BILL ANALYSIS AB 2122 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 14, 2010 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE Cathleen Galgiani, Chair AB 2122 (Mendoza) - As Amended: March 25, 2010 SUBJECT : Pesticides: regulations: continuing education. SUMMARY : Requires any regulations adopted or amended dealing with continuing education (CE) for any pesticide application or license to include specific minimum course requirements and require that the Director of the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) act within 15 days to approve or reject CE courses. Specifically, this bill : 1)Requires regulations adopted or amended for CE, as required by existing law, to establish minimum course requirements to address the following areas: a) Organic and sustainable practices; b) Nutrient management practices, including but not limited to, water and air monitoring and residual mitigation; c) Maximum residual levels; d) Quarantine practices; and, e) On-Farm storage of fumigants. 2)Requires a regulation adopted or amended for CE to require the director of DPR to approve or reject within 15 days any CE courses submitted in accordance with existing law. 3)Makes technical changes replacing the reference to "Department of Pesticide Regulation's" with "department's." EXISTING LAW permits DPR to adopt regulations establishing the minimum requirements for education, CE, training, experience, and examination for applicants of any license or certificate, or renewals of any license or certificate, or renewal of any license or certificate issued by DPR pursuant to their authority; prohibits the renewal of a license or certificate if the recipient does not complete require CE during the period of validity of the license or certificate; requires the AB 2122 Page 2 establishment of fees for licenses, certificates, and examinations, penalties for late payments and requires the fees be so set that they support the cost of these programs; requires all regulations be adopted in accordance with Title 2 of the Government Code; and, requires that the Office of Administrative Law consider these as emergency regulations. (Food and Agricultural Code Section 11502.5.) FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed "fiscal" by Legislative Counsel. COMMENTS : The sponsors are frustrated by the current approval process, which makes it difficult for Pest Control Advisors (PCAs) and Licensed Applicators (LAs) to meet their CE requirements. They have had CE requests for multiple hours sent to DPR and advertised to participants those hours, and then have them significantly reduced by DPR without time to get additional hours approved. This is a problem for the industry that is trying to meet certification requirements in a timely manner. They state that the purpose of AB 2122 is to broaden the CE curriculum offered to PCA and other DPR licensed professionals to include the latest trends and innovations in crop production and pest controls. DPR has not significantly changed its core course requirements since the mid 1990s, and much has changed in the area of agronomic practices, environmental protection and stewardship, water use, monitoring and enforcement requirements, nutrient and plant health. Further, they feel the 15 day course accreditation requirement for DPR will enhance the CE opportunities for DPR licensees. According to DPR's website, the purpose of CE is to ensure license and certificate holders keep their knowledge current in the area of laws and regulations; provide proper, safe and efficient pesticide use; protect public health, environment and property; and encourage safe working conditions for agricultural and pest control workers. Examples of CE course subjects cover pest management and pesticides and may include college level instruction, demonstrations or presentations of current applied research; professional or technical seminars; demonstrations relating to pesticides or pest management; and, field trial tours. Sales presentations or exams and testing are not approved for CE credit. DPR provides examples of course topics, other than pest AB 2122 Page 3 management and pesticides, which may be approved, are as follows: Pest identification, crop ecosystems, pest life histories, economic thresholds, cultural practices, biological control, plant and animal management systems, chemical control and other components of pest management systems. Other examples include characteristics, advantages, selection, use, cleanup, and care of ground equipment; use of compressed air, back-pack, low-pressure, high-pressure hydraulic, and air-blast sprayers; ultra-low volume, injection pump, dust and granular applications; application and drift reduction techniques; and equipment calibration. All of these topics relate back to pest management and pesticides. The committee may wish DPR to keep "pest management and pesticides" the focus for CE as it relates to AB 2122, even with its expanded areas for course subjects. Further, by stating the areas for course subjects, it eliminates any other subjects that could be covered because they are not listed. The committee may wish to include the phrase "including but not limited to" prior to the subject list. Current regulations require that PCAs and LAs are required to complete a specified number of hours of CE prior to renewal of their licenses. PCAs are being asked to provide a broader range of advice to farmers and ranchers than the historic pest management and pesticides. Such advice could include how to handle pesticides, in order to meet of the State Water Resources Control Board's waste water discharge requirements from a property, or meeting the air quality requirements of a regional air quality board. PCAs provide a range of crop production advice ranging from land preparation, planting, irrigation, fertilization, cultivation and harvest, so the need to be educated on the latest techniques and technology in these areas can benefit them and the farmer. The committee may wish to consider if these subject areas are appropriate as CE for a PCA or LA license and if DPR has the expertise in these subject areas to address CE courses and their appropriate hours of credit? In requesting approval of a CE class, regulations require submission of a CE request at least 30 days prior to the event, which is roughly the timeframe DPR uses for approval or rejection of the classes and hour credits. When a request is made, the presenter provides the hours of credit proposed, which may be reduced by DPR if they do not cover the appropriate subject matter as determined by DPR. This has caused some AB 2122 Page 4 disputes between the requesters and DPR. The committee may wish to consider if 15 days is the appropriate timeframe for approval or rejection of a CE request. CE requests travel through several hands in the approval process at DPR. First they go to the cashier for handling of the required fees, then to the appropriate approval personal, which may include multiple personnel if the request covers several areas, then to the Director for final approval. Under the current environment with furloughs, the approval personnel may have less than 10 days to review the request, and in order to meet the terms of AB 2122, reject applications without cause. There are two pending requests shown on DPR's web site reflecting receipt dates of November and December of 2009, that still are waiting for approval, while there are roughly 42 classes listed as having been added in the last 15 days, but include dates of January, March and early April of 2010. DPR has even developed a workshop for later this month to assist in educating the CE accreditation process. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support California Association of Pest Control Advisors (Sponsor) Opposition None on file. Analysis Prepared by : Jim Collin / AGRI. / (916) 319-2084