National School IPM Working Group Joint Steering and Advisory Committee Meeting
Notes, Monday, November 3rd at 11:30am CT
1. Roll: Janet Hurley, Kaci Buhl, Deborah Young, Fudd Graham, Lesley Deem, Lynn Braband,
Gregg Smith, Sherry Glick, Russell Noratel, Susan Kegley, Emily Morse, Dawn Gouge, Tom
Green, Matt Neff, Mariel Snyder
2. Additional Agenda Items
Katie Howard has accepted another position within EPA Region 7 and will not serve on the
NSIPMWG.
3. Educational Component: Our guest speakers are Dr. Susan Kegley and Emily Morse. Susan
has expertise in environmental, organic, inorganic and analytical chemistry, with an emphasis
on pesticides and heavy metals and their fate and transport in the environment. She is the
Pesticide Research Institute’s Principal and CEO. Emily is a program assistant at the Institute
and has experience with program support, website administration, research, data analysis,
and communication. Emily and Susan gave a presentation on the PRI Product Evaluator,
PestSmartTM Web and phone app.
The PRI Product Evaluator takes into consideration the chemical properties, toxicology and
water pollution potential of active ingredients, label and safety data sheet reviews. The
Hazard Tier system denotes the level of hazard: Tier I = greatest hazard and Tier III = least
hazard. Having the Hazard Tier rankings for multiple products allows for comparison of one
product against another to find the one that best suits the IPM program.
The Product Evaluator also solves the problem of pesticide product cancellations or transfers
that remove products on an “approved list” from the market. The PRI Product Evaluator is
designed as a central resource for IPM professionals, LEED Accredited Professionals,
facility managers, pest control operators, nurseries, golf courses, retailers and others to find
low-hazard products. PRI’s initial priority has been to ensure that comprehensive reviews are
available for products used in structural pest control, landscape maintenance, invasive weed
management, and turf pest management. A product review section allows specific feedback
for a product that may be unavailable through just reviewing the label and safety data sheet.
PestSmart Web is the partner to the PRI Evaluator and serves as a quick guide. The Mobile
App is compatible with iphones and ipads and is similar to Pestsmart Web.
Q&A
Kaci: Which version of the label does the link lead to, the federal label and PPLS?
Answer: Yes and we link out to the Purdue University system on the detail page, where you
can go get state specific labels.
Kaci: We also link to the federal page through our Apps and the first few pages confuse
people because they are a letter from EPA. Were you able to address this and remove the first
few pages from the label?
Answer: No, we send individuals directly to the EPA site and they can go to the most recent
product page and download the label.
Kaci: The list of other known ingredients, is this coming from the safety data sheets?
Answer: Yes, all known ingredients listed on the safety data sheets are included and we
include that into our chemical database so the hazards associated with that chemical are
addressed.
Kaci: When pulling data from PPIS, there is a product name problem. The same product can
be listed under multiple names. Have you been able to find a data set that lists alternate
product names?
Answer: No we do not have a list; we encourage people to search by the registration number.
Kaci: We have information from a subset about the ingredients, but how is it represented that
there is no way to know all risks if all ingredients are unknown? Is there a place that says you
may need to check for more information (signal word and label)?
Answer: Yes, several places address the hazards that are not known. The Hazard Tier
ranking is based on the label that is manually reviewed. So the environmental hazards, the
acute human health hazards, ground water warnings, etc. The hazard ranking is for the
product. The PRI comments section also helps address data gaps.
Ex: boric acid products are assumed to have a low toxicity but have been shown to have
developmental toxicity; however this is not on any lists. Every product that contains an active
ingredient that has particular effect can be flagged and the issue can be addressed in the PRI
comments section.
Janet: What is PRI’s vision of working with School IPM?
Answer: In the recent grant you received to develop an App, PRI would like to provide data
with whatever product is developed and we are willing to customize what we have to your
purposes.
Janet: We cannot charge for use of the App under the EPA grant
Answer: Pestsmart Webb App is free
4. Stop School Pests Business Plan
A quick note, the PMP learning objectives sent out with the version you received will be
updated to reflect NPMA’s training materials for pest management professionals.
The business plan was last updated to incorporate the feedback that we received during the
Dallas meeting. There is an updated timeline, FAQ, lessons learned, learning objectives and
priority schools section. Please send Mariel your list of priority schools, schools that you
have working relationships with that may be interested in participating in the Stop School
Pests training. Gregg is interested in hosting pilot sessions for several modules.
Stop School Pests Timeline
2014
Oct.
Nov. Dec.
Jan. March
April
May –
Sep.
Oct.
Nov. –
Dec.



