June 4, 2012

2400 Del Paso Road, Suite 140

Sacramento, CA 95834



### Linda Irokawa

- Otani, Regulations Coordinator Department of Pesticide Regulation
1001 I Street, P.O. Box 4015
Sacramento, California 95812

- 4015

RE: Proposed Non

- Fumigant VOC Regulations

Dear Ms. Irokawa

- Otani:

I am writing in response to your proposed VOC regulations for Non

- Fumigant products. As an agricultural input retailer located in the Central Valley of California, I find many problems with your proposal.

First, GoalTender and other low VOC oxyfluorfen formulations are NOT viable substitutes for Goal 2XL and other EC oxyfluorfen products. My company has over 20 years experience working with Goal 2XL an d over 10 years working with GoalTender. When it comes to post emergence weed control, GoalTender is not a substitute. Our experience in the field and orchard is that Goal 2XL is the only
formulation that controls hard to control weeds like malva, and he lps with glyphosate resistant weeds. Goaltender is NOT efficacious as a post emerge

herbicide.

I have reviewed your list of “kickers” and their cost as it pertains to making GoalTender an effective post emergence product. Reliable data does not exist that supports your position that these “kickers” are the answer to using GoalTender in place of Goa l 2XL. Glyphosate is not an effective tank mix partner due to the fact that glyphosate is already the foundation of the spray mix. Adding a pint of glyphosate will do nothing for resistant weeds and hard to control weeds. Paraquat is a Restricted Use Pe sticide due to acute toxicity. Human toxicity and worker exposure concerns make paraquat an extremely poor choice. The most likely “kickers” to be added to GoalTender are Rely and Treevix. Rely costs $46/acre and is currently not available from Bayer

Cr opScience. It is not expected to be available before 2014 due to market needsfor glufosinate in the Midwest. Treevix costs $16/acre and the label recommends the addition of Goal to broaden the spectrum. The label also recommends an “adjuvant system” for post emergent weed control. This “system” includes methylated seed oil (MSO) plus Ammonium Sulfate (AMS). With the additional costs of the adjuvant system, our growers cannot afford to add $20 to $50 per acre to their weed control programs.

Please allo w me to comment on the administrative burden that these regulations push upon our business and our people. Providing written information on the VOC regulations, tracking the intended use period, providing written recommendations and maintaining records fo r two years adds costs to our business. We will in turn be forced to pass these costs on to our grower customers. This is addition to the $20 to $50 per acre calculated above. Additionally, who and how, will applications of oxyfluorfen be monitored to be certain that only non

- VOC formulations will be applied during these time periods should that be determined to be necessary. This will put an additional financial burden on monitoring agencies to be certain everyone is in compliance.

We need Goal 2XL in o ur summer post emergent weed control programs. Its elimination will result in significant cost increases and decreased weed control in orchards and vineyards. This decreased weed control could even result in additional trips across the field with a tract or and sprayer. Have you considered the effect of additional VOC loading from additional spray trips?

We respectfully request that you find a way to keep Goal 2XL and other EC formulations available during the post emergent market months of May through

October.

Best Regards,

Scott Hushbeck
Vice President, Western Operations

Wilbur

- Ellis Company