Concerning retail sales tax exemptions for certain aircraft maintenance and repair.

2023-2024 Regular Session Introduced by Jenny Graham and 6 co-sponsors

ND HB 1318: EPA/FIFRA-compliant pesticide labels meet state warning duties, providing a defense and preemption against stricter state labeling claims.

Effective date 7/23/2023.

Summary — HB 1318 (North Dakota) — Pesticide labeling; duty to warn; defenses

Status and timeline
- Introduced: November 14, 2024.
- Passed both chambers (House vote and Senate vote recorded).
- Signed by the Governor: June 20, 2025.
- Effective date: September 1, 2025. (Enacted as Act 113.)

Purpose
- HB 1318 creates a statutory rule in chapter 28‑01.3 of the North Dakota Century Code that a pesticide label meeting specified federal registration/assessment standards is treated as a legally sufficient warning under state law. The bill aims to align state warning/labeling requirements with federal pesticide registration and human‑health determinations.

Key provisions
- New statutory section (added to NDCC chapter 28‑01.3) provides that, notwithstanding other state law:
- Any pesticide that is registered with the North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner under NDCC chapter 4.1‑33 or registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and that either:
- displays a label approved by the EPA in registering the pesticide, or
- displays a label consistent with the most recent human health assessment done under FIFRA, or
- displays a label consistent with the EPA’s carcinogenicity classification for the pesticide,
- is deemed a sufficient warning label to satisfy any health or safety warning/labeling requirement under the referenced chapter and “any other provision or doctrine of state law concerning the duty to warn or label,” including common‑law duties to warn.
- The statutory language therefore functions as a defense or preemption mechanism: compliance with the specified federal labeling/assessment standards is treated as satisfying state duties to warn.

Who is affected
- Pesticide registrants, manufacturers, packagers, distributors, retailers, and sellers operating in North Dakota whose products are registered under ND law or with EPA.
- Agricultural users and commercial applicators (indirectly), because the change affects available legal remedies and labeling standards.
- Plaintiffs and attorneys in product‑liability, tort or consumer protection suits asserting inadequate warnings or labeling under state law — those claims may be substantially limited where the pesticide label meets the statutory criteria.

Legal and practical implications
- The bill creates an explicit statutory defense for parties whose pesticide labels conform to EPA registration approvals or EPA health/carcinogenicity assessments.
- It effectively preempts disparate state warning/labeling claims to the extent a pesticide label conforms to the listed federal standards, potentially reducing state‑law warning litigation tied to labeling.
- The provision applies only where the pesticide is registered under ND chapter 4.1‑33 or with EPA under FIFRA and where the label is consistent with the specified EPA actions/assessments.

Notes
- The statute ties sufficiency to federal determinations (EPA registration approval, human‑health assessment, carcinogenicity classification), not to independent state findings.
- Implementation will rely on how courts interpret “sufficient” and the scope of “any other provision or doctrine of state law concerning the duty to warn.”