Bayer: The Science Is On Our Side In Belt Insecticide Battle

Bayer: The Science Is On Our Side In Belt Insecticide Battle

You may have seen some media stories about Bayer’s current disagreement with EPA over registrations for our pesticide flubendiamide, marketed in the U.S. as Belt, writes Bayer VP of Regulatory Affairs Dana Sargent in a recent blog post.


In short, EPA asked Bayer to voluntarily withdraw its registrations for flubendiamide-containing products, making them unavailable to growers in the U.S. Bayer rejected that request and, as expected, EPA then filed a formal Notice of Intent to Cancel these registrations.

Today we (Bayer) are officially taking the step that we previously said we intended to take and we have formally asked for a hearing before EPA’s Administrative Law Judge. With this action, I wanted to answer a few basic questions about why we are doing it and what it means.

What does it mean that you’re asking for a hearing?

We have a fundamental disagreement with EPA over science and process surrounding the registration of flubendiamide and Belt. We have been working with them to resolve the disagreement. Now EPA is trying to cancel it through a streamlined hearing in an effort to shield its science from independent peer review and to avoid other government and stakeholder input on its approach. We disagree with this and are invoking our right to have an EPA Administrative Law Judge hear both sides and make a determination on what process should be followed. As a matter of standard practice, the Administrative Law Judge’s initial determination will then be reviewed by the EPA Environmental Appeals Board.

Visit the Bayer Connect blog to read the rest of Sargent’s FAQ-style post on the EPA-Bayer battle over Belt.