Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

USDA’s Poultry Rule Will Exacerbate Water Pollution, in Addition to Its Negative Impacts on Food and Worker Safety

The Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) proposal to “modernize” the poultry inspection system by replacing government inspectors with company employees, and speeding up the processing line to a staggering 175 birds per minute, has been exposed on numerous occasions as a disaster-waiting-to-happen for food and worker safety. In its zeal to save money for poultry corporations, the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) failed to conduct its much-vaunted “interagency review” before giving the proposed rule its stamp of approval—it even neglected to invite the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to weigh in on the obvious dangers posed to workers.

As if more evidence were needed that the poultry rule is a horrible idea, it turns out that the rule also poses a number of serious threats to the environment that went unaddressed in the USDA’s analysis, as CPR President Rena Steinzor and I explain in a letter sent today to OIRA Deputy Administrator Dominic Mancini.

As proposed, the rule threatens to significantly increase water pollution in at least two distinct ways. First, it would lead to an increase in the use of poultry-sanitizing chemicals, which then have to be discharged into nearby water bodies where they will have toxic effects on aquatic life and threaten ecosystems. Poultry plants are expected to increase their reliance on something called “online reprocessing” (OLR), where all carcasses, visually contaminated or not, pass through automatic sprayers on the line that drench them with large amounts of antimicrobial chemicals like chlorine and trisodium phosphate (imagine a car wash … but for chickens). In the more traditional method, only those carcasses that are visually identified as contaminated are taken off the line for reprocessing, undergoing procedures that use smaller amounts of chemicals.

Half of all poultry plants already use OLR under waivers from the USDA, but the new rule would eliminate the need to obtain a waiver, paving the way for wider adoption of the practice. Even more importantly, with three chickens whizzing by every second under the new rule, and a sharp reduction in government inspectors, it would be nearly impossible to spot contaminated carcasses that should be taken off the line. Companies will turn to OLR as a way of indiscriminately disinfecting all the birds on the line: those plants that don’t already use OLR will start, and the rest are likely to install chemical washers and sprayers at additional points on the line.

As an entirely separate consequence, the faster line speeds permitted by the rule would enable poultry plants to increase the number of birds they slaughter every day, producing more pollutant-filled wastewater—containing larger amounts of blood, urine, feces, feathers, fat, and bone—that will also be discharged into surface waters. (On average, poultry plants produce 9.3 gallons of wastewater per chicken.)

In its proposed rule, the USDA quickly dismissed any significant rise in the number of birds slaughtered, insisting that there simply won’t be a market for that many additional poultry products. Because the agency predicted that the rule would have only a trivial effect on the price of poultry, it concluded that expected sales of poultry would remain essentially the same.

However, we found two major flaws in the USDA’s analysis. First, the agency severely underestimated the expected increase in line speeds and the resulting cost savings and growth in production capacity, which would likely reduce prices by more than the USDA predicted. Second, the agency looked only at domestic consumption, completely ignoring the enormous (and growing) foreign market for U.S. poultry exports, which has been shown to be much more responsive to slight changes in price than the domestic market. (In 2012, U.S. companies shipped 7.2 billion pounds of broiler meat to other countries.) As a result, the number of birds slaughtered and the amount of polluting wastewater produced under the rule are likely to be much greater than the USDA acknowledges.

To make matters worse, existing regulations and water permit programs are not equipped to handle large increases in the chemicals used in OLR or the pollutants that come from a rise in slaughtering, as we discuss in the letter:

Most poultry plants do not even have limits for these chemicals in their wastewater permits, so additional discharges will generally go undetected and unaddressed …. In the last three years, 68 percent of poultry plants with data available exceeded their effluent limits for one or more pollutants; a significant rise in slaughtering would only increase and intensify these permit violations. The USDA did not acknowledge any of these damaging outcomes in its Federal Register notice explaining the proposal, adopting the same “hear no evil, see no evil” position on these issues as it did on the worker safety ones.

We conclude our letter today by calling on OIRA to ensure that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) be given the opportunity to scrutinize the rule’s environmental implications this time around, as the Office prepares to review the USDA’s final version of the rule.

The letter is posted here.

Showing 2,821 results

Michael Patoka | April 9, 2013

USDA’s Poultry Rule Will Exacerbate Water Pollution, in Addition to Its Negative Impacts on Food and Worker Safety

The Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) proposal to “modernize” the poultry inspection system by replacing government inspectors with company employees, and speeding up the processing line to a staggering 175 birds per minute, has been exposed on numerous occasions as a disaster-waiting-to-happen for food and worker safety. In its zeal to save money for poultry corporations, […]

Adam Finkel | April 5, 2013

Updating OSHA Inspection Policies

This post originally appeared on Harvard Law School’s Bill of Health and on RegBlog and is cross-posted with permisison. For many of the federal agencies that promulgate and enforce regulations to protect public health, safety, and the environment, the era of “big government” never even began.  The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is a prime example: the […]

Ben Somberg | April 4, 2013

Simpler Government, or Secret and Unaccountable Government?

Over at Climate Progress, CPR Member Scholar Lisa Heinzerling critiques Cass Sunstein’s new book, “Simpler: The Future of Government.” Rules on worker health, environmental protection, food safety, health care, consumer protection, and more all passed through Sunstein’s inbox. Some never left. … In Sunstein’s account, OIRA’s interventions also ensured “a well-functioning system of public comment” and “compliance […]

Ben Somberg | April 1, 2013

Who Will Run the EPA?

From Member Scholar Lisa Heinzerling’s new article in the Yale Journal on Regulation: With President Obama’s nomination of Gina McCarthy as the new Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), much attention has turned to her record as the EPA official in charge of air pollution programs, experience as the head of two states’ environmental […]

Sidney A. Shapiro | March 28, 2013

Rep. Duckworth’s Small Business Paperwork Relief Act is a Flawed Solution for the Wrong Problem

Rep. Tammy Duckworth appears to have been caught up in the anti-regulatory fervor that has continued to afflict the House of Representatives ever since the GOP took control there in 2010.  On Monday, Representative Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat, announced a plan to address what she said was a problem: “For businesses with less than twenty […]

Michael Patoka | March 22, 2013

Taking ACUS to Task for Industry Bias in ‘International Regulatory Cooperation’ Project

In late 2011, a little known but surprisingly influential independent federal agency called the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) conducted a research project on “International Regulatory Cooperation” (IRC), culminating in a set of recommendations to U.S. agencies. In a letter sent yesterday (March 21), CPR Member Scholars Rena Steinzor and Thomas McGarity, and I […]

Matthew Freeman | March 22, 2013

test no

Not Yet Posted test

Dave Owen | March 20, 2013

Friday in DC: Creative Approaches to Critical Habitat Protection Under the ESA

Two months ago, a federal district court in Alaska set aside the Department of the Interior’s designation of critical habitat for the polar bear.  This had been the most geographically extensive critical habitat designation ever under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), but it provoked adamant opposition from the petroleum industry and the state of Alaska.  […]

Rena Steinzor | March 19, 2013

Refinery Rule Returned to EPA for Additional ‘Analysis’: How Big Oil, OIRA, and the SBA Office of Advocacy Teamed Up to Delay Progress

On Friday, the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) returned a proposed rule on air pollution standards for oil refineries to EPA, insisting that the agency complete “additional analysis” before moving forward. EPA’s efforts to reduce hazardous pollutants from these facilities will be delayed for months or likely years.  And that additional analysis? […]