ENVIRONMENTAL
NEWS
EPA struggles to implement pesticide law
T
he resignation last fall of the Environmental Working Group (EWG) from an advisory panel related to new pesticide regulations highlighted the trouble EPA is having putting the 1996 pesticide law into place. EWG officials said they resigned because EPA has done little to act on its 1994 pledge to protect children from pesticides. Environmental and public health groups are not the only ones griping about EPA's new responsibilities. "We are very concerned that EPA might set new [pesticide] tolerances wimout having enough data," said Adam Sharp, spokesperson for the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF). Signed by President Clinton in 1996, the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) set EPA on a short deadline schedule to reexamine by 2003 more than 9700 pesticide tolerances, which are the level of pesticide residue allowed in raw and processed foods. The first deadline of one-third is due this August. The reassessment includes a risk-based review that meets a health-based standard of a "reasonable certainty of no harm" to exposed children and infants. If the agency does riot have a reliable data set allowing it to determine this it must insert a 10-fold safety margin (10x factor) The new standard replaces the zero-tolerance level known as the Delaney clause in the former pesticide law Although the new standard aDDears to be more relaxed it reauires EPA to collect a much broader set of health ef fects information Shortly after the FQPA was signed, lobbyists moved into action. In the spring of 1997, nearly 150 agricultural and business groups wrote EPA that any regulation of commonly used pesticides 8 A •
could cause a "major disruption" in the food supply. Environmental groups have filed a petition charging mat EPA is not applying the 10-fold safety factor often enough. EPA plans to reassess by August the tolerance levels for a class of widely used pesticides known as organophosphates (OP), a broad-spectrum insecticide that kills bugs by attacking their nervous systems. The reassessment might result in the restriction of some OPs, EPA officials have said. In a preliminary risk assessment of 16 OPs released last fall, EPA suggested that the tolerance for Cadusafos, Tribuphos (DEF), and Temethos retain the safety factor; that three chemicals use a reduced three-fold safety factor; and the remaining 10 have the safety factor removed, said Jack Housenger, associate director of Special Review and Reregistration Division. In addition, EPA has made hundreds of tolerance decisions for new pesticides since 1986; 9 to 12 decisions retained the lOx factor, said Denise Kearns,
JAN. 1, 1999 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS
EPA spokesperson. Each decision entailed a risk assessment, which in some cases, resulted in a more conservative tolerance than a decision that retained the lOx factor, Kearns said. "EPA appears to have dismissed exposure data gaps as a reason for applying the 10-fold factor," said Jeannine Kenney, policy analyst with Consumer's Union. "We think this is a good place to regulate, while you are waiting for the data to come in." Farming groups, too, are displeased. The number of OPs that may retain the 10-fold safety factor "are more than what we agree with," said Sharp. In a March review, the pesticide office's Science Advisory Panel (SAP) sent the agency's lOx factor process back to EPA for more work. The SAP faulted the unclear reasoning behind its process and encouraged staff to reconsider the protocols and endpoints within EPA's required core tests to try to achieve results which more accurately assess the potential of chemicals to cause developmental toxicity. "They have no procedure. It is not quite clear how they are doing it making it hard to judge whether their judgements are appropriate or n o t " said one SAP member who asked not to be identified The farming industry disagrees that the lOx factor should be a default regulation. "In our opinion the law says that if they don't have the data set," then EPA must ask industry to conduct the tests. "And then they can only apply the lOx factor if it is proven to be necessary," Sharp added. As a result, last October AFBF and the American Crop Protection Association suggested that EPA file a formal request for more data from chemical producers. If the agency does require the © 1999 American Chemical Society
chemical makers to produce new data, regulators would not make tolerance decisions based on that information for at least two years, well after the deadlines in the FQPA, EPA staff said. A call for data will only slow down protections aimed at kids, public health groups said. "A gen-
eral principle of toxicology, it seems to me, doesn't need to be reexamined for every pesticide," added Herbert Needleman, professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh, whose work on lead's effect on the brain led to national regulations. Although the FQPA has raised
