EPA Will Allow Some Pesticide Use In Water Without Permit

The agricultural chemicals industry says it welcomes a decision by the Environmental Protection Agency that will allow pesticides to be applied by farmers, ranchers, and public health officials over and near bodies of water without first obtaining a permit under the Clean Water Act.

But pesticide manufacturers also maintain that the scope of the final rule, issued on Nov. 21, should be broader. "EPA's action clarifies two important situations where a permit will not be needed before applying pesticides, but it only applies to aquatic uses and forest canopy applications of pesticides," says Jay J. Vroom, president and chief executive officer of CropLife America, an industry trade group.

Under the new regulation, pesticides can be applied directly into water or sprayed nearby without a pollution permit if the application is needed to control aquatic weeds, mosquitoes, or other pests.

EPA says the measure clarifies that permits issued under the Clean Water Act are not required so long as the pesticides are sprayed in compliance with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the federal statute governing the registration and application of pesticides.

"This clean water rule strengthens and streamlines efforts of public health officials and communities to control pests and invasive species while maintaining important environmental safeguards," says Benjamin H. Grumbles, EPA's assistant administrator for water.

Vroom says the rule removes some ambiguity in the permit question for public health officials and a few other pesticide users and partially closes the door on lawsuits that could arise from this gray area governing pesticide use.

"For the rule to be comprehensive, it should apply to all applications of pesticides, which would encompass production agricultural uses of crop protection products and other essential applications of pesticides," Vroom states.

Environmental activists, however, charge the permitting exemption will lead to more toxic chemicals getting into the nation's waterways. "This EPA action allows the weaker and more generalized standards under FIFRA to trump the more stringent Clean Water Act standards," says Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, a Washington, D.C.-based activist group.

The water pollution law, he explains, uses a health-based standard known as maximum contamination levels to protect waterways and requires permits when chemicals are directly deposited into rivers, lakes, and streams. FIFRA, in contrast, uses a subjective risk assessment with no attention to the safest alternative. "Studies suggest that more protection is needed from pesticides, not less," Feldman asserts.

EPA's action was also criticized by Sen. James M. Jeffords (I-Vt.), ranking member of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee, who says the waiver rule is contrary to the purpose of the Clean Water Act. "We must strengthen, not weaken, our policies and laws that prevent pesticides from polluting rivers, streams, lakes, and our underground water supplies," Jeffords says.

"Pesticide applications in or near water should not be exempt from Clean Water Act permitting, which is what EPA has now allowed for," Jeffords declares. "Residues from pesticides discharged into water are clearly pollutants within the meaning of the act."