Background

H.R. 2230, introduced by Rep. Dan Miller (R-FL), would restrict EPA's authority to phase out the use of methyl bromide by the Agricultural industry until an adequate substitute is available.

H.R. 2230 should be modified to include language expanding the scope to the silvicultural industry.

The American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) strongly supports continued availability of methyl bromide because: (1) it is critically important in forest seedling nurseries and the export and import of wood products, and (2) no adequate substitutes currently exist.

Rationale for Continued Silvicultural Use

The AF&PA conducted a survey of its members in 1992 which revealed that methyl bromide is of critical importance to silvicultures and EPA's rule to phase it out by 2001 would cause great economic hardship to the forest and paper industry. Based on the impacts on wood supply alone, the loss of methyl bromide use would have an adverse economic impact of almost $7 billion in present value over the next 50 years, or an annual equivalent of over $424 million.

Forestry field research has revealed that there are currently no substitutes for methyl bromide, and it is unlikely any acceptable substitutes will become available in the foreseeable future. Losing the ability to use methyl bromide will result in a significant loss of tree seedlings for timber production and environmental protection programs. Many federal programs including the Conservation Reserve Program and private and public tree planting initiatives would be adversely affected by an inadequate supply of good quality seedlings. And most important, the U.S. industry would be restricted in its ability to export and import wood products. Current USDA wood import rules specifically require methyl bromide fumigation.

AF&PA believes that the current state of scientific knowledge is insufficient to support EPA's listing of methyl bromide as an ozone depleter. Therefore, AF&PA has urged EPA to refrain from listing methyl bromide until research provides important new information. AF&PA is coordinating its efforts with the Methyl Bromide Working Group, which has committed $2 million toward methyl bromide research.

H.R. 2230 would restrict EPA's authority to phase-out methyl bromide except when there is: (1) a research finding by the Secretary of Agriculture that adequate substitutes are available, and (2) a requirement in the Montrel Protocol that all countries take the same action to control methyl bromide use. Under the current EPA phase-out in the U.S., the domestic agriculture and forest industries would be significantly disadvantaged with little environmental benefit if the rest of the world is free to use methyl bromide.

(From AF&PA Forest Resources:  for more info, contact Scott Berg at 202/463-2456)