CTAG board approved—July 14, 2006 1 

## Positive Identification Requirement for Pesticide Applicator Certification Exams

CTAG Board Approved--July 14, 2006



### Executive Summary

People who are candidates for pest icide certification exams should be positively identified before the exam is issued and before any credentials are issued. Currently, there are no national

standards for identification of candidates. Further , a CTAG survey of State Lead Agencies (SLAs) indicates that many do not routinely verify the i dentification of private app licator exam candidates and a significant number do not verify commercial exam candidates. This calls into question the integrity of the ent ire certification system and prov ides opportunity for abuse.

CTAG suggests that SLAs, who do not currently ask for any fo rm of identification before administering exams, review their policies, regulations, and laws and consider adopting a mechanism to verify the identification of all individuals taking their exams.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should r equire positive verification of the identity of all individuals taking a privat e or commercial pesticide app licator certification exam.



### Perspective

CTAG is conducting a comprehensive assessment of the pesticide applicator certification program. One component of that assessment is to review procedures which per tain to the identification of candidates for the issuance of pesticide certificati on credentials. This is particularly important in light of increased concerns related to homeland security.

Indeed, the need for more security in our existi ng documentation system was highlighted by the 9/11 Commission Report:

"The federal government should set standards fo r the issuance of bi rth certificates and sources of identification, such as driver's licenses. Fraud in identification documents is no longer just a problem of theft. At many entry points to vulnerab le facilities, including gates for boarding aircraft, sources of identification ar e the last opportunity to ensure that people are who they say they are and to check whether they are terrorists." (see Chapter 12, p. 390.)

In our review, CTAG has found that there ar e widely divergent requirements for verifying identifications among states as well as between the types of crede ntials being granted (private versus commercial.) These inconsistencies, or in some case deficiencies, could and have resulted in people obtaining credentials under false pretenses.CTAG board approved—July 14, 2006 2 

### Background

Currently, there are no national standards for positive identification (i.e., photographic identification) for candidates taki ng a certification exam. Until Ma y of 2005, there was not even a

national standard on the i ssuance of drivers licenses. (Now t here is with the enactment of the

federal “Real ID Act” or Pub lic Law 109-13, see Appendix 1.)

States, tribes, and territories vary considerably on requiring some fo rm of positive identification for pesticide applicator exam candidates. A CTAG survey conducted in 2002 asked SLAs if positive identification was requir ed before their exam was administer ed. The results are as follows:

• Private applicators, 50 responses:

o 17 = yes

o 33 = no

• Commercial applicators, 50 responses:

o 29 = yes

o 21 = no

• Structural pest control, 3 responses:

o 3 = yes

o 0 = no

Where positive identification is requi red, it is usually driven by po licy rather than by statutory or regulatory authority. Further, if a policy exists, they are highly va riable as demonstrated below:

• Washington State Depart ment of Agriculture : Instructions for Exam Candidates--You must be prepared to present pictur e identification and to pay all lic ense fees at the time of testing.

• Virginia Department of Agriculture: Instructions for Exam Candidates--Commercial Pesticide Applicator and Registered Techni cian exams may be taken at any Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles Customer Serv ice Center during business hours. Exams at DMV are given on a touch screen automated system. Written exams may be taken by appointment at the twelve VDACS testing centers listed below . You must have a Notice of Authorization and photo identificat ion in order to take an exam at any location. Exams for Marine Antifouling Paints (TBT) and Sewer Root Control are not available at DMV sites.

• North Dakota State University: Policy for Extension Proctors --Clients must be positively identified before taking the exam. This means that a valid photo identity card issued by a state or federal agency must be requested and reviewed. (Exceptions can be made for the photo requirement if relig ious belief forbids photographs, i.e., the Amish.)

• Office of the Indian State Chemist: Instructions for Exam Cand idates--Upon arriving at the Assessment Center, you will be required to provide one official government-issued photo identification ID listed bel ow and sign a roster identifying yourself as the candidate. You must bring current, unexpired photogr aphic identification as listed below:

1. driver’s license with photograph

2. passport with photographCTAG board approved—July 14, 2006 3 3. military identification with photograph

4. green card with photograph

5. DMV identificati on card with photograph

NOTE: A temporary driver’s license or any other te mporary form of identification, even if it includes a photograph, is not acceptable.

