(Beyond Pesticides, June 4, 2010) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed new permit requirements for the discharge of pesticides into US waterways. EPA announced the public availability of a draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for certain pesticide use patterns, also known as the Pesticides General Permit (PGP). The agency is accepting public comments until July 19, 2010. This action stems from a 2009 court decision in the case of the National Cotton Council et al. v. EPA, in which the 6th circuit court of appeals ruled that pesticide discharges into water are pollutants and require permitting under the Clean Water Act (CWA). This ruling overturned the Bush administration policy that exempted pesticides from regulation under the CWA, and instead applied the less stringent standards of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). CWA uses a kind of health-based standard known as maximum contamination levels to protect waterways and requires permits when chemicals are directly deposited into rivers, lakes and streams, while FIFRA uses a highly subjective risk assessment that does not consider safer alternatives. EPA will issue permits in territories, Indian Country Lands, 6 states and the District of Columbia where the Agency is […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 3, 2010) City lawmakers in Albany, New York want to strengthen an 11-year-old ban on the use of some pesticides on city land after the revelation last week that one such banned chemical was sprayed near a local playground earlier this month. Albany’s Parks and Recreation Commissioner John D’Antonio said last Friday he was unaware of the ban, passed by the council in 1998, until he began researching a recent citizen complaint. The city is now rethinking its use of pesticides and exploring why the ban on city use of pesticides dubbed most toxic by the federal government was not more widely known. The law also required departments using less toxic pesticides to annually report plans to phase them out to the Common Council. TruGreen, a city contractor, used Trupower 3 Selective Herbicide, which is a mixture of 2,4-D, mecoprop-p and dicamba, and is listed in Toxicity Category 1 (most toxic) by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) — causing potentially irreversible eye damage, but is also toxic if ingested and can be irritating to the skin. The herbicide has been banned from city land, except in rare circumstances, since 1999. Under the same ordinance, all city agencies […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 4, 2010) On April 30, 2010, despite significant cancer and reproductive health risk, especially to farmworkers and people living near agricultural fields, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) proposed the use of a new and highly toxic pesticide, methyl iodide, for widespread agricultural use in California. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registered methyl iodide in 2007 as a replacement for the ozone-depleting pesticide, methyl bromide. Environmental and public health advocates believe that blocking methyl iodide registration in California will prevent its use elsewhere, since the state will account for the vast majority usage and profitability nationwide. Public comments may be sent to [email protected]. If registered, methyl iodide will be used primarily to fumigate and sterilize the California’s strawberry fields, although the pesticide will also be used in nurseries and nut tree production. DPR’s proposal does not require neighbor notification before use of this extremely toxic chemical. As evidenced by California’s thriving organic industry, alternatives to fumigants exist and are in use in California. In a hearing on February 8, 2010, before the California Senate Committee on Food and Agriculture, two panels of California growers and researchers discussed a number of safe and effective alternatives to […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 27, 2010) On April 22, 2010, Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) introduced H.R.5124, legislation to prohibit the use, production, sale, importation, or exportation of any pesticide containing atrazine. The bill’s introduction coincides with an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) meeting this week to reevaluate the human health effects of the popular endocrine disrupting herbicide. Environmentalists point to the 2003-2006 reregistration of atrazine as a prime example of the broken system of pesticide regulation in the U.S. and call on EPA to reassess atrazine fairly and for consumers to support an end to all unnecessary pesticide use by supporting organic whenever possible. “On this 40th Anniversary of Earth Day, I can think of no better tribute to our planet and our people than protecting it from known harmful chemicals,” Rep. Ellison said. “No one should ever have to worry if the water they drink is making them sick or preventing fertility.” Rep. Ellison’s bill cites widespread environmental contamination, health and environmental effects, as well as bans in other countries, as justification for the ban. The current SAP meeting follows EPA’s October 2009 announcement that it would begin a new evaluation of atrazine to determine its effects […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 9, 2010) U.S. Representative Edward J. Markey (D-Mass), Chairman of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, yesterday called for a ban on many applications of the antimicrobial chemical triclosan ””which is found in many consumer soaps and countless other products ranging from toys to lipstick. Rep. Markey called for the ban in conjunction with the release of correspondence from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that raise serious concerns regarding the use of the chemical triclosan. In response to the FDA and EPA letters, Chairman Markey also announced plans to