case summary - Office of Indiana State Chemist - Purdue University

November 20, 2012 

Stewart Center, Room 218 A & B 

Purdue University 

West Lafayette, IN 47907-0567 

DRAFT AGENDA 

9:30 a.m. 

1. Approval of the meeting agenda 

2. Approval of previous meeting minutes (August 20, 2012) 

3. Review of implementation plan for methomyl fly bait Restricted Use Pesticide status 

4. Review of cases involving civil penalties since the last meeting 

5. Vote to readopt LSA #12-582 (pesticide violator public listing rule; pesticide drift rule) 

6. Review of final adoption of LSA #12-134 (pesticide liability insurance rule) 

7. Vote on final adoption of LSA #12-513 (consolidation of civil penalty rules; storage & 

handling of pesticides in wellhead protection areas rule) 

8. Review of final adoption of LSA #12-517 (pesticide & fertilizer applicator licensing rule) 

9. 2012 OISC pesticide annual summary 

10. Agenda items for next meeting? 

1:30 p.m. Adjourn

DRAFT MINUTES – 133rd MEETING 

Location of meeting: 

Date and Time: 

Dow AgroSciences Research Facility 

7200 E. State Road 47 

Lebanon, Indiana 46052 

August 20, 2012; 9:15 AM 

Members present: Ex officio Members absent: 

Raymond Brinkmeyer Dave Scott Greg Campbell 

Phil Marshall Robert Waltz Bob Andrews 

Julia Tipton Hogan Fred Whitford Tim Gibb 

Cyndi Wagner for Martha Clark Mettler 

Larry Clemens 

Ronald Hellenthal (Chair) 

Michael Titus 

Steve Dlugosz 

Bruce Bordelon 

Kevin Underwood 

Bryan Price for Jennifer House 

Rick Foster 

Approval of the meeting agenda: 

-Mike Titus & Rick Foster…motion to approve the agenda as written; vote was unanimous. 

Approval of previous meeting minutes: 

-Julia Hogan & Ray Brinkmeyer…motion to approve the minutes of the 132nd meeting, as 

drafted; the vote was unanimous. 

Final adoption of state restricted use pesticide rule (LSA #12-135): 

-Bruce Bordelon & Rick Foster…motion to adopt as final the proposed rule which has been 

through the public hearing process with no comments being filed; vote was unanimous. 

-Bruce Bordelon…to confirm, this will require applicators to be certified to purchase and use 

these methomyl fly bait products. 

-Ron Hellenthal…neighboring states are keeping a watchful eye on this action. 

Introduction of proposed rule revisions resulting from recent legislative amendments: 

a) Draft proposed rule amending applicator certification & licensing requirements 

-Dave Scott…draft proposals intended to make State Chemist rules consistent with recent 

legislative recodification and legislative amendments; insert minimum age requirements for 

certification into rules in anticipation of potential federal rule changes by EPA; add 

references to combined commercial turf pesticide and fertilizer applicators. 

-Fred Whitford…would this prevent farm kids from applying pesticides for the family on the 

farm? 

1

-Dave Scott…the proposed minimum age restrictions are currently those under internal 

consideration by EPA; farm kids could still operate under direct supervision, but could not 

become certified unless 18. 

-Ray Brinkmeyer…any Indiana figures on number of those under 18 attempting to become 

certified? 

-Fred Whitford…maybe a couple of individuals a few years back but not many. 

-Julia Hogan…at least 18 seems reasonable for using pesticides. 

-John Baugh…FFA encourages high school age kids to start small businesses, including lawn 

care, and this might interfere with those ventures. 

-Mike Titus…this would not preclude those businesses if those individuals had adult 

supervision such as a parent who is certified. 

-Bruce Bordelon…can you get the required liability insurance for a business license if under 

18? 

-Ron Hellenthal…it is not unreasonable to expect an individual to be 18 if using pesticides 

commercially. 

-Bruce Bordelon…this would also apply to lawn fertilizer application under the current rules. 

-Julia Hogan & Larry Clemens…motion to adopt this draft document into rule making 

process; vote was unanimous. 

b) Draft proposed rule amending civil penalty & pesticide storage near well heads 

-Dave Scott…draft proposals intended to make Board rules consistent with recent legislative 

recodification and legislative amendments; consolidate the two separate civil penalty rules 

into one comprehensive rule, as recently suggested by the Indiana Attorney General; clarify 

some of the pesticide handling practice requirements in well head protection areas. 

-Ron Hellenthal…this document has many pages of changes for consideration, but if it is 

largely reformatting and there is little new actually being introduced, it may be manageable 

at this meeting. 

-Phil Marshall…IDNR also recently went through some similar rule changes resulting from 

the legislative recodification process. 

-Rick Foster…do we need to add a definition of the term “WHPA”? 

-Dave Scott…that definition already exists in the complete rule, but the definitions section is 

not being changed so it is not a part of this proposed rule. 

-Mike Titus…I see reference in the civil penalty chart to “highly volatile herbicides”; does 

Indiana have any so classified today? 

-Dave Scott…not currently; have not had any so classified for about 20 years. 

-Steve Dlugosz & Mike Titus…motion to adopt this draft document into the rule making 

process; vote was unanimous. 

Review of cases involving civil penalties since the last meeting: 

-Julia Hogan…for case #2012/0567 why only $100 for second drift incident? 

-Bruce Bordelon…it also appears that the violator tried to mislead you during the investigation. 

-George Saxton…this was a private applicator, and $100 is the maximum fine allowed by law. 

-Julia Hogan…if we get into a series of drift problems associated with the new 2,4-D and 

dicamba tolerant crops the $100 maximum penalty will not be enough. 

-Bruce Bordelon…$100 is not much of a deterrent. 

-Fred Whitford…how does the current legislature view civil penalties? 

-John Baugh…right now increased regulatory burdens are not favorably viewed by the 

legislature. 

-George Saxton…a finding of violation by OISC is often a slam dunk for complainants, should 

they feel compelled to pursue restitution civilly in court. 

2

-Steve Dlugosz…economic interface for violations or drift damage on the commercial 

application side is much much larger, as compared to the dollar value of a civil penalty. 

-Bruce Bordelon…expecting homeowners to file a civil suit to obtain results seems to be asking 

a lot. 

-Bruce Bordelon…case #2012/0158 appears that it might have bordered on entrapment of the 

store clerk. 

-Beth Carter…this was part of a much larger investigation of many methomyl fly bait vendors 

that I conducted; prior to inspecting any of them George Saxton and I were careful to prepare a 

fairly specific script to avoid any possibility of entrapment; I identified the pest problem, and the 

vendors offered the illegal control solutions without prompting. 

-Mike Titus…are Tractor Supply Company stores independent or company owned? 

-George Saxton…we are not sure. 

-Fred Whitford…could we mandate staff training for some of these violative store outlets? 

-George Saxton…they may be receptive to that. 

Fertilizer use regulation primer: 

-Ron Hellenthal…at the last meeting we asked OISC to provide some background on fertilizer 

use regulation now that OISC has civil penalty authority for fertilizer violations too. 

-Matt Pearson…while historically OISC fertilizer regulation focused primarily on “truth in 

labeling” of products, it has recently been expanded to include rules regarding proper use of 

fertilizers, similar to following pesticide label use instructions. 

-Ray Brinkmeyer…are there use directions on fertilizer labels? 

-Matt Pearson…no, there are general use rules that apply to all fertilizers, including the need to 

develop nutrient management plans to protect against over application and application near 

sensitive sites. 

-Fred Whitford…not a label per se as we have for pesticides. 

-Steve Dlugosz…is the management plan reviewed by OISC? 

-Matt…no. 

-Steve Dlugosz…the focus is best management practices and changing animal manure disposal 

practices. 

-Elisha Kemp…does this rule apply to application of turf fertilizers too? 

-Matt Pearson…no, just agriculture fertilizers and manures at this point. 

-Fred Whitford…there is also a continuing education requirement for fertilizer applicator 

certification; it is being run in tandem alongside the pesticide education program. 

2,4-D tolerant crop update & related drift & volatility research tour: 

-Elisha Kemp and other Dow AgroSciences staff hosting the meeting provided a tour of the field 

research facility and updates on the status of the new tolerant crop seed technology as well as 

their new formulation of 2,4-D that will be marketed to growers jointly with the seed; the 

primary focus for the Board was drift reduction and management. 

Next meeting: 

-Targeted date is Tuesday, November 20, 2012, location to be determined. 

. 

3

A Summary of Cases 

2011/0959 Disposition: David Wilson was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to follow label-directed application 

rates. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. 

However, the civil penalty was reduced to $125.00. Consideration was given to 

the fact Mr. Wilson cooperated during the investigation and this was his first 

offense of similar nature. 

2011/0963 Disposition: David Wilson was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to follow label-directed application 

rates. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. 

However, the civil penalty was reduced to $125.00. Consideration was given to 

the fact that he cooperated during the investigation and this was his first offense 

of similar nature. 

2012/0535 Disposition: Jason Woodward was cited for violation of section 65(9) of the 

Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for applying pesticides for hire 

without having an Indiana pesticide business license. A civil penalty in the 

amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. 

2012/0749 Disposition: Ross Lawn & Landscape and Aaron Stigall was cited for nineteen 

(17) counts of violation of section 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and 

Application Law, specifically 355 IAC 4-2-3, for failure to properly supervise a 

non-licensed employee. A civil penalty in the amount of $2,125.00 (17 counts x 

$125.00 per count) was assessed. However, the civil penalty was reduced to 

$1,062.50. Consideration was given to the fact that Mr. Stigall cooperated during 

the investigation; corrective action was taken and no restricted use pesticides were 

involved. 

Ross Lawn & Landscape was cited for violation of section 65(5) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law for operating in a careless and negligent 

manner by applying an incorrect pesticide thereby causing environmental damage. 

Ross Lawn & Landscape was warned for violation of section 65(9) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law for professing to be in the business of 

applying aquatic pesticides, turf and ornamental pesticides and right-of-way 

pesticides without having the proper licenses. 

2012/0753 Disposition Ross Lawn & Landscape was cited for violation of section 65(5) and 

65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for operating in a careless

and negligent manner and failure to properly supervise a non-licensed employee. 

A civil penalty in the amount of $125.00 was assessed for this violation. 

2012/0757 Disposition: U.S. Lawns was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law for applying pesticides for hire without having 

an Indiana pesticide business license. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 

was assessed for this violation. 

2012/0758 Disposition: Ross Lawn & Landscape was cited for violation of section 65(6) of 

the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to properly supervise a 

non-licensed employee. A civil penalty in the amount of $125.00 was assessed 

for this violation. 

2012/0841 Disposition: Hillcrest Supply Inc. was cited for two (2) counts of violation of 

357 IAC 1-3-2 of the Indiana Pesticide Registration Law for distributing restricted 

use pesticides to a non-certified user. A civil penalty in the amount of $1,000.00 

(2 counts x $500.00 per count) was assessed. Consideration was given to the fact 

this was not their first violation concerning handling and distribution of restricted 

use pesticides (see 2008/0208 and 2008/0329). 

2012/0848 Disposition: John Bruner was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to follow label directions. A civil 

penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. 

2012/0857 Disposition: Jeff Hayes was cited for violation of section 65(6) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law, specifically 355 IAC 4-2-3, for failure to 

provide on-site supervision for a non-licensed employee. A civil penalty in the 

amount of $125.00 was assessed for this violation.

CASE SUMMARY 

Case #2011/0959 

Complainant: 

Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC) 

175 S. University Street 

West Lafayette, IN 47907 

800-893-6637 

Applicator: David N. Wilson Certified Applicator 

Monroe Pest Control 

3220 W. Old Ridge Road 

Hobart, IN 46342 

219-942-2161 

1. On June 20, 2012, I visited Monroe Pest Control and there met with Mr. Marc Willie, General 

Manager, of Monroe Pest Control. I advised him that I was seeking termite treatment records 

specifically pre-construction termite treatment records with regard to Essex Park Lot #74 

Valparaiso, IN 

2. Mr. Willie advised that the person that would be able to obtain those records, Kelly Tichacek, 

was not in the office and as it turned out would not be able to get to the office that day due to 

traffic problems. 

3. Ms Tichacek then contacted me the next day via e-mail and sent the records to me 

electronically. 

4. After reviewing the treatment record with George Saxton of OISC there appeared to be a 

discrepancy with the total amount of use dilution used by Mr. Wilson from the total amount of use 

dilution calculated by Mr. Saxton and me based on Mr. Wilson’s measurements and diagram. Mr. 

Wilson’s records indicated that only the horizontal barrier was applied. The label for Talstar P, 

EPA. Reg. #279-3206, active ingredient bifenthrin, stated in addition to the Horizontal barrier, 

“Vertical barriers must be established in areas such as around the base of foundation…” 

5. Mr. Wilson’s calculations: 

Application on 2/16/11 

One slab 40x25 


One slab 12x8 

Horizontal barrier approx 1550 sq. ft 

1550 sq. ft x .1 (1gallon per 10 sq. ft) = 155 gallons Mr. Wilson reported using 150 gallons 


Vertical barrier outside Mr. Wilson reported using 70 gallons 

Page 1 of 2

Omitted calculation 

Vertical barrier outside 163 lin. Ft 

163 lin. Ft x .4 x 2.5 depth to footer =163 gallons 

Vertical barrier inside 218 lin. Ft 

218 lin. Ft x .4 = 87.2 gallons 

Horizontal barrier 1550 sq. ft =155 gallons 

Grand Total 

155 gallons (Horizontal) + 250.2 gallons (Vertical) = 405.2 gallons 

6. On June 28, 2012, Mr. Saxton and I met with Mr. Wilson regarding the discrepancy. Mr. 

Wilson stated that his paperwork was not in order and that he had not used the correct amount 

of chemical as called for by the label. 

Kevin W. Neal Date: July 3, 2012 

Pesticide Investigator 

DISPOSITION: David Wilson was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use 

and Application Law for failure to follow label-directed application rates. A civil penalty in the 

amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. However, the civil penalty was reduced to 

$125.00. Consideration was given to the fact Mr. Wilson cooperated during the investigation and 

this was his first offense of similar nature. 

