Topics in this issue of Blues Update:
- From the Chair: Going Big for National Blueberry Month!
- DOL Suspends 2024 Farmworker Protection Rule; Court Closes NABC Lawsuit
- NABC Joins Supreme Court Amicus Brief on Glyphosate Labeling Case
- Revised Reciprocal Tariffs Take Effect Aug. 1
- U.S.-Vietnam Deal Announced, Details Remain Unclear
- USDA, White House Confirm Additional MASC Payments Are on the Way
- MRL Quick Reference Sheets Now Available to Assist American Produce Exporters
- Details on Applying for the Supplemental Disaster Relief Program
- More Opportunities Than Challenges for Blueberries in the MAHA Agenda
- 4 Reasons The Blueberry Convention Is Not-To-Be-Missed!
From the Chair: Going Big for National Blueberry Month!
By Teddy Koukoulis
NABC Chair
NABC pulled out all the stops to celebrate and highlight National Blueberry Month this month, including attention-getting promotions, events in Washington, D.C., and an NABC membership drive.
All of these efforts are helping raise awareness and support the success of the blueberry industry – and it’s working!
Our efforts this month include:
- Hosting the Blueberry Ice Cream Social on Capitol Hill in partnership with the National Milk Producers Federation.
- Passing out blueberry Clif Bars and blueberry belVita Breakfast biscuits, along with National Blueberry Month pins, at the Capital South Metro Station during the morning commute.
- Releasing a new economic report on the value the blueberry industry brings to the economy.
- Driving home messages around blueberries’ health halo and year-round availability.
- Showcasing industry advancements during field days.
I’m proud of the many ways we put blueberries in the spotlight this month. Cheers to another year of inspiring blueberry possibilities!
DOL Suspends 2024 Farmworker Protection Rule; Court Closes NABC Lawsuit
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has suspended enforcement of the 2024 Farmworker Rule and issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to rescind several key provisions. The targeted provisions – collectively referred to in the rule as “protections for worker voice and empowerment” – were widely challenged by agriculture stakeholders, including NABC.
According to the DOL, “multiple federal court injunctions have created significant legal uncertainty, inconsistency and operational challenges for farmers lawfully employing H-2A workers.”
Key provisions targeted for rescission include:
- Worker Voice and Union-Related Protections: DOL proposes to eliminate anti-retaliation and employee rights provisions modeled after the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which courts found unlawfully extended union-related rights to agricultural workers who are excluded from the NLRA.
- Access to Employer-Provided Housing: The rule allowed H-2A workers to invite guests to employer-furnished housing. DOL is now acknowledging that this may constitute a regulatory taking under the Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid precedent.
- Wage Disclosure and Prevailing Piece Rates: DOL proposes to reverse requirements that employers include prevailing piece rates in job orders and pay the highest applicable wage each pay period.
- Termination for Cause and Progressive Discipline: The proposed rescission would eliminate documentation and procedural requirements for disciplining or terminating H-2A workers, and returns to the DOL’s long-standing approach of evaluating cases individually, rather than through a five-part test.
- Seat Belt Requirements: DOL would repeal the mandate requiring employers to provide and enforce the use of seat belts in most employer-furnished vehicles, following court findings that the rule was arbitrary and inconsistent with existing standards. State seat belt laws will continue to apply.
- Information Collection: Enhanced disclosure requirements such as reporting sensitive information on owners, operators, supervisors and foreign recruiters during the application process would be rescinded.
This is a major victory for all farmers nationwide who rely on the H-2A program to harvest their crops!
In related news, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi has granted an indefinite stay and administratively closed the case brought by NABC and nine co-plaintiffs against DOL – marking another significant win for H-2A employers!
The lawsuit played a critical role in DOL’s decision to rescind core elements of the rule, including all provisions challenged by the plaintiff coalition.
Background
In October 2024, NABC and nine co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the DOL arguing that the Rule unlawfully granted collective bargaining rights to H-2A workers, restricted the First Amendment rights of H-2A employers, and imposed excessive burdens on employers and state governments.
