SECTION: NATIONAL; Pg. A3

LENGTH: 690 words

HEADLINE: NEW CRITERIA SOUGHT ON PESTICIDE SAFETY;
EPA RESTRICTIONS PROMPT LEGISLATION

BYLINE: By Bruce Alpert Washington bureau

DATELINE: WASHINGTON

BODY:
Arguing that the Environmental Protection Agency is imposing unnecessary restrictions on farmers, 16 senators are sponsoring legislation that would require the agency to use hard scientific data rather than computer projections in deciding which pesticides to ban.

Among the sponsors are Sens. Mary Landrieu and John Breaux, both D-La. "Without safe and effective pesticides, our farmers harvest smaller crops, consumers pay higher prices, and we lose small family farmers at an astounding rate," Landrieu said.

The 16 senators offered their bill this week just as the EPA is moving to complete evaluations of 10,000 uses of various pesticides as required under the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act. The act was intended to better protect the food supply.

EPA Administrator Carol Browner is expected to announce Monday that some uses of two popular pesticides, methyl parathion and azinphos-methyl, will be banned. Among the expected restrictions: no more use of methyl parathion on apples and some other fruit.

During the past five years, the EPA has spent more than $100 million to remove methyl parathion from hundreds of homes and businesses in Louisiana, Mississippi and Illinois in which it was used illegally and improperly to kill roaches. A half-dozen people were convicted of criminal charges involving improper use of the pesticide, which has been used for years to kill boll weevils in cotton fields.

Improper application of azinphos-methyl, a pesticide used to kill sugar-cane borers, was linked to widespread fish kills in southern Louisiana in 1991.

Environmental groups have said that the EPA has moved too slowly to implement the Food Quality Protection Act, but some farm groups and pesticide companies have complained that the agency has used computer break-outs speculating on the worst-case effects of certain pesticides.

The 16 senators, 12 Republicans and four Democrats, are siding against the EPA.

"The Food Quality Protection Act requires that the standards used by the EPA be based on hard data and sound science, not arbitrary assumptions," said Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., the bill's chief sponsor. "However, as the EPA has moved forward to implement this law, it has not fully used the sound scientific analysis called for and instead has relied on theoretical computer models and worst-case scenarios. This is not what Congress intended."

He said that the EPA's analysis of pesticides threatens to cost farmers "the use of safe and effective pesticides."

But the Environmental Working Group, a research organization that advocates lower exposure to pesticides, said the congressional sponsors of the Hagel legislation seem intent on protecting the profits of farmers and pesticide companies at the expense of the health of consumers, especially children and infants who are more sensitive to fruit and vegetables treated with dangerous pesticides.

"This is nothing other than a pesticide industry lobbyists' bill from pesticide companies who are more interested in profits than protecting children's health," said Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group.

Cook said nobody should question the EPA's apparent decision to limit methyl parathion.

"They are evidently contemplating pretty strong action on methyl parathion, which is really a toxic pesticide," he said.

Farm groups say there is no sound scientific basis for restricting methyl parathion.

"It's an irresponsible action by the agency to take this action now," said Adam Sharp, director of governmental relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation. "The data they're using to make this assessment is not complete."

Browner is expected to defend the agency's handling of the pesticide issue during a news conference Monday. She already has complained that the House Appropriations Committee has cut the spending allocation for her agency by taking away proposed financing for environmental enforcement.

"The bill robs environmental cops of any basic authority by cutting more than half of the funds for hiring the experts who are critical to investigating and prosecuting enforcement cases," she said.



LOAD-DATE: August 3, 1999