1 / 36

Restricted Materials and Permitting Training

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

sherlock
Télécharger la présentation

Restricted Materials and Permitting Training

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Restricted Materials and Permitting Training 2006-2007

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. CEQA SCOPE • Does not cover private projects • Covers: • Government projects • Government financed projects • Government approved projects

  7. 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

  8. NOT: CEQA Functional Equivalency BUT: EIR Functional Equivalency 5 & 7 Chapters do apply to permits (Note Chapter 5, authority to require information)

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. Examples of Variable Use Classification • A tree • Milk handling equipment • Ag product fumigation • Swimming pool

  12. Classify the Following: Production Ag or Non-Production Ag • Apiaries • Cemeteries • Aquaculture • Field packing • Ditch banks • Farm roads • Christmas trees • Lakes, rivers, and streams

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. Persons Exempt From Permit • Registrants and manufacturers • Dealers • Structural businesses • Commercial warehouses • Common carriers

  16. 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

  17. Step # 1 Step # 2 Step # 3 Step # 4 Step # 5 Step # 6 Step # 7

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  21. If a sensitive area exists, presume that there is a likelihood of substantial adverse impact on the environment Step #3: Likelihood of Adverse Impact RMP manual page 7-3

  22. 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

  23. 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

  24. Step #5B: Additional Mitigation • If unmitigated hazards remain: • DPR recommended permit conditions • County permit conditions • 3 CCR section 6432

  25. 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

  26. 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

  27. 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

  28. 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

  29. 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

  30. 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

  31. 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

  32. 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

  33. 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

  34. 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

  35. Class Exercise

  36. Questions and Answers

More Related