Print this Article | Send to Colleague

Back in the August 2012 PCOC News Briefs, I wrote about the possible change in Pesticide Use Reporting. Previously, Enforcement Letter 90-13 required companies to only supply the number of applications for Restricted Use Pesticides and Category 1 Pesticides. The California Department of Pesticide Regulations has issued a new enforcement letter (ENF 12-18), switching the law to reflect the original wording in the Structural Pest Control Act 8505.17. This requires all pest companies to report the number of applications for all pesticides used for the month. This new letter rescinds all other enforcement letters to the contrary. The new regulation takes effect Jan. 1, 2013.

ENF 12-18

Sept. 21, 2012 ENF 12-18

TO: County Agricultural Commissioners

SUBJECT: STRUCTURAL PESTICIDE USE REPORT – TOTAL NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS ON MONTHLY SUMMARY

Structural pest control companies are required to submit a monthly summary pesticide use report for applications of registered pesticides to the county agricultural commissioner in which the work is performed.

Effective Jan. 1, 2013 the total number of applications made for each registered pesticide, whether classified as restricted or general use, regardless of signal word (or no signal word), must be reported.

Pesticide application information may be made either on the Monthly Summary Pesticide Use Report (MSPUR) form #DPR-ENF-60 or through the Cal-Ag Permit system for submission to the county agricultural commissioner.

This requirement is in accordance with Business & Professions Code section 8505.17(c) and California Code of Regulations §6627, and supersedes previous instructions in ENF 2000-003, ENF 90-013 and any other previous guidance, which stated that only certain structural use pesticides needed to be reported.

This information will be included in the upcoming Volume 1 of the Pesticide Use Enforcement Program Standards Compendium. Instructions for the MSPUR will be revised to reflect the change.

If you have any questions, please contact the DPR Enforcement Branch Liaison assigned to your county.

Sincerely,

Also, here is the link to a copy on DPR's website:

http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/county/cacltrs/penfltrs/penf2012/2012018.htm

The "instructions" from the back of the Monthly Summary Pesticide Use Report are what both ag & structural are complying with regarding the definition of "application."

In Column D, indicate the total number of applications for each pesticide used during the reporting month. Each separate site (home, apartment complex, building, right-of-way, grain silo, etc.) should be counted as one application. For tank mixes, each represented pesticide should be credited with one application.

Mechanic's Lien California (Senate Bill 189)

A mechanic's lien is a filing, typically allowed by state statute, which secures a contractor's or subcontractor's (laborer, mechanic, artisan, etc.) claim against a property that he has repaired, constructed or improved. It is basically a "hold" against the property which, if unpaid, allows a forced sale of that property (whether a house, a car or other real or personal property). The lien seeks to guarantee payment for the contracted services rendered and remains in effect until such time as the contractor or sometimes sub-contractor is paid in full for his services.

What makes a mechanic's lien appealing to contractors and vendors is that instead of finishing a project and hoping that the property owner is scrupulous, the threat of a mechanic's lien can guarantee payment.

In September 2010, Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. signed into law SB 189, which makes a number of significant changes to the laws governing the creation and enforcement of mechanic's liens in California (the "Mechanics Lien Law"). The law also results in new statutes governing stop notices (on both public and private works), payment bonds and related claims.

While SB 189 relocates and renumbers the Mechanics Lien Law, many of the provisions are substantively the same. Among these are two provisions that were modified as part of 2009's A.B. 457 and went into effect in January 2011: a change in the required form of mechanics lien claim and method of service (Civ. Code § 3084) and the new requirement that claimant's record a lis pendens within 20 days after filing an action to foreclose on mechanic's liens (Civ. Code § 3146). Pillsbury alerted clients here in April 2009 to earlier proposed versions of these changes.

The remaining changes took effect on July 1, 2012. The most sweeping change is that all of the statutes making up the Mechanics Lien Law (Civil Code sections 3082 through 3267), including the law governing stop notices and payment bonds, were repealed and replaced with new statutes (Civil Code sections 8000 through 8848 and 9000 to 9566). Lawyers and clients familiar with the old statutory scheme need to retool for the new layout. Despite the statutory upheaval, many of the provisions of the Mechanics Lien Law remained substantively unchanged. The substantive changes that took effect on July 1, 2012 include the following:

Definition of Completion. The deadline for recording a mechanics lien is generally triggered by the "completion" of a work of improvement. Under the old law, acceptance by the owner was one of the things deemed to constitute "completion." Under new section 8180, that is no longer the case. The remainder of circumstances that constitute "completion"—i.e., actual completion of all work on the project, occupation or use coupled with cessation of labor, a cessation of labor for 60 continuous days (or for 30 days after recording of a notice of cessation), acceptance by a public entity—remain unchanged. The former provision for acceptance by a private owner was recommended for deletion by the California Law Revision Commission because it was ambiguous in that it did not identify a particular manner of acceptance or how that acceptance should be communicated to interested parties.

Time for Recording Notice of Completion. Under the old law, owners recorded notices of completion within a window of 10 days after actual completion of the project. Under the new law (section 8182), that time period is extended to 15 days.

Preliminary Notice. Under the old law, a "Preliminary 20-Day Notice" must be served by most types of lien claimants at the outset of their work to preserve their lien claim and payment bond and to stop notice rights. Under the new law, this notice is referred to simply as a "Preliminary Notice." The required language for the Preliminary Notice has been changed. Also, section 8200 eliminates ambiguity in the current law and makes clear that contractors in direct contract with the project owner need only provide a Preliminary Notice to construction lenders and reputed construction lenders, if any.

Waiver and Release of Lien Rights. In order to ensure that a "downstream" subcontractor has validly released its right to assert lien, stop notice or payment bond rights, the old law required that specific waiver and release language be used. Under the new law (sections 8132, et seq.), the required language has been changed slightly; one should be careful to utilize the form current as of the day the release is executed. The form utilized for progress payments (as opposed to final payment) does not cover certain disputed or extra work items, or claims based on breach of contract, so "upstream" parties may want to supplement the statutory form with additional releases.

Release Bond. Under the new law (section 8424), the amount of the bond required to release property from a lien has been reduced from 150 percent to 125 percent of the lien amount.

Attorney's Fees on Petition to Expunge Lien. The new law removed the old $2,000 limit on the amount of attorney's fees that are recoverable on petitions to expunge stale liens; under the new law, all "reasonable" fees will be recoverable to the prevailing party. This will create a stronger incentive for lien claimants who did not foreclose upon their liens to make sure that their liens are formally released. The new law also adds a requirement that an owner must first make a demand that the lien claimant withdraw the lien at least 10 days before initiating a petition to expunge.

Pest Control Operators of California
www.pcoc.org

The Voice of PCOC digital magazine