Legislative Issues & Policies - Agricultural Protection and Prosperity Act of 2007

Introduction

Over the past few years, some state and local authorities have attempted to extend the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), commonly known as “Superfund,” and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) to livestock and poultry operations for emissions or discharges from manure produced in those operations. 

States and municipalities have filed suits against such operations claiming Superfund liability and arguing that farms and ranches should be covered under the toxic waste cleanup and liability provisions of the 1980 Superfund law.  While the animal agriculture industry has been regulated for years under the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act and various state laws to protect the environment, it has never been regulated under Superfund or EPCRA, which include severe liability provisions.

House and Senate Bills

Legislation has been introduced to amend CERCLA to provide that livestock manure is not considered a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant under that Act.

The House bill (H.R. 1398) was introduced by Representatives Collin Peterson (D-MN) and Ralph Hall (R-TX), along with numerous other Members.  The Senate bill (S. 807) was introduced by Senators Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Pete Domenici (R-NM) and Saxby Chambliss (R-GA). 

Horses Protected.  Unlike last Congress’ version, this bill protects horses along with other livestock.  The AHC worked with the supporters of the bill to ensure that the definition of “livestock” included horses.

The livestock industry is seeking a Congressional clarification that these laws were never intended to apply to or regulate manure.  The concern is that without such a clarification livestock and poultry operations could be subject to comprehensive and highly-regulated cleanup under the Superfund law.  The livestock industry maintains that CERCLA was created to provide for cleanup of industrial chemical toxic waste dumps, such as Love Canal and Times Beach, not to regulate manure and the livestock industry.

Specifically, the bill would amend CERCLA to provide that livestock manure would not be included in the meaning of “hazardous substance” or “pollutant or contaminant” under that Act.  The bill protects “livestock” as defined in Section 10403 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.  That provision defines livestock to include “all farm-raised animals,” which includes horses.

Congressional Action

The House bill was jointly referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.  The Senate bill was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

The Senate Agriculture Committee reported out the Farm Bill on October 25 and included a provision requiring the Secretary of Agriculture to submit to the House and Senate Agriculture Committees a report on the potential economic issues, including potential costs, associated with animal manure used in normal agricultural operations and as a feedstock in bio-energy production.  The report would be due within 180 days of enactment of the Farm Bill.  Although this provision falls short of amending CERCLA to provide that livestock manure is not included in the meaning of “hazardous substance” or “pollutant or contaminant,” it is hoped that such a study would convince those pushing to include manure under Superfund that this would have numerous bad affects for not only agriculture but also consumers.     

There was no comparable provision in the House-passed Farm Bill.

Conference Committee Meetings

A Conference Committee that included members of the House and Senate met for several months to resolve the differences between the two versions of the bill, including the study provision.  After months of negotiations, the Conference Committee agreed to a final Farm Bill that requires the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct a study evaluating the use of animal manure as fertilizer and potential other uses.  The study shall include the extent to which manure is used as fertilizer in agricultural operations by type and size; the potential impact on consumers and agricultural operations should limitations be placed on its use; and an evaluation of the effects on agricultural production of the increased competition for manure use for bioenergy production, including as a feedstock or a replacement for fossil fuel.  The report must be submitted to the House and Senate Agriculture Committees within a year.
 
President Bush vetoed the Farm Bill because of the overall cost, but Congress overrode his veto.  The study provision is now law.

AHC Position

The AHC supports this legislation.