PDF file - WSU Pesticide Safety Education Program

Progress Report of the Certification & Training Assessment Group
January 2002
Introduction to the Certification & Training Program
Protecting the public and the environment through the safe and effective use of
pesticides is the underlying purpose of the pesticide applicator certification and training
(C&T) program. With the 1972 amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was given
the authority to restrict the use of pesticides used by certified applicators (or under their
supervision). The determination of competency was delegated to pesticide state lead
agencies (SLAs). Pesticide applicator training was delegated primarily to state
cooperative extension service (CES) and is also performed by other entities.
There are approximately 1.2 million applicators in the U.S. who have received
certification to use Restricted Use Pesticides (RUPs) on farms by air and ground
equipment, in greenhouses, nurseries, golf courses, industrial plants, food production
facilities, hospitals, homes, restaurants, businesses --- just to name a few. Additionally,
many states require certification to use General Use or Unclassified pesticides in
specialized areas. Since the early 1970s, the reality of the national C&T program has
evolved to address such issues as: the need for specialized chemical-specific training,
the protection of sensitive populations, increased public concern over pesticide use,
agricultural/urban interface, a growing Spanish-speaking applicator workforce and
pesticide use in schools.
Establishment of the Certification & Training Assessment Group
History
The Certification & Training Assessment Group (CTAG) is a consortium of professionals
to promote the safe and effective use of pesticides through education, testing and
licensing, and enforcement. CTAG was formed in 1997 based on a request by the
American Association of Pesticide Safety Educators (AAPSE) to undertake an in-depth
study of the pesticide applicator C&T program. The mission of the group was to look at
where the program had been, where it should go, determine the needs, develop a
consensus for change and explore changes.
The original CTAG consisted of a body of directors and four teams in the following
program areas: content, infrastructure and delivery, evaluation and funding. After
collecting information from SLA and CES on their programs, each team developed
goals and recommendations in each area. The goals were: 1) reduce the risks to the
public from pesticide use; 2) provide high quality pesticide education and safety training
programs; 3) maintain the consistency, integrity and validity of the certification and
recertification programs and processes; 4) ensure that adequate and equitable funding
Page 1 of 5

is available to pesticide safety education, training and certification programs and 5)
improve the efficiency of program organization and operations.
A January 1999 draft report entitled “Pesticide Safety for the 21 st Century — The
Findings and Proposals of the Certification & Training Assessment Group” was
distributed for stakeholder review and comment. Comments were received from SLA
certification managers, CES pesticide applicator training coordinators, state pest control
associations, private training companies, state farm bureaus, state agri-business
associations, chemical companies, agricultural retailers, agricultural aviators, railroad
companies, nurseries, state berry growers, and Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory
Agency (PMRA). Proposals were also discussed during the 1999 National Pesticide
Applicator Training and Certification Workshop, a 1999 Pesticide Regulatory Education
Program (PREP) course, and AAPCO/SFIREG and AAPSE meetings.
New CTAG Board in 2001
In August 2001, representatives from EPA, USDA, SLA and CES came together to
review the CTAG effort. As a result of the meeting, CTAG was restructured thereby
creating an official CTAG Board. Board members, including chairs and vice chairs,
serve overlapping two and three year terms. It was also determined that CTAG
workgroups would be established by the Board, as needed, to work on specific tasks. A
CTAG charter was developed to formalize the roles and responsibilities of the CTAG
Board. This group will: determine the current status and future direction of the program;
create and coordinate workgroups, provide updates on accomplishments, and maintain
a communications network with partners. Two workgroups were formed to focus
activities on specific projects. The charge of the first workgroup is to determine the
components of a C&T plan that meet the requirements of FIFRA and the elements of a
C&T program that go beyond FIFRA requirements. The second workgroup is tasked
with looking at how the pesticide handler portion of the WPS program can be
incorporated into the current C&T program, as well as to provide EPA with a plan for a
comprehensive pesticide safety program, for all persons who sell, mix, load, apply or
recommend the use of pesticides, that will demonstrate competency, mitigate risk and
improve pesticide security through appropriate education, training and testing. For
more information, refer to the CTAG web page http://pep.wsu.edu/ctag which is under
development by Carol Ramsay.
Activities and Accomplishments to Date
Exam Development
Several activities related to exam development were carried-out in support of Goal 3 -
maintain the consistency, integrity and validity of the certification and recertification
programs and processes.
Page 2 of 5

