 3013 1/8/2011 10:55:00 AM QUADRIS 6 12 Yes 3014 1/8/2011 5:45:00 PM ASANA XL 7 11 Yes 3015 1/8/2011 5:45:00 PM QUADRIS 7 11 Yes 3016 1/8/2011 5:30:00 PM ASANA XL 8 14 Yes 3017 1/8/2011 5:30:00 PM QUADRIS 8 14 Yes 3018 1/8/2011 11:15:00 AM ASANA XL 10 21 Yes 3019 1/8/2011 11:15:00 AM ASANA XL 10 21 Yes 3020 1/8/2011 11:15:00 AM QUADRIS 10 21 Yes 3021 1/8/2011 11:15:00 AM QUADRIS 10 21 Yes 3022 1/8/2011 11:05:00 AM ASANA XL 10 21 Yes 3023 1/8/2011 11:05:00 AM QUADRIS 10 21 Yes 3024 1/8/2011 11:00 :00 AM ASANA XL 6 12 Yes 3025 1/8/2011 11:00:00 AM QUADRIS 6 12 Yes 3026 1/10/2011 11:00:00 AM Radiant SC 7 20 Yes 3027 1/11/2011 8:05:00 PM Headline 5 7 3028 1/11/2011 8:05:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 3029 1/11/2011 7:15:00 PM Headline 6 8 3030 1/11/2011 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 8 3031 1/11/2011 4:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 3032 1/11/2011 4:20:00 PM TILT 6 11 Yes 3033 1/11/2011 4:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 3034 1/11/2011 4:25:00 PM TILT 6 11 Yes 3035 1/11/2011 8:25:00 PM Headline 5 7 3036 1/11/2011 8:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 3037 1/11/2011 7:55:00 PM Headline 5 8 3038 1/11/2011 7:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 8 3039 1/11/2011 7:45:00 PM Headline 5 8 3040 1/11/2011 7:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 8 3041 1/11/2011 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 11 Yes 3042 1/11/2011 4:45:00 PM TILT 7 11 Yes
78 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 128 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8072 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3043 1/11/2011 6:05:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 1 Yes 3044 1/11/2011 6:05:00 PM TILT 0 1 Yes 3045 1/11/2011 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 11 Yes 3046 1/11/2011 4:45:00 PM TILT 7 11 Yes 3047 1/11/2011 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 1 Yes 3048 1/11/2011 6:15:00 PM TILT 0 1 Yes 3049 1/11/2011 7:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 8 3050 1/11/2011 7:30:00 PM TILT 6 8 3051 1/11/2011 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC 7 11 Yes 3052 1/11/2011 1:00:00 PM Radiant SC 5 9 Yes 3053 1/11/2011 5:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 9 Yes 3054 1/11/2011 5:35:00 PM TILT 2 9 Yes 3055 1/11/2011 5:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 9 Yes 3056 1/11/2011 5:55:00 PM TILT 2 9 Yes 3057 1/11/2011 9:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 9 Yes 3058 1/11/2011 9:00:00 PM TILT 6 9 Yes 3059 1/11/2011 9:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 9 Yes 3060 1/11/2011 9:00:00 PM TILT 6 9 Yes 3061 1/11/2011 7:00:00 PM Headline 4 7 3062 1/11/2011 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 7 3063 1/17/2011 883000:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 8 3064 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 8 3065 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 5 8 3066 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM QUADRIS 5 8 3067 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM ASANA XL 5 8 3068 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 8 3069 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM QUADRIS 5 8 3070 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 8 3071 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 8 3072 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 5 8 3073 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM QUADRIS 5 8 3074 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 8 3075 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 8 3076 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 5 8 3077 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM QUADRIS 5 8 3078 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 3079 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3080 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 0 Yes 3081 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes
79 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 129 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8073 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3082 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 3083 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 3084 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3085 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3086 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3087 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 0 Yes 3088 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 0 Yes 3089 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 0 Yes 3090 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 3091 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3092 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 0 Yes 3093 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 3094 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3095 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 0 Yes 3096 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3097 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 8 3098 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 8 3099 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM PERMETHRIN 0 0 Yes 3100 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 5 8 3101 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 0 Yes 3102 1/17/2011 883000:30:00 PM QUADRIS 5 8 3103 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 0 Yes 3104 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 8 3105 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 8 3106 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 5 8 3107 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM QUADRIS 5 8 3108 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 8 3109 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM PERMETHRIN 5 8 3110 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM Provado 1.6 5 8 3111 1/17/2011 8:30:00 PM QUADRIS 5 8 3112 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 0 0 Yes 3113 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3114 1/17/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 0 0 Yes 3115 1/18/2011 11:30:00 AM RoundUp Weathermax 5 9 Yes 3116 1/18/2011 3:30:00 PM Radiant SC 3 9 Yes 3117 1/18/2011 5:10:00 PM Bird Shield 2 8 3118 1/18/2011 5:35:00 PM Bird Shield 1 6 Yes 3119 1/18/2011 5:30:00 PM Bird Shield 2 8 3120 1/18/2011 5:10:00 PM Bird Shield 2 8
80 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 130 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8074 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3121 1/18/2011 5:40:00 PM Bird Shield 1 6 Yes 3122 1/18/2011 3:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 3 9 Yes 3123 1/18/2011 12:20:00 PM Affinity 7 10 Yes 3124 1/18/2011 12:20:00 PM Harmony GT XP 7 10 Yes 3125 1/18/2011 12:20:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 7 10 Yes 3126 1/19/2011 8:00:00 PM Surround WP 6 8 3127 1/19/2011 12:48:00 PM Affinity 6 9 Yes 3128 1/19/2011 12:48:00 PM Harmony GT XP 6 9 Yes 3129 1/19/2011 8:00:00 PM Surround WP 6 8 3130 1/19/2011 8:00:00 PM Surround WP 6 8 3131 1/19/2011 8:00:00 PM Surround WP 6 8 3132 1/19/2011 8:00:00 PM Surround WP 6 8 3133 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3134 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3135 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3136 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3137 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3138 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3139 1/20/2011 6:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 7 12 Yes 3140 1/20/2011 6:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 7 12 Yes 3141 1/20/2011 441500:15:00 PM IIitgnite 10 18 Yes 3142 1/20/2011 7:00:00 PM Intrro 0 0 Yes 3143 1/20/2011 7:00:00 PM Intrro 0 0 Yes 3144 1/20/2011 7:00:00 PM Intrro 0 0 Yes 3145 1/20/2011 6:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 7 12 Yes 3146 1/21/2011 4:15:00 PM Radiant SC 13 23 Yes 3147 1/22/2011 8:30:00 AM REGLONE 7 12 Yes 3148 1/22/2011 8:25:00 AM REGLONE 7 12 Yes 3149 1/22/2011 3:30:00 PM Ignite 7 16 Yes 3150 1/22/2011 9:00:00 AM Intrro 6 9 Yes 3151 1/22/2011 7:40:00 AM REGLONE 7 11 Yes 3152 1/23/2011 10:00:00 AM Provado 1.6 7 14 Yes 3153 1/23/2011 10:00:00 AM Provado 1.6 7 14 Yes 3154 1/23/2011 9:20:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3155 1/23/2011 9:20:00 AM TILT 5 10 Yes 3156 1/23/2011 9:20:00 AM XENTARI 5 10 Yes 3157 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM DIPEL 5 10 Yes 3158 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3159 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 10 Yes
81 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 131 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8075 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3160 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM QUADRIS 5 10 Yes 3161 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM DIPEL 5 10 Yes 3162 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3163 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 10 Yes 3164 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM QUADRIS 5 10 Yes 3165 1/23/2011 9:30:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3166 1/23/2011 9:30:00 AM TILT 5 10 Yes 3167 1/23/2011 9:30:00 AM XENTARI 5 10 Yes 3168 1/23/2011 9:10:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3169 1/23/2011 9:10:00 AM TILT 5 10 Yes 3170 1/23/2011 9:10:00 AM XENTARI 5 10 Yes 3171 1/23/2011 9:05:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3172 1/23/2011 9:05:00 AM TILT 5 10 Yes 3173 1/23/2011 9:05:00 AM XENTARI 5 10 Yes 3174 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM DIPEL 5 10 Yes 3175 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3176 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 10 Yes 3177 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM QUADRIS 5 10 Yes 3178 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM DIPEL 5 10 Yes 3179 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3180 1/23/2011 990000:00:00 AM PPdrovado 116.6 5 10 Yes 3181 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM QUADRIS 5 10 Yes 3182 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM DIPEL 5 10 Yes 3183 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3184 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 10 Yes 3185 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM QUADRIS 5 10 Yes 3186 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM DIPEL 5 10 Yes 3187 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3188 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 10 Yes 3189 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM QUADRIS 5 10 Yes 3190 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM DIPEL 5 10 Yes 3191 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM PERMETHRIN 5 10 Yes 3192 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM Provado 1.6 5 10 Yes 3193 1/23/2011 9:00:00 AM QUADRIS 5 10 Yes 3194 1/23/2011 9:45:00 AM PERMETHRIN 7 14 Yes 3195 1/23/2011 9:45:00 AM TILT 7 14 Yes 3196 1/23/2011 9:45:00 AM XENTARI 7 14 Yes 3197 1/23/2011 10:15:00 AM PERMETHRIN 9 18 Yes 3198 1/23/2011 10:15:00 AM TILT 9 18 Yes
82 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 132 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8076 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3199 1/23/2011 10:15:00 AM XENTARI 9 18 Yes 3200 1/24/2011 7:00:00 PM ASANA XL 6 10 Yes 3201 1/24/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 6 10 Yes 3202 1/24/2011 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 6 10 Yes 3203 1/24/2011 7:00:00 PM QUADRIS 6 10 Yes 3204 1/26/2011 7:30:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3205 1/26/2011 7:30:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 0 0 Yes 3206 1/26/2011 7:20:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3207 1/26/2011 7:20:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 0 0 Yes 3208 1/26/2011 3:15:00 PM Radiant SC 14 23 Yes 3209 1/26/2011 1:00:00 PM Radiant SC 8 12 Yes 3210 1/26/2011 9:30:00 PM Assail 70WP 2 6 3211 1/26/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 3 9 Yes 3212 1/26/2011 7:00:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 3 9 Yes 3213 1/26/2011 9:00:00 PM Assail 70WP 0 2 Yes 3214 1/26/2011 9:30:00 PM Assail 70WP 2 6 3215 1/26/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 3 9 Yes 3216 1/26/2011 7:00:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 3 9 Yes 3217 1/26/2011 9:30:00 PM Assail 70WP 2 6 3218 1/26/2011 10:00:00 PM ASANA XL 1 6 Yes 3219 1/26/2011 10:00 :00 PM AAilssail 70WP 1 6 Yes 3220 1/26/2011 7:45:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3221 1/26/2011 7:45:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 0 0 Yes 3222 1/26/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 3 9 Yes 3223 1/26/2011 7:00:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 3 9 Yes 3224 1/26/2011 8:15:00 PM DIPEL 0 0 Yes 3225 1/26/2011 8:15:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 0 0 Yes 3226 1/26/2011 9:45:00 PM Assail 70WP 1 6 Yes 3227 1/27/2011 4:15:00 PM Radiant SC 13 22 Yes 3228 1/27/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 3 9 Yes 3229 1/27/2011 7:00:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 3 9 Yes 3230 1/27/2011 7:00:00 PM DIPEL 3 9 Yes 3231 1/27/2011 7:00:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 3 9 Yes 3232 1/27/2011 6:30:00 PM DIPEL 5 11 Yes 3233 1/27/2011 6:30:00 PM Perm‐UP 3.2EC 5 11 Yes 3234 1/28/2011 8:30:00 PM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 3235 1/28/2011 8:30:00 PM SUCCESS 1 6 Yes 3236 1/28/2011 8:20:00 AM REGLONE 4 11 Yes 3237 1/28/2011 8:00:00 PM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes
83 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 133 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8077 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3238 1/28/2011 8:00:00 PM SUCCESS 1 6 Yes 3239 1/28/2011 8:45:00 PM Radiant SC 2 7 3240 1/28/2011 8:45:00 PM SUCCESS 2 7 3241 1/28/2011 9:45:00 PM Intrro 3 7 3242 1/28/2011 9:00:00 PM Radiant SC 2 7 3243 1/28/2011 9:00:00 PM SUCCESS 2 7 3244 1/28/2011 9:00:00 PM Radiant SC 2 7 3245 1/28/2011 9:00:00 PM SUCCESS 2 7 3246 1/28/2011 8:00:00 PM Radiant SC 1 6 Yes 3247 1/28/2011 8:00:00 PM SUCCESS 1 6 Yes 3248 1/29/2011 7:15:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 10 Yes 3249 1/29/2011 7:15:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 10 Yes 3250 1/29/2011 1:00:00 PM Radiant SC 11 19 Yes 3251 1/29/2011 9:00:00 AM Radiant SC 5 9 Yes 3252 1/29/2011 8:15:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 9 Yes 3253 1/30/2011 8:00:00 AM BASAGRAN 6 10 Yes 3254 1/30/2011 8:00:00 AM BASAGRAN 6 10 Yes 3255 1/30/2011 8:30:00 AM PROWL H2O 4 10 Yes 3256 1/30/2011 8:30:00 AM PROWL H2O 4 10 Yes 3257 1/31/2011 4:30:00 PM Radiant SC 9 11 Yes 3258 2/1/2011 11:00 :00 AM RRditadiant SC 1 6 Yes 3259 2/1/2011 4:15:00 PM Radiant SC 9 16 Yes 3260 2/1/2011 1:45:00 PM Radiant SC 5 20 Yes 3261 2/2/2011 8:30:00 PM ASANA XL 3 6 3262 2/2/2011 8:30:00 PM QUADRIS 3 6 3263 2/2/2011 8:30:00 PM ASANA XL 3 6 3264 2/2/2011 8:30:00 PM QUADRIS 3 6 3265 2/2/2011 9:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 5 9 Yes 3266 2/2/2011 2:50:00 PM Radiant SC 9 13 Yes 3267 2/3/2011 11:45:00 AM Radiant SC 9 13 Yes 3268 2/3/2011 7:30:00 PM ASANA XL 0 2 Yes 3269 2/3/2011 7:30:00 PM ASANA XL 0 2 Yes 3270 2/3/2011 7:30:00 PM ASANA XL 0 2 Yes 3271 2/3/2011 4:15:00 PM Ignite 10 15 Yes 3272 2/4/2011 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 0 Yes 3273 2/4/2011 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 0 Yes 3274 2/4/2011 7:00:00 PM XENTARI 0 0 Yes 3275 2/4/2011 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 0 Yes 3276 2/4/2011 7:00:00 PM Provado 1.6 0 0 Yes
84 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 134 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8078 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3277 2/4/2011 7:00:00 PM XENTARI 0 0 Yes 3278 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3279 2/4/2011 3:45:00 PM Ignite 9 12 Yes 3280 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3281 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3282 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3283 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3284 2/5/2011 7:30:00 AM BASAGRAN 10 14 Yes 3285 2/5/2011 7:30:00 AM BASAGRAN 10 14 Yes 3286 2/5/2011 10:19:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 3287 2/5/2011 10:25:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 3288 2/5/2011 10:17:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 3289 2/5/2011 10:25:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 3290 2/5/2011 2:00:00 PM Kocide 3000 12 21 Yes 3291 2/5/2011 2:00:00 PM Kocide 3000 12 21 Yes 3292 2/5/2011 4:00:00 PM Radiant SC 7 15 Yes 3293 2/5/2011 11:00:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 6 12 Yes 3294 2/7/2011 5:35:00 PM ASANA XL 2 9 Yes 3295 2/7/2011 5:50:00 PM ASANA XL 2 9 Yes 3296 2/7/2011 5:30:00 PM ASANA XL 5 10 Yes 3297 2/7/2011 553000:30:00 PM ASANA XL 5 10 Yes 3298 2/7/2011 5:30:00 PM ASANA XL 5 10 Yes 3299 2/7/2011 2:30:00 PM Radiant SC 8 16 Yes 3300 2/7/2011 4:40:00 PM Radiant SC 7 12 Yes 3301 2/7/2011 10:45:00 AM Radiant SC 2 7 3302 2/7/2011 3:35:00 PM Radiant SC 8 15 Yes 3303 2/7/2011 12:30:00 PM Radiant SC 7 14 Yes 3304 2/8/2011 11:00:00 AM Ignite 8 14 Yes 3305 2/8/2011 4:00:00 PM Radiant SC 1 11 Yes 3306 2/9/2011 5:45:00 PM Surround WP 5 11 Yes 3307 2/9/2011 7:00:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 4 7 3308 2/9/2011 5:45:00 PM Surround WP 5 11 Yes 3309 2/9/2011 7:00:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 4 7 3310 2/9/2011 5:30:00 PM Surround WP 7 12 Yes 3311 2/9/2011 7:00:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 4 7 3312 2/9/2011 12:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 13 21 Yes 3313 2/9/2011 12:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 13 21 Yes 3314 2/9/2011 12:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 13 21 Yes 3315 2/9/2011 5:00:00 PM Surround WP 8 13 Yes
85 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 135 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8079 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3316 2/9/2011 7:00:00 AM WARRIOR ZT 4 7 3317 2/9/2011 2:15:00 PM Radiant SC 6 13 Yes 3318 2/9/2011 4:00:00 PM Radiant SC 9 15 Yes 3319 2/10/2011 4:30:00 PM Radiant SC 10 15 Yes 3320 2/11/2011 4:30:00 PM Actinovate AG 7 12 Yes 3321 2/11/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 3322 2/11/2011 4:30:00 PM Actinovate AG 7 12 Yes 3323 2/11/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 3324 2/11/2011 4:45:00 PM Actinovate AG 5 9 Yes 3325 2/11/2011 12:30:00 PM Ignite 5 8 3326 2/11/2011 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 9 Yes 3327 2/11/2011 12:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 5 8 3328 2/11/2011 7:00:00 PM Radiant SC 0 0 Yes 3329 2/11/2011 5:00:00 PM Actinovate AG 5 9 Yes 3330 2/11/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 9 Yes 3331 2/11/2011 12:00:00 PM Ignite 6 10 Yes 3332 2/11/2011 12:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 6 10 Yes 3333 2/11/2011 4:45:00 PM Actinovate AG 5 9 Yes 3334 2/11/2011 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 9 Yes 3335 2/11/2011 3:30:00 PM Radiant SC 8 12 Yes 3336 2/11/2011 11:00 :00 AM RRditadiant SC 6 10 Yes 3337 2/11/2011 5:30:00 PM Actinovate AG 4 8 3338 2/11/2011 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 3339 2/12/2011 11:00:00 AM Radiant SC 7 16 Yes 3340 2/14/2011 8:00:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 0 3 Yes 3341 2/14/2011 8:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 1 7 Yes 3342 2/14/2011 8:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 1 7 Yes 3343 2/14/2011 6:30:00 PM Harmony GT XP 0 6 Yes 3344 2/14/2011 6:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 0 6 Yes 3345 2/14/2011 6:30:00 PM Affinity 0 6 Yes 3346 2/14/2011 3:30:00 PM Radiant SC 6 11 Yes 3347 2/14/2011 5:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 5 10 Yes 3348 2/14/2011 8:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 1 7 Yes 3349 2/14/2011 5:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 5 10 Yes 3350 2/14/2011 5:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 5 10 Yes 3351 2/14/2011 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC 5 10 Yes 3352 2/15/2011 5:20:00 PM Surround WP 3 10 Yes 3353 2/15/2011 3:00:00 PM Ignite 8 15 Yes 3354 2/15/2011 5:20:00 PM Surround WP 3 10 Yes
86 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 136 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8080 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3355 2/15/2011 4:30:00 PM Surround WP 4 12 Yes 3356 2/15/2011 3:30:00 PM Radiant SC 7 18 Yes 3357 2/15/2011 5:40:00 PM Surround WP 3 11 Yes 3358 2/15/2011 4:00:00 PM Radiant SC 6 12 Yes 3359 2/15/2011 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 8 15 Yes 3360 2/16/2011 3:00:00 PM Radiant SC 6 14 Yes 3361 2/16/2011 5:30:00 PM Radiant SC 5 12 Yes 3362 2/16/2011 1:15:00 PM Radiant SC 8 20 Yes 3363 2/16/2011 4:05:00 PM Radiant SC 7 14 Yes 3364 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 Yes 3365 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 Yes 3366 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 Yes 3367 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 Yes 3368 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 Yes 3369 2/17/2011 4:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 7 14 Yes 3370 2/17/2011 4:45:00 PM Radiant SC 3 9 Yes 3371 2/18/2011 7:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 0 Yes 3372 2/18/2011 6:45:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 0 0 Yes 3373 2/18/2011 6:50:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 0 0 Yes 3374 2/18/2011 3:30:00 PM Radiant SC 9 13 Yes 3375 2/18/2011 113000:30:00 PM Harmony GT XP 9 14 Yes 3376 2/18/2011 1:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 9 14 Yes 3377 2/18/2011 1:30:00 PM Affinity 9 14 Yes 3378 2/18/2011 7:30:00 AM Intrro 7 14 Yes 3379 2/18/2011 7:30:00 AM Intrro 7 14 Yes 3380 2/18/2011 7:30:00 AM Intrro 7 14 Yes 3381 2/18/2011 7:30:00 AM Intrro 7 14 Yes 3382 2/18/2011 6:30:00 PM SEVIN XLR PLUS 0 1 Yes 3383 2/18/2011 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC 8 12 Yes 3384 2/19/2011 1:30:00 PM Radiant SC 1 8 Yes 3385 2/19/2011 10:30:00 AM Radiant SC 8 13 Yes 3386 2/21/2011 6:30:00 PM Surround WP 10 14 Yes 3387 2/21/2011 4:00:00 PM Radiant SC 6 13 Yes 3388 2/21/2011 7:00:00 PM Surround WP 9 13 Yes 3389 2/21/2011 6:30:00 PM Surround WP 10 14 Yes 3390 2/22/2011 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 5 Yes 3391 2/22/2011 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 5 Yes 3392 2/22/2011 6:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 5 Yes 3393 2/22/2011 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC 8 13 Yes
87 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 137 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8081 H: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Pesticide Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application Application wind speed wind speed or Record Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >8 mph? 3394 2/22/2011 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 8 3395 2/22/2011 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 3396 2/22/2011 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 3397 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM DIPEL 0 5 Yes 3398 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM Radiant SC 0 5 Yes 3399 2/23/2011 5:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 0 0 Yes 3400 2/23/2011 5:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 0 0 Yes 3401 2/23/2011 2:45:00 PM Radiant SC 4 13 Yes 3402 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM DIPEL 0 5 Yes 3403 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM DIPEL 0 5 Yes 3404 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM Radiant SC 0 5 Yes 3405 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM Radiant SC 0 5 Yes 3406 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM DIPEL 0 5 Yes 3407 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM Radiant SC 0 5 Yes 3408 2/23/2011 5:00:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 0 0 Yes 3409 2/23/2011 4:45:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 0 0 Yes 3410 2/23/2011 4:40:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 0 0 Yes 3411 2/23/2011 7:30:00 AM REGLONE 8 11 Yes 3412 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM DIPEL 0 5 Yes 3413 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM Radiant SC 0 5 Yes 3414 2/23/2011 773000:30:00 PM DIPEL 0 5 Yes 3415 2/23/2011 7:30:00 PM Radiant SC 0 5 Yes 3416 2/23/2011 6:30:00 PM REGLONE 2 8 3417 2/24/2011 7:30:00 PM Surround WP 4 8 3418 2/24/2011 6:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 6 Yes 3419 2/24/2011 7:30:00 PM Surround WP 4 8 3420 2/24/2011 6:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 6 Yes 3421 2/24/2011 7:30:00 PM Surround WP 4 8 3422 2/24/2011 6:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 6 Yes 3423 2/24/2011 2:00:00 PM Radiant SC 6 11 Yes 3424 2/24/2011 8:30:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 0 6 Yes 3425 2/24/2011 5:00:00 PM Radiant SC 6 10 Yes 3426 2/24/2011 1:50:00 PM Harmony GT XP 6 11 Yes 3427 2/24/2011 1:50:00 PM RoundUp Weathermax 6 11 Yes 3428 2/24/2011 1:50:00 PM Affinity 6 11 Yes 3429 2/24/2011 7:30:00 PM Surround WP 4 8 3430 2/24/2011 6:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 6 Yes
88 of 88 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 138 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8082 I: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Lorsban 4E Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 1 12/13/2009 7:52:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 2 12/13/2009 7:57:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 5 12/13/2009 8:01:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 8 12/13/2009 8:06:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 15 12/13/2009 7:38:00 AM LORSBAN 4E 12 16 Yes 35 12/15/2009 4:30:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 7 11 Yes 92 12/18/2009 5:42:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 93 12/18/2009 5:33:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 10 94 12/18/2009 5:36:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 95 12/18/2009 5:29:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 10 96 12/18/2009 5:50:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 97 12/18/2009 5:46:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 98 12/18/2009 5:39:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 14 Yes 99 12/18/2009 5:25:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 10 115 12/21/2009 6:19:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 186 12/24/2009 6:08:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 298 12/30/2009 9:14:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 0 1 Yes 299 12/30/2009 9:12:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 0 1 Yes 302 12/30/2009 8:55:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 0 3 Yes 416 1/11/2010 6:23:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 4 12 Yes 441 1/12/2010 550700:07:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 12 Yes 442 1/12/2010 5:11:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 5 12 Yes 443 1/12/2010 4:40:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 11 Yes 444 1/12/2010 5:03:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 6 11 Yes 549 1/22/2010 4:05:00 PM LORSBAN 4E 8 16 Yes 811 2/19/2010 5:55:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 812 2/19/2010 5:55:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 813 2/19/2010 5:50:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 894 2/28/2010 8:25:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 895 2/28/2010 8:25:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 916 3/6/2010 6:47:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 917 3/6/2010 6:35:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 918 3/6/2010 7:19:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 919 3/6/2010 7:36:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 920 3/6/2010 7:29:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 921 3/6/2010 7:09:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 922 3/6/2010 7:09:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 923 3/6/2010 7:31:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 925 3/6/2010 7:02:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS
1 of 2 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 139 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8083 I: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Lorsban 4E Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 926 3/6/2010 6:57:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 927 3/7/2010 10:12:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 928 3/7/2010 10:15:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 929 3/7/2010 10:15:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 930 3/7/2010 10:18:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 931 3/7/2010 10:27:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 1043 3/20/2010 7:55:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 1044 3/20/2010 7:45:00 AM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 1062 3/23/2010 5:08:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS 1101 3/26/2010 4:45:00 PM LORSBAN 4E Missing WS Missing WS
Label Criteria: "Apply only when wind speed is 3 to 10 mph as measured by an anemometer ." "Do not apply product when wind speed exceeds 10 mph." Contains: 44.9% chlorpyrifos
2 of 2 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 140 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8084 J: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Lorsban Advanced Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 1039 3/20/2010 8:42:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1042 3/20/2010 9:10:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1047 3/20/2010 8:32:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1048 3/20/2010 8:25:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1098 3/26/2010 6:32:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1099 3/26/2010 6:35:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1102 3/26/2010 6:25:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1103 3/26/2010 7:04:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1107 3/26/2010 6:59:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1108 3/26/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1168 4/2/2010 6:59:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1169 4/2/2010 6:59:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1192 4/2/2010 4:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1196 4/2/2010 4:20:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1200 4/2/2010 3:13:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1207 4/2/2010 3:35:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1208 4/2/2010 3:40:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1209 4/2/2010 3:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1313 4/11/2010 10:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1314 4/11/2010 10:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1316 4/11/2010 10:45 :00 AM Lorsban AdAdvancedvanced Missing WS Missing WS 1397 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1398 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1399 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1410 4/16/2010 5:59:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1441 4/18/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1442 4/18/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1444 4/18/2010 7:30:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1445 4/18/2010 7:30:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1446 4/18/2010 7:35:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1447 4/18/2010 7:35:00 AM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1512 4/23/2010 6:05:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1513 4/23/2010 6:05:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1514 4/23/2010 6:10:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1515 4/23/2010 6:15:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1516 4/23/2010 6:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1517 4/23/2010 6:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1519 4/23/2010 5:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 1729 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10
1 of 3 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 141 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8085 J: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Lorsban Advanced Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 1730 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 1731 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 1732 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 1733 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 1734 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 1735 5/8/2010 7:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 10 1736 5/8/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 13 Yes 1737 5/8/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 13 Yes 1738 5/8/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 13 Yes 2005 5/29/2010 8:10:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 8 2006 5/29/2010 8:10:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 8 2071 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 7 2074 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 7 2075 6/6/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 3 7 2127 6/11/2010 5:05:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 2128 6/11/2010 5:05:00 PM Lorsban Advanced Missing WS Missing WS 2260 6/28/2010 10:15:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 10 15 Yes 2285 7/1/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 9 12 Yes 2287 7/1/2010 6:45:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 9 12 Yes 2335 7/16/2010 4:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 10 16 Yes 2344 7/23/2010 11:00 :00 AM LLborsban Advanced 11 19 Yes 2348 7/23/2010 10:20:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 11 16 Yes 2376 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2377 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2379 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2381 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2384 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2386 8/4/2010 8:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 1 5 Yes 2432 10/9/2010 7:30:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 4 8 2433 10/9/2010 7:30:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 4 8 2442 10/14/2010 6:55:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 8 16 Yes 2444 10/14/2010 6:35:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 8 16 Yes 2449 10/19/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 10 13 Yes 2451 10/19/2010 7:00:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 10 13 Yes 2462 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2464 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2466 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2468 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes 2470 10/23/2010 12:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 12 20 Yes
2 of 3 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 142 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8086 J: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Lorsban Advanced Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 3248 1/29/2011 7:15:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 10 3249 1/29/2011 7:15:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 6 10 3252 1/29/2011 8:15:00 AM Lorsban Advanced 5 9 3265 2/2/2011 9:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 5 9 3341 2/14/2011 8:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 1 7 Yes 3342 2/14/2011 8:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 1 7 Yes 3348 2/14/2011 8:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 1 7 Yes 3371 2/18/2011 7:00:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 0 Yes 3418 2/24/2011 6:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 6 Yes 3420 2/24/2011 6:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 6 Yes 3422 2/24/2011 6:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 6 Yes 3430 2/24/2011 6:30:00 PM Lorsban Advanced 0 6 Yes
Label Criteria: "Apply only when wind speed is 3 to 10 mph as measured by an anemometer ." "Do not apply product when wind speed exceeds 10 mph." Contains: 40.2% chlorpyrifos
3 of 3 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 143 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8087 K: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Malathion 8 Aquamul Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 4 12/13/2009 9:14:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 7 12/13/2009 9:06:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 10 12/13/2009 9:28:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 12 12/13/2009 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 15 Yes 14 12/13/2009 8:38:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 15 Yes 17 12/13/2009 8:30:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 12 16 Yes 37 12/16/2009 5:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 38 12/16/2009 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 Yes 39 12/16/2009 5:22:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 40 12/16/2009 6:23:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 Yes 41 12/16/2009 6:13:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 Yes 42 12/16/2009 5:34:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 43 12/16/2009 5:47:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 51 12/16/2009 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 61 12/16/2009 6:39:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 5 Yes 66 12/17/2009 8:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 8 69 12/17/2009 8:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 73 12/17/2009 8:24:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 12 Yes 76 12/17/2009 8:36:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 79 12/17/2009 8:47:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 84 12/17/2009 8:54:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 88 12/18/2009 4:54:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 12 Yes 141 12///23/2009 6:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 162 12/23/2009 6:42:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 165 12/23/2009 6:46:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 242 12/28/2009 7:28:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 243 12/28/2009 8:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 244 12/28/2009 7:57:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 245 12/28/2009 7:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 246 12/28/2009 8:48:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 247 12/28/2009 8:53:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 248 12/28/2009 8:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 256 12/28/2009 7:09:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 258 12/28/2009 7:46:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 260 12/28/2009 8:42:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 355 1/7/2010 6:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 6 Yes 448 1/14/2010 8:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 0 Yes 505 1/18/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 9 506 1/18/2010 5:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 9 507 1/18/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 9 509 1/18/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 4 Yes 547 1/22/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 12 Yes