In November 2024, the court issued a nationwide stay of the specific provisions challenged in the lawsuit (20 C.F.R. §§ 655.135(h)(2) and (m)), including:
- A prohibition on retaliation for engaging in self-organization or other concerted activities.
- A prohibition on retaliation for refusing to attend a mandatory meetings where the employer discusses organizing.
- A requirement that employers allow workers to designate a representative in investigatory interviews that could lead to disciplinary action.
Other courts also issued stays against the rule:
- The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia enjoined enforcement in 17 States and certain entities (Kansas v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 749 F. Supp. 3d 1363).
- The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky blocked key provisions in four additional states and with respect to certain entities (Barton v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 757 F. Supp. 3d 766).
NABC Joins Supreme Court Amicus Brief on Glyphosate Labeling Case
NABC has joined a coalition of national agricultural organizations in filing an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review Durnell v. Monsanto, a case that could significantly impact pesticide labeling laws and farmer access to critical crop protection tools like glyphosate.
At the heart of the case is whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state failure-to-warn lawsuits when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has already reviewed a pesticide’s safety and approved its labeling.
The plaintiff, John Durnell, claims he developed cancer from exposure to glyphosate and sued Monsanto under Missouri law for failing to warn consumers. A Missouri jury awarded damages, and the appellate court upheld the ruling despite EPA’s conclusion that glyphosate is not carcinogenic and does not require a cancer warning on its label.
The amicus brief argues that allowing states to impose separate or additional labeling requirements undermines FIFRA and EPA’s authority, creating confusion for manufacturers and threatening farmer access to safe, federally approved products.
The brief was led by Farmers for Sound Science (FSS), a nonprofit organization of which NABC is a founding member and Executive Committee participant.
On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court requested an opinion from the U.S. Solicitor General, signaling the court’s interest in a case and its potential national importance.
In addition to NABC, the coalition includes the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Corn Growers Association, American Soybean Association, Western Growers and others. Our shared message: Federal law and science-based regulation must remain the standard for pesticide labeling.
Revised Reciprocal Tariffs Take Effect Aug. 1
President Trump has delayed the implementation of revised reciprocal tariffs originally set to take effect on July 9 to Aug. 1. The president sent a series of letters to several trading partners outlining country-specific tariff increases unless new trade agreements are reached before the deadline.
Key U.S. blueberry export markets affected include Japan, South Korea, Thailand and the Philippines. Earlier this month, the president also notified Canada and Mexico of an increased reciprocal tariff of 35%, citing ongoing concerns over fentanyl trafficking and Canada’s tariffs on U.S. dairy products.
The White House has confirmed that USMCA compliant goods will remain exempt from reciprocal tariffs. Blueberries are a USMCA compliant product.
The current list of revised reciprocal tariff rates is below:
| Country | Original Reciprocal Tariff | Revised Reciprocal Tariff (Effective Aug. 1) |
| Japan | 24% | 25% |
| South Korea | 25% | 25% |
| Thailand | 36% | 36% |
| Malaysia | 24% | 25% |
| Canada | 25%* | 35%** |
| Mexico | 25%* | 35%** |
*Non-USMCA compliant goods.
**0% for USMCA compliant goods.
To date, none of the affected countries have announced retaliatory measures targeting U.S. products.
The baseline 10% tariff remains in effect against all trading partners except Canada and Mexico. As a USMCA-compliant product, blueberries imported into the U.S. from Mexico and Canada have a 0% tariff.
Countries such as Chile, Morocco and Peru remain subject to the baseline 10% tariff, and no additional reciprocal measures have been announced for those countries.
U.S.-Vietnam Deal Announced, Details Remain Unclear
In early July, President Trump announced that the U.S. had reached a trade agreement with Vietnam that expands market access for U.S. goods. While details remain limited, the U.S. will reduce its proposed reciprocal tariff on Vietnamese imports from 46% to 20%. Goods that are transshipped through Vietnam to the U.S., however, will be subject to 40%.
