Small Town News

Farm groups call ruling devastating

---

Devastating news for producers came in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision not to hear testimony from agriculture groups in the hopes of overturning the National Cotton Council v. EPA case that deals with the need for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for pesticide applications in, on, or near water.

"This is horrible news for all producers throughout the U.S. and right here in North Dakota," states North Dakota Grain Growers Association President Terry Weckerly. "If these permits become reality, producers will be unnecessarily burdened with excessive cost and time lost for no measurable gain. We need to now come together for agriculture and push for a legislative fix to this problem before it shuts down conven-tional agriculture as we know it."

Previous to the ruling, pesticide applications on or around water sources were governed by FIFRA. Now due to the Sixth Circuit Court Ruling, producers will be subject to costly and undue regulations, and permitting requirements that won't provide beneficial impacts to the environment.

On November 27, 2007, the EPA issued a Final Rule concluding that pesticides applied in accordance with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) are exempt from the Clean Water Act's permitting requirements. The Sixth Circuit Appellate Court decision stated that, "These proceedings involve a final regulation issued by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Water Act.

The Clean Water Act regulates the discharge of 'pollutants' into the nation's waters by, among other things, requiring entities that emit 'pollutants' to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge' Elimination System (NPDES) permit.

Two different groups of Petitioners--one representing environmental interest groups and the other representing industry interest groups--opposed the EPA's Final Rule as exceeding the EPA's interpretive authority. The EPA defends the Final Rule by arguing that the terms of the Clean Water Act are ambiguous and that the Final Rule is a reasonable construction of the Clean Water Act entitled to deference from this Court.

An update posted late last week at the EPA Agriculture webpage stated that, "On April 9, 2009, the Department of Justice (DOJ) chose not to seek rehearing on an opinion issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit in National Cotton Council v. EPA. The DOJ instead filed a motion to stay issuance of the Court's mandate for two years to provide EPA time to develop, propose and issue a final NPDES general permit for pesticide applications, for States to develop permits, and to provide outreach and education to the regulated community."

The decision as it stands is a clear threat to agricultural production; EPA estimates that the ruling would affect approximately 365,000 pesticide applicators across the U.S. annually.



Copyright 2010 Turtle Mountain Star, Rolla, North Dakota. All Rights Reserved. This content, including derivations, may not be stored or distributed in any manner, disseminated, published, broadcast, rewritten or reproduced without express, written consent from SmallTownPapers, Inc.

© 2010 Turtle Mountain Star Rolla, North Dakota. All Rights Reserved. This content, including derivations, may not be stored or distributed in any manner, disseminated, published, broadcast, rewritten or reproduced without express, written consent from DAS.

More from Turtle Mountain Star