The Accurate Job Description of A Pesticide Applicator for MVCAC Joint Powers Authority

Vector Control Technician Certification Program Website

Vector Control Technician Certification Program Requires that Pesticide Handlers be certified in order to qualify and comply with NPDES, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit.

HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE 

SECTION 106925 

 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=hsc&group=106001-107000&file=106925
 106925. (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b) or (i),
every government agency employee who handles, applies, or supervises
the use of any pesticide for public health purposes, shall be
certified by the department as a vector control technician in at
least one of the following categories commensurate with assigned
duties, as follows:
   (1) Mosquito control.
   (2) Terrestrial invertebrate vector control.
   (3) Vertebrate vector control.
   (b) The department may establish by regulation exemptions from the
requirements of this section that are deemed reasonably necessary to
further the purposes of this section.
   (c) The department shall establish by regulation minimum standards
for continuing education for any government agency employee
certified under Section 116110 and regulations adopted pursuant
thereto, who handles, applies, or supervises the use of any pesticide
for public health purposes.
   (d) An official record of the completed continuing education units
shall be maintained by the department. If a certified technician
fails to meet the requirements set forth under subdivision (c), the
department shall suspend the technician's certificate or certificates
and immediately notify the technician and the employing agency. The
department shall establish by regulation procedures for reinstating a
suspended certificate.
   
The California Department of Public Health offers an examination for certification as a Public Health Vector Control Certified Technician on the third Thursday of May and November.
Please contact the Training and Certification Coordinator if you would like additional information at (916) 552-9730.

Links to documents:

mvcac Full Accurate Job Description Malathion

Testing for Pesticide Applicators

Apply for VCT Examination

VCT Exam App

Category A Study Materials

11-00-08 Cat A practice

10-00-15 VCTCategory A Study Guide 2015

Category B Study Materials

10-00-15 Biology andControl of Mosquitoes in CA

11-00-08 Cat B practice

Supplemental VCT Study Materials

Manual Biology and Control of Mosquitoes in CA

11-00-09 Pest Appl and Safety Training for Appl PH Pesticides

Regulations

VCTCE Guide

All the information above must be learned and both Tests A & B passed to legally comply with 

HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE 

SECTION 106925 

I was allowed to spray pesticides from 4/19/04 to my date of certification without supervision.
I passed Tests A & B  on October 31, 2005, a year and a half after I began spraying pesticides.

My California Public Health License Certification Number 520003542.

I endured 3 separate exposures prior to being legally-compliant with the California Certification Statute

Weed Abatement Letter by Supervisor to Property Owner.  Originally the supervisors obtained property owners signatures and this responsibility was passed on to me, the new hire.

03-27-00 Zone 7 ,9, 10 Duane North Region Required by Manager Annually

04-01-01 Waste Pond Letter to Owner Annual written Chris Eley

The most accurate job description was provided to me by my knee surgeon.  As an employee I never saw this until after I was seriously injured, years into my employment.

Tiffany Anderson’s Training Record

Place with Training Records

04-19-04_I am not state certified

04-18-05

03-23-06_Pesticide Training Records

03-28-06_Pesticide Training Records

05-24-06_Pesticide Training Records

02-22-07_Pesticide Training Records

02-28-07 _Pesticide Training Records Make up List

02-28-07_Pesticide Training Records

02-06-08_Pesticide Training Records

03-04-09_Pesticide Training Records

04-21-09_Pesticide Training Records

08-31-10_Pesticide Training Records

01-11-11

03-24-11_Pesticide Training Records

The following is brought over from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Website

PESTICIDE PERMITS

According to the Sixth Circuit Court Ruling on National Cotton Council of America v. U.S. EPA (553 F.3d 927 (6th Cir., 2009)), the application of pesticides at, near, or over waters of the United States that results in discharges of pollutants requires coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. In response to the Sixth Circuit Court’s decisions and previous decisions by other courts on pesticide regulation, the State Water Board has adopted four Pesticide Permits.

Program Information:

Vector Control

Permit: 2011-0002-DWQ | Hot News! | Fees | Program Page

General Information – Archives

The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Decisions

The Sixth Circuit Court Decision on March 28, 2011 (Extension of Stay)
On March 28, 2011, the United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, granted a motion to extend the stay currently in place in the matter of National Cotton Council of America v. U.S. EPA,553 F.3d 927 (2009). The stay of the Court’s 2009 decision is now effective until October 31, 2011. As a result of this extension, the federal regulation exempting pesticide discharges in compliance with FIFRA from the requirement to apply for an NPDES permit continues in effect through October 31. Until that time, persons applying pesticides have no affirmative duty to apply for an NPDES permit, in accordance with federal law.

Those who have previously applied for coverage under the three pesticide discharge permits adopted by the State Water Board on March 1, 2011 and the Weed Control Permit (Water Quality Order No. 2004-0009-DWQ), must submit a notice of termination if they do not intend to comply with the applicable permit. Once the stay expires, a new application for coverage will be required.

