SB1494 would expand the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NCDAP) to include crops and grasses used for grazing by removing existing statutory exclusions. The bill tightens the scope of coverage to ensure grazing operations are protected when disasters disrupt yields, aligning NCDAP with forage-based livestock systems.
It also requires the Secretary of Agriculture to issue implementing regulations within 90 days of enactment to carry out the amendments.
This is a focused expansion, with no new funding provision in the bill. The practical effect for producers is an extended safety net for forage crops and pastures, while federal agencies gain a clear regulatory path to implement the change quickly.
The measure reduces a long-standing coverage gap for grazing operations, but it also transfers the onus of timely rulemaking to USDA to operationalize the expanded program.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends Section 196 of the 1996 Act to remove the grazing exclusion in two places, thereby making crops and grasses used for grazing eligible for NCDAP. It also requires the Secretary to promulgate regulations within 90 days after enactment to implement these amendments.
Who It Affects
Livestock producers and forage growers who rely on grazing crops; federal and state agencies that administer NCDAP will need to adjust eligibility criteria and outreach.
Why It Matters
Expands disaster assistance to grazing operations, reducing risk for ranchers and forage farmers. The 90-day deadline creates urgency for rulemaking, signaling a prompt transition from statute to on-the-ground protections.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill makes grazing crops eligible for the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program by removing two exclusions in the existing statute. In practice, this means producers who rely on pastures and forage crops will be able to access disaster assistance when disasters affect those grazing commodities.
The changes are implemented through amendments to the statute, and the Secretary of Agriculture must publish implementing regulations within 90 days of enactment. This rulemaking requirement ensures the policy shift doesn’t linger in law without a concrete administrative pathway.
Practically, farms that grow alfalfa, grasses, and other forage used for grazing would enter NCDAP eligibility where they previously did not. The bill does not specify new funding, so the expansion relies on existing program authorities and budgets.
For compliance, producers should prepare to document grazing use and comply with any new eligibility rules the rulemaking process establishes.In short, SB1494 closes a coverage gap for grazing operations and moves quickly to translate that policy into agency guidance and practice, potentially increasing the reach and cost of disaster assistance for forage-based farming systems.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill expands NCDAP coverage to grazing crops by removing the grazing exclusion from Section 196.
It amends two places in the 1996 Act to reflect grazing inclusion (a)(1)(A)(ii) and (l)(1).
Regulatory implementing rules must be issued within 90 days of enactment.
There is no new funding authorization in the bill; implementation rests on existing authorities.
Short title of the act is the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program Enhancement Act of 2025.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This section designates the act as the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program Enhancement Act of 2025.
Amendment to remove grazing exclusion
Section 196(a)(1)(A)(ii) is amended by striking the clause that excludes crops and grasses used for grazing. This change expands NCDAP eligibility to grazing crops and grasses, aligning disaster assistance with forage-based livestock operations.
Regulatory implementation
Not later than 90 days after enactment, the Secretary of Agriculture must promulgate regulations to carry out the amendments made by subsection (a). This creates an urgent but formal pathway to operationalize the expanded coverage and defines the initial framework for eligibility criteria and program administration.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Agriculture across all five countries.
Explore Agriculture in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Livestock producers (cattle, dairy, sheep, goats) who depend on grazing crops for feed will gain access to disaster assistance for those forage inputs.
- Forage crop growers (alfalfa, grasses, and other grazing-related crops) who participate in the NCDAP safety net will see expanded coverage.
- State and local agricultural agencies that administer NCDAP will gain a clearer basis to implement eligibility and outreach for grazing-related crops.
- Rural lenders and farm service organizations that rely on predictable disaster assistance to manage risk may see improved risk management options for grazing operations.
Who Bears the Cost
- USDA/Secretary of Agriculture will incur administrative and rulemaking costs to implement the new coverage and outreach materials.
- State agricultural agencies will bear additional ongoing administrative responsibilities to administer the expanded program.
- Producers seeking to qualify for the expanded coverage may incur costs associated with documentation and compliance to meet any new eligibility criteria established in the implementing regulations.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Expanding coverage for grazing crops improves risk protection for livestock producers but increases administrative complexity and potential program exposure without an explicit funding authorization, creating a trade-off between timely relief and sustainable program administration.
The bill expands the reach of NCDAP, but it concentrates implementation risk in the rulemaking process. While it does not include a new funding mechanism, the administrative costs of outreach, eligibility determinations, and potential increase in disaster payments could have budgetary implications for USDA and state agencies.
The rapid 90-day regulatory deadline prioritizes timely guidance, but raises questions about the sufficiency of stakeholder consultation and the precision of eligibility rules in the initial regulations.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.