(Beyond Pesticides, October 19, 2011) The latest water pollution data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Region 9 office shows considerable increases of chemical pollution, including pesticides, in California water bodies. According to the report, which gathered monitoring data for 2008-2010, more than half of the state’s water bodies do not meet existing water quality goals and many still need federal pollution control standards. While federal officials maintain that the increases are due to improved monitoring and not new pollution, the data presents a more accurate representation of real world contamination. California’s list of impaired waters, finalized last week, shows significant increases compared with the 2006 list. According to the report, “Of the total 3 million acres of lakes, bays, estuaries and wetlands in the state, 1.6 million acres are not meeting water quality goals and of these 1.4 million acres still needs total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) to be set. Of the total 215,000 miles of rivers, streams and shoreline, 30,000 miles are not meeting water quality goals and of these 20,000 miles still need TMDLs. While more than 50% of the lakes, bays, estuaries and wetlands acres have been assessed, less than 20% of the coastline, rivers […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 11, 2011) U.S. Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) has offered an amendment to a currency bill in the Senate this week which would strip protections against pesticide contamination from the Clean Water Act (CWA). The language of the amendment is the exact same language as H.R. 872, which is currently working its way through the Senate and which environmental and public health advocates have been fighting against for much of the past year. Urgent action is needed to stop the amendment from successfully being attached to the larger bill, S. 1619. Click here to send an email to your Senators urging them to stand with you in opposing the Roberts amendment, Amendment 720, and ensuring our waterways are kept safe from pesticide contamination. Attaching the bill as an amendment to an entirely unrelated bill represents an attempt to slip the language in unnoticed and get it through without a fight. The language in the amendment, which has already passed through the U.S. House of Representatives as H.R. 872, and was voted out of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry as the stand alone bill S. 718 in June, but had since stalled in the Senate, would […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 22, 2011) As part of his $3 trillion deficit-reduction plan, President Obama has proposed to increase pesticide and chemical registration fees and reinstate tolerance assessment fees in order to cover the costs of evaluating the chemicals’ health and environmental effects data. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) currently collects fees from companies seeking to register their pesticides or maintain existing registrations; however these fees do not cover the full cost of the review process. The White House fee collection proposal will save $740 million over 10 years. Under the reregistration program, pesticides that were registered prior to November 1, 1984 are evaluated to ensure that they continue to meet current regulatory standards. EPA began this effort under 1988 amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The amendment also requires EPA to review all other registered pesticides on a 15-year cycle to ensure that registrations reflect current regulations. The reregistration of pesticides under FIFRA is a lengthy and ongoing process. Hundreds of pesticides currently registered and commonly used still lack a full assessment of their potential short and long-term effects on human health, particularly on children, and the environment. For example, EPA has failed to […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 19, 2011) Dubbing it the “most anti-environment House in history,” Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), ranking member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, released a new searchable database last week listing a staggering 125 pieces of legislation that will reduce environmental protection. The bills, introduced and passed by the Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives, are aimed at limiting the authority of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal institutions tasked with upholding environmental laws set in place to protect human and environmental health. The database indicates that the legislation will undermine environmental laws, such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, and breaks down anti-environment bills in the 112th Congress into categories: clean energy, climate change, nuclear power, pipeline safety, pollution prevention, and public lands and coasts. This includes legislation limiting the regulatory authority of EPA by prohibiting it from regulating carbon emissions from power plants, votes to defund enforcement of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, and efforts to target federal agencies such as the Department of Interior and the Department of Energy. Recent attacks on environmental statutes, including attempts to strip the Clean Water Act of its power […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 15, 2011) Bowing to pressure from the chemical industry, the administration of President Barack Obama recently blocked a new and desperately needed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) review of chemical health hazards which was developed under the agency’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), according to Daniel Rosenberg of the Natural Resources Defense Council. In his blog, Mr. Rosenberg reported on September 13 that, “[T]he White House worked behind the scenes to stop EPA from issuing a hazard assessment of the cancer-causing chemical TCE [produced through the IRIS program] — and is working to effectively shut down the EPA’s program for assessing the hazards of chemicals — the basis for setting and updating health standards for drinking water, air quality, and clean-up of contaminated soil.” He notes that the move was obscured as it fell on the same day as the widely reported and controversial decision by the administration to withdraw a new EPA health standard for ozone smog. A chemical health review under IRIS apparently provided the groundwork for the establishment of a new health standard for the carcinogenic trichloroethylene (TCE), but the findings yielded no action. The existing standard for the substance was last updated more […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 17, 2011) Representatives Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, and Grace Napolitano (D-Calif.), the Ranking Democrat on the Natural Resources Committee’s Subcommittee on Water and Power, sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) urging adoption of new measures to help protect endangered species as the federal government develops rules governing the spraying of pesticides directly into U.S. waters. These new rules would apply to issuance of a Pesticide General Permit (PGP), which would be the first of its kind in the history of the Clean Water Act and would impose limits on the amount of pesticides that enter our streams, rivers, and lakes. The letters were forwarded to EPA and FWS at a time when Congress is doing all it can to strip the Clean Water Act of its power to protect U.S. waterways. The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011 or H.R. 872, already passed by the House earlier this year and recently voted out of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, would revoke EPA’s authority to require permits for pesticide discharges into waterways. Click here to send […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 29, 2011) With the nation’s attention diverted by the drama over the debt ceiling, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are loading up an appropriations bill with over 70 amendments (riders) to significantly curtail environmental regulation in the 2012 Department of the Interior and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) spending bill (H.R. 2584), in one of the most extreme attacks on the environment and public health in modern history. The debate began on Tuesday for this House spending bill, which determines the funding for the Department of Interior, EPA, Forest Service, and other environment-related federal agencies. Among restrictions is one that would restrict EPA’s ability to act in several key areas, including pesticide suspensions and cancellations related to endangered species protections, pesticide product brand names, and Clean Water Act (CWA) permits for pesticide use on or near water. It includes language that would amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the CWA to exempt FIFRA-compliant pesticides from requiring a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under the CWA. The appropriations includes bill language that is essentially the same as that contained in stand-alone legislation (H.R. 872) approved by the House and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 22, 2011) Parallel bills have been introduced in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives designed to increase federal research on endocrine disrupting chemicals and ensure public safety by restricting or eliminating chemicals found to present unacceptable risks to public health. S 1361, introduced by Senator John Kerry (D-MA), and HR 2521, introduced by Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), are both titled the Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals Exposure Elimination Act. The bills would establish a scientific panel at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) to evaluate up to ten chemicals per year that potentially affect the endocrine system and would create a trigger to ban those found most harmful to public health. The bills would create a more updated scientific evaluation process than any that currently exists in the federal government for reviewing potential endocrine disruptors and would have a strong regulatory mandate to ban or restrict chemicals that are found to present serious health risks. The specific process outlined directs the National Toxicology Program at NIEHS to evaluate each chemical according to (i) the amount of evidence that it is an endocrine disruptor, (ii) the “level of concern” that it may disrupt hormones, and (iii) the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 22, 2011) Parallel bills have been introduced in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives designed to increase federal research on endocrine disrupting chemicals and ensure public safety by restricting or eliminating chemicals found to present unacceptable risks to public health. S. 1361, introduced by Senator John Kerry (D-MA), and H.R. 2521, introduced by Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), are both titled the Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals Exposure Elimination Act. The bills would establish a scientific panel at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) to evaluate up to ten chemicals per year that potentially affect the endocrine system and would create a trigger to ban those found most harmful to public health. The bills would create a more updated scientific evaluation process than any that currently exists in the federal government for reviewing potential endocrine disruptors and would have a strong regulatory mandate to ban or restrict chemicals that are found to present serious health risks. The specific process outlined directs the National Toxicology Program at NIEHS to evaluate each chemical according to (i) the amount of evidence that it is an endocrine disruptor, (ii) the “level of concern” that it may disrupt hormones, and (iii) the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 18, 2011) The U.S. House of Representatives has proposed to strip significant clean water protection from the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA). In a vote on Wednesday, July 13, the Republican-controlled chamber passed the Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011, H.R. 2018. The act would prevent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from stepping in to enforce clean water standards when it deemed that a state agency was not effectively enforcing the law. The bill would also prevent EPA from refining its existing water standards to reflect the latest science without first getting approval from a state agency. Supporters of the bill say that EPA has gone too far in its enforcement of water standards at the expense of economic development. Opponents, however, point out that the bill presents the potential for new risks to public health and the environment in allowing states to issue subpar water standards and making it more difficult for outdated standards to be revised. The bill passed the House on a largely party-line vote of 239-184. 