The Sixth Circuit Court Decision on June 8, 2009 (Two-Year Stay)
On June 8, 2009, the Sixth Circuit granted the motion for a two-year stay of the effect of the National Cotton Council of America v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The USEPA exemption will remain in effect until April 9, 2011.

The Sixth Circuit Court Decision on January 7, 2009
On January 7, 2009, the Sixth Circuit Court decided that the USEPA Final Rule is not a reasonable interpretation of the CWA and vacated the Final Rule.

U.S.EPA Final Rule  and (memorandum)
On November 20, 2006, the U.S.EPA issued its final rule on aquatic pesticides. This rule would eliminate the need for a NPDES permit for the application of pesticides to waters, if the application is made in accordance with Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) labels.

Rescission NPDES Permit WQO 2005-0010-DWQ for the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Silver King Creek Rotenone Project

WQO 2005-0012-DWQ Adopted on October 20, 2005

Regulation of Aquatic Pesticides Following the Ninth Circuit Decision in Fairhurst v. Hagener (10/05/05)

Memorandum

Aquatic Pesticide Matrix

The Ninth Circuit Court Decision in Fairhurst v. Hagener (9/8/05)

Fairhurst v. Hagener

Water Board Comments on USEPA Draft Rule Regarding Permit Requirements for Pesticide Applications in Compliance with FIFRA (4/14/05)

Comments

Attachment

USEPA proposed rule

The Ninth Circuit Court Decision in League of Wilderness Defenders v. Forsgren (11/4/02)

League of Wilderness Defenders v. Forsgren

Water Quality Order 2001-12-DWQ Adopted on July 19, 2001, Rescinded by WQOs 2004-0008-DWQ (larvicide discharges for vector control) and WQO 2004-0009-DWQ (aquatic herbicide discharges for weed control) on May 20, 2004

Regulation of Discharges of Aquatic Pesticides

Memorandum from Craig M. Wilson, Chief Counsel, April 8, 2002 – Discusses an interpretive statement by the USEPA

The Ninth Circuit Court Decision in Headwaters, Inc. v. Talent Irrigation District (3/12/01)

Headwaters, Inc. v. Talent Irrigation District

DFG Silver King Creek Rotenone Project (7/13/05)

WQO 2005-0010-DWQ Adopted on July 6, 2005, Rescinded by WQO 2005-0012-DWQ on October 20, 2005.

Vector Control – Archives

Vector Control  »» Vector Control Program Page

Draft Order Amending Order 2011-0002-DWQ

Draft Order |  Notice of Public Hearing |  Authorization letter
Amended Monitoring and Reporting Program (Order 2014-0038-EXEC)

Preliminary Draft Adulticides Permit – Notice of Opportunity to Provide Informal Comments

Draft Vector Control General Permit

Notice of Public Hearing | Draft Permit | Comments | Response to Comments
Comments (November 2, 2010) | Response to Comments (November 2, 2010)
Comments (February 18, 2011) | Response to Comments (February 18, 2011)
Change Sheet | Conformed Response to February 18, 2011 Comments

Draft Amendment Vector Control Permit

Notice of Public Hearing | Draft Amendment (Notice and Draft Amendment posted 2/8/12)
Comments (March 12, 2012) | Response to Comments (March 27, 2012) – (Posted 7/06/12)

Discharges of Aquatic Pesticides for Vector Control

Water Quality Order 2004-0008-DWQ Adopted on May 20, 2004, Replaced by WQO 2011-0002-DWQ on March 1, 2011

