{"id":34702,"date":"2024-03-05T00:01:24","date_gmt":"2024-03-05T05:01:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/?p=34702"},"modified":"2024-03-05T11:54:22","modified_gmt":"2024-03-05T16:54:22","slug":"epa-and-court-allow-violations-and-hazards-of-weed-killer-dicamba-under-existing-stocks-order","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2024\/03\/epa-and-court-allow-violations-and-hazards-of-weed-killer-dicamba-under-existing-stocks-order\/","title":{"rendered":"EPA and Court Allow Violations and Hazards of Weed Killer Dicamba Under Existing Stock Order"},"content":{"rendered":"

(Beyond Pesticides<\/em>, March 5, 2024) Buried in a court decision in February that determined that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) violated the law in allowing harm associated with the herbicide dicamba\u2019s registration is language that permits the damages to continue through this year\u2019s growing season. The judge\u2019s ruling, deferring to EPA\u2019s interpretation of the existing stock provision in the federal pesticide law, continues a pattern of \u201cexisting stock\u201d allowances that permit hazards to continue well after a finding of harm or noncompliance. This process contrasts with the issuance of a product recall, which is typically done when pharmaceuticals are found to violate safety standards.<\/p>\n

Despite the finding of dicamba\u2019s harm and EPA\u2019s failure to comply with standards, the continued use of the weed killer through the 2024 growing season is effectively authorized in a decision of the U.S. District Court of Arizona<\/a>, which vacates the EPA\u2019s 2021 authorization of the use of three over-the-top (OTT) uses of dicamba-based herbicide products. In response, EPA issued an existing stocks order<\/a>.<\/p>\n

EPA\u2019s pattern of allowing the use of existing stocks has long been a concern for public health and environmental advocates, who have called for the discontinuance of use upon findings of elevated risk factors or illegal uses that do not comply with statutory standards. After EPA determined in 1999 that the toxic insecticide, chlorpyrifos, is highly neurotoxic to children, EPA announced in June 2000 an agreement it had reached with Dow AgroSciences that phased out most home uses, but permitted sales to continue through 2001 so that all existing stocks could be sold off. During the existing stock sell-off of chlorpyrifos labeled for home use, no warning was provided to the public and retailers offered discounts to help clear their shelves. Beyond Pesticides in the late 1980s (then the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides\/NCAMP) sued EPA (see The Washington Post<\/a><\/em> and The New York Times<\/a><\/em>) when the agency negotiated an agreement with Velsicol to phase out the use of the insecticide chlordane and allow all existing stocks to be used up. Then the issue was cancer, and the judge in the case found that the additional cancers that would be caused by leaving the chemical in commerce for the phaseout period, including the cost to cancer victims, were unacceptable. On a regulatory level, the judge also found that EPA\u2019s failure to evaluate the harm caused during the phase-out period was a violation of the agency\u2019s responsibility under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act<\/em> (FIFRA). The District Court\u2019s finding was reversed on appeal, but by then, EPA had negotiated a shortened phaseout period and established a recall\/buyback program, something the agency rarely does. For a history lesson on the failure of FIFRA, see National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides, et al., Appellees, v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al., Appellants<\/em>, 867 F.2d 636 (D.C. Cir. 1989)<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The current situation with the continued use of dicamba under the existing stock allowance is described by EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention: \u201cThis Existing Stocks Order is limited in time and scope, allowing for certain sale, distribution, and use of existing stocks of these formerly-registered dicamba products for the 2024 growing season… EPA has received ample evidence that millions of gallons of OTT dicamba had already entered the channels of trade prior to February 6, 2024. Additionally, most growers have already placed orders for dicamba-tolerant seed for the 2024 growing season and, given the timing of these registrations being vacated, are not able to pivot to another herbicide-tolerant seed and herbicide system.\u201d<\/p>\n

A report by AgWeek<\/em><\/a> outlines how the existing stocks order will impact farmers differently depending on the state. \u201cThe products can be sold and used by different dates depending on the state, as follows:<\/p>\n