StateCOMPARISON OF PESTICIDES <strong>US</strong>ED PER STATE VERS<strong>US</strong> PESTICIDES COLLECTED AT CLEAN SWEEPSEstimated(lbs. A.I.)Total Used1991 - 2000 1 Estimated(lbs. A.I.)Total Used1960 - 2000 2 Estimated Range (lbs. Formulated)Total Formulated Product Used,assuming 10% to 50% A.I.1960 - 2000 3 Amount Disposed(lbs. Formulated) in<strong>Clean</strong> <strong>Sweep</strong>sthrough year 2000Total Disposed as% of Total Used1960-2000Midpointof Dispvs. UsedCA 1,621,361,000 6,485,444,000 12,970,888,000 - 64,854,444,000 1,186,828 0.002% - 0.009% 0.006% CFL 906,399,000 3,625,596,000 7,251,192,000 - 36,255,960,000 292,929 0.0008%-0.004% 0.002% CIA 550,028,000 2,200,112,000 4,400,224,000 - 22,001,112,000 1,130,555 0.005% - 0.03% 0.018% PIL 503,623,000 2,014,492,000 4,028,984,000 - 20,144,920,000 252,316 0.001% - 0.006% 0.004% CID 470,340,000 1,881,360,000 3,762,720,000 - 18,813,600,000 322,604 0.002% - 0.009% 0.006% PWA 377,501,000 1,510,004,000 3,020,008,000 - 15,100,040,000 1,079,754 0.007% - 0.04% 0.024% PTX 363,298,000 1,453,192,000 2,906,384,000 - 14,531,920,000 3,149,820 0.02% - 0.10% 0.060% PNC 351,745,000 1,406,980,000 2,813,960,000 - 14,069,800,000 1,116,477 0.008% - 0.04% 0.024% PNE 349,158,000 1,396,632,000 2,793,264,000 - 13,966,320,000 1,336,033 0.01% - 0.05% 0.030% CIN 289,131,000 1,156,524,000 2,313,048,000 - 11,565,240,000 68,147 0.0006%-0.003% 0.002% CMN 282,216,000 1,128,864,000 2,257,728,000 - 11,288,640,000 2,036,380 0.02% - 0.09% 0.060% PGA 260,778,000 1,043,112,000 2,086,224,000 - 10,431,120,000 778,032 0.007% - 0.04% 0.024% CMI 216,015,000 864,060,000 1,728,120,000 - 8,640,600,000 852,118 0.01% - 0.05% 0.030% PKS 218,457,000 873,828,000 1,747,656,000 - 8,738,280,000 337,455 0.004% - 0.02% 0.012% PAR 205,826,000 823,304,000 1,646,608,000 - 8,233,040,000 35,689 0.0004%-0.002% 0.0012% IMO 207,423,000 829,692,000 1,659,384,000 - 8,296,920,000 9,800 0.0001%-0.0006% 0.0003% IOH 188,404,000 753,616,000 1,507,232,000 - 7,536,160,000 1,088,713 0.01% - 0.07% 0.040% POR 190,785,000 763,140,000 1,526,280,000 - 7,631,400,000 497,443 0.007% - 0.03% 0.019% CMS 175,099,000 700,396,000 1,400,792,000 - 7,003,960,000 989,886 0.01% - 0.07% 0.040% CND 170,164,000 680,656,000 1,361,312,000 - 6,806,560,000 1,029,230 0.02% - 0.08% 0.050% PLA 161,993,000 647,972,000 1,295,944,000 - 6,479,720,000 408,200 0.006% -0.03% 0.018% ICO 162,703,000 650,812,000 1,301,624,000 - 6,508,120,000 84,498 0.001% - 0.006% 0.004% ISD 157,839,000 631,356,000 1,262,712,000 - 6,313,560,000 263,663 0.004% - 0.02% 0.012% PWI 153,507,000 614,028,000 1,228,056,000 - 6,140,280,000 1,523,995 0.03% - 0.12% 0.075% PSC 119,669,000 478,676,000 957,352,000 - 4,786,760,000 7,143 0.0001% - 0.0007% 0.0004% INY 106,773,000 427,092,000 854,184,000 - 4,270,920,000 219,454 0.005% - 0.03% 0.018% ITypeofProgram4
