By TIM ALEXANDER
Illinois Correspondent

WASHINGTON, D.C. — After ten years of work to overhaul federal Clean Water Act rules applicable to livestock operations, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s new set of guidelines regarding confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) went into effect on Dec. 22.

Reaction to the new rules regarding discharges from animal feeding operations were varied. U.S. livestock leaders generally accept the new regulations, while some conservation groups are accusing the Bush administration of dismantling the Clean Water Act and opening the door to unchecked self-regulation of CAFOs.

The new regulations set a high standard for livestock producers, said National Pork Producers Association environmental committee chairman Randy Spronk, a pork producer from Minnesota.
“The CAFO regulation ... is a tough but fair rule and sets a standard that the U.S. pork industry has been and will continue living up to. Pork producers are ready to comply with the new regulation,” Spronk said in late October, when the EPA announced the overhaul.

“Looking back to where we were in federal policy in 1998, when all this started, through the 2001 proposed rule, the 2003 final rule, a 2005 federal court decision and this 2008 final rule, EPA is making sweeping policy changes that affect all aspects of pork operations and water quality.”

Changes mandated by EPA

The changes mentioned by Spronk are detailed in an EPA “CAFO Final Rulemaking Fact Sheet” that is available to everyone on the U.S. EPA’s website. First, the final rule revises the requirement that all CAFOs must apply for National Pollutant Discharge Elimin
ation System (NPDES) permits, requiring only those CAFO’s that discharge or propose to discharge to apply for federal permits. The ruling allows CAFO operators to self-evaluate whether or not their operation “does or will discharge from its production area or land application area based on an objective assessment of the CAFO’s design, construction, operation and maintenance,” according to the EPA fact sheet.

The new rule also would exempt CAFO operators who do not apply for NPDES permits from mandatory submission of their livestock nutrient management plans (NMPs). NMPs will now have to be filed along with NPDES permits.

Those who file for NPDES permits and submit NMPs will be subject to public review by the permitting authority.

It also clarifies an earlier ruling on water quality-based effluent limitations; they may be required in any CAFO permit with respect to production area discharges and discharges that are not exempt agricultural storm water.

EPA also removed a provision that allowed new source swine, poultry and veal calf CAFOs to use containment structures designed for the 100-year, 24-hour storm to fulfill the no-discharge requirement. Those CAFOs may now meet the no-discharge requirement with site-specific best management practice effluent limitations.

Existing reporting requirements created an unnecessary burden for many farms and emission release reports usually weren’t acted on, the EPA said.

EPA is warning CAFO operators that they will still need to control discharges from production and land application areas. Non-permitted CAFOS found to be discharging will be liable for more than just the normal discharge penalty through a new “Duty to Apply” penalty. That provision is being disputed through litigation prompted by the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), NPPA and others.

“With or without a permit, swine operations that are not well managed and have discharges are facing severe penalties,” said Michael Formica, NPPC environmental policy counsel.

“These rules really raise the water quality bar for us, but despite this challenge, producers are going to make this rule work.”
Though the NPPC and others may find fault with some of the EPA’s new decrees, much of the criticism of the overhaul is coming from environmental groups such as the Sierra Club. Opponents of the new CAFO regulations contend the ruling is a “midnight” provision –  a de facto law issued by the legislative branch – that is a prime example of outgoing President Bush’s “”slash-and-burn” tactics beneficial to special interest groups who supported him.

“It’s the fox guarding the hen house – all too literally,” Sierra Club executive director Carl Pope told news sources.

The Sierra Club is also upset about another midnight ruling by the EPA, issued Dec. 12, that exempts CAFO’s from reporting excess air pollution from animal waste to the federal government under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The ruling represents the first time the EPA has ever granted an exemption from hazardous substance notification requirements for a specific industry, according to the Sierra Club.