slide1
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Restricted Materials and Permitting Training

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 36

Introduction - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 92 Views
  • Uploaded on

Restricted Materials and Permitting Training. 2006-2007. Introduction. Volume #3 of the Pesticide Use Enforcement Program Standards Compendium The content of this volume supersedes any previous policy or direction on this subject

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Introduction' - sherlock


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
introduction
Introduction
  • Volume #3 of the Pesticide Use Enforcement Program Standards Compendium
  • The content of this volume supersedes any previous policy or direction on this subject
  • Will be the standard against which county programs are evaluated
  • CAC may deviate from these procedures provided the deviation doesn’t impact CAC PUE Program or DPR statewide Enforcement Program Oversight
manual chapters
Manual Chapters
  • California’s Restricted Materials Permitting Program
  • Restricted Use Pesticides and Restricted Materials
  • Environmental Impact Report Functional Equivalency
  • Private Applicator Certification
  • Permits and Exemptions
  • Permit Requirements
  • Permit Evaluations
  • (Pre-Application) Site Evaluations
  • Grounds for Refusal, Revocation, and Suspension
  • Due Process Related To Permits
  • County Agricultural Commissioner’s Permit Review
  • Appeals to the Director for Additional Review
changes to restricted materials permitting policy
Changes to Restricted Materials Permitting Policy
  • Chapter 6—Permit Requirements (also see Appendix subsection C.6.1 on commodity fumigation)
  • Chapter 7—Permit Evaluations
  • Chapter 10—Due Process Related to Permits
  • Appendix C—Recommended Permit Conditions
history and background leading to the restricted materials permit program
History and Background Leading to the Restricted Materials Permit Program
  • 1970 - CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act)
  • 1976 - Attorney General Decision: County Restricted Materials Permitting (RMP) falls under CEQA
  • 1979 - Functional equivalency
  • 2001 - Challenged
  • 2005 - Resolved

RMP manual page 1-1

ceqa scope
CEQA SCOPE
  • Does not cover private projects
  • Covers:
    • Government projects
    • Government financed projects
    • Government approved projects
functional equivalency
Functional Equivalency
  • Part of CEQA from the start
  • Amended by Chap 308 statute of 1978 (AB 3765)
  • 3 key points of program:
    • Document local environmental impacts
    • Consider mitigation or alternatives
    • Consult with local agencies
slide8
NOT: CEQA Functional Equivalency

BUT: EIR Functional Equivalency

5 & 7 Chapters do apply to permits

(Note Chapter 5, authority to require information)

definition of non agricultural use
Definition of Non-Agricultural Use
  • Non-agricultural use: Includes the sale or use of pesticides in properly labeled packages or containers which are intended for any of the following:
    • Home use (includes residential) labels with directions in “per square feet”
    • Use in structural pest control (no agricultural commodity involved)
    • Industrial or institutional use
    • The control of an animal pest under the written prescription of a veterinarian
    • Local districts or other public agencies which have entered into and operate under a DHS cooperative agreement
definition of agricultural use
Definition of Agricultural Use
  • Production Ag. Use: Any use to produce a plant or animal agricultural product (food, feed, ornamental, or forest) that will be distributed in the channels of trade
examples of variable use classification
Examples of Variable Use Classification
  • A tree
  • Milk handling equipment
  • Ag product fumigation
  • Swimming pool
classify the following production ag or non production ag
Classify the Following: Production Ag or Non-Production Ag
  • Apiaries
  • Cemeteries
  • Aquaculture
  • Field packing
  • Ditch banks
  • Farm roads
  • Christmas trees
  • Lakes, rivers, and streams
rups and rms
RUPs and RMs
  • RUP=Restricted Use Pesticides (Federal)
    • Potential to cause unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment
  • RM=Restricted Material (California)
    • Can impair human health or pose hazards to the environment
    • Includes all RUPs, section 18s, dusts (>25 pound containers), section 6800(a) listed (ground water protection), section 6400(e)

RMP manual page 2-1

pesticides exempt from permit
Pesticides Exempt from Permit
  • Exempt materials (FAC 14006.7)
  • RUPs—unless listed in 6400(e)
  • Antifouling and tributyltin paints
  • Research authorizations
  • Certain ground water protection pesticides

RMP manual page 5-1

persons exempt from permit
Persons Exempt From Permit
  • Registrants and manufacturers
  • Dealers
  • Structural businesses
  • Commercial warehouses
  • Common carriers
permits for rups and non restricted pesticides
Permits for RUPs and Non-Restricted Pesticides
  • CAC has authority to require permit for any use of a RUP or agricultural use of a non-restricted pesticide (FAC 14006.6)
  • Must make determination that pesticide cannot be used under local conditions without presenting an undue hazard
  • Determination is permanent until cancelled, unless limited by sunset clause
slide17

Step # 1

Step # 2

Step # 3

Step # 4

Step # 5

Step # 6

Step # 7

step 1 hazard identification
More than one hazard per pesticide

Tools available:

Pesticide labeling

DPR Risk Characterization

3 CCR section 6432

DPR recommended permit conditions

Step #1: Hazard Identification

RMP manual page 7-2

step 2 sensitive sites identification
Can people or the environment be adversely impacted from the pesticide application runoff, leaching and off-site movement?

