APPENDIX II-H: SoCalled “Inert” Ingredients are Toxic, Harmful, and Carcinogenic:
THE SECRET INGREDIENTS IN PESTICIDES:
REDUCING THE RISK
Printable
Version (100KB)
Americans are curious label readers. Walk down the aisle of any supermarket, and you will see consumers transfixed as they examine the number of calories in breakfast cereal or the fat content of a candy bar. The federal government has done a fairly good job of providing consumers with essential information on what is in our food and consumer products. But, when it comes to pesticides, toxic materials that are often used in our homes, schools and directly on our food, the federal government has completely dropped the ball by keeping a significant amount of pesticide information secret.
Look at the label on any pesticide product and you will most likely find both "active" and "inert" ingredients listed. The label will identify the active ingredient(s), perhaps with a chemical name, perhaps with a common name. It will also specify the percentage, by weight, of each active ingredient in the product. In comparison, the label will say little about the "inert" ingredients, which can comprise the bulk of the product. The label usually gives only a single percentage figure for all the "inerts", and does not specifically identify any of them. (See Figure 1 for some specimen pesticide labels. We have highlighted the statement of ingredients.) This labeling complies with federal law, as currently interpreted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). EPA's regulations require that each active ingredient must be identified by "name and percentage by weight," but - at EPA's discretion and with very few exceptions - the label contains only the "total percentage by weight of all inert ingredients."1
***The label will say little about the "inert" ingredients, which can comprise the bulk of the product. ***
Figure 1. Specimen Labels for Some Pestcide Products Showing Statement of Ingredients
It is important to understand the difference between the two types of ingredients and the possible consequences of the different ways in which they are managed by EPA. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the federal law that governs the registration and labeling of pesticides, defines active ingredients, in general terms, as the chemicals used to control the target pest.2 An "inert" ingredient is, according to FIFRA, "an ingredient which is not active." 3 Thus, the "inert" ingredients are substances formulated into...the pesticide product for some reason other than their direct effect on the target pest. "Inert" ingredients may serve as carriers for the active ingredients, help dissolve them, preserve them or make them easier to apply.
"Inert" ingredients however, can be toxic. In fact, a chemical may be an active ingredient in one pesticide product, and an "inert" ingredient in another product, depending only on the manufacturer's designation of the pests to be controlled by each product.4 According to one count, in which a 1995 list of "inert" ingredients was evaluated, 394 of those chemicals (16% of all "inerts" at that time) were, or had been, registered as active ingredients in pesticide products.5 So the differentiation between "active" and "inert" ingredients reflects the purpose they serve in the particular pesticide product, as defined by the pesticide manufacturer.
*** A chemical may be an active ingredient in one pesticide product, and an "inert" ingredient in another product. ***
Unfortunately, many people conclude that the term "inert" refers in some way to the toxicity of those ingredients, and are under the impression that "inert" ingredients have no adverse effects on human health or the environment. This is not the case. The chemicals used as "inerts" include some that are quite hazardous. A consumer would never know however, under current labeling requirements.
The New York State Attorney General's Environmental Protection Bureau first reported on the troublesome issue of "inert" ingredients in pesticide products in 1991.6 The fundamental problem identified in that 1991 report is still true today: "inert" ingredients are secret ingredients, the identities of which are not known to those who buy and use the products. Consumers and pest control services alike apply products without knowing their full composition. This situation is unique to pesticides; labeling on foods and other consumer products (such as household cleaners) provides far more complete information. While there have been some significant developments in this area, regrettably, the public is still denied information that should rightfully be provided on the label of all pesticide products.
*** Many people conclude that the term "inert" refers in some way to the toxicity of those ingredients, and are under the impression that "inert" ingredients have no adverse effects on human health or the environment. This is not the case. ***
EPA maintains and publishes a list of substances that may be formulated as "inert" ingredients in pesticide products.7 Although the substances are identified and categorized, there is no indication of which "inert" ingredients are formulated in specific pesticide products. EPA currently divides the "inert" ingredients into four groups: "inerts of toxicological concern" (List 1, 8 substances), "potentially toxic inerts, with high priority for testing" (List 2, approximately 100 substances), "inerts of unknown toxicity" (List 3, more than 1900 substances), and a two-part List 4. List 4A includes more than 100 "minimal risk inerts" while List 4B contains more than 300 "inerts" that EPA believes will cause no adverse effects given current use patterns in pesticide products.
*** Pesticide products contain a variety of ingredients that either are known to be toxic or have not been adequately tested for toxicity, and the public is denied knowledge of their presence. ***
EPA uses a limited set of criteria to assign "inert" ingredients to these lists. EPA considers carcinogenicity, adverse reproductive effects, neurotoxicity/chronic effects, developmental toxicity, documented ecological effects and the potential for bioaccumulation.8 EPA does not consider such effects as endocrine disruption, allergenic effects and chemical sensitization. Nevertheless, the descriptive titles for these groups reveal a simple truth: pesticide products contain a variety of ingredients that either are known to be toxic or have not been adequately tested for toxicity, and the public is denied knowledge of their presence.
The "inert" ingredients
in pesticides are associated with a wide range of adverse health effects. Some
of these chemicals are suspected carcinogens, others have been linked to other
long-term health problems such as central nervous system disorders, liver and
kidney damage and birth defects. The so-called "inert" ingredients
can also cause short-term health effects such as eye and skin irritation,
nausea, dizziness and respiratory difficulty. If found in other products, many
are specifically listed as hazardous substances and require a hazardous waste
permit for proper disposal. See
|
|
Some Adverse Health Effects Of A Sampling of Inert Ingredients* |
|
Chemical |
Effects |
|
Chloroethane |
Irritation of eyes; abdominal cramps, nausea, vomiting; liver and kidney damage; nervous system dysfunction; blood cell disorders; suspected carcinogen. |
|
Cresols |
Skin irritation, burns, and inflammation; irritation of eye, permanent damage and blindness; pneumonia; pancreatitis; central nervous system disorders; kidney failure. |
|
Dibutylphthalate |
Irritation of eyes and throat; photophobia, conjunctivitis, nausea, dizziness. |
|
Dimethylphthalate |
Irritation of eyes, mouth, nose, throat; dizziness, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea; central nervous system depression; reduced respiratory rate; paralysis, coma. |
|
Epichlorhydrin |
Skin and eye irritation, conjunctivitis, corneal clouding; nausea, vomiting, fatigue; liver and kidney damage; inflammation of lungs, chronic bronchitis, death by respiratory paralysis; mutagen; fetotoxic. |
|
Isophorone |
Irritation of skin, nose, throat, respiratory system; lung congestion and degeneration; central nervous system disorders; kidney and liver damage; suspected carcinogen. |
|
Naphthalene** |
Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, blood in urine, dermal sensitivity; hemolytic anemia; convulsions and coma. In newborns: brain damage with uncoordinated movements, disturbances in vision, hearing, feeding and speech. |
|
Phenol |
Irritation of eyes, nose, throat; headache, dizziness, fainting, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea; damage to liver, kidney and heart; chromosomalaberrations and damage; mutagen. |
|
Toluene |
Skin, eye and respiratory irritation; abdominal pain, headache, nausea, dizziness, drowsiness, hallucinations; anemia; liver disorders and enlargement; central nervous system dysfunction; coma and death. |
|
* Each of these chemicals is listed as a
"Hazardous Waste" under Superfund regulations and is subject to
special disposal restrictions. |
|
Pesticides are widely used
throughout the
These remarkable numbers, however, represent only the weight of the active ingredients. The total weight of products produced, which would include the active ingredients plus the "inerts", is not reported. At least in the homeowner sector, however, the total amount of "inert" ingredients far outweighs the weight of active ingredients. If the joint total of all toxic ingredients were reported, the number would be many times higher.