George N. Saxton Draft Date: July 13, 2012 

Compliance Officer Final Date: September 14, 2012 


CASE SUMMARY 

Case #2011/0963 

Complainant: 




800-893-6637 

Applicator: David N. Wilson Certified Applicator 

Monroe Pest Control 

3220 W. Old Ridge Road 

Hobart, IN 46342 

219-942-2161 

1. On June 20, 2012, I visited Monroe Pest Control and there met with Mr. Marc Willie, General 

Manager, of Monroe Pest Control. While there I advised that I was seeking termite treatment 

records specifically pre-construction termite treatment records with regard to Lot S-13 Fairfield 

Green Subdivision Valparaiso, IN 

2. Mr. Willie advised that the person that would be able to obtain those records, Kelly Tichacek, 

was not in the office and as it turned out would not be able to get to the office that day due to 

traffic problems. 

3. Ms Tichacek then contacted me the next day via e-mail and sent the records to me 

electronically. 

4. After reviewing the treatment record with George Saxton of OISC there appeared to be a 

discrepancy with the total amount of use dilution used by Mr. Wilson from the total amount of use 

dilution calculated by Mr. Saxton and me based on Mr. Wilson’s measurements and diagram. Mr. 

Wilson’s records indicated that only the horizontal barrier was applied. The label for Talstar P, 

EPA. Reg. #279-3206, active ingredient bifenthrin, states in addition to the Horizontal barrier, 

“Vertical barriers must be established in areas such as around the base of foundation…” 

5. Mr. Wilson’s calculations: 




Horizontal barrier approx 1750 sq. ft 

1750 sq. ft x .1 (1gallon per 10 sq. ft) = 175 gallons Mr. Wilson reported using 235 gallons 

Omitted calculation 

Vertical barrier outside 152 lin. Ft 

152 lin. Ft x .4 x 2.5 depth to footer =152 gallons 


Vertical barrier inside 221 lin. Ft 

221 lin. Ft x .4 = 88.4 gallons 

Horizontal barrier 1734 sq. ft =173.4 gallons 

Grand Total 

173.4 gallons (Horizontal) + 240.4 gallons (Vertical) = 413.8 gallons 

6. On June 28, 2012, Mr. Saxton and I met with Mr. Wilson regarding the discrepancy. Mr. 

Wilson stated that his paperwork was not in order and that he had not used the correct amount 

of chemical as called for by the label. 



DISPOSITION: David Wilson was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use 

and Application Law for failure to follow label-directed application rates. A civil penalty in the 

amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. However, the civil penalty was reduced to 

$125.00. Consideration was given to the fact that he cooperated during the investigation and this 

was his first offense of similar nature. 




CASE SUMMARY 

Case #2012/0535 

Complainant: 




Applicator: Jason Woodward Not Licensed 

Business: J.W. Lawn and Landscape Not Licensed 

1015 Bellvue Drive 

Kendallville, IN 46755 

260-318-1758 

1. On 3-22-2012, the Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC) received information indicating 

Jason Woodward may be making for-hire pesticide applications in Auburn, Indiana, without 

a license. Two possible application sites were listed as 1214 DeSoto Court and 106 McIntyre 

Drive. Fertilizer with Dimension, a crabgrass preventing herbicide, was suspected to have 

been applied. OISC records indicated Mr. Woodward was not licensed. 

2. On 3-27-2012, I spoke with Mr. Woodward on the phone and informed him of the complaint. 

He indicated he was not making for-hire applications to lawns. I later went to 1214 DeSoto 

Court where I observed granular product in the lawn and on the sidewalks. The lawn was 

posted with a paper/poster board type flag marked “JW Lawn and Landscape, LLC” and 

“CUSTOMER PLEASE REMOVE THE DAY AFTER APPLICATION.” The flag also 

listed the company phone number. 

3. I then went to 106 McIntyre Drive where Mr. Woodward happened to be mowing. I 

introduced myself and asked Mr. Woodward if he made the application at the DeSoto Court 

address. He stated he had forgotten that he did apply fertilizer with crabgrass preventer at the 

property. Mr. Woodward stated he was paid for the application, but that he used the 

customer’s product (possibly a Scott’s product) and spreader. I asked if he flagged the yard 

and he stated that he did not. I produced the flag and asked Mr. Woodward if he could 

explain why someone would put a flag with his company information on it in his customer’s 

lawn. He could not. I informed Mr. Woodward that I did not feel he was being honest with 

me. He stated he is not flagging lawns and he is not billing for applications. I explained the 

licensing requirements to Mr. Woodward. He then indicated he took the Core exam 2-3 

years ago but he did not pass. There was no evidence that an application had been made at 

the property on McIntyre Drive. 

4. I later returned to the DeSoto Court address and was able to speak to the elderly homeowner 

Mr. Howard. He stated that Mr. Woodward applied a granular product to his lawn, but he 

did not purchase the product and he does not own a spreader. Mr. Howard produced a 


handwritten bill on J.W. Lawn and Landscape letterhead. It was dated 3-20-2012, and stated, 

“19-0-6 fertilizer for crabgrass $40.00.” Also handwritten was “Check#2755 Paid 3-20- 

2012.” I photographed the bill. 

5. Mr. Woodward sent a written statement to the OISC stating, “Used Roundup RTU and 

Fertilized with Scott’s and used there stuff.” 

Andrew R. Roth Date: August 21, 2012 


Disposition: Jason Woodward was cited for violation of section 65(9) of the Indiana Pesticide 

Use and Application Law for applying pesticides for hire without having an Indiana pesticide 

business license. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. 

George N. Saxton Draft Date: August 22, 2012 



CASE SUMMARY 

Case #2012/0749 

Complainant: 

Applicator: 

Mark Stamper 

630 Redbud Lane 

New Castle, IN 47362 

765-521-3316 

765-521-0949 

Ross Lawn & Landscape 

Aaron Stigall 

Jason Enix 

3809 S. TSC Road 


765-529-8333 

Certified Applicator 

Unlicensed 

1. On May 1, 2012, Mark Stamper contacted the Office of the Indiana State Chemist (OISC) to 

report that Ross Lawn and Landscape sprayed his yard and it was now dying. 

2. On May 3, 2012, Agent Joe Becovitz and I met with Mr. Stamper at his property. Mr. 

Stamper stated that Ross Lawn & Landscape allegedly sprayed his yard for broadleaf weeds 

on April 11, 2012. He went on to say that on approximately April 18, he noticed the yard 

started ‘looking bad.’ 

3. Upon observing the yard, I noticed large areas of brown, dying turf. It appeared that the back 

yard looked worse than the front. It was also very evident where the application had been 

made on the property. Please see figures below. 

Fig 1: Front yard 

Fig 2: Front yard (spray pattern) 


Fig 3: Back yard (spray pattern) 


Fig 5: Property line 


4. Agent Becovitz and I then collected a composite soil and grass sample from the Stamper yard 

and later submitted it to the OISC Residue lab for analysis. 

5. On that same day, I went to Ross Lawn & Landscaping. I collected an invoice from the 

administrative assistant for the application at the Stamper residence. It listed that “Jason” 

made the application. I asked the assistant for Jason’s full name, and she stated “Jason Enix” 

and informed me that he had since been terminated. 

6. On May 7, 2012, Agent George Saxton and I met with Aaron Stigall, the certified applicator 

at Ross Lawn and Landscaping. Mr. Stigall stated he had approximately 16 to 18 properties 

that were having similar issues. He said that all the applications had been made by a former 

employee, Jason Enix. He was uncertain what caused the problem, but acknowledged that it 

was most likely pesticide related. 

7. Mr. Stigall also acknowledged that Mr. Enix was not a licensed pesticide applicator, and that 

Mr. Enix had not been properly supervised during the applications. I told Mr. Stigall I would 

need a copy of all the applications that Mr. Enix had completed. He then informed me that 

he was trying to do everything possible to remedy the situation with his customers. He stated 

he was planning on reseeding all the injured properties. 

8. Mr. Stigall and I also talked about the notification/ invoicing he was leaving with his 

customers. On the paperwork, it listed “Spraying Services Available…. Weed control, 

Fertilization, Tree and Shrub, Aquatics, Bare Ground, Flea and Tick, Parking Lots, 

Perimeter, Fungicide, and More.” I explained to Mr. Stigall that he could not advertise that 


the company could make tree and shrub, aquatic, or perimeter applications being that the 

business license only had a 3b (turf) endorsement. 

9. Later, Mr. Stigall submitted to me all of Mr. Enix’s application records. Mr. Enix made for 

hire turf applications on the following dates in 2012: 

• March 12, 13, 19, 21, 26, 27, 29, 30 

• April 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 

10. The OISC lab reported the following: 

Sample Number Sample Description Analysis Result 

VG01 Vegetation from comp. yard Glyphosate 4800 PPB 

Ampa 267 PPB 

SS02 Soil sample from comp. yard Glyphosate 138 PPB 

Ampa 204 PPB 

Figure 7: Residue results (Ampa= metabolite of glyphosate, PPB=parts per billion) 

11. Based on the lab results, it can be deduced that the applicator used glyphosate, a non 

selective herbicide, in place of the selective broadleaf herbicide. 

12. For related cases, please see: 2012/0753 and 2012/0758. 

Elizabeth C. Carter Date: July 6, 2012 


Disposition: Ross Lawn & Landscape and Aaron Stigall was cited for nineteen (17) counts of 

violation of section 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and Application Law, specifically 355 

IAC 4-2-3, for failure to properly supervise a non-licensed employee. A civil penalty in the 

amount of $2,125.00 (17 counts x $125.00 per count) was assessed. However, the civil penalty 

was reduced to $1,062.50. Consideration was given to the fact that Mr. Stigall cooperated during 

the investigation; corrective action was taken and no restricted use pesticides were involved. 

Ross Lawn & Landscape was cited for violation of section 65(5) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and 

Application Law for operating in a careless and negligent manner by applying an incorrect 

pesticide thereby causing environmental damage. 

Ross Lawn & Landscape was warned for violation of section 65(9) of the Indiana Pesticide Use 

and Application Law for professing to be in the business of applying aquatic pesticides, turf and 

ornamental pesticides and right-of-way pesticides without having the proper licenses. 




Complainant: 

Katie Manning 

3513 Innsdale Drive 


765-686-1203 

765-465-3201 

CASE SUMMARY 

Case#2012/0753 

Applicator: 


Aaron Stigall 

Jason Enix 

3809 S. TSC Road 


765-529-8333 


Unlicensed 

1. On May 4, 2012, Katie Manning contacted the Office of the Indiana State Chemist (OISC) to report 

that Ross Lawn and Landscape was only supposed to spray her landscape beds and instead sprayed her 

entire yard. According to Ms. Manning, her yard was now dying. 

2. On May 7, 2012, Agent George Saxton and I met with Ms. Manning at her property. Ms. Manning 

stated that Ross Lawn & Landscape sprayed her entire yard on April 11, 2012. She reiterated that she 

had only wanted the landscape beds sprayed and not the entire yard. She stated that she knew the yard 

had been sprayed because of the lawn care flag on the corner of her property. 

3. Upon observing the yard, I noticed large areas of brown, dying turf. Some parts of the turf were green, 

but the majority of the turf appeared brown and stressed. It was also very evident where the application 

had been made on the property. Please see the figures below. 

Figure 1: Front yard Figure 2: Front yard & side yard Figure 3: Side yard 

Figure 4: Back yard Figure 5: Up close back yard Fig 6: Sprayer pattern 


4. I then collected a composite soil and grass sample from the Manning yard and later submitted it to the 

OISC Residue lab for analysis. 

5. Later that day, Agent George Saxton and I met with Aaron Stigall, the certified applicator at Ross Lawn 

and Landscaping. Mr. Stigall stated he had approximately 16 to 18 properties that were having similar 

issues. He said that all the applications at these affected properties had been made by a former 

employee, Jason Enix. He was uncertain what caused the problem, but acknowledged that it was most 

likely pesticide related. 

6. Mr. Stigall also acknowledged that Mr. Enix was not a licensed pesticide applicator, and that Mr. Enix 

had not been properly supervised during the applications. I told Mr. Stigall I would need a copy of all 

the applications that Mr. Enix had completed. He then informed me that he was trying to do everything 

possible to remedy the situation with his customers. He stated he was planning on reseeding all the 

injured properties. 

7. Mr. Stigall and I also talked about the notification/ invoicing he was leaving with his customers. On 

the paperwork, it listed “Spraying Services Available…. Weed control, Fertilization, Tree and Shrub, 

Aquatics, Bare Ground, Flea and Tick, Parking Lots, Perimeter, Fungicide, and More.” I explained to 

Mr. Stigall that he could not advertise that the company could make tree and shrub, aquatic, or 

perimeter applications being that the business license only had a 3b (turf) endorsement. 

8. Later, Mr. Stigall submitted to me all of Mr. Enix’s application records. Mr. Enix made for hire turf 

applications on the following dates: 

• March 12, 13, 19, 21, 26, 27, 29, 30 

• April 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 

9. The OISC lab reported the following: 

Sample Number Sample Description Analysis Result 

SS01 Soil sample from comp. yard Glyphosate 94 PPB 

Ampa 

BQL 

GS02 Grass sample from comp. yard Glyphosate 2532 PPB 

Ampa 

155 PPB 

Figure 7: Residue results (Ampa= metabolite of glyphosate, PPB=parts per billion, BQL= below quantification limits.) 

10. Based on the lab results, it can be deduced that the applicator used glyphosate, a non selective 

herbicide, in place of the selective broadleaf herbicide. 




Disposition: Ross Lawn & Landscape was cited for violation of section 65(5) and 65(6) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law for operating in a careless and negligent manner and failure to 

properly supervise a non-licensed employee. A civil penalty in the amount of $125.00 was assessed for 

this violation. 




CASE SUMMARY 

Case #2012/0757 

Complainant: 




Applicator: U.S. Lawns (unlicensed business) 

2793 W. US Hwy. 40 

Brazil, IN 47834 

812-605-8083 

Bill Wells - owner (uncertified applicator) 

1. On May 10, 2012, I received a phone call that a crew from U.S. Lawns was observed 

making what appeared to be a “Roundup” application to weed areas around the Regions 

Bank in Terre Haute, Indiana. I also received photos of the application. 

2. I was approximately ten (10) minutes away from this area when I received the call and 

drove toward the location. I received another phone call informing me that the crew had 

left the bank and were headed south. I spotted the crew at a gas station just south of the 

bank. I spoke to Crew Leader, A.J. Wells. Mr. A.J. Wells informed me that they had just 

come from the bank and had been spraying Roundup to some weed areas. Mr. A.J. Wells 

informed me that no one on his crew had a license and that the owner of the company 

was Bill Wells. Mr. A.J. Wells was issued a Stop, Use or Removal order to cease any 

further applications of any pesticides until required licensing was obtained. 

3. I contacted Mr. Bill Wells and spoke to him about the licensing issue. Mr. Bill Wells 

informed me that he had sent an employee to the Category 3b training, but that person 

had not yet taken or passed any of the required tests. Mr. Bill Wells informed me that he 

did not think that spraying the Roundup required a license. I explained to Mr. Bill Wells 

the requirements for obtaining a license. Mr. Bill Wells informed me that no further 

applications of any pesticides would be used until they got a license. I also explained to 

Mr. Bill Wells that no fertilizer applications could be made until a Category 3b license 

was obtained. 

4. The following photographs were sent to me showing the crew member of U.S. Lawns 

applying the roundup (photo #1) and the U.S. Lawns vehicle parked at the Regions Bank 

(photo #2): 


Photo #1: Applicator from U.S. Lawns 

Photo #2: U.S. Lawns Vehicle at Regions Bank 

Scott M. Farris Date: June 5, 2012 


Disposition: U.S. Lawns was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide Use 

and Application Law for applying pesticides for hire without having an Indiana pesticide 

business license. A civil penalty in the amount of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. 

George N. Saxton Draft Date: June 7, 2012 



CASE SUMMARY 

Case #2012/0758 

Complainant: 

Applicator: 

David Hartwig 

170 Midway Drive 


765-521-8809 


Aaron Stigall 

Jason Enix 

3809 S TSC Road 


765-529-8333 


Unlicensed Applicator 

1. On May 10, 2012, David Hartwig contacted the Office of the Indiana State Chemist (OISC) 

to report that Ross Lawn & Landscape made a turf application to his yard on March 27, 

2012, in spite of Mr. Hartwig allegedly cancelling the lawn service in 2011. Mr. Hartwig was 

also very concerned about the overall appearance of his yard after the application. 

2. On May 14, 2012, I met with Mr. Hartwig at his property. He reiterated that he was very 

concerned about the condition of his yard. He then told me that in August or September of 

2011, he verbally told the secretary at Ross Lawn & Landscape that he wanted to cancel 

service for 2012. Consequently on March 12, 2012, Mr. Hartwig made a pre-emergent weed 

application of Halts Crabgrass Preventer (AI: Pendamethalin, EPA Reg. #538-192) to his 

own property. He then stated that on March 27, 2012, he observed someone else making 

another turf application to his yard. He confronted the applicator, and according to Mr. 

Hartwig the applicator stated that he was with Ross Lawn & Landscape and that this situation 

had happened to several other customers. The applicator informed Mr. Hartwig there would 

be no charge for service. Mr. Hartwig then stated that a week or so later his yard started to 

show some yellowing. He said he was concerned that the consecutive applications of preemergent 

negatively affected his yard. 

3. According to the spray ticket I received from Ross Lawn & Landscaping, Jason Enix, an 

unlicensed applicator, applied Barricade 4FL (EPA Reg. #100-1139 , AI: Prodiamine) and 

Armor Tech Threesome (EPA Reg. #86064-5, AI: 2,4-D, Mecoprop-p, and dicamba) on 

March 27 at 9:00 AM. 

4. On May 23, 2012, I spoke with Aaron Stigall, the owner of Ross Lawn & Landscaping. Mr. 

Stigall was aware of the complainant. I asked him if he was aware that Mr. Hartwig had 

cancelled his lawn service. He stated he was not. However, he said there had been a lot of 

problems/issues with his old secretary that has since been terminated. Mr. Ross said that the 

secretary probably did not record the cancellation in the system. He then explained to me 

that he offered to reseed Mr. Hartwig’s property, but Mr. Hartwig did not want to do that. I 


suggested that it might be more beneficial to do this is the fall especially since there had been 

two applications of pre-emergent weed control. Mr. Stigall agreed that this would be a 

reasonable course of action if Mr. Hartwig wanted to do so later in the season. 

5. Although in the other cases involving Ross Lawn & Landscape it was determined that 

glyphosate was used in place of a broadleaf weed killer, it was not suspected that this 

happened in Mr. Hartwig’s yard. It appeared that the minor symptoms seen in the yard were 

most likely due to consecutive pre-emergent applications and environmental factors. 

6. During the course of another investigation with Ross Lawn & Landscape, it was discovered 

that the company was sending out an unlicensed applicator, Jason Enix, to make for hire turf 

applications. Mr. Stigall, the owner, admitted to this action. He submitted to me all of Mr. 

Enix’s application records. Mr. Enix made for hire turf applications on the following dates: 

• March 12, 13, 19, 21, 26, 27, 29, 30 

• April 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 

7. It was also discovered that Ross Lawn & Landscape was leaving notification/ invoicing 

paperwork with their customers stating “Spraying Services Available…. Weed control, 

Fertilization, Tree and Shrub, Aquatics, Bare Ground, Flea and Tick, Parking Lots, 

Perimeter, Fungicide, and More.” Ross Lawn & Landscape only has a 3b turf endorsement 

on their business license. I explained to Mr. Stigall that Ross Lawn & Landscape cannot 

advertise pesticide application to tree and shrub, aquatic, or perimeter applications unless 

they have a proper license. 




Disposition: Ross Lawn & Landscape was cited for violation of section 65(6) of the Indiana 

Pesticide Use and Application Law for failure to properly supervise a non-licensed 

employee. A civil penalty in the amount of $125.00 was assessed for this violation. 




CASE SUMMARY 

Case #2012/0841 

Complainant: 




Applicator: Hillcrest Supply, Inc. (licensed business) 

6134 E. 200 N. 

Montgomery, IN 47538 

812-486-3261 

1. On May 31, 2012, I conducted a facility inspection at Hillcrest Supply and during a check 

of Restricted Use Pesticide (RUP) sales records, I discovered they had sold RUP products 

to an unlicensed person. 

2. The RUP sales records given to me at the time of my inspection indicated Melvin Yoder 

had been sold an RUP on April 9, 2012 and on May 16, 2012. A check of the OISC 

database indicated that Mr. Yoder had not renewed his license since the year 2005 and 

the license was currently inactive. 

3. I discussed this issue with the Facility Manager, Roman Wagler. Mr. Wagler confirmed 

they had sold RUP’s to Mr. Yoder and were not sure how they had not noticed the fact he 

no longer had a license. 

Scott M. Farris Date: June 5, 2012 


Disposition: Hillcrest Supply Inc. was cited for two (2) counts of violation of 357 IAC 1-3-2 of 

the Indiana Pesticide Registration Law for distributing restricted use pesticides to a noncertified 

user. A civil penalty in the amount of $1,000.00 (2 counts x $500.00 per count) was 

assessed. Consideration was given to the fact this was not their first violation concerning 

handling and distribution of restricted use pesticides (see 2008/0208 and 2008/0329). 

George N. Saxton Draft Date: June 7, 2012 

Compliance Officer Draft Date: July 31, 2012 

Final Date: September 14, 2012 


Complainant: 

CASE SUMMARY 




800-893-6637 

Case #2012/0848 

Applicator: John Bruner Certified Applicator 7B 

Paul Strode 

Certified Applicator 7A 

Cochnower Pest Control 

530 S. Earl Avenue 

Lafayette, IN 47904 

765-447-7502 

1. On June 26, 2012, I visited Cochnower Pest Control and met with Mr. Wayne Ritenour, 

Branch Manager, of Cochnower Pest Control. I advised him that I was seeking termite 

treatment records specifically pre-construction termite treatment records with regard to 

3557 Promenade Parkway Lafayette, IN 

2. Mr. Ritenour provided me with a copy of an estimate written by Mr. Strode for the job 

know as Verizon building on Promenade Parkway in Lafayette, IN along with a service 

report that indicated an exterior perimeter and plumbing and electrical areas termite 

treatment was done to the property. According to the service report, the applicator was 

Mr. Strode as his certification number was listed on the form. 

3. I then received from Mr. Strode on July 5, 2012, a copy of the treatment graph for this 

project. 

4. After reviewing the treatment record there appeared to be a discrepancy with the total 

amount of use dilution used by Mr. Bruner and Mr. Strode from the total amount of use 

dilution calculated by me based on Mr. Strode’s measurements and diagram. Mr. Strode’s 

records indicated that only the exterior vertical barrier was treated. 

5. Mr. Bruner’s calculations: 


Vertical Barrier Outside 

172 lin. Ft x .4 x 1 (1DTF) = 68.8 gallons Mr. Bruner reported using 75 gallons 

By-The-Label Calculations 

Horizontal Barrier: 

2584 ft 2 x 1gallon per 10 ft 2 = 258.4 gallons 

Inside Vertical Barrier: 

172 linear feet x 4 gallons per 10 linear feet x one foot depth-to-footer = 68.8 gallons 


Outside Vertical Barrier: 

172 linear feet x 4 gallons per 10 linear feet x one foot depth-to-footer = 68.8 gallons 

Grand total for a by-the-label application 

= 396 gallons 

6. The label for Termidor 80WG (EPA Reg. #7969-209) active ingredient fipronil states, 

“HORIZONTAL TREATED ZONES Apply an overall treatment of Termidor 80WG to the 

entire surface to be covered beneath the concrete slab. This includes the slab under the 

actual living area, plus carports, porches, basement floors and any extended entrances. Make 

this treatment at the rate of 1-1.5 gallons finished dilution per 10 square feet.” “VERTICAL 

TREATED ZONES apply Termidor 80WG termiticide/insecticide at rate of 1 gallon 

finished dilution/square foot around anything penetrating the slab (e.g. utility services 

plumbing lines) and at 4 gallons of finished dilution per 10 linear feet per foot of depth along 

the inside and outside perimeter of foundation walls.” 

7. On July 6, 2012, I spoke with Mr. Bruner and Mr. Strode regarding the discrepancy. Mr. 

Bruner stated that his paperwork was not in order and that he had not used the correct 

amount of chemical as called for by the label. 



DISPOSITION: John Bruner was cited for violation of section 65(2) of the Indiana Pesticide 

Use and Application Law for failure to follow label directions. A civil penalty in the amount 

of $250.00 was assessed for this violation. 




Complainant: 

CASE SUMMARY 




Case #2012/0857 

Owner: Jeff Hayes Licensed Applicator 

Applicator: Joe Fleener Not Licensed 

Business: New Image Not Licensed 

6595 E. Ridgeview Court 

Mooresville, IN 46158 

317-979-8299 

1. On 6-7-2012, I observed a New Image employee making an application to weeds in landscape 

beds at the Arby’s Restaurant off State Road 37 in Noblesville, Indiana. At the conclusion of the 

application, I introduced myself to the applicator, Joe Fleener, and initiated a routine pesticide 

use and licensing inspection. 

2. During our conversation, it was determined that Mr. Fleener was spraying weeds with Roundup 

Quick Pro (EPA Reg. #524-535), active ingredient glyphosate, and that he has not been issued a 

pesticide applicator license. I explained to Mr. Fleener that he must have an applicator license to 

apply pesticides for-hire. 

3. I spoke with his manager, New Image owner Jeff Hayes, on the phone. Mr. Hayes is a licensed 

certified applicator in Category 3b (turf) with Go Green Lawn Service. He reported that Go 

Green makes the lawn applications at the restaurant properties and that his company, New Image, 

is the mowing contractor. Mr. Hayes indicated he understands the licensing requirements for turf 

applications but stated he was not clear about spot treatments in landscape beds. I informed Mr. 

Hayes that such applications are for-hire pesticide applications so the same licensing 

requirements apply, and a phone call to the OISC could have cleared up the confusion. Mr. 

Hayes indicated his mowing crews have made applications to beds this year when needed, but he 

has no records for the applications. I explained to Mr. Hayes several options to come into 

compliance. 

Andrew R. Roth Date: August 3, 2012 


Disposition: Jeff Hayes was cited for violation of section 65(6) of the Indiana Pesticide Use and 

Application Law, specifically 355 IAC 4-2-3, for failure to provide on-site supervision for a nonlicensed 

employee. A civil penalty in the amount of $125.00 was assessed for this violation. 

George N. Saxton Draft Date: August 6, 2012 

Compliance Officer Final Date: September 14, 2012

Indiana Register 

TITLE 357 INDIANA PESTICIDE REVIEW BOARD 

Notice of Intent to Readopt 

LSA Document #12-582 

Readopts rules in anticipation of IC 4-22-2.5-2, providing that an administrative rule adopted under IC 4-22-2 

expires January 1 of the seventh year after the year in which the rule takes effect unless the rule contains an 

earlier expiration date. Effective 30 days after filing with the Publisher. 

OVERVIEW: Rules to be readopted without changes are as follows: 

357 IAC 1-8 Indiana Pesticide Law Violators; Public Listing 

357 IAC 1-12 Pesticide Drift 

Requests for any part of this readoption to be separate from this action must be made in writing within 30 days of 

this publication. Send written comments to the Small Business Regulatory Coordinator for this rule (see IC 4-22-2- 

28.1): 

Mr. David E. Scott 

Secretary 

Indiana Pesticide Review Board 

175 South University Street 

West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-2063 

(765) 494-1593 

scottde@purdue.edu 

Statutory authority: IC 15-16-4-52; IC 15-16-4-69; IC 15-16-5-44; IC 15-16-5-65. 

For purposes of IC 4-22-2-28.1, the Small Business Ombudsman designated by IC 5-28-17-5 is: 

Eric P. Shields 

Indiana Economic Development Corporation 

One North Capitol, Suite 700 

Indianapolis, IN 46204 

(317) 234-3997 

smallbizombudsman@iedc.in.gov 

Resources available to regulated entities through the small business ombudsman include the ombudsman's 

duties stated in IC 5-28-17-5, specifically IC 5-28-17-5(9), investigating and attempting to resolve any matter 

regarding compliance by a small business with a law, rule, or policy administered by a state agency, either as 

a party to a proceeding or as a mediator. 

Posted: 10/24/2012 by Legislative Services Agency 

An html version of this document. 

