DPR 22-001 Neonicotinoid Pesticide Exposure Protection

Back to Proposed and Recently Adopted Regulations

Sign-up to receive Notices of Proposed Regulatory Action via e-mail.

DPR 22-001 Neonicotinoid Pesticide Exposure Protection (Noticed 2/25/22; Comment period closed 4/26/22; “15-day” comment period 10/5/22-10/21/22)

DPR adopted sections 6990 through 6990.16 of Title 3, California Code of Regulations as control measures necessary to protect pollinator health as identified in the “California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination” and “Addendum to the July 2018 California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination.” The control measures would affect the pesticide regulatory program activities pertaining to pesticide use and enforcement by regulating certain production agricultural applications of pesticide products containing the nitroguanidine-substituted neonicotinoid active ingredients, clothianidin, dinotefuran, imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam (collectively referred to as neonicotinoids). In summary, the control measures consist of application method and rate restrictions, application timing restrictions, and seasonal application rate caps for the four-neonicotinoid active ingredients and are specific based on crop group.

A virtual public hearing was held on April 25, 2022, to receive oral or written comments regarding the proposed changes.

• Notice of Proposed Regulatory Action, PDF
• Proposed Text, PDF
• Initial Statement of Reasons, PDF
• Economic and Fiscal Impact Statement (Form 399), PDF
• Notice of Modification of Text, PDF “15-day” comment period 10/5/22-10/21/22
• Text of Modified Regulations, PDF
• Notice of Addition of Documents to Rulemaking File, PDF “15-day” comment period 10/5/22-10/21/22
  • Tafarella, B. (2022). “Updated Calculations for Conversion Factor Method to Use Bee-Collected Soybean Nectar Residues in Neonicotinoid Risk Determination.” Pesticide Evaluation Branch and Pesticide Registration Branch, California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Memorandum dated September 7, 2022, PDF.
  • Mace, K. (2022). “Number of farms using nitroguanidine-substituted neonicotinoid insecticides.” Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis, California Department of Food and Agriculture. Memorandum dated June 14, 2022, PDF.
• Final Statement of Reasons, PDF
  • Attachment #1, PDF
  • Attachment #2, PDF
• Final Text of Regulations, PDF Filed with Secretary of State 4/10/23; Effective 1/1/24

