Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pesticide Licensing Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would exempt some battery-powered 5-gallon sprayers from pesticide licensing; ODA urges standards and enforcement safeguards
Summary
Senate Bill 360 would create a pesticide‑licensing exemption for certain employees using battery‑powered backpack or handheld sprayers of five gallons or less and would require the Oregon Department of Agriculture to produce training standards, proponents and agency staff told the Senate Committee on Energy and Environment on March 17.
Senate Bill 360, introduced March 17 to the Senate Committee on Energy and Environment, would create a licensing exemption for certain employees using battery‑powered handheld or backpack devices that apply pesticides (limited to five gallons) and would require the Oregon Department of Agriculture to develop training materials and standards for safe use.
Senator David Brock Smith, the bill sponsor, said the change is aimed at parity between manual pump backpack sprayers and newer battery‑powered sprayers used by municipal groundskeepers and small operators. He told the committee the statutory language was written before battery‑operated backpack sprayers were widely available and described the bill as a modernization to reduce physical strain and program costs for small municipalities.
Tim Gross, groundskeeper for the City of Myrtle Point, testified he uses a five‑gallon hand pump backpack sprayer and sought the exemption so he could switch to a battery‑powered model that “uses DEWALT batteries” and would be an “ergonomic plus.” Gross said the battery units use the same volume and application method as his manual sprayer.
Jonathan Sandow, Deputy Director at the Oregon Department of Agriculture, told the committee that current pesticide law treats a transition from a manual backpack sprayer to a powered device as a move to “machine‑powered” equipment, which under existing rules requires a license. Sandow emphasized that “the pesticide label is the law” and that general‑use pesticides (sold to consumers) differ from restricted‑use pesticides that require licensed applicators. He said training, the type of pesticide used, and the site of application determine licensing needs.
Several senators questioned whether the bill would change the underlying safety obligations or the pesticide label requirements; Sandow and others said label compliance remains mandatory regardless of licensing. The bill’s text also requires the Department of Agriculture to “develop standards and materials for training individuals to safely apply these pesticides using the battery powered [devices],” a point Senator Brock Smith emphasized as an added safeguard.
What the hearing did not decide: The committee did not take a vote or adopt amendments on SB 360 during the March 17 hearing.