1 of 7 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 144 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8088 K: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Malathion 8 Aquamul Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 550 1/22/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 5 Yes 558 1/22/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 565 1/22/2010 5:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 621 1/28/2010 5:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 20 Yes 622 1/28/2010 5:47:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 20 Yes 623 1/28/2010 4:52:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 23 Yes 624 1/28/2010 5:10:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 11 20 Yes 625 1/28/2010 4:46:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 23 Yes 626 1/28/2010 5:02:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 23 Yes 640 1/28/2010 5:54:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 20 Yes 691 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 692 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 693 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 694 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 695 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 696 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 697 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 698 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 699 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 709 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 710 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 713 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 715 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 717 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 718 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 721 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 723 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 725 2/4/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 769 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 770 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 771 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 772 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 774 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 776 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 777 2/10/2010 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 780 2/10/2010 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 786 2/15/2010 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 789 2/15/2010 4:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 845 2/23/2010 7:12:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 847 2/23/2010 7:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 853 2/23/2010 7:31:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 982 3/14/2010 8:40:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS
2 of 7 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 145 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8089 K: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Malathion 8 Aquamul Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 987 3/14/2010 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1002 3/15/2010 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1003 3/15/2010 5:42:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1004 3/15/2010 5:37:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1005 3/15/2010 5:21:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1006 3/15/2010 5:13:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1007 3/15/2010 5:17:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1008 3/15/2010 6:22:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1009 3/15/2010 6:14:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1210 4/3/2010 8:12:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1211 4/3/2010 8:24:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1212 4/3/2010 7:18:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1213 4/3/2010 7:21:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1214 4/3/2010 7:20:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1215 4/3/2010 7:20:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1216 4/3/2010 10:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1217 4/3/2010 10:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1218 4/3/2010 7:27:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1220 4/6/2010 6:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1223 4/6/2010 6:47:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1226 4/6/2010 5:58:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1228 4/6/2010 6:45:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1230 4/6/2010 5:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1236 4/6/2010 6:59:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1238 4/6/2010 6:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1240 4/6/2010 6:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1243 4/6/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1244 4/6/2010 6:08:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1319 4/12/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1333 4/12/2010 6:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1334 4/12/2010 6:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1342 4/12/2010 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1343 4/12/2010 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1344 4/12/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1346 4/12/2010 6:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1351 4/13/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1352 4/13/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1353 4/13/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1443 4/18/2010 6:40:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1545 4/27/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1546 4/27/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1548 4/27/2010 4:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS
3 of 7 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 146 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8090 K: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Malathion 8 Aquamul Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 1549 4/27/2010 4:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1550 4/27/2010 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1551 4/27/2010 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1552 4/27/2010 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1600 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1601 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1619 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1620 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1621 5/2/2010 7:55:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1626 5/2/2010 8:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1629 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1632 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1635 5/2/2010 9:25:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1639 5/2/2010 7:35:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1640 5/2/2010 7:35:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1645 5/2/2010 7:20:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1646 5/2/2010 7:20:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 1795 5/12/2010 6:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1797 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1798 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1799 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1803 5/12/2010 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1805 5/12/2010 7:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1806 5/12/2010 7:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 1809 5/12/2010 5:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 18 Yes 1811 5/12/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1812 5/12/2010 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1813 5/12/2010 6:10:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1814 5/12/2010 6:10:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 1849 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1850 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1854 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1855 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1856 5/14/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 13 Yes 1859 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 11 Yes 1861 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 11 Yes 1864 5/14/2010 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 11 Yes 1868 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1869 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1871 5/14/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1960 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1961 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes
4 of 7 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 147 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8091 K: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Malathion 8 Aquamul Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 1966 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1967 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1968 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1972 5/27/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 12 Yes 1974 5/27/2010 5:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 9 1976 5/27/2010 5:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 7 Yes 1979 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1980 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1985 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1986 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 1987 5/27/2010 6:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 13 Yes 2055 6/4/2010 6:28:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 15 Yes 2056 6/4/2010 4:57:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 16 Yes 2058 6/4/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 16 Yes 2059 6/4/2010 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 15 Yes 2060 6/4/2010 4:48:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 16 Yes 2062 6/4/2010 6:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 15 Yes 2063 6/4/2010 5:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 10 15 Yes 2064 6/4/2010 6:05:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 15 Yes 2066 6/4/2010 5:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 19 Yes 2069 6/4/2010 5:21:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 19 Yes 2148 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2151 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2152 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2153 6/14/2010 2:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2158 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2159 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2160 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2164 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2166 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2167 6/14/2010 3:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2170 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2171 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2172 6/14/2010 2:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL Missing WS Missing WS 2258 6/28/2010 5:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 22 Yes 2268 6/28/2010 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 13 Yes 2271 6/28/2010 5:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 13 Yes 2272 6/28/2010 5:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 13 Yes 2273 6/28/2010 5:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 22 Yes 2274 6/28/2010 5:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 9 22 Yes 2277 6/28/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 13 Yes 2278 6/28/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 13 Yes
5 of 7 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 148 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8092 K: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Malathion 8 Aquamul Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 2279 6/28/2010 5:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 13 Yes 2292 7/3/2010 7:35:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 Yes 2293 7/3/2010 7:40:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 Yes 2294 7/3/2010 7:45:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 Yes 2295 7/3/2010 7:50:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 Yes 2296 7/3/2010 7:30:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 7 2297 7/3/2010 7:30:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 7 2298 7/3/2010 7:30:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 7 2299 7/3/2010 8:15:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 10 2300 7/3/2010 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 6 Yes 2301 7/3/2010 8:10:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 10 2336 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2337 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2338 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2339 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2340 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2341 7/20/2010 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 19 Yes 2737 11/29/2010 4:42:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2738 11/29/2010 4:50:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2739 11/29/2010 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 18 Yes 2740 11/29/2010 4:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2741 11/29/2010 4:40:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2742 11/29/2010 4:46:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2744 11/29/2010 4:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 11 Yes 2887 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2889 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2891 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2893 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2895 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2897 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 2909 1/1/2011 8:00:00 AM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3028 1/11/2011 8:05:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 3030 1/11/2011 7:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 8 3031 1/11/2011 4:20:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 3033 1/11/2011 4:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 11 Yes 3036 1/11/2011 8:25:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 7 3038 1/11/2011 7:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 8 3040 1/11/2011 7:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 8 3041 1/11/2011 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 11 Yes 3043 1/11/2011 6:05:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 1 Yes 3045 1/11/2011 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 11 Yes 3047 1/11/2011 6:15:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 1 Yes
6 of 7 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 149 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8093 K: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Malathion 8 Aquamul Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <3 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 3049 1/11/2011 7:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 8 3053 1/11/2011 5:35:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 9 Yes 3055 1/11/2011 5:55:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 2 9 Yes 3057 1/11/2011 9:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 9 3059 1/11/2011 9:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 6 9 3062 1/11/2011 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 7 3272 2/4/2011 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 0 Yes 3275 2/4/2011 7:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 0 0 Yes 3278 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3280 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3281 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3282 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3283 2/4/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 8 13 Yes 3321 2/11/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 3323 2/11/2011 4:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 3326 2/11/2011 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 9 3330 2/11/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 9 3334 2/11/2011 4:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 5 9 3338 2/11/2011 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 4 8 3364 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 3365 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 3366 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 3367 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 3368 2/17/2011 5:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 9 3390 2/22/2011 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 5 Yes 3391 2/22/2011 6:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 5 Yes 3392 2/22/2011 6:45:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 1 5 Yes 3394 2/22/2011 6:00:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 3 8 3395 2/22/2011 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes 3396 2/22/2011 5:30:00 PM MALATHION AQUA‐MUL 7 12 Yes
Label Criteria: "Make aerial or ground applications when the wind velocity favors on target product deposition (approximately 3 to 10 mph). " "Do not apply when wind velocity exceeds 15 mph. Avoid applications when wind gusts approach 15 mph." Contains: 81.8% malathion
7 of 7 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 150 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8094 L: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Gramoxone Inteon Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 881 2/26/2010 5:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon Missing WS Missing WS 1119 3/27/2010 9:30:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon Missing WS Missing WS 2076 6/6/2010 9:15:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 10 22 Yes 2077 6/6/2010 8:30:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 8 15 Yes 2078 6/6/2010 8:30:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 8 15 Yes 2183 6/16/2010 6:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 2184 6/16/2010 6:15:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 2185 6/16/2010 6:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 7 11 Yes 2188 6/16/2010 7:05:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 2 6 3133 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3134 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3135 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3136 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3137 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3138 1/20/2011 5:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 8 13 Yes 3139 1/20/2011 6:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 7 12 Yes 3140 1/20/2011 6:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 7 12 Yes 3145 1/20/2011 6:00:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 7 12 Yes 3286 2/5/2011 10:19:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 3287 2/5/2011 10:25:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 3288 2/5/2011 10:17 :00 AM GramoGramoxonexone Inteon 5 11 Yes 3289 2/5/2011 10:25:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 5 11 Yes 3293 2/5/2011 11:00:00 AM Gramoxone Inteon 6 12 Yes 3312 2/9/2011 12:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 13 21 Yes 3313 2/9/2011 12:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 13 21 Yes 3314 2/9/2011 12:30:00 PM Gramoxone Inteon 13 21 Yes
Label Criteria: "Drift potential is lowest between wind speeds of 2‐10 mph. " "Application must be avoided below 2 mph due to variable wind direction and high inversion potential." Contains: 30.1% paraquat dichloride
1 of 1 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 151 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8095 M: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Intrro Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 924 3/6/2010 8:48:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 937 3/7/2010 9:05:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 942 3/7/2010 8:56:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 943 3/7/2010 8:48:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1315 4/11/2010 10:45:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1394 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1395 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1396 4/14/2010 6:25:00 PM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 1934 5/25/2010 7:25:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 1935 5/25/2010 7:25:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 1936 5/25/2010 7:25:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 2020 6/2/2010 6:55:00 AM Intrro 6 15 Yes 2415 9/18/2010 9:10:00 AM Intrro 10 14 Yes 2424 10/6/2010 5:30:00 PM Intrro 9 14 Yes 2425 10/6/2010 5:30:00 PM Intrro 9 14 Yes 2448 10/19/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 10 13 Yes 2450 10/19/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 10 13 Yes 2471 10/26/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 4 8 2472 10/26/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 4 8 2473 10/26/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 4 8 2485 10/28/2010 660000:00:00 PM Intrro 9 19 Yes 2489 10/28/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 9 19 Yes 2490 10/28/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 9 19 Yes 2537 11/6/2010 10:15:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 2538 11/6/2010 10:15:00 AM Intrro 6 12 Yes 2539 11/6/2010 11:00:00 AM Intrro 8 14 Yes 2540 11/6/2010 11:20:00 AM Intrro 8 21 Yes 2563 11/7/2010 6:15:00 AM Intrro 6 10 2603 11/12/2010 7:00:00 AM Intrro 9 11 Yes 2624 11/17/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 0 4 Yes 2625 11/17/2010 6:00:00 PM Intrro 0 4 Yes 2667 11/21/2010 9:00:00 AM Intrro Missing WS Missing WS 2695 11/25/2010 9:00:00 AM Intrro 10 21 Yes 2696 11/25/2010 8:00:00 AM Intrro 6 11 Yes 2697 11/25/2010 8:30:00 AM Intrro 8 21 Yes 2698 11/25/2010 8:00:00 AM Intrro 6 11 Yes 2779 12/5/2010 7:25:00 AM Intrro 11 15 Yes 2783 12/5/2010 7:35:00 AM Intrro 11 14 Yes 2835 12/16/2010 5:25:00 PM Intrro 2 6
1 of 2 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-2 Filed 06/24/14 Page 152 of 152 PageID Exhibit #: 8096 M: Pioneer‐Measured Wind Speeds During Intrro Applications (December 13, 2009 through February 24, 2011)
Pioneer‐ Pioneer‐ Any wind Measured Measued speeds Reported Average Maximum <2 mph Application wind speed wind speed or Record Application Date Ending Time Product (mph) (mph) >10 mph? 2986 1/6/2011 6:30:00 PM Intrro 3 8 2987 1/6/2011 6:30:00 PM Intrro 3 8 2988 1/6/2011 6:30:00 PM Intrro 3 8 2989 1/6/2011 6:30:00 PM Intrro 3 8 3142 1/20/2011 7:00:00 PM Intrro 0 0 Yes 3143 1/20/2011 7:00:00 PM Intrro 0 0 Yes 3144 1/20/2011 7:00:00 PM Intrro 0 0 Yes 3150 1/22/2011 9:00:00 AM Intrro 6 9 3241 1/28/2011 9:45:00 PM Intrro 3 7 3378 2/18/2011 7:30:00 AM Intrro 7 14 Yes 3379 2/18/2011 7:30:00 AM Intrro 7 14 Yes 3380 2/18/2011 7:30:00 AM Intrro 7 14 Yes 3381 2/18/2011 7:30:00 AM Intrro 7 14 Yes
Label Criteria: "Drift potential is lowest between wind speeds of 2‐10 mph. " "Application must be avoided below 2 mph due to variable wind direction and high inversion potential." Contains: 45.1% alachlor
2 of 2 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-3 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 8097 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-3 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 8098 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-3 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 8099 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-3 Filed 06/24/14 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 8100 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-3 Filed 06/24/14 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 8101 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 48 PageID #: 8102
T
I R Toxicology Research International Toxicology and Health Impact Assessment Hawaii Office: 50 Oluolumau Place Haiku, HI (510) 384-4449
February 21, 2014
Kyle Smith, Esq. Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith Pali Palms Plaza, 970 N. Kalaheo, Ste. A 301, Kailua, HI, 96734
Re: Casey, et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Int’l, et al., Civil No. 12-00655-LEK-BMK
Dear Mr. Smith:
Please find attached my report titled “Survey and Toxicology of Pesticides Applied by Pioneer Hi-Bred International, in Waimea, Kauai.” Based on my analysis of the available data and my expertise as a pesticide toxicologist and public health practitioner, I have the following findings and conclusions regarding the health implications associated with the types of pesticides used by Pioneer in Waimea:
Based on my analysis of the available data and my expertise as a pesticide toxicologist and public health practitioner, I have the following findings and conclusions regarding the health implications associated with the types of pesticides used by Pioneer in Waimea:
1. Over the past six years, Pioneer has used 82 or more pesticide products containing 63 or more active ingredients, either individually or in combination. The pesticides applied to the Pioneer fields in Waimea include herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, and other pesticide types representing 34 different chemical classes.
2. Pesticide applications on the Pioneer fields occur frequently during the course of a year, on average about 65 percent of the time or about two out of every three days. Over the six- year span, there appears to be two months (December and January) when pesticide active ingredient applications appear to consistently increase and two months (September and October) when active ingredient application appears to decline. However, there is no time during the year when the application of pesticides does not occur and therefore there is a significant degree of unpredictability throughout the year as to when and to what extent pesticide applications are occurring on the Pioneer fields in Waimea. Unscheduled uses of pesticides compared to specific “use seasons” are far more unpredictable and present a greater hazard potential to the uninformed.
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 48 PageID #: 8103
3. Over the six-year span from February 2007 to December 2012, Pioneer applied to its fields, on the average, 8.0 pesticide products each day.
4. Over the six-year span, Pioneer used, on the average, 12 active ingredients (range is 9 to 15.5) on any day when they applied pesticides and 8.0 active ingredients every day when considering all days with or without pesticide applications.
5. The pattern and frequency of active ingredient applications by Pioneer in Waimea in the summer and fall of 2011 is dramatically different compared to the other five years on record. Although the pattern of frequency of use in 2011 is comparable to the other years from January to June, active ingredient applications declined significantly over the next four months. After October 2011, the “typical” pattern of active ingredient application resumed, although on the average the numbers of active ingredient applications remained lower than in previous years. There is no obvious explanation for this unusual use activity that can be gleaned from Pioneer’s records.
6. Over the span of six years, Pioneer averaged using 3.2 unique active ingredient ingredients whenever applying pesticide products to their fields in Waimea.
7. In 2010, 2011, and 2012, Pioneer applied 6.1, 4.7, and 0.7 pounds of restricted use active ingredients per cumulative acre treated, respectively, with an average of 3.6 pounds per cumulative acre treated over the three year span. Pioneer applied all active ingredients (restricted and general use) at rates of 7.4, 3.2, and 2.4 pounds active ingredients per cumulative acre treated, respectively, with an average of 4.3 pounds per cumulative acre treated for the three-year span.
8. In 2010, 2011, and 2012, Pioneer applied 26.3, 14.7, and 10.1 pounds of restricted use active ingredients per acre of fields, respectively, with an average of 18.4 pounds per acre over the three year span. Pioneer applied all active ingredients (restricted and general use) at rates of 56.5, 31.0, and 2.8 pounds active ingredients per acre, respectively, with an average of 22.2 pounds per acre for the three-year span.
9. Based on the data summarized in 7 and 8 above, it appears that Pioneer reduced the amount of pesticide active ingredients used per acre of land from 2010 to 2012. However, as explained elsewhere, the usage record inconsistencies between the CDMS system and the Old Access and Original records could account for some or all of this apparent decline if the pesticide use is underreported in the CDMS system as I suspect.
10. The active ingredients used in these pesticide products cause a myriad of health effects in experimental animals from repeated exposures, including: cancer; reproductive toxicity; birth defects; toxicity to the endocrine, immune, and nervous systems; genetic toxicity; and toxic effects in organs such as liver, kidney, blood, stomach, and skin. Animal study results are widely accepted in the scientific community as surrogates and predictors of human toxicity.
11. The top 15 pesticides in the “High” concern category exhibit significant and severe toxicity traits. Exposure to these chemicals should be avoided and it would best if Pioneer stopped using all of these pesticide products. Even active ingredients in the “Medium” tier of the initial toxicity screening demonstrate specific toxicity traits that present a cause for concern.
12. Based on my analysis of the toxicity traits, use information, and potential for migration offsite of the top 15 pesticide active ingredients, I ranked the top 15 chemicals from the initial 2
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 48 PageID #: 8104
toxicity screening in the following order of overall concern: paraquat dichloride, chlorpyrifos, malathion, carbaryl, methomyl, dimethoate, cypermethrin, propiconazole, atrazine (and simizine), permethrin, cyhalothrin, mancozeb/ETU, bromoxynil, β-cyfluthrin, and thiodicarb.
13. Exposures to complex mixtures of carcinogens, reproductive and/or developmental toxicants, endocrine disruptors, genetic toxicants, and chemicals that affect the immune and/or nervous systems or exhibit other types of toxicity can occur when multiple active ingredients are applied to Pioneer’s fields at the same time or on the same day. Based on the use records maintained by Pioneer, I conclude with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty that Pioneer workers, people living near the Pioneer fields including residents of Waimea, and visitors to publicly accessible areas in the vicinity of Pioneer fields are exposed to individual pesticide products as well as mixtures of pesticides applied by Pioneer with the potential for serious health consequences.
14. The pesticides applied to agricultural fields by Pioneer are more likely than not having a negative impact on the local environment in several ways: 1) they are likely impacting wildlife and plant life in the surrounding ecosystem, impairing reproduction and other essential functions necessary for survival; 2) they are likely causing toxicity to beneficial insects such as honey bees; 3) they have a significant potential to alter ecosystems by disrupting the natural balance between native species and their natural food source; 4) they have the potential to promote the introduction of invasive species into an ecosystem by killing the native fauna and flora; and 5) the repeated overuse of these pesticides is likely to result in a resistance of undesirable pests to the chemical pesticides.
15. In particular, Pioneer consistently uses pesticides products that are known to be toxic to beneficial species such as honey bees at alarming rates. For example, in 2010, Pioneer made approximately 1,200 applications of more than 13,600 pounds of a combination of bee-toxic pesticides. This trend continued in 2011 with 724 applications of 10,872 pounds. In 2012, the number of applications of bee-toxic pesticides increased to over 1,400 applications. With a reasonable degree of scientific certainty I conclude that the honey bee populations in Waimea are at significant risk for decline as a result of Pioneer’s pesticide use practices.
16. Although the residents and community of Waimea face some degree of risk of adverse health effects from ambient levels of chemicals in the environment, it is my expert opinion that the conditions in Waimea as a result of Pioneer’s activities and operations are well above what is ordinarily encountered in daily life. I conclude from my analysis, within a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that the conditions prevalent in Waimea exceed a minimal risk hazard due to the pesticide application activities of Pioneer. Furthermore, I conclude that the principle of beneficence is not satisfied; that is, the residents and community of Waimea receive none of the benefit but all of the risk from these activities
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at: (510) 384-4449.
Sincerely,
Michael J. DiBartolomeis, Jr., PhD, DABT Consulting Toxicologist 3
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 4 of 48 PageID #: 8105
Survey and Toxicology of Pesticides Applied by Pioneer Hi-Bred International in Waimea, Kauai (2007-2013)
Michael J. DiBartolomeis, Jr., PhD, DABT
Toxicology Research International 50 Oluolumau Place Haiku, HI 96708 February 21, 2014
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 5 of 48 PageID #: 8106
Table of Contents I. Scope of Work ...... 2 II. Education/Experience ...... 2 III. Pioneer Pesticide Use Trends and Statistics ...... 2 Profile of Pesticides Used ...... 2 Patterns of Pesticide Use ...... 6 Pesticide Use Metrics ...... 15 Rates of Pesticide Applications per Land Used ...... 18 IV. Summary of Adverse Health Effects in Humans from Pesticide Exposure ...... 22 V. Toxicological Effects Linked to Pioneer Pesticides ...... 24 Sources of Scientific Information ...... 24 Initial Toxicology Screening ...... 25 Priority Scoring for the Top 15 Active Ingredients ...... 26 Toxicological Effects of Mixtures ...... 28 VI. Environmental Impacts Associated with Selected Pioneer Pesticides ...... 35 VII. Discussion of Health and Environmental Impacts of the Higher Priority Pioneer Pesticides ...... 39 Findings and Conclusions ...... 39 Data Gaps and Methodological Limitations ...... 41 VIII. Impact on the Waimea Community ...... 42 IX. List of Selected References Cited in Report ...... 43
1
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 6 of 48 PageID #: 8107
I. Scope of Work
I was retained to review the inventory and application records of pesticides known or believed to have been applied by Pioneer Hi-Bred International (Pioneer) in or near the community of Waimea, Kauai, HI, from February 2007 to January 2013. I was also asked to focus more specifically on the pesticides reportedly applied between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2012, analyze frequencies of application and trends in usage, and provide an assessment of the human health implications and environmental impacts associated with applying these pesticides in or near the community of Waimea. In addition, I was asked to review the relationship between pesticide exposure and acute symptoms as well as nervous system disorders, developmental (and reproductive) toxicity, genetic toxicity, cancer, and other health effects and render an opinion as to whether the pesticides applied by Pioneer in or near Waimea could be a substantial contributing factor to current or future illness in Waimea residents.
To supplement my review and analysis of Pioneer’s pesticide use records and the scientific literature and related information on the toxicity and environmental fate of the pesticides, I also visited Waimea and met with community members. On June 25, 2011, I participated in a community meeting in which I presented information about pesticide use by Pioneer in Waimea and met with residents and other community members both before and after the formal meeting. In addition, I toured the Waimea community and the surrounding areas to familiarize myself with the topography, land use, and general environment.
II. Education/Experience
I hold a doctorate degree (Ph.D.) in toxicology from the University of Wisconsin (Madison) and have maintained active certification by the American Board of Toxicology since 1988. I have over 30 years of professional experience evaluating the toxicological effects in humans and in laboratory animals of pesticides and other hazardous chemicals in the environment, workplace, food, drinking water, and consumer products. I have provided expert testimony on several occasions representing both plaintiffs and defendants. I attached my curriculum vitae (Appendix A), which describes my education and experience in greater detail.
III. Pioneer Pesticide Use Trends and Statistics Profile of Pesticides Used A complete list of pesticide products (formulations) and active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea from February 16, 2007 to January 14, 2013, along with their corresponding U.S. EPA registration numbers and the percent content of active ingredients is presented in Table 1. Table 1 was compiled from three spreadsheets provided to me by the law office of Lynch Hopper Salzano & Smith. Spreadsheet 1 includes Pioneer pesticide application records from February 16, 2007 to February 17, 2011, which I call the “Original” records. Spreadsheet 2 includes Pioneer pesticide application records from December 13, 2009 to December 31, 2011 (“Old Access” records). Spreadsheet 3 includes Pioneer pesticide application records from October 4, 2011 to January 14, 2013 (“CDMS” records). It should be noted that the time periods for these records overlap necessitating removing the duplicates when combining the records prior to analysis. Furthermore, the individual spray records for the same days in overlapping time periods frequently differed among the 2
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 7 of 48 PageID #: 8108
spreadsheets, which raises some concern for me about the overall quality of Pioneer’s pesticide application records.
According to the combined Pioneer spray records, 82 different pesticide products (defined as having unique U.S. EPA registration numbers) were used by Pioneer in Waimea from February 2007 to January 2013. For two of these pesticide products, I could not locate an EPA registration number, which indicates that they are probably exempt from registration. While insecticides and herbicides constitute the majority of applied pesticide products (43% and 41%, respectively), fungicides (9%) and “other” pesticides (7%) were also used during this time period.
In addition, Table 1 lists the active ingredients associated with each of the pesticide products used by Pioneer in Waimea from February 2007 to January 2013. There are 63 unique active ingredients contained in these products with a few products containing two different active ingredients. The relative content of each active ingredient in the pesticide formulation (percent AI in formulation) is also included in Table 1. It should mentioned that pesticide formulations contain both the active ingredients specified on the label and other ingredients (often called “inert ingredients”) essential for the proper functioning of the pesticide product. These other ingredients presumably do not have pesticidal activity but are used as solvents, surfactants, diluents, and for other reasons. The relative content of other ingredients can be easily determined by subtracting the relative content of the active ingredients from 100. For example, if 60% of the formulation is the active ingredient then 40% is made up of other ingredients. A pesticide label is not required to list other ingredients and therefore Table 1 is not a complete ingredient list for the pesticide products used by Pioneer in Waimea.
