EPA Ends 2005 Emissions Agreement for Animal Feeding Operations

On October 30, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it will not finalize emissions‑estimating methodologies under the 2005 Animal Feeding Operations Consent Agreement and Final Order (the “2005 Air Compliance Agreement”) and will move to terminate obligations arising under that agreement. The action brings formal closure to a more than 20‑year‑old compliance framework affecting approximately 2,600 animal feeding operations (AFOs), representing nearly 14,000 farms.

In 2005, following recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences to improve methods for estimating air emissions from AFOs, EPA offered livestock and poultry operations the opportunity to enter into a voluntary agreement. Participating AFOs paid a civil penalty, undertook certain monitoring and reporting commitments, and in return received a covenant not to sue for specified past and ongoing Clean Air Act and related violations while EPA developed emissions‑estimating methodologies.

As part of this effort, EPA and industry conducted the National Air Emissions Monitoring Study (NAEMS), which collected emissions data from 2005–2007 for covered sectors (including hogs, broiler chickens, egg‑laying hens, and dairy cows). The data addressed ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds, and were intended to support development of methodologies that AFOs could use to estimate emissions and determine permitting and reporting obligations.

EPA’s Science Advisory Board reviewed early drafts of the methodologies in 2013. Updated draft methodologies were released for public comment in November 2024, with the comment period closing in August 2025. Throughout this period, producers faced uncertainty as to whether and how any finalized methods might trigger new permitting or reporting obligations, and many participating operations changed ownership, ceased operations, or significantly modernized facilities and manure systems.

After evaluating the NAEMS dataset and comments received on the 2024 draft methodologies, EPA concluded that the underlying data are “too old and too limited” to support reliable emissions‑estimating methods for current AFO operations. In particular, EPA found that the data reflect barn designs, herd sizes, and manure management practices that no longer represent how many farms operate today, and that key limitations regarding representativeness and age of the data, as well as changes in standard operational practices and technologies, cannot be resolved with the existing record.

EPA has therefore determined that it will:

• Not develop or finalize emissions‑estimating methodologies under the 2005 Air Compliance Agreement; and
• Work through its enforcement office to end obligations under that agreement and to terminate the agreement pursuant to its terms.

EPA officials emphasized that “good science requires good data” and that the agency would not promulgate methods that farms “could rely on” absent scientifically credible support. The agency also framed the action as advancing regulatory certainty for farmers and resolving “long‑obsolete obligations” under the 2005 framework.

EPA’s decision has several immediate and longer‑term implications:

• Termination of Agreement Obligations. EPA will seek to notify, “to the extent possible,” the approximately 2,600 AFOs subject to the 2005 Air Compliance Agreement and then terminate the agreement. This will bring to an end the specific monitoring‑ and methodology‑related expectations tied to NAEMS under that framework.
• No New Methodology‑Based Requirements. Because EPA will not finalize NAEMS‑based emissions‑estimating methodologies, participating AFOs will not face additional permitting or reporting obligations that might otherwise have flowed from those particular methods.
• Clean Air Act Enforcement Continues. EPA underscored that the action does not change its implementation of the Clean Air Act or its broader commitment to providing clean air, including in rural communities around farms. Existing statutory and regulatory requirements remain in place, and facilities remain subject to applicable enforcement mechanisms.
• Regulatory Certainty and Reduced Compliance Risk. By formally discontinuing work on the NAEMS‑based methods and closing out the 2005 agreement, EPA removes the longstanding prospect that AFOs would suddenly be subjected to a new emissions framework, potentially treating them like major industrial sources with associated permitting burdens and exposure to penalties.

EPA’s withdrawal of the NAEMS-based methodologies should also be read against the backdrop of the Fair Agricultural Reporting Method Act (FARM Act). CERCLA section 103 now provides that its release-reporting section “shall not apply to . . . air emissions from animal waste (including decomposing animal waste) at a farm.” The statute defines “animal waste” to mean “feces, urine, or other excrement, digestive emission, urea, or similar substances emitted by animals (including any form of livestock, poultry, or fish),” and it includes animal waste mixed or commingled with bedding, compost, feed, soil, or similar materials typically found with such waste.  EPA implemented the FARM Act under CERCLA in 2018 by adding the same exemption and definitions to the CERCLA release-reporting regulations.

In 2019, EPA issued a final rule adding a separate regulatory exemption for “Air emissions from animal waste (including decomposing animal waste) at a farm” to the EPCRA release reporting rule 40 C.F.R. § 355.31. EPA’s stated rationale was that, because the FARM Act exempted these emissions from CERCLA reporting, they no longer “occur[ ] in a manner” requiring CERCLA notification and therefore do not trigger EPCRA section 304 reporting. These exemptions materially narrow the practical significance of EPA’s discontinuance of the NAEMS effort for CERCLA and EPCRA reporting.

For affected operations, the practical implications are therefore best understood as follows:

• CERCLA and EPCRA reporting. Air emissions from animal waste at a qualifying farm remain exempt from CERCLA reporting by statute and from EPCRA emergency release reporting under EPA’s current regulation. EPA’s withdrawal of the NAEMS methodologies does not change those exemptions.
• Clean Air Act and other obligations. The FARM Act exemption and EPA’s 2019 EPCRA rule address emergency release reporting; they do not exempt operations from Clean Air Act permitting, enforcement, or other statutory requirements that may apply based on actual emissions or site-specific facts.
• Scope limitations and residual risk. The exemption is limited to air emissions from animal waste, including decomposing animal waste, at a farm. It does not cover releases of substances from animal waste into non-air media, such as a lagoon breach, or air releases from sources other than animal waste, such as an anhydrous ammonia storage tank, if applicable reportable quantities are exceeded. Operations should therefore evaluate whether the emission source, medium, and facility fit the FARM Act and EPA regulatory definitions before relying on the exemption.

The 2019 EPCRA rule remains subject to challenge in the D.C. Circuit, with oral argument held on November 3, 2026. As a result, while the current CERCLA statutory exemption and EPA’s EPCRA regulation remain important sources of reporting certainty, affected operations should continue to monitor the appeal and any subsequent EPA action that could change the EPCRA reporting landscape.

Although the NAEMS data will not be used to develop binding emissions‑estimating methodologies under the 2005 agreement, EPA indicated that NAEMS will remain a reference framework for understanding farm emissions. Looking forward, EPA stated that it will:

• Continue coordinating with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, land‑grant universities, and producers on “practical, science‑based” approaches to understanding and reducing air emissions from farms; and
• Maintain a policy posture of “putting farmers first” in recognition of their role in national food production, while sustaining its commitment to air quality and the rule of law.

EPA’s enforcement office will proceed to:

• Provide notice to participating AFOs of the agency’s decision not to develop NAEMS‑based emissions‑estimating methodologies and of the termination of obligations under the 2005 Air Compliance Agreement; and
• Formally close out the agreement in accordance with its terms.

Stakeholders may wish to review the National Air Emissions Monitoring Study materials for context on the historical monitoring effort and to monitor EPA and USDA communications for any future initiatives addressing farm‑related air emissions using updated data and methodologies. If you have any questions about this update or about air emissions on animal feeding operations, please contact any of the authors listed below.