case summary - Office of Indiana State Chemist - Purdue University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CASE SUMMARY Case #2012/0758 Complainant: Applicator: David Hartwig 170 Midway Drive New Castle, IN 47362 765-521-8809 Ross Lawn & Landscape Aaron Stigall Jason Enix 3809 S TSC Road New Castle, IN 47362 765-529-8333 Certified Applicator 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 Page 1 of 2
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. 8. For related cases, please see: 2012/0749 and 2012/0753. Elizabeth C. Carter Date: July 9, 2012 Pesticide Investigator 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. George N. Saxton Draft Date: July 16, 2012 Compliance Officer Final Date: September 14, 2012 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 and 2: November 20, 2012 Stewart Center, R
Page 3 and 4: -Dave Scott…the proposed minimum
Page 5 and 6: A Summary of Cases 2011/0959 Dispos
Page 7 and 8: CASE SUMMARY Case #2011/0959 Compla
Page 15 and 16: the company could make tree and shr
Page 17 and 18: 4. I then collected a composite soi
Page 19: Photo #1: Applicator from U.S. Lawn
Page 23 and 24: Complainant: CASE SUMMARY Office of
Page 25 and 26: Complainant: CASE SUMMARY Office of
Page 27 and 28: Indiana Register TITLE 355 STATE CH
Page 29 and 30: Indiana Register (State Chemist of
Page 31 and 32: Indiana Register SECTION 3. 357 IAC
Page 33 and 34: Indiana Register IC 15-3-3.5-25 IC
Page 35 and 36: Indiana Register 355 IAC 4-5-2(6) 3
Page 37 and 38: Indiana Register 355 IAC 5-4-7 Oper
Page 39 and 40: Indiana Register TITLE 355 STATE CH
Page 41 and 42: Indiana Register (A) has the abilit
Page 43 and 44: Indiana Register SECTION 10. 355 IA
Page 45 and 46: corrected. Enforcement action numbe
Page 47: . . Arnold Dr. Gates Road S. Univer

case summary - Office of Indiana State Chemist - Purdue University

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?