### J.R. Simplot Company Post

- Harvest Monitoring 1 Appendix 1 0

Post

- Harvest Monitoring

INDEX

Section Page

Index 1

Introduction 2

Results and Discussi on 3

Conclusion 5

Certification 6

### J.R. Simplot Company Post

- Harvest Monitoring 2 INTRODUCTION

All field trial sites are monitored for two grow ing seasons following the harvest in accordance with USDA

regulations . The volunteer monitoring information for our 2009, 2010, and 2011 field trials are included

in Tables 1, 2, and 3 (up to date as of 21 June , 2012). During the monitoring period, the Tr ial Manager

inspected the trial sites in accordance with the Simplot Design Protoco l for volunteers. Any volunteers

found in the trial sites were devitalized by using di sking, roguing , spraying herbicide or as per design

protocol.

### J.R. Simplot Company Post

- Harvest Monitoring 3 RESULTS and DISCUSSI ON

A summary of all post

- harvest monitoring pertaining to the 2009, 2010, and 2011 growing seasons is

included in Tables 1, 2, and 3

.

Table 1

. 2010 and 2011 Post

- H arvest M onitoring D ata for 2009 F ield T rials

Site Locations / USDA# Monitoring Year 2010

FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT

Canyon County, ID /

09

- 049

- 114n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bingham County, ID /

09

- 049

- 114n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Montcalm County, MI /

08

- 353

- 104n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cherry County, NE /

09

- 077

- 112n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oneida County, WI /

09

- 049

- 114n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

St Johns County, FL /

08

- 353

- 103n 0 0 0 0 0 NA NA NA NA

Site Locations Monitoring Year 2011

FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT

Canyon County, ID /

09

- 049

- 114n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bingham County, ID /

09

- 049

- 1 14n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Montcalm County, MI /

08

- 353

- 104n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cherry County, NE /

09

- 077

- 112n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oneida County, WI /

09

- 049

- 114n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

St Johns County, FL /

08

- 353

- 103n 0 0 0 0 0 NA NA NA NA

### J.R. Simplot Company Post

- Harvest Monitoring 4 Table 2. 2011 an d 2012 Post

- Harvest Monitoring Data for 2010 Field Trials

Site Locations / USDA# Monitoring Year 2011

FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT

Bingham County, ID /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Canyon County, ID /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 + + + 0 0

St Johns County, FL

09

- 336

- 103n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Missaukee County, MI

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Montcalm County, MI

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cherry County, NE /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Grand Forks County, ND

/ 10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adams County, WA /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 + + + 0 0 0

Adams County, WI /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oneida County, WI /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vilas County, WI1

10

- 076

- 103n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Site Locations Monitoring Year 2012

FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT

Bingham County, ID /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Canyon County, ID /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 15 6 1 2 0 0

St Johns County, FL /

09

- 336

- 103n 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA NA NA

Missaukee County, MI /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mon tcalm County, MI /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cherry County, NE /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Grand Forks County, ND

/ 10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adams County, WA /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 4 + 0 0 0

Adams County, WI /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oneida County, WI /

10

- 053

- 132n NA NA 0 + + 0 45 0 0

Vilas County, WI1 /

10

- 076

- 103n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

### J.R. Simplot Company Post

- Harvest Monitoring 5 Table 3. 2012 Post

- Harvest Monitoring Data for 2011 Field Trials

Site Locations / USDA# Monitoring Year 2012

FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AU G SEP OCT

Bingham County, ID /

11

- 063

- 103n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Canyon County, ID /

11

- 063

- 103n NA NA 0 15 18 27 7 0 0

St Johns County, FL /

10

- 326

- 103n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pulaski County, IN/

11

- 063

- 103n NA NA 0 20 TBD 0 0 0 0

Montcalm County, MI /

11

- 0 63

- 103n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ionia County, MI /

11

- 150

- 101n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cherry County, NE /

11

- 063

- 103n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Grand Forks County,

ND/ 11

- 063

- 103n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adams County, WA /

11

- 063

- 103n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adams County, WI /

11

- 063

- 103n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oneida County, WI/

11

- 063

- 103n NA NA 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Oneida County, WI/

11

- 094

- 106n NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



### +=Volunteers were found and destroyed

CONCLUSION

T he data presented in Tables 1

, 2 , and 3

, demonstrate that v olunteer potato plants grown under the

notifications w ere destroyed, in a similar fashion in fields that were planted and harvested the previous

year

.

It can be concluded that, based on post

- harvest monitoring observations and other agronomic data

presen ted elsewhere, the events do not pose a plant pest risk, and do not possess any characteristics

that would lead to increased weediness.