PESPWlRE The Monthly e-Bulletin of PESP | June 2010 PESP Member of the Month North American Pollinator Protection Campaign PESP Member since 2003 The mission of the North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (NAPPC) is to encourage the health of resident and migratory pollinating animals in North America. NAPPC has been an active PESP Member since 2003. In 2008, EPA recognized the NAPPC as a PESP Champion for its work on the local, national, and international level to conduct research and educate communities about creating a pollinator-friendly habitat. The major goal of this alliance of pollinator researchers, conservation and environmental groups, private industry, and state and federal agencies is to develop and implement an action plan to: Coordinate local, national, and international action proj- ects in the areas of pollinator research, education and awareness, conservation and restoration, policies and practices, and special partnership initiatives; Facilitate communication among stakeholders, build stra- tegic coalitions, and leverage existing resources; and Demonstrate a positive measurable impact on the populations and health of pollinating animals within five years. Since its founding, the NAPPC has been instrumental in focusing attention on the plight of pollinators and the need to protect them throughout the tri-national region comprised of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. Two such efforts were the NAPPC Strategic Planning Conferences at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, DC. These two conferences resulted in an ambitious but...Continued on page 2 | k I ational Pollinator weete -June 21-2.7S zo±o: | | 1^1 injust three years, Pollinator weete has | I grown to be an international celebrs?tk>i/u of the | | valuable ecosystem sen/Ices provided by bees, birds, | | butterflies, bats and beetles. Pollinating animals, are | | vital to our delicate ecosystem., s,u^orting terrestrial | | wildlife, providing healthy watershed, and more. | | Pollinator week, is, a way to share the message of the | | . - ' ."f ¦: 1I Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder Discovering a problem During the winter of 2006-2007, some beekeepers began to report unusually high losses of 30-90 percent of their hives. As many as 50 percent of all affected colonies demonstrated symptoms inconsistent with any known causes of honeybee death sudden loss of a colony's worker bee population with very few dead bees found near the colony. The queen and brood (young bees) remained, and the colonies had relatively abundant honey and pollen reserves. However, hives cannot sustain themselves without worker bees and eventually die. This combination of events resulting in the loss of a bee colony has been called Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). Although agricultural records from over a century ago note occasional bee "disappearances" and "dwindling" colonies in some years, it is uncertain whether the colonies had the same combination of factors associated with CCD. The most recent data for 2009 indicate that CCD is a continuing problem. Dead bees do not necessarily mean CCD Certain pesticides can kill bees if they are exposed to too much of these compounds. That is why we require instructions for protecting bees on the labels of pesticides that are known to be particularly harmful to bees. This is one of many reasons why everyone must read and follow pesticide label instructions. When most or all of the bees in a hive are killed by overexposure to a pesticide, we call that a bee kill incident resulting from acute pesticide poisoning. However, acute pesticide poisoning of a hive is very different from CCD and is almost always avoidable. There have been several incidents of acute poisoning of honeybees covered in the popular media in recent years, but sometimes these incidents are mistakenly associated with CCD. A common element of acute pesticide poisoning of bees is, literally, a pile of dead bees outside the hive entrance. With CCD, there are very few if any dead bees near the hive. Piles of dead bees are an indication that somebody failed to follow the EPA-approved label instructions. Continued on page 2... ~he numb&r of csmmerualli] manaaed Honetibee I 1 < ' \ \ , o! 1 r u,,,, ! colonies, m m& has aechnea -from svf million in the. ±54^3 to million 1 June 2010 www.epa.gov/pestwise/pesp ------- PESP News PESP Member of the Month: North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (Cont'd) vitally important and scientifically sound blueprint for pollinator protection. Research Identify threats to pollinators Document and evaluate pollinator populations and communities Evaluate impact of resource management practices on pollinators Increase understanding of socio-economic issues related to pollinators Education and Awareness