U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs Proposed Product Labeling for Spray/Dust Drift Jay Ellenberger Acting Director Field.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Label Confusion. Pesticide Safety & Environmental Education Driven To Discover Dean Herzfeld.
Advertisements

Brian A. Harris-Kojetin, Ph.D. Statistical and Science Policy
1 Encouraging the Use of Drift Reduction Technologies for Pesticide Applications --What’s in Store for 2007? Jay Ellenberger US EPA/Office of Pesticide.
Norman Birchfield and Jay Ellenberger EPA Office of Pesticide Programs Gregory Sayles, Kerry Bullock, and Michael Kosusko EPA Office of Research and Development.
Orchard Management Practices for Protecting Water  CURES: Non-profit organization: agricultural, urban projects  Promote stewardship, Best Management.
Proposed Modification of Policies for Rural Employment Centers Policy 6.3 of the Future Land Use Element of the Alachua County Comprehensive plan CPA
Norton, 2010 E. Randall Norton, Ph.D. The University of Arizona Safford Agricultural Center.
Overview and Implementation Schedules Richard Keigwin, Director EPA Pesticide Re-evaluation Division.
Western Regions Pesticide Meeting May 2010 Buffer Overlap Limitations & Exceptions.
1 PR NOTICE -- Improving Labels for Adult Mosquito Control Products Jim Roelofs Office of Pesticide Programs US EPA.
Status of Urban Misting Systems What N ext? Jim Roelofs Field and External Affairs Division Office of pesticide Programs.
1 Restricted Materials Permitting Pest Management Workshop Catheys Valley March 2, 2011.
Using Pulse Width Modulation to Control Spray Droplet Size Robert E. Wolf Extension Specialist Application Technology Biological and Agricultural Engineering.
Overview of the Tribal New Source Review (NSR) Rule U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) Research.
This presentation has audio and will auto advance. You may use the navigation buttons to move between the slides manually. □ To pause play press ‘s’ on.
Forest Plan Revision Using the 2012 Planning Rule Process Overview Steps and Expectations (I don’t know….but I’ve been told…if the horse don’t pull….you.
Laws and Regulations Update Sue Ostrom Senior Agricultural Biologist.
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Overview
Travel Management Rule Implementation
Pesticide Drift Management
Pesticide Drift Management
1 Overview of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)  Objective: Clarify the roles of NEPA and Negotiated Rulemaking Clarify the roles of NEPA and Negotiated.
 Nuisance.  Person liable if they use their property in a manner that unreasonably interferes with others’ rights to use or enjoy their own property.
© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part, except for use as permitted in a license.
Land Treatment and the Conservation Planning Process CNMP Core Curriculum Section 3 — Land Treatment Practices.
Pesticides in The Environment Compiled by Shelley Mills
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION Ohio Pesticide Applicator Training Unit 4 Pesticides in the Environment.
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
Distinguishing: Clean Air Act, EPA Rules, Regulations and Guidance David Cole U.S. EPA, OAQPS Research Triangle Park, NC.
1 GRIC TAS Development Process Dan Blair Compliance and Enforcement Mgr. Gila River Indian Community (GRIC) Department of Environmental Quality.
U N I T E D S T A T E S D E P A R T M E N T O F C O M M E R C E N A T I O N A L O C E A N I C A N D A T M O S P H E R I C A D M I N I S T R A T I O N State.
Sound solutions delivered uncommonly well Understanding the Permitting Impacts of the Proposed Ozone NAAQS Pine Mountain, GA ♦ August 20, 2015 Courtney.
Reregistration of Consumer Pesticides: US Environmental Protection Agency December 13, 2005 US Environmental Protection Agency December 13, 2005 Mosquito.
Laws and Regulations Update Sue Ostrom Senior Agricultural Biologist Sonoma County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office.
