OCR error (C:\Conversion\JobRoot\000007PD\tiff\2000SURC.tif): Unspecified error
-------
CONTENTS
Introduction 1
Overview of EPA's Role 1
Facts and Figures 2
Pesticide Registration 3
How EPA Regulates New Pesticides 3
v, Reregistration of Existing Pesticides 4
S Evaluating Scientific Studies 6
" < Special Review, Cancellations, and Suspensions 6
C-
(\ Food Safety 7
Setting Pesticide Tolerances 7
Monitoring Residues 8
c
Other Pesticide Programs 10
Farmworker Safety 10
Home, Lawn, and Garden Pesticides 10
Pesticide Storage and Disposal 11
Certification and Training 12
State Enforcement 13
Pesticides in Ground Water 13
Endangered Species 15
Biological Pesticides 16
Inert Ingredients 17
Preventing Pollution 17
A Closing Word 19
Appendices: 20
Glossary 20
For Further Information 21
EPA Pesticide Contacts 22
State Agency Contacts 23
Photo on p. 11 courtesy of S.C. Delaney/EPA; p. 15: Fish and Wildlife Service;
p. 18: Gene Alexander, USDA/SCS.
U.S. ir.r.<./::o;-r.'>Tl^1 Prov?':t!on Agency
Region £, ;..;••:.—/ .f':.-':2j)
77 Weil JdCYio", Sodovar.d, 12th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
-------
Introduction
Few chemicals have had as much
impact or been the subject of as
much controversy in recent
decades as pesticides. Introduced
on a massive scale following the
Second World War, pesticides
have become an integral part of
American agricultural production,
making possible the most plentiful
and safest food supply in human
history. Over time, however,
public concerns have mounted
about the toxic effects of chemical
pesticides. Pesticide residues in
food, farmworker exposure to
pesticides, and pesticide
contamination of ground water
have all contributed to a growing
unease over the widespread use
of pesticides.
Some of these concerns have had
beneficial results. Consumers are
using more caution in handling
pesticides and in limiting their
exposures to pesticides in food.
In the agricultural community,
many growers are using fewer
chemical pesticides and adopting a
more integrated approach to
managing pests. And new
pesticides coming on the market
tend to be less toxic than the
chemicals they replace. While all
of these are encouraging signs,
pesticides nevertheless remain a
fact of our daily lives. Managing
pesticides to minimize their risks
and maximize their benefits is the
task we face.
The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has
been charged by Congress with
the job of regulating the use of
pesticides and balancing the risks
and benefits posed by pesticide
use.
To carry out this task, EPA has
developed a variety of regulatory
and educational programs to
protect human health and the
environment from the harmful
effects of pesticides. These
include registering pesticides for
specific uses, setting tolerances for
pesticide residues on food, setting
standards to protect workers who
are exposed to pesticides,
certifying and training pesticide
applicators, and educating
consumers about pesticide use and
exposure.
This booklet is intended to
introduce readers to EPA's
pesticide programs. Pesticide
registration and food safety are
discussed first, followed by
descriptions of other pesticide
programs. The appendices at the
back of the booklet contain a
glossary of technical terms, a list
of materials for further reading
and reference, and the addresses
and telephone numbers of
pesticide program contacts in
EPA headquarters and 10 regional
offices and in all 50 states.
Overview of EPA's Role
EPA regulates the use of
pesticides in the United States
under the authority of two laws
— the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) and the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act. No
pesticide may legally be sold or
used in the United States unless it
bears an EPA registration
number. It is a violation of the
law for any person to use a
pesticide in a manner inconsistent
with its label.
EPA's pesticide regulations cover:
• Some 30 major pesticide
producers plus another 100
smaller producers
• 3,300 formulators
• 29.000 distributors and other
establishments
« 40,000 commercial pest control
firms
• About 1 million farms
• Several million industry and
government users
• About 90 million households.
FIFRA gives EPA the authority
and responsibility for registering
pesticides for specified uses,
provided that such uses do not
pose an unreasonable risk to
human health or to the
environment. EPA also has the
authority to suspend or cancel the
registration of a pesticide if
subsequent information indicates
that use of the pesticide would
pose unreasonable risks.
-------
Facts and Figures
Broadly defined, a pesticide is any agent used to kill
or control undesired insects, weeds, rodents, fungi,
bacteria, or other organisms. Thus, the term
"pesticides" includes insecticides, herbicides,
rodenticides, fungicides, nematicides, and acaracides, as
well as disinfectants, fumigants, and plant growth
regulators.
At present, approximately 25,000 formulated pesticide
products are registered for marketing and use in the
United States. EPA regulates these products primarily
on the basis of their pesticidal active ingredients, the
component of a pesticide product that acts on the
pest. There are fewer than 750 active ingredients
currently in production, with 200 leading active
ingredients.
Total U.S. annual pesticide consumption is estimated
at 2.7 billion pounds of active ingredients. Of this
amount, 1.6 billion pounds represents wood
preservatives, disinfectants, and sulfur (a fungicide).
The remaining 1.1 billion pounds of "conventional
pesticides" (herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides)
were sold to users at a cost of $7.4 billion in 1988.
In the conventional pesticide market (see Figure 1),
agriculture accounts for over two-thirds of pesticide
user expenditures and about three-quarters of the
volume used annually; the remainder of the market
comprises industry, government, and home and garden
-i millions Ibs a i
660
Herbicides
Insecticides
D Fungicides
Agriculture Ind/Com/Govl Home & Garden Total
Fig 1-VolumeotConventionalPestiadeActivelngretiientsUsedinUS., 1988
uses. Herbicides are the leading type of conventional
pesticide, with over 50 percent of both domestic sales
and volume used. EPA estimates that total U.S. farm
expenditures on pesticides, $5.1 billion in 1988,
represents less than 4 percent of total farm production
expenditures ($132 billion in 1989).
Alachlor
Atrazine
Tniluralin
Cyanazine
Carbaryl
Malathion
Metribuzin
Fig. 2 - Annual Usage of the Largest Agricultural Pesticides in the U S.
The 10 largest-use agricultural pesticides are shown in
Figure 2, along with estimates of their annual usage
for all agricultural and non-agricultural uses. Alachlor
and atrazine are the two most widely used pesticides
by volume. Eight of the 10 pesticides shown are
herbicides (carbaryl and malathion are insecticides.)
1200-
1000-
800-
600-
400
200
million Ibs. a.i.
Total
Agricultural
64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88
Fig. 3 - trends in US Pesticide Usage, 1964-1986
After increasing steadily throughout the 1960's and
1970's, pesticide usage reached its all-time high in the
early 1980's; since then, it appears to be holding
steady at just slightly lower levels (see Figure 3) and
may decline in coming years. More efficient use of
pesticides, the availability of even more effective
pesticides, and an increased interest in sustainable
agriculture contribute to this trend.
-------
Pesticide Registration
How EPA Regulates New
Pesticides
Basic Data Requirements for a New Food-Use Pesticide
At the present time, data from the following tests must be submitted
to EPA by a manufacturer prior to registration:
EPA is responsible under FIFRA
for registering new pesticides to
ensure that, when used according
to label directions, they will not
pose unreasonable risks to human
health or the environment.
FIFRA requires EPA to balance
the risks of pesticide exposure to
human health and the environ-
ment against the benefits of
pesticide use to society and the
economy.
Pesticide registration decisions are
based primarily on EPA's
evaluation of the test data
provided by applicants.
Depending on the type of
pesticide, EPA can require up to
70 different kinds of specific tests
(see box). For a major food-use
pesticide, testing can cost the
manufacturer up to $10 million.
