Methyl Bromide Critical Use Exemption Program

1
Methyl Bromide Critical Use Exemption Program

• Marta Montoro, US EPA/Office of Atmospheric
  Programs
• USDA/ARS NP 308 Methyl Bromide Assessment
  Customer Workshop
• February 28, 2006
• Monterey, CA

2
Overview of Presentation

• Methyl Bromide (MeBr) Critical Use Exemption
  (CUE) Background
• CUE Program Implementation
• CUE Regulatory Process
• Conclusions

3
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)

4
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

5
CUE Implementation Contd.

• 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

6
CUE Requests Granted
7
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

8
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

9
Regulatory Process contd.
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)
10
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!