introduce legislation that will accelerate the evaluation and regulation of substances such as triclosan that may harm the human endocrine system. “Despite the fact that this chemical is found in everything from soaps to socks, there are many troubling questions about triclosan’s effectiveness and potentially harmful effects, especially for children,” said Chairman Markey. In January 2010, Chairman Markey sent letters of concern regarding triclosan to FDA and to EPA. In FDA’s response letter to Chairman Markey, the FDA stated that, “existing data raise valid concerns about the [health] effects of repetitive daily human exposure to these […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 8, 2010) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is requiring new restrictions on aluminum and magnesium phosphide products in an attempt to better protect people, especially children, from dangerous exposures. The new restrictions prohibit all uses of the products around residential areas and increase buffer zones for treatment around non-residential buildings that could be occupied by people or animals from 15 feet to 100 feet. Human exposure to these toxic chemicals, though slightly minimized, would nevertheless continue because of their continued availability for use on athletic fields and playgrounds, around non-residential buildings, and in agricultural production. Phosphide fumigants are known to be highly acutely toxic when ingested or inhaled. Symptoms of mild to moderate acute exposure include nausea, abdominal pain, tightness in chest, excitement, restlessness, agitation and chills. Symptoms of more severe exposure include diarrhea, cyanosis, difficulty breathing, pulmonary edema, respiratory failure, tachycardia (rapid pulse) and hypotension (low blood pressure), dizziness and/or death. Aluminum and magnesium phosphide fumigants are used primarily to control insects in stored grain and other agricultural commodities. They also are used to control burrowing rodents in outdoor agricultural and other non-domestic areas. The fumigants are restricted to use by specially trained pesticide applicators. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 31, 2010) Last week the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it was taking action aimed at improving residential safety and reducing risks associated with bug bombs, or total release foggers (TRFs). The agency is calling for significant changes to product labeling to address the most common causes of exposure incidents associated with TRFs. However, product labels do not adequately protect the public from toxic pesticide ingredients and calls to ban foggers and promote safer alternatives, action that has been urged for years both within and outside the agency, continue to go unheeded. Prompted by concerns raised by a 2009 petition from the New York City Department of Health to reclassify TRFs as restricted use pesticides, EPA sent a letter of notification to manufacturers on March 23, 2010 stating that the agency is now requiring a number of labeling changes by September 30, 2011. In spite of New York’s recommendation, the agency concluded that reclassification is inappropriate and would unnecessarily remove these inexpensive pest control tools from the residential market. Since, according to the agency’s analysis, the largest proportion of incidents is attributable to failure to follow label instructions, the changes are targeted at minimizing those […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 24, 2010) On February 22, 2010 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a federal notice requesting data and information regarding the potential environmental impact of triclosan’s use in acne and antiplaque/antigingivitis products. The agency, in order to comply with the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), must complete environmental assessments (EA) for active ingredients before they are included in the agency’s over-the-counter (OTC) drug regulation system. Triclosan, a controversial antibacterial agent found in hundreds of consumer products, from hand sanitizers to toys, is one of 13 chemicals being assessed by FDA for environmental impacts according to their proposed uses. According to FDA regulations, the agency must conduct EAs before chemicals are approved for use in OTC drug products. In this case, triclosan is being considered for use in acne and antiplaque/antigingivitis products. Even though this action is being taken, FDA has never been able to finalize and approve the use of triclosan in any OTC products, despite the proliferation of these products in the consumer marketplace. It appears that EAs for the vast majority of triclosan uses have been completed. Other FDA regulations on triclosan have not been updated since 1994 and much of the data […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 19, 2010) To protect humans and the environment from the drift of pesticide spray and dust the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed new labeling guidelines last November and is seeking public comments. The Draft Guidance for Pesticide Registrants on Pesticide Drift Labeling is intended to provide clearer, more consistent and enforceable directions. EPA’s current pesticide label requirement, which instructs the user to avoid drift, is widely considered unenforceable and inadequate. Pesticides drift is a major threat to those living near agricultural areas, as wind and rain can carry these chemicals miles from the application site. A National Cancer Institute study shows that pregnant women living within 9 miles of farms where pesticides are used have an increased risk of losing an unborn baby to birth defects. Another study finds that children living near agricultural areas have twice the risk of developing acute lymphoblastic leukemia. When pest management strategies rely on spray and dust pesticide application, drift is inevitable. Aerial pesticide