Legislative counsel outlines bill shifting CAFO enforcement to ANR; committee to add $7.5 million to farm security fund

Michael Grady, legislative counsel, told a Senate Agriculture committee that a draft miscellaneous agricultural bill would clarify how the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) and the Agency of Agriculture (Agency of AG) share authority over concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and would make conforming changes to state water-quality rules.

The bill would replace an existing memorandum of understanding between the two agencies with statutory cooperative language and make ANR the primary enforcing authority for CAFO permits while retaining an Agency of Agriculture role for the state's nonpoint-source program, Grady said. "EPA has said ANR needs to be the primary enforcer for the CAFO program," Grady said.

The change responds to federal direction tied to the Clean Water Act and the NPDES permit program. Grady said U.S. EPA has told Vermont that ANR must begin permitting, inspecting and reviewing nutrient-management plans for regulated operations. He said the draft bill aligns state law with those federal expectations while preserving Agency of Agriculture involvement on nonpoint-source work and farm support.

Why this matters: committee members pressed for detail because the change could force some production facilities to relocate or alter structures to meet larger buffer or setback requirements. Grady and others noted existing state requirements include a typical 25-foot vegetative buffer between crops and surface water, but federal CAFO-related provisions require either a 100-foot nonvegetated setback or a 35-foot vegetated buffer in some cases. As one senator put it, "So it may have to go back. Even if the 25 feet may have to go back further." That would have potential on-farm engineering and cost implications, Grady said, and could require engineered solutions for older facilities.

Key provisions described

- Enforcement and roles: The draft strikes existing MOU text and replaces it with statutory language directing ANR and the Agency of Agriculture to "cooperate" and to document respective roles; ANR would be the lead enforcing authority for CAFOs consistent with the federal NPDES program, Grady said.

- Required Agricultural Practices (RAPs) and buffers: The bill would specify that the state's minimum vegetative buffer requirement "shall not apply to concentrated animal feeding operations that have an active CAFO permit subject to federal Clean Water Act CAFO regulations," per the draft language Grady reviewed. The committee heard that under current state RAPs many farms observe a 25-foot buffer; CAFO regulation can require a larger setback or buffer.

- Definition/aggregation: The draft adopts the federal approach that multiple operations under common ownership may be considered a single farm for permitting and compliance.

- Permitting and fees: Large farms now pay a $2,500 annual operating fee to the Agency of Agriculture; Grady said CAFO permit fees under ANR would likely be in a similar range ("probably about the same thing, 2,500 to $3,000").

- Seasonal application and emergency exemptions: The bill clarifies the agency secretary's authority to grant emergency exemptions to the December 15–April 1 seasonal land-application ban for manure in limited circumstances and to adjust those dates based on weather, soil or other conditions. Grady said the draft includes language allowing the secretary to expand the window (for example, to December 1 or April 30) when justified, but he also warned the committee he would check whether changing dates would affect TMDL load calculations tied to Lake Champlain.

- Small-farm certification: The draft contains conforming language clarifying which newly identified small farms must certify compliance with RAPs.

Funding and legislative scheduling

Committee members asked to attach funding language from S.60 to the miscellaneous bill to expedite aid to farms. Grady recommended amending the bill to include a specific FY26 appropriation. He proposed language to add to the bill: "In addition to the funds appropriated to the Agency of Agriculture in FY26, $7,500,000 is appropriated from the general fund to the Farm Security Special Fund in FY26." Committee members said they preferred a strike-all amendment when the time came so the committee and bill sponsor could explain the changes on the floor. The committee scheduled a follow-up review later in the week and planned to try to move the bill before crossover.

Discussion and concerns

Committee members raised implementation and equity concerns: farmers are accustomed to Agency of Agriculture staff conducting regular farm visits and said some producers may be unfamiliar with ANR staff. Grady said ANR has circulated draft language and planned cooperative inspection protocols; he described that ANR would likely include Agency of Agriculture personnel when conducting inspections to preserve agricultural expertise.

Committee members also cited outside pressures: the Conservation Law Foundation filed a petition that prompted EPA to seek changes, and Grady said litigation remains a possible enforcement risk if EPA or advocates judge ANR's response inadequate.

Next steps

Committee members directed staff and counsel to work with ANR, Agency of Agriculture witnesses and the bill sponsor to finalize language and to draft the appropriation amendment for S.60. The committee planned another meeting to review proposed amendments prior to crossover.