case summary - Office of Indiana State Chemist - Purdue University

-George Saxton…there were 19 different sites investigated but violations in only 17; OISC willclarify the case summary.-Fred Whitford…for case #2012/0841was mitigation consideration given by OISC?-George Saxton…no, this was aggravating consideration for repeat offense.Demonstration of on-line case summary report search engine:-Mark Sobers (OISC IT Manager)…conducted a live demonstration via the OISC web site;populated with case files from last 5 years; Google type search capabilities of almost anything inthe text of the case summaries; presented in order of the latest date finalized; can conduct asearch on any of the highlighted data fields or combinations thereof.-Steve Dlugosz…any help pages with search tips?-Sobers…will be added as people start to use it.-Fred Whitford…add a comment/suggestion button?-Bob Andrews…violations should be listed by company rather than applicator.-Sobers…it does both.-Ron Hellenthal…do we archive cases older than 5 years?-George Saxton...we keep paper case files indefinitely.-Hellenthal…can specialized reports be generated from this?-Sobers…not designed as a data base.-Bruce Bordelon…could do a search and capture as a work around for reports.-Hellenthal…will this replace the reports provided to the IPRB now?-Saxton…current reports will continue.Vote to readopt LSA #12-582 (pesticide violator public listing rule; pesticide drift rule):-Tim Gibb & Bob Andrews…motion to readopt both rules unchanged; vote was unanimous.Review of final adoption of LSA #12134 (pesticide liability insurance rule):-Dave Scott…minor non-substantive changes were made to the proposed rule based oncomments received at the public hearing by the State Surety Bond Association; theyrecommended retaining the surety bond option in the existing rule; OISC capitulated to theirrequest because it didn’t really impact any of the proposed revisions; IPRB vote is not necessarysince this is an OISC rule adopted as final by the State Chemist.-Phil Marshall…should check with the AG to insure there is no fiscal impact from this change.Vote on final adoption of LSA #12-513 (consolidation of civil penalty rules; storage &handling of pesticides in wellhead protection areas rule):-Dave Scott…the only change from the proposed rule as discussed at the last meeting is thestriking of the “consultant registration requirements” from the list of rules and sections beingrepealed by this rule; Legislative Services Agency pointed out that the consultant rule wouldexpire based on failure to readopt before this rule repealing it could be finalized; afterconsultation with the AG, it was determined that this conflict could be addressed via a simpletext change with explanation in the rule making process; that will be included in the final rulepackage sent to the AG by Scott.-Ron Hellenthal…are there any proposed changes to the civil penalty dollar amounts in this rule?-Scott…no proposed changes to civil penalties, since the maximums are established by law.-Steve Dlugosz & Greg Campbell…motion to adopt final rule as proposed, with the text change;vote was unanimous.Review of final adoption of LSA #12-517 (pesticide & fertilizer applicator licensing rule):-Dave Scott…minimum age requirements for applicator certification discussed at the lastmeeting were removed from the proposed rule based on counsel that such a proposal wouldlikely draw unnecessary political attention to the rule; in practice this has been largely a nonissue,since it has been many years since a commercial applicator or farmer younger than 18 has2

attempted to become certified; IPRB vote is not necessary since this is an OISC rule adopted asfinal by the State Chemist.-Julia Tipton Hogan…the logic of not drawing unnecessary attention to the proposed rule isgood.-Bruce Bordelon…the definition of “competent person” in the rule includes the ability to readbut does not specify which language; does it matter?-Fred Whitford…some manufacturers are providing Spanish labels and PPP has developed aSpanish core training manual.-Leo Reed…EPA does not recognize Spanish equivalent labels; states that are currently offeringSpanish certification exams have very poor pass rates of those examinees; it is more of an issueof poor reading skills rather than a language barrier.Pesticide use in schools; emergency procedures for stinging insects:-Dave Scott…during OISC compliance inspections at schools, one question that is often repeatedby those who hire licensed contractors for pest control services is “what do we do betweencontractor visits for the occurrence of stinging insects that may pose a bigger health risk tostudents than exposure to pesticides?”; can non-certified staff be allowed to address the isolatedemergency with pesticides?-Ron Hellenthal…this would require a rule change.-Fred Whitford…this is an understandable request.-Martha Clark Mettler…what would constitute a necessity to spray in rule language?-Tim Gibb…can’t imagine a scenario where child safety would be improved by allowinguntrained teachers and staff to use a pesticide around children; spraying stinging pests mayactually stir them up into a stinging mode.-Steve Dlugosz…why not try avoidance of the area, which is an IPM strategy?-Gibb…education about management strategies would be preferred to rule allowances.-Whitford…we should invite Beth Carter to present the case being made to her by the schools.-Julia Tipton Hogan…we should also invite the IKE IPM coordinator to participate in thatdiscussion.-Greg Campbell…agree that spraying can often stir up docile stinging pests, making the hazardworse; recommend avoiding the area and alerting your licensed contractor.-Bruce Bordelon…do we have any data on # of stings per year at schools?-Gibb…these infestations don’t occur over night but develop due to a set of manageable siteconditions over time.-Hellenthal…this allowance would require storage of pesticides on site at the school to beprepared; would also require that staff be trained to properly ID the pest.- Hellenthal/Whitford/Tipton Hogan…invite stakeholders to a subsequent meeting to facilitate amore informed discussion.2012 OISC pesticide annual summary:-Dave Scott…the distributed one page annual summary has become a two page summary tofacilitate a reasonable font size; this summary will be updated with a new print date as 2012 dataon the summary evolves with time.Agenda items for next meeting:-Imprelis follow-up?-Seed treatment insecticides and bee health-Status report & next steps for issues surrounding dicamba and 2,4-D tolerant cropsNext meeting:-February 28, 2013 at the Tippecanoe County Extension Service office or the Turfgrass ResearchCenter.3

A Summary of Cases2011/0169 Disposition: Michael Jochem was cited for violation of section 65(13) of theIndiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for aiding or abetting a person toevade this chapter, for knowingly giving a restricted use pesticide to a noncertifiedapplicator. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed forthis violation.Paul Ficker was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Useand Application Law for violation of label prohibition on baiting. A civil penaltyin the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation.Paul Ficker was also cited for violation of section 65(10) of the Indiana PesticideUse and Application Law for using a restricted use pesticide without having anIndiana pesticide applicator certification.Paul Ficker was also cited for violation of section 65(13) of the Indiana PesticideUse and Application Law for aiding or abetting a person to evade this chapter forgiving a restricted use pesticide to a non-certified applicator.John Rudolph was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Useand Application Law for violation of label prohibition on baiting. A civil penaltyin the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation.John Rudolph was also cited for violation of section 65(10) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for using a restricted use pesticide withouthaving an Indiana pesticide applicator certification.David Rudolph was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana PesticideUse and Application Law for violation of label prohibition on baiting. A civilpenalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation.David Rudolph was also cited for violation of section 65(10) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for using a restricted use pesticide withouthaving an Indiana pesticide applicator certification.2011/1301 Disposition:A. EcoLab was cited for seventy-two (72) counts of violation of section 65(2) ofthe Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to comply with labeldirections regarding indoor use. A civil penalty in the amount of $18,000.00 (72counts x $250.00 per count) was assessed. However, the civil penalty was reducedto $9,000.00. Consideration was given to the fact EcoLab corporate headquarterscooperated during the investigation; corrective action was taken and no restricteduse pesticides were involved.B. The 7a license and certification of District Manager Brian Corcoran wererevoked.

C. The 7a certification of Assistant District Manager Brad Harvey was suspendedfor a period of one hundred-eighty (180) days with the understanding that if hechose to continue to apply pesticides for hire, he would have to apply for anotherlicense as a registered technician only. At the conclusion of his six monthrevocation, his 7a certification would be automatically reinstated provided he hadenough continuing certification hours or if not, he would have to re-test. Mr.Harvey was placed on probation for a period of three (3) years with theunderstanding if he committed similar violations within those three years, all ofhis certifications and license would be revoked indefinitely.D. The 7a certification of Kurt Johnson was suspended for a period of onehundred-eighty (180) days. If he chooses to continue to apply pesticides for hire,he would have to apply for another license as a registered technician only. At theconclusion of his six month suspension, his 7a certification would beautomatically reinstated provided he had enough continuing certification hours orif not, he would have to re-test. Consideration was given to the fact Johnsonoperated under the guidance and direction of Corcoran and Harvey.E. The 7a certification of John-Thomas Lewis was suspended for a period of onehundred-eighty (180) days. If he chooses to continue to apply pesticides for hire,he would have to apply for another license as a registered technician only. At theconclusion of his six month revocation, his 7a certification would beautomatically reinstated provided he had enough continuing certification hours orif not, he would have to re-test. Consideration was given to the fact Mr. Lewisoperated under the guidance and direction of Corcoran and Harvey.F. The 7a certification of Tony Curtis was suspended for a period of one hundredeighty(180) days. If he chooses to continue to apply pesticides for hire, he wouldhave to apply for another license as a registered technician only. At the conclusionof his six month revocation, his 7a certification would be automatically reinstatedprovided he had enough continuing certification hours or if not, he would have tore-test. Consideration was given to the fact Mr. Curtis operated under theguidance and direction of Corcoran and Harvey.G. The 7a certification of Lisa Farrer was put on probation for a period of oneyear. Consideration was given to the fact Farrer operated under the guidance anddirection of Corcoran and Harvey and Farrer largely cooperated during theinvestigation as well as being the person who brought this matter to the attentionof OISC.2012/0172 Disposition: Brett Lee was cited for violation of section 65(6) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law, specifically 355 IAC 4-5-2, for failure tokeep mandatory termiticide application records.

Brett Lee was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use andApplication Law for failure to follow label directions regarding preconstructiontermite control treatments. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessedfor this violation.2012/0672 DISPOSITION: Matthew Gunningham was cited for violation of section 65(7)of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for refusing to supplyinformation when required or requested by the state chemist in the course of aninvestigation or inspection. As a result, Mr. Gunningham’s license was suspendeduntil an inspection can be performed.2012/0745 Disposition: Bill Steinecker was cited for fifty-seven (57) counts of section 65(6)of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to properly supervisea non-licensed employee. A civil penalty in the amount of $7,125.00 was assessedfor this violation. However, the civil penalty was reduced to $3,918.75.Consideration for mitigation was given to the fact corrective action was taken;there was no previous history of similar nature and no restricted use productswere documented as having been used. Consideration against mitigation wasgiven to the fact Mr. Steinecker did not appear to be completely truthful duringthe initial investigation.2012/0849 Disposition:A. On October 8, 2012, I spoke with John Bruner of Cochnower Pest Control. Headmitted they did not apply the correct amount of chemical. He further stated thesalesman who sold the job has been terminated and they have already contactedthe contractor and admitted to him their error and gave him a five year guaranteeanyway.B. Cochnower Pest Control was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for failure to follow label directed applicationrates. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation.2012/0902 Disposition: John Kolb was cited for violation of section 65(9) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for applying pesticides for hire without havingan Indiana pesticide business license. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00was assessed for this violation. Consideration was given to the fact this was hissecond violation of similar nature. See case number 2011/0852.2012/0939 Disposition: Mark Alldredge and ProCare Termite & Pest Control were cited forviolation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law forfailure to follow label directions regarding drilling of slabs for a termite controltreatment.Mark Alldredge and ProCare Termite & Pest Control were cited for thirty-three(33) counts of violation of section 65(9) of the Indiana Pesticide Use andApplication Law for applying pesticides for hire without having an Indiana

pesticide business license. A civil penalty in the amount of $16,500.00 wasassessed for this violation. However, the civil penalty was reduced to $3,600.00.2012/1008 DISPOSITION: Klint Anderson was cited for violation of section 65(2) of theIndiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to follow label directionsregarding drift to people. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessedfor this violation. Consideration was given to the fact there was potential forhuman harm.Crop Production Services Inc. was cited for violation of section 65(5) of theIndiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for operating in a careless manner byplacing an additional pesticide in the nurse tank to be applied without notifyingthe certified applicator making the application.2012/1046 Disposition: Heartland Crossing Golf Links was cited for twenty-four (24) countsof violation of section 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law,specifically 357 IAC 1-15-2, for applying pesticides to a gold course withouthaving a certified applicator. A civil penalty in the amount of $6,000.00 (24counts x $250.00 per count) was assessed. However, the civil penalty was reducedto $600.00. Consideration was given to the fact Mr. Hofmann cooperated duringthe investigation; corrective action was taken; there was no previous history ofsimilar nature; no potential for damage; a good faith effort to comply and norestricted use pesticides were involved.2012/1049 Disposition: Lakeview Greens was cited for fourteen (14) counts of violation ofsection 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law, specifically 357IAC 1-15-2, for applying pesticides to a golf course without having a certifiedapplicator. A civil penalty in the amount of $3,500.00 (14 counts x $250.00 percount) was assessed. However, the civil penalty was reduced to $350.00.Consideration was given to the fact Mr. Green cooperated during theinvestigation; corrective action was taken; there was no previous history ofsimilar nature; no potential for damage; a good faith effort to comply and norestricted use pesticides were involved.2012/1052 Disposition: Plum Creek Country Club was cited for thirty-seven (37) counts ofviolation of section 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law,specifically 357 IAC 1-15-2, for applying pesticides to a golf course withouthaving a certified applicator. A civil penalty in the amount of $9,250.00 (37counts x $250.00 per count) was assessed. However the civil penalty was reducedto $925.00. Consideration was given to the fact Mr. Lohss cooperated during theinvestigation; corrective action was taken; there was no previous history ofsimilar nature; no potential for damage; a good faith effort to comply and norestricted use pesticides were involved.2012/1126 Disposition: John Huiner was cited for violation of section 65(6) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law, specifically 355 IAC 4-2-3, for failure to

supervise a non-licensed employee. A civil penalty in the amount of $125.00 wasassessed for this violation.2012/1257 Disposition: Royce Simpkins was cited for fifty-two (52) counts of violation ofsection 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure toproperly supervise a non-licensed employee. A civil penalty in the amount of$6,500.00 (52 counts x $125.00 per count) was assessed. However, the civilpenalty was reduced to $1,950.00. Consideration was given to the fact Mr.Simpkins cooperated during the investigation; corrective action was taken; therewas no previous history of similar nature and no restricted use pesticides wereinvolved.

