-23

b. That defendants' adoption without publication in the Federal Register, and without notice and opportunity for comment, of specific Registration Standards, pre-RPAR and RPAR decisions, and revised cancer criteria violates the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552(a) (1), and the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. S 553(b). All such Registration Standards, pre-RPAR and RPAR decisions, revised cancer criteria and determinations utilizing such revised cancer criteria are null and void and of no effect.

c.

That defendants' use of industry-agency "decision conferences" or other similar meetings to advise and assist EPA in making decisions to establish and apply pesticide Registration Standards, and in making pre-RPAR or RPAR determinations, violates the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. SS 136 et seq. and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. I, SS 3, 5, 9 and 10. Decisions reached utilizing such procedures are null and void and of no effect.

2.

An injunction:

a.

Enjoining defendants and all persons acting in

concert with them from continuing to utilize "decision

conferences" or other private industry-agency meetings to advise

or assist EPA in making decisions to establish or apply pesticide Registration Standards and in making pre-RPAR or RPAR

determinations.

-24

b. Enjoining defendants and all persons acting in

concert with them from utilizing revised procedures for

formulating "industry-assisted" Registration Standards or conducting pre-RPAR and RPAR reviews, including the "Regulatory Reform Measures for Pesticides," until and unless such procedures are adopted with publication in the Federal Register and notice and opportunity for public comment.

C.

Enjoining defendants and all persons acting in

concert with them from adopting specific Registration Standards, pre-RPAR or RPAR decisions, except with publication in the Federal Register and notice and opportunity for public comment.

d. Enjoining defendants and all persons acting in concert with them from relying upon, applying, implementing or enforcing revised cancer criteria adopted without publication in the Federal Register and notice and opportunity for public comment; and further enjoining each and every pesticide registration decision based in whole or in part on such criteria. e. Enjoining defendants and all persons acting in concert with them from relying upon, applying, implementing or enforcing each and every Registration Standard, pre-RPAR decision or RPAR decision previously adopted or influenced by industry-agency "decision conferences" or other private meetings or adopted without publication in the Federal Register and notice and opportunity for public comment.

-25

f. Requiring submission by defendants of a formal

plan, with specific procedures, goals and timetables, by which all

of the aforementioned Registration Standards, pre-RPAR decisions and RPAR decisions will be independently redetermined de novo with full opportunity for public participation.

3.

4.

Attorneys fees and costs; and

Such other and further relief as may be just.

-26

STEPHEN P. BERZON

MICHAEL RUBIN

ALTSHULER AND BERZON

177 Post Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94108
415/421-7151

Attorneys for Plaintiff
AFL-CIO

RALPH SANTIAGO ABASCAL

CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE
2111 Mission Street

San Francisco, CA 94110
415/864-3405

RALPH LIGHTSTONE

CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE

1900 "K" Street, Suite 200

Sacramento, CA 95814

916/446-1416

Attorneys for Plaintiff
HECTOR CHAVEZ

By:

Albert H. Meyerhoff

By:

Stephen P. Berzon

By:

Jonathan Lash

Dated: May 26, 1983

* Local counsel for all plaintiffs for purposes of contact.

INDEPENDENCE MALL WEST PHILADELPHIA, PA 19105, USA TELEPHONE (215) 592-3000

CABLE ADDRESS ROHMHAAS

TELEX 845-247

Honorable George E. Brown, Jr.
Chairman

U.S. House of Representatives

Committee on Agriculture

Subcommittee on Department Operations,
Research, and Foreign Agriculture
1301 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

March 4, 1983

ROHM
HAAS

COMPANY

We at the Rohm and Haas Company are concerned that the record of the hearing held by the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture on February 22 and 23, 1983, to review the staff report on "Regulatory Procedures and Public Health Issues in the EPA's office of Pesticide Programs" may convey an incomplete impression of the uses of the ethylenebisdithiocarbamate fungicides, and of the benefits associated with the uses of these major agricultural fungicides. With your permission, we would like to submit the following comments for inclusion in the record of the hearing.

As EPA stated in the Notice of Determination concluding the RPAR proceedings on the ethylenebisdithiocarbamate (EBDC's),

"The EBDC's are the most widely used fungicides in the United States,
accounting for almost half of the organic fungicides applied to agricultural
crops.... These chemicals are effective against a broad spectrum of
fungi and plant diseases caused by fungi. They mix well with other
pesticides and usually are less expensive than alternative fungicides."
(47 FR 208, 47671, 2 November 1982)

Professionals in crop protection also support the Agency's opinion on the EBDC's importance:

".... the EBDC fungcidies are unique: they combine the attributes of
a broad pathogen spectrum; have high efficency, low cost, low toxicity
to applicator and nontarget organism; are not susceptible to pathogen
resistance; and have good compatibility with other pesticides.
Significantly, losing the use of the EBDC's could result in increased
disease control costs, a loss of suitable alternatives for many minor
crops, an increased probability for the development of pathogen
resistance (because of the use of more selective compounds), increased
levels of fungicides required to control diseases in many cases, and
increased costs for many foods and ornamental crops." (The American
Phytopathological Society, Contemporary Control of Plant Diseases with
Chemicals: Present Status, Future Prospects, and Proposals for Action:
June, 1979)

Some 30 million pounds are used annually in the U.S., 250 million pounds worldwide, for the effective control of over 260 diseases in 70 or more fruit, vegetable, small grain and nut and nursery crops. The Agency's Decision Document summarized the principal uses as follows: