Reduce Food Loss and Waste Act of 2025
SB 835, the Reduce Food Loss and Waste Act of 2025, would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to create a voluntary Food Loss and Waste Reduction Certification Program. The program is designed to certify eligible participants that document how they handle excess food, with the goal of reducing food loss and waste, increasing donations of wholesome surplus food to nonprofits serving people in need, and encouraging alternative disposal methods such as animal feed, anaerobic digestion, and composting.
The bill defines a broad set of eligible participants, including federal contractors, state and local governments, businesses, farms, food producers, retailers, restaurants, schools, and institutions of higher education. Certified participants could be promoted by USDA through voluntary labels, website listings, events, and other communications. The bill also requires USDA to establish criteria for certification, recognize accreditation bodies, and allow third-party certifiers to review participants, with preference given to higher education institutions with expertise in food loss and waste reduction.
The bill would amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 by adding a new Section 210B establishing the certification program and related USDA authority. It would also require USDA, FDA, and EPA to revise their 2020 memorandum of understanding on food loss and waste coordination. The measure authorizes $3 million annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to carry out the program, including staffing, and would create new federal administrative responsibilities for certification, accreditation, public reporting, and promotion of participating entities.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be framed positively and as a collaborative, voluntary food-waste reduction initiative. Its sponsors are Senators Durbin and Grassley, suggesting bipartisan support at introduction. The bill’s emphasis on donation, sustainability, and coordination among USDA, FDA, and EPA indicates a policy approach likely to attract support from food recovery, anti-hunger, and environmental stakeholders.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented opposition in the available materials. Potential points of contention, if raised later, could include the administrative burden of certification and accreditation, the cost of implementing the program, the reliability and value of voluntary labeling, and whether USDA should be involved in promoting private or institutional practices. Some stakeholders may also question the need for federal oversight where existing food donation and waste-reduction efforts already operate.