Educate policy makers Educate policy makers Transfer technical information Increase general public awareness Educate and prepare the next generation Conservation and Restoration Manage lands to reduce habitat loss Reduce pollinator mortality due to improper pesticide use Increase resources for restoring pollinator populations and habitat policy practices Policy and Practices Increase resources for restoring pollinator populations and habitat Document existing best practices and encourage replica- tion Special Partnership Initiatives Create special partnerships to support scientific, economic and policy research Develop educational material and programs to reach targeted publics Promote private landowner incentives for implementing pollinator-friendly practices through regional and national agencies. NAPPC works in coordination with existing local, national, and international pollinator protection plans that focus on individual species, genera, families, or classes of animals. The Campaign also coordinates with existing projects that address specific pollinator habitats or migratory corridors. Such plans include but are not limited to Bat Conservation International's Management Plan, the Plant Conservation Alliance's Plan, and the Sao Paulo Declaration on Pollinators. NAPPC complements these and other pollinator conservation efforts. It focuses on pollinator protection throughout the tri- national region, and it addresses a variety of species including invertebrates, birds, and mammals. NAPPC will coordinate with existing pollinator protection plans to avoid duplication, leverage existing resources to maximize effectiveness, and where possible replicate proposals in new venues. The NAPPC Action Plan builds on scientific research concerning pollinators and pollinator habitats, and it seeks to promote and support additional pollinator research. Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder (Cont'd) Heavily diseased colonies also can exhibit large numbers of dead bees near the hive. Why it's happening There have been many theories about the cause of CCD. The researchers leading the effort to find out why are now focused on the following factors: increased losses due to the invasive varroa mite (a pest of honeybees); new or emerging diseases such as Israeli Acute Paralysis virus and the gut parasite Nosema; pesticide poisoning through exposure to pesticides ap- plied to crops or for in-hive insect or mite control; bee management stress; foraging habitat modification; inadequate forage/poor nutrition; and potential immune-suppressing stress on bees caused by one or a combination of the factors identified above. Additional factors might include drought and migratory stress brought about by the increased need to move bee colonies long distances to provide pollination services. What is being done The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is leading the Federal Government response to CCD. USDA has established a CCD Steering Committee with representatives from other government agencies, academia, beekeepers, professional organizations, and other stakeholders. EPA is an active participant in the CCD Steering Committee. The Steering Committee has developed the Colony Collapse Disorder Action Plan (PDF), which has four main components: 1. Survey/Data Collection to determine the extent of CCD and the current status of honeybee colony production and health; 2. Analysis of Bee Samples to determine the prevalence of various pests and pathogens, bee immunity and stress, and exposure to pesticides; 3. Hypothesis-Driven Research on four candidate factors including new and reemerging pathogens, bee pests, en- vironmental and nutritional stresses, and pesticides; and 4. Mitigative/Preventive Measures to improve bee health and habitat and to counter mortality factors. What EPA is doing While our longstanding regulatory requirements for pesticides are designed to protect beneficial insects such as bees, EPA historically has been more focused on pesticide impacts on the young adult forage bees. Since 2007 we have been looking at many different ways to improve pollinator protection. For example, EPA scientists are collaborating with USDA, the University of Maryland, and Pennsylvania State University on measuring pesticide residues in honey bees, wax, comb, and honey. Scientists at the Agency's Ft. Meade Lab are developing new analytical chemistry methodologies to measure residues of neonicotinoid pesticides at lower levels than was previously possible. EPA Contact: Tom Moriarty (moriarty.thomas@epa.gov) June 2010 2 www.epa.gov/pestwise/pesp ------- PESP News Continued Biopesticide Company Makes Case for Greater Use of Biopesticides on Earth Day AgraQuest Inc., of Davis, California, develops and manufactures innovative biological and low-chemical pest management solutions. On April 