RFR-Page 2
There is little if any conflict. The production, sale, and application of pesticides are all highly
regulated activities due to the inherent potential risk to human health and the environment. The
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has federal oversight of pesticide activities
and delegates some regulatory authority to the states. The EPA reviews state pesticide programs
including legislative and regulatory provisions to ensure adequacy of the state programs and a
level of uniformity across the country. Michigan’s statutory provisions in Part 83 of NREPA and
in Regulations 633 (Restricted Use Pesticides), 636 (Pesticide Applicators), 637 (Pesticide Use),
and 640 (Commercial Pesticide Bulk Storage) make up the coordinated and aligned framework
within Michigan.
10. Is the subject matter of the rules currently contained in any guideline, handbook, manual,
instructional bulletin, form with instructions, or operational memoranda?
No. Regulation 637 is very detailed and additional materials are not necessary.
11. Are the rules listed on the department’s annual regulatory plan as rules to be processed
for the current year?
No. After review of the Department’s response to Eastern Equine Encephalitis and the need for a
temporary emergency rule, updating the provisions is now necessary before next year’s mosquito
season.
12. Will the proposed rules be promulgated under Section 44 of the Administrative Procedures
Act, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.244, or under the full rulemaking process?
Full Process
13. Please describe the extent to which the rules exceed similar regulations, compliance
requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.
The current rules align with similar regulations and standards across the country. The proposed
change would remove a time consuming and burdensome requirement during emergency
responses.
14. Do the rules incorporate the recommendations received from the public regarding any
complaints or comments regarding the rules? If yes, please explain.
Yes. During the 2019 mosquito season, there were not emergency rules that streamlined state and
local response. As a result, local health departments and MDHHS took on an enormously resource
and labor-intensive process related to the exclusion provisions. This process delayed response and
took resources away from other public health activities.
15. If amending an existing rule set, please provide the date of the last evaluation of the rules
and the degree, if any, to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed
the regulatory activity covered by the rules since the last evaluation.
Rule 11 of Regulation 637 was reviewed in 2019 and 2020 as part of the multi-agency response to
EEE. The notification and exclusion requirements for routine community pest abatement
programs creates an unnecessary burden and delay when confronted by an emergency. This is
particularly true of arboviruses such as EEE, Zika, or Chikungunya. Emerging diseases such as
these require prompt coordinated responses.
16. Are there any changes or developments since implementation that demonstrate there is no
continued need for the rules, or any portion of the rules?
No. Pesticide usage remains an area requiring a strong regulatory framework.
Note, related to #17: There is no existing advisory committee or other advisory entity created by
statute in this area. Note that the Pesticide Advisory Committee created in MCL 324.8326 was
abolished by Executive Reorganization Order 2009-31. See MCL 324.99919.
MCL 24.239