Capital Update – For the Week Ending October 23, 2026

EPA to Further Define Provisions of Waters of the United States Rule

What happened: The National Pork Producers Council and the Waters Advocacy Coalition, of which NPPC is a founding member, submitted comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking to further define provisions of its proposed final rule on “waters of the United States.” 

The supplemental notice was issued following efforts by the Trump administration to develop a durable rule that defines the limits of federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. Last November, the agency released an interim final regulation on WOTUS, seeking to correct concerns in a Biden-era rule that conflicted with a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision. That decision further limited EPA’s authority over some waterways under the Clean Water Act. The proposed final rule makes jurisdictional waters that are “permanent,” which it defined as perennial streams; wetlands that touch an otherwise jurisdictional water and also hold surface water year after year; and tributaries that both connect directly to otherwise navigable waters and have a consistent flow.

The supplemental notice proposes additional options for defining what both the terms “continuous surface connection” and “relatively permanent” will mean under the final rule. As explained, EPA is now considering whether these terms should require what is essentially a lasting permanent connection.

The WAC supports codification of both supplemental options, which are “clear, administrable, and faithful to the text of the CWA as interpreted by the Supreme Court.”

Why it matters: The WOTUS rule spells out the limits of federal jurisdiction over waterways and wetlands under the CWA. EPA’s effort to provide better definitions for terms should help farmers know what is and isn’t covered under WOTUS. For pork producers, an expansive definition of WOTUS — such as the one in the 2023 WOTUS rule – which included farm fields and ditches — would have led to significant increases in regulatory and activist pressure and taken away farmers’ freedom to operate.

NPPC Comments on Improving Pork Trade with China

What happened: NPPC submitted commented on issues related to trade with China ahead of President Trump’s September 24 meeting at the White House with Chinese President Xi Jinping, which also produced positive news for the U.S. pork industry.

In comments to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, NPPC weighed in on China’s trade-limiting measures that are contrary to international rules and standards and on USTR’s efforts to promote reciprocal managed trade with the Asian nation.

It pointed out that, despite the 2020 U.S.-China Phase One trade agreement, U.S. pork exports remain restricted to the Asian nation because of its tariffs, domestic subsidies, and sanitary and phytosanitary restrictions, which violate World Trade Organization rules.

As part of a broad coalition of importers, exporters, retailers, manufacturers, agriculture groups, logistics providers, and other users of the international freight transportation system, NPPC also urged USTR to extend a suspension of fees on Chinese-owned, -operated, or -built vessels entering U.S. ports. Last October, USTR imposed the fees under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 in response to China’s targeting of the U.S. maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding sectors. In November 2025, it suspended them for a year, and that suspension is set to expire November 9.

During the Trump-Xi meeting, the two sides discussed matters that would benefit U.S. pork exports, including establishing a U.S.-China Board of Trade to manage trade between the two countries and reducing reciprocal tariffs on a host of products, including live swine, fresh/chilled pork, frozen pork, and additional pork products.

What it means for producers: China is a very important market for the U.S. pork industry, taking nearly $893 million of product in 2025 and making it the No. 3 value market for U.S. pork. Getting the Asian country to abide by WTO trade rules, ease trade restrictions, and reduce tariffs could further open the Chinese market to U.S. pork exports and improve producers’ bottom lines.

Groups Weigh in on Draft Guidance for Reducing PFAS in Biosolids

What happened: NPPC and four other agricultural groups – American Farm Bureau Federation, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, United Egg Producers, and U.S. Poultry and Egg Association – submitted comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s draft guidance for reducing the risks from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, in biosolids. Biosolids are EPA’s term for sewage sludge which is then applied to agricultural land as a nutrient.

In light of the complex and varied waste streams present in municipal sewage systems, PFAS chemicals are often found in biosolids. These chemicals have been alleged to cause health concerns from prolonged exposure. 

The agriculture organizations support EPA’s goal of addressing widespread contamination of the environment caused by PFAS. However, they urged the agency to consider several points before finalizing the guidance, including limitations to the information currently known on PFAS concentrations in biosolids, recent U.S. food-monitoring data that show low and infrequent detections – if any – in commercial food supplies, and other points.

