Comment submitted by M. Vinsel

Re: EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1008 Dear Stephen Johnson, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on docket # EPA-HQ-OPP-2007- 1008, "Label Statements Regarding Third-Party Endorsements and Cause Marketing Claims." I believe the proposed rule changes are inappropriate and potentially dangerous for the public and the environment. Specifically, I disagree with this proposal because: Placement of the Red Cross and other safety or environmental symbols on commercial poisons is inherently misleading and violates federal and state laws and EPA guidelines. The symbols themselves may imply health and environmental benefits that conflict with the product's actual properties and regulatory status. Extraneous claims and symbols may distract consumers from safe usage label instructions. It is critical that consumers be able to understand and carefully follow label instructions in order to prevent serious harm from pesticide misuse. The proposal inappropriately involves a regulatory agency - the EPA - in corporate marketing schemes. Cause-related symbols may imply an endorsement of the product by either the EPA or the charity. Thank you for your attention to this very important matter. Please don't let this proposed rule take effect! Sincerely, Mike Vinsel Raleigh, NC