16 Democrats joined Republicans in support of the measure, while 13 Republicans voted against it. The fate […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 23, 2011) The Senate Agriculture Committee has passed legislation that would allow pesticides to be sprayed into water without a Clean Water Act (CWA) on Tuesday, June 21, and urgent action is needed to stop the bill from passing in the full Senate. The bill, Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011 (H.R. 872) amends the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the CWA, reversing a 2009 court order requiring the permits as a part of the National Pollutant Discharge System (NPDES). The U.S. House of Representatives already passed H.R. 827 by a vote of 292-130 back in April. Beyond Pesticides encourages individuals and organizations email and call their Senators that regulating pesticides under the CWA is necessary to protect our waterways, public health, fish, and wildlife, and therefore, they must oppose H.R. 872. Out of eight committee members who voted, the only ones to oppose the bill were Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), who was not present at the markup, but issued a recorded vote. Without press or notice, the bill was marked up private business meetings, and is being heralded by the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), which states that “The […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 20, 2011) Last Thursday, U.S. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced legislation to update and modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) which has allowed tens of thousands of toxic substances onto the marketplace with little or no testing. The new ”˜Safe Chemicals Act of 2011,’ utilizing risk assessment methology, would, in theory, require chemical companies to prove their products are “safe” for human health and the environment when allowed in commerce. While creating priority reviews for the higher tisk categories of chemicals, many analysts are concerned that continued exclusive reliance on risk assessment with its serious uncertainties and lack of attention to least toxic alternatives allows unnecessary toxic chemical use and undermines a precautionary approach. Sen. Lautenberg, who chairs the Senate Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health, seeks to require that chemical manufacturers demonstrate the safety of industrial chemicals used in everyday household products. “The Safe Chemicals Act of 2011” would require safety testing of all industrial chemicals, and puts the burden on industry to prove that chemicals are safe in order to get on or stay on the market. Currently, EPA may not regulate a chemical unless it can first prove that […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 6, 2011) In yet another move to dismantle Clean Water Act (CWA) regulations regarding pesticides, U.S. Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry introduced legislation (S. 718) aimed to “eliminate a burdensome, costly and redundant permit requirement for applications of pesticides.” Last week a similar bill, H.R. 872, passed in the House which prevents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from applying the protective CWA permit regulations to monitor pesticides applied to and near U.S. waters. However, EPA has moved forward and published its draft version of the final permit. Like HR 872, S. 718, “Bill to amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act to improve the use of certain registered pesticides,” would ensure that Clean Water Act permits are not required for the application of pesticides and amends the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) by stating that no permit shall be required for the use of a pesticide that is registered under FIFRA. This bill would mean that pesticide applicators will be able to discharge pesticides into US waterways without any government oversight. Should this bill pass in the Senate it would mean final legislation […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 04, 2011) After Friday’s vote (April 1, 2011) to weaken protections from pesticides in the Clean Water Act, send a message to your U.S. Representative today. See action steps, as easy as two clicks, at the end of this post. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act (H.R. 872) by a vote of 292-130. The bill, introduced by Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-OH), amended the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) to eliminate provisions requiring pesticide applicators to obtain a permit to allow pesticides or their residues to enter waterways. The bill effectively reversed a 2009 Sixth Circuit court decision which ruled that, under FIFRA and CWA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must require such permits. Sponsors of the bill said that the clean water requirements are “duplicative regulations” which would “unnecessarily burden” farmers and small businesses. However, the potentially high cost of public health problems, environmental clean-up efforts, and irreversible ecological damage that could result in the removal of this permitting process has not been considered. The