Methyl Bromide Critical Use Exemption Program

Marta Montoro, US EPA/Office of Atmospheric Programs

USDA/ARS NP 308 Methyl Bromide Assessment & Customer WorkshopFebruary 28, 2006

Monterey, CA

Overview of Presentation

Methyl Bromide (MeBr) Critical Use Exemption (CUE) Background

CUE Program Implementation CUE Regulatory Process Conclusions

Background: CUE and MeBr Phaseout 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) required MeBr phaseout in

2001, no exemptions U.S. pushed for schedule to match Montreal Protocol

(2005) 1998 CAA Amendment aligned U.S., Protocol

25% in 1999 50% in 2001 75% in 2003 100% in 2005 (with allowable exemptions such as

CUEs, Quarantine & Preshipment) 2015 phaseout date for developing countries (some

countries have accelerated the phaseout)

Steps in Implementing CUE Process EPA solicits CUE applications from MeBr users through a

Federal Register notice EPA conducts technical & economic review of

applications U.S. govt. develops Critical Use Nomination (CUN) State Dept. submits CUN to Ozone Secretariat

Forwarded to Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) & subsidiary body, Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC)

MBTOC reviews CUNs (2nd technical review, after EPA), provides recommendations to Parties

Parties authorize exemptions in consensus-based fashion EPA conducts allocation Notice and Comment

Rulemaking

CUE Implementation: Cont’d. All applications are carefully reviewed and

assessed by EPA experts Technical analysis (pest pressure, effective

alternatives, etc.) Economic analysis (yield losses, operating costs,

etc.) The annual CUN is calculated on behalf of

all U.S. critical users MBTOC now requires specific information

on certain sectors during their review process in order to make recommendations

CUE Requests GrantedMethyl Bromide 2005-2008

Critical Use Exemption Process

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

2005 2006 2007 2008

Year

Per

cen

t o

f 1

99

1 B

ase

lin

e

Nominated

Approved by Parties

Request from applicants

Consumption was 30% of baseline in 2003 & 2004

Regulatory Process EPA regulations typically require 12-18

months to become effective Sample Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM) Process: EPA Inter-Office Work Group concurrence required for

significant actions Inter-Agency agreement required for MeBr rules, to

ensure USDA, Dept. of State collaboration Office of Management & Budget (OMB) review--up to 90

days Package routed for signature & publication Public Comment period (30-60 days)

Process repeated for Final Rules (except Public Comment) MeBr CUE regulations have all required expedited

scheduling

CUE Allocation Amount of overall total quantity allocation authorized

by EPA mirrors Decisions taken by Parties The Parties authorize most of the CUE from new

production, with the difference taken from pre-phaseout existing inventory Critical Use Allowances (CUAs) Critical Stock Allowances (CSAs)

More flexible option (universal cap) preferred during Allocation Framework NPRM comment period (as opposed to sector-specific allocation) Pre-plant cap (CUAs) Post-harvest cap (CUAs) CSAs are unrestricted

Regulatory Process: cont’d.

ACTION AUTHORIZATION BY PARTIES

DATE FINAL PUBLICATION

Allocation Framework/2005 CUEs

1st Ex-MOP [Mar. 2004] Dec. 23, 2004

2005 Supplemental

16th MOP [Nov. 2004] Dec. 13, 2005 (Direct Final pub. Aug. 30)

2006 CUEs 16th MOP [Nov. 2004];2nd Ex-MOP [July 2005]

Feb. 6, 2006

2007 CUEs 17th MOP [Dec. 2005] TBD (no delays expected)

Conclusions U.S. CUE process very successful thus far; 90%

of all U.S. requests granted for 2005-07 calendar years Future CUE authorizations from the Parties will continue to

depend on robust nominations, research, and transition plans for alternatives

EPA does not expect any delays in promulgating the 2007 CUE rule because all authorizations were granted 1 full year in advance

Thank you to USDA and CUE applicants for your continued support and hard work!