Norman Birchfield and Jay Ellenberger EPA Office of Pesticide Programs Gregory Sayles, Kerry Bullock, and Michael Kosusko EPA Office of Research and Development.

Norman Birchfield and Jay EllenbergerEPA Office of Pesticide Programs

Gregory Sayles, Kerry Bullock, and Michael Kosusko

EPA Office of Research and Development

Environmental Technology Council Brownbag April 20, 2006

Project for Encouraging the Use

of Pesticide Drift Reduction

Technologies

Spray Drift• What is spray drift?

The movement of droplets through the air to any off-target site during, or shortly after, application

Modesto, CA Area Agriculture and Development

From EPA Pesticide Industry Sales and Usage Report

Motivation for this Work• Increased sensitivity to spray drift issues from

suburban development and endangered species concerns

• Growers/applicators currently manage drift via following labels buffer zones, weather conditions

• Product labels do not recognize many potentially effective technologies certain low-drift nozzles drift retardants etc

Motivation for this Work

• The acceptance of a larger variety of drift-reducing technologies (DRTs) would allow greater flexibility in drift management

• Many potentially effective DRTs are not generally utilized but may be economical

What is needed to support more use of more DRTs?

EPA DRT Team• OPP – spray drift risk assessment and policy• ORD

DC – ETC, cross-EPA communications RTP – ETV experience Athens – spray drift research Cincinnati – project guidance

• Contract support RTI – QA and ETV experience University of Queensland – technical support

Development Process

How should this process be tested and improved?

What are the barriers /challenges to the use of DRTs?

What research is needed to overcome these barriers / challenges?

What process would support and motivate the use of DRTs?

• Experts meeting in Indianapolis – January 2003• Equipment manufacturers, registrants,

academic / government researchers, regulators, extension

• Most significant challenges identified: No established U.S. program to verify DRT

performance Currently no mechanism to reward use of DRTs in

EPA risk assessments and on pesticide labels

What are the barriers /challenges to the use of DRTs?

• Experts meeting in Arlington VA – May 2004

• Equipment manufacturers, registrants,

academic/government researchers, regulators

• Research elements identified

• Elements linked to form draft DRT Process

What research is needed to overcome these barriers / challenges?

What process would support and motivate the use of DRTs?

Draft DRT Process

Develop information to support choice of DRT

Develop verificationprogram for DRTs

Conduct verification ofDRT performance

Update drift models for DRT use in R.A.

Nominate pesticide/use compatible with DRT

Conduct R.A. with DRTincluded with use

Develop label language allowing/crediting DRT

Conduct cost savingsanalysis

Conduct grower/applicator outreach

• Run feasibility test – evaluate and improve• 2005 ESTE grant received

focusing on boom-type sprayers Subsidize testing of some promising DRTs Stakeholder Technical Panels to develop test

plans• January 2006• July 2006

• 2006 ESTE funding proposal submitted for orchard/vineyard DRTs

How should this process be tested and improved?

Examples of Potential DRTs for Boom Sprayers

• Spray Tank Adjuvant Drift Retardants

• Low Drift Nozzles/Atomizers

• Windbreaks

• Electrostatic Sprayers

• Shields/Shrouds

• Air Assisted Sprayers

Two Air Assisted Sprayers

Ledebuhr Industries’Proptec Horizontal Sprayer

Hardi International’sTWIN sprayer

Draft DRT Process

Develop information to support choice of DRT

Develop verificationprogram for DRTs

Conduct verification ofDRT performance

Update drift models for DRT use in R.A.

Nominate pesticide/use compatible with DRT

Conduct R.A. with DRTincluded with use

Develop label language allowing/crediting DRT

Conduct cost savingsanalysis

Conduct grower/applicator outreach

• Can the DRT effectively and economically reduce drift? Review existing info “Strawman” Risk Assessment Preliminary cost analysis

Develop information to support choice of DRT

Draft DRT Process

Develop information to support choice of DRT

Develop verificationprogram for DRTs

Conduct verification ofDRT performance

Update drift models for DRT use in R.A.

Nominate pesticide/use compatible with DRT

Conduct R.A. with DRTincluded with use

Develop label language allowing/crediting DRT

Conduct cost savingsanalysis

Conduct grower/applicator outreach

• Design a verification program that meets stakeholders’ needs Scientifically sound verification protocol Third-party verification using specific

protocol increases confidence

• Institute the verification program• Drift models used in EPA risk

assessment need to include DRT

Develop verificationprogram for DRTs

Conduct verification of DRT performance

Update drift models for DRT use in R.A.

EPA – experienced in technology performance

verification

• Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program

• Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program

• Energy Star

Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program

• ETV develops testing protocols and verifies the performance of technologies that have the potential to improve protection of human health and the environment

• The Environmental and Sustainable Technology Evaluation (ESTE) Program is a new part of ETV

• ESTE is funding the development of a DRT performance protocol and is expected to subsidize testing of initial DRTs

Draft DRT Process

Develop information to support choice of DRT

Develop verificationprogram for DRTs

Conduct verification ofDRT performance

Update drift models for DRT use in R.A.

Nominate pesticide/use compatible with DRT

Conduct R.A. with DRTincluded with use

Develop label language allowing/crediting DRT

Conduct cost savingsanalysis

Conduct grower/applicator outreach

• Nominate pesticide/use which may benefit from DRT availability

• OPP conducts RA including use of DRT based on: Performance of DRT Updated drift models

• Label language developed giving incentives for use of DRT

Nominate pesticide/use compatible with DRT

Conduct R.A. with DRTincluded with use

Develop label language allowing/crediting DRT

Example of Possible DRT Incentives on Label

Application Equipment

Release Height

Droplet Size

Buffer Size (ft)

Standard application equipment

High boom Fine 80

Coarse 40

Low boom Fine 40

Coarse 20

DRT -- -- 20

Draft DRT Process

Develop information to support choice of DRT

Develop verificationprogram for DRTs

Conduct verification ofDRT performance

Update drift models for DRT use in R.A.

Nominate pesticide/use compatible with DRT

Conduct R.A. with DRTincluded with use

Develop label language allowing/crediting DRT

Conduct cost savingsanalysis

Conduct grower/applicator outreach

• Conduct cost analysis of spraying with and without DRT Spraying at critical times Additional spray hrs/day, days/yr Lower liability?

• Tech transfer to Growers/Applicators Drift reduction capability of the DRT Incentives on labels Possible cost savings

Conduct cost savingsanalysis

Conduct grower/applicator outreach

Strong Interest to Date• Pesticide Registrants• Adjuvant Producers• Applicator Groups• Sprayer Manufacturers • Academic Researchers• USDA ARS, NRCS• Pursuing others

Grower Groups Insurance Companies

DRT Project receiving high visibility in EPA

Environmental Technology Council• Established by the EPA Administrator

To achieve improved, real world environmental results through the application of innovative technology

Identify priority environmental problems needing new approaches

Coordinate efforts by EPA and others to identify and implement technology solutions

Partner with other Feds, states, tribes, non-profits, and industry

Summary• This effort can be a winner for multiple

stakeholders: Gives greater flexibility to Grower/Applicators to

meet or improve on drift requirements May lower overall costs of spraying Supports private-sector technology development Minimizes impact of spraying on humans and

ecosystems

• Draft DRT Process constructed• Feasibility test of the DRT Process planned