we see ms. ere comm Independent Expert David Shaw Erl'es dished Professor of Weed Science at Mississippi State Dr- David Shaw is Past-President of the Weed Science Society of America chair of Herbicide Resistance Education Committee and l.fice President for Research and Economic Development at Mississippi State Llniyersity- His past roles include chairing the task force developing the report on Herbicide Resistance Best Management Practices and Recommendations and chairing the l[Council for ?igricultural Science and Technology taslt force on Impacts of Herbicide Resistant Weeds on Tillage Systems- Currently. Dr. Shaw is leading an effort to develop a comprehensiye suite of educational materials on resistance management based on sound scientific principles- From This Expert Recently ?nswered Questions Stu dies 5: Articles Q. Do EMDs contaminatethe soil? I Posted Clo: Thursday. am Answered [layid Shay-r. Glee. Prcfessor of Sc'ence at State Fric pm A. The short answer is no?there is no impact of GM crops on soil. More specifically, this can be yiewed from three perspectiyes: 1. The genetically modified crops themselyes brealt down in exactly the same manner as non-ISM crops- The genetic composition Is organic in nature and is broken down by the soil microbial community- The genes themselyes are no different than the genes for flowering characteristics, seed production or they are simply DNA and all.-. Continue Reading From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Wainwright, Heather Friday, August 30, 2013 2:50 PM suzanne.thompson@monsanto.com;tlneed@monsanto.com Hathcock, Beth;Hood, Tina Address for MSU Plant & Soil Sciences Dear Suzanne and Teri, Thank you for handling the several recent Service Order payments and unrestricted gifts for our faculty. We appreciate Monsanto's support of their research and Mississippi State University. In order to ensure a safe and more expedient delivery of these funds (recent checks have been misdirected from the mail to other departments and/or centers), the Department of Plant & Soil Sciences (PSS) respectfully requests a change of address ONLY for the payments/gifts intended for our faculty members. If possible, please send any future payments to PSS faculty to the following address: Mississippi State University Department of Plant and Soil Sciences PO Box 9555 Mississippi State, MS 39762 PSS Faculty who have received support from Monsanto: Service Orders Dr. Darrin Dodds Dr. Brien Henry Dr. Trent Irby Dr. Dan Reynolds Unrestricted Gifts Dr. John Byrd Dr. Darrin Dodds Dr. Trent Irby Dr. Dan Reynolds Dr. David Shaw If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks, again, for the generous support of the research and faculty at MSU. Best regards, Heather Heather Wainwright Contracts & Grants Specialist Plant & Soil Sciences http://www.pss.msstate.edu 1 Pest Management Science Research Arlicte Benchmark study an cropping systems in the United States. Part 5: Effects nf quphesate-hased 1weed management pregrams an farm-level profitability Jasen WWeirich1-': David Shawn?: Issue Micheal DHDarenE. Philip Dir-Lang, Stephen E: Weller3, Bryan GTeung?: Hebert EWilsenE and David LJerdan? ?We 57' 7= "34395 T?1?T?eduhr 2011 Pest Management Science Article ?rst published enline: 2 MPH 21111 DDI: Icc-c-yrigrt-E EDI E'c-ciety ef Elten'icel Inccs?lry Emmi. H. Additicnal Information Hawta Cite Autharlnfarmeticn Publicatian TThis research was funded by Mensante Cempeny. From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Jachetta, John Tuesday, January 17, 2012 5:27 PM Shaw, David It’s Showtime for the enlist comments!!! Enlist Public Comment Communication.pdf; Comments on weed resistance 7.pdf Hi David, Looks like it’s Showtime for the enlist comments!!! The current deadline for comments to be submitted into the docket is Feb 27th – so it would be perfect if you were able to submit your comments by Feb 21-26th to ensure they received without processing issues. If an extension occurs, I’ll notify you, but this is the working plan. I cannot stress enough how important your effort is to the success of the Enlist comment periods. We really appreciate your contribution in helping to bring this technology forward. I’ve included two items: 1. My cover letter which introduces and includes “how to submit” instructions: (Enlist Public Comment Communication – attached) 2. Guidance for key topics to comment on and what you may consider including in your comments – if you wanted to add comments on the reduced probability of resistance to both modes of action in Enlist, that would be great too. These are your comments, so it’s important to cover what you think is important! As we approach the submission date, it would be great if you could confirm for me that your comments were submitted. Also, I’ll be at the SWSS for a few days and then, of course, at the WSSA meeting and we can talk a bit more about this if you’ve got any questions. I really appreciate your help with this, quality comments do take a bit of time to develop and I know very well how busy you are,; but this is important and they will listen to you. Kind Regards, John John J. Jachetta, Ph.D. Regulatory Sciences and Government Affairs Leader Dow AgroSciences L.L.C. Phone: (317) 337-4686   Fax: (317) 337-4649   E-mail: jjjachetta@dow.com   1 Suggestions on providing comments to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) public docket on Dow AgroSciences’ petition for a determination of nonregulated status for Enlist™ corn and the associated plant pest risk assessment and environmental assessment (EA) Individual comments should be independent with regards to both content and style. The following are intended only as general guidance for your consideration. Information about particular subject areas that are of interest to the agency regarding the Enlist™ Weed Control System about which you may be especially qualified to provide comments to the agency are discussed, along with some format suggestions that have proven to be useful when submitting comments to the Agency. As you prepare your comments and any supporting documentation, please remember all comments submitted to this docket are considered public information. Topics of important interest to the Agency: 1. Weed resistance and weed resistance management – the issue.  The scope of glyphosate resistance and hard-to-control weeds. What is the level of the challenge and do you see it increasing, decreasing or remaining the same?  High level aspects of weed management and herbicide management as part of an integrated management system. Specifically the value of mixtures to provide multiple modes of action and how this can be a tool in the program  Your thoughts on the value of 2,4-D as one of the herbicide tools.  2,4-D mode of action and how it relates to resistance management  Based on what we have seen historically, can it be an effective tool when used as part of an integrated weed resistance Subject and format points to consider for inclusion in your comments:  The length of your letter will depend on what information you believe will be helpful to the agency. Remember that they are looking for credible, substantive comments. One paragraph opinion comments usually cannot cover the topic(s) adequately. Comments from 2-5 pages + any attached studies or articles are typical for quality comments   Write on your letterhead if possible Introductory address for USDA Regulatory Analysis and Development PPD, APHIS Station 3A-03.8 4700 River Road Unit 118 Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 Docket ID APHIS-2010-0103 1. Reference the name of the docket and docket number 2. Introduce yourself: Describe your background and qualifications relevant to commenting on weed resistance management, Enlist Weed Control System™ with Colex-D Technology™ or 2,4-D. Such as:  Your professional experience and current position  Number of years working in your field of expertise  Relevant research work or programs you have been involved with  Degrees and any other relevant professional accreditations  Participation in and any offices held in professional organizations, advisory boards, etc. 3. Share a concise, overall conclusion or summary statement regarding what the science says on the particular issue based on your evaluation, experience and interpretation. Especially useful to the Agency will be your thoughts on:  State of the research for addressing the issues How the research relates to the real-world  How the research relates to use of the Enlist Weed Control system. 4. Discuss the key results or conclusions of the most important scientific research on this topic. Consider including:  Statement of what was done in the study  Key results o Summation statement o Concise compilation of key data if it adds value to the understanding of results  How these results relate to real-world situations  How the particular study relates to other research on the topic such as: o Supports conclusions of other studies o Further refines understanding or conclusion o Offers new interpretation or result  If you are referring to a published article (scientific or even popular) or have any articles you feel would be useful to the Agency, you should include them as an attachment with your comment. Although a copy of the article is always easiest for the Agency and ensures they include it the record, if you cannot provide the article, include a full reference citation. 5. Especially useful to the Agency is references to newer studies or studies which may be in progress which may not have been considered in their review. Remember the docket is public, but even if you are able to generalize what you are finding in your new or ongoing research that can be useful. 6. The Agency will often be faced with conflicting studies or research opinions, so your thoughts on studies or claims that you feel are not scientifically valid or not relevant to real world conditions, would help provide perspective. 7. Any additional personal observations and real-world insights you may have made during your own research or experiences 8. Re-statement of your expert opinion or conclusion specifically regarding the decision the Agency is considering 9. Close using your signature (original or scanned signature if possible) ™ Enlist, Enlist Duo, and Colex-D Technology are trademarks of Dow AgroSciences LLC. Components of the Enlist Weed Control System have not yet received regulatory approvals; approvals are pending. The information presented is not an offer for sale. Enlist Duo is not yet registered for sale or use as part of the Enlist Weed Control System. Always read and follow label directions.