---Software Assessment
In 2000, a CTAG Technical Review Committee provided their evaluation of
commercially available Certification Exam Development Software to the states, tribes
and territories. Each product was evaluated on: compatibility with equipment, capacity
to store large item banks, user-friendly, use on networks, scoring and grading
capabilities, cost, security, graphics, technical support and ability to scramble questions.
Committee members were: Carl Rew (IN.), Carl Martin (AZ.), Randy Rivera (TX.), John
Snodgrass (TX.), Gary Fish (ME.) and Jeanne Heying (EPA). Copies of the evaluation
are available through Jeanne Heying (telephone 703-305-7666.)
---Workshops/Sessions on Exam Development Process
EPA sponsored two workshops for SLA and CES partners on "Creating a Professionally
Sound and Legally Defensible Pesticide Credentialing Exam." The three day
workshops were held in April 1999 and May 2000 and focused on the process used to
develop a pesticide applicator exam that will give results that are reliable, consistent
over time, valid and legally defensible. Representatives (at least one state regulatory
and/or pesticide educator) of 42 states, 3 territories, Puerto Rico, and the District of
Columbia, EPA Regions (7 & 8) and USDA participated in the two workshops. Carl
Rew (IN.) was instrumental in the planning of, and instruction during, the workshops.
---Core Exam Project:
EPA and Canada’s PMRA are in the process of collaborating on a pesticide applicator
core exam project. The outcome of the project will be a professionally developed exam
of core knowledge principals for all first time candidates to become pesticide
applicators. A committee of pesticide applicators and volunteers have approved a job
analysis and written “items” or questions. Apart from the exam committee, items were
written with the help of: Colleen Hudak/N.C., Carl Martin/AZ., Paul Baker/AZ., Sherman
Takatori/ID., Ivan Sanderson/UT., Richard Beard/UT., Diana Roll/OH., Ruth
Marston/MN., Derrick Lastinger/GA., Jessica Dewey/USDA-APHIS and from Canada -
Terry Waddell, Susan Kelner and Sandra Shiels. Lead agencies and provincial
governments are in the process of field testing items. Field testing is being conducted
with the help of the following lead agencies in the U.S.: Gina Davis/MI., Liz Braxton and
Norm Nesheim/FL., Sherman Takatori/N.D., Mac Takeda/CA., Randy Rivera and John
Snodgrass/TX., Diana Roll/OH., Rick Hansen and Ruth Marston/MN., Dave Scott/PA.,
Andrew Thostensen/N.D., Linda Schmidt/CT., Sandy Wells/OK., John Scott/CO.,
Derrick Lastinger/GA., Jeff Goode/AR., Ivan Sanderson/UT., Gerald Kirbach/IL.
Completed core exams are expected to be available to lead agencies and provincial
governments in late 2002. Copies of the job analysis are available through Jeanne
Heying/EPA (telephone 703-305-7666.)
Cooperation
---Pesticide Safety Education Center
One of the CTAG proposals was to enhance pesticide safety education in part by
strengthening the skills of pesticide safety trainers. In 2001, two pilot Pesticide Safety
Education Center (PSEC) courses were held for county agents and field inspectors.
Page 3 of 5

