2019 NASDA Winter Policy Meeting Policy Materials

• Committee Agendas – pg. 2 • Policy Amendments & Action Items – pg. 16

Please bring this packet with you to all committee meetings. Additional printouts will not be distributed. All documents are available on our app. 1

2019 Winter Policy Meeting Committee Agendas

2 3 Food Regulation Committee Chair: Commissioner, Richard Ball, New York Vice-Chair: Secretary, Karen Ross, California Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 26, 2019 | 10:30- 11:15 AM | 2019 Winter Policy Conference | Arlington, VA

Roll Call and Opening Remarks • Commissioner Ball and NASDA Staff

FDA Update and Member Discussion (10:35) • FDA Leadership

Update and Member Discussion: Cooperative Agreements and Activities (10:55) • NASDA Staff

Member Dialogue: Other Food Safety Issues of Interest to the Membership (11:05) • Commissioner Ball and NASDA Members

Consideration of Policy Amendments, Action Items (11:10) • Consideration of Action Item I: Continuation of Federal Appropriations to States for FSMA Produce Rule Implementation, Secretary Brad Pfaff, Wisconsin

Adjourn (11:15)

4 5

Plant Agriculture & Pesticide Regulation Committee Chair: Director Bruce Kettler, Indiana Vice-Chair: Commissioner Gary Black, Georgia Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 26, 2019 | 11:15 – 12:00 PM | NASDA Winter Policy Conference | Arlington, VA

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (11:15) • Director Kettler and Commissioner Black

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Hemp (11:18) • US Hemp Roundtable o Jonathan Miller • Director Bruce Kettler and Commissioner Black o USDA State Plan Guidance o Sampling and Testing o Sharing Data in Real Time o Economic Impact • Consideration of Policy Amendment 2: Industrial Hemp, Commissioner Ryan Quarles, Kentucky • Consideration of Action Item G: USDA Promulgation of Federal Regulations and Guidelines for Hemp Production, Secretary Brad Pfaff, Wisconsin • Consideration of Action Item L: Industrial Hemp, Commissioner Quarles

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Regulatory Framework for Biostimulants (11:35) • Director Kettler and Commissioner Black

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Pesticide Regulatory Issues (11:45) • Director Kettler and Commissioner Black

Consideration of Other Policy Amendments and Action Items (11:50) • Consideration of Action Item B: Support Predictive Modeling Tool Research, Commissioner Doug Goehring, North Dakota

Member Dialogue (11:55) • Open Discussion

Adjourn (12:00)

Rural Development and Financial Security Chair: Secretary Russell Redding, Pennsylvania Vice-Chair: Director Ben Thomas, Montana Tuesday, February 26, 2019 | 1:30-2:15 PM | NASDA Winter Policy Conference | Arlington, VA

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (1:30) • Secretary Redding

Policy Update and Member Discussion: 2018 Farm Bill Review (1:35) • Secretary Redding and NASDA Staff o Research o Rural Mental Health o Rural Development Title o NIFA/ERS Latest o Other

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Workforce (1:45) • Secretary Redding and NASDA Staff

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Broadband (1:55) • Secretary Redding and NASDA Staff

Consideration of Policy Amendments, Action Items (2:05) • Action Item A: Supporting America’s Waterways, Commissioner Mike Naig, Iowa • Action Item E: Encouraging Tax Code Changes to Support Farmland Transfer, Secretary Russell Redding, Pennsylvania • Action Item K: Mitigating Impacts of a Lapse in Federal Appropriations, Director Gary McDowell, Michigan

Adjourn

Marketing and International Trade Chair: Director Derek Sandison, Washington Vice-Chair: Secretary Mike Naig, Iowa Meeting Agenda Tuesday, February 26, 2019| 4:45 - 5:30 PM | 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference | Arlington, VA

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (4:45) • Director Sandison

Policy Update (4:48) • Director Sandison and NASDA Staff

Tri-National Accord Update (4:55) • Secretary Jeff Witte, New Mexico, and Nathan Bowen, NASDA

Member Discussion and Consideration of Trade Policy Statement Update (5:00) • Member Discussion Led by Director Sandison • Consideration of Policy Amendment 1: Trade Policy Statement, Director Sandison, Secretary Naig, and Director Alex Taylor, Oregon

Member Discussion on USMCA and Consideration of Action Item J (5:10) • Member Discussion Led by Director Sandison • Consideration of Action Item J: Support Free Trade in North America, Director Sandison and Secretary Naig

Consideration of Other Policy Amendments and Action Items (5:20) • Consideration of Action Item D: Support the USDA Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production, Commissioner John Lebeaux, Massachusetts • Consideration of other Policy Amendments and Action Items

Adjourn (5:30)

NASDA grows and enhances agriculture by forging partnerships and creating consensus to achieve sound policy outcomes between state departments of agriculture, the federal government, and stakeholders. 10 11 Natural Resources and Environment Chair: Director Doug Miyamoto, Wyoming Vice-Chair: Secretary Michael Scuse, Delaware Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 27, 2019| 8:00 - 8:45 PM | 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference | Arlington, VA

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (8:00) • Director Miyamoto • NRE Committee Overview • Policy Updates for the 2018 Annual Meeting—Britt Aasmundstad, NASDA

2018 Waters of the U.S. Rule (8:05) • EPA Office of Water

2018 Farm Bill Review (8:30) • Director Miyamoto & NASDA Staff o Title II: Conservation

Consideration of Other Policy Amendments and Action Items (8:40) • Consideration of Action Item C, PFAS Research and Federal Standards, Director Gary McDowell, Michigan

Adjourn (8:45)

NASDA grows and enhances agriculture by forging partnerships and creating consensus to achieve sound policy outcomes between state departments of agriculture, the federal government, and stakeholders. 12 13 Animal Agriculture Committee Chair: Director Chris Chinn, Missouri Vice-Chair: Secretary Anson Tebbets, Vermont Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 27, 2019| 8:45 - 9:30 AM | 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference | Arlington, VA

Roll Call and Opening Remarks (8:45) • Director Chinn

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Animal Biotechnology (8:50) • Director Chinn

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Farm Bill Implementation (8:55) • Director Chinn • APHIS Speaker

Policy Update and Member Discussion: Biosecurity (9:15) • Director Chinn • APHIS Speaker

Member Discussion and Consideration of Action Item F (9:20) • Member Discussion Led by Secretary Brad Pfaff, Wisconsin • Consideration of Action Item F: Increased USDA Planning Concerning African Swine Fever (ASF)

Member Discussion and Consideration of Action Item H (9:25) • Member Discussion Led by Secretary Pfaff • Consideration of Action Item H: Increased USDA Research and Collaboration Concerning Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD)

Adjourn (9:30)

2019 Winter Policy Meeting Policy Amendments & Action Items For consideration and action during Committee Meetings

16 17 Policy Amendments and Action Items for Member Consideration 2019 Winter Policy Conference

Policy Amendments

# Submitted By Section to be Amended Description Staff Lead Committee Referral Director Derek Sandison, Washington; Secretary 6.0 International Nathan Mike Naig, Iowa; Amendment updates and modernizes NASDA’s Marketing & 1 Marketing and Trade of Bowen/Alex Director Alexis Taylor, international trade policy. International Trade Agricultural Products Noffsinger Oregon; Secretary Anson Tebbetts, Vermont Amendment updates NASDA’s policy around the Commissioner Ryan 11.8 New Uses of production, processing, and commercialization of Plant Agriculture & 2 Aline DeLucia Quarles, Kentucky Agricultural Products industrial hemp, including the importance of model Pesticide Regulation legislation and uniform standards.

Action Items # Submitted By Title Description Staff Lead Committee Referral NASDA supports funding for inland waterways Supporting America’s Rural Development & A Secretary Naig, Iowa infrastructure and authorizing of funds to allow for the Britt Aasmundstad Waterways Financial Security operations and maintenance of waterways. NASDA supports research into the development of the Commissioner Goehring, Support Predictive Plant Agriculture & B Predictive Modeling Tool for disease and mycotoxins Aline DeLucia North Dakota Modeling Tool Research Pesticide Regulation affecting U.S. row crops. NASDA encourages Congress and the administration to conduct research, appropriate necessary funds, and Britt Director McDowell, PFAS Research and Federal Natural Resources & C otherwise coordinate a response that ensures PFAS Aasmundstad/Janell Michigan Standards Environment exposure does not compromise drinking water or food Hendren products. Support the USDA Office of NASDA supports the Office of Urban Agriculture and Commissioner Lebeaux, Marketing & D Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production at the U.S. Department of Alex Noffsinger Massachusetts International Trade Innovative Production Agriculture as authorized by the 2018 Farm Bill. Encouraging Tax Code Secretary Russell NASDA supports changes to federal tax policy that can Rural Development & E Changes to Support Britt Aasmundstad Redding, Pennsylvania help facilitate the transfer of farmland to farmers. Financial Security Farmland Transfer 18 Policy Amendments and Action Items for Member Consideration 2019 Winter Policy Conference

# Submitted By Title Description Staff Lead Committee Referral NASDA requests the USDA to prioritize planning Increased USDA Planning Secretary Brad Pfaff, concerning African swine fever, to prevent its introduction F Concerning African Swine Aline DeLucia Animal Agriculture Wisconsin in the United States and plan strategic rapid response Fever (ASF) methods to contain the disease. USDA Promulgation of NASDA urges USDA to consult with state agricultural Secretary Brad Pfaff, Federal Regulations and Plant Agriculture & G departments and industry partners in the promulgation of Aline DeLucia Wisconsin Guidelines for Hemp Pesticide Regulation regulations and guidelines relating to hemp production. Production NASDA requests the USDA to prioritize research and Increased USDA Research collaboration efforts with state and industry partners to Secretary Brad Pfaff, and Collaboration H analyze and develop strategies to prevent the Aline DeLucia Animal Agriculture Wisconsin Concerning Chronic introduction, transmission, and spread of Chronic Wasting Wasting Disease (CWD) Disease in captive cervids. Continuation of Federal NASDA encourages the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Secretary Brad Pfaff, Appropriations to States (FDA) to continue authorization of funding for states to I Janell Hendren Food Regulation Wisconsin for FSMA Produce Safety develop and implement State and Territory Produce Safety Program Programs. Director Derek Sandison, NASDA urges Congress and the administration to work Support Free Trade in Nathan Bowen/Alex Marketing & J Washington & Secretary together on successful ratification and implementation of North America Noffsinger International Trade Mike Naig, Iowa the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). NASDA urges USDA, FDA, and EPA to work closely with Mitigating Impacts of a Director Gary McDowell, NASDA and state departments of agriculture to identify Rural Development & K Lapse in Federal Janell Hendren Michigan gaps in federal services resulting from lapses in federal Financial Security Appropriations (Shutdown) funding and develop strategies for minimizing impacts. NASDA urges the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) be a Commissioner Ryan Plant Agriculture & L Industrial Hemp constructive partner and urges the Drug Enforcement Aline DeLucia Quarles, Kentucky Pesticide Regulation Agency (DEA) to clarify procedures on hemp seed imports.

19 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Policy Amendments (PA) either create a new section or amend an existing section of NASDA’s Policy Statements. PAs establish general policy principles of the association and guide NASDA’s policy prioritization process and engagement.

Section Number and Title to be Amended: 6.0 International Marketing and Trade of Agricultural Products

Subject of Policy Amendment: International Trade & Marketing Policy Revision

Submitted By: Director Derek Sandison, Washington; Secretary Mike Naig, Iowa; Director Alexis Taylor, Oregon; Secretary Anson Tebbetts, Vermont

Text of Policy Amendment: [This Amendment Replaces Current Section 6.0 – International Marketing and Trade of Agricultural Products]

1 6 International Marketing and Trade of Food, Beverage and Agricultural Products 2 3 (Updated February 2019) 4 5 6.1 Introduction 6 7 Although state governments are active in expanding foreign market access, the Federal government plays a critical 8 role in ensuring American food, beverage and agricultural producers access to international markets and the ability 9 to conduct commerce on mutually agreed upon terms. Maintaining, expanding, and obtaining market access for U.S. 10 agricultural products should be one of the highest priorities for the Administration and Congress. 11 12 6.2 Federal Trade Authority 13 14 Trade Promotion Authority 15 16 Under trade promotion authority, Congress grants the President the ability to negotiate trade agreements and 17 subsequently submit these agreements to Congress for an up or down approval (Congress has limited time to 18 approve or reject without any amendments). 19 • NASDA supports trade negotiating authority for the administration to allow flexibility for U.S. negotiators to 20 deliver comprehensive trade agreements that benefit U.S. agriculture. 21 22 Role of Federal Agencies 23 24 • NASDA supports the position of the Office of Chief Agricultural Negotiator within the Office of the U.S. 25 Trade Representative (USTR). 26 • NASDA supports the Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs (TFAA) Mission Area at the U.S. Department of 27 Agriculture (USDA) as the lead for international trade within USDA.

20 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 • NASDA encourages the USTR Chief Agricultural Negotiator to work closely and collaboratively with USDA’s 2 Under Secretary for TFAA and the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) given their long history of joint trade 3 policy and promotion for the sale and consumption of U.S. agricultural products in international markets. 4 5 6.3 Agriculture in Trade Agreements 6 The multilateral WTO process has some of the greatest potential for promoting and enforcing raised and 7 harmonized standards that level the playing field for U.S agricultural producers. The WTO process can be used to 8 ensure fair labor practices, protect the environment and empower family farmers and ranchers. However, NASDA 9 also supports bilateral, plurilateral, and regional trade agreements as critical components of a comprehensive and 10 strategic United States trade strategy. 11 12 • NASDA supports efforts to liberalize world trade in agriculture that we believe must continue through the 13 multilateral process and through bilateral, plurilateral, and regional trade agreements. 14 • In negotiating free trade agreements, NASDA believes the U.S. government should specifically seek the 15 inclusion of the following provisions: 16 17 National Treatment and Market Access for Goods 18 19 • Agriculture should be included in all trade agreement the U.S. negotiates, and the U.S. government should 20 seek to eliminate tariffs on U.S. food, beverage, and agricultural products entering foreign markets. 21 22 Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures 23 24 • NASDA urges the U.S. government to make the elimination of unjustified non-tariff barriers characterized as 25 SPS measures a priority and to take all appropriate actions, consistent with our international rights and 26 obligations, to address this problem. 27 • NASDA urges U.S. regulatory bodies to work on a multilateral or bilateral basis with trading partners 28 interested in increased harmonization of SPS measures to reach agreements that permit trade, as 29 appropriate, on the basis of mutual recognition, equivalence, or reciprocal agreement based on the 30 adoption of international standards. 31 • In the absence of existing international standards, NASDA urges the U.S. government to ensure all free 32 trade agreements rely on science-based standards in developing SPS measures. 33 34 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Measures 35 36 • NASDA urges the U.S. government to pursue a stronger, clearer TBT Agreement in multilateral negotiations. 37 • NASDA believes the federal government should include protocols that address the time sensitivity needed 38 to move perishable and seasonal commodities. 39 40 Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Measures

