EPA and the Department of Health and Human Services have signed a memorandum of understanding to coordinate scientific research on glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup herbicide, with EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin targeting completion of the agency's human health risk assessment by early 2027.

Under the agreement, the two agencies will exchange scientific information, identify research gaps, and expand research into potential human health effects of the compound. EPA retains sole authority over pesticide registration decisions under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and the MOU creates no new authority for either side, according to the announcement.

What did EPA's administrator say?

"This agreement with Secretary Kennedy and HHS gives our scientists access to research capacity at HHS that addresses potential gaps in the record," Zeldin said in the release. "EPA will weigh what that work produces the way we weigh any other scientific evidence. We will evaluate the relevant evidence, address important scientific questions, and show our work, providing insight into how the science informs our decisions, as we always do, to conduct the most transparent and thorough review possible."

What will the agencies study?

The MOU identifies four research areas for joint work:

• Toxicology of glyphosate formulations and surfactants
• Occupational epidemiology
• Human exposure and biomonitoring
• Dietary exposure

Why are consumer groups skeptical?

The Center for Food Safety, which sued to force EPA to re-evaluate human health effects, responded with caution. CFS Science Director Bill Freese said the collaboration "will take years to bear fruit in terms of usable results on the health impacts of glyphosate formulations in commercial use, far beyond the 'early 2027' timeframe EPA has announced for completion of its glyphosate human health risk assessment."

In CFS's reading, the timing works against EPA's stated deadline: the new research pipeline will not produce answers the agency can use before its 2027 decision point.

What stays unchanged for registrants?

For pesticide registrants and the agricultural input supply chain, the MOU leaves the existing regulatory structure intact. EPA retains FIFRA authority, and the agreement does not transfer or share registration power with HHS. Any change in glyphosate's registered uses — new label restrictions, application limits, or classification changes — would still move through EPA's standard registration review process.

For growers, the question is whether the next review will change on-label uses that anchor current agronomic systems. Until EPA issues a new decision, current labels remain in force.

How does this fit the policy calendar?

The MOU lands in the run-up to EPA's scheduled human health assessment for glyphosate. Zeldin's pledge that EPA will "show our work" signals the agency expects heightened scrutiny over how it weighs new evidence — including any HHS-generated data that arrives during or after the 2027 review window.

The collaboration effectively creates a two-track timeline: EPA's near-term 2027 assessment on one side, longer-horizon HHS research that critics say will not mature in time on the other. How the agency reconciles that gap — and whether it delays, narrows, or expands its 2027 assessment to await new data — will shape the evidentiary record behind the next registration decision.