TITLE 3. DEPARTMENT OF PESTICIDE REGULATION 

Volatile Organic Compounds in the 

 San Joaquin Valley Ozone Nonattainment Area 

DPR Regulation No. 12-001 

NOTICE OF PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION 

AND 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 

ON A PROPOSED OZONE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT 

REGARDING PESTICIDE EMISSIONS IN THE 

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY NONATTAINMENT AREA 

The Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) proposes to amend Title 3, California Code of 

Regulations (3 CCR) sections 6452, 6452.2, and 6864; amend section 6452.4 and renumber to 

6881; renumber section 6890 to 6864; and adopt sections 6558, 6577, 6880, 6883, 6884, and 

6886. The proposed action would require prohibitions on the use of certain nonfumigants on 

certain crops in the San Joaquin Valley ozone nonattainment area (NAA) during May 1 through 

October 31 if the volatile organic compound (VOC) emission limit is triggered. These 

prohibitions would apply to agricultural use products containing abamectin, chlorpyrifos, 

gibberellins, or oxyfluorfen. Also, when purchasing or using certain products containing these 

four active ingredients, the proposed action would require a written recommendation from a 

licensed pest control adviser and require pest control dealers to provide VOC information to the 

purchaser. 

DPR will conduct a public hearing to accept comments on these amendments that may become 

part of the ozone state implementation plan (SIP). The federal Clean Air Act requires each 

state to submit a SIP for achieving and maintaining federal ambient air quality standards for 

ozone. California's SIP contains an element to reduce pesticidal sources of VOCs. These 

proposed regulations amend and add to regulations that were previously submitted to the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) to support a pending SIP amendment. 

Opportunity to comment and the hearing on the proposed regulations as part of the SIP 

amendment are being provided in conjunction with this rulemaking. 

SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS 

Any interested person may present comments in writing about the proposed action to the agency 

contact person named below. Written comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on 

June 7, 2012. Comments regarding this proposed action may also be transmitted via e-mail to 

<dpr12001@cdpr.ca.gov> or by facsimile at 916-324-1452. 

A public hearing has been scheduled for the time and place stated below to receive oral 

comments regarding the proposed changes.1

 

1 If you have special accommodation or language needs, please include this in your request for a public hearing. 

TTY/TDD speech-to-speech users may dial 7-1-1 for the California Relay Service.
2

DATE: June 6, 2012 

TIME: 6:00 p.m. 

PLACE: Tulare County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office - Auditorium 

4437 S. Laspina Street 

Tulare, California 93274 

A DPR representative will preside at the hearing. Persons who wish to speak will be asked to 

register before the hearing. The registration of speakers will be conducted at the location of the 

hearing from 5:00 to 6:00 p.m. Generally, registered persons will be heard in the order of their 

registration. Any other person who wishes to speak at the hearing will be afforded the 

opportunity to do so after the registered persons have been heard. If the number of registered 

persons in attendance warrants, the hearing officer may limit the time for each presentation in 

order to allow everyone wishing to speak the opportunity to be heard. Oral comments presented 

at a hearing carry no more weight than written comments. 

EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS 

DPR has determined that the proposed regulatory action does affect small businesses. 

INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW 

State and federal law mandates that DPR protect human health and the environment by 

regulating pesticide sales and use and by fostering reduced-risk pest management. 

VOCs contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone, which is harmful to human health and 

vegetation when present at high enough concentrations. The federal Clean Air Act requires each 

state to submit a SIP for achieving and maintaining federal ambient air quality standards for 

ozone. An ozone NAA is a geographical region in California that does not meet federal ambient 

air quality standards. U.S. EPA designates NAAs in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations 

section 81.305. 

California’s SIP includes an element that requires DPR to track and reduce pesticidal sources of 

VOCs in five NAAs--Sacramento Metro, San Joaquin Valley, South Coast, Southeast Desert, 

and Ventura--to meet the ozone standard. The tracking of emissions and control measures are 

focused on the period between May 1 and October 31, because that is the peak "ozone forming" 

season in California. 

