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