Volume 24,No. 4 October 2006

In this issue . . .

Pesticide Worker Safety Regulatory Development and the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee - July 2006

Coordinator's Comments

Worker Protection Standard: Focus on eye flush requirements

2006-07 Commercial Pesticide Certification Calendar

N.D.Department of Agriculture Releases Personal Protective Equipment Definitions

Certified Crop Adviser Continuing Education Units Available at Commercial Pesticide Applicator Trainings

EPA Announces a Voluntary Cancellation for Lindane

EPA Announces Intention to Phase Out Carbofuran Use in Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision - August 2006

Commercial Pest Certification Form  (PDF 71KB)

Pesticide Worker Safety Regulatory Development and the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee - July 2006

Issue

The Environmental Protection Agency is considering changes to the agricultural worker protection regulation and the pesticide applicator certification regulation. These regulations have been unchanged for 11 and 32 years, respectively.

Background

• The agricultural worker protection regulation is intended to safeguard workers who enter pesticide-treated areas on farms and in forests, nurseries and greenhouses to perform crop-related tasks, such as harvesting or pruning, and those who mix, load or handle agricultural pesticides. The regulation has provisions for training, posting in treated areas, entry restrictions and personal protective equipment.
• The certification of pesticide applicators regulation requires those who intend to apply restricted-use pesticides demonstrate competency and become certified to use these pesticides. This requirement is designed to assure that certified applicators are adequately prepared to protect human health and the environment from misapplication and exposure to pesticides.
• The changes to the regulations being considered are based, in part, on the culmination of separate assessments of the certification of pesticide applicator and agricultural worker protection programs. The process for, and the findings from, these assessments are summarized in the Report on the National Assessment of EPA's Pesticide Worker Safety Program. In both assessments, issues were identified that can be addressed only through regulation change.
• For more information about these proposed regulatory changes, refer to the Report on the National Assessment of EPA's Pesticide Worker Safety Program at:
  - www.epa.gov/oppfead1/safety/workshops.htm
  - www.epa.gov/pesticides/ppdc/2005/october05/session7-2.pdf

Status

Based on internal program review and stakeholder input from the assessments, EPA has developed issue papers that describe the concern, background and proposed regulatory options for addressing the concern. These issue papers provide the beginning point for developing regulatory text, which in turn will be formed into a proposal for regulatory change.

A work group of the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC) has been formed to provide a mechanism for stakeholder input on the regulation change process. The PPDC Worker Safety Regulation Change Workgroup met in February and June 2006, and a process has been developed for stakeholders' informed participation in the regulation change discussions. At the June 2006 PPDC meeting, EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs committed to sharing the preliminary draft issue papers with the PPDC work group, and to follow up with conference calls for discussion. The first set of issue papers for work group discussion was selected based on the work group's input. They are:

1. Ensure that users of potentially harmful pesticides have the appropriate competence to use the pesticides safely

2. Protect public health and the environment by ensuring that users of potentially harmful pesticides have adequate supervision

3. Ensure that pesticide dealers have the competency to protect public health, the environment and homeland security by safely overseeing and controlling access to pesticides

4. Ensure that children do not endanger their own health, the health of others and the health of the environment by occupationally applying pesticides

5. Protect human health and the environment by ensuring that occupational users of potentially harmful pesticides pass a reliable gauge that determines their competency to use pesticides safely

About the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC)

The PPDC, established in 1995, was renewed in November 2003 for two more years under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This committee provides a forum for a diverse group of stakeholders to provide feedback to the pesticide program on various pesticide regulatory, policy and program implementation issues. Topics of discussion at past meetings have included inerts disclosure, registration review, spray drift, nonanimal testing, anti-microbial pesticides, endangered species, reduced-risk pesticides, labeling, minor uses, ecological standards, fees for service, experimental-use permits, environmental marketing claims, outreach to the public and several implementation issues emanating from the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996.

