NRDC v. EPA et al

19-71324 // 20-72794
February 6, 2014
Provisional judgment
United States, San Francisco

Environmental NGOs
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
EPA, Andrew Wheeler
Ian Fein, Mae Wu, Aaron Colangelo, Peter J. DeMarco

Petition for writ of mandate
Insecticide, Tetrachlorvinphos (TCVP), Organophosphate, Propoxur
Order EPA to respond to NRDC's administrative petition requesting that the Agency end the use of a dangerous pesticide in household pet products.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of San Francisco, United States
Appellate (Appeal) Court

April 20, 2022
Vacate EPA’s denial of NRDC’s petition and remand to EPA to issue a revised response to NRDC’s petition within 120 days.
National law

Without an answer from EPA to its administrative petition from April 2009 requesting that it ends the use of TVCP, a dangerous pesticide in household pet products, NRDC filed a petition for writ of mandamus in Feb. 2014. In March 2014, EPA announced an agreement with Sergeant’s Pet Care Products, Inc. and Wellmark International to cancel the use of propoxur in flea collars due to risk posed to the brain and nervous systems of kids – but did not address related use of other dangerous chemicals, including TCVP. On Nov. 7, 2014, EPA denied NRDC’s 2009 petition seeking to cancel all pet uses of the toxic chemical TCVP because of the risks to kids. On April 22, 2020, the petition is granted. EPA is ordered to respond to the NRDC’s petition to ban the neurotoxic pesticide tetrachlorvinphos (TCVP) in household pet products within 90 days. EPA decided not to ban the pesticide. NRDC has challenged that decision. On Apr. 20, 2022, the court ruling agreed with NRDC that EPA’s risk analysis was inaccurate and is requiring that EPA publish a revised assessment in 120 days. On May 19, 2022 the EPA Office of Inspector General said it plans to determine whether the agency’s response “provides assurance that the collars can still be used without posing unreasonable adverse effects to human health and the environment” and whether the EPA adhered to pesticide registration requirements in approving the popular Seresto collar.