Table 2 presents the active ingredients sorted by chemical class of pesticide. Thirty-four different active ingredient chemical classes are represented by the 82 pesticide formulations used by Pioneer in Waimea. The information on chemical classes is important because active ingredients in any single chemical class (for example the pyrethroids) tend to be structurally-related and exert a similar mode of pesticidal action. In general terms, there is likely to also be some common toxicity traits associated with active ingredients in a single chemical class but there is also clear evidence to suggest that even chemicals with similar structures often exhibit different toxicity traits as well. Some chemical classes such as those that are listed as “unclassified” do not provide useful information about structurally-related chemicals.
Table 2 also provides a breakdown of the number of applications of active ingredients within a chemical class of pesticide over the six-year span. During this period, over 17,600 active ingredient applications were made by Pioneer in Waimea. At the top of the list are pyrethroid, organophosphate, and microbiological insecticides with 2,699, 2,188, and 2,275 applications, respectively, during this time period. On the other end of the spectrum, pesticide products that contain imadazolinine, phenoxypropionic acid, benzoic acid, sulfite ester, or botanical-classified active ingredients were applied 10 or fewer times in six years. In terms of total relative number of applications, Pioneer used more insecticides (60%) than herbicides (23%), fungicides (11%), and other pesticide products (6%) from February 2007 to January 2013.
3
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 8 of 48 PageID #: 8109
Table 1. Pesticide Products Used by Pioneer in Waimea from February 2007 to January 2013
% Active EPA Product Product Active Ingredient Ingredient Reg Number
Aatrex Nine-O Atrazine 88.2 100-585 Actinovate AG Streptomyces lydicus 0.0371 73314-1 Admire Pro Imidacloprid 42.8 264-827 Affinity Broadspec Thifensulfuron-methyl/Tribenuron methyl 25.0/25.0 352-661 Herbicide w/Total Sol® Asana XL Esfenvalerate 8.4 352-515 Assail 70WP Acetamiprid 70.0 8033-23-70506 Assure II Quizalofop P-Ethyl 10.3 352-541 66222-36 or Atrazine 4L Atrazine 42.9 or 42.2 34704-69 Banvel Dicamba 49.4 66330-276 Basagran Bentazon, sodium salt 44.0 7969-45-51036 Baythroid XL β-cyfluthrin 12.7 264-840 Beyond Imazamox, ammonium salt 12.1 241-441 Bicep II Magnum Atrazine/s-Metolachlor 33.0/26.1 100-817 Bird Shield Methyl anthranilate 26.4 66550-1 Bravo Weatherstik Chlorothalonil 54.0 50534-188-100 Buctril Bromoxynil Octanoate 34.4 264-437 Buctril 4EC Bromoxynil Octanoate 28.0 264-540 Callisto Mesotrione 40.0 100-1131 Carbaryl 80S Carbaryl 80.0 19713-50 Comite Propargite 69.6 400-154 Coragen Chlorantraniliprole 18.4 352-729 Dimethoate 400 Dimethoate 43.5 34704-207 Bacillus thuringiensis, Kurstaki strain ABTS- Dipel DF 54.0 73049-39 351 Distinct Dicamba 55.0 7969-150 Dual II Magnum s-Metolachlor 82.4 100-818 EF 300 Herbal mix? Unknown Unknown Entrust Spinosad A&D 22.8 62719-621 Express w/Total Sol® Tribenuron methyl 50.0 352-632 Express XP Tribenuron Methyl 75.0 352-509 Force 3G Insecticide Tefluthrin 3.0 100-1075-5481 Fusilade DX Fluazifop-P-butyl 24.5 100-1070 Gramoxone Inteon Paraquat Dichloride 30.1 100-1217 Harmony GT XP Thifensulfuron-methyl 75.0 352-446 4
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 9 of 48 PageID #: 8110
Table 1. Pesticide Products Used by Pioneer in Waimea from February 2007 to January 2013 % Active EPA Product Product Active Ingredient Ingredient Reg Number
Harmony SG w/ Thifensulfuron-methyl 50.0 352-633 Total Sol® Headline Pyraclostrobin 23.6 7969-186 Honcho Plus Glyphosate, potassium salt 41.0 524-454 Ignite 280 SL/Rely 280 Glufosinate-ammonium 24.5 264-829 Intrepid 2F Methoxyfenozide 22.6 62719-442 Intrro Alachlor 45.1 524-314 Javelin WG Bacillus thuringiensis, EG2371 85.0 70051-66 JMS Stylet-Oil Paraffinic Oil 97.1 65564-1 Kocide 3000 Copper Hydroxide 46.1 352-662 Lannate LV Methomyl 29.0 352-384 Larvin 3.2 Thiodicarb 34.0 264-379 Liberty Glufosinate ammonium 18.2 264-660 Lorsban 4E Chlorpyrifos 44.9 62719-220 Lorsban Advanced Chlorpyrifos 40.2 62719-591 Malathion 8 Aquamul Malathion 81.8 34704-474 Manzate DF Mancozeb Unknown Unknown Manzate Pro-Stik Mancozeb 58.1 352-704 Marathon 1% G Imidacloprid 1.0 432-1329-59807 M-Pede Fatty Acids, potassium salts 49.0 62719-515 Mustang Max Cypermethrin 9.6 279-3249 Mustang Max EC Cypermethrin 9.6 279-3327 Neemix 4.5 Azadirachtin 4.5 70051-9 Oberon 2SC Spiromesifen 23.1 264-719 Permethrin Permethrin 38.4 34704-873 Permethrin 3.2 EC Permethrin 38.4 279-3014-34704 Perm-Up 3.2EC Permethrin 36.8 70506-9 Pincep 4L Simazine 41.9 100-526 Poast Sethoxydim/Naphthalene/Solvent Naptha 18.0/7.32/65.35 7969-58 Provado 1.6 Flowable Imidacloprid 17.4 264-763 Prowl H2O Pendimethalin 38.7 241-418 Purespray Green Petroleum extract, oil 98.0 69526-9 Pursuit Herbicide Imazethapyr 22.87 241-310 Quadris Azoxystrobin 22.9 100-1098 Radiant SC Spinetoram 11.7 62719-545 Reglone Diquat dibromide 37.3 100-1061
5
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 10 of 48 PageID #: 8111
Table 1. Pesticide Products Used by Pioneer in Waimea from February 2007 to January 2013 (concl.)
% Active EPA Product Product Active Ingredient Ingredient Reg Number RoundUp Glyphosate, isopropylamine salt 41.0 524-445 Originalmax RoundUp Powermax Glyphosate, potassium salt 48.7 524-549 RoundUp Glyphosate, potassium salt 48.8 524-537 Weathermax Sandea Halosulfuron-methyl 75.0 81880-18-10163 Sencor 75 DF Metribuzin 75.0 264-738 Sevin XLR Plus Carbaryl 44.1 264-333 Success Spinosad (spinosyn A and D) 22.8 62719-292 Surround WP Kaolin 95.0 61842-18 Tilt Propiconazole 41.8 100-617 Trilogy Clarified Hydrophobic Extract of Neem Oil 70.0 70051-2 Ultra-Pure Oil Petroleum extract, oil 90.0 69526-5-499 Vineyard Magic Herbal Mix? Unknown Unknown Warrior ZT Cyhalothrin 11.4 100-1112 Bacillus thuringiensis, Aizawai Lepidopteran XenTari 54.0 73049-40 strain
Table 3 provides the subset of pesticide products and active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012. During this three-year span, 70 different pesticide products utilizing 54 different active ingredients were reportedly used by Pioneer in Waimea. Of the pesticide products used during this time period, 19 are restricted-use pesticides, which require special handling and application by certified applicators. Five pesticide products were identified to not be registered for application and use in Hawaii. These include Permethrin 3.2 EC, Basagran, JMS Stylet Oil, EF 300, and Vineyard Magic. I suspect that the last two products are exempt from registration. It is not clear what the conditions were that allowed Pioneer to purchase and apply the other three unregistered pesticide products during this three-year period. For the purposes of further analytical and toxicological analyses, eight pesticide products were deemed either of little concern, or due to a lack of information no further analysis would be feasible; these products are denoted in Table 3 with colored text. Patterns of Pesticide Use Figure 1 shows the pattern of pesticide active ingredient applications by Pioneer in Waimea from February 2007 to December 2012. The number of applications of each pesticide active ingredient was derived by sorting the data according to the date of application and summing the total number of active ingredients for every date that a pesticide product was applied. If a pesticide product contained more than one active ingredient, each active ingredient application was counted separately. For example, if a pesticide formulation containing two or more active ingredients was applied on a particular day, then it would be counted as two or more active ingredients applied on that day. 6
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 11 of 48 PageID #: 8112
Table 2. Total Applications of Active Ingredients Used by Pioneer in Waimea, Feb ⱡ 2007 through Dec 2012, Grouped by Chemical Class
Total Number Active Ingredient Classification AI Applications Cyfluthrin, Cyhalothrin, Cypermethrin, Pyrethroid Insecticide 2,908 Esfenvalerate, Permethrin, Tefluthrin Chlorpyrifos, Dimethoate, Malathion Organophosphorous Insecticide 2,412 Bacillus thuringiensis, Streptomyces lydicus Microbiological Insecticide 2,275 Glyphosate, Glufosinate Organophosphorous Herbicide 1,360 Azoxystrobin, Pyraclostrobin Strobilurin Fungicide 1,174 Spiromesifen, Spinosyn/Spinosad, Spinetoram Macrocyclic Lactone Insecticide 1,064 Alachlor, s-Metolachlor Chloroacetanilide Herbicide 899 Kaolin, Neem Oil Barrier Film, Unclassified 783 Carbaryl, Methomyl, Thiodicarb Carbamate Insecticide 759 Acetamiprid, Imidacloprid Neonicotinoid Insecticide 573 Propiconazole Conazole Fungicide 558 Diquat Dibromide, Paraquat Dichloride Quaternary Ammonium Herbicide 506 Atrazine, Simazine Chlorotriazine Herbicide 398 Fatty Acids, salts Unclassified Insecticide (Soap) 336 Bentazon Unclassified Herbicide 281 Herbs Unclassified 255 Chlorantraniliprole Diamide Insecticide 215 Halosulfuron-methyl, Thifensulfuron-methyl, Sulfonylurea Herbicide 214 Tribenuron methyl Pendimethalin Dinitroaniline Herbicide 143 Bromoxynil Nitrile Herbicide 130 Mancozeb Dithiocarbamate Fungicide 123
Naphthalene, Paraffinic Oil, Petroleum Extract Petroleum Extract Insecticide 57
Copper Hydroxide Copper Fungicide 42 Chlorothalonil Substituted Benzene Fungicide 37 Sethoxydim Cyclohexenone Herbicide 35 Benzoylcyclohexanedione Mesotrione 27 Herbicide Methoxyfenozide Growth Regulator Insecticide 18 Metribuzin Triazinone Herbicide 17 Methyl anthranilate Bird Repellant 14 Imazamox, Imazethapyr Imidazolinone Herbicide 10 Fluazifop-P-butyl, Quizalofop p-ethyl Phenoxypropionic Herbicide 7 Dicamba Benzoic Acid Herbicide 5 Azadirachtin Botanical Insecticide 2 Propargite Sulfite Ester Acaricide 1 ⱡ Source: Pioneer combined “original records” + “old access” records + “CDMS” records.
7
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 12 of 48 PageID #: 8113
Table 3. Pesticide Products Used by Pioneer in Waimea from ⱡ January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2012
Registration Registered Restricted Product Product Active Ingredient Number in Hawaiia Usea Applications Aatrex Nine-O Atrazine 100-585 Y Y 2 Actinovate AG Streptomyces lydicus 73314-1 Y N 39 Admire Pro Imidacloprid 264-827 Y N 144 Thifensulfuron-methyl Affinity 352-661 Y N 36 + Tribenuron methyl Asana XL Esfenvalerate 352-515 Y Y 571 8033-23- Assail 70WP Acetamiprid Y N 177 70506 Assure II Quizalofop P-Ethyl 352-541 Y N 2 34704-69 Atrazine 4L Atrazine Y Y 13 or 66222-36 7969-45- Basagran Bentazon, sodium salt b N N 96 51036 Baythroid XL β-Cyfluthrin 264-840 Y Y 88 Imazamox, Beyond 241-441 Y N 8 ammonium salt Bicep II Atrazine 100-817 Y Y 6 Magnum Bird Shield Methyl anthranilate 66550-1 Y N 14 Bravo 50534-188- Chlorothalonil Y N 3 Weatherstik 100 Buctril Bromoxynil 264-437 Y N 5 Buctril 4EC Bromoxynil 264-540 Y N 31 Carbaryl 80S Carbaryl 19713-50 Y N 2 (Disc.) Coragen Chlorantraniliprole 352-729 Y N 213 Dimethoate 400 Dimethoate 34704-207 Y N 51 Bacillus thuringiensis, Dipel DF Kurstaki strain ABTS- 73049-39 Y N 333 351 Dual II Magnum s-Metolachlor 100-818 Y Y 145 Unknown (Herbal EF 300 Unknown Unknown Unknown 52 mix?) Express Tribenuron methyl 352-632 Y N 3 w/TotalSol Express XP Tribenuron methyl 352-509 Y N 9 Force 3G Tefluthrin 100-1075 Y Y 60 Insecticide Fusilade DX Fluazifop-P-butyl 100-1070 Y N 5 Gramoxone Paraquat Dichloride 100-1217 Y Y 206 Inteon Harmony GT Thifensulfuron-methyl 352-446 Y N 20 XP
8
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 13 of 48 PageID #: 8114
Table 3. Pesticide Products Used by Pioneer in Waimea from ⱡ January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2012
Registration Registered Restricted Product Product Active Ingredient Number in Hawaiia Usea Applications Thifensulfuron- Harmony SG 352-633 Y N 1 methyl Headline Pyraclostrobin 7969-186 Y N 148 Glyphosate, Honcho Plus 524-454 Y N 19 potassium salt Glufosinate Ignite/Rely 280 264-829 Y N 658 Ammonium Intrepid 2F Methoxyfenozide 62719-442 Y N 18 Intrro Alachlor 524-314 Y Y 290 JMS Stylet Oil Paraffinic oil 65564-1 N Unknown 2 Kocide 3000 Copper Hydroxide 352-662 Y N 42 Lannate LV Methomyl 352-384 Y Y 102 Larvin 3.2 Thiodicarb 264-379 Y Y 10 Lorsban Chlorpyrifos 62719-591 Y Y 191 Advanced MalathionAquamul Malathion 34704-474 Y N 632 Manzate Prostick Mancozeb 352-704 Y N 26 (Disc.) 432-1329- Marathon 1% Imidacloprid Y N 2 59807 Potassium salts of M-Pede 62719-515 Y N 102 fatty acids Mustang Max Cypermethrin 279-3249 Y Y 145 Mustang Max EC Cypermethrin 279-3327 Y Y 33 Neemix 4.5 Azadirachtin 70051-9 Y N 1 Oberon 2SC Spiromesifen 264-719 Y N 3 Permethrin Permethrin 34704-873 Y Y 56 279-3014- Permethrin 3.2 EC Permethrin c N Y 79 34704 Perm-Up 3.2EC Permethrin 70506-9 Y Y 11 Princep 4L Simazine 100-526 Y Y 1 Provado 1.6 Imidacloprid 264-763 Y N 244 Prowl H2O Pendimethalin 241-418 Y N 89 Petroleum extract, Purespray Green 69526-9 Y N 9 oil Pursuit Herbicide Imazethapyr 241-310 Y N 1 Quadris Azoxystrobin 100-1098 Y N 206 Radiant SC Spinetoram 62719-545 Y N 876 Reglone Diquat dibromide 100-1061 Y N 133
9
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 14 of 48 PageID #: 8115
Table 3. Pesticide Products Used by Pioneer in Waimea from ⱡ January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2012
Registration Registered Restricted Product Product Active Ingredient Number in Hawaiia Usea Applications RoundUp Glyphosate, 524-445 Y N 5 Originalmax isopropylamine salt RoundUp Glyphosate, 524-549 Y N 48 Powermax potassium salt RoundUp Glyphosate, 524-537 Y N 296 Weathermax potassium salt Sevin XLR Plus Carbaryl 264-333 Y N 55 Success Spinosad 62719-292 Y N 6 Surround WP Kaolin 61842-18 Y N 483 Tilt Propiconazole 100-617 Y N 293 Clarified Hydrophobic Trilogy 70051-2 Y N 204 Extract of Neem Oil Ultra-Pure Oil Petroleum extract, oil 69526-5-499 Y N 11 Unknown (Herbal Vineyard Magic Unknown Unknown Unknown 33 mix?) Warrior ZT Cyhalothrin 100-1112 Y Y 51 Bacillus thuringiensis, XenTari Aizawai Lepidopteran 73049-40 Y N 254 strain ⱡ Source: Pioneer combined “original records” + “old access” records + “CDMS” records. a Source Link: https://data.hawaii.gov/Health/LICENSED-PESTICIDES-LISTING/rzjk-9g6v b Basagran products EPA 7969-45 and 7969-45-66330 are registered. c Other permethrin products are registered but not this one.
It is clear from the plot of use activity in Figure 1 that there is no significant amount of time during the year that pesticides are not applied. Looking at individual dates, pesticides are applied on any day of the year, including weekends and national holidays such as December 25, January 1, July 4, and Thanksgiving. Based on the distribution pattern shown in Figure 1, there appears to be three periods during the year where pesticides are applied in greater quantities than other time periods. Increased pesticide applications appear to occur from late November to early February, in mid-March to late April, and a third smaller increase in activity in July and August. The most prominent increase in pesticide use seems to occur in November to February time period. Despite these possible trends in increased pesticide use, it is clear from this graph that there is no time during the year that chemical exposure from any offsite migration of chemicals would not occur due to periods of inactivity.
Figure 2 presents the same active ingredient application data (as Figure 1) but on a monthly basis. The apparent increase in pesticide active ingredient applications in the late fall and early winter observed in Figure 1 is also seen in the monthly comparisons in Figure 2, although it is not as clear when looking at monthly totals. Active ingredient application in December 2009 and January 2010 was 767 and 542, respectively. On the average, over 10
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 15 of 48 PageID #: 8116
11
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 16 of 48 PageID #: 8117
the five year span from December 2008 to December 2012 (there are no data for January 2007) more than 370 active ingredients were applied per month in December and January. The other periods of increased active ingredient application observed in Figure 1 are not identifiable when looking at the monthly totals. Active ingredient applications by Pioneer in Waimea do appear to decline in September and October, and this is consistent on a yearly basis. It should be noted that this decrease in pesticide use is relative. In September and October, more than 150 active ingredient applications per month, on the average, still occurred.
The pattern and frequency of active ingredient applications by Pioneer in Waimea in the summer and fall of 2011 is dramatically different compared to the other five years on record. Although the pattern of frequency of use in 2011 is comparable to the other years from January to June, active ingredient applications declined significantly over the next four months. The number of active ingredients applied in July, August, September, and October 2011, were 32, 1, 1, and 100, respectively. Averaging the number of active ingredient applications over those same four months for the other years, the numbers of active ingredients applied in July, August, September, and October were 286, 340, 195, and 205, respectively. After October 2011, the “typical” pattern of active ingredient application resumed, although on the average the numbers of active ingredient applications remained lower than in previous years. The total active ingredient application for 2008, 2009, and 2010 were on the average nearly 70% greater than in 2007, 2011, and 2012. It should be noted that data for January and February 2007 were not available for this analysis.
Overall, the data in Figures 1 and 2 appear to indicate a consistent seasonal increase in active ingredient application by Pioneer in Waimea in the winter months of December and January and a seasonal decrease in September and October. The application of active ingredients in the three year period from 2008 to 2010 was greater than in 2007 and 2011 and 2012, although the records for 2007 are incomplete and do not include the peak use month of January. It is not clear from these data whether the application of active ingredients by Pioneer from 2008-2010 was higher than what is normally used in Waimea or whether active ingredient use was curtailed in 2011 and 2012.
Figures 3-5 present the pesticide product and active ingredient use data on a per year basis. In Figure 3, the fraction of days that at least one pesticide product was applied to a Pioneer field in Waimea for each year is shown. If at least one pesticide were applied each day during the course of a year, then the fraction would be 1.0 (or 100 percent). The fraction of days that at least one pesticide product was applied in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012, were 0.56, 0.57, 0.73, 0.78, 0.57, and 0.71, respectively. These data indicate some consistency in the number of days that pesticide products are used from year-to-year. There is a slight increase in the number of “use-days” in 2009, 2010, and 2012 (average 0.74) compared to 2007, 2008, and 2011 (average 0.57). The average over the six-year span is 0.65 (or 65 percent).
Figure 4 presents the use data on an annual basis for total active ingredient applications. In the first plot (blue), the average number of active ingredients used on any day when pesticide products were applied is shown. Clearly, the average number of active ingredients applied per application-day in 2008-2010 (average 14.4 active ingredients per application- day) is higher than the other three years (average 9.5 active ingredients per application day). This is consistent with the use trends observed in Figure 2. For the six-year span, Pioneer used, on the average, 12 active ingredients on any day (range is 9 to 15.5) when they applied pesticides. On a per day basis (including days with or without pesticide 12
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 17 of 48 PageID #: 8118
applications) the average number of active ingredients applied during the six-year span is 8 active ingredients (Figure 4, second plot, red line). In other words, on the average, Pioneer applies eight active ingredients every day in Waimea.
Figure 5 presents the annual use of unique active ingredients by Pioneer in Waimea. In contrast to Figure 4 where all incidences of an application of an active ingredient were counted, in Figure 5 only individual unique active ingredients were counted. In other words, if the same active ingredient were used 10 times in one day, it counts as only one unique active ingredient application in Figure 5, whereas in Figure 4 it would count as 10 active ingredient applications. Over the six year span, Pioneer used an average of 3.2 unique active ingredients each time they applied pesticides in Waimea. This trend is consistent; the average number of unique active ingredients applied ranged from 2.9 active ingredients per application in 2011 to 3.4 in 2008. As noted previously, 2011 included four months of unusually low activity, which more than likely accounted for the slightly lower average of unique active ingredients used per application in that year. Looking at the slope of the plot in Figure 5 (blue line), there appears to be a trend downward in the number of unique active ingredients used per application. However, in 2012, the trend took an upward swing. It is not clear whether these slight fluctuations in pesticide applications are significant.
Figure 5 also shows the trend in unique active ingredient applications per day (red line). That it, the average number of active ingredients applied every day whether or not pesticide products were applied in Waimea by Pioneer. Over the span of six years, the average number of unique active ingredients applied each day is 2.1, with a range of 1.6 (2011) to 2.5 (2010). However, excluding 2011, there appears to be an increase in the number unique active ingredients applied per day from an average of 1.9 per day in 2007 and 2008 to an average of 2.4 per day in 2009, 2010, and 2012. It is not clear from the data whether this trend is significant or not. 13
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 18 of 48 PageID #: 8119
14
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 19 of 48 PageID #: 8120
Pesticide Use Metrics Table 3 also provides individual product application numbers from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012 summed over the three-year span. During this time period the pesticide products applied the most frequently were Radiant SC, which contains the active ingredient spinetoram, Ignite or Rely 280 containing glufosinate ammonium, Malathion 8 Aquamul containing malathion, and Asana XL containing esfenvalerate. Twenty-four pesticide products were applied more than 100 times in the three year span and 50 products were applied 10 or more times.
Because active ingredients in a specific chemical class are structurally similar, often share a common mechanism of pesticidal activity, and share some similar toxicity traits, it is informative to group pesticide products with active ingredients in the same chemical class to compare use metrics. The two use metrics most accessible using these data are frequency of application and amount applied. Figure 6 shows the frequency of active ingredient applications by Pioneer in Waimea from 2010 to 2012, sorted by chemical class. The top three chemical classes of pesticides used by Pioneer during the three year span, according to frequency of application, were pyrethroid insecticides (1,070 applications), organophosphate herbicides (1,026 applications) and organophosphate insecticides (911 applications). Chemicals within these three pesticide groups do have structural similarities and share some similar toxicity traits. Other chemical classes of note with 300 or more active ingredient applications in the three year span include neonicotinoid insecticides, chloroacetanilide herbicides, strobilurin fungicides, and quaternary ammonium herbicides. Conazole fungicides, carbamate insecticides, and sulfonylurea herbicides were used more than 100 times.
15
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 20 of 48 PageID #: 8121
The amount of pesticide active ingredient (in pounds) applied by Pioneer in Waimea from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012, is shown in Figure 7 for the pesticide product and in Figure 8 for the amount of active ingredient applied. The calculations of amount used are based on the use records maintained by Pioneer. For the majority of pesticide products and application days used, adequate information was available to calculate usage in units of pounds over the course of the three-year period. However, the recorded information provided by Pioneer was not always complete and therefore some amounts could not be calculated from the data for some days and/or applications.
In addition to the data gaps noted above, there are some inconsistencies in the records when comparing the “Old Access” and “CDMS” records for 2011 and 2012. In particular, the unit used (primarily gallons) for pesticide use reporting in 2012 is inconsistent with the older reporting systems (primarily ounces or pounds). When “normalizing” the data to ounces or pounds and comparing rates of application (amount applied per acre), it appears that pesticide usage for several pesticide products is underreported by 10 up to nearly 200-fold in the CDMS system. For example, for three products (Malathion Aqua-Mul, Lannate LV, and Dimethoate 400) the reported use per acre differed for CDMS records compared to Old Access and Original records by 15 to almost 200-fold. In all cases, these inconsistencies result in a significant underreporting in the CDMS system, assuming that the Original and Old Access systems are correct. It is not clear whether this is an error in conversion or whether Pioneer actually reduced usage of these pesticides in 2012 even though the acreage treated remained comparable.
These inconsistencies in pesticide use reporting by Pioneer call into question the validity of comparing usage records from 2012 with the previous years. In conclusion, while I have a fair degree of confidence in the number of applications reported, I have far less confidence in the reported amounts of pesticide applied, especially for 2012. Nevertheless, the data are robust enough to have a good understanding of the application rate of active ingredients on a per pound basis. As with the frequency data in Figure 6, the amounts of product and active ingredients applied shown in Figure 7 and 8, respectively, are sorted by chemical class.
The top three chemical classes of pesticide products used by Pioneer during the three-year span, according to amount applied, were the chloroacetanilide herbicides (14,970 pounds), carbamate insecticides (6,793 pounds), and organophosphate insecticides (5,934 pounds) (Figure 7). To put this in perspective, the amount of chloroacetanilide, carbamate, and organophosphate (insecticide) pesticide products applied per day in the three-year span was 13.7, 6.2, and 5.4 pounds, respectively. Other pesticide product chemical classes of importance with over 1,000 pounds applied include organophosphate herbicides, quaternary ammonium herbicides, and pyrethroid insecticides.
The top three important classes of chemicals applied based on active ingredient content (Figure 8) include chloroacetanilide herbicides (7,142 pounds), organophosphate insecticides (4,424 pounds), and carbamate insecticides (3,220 pounds). This equates to 6.5, 4.0, and 2.9 pounds per day of applied active ingredients in the chloroacetanilide, organophosphate Insecticide), and carbamate chemical classes, respectively. Other pesticide chemical classes of importance with over 300 pounds of active ingredients applied include organophosphate herbicides, quaternary ammonium herbicides, and pyrethroid insecticides.
16
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 21 of 48 PageID #: 8122
Comparing the total amount (pounds) of pesticide products applied in Figure 7 with the frequency of applications shown in figure 6, different patterns of pesticide use are observed. For example, although pyrethroid insecticides were applied most frequently to the Pioneer fields in Waimea over the three-year span, the total amount used ranks only seventh, at 11 percent of the total amount of chloroacetanilide herbicides used (the highest use in terms of pounds). Carbamate insecticides, which rank number two in total amount used, rank only thirteenth in the frequency of application at 15.7 percent of the frequency of application of pyrethroids. On the other hand, a few chemical classes of active ingredients rank about the same regardless of the use metric. For example, organophosphate insecticides rank 3rd in both amount pesticide product applied and frequency of use, microbiological insecticides rank 6th in both amount pesticide product applied and frequency of application, and strobilurin fungicides rank 9th in frequency of application and 11th in total amount of pesticide product used.
In comparing the results in Figure 7 and 8, there are mostly similarities in the rankings when total amount of pesticide product applied versus active ingredient applied are considered. For example, looking at the top 10 ranked pesticide according to amount used, chloroacetanilide herbicides rank number one regardless of the total product amount or active ingredient content while organophosphate insecticides and herbicides, microbiological insecticides, quaternary ammonium herbicides and within one rank order. Carbamate insecticides rank 2nd in total pesticide product used and 5th in amount of active ingredients applied and pyrethroid insecticides rank 8th in total pesticide product used compared to 11th in amount of active ingredients applied. It is interesting to note that pesticide products using extracts of petroleum oil rank 4th in active ingredient used but only 14th when considering the total amount of product applied. This is probably because there is only a small percentage 17
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 22 of 48 PageID #: 8123
of “other” ingredients in these products such that the active ingredient content is close to 100% of the pesticide product.
