Tag: EPCRA
Emissions reporting ruling draws near
By Clay Detlefsen, Senior Vice President, Regulatory & Environmental Affairs
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), was created in 1986. It’s intended to help communities plan for chemical emergencies and requires industry to report on the storage, use, and release of hazardous substances to federal, state, and local governments. Overall, EPCRA is actually a good legislation, and it was passed by Congress for a good reason.
But EPCRA is also a very complicated and comprehensive law, with many provisions. And while some provisions make a lot of sense, others don’t, depending on how they’re applied.
The dairy industry can be subject to reporting requirements in EPCRA 304 — an emergency reporting obligation when chemicals are released into the environment — as well as reporting obligations under EPCRA 311, EPCRA 312, and EPCRA 313.
The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) has worked for decades to resolve conflict with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and environmental activists over various EPCRA reporting mandates for dairy farmers and processors, and has had success in resolving many of those conflicts. Now, we’re on the precipice of resolving yet another EPCRA reporting conflict: a Section 304 provision that requires reporting of air emissions from manure.
This EPCRA obligation is triggered when there’s a release of 100 pounds or more of anhydrous ammonia or ammonia off manure in a 24-hour time frame. By my rough estimates, about 1,400 cows would trigger an obligation. This requirement creates a lot of unnecessary work for dairy farmers, and also for government officials and emergency responders, which nobody wants. So, in 2008, EPA proposed an air emission from manure exemption to the reporting requirements under Section 304 for farmers.
That rule was challenged in the courts by environmental activists who ultimately won in 2017. EPA then recrafted another exemption in 2019 which has also been challenged, but thankfully, last year, the federal district court ruled that the EPCRA exemption from EPA was in fact valid and appropriate. That ruling is now under appeal, and the appeals court will likely have oral arguments on that issue within the next six months. So now, after nearly 20 years of back-and-forth in the courts, we may soon be able to put this issue to rest once and for all.
This exciting development is just one example of the many regulatory issues that NMPF has poured time and resources into over the years. From environmental issues to food safety to nutrition and the similarly long-term fight against plant-based dairy imposters, regulatory changes take years. And though you may not always hear about these issues, some of NMPF’s most successful regulatory battles are won in Washington before the effects ever reach the dairy farm.
To hear more about the history of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act and NMPF’s work to support dairy farmers, check out the latest episode of the “Dairy Defined” podcast.
This column originally appeared in Hoard’s Dairyman Intel on Aug. 17, 2026.
Dairy Farmers Near Win in Decades-Long Regulatory Fight
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, aka EPCRA, was created in 1986 to help communities plan for chemical emergencies. It requires industry to report on the storage, use, and release of hazardous substances to federal, state, and local governments.
It’s a good law, says NMPF Chief Counsel Clay Detlefsen, but unintended consequences have snared dairy farmers into a decades-long fight against over-regulation. And for those decades, Detlefsen’s been part of every twist and turn, with potential light at the end of the tunnel within the next year.
“EPCRA overall I think is a great law. It’s just been misconstrued by environmental activists, and they’ve hijacked a good law for nefarious purposes,” Detlefsen said. “My job is making sure that regulatory agencies don’t do stupid things, and yes, it takes literally decades to stop things from happening.”
Regulatory Register — Summer 2025
NMPF Against Emissions Reporting for Manure under EPCRA
NMPF filed its own comments Feb. 13 and joined with other agriculture groups in coalition comments to EPA’s Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking weighing in on the reporting of air emissions from manure under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).
Both sets of comments assert that Congress, the emergency response community, animal agriculture groups and the Coast Guard think that reporting air emissions from manure under a statute designed to address serious, life-threatening chemical spills is ill-advised and unnecessary. NMPF also said reporting would invade farmers’ privacy and put them at risk of being targeted by activist groups such as the Animal Liberation Front, which has been labeled a terrorist organization by the FBI.
Air emissions reporting under EPCRA has been an ongoing battle. NMPF and other agriculture groups were able to quash the notion that ammonia and hydrogen sulfide from manure were reportable under EPCRA and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act through a legislative fix in 2018 and a regulatory fix in 2019.
In January 2021, the Biden Administration issued an Executive Order instructing EPA to review and rethink its regulations. Later that same year, EPA requested a court, where legal action was ongoing, to send the rule back for review without nullifying it so the rule would remain in effect while undergoing review.
The agency’s plan to revoke the exemption it granted in 2019 was abandoned after pushback from NMPF and other agriculture groups. NMPF is cautiously optimistic that the common-sense exemption will be retained. On Feb. 14, Representatives Nick Langworthy, R-NY, and Jim Costa, D-CA, led a letter signed by 44 of their colleagues urging EPA to retain the current exemption.
