 | |
| Agency overview | |
|---|---|
| Headquarters | Cal/EPA Building,Sacramento,California |
| Employees | 440 staff |
| Annual budget | $12.478 million (2023-2024) |
| Agency executives |
|
| Parent agency | California Environmental Protection Agency |
| Website | www |
TheCalifornia Department of Pesticide Regulation, also known as DPR or CDPR, is one of six boards, departments and offices (BDOs) of theCalifornia Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA).
The stated mission of DPR: "We protect human health and the environment by fostering sustainable pest management and regulating pesticides." DPR's work includes:[1]
DPR is regarded as the premier U.S. agency for pesticide regulation, the acknowledged peer ofUnited States Environmental Protection Agency andHealth Canada, and as an international authority in the field.[1]
California passed its first pesticide-related law in 1901, just three years afterNew York passed the nation's first pesticide law in 1898. The focus of California's first law was on preventing consumer fraud for sale of the most widely usedinsecticide,Paris green. Following theUnited States Congress passage of the first federal pesticide legislation, theFederal Insecticide and Rodenticide Act in 1910, California passed corresponding legislation, the State Insecticide and Fungicide Act of 1911. Similar to the federal act, at this time, the legislation was primarily concerned with mislabeling and adulteration of pesticides.[1]
In the 1920s, the public began to raise concerns about pesticide residues in food as agricultural pesticide use, reports of illnesses, and seizures of fruit with high arsenic levels conducted by health officials increased. These changes prompted the state's pesticide regulatory program, which was at that time part of theCalifornia Department of Agriculture (also known as CDA and renamed as theCalifornia Department of Food and Agriculture in 1972), to begin analyzing fresh produce forpesticide residues and set allowable residue levels, or tolerances.[1]
New pesticides prompted additional controls in the decades to follow. In 1925, there were about 1,700 pesticide products in California, which doubled to about 3,500 products in 1935, and grew to 7,000 pesticide products in 1945.[1]
In 1969 and 1970, California passed landmark legislation that required pesticides to be thoroughly evaluated prior to being registered for use. Additionally, more authority was given to the department, allowing them to strengthen the study criteria for which pesticide manufacturers were required to submit and to make restrictions on how pesticides are used. Another major component of the legislation required the department to begin “an orderly program of continuous evaluation of pesticides already registered and eliminate from use those posing a danger to the agricultural or nonagricultural environment."[1]
In 1972,CDFA was given the primary responsibility for ensuring “the safe use of pesticides and for safe working conditions for farmworkers, pest control applicators, and other persons handling, storing or applying pesticides, or working in and about pesticide-treated areas.” The department carried out the mandate by adopting regulations outlining rules on pesticide handling, pesticide storage,protective clothing, worker entry into treated fields, and field posting. At this time, the county agricultural commissioners (CACs) were given joint responsibility, along withCDFA, to enforce these regulations, and both theCDFA and the Department of Health were given “joint and mutual responsibility” for developing pesticide worker safety regulations. WhenCal/EPA was formed in 1991, the aforementioned roles were transferred to DPR and Cal/EPA’sOffice of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), respectively.[1]
DPR continues to complete risk assessments and risk reduction measures on chemicals that pose the highest risks to human health and the environment. Protection of workers remains paramount, and these activities are consistently improved and expanded.[1] Recent accomplishments are described below.
From 2012 to 2014, DPR continued to advance the protection of California’s residents and environment, including:
DPR is organized into two divisions: Pesticide Programs and Administrative Services. The Pesticide Programs includes the following branches:[1]
The Administrative Services Division includes:
DPR's scientific responsibilities are fulfilled by a highly educated and trained professional staff of about 390 individuals.[6] The staff includetoxicologists, environmental specialists,statisticians,epidemiologists,community outreach workers, andindustrial hygienists. Additionally, under DPR oversight, the CACs and approximately 250 of theirbiologists serve as the local enforcement agents for pesticide laws and regulations in California's 58 counties.[7]
In fiscal year 2015-2016 DPR was budgeted for approximately $90.9 million, almost 98% of the funding coming from regulatory fees, primarily levied on pesticide sales at the point of first sale into the state, and penalties and the remaining 2% coming from federal funds from theUnited States Environmental Protection Agency and theUnited States Department of Agriculture.[1][6]
All DPR grant programs are related toIntegrated Pest Management (IPM). The DPR cites the University of California Agriculture & Natural Resources definition of IPM as "an ecosystem-based strategy that focuses on long-term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological control, habitat manipulation, modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties."[8][9] This term encompasses a wide variety of both research and implementation projects that apply for grants from the DPR. Due to the broad nature of IPM, there are two separate grant programs, the Alliance and Research Grant Programs, each with different funding criteria. The Pest Management Advisory Committee is a 30-member group which meets four times a year to determine which applicant projects to fund.[8]
This program's focus is expanding and improving existing IPM practices throughout California. Two common features in projects that receive Alliance Grants are the reduction of dangers to the public and the environment, and education and outreach programs related to their proposed actions. These projects are often applicable to a variety of circumstances, and can provide the groundwork for future projects. This program has funded 32 separate projects with a total grant amount of $5.6 million, between 2007 and 2022, with two to three projects funded every year.[10] In 2022, the DPR announced an expansion of the Alliance Grant budget from $400,000 divided amongst all awardees to up to $1.8 million per awardee.[11][12][13]
This program is focused on the research and development of new pesticide use practices, to advance modern IPM systems. Research Grants are often used to gain a better understanding of an ecosystem, or to investigate the impacts of a certain IPM practice. When successful, these projects can guide future policy design, as well as future pesticide production. Between 2013 and 2022, this program has provided funding to 31 projects with a total grant amount of $6.8 million, with up to five projects funded every year.[14] In 2022, the DPR announced an expansion to the Research Grant budget from $1.1 million divided amongst all awardees to up to $3.75 million per awardee.[15][12][16]
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)| History |  | |
|---|---|---|
| Agencies | ||
| Regulations | ||
| Programs | ||
| Related topics | ||
Executivestate agencies, departments and other entities of theState of California | ||
|---|---|---|
| Cabinet-level superagencies |  | |
| Cabinet-level departments | ||
| Cabinet-level offices | ||
| BCSH departments | ||
| GOA departments | ||
| CalEPA departments | ||
| HHS departments |
| |
| LWDA departments | ||
| CNRA departments | ||
| CalSTA departments | ||
| Independent entities | ||
| Future superagencies | ||
| Former superagencies | ||
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