• Texas Structural Pest Control: Policy Instructions for A pplicants--You must bring a picture ID in order to be allowed to test.

Other states, by virtue of their certification systems for private applicators, do not confirm the identity of who actually takes a certification exam because they use an on-line certification tutorial,

and/or take home exams. This is the case with Minnesota and South Dakota private applicators. (Note, in recent months, both states have made modifications and are considering further changes to their systems to addre ss this matter.)

Further, without requiring some form of positive i dentification and appropriate exam proctoring, a surrogate could take a pesticide applicator cert ification exam. This has been documented in several states; CTAG has first ha nd experience with such cases in Washington and North Dakota.

Consequently, an unqualified pers on who has falsely become "certified" and "licensed" could purchase any amount of Restricted Use Pesticides (RUP), use or supervise the use of the illegally-purchased pesticides, and in certain inst ances even use the false credentials to gain access to secure pesticide storage facilities. T he latter raises serious questions for homeland security and for simply securing pesticide from people who harbor malicious intent.



### Q & A regarding positive iden tification of exam candidates

What are the risks to maintaining the status quo?

1. We fail to carryout our r egulatory obligation to ensure t hat applicators who use RUPs are who they purport to be and are competent. Th is implies to the general public that

certifications credentials can easily be obtained by untrained and an onymous individuals.

2. Unqualified people, that have not demonstrated competence, could easily obtain

credentials.

3. Terrorists may easily obtain credentials under false pr etenses and may then obtain other

documents or material to facilitate their attacks against this country.

4. Finally, people who are mentally unbalanced, or who wish to engage in acts of vandalism, assault, or homicide have been known to use pes ticides as weapons. Without some minimal system of verifying identity, t hey could engage in these acts without difficulty

.CTAG board approved—July 14, 2006 4 Is this an over-reaction to 9/11?

CTAG believes checking credentials would provi de a layer of security which may reveal

inconsistencies that could then be shared with and acted upon by law enforcement agencies. Further, simply asking questions of candidates for exams is not burdensome and would go a long ways towards:

o Providing minimal deterrence for people wh o would casually abuse the system by obtaining credentials for friends , family, or co-workers.

o Providing minimal deterrence for people who wish to engage in acts of vandalism, malicious destruction, assault, or even homicides with pesticides.

o Setting a good example by showing pesticide dealers that checking credentials is not just the job of those being regulated (the pesticide sales industry) but it is also the job of regulators (those issu ing the credentials).



### o Complying with federal law and satisfying Congress. Indeed, the Real ID Act implies that people need to identify themselves when engaging in activities which could be distorted and thereby threaten the security of the country. Clearly, making it easy for someone to purchase highly toxic pesticides (for terrorist purposes) is not consistent

with the desire of decision makers.

What about law abiding client s, will they take this as being a high handed and paranoid reaction by bureaucrats?

Some candidates may react negatively to this. However, most will not even notice the change since they already have to produce identificat ion to cash checks or to purchase controlled substances (tobacco, prescription and some over the counter drugs, alc ohol, or firearms.) Many will see it as a reasonable request which is consistent with the norms and concerns of society.

What about people who would object to producing identification for religious purposes?

A positive identification requirement may present some difficu lt issues in situations where legitimate religious beliefs and practices of some people prohibit them from having their photographs taken. For such groups, the air line industry generally requires two forms of non-photo identification documents, one of which must be a government-issued identification document such as a social security card whic h bears the person’s signature. The other form of identification may include documents such as a c hecking statement or a utility bill that shows the person's name and current address.

SLAs may encounter such individuals (the Amish, for example) in connection with pesticide applicator certification or re certification exams. Reviewin g multiple forms of non-photo identification may increase staff ti me in verifying a person's identit y, but this would only occur in very few cases, the vast ma jority of candidates will hav e government issued photographic identification. Regardless, SLAs should refuse to administer a ce rtification or recertification exam to any individual who c annot be positively identified.CTAG board approved—July 14, 2006 5 What will this cost?