Date: Oct 26,2012 8:18:13AM EDT DIN: 20121024-IR-357120582RNA Page 1


TITLE 355 STATE CHEMIST OF THE STATE OF INDIANA 

Proposed Rule 


DIGEST 

Adds 355 IAC 4-3-0.5 to establish definitions of terms used in the rule. Amends 355 IAC 4-3-1 to eliminate 

the requirement for pesticide businesses to file proof of unexpired liability insurance annually. Amends 355 IAC 4- 

3-2 to clarify the minimum coverage requirements for liability insurance. Amends 355 IAC 4-3-3 to clarify type and 

scope of liability coverage required. Amends 355 IAC 4-3-4 concerning acceptable proof of insurance form. 

Effective 30 days after filing with the Publisher. 

IC 4-22-2.1-5 Statement Concerning Rules Affecting Small Businesses 

355 IAC 4-3-0.5; 355 IAC 4-3-1; 355 IAC 4-3-2; 355 IAC 4-3-3; 355 IAC 4-3-4 

SECTION 1. 355 IAC 4-3-0.5 IS ADDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

355 IAC 4-3-0.5 Definitions 

Authority: IC 15-16-5-44 

Affected: IC 15-16-5-19; IC 15-16-5-25; IC 27-1-3-20 

Sec. 0.5. The following definitions apply throughout this rule: 

(1) "Pesticide", as defined in IC 15-16-5-25, includes, but is not limited to, the following products: 

(A) Fungicides. 

(B) Herbicides. 

(C) Insecticides. 

(D) Rodenticides. 

(E) Termiticides. 

(2) "Pesticide business license", as defined in IC 15-16-5-19, means the license issued annually by the 

state chemist to a for-hire: 

(A) pesticide application business; or 

(B) category 12 wood destroying pest inspection business. 

(3) "Wood destroying pest" means a wood infesting pest commonly targeted for inspection prior to a 

real estate transfer, including: 

(A) carpenter ants; 

(B) carpenter bees; 

(C) reinfesting wood boring beetles; 

(D) termites; or 

(E) wood destroying fungus. 

(State Chemist of the State of Indiana; 355 IAC 4-3-0.5) 

SECTION 2. 355 IAC 4-3-1 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

355 IAC 4-3-1 Proof of liability insurance 


Affected: IC 15-16-5-48; IC 15-16-5-58; IC 27-1-3-20 

Sec. 1. Applicants for licensure as (a) Prior to the issuance of a pesticide business license, applicants shall 

furnish evidence of financial responsibility liability insurance acceptable to the state chemist. prior to the 

issuance and upon annual renewal of such license or upon expiration of the proof of insurance on file with the 

state chemist. This requirement may be satisfied by: 

(1) liability insurance or a surety bond issued by a company holding a certificate of authority issued by the 

Indiana department of insurance under IC 27-1-3-20; or 

(2) certificate of financial responsibility issued by an institution licensed to do business in the state by the 

Date: Oct 23,2012 8:24:34AM EDT DIN: 20121017-IR-355120134PRA Page 1


Indiana department of financial institutions. 

(b) Pesticide business licensees must provide the state chemist with updated proof of liability 

insurance whenever the pesticide liability insurance expires or is modified. 

(State Chemist of the State of Indiana; Pesticide Use & Application Reg 3, Sec 1; filed Aug 3, 1976, 4:10 p.m.: 

Rules and Regs. 1977, p. 443; filed Jan 10, 1995, 8:45 a.m.: 18 IR 1238; readopted filed Nov 21, 2001, 10:17 

a.m.: 25 IR 1269; readopted filed Sep 20, 2007, 1:46 p.m.: 20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 


355 IAC 4-3-2 Minimum coverage amounts 


Affected: IC 15-16-5-48; IC 15-16-5-58 

Sec. 2. (a) The minimum coverage requirements for a pesticide application business shall be: as follows: 

(1) General liability, three five hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) ($500,000) general liability combined 

single limit of liability for bodily injury and property damage; The limit is to apply to each occurrence. and 

(2) Vehicle liability, three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) limit per accident This shall be required only if 

the insured owns, leases, rents, maintains, or uses any vehicle in connection with the use of pesticides. This 

type of coverage is not required if already covered by the general liability insurance. or occurrence. 

(3) Watercraft liability, three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) limit per accident. This shall be required 

only if the insured owns, leases, rents, maintains, or uses any watercraft in connection with the use of 

pesticides. This type of coverage is not required if already covered by the general liability insurance. 

(4) Aircraft liability, either of the following shall be required only if the insured owns, leases, rents, maintains, or 

uses any aircraft in connection with the use of pesticides: 

(A) Three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) limit per accident. 

(B) Both: 

(i) one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) bodily injury per person and three hundred thousand dollars 

($300,000) per accident; and 

(ii) one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) property damage per accident and one hundred thousand 

dollars ($100,000) aggregate. 

(b) The minimum coverage requirements for a category 12 wood destroying pest inspection business 

shall be three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) errors and omissions combined single limit of liability. 





355 IAC 4-3-3 Type of coverage 


Affected: IC 15-16-5-48; IC 15-16-5-58 

Sec. 3. (a) General liability coverage insurance shall be conditioned to provide coverage for pesticide 

related damage to persons or property: 

(1) outside of the insured's care, custody, and control; 

(2) in the insured's care, custody, and control; 

(3) resulting from wind drift or overspray of pesticides; and 

(4) resulting from any pesticides used by the business. 

(b) Errors and omissions liability insurance shall provide coverage for damage to persons or property 

resulting from an inaccurate wood destroying pest inspection or inspection report. 







355 IAC 4-3-4 Acceptable proof of insurance form 


Affected: IC 15-16-5-48; IC 15-16-5-58 

Sec. 4. (a) Proof of financial responsibility liability insurance shall be provided by the issuing insurance 

company or institution on forms determined to be acceptable by the state chemist. Acceptable forms shall include, 

but may not be limited to, a certificate of insurance. 

(b) The certificate of insurance for general liability must include specific reference to any 

endorsements or exclusions that impact the coverage of pesticide activities by the business, including, 

but not limited to, the pesticide or herbicide endorsement on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form 

number CG2264, or its equivalent. 

(c) The state chemist may be listed as a certificate holder on the certificate of insurance. 




Notice of Public Hearing 





TITLE 357 INDIANA PESTICIDE REVIEW BOARD 

Proposed Rule 


DIGEST 

Amends 357 IAC 1-3-1 and 357 IAC 1-3-3 to make legal citation references consistent with amendments to 

IC 15-16-5. Amends 357 IAC 1-6-1 and 357 IAC 1-6-2 to make legal citation references consistent with 

amendments to IC 15-16-4 and IC 15-16-5 and to consolidate 357 IAC 1-6 and 357 IAC 1-7 into one 

comprehensive rule addressing civil penalties under both IC 15-16-4 and IC 15-16-5. Amends 357 IAC 1-10-3 to 

clarify where within a wellhead protection area pesticide storage is permitted. Amends 357 IAC 1-10-4 to clarify 

that immediate pesticide spill cleanup requirements apply within an isolation area. Repeals 357 IAC 1-7-1, 357 

IAC 1-7-2, 357 IAC 1-7-4 through 357 IAC 1-7-8, 357 IAC 1-9, and 357 IAC 1-10-6. Effective 30 days after filing 

with the Publisher. 


357 IAC 1-3-1; 357 IAC 1-3-3; 357 IAC 1-6-1; 357 IAC 1-6-2; 357 IAC 1-7-1; 357 IAC 1-7-2; 357 IAC 1-7-4; 357 

IAC 1-7-5; 357 IAC 1-7-6; 357 IAC 1-7-7; 357 IAC 1-7-8; 357 IAC 1-9; 357 IAC 1-10-3; 357 IAC 1-10-4; 357 IAC 

1-10-6 


357 IAC 1-3-1 Definitions 


Affected: IC 15-16-5-7; IC 15-16-5-30 

Sec. 1. The following definitions apply throughout this rule: 

(1) "Business location" means the physical site of each office, warehouse, salesroom, or other establishment 

with a distinct mailing or electronic address at which orders for pesticide products with restricted uses are 

brokered or accepted from certified users. 

(2) "Certified user" means the following: 

(A) A private applicator (IC 15-3-3.6-2(6). (IC 15-16-5-30). 

(B) A commercial applicator (IC 15-3-3.6-2(7). (IC 15-16-5-7). 

(C) A person acting as an agent for and under the direct supervision of clause (A) or (B). 

(3) "Restricted use pesticide dealer" means any business location from which restricted use pesticides are 

distributed or brokered to certified users. 

(Indiana Pesticide Review Board; Reg 4,Sec 1; filed Jul 14, 1977, 2:26 p.m.: Rules and Regs. 1978, p. 656; filed 

Apr 18, 2001, 3:37 p.m.: 24 IR 2680; readopted filed Oct 29, 2001, 4:41 p.m.: 25 IR 936; readopted filed Sep 20, 

2007, 1:47 p.m.: 20071010-IR-357070485RFA) 


357 IAC 1-3-3 Distribution to certified users by registered dealers only 


Affected: IC 15-16-4; IC 15-16-5-57 

Sec. 3. Restricted use pesticides shall be distributed to certified users only by restricted use pesticide dealers 

who are registered in accordance with IC 15-3-3.6-12 IC 15-16-5-57 and in compliance with regulations pertaining 

thereto. 

(Indiana Pesticide Review Board; Reg 4,Sec 3; filed Jul 14, 1977, 2:26 p.m.: Rules and Regs. 1978, p. 656; filed 

Apr 18, 2001, 3:37 p.m.: 24 IR 2680; readopted filed Oct 29, 2001, 4:41 p.m.: 25 IR 936; readopted filed Sep 20, 

2007, 1:47 p.m.: 20071010-IR-357070485RFA) 




Rule 6. Civil Penalty Assessment Schedule 


Authority: IC 15-16 

Affected: IC 15-16-4; IC 15-16-5 


(1) "Adulterated" means a product as described in IC 15-3-3.5-2(2). IC 15-16-4-3. 

(2) "Board" means the Indiana pesticide review board created by IC 15-3-3.5-12. IC 15-16-4-42. 

(3) "Bulk pesticide" means a pesticide as described in IC 15-3-3.5-2(32). IC 15-16-4-7. 

(4) "Distribute" means to distribute a product, as described in IC 15-3-3.5-2(8). IC 15-16-4-11. 

(5) "Labeling" means all products labels and written, printed, or graphic material as described in IC 15-3-3.5- 

2(18). IC 15-16-4-24. 

(6) "Legal citation" means the Indiana Code (IC) or the Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) section or 

subsection cited on the schedule to describe the relevant portion of a pesticide law or rule that has been 

violated. 

(7) "Misbranded" means a product as described in IC 15-3-3.5-2(19). IC 15-16-4-25. 

(8) "Per day" means the method to be utilized for determining the civil penalty to be assessed for a violation 

that is of a continuing nature but may be the result of one (1) distinguishable act or failure to act. The violation 

number shall remain the same when assessing civil penalties for multiple counts of violation on a per day 

basis. 

(9) "Per incident" means the method to be utilized for determining the violation number for a violation that is 

usually not of a continuing nature and is the result of a separate and distinguishable act or failure to act. 

Violations involving separate and distinguishable acts may be assigned accumulating violation numbers. 

(10) "Per person" means the method to be utilized for determining the civil penalty to be assessed for 

a violation that may involve more than one (1) person. The violation number shall remain the same 

when assessing civil penalties on a per person basis. 

(10) (11) "Per product" means the method to be utilized for determining the violation number for a violation that 

may involve more than one (1) different product. Violations involving multiple products will be assigned 

accumulating violation numbers. 

(11) (12) "Person" has the meaning set forth in IC 15-3-3.5-2(22). IC 15-16-4-28. 

(12) (13) "Per year" means the method to be utilized for determining the violation number for a violation that 

may be documented on several dates or at several locations but is the result of one (1) distinguishable act or 

failure to act. 

(13) (14) "Product" means pesticide product as defined in IC 15-3-3.5-2(38). IC 15-16-4-33. 

(14) (15) "Schedule" means the civil penalty schedule required by IC 15-3-3.5-18.3(b) IC 15-16-4-69 and IC 

15-16-5-66 and as specified in section 2 of this rule. 

(15) (16) "State chemist" means the Indiana state chemist or his or her appointed agent. 

(16) (17) "Violation assessment" means the scheme to be utilized for determining the violation number and the 

count of violations eligible to be assessed civil penalties on the schedule. This scheme includes the concept of 

assessing civil penalties on a per incident, per day, per product, and per year basis as indicated on the 

schedule. 

(Indiana Pesticide Review Board; 357 IAC 1-6-1; filed Jan 9, 1992, 3:00 p.m.: 15 IR 706; readopted filed Oct 29, 

2001, 4:41 p.m.: 25 IR 936; filed Jan 7, 2005, 2:15 p.m.: 28 IR 1689; readopted filed Nov 18, 2011, 1:21 p.m.: 

20111214-IR-357110572RFA) 


357 IAC 1-6-2 Schedule 


Affected: IC 15-16-4; IC 15-16-5 

Sec. 2. (a) The schedule of civil penalties for violations of IC 15-3-3.5, the Indiana Pesticide Registration Law, 



IC 15-16-4 and IC 15-16-5, and the rules adopted under this law these laws is as follows: 

Legal Citation 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(1) 

IC 15-16-4-57(1) 

or IC 15-3-3.5- 

18.1(a)(1) IC 15- 

16-4-66(1) 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(2) 

IC 15-16-4-57(2) 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(3) 

IC 15-16-4-57(3) 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(4) 

IC 15-16-4-57(4) 

General Description of Violation 

Produce, distribute, display, sell, offer for 

sale, or transport a nonregistered 

pesticide product. 


sale, or transport a pesticide product with 

labeling claims or directions for use 

different from that registered. 



composition different from that registered. 



incomplete or illegible label or in a container 

other than manufacturer's immediate, 

unbroken, and approved or authorized 

container. 

Violation Number 

1 2 

3 and 

subsequent 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$100 $200 $300 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(5) Distribute an improperly colored product. $250 $500 $1,000 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(6) 

IC 15-16-4-57(5), 

IC 15-3-3.5- 

18.1(2) IC 15-16- 

4-66(2), or IC 15- 

3-3.5-18.1(3) IC 

15-16-4-66(3) 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(7) 

IC 15-16-4-57(6) 

or IC 15-16-4- 

57(9) 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(8) 

IC 15-16-4-57(7) 

or IC 15-16-4- 

59(5) 

IC 15-3-3.5-3(9) 

IC 15-16-4-57(8) 

IC 15-16-4-57(9) 

IC 15-3-3.5-4(1) 

IC 15-16-4-59(1) 

IC 15-3-3.5-4(2) 

IC 15-16-4-59(2) 

IC 15-3-3.5-4(3) 

IC 15-16-4-59(4) 

IC 15-16-4-59(6) 

or IC 15-16-5- 

65(6) 


sale, or transport an adulterated or 

misbranded pesticide product. 


sale, or transport a pesticide product in a 

container not in compliance with container 

rules adopted by the board or regulations 

adopted under the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 

136 et seq.) 