The courses focused mainly on how to engage the audience and use hands-on
education tools. The course was funded by the North Carolina Environmental Trust
Fund and was attended by representatives from Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina,
South Carolina and Virginia. Additional courses are planned for March and October
2002. This project was made possible with the help of: Barry Brennan/HI., Julie Haigler
and Colleen Hudak/N.C., Wayne Buhler and Bob McRracken/N.C., Bob Bellinger/S.C.,
Natalia Clifton/MA., Mary Grodner/LA., Pat Hipkins and Mike Weaver/VA., Win
Hock/PA., Norm Nesheim/FL., Pat O’Connor-Marer/CA., Sherman Takatori/ID., Ed
Vitzthum/NE., Melanie Zavala/CA, Kerry Richards/PA., Monte Johnson/USDA, John
Impson/USDA (retired) and EPA - Jeanne Heying, Richard Pont, Kevin Keaney and
EPA Region 4.
---Web Site on Educational Resources:
Resource sharing among educators and regulators saves monetary resources
expended on development and delivery. During 2001, a new web site was launched as
a sharing platform for educators and regulators. The web site, http://pep.wsu.edu/psp
lists materials developed or being drafted, format, dates and contact information. In
order to get the most out of this resource, educators and regulators are asked to keep
the web site current by continuously entering information on resources developed. If
you qualify and don’t already have a login password, contact Jeanne Heying at EPA.
Credit goes to Carol Ramsay/WA. for making it happen.
---Workshops for Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP):
EPA/OPP decisions on the classification or reclassification of pesticide uses impact
pesticide safety education and regulatory programs. To improve EPA’s understanding
of these ramifications, lead agencies and pesticide safety educators have voluntarily
provided their time to interact with OPP staff. Workshops were held in 2000, 2001 and
expect to be held again in 2002. Presenters have included: Ed Crow/MD., Rick
Hansen/MN., Carol Ramsay/WA., Randy Rivera/TX., Suzanne Deatherage/TX., Larry
Olsen/MI., Drew Martin/IN. and Fred Whitford/IN.
---PREP Course:
Pesticide Regulatory Education Programs (PREP) are courses designed to provide
practical, up-to-date information on technical, policy and management related issues for
state, tribal, territorial and federal partners. The goals of this national program are to
strengthen partner capabilities to address current and evolving issues and continue to
improve cooperation among partners. Planning is now underway for an April 2002
PREP course on CTAG activities. For more information on PREP, consult:
http://www.prep-gov.net
---USDA Efforts:
Monte Johnson, USDA’s National Program Leader, renamed the program from
Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT) to Pesticide Safety Education Program (PSEP) to
reflect that the coordinators and staff in the Cooperative Extension Service at Land
Grant Universities serve not only pesticide applicators, but the public, master gardeners,
technicians, professional associations and others. The Performance Planning and
Page 4 of 5

Reporting System (PPRS) is a web-based reporting system for the PSEP coordinators
that was initiated in 2001. The Plans of Work and Annual Reports from PPRS will be
used to justify funding for the program and provide data to enhance the program’s
visibility and credibility. Also, USDA is forming committees to review PPRS and
address possible changes to the funding formula. For more information, contact Monte
(telephone 202-401-1121) or visit:
http://www.reeusda.gov/pas/programs/pat/coverpas.htm
CTAG 2001
---(#1) Workgroup on C&T Plans:
The State Plan CTAG workgroup, led by Carol Ramsay/WA. and Debborah Danford/TX.
met in December 2001 to review and continue progress on tasks related to improving
FIFRA C&T programs. Substantial progress was made on the development of a draft
C&T state plan template which will facilitate the collection, maintenance and review of
required state plan components, applicator number reporting requirements, reciprocity
agreements and access to additional program information. The template will be further
developed with the help of program partners during the April 2002 PREP course.
Three white (or “issue”) papers were developed to address current impediments in
FIFRA and its corresponding rules (40 CFR Part 171). These issues include: 1)
Requiring Minimum Age Requirements for Approval of State Certification Programs; 2)
Requiring Written Examinations for Approval of State Certification Programs and 3)
Eliminating 50/50 Grant Funding Match Requirements for C & T Programs.
---(#2) Workgroup on Program Integration:
The second workgroup, led by Carl Martin/AZ. and Pat O’Connor-Marer/CA. met
January 15 - 16, 2002 in Alexandria, Virginia. The workgroup is now drafting proposals
on measures that could be taken throughout the lifetime of a pesticide product that
would increase security of pesticides and application equipment.
Future Efforts
As is demonstrated in the 1999 “Pesticide Safety for the 21 st Century — The Findings
and Proposals of the Certification & Training Assessment Group,” the universe of
issues, concerns and possibilities in the C&T program continue to change and evolve
over time. While the fundamental needs of the program are being addressed, new
areas to be addressed are continually rising to the top and the “wish list” always
remains. Fortunately, there are many lead agency and safety education partners willing
to contribute time, energy and enthusiasm for the good of the program and its role in our
society.
Page 5 of 5