The National Academy of Sciences’ National Research Council is reviewing ecological risk assessments for pesticides under FIFRA and the Endangered Species Act. This review is being conducted at the request of EPA, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Department of Agriculture. EPA, NMFS and FWS do not always agree on data and analyses during their Section 7 consultations.
EPA, NMFS and FWS have not adequately briefed the NAS/NRC Committee on the Government-wide data quality protocols and standards that govern their ecological risk assessments under FIFRA and the ESA. Consequently, the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness submitted a White Paper for the Committee’s review. This White Paper discusses:
The Office of Management and Budget’s (“OMB”) Government-wide Data Quality Act (“DQA”) Guidelines;
- EPA’s, NMFS’ and FWS’ own DQA Guidelines;
- OMB’s Peer Review Bulletin; and
- The Council for Regulatory Environmental Modeling’s (“CREM”) Guidance for the development, validation and application of computer models .
CRE’s White Paper explains that EPA, NMFs and FWS all have to comply with OMB’s Government-wide DQA Guidelines and their own DQA Guidelines when they perform ESA pesticides consultations. NMFS’ biological opinions for pesticides apparently violate both the OMB Guidelines and NMFS’ own DQA Guidelines. All of the agencies should peer review computer models they use in order to determine their compliance with the CREM Guidance, and all peer reviews should comply with OMB’s Peer Review Bulletin.
Read CRE White Paper