|
Federal Actions on Atrazine
EPA Announces Public Comment Period On Atrazine IRED And Water Quality Criteria Document
EPA's Pesticides Office has released for public comment a revised atrazine Interim Registration Eligibility Document under FIFRA and the FQPA. At the same time, EPA's Water Office released for public comment a draft atrazine Water Quality Criteria Document under the Clean Water Act. The comment period for both the IRED and the Criteria Document ends February 5, 2004. These two documents have importance beyond the re-registration of this product. They both involve EPA regulation in atrazine in surface waters, and the two EPA Offices have attempted to be consistent under two different regulatory regimes. In addition, these may be the first major EPA public comment proceedings where Data Quality Act issues are prominent during the comment period.
Click for for atrazine IRED
Click Click here for atrazine Water Quality Criteria Document.
EPA Announces Public Comment Period On Atrazine IRED And Water Quality Criteria Document
EPA's Pesticides Office has released for public comment a revised atrazine Interim Registration Eligibility Document under FIFRA and the FQPA. At the same time, EPA's Water Office released for public comment a draft atrazine Water Quality Criteria Document under the Clean Water Act. The comment period for both the IRED and the Criteria Document ends February 5, 2004. These two documents have importance beyond the re-registration of this product. They both involve EPA regulation in atrazine in surface waters, and the two EPA Offices have attempted to be consistent under two different regulatory regimes. In addition, these may be the first major EPA public comment proceedings where Data Quality Act issues are prominent during the comment period.
Click for for atrazine IRED.
Click Click here for atrazine Water Quality Criteria Document.
CRE Files Comments on Atrazine IRED
CRE's comments on EPA's "Interim" Interim Registration Eligibility Decision for atrazine made the following main points. First, CRE asked EPA to confirm that the IRED contained EPA's response to CRE's Data Quality Act petition on EPA's prior statements regarding atrazine's endocrine effects, as the Agency had stated in a letter to CRE. Second, CRE questioned EPA's use of the PRIZM/EXAMS model to assess atrazine's environmental effects when the model has never been fully validated and is by design biased. Third, CRE questioned EPA's reliance on simulated field studies to assess atrazine's environmental effects when there are no standardized, validated protocols for conducting such studies.
SAP Meeting Date Changed
The Science Advisory Panel's meeting on the amphibian endocrine disruption issue has been changed to June 17 through 20, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST, at the Sheraton Crystal City Hotel, 1800 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. 22202, 703/486-1111. (May 28th deadline for registering). Written comments on this issue must be submitted no later than May 28, 2003.
CRE Files Comments On ESA Consultation
EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service sought public comment on how to improve their consultations regarding pesticides under the Endangered Species Act. CRE's comments on this Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking emphasized two points. First, all ESA determinations must be based on accurate and reliable data. Second, EPA should be the lead agency in the consultation process.
Concentrated Atrazine Use Prevents Runoff
A joint study by Texas Cooperative Extension and the Texas Agricultural Experiment indicates that growers can increase crop yield, and decrease atrazine surface water runoff, by using one of two methods. First, in a method called banding, growers can use concentrated applications of atrazine directly over planted rows, supplemented by mechanical weed control during the early season. Second, in a method called pre-plant incorporation, growers can mechanically insert atrazine into soil before planting rather than surface application and waiting for rainfall.
EPA Reaffirms Its Conclusion That Atrazine Is Not A Carcinogen
EPA recently published its response to public comment on the Agency's
human health risk assessment for its FIFRA/FQPA re-registration review
of atrazine. In its comment response document, EPA reaffirmed its conclusion
that atrazine is not likely to be a human carcinogen. EPA also concluded
that any apparent increase in prostate cancer at an atrazine manufacturing
plant resulted from the manufacturer's intensive screening of all its
workers, and not from atrazine exposure.
EPA Acts
on Atrazine Data Quality Petition
EPA has announced its position on atrazine's purported endocrine effects
on wildlife in response to the Data Quality Act Petition filed in November
by the Triazine Network, the Kansas Corn Growers Association and CRE. This
Petition argued that EPA's FIFRA/FQPA Environmental Risk Assessment for
atrazine violated both EPA's own DQA Guidelines and Government-wide ICCVAM
guidelines by concluding that atrazine causes endocrine effects in frogs
and other wildlife when there are no validated tests for those effects.
EPA concluded that the Agency's ecological risk assessment "does not suggest
that endocrine disruption...be regarded as an regulatory endpoint at this
time."
EPA
Provides Public Notice of Sap Atrazine Review
EPA announced in the February 24th Federal Register
that the FIFRA Science Advisory Panel will consider and review the effect
of atrazine on amphibians. The SAP will have a pre-meeting teleconference
on this issue on May 21, 2003, from 1:00 p.m. to 3 p.m. EST. The SAP will
have a "face-to-face" meeting on this issue on June 3-5, 2003, from 8:30
a.m. to 5 p.m., EST. For additional information on participating in the
teleconference, contact Paul Lewis, 202/564-8450 or lewis.paul@epa.gov.
