Source: https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/opinions/48morales/lo/1997/htm/lo1997085.htm
Timestamp: 2017-04-27 15:14:24
Document Index: 364260381

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 18', '§ 32', '§ 122', '§ 122', '§ 341', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 364', '§ 26', '§ 26', '§ 26', '§ 26', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 26', '§ 26', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 321', '§ 321', '§ 321', '§ 231', '§ 341', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 361', '§ 26', '§ 26', '§ 26', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 382', '§ 321', '§ 321']

Morales Letter Opinion No. 97-085
The Honorable John L. Hutchison
Hansford County Attorney
Letter Opinion No. 97-085
Re: Commissioners court's authority over
construction and operation of a concentrated
animal feeding operation (ID# 39442) Dear Mr. Hutchison:
You ask about the authority of a commissioners court with respect to a concentrated animal feeding operation ("CAFO"). You explain that Texas Farm, Inc., has applied to the Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission ("TNRCC") to operate a new swine feeding facility(1) in
Hansford County. The facility will generate, collect, and treat animal waste and wastewater on the
CAFO site. County residents, you state, are concerned the waste will pollute the underground water
supply, and the odor from the swine and the waste will pollute the air.
Your first ask about all the powers a county commissioners court may have "in regard to the
construction of a concentrated animal feeding operation and the regulation of the operations of a
concentrated animal feeding operation." You additionally ask if "there are any other permits, in
addition to the permit granted by the TNRCC, which Hansford County can require before the facility
can be constructed." An exhaustive treatment of these questions is beyond the scope of an attorney
general opinion. We limit our discussion to some of the relevant state law in this area, based on the
concerns expressed. Furthermore, we express no opinion regarding the extent to which any of these
provisions may be available to the county with respect to the proposed facility.
A county commissioners court has only the powers conferred by the Texas Constitution or
statutes. Tex. Const. art. V, § 18; Canales v. Laughlin, 214 S.W.2d 451, 453 (Tex. 1948). A commissioners court has no specific authority with respect to CAFO facilities. But a county does
have general authority to deal with environmental pollution and sanitation problems that may be
created by these facilities.(2) 36 David B. Brooks, County and Special District Law § 32.1
(Texas Practice 1989). Specifically, the commissioners court may enforce the sanitation and health
protection statutes as provided in chapters 121, 341, 361, and 364 of the Health and Safety Code, or
the water quality laws as provided in chapter 26 of the Water Code. Similarly, the commissioners
court may enforce air quality standards as provided in chapter 382 of the Health and Safety Code. A county appears to have very limited authority under these provisions, however, to regulate the
actual construction and operation of a CAFO or similar facility. We consider first the powers of the commissioners court under the sanitation and health
protection provisions of the Health and Safety Code. A commissioners court may "enforce any law
that is reasonably necessary to protect the public health," Health & Safety Code § 122.003(a), and
may appropriate and expend general county funds for the public health and sanitation in the county,
id. § 122.001. The county may use chapter 341, which provides for general sanitation standards and
health protection measures. Id. § 341.092(d). Section 341.011, for example, declares certain
conditions or places to be a "public health nuisance," including breeding places for flies in populous
areas, and organic wastes stored or discharged in such a way as to be a potential instrument or
medium in disease transmission to a person. Section 341.012 allows a local health authority to order
abatement of public health nuisance, and the local prosecuting attorney to sue to abate such nuisance
if necessary. Lastly, section 341.092(d) allows a county to institute proceedings to enjoin violations
of chapter 341 generally, including section 341.013(c), which prohibits the storage or disposal of
waste in a manner that may cause pollution or contamination of ground or surface water.(3)
The Solid Waste Disposal Act, Health and Safety Code chapter 361, allows a commissioners
court by rule to require and issue licenses authorizing and governing operation of facilities that
process, store, or dispose of solid waste,(4) other than hazardous waste,(5) outside the territorial or
extraterritorial jurisdiction of a city. Id. § 361.154. This regulatory authority, however, is limited. It may not be available with respect to facilities regulated by the TNRCC under chapter 26 of the
Water Code. See id. § 361.003(34) (excluding industrial discharges subject to regulation by permit
under chapter 26 of Water Code from definition of solid waste). Moreover, the commissioners court
may not exercise the licensing authority with respect to industrial solid waste disposed of on the site
of the operation that is the source of the waste. Id. §§ 361.090, .152, .154. If the authority were exercisable, the county would have to adopt solid waste management rules consistent with those of
and approved by the TNRCC. Id. § 361.154. The county then could amend or revoke a license
granted for reasons of public health, air or water pollution, or violation of chapter 361 of the Health
and Safety Code or other applicable law. Id. § 361.160. County actions would be subject to being
superseded by a specific action or directive of the TNRCC. Id. §§ 361.151, .154.
If the Solid Waste Disposal Act were applicable, a county would have authority to enforce
its provisions and rules adopted by the TNRCC with respect to solid waste management. Id.
