To:

Cc:

Bcc:

Subject: 

From: "Thompson, John E (OES)" <ThompsonJE2@state.gov>

To: Ross Brennan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Cindy Newberg/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Jeremy Arling/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 04/12/2010 03:49 PM

Subject: RE: John - Re: FW: For EO 12866 Review: EPA's Final 2010 Critical Use Exemption for Methyl

Bromide Phaseout

Thanks, I think this is fine with me but running it by the lawyers. Should be

able to respond this week.

John

-----Original Message-----

From: Brennan.Ross@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Brennan.Ross@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 2:29 PM

To: Thompson, John E (OES)

Cc: Newberg.Cindy@epamail.epa.gov; Arling.Jeremy@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: John - Re: FW: For EO 12866 Review: EPA's Final 2010 Critical Use

Exemption for Methyl Bromide Phaseout

John -

Thanks for the note - sorry I didn't respond before you left town.

There are really no issues raised by the final rule. Two things to note

-

1. Whereas the proposed rule reflected a new "no increase in new

production" policy approach, the final rule does not, because the amount

of the stockpile was large enough and thus we allocated more stocks, and

less new production, than proposed. Therefore the final rule adheres

very closely to the existing allocation approach, with no new policy

wrinkles.

2. The only other change in the final rule reflects that MBTOC reversed

its earlier assumption about iodomethane uptake for SE Strawberry

nurseries, and changed its recommendation accordingly. The Parties gave

us a supplemental authorization, which bumps up the U.S;. 2010

authorization slightly.

Therefore I think you can feel quite comfortable concurring with the

rule. If you see Dhol at the meeting, and want to tell her of your

comfort and why, that might help her as she considers how to facilitate

USDA's signoff. My assumption is that it will take her longer to sign

off than you.

Jeremy and I had a phone discussion with Heidi King of OMB today to

acquaint her with the rule and facilitate her review. She seemed

relieved that there were no major issues and told us she was eager to

sign off this week, assuming State and USDA had signed off. So that's

good news.
Happy travels!

_____________________________________________

Ross Brennan, Chief

Stratospheric Program Implementation Branch

Office of Atmospheric Programs

(202) 343-9226

From: Thompson, John E (OES)" <ThompsonJE2@state.gov>

Sent: 04/08/2010 12:57 PM

To: Cindy Newberg/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: Ross Brennan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

Subject: FW: For EO 12866 Review: EPA's Final 2010 Critical Use Exemption for

Methyl Bromide Phaseout 

 

I’m assuming one or both of you can tell me if there is anything I care

about in this. Any deviations from past practice or pretty much same

old stuff. I’m planning to clear with no comment (unless Jeff K spots

something) but let me know if there are particular policy issues to

address.

From: King, Heidi R. [mailto:Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov]

Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 9:45 AM

To: Thompson, John E (OES); Dhol.Herzi@ARS.USDA.GOV; Smith, Russell;

Poster, Dianne L.

Cc: Lee, Amanda I.; Mancini, Dominic J.

Subject: For EO 12866 Review: EPA's Final 2010 Critical Use Exemption

for Methyl Bromide Phaseout

Good morning,

Attached for your review under EO 12866 is EPA’s draft final Critical

Use Exemption from the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide.

Please provide comments one week from today: COB Friday, 4/15.

Thanks very much,

Heidi

X 54551[attachment "2010_CUE_Final_Rule_3-29-10.doc" deleted by Ross

Brennan/DC/USEPA/US]