1. Update on EPA’s Pollinator Protection Efforts
North American Beekeeping Conference
January 2017
Rick Keigwin
Office of Pesticide Programs
US Environmental Protection Agency
Thank you. It is very nice to be here. In particular, I want to thank Gene Brandi for inviting me back to be with all of you again.

2. Presentation Outline
Efforts Under the National Pollinator Health Strategy
Acute Risk Mitigation Policy
Status of the Neonicotinoid Re-evaluation
Questions
I know I only have about 20 minutes, so I’m going to try to do this quickly to allow some time for questions. I will be here for most of the morning and will be happy to answer questions after my talk.

3. EPA’s Efforts Under the National Pollinator Health Strategy

4. EPA’s Efforts Under the National Pollinator Health Strategy
Assess effects of pesticides on bees & other pollinators
Expedite registration of new products to control varroa mites
Encourage pollinator protection and habitat plantings in green infrastructure and Superfund projects, and, enhance pollinator habitat at EPA-owned facilities
Varroa control products: no new modes of actions pending review
Site assessments at all EPA-owned facilities
Inventory of resident pollinators
IPM and IVM programs that address pollinator protection and promote stable, pollinator-friendly plant communities
Edison Electric MOU: EPA, DOI, DOE

5. Assess effects of pesticides
Prioritized chemicals for higher-tiered testing
Initiated rulemaking to codify tiered acute and chronic data requirements
Hosted a workshop on Non-Apis Bee Exposure
Continuing to assess new and existing active ingredients utilizing the pollinator risk assessment framework
Workshop held this week in Arlington, VA
Representation from a broad set of stakeholders
Identified potential surrogates for use in risk assessment
Ranked routes of exposures to determine the extent to which honey bees are a protective means for evaluating exposure
Discussed the available data for model parameterization
Identified further research needs

6. Acute Risk Mitigation Policy

7. Managed Pollinator Protection Plans
MP3 Symposium held March 2016
Sessions focused on: objectives/lessons learned; effectiveness of MP3s; engaging stakeholders; tools for tracking and mapping
Majority of states have implemented, are developing or planning to develop an MP3
Formed workgroup under the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee to provide input on performance metrics
Co-sponsored with NASDA, HBHC, USDA, and EPA
48 states have either developed plans or have plans in development; Several tribes also have MP3’s under development
94% of survey respondents said that the symposium was a high value experience
Majority of survey respondents said that MP3s will address pollinator health concerns

8. Acute Risk Mitigation Policy
Utilizes a quantitative risk approach
Risk Quotient > 0.4 (based on contact exposure)
Liquid/dust formulations
Foliar exposure to a crop that may utilize contract pollination
Exceptions:
Products with short residual toxicity times
Crops with extended bloom periods
Response to stakeholder feedback to provide more flexibility to growers to meet their pest management needs.
Exceptions were developed to allow applications of certain products during hours when bees are less likely to be foraging

9. Acute Risk Mitigation Policy
FOR FOLIAR APPLICATIONS OF THIS PRODUCT TO A CROP WHERE BEES ARE UNDER CONTRACT TO POLLINATE THAT CROP: Foliar application of this product is prohibited to a crop from onset of flowering until flowering is complete when bees are under contract for pollination services to that crop unless the application is made to prevent or control a threat to public health and/or animal health as determined by a state, tribal, authorized local health department, or vector control agency.
Made changes to clarify that the policy applies when 3 conditions are met
The target crop is flowering
The target crops of the application is the target crop of the pollination services
A contract exists between the grower and the beekeeper
The revised policy also includes a discussion of certain terms:
Onset of flowering
Until flowering is complete
Bees are under contract

10. Acute Risk Mitigation Policy
Environmental Hazard Language for Pollinating Insects:
This product is [moderately/highly] toxic to bees and other pollinating insects exposed to direct treatment or to residues in/on blooming crops or weeds. Protect pollinating insects by following label directions intended to minimize drift and reduce pesticide risk to these organisms.
Also received comments about the current environmental hazards statement. Concerns raised that the current language could lead to confusion and/or impact efforts to enforce the label.
A key purpose of the environmental hazards statement is to provide general information; restrictions should be in the Directions for Use section.

11. Acute Risk Mitigation Policy
Exception: Indeterminate Blooming Crops
The application is being made to an indeterminate blooming crop in the time between 2-hours prior to sunset and sunrise; OR
The application is being made to an indeterminate blooming crop at a time when the temperature at the application site is 50oF or less.
Exception: Products with short residual toxicity times
The application is made with a product with an residual toxicity time less than 6 hours (RT25 < 6) and the application is made in the time between 2-hours prior to sunset but not less than 8 hours prior to sunrise.

12. Acute Risk Mitigation Policy
Implementation
Group 1: Active ingredients with LD50 < 11µg/bee
Group 2: Active ingredients with LD50 > 11µg/bee
Implicated in beekills and/or
Residues found in pollen and/or wax
Group 3: All other active ingredients
Over the next 4 months, letters will be sent to registrants of active ingredients in Group 1. The final policy lists the active ingredients in Group 1. Registrants will have the option to lower the application rates to bring the risk quotient below 0.4.

13. Status of the Neonicotinoid Re-evaluation

14. Imidacloprid, Clothianidin, Thiamethoxam, and Dinotefuran
Released the aquatic risk assessment
Dinotefuran
Released a Tier 1 pollinator risk assessment
Clothianidin and thiamethoxam
Released a preliminary pollinator risk assessment
Assessments are now available; comment periods will begin in the near future.
Combined clothianidin and thiamethoxam into a single risk assessment because the toxicities and use patterns are similar

15. Dinotefuran Preliminary Pollinator Risk Assessment
Some use patterns have low on-field risk
Based on attractiveness and agronomic practices
Similar to those identified for other neonicotinoids
Acute and chronic adult risk quotient exceedances for:
Default Tier I: All other use patterns
Refined Tier I: Most use patterns where residue data are available

16. Clothianidin and Thiamethoxam Preliminary Pollinator Risk Assessments
Low On-Field Risks for:
Root and tuber vegetables
Bulb vegetables
Leafy vegetables
Brassica leafy vegetables
Tobacco
Artichoke
Tomato
Low On-Field Risks for:
Seed treatments
Corn
Cotton
Soybean
Canola
Sunflower
Soil treatment of corn
Conclusions based on
Low crop attractiveness
Crop is harvested prior to bloom
Flowering crop is not attractive to honey bees
Refined Tier I Assessment
Tier II assessment
Foraging behavior of bees

17. Clothianidin and Thiamethoxam Preliminary Pollinator Risk Assessments
Potential On-Field Risks for:
Foliar
Cotton (both)
Cucurbits (both)
Berries (thiamethoxam only)
Stone fruit (thiamethoxam only)
Soil
Citrus (both)
Conclusions based on:
Empirical residue data
Refined Tier assessments
Colony level impacts due to contaminated nectar (alone) and bee bread (pollen + nectar)
Incident information

18. Next Steps in the Neonicotinoid Re-evaluation
January 2017
Imidacloprid aquatic risk assessment
Clothianidin, Thiamethoxam, and Dinotefuran preliminary pollinator assessments
Fall 2017: Clothianidin, Thiamethoxam, and Dinotefuran
Draft ecological risk assessments
Spring/Summer 2018: All Neonicotinoids
Revised pollinator/ecological risk assessments
Proposed interim registration review decisions
Winter 2018/2019: All Neonicotinoids
Interim registration review decisions
Plan is to better align all of the assessments, since in many cases the chemicals are substitutes for each other

19. Questions