Will you have to report livestock emissions? It’s up to Congress

beef cattle feedlot
(Farm and Dairy file photo)

WASHINGTON — Bipartisan legislation was introduced March 14 in the U.S. House of Representatives that would prevent 200,000 farms from being regulated as if they were toxic Superfund sites.

The bill, introduced by U.S. Reps. Billy Long, R-Missouri, and Jim Costa, D-California, is known as the Agricultural Certainty for Reporting Emissions (ACRE) Act and is supported by 85 original co-sponsors.

It would exempt farms from reporting requirements dictated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), which was enacted to provide for cleanup of the industrial toxic waste sites and spills.

Similar bipartisan legislation, the Fair Agricultural Reporting Method (FARM) Act, was introduced in the U.S. Senate by U.S. Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Nebraska, and Joe Donnelly, D-Indiana, Feb. 13. That bill currently has 37 co-sponsors.

Bill proponents include many major farm groups, who claim CERCLA was never intended to govern agricultural operations, like livestock emissions.

“There’s not a lot of bipartisan consensus on Washington, DC, these days, but one thing that a lot of folks on both sides of the aisle can agree on is that the CERCLA law that regulates toxic Superfund sites shouldn’t apply to animal agricultural operations,” said fifth-generation California rancher Kevin Kester, who is the current president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.

“CERCLA was never intended to regulate cow manure, and Congress should fix this situation as soon as possible,” Kester added.

Groups sued EPA

In 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a rule to clarify that farms were exempt from CERCLA reporting and small farms, in particular, were exempt from EPCRA reporting, given that low-level livestock emissions are not the kind of “releases” that Congress intended to manage with these laws.

Upon being sued in 2009 by environmental advocacy groups, the Obama Administration’s EPA defended the exemption in court on the grounds that CERCLA and EPCRA do not explicitly exempt farms because Congress never believed that agriculture would be covered under these statutes, so a specific statutory exemption was not viewed to be necessary.

In April 2017, however, the D.C. Circuit Court vacated the EPA’s 2008 exemption, putting nearly 200,000 farms under the regulatory reporting authorities enshrined in CERCLA and EPCRA.

The new reporting requirements could have gone into effect on Jan. 22, but the court delayed implementation of the requirements until May 1, 2018, which gives Congress time to act.


Related articles:

Bill would exempt farms from reporting emissions Feb. 15, 2018
Court extends livestock emissions reporting deadline Dec. 4, 2017
Livestock farmers face emissions deadline Nov. 14, 2017
Superfund not meant for farms March 15, 2007
Commentary: Is that a Superfund site or a farm? Nov. 23, 2005


Up-to-date agriculture news in your inbox!



We are glad you have chosen to leave a comment. Please keep in mind that comments are moderated according to our comment policy.

Receive emails as this discussion progresses.