# Encouraging the Use of Drift Reduction Technologies In the United States Environmental Modeling Public Meeting Washington, D.C April 28, 2015 Anne Overstreet, Charles Peck and Faruque Khan, 

# Office of Pesticide Programs, US EPA

4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 14/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2 

# OVERVIEW

• Background • Key Points of the DRT Program • Risk Assessment Processes • Risk Mitigation and DRT Application • References/Links

# BACKGROUND Why Interest in Spray Drift Reduction  700 million pounds of pesticides are sprayed on 800 million crop acres annually.  1 – 10% of the spray (smallest droplets) drifts and deposits on other sites:
 70 millions pounds of pesticide active ingredient  Value of $660 million 

##  Thousands of complaints reported annually to state pesticide regulatory agencies; many (most?) complaints resolved privately.  Spray drift is a component of EPA’s pesticide risk assessment. 4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 34/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 4 

# Drift Reduction Technology Program  

## Launched October 2014  

## Accelerate use of application technologies verified to significantly reduce spray drift  

## Encourage technology and pesticide manufacturers to voluntarily participate  

## EPA can credit use of DRTs in registration decisions and registration reviews  

## Significant enthusiasm by agriculture industry4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 5 

# Key Point 1: Technology manufacturers volunteer to test technologies  DRT standard test protocol  Test technology against a standard nozzle for comparison  For nozzles: ASABE S572.1 fine/medium boundary reference nozzle  For nozzle plus adjuvant/formulation: ASABE S572.1 reference nozzle at the lower boundary in the which the test system falls ( e.g. if a coarse nozzle is used with adjuvant/formulation to test drift reduction, ASABE572.1 coarse nozzle would be the reference nozzle) . 

##  Wind tunnels for droplet size distributions  Field studies for deposition4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 6 

# Key Point 2: EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) reviews test results and determines DRT-star rating for technology  Four ratings:  Rating is percent difference between technology and standard nozzle. DRT* 25 - 49 % DRT** 50 - 74 % DRT*** 75 - 89 % DRT  90 + %4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 7 

# Key Point 3: Example of DRT ratings on future OPP - DRT webpage4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 8 

# Factors Considered in Risk Assessments  Use Patterns  Formulation Type  Chemical Properties  Methods of Application  Sources of Exposure  Routes of Exposure  Durations of Exposure  Hazard (Toxicity)4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 9 

# Spray Drift in Risk Assessments
• Spray drift is one route of exposure considered in EFED risk assessments • Spray drift is normally included in  Terrestrial plant exposure estimates  Aquatic exposure estimates  Human drinking water exposure estimates  Off- site terrestrial animal exposure estimates4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 10 

# Generic Scenario for Spray Drift

Spray Drift Exposure in the Environment4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 11 

# Key Inputs/Assessment Summary Drift will occur and can have impacts • Labeled uses/restrictions • Amount which drifts: AgDRIFT/AGDISP models • Exposures: models, assessment methods • Risk: calculated based on chemical specific toxicity information • Characterize: discuss the uncertainties and the overall issues to describe risk picture4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 12 

# Spray Drift Values Derived from AgDRIFT Model Application Type Tier I AgDRIFT Application Parameters Aerial Fine to medium (D v0.5 - 255mm) Release height - 10 ft Wind speed – 10 mph Spray volume – 2 gallon Swath displacement - 37 % Ground Boom Very fine to fine (D v0.5 - 175mm) High boom (50”)

Data - 90 th %ile Airblast Sparse (young and dormant)4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 13 

# Process for Considering Spray Drift in Risk Assessments

13 Evaluate importance of spray drift in exposure assessment Describe spray drift’s contribution to

exposure/risk Spray drift is NOT a significant source of exposure/risk No more spray drift work required Spray drift IS a significant source

of exposure/risk Review labels for mandatory vs advisory language on:

- Droplet size

- Wind speed

- Release height

- Buffer zones

Use spray drift model to estimate deposition/exposure Use model estimates to describe the level of confidence in assessment conclusions ( RQ - LOC comparisons)4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 14 

# Risk Mitigation Regulatory Decision  Legal Standards  Risk Characterization  Risk Management Tools  Benefit Analysis  Public Inputs FIFRA ESA FQPA etc4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 15 

# Risk Management – Product Labels
• Current labels include:

– Instructions for minimizing drift and may include min/max wind speeds and max spray heights

– May include additional restrictions – mean droplet size category, no - spray buffer zones 

# • Use of verified low drift technologies can lessen need for application restrictions • Represents the future of better agricultural management practices.4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 16 

# Example of Risk Management Credit for U sing DRT Nozzle

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Concentration (μg/L)

Distance (ft) 

## Example of Aquatic Exposure ASABE-Fine ASABE-Fine-Medium DRT Nozzle LOC for restricted use4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 17 

# Incentives/Benefits of DRT Program  

## Standard method for validating and comparing technologies  

## Support by equipment and pesticide companies, states, researchers  

## Fits into our risk assessment/management decision - making  

## Reduced off-target drift/deposition – greater protection  

## Gives applicators more flexibility, better efficacy, cost savings, reduced liabilities  

## Moves agriculture sector to develop, sell, use validated low drift technologies .4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 18 

# Reference and Links ** Understanding** **the Science behind EPA’s Pesticide Decisions** http:// www2.epa.gov/pesticide -registration/understanding-science -behind -epas - pesticide decisions Generic Verification Protocol for Testing Pesticide Application Spray Drift Reduction Technologies for Row and Field Crops http://www2.epa.gov/reducing- pesticide -drift/epa - verified -and -rated-drift-reduction technologies4/23/2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 19 

# Thank **you! Questions/Comments**