### 8. Benefits Analysis This section presents benefits of the CUE allocation phaseout as compared to the original methyl bromide Phaseout RIA.



### 8.1 Basic Methodology Framework The benefits of the regulation were calculated using the Atmospheric and Health Effects Framework (AHEF) model. The AHEF, which consists of a series of FORTRAN modules, produces estimates of the likely increases in skin cancer mortality and incidence and cataract incidence resulting from past and future ODS emission scenarios, and compares the changes in health effects incidence and/or mortality to those that would otherwise exist under a the 1979- 1980 baseline scenario of no-further-ozone-depletion scenario (i.e., no depletion beyond that which existed in the 1979-1980 time period). The AHEF compares these differences across policy and control scenarios to estimate the additional benefits of each scenario based on the degree of ODS control stringency (ICF 2000a).



### 8.2 Input Data The primary input for the AHEF is methyl bromide emissions data (see Appendix B). The emissions model is based upon the assumption that 50 percent of methyl bromide consumed for treatment of agricultural soils is ultimately emitted to the atmosphere. 1This analysis of benefits is for pre-plant and post-harvest methyl bromide uses for both the original and CUE phaseout scenarios. Consumption data are derived from figures reported to National Ozone Units and the Montreal Protocol Secretariat. In the baseline scenario, growth in future emissions was constrained to account for actual methyl bromide consumption, as well as the freeze required by the Montreal Protocol for both developed and developing countries. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that a CUE level equal to 39% of the 1991 baseline for 2005, 37% of the baseline for 2006, and further reduction as outlined in Chapter 4 (see Section 4.1) will be implemented. 2 Other important inputs to the benefits assessment are unit values used to monetize reductions in health effects due to the phaseout. In addition to value of a saved life (VSL) estimates, other values include costs for hospitalization or treatment of skin cancer (e.g., surgery or therapy for melanoma and non-melanoma lesions), and medical treatment for cataracts. To monetize the avoided health effects the following input data were used:

1 Emissions rates have been reported to range from 32 to 87 percent as presented by UNEP (1998).
2As paraphrased by UNEP (1998), “For non-Article 5(1) Parties operating under the Protocol (developed countries) . . . A freeze on MB production and consumption [is] based on 1991 levels . . . For Parties operating under Article 5(1) of the Protocol (developing countries) a freeze on MB production and consumption [is] based on 1995-98 levels from 1 January 2002 . . .” Value of a life saved is based on EPA (1999b). The value used for this analysis is $5.8 million.

 Value of avoided non-fatal melanoma skin cancer is based on ICF (1999a). The value used for this analysis is $12,500.

 Value of avoided non-melanoma skin cancer is based on ICF (1999b). The value used for this analysis is $1,250.

 Value of avoided cataract is based on ICF (1999c). The value used for this analysis is $2,500. These values were used in the Phaseout RIA and are used here to maintain consistency between the monetized estimates of benefits presented in that analysis and the estimates presented here.



### 8.3 Results of the Benefits Analysis for the CUE Scenario Exhibit 8.3.1 presents preliminary estimates of the increases in human health effects expected from the CUE scenario, compared to the methyl bromide phaseout, as estimated by the AHEF. As stated previously, benefits were monetized by multiplying the reduced morbidity and mortality estimates by their respective unit value. Note that the monetized values are based on the central incremental case value in Exhibit 8.3.1. Monetized values are not provided for the uncertainty range of incremental cases. As shown, the benefits of the proposed CUE allocations in the United States are estimated to have decreased by $783.8 million (undiscounted relative to the original 2005 phaseout). Benefits were also assessed at discount rates of 7, 3, and 1 percent. As shown by Exhibit 8.3.2, discounted benefits decreased $60 million and $209 million at 7 and 3 percent, respectively. On an annualized basis, the decrease in benefits range from $4.4 million to $8.0 million at 7 and 3 percent discount rates, respectively.Exhibit 8.3.1. Decreased Human Health Benefits from CUE allocations compared to the Methyl Bromide Phaseout in the United States in 2005 (1999-2150) Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma Non-melanoma Skin Cancer Cataract

Incidence Mortality Basal Cell Incidence Squamous Cell Incidence Mortality Incidence
Incremental Cases a (Uncertainty Range) 660 (264 – 1,056) 83 (33 – 133) 15,809 (6,324 - 25,294) 7,752 (3,101 – 12,403) 42 (17 – 67) 8,105 (3,242 – 12,968) Unit Value (1999$) $12,500 $5.8 million $1,250 $1,250 $5.8 million $2,500
Monetized Benefit

(undiscounted) -$8.3 million -$481.5 million -$19.8 million -$9.7 million -$244.2 million -$20.3 million

aValues in parentheses represent an uncertainty range of approximately 60% (0.6), based on health effects uncertainties for the following factors: 0.50 for action spectrum values, 0.05 for the UV radiative transfer modeling step, 0.30 for the biological amplification factor (BAF), and 0.10 for the choice of dose metric used in the AHEF. The value of 0.6 is the square root of the sum of the squared uncertainty terms.

Exhibit 8.3.2. Decreased Human Health Benefits from

CUE allocations compared to the Methyl Bromide Phaseout in the United States in 2005 (1999-2150)

Scenario Benefits (1997$) Undiscounted NPV ($783.8 million) Annualized $15.1 million) Discount Rate: 7 percent NPV ($60.4 million) Annualized ($4.4 million) Discount Rate: 3 percent NPV ($208.6 million) Annualized ($8.0 million) Discount Rate: 1 percent NPV ($479.8 million) Annualized ($11.9 million)



### 8.4 Unquantified Benefits Changes in the incidence and mortality for the numbers of skin cancers and incidence for cataracts are not the only indicators of the damage to human health and the environment that result from increases in UV radiation due to ozone depletion. Increased UV radiation can cause a wide variety of additional human health problems, including actinic keratosis (a skin disease) and immune system disorders. Increased UV levels also lead to higher concentrations of tropospheric ozone (smog) that can adversely impact human respiratory and pulmonary systems. Furthermore, the impact of ozone depletion is not limited to humans; plants and animals can also suffer serious consequences from UV radiation. Overall, in addition to fewer skin cancers andcataracts, the following endpoints are expected to change due to the phaseout modifications. Increase in:

 mortality from acute exposure;3

 immune system suppression;

 aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem disruption, including reproductive/developmental effects, immune system suppression;

 impacts on agriculture such as decreased plant productivity, slowed metabolism, hastened plant disease;

 impacts on materials (i.e., accelerated breakdown of plastics and other synthetics); and

 lost productivity and evacuations. Therefore, negative unquantified impacts will follow in each of these areas as a result of the CUE.

3 Incremental human health effects due to acute exposure expected from the CUE scenario were examined for this analysis. Between 2005 and 2018, 5.4 fatalities are expected due to acute methyl bromide exposure and 106.3 cases of acute methyl bromide exposure are expected in California. Benefits (or lost benefits) associated with acute exposure to methyl bromide are not examined further in this document, as analysis of these exposures fall under the purview of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) and any re-registration requirements under FIFRA. (CADPR 2000, EPA 1999b, ICF 1999).