Committee hears S.124 changes on CAFO permits, vegetated buffers and winter manure exemptions

BURLINGTON, Vt. — Steve Collier, an Agency of Agriculture representative, told a legislative committee that S.124 would clarify which farms must seek federal concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) permits and would make several technical changes to Vermont law governing buffers, winter manure spreading exemptions and certification filings.

Collier said the bill’s core issue is legal: whether federal CAFO permitting applies in specific discharge scenarios, not a change in water-quality standards. “If you have a pipe going into a lake and you don't have a permit to allow it, that's illegal under the Clean Water Act,” Collier said, and added that “you can't discharge without a permit. But once you get a permit, you can't discharge,” except in extreme flood events.

The measure would: (1) allow federal CAFO standards to supersede certain state buffer requirements for farms that must obtain federal permits; (2) eliminate double permit fees so a farm that requires a federal CAFO permit would not also pay the state’s large farm (LFO) fee; (3) clarify that the existing Dec. 15–April 1 winter manure-spreading prohibition continues to allow emergency and seasonal exemptions; and (4) change annual certification requirements so newly identified small certified farms must certify on entry but do not necessarily file the same annual paperwork thereafter.

Why it matters: Collier told lawmakers that since Vermont’s 2016 law took effect, farmers have accounted for most proven annual phosphorus reductions while receiving roughly a quarter of total investments to reach those results. He warned, however, that permitting language matters because federal and state rules differ in scope, who may enforce them and what liabilities apply if a permit is violated.

The buffer change: Vermont currently requires a 25-foot vegetated buffer along water; federal options include a 100-foot setback, a 35-foot vegetated buffer, or other equivalent practices. Collier said S.124 would let federal CAFO rules govern vegetative-buffer options for farms that qualify as CAFOs under federal thresholds, giving such farms the federal options rather than leaving them constrained by the state’s 25-foot rule.

Manure-spreading ban and exemptions: The bill would codify the long-standing Dec. 15–April 1 winter-spreading prohibition while clarifying that emergency exemptions and the statute’s seasonal-exemption process remain available. Collier said the intent is to “memorialize existing practice” and remove ambiguity about the agency’s continuing ability to grant narrow exemptions, for example after extreme flooding events that filled manure storage and created urgent risks to water quality.

Fees and permitting: Under the draft language discussed, a farm that needs a federal CAFO permit would not pay duplicate fees to the Agency of Agriculture; instead the permitting fee for discharge issues would go to the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). Collier said the LFO permit would still exist because it covers broader land-use and nuisance authority, but the goal is to avoid a double charge.

Certifications and inspections: The bill would stop requiring some small certified farms to file an annual compliance certificate. Collier said newly identified farms would still need to certify on entry, and the agency would retain discretion to require more frequent certification or inspections if problems arise. He noted routine inspections occur at least every seven years and always on a complaint basis.

Liability and definitions: Collier emphasized a policy choice in the bill about whether the federal CAFO program should be tied to the federal “waters of the United States” definition or the state “waters of the state” definition. He warned that tying federal permitting to the broader state-water definition could expand federal permit requirements and expose farms to additional citizen enforcement under the Clean Water Act for discharges that are regulated under state law today.

Committee reactions and next steps: Several legislators asked procedural questions and suggested edits. Representative Nelson urged removing a redundant statutory subsection, and committee members asked the Agency of Agriculture to provide suggested drafting changes so the committee could consider them at a future hearing. Collier and the committee said they expected follow-up stakeholder meetings involving ANR, environmental groups and farm representatives.

Context and scale: Collier reiterated the agency’s position that Vermont farms have driven most of the state’s proven phosphorus-reduction gains since the state's 2016 clean-water measures while noting that compliance and costs remain a strain for some operations. He said there are currently no permitted federal CAFOs in Vermont, though federal definitions treat some large farms as CAFOs even if they do not hold a federal permit.