(Beyond Pesticides, April 30, 2013) A landmark decision by the European Commission on Monday means that bee-killing, neonicotinoid pesticides will experience a continent-wide ban in Europe for two years. A  15 Member States majority  supported the ban, with eight against, and four abstaining. European Health and Consumer Commissioner Tony Borg explains, “Since our proposal is based on a number of risks to bee health identified by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the Commission will go ahead with its text in the coming weeks. I pledge to do my utmost to ensure that our bees, which are so vital to our ecosystem and contribute over €22 billion annually to European agriculture, are protected.” The ban comes several months after the EFSA released a report identifying “high acute risk” to honey bees from uses of certain neonicotinoid chemicals. The moratorium will begin no later than December 1 this year. “We’re happy to see the EU take a leadership role to remove from the market these chemicals associated with colony collapse disorder and hazards to bee health. We’ll continue to push the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through legal and advocacy means to follow-up with urgent actions needed to protect bees,” says […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 29, 2013) Dow AgroSciences, one of the nation’s largest pesticide makers, along with various food companies, have persuaded several members of Congress to endorse a bill that directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reverse a proposed phase out of sulfuryl fluoride, a highly toxic food fumigant and potent greenhouse gas. If passed, the bill would make the U.S. one of only two western nations to allow sulfuryl fluoride on food, increase the number of American children ingesting unsafe levels of fluoride, and create a food poisoning risk for consumers who  purchase food that contains permissible levels of the fumigant. The  Pest Free Food Supply Act, H.R. 1496, sponsored by Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA) and 14 others, seeks to prevent the proposed  phase out  of sulfuryl fluoride from taking effect. The phase out, which EPA proposed in January 2011, was prompted by a  joint petition from the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), Environmental Working Group (EWG) and Beyond Pesticides. In seeking to prevent the phase out from taking effect, the bill’s sponsors have adopted Dow’s widely discredited talking points on the safety and necessity of sulfuryl fluoride fumigation. The public should know: ”¢ Of the few western nations […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 11, 2013) A report released Tuesday by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) lays out an “Action Plan” to reduce farmer’s reliance on toxic soil fumigants. The plan was created by the Nonfumigant Strawberry Production Working Group, which was made up of scientists, growers, and other specialists. The working group was assembled in April 2012 because of the health and environmental concerns posed by the continued use of soil fumigants in strawberry production. The working group was asked to develop an action plan of research priorities for developing nonfumigant management strategies. However, even as the working group acknowledged the health and environmental risks posed by the continued use of fumigants, the plan remained conservative in its recommendations; it concluded that, “Even with full commitment to implement this action plan, the strawberry industry will need to continue its use of fumigants for years to remain viable in California,” even though growing strawberries organically without the use of fumigants has been shown to be effective. The working group was most concerned about the continued use of methyl bromide. Historically methyl bromide has been used as a fumigant to eliminate the threat of soil borne pests. Methyl bromide has […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 28, 2013) A scathing new report by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) sheds much needed light on the flaws in the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) pesticide approval process, noting that in terms of the agency’s ability to offer transparency and rigorously test these inherently toxic chemicals, “the public’s trust is misplaced.” The recent lawsuit brought about by a coalition of beekeepers, consumer, and environmental groups, including Beyond Pesticides, emphasizes the harm resulting from EPA’s  abuse of the statutory  “conditional registration” program.  Through this program,  EPA has  allowed  the wide and growing use of the systemic neonicotinoid pesticides that are  linked to the dramatic decline in honey bee health and viability of honey bee colonies. A startling number of pesticides, nearly 65% of the more than 16,000 pesticides now on the market, were first approved by the process of “conditional registration,” a loophole in which EPA allows new pesticides on the market without the full range of legally mandated toxicity tests. NRDC accuses EPA of misusing the conditional registration process, and their assertions are by no means unfounded. The report cites EPA’s own 2004-2010 internal analysis that ultimately determined the agency had misused the provision “98 percent […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 18, 2013) The bee-killing neonicotinoid insecticides used for agriculture will continue to be used across the European Union (EU), as members failed to reach an agreement on the proposal to suspend their use on flowering crops over the next two years. The proposal had followed reports released by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which found the continued use of neonicotinoids to be an unacceptable “high acute risk” to pollinators, particularly honey bees. However, three EU members opposed the plan to suspend, blocking the European Commission from attaining a qualified majority to adopt the proposed suspension. “The commission put the text to the vote and no qualified majority was reached, either in favor or against the text,” the European Commission said in a statement. Those opposing the proposal, notably