Epa Reviews State Control Of Pesticides Epa May Revoke Washington Department Of Agriculture’s Authority To Regulate Farm Chemicals

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is launching an investigation into whether Washington regulators are lax in their enforcement of pesticide regulations.

In two internal memos, the EPA’s regional office in Seattle says the state’s program is “slipshod” and rife with “repeated deficiencies.”

EPA Regional Director Chuck Clarke is expected to officially notify Washington Department of Agriculture Director Jim Jesernig of the investigation in a few days, said EPA spokesman Mark McIntyre.

“It will happen very soon,” McIntyre said Thursday.

The EPA plans to investigate how the state has handled hundreds of pesticide complaints over the past two years. The review comes at a time of growing public criticism of the state’s enforcement of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the bedrock national pesticide law.

Last month, a group of 24 public interest groups asked Clarke for an EPA investigation.

“The limp effort of the Washington state Department of Agriculture to investigate the pesticide incidents reflects an intolerable breach of duty,” said environmentalist Dennis Hayes of the Bullitt Foundation in a letter to Clarke. The foundation supports Northwest environmental projects.

The EPA, which usually delegates pesticide enforcement to states, gives the Agriculture Department $500,000 a year for enforcement and other programs, said EPA pesticide expert Lyn Frandsen.

But a series of recent incidents has caught EPA’s attention. The agency could take back its power to regulate the powerful chemicals, or force the state to run a more aggressive program.

In an interview Thursday, Jesernig said he takes EPA’s concerns “very seriously” and hopes to retain the enforcement program.

The problems include recent “misadventures in aerial spraying,” according to one EPA memo.

The most publicized incident occurred last November in the Wahluke Wildlife Area near Hanford, when a helicopter under contract to the South Columbia Basin Irrigation District sprayed a prominent Seattle public relations executive with 2,4-D while he was hunting pheasants with his dogs in public wetlands.

The herbicide is used to kill broad-leaf plants and weeds. According to its safety labels, it’s not supposed to be sprayed on water, or when people are present.

John Hough, chief executive officer of The Rockey Co., became “violently ill” with dizziness, headaches and diarrhea that started 30 minutes after the pesticide cloud encircled him, he said in a letter last November to the Federal Aviation Administration.

Hough requested EPA involvement after he complained the Agriculture Department acted in a “confrontational” manner when he reported the incident.

This “made me uneasy about the thoroughness, fairness and objectivity of the (state) investigation,” Hough said.

In April, the FAA concluded there was “insufficient evidence” that the helicopter company involved, Precision Helicopters of Newberg Ore., had violated agency regulations.

The state had primary responsibility for the investigation. But after months of inactivity, the EPA stepped in at Hough’s request.

On April 21, the EPA announced it was fining Precision Helicopters $1,500 for three violations of federal pesticide law.

Precision sprayed the herbicide in greater concentrations than the label allows, endangering Hough, six other hunters and four dogs in the area, the EPA said.

Hough said Thursday he’s pleased the EPA is moving to investigate the state program.

“My experience led me to believe that their enforcement is dysfunctional. The Agriculture Department has neither the will nor the resources to effectively manage the application of pesticides throughout the state,” Hough said.

Jesernig disagrees with that criticism, saying the agency is doing the best it can with limited resources. He is a former Democratic congressman from the Tri-Cities with strong ties to the agricultural community.

With 12 inspectors to regulate 25,000 pesticide applicators, the Agriculture Department’s resources are “stretched thin,” Jesernig said.

He blamed the Republican-controlled state Legislature for hacking away his enforcement authority when it passed HB 1010 in 1995.

That “regulatory reform” law was designed to curb state agencies’ enforcement powers. It prevents regulators from issuing fines or large penalties on a first violation - mandating a “warning” instead.

Under the law, “you get to a fourth violation before you get a substantial penalty,” Jesernig said.

EPA will take an in-depth look at many of the pesticide complaints Jesernig’s department handled over the past two years, Frandsen said.

EPA’s internal memos also suggest there may be repeated pressure on state inspectors not to be too hard on pesticide users.

Agriculture Department workers who’ve attempted to enforce the law have reported “internal roadblocks,” one memo notes.

, DataTimes