1.1 	A bill for an act
1.2 	relating to agriculture; requiring the Department of Agriculture to perform 
1.3 	studies related to pesticides and report to the legislature.
1.4 	BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

1.5 	Section 1. WASTE PESTICIDE COLLECTION STUDY.
 1.6 		Subdivision 1.Study.  In accordance with statutory obligations under Minnesota 
1.7 	Statutes, section 18B.065, subdivisions 1 and 2a, and the findings of the legislative 
1.8 	auditor??a??a??s 2006 pesticide regulation evaluation report, the commissioner of agriculture 
1.9 	shall complete a study that identifies and evaluates several possible methods to address the 
1.10 	gap identified in the waste pesticide collection program. The commissioner shall consider 
1.11 	multiple options, including but not limited to the following:   
1.12 	(1)  Expand cooperative agreements and funding arrangements with participating 
1.13 	counties that agree to accept waste pesticides from persons living in adjacent or other 
1.14 	geographically proximate, nonparticipating counties.  The funding arrangement should be 
1.15 	modified so that participating counties will not need to charge a fee for waste pesticides 
1.16 	dropped off by persons from other counties.  In addition, the resulting network of 
1.17 	participating counties must be geographically distributed throughout the state so that no 
1.18 	person must travel an unreasonable distance to drop off waste pesticides.  
1.19 	(2)  Achieve full or greater county participation by revising the program funding 
1.20 	formula.  Possible formula changes include adding a component that compensates counties 
1.21 	for a portion of related administrative costs incurred, incorporating a weighting mechanism 
1.22 	to provide more funding to heavily agricultural counties, and assuaging concerns in these 
1.23 	agricultural counties by creating a program reserve that could be disbursed to counties as 
2.1 	needed to respond to a surge in waste pesticides above and beyond the amount anticipated 
2.2 	by the funding formula.   
2.3 	(3)  Allot funding from the pesticide regulatory account above and beyond the 
2.4 	$300,000 minimum specified in Minnesota Statutes, section 18B.26, subdivision 3, and 
2.5 	use the additional funds to satisfy completely the commissioner??a??a??s obligations under 
2.6 	Minnesota Statutes, section 18B.065.  
2.7 	 For each option, the commissioner shall identify potential pros and cons and generate 
2.8 	an estimate of additional costs or savings as well as a timeline for implementation.  The 
2.9 	commissioner shall conclude the report by identifying the best approach or combination 
2.10 	of approaches that would provide waste pesticide disposal options for the residents of 
2.11 	each county in Minnesota. 
2.12 		Subd. 2.Report. No later than February 1, 2007, the commissioner shall present the 
2.13 	report findings and recommendations to the house and senate committees with jurisdiction 
2.14 	over agriculture policy. 

2.15 	Sec. 2. URBAN PESTICIDE MONITORING.
 2.16 		Subdivision 1.Study. In accordance with the statutory obligation under Minnesota 
2.17 	Statutes, section 18B.064, to monitor both urban and rural pesticide use on a biennial basis 
2.18 	and the findings of the legislative auditor??a??a??s 2006 pesticide regulation evaluation report, the 
2.19 	commissioner of agriculture shall complete a study that identifies and evaluates several 
2.20 	methods for monitoring urban pesticide use.  The commissioner shall consider multiple 
2.21 	options, including but not limited to the following:
2.22 	(1)  Utilize the existing, annual pesticide registration process to capture the amount 
2.23 	and type of urban pesticides sold, offered for sale, or otherwise distributed in the state 
2.24 	during the previous year and modify the registrant reporting requirements as needed to 
2.25 	group sales data by geographic designations such as zip codes in urban areas or watershed 
2.26 	districts in rural areas.  
2.27 	(2)  Sample the application records of such nonagricultural pesticide users as 
2.28 	structural or turf and ornamental applicators and use statistical methods to estimate the 
2.29 	amount and types of nonagricultural pesticides used statewide.   
2.30 	 (3) Gain a more complete picture of pesticide use at schools by supplementing 
2.31 	existing survey data on pest management practices in state school districts with additional 
2.32 	survey data on the amount and types of pesticides currently used. 
2.33 	(4)  Develop a method to periodically capture and analyze point-of-sale data from all 
2.34 	persons who sell nonagricultural pesticides in the state. 
3.1 	For each option, the commissioner shall identify potential pros and cons and generate 
3.2 	an estimate of additional costs or savings as well as a timeline for implementation.  The 
3.3 	commissioner shall conclude the report by identifying the best approach or combination 
3.4 	of approaches to monitor urban pesticide use biennially. 
3.5 		Subd. 2.Report. No later than February 1, 2007, the commissioner shall present the 
3.6 	report findings and recommendations to the house and senate committees with jurisdiction 
3.7 	over agriculture policy.