Membership in the committee includes environmental and public interest groups, pesticide manufacturers and trade associations, user and commodity groups, public health and academic institutions, federal and state agencies, and the general public. The committee meets two to three times a year, and all meetings are open to the public. Background materials, along with a summary of each meeting, are kept in a public docket 28 at EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs. The docket is in Room 1132, Crystal Mall No. 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Va., and is available for viewing Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. For additional information on the PPDC, go to:

www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/ppdc/

Comments may be made during the public comment session of each PPDC meeting or in writing to the address below:

Jim Jones, Director
Office of Pesticide Programs, OPPTS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. (7501P)
Washington, D.C. 20460

Coordinator's Comments

Fall marks the beginning of the pesticide certification training season. This year is no exception, but by the time you read this issue of the Pesticide Quarterly (PQ), we already will have conducted half a dozen trainings. We are starting much earlier than in years past because we have a very aggressive calendar. This PQ is chock-full of news, notices and opportunities, so read it carefully, especially if you need to participate in trainings to maintain your certificate.

Some of the high points you should take note of are:

• If your certification category expires April 1, 2007, you will need to participate in a training session, complete a home-study correspondence course (minor categories only) and/or take a monitored exam to obtain a new three-year certificate.
• Ornamental and turfgrass applicators especially should note that the home-study correspondence course no longer is offered as a means for recertification. This was implemented because ornamental and turfgrass no longer is considered a minor category. Plus, we have multiple (eight) live trainings spread across the state.
• Preregistration is required for all trainings in 2006-07. Registrations at the door will be taken on a space-available basis only.
• Certified crop adviser credits again will be offered for our commercial agricultural pest trainings.

RIP, Lindane and Carbofuran

This issue of the PQ contains notices about the cancellation of a couple of old, stalwart pesticides, lindane and carbofuran (Furadan). In the scheme of things, these cancellations are not a surprise. But, I can't help feeling sentimental about losing a few trusted tools. For nearly three decades, these compounds were the cornerstones of wireworm management in grains and general insect pest management in oilseeds, potatoes and rangeland. Plus lindane once was thought to be indispensable for human scabies and lice control. I guess only a pesticide specialist would mourn their loss, but the time has come to say goodbye and move on.

Federal Regulation Changes for WPS and C and T

Finally, this issue has a note about the EPA's intention to revise the federal certification and training regulations and the worker protection standard regulations. Most people think some changes need to be made, but the same people quickly add that the "devil is in the details." Well, EPA revealed some of those details starting with the Pesticide Program Dialog Committee in June. Since then, people in my line of work have had hundreds of pages of issue papers to wade through to understand what is being proposed and why.

North Dakota is fortunate in that I sit as the chair of EPA's Certification and Training Assessment Group and therefore have had an opportunity to study and debate these proposals for several months, and in some cases several years. Plus, I was invited to a four-day intensive workshop in September to thrash through them with about 45 of my colleagues from across the United States. So, what do I know? Well, this process is ongoing and this still is way too early to get into specifics, but I can say, so far, many of the proposals will not make substantive impacts on how North Dakota works with pesticides. This is because many of our laws and regulations already are well beyond what EPA is proposing. Does that mean North Dakota is too regulatory and bureaucratic? Perhaps, but based on my feedback from the industry, and after looking at other states, I think we are ahead of the curve.

Stay tuned, and when I have more to share, you will hear about this at trainings or in future issues of the PQ.

Best regards,

Andrew A. Thostenson,
Pesticide Program Specialist

Worker Protection Standard: Focus on eye flush requirements

This fact sheet will help you understand how to comply with Worker Protection Standard (WPS) requirements for ensuring your employees have access to water for eye flushing. The questions answered here were submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency by people seeking clarification on this part of the regulation.

The WPS requires the agricultural employer to assure that at least 1 pint of water is immediately available to each worker performing early entry activities for which the pesticide labeling requires protective eyewear. Similarly, the WPS requires the handlers' employer to assure that at least 1 pint of water is immediately available to each handler who is performing tasks for which the pesticide labeling requires protective eyewear.

What does "immediately available" mean?

In both sections of the WPS addressing availability of eye flush water, the agency requires emergency eye flush water be carried by the handler or early entry worker, or be on the vehicle (or aircraft) the handler or early entry worker is using, or be otherwise immediately accessible. [40 CFR §§ 170.150(b)(4) and 170.250(d)].