Testing is needed to determine
whether a pesticide has the
potential to cause adverse effects
on humans, wildlife, fish, and
plants, including endangered
species. Potential human risks,
which are identified by using the
results of laboratory tests, include
acute toxic reactions, such as
poisoning and skin and eye
irritation, as well as possible long-
term effects like cancer, birth
defects, and reproductive system
disorders. Data on "environ-
mental fate" (how a pesticide
Chemistry:
Environmental Fate:
Toxicology:
Ecological Effects:
list of ingredients
description of manufacturing process
discussion of formation of impurities
physico-chemical properties
residue studies
metabolic studies
analytical methods
results of analytical procedures
hydrolysis
leaching
terrestrial dissipation
photodegradation
soil metabolism
rotational crop study
acute oral
acute dermal
acute respiratory
eye irritation
chronic toxicity
subchronic oral toxicity
reproduction and fertility
metabolism
mutagenicity
birth defects
carcinogenicity
aquatic, acute toxicity
avian, dietary & acute oral
-------
behaves in the environment) also
are required so that EPA can
determine, among other things,
whether a pesticide poses a threat
to ground or surface water. The
list of tests required is currently
undergoing review; revisions are
expected to be proposed in 1991.
Certain additions to the list, such
as neurotoxicity, applicator
exposure, ground and surface
water contamination, and
residential exposure tests, will
strengthen the data requirements.
EPA may classify a product for
restricted use if it warrants special
handling due to its toxicity.
Restricted use pesticides may be
used only by or under the
supervision of certified applicators
trained to handle toxic chemicals
and this classification must be
shown on product labels. During
registration review, the Agency
may also require changes in
proposed labeling, use locations,
and application methods. If the
pesticide is being considered for
use on a food or feed crop, the
applicant must petition EPA for
establishment of a tolerance (see
the section on Food Safety
below).
A brand-new active ingredient
may need six to nine years to
move from development in the
laboratory, through full
completion of EPA registration
requirements, to retail shelves.
This time-frame includes at least
two or three years to obtain
registration from EPA A
diagram of the process is shown
in Figure 4 on the next page.
Since 1978, when EPA began
requiring more extensive data on
pesticides than in the past, over
130 brand-new chemical active
ingredients have been registered;
between 10 and 15 new pesticide
active ingredients are registered
each year.
Reregistration of Existing
Pesticides
EPA is required by law to
reregister existing pesticides that
were originally registered before
current scientific and regulatory
standards were formally
established. The reregistration
process ensures that:
(1) Up-to-date data bases are
developed for each of these
chemicals (or their registrations
will be suspended or cancelled)
(2) Modifications are made to
registrations, labels, and tolerances
as necessary to protect human
health and the environment
(3) Special review or other
regulatory actions are initiated to
deal with any unreasonable risks.
Reregistration has proved to be a
massive undertaking and has
proceeded slowly. To date, EPA
has issued 194 "registration
standards." A registration
standard includes a comprehensive
review of all the available data on
an existing chemical, a list of
additional data needed for full
reregistration, and the Agency's
current regulatory position on the
pesticide. The 194 registration
standards already issued represent
about 350 individual active
ingredients that account for 85 to
90 percent of the total volume of
pesticides used in the United
States.
Under the 1988 FIFRA
amendments, EPA has been
directed to accelerate the progress
of reregistration so that the entire
process is completed by 1997.
FIFRA '88 sets out a five-phase
schedule to accomplish this task
with deadlines applying to both
pesticide registrants and EPA. It
was originally estimated that
EPA's reregistration activities
would cost in excess of $250
million over a nine year period,
with almost half the amount
coming from EPA's current
budget for reregistration and the
remainder coming from
reregistration fees assessed on the
pesticide industry. These cost
estimates are being revised
upwards to reflect actual costs
incurred in the accelerated
program.
-------
Product Development:
Product discovery
Laboratory & greenhouse testing
Experimental use permit obtained from EPA
Large-scale field testing
Application:
Registrant submits test data, application
to register product, draft labeling, & tolerance
petition (for food-use pesticide)
Registration Review:
Review of Data:
- toxicology - ecological effects
- residue analysis - exposure assessment
Are data valid?
When used according to label directions, does the pesticide
pose unreasonable risks of adverse effects to human health
and the environment?
Approval:
EPA establishes tolerance
for food use pesticide,
approves registration, publishes
notice in Federal Register
Returned:
EPA returns application, noting:
• need for more or better data
• need for labeling modifications
• need for use restrictions
Producer markets product for
use according to label
1
Figure 4 - Pesticide Registration Process for New Chemical
-------
Evaluating Scientific
Studies
Because virtually all of EPA's
decisions relating to the
registration of pesticides depend
on the Agency's evaluation of
scientific studies, EPA has
developed a standardized review
process and established
procedures and testing guidelines
to ensure the quality and
consistency of toxicity studies.
How much data to require in the
first place and how much should
be generated again in the
reregistration process are
important issues. For example,
long-term animal studies usually
require two or more years to
complete, at a significant cost to
the registrant, and using
significant numbers of animals.
Thus, it is not a trivial matter to
require additional studies to be
performed. At the same time, it
is crucial that registration
decisions be based on conclusive
scientific information and that all
products be evaluated consistently.
In light of these considerations,
EPA has set forth four types of
documents governing the
generation and review of data.
These are:
(1) Data requirements — what
data must be generated to support
registration and reregistration;
(3) Standard evaluation
procedures — guidelines for
Agency reviewers on what to look
for in the data and how to reach
consistent conclusions; and
(4) Good Laboratory Practices —-
regulations that specify how
studies must be conducted to
assure the quality and integrity of
data submitted to support
pesticide registration and
reregistration. EPA's laboratory
audit program also serves as a
further check on the quality of
pesticide safety data.
Nevertheless, there still may arise
differences in professional
judgment about whether a
particular study satisfies a data
requirement or whether data can
be used from multiple studies to
fill data requirements. Therefore,
major evaluations made by EPA's
staff may be submitted for review
to an independent panel of
experts, known as the Scientific
Advisory Panel. In addition, the
bases for EPA's regulatory
decisions are subject to public
review so that everyone has an
opportunity to look at the science
supporting the Agency's decisions.
Special Review,
Cancellations, and
Suspensions
New data on registered products
sometimes reveal the existence of
a problem or a potential for
hazard that was not known at the
time of registration. Congress
and EPA have developed various
mechanisms to reach sound
scientific decisions in these
situations.
Special Review: Under the law, if
EPA seeks to revoke the
registration of a pesticide, the
Agency must first announce its
reasons and offer the registrant a
formal hearing to present
opposing evidence. Because the
cancellation process can be very
time- and resource-consuming,
EPA often will employ a more
informal and often more
productive process known as
Special Review.
Special Review is an intensive and
systematic examination process
that offers opportunities for
interested parties on all sides to
comment and present evidence on
the risks and benefits of a
pesticide. In many cases, the
Special Review results in an
agreement to modify the
registration to sufficiently reduce
risk so that a formal hearing is no
longer necessary.
(2) Data guidelines — protocols
for how to conduct the studies;
-------
Cancellation: If the Special
Review process fails to resolve
the issues, however, or if EPA
decides that the problem is severe
enough to warrant cancellation,
EPA may issue a proposed notice
of intent to cancel without
holding a Special Review. The
Agency also is required by FIFRA
to send the proposed notice to
the Scientific Advisory Panel and
the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), and must
evaluate their comments before
proceeding with a final Notice of
Intent to Cancel Registration.
If no hearing is requested within
30 days of the notice, the
pesticide's registration is cancelled
immediately. If a hearing is
requested, it is conducted in a
trial-like administrative proceeding
before an EPA Administrative
Law Judge, who issues a
recommended decision to the
EPA Administrator. At the end
of the cancellation process, which
may take two years or more, the
decision may still be challenged in
a federal court of appeals. If
there is no appeal to a decision
to cancel, all pertinent
registrations of the pesticide are
automatically cancelled, and the
products may no longer be sold
or distributed in the United
States.
Suspension: During the entire
cancellation process, the pesticide
remains on the market and no
regulatory restrictions are imposed
on the pesticide or its use. In
some cases EPA may believe that
allowing the pesticide to stay on
the market — during a Special
Review and/or a cancellation
hearing — would pose an
unacceptably high risk. In such
cases, EPA may issue a
suspension order that bans sale or
use of the pesticide while the
ultimate decision on the
pesticide's status is under review.
In order to issue a suspension
order, EPA must find that use of
the pesticide poses an imminent
hazard. In most cases, EPA must
first offer the registrant an
expedited hearing on the
suspension issues. However, if
EPA finds that an emergency
exists (i.e., that even during the
time needed for a suspension
hearing, use of the pesticide
would pose unreasonable adverse
effects), the Agency can ban the
sale and use of a pesticide
effective immediately.