StateEstimated(lbs. A.I.)Total Used1991 - 2000 1 Estimated(lbs. A.I.)Total Used1960 - 2000 2 Estimated Range (lbs. Formulated)Total Formulated Product Used,assuming 10% to 50% A.I.1960 - 2000 3 Amount Disposed(lbs. Formulated) in<strong>Clean</strong> <strong>Sweep</strong>sthrough year 2000Total Disposed as% of Total Used1960-2000Midpointof Dispvs. UsedKY 94,681,000 378,724,000 757,448,000 - 3,787,240,000 278,367 0.007% - 0.04% 0.024% PAL 87,279,000 349,116,000 698,232,000 - 3,491,160,000 189,393 0.005% - 0.03% 0.018% IVA 92,660,000 370,640,000 741,280,000 - 3,706,400,000 818,799 0.02% - 0.11% 0.060% PPA 86,519,000 346,076,000 692,152,000 - 3,460,760,000 1,001,597 0.03% - 0.15% 0.09% PTN 80,566,000 322,264,000 644,528,000 - 3,222,640,000 300,000 0.009% - 0.05% 0.03% PMT 67,325,000 269,300,000 538,600,000 - 2,693,000,000 179,186 0.0007% - 0.03% 0.02% POK 64,871,000 259,484,000 518,968,000 - 2,594,840,000 0 NAZ 61,058,000 244,232,000 488,464,000 - 2,442,320,000 0 NMD 36,066,000 144,264,000 288,528,000 - 1,442,640,000 86,990 0.006% - 0.03% 0.018% CNM 27,183,000 108,732,000 217,464,000 - 1,087,320,000 0 NNJ 23,492,000 93,968,000 187,936,000 - 939,680,000 722,747 0.08% - 0.39% 0.240% CME 24,484,000 97,936,000 195,872,000 - 979,360,000 120,209 0.01% - 0.06% 0.040% CWY 14,478,000 57,912,000 115,824,000 - 579,120,000 16,000 0.003% - 0.01% 0.007% OUT 14,322,000 57,288,000 114,456,000 - 572,880,000 145,261 0.03% - 0.13% 0.080% PDE 13,438,000 53,752,000 107,504,000 - 537,520,000 30,423 0.006% - 0.03% 0.018% OWV 9,233,000 36,932,000 73,864,000 - 369,320,000 239,430 0.07% - 0.32% 0.200% CMA 7,852,000 31,408,000 62,816,000 - 314,080,000 158,989 0.05% - 0.25% 0.150% CVT 5,158,000 20,632,000 41,264,000 - 206,320,000 65,953 0.03% - 0.16% 0.100% PCT 3,037,000 12,148,000 24,296,000 - 121,480,000 46,100 0.04% - 0.19% 0.120% INH 1,882,000 7,528,000 15,056,000 - 75,280,000 20,000 0.03% - 0.13% 0.080% ONV 1,746,000 6,984,000 13,968,000 - 69,840,000 74,564 0.11% - 0.53% 0.320% PRI 488,000 1,952,000 3,904,000 - 19,520,000 some OAK 0 0 0 0 NHI 0 0 0 17,471 ITotal 9,578,053,000 38,312,212 76,624,304,000 - 383,122,116,000 24,608,646 0.006% - 0.03% 0.018%Notes: (1) The total pounds of active ingredient (AI) used 1990-2000 was calculated using the estimated quantity of AI used in each state in 1992 and 1997. Thequantities for the other years was estimated by assuming the change (either increase or decrease) between 1992 and 1997 was the constant across the decade.(2) The total pounds of AI used 1960-2000 was calculated assuming that the amount used in the 1990s was the same as the amount used in the other decades inTypeofProgram4--
- Page 1 and 2:
ForewordThe states and some countie
- Page 3 and 4:
Table of ContentsSECTIONFOREWORDTAB
- Page 5 and 6:
List of Figures and TablesNumber Ti
- Page 7 and 8:
State IndexAlabamaAlaskaArizonaArka
- Page 9 and 10:
Executive SummaryParticipants. Alth
- Page 11 and 12:
Executive Summarypounds. States wan
- Page 14 and 15:
Section 1 IntroductionFor the past
- Page 16:
The Clean Sweep Reportshort-term or
