Sludge Watch ==> Manure spreading from CAFOs - gets more scutiny than toxic sludge

[maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca]

Sludgewatch Admin:

Well congratulations to the wonderful folks at Waterkeepers.  Looks like 
they have pushed the EPA into stronger regulations on Concentrated Animal 
Feedlot Operations (CAFOs).

Ironically, it looks like animal manure will, in many respects, have 
stronger regulations than the far more toxic land application of sewage 
sludge.  Face it...the industrial contamination of sewage sludge means that 
it is far more full of toxic substances than the tailings of a large 
mammal... or even hundreds of large mammals.

But while manure gets regulated by an NPDES permit and has to file for a 
public review of each proposed spreading site, farms taking sludge can still 
sneak up on the neighbors, file no Nutrient Plan, have no waste discharge 
permits, no neighbor review, and hell take the hindmost.

Yes...the EPA has cleared a path for smearing toxic urban wastes on farm and 
foodchain lands.  The same permits proposed for CAFOs should also be 
required of sewage sludge spreading operations. Its time to end the 'self 
implementing' rule...that was illegal anyway.

Every sludge site should have to apply for permits and should have those 
proposed permits reviewed publicly before the spreading starts.




....................................................

>From Dale Kemery, kemery.dale at epa.gov. 202-564-7839


EPA Rule Proposed to Control Effluent from Large Animal Feedlots.

Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), such as large pig, veal and 
poultry, beef and dairy farms, would continue to be required to properly 
manage the manure they generate under a rule proposed on June 22 by EPA.

The move, in response to a 2005 court ruling, would revise the current 
permit system for such farms. The proposed rule revises the National 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting requirements and 
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for CAFOs. The proposal:

Requires those CAFOs that discharge - or propose to discharge - pollutants 
to apply for a permit.
Provides for greater public participation in connection with nutrient 
management plans. Applicants would have to submit a nutrient management plan 
with their permit application. Permitting authorities would be required to 
provide public notice and review of the plans, and include them as 
enforceable elements of the permit.

Clarifies the selection of best conventional technology for fecal coliform 
bacteria.
Clarifies that under the exemption established by the Clean Water Act, CAFOs 
land applying manure, litter or processed wastewater don't need NPDES 
permits if the only discharge from those facilities is agricultural storm 
water.

The proposed revision is in response to a ruling from the Second Circuit 
Court of Appeals in Waterkeeper Alliance, et al., vs. EPA.

The proposed rule is open for a 45-day comment period.

For more information on proposed rule, visit:

http://www.epa.gov/npdes/afo/revisedrule

..................................................................................
Proposed Revisions to CAFO NPDES Rule
EPA is proposing to revise the NPDES permitting requirements (Section 122) 
and Effluent Limitations Guidelines (Section 412) for CAFOs in response to 
the order issued by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Waterkeeper 
Alliance et al. v. EPA, 399 F.3d 486 (2nd Cir. 2005). This proposed rule 
responds to the court order while furthering the statutory goal of restoring 
and maintaining the nation's water quality and effectively ensuring that 
CAFOs properly manage manure generated by their operations.

Summary
This proposal would revise several aspects of EPA's current regulations 
governing discharges from CAFOs. First, EPA proposes to require only the 
owners and operators of those CAFOs that discharge or propose to discharge 
to seek coverage under a permit. Second, EPA proposes to require CAFOs 
seeking coverage under a permit to submit their nutrient management plan 
(NMP) with their application for an individual permit or notice of intent to 
be authorized under a general permit. Permitting authorities would be 
required to review the plan and provide the public with an opportunity for 
meaningful public review and comment. Permitting authorities would also be 
required to incorporate terms of the NMP as NPDES permit conditions. Third, 
this action proposes to authorize permit writers, upon request by a CAFO, to 
establish best management, zero discharge effluent limitations when the 
facility demonstrates that it has designed an open containment system that 
will comply with the no discharge requirements.

This proposed rule also responds to the court's remand orders regarding 
water-quality based effluent limitations (WQBELs) and pathogens. EPA 
proposes to clarify that WQBELs are available in permits with respect to 
production area discharges but are statutorily unavailable in permits for 
Large CAFOs with respect to land application discharges because the only 
available discharge from a land application area is due to agricultural 
stormwater which is by statute exempt from permitting requirements. Finally, 
EPA proposes to clarify its selection of BCT technologies for pathogens 
(fecal coliform), and reaffirm its decision to set the BCT limitations for 
fecal coliform to be equal to the BPT limits established in the 2003 CAFO 
rule.

Proposed Rule Preamble and Regulatory Text [PDF - 552 KB - 151 pp]
Fact Sheet on the Proposed Rule [PDF - 32 KB - 2 pp]
Draft NMP Template [PDF - 215 KB - 11 pp]
CAFO Proposed Rule Public Meetings
Below is a list of public meeting locations on the proposed CAFO rule. This 
website will be updated to reflect facility and time information for each 
location. Watch this site for further updates.

DATE
LOCATION

Monday, July 24, 2006
Raleigh, North Carolina

Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Ames, Iowa

Tuesday, August 1, 2006
Denver, Colorado

Wednesday, August 2, 2006
Dallas, Texas

Thursday, August 3, 2006
Sacramento, California