[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 2110-2111]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND 
                            RODENTICIDE ACT

  Mr. CARDOZA. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 2571) to make technical corrections to the Federal 
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
  The text of the Senate bill is as follows:

                                S. 2571

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

     SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, 
                   FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT.

       (a) Pesticide Registration Service Fees.--Section 33 of the 
     Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 
     136w-8) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(7)--
       (A) in subparagraph (D)--
       (i) by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:
       ``(i) In general.--The Administrator may exempt from, or 
     waive a portion of, the registration service fee for an 
     application for minor uses for a pesticide.''; and
       (ii) in clause (ii), by inserting ``or exemption'' after 
     ``waiver''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (E)--
       (i) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``Waiver'' and 
     inserting ``Exemption'';
       (ii) by striking ``waive the registration service fee for 
     an application'' and inserting ``exempt an application from 
     the registration service fee''; and
       (iii) in clause (ii), by striking ``waiver'' and inserting 
     ``exemption''; and
       (2) in subsection (m)(2), by striking ``2008'' each place 
     it appears and inserting ``2012''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     take effect on October 1, 2007.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Cardoza) and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Senate bill 2571 provides a technical correction to the 
reauthorization of the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act approved 
by the House and the Senate and that was signed by the President on 
October 9, 2007.
  As my colleagues know, EPA is currently responsible for regulating 
the sale, use, and distribution of pesticides. In order to facilitate 
and expedite the approval process, pesticide manufacturers and other 
registrants have supplemented EPA's annual budget for a number of 
years. It's a win-win process for both the manufacturer and the end 
user and a clear example of good government at its best.
  Unfortunately, EPA has interpreted the PRIA reauthorization approved 
by Congress to collect fees for chemicals that are not part of the 
Interregional Project Number 4, a popular research program that 
assesses tolerance levels for pest management chemicals applied on 
specialty crops. These IR-4 chemicals have historically been exempt 
from fees prior to the enactment of the PRIA reauthorization, and it 
was not the intention of the House nor the Senate to suddenly assess 
fees on all these chemicals.
  This bill will simply restore the status quo for these particular 
products and reassert congressional intent.
  Because the program fees are being assessed on IR-4 chemicals as we 
speak, it is vitally important to address this situation immediately. 
While the farm bill would be the natural vehicle to make this technical 
correction, EPA is currently unable to process any registration 
applications without these fees being paid. Therefore, while this fix 
is not controversial, it is extremely time sensitive, and the 
uncertainty of the farm bill process dictates that Congress must take 
action now.
  Restoring congressional intent by passing this technical correction 
to PRIA will prevent delays and backups of applications and stop EPA 
from collecting and then reimbursing the fees for these chemicals.

[[Page 2111]]

  It is important that we continue to encourage the type of public-
private partnerships envisioned in PRIA. I urge my colleagues to 
support this technical fix and the underlying goals of the Pesticide 
Registration Improvement Act.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise today in support of S. 2571. Madam Speaker, last fall we 
passed Senate bill 1983, which reauthorized the highly successful 
Pesticide Registration Improvement Act. That act had been worked on by 
a number of Members in the House and Senate, including the chairmen and 
ranking members of the House and Senate Agriculture Committees as well 
as the chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Horticulture 
and Organic Agriculture. In developing this legislation, we sought the 
advice and counsel of the administration, the affected industry, and 
the environmental community. I was very happy to have the unanimous 
endorsement of all interested parties as we moved forward with that 
bill.
  As is not uncommon in working on complex legislation, language is 
included that is subject to interpretation, and in this particular case 
we included language intending to maintain an existing fee exemption 
for certain chemicals that have limited uses on specialty crops. 
Unfortunately, the EPA has interpreted the final language to mean that 
they would not be able to continue to offer this exemption. This bill 
that we are considering today would simply restore the status quo for 
these chemicals, as was the congressional intent.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. CARDOZA. Madam Speaker, I just want to thank my colleague, the 
very capable and wise gentleman from Oklahoma who has been a great 
friend throughout the years that I have been here and thank him for his 
assistance in this legislation.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 2571.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________