- Page 19 and 20:
Section 1 Introductionextensive and
- Page 21 and 22:
Section 1 Introductionfunded, conti
- Page 23 and 24:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 25 and 26:
Section 2Clean Sweep Program Operat
- Page 27 and 28:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 29 and 30:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 31 and 32:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 33 and 34:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 35 and 36:
Section 2Clean Sweep Program Operat
- Page 37 and 38:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 39 and 40:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 41 and 42:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 43 and 44:
Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
- Page 45 and 46:
Section 3 Clean Sweep Program Resul
- Page 47 and 48:
Section 3 Clean Sweep Program Resul
- Page 49 and 50:
Section 3 Clean Sweep Program Resul
- Page 51 and 52:
Table 11 Total Amount of Pesticides
- Page 53 and 54:
Section 3 Clean Sweep Program Resul
- Page 55 and 56:
Section 3 Clean Sweep Program Resul
- Page 57 and 58:
44Table 13 Specific Pesticides Trac
- Page 59 and 60:
Table 14 Quantity of the Most Commo
- Page 61 and 62:
Section 4 Challenges and Opportunit
- Page 63 and 64:
Section 4 Challenges and Opportunit
- Page 65 and 66:
Section 4 Challenges and Opportunit
- Page 67 and 68:
Section 4 Challenges and Opportunit
- Page 69 and 70:
Section 4 Challenges and Opportunit
- Page 71 and 72:
Section 5 Observations5.2 The unit
- Page 73 and 74:
Section 5ObservationsTable 17: Tota
- Page 75 and 76:
Section 5 Observations5.3 Reliable
- Page 77 and 78:
Section 5 Observationsamount annual
- Page 79 and 80:
Appendix INOTES on STATE “ATA GLA
- Page 81 and 82:
ALABAMA AT A GLANCESince 1994 Alaba
- Page 83 and 84:
ALASKA AT A GLANCEAlaska conducts s
- Page 85 and 86:
ARIZONA AT A GLANCEArizona does not
- Page 87 and 88:
ARKANSAS AT A GLANCEThe Arkansas St
- Page 89 and 90:
CALIFORNIA AT A GLANCESince 1989 Ca
- Page 91 and 92:
COLORADO AT A GLANCEAn EPA grant an
- Page 93 and 94:
YearColorado Table 1 - Quantity of
- Page 95 and 96:
Summary of Connecticut Waste Pestic
- Page 97 and 98:
Summary of Delaware Waste Pesticide
- Page 99 and 100:
Summary of Florida Waste Pesticide
- Page 101 and 102:
GEORGIA AT A GLANCEGeorgia has cond
- Page 103 and 104:
HAWAII AT A GLANCEHawaii conducted
- Page 105 and 106:
IDAHO AT A GLANCEIdaho’s permanen
- Page 107 and 108:
ILLINOIS AT A GLANCESince its first
- Page 109 and 110:
Illinois attempted a swap program i
- Page 111 and 112:
Summary of Indiana Waste Pesticide
- Page 113 and 114:
IOWA AT A GLANCESince 1991 Iowa has
- Page 115 and 116:
YearIowa Table 1 - Quantity of Pest
- Page 117 and 118:
Summary of Kansas Waste Pesticide D
- Page 119 and 120:
KENTUCKY AT A GLANCEKentucky conduc
- Page 121 and 122:
LOUISIANA AT A GLANCELouisiana coll
- Page 123 and 124:
