CAFO leaders:

We have forced a public hearing for Monday night.
The Des Moines Register, in addition to the article below, had a great lead
editorial on our side this morning in the same section.

Weblink to editorial:
http://www.dmregister.com/opinion/stories/c2125555/21094217.html

We are flooding the switchboard in the House and Senate (and emails).
They are going to pay a heavy price for this action!

All with only 18 hours from first sight of the Resolution.

Go Iowa Sierrans and Environmentalists.

Lyle Krewson
Sierra Club Iowa Lobbyist


On 4/25/03 11:48 a, "Ed Hopkins" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Lawmakers attempt to block hog-lot limits
>
>
> By LYNN OKAMOTO
> Register Staff Writer
> 04/25/2003 State lawmakers on Thursday took steps to block Iowa's first
> limits on air pollution from livestock confinements and other sources,
> saying the new rules send an unwelcome message to Iowa businesses.
>
>
> Critics said the last-minute move - which comes after two years of widely
> publicized study and a string of public hearings on the rules - sends an
> unfortunate message to everyone else.
>
>
> "What this demonstrates to the people of Iowa is that they don't care
> about neighbors that are suffering from these emissions that are not only
> a nuisance, but are threatening their health," said former state lawmaker
> David Osterberg, a University of Iowa public-health pro- fessor who was
> one of 27 university scientists the governor enlisted to help write the
> rules.
>
>
> The rules have drawn heavy resistance from politically powerful
> agricultural and business groups worried that they would require expensive
> improvements.
>
>
> Rep. Sandra Greiner and others who consider the rules too broad want them
> sent back to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources' drawing board.
>
>
> "We need to send a signal that the Legislature believes the Environmental
> Protection Commission reached beyond its authority," said Greiner, a Keota
> Republican who is chairwoman of the House Environmental Protection
> Committee.
>
>
> She and other lawmakers said they needed to act before the Legislature
> adjourned to give the resources department time to rework the rules before
> the 2004 session.
>
>
> A subcommittee of Greiner's committee voted 11-8 Thursday to set aside the
> rules, which were approved just three days ago by state environmental
> regulators. The full committee was expected to follow suit Thursday night.
> The Senate Commerce Committee also approved the nullification on a 10-3
> vote Thursday.
>
>
> If the resolution passes, the rules would be scrapped and the resources
> department would have to start over.
>
>
> The resolution wouldn't require the signature of Gov. Tom Vilsack, a
> Democrat.
>
>
> The move by state lawmakers came before their own review panel - the Iowa
> Administration Rules Review Committee - could consider final approval,
> which was expected in June.
>
>
> "This is an outrageous attempt to undermine rules that would protect
> Iowans from factory-farm air pollution," said Dick Bird of Keosauqua, a
> member of the nonprofit Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement.
>
>
> CCI forced the state to write the rules after a legal petition and years
> of wrangling over large-scale hog confinements and health threats they
> present.
>
>
> Last year, state lawmakers overhauled the whole livestock-confinement law,
> calling for a monitoring system and what is called "ambient" standards -
> limits on what can be in the air, but not specific restrictions on what
> comes off each confinement, factory or plant.
>
>
> The state could end up pressuring farmers to change their operations, just
> as power plants and industrial complexes have had to do when they were
> found to have violated general air regulations. That could include
> covering manure lagoons or regulating how manure is applied to fields.
>
>
> Osterberg said lawmakers are setting aside months of work that already had
> prompted lawmakers to ease some regulations four years before the rules
> even would be enforced.
>
>
> The rules approved Monday by the Iowa Environmental Protection Commission
> set no limits on odor, the biggest issue to many residents. State
> lawmakers prohibited measurement at a facility's fence line, a common
> procedure for regulating air pollution. And they would allow a facility to
> exceed the limits seven times - without warning neighbors as scientists
> had suggested - before a violation would be declared.
>
>
> The rules drew fire when business groups realized they would apply to any
> facility that would emit the regulated compounds. In addition to livestock
> confinements, that could include sewage-treatment plants and firms that
> make livestock feed, chemicals, rubber or anhydrous ammonia.
>
>
> The Iowa Farm Bureau Federation and the Iowa Pork Producers Association
> supported the move to block the rules.
>
>
> "The science we are aware of disputes much of what has been presented to
> the commission, and we believe there is not sound science to move
> forward," said Eldon McAfee, a lawyer for the pork producers.
>
>
> "We provided them statutory authority to go in and regulate air as it
> pertains to livestock-confinement facilities," said House Speaker
> Christopher Rants, a Sioux City Republican. "They have now gone well
> beyond livestock-confinement facilities, and they're regulating business
> and industry."
>
>
> State law gives the Iowa Environmental Protection Commission broad
> authority to pass rules to protect against pollution and public-health
> threats.
>
>
> The code says in part that the commission is authorized to "Adopt, amend
> or repeal ambient air quality standards for the atmosphere of this state
> on the basis of providing air quality necessary to protect the public
> health and welfare."
>
>
> Vilsack said he believed the commission followed the law approved by
> legislators last year. The overhaul of Iowa's livestock-confinement law
> authorized air-pollution monitoring of livestock operations and eventual
> enforcement of new air-quality standards.
>
>
> "What we don't want to do is take a step back," Vilsack said Thursday. "We
> want to continue to improve the environment. We also want to make sure we
> have a healthy livestock industry. I think the rules, if they were given a
> chance to be implemented, would do that."
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
> http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp