Ag giants persuade MPCA to alter rule

After three years of research, the state was ready to impose the nation's first water-quality limit for acetochlor, a potent farm chemical that was washing into rivers and lakes.

But after hearing from scientists from agribusiness giants Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) decided to allow more than twice the concentration of the chemical in rivers than it had originally proposed.

As a result, three of five rivers that the state had previously classified as "impaired" by acetochlor, including a popular trout stream in southeastern Minnesota, will no longer be considered polluted.

Explaining their change of heart, MPCA officials said industry scientists showed them six studies that persuaded the state that its original draft limit for acetochlor was too strict. Three of the scientists met with agency officials on Aug. 28, and they also testified at a public hearing.

The new standard for acetochlor was adopted last month.

"When we added that information and ran it through the process we came up with a different number," said Marvin Hora, MPCA manager in charge of water assessment and environmental reporting. "That's the way the process is supposed to work."

Company officials say that even the new maximum level of acetochlor -- 3.6 parts per billion in water -- is unnecessary and scientifically unjustified. But some environmental advocacy groups question whether the MPCA gave favorable treatment to the pesticide makers.

They say pollution officials have been willing to meet with industry representatives to discuss acetochlor, atrazine and other pollutants such as mercury, but have not taken seriously enough other research suggesting that exposure to those compounds can cause ecological damage.

"It looks like there's a double standard, that industry can come in and suggest changes without putting it up for new review and comment," said Janette Brimmer, legal director for the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy.

Hora calls that accusation "a bunch of bull." "We have met with all kinds of groups, and people come in and talk with us about [water quality] standards all the time," he said.

Overlooked studies?

Pesticides containing acetochlor are used widely in Minnesota. Marketed as Harness, Surpass and Keystone, among other brands, acetochlor kills weeds before they can start growing in cornfields.

The debate concerns what concentrations of the pesticide will also kill aquatic plants in rivers and lakes on a chronic basis when the chemical runs off those fields.

Paul Wotzka, a former hydrologist for the Minnesota Department of Agriculture who studied southern Minnesota's Whitewater River and other streams for 16 years, said that acetochlor was first marketed in the state in 1994, and that it showed up in waterways almost immediately. Over the years the detection levels in the Whitewater River have jumped as more corn is grown and more of the herbicide is used on surrounding lands, he said.

Dan Stoddard, assistant director for environmental programs at the Agriculture Department, said that his agency asked the MPCA in 2002 to develop an acetochlor standard after finding the chemical in waterways.

Last July, the state determined that acetochlor was contaminating a well-known trout stream, the middle branch of the Whitewater River, and four other waterways. So the MPCA proposed the nation's first legal limit on the pesticide at 1.7 parts per billion. If concentrations went higher, the state could have required farmers to take measures to limit or control their use of acetochlor.

The following month, in their private visit, the scientists from Dow AgroSciences and Monsanto made the state aware of six published studies -- one of them in Chinese -- that MPCA scientists had missed as they were researching literature to calculate the standard, Hora said.

One of the three visitors, Monsanto environmental scientist Dave Gustafson, said the industry did not have special access or influence with the MPCA, but presented evidence the state had overlooked. Gustafson's perspective is that no rivers in Minnesota are contaminated from acetochlor.

"From where we sit here as the regulated party, we think time is of the essence to get in and talk to MPCA about this," he said.

In September, Monsanto officials said in public hearings in Marshall, Minn., that any standard for acetochlor was unnecessary because the Minnesota Department of Agriculture was educating farmers on ways to prevent it from running off farm fields. A company consultant presented evidence that if any standard was adopted, it should be set at 4.3 parts per billion.

Last month, the MPCA Citizens' Board adopted the revised proposal of 3.6 parts per billion. On Tuesday, the board will hear an update about the rivers removed from the pollution list and other changes to the state's impaired-waters list.

Monsanto officials say the new standard has been driven by science's ability to detect very low levels of chemicals, not by any observable harm.

"We hope that it doesn't become a number that's used elsewhere," Gustafson said. "It doesn't represent a sound scientific approach."

But Wotzka said he is baffled that the state would spend years of research preparing to establish an official standard of 1.7 parts per billion, and then change its mind in the space of a few weeks.

"I can't fathom how quickly a state agency would bend over backwards to a chemical giant like Monsanto," he said.

Wotzka was fired from his state job and filed a whistleblower lawsuit last May, claiming that he was refused permission to testify at the Legislature about his research regarding atrazine, another pesticide commonly found in state waterways. State officials said he was fired for other reasons but have declined to discuss details, citing personnel privacy laws.

Rep. Ken Tschumper, DFL-La Crescent, said that if there's a dispute between 1.7 and 3.6 parts per billion, the state should "err on the side of safety" and use the more protective standard. Tschumper, a dairy farmer, has authored legislation to determine whether some of the pesticides used in Minnesota are safe enough for the environment and human health.

Tschumper said that the MPCA's change of heart on acetochlor is only the latest example of how agricultural chemical companies have too much influence on state regulators. "It's a heckuva way to start out setting standards for pesticides in this state," he said.

Tom Meersman • 612-673-7388