Pacific Nut Producer Magazine

Tag: EPA

  • EPA Fines SJV Almond Grower for Clean Water Act Violations, Orders Restoration of Wetlands

    Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a settlement with Edward Lynn Brown, owner of an almond orchard near Merced, California, for violations of the federal Clean Water Act that impacted more than two acres of rare vernal pool wetlands . The settlement requires Brown to pay $212,000 in civil penalties and restore and preserve 15 acres of wetland habitat.

    On March 14, 2019, EPA inspected the site. Inspectors determined that earth-moving activities by Brown had discharged fill material into waters that flow into the San Joaquin River. This work had been undertaken without obtaining a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

    “Grading and filling wetlands of the San Joaquin River Valley without proper permitting impacts water resources and endangers California’s unique native plants and animals,” said EPA Pacific Southwest Regional Administrator Martha Guzman. “In a time of drought and climate change, it is essential to protect these rare and vital water resources and habitats from destruction.”

    Brown’s earth-moving activities from 2016 to 2020 involved building a retention basin and access roads and planting a new almond orchard. The impacts from these activities resulted in the degradation of over two acres of vernal pool wetlands adjacent to Parkinson Creek, a tributary of the San Joaquin River that bisects the ranch. This work violated provisions of a previous 2014 EPA Order, which had required Brown to notify the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of any proposed activity that may impact local water systems.

    A pond on the almond orchard that provides critical wetland habitat impacted by soil and sediment disturbances. (EPA photo)

    To mitigate these negative environmental impacts, under this settlement Brown has agreed to develop a plan for removing 1.9 acres of fill material, restoring, and enhancing 2.44 acres, and preserving 12.66 acres within an 81.39-acre area within the orchard.

    For more information on enforcement of Clean Water Act Section 309 visit: https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/clean-water-act-section-309-federal-enforcement-authority.

    To view information on the 2014 Clean Water Act enforcement action, visit: https://archive.epa.gov/epapages/newsroom_archive/newsreleases/f7437d2c778475d685257d94006344bc.html.

    To view the 2014 public notice, visit: https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/www3/region9/enforcement/pubnotices/pubnotice-merced-ranch.html.

    To view the proposed settlement, visit: https://www.epa.gov/publicnotices/edward-lynn-brown-merced-ca-proposed-settlement-cwa-section-309g-class-ii

    To view the Consent Agreement and Final Order, visit: https://www.epa.gov/ca/cwa-09-2022-0007-edward-lynn-brown-merced-ca-proposed-settlement-cwa-section-309g-class-ii

    Learn more about EPA’s Pacific Southwest Region. Connect with us on Facebook and on Twitter.

  • Industry Input Needed: Aluminum Phosphide, Magnesium Phosphide & Phosphine Proposed US EPA Interim Registration Review Decision

    In September of 2020, the US EPA released their Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision on Aluminum Phosphide, Magnesium Phosphide, and Phosphine. There is a 60-day comment period on this decision with a deadline of Tuesday, December 22, 2020.

    In the review, the EPA has proposed mandatory buffer zones based on computer modeling. The proposed actions for phosphine and the metal phosphides would establish mandatory buffer zones around fumigation facilities into which bystanders may not enter during treatment or aeration of commodities post treatment. EPA is proposing a minimum of 10 feet for all fumigations and proposed buffers of 10 feet to 500 feet depending on application rate, facility, container size and other impacts of the fumigation procedures. These buffer zones could restrict your current uses of phosphine drastically, some to the point where you may no longer be able to use the fumigant.

    How does this impact the almond industry?  This decision impacts almonds, barley, grains, avocados, corn, cotton, lettuce, peanuts, pistachios, rice and more. Phosphine is a colorless gas used on commodities in storage and shipping to prevent losses due to insect and vertebrate (mainly rodent) pests. Phosphine is formulated as a pressurized gas stored in cylinders. It is the active component of the metal phosphides, released when pellets of metal phosphide interact with moisture in the air. Phosphine and metal phosphide products are registered for use on dried foods (e.g.: nuts, dried fruits, grains), on animal feed, and on processed foods (e.g.: candy, baking mixes, crackers, meats, dairy). Phosphine gas products are registered for use on non-food commodities, such as tobacco, clothing fibers, hair, wood, paper, tires, and beehives. Metal phosphide products are also registered for in-field (i.e.: greater than 100 feet from occupied buildings), in-burrow rodent control. Phosphine and the metal phosphides are applied as structural or space fumigants (e.g.: under tarps, in grain mills, in warehouses), vehicle fumigants (e.g.: railcars, trucks, containers), grain fumigants (e.g.: silos, farm storage, flat storage), and vessel/ship fumigants.

    Data from California for the years 2013 to 2017 indicate that an average of 19,900 lbs phosphine, 160,600 lbs aluminum phosphide, and 13,200 lbs magnesium phosphide were applied annually in California. The applications for all three active ingredients (a.i.s) were made to nuts (6,900 lbs phosphine, 50,200 lbs aluminum phosphide, and 67,000 lbs magnesium phosphide). Structural use including storage facilities and processing equipment (14,900 lbs aluminum phosphide, 300 lbs magnesium phosphide) was also reported. The remaining usage data do not specify a specific commodity. Similar records of usage data are not required by other states and are not available.

    Please take the time to read the below attachments and click the link to fill out the questionnaire which was developed by the manufacturer Degesch. This questionnaire should only take a few minutes to complete but is extremely valuable in responding to public comments and advocating on behalf of the industry. Time is of the essence, so we are asking for your assistance by November 30th.

    Questionnaire: Click Here.

    EPA Proposed Interim Registration Review Letter: Click Here.

    Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision Case Document: Click Here.

    Again, the industry has a deadline of December 22, 2020, to respond to the PID. Please complete your responses to the questionnaire by Monday, November 30, 2020.

    Feel free to distribute this link within your organization or to others who may be able to provide feedback on the PID proposals.

    If you have any questions, please call, Elaine Trevino at 209-300-7140 or Ed Hosoda at Cardinal Professional Products at 916-997-6045.

    For additional information please go to the EPA website at the following link: http://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.