The EPA assessed a $230,000 fine against shoe manufacturer Crocs Inc. due to their claim some versions of their shoes have an antimicrobial property. And, according to the EPA, if your product claims to have an antimicrobial property, it is  considered a pesticide by the EPA and is a regulated substance covered under under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act:

The case involves several styles of Crocs shoes that included unsubstantiated health claims on product packaging in violation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The company also made similar claims in advertisements and on their web site. Crocs has agreed to stop making such claims and has cooperated fully with EPA enforcement staff. EPA’s authority to assess penalties in these settlements stems from FIFRA, which requires that companies register pesticide products with EPA before making claims about their ability to control germs or pathogens.

The EPA doesn’t say that the shoes fail to posses an antimicrobial property or that the shoes are dangerous.  No, the issue is the shoe company failed to properly REGISTER their shoes with the EPA because of the one word. Antimicrobial.

Under FIFRA, products that claim to kill or repel bacteria or germs are considered pesticides, and must be registered with the EPA prior to distribution or sale. The Agency will not register a pesticide until it has been tested to show that it will not pose an unreasonable risk when used according to the label directions.

No wonder our economy is in the tank.