AN ACT to create and enact a new chapter to title 4.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to regulation of biostimulants and beneficial substances; and to provide a penalty.
HB 1551 creates a new chapter in North Dakota law to regulate “beneficial substances,” including plant biostimulants, plant inoculants, soil amendments, and related products. The bill defines these products and distinguishes them from fertilizers, pesticides, and other excluded materials. It establishes labeling standards requiring product identity, net weight or volume, manufacturer and guarantor information, intended purpose, directions for use, and composition details, with additional requirements for products making microorganism claims or using ingredients not already recognized by the relevant agricultural control officials.
The bill also creates a licensing and registration system for distributors and product brands. Distributors must obtain a two-year license and pay a fee, and each brand must be registered with a product label and fee before sale or distribution in the state. The measure imposes an inspection fee on distributed products, requires annual reporting and recordkeeping, and directs the resulting fees into the environment and rangeland protection fund. It also authorizes the agriculture commissioner to inspect, sample, analyze, and test products, issue stop-sale orders, cancel or refuse registrations, and adopt rules to carry out the chapter.
HB 1551 adds a new regulatory framework to Title 4.1 of the North Dakota Century Code governing the sale and distribution of biostimulants and other beneficial substances. It affects manufacturers, registrants, distributors, and retailers of these agricultural input products by requiring licensing, product registration, labeling compliance, fee payments, and record retention. The bill also gives the agriculture commissioner enforcement authority, including sampling, stop-sale orders, civil penalties, and misdemeanor liability for knowing violations, while exempting certain common soil-amending materials and some bulk or small-package products.
The bill appears to have broad support overall, passing the House and Senate by large margins, with only a small number of dissenting votes in each chamber. The vote totals suggest general agreement that the state should establish clearer standards for a growing category of agricultural products and provide oversight to prevent misbranding or adulteration. The absence of committee transcript material limits insight into detailed debate, but the final votes indicate the measure was not highly controversial.
The main points of potential contention are the added regulatory and fee burden on businesses that distribute biostimulants and related products, and the scope of the commissioner’s enforcement authority. Producers and distributors may be concerned about registration costs, inspection fees, labeling mandates, and the possibility of stop-sale orders or penalties for noncompliance. At the same time, supporters likely view those requirements as necessary consumer and environmental protections, especially given the bill’s focus on scientific substantiation, accurate labeling, and preventing misleading claims about product performance.