reality is that this permitting process forces the pesticide users to seek alternative approaches to pest management if […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 17, 2011) Urgent action is needed to stop the bill, Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011 (H.R. 872), from weakening protections under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The U.S. House of Representatives Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved the bi-partisan bill yesterday, which amends the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the CWA to eliminate provisions requiring pesticide applicators to obtain a permit to allow pesticides or their residues to enter waterways. This bill has also been approved unanimously by the House Committee on Agriculture and will reverse a 2009 court order requiring the permits as a part of the National Pollutant Discharge System (NPDES) if it lands on the President’s desk by April 9, 2011. Take Action Now. The 2009 Sixth Circuit court decision, in response to the National Cotton Council v. EPA, overturned the Bush Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule exempting commercial pesticide applications from the oversight provided under CWA. The decision requires NPDES permits for pesticide applications directly to or near waterways in order to reduce and eventually eliminate pollutants in the natural environment. Sponsors of the bill say that the clean water requirements are “duplicative regulations” which would “unnecessarily burden” farmers […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 11, 2011) The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture unanimously approved a bill, Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011 (H.R. 872), on Wednesday, March 9 which would amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) to eliminate provisions requiring pesticide applicators to obtain a permit to allow pesticides or their residues to enter waterways. The bill would effectively reverse a 2009 Sixth Circuit court decision which ruled that, under FIFRA and the CWA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must require such permits. A similar bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate last year. The 2009 court ruling came in the case National Cotton Council v. EPA. Prior to this case, EPA had deemed it unnecessary to require permits for pesticide applications near waterways. These previous regulations meant that, in instances where pesticides were applied directly to water to control pests such as mosquito larvae or aquatic weeds, or when pesticides were applied to control pests over or near water, applications were held to the much less stringent FIFRA standards. FIFRA, unlike the CWA, does not fully regulate or monitor water quality and the protection of aquatic ecosystems in […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 19, 2010) House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise M. Slaughter and two colleagues asked the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ban triclosan due to the hazards that this chemical poses, including antibiotic resistance and potentially leading to higher health care costs, citing both Beyond Pesticides and Food and Water Watch along with other environmental groups. Rep. Slaughter, joined by Reps. Raul Grijalva and Betty McCollum, delivered the letter Tuesday, November 16, urging FDA to take immediate steps to stop the unnecessary exposure to this chemical in the U.S. Rep. Slaughter concludes that “triclosan is clearly a threat to our health.” Among the reasons for her conclusion, she lists: ”¢ The presence of triclosan in the human body and its impact on our “body burden;” ”¢ Bacterial resistance to antibiotic medications and antibacterial cleaners; ”¢ The potential for endocrine disruption as a result of triclosan bioaccumulation in the body; ”¢ Wastewater contamination; ”¢ The threat of destroying ecological balance, and; ”¢ The fact that triclosan is no more effective than soap and water. The scientific literature has extensivelly linked the non-medical uses of triclosan to many health and environmental hazards. Triclosan is an endocrine disruptor and has […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 22, 2010) The National Conversation on Public Health and Chemical Exposures, a collaborative initiative aimed at developing an action agenda for strengthening the nation’s approach to protecting the public’s health from harmful chemical exposures, has drafted six work group reports on cross-cutting public health and chemical exposure topics. Public comment is invited and has been extended to Monday, September 27, 2010. Supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ASTDR), the National Conversation is a collaborative project that was launched in June 2009 to engage CDC, ATSDR, other organizations working on chemical exposure issues, and the public to develop an action agenda with clear, achievable recommendations that can help government agencies and other organizations strengthen their efforts to protect the public from harmful chemical exposures. Beyond Pesticides is an active participant in the National Conversation. Six work groups have convened to research and make recommendations on public health and chemical exposure issues. Public comment is needed for each work groups’ final reports as they work to develop the action agenda. To view work group reports and instructions for submitting comments, visit each work group’s page: Monitoring […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 16, 2010) The New Hampshire House of Representatives passed a measure last week to study the passage of a bill, HB 1456, that would establish a New Hampshire General Court committee to study the use of pesticides and their alternatives in areas where children may be exposed. Yes, that’s right; they passed a bill to study a study bill. The House majority committee proposed the interim study bill as an alternative to seeking a floor vote on HB 1456 itself because of the bill opponents’ view that the safety of pesticides is unquestionable and