U.S., EU Reach Framework Agreement on Trade Deal

What happened: Pork – and other agricultural commodities – will be part of any new trade agreement between the United States and the European Union, according to a framework deal, known as the Cooperation Agreement on Reciprocal, Fair, and Balanced Trade, the two sides reached in late July.

The Trump administration said the framework aims to resolve trade imbalances and maximize the combined economic power of the United States and the EU in an ongoing process to improve market access and increase the U.S.-EU trade and investment relationship.

Among other specific areas of negotiation, the United States and the EU will work to address non-tariff barriers affecting trade in food and agricultural products, including streamlining requirements for sanitary certificates for U.S. pork and dairy products.

For decades, pork trade between the United States and the EU has favored the EU. In 2024, the United States exported $7.3 million of pork to the EU while importing more than $709 million from Europe. By comparison, the United States currently exports more pork to Honduras than to the 27 countries of the EU, the second-largest pork consumer.

NPPC’s take: NPPC supports a trade deal with the EU that addresses U.S. agricultural market access and the reduction – or elimination – of tariff and non-tariff barriers to pork. The agreement also should include the adoption of science-based technical, sanitary, and phytosanitary standards.

Said NPPC President Duane Stateler, a pork producer from McComb, Ohio, “America’s pork producers are encouraged by the specific inclusion of pork in the U.S.-EU framework to address tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade. We look forward to continued collaboration to address longstanding market access issues.”

Why it matters: U.S. food and agriculture exports are vital to the U.S. economy. Last year, the agricultural sector exported about $196 billion of products, which supported millions of American jobs. U.S. agricultural exports to the EU in 2024 were $12.8 billion, but average growth has been just 1.5% annually over the past 10 years, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service.

Bill Introduced to Make Increased Line Speeds Program Permanent

What happened: Rep. Brad Finstad (R-MN) introduced the “Meat and Poultry Processing Efficiency Act” to make permanent a federal provision that lets meat and poultry packing plants operate with faster processing line speeds.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture in late 2019 established the New Swine Inspection System, which, among other things, allowed for increased line speeds. But in March 2021, a U.S. District Court struck down the provision, citing a lack of worker safety data. USDA then implemented a pilot program for six NSIS facilities to use faster line speeds while data for evaluating the impact of them on workers was collected.

In addition to making the line speeds provision permanent, Finstad’s legislation would:

• Require USDA to publish food safety criteria for plants to use increased line speeds, ensuring they can operate without fear of arbitrarily imposed slowdowns.
• Protect farmers by reducing the potential for arbitrary reductions in processing capacity, which can result in lost contracts with packers, increased time between plant deliveries, or a reduction in animal units.
• Bring U.S. meat and poultry processing closer to global competitiveness.

NPPC’s take: NPPC strongly supports the “Meat and Poultry Processing Efficiency Act” to allow packing plants to operate with fast processing line speeds, which likely would increase packing capacity and alleviate any supply issues.

“Having sufficient harvest capacity is critical to allow America’s pig farmers to continue to provide wholesome pork products to consumers,” said NPPC CEO Bryan Humphreys, who thanked Finstad for sponsoring the line speeds legislation.

Why it matters: Ensuring sufficient harvest capacity at packing plants is critical to the ability of the U.S. pork industry to provide products to consumers worldwide. Without faster line speeds, there would be a decrease in packing capacity as more hogs chase less shackle space, which could lead to a drop in pork prices. Economists estimated producers would have lost an additional $10 per head in the first and second quarters of 2024 without the increased line speed.

New World Screwworm Movement Concerns U.S. Livestock Industry

What happened: Recent confirmation of a human case of New World Screwworm infestation in the United States has heightened awareness of the threat to U.S. livestock industries.

NWS is a flesh-eating parasite from female flies that lay eggs in wounds on warm-blooded animals. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, animals that recently have given birth, suffered an injury, or had a surgical procedure, such as tail docking or branding, are most vulnerable. Even tick bites can attract NWS flies.

After an investigation by the Maryland Department of Health and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in early August confirmed the case in a Maryland person who had been to El Salvador.

NWS has moved from South America, through Central America, and into Mexico over the past few years. It is endemic in Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and South American countries. In May, USDA closed the U.S. southern border to imports of cattle from Mexico – sent to U.S. feed lots – to prevent NWS from entering the United States.