Other examples of big differences in ranking between frequency of use and amount applied for specific chemical classes include the neonicotinoid insecticides (7th in frequency of application and 16th in amount of active ingredient used), macrocyclic lactone insecticides (4th in frequency of application and 19th in amount of active ingredient applied), chloroacetanilide herbicides (1st in amount of active ingredient applied and 8th in application frequency), and sulfonylurea herbicides (14th in application frequency and 26th - next to last - in amount applied). The large differences in rankings are likely due to several factors including potency of the pesticidal activity, pesticide label restrictions on amounts applied or frequency of use, specificity of use and corresponding needs for pest control, and possibly economic factors (for example, cost of a pesticide product). It is not clear from these results whether consideration of public health or environmental impact of pesticide use is a consideration when Pioneer applies pesticide in Waimea.
Rates of Pesticide Applications per Land Used The Pioneer fields are located adjacent to and to the east of the community of Waimea, separated by the Waimea River (Figures 9a & 9b). The Pioneer fields are elevated above the community and the prevailing wind direction is from the fields across the river to the community. 18
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 23 of 48 PageID #: 8124
Table 4 presents the total amounts of pesticide products and active ingredients applied by Pioneer over the cumulative area treated in 2010, 2011, and 2012 in Waimea. For restricted use pesticides, the amounts of pesticide products applied in 2010 and 2011 were 11.5 and 11.7 pounds per cumulative treated acre, respectively. However, the rate of pesticide
Figure 9a. Location of Pioneer Fields in Relation to the Community of Waimea
Figure 9b. Location of Pioneer Fields in Relation to the Community of Waimea 19
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 24 of 48 PageID #: 8125
application per cumulative treated acre dropped significantly in 2012, to 2.0 pounds per treated acre. This decline in use is at least in part due to the records inconsistencies between the CDMS system and the Old Access and Original records systems where it appears that there is significant underreporting for several products in the CDMS system. For restricted use active ingredients, the total amounts applied per treated acre in 2010, 2011, and 2012, were 6.1, 4.7, and 0.7 pounds per treated acre, respectively. Again, because of the apparent underreporting in the CDMS system, the large decline in active ingredient use in 2012 might not be real. The average rate of restricted use pesticide applications per cumulative acre treated was 7.9 pounds product and 3.6 pounds active ingredient over the three-year span.
In 2010, 2011, and 2012 the rate of all pesticide product applications was 12.0, 6.8, and 3.1 pounds per cumulative acre treated, respectively. The rates of total active ingredients applied per cumulative acre treated in 2010, 2011, and 2012 were 7.4, 3.2, and 2.4 pounds, respectively. The average rate of all pesticide applications per cumulative acre treated was 7.4 pounds product and 4.3 pounds active ingredient over the three-year span.
Table 4. Pioneer Pesticide Usage in Pounds per Cumulative Area Treated in Waimea from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2012
A. Restricted Use Pesticides Summed Total Pounds per Pounds AI Pounds AI Year Area Treated Pounds Acreage per Acreage Applied (Acres) Applied Treated Treated 2010 1,220 13,971 11.5 7,424 6.1
2011 1,124 13,111 11.7 5,294 4.7
2012 1,428 2,829 2.0 1,048 0.7
2010-12 3,772 29,911 7.9 13,766 3.6
B. All Pesticide Products w/Registration Number Summed Total Pounds per Pounds AI Pounds AI Year Area Treated Pounds Acreage per Acreage Applied (Acres) Applied Treated Treated 2010 5,109 61,721 12.0 36,680 7.4
2011 4,468 30,494 6.8 14,247 3.2
2012 4,832 14,859 3.1 11,459 2.4
2010-12 14,409 107,074 7.4 62,386 4.3
20
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 25 of 48 PageID #: 8126
It should be noted that the results presented in Table 4 do not indicate the amount of pesticide product or active ingredient applied on a per acre basis for each Pioneer field in Waimea but rather the total amount applied over a year for all acres treated and for all treatments. In other words, the same Pioneer fields are treated for pesticides several times per year and looking at the cumulative totals does not provide an accurate representation of the amount of pesticide use per acre of Pioneer land. The actual amount of pesticides applied per acre of land would be much higher than the amount used per cumulative treated acreage.
Table 5 presents the rate of pesticide active ingredient application on a “field-acre” basis from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012 (Source: Pesticide Action Network, 2013). To arrive at these figures, the amount of active ingredient application was totaled for each individual Pioneer field treated over the calendar year and then divided by the number of acres of each distinct field. Using this approach, as noted above, the rate of active
Table 5. Pioneer Pesticide Usage in Pounds per Field-Acre Treated in Waimea from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2012*
A. Restricted Use Pesticides
Active Ingredients Year Field-Acres Treated Pounds AI Applied Applied per Field- Acre (pounds)
2010 348 9,155 26.3
2011 440 6,459 14.7
2012 135 1,366 10.1
2010-12 923 16,980 18.4
B. All Pesticides, Excluding OMRI Certified
Active Ingredients Year Field-Acres Treated Pounds AI Applied Applied per Field- Acre (pounds)
2010 402 22,726 56.5
2011 486 15,072 31.0
2012 933 2,622 2.8
2010-12 1,821 40,420 22.2
* Table 5 was generated using the analysis and numbers prepared and reported by staff of the Pesticide Action Network.
21
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 26 of 48 PageID #: 8127
ingredient application is significantly higher on a per field-acre basis than when considering cumulative treated acreage. In 2010, the amount of restricted use active ingredients applied per field-acre of Pioneer land was 26.3 pounds. This a rate more than four times the rate when calculated using the cumulative treated acre method in Table 4. Also in 2010, the rate of all pesticide active ingredients applied to the Pioneer fields was 56.5 pounds per field- acre, which is 7.6 times the calculated amount using the cumulative treated acre method. As observed in Table 4 for the cumulative treated area, the rate of both restricted and general use active ingredients applied per acre of land appears to decline from 2010 to 2012. As with the results shown in Table 4, this decline is due at least in part to the inconsistencies in reporting and usage values in the CDMS records compared to the other Pioneer records.
IV. Summary of Adverse Health Effects in Humans from Pesticide Exposure
Acute (short-term) signs and symptoms of pesticide exposure/poisoning are often associated with a specific event or events, such as a worker exposure during pesticide application, a drift episode where visual drifts or odors are observed followed by health effects such as burning eyes, skin irritation, respiratory irritation (coughing), or following environmental releases/accidents, food contamination, or attempted suicides.
The spectrum of initial signs and symptoms depends on the pesticides themselves and the route of exposure (breathing, ingestion, skin contact), but often there is some similarity, at least at first. The scientific and medical literature is full of case reports of individuals exhibiting a range of medical problems starting with flu-like symptoms to more severe airway reactions and multiple nervous system effects and then ultimately high enough exposures will cause convulsions, respiratory paralysis, and death.
Here is a list of general signs and symptoms reported for acute cases of pesticide poisoning or for which there are reported links between pesticide exposure and human health conditions:
Odor (odors alone can trigger other ill effects or complaints) Flu-like symptoms Irritation to skin, eyes, nose and throat Burning eyes (some pesticides can cause blindness) Excessive tearing and or contracted pupils Constrictive pupils in more severe exposures (pinpoint pupils) Excessive sweating and salivation Burning skin or rashes, welts or hives (erythema) Headache and or dizziness and or blurred vision Fever Nausea, loss of appetite Cramps and diarrhea Vomiting Involuntary urination or bowel movements Increase or slowing of heartbeat (changes in pulse rate) Elevated blood pressure (hypertension) 22
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 27 of 48 PageID #: 8128
Tightness in chest Respiratory effects (irritation, constricted breathing, burning) Asthma-like responses (more severe respiratory constriction, spasms or respiratory airway distress syndrome) Sensitization and allergic-type reactions (these can be mild or possibly life-threatening, depending on the individual reaction) Multiple chemical sensitivities (MCS) Soreness of joints Numbness or tingling in fingertips, toes, hands and feet, muscle twitches or spasms or loss of muscle function (usually reversible), loss of coordination, loss of balance, strange gait (walking) Memory loss, cognitive dysfunction, other central nervous system disorders such as behavioral abnormalities, behavioral changes, hyperactivity, moodiness, change in sleeping patterns Peripheral neuropathy (dying back of peripheral nerves is the worst condition, which could be irreversible) Paralysis Convulsions, seizures Unconsciousness, coma Respiratory paralysis (typical cause of death) Death of the primary exposed individual Fetal death in the form of miscarriage, abortion, or other fetal death Birth defects, following pesticide exposure in a pregnant woman Developmental toxicity, including structural and functional problems, following pesticide exposure in a pregnant woman (includes delayed diagnosis of behavioral and cognitive problems or reduced IQ in a child or even possibly autism)
In addition to the above list, clinical tests or diagnoses might reveal the following clinical signs or illnesses following repeated or multiple exposures to lower levels of pesticides:
Changes in blood chemistry (anemia, increased white blood cell count) Chronic fatigue Reproductive failures (difficult to diagnose without tests) such as inability to conceive, a measured decline in sperm motility or reduction in the number of sperm, sterility Disruption in normal endocrine function (can affect a variety or organ systems as well as reproductive outcomes, metabolic functions, and central nervous system function) Immune deficiency disorders Central nervous system disorders not immediately apparent with higher levels of exposure Parkinsonism Delayed peripheral neuropathy (might be the result of one high level exposure but this is a delayed response and has a specific pathology) Changes in liver (death of liver cells, jaundice, fibrosis and or cirrhosis) and or kidney function (protein and blood in urine, decreased function) – damage to either organ can lead to an increase in toxic substances in blood since these organs are essential in the process of detoxification Genetic damage (requires specific tests) Various cancers
23
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 28 of 48 PageID #: 8129
Presenting this list of possible signs and symptoms of pesticide poisoning is not meant to imply that every person exposed to pesticide products under conditions of use by Pioneer in Waimea would exhibit the same effects or that any person would exhibit all or even many of these effects. The actual demonstrated effect is dependent on dose, exposure duration, the mechanism of action of the pesticide, the individual’s health status, age, gender, etc., as well as other factors.
V. Toxicological Effects Linked to Pioneer Pesticides
As stated in the “Scope of Work” above, I was asked to review the pesticide products and active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea in terms of expected and possible adverse health effects, including acute toxicity, nervous system disorders, developmental (and reproductive) toxicity, genetic toxicity, cancer, and other health effects. In order to facilitate my review and assessment of the large number of pesticide formulations (70) and active ingredients (54) used by Pioneer between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012, I used a two-step approach to prioritize the active ingredients on the basis of potential health concerns and then I conducted a refined analysis for only those active ingredient that were in the top third of the screening assessment.
The first step I took was to reduce the number of active ingredients by eliminating 10 of little health concern such as barrier films, petroleum extracts, and herbal mixtures. To prioritize the remaining 44 active ingredients, I used standard and widely accepted scientific approaches for evaluating and weighing the quality and relevance of experimental data for priority-setting and regulatory decision-making. In other words, had I been presented with the same information and been asked to evaluate the toxicity data for similar pesticides under different circumstances, I would have followed the exact same procedures as I did in preparing this report. Sources of Scientific Information In conducting the evaluation of the health effects associated with the prioritized 44 pesticide active ingredients (see above) used by Pioneer in Waimea during the three-year span covering January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012, I reviewed the summaries of available toxicology databases for the registration of pesticides from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/) and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) (http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/risk/toxsums/toxsumlist.htm). The data submitted by a manufacturer of a pesticide product are primarily the results from toxicity testing in laboratory animals conducted in accordance with guidelines published by EPA. The database also contains results from studies that do not meet the criteria set forth in the EPA guidelines. Results from such studies are not invalid, however, the methodology used or the information reported might not meet a minimum standard of quality and consistency, especially among older studies. Note: the actual registrant studies are labeled as trade secret and require special permission to access. Therefore the publicly accessible information only includes summaries of key studies made by government staff and laboratory personnel hired by the manufacturers to conduct the toxicity testing. The raw data and the original reports are not available for review.
I also relied upon information listed on the pesticide product labels. I supplemented this information with a survey of the open scientific literature using Pub Med, Toxnet, Medline, Toxline, and other searchable database libraries for toxicology and epidemiology studies not
24
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 29 of 48 PageID #: 8130
included in the registration databases, as well as technical information available on the Internet. The scientific literature I reviewed is published in internationally recognized peer- reviewed journals. I reviewed articles written in English only. It should be noted that the official pesticide registration database in many cases is significantly outdated and/or incomplete; there are important animal and human studies not included in the databases that have been published in the open scientific literature. Initial Toxicology Screening The first step I took was to complete an initial “screening level” review of the toxicology database and supplemental data for all of the active ingredients (Appendix B). The screening level assessment relies heavily on the reviews by professional technical staff at EPA or CDPR responsible for determining the registration eligibility of pesticides products. When available, I used supplemental information obtained from the open peer-reviewed scientific literature and from reviews conducted by the European government.
The health effect outcomes I selected in my screening evaluation include adverse effects commonly observed and reported after both acute and chronic exposures to a pesticide in laboratory toxicity tests. Acute effects are observed a single or a limited number of exposures to high levels of a pesticide over a brief period of time (for example hours to days). Longer-term subchronic or chronic effects are observed following multiple, repeated exposures to lower levels of a pesticide over extended periods of time (months to years to lifetime). For the longer-term effects, I selected the studies required for registering a pesticide product under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, including cancer, reproductive and developmental toxicity, genetic toxicity, and nervous system toxicity (EPA 2013). I also added immune system toxicity and endocrine (hormonal) system toxicity because these effects are very sensitive at very low levels of a chemical. Toxic effects to the endocrine system are often referred to as “endocrine disruption.”
In order to evaluate and compare the overall data available for a screening level toxicity assessment I used a “weight-of-evidence” approach, which is commonly utilized in regulatory agencies to compare and prioritize chemicals for toxicity concern. A weight-of- evidence approach involves considering the strengths and weaknesses of the available toxicity data in order to reach a conclusion regarding the overall toxicity profile of a given chemical. To conduct a weight-of-evidence assessment, the relative quality and relevance of the different data are evaluated and then assigned a value for each piece of information. This can be accomplished in an objective way by using a formalized procedure (for example, assigning more “points” for ascending confidence in the database) and/or by using expert judgment. I incorporated both of these accepted methods into my screening level assessment.
The value assigned to the available information will be influenced by factors such as the quality of the data, consistency of results, nature and severity of effects, and relevance of the information for the given health effects outcome. Therefore, the weight-of-evidence approach I used requires: 1) identifying health effects of concern from the available studies, 2) evaluating the strength of the database for the individual selected health effects, and 3) assigning a value for the available data that can help me rank the potential toxicity concern for each chemical. The most important aspect of using this approach is to ensure consistency in criteria used to assign weight values to the data.
For the purposes of the initial toxicity screening level assessment, I assigned the available evidence for a specific toxicity outcome (for example cancer) a value of “W” for weak, an “M” 25
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 30 of 48 PageID #: 8131
for moderate, or an “S” for strong. Using the cancer health endpoint as an example, if statistically positive results were reported for tumors in two or more species, or tumors in both male and female animals in the same species, or a rare tumor reported in one species, then an “S” for strong evidence was designated. An “M” for moderate would be applied when a statistically positive result is reported for more than one tumor type in one species or gender, or positive tumorogenicity data with other supporting evidence for carcinogenicity (e.g., precancerous lesions). A “W” for weak evidence was assigned for positive tumor data in one species for one tumor. Positive human epidemiological evidence is also factored in when available. When all of the data available provide no evidence for a toxic effect, I tagged the data as “Negative,” the lowest value assigned. If the data available are insufficient or missing, I tagged it as a “Data Gap.” If a chemical has been designated to be a carcinogen, a reproductive or developmental toxicant and/or an endocrine disruptor by a government agency, an “S” was automatically assigned for the relevant health effect category.
In addition to the strength and relevance of the available toxicity data, I also abstracted the reported lowest-observed-adverse-effect levels (LOAELs) from government reviews available from EPA and CDPR for an active ingredient in the pesticide registration database. No LOAELs were included from independent research conducted on an active ingredient. A LOAEL is the lowest dose tested in a toxicology test that results in a non-cancer adverse health outcome. The lower the LOAEL, the more potent the chemical is in causing that effect. The LOAEL is not the lowest level of a chemical that will cause a non-cancer adverse effect; it is the lowest dose used in a toxicology test that caused an effect. Because toxicity tests often only use two or three dose levels of a chemical, it is likely that the smallest dose needed to cause toxicity in an experimental animal is actually lower than the LOAEL. The main purpose of including the LOAEL values in my analysis was to add an additional ranking factor for prioritizing chemicals of concern for further analysis.
The results of my initial toxicity screening evaluation are shown in Table 6. Of the 44 pesticide active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012, I assigned approximately one-third (15) the score of “High,” one-third (14) as “Medium,” and the last third (14) as “Low” concern on a relative scale. One active ingredient, simazine, I combined with the toxicity ranking for atrazine because they are structurally-related, share common toxicity traits, and simazine was only applied once on one day during the three-year span evaluated. Priority Scoring for the Top 15 Active Ingredients The second step in the active ingredient prioritization process is to consider the toxicity data along with potential exposure factors to rank the top 15 pesticides (marked with an “H” in Table 6) in relative order of importance for public health concern. Because these 15 active ingredients received the highest ranking during the toxicity screening analysis, all of the active ingredients pose a significant concern with regard to inherent toxicity and warrant a high level of concern and caution when used in or near residential and publicly accessible areas. However, the relative use metrics associated with the application of active ingredients by Pioneer in Waimea provide additional important information as to the overall potential public health impact of Pioneer’s pesticide use practices. Table 7 provides the relative rankings for five categories of toxicity and use/exposure metrics and then one overall ranking of the 15 high concern active ingredients.
26
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 31 of 48 PageID #: 8132
In the first column of Table 7, I used a combination of assigned values and expert judgment to rank in relative order the existing toxicity data on the active ingredients. Despite my reluctance to rank the active ingredients in terms of health effects, it is important to consider the relative importance to inform management efforts in reducing public health risk. The scoring system I use awards higher points for the strength of the evidence in the subchronic and chronic health effects categories in Appendix B.
Carbaryl, a carbamate insecticide, ranked the highest on my list in terms of the toxicity evidence because the chemical is a probable human carcinogen and is also likely to cause birth defects and developmental toxicity (OEHHA 2013). There is also strong evidence for carbaryl to cause genetic toxicity, immunotoxicity, and it is a suspected endocrine disruptor. Carbaryl is a reversible cholinesterase inhibitor and therefore a neurotoxicant at high enough doses.
I rated dimethoate (organophosphate insecticide) and cypermethrin (pyrethroid insecticide) second based on the health effects data. There is moderate to strong evidence for dimethoate and cypermethrin to cause cancer, genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity including developmental neurotoxicity, endocrine disruption and immunotoxicity. Dimethoate is an irreversible cholinesterase inhibitor. Recent evidence not available at the time that EPA conducted its risk assessment for cypermethrin demonstrates significant effects on sperm production and endocrine effects. It is a developmental toxicant and causes delayed neuropathy in experimental toxicity tests. Other active ingredients that rated very high in health effects scoring include mancozeb (and ethylenethiourea a breakdown product), a dithiocarbamate insecticide, paraquat dichloride, a quaternary ammonium herbicide, and atrazine (atrazine is chlorotriazine herbicide, which also includes simazine).
Looking at the three active ingredients ranked lowest in Table 7, column 1, β-Cyfluthrin, a pyrethroid insecticide (ranked lowest in terms of health effects) is a neurotoxicant that causes birth defects and delayed neuropathy. Methomyl (carbamate insecticide) and permethrin (pyrethroid insecticide) are both neurotoxicants. Permethrin is likely to be a human carcinogen with moderate evidence for genetic, immune, and developmental toxicity. The evidence for methomyl as a carcinogen is not sufficient however its metabolite, thiodicarb is known to the State of California as a probable human carcinogen (OEHHA 2013). There is moderate evidence for methomyl to cause genetic toxicity and to act as an endocrine disruptor. I highlight this information because it shows that the relative concern of the toxicity data between the top and the bottom chemicals on my list is subtle and demonstrates that all of these active ingredients are toxic and present a significant public health threat when exposure is possible.
The second column in Table 7 provides a ranking of the lowest observed adverse (non- cancer) effect levels (LOAELs) reported in Table 6 for each active ingredient used by Pioneer in Waimea during the three-year span of interest. This is an empirical, value-based ranking with the lowest LOAEL receiving the highest ranking of 15. There is not necessarily a direct correlation between the ranking of the LOAELs and the ranking of the health effects (column 1, Table 7). This is because the LOAELs are reported only for non-cancer effects and several of the top-rated active ingredients in terms of health effects ranked high due to carcinogenic activity; carcinogenic activity does not usually exhibit a threshold for effects.
Columns three and four in Table 7 provide a ranking of the number of applications for each active ingredient and the total amount used based on the Pioneer pesticide use records. 27
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 32 of 48 PageID #: 8133
The rankings are based on empirical data, with the active ingredient most frequently applied or used (in terms of pounds applied) receiving a score of 15 and declining in order with the active ingredients least applied receiving the lower scores. The fifth column in Table 7 provides an assigned value of 1, 2, or 3 for the potential of the active ingredient to migrate offsite (off the Pioneer fields) in the air, soil, or water. A score of 3 relates to a high or moderate potential for the chemical to migrate offsite. A score of 2 means the chemical has a low probability to migrate far from the Pioneer fields. A score of 1 means the active ingredient is not likely to migrate far from the Pioneer fields. The data on migration potential for these active ingredients is not always comparable or complete and therefore I had to use expert judgment in assigning these values.
The overall ranking in Table 7 (column six) is the ranking of the summed values in columns one through 5 and ordered from the highest overall value to the highest. A higher overall total score equates to a higher level of concern. Based on this ranking approach, paraquat dichloride ranks the highest of the 15 active ingredients originally screened as the highest of concern among the 54 active ingredients applied by Pioneer in Waimea from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012. Chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate insecticide, ranks a close second with malathion (also an organophosphate insecticide) and carbaryl tied for third highest rank. At the bottom of the ranking list are bromoxynil, a nitrile herbicide, β-cyfluthrin, and thiodicarb, a carbamate insecticide.
Toxicological Effects of Mixtures As reported in Section III (pesticide use trends and statistics), more than one unique active ingredient is commonly applied by Pioneer in Waimea during any single application day. Multiple active ingredients are applied because: 1) a single pesticide formulation contains more than one active ingredient, and/or 2) more than one pesticide product is applied on the same day. On 80.6 percent of the days that pesticides were applied from February 2007 to December 31, 2012, two or more unique active ingredients were used. Over the span of six years, Pioneer averaged nearly four unique active ingredient ingredients when applying pesticide products. Figure 10 presents the use profile of multiple unique active ingredients from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012. The highest number of unique active ingredients applied on any one day was 10; this occurred twice in 2010. The average number of multiple active ingredients applied was 3.8, 3.5, and 4.0 for 2010, 2011, and 2012, respectively. It is likely that anyone in the range of exposure to pesticides applied to the Pioneer fields will be exposed to more than one chemical active ingredient on that same day.
The toxicology data required and submitted in support of the registration of pesticides is typically for a single chemical (the active ingredient) only and not for a combination of chemicals (multiple active ingredients or active ingredients plus “inert” or other ingredients). When acute toxicity of a pesticide formulation is assessed, other ingredients would contribute to the overall toxicity since the formula itself is tested. Other ingredients in a pesticide formulation often contribute to modulate the acute toxicity of a pesticide formulation. However, for subchronic effects (for example, reproductive or developmental toxicity) or chronic effects (for example cancer), only the specific active ingredient is tested in laboratory animals. In other words, only one chemical is tested for toxicity. This is true even for pesticide formulations that contain more than one active ingredient (for example, Affinity herbicide, Bicep II Magnum herbicide, and Poast herbicide).
28
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 33 of 48 PageID #: 8134
29
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 34 of 48 PageID #: 8135
30
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 35 of 48 PageID #: 8136
31
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 36 of 48 PageID #: 8137
Humans are exposed to mixtures of chemicals daily from a variety of common sources such as the environment and workplace, food and drinking water, consumer and household products, personal care products, cigarette smoke, pharmaceuticals, and many other sources. Analysis of people’s urine and blood from national and local biomonitoring efforts show that all people have measurable pesticides in their bodies that are either transient (eliminated relative quickly) or persistent (stored for longer periods in body fat). There is no debate that people are exposed to mixtures of pesticides from the environment and it is with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty that I conclude that Pioneer workers, people living near the Pioneer fields including residents of Waimea, and visitors to publicly accessible areas in the vicinity of Pioneer fields are exposed to mixtures of pesticides applied by Pioneer.
There is evidence that one chemical in a mixture can modulate certain toxicities of another chemical in the same mixture (COT 2002). For example, some chemical carcinogens require metabolism to be activated and there are many chemicals known to promote this activation in animals and humans, even if these “promoters” are not carcinogens themselves. Asbestos exposure and cigarette smoke are both known to individually cause lung cancer in humans. However, when combined exposures occur, the relative risk for lung cancer increases by ten times. Therefore, two toxic chemicals acting in combination might increase toxicity in an additive (1 + 1 = 2), synergistic (1 + 1 = 10), or antagonistic manner (1 + 1 = 0.5). Or there may be no change in the toxic effect observed. The outcome of mixing chemicals together is nearly impossible to predict with the limitations in capability and throughput of the currently available toxicity testing methods.
Epidemiological studies examining the relative risks of exposure to pesticide formulations or combinations of chemicals are available but the human epidemiological database for pesticide exposures is limited. Even more limited is the availability of pesticide exposure studies in humans that are relevant to the pesticide active ingredients applied to the Pioneer 32
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 37 of 48 PageID #: 8138
fields. With the exception of human exposure and epidemiological studies investigating combined exposures to chlorotriazine, organochlorine, and organophosphate (OP) pesticides there are no or very few studies available with direct relevance for the pesticides used in combination by Pioneer in Waimea.
In order to better examine the use of active ingredient combinations by Pioneer in Waimea, I selected 18 different combinations of pesticide products and active ingredients used on at least one day between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012. There are numerous other combinations of unique active ingredients used on multiple days throughout this period and it is beyond the scope of this report to list them all. Therefore, the 18 groups of active ingredients shown in Table 8 were listed in order to provide a representation of commonly used combinations used by Pioneer during this time period. It is important to remember that this is not a comprehensive listing of all combinations of active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea. Also, the combinations of active ingredients were not necessarily applied to the same fields at the same time, and it is not clear whether they were applied by the same individual throughout the course of the day or applied by more than one applicator, possibly simultaneously.
In addition to listing the combinations of active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012, Table 8 also provides the numbers of different carcinogens; developmental or reproductive toxicants; neuro- or immunotoxicants, or chemicals with positive genetic toxicity data in a mixture (or from multiple products applied on one day). For example, on January 8, 2010, six unique active ingredients were applied in 16 total applications. Four of these chemicals are rated to be in the highest health effects group (Table 6), four are carcinogens, five have positive genetic toxicity data, five are suspected developmental or reproductive toxicants and/or endocrine disruptors, four are neurotoxicants, and two chemicals affect the immune system. In addition, five of these chemicals have data gaps in toxicity testing.
In another example, on November 22, 2011, two days before Thanksgiving, seven unique active ingredients were used in 36 total applications. Among these unique active ingredients, two are rated in the highest health effects group, three are carcinogens, three have positive genetic toxicity resting results, four are developmental or reproductive toxicants, three are neurotoxicants, two cause immunotoxicity and five of the chemicals have data gaps in toxicity testing (Table 6). On November 23, 2011, four unique active ingredients were used in 38 applications and on Thanksgiving Day three unique active ingredients were used in 16 total applications.
Even active ingredient combinations with as few as two or three different chemicals can present a concern regarding exposure to chemical mixtures. For example, on February 5, 2010, the two active ingredients chlorpyrifos and malathion were used during 23 pesticide product applications (Table 8). Both of these chemicals are from the OP chemical class of pesticides and they share a similar mechanism of pesticidal action and mammalian toxicity. EPA generally recommends that assessment of exposure and risk of OP mixtures be considered as one rather than separate exposures. Similarly, two pyrethroid pesticides were used on October 2, 2012. As with OPs, pyrethroid insecticides share a common mechanism of pesticidal action and share some common toxicity traits.
33
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 38 of 48 PageID #: 8139
34
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 39 of 48 PageID #: 8140
It is widely recognized that the regulatory system for pesticides does not routinely address the toxic effects of different substances in combination. As noted above, registration requires only safety testing for individual active ingredients. Furthermore, the potential toxicological effects of mixtures of chemicals have been unaccounted for in most human health risk assessments for decades. Some health risk assessments have used rudimentary approaches to account for additive effects of chemicals with similar toxicity traits, or in a more refined way, by adding the effects of chemicals with similar mechanisms for causing toxicity (for example, OP insecticides that inhibit red blood cell cholinesterase activity) (EPA 2006). EPA has developed toxicity equivalence factors for structurally related chemicals such as the chlorinated dioxins and furans (EPA 2010). However, I was not able to locate any government-sanctioned report where pesticide active ingredient combinations, such as what have been used routinely in Waimea by Pioneer have been assessed either qualitatively or quantitatively for human health risk. I also found no results in the open peer- reviewed literature for such reports.