application is of greatest concern, where an estimated 40% of pesticides used are lost to drift. Despite this inefficiency the aerial application of pesticides. especially fungicides, is actually increasing. EPA’s labeling guidelines were introduced a month […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 2, 2010) We’re not Cockroaches, EPA. Tell Us What’s in that Toxic Spray! EPA is taking public comments on this important public health and environmental issue and your views are critical to the process. The agency has published a notice proposing the option of full disclosure of all ingredients in pesticide products, including those ithat have been claimed to be trade secrets and withheld from the public. Take a close look at the fine print on a can of Raid, a bottle of Cutters, a jug of RoundUp, or virtually any pesticide on the market today, and you’ll see these words: “Inert ingredients.” Inert ingredients are the pesticide industry’s best-kept secret. The Bad News There are thousands of chemicals used as inerts in pesticides, and over the years we’ve discovered what some of them are. The truth is that many inert ingredients are neither chemically nor toxicologically inert. Some cause cancer, some cause genetic damage, some cause reproductive harm, and others cause a wide variety of other health problems. For decades, EPA has routinely accepted the pesticide industry’s line that these ingredients are “confidential business information.” That’s a red herring. Pesticide companies can easily test their competitors’ […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 1, 2010) Public health, environmental and organic agriculture advocates are urging the public to submit comments to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on its draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa by the February 16, 2010 deadline, demanding that USDA protect organic food from GE contamination and not approve Monsanto’s GE alfalfa. USDA claims in the EIS that there is no evidence that consumers care about GE contamination of organic alfalfa. But, it is not just alfalfa that is at risk. Since alfalfa is fed to dairy cows and other livestock, organic dairy and meat products could also be affected. Last week, Beyond Pesticides reported that in the ongoing battle to stop the use of GE alfalfa seeds, Monsanto v. Geerston Seed Farms will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. The seed is modified to be resistant to the herbicide glyphosate, sold by Monsanto under the brand name Roundup. In 2006 the Center for Food Safety (CFS) and several other farming and environmental groups, including Beyond Pesticides, filed suit on behalf of Geerston Seed Farms. The suit led to a U.S. District Court ruling that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) violated […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 15, 2010) Yesterday, environmental and health groups petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban the use of the widely used antimicrobial pesticide triclosan, which is linked to endocrine disruption, cancer and antibiotic resistance and found in 75% of people tested in government biomonitoring studies. Over 75 groups, lead by Beyond Pesticides and Food and Water Watch, say EPA must act to stop the use of a chemical now commonly found in soaps, toothpaste, deordorants, cosmetics, clothing, and plastic, with a nearly $1 billion market and growing. In their petition, the groups cite numerous statutes under which they believe the government must act to stop non-medical uses of triclosan, including laws regulating pesticide registration, use and residues, clean and safe drinking water, and endangered species. “Given its widespread environmental contamination and public health risk, EPA has a responsibility to ban household triclosan use in a marketplace where safer alternatives are available to manage bacteria,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. “Scientific studies indicate that widespread use of triclosan causes a number of serious health and environmental problems,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. “EPA needs to ban its use in non-medical […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 7, 2010) Family farm groups across the Midwest are calling on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to prioritize independent science as the agency begins reviewing the health and environmental threats posed by the herbicide atrazine. In a letter sent to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson on January 5, 2010, over a dozen groups maintain that only a completely transparent process that rejects biased research produced by the pesticide’s primary manufacturer, Syngenta, will result in a review that serves the interests of farmers, the general public and the environment. “As farmers on the front line of chemical exposure, we need EPA to make science-based decisions in the interest of our health, our family’s health and the health of our community,” said Paul Sobocinski, a southwest Minnesota crop and livestock farmer and Land Stewardship Project member. “Unfortunately, EPA has a track record of allowing agrichemical companies like Syngenta to hijack the process with bad science.” The letter to Ms. Jackson was accompanied by a new report, The Syngenta Corporation & Atrazine: The Cost to the Land, People & Democracy, jointly produced by the Minnesota-based Land Stewardship Project (LSP) and Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA). The report provides farmers […]

(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 17, 2009) Earlier this week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced the availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that preliminarily concludes that there is no significant impact on the human environment due to granting nonregulated status to Roundup Ready (RR) alfalfa. Much to the dismay of environmentalists, the draft EIS outlines plans to allow unlimited commercial planting of genetically-engineered (GE) alfalfa that is resistant to the herbicide glyphosate, despite increasing evidence that GE alfalfa will threaten the rights of farmers and consumers, as well as damage the environment and the integrity of organic food. The agency prepared this draft EIS to comply with a February 2007 judgment and order by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in which Judge Charles R. Breyer found that USDA violated federal environmental law by failing to conduct an EIS on GE alfalfa seeds before deregulating them in 2005. The lawsuit, originally brought on by The Center for Food Safety (CFS) and several other environmental and farming groups, including Beyond Pesticides and Sierra Club, led to a 2007 court order that the deregulation may have significant environmental impacts […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 10, 2009) Following news that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is considering a higher uncertainty factor in all pesticide risk determinations, the agency is making available for comment a policy paper entitled “Revised Risk Assessment Methods for Workers, Children of Workers in Agricultural Fields, and Pesticides with No Food Uses.” The paper describes how EPA will assess pesticide risks not governed by Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) amendments to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). EPA describes its proposal as incluing a more thorough assessment of risks to workers, including farmworkers and farm children, as well as risks posed by pesticides that are not used on food. The agency is asking the public to comment on the new approach and how best to implement the improvements. “Better information and applying these tools will strengthen EPA’s protections for farm workers exposed to these chemicals, and children living in and around the areas of highest possible exposure,” says EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “It’s essential we have the tools to keep everyone, especially vulnerable populations like children, safe from the serious health consequences of pesticide exposure.” EPA licenses or registers pesticides for sale and distribution under the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 7, 2009) In an investigation and legal case that dragged on for almost four years, one of the largest organic cattle producers in the United States, Promiseland Livestock, LLC, is suspended from organic commerce, along with its owner and key employees, for four years. The penalty is part of an order issued by administrative law judge Peter Davenport in Washington, DC on November 25, 2009, a multimillion dollar operation with facilities in Missouri and Nebraska, including over 13,000 acres of crop land, and managing 22,000 head of beef and dairy cattle, had been accused of multiple improprieties in formal legal complaints, including not feeding organic grain to cattle, selling fraudulent organic feed and “laundering” conventional cattle as organic. “We are pleased that justice has been served in the Promiseland matter,” said Mark A. Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst for the Wisconsin-based Cornucopia Institute. Scrutiny from Cornucopia, one of the industry’s most aggressive independent watchdogs, was part of the genesis for the comprehensive USDA investigation and subsequent legal proceedings. Promiseland became the focus of Cornucopia’s investigation into giant factory farms, milking thousands of cows that were allegedly operating illegally. Promiseland sold thousands of dairy cows to giant factory […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 24, 2009) The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is considering expanding to all pesticides the use of what is typically referred to as the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) safety factor (the allowable margin of error or the uncertainty factor in risk determinations), which is currently only applied to the agency’s pesticide evaluations for infants and children. Under the plan the increased uncertainty factor will be applied to other sensitive populations, including farmworkers. Beyond Pesticides learned of the plan through communications with the agency over the past several months. EPA officials told Beyond Pesticides that, under the Obama Administration leadership, the agency would like to apply an equal standard to all people living in the U.S. Beyond Pesticides called on the Obama Administration to protect farmworkers and their children in the Transforming Pesticide Policy document sent after the 2008 election to President Obama’s transition team and top agency officials. Applying an additional uncertainty factor in risk assessments affecting infants and children and a reassessment of all existing pesticide tolerances were touted as the centerpieces of FQPA, which passed and amended the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the federal pesticide law, in 1996. The legislation gained momentum […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 20, 2009) Three companies in Washington, Oregon and Idaho are the target of enforcement actions for their failure to follow federal pesticide laws, according to orders issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The fines range from $1,280 to $28,080, and are characterized by safety advocates as a mere slap on the wrist for violations that the EPA says pose public safety hazards. J.R. Simplot Company of Boise, Idaho; Agricare of Amity, Ore.; and Northwest Agricultural Products of Pasco, Wash. violated the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) at their respective facilities, according to the EPA. Numerous other violations of FIFRA this past year have led to EPA fines or lawsuits, including several in the state of Washington last spring. In October, EPA fined Samsung for violating the federal