In late 1995, Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation agreed to pay a $500,000 fine ($100,000 of it deferred) to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission for a host of violations, including unpermitted releases of wastewater and sludge. As part of the penalty, the company agreed to conduct an environmental audit within 90 days and turn over its findings to the agency. That audit found that Pilgrim’s egg farms in Camp County, known as Strube 1 and 2, were out of compliance with state environmental regulations. The plants, according to the company’s environmental engineering firm, did “not have wastewater permit. Permit application needs to be submitted.”
Despite that admission and the need for a permit, Pilgrim’s Pride didn’t apply for a permit in 1995. Nor in 1996 or 1997. In March of 1998, the facility was inspected again by the TNRCC. And it was once again discovered that the facility, which houses 1.3 million hens, didn’t have a permit. In July of 1999, the agency issued an agreed order, fining the company another $31,250, this time for not having met state rules on permitting the egg farm.
When asked why the company did not apply for a permit until then, Cliff Butler, the vice-chairman of Pilgrim’s Pride, said simply, “I don’t know,” adding, “We were operating under the idea that a permit wasn’t required.” Butler said the company got an air permit for the facility after they purchased it in 1984, but believed it was grandfathered under the old ownership and therefore didn’t need a water permit.
Environmentalists aren’t buying that explanation. “They knew they didn’t have a permit, but it’s been cheaper for them to operate without one,” says Rick Lowerre, an Austin attorney who represents Texas Campaign for the Environment (TCE), which is opposing the permit. “You don’t have to keep the records, you don’t have to have staff to track the records or file the reporting documents, and you don’t get inspected. When they get fined, it just becomes a cost of doing business.”
To get the permit, Pilgrim’s Pride must go through a contested case hearing with TCE and some adjoining landowners, including Kenneth Hicks, whose family has owned property in the area for over a century. In a letter to the TNRCC last year, Hicks said he opposes the permit because “the odor emitted from the existing facility has been onerous for years.” He also complained that runoff from Pilgrim’s property, which is irrigated regularly with chicken manure, is polluting his property. In September, the agency finally set a schedule for the permit process on the egg facility. The TNRCC commissioners have since asked the opponents and Pilgrim’s to see if they can reach a settlement. But TCE has said it needs more information from Pilgrim before any talks can begin. Given the long history of noncompliance for the Strube plants, it appears that getting permits for them could last a good long while.
This article appears in November 3 • 2000.