Remaining Lindane Registrations Cancelled 10/06
EPA has issued final orders cancelling the registrations of all remaining pesticide products containing lindane. In July 2006, EPA received formal requests to voluntarily cancel their lindane pesticide product registrations from all registrants, first Chemtura USA Corporation, followed by AGSCO Inc., Drexel Chemical Company, and JLM International, Inc. The Agency received no substantive comments in response to an August 23, 2006, Federal Register notice announcing its receipt of these requests and inviting public comment. Therefore, as announced in the Federal Register on December 13, 2006 (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2006/December/Day-13/p21101.htm), EPA has granted the voluntary cancellation requests, and sent cancellation orders to the registrants. Technical (manufacturing use) products were cancelled effective October 4, 2006, and the last date for use of these products will be July 1, 2007. Cancellation of end-use product registrations will be effective on July 1, 2007, and the last use date for these products will be October 1, 2009. The Agency expects that all existing stocks of lindane will be depleted by that time. This action results in the cancellation of all remaining lindane pesticide products registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) for use in the United States.

Lindane is a broad spectrum, organochlorine insecticide used to treat the seeds of barley, corn, oats, rye, sorghum, and wheat. EPA announced in early August 2006 that it has determined that the risks of continued lindane registration outweigh the benefits, and therefore the remaining uses of lindane are not eligible for reregistration. EPA expects the cancellation of these uses to result in no significant loss to U.S. agriculture due to the successful development and registration of safer alternative pesticides in recent years. Once the cancellation process is complete, EPA will propose to revoke the existing tolerances (or allowable residues of lindane) for animal fat.

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 is a toxic, persistent, and bio-accumulative pesticide that has been of international as well as domestic concern.

Information about lindane is available at http://www.regulations.gov in docket number EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0202, and on the Agency's lindane reregistration Web page, http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/reregistration/lindane

USDA rule on pallets and pests leaves some fuming 10/04
October 12, 2004
Washington Post Page E01 [excerpt]
Cindy Skrzycki
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25720-2004Oct11.html

The Natural Resources Defense Council was cited as saying it plans to fight a final rule that the USDA issued last month that allows heat or chemical treatment -- including methyl bromide -- of wooden pallets and other
shipping containers, in an effort to stop foreign insects from invading the country.
The story says that in recent years, the Asian long-horned beetle from China and the emerald ash borer have hitchhiked into the United States on shipping materials; it is estimated that the Asian long-horned beetle has
destroyed about $6 million worth of trees in Chicago and New York and cost millionsmore in eradication efforts.

The environmental group was cited as saying it considers the rule the result of the wood packaging industry looking for a quick solution to a big problem and the methyl bromide industry looking for a market. So it has begun work on a legal challenge.
David Doniger, policy director of the NRDC's Climate Center, was cited as saying that the grounds for the suit are that methyl bromide is not an effective treatment, it harms the environment, and the USDA overlooked
a more favorable option -- getting rid of wood packaging material, adding, "We're looking for the approach that does the least damage. Treating wooden pallets won't eliminate the pests, and it will blow a hole in the ozone
layer. We want to stop the invasive pests without hurting the ozone layer, and there is a way to do it."

The NRDC and other environmental groups have pushed since the late 1990s for the elimination -- or at least a definite phaseout -- of wood packaging materials. They wanted to require the use of plastic, plywood and
corrugated wood, eliminating the need for bombing the bugs with methyl bromide. In the earliest phases of rulemaking, the USDA did consider an option to prohibit the import of any kind of wood packaging material, including an orderly phaseout of wood packing materials so developing countries would have time to make the switch. But that option was dropped in the final rule, even though the department had noted that fumigating with methyl bromide to quarantine insects could cause an increase in its use.
Julie Quick, a spokeswoman for the USDA, was cited as saying the discussions about using alternative materials occurred before the department decided to adopt the United Nations standard set by the International Plant Protection Convention in 2002. Eliminating the use of wood would have violated trade obligations to developing countries, background material on the rule said.
Doniger and others worry that "quarantine" uses of methyl bromide will grow enormously under the terms of the final rule -- a prospect, they say, that signatories to the treaty never envisioned. There is also concern that countries that allow the use of methyl bromide will not adequately police whether chemical treatments actually occur, though the pallets may show the official certification mark the rule requires.

DURSBAN CHANGES  8/00  
Many of you may have heard the EPA announcement about changes in the use of insecticides products containing chlorpyrifos, which is sold most commonly under the trade name, "Dursban" by Dow AgroSciences.  This action is part of the reassessment of all organophosphate and carbamate pesticides conducted under the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 which imposes a significantly greater margin of safety to ensure the protection of children's health.

Some of the reports coming through the media contain inaccuracies or are written without being clear as to what is actually happening.The EPA did not *ban* Dursban, which would have meant an immediate recall of the product from the shelves of retail stores.  The EPA reached an agreement with the manufacturers on a phased withdrawal which will substantially reduce the amount of the chemical being used in the United States.

The major impact is on residential use.  The companies will cease producing products containing chlorpyrifos for the consumer market at the end of the year, but existing stocks of these products, e.g.,what you would find in retail stores, can sold and used.  This means that you will find Dursban for use in/around homes and on lawns and gardens until those stocks are depleted.  Quite likely, many people may decide to use other chemicals.

For professional pesticide users, indoor and outdoor applications for general household pests around residences will also discontinue.   Things are slightly different for termite treatments.  Existing stocks of the termiticide versions of chlorpyrifos can be used according to their current product labels, which means they can be used to treat an entire house as has been done for decades.  However, after those stocks are depleted, the manufacturers can produce the termiticide, but the new products will carry revised labels that:

1. Reduce the rate of application by 50% (to 0.5%)
2. Limit the use of the chemical to spot or local treatments.
3. Allow the continued use of the insecticide to treat homes (and other buildings) that are under construction (what are commonly called "pre-treats" in the pest control business).

