FR 2024-28332

Overview of the Proposed Rule

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a rule concerning the insecticide chlorpyrifos, aiming to revoke tolerances, which are legal limits for pesticide residues on food, for most uses of chlorpyrifos. This action excludes certain uses on 11 specific crops like alfalfa, apple, and soybean in selected states. This proposal responds to a 2007 petition from environmental groups seeking the revocation of all chlorpyrifos tolerances over concerns about its potential adverse effects on human health, particularly neurodevelopment in children. With some uses voluntarily canceled, the EPA argues that remaining uses are safe under newly imposed restrictions. Public comments are invited until February 10, 2025.

Key Concerns and Challenges

The document is lengthy, filled with complex legal and scientific language, and it presumes familiarity with a broad history of legal cases and agency decisions. This complexity may deter public participation in the comment process, as it could be challenging for individuals without a specialized background to fully grasp the implications or contribute effectively to the discussion. The dense detail and extensive referencing of past legal and regulatory frameworks further complicate comprehension, potentially obscuring the key proposals or changes the EPA is implementing.

Moreover, the document lacks clarity about the specific restrictions and registrations that remain active, which could lead to confusion among affected stakeholders, including farmers and states where the continued use of chlorpyrifos is permitted. Additionally, the document does not thoroughly address potential economic impacts on international trade or the effects on foreign producers who might face difficulties if their produce containing chlorpyrifos residues is barred from entering the United States market.

Broader Public Impact

For the general public, this rule represents a significant potential stride toward ensuring food safety and health protection from potentially harmful pesticides, but also raises concerns about whether such actions are comprehensively communicated. The general public may find reassurance if convinced that the chlorpyrifos tolerances deemed safe truly reflect a negligible health risk. However, due to the document's technical nature, many might remain uncertain about how this proposal affects them directly.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

• Farmers and Agricultural Producers: Those involved in growing the specified crops in designated states where use is still permitted will have clear guidelines but may face challenges with compliance and reporting. In contrast, producers in states where tolerances are revoked will need to seek alternative pest control measures, potentially increasing operational costs and affecting crop yields.

• Environmental and Health Advocates: The EPA's partial revocation of tolerances might appear as a step forward, but the decision not to revoke certain tolerances will be viewed skeptically. Advocates might argue more drastic action should have been taken to protect public health.

• International Producers: This group might face disruptions due to potentially tighter entry restrictions for produce into the U.S. However, without clear economic impact data, the full extent of this consequence remains uncertain.

In summary, while the proposal underscores efforts to align pesticide use with safety standards, it brings forth complexities that necessitate clear, accessible communication to stakeholders and the public. The effectiveness of the proposal could largely depend on how well these stakeholders understand the changes and how they will be enforced.