When is eye flush water "immediately accessible"?

The WPS How To Comply manual states that emergency eye flush water may be at the decontamination site if the decontamination site is immediately accessible. Because the WPS specifies that eyewash water must be carried by the handler or early entry worker, or must be on the vehicle or aircraft that the handler or early entry worker is using, the eyewash water must be close and accessible to the worker or handler at all times. In addition, because concentrations and causticity of agricultural chemicals vary so greatly (and therefore the duration of exposure necessary for ocular damage to occur is difficult to uniformly determine), emergency eyewash water must be available immediately. If the emergency eyewash water is not being carried on one's person, it must be situated at such a distance that one could get to it within very few seconds.

If emergency eye flush water must be close, accessible and situated so one could get to it within very few seconds, what are some examples of places it may be located/stored so the above criteria are met?

In addition to the examples listed above, the following might be additional examples of "immediately available":

• Running water, a commercial eye flush dispenser or decontamination water in a carboy at a mix/load, storage, equipment cleaning or repairing, or other stationary handling (or early entry) site for handlers or early entry workers engaged in such activities at the site
• Running water or commercial eye flush dispensers that are at frequent intervals and easily accessed by the handlers/early entry workers in a bench-type nursery or greenhouse site
• Water that meets the WPS standard for decontamination water that is in a nurse tank or other supply tank that is on (or being dragged by) the vehicle a handler or early entry worker is operating

What are some examples of unacceptable locations to store emergency eye flush water (i.e., where water would not be immediately available)?

Examples of situations where emergency eye flush water would not be immediately accessible are:

• Water on a vehicle but in a locked compartment
• Water for which difficult or time-consuming steps must be taken to access, such as having to uncouple or connect a nurse tank hose, unlock a compartment holding the eye flush dispenser or unlock a restroom
• Water located across a stream or commercial road

Does the eye flush water requirement in the WPS need to be in 1-pint containers only? Can a single, large container suffice if the contents equal or exceed 1 pint per worker?

A single, large container would suffice if it were immediately accessible to each worker or handler who requires it. [40 CFR § 170.150]

For more information

To get more facts about compliance, contact the Ag Center by phone, fax or mail. Call the toll-free number to ask compliance questions or order publications. At the Ag Center's Web site, you can explore compliance information and order or download publications. For a complete publications list, request document 10001, "Ag Center Publications."

The Ag Center welcomes comments on this document and its other services.

National Agriculture Compliance Assistance Center
901 5th St. N.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Toll-free: (888) 663-2155

Internet: www.epa.gov/agriculture

2006-07 Commercial Pesticide Certification Calendar

Here are schedules you can use for planning your training needs in the next several months. Preregistration is required for all trainings. If you do not preregister, you have no guarantee you will get in the door. When you preregister, you will receive a $10 discount. A training registration/home-study course material form is included in this issue of the Pesticide Quarterly. Preregistration forms must be postmarked 10 days prior to the training date to receive the discount.

Online preregistration also is available on the Web through our secure server. Electronic preregistration forms for downloading and printing are at www.ndsupesticide.org. Initial trainings are designed for new applicators or dealers needing to prepare to take certification exams. Recertification trainings are structured to give certified applicators the information necessary to maintain or renew their certificates.

Home-study course recertification is available for those categories that are not on the training calendar or for the following categories: greenhouse, home industrial and institutional, public health, vertebrate and wood preservation.

 

