Rural lawmakers retry Superfund exemption

By Aaron Sadler
The Morning News

WASHINGTON -- A group of farm-state lawmakers Thursday said they would try again to prevent animal waste from being classified as a pollutant, an exemption opposed by environmental groups and plaintiffs in a case against Arkansas poultry companies.

A new bill specifies manure would not be designated as a hazardous substance or contaminant under the federal "Superfund" law.

Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., said Congress never intended manure to be covered under Superfund, the federal program to clean up hazardous waste sites.

Lincoln, a lead sponsor of the bill in the Senate, maintained family farmers could be exposed to significant liabilities without the exemption.

Opponents claimed the measure would unfairly insulate large poultry producers from litigation.

"We're not talking about granddad's chicken coop. We're talking about an industry that's producing waste that is the equivalent of 10.7 million additional people," said Ed Brocksmith of the Tahlequah, Okla.-based group, Save the Illinois River.

Brocksmith cited statistics from Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson, who is suing Tyson Foods and 13 other poultry companies or subsidiaries. The suit contends the poultry industry in Northwest Arkansas is to blame for polluting the Illinois River watershed in Oklahoma.

The federal lawsuit is in the discovery phase and trial is still several months away, an Edmondson spokesman said Thursday.

Illinois River pollution could also be caused by municipalities, said Lincoln, who denied the legislation is driven by major poultry corporations.

"People all over the state are very, very concerned about whether or not their farming operations are all of a sudden going to become a liability," she said.

An identical bill died in the last Congress without being considered on the House or Senate floor, though Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., said Congress had the votes to approve it.

Peterson is now chairman of the House Agriculture Committee.

Peterson and Lincoln said efforts to convert manure into a renewable energy source may be thwarted without the exemption.

"If we get bogged down in this Superfund stuff, I think it's going to get in the way of what we're trying to do, which is not only good for the environment, but good for energy," Peterson said.

Proponents said disposal of animal waste is covered under other environmental statutes, so including manure in Superfund is unnecessary.

For the same reasons, opponents argued the necessity since federal law already exempts normal application of manure as fertilizer.

"Farmers that use manure responsibly don't need the exemption," said Velma Smith, spokeswoman for the National Environmental Trust. "To those who use manure irresponsibly, we shouldn't send a signal that this kind of practice is acceptable."

Edmondson has referred to the bill as a "blatant attempt by a multibillion dollar industry to protect its practice of dumping waste in an environmentally damaging manner."

But Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said it is designed only to protect the growing dairy farm industry in his state and farmers throughout the country.

Third District Rep. John Boozman, R-Rogers, was a co-sponsor of the bill in the last Congress and said he will again support the exemption.

"When the original law was set up, nobody intended that grandpa's barnyard would be a potential Superfund site," Boozman said. "Those chicken farms have been following best management practices for years and doing what is appropriate."