Earlier this month, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin announced the next phase of organizational improvements for the agency. For agriculture, the focus went to 130 science positions that were being reallocated.
With EPA’s authority over reviewing the science of pesticides, and a current backlog of 504 new chemicals in review plus 12,000 pesticide reviews that are overdue compared to their expected timelines, the industry has been watching a ballooning backlog.
“We’ve been trying to get more resources to help to reduce the backlog, and we’ve been advocating for Administrator Zeldin to provide additional resources,” says Terry Kippley, president and CEO of the Council of Producers and Distributors of Agrotechnology. “And so we’re still waiting on some details, but they have announced that there’s 130 scientists that could be moving over into the chemicals division and the chemicals division is the division that growers care about and agribusiness cares about because it includes the Office of Pesticide Programs [OPP], and they’re responsible for getting the tools out into the field.”
Two core causes of the backlog:
There have been two key factors adding up to the slowdown and now backlog of pesticide processing, regulations and approval.
1. Underfunding and interagency performance.
Specific to the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Congress has underfunded its activities. Registrants agreed to a fee structure helping pay for the services provided by EPA, known as PRIA 5, which increased industry fees by 30%.
Congress has continually funded the EPA at low levels, and the OPP significantly below the $166 million asked for in appropriation.
“For many reasons every year they’ve only been giving approximately 80% of that number,” Kippley says. “From the farmer perspective, if you have a deal with a local co-op, and you say I’m going to give you 30% more money. But then you find out that you’re only getting about 80% of that agreed upon number. That’s a problem.”
Kippley says right now, for OPP, it adds up to being short about $32 million.
“We’d like to have them allocate that additional $32 million dollars, so that in the end OPP has the resources to consistently deliver and execute these timelines, so that everybody has certainty.”
2. The COVID-19 pandemic brought an unexpected workload
During the COVID-19 pandemic, disruptions added up in addition to EPA being responsible for testing and approving hand sanitizer products.
“I’ve had nearly a 30-year career dealing with regulated products, and I can say we’ve had certainty out of EPA in the past,” Kippley says. “Maybe wasn’t always perfect, but until COVID it was really operating in a way that we could do business, and they have just received so much more work with so many fewer resources. It’s really a difficult situation to manage.”
Will DOGE be the answer to the two issues that have amassed this backlog?
It has yet to be seen. One retiree from EPA is skeptical that even with an influx of 130 scientists transferred into the OPP, any benefits in terms of approvals won’t be seen for 18 months.
“If they allocate all of the transfers to new registrations — and ignore the FIFRA renewals — and if they are creative, by the time the Trump administration is over, things could be caught up,” they say.
One reason is the recent wave of early retirements, which currently employs 550 total scientists and 100 of those taking the early out package, which went into effect on May 5.