CASE SUMMARYCase #2011/0169Complainant: Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC)175 South University StreetWest Lafayette, IN 47907-2063800-893-6637Applicator: Michael Jochem (Private Applicator) Paul Ficker10605 S. 50 W. 160 Lechner LaneFerdinand, IN 47532 Jasper, IN 47546812-367-2607 812-482-2579John RudolphDavid Rudolph4339 W. SR 56 4326 W. SR 56Jasper, IN 47546 Jasper, IN 47546812-634-2999 812-630-21411. On June 18, 2008, Indiana Conservation Officer (ICO) Ron Miller was contacted by a confidentialinformant about a person, Paul Ficker, using poison to kill animals in Jasper, Indiana. ICO Millerwas informed that Mr. Ficker used poison in 2007 to kill birds in his sweet corn. ICO Millercontacted Indiana Department of Natural Resources (INDNR) Detective Kim Wolsiefer, whocontacted U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Special Agent Paul Beiriger about the potentialpoisoning and subsequent investigation. See US Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Enforcementcase number 2008303350 for full investigation.2. On September 3, 2009, (USFWS) Special Agent Beiriger, (ICO) Miller, and U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (USEPA) Special Agent Greg McDowell interviewed Paul Ficker. Mr. Fickeradmitted to using Furadan to kill birds in his sweet corn. Mr. Ficker stated he got the product fromMichael Jochem, who had a license to purchase Furadan, a Restricted Use Pesticide (RUP). Mr.Ficker stated he gave some Furadan to John Rudolph, who mixed it with corn in his garden. Mr.Ficker stated John Rudolph gave some Furadan to his brother, David Rudolph.3. On September 3, 2009, (USFWS) Special Agent Beiriger, and U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (USEPA) Special Agent Greg McDowell interviewed Michael Jochem. Mr. Jochem toldinvestigators that he specifically purchased the Furadan for Mr. Ficker at Mr. Ficker’s request. Mr.Jochens stated that Mr. Ficker wanted the Furadan to kill coyotes. Mr. Jochem stated he knew itwas an RUP and that Mr. Ficker was not a licensed RUP applicator.4. On September 3, 2009, (USFWS) Special Agent Beiriger, and U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (USEPA) Special Agent Greg McDowell interviewed John Rudolph. Mr. J. Rudolph toldinvestigators that he got Furadan from Mr. Ficker to kill groundhogs on his property and birds inthe sweet corn.Page 1 of 3

5. On September 3, 2009, (USFWS) Special Agent Beiriger, and U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (USEPA) Special Agent Greg McDowell interviewed David Rudolph. Mr. D. Rudolphtold investigators that he got some Furadan from his brother John. Mr. D. Rudolph stated he usedthe product to kill birds on his property.6. On November 19, 2010, the Office of the Indiana State Chemist (OISC) was contacted by U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Special Agent Greg McDowell requesting that OISCassist with storage of a two and half (2.5) gallon jug of Furadan and related material as caseevidence that USEPA and other agencies were working.7. On November 19, 2010, I met with Special Agent McDowell at his office in Indianapolis, Indiana,to secure custody of the Furadan and related materials.8. On November 22, 2010, I transported the Furadan and related materials to OISC’s lab for storageuntil notified by USEPA Special Agent McDowell for further direction.9. On December 12, 2011, I received an email from USEPA Special Agent McDowell with a letterfrom Verkamp Law Office that Michael Jochem was making no claims to the seized evidence(Furadan and related materials) and there was no objection to its disposal.10. On October 27, 2011, Michael Jochem, John Rudolph, and David Rudolph pled guilty in U.S.District Court. Mr. Ficker pled guilty earlier this year.Michael Jochem was semtenced to six (6) months probation and $5,000 fine.John and David Rudolph were sentenced to pay a $5,000 fine.Paul Ficker was sentenced to two (2) years probation and a $10,000 fine.11. Label language for Furadan 4F, EPA Reg. #279-2876, states; “This product is toxic to fish, birds,and other wildlife. Birds feeding on treated areas may be killed.” Furthermore, the label states,“Use of this product for baiting or in bait stations is strictly prohibited and can result in criminaland civil penalties under Federal Law.”Paul J. Kelley Date: February 7, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: Michael Jochem was cited for violation of section 65(13) of the Indiana Pesticide Use andApplication Law for aiding or abetting a person to evade this chapter, for knowingly giving a restricteduse pesticide to a non-certified applicator. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed forthis violation.Paul Ficker was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Lawfor violation of label prohibition on baiting. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed forthis violation.Paul Ficker was also cited for violation of section 65(10) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and ApplicationLaw for using a restricted use pesticide without having an Indiana pesticide applicator certification.Page 2 of 3

Paul Ficker was also cited for violation of section 65(13) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and ApplicationLaw for aiding or abetting a person to evade this chapter for giving a restricted use pesticide to a noncertifiedapplicator.John Rudolph was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and ApplicationLaw for violation of label prohibition on baiting. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 wasassessed for this violation.John Rudolph was also cited for violation of section 65(10) of the Indiana Pesticide Use andApplication Law for using a restricted use pesticide without having an Indiana pesticide applicatorcertification.David Rudolph was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and ApplicationLaw for violation of label prohibition on baiting. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 wasassessed for this violation.David Rudolph was also cited for violation of section 65(10) of the Indiana Pesticide Use andApplication Law for using a restricted use pesticide without having an Indiana pesticide applicatorcertification.George N. Saxton Draft Date: August 9, 2012Compliance Officer 2nd Draft Date: August 31, 2012Final Date: November 9, 2012Page 3 of 3

CASE SUMMARYCase #2011/1301Complainant: Lisa Farrer Certified Applicator18 Hidden Bay Dr., Apt DGreenwood, IN 46142347-578-5718Applicator:EcoLab Pest Elimination, Inc.370 N. Wabasha StreetSt. Paul, MN 55102Brian Corcoran7428 E. 49 th StreetIndianapolis, IN 46226317-507-4366Brad Harvey8451 Christiana LaneIndianapolis, IN 46256317-501-0300Lisa Farrer18 Hidden Bay Dr., Apt DGreenwood, IN 46142347-578-5718Kurt Johnson8850 Chalmers Court, Apt 1bCamby, Indiana 46113317-627-1797John-Thomas “JT” Lewis5332 W 16 th StreetSpeedway, Indiana 46224317-430-2789Tony Curtis12205 E 25 th StreetIndianapolis, Indiana 46229317-508-8277Certified ApplicatorCertified ApplicatorCertified ApplicatorCertified ApplicatorCertified ApplicatorCertified Applicator1

Steve Smith76 Pebble Creek DriveGreenwood, Indiana 46143317-209-5217Bill Clark111 Meadow LaneFishers, Indiana 46038317-845-9799Michael Foster5310 Milhouse RoadIndianapolis, Indiana 46221317-695-7572James Schulz11245 Black Gold DriveNoblesville, Indiana 46060317-441-5205Jay Bailey6630 Long Wood CircleIndianapolis, Indiana 46254317-714-4311Robert Mummert665 Wooddale Terrace #4Greenwood, Indiana 46142317-340-0646Eric Royal10342 Lyric DriveIndianapolis, Indiana 46235317-450-5759Vanessa Stephenson6736 Crone RoadMartinsville, IN 46151Certified ApplicatorCertified ApplicatorRegistered TechnicianCertified ApplicatorCertified ApplicatorCertified ApplicatorRegistered TechnicianCertified ApplicatorOther EcoLab applicators known or unknown1. On July 20, 2011, Lisa Farrer contacted the Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC) and reportedthat EcoLab applicators used Termidor (active ingredient is fipronil) contrary to label directions onthe interior of accounts where pests are persistent and/or difficult to control with products labeledfor indoor use. Ms. Farrer stated that the EcoLab paperwork is marked with products such asPhantom or Premise when Termidor was actually used.2

2. The label directions for Termidor SC, EPA Reg. #7969-210, state in part, “DIRECTIONS FORUSE TO CONTROL LISTED PESTS ON OUTSIDE SURFACES ANALONG FOUNDATIONPERIMETER OF LISTED STRUCTURES… DO NOT use indoors except for applications intowall voids.”3. On October 5, 2011, I spoke with Ms. Farrer by telephone. She stated she was terminated fromEcoLab on July 11, 2011. She also stated that her District Manager, Brian Corcoran, and AssistantDistrict Manager, Brad Harvey, encouraged and trained applicators to use Termidor in accountsthat had persistent ant problems. Ms. Farrer stated that she was told by Mr. Corcoran and Mr.Harvey to document on invoices as using Phantom when Termidor was used.4. On November 16, 2011, I met with Mr. Corcoran at his residence; which is also the address for theEcoLab business. He confirmed Ms. Farrer’s termination. Mr. Corcoran stated that Ms. Farrermade several non-pesticide related allegations to EcoLab Human Resources regarding hertermination. Mr. Corcoran stated that EcoLab conducted an internal investigation regarding Ms.Farrer’s allegations but he was not found to be in violation of EcoLab policies. I questioned Mr.Corcoran about Ms. Farrer’s allegation of applying Termidor on the inside of EcoLab accounts.He stated if Termidor had been applied on the inside to their accounts, Ms. Farrer was theapplicator doing it. I requested from Mr. Corcoran copies of all category 7A service records orinvoices from January 1, 2010 to August 1, 2011 for applications made by Ms. Farrer, Mr. Harveyand himself. I gave Mr. Corcoran until December 16, 2011, to comply with my request.5. On December 2, 2011, I spoke with John Wagner, Senior Regulatory Specialist, for EcoLablocated in St. Paul, Minnesota. I explained the complaint to Mr. Wagner. Mr. Wagner ultimatelyprovided me with a spreadsheet for exterior Termidor usage by Ms. Farrer and Mr. Harvey.6. After December 2, 2011, I received two (2) “Copy Paper” boxes from EcoLab containingapproximately 9,000 invoices of pesticide applications performed by Lisa Farrer, Brian Corcoranand Brad Harvey.7. Based on the initial complaint, I pulled all invoices that documented Phantom as being used to treatfor ants. I found thirteen (13) invoices of pesticide applications performed by Brad Harvey thatmet the “Phantom” criteria.8. On February 28, 2012, I went to Kindred Transitional Care and Rehabilitation in Greenwood,Indiana. See case summary 2012/0941. I collected swab samples to be analyzed by OISC’sResidue Lab.Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120026 C; Control Swab Sample Chlorfenapyr BDLFipronilBDL20120026 SW1; swab sample from corner wall on Chlorfenapyr CONFcounter in reflection RM 1FipronilBDL20120028 SW2; Swab sample from baseboard of Chlorfenapyr CONFreflection RM 1FipronilBDL3

20120029 SW3; Swab sample second pantry Chlorfenapyr BDLFipronilBDLBDL=Below Detection LimitsCONF=Confirmed9. On March 5, 2012, I collected swab samples from Famous Dave’s Bar-B-Que (See case summary2012/0942) and Buca Di Beppo (See Case Summary 2012/0943).Famous Dave’s Bar-B-Que – 2012/0942Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120035 C; Control Swab Sample Chlorfenapyr BDLFipronilBDL20120036 SW1; swab sample from baseboard of booth 1 Chlorfenapyr CONFFipronilCONF20120037 SW2; Swab sample from baseboard of booth 2 Chlorfenapyr CONFFipronilCONF20120038 SW3; Swab sample from baseboard of booth 3 Chlorfenapyr CONFFipronilCONFBuca Di Beppo – 2012/0943Lab sample # Description Active Ingredient Results20120039 C2; Control swab sample Chlorfenapyr BDL20120040 SW4; Swab sample from both sides of dooralong east wallFipronilChlorfenapyrBDLCONFFipronilCONF20120041 SW5; Swab sample along east wall baseboard Chlorfenapyr CONFFipronilCONFBDL=Below Detection Limits CONF=Confirmed10. As a result of the confirmation of fipronil, OISC expanded the investigation to include swab datafrom additional locations. The remaining ten (10) locations from Mr. Harvey’s pesticideapplications that met the “Phantom” criteria were selected to be swabbed. Five (5) additional antjobs by Mr. Harvey were selected. Furthermore, five (5) invoices, each for ants performed by LisaFarrer and Brian Corcoran, were selected.11. Agent Beth Carter was assigned five (5) locations to collect environmental swab samples to bespecifically analyzed for fipronil. The locations were as follows;• Sprint-See case summary 2012/0960• Pizza Hut-See case summary 2012/0961 (No swabs taken due to remodel)• Wal-Mart-See case summary 2012/0962• Hancock Surgery Center- See case summary 2012/0963• Hancock Regional Hospital-See case summary 2012/0964The samples were analyzed by OISC’s Residue Lab and results were reported on May 23, 2012.4

Sprint- 2012/0960Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120163 SC-Sprint; Control Swab Sample at SprintstoreFipronilBDL20120164 SB01Sprint; swab of baseboards on east wallin break roomFipronilBDLWal-Mart – 2012/096220120161 SC-Walmart; Control Swab at Walmart Fipronil BDL20120162 SW01-Walmart; Swab of break room sink onsouth wall at walmartFipronilBQLHancock Surgery Center – 2012/096320120159 SC-Surgery; Control swab surgery center Fipronil BDL20120160 LR01-Surgery;Swab of baseboards inbathroom near sink in locker room of surgerycenterFipronilBDLHancock Regional Hospital – 2012/096420120165 SC-Hosp; Control swab in Hospital Fipronil BDL20120166 WR01;Swab of baseboard near plant in cardiowaiting room of hospitalBDL=Below Detection LimitsFipronilBQL=Detected but Below Quantifiable LimitsBDL12. Agent Scott Farris was assigned five (5) locations to collect environmental swab samples to bespecifically analyzed for fipronil. The locations were as follows;• Panera Bread- See case summary 2012/0955• Pizza Hut-See case summary 2012/0965• Pizza Hut-See case summary 2012/0966• Outback Steakhouse-See case summary 2012/0967• LaQuinta-See case summary 2012/0968The samples were analyzed by OISC’s Residue Lab and results were reported on May 23, 2012.Panera Bread – 2012/0955Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120153 SS#100; Swab control-panera bread-TerreHauteFipronilBDL20120154 SS#101;Swab sample-kitchen-panera bread Fipronil CONF20120155 SS#102; Swab sample-office area-panerabread5FipronilCONF

