CHANGE IN SCHEDULE

1. CHANGE IN SCHEDULE • 12:15-1:00 p.m. Programmatic Environmental Assessment • 1:00-2:00 p.m. Market Analysis for Effective Food Security Programming • 2:00-2:15 p.m. Break • 2:15-3:35 p.m. Market Analysis cont’d • 3:35-3:45 p.m. Value of Monetization • 3:45-4:30 p.m. Food for Peace Update

2. Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) for Use of Fumigants in USAID Food for Peace Title II Food Aid Arianne Neigh, USAID DCHA Post-Crisis Environmental Advisor Erika Clesceri, USAID DCHA Bureau Environmental Officer IFADC May 7, 2012

3. By the end of this talk you will have heard about….. • Why USAID Food for Peace is developing a Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA)? • What is a PEA for fumigants? • What are the health concerns of fumigants in the context of food aid? • What is the current state of fumigation practices? • What are the important factors for safe fumigation? • What do we understand about the safety of fumigant use for food aid and what do we still have to learn?

4. Food for Peace (FFP) Development of the PEA Food for Peace funded through the USAID GEMS Contract (Global Environmental Management Support) Prevent Loss of Commodity Purpose of Fumigant Use Deliver the Highest Quality & Nutritious Commodity Fumigants are an important tool, when used properly!

5. Identify potential human health and environmental impacts of fumigant use in food aid • Determine appropriate mitigation measures for host country conditions Why is FFP developing a PEA? • Raise awareness of best management practices in the food aid community for fumigation • Improve the safety and effectiveness of fumigation practices

6. What is a Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA)? Title 22, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 216 (22 CFR 216) • USAID’s environmental assessment procedures • Applies to all USAID programs, projects, activities, and substantive amendments * Special provisions for pesticides, which includes fumigants • Programmatic Environmental Assessment • Fulfills technical and administrative requirements for analyzing and documenting the proposed use of pesticides • Documents environmental mitigation and management • For activities of repetitive nature treated as a “generic class of actions”

7. PEA Development and Design Process PEA Scoping Statement 2011 • Scoping Activities: • Stakeholder Consultation • -US Headquarters • USAID Internal Engagement • -Washington DC • Literature Review • PEA Guidance Activities: • Stakeholder Consultation • -US Headquarter • -Country-level • USAID Internal Engagement • -Mission • -Washington DC • Literature Review • Field Site Visits • Human Health Risk Evaluation PEA 2012

8. Metal Phosphides(e.g., Tri-tox, Phostoxin, Quik-Fume) Fumigants 101 Phosphine (gas) • Restricted use pesticide – High acute toxicity • Colorless, fish/garlic odor • Highly explosive, corrosive + + = Metal Phosphide (solid) Water (gas) Phosphine (gas) Metal Hydroxide (solid)

9. Health Concerns and Safety of Phosphine • Symptoms of Poisoning: • Headache, dizziness, double vision • Vomiting, diarrhea, difficulty breathing • Seizures, unconsciousness, death • Anecdotal Observations in Field: • Given preventative treatment • Complaints of dizziness • Workers using the “sniff” test

10. Where is the PEA focused? …at the primary warehouse level …at the distribution point …NOT at the household level

11. FFP Commodity Chain • Protection in the Warehouse Starting from Port of Entry • Pre-positioning • Primary Warehouses (Country-level) • Secondary Warehouses (Sub-national-level) • Tertiary Distribution Centers (District-level) Ref: WFP. 2003. Food Storage Manual.

12. Limiting the Scope – A Summary • THE PEA IS FOR……. • Phosphine-generating fumigants • Improving safety during fumigation • Fumigation at the warehouse level • Single and repeated applications • THE PEA IS NOT FOR…… • Other warehouse pesticides (rodenticides, etc.) • Food aid quality • Post harvest storage loss at the household level • Disposal of spoiled food • Improper fumigation • Use of banned or outdated pesticides

13. PEA Approach & Team Composition • Approach: • Stakeholder Consultation • -US Headquarter • -Country-level • USAID Internal Engagement • -Mission • -Washington DC • Literature Review • Field Site Visits • Human Health Risk Evaluation (HHRE) • Team Composition: • Team Leader/ • Environmental Impact Specialist • Fumigation Expert • Human Health Risk Assessor • Gender and Social Impact Specialist

