STRAIGHT FROM THE HORSES MOUTH

Duane A. Lienemann
UNL Extension Educator

     Lawmakers have just announced a final deal on H.R. 3080, the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) and have filed a conference report, setting the bill for final passage. The WRRDA is a water resources bill that allows the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to develop, maintain, and support a variety of water-related projects including infrastructure, flood protection and environmental restoration needs. Both Houses must now approve the Conference Report before sending to the President to sign into law. You might say “So what, what does it got to do with me?” Let’s find out.      My guess is that you remember about a year ago we were talking about the needed compliance to the EPA’s Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) that was postponed. This act is important because it contains the hoped for exemption for many farmers and ranchers from the insidious regulation.  The SPCC rule is over 30 years old and was originally intended for the petroleum industry, but then the EPA decided that agriculture has never been exempt and was trying to implement the rule and possible penalties to farmers who were not in compliance. 
     We need to be particularly interested with Section 1049 of H.R. 3080 which secures a permanent exemption from the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Spill Prevention Control Countermeasure (SPCC) rule for farmers and ranchers. This amendment will exempt all tanks of 1,000 gallons or less from the rule, and farms with an aggregate tank storage capacity of 2,500 gallons or less would not have to comply with the rule.  Farms with tank storage capacities of between 2,500 gallons and 6,000 gallons would have a temporary exemption, pending a study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the EPA. I am not sure when this study will be completed, so stay tuned for further information on that portion of the act. The provision also greatly limits the instances when professional engineers must certify spill plans. As I understand it the threshold before a farmer would need to hire an engineer to certify your plan would be increased from 10,000 gallons to 20,000 gallons as long as you don’t have a single tank which holds over 10,000 gallons and don’t have a history of spills.
     As our farmers and ranchers struggle with narrow profit margins, changing markets, the climate and other issues - these new SPCC provisions are a bright spot. With the knowledge that exemptions exist for up to 6000 gallons of storage and complete exemptions for 1000 gallons or less, the ability to be confident about on farm storage is a reality. I am glad that our legislators are for once rolling back –“out of control and burdensome” regulations. I don’t think there are too many farmers and ranchers that don’t agree with me that overreaching regulations negatively impact the modern producer and local economies. The original SPCC rule is yet another example of the EPA’s regulatory scheme threatening the economic viability of rural America and family farms and ranches and we have waited too long for a permanent fix to the SPCC rule and this provision in the Water Resources Development Act will ease the burden of this rule for many farmers and ranchers. 
     All indications are that this will likely pass the House on May 20 and then will reach the Senate later on in the week. We may want to cross our fingers on that vote as there seems to be a lot of contention right now in the Senate and this could be another victim of the Senate Leader’s refusal to allow amendments, even with important issues like this. I suggest that you contact your Representative and Senator, and urge the passage of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act as amended -- as it is critical to the well-being of our farms and ranchers and keeps overreach of the EPA at bay.  
     Heaven knows we have plenty of other things to worry about with the EPA’s broadening jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act with its proposed Waters of the U.S. Rule which is now under public comment and will be for only a couple of months. The EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers proposed the rule this past March to clarify which bodies of water, such as wetlands and streams that will come under the agencies’ authority to protect under the Clean Water Act. I believe that the proposed new definition of which bodies of water are under its jurisdiction should run up all kinds of red flags for farmers and ranchers as it looks to me that they could impose unworkable regulations on the nation’s farms. American Farm Bureau President Bob Stallman called EPA’s proposed rule, known as Waters of the United States, “the biggest federal land grab — in terms of power over land use — that we’ve seen to date.” It does appear to me that this has the potential to drastically increase the amount of water and land under EPA’s authority. Land that has water flowing through it one day per year, for example, could be subject to EPA’s authority. Can you imagine the level of uncertainty that creates for farmers and ranchers, and the issue that somehow we’re all protected by these exemptions? Just how much can we trust this EPA?
     As I read it, if the rule is finalized, EPA could potentially require permits for spraying pesticides, building fences, digging ditches or even planting crops not to mention that they can take over any land that water pools or runs through after a rain, if the rule is taken on its own merit. I have written previously on this troubling rule (Note: 4/11/14 Edition of Horse’s Mouth @ www.webster.unl.edu ) I suggest that all farmers and ranchers study up on this thing, be proactive – not reactive, and be sure to comment at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880-0001 .  
     I am in the camp with many other farmers and ranchers as well as farm organizations that believe that the EPA’s move could be part of an attempt by environmental activists to regulate all agricultural practices. It should be evident with the continual attack on agriculture in our society where activists, environmentalist and ideologues that want to use this kind of structure to basically have the federal government control uses of land -- and what is even more troubling is that these regulators know very little about agriculture or agriculture practices ---and they want to tell us what to do on our own land!!! 

The preceding information comes from the research and personal observations of the writer which may or may not reflect the views of UNL or UNL Extension. For more further information on these or other topics contact D. A. Lienemann, UNL Extension Educator for Webster County in Red Cloud, (402) 746-3417 or email to: dlienemann2@unl.edu or go to the website at: http://www.webster.unl.edu/home