Pizza Hut – 2012/096520120156 SW#104; Control swab-pizza hut-Linton Fipronil BDL20120157 SW#105; Swab dining area-pizza hut-Linton Fipronil BQL20120158 SW#106; swab kitchen area-pizza hut-Linton Fipronil CONFPizza Hut – 2012/096620120150 SW#107; control swab-pizza hut-Rockville Fipronil BDL20120151 SW#108; Swab dining area-pizza hut-Rockville20120152 SW#109; Swab kitchen area-pizza hut-RockvilleFipronilFipronilCONFCONFOutback Steakhouse – 2012/096720120168 SW#110; Control swab-Outback Fipronil BDL20120169 SW#111; Dining room Swab-ant area Fipronil CONF20120170 SW#112; bar area swab Fipronil CONFLaQuita – 2012/096820120171 SW#113; control swab-LaQuinta Fipronil BDL20120172 SW#114; lobby area swab Fipronil BQL20120173 SW#115; Dining room area swab Fipronil CONFBDL=Below Detection Limits CONF= Confirmed BQL=Below Quantifiable Limits13. I collected environmental swab samples at fifteen (15) additional sites.• HSBT Primary Healthcare-See case summary 2012/0944• Holiday Inn Express- See case summary 2012/0945• Shell formally Crystal Flash-See case summary 2012/0946• Subway-See case summary 2012/0947• Speedway-See case summary 2012/0948• Applebee’s-See case summary 2012/0949• Outback Steakhouse-See case summary 2012/0950• Chili’s-See case summary 2012/0951• Hooter’s-See case summary 2012/0952• Outback steakhouse- See case summary 2012/0953• Logan’s Roadhouse-See case summary 2012/0954• Uno-See case summary 2012/09566

• Denny’s-See case summary 2012/0957• Kroger-See Case summary 2012/0958• WMP Cosmetic &Family Dentistry-See case summary 2012/0959The samples were analyzed by OISC’s Residue Lab and results were reported on May 23, 2012.HSBT Primary Healthcare - 2012/0944Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120042 C1; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120043 SW313; Swab sample from baseboard next toexterior door20120044 SW1313; Swab sample from baseboard nextto exterior door20120045 SW2313; Swab sample from baseboard ofkitchen cabinet20120046 SW313; Swab sample from baseboard inbathroomFipronilFipronilFipronilFipronilBQLCONFBQLBQLHoliday Inn Express - 2012/094520120047 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120048 SWHoliday; swab sample from area aroundwindow in room 13120120049 SWHol 1; Swab sample from area aroundwindow in room 231FipronilFipronilCONFBQLShell formally Crystal Flash - 2012/094620120050 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120051 SWShell; Swab sample from counter behindsoda machine20120052 SWShell1; swab sample from baseboard offountain machineFipronilFipronilBQLCONFSubway - 2012/094720120053 C1; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120054 SWSubway; Swab sample from baseboardaround soda machineFipronilBQL7

20120055 SWSubway 1; Swab sample from baseboardon both sides of entry doorFipronilBDLSpeedway - 2012/094820120056 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120057 SWSpeedway; Swab sample from storagearea next to exterior doorFipronilBDLApplebee’s - 2012/094920120112 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120113 SSApplebee; Swab sample from baseboard ofeast wall of Applebee’sFipronilCONFOutback Steakhouse - 2012/095020120114 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120115 SWOutback; Swab sample from baseboard ofwest wallFipronilCONFChili’s - 2012/095120120116 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120117 SWChillis; Swab sample from baseboardalong east wallFipronilCONFHooter’s - 2012/095220120122 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120123 SWHooters; Swab sample from window ledgeand baseboard of south wallFipronilCONFOutback Steakhouse - 2012/095320120124 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120125 SWOutback; Swab sample from baseboard ofeast wall of dining roomFipronilCONFLogan’s Roadhouse - 2012/095420120126 C; Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120127 SWRoadhouse; Swab sample from baseboardalong west wall across from barFipronilBQLUno - 2012/095620120143 CUno; control swab sample Fipronil BDL8

20120144 SWUno; Swab sample from baseboard alongeast wallFipronilBQLDenny’s - 2012/095720120145 CDennys: Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120146 SWDennys; Swab sample from baseboardalong east wall of dining roomFipronilCONFKroger - 2012/095820120147 CKroger, Control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120148 SWKroger; Swab sample from east interiorwall of bun makerFipronilBDLWMP Cosmetic &Family Dentistry -2012/095920120141 CDentist; control swab sample Fipronil BDL20120142 SWDentist; Swab sample from baseboard instorage areaBDL=Below Detection Limits CONF= ConfirmedFipronilBQL=Detected but Below Quantifiable Limits14. On May 24, 2012, I spoke with Dr. Andrew Goetz from BASF. I asked Dr. Goetz if he couldprovide me with a “risk assessment” for the application of fipronil inside commercial buildings. Iprovided Mr. Goetz with basic information regarding OISC’s swabbing materials and techniques.In addition, I discussed with Mr. Goetz generic swab result numbers based on the swab size that hemight use for the “risk assessment”. Mr. Goetz explained to me that the “risk assessment” wouldbe based on levels of fipronil from studies of residential structures not commercial buildings. Mr.Goetz explained that since fipronil is not labeled for interior use, a comparative analysis was notpossible.15. On May 31, 2012, I met with Lisa Farrer to obtain a recorded audio statement. In that statementshe stated she had not used Termidor indoors on accounts. She further stated that she was told touse Termidor indoors by Brian Corcoran and Brad Harvey. Ms. Farrer stated other technicianswere told to use Termidor indoors and document the application as using “Phantom”. Ms. Farrerexplained that technicians are issued a PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) that is loaded monthlywith the technician’s routes. She stated that the PDA is loaded with the technician’s signature.Ms. Farrer stated that technicians can and do overlap on accounts; meaning if a technician is onvacation, sick, or off duty, any other technician may service those accounts. Ms. Farrer stated thatother technicians may even use her PDA to service accounts while she is on vacation. She alsostated that a record of service may not be created when an application is made. See transcript ofrecorded audio statement dated May 31, 2012.16. On May 31, 2012, at approximately 3:26pm after the recorded audio statement from Lisa Farrer, Ireceived a telephone call from her. She stated she was not completely honest with me in herstatement. Ms. Farrer stated she used Termidor indoors as directed by Mr. Harvey and Mr.Corcoran. A date was set up with Ms. Farrer to obtain a second statement.9BDL

17. On June 7, 2012, I met with Ms. Farrer to obtain a second recorded audio statement. She reiteratedwhat she said in the May 31, 2012, statement. She also stated she had not told the complete truthin her first statement because she feared she was going to go to jail. See transcript of recordedaudio statement dated June 7, 2012.18. On July 9, 2012, I received a risk assessment from BASF for the risk of fipronil to children insideresidential structures. However, the risks identified in this assessment did not seem to beapplicable to this investigation of applications of fipronil inside of commercial structures, based onthe differing exposure scenarios and assumptions used.19. On June 13, 2012, Agent George Saxton and I met at EcoLab located at 5310 E. 25 th St. inIndianapolis, Indiana to conduct interviews with EcoLab pesticide applicators. See Agent Saxton’ssupplemental summary. Prior to interviewing EcoLab technicians, we met with Senior CorporateCounsel Laws & Regulatory Affairs, Peter Tester, from St. Paul Minnesota. Mr. Tester requestedto sit in on the interviews.20. At approximately 9:30am, Agent Saxton and I interviewed District Manager Brian Corcoran. Mr.Corcoran stated that EcoLab technicians may have taken his direction out of context. He stated hetold technicians and Lisa Farrer to “Do what is needed to do the job” and “Do whatever it takes”.Mr. Corcoran stated an application of Termidor indoors was not a practice now but may have beenunder the “old culture”. Mr. Corcoran indicated technician Kurt Johnson was part of the oldculture.21. At approximately 10:30am, Agent Saxton and I interviewed, Assistant District Manager, BradHarvey. Mr. Harvey stated he has applied Termidor indoors “zero times”. Mr. Harvey indicatedthat Kurt Johnson had applied Termidor to restaurants in Danville and Avon, Indiana. Mr. Harveyindicated he may have unintentionally applied Termidor to the interior of accounts. Mr. Harveystated, “Not 100% sure, may have mixed up containers or products” and “Can’t say positivelydidn’t do it”.22. At approximately 12:45pm, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Bill Clark. Mr. Clark stated he hadnever used Termidor and was unaware of Termidor being applied indoors.23. At approximately 1:05pm, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Michael Foster. Mr. Foster stated hehad only used Termidor as an exterior application. Mr. Foster stated he was told by Mr. Corcoranthat Lisa Farrer used Termidor inside at Logan’s Roadhouse.24. At approximately 1:35pm, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Steve Smith. Mr. Smith stated he hadnever used Termidor, had never seen others use it, nor had others admitted to him any informationregarding the misuse of Termidor.25. At approximately 2:40pm, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Tony Curtis. Mr. Curtis stated he hadused Termidor on the exterior of accounts and around a door threshold of Wishard Maintenancefacility. Mr. Curtis stated he was unaware of others using Termidor indoors.10

26. At approximately 3:15pm, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Kurt Johnson. Mr. Johnson stated hehad applied Termidor inside at a Chili’s restaurant in Plainfield, Indiana, Pizza Hut in Rockville,Indiana, and LaQuinta Hotel on Southern Avenue in Indianapolis, Indiana. He stated there weresix (6) additional locations but he could not recall the specific locations. Mr. Johnson stated BrianCorcoran suggested 2-3 times that he could “go in with Termidor in a squirt bottle”. Mr. Johnsonstated Brian Corcoran said in reference to Termidor, “Careful use” and “low amounts”. Mr.Johnson stated he did not log Termidor on invoices, or if he did log this application, he would loganother product like “Tempo”.27. On June 14, 2012, at approximately 9:50am, Agent Saxton and I interviewed James Schulz. Mr.Schulz stated he had not used Termidor indoors, not heard of other technicians mis-applying it andnot been told of others using Termidor indoors.28. At approximately 10:20am, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Jay Bailey. Mr. Bailey stated he heardaccusations were made against management. Mr. Bailey stated he has only used Termidor outsideand uses Premise indoors. Mr. Bailey stated Lisa (Farrer) told him there was going to be aninvestigation.29. At approximately 10:55am, Agent Saxton and I interviewed John-Thomas “JT” Lewis. Mr. Lewisstated he had used Termidor inside in several accounts that included:• Steak N Shake in Avon;• Fairfield Inn in Bloomington;• Logan’s Roadhouse in Greenwood; and• A “handful” of Speedway gas stationsMr. Lewis stated he was constantly pressured by Mr. Corcoran and Mr. Harvey to use Termidorindoors on hard to control ant jobs. Mr. Lewis stated that Brian Corcoran told him, “I don’t carewhat you do, use Termidor sparingly inside if you have to” and “You have Termidor use it”. Mr.Lewis said that Brad Harvey applied intense pressure because, “customers are going to cancel, andcorporate is going to be mad!”30. At approximately 12:50pm, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Robert Mummert. Mr. Mummertstated he had never used Termidor. He said he was told that Brad Harvey had been accused of misapplyingTermidor.31. At approximately 2:20pm, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Eric Royal. Mr. Royal stated that BrianCorcoran and Brad Harvey discussed with him using Termidor, “If you have trouble, use it” on“real bad ant calls”. Mr. Royal was a registered technician and was unaware of what a siteassessment fact sheet was.32. On June 19, 2012, I received an email from John-Thomas Lewis describing in more detail hisstatement on June 14, 2012.33. On June 20, 2012, I requested the following information from Peter Tester:• Application records for jobs or locations where ants were present for the followingpeople:11

1. Brian Corcoran from 2005 to 2009, and 2012;2. Brad Harvey from 2009, 2012;3. Kurt Johnson from 2005 to present;4. Lisa Farrer from 2006 to 2009;5. John-Thomas Lewis from hire date (2009) to present;6. Eric Royal from hire date to present.• Emails, written correspondence authored by Lisa Farrer to EcoLab Management and/orHuman Resources outlining her allegations of pesticide misuse or pesticide activities.• Any ant jobs involving the above listed applicators where they were the sole applicatorassigned to the specific account. (Example-Brian Corcoran was the only applicator whomade application to a particular location)• List of all former applicators supervised by Brian Corcoran since 2005.34. On June 26, 2012, Lisa Farrer was administered a polygraph examination at the Greenwood PoliceDepartment in Greenwood, Indiana by Agent Saxton. See polygraph examination report.35. On June 28, 2012, I received a call from Brian Corcoran. Mr. Corcoran stated he had beenterminated by EcoLab. He asked if he could surrender his applicator license and put theinvestigation behind him.36. On June 29, 2012, I received an email from Peter Tester. Mr. Tester stated EcoLab wasterminating the employment of Brian Corcoran, Brad Harvey, John-Thomas Lewis and KurtJohnson. Mr. Tester stated that Tony Curtis would be suspended for applying Termidor around theinside of the door jam37. On July 11, 2012, Steve Smith and Tony Curtis were each administered a polygraph examination atthe Greenwood Police Department in Greenwood, Indiana by Agent Saxton. See polygraphexamination report. During the pre-test interview, Mr. Curtis disclosed that he applied Termidorinside to a downstairs hallway of Wishard Hospital on North Arlington Street in Indianapolis,Indiana.38. On July 11, 2012, I spoke with Pat O’Brian, attorney for Mr. Johnson. Mr. O’Brian stated that Mr.Johnson would not be renewing his pesticide applicator license.39. On July 12, 2012, I received correspondence and a CD ROM from EcoLab containing informationconcerning my June 20, 2012, email document request.40. On July 13, 2012, the following locations were given to Agent Saxton for assignment toinvestigators to collect swab evidence:• Knights Inn-See Case Summary 2012/0986 – (No samples taken)• Marriott-See Case Summary 2012/0987 – (No samples taken)• McAllister’s-See Case Summary 2012/0990• Outback-See Case Summary 2012/0991• Steak N Shake-See Case Summary 2012/0994• LaQuinta-See Case Summary 2012/0988– (No samples taken)12