UK and German Ministers, argued that more scientific evidence was needed as a suspension could cause disproportionate damage to food production, counter to research indicating bee declines also damage crop productivity. Pesticide companies Bayer and Syngenta have pressed hard following the EFSA report to effect this outcome. The decision, or lack thereof, runs contrary to a precautionary approach to ensuring healthy bees as critical for our food production […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 13, 2013) On March 6, 2013, pesticide manufacturer Reckitt Benckiser Inc. requested a hearing in response to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Notice of Intent to Cancel 12 of the company’s d-CON mouse and rat poison products, delaying the ban that otherwise would have taken effect on March 7, 2013. This is the first time in more than 20 years that a company has declined to voluntarily implement EPA risk mitigation measures for pesticide products to ensure children are not exposed to what EPA identifies as an unacceptable risk. Reckitt Benckiser’s products would still be available to unknowing consumers until the case is resolved. In submitting its request for a hearing by an Administrative Law Judge, Reckitt Benckiser is preparing to waylay federal law by engaging in a legal battle with EPA that could drag on for many years. This comes after EPA announced its decision to go ahead and cancel rodenticide products not in compliance with EPA’s new mitigation measures to reduce exposures to children and wildlife. Unfortunately, until the case is resolved, Reckitt Benckiser will be allowed to continue selling 12 of its d-CON rat poisons, despite the products not being in compliance with […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 11, 2013) Recent sequester cuts and new proposed Congressional legislation could dramatically affect the safety of American waterways. According to a February 25 email, the White House Council on Environmental Quality estimates that the recent sequester could reduce federal funding for state environmental programs by $154 million. These cuts, which kicked in March 1, impact all states, with California losing the most funding totaling $12.4 million. The email also contains estimates that grants to federal fish and wildlife programs would be cut by $46.2 million. As these cuts begin to take effect, U.S. Representative Bob Gibbs (R-OH) introduced the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2013 (H.R. 935) on March 4. This bill, which is similar to a piece of legislation that was passed in the house in 2011, will eliminate the requirement for pesticide applicators to file Clean Water Act (CWA) permits for applications where pesticides could be discharged into water. The recent sequester has led to losses in “environmental funding to ensure clean water and air quality, as well as prevent pollution from pesticides and hazardous waste,” according to the White House Council on Environmental Quality. The cuts that could most affect states’ ability to enforce […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 7, 2013) A group of Canadian doctors and health advocates are urging the provincial government of British Columbia (B.C.) to ban the use of all cosmetic pesticides for lawns and gardens. The campaign, lead by the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) along with the David Suzuki Foundation and Environmental Defense began charging forward again Tuesday, despite setbacks last year, with an open letter signed by over 100 doctors urging the government to “enact a provincewide ban on the use and sale of non-essential pesticides.””Chemicals are used quite widely in many communities. They threaten kids, they threaten pets, and they threaten drinking water,” Gideon Foreman, the executive director of CAPE told CBC News. Research by the Ontario College of Family Physicians has identified scores of studies showing that human health is at risk from pesticide use. Other recent scientific evidence shows aquatic ecosystems are especially endangered. The Canadian Cancer Society has also warned pesticide exposure may increase the risk of certain cancers and calls for a ban on cosmetic pesticides. In May 2012, health and environmental advocacy groups were disappointed when a special committee in the Canadian provincial government of BC made the recommendation not […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 27, 2013) Last week a U.S. Court of Appeals found that pesticide restrictions to protect endangered salmon and steelhead proposed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in its Biological Opinion (BiOp) were “arbitrary and capricious,” supporting Dow AgroSciences LLC and other pesticide makers’ claims that the restrictions were based on “unsupported assumptions and conclusions.” The BiOp concluded that the pesticides chlorpyrifos, malathion and diazinon, three of the most highly toxic pesticides still in use, pose risks to salmon, steelhead and their habitat. In collaboration with NMFS, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is tasked with implementation of any recommended pesticide restrictions to satisfy the mandate under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). However, to date, EPA has not taken any actions to implement any of the proposed measures to protect endangered salmon and steelhead, in part due to challenges from industry. Dow AgroScience LLC, Makhteshim Agan of North America, Inc., and Cheminova, Inc. USA first filed a suit in 2009 (Dow Agrosciences v. National Marine Fisheries ), challenging the NMFS’ 2008 BiOp to restrict  chlorpyrifos, malathion and diazinon as being based on numerous unsupported assumptions and conclusions, and faulty analyses. The U.S. District Court […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 25, 2013) Both current and future pesticide laws are under assault in several states. State-run agencies in Alaska are no longer required to solicit public comments or a review process for pesticide applications on state land due to new regulations adopted by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). In Maine, the state Board of Pesticides Control