pesticide law when it publicized that its keyboards, produced with nanosilver, were antimicrobial and inhibited germs and bacteria without registering its products. EPA also filed suit against VF Corporation for the sale and distribution of unregistered pesticides through its retail company, The North Face. “Companies that produce pesticides but fail to register their facilities or submit required reports are not only operating illegally, but also pose a […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 13, 2009) The Ohio Department of Agriculture is asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allow an unregistered use of the neurotoxic and cancer causing insecticide propoxur in homes to fight bedbugs in what state officials are describing as an ”˜emergency’ situation. The chemical, o-isopropoxyphenyl methylcarbamate, is in the carbamate family and classified as a probable human carcinogen (Group B2) by EPA, and listed as a known human carcinogen by the state of California. Though EPA allows emergency exemptions for unregistered pesticide uses in agriculture and for public health reasons under a controversial waiver program (Section 18, Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, 40 CFR Part 166), it rarely issues such an exemption for an indoor pesticide use. Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincinnati are all experiencing a surge of bed bug infestations. According to Richard Pollack, a Harvard University public health entomologist, this is probably due to the fact that bedbugs are becoming resistant to many pesticide products that are used today. The use of broad spectrum insecticides, which kill common household insects such as cockroaches, ants and other insects including bed bugs, has resulted in insect resistance to these chemicals. Many of the chemicals used against […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 5, 2009) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has rolled out proposed guidance for new pesticide labeling in an effort to reduce off-target spray and dust drift. According to EPA, the actions detailed in the draft Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice on Pesticide Drift Labeling, when implemented, are projected to help improve the clarity and consistency of pesticide labels and help prevent harm from spray drift. The agency is also requesting comment on a petition to evaluate children’s exposure to pesticide drift. Last month, a petition filed by Earthjustice and Farmworker Justice asked EPA to set safety standards protecting children who grow up near farms from the harmful effects of pesticide drift. The groups also asked the agency to adopt an immediate no-spray buffer zone around homes, schools, parks and daycare centers for the most dangerous and drift-prone pesticides. According to the agency, the new instructions are said to prohibit drift that could cause “adverse health or environmental effects,” by evaluating scientific information on risk and exposure based on individual product use patterns on a pesticide-by-pesticide basis. These assessments will help the agency determine whether no-spray buffer zones or other measures, such as restrictions on droplet or particle […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 4, 2009) Environmental and farm groups are asking the Senate to reject the Obama Administration pick for chief agriculture trade representative because of positions that he has taken in support of genetically modified organisms as a spokesman for the agrichemical industry, his attack of the European Union (EU) moratorium on genetically engineered crops as lacking “sound science,” and his organization’s outright opposition to organic agriculture and First Lady Michelle Obama’s efforts to advance organic gardening. Groups are calling for the rejection of the nomination of Islam Siddiqui, PhD, vice president for science and regulatory affairs at CropLife America, to be the chief agricultural negotiator in the Office of the United States Trade Representative. Dr. Siddiqui’s confirmation is scheduled for today in the Senate Finance Committee. The National Organic Coalition (NOC) sent a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance intending “to bring to the committee’s attention serious concerns and questions” surrounding the nomination of Dr. Siddiqui, including positions that promoted hazardous and unnecessary chemical dependency, as well as his advocacy of genetically modified organisms. NOC states in its letter that, “We have no reason to believe that, at this time, [Dr. Siddiqui’s] history of positions makes […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 21, 2009) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is making available the battery of scientific assays and test guidelines for conducting the assays for each of 67 chemicals included for Tier 1 testing for endocrine disrupting effects during the next three months. This comes after the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) instructed EPA to use existing toxicity data rather than require companies to conduct new tests to determine whether chemicals can damage the human endocrine system. With the availability of the assays and test guidelines, EPA will move forward with issuing test orders to manufacturers to compel the generation of the needed data. However, acquisition of new, relevant data may be limited. This is because after EPA submitted the request for additional information for OMB approval, the Office issued a directive that approved EPA’s request to collect additional data for the 67 chemicals but warned the agency that it should “to the greatest extent possible” accept existing data to satisfy test requirements. The OMB directive, which observers say contains unusually strong language, is being hailed by industry groups that had been concerned about the prospects for expensive testing mandates. But many environmental groups and scientists say […]