In 1990, 1997 and 1999, the
Attorney General's office conducted three separate market surveys to
investigate the percent by weight of "inert" ingredients in
pesticides readily available to the general public in
*** Surveys disclosed that almost three quarters of the pesticide products contained at least 95% "inerts" by weight. ***
These surveys disclosed that almost
three quarters of the pesticide products contained at least 95%
"inerts" by weight. Based on EPA's estimate of total use of
"homeowner" conventional pesticides (76 million pounds in 1997),
hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of pounds of "inert"
ingredients are applied to homes, gardens and lawns by homeowners in the
|
|
Summary of Market Surveys of Inerts in Some Commonly Available Pesticide Products* |
||
|
|
1990 |
1997 |
1999 |
|
Total # products examined |
85 |
81 |
113 |
|
Products containing: |
|||
|
99% or more inerts** |
33% |
57% |
48% |
|
95% or more inerts |
71% |
70% |
72%/tr> |
|
90% or more inerts |
76% |
78% |
90% |
|
Less than 50% inerts |
2% |
5% |
2% |
|
Some inerts identified on label |
----- |
15% |
10% |
|
All Inerts Identified on label |
----- |
0% |
0% |
|
* Results of three surveys
conducted in 1990, 1997 and 1999. See Appendices 1, 2 & 3 for full list
of percent inerts by product. |
|||
Another indication of the hazards associated with many "inert" ingredients is the extent to which those chemicals are regulated under other laws. Congress has passed, and EPA implements, laws that regulate pollutants in our air11 and our water12 as well as laws that identify chemicals found at Superfund sites,13 which must be reported to state and local emergency planning and response committees,14 or which must be reported to EPA's Toxic Chemical Release Inventory.15 Many "inert" ingredients are recognized to be sufficiently toxic to merit regulation under these laws. More than 200 chemicals used as "inert" ingredients are considered to be hazardous pollutants in air and/or water. More than 80 "inerts" are chemicals that must be reported under EPA's Toxic Chemical Release Inventory. More than 20 "inerts" are on EPA's list of priority pollutants found at Superfund sites, and 14 are considered "extremely hazardous substances," which must be reported to emergency planning and response committees. Furthermore, 127 chemicals used as "inert" ingredients are classified by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration as occupationally hazardous chemicals.16
*** More than 200 chemicals used as "inert" ingredients are considered to be hazardous pollutants in air and/or water. ***
A review of the history of EPA policies and practices in regard to "inerts" reveals both the magnitude of the problem and EPA's failure to respond it effectively. FIFRA reserves exclusive authority over pesticide labels to EPA. The states or local governments cannot change label content or design. Prior to 1987, EPA did not require the identification of any "inert" ingredients on pesticide product labels and testing of "inert" ingredient toxicity was very limited. Only "inert" ingredients in food use pesticides were tested, and even those were only tested for their short term health effects, i.e. acute toxicity. (They were not, however, tested for their long-term, chronic, toxicity.) In 1987, EPA announced an "Inerts Strategy" designed to eliminate the most toxic "inert" ingredients from use, require improved label disclosure of "inert" ingredients, and increase the toxicity testing required for "inerts." Central to the strategy was the classification of "inert" ingredients into five categories:
|
List 1: |
Inerts of Toxicological Concern |
|
List 2: |
Potentially Toxic Inerts, High Priority for Testing |
|
List 3: |
Inerts of Unknown Toxicity |
|
List 4A: |
Minimal Risk Inerts |
|
List 4B: |
Inerts that will not adversely affect public health or the environment given current use patterns |
*** Prior to 1987, EPA did not require the identification of any "inert" ingredients on pesticide product labels and testing of "inert" ingredient toxicity was very limited. ***
One early and positive development, which apparently resulted from implementation of this strategy, was that registrants removed many of the "inert" ingredients included on List 1 from their products. As part of the Inerts Strategy, EPA mandated that all products containing, as an "inert" ingredient, any of the substances on List 1 must identify the substance by name on the product label. At the time of original listing, there were almost 60 chemicals on List 1. today there are fewer than 10. Their removal from pesticide products was good news for public health.
Implementation of the Inerts Strategy developed slowly, and not without problems. In 1991, the EPA Inspector General reported on an investigation of EPA's implementation of its Inerts Strategy. The Inspector General reported that:
EPA has not ... enforced the 1987 Inerts Strategy requirements for inerts with toxic effects.... EPA identified 68 inerts as potentially toxic, and assigned them to a high priority for testing .... EPA has no specific procedures or timetables for insuring that these inerts are reviewed.
EPA is not sure how many chemicals registrants are using as inert ingredients because the inerts were not accurately coded into... [the EPA database] .... [T]here were about 600 registrations for which ... the chemical name was not available.17
EPA responded to this 1991 criticism of its implementation of the Inerts Strategy quite ineffectively. According to a 1993 internal memo from the EPA Inspector General's office, corrective actions originally scheduled for completion in 1992 or 1993 had been delayed until 1995 or beyond. For example, attempts to develop a computer database for "inert" ingredients had failed, and further development of the system was contingent upon further funding.18 Only recently did the system start operation, yet it still provides only limited search capabilities with which EPA can now, for example, identify products containing a particular "inert" ingredient. More refined searches, which might identify products with an "inert" ingredient at a specific percent of product weight, are not yet feasible.19
In 1996, EPA began a Consumer Labeling Initiative intended to improve consumer labeling of pesticides and other consumer products. As part of the Consumer Labeling Initiative, EPA interviewed consumers to evaluate the impact of current labels. In EPA's own words, "the interviews demonstrated that many consumers have a misleading impression of the term ‘inert ingredient,' believing it to indicate water or other harmless ingredients."20 With that finding, EPA was perfectly situated to act decisively to remedy the misconceptions fostered by years of deceptive terminology and secrecy. The remedy was clear: mandate that the identity of all ingredients be clearly stated on all pesticide labels.
*** EPA interviews demonstrated that many consumers have a misleading impression of the term ‘inert ingredient,' believing it to indicate water or other harmless ingredients. ***
EPA did not see it quite so clearly. Instead of providing the public with the necessary information, it issued a 1997 notice proclaiming a new policy:
Effectively immediately, EPA will permit (and encourages) registrants and applicants for registration to substitute the more neutral term "Other Ingredients" on their pesticide labels and in other materials describing the pesticide product.21
Even this very weak and voluntary initiative has, to date, resulted in few changes. Of 113 pesticide products examined in our 1999 market survey (Appendix 3), 12 bore labels using "Other Ingredients" rather than "Inert Ingredients." Only one of those labels gave any indication of what the "other ingredients" were ("petroleum distillates") and "petroleum distillates" were labelled on other products as "inert ingredients." EPA's response to the problem identified in the 1996 Consumer Labeling Initiative has been profoundly ineffective. Consumers are still kept in the dark on the identity of the full composition of pesticide products, and are left to speculate as to the significance of EPA's differentiation between different types of ingredients.
