Notification rules lead to changes for farmers, PCAs

Issue Date: July 21, 2010

By Kate Campbell
Assistant Editor

A revision to notification requirements prior to pesticide applications has prompted questions from farmers about the scope of the new requirements.

The state Department of Pesticide Regulation issued revisions last August that spell out who is responsible for notifying field workers, neighbors and other people who might reasonably be expected to enter areas where crop protection materials have been applied.

“Prior to these revisions, responsibility for communication primarily fell on the growers, but now there’s dual responsibility with farm labor contractors,” said Rick White of the Kern County agricultural commissioner’s office. “Then, we ensure the regulatory updates are being followed through fieldworker safety inspections and through advising farm labor contractors when they come in to register with the county, which is required.”

In addition, White said farmers and persons certified to apply pest control materials have been advised of the changes during mandatory continuing-education sessions.

Under revisions to the California Code of Regulations, Title 3, Division 6, Pesticide and Pest Control Applications, notice of applications must be given orally or in writing and completed prior to the use of any pesticide and in ample time for all subsequent notifications to be made and for all persons notified to take appropriate action. The regulations account for variability in the timing of application due to a variety of factors.

Fields to be treated must be properly posted and neither employees nor employers may enter or walk within a quarter mile of the field being treated.

The revisions say the operator of a property to be treated “shall assure that notice is given to all persons who are on the property to be treated, or who may enter during the application or the period of time that any restrictions on entry are in effect.”

The provision covers providing notice to those who routinely enter the fields—utility workers, maintenance personnel, service providers—but does not extend to those who show up unexpectedly or who are trespassing.

“If a grower knows someone will be entering a property within a quarter mile of a property that has been treated, then the revised regulations require that the person or company be notified in advance of treatment,” White said. “Someone who just shows up is beyond the grower’s control and the requirement doesn’t apply.”

Beyond the expansion of responsibility of notice requirements, White said the revisions to the code section are mostly refinements that should not pose any new difficulties for growers or fieldworkers.

Notification requirements for consulting pest control applicators, however, have been affected by the revisions. Doug Okumura of Lawson & Associates Government Relations said in an article this spring that while the regulations were not intended to directly impact pest control applicators, there’s a possibility growers will depend on them to do the notification and provide necessary documentation.

“One of the biggest changes is the strategic incorporation of the words ‘shall assure,’” said Okumura, who recently retired from his position as chief of the DPR Pesticide Enforcement Branch. “In regulatory terms, if a requirement is not met, and a violation is determined, the question will be: Who was responsible for the ‘shall assure’ requirement, and did the violation occur because the ‘shall assure’ standard was not met?”

Responsibilities that fall to the applicator include: assuring the farmer has notice of application in enough time for the farmer to make all other notifications to employees, farm labor contractors and others who may enter the treated site. If there’s a change in the date of application, the applicator must assure the grower receives notice of this change prior to the application.

“For many companies, the PCA takes care of the NOI (Notice of Intent), NOA (Notice of Application) and NOC (Notice of Completion) paperwork,” Okumura said. ”In addition, both the grower and applicator are required to keep written records. If one reviews all the information required in both the NOA and NOC, it’s clear that all the information is found in a PCA’s complete written recommendation except for the time and date completed in the NOC.”

Because of this, “we anticipate growers may ask that the written recommendations become the written record,” Okumura said.

Farmer Ed Needham of Visalia, past president of the Tulare County Farm Bureau, noted that much of the requirement for filing notices with the counties has been “streamlined and automated. But communication remains a key to safe materials application. We’ve been working with the SpraySafe program, which started in Kern County, and we’re getting ready to expand the program here in Tulare County.”

Recent changes to pesticide notification regulations are pretty straightforward, said George Daniels of Farm Employers Labor Service.

“The main change is the requirement to notify a broader range of people about an application than in the past. That includes employees and those in nearby, sensitive areas. We have not received a lot of calls on these revisions, but directing applicators to the regulations helps maintain compliance, which is in everyone’s interest,” Daniels said.

The complete regulation language, including revisions by date, can be found on the DPR website at www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/legbills/calcode/subchpte.htm#0302

(Kate Campbell is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at kcampbell@cfbf.com.)

Permission for use is granted, however, credit must be made to the California Farm Bureau Federation when reprinting this item. Top