fear that HB 1456 would lead to a moratorium on lawn pesticides, much like what has been done throughout Canada. HB 1456 is the first state bill in the country to be successfully introduced and have a hearing with intent to restrict toxic pesticide use on public and private property, showing the momentum that is building throughout the country on this issue. At the House Environment and Agriculture Committee hearing on HB 1456 in February, the issue of studying the impact of pesticides, mainly herbicides, on children where they are commonly used in residential neighborhoods, on school grounds, playgrounds, and other places where […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 4, 2009) The Obama Administration proposed a budget of $10 billion for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which represents an overall cut of $300 million from its 2010 fiscal year budget. However, within its $10 billion budget EPA is proposing a $43.5 million in new funding for climate regulatory efforts in fiscal 2011. Overall, $1.1 billion is devoted to EPA’s clean air and global climate change program – one of five funding priorities for the agency – that represents about 12 percent of the agency’s budget. Of that, the proposal sets aside $169 million to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The budget would also add $13 million for the Chesapeake Bay. Last year, the Obama administration promised an overhaul of the EPA-led cleanup program, which despite 25 years of effort and billions of dollars failed to improve the bay’s problems with low-oxygen “dead zones.” “To meet our environmental challenges and ensure fiscal responsibility, we’re proposing targeted investments in core priorities. This budget cuts spending while promoting clean air, land and water, growing the green economy and strengthening enforcement,” said Administrator Lisa Jackson. “The president’s budget is focused on creating the conditions that help American families, communities and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 6, 2010) The House Energy and Environment Subcommittee chairman asked federal regulators for an open discussion about the health and environmental impacts of two controversial chemicals- triclosan and triclocarban- commonly found in antimicrobial hand soaps and other consumer products. Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) is asking U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for answers to questions about triclosan and triclocarban. The synthetic antimicrobial chemicals are found in many soaps, toothpastes, deodorants and cosmetics. “Despite serious questions regarding the safety of these potentially dangerous products, these substances seem to exist in a regulatory black hole,” Rep. Markey said in a statement. “We must ensure that these products … kill germs without adversely impacting human health.” Read letter to EPA and FDA. In the letter to EPA, Rep. Markey questions whether the agency is reviewing existing data on the two chemicals, and if it has made a decision about further regulating them. He also asked if the agency has examined the impact of triclosan on wildlife, and whether it plans to evaluate the chemicals under its hormone-screening program, the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. The lawmaker also pushed FDA on its plan for finalizing a […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 22, 2009) Currently, very few companies control most of the global food supply. But for the first time ever, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is calling for public comment on how big business controls food and farming. The DOJ’s Antitrust Division is collecting input in preparation for “agricultural workshops,” to be held jointly with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in early 2010, which will examine the extent of abusive anticompetitive behavior by agribusiness giants. The workshops, which were first announced by Attorney General Eric Holder and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack on Aug. 5, 2009, are the first joint Department of Justice/USDA workshops ever to be held to discuss competition and regulatory issues in the agriculture industry. The all-day workshops, which will begin in March 2010, will be held in Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Washington, D.C. and Wisconsin. According to DOJ, the goals of the workshops are to promote dialogue among interested parties and foster learning with respect to the appropriate legal and economic analyses of these issues, as well as to listen to and learn from parties with experience in the agriculture sector. Each workshop may feature keynote speakers, general expert panels, and break-out panels that […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 21, 2009) Earlier this month, Congressman Jim Moran of Northern Virginia and Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts introduced legislation to explore linkages between hormone disrupting chemicals in the environment and everyday products and the dramatic increase of autism, hyperactivity, diabetes, obesity, breast cancer, prostate cancer and other hormone related disorders. After the identification of endocrine disruptors, the legislation requires federal agencies with regulatory authority to report to Congress on the action it plans to take. For years, scientists have noted strange anomalies in fish and wildlife in locations where endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are found. A recent study found that an astounding 100 percent of small mouth bass in certain sites of the Potomac River basin have exhibited both male and female organs, a characteristic linked to EDCs. According to a 2009 study by the U.S. Geologic Survey, the occurrence of “intersex” fish is now found to be nationwide. “These fish are the proverbial ”˜canaries in the coal mine,’ a symptom of a larger sickness in our environment. The implications for humans are real and deeply troubling,” said U.S. Representative Moran, who worked with experts for roughly a year to craft the legislation. “We need facts driven […]