Carbaryl, Carbofuran, and Methomyl - National Marine Fisheries ...

On that same date, EPA e-mailed NMFS information on the voluntary cancellation of
carbofuran. NMFS replied to EPA’s message and reminded EPA of NMFS questions
raised in a February 3, 2009, e-mail regarding uses of carbofuran.
On March 24, 2009, EPA notified NMFS via e-mail of receipt of the cd containing the
word versions of a complete draft Opinion and separate RPA document.
On March 30, 2009, EPA and NMFS confirmed their availability to meet with the three
identified applicants for this consultation on April 7, 2009.
On April 7, 2009, EPA, NMFS, and the applicants met at EPA’s office in Crystal
City, VA. NMFS presented its assessment and conclusions on the draft Opinion. The
applicants provided a combined presentation on their general and specific comments on
NMFS’ draft Opinion. Afterwards, all parties discussed potential Reasonable and
Prudent Alternatives (RPAs) as NMFS concluded that EPA’s proposed action will likely
result in jeopardy of listed species and adverse modification of critical habitat for listed
Pacific salmonids under NMFS’ jurisdiction.
On that same date, NMFS and EPA discussed RPAs for this consultation and for NMFS’
November 18, 2008, Opinion for chlorpyrifos, diazinon, and malathion.
On April 9, 2009, NMFS received copies of the three presentations made by the
applicants at the April 7, 2009, meeting.
On April 10, 2009, NMFS received written comments from EPA on the March 18, 2009
draft Opinion for carbaryl, carbofuran, and methomyl. On that same date, NMFS
received comments on the draft Opinion from Bayer CropScience on carbaryl and from
DuPont on methomyl.
On April 15, 2009, NMFS received additional comments from Bayer CropScience on the
draft Opinion.
15