25th, 2010, AgraQuest Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Marcus Meadows-Smith discussed "Biopesticides in the Green Agricultural Revolution" at EPA's Celebration of the 40th anniversary of Earth Day and the founding of the Environmental Protection Agency. During his visit to the Nation's capitol, CEO Meadows-Smith met with legislators and other key stakeholders to U.S. agriculture and food production, and he highlighted the need for legislative support to expand the adoption of biopesticides in mainstream food production. During meetings with EPA officials, key trade associations, journalists, senior staffers of agriculture committees and Congressional staff, Meadows-Smith laid out his vision for expanding the Green Agricultural Revolution. "We sit at the convergence of demands - a growing population which must be fed, consumers who want diverse, healthy foods with low residue at affordable prices, and the need to protect and improve the environment which means a new sustainable, Green Ag approach is needed," said Meadows-Smith in his many conversations with legislators and staff. "We believe the best approach balances the use of innovative and effective biopesticides with the use of the best conventional pesticides to deliver maximum pest control and yield, while minimizing chemical residues and ensuring growers can comply with global maximum residue limits (MRLs) on food. At AgraQuest, we refer to this approach as "low chem" agriculture." In his meetings, Meadows-Smith challenged the legislators along three themes: A combination of regulatory, economic, and public policy mechanisms to expand the use of sustainable agri- cultural practices; A new "low-chem" or sustainable classification of produce, unique from organic, that recognizes the efforts of growers to produce high-yielding crops with much reduced pesticide residues; And, transparency of pesticide residue limits (MRLs) both within the U.S. and in export markets, so that Ameri- can growers can effectively complete in global food networks; To bring the Green Ag Revolution to life, Meadows-Smith urges action on these three challenges to accelerate development and adoption of effective biopesticides, enabling technology required to meet these challenges. During these sessions, specific future actions were defined and AgraQuest was invited to participate in upcoming discussions with key influencers like House and Senate Agriculture Committees, U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency to make further advancement along these three themes. Meadows- Smith said, "While we are envisioning how to feed the global population which is expected to exceed 9 billion in the next 40 years, we must recognize that the answer is a "low-chem" approach that uses the best technologies of biopesticides and conventional pesticides to maximize yields and minimize pesticide residues." For more detail, visit www.agraquest.mobi. | Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program (PESP) Re- | | gional Grants: EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), | | in coordination with the EPA Regional Offices, announces | | the availability of approximately $530,000 for assistance | | agreements to further the pesticide risk reduction goals of | | the Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program (PESP). | | Proposed projects must address implementation of integrat- | | ed pest management approaches that reduce the risks asso-| | ciated with pesticide use in an agricultural or non-agricultur-1 | al setting and demonstrate the importance and relevancy of| | the project to the goals of PESP. Proposals will be accepted| | through July 26, 201 0. For more information, please see | | http://epa.gov/pestwise/pesp/grants/index.html | June 2010 3 www.epa.gov/pestwise/pesp ------- Announcements e=£ National Tribal School Integrated Pest Management Training A National Tribal School Integrated Pest Management Train- ing will be held in Phoenix, AZ on July 20-21, 201 0. Arizona participants can receive 6 Office of Pest Management CEUs and 6 Arizona Department of Agriculture CEUs. A block of rooms are reserved under the name Tribal School IPM (mar- ket code: TRIBA) at the Grace Inn, 1 0831 South 51 st Street, Phoenix, AZ 85044-1700, 800-843-601 0 or 480-893-3000. Room rates are $55.00 per night plus tax. This includes a hot breakfast in the hotel's restaurant. The room block will be re- leased on June 1 9th and the rate is not guaranteed after this date. There is no cost to register for this training and space is limited, register at http://www.ncipmc.org/training/. iL" Online Pesticide Label Training to Improve Safety and Efficiency EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) has made new pesticide label training available online. The training was developed primarily for EPA staff who review