•AgPest, Right-of-Way, Seed Treatment, Research and Demonstration
Date	Type	Time	Location
Nov. 28, 2006 Northern Ag Expo	Recertification	Registration 7:30 a.m.; Training 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.	Fargo, Fargodome, 1800 University Drive N.
Dec. 5, 2006	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Dickinson, Days Inn, Grand Dakota Lodge, 532 15th St. W.
Feb. 1, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Minot, International Inn, 1505 Broadway N.
Feb. 13-14, 2007	Initial	2/13 - Registration 1 p.m.; Training 1:30 - 4 p.m.; 2/14 - Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m. No exams during this training; schedule with your county Extension office	Mandan, Seven Seas Hotel, 2611 Old Red Trail
Feb. 15, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Mandan, Seven Seas Hotel, 2611 Old Red Trail
Feb. 27, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Crosby, Divide County Extension, 300 2nd Ave. N.
Feb. 27, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Fargo, Cass County Annex, 1010 2nd Ave. S.
Feb. 27, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Fessenden, Wells County Extension, 600 Railway St. N.
Feb. 27, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Linton, Emmons County Extension, 100 4th St. N.W.
Feb. 28-Mar. 1, 2007 NDAAA Convention, must attend both days	Aerial App. ONLY Recertification	TBA*	Fargo, Holiday Inn, 3803 13th Ave. S.W., I-29 and 13th Ave. S.
March 6, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Devils Lake, Ramsey County Courthouse, 524 4th Ave. N.E.
March 6, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m	LaMoure, LaMoure County Extension, 202 4th Ave. N.W.
March 6, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m	Mohall, Renville County Courthouse, 205 Main St. E.
March 6, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Watford City, McKenzie County Courthouse, 201 5th St. N.W.
Mar. 14-15, 2007	Initial	3/14 - 1 p.m. Registration Training 1:30 - 4 p.m.; 3/15 - Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m. No exams during this training; exams available March 16 or schedule with your county Extension office	Fargo, NDSU Memorial Union Ballroom
March 16, 2007	Exam day	8 a.m. - 5 p.m.	Fargo, NDSU Loftsgard 380
March 20, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Grand Forks, Holiday Inn, 1210 43rd St. N., junction I-29 and U.S. Highway 2
March 30, 2007	Recertification	Registration 8 a.m.; Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Fargo, Ramada Plaza Suites, 1636 42nd St. S.W.

 

•Home, Industrial and Institutional
Date	Type	Time	Location
Nov. 2, 2006	Initial, Recertification	Registration 8:30 a.m. Training 9 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Fargo, NDSU Loftsgard Hall 260

*TBA - To be announced in a future issue of the Pesticide Quarterly newsletter.

North Dakota Department of Agriculture Releases Personal Protective Equipment Definitions

Personal Protective Equipment

Apparel and devices worn to protect the body from contact with pesticides or pesticide residue, including coveralls, chemical-resistant suits, gloves, footwear, aprons, headgear, protective eyewear and respirators. While the following attire is not defined as PPE, the labeling may require pesticide handlers or early entry workers to wear it for some tasks: long- and short-sleeved shirts, long and short pants, shoes and socks, and other items of regular work clothing. If such non-PPE attire is required, the employer must make sure it is worn.

Chemical Resistant

Allows no measurable amount of the pesticide being used to move through the material during use.

Waterproof

Allows no measurable movement of water (or water-based solutions) through the material during use.

Chemical-resistant Footwear

Chemical-resistant shoes, chemical-resistant boots or chemical-resistant shoe coverings worn over shoes or boots. Substitution: Leather boots may be worn in rough terrain if chemical-resistant footwear with sufficient durability and a tread appropriate for wear in such terrain is not obtainable.

Protective Eyewear

Goggles, a face shield or safety glasses with front, brow and temple protection. Substitution: A full-face respirator may be worn instead of protective eyewear.

Chemical-resistant Suit

A loose-fitting, one- or two-piece, chemical-resistant garment that covers, at a minimum, the entire body except head, hands and feet.

Coverall

A loose-fitting one-or two-piece garment that covers, at a minimum, the entire body except head, hands and feet. Coveralls are made of fabric, such as cotton or a cotton-polyester blend, and are not chemical-resistant. The pesticide labeling may specify that the coveralls be worn over a layer of clothing. Substitution: A chemical-resistant suit may be worn instead of coveralls and any required inner layer of clothing.

Chemical-resistant Apron

An apron that is made of chemical-resistant material and that covers the front of the body from midchest to the knees. Substitution: If a chemical-resistant suit is worn, no apron is required.

Respirator

A device that protects the respiratory system. It must be the type listed on the pesticide label (or one that is more protective) and must be appropriate for the pesticide product being used and for the activity being performed. Substitutions: A respirator with a canister approved for pesticides or with an organic-vapor cartridge equipped with a pesticide prefilter may be worn instead of a dust/mist filtering respirator.