Since 1990, DPR maintains an annual emissions inventory to track pesticide VOC emissions, 

based on the amount of pesticide products applied (from pesticide use reports) and the VOC 

content (emission potential) of pesticide products. Most pesticide VOC emissions are from 

fumigants and products formulated as emulsifiable concentrates. Fumigants are gaseous 

pesticides, applied in relatively high amounts. Emulsifiable concentrates (nonfumigants) contain 

solvents that keep pesticides in liquid form, so that mixing and applying the product are easier. 

Sacramento Metro and South Coast ozone NAAs have consistently achieved a reduction of 

pesticide VOC emissions from the 1990 base year. Prior to 2008, San Joaquin Valley, Southeast 
3

Desert, and Ventura NAAs did not always meet the reduction goals. In January 2008, DPR 

adopted regulations (Office of Administrative Law File No. 2007-1219-01S) to achieve a 

reduction of pesticide VOC emissions from a baseline level in the five NAAs. Those regulations, 

in part, focused exclusively on fumigant VOC emissions to achieve reductions through controls 

requiring "low-emission" application methods and the benchmarks that trigger a cap and 

allowance system to force reductions if needed. 

With the current fumigant controls in place, the emissions inventory indicates that DPR will 

consistently achieve the SIP reduction goals for the Sacramento Metro, South Coast, Southeast 

Desert, and Ventura ozone NAAs. However, the emissions inventory indicates that DPR may not 

consistently achieve the SIP emission level goal of 18.1 tons per day average for the San Joaquin 

Valley ozone NAA since most pesticide VOC emissions are due to the use of nonfumigants. 

Fumigants account for approximately one-quarter of the pesticide emissions in the San Joaquin 

Valley NAA, and nonfumigants account for three-quarters. Since fumigants have a relatively 

smaller contribution, additional fumigant reductions would have minimal impact on total 

pesticide VOC emissions. Under the 2009 proposed SIP revision, DPR is obligated to reduce 

VOC emissions from nonfumigant pesticides. These reductions will be more effective in 

reducing total pesticide VOC emissions, since nonfumigants make up the majority of pesticide 

VOC emissions in the San Joaquin Valley ozone NAA. 

It is possible that current regulations would require a major decrease or a total prohibition of 

fumigants, and still not achieve the pesticide SIP goal for the San Joaquin Valley due to 

increased nonfumigant emissions. Under the current regulations, a fumigant limit is triggered 

even if emissions exceed a specified level due to an increase in nonfumigants. Therefore, a 

fumigant limit program is a less efficient reduction measure for the San Joaquin Valley ozone 

NAA compared to the other NAAs. DPR proposes to replace fumigant limits in the San Joaquin 

Valley ozone NAA with nonfumigant use restrictions and prohibitions when emissions reach 

levels five percent or less below the benchmarks or exceeds the benchmark of 6,700,000 pounds 

(18.1 tons per day average). 

As mentioned above, most pesticide VOC emissions in the San Joaquin Valley NAA are from 

nonfumigant products formulated as emulsifiable concentrates. The liquid products have higher 

emission potentials, while solid products (e.g., dusts, powders, and granules) have lower 

emission potentials. In 2005, DPR initiated a reevaluation (regulatory process to request actions 

by pesticide manufacturers and formulators [registrants]) for several hundred nonfumigant 

products. The reevaluation required registrants to submit plans for reformulating the inert 

ingredients in the products to reduce VOC emissions. Some registrants responded to the 

reevaluation or earlier informal DPR requests by successfully reformulating several products. 

