Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0230-0260
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2004-10-25T04:00Z

ENVIRONMENTAL
SOLUTIONS
GROUP,
LLC
1415
L
STREET,
SUITE
460
SACRAMENTO,
CALIFORNIA
95814­
2823
TELEPHONE
(
916)
443­
2793
FACSIMILE
(
916)
443­
3071
October
21,
2004
The
Honorable
Jeffrey
R.
Holmstead
Assistant
Administrator
for
Air
and
Radiation
c/
o
Air
Docket
EPA
61027
Mailcode:
6102T
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW
Washington,
D.
C.
20460
Re:
Docket
ID
No.
OAR­
2003­
0230
Proposed
Rule­
Protection
of
Stratospheric
Ozone:
Process
for
Exempting
Critical
Uses
From
the
Phaseout
of
Methyl
Bromide.
69
Fed.
Reg.
52365­
52402
Dear
Mr.
Holmstead:

Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
provide
comments
on
the
above
captioned
rule
on
behalf
of
the
California
Rose
Growers,
represented
by
the
Garden
Rose
Council
(
GRC).
GRC
would
like
to
address
the
following
issues.

Lump
Sum
vs.
Sector
Specific
Allocation.
The
system
should
be
as
open
as
possible
with
minimal
barriers
to
access
by
qualified
critical
users
to
methyl
bromide
in
both
existing
stocks
and
the
full
amount
approved
by
the
Montreal
Protocol
for
critical
uses.
The
lump
sum
allocation
system,
with
the
safeguards
afforded
by
the
proposed
scheme
for
identifying
qualified
users,
is
preferable.

Approved
Critical
User.
We
support
the
agency s
proposed
definition
of
approved
critical
users.
Critical
Use
Exemptions
have
been
approved
by
the
Montreal
Protocol
based
on
the
data
and
circumstances
of
the
nominations
of
identified
consortia.
The
members
of
these
consortia
should
have
access
to
the
amount
of
methyl
bromide
approved
by
the
parties,
without
competition
from
growers
of
commodities
who
did
JAMES
W.
WELLS
PRESIDENT
E­
Mail:
jwells@
esgllc.
net
not
apply
for
an
exemption,
or
who
did
not
qualify
for
an
exemption.
However,
the
association
also
agrees
that
growers
who
join
a
qualified
consortium,
and
who
meet
the
qualifying
conditions,
should
also
have
the
same
access
to
exempted
methyl
bromide.

Limiting
Critical
Conditions.
All
growers
whose
sector
and
region
qualified
for
a
CUE
should
be
considered
 
pre­
qualified 
as
approved
critical
users
and
should
be
allowed
to
self­
certify
that
they
have
one
or
more
of
the
limiting
critical
conditions
considered
by
the
Montreal
Protocol
in
granting
the
Critical
Use
Exemption.
The
self­
certification
process
should
be
as
simple
as
possible
and
should
be
consistent
with
the
system
currently
used
for
QPS
exempted
methyl
bromide.
In
the
case
of
rose
nursery
production,
the
need
for
clean
propagation
stock
was
recognized
by
the
Montreal
Protocol.
Specific
conditions
delineated
in
the
rule;
moderate
to
severe
nematode
infestation,
medium
to
heavy
clay
soils,
go
beyond
the
scope
of
the
EPA
nomination
and
the
Montreal
Protocol
exemption.
With
respect
to
township
limits
on
1,3­
dichloropropene,
given
due
to
the
way
the
California
system
operates,
individual
growers
may
not
know
whether
the
1,3­
d
limits
have
been
reached
for
a
particular
township
until
immediately
prior
to
application.

Penalties.
The
proposed
penalties
for
grower
violations
are
significantly
out
of
line
with
the
severity
of
the
infractions.
Grower
penalty
provisions
should
be
consistent
with
FIFRA
penalty
guidelines,
not
Clean
Air
Act
guidelines.

Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
comment
on
this
proposed
rule.
If
you
have
any
questions
regarding
the
comments,
please
contact
me
at
916.443.2793.

Respectfully,

James
W.
Wells
President