As registrants seek defensible decisions from the EPA and the Services, there is an imperative to structure both an integrated regulatory process and an effective mitigation implementation program. An integrated registration and consultation process aligns up front conservation commitments with the ESA Section 7 regulations through the quantification of residual, unavoidable effects (i.e., incidental take) and the resultant exemption from incidental take under Section 7. This effort includes coordinating with Section 7 applicants to quantify residual, unavoidable effects to determine appropriate conservation measures on a per-product registration basis, and ultimately scales up across all registrations. A programmatic consultation framework and an Interagency Review Team (IRT) process can streamline the compliance coordination across all registrations.<br/> <br/>While approved avoidance and minimization measures are communicated via the product label, as well as agency and grower communications platforms, any formal conservation offset commitments agreed to in the Final Biological Opinion, must be implemented by the respective registrant. While the agencies are responsible for an effective regulatory process, registrants similarly should consider how they can effectively meet their respective offset commitments through an implementation program thus ensuring legally defensible registrations. A privately administered Mitigation Implementation Entity (MIE) and funding structure for the delivery of conservation offset obligations offers potential for meeting this long-term industry need in a proportional and equitable fashion. Under an MIE, an account would be generated for each registration, possibly funded through a portion of product sales, to cover the apportioned costs of the conservation offset commitments made in the respective Biological Opinions. The MIE would provide a structure for how multiple registrants in a common geography with overlapping impacts to the same species share the costs of ESA compliance while meeting regulatory standards and providing long-term management assurances. This approach may be established in parallel with an integrated process, so registrants could predict potential, future obligations in the early stages of the registration and reregistration process. Through continued collaboration and innovative leadership, the regulating and regulated communities can achieve defensible decisions and meaningful conservation outcomes.

Conservation that counts: Scaling up the FIFRA-ESA consultation process and implementation of offsets across space, time, and registration actions

Fall 2022 abstracts, posters, and presentations will launch in mid-September.

ACS Fall 2022

The official archive and repository for all ACS Meetings & Expositions abstracts and select posters or presentations.