The Pesticide Harm Accountability Act would change parts of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). It adds language saying that FIFRA provisions about misbranding and uniformity should not be read to stop a State from placing a warning required under that State's tort law or from bringing tort claims about pesticide labeling or packaging. The bill also directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to submit a report within 180 days identifying any EPA regulation, guidance, or interpretive statement that limits State tort claims under those FIFRA provisions and to describe steps taken to comply. The bill includes findings about EPA registration practices and a referenced Supreme Court decision (Monsanto Co. v. Durnell). It also contains a severability clause.
If enacted, the bill would make clear that States can require or allow warnings tied to State tort law on pesticide products and that people can bring State tort claims about pesticide labels or packaging even when FIFRA has been applied. The EPA would have to report to Congress about any agency rules or guidance that limit those State tort claims.
No publicly available information.
The bill's findings state that supporters believe EPA sometimes uses outdated science, issues many conditional registrations, allows continued sale of canceled products, extends emergency exemptions, and blocks disclosure of some inactive ingredients. Supporters say State tort law is an important check when federal regulation does not protect people. The bill cites a Supreme Court decision (Monsanto Co. v. Durnell) that, according to the bill, removed a path for victims to use State courts. Supporters say the changes would restore the ability of victims to pursue State tort claims about pesticide labeling and packaging.
No publicly available information.