[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 30 (Thursday, March 17, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 17, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
 EXTENDING CERTAIN COMPLIANCE DATES FOR PESTICIDE SAFETY TRAINING AND 
                         LABELING REQUIREMENTS

  Mr. de la GARZA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Committee on Agriculture be discharged from further consideration of 
the Senate bill (S. 1913) to extend certain compliance dates for 
pesticide safety training and labeling requirements, and ask for its 
immediate consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Studds). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Texas?
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I shall 
not object, I yield to the chairman of the full committee, the 
gentleman from Texas, Mr. de la Garza, to explain the bill.
  Mr. de la GARZA. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, this is a bit of carefully crafted 
legislation that pertains to the farm worker safety regulations which 
were due to become effective in April of 1994. This carefully crafted 
compromise allows that those areas that can be put into effect now 
should be put into effect to protect farm workers in the field, should 
be allowed to go on at this time; and in areas where they need training 
or working between the State departments of agriculture and EPA, they 
be allowed to have the extended time. It does not change any basic 
safety regulations at this point.
  Mr. Speaker, the amendment we offer to the bill, S. 1913, represents 
a carefully crafted compromise on the implementation of certain 
farmworker safety regulations due to go into effect in April 1994.
  This bipartisan amendment has been developed following meetings with 
the principal parties involved in this issue. Those organizations were 
the Farmworker Justice Fund, the American Farm Bureau Federation and 
the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture. The 
substitute has also been reviewed by the Environmental Protection 
Agency and it is my understanding EPA has no objection to its passage.
  Let me make it clear that this legislation does not in any way weaken 
existing legal health safeguards for farmworkers. What it does is 
provide additional time for EPA to resolve certain regulatory issues 
that have been raised by the states and agricultural producers.
  I also want to provide some clarification to certain provisions in 
the bill. It is the Committee on Agriculture's view that the provision 
requiring agricultural employers to provide ``clean'' personal 
protective equipment to agricultural workers in paragraph 2(D) of the 
bill may be met by providing new equipment or by following the normal 
practice within the industry for cleaning personal protective 
equipment. Normal practices for cleaning equipment include cleaning 
according to manufacturer's instructions or pesticide product labeling 
instructions before each day of reuse. In the absence of any such 
instructions, normal practices include washing the equipment in 
detergent and hot water.
  In addition, it is the Committee's intention that the term 
``planting'' in the definition of ``hand labor'' in paragraph 4 of the 
bill only includes planting by hand. It does not include planting using 
machinery because in this circumstance the agricultural worker does not 
make direct contact with treated soils.
  Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere hope that this legislation marks the 
final legislative involvement in the long-overdue implementation of 
farmworker protection regulations. It is my view as chairman of the 
House Agriculture Committee that this measure should provide adequate 
time to resolve all legitimate concerns about the drafting of these 
regulations.
  Mr. ROBERTS. Further reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, I 
yield to the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Boehner.
  Mr. BOEHNER. I thank the gentleman from Kansas for yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the chairman of the full 
committee, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. de la Garza, and his staff for 
the work that they have done, and the gentleman from Kansas, Mr. 
Roberts, the ranking member, on trying to delay these standards until 
the industry can deal with them in a very effective way.
  I think we have worked out a very good compromise, and I thank them 
both.
  (Mr. ROBERTS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the gentleman for his remarks.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation will prevent an imminent regulatory 
morass. It is supported by State regulatory officials, the U.S. EPA, 
growers and farm labor groups, in short everyone involved in the issue 
of worker protection regulations. Effectively we will be extending the 
time before the rules take effect, allowing for needed revision of the 
regulations and more time for education of the regulated community.
  While I wish we had extended the deadline to October 1995 when all 
the pesticide labels would be uniform and confusion would be reduced, I 
support this interim effort. I urge the EPA to work closely with 
growers, State officials and labor groups to make the necessary 
revisions and get the needed educational materials distributed over the 
9 months of this reprieve. This short delay will prevent untold wasted 
effort and unnecessary legal jeopardy if we make good use of the time. 
However important this interim measure is, I am concerned about the 
ultimate regulatory burden we will be saddling our growers with.
  Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservations of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Clerk read the Senate bill, as follows:

