Pesticide Action Network North America v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Good Law
798 F.3d 809·2015 WL 4718867
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 10, 201514-72794California2,175 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKEOWN, J.

Although filibustering may be a venerable tradition in the United States Senate, it is frowned upon in administrative agencies tasked with protecting human health. Pesticide Action Network North America and the Natural Resources Defense Council have been waiting for years for the United States Environmental Protection Agency to respond to their administrative petition requesting a ban on the pesticide chlorpyrifos. Instead, they’ve received a litany of partial status reports, missed deadlines, and vague promises of future action. We recognize the scientific complexity inherent in evaluating the safety of pesticides and the competing interests that the agency must juggle. However, EPA’s ambiguous plan to possibly issue a proposed rule nearly nine years after receiving the administrative petition is too little, too late. This delay is egregious and warrants mandamus relief. We order EPA to issue a full and final response to the petition no later than October 31, 2015.

Background

EPA is tasked with registering all pesticides. A pesticide may be registered only if EPA finds that it is “safe,” meaning that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.