Business Plan completed
All modules created
Objectives finalized





2015
Remaining modules reviewed by committee and professionals in field
Blue print for objectives finalized
All modules finalized and in-person version ready to pilot
Exam/quiz questions finalized
Pilot modules: minimum 2-3 per role


Incorporate feedback from pilots into modules (online and in-person
version)
HTML conversion for all modules
2016
Jan.
Feb.



Launch modules online
Track use of in-person version through log-in format
EPA grant closed
5. School IPM Strategic Plan
This is still a work in progress, working on updating the document to reflect current pest
concerns and IPM management practices.
6. Regional Updates
a. North Central
Tom mentioned that there is a comment coming to the American Entomologist on our
article from the folks in Georgia. The letter will draw additional attention to School IPM.
The IPM Institute has been working with Whole Foods Market on a program for their
produce and floral supply chain that just launched last month. There are 16 requirements
for suppliers to earn a good rating, and additional requirements to earn a better and best
rating. The good rating requires that suppliers use a number of IPM elements. Click here
for more information.
b. Northeastern
Two weeks ago Lynn had meetings of the NYS School IPM Committee and the NYS
Community IPM Council near Albany. Updates were given of the USDA overseeding
project that is a collaboration among NYS (30 schools), Connecticut (10 schools), and
Maine (10 schools). Cornell's Joann Gruttadaurio is responsible for recruiting and
overseeing the New York piece and will be asking schools to use practice fields (not
main athletic fields) for the project.
Cornell's turf team has developed a new website for managing sports field turf.
http://safesportsfields.cals.cornell.edu/
A subgroup of the NYS School IPM Committee will be working on developing a strategy
for outreach concerning food in non-cafeteria locations within schools. Subgroup
participants are from the state's teacher union, state department of education, a school
facility manager, a school health and safety official and the NYS IPM Program
c. Western
Kaci is finishing School IPM coordinating training this week and looking at evaluations.
Deb had a School IPM meeting on Thursday and one of the speakers was a medical
entomologist for the Department of Public Health and Environment. She did a great job
and is interested in getting more involved.
Greg hosted one of the two training sessions with Ryan. Of the two groups who attended
the training, health department employees were more difficult to work with. Gregg will
also be hosting a tour on the opening day of the IPM Symposium.
Dawn had a landscape and turf workshop that was well attended. One of the rural school
districts is stepping forward and playing a leadership role. Anytime there is an outreach
or training at their location, larger and larger groups attend from surrounding rural
schools.
d. Southern
Janet is preparing for a statewide conference and the ESA meeting. As of right now there
are 1,5060 resources listed in the compiled excel sheet that Mary is working on.
Fudd attended a southern IPM advisory council meeting and the working group decided
to put in a grant to support their work.
The eXtension Urban IPM meeting in Portland is on Sunday, November 16 from 3:30 5:00 PM at the Oregon Convention Center, room D131.The eXtension imported fire ant
network meets in the same room from 2:00 until 3:30 PM. Many of our group are
members of this CoP also.
Kathy Flanders, the fire ant CoP leader, has arranged a conference call to the directors of
eXtension for the last 30 minutes of her network meeting, starting at 3:00 PM. This call
will be about the ‘New eXtension’ and will affect both of our groups. Since this call may
be a large part of our group’s discussion, you are invited to come to our group early (or
Kathy’s late) and sit in on this call-in session with eXtension. Kathy and Fudd share
refreshments for the 2 groups, so come early at 3:00, grab a drink, a cookie and join in
the call.
e. EPA is internally working on a revision of Rat Book and Sherry will be looking to the
National School IPM Working group to assist with an external review. It is the most
requested document out of the pesticide program and one of the top three in the agency.
The book will be ready in early spring; distribution methods have not been discussed. On
November 13th EPA will be celebrating the 20-year anniversary of the Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division.
Next call: Monday, December 1st at 11:30am CT