Under current law, even in an
emergency suspension, EPA must
assess the benefits of the pesticide
as well. This provision makes
emergency suspension difficult to
use, and EPA has been able to
make these findings only three
times for major pesticides —
ethylene dibromide (EDB);
2,4,5-T/Silvex; and dinoseb.
Proposals have been made that
would streamline the existing
cancellation process and make the
suspension process more flexible.
Food Safety
The food supply of the U.S. is
among the safest in the world.
Although many of the foods we
consume may contain low levels
of pesticide residues as a result of
the legal use of these products,
numerous safeguards are built into
EPA's pesticide regulatory process
to ensure that the public
(including infants and children)
are protected from unreasonable
risks posed by eating pesticide-
treated foods.
EPA regulates the safety of the
food supply by setting tolerance
levels, or maximum legal limits,
for pesticide residues on food
commodities and animal feed
available for sale in the United
States. The purpose of the
tolerance program is to ensure
that U.S. consumers are not
exposed to unsafe levels of
pesticide residues in food.
Pesticides can be registered under
FIFRA for use on a food or feed
crop only if a tolerance (or
exemption from tolerance) is first
granted, under authority of
sections 408 and/or 409 of the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic
Act. EPA has approved about
300 pesticides for food uses;
about 200 of them are in common
use in the U.S.
Setting Pesticide Tolerances
Pesticide tolerances are being
reassessed as part of EPA's
reregistration process. Since
-------
residue chemistry and toxicology
are far more advanced now than
when pesticides were first
registered in this country, EPA is
upgrading its traditional tolerance
system.
To evaluate the risks posed by
pesticides in the diet, EPA follows
Agency risk assessment guidelines.
For non-cancer effects, when
using the results of animal tests,
EPA determines the highest level
of exposure to a pesticide at
which there are no observed
adverse effects in animals. An
"uncertainty factor" is applied to
that level (most often, by dividing
by 100) in order to estimate a
level of daily exposure to the
pesticide acceptable for humans.
This level is called the Reference
Dose (once known as the
Acceptable Daily Intake).
EPA also estimates the levels of
people's exposure to pesticide
residues in food, based on
pesticide residue studies as well as
studies of how much food people
consume. Using data on both
toxicity and exposure, the Agency
sets tolerances at levels that will
not pose significant dietary risks
to the consumer. EPA usually
will deny a registration if the
anticipated exposure from a
proposed new food use of a
pesticide, when added to
estimated exposure from other
food uses of that pesticide,
significantly exceeds the pesticide's
Reference Dose.
In cases where a food-use
pesticide is a carcinogen (cancer-
causing agent), EPA uses a
second approach in addition to
that discussed above. EPA
assesses the cancer risk specifically
associated with exposure to the
pesticide in food over the course
of a lifetime. EPA then
determines whether that cancer
risk can be considered "negligible."
In general, EPA will grant a
tolerance and register any
pesticide that poses a negligible or
no-cancer risk.
The concept of a negligible risk is
the attempt to set a standard
below which the cancer risk is so
small that there is no cause for
worry from a regulatory or public
health perspective. EPA's
pesticide program defines a risk as
negligible if a person has a one-
in-a-million or less chance of
getting cancer as a direct result of
a lifetime of exposure to a
particular substance. (By contrast,
the overall risk to the U.S. public
of getting cancer, from all factors,
is on the order of one in four or
one in five.)
For pesticides that pose a cancer
risk that is greater than negligible,
there are two different policies,
depending on the situation. For
pesticides that require only a
section 408 tolerance (i.e.,
residues in raw agricultural
commodities), EPA will register
the pesticide if its benefits
outweigh the risks posed by its
use. If, however, a pesticide also
requires clearance under the food
additive provisions of FFDCA
(section 409), then EPA cannot
by law grant a tolerance or
/ am encouraged by the
increased interest and
participation of the public in
the issues of food safety. . .
Informing the public
accurately and truthfully
about risks is in itself an
essential part of protecting
the public interest.
- Linda Fisher, EPA Assistant
Administrator, Pesticides
and Toxic Substances
register the pesticide if it poses a
greater-than-negligible risk, no
matter how significant the
benefits.
Monitoring Residues
The pesticide tolerances set by
EPA are enforced by the Food
and Drug Administration, which
monitors all domestically produced
and imported foods traveling in
interstate commerce except meat,
poultry, and some egg products.
FDA conducts a Total Diet Study,
also known as a Market Basket
Study, which measures the
American consumer's daily intake
of pesticide residues from foods
that are bought in typical
supermarkets and grocery stores,
and prepared or cooked as they
would be in a household setting.
The findings of the ongoing Total
Diet Study show that dietary
levels of most pesticides are less
than one percent of the
Reference Dose.
8
-------
Imported foods receive special
attention in FDA's monitoring
program. Above-tolerance
residues in 1987 and 1988 were
found in less than one percent of
import samples. Even so, FDA
has tightened its import policy in
the last few years: if a single
shipment from a given source is
found to violate U.S. tolerance
regulations, all shipments from the
same source are subject to
automatic detention.
Monitoring of meat and poultry
products is conducted by USDA's
Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS). Each year, FSIS
conducts 10,000 to 20,000
pesticide residue analyses.
Currently, fewer than one percent
of these tests show illegal
residues, and the violation rate
has been declining steadily over
the last two decades. State
regulatory agencies are also
involved in monitoring the safety
of the food supply; some states
have their own pesticide residue
regulations for food produced and
sold within state boundaries.
In summary, EPA believes that
foods containing legal levels of
pesticides are safe, that continued
regulatory review and action are
serving to reduce and eliminate
unnecessary risks, and that the
overall risks from pesticides in the
diet are small compared to the
benefits of the plentiful,
nutritious, and affordable food
supply that we enjoy in the
United States.
EPA's tolerance-setting system is designed to protect the average person against
both short-term and any long-term harmful effects of exposure to pesticides in
food.
However, some people, especially infants and children, tend to receive
significantly higher than average exposures, at least for some portion of their
lives. Children and infants typically eat more food in relation to their body
weight and more of certain types of food (such as milk) than the average adult.
In setting tolerances, therefore, EPA takes into account the potential risks to
children and infants, as well as to over 20 other subgroups in the population.
Although EPA believes that its approach to setting tolerances adequately
protects the young, the Agency has contracted with the National Academy of
Sciences to study this issue and report on any recommended changes in
approach. This study is due in the spring of 1991.
-------
Other Pesticide
Programs
Farmworker Safety
EPA is making a concerted effort
to safeguard farmworkers' health
through a combination of
regulatory, educational, and
research programs. Despite
regulations issued in 1974,
significant numbers of pesticide
poisonings among agricultural
workers continue to occur every
year. In 1988, EPA proposed
new Worker Protection Standards
to strengthen the earlier worker
protection provisions, reduce risks
of exposure to pesticides, and
extend coverage to include
persons who engage in hand labor
tasks or handle pesticides on
farms, or in forests, nurseries, and
greenhouses. Final new
regulations will be issued in 1991.
The proposed new standards will
reduce the risk of exposure to
pesticides by:
• Requiring that general
pesticide safety rules be
posted in a prominent location
and that workers be notified
of all pesticide applications.
• Requiring training for
pesticide handlers and use of
appropriate personal
protective equipment during
handling activities.
• Prohibiting workers (other
than handlers) from being
present in a pesticide-treated
area during application.
• Imposing interim reentry
intervals for the most acutely
toxic chemicals until these
chemicals can be evaluated in
the reregistration process.
Requiring that potable water,
soap, and disposable towels be
made available to pesticide
handlers and workers in
treated areas for washing off
pesticide residues.
EPA also is undertaking a variety
of outreach activities, including
preparing a user's guide to the
regulations, poster materials, and
slide and tape programs in
English and Spanish that will help
communicate these safety
measures to farm workers and
farm owners.
Information on the health
effects of pesticides and
pesticide poisonings is
available 24 hours a day from
operators at the EPA funded
National Pesticide Tele-
communications Network
operating out of the Texas
Tech University School of
Medicine.