©2012 Dow AgroSciences LLC Additional information: Also, if you are interested in reading the APHIS Environmental Assessment, you can access and printout a copy of all the materials from www.regulations.gov using that same docket number (click on listing of documents entitled “Dow AgroScience LLC; Availability of Petition, Plant Pest Risk Assessment, and Environmental Assessment for Determination of Nonregulated Status of Corn Genetically Engineered for Herbicide Tolerance” on the left hand-side of that page). To assist you if there are particular aspects of interest to you, below is some general guidance of which sections of the EA may be applicable • • • • • • • Weed Resistance: Sections 2.2.2.3, 4.2.2, Value of no- and minimum tillage Sections 2.2.2.1, 2.3, 2.4.4, 2.7, 4.2.2, 4.3, 4.4 Auxin or 2,4-D resistance potential – potential for superweeds: Sections 4.4.2, 4.4.4, Practical aspects of Enlist system (ease of use, value to growers, etc): Sections 4.1, 4.2.2, 4.3.2, 4.3.3, 4.4.4, 4.7, Use of 2,4-D / lbs applied: Sections 2.6, 4.2.2, 4.4.2 Co-existence: – With non-GMOs: Sections 2.2.5, 4.2.5, 4.3.3, 4.4.5 – With organics : Sections 2.2.4, 4.2.4, 4.3.3, 4.4.5 – With sensitive crops: Sections 4.3.3, 2,4-D: Sections 5.5 From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Shaw, David Monday, February 20, 2012 11:08 AM Jachetta, John Enlist Letter EPA Letter Enlist.docx John, Here's what I have so far. Take a look and give me feedback. David 1 Regulatory Analysis and Development PPD, APHIS Station 3A-03.8 4700 River Road Unit 118 Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 Docket ID APHIS-2010-0103 By way of introduction, I am currently the Vice President for Research and Economic Development at Mississippi State University. I have been a faculty member at MSU for over 26 years, rising to the rank of Giles Distinguished Professor of Weed Science. I have taught a number of weed science courses, have conducted extensive research in weed management, and have advised over 60 graduate students in weed science. I am the past president of the Weed Science Society of America, and currently serve as chair of the WSSA special task force on herbicide resistance education. This task force has just completed a report commissioned by APHIS, entitled “Reducing the Risks of Herbicide Resistance: Best Management Practices and Recommendations”. It has been accepted and soon will soon be published as a special issue in the journal Weed Science. The report is the foundation for the National Herbicide Resistance Summit, hosted by the National Research Council and sponsored by a number of agencies and farmer commodity organizations. I am serving on the planning committee for the Summit, and will be speaking on best management practices for herbicide resistance management. Recently I was also the lead author on a special issue paper sponsored by the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology entitled “Herbicide-resistant Weeds Threaten Soil Conservation Gains: Finding a Balance Between Soil and Farm Sustainability”. I am attaching both of these publications as addenda to this letter. Herbicide resistance is the most pressing issue facing production agriculture today. In particular, glyphosate-resistant weeds have become a national and even global issue, with nearly thirty species worldwide confirmed having this resistance. Within my own state, a survey was conducted last year and found that every crop producing county in Mississippi has incidences of glyphosate-resistant weeds. Of particular concern are species such as Palmer amaranth, common waterhemp, and horseweed. These weeds produce hundreds of thousands of seed, and are aggressive competitors with agronomic crops. Concerns among industry, academia, and grower organizations have led to the reports and meetings mentioned above, and have even led to congressional testimony on management approaches. In response to these concerns, the Weed Science Society of America has developed the aforementioned report to USDA/APHIS on Best Management Practices, impediments to adoptions of these practices, and recommendations for overcoming these obstacles. Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent resistance development and mitigate it when present include (from the WSSA report): 1. 2. Understand the biology of the weeds present. Use a diversified approach to weed management focused on preventing weed seed production and reducing the number of weed seeds in the soil seedbank. 3. Plant into weed-free fields and then keep fields as weed free as possible. 4. Plant weed-free crop seed. 5. Scout fields routinely. 6. Use multiple herbicide mechanisms of action that are effective against the most troublesome or herbicide-resistance-prone weeds. 7. Apply the labeled herbicide rate at recommended weed sizes. 8. Emphasize cultural practices that suppress weeds by utilizing crop competitiveness. 9. Use mechanical and biological management practices where appropriate. 10. Prevent field-to-field and within-field movement of weed seed or vegetative propagules. 11. Manage weed seed at harvest and post-harvest to prevent a buildup of the weed seedbank. 12. Prevent an influx of weeds into the field by managing field borders. A critical element of these BMPs is the availability of herbicides with diverse mechanisms of action (MOA). This is where the Enlist technology fills a critical role. Enlist technology brings a new MOA to these productions systems at a time when herbicide resistance, particularly to glyphosate, is at or approaching a crisis level. Growers must be given as many tools as possible if they are to prevent resistance from developing, and mitigate resistance when it has developed. The use of alternating MOAs or mixtures of them is an essential element. The herbicide 2,4-D will be an invaluable asset in proactively preventing or mitigating herbicide resistance. Its MOA is different than any used in cotton and soybean. It has also proven to be less susceptible to resistance development than many other herbicide MOAs. It is also particularly effective on many of the species that have exhibited resistance to glyphosate, so will be a valuable tool in managing the resistance that we are now dealing with. Our experience is that with overuse of any herbicide technology leads to selection pressure for development of resistance to that technology. WSSA is strongly promoting sound resistance management principles, in which integrated weed management approaches are adopted at all levels. The Enlist technology will not be an exclusive answer to resistance development, but will be an extremely important tool in the development of comprehensive, science-based approaches to resistance management. Sincerely, David R. Shaw, Vice President for Research and Economic Development and Giles Distinguished Professor of Weed Science From: Sent: To: Subject: Shaw, David Monday, February 20, 2012 3:43 PM Jachetta, John RE: Enlist Letter You are buttering me up for something now..... :) >>> "Jachetta, John" 2/20/2012 2:33 PM >>> David, This is just perfect! It both reinforces the acute nature of the need and that multiple modes-of-action and new tools are critical to the management of this problem; I thought that you hit the target dead-center! In fact, it’s so perfect that I’m wondering if you would consider cc’ing Tom Vilsack, Secretary of the USDA? If that works for you, I’ll dig up the contact information. Thanks! John   John J. Jachetta, Ph.D.   Regulatory Sciences and Government Affairs Leader   Dow AgroSciences LLC   From: David Shaw [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 11:08 AM To: Jachetta, John Subject: Enlist Letter John, Here's what I have so far. Take a look and give me feedback. David 1 From: Sent: To: Subject: Shaw, David Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:35 AM jjjachetta@dow.com Re: emails for David Shaw I'd be happy to. I would like some guidance on how to explain why it is being sent. >>> "Jachetta, John" 2/29/2012 8:30:51 AM >>> Hi David Like I mentioned yesterday, the guys at home really liked your comments to the Enlist docket! They’ve asked me if you’d be willing to also send your comments to this whole list of folks below. It’s OK to say no to some or all of this list if you want, it’s a long list! Kind Regards, John   John J. Jachetta, Ph.D.   Regulatory Sciences and Government Affairs Leader   Dow AgroSciences LLC   From: Oliver, George (GR) Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 8:24 AM To: Jachetta, John Subject: emails for David Shaw   John, David Shaw’s comments to the docket were excellent. Do you think he would be willing to send them to the following (identified by Constance and Brad) Secretary Tom Vilsack - agsec@usda.gov Deputy Under Secretary Rebecca Blue - rebecca.blue@osec.usda.gov Administrator Gregory Parham - gregory.1.parham@aphis.usda.gov Deputy Administrator Michael Gregoire - Michael.C.Gregoire@aphis.usda.gov 1 From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Shaw, David Monday, July 30, 2012 5:00 PM MILLS, ANTHONY (AG/1000) Re: Public Comment Period - Dicamba Support IMAGE.jpeg Got it. I'll be happy to write a letter for this. David >>> "MILLS, ANTHONY (AG/1000)" 7/30/2012 3:53 PM >>> David,    Sorry I missed your call.  Hope things are going well for you and your family.    Thanks for agreeing to write a support letter for Dicamba.  The attached flyer has the details including the docket  number and website for submitting online if you choose to do so.    I know you will write about several of the benefits associated with Dicamba technology but we would like you to  specifically mention the following in your letter:    Sustainability:  RR2 Xtend soybean system will enable implementation of  weed resistance mgmt practices to delay/prevent resistance to  glyphosate, dicamba and important soybean herbicides   Low potential for resistance to develop to dicamba or the evolution of  weeds with multiple resistance (add references to support low potential  for auxin). Dicamba used in a herbicide program with glyphosate and soil  residuals    If you have questions let me know.  Thanks again for your support.      