October 30, 2008

Subject:  EPA’s Fumigant Cluster CommentsEPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0123 – Methyl Bromide Docket

EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0124 – 1,3-Dichloropropene Docket

EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0125 – Metam Sodium/Potassium Docket

EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0128 – Dazomet Docket

EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0350 – Chloropicrin Docket

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments and the associated attachment filed in response to the Reregistration Eligibility Decisions(REDs) released by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on July 10, 2008.  The REDS include a series of risk mitigation measures intended to protect handlers, re-entry workers, and by-standers from risks due to exposure to soil fumigants including methyl bromide and chloropicrin.  While the purpose of the REDs are to reduce exposure, even the EPA acknowledged in the rule documents that “incidents for soil fumigants generally occur at a low frequency relative to the total number of fumigations annually” (Chloropicrin RED; page17).

During the RED process, growers, commodity associations, university researchers, and fumigant manufacturers have provided EPA with information on the use of soil fumigants, including an incident rate of less than 0.1 percent and the devastating effects of large buffer zones.  Despite grower/user input and their own knowledge of low fumigant incidents, EPA has recommended buffer zones, monitoring requirements, extended re-entry periods, and several other practices that will have a devastating impact on Georgia growers.  These REDS will result in the US consumer relying more heavily on imports from other nations where Good Agricultural Practices, sanitation, or food safety is not a part of any monitored standard.

The use of soil fumigants in Georgia play a major role in Georgia’s agricultural production of fresh fruits and vegetables.  Plasticulture production of vegetables alone adds over $ 281 million dollars to Georgia’s economy at the farm gate each year.

The Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association is in full support of efforts to better protect work workers and bystanders where there is a real risk.  Fruit and vegetable growers do not want accidents on their farms or production areas.  In addition they do not want to do anything that might harm themselves, their families, their workers, their neighbors or their environment.  We believe that most of the mitigation measures dictated by these REDs are unnecessary, expensive, and do not improve safety in any way and could actually result in the application of more pesticides into the environment or cause undue stress and concern to the general public.

As noted in the attached research study conducted by the University of Georgia and the Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association, the report outlines the need for further study of the buffer zone distances based on recent research findings.  The UGA/GFVGA study shows the serious impacts from the EPA’s proposed buffers for Georgia vegetable production.  These proposed regulations for Georgia’s vegetable plasticulture production, at a minimum, would:

1. Reduce farmer income $20.94 million or 15.3% of their total income,
2. Reduce sales value or output impact by $73.13 million,
3. Reduce labor income $35.1 million,
4. Would eliminate at least 775 workers.

Every day Georgia farmers have to make tough decisions balancing the risk management requirements of the crops they grow to the profitability generated.  If the proposed REDs are implemented, we anticipate a significant reduction in the production of fruits and vegetables in Georgia and other southeastern states.  Where will our nation’s supply of fresh fruits and vegetables come from then?  The answer is clear – from other nations that do not have the food safety oversite that is an integral part of Georgia vegetable production.  By EPA’s own statements, “The trade off to growers, however, will be some combination of more trips to fumigate the field, use of more expensive high barrier film, delays in planting due to longer fumigation operations, and more trips to the field for planting and other operations if fumigating in smaller blocks results in staggered operations. Some of these costs could be substantial.” (Biological and Economic Analysis Division (BEAD) EPA, June 24, 2008).

We call on EPA to seriously review the input from its stakeholders and evaluate the dramatic requirements created by the proposed REDs.  It is our belief the significant economic impact to Georgia growers caused by the implementation of the REDs, is not justified to address a problem which EPA has admitted ‘occurs at a low frequency relative to the total number of fumigations’.  Thank you for the opportunity to file these comments.

Sincerely,

Charles T. Hall, Jr.

Executive Director
Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association