21 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 2 • NASDA supports language in trade agreements protecting U.S. food, beverage, and agricultural products 3 from the use of geographical indicators (GIs), which foreign competitors use to restrict the trade of U.S. 4 products. 5 • NASDA encourages the U.S. government to ensure U.S. food, beverage, and agricultural products using 6 generic terms are not harmed when foreign competitors seek the inclusion of GIs in trade agreements with 7 third party countries the U.S. trades with. 8 • NASDA supports IPR provisions that protect U.S. agricultural products from forced transfers and theft. 9 10 Treatment of Agricultural Biotechnology Products 11 12 • NASDA supports global market access for genetically engineered (GE) products and urges trading partners 13 to recognize science-based standards regarding these products. 14 • NASDA urges the federal government to include provisions recognizing gene-edited products in all future 15 trade agreements. 16 • NASDA supports a transparent and timely regulatory process to be used by the U.S. and other countries and 17 encourages the U.S. government to work with trading partners to improve information sharing and the 18 adoption of a transparent and predictable regulatory approach for GE and gene-edited agricultural 19 products. 20 21 Treatment of Non-Market Economies 22 23 • Future trade agreements should seek to eliminate agricultural export subsidies. 24 • NASDA urges negotiators to include provisions increasing the transparency around domestic agricultural 25 supports, so it is easier to challenge domestic supports when they may unfairly impact trade and violate 26 international commitments. 27 • NASDA urges the U.S. government to address trade distorting efforts of state owned enterprises (SOEs), 28 such as monopoly rights, exclusive import rights, and the reduction of subsidies for SOEs. 29 30 6.3 Trade Facilitation & Enforcement 31 32 The WTO’s dispute settlement body (DSB) is a vital tool for upholding a rules-based trading system when it functions 33 according to agreed upon WTO rules. 34 35 • NASDA supports the WTO dispute settlement body and urges actions by the U.S. and other WTO members 36 to increase its effectiveness and to rebuild its integrity as the preeminent way of resolving international 37 trade disputes. 38 • NASDA urges the federal government to utilize domestic trade enforcement mechanisms to ensure that U.S 39 trading partners live up to their international obligations [but to do so in such a way that does not 40 negatively impact U.S. agriculture].

22 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 2 6.4 Federal Domestic Policies Affecting Trade 3 4 Congress should be encouraged to continue to support programs that promote agricultural products grown in the 5 U.S. These trade promotion programs enable U.S. agriculture to compete in foreign markets by providing the 6 resources needed for establishing new, emerging markets while also expanding existing trade relationships. 7 8 Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs – Foreign Agricultural Service 9 10 TFFA and FAS provide valuable leadership at the federal level and assistance to state departments of agriculture and 11 agricultural producers of both bulk commodities and value-added food products in establishing and maintaining 12 markets around the world. FAS also helps to promote the sale and consumption of U.S. grown agricultural products 13 through a variety of programs. 14 15 • NASDA supports maximizing funding for both the Foreign Market Development (FMD) program, which 16 provides cost-share assistance to help boost U.S. agricultural exports, and the Market Access Program 17 (MAP), which helps U.S. agricultural producers, exporters, private companies and other organizations 18 finance international promotional activities. 19 • NASDA also supports maximizing funding for the Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) program, 20 which provides funds to organizations to address SPS and technical barriers to trade. 21 • Similarly, NASDA supports the Emerging Markets Program (EMP), created to promote U.S. agricultural 22 exports to countries that have or are developing market-oriented economies. NASDA encourages USDA to 23 streamline and simplify administering EMP projects to fully maximize the impact of the program for U.S. 24 producers. 25 26 6.5 International Food Security 27 28 International food aid programs at both USDA and USAID are critical to U.S. leadership around the world. These 29 programs help developing countries improve their agricultural systems and build their trade capacity, which places 30 them in a better position to receive U.S. agricultural exports in the future. Also, these programs help reduce hunger, 31 improve education/literacy, and ameliorate international humanitarian crises around the world. 32 33 • NASDA supports continued U.S. efforts to provide humanitarian assistance in all forms, including cash, 34 direct food, and in-kind. 35 36 37 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Policy Amendment 38 or appear in the NASDA Policy Handbook): 39 [The following text will be deleted and replaced by the proposed amendment] 40

23 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 6 International Marketing and Trade of Agricultural Products 2 3 6.1 Introduction 4 Federal and state governments play a critical role in ensuring American agricultural producers access to 5 international markets that are operated in an equitable manner to our own. Obtaining market access for our 6 agricultural products should be one of the highest priorities for the Administration and Congress. 7 8 6.2 Expansion of Trade 9 10 (Updated September 2015) 11 The multilateral WTO process has the greatest potential in raised and harmonized standards that level the 12 playing field in regard to treating labor fairly, not degrading the environment and empowering family farmers 13 and ranchers rather than exploiting them. 14 15 • NASDA supports efforts to liberalize world trade in agriculture that we believe should continue through 16 the multilateral process and through regional free trade agreements. 17 18 • Until such time as other countries phase out their export subsidies entirely, NASDA encourages the 19 federal government to work to end export subsidies across all countries. 20 21 • NASDA encourages the federal government to utilize export subsidies to the fullest level allowed under 22 our current WTO commitments. 23 24 • NASDA opposes excluding a specific agricultural commodity or product from any trade agreement unless 25 this exclusion is specifically at the request and benefit of the agricultural commodity producers or 26 product manufacturers to be impacted. 27 28 Trade with Cuba 29 30 Current U.S. economic sanctions against Cuba allow for U.S. food and agricultural sales to Cuba but contain very 31 challenging and specific licensing and financial provisions to which U.S. exporters must adhere. U.S. trade policy 32 to Cuba is inconsistent with trade policy to other countries. 33 34 • NASDA urges the Administration and the U.S. Congress to reexamine U.S. policy towards Cuba and lift 35 the current embargo against Cuba. The U.S. should: 36 37 • eliminate the “Cash Only” sales provision of the current law as well as extend trade to other areas 38 besides food and medicine; 39