The potential impact of requiring positive id entification through the use of existing photo

identification documents incl uding a state-issued driver's license (or “non-driver” photo identification document) or a U. S. government issued passport, m ilitary identification card, or immigration "green" card will be minimal. It shoul d cause little inconvenience for the proctor to verify a candidate's identity. In or der to minimize staff time, some states collect identification at the beginning of the exam, review them and then return them to the applicant after the exam

materials are returned.

What about states who cannot phys ically inspect identifications because of the nature of their certification systems?

These states would have to revamp their sy stems and this would have at least short term negative financial impacts. However, implementation of any nat ional standard would take time (at least two to three years), and presumably, in the interim, new resources or alternative schemes of administering exams could be identified and adopted.



### Recommendation

SLAs who do not currently ask for any form of identification before admin istering exams should review their policies, regulations, and laws and consider adopting a means of verifying who is taking their exams. All states that lack the necessary legal authority to positively identify candidates, should begin the process of obtaini ng it through rule making or via statutes.

At the federal level, EPA should implement requirements to positiv ely verify the identity of all individuals taking a private or commercial pestici de applicator certificat ion exam. To improve security, positive identification should be det ermined through the use of photo identification documents issued by a U.S. government agency or affiliated jurisdiction (states, tribes, or territories). Acceptable phot o identification documents should be limited to:



### • a driver's license or “non-driver” photo identific ation document issued by a state, tribe or territory,



### • a U.S. government issued passport,



### • a U.S. military identification card,



### • or a U.S. immigration "green" card.

Any implementation of a national standard by EPA s hould include exemption provisions for those individuals who are legitimately photo-averse. In these rare instances, at least two forms of nonphoto identification documents should be requir ed. At least one such document must be a government issued document, such as a social secu rity card, which bears the holder’s signature. Other non-photo identification docu ments must identify the holder by name and address. In all cases, the name of the pers on taking the exam must match the name on each non-photo identification document. (T hese exceptions are consistent wit h standard practice in the airline industry.)CTAG board approved—July 14, 2006 6 

### Appendix 1



## The Federal “Real ID” Act, now P.L. 109-13

May 11, 2005

Title II: Improved Security for Driver's Licenses and Personal Identification Cards

(Sec. 202) Prohibits Federal agencie s from accepting Stat e issued driver's licens es or identification cards unless such documents are determined by the Secretary to meet minimum security requirements, including the incorporation of specified data, a common machine-readable technology, and certain anti-fraud security features.

Sets forth minimum issuance standards for such documents that require: (1) verification of presented information; (2) evidence t hat the applicant is lawfully pr esent in the United States; and (3) issuance of temporary driver's licenses or i dentification cards to pers ons temporarily present that are valid only for their peri od of authorized stay (or for one year where the period of stay is indefinite).

(Sec. 203) Requires States, as a condition of receiving grant f unds or other fi nancial assistance under this title, to participate in the interstate co mpact regarding the sharing of driver's license data (the Driver Lic ense Agreement).

(Sec. 204) Amends the Federal criminal code to pr ohibit trafficking in actual as well as false

authentication features for use in false identification documents, document-making implements, or

means of identification.

Requires the Secretary to enter into the appropriate aviation security screening database information regarding persons convicted of us ing false driver's licenses at airports.

(Sec. 205) Authorizes the Secretar y to make grants to assist Stat es in conforming to the minimum

standards set forth in this title.

(Sec. 206) Gives the Secretary a ll authority to issue regulations , set standards, and issue grants under this title. Gives the Secretary of Transporta tion all authority to certify compliance with such

standards.

Authorizes the Secretary to grant States an extension of time to meet the minimum document requirements and issuance standards of this title, with adequate justification.

(Sec. 207) Repeals overlapping docum ent provisions of the IRTPA.

(Sec. 208) States that nothing in this title shall be construed to affect the authorities and responsibilities of the Se cretary of Transportation or the Stat es under existing laws governing the establishment of a National Driver Register.