Anthony   Anthony Mills, Ph.D. Technology Development Representative   anthony.mills@monsanto.com   (662) 719-5258 - cell   (901) 854-9998 - FAX The link ed image cannot be display ed. The file may hav e been mov ed, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.     1 Pending Regulatory Approval Pending Regulatory Approval *APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS New System & Labels Will Increase Application Accuracy Compared to Older Products and Uses *APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Product Examples New Low Volatility Formulation Nozzle (Droplet)                          Wind Speed Boom Height Buffer Roundup Xtend, XtendiMax YES Coarse - Ultra Coarse 10 mph or less 20" above canopy Maintain the required label buffer to protect sensitive areas Drift Reduction Agent Should be used Gallons Per Acre At least 10 gpa Tank Clean Out Triple rinse Ground Speed Less than 15 mph Sensitive Crop Registries Weed Timing Weed Resistant Management DriftWatch and others Spray < 4” weeds Use residual herbicides visit RoundupReadyPLUS.com **Monsanto will not authorize the use of any herbicide product containing the active ingredients in final form dimethylamine salt (DMA) of dicamba and/or dicamba acid in the Roundup Ready Xtend Crop System. ROUNDUP READY 2 XTEND Designed to provide more consistent, flexible control of weeds, especially tough-to-manage and glyphosate-resistant weeds, to maximize crop yield potential. This advanced system from Roundup Ready PLUSTM Weed Management Solutions coming soon, pending regulatory approval. Designed to: Xtend your control of resistant and tough weeds with a dual-mode-of-action herbicide Xtend your yield potential with the Roundup Ready 2 Xtend soybean trait Xtend your application and planting flexibility with this innovative system Broaden weed control with Roundup Xtend for Roundup Ready Xtend crops Xtend your window for post applications and realize enhanced residual benefits Monsanto Company is a member of Excellence Through Stewardship® (ETS). Monsanto products are commercialized in accordance with ETS Product Launch Stewardship Guidance, and in compliance with Monsanto’s Policy for Commercialization of Biotechnology-Derived Plant Products in Commodity Crops. Commercial product(s) has been approved for import into key export markets with functioning regulatory systems. Any crop or material produced from this product can only be exported to, or used, processed or sold in countries where all necessary regulatory approvals have been granted. It is a violation of national and international law to move material containing biotech traits across boundaries into nations where import is not permitted. Growers should talk to their grain handler or product purchaser to confirm their buying position for this product. Excellence Through Stewardship® is a registered trademark of Biotechnology Industry Organization. LOW VOLATILITY FORMULATIONS COMING SOON FROM MONSANTO: Commercialization is dependent on multiple factors, including successful conclusion of the regulatory process. Monsanto’s dicamba tolerant soybean product is currently in Phase IV of Monsanto’s R&D pipeline. Dicamba formulations and premixes discussed herein are in various phases of development in Monsanto’s R&D pipeline. Dicamba is not currently registered for over the top use on soybeans. It is a violation of federal law to use a pesticide in a manner inconsistent with its label. Roundup Technology® includes Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicide technologies. Roundup® Xtend XtendiMaxTM Individual results may vary, and performance may vary from location to location and from year to year. This result may not be an indicator of results you may obtain as local growing, soil and weather conditions may vary. Growers should evaluate data from multiple locations and years whenever possible. ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW PESTICIDE LABEL DIRECTIONS. Roundup Ready® crops contain genes that confer tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides. Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides will kill crops that are not tolerant to glyphosate. Genuity and Design®, Genuity Icons, Genuity®, Monsanto and Vine Design®, Roundup Ready 2 Yield®, Roundup ReadyPLUS™, Roundup Ready®, Roundup Technology®, Roundup WeatherMAX®, and Roundup® are trademarks of Monsanto Technology LLC. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. ©2012 Monsanto Company. *Anticipated application requirements pending final label approval. This information is current as of July 2012. July 2012 *Anticipated application requirements pending final label approval. This information is current as of July 2012. “Applicators have the tools & responsibility to manage drift. The Roundup Ready® Xtend Crop System is developed around application methods proven to increase on target application.” Dr. Robert E. Wolf, Application Technology Specialist, Consultant and Professor Emeritus at Kansas State University 3-10 mph AI Air Induction TTI Turbo TeeJet Jet Induction 15 mph Use nozzles and operating pressures that produce coarse/ultra coarse droplets to minimize drift Spray weeds less than 4 inches tall Maintain the required label buffer to protect sensitive areas Make sure ground speed is less than 15 mph Use low volatility formulations such as Roundup Xtend and XtendiMax Always read and follow label directions Pending Regulatory Approval Use triple rinse tank clean-out procedure Maintain boom height 20 inches above crop canopy Apply when wind speed is between 3-10 mph July 2012 SUPPORT FARMERS’ CHOICE TO ACCESS NEW TECHNOLOGIES WEIGH IN ON ROUNDUP READY® 2 XTEND SOYBEANS YOUR INPUT MATTERS SEE PAGE 2 FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO BE HEARD. IT’S CRITICAL FOR YOU TO BE HEARD o Farmers should have the choice to use safe and valuable new agricultural technologies to increase yields and keep SGDHQØE@QLRØOQNÚS@AKD o Farmers need multiple mode-of-action weed management tools. Dicamba tolerance would be a valuable addition SNØSGDØDWHRSHMFØRNXAD@MØVDDCØBNMSQNKØ NOSHNMRØSNØL@WHLHYDØXHDKCØONSDMSH@K Ø o Dicamba has been used in crops for many decades in the U.S. and continues to be effective on major broadleaf weeds. o The availability of new and effective soybean production tools is vital to maintaining the health of sectors beyond the farm, including the U.S. soybean processing and feed industries and the FQNVHMFØ4 2 ØRNXAD@MØDWONQSØL@QJDSR YOUR ACTION IS NEEDED As a member of the U.S. agricultural community, it is very important that you weigh in with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on giving farmers the choice to plant soybeans developed to tolerate dicamba. When commercialized, the dicamba tolerance trait will be combined with Roundup Ready 2 Yield® to form Roundup Ready® 2 Xtend 2NXAD@MR Ø3GHRØSDBGMNKNFXØHRØCDRHFMDCØSNØOQNUHCDØFQD@SDQØÛDWHAHKHSX Ø RHLOKHBHSXØ@MCØBQNOØR@EDSXØHMØBNMSQNKKHMFØSNTFGØVDDCRØ@MCØL@WHLHYDØ yield opportunity. The USDA is now accepting public comments on Monsanto’s petition to deregulate dicamba-tolerant soybeans (event MON87708). These comments will help determine if farmers will have the choice to use this new technology that meets an important need in weed control options for soybean farmers. o Farmers have proven they are able to use different application techniques and equipment for different types of pesticides to ensure proper performance of the product as well as on target application. These include, but are not limited to, application techniques, equipment settings, nozzle selection and consideration of environmental conditions during application, such as wind speed. o It is important that USDA follow through on its commitment to U.S. farmers to conduct timely, science-based reviews of new technologies, such as dicambatolerant soybeans. This is necessary to support innovation and access to technology that keeps U.S. agriculture productive, sustainable and globally competitive. SUBMIT YOUR COMMENT YOUR INPUT MATTERS The USDA considers public input in the decision-making process. Supportive letters are important to be sure regulators understand the various perspectives from rural America and agricultural industries. We also anticipate these comments will play a valuable role in countering the campaigns waged by groups and individuals who are in vocal opposition to biotech. Letters should be unique as the USDA counts multiple form letters as a single comment. You can review Monsanto’s petition to USDA to deregulate soybeans (event MON87708) at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/10_18801p.pdf. ONLINE INSTRUCTIONS BE SURE TO INCLUDE: o You can develop an online comment at: www.roundupreadyplus.com/supportdicamba o Your name. o Complete the form provided on the Submit a Comment page: http://www.regulations.gov/#!sub mitComment;D=APHIS-2012-0047-0001 oØØA date within the public comment period – between July 13 and September 11, 2012 (or September 3, if mailing the comment). o You can type in your comment, but you are limited to 2,000 characters. o Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2012-0047. o If you have a longer comment, you can attach HSØ@RØ@ØÚKD o Sample comment: o Be sure to preview your comment for accuracy. o Once you have completed the form, typed or attached your comment, and reviewed it, you are ready to submit your comment. MAILING INSTRUCTIONS o Submit your comment on your farm, organization or company letterhead. o Be sure to state the docket number in the subject line – Docket No. APHIS-2012-0047. o Please mail your letter before September 3, 2012 to be sure it arrives in time to be considered. o The deadline for all comments to be received by USDA is September 11, 2012. o Mail your letter to: Docket No. APHIS—2012—0047 Regulatory Analysis and Development PPD, APHIS, Station 3A—03.8 4700 River Road Unit 118 Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 oØYour city, state and country. “I support full deregulation of dicamba-tolerant soybeans because they will….” ,NMR@MSNØ"NLO@MXØHRØ@ØLDLADQØNEØ$WBDKKDMBDØ3GQNTFGØ2SDV@QCRGHO…Ø $32 Ø,NMR@MSNØOQNCTBSRØ@QDØBNLLDQBH@KHYDCØ in accordance with ETS Product Launch Stewardship Guidance, and in compliance with Monsanto’s Policy for Commercialization of Biotechnology-Derived Plant Products in Commodity Crops. This product has not yet been @OOQNUDCØENQØHLONQSØHMSNØJDXØDWONQSØL@QJDSRØVHSGØETMBSHNMHMFØQDFTK@SNQXØRXRSDLRØ@MCØHRØMNSØ@U@HK@AKDØENQØR@KD Ø.MBDØ @U@HK@AKD Ø@MXØBQNOØNQØL@SDQH@KØOQNCTBDCØEQNLØSGHRØOQNCTBSØB@MØNMKXØADØDWONQSDCØSN ØNQØTRDC ØOQNBDRRDCØNQØRNKCØHMØ countries where all necessary regulatory approvals have been granted. It is a violation of national and international law to move material containing biotech traits across boundaries into nations where import is not permitted. At such SHLDØ@RØSGDØOQNCTBSØHRØENQØR@KD ØFQNVDQRØRGNTKCØS@KJØSNØSGDHQØFQ@HMØG@MCKDQØNQØOQNCTBSØOTQBG@RDQØSNØBNMÚQLØSGDHQØATXHMFØ ONRHSHNMØENQØSGHRØOQNCTBS Ø$WBDKKDMBDØ3GQNTFGØ2SDV@QCRGHO…ØHRØ@ØQDFHRSDQDCØSQ@CDL@QJØNEØ!HNSDBGMNKNFXØ(MCTRSQXØ Organization. Commercialization is dependent on multiple factors, including successful conclusion of the regulatory process. The information presented herein is provided for educational purposes only, and is not and shall not be construed as an offer to sell, or a recommendation to use, any unregistered pesticide for any purpose whatsoever. It is a violation of federal law to promote or offer to sell an unregistered pesticide. Individual results may vary, and performance may vary from location to location and from year to year. This result may not be an indicator of results you may obtain as local growing, soil and weather conditions may vary. Growers should evaluate data from multiple locations and years whenever possible. ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW PESTICIDE LABEL DIRECTIONS. Roundup Ready® crops contain genes that confer tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides. Roundup® brand @FQHBTKSTQ@KØGDQAHBHCDRØVHKKØJHKKØBQNORØSG@SØ@QDØMNSØSNKDQ@MSØSNØFKXOGNR@SD Ø3@MJØLHWSTQDR Ø3GDØ@OOKHB@AKDØK@ADKHMFØENQØ each product must be in the possession of the user at the time of application. Follow applicable use instructions, HMBKTCHMFØ@OOKHB@SHNMØQ@SDR ØOQDB@TSHNMRØ@MCØQDRSQHBSHNMRØNEØD@BGØOQNCTBSØTRDCØHMØSGDØS@MJØLHWSTQD Ø,NMR@MSNØG@RØMNSØ SDRSDCØ@KKØS@MJØLHWØOQNCTBSØENQLTK@SHNMRØENQØBNLO@SHAHKHSXØNQØODQENQL@MBDØNSGDQØSG@MØRODBHÚB@KKXØKHRSDCØAXØAQ@MCØM@LD Ø KV@XRØOQDCDSDQLHMDØSGDØBNLO@SHAHKHSXØNEØS@MJØLHWSTQDRØAXØLHWHMFØRL@KKØOQNONQSHNM@KØPT@MSHSHDRØHMØ@CU@MBD Ø&DMTHSXØ and Design®, Genuity Icons, Roundup Ready 2 Yield®, Roundup Ready PLUS™, Roundup Ready®, and Roundup® are trademarks of Monsanto Technology LLC. Banvel® and Clarity® are trademarks of BASF Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. ©2012 Monsanto Company From: Sent: To: Subject: MD Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:29 PM Shaw, David;Jachetta, John RE: Enlist Soybean Comments Mr. Shaw,    Thank you for your Comment Letter regarding Enlist 2,4‐D Tolerant Soybeans.  Your comments have been submitted to  the USDA on your behalf.  And as John and I mentioned previously, your letter was very well written and we at Dow  AgroSciences appreciate you taking time to prepare it.    Kindest Regards,  Michele D. Swarn Sr. Office Professional Global Biotech RSGA Dow AgroSciences LLC 9330 Zionsville Road Indianapolis, IN 46268 317-337-4383 (Business) 317-337-4649 (Fax)  mdswarn@dow.com    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including all attachments) from Dow AgroSciences LLC is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.   Learn more about Dow AgroSciences at:         From: David Shaw [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:31 PM To: Jachetta, John; Swarn, Michele (MD) Subject: RE: Enlist Soybean Comments Thanks, Michele. I appreciate your assistance. 1 David David R. Shaw, Vice President Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 617 Allen Hall Mississippi State, MS 39762 662/325-3570 Fax: 662/325-8028 dshaw@research.msstate.edu >>> "Swarn, Michele (MD)" 8/14/2012 9:54 AM >>> John,  I will submit comments for Mr.  Shaw to both dockets on his behalf.  And yes, I agree it was a great letter!  Michele D. Swarn Sr. Office Professional Global Biotech RSGA Dow AgroSciences LLC 9330 Zionsville Road Indianapolis, IN 46268 317-337-4383 (Business) 317-337-4649 (Fax)  mdswarn@dow.com    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message (including all attachments) from Dow AgroSciences LLC is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.   Learn more about Dow AgroSciences at:       From: Jachetta, John Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:46 AM To: David Shaw (dshaw@research.msstate.edu) Cc: Swarn, Michele (MD) Subject: RE: Enlist Soybean Comments Hi David, 2 Just a quick question… did you submit your letter to the docket already or did you want us to submit it on your behalf? This was a really great letter! Thanks again! John   John J. Jachetta, Ph.D.   Regulatory Sciences and Government Affairs Leader   Dow AgroSciences LLC   From: Jachetta, John Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:30 AM To: 'David Shaw'; Swarn, Michele (MD) Subject: RE: Enlist Soybean Comments Hi David A very well crafted strong-and-to-the point letter! Thanks David, great job just as I expected! You remain my hero! Kind Regards, John   John J. Jachetta, Ph.D.   Regulatory Sciences and Government Affairs Leader   Dow AgroSciences LLC   From: David Shaw [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 7:35 PM To: Swarn, Michele (MD) Cc: Jachetta, John; David Shaw Subject: Enlist Soybean Comments Attached is my letter for submission to EPA as comments on the Enlist soybean technology. Best regards, David David R. Shaw, Vice President Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 617 Allen Hall 3 From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: AG/1000 Friday, May 24, 2013 4:08 PM Shaw, David Dicamba EIS Dicamba EIS_Academic Group Letter.docx David, thanks so much for agreeing to work on this.  It is certainly important to Monsanto that dicamba tolerant crops  be approved as quickly as possible but I truly believe it also critically important to crop production in this country.    Attached is a really rough beginnings of a letter.  The underlined parts are the key concepts I wanted to include. I wanted  to get this out to you now since you are leaving in the morning.      Have a safe trip and talk to you when you get back.    John  1 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: AG/1000 Tuesday, May 28, 2013 10:33 AM _mdowen@iastate.edu_ Shaw, David Dicamba EIS Dicamba EIS_Academic Group Letter.docx Mike, do you have time for a call this afternoon?  I would like to ask your help in organizing a letter to be submitted  during the dicamba EIS comment period.  I talked to David S. about this last Friday before he left for India and would like  to discuss the same with you.  With David I discussed the possibility of getting a statement from WSSA and asking his  help in facilitating a letter signed by multiple academics speaking to some of the key points that those opposed to  dicamba, 2,4D or any other biotech derived herbicide tolerant technology have raised.   I wanted to ask you and David to  help with the latter.  Getting something from WSSA would be more general than the group letter I envision.  I also  recognize that the WSSA angle is very much a long shot.    Attached are my thoughts on issues that could be covered in a group letter.  If you are at all interested and feel  comfortable helping with this let’s discuss which of these points could and which should not be included in such a  letter.  This letter, of course, would be written in the words you and David feel comfortable with.  I provide prose since it  is the easiest way for me to provide my thoughts on which issues would be most important to cover with USDA.  Right  now USDA hears a lot from the anti’s but not as much from others.  They are also well organized.    Well, would you have some time to talk about this?  I am open any time between 1 and 3 PM and again from 4 to 5 PM.   Thanks,  John    1 Academic Group Letter_dicamba EIS_USDA NOI comment period_first draft To: USDA APHIS From: (15-25 leading weed scientists or WSSA) We the undersigned offer the following comments regarding the de-regulation of dicamba tolerant soybean and cotton and the associated use of dicamba in a diversified weed management program. Using the tools of biotechnology to transform a crop which allows the safe use of a herbicide normally lethal to the crop is an important technology to provided new weed management tools to farmers in order to most effectively manage weeds for the purposes of optimizing yields and economics, mitigate the potential for herbicide resistance ,and to preserve environmental benefits that herbicides offer in the form of facilitating the use of conservation tillage practices. The evolution and spread of weed populations resistant to one or more herbicides used in soybeans and cotton is a significant threat to future productivity in these crops and to the continued growth of conservation tillage practices. We are managing the situation today for glyphosate resistant weeds but in so doing significant selection pressure is being put on certain chemistries (i.e. PPO, HPPD and glufosinate) that are effective against the key broadleaf species with widespread resistance to glyphosate and ALS chemistries (i.e. Amarathus spp., and Conyza spp.). We need more herbicide options to manage these species and to preserve the utility of the remaining options. The ability to safely use dicamba in both soybeans and cotton, in part, fills this need. Dicamba is effective on the subject weeds, provides complementary postemergence activity to glyphosate on all key broadleaf weeds, adds to the consistency of residual control of other residual herbicides that would be used in the system and will have an excellent safety profile due to the inserted gene. The ability to use dicamba as part of a diversified weed management programs is not just a nice to have but rather is a must have. There are no new modes of action on the horizon and we must have more options for which biotechnology can provide options that fill critical holes. There is also a timing component that USDA must consider. For dicamba to be most effective in filling this critical need, we need it without any undue delay and, indeed, would ask that it’s review be expedited. We can’t afford to wait for resistance to evolve and further spread to our existing herbicide options before offering this tool to farmers. Delayed launch of dicamba could decrease the options and thus the ability