Food Quality Protection Act: 

 An Update, February 2000 



Glenn Morin 



New England Fruit Consultants, Montague, MA 



Although the Food Quality Protection Act of 1 996 

 requires that the EPA review all active ingredients cur- 

 rently registered, the spotlight continues to focus on 

 the organophosphate (OP) class of compounds. These 

 materials, the majority of which are insecticides, are 

 labeled for a wide variety of uses including agricul- 

 tural, veterinary, residential, and structural. EPA must 

 first assess the aggregate risk to human health posed 

 by these compounds on an individual basis by consid- 

 ering all potential routes of exposure. Cumulative as- 

 sessment of the OP's as a group will be conducted at a 

 later date. 



To date, only two (azinphos methyl and methyl par- 

 athion) of the five active ingredients most commonly 

 used in commercial tree fruit production have com- 

 pleted the EPA's six-step initial review process culmi- 

 nating in risk management recommendations. The 

 balance (chlorpyriphos, dimethoate, and phosmet) is 

 currently under active review. Discussions of two 

 materials with only limited usage in tree fruits (diazinon 

 and malathion) have only recently been initiated. The 

 following is a summary EPA's findings and actions as 

 of February 21,2000. 



Azinphos methyl - The initial review of azinphos 

 methyl (Guthion, Sniper) was completed on August 2, 

 1999. As registered at that time, EPA concluded that 

 azinphos methyl posed an unacceptable dietary risk to 

 children ages 1 to 6 years, risks of concern to agricul- 

 tural workers, and unacceptable ecological risks. To 

 mitigate occupational and environmental concerns, the 

 registrants volunteered to amend their labels by agree- 

 ing to delete the use of azinphos methyl on cotton in 

 Louisiana and east of the Mississippi River on sugar- 

 cane, ornamentals (except for nursery stock), Christ- 

 mas trees, shade trees, and forest trees. 



The majority of label amendments effecting tree- 

 fruit production were made prior to the 1 999 growing 

 season as the registrants were aware of EPA's concerns 

 prior to the final decision and acted accordingly. Ad- 

 ditional changes for the upcoming season include a 



reduction in total amount of product allowed per acre 

 per season from 12 to 9 pounds, a variable preharvest 

 interval dependent on late-season application rates, and 

 a prohibition on application by fixed-wing aircraft. 



Methyl parathion - The revised risk assessment 

 for methyl parathion (Penncap-M) also was made pub- 

 lic in early August 1999. Although not widely used in 

 the Northeast, methyl parathion has historically been 

 applied to approximately 20% of the apple acreage and 

 nearly 50% of the peach acreage in the U.S. EPA indi- 

 cated their primary concern was acute dietary risk to 

 children, a portion of the population specifically ad- 

 dressed by the FQPA. 



In order to reduce the risk to this sensitive sub- 

 population, EPA accepted the registrant's voluntary 

 cancellation of all children's food uses including fruit 

 (apples, peaches, pears, grapes, nectarines, cherries, 

 and plums), carrots, succulent peas, succulent beans, 

 and tomatoes effective December 31,1 999. Additional 

 food uses have been cancelled as well as non-food uses 

 such as ornamentals, nursery stock, grasses grown for 

 seed, and mosquito control. 



Phosmet - Phosmet (Imidan) has reached a criti- 

 cal point in the review process. EPA's revised risk as- 

 sessment was released and a technical briefing was held 

 in Pasco, WA on February 10. This event officially 

 began the 60-day public-comment period for submit- 

 ting risk-mitigation proposals. The revised risk assess- 

 ment indicated that acute dietary risk was not an is- 

 sue, as phosmet accounted for an average of only 5% 

 of the "risk cup" for all sub-groups. EPA also indi- 

 cated that exposure to handlers (mixer/loader/applica- 

 tors) could be managed satisfactorily with increased 

 personal protective equipment and engineering con- 

 trols such as closed loading systems and enclosed cabs. 



However, EPA voiced concern for post applica- 

 tion workers who may contact residues. Current in- 

 formation indicates that, depending on the rate used, 

 acceptable margins of exposure may not be met until 

 37 to 52 days after application. Re-entry intervals of 



Fruit Notes, Volume 64 (Number 3), Summer, 1999 



13 



