Future Use: Use of FESTF-generated Proximity Analyses for Listed Species Effects Determination
May 10, 2011
SUBJECT: Future Use: Use of FESTF-generated Proximity Analyses for Listed Species Effects Determination
FROM: Donald J. Brady, Ph.D., Director, Environmental Fate and Effects Division
TO: All Managers and Staff of the Environmental Fate and Effects Division
Effective immediately, this guidance provides information on how to account for future use of a pesticide when using FESTF-generated Proximity Analyses as part of a Listed Species Effects Determination.
In conducting listed species effects determinations for consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service (the "Services"), EFED risk assessors may be using proximity analyses generated by Compliance Services International, Inc. (CSI), a contractor to the industry group known as the Federal Endangered Species Task Force (FESTF). A proximity analysis is a product of a geographic information system (GIS) analysis that determines the distance between the locations of listed species (EO or element occurrence) and the types of land on which pesticides may be used, such as cultivated cropland or National Land Cover Database, NLCD category 82.
The proximity analyses currently supplied by CSI use data from the National Agricultural Statistics Survey (NASS) to limit the analysis to those counties in which the crops registered for the active ingredient of interest have been grown in the past three survey cycles (15 years). This implicitly creates a list of "excluded" counties, which do not appear in the NASS surveys. In order to account for "future use," as agreed with the Services, it is necessary for EFED risk assessors to determine if the appropriate NLCD land-cover type exists in counties excluded from the FESTF analysis. If appropriate land-cover types are found in the excluded counties, the applicable taxon-specific effects determination (May Affect or No Effect) is also applied to listed species in the excluded counties.
Other lines of evidence are then applied to determine if the determination is Likely to Adversely Affect (LAA) or Not Likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA). A finding of NLAA is appropriate if the currently-registered crops are unlikely to be grown in the excluded counties.
If you have questions regarding this guidance which is effective immediately, please contact William Eckel or other members of the Endangered Species Reregistration Workgroup.
Endangered Species Reregistration Workgroup
David Bays, AD
Shannon Borges, BPPD
James Breithaupt, AD
Mark Corbin, EFED
Kevin Costello, PRD
William Eckel, EFED
Catherine Eiden, PRD
Melissa Grable, EFED
Mark J. Huff, EFED
Stephanie Irene, EFED
Russell Jones, BPPD
Stephen Morrill, BPPD
Edward Odenkirchen, EFED (Co-Chair)
Melissa Panger, EFED
Anita Pease, EFED
Mohammed Ruhman, EFED
Dana Spatz, EFED
Thomas Steeger, EFED
Ingrid Sunzenauer, EFED (Co-Chair)
Michelle Thawley, EFED
Zigfridas Vaituzis, BPPD
Katrina White, EFED