Definition for restricted pesticide handler added, and restricted pesticide license requirements for handlers modified.
Summary
HF2667 amends Minnesota’s pesticide law to create a new definition of “handler” and to clarify when certain people may mix and load restricted use pesticides under supervision. The bill defines a handler as an individual who meets federal requirements and performs preapplication activities involving the mixing and loading of restricted use pesticides while working under a licensed pesticide applicator’s supervision. It also updates the statutory definition of “application or use of a pesticide” to expressly include these preapplication activities and other related handling tasks such as transporting opened containers, cleaning equipment, and disposing of pesticide-related waste.
The bill further revises the restricted use pesticide licensing framework in Minnesota Statutes section 18B.30. Under the bill, a person generally may not use a restricted use pesticide without the required license or certification, but a handler may perform mixing and loading activities under supervision. The bill also retains and restates the prohibition on Internet sales of restricted-use pesticides to Minnesota residents who are not licensed or certified applicators, and requires sellers to verify purchaser credentials before completing such sales.
Impact
HF2667 would modify Minnesota’s pesticide regulatory statutes in chapter 18B by adding a new statutory term and expanding the list of activities treated as pesticide application or use. The practical effect is to formalize a supervised handler role for restricted use pesticides, which may affect pesticide employers, applicators, workers performing mixing/loading tasks, and businesses selling restricted-use products online. It also reinforces existing licensing and verification requirements for restricted-use pesticide use and sales.
Sentiment
The available record suggests the bill was presented as a technical and regulatory clarification rather than a controversial policy change. The bill was referred to the House Agriculture Finance and Policy Committee, and there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials indicating opposition or amendment debate. Overall, the sentiment appears neutral to supportive, with the bill framed as aligning state law with federal handler standards and clarifying who may perform certain pesticide-related tasks under supervision.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of concern, based on the bill text, could include worker safety, employer compliance burdens, and the scope of supervised mixing and loading activities for restricted use pesticides. However, the record provided does not show any named opponents, disputed provisions, or recorded vote split on those issues.