Distribute a highly volatile herbicide except 

on written permission by the state 

chemist. 


sale, transport, or store a bulk pesticide 

without an a fully compliant label affixed 

label to the container. 

Produce, distribute, sell, offer for sale, or 

transport a pesticide that violates the 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 

Rodenticide Act (U.S.C. 136 et seq.) or 

regulations adopted under the Act. 

Detach, alter, deface, or destroy a pesticide 

product label or labeling. or adulterate a 

product. 

Reveal a product formula. Add any 

substance to, or take any substance 

from, a pesticide in a manner that may 

defeat the purpose of IC 15-16-4 or IC 15- 

16-5. 

Use or cause to be used a pesticide not in 

compliance with use, distribution, storage, 

transportation, disposal, or container rules. 

contrary to the rules adopted by the 

board. 

Neglect, or after notice, refuse to comply 

with IC 15-16-4, IC 15-16-5, the rules 

adopted under these chapters, or any 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$100 $200 $300 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

Violation 

Assessment 

Per product 

and per year 

Per product 

and per year 

Per product 

and per year 

Per product 

and per 

incident 

Per product 

and per year 

Per product 

and per year 

Per product, 

and per 

incident, and 

per year 

Per product 

and per 

incident 

Per product 

and per 

incident 

Per product 

and per 

incident 

Per product 

and per 

incident 

Per product 

and per 

incident 

Per product 

and per 

incident 

Per product 

and per 

incident 



IC 15-3-3.5-25 

IC 15-3-3.5-33 IC 

15-16-4-67 or IC 

15-16-5-64 

IC 15-3-3.5-34 IC 

15-16-4-68 

IC 15-16-4-73(c) 

IC 15-16-4-77 or 

IC 15-16-5- 

65(19) 

IC 15-16-5-65(1) 

IC 15-16-5-65(2) 

IC 15-16-5-65(3) 

lawful order of the state chemist or 

board. 

Sell, use, or remove without permission a 

product placed under a stop sale, use, or 

removal order. 

Store, display Produce, handle, transport, 

store, display, dispose, or distribute a 

pesticide product or pesticide product 

container in a hazardous manner that may 

endanger or cause injury to humans, 

beneficial vegetation, crops, livestock, 

wildlife, beneficial insects, the 

environment, food, feed, or other 

associated products. 

Store, discard, or Dispose of, discard, or 

store a pesticide product or pesticide 

container in a hazardous manner that may 

cause injury to humans, plants, animals, 

wildlife, lands, or waters. 

Sell, use, or remove without written 

permission from the state chemist or by a 

court order a pesticide product placed 

under a stop sale, use, or removal order 

by the state chemist. 

Recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally 

impede or prevent the state chemist or 

the state chemist's agent in the 

performance of the state chemist's duty 

in connection with IC 15-16-4 or IC 15-16- 

5. 

Make a false or fraudulent claim either 

verbally or through any media 

misrepresenting the effect of a pesticide 

product or a method to be used. 

Recommend, use, or supervise the use of 

a registered pesticide product in a 

manner inconsistent with its labeling, or 

in violation of the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency or 

Indiana state restrictions on the use of 

that pesticide product. 

Use a known ineffective or improper 

pesticide product or known ineffective 

amount of pesticide. 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per incident 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per incident 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per incident 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

Per incident 

and per day 

Per incident 

and per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

IC 15-16-5-65(4) Operate faulty or unsafe equipment. $250 $500 $1,000 

IC 15-16-5-65(5) 

IC 15-16-5-65(7) 

IC 15-16-5-65(8) 

IC 15-16-5-65(9) 

IC 15-16-5- 

65(10) 

Operate in a careless or negligent 

manner. 

Refuse or neglect to keep and maintain 

the records required by IC 15-16-5 or to 

make reports and supply information 

when required or requested by the state 

chemist in the course of an investigation 

or inspection. 

Make false or fraudulent records, 

invoices, or reports. 

Engage in or profess to engage in the 

business of using a pesticide or any 

other product regulated under IC 15-16-5 

or by rules adopted under IC 15-16-5 or 

making a diagnostic inspection to 

determine infestations of a wood 

destroying pest for hire on the property 

of another without having a pesticide 

business license issued by the state 

chemist. 

Use a restricted use pesticide without 

having an applicator, who is licensed or 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

Per incident 

and per day 

Per incident 

and per day 

Per incident 

and per day 

Per incident 

and per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 

Per incident, 

per day, and 



permitted under IC 15-16-5, in direct 

supervision. 

per person 

Use fraud or misrepresentation in making 

IC 15-16-5- an application for, or renewal of, a 

Per incident 

65(11) 

license, permit, registration, or 

$250 $500 $1,000 and per 

certification. 

person 

Refuse or neglect to comply with any 

$250 $500 $1,000 

certification. 

IC 15-16-5- 

65(12) 

limitations or restrictions on or in a duly 

issued license, permit, registration, or 

Per incident 

and per day 

Aid or abet a person to evade IC 15-16-5, 

IC 15-16-5- 

conspire with a person to evade IC 15-16- 

65(13) 

5, or allow a license, permit, registration, 

or certification to be used by another 

person. 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per day 

IC 15-16-5- 

Make false or misleading statements 

65(14) 

during or after an inspection concerning 

any infestation or infection of pests. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

IC 15-16-5- 

65(15) 

Impersonate any federal, state, county, or 

city inspector, investigator, or official. 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per incident 

IC 15-16-5- 

Knowingly purchase or use a pesticide 

65(16) 

product that was not registered under IC 

15-16-4. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

Fail to continuously maintain financial 

IC 15-16-5- 

responsibility required under IC 15-16-58 

65(17) 

or to provide proof of financial 

responsibility to the state chemist when 

requested. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

IC 15-16-5- 

65(18) 

Intentionally alter a duly issued license, 

permit, registration, or certification. 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per incident 

355 IAC 4-2-3 

Fail to provide on-site supervision to a 

noncertified individual. 

$125 $250 $500 Per day 

355 IAC 4-2-5 Fail to provide direct supervision. $125 $250 $500 Per day 

355 IAC 4-2-6 

Fail to provide technician with label, fact 

sheet, safety equipment, or voice 

communication. 

$25 $50 $100 Per day 

355 IAC 4-2-7 Supervise more than 10 technicians. $100 $100 $100 

Per day and 

per person 

355 IAC 4-2-8 

Fail to have technician credential at the 

work site. 

$25 $50 $100 Per incident 

355 IAC 4-4-1 

Fail to keep and maintain commercial 

applicator restricted use pesticide 

application records. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 4-4-1.5 

Fail to keep and maintain private 

applicator restricted use pesticide 


$100 $100 $100 Per day 

355 IAC 4-4-1 or 

355 IAC 4-4-1.5 

Fail to keep all required restricted use 

pesticide application record elements. 

$25 $50 $100 Per day 

355 IAC 4-4-3 

Fail to register as a restricted use 

pesticide dealer. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

355 IAC 4-4-3 

Fail to keep restricted use pesticide sale 

or distribution records. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

355 IAC 4-5-2(1) 

Fail to develop for hire termiticide 


$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 4-5-2(2) 

Fail to keep all required for hire 

termiticide application records. 

$25 $50 $100 Per day 

355 IAC 4-5-2(3) 

Fail to keep for hire termiticide 

application records for five years. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 4-5-2(4) 

Fail to provide label and application 

specifications to termite control 

technicians. 


355 IAC 4-5-2(5) 

Fail to ensure the completed termite 

control customer disclosure form is 

issued to the customer before the 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 



355 IAC 4-5-2(6) 

355 IAC 4-7-7 

357 IAC 1-3-2 

357 IAC 1-3-3 

357 IAC 1-3-5(a) 

357 IAC 1-3-5(c) 

357 IAC 1-5-2(a) 

357 IAC 1-5-2(b) 

357 IAC 1-5-3 

357 IAC 1-10-2 

357 IAC 1-10-3 

357 IAC 1-10-4 

357 IAC 1-11-2 

357 IAC 1-11-3 

357 IAC 1-12-2 

357 IAC 1-13-2 

357 IAC 1-14- 

3(a) 

357 IAC 1-14- 

3(b) 

357 IAC 1-15-2 

357 IAC 1-15-3 

357 IAC 1-15-4 

357 IAC 1-16-4 

application. 

Fail to ensure that the state chemist is 

notified in advance of a preconstruction 

termiticide application. 

Make false or fraudulent reports or 

misrepresent participation in the 

certification or registration renewal 

process. 

Distribute a restricted use pesticide to a 

noncertified user. 

Distribute a restricted use pesticide without a 

dealer registration. 

Fail to keep restricted use pesticide 

distribution records. 

Fail to keep complete all required elements 

of restricted use pesticide distribution 

records. 

Fail to place a lawn marker at the time of 

a commercial application for hire. 

Fail to ensure the lawn marker meets all 

of the required specifications. 

Fail to provide written customer 

notification containing all required 

notification elements. 

Load, mix, or store a pesticide within an 

isolation area around a community public 

water supply system. 

Fail to provide proper storage or 

containment in wellhead area. 

Fail to properly and immediately clean up 

a pesticide spill within an isolation 

wellhead area. 

Use or supervise the use of a pesticide 

for community-wide mosquito abatement 

without a category 8 license. 

Fail to supervise a noncertified 

community-wide abatement applicator as 

required. 

Apply a pesticide in a manner that allows 

it to drift from the target site in sufficient 

quantity to cause harm to a nontarget 

site. 

Cause the open burning of a pesticide 

container. 

Fail to attach the required labeling to a 

pesticide service container. 

Fail to have possession of a complete 

label copy during transport of a pesticide 

service container. 

Use or supervise the use of a pesticide 

on a golf course without having a 

category 3b commercial applicator 

license. 

Fail to supervise a noncertified pesticide 

applicator on a golf course. 

Fail to keep and maintain all required 

records of a pesticide applied on the golf 

course. 

Use or supervise the use of a pesticide at 

a school without the proper commercial 

applicator license. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per incident 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

$100 $200 $300 Per incident 


$100 $200 $300 Per incident 


$100 $200 $300 Per incident 

$100 $200 $300 

Per incident 

and per day 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 

Per incident 

and per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

$250 $500 $1,000 

Per incident 

and per 

product 

Per incident 

and per 

product 

Per incident 

and per 

product 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

357 IAC 1-16-5 Fail to supervise a noncertified pesticide $250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 



applicator at a school. 

357 IAC 1-16- 

Apply a pesticide at a school during 

6(a) 

normal instructional hours when school 

is in session. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

357 IAC 1-16- 

Allow a student to enter a pesticide 

6(c) 

treatment area during the required 

restricted reentry period. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

357 IAC 1-16-7 

Store a pesticide at a school contrary to 

the storage requirements. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

357 IAC 1-16-8 

Fail to provide required pesticide 

notification. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

357 IAC 1-16- 

9(a) 

Fail to keep and maintain required 

pesticide application at school records. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

357 IAC 1-16- 

Fail to provide requested pesticide 

9(f) 

application records for inspection or 

copying. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

355 IAC 5-2-1 or 

355 IAC 5-2-4 

Store a pesticide in a bulk container made of 

improper design or materials. 

$100 $200 $300 

Per incident 

and per day 

355 IAC 5-2-2 

Store a pesticide in an underground bulk 

container. 

$250 $500 $1,000 

Per incident 

and per day 

355 IAC 5-2-3 

Abandon a bulk storage container 

improperly. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

355 IAC 5-2-5 

Fail to anchor a bulk storage container to 

prevent flotation or instability. 

$100 $200 $300 

Per incident 

and per day 

355 IAC 5-2-6 Fail to vent a bulk storage container. $100 $100 $100 Per incident 

355 IAC 5-2-7 

Fail to provide bulk storage container 

security. 

$100 $100 $100 Per day 

355 IAC 5-2-8 

Fill bulk storage container beyond intended 

capacity. 

$100 $200 $300 Per incident 

355 IAC 5-2-9 

Fail to have proper shut-off valve on bulk 

storage container. 

$50 $50 $50 Per day 

355 IAC 5-2-10 

Fail to support bulk storage container 

appurtenances. 

$50 $50 $50 Per day 

355 IAC 5-2-11 

Fail to have a proper liquid level gauging 

device on a bulk storage container. 


355 IAC 5-2-12 Fail to maintain a bulk storage container. $100 $100 $100 Per day 

355 IAC 5-3-1(a) 

Fail to carry out operational area activities 

within contained area. 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per incident 

355 IAC 5-3-1(b) Operate operational area containment with 

or 355 IAC 5-3- improper design, construction, capacity, or 

1(d) 

drainage. 

$100 $200 $300 

Per incident 

and per day 

355 IAC 5-3-1(e) 

Fail to remove liquids promptly from 

operational area containment. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-3-1(f) 

Fail to protect storage containers and 

appurtenances from damage by vehicles. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per incident 

355 IAC 5-3-1(h) 

Fail to maintain operational area 

containment. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-1(a) 

Store a bulk storage container outside of 

secondary containment. 

$250* $500* $1,000* Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-1(b) 

Fail to separate pesticide secondary 

containment from other materials. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-1(c) 

Fail to maintain required capacity for 

secondary containment. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-1(f) 

Operate secondary containment with tile 

drainage within or under the containment. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-2 

Operate secondary containment with 

improperly constructed or sealed walls. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-3 

Operate secondary containment with 

improperly constructed or sealed base. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-4 

Operate secondary containment with a relief 

outlet, valve, or improper pump. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 



355 IAC 5-4-7 

Operate an improperly designed, 

constructed, or maintained elephant ring. 

$100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-8(a) Fail to maintain secondary containment. $100 $200 $300 Per day 

355 IAC 5-4-8(b) 

Fail to maintain secondary containment free 

of debris and foreign matter. 