Call toll-free:
1-800-858-7378
Home, Lawn, and Garden
Pesticides
A wide variety of pesticides used
in homes and on lawns and pets
are readily available to consumers
in retail stores. No special
training is required to use these
products; consumers are expected
to follow the instructions on the
pesticide label. However, many of
these products can be hazardous
if improperly stored, handled, or
applied.
Household pesticides are coming
under a systematic review as part
of the Agency's reregistration
process. EPA also is studying
whether household pesticide labels
are adequate to fully inform the
user of potential health or
environmental hazards.
Indoor Air
An emerging concern is the level
of pesticide residues in indoor air.
EPA recently conducted a limited
monitoring study, the Non-
Occupational Pesticide Exposure
Study (NOPES), which measured
exposures in some 250 households
in Florida and Massachusetts. Of
the 32 pesticides monitored, all
were detected at least once in an
air sample, but the levels found
were minute and were determined
to present little or no concern for
adverse health effects. This study
was too limited to draw any broad
conclusions about residential air
quality, but it will help set the
Agency's course for future
research.
10
-------
Lawn Cam
As part of the reregistration
process, EPA is reviewing
individually the 35 major lawn
pesticides. In addition, EPA is
reviewing the current set of data
requirements for lawn care
products in order to determine if
additional potential hazard
information should be generated.
EPA believes that homeowners
and residents are unlikely to
receive long-term or chronic
exposure to lawn care pesticides.
Even intensively managed lawns
generally receive a maximum of
five pesticide applications a year.
Furthermore, highly toxic
pesticides are not registered for
home use.
Nevertheless, EPA encourages
homeowners and the pest control
industry to follow integrated pest
management (IPM) practices that
reduce reliance on pesticides
while still allowing healthy,
attractive lawns to be maintained.
For example, in properly
maintained lawns, the thick
healthy turf will crowd out many
weed species; if grass is cut at the
proper height, watered, aerated,
and fertilized properly, the
incidence of fungus disease will be
lessened. A number of pest-
resistant grass varieties and low-
maintenance ground cover plants
are available commercially.
EPA is working with state and
local governments to develop IPM
plans, guidance documents, and
research papers on IPM
technology for home lawns and
golf courses. (See the appendix
for recent IPM publications and
fact sheets on home gardening
and lawn care.)
Even tftougft
pesticides are
familiar and
frequently used items
in a household,
reading the label is
ALWAYS necessary.
For tips on the safe
use of pesticides,
write for the free
brochure, "A
Citizen's Guide to
Pesticides," U.S.
EPA, Public
Information Center,
401 M Street SW,
Washington, DC
20460.
Pesticide Storage and
Disposal
Pesticide wastes result from the
use of pesticides in agriculture,
industry, households, and various
other pest control operations.
Pesticide wastes appear in a
variety of forms: empty containers,
left-over pesticides, and excess
dilute pesticide solutions resulting
from left-over tank mixes, spray
equipment rinsate, and rinsing of
empty containers.
FIFRA '88 significantly expanded
EPA's authority and responsibility
to regulate the packaging, storage,
transportation, and disposal of
pesticides. EPA may now require
pesticide producers to submit data
on storage and disposal methods;
EPA may also establish labeling
requirements for transportation,
storage, and disposal of pesticides
and their containers. The new
law also strengthens EPA's ability
to take direct enforcement action
against violations of storage,
disposal, and transportation
requirements. Under FIFRA '88,
registrants will have significant
new responsibilities in assuring
that pesticide wastes are
minimized and that any eventual
disposal is carried out in an
environmentally sound manner.
If a pesticide is suspended and
cancelled, EPA now has the
authority to order the recall of
the product and its eventual
disposal at the producer's expense.
The recall of products by
manufacturers is the most efficient
11
-------
and environmentally sound
method of consolidating stocks of
cancelled and suspended products.
EPA also will be studying the
problems associated with pesticide
container disposal, and examining
options to encourage or require:
• The return, refill, and reuse of
pesticide containers
• The development and use of
pesticide formulations that
facilitate the removal of
pesticide residues from
containers
• The use of refillable
containers to reduce the
number of pesticide containers
requiring disposal.
This study was due to be
submitted to Congress by
December 1990, with regulations
on the design of pesticide
containers to follow in 1991. The
regulations are intended to
facilitate the safe use, disposal,
and refill and reuse of pesticide
containers. FIFRA '88 also
authorizes EPA to establish
procedures for storage, transport,
and disposal of containers,
rinsates, or other materials used
to contain or collect excess or
spilled pesticides.
Recycling Pesticide Containers in Mississippi
In a pilot project begun in May 1989 in Washington County, Mississippi,
pesticide users were asked to rinse, collect, and recycle their empty pesticide
containers. Metal containers were hauled to a metalwork plant in Greenville,
Mississippi, where they were melted at a high temperature, destroying all
remaining residues. Plastic containers were crushed and baled in an old cotton
gin, then shipped to Ohio and pulverized into flakes and pellets for recycling.
Certification and Training
Pesticides with a restricted use
classification can be applied only
by a certified applicator or under
a certified applicator's direct
supervision. There are currently
over 100 federally registered
restricted use pesticides and some
1.25 million applicators holding
valid certification. Applicators
include both "private" applicators
(mostly farmers) and "commercial"
applicators.
Because FIFRA gives the states
the opportunity to administer
their own certification program,
certification requirements vary
from state to state. All states,
however, must meet the minimum
federal requirements established
by EPA
Certification programs currently
are conducted by all states except
Colorado (where EPA administers
the program for private
applicators) and Nebraska (where
EPA administers the program for
all applicators).
12
-------
The law does not require
pesticide applicators to be trained;
however, the law does require
certified applicators to
demonstrate competency with
respect to the use and handling of
pesticides. EPA has issued
standards for determining the
competency of commercial and
private applicators for certification
purposes.
Both EPA and USDA fund,
develop, and distribute training
materials for certified applicators.
Under an interagency agreement
between EPA and USDA, EPA
funds are passed through USDA
to state extension service training
programs. Each state has at least
one extension specialist on
pesticide use and safety. Efforts
are underway to strengthen state
training programs, particularly in
relation to ground-water
contamination and endangered
species protection.
State Enforcement
FTFRA includes provisions for
monitoring the distribution and
use of pesticides, and imposing
civil as well as criminal penalties
for violations. For example, it is
unlawful under FTFRA to use a
registered pesticide product in a
manner inconsistent with its label,
to alter the label, or to distribute
in commerce any adulterated or
misbranded product. FIFRA also
authorizes "cooperative
enforcement agreements" between
EPA and the states.
Since 1978, the states have been
given primary enforcement
responsibility for pesticide use
violations, subject to oversight by
EPA. Through cooperative
enforcement agreements, all states
except Nebraska and Wyoming
have now assumed primary
enforcement responsibility. EPA
sets FIFRA enforcement policy
and conducts compliance
monitoring and enforcement
programs in these two states.
On an annual basis, EPA issues
national Consolidated Pesticide
Cooperative Agreement Guidance,
which outlines the national
enforcement priorities and
activities that every state, tribe,
and territory must address under
its enforcement cooperative
agreement. EPA also issues
national compliance monitoring
strategies in follow-up to every
major pesticide regulatory action
to help ensure consistency in
enforcement activities across the
country.
Cases of pesticide misuse or
accidents should be reported to
the state agency with
responsibility for pesticides —
generally the state department of
agriculture (see appendix at the
back of this booklet). Such cases
also may be reported to an EPA
regional office (see appendix).
Pesticides in Ground
Water
Ground water is the vast
underground accumulation of
reservoirs that supplies wells and
springs. Nearly half of all
Americans get their drinking
water from private or community
wells that tap ground water. Our
dependence on ground water to
meet drinking water needs is
growing. In some rural areas,
ground water accounts for up to
95 percent of the water used for
domestic purposes.
Pesticides can enter ground water
in a variety of ways — through
pesticide spills, improper storage,
or even as a result of normal
application of pesticides in the
field. The extent to which
ground-water contamination can
occur depends on a variety of
factors: the chemical/physical
properties of the pesticide, the
frequency and quantity of
pesticide applied, the
characteristics of the soil, and the
geology of the area. These
factors, working singly or in
combination, influence the
movement of a pesticide through
the soil and whether or not it will
leach into ground water.