and approve pesticide labels, but the material is also expected to be useful for pesticide safety educators and for pesticide industry employees who develop and submit labels to EPA. The pesticide label is one of EPA's most critical tools for managing pesticide risks, and the enforceability of labels is the cornerstone of EPA and State programs that assure users are in compliance with label directions and precautions. Since the safe and legal use of pesticides depends on following label instructions, EPA pesticide label reviewers are trained to apply four core principles: labels need to be consistent with Agency policies and regulations, enforceable, clear, and accurate. By sharing our pesticide label training online, EPA is helping improve pesticide safety and the efficiency of the pesticide label review process. This web-based training, which takes roughly three hours and includes four modules, is one of several OPP initiatives to improve label quality. It is intended as an introduction to basic principles and to identify the main resources available to label reviewers, particularly the recently updated Label Review Manual, which is also available to the public on-line. For more information, please see http://go.usa.gov/309. EPA Proposes New Permit Requirements for Pesticide Discharges: Action Would Reduce Amount of Pesticides Discharged and Protect America's Waters EPA is proposing a new permit requirement that would decrease the amount of pesticides discharged to our nation's waters and protect human health and the environment. This action is in response to an April 9, 2009 court decision that found that pesticide discharges to U.S. waters were pollutants, thus requiring a permit. The proposed permit, released for public comment and developed in collaboration with states, would require all operators to reduce pesticide discharges by using the lowest effective amount of pesticide, prevent leaks and spills, calibrate equipment and monitor for and report adverse incidents. Additional controls, such as integrated pest management practices, are built into the permit for operators who exceed an annual treatment area threshold. "EPA believes this draft permit strikes a balance between using pesticides to control pests and protecting human health and water quality," said Peter S. Silva, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Water. EPA estimates that the pesticide general permit will affect approximately 35,000 pesticide applicators nationally that perform approximately half a million pesticide applications annually. The agency's draft permit covers the following pesticide uses: (1) mosquito and other flying insect pest control; (2) aquatic weed and algae control; (3) aquatic nuisance animal control; and (4) forest canopy pest control. It does not cover terrestrial applications to control pests on agricultural crops or forest floors. EPA is soliciting public comment on whether additional use patterns should be covered by this general permit. The agency plans to finalize the permit in December 2010. It will take effect April 9, 201 1. Once finalized, the pesticide general permit wiii be used in states, territories, tribal lands, and federal facilities where EPA is the authorized permitting authority. In the remaining 44 states, states will issue the pesticide general permits. EPA has been working closely with these states to concurrently develop their permits. EPA will hold three public meetings, a public hearing and a webcast on the draft general permit to present the proposed requirements of the permit, the basis for those requirements and to answer questions. EPA will accept written comments on the draft permit for 45 days after publication in the Federal Register. More information on the draft permit: http://www. epa.gov/npdes Contact Information: Enesta Jones, jones.enesta@epa.gov, 202-564-7873, 202-564-4355. June 2010 4 www.epa.gov/ pestwise/pesp ------- Upcoming Conferences, Meetings, and Events 4th Annual National Value Added Agriculture Conservation in Action Tour 2010 Conference August 3, 201 0 June 27- 29, 2010 Williamsburg, Virginia Biloxi, Mississippi NPMA Carolinas/Mid-Atlantic Summer Conference 2010 American Nursery and Landscape Association Annual August 5-7, 201 0 Meeting Kiawah Island, South Carolina July 10-1 1, 2010 Columbus, Ohio Sustainable Agricultural Partnerships 2010 August 1 0 -1 1, 201 0 OFA Short Course San Francisco, California July 10-13 Columbus, Ohio Growing Power's National-International Urban & Small Farm Conference September 1 0 - 12, 201 0 2010 Soil and Water Conservation Society International Milwaukee, Wisconsin Annual Conference July 18 - 21, 2010 2010 USDA/IR-4 Food Use Workshop St. Louis, Missouri September 14-15, 2010 Summerlin, Nevada Academy 2010 July 22 - 24, 2010 BedBug University's North American Summit 2010 Orlando, Florida