• Documents Relied Upon
1. Assembly Bill No. 1789. Assembly Floor Analysis. 2013-2014 Regular Session, May 16, 2014.
2. Assembly Bill No. 1789. Senate Environmental Quality Analysis. 2013-2014 Regular Session, June 16, 2014.
3. Assembly Bill No. 1789. Senate Floor Analysis. 2013-2014 Regular Session, August 16, 2014.
4. California Notice 2009-02. “Notice of Decision to Initiate Reevaluation of Chemicals in the Nitroguanidine Insecticide Class of Neonicotinoids.” Dated March 31, 2009.
5. Cimino, A.M., Boyles, A.L., Thayer, K.A., & Perry, M.J. (2017). “Effects of Neonicotinoid Pesticide Exposure on Human Health: A Systematic Review.” Environmental Health Perspectives, 125(2), 155–162. DOI:10.1289/EHP515.
6. Clendenin, B. (2022). “Estimated Economic and Fiscal Impact of the Proposed Regulations Mitigating Impacts to Pollinators from Neonicotinoids.” Pesticide Registration Branch, California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Memorandum dated February 1, 2022, PDF.
7. DPR (2022). “Update to the Identification of Crop Residue Studies for Development of Proposed Pollinator Protection Regulations in Response to the Neonicotinoid Reevaluation.” Pesticide Evaluation Branch and Pesticide Registration Branch, California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Memorandum dated February 1, 2022, PDF.
8. Darling, R. (2019). “Addendum to the July 2018 California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination.” Pesticide Registration Branch, California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Memorandum dated January 30, 2019, PDF.
9. FAC section 12838. Legislative Counsel Digest. 2013-2014 Regular Session, September 26, 2014.
10. Goodhue, R., Mace, K., Rudder, J., Tolhurst, T., Tregeagle, D., Wei, H., Zheng, Y., Grafton-Cardwell, B., Grettenberger, I., Wilson, H., Van Steenwyk, R., Zalom, F., Rivera, M., Steggall, J. (2021). “Economic and pest management evaluation of proposed regulation of nitroguanidine-substituted neonicotinoid insecticides: eight major California commodities. Prepared by the California Department of Food and Agriculture’s Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis, the University of California, and the University of California Cooperative Extension.” Dated July 2, 2021, PDF.
11. Goodhue, R., Mace, K., Tolhurst, T., Tregeagle, D., Wei, H., Grafton-Cardwell, B., Grettenberger, I., Wilson, S.H., Van Steenwyk, R., Zalom, F., Steggall, J. (2019a). “Economic and pest management evaluation of nitroguanidine-substituted neonicotinoid insecticides: nine major California commodities. Prepared by the California Department of Food and Agriculture’s Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis, the University of California, and the University of California Cooperative Extension.” Dated August 26, 2019, PDF.
12. Goodhue, R., Mace, K., Tolhurst, T., Tregeagle, D., Wei, H., Grafton-Cardwell, B., Steggall, J., et al. (2020). “Economic and pest management evaluation of nitroguanidine-substituted neonicotinoid insecticides: eight major California commodities. Prepared by the California Department of Food and Agriculture’s Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis, the University of California, and the University of California Cooperative Extension.” Dated July 29, 2020, PDF.
13. Goodhue, R., Mace, K., Rudder, J., Steggall, J. (2019b). “Economic impact on agricultural operations of making nitroguanidine-substituted neonicotinoid insecticides restricted material. Prepared for the Department of Pesticide Regulation by the California Department of Food and Agriculture’s Office of Pesticide Consultation and Analysis, the University of California, and the University of California Cooperative Extension.”
14. Hageman, K. (2020). Scientific Peer Review of DPR’s Methodology to Develop the California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination and Supporting Report. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Utah State University. Dated May 4, 2020.
15. Johnson, R. (2020). Scientific Peer Review of DPR’s Methodology to Develop the California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination and Supporting Report. Department of Entomology, Ohio State University. Dated June 18, 2020.
16. Krupke, C. (2020). Scientific Peer Review of DPR’s Methodology to Develop the California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination and Supporting Report. Department of Entomology, Purdue University. Dated May 10, 2020.
17. Mace, K. (2021). Kevi Mace to Lauren Otani, Sacramento, CA, November 17, 2021.
18. Pesticide Registration and Evaluation Committee Meeting Minutes. Dated September 21, 2018.
19. Pesticide Registration and Evaluation Committee Meeting Minutes. Dated July 17, 2020.
20. Prichard, A. (2020). “Request for an External Peer Review of the Department of Pesticide Regulations’ Methodology to Develop the California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination and Supporting Report.” Pesticide Registration Branch, California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Memorandum dated February 3, 2020.
21. Smith, P. (2020). Scientific Peer Review of DPR’s Methodology to Develop the California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination and Supporting Report. Department of Environmental Toxicology, Texas Tech University. Dated April 14, 2020.
22. Tafarella, B., Clendenin, B. (2022). “Response to the External Scientific Peer Review Comments on DPR’s Neonicotinoid Risk Determination.” Pesticide Evaluation Branch and Pesticide Registration Branch, California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Memorandum dated February 1, 2022, PDF.
23. Tafarella, B. (2020). “Additional Information Related to the Department of Pesticide Regulation’s (DPR’s) 2018 California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination and Addendum.” Pesticide Registration Branch, California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Memorandum dated February 3, 2020, PDF.
24. Troiano, J., Tafarella, B., Kolosovich, A., Cameron, R., Alder, D., Darling, R. (2018). “California Neonicotinoid Risk Determination.” Environmental Monitoring and Pesticide Registration Branches, DPR. Dated July 2018, PDF.
25. U.S. EPA. (2020). “Attachment 2 to the Neonicotinoid Final Bee Risk Assessments: Residue Bridging Analysis of Foliar and Soil Agricultural Uses of Neonicotinoids.” Report Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0581-0357. Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA.
26. U.S. EPA, & DPR. (2016). “Preliminary Pollinator Assessment to Support the Registration Review of Imidacloprid.” Report Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844-0140. Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA.
27. U.S. EPA, PMRA, and DPR. (2014). “Guidance for Assessing Pesticide Risks to Bees.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA.
28. U.S. EPA. (2017a). “Draft Assessment of the Potential Effects of Dinotefuran on Bees.” Report Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0920-0014. Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA.
29. U.S. EPA. (2017b). “Preliminary Bee Risk Assessment to Support the Registration Review of Clothianidin and Thiamethoxam.” Report Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0865-0173. Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA.
30. USDA (2017). “Attractiveness of Agricultural Crops to Pollinating Bees for the Collection of Nectar and/or Pollen”, PDF.
31. USDA (2019). “2017 Census of Agriculture, California, State and County Data, Volume 1.” U.S. Department of Agriculture, Report AC-17-A-5.
32. Steinmann, K. (2021). “Analysis of Potential Reduction in Neonic Use from the Proposed Regulations.” Dated August 16, 2021.