Committee considers $50 pesticide registration fee, orders study of extended producer responsibility

The Senate Agriculture Committee on April 23 reviewed proposed amendments to a pesticide bill that would add a $50 per‑product pesticide registration fee, with proceeds deposited into the existing pesticide registration special fund to reimburse solid waste management entities and municipalities for collection and disposal of unwanted or obsolete pesticides.

Committee members and counsel said the fee and related language are intended to pay costs for collection programs: facility costs, equipment, labor, supplies, maintenance and prorated collection‑event costs (for example, the prorated portion of insurance tied to a collection event). The draft also excludes full insurance fees and service fees where those costs are not directly attributable to a collection event.

Chief counsel Michael O'Grady explained that the bill would also require the Agency of Agriculture, in consultation with agricultural conservation partners, to study options for sustainable funding to reimburse solid waste management entities for all costs associated with unwanted pesticide collection and disposal. The study would examine whether to shift responsibility to manufacturers under an extended producer responsibility (EPR) model and must deliver a report by 12/15/2025 with recommended funding mechanisms and cost coverage for initial collection programs.

O'Grady and the committee described EPR as a program structure that shifts end‑of‑life waste collection responsibility from government and consumers to the product manufacturers, typically fulfilled through a stewardship organization that represents manufacturers of the covered product. Committee members referenced the state's existing EPR experiences — for electronics, mercury‑containing light bulbs and batteries — and noted that EPR programs generally require free consumer collection; committee members also noted there are limited exceptions in which programs assess fees at point of sale.

No formal vote was recorded during the discussion; committee staff said amendments were being posted to the bill (identified in committee discussion as "h 4 84" in the draft). Committee members said the posted amendments and the study's recommendations would inform subsequent drafting.

The committee did not set a committee vote date during the discussion and asked staff to circulate revised language after fact‑finding and stakeholder comment.