www.gfredlee.com
San Joaquin River Water Quality Issues G. Fred Lee PhD, DEE, and Anne Jones-Lee, PhD G. Fred Lee & Associates, El Macero, California gfredlee@aol.com www.gfredlee.com
Chemical Name: Formaldehyde
Chemical Type: Organic Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number: 50-00-0
Synonyms: Methanal
Source & References Threshold 1
(ug/L) 
Threshold 2
(ug/L) 
Units
if not ug/L
Notes Foot
note1 
Foot
note2
Adoption Date Limiting Threshold
Drinking Water Standards – Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs)
California Dept of Public Health 
Primary MCL
(health based + technology & economics)
Secondary MCL 
(taste & odor or welfare-based)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA)
Primary MCL 
(health based + technology & economics)
Secondary MCL
(taste & odor or welfare-based)
MCL Goal
(level for no adverse health effects)
California Public Health Goal or PHG 
(Cal/EPA, OEHHA)
California Notification Levels
(Department of Public Health)
100 1000 191 1/1/2000
Source & References Threshold 1
(ug/L) 
Threshold 2
(ug/L) 
Units
if not ug/L
Notes Foot
note1 
Foot
note2
Adoption Date Limiting Threshold
Drinking Water Health Advisories or
Suggested No-Adverse-Response Levels
for non-cancer health effects
USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD)
as a drinking water level*
1400 9/1/1990
USEPA Health Advisory
1000 166 1/1/1993
National Academy of Sciences Health Advisory
One-in-a-Million Incremental Cancer Risk Estimates for Drinking Water
Cal/EPA Cancer Potency Factor 
as a drinking water level**
USEPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) 
B1 119 5/1/1991
USEPA Health Advisory
B1 119 1/1/1993
National Academy of Sciences Health Advisory
California Proposition 65 Safe Harbor Level 
as a drinking water level***
No Significan Risk Level 
(one-in-100,000 cancer risk)
20 124 188
Maximum Allowable Dose Level
for Reproductive Toxicity
Source & References Threshold 1
(ug/L) 
Threshold 2
(ug/L) 
Units
if not ug/L
Notes Foot
note1 
Foot
note2
Adoption Date Limiting Threshold
Taste & Odor Threshold 600 126 1/1/1983
Agricultural Water Quality Goals 
(Food & Ag. Org. of United Nations)
California Inland Surface Waters –
California Toxics Rule Criteria
 (USEPA)
Human Health Protection
(30-day average)
Sources of Drinking Water
(water & fish consumption)
Other waters (fish consumption only)
Freshwater Aquatic Life Protection
Continuous Concentration
(4-day Average)
Maximum Concentration
(1-hour Average)
Maximum (Instantaneous)
Source & References Threshold 1
(ug/L) 
Threshold 2
(ug/L) 
Units
if not ug/L
Notes Foot
note1 
Foot
note2
Adoption Date Limiting Threshold
California Enclosed Bays & Estuaries –
California Toxics Rule Criteria 
(USEPA)
Human Health Protection 
(30-day avg; fish consumption only)
Saltwater Aquatic Life Protection
Continuous Concentration
(4-day Average)
Maximum Concentration
(1-hour Average)
Maximum (Instantaneous)
California Ocean Plan — Numerical Water Quality Objectives (State Water Board)
Human Health Protection
(30-day average; fish consumption only)
Marine Aquatic Life Protection
6- month Median
30-day Average
7-day Average
Daily Maximum
Instantaneous Maximum
Source & References Threshold 1
(ug/L) 
Threshold 2
(ug/L) 
Units
if not ug/L
Notes Foot
note1 
Foot
note2
Adoption Date Limiting Threshold
National Recommended Water Quality Criteria 
(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; CA Dept of Fish and Game if footnoted)
Human Health & Welfare Protection
Public Health Effects
(other than cancer risk)
Water & Fish Consumption
Fish Consumption Only
One-in-a-Million Incremental Cancer Risk Estimate
Water & Fish Consumption
Fish Consumption Only
Taste & Odor or Welfare
Freshwater Aquatic Life Protection
Recommended Criteria
Continuous Concentration
(4-day Average)
24-hour Average
Maximum Concentration
(1-hour Average)
Maximum
(Instantaneous)
Toxicity Information
(Lowest Observed Effect Level)
Acute
Chronic
Other
Saltwater Aquatic Life Protection
Recommended Criteria
Continuous Concentration
(4-day Average)
24-hour Average
Maximum Concentration
(1-hour Average)
Maximum (Instantaneous)
Toxicity Information
(Lowest Observed Effect Level)
Acute
Chronic
Other
Source & References Threshold 1
(ug/L) 
Threshold 2
(ug/L) 
Units
if not ug/L
Notes Foot
note1 
Foot
note2
Adoption Date Limiting Threshold
Notes:
*
Assumes 70 kg body weight, 2 liters/day water consumption, and 20% relative source contribution from drinking water. An additional uncertainty factor of 10 is used for Class C carcinogens.
**
Assumes 70 kg body weight and 2 liters/day water consumption.
***
Regulatory dose level divided by 2 liters/day water consumption.
#
Carcinogen / based on cancer risk
R
Reproductive toxin / based on reproductive toxicity.
CA
First threshold or range is recommended to implement promulgated Criteria to protect Aquatic life.
CH
First threshold or range is recommended to implement promulgated Criteria to protect Human health.
CC
First threshold or range is recommended to implement the Chemical Constituents objective.
CT
First threshold or range is recommended to implement the Chemical Constituents and the Tastes & Odors objectives.
TA
First threshold or range is recommended to implement the Toxicity objective to protect Aquatic life.
TH
First threshold or range is recommended to implement the Toxicity objective to protect Human health.
TO
First threshold or range is recommended to implement the Tastes and Ordors objectives.
G
Limiting threshold applies to Groundwater only.
IS
Limiting threshold applies to Inland Surface water only.
G&IS
Limiting threshold applies to both Groundwater and Inland Surface water.
EW
Limiting threshold applies to Estuarine Water only.
MW
Limiting threshold applies to Marine Water only.
Footnotes
191 First number is the Notification Level, above which local government notification is required and customer notification is recommended. Second number is the Response Level, at which the drinking water source is recommended to be taken out of service.
166 Value modified using more recent information in USEPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). See Reference 3.
B1 Class B1: Probable human carcinogen; limited epidemiologic evidence in humans. Likely to be carcinogenic to humans (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986 Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment).
119 Cancer classification not supported by ingestion data.
124 For the gas phase.
188 Carcinogen; limit based on cancer risk.
126 Applies to second value if more than one value listed. Water-dilution odor threshold calculated from air odor threshold using equilibrium distributions. From Reference 29.
Please follow and like us:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*