In a post on Truth Social, the president indicated that Vietnam will eliminate its tariff on U.S. goods. It’s unclear if that applies to all U.S. goods. The Vietnamese tariff on U.S. blueberries is 15% on fresh, and 30% on dried and frozen.
The administration has not yet released further details regarding implementation timelines or specific commitments under the deal.
We will continue to keep members informed as new information becomes available. We remain in active communication with the administration about the dynamics of the blueberry trade – emphasizing the importance of opening and expanding export markets for U.S. blueberries, and the critical role that counter-seasonal imports play in maintaining market stability and driving year-round consumer demand.
For updates and additional information, please visit our Trade and Tariffs webpage.
USDA, White House Confirm Additional MASC Payments Are on the Way
In early July, NABC was notified by the White House and the USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service (FSA) that they had successfully processed Marketing Assistance for Specialty Crops (MASC) payments totaling over $981 million to 43,646 participants. County officials began certifying payments on Friday, and producers should be receiving deposits.
If you experience any issues with receiving payments, please contact NABC Director of Government Affairs Alyssa Houtby. NABC will continue working with USDA to ensure our growers receive the MASC payments they were approved for.
About MASC
First announced in December 2024, MASC authorized $2 billion in Commodity Credit Corporation funds to assist specialty crop growers with rising input costs and aid in the expansion of domestic markets. In January 2025, in response to stakeholder feedback and program demand, funding for MASC was increased to $2.65 billion. The MASC application period closed on Jan. 10, 2025.
MASC is designed to help specialty crop producers meet higher marketing costs related to:
- Perishability of specialty crops like fruits, vegetables, floriculture, nursery crops and herbs.
- Specialized handling and transport equipment with temperature and humidity control.
- Packaging to prevent damage.
- Moving perishables to market quickly.
- Higher labor costs.
On April 29, USDA announced a second round of the MASC Program, providing up to $1.3 billion in additional payments.
According to the White House Office of Public Engagement, “USDA’s action this week is fulfilling that commitment to farmers.”
MRL Quick Reference Sheets Now Available to Assist American Produce Exporters
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) has launched a new resource to support American farmers’ access to international trade opportunities. Maximum Residue Limit Quick Reference Sheets provide information about pesticide residue requirements in major export markets for U.S. producers and shippers of fruit, vegetables, nuts, pulses and other horticultural crops.
FAS developed the MRL Quick Reference Sheets in partnership with Bryant Christie Inc. FAS will update these sheets every six months and will cover 60 different specialty crop commodities. MRL Quick Reference Sheets are free, easily accessible and downloadable for American farmers and businesses.
Through the Assisting Specialty Crop Exports Initiative, USDA is developing resources to help American produce and nut exporters understand and meet foreign regulatory requirements to access new export market opportunities, as well as address trade barriers in foreign markets.
Pesticide maximum residue limits (MRLs), also referred to as “pesticide tolerances,” are set by governments and are nonharmful amounts of pesticide residues that may remain on or in a food product when a pesticide is used according to label directions. MRLs vary by country and can be complex to track. FAS offers a number of programs and resources to support U.S. exporters with this issue, including engagement with foreign governments to resolve MRL trade barriers.
For more information about resources for U.S. exporters of fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, pulses and other specialty crops, visit fas.usda.gov/programs/assisting-specialty-crop-exports-asce-initiative
Details on Applying for the Supplemental Disaster Relief Program
Earlier this month, the USDA announced that producers who incurred crop losses due to qualifying natural disasters in 2023 and 2024 can now apply for assistance through the Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP).
To expedite the implementation of SDRP, USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) is delivering assistance in two stages. Stage 1 is open to producers with eligible crop losses that received assistance under crop insurance or the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program during 2023 and 2024.
Prefilled applications were mailed to eligible producers on July 9. Producers can also sign up in person at their FSA county offices.
SDRP Stage 2 signups for eligible shallow or uncovered losses will begin in early fall.
How to Apply
To apply for SDRP Stage 1, producers must submit the FSA-526 Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) Stage One Application, in addition to having other forms on file with FSA.
