<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.5945" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial" bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV> <EM>Thanks to Mary Clock-Rust for this.</EM></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Pesticides<BR> EPA Cancels Spirotetramat
Registrations,<BR> Could Issue New Approval for the
Insecticide<BR> The Environmental Protection Agency has issued a
final order<BR> cancelling the registration of all products
containing the<BR> insecticide spirotetramat following a federal
court decision vacating<BR> the 2008 registration because EPA had
failed to follow proper<BR> notice-and-comment
procedures.<BR> Although the agency is canceling the registration in
accordance with<BR> the December 2009 ruling by the federal court in
New York, EPA also<BR> said it is proceeding on a possible new
registration of spirotetramat<BR> because it appears to be less
risky than alternative pesticides.<BR> EPA said in the April 5 order
that it will allow sale, distribution,<BR> and use of existing
stocks by persons other than spirotetramat's<BR> registrant, Bayer
CropScience. “Use of existing stocks is permitted<BR> provided such
use is consistent in all respects with the<BR> previously-approved
labeling for the product,” it said.<BR> The agency also said it is
proceeding on a possible new registration<BR> of
spirotetramat.<BR> Bayer CropScience developed the insecticide to
combat crop pests such<BR> as aphids, whiteflies, scales, mealybugs,
and gall midges in crops<BR> including vegetables, cotton, and
soybean, according to the company<BR> website. The chemical is the
active ingredient in the Bayer<BR> CropScience products Movento,
Spirotetramat Technical, and Ultor.<BR> Possible New Registration of
Product<BR> EPA said it is treating as new the applications for
spirotetramat<BR> registration that Bayer CropScience filed in 2008.
EPA said it is<BR> also reviewing public comments submitted since
the court vacated the<BR> registration and will “determine whether
the spirotetramat<BR> applications for registration should be
granted [and] what license<BR> conditions and label language would
be appropriate.”<BR> The pesticide “appears to be less risky to the
environment and to<BR> human health than many of the alternative
insecticides used on the<BR> sites for which spirotetramat was
approved,” it said.<BR> The U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York in<BR> December upheld claims by the Natural
Resources Defense Council and<BR> the Xerces Society that the agency
failed to publish Federal Register<BR> notices or provide for public
comment before approving the pesticide<BR> (NRDC v. EPA, S.D.N.Y.,
No. 09cv4317, 12/23/09; 247 DEN A-6, 12/30/09<BR> ).<BR>
In a fact sheet on spirotetramat, EPA said that it “did not publish
a<BR> notice of registration in the Federal Register for any of
these<BR> decisions until August 6, 2009, three months after the
plaintiffs<BR> filed this lawsuit,” according to court
documents.<BR> In a March 22 statement, the NRDC also called
spirotetramat a<BR> “bee-toxic pesticide” that should not be sold
until its effects are<BR> evaluated.<BR> “We remain
hopeful” that the insecticide will ultimately be<BR> registered,
Bayer CropScience spokesman Jack Boyne told BNA April 7.<BR> “It's a
very effective product.”<BR> The company has asked the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second<BR> Circuit to review the district court's
order. The circuit court has<BR> yet to schedule a hearing,
according to its docket, but last month it<BR> denied the company's
motion to stay the district court's ruling<BR> pending appeal (NRDC
v. EPA, 2d Cir., No. 10-253, motion denied<BR>
3/10/10).<BR> Comments Favor Spirotetramat<BR> EPA said
slightly less than 90 percent of the remarks submitted<BR> during a
Feb. 26-March 29 comment period following the court ruling<BR>
favored continued use and distribution of existing stocks of the<BR>
insecticide. Those remarks “cited a number of situations in
which<BR> spirotetramat has replaced older, more toxic chemistries,
including<BR> organophosphates and carbamates,” the agency
said.<BR> For example, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture
said “there<BR> is no justification to burden businesses, and
individuals currently<BR> in possession of products thought to be
properly registered,”<BR> according to a March 4 EPA publication,
“Spirotetramat—Comments<BR> received on the sale, distribution,
and/or use of existing stocks.”<BR> The National Potato Council said
that “providing for the continued<BR> use of existing stocks of
spirotetramat is critical to not needlessly<BR> disrupting the on
farm decisionmaking process due to procedural<BR> issues in the
legal system and with no demonstration of evidence<BR> against the
safety of the use of spirotetramat.”<BR> Threat to Honey Bee
Colonies?<BR> However, the National Honeybee Advisory Board said the
pesticide<BR> “represents a threat to insect pollinators and
specifically managed<BR> honey bee colonies.” The board asked EPA to
“require the registrant<BR> (Bayer) to recall all existing
product.”<BR> Aaron Colangelo, a senior attorney for the Natural
Resources Defense<BR> Council, said in the organization's March 22
statement that “our<BR> national bee emergency continues, with
estimates of winter colony<BR> losses topping 30 percent again this
year. We simply cannot afford to<BR> run an unregulated experiment
on the pollinators that are central to<BR> our food system.”<BR>By
Bill Pritchard</DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>