When pesticides do enter ground
water, there may be a potential
risk to the health of those who
drink and use the water. In 1988,
the Agency's Pesticides in Ground
Water Data Base showed that 46
pesticides had been found in
13
-------
ground water in 26 states as a
result of normal agricultural use.
In response to these findings,
EPA has undertaken a number of
activities. In 1989 EPA published
Health Advisories for 55
pesticides to assist federal, state,
and local officials in responding to
the contamination of drinking
water. The Health Advisories
contain information about the
pesticides and their uses, the
health risks associated with
drinking water containing
particular concentrations of
pesticides, and testing and
treatment methods for removing
the pesticides from the water.
Summaries of the Health
Advisories can be obtained by the
public through EPA's Safe
Drinking Water Hotline (1-800-
426-4791).
Recently, EPA set standards that
regulate 17 pesticides in drinking
water, setting Maximum
Contaminant Levels for the
pesticide contaminants in
community water system wells and
establishing monitoring and
reporting requirements.
In addition, in a major effort to
determine the extent of the
problem of pesticides in drinking
water wells, EPA has undertaken
a National Pesticide Survey of
drinking water wells (see box).
EPA also is preparing to publish
a final Pesticides in Ground-
Water Strategy based on extensive
analysis and consultation with
farmers, other business
organizations, environmentalists,
and government officials at all
levels. The strategy will define
the Agency's goal of preventing
adverse effects on current and
potential sources of drinking
water. States play a key role in
achieving this goal by developing
and implementing state
management plans to identify
areas most vulnerable to
contamination and by tailoring
appropriate prevention and
management measures to local
conditions. EPA will issue
guidance for the management
plans that will specify the
necessary components of an
acceptable plan.
National Pesticide Survey
The National Pesticide
Survey was the first study of
its kind to be conducted on
a national scale. Between
1988 and 1990, EPA
sampled 1,350 wells located
in all 50 states for the
presence of over 100
pesticides and for nitrates.
Preliminary results indicate
that 10 percent of the
nation's community drinking
water wells and about four
percent of rural domestic
drinking water wells have
detectable residues of at least one pesticide. However, fewer than one percent
of all wells have concentrations of pesticides above levels of health concern.
(Of the wells with detectable levels of one or more pesticides, EPA estimates
that 10 percent of community wells and 20 percent of rural domestic wells
exceed health advisory or maximum contaminant levels.) The most frequently
detected pesticides were dacthal metabolites and atrazine. More than half the
nation's wells contain nitrates, but fewer than three percent have
concentrations above the level of health concern.
A final report on the survey will be available in 1991. Detailed information
collected in the survey — on hydrogeological conditions, patterns of pesticide
use, and well characteristics — will help EPA regulate pesticides that can
contaminate well water.
14
-------
Endangered Species
Each species plays
an interdependent
role in the dynamic
functioning of a
healthy and stable
environment,
storing a wealth of genetic
information that has taken
millions of years to develop and
perfect. Despite increased
concern over the need to protect
endangered and threatened
species, the world continues to
lose entire species at an alarming
rate. Over 500 plants, animals,
fish, and birds currently are listed
as endangered or threatened in
the United States; some of these
species may be harmed directly or
indirectly by exposure to
pesticides.
Under the Endangered Species
Act, federal agencies must ensure
that any action they carry out or
authorize is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence
of any listed species, or to destroy
or adversely modify its critical
habitat. EPA's registration of
pesticides is considered to be
"authorization" under the
Endangered Species Act.
Therefore, EPA is required to
ensure that the registration of
pesticides and their use are not
likely to jeopardize endangered
species.
In July 1989, EPA proposed an
Endangered Species Protection
A steady rise in bald eagle populations has occurred since EPA
cancelled the registrations of DDT for most uses in the early 1970's.
Absorption of these pesticides through the food chain had brought the
birds to the brink of extinction. From estimates as low as 400 nesting
pairs in the early 1960's, their numbers improved to over 2,660 nesting
pairs in the lower 48 states in 1989. On the basis of this recovery, the
Fish and Wildlife Service is considering whether or not to reclassify the
bald eagle as threatened rather than endangered.
Program aimed at protecting listed
species from harmful exposure to
pesticides, while avoiding placing
any unnecessary limitations on
pesticide use.
EPA's new program evaluates
potential pesticide impacts by
focusing first on listed species
whose status is most fragile. In
cooperation with USDA and the
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS),
EPA will gather information on
the habitats and locations of these
species, and determine whether
the species may be affected by
pesticides to which they are likely
to be exposed. If so, as required
by the law, EPA will formally
consult with FWS to determine if
these pesticides will jeopardize the
continued existence of the species.
In cases where FWS finds that
EPA actions are required to
protect the species, EPA will
institute use limitations on the
pesticides.
15
-------
The Endangered Species
Protection Program will be
implemented through product
labeling and county bulletins.
The pesticide labels will instruct
users that use of the product
within each county must comply
with the limitations set forth in
the bulletin for that county. The
label will also list a toll-free
phone number that pesticide users
can call to find out whether or
not their county is affected by the
program. Bulletins will be made
widely available through a variety
of outlets.
EPA is encouraging states to
recommend protective measures
tailored to the listed species
located within each state. Until a
final program is developed and
pesticide registrants are required
to modify their labels, EPA will
be relying on a voluntary interim
program to help protect
endangered species.
Biological Pesticides
Natural and Genetically
Engineered Microbials
Certain microorganisms, including
bacteria, fungi, viruses, and
protozoa, have been found
effective as pesticidal active
ingredients. EPA has registered
over 20 naturally occurring
microbial pesticides, which are
currently used in over 100
products in agriculture, forestry,
mosquito control, and home and
garden applications.
As a class, natural microbial
pesticides usually exhibit several
desirable characteristics — they
tend to be effective in controlling
the target organisms without
adversely affecting other
organisms; they usually do not
have toxic effects on animals and
people; and they do not leave
toxic or persistent chemical
residues in the environment.
Because of this "safe" use history,
natural microbial pesticides are
not subject to the same stringent
registration requirements as
chemical pesticides. However,
manufacturers are still required to
register them as pesticides if they
are intended for commercial use,
and the microbials must still
undergo certain testing
requirements.
With recent advances in
biotechnology, there has been
considerable interest in genetic
engineering of microorganisms to
produce pesticides that are as
effective and less toxic than
chemical pesticides. At the same
time, there has been concern that
the experimental applications of
genetically altered microbes could
result in unforeseen risks to the
environment. Such microbes, for
example, may not be subject to
natural biological or environ-
mental control mechanisms when
introduced into the environment.
As a result of this concern, EPA
evaluates certain genetically
engineered microbial pesticides
before they are applied in the
environment. Manufacturers are
always required to obtain
experimental use permits (EUPs)
for any large-scale field study of a
pesticide. In addition, in 1984,
EPA published a notice requiring
the Agency to be notified at least
90 days prior to small-scale field
testing of genetically engineered
pesticides. Regulations specifying
the notification and information
requirements for small-scale field
tests of genetically engineered
pesticides are being prepared.
Biochemicals
Biochemicals are chemicals that
are either naturally occurring or
identical to naturally occurring
substances. Examples include
hormones, pheromones, and
enzymes. Biochemicals function
as pesticides through non-toxic,
non-lethal modes of action, such
as disrupting the mating patterns
of insects, regulating growth, or
acting as repellents. Like many
microbials, biochemicals tend to
be more environmentally
compatible and are thus important
to integrated pest management
programs. They tend not to
disrupt beneficial organisms and
do not generally pose risks of
mammalian toxicity or human
health effects.
Over 30 biochemical pesticides
have been registered by EPA
Although these substances must
still go through the registration
process, EPA allows for reduced
testing requirements for
biochemicals in order to promote
their use.
16
-------
Inert Ingredients
In addition to containing active
ingredients, virtually all pesticide
products contain one or more
inert ingredients. Typical inerts
are solvents (water, petroleum
distillates, or alcohols), carriers
(talc, sand, or corn meal) and
surfactants (soaps or detergents).