for farmers to combine dicamba with other herbicides in way to deliver multiple modes of action effective on key targeted weeds. This would negatively impact the ability to mitigate potential evolution of resistance to dicamba. The myriad of factors driving the evolution of herbicide resistant weeds in crop production make its management incredibly complex. Weed resistance management is a function of managing the practices and the herbicides available for weed management in a particular crop. As such it is not a plant biotechnology issue. Likewise, weed management is ultimately the responsibility of farmers and farm advisors and require that the weed science community, including industry, academics, crop commodity groups and others who reach out to farmers, implement robust and effective stewardship programs espousing the basic principles of good weed management and encouraging adoption of these practices. By so doing resistance to our herbicide resources and new options such as dicamba will be minimized. Also it should be noted that resistance to dicamba represents no more a threat to ag production than resistance to other critical herbicides and the likelihood that it will be used in a manner consistent with Academic Group Letter_dicamba EIS_USDA NOI comment period_first draft best management practices is good. Research indicates that dicamba best fits in a fully diversified program and such a program is particularly important when glyphosate resistant palmer pigweed and waterhemp are the targets. Stacking dicamba tolerance with that of glyphosate, glufosinate, and other herbicide tolerant traits will further facilitate the use of dicamba in a diversified program. Stacking herbicide traits does not in itself promote the evolution of resistance to more than one herbicides since just as for individual herbicides the evolution of resistance is a function of how the herbicides are used rather than a function of the selectivity of the crop to multiple herbicides. The ability of farmers to use dicamba in diversified weed management programs in soybeans and cotton is not expected to significantly change current farming practices. It will provide a valuable new postemergence option that will allow farmers to most effectively manage their weeds in conservation tillage practices even in the presence of glyphosate resistant populations. Farmers have clearly shown a preference for postemergence weed control in conservation tillage systems and dicamba be an important part of this system. In closing we urge USDA to expedite the necessary reviews leading to final approval of dicamba tolerant soybeans and cotton. In the area of weed management we must have new herbicides or new/expanded uses of existing herbicides in order to mitigate resistance and thus to meet our current and future crop production needs. Dicamba is not the only answer to the issues we face but it is an important one. From: Sent: To: Subject: AG/1000 Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:17 AM Shaw, David;Owen, Micheal D [AGRON] dicamba EIS   Would you guys have 15 to 30 minutes on Wednesday June 5th for a call to discuss the current situation around a  possible WSSA response and the possibility of still organizing a group letter during the present USDA comment period.  I  am open to any time that would work for you.    I want to thank you both of helping on this.  It is certainly important to Monsanto but also to further development of  new herbicide options and the speed with which these options become available.    John  This e-mail message may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive such information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately. Please delete it and all attachments from any servers, hard drives or any other media. Other use of this e-mail by you is strictly prohibited. All e-mails and attachments sent and received are subject to monitoring, reading and archival by Monsanto, including its subsidiaries. The recipient of this e-mail is solely responsible for checking for the presence of "Viruses" or other "Malware". Monsanto, along with its subsidiaries, accepts no liability for any damage caused by any such code transmitted by or accompanying this e-mail or any attachment. The information contained in this email may be subject to the export control laws and regulations of the United States, potentially including but not limited to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and sanctions regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Treasury, Office of Foreign Asset Controls (OFAC). As a recipient of this information you are obligated to comply with all applicable U.S. export laws and regulations. 1 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: AG/1000 Thursday, June 06, 2013 3:30 PM Owen, Micheal D [AGRON] Shaw, David Dicamba EIS Freese letter to EPA 2012.pdf; Jaffe Letter-to-EPA-Feb-4.pdf; food and water watch 0320.pdf; J Egan Penn State DTS USDA.pdf; Mortensen et al. 2012. Navigatinga critical juncture for sustainable weed management(2).pdf Mike, attached are 5 significant public letters/papers presented by those opposed to dicamba (auxin) tolerant crops.  I  highlighted sections in each and summarize some of the main points in each as follows.  There are a few other negative  letters but they do not deal specifically with herbicide use/resistance.     I hope this helps your efforts.  I look forward to hearing your perspective after reviewing this material.  Also, as you  continue to develop your outline please keep in mind there are a few issues specific to USDA’s Notice that I included as  suggested topics, i.e. impact of use of dicamba on current farming practices.    John    Food and Water Watch letter to APHIS, Sept 11, 2012   Urged USDA to conduct EIS   “Herbicide resistant crops will continue to spur weed resistance.”  In short HT crops are the problem.   “Approving the corps in the USDA pipeline…… will only worsen this problem.”   In general, it appears their argument is that these new herbicide approvals are “not sustainable solutions to the  problem of resistant weeds”….    Egan letter to USDA, 2012   Urged USDA to conduct EIS   Dicamba crops will lead to overuse of dicamba and outbreak of auxin resistant weeds.   Urge delay in deregulation until policy for regulation and management of herbicide resistance has been  developed.   Use of DT soybeans “will thwart the evolution of sustainable integrated weed management systems”.   Use of DT crops will “encourage simple, non‐integrated weed management systems…”.    Freese letter to EPA, 2013   “HR crops systems promote more rapid evolution of resistant weeds than do other (non‐HR crop) uses of the  pertinent herbicides.”   “It is highly doubtful whether any voluntary stewardship plan for DT cotton would be effective in forestalling  weed resistance to dicamba.”   In general, Freese ‘s approach was to dispute all Monsanto claims.   Calls for mandatory weed resistance plans.   HR crops do not drive increased use of conservation tillage systems   Monsanto and Dow are falsely hyping auxin tolerant crops as solutions    Jaffe Letter to EPA, 2012   Overall, Jaffe argued for mandated regulations   Without EPA involvement farmers are not likely to carry out integrated weed management    1 Mortensen et al, paper published 2012   Argues that multiple resistance is likely with stacked HT crops.   Argues for regulatory mandated herbicide use restrictions.        2 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Shaw, David Friday, June 21, 2013 2:21 AM john.k.soteres@monsanto.com mdowen@iastate.edu;rhonda.m.mannion@monsanto.com Re: USDA Virtual meetings on dicamba/2,4-D EIS John,    I will call in to the first one.       David R. Shaw  Vice President for Research and Economic Development  Mississippi State University  662‐325‐3570  dshaw@research.msstate.edu    On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:56 PM, "SOTERES, JOHN K (AG/1000)"  wrote:  David/Mike, another ask for help….       USDA is setting up two virtual meetings to solicit verbal input on the dicamba and 2,4 D EISs.  Our  Regulatory Affairs and Government Affairs groups feel it is important that USDA hear from folks like you  on the key issues since there is a high probability that many negative voices will be heard during these  calls.  Your voice not only count from the standpoint of presenting scientifically based viewpoints but  also to a degree from a numbers standpoint.   We feel that Vilsack and his management team are paying  as much attention to the optics of this as to the technical issues / merits.  In a way this boils down to a  numbers game which means we can’t just sit back and let the opposition dominate the  conversation.  Thus another request for help.     Would one or both of you be available for one of these calls and offer comments along the lines of the  talking points I had sent earlier (or ones you feel comfortable making)?      I summarize the main points to consider offering as follows; (1) importance of dicamba and, in general,  biotech solutions (single trait and stacked) to address the growing needs relative to herbicide resistance  in the US, (2) the need for USDA to act expeditiously to provide these tools for managing resistance, (3)  resistance is not a plant biotech issue but rather a herbicide issues, and (4) need for dicamba to preserve  the gains made in expanding use of conservation tillage.  In addition to these, that we had previously  discussed, please also consider offering points about the risk of resistance to dicamba.  Possible talking  points here could include; (1) because of the activity of dicamba it will most often be used in weed  management systems that include other herbicides (residual and postemergence) that have  complementary and overlapping activity, (2) past history indicates that probability for presence of  resistance alleles in most weed species is low and (3) the combination of these two factors suggests that  the risk of resistance is low without implying that the risk is non existence.     I hate to keep asking for your time on this stuff but it is important to not only these technologies but to  an overall effort to educate USDA on the issues.  Call in information is provided by Rhonda below.  If you  1 don’t feel comfortable doing this or have conflicts please let me know.  Either way I / we appreciate your  involvement in other ways.     