Pesticide Spray Drift Conference September 5 and 6, 2001 AgDRIFT® Dave Esterly Environmental Focus, Inc
Regulatory Processes for Pesticides Mark Hartman Antimicrobials Division (AD) Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances United States Environmental.
Revisions to Primacy State Underground Injection Control Programs Primacy State Implementation of the New Class V Rule.
New Requirements For Soil Fumigant Pesticide Products EPA - August 2010 Soil Fumigant RED Requirements Training Program Module 1: The EPA Regulatory Process.
2001SDTF SDTF Comments on Sensitive Areas and BMP Labeling Dave Valcore, Dow AgroSciences & SDTF Technical Committee Chair John Jachetta, SDTF Regulatory.
Introduction to FIFRA Federal Insecticide Fungicide Rodenticide Act Chapter 1 Section I of the Pest Bear & Affiliates Service Personnel Development Program.
Class I Overview EPA Class I determination. Basics regarding how Class I works. Importance of Tribal Class I status. EPA’s Handling of Michigan’s objections.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General Oversight of EPA FIFRA Implementation June 2, 2015 SFIREG Meeting.
Exceptional Events and Fire Policy Presented by Don Hodge, U.S. EPA Region 9 Interagency Air and Smoke Council meeting May 2, 2012 Disclaimer: Positions.
Applying for Treatment in the Same Manner as a State for Sections of the Clean Air Act National Tribal Forum May 12, 2014.
Forging Partnerships on Emerging Contaminants November 2, 2005 Elizabeth Southerland Director of Assessment & Remediation Division Office of Superfund.
Kansas State University Biological and Agricultural Engineering Department Influence of Nozzle Type and Spray Pressure on Droplet Size Robert Wolf Biological.
Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange November 7, 2007 Geneva Session 1 Anne Meininger United States USA WTO TBT Enquiry Point.
DRAFT USEPA Office of Compliance Update: 90 CWA Action Plan, State Review Framework, & OECA National Priority Selection Presentation to NACAA Chris Knopes.
Understanding Spray Drift Robert E. Wolf Extension Specialist Application Technology Biological and Agricultural Engineering.
Pesticide Drift MSU Pesticide Education Program Michigan Groundwater Stewardship Program (MGSP) Note to presenter: It is highly recommended to use one.
Update on EPA’s Pollinator Protection Activities Rick Keigwin Office of Pesticide Programs January 2016.
1 Sahtu Land Use Planning Board Public Hearing on the Draft 3 Sahtu Land Use Plan May 2011 INAC Presentation.
Understand How Pesticides Impact the Environment.
BSEE BAST Determination Process Joseph Levine National Ocean Industries Association 2016 Annual Meeting April 22, 2016 Washington, D.C “To promote safety,
Texas Department of Transportation Corpus Christi District U.S. 181 Harbor Bridge Project Environmental Documentation and Schematic Development Citizens.
Considerations for Selecting Turf Spray Tips Maximizing control while minimizing spray drift!
Application Exclusion Zone/ Protections During Applications Region 3 WPS Training April 11-12, 2016.
Environmental aspects and sustainable use of PPPs: Drift
Aquatic Life Metals Criteria Under Development in OW
Module 17: MIXING ZONES A limited area or volume of water where initial dilution of a discharge takes place and where numeric water quality criteria.
Endangered Species Act
Dicamba: A Federal Perspective Summary of dicamba issues, label changes, and a discussion on the road ahead Reuben Baris, U.S. Environmental Protection.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
From Lab to Label: Innovations That Feed The World
Joint Army-EPA Mitigation Rule
Clean Air Act of 1963 By: Brian Bae Period 4.
FIFRA 1972, 1988 (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act)
Exceptional and Natural Events Rulemaking
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
Brad Fritz USDA-ARS Aerial Application Technology Research Unit
Presentation transcript:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs Proposed Product Labeling for Spray/Dust Drift Jay Ellenberger Acting Director Field and External Affairs Division