*** Despite Inspector General criticisms, consumers are still kept in the dark on the identity of the full composition of pesticide products. ***
On what basis does EPA grant this extraordinary secrecy to the identity of the so-called "inert" ingredients? Clearly, it is within the Agency's power to require the identification of "inert" ingredients on pesticide product labels. In fact, EPA did so as part of its Inerts Strategy of the late 1980's when it required the identification of all "inert" ingredients included on List 1. By the same authority, it could and should extend that requirement to all "inert" ingredients.
EPA's apparent deference to the
pesticide industry desire for confidentiality over the public's right to know
is inconsistent with the labeling requirements for other consumer products such
as non-prescription drugs, foods and cosmetics. The labels on these products
require much more complete disclosure of ingredients, allowing the public to
make informed decisions about their purchase and use. Where some
confidentiality is permitted, as in the case of some ingredients in cosmetics,
the manufacturer is required to petition for that protection as part of the
label approval process, and before the product reaches the marketplace. (See
|
|
Labeling Requirements For Other Consumer Products |
|
While the labeling requirements for other common consumer products, such as non-prescription drugs, foods and cosmetics may be limited in some aspects, and certainly could be improved to provide even more public disclosure, they provide for a much more informative label than that found on pesticide products under EPA's current regulatory practice. A brief review of the laws and regulations governing these products reveals these important differences. Non-Prescription Drugs: (See Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 352(e)(1)§502(e) and 21 CFR 201.10) All active ingredients must be labeled by name and quantity. All inert ingredients must be labeled and listed in alphabetical order. Foods: (See Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 343 § 403(i), and 21 CFR 101 et seq.) All ingredients are required to be identified in descending order of percent composition by weight. Ingredients that comprise less than 2% of the total weight of the product can be listed at the end of the ingredient list with a statement stipulating that all ingredients in the identified group are present as less than 2% of the total product weight. Water added to foods must be listed in its appropriate weight order. Preservatives must be listed by their usual common name. Flavorings can be identified individually by common name or as a broader classification such as "spice" or "natural flavor." Certified colors must be identified by their certified name, while other colors may be identified by a common name or "article color." Only "incidental additives," which are components included at an insignificant level and which have no function in the final product, need not be listed. Notwithstanding the large quantities generally present, inert ingredients in pesticides would not qualify for this sort of exemption since they are formulated into the product for a purpose. Cosmetics: (See Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 362 §602, and 21 CFR 701 et seq.) As is the case for foods, all ingredients in cosmetics must be listed in descending order of weight in the product. Fragrances and flavors are treated as they are in foods, as are "incidental ingredients." There is a provision under which a manufacturer may apply for exemption from public disclosure [21 CFR 720.8(a)]and list a particular ingredient as an "other ingredient." The burden rests on the petitioner to provide a request that includes a full statement of the factual and legal grounds for the request including all data and other information on which the petitioner relies (21 CFR 720.8). Furthermore, the petitioner is required to submit information unfavorable to the request. In making a determination about trade secret status, the Food and Drug Administration considers the following factors:
|
|
EPA, however, takes the opposite approach with "inert" ingredients in pesticides. Products routinely go to market with labels that fail to identify the "inert" ingredients, and citizens must file a freedom of information request in an attempt to determine the composition of products already in use. Upon receipt of such a request, EPA contacts the registrant (or other party submitting the inert ingredient for registration) to inquire if they wish to assert confidentiality. If they so desire, they may then assert confidentiality and submit substantiation for that claim. In the meantime, the freedom of information requestor must wait. According to EPA, requests for disclosure of "inert" information can take "as little as six weeks" but may take as much as several years. 22
The federal courts have already
spoken on the issue of confidentiality for pesticide "inert" ingredients
in the context of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)23,
and have ruled in decisively favor of public disclosure of "inert"
ingredients. In 1996, the United States District Court for the
*** A federal judge ruled that EPA had improperly relied on unsubstantiated claims by manufacturers that the identity of the ingredients was "trade secret" or "confidential business information." ***
The court's ruling in the NCAP case
did not, however, mandate that the information be provided on the label of the
product. It only directed EPA to respond more appropriately to freedom of
information requests. The process of getting information from EPA in this
fashion can still be extraordinarily slow and difficult. On
Yet, even if EPA were to respond correctly to FOIA requests, such compliance would be far from adequate. Individuals experiencing adverse reactions to pesticide exposure, emergency responders, and physicians should have full ingredient information at hand, on the product label. Nor is it practical for individuals faced with a pest infestation and contemplating the use of pesticide products or pest control services to be required to file freedom of information requests, and then wait months or years to obtain the information needed to make informed decisions. They have a right to full disclosure on the product label.
*** Individuals experiencing adverse reactions to pesticide exposure, emergency responders, and physicians should have full ingredient information at hand, on the product label. ***
Recognizing that Judge Robertson's ruling had limited although positive impact, the New York State Attorney General and others filed a petition with EPA on January 20, 199827 requesting that EPA change its labeling regulations to require that all ingredients, including "inert" ingredients, be disclosed on pesticide labels. NCAP and almost 200 other citizens's groups filed a parallel petition.28 These petitions argue that EPA has the discretion, under FIFRA and EPA's existing regulations, to require disclosure of all ingredients on pesticide labels regardless of their target organism or purpose. EPA's labeling regulations clearly state that "the Administrator may require the name of any inert ingredients(s) to be listed in the ingredient statement if he determines that such ingredients maypose a hazard to man or the environment."29
As is clear in this report, and indeed in the descriptive titles assigned by EPA to the lists of "inerts," there is abundant support for a finding by the Administrator that inert ingredients do or may pose a hazard to man or the environment. In mandating the disclosure of only List 1 Inerts (an EPA creation), EPA in no way exhausted its discretion under the labeling regulations. The List 1 Inerts are those of known toxicological concern. This reflects the application of a much higher disclosure threshold than the standard of "may pose a hazard to man or the environment." EPA lacks sufficient evidence to preclude the possibility of hazard to humans or the environment for the vast majority of the remaining "inerts," and therefore could, and should, require the label disclosure of their identity and quantity in specific pesticide products.
*** EPA lacks sufficient evidence to preclude the possibility of hazard to humans or the environment for the vast majority of the remaining "inerts," and therefore could, and should, require the label disclosure of their identity and quantity in specific pesticide products. ***
In response, EPA has expressed concern that FIFRA provides protection of trade secrets or confidential information. However, that protection is tempered by provisions within FIFRA that balance the statute's protection of trade secret information against the public's right to know, where such disclosure is "necessary to carry out the provisions of [FIFRA].30" Those provisions, of course, include require pesticides to bear labels that include detailed ingredients statements,31 information critical to the public.
