HCPA Meets with Top Official from EPA’S Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP)
July 17, 2018
On July 10, HCPA and representatives from New Mexico and Indiana met with Rick Keigwin, Director of EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs about FIFRA 25(b) Minimum Risk Pesticides. The goal of the meeting was to ensure a level playing field for these products and to minimize the inconsistencies between the states. HCPA has long raised issues with this class of pesticides, including a 2006 petition (https://www.epa.gov/minimum-risk-pesticides/personal-insect-repellents-and-minimum-risk-pesticides#exemption) pertaining to the control of “pests of significant public health importance,” abbreviated registration for minimum risk products that are to be used for the control of public health pests, and submission of efficacy data to support label claims. While the EPA partially addressed the petition by clarifying the language around public health claims, additional rule-making to address the other concerns has not taken place. In the intervening years, Minimum Risk Pesticides in the marketplace have increased significantly, further exacerbating the inconsistencies between the states, and the time appears ripe for improved federal oversight and/or increased enforcement. The meeting was very helpful, and discussions will continue to determine if and how there may be opportunities to address this issue.
On July 10, HCPA and representatives from New Mexico and Indiana met with Rick Keigwin, Director of EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs about FIFRA 25(b) Minimum Risk Pesticides. The goal of the meeting was to ensure a level playing field for these products and to minimize the inconsistencies between the states. HCPA has long raised issues with this class of pesticides, including a 2006 petition (https://www.epa.gov/minimum-risk-pesticides/personal-insect-repellents-and-minimum-risk-pesticides#exemption) pertaining to the control of “pests of significant public health importance,” abbreviated registration for minimum risk products that are to be used for the control of public health pests, and submission of efficacy data to support label claims. While the EPA partially addressed the petition by clarifying the language around public health claims, additional rule-making to address the other concerns has not taken place. In the intervening years, Minimum Risk Pesticides in the marketplace have increased significantly, further exacerbating the inconsistencies between the states, and the time appears ripe for improved federal oversight and/or increased enforcement. The meeting was very helpful, and discussions will continue to determine if and how there may be opportunities to address this issue.