• North Arlington Health Center (Wishard)-See Case Summary 2013/0038 (Lab samplesreported 10/23/12)• Chili’s-See Case Summary 2012/0992• Steak N Shake-See Case Summary 2012/0993• McAllister’s-See Case Summary 2012/0995• Steak N Shake-See Case Summary 2012/0996• Holiday Inn-See Case Summary 2012/0997• Chili’s-See Case Summary 2012/0998 (labs reported 9/1/12)• Texas Roadhouse-See Case Summary 2012/0999• Fairfield Inn-See Case Summary 2012/1000• Four winds resort-See Case Summary 2012/1001The samples were analyzed by OISC’s Residue Lab and results were reported on August 2, 2012.McAllister’s - 2012/0990Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120391 SS-1; Swab sample Northeast Corner Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil7468.0 NG/S20120392 Swab sample “free: NE Corner Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil2108.0 NG/SOutback - 2012/099120120359 SS-1; swab sample from middle seatbooth20120360 SS-2; Swab sample middle seat boothfreeFipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronil197241.0 NG/SFipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronil86222.0 NG/SSteak N Shake - 2012/099420120356 CKroger, Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120357 STO2; Swab W/template-Steak N Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLShake, indy-back doorFipronilBDL20120358 SO03; Overall Swab-Steak N Shake- Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLBack doorFipronilBDLChili’s - 2012/099220120393 SS-1;swab sample next to inside wall Fipronil Desulfinyl 74.0 NG/SFipronil47786.0 NG/S20120394 SS-2; Swab sample inside wall free Fipronil Desulfinyl 56.0 NG/SFipronil57254.0 NG/S13

Steak N Shake - 2012/099320120353 SC01; Control Swab-steak N Shake,Avon-Emergency Exit20120354 ST02; Swab w/Template-Steak NShake, Avon-Emergency Exit20120355 SO03; Overall swab-Steak N Shake,Avon-Emergency ExitFipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLFipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLFipronil Desulfinyl 58.0 NG/SFipronil2048.0 NG/SMcAllister’s - 2012/099520120406 SC01; Control Swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120407 SCRT2; Swab of Conf. room area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLtemplateFipronilBDL20120408 SCRF3; Swab of conf. room area free Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120409 SSDT4; Swab of side door area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLtemplateFipronilBDL20120410 Swab of door area free Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil117.0 NG/SSteak N Shake -2012/099620120411 SC01; control Swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120412 SBDT2; Swab of back door area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLtemplateFipronilBDL20120413 SBDF3; Swab of back area free Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120414 SEET5; Swab of emergency exit area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLtemplateFipronilBDL20120415 SEEF5; Swab of emergency exit area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLfreeFipronilBQLHoliday Inn (Now Clarion Hotel) -2012/099720120361 SW#1; control swab Room #520 Fipronil Desulfinyl BDL20120362 SW#2; Template swab under windowroom #52014FipronilBDLFipronil Desulfinyl BDL

20120363 SW#3 free swab under window room#52015FipronilBDLFipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120364 SW#4; control swab room #621 Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120365 SW#5; Template swab under windowroom #621Fipronil Desulfinyl BDL20120366 SW#6; Free swab under window room#621FipronilBDLFipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120367 SW#7; control swab room #718 Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120368 SW#8; Template swab under windowroom #718Fipronil Desulfinyl BDL20120369 SW#9; Free swab under window room#718FipronilBDLTexas Roadhouse - 2012/099920120370 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120371 SW#2; Template swab west dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLroomFipronilBDL20120372 SW#3; Template swab east dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLroomFipronil48.0 NG/S20120373 SW#4; Free swab north dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120374 SW#5; Free swab south dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLFairfield Inn - 2012/100020120379 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120380 SW#2; Template swab bathroom Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLvanity room #106FipronilBDL20120381 SW#3; Free swab bathroom vanity Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLroom #106FipronilBDL20120382 SW#4; Template swab by soft drink Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLmachineFipronilBDL

20100383 SW#5; Free swab by soft drinkmachineFipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLFour Winds Resort - 2012/100120120384 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120385 SW#2; Template swab admiral Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLballroom north wallFipronil3297.0 NG/S20120386 SW#3; Free swab admiral ballroom Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLnorth wallFipronil513.0 NG/S20120387 SW#4; Template swab upstairs office Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLboat rental officeFipronil424.0 NG/S20120388 SW#5; Free swab upstairs office boat Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLrental officeFipronil481.0 NG/S20120389 SW#6; Template swab main floor near Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLsoda machineFipronilBDL20120390 SW#7; Free swab main floor near Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLsoda machineFipronil61.0 NG/SBDL=Below Detection Limits CONF=Confirmed BQL=Detected but Below Quantifiable Limits NG/S = Nanograms per Swab41. On August 7, 2012, the following locations were given to Agent Saxton for assignment toinvestigators;• Burger King – See Case Summary 2013/0039• Taco Bell – See Case Summary 2013/0040• Speedway - See Case Summary 2013/0041• Wendy’s - See Case Summary 2013/0001• Steak N Shake - See Case Summary 2013/0002• Pizza Hut - See Case Summary 2013/0003• Cracker Barrel - See Case Summary 2013/0004• Wendy’s - See Case Summary 2013/0005• Steak N Shake - See Case Summary 2012/1065 (No samples taken due to fire)• IHOP – See Case Summary 2012/1066• Bob Evans - See Case Summary 2012/1067• Logan’s Ribeye - See Case Summary 2012/1068• Hampton Inn - See Case Summary 2012/1069• KFC - See Case Summary 2012/1070• Pizza Hut - See Case Summary 2012/1071• Wal-Mart - See Case Summary 2012/107316

• Applebee’s - See Case Summary 2012/1074• 33 Brick Street - See Case Summary 2012/1075• Steak N Shake - See Case Summary 2012/1076• Pizza Hut - See Case Summary 2012/1077• O Charley’s - See Case Summary 2012/1078• On the Border - See Case Summary 2012/1079 (No samples taken)• Speedway - See Case Summary 2012/1080• Dave’s All American Pizza - See Case Summary 2012/1081 (No samples taken)• Hardee’s - See Case Summary 2012/1082• Walden Inn - See Case Summary 2012/1083• Wendy’s - See Case Summary 2012/1084• McDonald’s - See Case Summary 2012/1085• USPS Pittsboro - See Case Summary 2012/1086• Chili’s - See Case Summary 2012/1088• Homewood Suites - See Case Summary 2012/1089• Taco Bell - See Case Summary 2012/1090• Summit Place West - See Case Summary 2012/1091• Williams Cylinder & Controls Inc. - See Case Summary 2012/1092• Harborside Healthcare - See Case Summary 2012/1093• Hardee’s - See Case Summary 2012/1094• USPS Indianapolis - See Case Summary 2012/1095• Speedway - See Case Summary 2012/1096• Altenheim Community - See Case Summary 2012/1097• Fazolis - See Case Summary 2012/1098• Fazolis - See Case Summary 2012/1099• Hyatt Place (formerly Amerisuites) -See Case Summary 2012/1100• KFC - See Case Summary 2012/1101• Ryan’s - See Case Summary 2012/1102• McAllister’s - See Case Summary 2012/1103• Fairfield Inn - See Case Summary 2012/1104• Taco Bell - See Case Summary 2012/1106• Comfort Inn – See Case Summary 2012/1107• Morristown Manor – See Case Summary 2012/1108• Wal-Mart - See Case Summary 2012/1109• Speedway - See Case Summary 2012/1110• McAllister’s Deli - See Case Summary 2012/1111• Marriott Courtyard - See Case Summary 2012/1112• St. Francis Neighborhood Clinic - See Case Summary 2012/1113• St. Francis Occupational Health Clinic - See Case Summary 2012/1114 (No samplestaken)• Steak N Shake - See Case Summary 2012/1115• Speedway - See Case Summary 2012/1116• Bajio Mexican Grill - See Case Summary 2012/1117• TGI Friday’s - See Case Summary 2012/111817

• Steak N Shake - See Case Summary 2012/1119• Louie’s - See Case Summary 2012/1120• Ryan’s Restaurant - See Case Summary 2012/112142. On September 1, 2012, OISC’s Residue Lab reported the following swab sample results;Chili’s -2012/0998Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120421 SW #1: Control swab Fipronil BDL20120422 SW #2: Template Swab Dining Room #1 Fipronil BDL20120423 SW #3: Template Swab Dining Room #2 Fipronil BDL20120424 SW #4: Free Swab Dining Room #1 Fipronil BDL20120425 SW #5: Free Swab Dining Room #2 Fipronil BDLIHOP - 2012/106620120490 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120491 SW#2; Template swab kitchen west wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120491 SW#3; Free swab kitchen west wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil26.1 NG/SBob Evans - 2012/106720120493 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120494 SW#2; Template swab dining room north Fipronil Desulfinyl 38.7 NG/Swall lFipronil 3846.0NG/S20120495 SW# 3; Free swab dining room north wall Fipronil Desulfinyl 47.4 NG/SFipronil 4573.0NG/S20120496 SW#4; Template swab kitchen east wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120497 SW#5; Free swab kitchen east wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLLogan’s Ribeye - 2012/106820120498 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120499 SW#2; Template swab bar room east wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil 685.0NG/S20120500 SW# 3; Free swab bar room east wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDL18

Fipronil 276.0NG/S20120501 SW#4; Template swab kitchen west wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil 105.0NG/S20120502 SW#5; Free swab kitchen west wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil 133.0NG/SHampton Inn -2012/106920120503 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120504 SW#2; Template swab dining room north Fipronil Desulfinyl 15.2 NG/SwallFipronil 685.0NG/S20120505 SW# 3; Free swab dining room north wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronil 19056.0NG/S20120506 SW#4; Template swab kitchen east wall Fipronil Desulfinyl 372.0NG/SFipronil 105.0NG/S20120507 SW#5; Free swab kitchen east wall Fipronil Desulfinyl 1753.0NG/SFipronil 55547.0NG/SKFC - 2012/107020120508 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120509 SW#2; Template swab dining room south Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLwallFipronilBQL20120510 SW# 3; Free swab dining room south wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronilBQL20120511 SW#4; Template swab kitchen north wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBQL20120512 SW#5; Free swab kitchen north wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil26.4 NG/SPizza Hut - 2012/107120120570 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120571 SW#2; Template swab west wall dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLroom19

Fipronil 2103.0NG/S20120572 SW# 3; Free swab west wall dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil 297.0NG/S20120573 SW#4; Template swab drive thru areakitchenFipronil Desulfinyl87.0 NG/SFipronil 513.0NG/S20120574 SW#5; Free swab drive thru area kitchen Fipronil Desulfinyl 418.0NG/SFipronil 7330.0NG/SWal-Mart - 2012/107320120513 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120514 SW#2; Template swab break room south Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLwallFipronilBDL20120515 SW#3; Free swab break room south wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120516 SW#4; Template swab bakery south wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120517 SW#5; Free swab bakery south wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLApplebee’s - 2012/107420120575 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120576 SW#2; Template swab south wall dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLroomFipronil 277.0NG/S20120577 SW#3; Free swab south wall dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil 18756.020120578 SW#4; Template swab north wall barroomFipronil DesulfinylNG/S35.0 NG/SFipronil 153947.0NG/S20120579 SW#5; Free swab north wall bar room Fipronil Desulfinyl 249.0NG/SFipronil 251262.0NG/S20

On the Border - 2012/107920120583 SW-1; Control Swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120584 SW-2; Swab Dining area west booth Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLtemplateFipronil 2896.0NG/S20120585 SW-3; Swab Dining area west booth Fipronil Desulfinyl BDL“free”Fipronil 7261.0NG/SSpeedway - 2012/108020120586 SW-1; Swab sample template office area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120587 SW-2; Swab sample “free” office area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120588 SW-3; Swab sample control Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLHardee’s - 2012/108220120566 SW-1; Swab sample east wall template Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120567 SW-2; Swab sample east wall “free” Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLWalden Inn - 2012/108320120564 SW-1; Swab sample womens restroomtemplate20120565 SW-2; Swab sample womens restroom“free”Fipronil DesulfinylFipronilFipronil DesulfinylFipronil43.8 NG/SBQLBQLBQLWendy’s - 2012/108420120568 SW-1; Swab sample NW corner template Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil 6588.0NG/S20120569 SW-2; Swab sample NW corner “free” Fipronil Desulfinyl 29.8 NG/SFipronil 14188.0NG/SChili’s - 2012/108820120529 SS-1; Swab sample baseboard north walldining room-chili’s21Fipronil DesulfinylBQLFipronil 18752.0NG/S

20120530 SS-2; swab sample baseboard west wall Fipronil Desulfinyl 31.9 NG/Sdining room-chili’sFipronil 24347.0NG/S20120531 C-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLHomewood Suites - 2012/108920120532 SS-1; Swab sample kitchen countertop-Homewood suites room 11320120533 SS-2; Swab sample kitchen baseboard –Homewood suites room 113Fipronil DesulfinylFipronilFipronil DesulfinylBDLBDLBDLFipronil39.7 NG/S20120534 CS-1; control swab sample – room 113 Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120535 SS-3; Swab sample kitchen countertop-Homewood suites room 108Fipronil Desulfinyl BDL20120536 SS-4; Swab sample kitchen baseboard –Homewood suites room 108FipronilFipronil DesulfinylBDLBDLFipronil201203537 CS-2; control swab sample – room 108 Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL64.6 NG/STaco Bell - 2012/109020120538 SS-1; Swab sample Taco bell dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120539 SS-2; Swab sample Taco bell dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120540 SS-3; Drive thru window at taco bell Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120541 SS-4; Baseboard tile drive-thru Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120542 CS-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLSummit Place West - 2012/109120120589 CS-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120590 SS-1; Swab baseboard dining room next Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLto kitchenFipronil 2678.0NG/S20120591 SS-2; Swab baseboard dining room next Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLto exit doorFipronil 3076.0NG/S22