By letter dated
EPA has invited a group of 20 individuals to participate on the Inerts Disclosure Stakeholder Workgroup. The New York State Attorney General's office is represented in the Stakeholder Workgroup, and will continue to pursue full label disclosure and press for prompt action. Our participation in that advisory process will not constrain us from further legal action as may be appropriate.
|
|
EPA's Justification for Continued Secrecy |
|
EPA's denial of the Attorney General petition did not specifically ground its concern about the protection of trade secrets or confidential information in any specific provision of FIFRA. However, the agency's position apparently arises from FIFRA Section 10, 7 U.S.C. § 136h, "Protection of trade secrets and other information." This section contains a number of somewhat contradictory provisions, some of which favor public disclosure and others of which shield certain pesticide information from the public on trade secret grounds. Reflecting these internal contradictions, Section 10, subsection (b) establishes, but limits, trade secret protection for pesticide formulas under FIFRA. Subsection (b) provides that: [T]he Administrator shall not make public information which in the Administrator's judgment contains or relates to trade secrets or commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential, except that, when necessary to carry out the provisions of this subchapter, information relating to formulas of products acquired by authorization of this subchapter may be revealed to any Federal agency consulted and may be revealed at a public hearing or in findings of fact issued by the Administrator. (Emphasis added.) Subsection (d) then details a broad range of information about pesticides (including their "separate ingredients") that cannot be kept from the public as trade secrets, but does specify that this limitation on secrecy does not, in and of itself, authorize disclosure of the identity and quantity of inert ingredients: All information concerning the objectives, methodology, results, or significance or any test or experiment performed on or with a registered or previously registered pesticide or its separate ingredients, impurities, or degradation products, and any information concerning the effects of such pesticide on any organism or the behavior of such pesticide in the environment, including, but not limited to, data on safety to fish and wildlife, humans and other mammals, plants, animals, and soil, and studies on persistence, translocation and fate in the environment, and metabolism, shall be available for disclosure to the public. This paragraph does not authorize the disclosure of any information that: * * * (C) discloses the identity or percentage quantity of any deliberately added inert ingredient of a pesticide, unless the Administrator has first determined that disclosure is necessary to protect against an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. 7 U.S.C. § 136h(d)(1). Thus, proponents of non-disclosure are correct that FIFRA does provide a degree of confidentiality for the identity and quantity of inert ingredients. However, that protection must yield to the public's right to know where "the Administrator has ... determined that disclosure is necessary to protect against an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment." As demonstrated above, the Attorney General petition has presented the Administrator with abundant evidence that the current labeling system, which prevents the consumer from knowing the identity and amounts of inert ingredients being released into the environment, poses unreasonable risks of injury to health or the environment. EPA would act well within the discretion afforded it under Section 10 and other provisions of FIFRA to issue regulations requiring the disclosure of inert ingredients' identities and quantities on labels.1 1 To the extent that those arguing that FIFRA prohibits requiring disclosure of inert ingredients are correct, the statute could be amended in several ways to mandate dissemination of this important information to the public. The basic labeling provisions, 7 U.S.C. §§ 136(n) and (q), could be amended to require that "ingredient statements" include the name and percentage of each inert ingredient, and Section 10(d)(1), 7 U.S.C. §§ 136h(d)(1) (set forth in part above) could be amended by eliminating subsection (d)(1)(C), which prohibits disclosure of inerts unless the Administrator first finds disclosure necessary to protect against an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. Alternatively, some leeway could be maintained to accommodate legitimate trade secret concerns about inert identities and quantities by making this information presumptively available to the public, but allowing registrants to make an affirmative showing on a product by product basis that disclosure would in fact reveal legitimately confidential information. |
|
The Attorney General's office has prosecuted scores of cases involving deceptive advertising claims for pesticides and pest control services. In many of these cases, pesticide producers and pest control services were using the secrecy surrounding "inerts" to their advantage when advertising claims about the health and environmental impacts of pesticides.
For example, in advertising for its Roundup products, the Monsanto Company made various claims about the characteristics of the formulated product, and sought to substantiate the claims with data on the active ingredient alone. In fact, some of those claims were false as they related to the "inert" ingredients. For example, although they implied that Roundup was not toxic to fish, the "inert" surfactant (which helps to spread the active ingredient over the surface of foliage) in Roundup is "highly toxic" to some fish, according to data Monsanto submitted to EPA.35 Furthermore, the implication that claims for the product can be based on the characteristic of a single component is misleading. In November 1996, Monsanto signed an Assurance of Discontinuance with the Attorney General's office in which the company agreed to cease and desist from making these and other deceptive claims, and paid $75,000 in penalties.
*** Pesticide producers and pest control services were using the secrecy surrounding "inerts" to their advantage when advertising claims about the health and environmental impacts of pesticides. ***
Similarly, the Chevron Chemical Corporation advertised its "Orthoganics" line of products as a "brand new line of products composed of naturally occurring pesticides and organic fertilizers." When pressed, the company could not demonstrate that the "inert" ingredients in the Orthoganic brand pesticides were also naturally occurring. Chevron agreed to stop making these and other deceptive claims, and paid a penalty of $50,000. (Assurance of Discontinuance signed December 1993).
The Attorney General's office has also obtained more than one hundred Assurances of Discontinuance from pest control services that made advertising claims about the health and environmental impacts of their services, including that the products applied. Those claims were deceptive for a number of reasons, including that the applicators could not substantiate them since they, like the rest of the public, were ignorant of the full composition of the pesticide products used.
As long as such secrecy is maintained, the public will remain ill-prepared to guard against this sort of deception and businesses will risk running afoul of the law, be that by intent or by ignorance.
- Conclusion
As a result of the secrecy allowed by EPA, the public is kept in the dark on many of the chemicals that compose pesticide products. Although the labels identify the active ingredients, most pesticide products are composed largely of ingredients designated "inert" only as a result of statutory definition. The identities of these ingredients are withheld from the public. Pesticide registrants know what is in these products, as does EPA. Competitors who wish to determine the composition of products have the resources to do so through reverse engineering. But the average citizen who is exposed to these products is kept uninformed. Although the courts have provided guidance on the release of the identity of "inerts" in response to freedom of information requests, the EPA has not availed itself fully of the courts' guidance. The information must be available when needed, when decisions on pesticide use are made, and when quick response to pesticide poisonings is imperative. Despite lawsuits and petitions, despite the concerns expressed by the public, and despite the clear need for full label disclosure, EPA still accords unprecedented protection to the identity of certain ingredients. The protection EPA gives pesticides -- poisons -- goes well beyond that accorded other common consumer products and is inconsistent with the public interest.
*** Despite lawsuits and petitions, despite the concerns expressed by the public, and despite the clear need for full label disclosure, EPA still accords unprecedented protection to the identity of certain ingredients. ***
By the end of 2000, EPA should revise its labeling policies and practices to require the full disclosure of all pesticide ingredients, regardless of the purpose they serve in the formulation. The label must inform the public, and the identity of the ingredients is a fundamental element of the information that should be available.
In the meantime, the public must recognize that any decision to use a pesticide, or to otherwise be exposed to pesticides, is a decision made in ignorance. We do not know the identity of the chemicals to which we are exposed. We cannot make informed individual decisions on the acceptability of those exposures, a basic element in the maintenance and protection of our own health. And when adverse reactions occur, we must stand by and wait until the information necessary for proper diagnosis and treatment is obtained from other sources.
One sure way to avoid the hazards
of exposure to these secret ingredients is to avoid exposure to pesticides.
