Jump to main content.

ECOFRAM Terrestrial Peer Input Workshop

EPA's Initiative to Revise the Ecological Assessment Process for Pesticides
Terrestrial Peer Input Workshop

Holiday Inn Select
480 King Street
Old Town Alexandria, VA 22314   (map Exit EPA Disclaimer)
(703) 549-6080
June 23 - 24, 1999

Day 1, June 23

12:30 - 1:00 Registration

1:00 - 1:30 Opening Remarks to the Terrestrial Input Panel Members

Denise Keehner, Acting Director
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Pesticide Programs
Environmental Fate and Effects Division

1:30 -5:00 Presentations by Terrestrial Peer Input Panel Members

Dr. Timothy Barry
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Economy and Environment
Climate and Policy Assessment Division

Ms. Sandra Bird
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Ecosystems Research Division

Dr. George P. Cobb
The Institute for Environmental and Human Health
Texas Tech University and the Texas Tech Health Science Center

Dr. Peter Edwards MBE
Zeneca Agrochemicals

Dr. Chris Grue
WA Coop. Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
School of Fisheries

Dr. Michael L Lavine
Duke University
Institute of Statistics and Decision Science

Dr. Robert Luttik
Center for Substances and Risk Assessment

Dr. Dwayne Moore
The Cadmus Grup

Dr. Edward Odenkirchen
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Pesticide Programs

Dr. Glenn Suter
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Center for Environmental Assessment

Mr. Douglas J. Urban
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Pesticide Programs

Day 2, June 24

8:00 - 12:00 Discussion

  1. Given the defined endpoints (Terrestrial Draft Report, Page 2 - 8), how well do the tools presented allow for a probabilistic assessment of the endpoints? What approaches/data could be used to do a probabilistic assessment for those endpoints not fully addressed? (45 minutes)

  2. Are the data recommended by the Terrestrial Draft Report sufficient to develop probabilistic assessments? (1 hour, 30 minutes)

  3. Is the proposed level of refinement process practical and logical? (1 hour)

  4. ECOFRAM concluded that some endpoints could not be assessed probabilistically given the current data and state-of-the-art. That is reproductive, population and ecosystem effects. Do you agree? (1 hour, 15 minutes)

12:00 - 1:00 Lunch

1:00 - 2:30 Closing Discussion

2:30 - 3:15 Public Comments

3:15 - 4:00 Closing Remarks

Please be advised that agenda times are approximate.

Publications | Glossary | A-Z Index | Jobs

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.