USDA CROP Act of 2025
- Bill Number
- S. 1999
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Environmental Protection
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-06-09: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
- Last Updated
- 2026-02-18T14:50:54Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The USDA Communication Regarding Oversight of Pesticides Act of 2025 (USDA CROP Act of 2025), or S. 1999, aims to enhance collaboration between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in regulating pesticides. It seeks to ensure that decisions on pesticide use consider agricultural impacts, economic factors, and alternative options while protecting the environment.
Key Provisions
The bill amends Section 3 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA, a law governing pesticide registration and use) by adding a new subsection on coordination:
- Risk Mitigation Measures: For any required measures to reduce risks from registered pesticides (e.g., limits on use to protect health or the environment), the EPA must:
- Develop them in partnership with the USDA Secretary.
- Perform and publicly release an economic analysis in the official record (docket) of costs to farmers, state agencies, and others, including changes to usage rules and labeling expenses.
- Data and Information Sharing: During pesticide registration, review, or decisions affecting sales, distribution, or use (including under food safety laws), the EPA must:
- Work with the USDA's Director of the Office of Pest Management Policy to access farming-related data (agronomic data) from USDA and industry sources, plus details on available and affordable alternatives to the pesticide.
- Publish in the docket a summary of how it used (or decided not to use) this data, including reasons for any non-use.
- Endangered Species Consultations: For actions or measures to protect endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA, a law requiring federal agencies to avoid harming protected wildlife), the EPA must coordinate with the USDA Secretary, Interior Secretary, and Commerce Secretary to:
- Review development of these measures from ESA consultations related to pesticides.
- Evaluate options using established pesticide risk-benefit assessments to guide final choices and implementation.
- Offer feedback on decisions that could impact pesticide users.
- Waiver Option: Coordination requirements can be skipped or adjusted for a specific case if agreed by the EPA, USDA Secretary, and the pesticide's manufacturer (registrant), provided the agreement is publicly posted in the docket.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Introduces mandatory inter-agency coordination for pesticide risk decisions, which was not explicitly required before, giving USDA a formal role in EPA processes.
- Requires new economic analyses for risk mitigation, ensuring costs to agriculture are documented and considered.
- Mandates transparency through docket publications, including data usage and feedback on endangered species measures, to make EPA decisions more accountable.
- Links pesticide regulation more closely with ESA consultations, standardizing how environmental protections are balanced with agricultural needs.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: Enhances efficiency and information-sharing among EPA, USDA, Interior, and Commerce, potentially reducing conflicts or delays in approvals but increasing workload for analyses and coordination.
- Citizens and Farmers: Farmers (growers) may benefit from decisions that account for economic viability and alternatives, possibly lowering costs or preserving pesticide access; state agencies could face new implementation burdens but gain from better data.
- International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though improved U.S. pesticide policies could influence global trade standards for agricultural products by ensuring regulations are agriculturally informed.
- Overall, it could lead to more balanced regulations that protect the environment without overly disrupting farming practices.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Agencies: EPA (primary regulator of pesticides), USDA (agricultural expertise), Department of the Interior and Commerce (endangered species oversight).
- Industry and Farmers: Pesticide manufacturers (registrants), agricultural growers, and industry groups providing data.
- State and Local Entities: State lead agencies involved in pesticide enforcement and monitoring.
- Environmental Groups: Indirectly affected through stronger ties to ESA protections.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces FIFRA's framework by embedding coordination without altering core registration standards; promotes transparency via public dockets, which could support legal challenges if data is mishandled. It aligns pesticide rules with ESA without changing the underlying consultation process.
- Constitutional: No direct challenges; upholds separation of agency powers by fostering collaboration rather than consolidating authority.
- Political: Highlights tensions between environmental protection and agricultural interests, potentially appealing to farming communities while requiring agencies to justify decisions economically—could influence future regulatory reforms or inter-agency disputes.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Recent Actions
- 2025-06-09: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
- 2025-06-09: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- USDA Communication Regarding Oversight of Pesticides Act of 2025 — issued 2025-06-09 — PDF (5 pages)