A review of diazinon use, contamination in surface waters, and regulatory actions in California across water years 1992–2014



Diazinon is an organophosphorus insecticide that has been widely used in the USA and in California resulting in contamination of surface waters. Several federal and state regulations have been implemented with the aim of reducing its impact to human health and the environment, e.g., the cancellation of residential use products by the USEPA and dormant spray regulations by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. This study reviewed the change in diazinon use and surface water contamination in accordance with the regulatory actions implemented in California over water years 1992–2014. We observed that use amounts began declining when agencies announced the intention to regulate certain use patterns and continued to decline after the implementation of those programs and regulations. The reduction in use amounts led to a downward trend in concentration data and exceedance frequencies in surface waters. Moreover, we concluded that diazinon concentrations in California’s surface waters in recent years (i.e., water years 20122014) posed a de minimis risk to aquatic organisms.


Diazinon Regulatory actions Surface waters Risk assessment 



The authors would like to thank Jennifer Teerlink for her critical review of this manuscript.

Supplementary material

10661_2017_6026_MOESM1_ESM.docx (140 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 140 kb)


  1. Aggarwal, V., Deng, X., Tuli, A. Goh, K. S. (2013). Diazinon—chemistry and environmental fate: a California perspective, in Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Volume 223, edited, pp. 107–140, Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, M. (2016). California’s most significant droughts: comparing historical and recent conditions.Google Scholar
  3. CVRWQCB (2014). Amendment to the water quality control plan for the Sacramento river and San Joaquin River Basins for the control of diazinon and chlorpyrifos discharges, California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, resolution R5–2014-0041, edited.Google Scholar
  4. Fox, J. (1997). Applied regression analysis, linear models, and related methods, Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Giddings, J. M., Williams, W. M., Solomon, K. R., Giesy, J. P. (2014). Risks to aquatic organisms from use of chlorpyrifos in the United States, in Ecological Risk Assessment for Chlorpyrifos in Terrestrial and Aquatic Systems in the United States, edited, pp. 119–162, Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Good, P. (2011). A practitioner’s guide to resampling for data analysis, data mining, and modeling, Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
  7. Hall, L. W. J. (2003). Analysis of diazinon monitoring data from the Sacramento and Feather River watersheds: 1991–2001. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 86(3), 233–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Johnson, H. M., Domagalski, J. L., & Saleh, D. K. (2011). Trends in pesticide concentrations in streams of the western United States, 1993-2005. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 47(2), 265–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kuivila, K. M., & Foe, C. G. (1995). Concentrations, transport and biological effects of dormant spray pesticides in the San Francisco estuary, California. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 14(7), 1141–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lee, L. (2015). NADA: nondetects and data analysis for environmental data (R package), edited.Google Scholar
  11. Palumbo, A., Fojut, T., TenBrook, P., Tjeerdema, R. (2010). Water quality criteria report for diazinon, Phase III: Application of the pesticide water quality criteria methodology. Report prepared for the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, Rancho Cordova, CA.Google Scholar
  12. Ryberg, K. R., & Gilliom, R. J. (2015). Trends in pesticide concentrations and use for major rivers of the United States. Science of the Total Environment, 538, 431–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. USEPA (2008). Registration review—preliminary problem formulation for ecological risk and environmental fate, endangered species and drinking water assessments for diazinon, edited.Google Scholar
  14. USEPA (2011). Problem formulation of the reassessment of ecological effects from the use of atrazine., edited.Google Scholar
  15. USEPA (2016). Refined ecological risk assessment for atrazine, edited.Google Scholar
  16. Wang, D., Singhasemanon, N., & Goh, K. S. (2016). A statistical assessment of pesticide pollution in surface waters using environmental monitoring data: chlorpyrifos in Central Valley. California, Science of The Total Environment, 571, 332–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Zhang, X., & Starner, K. (2011). Analysis of diazinon agricultural use in regions of frequent surface water detections.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.California Department of Pesticide RegulationSacramentoSacramentoUSA

Personalised recommendations