Animal Feeding Operations (Board decision, January 19, 2007)

In re Animal Feeding Operations (EAB CAA 06-2468C thru 06-2618C, CERCLA 06-2468C thru 06-2618C, and EPCRA 06-2468C thru 06-2618C): supporting documentation requested

Decision type
Board decision
Dockets
CAA 06-2468C, CAA 06-2468C thru 06-2618C, CERCLA 06-2468C thru 06-2618C, EPCRA 06-2468C thru 06-2618C, CAA-HQ-2005-xx, CERCLA-HQ-2005-xx, EPCRA-HQ-2005-xx
Decided
January 19, 2007
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Board precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-25

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Board precedent from 2007, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2007
The EPA regulations may have been amended, penalty amounts have been adjusted, and later Board or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current compliance advice. Verify the current standard before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or penalty mentioned here.
Final EAB decision
This Environmental Appeals Board order is a final disposition of the request concerning six previously ratified animal feeding operations agreements. The Board requested supporting documentation before proceeding with the requested transfers of responsibility. The full text below is the official EPA release, transcribed from a scanned PDF with OCR proofreading.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official EPA EAB release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Transcribed from a scanned original: EPA EAB released this decision as an image-only file. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the official release before quoting exact language.
Read the official release (epa.gov)

Plain-English summary

EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance asked the Environmental Appeals Board to transfer responsibility in six previously ratified animal feeding operations consent agreements after the farms were sold. EPA represented that the new owners wanted to assume responsibility, but the Board found no supporting documentation for those representations. The Board ordered EPA to provide written confirmation from the new owners by February 9, 2007, or submit a status report if more time was needed. The order did not transfer responsibility or impose a penalty.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited authorities: None stated in the release.
  • Outcome: The Board ordered EPA to provide supporting documentation for six proposed responsibility transfers, or a status report if more time was needed.
  • Key point: The EAB required written confirmation from the proposed new owners before it would proceed with the requested transfers.

Full text (EPA EAB public release)

              BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD
      UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                     WASHINGTON, D.C.


                                 )

In re: ) Consent Agreement and
) Final Order
Consent Agreements and Proposed ) CAA-HQ-2005-xx Final Orders for Animal Feeding ) CERCLA-HQ-2005-xx Operations ) EPCRA-HQ-2005-xx
)

        ORDER REQUESTING SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION


 On December 6, 2006, the Environmental Appeals Board

("Board") received a memorandum from the EPA's Office of

Enforcement and Compliance Assurance ("OECA", also referred to as

"Complainant") requesting, inter alia,¹ the transferring of

responsibility in six of the two thousand five hundred and sixty-

eight Consent Agreements ("Agreements") the Board has ratified in

the above-captioned matter.

 In its memorandum, OECA represents that six Respondents have

informed OECA that they subsequently sold their farm(s) after

Board approval of their Agreement, and that the new owners wish

   ¹ The same submittal requested that the Board ratify fifty-two

other Agreements, approve changes to one hundred and seventy-one previously ratified Agreements, and vacate nine of the ratified Agreements. Memorandum from Granta Y. Nakayama on Consent Agreements and Proposed Final Orders for Animal Feeding Operations to Environmental Appeals Board (December 6, 2006). The Board ratified the fifty-two Agreements in an order dated December 12, 2006, vacated the nine Agreements in an order dated January 17, 2007, and approved changes to the one hundred and seventy-one previously ratified Agreements in an order dated January 18, 2007.

to assume responsibility for the Agreement. OECA also represents

that it has contacted the new owners and that they have expressed

interest in assuming responsibility for these Agreements. The

Board has reviewed OECA's submittal package and have found no

supporting documentation corroborating OECA's representations.

 In order for the Board to proceed with OECA's request, the

Board needs written confirmation from the new owners showing that

they are indeed interested in the transferring of responsibility.

OECA is hereby ordered to provide the required documentation by

no later than February 9, 2007. OECA may, instead, submit a

status report if additional time is necessary.

 So ordered.


                              ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD



                              By: [signature]
                                  Edward E. Reich
                                  Environmental Appeals Judge

Dated: 1/19/07

                    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing Order

Requesting Supporting Documentation in the matter of Consent Agreements and Proposed Final Orders for Animal Feeding Operations, were sent to the following persons in the manner indicated:

By Interoffice Mail
(and copy by facsimile): Robert A. Kaplan
Bruce Fergusson
Tim Sullivan
Special Litigation & Projects
Division
Office of Civil Enforcement (2248-A)
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20460

                          FAX: (202) 564-0010

Dated: JAN 19 2007

                          [signature]
                          Annette Duncan
                          Secretary

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace