Update: Court Actions on Regulations, Legislation

Court decisions and government mandates rarely receive the hype or headlines of this week’s presidential debate, but they often have a direct impact on our members and their customers. Here’s one example.

In July of 2015, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) issued new standards to restrict farmers’ abilities to access anhydrous ammonia. The proposed OSHA regulation would have required even small retail facilities that store or transport 10,000 pounds or more of anhydrous ammonia to obtain the same Process Safety Management Standard (PSM) documentation that is required of large anhydrous ammonia producers.

If a retail facility is unable to obtain this documentation, under the standard, it would be forced to purchase new storage tanks, costing $70,000 or more, effectively eliminating the economic viability for many small dealers and further reducing the retail choices for farmers.

We were pleased to learn last week that the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of production agriculture by finding that OSHA violated the law when it issued new standards for anhydrous ammonia storage.

The court vacated OSHA’s regulation for failure to abide by procedural requirements of the Occupational Safety & Health Act. When promulgating or modifying a “standard,” OSHA must adhere to notice-and-comment procedures set forth in the act. “OSHA concedes that, when it promulgated its memorandum redefining ‘retail facility,’ it did not satisfy the procedural requirements for standards,” the court document stated.

 In July, U.S. Senators Deb Fisher (R-Neb.) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) introduced bipartisan legislation that would stop these onerous OSHA standards. Fisher said, “We came together to provide some relief for ag producers and force the administration to follow the law. Today’s ruling by the federal court reinforces the provisions in our bill and sets an important precedent for other harmful regulations. Now, our ag producers will face one less hardship, so they can focus on feeding the world and providing for their families.”

Congressman Adrian Smith (R-Neb.), who introduced a bill to roll back the regulations, released the following statement: “The Obama administration has made a habit of unilateral action, but I am glad the judicial branch has stepped in to protect producers from this unlawful regulation. Retailers and producers deserve to have their voices heard on the impacts of a rule change of this magnitude rather than having it forced upon them with no input. We must continue working to empower producers and remove barriers to their success, namely by rolling back onerous regulations like this one.”

OSHA initiated the changes after an explosion at a fertilizer facility in West, Texas, in 2013. While anhydrous ammonia was present at the facility, it was not a contributing factor to the explosion. Investigators later determined the explosion was the result of an intentional criminal act.

 Despite these facts, OSHA pushed forward with this needless regulation on agriculture. This court action will force OSHA back to the drawing board to justify their actions, and hopefully mark the beginning of the end to this unwarranted regulatory burden.

Another case we continue to follow involves asking the courts to overturn new overtime rules set to take effect December 1. See the story on page 2. And, the U.S. Supreme Court is in conference this week and may decide to consider a case very important to members. Learn more in the Deere story on page 6.