FSA will generate an FSA-526 Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) Stage 1 Application, with certain items prefilled with information already on file with USDA. Producers may also electronically obtain prefilled applications by contacting their FSA county office.
Producers will submit separate applications for each crop year.
Producers may submit applications to their FSA county office in person or by mail, email, fax or other methods announced by FSA.
Producers cannot alter the data in these prefilled items; any alterations in the prefilled data on the application will result in FSA disapproving the producer’s Stage 1 application. FSA will not calculate Stage 1 payments using data manually submitted by producers. Stage 1 payments will only be calculated using data already on file with the Risk Management Agency (RMA) and FSA.
SDRP Stage 1 Payment Calculation
Stage 1 payments are based on the SDRP adjusted Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) or federal crop insurance coverage level that the producer purchased for the crop. The net NAP or net federal crop insurance payments will be subtracted from the SDRP calculated payment amount. See the charts and example calculation below:
| Crop Insurance Level | Adjusted SDRP Coverage Level |
| Catastrophic Coverage | 75% |
| More than catastrophic coverage but less than 55% | 80% |
| 55-59% | 82.5% |
| 60-64% | 85% |
| 65-69% | 87.5% |
| 70-74% | 90% |
| 75-79% | 92.5% |
| 80%+ | 95% |
| NAP Coverage Level | Adjusted SDRP Coverage Level |
| Catastrophic Coverage | 75% |
| 50% | 80% |
| 55% | 85% |
| 60% | 90% |
| 65% | 95% |
Total SDRP payment will not exceed 90% of the loss. A payment factor of 35% will be applied to all Stage 1 payments. If additional SDRP funds remain, FSA may issue a second payment.
Example Payment Calculation
Facts:
- A producer has a crop insurance policy with a coverage level of 65% and the total administrative fee was $3,500.
- The expected value of the crop was $500,000.
- The liability was $325,000 (65% of $500,000).
- The actual value of the crop was $250,000.
- The gross indemnity was $75,000 (liability minus actual value).
- The net indemnity was $71,500 (gross indemnity minus administrative fee).
SDRP Calculation:
- Expected Value x Adjusted SDRP Calculation = Liability
- $500,000 x 87.5% = $437,500
- Liability – Actual Value – Net Indemnity = Gross SDRP Payment
- $437,500 – $250,000 – $71,500 = $116,000
- Gross SDRP Payment x 35% = Total Payment
- $116,000 x 35% = $40,600
In this example, the producer will receive a SDRP payment of $40,600 in addition to the crop insurance indemnity received.
Additional Information
In addition to filing the SDRP Stage 1 application, producers must have the following forms on file with FSA:
- Form AD-2047, Customer Data Worksheet.
- Form CCC-902, Farm Operating Plan for an individual or legal entity.
- Form CCC-901, Member Information for Legal Entities (if applicable).
- Form FSA-510, Request for an exception to the $125,000 payment limitation for certain programs (if applicable). This form must be on file for all applicable crop years to be eligible for the payment limitation exception.
- SF-3881, Direct Deposit.
- AD-1026, Highly Erodible Land Conservation (HELC) and Wetland Conservation (WC) Certification.
Most producers that have previously participated in FSA programs likely have these forms on file. However, those that are uncertain and want to confirm the status of their forms can contact their local FSA county office.
All producers who receive SDRP payments will be required to purchase federal crop insurance or NAP coverage for the next two available crop years at the 60% coverage level or higher.
The payment limit for specialty and high value crops is $900,000 per year, if 75% of the producer’s average adjusted gross income is derived from farming activities (7 CFR 760.1507(a)(2)).
Resources
- Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) Home Page
- FSA Fact Sheet
- SDRP Drought Eligible Counties
- Full SDRP Rule in Federal Register
Questions?
Please reach out to NABC Director of Government Affairs Alyssa Houtby with questions.