September 21 -22, 201 0 Chicago, Illinois International Society of Arboriculture Annual Meeting July 23-28, 2010 Association of School Building Officials Pre-Annual Chicago, Illinois Meeting IPM Workshop September 24, 201 0 International Conference on Pollinator Biology, Health Lake Buena Vista, Florida and Policy July 24 - 28, 2010 PestWorld 2010 University Park, Pennsylvania October 20-23, 2010 Honolulu, Hawaii Botany, 2010 July 31 -August 4 Providence, Rhode Island $ 95th Annual Ecological Society of America Meeting ^ fcr August 1 -6 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ------- Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) News EPA's Pollinator Protection Team and Strategic Plan Last year, EPA established a multidisciplinary Pollinator Protection Team. The team developed a strategic plan that reflects the importance of pollinators to human health and the environment. The plan lays out EPA's goals to advance the science, policy, and outreach around pollinator protection. A new web page summarizes what EPA is doing to ensure that pollinators are not subject to unreasonable adverse effects from exposure to pesticides. Pollinator Protection - Then & Now EPA's conventional approach for protecting pollinators has been to require studies to determine the toxicity of a compound and use pesticide labeling to require measures to mitigate any risk. Data required by EPA mostly looks at acute (short-term) effects of a pesticide on individual bees. Additional, long-term studies may be required if a pesticide appears to be very toxic to bees. EPA is re-examining its current testing requirements to determine if they provide the right kind of information to make regulatory decisions for the different ways bees may be exposed to pesticides. In 2007, EPA joined with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other stakeholders to form the CCD Steering Committee. EPA's re-examination of its testing requirements is part of its goal to protect pollinators, and is also a part of the USDA's Action Plan to investigate the causes of CCD. In reviewing current toxicity testing guidelines, the Agency is evaluating potential gaps in the current knowledge base, which if filled, could better inform our regulatory decisions. Since understanding of toxicity and potential exposure to pollinators from pesticides is not as advanced as it is for other wildlife species, the Pollinator Protection Team is working with researchers and other regulatory authorities to assess the state of regulatory testing requirements against the current state of knowledge. The Agency is developing methodologies to measure trace amounts of pesticide residues in bees, wax, and pollen to determine levels of exposure to honeybees. USDA and land grant universities are using these methodologies to measure pesticide levels in bees and in the hive. In addition, EPA is evaluating the state of the science for testing toxic effects of pesticides on honey bees at low levels of pesticide exposure. Development of methods to assess effects at low levels of exposure would complement toxicity information currently obtained from acute studies that use higher pesticide doses. Working with its partners and using the best available scientific methods, EPA will aim to advance testing requirements to support well-informed regulatory decisions. To mitigate risks to bees, the Agency typically relies upon pesticide product labels to reduce risk by reducing potential exposure. For example, EPA may require that a pesticide label caution pesticide users against applying the products when crops, flowers, or weeds are in bloom and bees are in the area and/or to limit applications to early morning or evening when bees are not foraging. A key element of the Pollinator Protection Team's focus is on examining risk management approaches to protect pollinators. The Pollinator Team meets with key stakeholders- representatives of the American Beekeeping Federation and National Honey Board, researchers in academia, representatives of national and international government organizations, and other stakeholders - to better understand the challenges and potential approaches to managing risks to pollinators. Pollinator Protection Strategic Plan Because of the complexity and far-reaching implications of pollinator issues, EPA's Pollinator Protection Team has developed a strategic plan to help coordinate and organize our efforts. The pollinator protection strategic plan identifies three main goals for guiding the EPA's work and direction in protecting pollinators in the years ahead: Advancing the Agency's scientific knowledge and as- sessment of potential pesticide risks to pollinator; Improving risk management tools for mitigating poten- tial risks to pollinators; and, Increasing and broadening EPA's collaboration and communication with governmental