                                S. 1913

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. COMPLIANCE DATES FOR PESTICIDE SAFETY 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Worker Protection Standards.--
       (1) In general.--The compliance date for provisions of the 
     worker protection standard set forth in part 170.5(c) of 
     subchapter E of chapter I of title 40, Code of Federal 
     Regulations, due to become effective on April 15, 1994, shall 
     be January 1, 1995.
       (2) Pesticide safety training.--Not later than September 
     23, 1994, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency (referred to in this section as the ``Administrator'') 
     shall--
       (A) develop and distribute pesticide safety training 
     materials that convey, at a minimum, the information referred 
     to in section 170.230(c)(4) of such title; and
       (B) assist the appropriate Federal, State, and tribal 
     agencies in implementing pesticide safety training programs 
     required under section 170 of such title.
       (b) Labeling Requirements.--
       (1) Enforcement.--
       (A) In general.--During the period ending on January 1, 
     1995, the labeling requirements for pesticides and devices 
     set forth in subpart K of part 156 of subchapter E of chapter 
     I of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, due to become 
     effective on April 21, 1994, may be enforced only--
       (i) in a State that has established a worker protection 
     program with respect to pesticides and devices as of the date 
     of enactment of this Act; and
       (ii) for the purpose of enforcing a State program referred 
     to in clause (i).
       (B) Equivalency.--During the period ending on January 1, 
     1995, each worker protection program referred to in 
     subparagraph (A)(i) shall be considered to meet the 
     requirements of the worker protection standard set forth in 
     part 170 of such subchapter. After such date, the 
     Administrator shall reassess whether the program meets the 
     standard.
       (2) Notification of purchasers.--Beginning on April 22, 
     1994, each registrant of pesticides shall provide information 
     for point-of-sale notification to inform purchasers of 
     pesticides that the applicable compliance date for the 
     labeling requirements referred to in paragraph (1)(A) is 
     January 1, 1995.
       (c) Existing Authority.--Notwithstanding the foregoing 
     provisions, the existing authority of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency to enforce existing label requirements 
     shall not be affected.


   Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. de la Garza

  Mr. de la GARZA. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. de 
     la Garza: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert 
     in lieu thereof the following:

     SECTION 1. COMPLIANCE.

       Until January 1, 1995, it shall not be a misuse under 
     section 12(a)(2)(G) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, 
     and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136j(a)(2)(G)) to use any 
     pesticide product in a manner inconsistent with the 
     provisions of 40 CFR Part 170 that are (1) subject to the 
     compliance date specified in 40 CFR section 170.5(c) and (2) 
     incorporated by reference on the label or labeling of any 
     pesticide product. This delay in compliance shall not apply 
     to specific worker protection requirements that appear 
     directly on the label or labeling of the pesticide product.

     SEC. 2. REENTRY INTERVAL.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the provisions of 40 CFR 
     Part 170, until January 1, 1995, a worker may enter an area 
     treated with a pesticide product during the restricted entry 
     interval specified on the label of the pesticide product to 
     perform tasks related to the production of agricultural 
     plants if the agricultural employer ensures that--
       (1) no hand labor activity is performed;
       (2) no such entry is allowed for the first 4 hours 
     following the end of the application of the pesticide 
     product;
       (3) no such entry is allowed until any inhalation exposure 
     level listed on the product labeling has been reached; and
       (4) the personal protective equipment specified on the 
     product labeling for early entry is provided in clean and 
     operating condition to the worker.
       (b) Protective Equipment for Irrigation Work.--For 
     irrigation work for which the only contact with treated 
     surfaces is to the feet, lower legs, hands, and arms, the 
     agricultural employer may provide coveralls, chemical 
     resistant gloves, and chemical resistant footwear instead of 
     the personal protective equipment specified on the label.

     SEC. 3. CROP ADVISORS

       Notwithstandig the provisions of 40 CFR Part 170, until 
     January 1, 1995, persons performing duties as crop advisors 
     shall not be considered workers or handlers under 40 CFR Part 
     170 (or for the purposes of the pesticide label) and shall 
     not be subject to the requirements of 40 CFR Part 170.

     SEC. 4. SAFETY TRAINING.

       (A) Training Materials.--Not later than September 23, 1994, 
     the Administrator shall develop and distribute pesticide 
     safety training materials that convey, at a minimum, the 
     information referred in 40 CFR section 170.230(c)(4).
       (b) Implementation.--The Administrator shall assist the 
     appropriate Federal, State, and tribal agencies in 
     implementing the pesticide safety training programs required 
     under 40 CFR part 170.

     SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this Act:
       (1) The term ``hand labor'' means any agricultural activity 
     performed by hand or with hand tools that causes a worker to 
     have substantial contact with surfaces (such as plants, plant 
     parts, or soil) that may contain pesticide residues. These 
     activities include, but are not limited to, harvesting, 
     detasseling, thinning, weeding, topping, planting, sucker 
     removal, pruning, disbudding, roguing, and packing produce 
     into containers in the field. The term ``hand labor'' shall 
     not include operating, moving, or repairing irrigation or 
     watering equipment or performing the tasks of crop advisors.
       (2) The term ``agricultural employer'' means any person who 
     hires or contracts for the services of workers, for any type 
     of compensation, to perform activities related to the 
     production of agricultural plants, or any person who is an 
     owner of or is responsible for management or condition of an 
     agricultural establishment that uses such workers.
       (3) The term ``worker'' means any person, including a self-
     employed person, who is employed for any type of compensation 
     and who is performing activities relating to the production 
     of agricultural plants on an agricultural establishment. The 
     term ``worker'' shall not include any person employed by a 
     commercial pesticide handling establishment to perform tasks 
     as a crop advisor.
       (4) The term ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency.

     SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE PERIOD.

       The provisions in this Act shall be effective until January 
     1, 1995.

  Mr. de la GARZA (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment in the nature of a substitute be considered 
as read and printed in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. de la 
Garza).
  The amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
  The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the 
third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the 
table.

                          ____________________