Month: March 2012

The California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) has issued a Notice of Modifications to the text of the urban surface water regulations.

This was not unexpected given that EPA disagreed with DPR’s language which allowed treatment of surfaces during rainfall events, if the surfaces were protected from precipitation.  EPA felt that this language was less restrictive than the EPA required label changes, so DPR changed the language to allow treatment during rainfall events to the “underside of eaves.”

Other minor changes clarified exemptions for persons operating under NPDES permits (such as vector control agencies) and a change to the definition of crack and crevice treatment to remove what DPR sees as regulatory language from the definition.  Click here for Notice of Changes and Actual Text to read the latest documents.

NPMA Legislative Day

New labeling requirements for non-agricultural pyrethroid insecticides was a topic of great interest at this week’s National Pest Management Association (NPMA) Legislative Day in Washington D.C.

NPMA, industry speakers and EPA representatives presented an overview of the factors leading to these labeling requirements and proposed regulations in the state of California and the potential for similar rules to be adopted in other regions of the country.

PMPs expressed concern that many of these new restrictions would potentially nullify the effectiveness of their treatment, leaving customers with unacceptable results.  There are also concerns about interpretations and enforceability of this new labeling. These concerns were more fully discussed during the NPMA Government Affairs Committee meeting and a working sub-committee was formed to ensure that the nation’s pest management professionals will have a clear voice in the process of reviewing, refining and eventually adopting revised label language for pyrethroids.

Julie Spagnoli of FMC and Brad Chalk, Cheminova, are both members of the NPMA Government Affairs Committee as well as members of the communications committee for the PWG.  Their active involvement in both groups ensures a clear channel of communications between the two organizations.  This collaborative effort can greatly enhance the effectiveness of the PWG in their efforts to reach out to the professional pest management community.