Williams Cylinder & Controls Inc. – 2012/109220120592 CS-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120593 SS-1; Swab baseboard mens bathroom Fipronil Desulfinyl 879.0NG/SFipronil 47926.0NG/S20120594 SS-2; Swab baseboard womens bathroom Fipronil Desulfinyl 33.9 NG/SFipronil 15921.0NG/S20120595 SS-3; Swab baseboard mens bathroom Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLshop areaFipronil 523.0NG/SHardee’s - 2012/109420120596 CS-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120597 SS-1; Swab sample - baseboard kitchen Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLUSPS Indianapolis - 2012/109520120598 CS-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120599 SS-1; Swab sample baseboard next to Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLrefrigeratorFipronilBDL20120600 SS-2; Swab sample baseboard next to Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLdrink machineFipronilBDLSpeedway - 2012/109620120601 CS-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120602 SS-1; Swab sample - tea dispenser Fipronil Desulfinyl 83.7 NG/SFipronil 1148.0NG/S20120603 SS-2; Swab sample – kitchen area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil55.6 NG/SAltenheim Community - 2012/109720120604 CS-1; Control sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120605 SS-1; Swab sample baseboard B Hallway Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronilBDL20120606 SS-2; Swab sample baseboard B hallway Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronilBQL23

Hyatt Place (formerly Amerisuites) - 2012/110020120543 1100-1; Control sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120544 1100-2; Women’s room Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronil 1689.0NG/S20120545 1100-3; free swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronil 1438.0NG/SFairfield Inn - 2012/110420120546 1104-1; Control sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120547 1104-2; Swab – kitchen area Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronil 55928.0NG/S20120548 1104-3; free swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLFipronil 13161.0NG/SSpeedway - 2012/111020120468 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL201206469 SE02T; Swab of base boards near main Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLentrance – templateFipronilBDL20120470 SE03F; Swab of base board near main Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLentrance – FreeFipronilBDLMcAllister’s Deli – 2012/111120120439 SC01; control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120440 SDT02; Swab of south side door area –templateFipronil Desulfinyl 327.0NG/SFipronil 531.0NG/S20120441 SDF03; Swab of south side door area -freeFipronil Desulfinyl 35.06NG/SFipronil 485.0NG/S20120442 SKT04; Swab kitchen area - template Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120443 SKF05; Swab of kitchen area - free Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL24

Marriott Courtyard - 2012/111220120549 SC01; control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120550 SL02T;Swab of baseboards in lobby – Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLtemplateFipronil 2490.0NG/S20120551 SL03F; Swab of baseboards in lobby - Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLfreeFipronil 18753.0NG/S20120552 SB04T; Swab of baseboards in break Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLroom - templateFipronil 4162.0NG/S20120553 SB05F; Swab of baseboard in break room Fipronil Desulfinyl 25.2 NG/S- freeFipronil 8475.0NG/SSt. Francis Neighborhood Clinic -2012/111320120471 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120472 SB02T; Swab of base boards in old break Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLroom - templateFipronilBDL20120473 SB03F; Swab of base board in old break Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLroom - FreeFipronilBDLSteak N Shake - 2012/111520120444 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120445 SDT02; Swab of southeast dining area- Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLtemplateFipronil 8149.0NG/S20120446 SDF03; Swab of southeast wall dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLarea - FreeFipronil 5530.0NG/S20120447 SWT04; Swab of drive through window Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLarea- templateFipronil26.6 NG/S20120448 SWF05; Swab of drive through windowarea - FreeFipronil Desulfinyl BDL25

Fipronil20.3 NG/SSpeedway - 2012/111620120474 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120475 SD02T; Swab of drink station area - Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLtemplateFipronilBDL20120476 SD03F; Swab of drink station area - Free Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil 190.0NG/SBajio Mexican Grill - 2012/111720120518 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120519 SE02T; Swab of base boards by main Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLentrance doors- templateFipronilBDL20120520 SE03F; Swab of base boards by main Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLentrance doors - FreeFipronilBQL20120521 SD04T; Swab of base boards by drink Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLstation/kitchen- templateFipronil91.4 NG/S20120522 SD05F; Swab of base board byFipronil Desulfinyl BDLdrink/kitchen - FreeFipronilBQLTGI Friday’s - 2012/111820120523 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120524 SE02T; Swab of base boards by exit to Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLpatio - templateFipronilBDL20120525 SE03F; Swab of base boards by exit to Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLpatio - FreeFipronilBQLSteak N Shake - 2012/111920120554 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120555 SD02T; Swab of base boards in dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLroom- templateFipronil 649.0NG/S20120556 SD03F; Swab of base boards in diningroom - FreeFipronil Desulfinyl BQL26

20120557 SS04T; Swab of base boards in foodstorage area - template20120558 SS05F; Swab of base board in foodstorage area - FreeFipronil 1073.0NG/SFipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLFipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBQLLouie’s - 2012/112020120559 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120560 SD02T; Swab of base boards in dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLroom - templateFipronilBQL20120561 SD03F; Swab of base boards in dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BQLroom - FreeFipronil 220.0NG/SRyan’s Restaurant - 2012/112120120518 SC01; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120519 SS02T; Swab of base boards in food Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLstorage area - templateFipronilBDL20120520 SS03F; Swab of base boards in food Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLstorage area - FreeFipronil18.8 NG/S20120521 SO04T; Swab of base boards in officearea - templateFipronil Desulfinyl 247.0NG/SFipronil 1258.020120522 SO05F; Swab of base board in office area- FreeBDL=Below Detection Limits CONF=Confirmed27Fipronil DesulfinylNG/S38.3 NG/SFipronil 775.0NG/SBQL=Below Quantifiable Limits43. On September 25, 2012, OISC’s Residue Lab reported the following swab sample results;McDonald’s – 2012/1085Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120617 SW-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120618 SW-2; Swab sample east wall template Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL

20120619 SW-3; Swab sample east wall free Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBQLUSPS Pittsboro – 2012/108620120613 SW-1 Swab Control Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil BDL20120614 SW-2 baseboard west wall template Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil BDL20120615 SW-3 baseboard west wall “free” Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil BDLFazolis - 2012/109820120622 1098-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120623 1098-2; Swab from south side of dining Fipronil Desulfinyl CONFroomFipronilBQL20120624 1098-3; Free swab from north wall Fipronil Desulfinyl CONFFipronil126.0 PPBFazolis - 2012/109920120628 1099-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120629 1099-2; Swab from front wall Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120630 1101-3; Free swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLKFC - 2012/110120120628 1101-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120629 1101-2; Swab from office baseboard Fipronil Desulfinyl CONFFipronil214.0 PPB20120630 1101-3; Free swab from drive-thru Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLbaseboardFipronilBDLRyan’s -2012/110220120631 1102-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120632 1102-2; Swab from dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil300.0 PPB20120633 1103-3; Free swab from dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil157.0 PPBMcAllister’s- 2012/110320120634 1103-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDL28

FipronilBDL20120635 1103-2; Swab from kitchen Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120636 1104-3; Free swab from dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBQLTaco Bell - 2012/110620120637 1106-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120638 1106-2; Swab from wall near front door Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120639 1106-3; Free swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLComfort Inn - 2012/110720120640 1106-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120641 1106-2; Swab from laundry room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLbaseboardFipronil 3186.0PPB20120642 1106-3; Free swab from laundry room Fipronil Desulfinyl CONFFipronil 15620.0PPBMorristown Manor - 2012/110820120643 1108-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120644 1108-2; Swab from dining room door Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil21.0 PPB20120645 1108-3; Swab from dining roomFipronil Desulfinyl BDLbaseboardFipronilBDLBDL=Below Detection Limits CONF=Confirmed BQL=Below Quantifiable Limits44. On September 4, 2012, OISC’s Residue Lab reported the following swab sample results;Pizza Hut – 2012/1077Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120610 SW-1; Swab control Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120611 SW-2; Swab south wall template Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120612 SW-3; Swab south wall free Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL29

Steak N Shake – 2012/107620120607 SW-1; Swab control Desulfinyl Fipronil BDLFipronilBDL20120608 SW-2; Swab south wall template Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120609 SW-3; Swab south wall free Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil314.0 PPBO’Charley’s – 2012/107820120580 SW-1; Swab sample control Desulfinyl Fipronil BDLFipronilBDL20120581 SW-2; Swab sample southeast wall diningroom templateFipronil Desulfinyl 484.0NG/SFipronil 5853.020120582 SW-3; Swab sample southeast wall diningroom “free”BDL=Below Detection Limits CONF=ConfirmedFipronil DesulfinylNG/S46.8 NG/SFipronil 69361.0NG/SBQL=Below Quantifiable Limits45. On September 26, 2012, OISC’s Residue Lab reported the following swab sample results;33 Brick Street– 2012/1075Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20120649 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120650 SW#2; Template swab south dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil293.0 PPB20120651 SW#3; Free swab south dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil112.0 PPB20120653 SW#4; Template swab north dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl CONFFipronil 6599.0PPB20120653 SW#5; Free swab north dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil296.0 PPBWal-Mart - 2012/110920120646 1109-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120647 1109-2; Swab from office baseboard Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20120648 1109-3; Swab from dock area Fipronil Desulfinyl CONFFipronil 28517.0PPBBDL=Below Detection Limits CONF=Confirmed30BQL=Below Quantifiable Limits

46. On October 3, 2012, at 12:58pm, Agent Saxton and I interviewed Vanessa Stephenson, CertifiedApplicator for EcoLab, at the Morgan County Purdue Extension office located at 180 South MainStreet in Martinsville, Indiana. Ms. Stephenson stated she had used Termidor on the exterior of aWendy’s restaurant in Cloverdale. She stated she did not have conversations with other EcoLabemployees about the use of Termidor indoors. She further stated she learned of the issue uponreturning from vacation and the termination of Brian Corcoran and Brad Harvey.47. On September 26, 2012, OISC’s Residue Lab reported the following swab sample results;N. Arlington Health Center (Wishard) – 2013/0038Lab sample # Invest. Sample #/Description Active Ingredient Results20130022 38-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130023 38-2; Swab from downstairs baseboard Fipronil Desulfinyl BDL20130024 38-3; Free swab from baseboard nearstairs31FipronilFipronil DesulfinylBDLBDLBurger King – 2013/003920130025 39-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130026 39-2; Swab from dining room near door Fipronil Desulfinyl 5.3 NG/SFipronil63.3 NG/S20130027 39-3; Free swab from near south door Fipronil Desulfinyl 15.0 NG/SFipronil215.5 NG/STaco Bell – 2013/004020130028 40-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130029 40-2; Swab from dining room baseboard Fipronil Desulfinyl 177.4 NG/SFipronil715.3 NG/S20130030 40-3; Free swab from near west door Fipronil Desulfinyl 71.1 NG/SFipronil437.4 NG/SSpeedway – 2013/004120130031 41-1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130032 41-2; Swab from storage area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130033 41-3; Free swab from near south door Fipronil Desulfinyl 7.0 NG/SFipronil 1284.4NG/SWendy’s – 2013/000120130001 SS-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL

20130002 SS-2; Swab sample condiment area Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLtemplateFipronilBDL20130003 SS-3; Swab sample condiment area “free” Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDLSteak N Shake – 2013/000220130004 SS-1; Control swab sample Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130005 SS-2; Swab sample restroom template Fipronil Desulfinyl 7.2 NG/SFipronil145.1 NG/S20130006 SS-3; Swab sample restroom “free” Fipronil Desulfinyl 80.0 NG/SFipronil 2175.0NG/SPizza Hut – 2013/000320130007 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130008 SW#2; Template swab near utility sink Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130009 SW#3; Free swab near utility sink Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130010 SW#4; Template swab west wall dining Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLroomFipronil25.0 NG/S20130011 SW#5; Free swab west wall dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil15.6 NG/SCracker Barrel – 2013/000420130012 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130013 SW#2; Template swab near freezer Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130014 SW#3; Free swab near freezer Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130015 SW#4; Template swab east wall kitchen Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil19.5 NG/S20130016 SW#5; Free swab east wall kitchen Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil18.4 NG/SWendy’s – 2013/000520130017 SW#1; Control swab Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronilBDL20130018 SW#2; Template swab room divider Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLdining roomFipronil4.9 NG/S32

20130019 SW#3; Free swab room divider diningroom20130020 SW#4; Template swab east wall diningroomFipronil DesulfinylFipronilFipronil DesulfinylBDL3.9 NG/SBDLFipronilBDL20130021 SW#5; Free swab east wall dining room Fipronil Desulfinyl BDLFipronil6.8 NG/SBDL=Below Detection Limits CONF=ConfirmedBQL=Below Quantifiable Limits48. On November 30, 2012, Agent George Saxton and I met with attorney Beverly Marker and BradHarvey. Mr. Harvey admitted to using Termidor inside contrary to label directions. He statedsometime in 2010, he sprayed inside on more than ten (10) but less than twenty (20) locations withthe Termidor use dilution.Paul J. Kelley Date: December 3, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition:A. EcoLab was cited for seventy-two (72) counts of violation of section 65(2) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for failure to comply with label directions regarding indooruse. A civil penalty in the amount of $18,000.00 (72 counts x $250.00 per count) was assessed.However, the civil penalty was reduced to $9,000.00. Consideration was given to the factEcoLab corporate headquarters cooperated during the investigation; corrective action was takenand no restricted use pesticides were involved.B. The 7a license and certification of District Manager Brian Corcoran were revoked.C. The 7a certification of Assistant District Manager Brad Harvey was suspended for a period ofone hundred-eighty (180) days with the understanding that if he chose to continue to applypesticides for hire, he would have to apply for another license as a registered technician only.At the conclusion of his six month revocation, his 7a certification would be automaticallyreinstated provided he had enough continuing certification hours or if not, he would have to retest.Mr. Harvey was placed on probation for a period of three (3) years with the understandingif he committed similar violations within those three years, all of his certifications and licensewould be revoked indefinitely.D. The 7a certification of Kurt Johnson was suspended for a period of one hundred-eighty (180)days. If he chooses to continue to apply pesticides for hire, he would have to apply for anotherlicense as a registered technician only. At the conclusion of his six month suspension, his 7acertification would be automatically reinstated provided he had enough continuing certificationhours or if not, he would have to re-test. Consideration was given to the fact Johnson operatedunder the guidance and direction of Corcoran and Harvey.33