More Opportunities Than Challenges for Blueberries in the MAHA Agenda
In late May, President Trump’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission released its Make Our Children Healthy Again Assessment, outlining the “dietary, behavioral, medical and environmental drivers” behind the decline in American children’s health. The report lays the foundation for evidence-based policy reforms and cultural shifts aimed at reversing this trend. A national strategy will follow in August, with the 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs) expected later this year.
Farmers, particularly specialty crop producers, are identified as “critical partners in the success of the Make America Healthy Again agenda,” presenting a meaningful opportunity to align the blueberry industry with national public health goals.
The report underscores a significant gap in federal support for fruits and vegetables, noting that “specialty crops remain underfunded, with only 0.1% of Farm Bill subsidies supporting fruits, vegetables and organics.” This highlights the urgent need for increased advocacy for expanded support, including insurance coverage and research investment.
A key recommendation of the report is replacing ultra-processed foods with whole foods, especially for children. It emphasizes that fruit consumption remains too low, and calls for greater access to nutrient-dense, phytonutrient-rich options as a strategy to reduce chronic disease. With their strong nutritional profile, blueberries are well-positioned as part of the solution.
Notably, the commission advocates for farmers to play a central role in advancing public health – an approach that aligns closely with the blueberry industry’s strengths – and offers a strategic opportunity to promote blueberries as part of a healthier food system.
Since its inception, the U.S. Highbush Blueberry Council (USHBC) has prioritized health research, yielding significant promotional benefits for the industry. Today, USHBC and the North American Blueberry Council (NABC) work in tandem – USHBC as the research arm and NABC as the advocacy arm – to support public policy that increases blueberry consumption. This includes advocacy for a fruit subgroup within the DGAs. Given the MAHA Commission’s emphasis on chronic disease prevention and whole-food diets, NABC is intensifying its efforts around the 2030 DGAs.
While the MAHA agenda presents major opportunities, the report’s treatment of crop protection tools – specifically glyphosate and atrazine – reinforces the importance of defending the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) science-based, risk-based approach to pesticide regulation.
Encouragingly, the commission warns that any attempt to restrict crop protection tools beyond the scientific standards established by Congress must consider alternatives and production costs. At the same time, the report raises concerns about the influence of privately funded toxicology and epidemiology research, warning it could skew regulation in favor of the chemical industry. However, it also points to a major gap in publicly funded research, creating an opportunity to push for more government-supported science.
This moment presents a strategic opening for the specialty crop sector to advocate for increased investment in programs like the IR-4 Project, which supports the registration of crop protection tools for fruits and vegetables.
To help ensure regulatory consistency, NABC recently joined an amicus brief in support of Monsanto’s petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in Durnell v. Monsanto. The case raises critical questions about federal preemption under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and whether states can impose conflicting pesticide labeling requirements. Unified industry support for judicial resolution is especially important given the broader implications of the MAHA Commission’s work.
NABC sees significant opportunity for the blueberry industry within the MAHA agenda. For decades, blueberries’ “health halo” has made them a standout among fruits. Now, we’re prepared to leverage that reputation to shape the future of nutrition policy.
4 Reasons The Blueberry Convention Is Not-To-Be-Missed!
The Blueberry Convention, October 8-10 in Seattle, is going to be action-packed! You’ll want to be there to explore cutting-edge technologies and groundbreaking advancements shaping the future of the blueberry industry.
Here are four more reasons you simply can’t afford to miss out!
- Inspiring keynotes that will help you innovate, think differently and understand the market.
- The day-long Blueberry Farm Tour: A Taste of Washington’s Finest.
- The Blueberry Boost Accelerator pitch competition where startups will share their pitch and showcase their product during a “Shark Tank-style” competition.
- The NABC & USHBC Reception and Awards Dinner where we’ll honor industry luminaries – and hand out the first Elizabeth White Award.
Register now, while early-bird pricing is still available! And don’t forget to reserve your room in our discounted housing block ASAP.
Hosting a Blueberry Event? We Can Help!
If you’re hosting a blueberry industry event, we’d love to help you promote it! Email Gabriella Gebhardt at [email protected] with the details and we’ll include it in an upcoming newsletter.