In this April 12, 2017 email, a Dow AgroSciences lobbyist urged EPA to withdraw findings that could lead to restrictions on the use of their products.
Cc: 'Mike Seyfert From: Provost. Megan (J)
Sent: Wed 4f12/2017 6:42:26 PM
Subject: Touching Base re: Endangered Species Act 8: Pesticides
I wanted to touch base with you on behalf of Adama, Dow AgroSciences, and FMC, to give y0u a quick heads up that you all will be receiving a letter later this week sharing some concerns with the Environmental Protection Agency's recently ?nalized Endangered Species Act (ESA) biological evaluations (BEs) for diazinon, chlorpyrifos, and malathion.
On January 18, 2017, the EPA ?nalized BEs for these three important organophosphate (OP) pesticides. These BEs were conducted (1) as part of an "interim approach" agreed to by EPA and the Services to create a path forward for pesticide registrations under the ESA and (2) in addition to the detailed evaluation of the ecological impact these pesticides have gone through over decades of registration and
re-registration already required by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Unfortunately, these BEs were seriously ?awed. For example, with regard to one OP, EPA proposed that over 97% of the 1,835 endangered species and 98% of the 794 critical habitats have a ?likely to adversely affect? determination for a product that has been in use since 1965. In addition, these BEs were rushed through the rulemaking process and demonstrate the unworkability of the ?interim approach? being proposed by the agencies. These BEs have now been passed to the Services for use in developing more detailed biological opinions (BiOps).
As such, we are asking that the BEs be withdrawn because those work products did not provide a rational basis for further analysis. We're happy to answer any questions you have and to discuss this in further detail.
Megan J. Provost
US. Government Affairs
pow Ag roSciences. LLC
500' North Capitol Street, NW Suite 200'] Washington, [3020001