Report finds pesticide enforcement failures

The vice-president of a pesticide manufacturers’ trade association doesn’t understand why some companies did not comply with mandatory incident reporting regulations for the July 2007 Biedermann Packaging fire in Dundas.

Just last week, after stories in the Dundas Star News and an environmental petition by Environment Hamilton, a registrant of pesticide products containing diazinon, malathion and zineb reported the fire to the Pest Management Regulatory Agency – more than a year and half after the regulation required it.

United Agri Products of Dorchester, Ont., sent a report to the PMRA on March 2, 2009. The mandatory report states the company became aware of the Biedermann fire on July 26, 2007, over 18 months ago. The incident reporting regulation required the report to be filed within 15 days of the company being notified of the incident.

“The rules are very clear,” said Peter MacLeod of CropLife Canada. “There should be compliance. It’s not like people didn’t know about that fire.”

Mr. MacLeod said members of CropLife are well aware of the requirements and he feels the system has been working since introduced in the fall of 2006.

Officials of the Health Canada agency told the Dundas Star News they have only “been in contact” with pesticide registrants whose products were in Biedermann Packaging during the 2007 fire.

Concerns about PMRA enforcement are not new. There has been no further review of the agency since a 2003 audit found the federal department was failing to enforce its pesticide regulations.

Canada’s Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development expected PMRA’s effort to ensure compliance would get even more difficult in the future.

“The agency does not have reliable or timely information on the effectiveness of its compliance programs,” the report stated. “Therefore, it is difficult for the agency to determine what resources are needed and to help target its limited inspection and enforcement activities systematically or on the basis of risk. Nor can it demonstrate that it is meeting its commitment to ensure compliance with the Pest Control Products Act.”

Three years later the agency brought in new mandatory reporting regulations for pesticide registrants whose products were involved in major incidents, like the Biedermann Packaging fire in July 2007.

There has not been any update on enforcement of the regulation by the PMRA. There is apparently no way to know how many significant pesticide incidents impacting human or environmental health have not been reported to the PMRA, despite legislation requiring it.

Environment Hamilton filed an environmental petition last month with the commissioner’s office, asking for some accountability and an explanation from the PMRA about its lack of enforcement in the Dundas case, as well as reviews of the products apparently involved in the death of millions of fish and aquatic organisms in Spencer Creek and Cootes Paradise. The organization has several months to respond.

Two companies reported their products were in the Biedermann building at the time of the fire within a month of the incident, but there’s no evidence those products had any impact.

Both companies reported the incident as major. Several environmental organizations, including the Canadian Environmental Law Association, and Ecojustice had no details about the mandatory reporting regulation or its enforcement.

That was no surprise to Stephen Hazell, executive director of the Sierra Club of Canada. He said the national environmental organization has done little work in the area of pesticides and other toxins because there’s little funding available for such projects.

“It’s very, very small the amount of work the non-governmental organizations are doing,” he said.