24 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 • streamline laws and regulations related to visa and license requirements to better promote trade 2 activities and 3 4 • allow long term contracts, which will provide more efficiencies for both parties; 5 6 • allow exchange of biotech research would have a benefit to both countries; 7 8 • allow importation of Cuban products into the U.S. only on the condition that there are appropriate safe 9 guards for our domestic markets, particularly for import-sensitive commodities; 10 11 • hold Cuba to the same sanitary/phytosanitary standards as the rest of the world trading community; and 12 13 • ease travel and tourism restrictions for both countries, or at the very least, allow plant and animal 14 health officials, as well as food safety officials of both countries to travel to and from Cuba. 15 16 • NASDA urges the Administration and the various U.S. government agencies to interpret the Trade 17 Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act as broadly as possible, especially the financial terms so 18 companies can compete with other countries in the global marketplace. 19 20 Trade with China 21 22 China is a growing market for U.S. agriculture and the third largest market for U.S. exports in recent years. 23 Expansion of the Chinese market for U.S. products could be larger if more Chinese buyers could visit U.S. 24 suppliers but too often U.S. visas are delayed or denied to prospective China buyers, resulting in lost sales and 25 decreased U.S. competitiveness in the China market. 26 27 • NASDA urges the Secretary of State to issue visas for temporary entry into the United States of Chinese 28 nationals who demonstrate a full itinerary of purchasing activities. 29 30 • NASDA urges the Administration to continue to seek changes in the way China values their currency to 31 ensure domestic producers are not competitively disadvantaged due to currency manipulations. 32 33 Unilateral Sanctions 34 35 Unilateral sanctions that limit commercial, government-assisted, or humanitarian movement of agricultural 36 products have proven to be ineffective mechanisms to further foreign policy and are disruptive to international 37 food trade. 38 39 • NASDA opposes any unilateral sanctions pertaining to agricultural exports. 40

25 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 Trade Promotion Authority 2 3 Under trade promotion authority, the President is able to negotiate trade agreements and submit them to 4 Congress for a simple up or down vote. The Congress then has a limited time period in which to approve or 5 reject the agreement without any amendments. Current fast track trade promotion authority expired in 2007. 6 7 • NASDA supports reauthorizing trade negotiating authority for the Administration to allow flexibility for 8 U.S. negotiators but include consideration for import-sensitive commodities. 9 10 • NASDA supports the continuation of the position of the Office of Chief Agricultural Negotiator, an 11 Ambassador level position, within the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. 12 13 • NASDA urges the Agricultural Negotiator to ensure NASDA is included in stakeholder consultations 14 during trade negotiations. 15 16 • NASDA further encourages the Agricultural Negotiator to work closely with USDA’s Foreign Agricultural 17 Service given their long history of promoting the sale and consumption of domestic agricultural products 18 abroad. 19 20 • NASDA strongly recommends that the United States Congress once again grant Trade Promotion 21 Authority (TPA) for the President. 22 23 Harmonization of International Standards[1] 24 25 Sanitary or phytosanitary measures provide for the protection of animal and plant health and are contained in 26 the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). Non-sanitary or phytosanitary 27 measures (e.g., certain labeling requirements) also affect international trade in food and agricultural products 28 and are contained in the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). 29 30 Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures 31 32 The SPS Agreement requires countries to base health and safety measures affecting products in international 33 trade on sound science and appropriate risk assessment. Despite the agreement, a number of WTO member 34 countries continue to impose sanitary and phytosanitary measures which lack a sound scientific basis, which 35 create significant barriers to market access abroad for U.S. agricultural products. 36 37 • NASDA urges negotiators to actively seek trade remedies when the SPS Agreement is not being adhered 38 to in accordance with trade agreements. 39

26 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 • NASDA urges the U.S. government to make the elimination of unjustified non-tariff barriers 2 characterized as SPS measures a priority and to take all appropriate actions, consistent with our 3 international rights and obligations, to redress this problem. 4 • NASDA urges the U.S. not to agree to reopen the SPS Agreement in either the current or any future WTO 5 negotiations. 6 7 • NASDA urges U.S. regulatory bodies to work on a multilateral or bilateral basis with other trading 8 partners interested in increased harmonization of SPS measures to reach agreements that would permit 9 trade, as appropriate, on the basis of mutual recognition, equivalence or reciprocal agreement on the 10 adoption of international standards. 11 12 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) 13 14 NASDA is concerned that the TBT Agreement does not currently provide for greater international harmonization 15 of standards, and does not contain the types of enforceable disciplines that would permit U.S. exporters to 16 effectively challenges protectionist trade measures. 17 18 • NASDA urges the U.S. government to pursue a stronger and clearer TBT Agreement in multilateral 19 negotiations. 20 21 Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) 22 23 The movement of GMOs and other biotechnology products to the international market is constrained by the 24 unwillingness of some foreign governments to accept these products. In addition, labeling of genetically 25 modified products has been proposed by many foreign governments as a condition for accepting these 26 products, potentially presenting an additional barrier to trade. 27 28 • NASDA urges the federal government should work to ensure that the same sanitary and phytosanitary 29 measures and standards are applied to genetically modified organisms in the international market place. 30 Labeling of such products should conform to international standards and should not be construed in a 31 way that acts as a barrier to trade. 32 33 • NASDA supports global market access for genetically modified organisms in all WTO countries. 34 35 Highway Trade Corridors 36 37 The North American Free Trade Agreement contains provisions for national treatment of cross-border trucking. 38 Differences in trucking standards between the three NAFTA countries have created inefficiencies and increased 39 transportation costs borne by producers and shippers. 40

27 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 • NASDA supports the implementation of the trucking provisions contained in NAFTA and the elimination 2 of transportation system barriers, which will help to lower transportation costs for continental trade in 3 agricultural products and enhance the competitiveness of North American exports to world market. 4 • NASDA believes consideration should be given to harmonizing trucking standards among the three 5 countries, including streamlining the obtainment of interstate and international trucking permits and 6 establishing one-stop, joint vehicle inspection facilities. 7 8 Cargo Preference Laws/Jones Act 9 10 The Cargo Preference Laws require up to 75 percent of U.S. food aid shipments to be shipped on U.S. flag 11 vessels, increase the cost of shipping food aid and reduce the quantity of food aid that can be made available to 12 needy countries. The Jones Act requires all goods carried from one point in the United States to another to be 13 carried on vessels built and repaired in the United States, owned by U.S. citizens, manned by U.S. citizen crews, 14 and registered in the United States, creating a competitive disadvantage for American agriculture, as compared 15 to our foreign counterparts. 16 17 • NASDA supports repeal of the Cargo Preference Laws and the Jones Act. 18 19 State Trading Enterprises (STEs) 20 21 State trading enterprises can have the effect of distorting trade in the world market place. These enterprises can 22 disrupt the market place if they become subsidized entities which enjoy monopoly buying authority. 23 24 • NASDA believes the federal government should ensure that future trade agreements address trade 25 distorting effects of state trading enterprises to end monopoly rights and exclusive import rights. 26 27 • NASDA further believes the U.S. should require that activities of state trading enterprises be transparent 28 and that the practice of subsidizing these enterprises be eliminated so as to remove price discrimination 29 in the market place. 30 31 Perishable and Seasonal Commodities 32 33 When shipments of perishable and seasonal commodities, or live animals, get held up in a port of destination, 34 due to SPS issues or other trade related disputes, a rapid resolution of the issue is critical to prevent 35 deterioration of the perishable cargo. Very few trade agreements include protocols for resolving these kinds of 36 situations in the timely fashion that is needed to allow the quick release of perishable and seasonal 37 commodities. 38

28 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 • NASDA urges the Administration, when negotiating trade agreements, to include protocols that address 2 the time sensitivity needed to move perishable and seasonal commodities, particularly related to 3 dispute resolution. 4 5 Canadian Ministerial Exemption System 6 The Canadian system of ministerial exemptions, or “easements” that control the importation of U.S. produce, in 7 particular potatoes, inhibits trade for U.S. producers and serves to protect Canadian producers from competition 8 and supply from the United States. 9 10 NASDA urges the U.S. Trade Representative and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to include the ministerial 11 exemption system on the agenda for bilateral trade negotiations, and seek its removal to facilitate agricultural 12 trade between the United States and Canada. 13 14 15 [1] This section addresses the SPS agreement as it relates to trade. For NASDA policy on sanitary and 16 phytosanitary measures please see Section 1 Animal Health and/or Section 2 Plant Health. 17 18 6.3 Federal Domestic Policies Affecting Trade 19 20 Legislation that blocks the use of federal resources for the agricultural marketing and promotion of a United 21 States grown agricultural product hurts our farmers. Congress should be encouraged to repeal legislation that 22 blocks promotion of any legal agricultural products grown in the United States. 23 24 • NASDA supports the promotion of international markets for American grown agricultural products and 25 opposes legislative efforts that specifically exclude the ability to promote and market those products 26 abroad. 27 28 Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS) 29 30 FAS provides valuable assistance to state departments of agriculture and agricultural producers of both bulk 31 commodities and high valued food products in establishing and maintaining markets around the world and in 32 promoting the sale and consumption of U.S. grown agricultural products through a variety of programs, 33 including foreign market development, market promotion, outreach, direct credits and loan guarantees. 34 35 • NASDA supports FAS programs aimed at meeting the objective of expanding trade for agricultural 36 products. 37 38 • NASDA supports fully funding, at the authorized levels, both the Foreign Market Development (FMD or 39 “Cooperator”) Program, which provides cost-share assistance to help boost U.S. agriculture exports and

29 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 the Market Access Program (MAP), which helps U.S. agricultural producers, exporters, private 2 companies and other organizations finance promotional activities overseas. 3 4 Market Access Program (MAP) 5 The Market Access Program authorizes funding to support partial reimbursement to private companies for 6 qualified overseas brand promotion of U.S. agricultural products. The policy rationale is that the promotion of 7 brands containing U.S. agricultural products helps to boost exports of U.S. products. 8 9 • NASDA supports the objectives of the MAP and believes the federal government and the Congress 10 should support this critical resource for agricultural producers and promote an equitable international 11 market place for agricultural products. 12 13 Export Financing & Credit Guarantees 14 15 Programs have been designed to increase or maintain U.S. agricultural exports by having a federal agency act as 16 the guarantor of financing for sales of U.S. agricultural commodities in foreign markets. NASDA believes that 17 export financing and credit guarantee like GSM 102 and 103 programs are important resources for agricultural 18 producers entering the foreign market place. 19 20 • NASDA supports the expansion of these programs to cover transportation costs from the U.S. border to 21 export destinations. 22 23 Export Enhancement Program 24 25 The Export Enhancement Program (EEP) and similar policies became necessary because U.S. exporters faced 26 unfair and highly subsidized competition from the European Union. Current U.S trade policy favors the 27 elimination of export subsidies and the United States has put forth an ambitious proposal in the current round 28 of multilateral trade negotiations to eliminate export subsidies completely with reductions phased in over a five- 29 year period in equal annual increments. 30 31 • NASDA supports export subsidy elimination in multilateral agreements if the implementing legislation 32 for that agreement allows up to 50 percent of unused EEP funds to be used for related market 33 development and promotion activities. 34 35 • NASDA’s support for the elimination of the EEP and similar programs is contingent upon a world-wide 36 commitment to end export subsidy practices. 37 38 NASDA supports the promotion of international markets for American grown agricultural products and opposes 39 legislative efforts that specifically exclude the ability to promote and market those products abroad. 40

30 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 1 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

1 6.4 International Food Aid 2 3 International food aid program budgets have been reduced over the years due to fiscal constraints. 4 5 • NASDA supports continued US efforts to provide humanitarian assistance in the form of food. 6 7 6.5 The Global Economy 8 9 Global economic conditions impact the value and volume of trade. It is in the United States’ interest to promote 10 and ensure a financially stable global marketplace so that trade between nations is not disrupted. 11 12 • NASDA supports efforts to promote and improve economic and financial stability in the global 13 marketplace. 14 15 6.6 Country of Origin Labeling 16 (Updated September 2013) 17 18 Existing Federal law requires most imports, including many food items to bear labels informing the ultimate 19 purchaser of their country of origin. There is value in policy that allows for differentiation of product in this 20 manner, offering American consumers important Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) information as they make 21 purchases within the U.S. retail food supply. 22 23 There is equal value in assuring that COOL policy be implemented in a manner that ensures the United States is 24 able to maintain its obligations under negotiated regional and international trade agreements and does not 25 prompt retaliatory trade actions against U.S. agricultural products. 26 27 6.7 Dispute Resolution 28 29 Under current U.S. law, the federal government has certain legal means and remedies in place to address 30 concerns with agricultural trade. A special rapid dispute resolution mechanism should be established for use 31 specific to perishable commodities. 32 33 • NASDA supports federal laws and rules designed to resolve agriculture trade issues and encourage their 34 use by the USTR to ensure our domestic producers are not competitively disadvantaged by unfair trade 35 practices. 36 37 6.8 Monetary Valuation and Exchange Rates 38 39 NASDA supports the establishment of international monitoring tools to address possible trade-distorting 40 manipulation of monetary valuation and exchange rates.

31 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference 2 Policy Amendment Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Plant Agriculture & Pesticide Regulation [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Section Number and Title to be Amended: 11.8 New Uses of Agricultural Products

Subject of Policy Amendment: Industrial Hemp

Submitted By: Commissioner Ryan Quarles, Kentucky

Text of Policy Amendment:

1 11.8 New Uses of Agricultural Products 2 3 Industrial Hemp 4 • NASDA supports revisions to the federal rules and regulations authorizing commercial production of 5 industrial hemp. 6 • NASDA urges the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and 7 the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) to collaboratively develop and adopt an official 8 definition of industrial hemp that comports with definitions currently used by countries producing hemp. 9 • NASDA also urges Congress to statutorily distinguish between industrial hemp and marijuana and to direct 10 the DEA to revise its policies to allow USDA to establish a regulatory program that allows the development 11 of domestic industrial hemp production by American farmers and manufacturers. 12 • NASDA supports the production, processing and commercialization of industrial hemp. 13 • NASDA encourages research in all aspects of industrial hemp from production to finished products. 14 • NASDA supports consistent model legislation to assist state legislatures in their efforts to enact laws 15 permitting hemp production within their jurisdictions in accordance with the 2018 Farm Bill. 16 • NASDA supports the development of uniform standards for field sampling and tetrahydrocannabinol 17 (THC) content testing with gas chromatography (GC) methods.

Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Policy Amendment or appear in the NASDA Policy Handbook):

32 33 2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference A Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Rural Development & Financial Security [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Action Items (AI) highlight a specific current issue Members feel NASDA should act on or other priority issues. AIs do not establish NASDA policy and must comply with existing policy or be accompanied by a corresponding Policy Amendment.

Subject of Action Item: Supporting America’s Waterways

Submitted By: Secretary Mike Naig, Iowa

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA supports funding for inland waterways infrastructure and authorizing of funds to allow for the operations and 2 maintenance of waterways. 3 4 Inland waterways are a crucial transportation mechanism for agriculture and food products throughout the United 5 States and into the global market. Without maintenance, inland waterways are unable to carry product efficiently. 6 Further, NASDA supports robust federal appropriations to match the expenditure of the Inland Waterways Trust Fund 7 and supports increasing the budget for operations and maintenance of waterways. These actions will ensure that the 8 efficient operation and structural integrity of our waterways is maintained.

Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item):

34 35

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference B Action Item Form

To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Plant Agriculture & Pesticide Regulation [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Support Predictive Modeling Tool Research

Submitted By: Commissioner Doug Goehring, North Dakota

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA supports research into the development of the Predictive Modeling Tool for disease and mycotoxins 2 affecting U.S. row crops. 3 4 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 5 6 The overall goal of the Predictive Modeling Tool project is to ensure crop sustainability and crop quality, to 7 increase precision and optimize pesticide use and to improve disease management thereby reducing yield losses. 8 The hypothesis is that the tool would be able to assess disease risk based on quantifying the pathogen (spore) 9 densities within a field; considering hybrid/ varietal genetics, soil type and other agronomic factors, and 10 integrating weather-based prediction models. 11 12 Participating commodity groups and land grant university investigators will determine disease priorities. 13 Investigators will conduct field research, develop assays (tests) to detect pathogens and models to determine 14 disease risk, all of which will ultimately establish thresholds for corrective action. 15 16 Assay development will be a collaborative effort between Los Alamos National Laboratory, land grant investigators 17 and the National Agriculture Genotyping Center. Validated PMT assays will be available to farmers through NAGC, 18 university or private labs thus ensuring the assays are distributed as widely as possible to help achieve the stated 19 goals. 20 21 The project is seeking an appropriation from Congress of $ 7 million dollars in FY 2020 in year one. The project is 22 proposed to be a 10-year program to complete the Predictive Modeling Tool. 23 24 Land Grant Universities Involved 25 26 The Year One research proposed will be done at the following universities Auburn University Texas A&M University of Minnesota Iowa State University University of Arkansas University of Missouri Kansas State University University of Georgia University of Nebraska Mississippi State University University of Illinois University of Wisconsin North Dakota State University University of Kentucky 27

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference B Action Item Form

28 Collaborating Organizations 29 • American Soybean Association / United Soybean Board 30 • Cotton Incorporated / The Cotton Board 31 • National Corn Growers Association 32 • National Agricultural Genotyping Center 33 • Los Alamos National Laboratory

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference C Action Item Form

To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Natural Resources & Environment [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Research and Federal Standards

Submitted By: Director Gary McDowell, Michigan

Text of Action Item:

1 States are looking for a nationally supported approach to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) 2 that protects human health while not raising unnecessary food safety concerns. As such, NASDA encourages 3 Congress and the administration to conduct research, appropriate necessary funds, and otherwise coordinate a 4 response that ensures PFAS exposure does not compromise drinking water or food products. 5 6 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 7 8 Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection 9 Agency as an emerging contaminant on the national level, having been found in the United States and many other 10 countries. PFAS is a suite of chemicals historically used in thousands of applications throughout the industrial, 11 food, and textile industries. It is incredibly stable, breaking down very slowly in the environment, and is highly 12 soluble, easily transferring through soil to groundwater. PFAS is used in firefighting foams, food packaging, 13 cleaning products, and various other products. 14 15 Drinking water is the primary concern and EPA has set a standard of 70ppt as an allowable level. However, the 16 public asks about the food supply; including meat, milk, and garden vegetables. With the lack of any known federal 17 PFAS guidance or standards relating to the food supply other than some guidance on packaging and limited 18 research on PFAS in food, states are finding it difficult to provide clear or standardized answers to food-related 19 questions from the public, regulators, educators, and the food industry. States would appreciate the federal 20 government sharing any existing guidance, as well as assistance in developing additional guidance needed related 21 to PFAS in the food supply.

38 39

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference D Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Support the USDA Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production

Submitted By: Commissioner John Lebeaux, Massachusetts and Commissioner Jewel Bronaugh, Virginia

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA supports the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production at the U.S. Department of Agriculture as 2 authorized by the 2018 Farm Bill. NASDA’s goal is to support all forms of food and agricultural production, including 3 the production of specialty and organic crops. Moreover, the creation of this office is necessary for further promoting 4 urban agriculture. With their history of promoting the specialty crop and organic industries of their states, as well as 5 local and regional markets, state departments of agriculture should engage with USDA as it forms the Office of Urban 6 Agriculture and Innovative Production. 7 8 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 9 10 In Section 12302 of the 2018 Farm Bill, the “Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production” is created to 11 “encourage and promote urban, indoor, and other emerging agricultural practices…” A “Director of the Office of 12 Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production” will be created to manage programs, including those for community 13 gardens, urban farms, and indoor vertical production; advise the USDA Secretary; coordinate efforts with relevant 14 USDA agencies; engage and develop stakeholder partnerships; identify state & municipal best practices for 15 handling local policies; and facilitate relationships between urban agricultural producers and local food banks. 16 17 Moreover, an “Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production Advisory Committee” of 12 individuals will be 18 created. The Committee shall consist of urban agricultural producers and individuals from higher 19 education/agricultural extension, nonprofits, economic development agencies, a financing entity, and supply 20 chain functionaries among others. State departments of agriculture could join the Committee as “2 shall be 21 individuals with related experience or expertise in urban, indoor, and other emerging production practices, as 22 determined by the Secretary.” The Committee will develop recommendations on policy, outreach, and initiatives 23 to be administered by the Office. 24 25 While there exist challenges in developing urban agriculture, including access to land and capital, this type of food 26 production can diversify individuals’ income sources, ameliorate food deserts, engage urbanites in agriculture, 27 and support community as well as economic development. Finally, many states have already taken proactive steps 28 to support the growth of urban agriculture. The National Conference of State Legislatures provides 17 examples 29 of states who have passed legislation related to the promotion of urban agriculture.

