OMAHA
(DTN) -- As of Tuesday morning, livestock producers are not yet required to
report certain emissions to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, since a
federal appeals court had not yet responded to an agency request for a delay
past Monday's deadline.
In a
message posted on the agency's website, EPA said it will not enforce the
reporting requirement until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit issues a ruling.
"No
reporting is required until the court issues its order, or mandate, enforcing
its decision to eliminate the reporting exemptions for farms," EPA said.
Back in
November, the court delayed until Jan. 22, 2018, the rule that requires
livestock producers to report emissions of more than 100 pounds per day of
either ammonia or hydrogen sulfide.
In its
Jan. 19 motion to delay for three months, the EPA said farmers are not yet ready
to meet the requirements of the mandate.
"As
explained in EPA's prior motions to stay the issuance of the mandate, EPA has
been developing guidance to help farms come into compliance with requirements
to report certain releases of hazardous substances under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act," the agency said.
"On
Oct. 25, 2017, EPA released its preliminary guidance and solicited public
input. Based on comments EPA has received, there is still confusion among
farmers as to how they will meet their reporting obligations."
In
April 2017, the court threw out an EPA decision to not require livestock
operations to report emissions. That essentially allowed the reporting rule to
take full effect on Nov. 15, 2017.
Animal
feeding operations that confine more than 1,000 head of cattle, 2,500 head of
hogs, or 125,000 chickens are defined as concentrated animal feeding
operations, or CAFOs, by EPA. Ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emitted from
livestock lagoons have been classified as "hazardous" and
"extremely hazardous."
The
National Pork Producers Council and the U.S. Poultry and Egg Association filed
court briefs in support of the EPA's request to delay the mandate in the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, or CERCLA, and the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, or EPCRA.
In
requesting a delay in the rule, the EPA said it would allow for further
coordination in response to what is expected to be an increase in reports made
to the EPA.
A
number of environmental groups led by the Waterkeeper Alliance asked the court
to deny the agency's request for an extension, calling the request a
"smokescreen" to further delay the rule.
The
National Cattlemen's Beef Association had raised a number of concerns about how
the rule could affect producers.
First,
prior to the rule, only those cattle operations with 1,000 or more animals were
required to submit reports. With the rule, NCBA said operations with as few as
208 cattle are subject to reporting.
In
addition, the industry has been concerned about the costs to comply with the
reporting requirements and exposure to citizen lawsuits.
Also,
NCBA has expressed concern that the data could be misused by EPA to develop
CAFO emissions regulations through the Clean Air Act.
The
group also has raised concern about how the reporting rule could inundate the
National Response Center with information from some 100,000 agriculture
operations and limit the federal government's ability to respond to hazardous
waste emergencies.
The
National Cattlemen's Beef Association launched a media campaign last week aimed
at spotlighting the reporting requirement.
NCBA's
Chief Environmental Counsel Scott Yager is featured in an online video wearing
a yellow hazmat suit explaining the rule while at a federal Superfund site in
Virginia. He then shows the contrast between that site and a nearby cattle
farm.
"This
is just another example of radical environmental groups using the courts to
wildly distort the original Congressional intent behind legislation," NCBA
President and Nebraska cattleman Craig Uden said in a news release last week.
"Unless
this ridiculous situation is fixed, agricultural producers will soon have their
operations treated like toxic Superfund sites, and government agencies like the
U.S. Coast Guard will be inundated with unnecessary questions and
reports."
The
rule potentially affects nearly 200,000 farms and ranches.