The lack of information and knowledge about the behavior and toxicity of pesticide mixtures in humans is extremely important to acknowledge. Despite the fairly extensive database available on the toxicity of individual active ingredients, these data not address how these chemicals act together in a biological system to modulate toxicity of a single chemical.
VI. Environmental Impacts Associated with Selected Pioneer Pesticides
In addition to potential adverse human health effects, pesticides applied to agricultural fields also impact the environment in several ways: 1) They can be toxic to wildlife and plant life in the surrounding ecosystem, impairing reproduction and other essential functions necessary for survival; 2) they can be toxic to beneficial insects such as honey bees; 3) they can alter ecosystems by disrupting the natural balance between native species and their natural food source; 4) they can promote the introduction of invasive species into an ecosystem by killing the native fauna and flora; and 5) they can cause resistance of pests to chemical pesticides from repeated exposure. Pesticides that are persistent and exhibit certain chemical traits (for example, are fat soluble) also have the capacity to accumulate in the environmental and ultimately the food chain (this is called “bioaccumulation”) resulting in toxicity to higher level species. Therefore, in addition to the inherent toxicity of a chemical active ingredient to beneficial species, environmental impacts are also measured by how pesticides behave in the environment (“environmental fate”), where and how far they migrate and whether they are soluble in water (“environmental transport”), and how long it takes for them to degrade and detoxify (“persistence”).
Appendix C provides a graphic summary of the scientific literature describing the environmental impacts of several selected pesticide active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea from 2007 to 2013. The environmental impacts traits such as toxicity to fish, birds, or mobility in soil and air reflect generally measured outcomes of pesticide active ingredients in field trials or laboratory tests. The primary sources of data I used to prepare this table included the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and other state agencies. I did not conduct my own literature search of the environmental impacts of the pesticide active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea.
35
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 40 of 48 PageID #: 8141
36
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 41 of 48 PageID #: 8142
37
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 42 of 48 PageID #: 8143
In Appendix C, the relative impacts of each environmental impact trait was denoted with a color and text designation of high, medium, low, and so forth. The legend in Appendix C provides more detail. In the column titled “Total Environment” I weighed the entirety of data summarized in the previous columns to provide an overall qualitative relative ranking of the different active ingredients for their potential impact on the environment in Waimea.
Table 9 presents a summary of the potential environmental impacts of selected pesticide active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea on beneficial species. These are the same data shown in Appendix C except the last column provides a relative ranking of concern for only the data on toxicity to beneficial species and not for the impact to the total environment as was done for Appendix C. Based on the profile of pesticide products and active ingredients used by Pioneer, the honey bee population in Waimea and surrounding areas is likely to be particularly vulnerable to the repeated use of organophosphate, carbamate, pyrethroid, and nicotinoid pesticides. In order to better characterize the threat of the Pioneer pesticide application activities to honey bees, Table 10 presents Pioneer’s use metrics for the pesticide active ingredients reported by EPA and other governmental agencies as either highly or moderately toxic to honey bees applied from 2010 through 2012. Twenty-two pesticide products were used in the three year span that contained 18 different active ingredients know to be toxic to honey bees. During this period, pesticide products containing bee-toxic active ingredients were applied 2,977 times resulting in nearly 26,000 pounds of product being added to the environment. Nearly 15,500 pounds of the active ingredients were applied between January 2101 and December 31, 2012.
38
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 43 of 48 PageID #: 8144
Figure 11 shows the pattern pesticide product applications by month over the three-year span. The heaviest use of these pesticide products occurred between November and May (2011) or November to June (2010) with an apparent reduction of use in the summer months. In 2012, the application pattern is somewhat different since there is no clear reduction of use during the summer months. The pattern of application of bee-toxic pesticides in 2011 by Pioneer is consistent with the reduction in the overall number of pesticide applications observed for the same time period (see Figure 2).
It should be noted that because only two of the three Pioneer pesticide use records (“Old Access” and “CDMS”) were used to create Table 10 and Figure 11, the results shown are underestimates of the actual use. If the “Original” data were also included, the number of applications of any pesticide product containing an active ingredient toxic to honey was actually 34% higher and the total pounds applied was 24% more than what is presented in this report. Furthermore, as noted previously, the records of pesticide use by Pioneer as documented in the “CDMS” system are, in my opinion, unreliable and indicate that there was an error in reporting or in unit conversions; several of the pesticides reported used in 2012 in the CDMS records appear to be underreported.
VII. Discussion of Health and Environmental Impacts of the Higher Priority Pioneer Pesticides Findings and Conclusions Based on my analysis of the available data and my expertise as a pesticide toxicologist and public health practitioner, I have the following findings and conclusions regarding the health implications associated with the types of pesticides used by Pioneer in Waimea:
1. Over the past six years, Pioneer has used 82 or more pesticide products containing 63 or more active ingredients, either individually or in combination. The pesticides applied to the Pioneer fields in Waimea include herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, and other pesticide types representing 34 different chemical classes.
2. Pesticide applications on the Pioneer fields occur frequently during the course of a year, on average about 65 percent of the time or about two out of every three days. Over the six-year span, there appears to be two months (December and January) when pesticide active ingredient applications appear to consistently increase and two months (September and October) when active ingredient application appears to decline. However, there is no time during the year when the application of pesticides does not occur and therefore there is a significant degree of unpredictability throughout the year as to when and to what extent pesticide applications are occurring on the Pioneer fields in Waimea. Unscheduled uses of pesticides compared to specific “use seasons” are far more unpredictable and present a greater hazard potential to the uninformed.
3. Over the six-year span from February 2007 to December 2012, Pioneer applied to its fields, on the average, 8.0 pesticide products each day.
4. Over the six-year span, Pioneer used, on the average, 12 active ingredients (range is 9 to 15.5) on any day when they applied pesticides and 8.0 active ingredients every day when considering all days with or without pesticide applications.
39
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 44 of 48 PageID #: 8145
5. The pattern and frequency of active ingredient applications by Pioneer in Waimea in the summer and fall of 2011 is dramatically different compared to the other five years on record. Although the pattern of frequency of use in 2011 is comparable to the other years from January to June, active ingredient applications declined significantly over the next four months. After October 2011, the “typical” pattern of active ingredient application resumed, although on the average the numbers of active ingredient applications remained lower than in previous years. There is no obvious explanation for this unusual use activity that can be gleaned from Pioneer’s records.
6. Over the span of six years, Pioneer averaged using 3.2 unique active ingredient ingredients whenever applying pesticide products to their fields in Waimea.
7. In 2010, 2011, and 2012, Pioneer applied 6.1, 4.7, and 0.7 pounds of restricted use active ingredients per cumulative acre treated, respectively, with an average of 3.6 pounds per cumulative acre treated over the three year span. Pioneer applied all active ingredients (restricted and general use) at rates of 7.4, 3.2, and 2.4 pounds active ingredients per cumulative acre treated, respectively, with an average of 4.3 pounds per cumulative acre treated for the three-year span.
8. In 2010, 2011, and 2012, Pioneer applied 26.3, 14.7, and 10.1 pounds of restricted use active ingredients per acre of fields, respectively, with an average of 18.4 pounds per acre over the three year span. Pioneer applied all active ingredients (restricted and general use) at rates of 56.5, 31.0, and 2.8 pounds active ingredients per acre, respectively, with an average of 22.2 pounds per acre for the three-year span.
9. Based on the data summarized in 7 and 8 above, it appears that Pioneer reduced the amount of pesticide active ingredients used per acre of land from 2010 to 2012. However, as explained elsewhere, the usage record inconsistencies between the CDMS system and the Old Access and Original records could account for some or all of this apparent decline if the pesticide use is underreported in the CDMS system as I suspect.
10. The active ingredients used in these pesticide products cause a myriad of health effects in experimental animals from repeated exposures, including: cancer; reproductive toxicity; birth defects; toxicity to the endocrine, immune, and nervous systems; genetic toxicity; and toxic effects in organs such as liver, kidney, blood, stomach, and skin. Animal study results are widely accepted in the scientific community as surrogates and predictors of human toxicity.
11. The top 15 pesticides in the “High” concern category exhibit significant and severe toxicity traits. Exposure to these chemicals should be avoided and it would best if Pioneer stopped using all of these pesticide products. Even active ingredients in the “Medium” tier of the initial toxicity screening demonstrate specific toxicity traits that present a cause for concern.
12. Based on my analysis of the toxicity traits, use information, and potential for migration offsite of the top 15 pesticide active ingredients, I ranked the top 15 chemicals from the initial toxicity screening in the following order of overall concern: paraquat dichloride, chlorpyrifos, malathion, carbaryl, methomyl, dimethoate, cypermethrin, propiconazole, atrazine (and simizine), permethrin, cyhalothrin, mancozeb/ETU, bromoxynil, β- cyfluthrin, and thiodicarb.
40
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 45 of 48 PageID #: 8146
13. Exposures to complex mixtures of carcinogens, reproductive and/or developmental toxicants, endocrine disruptors, genetic toxicants, and chemicals that affect the immune and/or nervous systems or exhibit other types of toxicity can occur when multiple active ingredients are applied to Pioneer’s fields at the same time or on the same day. Based on the use records maintained by Pioneer, I conclude with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty that Pioneer workers, people living near the Pioneer fields including residents of Waimea, and visitors to publicly accessible areas in the vicinity of Pioneer fields are exposed to individual pesticide products as well as mixtures of pesticides applied by Pioneer with the potential for serious health consequences.
14. The pesticides applied to agricultural fields by Pioneer are more likely than not having a negative impact on the local environment in several ways: 1) they are likely impacting wildlife and plant life in the surrounding ecosystem, impairing reproduction and other essential functions necessary for survival; 2) they are likely causing toxicity to beneficial insects such as honey bees; 3) they have a significant potential to alter ecosystems by disrupting the natural balance between native species and their natural food source; 4) they have the potential to promote the introduction of invasive species into an ecosystem by killing the native fauna and flora; and 5) the repeated overuse of these pesticides is likely to result in a resistance of undesirable pests to the chemical pesticides.
15. In particular, Pioneer consistently uses pesticides products that are known to be toxic to beneficial species such as honey bees at alarming rates. For example, in 2010, Pioneer made approximately 1,200 applications of more than 13,600 pounds of a combination of bee-toxic pesticides. This trend continued in 2011 with 724 applications of 10,872 pounds. In 2012, the number of applications of bee-toxic pesticides increased to over 1,400 applications. With a reasonable degree of scientific certainty I conclude that the honey bee populations in Waimea are at significant risk for decline as a result of Pioneer’s pesticide use practices. Data Gaps and Methodological Limitations 1. Individual spray records for the same days in overlapping time periods frequently differed among the spreadsheets, which raises a concern about the overall quality of Pioneer’s records. In particular, the records designated as “CDMS” for part of the 2011 year, all of 2012, and for a brief period in 2013 utilize different units than were used in the “Old Access” system and as reported in the “Original” records. Some examples of inconsistencies among reported pesticide product use when comparing the three records sources include Malathion 8 Aquamul, Lannate LV, and Dimethoate 400. These three products are some of the most heavily used products by Pioneer. For these three products the reported use per acre differences range from 15 to almost 200-fold for CDMS records compared to Old Access and Original records. In all cases, these inconsistencies result in a significant underreporting in the CDMS system, assuming that the Original and Old Access systems are correct. These unresolved inconsistencies need to be taken into account when comparing use amounts among the three year period 2010-2012. 2. Because the results of toxicity studies submitted by pesticide product registrants are trade secret I was not able to review original data. Therefore, I relied upon the evaluations of toxicologists at EPA and CDPR.
41
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 46 of 48 PageID #: 8147
3. For many pesticide active ingredients, the toxicological data for toxicities of concern are not available or are insufficient. Data gaps in toxicity testing result in incomplete toxicity profiles and could result in an underestimate of risk. 4. The highest priority active ingredients in terms of toxicity and use included about 34 percent of all of the active ingredients used by Pioneer in Waimea between January 2010 and December 2012. Therefore, I did not further evaluate 66% of the active ingredients used. 5. There is little or no information about the toxicity of active ingredient mixtures. 6. The analysis I conducted is primarily qualitative (descriptive). I would require specific exposure data for each pesticide active ingredient in order to conduct a quantitative assessment of risk.
VIII. Impact on the Waimea Community
Risk is typically defined as the “probability that certain harm will occur.” With adequate toxicity testing and exposure data, risks of adverse health outcomes from exposure to chemicals such as pesticides can be estimated, although not with potential daily exposures to chemical mixtures as is the case in Waimea. However, determining what level of risk is “acceptable” to an individual or a community is not possible without first seeking input from those affected. The principle of beneficence for society involves maximizing benefits while minimizing harm. This balancing act is often called “risk-benefit.” In the case of Waimea, residents do not receive any benefit from the application of pesticides to Pioneer’s fields whereas they assume all of the risk of harm.
In order to evaluate the overall impact of the potential daily exposures of Waimea residents to multiple active pesticide active ingredients, consideration of the concept of “minimal risk” is appropriate and reasonable. Minimal risk is when the probability and magnitude of harm or discomfort anticipated by some actions or events are not greater in and of themselves than those ordinarily encountered in daily life. There are four categories of harm that could apply to Waimea residents resulting from the extraordinary heavy use of pesticides by Pioneer:
1. Physical. In Section IV of my report I listed the types of adverse health effects generally associated with exposures to chemical pesticides in humans. In many situations, physical risks associated with exposures to chemicals in the environment can be minimized by fully following regulatory procedures and guidelines and taking precautionary approaches when feasible, having only properly trained and equipped individuals handle hazardous chemicals, regularly monitoring air and water quality in communities, performing routine medical monitoring of impacted populations to track and assess health status, and by providing clinical care when needed.
2. Psychological. Regardless of whether physical risks are real or perceived, there is a significant risk for psychological harm to individuals or communities when they experience external, uncontrollable threats to their well-being. The residents of Waimea chose to live in this area because of a certain quality of life they have come to expect and enjoy. Environmental concerns such as those experienced in Waimea erode that quality of life. In some cases counseling or psychological support for those who experience distress is helpful. However, in the case of Waimea residents, it is likely that 42
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 47 of 48 PageID #: 8148
psychological harm would only be diminished when Pioneer ceases its current operations.
3. Social. Often, environmental pollution concerns such as those that exist in Waimea can split communities and create tension among neighbors and peers. This tension can result in mistrust and anxiety, which in turn may contribute to the overall psychological harm for an individual. Under these conditions, social stigmas may be attributed to a variety of individual and personal circumstances. For example, individuals with health conditions are often stigmatized in a society; obesity, HIV positivity, birth defects, amputations, and mental illness are some common conditions. Individuals with property damage and/or bankruptcy can also lead to social stigmas. It is reasonable to assume that individuals who have come forward expressing physical or psychological illness from the real or perceived pesticide exposures in Waimea could be stigmatized. Social stigmas cause lasting harm in an individual.
4. Economic. Economic harm related to property damage and devaluation, loss of work and pay due to illness, and reduced tourism are some examples of further impact of Pioneer’s activities and operations in Waimea. An analysis of the economic impacts of the pesticide use by Pioneer on Waimea is beyond the scope of this report.
Although the residents and community of Waimea face some degree of risk of adverse health effects from ambient levels of chemicals in the environment, it is my expert opinion that the conditions in Waimea as a result of Pioneer’s activities and operations are well above what is ordinarily encountered in daily life. I conclude from my analysis, within a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that the conditions prevalent in Waimea exceed a minimal risk hazard due to the pesticide application activities of Pioneer. Furthermore, I conclude that the principle of beneficence is not satisfied; that is, the residents and community of Waimea receive none of the benefit but all of the risk from these activities.
IX. List of Selected References Cited in Report
The number of documents, reports, and publications I relied upon to produce my report is quite extensive. All of the documents I referred to in developing the tables, figures, and text in the report are provided in electronic format as an addendum to this report. All other references I relied on can be produced on a CD. The only references I am providing here are for the selected documents I cited in my report.
COT (2002). Risk Assessment of Mixtures of Pesticides and Similar Substances, Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT), Food Standards Agency, United Kingdom http://cot.food.gov.uk/.
EPA (2006). Organophosphorous Cumulative Risk Assessment 2006 Update, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs, July 31, 2006.
EPA (2010). Recommended Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs) for Human Health Risk Assessments of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the Science Advisor, Risk Assessment Forum, December 2010.
43
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-4 Filed 06/24/14 Page 48 of 48 PageID #: 8149
EPA (2013). Data Requirements for Pesticide Registration, August 2013, http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/data_requirements.htm.
HI (2013). Licensed Pesticides Listing, State of Hawaii, downloaded on 11/2/13 https://data.hawaii.gov/Health/LICENSED-PESTICIDES-LISTING/rzjk-9g6v.
OEHHA (2013). Chemicals Known to the State to Cause Cancer or Reproductive Toxicity, California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento CA http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65.html.
Spreadsheet 1 (2013). Waimea Spray Records, February 2007 - February 2011 (PDF version). “Original” Records.
Spreadsheet 2 (2013). Waimea Spray Records, Old Access System, December 13, 2009 - December 31, 2011. “Old Access” Records.
Spreadsheet 3 (2013). Waimea Spray Records, CDMS, October 4, 2011 – January 14, 2013. “CDMS” Records.
44
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-5 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 8150
Expert Report Jim Aana et al., vs. DuPont Pioneer, et al. CV12 00231 – LEK-BMK United States District Court District of Hawaii
Author: Lorrin Pang, MD, MPH Date: March 12, 2014 I. Scope of Work I have been asked to review the facts and circumstances of this case and offer an expert opinion whether DuPont Pioneer’s creation of fugitive dust and pesticide drift constitutes a public health concern for the community of Waimea. II. Core Conclusion DuPont Pioneer’s creation of fugitive dust and pesticide drift constitutes a public health concern for the community of Waimea. III. Background and Experience My name is Lorrin Pang, MD, MPH and I have worked in the field of medicine, public health and research for nearly 40 years, in Southeast Asia, Latin America and Africa developing drugs, vaccines, and diagnostics against tropical diseases. I am Board Certified in Preventive Medicine and have worked as an US Army preventive medicine officer (1987-90) where my responsibilities included the occupational health and environmental hygiene programs for a population of 110,000. I retired from the Walter Reed Institute of Research and the World Health Organization after 20 years of service. I taught clinical research and product development principles for the World Health Organization/United Nations Development Program, 1985-2005. Since 2000 I returned to the Hawaii Dept of Health (DOH) as the District Health Officer for Maui County. My CV is attached. Since joining the DOH I have investigated several complaints related to commercial agriculture practices in both Maui county and Kauai county. These communities have sought my advice for illness outbreaks resembling acute pesticide exposures (Waimea, Kauai and Molokai) as well as case reports of chronic conditions, including cancers (Kauai and Maui). I have also investigated/published community complaints of waterborne outbreaks from chemical additives working with the DOH as well as the EPA. I am completing an investigation of health risks of smoke from burning sugar cane during harvesting on Maui. Preliminary findings have been presented in conjunction with the UH Hilo school of pharmacy at scientific meetings. I have visited Waimea, Kauai numerous times over the past several years to investigate and attend hearings regarding health risks related to pesticides used by neighboring agricultural operations. These hearings involved county, state and federal agencies. I am also working with
1 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-5 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 8151
Pesticide Action Network (PAN) to design an epidemiologic study to assess chronic illnesses related to pesticide exposure. I have visited Kauai over a dozen times during the past decade to lecture on GMO-related issues and am familiar with both the community and geographic conditions of Waimea, Kauai. I have consulted with the former health officer of Kauai (Ron Metler, MD) for incidents of individuals exposed to pesticides from Waimea’s agriculture operations. I have given testimony (twice) and consulted with Kauai physicians and health care professionals with regard to the risks of pesticides to Kauai and concerning the recent bill for more precautions for GMO farming practices (pesticide disclosure, buffer zones and health studies). In Brazil (1992-97) I treated acute malathion poisoning from agricultural practices as well as chronic neurologic conditions related to mercury toxicity from gold mining practices. I was responsible (1987-90) for the safety conditions and outbreak investigations of the chemical weapons arsenal “burn-off” at the US military Johnson Island facility. IV. Expert Opinion In reaching the following conclusions, I note several initial facts:
Clinical studies of pesticides used by DuPont Pioneer on humans do not exist. By their very nature, pesticides are poisons and pose health risks for humans and the environment by virtue of their pharmacological toxicity. Despite universal recognition of their danger, clinical studies on humans are not done for pesticides because of the obvious ethical concerns. Rather, mathematical safety factors are utilized, which are intended to account for differences between animal species and across different populations. This is in direct contradiction to what is done for pharmaceuticals where human subjects are carefully dosed and assessed for adverse health outcomes. Importantly, it should be noted that even with the precautions followed for medical drugs, there are numerous examples of drugs with unexpected adverse health outcomes even when they successfully go through thorough clinical trials. This is in large part because the target population, i.e. humans, are diverse and involve a complex array of environmental factors that confound our ability to predict negative outcomes from these chemicals.
Chronic & Sub-chronic effects for the pesticides used by DuPont Pioneer are largely unknown. While we are aware of acute effects in some cases of a single chemical from animal testing or acute exposure, the impact of chronic exposure is largely unknown for pesticides because of the lack of research. Instead, potential toxic effects are generally derived from bio- molecular arguments, laboratory models, and epidemiologic observations. For example, laboratory studies of pesticides upon cell/tissue samples and animal models have numerous and important limitations when extrapolating results to a human population that include qualitative, quantitative, and statistical uncertainties to suggest risks to humans through indirect assumptions. Further, even when epidemiologic, population-based studies exist, they have low statistical power to detect toxic effects for both rare syndromes and common syndromes of pesticides. Therefore, negative results do not guarantee adequate levels of safety.
2 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-5 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 8152
The human health risks for the pesticide combinations used by Pioneer are largely unknown. To make matters more complicated, testing of pesticide combinations are not done systematically since overlapping pesticide exposures lead to a huge number of possible (factorial) combinations. Rather, when pesticides are studied, they are studied for the effect of single formulations without consideration of their use in combination either intentionally or unintentionally. Importantly, it is clear that consideration of bio-molecular pathways and laboratory examples point to quantitative and qualitative novel effects of combinations that cannot be predicted by assessment of individual components. Just because the task of evaluating combinations is daunting does not make them any safer. For example, the number of pesticides used in Waimea by DuPont Pioneer by itself total approximately 90. For comparison purposes, suppose we say that only 20% of chemicals in a mixture overlap, resulting in a chance to have a combination toxic effect. For 15 chemicals (three overlapping) there are 4 new combinations compared to 90 chemicals (18 overlapping) with about 200,000 new combinations. There has also been an increase in the total dose of pesticides applied as well. Similarly, a recent publication shows that non-pesticide chemicals (POEA) combined with glyphosate (the active component of the common mixture Round-up) potentiate toxic effects in reproductive cell cultures previously unseen with either component alone. There were investigations and recent publications of glyphosate leading to thousands of kidney deaths in areas of hard (high pH) water. Other studies show potentiating and novel toxicities of combining pesticides. New pesticide combinations should therefore be assessed like new pesticides, but they are not. Likewise, one study of the gulf war syndrome illustrated that a combination of risk factors (repellent, burning oil fields, depleted uranium, malaria prophylaxis, etc.) could lead to a combination of syndromes. Although each individual syndrome may not show a significant elevation compared to a control group, when increases were combined across the syndromes the excess (attributable) illnesses became significant (about 350,000 excess cases). The Precautionary Principle should be followed when the risks are unknown. Because of the known and unknown risks of pesticides used by DuPont Pioneer, one should err on the side of caution by not using these pesticides until it is established there are either no negative health effects or that the pesticides cannot reach the target population. This is known as the precautionary principle and is a fundamental concept of both the medical and public health fields. Here, despite the acknowledged risks, I am unaware of any evidence that DuPont Pioneer has ever assessed the potential risk of its pesticide use upon the community and environment of Waimea despite awareness of community complaints and even acute illness in Waimea potentially caused by pesticide exposure.
I hold the following opinions to a reasonable degree of scientific and medical probability: 1. DuPont Pioneer’s creation of fugitive dust and pesticide drift constitutes a public health concern for the community of Waimea. This conclusion is based upon my personal experience and expertise as a medical doctor with a specific focus upon public health and health risks associated with toxins and pesticides. In
3 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-5 Filed 06/24/14 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 8153
addition, I have first-hand knowledge of the town of Waimea, have met with health care professionals on this subject on Kauai, and met with numerous residents of Waimea, Kauai, about these issues. Although I rely upon my personal expertise and experience in reaching my conclusions, I have also reviewed the expert reports of Charles Benbrook, Michael J. DiBartolomeis, Susan Kegley, Camille Sears, and David Knox, which confirm pesticide and dust drift into the town of Waimea. My opinion is further supported by the uncontroverted evidence of fugitive dust drift into the community of Waimea as well as the positive test results for pesticides such as chlorpyrifos at the Waimea Canyon Middle School. Based on the frequency of Pioneer’s use of pesticides in combination on its Waimea fields, it is my expert opinion that Pioneer’s use of pesticides poses a substantial and ongoing public health concern for the residents of Waimea. Similarly, the drift of fugitive dust into the community of Waimea poses a public health concern both in its own right (e.g., respiratory impacts to the community) as well as a carrier of pesticides into the community. By public health concern, I mean that all residents of Waimea should be aware of their risk of exposure to pesticide drift and fugitive dust and medical professionals should consider these factors when treating patients.
2. DuPont Pioneer has failed to use pesticides with necessary care because there is no consideration or evidence it has considered the toxic effects of its operation upon the surrounding environment and community before using these pesticides.
In my expert opinion, DuPont Pioneer’s frequent use of pesticides in combination constitutes a violation of the precautionary principle with respect to its use of pesticides. The practice of medicine strives to “do no harm,” which requires a comparison of the potential harm to human health and/or the environment with the perceived benefit (i.e., agriculture). Here, however, there is no evidence DuPont Pioneer has ever assessed the risk of pesticides it uses to the town of Waimea despite reliable evidence that it is exposing the community to routine drift of pesticides and fugitive dust. This is particularly egregious given the history of complaints and concerns about pesticide use from adjacent agricultural operations.
3. State regulatory agencies have also failed to address health concerns in Waimea raised by the use of pesticide from adjacent GMO field operations.
I also believe there are serious shortcomings to the assessment and response by various state and local agencies to the health issues raised by the community alleging pesticide toxicity by the GMO corporations near Waimea. Specifically, health authorities/regulatory agencies should have had an understanding of pesticide-related issues on which to base an adequate community response when pesticide complaints were originally raised in Waimea. While the exact sequence of what agencies knew what information when is not fully known, the response should have been led by the health authorities rather than relying upon ad hoc community committees. For example, since the start of GMO farming in Waimea, Kauai, there have been complaints of acute pesticide exposures in Waimea Canyon Middle School suspected to be the result of pesticide drift. After the Waimea community insisted upon action, a air quality study was performed that confirmed the presence of agricultural pesticides in Waimea. Despite this study, however, no
4 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-5 Filed 06/24/14 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 8154
effort has been taken by regulatory agencies to determine the origin of these pesticides. Based upon the frequency of usage by DuPont Pioneer and the expert work completed by Waimea plaintiffs experts, however, DuPont Pioneer’s usage of pesticides is contributing to the total chemical exposure of the Waimea community. V. Conclusion Finally, I have been asked to suggest preliminary steps to protect the health of Waimea from pesticide drift from DuPont Pioneer’s GMO research fields. At minimum, the frequency, location, time, and relevant environmental factors associated with pesticide applications must be recorded and provided to the community of Waimea, health professionals, and regulators in order to ensure that pesticides are being properly used. Further, unique marker chemicals (odor, residues, etc) could be added to the GMO pesticide mixtures in the future to warn Waimea residents if drift is occurring from Waimea fields. I would also note that prior complaints have been met by the regulators and companies with suspicion and claimed to be caused by “stinkweed” or hysteria (both of which are diagnoses of exclusion). Recent studies, however, have confirmed the presence of agricultural pesticides in Waimea rather than elevated levels of stinkweed, which supports the conclusion that pesticides from the adjacent agricultural operations of Syngenta and DuPont Pioneer are contributing to pesticide levels in the Waimea community. The frequency and combination of DuPont Pioneer’s pesticide applications should be reported to EPA to evaluate the impact of this use upon the unique environment and community of Waimea. For example, requests for laboratory (cell and animal) studies of most likely combinations should be done. Since the number of possible combinations is daunting the entire set could have been tested on the same models used for testing single components - much as we study the effects of other combinations (cigarette smoke, creosote, etc). Finally, a series of epidemiologic studies (dose finding - using distance and time in area as surrogate markers for dose, case-control, etc.) should be started to look for chronic illnesses. Large studies with high statistical power may not be necessary when the effect size increases for combinations for the reasons outlined above. Finally, it is my expert opinion from a public health perspective that this kind of approach should have been undertaken before using pesticides in the combinations and at the frequency applied by DuPont Pioneer in Waimea, Kauai, to determine the potential impact upon the community.
