Abstract

A number of pesticide application technologies offer the potential to reduce spray drift from pesticide applications. However, limited information exists on the effectiveness of these technologies in reducing spray drift. Working with a stakeholder technical panel under EPA’s Environmental Technology Council, the Office of Pesticide Programs in EPA has developed and is in the process of validating a testing protocol to verify the effectiveness of drift reduction technologies (DRTs). The DRT testing protocol was adapted from standard test methods and regulatory methods used in other countries and describes the testing approach that will be used to generate high-quality, peer-reviewed data for DRTs, including test design and quality assurance aspects. Both low-speed and high-speed wind tunnel tests were completed using a reference nozzle and two test nozzles to evaluate the performance of the generic DRT testing protocol. By Summer 2010, EPA anticipates to finalize this testing protocol based on the test results performed by EPA and other stakeholders. As a next step, EPA intends to encourage equipment manufacturers to voluntarily use the protocol for testing their equipment. Tested technologies that are proven to significantly reduce spray drift may be considered for addition to pesticide product labels by pesticide registrants and by EPA in its risk assessment and management decisions for the registration of new pesticide and uses and registration review (reevaluation) of currently registered pesticides. Pesticide product labels citing the use of DRTs could have reduced restrictions for applications, provide applicators with greater flexibility, and result in less off-target pesticide deposition. This paper will provide an update of EPA’s efforts to validate the DRT testing protocol and discuss future plans for using a validated protocol in evaluating DRTs in an effort to reduce load from unintended spray drift of pesticides in the environment.

References

1.
U.S. EPA
, Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee, Oct. 17–18, 2007, Meeting,
2007
, http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ppdc/2007/oct2007/session1-spraydrift.pdf (Last accessed July 29, 2010).
2.
Khan
,
F. A.
,
Ellenberger
,
J. S.
,
Kosusko
,
M.
,
Bullock
,
K.
, and
Birchfield
,
N. B.
, “
Encouraging the Use of Drift Reduction Technologies in the United States
,”
Aspect of Applied Biology 84, International Advances in Pesticide Application
,
Association Applied Biology, c/o Warwick HRI
,
Wellesbourne, Warwick, United Kingdom
,
2008
, pp.
107
114
.
3.
Sayles
,
G.
,
Birchfield
,
N.
, and
Ellenberger
,
J.
, “
US EPA’s Research Proposal for Encouraging the Use of Spray Drift Reduction Technologies
,”
Proc. Int. Conf. on Pesticide Application for Drift Management
, Waikoloa, HI, Oct. 27-29
2004
, pp.
204
209
, http://pep.wsu.edu/drift04/proceedings.html.
4.
U.S. EPA
, DRAFT Generic Verification Protocol for ETV DRT,
2007
, http://www.epa.gov/etv/este.html#pdrt (Last accessed July 29, 2010).
5.
Kosusko
,
M.
,
Birchfield
,
N. B.
,
Khan
,
F. A.
, and
Ellenberger
,
J. S.
, “
Development of the EPA/ETV Test Protocol for Pesticide Spray Drift Reduction Technology (DRT)
,”
30th ASTM Symposium on Pesticide Formulations and Delivery Systems: Regulations and Innovations
, Atlanta, GA,
2009
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
.
6.
Bilanin
,
A. J.
,
Teske
,
M. E.
,
Barry
,
J. W.
, and
Ekblad
,
R. B.
, “
AGDISP: The Aircraft Spray Dispersion Model, Code Development and Experimental Validation
,”
Trans. ASAE
 0001-2351, Vol.
32
,
1989
, pp.
327
334
.
7.
Bird
,
S. L.
,
Perry
,
S. G.
,
Ray
,
S. L.
, and
Teske
,
M. L.
, “
Evaluation of the AGDISP Aerial Spray Algorithms in the AgDRIFT Model
,”
Envir. Toxicol. Chem.
 0730-7268, Vol.
21
, No.
3
,
2002
, pp.
672
681
. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620210328
8.
ASABE S572,
1999
, “
Spray Nozzle Classification by Droplet Spectra
,” American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.
9.
Hewitt
,
A. J.
, “
A Developmental Drift Model for Ground Applications
,”
Aspect of Applied Biology 84, International Advances in Pesticide Application
,
Association Applied Biology, c/o Warwick HRI
,
Wellesbourne, Warwick, United Kingdom
,
2008
, pp.
73
82
.
10.
Connell
,
R. J.
,
Hewitt
,
A.
,
Wolf
,
T.
, and
Miller
,
P. C. H.
, “
WTSIDP-Adapting a Lagrangian Ground Sprayer Model Using Wind Tunnel Data
,”
18th World IMACS/MODSIM Congress
, Cairns, Australia,
2009
,
Modeling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand, Inc.
,
Caims, Australia
, http://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim09 (Last accessed July 29, 2010).
11.
Nuyttens
,
D.
,
Taylor
,
W. A.
,
De Schampheleire
,
M.
,
Verboven
,
P.
, and
Dekeyser
,
D.
, “
Influence of Nozzle Type and Size on Drift Potential by Means of Different Wind Tunnel Evaluation Methods
,”
Biosyst. Eng.
 1537-5110, Vol.
103
,
2009
, pp.
271
280
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2009.04.001
12.
Fritz
,
B. K.
,
Hoffman
,
C. W.
, and
Lan
,
Y.
, “
Evaluation of the EPA Drift Reduction Technology (DRT) Low Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Protocol
,”
J. ASTM Int.
 1546-962X, Vol.
6
, No.
4
,
2009
, Paper ID JAI102129. https://doi.org/10.1520/JAI102129
13.
Fritz
,
B. K.
,
Hoffman
,
C. W.
,
Birchfield
,
N. B.
,
Ellenberger
,
J.
,
Kosusko
,
M.
,
Khan
,
F. A.
,
Bagley
,
W. E.
,
Thronburg
,
J. W.
, and
Hewitt
,
A. W.
, “
Evaluation of Spray Drift Reduction Technologies Using Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Measurements and Dispersion Modelling
,”
J. ASTM Int.
 1546-962X, Vol.
7
, No.
6
,
2010
, Paper ID JAI102775.
14.
ISO 2236901-2006,
2006
, “
Crop Protection Equipment-Drift classification of Spraying Equipment—Part 1-Classes
,” International Standards Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
15.
Hoffman
,
C. W.
,
Fritz
,
K. B.
, and
Lan
,
Y.
, “
Evaluation of a Proposed Drift Reduction Technology (DRT) High-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Protocol
,”
J. ASTM Int.
 1546-962X, Vol.
6
, No.
4
,
2009
, Paper ID JAI102122. https://doi.org/10.1520/JAI102122
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.