Maryland 2023 Regular Session

Maryland Senate Bill SB158

Introduced
1/18/23  
Refer
1/18/23  
Report Pass
3/27/23  
Engrossed
3/28/23  
Refer
3/29/23  
Refer
4/5/23  
Report Pass
4/8/23  
Enrolled
4/10/23  
Chaptered
5/8/23  

Caption

Pesticides - PFAS Testing - Study

Impact

The implementation of SB 158 is expected to enhance the safety of pesticide use in Maryland, particularly concerning those utilized for mosquito control. By requiring rigorous testing for harmful substances, the bill represents a proactive approach to protect both public health and the environment. This change is poised to influence state laws regarding pesticide safety, potentially serving as a model for other states looking to regulate PFAS in similar contexts. The requirement for distributors to submit affidavits alongside test results adds an extra layer of accountability within the industry.

Summary

Senate Bill 158 addresses the registration process for pesticides used against mosquitoes in Maryland by instituting stringent requirements for testing for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Beginning January 1, 2024, and subsequently on January 1, 2026, the bill mandates that distributors provide proof of passing PFAS testing before a pesticide can be registered for use. This testing aims to ensure that any registered pesticide meets established safety thresholds concerning PFAS, a group of chemicals known for their potential adverse effects on human health and the environment.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment regarding SB 158 appears to be positive, particularly among environmental groups and public health advocates who view the bill as a necessary step toward reducing chemical exposure risks. Proponents argue that enhanced regulation of pesticide ingredients like PFAS is vital for safeguarding community health and preserving ecological integrity. However, there may be concerns from pesticide manufacturers regarding the potential costs and logistical challenges associated with compliance with the new testing requirements, suggesting a conflict of interests between public health goals and industry-related economic impacts.

Contention

While SB 158 has garnered bipartisan support, potential contention exists around the feasibility of the mandated testing processes and the burden it may impose on pesticide distributors. Some stakeholders in the agricultural and pesticide sectors may be apprehensive about the increased regulatory oversight and its implications for product availability and pricing. Additionally, discussions around the adequacy of current testing methods for accurately assessing PFAS levels in pesticides may lead to further legislative scrutiny in the future.

Companion Bills

MD HB319

Crossfiled Pesticides - PFAS Testing - Study

Previously Filed As

MD HB319

Pesticides - PFAS Testing - Study

MD HB570

Pesticides – Mosquito Control Products and PFAS Chemicals

MD HB386

Pesticides - PFAS Chemicals - Prohibitions

MD HB2646

Pesticides; fertilizer; PFAS; prohibition

MD SB345

Pesticides - PFAS Chemicals - Prohibitions

MD HB1190

Pesticides - PFAS Chemicals - Prohibitions

MD S0197

An act relating to restricting perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in consumer products

MD AB2113

Pesticides.

MD H0152

An act relating to regulating products containing certain chemicals and chemical classes

MD SB00292

An Act Concerning The Use Of Pfas In Certain Products.

Similar Bills

OR HB4062

Relating to licensing of persons using pesticides; and prescribing an effective date.

NJ S4154

Establishes farm pesticide collection and disposal program.

NJ A5357

Establishes farm pesticide, herbicide, and fertilizer collection and disposal program.

NJ S1576

Establishes farm pesticide collection and disposal program.

CA AB2491

School facilities: organic pesticides: pilot program.

NJ A1091

Restricts use of neonicotinoid pesticides.

HI SB12

Relating To Neonicotinoids.

CA AB2816

Pesticides: schoolsites: report.