VI. Compensation My current rate of compensation for this work is $250 per hour for technical tasks. My current rate for deposition and trial testimony is $500 per hour.
. . .
5 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-5 Filed 06/24/14 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 8155
VII. Curriculum Vitae & Prior Testimony in Last 4 Years I have provided no testimony in deposition or trial in the past four years. My CV is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
March 11, 2014
/s/ Lorrin Pang ______Lorrin Pang, MD, MPH
6 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-6 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 8156 Page 1 Page 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 INDEX FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII 2 EXAMINATION BY: PAGE JIM AANA, et al., on behalf of ) Civil No. themselves and all others ) CV12-00231 LEK BMK 3 Mr. Scanlon 4 similarly situated, ) 4 ) 5 Plaintiffs, ) 6 EXHIBITS FOR IDENTIFICATION ) v. ) 7 (No exhibits marked.) ) 8 PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL, ) 9 INC., a DuPont Business and ) Iowa Corporation, et al., ) 10 ) 11 Defendants. ) 12 ______) 13 14 15 16 17 DEPOSITION OF LISETTE LANGLOIS 18 Taken on behalf of the Defendants at the Law Office 19 of Susan Lynn Marshall, 4265 Halenani Street, Lihue, 20 Hawaii, commencing at 12:46 p.m. on April 18, 2013, pursuant to Notice. 21 22 23 BEFORE: JESSICA R. PERRY, CSR NO. 404 24 Certified Shorthand Reporter 25
Page 2 Page 4 1 APPEARANCES 1 LISETTE LANGLOIS, 2 For the Plaintiffs: 2 the witness hereinbefore named, being first duly 3 GERARD A. JERVIS, ESQ. 3 cautioned and sworn to testify the truth, the whole 4 The Law Offices of Gerard Jervis 4 truth, and nothing but the truth, testified under oath 5 354 Uluniu Street 5 as follows: 6 Suite 100 6 7 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 7 EXAMINATION 8 and 8 BY MR. SCANLON: 9 FRANCIS I. LYNCH, ESQ. 9 Q. Could you please state and spell your full 10 Lynch, Hopper, Salzano & Smith 10 name for the record. 11 1641 West Alta Drive 11 A. Okay. My name is Lisette Langlois, and it's 12 Las Vegas, Nevada 89106 12 L-I-S-E-T-T-E, L-A-N-G-L-O-I-S. 13 13 Q. My name is Michael Scanlon. I represent 14 For the Defendant: 14 Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Gay & Robinson and the 15 MICHAEL J. SCANLON, ESQ. 15 Robinson Family Partners in this case. Before we 16 Carlsmith Ball LLP 16 proceed, I'd like to go over the ground rules of 17 ASB Tower, Suite 2200 17 depositions with you. 18 1001 Bishop Street 18 Have you ever had your deposition taken 19 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 19 before? 20 20 A. No. 21 21 Q. Okay. I'll explain to you what a deposition 22 22 is. A deposition is a way of gathering information in 23 23 a court case, and the way that we gather information 24 24 is through a conversation. I ask you questions; you 25 Draft Copy25 answer my questions. It is, however, a conversation 1 (Pages 1 to 4) Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-6 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 8157 Page 33 Page 35 1 Q. To the extent you know, has anybody else 1 Q. Do you remember who did the work? 2 applied pesticides or chemicals at your house? 2 A. No. 3 A. No. 3 Q. Do you know what chemicals or pesticides were 4 Q. No meaning you don't know or -- 4 used? 5 A. Well, let me clarify. My husband sometimes 5 A. No. No, I don't know. And I took every 6 uses glue and that -- to me that's a chemical, but 6 single cloth out of that house and put it in an ohana 7 it's okay. 7 shed that we have and, you know, did not -- and then I 8 Q. Have you ever had to use chemicals or 8 came home inside and washed all the surfaces. Very 9 pesticides in connection with your employment? 9 cautious. 10 A. No, no. Health care. Massage. 10 Q. Do you know whether your home was treated for 11 Q. Are you aware of whether any of your neighbors 11 termites before you bought it? 12 apply pesticides or chemicals on their property? 12 A. No. 13 A. You know, when I first got there, I saw Jimmy 13 Q. To the extent you know, have any of your 14 next door using RoundUp, and I actually photocopied 14 neighbors' homes been treated for the termites? 15 papers on RoundUp and gave it to Jimmy and he stopped 15 A. I haven't seen the termite tents. 16 using. 16 Q. Now we're into the third part of the 17 Q. And? 17 deposition. 18 A. Jimmy stopped using chemicals. 18 A. Uh-huh. 19 Q. Jimmy is Jimmy Aana? 19 Q. We're going to talk about the conditions that 20 A. Yeah. 20 you allege in your complaint. Do you know what the 21 Q. And do you remember when you gave those papers 21 term "off-site impact" means? 22 to Jim Aana? 22 A. Off-site impact. No, refresh me, please. 23 A. Early. Like 2002 or '01 or really -- not the 23 Q. So off-site impact means something that 24 first year we met him, but like maybe the second year 24 happens in one place affects places outside that 25 we met him, because I saw that he was using RoundUp on 25 place.
Page 34 Page 36 1 weeds, and I'm totally against chemicals. 1 A. Yeah. 2 Q. And to the extent you know, he stopped using 2 MR. JERVIS: Could you give us an 3 the RoundUp? 3 example. Sorry. I couldn't resist. 4 A. Yes. Now I see when he weeds, he brings his 4 BY MR. SCANLON: 5 torch and he burns the weeds. Smart guy. 5 Q. If you want, I can give you an example. I 6 Q. Do you know of any other neighbor who 6 believe Jerry has heard this example many, many times. 7 has applied pesticide or chemicals -- 7 MR. JERVIS: 50 times. 8 A. No. 8 BY MR. SCANLON: 9 Q. -- on the property? 9 Q. Would you like an example? 10 A. The other people, they mow their lawn. They 10 A. Yeah. 11 don't farm. 11 MR. JERVIS: I could give you the 12 Q. Oh, and was Jim Aana applying pesticides at a 12 example. Go ahead. Sorry. 13 residential property or at his farm? 13 BY MR. SCANLON: 14 A. On his farm. They grow taro. He wasn't 14 Q. I grew up in South Jersey, and one of the 15 putting it on the taro, he was just putting it between 15 places that people would go on day trips in South 16 our property and the taro fields there was like weeds 16 Jersey is a place called Hershey, Pennsylvania. 17 there, and that's the only time I ever saw him. 17 There's an amusement park in Hershey, Pennsylvania 18 Q. To the extent you know, has your home ever 18 called Hershey's Park. 19 been treated for termites? 19 A. Uh-huh. 20 A. Yeah, we were treated for termites once. 20 Q. It was also the headquarters of Hershey's 21 Q. Do you remember when that was? 21 chocolate. And there was a Hershey's chocolate 22 A. I think it was 2010 and we left the property 22 factory there. And from what friends told me, when 23 for a week and a half. 23 the Hershey's chocolate factory was making chocolate, 24 Q. Do you remember whether it was tented? 24 you could smell the chocolate smell throughout 25 A. It was tented. Draft Copy25 Hershey, Pennsylvania. 9 (Pages 33 to 36) Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-6 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 8158 Page 37 Page 39 1 So there the off-site impact is the chocolate 1 Kaumakani, there was still a mill and they were still 2 smell because something that was happening in one 2 planting sugar cane. 3 place, the Hershey's chocolate factory, had an effect 3 Q. From either of your visits in 1997 or 1998, 4 outside the factory in Hershey, Pennsylvania, in that 4 did you ever experience any off-site impact from Gay & 5 you could smell the chocolate being made. 5 Robinson's farming of sugar cane on the land? 6 Does that make sense? 6 A. No. 7 A. Yep. 7 Q. Were you ever in the Waimea area when Gay & 8 Q. Had you visited -- oh, let me start again. 8 Robinson harvested sugar cane? 9 Do you know when Pioneer started to farm the 9 A. No. 10 land above Waimea? 10 Q. Your complaint also focuses on dust you allege 11 A. I believe it was before 2000, just before 11 is generated from Pioneer's land. When did you first 12 2000. 12 notice that dust was a problem? 13 Q. They got a lease that started in 1998, and 13 A. You know, at first I didn't notice. We 14 started to farm after that. 14 were -- the house was gutted and there were -- you 15 A. Yeah. 15 know, we didn't have furniture at first, except very 16 Q. Had you ever visited Waimea during the period 16 minimal, so I wasn't paying attention to that kind of 17 before Pioneer started farming the land above Waimea? 17 thing. And I would say probably after about two, 18 A. In 1997 and in 1998 we camped in, you know, 18 three years that we were there, then we started 19 the whole west side, all the different sites, so it 19 noticing and we had already made friends with the 20 wasn't in Waimea valley, but it was on -- you know, 20 neighbors and they were telling us that the increase 21 where I could camp. 21 in dust was terrible and that's -- you know, then we 22 Q. Do you know what Gay & Robinson grew in the 22 all started noticing together. 23 land above Waimea? 23 Q. And you said it was two or three years after 24 MR. JERVIS: Time frame? 24 you arrived, so that was around 2002 or 2003? 25 BY MR. SCANLON: 25 A. Uh-huh.
Page 38 Page 40 1 Q. Sorry, before 1998. 1 Q. How do you know that the dust is coming from 2 A. No. I think it was sugar. 2 Pioneer's fields? 3 Q. I can represent to you that Gay & Robinson 3 A. We see it. 4 used to grow sugar cane on the land that Pioneer now 4 Q. And what do you see? 5 farms. 5 A. We see -- sometimes we see dust, sometimes we 6 A. Yeah. 6 smell it. 7 Q. To the extent you know from your visits in 7 Q. What do you smell? 8 1997 and 1998, did Gay & Robinson or the Robinson 8 A. It's -- all I can say is bubble gum. I don't 9 Family Partners use chemicals when they were farming 9 know. And it's kind of harsh in the nostrils and, you 10 sugar cane on that land? 10 know, I make a beeline for the inside of the house. 11 A. From everything I've heard, chemicals are 11 Q. And are you sure that the dust is not coming 12 being used, but not to the same extent, not five days 12 from places besides Pioneer's farms? 13 a week for hours and hours. So I knew that they do 13 A. I'm not sure. 14 chemicals, but only when they're planting and then 14 Q. Do you know of anybody in the Waimea community 15 they leave it alone or, you know, I'm not sure 15 who thinks that the dust might be coming from places 16 exactly, but it's not the same as what this is. 16 other than Pioneer's farm? 17 Q. And do you remember that from your visits or 17 A. No. Everyone that I speak to say that it's 18 is this something you've heard? 18 coming from the ridge. 19 A. No, it was word of mouth. 19 Q. And how often is dust from Pioneer's fields a 20 Q. To the extent that you know from your visits 20 problem? 21 in 1997 and 1998, did Gay & Robinson or the Robinson 21 A. Well, it varies, and depending on, you know, 22 Family Partners use machines to work the land when 22 sometimes it's very windy and that's when we start 23 they were farming sugar cane above Waimea? 23 emailing each other and, you know, letting somebody 24 A. You know, I have no idea what activity there 24 know if anybody smelled anything, because now we're 25 was above Waimea. All I knowDraft is there was, in Copy25 all on high alert. 10 (Pages 37 to 40) Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 8159 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
JIM AANA, on behalf of themselves) and all other similarly ) CASE NO. 12-00231LEK-BMK situated, ET AL., ) ) April 9, 2014 Plaintiffs, ) 11:34 a.m. ) v. ) ) U.S. District Court PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL, ) 300 Ala Moana Boulevard INC., ET AL., ) Honolulu, Hawaii 96850 ) Defendants. ) ______)
TRANSCRIPT OF DEFENMDANT'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER; DISCOVERY CONFERENCE BEFORE THE HONORABLE BARRY M. KURREN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiffs: LYNCH HOPPER SALZANO & SMITH By: P. KYLE SMITH, ESQ. 970 N. Kalaheo, #A301 Kailua, HI 96734
Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording; transcript produced by transcription service.
Maukele Transcribers LLC Jessica B. Cahill, CET**D-708 P.O. Box 1652 Wailuku, Maui, Hawaii 96793 Telephone: (808)244-0776
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 8160 2
CONTINUED APPEARANCES:
For Defendants: CARLSMITH BALL, LLP By: MICHAEL M. PURPURA, ESQ. MICHAEL J. SCANLON, ESQ. 1001 Bishop Street, #2200 Honolulu, HI 96813
Appearing telephonically: GLYNN AND FINLEY, LLP By: CLEMENT L. GLYNN, ESQ. ADAM D. FRIEDENBERG, ESQ. 100 Pringle Avenue, #500 Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 8161 3
1 APRIL 4, 2014 11:34 A.M.
2 THE CLERK: All rise. The United States District Court
3 for the District of Hawaii with the Honorable Barry M. Kurren,
4 United States Magistrate Judge presiding is now convened.
5 Civil number 12-231LEK-BMK, Jim Aana, et al v. Pioneer
6 Hi-Bred International, Incorporated, et al. This hearing is
7 called for defendant's motion for protective order. You may make
8 your appearances.
9 MR. SMITH: Good morning, Your Honor, Kyle Smith on
10 behalf of plaintiffs.
11 THE COURT: Good morning.
12 MR. SMITH: Good morning.
13 MR. PURPURA: Good morning, Your Honor, Michael Purpura
14 and Michael Scanlon on behalf of the defendants.
15 THE COURT: Good morning. And a couple of folks are on
16 the phone.
17 MR. PURPURA: Yes, Your Honor.
18 MR. GLYNN: We are. Hi, Judge, Clement Glynn and Adam
19 Friedenberg also appearing on behalf of the defense.
20 THE COURT: Yes, good morning. Okay. Well, we have a
21 few matters to take up today and one of those I think I can sort
22 of deal with fairly quickly and this is the request to strike
23 certain of the plaintiffs' experts.
24 You know, my sense of this is that the issues that are
25 raised here go well beyond the discovery rulings and matters that Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 8162 4
1 I considered in addressing, you know, a more focused inquiry
2 concerning further discovery and actually impact issues to be
3 decided at trial.
4 So I think the best way to proceed on that, if there is
5 a request to determine or address, you know, who should testify
6 and on what issues at trial, I certainly can't do it by way of a
7 short letter briefing. And, frankly, my view is that it should
8 be done, if at all here, by way of a motion in limine to be
9 addressed to Judge Kobayashi.
10 And, I mean, you could do that early on. I mean, you
11 don't have to wait until the trial related motions, but I mean
12 this goes to the heart of what evidence, you know, will be
13 presented at trial and what claims actually exist, what claims
14 don't exist. It's a much broader inquiry than the discovery
15 issue I addressed.
16 And, I mean, you know, she may ask me to decide it, but
17 frankly in the first instance, I think this should be presented
18 to her, and I would actually suggest that you do it by way of a
19 motion in limine, and you could file that at any time, and she
20 can consider how best to address that.
21 Any problem or issue there? I know this raises a
22 question concerning what further discovery you want to do about
23 experts and where you stand on experts on the defense side.
24 Unfortunately, you know, this kind of a problem arises often in
25 these cases. If you want to test the waters on this, you know, Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 8163 5
1 get on with it in a more formal motion is my sense of it.
2 MR. GLYNN: Thank you, Judge. This is Clem Glynn, and
3 we actually did not expect that you would be able to completely
4 rule on this, what we were concerned about, and we take your
5 guidance and appreciate it and will follow --
6 THE COURT: Yeah, this involves -- you know, this
7 involves a consideration of a great deal of evidence that will
8 come into this case, quite frankly, and what, you know, will be
9 required to establish your claims and how you will be able to
10 respond to their defenses. I mean this is really, frankly, all
11 about the trial. So, I mean, it's a much bigger issue.
12 MR. GLYNN: Yes, the reason we thought it was
13 appropriate, at least to flag it for Your Honor's guidance, is
14 that as recently as March 7th, when Mr. Friedenberg was there and
15 plaintiffs' counsel sought clarification, as he put it, you were
16 very emphatic --
17 THE COURT: Right.
18 MR. GLYNN: -- and very clear, and very unambiguous,
19 and yet of the nine experts that we need to deal with, the
20 majority are dealing with human health effects and the
21 environment, in direct contravention of what you have --
22 THE COURT: Well --
23 MR. GLYNN: -- the guidance that you provided.
24 And --
25 THE COURT: -- you know, I'm not entirely certain of Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 8164 6
1 that. I don't -- you know, frankly, we don't need to really get
2 into a discussion of this now, because it's not going to get us
3 anywhere, but, you know, I see what Mr. Smith has raised in
4 opposition to it.
5 I mean there needs -- and I'm not changing my mind
6 about that discovery. I mean that -- you know, and I don't think
7 that needs to be clarified, and I think I've made my point fairly
8 clear, but I mean as to what he may be able to present and not
9 what he's asking for in further discovery here, to respond to
10 some of these defenses and to prove aspects of his claims, you
11 know, that's -- there is a little more complexity, and I think a
12 somewhat different consideration.
13 MR. GLYNN: And I'm not --
14 THE COURT: I hear what you're saying, and it may well
15 be some of where, you know, I came from before impacts on some of
16 that discussion and the decisions ultimately made, but this
17 really does impact directly on the evidence to be presented at
18 trial, so I would ask you to file a motion in limine.
19 MR. GLYNN: We will. And may I just ask one related
20 question --
21 THE COURT: Sure. Yes.
22 MR. GLYNN: -- and the Court's guidance would be very
23 valuable? Right now -- one of the reasons that we wanted to
24 raise this is it requires that we go to a great deal of expense
25 and effort, because the way the schedule works, we've got to have Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 8165 7
1 counter experts in case somebody disagrees with our view of this,
2 and whether it be Your Honor or Judge Kobayashi.
3 At 2:45 California time this morning, the plaintiffs'
4 filed a motion for preliminary injunction and partial summary
5 judgment. The asserted ground being that Pioneer is unlawfully
6 killing the honeybees.
7 So that got set for June 23rd, which is the day before
8 the pretrial conference and just a few months before the trial.
9 THE COURT: Oh.
10 MR. GLYNN: And I'm concerned that if we file motions
11 in limine that have some granularity that we're going to see a
12 similar late hearing. I wonder if this is something that would
13 justify looking at the overall schedule to avoid waste not only
14 by the parties, in this case Pioneer, but also the Court, because
15 otherwise we're doing things somewhat out of sequence.
16 THE COURT: Okay. So --
17 MR. GLYNN: This is not a new idea. As you know from
18 us, it's been one that we've been consistent on. And so, it's
19 one, as you point out, that Judge Kobayashi's going to need to
20 address.
21 THE COURT: Well, okay. You know, my suggestion is
22 that you file your motion. If you want to get it heard early,
23 you can file a motion to have it heard early. Let's see what
24 Judge Kobayashi does with that.
25 MR. GLYNN: Okay. Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 8166 8
1 THE COURT: And then depending upon what the scheduling
2 is and where things stand on these various motions, if we need to
3 revisit the schedule in any significant way, you know, we could
4 do that at any time.
5 Okay. So I think it's premature right now to know, you
6 know, what we need to do depending upon motions that haven't yet
7 been filed.
8 MR. GLYNN: Okay. And just so I'm clear, and I
9 appreciate your giving us your guidance, right now we have to
10 respond, by May 9th, with experts.
11 THE COURT: Right.
12 MR. GLYNN: And I think it's highly improbable that we
13 would get a briefing done and a decision by Judge Kobayashi that
14 would spare us that, were she to rule in our favor. So that's
15 what I was trying to get at in terms of the schedule.
16 THE COURT: Well, and I gather you haven't talked
17 together about this at all. So, you know, talk with the other
18 side, see where they stand on this, see if you can reach some
19 agreement. If you can't, you know, on very short notice, I can
20 get to scheduling issues at any time.
21 I'd like you guys to sort this out a little bit first
22 and talk about what, if anything -- what your thoughts are. I
23 assume you haven't had any discussion, Mr. Smith, about this.
24 MR. SMITH: No, Your Honor, other than just to point
25 out that it's a preliminary injunction and a motion for partial Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-7 Filed 06/24/14 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 8167 9
1 summary judgment.
2 THE COURT: Right.
3 MR. SMITH: It's filed far before the deadline.
4 THE COURT: Right.
5 MR. SMITH: I don't see how it impacts any of our other
6 deadlines personally.
7 THE COURT: Well, I'm not so much concerned about that
8 motion, but this issue about what to do about experts and the
9 like there might be some complication here.
10 MR. SMITH: To be honest, I mean, I think this is --
11 defendants were wanting to use that language in your order as a
12 plug to throw out a lot of our experts. The pesticide issue and
13 the dust issue has always been a part of the case. We've always
14 made that clear.
15 We have experts on those issues. And now that they've
16 seen the expert work that's been done --
17 THE COURT: Right.
18 MR. SMITH: -- you know, they want to ask for new
19 deadlines. So -- but they can ask for it, and Your Honor can
20 consider it at that time.
21 THE COURT: Okay.
22 MR. SMITH: I think doing it here doesn't make a lot of
23 sense.
24 THE COURT: Okay. You know, think about this, guys,
25 and talk about it, and then if really at any time here in the Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 30 PageID #: 8168 March 11, 2014
Report Regarding Jim Aana et al., vs. DuPont Pioneer, Gay Robinson, Inc., and Robinson Family Partners Civil No. CV12 00231 – LEK-BMK United States District Court District of Hawaii
Submitted By: Charles M. Benbrook, PhD.
Pertinent Questions
I have been asked by the plaintiffs’ attorney in this case, Mr. Kyle Smith, to review the facts of the case and offer opinions on some issues likely to be addressed as the litigation progresses. My first contact with Mr. Smith regarding developments in Kauai on corn and soybean seed production and research farms occurred in August 2013. I agreed to serve as an expert in the case in October 2013, and charge a professional fee of $200.00 per hour. Per discussions and agreement with plaintiff’s council last October, I will submit a first invoice after completion and transmission of this expert report.
In some places in this report where points are made that are relevant to seed research or production fields on any of the Hawaiian Islands, I refer to fields or farms in the State of Hawaii or the Hawaiian Islands. My analysis of records in this case have focused on the corn and soybean seed research and grow out fields on the island of Kauai, near the town of Waimea, and my conclusions and opinions are pertinent primarily to the seed-related activities near the town of Waimea.
The five questions I have been asked to analyze and offer opinions on are listed below.
1. Are there any significant differences between the agronomic systems and pest management practices used by commercial farmers growing corn and soybeans on the mainland, in contrast to field corn and soybean seed production and research farms in Kauai? If yes, what are the differences?
2. To what extent do the EPA labels on the pesticide products frequently applied on Kauai corn and soybean seed farms (research or propagation fields) address the unique pesticide use patterns, environmental risks, and public health issues associated with the way pesticides have been used on seed production farms in Kauai?
3. Based on common agronomic practices and pesticide use patterns in seed production and research fields in Kauai, what environmental and/or human health risks might arise and warrant monitoring and focused, field-level risk assessments?
4. Whose responsibility is it to avoid, or mitigate pesticide-related, economic damage to personal property?
1 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 30 PageID #: 8169 March 11, 2014
5. How do pesticide product manufacturers typically deal with situations where a pesticide needs to be used or applied in a significantly different way, possibly leading to novel exposure pathways and risks, compared to the typical and common conditions and methods of use, as set forth on product labels?
Background and Experience
Appendix A contains my resume; Appendix B lists materials relied upon in preparing this report; Appendix C lists my past experience as an expert witness.
I have worked on the impact of pesticide use and regulation, pesticide efficacy, risks, and costs for over 30 years. I was the Staff Director for the House subcommittee with jurisdiction over the “Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act” (FIFRA) from 1981-1983, and in this period organized in-depth hearings on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) pesticide regulatory policies and activities. Detailed legislation amending FIFRA was drafted and assessed during my tenure. Federal pre- emption issues and the role of state-issued Section 24(c) labels were among the divisive topics explored in depth. I have studied the justification for, and impacts of most federal pesticide-related legislation introduced since the early 1980s.
For a variety of clients I have studied the impact of EPA pesticide program decisions and policies on pesticide use, efficacy and risks. I worked as a consultant for the California State Department of Pesticide Regulation and carried out a comprehensive program evaluation in 1991-1993. My focus was on identifying and addressing duplication or conflicts in the role of the State agency and federal EPA in carrying out pesticide risk assessments and in regulatory decision making.
I have studied the properties, uses, efficacy, and impacts of pesticides, including herbicides during my entire career. My work has led to several reports focusing on weed management and herbicide use. I have followed the scientific literature on the persistence, biological activity, toxicology, and impacts pesticides and pest management systems throughout my career, and written extensively about pesticide use and impacts both in popular media and peer-reviewed journals. I have served as an expert witness in two cases focused on damages to economic property triggered by the off-target movement of herbicides.
Working on behalf of clients including the State of California Department of Pesticide Regulation, the U.S. EPA Office of Inspector General, Consumers Union, the Wisconsin Potato and Vegetable Growers Association, Gerber Products Company, the United Nations Development Fund, Lodi Woodbridge Winegrape Commission, and the World Wildlife Fund, I have developed methods and models to estimate the environmental and public health risks associated with pesticide use. Several organizations rely on these models in carrying out assessments of pesticide use and risks.
2 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 3 of 30 PageID #: 8170 March 11, 2014
In my capacity as a consultant, I have worked with companies seeking to obtain EPA registration of a new pesticide, or working to amend, expand, or defend the label governing use of an already registered product.
Over nearly 30 years I have carried out research on the causes, magnitude, and prevention of pesticide-induced damage to nontarget organisms – e.g., rural residents, farm workers, birds, fish, agronomic crops and other vegetation, and bees. This has required me to learn the basic methods used to characterize pesticide environmental fate and exposures, as well as EPA risk assessment methods, activities and policies.
From personal experience, observation, my reading of scientific and agricultural literature, and participation in crop damage lawsuits triggered by herbicide drift, I am aware of the potential of certain herbicides to carry over and/or move off target and damage non-target vegetation, including agronomic crops or plants or trees in suburban or urban areas. I understand the circumstances that can increase or decrease the odds that such damage might occur.
I have carried out extensive studies on the factors giving rise to wind and water- driven soil erosion. As part of my work on soil conservation policy in the 1980s, I used the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the Wind Erosion Equation (WEE) to:
• Identify highly erodible lands, • Assess the need for, effectiveness, and targeting of conservation practices, • Project the cost-effectiveness of soil conservation policy interventions, and • Analyze the economic impacts of soil erosion on farmers and society.
Response to Questions
1. Are there any significant differences between the agronomic systems and pest management practices used by commercial farmers growing field corn and soybeans on the mainland, in contrast to corn and soybean seed production and research farms in Kauai? If yes, what are the differences?
There are many significant differences in the circumstances in which pesticides are applied on corn and soybean seed research and propagation fields in the Hawaiian Islands, compared to how the same pesticides are applied on corn and soybean fields elsewhere in the U.S. (hereafter referred to as the “mainland”).
First, virtually all farmers producing corn and/or soybeans on the mainland plant one crop per field per year. The only time the same field is planted twice is when inclement weather soon after planting washes the seed away, or kills the newly germinating plants. In such cases, economic factors determine whether a farmer decides to replant the field, but still, only one corn or soybean crop is produced on such a field in any given year.
On Kauai, however, companies conducting corn and soybean seed research, and propagating seed for use in breeding programs, produce two or three crops per year on
3 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 4 of 30 PageID #: 8171 March 11, 2014
the same field. Indeed, the ability to produce three crops in a year, instead of one, is the primary reason the companies have chosen to locate breeding and research facilities in Kauai. This advantage accelerates the timetable for developing and propagating a new corn or soybean variety.
Second, producing two or three corn or soybean crops on the same field in a year increases by two-fold to three-fold, or more the volume of fertilizers and pesticides that must be applied on any given field, compared to growing just one crop, as on the mainland.
Third, the differences in the intensity of pesticide use on any given field are enormous between mainland corn and soybean production and seed fields in the Hawaiian Islands. On the mainland, 88.19 million acres of corn were grown in 2010. The average acre of this corn was sprayed with 2.7 herbicides. On average, each acre of corn was treated 3.05 times with a herbicide, and a total of 2.26 pounds of herbicide active ingredient was applied per acre.
Only 15.5% of national corn acres were treated with an insecticide, and so 84.5% was not treated with any insecticide. Only 0.02 pounds of insecticide were applied on the average corn acre in 2010 on the mainland. Even less fungicide was used. Only 11% of corn acres were treated with an average of 0.009 pounds of fungicide active ingredient per acre.
