EPA to Watch Farm Smog

A loophole that allowed California farms to escape federal air pollution controls has been closed as part of a legal settlement Tuesday that will cause the state’s agriculture to be regulated the same way it is in the rest of the country.

Although agriculture is a major source of air pollution in California, the state Legislature in 1976 granted farmers an exemption from federal Clean Air Act requirements to secure permits before operating or expanding. While California pioneered many air pollution controls, it was alone among the states in granting agriculture, its largest industry, a waiver from federal air quality regulations.

Emissions from the state’s farms are subject to some control. For example, there are days when agricultural burning is prohibited. However, state and local air quality officials have lacked the power to issue permits that regulate a variety of operations, including feed lots, diesel-powered irrigation pumps, livestock waste lagoons and pesticide spraying.

In settling three consolidated lawsuits, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged that the agricultural exemption violates federal law and agreed to begin regulating farms in the nation’s leading agricultural state next year.

“This is the first time agriculture will be regulated in California under the Clean Air Act. That’s why it’s a big deal,” said Anne Harper, attorney for the Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, one of the plaintiffs in the suit. “We hope this is a first step in regulating agriculture so they become part of the solution instead of part of the problem.”

The EPA has made it clear that unless the state Legislature removes the 26-year-old loophole, the state could face economic penalties. The agency has begun an 18-month countdown toward the imposition of sanctions that could include tougher pollution regulations on new businesses as well as the loss of federal highway funds.

“This is a deficiency in California,” said Jack Broadbent, who runs the EPA’s air quality programs across the Pacific Southwest.

“It begins the process of identifying these emissions so agricultural operations can begin to take steps that will lead to emissions reductions. It’s another step that will help air quality.”

Regulating a significant portion of California’s $30-billion agriculture industry is not a role the EPA relishes. The agency has long had authority to intervene, but did not do so until it was sued earlier this year.

Environmentalists, physicians and concerned citizens who sued the EPA hailed the agreement as an important step toward clean air. They sued after the EPA approved California’s air quality plan that perpetuated the agricultural exemption.

“It is long overdue for big [agriculture] to do its air share to clean up our air,” said Brent Newell, an attorney for the Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment in Delano, in Kern County.

“When the largest agribusinesses are required to get air pollution permits, this will level the playing field for other business sectors that already obey the Clean Air Act.”

Growers reacted to the announcement with dismay.

“Agriculture does support clean air and we want to do our part, but now, instead of working with local air folks, we’re going to be working with folks out of Washington. The farther they are from here, the less they understand agriculture,” said Paul Betancourt, a Fresno County cotton grower.

“What about a guy who wants to expand? How much is it going to cost him on top of the expense of new land and equipment? Is this another case of discouraging success? We should be encouraging folks to grow and prosper.”

“We have really been trying to protect the air,” said Brad Schnoor, who farms 5,000 acres of almonds, corn and alfalfa in Madera County. “We don’t burn anymore. We grind all of our prunings. We’ve gone to some no-till corn varieties that eliminate the need to plow and create more dust.

“We water down all our roads. But I don’t know what we can do to cut down on the dust during almond harvest. What do you do about a guy plowing his field? Tell him he can’t?”

Agriculture contributes to air pollution in a number of ways. Clouds of dust from dirt roads atop levies cloud the Imperial Valley. Downwind from Chino dairy farms, ammonia from cow excrement contributes to some of the worst particle air pollution in the nation.

In the San Joaquin Valley, progress in reducing ozone, one of the components of smog, lags behind the rest of California, while emissions of dust and smoke in the valley are actually increasing. Most farm operations have no pollution controls. About 3,500 smoky irrigation pumps dot hundreds of farms and few of the machines have pollution controls. Huge livestock feedlots produce clouds of dust, manure and chemicals that contribute to smog as well.

Smog in Bakersfield, Fresno and Sequoia National Park is beginning to rival that of Los Angeles. From the Central Valley, the Sierra Nevada appears shrouded in haze much of the year.

Under the settlement, the EPA will give California six months to remove the exemption for agriculture before issuing notices to big farms to secure permits for diesel-powered water pumps by next May and for remaining farm operations by August 2003.

Although those actions do not automatically trigger emissions controls, they provide a powerful incentive for farms to clean up.

Since the requirement applies only to agricultural operations that emit more than 25 tons of smog-forming pollutants annually, a farm can avoid permits and bureaucratic red tape by reducing emissions before the deadlines.

Also, by placing agriculture under permits, air quality officials can more accurately track how much pollution farms produce and where it comes from.