Appendix 1: Percent inerts in some pesticide products (1990)*
|
HOUSEHOLD PESTICIDE |
MANUFACTURER |
PERCENT INERT |
|
Ant, Roach, and Spider Killer |
Dexol Industries |
99.5 |
|
Aphid and Mite Attack |
Ringer Corp. |
97.96 |
|
Crawling Insect Attack |
Ringer Corp. |
99.56 |
|
Flea Kill Fogger |
The d-Con |
98.35 |
|
Hyponex Bug Spray |
Hyponex Corp. |
99.78 |
|
Insecticidal Soap for Indoor Plants |
Safer, Inc. |
98.0 |
|
Mite Killer |
Safer, Inc. |
98.0 |
|
No-Roach |
Gaston Johnston Corp. |
82.034 |
|
Ortho Flea-B-Gon |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
99.17 |
|
Ortho Hi-Power Ant, Roach & Spider Killer |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
95.11 |
|
Ortho Hornet & Wasp Killer |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
99.50 |
|
Raid Ant & Roach Killer |
S.C.Johnson & Sons Inc. |
99.10 |
|
Raid Flying Insect Killer |
S.C.Johnson & Sons Inc. |
99.2 |
|
Raid Fogger II |
S.C.Johnson & Sons Inc. |
85.0 |
|
Raid Fumigator |
S.C.Johnson & Sons Inc. |
87.4 |
|
Raid House and Garden Bug Killer |
S.C.Johnson & Sons Inc. |
97.504 |
|
|
Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp. |
99.5 |
|
Spectracide Home Insect Control |
Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp. |
99.17 |
|
Spectracide Indoor Fogger |
Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp. |
99.40 |
|
Spectracide Wasp and Hornet Killer |
Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp. |
99.3664 |
|
Wasp and Hornet Attack |
Ringer Corp. |
99.56 |
|
|
||
|
LAWN CARE FUNGICIDE |
||
|
Lawn and Turf Fungicide |
Faesy & Besthoff, Inc. |
92.0 |
|
Lawn Disease Preventer |
Glorion Corp. |
95.0 |
|
Lawn Fungicide |
Lebanon Chemical Corp. |
99.945 |
|
|
||
|
LAWN CARE HERBICIDE |
||
|
2-Way Green Power |
Lebanon Chemical Corp. |
96.52 |
|
Balan 2, 5G |
Elanco Products Co. |
97.5 |
|
Expel Dandelion Killer |
Lebanon Chemical Corp. |
97.92 |
|
Longlife Weed and Feed |
Frank's Nursery & Crafts |
99.9845 |
|
Preen'n Green |
Lebanon Chemical Co. |
99.26 |
|
Spectracide Grass and Weed Killer |
Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp. |
99.7 |
|
Step 1 Crab Grass Prevention |
O.M.Scott & Sons Co. |
99.85 |
|
Step 2 Weed Control |
O.M.Scott & Sons Co. |
97.205 |
|
Super Turf Builder Plus 2 |
O.M.Scott & Sons Co. |
97.66 |
|
Super Turf Builder Plus Halts |
O.M.Scott & Sons Co. |
98.97 |
|
Surety Weed and Feed Plus |
Howard Johnson Ent. Inc. |
99.063 |
|
Team 2G |
Elanco Products Co. |
98.0 |
|
XL 2G |
Elanco Products Co. |
98.9 |
|
|
||
|
LAWN CARE INSECTICIDE |
||
|
Bugout |
Lebanon Chemical Corp. |
98.86 |
|
Chinch Bug & Grub Preventer |
Glorion Corp. |
97.28 |
|
Deluxe Weed and Feed |
Glorion Corp. |
97.28 |
|
Grub Buster |
Free Flow Fertilizer |
98.5 |
|
Insect Control |
O.M.Scott & Sons Co. |
96.40 |
|
Lawn Insect Control |
Glorion Corp. |
98.86 |
|
Lawn Insect Control |
O.M.Scott & Sons Co. |
94.16 |
|
Lawn Insecticide |
Free Flow Fertiliz |
95 |
|
Lawn Insecticide |
Greensweep Household Products |
58.5 |
|
Longlife Lawn & Garden Insecticide |
Frank's Nursery & Crafts |
95.000 |
|
Oftanol |
Glorion Corp. |
98.5 |
|
Spectracide Lawn & Garden Insect Control (granular) |
Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp. |
95 |
|
Spectracide Lawn & Garden Insect Control (liquid) |
Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp. |
18.7 |
|
Step 3 Insect Control |
O.M.Scott & Sons Co. |
96.40 |
|
|
||
|
GENERAL HERBICIDES |
||
|
2 in 1 Crabgrass Preventer |
Glorion Corp. |
98.78 |
|
AAtrex 4L |
CIBA-GEIGY Corp. |
57.0 |
|
Arsenal |
American Cyanamid Co. |
72.4 |
|
Chopper |
American Cyanamid Co. |
72.4 |
|
Ortho Kleenup Super Edger |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
99.50 |
|
Prowl |
American Cyanamid Co. |
57.7 |
|
|
||
|
GARDEN FUNGICIDE |
||
|
Dexol Bordeaux Mixture |
Dexol Industries |
87.35 |
|
Garden Fungicide |
Safer, Inc. |
99.6 |
|
Pipron L.C. |
Elanco Products Co. |
17.6 |
|
Rubigan E.C. |
Elanco Prodcuts Co. |
87.5 |
|
|
||
|
GARDEN INSECTICIDE |
||
|
Liquid Sevin |
Faesy & Besthoff, Inc. |
77.5 |
|
Ortho 3-Way Rose & Flower Care |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
98.85 |
|
Rose & Flower Spray or Dust |
Bonide Chemical Co. Inc. |
84.5 |
|
Spectracide Rose & Garden Insect Killer |
Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp. |
99.88 |
|
|
||
|
OUTDOOR INSECTICIDE |
||
|
Abate 1-SG |
American Cyanamid Co. |
99 |
|
Amdro |
American Cyanamid Co. |
99.12 |
|
Cygon 400 |
American Cyanamid Co. |
56.5 |
|
Gypsy Moth Biological Control |
Acme Burgess Inc. |
99.14 |
|
Mosquito Attack |
Ringer Corp. |
50 |
|
Ortho Diazinon Soil & Foliage Dust |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
96 |
|
Ortho Diazinon Plus Insect Spray |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
75 |
|
Ortho Home Orchard Spray |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
62.5 |
|
Ortho Isotox Insect Killer |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
90.6 |
|
Ortho Orthene Systemic Insect Control |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
90.6 |
|
Ortho Rose & Flower Insect Killer |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
99.70 |
|
Ortho Sevin |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
95 |
|
Raid Yard Guard |
S.C.Johnson & Sons Inc. |
99.125 |
|
Yard and Garden Insect Attack |
Ringer Corp. |
99.56 |
|
|
||
|
PET CARE |
||
|
Hartz 2 in 1 Flea and Tick |
The Hartz Mountain Corp. |
99.332 |
|
|
||
|
INSECT REPELLENT |
||
|
Cutter Insect Repellent |
Miles Laboratory |
67 |
|
Off |
S.C.Johnson & Sons Inc. |
85.00 |
|
Ortho Outdoor Insect Fogger |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
