Virginia Cooperative Extension Virginia Tech Pesticide Programs Department of Entomology Blacksburg, Virginia Nov. 1998

1. Virginia Cooperative ExtensionVirginia Tech Pesticide ProgramsDepartment of EntomologyBlacksburg, VirginiaNov. 1998

2. Passed in August, 1996 Protects the public from pesticide residues in dietary and non-dietary sources Passed after great national debate over effectiveness of existing laws to protect us from pesticide residues in our diet Food Quality Protection Act

3. Single health-based standard for residue tolerances in both raw and processed foods Determine that residues are safe for children Consider - aggregate exposure to residues in food, drinking water, residential use Consider - cumulative exposure to all other pesticides with a common mechanism of toxicity Review all existing tolerances within 10 years Food Quality Protection Act

4. Tolerances • Pre-FQPA • based on characteristics of each individual pesticide • Now • based on cumulative effectsof all pesticides • Example: • Organophosphate insecticides (diazinon, malathion, chloropyrifos, etc.) have common mechanism of toxicity - effects must now all be weighed together

5. What does this all mean? • EPA uses “risk cup” to describe how tolerances are now set • Full cup represents • Amount pesticide a person could receive every day for 70 years without significant health risk • Determined through animal studies • Amount reduced by 100-1000 fold to determine daily/lifetime safe exposure for humans

6. What does FQPA do to the Risk Cup? • Before: EPA considered onlyexposure to pesticides in food - cup contained only dietary exposure • Now: EPA considers exposure from all possible sources - cup contains both dietary and non-dietary exposure • Result: Cup fills more quickly; less room for new and existing uses.

7. What does FQPA do to the Risk Cup? • Before: EPA considered eachpesticide - one risk cup for each pesticide. • Now: EPA considers compounds with common mechanism of toxicity - each cup contains a group of pesticides that work the same way. • Result: Cup fills quickly; less room for pesticides and their uses.

8. What does FQPA do to the Risk Cup? • Before: EPA added safety factors to account for animal testing and human variability - 100 to 1,000-fold safety factor. • Now: Must consider infants and children - an additional 10-fold safety factor may be added - 1,000 to 10,000-fold safety margin. • Result: Cup gets smaller; less room for pesticides and their uses.

9. What happens when the cup is full or a manufacturer wants to add a new use? • Make label or formulation changes so pesticide is safer. - Pesticide and uses require less room in cup. • Drop pesticides and/or uses from the cup. This would make more room for remaining uses or new uses.

10. Tolerance Reassessment • All tolerances must be reviewed by 2006 • Organophosphates, carbamates, some fungicides and herbicides must be reviewed by August 1999

11. Tolerance Reassessment by 1999 • Insecticides • organophosphates and carbamates • Fungicides • benomyl, captan, chlorothalonil, iprodione (Rovral), mancozeb, maneb, thiophanate-methyl (Topsin M), vinclozolin (Ronilan) • Herbicides • alachlor (Lasso), bensulide (Betasan), phenmedipham, pronamide (Kerb)

12. Impact on Agriculture • Minor crops at risk for label restrictions and loss of uses • fruits and vegetables • Be aware that pest controloptions may change in next few years

13. What Should Growers Do? • Determine pesticides needed to grow crops • Communicate needs with: • Cooperative Extension • Commodity Groups • USDA and EPA • Respond to requests for data • Land-Grant University • USDA/National Ag. Statistics Service • commodity groups

14. What is being done? • Pest management assessment • Collecting and sharing data • Developing crop/pest management profiles (fact sheets) to be shared with FQPA decision-makers • Communication • Informing growers through Cooperative Extension • Coordinating efforts with Ag. & commodity groups • Working with USDA/EPA to identify alternative controls / maintain existing uses