E. The 7a certification of John-Thomas Lewis was suspended for a period of one hundred-eighty(180) days. If he chooses to continue to apply pesticides for hire, he would have to apply foranother license as a registered technician only. At the conclusion of his six month revocation,his 7a certification would be automatically reinstated provided he had enough continuingcertification hours or if not, he would have to re-test. Consideration was given to the fact Mr.Lewis operated under the guidance and direction of Corcoran and Harvey.F. The 7a certification of Tony Curtis was suspended for a period of one hundred-eighty (180)days. If he chooses to continue to apply pesticides for hire, he would have to apply for anotherlicense as a registered technician only. At the conclusion of his six month revocation, his 7acertification would be automatically reinstated provided he had enough continuing certificationhours or if not, he would have to re-test. Consideration was given to the fact Mr. Curtisoperated under the guidance and direction of Corcoran and Harvey.G. The 7a certification of Lisa Farrer was put on probation for a period of one year. Considerationwas given to the fact Farrer operated under the guidance and direction of Corcoran and Harveyand Farrer largely cooperated during the investigation as well as being the person who broughtthis matter to the attention of OISC.George N. Saxton Draft Date: December 4, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: February 3, 2013Cc:Peter TesterEcoLab Pest Elimination, Inc.370 N. Wabasha StreetSt. Paul, MN 5510234

CASE SUMMARYCase #2012/0172Complainant:Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC)175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, IN 47907-2063800-893-6637Applicator:Cardinal Pest ControlBrett Lee613 W. 4 th StreetGreensburg, Indiana 47240812-663-6112Certified Applicator1. On October 14, 2012, I went to Cardinal Pest Control to investigate a preconstruction termitecontrol treatment performed by Cardinal Pest Control at 833 Mulberry Drive in Batesville. ANotice of Inspection was issued to office manager Rodella Speer.2. Ms. Speer gave me copies of the treatment records. There was no Disclosure form indicating anon-label treatment. The records were missing the:A. name of the chemical used;B. EPA registration number;C. percent of use dilution; andD. depth to footer.3. According to the written information on the diagram, a total of 665 gallons of a termiticide usedilution were used as follows:254 gallons for the square feet of the basement;117 gallons for the inside vertical for the basement;117 gallons for the outside vertical for the basement;95 gallons for the square feet of the garage;34 gallons for the inside vertical of the garage;34 gallons for the outside vertical of the garage; and14 gallons for the square feet of the porch.4. I asked Ms. Speer to have Mr. Lee fax the missing information to me. I received a fax on October26, 2012, indicating the chemical used was Talstar Professional, EPA Reg. #279-3206.5. On October 29, 2012, I called Cardinal Pest Control and asked for Mr. Lee. Ms. Speer told me shewould get the message to him. She also stated she may have given me the wrong chemical whenshe sent me the fax. She said she believed it was Premise that was used and not Talstar.Page 1 of 2

6. Bret Lee called and confirmed the chemical used was Talstar Professional and he used the labelrate of 0.06% and applied a total of 665 gallons of use dilution. He also stated the treatment wascomplete. I asked him about treatment on the outside and the depth to footer. He indicated thefooter was exposed when he performed the treatment and this is why he only treated to a depth ofone foot.7. The Talstar label states in part . . . “When treating foundations deeper than 4 feet, apply thetermiticide as the backfill is being replaced, or if the construction contractor fails to notify theapplicator to permit this, treat the foundation to a minimum depth of 4 feet after the backfill hasbeen installed, . . . Vertical barriers must be established in areas such as around the base offoundations, plumbing, utility entrances, back-filled soil against foundation walls and other criticalareas. . . . For a 0.06% rate, apply 4 gallons of dilution per 10 linear feet per foot of depth or 4fluid ounces of Talstar P Professional Insecticide 10 linear feet per foot of depth from grade to topof footing in sufficient water (not less than 2 gallons or more than 8 gallons) to ensure completecoverage.”8. According to my calculations, the amount of chemical that would be needed for a by-the-labeltreatment assuming Mr. Lee’s measurements are correct would be:• 3,624 square feet x 0.1 gallon per 10 square feet = 362.4 gallons• 292 outside linear feet of basement x 4 gallons/10 linear feet x 4 feet d-t-f = 467.2 gallons• 292 inside linear feet of basement x 4 gallons/ 10 linear feet x 1 foot d-t-f = 116.8 gallons• 86 inside linear feet of garage x 4 gallons/ 10 linear feet x 1 foot d-t-f = 34 gallons• 86 outside linear feet of garage x 4 gallons/ 10 linear feet x 1 foot d-t-f = 34 gallons 1• Total amount of chemical needed for a by-the-label treatment = 1014.4 gallons“d-t-f” = depth-to-footer9. On November 13, 2012, I went to 833 S. Mulberry Drive in Batesville and spoke with the resident.I explained the investigative process to her and asked about taking soil samples for analysis. Shedeclined.Disposition: Brett Lee was cited for violation of section 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use andApplication Law, specifically 355 IAC 4-5-2, for failure to keep mandatory termiticide applicationrecords.Brett Lee was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Lawfor failure to follow label directions regarding preconstruction termite control treatments. A civilpenalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation.George N. Saxton Draft Date: November 28, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: January 4, 20131 This assumes a one foot depth-to-footer which is not usually the case since the outside depth is normally below frost lineor a minimum of 32 inches.Page 2 of 2

CASE SUMMARYCase #2012/0672Business: Regional Vegetation Management Licensed BusinessMatthew GunninghamCertified Applicator14338 Dragus DriveCedar Lake, IN 46308219-808-39581. On April 12, 2012 I was assigned as a new business inspection for the above referencedbusiness. I have spoken with Mr. Gunningham on at least two separate occasions, both ofwhich he advised he was out of town, he said he would contact me when he got back sothat I could meet with him. I still have not heard from him to set up a meeting date.2. I made a visit to the Dragus Dr. address and met with Mr. Dragus’ wife. I gave her one ofmy business cards and requested that he contact me. He then called and advised that hewas again out of town working with his father but that he would call me when he gotback. Still I have not had the opportunity to meet with him.3. On Friday October 12, 2012 I again went to the Dragus Dr. address and no one was athome. I called and left a message for Mr. Gunningham and as of the writing of this reportI still have to hear from him.Kevin W. Neal Date: October 16, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDISPOSITION: Matthew Gunningham was cited for violation of section 65(7) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for refusing to supply information when required orrequested by the state chemist in the course of an investigation or inspection. As a result, Mr.Gunningham’s license was suspended until an inspection can be performed.George N. Saxton Draft Date: October 25, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: December 17, 2012

CASE SUMMARYCase#2012/0745Complainant:Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC)175 South University StreetWest Lafayette, IN 47907-2063Applicator: Bill Steinecker Certified ApplicatorNew Era Ag1522 S. 000 RoadMonroe, IN 46772260-692-14921. On 4-30-2012, the Office of Indiana State Chemist received anonymous informationindicating David Bluhm may be making for-hire pesticide applications for New Era Ag.According to OISC records, Mr. Bluhm is a licensed private applicator, not a commercialapplicator with New Era Ag.2. On 5-8-2012, I went to New Era Ag and spoke with managing partner Bill Steinecker.He indicated Mr. Bluhm had not made any pesticide applications for the business, but hehad been utilized to top-dress some wheat. Mr. Steinecker indicated he planned to useMr. Bluhm as an extra applicator during the busy spray season. He stated he would getMr. Bluhm licensed.3. We then discussed the license status of the other applicators at New Era Ag. It wasdetermined that Mr. Steinecker is the only certified applicator and Luke Liechty is thesole registered technician. Justin Fox reportedly became a registered technician in thespring of 2012; OISC records indicate he failed the core exam twice and has not beenissued a license. Partner Todd Mathewson, who was also present for the discussion, NeilGarwood, Steve Harner and Mike Ault (who had just quit the week prior) are licensedapplicators in Ohio. Mr. Steinecker and Mr. Mathewson indicated it was theirunderstanding applicators holding an Ohio license could make for-hire pesticideapplications in Indiana under reciprocity.4. After I left the facility, I contacted OISC Certification & Licensing Manager, Leo Reedand clarified that reciprocity is utilized by out-of-state companies which send applicatorswith out-of-state licenses into Indiana to make for-hire applications. The New Era Agfacility is in Indiana and its applicators operate out of that facility, thus Indiana applicatorlicenses, obtained by passing Indiana examinations, are required.5. I collected copies of application records for 2011 and 2012 from New Era Ag. Many ofthe records were incomplete, lacking either applicator name or date. Mr. MathewsonPage 1 of 2

cited that the company changed the way records are kept over the past year, and that therehad been personnel turnover in the office. After examining the application records, it wasdetermined that David Bluhm had, in fact, made for-hire pesticide applications for thebusiness on several days contrary to what Mr. Steinecker had told me. Additionally, therecords indicated Mr. Fox, Mr. Mathewson, Mr. Garwood and Dan Kaminsky, a formerIndiana licensee whose pesticide applicator license became inactive in 2002, made forhirepesticide applications in Indiana without either the on-site supervision of an Indianacertified applicator or a valid Indiana pesticide applicator license. The days documentedare as follows:2011 May 13, 14, 15, 25, 31June 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30July 1, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 25, 26, 28August 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18, 27, 31September 22November 11December 122012 March 19, 23, 29April 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 16, 17, 20, 25, 26, 27, 305. New Era Ag has since licensed the applicators involved in this investigation; Mr. Bluhmwas issued a registered technician credential and Mr. Mathewson, Mr. Garwood and Mr.Kaminsky obtained certification and are licensed. In addition, New Era Ag addedanother registered technician and another certified applicator.Andrew R. Roth Date: October 30, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: Bill Steinecker was cited for fifty-seven (57) counts of section 65(6) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for failure to properly supervise a non-licensed employee. Acivil penalty in the amount of $7,125.00 was assessed for this violation. However, the civilpenalty was reduced to $3,918.75. Consideration for mitigation was given to the fact correctiveaction was taken; there was no previous history of similar nature and no restricted use productswere documented as having been used. Consideration against mitigation was given to the factMr. Steinecker did not appear to be completely truthful during the initial investigation.George N. Saxton Draft Date: November 28, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: January 4, 2013Page 2 of 2

CASE SUMMARYCase #2012/0849Complainant:Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC)175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, IN 47907800-893-6637Applicator: John Bruner Certified Applicator 7BWayne RitenourCertified Applicator 7BCochnower Pest Control530 S. Earl AvenueLafayette, IN 47904765-447-75021. On October 5, 2012, I visited Cochnower Pest Control and there met with Mr. WayneRitenour, Branch Manager, of Cochnower Pest Control. While there I advised that I wasseeking termite treatment records specifically pre-construction termite treatment recordswith regard to 950 Park East Blvd Lafayette, IN2. Mr. Ritenour provided me with a copy of an estimate written by Mr. Paul Strode for thejob known as DeAngelis Diamond Healthcare Group on Park East Blvd in Lafayette, INalong with a service report that indicated an exterior perimeter and plumbing andelectrical areas termite treatment was done to the property. According to the servicereport the applicator was Mr. Ritenour as his certification number is listed on the form.Mr. Ritenour also provided me with a copy of the treatment graph for this project. Theapplication was made on 8/23/12, 8/24/12 and 9/27/123. After reviewing the treatment record there appeared to be a discrepancy with the totalamount of use dilution used by Mr. Bruner and Mr. Ritenour from the total amount of usedilution calculated by me based on Mr. Ritenour’s measurements and diagram. Mr.Ritenour’s records indicated that only the exterior vertical barrier was applied. The label forTermidor 80WG (EPA Reg. #7969-209) active ingredient fipronil states, “HORIZONTALTREATED ZONES Apply an overall treatment of Termidor 80WG to the entire surface tobe covered beneath the concrete slab. This includes the slab under the actual living area,plus carports, porches, basement floors and any extended entrances. Make this treatment atthe rate of 1-1.5 gallons finished dilution per 10 square feet.” “VERTICAL TREATEDZONES apply Termidor 80WG termiticide/insecticide at rate of 1 gallon finisheddilution/square foot around anything penetrating the slab (e.g. utility services plumbinglines) and at 4 gallons of finished dilution per 10 linear feet per foot of depth along the insideand outside perimeter of foundation walls.”Page 1 of 2

4. By-the-label directions:Outside vertical = 1323ft x 4 gallons10 linear feetx 2ft. D-T-FInside vertical = 1323ft x 4 gallons x 1ft. D-T-F10 linear feet= 1058.4 gallons.= 529.2 gallons44,976 square feet x one gallon per 10 square feet = 4,497.6 gallonsTotal by-the-label gallons= 6,085.2 gallons5. Mr. Ritenour reported using 1099 gallons, or approximately 18% of a by-the-labeltreatment. Cochnower Pest Control omitted the horizontal treatment and the insidevertical barrier treatment.6. On October 5, 2012, Mr. Ritenour stated that his paperwork was not in order and that hehad not used the correct amount of chemical as called for by the label. He also advisedthat they did not issue a customer disclosure form advising of the discrepancy.Kevin W. Neal Date: October 5, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDISPOSITION:A. On October 8, 2012, I spoke with John Bruner of Cochnower Pest Control. He admittedthey did not apply the correct amount of chemical. He further stated the salesman whosold the job has been terminated and they have already contacted the contractor andadmitted to him their error and gave him a five year guarantee anyway.B. Cochnower Pest Control was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana PesticideUse and Application Law for failure to follow label directed application rates. A civilpenalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation.George N. Saxton Draft Date: October 24, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: November 15, 2012Page 2 of 2

Complainant:CASE SUMMARYOffice of Indiana State Chemist (OISC)175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, IN 47907Case #2012/0902Applicator: John Kolb Not LicensedBusiness: Kolb & Associates Not Licensed3115 Mallard LaneGoshen, IN 46526574-971-66261. On 7-2-2012, the Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC) received information indicating John Kolb andanother employee may be making for-hire pesticide applications at Waterford Crossing, a condominiumcomplex in Goshen, Indiana. The information received indicated the application was made to a pond atthe complex. According to OISC records, Mr. Kolb is not a licensed applicator and his business has notbeen issued an Indiana pesticide business license. I investigated a similar complaint involving Mr. Kolb in2011 (Case #2011/0852).2. On 7-6-2012, I met John Kolb at Waterford Crossing. I explained to Mr. Kolb that the OISC had receiveda complaint alleging he made a for-hire herbicide application to a pond without having an Indianapesticide business license. Mr. Kolb indicated weeds in the pond were manually removed, but coppersulfate was applied around the edges of the pond for algae control. I explained to Mr. Kolb that, like in the2011 incident when pre-emergent herbicide and fertilizer was applied at the property as part of a billableservice, he is required to have a pesticide business license. Mr. Kolb indicated that he passed the Coreexam but did not pass the Category 3b (turf) exam; turf applications have since been subbed out to alicensed business.3. Mr. Kolb provided a statement indicating the following:“Kolb & Associates, Ltd. (K&A) is the developer of Waterford Crossing and owned by John Kolb andSharon Risser. Part of the development is a condominium community which includes a pond. (Both theKolb's and Risers reside in this condominium community) The Condominium property is maintained by(K&A) and their employees. This spring the pond has had weed and algae growth as well as muskratactivity. They have raked out most of the weeds, installed a water fountain for circulation, trapped themuskrats and treated the algae with copper sulfate.”Andrew R. Roth Date: August 24, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: John Kolb was cited for violation of section 65(9) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and ApplicationLaw for applying pesticides for hire without having an Indiana pesticide business license. A civil penaltyin the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. Consideration was given to the fact this was hissecond violation of similar nature. See case number 2011/0852.George N. Saxton Draft Date: October 4, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: November 9, 2012