is considering a proposal that weakens requirements for notification of pesticide spraying in fear of West Nile Virus (WNv) problems this summer. A state bill introduced in Hawaii to require neighbors to share specific information on pesticides being used to any abutting property owners was revised by various Hawaii statehouse committees until all notification rules in the bill were removed. Alaska The decision in Alaska, which will go into effect on March 7th, allows state agencies to spray pesticides on state land without having the application subject to public comment. The new regulation replaces the former transparent process with one that only requires agencies to develop an Integrated Pest Management Plan and submit it to the DEC. This new regulation takes away the ability for the public’s input to have an impact on proposed pesticide applications on state land. The […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 21, 2013) On February 6, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its preliminary volatilization assessment for the registration review of chlorpyrifos, finding that vapor phase chlorpyrifos may be emitted from treated fields at levels resulting in exposure to children and others who live, work, attend school, or otherwise spend time nearby.  In some circumstances, these bystanders may be exposed to chlorpyrifos and/or the transformation product chlorpyrifos-oxon at concentrations that could cause adverse effects. Citing uncertainties, the agency is requesting comments by March 8, 2013 on the potential risks to children and other bystanders from volatilization of chlorpyrifos from treated crops. EPA’s preliminary volatilization assessment is also in response to a petition filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Pesticide Action Network North America (PAN) in 2007, which requested that the agency revoke all tolerances and cancel all registrations for chlorpyrifos. In a letter to NRDC and to PAN dated January 25, 2013, updating these groups on EPA’s response to their September 12, 2007 joint petition regarding chlorpyrifos, EPA stated that, “This assessment represents a significant advancement in the evaluation of pesticide risks, as it will be the first probabilistic assessment of the risks […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 19, 2013) On February 14, Beyond Pesticides joined with Earthjustice, Farmworker Justice, and a number of other environmental and farmworker organizations to submit a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson, urging for long overdue revisions to the Workers Protection Standard (WPS) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The letter states that, “EPA’s inaction is unacceptable given farmworkers’ persistent exposure to harmful pesticides and ineffectual enforcement of the current WPS.” This letter comes after a previous petition in 2011 stressed the need for the agency to implement stronger protections for farmworkers. This letter also comes after fears from environmental and farmworker organizations over a recent EPA handout distributed during a November 2012 Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC) meeting that downplayed the details of a 2010 EPA document released on farmworker safety. EPA has not effectively updated WPS for almost 20 years, leaving farmworkers at risk. Farm work is demanding and dangerous physical labor. A 2008 study by a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) researcher finds that the incidence rate of pesticide poisoning is extremely high among U.S. agricultural workers. An average of 57.6 out of every 100,000 agricultural workers […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 13, 2013) After years of scrutiny and criticism, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Administrator Lisa P. Jackson signed amendments strengthening existing standards for human research involving pesticides submitted by third parties for consideration in EPA decisionmaking. These amendments apply to studies involving the controlled exposure of participants to pesticides, with the hope that these “tougher” new standards will decrease the number of intentional human dosing studies conducted for pesticides. Even though EPA stated in 2001 that it will not consider or rely on human studies in its regulatory decisionmaking, subsequent industry pressure resulted in EPA invoking the Common Rule (40 CFR 26 – Protection of Human Subjects) for third-party intentional dosing studies. The agency promulgated new rules and made revisions to these rules, stemming from the lawsuit and settlement by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) et al., to broaden and refine rules relating to human research involving pesticides. In 2010, EPA published the proposed rule to amend EPA’s protocol for the testing of pesticides on humans. Now finalized, the rule strengthens EPA’s 2006 rule, Protections for Subjects in Human Research. Now prohibited is testing on nursing and pregnant women, children, as well as testing on […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 12, 2013)   Is 2013 the year colony collapse disorder (CCD) begins impacting our food supply? According to the American Bee Journal, almond growers in California may not have access to the honey bee colonies necessary to pollinate this year’s crop. “We need 1.6 million colonies, or two colonies per acre, and California has only about 500,000 colonies that can be used for that purpose. We need to bring in a million more colonies but due to the winter losses, we may not have enough bees,” says Eric Mussen, PhD,  extension apiculturist at the University of California Davis (UC Davis) Department of Entomology. The problem, Dr. Mussen explains, is due to heavy losses this winter and less populous hives overall. Some beekeepers are reporting astonishing winter losses upwards of 90 percent, and in select cases complete colony loss. Honey production in 2012 was one of the worst years in the history of the United States, Dr. Mussen notes. Less honey means less food for overwintering bees, putting increased stress on colonies attempting to fight off the spread of CCD. CCD is the name given to the precipitous