USDA has for decades been working with Panama – through the Commission for the Eradication and Prevention of Screwworm Infestation in Livestock – to stop the spread of NWS, using sterile flies.

NPPC’s take: While prevention of an incursion is the goal, NPPC remains engaged to prepare for an incursion of NWS, including remaining in close contact with USDA on the incident playbook (response plan), the Food and Drug Administration on treatment options for swine, state associations on preparing with state regulatory officials, and more.

Why it matters: Swine are a susceptible species to NWS, along with other warm-blooded mammals. An outbreak of NWS in the U.S. is concerning for multiple reasons, including swine welfare, movement restrictions, and economic impacts for producers. Efforts to prevent an introduction of a foreign or emerging disease remain a priority for the U.S. swine industry.

USDA Offers Free RFID Ear Tags for Sows, Show Pigs

What happened: The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced it will provide no-cost radio frequency identification ear tags for swine beginning this fall. The tags will be available for sow and exhibition pig producers.

Over the next five years, up to $20 million in RFID tags will be available as a way to bolster national swine disease traceability by improving the U.S. pork industry’s ability to control the spread of a foreign animal disease and lessen the economic impact of an FAD outbreak.

The tags will be provided by Merck Animal Health, which will receive, process, and ship orders directly to producers and state animal health officials. Producers must have a valid premises identification number (PIN) and provide shipping and contact information and the number of sows – for commercial sow farms – or show pigs on a premises.

State animal health officials will be able to order tags based on the number of sows in their state. RFID tags can be ordered at www.840swinetags.com.

NPPC’s take: The U.S. pork industry, which has had a voluntary animal ID system since the mid-2000s, has pushed to enhance that system through the swine traceability standards, submitted to USDA March 2024:

• High-risk swine, including cull breeding stock and show/exhibition pigs, to be tagged with an animal identification number, with an RFID tag.
• All swine owners to register for a premises identification number.
• Producers to record consistent data points, including PIN of origin, PIN of destination, date of movement, animal type, and official identification.
• Movement data to be reported to a centralized database following the detection of a trade-limiting disease.
• Semen to be labeled with the PIN of the source herd.
• Cull markets and packing plants to use tattoo numbers unique to each facility.

Why it matters: An efficient and accurate traceability system, including RFID tags, improves the response time and accuracy of a disease investigation, limiting the number of farms and animals affected. This, in turn, reduces the economic impact on owners and affected communities.

Pork Producers Take Advantage of State Agricultural Events

What happened: Over the past several weeks, NPPC board members and pork producers from across the country attended state agricultural events, meeting other commodity producers and talking about NPPC’s priority issues.

NPPC President Duane Stateler, a producer from McComb, Ohio, and Vice President-elect Rob Brenneman, a producer from Washington, Iowa, met with Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins at the Iowa State Fair in Des Moines. Among other matters, they discussed the need for a fix of California Proposition 12 and a new farm bill. Producers also met with EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin.

Stateler also attended the Ohio State Fair, where he spoke with Rep. David Taylor (R-OH) about the top issues facing the pork industry and, along with past NPPC and Ohio Pork Council President Bryan Black, met with U.S. House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA).

Lori Stevermer, NPPC’s immediate past president, and Minnesota Pork Producers President Todd Selvik participated in a Minnesota Ag Leadership Conference panel discussion on agricultural issues. While much of the focus was on Minnesota issues, panelists also touched on the efforts of the Make America Healthy Again Commission and federal environmental regulations. Stevermer and Selvik also met with Rep. Thompson, House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig (D-MN), and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).

In Nebraska and Tennessee, producers participated in events with Secretary Rollins. And in Illinois, pork producer Chad Leman and Illinois Pork Producers Association Executive Director Jennifer Tirey met with USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden to discuss Prop. 12 and pork purchases under the Section 32 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1935, which authorizes the Agriculture Secretary to make commodity purchases, entitlement purchases, and disaster assistance using funds appropriated annually from U.S. customs receipts.

NPPC Past President Scott Hays, a pork producer from Monroe City, and fellow pork producers met with a variety of congressional leaders at the Missouri State Fair. Discussing California Proposition 12, trade, and more, producers gathered with U.S. Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO), House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO), and Rep. Mark Alford (R-MO).

Why it matters: Participating in state agricultural events lets NPPC board members and staff raise awareness with and educate a broader audience about the current public policy issues and challenges facing pork producers. NPPC’s grassroots reach and influence are key to achieving meaningful policy outcomes.