Thanks for your consideration of this.        John     From: MANNION, RHONDA M [AG/1000] Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 4:58 PM To: SOTERES, JOHN K [AG/1000] Subject: USDA Virtual meetings on dicamba/2,4-D EIS     John,      The information on the virtual meetings for the Dicamba/2,4‐D NOI can be found using the below  link.  There are two meetings options to choose from:     June 26 7‐9pm ET   June 27  4‐6 pm ET                APHIS has only done one other virtual meeting, cold tolerant eucalyptus, and the virtual meeting was  held open only for an hour due to lack of activity.  Plus I believe they do a query at the beginning on who  wishes to comment so need to be on the call at the start.     You can register directly through the website, it’s very easy. It requires you to download Microsoft  Office Live meeting but it is free.     http://www.aphisvirtualmeetings.com/participate.html        Rhonda   Biotech Regulatory Affairs Manager   Monsanto Company   Telephone: 314-694-8785   Mobile: 314-452-0475      This e-mail message may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive such information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately. Please delete it and all attachments from any servers, hard drives or any other media. Other use of this e-mail by you is strictly prohibited. All e-mails and attachments sent and received are subject to monitoring, reading and archival by Monsanto, including its subsidiaries. The recipient of this e-mail is solely responsible for checking for the presence of "Viruses" or other "Malware". Monsanto, along with its subsidiaries, accepts no liability for any damage caused by any such code transmitted by or accompanying this e-mail or any attachment. 2 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: AG/1000 Wednesday, June 26, 2013 9:20 PM Shaw, David mdowen@iastate.edu RE: Dicamba EIS call So pretty much a non‐event. I think I owe you a really good steak for this one.  Mike, I bet you can’t wait for tomorrow’s  call.  Well, at least it will be a really short call.    Thanks David,  John    From: David Shaw [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 8:08 PM To: SOTERES, JOHN K [AG/1000] Cc: mdowen@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Dicamba EIS call   Interesting, somewhat. Two people spoke before I did, and both were growers. The first read a prepared statement that  he obviously didn't write. The second was on the board for the soybean association. Both were strongly in favor of the  technology. I was the third speaker. After a long period of silence the first speaker came back on and said a few more  things. After listening to music for another 30 minutes I got off.         David R. Shaw  Vice President for Research and Economic Development  Mississippi State University  662‐325‐3570  dshaw@research.msstate.edu    On Jun 26, 2013, at 7:38 PM, "SOTERES, JOHN K (AG/1000)"  wrote:  David, how did the USDA call go tonight.  I could not call in.  Anything interesting?     Thanks again for doing this.      John  This e-mail message may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive such information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately. Please delete it and all attachments from any servers, hard drives or any other media. Other use of this e-mail by you is strictly prohibited. All e-mails and attachments sent and received are subject to monitoring, reading and archival by Monsanto, including its 1 SACHS. ElUC S (AGIIOM)) : Nicholm Kelaimdonakes ~ a l a i ~ d o n a k s ~ N ~ i ~ ~ w i ~ d u ) ~KalaiImndonalr~h'~ssouriuriedu>; David S b \ v (DShaw@nscanhmr~ld.sdu) Q ) S h a w @ ~ h . m ~ l e t o . c d ~Rogor ; Bcachy To: uboschy@biology2.wus11.sdu>; Jume. Calcalour < s a l o ~ t o u i u m s ~ n r d . e Carl d ~ ;E. Ray ;Phillips. Parer ~!er.philUpr@uwk.c~;Folta, Kevin M.;Tony Shellon Cc: SACHS. ERIC fi (Aa11000) ~ ' C . S . M C ~ ~ @ ~ O W I O .Beth ~ C ~Annc ~ , Mumford +eIhnMem-buildmun.~m> Subjec(: Invitation ta Authors Polioy Brief in tho Soriss "Pmpctivsr on Seisnce Manan* All, As some of you know based on Initial contacts, I have started an important project to produce a series of short pollcy brlefs on important topics In the agricultural blotechnology arena called "Perspectives on Science Matters." Based on initial feedback, I decided to reach out t o all of you collectively. I understand and appreclate that you need me to be completely transparent and I am keenly aware that your Independence and reputations must be protected. I hope after reviewing this message you will support thc vision and agree to author one of the briefs. Prospective authors and topics are listed below. lndlvidually and collectivelythe toplcs were selected because of their Influence on publlc policy, GM crop regulation and consumer acceptance. The specific goal Is to frame some of the imponant issues facing biotechnology with reasoned thoughtful messages In a way that helps thought leaders and influencers to better appreclate the growlng body of knowledge available on the safety and benefits of GM crops. The broader goal Is to elevate the publlc dlalogue and public policy discussion from Its current over-emphasis on perceived rlsks toward a broader understanding of the societal benefits of GM crops and needed improvement in policies that are unnecessarily limltlng innovatlon In the biotechnology arena. I am convlnced that thls lnltiatlve to publish and promote seven policy briefs on agricultural biotechnology will spark new opportunltles for outreach and engagement wlth pollcy makers and consumers, The key to success Is participation by all of you recognized experts and leaders with the knowledge, reputation and communicatfon experience needed to communicate authoritatively to the target groups. You represent ar elite group whose credibility wlll be strengthened by working together, Naturally, If you would like to add a co-author that Is entirely up to you and welcome. - To ensure that the pollcy brlefs have the greatest Impact, the American Council for Sclence & Health is partnerlng wlth CMA Consulting to drive the project. The completed policy briefs wlll be offered on the ACSH web site. The serles of brlefs as envisioned will facilitate policy maker engagement and serve as a basis for supplemental knowledge mobllizatlonto a range of audiences. Both ACSH and CMA have expertise to leverage experts, knowledge and key messages to serve the project goals. CMA Consulting wl manage the process of producingthe policy brlefs. This Is an lmportant element because Monsanto wants the authors to cornmunlcate freely without involvement by Monsanto. As the process develops, CMA and ACSH will coordinate web site posting and promotion. CMA and ACSH also will merchandize the pollcy brlefs, Includlng development of media-speclflc materials, such as op-eds, blog postings, speaking engagements, events, weblnars, etc. The brlefs will cover a range of lmportant toplcs and themes. Some background is included below but this Is only a suggestion. As the author, you will know how to best approach the topic and are free to do so In your own way. a Meeting World Challenges Carl Pray and Prabhu Pengali Background: Explore the ways In whlch the use of GM crops and foods can help to address many of the world's most pressing challenges and Improve the global standard of living today and for future generations. Speclflcally, dlscuss how GM technology helps address key pollcy concerns, such as shrlnklng agricultural resources (land, water), food security, food affordablllty and environmental sustainabillty. In addition, provide an overview of the challenges inherent In farming and how GM technology addresses these challenges by providlngfarmers with beneficlal tools for on-farm management. =. ' Stifling Innovation Peter Phillips Background: Dlscuss how over burdensome regulation of GM crops and food stifles the innovatic and technological advancements important for helping support global food securlty and improve overall quallty of Ilfe. Consider the llmltations to innovation and advancements In GM technology that results from a regulatory process that dlsmisses positive scientific conclusions and assumes molecular modification technlques carry a hlgher risk than other techniques used to generate new crop varieties. Holding Activists Accountable Kevin Folta Background: Demonstrate how activist'snessages and tactlcs regarding Genetically Modified (GM) crops and plant blotechnology undermine worldwide effotts to ensure a safe, nutrltious, plentiful and affordable food supply using responslble and sustainable agricultural pradces. Provlde examples of advist campaigns that spread false information that goes unchallenged and results In further erosion of the public's confidence in agricultural innovation. Detail how the impact of these efforts If not challenged ultimately would llmlt consumer cholce, lncrease food prices, decrease farmer viabllity, and undermine global food securlty. Roger Beachy GM Crop Safety Background: Address consumer and policy-maker concerns that GM crops and foods are not adequately tested for safety compared to other crop and food products approved for human consumption. Explain early GM crop evaluation, event selection, equivalence characterization and product safety assessment through each step of development and regulatory assessment; and detall how this comprehensive process meets the same strlngent sclentific and regulatory standards developed for other crop and food products. Consequences of Rejecting GM Crops Calestous Juma Background: Explore the issues and consequences wlthln both developed and developlng countrles that lead t o rejection of or barriers to adoption of GM crop and food technology at the farmer, consumer and regulatory level. Understand the combination of Issues; including consumer and political resistance, food safety and public health fears, concerns about blodiverslty and biological safety, restrictive regulation, and lack of Information (or existence of mlslnformation)about intellectual property rights that create barrlers to GM acceptance. Detail the consequences, lncludlng impacts on yield, household Income, food securlty and soclal Impacts, as well as on pesticide use, health risks from pesticide exposure and on blodiversitythat result. Sustainable Crop Systems Tony Shelton and David Shaw Background: Detail