decline of honey bee populations around the world beginning in […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 11, 2013) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced its decision to allow residues of the cancer causing insecticide endosulfan on imported Chinese teas until July 31, 2016. Its decision to provide “additional time to transition to an alternative to endosulfan” raises serious concerns of further exposure to the toxic carcinogen for farmworkers and consumers. In May 2011, EPA proposed to revoke all tolerances for endosulfan, as, “It can pose unacceptable health risks to farmworkers and wildlife and can persist in the environment.” The agency proposed transition time that would allow growers time to adopt alternatives, with the last four uses ending on July 31, 2016. For tea, EPA proposed an immediate revocation, since there is little if any endosulfan used in tea production in the U.S. However, the Chamber of Commerce of the Zhejiang International Tea Industry filed a complaint indicating that it would need five years or less to find feasible alternatives to endosulfan. It also indicated that it was unable to provide comment on the tolerance revocation ruling as the EPA did not provide proper notice to the World Trade Organization. In acknowledging this oversight, EPA will allow endosulfan residues of 24 parts […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 6, 2013) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed to register a new insecticide, sulfoxaflor, which the agency has classified as “very highly toxic” to honey bees. Despite efforts underway in Europe to protect bee populations, and continued warnings from beekeepers, EPA is poised to allow another chemical toxic to bees into the environment without proper field studies evaluating long-term effects to bee colonies and with label statements that are impractical and unenforceable. With continuing reports of bee deaths, would sulfoxaflor be yet another bee disaster waiting to happen? Take action and tell EPA not to repeat past missteps and protect pollinators from sulfoxaflor by providing a public comment to EPA.   (see below for sample comments). Last month, EPA opened the comment period for the proposed conditional registration of sulfoxaflor, a new active ingredient, whose mode of action is similar to that of neonicotinoid pesticides -it acts on the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) in insects. Even though it has not been classified as a neonicotinoid, it elicits similar neurological responses in honey bees, with many believing that sulfoxaflor is the new generation of neonicotinoid.  EPA has noted that sulfoxaflor is highly toxic to bees, and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 4, 2013) U.S. Senators Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Mike Johanns (R-NE) re-introduced legislation that would reduce the review requirements for pesticides applied directly to water. Similar legislation was passed in the House of Representatives in March 2011. The previous Senate version of the bill, called the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, passed through the Senate Agriculture Committee but never reached the Senate floor because of a hold placed on the legislation by Senators Barbra Boxer (D-CA) and Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD). This re-introduced legislation would reduce pesticide testing by ensuring that Clean Water Act (CWA) permits are not required for the application of pesticides. In 2009, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the case of the National Cotton Council et al. v. EPA that pesticides discharged into water are pollutants and required to be permitted under the CWA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). This ruling overturned Bush administration policy that exempted pesticides from regulation under the CWA and applied the less protective standards of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). CWA uses a health-based standard known as maximum contamination levels (MCLs) to protect waterways and requires permits when chemicals are directly […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 1, 2013) The European Commission announced yesterday its position against the use of neonicotinoid insecticides, pushing nations within the European Union (EU) to impose a two year suspension on their use. The proposal, put forward at a meeting of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, would restrict the application of neonicotinoids as granules, seed-treatment or spray, on crops that are attractive to bees, particularly, sunflowers, rapeseed, corn, cotton, and cereal crops. Environmental groups say that this decision should signal the way forward for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to suspend neonicotinoids in the U.S. “It’s a great thing,” said New York beekeeper Jim Doan, “I’m hoping that the EPA follows in their footsteps. While I recognize our government works differently, it says something that the European government has recognized the overwhelming data on the impact of these pesticides.” The announcement comes on the heels of research conducted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) which indicated that three neonicotinoid insecticides””imidacloprid, clothianidin, and thiamethoxam, produced by Switzerland’s Syngenta and Germany’s Bayer, pose an unacceptable hazards to honey bees. In its report released January 16th, EFSA concludes that systemic contamination of neonicotinoid-treated crops, neonicotinoid […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 1, 2013) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its decision to go ahead with the cancellation of 12 rodenticide products which posed “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.” The decision came after manufacturer Reckitt Benckiser’s refusal to adopt EPA safety standards for its d-CON mouse and rat control products. The action follows EPA’s Notice of Intent to Cancel (NOIC), issued in 2011, to Reckitt Benckiser and two other companies, Liphatech and Spectrum Group Division of United Industries Corporation, which voluntarily removed eight of their products from the market and were therefore not listed for cancelation by EPA. EPA requires that rodenticide products sold to individual consumers are in tamper-resistant bait stations, rather than in pellet or powder form. Additionally, EPA recognizes the risks that rodenticide products containing brodifacoum, bromadiolone, difethialone, and difenacoum pose to wildlife and will no longer allow them to be sold or distributed in the consumer market. However, use by professional applicators and in agriculture will still be permitted as long as they are in bait stations. EPA says this will reduce the amount of product in the environment, providing additional protection for wildlife from poisonings by these more toxic and persistent products. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 30, 2013) A new report, “Late lessons from early warnings: science, precaution, innovation,” from the European Environment Agency (EEA) concludes that concerns raised by the scientific community on bee death, genetically engineered (GE) food, and nanotechnology support the need for a precautionary approach to public policy. Significantly, the report concludes that the “precautionary principle,” whereby industry and policy makers are advised to take seriously  early warnings about potential environmental impacts is “nearly always beneficial.” The report cites some industry efforts to undermine precautionary decision making. The report features case studies on environmental impacts, such as mercury poisoning, effects on fertility caused by pesticides, and the impact of pharmaceuticals on some ecosystems, and raises questions about the potential wider impacts of GE crops, nanotechnology, nuclear power, and the effect of pesticides on bee populations. The report lays the blame for numerous environmental crises squarely at the feet of corporations and policy makers who ignore early warnings about environmental impacts. “The historical case studies show that warnings were ignored or sidelined until damage to health and the environment was inevitable,” the EEA said. “In some instances, companies put short-term profits ahead of public safety, either hiding or ignoring the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 29, 2013) A new study has discovered the anti-bacterial chemical triclosan and several of its toxic derivatives in sediment samples taken from freshwater lakes. Research published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology reveals the chemical to be present in increasing concentrations since it was first invented in the 1960’s. The results of this study put increased pressure on lawmakers and cosmetic companies to remove this chemical from consumer products. Beyond Pesticides and other groups, which have petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to remove triclosan from a vast array of consumer products, continues to urge cosmetic companies to take action on the chemical in the face of inadequate regulation to protect human health and the environment. Scientists tested  eight sediment samples from freshwater lakes across Minnesota, including Lake Superior. Bill Arnold, Ph.D.,  co-author of the study and professor at University of Minnesota notes, “We found that in all the lakes there’s triclosan in the sediment, and in general, the concentration increased from when triclosan was invented in 1964 to present day. And we also found there are seven other compounds that are derivatives or degradation products of […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 23, 2013) A new federal report finds toxic contamination remains widespread in the Chesapeake Bay, with severe impacts in some places, which health and environmental advocates say lends support to their push in Maryland for legislative action on pesticides and other hazardous chemicals. In spite of some cleanup, the health of the Bay has not significantly improved. The report, “Technical Report on Toxic Contaminants in the Chesapeake Bay and its Watershed: Extent and Severity of Occurrence and Potential Biological Effects” is based on a review of integrated water-quality assessment reports from the jurisdictions in the Bay watershed (Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and Washington, D.C.), Federal and State reports, and articles in scientific journals. It notes that nearly three-fourths of the Bay’s tidal waters are “fully or partially impaired” by toxic chemicals, with people warned to limit fish consumption from certain areas. Contamination is severe in a handful of “hot spots” around the Bay, including Baltimore’s harbor, largely a legacy of past industrial and shipping activity. Previous reports have called on federal, state and local government to accelerate research into what threats chemical contamination may pose to the Bay, and to step up efforts […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 22, 2013) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently faced tough questioning from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit over its decision to conditionally approve a pesticide product containing nanosilver as the active ingredient. The antimicrobial pesticide product, HeiQ AGS-20, contains microscopic particles of silver and has been applied to textiles such as clothes, blankets, and pillowcases, in an attempt to suppress odor and bacterial growth. The main argument in the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA lawsuit is that EPA was wrong  to assume that 3-year-olds would be the most vulnerable consumers. Instead, NRDC attorney Catherine Rahm of Washington argued that, “Infants are more likely than any other subgroup to chew on fabrics that could contain this pesticide.” In arguments over whether EPA lawfully granted conditional registration to HeiQ AGS-20, NRDC challenged EPA’s risk assessment for infants and children claiming the agency erred by assuming in its risk assessment that 3-year-olds would be the most vulnerable consumers. Up for debate is oral exposure to the product and whether 3-year-olds chew more aggressively than infants and produce more saliva, an important factor for extracting nanoparticles from products and becoming exposed. NRDC contends EPA’s […]