Chemical-resistant Headgear

A chemical-resistant hood or a chemical-resistant hat with a wide brim.

Gloves

Hand coverings that are the type listed on the pesticide label.

• Gloves made of leather, cotton or other absorbent materials must not be worn for handling or early entry activities unless these materials are listed on the pesticide labeling as acceptable for such use.
• Chemical-resistant gloves with nonseparable absorbent lining materials must not be worn for handling or early entry activities.
• Substitution: Leather gloves may be worn over chemical-resistant liners if chemical-resistant gloves with sufficient durability and suppleness are not obtainable. However, after leather gloves have been worn for protection from pesticide exposure, they may be worn only with chemical-resistant liners and may not be worn for any other use.

Separable Glove Liners

Separable glove liners are separate glovelike hand coverings made of lightweight material, with or without fingers.

• Work gloves made from lightweight cotton or poly-type material are considered to be glove liners if worn beneath chemical-resistant gloves.
• Unless the pesticide product labeling specifically prohibits their use, separable glove liners may be worn beneath chemical-resistant gloves, provided the liners do not extend outside the chemical-resistant gloves that are worn over them.
• Once used for handling or early entry activities, separable glove liners must be discarded immediately after a total of 10 hours of use or within 24 hours of first use, whichever occurs first. The liners must be replaced immediately if they come into direct contact with pesticides. Pesticide-contaminated liners must be disposed of in accordance with any federal, state or local regulations.

Certified Crop Adviser Continuing Education Units Available at Commercial Pesticide Applicator Trainings

The NDSU Extension Service Pesticide Program is offering certified crop advisers the opportunity to obtain their continuing education units (CEUs) at commercial pesticide training sessions.

Please note that you must attend 100 percent of the training to receive your CEU credits. No exceptions allowed!

Fees for attending a session are as follows:

• $ 5 per credit for crop advisers who also are attending for commercial pesticide certification
• $10 per credit for crop advisers who are attending for CEUs only

Please preregister 10 days before a training to ensure adequate space at each location. Call the NDSU Extension Pesticide Program with any questions at (701) 231-7180.

 

Date	Times	Location	CEU Breakdown
Nov. 28, 2006 6 credits	Registration 7:30 a.m. Training 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.	Fargo, Fargodome 1800 University Drive N.	Soil and Water Management - 1.5 Pest Management - 4.5
Dec. 5, 2006 6 credits	Registration 8 a.m. Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Dickinson, Days Inn, Grand Dakota Lodge, 532 15th St. W.	Soil and Water Management - 1.5 Pest Management - 4.5
Feb. 1, 2007 6 credits	Registration 8 a.m. Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Minot, International Inn 1505 Broadway N.	Soil and Water Management - 1.5 Pest Management - 4.5
Feb. 13-14, 2007 (must attend both days) 9 credits	Feb. 13: Registration 1 p.m. Training 1:30 - 4 p.m. Feb 14: Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Mandan, Seven Seas Hotel 2611 Old Red Trail	Soil and Water Management - 2.5 Pest Management - 6.5
Feb. 15, 2007 6 credits	Registration 8 a.m. Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Mandan, Seven Seas Hotel 2611 Old Red Trail	Soil and Water Management - 1.5 Pest Management - 4.5
Feb. 27, 2007 6 credits	Registration 8 a.m. Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Crosby, Divide County Extension, 300 2nd Ave. N. Fargo, Cass County Annex 1010 2nd Ave. S. Fessenden, Wells County Extension, 600 Railway St. N. Linton, Emmons County Extension, 100 4th St. N.W.	Soil and Water Management - 1.5 Pest Management - 4.5
March 6, 2007 6 credits	Registration 8 a.m. Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Devils Lake, Ramsey County Courthouse, 524 4th Ave. N.E. LaMoure, LaMoure County Extension, 202 4th Ave. N.W. Mohall, Renville County Courthouse, 205 Main St. E. Watford City, McKenzie County Courthouse, 201 5th St. N.W.	Soil and Water Management - 1.5 Pest Management - 4.5
Mar. 14-15, 2007 (must attend both days) 9 credits	March 14: Registration 1 p.m. Training 1:30 - 4 p.m. March 15: Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Fargo, NDSU Memorial Union Ballroom	Soil and Water Management - 2.5 Pest Management - 6.5
March 20, 2007 6 credits	Registration 8 a.m. Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Grand Forks, Holiday Inn 1210 43rd St. N., Jct. I-29 & U.S. Hwy 2	Soil and Water Management - 1.5 Pest Management - 4.5
March 30, 2007 6 credits	Registration 8 a.m. Training 8:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.	Fargo, Ramada Plaza Suites 1636 42nd St. S.W.	Soil and Water Management - 1.5 Pest Management - 4.5

