CropLife president comments on potential pesticide application permit requirement

"Potential for point source permitting requirements for crop protection use is a troublesome possibility for ag dealers and farmers in the United States," reported Jay Vroom, president and CEO of CropLife America (CLA), while speaking January 21 at the annual convention of the Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association (IFCA).

"Because of the adverse ruling by the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals one year ago, we are getting closer to water point source permitting becoming an added regulatory burden for crop protection and public health products applied to water. At CropLife, we are working on both the legal appeal and regulatory implementation fronts, in order to exhaust all possible means of avoiding or minimizing the burden on farmers, dealers and other applicators from this potentially new bureaucratic burden."

In remarks to several hundred industry representatives gathered for the annual statewide convention, Vroom explained reasons why so-called NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits have the potential to be a burden to applicators.

"NPDES permitting was devised to help the EPA manage or eliminate unwanted pollution from big, stationary sources like sewage treatment plants and factories. Using this system, created solely for vastly different purposes, to put a new layer of regulation on crop protection products is more than redundant.

"Its wrong. Getting a permit can take up to 180 days lead time and involves incredible layers of process and generates new, unwarranted legal exposures," Vroom observed. "Thats why we are working hard -- in conjunction with the America Farm Bureau, National Cotton Council, and many other close allies to get this ruling overturned -- or at a minimum implemented by the EPA in a manner that will reduce the burden as much as possible."

Vroom commended the U.S. EPA staff for their efforts over the last several months to come up with the most workable permitting system possible.

"Weve seen staff in the EPA Office of Water realize how agriculture and other applicators depend on and utilize the products that are subject to the court ruling, and they continue to work hard to devise a workable and focused implementation.

"Those officials consider valuable input from a wide cross-section of ag experts, and were hopeful it will result in a better final product -- due to be effective in 2011 -- if efforts by CLA and others to gain Supreme Court review of the 6th Circuit ruling is refused." Vroom noted.