Document 3QekMj3MLwyOXnbBZ6x8rr4V3

E. S c o t t P ruitt A d m in istra to r Juiv 3, 2017 Mr. James R. Barbee Director Nevada Department of Agriculture 405 South 21sSStreet Sparks, Nevada 89431 SUBJECT; NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL SLN No. NV170003 - General Hydroponics Prevasyn <EPA Reg. No. 91865-1) SEN No. NVI70004 - General Hydroponics Exile (EISA. Reg. No. 91865-2) SLN No. NVI 70005 - General Hydroponics Defguard (EPA Reg, No. 9 1865-3) SLN No. NVI 70006 - General Hydroponics Azamax (EPA Reg. No. 91865-4) Dear Mr. Barbee: On April 5, 2017, the Nevada Department of Agriculture issued Special Local Need registrations under Section 24(c) of the Federal insecticide. Fungicide and Rodenticide Act as amended, to Hawthorne Hydroponics EEC cl/b/a General Hydroponics. These state registrations, submitted to the II.S. Environmental Protection Agency by Jian (Jim) Zhang of NDA, were issued for the application of the following chemicals: capsicum oleoresin extract, garlic oil and soybean oil (NVI 70003), potassium salts of fatty acids (NVI 70004). Bacillus amyloliquefuciem strain 0747 (NVI70005) and azadirachtin (NVI70006) to control various insect pests, mites and/or diseases on cannabis. The aforementioned chemicals are not registered by the EPA for use on cannabis. On June 22, 2017, the agency sent the NDA a Notice of Intent to Disapprove the four SLN registrations. On June 29. 2017, the NDA consulted with the agency about the SLN registrations. Decision: The EPA concludes that SLN Nos. N V I70003, NV170004, NVI70005 and NVI 70006 are disapproved, effective immediately, for the reasons provided below. Reasons for Disapproval: During the consultation on June 29. 2017. the NDA expressed their interest in pesticide use for the marijuana industry in Nevada. However, pursuant to EIFRA section 24(e), the EPA's regulations pertaining to state registrations of pesticides to meet special local needs state that "the Administrator may disapprove, on any reasonable grounds, any state registration which, when compared to a federally registered product, does not have . , . a similar S20O IV-.nxsylwma Avk, N W * Maii. Com. I tOI A * W ashington, DC 0-160 * (202> M 1-4700 * Fa s: (202) .tH-HJO a s ;sspar u; psinisd w:!ts sA3BSaiiie-i;ii-fiasBfi ---A 3.d is teo-psiCftW postsosuTMsr raciyciad s-asas: ciAiAiisa-faia-pfiXABBesj an<;: s - A.- Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Attachments Prod 1 ED 002061 00042759-00001 use pattern . . 4 0 C.F.R. i62.154(a)(l ). The regulations define "similar use pattern" to mean "a use of a pesticide product . . . which is [among other things] substantially the same as the federally registered use," 40 C.F.R. 162.151, Under federal law, cultivation (along with saie and use) of cannabis is generally unlawful as a schedule 1 controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act.1 The EP finds that the general illegality of cannabis cultivation makes pesticide use on cannabis a fundamentally different use pattern. The Administrator may disapprove a different use pattern "on any reasonable grounds/' Here, in accordance with 40 C.F.R. section 162.154, the Administrator has determined disapproval is reasonable because the EPA does not believe that Congress intended the process isnder section 24(e) of FIERA to be used for the purpose of facilitating activities that are generally in violation of federal law. While the EPA believes that it is not required to consider the general cost-benefit standard applicable to FIERA registrations when disapproving a registration tirt is inextricably linked with violations of federal Saw. application of the costbenefit standard would not yield a different result - any economic, social or environmental costs associated with pesticide use on cannabis would not be reasonable or justified in light of the fact that such use is in furtherance of an illegal act. The EPA has reviewed the SEN registrations submitted by the state and has not identified any significant risks associated with the SEN registrations; the EPA would not have been inclined to disapprove these registrations were cultivation and sale of marijuana generally lawful in the United States. Disposition of Existing Stocks: Hie disapprovals of SLN Nos. NV 170003, NV170004, NV 170005 and NV 170006 are effective immediately. You must take steps to halt any further sale or distribution of producs under these SEN registrations. For uses subject to the disapproval, distribution or sale of existing stocks of all disapproved products listed above is prohibited. Sale or distribution of the EPA-registered products is still permitted, as long as the products are still properly labeled and the SEN labeling does not accompany the product. Per 40 CFR 162.154(c), a notice of the disapproval of these SEN registrations will be published in the Federal Register. However, this disapproval is effective immediately, as of the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact Nancy Beck at (202) 564-2910 or beck.nancy a epa.gov. Ce: Jian (Jim) Zhang. Nevada Department of Agriculture Alexis Strauss. Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 5Marihuana, an older spelling of marijuana, and tetrahydrocannabinol are listed under schedule I in 2 i U.S.C section 8 1 2 (e), Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Attachments Prod 1 ED 002061 00042759-00002