$25 $50 $100 Per day 

355 IAC 5-5-1 

Store dry bulk pesticide in improper, 

non-elevated, uncovered, or unsecured 

container or manner. 

$250 $500 $1,000 Per day 

355 IAC 5-8-1 

Fail to notify the state chemist annually of 

the bulk storage facility location and status. 

$50 $100 $150 Per year 

* This penalty shall not be subject to the potential for mitigation listed in section 5 of this rule. 

(b) Each penalty for each violation, if the violation is of a continuing nature, shall not be imposed for more than 

one hundred eighty (180) days when assessed on a per day basis. 

(c) Each penalty for each violation, if the violation is of an identical repetitive nature, shall not be imposed for 

more than one hundred eighty (180) incidents when assessed on a per incident basis. 

(Indiana Pesticide Review Board; 357 IAC 1-6-2; filed Jan 9, 1992, 3:00 p.m.: 15 IR 706; readopted filed Oct 29, 

2001, 4:41 p.m.: 25 IR 936; filed Jan 7, 2005, 2:15 p.m.: 28 IR 1690; readopted filed Nov 18, 2011, 1:21 p.m.: 

20111214-IR-357110572RFA) 


357 IAC 1-10-3 Pesticide storage within the WHPA and outside of the isolation area 

Authority: IC 15-16-5-44; IC 15-16-5-64 

Affected: IC 15-16-5 

Sec. 3. (a) Pesticide containers stored: 

(1) within a WHPA; and 

(2) outside of an isolation area determined by the Indiana department of environmental management; 

and 

(3) with the capacity for the storage of to hold pesticides in undivided quantities exceeding fifty-five (55) U.S. 

gallons or one hundred (100) pounds dry product; 

shall be subject to the storage and containment requirements in 355 IAC 5. 

(b) Pesticide containers not covered by the requirements referenced in subsection (a) shall be stored: 

(1) on an impervious surface; 

(2) in a covered area that is protected from precipitation; and 

(3) within secondary containment when the quantity of pesticide product in all containers exceeds fifty-five (55) 

U.S. gallons of liquid or one hundred (100) pounds of dry product and a spill or leak is likely to enter a septic 

system, sanitary or storm sewer, drinking water well, or dry well. 

(c) Secondary containment required in subsection (b) shall be: 

(1) constructed with a capacity of a minimum of at least one hundred ten percent (110%) of the volume of the 

largest storage container within the contained area plus the volume displaced by all other pesticide containers, 

equipment, and other items in the containment vessel; and 

(2) constructed, installed, and maintained so as to prevent the spill or leakage of the pesticide. 

(Indiana Pesticide Review Board; 357 IAC 1-10-3; filed Apr 23, 2003, 3:45 p.m.: 26 IR 2860; readopted filed Jul 

20, 2009, 7:01 a.m.: 20090819-IR-357090369RFA) 


357 IAC 1-10-4 Cleanup of discharged or spilled pesticide 





Sec. 4. (a) Remediation and cleanup of a discharged or spilled pesticide in an isolation area shall be 

performed immediately upon discovery. 

(b) Clean-up procedures shall be conducted in: 

(1) in accordance with the procedures on the pesticide product label; and 

(2) in a manner that prevents the pesticide from impacting the soil or ground water, and from reaching a 

drinking water well, dry well, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, or septic system. 

(Indiana Pesticide Review Board; 357 IAC 1-10-4; filed Apr 23, 2003, 3:45 p.m.: 26 IR 2860; readopted filed Jul 

20, 2009, 7:01 a.m.: 20090819-IR-357090369RFA) 

SECTION 7. THE FOLLOWING ARE REPEALED: 357 IAC 1-7-1; 357 IAC 1-7-2; 357 IAC 1-7-4; 357 IAC 1- 

7-5; 357 IAC 1-7-6; 357 IAC 1-7-7; 357 IAC 1-7-8; 357 IAC 1-9; 357 IAC 1-10-6. 






TITLE 355 STATE CHEMIST OF THE STATE OF INDIANA 

Proposed Rule 


DIGEST 

Amends 355 IAC 4-0.5-2 to include users of any product regulated under IC 15-16-5 in the definition of 

"licensed applicator for hire". Amends 355 IAC 4-0.5-4 to include employees of nonprofit organizations in the 

definition of "licensed public applicator". Amends 355 IAC 4-1-1.1 and 355 IAC 4-1-4 to make legal citation 

references consistent with amendments to IC 15-16-5. Amends 355 IAC 4-2-1 through 355 IAC 4-2-3 and 355 

IAC 4-2-5 to add reference to both fertilizers and pesticides regulated under IC 15-16. Amends 355 IAC 4-2-8 to 

eliminate reference to an outdated registration fee that was replaced through amendments to IC 15-16-5. Amends 

355 IAC 4-7-2 to add reference to category 14 continuing certification hour requirements. Effective 30 days after 

filing with the Publisher. 


355 IAC 4-0.5-2; 355 IAC 4-0.5-4; 355 IAC 4-1-1.1; 355 IAC 4-1-4; 355 IAC 4-2-1; 355 IAC 4-2-2; 355 IAC 4-2- 

3; 355 IAC 4-2-5; 355 IAC 4-2-8; 355 IAC 4-7-2 

SECTION 1. 355 IAC 4-0.5-2 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

355 IAC 4-0.5-2 "Licensed applicator for hire" defined 


Affected: IC 15-16 

Sec. 2. "Licensed applicator for hire" means any licensed certified commercial applicator who is: 

(1) employed by a licensed pesticide business; and is 

(2) directly responsible for the use or supervision of the use of any: 

(A) pesticide; or 

(B) product regulated under: 

(i) IC 15-16-2, IC 15-16-4, or IC 15-16-5; or 

(ii) regulations adopted under IC 15-16-2, IC 15-16-4, or IC 15-16-5; 

on the property of another. 

(State Chemist of the State of Indiana; 355 IAC 4-0.5-2; filed Nov 22, 1999, 3:39 p.m.: 23 IR 776; readopted filed 

Nov 21, 2001, 10:17 a.m.: 25 IR 1269; readopted filed Sep 20, 2007, 1:46 p.m.: 20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 

SECTION 2. 355 IAC 4-0.5-4 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

355 IAC 4-0.5-4 "Licensed public applicator" defined 



Sec. 4. (a) "Licensed public applicator" means a licensed certified commercial applicator who, as an employee 

of a state agency, municipal corporation, or other governmental agency, or nonprofit organization, uses or 

supervises the use of: 

(1) a restricted use pesticide; or 

(2) any pesticide in a potentially hazardous situation or site as determined by the Indiana pesticide review 

board by rule. 

(b) The term does not include the following: 

(1) A doctor of veterinary medicine. 

(2) A medical doctor. 

(3) An applicator who uses only the following nonrestricted use pesticides: 

(A) Germicides. 



(B) Disinfectants. 

(C) Bactericides. 

(D) Sanitizers. 

(E) Water purifiers. 

(F) Swimming pool chemicals. 

(State Chemist of the State of Indiana; 355 IAC 4-0.5-4; filed Nov 22, 1999, 3:39 p.m.: 23 IR 777; readopted filed 

Nov 21, 2001, 10:17 a.m.: 25 IR 1269; readopted filed Sep 20, 2007, 1:46 p.m.: 20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 

SECTION 3. 355 IAC 4-1-1.1 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

355 IAC 4-1-1.1 Commercial applicators; licensing 


Affected: IC 15-16-5-7 

Sec. 1.1. (a) Completing the certification requirements as a commercial applicator (IC 15-3-3.6-2(7)) (IC 15- 

16-5-7) shall be a qualifying requirement for each of the licenses defined in 355 IAC 4-0.5. 

(b) An individual who is employed as a licensed applicator at more than one (1) business location or agency at 

the same time shall: 

(1) hold separate and distinct licenses for each employer; and 

(2) pay all applicable license fees. 

(State Chemist of the State of Indiana; 355 IAC 4-1-1.1; filed Nov 21, 1984, 3:33 p.m.: 8 IR 331; filed Nov 

22,1999, 3:39 p.m.: 23 IR 777; readopted filed Nov 21, 2001, 10:17 a.m.: 25 IR 1269; filed Jan 30, 2007, 9:49 

a.m.: 20070228-IR-355060063FRA; readopted filed Sep 20, 2007, 1:46 p.m.: 20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 


355 IAC 4-1-4 Private applicators; certification requirements 


Affected: IC 15-16-4-51; IC 15-16-5 

Sec. 4. The requirements for (a) Initial certification of as a private applicators (IC 15-3-3.5-1(6)) applicator (IC 

15-16-4-51) shall be require an individual to pass the same written closed book exams as those described for 

commercial applicators in section 2.1 of this rule, except that the state chemist shall determine which commercial 

applicator examination will be considered appropriate for the private applicator's proposed use of pesticides. 

(b) Certification and the permit for private applicators shall remain valid from the date of passing the 

examination and paying the permit fee through December 31 of the fourth year following the year during which the 

examination was passed. 

(State Chemist of the State of Indiana; 355 IAC 4-1-4; filed Nov 21, 1984, 3:33 p.m.: 8 IR 334; filed Nov 22, 1999, 

3:39 p.m.: 23 IR 780; readopted filed Nov 21, 2001, 10:17 a.m.: 25 IR 1269; filed Jan 30, 2007, 9:49 a.m.: 

20070228-IR-355060063FRA; readopted filed Sep 20, 2007, 1:46 p.m.: 20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 






(1) "Competent person" means a person who: 



(A) has the ability to read and comprehend written instructions, including the text of pesticide and fertilizer 

labels; 

(B) is at least sixteen (16) years of age; or over; and 

(C) is a registered technician. 

(2) "Direct supervision" means either of the following: 

(A) The physical presence of the supervising certified applicator at the work site under circumstances that 

permit continuous direct voice contact with the noncertified individual. 

(B) The supervising certified applicator has provided the noncertified competent person the following: 

(i) Written instructions covering site-specific precautions to prevent injury to persons or the environment or 

damage to property. 

(ii) A copy of the labels of all pesticide and fertilizer products to be used. 

(iii) The means and instructions to establish direct voice communication during the use of the pesticide or 

fertilizer with the supervising certified applicator. 

(iv) All personal protective equipment and instructions on proper use required by the labels of the pesticide 

or fertilizer products for the uses being performed. 

(3) "Registered technician" means a noncertified person who, having met the requirements of section 8 of this 

rule, is registered by the state chemist and thereby is authorized to engage in pesticide use and related 

activities while working under the direct supervision of a certified applicator. 

(4) "Work site" means any location at which pesticides or fertilizers are used. as defined in IC 15-3-3.6-2(37). 

(5) "Written instructions" means a written or printed site assessment fact sheet or similar document that shall 

be reviewed by the noncertified applicator prior to each pesticide or fertilizer application. The required 

elements on the site assessment fact sheet shall be industry specific and developed by the state chemist in 

consultation with the appropriate certified applicator industry. 


Rules and Regs. 1977, p. 442; filed Apr 21, 1982, 3:45 p.m.: 5 IR 1191; filed Sep 20, 2001, 3:54 p.m.: 25 IR 376; 

readopted filed Nov 21, 2001, 10:17 a.m.: 25 IR 1269; readopted filed Sep 20, 2007, 1:46 p.m.: 

20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 


355 IAC 4-2-2 Pesticide or fertilizer use by noncertified persons 



Sec. 2. Pesticides or fertilizers may be used by a noncertified person working under the direct supervision of 

a certified applicator. All persons conducting use of pesticides or fertilizers for hire by aerial application shall be 

certified. 



readopted filed Nov 21, 2001, 10:17 a.m.: 25 IR 1269; filed Aug 18, 2005, 4:30 p.m.: 29 IR 6; readopted filed Sep 

20, 2007, 1:46 p.m.: 20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 


355 IAC 4-2-3 On-site supervision of use 



Sec. 3. The supervising certified applicator shall be physically present as defined in section 1(2)(A) of this rule 

if the: 

(1) the label of the pesticide being used so stipulates; or 

(2) the noncertified individual: 

(A) has had no prior experience with either the pesticide, the fertilizer, or the application methodology in 

use; or 

(3) the noncertified individual (B) is not competent as defined in section 1(1) of this rule. 






20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 


355 IAC 4-2-5 Applicability of supervision requirements 



Sec. 5. The requirements for direct supervision of noncertified individuals shall apply to the use of the 

following: 

(1) Use of All pesticides or fertilizers by any person required by IC 15-3-3.6 IC 15-16-5 or the rules under 

that chapter to be licensed as one (1) of the following: 

(A) A pesticide business. 

(B) A for hire applicator. 

(C) A not for hire applicator. 

(D) A public applicator. 

(2) Use of Restricted use pesticides. 




20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 


355 IAC 4-2-8 Technician registration requirements 



Sec. 8. (a) To become a registered technician, an individual must do the following: 

(1) Pass the commercial applicator core examination described in 355 IAC 4-1-2.1. 

(2) Submit an application on a form provided by the state chemist. 

(3) Submit the thirty dollar ($30) technician registration fee. 

(b) Registration shall remain in force from the date of passing the examination through December 31 of the 

fourth year following the year during which the examination was passed unless revoked or suspended. 

(c) The registration period may be extended indefinitely for an additional five (5) years if the registered 

technician accumulates at least eight (8) continuing registration credits by attending at least two (2) state chemist 

approved continuing registration programs while the registration is in force. 

(d) Annual registration credentials shall expire on December 31 unless renewed by a payment of a thirty dollar 

($30) the renewal fee by that date. Renewal after December 31 shall include a late fee of thirty dollars ($30) as 

established by IC 15-3-3.6-12.1 IC 15-16-5-60 in addition to the thirty dollar ($30) renewal fee. 

(e) The registration credential shall be in the possession of the registered technician at all times the technician 

is at a work site as defined in section 1(4) of this rule. 

(State Chemist of the State of Indiana; 355 IAC 4-2-8; filed Sep 20, 2001, 3:54 p.m.: 25 IR 377; readopted filed 

Nov 21, 2001, 10:17 a.m.: 25 IR 1269; filed Aug 18, 2005, 4:30 p.m.: 29 IR 6; readopted filed Sep 20, 2007, 1:46 

p.m.: 20071010-IR-355070484RFA) 




355 IAC 4-7-2 Commercial applicators; certification renewal standards 

Authority: IC 15-16-2; IC 15-16-5 

Affected: IC 15-16-2; IC 15-16-5 

Sec. 2. (a) Certification renewal of commercial applicators shall be accomplished by the applicator completing 

one (1) of the following: 

(1) The written examination procedures for initial certification established in 355 IAC 4-1-2.1. 

