Suspension-October 1974 The Agency issued the suspension notice based primarily on evidence that the pesticides are potential carcinogens and thus pose an "imminent hazard". Judicial review--May 1975 On May 4 the Court of Appeals affirmed suspension for these products and on May 28 a motion for an accelerated decision was filed. As of May 27, all registrations of aldrin and dieldrin were effectively canceled except for exempted uses in subsurface termite control, certain moth proofing systems and dipping of tops and roots of non-food plants. E. Chlordane and Heptachlor Cancellation initiated-November 26, 1974 EPA gave notice of its intent to cancel all registered uses of these products, with the exception of uses through subsurface ground insertion for termite control and the dipping of roots or tops of non-food plants. On the information that is currently available to EPA, it is felt that chlordane and heptachlor clearly present a serious question of safety and may pose a hazard to our population and environment. Current status Case preparation for the cancellation hearings is continuing. Public hearings are expected to commence in late summer. F. Vinyl Chloride Cancellation and suspension initiated-April 26, 1974 At this time, EPA issued a notice of emergency suspension and intent to cancel all products containing vinyl chloride for all uses in the home, food handling establishments, hospitals, or in enclosed areas. Evidence has come to light in 1974 that vinyl chloride can induce a rare form of liver cancer. Based on the action taken by this Agency, thirty-two (32) products were finally canceled. G. Mercury Pesticides Cancellation proceedings The Federal government has instituted a series of regulatory actions against the mercury-based pesticides. Those products containing mercury in organic or aryl salt forms can convert to alkyl mercury in an aquatic environment in a process known as methylation and is considered to be the most toxic form of mercury. In 1969, USDA issued cancellation notices for all uses of mercury pesticides products on apples, oats, potatoes, and for use in swimming pools and water cooling towers. Between 1970 and 1972, among those uses for which mercury pesticide products were canceled were: sugarcane, aigicidal, slimicidal or laundering purposes, peanuts and apples. On March 22, 1972, the EPA Administrator issued cancellation notices for all remaining registrations for mercury products and suspended registrations for alkyl compounds and all other mercury products used on rice seed, in laundry fabrics and in marine anti-fouling paint. At the request of approximately 20 registrants affected by the Administrator's orders, a public hearing commenced on October 1, 1974, in Washington, D.C. The hearing is still in progress and will enable EPA to determine whether a final cancellation order should be issued. Senator BELLMON. Have you also banned this product known as Severin for weevil control? Mr. JOHNSON. No, we have not. Senator BELLMON. Will you check that? Mr. JOHNSON. Severin is one of the products that is generally regarded as an acceptable product for many uses and used in gypsy moth control, spruce budworm control, and other large broadcast type programs, and we have experienced no problem with it. Senator ALLEN. Mr. Agee, I believe the necessity of this legislation in 1972 was to give the EPA some needed and reasonable enforcement authority. Now when you feel that you have enough authority, can you suggest any areas where the discretionary authority or the actual legal authority of EPA should be limited in the enforcement areas or any of its authorities under the act? Mr. AGEE. Mr. Chairman, I cannot recommend any areas that need legislative change at this time. We do, within the Agency, have continuing work that is necessary, I think, in defining or interpreting the legislation and establish some policies. One area that has given us some degree of difficulty which we are attending to it now is the matter of applications less than recommended on the label. Senator ALLEN. But you handle that internally. Mr. AGEE. We feel we can handle this administratively; yes, sir. Senator ALLEN. Now Mr. Agee and Mr. Johnson, some committee members who are not here may wish to file written questions with the Agency and you would have no objection to responding to those questions for the record? Mr. AGEE. We would be pleased to do so, Mr. Chairman. Senator BELLMON. Thank you. I have a few questions I would like to ask Mr. Agee, if I may. I am concerned about this process of certification. In your statement you say that the applicator certification program is essentially to insure that applicator's knowledge keeps up with the rapidly changing state-of-the-art. And you say at the same time farmers should not fear that they will be forced to undergo a difficult, academic, and administrative process to be certified or that they will be denied pesticides pending certification, as our plans