how GM crop technology provldes farmers wlth safe, efficient and effective tools to manage crop pests (Insects/weeds/dlsease), delivers environmental benefits, increases yields and Improves producttvity. Specifically dlscuss the use of GM crops contalning herblclde tolerant (HT) and Insect resistance (IR) traits and the risk versus benefit of their use. in addition, detall how educational outreach and a focus on responslble use can address public concerns about plant resistance and the envlronmental/eco-system impacts of GM crop technology. Responsible Choice ? Background: Explore the competing issues inherent in crop production used for food versus crop produdon used for fuel and highlight the role GM crop technology can play In ensuring we can adequately lncrease production and balance our needs for food, feed, fiber and fuel. Your role would be to wrlte a short brief aimed at a broad audlence, lncludlng academlcs, opinion leaders, policy-makers, regulators and other Influencers. Each brief should be about 4-6 pages In length and include key themes and messages related to the specific topic, recommendations, and a call to action. The briefs will serve as the foundation for further outreach and engagement to extended audiences and the broader public via supplemental media platforms, Includingallled organizations web sites, blogs and social media. Be assured that nothing will ever be dlstrlbuted under your authorship unless you have approved the contents and use in i t s entirety. + . I have copied Beth Anne Mumford of CMA (wtuw.cmabdl~trust.cam)because she and her colleagues that have been working on this Initiative, Please feel free t o contact Beth Anne if you continue t o have questions. Of course you can contact me a s well b u t I need t o step aside so that I doh compromise the project, This will be an important project and is deslgned t o lead t o increased engagement on critical topics that are barriers t o broader use and acceptance of GM crops globally. You are the best possible messengers and I hope you will make t i m e t o participate. Warm Regards, Eric Eric Sachv Reyula~oryPolicy & Scienlilic Arrnirs Drsk: (3 14) 694-1709 Mobile: (3 14) 637-7650 lir1c.S.Sl~chs/~r~n1~~n~n111o.ct~n1 This e-mail message ]nay contain privileged and/or confidential infornlation, and is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive such infonnation. If you havc received this e- nail in error, please notiQ the sender immediately. Please delete it and all attacliments from any servers, hard drives or any other naledia.Other use of this e-mail by you is strictly prohibited. All e-mails and attachments sent and received are subject to monitoring, reading and archival by Monsanto, including its subsidiaries. The recipient ofthis e-mail is solely responsible for checking for the presence of "Viruses" or other "Malware". Monsanto, along with its subsidiaries, accepts no liability for any damage caused by any such code transniitted by or accompanying this e-mail or any attachment. The information contained in this elnail may be subject to the export control laws and regillations of the United States, potentially including but not limited lo the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and sanctions regulations issued by the U S . Departnlcnt of Treasury, Office of Foreign Asset Controls (OFAC). As a recipient of this information you are obligated to comply with all applicable U.S, export laws and regulations. From: David Shaw Sent time: 08/0912013 10:59:21 PM Prabl~uPengali (plp39@comelI,edu) ; Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes(KalaitzandonakesN@n~issoori.edu) 'To: ;Carl E. Pray ; Roger Bcachy ~rbeachy@biology2.wustl.cdu>; Tony Shclton ; Calestous"Juma ; ERIC S (AG/1000) SACHS ; Folta, Kevin M.; Pctcr' 'Ph~llips Cc: Beth Anne Mumford Subject: Re: Invitation to Author a Policy Brief in the Series "Perspectives on Science Matters" Thanks for organizing this, Eric. I'm definitely interested. David David R. Shaw Vice President for Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University Box 6343 Mississippi State, MS 39762 6621325-3570 FAX: 6621325-8028 dshaw@research,msstate.edu >>> "SACHS, ERIC S (AG11000)" 81712013 11:06 PM >>> All, As some of you know based on initial contacts, I have started an important project t o produce a series of short policy briefs on important topics in the agricultural biotechnology arena called "Perspectives on Science Matters." Based on initial feedback, I decided t o reach out t o all of you collectively. I understand and appreciate that you need me to be completely transparent and I am keenly aware that your independence and reputations must be protected. I hope after reviewing this message you will support thl vision and agree t o author one of the briefs. Prospective authors and topics are listed below. Individually and collectively the topics were selected because of their influence on public policy, GM crop regulation and consumer acceptance. The specific goal is to frame some of the important issues facing biotechnology with reasoned thoughtFul messages in a way that helps thought leaders and influencers to better appreciate the growing body of knowledge available on the safety and benefits of GM crops. The broader goal is t o elevate the public dialogue and public policy discussion from its current over-emphasis on perceived risks toward a broader understanding of the societal benefits of GM crops and needed improvement in policies that are unnecessarily limiting innovation in the biotechnology arena. I am convinced that this initiative to publish and promote seven policy briefs on agricultural biotechnology will spark new opportunities for outreach and engagement with policy makers and consumers. The key t o success is participation by all of you - recognized experts and leaders with the knowledge, reputation and communication experience needed t o communicate authoritatively t o the target groups. You represent at elite group whose credibility will be strengthened by working together. Naturally, if you would like t o add a co-author that is entirely up t o you and welcome. To ensure that the policy briefs have the greatest impact, the American Council for Science & Health is partnering with CMA Consulting to drive the project. The completed policy briefs will be offered on the ACSH web site. The series of briefs as envisioned will facilitate policy maker engagement and serve as a basis for supplemental knowledge mobilization t o a range of audiences. Both ACSH and CMA have expertise t o leverage experts, knowledge and key messages t o serve the project goals. CMA Consulting wi manage the process of producing the policy briefs. This is an important element because Monsanto wants SCIENCE THUMPS ABDUT HUMAN F-DCID SPECML RE: Elrc-wse I: GMD BEYOND THE SCIENCE :ct'y-zurs? GMEIJs and Giulia! Feed 590111112}? Safetyr and Regtilatiens Consequences cf?egnlatinns cat?{35d Craps {slnlial Risks at" Rejecting Agricultural Anti-Grew Activism and Its impact an Feed Security Gteen Genes: Sustainability Advantages cf Herbicide Tcderant and Insect Reslstant tam Genetic Literacy Prcject Special Repnrt: DMD: Bet-rend the Science From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Shaw, David Monday, June 15, 2015 12:40 PM Walton, Larry (L) RE: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits EPA Letter Dicamba 2015.docx Well, duh.  Sorry about that – working on it with one thought in mind, meaning the other!  Here’s the revised letter.  Do  you want me to submit or do you want to?    David      David R. Shaw, Vice President Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 3001 Lee Hall Mississippi State, MS 39762 662/325-3570 Fax: 662/325-8028 dshaw@research.msstate.edu   From: Walton, Larry (L) [mailto:LWalton@dow.com]   Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 6:33 AM  To: Shaw, David  Subject: RE: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits    Thanks so much for your letter David. One comment  that I do have is to switch dicamba to 2,4‐D tolerant (Enlist cotton  traits) soybeans and cotton. You mention dicamba a few times in paragraphs under BMP. Since this is a comment period  for Enlist Traits, this would be very beneficial.    Thanks again David.     From: Shaw, David [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 1:29 PM To: Walton, Larry (L) Cc: Shaw, David Subject: RE: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits   Larry,    Take a look at the attached and let me know what you think.    David      David R. Shaw, Vice President Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 1 3001 Lee Hall Mississippi State, MS 39762 662/325-3570 Fax: 662/325-8028 dshaw@research.msstate.edu   From: Walton, Larry (L) [mailto:LWalton@dow.com]   Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 5:14 AM  To: Shaw, David  Subject: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits    Hi David, First let me ask you if are planning on attending the MAIC this year? We have an all star line of speakers in  including our own President of MSU, Mark Keenum! We also have Meredith Laws from EPA who will be speaking also in  addition to several more that I will not mention at this time. We have worked extremely hard to make the MAIC “bigger  and better” each year. In addition, we are providing some very good scholarship funding through our endowment funds  for some top MSU grad and undergraduate students. Please try to make it if you can and bring your family.    The MS. roundtable also continues to grow each year as well. I still remember the day I was sitting next to you at the  MS. roundtable and mentioned 2,4‐D tolerant cotton that Dow was working on.  I think a couple at the meeting almost  fell out of their chairs.     David,  WE are getting very close to commercial registration and I would appreciate if you could take time out of your  busy schedule and send your comments about this new technology and what it means to cotton farmers during this  comment period.  The USDA’s recommendation to deregulate the Enlist Cotton Trait was released for public  comment.  The comments that you submitted last year concerning corn and soybeans was greatly  appreciated.    The comment period will close on June 29, 2015. I have attached is a guidance document describing how to  submit comments and the federal resister announcing the USDA’s decision.     