91.385 |
|
|
||
|
MOLLUSCICIDE |
||
|
Deadline |
Pace National Corp. |
96 |
|
Ortho Slug-geta |
Chevron Chemical Co. |
98 |
|
|
||
|
* Based on a market survey of conventional pesticide products sold at several retail outlets during the Spring and Summer of 1990. |
||
Appendix 2: Percent inert ingredients in some pesticide products (1997)*
|
Products |
EPA Reg. # |
% Inerts |
Inerts Identified |
|
LAWN AND GARDEN INSECTICIDES |
|||
|
Combat Outdoor Ant Killing Stakes |
64240-3 |
99.00 |
|
|
Cygon Systemic Insecticide |
4-256 |
76.6 |
|
|
Ortho Diazinon Granules |
239-2375 |
98 |
|
|
Ortho Diazinon Plus Insect Spray |
239-2364 |
75 |
aromatic petroleum distillates |
|
Ortho Dursban Ready - Spray Outdoor Flea & Tick Killer |
239-2633 |
95.62 |
|
|
Ortho Hornet & Wasp Killer |
239-2390 |
99.50 |
petroleum distillates |
|
Ortho Isotox Insect Killer Formula IV |
239-2595 |
91.5 |
|
|
Ortho Orthene Systemic Insect Control |
239-2461 |
90.6 |
|
|
Ortho Rose Pride Systemic Rose & Flower Care |
239-2134 |
99 |
|
|
Ortho |
239-2181 |
95 |
|
|
Ortho Sevin Liquid Carbaryl Insecticide 2 |
239-2628 |
78.7 |
|
|
Ortho Tomato & Vegetable Insect Killer |
239-2497 |
99.78 |
|
|
Raid Yard Guard (Outdoor Fogger) |
4822-309 |
99.1325 |
sodium nitrate |
|
Real-Kill Diazinon Insect Killer Spray Concentrate |
8845-92-478 |
75.0 |
aromatic petroleum distillates |
|
Sevin Insect Control |
65636-127-4 |
99.874 |
|
|
Spectracide Lawn & Garden Insect Control - Diazinon Insect Spray |
8845-92 |
75.0 |
aromatic petroleum distillates |
|
Spectracide Rose & Garden Insect Killer |
478-46-8845 |
99.96 |
|
|
Spectracide Termite & Ant Control Concentrate |
62719-56-8845 |
87.4 |
aliphatic & aromatic petroleum solvents |
|
|
|||
|
LAWN AND GARDEN HERBICIDES |
|||
|
Ortho Brush-B-Gon Poison Ivy, Poison Oak, and Brush Killer 3 |
239-2515 |
99.30 |
|
|
Ortho Brush-B-Gon Poison Ivy, Poison Oak & Brush Killer Concentrate |
239-2491 |
92 |
|
|
Ortho Crabgrass Killer Formula II |
239-2510 |
91.6 |
|
|
Ortho Grass-B-Gon Grass Killer Formula II |
239-2620 |
99.52 |
|
|
Ortho Ground Clear Super Edger Grass & Weed Control |
239-2516 |
99.50 |
|
|
Roundup Sure Shot Foam |
239-2652 |
99.04 |
|
|
Roundup Weed & Grass Killer |
239-2638 |
99.04 |
|
|
Safer Brand Superfast Weed & GrassKiller |
42697-22 |
97.00 |
|
|
Safer |
42697-17 |
99.60 |
|
|
Spectracide Grass & Weed Killer Concentrate |
9688-106-8845 |
96.95 |
|
|
|
|||
|
OTHER - LAWN AND GARDEN |
|||
|
Fruit Tree Spray |
4-107 |
68.47 |
|
|
|
4-107 |
68.47 |
|
|
Moletox |
4-285 |
98 |
|
|
Ortho Home Orchard Spray |
239-568 |
62.5 |
|
|
Ortho Rose Pride Funginex |
239-2435 |
93.5 |
|
|
Ortho Rose Pride Orthenex Insect & Disease Control |
239-2476 |
99.536 |
|
|
Rose & Flower Dust |
4-59 |
84.5 |
|
|
Rose Spray II |
4-122 |
69.70 |
petroleum distillate |
|
Spectracide Immunex |
100-773-8845 |
98.45 |
|
|
|
|||
|
INDOOR INSECTICIDES |
|||
|
Combat Superbait Ant Baits |
64248-2-64240 |
99 |
|
|
Enforcer Carpenter Ant Killer Concentrate |
432-733-40849 |
74.0 |
|
|
Enforcer Concentrate for Fleas |
40849-54 |
98.70 |
|
|
Enforcer Exterminator Plus One-Year Flea Control |
40849-64 |
35.00 |
|
|
Enforcer Flea Fogger |
40849-56 |
99.015 |
|
|
Enforcer Flea Killer for Carpets III |
40849-61 |
99.7 |
|
|
Hot Shot Fogger |
478-126-8845 |
99.4 |
|
|
Hot Shot Maxattrax Roach Bait |
9688-67-8845 |
99.50 |
|
|
Hot Shot Roach & Ant Killer 2 |
9688-86-8845 |
99.94 |
|
|
Ortho Ant-Stop Ant Killer Bait 2 |
506-137-239 |
99.75 |
|
|
Ortho Ant-Stop Ant Killer Dust |
239-2517 |
99 |
|
|
Ortho Home Defense |
62719-197-239 |
99.19 |
|
|
Ortho Home Defense Flying & Crawling Insect Killer |
239-2512 |
99.5 |
petroleum distillate, Xylene, or Xylene Range Aromatic
Solvent |
|
Raid Ant Baits Plus |
4822-356 |
99.50 |
|
|
Raid Ant & Roach Killer 14 |
4822-403 |
99.100 |
petroleum distillates |
|
Raid Fogger |
1021-1558-4822 |
99.115 |
|
|
Raid Fumigator |
4822-278 |
87.4 |
|
|
Raid House & Garden Bug Killer |
4822-38 |
98.70 |
|
|
Raid Max Plus Egg Stoppers |
4822-400 |
9 |
|
|
Raid Max Plus Roach Bait |
4822-411 |
99.472 |
|
|
Real-Kill Ant & Roach Killer 2 |
9688-86-478 |
99.94 |
|
|
Real-Kill Dursban Ant, Flea, & Tick Killer Spray Concentrate |
9688-95-478 |
95.25 |
|
|
Real-Kill Foaming Wasp, Hornet & Yellow Jacket Killer |
9688-62-478 |
99.70 |
sodium nitrite |
|
Real-Kill Home Insect Control |
9688-80-478 |
99.99 |
|
|
Real-Kill Indoor Flea Fogger 2 |
8845-123-478 |
99.115 |
|
|
Real-Kill Indoor Fogger |
8845-123-478 |
99.115 |
|
|
Safer Brand Home Patrol |
42697-38 |
99.75 |
|
|
Safer Brand Household Insecticidal Soap |
42679-2 |
98.00 |
|
|
Spectracide Ant Shield Home Barrier Granules |
9688-83-8845 |
99.75 |
|
|
Spectracide Bugstop |
9688-81-8845 |
99.975 |
|
|
Spectracide Wasp & Hornet Killer II |
9688-62-8845 |
99.70 |
sodium nitrite |
|
TAT Ant Trap |
506-137 |
99.75 |
|
|
|
|||
|
RODENTICIDES |
|||
|
d-CON Mouse Prufe II |
3282-65 |
99.99 |
|
|
d-CON Ready Mixed Baitbits |
3282-81 |
99.995 |
|
|
Enforcer Exterminator Plus Rat & Mouse Weather Bait |
12455-5-40849 |
99.995 |
|
|
Enforcer Rat Kill II |
10182-337-40849 |
99.995 |
|
|
Enforcer Rat & Mouse Killer |
7173-128-40849 |
99.995 |
|
|
Hot Shot Sudden Death Brand Mouse Killer I |
8845-125 |
99.99 |
|
|
Revenge Rodent Smoke Bomb |
9086-4 |
11 |
|
|
|
|||
|
REPELLANTS |
|||
|
Hinder Deer & Rabbit Repellent |
64864-26 |
86.2 |
|
|
RO-PEL Animal, Rodent, & Bird Repellent |
45735-2 |
99.9 |
|
|
Shot-Gun Mole Repellent |
64439-1-4 |
34.0 |
|
|
XP-20 Deer & Rabbit Repellent |
65636-92-46260 |
90.00 |
|
|
Enforcer Ant & Insect Barrier Treatment |
769-726-40849 |
99.00 |
|
|
|
|||
|
