Farm Progress is part of the Informa Markets Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Pesticide application permitting bill introduced

Pesticide application permitting bill introduced
Legislation has been introduced in the Senate to eliminate a burdensome, costly and redundant EPA permit requirement for applications of pesticides.

Sens. Roberts (R-Kan.) and Johanns (R-Neb.) have introduced legislation to eliminate a burdensome, costly and redundant EPA permit requirement for applications of pesticides.

In a news release issued by Sen. Roberts, he said, “This double layer of red tape is costly to the agriculture industry and consumers. It also takes aim at public health departments by requiring permits on top of existing permits for pesticide use. This creates confusion and the potential for significant penalties. Our bill eliminates this redundant permit requirement while at the same time ensuring proper pesticide use through existing law.”

Sen. Johanns added, "Not only is EPA pursuing regulations that are economically crippling, they are also pursuing regulations that are clearly duplicative. The agenda being pushed by this Administration’s EPA amounts to more red tape, more roadblocks and more needless headaches. President Obama has repeatedly promised to eliminate duplicative regulations, but actions speak louder than words. That’s why we’re acting on an economically and environmentally responsible solution to this government-made problem.”

(See related: NPDES bill would fix permitting duplication)

At issue is the January ’09, Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion in National Cotton Council v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that requires pesticide applications to be permitted under the Clean Water Act. This National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is now in addition to any label requirements or restrictions already placed on the use of a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

Since early in ’12, the EPA has enforced a now permanent rule in response to the Sixth Circuit Court ruling requiring approximately 35,000 pesticide applicators to get permits to cover about 500,000 applications per year. EPA estimates indicate the permit rule will cost states, local entities and pesticide applicators $50 million and require one million hours to implement per year. Under the Clean Water Act, unlawful discharges are subject to $37,500 per day in fines.

This requirement is of particular concern for public health officials who are now restricted in their ability to control mosquitoes, and the spread of diseases like the West Nile virus. It is also a significant issue for agriculture.

Sens. Roberts and Johanns’ bill, S. 175, would amend FIFRA by stating that no permit shall be required for the use of a pesticide that is registered under FIFRA. Roberts introduced the same legislation in the last Congress where it was blocked from consideration on the Senate floor. Also in the 112th Congress, the House and Senate agriculture committees passed similar legislation, H.R. 872, with strong bipartisan support.

The bill has the following original co-sponsors: Sens. Moran (R-Kan.), Blunt (R-Mo.), Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Thune (R-S.D.), Grassley (R-Iowa), Vitter (R-La.), Enzi (R-Wyo.), Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Boozman (R-Ark.).

TAGS: Legislative
Hide comments


  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.