FARMING: Provides for limitation of liability related to the utilization of gypsum. (8/1/25)
SB 32 limits legal liability for farmers who use gypsum to improve soil health, directly affecting agricultural producers in the state. The bill clarifies that farmers using gypsum for soil management cannot be held legally responsible for reduced soil erosion or retained nutrients, as specified in amended language. Key provisions include revised wording on soil erosion and nutrient retention in the bill text, ensuring the liability limitation applies specifically to gypsum utilization practices. This policy change aims to encourage sustainable farming methods by reducing legal risks associated with soil amendment use.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Mar 2025
Committee Review
May 2025
Senate Passage
Jun 2025
House Passage
May 2025
Signed into Law
Jun 2025
Introduced Mar 31, 2025
Signed Jun 8, 2025
Maddy AI version diff · 4 comparisons
What changed between versions
SB32 Original
→
SB32 Act
·
3 edits
MINOR
The bill expanded liability protection to include landowners in addition to agricultural producers and suppliers. It clarified that gypsum must be obtained for free from a manufacturing byproduct source and strictly defined the testing requirements, mandating analysis by an accredited lab using specific USDA and EPA standards before use.
Scope change
The scope of liability protection was broadened to explicitly cover landowners who authorize the use of gypsum on their property, whereas the original draft only covered agricultural producers and suppliers.
ELIGIBILITY
Landowners are now explicitly included in the group eligible for liability protection when they authorize gypsum use on their land.
REQUIREMENT
The requirement to obtain gypsum at no cost was moved from a general condition to a specific sub-clause to ensure it is clearly defined as a prerequisite for liability protection.
The testing protocol was refined to specify that analysis must be conducted by an accredited laboratory using the most recent USDA Conservation Practice Standards and EPA regulatory requirements.
Floor votes · Senate Apr 29, 2025 · House May 27, 2025
How they voted
37–0
Passed
Total votes 37
Apr 29, 2025
D
Democratic11
100% Yea
R
Republican26
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
23
Key actions
5
Committee
4
Amendments
1
Jun 1, 2025
Upper · Passed
Amendments proposed by the House read and concurred in by a vote of 34 yeas and 0 nays.
upper
May 27, 2025
Lower · Passed
Read third time by title, amended, roll called on final passage, yeas 95, nays 0. Finally passed, ordered to the Senate.
lower
May 19, 2025
Introduced
Reported without Legislative Bureau amendments.
lower
May 15, 2025
Lower · Passed
Reported with amendments (11-0). Referred to the Legislative Bureau.
lower
May 5, 2025
Committee
Read by title, under the rules, referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural Development.
lower
Apr 29, 2025
Upper · Passed
Senate floor amendments read and adopted. Read by title and passed by a vote of 39 yeas and 0 nays; ordered reengrossed and sent to the House. Motion to reconsider tabled.
upper
Apr 22, 2025
Upper · Passed
Reported favorably.
upper
Apr 14, 2025
Committee
Introduced in the Senate; read by title. Rules suspended. Read second time and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural Development.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Robert Allain
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 32
Scope: LA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 32. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline