Regulatory Updates
Clear, current summaries of regulatory changes affecting pesticides and pesticide devices
Our Regulatory Updates highlight significant FIFRA and EPA developments so businesses can stay compliant and prepared.
Regulatory Updates
What changed — factual summaries of new rules, guidance, enforcement actions, and official announcements
Industry Insights
What it means — expert analysis, business implications, and how to respond strategically
What We Track
Federal Updates
New EPA regulations, guidance documents, PR Notices, and policy changes
State Actions
State-level regulatory changes and enforcement priorities
Enforcement Policy
Procedural changes and compliance monitoring announcements
Critical Updates
Summary of Change
Two new regulations from California DPR took effect July 1, 2026. The first updates the Groundwater Protection List using a new scientific method, adding 51 new active ingredients identified as having potential to pollute groundwater while removing pesticides unlikely to contaminate. The second clarifies personal protective equipment (PPE) requirements for pesticide handlers. The groundwater regulation replaces a decades-old approach to identifying groundwater contaminants under California's Pesticide Contamination Prevention Act (PCPA).
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide registrants with products on the California market
- •Agricultural applicators in California
- •Pest control operators
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Registrants must check if their active ingredients are now on the updated Groundwater Protection List — 51 new ingredients were added
- →Products on the list may trigger additional use restrictions in Groundwater Protection Areas
- →PPE requirements for handlers have been clarified — update worker safety training and SOPs accordingly
Summary of Change
The EPA approved two new pesticides containing PFAS compounds — diflufenican and epyrifenacil — for use on some of the most widely grown U.S. crops. Neither active ingredient has been used previously in the United States. The approvals are part of a broader effort to roll back PFAS regulation, following an earlier 2026 approval of a third fluorinated pesticide. Environmental groups have strongly criticized the decision, noting PFAS chemicals do not break down easily in the environment.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide registrants and formulators
- •Agricultural producers of affected crops
- •Companies assessing PFAS exposure in product lines
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Registrants should proactively assess product portfolios for fluorinated compounds and maintain EPA-reviewed safety documentation
- →The regulatory landscape for PFAS in pesticides remains volatile — current approvals may face future retrospective review or policy reversal
- →Companies should monitor ongoing NGO litigation challenging these approvals
Summary of Change
EPA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have intensified import enforcement on pesticides, toxic chemicals, and polluting products, with particular focus on pesticide devices. Many common consumer products — including UV light devices, air purifiers, and household appliances — qualify as pesticide devices under FIFRA if distributed with antimicrobial claims. EPA reported unprecedented enforcement results, targeting imported products that lack proper EPA establishment numbers or make unsubstantiated public health claims.
Who Is Impacted
- •Importers of UV lights, ozone generators, and air purifiers
- •Retailers selling consumer products with antimicrobial claims
- •E-commerce platforms and third-party sellers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →All pesticide devices must be produced in an EPA-registered establishment and bear an EPA establishment number
- →Devices may not make false or misleading claims — all public health claims must be substantiated
- →Importers should verify that foreign manufacturers are properly registered before shipping to the U.S.
Summary of Change
On April 30, 2026, the EPA released its draft Fungicide Strategy identifying practical, science-based protections that fungicide users can adopt to safeguard more than 1,000 federally listed endangered and threatened species and their designated critical habitats from conventional agricultural fungicide use. This completes the EPA's three-part ESA strategy framework, following the Final Herbicide Strategy (2024) and Final Insecticide Strategy (2025). The EPA expects to finalize the strategy in November 2026 and apply it through FIFRA registration review decisions. Public comments were accepted through spring 2026.
Who Is Impacted
- •Fungicide manufacturers and registrants
- •Agricultural producers using fungicide programs
- •Specialty crop growers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Registrants should proactively review fungicide labels for ESA-sensitive use areas
- →New spray-drift and runoff/erosion mitigation requirements are anticipated to be incorporated into future label amendments
- →Companies should develop internal documentation frameworks now to prepare for compliance
Summary of Change
The AAPCO FIFRA 25(b) Workgroup is set to release new guidance titled 'FIFRA Minimum Risk Pesticides – 25(b) Product Efficacy Data Guidance.' For the first time, this document clearly defines compliance expectations for efficacy claims, supporting test data, and label statements for 25(b) exempt products — signaling a move away from relatively lenient oversight toward a science-based regulatory model.
Who Is Impacted
- •Manufacturers of 25(b) exempt (minimum risk) pesticide products
- •Natural and organic pesticide brands
- •E-commerce sellers of 25(b) products
Key Compliance Considerations
- →'Minimum risk' no longer means 'minimal compliance' — verifiable efficacy data will be required
- →Review existing 25(b) product labels and marketing claims for alignment with forthcoming standards
- →Design scientifically sound efficacy support strategies for any new 25(b) product launches
Summary of Change
Official announcement of fee schedules and filing requirements to maintain active FIFRA Section 3 and Section 24(c) registrations for the 2026 fiscal year.
Who Is Impacted
- •All entities holding active pesticide product registrations
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Payments were due Jan 15, 2026; late payments lead to automatic cancellation of registrations
Summary of Change
Alert regarding increased scrutiny of imported disinfectants that lack proper FIFRA registration or labeling.
Who Is Impacted
- •Importers and retailers of cleaning and sanitizing products
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Products must have an EPA Registration Number and be produced in an EPA-registered establishment
Summary of Change
Annual reminder that pesticide production and sales reports for the 2025 calendar year are due electronically.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide establishment owners
- •Producers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Reports must be submitted via the Central Data Exchange (CDX) by March 1, 2026
Summary of Change
A national retailer agreed to a major penalty for allegedly distributing unregistered and misbranded pesticides.
Who Is Impacted
- •Retailers
- •E-commerce platforms
- •Third-party sellers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Underscores the risk of selling 'pesticide devices' or antimicrobial products without proper registration
Summary of Change
Revises the Worker Protection Standard (WPS) to reinstate AEZ protections, ensuring bystanders are not near active applications.
Who Is Impacted
- •Agricultural employers
- •Owners
- •Commercial pesticide handlers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Applicators must suspend application if anyone enters the AEZ, including off-property areas
Summary of Change
The EPA issued a rare emergency suspension followed by a voluntary cancellation of all DCPA products due to fetal health risks.
Who Is Impacted
- •Retailers
- •Distributors
- •Brassica crop growers (broccoli, cabbage)
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Legal sale and use of existing stocks have ceased; unauthorized use is a FIFRA violation
Recent Updates
Summary of Change
Two new regulations from California DPR took effect July 1, 2026. The first updates the Groundwater Protection List using a new scientific method, adding 51 new active ingredients identified as having potential to pollute groundwater while removing pesticides unlikely to contaminate. The second clarifies personal protective equipment (PPE) requirements for pesticide handlers. The groundwater regulation replaces a decades-old approach to identifying groundwater contaminants under California's Pesticide Contamination Prevention Act (PCPA).
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide registrants with products on the California market
- •Agricultural applicators in California
- •Pest control operators
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Registrants must check if their active ingredients are now on the updated Groundwater Protection List — 51 new ingredients were added
- →Products on the list may trigger additional use restrictions in Groundwater Protection Areas
- →PPE requirements for handlers have been clarified — update worker safety training and SOPs accordingly
Summary of Change
The EPA announced a national innovation challenge with up to $30 million in total prize funding to help American farmers grow healthy food with fewer chemicals. The challenge supports practical, cost-effective alternatives to conventional chemical crop desiccation — the practice of spraying pesticides to dry crops before harvest. The initiative is part of a broader $1 billion+ investment plan announced jointly by HHS, USDA, and EPA to accelerate farm modernization and long-term food supply security.
Who Is Impacted
- •Manufacturers of desiccant pesticide products
- •Companies developing biological or reduced-risk alternatives
- •Agricultural producers using pre-harvest desiccation
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Desiccant product manufacturers should anticipate shifting demand as the administration actively incentivizes alternatives
- →Companies with reduced-risk or biological product lines may find new funding and partnership opportunities
- →Monitor whether EPA ties future registration review priorities to the challenge's outcomes
Summary of Change
The EPA approved two new pesticides containing PFAS compounds — diflufenican and epyrifenacil — for use on some of the most widely grown U.S. crops. Neither active ingredient has been used previously in the United States. The approvals are part of a broader effort to roll back PFAS regulation, following an earlier 2026 approval of a third fluorinated pesticide. Environmental groups have strongly criticized the decision, noting PFAS chemicals do not break down easily in the environment.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide registrants and formulators
- •Agricultural producers of affected crops
- •Companies assessing PFAS exposure in product lines
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Registrants should proactively assess product portfolios for fluorinated compounds and maintain EPA-reviewed safety documentation
- →The regulatory landscape for PFAS in pesticides remains volatile — current approvals may face future retrospective review or policy reversal
- →Companies should monitor ongoing NGO litigation challenging these approvals
Summary of Change
EPA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have intensified import enforcement on pesticides, toxic chemicals, and polluting products, with particular focus on pesticide devices. Many common consumer products — including UV light devices, air purifiers, and household appliances — qualify as pesticide devices under FIFRA if distributed with antimicrobial claims. EPA reported unprecedented enforcement results, targeting imported products that lack proper EPA establishment numbers or make unsubstantiated public health claims.
Who Is Impacted
- •Importers of UV lights, ozone generators, and air purifiers
- •Retailers selling consumer products with antimicrobial claims
- •E-commerce platforms and third-party sellers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →All pesticide devices must be produced in an EPA-registered establishment and bear an EPA establishment number
- →Devices may not make false or misleading claims — all public health claims must be substantiated
- →Importers should verify that foreign manufacturers are properly registered before shipping to the U.S.
Summary of Change
At least six states and the federal government have introduced bills in 2026 to limit liability for pesticide manufacturers. These bills seek to shield manufacturers from failure-to-warn claims when their products are registered and labeled in compliance with FIFRA. The federal bill includes a 'Uniformity of Pesticide Labeling Requirements' provision that would limit states' ability to modify or add to federally approved label language, intensifying the long-standing federal preemption debate under FIFRA.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide manufacturers and registrants
- •Distributors and retailers
- •Companies operating across multiple states
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Monitor these bills closely — enactment could significantly reduce litigation exposure
- →Do not assume blanket protection — continue ensuring label accuracy as a first line of defense
- →The federal uniformity provision, if passed, could override state-specific label requirements
Summary of Change
On April 30, 2026, the EPA released its draft Fungicide Strategy identifying practical, science-based protections that fungicide users can adopt to safeguard more than 1,000 federally listed endangered and threatened species and their designated critical habitats from conventional agricultural fungicide use. This completes the EPA's three-part ESA strategy framework, following the Final Herbicide Strategy (2024) and Final Insecticide Strategy (2025). The EPA expects to finalize the strategy in November 2026 and apply it through FIFRA registration review decisions. Public comments were accepted through spring 2026.
Who Is Impacted
- •Fungicide manufacturers and registrants
- •Agricultural producers using fungicide programs
- •Specialty crop growers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Registrants should proactively review fungicide labels for ESA-sensitive use areas
- →New spray-drift and runoff/erosion mitigation requirements are anticipated to be incorporated into future label amendments
- →Companies should develop internal documentation frameworks now to prepare for compliance
Summary of Change
The EPA published a Federal Register final rule implementing registration review decisions for certain pesticides, including updated tolerances for residues in or on food commodities. The rule became effective April 22, 2026, with objections and hearing requests due by June 22, 2026. The action reflects the EPA's ongoing 15-year registration review cycle mandated by FIFRA, which requires reevaluation of every registered pesticide.
Who Is Impacted
- •Registrants of affected active ingredients
- •Food crop producers and processors
- •Importers of treated agricultural commodities
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Verify that product tolerances align with the updated rule — some may have been revoked or modified
- →Companies with affected active ingredients should review for use pattern changes or new data requirements
- →Exporters must ensure residues do not exceed newly defined maximum permissible levels
Summary of Change
The EPA announced a proposed rule to update several pesticide tolerance crop groupings, including changes to terminology in the names of Crop Groups 6, 7, and 16, plus the addition of new commodities and modifications to existing group compositions. The crop grouping system allows the establishment of tolerances for multiple related crops based on data from representative crops, streamlining the registration process. This is part of a multi-year joint project with Canada and Mexico under the NAFTA/USMCA framework.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide registrants seeking tolerance expansions
- •Specialty crop growers seeking new use registrations
- •Regulatory affairs professionals
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Registrants with pending or planned tolerance petitions should review how the proposed crop group changes affect their submissions
- →New commodities added to groups may open opportunities for label expansions without additional data requirements
- →Comment period provides an opportunity to request additions of specific crops
Summary of Change
Monthly compilation of applications to register new uses for currently registered pesticide products (e.g., fluazifop-p-butyl on sod farms).
Who Is Impacted
- •Registrants
- •Commodity groups seeking expanded label use
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Public comment period is open for 30 days; reviewers can submit data supporting or opposing the use
Summary of Change
Notice regarding petitions to establish or modify residue tolerances for various pesticide chemicals in or on food.
Who Is Impacted
- •Food producers
- •Importers
- •International trade partners
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Essential for aligning Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) with global trade standards
Summary of Change
Announcement of applications to register entirely new chemical entities as pesticides in the U.S.
Who Is Impacted
- •Innovation-focused agricultural firms
- •Chemical manufacturers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Represents the 'pipeline' of new chemistry entering the market for 2027-2028
Summary of Change
The AAPCO FIFRA 25(b) Workgroup is set to release new guidance titled 'FIFRA Minimum Risk Pesticides – 25(b) Product Efficacy Data Guidance.' For the first time, this document clearly defines compliance expectations for efficacy claims, supporting test data, and label statements for 25(b) exempt products — signaling a move away from relatively lenient oversight toward a science-based regulatory model.
Who Is Impacted
- •Manufacturers of 25(b) exempt (minimum risk) pesticide products
- •Natural and organic pesticide brands
- •E-commerce sellers of 25(b) products
Key Compliance Considerations
- →'Minimum risk' no longer means 'minimal compliance' — verifiable efficacy data will be required
- →Review existing 25(b) product labels and marketing claims for alignment with forthcoming standards
- →Design scientifically sound efficacy support strategies for any new 25(b) product launches
Summary of Change
Guidance on how conservation programs can become 'EPA Qualified' to provide growers with mitigation credits.
Who Is Impacted
- •Agricultural associations
- •Conservation groups
- •Farm managers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Participation in a QCP can reduce the need for additional on-field mitigation points
Summary of Change
This draft notice modernizes how registrants submit minor modifications through notifications and non-notifications, aiming to replace the older PRN 98-10.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide Registrants (technical and end-use products)
- •Regulatory consultants
Key Compliance Considerations
- →New pathways for label notifications regarding state-specific fertilizer restrictions and 100% repacks
Summary of Change
Official announcement of fee schedules and filing requirements to maintain active FIFRA Section 3 and Section 24(c) registrations for the 2026 fiscal year.
Who Is Impacted
- •All entities holding active pesticide product registrations
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Payments were due Jan 15, 2026; late payments lead to automatic cancellation of registrations
Summary of Change
Alert regarding increased scrutiny of imported disinfectants that lack proper FIFRA registration or labeling.
Who Is Impacted
- •Importers and retailers of cleaning and sanitizing products
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Products must have an EPA Registration Number and be produced in an EPA-registered establishment
Summary of Change
First performance standards for antimicrobial pesticide devices specifically focused on air purification claims.
Who Is Impacted
- •Manufacturers of UV lights, ozone generators, and air filtering devices making 'anti-microbial' claims
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Devices must now meet specific EPA-validated testing protocols to support public health claims
Summary of Change
Approval of the new insecticide active ingredient isocycloseram for use on various crops and ornamentals.
Who Is Impacted
- •Specialty crop growers
- •Insecticide manufacturers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Label includes strict ESA-related buffer requirements from the outset
Summary of Change
Final case closures for various pesticide active ingredients, confirming they meet FIFRA standards for another 15 years.
Who Is Impacted
- •Registrants of the specific chemicals listed in the docket (e.g., Sedaxane)
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Check individual dockets for any minor label amendments required for final closure
Summary of Change
EPA updated its review on the potential for Paraquat to volatilize and move off-site, requesting additional data from manufacturers.
Who Is Impacted
- •Paraquat registrants
- •Agricultural applicators
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Future label changes regarding application timing and weather conditions are likely
Summary of Change
Annual reminder that pesticide production and sales reports for the 2025 calendar year are due electronically.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide establishment owners
- •Producers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Reports must be submitted via the Central Data Exchange (CDX) by March 1, 2026
Summary of Change
Updates to the EPA's ESA Workplan focusing on implementing mitigations earlier in the FIFRA process rather than at the end.
Who Is Impacted
- •New pesticide applicants
- •Those in the reregistration cycle
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Expect ESA-related restrictions to appear on 'Proposed Interim Decisions' (PIDs) more frequently
Summary of Change
Approval of the fungicide cyclobutrifluram with specific warnings regarding carryover in field studies and runoff potential.
Who Is Impacted
- •Row crop farmers (soybean, cotton, lettuce)
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Mandatory crop rotation intervals must be followed to avoid illegal residues in subsequent crops
Summary of Change
Proposal to register the new herbicide epyrifenacil for use on corn, canola, soybean, and wheat.
Who Is Impacted
- •Large-scale row crop producers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Proposed label features integrated resistance management and ESA mitigation points
Summary of Change
New regulation establishing tolerance levels for residues of the herbicide amicarbazone in sugarcane and molasses.
Who Is Impacted
- •Sugarcane growers
- •Food processors
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Exporters must ensure residues do not exceed the newly defined maximum permissible levels
Summary of Change
Revisions to benchmarks for hundreds of registered conventional and antimicrobial pesticides used in risk assessments.
Who Is Impacted
- •State regulators
- •Water quality managers
- •Pesticide registrants
Key Compliance Considerations
- →These values are used to determine if a pesticide's use poses a risk to freshwater organisms
Summary of Change
Release of a printable worksheet to help farmers calculate compliance with the point-based ESA mitigation system.
Who Is Impacted
- •Growers without consistent internet access or mobile apps
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Can be used to document compliance for state and federal inspectors
Summary of Change
Approval of the herbicide fluazifop-p-butyl for use on commercial sod farms.
Who Is Impacted
- •Sod producers
- •Turfgrass managers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Label includes specific runoff reduction requirements near surface water
Summary of Change
Launch of a mobile-friendly tool to help farmers navigate the point-based mitigation menu for ESA compliance.
Who Is Impacted
- •Agricultural producers
- •Professional pesticide applicators
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Can be used as a primary resource for calculating runoff/erosion points required by new herbicide and insecticide labels
Summary of Change
Proposed registration of new uses for dicamba on over-the-top (OTT) soybeans and cotton with enhanced human health and environmental protections.
Who Is Impacted
- •Soy and cotton farmers
- •Herbicide applicators
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Expected to include restrictive application windows and mandatory drift reduction technology
Summary of Change
Outlines the mandatory schedule for adding Spanish translations of signal words and precautionary statements to pesticide labels.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide registrants
- •Manufacturers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Phased compliance based on product toxicity; high-toxicity products must comply first
Summary of Change
Registration of the new fungicide florylpicoxamid for use on cereals, pome fruit, and grapes.
Who Is Impacted
- •Cereal and fruit producers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Integrated resistance management plan required on the final label
Summary of Change
A specialized framework for pesticide use in Hawaii to protect island-specific endangered flora and fauna.
Who Is Impacted
- •Hawaiian agricultural producers
- •Pest control companies
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Unique buffer zones and application restrictions not found in the conterminous U.S.
Summary of Change
A national retailer agreed to a major penalty for allegedly distributing unregistered and misbranded pesticides.
Who Is Impacted
- •Retailers
- •E-commerce platforms
- •Third-party sellers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Underscores the risk of selling 'pesticide devices' or antimicrobial products without proper registration
Summary of Change
A framework to protect federally listed species from insecticide exposure while providing growers with a point-based mitigation menu.
Who Is Impacted
- •Insecticide manufacturers
- •Commercial applicators
- •Farmers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Labels will increasingly direct users to the 'Bulletins Live! Two' portal for site-specific restrictions
Summary of Change
Finalized interim decision implementing new mitigation for dicrotophos to protect workers and the environment.
