US Pesticide Reduction Signal

In June the Clinton Administration announced its commitment to reducing the use of pesticides and promoting sustainable agriculture (see PN 21 p.6.). By September 1993, the Administration developed these ideas  further(1). They hope to put relevant legislation before the US Congress half-way through 1994. Local environmentalists and consumer groups have welcomed the move in general whilst criticising aspects of the proposal.

Food safety

The Clinton Administration intends to establish a strong, protective and health- based safety standard for pesticide residues in all types of food. They intend to provide a timely review of all existing tolerances to ensure that they meet this standard and, strengthen the authorities of food safety regulatory agencies.

Tolerance setting: a new approach

For chronic effects such as cancer, it is proposed that exposure to a pesticide residue would have, with reasonable certainty, a no harm/negligible risk standard.  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would assume high food consumption rates, that residues  are present at tolerance levels and 100% of the crop is treated. EPA will be required to consider other potential routes of exposure to the same or related chemicals including drinking water or non-dietary exposures, risks of other chemicals causing the same effect, and risk to potentially sensitive populations. 

Tolerances for children

The proposals set by the EPA are a direct response to recommendations of the 1993 NAS report Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children(2) (see PN 21 p.4). The Administration supports greater funding for the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to collect improved food consumption data for children. The EPA will look at multiple sources of exposure.    

Review of existing tolerances

The proposals will include a requirement that all tolerances meet new safety standards by fixed deadlines. All tolerances should be completed within seven years of the reform legislation being passed.   

Fast track review

The EPA will identify potentially higher risk pesticides for priority attention. They have estimated that at least 75% will be completed within four years.  

Time-limited tolerances

Tolerances will remain for a non-renewable period of no more than five years for a pesticide that does not satisfy the standard, to maintain direct health benefits or to avoid significant disruption to food supply. 

Not just food residues

The Administration’s proposals would address farm worker risk, groundwater contamination, hazards to endangered species, and exposures to children and others to pesticides used for lawns or residential pest control.

'Sunset' pesticides

The Administration proposes a 'sunset' for pesticide registrations to make sure all pesticides are reviewed periodically and taken off the market if the supporting data do not meet modern scientific standards. Future registrations would expire after 15 years unless a new application meeting then-current scientific standards is approved.

Phase-out/phase down

Currently, pesticide production and use can continue for years as data are generated to resolve scientific questions, while the public bears the potential risk. A new phase-out/phase-down proposal would give the EPA a regulatory tool to reduce potential risks when questions arise about the safety of registered products.

Incentives for reduced risk

The EPA will establish criteria for designation of reduced risk pesticides. Time-limited conditional registration for biologically based pesticides may be granted before full data is developed if the pesticide is unlikely to pose a risk.  

Risk and use reduction

The EPA and USDA have announced a one year process to develop specific pesticide use reduction goals for various segments of agriculture to be achieved by the year 2000.   

IPM in 75% of farms by 2000

The Administration hopes Congress will endorse the EPA goal of implementing IPM programmes for 75% of total crop acreage by the year 2000. The EPA already support several pilot ecosystem-based reduced use programmes, tailored to specific regions and involving all relevant sectors of society (growers, home owners, officials, industry and others).

Pesticide usage data

Not enough is known about pesticide use in the US. Pesticide use surveys will be increased and record-keeping will be required.  

Worker exposure 

Improved surveillance data, follow-up, and analysis should help identify pesticides posing the greatest risk to workers. The EPA’s Incident Data System received about 2,000 incidents during 1992. A poison control centre surveillance system reported about 55,000 pesticide exposure incidents of which 28,000 involved children under six years old.  

Export legislation adopting PIC

Proposed legislation should prohibit the export of any pesticide to a country that has decided not to import it under the UN prior informed consent (PIC) procedure. Export of any pesticide banned or severely restricted in the US on health grounds, or voluntarily cancelled by the manufacturer for health or safety reasons, will be banned. This would include about 50 pesticides. Pesticides never-registered for food use should only be exported if there is a US tolerance for the active ingredient and/or an EPA method capable of detecting residues in food.  

No chemical-by-chemical assessment

Until recently, pesticides have been regulated on a pesticide-by-pesticide basis. The USDA has initiated a 'cluster' approach to examine all pesticides on a crop basis. This will assess relative impact and risks. The Administration will not adopt percentage volume reduction targets but aims to discourage use of higher risk products; to provide incentives for development of safer products; and to encourage alternative control methods.   

Biocontrol / biological pesticides

Biological pesticides are the fastest growing segment of the US registration process. In the past two years, 50% to 70% of all new active ingredients  registered have been biologicals. New applications are given a high priority—registration processing time is generally six  to 18 months compared to two to three years for a conventional pesticide.   

Reduced risk policy

The EPA is in the process of developing a  reduced risk policy which will focus on: adopting reduced-risk criteria; streamlining the registration process; initiating pesticide label reform; and information outreach.   

The expansion of extension

The Administration will increase its efforts in research and expansion programmes in terms of IPM education.  

The reaction of environmentalists

In general, environmentalists have welcomed these initiatives. “The Clinton Adminstration has adopted the right language” according to Jenifer Curtis of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Many ideas need clarification. The proposals fail to define IPM. Most environmental organisations would like to see quantitative targets on volume and risk reduction, and  more attention paid to water, health and the environment. Delays are also foreseen on the road ahead. (DB)

1. Testimony of Carol Browner, EPA, Richard Rominger, USDA and David Kessler, FDA before the Committee on Labor and Human Resources, US Senate and Subcommittee on Health and the Environment & Committee on Energy and Commerce, US House of Representatives, 21 September 1993.  

2. National Research Council, Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children, National Academy Press, Washington D.C., 1993.

[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 22, December 1993, page 16]