and non-governmental organizations and the public in addressing pollinator is- sues. Some of the activities that are currently being implemented under EPA's pollinator protection strategic plan include: Science Developing more comprehensive testing protocols for evaluating potential sub-lethal and chronic effects of pesticides to brood and adult honey bees under both laboratory and field conditions. Exploring the feasibility of sponsoring an international conference in 2010 designed to address risk assessment processes for evaluating the potential effects of systemic pesticides on bees and the data necessary to inform that process. Conducting a survey of member countries of the Or- ganization for Economic Cooperation and Development to determine the extent to which CCD may be occurring globally, the extent to which these countries have infor- mation that pesticides may be related to these sudden declines, and what mitigation measures are being em- ployed to reduce sudden pollinator losses. Establishing a process for beekeepers to report bee kill incidents directly to EPA. Only through accurate re- porting of field effects can the Agency assess the poten- tial effects that pesticides may be having on beekeeping operations. Risk Management Developing a risk management tool box for pollinator protection. Coordination and Outreach Enhancing communications with stakeholders, through meetings, conference calls, and other communication with beekeepers, environmental and public interest groups, and others. Working with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (Cal DPR) on its re-evaluation of and data re- quirements for certain neonicotinoid insecticides. EPA, Cal DPR, and the Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency are working together to develop protocols and analyze the data provided in response to the California re-evaluation. Coordinating with USDA and others to explore habitat June 2010 6 www.epa.gov/pestwise/pesp ------- Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) News conservation for pollinators. For More Information: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ ecosystem/pollinator-protection.html Registration Review Schedule EPA has issued an updated schedule for the registration review program, the periodic review of all registered pesticides mandated by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The registration review schedule for FY 2010 to 2013 reflects EPA's decision to review all pesticides in two additional groups - the fumigants and the triazines - within the same time frame. Web site: The updated Schedule for Beginning Reviews and an explanation of the schedule are at http://www. epa.gov/oppsrrd 1 / registration_review/schedule.htm. Information about the status of individual pesticides in registration review is at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrdl/ registration_review/reg_review_status.htm. Information about the registration review program is at http://www. epa.gov/oppsrrdl /registration_review/index.htm The updated schedule provides the timetable for opening public dockets for the next four years of the registration review program, from fiscal year (FY) 201 0 to 201 3, and includes information on dockets that opened in FY 2007 through FY 2009. The schedule reflects the Agency's plan to continue to open about 70 new dockets each year through 2017. Following this schedule, EPA will complete the first 1 5-year cycle of registration review by October 1, 2022, for all pesticides registered as of October 1, 2007. The registration review schedule for FY 2010 to 2013 reflects EPA's decision to review all pesticides in two additional groups the fumigants and the triazines - within the same time frame. In recent years, the Agency moved the fumigants and triazines ahead in the schedule so that dockets for all pesticides in these groups will open in FY 201 3. While EPA is implementing risk mitigation decisions for the soil fumigants, new research is underway to address current data gaps and to refine the understanding of factors that affect how fumigants move in the environment. New methods and technologies for fumigation are emerging. By moving the soil fumigants forward in registration review from 2017 to 2013, the Agency will be able to consider new data and new technologies sooner, determine whether mitigation included in its decisions is effectively addressing risks as EPA believes it will, and include other fumigants that were not part of the reregistration review of these pesticides. EPA Moves to Terminate All Uses of Insecticide Endosulfan to Protect Health of Farmworkers and Wildlife The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking action to end all uses of the insecticide endosulfan in the United States. Endosulfan, which is used on vegetables, fruits, and cotton, can pose unacceptable