CASE SUMMARYCase #2012/0939Complainant:Eric Newkirk8704 Wyatt DriveColumbus, IN 47201812-606-4166Applicator: ProCare Termite & Pest Control (licensed business 5/21/12)1898 W. State Road 46Nashville, IN 47448812-988-1937Mark Alldredge(certified applicator)1. On July 9, 2012, the Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC) received a complaint fromEric Newkirk. Mr. Newkirk reported that ProCare Termite & Pest Control had beenhired in May of 2012, to apply Termidor to the exterior perimeter of his home for theprevention of termites and apply Tim-bor to wood members in the crawlspace for moldcontrol. Mr. Newkirk believed that ProCare failed to apply the Tim-bor product properlyand was concerned that the Termidor may not have been applied at all.2. On May 9, 2012, I contacted Mr. Newkirk and was informed that he believed the Tim-borproduct had not been applied correctly, because he went into the crawlspace the eveningafter ProCare had been there and the wood members in the crawlspace were dry. Mr.Newkirk indicated that the plastic sheeting placed over the gravel in the crawlspace hadstanding liquid and believed that ProCare had only made an application to the plastic andnot wood. Mr. Newkirk also stated that he had two (2) other companies inspect thecrawlspace with him and was informed that they did not see any evidence that a Tim-bortype of product had been applied. Mr. Newkirk provided me with a copy of the “ServiceSlip/Invoice” given to him by Mark Alldredge. The document indicated that $2000 hadbeen paid to Mr. Alldredge on May 9, 2012, for a termite treatment using Termidor SC(EPA Reg. #7969-210; active ingredient: fipronil) and a Tim-Bor treatment (EPA Reg.#66405-8; active ingredient: disodium octaborate tetrahydrate). Mr. Newkirk informedme that this was the only document he had received from Mr. Alldredge and wassupposed to have been given a Termite Warranty Certificate, but never received one.3. On May 10, 2012, I went to Mr. Newkirk’s home and began by checking the exteriorconcrete area for drill marks that would be consistent with a by-the-label termiticidetreatment and none were found. I then took eight (8) core soil samples from the exteriorperimeter of the home. Large gravel landscaping stones were around the entire exteriorof the home, with plastic sheeting underneath. The plastic sheeting was against theexterior foundation of the home and appeared undisturbed. I then entered the crawlspaceand observed dried crystallized material on top of the plastic sheeting covering the floorPage 1 of 3

of the crawlspace. I did not observe this same type of crystallized material on any of thewood members of the crawlspace that would have been consistent with a Tim-borproduct treatment. I took two (2) swab samples from wood members in the crawlspace.Photograph #1 below shows the crystallized material on top of the plastic sheeting in thecrawlspace. Photograph #2 shows a floor joist in the crawlspace showing no evidence ofcrystallized material.Photo #1 Photo #24. On July 12, 2012, I met with Mark Alldredge and spoke to him about the treatments hehad performed for Mr. Newkirk. Mr. Alldredge informed me that he did not apply anyTermidor for termites to Mr. Newkirk’s home. Mr. Alldredge informed me that he hadmade the Tim-bor treatment to the crawlspace wood members and that the money he hadcollected from Mr. Newkirk was only for the Tim-bor treatment. I questioned Mr.Alldredge about the invoice that was marked “PD in advance 5/9/12” indicating that atermite treatment using Termidor would be performed. Mr. Alldredge stated that this wasonly a quote and not an invoice. Mr. Alldredge informed me that he had sent Mr.Newkirk a second invoice with a quote to complete the exterior for termites. Mr.Alldredge indicated that he would send me a copy of this second invoice. I alsoquestioned Mr. Alldredge about the dates on the invoice that showed he gave the“Service Slip/Invoice” on May 3, 2012. I informed Mr. Alldredge that according toOISC records he did not renew his business license until May 21, 2012, and was notlicensed at the time this invoice was given to Mr. Newkirk. Mr. Alldredge did not havean explanation for this.5. On July 11, 2012, the soil core samples and swab samples were turned into the StateChemist Residue Lab for analysis. The results were reported back on August 16, 2012,and stated the following:• Sample #20120306: Core Soil Samples from Exterior Perimeter HouseFipronil320.0 PPB• Sample #20120308: Floor Joist SwabDisodium Obtaborate Confirmed• Sample #20120309: Band Board SwabDisodium Octaborate Confirmed6. On August 1, 2012, Agent George Saxton and I executed a search warrant at Mr.Alldredge’s home to secure application records made during the year of 2012. Mr.Alldredge was not present at the time the warrant was served and we spoke with his wife.Page 2 of 3

The Invoice/Service Slip records obtained from Mr. Alldredge’s home indicated that hehad made pesticide applications on the following dates while he was unlicensed:• 2/10/12 2/22/12 3/5/12 3/6/12 3/9/12 3/19/12 3/27/12 3/29/12• 4/2/12 4/3/12 4/6/12 4/7/12 4/17/12 4/18/12 4/19/12 4/20/12• 4/21/12 4/23/12 4/24/12 4/25/12 4/30/12 5/1/12 5/2/12 5/3/12• 5/7/12 5/8/12 5/9/12 5/10/12 5/14/12 5/15/12 5/16/12 5/17/12• 5/18/127. The Termidor label states in part . . . “For applications made after the final grade isinstalled for purpose of protecting the structure from termite infestation and/or forcontrolling existing termite populations. The applicator must trench and rod into thetrench or trench along the foundation walls and around pillars and other foundationelements, at 0.06%, 0.09% or 0.125% Termidor SC from grade to the top of the footing.”Scott M. Farris Date: August 22, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: Mark Alldredge and ProCare Termite & Pest Control were cited for violation ofsection 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to follow labeldirections regarding drilling of slabs for a termite control treatment.Mark Alldredge and ProCare Termite & Pest Control were cited for thirty-three (33)counts of violation of section 65(9) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law forapplying pesticides for hire without having an Indiana pesticide business license. A civilpenalty in the amount of $16,500.00 was assessed for this violation. However, the civilpenalty was reduced to $3,600.00.George N. Saxton Draft Date: August 22, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: December 4, 2012Page 3 of 3

Complainant:Respondent:Office of Indiana State Chemist175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, Indiana 47907765-494-1585Kip BergmanBergman Farms5380 W. State Road 28Tipton, Indiana 46072765-675-6522CASE SUMMARYCase #2012/09401. On July 5, 2012, I received information from the Fertilizer section of the Office of Indiana State Chemist(OISC) regarding fertilizer containment violations at the Bergman Farms in Tipton, Indiana. Matt Pearson andBob Wakeman of the Fertilizer section made a visit to the farm in June. When checking the fertilizercontainment, they found violations.2. On September 24, 2012, Bob Wakeman and I attempted to contact Mr. Bergman at his farm. He was away atthe time. I did speak to him be telephone. I set an appointment for September 26 th . Mr. Wakeman and I didcheck the fertilizer containment. We found an open drain in one of the containment walls. We also found acrack in another of the containment walls. The tanks were not lockable and unlabeled. According to Mr.Pearson, the site was not registered as a bulk storage site with OISC. (see the photos below)Fertilizer Containment Containment Wall Containment Wall Drain Unlockable Valve3. While enroute to Bergman Farms on September 26 th , Mr. Bergman told me by telephone he was unavailableand asked that I meet with his “chemical” representative Todd Harris of Crop Production Services (CPS)located at 4747 E. 266 th Street, Arcadia, Indiana. I met with Mr. Harris. I issued a Notice of Inspection (NOI)to Mr. Harris. I told him of the violations with the fertilizer containment area. He told me Mr. Bergmanauthorized CPS to make the repairs and corrections for compliance. I told Mr. Harris the repairs andcorrections would need to be completed by October 26, 2012.4. On September 27th, I obtained the fertilizer delivery records for the Bergman Farms from CPS in Arcadia.According to CPS records, Mr. Bergman obtained fertilizer on three (3) separate dates since January 2011:Date Product Description Amount6/24/11 28-0-0 N Solution Bulk 3,761 gallons10/21/11 28-0-0 N Solution Bulk 30,181 gallons12/29/11 28-0-0 N Solution Bulk 5,435 gallonsPage 1 of 2

5. The fertilizer from June 24, 2011 was never stored in the tanks. That fertilizer was taken to the field forimmediate use. According to Mr. Bergman, the fertilizer from the October 21, 2011 delivery was stored untilMay 1, 2012 or 193 days in the containment tanks.6. On October 25, 2012, I inspected the fertilizer containment area. I found the appropriate corrections weremade; drain plugged, tanks labeled with lockable valves, and containment wall repaired. I checked with theFertilizer section and was told Bergman Farms started the paperwork for registration as a bulk facility withOISC. (see photos below)Repaired Drain Plug Repaired Dike Wall Lockable Valve Labeled TankKevin W. Gibson Date: October 25, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition:A. Kip Bergman was cited for one hundred-eighty (180) counts of violation of 355 IAC 2-5-12(a) of theIndiana Commercial Fertilizer Law for having a relief outlet within secondary containment.B. Kip Bergman was cited for one hundred-eighty (180) counts of violation 355 IAC 2-3-6 for failure toprovide container security.C. Kip Bergman was cited for one hundred-eighty (180) counts of violation 355 IAC 2-3-10 for failure toproperly label a bulk container.D. A civil penalty in the amount of $18,000.00 (180 counts x $100 per count) was assessed for theseviolations. However, the civil penalty was reduced to $5,400.00. Consideration was given to the factMr. Bergman cooperated during the investigation; corrective action was taken and there was no previoushistory of similar nature.E. Of the $5,400.00 civil penalty, only $400.00 was imposed. The remaining $5,000.00 was held inabeyance for a period of three (3) years and will not be imposed provided Mr. Bergman does not commitfurther violations of the Indiana Commercial Fertilizer Law.George N. Saxton Draft Date: November 28, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: January 4, 2013Page 2 of 2

Complainant:Erin Engels5206 E. 1000 N.Pittsboro, IN 46167317-892-2799CASE SUMMARYCase #2012/1008Applicator: Klint Anderson Certified ApplicatorAg Air, LLCLicensed Business2 Airport Rd.Thomasville, PA 17364717-792-1776Dealer:Brian RedmonCrop Production Services Inc (CPS)6510 S. ST. Rd. 39Lebanon, IN 46052765-482-21901. On July 24, 2012 I met with Ms Engels at her residence in response to a complaint she filed withthe Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC). Ms Engels alleged that on the morning of July 22,2012 there was a drift of unknown pesticide from an aerial application being made to a nearbybean field onto her property. Ms Engels reported watery eyes and a sore throat from exposure tothe drift.2. While at the Engels residence I took a full complement of photos depicting the scene, prepared adiagram for future reference and collected samples for analysis by the OISC residue lab.3. According to a signed Pesticide Investigation Inquiry (PII) and application was made by Mr.Anderson on July 22, 2012 from 6:35am to 6:56am to the field located directly north and east ofthe Engels property. The product reportedly applied was Dimethoate 400 (EPA Reg. #34704-207) active ingredient dimethoate. The wind speed and direction at the time of the application asreported by Mr. Anderson, calm.4. See Figures One, Two and Three for photos depicting the scene.Figure One Figure Two Figure ThreePage 1 of 3

5. Figure One depicts the east side of the Engels home where SS-1 swab was taken from windowand PS-1 was collected from Maple.6. Figure Two depicts the view from the Engels home looking east toward the target field of beans.7. Figure Three depicts the view from Engels pasture toward the target field where PS-2 wascollected from pasture and PS-3 was collected from target field.8. The report from OISC residue lab concluded that the active ingredient dimethoate was found onthe Engels property in levels that would indicate that it did indeed drift off target. See TableSample Dimethoate Tebuconazole AzoxystrobinPS-1 Maple East Side of House 1026.0 PPB 1293.6 PPB 283.3 PPBPS-2 Plant Sample Pasture 6485.9 PPB 5597.8 PPB 745.0 PPBPS-3 Blanton Beans (Target) 8271.2 PPB 12097.9 PPB 1123.0 PPBSS-1 Swab East Window 17.9 NG/S BDL 0.76 NG/SPPB=Parts per Billion NG/S=Nanograms/Swab BDL=Below Detection Limits9. The wind speed and direction at the time of the application according to recorded weather datawas calm.10. Tebuconazole and azoxystrobin were also found in the residue samples. When questioning Mr.Anderson as to how those actives may have been found in the samples he advised that he did notknow. He stated that his information from Crop Production Services who loaded the nurse truckwhich loaded Mr. Anderson’s helicopter was that only the Dimethoate 400 was in the spraysolution.11. In speaking with Mr. Redmon on September 5, 2012 he advised that the farmer Mr. Blanton hadpurchased Tebucon 3.6F Foliar Fungicide (EPA Reg. #69361-11) active ingredient tebuconazoleand brought it to CPS and asked that it be placed in the tank mix for application to his beansalong with the Dimethoate 400. Mr. Redmon advised that the Tebucon 3.6F was placed in thespray solution however they did not advise Mr. Anderson of this.Page 2 of 3

12. Mr. Redmon was not able to explain how the azoxyxtrobin would have been found in the residuesamples other than to say that it may have been left over in the nurse truck from a previous mix.13. The label for Dimethoate 400 states, “Do not apply this product in a way that will contactworkers or other persons either directly or through drift.”Kevin W. Neal Date: September 5, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDISPOSITION: Klint Anderson was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for failure to follow label directions regarding drift to people.A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. Consideration wasgiven to the fact there was potential for human harm.Crop Production Services Inc. was cited for violation of section 65(5) of the Indiana PesticideUse and Application Law for operating in a careless manner by placing an additional pesticide inthe nurse tank to be applied without notifying the certified applicator making the application.George N. Saxton Draft Date: October 4, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: November 9, 2012Page 3 of 3

