```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 11 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 11

Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the fair and equitable 
 implementation of the amendments made by the Food Quality Protection 
                              Act of 1996.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 12, 1999

 Mr. Campbell (for himself, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Frist, Mr. 
Gramm, Mr. Hutchinson, Mrs. Hutchison, and Ms. Landrieu) submitted the 
following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                  Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the fair and equitable 
 implementation of the amendments made by the Food Quality Protection 
                              Act of 1996.

Whereas the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-170; 110 Stat. 
        1489) was enacted with unanimous congressional approval and with the 
        assistance and leadership of a broad coalition of agricultural, 
        industry, and public interest groups;
Whereas the amendments made by that Act are intended to be an important tool in 
        protecting public health, particularly the health and well-being of the 
        most valuable resource of the United States, the children of the United 
        States;
Whereas it is critical that the amendments made by that Act be implemented in a 
        way that accomplishes the intent of Congress while maintaining an 
        abundant, affordable, and safe food supply for the United States, 
        ensuring urban pest control, and not unfairly providing competitive 
        advantages to foreign food suppliers over domestic producers;
Whereas the amendments made by that Act require the Administrator of the 
        Environmental Protection Agency to develop risk assessment methodologies 
        that are based on reliable information and to undertake a massive review 
        of all approved pesticide tolerances;
Whereas on August 4, 1997, the Administrator published a schedule for 
        reassessment of more than 3,000 tolerances by August 3, 1999, that could 
        include certain classes of products that are extensively used;
Whereas the sudden loss of uses and products could both economically cripple a 
        host of agricultural commodities, including corn, soybeans, wheat, rice, 
        cotton, and dozens of fruit and vegetable crops and create a public 
        health threat to the urban environment from the unchecked infestation of 
        insects; and
Whereas it is critical that the amendments made by that Act be implemented in a 
        fair and equitable manner, and that the protections be implemented while 
        maintaining an abundant, affordable, and safe food supply for the United 
        States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
        Agency and the Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the 
        implementation of the amendments made by the Food Quality 
        Protection Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-170; 110 Stat. 1489)--
                    (A) be based on sound science that protects public 
                health;
                    (B) include transparent processes with full 
                disclosure of decisions and be subject to peer and 
                public review;
                    (C) provide for a reasonable transition for 
                agriculture; and
                    (D) require consultation with the public and other 
                agencies;
            (2) the development of risk assessment methodologies, 
        guidelines, and protocols for collection of data under the 
        amendments made by that Act be based on sound science and not 
        default assumptions in the absence of reliable data;
            (3) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
        Agency should devote sufficient resources to register new 
        pesticide products and uses to provide effective substitutes 
        for pesticides that may be considered high risk under the 
        amendments made by that Act; and
            (4) the Administrator should establish ongoing means for 
        input regarding the implementation decisions of the 
        Administrator with respect to that Act from producers, 
        pesticide users, registrants, environmental and public health 
        groups, consumers, State and local agencies, tribal 
        governments, Members of Congress, and appropriate Federal 
        agencies.
                                 <all>
```