Development of Endangered Species 

Proximity Tool – Registration Review Focus

EPA Potomac Yard 1, April 22 2014

Scott H. Jackson, Ph.D.

Regulatory Technical Stewardship & Sustainability

1
Introduction

 Preliminary effects determination by taxa table.

 Screening assessment identifies May Affect (next slide) ... 

 One approach to refining number of chemical/species interactions might 

be through biological exclusions. 

 GIS analysis intensive 

 Greatly reduces (eliminates?) species of concern

 Alternatively;

 Filtering – we think this will eliminate many May Affect situations.

 A step after filtering might be a simple proximity approach.

2
Example Preliminary Effects 

Determination

3

(Filters covered by Moore, Brain, others today)

Edge of field
GIS/EO Exclusions 

 Biological exclusions by species in theory eliminate chemical/species 

interactions by identifying species where there is no overlap with chemical 

use. 

Associated challenges:

obtain resolution that would be commercially acceptable 

determining mutually acceptable proximity datasets 

 There may be alternative approaches to achieve the same intent

4
 Use: Grass for Seed

 Location: Western Oregon

Use Site (field) Proximity Analysis to 

Endangered Species for Grass for Seed

“Use Site” = Field

440 EO’s

5
Results – From 4 Proposed Methods, 

6

442 EO’s total

We eliminated few EO’s from Proximity!
Where are fields? What are they planted 

to? What are they next to?

7

Simple thought – the best way to know what crop, what proximity , is when you are 

standing in the field.
Finding Fields / Determining what is next 

to them – Simple Proximity Tool

 As compounds enter into registration review, EPA must do 

endangered species risk assessments.

 1

st step filter (Dicots remain).

 If necessary step 2 could be a simple field up proximity tool 

outlined here.

8
Proximity Tool

 Development of a proximity tool based on FESTF MJD 

NatureServe location data, Google Maps and an ARCGIS 

method. 

 The tool requires a 2 bits of information from the label:

1) An EPA problem formulation that defines taxa of concern 

(e.g. monocots)=>> Leading to taxa labeling (e.g. dicots)

2) An EPA derived spray buffer distance for protection of 

those species (e.g. ‘200 to obtain an NOEC/EC25) =>> 

Risk based spray buffers.

9
How the proximity tool would/might work

 An applicator (user) would log onto the website prior to making an 

application. 

 Next the user would select the taxa of concern and enter the required 

buffer distance (from the label).

 Next the user find the field they want to apply to, drag the field with one of 

the two selection tools (Google map ARC-GIS.)

 Once the field is selected the buffer is drawn, and a notice pops up if there 

are any proximity concerns. Additionally the field is symbolized red in the 

direction of the proximity concern (if one exists). If the field is totally red 

this means the field is located within an EO. 

10
Web Based Tool - Proximity Analysis

11
Field with a ’400 buffer – no EO’s of concern

12
Field Selected – EO Proximity Alerted

13

Wind Directional Spray Buffer Required.

User View Regulator/Regulatory View (EO displayed)
Varying View

14

Street View Field or Imagery View

Slides indicates different map views possible
EO View

15

Public/User View Regulator View

Displaying the location of EO’s has been a concern with tool discussions. The tool 

could allow displaying EO’s only when a password has been entered to protect these 

locations.
16

Nozzle, Release Height, Buffer Distance and What buffered to

Protection Area too Broad Sweeping

Interestingly – no wind restriction !!
Refinement ?

Step 1

• Risk Based Buffers to: Non-Target areas “Grasslands, forested areas, 

shelter belts, woodlots, hedgerows, riparian areas, and shrub lands.”

Too broad !!

Step 2

• EPA’s new DRT Process to reduce base case buffers in step 1 and 

filtering !!!

Step 3

• Proximity Analysis to eliminate buffer concern but this is too much 

information for county bulletins – this would require an ArcMap server 

like EPA’s surf your watershed for local – field level specificity.

17

Steps 1 & 2 are already EPA processes
02.06.2010 INTERN 18