Complainant:CASE SUMMARYOffice of Indiana State Chemist (OISC)175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, IN 47907800-893-6637Business:Heartland Crossing Golf LinksApplicator: Brad Hofmann Not Licensed6524 E. Landersdale RoadCamby, IN 46113317-834-4818Case#2012/10461. On 8-7-2012, I went to Heartland Crossing Golf Links to perform a follow-up golf course inspection. OISCrecords indicated the golf course did not renew the license of certified applicator Brad Hofmann for 2012.2. I met with Superintendent Tony Roach at the golf course and informed him that the license for Mr.Hofmann had not been renewed. He indicated he remembered seeing the renewal application and he wassure the paperwork had been completed and forwarded to the business managers to be paid. Mr. Roachindicated that Mr. Hofmann is quite meticulous and that he would be surprised to learn that his license wasnot renewed. He stated Mr. Hofmann would be able to provide application records for 2012 and that hewould have him call me when he returned to the shop. He further indicated he would follow-up on therenewal application and make sure it got sent to the OISC with the fees if a check had not already beenissued.3. Mr. Hofmann called later in the day and confirmed that the renewal application was completed and turned into management. He indicated that he did not knowingly operate with an expired license and takes fullresponsibility for the mix-up. Mr. Hofmann provided a statement and copies of his pesticide applicationrecords. He explained that, in hindsight, the renewal came at a time when ownership was shifting control ofthe finances to a management company and that could have been where the mix-up occurred. Theapplication records indicated Mr. Hofmann made pesticide applications to the golf course on twenty-fourdays during the months of April, May, June, July and August of this year.4. On 8-22-2012, the OISC issued Mr. Hofmann an applicator license.Andrew R. Roth Date: October 31, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: Heartland Crossing Golf Links was cited for twenty-four (24) counts of violation of section 65(6)of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law, specifically 357 IAC 1-15-2, for applying pesticides to agold course without having a certified applicator. A civil penalty in the amount of $6,000.00 (24 counts x$250.00 per count) was assessed. However, the civil penalty was reduced to $600.00. Consideration wasgiven to the fact Mr. Hofmann cooperated during the investigation; corrective action was taken; there wasno previous history of similar nature; no potential for damage; a good faith effort to comply and norestricted use pesticides were involved.George N. Saxton Draft Date: November 13, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: January 4, 2013

Complainant:CASE SUMMARYOffice of Indiana State Chemist (OISC)175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, IN 47907800-893-6637Case #2012/1049Business:Lakeview GreensApplicator: Leslie Green Not Licensed18921 N. CR150EEaton, IN 47338765-396-90101. On 8-8-2012, I went to Lakeview Greens to perform a follow-up golf course inspection. OISC recordsindicated the golf course did not renew the license for Superintendent Leslie Green for 2012.2. I met with Mr. Green at the golf course and informed him that his license had not been renewed for2012. He indicated he obtained his certification in 2011 after the former superintendent left, and it washis understanding that the certification was good for five years. I explained to Mr. Green that, while thecertification is good for five years, he must renew the license annually. I further explained that theOISC sends a renewal form each fall and a reminder letter in the spring if the license is not renewed.Mr. Green indicated he had not seen any correspondence from the OISC, but stated he is not surprisedbecause he is not always forwarded mail that is sent to the golf course in his name. He stated that itmay be best if correspondence from the OISC could be sent to his home address.3. I then asked Mr. Green to see his pesticide application records. The records indicated he madepesticide applications to the golf course on fourteen days in March, April, May, June and July.4. Mr. Green apologized and stated he would cease applications until he activates his license. On 8-10-2012, the OISC issued Mr. Green a license.Andrew R. Roth Date: October 31, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: Lakeview Greens was cited for fourteen (14) counts of violation of section 65(6) of theIndiana Pesticide Use and Application Law, specifically 357 IAC 1-15-2, for applying pesticides to a golfcourse without having a certified applicator. A civil penalty in the amount of $3,500.00 (14 counts x$250.00 per count) was assessed. However, the civil penalty was reduced to $350.00. Consideration wasgiven to the fact Mr. Green cooperated during the investigation; corrective action was taken; there was noprevious history of similar nature; no potential for damage; a good faith effort to comply and no restricteduse pesticides were involved.George N. Saxton Draft Date: November 13, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: January 4, 2013

Complainant:CASE SUMMARYOffice of Indiana State Chemist (OISC)175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, IN 47907800-893-6637Case #2012/1052Business:Plum Creek Country ClubApplicator: Jeff Lohss Not Licensed12338 ½ Medalist WayCarmel, IN 46033317-575-62331. On 8-7-2012, I went to Plum Creek Country Club to perform a follow-up golf course inspection. OISCrecords indicated the golf course did not renew the licenses for any of the three applicators associated withthe golf course in 2011.2. I met with Superintendent Jeff Lohss at the golf course and informed him that none of the licenses had beenrenewed for 2012. He indicated he is certified and that he came to Plum Creek in the fall of 2011 afterworking 14 years at The Trophy Club in Lebanon, IN. He indicated that none of the three licensedapplicators at the course in 2011 remain employed at Plum Creek. Mr. Lohss stated he received the renewalapplication in the fall of 2011, completed the paperwork and forwarded it to the accounts payabledepartment to be paid. He indicated he would follow-up on it to see if a check had been issued to the OISC.3. Mr. Lohss later provided a statement and copies of his application records for 2012. He indicated that therenewal application must have been misplaced and that the fees were never paid; he cited that the accountspayable person had been hospitalized for four weeks and that her absence may have contributed to the mixup.The application records indicated Mr. Lohss made pesticide applications to the golf course on thirtysevendays during the months of March, April, May, June, July and August of this year.4. On 8-14-2012, the OISC received an application for credential and fees from Mr. Lohss. He was licensedon 8-22-2012, but his applicator was not printed and issued until 10-31-2012.Andrew R. Roth Date: October 31, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: Plum Creek Country Club was cited for thirty-seven (37) counts of violation of section 65(6) of theIndiana Pesticide Use and Application Law, specifically 357 IAC 1-15-2, for applying pesticides to a golfcourse without having a certified applicator. A civil penalty in the amount of $9,250.00 (37 counts x$250.00 per count) was assessed. However the civil penalty was reduced to $925.00. Consideration wasgiven to the fact Mr. Lohss cooperated during the investigation; corrective action was taken; there was noprevious history of similar nature; no potential for damage; a good faith effort to comply and no restricteduse pesticides were involved.George N. Saxton Draft Date: November 13, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: January 4, 2013

Complainant: Office of Indiana State Chemist175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, Indiana 47907765-494-1585CASE SUMMARYCase #2012/1126Applicator: John Huiner Certified ApplicatorBrian Mc AnallyCertified ApplicatorEdward HoffmanRegistered TechnicianCesar GonzalezUnlicensed ApplicatorLeonel MarquezRegistered TechnicianClarence Davids and Co.23900 W. 127 th StreetPlainfield, Illinois 60585708-514-57821. On August 8, 2012, Agent Saxton and I were conducting a misapplication investigation at the BPRefinery located at 2815 Indianapolis, Blvd. in Whiting, Indiana. While we were there we observed twoindividuals making what appeared to be a pesticide application to a ditch area (category 6) at the BPRefinery. After identifying ourselves, the first individual, Leonel Marquez told us he worked forClarence Davids Co. and he was making a pesticide application of “Roundup” (Roundup OriginalMAX Herbicide; EPA #524-539; active ingredient: glycine) and Trimec” (Trimec 992 BroadleafHerbicide; EPA #2217-656; active ingredients: 2,4-D, dicamba, propionic acid), for weed control.2. He showed us a valid Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC) pesticide applicator license as a“registered technician”. He identified the other individual as Cesar Gonzalez who did not have anapplicator license. Mr. Marquez told us his supervisor was Brian Mc Anally. We attempted to contactMr. Mc Anally by a telephone number supplied by Mr. Marquez. We were unable to make contact. Mr.Marquez also told us he did not have a “Site Assessment Fact” sheet and was unfamiliar with it. Mr.Gonzalez stated his supervisor was Mr. Ed Hoffman. We spoke to Mr. Ed Hoffman of the Matteson,Illinois office (708-720-4100). We told him of our location. We told him Mr. Gonzalez was making apesticide application without an Indiana applicator’s license of which Mr. Hoffman was aware. (seephoto below)Cesar Gonzalez at BP RefineryPage 1 of 2

3. We asked about Mr. Mc Anally. Mr. Hoffman told us Brian Mc Anally was on vacation. We explainedthat Mr. Gonzalez would no longer be allowed to make any pesticide applications in Indiana until hereceived his pesticide applicator’s license. We asked about the “Site Assessment Fact” sheet. Mr.Hoffman was unaware a “Site Assessment Fact” sheet was required.4. We issued an OISC “Notice of Inspection” to Mr. Gonzalez for making a pesticide application withouta pesticide applicator’s license. Mr. Gonzalez was told and understood he could no longer apply apesticide until he received his applicator’s license. Mr. Marquez was also told and understood Mr.Gonzalez could no longer make a pesticide application until he received his applicator’s license.5. Mr. Marquez identified Mr. Mc Anally as his supervisor. Because Mr. Mc Anally was on vacation, Mr.Marquez made a pesticide application without supervision and without a “Site Assessment Fact” sheetas required by Indiana law.6. I spoke to Mr. Mc Anally. Mr. Mc Anally told me he was not on vacation at the time of the application.However, he further explained he was not Mr. Marquez’s supervisor when the application was made atthe BP Refinery. Applications made at the BP Refinery in Whiting, Indiana were supervised from theMatteson, Illinois office by John Huiner. I checked with the licensing section at OISC for certificationsof Hoffman, Mc Anally and Huiner. According to the OISC licensing section, Ed Hoffman is acertified registered technician; Brian Mc Anally is a certified applicator in categories 3a, 3b, 5 butexpired in category 6; John Huiner is a certified applicator in categories 3a, 3b and 6.7. I spoke to John Huiner. He explained Mr. Marquez normally worked for Mc Anally in the Plainfield,Illinois but he was behind on the work at the BP Refinery and borrowed Mr. Marquez. He stated Mr.Marquez was under his supervision when he made the pesticide application at the BP Refinery inWhiting, Indiana. I explained to him that Mr. Marquez did not have a “Site Assessment Fact” sheetwhen he made the application at the BP Refinery.8. I spoke to Leo Reed of the OISC licensing section. He found all of their certified applicators andregistered technicians were affiliated with the Plainfield, Illinois office. The Clarence Davids andCompany, Inc. in Matteson, Illinois did not have a business license as required by Indiana law.Kevin W. Gibson Date: August 20, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: John Huiner was cited for violation of section 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use andApplication Law, specifically 355 IAC 4-2-3, for failure to supervise a non-licensed employee. A civilpenalty in the amount of $125.00 was assessed for this violation.George N. Saxton Draft Date: October 4, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: November 9, 2012Page 2 of 2

Complainant:Office of Indiana State Chemist175 S. University StreetWest Lafayette, Indiana 47907765-494-1585CASE SUMMARYTarget: Sean Bennett Unlicensed ApplicatorRoyce SimpkinsCertified ApplicatorGreenLawn by Design1310 SR 32 WestWestfield, Indiana 46074317-564-1009Case #2012/12571. On September 17, 2012, I observed a subject making what appeared to be a pesticide application at 727 W.SR 32 in Westfield, Indiana. I identified myself and issued a Notice of Inspection (NOI) to Sean Bennett. Hetold me he was applying “Lesco Three-Way Herbicide (EPA Reg. #10404-43; active ingredients: 2, 4D,propionic acid and dicamba). It should be noted he was wearing the proper Personal Protective Equipment(PPE) at the time of the application. When I asked for his applicator license, he said he didn’t have a currentone. He just started back as an applicator in 2012 after not working in 2011. He told me he worked forGreenLawn by Design located at the above address.2. We went to GreenLawn by Design at the above address. I spoke to the owner, Royce Simpkins. When askedabout Sean Bennett’s applicator license, he admitted he failed to obtain it. I requested all of Sean Bennett’sapplication records for 2012. I told him Sean could not make any more pesticide or fertilizer applicationsuntil he obtained his applicator license.3. On September 20, 2012, I received the application records for Sean Bennett from Mr. Simpkins asrequested. According to the invoices, Sean Bennett made fifty-two (52) pesticide/fertilizer applications onthe following dates:3/19/12 3/26/12 3/27/12 3/28/12 3/29/12 4/3/12 4/4/124/16/12 4/17/12 4/25/12 4/27/12 4/29/12 5/2/12 5/3/125/8/12 5/9/12 5/10/12 5/14/12 5/15/12 5/17/12 5/21/125/22/12 5/29/12 5/30/12 6/13/12 6/16/12 6/18/12 6/25/126/26/12 6/27/12 6/28/12 7/1/12 7/2/12 7/10/12 7/15/127/20/12 7/22/12 7/31/12 8/3/12 8/5/12 8/14/12 8/27/128/30/12 8/31/12 9/1/12 9/5/12 9/6/12 9/7/12 9/12/129/13/12 9/14/12 9/15/12Kevin W. Gibson Date: September 22, 2012Pesticide InvestigatorDisposition: Royce Simpkins was cited for fifty-two (52) counts of violation of section 65(6) of the IndianaPesticide Use and Application Law for failure to properly supervise a non-licensed employee. A civil penalty inthe amount of $6,500.00 (52 counts x $125.00 per count) was assessed. However, the civil penalty was reducedto $1,950.00. Consideration was given to the fact Mr. Simpkins cooperated during the investigation; correctiveaction was taken; there was no previous history of similar nature and no restricted use pesticides were involved.George N. Saxton Draft Date: October 24, 2012Compliance Officer Final Date: January 23, 2013

Take I-65North US 52 (last Lebanon exit)Take US 52 all the way into Lafayette.US 52 is Sagamore Pkwy in LafayetteThe extension office will be on your left just past the light at US 52/Sagamore Pkwy &Creasy Lane/Beck Lane (Ivy Tech will be onyour right at that light) )