Government
House panel reunites pesticide regulation act ^ F V N H HB^V^P 11 wVw%m^9 ^**W ^«βββ I v W H H ^#
Committee involve states' right to set stricter rales, dtectosure of health data, "whistle-blower" protection The House Agriculture Committee, rushing to meet a May 15 budget deadline, in a one-day markup session earlier this month approved a number of changes to the law providing the basis for the Environmental Protec tion Agency's authority to regulate use of pesticides. Provisions that were amended by the committee include those dealing with a state's right to regulate pesticide use within its boundaries, disclosure and use of safety and health data used to sup port pesticide registrations, safe working conditions, and protection for "whistle-blowers." Efforts to rewrite the Federal In secticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) have been under way for more than a year as Rep. George E. Brown Jr. (D.-Calif.), chairman of the Agriculture Subcommittee on De partment Operations, Research & Foreign Agriculture, strove to form a consensus among the pesticide in dustry, environmental and consumer groups, labor unions, farmers, and state agriculture officials on what changes were needed in the bill. Brown's efforts were not entirely successful. The bill that emerged so swiftly from the full committee re flects largely the views of the pesti cide industry, although the industry did not get all it wanted and other groups did win a few concessions. The most controversial changes made by the committee probably are those dealing with a state's right under the present law to set stricter registration and use requirements than those set by the federal govern ment So far only one state—Cali fornia—has taken advantage of that provision, but that has been enough to give the pesticide industry head aches and to prompt industry, par ticularly the Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association, which represents the nonagricultural pes-
UndarbH, atatm $tm may ragulata ptatkXb* $uch a$ that being applhd hara
ticide industry, to seek changes in that provision of FIFRA. Among the "unnecessary and un reasonable burdens" CSMA says are imposed by the California Depart ment of Food & Agriculture is exces sive time to process applications for products already federally and state registered. CSMA also assailed reuirements to generate additional ata beyond those necessary to obtain a federal registration for the same product and product uses. As approved by the Agriculture Committee, states would retain their right to enforce more stringent pes ticide standards than those set by EPA and also to require more health and safety data than does the federal government. However, those rights would be somewhat circumscribed under the bill. When dealing with a question of special local concern within a state, the state authorities could require pesticide producers to submit data in addition to those given the federal authorities. If a pesticide firm challenged the request, the next step would depend on the type of material involved. If the challenge involved a pesticide used in the production of commercial food, fiber, and feed crops, the issue would be settled entirely under state law. However, if pesticides used for other purposes were involved, the request could be appealed to EPA and the administrator could overrule or modify the state request for data. In addition, the bill, H.R. 5203, would set strict time limits on the period in which states must act to
S
approve or deny pesticide registration or reregistration applications. The committee also approved tighter restrictions on the public disclosure of information submitted in support of pesticide registration application, including manufacturing methods, methods used for testing active ingredients, and the effects of the pesticide on animals, human health, and the environment The bill would require EPA to issue regula tions under which health and safety test data would be available to the public, but verbatim details of the reports would not be available to pesticidefirmsthat compete with the companies that filed the reports. Tnus the data would be open to the general public, including scientists, state and federal agencies, and public interest and labor organizations. All health and safety and environ mental test data could be discussed publicly, but verbatim copies of studies could not be given to com mercial pesticidefirms.In a few cases in which health and safety data re ports included innovative methods and technology, that information would be disclosed only to scientists and representatives of health, envi ronmental, and labor groups that wished to conduct peer reviews or duplicate studies. In addition, the bill would extend from the present 10 to 15 years the period during which a manufacturer has exclusive use of the data it de velops to support registration of a new ingredient. This means that if an other company later wants to register May 24, 1982 C&EN
25
Good news for alpha olefin users from the world's largest supplier. Your cup runneth over. With the start-up of our expanded Houston plant, Ethyl now has enough alpha olefin production capacity in the C6 to Ci 8 range to meet the merchant market requirements of the entire world. Further expansions will be made, as needed, to keep our alpha olefin capability well ahead of requirements. So if you've been concerned about present or future olefin supplies, be assured that Ethyl is now, and will continue to be your Number One supplier.. .wherever you are. Ethyl alpha olefin technology offers a unique advantage. Production can be quickly changed by automated computer controls to provide the carbon chain lengths in most demand at any given time. Standard products include even-numbered single-carbon cuts from C 4 to C12 and blends from C6 to C18. With their terminal double-bond, it is easy to attach a wide variety of functional groups. Free laboratory samples are available for evaluation. Write or phone the office nearest you: Ethyl Chemicals Group, 451 Florida Blvd., Baton Rouge, LA 70801 U.S.A. From U.S., phone (504) 388-7556; from Latin America, phone (504) 388-7050. Ethyl S.A., Avenue Louise 523, Boite 19, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium. From Europe, Middle East, Africa, phone 322-640-3800. Ethyl Asia Pacific Company, 06-05 Unity House, 1 Science Center Road, Singapore 2260. From Far East, phone (65) 561-0455. Ethyl Canada Inc., 48 St. Clair Avenue West, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4V2Z2. From Canada, phone (416) 962-1611.
