Take Action - Bill Strips Clean Water Act Protections from Pesticides: Oppose HR 872

Woman fishing in clean water Ask your U.S. Representative to stand with you in opposing the chemical industry’s Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, H.R. 872, which will limit badly needed protection of our nation’s waterways from pesticide contamination. The bill would amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) to eliminate provisions requiring pesticide applicators to obtain a permit to allow pesticides or their residues to enter waterways. This bi-partisan bill has already been approved by the U.S. House of Representatives Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and by the House Committee on Agriculture and now heads to the floor next week (week of March 28) for a full House vote.

Take Action:

Also, call your Representative's Washington, DC, office. You can look online or call 202-224-3121 for Capitol Information and ask for your Representative's office.

Background

The bill will reverse a 2009 court order requiring the permits as a part of the National Pollutant Discharge System (NPDES) if it lands on the President’s desk by April 9, 2011. Unfortunately, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has already told Congress it supports the measure. You may use the sample letter below.

Arguing that clean water permit requirements are burdensome, supporters introduced H.R. 872, Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, which reduces existing protections under CWA that are intended to prevent water contamination from pesticide use. Currently, under CWA, pesticide use that contaminates water may only be allowed if a state permit is obtained under the national pollutant discharge elimination system (NPDES). This rule is now being challenged in the U.S. House of Representatives with H.R. 872 because the pesticide industry and users prefer the lax protection of water resources under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), a notoriously weak statute driven by unprotective risk assessment standards.. If left to FIFRA, most pesticide spraying in and over waterways would ensue without oversight because pesticide labels specify how the pesticide should be used, but more often than not are silent on questions of chemical discharge into water. The key here is that FIFRA provides broad guidance while CWA offers more localized control to protect against pesticide contamination of waterways that is occurring across the country. More on this issue can be found in Beyond Pesticides' March 11, 2011 Daily News.

H.R. 872 amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (popularly known as the Clean Water Act) to state that the EPA Administrator or a State shall not require a permit for a discharge from a point source into navigable waters of a pesticide registered under FIFRA.