Certified Crop Adviser - CEU Preregistration 2006-07

Include fee

(Please print)

Name ____________________________

Phone ___________________________

Address __________________________

City ______________________________

State ______Zip _______________

I will attend the following workshop:

Date ___/___/___ City ____________

Fee

Attending for CEUs only?

_____ credits

x 10

Total$__________

Attending for pesticide certification also?

_____ credits

x 5

Total$__________

Make checks payable to: NDSU Extension Pesticide Program

(If paying by personal check, the state of North Dakota requires your birth date on the check.)

Return to:
NDSU Extension Pesticide Program
P.O. Box 5051
Fargo, ND 58105-5051

EPA Announces a Voluntary Cancellation for Lindane

On Aug. 2, 2006, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that registrants Chemtura USA Corp., followed by AGSCO Inc., Drexel Chemical Co. and JLM Industries Inc., requested to voluntarily cancel all remaining pesticide registrations of the organochlorine pesticide lindane. EPA also has made a determination that the remaining uses of lindane are not eligible for re-registration. The agency has found the costs of continued lindane registration outweigh the benefits of the remaining seed treatment uses for barley, corn, oats, rye, sorghum and wheat. Cancellation of these uses is expected to result in no significant loss to U.S. agriculture because safer alternative pesticides have been development and registered in recent years. Once the cancellation process is complete, EPA will propose to revoke the existing tolerances or limits for residues of lindane in animal fat.

EPA's lindane decision is set forth in the July 2006 addendum to the July 2002 Lindane Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED). This 20-page document can be found at:

www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/lindane_red_addendum.pdf

This document reflects EPA's conclusions on the lindane seed treatment use in light of information gathered since the 2002 RED.

Background

The six seed treatment use cancellations are the last of many lindane voluntary cancellations that have taken place since the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) was enacted. Lindane first was registered in the 1940s, and has been used in the U.S. on a wide variety of agricultural, residential, commercial and other sites. Lindane was the subject of a special review in the late 1970s. EPA issued a registration standard for lindane in 1985, requiring the submission of additional data. Since 1998, the registrants have voluntarily canceled a large number of lindane uses, including direct treatment of livestock, pet products, ornamentals, home lawns, fallow areas, commercial food processing facilities and storage areas, greenhouses, wood treatment, forestry and Christmas tree plantations; military use on human skin and clothing; foliar treatment to many fruits and vegetables, pecans and tobacco; and seed treatment of many additional field crops, such as alfalfa, brassica and cole crops, cotton, soybeans and sunflowers. By 2002, all lindane uses were cancelled voluntarily except the six lindane seed treatment uses that are being addressed at this time (barley, corn, oats, rye, sorghum and wheat).

Lindane's Toxicity

Lindane primarily affects the nervous system, causing neurotoxic effects. It also appears to cause liver and kidney toxicity, and may act as an endocrine disruptor. Infants and children may be more susceptible to the potential adverse effects of lindane than adults.

Sources of Lindane Exposure

Seed treatment is a source of human exposure to lindane. People may be exposed to lindane residues when eating plants grown from treated seeds; eating meat from livestock that were fed grain grown from lindane-treated seed; or drinking water in areas where treated seeds were planted. Also, lindane volatilizes into the atmosphere from treated seeds, contributing to human exposure via any route.

Past uses of lindane also may result in ongoing exposure because of lindane's extreme persistence and ability to bio-accumulate and be transported long distances.

