County Roads Department Investigated for Use of Prohibited Pesticides Near Wellheads: Part III
Pesticide Episode Incident Report Reveals Numerous Incriminating Details Discovered During Investigation of County Roads Department Roadside Right-of-Way Vegetation Control Program.
Investigation Conducted by County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office Exposes Multiple Violations by County Roads Department of the California Code of Regulations for Wellhead Protection, Groundwater Protection, General Standards of Care, and Protection of Persons, Animals, and Property.
Published: 7 February 2018–2110 PST (Rev. 12 April 2018–0115 PST)
Chapter 3: Overview
California Code of Regulations (Title 3. Food and Agriculture) § 6609(a)(4) Wellhead Protection — enacted May 27, 2004 — was repeatedly violated when the Roads Department of a rural California county sprayed mixtures containing multiple prohibited preemergent pesticides within 100 feet of unprotected wellheads in violation of California’s state-mandated minimum distance requirement.
Additionally, the County Roads Department repeatedly violated CCR § 6600(e) General Standards of Care, CCR § 6614(b)(2)(3) Protection of Persons, Animals, and Property, and CCR § 6800(b) Groundwater Protection List.
The repeated violations by the County Roads Department of the 100-foot restricted zones protecting the wellheads were found to be the direct byproduct of its flawed operational and pesticide procurement practices, compounded by negligently engaging in long-prohibited field practices.
Those repeated violations, compounded by other critical factors such as the County Roads Department’s failure to conduct a comprehensive and regulatory-compliant roadside vegetation management program for fire hazard risk reduction in 2017, led to an escalating citizen encounter with the county’s government, forcing the county’s government to publicly address the health hazard risk and wildfire hazard risk associated with its failed roadside vegetation management practices, in addition to addressing the underlying negligent practices that it had been found to have engaged in during 2016 (and potentially prior years).
It was the county’s lack of openness and its lack of transparency with its impacted citizens regarding the pesticide violations that gave impetus to the escalation with the Board of Supervisors, and publicly pressured the District 5 Supervisor’s reluctant action on January 16, 2018 to direct county staff to prepare to deliver a public presentation in an upcoming Board of Supervisors meeting on the entire process, both legal and administrative, of what went on with respect to the wellheads and the spraying in District 5.
As of April 12, 2018 that public presentation has not yet occurred, and the April 17 Board of Supervisors meeting will be 13 weeks since staff was directed to prepare and present.
The manner and magnitude of the County Roads Department’s preemergent pesticide violations — and that of the Pest Control Advisor who provided the Pest Control Recommendation — are well documented in the Chronology that appears in later parts of this report.