By definition, inert ingredients are
not "active" in attacking a
particular pest. However, some
inert ingredients are chemically or
biologically active and may cause
health and environmental
problems. Prior to 1987, the
majority of inert ingredients had
received EPA clearance but had
been subject to relatively little
scientific scrutiny.
In 1987, EPA published an Inerts
Strategy which calls for the use of
the least toxic inert ingredients
available. For new inerts,
clearance requests must include a
minimum "base set" of data that
allows EPA to determine whether
or not exposure to the inert will
result in unreasonable adverse
effects. Existing inerts have been
placed in groups based on their
known toxicity and the need for
additional toxicity testing.
EPA is concentrating its attention
on the higher priority inerts. Of
some 50 substances identified by
EPA as presenting potential
lexicological concern, all but a
few have now been eliminated by
registrants from their products; in
the interim, manufacturers must
relabel products to identify the
presence of these toxic inerts. A
second group of about 65 inerts
has been identified as
representing potential toxic
concern and a high priority for
testing. EPA is evaluating these
chemicals as additional
information becomes available to
determine the risks of their
continued use.
Preventing Pollution
In line with an Agency-wide
priority on preventing pollution,
EPA is promoting the
development, and expediting the
registration, of safer alternatives
in pest control. EPA is also
looking to build into the review
process for existing pesticides an
increased emphasis on non-
chemical alternatives to problem
pesticide uses. Other specific
initiatives are being developed in
integrated pest management and
in sustainable agriculture.
Integrated Pest Management
For the urban environment, EPA
has been developing an integrated
pest management (IPM) strategy.
Elements of that strategy over the
next few years will likely include:
• Support for research to
develop biological and cultural
alternatives to traditional
pesticides
• An emphasis on the
development of integrated
systems to forestall the build-
up of resistance to any single
control measure
• Building strong public/private
partnerships involving
government, industry, users,
universities, and private
organizations to promote rapid
transfer of new pest
management and crop
production technologies to
growers and other users.
EPA is participating in the
International Pest Resistance
Management Congress, to be held
late in 1991, which will bring
together representatives from both
industrialized and developing
countries. The Congress will
establish a global communication
network and data base on
pesticide resistance and successful
management strategies.
Sustainable Agriculture
Pesticide use in agriculture is
increasingly coming under scrutiny
in the context of preventing
pollution and achieving a
sustainable agricultural system.
Several features of the current
system of American agriculture
detract from its "sustainability"
over the long term. These
include a heavy reliance on fossil
fuels; cropping systems that
degrade soils and water;
chronically low economic returns
that continue to force some
17
-------
farmers, particularly family
farmers, out of business; and
environmentally damaging use of
synthetic pesticides and inorganic
fertilizers.
The long-term solutions to
agricultural pollution, like the
sources themselves, are highly
diverse. But certain methods hold
considerable promise. They
include: rotating crops, scouting
fields to determine actual pest
populations, the use of pest
resistant crop varieties, recycling
animal manures, and the use of
biologically based methods of pest
control. The intent is to minimize
the need for pesticides, conserve
soil or enhance soil productivity,
and make farming systems more
sustainable.
To support USDA in fostering
sustainable agriculture, EPA is
generating and distributing
information that will assist in a
voluntary shift in agricultural
practices over the long term.
Particularly important are
demonstration and education
projects emphasizing more
environmentally benign production
practices which also sustain yield
and net farm income. EPA is
working with USDA officials to
increase their emphasis on these
programs and to use their field
presence to educate farmers on
pollution prevention and
sustainable agriculture.
A Sustainable Agriculture Initiative
A joint project was initiated in March 1991 to allow farmers, extension agents,
and crop consultants to use a computer model in their weed management
decisions. Participating in the project are EPA Regions 7 and 8, EPA's Office
of Pesticide Programs, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and agriculture
experiment stations and universities in Minnesota, Illinois, and Colorado.
The computer model to be distributed is an expert system containing ten years
of research data with over 150 herbicide/cultural options for corn and corn
rotations, plus their projected yields and costs. Growers can use this
information to reduce their reliance on chemical herbicides. The benefits of
reducing herbicide usage in corn production include cost savings to farmers;
reduced exposure to herbicides during mixing, loading, application, and cleanup;
and a reduced risk of ground-water contamination associated with corn
production in the Central Great Plains and Midwestern Corn Belt.
18
-------
A Closing Word
The next few years will require an
enormous level of effort by EPA
and our state partners to develop
a more comprehensive system to
implement the provisions of the
FIFRA '88 amendments. The
effort calls for equally active roles
by a wide variety of individuals
and groups affected by pesticides.
State agencies play a critical role
in ensuring compliance with
regulations, as well as in providing
guidance to users and educating
the public concerning pesticide
issues. In the next several years,
states will have a new and critical
role in ground-water protection,
endangered-species protection,
and farmworker safety. In all
areas of pesticide regulation, EPA
hopes to build on existing
EPA/state partnerships.
Environmental and public interest
groups are encouraged to monitor
the progress of particular
pesticides through the
reregistration process and to
provide input in the development
of EPA's forthcoming regulations
on storage, transport, and disposal
of pesticides and containers.
EPA also encourages environ-
mental and public interest groups
to work closely with the public
and with pesticide users to
promote better understanding of
pesticide usage and to encourage
more integrated pest management.
Pesticide registrants will be
required to play a much more
active role in the regulatory
process than in the past,
particularly in reregistration.
They are being asked to make
financial commitments in the form
of fees and testing costs, and to
meet statutory deadlines for
submitting as complete and
accurate data as possible.
Registrants will need to keep lines
of communication open with
growers about the pesticide
industry's intentions for
reregistering old products and for
registering new products.
Pesticide users will benefit from
the increased protection that
reregistration will offer, but they
may experience temporary
disruptions in the availability of
familiar products. Grower groups
have a role to play in:
• Providing information to EPA
early on about critical
pesticide uses
• Assisting in conducting more
residue studies in the
marketplace so that exposure
data are more realistic
• In some cases, supporting the
development of data for
"minor uses" of a pesticide for
which the basic registrant does
not intend to seek
reregistration
• Actively supporting and trying
IPM and other techniques of
sustainable agriculture to
reduce the overall burden to
the environment.
The food industry should note that
EPA's accelerated review of older
pesticides may uncover risk
concerns in some cases. Food
industry representatives are urged
to be as responsive as possible to
consumer inquiries and to help in
educating consumers on pesticide
issues. The food industry may
also be asked to assist in
improving exposure data through
increased residue studies.
Finally, individual members of the
public will have the opportunity to
contribute information to the
decisions on pesticides made by
EPA. Ultimately the public will
benefit from greater confidence in
our national pesticide regulatory
process and the enhanced safety
of our food supply that will result
from the implementation of
FIFRA'88.
19
-------
Appendices
Glossary
Active Ingredient: In any pesticide
product, the component which kills,
or otherwise controls, target pests.
Pesticides are regulated primarily on
the basis of their active ingredients.
Acute Toxitity: The capacity of a
substance to cause a poisonous effect
(such as skin or eye irritation or
damage to an organ) or death as a
result of a single or short-term
exposure.
Cancellation: The Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) section
6(b) authorizes cancellation of
registration if, when used according
to widespread and commonly
recognized practice, the pesticide
generally causes unreasonable adverse
effects on the environment, or if its
labeling or other material required to
be submitted does not comply with
FIFRA provisions.
Cholinesterase: An enzyme that
helps regulate nerve impulses.
Cholinesterase inhibition is
associated with a variety of acute
symptoms such as nausea, vomiting,
blurred vision, stomach cramps, and
rapid heart rate, and can lead to
death in severe cases.
Chronic Toxicity: The capacity of a
substance to cause harmful health
effects after long-term exposure.
Endangered Species: Animals, birds,
fish, plants, or other living organisms
threatened with extinction by man-
made or natural changes in their
environment. Requirements for
declaring a species endangered are
contained in the Endangered Species
Act.
Experimental Use Permit: Pesticide
manufacturers are required to obtain
experimental use permits for testing
new pesticides or new uses of
pesticides whenever they conduct
experimental field studies to support
registration of the pesticide on 10
acres or more of land or one acre or
more of water.
