By TIM ALEXANDER
Illinois Correspondent

PHILADELPHIA, Pa. — As chemical company FMC Corp. and a group of U.S. crop commodity associations mount a legal challenge to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to refuse to grant an administrative hearing on its decision to ban the insecticide carbofuran (marketed as Furadan), EPA officials are prepared to move ahead with plans to revoke all U.S. food tolerances for the chemical on Jan. 1, 2010.

FMC and the commodity associations will take legal action in a U.S. federal circuit court of appeals, according to an Oct. 30 statement by the company. FMC is upset with the EPA for refusing to grant an administrative hearing and on its decision to revoke all tolerances, or residue limits, of carbofuran in U.S. foods.

“EPA’s unprecedented attempt to deny any review of its science deprives the registrant and the growers who use carbofuran the right to prove that the product is safe, and represents a bold abuse of power in contradiction of the agency’s earlier commitment to transparency and good science,” stated Dr. Michael Morelli, director of global regulatory affairs for FMC Agricultural Products Group.
“Additionally, EPA’s attempt to link carbofuran food residues to symptoms of potential poisoning in children is particularly unwarranted.”

While FMC strongly believes that carbofuran meets all safety standards, the EPA announced evidence is clear that carbofuran does not meet today’s food safety regulations, according to Steve Owens of the EPA Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

“EPA has carefully evaluated the scientific issues and has provided more than 500 days of public comment on this decision,” said Owens. “It is now important to move forward with the needed public health protections, especially for children.”

The EPA contends that “short-term health effects (of carbofuran ingestion) include headache, sweating, nausea, diarrhea, chest pains, blurred vision, anxiety and general muscular weakness” and encourages farmers to switch from carbofuran to “safer pesticides or other environmentally preferable pest control strategies.”

FMC argues, however, that EPA admitted there are no safety concerns with carbofuran residues in food or in imported crops. EPA’s only alleged concern, according to FMC, is with drinking water. Its concern is based on an incorrect assumption that 100 percent of crops are exposed to carbofuran, while only approximately 1 percent of crops are treated with the chemical, FMC asserts.
“Without exaggerated assumptions, carbofuran residues are well within safe levels,” said Morelli.

The EPA confirmed that FMC and three grower associations submitted objections to the EPA’s tolerance revocations and requested an administrative hearing during the allowed public input period, but concluded the “regulatory standard for holding an evidentiary hearing has not been met” in deciding to reject the appeal.

FMC will argue in federal court that current law mandates that registrants be provided a right to a timely and neutral hearing with the EPA when there are “obvious and genuine factual issues between EPA and those parties over the safety of a pesticide.”
Morelli said the EPA is in violation by choosing to disregard the legal requirements for granting an administrative hearing.

The EPA’s actions regarding carbofuran have been puzzling to those in the agricultural community, as they seem to circumvent the normal re-registration process for chemicals as described by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Morelli said. He noted that aside from several major grower associations, the USDA and all 50 secretaries of state departments of agriculture support the continued use of carbofuran under limited circumstances.

“EPA remains closed-minded about mitigation measures, even though FMC proposals have clearly demonstrated how such mitigation is possible and indeed, allow product use to meet the EPA safety standard even under the agency’s worst case assumptions,” Morelli stated.

The EPA began action to revoke carbofuran tolerances in May after considering a 2006 risk assessment report, which determined that no uses were eligible for registration.

While FMC voluntarily cancelled 22 uses for carbofuran in March, the EPA has concluded the dietary risks are too great to allow any continued food tolerance for the chemical. The product is currently registered for use with corn, pumpkins, potatoes, spinach grown for seed, sunflowers and pine seedlings.