avoid these problems. Can you discuss your plans? How do you intend to get around those problems? Mr. AGEE. We have been working with the States and our guidelines and regulations, I think, are fairly flexible so that a State, as it undertakes a certification program, will have a good deal of flexibility to satisfy their own particular needs, and not upset some of its traditional dealings with applicators. Senator BELLMON. Let's talk more about farmers. Suppose I am a farmer and boll weevils are eating up my cotton. How long is it going to take me to get permission to spray? Mr. AGEE. The farmer has until October 1976 to become certified by the State. Following that, Mr. Johnson, correct me if I am wrong, if a farmer has not traditionally used a restricted use pesticide, or he has failed to become certified by the State by October 1976, and he finds it necessary to use a restricted use product to control an infestation on his farm, then the States can have, and we hope that they will have, a rapid certification program so that farmer could become knowledgeable about that particular restricted use pesticide, maybe not doing anything more than reading a brochure. Senator BELLMON. Now if he is going to get certified by just reading a brochure, what is the point of certifying him? Mr. AGEE. We feel that in becoming familiar with that particular restricted use pesticide, he would have knowledge as to how he should use it, become knowledgeable about the label requirements that are on there, knowledgeable about Senator BELLMON. Do you not think that the farmer is going to read the label anyway? What I am getting to is it looks to me like you have set up a bunch of Mickey Mouse regulations, you are just here to harass these people without really doing them any good. Reading a brochure, reading the label, is a very common procedure now without any filling out of any forms or going to State capital to be certified. Why go through all this business if all you are going to do is say you have got to read the label or read a brochure? Mr. AGEE. Well, he has to read and understand the label. Mr. AGEE. If a State requires, yes; some kind of an examination. It does not necessarily have to be a written examination. It may be a very simple examination, or it could be an oral examination that the State would permit him to use. Senator BELLMON. For each insecticide he intends to use? Mr. AGEE. No, sir. There are two ways. If the State program generally will entail a certification program for the total restricted use of pesticides, particularly, that that farmer or individual is likely to use, and it might be for a number of restricted use products. This situation I was citing was that if a farmer failed to become registered or certified by 1976 and then he was faced with the necessity of using a restricted use pesticide, the States can have and we are encouraging them to have an abbreviated certification program for that farmer to purchase and to use that product on a one-time basis. We do encourage the States to have their farmers become certified for all the likely restricted use products that that farmer might have to use. Senator BELLMON. Let us say I am a farmer and I have been using a certain product. I go into town to buy it. The dealer says, I have something that is better. Do I have to go to Oklahoma City, take a test in order to apply for this new product? Mr. AGEE. I would hope the farmer would not have to go to Oklahoma City to do this. Again, a good many of the States are developing certification programs whereby the farmers can become certified in their own county or near their residences so that they do not have to go into the State capital. Senator BELLMON. What is the purpose, though. I cannot understand. I am a farmer; I have been using this sort of stuff for a long time and, if I have been certified once as being intelligent, able to read the label, and follow the directions, why do I have to go back and get somebody's blessing to use a different product? Mr. AGEE. As you say the farmer has been certified in the past and he has used these products in the past. A State recertification program should not be too difficult for him to undertake. Senator BELLMON. Why cannot you certify just once, if you have to certify him at all, and be through with it? 54-495-75-2 Mr. AGEE. You can. There is no provision, mandatory provisions, from EPA that a farmer be recertified at periodic intervals. We have encouraged some States to look at the total need Senator BELLMON. Your statement says the applicator certification program is essential to insure the applicators' knowledge keeps up with the rapidly changing state of the art. This sounds to me like the farmer has to go to be reprocessed every time he changes from one product to another. Mr. AGEE. We have encouraged States to undertake a continuing education program in the future. We do not feel that a one-shot certification is satisfactory, but we are not