Pesticide products containing abamectin, chlorpyrifos, gibberellins, or oxyfluorfen have 

consistently been among the highest nonfumigant VOC contributors in the San Joaquin Valley 

ozone NAA. Although products with lower VOC emissions are available for these active 

ingredients, current voluntary efforts to use lower VOC products may not consistently achieve 

the SIP reduction goals. Therefore, restrictions on nonfumigant VOC emissions in the San 

Joaquin Valley NAA are needed to: ensure that the SIP reduction goal is achieved in a worstcase year; comply with the SIP commitment to implement restrictions on nonfumigant pesticides 

by 2014; and reduce the regulatory burden on fumigants and avoid triggering a fumigant limit. 
4

DPR will need to balance four factors to achieve the needed VOC reductions from the 

nonfumigant restrictions--active ingredients, setting product emission potential limits, crops, and 

exemptions. DPR proposes to designate products with agricultural uses containing abamectin, 

chlorpyrifos, gibberellins, or oxyfluorfen as their primary active ingredient as a "low-VOC" or 

"high-VOC" contributor based on the product's emission potential. DPR proposes to require 

nonfumigant use prohibitions on certain crops in the San Joaquin Valley ozone NAA when using 

these active ingredients during May 1 through October 31 if the VOC emission limit is triggered. 

With a few exceptions, products that are designated as "high-VOCs" will not be allowed to be 

applied to alfalfa, almonds, citrus, cotton, grapes, pistachios, and walnuts during this time period. 

Additionally, when agricultural use of a high-VOC product is allowed, DPR proposes to require 

a written recommendation from a licensed pest control adviser (PCA) as a condition use on the 

seven crops during May 1 through October 31. A PCA recommendation is currently optional for 

all pesticides. The operator of the property and the PCA will be required to retain a copy of the 

recommendation for two years after the application. Also, whenever selling certain high-VOC 

products, a licensed pest control dealer will be required to provide written VOC information to 

the purchaser who has an operator identification number issued by a county agricultural 

commissioner (CAC) in the San Joaquin Valley ozone NAA. 

Adoption of these regulations will provide a benefit to public health and the environment by 

continuing to reduce VOC emissions in the San Joaquin Valley ozone NAA. 

 

These proposed regulations are not inconsistent or incompatible with existing state regulations. 

IMPACT ON LOCAL AGENCIES OR SCHOOL DISTRICTS 

DPR has determined that the proposed regulatory action does not impose a mandate on local 

agencies or school districts, nor does it require reimbursement by the state pursuant to Part 7 

(commencing with section 17500) of Division 4 of the Government Code, because the regulatory 

action does not constitute a "new program or higher level of service of an existing program" 

within the meaning of section 6 of Article XIII of the California Constitution. DPR has also 

determined that no nondiscretionary costs or savings to local agencies or school districts are 

expected to result from the proposed regulatory action. 

CAC offices will be the local agencies responsible for enforcing the proposed regulations. DPR 

anticipates that there will be no fiscal impact to these agencies. DPR negotiates an annual work 

plan with the CACs for enforcement activities. 
5

COSTS OR SAVINGS TO STATE AGENCIES 

DPR has determined that no savings or increased costs to any state agency will result from the 

proposed regulatory action. 

EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDING TO THE STATE 

DPR has determined that no costs or savings in federal funding to the state will result from the 

proposed action. 

EFFECT ON HOUSING COSTS 

DPR has made an initial determination that the proposed action will have no effect on housing 

costs. 

SIGNIFICANT STATEWIDE ADVERSE ECONOMIC IMPACT DIRECTLY AFFECTING 

BUSINESSES 

DPR has made an initial determination that adoption of this regulation will not have a significant 

statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the ability of 

California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. 

COST IMPACTS ON REPRESENTATIVE PRIVATE PERSONS OR BUSINESSES 

DPR has made an initial determination that the adoption of this regulation will have a significant 

cost impact on representative private persons or businesses. The prohibition of the relevant highVOC products on the seven crops could affect nearly 17,000 producers in the San Joaquin Valley 

ozone NAA. The total cost for producers from using low-VOC products instead of high-VOC 

products on the relevant crops is estimated to be about $1.58 million annually. The average 

change in expenditures differs by crop, ranging from an average annual savings of $39 for citrus 

producers to an average additional annual cost of $359 for almond producers. Costs may 

fluctuate as pesticide product prices change, but in the long-run, it is likely that prices will fall 

after newer low-VOC products have been on the market for some time. If the emissions trigger 

level for the San Joaquin Valley NAA is not exceeded, producers would face no high-VOC 

pesticide restrictions and thus no additional costs. 

RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 

Adoption of these regulations will provide a benefit to public health and the environment by 

continuing to reduce VOC emissions in the San Joaquin Valley ozone NAA. 

Impact on the Creation, Elimination, or Expansion of Job/Businesses: DPR has determined it is 

unlikely the proposed regulatory action will impact the creation or elimination of jobs, the 

creation of new businesses or the elimination of existing businesses, or the expansion of 

businesses currently doing business with the State of California. 
6

CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES 

DPR must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the agency, or that has 

otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the agency, would be more effective in 

carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed or would be as effective and less 

burdensome to affected private persons or businesses than the proposed regulatory action or 

would be more cost-effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing 

the statutory policy or other provision of the law. 

DPR has identified several alternatives to the proposed regulatory action. DPR could deny or 

cancel registrations for high-VOC products and limit registrations to low-VOC products 

statewide, year-round. This would extend the costs outlined above to agricultural producers 

across the state and increase aggregate costs substantially. Alternatively, DPR could reclassify 

the active-ingredients in high-VOC products as restricted materials, which means that high-VOC 

products would undergo the permitting process and would be evaluated by individual 

agricultural commissioners for use within each county. This process would limit costs associated 

with switching from high-VOC to low-VOC products to counties that are close to meeting the 

VOC trigger level. However, administrative costs for CACs would be increased across the state 

and unnecessary regulatory burden would be placed on growers across the state who would need 

to obtain a restricted materials permit to use the high-VOC products. 

AUTHORITY 

This regulatory action is taken pursuant to the authority vested by Food and Agricultural Code 

sections 11456, 12111, 12976, 14005, and 14102. 

REFERENCE 

This regulatory action is to implement, interpret, or make specific Food and Agricultural Code 

sections 11501, 12003, 14006, 14021, 14023, and 14102. 

AVAILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS AND TEXT OF PROPOSED 

REGULATIONS 

DPR has prepared an Initial Statement of Reasons and has available the express terms of the 

proposed action, all of the information upon which the proposal is based, and a rulemaking file. 

A copy of the Initial Statement of Reasons and the proposed text of the regulation may be 

obtained from the agency contact person named in this notice. The information upon which DPR 

relied in preparing this proposal and the rulemaking file are available for review at the address 

specified below. 
7

AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT 

After the close of the comment period, DPR may make the regulation permanent if it remains 

substantially the same as described in the Informative Digest. If DPR does make substantial 

changes to the regulation, the modified text will be made available for at least 15 days prior to 

adoption. Requests for the modified text should be addressed to the agency contact person named 

in this notice. DPR will accept written comments on any changes for 15 days after the modified 

text is made available. 

AGENCY CONTACT 

Written comments about the proposed regulatory action; requests for a copy of the Initial 

Statement of Reasons, and the proposed text of the regulation; and inquiries regarding the 

rulemaking file may be directed to: 

 Linda Irokawa-Otani, Regulations Coordinator 

Department of Pesticide Regulation 

 1001 I Street, P.O. Box 4015 

 Sacramento, California 95812-4015 

 916-445-3991

Note: In the event the contact person is unavailable, questions on the substance of the proposed 

regulatory action may be directed to the following person at the same address as noted below: 

 Randy Segawa, Environmental Program Manager 

 Environmental Monitoring Branch 

 916-324-4137

This Notice of Proposed Action, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the proposed text of the 

regulation are also available on DPR’s Internet Home Page <http://www.cdpr.ca.gov >. Upon 

request, the proposed text can be made available in an alternate from as a disability-related 

accommodation. 

AVAILABILITY OF FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS 

Following its preparation, a copy of the Final Statement of Reasons mandated by Government 

Code section 11346.9(a) may be obtained from the contact person named above. In addition, the 

Final Statement of Reasons will be posted on DPR’s Internet Home Page and accessed at 

<http://www.cdpr.ca.gov>. 

DEPARTMENT OF PESTICIDE REGULATION 

_______________________ ___________________ 

Director Date