April 13, 2011
www.gfb.org
Vol. 29 No. 15
PESTICIDE PERMIT BILLS INTRODUCED IN SENATE, PASSED IN HOUSE The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill to provide regulatory relief to pesticide applicators and a companion bill was introduced in the Senate. On March 31, the House passed H.R. 872, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, by a 292-130 vote. Of Georgia’s 13 representatives, 11 voted for H.R. 872, which was supported by Farm Bureau. H.R. 872 would eliminate what many consider burdensome and overlapping permit requirements resulting from the 2009 Sixth Circuit Court case National Cotton Council vs. EPA. It would amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) to clarify that CWA permits are not needed when a pesticide is applied in accordance with a FIFRA-approved label. The court ruling requires pesticide applications to be permitted under the CWA using the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) in addition to any label requirements or restrictions for the use of a pesticide under FIFRA, though the EPA has not previously required an NPDES permit for the application of FIFRA-registered crop protection products. Companion legislation was introduced in the Senate on April 4 by Pat Roberts, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. Roberts’ bill, S. 718, was originally cosponsored by 12 senators, including Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.). Under the EPA’s rule, 35,000 pesticide applicators will need permits to cover about 500,000 applications per year. Under the CWA, unlawful discharges are subject to fines of $37,500 per day. S. 718 clarifies that lawful application of pesticides under FIFRA does not trigger regulatory requirements in other programs. Like H.R. 872, S. 718 includes a provision that additional permits are not needed when a pesticide is used in accordance with the FIFRA-approved label, and is intended to solve many of the problems associated with the new NPDES permitting program and the Sixth Circuit ruling. “Once again, the EPA has overreached, causing serious consequences in our agriculture sector,” said Chambliss. “By refusing to defend current law and its own reasonable regulations, the EPA is in the position to place unnecessary, burdensome and duplicative permit requirements on producers, mosquito-control districts and states. Our legislation would simply prevent the EPA from imposing an erroneous regulation that does absolutely nothing to further protect or enhance the environment.”