For more information on NPPC’s policy priorities and ways to get involved with the organization, click here.

NPPC Calls Proposed Farm Air Emissions Methodologies ‘Flawed’

What happened: In comments submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, NPPC said the agency’s proposed methodologies – and the data on which they were developed – for estimating air emissions from livestock farms are “technically flawed.” NPPC urged EPA to reconsider its model and approach for determining emissions.

The pork industry in 2006 negotiated with EPA “air consent agreements” that absolved livestock producers from Clean Air Act emissions violations – because there were no standards for farms – in exchange for participating in a National Air Emissions Monitoring Study. Data on farm emissions, including ammonia and hydrogen sulfide, gathered during the study was transmitted to EPA in 2010 for developing estimating methodologies.

NPPC pointed out in its comments that the proposed methodologies and predictive models are inaccurate and mathematically unreliable. Further, they show that, despite 15 years of work on the data, EPA still does not understand livestock production. Farms, unlike emission source categories in other industries, are unique and do not fit “cookie cutter” modeling. No two farms or farmers are alike.

“The current draft models simply are not reliable for predicting emissions,” said NPPC, noting that the pork industry has changed significantly since the NAEMS data was gathered. “The current draft models are so technically flawed that their use by EPA would render any consequent regulatory decision or action legally fraught.”

Why it matters: If adopted in their current form, EPA’s estimating methodologies and an accompanying webtool that calculates farm emissions – based on 20-year-old data – could cost the livestock industry billions of dollars in capital and annual expenditures, due to egregious mathematical flaws in the modeling. What’s worse, the model ignores the pork industry’s advances over the last two decades, including improved livestock genetics, targeted nutrition, and the design and management of farms – all of which have greatly reduced the industry’s footprint.

There are significant costs associated with determining farm emissions, applying for a CAA permit, and implementing mitigation and compliance strategies to address emissions that, for the most part, quickly dissipate, said NPPC.

Groups Weigh in on Risk Assessment for PFAS in Biosolids

What happened: NPPC and nine other agricultural groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, submitted comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed risk assessment related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, so-called forever chemicals or PFAS.

PFAS chemicals, used for decades in many industrial, commercial, and consumer products, have been found to cause serious health problems from prolonged exposure to high levels. Such chemicals also are pervasive and persistent – they break down very slowly – in the environment and human bodies.

EPA’s risk assessment would characterize the potential human health and environmental risks associated with land application, surface disposal, and incineration of biosolids that contain two of the most widely used PFAS chemicals – Perfluorooctanoic Acid and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate.

While the agriculture organizations support a risk assessment, they have concerns about the methodology used to conduct it, including the use of “extreme” assumptions and estimates, which, they say in their comments, “must be scrutinized more carefully.”

Why it matters: Results from EPA’s risk assessment likely would be used to take federal or state actions related to the land application of biosolids, which is the management option used for more than half the biosolids produced in the United States.

NPPC and the other farm groups are concerned that the assessment could serve as the “underpinning for an overly restrictive regulation on biosolid application,” including a ban on the use of biosolids on agricultural lands.

NPPC, Others Urge Vote on Brashears for USDA Food Safety Post

What happened: NPPC joined the Meat Institute, the National Chicken Council, and the National Turkey Federation in urging Senate Republican and Democrat leaders to move to the Senate floor for a confirmation vote Mindy Brashears’ nomination to be Under Secretary for Food Safety in the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Brashears, who held that post for the last 10 months of President Trump’s first term in the White House, would oversee USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service, which is responsible for regulatory oversight of meat, poultry, and processed egg products, ensuring they are safe, wholesome, accurately labeled, and correctly packaged. She also would serve as the chairperson of the U.N. Codex Alimentarius Commission’s Policy Committee.

Currently a professor of food safety and public health at Texas Tech University, Brashears holds a bachelor’s degree in food technology from the university and master’s and doctoral degrees in food science from Oklahoma State University.

NPPC’s take: NPPC strongly supports the nomination of Brashears to be USDA’s Under Secretary for Food Safety and is asking the Senate to approve her for the job.

Why it matters: The Under Secretary for Food Safety helps ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. meat and poultry supply. The department’s FSIS conducts inspections at federally-approved meat and poultry establishments and ensures that state-approved facilities – those that sell product only within a state – have standards at least equivalent to federal standards.