Return to TFB Main Page
Return to Texas Agriculture Archive

March 16, 2001

FQPA relief?

Prospects brighter under
Bush administration...

By Mike Barnett
Editor

Prospects for implementation of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) are brighter for agricultural producers now that the Bush administration has taken over the reigns of government. At least that was the view expressed at the recent American Farm Bureau Federation's leadership conference.

FQPA, long a thorn in agriculture's side, was passed in 1996 and requires EPA to reassess all 10,000 pesticides tolerances in 10 years. There's a different attitude in Washington, now.

"First, we're working at getting the right people into the right slots into the administration," said AFBF's Scott Rawlins. "Second, legislatively, H.R. 1592, with 240 cosponsors last year, clearly influenced EPA in how they implemented the act. We've weighed in on the FQPA science policies. And our litigation, I think, has been a success. The latest round is this NRDC/EPA consent decree that Carol Browner signed the day before she left office that we're working on.

"Our strategy has been to stall, stall, stall," he added. "A Mr. Gore election with Carol Browner there—or somebody even worse—we could have expected more of the same. With Mr. Bush we do see a little light at the end of the tunnel, but we've got some work to do."

Rawlins said AFBF is currently sending several messages to EPA.

First, he said, EPA needs to abandon the 99.9 percent exposure. "Using 99.9 means that out of a sample of 1,000 people, EPA wants to protect two...number 999 and 1,000, who are most exposed. Without data, EPA assumes all food is treated and has residues of various levels. These two people always randomly choose food with the most residues, where the odds of that happening...well, these are unlucky people. We don't think they exist," Rawlins said. "But that's where EPA's regulations are. 99.9 stacks a series of unlikely events upon one another. At 99.7—just going down a couple of notches—most concerns for the organophosphates go away. Before FQPA, EPA regulated at the 95th percentile."

Rawlins also said EPA needs to wait on the science on cumulative exposure, and apply an extra children's safety factor on a case-by-case basis. As far as cumulative exposure, EPA's policy so far is to assess the risk of chemically similar pesticides as a single pesticide.

As an example of why EPA should wait, Rawlins gave an example of three organophosphates used for coddling moth control. One is very effective, another is somewhat effective, and one is labeled, but not effective. "These three organophosphates do not have a common mode of action against the coddling moth," Rawlins explained. "Why should they in humans?"

Rawlins says EPA is on the wrong track in determining the children's safety factor. The agency currently determines "safe" pesticide levels by determining the highest dose fed to rats that causes no effects. They then divide that dose by 100, which is the dose a person can consume daily over a seven-year lifetime. To determine an extra children's safety factor, that number is divided by 300 or 1,000, which shrinks the dose that can be put on crops.

"What should EPA do?" Rawlins asked. "Apply extra safety factors only if laboratory animals show that baby rats are more affected. Pretty simple."

Finally, he urged EPA to not use bad data. "Gather the data you need to make science-based decisions," he said. "Take the time to do the job right."

The political climate in Congress is also ripe for FQPA change, said AFBF lobbyist Adam Sharp.

In the 107th Congress, there are 221 Republicans, 212 Democrats and two independents.

"As far as FQPA, I think this is the key message," he said. "We have 12 new sitting chairmen in the House. One of those is the new chairman of the Commerce Committee, the committee of primary jurisdiction over FQPA. Our former chairman of the committee held zero hearings on FQPA in four years after it was passed.

"Our new chairman, Rep. Billy Tauzin, out of Louisiana, has probably done more in the last month on FQPA than the previous chairman did in four years. He's taking an active role."

Legislative coalitions are also key in working on FQPA, Sharp said, putting the Blue Dog Democrats, led by Texan Charlie Stenholm, at the top of the list.

"These folks were the ones who put FQPA on the map. They were the folks who put in legislation last year, who are continuously sending letters and making phone calls to EPA, to the administration. We need to make sure we keep these folks engaged in the new Congress."

The situation in the Senate is a little different, with a 50/50 split.

The Senate Ag Committee has primary jurisdiction over the food safety law.

"We need to make sure those folks are more engaged on the issue," Sharp said. "The Senate Ag Committee has also been sitting a little bit more on the sidelines. They haven't held any oversight hearings on FQPA either. So we need to be talking to those members and try to influence them on taking active participation on oversight."