Sensitive site may vary based on the specific hazard of the particular pesticide

3 CCR 6438 requires permit applicant must include sensitive sites in the permit application

Step #2: Sensitive Sites Identification
step 2 fac section 14006 5 requirements
Step #2: FAC Section 14006.5 Requirements
  • CAC staff to consider
    • Sensitive areas: schools, dwelling etc….
    • Heterogeneous crops
    • Resurgence of secondary pest problems
    • Weather
    • Bees
    • Storage and disposal
step 3 likelihood of adverse impact
If a sensitive area exists, presume that there is a likelihood of substantial adverse impact on the environmentStep #3: Likelihood of Adverse Impact

RMP manual page 7-3

step 4 existing mitigation
Do regulations or label adequately mitigate the hazard?

Specific buffer distances may be cited in the regulations

If not, judgment must be used

Step #4: Existing Mitigation
step 5a additional mitigation
Permit applicant/PCA must consider mitigation measures

Ask applicant to identify the mitigation measures and document response

If applicant did not consider mitigation measures, refuse to issue permit

3 CCR section 6426

Step #5A: Additional Mitigation
step 5b additional mitigation
Step #5B: Additional Mitigation
  • If unmitigated hazards remain:
    • DPR recommended permit conditions
    • County permit conditions
  • 3 CCR section 6432
step 5 permit conditions
Step #5: Permit Conditions
  • Appendix C
    • General Drift Minimization
    • 1,3-Dichloropropene
    • Carbofuran
    • Ground Water Protection Alternatives
    • Metam Products
    • MeBr & Sulfuryl Fluoride
    • Rice Pesticides
    • DEF, tribufos

RMP manual page C.1

step 6a alternatives
Permit applicant/PCA must consider alternatives

Ask applicant to identify alternatives and document response

If applicant did not consider alternatives, refuse to issue permit

3 CCR section 6426

Step #6A: Alternatives

RMP manual page 7-4

step 6b alternatives
If hazards cannot be mitigated:

CAC must consider alternatives

If feasible alternatives exist, deny permit

3 CCR section 6432

Step #6B: Alternatives

RMP manual page 7-4

step 7 benefit analysis
Step #7: Benefit Analysis
  • Serious uncontrollable adverse environmental effects with no feasible alternatives:
    • Consult with EBL
    • May issue permit only if benefit gained from the use is greater than the risk to the public or environment

RMP manual page 7-5

permit evaluation
Permit Evaluation
  • Initiated with the RMP application
  • Continues with the CAC’s review of each NOI
  • CAC’s NOI review and acceptance or denial signals the completion of the evaluation process
  • CAC is responsible for knowing local conditions and utilizing that knowledge
reviewing and evaluating the noi
Reviewing and Evaluating the NOI
  • NOI provides specific and critical information not available when RMP was issued
  • The property operator is responsible for assuring the NOI is submitted
  • NOI is part of the permit

RMP manual page 7-12

reviewing the noi
Reviewing the NOI
  • CAC will review NOI and make sure:
    • Location matches permit locations
    • Permit requirements from 3 CCR 6428 (g-i) are included
    • Environmental conditions have not changed
evaluating the noi
Evaluating the NOI
  • CAC must review all NOI’s prior to the application:
    • Compare the NOI against the permit
    • Review proposed application
    • Review maps for accuracy
handling permit refusal
Handling Permit Refusal
  • Grounds and time frames:
    • Based upon violations
      • Outstanding fines
    • Based upon permit evaluation
    • Based upon FAC section 14006.5
    • Pesticide is not registered for the site
    • Label and regulatoryrequirements cannotbe met

RMP manual page 9-1

handling permit refusal due process
Handling Permit Refusal: Due Process
  • CAC shall inform the permittee in writing
  • Written Notice of Proposed Action (NOPA) : “Notice and hearing”
  • If a hearing is set, it must be within 7 days
  • CAC decision issued within 10 days after the conclusion of the hearing
  • All permit refusals must be documented
ad