View Rule

EPA promulgated a final rule to amend the Certification of Pesticide Applicators regulations at 40 CFR 171 on January 4, 2017 (82 FR 952). The rule went into effect on March 6, 2017. In accordance with Executive Order 13777, EPA solicited comments in the spring of 2017 on regulations that may be appropriate for repeal, replacement or modification as part of the Regulatory Reform Agenda efforts. EPA received comments specific to the certification rule. Based on concerns raised through the Regulatory Reform process, EPA announced in December 2017 that it was beginning a process to reconsider the minimum age provision for the Certification rule. EPA plans to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for this action.

Statement of Need:

Based on input received from stakeholders in part on Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Agency is proposing to amend the Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule ("Certification rule"), 40 CFR part 171, as revised January 4, 2017 (82 FR 952), by revising the minimum age requirements for applicators certified to use RUPs and for persons who use RUPs under the supervision of a certified applicator. EPA is proposing to defer to state or tribal minimum age requirements for commercial applicators, private applicators and noncertified applicators who use RUPs under the supervision of a certified applicator and to establish a federal minimum age of 16 years for all three types of applicators if states or tribes do not establish enforceable minimum age requirements.

Summary of the Legal Basis:

This proposal would amend the Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule ("Certification rule"), 40 CFR part 171, as revised January 4, 2017 (82 FR 952).

Alternatives:

Not to propose the rule with the potential to reduce costs and potentially streamline regulatory burden.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits:

To be determined.

Risks:

By law, some states have minimum age of 18 years of age for workers and would probably not change the state laws to reap the additional cost benefit of this rule.