Attached to this e‐mail you will find the PDF of the information published in the Federal Register. I have also  attached a word document that will provide guidance on submitting comments with step by step instruction.  If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call.      Best Regards,     Larry Walton  Dow AgroSciences  662‐213‐4872    2 From: Sent: To: Subject: Shaw, David Tuesday, June 16, 2015 12:20 PM Walton, Larry (L) Re: Your Comment Submitted on Regulations.gov (ID: APHIS-2013-0113-0196) I will very much look forward to the stories from this year's adventure.... David R. Shaw Vice President for Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 662-325-3570 dshaw@research.msstate.edu On Jun 16, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Walton, Larry (L) wrote: Will do David, During the tour the past 4 to 8  years I have observed 2 that actually fell in the flooded  rice paddy, one that got overheated, one that stepped on a small alligator, one that a cottonmouth  snake struck at him and hit his rice boot,  and one female that lost a very expensive wedding ring! I  should have to purchase a ticket for this tour because it is so much fun!!!!!   From: Shaw, David [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 11:12 AM To: Walton, Larry (L) Subject: RE: Your Comment Submitted on Regulations.gov (ID: APHIS-2013-0113-0196) You HAVE to send me a picture of Darla in amongst the mud and snakes!        David R. Shaw, Vice President Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 3001 Lee Hall Mississippi State, MS 39762 662/325-3570 Fax: 662/325-8028 dshaw@research.msstate.edu   From: Walton, Larry (L) [mailto:LWalton@dow.com]   Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 10:55 AM  To: Shaw, David  Subject: RE: Your Comment Submitted on Regulations.gov (ID: APHIS‐2013‐0113‐0196) Thanks so much David, I can’t thank you enough. I hope to see you soon. On a side note,  I will see “ole”  Huffy wife next week Darla on our annual rice weed tour. Can’t wait to see her and those “Indy” folks in  the rice fields fighting snakes and mosquitoes. I will have my camera ready to take a few photos. It’s  always fun to see this group and I think it will be Darla’s 1st official rice tour.  1   Take care David,    From: Shaw, David [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 10:33 AM To: Walton, Larry (L) Subject: Fwd: Your Comment Submitted on Regulations.gov (ID: APHIS-2013-0113-0196) Done! David R. Shaw Vice President for Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 662-325-3570 dshaw@research.msstate.edu Begin forwarded message: From: Regulations.gov Date: June 16, 2015 at 10:32:02 AM CDT To: Subject: Your Comment Submitted on Regulations.gov (ID: APHIS-20130113-0196) Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect y our priv acy , Outlook prev ented auto matic downlo ad o f this picture from the Internet. Regulations Logo Please do not reply to this message. This email is from a notification only address that cannot accept incoming email. Your comment was submitted successfully! Comment Tracking Number: 1jz-8jgf-4apw Your comment may be viewable on Regulations.gov once the agency has reviewed it. This process is dependent on agency public submission policies/procedures and processing times. Use your tracking number to find out the status of your comment. Agency: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) Document Type: Nonrulemaking Title: Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Dow AgroSciences LLC; Cotton Genetically Engineered for Resistance to 2,4-D and Glufosinate Document ID: APHIS-2013-0113-0196 Comment: Please see attached letter. Uploaded File(s):  EPA Letter 24-D 2015.pdf 2 This information will appear on Regulations.gov: First Name: David Last Name: Shaw City: Mississippi State Country: United States State or Province: MS This information will not appear on Regulations.gov: Mailing Address: 3001 Lee Hall, Mississippi State University ZIP/Postal Code: 39762 Email Address: dshaw@research.msstate.edu For further information about the Regulations.gov commenting process, please visit http://www.regulations.gov/#!faqs. 3 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Shaw, David Saturday, June 13, 2015 2:29 PM Walton, Larry (L) Shaw, David RE: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits EPA Letter Dicamba 2015.docx Larry,    Take a look at the attached and let me know what you think.    David      David R. Shaw, Vice President Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 3001 Lee Hall Mississippi State, MS 39762 662/325-3570 Fax: 662/325-8028 dshaw@research.msstate.edu   From: Walton, Larry (L) [mailto:LWalton@dow.com]   Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 5:14 AM  To: Shaw, David  Subject: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits    Hi David, First let me ask you if are planning on attending the MAIC this year? We have an all star line of speakers in  including our own President of MSU, Mark Keenum! We also have Meredith Laws from EPA who will be speaking also in  addition to several more that I will not mention at this time. We have worked extremely hard to make the MAIC “bigger  and better” each year. In addition, we are providing some very good scholarship funding through our endowment funds  for some top MSU grad and undergraduate students. Please try to make it if you can and bring your family.    The MS. roundtable also continues to grow each year as well. I still remember the day I was sitting next to you at the  MS. roundtable and mentioned 2,4‐D tolerant cotton that Dow was working on.  I think a couple at the meeting almost  fell out of their chairs.     David,  WE are getting very close to commercial registration and I would appreciate if you could take time out of your  busy schedule and send your comments about this new technology and what it means to cotton farmers during this  comment period.  The USDA’s recommendation to deregulate the Enlist Cotton Trait was released for public  comment.  The comments that you submitted last year concerning corn and soybeans was greatly  appreciated.    The comment period will close on June 29, 2015. I have attached is a guidance document describing how to  submit comments and the federal resister announcing the USDA’s decision.     1 Attached to this e‐mail you will find the PDF of the information published in the Federal Register. I have also  attached a word document that will provide guidance on submitting comments with step by step instruction.  If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call.      Best Regards,     Larry Walton  Dow AgroSciences  662‐213‐4872    2 From: To: Subject: Date: Walton, Larry (L) Shaw, David RE: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits Monday, June 15, 2015 1:38:16 PM Looks great David, please go ahead and submit and I would appreciate.   Thanks again and travel safely   From: Shaw, David [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 11:40 AM To: Walton, Larry (L) Subject: RE: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits   Well, duh.  Sorry about that – working on it with one thought in mind, meaning the other!  Here’s the revised letter.  Do you want me to submit or do you want to? David     David R. Shaw, Vice President Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 3001 Lee Hall Mississippi State, MS  39762 662/325-3570 Fax:  662/325-8028 dshaw@research.msstate.edu   From: Walton, Larry (L) [mailto:LWalton@dow.com] Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 6:33 AM To: Shaw, David Subject: RE: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits   Thanks so much for your letter David. One comment  that I do have is to switch dicamba to 2,4-D tolerant (Enlist cotton traits) soybeans and cotton. You mention dicamba a few times in paragraphs under BMP. Since this is a comment period for Enlist Traits, this would be very beneficial.   Thanks again David.   From: Shaw, David [mailto:DShaw@research.msstate.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 1:29 PM To: Walton, Larry (L) Cc: Shaw, David Subject: RE: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits   Larry, Take a look at the attached and let me know what you think.   David     David R. Shaw, Vice President Research and Economic Development Mississippi State University 3001 Lee Hall Mississippi State, MS  39762 662/325-3570 Fax:  662/325-8028 dshaw@research.msstate.edu   From: Walton, Larry (L) [mailto:LWalton@dow.com] Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 5:14 AM To: Shaw, David Subject: USDA Comment Period for Enlist Cotton Traits   Hi David, First let me ask you if are planning on attending the MAIC this year? We have an all star line of speakers in including our own President of MSU, Mark Keenum! We also have Meredith Laws from EPA who will be speaking also in addition to several more that I will not mention at this time. We have worked extremely hard to make the MAIC “bigger and better” each year. In addition, we are providing some very good scholarship funding through our endowment funds for some top MSU grad and undergraduate students. Please try to make it if you can and bring your family.   The MS. roundtable also continues to grow each year as well. I still remember the day I was sitting next to you at the MS. roundtable and mentioned 2,4-D tolerant cotton that Dow was working on.  I think a couple at the meeting almost fell out of their chairs.   David,  WE are getting very close to commercial registration and I would appreciate if you could take time out of your busy schedule and send your comments about this new technology and what it means to cotton farmers during this comment period.  The USDA’s recommendation to deregulate the Enlist Cotton Trait was released for public comment.  The comments that you submitted last year concerning corn and soybeans was greatly appreciated.   The comment period will close on June 29, 2015. I have attached is a guidance document describing how to submit comments and the federal resister announcing the USDA’s decision.   Attached to this e-mail you will find the PDF of the information published in the Federal Register. I have also attached a word document that will provide guidance on submitting comments with step by step instruction. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call.     Best Regards, Larry Walton Dow AgroSciences 662?213?4872