Inert Ingredient: A component of a
pesticide such as a solvent or carrier
that is not active against target pests.
Microbial Pesticide: A
microorganism that is used to control
a pest. Microorganisms are living
organisms so small that individually
they usually can be seen only
through a microscope.
Pest: An insect, rodent, nematode,
fungus, weed, or other form of
terrestrial or aquatic plant or animal
life or virus, bacteria, or
microorganism considered to be an
annoyance and which may be
injurious to health or the
environment.
Pesticide: Substance or mixture of
substances intended for preventing,
destroying, repelling, or mitigating
any pest. Also, any substance or
mixture of substances intended for
use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or
desiccant.
Reentry Interval: The period of time
immediately following the application
of a pesticide to an area during
which unprotected workers should
not enter the area.
Registrant: Any manufacturer or
formulator who obtains registration
for a pesticide active ingredient or
product.
Registration: Under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (as amended), the
formal listing with EPA of a new
pesticidal active ingredient prior to
its marketing or distribution in intra-
or inter-state commerce.
Registration Standards: Published
documents which include summary
reviews of all the data available on a
pesticide active ingredient, data gaps
identified, and the Agency's existing
regulatory position on the pesticide.
Reregistralion: The reevaluation and
relicensing of existing pesticidal
active ingredients originally
registered prior to current scientific
and regulatory standards.
Residues: The pesticide remaining
after natural or technological
processes have taken place.
Restricted Use: When a pesticide is
registered, some or all of its uses
may be classified under FIFRA for
restricted use if the pesticide requires
special handling because of its
toxicity. Restricted-use pesticides
may be applied only by trained,
certified applicators or those under
their direct supervision.
Suspension: EPA's act of prohibiting
the 1l$« of a pesticide in order to
prevent an imminent hazard resulting
from continued use of the pesticide.
An emergency suspension takes effect
immediately; under an ordinary
20
-------
An emergency suspension takes effect
immediately; under an ordinary
suspension, a registrant can request a
hearing before the suspension goes
into effect.
Tolerance: The maximum amount of
pesticide residue allowed by law to
remain in or on a harvested crop.
EPA sets these levels so that the
chemicals do not pose an
unreasonable risk to consumers.
Toxic: Harmful to living organisms.
Toricity: The inherent capability of
a substance to cause adverse effects
in human, animal, or plant life.
Unreasonable Risk: Under FIFRA,
"unreasonable adverse effects on the
environment" means any
unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, taking into account the
economic, social, and environmental
costs and benefits of the use of any
pesticide.
For Further Information:
Brochures
"Apply Pesticides Correctly: A Guide
for Commercial Applicators," and
"Apply Pesticides Correctly: A Guide
for Private Applicators." U.S.
Department of Agriculture and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Government Printing Office, 1975.
"Chemical Risk: A Primer."
Information Pamphlet. American
Chemical Society Department of
Government Relations and Science
Policy, 1155 16th Street NW,
Washington, DC 20036. 1984.
"Citizen's Guide to Pesticides"
(1990), " A Consumer's Guide to
Safer Pesticide Use" (1987), "Lawn
Care for Your Home," and
"Pesticides in Drinking Water"
(1989). U.S. EPA, Office of
Pesticide Programs (H7501C), 401 M
Street SW, Washington, DC 20460.
"Farm Chemical Safety is in Your
Hands." National Agricultural
Chemicals Association, 1155 15th St.
NW, Washington, D.C. 20005.
"Integrated Pest Management for
Turfgrass and Ornamentals." U.S.
EPA, 1989 (NTIS PB90-204587).
"The Least Toxic Pest Management
Catalog." Bio Integral Resource
Center, P.O. Box 7414, Berkeley, CA
94707.
"Pesticides: A Community Action
Guide." Concern, Inc., 1794
Columbia Rd. NW, Washington, DC
20009. 1987.
"Pesticide Safety for Farmworkers,"
(1985), and "Pesticide Safety for
Non-Certified Mixers, Loaders and
Applicators" (English and Spanish,
1986). U.S. EPA, Office of Pesticide
Programs. 401 M Street SW,
Washington, DC 20460.
"Preventing Pests in Your Home";
"Lawn Care"; "Home Gardening";
"Home Garden Companion Planting";
"Pesticide Labels"; "Endangered
Species"; "EPA's Endangered Species
Protection Program." Environmental
Fact Sheets. U.S. EPA, Office of
Pesticide Programs (H7501C), 401 M
Street SW, Washington, DC 20460.
April 1990.
Reports
Agricultural Chemicals in Ground
Water: Proposed Pesticide Strategy.
U.S. EPA, Office of Pesticides and
Toxic Substances. December 1987.
Alternative Agriculture. National
Research Council. National
Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
1989.
Pest Management for Local
Governments. MIS Report, Vol. 21,
No. 8, International City
Management Association.
Pesticides Industry Sales and Usage.
1988 Market Estimates. U.S. EPA.
Office of Pesticides and Toxic
Substances, 401 M St. SW,
Washington, DC 20460. February
1990.
Pesticides in Ground Water:
Background Document. U.S. EPA.
401 M St. SW, Washington, DC
20460. 1986.
Regulating Pesticides in Food: The
Delaney Paradox. National Academy
of Sciences. National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C. 1987.
21
-------
Federal Register Notices
EPA Pesticide Contacts
U.S. EPA, Endangered Species
Protection Program; Notice of
Proposed Program. 54 FR 27984
(July 3, 1989).
U.S. EPA, FIFRA Amendments of
1988; Schedule of Implementation.
54 FR 18078 (April 26, 1989).
U.S. EPA Inert Ingredients in
Pesticide Products; Policy Statement.
52 FR 13305 (April 22, 1987).
U.S. EPA, Worker Protection
Standards for Agricultural Pesticides;
Public Meetings and Proposed Rule.
