Comments to the Virginia Board of Agriculture and Consumer Services

RE: Proposed changes to 2 VAC 5-685-50

The Virginia Pest Management Association (VPMA) appreciates the important oversight of our industry by the VDACS Office of Pesticide Services, under the direction of the Virginia Board of Agriculture and Consumer Services. VPMA is dedicated to supporting strong pest management businesses that have the knowledge and ability to operate professionally and in compliance with the State's regulatory mandates.

Working with our industry to fulfill VPMA’s mission of promoting ethical and environmentally responsible pest management practices among our members through education, coalition and professionalism to safely protect the general public, the VPMA respectfully submits the following comments on the proposed changes to 2 VAC 5-685-20 and VAC 5-685-50.

2 VAC 5-685-20: VPMA supports the proposed change that eliminates the 10 day waiting period to retake a failed certification exam. We understand that this language change reduces the obstacles for getting technicians properly certified and licensed in Virginia, and may result in the reduction of the employer’s financial burden before a technician becomes productive for the employing company.

2 VAC 5-685-50:  VPMA does not support the proposed changes to this section. By deleting the 30 day grace period during which a candidate for registered technician who has failed their initial exam may continue to train and apply pesticides commercially under direct on-site supervision, we effectively take away their opportunity to train to pass the exam and become a certified applicator.

For several reasons stated below, taking away a trainee’s ability to apply pesticides during a 30-day “grace period” after failing the initial exam by a registered technician in training, even under direct on-site supervision, can be a costly and cumbersome issue that lacks sound reasoning.  The continued onsite supervised training of the candidate allows for additional on the job training and allows for the candidate to remain a productive member of the company.  The change as proposed will pose an undue financial burden on the company, and possibly result in a loss of employment opportunity for the candidate if their continued field training is denied by regulation.

Additionally, to take away the essential training scenario provided by the application of pesticides under the direct on-site supervision of a commercial certified applicator, in effect takes away the ability to train and educate a candidate for registered technician in the very tasks that he or she is being tested on.  You can liken this to a teenager with a driver’s permit who fails their driving test on the first attempt, who is then not able to practice driving any more, until they pass the test.

Further, a candidate for registered technician should be able to do the same job tomorrow that they were able to do yesterday.  The individual that failed the exam did not suddenly become less knowledgeable after taking the test, and by failing we should encourage continued training rather than prohibiting a reasonable 30-day time period to continue to train and teach this individual.  In many cases, training reviews are conducted while riding in the vehicle with the trainer and working on the job.

Finally, because a candidate for registered technician has to reapply to VDACS-OPS to get authorization to retake the exam, and this is still a manual process, it could be as long as two full weeks before that individual receives authorization to retake the exam.  This waiting period will cost the employer salary and benefits for a person that cannot even effectively train to retake the exam on which his job is dependent. 

We understand and appreciate removing the 10-day waiting period to retake the exam, but the reality is that through no fault of VDACS-OPS, the option for online application does not currently exist therefore this application process likely will take 10 days anyway.

Regardless of when a candidate for registered technician will be authorized to retake the exam, the proposed changes that disallow this individual from continuing their practical pesticide application training is counter intuitive to developing a well-prepared candidate for becoming a registered technician. Nothing can replace supervised, hands-on training experience in the preparation for becoming a certified pesticide applicator.

Respectfully Submitted,

Andrea Coron

VPMA Executive Director

PO Box 7161

Fredericksburg, VA 22404

vpma@cox.net

540/374-9200