WASHINGTON – Yesterday, Reps. Ron Estes (R-Kansas) and Eric Burlison (R-Missouri) introduced the Banning EPA’s Encroachment on Facilities (BEEF) Act, H.R.7079, which will protect small family-owned meat and poultry processors from new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations by prohibiting the EPA from finalizing, implementing or enforcing a new EPA proposed rule entitled "Clean Water Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Meat and Poultry Products Point source category."
"Once again, Biden’s EPA is using its rulemaking pen to attack small businesses in Kansas and across the country through their recent regulations proposal on local meat processors," said Rep. Estes. "Kansans have shared with me that this egregious burden by federal bureaucrats would shutter small operations in our communities due to the steep costs of implementing unnecessary, major phosphate and nitrogen testing that large-scale meat-processing operations can absorb and already conduct. Together with Congressman Burlison, our commonsense bill would prevent the EPA from attacking local mom-and-pop meat producers with their regulatory overreach."
"The EPA’s newly proposed regulation isn’t just an attack on family-run small businesses, it’s an attack on rural communities, like Southwest Missouri. These meat and poultry processors are the lifeblood of our communities and instead of supporting them, the Biden EPA is on the attack," said Rep. Burlison. "The BEEF Act cuts through bureaucratic nonsense and lets these hardworking Americans do what they do best, produce safe, affordable food for our families."
In December 2023, the EPA proposed a rule to strengthen regulations on discharges from meat and poultry facilities, in order to appease environmentalists at the expense of family-run facilities. The rule, titled the “Clean Water Act Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Meat and Poultry Products Point source category,” will, for the first time, expand regulations to include phosphorus discharge along with new standards for oil, organic material, salt, ammonia, and nitrogen.
The agricultural community, not leftists in Washington, D.C., are best able to make decisions on land and water management. This rule is another example of the left’s push for more government control in environmental matters with no consideration for the impact it will have on the farming community.
Text of the BEEF Act is available here.
"Kansas Meat Processors Association, representing the small to medium-sized meat processors in the state of Kansas, is concerned the proposed changes suggested in the Wastewater Act will be detrimental to not only the processing industry, but also to many other agricultural-related fields in the state of Kansas. While the government promotes fairness across the industry, these regulations would hurt the small family-owned businesses and push their customers to the larger corporations. Our members reside in rural areas and understand the importance of keeping our environment clean and safe for our residents. That being said, is there any scientific evidence that every meat/poultry processing facility needs to follow the same guidelines – regardless of size? It is possible present guidelines provide the needed regulations for the majority of processing facilities in our state. We would like to see more evidence supporting the necessity of the proposed changes before something is enacted that could affect the economy of our entire state."
"The American Association of Meat Processors (AAMP) fully supports the legislation proposed by Representatives Burlison and Estes to stop the EPA’s proposed rule on Effluent Limitation Guidelines for meat and poultry facilities," said Chris Young, Executive Director, American Association of Meat Processors. "I want to be clear that AAMP believes we as an industry need to be environmentally responsible, but the proposed rule in its current state is greatly flawed. I believe EPA rushed the proposed rule to meet dates as part of a sue-and-settle case with multiple activist groups and did not take the time to study and understand the industry as a whole. The proposed rule is based on limited wastewater collection and limited visits to meat and poultry facilities and is based largely on a study performed by one of the activist groups that sued EPA. EPA quotes the study more than 20 times in the proposed rule, a study that has not been peer reviewed. EPA needs to start over and do its due diligence in collecting data and work with the industry to understand its diversity and how we can work together to come up with cost effective sustainable answers to wastewater issues."
"A better understanding of the industry as a whole is needed to form a working set of rules that protects the environment and allows us to produce the food needed to feed the nation," said Tom Eickman, Owner, Eickman’s Processing Inc. (Seward, IL) and President, American Association of Meat Processors. "Our owners and employees of all food processing facilities are also members of our communities. We all live, work and enjoy the environments in which we live, and we wish to be environmentally responsible. However, a one-size-fits-all approach often does not work. EPA proposed this regulation as the result of a sue-and-settle agreement with a timeline pushed by that court settlement. The meat industry welcomes a discussion of revising the rules but would like more input than a long, complicated survey and limited site visits."
"The Missouri Association of Meat Processors represents nearly 140 small meat processors who serve their area’s small farmers, feed their local communities, and take care to be good environmental stewards," said Niki Cloud, Executive Secretary, Missouri Association of Meat Processors. "Many of our members are family-owned businesses that have served their communities for generations. We fear that many of our members would be forced to discontinue operations rather than pay for expensive wastewater treatment equipment that they may not even need, because the EPA has not considered small processors in its proposal."
