Document 0gqdyDO69DGGKyqjZzovX5YGV

Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Bennett, Tate [/0=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=1FA92542F7CA4D01973B18B2F11B9141-BENNETT, EL] 10/2/2017 3:13:41 PM Ethan Mathews [emathews@croplifeamerica.org] Beck, Nancy [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=168ecb5184ac44de95a913297f353745-Beck, Nancy]; Lyons, Troy [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=15e4881c95044ab49c6c35a0f5eef67e-Lyons, Troy] RE: PRIA question info Thanks, we will be in touch with the committee on the best way to handle these questions. Our position is the same as it was the other week. From: Ethan Mathews [mailto:emathews@croplifeamerica.org] Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 10:50 AM To: Bennett, Tate <Bennett.Tate@epa.gov> Subject: PRIA question info Tate - Below is information on PRIA which we expect to be asked of Dr. Dourson at the hearing on Wednesday 10/4. If you have any questions or need additional info please do not hesitate to reach out. Ethan PRIA/OPP Funding Question The Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) was first enacted in 2003 and established a fee schedule for pesticide registration requests. It lists specific decision time periods for EPA to make a regulatory decision on pesticide registration and tolerance actions submitted to the Agency. The goal of PRIA was to create a more predictable and effective evaluation system for affected pesticide decisions and couple the collection of individual fees with specific decision review periods. It also promoted shorter decision review periods for reduced-risk applications. It has been tremendously successful, providing hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to EPA and providing product developers with clarity on timelines for agency actions and facilitating investment in research and development of new products. Importantly, it also has provided $1 million annually in worker protection and pesticide safety training, funded by industry fees. PRIA has been reauthorized twice since it was first enacted - in 2007 and 2012 - each time by unanimous consent. It has been supported by large and small manufacturers of agricultural and non-agricultural products, antimicrobial products, biotech companies, and biopesticides, as well as labor and environmental advocates. The current law expired on September 30, 2017. HR 1029, the Pesticide Registration Enhancement Act, which would reauthorize these authorities passed the House on March 20, 2017 and was reported by the Senate Agriculture Committee on June 29, 2017. What would the impact be to worker protection programs if PRIA is not reauthorized? Answer: The $1 million annually that goes to program funding for worker protection safety and training - largely in cooperation with State Departments of Agriculture and Cooperative Extension Service - would Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 3/4 ED 002061 00041957-00001 cease. Therefore those programs would either have to be funded with other EPA funds (difficult in a time of shrinking budgets), funded by our state partners, or terminated. What would the impact be to EPA if PRIA is not reauthorized? Answer: The loss of maintenance and registration fees would result in the elimination of 200 full-time-equivalent positions in EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs. The authority to collect product maintenance fees expires on 9/30/2017, resulting in an annual loss of resources of $27.8 million. However, EPA's obligation to conduct registration review continues. Without additional resources, it will be impossible for EPA to comply with the 2022 review deadline. New registration applications submitted after 9/30/2017 have no completion deadlines. Companies will face tremendous uncertainty about whether to make new R&D investment in new products. Ethan Mathews Director of Government Affairs CropLife America emathews@croplifeamerica.org Ex. 6 Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 3/4 ED 002061 00041957-00002