N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
PESTIC IDE AC T ION NETW ORK NOR TH AM ER IC A; e t a l., Pe titione rs, v. U.S. ENVIR ONM ENTAL PR OTEC TION AGENC Y, R

e sponde n t . No. 14-71514

M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the Environm e nta l Prote c tion Age nc y Argue d a nd Subm itte d M ay 9, 2016 San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : WARDLAW , PAEZ, a nd B EA, C irc uit Judge s. Pe stic ide Ac tion Ne twork North Am e ric a , Unite d Farm W o rke rs, a

n d Pine ros y C am pe sinos Unidos de l Noroe s te (“ Pe t itione rs” ) pe tition for re v ie w of the E nvironm e nta l Prote c t ion Age nc y ’ s (“ EPA” ) partia l de nia l of the ir a dm inistra

tive pe tition, “ Pe stic i de s in theAir – Kids a t R isk: Pe tition to the

EPA to 

# FIL ED JUL 05 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.Prote c t C hildre n from Pe stic ide Drift.” W e hav e jurisdic tion unde r 7 U.S.C . §136n(b). TheEPA’ s orde r “ sha ll be susta ine d if it is supporte d by substa ntia l e vide nc e whe n c onside re d on the re c ord a s a whole .” Id. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the EPA’ s de c ision to deny

Pe titione rs’ re que s t tha

t the EPA “ i m

m e diate ly a dopt inte rim prohibitions on the use of toxic drift-prone pe stic ide s suc h a s orga nophospha

te s a nd n-m e thy l c arbam at e s ne ar hom e s, sc hools, pa

rks, a nd da y c are c e nte rs or whe re ve r c hildre n c ongre gate .” Vie we d a s a whole , the re c ord a de quate ly supports the

EPA’ s c onc lusion tha

t the im position of uniform

buffe r z one s is not the

m ost “ sc ie ntific a lly

a ppropria t e ” m e thod for m itiga

ting the risk of e xposure to pe stic ide drift. The re c ord ge ne ra lly

sugge sts tha

t the risk of e xposure to pe stic ide drift de pe nds on a

num be r of fa c tors, inc l uding pe stic ide toxic ity , the m e thod of pe stic ide a

p plic ation, thesiz e of pe stic ide drople ts, a nd we athe r c onditions. B a se d on this e vide nc e , the EPA c ould re a s ona b ly c onc lude tha

t Pe titione rs’ proposa l of uniform buffe r z one s for a la rge num be r of pe s tic i de s would not a de quate ly a ddre s s the va

ria ble risk of e xposure to pe stic ide drift without unne c e ssa rily c urta iling som e s a fe pe stic ide use . Pe titione rs did not re que st a ny inte rim re lie f ta ilore d to pre ve n t de m onstra t e d drift by

spe c i fic pe stic ide s, a

nd thus Pe titione rs’ e vide nc e tha

t som e unsa fe pe s tic ide drift oc c urs doe s not e sta blish tha t the EPA’ s -2-orde r wa s unsupporte d by substa ntia l e vide nc e . M ore ove r, to re quire the im m e diate im

position of uniform

buffe r z one s would like ly dive rt lim ite d a ge nc y re sourc e s from

the risk a sse ssm e nt proc e s s a nd disrupt the

EPA’ s e sta

blishe d proc e s s for e va luating thesa fe t y of pe stic ide re g i strations a nd tole ranc e s. The re fore , substa

ntia l e vide nc e supports the EPA’ s de te rm ination tha t, a s a m atte r of sc i e nc e and polic y , the im m e diate im

position of inte

rim buffe r z one s is not a

n a ppropria te m e ans of m itiga

ting therisk of c hildre n’ s e xposure to pe stic ide drift. 1 PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

1 The Food Qua l ity

Prote c tion Ac t of 1996 re quire d the EPA to de te rm ine e a c h food-use pe stic ide ’ s e ligibility for re re gistra

tion a nd to re vie w the sa fe ty

of a ll food-use pe stic ide tole ranc e s or e xe m ptions by August 3, 2006. Se e 7 U.S.C . § 136a -1(g)(2)(A)(i); 21 U.S.C . § 346a (q)(1)(C ). W e la c k jurisdic tion to re vie w the s e re re gistra

tion a nd tole ranc e de te rm i nations, a s any c ha lle nge to the se de te rm i nations would be

tim e -barre d. Se e 7 U.S.C . § 136n(b); 21 U.S.C . § 346a (h)(1). In a ddition, this pe tition is m

oot a s to a

ny pe stic ide s for whic h the EPA ha s a lre a dy

m a d e fina l re re gistra

t ion re v ie w de te rm inations a nd to a ny pe stic ide s for whic h the EPA ha s a lre a dy im pose d inte rim

no-spra y buffe r z one s, suc h a s c hlorpy

rifos. -3-