exciting science and regulatory issues, it has put a strain on agency resources, staff members said. "Delaney is looking pretty good right now," added EPA's Housenger. "lust when you think you understand the rules, they go and change them." —CATHERINE M. COONEY
Maine seeks to drop MTBE from its clean fuels program Maine is set to become the first state in the United States to opt out of EPA's reformulated gasoline program due to groundwater contamination by methyl-fert-butyl ether (MTBE), a controversial oxygenate that helps gasoline burn cleaner. The action spotlights an emerging trend among states that share the thinking of environmental officials in Maine on MTBE, which because it promotes more complete combustion of gasoline, it reduces carbon monoxide and ozone pollution. Consumer complaints about acute health problems from inhalation of MTBE fumes and concerns about groundwater contamination have led environmental groups and lawmakers in California and Maine to call on EPA to phase out the additive in favor of allowing states to set their own fuel performance standards. Also, there is uncertainty about the health effects of MTBE, which EPA has labeled a possible human carcinogen. The extent of groundwater contamination in all 50 stcites is 3J.so unclccir As 3. rc~ sult 3. widespread research effort is under way to determine whether the clean air benefits of MTBE outweigh its risks MTBE became controversial in 1992 when EPA mandated the winter use of the cleaner burning oxygenate in 39 metropolitan areas to control carbon monoxide. In 1995, EPA required the year-round sale of reformulated gas in about a dozen metropolitan areas to control ozone emissions. In 1997, because of ongoing concern in Maine about MTBE, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) established Maine's right to opt out of EPA's fuel program. Maine is
the only state to have exercised this option. This month, Maine officials expect to send EPA an alternative fuel strategy for meeting air quality goals, according to DEP spokesperson Deb Garrett. The strategy is based on replacing MTBE-oxygenated gasoline with either a low-volatility or a lowsulfur gasoline, she said. The move to seek a replace-
ment for MTBE in Maine was prompted by a state sampling program conducted last summer that found trace levels of MTBE in 15% of Maine's drinking water supplies. Concentrations above the state maximum of 38 parts per billion were found in 1% of the wells. Many people in the rural state get their drinking water from private wells, said Garrett.
Ship study to assess emission impacts The International Maritime Organization (IMO) voted last November to spearhead a study of ship stack emissions in the wake of evidence that ships may account for a large percentage of global emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOJ. Although it is unlikely that the study will lead to any pollutioncurbing regulation, the investigation could place knowledge of vessel emissions on the firm, quantitative basis needed for framing discussions on the environmental impacts of this transportation mode. The investigation will collect C02 data for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which requested that IMO conduct the global study. A range of organic and other inorganic contaminants emitted from ship stacks also will be characterized. Determining the shipping industry's C02 impact is complicated by the fact that environmentally motivated improvements, such as double-hulls for oil tankers, can result in reduced C02 efficiency because they decrease the amount of cargo the vessels can contain, Ostergaard explained. The study will attempt to clarify such sticky issues, he said. Although Brian Wood-Thomas, senior advisor for EPA's Office of International Environmental Policy, considers shipping a significant source of global pollution, both he and John Ostergaard, IMO's senior advisor on marine pollution, point out that it "is recognized as one of the most environmentally efficient methods of transporting cargo," in terms of its emissions intensity—emissions per ton of cargo moved per mile. According to Ostergaard between 85-90% of all commodities are transported via ships, and the diesel engines that power the vast majority of modern vessels have become much more efficient over the years. For these reasons, the shipping industry is also in favor of the study, said Kathy Metcalf, director of maritime affairs for Chamber of Shipping of America, an industry association. The industry is confident that the study will show the environmental value of shipping, she explained. "All modes of transportation need to do this kind of study to find out where they stand in terms of their overall environmental emissions inventory and efficiency," Metcalf said. This will provide crucial data if environmental taxation aimed at reducing emissions from different transportation sectors is ever implemented, she noted. —KELLYN S. BETTS
JAN. 1, 1999 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS • 9 A