* Survey of all 81 pesticide products found in a large
home improvement center in |
|||
Appendix 3: Percent inerts in some pesticide products (1999)*
|
Products |
EPA Reg. # |
% Inerts |
Inerts Identified** |
|
LAWN AND GARDEN HERBICIDES |
|||
|
Crabgrass & Broadleaf Weed Killer |
2217-709-4 |
68.85 |
|
|
Green Sweep (Weed & Feed Spray) |
239-2640 |
93.15*** |
|
|
Ortho Brush-B-Gon Poison Ivy, Poison Oak & Brush Conc. |
239-2491 |
92 |
|
|
Ortho Brush-B-Gon Poison Ivy, Poison Oak & Brush Killer |
9688-89-478 |
92 |
|
|
Ortho Clear Triox - Total Vegetation Killer |
239-2622 |
99.22 |
2-(4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4- |
|
Ortho Concentrated Weed-B-Gon |
239-2510 |
92 |
|
|
Ortho Grass-B-Gon Grass Killer Formula II |
239-2620 |
99.52 |
|
|
Ortho Ground Triox - Total Vegetation Killer |
239-2657 |
94.92*** |
|
|
Ortho Lawn Weed Killer |
2217-570-239 |
85.05 |
|
|
Ortho Ready Spray Lawn Weed Killer |
239-2664 |
85.05 |
|
|
Ortho Weed-B-Gon Crabgrass Killer Formula |
239-2510 |
91.6 |
|
|
Preen Weed Control |
961-280 |
98.53 |
|
|
Premium Crabgrass Control & Lawn Fertilizer |
62719-152-557 |
98.75 |
|
|
Real Kill Grass & Weed Killer |
9688-126-478 |
99.76*** |
|
|
Roundup Sure Shot Foam |
239-2652 |
99.04 |
|
|
Roundup Weed & Grass Killer |
239-2638 |
99.04 |
|
|
Safer Brand Superfast Weed & Grass Killer |
42697-22 |
97 |
|
|
Scotts Turf Builder & Weed Control |
538-28 |
97.58 |
|
|
Spectracide Lawn & Garden Insect Control - Diazinon |
8845-92 |
77.6 |
|
|
Spectracide Weed Stop |
478-121-8845 |
81.91 |
|
|
Spectracide Weed & Grass Killer |
9688-126-8845 |
99.76*** |
|
|
Spring Crabgrass Control |
62719-137-961 |
98 |
|
|
Ultra Vigoro Weed & Feed |
271-819-8660 |
99.02 |
|
|
Vigoro Premium Lawn Fertilizer w/ Weed Control |
228-301-557 |
99.06 |
|
|
|
|||
|
LAWN AND GARDEN INSECTICIDES |
|||
|
Carpenter Ant Control Spray |
9591-124-5 |
99 |
Petroleum distillate |
|
Carpenter Ant Dust |
62719-54-5 |
99 |
|
|
Combat Outdoor Ant Killing Granules |
64240-25 |
99 |
|
|
Combat Outdoor Ant Killing Stakes |
64240-30 |
99.99 |
|
|
Enforcer Ant & Insect Barrier Treatment |
62719-14-40849 |
99.5 |
|
|
Grub Control w/Dylox Insecticides |
3125-406-961 |
93.8 |
|
|
Ortho |
239-2181 |
95*** |
|
|
Ortho Diazinon Ultra Insect Spray |
239-2643 |
77.6 |
|
|
Ortho Dursban Ready Spray Outdoor Flea & Tick Killer |
239-2633 |
95.62 |
|
|
Ortho Isotox Insect Killer Formula IV |
239-2595 |
91.5 |
|
|
Ortho Multipurpose Daconil |
239-2522 |
70.4*** |
|
|
Ortho Orthene Systemic Insect Control |
239-2461 |
62.5 |
|
|
Ortho Rose & Flower Insect Killer |
239-2668 |
99.988 |
|
|
Ortho Rose Pride Systematic Rose & Flower Care |
239-2134 |
99 |
|
|
Ortho Rose Pride - Rose & Flower Insect Killer |
239-2498 |
99.78 |
|
|
Ortho |
239-2181 |
95 |
|
|
Ortho Sevin Liquid Brand Carbaryl Insecticide 2 |
239-2628 |
78.7 |
|
|
Ortho Tomato & Vegetable Insect Killer |
239-2497 |
99.78 |
|
|
Raid Yard Guard (Outdoor Fogger) |
4822-394 |
99.632 |
Sodium nitrate |
|
Real Kill Diazinon Insect Killer Spray Concentrated |
8845-92-478 |
75*** |
Aromatic petroleum distillates |
|
Real-Kill Diazinon Soil & Turf Insecticide |
239-2651 |
98*** |
|
|
Safer Insecticidal Soap |
42697-1 |
50.48 |
|
|
Safer Rose&Flower Insect Killer Spray |
36488-33-42697 |
98.5 |
|
|
Safer Yard & Garden Insect Killer |
42697-33 |
98.973 |
|
|
Scotts Turf Builder w/ Insect Control |
538-254 |
97.58 |
|
|
Sevin Insect Control |
65636-127-4 |
99.874 |
|
|
Spectracide Diazinon Soil & Turf Insecticide |
8845-95-478 |
95 |
|
|
Spectracide Dursban Granules |
9688-88-8845 |
99 |
|
|
Spectracide Termite & Ant Control Concentrated |
62719-56-8845 |
87.4 |
Aliphatic & aromatic |
|
Vigoro Lawn Insect Control and Fertilizer |
8660-11 |
96.66 |
|
|
Vigoro Premium Insect Control |
557-1980 |
99.36 |
|
|
|
|||
|
OTHERS |
|||
|
Fruit & Vegetable & Flower Garden Dust |
4-30 |
76.6 |
|
|
Fungonil |
675-72-2-4 |
99.913 |
|
|
Moletox |
4-285 |
98 |
|
|
Ortho Bug-Geta Snail & Slug Killer |
239-2561 |
98*** |
|
|
Ortho Rose Pride Funginex |
239-2435 |
93.5 |
|
|
Ortho Rose Pride Orthenex Insect & Disease Control |
239-2476 |
99.536 |
|
|
Ortho Rose Pride Othenex Insect & Disease Control |
239-2594 |
92 |
|
|
Rose & Flower Dust |
4-59 |
84.5 |
|
|
Rose Spray II |
4-122 |
69.7 |
Petroleum distillate |
|
Spectracide Immunex Multi-Purpose Fungicide (Concentrated) |
9688-123-8845 |
98.45 |
|
|
|
|||
|
INDOOR INSECTICIDES |
|||
|
Black Flag Roach Barrier & Killer |
11715-184-69421 |
96.5 |
|
|
Combat Quick Kill Roach Bait |
64240-33 |
99.97 |
|
|
Enforcer Concentrate for Fleas |
40849-54 |
99.015 |
|
|
Hot Shot Ant Kill Plus |
9688-79-8845 |
99.92 |
|
|
Hot Shot Flying Insect Killer |
9688-111-8845 |
99.2 |
|
|
Hot Shot Fogger |
478-126-8845 |
99.4 |
|
|
Hot Shot Kitchen Bug Killer |
9866-114-8845 |
98.75 |
|
|
Hot Shot Maxattrax Roach Bait |
9688-67-8845 |
99.5 |
|
|
Hot Shot Roach & Ant Killer 2 |
9688-86-8845 |
99.94 |
|
|
Mosquito Beater |
4-123 |
95 |
|
|
No-Escape |
4-364 |
99.188 |
Petroleum distillate |
|
Ortho Ant-Stop Ant Killer Spray |
239-2524 |
99.6 |
Petroleum, xylene range aromatics |
|
Ortho Ant-Stop Killer Bait 2 |
506-137-239 |
99.75 |
|
|
Ortho Ant-Stop Killer Dust |
239-2517 |
99 |
|
|
Ortho Bug-B-Gon |
239-2630 |
99.925 |
|
|
Ortho Home Defense |
627-197-239 |
99.5 |
|
|
Ortho Home Defense Flying & Crawling |
239-2512 |
99.5 |
Petroleum distillate, xylene, Insect Killer & xylene range aromatic solvent |
|
Ortho-Klor Insect & Termite Killer |
4675-19-478 |
87.4 |
|
|
Raid Ant Baits Plus |
4822-356 |
99.5 |
|
|
Raid Commercial Flying Insect Kill |
4822-85 |
97.68 |
|
|
Raid Commercial Flying Insect Killer |
4822-36 |
97.6 |
|
|