§ 361.164. Specifically, the county would have authority to enter public or private property in its
jurisdiction to inspect and investigate solid waste management conditions. Id. § 361.032(b). Additionally, the county could sue to enjoin violations or threatened violations of any provision of
the act or any rule, permit, license, or other order of the TNRCC, the county, or another political
subdivision exercising authority under this act, within the county's jurisdiction, have penalties
assessed for violations, or both. Id. § 361.225.(6) The County Solid Waste Control Act, chapter 364 of the Health and Safety Code, allows a
commissioners court to regulate or prohibit waste disposal in the county if the disposal threatens
public health, safety, and welfare. Id. §§ 364.011, .012. These provisions are subject, however, to
the same limitations, including those related the definition of solid waste, described above with
respect to the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
We consider next the county's authority to enforce water quality laws under chapter 26 of
the Water Code. Section 26.121 generally prohibits discharge of waste(7) into or adjacent to any water
in the state(8) except as authorized by a TNRCC rule, permit, or order. A county may inspect public
water in the area and determine if persons discharging effluents have obtained and are complying
with permits for the discharge, Water Code § 26.171, and may enter private property to inspect and
investigate water quality conditions generally. Id. § 26.173. The commissioners court may also
execute cooperative agreements with the TNRCC or other local governments to provide "water
quality management, inspection, and enforcement functions . . . ." Id. § 26.175. Finally, the county
may sue to enjoin violations or threatened violations of section 26.121 or any TNRCC rule, permit,
or order(9) within the county's territorial jurisdiction, have penalties assessed for violations, or both.
Id. § 26.124.(10) Finally, we look at the county's authority, similar to its authority to enforce water quality
laws under chapter 26 of the Water Code, to enforce air quality laws under the Texas Clean Air Act. The act prohibits emission of any air contaminant or any activity that causes or contributes to air
pollution(11) except as authorized by a TNRCC rule or order. Health & Safety Code § 382.085(a). Furthermore, emission of any air contaminant or performance of any activity that violates the act or
any TNRCC rule or order is prohibited. Id. § 382.085(b). The county may monitor the air quality
and enter public or private property to determine compliance with the act. Id. § 382.111. The
commissioners court may make recommendations to the TNRCC concerning any rule or order that
affects the area within the county's jurisdiction, and the TNRCC is required to give maximum
consideration to these recommendations. Id. § 382.112. A county may also execute cooperative
agreements with the TNRCC or other local governmental entities "to provide for the performance
of air quality management, inspection, and enforcement functions . . . ." Id. § 382.115. Lastly, the
county may bring suit(12) for injunctive relief, civil penalties, or both, against persons violating or
threatening violation of the act or any TNRCC rule or order. Id. §§ 382.084, .114.(13) We proceed to consider your second question regarding any permits that the commissioners
court may require with respect to construction of the proposed facility. Generally, the TNRCC is
the state agency with authority to issue permits for the construction or operation of facilities that may
discharge waste or emit air contaminants. See State v. Associated Metals & Minerals Corp., 635
S.W.2d 407, 409-10 (Tex. 1982) (discussing provisions with respect to TNRCC in Clean Air Act
and concluding TNRCC has exclusive original jurisdiction to issue permits). Unless provisions of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act(14) apply, the county would appear to have a limited role in this process. The TNRCC is expressly authorized to issue permits and amendments to permits for
discharge of waste into or adjacent to water in the state. Water Code § 26.027(a). No person may construct a treatment facility, including any facility to treat, neutralize, or stabilize waste, until the
TNRCC has issued a permit authorizing or approved the discharge. Id. §§ 26.001(15), .027(c). The
TNRCC is also expressly authorized to issue a permit for a facility that may emit air contaminants
or operate a "federal source."(15) Health & Safety Code § 382.051. A person must obtain the permit
before constructing the facility. Id. § 382.0518. Pursuant to its authority to regulate facilities that may discharge waste or emit air
contaminants, the TNRCC has promulgated rules with respect to CAFOs that address both water and
air quality issues. See T.N.R.C.C., 20 Tex. Reg. 4719 (1995) (codified at 30 T.A.C. subch. K). CAFO facilities, as defined in the TNRCC rules, required to submit an application, may not start
operation without receiving authorization or permit under the rules.(16) 30 T.A.C. § 321.183(h). A
county may oppose the issuance of the permit(17) on the basis that the permitted activity may result in
detrimental impact on the groundwater underlying the CAFO. Id. § 321.187. Any such
administrative contest must be pursued within the time period and the format prescribed by the
A commissioners court has no specific authority with respect to a
concentrated animal feeding operation ("CAFO"). A county does have
authority to enforce environmental pollution laws in general under the
provisions of the Health and Safety Code and the Water Code. A county has
very limited authority to regulate the actual construction and operation of a
CAFO or similar facility, however, under those provisions. Generally, the
Texas Natural Resource and Conservation Commission is the state agency
with authority to issue permits for construction and operation of a CAFO
facility. A county's role is generally limited to opposing issuance of such
permit. Yours very truly,
1. The facility will hold a maximum of 23,222 swine. T.N.R.C.C., Notice of Application for Authorization
to Operate a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation in Accordance with T.N.R.C.C. Subch. K Rules
(Dec. 1996). See 30 T.A.C. § 321.182(A)(iii) (defining CAFO as any animal feeding operation designated by TNRCC
executive director as significant contributor of pollution or any animal feeding operation which stables and confines
for 45 days or more, in any 12-month period, more than 2,500 swine weighing over 55 pounds). 2. As you suggest, a county has very limited and specific zoning authority, and none that may be used to regulate
construction or operation of the proposed facility. See, e.g., Local Gov't Code §§ 231.101 - .113 (county zoning around
Lakes Tawakoni and Ray Roberts), 231.131 - .140 (county zoning around Lakes Alan Henry, Cooper, and Post);
231.171 - .183 (county zoning and regulations in El Paso Mission Trail Historical Area), 240.061 - .067 (regulation of
slaughterers applicable to county containing 2 or more municipalities with population of 250,000 or more, or to county
adjacent to such county), 243.001 - .011 (county and municipal regulation of sexually oriented business). 3. The Texas Department of Health is a necessary and indispensable party in any suit brought by a county under
this section. Health & Safety Code § 341.092(e). 4. See id. § 361.003(34) (defining solid waste to include "garbage, rubbish, refuse, sludge from a waste treatment
plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility, and other discarded material, including solid, liquid,
semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, municipal, commercial, mining, and agricultural
operations and from community and institutional activities").
