The FIFRA Endangered Species Task Force (FESTF) has sent a letter to the National Academy of Sciences offering its experience and expertise to the NAS/National Research Council panel reviewing risk assessments of FIFRA-Regulated Pesticides for species regulated by the Endangered Species Act. Their letter explains that FESTF
On January 31 through February 2, 2012, EPA held a Science Advisory Panel meeting on “Common Effects Assessment Methodology developed in the Office of Pesticide Programs and Office of Water.” Prior to the meeting, EPA published the Agency’s white paper on this subject, entitled “Review of Methods for Characterizing Effects of Pesticides and Other Chemical Stressors to Aquatic Organisms.” Consequently, it was surprising and somewhat anti-climactic when EPA representatives told the SAP, “At this point we’re not proposing to move forward with these analyses or any implementation.”
Click below to access the online record for this SAP:
On January 31 and February 1, in Seattle, Washington, the National Research Council held its second public meeting during the NRC’s review of scientific and technical issues related to the methods and assumptions used by EPA, NMFS and FWS in conducting scientific assessments and ecological risks from pesticides registered by EPA under FIFRA. The Minor Crop Farmer Alliance presented comments at this meeting.
On January 31 and February 1, in Seattle, Washington, the National Research Council held its second public meeting during the NRC’s review of scientific and technical issues related to the methods and assumptions used by EPA, NMFS and FWS in conducting scientific assessments and ecological risks from pesticides registered by EPA under FIFRA. At this meeting CropLife America submitted separate papers to the NRC on the following issues:
● use of the best avaialble science in a well-defined weight-of evidence framework;
● causal analysis;
● the state-of-the-art with respect to assessment of the combined effects of pesticide mixture and inert incgredients;
Environmental groups have sued EPA in San Francisco federal court. They allege that EPA’s registration of pesticides violates federal law. Industry groups have intervened. The litigation has been stayed by the court pending settlement negotiations by the EPA and the Enviros. Pursuant to court order, on February 2, 2012, EPA and the Enviros filed a status report with the court which stated that they are still “pursuing settlement discussions and are in the process of
On February 7, 2012, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service jointly published Federal Register notice that they were extending for 30 days the period for submitting public comments on their draft policy interpreting the phrase ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ in the Endangered Species Act’s definitions of “endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened species.’’ Information and comments regarding the draft policy must now be received by NMFS or FWS on or before March 8, 2012.
● Click here to read Services’ Federal Register notice extending comment period
On , 2012, the Council for Endangered Species Act Reliability (CESAR) filed an appeal of a federal district court decision which held that challenges to EPA pesticide registrations for failing to consult on endangered species impacts must be brought under FIFRA, not under the Endangered Species Act . The district court therefore concluded that FIFRA requires CESAR’s challenge to be brought in a federal court of appeals, and not in the district court as the ESA requires. CESAR’s appeal is filed in the United State Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
● The notice of appeal is attached below.
The National Academy of Sciences’ National Research Council is reviewing ecological risk assessments under FIFRA and the ESA. This NAS/NRC review committee held its second public meeting in Seattle, Washington, on January 31-February 1, 2012. The agenda for this meeting is available online at http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/meetingview.aspx?MeetingID=5861&MeetingNo=2.
EPA has initiated formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the potential effects of Rozol Prairie Dog Bait, for the control of black-tailed prairie dogs, on wildlife species listed under the Endangered Species Act as either threatened or endangered. The Biological Opinion relative to this consultation is posted at www.epa.gov/espp and included in public docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0909 at Regulations.gov so that EPA may receive public input on any changes to this pesticide’s registration recommended by FWS. EPA must receive any comments on this BiOp no later than February 17, 2012.
The President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology met on January 6, 2012, to discuss a number of issues, including a report evaluating the effectiveness of the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), which coordinates nanotechnology programs across EPA and other agencies,” PCAST Vice Chair Maxine Savitz, of the National Academy of Engineering, said at the meeting that “The key thing as we move into manufacturing is environmental impacts — and making sure we know ahead of time what they are.” The report is expected to be discussed further during PCAST’s March 9, 2012 meeting. Savitz’s remarks follow an Office of Inspector General report that identified a number of flaws in EPA’s risk management and risk assessment process for nanomaterials, including: “EPA’s management of nanomaterials is limited by a lack of risk information and reliance on industry-submitted data.” A webcast of PCAST’s January 6th meeting is available at http://www.tvworldwide.com/events/pcast/120106/