Raid Concentrated Deep Reach Fogger |
4822-452 |
98.284*** |
|
|
Raid Flea Killer Plus |
4822-273 |
99.015 |
|
|
Raid Fumigator |
4822-278 |
87.4 |
|
|
Raid House & Garden Bug Killer |
4822-38 |
98.7 |
|
|
Raid Indoor Flea Fogger |
1021-1623-478 |
99 |
|
|
Raid Max Plus Egg Stoppers |
4822-400 |
9 |
|
|
Raid Max Plus Roach Bait |
48822-411 |
99.472 |
|
|
Real Kill Dursban Ant,Flea & Tick Killer Spray (Concentrated) |
9688-95-478 |
95.25 |
|
|
Real Kill Dursban (Ant, Flea &Tick Killer) |
9688-95-478 |
95.25 |
|
|
Real Kill Indoor Fogger |
8845-123-478 |
99.115 |
|
|
Real Kill Malathion Insect Killer Spray |
4615-19-478 |
50 |
|
|
Real-Kill Ant & Roach Killer 2 |
9688-86-478 |
99.94 |
|
|
Real-Kill Foaming Wasp, Hornet & Yellow Jacket Killer |
9688-62-478 |
99.7 |
Sodium nitrite |
|
Real-Kill Home Insect Control |
9688-80-478 |
99.99 |
|
|
Safer Brand Home Patrol |
42697-38 |
99.75 |
|
|
Spectracide Ant Shield Home Barrier Granules |
9688-83-8845 |
99.75 |
|
|
Spectracide Bugstop |
9688-81-8845 |
99.975 |
|
|
Spectracide Dursban Multi-purpose Insect Spray Concentrated |
8845-30 |
94*** |
|
|
Spectracide Wasp & Hornet Killer II |
9688-62-8845 |
99.7 |
Sodium nitrite |
|
TAT Ant Trap |
506-137 |
99.75 |
|
|
|
|||
|
RODENTICIDES |
|||
|
d-CON Mouse Pruf II |
3282-65 |
99.995 |
|
|
d-CON Ready Mixed Baitbits |
3282-81 |
99.995 |
|
|
Enforcer Rat & Mouse Killer |
7173-128-40849 |
99.995 |
|
|
Zep Commercial Rat & Mouse Killer |
182-337-40849 |
99.995 |
|
|
|
|||
|
REPELLANTS |
|||
|
XP-20 Deer & Rabbit Repellent |
6536-92-46260 |
90 |
|
|
Hinder Deer & Rabbit Repellent |
64864-26 |
86.2 |
|
|
Shot-Gun Mole Repellent |
64439-1-4 |
34 |
|
|
|
|||
|
MOLLUSCICIDE |
|||
|
Ortho Bug-Geta Snail & Slug Killer |
39-2561 |
98*** |
|
|
|
|||
|
* Survey of all 113 conventional pesticide products found in a large home improvement center in New York City, May, 1999. |
|||
|
** Unless specified here, the quantity of each inert ingredient was not stated on product label. |
|||
|
*** These products used the term "Other Ingredients" rather than "Inert Ingredients" on the label. |
|||
4 52 Fed.Reg. 13305, 13307, 1987.
5 Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, "Worst Kept Secrets: Toxic Inert Ingredients in Pesticides" p.3, 1998.
6 New York State Attorney General's Office, "The Secret Hazards of Pesticides: Inert Ingredients." This report, originally published in June 1991, and subsequently revised, is now out of print.
7 For EPA's current list of "inert" ingredients, see http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/inerts/lists.html.
8 52 Fed. Reg. 13305, 133306.
9 U.S. EPA, "Pesticide Industry Sales and Usage - 1996 and 1997 Market Estimates," 73-R-99-001 1999.
10 EPA classifies pesticides as one of several "types." "Conventional pesticides" are chemicals developed and produced exclusively or primarily for use as pesticides. "Other pesticide chemicals" are those registered as pesticides but used primarily for other purposes, such as sulfer and petroleum. EPA also recognizes three other "types" of pesticides- "wood preservatives," "specialty biocides" and "chlorine/hypochlorites." See U.S. EPA, "Pesticide Industry Sales and Usage - 1996 and 1997 Market Estimates," 73-R-99-001, 1999.
11 Federal Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
12 Federal Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 121 et seq.
13 42 U.S.C. §9604(i), Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, Section 110.
14 42 U.S.C. §11002(a), Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, Section 302A.
15 42 U.S.C. §11023(a), Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, Section 313.
16 Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, "Worst Kept Secrets: Toxic Inert Ingredients in Pesticides," p.4, 1998.
17 U.S. EPA, Office of the Inspector General, "Inert Ingredients in Pesticides," Audit Report E1EPF1-05-0117-1100378, Sept. 27, 1991.
18 Memo from Michael Simmons, Associate Assistant Inspector General for Internal and Performance Audits to Victor J. Kimm, Acting Assistant Adminstrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Sept. 17, 1993.
19 Personal communication from Kerry Leifer, Inerts Team Leader, U.S. EPA Office of Pesticide Programs, Jan. 10, 1999.
20
21 Ibid.
22
23 Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
24 Northwest
Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides v. Browner, Slip op. D.D.C.
25 Letter from Assistant Attorney General Andrew J. Gershon to Freedom of Information Officer, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. EPA, April 5, 1999.
26 Letter from Richard D. Schmitt, Acting Director - Information Resources and Services Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. EPA to Assistant Attorney General Andrew J. Gershon, April 29, 1999.
27 Petition
of
28 Petition
To Require Disclosure of Inert Ingredients On Pesticide Product Labels, by the
Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, the
29 40 C.F.R. § 156.10(g)(1).
30
31 7
32 Letter
from Assistant Attorney General Andrew Gershon to Deputy Assistant
Administrator Susan H. Wayland,
33 Letter
from Acting Administrator Suan H. Wayland to Assistant Attorney General Andrew
Gershon,
34 Letter from Susan H. Wayland, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, U.S. EPA to Assistant Attorney General Andrew J. Gershon, November 1, 1999.
35 United States Environmental Protection Agency, "Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Glyphosate - September 1993" EPA 738-R-93-014.
This appendix is copied from:
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/reports/inerts/pesticide_inerts.html