|
Issue:
Can the Services streamline the risk assessment process
required by Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for the registration and
reregistration of pesticides by allowing EPA to conduct that evaluation?
Background:
The Services proposed joint counterpart regulations for
consultation under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 ("ESA") for
regulatory actions under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
("FIFRA"). The proposed regulations would eliminate the need for EPA to consult
with and obtain the written concurrence from the Services that no endangered
species would be harmed when taking FIFRA actions--namely the registration and
reregistration of pesticides. The Services' rationale for this proposed
regulation was that EPA had the expertise to undertake such evaluations and to
require the Services to make these assessments was duplicative and time
consuming, resulting in delays.
RtE Position:
The proposed regulations should be withdrawn.
Pesticides pose a serious threat to endangered species. The EPA's evaluation in
the FIFRA registration process alone is not sufficient to protect wildlife
species from the ill-effects of pesticides.
EPA is not legally permitted to bypass the consultation process, which is
required by the ESA and the Services have a Congressionally mandated, statutory
duty under Section 7 of the ESA to conduct risk assessments. This statutory duty
of the Services cannot be waived by a regulatory fix. Furthermore, the EPA's
authority to make risk assessments is limited. Exceptions to the consultation
process are already imbedded within the ESA, and therefore not only is the
waiver process contained in the proposed regulation contrary to law, but it is
not necessary.
In addition to the legal barriers to the Services' proposal to bypass the
mandatory consultation process, is the fact that EPA is simply not qualified to
conduct evaluations required under Section 7 of the ESA. Not only has EPA's risk
assessment review process been demonstrated to be deficient, but it has found to
be biased, inaccurate, and incomplete as well. Therefore, even if EPA were
legally permitted to conduct such reviews, they are not qualified to do so.
Update:
In March, RtE commented on the proposed rule as well as the
Environmental Assessment. However, on August 5, USFWS finalized the rule in favor of the proposal.
RtE is reaching out to other environmental groups to explore potential
collaboration in litigating the regulations.
Links:
- RtE-ESA_CounterpartLetter.pdf
- Rock the Earth letter of March 29, 2004, to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, commenting on the Joint Counterpart Endangered Species Act Section 7
Consultation Regulations.
|