WASHINGTON, D.C. – Legislation designed to clarify and reaffirm long-standing provisions in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) regarding labeling requirements should be enacted by Congress, according to a recent letter signed by hundreds of agricultural-related groups.

Under FIFRA, states are permitted to regulate the sale and use of pesticides, but are preempted from requiring additional or different pesticide labels or packaging, the letter said. FIFRA authorizes the U.S. EPA to make foundational, science-based decisions on how pesticides can be labeled and used, the letter noted.

In the letter dated May 28, the groups said, “In recent years, we have seen actions from states that directly and unjustifiably contradict EPA’s scientific findings on pesticide safety. These actions risk creating an unworkable, inconsistent patchwork of state pesticide labels that can quickly disrupt commerce and access to these much-needed tools.

“As concerning, this threatens to jeopardize public confidence in EPA’s authority and science-based regulation under FIFRA, as well as the continued availability of individual tools on which there are contradictory claims.”

The groups are concerned that if contradictory labels are required on the same package, it could lead to some products being pulled from the market, according to the American Soybean Association (ASA), one of the 365 groups that signed the letter.

The letter was sent to House and Senate leadership.

In the letter, the groups called for the passage of the Agricultural Labeling Uniformity Act, introduced during the last Congress by Reps. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) and Jim Costa (D-Calif.) Among the legislation’s provisions is a requirement for uniformity in national pesticide labeling.

“Political agendas in states like California are causing confusion in the ag industry,” Johnson said in a release in June 2023, when he introduced the measure. “Labeling decisions must be based on sound science, not unsupported claims that instill fear in consumers. The bill would make it clear there is only one standard to follow.”

Added Costa, “Growers depend on resources like herbicides to manage pests and disease prevention, which threatens our food supply chain. This bill will assure uniformity in the national pesticide labeling under federal law, which will result in a more sustainable and secure food supply.”

Caleb Ragland, ASA president, said not only does FIFRA prohibit states from requiring labels that conflict with federal findings, but also labels are not allowed to be false or misleading.

“If a state requires a product to be labeled in contradiction to scientific findings from federal regulators, it places manufacturers in a no-win situation – either disregard a state labeling requirement or put a false and misleading label on a product, contradicting EPA findings and violating federal law,” he said in a release. “This situation is not sustainable.

“We’re really taking an ‘all of the above’ approach to bring certainty to this issue. Unless there is clarity, we’re worried manufacturers could exit the market and leave farmers without much-needed tools needed to protect crops and provide affordable food for consumers.”

The bipartisan legislation doesn’t impact use restrictions, noted CropLife America, which also signed the letter. “It would reaffirm that the EPA is the preeminent authority on pesticide labeling and packaging requirements, while still allowing states to enact use restrictions under current law,” the organization said.

Other ag organizations that signed the letter include the American Farm Bureau Federation and farm bureaus in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee; the National Association of Wheat Growers; the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association; the National Corn Growers Association; the National Milk Producers Federation; and the National Turkey Federation.