40 41

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference E Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Rural Development & Financial Security [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Encouraging Tax Code Changes to Support Farmland Transfer

Submitted By: Secretary Russell Redding, Pennsylvania

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA supports changes to federal tax policy that can help facilitate the transfer of farmland to farmers. 2 3 As such, we support creating a capital gains exclusion for the sale of farm or ranchland to a farmer. A lifetime 4 exclusion of $500,000 for an individual or $1M for a couple is needed to ensure farms can transfer flexibly, 5 especially to new and beginning farmers and ranchers. 6 7 Additionally, NASDA supports creating a similar exclusion from capital gains for the sale of an agricultural 8 conservation to a farmer or rancher. 9 10 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 11 12 Establishing a capital gains exclusion on the sale of farmland or ranchland to a “qualified farmer” for agricultural 13 use frees up farmers, ranchers and landowners to decide the future of their land during their lifetimes. By 14 reducing or eliminating the tax on land sales, farmers and ranchers will be more likely to pursue gradual 15 transfers and other transfer strategies to next-generation farmers as they retire or step back from full-time 16 farming.

42 43

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference F Action Item Form

To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Animal Agriculture [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Increased USDA Planning Concerning African Swine Fever (ASF)

Submitted By: Secretary Brad Pfaff, Wisconsin

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA requests the USDA to prioritize planning concerning African swine fever, to prevent its introduction in the 2 United States and plan strategic rapid response methods to contain the disease. 3 4 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 5 6 African swine fever is a highly contagious and deadly viral disease affecting both domestic and feral (wild) pigs in all age 7 groups. The disease causes high fever, skin discoloration, diarrhea, and death. Death usually occurs within 7 to 10 days, 8 but sudden death is possible in newly exposed herds. Animals that recover from the illness can be carriers of the virus 9 for several months. 10 11 ASF is a notifiable disease with the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) due to its ability to spread rapidly and 12 cause severe illness and death. The disease is endemic in Sardinia, most countries of sub-Saharan Africa, and some 13 West African countries, and has spread through Russia and the Caucuses. The disease is also spreading within the 14 European Union, reaching 10 member states. ASF has not yet occurred in the United States. 15 16 Outbreaks of ASF are currently spreading across China, a country which had previously never experienced the disease. 17 Since August 2018, China has reported 107 outbreaks of ASF. The outbreaks have been reported thousands of 18 kilometers apart. China has culled over 900,000 animals, including both domestic pigs and wild boars. ASF virus nucleic 19 acids have been found in pig feed supplements within China, as well as food products smuggled into other counties. 20 China is one of the largest producers and consumers of pigs and pork products in the world. The rapid geographic spread 21 of the diseases throughout China poses potential risk for neighboring countries and trade partners. 22 23 ASF is spread by contact with infected animals’ body fluids. It can be spread by ticks that feed on infected animals. ASF 24 is not a threat to human health and cannot be transmitted from pigs to humans. However, people are a source of 25 spread, as they can move the virus on vehicles or clothing. The virus is highly resistant in the environment, especially at 26 low temperatures, and is highly resistant to many disinfectants. It can also be spread by feeding pigs uncooked garbage 27 that contains infected pork products, though there are state and federal regulations in place to ensure garbage feeding 28 is done correctly to not spread disease. 29 30 ASF has serious animal health and economic consequences, including export bans on pigs and pork products. There is 31 no treatment or vaccine available for this disease. The only way to stop ASF is to restrict movement and depopulate all 32 affected or exposed swine herds. The disease spreads rapidly, which presents complications for containment. 33 Therefore, NASDA requests prioritization of strategic planning to prepare for rapid response and containment.

44 45

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference G Action Item Form

Subject of Action Item: USDA Promulgation of Federal Regulations and Guidelines for Hemp Production

Submitted By: Secretary Brad Pfaff, Wisconsin

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA encourages the USDA to promulgate as expeditiously as practicable the required regulations and guidelines 2 to implement the statutory changes to hemp production, as amended in the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 3 (2018 Farm Bill). 4 5 NASDA supports USDA efforts to establish guidelines and provide technical assistance in the development of state or 6 tribal plans that seek approval for delegated primary regulatory authority over the production of hemp. 7 8 NASDA urges USDA to consult with state agricultural departments and industry partners in the promulgation of 9 regulations and guidelines relating to hemp production, including jurisdictions that do not request delegated primary 10 regulatory authority. 11 12 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 13 14 As provided in the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, Sec. 10113 amended the Agricultural Marketing Act of 15 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq.) by establishing provisions relating to hemp production. As part of these statutory 16 changes, the Act provides that a state or tribal jurisdiction may be granted primary regulatory authority over the 17 production of hemp. Generally, a state department of agriculture, in consultation with the state’s Governor and 18 Attorney General, may submit a state plan that establishes the monitoring and regulation of hemp production in 19 the requisite territory to the USDA Secretary for approval. The USDA Secretary, within 60 days of receipt of a state 20 or tribal plan, shall make a determination in consultation with the Attorney General on the proposed plan, as 21 provided in Sec. 297B(b). The USDA Secretary is authorized under Sec. 297B(d) to provide technical assistance to 22 a state or tribe in the development of a plan. Lastly, as provided under Sec. 297C et seq., the USDA Secretary shall 23 establish a plan to monitor and regulate the production of hemp for territories not subject to an approved state 24 or tribal plan. 25 26 Given that NASDA members are the sole authority and conduit, as state departments of agriculture, in submitting 27 proposed state plans, it is important that USDA promulgate regulations and guidelines in an expedited fashion to 28 ensure limited state application issues and USDA determination. NASDA members support the efforts of USDA to 29 provide technical assistance to states in the development of plans and interactive ways to ensure compliance with 30 USDA objectives and regulation.

46 47

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference H Action Item Form

To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Animal Agriculture [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Increased USDA Research and Collaboration Concerning Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD)

Submitted By: Secretary Brad Pfaff, Wisconsin

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA requests the USDA to prioritize research and collaboration efforts with state and industry partners to analyze 2 and develop strategies to prevent the introduction, transmission, and spread of Chronic Wasting Disease in captive 3 cervids. 4 5 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 6 7 Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) is a progressive and terminal transmissible neurological disease found in cervids caused 8 by an infectious protein, or prion, which produces small lesions in the brains of infected animals. CWD is classified as a 9 transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE), and is similar to mad cow disease in cattle and scrapie in sheep. 10 11 The biological characteristics and overall limited understanding of CWD present significant challenges to wildlife 12 managers and captive cervid farmers who seek management solutions in preventing and controlling the disease. 13 Current efforts to control or eradicate CWD are complicated by its long incubation periods, delayed clinical signs, and 14 ability to infect and contaminate the surrounding environment with highly resistant and contagious prions. 15 16 CWD is highly transmissible within both free-ranging and captive cervid herd populations. Since 2001, CWD has been 17 identified in free-ranging cervids in 21 states and in farmed cervids in 16 states. Modes of transmission are not fully 18 understood. Scientific evidence supports the possibility that the disease is spread through direct animal-to-animal 19 contact or as a result of indirect exposure to prions in the environment (e.g., in contaminated feed and water sources). 20 Further research into modes of transmission could assist states in controlling the spread of CWD. 21 The USDA APHIS administers the national voluntary CWD Herd Certification Program (HCP) as a cooperative effort 22 between federal, state, and industry partners to minimize the risk of introduction, transmission, and spread of CWD in 23 captive cervid populations across the U.S. The program implements a consistent and national approach to control CWD 24 in farmed cervids, and to prevent the interstate spread of the disease (9 CFR Parts 55 and 81). As of September 2018, 25 there are 28 states that participate in the program. However, there are limited available federal resources and overall 26 access to scientific research for state regulators and industry partners to better understand and work together to 27 implement effective measures to control and eradicate the disease. 28 29 Therefore, NASDA believes that this existing regulatory relationship provides an opportunity for increased collaboration 30 and research activities with respective state and federal animal health, natural resource, and public health agencies to 31 identify and develop innovative strategies and methods for state and industry partners to utilize in order to better 32 understand, prevent, control, and eradicate the disease.

