01/09/06 C.A.F.O. rule revisions

It was last March that the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Second Circuit Court ruled on an appeal of a lawsuit centering on federal regulations for Concentrated Animal Feedlot Operations, or C.A.F.O.'s. The Court ruled several provisions of the C.A.F.O. rules were illegal and needed revision to meet legal muster. Since that time, the Environmental Protection Agency has been keeping busy determining how to rewrite C.A.F.O. rules that were adopted by the agency in 2003. And as E.P.A.'s Jon Scholl points out, there have been a lot of concerns raised by agriculture about the direction in revising the C.A.F.O. regulations. SCHOLL: I think that it's fair to say that a lot of the operations that are potentially impacted by this haven't really operated in the arena before where they have to have permits or even deal directly with the agency. So there's a lot of questions. There's a lot of concerns. I think an important thing to remember though is the fact that in the lawsuits that drove some of the changes that are taking place, some of the agricultural groups are part of those lawsuits and they won some things but there are also some things that the environmental community sought that the ag community I think is very eager to see how's its all going to play out and how its going to effect them. So who gained what from that court ruling last March? Agriculture and feedlot operations won a victory when the court said livestock producers must apply for federal Clean Water Act permits based on actual discharges into U.S. waters, versus environmentalist demands that the permits be granted based on potential discharges. But Scholl says environmentalists obtained more exact guidelines for filing of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits in the context of C.A.F.O. regulations. SCHOLL: Probably the two key provisions that came out of that that we've been working on is what they call a duty to apply which means who has to have an N.P.D.E.S. permit, and the second part is a provision that requires details of the nutrient management plan that C.A.F.O.'s have to have be put into the permit application itself. As E.P.A. continues to revise the C.A.F.O. rules, Scholl says he expects the shaping of the updated regulations to be based on the trend of public-private partnerships. SCHOLL: I think those kinds of public-private partnerships are going to be an increasing part of what we do in agriculture and there's going to be some terrific benefits that can come from that. But also it's also going to be a terrific challenge in terms of trying to make sure that the agricultural community communicates their needs and the realities of their life in a way that allows them to have rules or have programs that allow them that continue to help them thrive economically.