Who Is Impacted
- •Applicators
- •Farm owners using dicrotophos
Key Compliance Considerations
- →New restrictions on aerial application and increased buffer zones
Summary of Change
Major update to the portal that allows registrants to track the real-time status of their PRIA submissions.
Who Is Impacted
- •Regulatory affairs professionals
- •Pesticide registrants
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Requires updated CDX credentials to access the new 'Predictive Timeline' features
Summary of Change
Finalized interim decision for the organophosphate dicrotophos, including new PPE requirements and application limits.
Who Is Impacted
- •Cotton and ornamental growers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Updates to worker safety intervals and mandatory usage of closed loading systems
Summary of Change
EPA officially launched MyPest, a new end-to-end digital platform for pesticide registration applicants providing real-time tracking of review status, document management, and direct communication with EPA reviewers. This replaces older submission workflows and significantly enhances transparency.
Who Is Impacted
- •All pesticide registrants
- •Regulatory affairs professionals
- •Companies seeking new or amended registrations
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Registrants should activate MyPest accounts immediately to access status notifications and document management
- →All future bilingual label updates will be submitted and managed through MyPest
Summary of Change
Clarification on the continued availability of fee waivers for small businesses under the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act of 2022.
Who Is Impacted
- •Small pesticide companies
- •Start-up manufacturers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Requires submission of IRS tax records to prove revenue thresholds
Summary of Change
EPA finalized a rule codifying the efficacy data requirements for pesticides targeting ticks, mosquitoes, and cockroaches.
Who Is Impacted
- •Registrants of consumer and public health pest control products
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Ensures a consistent standard for 'Public Health Claims' made on labels
Summary of Change
Issuance of new Data Call-In (DCI) notices for several pesticides to assess their potential for endocrine interference.
Who Is Impacted
- •Chemical manufacturers
- •Registrants of the specific substances
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Strict deadlines for submitting screening data or justifying waivers based on existing literature
Summary of Change
At the start of 2025, EPA launched a new FIFRA Expedited Settlement Agreement (ESA) Pilot Program designed to streamline resolution of minor FIFRA violations that are easily correctable and do not present significant public health or environmental risk. Modeled on the existing Section 7(c) ESA policy for establishment-reporting violations.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pesticide manufacturers
- •Distributors and retailers
- •Companies with minor labeling or paperwork violations
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Eligible violations are relatively narrow in scope — primarily minor labeling and NOA errors
- →Companies should maintain detailed compliance records to qualify for expedited resolution
- →Watch for potential expansion of eligible violation categories in 2026
Summary of Change
Proposal to revoke residues for chlorpyrifos on most crops, keeping only 11 specific uses (e.g., alfalfa, citrus, soybeans).
Who Is Impacted
- •Fruit and vegetable growers
- •Exporters
- •Registrants
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Significant change for Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies for non-listed crops
Summary of Change
Finalized mitigations for 11 rodenticides to reduce exposure to non-target wildlife like birds of prey.
Who Is Impacted
- •Pest Control Operators (PCOs)
- •Livestock producers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Classification of several products has moved to 'Restricted Use Pesticide' (RUP) status
Summary of Change
EPA made thousands of records on the Agency's review of pesticide toxicity and efficacy studies publicly available.
Who Is Impacted
- •Academic researchers
- •Litigation specialists
- •Regulatory consultants
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Significant increase in transparency regarding the data behind registration decisions
Summary of Change
Finalized evaluation of how common rodenticides impact endangered species like the San Joaquin kit fox.
Who Is Impacted
- •Urban and rural pest control professionals
Key Compliance Considerations
- →New 'Pesticide Use Limitation Areas' (PULAs) for rodenticide applications
Summary of Change
Proposed settlement to resolve litigation regarding the EPA's failure to complete endocrine screening for certain pesticides.
Who Is Impacted
- •Registrants of over 100 chemicals listed in the settlement
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Will result in accelerated data call-ins and potentially more restrictive registrations for high-risk substances
Summary of Change
Revises the Worker Protection Standard (WPS) to reinstate AEZ protections, ensuring bystanders are not near active applications.
Who Is Impacted
- •Agricultural employers
- •Owners
- •Commercial pesticide handlers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Applicators must suspend application if anyone enters the AEZ, including off-property areas
Summary of Change
Announcement of grants to support community-based organizations providing pesticide safety training.
Who Is Impacted
- •Non-profits
- •Agricultural extension services
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Focuses on improving compliance with the Worker Protection Standard (WPS)
Summary of Change
Proposal to register the new active ingredient metamitron for use as a plant growth regulator on apples and pears.
Who Is Impacted
- •Orchard owners
- •Fruit tree nurseries
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Focuses on fruit thinning applications; proposed labels include specific timing restrictions
Summary of Change
Draft evaluations released for public comment regarding the ESA impacts of two common agricultural active ingredients.
Who Is Impacted
- •Chemical registrants
- •Agricultural advisors
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Serves as an early indicator of future label restrictions for these chemistries
Summary of Change
Proposal to register glycerol formate as a new antimicrobial active ingredient for industrial use.
Who Is Impacted
- •Industrial preservative manufacturers
- •Distributors
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Proposed for use in pulp/paper mills and industrial cooling systems
Summary of Change
The EPA issued a rare emergency suspension followed by a voluntary cancellation of all DCPA products due to fetal health risks.
Who Is Impacted
- •Retailers
- •Distributors
- •Brassica crop growers (broccoli, cabbage)
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Legal sale and use of existing stocks have ceased; unauthorized use is a FIFRA violation
Summary of Change
Guidance on efficacy testing for antimicrobial pesticides used in cooling tower water against Legionella pneumophila.
Who Is Impacted
- •Antimicrobial pesticide registrants
- •Industrial water treatment facilities
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Standardizes the protocols required to make public health claims regarding Legionella
Summary of Change
A comprehensive strategy for assessing and mitigating the impacts of herbicides on thousands of listed species and their habitats.
Who Is Impacted
- •All agricultural herbicide users
- •Registrants
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Users must adopt specific runoff and erosion control measures if their land falls within a PULA (Pesticide Use Limitation Area)
Summary of Change
Notice of availability for proposed decisions regarding the fungicides Thiram and Ziram, focusing on ecological risks.
Who Is Impacted
- •Seed treatment facilities
- •Fruit growers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Proposals include phase-outs of certain high-exposure application methods
Summary of Change
Public announcement of new initiatives to accelerate the review of pollinator-safe biopesticides.
Who Is Impacted
- •Biopesticide manufacturers
- •Beekeepers
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Focuses on expediting registrations for products with 'low toxicity' to honeybees
Summary of Change
Comprehensive risk evaluation for formaldehyde when used as a pesticide and industrial chemical.
Who Is Impacted
- •Manufacturers of pesticide products containing formaldehyde or formaldehyde-releasing preservatives
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Potential for new inhalation exposure limits and required engineering controls
Summary of Change
Final assessment of the impacts of carbaryl and methomyl on salmon, steelhead, and other protected marine species.
Who Is Impacted
- •Growers in coastal regions and the Pacific Northwest
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Mandatory implementation of NMFS-prescribed mitigation measures for use near sensitive watersheds
Summary of Change
Agreement to share data and collaborate on the development of 'menus' for pesticide mitigation.
Who Is Impacted
- •Agricultural researchers
- •Policy consultants
Key Compliance Considerations
- →Streamlines how the agencies determine 'Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives' (RPAs)
Official Regulatory Sources
EPA Pesticide Program Updates
Official announcements, guidance documents, and regulatory changes from EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs
Federal Register Notices
Proposed and final regulations published for public comment and implementation
EPA PR Notices
Pesticide Registration Notices providing guidance to registrants
Our Commitment to Accuracy
Regulatory Updates are reviewed and posted regularly to ensure businesses have timely access to compliance-critical information. We monitor EPA announcements, Federal Register notices, and state agency bulletins continuously. All updates are verified against official sources.
How Does This Update Affect Your Business?
Regulatory changes can have different implications depending on your products, markets, and role in the supply chain. We help clients interpret and implement new requirements efficiently.
Disclaimer: Regulatory Updates are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. Regulations and interpretations may change after publication. Businesses should verify current requirements with official regulatory sources and consult qualified professionals for compliance guidance specific to their operations.