53 FR 25970 (July 8, 1988).
EPA Headquarters
Office of Pesticide Programs
401 M Street SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
(703) 557-7102
Region 1
Chief, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances Branch
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
(617) 565-3932
Region 2
Chief, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances Branch
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
(201) 321-6765
Region 3
Chief, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances Branch
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597-8598
Region 4
Chief, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances Branch
345 Courtland Street NE
Atlanta, GA 30365
(404) 347-5201
Region 5
Chief, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances Branch
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 886-6006
Region 6
Chief, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances Branch
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202
(214) 655-7235
Region 7
Chief, Pesticides and Toxics
Branch
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913) 551-7400
Region 8
Director, Air and Toxics
Division
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
(303) 293-1438
Region 9
Chief, Pesticides and Toxics
Branch
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 744-1090
Region 10
Chief, Pesticides and Toxics
Substances Branch
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
(206) 442-1198
22
-------
State Agency Contacts
Region 1
Connecticut
Director,
Waste Engineering and Enforcement
Division
Bureau of Waste Management
State Office Building
165 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06115
(203) 566-5148
Maine
Director, Pesticides Control Board
State House, Station 28
Augusta, ME 04333
(207) 289-2731
Massachusetts
Chief, Pesticides Bureau
Dept. of Food and Agriculture
100 Cambridge Street, 21st Floor
Boston, MA 02202
(617) 727-7712
New Hampshire
Supervisor, Pesticides Control
Division
Dept. of Agriculture
10 Ferry Street
Collerbox 2042
Concord, NH 03302-2042
(603) 271-3550
Rhode Island
Chief, Division of Agriculture
Dept. of Environmental Management
22 Hayes Street
Providence, RI 02908
(401) 277-2782
Vermont
Director, Agriculture Foods and
Markets
120 State Street
State Office Building
Montpelier, VT 05620
(802) 828-2431
Region 2
New Jersey
Director, Pesticide Control Program
New Jersey Dept. of Environmental
Protection
380 Scotch Road, CN 411
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 530-4123
New York
Director, Bureau of Pesticides
Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Room 404, 50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233
(518) 474-2121
Puerto Rico
Director, Analysis and Registration
of Agricultural Materials
Puerto Rico Dept. of Agriculture
Post Office Box 10163
Santurce, PR 00908
(809) 796-1710
Virgin Islands
Director, Pesticide Programs
Division of Environmental Protection
Dept. of Planning and Natural
Resources
14 F Building, 111 Watergut Homes
Christiansted, St. Croix
U.S. Virgin Islands 00820
(809) 773-0565
Region 3
Delaware
Delaware Dept. of Agriculture
2320 South Dupont Highway
Dover, DE 19901
(302) 739-4815
District of Columbia
Dept. of Consumer and Regulatory
Affairs
Housing and Environmental
Regulations Administration
Environmental Control Division
2100 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE
Room 203
Washington, D.C. 20020
(202) 404-1167
Maryland
Chief, Pesticide Regulation Section
Maryland Dept. of Agriculture
50 Harry S. Truman Parkway
Annapolis, MD 21401
(301) 841-5710
Pennsylvania
Chief, Agronomic Services
Bureau of Plant Industry
Pennsylvania Dept. of Agriculture
2301 N. Cameron Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
(717) 787-4843
Virginia
Program Manager, Virginia Dept. of
Agriculture and Consumer Services
Post Office Box 1163, Room 403
Richmond, VA 23209
(804) 786-3523
West Virginia
Director, Pesticides Division
West Virginia Dept. of Agriculture
Charleston, WV 25305
(304) 348-2212
Region 4
Alabama
Director, Agriculture,
Chemistry/Plant Industry Division
Dept. of Agriculture and Industry
Post Office Box 3336
Montgomery, AL 36193
(205) 242-2656
Florida
Administrator, Dept. of Agriculture
and Consumer Services
3125 Conner Blvd., MD2
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1650
(904) 487-2130
Georgia
Assistant Commissioner
Georgia Department of Agriculture
Entomology and Pesticide Division
Capital Square, Room 550
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-4958
23
-------
Kentucky
Director, Division of Pesticides
Kentucky Dept. of Agriculture
500 Mero Street, 7th Floor
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502) 564-7274
Mississippi
Director, Division of Plant Industry
Dept. of Agriculture and Commerce
Post Office Box 5207
Mississippi State, MS 39762
(601) 325-3390
North Carolina
Pesticide Administrator
Pesticide Section
North Carolina Dept. of Agriculture
Post Office Box 27647
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919) 733-3556
South Carolina
Department Head, Dept. of Fertilizer
and Pesticide Control
257 Poole Agricultural Center
Clemson University
Clemson, SC 29634-0394
(803) 656-3005
Tennessee
Director, Plant Industries Division
Department of Agriculture
P.O. Box 40627, Melrose Station
Nashville, TN 37204
(615) 360-0117
Region 5
Illinois
Chief, Bureau of Plant and Apiary
Protection
Department of Agriculture
State Fairgrounds, P.O. Box 19281
Springfield, IL 62794-9281
(217) 785-2427
Indiana
Pesticide Administrator
Office of the State Chemist
Department of Biochemistry
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907
(317) 494-1587
Michigan
Director, Pesticide and Plant Pest
Management Division
611 W. Ottawa Street
4th Floor, North Ottawa Tower
Lansing, MI 48933
(517) 373-1087
Minnesota
Director, Division of Agronomy
Services
Department of Agriculture
90 West Plato Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55107
(612) 297-2261
Ohio
Specialist in Charge of Pesticides
Pesticide Regulation Division
Department of Agriculture
8995 East Main Street
Reynoldsburg, OH 43068
(614) 866-6361
Wisconsin
Executive Assistant
Department of Agriculture,
Trade, and Consumer Protection
Post Office Box 8911
Madison, WI 53708
(608) 267-3304
Region 6
Arkansas
Director, Division of Feed,
Fertilizer, and Pesticides
Arkansas State Plant Board
1 Natural Resources Rd.
Little Rock, AR 72205
(501) 225-1598
Louisiana
Office of Agricultural and
Environmental Sciences
Louisiana Dept. of Agriculture
and Forestry
Post Office Box 35%
Baton Rouge, LA 70821-3596
(504) 925-3763
New Mexico
Chief, Division of Agricultural and
Environmental Services
New Mexico State Dept. of
Agriculture
Post Office Box 3150
New Mexico State University
Las Cruces, NM 88003
(505) 646-2133
Oklahoma
Supervisor, Pest Management Section
Plant Industry Division
Oklahoma State Dept. of Agriculture
2800 N. Lincoln Blvd.
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
(405) 521-3864
Texas
Director, Division of Agricultural
and Environmental Sciences
Texas Dept. of Agriculture
Post Office Box 12847
Austin, TX 78711
(512) 463-7624
Region 7
Iowa
Supervisor, Pesticide Control
Section
Iowa Dept. of Agriculture and Land
Stewardship
Henry A. Wallace Building
E. 9th Street and Grand Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50319
(515) 281-8590
Kansas
Director, Plant Health Division
Kansas State Board of Agriculture
901 South Kansas, 7th Flor
Topeka, KS 66612-1281
(913) 296-2263
Missouri
Supervisor, Bureau of Pesticide
Control
Department of Agriculture
Post Office Box 630
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(314) 751-2462
24
-------
Nebraska
Director, Bureau of Plant Industry
Nebraska Department of Agriculture
301 Centennial Mall South
Lincoln, NE 68509
(402) 471-2341
Region 8
Colorado
Supervisor, Pesticide Section
Division of Plant Industry
Colorado Dept. of Agriculture
700 Kipling Street, Suite 4000
Lakewood, CO 80215-5894
(303) 239-4140
Montana
Administrator, Montana Dept. of
Agriculture
Environmental Management Division
Agriculture-Livestock Building
Room 317, Capitol Station
Helena, MT 59620-0205
(406) 444-2944
North Dakota
Director, Pesticides and Noxious
Weed Division
Department of Agriculture
600 East Blvd.
Bismarck, ND 58505-0020
(701) 224-2231
South Dakota
Director, Division of Regulatory
Services
South Dakota Dept. of Agriculture
Anderson Building
445 East Capitol
Pierre, SD 57501-3188
(605) 773-3375
Utah
Director, Division of Plant
Industries
Department of Agriculture
350 North Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, UT 84116
(801) 538-7100
Wyoming
Manager, Technical Services
Wyoming Dept. of Agriculture
2219 Carey Ave.
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7324
Region 9
Arizona
Associate Director, Division of
Agricultural Chemicals and
Environmental Services
Arizona Dept. of Agriculture
1688 West Adams Street
Phoenix, AZ 85007
(602) 542-3579
California
Assistant Director, Division of
Pest Management, Environmental
Protection, and Worker Safety
California Dept. of Food and
Agriculture
1220 N Street, Room A414
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 322-6315
Hawaii
Head, Division of Plant Industry
Hawaii Dept. of Agriculture
Post Office Box 22159
Honolulu, HI 96823-2159
(808) 548-7124
Nevada
Administrator, Division of Plant
Industry
Nevada Dept. of Agriculture
Post Office Box 11100
Reno, NV 89510
(702) 789-0180
Guam
Director, Air and Land Programs
Division, Guam Environmental
Protection Agency
Post Office Box 2999
Agana, GU 96910
American Samoa
Director, Dept. of Agriculture
Post Office Box 366
Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799
Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands
Executive Officer, Trust Territory
Environmental Protection Board
Office of the High Commissioner
Saipan, Mariana Islands 96950
Commonwealth of Northern Mariana
Islands
Environmental Engineer, Division
of Environmental Quality
Dr. Torres Hospital
Saipan, Mariana Island 96950
Region 10
Alaska
Alaska Dept. of Environmental
Conservation
Post Office Box 1088
Palmer, AK 99645
(907) 745-3236
Idaho
Agrichemical Standards Bureau Chief
Division of Agricultural Technology
Idaho Dept. of Agriculture
Post Office Box 790
Boise, ID 83701
(208) 334-3240
Oregon
Assistant Administrator, Plant
Division
Oregon Dept. of Agriculture
635 Capitol Street, NE
Salem, OR 97310-0110
(503) 378-3777
Washington
Pesticide Specialist
Washington Dept. of Agriculture
406 General Administration
Building
Olympia, WA 98504
(206) 735-5064
25
-------
US EPA Region 5 Library
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Rsgion 5, ;.•;'-. 7,,-y rp,*_-i
?LVV~st n
CniCdgo, IL
------- |