NAFTA Label Update Jim Gray North Dakota Dept of Agriculture WRPM May 16, 2007

PESTICIDE HARMONIZATION North American Market for Pesticides Equal Access To Pesticide Uses Regulatory Harmonization Free Trade In Ag Outputs

A Little on the TWG… NAFTA Technical Working Group on Pesticides ( NAFTA TWG) –EPA, PMRA, and CICOPLFEST reps –Commonly called the “TWG” or “Working Group”

TWG NAFTA Label Sub-Team U.S. & Canadian growers requested formation of sub-team at TWG public stakeholder December 2005 Sub-team would be focused on resolving barriers to creating North American pesticide market –Would consider long-term & short-term strategies

Long-term strategy: NAFTA Label - Negates need for re-labeling prior to import Short-term strategy: U.S. Own Use Import (OUI) system - Generally mirrors Canadian OUI program - Re-labeling done at dealer level

A Little on Semantics… “NAFTA Label” is a term of art –Mexico is not participating on NAFTA label subteam –“NAFTA label” is being used to refer to joint U.S./Canadian labeling –Could expand to include Mexico in the future

TWG NAFTA Label Sub-Team Composition: - EPA & PMRA staff - Growers from U.S. & Canada - Registrants from U.S. & Canada - Agricultural pesticide retailers - J. Gray, ND Dept of Ag

Summary of NAFTA Label Options Dual label option Joint labeled option E-label option “As if” e-label option(s) –Dealer distribution –Separate sleeves

Status of NAFTA labeling One NAFTA label approved to date: Far-Go/Avadex (Gowan Company)

Status of NAFTA Labeling Several other NAFTA labels in some stage of completion for 2007 or 2008: –Gavel (Dow AgroSciences) –Reflex (Syngenta) –Clarity/Banvel II (BASF) –Spinosad (Dow AgroSciences) –Everest (Arysta) –Tanos (DuPont) –Betamix (Bayer) –Bifenthrin (FMC)

Status of NAFTA Labeling Three new pesticide formulations slated for NAFTA labels: –Pyroxsulam (Dow AgroSciences) –Metaflumizone (BASF) –Mandipropamid (Syngenta)

Status of NAFTA Labels Regulatory barriers to NAFTA labeling largely resolved Ideal format for NAFTA labeling still being discussed –E-label best long-term option –“As if” e-label being used in interim Still looking at strategies for widespread use and adoption of NAFTA labels

NAFTA Labels: Remaining Issues U.S. Customs SLA feedback on enforcement and state registration programs E-labeling

U.S. Customs Issues Need for an import broker? –Formal vs Informal entries Import duties –Are NAFTA-labeled pesticides considered to be NAFTA products? Consistency and predictability

SLA Feedback on NAFTA Labels First questionnaire sent to 13 states per industry’s request –CA, AZ, FL, NY, WA, OR, TX, MA, HI, ID, CO, IN, SD –Received responses from six states (CA, AZ, WA, CO, FL, NY) Questionnaire sent through AAPCO listserve early May ’07 to solicit more extensive feedback

NAFTA E-Label Issues E-labeling the best long-term format for NAFTA labeling –Instantaneous label revisions –Accommodates different label revision processes between U.S. and Canada –Allows users to find geographic-specific label components

Summary & Next Steps One NAFTA label approved, more in the works Need to create a system that results in widespread adoption of NAFTA labels by registrants –Incentives? –Legislative mandate?

Summary & Next Steps Need to address U.S. Customs issues –Legislation? Need to continue to solicit SLA input on enforcement and state registration issues Use NAFTA labels to push work on e- labeling

What is “Pesticide Harmonization”? It’s a way of regulating pesticides from a “North American” perspective