Imported meats may contain lindane residues; U.S. tolerances exist for lindane in livestock fat.

Subsistence diets of indigenous populations may contain residues of lindane and other HCH isomers. These chemicals are mobile in the environment, can be transported long distances, concentrate in the food chain and tend to accumulate in colder climates, such as the Arctic. Residues of lindane and other HCH isomers are found in walruses, seals and whales in Alaska, even though these animals are not in areas where lindane is manufactured or used.

Pharmaceutical use of lindane for treatment of lice and scabies results in exposure to the treated individual, as well as exposure to the general population as a result of "down the drain" release into drinking water. FDA has restricted the use of these products since the 2002 RED.

Use in foreign countries may result in exposures in the U.S. because lindane can migrate over long distances through air, water and sediment.

Environmental Fate

Lindane is recognized internationally as a toxic, persistent and bio-accumulative pesticide. Seed treatment has been a source of human exposure, contributing to the reservoir of lindane already in the environment. Due to its persistence, residues of lindane may remain in the environment for some time. In addition, lindane is widely distributed in the environment due to its potential for long-range transport via air, water and sediment. Lindane has been detected in air, surface water, groundwater, sediment, soil, ice, snowpack, fish, wildlife and humans. It has been detected in ambient air, precipitation and surface water throughout North America, and also has been detected in areas of nonuse (for example, the Arctic). Once released into the environment, the primary dissipation process is volatilization into the air, followed by aerial long-range transport.

Dietary Risks

Continuing exposure to lindane may be of particular concern due to its tendency to bio-concentrate and bio-accumulate. When people are exposed to lindane through food, water or the atmosphere, they will accumulate lindane residues in their fatty tissues, and these lindane residues will remain there for an undetermined amount of time. Infants will be exposed if they are fed breast milk containing residues of lindane. Although the agency cannot quantify risks at this time or determine whether current exposures to lindane result in any harm, we recognize the potential for adverse effects.

Effect on Growers

At present, lindane is registered only as a seed treatment for use on barley, corn, oats, rye, sorghum and wheat. Cancellation of these six seed treatment uses is expected to result in no significant loss to U.S. growers or agriculture. During the past several years, safer alternative pesticides have been developed and registered for lindane's seed treatment uses. Further, the use of lindane-treated seeds appears to be declining in this country.

Next Steps

EPA will announce the receipt of requests for voluntary cancellation in the Federal Register with an opportunity for comment. After the comment period closes, EPA publishes the cancellation order. Once the cancellation process is complete, EPA will propose to revoke the existing tolerances or limits for residues of lindane in animal fat.

EPA Announces Intention to Phase Out Carbofuran Use in Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision - August 2006

Regulatory History

Carbofuran, also known under the trade name Furadan, first was registered in the United States in 1969 and is classified as a restricted-use pesticide.

Through an agreement between the Environmental Protection Agency and the technical registrant in 1991, the sale of granular carbofuran has been limited to 2,500 pounds per year in the U.S. since 1994, and to use only on spinach grown for seed, pine seedlings, cucurbits and bananas.

Additionally, in the late 1990s, the technical registrant made a number of changes to labels for flowable carbofuran to reduce drinking water and ecological risks of concern. These included reducing application rates and numbers of applications for alfalfa, cotton, corn, potatoes, soybeans, sugarcane and sunflowers.

Three human studies have been conducted for carbofuran - one oral and two dermal. These studies were reviewed by the agency's Human Studies Review Board (HSRB) in May 2006. The HSRB concluded that, while informative, the studies are not appropriate for use by the agency in either the individual carbofuran or N-methyl carbamate cumulative risk assessment. The agency did not use any of the human studies in the risk assessment for carbofuran.

Uses

• Carbofuran is a systemic, broad-spectrum N-methyl carbamate insecticide and nematicide registered for control of soil and foliar pests on a variety of field, fruit and vegetable crops. It has no residential uses.
• Nearly 1 million pounds of carbofuran are applied annually.
• Carbofuran is a restricted-use pesticide.

