EPA Anti-Pollution Rules Examined

February 24, 2000

Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-IN) Wednesday told USDA to determine the cost of proposed Environmental Protection Agency water quality regulations on agriculture, state and federal agencies. The EPA regulations are "very complex," Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman told the committee. One of his concerns was the lack of cost projections.

Lugar says cost predictions of the proposed EPA regulations vary widely. USDA is the most appropriate department to assess the costs of regulations on farmers, foresters and state and federal agencies.

In August, EPA proposed rules on the total maximum daily load (TMDL) program of the Clean Water Act. TMDLs set the maximum amount of pollution that a water body can receive without violating water quality standards.

EPA Administrator Carol Browner told the committee EPA will work with USDA to address such issues as cost and claims that the proposals exceed EPA’s legal authority. However, she also said the EPA proposal was a "very sensible way" to make sure the nation’s water supplies are clean.

In the August proposal, states were given 15 years to submit plans to clean up water sources that fail to meet water quality standards. EPA believes there are more than 20,000 streams and lakes that don’t meet the standards.

Robert W. Adler, law professor at the University of Utah, told the committee there is little if any doubt the proposed regulations will force more costs and agriculture and forestry. "In some cases, operators will face increased costs of doing business just as all other major U.S. industries have been asked to incur reasonable increased costs in order to do their fair share to protect the waterways we all rely on ..."

That doesn’t mean the net result is to the detriment of economic sectors, he added. In some cases, operators can benefit economically from operational changes required by the regulations by decreased annual input costs and increased annual yields.

By increasing efficiency, said Adler, the rules "have strong potential to benefit both the environment and our agriculture and forestry industries. They also could help to ensure that the agricultural pollution control assistance programs conducted ... are conducted in a smarter, more cost-effective way."