Ethyl
Chemicals Group
Gov0fnnwnt
Why you should be interested in locating in the Southern Alleghenies of Pennsylvania: Financing.
3% We have i' Eor y o u r e x p a n s i o n or r e l o c a t i o n in s o u t h - c e n t r a l P e n n s y l v a n i a , w e can h e l p y o u s e c u r e up to 70 of y o u r site a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n costs At interest rates as low as 3 That s right Three per c e n t We c a n help y o u s e c u r e m o n e y for new e q u i p m e n t at a g o o d interest rate too Site a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s E q u i p m e n t c o s t s We w a n t y o u to c o m e to the S o u t h e r n A l l e g h e n i e s a n d take a d v a n t a g e of our s p e c i a l f i n a n c i n g A n d o n c e y o u re here, t h e r e arc other t h i n g s y o u II w a n t to take a d v a n t a g e of free m a n a g e m e n t t r a i n i n g , a b u n d a n t n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s , a n d a c r i m e rate that is c o n s i s t e n t l y the first or s e c o n d l o w e s t in the n a t i o n . A n d r e m e m b e r a 3 interest rate o n 70 of your site a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n costs
Name:. Title: _
Company: State.
Address:
Zip_
Phone:: I'm interested in further information for immediate use D Financing
D Labor Market
-for future reference D Warehouse/Distribution
D Shells & Sites D Manufacturing Facilities D Research & Development D Other
Southern Alleghenies Commission Suite 400 1506 11th Avenue Altoona, PA 16601 814-946-1641 28
CAEN May 24, 1982
a similar ingredient, it cannot back up its application by referring to the original test, unless it has the consent of the firm that did the original research. With this exception, the bill specifically authorizes an applicant who wants to register a pesticide to either submit original research data or to cite data previously submitted to EPA. In cases in which EPA is requiring new research data to support continuation of an existing pesticide registration, the bill sets up new procedures under which all manufacturers of the substance could share the costs of producing the required new data. It also would require EPA to compile and make available to the ublic an index of all data protected y exclusive use. In the occupational area, the bill would require the EPA administrator to develop any necessary regulations on minimum re-entry time into fields treated with pesticides and minimum requirements for storing, warehousing, and disposing of pesticides in cases in which workers are not alreadv rotected by Occupational Safety & lealth Administration regulations. Another provision of the bill would make it illegal for an employer to fire or otherwise discriminate against employees who exercise their rights under FIFRA. EPA now has the authority to cancel the registration of a pesticide or to change the classification of a registered pesticide if new evidence shows that it should be banned or controlled more strictly. The bill would give EPA a third power, that of hasing out the use of a pesticide, lowever, in all cases the administrator would have to consider a new factor—the impact of the possible action on agricultural producers. In addition, the bill would extend for five years EPA's Scientific Advisory Panel and provide for publication in the Federal Register of all comments, evaluations, and recommendations made by the panel in its pesticide studies. The bill would set funding for EPA's pesticide programs at $56.4 million in fiscal 1983 and allow a 6% increase in fiscal 1984. The Senate Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry Committee last year reported out a simple two-year reauthorization of FIFRA, but the bill has never been brought up for a floor vote primarily because of the review of more far-reaching legislative changes being carried on in the House. Now that that work is all but completed, the Senate committee is expected to begin work on the bill shortly. Janice Long, Washington
C
B
E
