Flexibility to Farm Act

Bill: 113-hr-1304
Sponsor: full_name: Rep. Walberg, Tim [R-MI-7]
Introduced: 2013-03-20
Policy area: Environmental Protection
Subjects: Administrative law and regulatory procedures

Agricultural conservation and pollution

Air quality

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Environmental regulatory procedures

Intergovernmental relations

Solid waste and recycling

State and local government operations

Water quality
Latest action: action_date: 2013-03-22
text: Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.

Summaries:
action_date: 2013-03-20
action_desc: Introduced in House
text: <p>Flexibility to Farm Act - Permits the chief executive of a state to exempt farmers in the state from a requirement of a covered federal environmental law by determining that such requirement is unduly burdensome.</p> <p>Requires the chief executive to solicit and accept public comments for at least 90 days before finalizing any such determination.</p> <p>Defines "covered federal environmental law" to mean the Clean Air Act insofar as it applies to emissions of air pollutants other than those resulting from the combustion of fossil fuel and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act).</p>

tv_txt: I 113th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 1304 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 20, 2013 Mr. Walberg introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce , and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure , for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To permit the chief executive of a State to create an exemption from certain requirements of Federal environmental laws for producers of agricultural commodities, and for other purposes.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Flexibility to Farm Act . 2. Findings Congress finds the following: (1) The agricultural community of the United States serves as the economic backbone of many communities and employs millions of Americans. (2) In recent years, one-size-fits-all policies issued by the Environmental Protection Agency have increased dramatically, requiring agricultural producers to focus on regulation compliance rather than on growing the world’s healthiest, most abundant food supply. (3) Attempts by the Environmental Protection Agency to expand the definition of navigable waters under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act expand the scope of Federal jurisdiction under that Act well beyond the intent of Congress, and would eliminate a central precept of that Act, which reserves certain waters to the exclusive jurisdiction of the States. (4) The Environmental Protection Agency’s interpretation of the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure program has attempted to regulate milk in the same manner as petroleum, requiring dairy farmers to develop oil spill prevention plans and moving far beyond common sense and the intent of the law. (5) An increasing number of poultry and livestock operations have been forced to apply for permits under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System resulting from the Environmental Protection Agency’s expanding definition of what constitutes a discharge under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. (6) Duplicative and costly permitting requirements under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act will require additional National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits for pesticide applications, subjecting pesticide users to unnecessary red tape and financial burdens while exposing them to the threat of unfounded litigation. (7) The Environmental Protection Agency has initiated a program to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act, which could impose an undue burden on agricultural producers by requiring them to obtain permits to continue operations. (8) The Federal Government should not impose further rules or regulations that are overly burdensome or cause economic hardship for the agricultural community. 3. Unduly burdensome regulations exemption (a) In general If the chief executive of a State determines, in accordance with this section, that a requirement of a covered Federal environmental law, or a regulation thereunder, is unduly burdensome to persons in the State acting in their capacity as farmers, such requirement or regulation shall not apply to persons in the State acting in that capacity. (b) Procedure Before finalizing any determination under subsection (a), the chief executive of a State shall solicit and accept public comments regarding such determination for a period of not less than 90 days. (c) Definitions In this Act: (1) Covered Federal environmental law The term covered Federal environmental law means— (A) the Clean Air Act ( 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. ), insofar as such Act applies to emissions of air pollutants other than emissions resulting from the combustion of any fossil fuel; and (B) the Federal Water Pollution Control Act ( 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. ). (2) Farmer The term farmer means— (A) a producer, as that term is defined in— (i) section 1001 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 ( 7 U.S.C. 8702 ); (ii) section 1506(a) of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 ( 7 U.S.C. 8773(a) ); and (iii) section 212 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 ( 7 U.S.C. 1635a ); and (B) a producer of a specialty crop, as that term is defined in section 3 of the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004 ( 7 U.S.C. 1621 note; Public Law 108–465 ). (3) State The term State means any of the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States.