Use of chlorpyrifos in the U.S. as a termiticide for spot and local treatment will be allowed until December 31, 2002.  At that point,the only remaining use against termites will be for pre-treats, which will continue through at least December 2004.

Some other points of note:

1. Chlorpyrifos will remain available for various U.S. nonresidential uses such as golf courses and ornamental nurseries as well as for all U.S. crop uses except tomatoes.

2. The agreement includes refinements in agricultural applications that result in a reduction of chlorpyrifos residues in the U.S. on apples and grapes.

You may receive calls from people who are concerned about having any quantity of the insecticide stored around their house or property and they wish to dispose of it.  Tossing full or partially-filled containers of pesticide into the garbage can or at landfill is not what we need at this time. There are probably several options including:
a) giving it to someone else who wants to use it,
b) contacting your county agency that accepts pesticides and other hazardous chemicals on special collection days during the year, or
c) contact the NC Dept. of Agricultural and Consumer Services at (919) 715-9023.  Options a-b
may be the simplest (and local) approaches.

Should people be concerned if there house was recently treated withDursban?  The best response to that question may be that, if the house was treated properly (i.e, according to the product label), then there should not be any problems.  If they have concerns, then they should contact the pest control professional who treated their house.  If they treated the house themselves, then hopefully they followed the product label (which is what we expect professionals to do all of the time).  The product label is not a list of suggestions on how to use the insecticide. It is the law and it is meant to prevent pesticide misuse.

As I mentioned in the brief message last week, the toxicological issues surrounding chlorpyrifos are complicated and you'll hear many interpretations of the same studies. I'd advise you to refer any specific questions about the "danger" or toxicology of chlorpryrifos to Dr. Greg Cope, Extension Toxicologist at NCSU:  919-515-5296 or
Greg_Cope@ncsu.edu.

The other major point to emphasize is that there are other pesticide products available to both the general public and to pest control professionals.  More importantly, pest control does not have to be some liquid sprayed out of the nozzle of an aerosol can or pump sprayer.  There are also many non-chemical methods that are quite effective against a variety of pests in and around our homes, lawns and gardens.  We should always give consideration to employing them first.

Mike Waldvogel, Extension Entomology Specialist

EPA is announcing a voluntary consumer product safety recall for two faulty Pull 'N Spray home pesticide products.
This alert only affects products sold in Pull 'N Spray containers; the problem is with the faulty container, not with the pesticide itself.  The products are Monsanto Corporation's Roundup® Ready-To-Use Weed and Grass Killer and the Scotts Company's Ortho® Ready-To-Use Home Defense tm  Indoor & Outdoor Insect Killer 5, both sold in 1.33 gallon plastic containers with a t-handle pump and application wand.  This voluntary measure was issued after the manufacturers of the Pull 'N Spray products reported to EPA calls from consumers who described experiencing mechanical failures with the pump spray causing exposure to the pesticide.

 The containers can be identified by the words Pull 'N Spray on the label or by the UPC codes.  The Roundup® UPC code item numbers are either 70183-58064 or 70183-58065.  The Home Defense tm
UPC code is 71549-01991.  When the mechanism does not function properly, it may spray the pesticide contents onto the user or may pop out of the container and strike the user. The majority of the Pull 'N Spray product incidents were reports of skin and eye irritation associated with leaks resulting from container failures or misuses.  On rare occasions, a small number of consumers have reported some respiratory difficulty associated with exposure to the Home Defense
product.

For additional information about returns and refunds for these Pull 'N Spray products, consumers should call the Manufacturers' Consumer Helpline at 1-800-225-2883.  For additional information on the products, see:  www.epa.gov/pesticides.

EPA registered a new biochemical pesticide, the Harpin protein (Trade Name MESSENGERTM ) on April 19, as an alternative to conventional, synthetic pesticides such as methyl bromide. This biochemical pesticide is registered for use on field crops, trees, turf, and ornamentals to control a wide variety of fungal, bacteria, and viral pathogens as well as several insect pests.

Unlike most pesticides, the Harpin protein does not act directly on the target pest. Instead, it activates a natural defense mechanism in the host plant, called systematic acquired resistance, that makes the plant resistant to a wide range of fungal, bacterial and viral diseases. The Harpin protein also protects against certain nematodes and fungal diseases that have few effective controls except methyl bromide, a broad-spectrum pesticide that is believed to contribute to stratospheric ozone depletion and have adverse effects on human health. The Harpin protein is non-toxic and not expected to pose risks to human health or the environment. Because the product is applied at low rates and degrades rapidly in the field, no residues are expected on treated crops.

In addition, studies demonstrate no toxicity to humans and no adverse effects on many species of wildlife (e.g., birds, fish, honeybees, aquatic invertebrates, non-target plants and algae). During its experimental use stage, the Harpin protein was used on tomatoes as a component of Integrated Pest Management programs, thereby decreasing the use of conventional pesticides by 70 percent while outperforming them in effectiveness. EDEN Biosciences Corp. of Bothell, Wash., was granted registrations for both the Harpin protein and MESSENGERTM (the only product containing this protein as an active ingredient). For more information, see: www.epa.gov/pesticides/biopesticides.

Dr. Wayne G. Buhler, Pesticide Education Specialist, NCSU

[Note: We do not yet have experience with this chemical to formulate recommendations in ornamentals.] JRB & SBB