(2) Accumulating the minimum number of CCHs listed in the table in subsection (b) before the expiration of the 

applicator's certification period for that category. 

(b) The minimum number of CCHs required for renewal of each category is as follows: 

Category 1 

20 CCHs 

Category 2 

10 CCHs 

Category 3a 

15 CCHs 

Category 3b 

20 CCHs 

Category 4 

10 CCHs 

Category 5 

15 CCHs 

Category 6 

15 CCHs 

Category 7a 

20 CCHs 

Category 7b 

15 CCHs 

Category 7d 

20 CCHs 

Category 8 

15 CCHs 

Category 11 

20 CCHs 

Category 12 

10 CCHs 

Category 13 

10 CCHs 

Category 14 

3 CCHs 

(c) A commercial applicator can accumulate CCHs only in the categories in which the applicator is certified at 

the time of participating in the training. 

(d) A commercial applicator can accumulate a maximum of one-half (1/2) of the number of CCHs required in 

subsection (b) at any one (1) training program. 

(e) CCHs accumulated by a commercial applicator in excess of the number of CCHs required in subsection (b) 

shall not be carried forward to the next certification period. 

(f) Renewed certification shall remain in force through December 31 of the fifth year following renewal unless 

revoked or suspended prior to that date. 

(State Chemist of the State of Indiana; 355 IAC 4-7-2; filed May 12, 2009, 11:20 a.m.: 

20090610-IR-355090063FRA) 





2012 

INDIANA PESTICIDE CONTROL 

SUMMARY REPORT of ACTIVITIES 

Office of Indiana State Chemist 

Robert D. Waltz, Ph.D. 

Dr. State Robert Chemist D. Waltz 

State Chemist & Seed 

Commissioner 

Dave Scott 

Pesticide Larry Administrator 

W. Nees 

www.isco.purdue.edu 

MISSION & STAFF: The pesticide section of the Office of Indiana State Chemist (OISC) is charged with 

administration of the Indiana pesticide laws I.C. 15-16-4 and I.C.15-16-5, and also represents the Environmental 

Protection Agency (US EPA) in Indiana for the purpose of enforcing federal pesticide law. The mission of OISC 

under these laws is to protect Indiana citizens and the environment from hazardous, ineffective and improperly 

formulated and labeled pesticide products and from unacceptable pesticide exposure. Eighteen full-time 

professionals, three clerical staff, and ten shared staff are responsible for carrying out this mission. During 2012 

OISC eliminated one full-time pesticide program management position. 

PRODUCT REGISTRATION: In 2012, pesticide manufacturers registered 14,745 products for sale and 

distribution in Indiana. This number exceeds the ten year annual average for Indiana of 14,210. It also exceeds 

the ten year average of 12,623 pesticide products registered by neighboring states. 

OISC continued to work with US EPA and manufacturers to improve or correct misleading or 

violative product labeling on Indiana registered products, taking action on over 41 problem labels. Requiring 

corrected labels with improved safety and use directions protects Indiana’s environment and citizens as well 

as those in other states where these products are distributed and used. 

OISC also coordinated with the Indiana Pesticide Review Board to promulgate a rule to restrict the 

distribution of methomyl containing fly baits. OISC had determined through undercover investigations, 

internet searches, and communications with other state regulatory agencies that these widely available fly 

baits were being intentionally misused to illegally poison wildlife and domestic animals. Efforts urging US 

EPA to restrict distribution of these products nationally have been unsuccessful to date, thus prompting state 

action. 

CERTIFICATION & CREDENTIALING: OISC issued 27,410 pesticide credentials. This included licenses 

for 3,078 pesticide application businesses, 6,950 pesticide applicators, 2,313 in-house and government 

applicators, 2,805 pesticide technicians, 567 pesticide dealers, and 11,358 farmers using pesticides. The 

27,410 total credentials for 2012 is consistent with the ten year annual average of 27,434. 

During 2012 OISC worked with the Purdue Cooperative Extension Service (CES) and a team of 

industry representatives to develop or upgrade subject-matter-valid certification exams for the core (general 

standards), aquatic, and termite pesticide applicators as well as an exam for fertilizer applicators. OISC also 

reviewed and approved over 678 continuing certification training programs for pesticide applicators. 

COMPLIANCE & ENFORCEMENT: Pesticide staff investigated 303 complaint cases and conducted 1657 

routine compliance inspections, exceeding the ten year annual averages of 198 complaint cases and 1127 

compliance inspections. These investigations and inspections required OISC laboratory analysis of 626 

environmental residue samples and 56 product integrity samples. The 656 environmental samples exceeded the 

ten year annual average of 221 samples. 

For investigations finalized to date there have been 92 formal violations, including 92 written 

warnings/citations, 48 administrative fines, one applicator credential suspension, and two stop use/sale orders. 

Less than 1% of the enforcement actions involved repeat violators. Follow-up or compliance assurance 

inspections were performed in 76% of the violation cases to insure that the non-compliant behavior had been 

1

corrected. Enforcement action numbers have been relatively consistent with the ten year annual average of 109. 

Numbers of off-target pesticide drift complaints (69) and resulting violations (16 to date) were relatively 

consistent with the ten year averages of 55 and 25 respectively. However, as a subset of those cases, OISC did 

receive an extraordinary number of bee kill complaints (8). OISC investigations determined that the insecticide 

clothianidin was involved in the bee deaths, but the exposure appears to be from handling of insecticide treated 

seed rather than direct exposure from misuse of the insecticide during application. OISC has committed to work 

with US EPA in the coming year to seek a solution to address this unanticipated route of pesticide exposure to 

honey bees. 

TRAINING, OUTREACH & COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE: With funding from US EPA, OISC 

conducted a Pesticide Clean Sweep Project, collecting 26,590 pounds of hazardous waste pesticides from Indiana 

applicators at little or no cost to the participants. This 26,590 figure exceeded the annual average over the last five 

years of 18,800 pounds. Both agricultural and structural pesticide users have continued to praise the benefits of 

this waste collection program. 

OISC also utilized a grant from US EPA to develop a week long training course for over 40 state and 

tribal pesticide inspectors and investigators. The focus of this training was the investigation of pesticide drift 

incidents. OISC has developed a reputation as being proactive in off-target drift regulation and was asked to share 

some of this expertise with colleagues from across the country. 

OISC continued to participate in professional and regulatory association affairs with at least 9 staff 

members serving as officers or committee members on no fewer than 24 regional and national committees and 

work groups. 

The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) and OISC worked cooperatively to 

develop and implement a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permit for 

pesticides. The need for a general permit for discharging pesticides into water was created as a result of a recent 

federal court decision and was passed down from US EPA to the states. OISC and IDEM were successful in 

crafting a permit that has been implemented almost seamlessly and with a minimum of new requirements for 

already heavily regulated licensed Indiana pesticide applicators. This serves as a shining example of state agencies 

working together to avoid onerous government duplication of regulatory requirements. 

Special US EPA funding also enabled a 2012 project in which OISC teamed with Purdue’s Agronomy 

Department to examine residual environmental impacts resulting from the 2011 use of a new lawn and turf 

product Imprelis Herbicide. Widespread non-target ornamental tree damage had resulted in this product’s first 

year of commercial use. This study focused on a small sub-sampling of the almost 400 tree damage complaints 

investigated by OISC in 2011. The results demonstrated that Imprelis residues are still analytically detectable in 

target soils and damaged trees in 2012, up to a year after exposure, and that mulch made from those damaged 

trees still contains residues that negatively impact sentinel tomatoes planted adjacent to the mulch. This study 

provided objective technical information to decision makers at US EPA who are, like OISC, still dealing with the 

aftermath of the 2011 Imprelis damage incidents. 

INDIANA PESTICIDE REVIEW BOARD: Created through IC 15-16-4-42 in 1971, this twenty-member 

board is appointed by the Governor to develop pesticide policy and regulations for the State of Indiana. 

Board members include scientists, government officials, conservationists, industry representatives and a 

public representative. In 2012, the Board and OISC amended a rule outlining liability insurance 

requirements for pesticide businesses, finalized a rule restricting the distribution and use of a widely misused 

pesticide, and worked with the Indiana legislature to amend the state pesticide law. Specific legislative 

changes include eliminating license fees for not-for-profit organizations, eliminating a retail pesticide 

consultant registration requirement, and creating the ability to perform federal pesticide production 

inspections and enforcement under state authority. 

Information accurate as of 10-4-12 

2

West Lafayette Campus 

Building Names and Abbreviations 

SUMMER 2011 

ABE Agricultural and Biological Engineering F9 

ADDL Animal Disease Diagnostic Lab G10 

AERO Aerospace Science Laboratory C11 

AGAD Agricultural Administration Building G8 

AHF Animal Holding Facility G10 

AQUA Boilermaker Aquatic Center D6 

AR Armory G6 

ARMS Armstrong (Neil) Hall of Engineering G5 

ASTL Animal Sciences Teaching Laboratory E8 

BCC Black Cultural Center F6 

BCHM Biochemistry Building F8 

BIND Bindley (William E.) Bioscience Center D8 

BRK Birck Nanotechnology Center D8 

BRNG Beering (Steven C.) Hall of Liberal Arts and 

Education F, G7 

BRWN Brown (Herbert C.) Laboratory of Chemistry H7 

BSG Building Services and Grounds F9 

CDFS Child Development and Family Studies Building D8 

† CHAF Chaffee Hall A9 

CIVL Civil Engineering Building G5 

CL50 Class of 1950 Lecture Hall G7 

COMP Composites Laboratory C11 

‡ DANL Daniel (William H.) Turfgrass Center B1 

DAUC Dauch (Dick and Sandy) Alumni Center H9 

DLR Hall for Discovery and Learning Research E9 

DMNT DeMent (Clayton W.) Fire Station D6 

DOYL Doyle (Leo Philip) Laboratory G10 

DYE Pete Dye Clubhouse C1 

EE Electrical Engineering Building H6 

EEL Entomology Environmental Laboratory G8 

EHSA Equine Health Sciences Annex G10 

EHSB Equine Health Sciences Building G10 

ELLT Elliott (Edward C.) Hall of Music G6 

ENAD Engineering Administration Building G6 

EXPT Exponent H6 

FOOD Food Stores Building F9 

FOPN Flight Operations Building B11 

FORS Forestry Building G8 

FPRD Forest Products Building G8 

FREH Freehafer (Lytle J.) Hall of Administrative 

Services H10 

FRNY Forney Hall of Chemical Engineering G5 

FWLR Fowler (Harriet O. and James M., Jr.) 

Memorial House E7 

GCMB Golf Course Maintenance Barn C2 

GMF Grounds Maintenance Facility F11 

GRIS Grissom Hall H7 

GSMB Golf Storage Maintenance Building C2 

HAAS Haas (Felix) Hall G7 

HANS Hansen (Arthur G.) Life Sciences Research 

Building F8, 9 

HEAV Heavilon Hall H7 

HERL Herrick Laboratories E8 

HGR4-6 Hangars, Numbers 4 through 6 A11,12 

HGRH Horticulture Greenhouses G9 

HIKS Hicks (John W.) Undergraduate 

Library G, H7, 8 

HMMT Hazardous Materials Management Trailer H11 

HNLY Bill and Sally Hanley Hall C7 

HOCK Wayne T. and Mary T. Hockmeyer Hall of Structural 

Biology E9 

HORT Horticulture Building G9 

HOVD Hovde (Frederick L.) Hall of 

Administration G6 

HPN Heating and Power Plant-North G6 

IAF Intercollegiate Athletic Facility F3 

JNSN Johnson (Helen R.) Hall of Nursing G5, 6 

KCTR Krannert Center for Executive Education 

and Research H8 

KNOY Knoy (Maurice G.) Hall of Technology H6 

KRAN Krannert Building H8 

LAMB Lambert (Ward L.) Fieldhouse and Gymnasium F, 

G4 

LCC Latino Cultural Center (600 Russell St.) F5 

n Library, Main (see HIKS) 

LILY Lilly Hall of Life Sciences F8 

LMSB Laboratory Materials Storage Building H11 

LMST Laboratory Materials Storage Trailer H11 

LSA Life Science Animal Building F8 

LSPS Life Science Plant and Soils Laboratory F8 

LSR Life Science Ranges (Greenhouse and Service 

Building) F8, 9 

LWSN Lawson (Richard and Patricia) Computer Science 

Building F6 

LYNN Lynn (Charles J.) Hall of Veterinary 

Medicine G10 

MACK Mackey (Guy J.) Arena F, G4 

MANN Mann (Gerald D. and Edna E.) Hall E8 

MATH Mathematical Sciences Building G7 

ME Mechanical Engineering Building G, H6 

MGL Michael Golden Engineering Laboratories 

MJIS 

and Shops H6 

Martin C. Jischke Hall of Biomedical Engineering 

E9 

MMDC Materials Management and Distribution Center 

F11 

MMS1 Materials Management Storage 

Building 1 F12 

MOLL Mollenkopf Athletic Center F3 

MRGN Morgan (Burton D.) Center for Entrepreneurship E8 

MRRT Marriott Hall E7 

MSEE Materials and Electrical Engineering Building H5, 6 

MTHW Matthews (Mary L.) Hall F7, 8 

NLSN Phillip E. Nelson Hall of Food Science G9 

NISW Niswonger Aviation Technology 

Building B11 

NUCL Nuclear Engineering Building H6 

OLMN Ollman (Melvin L.) Golfcart Barn C1 

PAO Pao (Yue-Kong) Hall of Visual and 

Performing Arts H8 

VIC Parking Services H5 

PFEN Pfendler Hall (David C.) of Agriculture G8 

PFSB Physical Facilities Service Building F12 

PHYS Physics Building G5 

PJIS Patty Jischke Early Care and Education Center C8 

PMU Purdue Memorial Union (includes Visitor 

Information Center at PMU 

[VIC@PMU]) H7 

PMUC Purdue Memorial Union Club H7 

POAN Poultry Science Annex E8 

POTR Potter (A. A.) Engineering Center H6 

POUL Poultry Science Building E8 

PRCE Peirce Hall G7 

PRSV Printing Services Facility F11 

PSYC Psychological Sciences Building G6, 7 

PUSH Purdue University Student 

Health Center F, G5 

PVCC Purdue Village Community Center C8 

PWF Purdue West, Building F B7 

RAIL American Railway Building H6 

RAWL Rawls (Jerry S.) Hall H, I8 

REC Recitation Building G7 

RHPH Heine (Robert E.) Pharmacy Building F, G5 

RSC Recreational Sports Center D, E6 

SC Stanley Coulter Hall G7 

SCCA-E South Campus Courts, Buildings A 

through E G, H9, 10 

SCHL Schleman (Helen B.) Hall of 

Student Services G6 

SCHO Global Policy Research Institute (Schowe House) 

F1 

SCPA Slayter Center of Performing Arts D4 

SEAN Service Building Annex F9 

SERV Service Building F9 

‡ SIML Holleman-Niswonger Simulator Center 

SMTH Smith Hall F8 

SOIL Soil Erosion Laboratory, National E9 

SPUR Spurgeon (Tom) Golf Training Center C1 

SSOF State Street Office Facility A8 

STDM Ross-Ade Stadium (includes Ross-Ade 

Pavilion [RAP]) F3 

STEW Stewart Center G, H7 

STON Stone (Winthrop E.) Hall G7, 8 

n Student Health Center (see PUSH) 

TEL Telecommunications Building F7 

TERM Terminal Building B11 

TERY Terry (Oliver P.) Memorial House E8, 9 

TH1-6 Tee-Hangars 1 through 6 A11 

TMB Transportation Maintenance Building E9 

TREC Turf Recreation Exercise Center D6 

UNIV University Hall G7 

UPOB Utility Plant Office Building H11 

UPOF Utility Plant Office Facility H10 

UPSB Utility Plant Storage Building G11 

VA1 

VA2 

VCPR 

VIC 

VLAB 

VMIF 

VOIN 

VPRB 

VPTH 

n 

Veterinary Animal Isolation Building 1 G10 

Veterinary Animal Isolation Building 2 G10 

Veterinary Center for Paralysis Research G10 

Visitor Information Center H5 

Veterinary Laboratory Animal Building G10 

Veterinary Medicine Isolation Facility G10 

Voinoff (Samuel) Golf Pavilion C1 

Veterinary Pathobiology Research 

Building F, G9, 10 

Veterinary Pathology Building G9 

Visitor Information Center (VIC) and Parking 

Services (see PGNW). Visitor Information Center 

at PMU (VIC@PMU) (see PMU). 

WADE Wade (Walter W.) Utility Plant H11 

WEST Westwood (President’s Home) A5, 6 

WGLR Women’s Golf Locker Room D1 

WSLR Whistler (Roy L.) Hall of Agricultural Research G8 

WTHR Wetherill (Richard Benbridge) Laboratory of 

Chemistry G, H7 

YONG Young (Ernest C.) Hall H8 

† ZL1 Combustion Research Laboratory 

† ZL2 Gas Dynamics Research Laboratory 

† ZL3 High Pressure Research Laboratory 

† ZL4 Propulsion Research Laboratory 

† ZL5 Turbomachinery Fluid Dynamics Laboratory 

501H 

Employee Assistance Program 

(501 Hayes St.) H5 

Residence Facilities 

CARY Cary (Franklin Levering) Quadrangle F4 

* DUHM Duhme (Ophelia) Residence Hall E7 

ERHT Earhart (Amelia) Residence Hall D7 

FORD Ford (Fred and Mary) Dining Court F4 

FST First Street Towers D7 

HARR Harrison (Benjamin) Residence Hall C7 

HAWK Hawkins (George A.) Hall H8 

HILL Hillenbrand Residence Hall C7 

HLTP Hilltop Apartments E3 

MCUT McCutcheon (John T.) Residence Hall C7 

MRDH Meredith (Virginia C.) Residence Hall D7 

OWEN Owen (Richard) Residence Hall E4 

PVAB Purdue Village Administration Building D9 

PVCC Purdue Village Community Center C8 

PVIL Purdue Village B, C, D8, 9, 10 

PVP Purdue Village Preschool C9 

* SHLY Shealy (Frances M.) Residence Hall E7 

SHRV Shreve (Eleanor B.) Residence Hall D6, 7 

SMLY Smalley (John C.) Center for Housing and Food 

Services Administration D6, 7 

TARK Tarkington (Newton Booth) 

Residence Hall E5 

* VAWT Vawter (Everett B.) Residence Hall E6 

* WARN Warren (Martha E. and Eugene K.) Residence Hall 

E7 

WDCT Wiley Dining Court E6 

WILY Wiley (Harvey W.) Residence Hall E5, 6 

* WOOD Wood (Elizabeth G. and William R.) 

Residence Hall E7 

Parking Garages 

PGG Parking Garage, Grant Street H, I7 

PGW Parking Garage, Wood Street H8 

PGM Parking Garage, Marsteller Street G, H8 

PGMD Parking Garage, McCutcheon Drive C6, 7 

PGNW Parking Garage, Northwestern Avenue (includes 

Visitor Information Center and Parking Services) 

H5 

PGU Parking Garage, University Street F6, 7 

Other Maps 

Maps are available in the publications racks in Hovde Hall, 

the Memorial Union, Purdue Airport, the Visitor Information 

Center, and from the Office of the Dean of Students and 

Purdue Marketing and Media. These include the Accessibility 

Guide for people with disabilities and the Self-Guided Tour 

map highlighting points of interest near the Memorial Union. 

Parking Facilities offers Parking Guide maps. 

* Windsor Residence Halls 

† Part of Maurice J. Zucrow Laboratories 

‡ Buildings not appearing on map

. 

. 

Arnold Dr. 

Gates Road 

S. University St. 

Hort Dr. 

Marsteller St. 

Sheetz St. 

S. Grant St. 

S. Russell Dr. 

Russell St. 

Waldron St. 

Oval Dr. 

University St. 

Andrew Pl. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

McCormick Road 

26 

WEST 

SSOF 

Maurice J. Zucrow 

Laboratories 

Allison Road 

A B C D E F G H I 

Cattail 

Trail to 

Purdue 

Research 

Park 

Newman 

Road 

ZL5 

CHAF 

ZL2 

ZL1 

State St. (SR 26) 

ZL4 

FUTURE 

RELOCATION OF 

To William Daniel 

Turf Center (DANL) 

To soccer complex, 

Schwarz Tennis Center, 

and Grand Prix Track 

A P P R O X I M A T E S C A L E I N F E E T 

0 250 500 

526 

State Road 26 

ZL3 

231 

McCormick Road 

Airport Road 

✹ 

Airport Road 

1000 

Emergency phones at street level 

Emergency phones in tunnels and garages 

●P Metered parking 

ATM machine location 

✹ Traffic signal 

One-way street 

Parking garages 

Residence facilities 

Under construction 

Horticulture 

Park 

Intramural 

Playing 

Fields 

Intramural 

Playing 

Fields 

Cattail 

Trail 

Pickett 

Park 


West 

Shopping 

Plaza 

PWF 

205 

208 

1389 

McCutcheon Dr. 

204 201 

203 

211 210 

141 

139 

1397 

Squirrel 

Park 

206 

209 

Intramural 

Playing 

Fields 

142 143 

140 

202 

207 

1365 

David Ross Road 

Halsey Dr. 

State St. 

1333 

Marshall Dr. 

MacArthur Dr. 

1381 

1349 

1341 

1357 

1325 1317 

Purdue Village (PVIL) 

213 

215 

212 214 

146 

Varsity 

Softball 

Complex 

PGMD 

MCUT 

●P 

PVCC 

GCMB 

GSMB 

PVP 

144 

OLMN 

VOIN 

SPUR 

145 

216 

PJIS 

227 

228 

HILL 

HARR 

118 

217 

131 

225 

147 

DYE 

Band 

Practice 

Field 

218 

226 

224 

148 149 

●P 

●P 

132 

133 

134 

219 

222 

223 

Ackerman Hills 

Golf Course 

135 

221 

150 

1309 

151 

1301 

220 

Cherry Lane 

Tower Acres 

David Ross 

Memorial 

and Garden 

●P 

SHRV 

ERHT 

●P 

Lambert 

Field 

BRK 

Tower Dr. 

Hilltop Dr. 

Stadium Ave. 

TREC 

CDFS 

WGLR 

DMNT 

FST 

(FSTC) 

(FSTW) 

(FSTE) 

136 137 

●P 

138 

●P 

30 

DLR 

Nimitz Dr. 

DISCOVERY 

PARK LOT 

Hilltop 

Apts. 

29 

Rankin 

Track and 

Field 

AQUA 

MRDH 

DISCOVERY PARK 

PVAB 

BIND 

SCPA 

RSC 

●P 

SMLY 

●P 

32 

31●P 

24 

23 

●P 

27 

WOOD 

HNLY 

FWLR 

●P 

MRGN 

MANN 

TERY 

●P 

●P 

✹ 

S. Martin Jischke Dr. 

N. Martin Jischke Dr. 

126 

19 

5 

18 

15 

17 

16 

25 

14 

26 HLTP 

28 

●P 

●P 

Duhme Dr. 

HOCK 

TMB 

●P 

Kampen 

Golf Course 

●P 

4 

13 

10 

1 

Ade Dṙ 

FUTURE EXTENSION OF 

MARTIN JISCHKE DR. 

3 

OWEN 

TARK 

WILY 

2 

WDCT 

7 

20 

8 

9 

6 

11 

12 

22 

21 

Steven C. Beering Dr. 

Steven C. Beering Dr. 

FORD 

WARN 

Windsor Halls 

MJIS 

HERL 

VAWT 

SHLY 

DUHM 

26 

International 

Center 

STADIUM 

LOT 

STDM 

✹ 

ONE WAY 

✹ 

POUL 

●P 

POAN 

ASTL LSPS 

●P 

SOIL 

●P 

BCC 

●P 

SCHO 

John R. Wooden Drive 

H LOT 

H LOT 

A LOT 

Stadium Ave. 

Sixth St. 

Fifth St. 

Fourth St. 

Third St. 

First St. 

✹ 

TRNR 

(CQNW) (CQNE) 

CARY 

(CQW) 

MOLL 

N. University Dr. 

✹ 

ONE WAY 

To 

U.S. 

Road 

52 

231 

MACK 

F LOT 

LAMB 

RHPH 

Founders 

Park 


& Research 

Park 

Stadium Mall 

Northridge Dr. 

Bexley Rd. 

Chelsea Rd. 

Meridian St. 

Dodge St. 

Evergreen St. 

Northwestern Ave. 

✹ 

Agricultural Mall 


Mall 


Credit 

Union 

Purdue Research Park 

ONE WAY 

Stadium Ave. 

Hayes St. 

ONE WAY 

Harrison St. 

Steely St. 

Sylvia St. 

Office of 


Admissions 

EE 

Exponent 

ME 

231 

●P 

AR 

MEA 

ELLT 

✹ 

●P ENAD 

KNOY 

POTR 

✹ ●P 

MGL 

Bell 

NUCL 

PSYC Tower 

PGU 

PRCE 

BRWN 

CL50 

SC WTHR 

Second St. 

MATH 

HEAV GRIS 

TEL 

REC 

●P 

Academy Park PMUC 

●P 

BRNG UNIV John 

Purdue’s 

●P Grave 

STEW 

PMU 

Memorial 

Mall 

STON 

HIKS 

●P 

✹ 

✹ 


✹ 

PFEN 

KRAN 

SMTH 

AGAD 

26 

LILY ●P 

KCTR 

●P 

●P 

PGM 

YONG ●P 

BCHM 

EEL 

LSA 

●P 

PAO 

●P ●P 

HAWK 

HANS 

FOOD 

BSG 

LSR 

LCC 

●P 

(CQS) 

●P 

(CQE) 

LWSN 

MRRT 

IAF 

●P 

SERV 

●P 

PUSH 

ABE 

HAAS 

MTHW 

SEAN 

ADDL 

JNSN 

VA 1 

VA 2 

WSLR 

ARMS 

CIVL 

VPTH ●P 

●P 

VPRB 

●P 

DOYL 

FPRD 

●P 

NLSN 

VLAB 

VMIF 

SCHL 

EHSB 

HOVD 

LYNN 

VCPR 

FORS 

HORT 

FRNY 

PHYS 

Centennial 

Mall 

HGRH 

EHSA 

AHF 

HPN 

UPSB 

Morehouse Rd. 

●P 

Visitor 

Information 

Center 

MSEE 

RAIL 

SCCA-E 

Kalberer Rd. G 

ROSS T 

B 

A 

U 

M 

I 

VTCH P 

L 

D N CHAO 

52 F 

PTC 

Innovation Pl. 

(PRF) 

Geddes Way 

Cumberland Ave. 

UPOF 

WADE 

501H 

●P 

VIC 

Win Hentschel 

Blvd. 

UPOB 

231 J 

Wal-Mart 

PGNW 

DAUC 

N. Grant St. N. Grant St. 

ONE WAY 

✹ 

●P 

FREH 

●P 

●P 

Kent Ave. 

C 

E 

Sylvia St. 

Lutz Ave. 


PGG 

ONE WAY 

RAWL 

PGW 

Kent Ave. 

Kampen 

Golf Course 

McClure Ave. 

North St. 

Wood St. 

ONE WAY 

Yeager Rd. 

R 

BTC CMBR 

Montgomery St. 

S 

K 

O 

YEAG 

Q 

H 


Stadium Ave. 

Fowler Ave. 

26 

Vine St. 

Wiggins St. 

26 

Cumberland Ave. 

Yeager Rd. 

Potter Dr. 

Sagamore Pkwy. 

ONE WAY 

ONE WAY 

Williams St. 

To 

State 

Road 

26E 

Chauncey Ave. 

231 

ONE WAY 

Salisbury St. 

Chauncey Ave. 

Columbia St. 

✹ 


✹ 

South River Rd. 

231 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

HGR5 

TH1 

TERM 

FOPN 

NISW 

AERO 

COMP 

Ahlers Road 

HMMT 

LMST 

LMSB 

Ahlers Road 

11 

HGR4 

Purdue Airport 

GMF 

MMDC 

PRSV 

231 

FUTURE 

RELOCATION OF 

231 

MMS1 

12 

PFSB 

12 

A B C D E F G H I 

2011, Purdue University 

CMapK1245U_61311

case summary - Office of Indiana State Chemist - Purdue University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?