PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from EPA.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 25, 1999
FQPA Implementation Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, upon determining that there may be grounds for modifying, suspending, or revoking a tolerance or exemption for a pesticide chemical residue in or on food, from taking any such action until considering any additional data submitted to support the continuation of a tolerance or exemption. Makes certain requirements for the Administrator's review of tolerances and exemptions for pesticide chemical residues in effect before the enactment of the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) that relate to periods of time applicable only to the extent determined by the Administrator to be in the public interest. (Current law requires specified percentages of such tolerances and exemptions to be reviewed by certain dates.) Authorizes the Administrator to issue a tolerance or exemption associated with an emergency exemption without regard to other tolerances or exemptions for the pesticide chemical residue and before reassessing such tolerances and exemptions if the Administrator determines that any incremental exposure that may result from the tolerance or exemption associated with the emergency exemption alone will not pose any significant dietary risk. Directs the Administrator to report to Congress on financial resources needed for FY 2001 through 2005 to carry out the amendments made by the FQPA to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. Requires the Secretary of Agriculture to report to Congress the financial resources needed for such fiscal years in order to carry out responsibilities under the FQPA. Directs the Secretary to: (1) establish a program to monitor continuously the competitive strength of major U.S. agricultural commodity sectors in the international marketplace; (2) examine factors pertinent to assessing, by sector, the sustainability and competitive strength in the international marketplace and the relationship of such factors to regulatory decisions issued under the amendments made by the FQPA; and (3) submit periodic reports on such requirements and factors to Congress.
People & committees
Rep. LaHood, Ray [R-IL-18] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from EPA.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA, EPA.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1334 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1334 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1334 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1334 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.