Statement by Bayer on Motions to Intervene in Cases Brought Against the Environmental Protection Agency on Glyphosate Registration

Bayer issued the following statement today in response to motions to intervene filed in Rural Coalition et al. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency et al. and a parallel case brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council, cases which challenge EPA’s Interim Registration Review Decision on glyphosate. Monsanto filed this motion and this one alongside 10 associations, which represent a substantial segment of U.S. agriculture and other professions that utilize and rely on glyphosate, and these parties have jointly requested to intervene in support of the EPA in these cases before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The motions to intervene make three main points:

• The EPA’s assessment is scientifically sound:  We stand by the EPA’s Interim Registration Review of glyphosate, which “did not identify any human health risks from exposure to glyphosate,” echoing the favorable regulatory conclusions of leading health regulators worldwide. EPA’s science-based, in-depth assessment by its expert team reflects a gold standard for scientific rigor that is respected by regulators and scientists across the globe. Further, the EPA’s conclusions are supported by a body of science spanning over 40 years that has consistently confirmed that glyphosate-based products can be used safely as directed and that glyphosate is not carcinogenic.

• Glyphosate is very important to agriculture and the interests of the parties to this motion: Glyphosate-based products are among the most thoroughly studied herbicides in the world. Its safety and efficacy have made glyphosate the most widely used herbicide by growers and other professionals worldwide, who rely on it not only for effective weed control, but also to minimize tillage farming practices, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and preserve more land for native habitats. Furthermore, the use of glyphosate-based products allows growers to achieve greater yields and provide an abundance of food to meet the needs of a growing population worldwide.

• Each proposed intervener meets the legal standard to intervene in this case:  We have requested the court’s approval to intervene as the EPA is not able to adequately represent our significant interests in EPA’s Interim Registration Review Decision on glyphosate, which are threatened in this matter. We are determined that regulatory decisions about glyphosate should be guided by science, not conjecture. The livelihood of farmers and other professionals, who have been using glyphosate safely and effectively for more than four decades, depends on it. 

In addition to Monsanto, the parties filing these motions include the National Association of Wheat Growers, the National Corn Growers Association, the National Cotton Council of America, the American Soybean Association, the American Sugarbeet Growers Association, the National Sorghum Producers, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Association of Landscape Professionals, the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America, and the Agricultural Retailers Association.

Additional Background:

Glyphosate was first registered under FIFRA in 1974 and was re-registered in 1993. In January 2020, the U.S. EPA published its Interim Registration Review of glyphosate. The EPA’s registration review of glyphosate ‘did not identify any human health risks from exposure to glyphosate.’ These conclusions were reached through years of rigorous scientific analysis and EPA’s evaluation of thousands of comments from various stakeholders, including glyphosate registrants, grower groups, non-governmental environmental organizations, states, and members of the general public.

Each intervening party to these motions holds a significant commercial interest in this registration review and would be substantially harmed if the petitioners succeeded in their challenge to it. The associations represent growers and those who serve them, as well as other professionals who utilize and rely upon glyphosate-based pesticides as an essential tool in their operations. Monsanto has multiple legally protectable interests that support its intervention, as glyphosate is the active ingredient in a number of its product formulations, and the company retains patents and other intellectual property rights protecting certain applications of glyphosate.