14. Stakeholder Engagement for Fumigant PEA • PEA announcement sent to Food Aid Consultative Group (FACG) & Food Security Network (FSN) • Series of meetings with FACG members in Washington DC • USAID Missions, PVOs, fumigants operators, and warehouse managers consulted during field site visits

15. Field Visits • PEA Team visited ports and Title II warehouses in Ethiopia, Djibouti, and Uganda (April 2012) • Interviewed with USAID Missions, fumigators, warehouse managers, PVOs, and residents nearby to warehouses • Reviewed detailed fumigation tracking and protocols • Gathered site-specific information to inform the HHRE • -Timing of fumigation • -Set-up and removal • -Warehouse configuration

16. Preliminary Findings Inconsistent Use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Improper Storage of Fumigants Improper Disposal of Fumigation Containers Lack of Replacement of Protective Equipment Improve Fumigation Safety Practices

17. Preliminary Findings Commodities Sitting at Port for Long Periods Improve Techniques for Prevention of Infestations Damaged Commodities Arriving at Port Poor Warehouse Design Spillage During Transport Poorly Sewn Bags

18. Needs Assessment for Fumigation Practices in Food Aid Improve the understanding of fumigation safety practices Improve techniques to prevent infestations Provide training on integrated pest management practices Provide training on monitoring and enforcement of best practices Improve the understanding of “appropriate or adequate” standards Full-face respirator Draeger tube gas detector

19. From Understanding Fumigation Practices to Evaluating Health Risks Goal: Identify potential human health and environmental impacts of fumigant use in food aid • Considered key concerns of stakeholder’s • Evaluated current practices for fumigation in host countries • Inform our understanding of health risks of fumigants used in for food aid in host countries • Evaluate what mitigation measures are necessary and appropriate for health risks

20. What is a human health risk evaluation (HHRE)? A process to evaluate the potential for people to experience adverse health effects when exposed to chemicals. • Not all PEAs for pesticides will conduct a risk evaluation • Concerns arising from stakeholder consultation indicated need for this additional assessment within the PEA Toxicity Exposure RISK Sensitivity

21. What is a human health risk evaluation (HHRE)? • Toxicity • Can this chemical cause adverse health effects? • What are those health effects? A process to evaluate the potential for people to experience adverse health effects when exposed to chemicals. Exposure Toxicity • Exposure • What groups of people are exposed to a fumigant? • How are people exposed? • At what concentrations are they exposed? RISK • Sensitivity • What are the health effects at the concentrations we are predicting? • What is the likelihood that people will experience health effects? Sensitivity

22. Conducting the Fumigant Human Health Risk Evaluation • Identified Groups: • Fumigant worker • Warehouse bystander • -Managers • -Other workers • Nearby residents • Beneficiaries

23. Routes of Exposure Ingestion Inhalation X • Exposure Route: • Fumigation workers - inhalation • Warehouse bystander - inhalation • Beneficiaries - ingesting fumigated food Dermal ? Maternal/ Genetic Transfer?

24. Estimation of Fumigant Risks with protective equipment without protective equipment Increasing Risk Level ?

25. Risk Evaluation Review and Needs Review: In certain cases, there may be potential health risks for fumigation workers when proper fumigation practices and safety standards are not followed. Inhalation of gases during fumigation poses the most risk for bystanders. Additional data is needed.

26. Preliminary recommendations as of May 2012… • Fumigation Companies: • Improve fumigation practices • Increase training • Improve use and maintenance of protective equipment • Cooperating Sponsors: • Monitor fumigation before/during/after • Increase capacity to critically monitor fumigation practices • Improve sanitation practices in the warehouses and on vehicles • USAID/FFP: • Investigate the use of alternative technologies to fumigants • Disseminate lessons learned • Provide tools for monitoring fumigation practices

27. What will come out of this? • USAID FFP program will have best available knowledge • Identify human health and environmental impacts of fumigant use in food aid • -Provides FFP implementing partners with evaluation of human health impacts of fumigants • -Recommends best practice to improve safety standards • USAID-approved Fumigation PEA will apply to all Title II programs going forward, replacing the need for stand-alone assessments. • Raise awareness of best management practices in the food aid community for fumigation

28. Where to obtain more Fumigation PEA information? Erika Clesceri, Bureau Environmental Officer (BEO) USAID Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance (DCHA) Email: eclesceri@usaid.gov Thank You