Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

EPA Releases New Guidance on Pesticide Devices

By Thomas Brugato on February 15, 2023
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On February 14, 2023, EPA released a compliance advisory regarding pesticide devices regulated under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (“FIFRA”).  EPA released the advisory in response to “substantial non-compliance with FIFRA in the device and pesticide marketplace. Examples of non-compliance include unregistered pesticides claiming to be devices, devices bearing false and misleading statements, and devices being sold and distributed that were not produced in an EPA registered establishment.”  While the compliance advisory provides a helpful overview of requirements applicable to pesticide devices, it does not provide new substantive guidance, including on key questions facing many device manufacturers and distributors.  The advisory also suggests that EPA may increase its enforcement efforts in this area, so companies producing devices (or products that may arguably be devices) should consider taking proactive steps to ensure their product lines comply with FIFRA’s requirements.

EPA’s compliance advisory outlines the key requirements applicable to pesticide devices, including:

  • Devices must be produced in an EPA-registered establishment and bear an EPA establishment number.
  • Devices may not make claims that are false or misleading, including several categories of claims EPA has determined via notice and comment rulemaking are false or misleading.
  • Entities importing devices must ensure that appropriate Notices of Arrival are submitted to Customs in connection with each import.
  • States may impose their own requirements, and a number of states require pre-market registration of devices.

However, the compliance advisory does not break new ground, and leaves open a number of significant questions, including:

  • The precise demarcation between devices and pesticides, including how novel technologies are classified; the advisory does not discuss precedent or provide additional guidance that device manufacturers should be aware of in evaluating whether their product is properly categorized as a device.
  • What efficacy data companies marketing pesticide devices must generate in order to prevent efficacy claims from being false or misleading.  As this blog has previously noted, this was a particularly significant question during the COVID-19 pandemic.
    • Notably, as part of the 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress enacted the fifth iteration of the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act, which contains a provision requiring EPA “to develop efficacy test methods for antimicrobial pesticide devices making public health claims.”  To date, EPA has not publicly released such test methods.
  • What testing or other steps device manufacturers should take to ensure that their devices are safe.

Given EPA’s continued focus on this area, as well as the lack of guidance on several key issues, companies should carefully monitor EPA developments and take affirmative steps to minimize the risk of a potential enforcement action.

Photo of Thomas Brugato Thomas Brugato

Thomas Brugato is a partner in the firm’s Washington, DC office. His practice focuses on environmental matters, as well as civil and administrative litigation. He has experience advising clients on a wide variety of environmental issues, including under the Clean Air Act, Clean…

Thomas Brugato is a partner in the firm’s Washington, DC office. His practice focuses on environmental matters, as well as civil and administrative litigation. He has experience advising clients on a wide variety of environmental issues, including under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, RCRA, CERCLA, EPCRA, TSCA, FIFRA, the Endangered Species Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and EPA’s Renewable Fuel Standard program.

Thomas has extensive experience in representing companies on FIFRA matters relating to a wide range of products—such as antimicrobials, devices, treated articles, and traditional pesticides—including in EPA enforcement actions. He also has particular expertise in advising companies on a wide range of Administrative Procedure Act (APA) issues, including in litigation involving agencies in federal court. Finally, Thomas has significant experience advising clients on Indian law related issues, particularly relating to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and tribal sovereign immunity.

Read more about Thomas BrugatoEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Environmental and Climate
  • Blog:
    Inside Energy & Environment
  • Organization:
    Covington & Burling LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo