EPA recently posted the above-titled notice, which reads as follows:
“This is the time of year that EPA receives many special local needs registration requests from states under section 24(c) of FIFRA. Section 24(c) states that “A State may provide registration for additional uses of federally registered pesticides formulated for distribution and use within the State to meet special local needs . . .”
Courthouse News published the above-titled article, which reads in part as follows:
“An en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit appeared reluctant to uphold a three-judge panel August decision requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to ban pesticide chlorpyrifos over potential jurisdictional issues during a hearing held in San Francisco on Tuesday.
‘You don’t have an order on your objections and you are asking us to get to the merits even though there has been no ruling on your objections,’ said Circuit Judge Richard Paez — one of 11 judges to sit on the panel.
“EPA Releases for Public Comment Draft Guidance for Plant Regulators, Including Plant Biostimulants”
EPA posted the following notice on its website:
“EPA has released for public comment Draft Guidance for Plant Regulators, Including Plant Biostimulants. Read a pre-publication copy of the draft guidance.
In recognition of the growing categories of products generally known as plant biostimulants, this draft document gives guidance on which products are (and are not) subject to regulation under FIFRA as plant regulator pesticides, and what kinds of claims can be made for them. The draft guidance provides examples of each. EPA is taking this step to provide clarity to our state regulatory partners, to industry, and to the interested public in this emerging product area.
CropLife America posted the following information on its website, http://www.croplifeamerica.org/events:
- Wed, Apr 3, 20193:00 PM Fri, Apr 5, 201912:00 PM
- Renaissance Arlington Capital View Hotel (map)
The CropLife America & RISE Regulatory Conference is the preeminent scientific and technical forum for the pesticide industry and regulators. Speakers will provide technical and policy input on issues related to pollinators, ecological and human health risk assessment, endangered species risk assessment, MRLs and international trade, and much more. Come participate in interactive sessions and network with conference attendees. Click here to view the agenda.
EPA published a Federal Register notice that reads in part as follows:
“An Environmental Modeling Public Meeting (EMPM) will be held on Wednesday, March 27, 2019. This Notice announces the new time for the meeting. Location, agenda topics and supplementary information can be found in the original notice published in the Federal Register, of December 28, 2018 (83 FR 67282) (FRL–9987–26). The EMPM provides a public forum for EPA and its stakeholders to discuss current issues related to modeling pesticide fate, transport, exposure, and ecotoxicity for pesticide risk assessments in a regulatory context.
“41% glyphosate-cancer increase claim under fire: Did authors of new meta-study deliberately manipulate data or just botch their analysis?”
The Genetic Literacy Project posted the above-titled article. The entire article can be read here.
“Rebellion against Europe’s ‘innovation-killing’ crop gene editing regulations grows among scientists, frustrated member states”
The Genetic Literacy Project posted the above-titled article, which reads as follows:
“Last July, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) surprised pretty much everybody—politicians, industry and environmental NGOs—when it ruled that plants developed using gene-editing techniques such as CRISPR should be regulated as transgenic crops (GMOs) under rules promulgated in 2001, and now widely considered archaic.
Almost the entire European science establishment had urged that gene-edited crops should be subject to minimal regulations. Not surprisingly, scientists across the continent were almost universally disappointed at what they believed was a political rather than a science-based decision.
A three judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently ordered EPA “to revoke all tolerances and cancel all registrations for chlorpyrifos within 60 days” of the court’s order. One of the three judges dissented on several grounds, including that the court did not have jurisdiction to issue this order.
The Ninth Circuit has now granted EPA’s Petition for En Banc Rehearing of this Order and the three-judge panel decision underlying it. Oral argument before every non-recused judge in the Ninth Circuit is scheduled for sometime during the week of March 25, 2019, in San Francisco.
Agriland recently posted the above-titled article, which reads as follows:
“PEU pesticide policy is under scrutiny and review – but is in danger of being overly politicised, with scientific rigor taking second place to opinion, according to Mairead McGuinness.
The MEP and First Vice-President of the European Parliament was speaking ahead of a vote this Wednesday (January 16) in Strasbourg, and commenting on a report that outlines the European Parliament’s position on the EU’s pesticide policy.
“The EU’s authorisation procedure could have serious consequences for the Irish tillage industry if a proposal to ban the use of PPPs (plant protection products) for desiccation purposes is adopted,” the MEP said.
The Natural Resources Defense Council has sued the Department of Interior and the Fish and Wildlife Service, claiming that they failed to follow the Endangered Species Act in protecting the habitat of the rusty patched bumble bee.This lawsuit was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. on January 15, 2019.
Click here for a Chicago Tribune article discussing this case.