>> "It is a violation of Federal law to use this 
>> product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling."  
>
> You have provided no concrete evidence that 
> de-registration voids this admonition. 
> If you have it, present it 

Yes I have - the statutes themselves provide the concrete evidence.  For
those who would rather argue than read the regs for themselves, I will cite
the regs and briefly summarize them:

40 CFR 156.10 requires all "pesticide products" to have a label containing
specified information.  

40 CFR 152.3(t) defines "pesticide products", and says that the label
requirement applies to all pesticide containers.  

40 CFR 152.15 prohibits the >> distribution << of any pesticide "that is not
registered under the Act." Note that there is nothing said about USE of a
pesticide  "not registered under the Act", and under US law, what is not
prohibited is allowed by default.  (This is the key regulation cited in the
EPA memo I quoted about spirotetramat back in 2010.)

Section 136j(a)(2) is the only provision of FIFRA that explicitly prohibits
pesticide misuse, and it applies only to registered pesticides.   

The one portion of FIFRA, that offers limited hope is Section 136a(a):

"...no person in any State may distribute or sell to any person any
pesticide that is not registered under this subchapter.  To the extent
necessary to prevent unreasonable adverse effects on the environment, the
Administrator may by regulation limit the distribution, sale, or use in any
State of any pesticide that is not registered under this subchapter..."

But this requires the EPA to draft a regulation, go through a public comment
process, and so on, while the pesticide that is no longer "registered" due
to the revocation can be used with wild abandon, and in direct contradiction
of the label.  Without a special order prohibiting the use of a particular
unregistered pesticide, the EPA has no authority to regulate the chemical at
issue.

I hope I have fully explained the implications of FIFRA to those who have
remained conscious through all of this.

The only question remaining in the astute student's mind would concern the
plaintiff's attorneys' choice of an Ithaca Mag-10 Roadblocker versus a
Mossberg M500 in their self-inflicted shotgun wound to the foot.  ;)

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html