proposing that a farmer be recertified every year. For example, we would encourage, I think, the users of pesticides to have continual training and knowledge on his own, not through formal training programs, but a good many of the manufacturers put out fact sheets, data sheets on their particular products, and I think an applicator should be knowledgeable of these. But we do have concerns Senator BELLMON. How much indication do you have if the applicators are not presently knowledgeable? I cannot remember in my State of any case where the farmers have hurt someone else, except in very unusual circumstances, using something like parathion and hurt themselves by using pesticides, and, of course, we use them by the tons. I do not see why all this business is going to help-how you plan to really improve upon a situation by requiring all those recertifications. What I am asking is, do you have evidence for the need of recertification program? Mr. AGEE. Not for a recertification and, again. I do not think that we feel a recertification is absolutely necessary. We do encourage the States to have a continuing educational kind of a program, basically, so that we do not have to have recertification programs and make it a mandatory requirement. Senator BELLMON. You also say that you have drawn on as wide a scope of interest and persons as possible in writing regulations. How many farmers are involved in your regulation writing procedure? Mr. JOHNSON. I believe there are no farmers, per se. We have had farm groups reviewing our regulations, such as the Farm Bureau Federation and the granges have had copies of these, as well as the State people and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Senator BELLMON. Do you have a list of those who have drawn up the regulations? Mr. JOHNSON. A list of the people? Senator BELLMON. Yes. Mr. JOHNSON. There have been a wide variety of people involved since the first drafts on through the final drafts, but I would certainly be glad to supply you with a list of names of people who have been involved at one time or another. Senator BELLMON. And also their profession and their business. Mr. JOHNSON. Would you like this just within the agency or people outside the agency? regu Senator BELLMON. What I would like to be sure is that the lations that are drawn up have the input from people who are going to have to live with the regulations, and I do not think that somebody at USDA or somebody from the university is going to solve the problem. It is going to be necessary for someone with some practical experience applying these materials, that you need to have their input as well. [The following material was subsequently received for the record:] I. Intra-Agency FORMATION OF CERTIFICATION STANDARDS INITIAL DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARDS A. Jim White-Chairman, 15 years experience in Pest Control and PesticidesUSDA. B. Dr. Burton Evans-Ph.D, Entomology 17 years in Pesticide Research and Public Health Programs, Involving Use of Pesticides. C. Ivan Dodson-Regional Pesticide Branch Chief, EPA-Region VIII 13 years experience in Soil Conservation-USDA Research on Water Quality Criteria for the Federal Water and Pollution Control. D. Lowell Miller-Chief Authority for Old and New FIFRA, USDA-20 years. Pesticide Attorney-Office of General Counsel. Former Director-Pesticide Regulation Division. E. Dr. John Osmun-Nationally Known Authority on Pesticide Use; Former Head-Entomology Dept., Purdue University, Chairman of Task Group on Training Objectives and Standards (Pesticides) Federal Working Group on Pest Management (1972), Former Director, Operations Division, Office of Pesticide, Programs, E.P.A., Washington, D.C. 1973–74. II. State Regulatory Officials A. M. R. Van Cleave-Iowa, President of Association of American Pesticide Control Officials, Inc. B. William Buffaloe-N.C. III. Pesticide Users Conference Persons involved in setting certification guidelines range in the hundreds, including those from Cooperative Extension Services, Health Agencies, Industry Associations, and Environmental Groups. Listed below are several of the individuals who played a leading role in formation of the guidelines. A. National Farmers Union-Art Wolcott. B. American Farm Bureau--Bruce Hawley, Seeley Lodwick. C. National Grange Organization-Dave Robert. D. National Cotton Council of America--Albert Russell. E. National Aerial Applicators Association-Farrell Higby. F. National Agricultural Chemicals Association-Parke Brinkley, John Stackhouse. G. National Pest Control Association-Phillip Spear, Richard Eldredge. H. National Canners Association-Edwin Crosby. I. Health Research Group-Stephanie Harris. J. Environmental Defense Fund-Maureen Hinkle. K. Audubon Society-Cynthia Wilson. Senator BELLMON. One other question. In your statement-the process for certifying insecticides and I am not going to take time. to read it all-let me recite a little, "we intend to first seek indicators |