|
|
March 29, 2002 EPA Memo
Important note: The following document was scanned from
a fax and converted using OCR technology. Some
editing of obvious errors was done, but slight typographical errors may have
occurred in the process, which may have been overlooked.
At least one illegible signature was in the document and could not be
converted (Michael? Somethingerother who signed on behalf of Sylvia K. Lowrance). UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20460 MAR 2 9 2002 OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE MEMORANDUM SUBJECT:
Extension of Memorandum Regarding the Application of Pesticides to Waters of the United States, dated May 31, 2001 FROM:
Sylvia K. Lowrance, Acting Assistant Administrator TO:
Regional Administrators, Regions I – X On May 31, 2001, the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance (OECA) issued a memorandum stating that civil
enforcement under the Clean Water Act (CWA) for any direct application of
pesticides to waters of the United States would be a low enforcement priority
provided certain conditions intended to ensure appropriate protection of human
health and the environment were met. We are continuing that low enforcement
priority here. Today, the Office of Water, the Office of
Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, and the Office of General Counsel
jointly issued a memorandum titled Interpretative Statement and Regional
Guidance on the Clean Water Act’s Exemption for Return Flow from Irrigated
Agriculture (Interpretive Statement) that addresses the application of
aquatic herbicides in a manner consistent with a Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) label to ensure passage of irrigation return flows.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to work on how to best
address CWA and FIFRA requirements for other direct pesticide applications to
waters of the United States. OECA will continue to implement its
enforcement activities as discussed in the original memorandum of May 31, 2001,
for all direct pesticide applications to waters of the United States not
addressed in today’s Interpretive Statement. This will allow EPA additional
time to determine how to best address CWA and FIFRA requirements for those other
direct pesticide applications to waters of the United States and ensure that
vital pesticide application activities such as disease vector and invasive
species control are not disrupted. Internet
Address (URL) • http:IIwww.epa.gov
2. This low
enforcement priority will remain in effect until March 31, 2003. At that time,
we will again review EPA’s efforts to address direct pesticide applications to
waters of the United States and determine whether to continue this priority. If you have any
questions regarding this matter, please contact Connie Musgrove, Acting.
Director of the Office of Regulatory Enforcement, Mark Pollins, Director of the
Water Enforcement
Division, or Tom Charlton of their staff at (202) 564-6960. cc:
G. Tracy Mehan, III, Assistant Administrator, Office of Water Stephen L.
Johnson, Assistant Administrator, Office
of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances Robert E.
Fabricant, General Counsel, Office of General Counsel |