In the case of soybeans, the USDA last surveyed soybean pesticide use in 2012. Just as the case with corn, herbicides account for most of the total volume of pesticides applied. On average across 77.2 million acres of soybeans in 2012, each acre was treated with 2.12 herbicides, totaling 1.72 pounds of herbicide active ingredient applied per acre. Some 21% of soybean acres were treated with an insecticide, averaging 0.053 per surveyed acre, while 11% of acres were sprayed with a fungicide at an average rate of 0.014 pounds per acre.
Comparing pesticide use on mainland corn and soybeans to typical annual use patterns on Kauai where corn and soybean seed facilities are located is tricky for several reasons. On some fields in Kauai, a corn seed crop might be followed in the same year by another corn crop, and then a soybean crop. On another field, the pattern might be strictly corn- soybeans-corn, while on other fields continuous corn or continuous soybeans might be produced.
Different pesticides are needed to treat corn and soybean fields in Kauai, and so to calculate annual, per acre pesticide use on each field, one would have to know the annual crop rotation pattern on a given field, as well as the mix of pesticides applied, how many times each was applied, and the rates at which they were applied. Moreover, there are several dozen fields on most corn and soybean seed research farms that vary in size from a fraction of an acre to a few acres. Field sizes are larger on the farms used to propagate seed for shipment to the mainland and subsequent use in the breeding of corn hybrids, but still, there are many fields to keep track of.
4 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 5 of 30 PageID #: 8172 March 11, 2014
I have been given access to detailed records of pesticide use on corn and soybean seed fields managed by Pioneer Hi-Bred near the community of Waimea. The fields are designated as part of a set of “Akai” fields. The records encompass 4,910 pesticide applications from 12/31/2009 through 12/31/2011. I reordered the spreadsheet by crop, and then season, and last by field number. This reordered the spreadsheet to cover all the applications made on a given field, on a specified crop, in one season.
I isolated and analyzed all applications reportedly made during the fall 2010 corn season on a 2.4 acre field designated “Akai 1 W14E-F,” also labeled field number 160. The first application occurred on 1/6/2011 and the last one was made 5/11/2011. A total of 38 applications were made, including 7 herbicide applications, 24 insecticide applications, and 7 fungicides.
To determine if the 38 applications made on field 160 in the fall, 2010 corn season was representative of other fields, I calculated the number of sprays made on five other randomly selected corn fields (165, 114, 123, 133, 25) in a crop season in either 2010 or 2009. The number ranged from 7 to 42 applications, and averaged 24.8.
Detailed inspection of other corn field-crop season records confirmed that the breakdown of herbicide, insecticide, and fungicide treatments in field 160 as a percent of total applications, was similar to the breakdown on most other fields. On field 160 in the fall 2010 corn crop season, 18.4% of the applications were made with herbicides and another 18.4% with fungicides, while 63% were insecticide treatments. Accordingly, typical corn pesticide use in the years reflected in these records entails on a single corn crop-season combination:
• About 25 applications of pesticides on the average field per crop; • An average of 4.6 fungicides and 4.6 herbicides were applied per corn crop; and • A total of 15.5 applications of an insecticide were applied per crop.
Given that up to three, and nearly always two crops are at times grown on each acre in any given year, the above numbers can be multiplied by two to approximate annual pesticide use, resulting in:
• About 50 applications of pesticides on the average field per year; • An average of 9.2 fungicides and 9.2 herbicides applied per year; and • A total of 31 applications of an insecticide applied per year.
Accordingly, corn seed research fields covered by the records analyzed above are treated with about 3.4-fold more herbicides than the average cornfield on the mainland. In the case of fungicides, the subject fields in Kauai were treated 83.6-fold more times than mainland fields. While these are very large differences, insecticides account for by far the most striking difference in pesticide use between the mainland and corn seed research fields in Kauai. In the case of insecticides, the Kauai fields were treated 203-fold more times (31.5 applications per acre per year, versus 0.155).
5 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 6 of 30 PageID #: 8173 March 11, 2014
It is appropriate to highlight here that in general, the human health and environmental risks associated with insecticide applications dwarf those stemming from typical applications of most herbicides and fungicides.
The average number of pesticide applications on soybeans is about one-half as intensive compared to fields planted to corn. Records covering all applications on 12 fields were analyzed in the same way that the cornfields were assessed. The soybean fields included three from the spring 2010 planting (45, 53, 54), and nine from spring 2011 (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,13,14,15). On average across these 12 fields, 12 pesticide applications were made including 3 herbicides (25%), 8 insecticides (67%), and 1 fungicide (8%).
On the mainland, far fewer pesticide applications were made on the approximate 77 million acres of soybeans in 2012, the last year for which USDA-NASS pesticide use data are available. On average nationwide, only 7% of soybeans were treated once with a fungicide, and 4% of the acres were treated twice with Quadris, the most common fungicide applied on Kauai seed fields. Accordingly, fungicide use on soybean seed fields in Kauai is about 8-fold more intensive than on the mainland.
An average of 2.7 herbicide plus desiccant applications were made on the average acre of soybeans on the mainland in 2012 (almost all accounted for by herbicides). On Kauai soybeans in each crop season, an average three herbicide plus desiccant applications were made, slightly more than on the mainland.
Just as in the case of corn seed fields, insecticide use on soybean seed fields on Kauai differs dramatically from use on mainland soybean fields. Only 24% of mainland acres were treated with an insecticide, whereas the average soybean field on Kauai was sprayed eight times per crop with an insecticide. Accordingly, insecticide use of soybean seed fields in Kauai is about 32-fold more intensive in terms of number of applications made, when comparing one crop on the mainland to one on Kauai.
If a given field were devoted to soybean seed plantings for all three crops in a year, approximately 36 applications would be made, on average, per acre. Herbicide use would be about 24-fold more intensive when comparing use over a calendar year on both the mainland and Kauai. Insecticide use would be 96-fold more intensive over a full year, and fungicide use would be about 24-fold more intensive.
On a field in Kauai that produces two corn crops and one soybean crop in a calendar year, an estimated 62 applications would be made, whereas on fields producing two soybean crops and one corn crop, an average 49 applications of pesticides would be anticipated per acre per year.
These numbers obviously dwarf by some 20-fold the frequency of pesticide use on corn and soybeans grown on the mainland U.S. Accordingly, the pesticide use monitoring and risk assessments carried out by EPA on pesticide use on corn and soybeans grown in the mainland are not suitable in predicting whether pesticide use on corn and soybean seed
6 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 7 of 30 PageID #: 8174 March 11, 2014
farms in Kauai might be associated with unreasonable adverse effects on man or the environment.
Pesticide risk is a function of multiple variables in addition to number of applications. Two other critical parameters are average rates of application, and pesticide toxicity. So, in comparing pesticide use and risks on mainland corn and soybeans versus the seed fields on Kauai, it is essential to consider these two other factors. In terms of rates, a review of one-time rates of application across multiple fields on Kauai for both crops shows clearly that the rate of application on Kauai is roughly equal or somewhat higher than rates on the mainland reported by USDA-NASS. Given the tropical conditions on Kauai and the high level of control sought on the seed fields, such a difference is not surprising.
In terms of toxicity, the most frequently pesticides applied on Kauai are similar to the ones applied on the mainland, so there is no reason to expect a markedly different risk profile on Kauai because of differences in the toxicity of pesticides applied, compared to the mainland.
Two more observations are relevant in assessing relative human and ecological risks between Kauai and mainland corn and soybean fields. In terms of human risk, the generally small field size likely increases the frequency and levels of exposure. So too does the large number and frequency of workers who either must enter fields to observe plant growth and performance, or carry out other tasks, or travel past fields on their way to another portion of a farm. The proximity of people living in and around Waimea, or traveling through this coastal area, also increases the likelihood that pesticide drift, or residues bound to blowing soil, will increase inhalation and other exposures off the farm. In contrast on the mainland, the likelihood of worker exposure, and pesticide drift to nearby communities, is much lower because fields are so much larger. Plus, most people in or near corn and soybean fields on the mainland who are carrying out field operations are in tractor or machinery cabs with air filtration systems.
In terms of environmental risks, there is a daunting frequency in the applications on both corn and soybean seed research fields of insecticides known to be highly toxic to beneficial insects, pollinators and aquatic organisms, especially juvenile organisms (both freshwater and marine). On soybean field 45 in the spring 2010 crop, the extremely toxic (to bees, aquatic invertebrates, and fish) synthetic pyrethroid Asana (DuPont’s esfenvalerate) was sprayed on 4/18/2010, again three days later on 4/21, and then again on 5/2/2010 and 5/28/2010. On this field there were four other synthetic pyrethroid applications, for a total of eight synthetic pyrethroid sprays in approximately 40 days, or one every five days. In this time period, other insecticide applications were also made.
Fourth, the climate and prevailing weather patterns in the Hawaiian Islands are very different than on the mainland, and reflect sub-tropical or tropical conditions that exist near the equator worldwide. Three important differences in weather are relevant in the assessment and prevention of pesticide-induced risks to man or the environment, or damage to economic property:
7 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 8 of 30 PageID #: 8175 March 11, 2014
• Relatively high temperatures, and the absence of hard freezes; • Frequent and often heavy rainfall; and • Periodically very strong and sustained winds that typically blow in the same direction, at least during certain parts of the year.
Fifth, weather conditions in Kauai are highly conducive to the proliferation and spread of a number of fungal, weed, and insect pests that either do not exist on the mainland, or rarely reach economically damaging levels in farm fields on the mainland. For this reason, a different mix of pesticides may be needed to control pests in Kauai, and available products will likely need to be applied more intensively, unless farmers and pest managers deploy multi-tactic, prevention-based Integrated Pest Management systems.
Sixth, the predominant soils on the Hawaiian Islands are very different than the soils in regions in the U.S. where corn and soybeans are common agronomic crops. Kauai soils tend to have much lower organic matter content, and are highly vulnerable to water and wind induced erosion, especially when not protected by conservation practices and systems, such as those routinely recommended by the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
2. To what extent do the EPA labels on the pesticide products frequently applied on Kauai corn and soybean seed farms (research or propagation fields) address the unique pesticide use patterns, environmental risks, and public health issues associated with the way pesticides have been used on seed production farms in Kauai?
Essentially not at all.
While several of the pesticides applied on corn and soybean seed fields in Kauai are sprayed at about the same rate and in the same way as on the mainland, there are huge differences in the number of different pesticides applied, the total number of applications during a single crop-season combination, and most dramatically, over the two or three crops grown each year on a given field in Kauai.
The potential cumulative impact of so many different pesticide applications on a given field in a calendar year has not been evaluated by EPA, nor anyone else to my knowledge, and none of the applicable pesticide labels offer any warnings or restrictions to prevent problems from arising in places that are treated with such a high volume of a diverse mix of pesticide active ingredients.
3. Based on common agronomic practices and pesticide use patterns in seed production and research fields in Kauai, what environmental and/or human health risks might arise and warrant monitoring and focused, field-level risk assessments?
Several of the pesticides applied on the Kauai seed fields are highly toxic to juvenile aquatic organisms, both those commonly present in Kauai’s fresh, surface water
8 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 9 of 30 PageID #: 8176 March 11, 2014
ecosystems and in the ocean. Both water runoff and eroding soil from the seed fields are no doubt transporting some of these toxic pesticides into fresh and salt-water resources where damage can be done to sensitive species. Presumably, the companies leasing the farmland on Kauai either carried out themselves, or commissioned someone to establish baseline species composition and population level data, so that an ongoing monitoring program could track changes in aquatic species abundance and diversity since the conversion of the cropland from sugarcane to corn and soybean seed research and production.
The remarkable intensity of insecticide use, nearly year round, is bound to have a number of adverse impacts. It is hard to imagine how most birds or beneficial insects, including pollinators, can thrive in and around the seed research and production fields. Moreover, the frequency of use of a number of insecticides increases markedly the risk of the emergence of resistance. Insect populations in regions where substantial acreage is devoted to seed production will likely be subjected to far more intense selection pressure than populations elsewhere on the island. This could either trigger or accelerate the spread of resistant insects, which could then move across the island, causing once effective insecticides to work less well, or fail on other farmland.
The primary human risks of concern arise among workers at the seed production facilities, who will periodically be occupationally exposed to the pesticides applied. On the mainland, corn and soybean farmers are exposed occupationally to pesticides for just a few days, to a few weeks each year, around the time herbicides are applied in the late April to early June window. Chronic exposures can and do occur in mainland regions where herbicides are found year-round in drinking water resources. But on and around Kauai seed production facilities, workers and other people will be exposed on possibly multiple days in most weeks to a mix of pesticides. These exposures will join any from contaminated drinking water, the multiple pesticide residues each person ingests on the typical day through their diet, and any pesticides applied in and around an individual’s home, or present there as a result of wind erosion or drift.
As a result of the frequency of use of high-risk organophosphate (OP) insecticides on Kauai, and the risk of cholinesterase inhibition and neurodevelopmental impacts, steps have presumably been taken to assure minimal adverse impacts from OP exposure levels among applicators and others spending significant time in and around seed fields. Several programs have been put in place in other intensively farming regions where workers are frequently exposed to OPs (e.g., tree-fruit in Washington State), and have proven effective in identifying high-exposure and risk scenarios, and assuring no worker is persistently over exposed.
Prevailing winds often no doubt trigger drift of pesticides from seed production areas downslope toward areas in and around Waimea where people live, work, or congregate. Wind also will carry some soil with it, particularly in periods of the year when substantial acreage is being tilled to prepare ground for the next crop. Accordingly there is markedly heightened risk of inhalation exposures for people spending time downwind from seed production fields. Exposure and risk levels would have to be calculated with monitoring
9 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 10 of 30 PageID #: 8177 March 11, 2014
data collected in the seed production regions on Kauai, since any such data collected on the mainland will be largely irrelevant given the significant differences in the intensity of pesticide use on Kauai where corn and soybean seed production facilities are in operation.
Another serious, long-term threat associated with the intensive production of corn and soybean seed in the Hawaiian Islands is soil degradation. Soils in tropical regions are typically thin, with relatively low organic matter content. They are highly vulnerable to erosion from heavy rainfall, or heat and dry winds. It is essential that farmers pay close attention to erosion control and the management of organic material cycling through the soil, to avoid progressive loss of soil organic matter and degradation in soil quality.
The agronomic practices on the Kauai corn and soybean seed fields make heavy and repeated use of tillage, in part to assure that each field is free of plant material from the preceding seed crop. Heavy reliance on tillage removes crop residues on the surface of the soil, where they can reduce erosion losses.
In addition, significant amounts of nitrogen fertilizer are no doubt applied on the corn and soybean seed fields during the course of a year. Heavy applications of nitrogen are known to stimulate soil microbial activity and proliferation. On the mainland, soil microbes are kept busy on most corn-soybean farms breaking down the residues of the previous corn crop, but in Kauai, the likely two or three, or more applications of nitrogen will provide a continuous and stable energy source for microorganisms, who will turn to consuming organic matter in the soil when the supply of crop residues is exhausted.
It is likely that organic matter levels on the Kauai fields producing multiple crops of corn and soybean seed have fallen incrementally since seed production began. This is particularly true since much of the land converted to corn and soybean seed production had been used for many years to grow sugarcane, a very high residue crop ideally suited to protect vulnerable tropical soils and sustain levels of soil organic matter. If soil organic matter losses are occurring, which is likely, these losses may soon reach a point where there is almost no organic matter left, sacrificing perhaps in perpetuity the ability to produce healthy crops without substantial applications of inputs from off the farm.
The loss of soil via wind erosion or water erosion, and the impact of the moving soil on where it ends up, is a second major concern. Given the multiple applications of pesticides on the corn and soybean seed fields, it is inevitable that soil blowing off the fields at any time of the year, or washing into creeks and streams, carries with it pesticides that are inclined to bind to soil particles by virtue of their physical and chemical properties.
New evidence from Sri Lanka suggests that glyphosate, a herbicide applied multiple times per year on the corn-soybean seed fields near Waimea, can form stable bounds with soil minerals (Jayasumana et al., 2014). When soil particles containing bound, glyphosate-metallo-complexes blow off fields, they can be inhaled and move into the
10 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 11 of 30 PageID #: 8178 March 11, 2014
body. Such complexes have been identified as a plausible explanation of a previously unexplained outbreak of kidney disease in Sri Lanka.
4. Whose responsibility is it to avoid or mitigate pesticide-related, economic damage to personal property?
Pesticide manufacturers bear the responsibility to assure that their products, when applied in accord with label directions, do not cause economic harm to personal property as a result of drift, movement in water, carryover in the soil, or any other exposure route. Such harm could include damage to crops, lawns, trees or other vegetation, damage to bees or pets, loss of enjoyment of a person’s home or yard because of odors stemming from a pesticide application, or damage to the surface of cars, equipment, or structures.
EPA policy addressing the content of label directions and restrictions designed to prevent these sorts of economic damage to personal property is set forth in the 1996 Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice 96-4. PR 96-4 explains that in the 1977 amendments to FIFRA, Congress granted EPA the authority to waive pesticide efficacy data requirements, which the agency did in regulations promulgated in 1979.
In conducting an initial analysis of a new pesticide’s overall risks and benefits, this policy change took the agency out of the business of assessing pesticide efficacy, and more broadly, relieved EPA of the obligation (and means) to quantify and assure a favorable balance in a pesticide’s benefits and costs. In PR 96-4, the Agency explained the purpose of this important change in policy:
“…waiving review of the efficacy of agricultural pesticides in the registration process would enable the Agency to focus on its ‘primary mandate under FIFRA’: investigating ‘the health and safety aspects of pesticides.” (PR Notice 96-4)
Moreover, the agency acknowledges in PR 96-4 that:
“…in actual fact, EPA, with Congress’ approval, stopped evaluating pesticide efficacy for routine label approvals almost two decades ago. Further, as explained below, EPA’s regulations do not require a review of efficacy or property damage issues for agricultural pesticides.” (Emphasis added).
The Agency has acknowledged that pesticide manufacturers were “…potentially subject to damage suits by the user community if their products prove ineffectual in actual use” (original quote from a September 15, 1982 Federal Register notice [47 Fed. Reg. 40,659-40,661], restated in PR 96-4). PR 96-4 goes on to explain that label requirements encompass “…directions for use of a pesticide for the purpose of insuring that pesticide applicators and farmworkers are adequately protected” and to assure compliance with legal limits for residues in food, as governed by pesticide tolerances. These are the critical “directions for use” that are the focus of EPA’s assessment of potential risks, and when warranted, attempts to prevent “unreasonable risk to man or the
11 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 12 of 30 PageID #: 8179 March 11, 2014
environment,” the basic standard set forth in FIFRA that each pesticide label must comply with.
The waiver of pesticide efficacy data requirements encompasses not just the results of studies on the effectiveness of a pesticide in controlling its target pests, but also includes potential for crop damage from carryover in the soil, or as a result of off-target movement of an applied pesticide (e.g., via water, or in wind or blowing soil). The Agency reiterates this point throughout PR Notice 94-6 and offers examples, including a reference to plant back restrictions on herbicide labels made necessary by the propensity of some herbicides to remain biologically active in the soil for many months after application. PR 96-4 states that:
“Rotational crop restrictions are not reviewed to determine if the rotated crop would be injured by the residual pesticide residues.”
While PR 96-4 places the responsibility on pesticide manufacturers to craft and include on pesticide product labels warnings and restrictions sufficient to prevent economic damage to personal property, such as crop rotational restrictions, the EPA does not assess nor render judgment on the adequacy of such warnings and restrictions. For this reason, there is no basis in law or fact for assertions by farmers, applicators, or manufacturers that they are not responsible for off-target pesticide movement leading to economic damage to property, because all label directions were followed and the labels were EPA-approved. Such assertions rest upon the logical, but erroneous presumption that the EPA must have reviewed and approved pesticide label warning statements and restrictions, but this is simply not the case as made clear in PR 96-4. The Notice’s final sentence states this point clearly:
“…EPA’s approval of a pesticide label does not reflect any determination on the part of the EPA that the pesticide will be efficacious or will not damage or cause property damage.” (PR Notice 94-6).
PR 96-4 also notes that “pesticide producers are aware that they are potentially subject to damage suits by the user community if their products prove ineffective in actual use.” The same point applies, as well, to instances where a pesticide has allegedly triggered economic damage to personal property. By far the most common type of economic damage results from herbicide drift or carryover, as evident in the periodic reports of the American Association of Pesticide Control Officials (AAPCO). For example, AAPCO’s 2005 pesticide drift surveys notes 1,705 complaints were received and investigated nationwide. A table reports the most common five pesticides by state triggering complaints. The vast majority of active ingredients in this list are herbicides, lead by 2,4- D, glyphosate, atrazine, and dicamba.
In pesticide drift and damage cases, individuals alleging such harm typically seek compensation from the grower making the application, or the applicator, and often both. If the parties are unable to reach agreement on compensation, the allegedly harmed individual’s only remaining remedy is to seek damages via a lawsuit. When such cases
12 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 13 of 30 PageID #: 8180 March 11, 2014
are brought to court, defendant attorneys often invoke as their primary defense that all applicable pesticide label directions and restrictions were followed, and hence even if there were damages, fault lies not with the farmer or applicator, but instead with EPA, which apparently or purportedly carried out an ineffective review and approval process.
Court confusion associated with this sort of defense argument in herbicide damage cases is cited by EPA as one reason for the issuance of PR 96-4. Via this PR notice, the agency alerts the user community, and those allegedly adversely impacted by damage to economic property, that the agency has not reviewed nor rendered judgment on the adequacy of pesticide label warnings and restrictions designed to mitigate harm to economic property, and that the adequacy of such warnings and restrictions are, in fact, germane in resolving economic damage-related pesticide litigation.
Last, the companies (or their parent companies) leasing the majority of farmland in Kauai for research on corn and soybean seed technology, and/or for seed propagation, are themselves major pesticide manufacturers with decades of experience with EPA policies relative to pesticide labels and prevention of damage to economic property. They fully understood the source of label warnings and restrictions targeting prevention of economic damage to private property, and that the EPA had not reviewed nor rendered judgment on their adequacy.
5. How do pesticide product manufacturers typically deal with situations where a pesticide needs to be used or applied in a significantly different way, possibly leading to novel exposure pathways and risks, compared to the typical and common conditions and methods of use, as set forth on product labels?
Recognizing the vast diversity in pesticide application scenarios and the fact that certain states will face unique pest control and/or environmental challenges related to pesticide use, the FIFRA statue provides a mechanism for grower groups and pesticide users to petition states to issue specialized pesticide labels applicable only in the state issuing the label. These so-called Section 24(c) labels must be approved by the state, and are submitted to EPA, where a typically cursory review is conducted.
This type of pesticide product label often authorizes treatment of an additional crop not on a federal label, or an application targeting a different pest not present elsewhere. Other 24(c) labels might authorize a different application method, a higher rate or application or more applications. Some include special restrictions to prevent problems in vulnerable areas like wildlife refuges, or near parks or schools, or drinking water reservoirs.
Most of pesticides applied on the corn and soybean seed research and propagation farms in Kauai are used in a very different way than in all other regions of the U.S., with the possible exception of Puerto Rico. The major difference is that various pesticides are typically applied on two or three crops in a calendar year on the same acre, as opposed to just on a single crop per year, as elsewhere in the U.S. Given that the acres treated in Kauai would typically account for a tiny fraction of national acres treated (less than one-
13 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 14 of 30 PageID #: 8181 March 11, 2014
hundredth of 1%), it is understandable that pesticide manufacturers would not place special use directions, warnings, and restrictions relevant to the typical use pattern in Kauai on a national pesticide label. This is the basic purpose of the Section 24(c) label option.
To the extent that pesticide manufacturers wanting to sell or use products on corn and soybean seed acreage in Kauai recognized a need to mitigate the risk of off-target pesticide movement and damage to economic property, the appropriate way to mitigate such risks would have been through seeking a 24(c) labels, and including on those labels the warnings and restrictions deemed necessary to prevent damage to economic property in the surrounding area. To my knowledge, this option was not exercised.
But the decision by the manufacturers of the pesticides applied in Kauai on corn and soybean seed production fields to not seek 24(c) labels does not dissolve them of the obligation to place necessary warnings and restrictions on labels when warranted by the circumstances of use. For example, trade winds frequently blow across the Hawaiian Islands in addition to more complex winds associated with temperature differences between the coast and mountains. Most cities, towns, and private homes and businesses are located along the coast, within a few miles of the ocean. This combination of unique circumstances points to the need for special instructions regarding when it is appropriate to apply pesticides on cropland subject to Hawaii’s unique trade wind and coastal weather patterns, especially in the case of pesticides like 2,4-D and glyphosate which are known to be subject to drift and off-target movement and damage to non-target vegetation.
14 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 15 of 30 PageID #: 8182 March 11, 2014
Attachment A. Resume
CHARLES M. BENBROOK
BUSINESS 90063 Troy Road AND HOME Enterprise, Oregon 97828 ADDRESS
PHONE (541) 828-7918 (Business) FAX (541) 828-7921 E-MAIL -- [email protected]
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Birthdate: November 26, 1949 Place: Los Angeles, California Children: Stephen, Rachel, Michael, Seth and Zacary Wife: Karen Lutz Benbrook Hobbies: Fishing, Raising Rabbits, Photography
EDUCATION
B.A. Degree - Economics, Harvard University (1971) M.A. Degree - Agricultural Economics, University of Wisconsin (1979) Ph.D.Degree - Agricultural Economics, University of Wisconsin (1980)
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY
Washington State University, Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources, Research Professor. August 16, 2012 to present
Research scientists and program leader for the “Measure to Manage Program – Farm and Food Diagnostics for Sustainability and Health.”
The Organic Center, Chief Scientist. January 1, 2006 to May 31, 2012; Consultant June 1 to present.
Develops and manages a program of research on the environmental and consumer health benefits of organic foods and farming. Responsible for synthesizing new research and science on the impacts of organic and conventional farming systems on food safety, nutritional quality, and taste.
15 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 16 of 30 PageID #: 8183 March 11, 2014
Benbrook Consultant Services (BCS). Sole proprietor of a Troy, Oregon based consulting business. December 1, 1990 to present.
Services for domestic and international clients in the public and private sectors. Major areas of focus include biotechnology; pesticide use, risks, and regulation; adoption and costs-benefits of Integrated Pest Management; impacts of federal environmental laws, especially the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. BCS specializes in the development of novel methodologies to assess environmental and public health risks and issues. BCS makes heavy use of government, academic and private sector data sets in shedding light on key policy choices, and maintains extensive, interlinked databases.
Clients include national consumer and environmental groups, international organizations, companies, federal and state government agencies, trade associations, and academic research organizations. Benbrook has also served as an expert witness in several pesticide and biotechnology related lawsuits.
National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. Executive Director, Board on Agriculture. January 16, 1984 to November 30, 1990
The Board on Agriculture is one of eight major units of the NRC. The executive director is responsible for overseeing and managing activities of the Board. When hired, the Board had three staff (a secretary and two program officers). Benbrook expanded the scope of activities and raised over $1 million per year. The staff grew over seven years to exceed 20.
Major NAS reports carried out during this period covered the early methods and applications of agricultural biotechnology; unique risks faced by infants and children from pesticide exposure, modernizing U.S. pesticide regulatory law, pesticide use and resistance, options to improve the nutritional composition of animal products, animal nutrition needs, agricultural education programs at the federal level, soil and water conservation, germplasm conservation and use, the healthfulness of food products and options to improve food safety, agriculture’s impact on water and soil quality, and agricultural research and sustainable development needs and challenges.
Subcommittee on Department Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture, Committee on Agriculture, U.S. House of Representatives. Subcommittee chaired by Congressman George E. Brown, Jr., Staff Director. April 1981 - January 13, 1984.
Responsibilities of the staff director include: (i) preparing and analyzing legislation within the jurisdiction of the subcommittee (agricultural research system, pesticide regulation, foreign agricultural issues and programs, and plant and animal protection programs); (ii) conducting subcommittee business meetings; (iii) briefing members and staff on legislation and oversight activities; and (iv) analyzing annual budget proposals.
During this period, Benbrook participated in the drafting and passage of legislation in many areas. Major pesticide reform legislation was debated each year, but never passed.
16 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 17 of 30 PageID #: 8184 March 11, 2014
Benbrook and staff working for Congressman Jim Weaver of Oregon drafted the first version of what became the Organic Food Production Act (passed in the 1990 farm bill). Oversight hearings by the Subcommittee on pesticide risk and regulatory issues led to the recognition, and ultimately the resolution, of the Delaney paradox (focus on the 1987 NAS report).
Council on Environmental Quality, Executive Office of the President, Agricultural Policy Analyst. December 1979 - March 1981.
Responsibilities included: (i) representing CEQ on various Executive Branch committees; (ii) analyzing natural resource data and policy options; (iii) preparing the agricultural section of the Natural Resources chapter in CEQ's 1980 annual report; and (iv) principal author of the Final Report to the President of the National Agricultural Lands Study.
AWARDS and HONORS
Received “Award for Excellence” in science, from the The Organic Center, March 2014.
Appointed as member, USDA’s AC 21 agricultural biotechnology advisory committee, 2010, and reappointed in 2013.
Appointed to AGree Advisory Committee, 2010.
