Forwarded by Jane Clark A C T I O N A L E R T on C A FOs The public comment deadline for EPA's proposed concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) regulations is July 30 (Monday). CAFOs are one of the largest, essentially unregulated point sources of water pollution. The existing regulations are severely outdated and were not written to control pollution from these large-scale animal factories. EPA's proposed regulations would close a few of the loopholes, but overall are not sufficient to protect the environment and public health from this POLLUTING industry. We need you to URGE EPA to TIGHTEN its proposed regulations to protect our nation's rivers, lakes, streams, and coastal waterways.! How to submit your own comments? Comments may be submitted by mail to: Docket number OW-00-27 Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation Proposed Rule Office of Water, Engineering and Analysis Division (4303) USEPA electronically to [log in to unmask] (Copy and paste this address) Show EPA that the environmental community is united--we all want to see STRONG REGULATIONS that will PROTECT our waterways! Because the agency counts the comments it receives, it is important to also send in comments on your own. You can use the attached model comments and add state-specific information where available. ****Electronic comments must be identified by the docket number OW-00-27. The DEADLINE is on or before midnight on JULY 30. Please take time this weekend or on Monday, July 30 to email comments. It is too late to send in comments via mail, but e-mail comments may be sent to: [log in to unmask] The following are sample comments prepared by Sierra Club that ask EPA to do the following: Prohibit stormwater discharge exemptions Prohibit exemptions from NPDES permits Approve of corporate liability . The rules state "substantial operational control" should be required to obtain a permit and be co-liable for environmental and public health damages. Prohibit issuance of general permits Change criteria for land application of phosphorus Page numbers below in brackets [ ] reflect the Proposed Rule page numbers as provided in the USEPA's web page document. The specific sections to be amended are also given. 1. §122.23 (a) Definitions [p377] (1) We object to any exemptions for "agricultural stormwater discharges" applicable to Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). If runoff of animal wastes from a land application area causes contaminants or pollutants to enter waters of the state, this must treated as a violation of water quality standards. Permits issued should contain a condition that requires land application of wastes to be conducted in such a manner that such wastes do not enter waters of the state under any situations. General Comment on inclusion of poultry as a CAFO: We are strongly supportive of the inclusion of poultry operations - both broilers and egg production - as CAFOs. Poultry operations have caused much pollution of the waters of the United States from the DelMarVa Peninsula (Chesapeake) to the Cumberland River in Kentucky to the White River Basin in Arkansas to the drinking water supply lakes of Tulsa, Oklahoma. It is well past time that these facilities and operations were required to handle their wastes in ways that do not pollute the nation's waters. 3. §122.23(c Who must apply for an NPDES Permit? [p381] 2) There should be no exceptions allowed - every CAFO has the "potential to discharge" (3) This is laudable. Those entities with "substantial operational control" should be required to obtain a permit and be co-liable for environmental and public health damages. States that have experienced new swine and poultry facilities recognize that contract operations - where a corporate entity retains substantial operational control - is the preferred method of expansion of these industries. The contracts make it clear that the corporate entity (the "integrator") retains ownership of the animals, own the feed and medication, detail the daily operating procedures of the facility, and have almost complete control over the ways the animals are housed, fed, and raised. These companies have the resources to address the situations that cause public health problems and environmental degradation. We strongly support this proposed rule. EPA cannot continue to allow swine and poultry integrators to hide behind "independent contractors" who are nothing more than poorly-paid employees of the company and have little or no control over the facility. 11. §122.28 General Permits (applicable to State NPDES programs.) [p387] General Permits do not provide the level of protection - specifically in regard to monitoring for compliance - nor the public participation elements necessary for pollution prevention nor public health protection. Only site-specific permits provide the level of protection expected by adjacent landowners, neighbors, and those downstream and downwind. We are, therefore, unequivocally opposed to the issuance of General Permits to CAFOs. 12. §412.1 General Definitions [p390] (k) through (o) Phosphorous is an important fertilizer and a require nutrient/element for certain crops. However, the "phosphorous index" proposed in these subparagraphs provides for a method of disposal of animal wastes on an industrial scale, not at true agronomic rates. We suggest that no land application of animal wastes containing phosphorous be allowed unless the following criteria are met: -Soil testing on an annual basis to determine the availability of phosphorous on a specific field. -An analysis of the amount of phosphorous needed by the crop to be grown on that field that year. -Application amounts shall be calculated to meet soil and crop needs. If the soil and crop needs determine no application of phosphorous is indicated, none shall be allowed. When the existing technology standard and permitting rule for concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) was promulgated in the 1970's, animal feeding operations existed on a much smaller scale. Today, large-scale animal factories, which raise thousands of animals and produce enormous quantities of manure, dominate animal production. Annually, animal feeding operations generate 220 billion gallons of waste, or 130 times more waste than the entire human population in the United States. This increasing concentration and industrialization of livestock production is devastating our waterways. Conservative estimates reported by states and tribes in 28 states indicate that animal feeding operations pollute 27,751 miles of rivers and streams. CAFOs contribute to water pollution when lagoons break, spill, or fail, releasing wastewater into rivers, lakes, and streams. In fact, over 1,000 spills occurred at feedlots in just ten states between 1995 and 1998, resulting in the death of more than 13 million fish. In addition, liquid waste is often over-applied or inappropriately applied to land, causing runoff into surface water or seepage into groundwater. Furthermore, ammonia emissions from open-air lagoons and sprayfields redeposit nitrogen on land and waterbodies, adding to nutrient pollution. Nutrient pollution threatens the future of this country's waterways, impairing 30 percent of surveyed rivers, 44 percent of lakes, and 23 percent of estuaries. The nutrients in animal manure are causing eutrophication and toxic algal blooms that harm recreational waters, kill fish, and alter the species composition of our coastal fisheries. Outbreaks of the toxic microbe, Pfiesteria piscicida, have been linked to nutrient pollution from animal waste in North Carolina and Maryland. Pfiesteria has killed over a billion fish in coastal waters in North Carolina alone. Runoff from animal manure also contributes to the Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico, 7,000 square miles of oxygen-deprived water devoid of aquatic life. Leaking animal waste storage lagoons threaten human health by contaminating groundwater used for drinking water supplies. Nitrate levels above 10 mg/l in drinking water increase the risk of methemoglobinemia, or "blue baby syndrome," which can cause developmental deficiencies and deaths in infants. High nitrate levels in drinking water near feedlots has also been linked to spontaneous abortions in humans. Just last month EPA Region 6 resorted to its federal emergency powers under the Safe Drinking Water Act to require Seaboard Farms to provide safe drinking water to residents in Oklahoma, after discovering that nitrates from five hog operations had contaminated drinking water wells. PERMITTING (1) EPA Should Eliminate All Loopholes Despite the overwhelming evidence of the damage wrought by CAFOs on our environment, the majority of CAFOs continue to operate without any regulatory oversight by either EPA or state authorities. EPA's own estimates indicate that some 13,000 CAFOs should be permitted under the agency's existing regulations, yet only an estimated 2,520 CAFOs (19 percent) are actually covered under either a general or an individual permit. Now is the time for the agency to seize the opportunity to close all of the loopholes that have allowed this industry to pollute our environment. In the interest of protecting our communities and the environment, we hope you will consider our views. Sincerely, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to: [log in to unmask]