The "face-to-face" meeting will be held at the Sheraton Crystal City Hotel,
1800 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. 22202, 703/486-1111. Contact
Paul Lewis at the above telephone number or email address no later than
May 28, 2003, in order to make an oral presentation at the "face-to-face"
meeting. Written comments must be submitted no later than May 28, 2003.
The Federal Register notice provides detailed information on submitting
written comments electronically and by other means. Nominations for the
SAP panel must be submitted to Paul Lewis at the above telephone number
or email address by March 6, 2003. CRE urges all stakeholders to participate
in this important atrazine review.
The primary federal government actions on atrazine are:
- EPA's review of atrazine under FIFRA and the FQPA
- EPA's development of national primary drinking water standards under the Safe Drinking Water Act
- EPA's development of water quality criteria under the Clean Water Act
For a discussion of EPA's FIFRA/FQPA review
For a discussion of SDWA and water quality criteria issues, see below:
Atrazine SDWA Standards
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f et seq., EPA sets national standards to protect against health risks, considering available technology and cost. These National Primary Drinking Water Regulations set enforceable maximum contaminant levels for particular contaminants in drinking water or required ways to treat water to remove contaminants. Each standard also includes requirements for water systems to test for contaminants in the water to ensure standards are achieved. While states can set standards different from EPA's, state standards must be at least as stringent as EPA's.
EPA has published National Primary Drinking Water Standards for atrazine. These SDWA standards impose a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal and Maximum Contaminant Level of 0.003 mg/L.
EPA has stated that it will defer any further SDWA action on Atrazine until EPA completes its review of atrazine under FIFRA and the FQPA. 67 FR 19030 (April 12, 2002).
CRE's Position on Atrazine SDWA Standards
CRE believes that EPA should coordinate its FIFRA/FQPA review for atrazine with EPA's SDWA standard-setting process to ensure Government-wide consistency in the regulation of atrazine. Inconsistent standards would cause significant implementation, compliance and enforcement problems.
Atrazine Water Quality Criteria
Under the Federal Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1314(a)(1), EPA establishes water quality criteria that must accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge on the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on health and welfare that might be expected from the presence of pollutants in any body of water, including ground water. EPA water quality criteria associated with specific uses adopted by a state under section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1313(c), become enforceable maximum acceptable pollutant concentrations in ambient waters within that state.
On September 26, 2001, EPA announced the availability of its draft water quality criteria for atrazine. 66 FR 49186. EPA's draft water quality criteria state that freshwater aquatic life and their uses should not be affected unacceptably if the one-hour average atrazine concentration does not exceed 350 ug/L more than once every three hours on the average (acute criterion), and if the four-day average concentration of atrazine does not exceed 12 ug/L more than once every three years on the average (chronic criterion). EPA's draft water quality criteria further state that saltwater aquatic life and their uses should not be affected unacceptably if the one-hour average concentration does not exceed 760 ug/L more than once every three years on the average (acute criterion), and if the four-day average concentration of atrazine does not exceed 26 ug/L more than once every three years on the average (chronic criterion).
EPA's draft water quality criteria for atrazine were developed by EPA's Water Office. They were developed using different risk assessment methods than those used by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs in its ongoing review of atrazine under FIFRA and the FQPA. The atrazine draft water quality criteria differ from the atrazine Levels of Concern that EPA's Pesticides Office identified in its environmental risk assessment. EPA has acknowledged the need to harmonize the Agency's different methods of assessing atrazine risks. 66 FR 49186.
CRE's Position on Atrazine Water Quality Criteria
CRE believes that EPA should coordinate its FIFRA/FQPA review for atrazine with EPA's process for establishing water quality criteria to ensure Government-wide consistency in the regulation of atrazine. Inconsistent standards would cause significant implementation, compliance and enforcement problems.
EPA Further Acknowledges That Endocrine Effects Cannot Be Used As A Regulatory Endpoint For Atrazine
EPA has now published its response to public comment on EPA's Environmental Risk Assessment for
the Agency's FIFRA/FQPA re-registration review for atrazine. The public comment response reiterates EPA's conclusion in its IRED that endocrine effects cannot be regarded as a legitimate regulatory endpoint for atrazine at this time. In response to the Data Quality Act petition on this issue filed by the Triazine Network, the Kansas Corn Growers Association and CRE, EPA has revised the Environmental Risk Assessment to "clearly state that based on the existing data uncertainties, the chemical [atrazine] should be subject to more definitive testing once the appropriate testing protocols have been established."
Click here for EPA's Response to Comments (relevant pages are 18-20).
EPA Reaffirms Its Conclusion That Atrazine Is Not A Carcinogen
EPA recently published its response to public comment on the Agency's human health risk assessment for its FIFRA/FQPA re-registration review of atrazine. In its comment response document, EPA reaffirmed its conclusion that atrazine is not likely to be a human carcinogen. EPA also concluded that any apparent increase in prostate cancer at an atrazine manufacturing plant resulted from the manufacturer's intensive screening of all its workers, and not from atrazine exposure.
Click here for EPA's discussion of the cancer issue (relevant pages are 14-25, 62-65).
Click here for EPA memorandum analyzing prostate cancer at atrazine manufacturing facility.
|
