Comment from Stephanie Bostic

APHIS: I am highly concerned about the use of methyl bromide as a fumigation technique for citrus fruit being imported from Chile to the US. While I fully support all efforts to prevent the entrance of pests such as the medfly into domestic crops and wildlife areas, the use of methyl bromide concerns me. Methyl bromide was supposed to be phased out around the world due to its highly destructive impact on the ozone beginning in 2000, per the Montreal Protocol. I have been horrified to see the US’s abuse of the “critical-use” exemptions. This rule would be a furtherance of that attitude: requiring another country to use a chemical that we should not be using. Methyl bromide is extraordinarily effective at destroying the ozone layer which protects all life from UV-B rays. It is responsible for as much as 15% of the loss. The ozone plays a vital role in protecting the Earth’s ecosystems, and disrupting it is also contributing to problems like climate change. In addition, methyl bromide, like most pesticides, can have a harmful effect on the workers administering it. Particularly in a less developed nation, where occupational health and safety standards may not be as high, the dangers of acute and chronic poisoning should be considered. Methyl bromide has been shown to damage the neurological system, the lungs, the heart, and kidneys. While it is not carcinogenic, it takes around 12 days to be excreted from the body, so a build-up of the chemical can lead to a sudden onset of toxicity. Alternatives range from heat/cold treatments to other chemicals and irradiation. The EPA has done extensive research and compiled easily accessible reports on alternatives. Unless a fumigation method other than using methyl bromide is adopted, I cannot support this rule, or the importation of citrus fruit from Chile. Stephanie Bostic M.S. candidate in Agriculture, Food, and the Environment