Appointed as Adjunct Faculty Member, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, 2007.
Graduated cum laude from Harvard University, 1971.
Received $1,000 cash award from the Council on Environmental Quality for contributions to the completion of the National Agricultural Lands Study.
RESEARCH and ANALYTICAL ACTIVITIES
1979-1983: Carried out the basic analytical work on the extent and distribution of soil erosion that was used in developing and building the case for the conservation provisions in the 1985 farm bill. This work, carried out with the help of Dr. William Larson, Univ. of Minnesota, was the first independent analysis of erosion challenges conducted outside USDA utilizing the Natural Resources Inventory dataset. The results were reported in several publications (see list below), as well as in CEQ publications and the 1983 American Farmland Trust report on soil conservation. These analytical findings were cited by all major participants in the debate leading to passage of Title 12 in the 1985 Food Security Act.
17 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 18 of 30 PageID #: 8185 March 11, 2014
1981- present: Carried out Congressional oversight investigation of the pesticide regulatory activities of the Environmental Protection Agency, focusing on Reagan- administration policy changes. Wrote the synthesis volume and compiled the other three volumes of the subcommittee report: "EPA Pesticide Regulatory Study." This report contained a comprehensive review of the legal, administrative, and scientific dilemmas confronting pesticide regulatory officials. The report's findings and recommendations formed the basis of several major legislative proposals to amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act in the 99th-101st Congresses, and led to the 1984-1987 NAS/NRC project that produced the report Regulating Pesticides in Food: The Delaney Paradox (1987). This NAS/NRC report identified the need for further assessment of the unique regulatory challenges entailed in protecting the health of infants and children, and the NAS/NRC project that produced the seminal 1993 report Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children.
The recommendations in the 1993 NAS/NRC report were adopted fully in the 1996 “Food Quality Protection Act.” From 1997-2006, Benbrook carried out many studies of FQPA implementation for Consumers Union and other clients. Multiple books, reports, and articles were developed reporting this work.
Benbrook has remained actively involved in the developing methods to assess pesticide residue and risk levels in food. In 2005-2006, the EPA’s Office of Inspector General hired Benbrook to apply his risk model to an evaluation of the impacts of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA).
1984-present: Helped design, develop and apply the dataset and analytical methodology underlying the work of the NAS/NRC committee on pesticide residues in the food supply. In conjunction with Dr. John Wargo of Yale University and Mr. Richard Wiles of the Board on Agriculture staff, developed the method used by the NAS/NRC committee to conduct a cumulative risk assessment of exposure and risks to oncogenic pesticides, the first such analysis ever conducted. The method utilized USDA food consumption data, and EPA tolerance and toxicological data, and a Monte Carlo simulation model. The basic method set forth in this report formed the foundation for contemporary EPA cumulative risk assessments of the organophosphate insecticides.
1988-1989: Compiled data and conducted analysis of private sector research investments in the food and agricultural industries. The results of this analysis are reported in Appendix B, "Private Sector Research Activities and Prospects", in Investing in Research: A Proposal to Strengthen the Agricultural, Food, and Environmental System, NAS Press, 1989.
1995-present: Developed the first system in the U.S. designed to quantify the level of adoption of Integrated Pest Management along the “IPM continuum.” The original Benbrook Consulting Services IPM measurement system was set forth in Chapter 7 in the Consumers Union book Pest Management at the Crossroads (1996). The first empirical application focused on weed management in corn and soybeans and was done as part of a
18 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 19 of 30 PageID #: 8186 March 11, 2014
World Wildlife Fund project. The results were reported in a presentation made to the Weed Science Society of America circa 1998.
This early model of IPM adoption has been refined and augmented through several iterations and applications in projects with the Wisconsin Potato and Vegetable Growers Association and University of Wisconsin-Madison, Gerber Products Company, Glades Crop Care of Jupiter Florida, and the Lodi-Woodbridge Wine Grape Commission. The pesticide risk indicator component of the IPM measurement system is now the “Pesticide Environmental Assessment System,” or PEAS. In 2007, a large team led by Dr. Tom Green of the IPM Institute, applied for and received an $800,000.00 NRCS Conservation Innovation Technology grant to refine the water quality components in PEAS and make the model accessible via the Internet. Benbrook is a PI on this grant. Benbrook wrote an earlier, successful RAMP grant proposal (Risk Avoidance and Management Program, an USDA competitive grant program focusing on large, multistate IPM projects) that provided support for enhancement of modules in PEAS.
1999-2004: Developed and applied a method to estimate the usage of subtherapeutic doses of antimicrobials in livestock for growth promotion and disease prevention, as part of projects focusing on antibiotic resistance management. Developed the model and results reported in the Union of Concerned Scientists’ report Hoggin It! Estimates of Antimicrbial Abuse in Livestock (2001). Subsequent work has focused on the costs and prevention of antibiotic resistance.
2004-June 2012: Through work with The Organic Center, Benbrook is developing a food quality index modeling system encompassing positive (e.g., nutrient density, nutrient composition, taste) and negative attributes of food (e.g., fat, salt, sugar levels; pesticide residues/risk; bacteria and mycotoxins). An Access database and modeling system has been developed to assess differences in the nutrient density of foods produced using conventional and organic production systems.
REPORTS, ARTICLES, AND PRESENTATIONS
Benbrook has published peer reviewed articles in multiple disciplines including agricultural biotechnology, pesticide use and residues in food, soil and water conservation, pesticide risk assessment methods, Integrated Pest Management, germplasm conservation, scientific basis for evaluating agricultural technologies, antibiotic use and resistance, food safety, international agricultural development, sustainable agriculture, and agricultural policy.
Peer Reviewed Articles
Charles M. Benbrook, Gillian Butler, Maged A. Latif, Carlo Leifert, and Donald R. Davis. 2013. “Organic Production Enhances Milk Nutritional Quality by Shifting Fatty Acid Composition: A United States-Wide, 18-Month Study,” PLOS ONE, December 9, 2013
19 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 20 of 30 PageID #: 8187 March 11, 2014
Benbrook, C.M. 2013. IMPACTS OF CHANGING PEST MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND ORGANIC PRODUCTION ON TREE FRUIT PESTICIDE RESIDUES AND RISK. Acta Hort. (ISHS) 1001:91-102, http://www.actahort.org/books/1001/1001_8.htm
Benbrook, C. Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use in the U.S. – the First Sixteen Years, Environmental Sciences-Europe, 24:24 (2012)
Benbrook, C. Inappropriate measures of pesticide health risks, Letter to the Editor, The Annals of Internal Medicine, posted September 21, 2012
Benbrook, C. “The Impacts of Yield on Nutritional Quality: Lessons from Organic Farming,” HortScience, (2007).
McCullum, C., C.M. Benbrook, L. Knowles, S. Roberts, T. Schryver, “Application of Modern Biotechnology to Food and Agriculture: Food Systems Perspective”, J. Nutr. Educ Behav., (2003); 35:319.
Benbrook, C. et. al. “Use of ‘resistance risk profiles’ to guide resistance management planning”, Pesticide Outlook, 14:3, June 2003.
Baker, B. P., Benbrook, C. M., Groth, E., and K.L. Benbrook. "Pesticide residues in conventional, integrated pest management (IPM)-grown and organic foods: insights from three US data sets." Food Addit.Contam 19.5 (2002): 427-46.
Benbrook, C. M. et al. "Developing a pesticide risk assessment tool to monitor progress in reducing reliance on high-risk pesticides." American Journal of Potato Research, 79 (2002): 183-99.
Benbrook, C. M. "Organochlorine residues pose surprisingly high dietary risks." J Epidemiol Community Health 56.11 (2002): 822-23.
Benbrook, C. “Do GM Crops Mean Less Pesticide Use?”, Pesticide Outlook, Royal Society of Chemistry, October 2001.
Benbrook, C. M. “Performance criteria for IPM: measuring IPM results,” Henk, M. Kogan M. IPM in Oregon: Achievements and Future Directions, Special Report 1020 , 19-27. 2000. Corvallis: Integrated Plant Protection Center, Oregon State University Extension Service.
Benbrook, C. “Apples, Kids and Core Science,” Choices, Third Quarter 2000, Am. Ag. Econ. Assoc.
Lynch, S., D. Sexson, C.M. Benbrook, M. Carter, J. Wyman, P. Nowak, J. Barzen, S. Diercks, J. Wallendal, “Working out the Bugs”, Choices, Third Quarter 2000, Am. Ag. Econ. Assoc.
20 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 21 of 30 PageID #: 8188 March 11, 2014
Benbrook, C. “Carcinogen Policy at EPA,” Science, Vol. 219, No. 4586: 798. February 18, 1983.
Benbrook, C. “What We Know, Don't Know, and Need to Know About Pesticide Residues in Food,” January 23, 1990. Chapter 15 in Pesticide Residues and Food Safety: A Harvest of Viewpoints, Edited by B.G. Tweedy, et. al., Amer. Chemical Society Symposium Series # 446, 1991.
Benbrook, C. “Why A Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture?,” February 6, 1990. Jan-Feb. 1991 issue of the Journal of Soil and Water Conservation.
Benbrook, C., and Moses, P. “Engineering Crops to Resist Herbicides,” Technology Review, MIT Press, November-December 1986, pp. 55-61, 79.
Benbrook, C. “Is American Environmental Policy Ready for de Minimis Risks in Water?”, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 8, pp. 300-307 (1988).
Benbrook, C. “First Principles: The Definition of Highly Erodible Land and Tolerable Soil Loss, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, January-February 1988, pp. 35-38.
Benbrook, C. “The Science and Art of Conservation Policy,” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, September-October 1986, pp. 285-291.
Reports, Papers, and Book Chapters (partial list)
Benbrook, C. Transforming Jane Doe’s Diet, Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, Boulder, CO., 2011, access at – http://www.organic-center.org/science.nutri.php?action=view&report_id=190
Benbrook, C. The Organic Center’s “Dietary Risk Index “ – Tracking Relative Pesticide Risks in Foods and Beverages, The Organic Center, Boulder, CO., 2011, access at www.organic-center.org/DRI
Benbrook, C., and D.R. Davis. Identifying Smart Food Choices on the Path to Healthier Diets: Documentation and Applications of TOC-NQI, Version 1.1. The Organic Center, Boulder, CO., 2011, access at: www.organic-center.org/TOC-NQI
Benbrook, C. et al. A Dairy Farm’s Footprint: Evaluating the Impacts of Organic and Conventional Dairy Production Systems, Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, Boulder, Co., 2010, access at – http://www.organic-center.org/science.environment.php?action=view&report_id=184
Benbrook, C. What Does Sustainable Agriculture Have to Offer? Conclusions and Recommendations in Two NAS Reports, Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, Boulder, Co., 2010, access at – http://www.organic-center.org/science.environment.php?action=view&report_id=180
21 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 22 of 30 PageID #: 8189 March 11, 2014
McCullum-Gomez, C., Benbrook, C., and R. Theuer. That First Step: Organic Food and a Healthier Future, Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, Boulder, CO., 2009, access at http://www.organic- center.org/science.healthy.php?action=view&report_id=149
C., Benbrook, C., X. Zhao, J. Yanez et al. New Evidence Confirms the Nutritional Superiority of Plant-Based Organic Foods, State of Science review, The Organic Center, Boulder, CO., 2008, access at -- http://www.organic- center.org/science.nutri.php?action=view&report_id=145
Benbrook, C. Simplifying the Pesticide Risk Equation: The Organic Option, Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, Boulder, Co., 2008, access at http://www.organic- center.org/science.pest.php?action=view&report_id=125
Benbrook, C. “Principles Governing the Long-Run Risks, Benefits, and Costs of Agricultural Biotechnology,” Chapter 11, Biodiversity and the Law: Intellectual Property, Biotechnology, and Traditional Knowledge. Edited by Charles McManis, Earthscan, 2007.
Benbrook, C. Unfinished Business: Preventing E. coli O157 Outbreaks in Leafy Greens, Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, 2007. 21 pages.
Benbrook, C., Greene, Al., Lu, C., and Landrigan, P. Successes and Lost Opportunities to Reduce Children’s Exposure to Pesticides Since the Mid-1990s, Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, 2006. 41 pages.
Benbrook, C. E. coli – Frequently Asked Questions, Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, 2006. 30 pages.
Benbrook, C. Breaking the Mold – Impacts of Organic and Conventional Farming Systems on Mycotoxins in Food and Livestock Feed, State of Science Review, The Organic Center, 2005. 70 pages.
Benbrook, C. Elevating Antioxidant Levels in Food through Organic Farming and Food Processing, State of Science Review, The Organic Center, 2005. 78 pages.
Benbrook, C. “Tracking the Impacts of the FQPA on Pesticide Dietary Risks -- A Preliminary Assessment,” report commissioned by the EPA Office of Inspector General, 2005.
Benbrook, C. Minimizing Pesticide Dietary Exposure Through the Consumption of Organic Food, State of Science Review, The Organic Center, 2004. 63 pages.
Benbrook, C. “Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use in the United States: The First Thirteen Years,” Critical Issue Report, The Organic Center, 2009.
22 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 23 of 30 PageID #: 8190 March 11, 2014
Benbrook, C. “Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use in the United States: The First Eight Years”. 2003.
Benbrook, C. “Genetically Engineered Crops and Pesticide Use in the United States: The First Nine Years,” Ag BioTech InfoNet Technical Paper #7, 2005.
Mellon, M., Benbrook, C., and K.L. Benbrook. Hogging It!: Estimates of Antimicrobial Abuse in Livestock, Published by the Union of Concerned Scientists, January 2001.
Benbrook, C. et al. “Update: Pesticides in Children’s Foods, An analysis of 1998 USDA PDP Data on Pesticide Residues,” Consumers Union of the U.S., Inc. May 2000.
Benbrook, C., Groth, E., Hanson, M., and S. Marquardt. Pest Management at the Crossroads, Consumers Union, 1996. 272 pages.
Benbrook, C. et al. “Do You Know What You Are Eating?” Consumers Union of U.S., Inc. Public Service Projects Department, Technical Division, February 1999.
Benbrook, C., and Marquardt, D. Challenge and Change: A Progressive Approach to Pesticide Regulation in California, Cal-EPA, Department of Pesticide Regulation, 1993. 153 pages.
Benbrook, C. “The Road from Rio: An International Policy and Action Framework for Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development,” (Client: FAO/UN), 1994.
Benbrook, C. “U.S. Foreign Aid: What Counts for Sustainable Development?,” (Client: Coalition of NGO/PVO groups led by Bread for the World), 1995.
Benbrook, C. “Unraveling Delaney's Paradox: Challenges for the 102nd Congress,” (Client: Institute for Science in Society).
Benbrook, C. “Costs and Benefits of Water Quality Best Management Practices,” (Client: Environmental Protection Agency).
Benbrook, C. “Sustainable Agriculture in the 21st Century: Will the Grass Be Greener?,” (Client: Humane Society of the United States), 1992.
Benbrook, C. “Natural Resources Assessment and Policy,” Chapter 12 in Soil Management for Sustainability, Edited by R. Lal, and F.J. Pierce. Proceedings of a Special Symposium held in Edmonton, Alberta, August, 1989 honoring the work and accomplishments of Dr. William E. Larson.
23 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 24 of 30 PageID #: 8191 March 11, 2014
Benbrook, C. Appendix B, "Private Sector Research Activities and Prospects", in Investing in Research: A Proposal to Strengthen the Agricultural, Food, and Environmental System, NAS Press, 1989.
Benbrook, C., and Brown, W. “Public Policies and Institutions to Enhance Crop Productivity,” Crop Productivity Research Imperatives Revisited, proceedings of the Crop Productivity Revisited Conference, December 11-13, 1985, Airlie, Virginia, pp. 239-257.
Presentations, Comments, Congressional Testimony, and Opinion Pieces
Benbrook delivers between 10 and 20 presentations per year; a partial listing follows.
Benbrook, C. “Private Sector Initiatives to Reduce Children’s Pesticide Exposures,” AAAS annual meeting symposium on reducing children’s pesticide risks, February 19, 2006, St. Louis, Missouri.
Landrigan, P., and Benbrook, C. “Impacts of the Food Quality Protection Act on Children’s Exposures to Pesticides,” AAAS annual meeting symposium on reducing children’s pesticide risks, February 19, 2006, St. Louis, Missouri.
Benbrook, C. “Sowing the Seeds of Destruction,” Op-Ed in the New York Times, July 11, 2003. Accessible at http://www.biotech-info.net/sowing_seeds_NYT.html
Benbrook, C. “Stakeholder Roles in Resistance management – Time to Get with the Program” CAST Resistance Management Symposium, April, 2003.
Benbrook, C.M., “Why pesticide risks matter and pose tough challenges for ecolabel programs”, In Proceedings of a Conference on Ecolabels and the Greening of the Food Market, Tufts University, Boston MA, November 7-9, 2003.
Benbrook, C., and E. Groth. “Who Controls and Who Benefits from Plant Genomics?,” AAAS Genomics Seminar Paper, February 19, 2000.
Nigh, R., Benbrook, C., Brush, S., Garcia-Barrios, L., Ortega-Paczka, R., Perales, H.R. “Transgenic crops: a cautionary tale,” Science, Vol. 287 (5460), 2000. Page 1927.
Benbrook, C. M..” Performance criteria for IPM: measuring IPM results,” Henk, M. Kogan M. IPM in Oregon: Achievements and Future Directions, Special Report 1020 , 19-27. 2000. Corvallis: Integrated Plant Protection Center, Oregon State University Extension Service.
1998-2002 comments to the EPA and reports on the implementation of the Food Quality Protection Act are accessible through the Consumers Union FQPA website at http://www.ecologic-ipm.net.
24 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 25 of 30 PageID #: 8192 March 11, 2014
Benbrook, C. and J. Cook.. “Striving Toward Sustainability: A Framework to Guide On-Farm Innovation, Research, and Policy Analysis,” March 2, 1990. Paper presented at the 1990 Pacific Northwest Symposium on Sustainable Agriculture, Vancouver, Washington.
Benbrook, C. “Conflict or Cooperation: The Path to a 1990 Farm Bill,” March 22, 1990. Speech presented before the "Who's Writing the Farm Bill?" Conference, sponsored by Governor George Mickelson and the South Dakota Department of Agriculture, Sioux Falls.
Benbrook, C., and Moses, P. “Herbicide Resistance: Environmental and Economic Issues,” Proceedings, BioExpo 1986.
Agriculture and Groundwater Quality: Policy Implications and Choices. January 17, 1989. Paper presented as part of the "Technical Session on Agriculture and Groundwater Quality," 1989 Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco, California.
Practical Realities and Political Options in Overcoming World Hunger. February 28, 1989. Invited testimony before the Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agriculture Research, and the Environment, House Committee on Science and Technology.
Sustainable Agriculture: Policy Options and Prospects. February 28, 1989. Speech before the Institute for Alternative Agriculture Symposium on Sustainable Agriculture, Washington, DC. Published in the American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 4:3-4, pp. 153-159.
Coping With Delaney's Paradox. May 15, 1989. Invited testimony before the Subcommittee on Toxic Substances, Environmental Oversight, Research and Development of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Will S. 7222 Unravel Delaney's Paradox? June 6, 1989. Invited testimony before the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee's Food Safety Hearing.
Priority Setting Mechanisms Utilized by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. June 20, 1989. Testimony before the Senate Agriculture Committee's Agricultural Research and General Legislation Subcommittee.
The United States' Progress Toward Sustainable Resource Development. July 31, 1989. Paper presented at the Forty-fourth Annual Meeting of the Soil and Water Conservation Society, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Balancing Agricultural Production and Resource Conservation Goals Through Commodity Program Reform: Recommendations from the NAS Report Alternative Agriculture. September 21, 1989. Invited testimony before the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry's Subcommittee on Agriculture Production and
25 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 26 of 30 PageID #: 8193 March 11, 2014
Stabilization.
Alternatives to Pesticides: Findings and Recommendations from the NAS Report Alternative Agriculture. September 22, 1989. Invited testimony by Dr. Charles M. Benbrook and Dr. Robert M. Goodman before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works' Subcommittee on Toxic Substances, environmental Oversight, Research and Development Hearing on Pesticides.
Agriculture's Contribution to Water Quality Protection: Lessons from the NRC Report Alternative Agriculture. October 3, 1989.Invited testimony before a joint hearing of the House Committee on Agriculture's Subcommittee on Department Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture, and the House Committee on Science and Technology's Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agricultural Research, and the Environment.
Unraveling Delaney's Paradox: Unfinished Business. October 19, 1989. Invited testimony before the House Committee on Agriculture's Subcommittee on Department Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture.
Opportunities to Protect Water Quality: Lessons from the NRC Report Alternative Agriculture. October 24, 1989. Invited testimony before a hearing of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry's Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry.
Quality in the American Food Industry: Lessons from the NRC Alternative Agriculture Report. November 3, 1989. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Gastronomy; "Tradition and Innovation in American Food and Wine--A View From the Midwest," Chicago, Illinois.
Beware the Future: Pesticides, Public Policy, and Pest Management. Presented before the 14th Illinois Crop Protection Workshop sponsored by the Illinois Cooperative Extension Service, March 9-11, 1988.
Pesticide Food Safety Act of 1988. September 7, 1988. Invited testimony before the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture, Committee on Agriculture, U.S. House of Representatives.
Florida's Food Safety Challenges. September 27, 1988. Speech presented at the 45th Annual Convention of the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association in Naples, Florida.
Pesticide Regulatory Policy: Creating a Positive Climate for Innovation. Presented before the Conference on Technology and Agricultural Policy on December 12, 1986. Published in Technology and Agricultural Policy: Proceedings of a Symposium, 1990, pp. 122-140.
Federal-State Cooperation in the Regulation of Pesticides, chapter in the Primer Agricultural Chemicals and the Midwestern States. Proceedings of a conference held
26 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 27 of 30 PageID #: 8194 March 11, 2014
March 27-28, 1987.
Major Board on Agriculture NAS/NRC Reports
Soil Conservation: An Assessment of the National Resources Inventory, Volumes 1 and II (1986)
Pesticide and Groundwater Quality: Issues and Problems in Four States (1986)
Pesticide Resistance: Strategies and Tactics for Management (1986)
Agricultural Biotechnology: Strategies for National Competitiveness (1987)
Educating the Next Generation of Food and Agricultural Professionals (1987)
Regulating Pesticides in Food: The Delaney Paradox (1987)
Designing Foods: Animal Product Options in the Marketplace (1988)
Understanding Agriculture: Education in the Secondary Schools (1988)
Alternative Farming (1989)
Investing in Research: A Proposal to Strengthen the Agricultural, Food, and Environmental System (1990)
Partial List of Hearings Conducted by the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture
Agricultural Research System
Overnight Hearings on Agricultural Research -- June 22, 23, 28, 29, 1982.
Review of the Report "Extension in the Eighties," June 30, 1983 (Ser. No. 98-28).
Extension Service Oversight, February 17 and March 9 and 10, 1982 (Ser. No. 97-EEE).
National Plant Germplasm System, June 24, 1981 (Ser. No. 97-W).
1981 Farm Bill, agricultural research and extension titles, March 19 and 20, June 6 and 28, 1981 (Ser. No. 97-G, Part 8).
H.R. 1309 on the 1890 land grant colleges, June 4, 1981. Resident instruction hearings, February, 1984.
Information Management
27 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 28 of 30 PageID #: 8195 March 11, 2014
"Information Technology for Agricultural America." Workshop and Committee Print, December 1982.
Application of Computer Based Information Systems and Services in Agriculture, May 19 and 20, 1982.
Natural Resources Data Bases, June 2, 1981 (Ser. No. 97-K).
Substantial portions of "Sustainable Agricultural Systems," April 22 and 27, 1982 (Ser. No. 97-PPP).
Natural Resource Conservation
Sustainable Agricultural Systems, April 16, 22, and 27, 1982 (Ser. No. 97-PPP).
Groundwater Quality and Quantity Issues, July 23, 1981 (Ser. No. 97-7).
Salinity Control in the Colorado River Basin, June 10, 1981 (Ser. No. 97-L).
Effects of Air Pollution on Agricultural Productivity, July 9, 1981 (Ser. No. 97-TT).
Pesticide Regulation and Pest Control Issues
EPA Pesticide Regulatory Program Study, December 17, 1982 (Ser. No. 97-NNNN).
Regulation of Pesticides, February 22 and 23, April 6, June 9, July 6 and 27, 1982 (Four volumes, Ser. No. 98-).
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Hearings in the 97th Congress, June 16 and 18, July 16 and 22, September 4, 1981, February 4, 1982 (Ser. No. 97-R, Parts I, II, III).
APHIS Oversight, July 28, 1983 (Ser. No. 98-).
Miscellaneous APHIS programs, September 21, 1982 (Ser. No. 97-FFFF). Compensation for Quarantine Plant Pest Loss; Protection Against Plant Pests, October 1, 1981.
28 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 29 of 30 PageID #: 8196 March 11, 2014
Appendix B. Materials Relied Upon
In addition to work over 35 years on pesticide use, impacts, and regulation, and all published papers and reports listed in my resume, I relied on the following items in preparing my report. I also relied on information obtained during the course of other cases in which I have served as an expert witness. See Appendix C for a list.
1. Third Amended Complaint (Property Related Claims) (40 pages, plus 13 attachments). 2. Pesticide Product Label Provisions (Excel spreadsheet) 3. National Average Soybean Pesticide Use on Acres Surveyed by the USDA in 2012. Benbrook Consulting Services (BCS) spreadsheet containing USDA-NASS pesticide use data. 4. NASS Highlights, U.S. Soybean Industry, January 2014, No. 2014-1. 5. Pesticide and Dietary Risk on Crops Surveyed by the USDA NASS and the USDA PDP, Soybeans 2006-1971, Access report with national and state level data, compiled by BCS based on USDA-NASS data, 385 pages. 6. Pesticide and Dietary Risk on Crops Surveyed by the USDA NASS and the USDA PDP, Corn 2010-1971, Access report with national and state level data, compiled by BCS based on USDA-NASS data, 506 pages. 7. Waimea Research Center Master List of Planted Acres 2010-Waimea 8. Hawaii_Seed_Corn.xlsx Excel Workbook provided by plaintiff’s attorney, encompassing ~4190 applications of pesticides on fields near Waimea, on the old Akai farm. I used primarily the worksheet “OldAccessSystem.” 9. Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice 96-4: Label Statements Involving Product Efficacy and Potential Harm to Property, June 3, 1996, accessed 2/4/2014, http://www.epa.gov/PR_Notices/pr96-4.html 10. AAPCO 2005 Pesticide Drift Enforcement Survey, http://aapco.ceris.purdue.edu/doc/surveys/DriftEnforce05State.html 11. Letter to Kyle Smith from Michael DiBartolomeis dated 2/21/2014 and accompanying report “Survey and Toxicology of Pesticides Applied by Pioneer Hi-Bred International in Waimea, Kauai (2007-2013) 12. Pest Management at the Crossroads, by Charles Benbrook et al., 1996, Consumers Union 13. Townsend, AR and Vitousek, PM. (1995). Soil Organic Matter Dynamics Along Gradients in Temperature and Land Use on the Island of Hawaii, Ecology, 76(3) pp. 721-733. 14. Feller, C, and Meare, MH. (1997). Physical control of soil organic matter dynamics in the tropics, Geoderma, Vol 79, pp 69-116. 15. Deposition transcript, Judith Rivera, 13.4.8 16. Maps.Pioneer.Waimea – AKIA/TMK 17. Pesticide labels (multiple products used on Kauai) 18. Pioneer Field Photos & Videos provided by plaintiff’s attorney (Mr. Smith will provide)
29 Case 1:12-cv-00231-LEK-BMK Document 766-8 Filed 06/24/14 Page 30 of 30 PageID #: 8197 March 11, 2014
Appendix C. Dr. Charles Benbrook: Expert Witness Assignments
1. Peterson, et al. v. BASF Corp. Plaintiff’s attorney, Hugh Plunkett, then Lockridge Grindal Nauen, St. Paul, Minnesota. Trial Ada, Minnesota, in the District Court for Northeastern Minnesota (Red River Valley)
2. James E. Fox, et al. v. Cheminova, Inc USDC, EDNY Case Number CV 00-5145, plaintiff’s attorney Kevin Huddel, Jones, Verras, and Freiberg, LLC, New Orleans, Louisiana.
3. Ricardo Ruiz Guzman individually, Martin Martinez individually, and Miguel Farias and Ignacia Farias, husband and wife v. Amvac Chemical Corporation. Plaintiff’s attorney, Richard Eymann, Eymann, Allison, Hunter, Jones, P.S., Spokane, Washington.
4. United Industries v. Dow AgroSciences. Plaintiff’s attorney, Dudley Von Holt, Thompson Coburn LLP, St. Louis, Missouri.
5. Hardin et al. v. BASF, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Plaintiff’s attorney, William French, LooperReed and McGraw, Dallas, Texas.
6. Timm Adams, et al. vs. U.S.A., et al., Idaho U.S.D.C. Case No. CIV 03-049-E-BLW, Plaintiff’s attorneys, Holland and Hart, Boise, ID and Denver, CO.
30