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 2 EPA’s Proposed Action  Draft Guidance for labeling statements for controlling spray and dust drift  Position on drift  A plan to get these and other statements on product labels  Call for public review and comment

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 3 What Are The Documents?  Draft Pesticide Registration Notice or PR Notice Draft guidance OPP website:  Federal Register Notice – availability of PRN, public comment period

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 4 Why?  Legal/regulatory requirements for product labeling  Concerns about drift and incidents  Improve labeling Consistency Expectations and directions for applicators Enforceability for EPA, state, tribal authorities  Public comment–complexity, different opinions

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 5 Scope and Purpose  Agricultural, industrial, horticultural, home/garden sprays and dusts  Not other formulations–fumigants, granulars  Not certain uses–mosquito adulticides for public health programs  Not meant to supercede more requirements on labels and by states, tribes

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 6 Definitions  EPA limits the meaning of the term “spray or dust drift” to the following: “Spray or dust drift is the physical movement of pesticide droplets or particles through the air at the time of pesticide application or soon thereafter from the target site to any non- or off-target site. Spray drift shall not include movement of pesticides to non- or off-target sites caused by erosion, migration, volatility, or windblown soil particles that occurs after application or application of fumigants unless specifically addressed on the product label with respect to drift control requirements.”

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 7 Definitions  EPA defines the term “no-spray zone” (also known as “buffer zone”) as follows: “ A no-spray zone is an area in which direct application of the pesticide is prohibited; this area is specified in distance between the closest point of direct pesticide application and the nearest boundary of a site to be protected, unless otherwise specified on a product label.”

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 8 EPA’s Position on Pesticide Drift  Important responsibilities: EPA to ensure that use will not cause unreasonable adverse effects States, tribes, EPA carry out enforcement to ensure compliance Applicators to protect people and the environment

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 9 EPA’s Position (continued)  EPA takes very seriously potential adverse impacts from drift  Labeling must be clear for applicators and enforceable for government  Recognize de minimus drift

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 10 Position Statement--Applicators Must:  Not allow pesticide spray or dust to drift from application sites and contact– People and animals Sensitive sites: structures people occupy at any time, parks and recreation areas, nontarget crops, aquatic and wetland areas, woodlands, pastures or rangelands  Follow label statements about controlling drift  Consider and use other measures, including those required by states and tribes

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 11 Proposed Labeling Directions  Generic directions for all application methods: “Do not allow spray to drift from application site and contact...” “Applicator must use all other measures necessary to control drift.”  Specific directions for each type of application method

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 12 Ground Boom Applications--Proposal  Nozzle height maximum 4 feet  Wind speed maximum 10 mph, measured by anemometer  Use spray quality/droplet size (provided by registrant) per ASAE standard or VMD for spinning atomizer nozzles

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 13 Orchard/Vineyard Airblast--Proposal  Do not direct spray above trees/vines  Turn off outward pointing nozzles at row ends and outer rows  Wind speed range of 3 to 10 mph, measured by anemometer outside and upwind side

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 14 Aerial Applications--Proposal  Boom width maximum 75% wingspan or 90% rotary blade  Use upwind swath displacement  Wind speed range of 3 to 10 mph, measured by anemometer  Use spray quality/droplet size (provided by registrant) per ASAE standard or VMD for spinning atomizer nozzles  With a no-spray zone, limit release height to 10 feet maximum

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 15 Overhead Chemigation--Proposal  Maximum wind speed of 10 mph

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 16 Handheld Sprayer--Proposal  Maximum wind speed of 10 mph  For sprays, apply largest droplets possible

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 17 Other Labeling May Be Appropriate  Depends on potential risks of product/uses, incident history, science  No-spray zones, tighter limitations of the above directions, prohibition of an application method  Flexibility of product specific labeling to address risks and uses

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 18 No-spray Zones  Proposal: “Do not apply this product within (distance) of (sensitive areas to be determined for the product). Under no circumstances apply this product within (distance) of people or these areas.”  Risk assessment/management decisions determine need for, distances, and sensitive areas to be protected  Implementation plan under development

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 19 Rationale for Proposed Label Statements  If adopted, will be adequate to protect from unreasonable adverse effects Meets responsibilities of applicators, registrants, and government  Addresses factors that are most influential in cause and control  Clear, concise, readily understood

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 20 Proposed Implementation  90 days for public comment on any and all aspects  Assess comments, revise guidance as appropriate  Issue final guidance (PRN) with labeling statements and implementation plan Summer 2002???

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 21 Proposed Implementation  Place new statements on labeling--new products, amendments, reregistration Entertain requests for alternate wording  Goal: new labeling on most products by October ???

8/16/01Office of Pesticide Programs 22 EPA’s Bottom-line Message  Serious about concerns of drift and its adverse effects  Improvements in education/behavior, technology and labeling are key  Be flexible  We’re open to other ideas to achieve our goals