neurological and reproductive risks to farmworkers and wildlife and can persist in the environment. New data generated in response to the agency's 2002 decision have shown that risks faced by workers are greater than previously known. EPA also finds that there are risks above the agency's level of concern to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife, as well as to birds and mammals that consume aquatic prey which have ingested endosulfan. Farmworkers can be exposed to endosulfan through inhalation and contact with the skin. Endosulfan is used on a very small percentage of the U.S. food supply and does not present a risk to human health from dietary exposure. Makhteshim Agan of North America, the manufacturer of endosulfan, is in discussions with EPA to voluntarily terminate all endosulfan uses. EPA is currently working out the details of the decision that will eliminate all endosulfan uses, while incorporating consideration of the needs for growers to timely move to lower-risk pest control practices. Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA must consider endosulfan's risks and benefits. While EPA implemented various restrictions in a 2002 re-registration decision, EPA's phaseout is based on new data and scientific peer review, which have improved EPA's assessment of the ecological and worker risks from endosulfan. EPA's 201 0 revised ecological risk assessment reflects a comprehensive review of all available exposure and ecological effects information for endosulfan, including independent external peer-reviewed recommendations made by the endosulfan Scientific Advisory Panel. Endosulfan, an organochlorine insecticide first registered in the 1 950s, also is used on ornamental shrubs, trees, and herbaceous plants. It has no residential uses. For more information: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/ endosulfan/endosulfan-cancl-fs.html Pesticide Program Grant Will Advance Environmental Justice The Office of Pesticide Programs has published online a request seeking proposals to support the Pesticides and National Strategies for Healthcare Providers, Clinical Training Program. This Clinical Training Program grant will help further EPA's dedication to Environmental Justice by training clinicians and other stakeholders in the agricultural and medical community to recognize and manage pesticide-related health conditions. Our investment of up to $1.2 million over five years will improve care of farmworkers and their families, as this community is generally understood to be medically underserved and therefore at greater likelihood to have exposure incidents and illnesses that go undetected. Proposals will be accepted through July 26, 2010. For more information on the Clinical Training Program grant, please see http://go.usa.gov/3Ud. June 2010 7 www.epa.gov/pestwise/pesp ------- Grant Opportunities ¦rfc Close Date Grant Title Agency/Organization Funding Number Letters of Inquiry New Insecticides for Malaria FNIH N/A (LOI) due June 25, Control 2010 Application due August 27, 2010 June 29, 2010 Agriculture and Food Research Initiative - Global Food Security USDA-NIFA-AFRI USDA-NIFA-AFRI-003041 July 1, 2010 Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program - Organic Transitions (ORG) USDA-MIFA-ICGP USDA-NIFA-ICGP-00321 8 July 6, 201 0 Expert Integrated Pest Management Decision Support System USDA-NIFA USDA-NIFA-SRGP-00321 9 July 16, 2010 Agriculture and Food Research Initiative - Climate Change USDA-NIFA-AFRI USDA-NIFA-AFRI-003038 July 23, 2010 Pesticide Environmental Stewartship Program (PESP) Regional Grants US EPA EPA-OPP-10-005 August 2, 201 0 Core Fulbright Scholar Program Council for International Exchange of Scholars Council for International Exchange of Scholars August 1 1, 2010 Agriculture and Food Research Initiative - Global Food Security USDA-NIFA-AFRI USDA-NIFA-AFRI-003041 August 23, 2010 Agriculture and Food Research Initiative - Foundational Programs USDA-NIFA-AFRI USDA-N1FA-AFRI-003040 September 1 5, 201 0 Agriculture and Food Research Initiative - Sustainable Bioenergy USDA-NIFA-AFRI USDA-NIFA-AFRI-003042 September 29, 201 0 Environmental Training for US Fish and Wildlife US Fish and Wildlife Youths Service Service Ongoing Federal Funding Opportunities for Emerald Ash Borer Research USDA - APHIS - PPQ EAB N/A Ongoing Environmental Quality Incentives Program USDA- NRCS N/A Until Funds Exhaust IPM Minigrants Program North Central IPM Center N/A Ongoing Special Issues in the West Western IPM Center N/A Ongoing SARE Grant Opportunities North Central Region SARE N/A Ongoing SARE Grant Opportunities Northeast Region SARE N/A Ongoing SARE Grant Opportunities Southern Region SARE N/A Ongoing SARE Grant Opportunities Western Region SARE N/A M p*s 11 ^¦ajf TV, *.Tl. V Z. 4k. . 1M P-«- June 2010 www.epa.gov/pestwise/pesp ------- |