Update on Montreal Protocol Actions

"Methyl bromide is a tough subject because everyone involved with the issue needs some certainty for the future," said Charlie Rawls. Speaking at the 1997 Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions in San Diego, California, Nov. 3–5, he was updating the actions taken by the Montreal Protocol in 1997. Rawls is executive assistant to Richard Rominger, deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

According to Rawls, the Montreal Protocol will review an updated version of the Methyl Bromide International Assessment document in 1999 to determine what additional actions should be taken.

"There is likely to be a push to move up the phaseout dates for developed and developing countries. However the discussions should primarily focus on the phaseout date for developing countries, and dates for freezing production and consumption levels and further interim reductions."

Rawls compared the U.S. Clean Air Act with the Montreal Protocol (MP).

"The Clean Air Act classifies ozone-depleting substances as Class I and II materials and mandates their phaseout, while the Montreal Protocol makes no classification, leaving phaseouts to be voted on by member countries. And while the Clean Air Act provides for no exemptions or essential uses, the Montreal Protocol allows both."

• An emergency-use provision, which will allow a country to use up to 20 tons of methyl bromide in emergency situations such as unanticipated pest outbreaks or infestations,
• A "critical use" exemption to allow use of methyl bromide where no available alternatives exist after the phaseout date.

Criteria for critical use, Rawls said, would include situations "where significant market disruptions would occur without the use and where no technically and economically feasible alternative is available. Production of methyl bromide would be permitted for critical uses only if there were no existing stocks and if there were no feasible alternatives available. However, there must be evidence that appropriate measures were being taken to identify alternatives."

In 1992, the Montreal Protocol agreed to freeze production and use of methyl bromide at the 1991 levels in developed countries on January 1, 1995, and at the 1995–98 average in developing countries on January l, 2002. Actions taken at the September 9–17, 1997, meeting in Canada are shown in the table below.

Rawls reported that USDA's Economic Research Service (ERS) will lead a study of the impact the ban will have on the U.S. agricultural economy. Scientists from ARS' National Agricultural Pesticide Impact Assessment Program and from the National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy will work with ERS to establish baselines for uses of methyl bromide and review available alternatives for commodities and growing areas of the country. They will study changes in crop yields and costs of production associated with farming without methyl bromide or viable alternatives.

"These USDA agencies will work with EPA and with industry and growers, possibly through workshops or forums, to gather data and review the process of economic analysis," Rawls said. "Through cooperative agreements, we hope to calculate the economic impact of the methyl bromide phaseout on producers, consumers, and our trade situation. The first phase of the study is well under way and the full report is expected by June or July 1998."

"Since there is such divergence between the mandates of the U.S. Clean Air Act and the Montreal Protocol, legislation is needed to address these differences. Rawls said that "a reasonable approach would be to consider amending the Clean Air Act to ensure that regulations governing use, production, import, or export of methyl bromide in the United States be no more stringent or restrictive than those required by the Montreal Protocol. This would bring the United States in line with other developed countries and provide certainty for those with an interest in the production or use of methyl bromide."

Action___________________Developed Countries______________Developing Countries

Phaseout ...........................................2005.........................................................2015

*Effective only after the phaseout.