Health Effects

• As with other N-methyl carbamate pesticides, the critical effect of carbofuran for various exposure durations is cholinesterase inhibition; that is, it can overstimulate the nervous system, causing nausea, dizziness, confusion and, at very high exposures (e.g., accidents or major spills), respiratory paralysis and death. Similar to other N-methyl carbamate pesticides, inhibition is followed by rapid recovery of cholinesterase.
• Carbofuran is classified as "not likely" to be a human carcinogen.

Ecological Effects

• Carbofuran is very highly toxic to birds on an acute basis, and highly toxic on a subacute basis. A chronic effect level could not be established because all concentrations tested caused mortality in the test subjects.
• Carbofuran is highly toxic to mammals on an acute basis. Chronic toxicity testing on laboratory rats showed reduced offspring survival and body weight reductions.
• Carbofuran is very highly toxic to freshwater and estuarine/marine fish on an acute basis. The available chronic test showed larval survival as the most sensitive end point for freshwater fish and embryo hatching as the most sensitive end point for estuarine/marine fish.
• Carbofuran is considered to be very highly toxic to freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates on an acute basis. Chronic tests showed reproductive effects.

Risks

• Three lines of evidence were considered in assessing ecological risks from carbofuran: a screening level deterministic assessment, a refined probabilistic assessment and an evaluation of available field data. All three lines of evidence support the same conclusion: Ecological risks are of concern from all uses of flowable carbofuran. A screening level assessment for granular carbofuran also shows risks of concern from all uses of granular carbofuran.
• Occupational risks are of concern from most mixer/loader/applicator scenarios, even when assessed with engineering controls (i.e., margins of exposure fail to reach 100). Additionally, post-application risk assessments indicate the need for restricted entry intervals (REIs) that are longer than REIs required by current labels.
• Acute dietary risk from food alone is estimated at 260 percent of the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) and 490 percent of the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the population subgroup with the highest estimated dietary exposure. Chronic dietary risks were not assessed because cholinesterase inhibition due to carbofuran exposure reverses rapidly. EPA believes the acute dietary assessment would be protective of any chronic exposures in the diet.
• Since acute exposures exceed the aPAD for food alone, EPA is concerned about any additional exposure (to all subpopulations) through drinking.

Risk Mitigation

To address the assessed risks of concern, the following mitigation measures will be implemented:

• Cancellation based on high ecological and worker risks and low economic benefits for growers: sorghum, alfalfa, sweet corn, cotton, grapes, field corn and popcorn, wheat, potatoes, bananas/plantains, cucurbits (flowable), oats, soybeans, barley, tobacco, fallow/idle land, sugarcane, ornamentals, sugar beets and peppers (except chili)
• Four-year phaseout for the crops that have moderate benefits to growers: artichokes, chili peppers in the southwestern U.S.; cucurbits (granular formulation only), sunflowers, spinach grown for seed and pine seedlings in the southeastern U.S.

Regulatory Conclusion

Based on the assessment of ecological and human health risks associated with carbofuran uses, the agency has determined all uses of carbofuran are ineligible for reregistration.

The agency is proposing to retain tolerances for sugarcane, rice, bananas and coffee for imported commodities. The dietary risk from these commodities (food alone) is 56 percent of the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the population subgroup with the highest estimated dietary exposure.

For More Information

Electronic copies of the carbofuran Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision (IRED) and all supporting documents are available in public docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0162, online in the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at www.regulations.gov or at:

www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/carbofuran_ired.pdf

For more information about EPA's pesticide reregistration program, the carbofuran IRED or reregistration of individual products containing carbofuran, contact the Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460, telephone (703) 308-8000.

Need help with pesticide certification or general pesticide use issues?

Contact:

NDSU Pesticide Training and Certification Program
Box 5051, Fargo, ND 58105-5051
Tel: (701) 231-7180
Fax: (701) 231-5907
E-mail: pesticid@ndsuext.nodak.edu
Internet: www.ndsupesticide.org

This newsletter may be copied for noncommercial, educational purposes in its entirety with no changes. Requests to use any portion of the document (including text, graphics or photos) should be sent topermission@ndsuext.nodak.edu. Include exactly what is requested for use and how it will be used.

North Dakota State University
NDSU Extension Service