Comment Log Display

In 2018 the Superior Ct of CA ordered DPR to develop a new
regulation for 1,3-D after it found that DPR had unlawfully adopted
a previous underground regulation. The regulation referred to On
page 12 sets a lifetime cancer potency level for residential
bystanders of 0.56ppb, a level 14 times less protective than the
0.04 ppb recommended by OEHHA scientists AND DPR is not in the
process of finalizing a second regulation for occupational
bystanders that sets a lifetime cancer potency level based on
OEHHA's more protective standard of 004 ppb recommendation. These
are 2 vastly different lifetime cancer potency levels for the same
chemical depending on who the person is - a neighbor near a field
or a worker close to a field, treated with 1,3-D. As a fumigant
(and contributor to ground OZONE) it drifts! It also assumes that
farm workers (occupational bystanders) only work from 8-4pm when
the lowest levels of 1,2-D are in the air. The reality is that more
than 90% of farmworkers start work at or before 7am.  The
regulation ignores exposure before or after work and exposures
during childhood and in retirement. It ignores concerns by expert
peer reviewers about breathing rates. This is a biased and
dangerous model and the CAPP report fails to acknowledge this
double standard in saying that "On January 1, 2024, DPR implemented
new regulations to strengthen protections for residential
bystanders against acute and chronic health risks associated with
1,3-Dichloropropene (1,3-D), a commonly used agricultural fumigant.
Building on these efforts, DPR has proposed additional regulations
to address cancer risk to occupational bystanders, which are
anticipated to take effect January 1, 2026. As part of DPR's
continuous evaluation of pesticides and to meet commitments under
various CERPs, DPR continues to participate in multiple community
air monitoring studies. These studies focus on tracking fumigants
including 1,3-D, methyl isothiocyanate (MITC), and chloropicrin in
communities where these pesticides are used." They  
What isn't said here is that there were many many comments that
there should not be two different protective life-time potency
exposure standards one for residential bystanders and one for
occupational bystanders. All bystanders exposed by either directly
applying 1,3-D or from drift should have the same LIFETIME
protective standard! By the way, 1,3-D is banned in 40 countries
and there are safer alternatives! 
In addition the report on Spray Days fails to provide the exact
location in the system of where the pesticides will be applied.
Without knowing where the system does not provide protective
information.