Why it matters: Farmers and ranchers indirectly receive PFAS chemicals, which can occur on grazing land and be taken up by grain crops grown on land that has recieved biosolids. Farmers need to be aware of what is in the biosolids they accept, ensuring that land application of biosolids won’t contribute to contamination of their land.

NPPC and the other farm groups view the draft guidance as an important step toward providing more information to landowners and allowing farmers and ranchers to make more informed decisions when applying biosolids to their lands.

Coalition Comments on Near-Final Conservation Practice Standards

What happened: The Agricultural Nutrient Policy Council, a coalition of more than 50 state and national agribusinesses and agricultural associations, that NPPC was a founding member, submitted comments to USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service on the most recent set of proposed revisions to the agency’s Conservation Practice Standards. The standards are technical guidelines used to plan, implement, and evaluate conservation practices that protect soil, water, air, plants, animals, and energy resources.

The comments submitted in late September follow others filed earlier this year on additional proposed revisions to the Concervation Practice Standards. In its recent comments, the Ag Nutrient Policy Council asked that, in finalizing the National Handbook of Conservation Practices, NRCS should:

• Preserve site-specific flexibility and professional engineering and agronomic judgment.
• Keep mandatory criteria limited to what is necessary for a practice to function.
• Clearly distinguish technical practice criteria from rules for other programs, including the Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation regulation.
• Avoid requirements that are not implementable on working livestock and row-crop operations.
• Maintain economic feasibility at the farm gate. Additional recordkeeping that offsets newly granted flexibility is not a net improvement.

Why it matters: The NRCS Conservation Practice Standards provide scientifically based guidance for managing natural resources on agricultural, forest, and other lands. Historically, the agency has made periodic revisions to the standards to reflect new research, technology, and environmental priorities. USDA has set out to review, revise, and update the approximately 160 conservation practice standards it maintains. Conservation compliance is essential for participation in most USDA plans and programs and the practices themselves can become significant barriers for farmers to qualify.

Groups Urge Senate Committee to Advance Ibach Nomination

What happened: NPPC joined other agricultural and business trade associations in urging the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee to advance the nomination of Greg Ibach to the Senate floor for confirmation. Ibach is nominated to be the USDA’s Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs.

In a letter to committee Chairman John Boozman (R-AR) and Ranking Member Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), the groups noted that Ibach has “a wealth of experience that positions him for success in this role, having served in multiple key capacities vital to trade and agriculture.”

A fifth-generation Nebraska farmer and the state’s former director of the Department of Agriculture, Ibach served as USDA Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs in the first Trump administration. A fifth-generation Nebraska farmer and the state’s former director of the Department of Agriculture, Ibach served as USDA Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs in the first Trump administration.

Why it matters: The undersecretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs oversees the administration of a variety of programs that link U.S. agriculture to global markets, promote exports, and support U.S. foreign policy through trade, market development, data, and food security programs.

Sonderling New Secretary of Labor

What happened: The Senate approved the nomination of Keith Sonderling to be Secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor; he was sworn in October 2. NPPC joined almost 50 other agricultural organizations in supporting Sonderling’s candidacy for the job.

In a July 14 letter to Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Chairman Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Ranking Member Bernie Sanders (I-VT), the organizations pointed out that Sonderling understands the “operational realities of farm labor and what policies can help ensure American agriculture will thrive into the future.” Sonderling had been the DOL Acting Secretary since April 2026.

Sonderling previously was Deputy Secretary of the Labor Department and Acting and Deputy Administrator of the agency’s Wage and Hour Division, which gave him experience with the H-2A visa program for foreign agricultural workers and the compliance burdens agricultural employers face in trying to use immigrant laborers.

Why it matters: The Secretary of Labor oversees the department responsible for the administration of federal laws governing occupational safety and health, wage and hour standards, unemployment benefits, and reemployment services.

Primarily for agriculture, DOL administers the H-2A visa program, which allows agricultural employers who meet specific requirements to bring a limited number of foreign nationals to the United States to fill temporary seasonal farm jobs. NPPC and other livestock organizations want the H-2A program expanded to include year-round foreign workers.