48 49

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference I Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Food Regulation [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Continuation of Federal Appropriations to States for FSMA Produce Safety Program

Submitted By: Secretary Brad Pfaff, Wisconsin

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA encourages the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to continue authorization of funding for states to 2 develop and implement State and Territory Produce Safety Programs to enforce FDA regulations mandated by the 3 Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). 4 5 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 6 7 As mandated in the 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is 8 implementing science-based regulatory standards to reduce the risk of microbial contamination of fresh produce, 9 as outlined in the “Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human 10 Consumption,” commonly referred to as the Produce Safety Rule. The final rule, effective January of 2016, 11 establishes minimum standards for the safe growing, harvesting, packaging, and holding of fruits and vegetables 12 grown for human consumption. 13 14 Through cooperative funding agreements, 46 states across the nation have begun implementing the Produce 15 Safety Rule through the State Produce Implementation Cooperative Agreement Program (CAP). This cooperative 16 agreement program has provided states with the necessary resources to assist in establishing state produce safety 17 programs, and promote compliance with, and understanding of, the requirements of FDA regulation. Many states 18 have made significant progress in developing and executing multi-year plans to implement produce safety systems 19 and the necessary regulatory infrastructure due to the federal awards and resources provided by the FDA. 20 Although the FDA has authorized funding until 2021 for states to formulate jurisdictional produce safety programs, 21 it is expected that the requisite state regulators will continue to have implementation or continuation costs for 22 education, outreach, and required inspections. To provide regulatory certainty and proper administration of 23 promulgated state programs, it is requested that FDA clarify the expected future of cooperative funding 24 opportunities or fiscal resources to assist states.

50 51

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference J Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Marketing & International Trade [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Support Free Trade in North America

Submitted By: Director Derek Sandison, Washington and Secretary Mike Naig, Iowa

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA urges Congress and the administration to work together on successful ratification and implementation of the 2 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). An integrated North American food and agricultural market is 3 critical for America’s farmers and ranchers. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has provided U.S. 4 agriculture producers and food manufacturers with unparalleled access to the Mexican and Canadian markets, which 5 have now long stood as two of the top three export markets for food and agricultural products. While NAFTA has 6 served U.S. agriculture well, the USMCA includes important modernizing provisions as well as increased market access 7 for agricultural goods in Canada. As we advocate for the passage of USMCA, we also urge the administration to resolve 8 the Section 232 tariff issue so U.S. farmers and ranchers no longer face Canadian and Mexican retaliatory tariffs. 9 10 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 11 12 NAFTA has been one of U.S. agriculture’s great success stories since it went into effect more than 20 years ago. Due 13 to the USMCA’s largely evolutionary nature, it should continue to serve the U.S. agricultural sector well. Moreover, 14 there are modernizing elements within the agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures as well as 15 agricultural biotechnology that will not only continue to provide lucrative access to the Mexican and Canadian markets 16 for U.S. farmers and ranchers but will also serve as a template for future trade agreements. Expanded access in the 17 Canadian market for U.S. dairy, poultry, and wine, while certainly not a panacea for these sectors, will also serve U.S. 18 agriculture well. 19 20 The USMCA maintains and strengthens the North American market for U.S. producers, but it is not without its flaws. 21 NASDA is concerned by provisions within Chapter 34 of the agreement, specifically, the “sunset clause” that could 22 create uncertainty for U.S. farmers and ranchers in the event of the agreement having to be renegotiated or 23 terminated. Also, the Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs and the subsequent retaliatory tariffs from Mexico and 24 Canada on U.S. agricultural products remain a serious concern for NASDA; the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative 25 should promptly resolve this issue with Mexico and Canada. 26 27 Farm Foundation released a USCMA study, conducted by Purdue University, in October entitled, “How U.S. Agriculture 28 Will Fare Under the USMCA and Retaliatory Tariffs.” The study concludes USMCA will lead to a modest expansion of 29 market access in Canada and Mexico of $450 million, concentrated mainly in the dairy and poultry sectors. However, 30 the study also estimates that the retaliatory measures by Canada and Mexico “will cause U.S. agricultural exports to 31 decline by $1.8 billion, and by $1.9 billion to these key trading partners.” The Purdue researchers conclude the worst 32 possible situation is for the retaliatory tariffs to be kept in place while the U.S. withdraws from the current NAFTA.

52 53

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference K Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Rural Development & Financial Security [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Mitigating Impacts of a Lapse in Federal Appropriations (Shutdown)

Submitted By: Director Gary McDowell, Michigan

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA urges USDA, FDA, and EPA to work closely with NASDA and state departments of agriculture to identify gaps 2 in federal services resulting from lapses in federal funding that adversely impact industry, consumers, or state agencies 3 and develop strategies that allow state departments of agriculture to address those needs on a temporary basis to 4 minimize impacts on commerce. 5 6 Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item): 7 8 Prolonged government shutdowns of due to a lapse in federal appropriations have significant adverse impacts on 9 all segments of the U.S. economy including agriculture producers, food manufacturers, rural communities, federal 10 partners, and consumers. 11 12 Due to the extended federal government shutdown in early 2019, many routine processes that keep commerce 13 flowing ceased to happen. As a result, there were frustrated state officials as well as customers. It appears the 14 prudent thing to do is address this matter through a NASDA working group to investigate ways to mitigate the 15 absence of federal agencies, including allowing stamped, electronic or facsimile signatures on routine documents 16 in the event of a two-week or more federal government shutdown.

54 55

2019 NASDA Winter Policy Conference L Action Item Form To be completed by NASDA Staff: Date Submitted: 1/25/19 Committee: Plant Agriculture & Pesticide Regulation [ ] Adopted by NASDA [ ] Adopted with Amendment by NASDA [ ] Not Adopted by NASDA Additional Notes:

Subject of Action Item: Industrial Hemp

Submitted By: Commissioner Ryan Quarles, Kentucky

Text of Action Item:

1 NASDA urges the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be a constructive partner with USDA, state 2 departments of agriculture, and industry leaders. 3 4 NASDA urges the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to clarify procedures for the importation of 5 hemp seeds from locations outside the United States.

Background & Rationale (Note: Information in this section will not be included in the final text of the Action Item):