5. See id. § 361.003(12) (defining hazardous waste as solid waste identified or listed as such by administrator
of United States Environmental Protection Agency under federal Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended). 6. The TNRCC would be a necessary and indispensable party to any such action. Id. § 361.229. 7. The term "waste" is defined as "sewage, industrial waste, municipal waste, recreational waste, agricultural
waste, or other waste, as defined in this section. Water Code § 26.001(6). 8. The terms "water" or "water in the state" includes groundwater. Id. § 26.001(5). 9. Issuance of a TNRCC permit to discharge waste or air contaminants would not bar a nuisance action. Manchester Terminal Corp. v. Texas TX TX Marine Transp., Inc., 781 S.W.2d 646, 651 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.]
1989, writ denied) (neither TNRCC permit authorizing emission of specified amount of pollutant into air nor underlying
legislation gave company right to create nuisance; activity may be judicially declared nuisance); Atlas Chem. Indus.,
Inc. v. Anderson, 514 S.W.2d 309, 318-19 (Tex. Civ. App.--Texarkana 1974), aff'd, 524 S.W.2d 681 (Tex. 1975)
(permit to discharge pollutants into stream will not defeat action for damages); Attorney General Opinion M-190 (1968)
at 5 (provisions of Texas Clean Air Act and what is now Water Code ch. 26 do not affect authority of city or county
to abate pollution as common-law public nuisance; only effect of permit from TNRCC would be to protect permittee
from "statutory pollution"). 10. TNRCC is a necessary and indispensable party to any suit instituted by a county under this section. Water
Code § 26.124(a). 11. The term "air pollution" means the presence of contaminants in such concentration and duration as to: (A)
be injurious to or adversely affect human health or welfare, animal life, vegetation, or property; or, (B) interfere with
normal use or enjoyment of animal life, vegetation, or property. Health & Safety Code § 382.003(3). The phrase "air
contaminant" includes odor, produced by processes other than natural. Id. § 382.003(2). Odor produced by "natural
processes" means that which occurs in nature and is affected or controlled by human mechanics only to the extent
normal and usual for the particular area. F/R Cattle Co., Inc. v. State, 866 S.W.2d 200, 203 (Tex. 1993). Location is
a factor to be considered in deciding if the pollutant is produced by "natural processes," and is a factual determination.
Id. at 204-05. 12. See supra note 9. 13. TNRCC is a necessary and indispensable party. Health & Safety Code § 382.114(d).
14. See supra discussion at 2.
15. See Health & Safety Code § 382.003(7) (defining "federal source" as facilities subject to permitting
requirements of federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-549).
16. In addition to the TNRCC permit, a CAFO facility may be required to obtain coverage under a general, federal
permit. See EPA Guide Manual on Npdes Regulations for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dec.
1995) at 8, 10. To obtain this coverage, a CAFO operator must file a standardized notice of intent, prepare and
implement a pollution prevention plan, properly operate and maintain the facilities, and lastly, "make proper
notifications" if discharges do occur. Id. at 11, 14, 17, 30. This permit does not release the permittee from any
responsibility it may have under other federal or state laws or regulations. Id. at 29. 17. The applicant is required to publish notice of the application in a newspaper of general circulation within the
county and area where the proposed facility is to be located. 30 T.A.C. § 321.186(b). Additionally, the TNRCC's
executive director must mail the notice of application (which includes instructions on the manner and time frame for
submitting comments) to the county judge and health authorities in that county or in which the waste is to be disposed
of, among others. Id. § 321.186(d)(1), (2)(C). Texas OAG home page | Opinions & Open Government