MAINE AT A GLANCEMaine conducted it
- Page 125 and 126:
MARYLAND AT A GLANCEThe Maryland De
- Page 127 and 128:
MASSACHUSETTS AT A GLANCEMassachuse
- Page 129 and 130:
MICHIGAN AT A GLANCEMichigan’s pe
- Page 131 and 132:
MINNESOTA AT A GLANCESince 1989 Min
- Page 133 and 134:
Minnesota Table 1 - Quantity of Pes
- Page 135 and 136:
Summary of Mississippi Waste Pestic
- Page 137 and 138:
Summary of Missouri Waste Pesticide
- Page 139 and 140:
Summary of Montana Waste Pesticide
- Page 141 and 142:
Summary of Nebraska Waste Pesticide
- Page 143 and 144:
Summary of Nevada Waste Pesticide D
- Page 145 and 146:
Summary of New Hampshire Waste Pest
- Page 147 and 148:
Summary of New Jersey Waste Pestici
- Page 149 and 150:
New Jersey Table 3 - County-by-Coun
- Page 151 and 152:
Summary of New Mexico Waste Pestici
- Page 153 and 154:
Summary of New York Waste Pesticide
- Page 155 and 156:
churches, schools and businesses. P
- Page 157 and 158:
NORTH CAROLINA AT A GLANCENorth Car
- Page 159 and 160:
North Carolina Table 1 - Quantity o
- Page 161 and 162:
Summary of North Dakota Waste Pesti
- Page 163 and 164:
Summary of Ohio Waste Pesticide Dis
- Page 165 and 166:
OKLAHOMA AT A GLANCEOklahoma does n
- Page 167 and 168:
OREGON AT A GLANCESince 1991 Oregon
- Page 169 and 170:
PENNSYLVANIA AT A GLANCEIn 1993 Pen
- Page 171 and 172:
RHODE ISLAND AT A GLANCERhode Islan
- Page 173 and 174:
SOUTH CAROLINA AT A GLANCESouth Car
- Page 175 and 176:
SOUTH DAKOTA AT A GLANCESince 1993
- Page 177 and 178: TENNESSEE AT A GLANCEThe Tennessee
- Page 179 and 180: TEXAS AT A GLANCESince 1992 Texas h
- Page 181 and 182: YearNumberof SitesTexas Table 1 - Q
- Page 183 and 184: UTAH AT A GLANCESince 1993 Utah has
- Page 185 and 186: VERMONT AT A GLANCEVermont first co
- Page 187 and 188: VIRGINIA AT A GLANCEVirginia conduc
- Page 189 and 190: YearQuantity ofPesticides(pounds)Vi
- Page 191 and 192: Summary of Washington Waste Pestici
- Page 193 and 194: Summary of West Virginia Waste Pest
- Page 195 and 196: Summary of Wisconsin Waste Pesticid
- Page 197 and 198: WYOMING AT A GLANCEIn 1992 Wyoming
- Page 199 and 200: Appendix II - Pesticides That are R
- Page 201 and 202: Appendix IIU044 chloroform U080 met
- Page 203 and 204: Appendix IIIB. Availability Contrac
- Page 205 and 206: Appendix III4. Federal Hazardous Ma
- Page 207 and 208: Appendix III22. INDEPENDENT CONTRAC
- Page 209 and 210: Appendix IIIContractor further agre
- Page 211 and 212: Appendix III33. CONTRACTOR’S DUTI
- Page 213 and 214: Appendix IIIC. Any deviation of mor
- Page 215 and 216: Appendix III45. MERGER CLAUSEThis a
- Page 217 and 218: Appendix IVOnyx Environmental Servi
- Page 219 and 220: State Pre-89 1989 1990 1991 1992 19
- Page 221 and 222: State pre-89 1989 1990 1991 1992 19
- Page 223 and 224: Appendix VILouisiana: Division of P
- Page 225 and 226: Appendix VII - Sample Emergency Pla
- Page 227: Appendix VIIICOMPARISON OF PESTICID