In West Virginia’s Potomac Headwaters, large poultry farms are a major source of water pollution. The West Virginia Rivers Coalition has been working to bring attention to these operations that threaten the state's drinking water supplies and recreation opportunities, since one-third of samples taken in this region have exceeded bacteria safety standards and because the state government regulates factory farms very poorly.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently drafting guidance for state governments to designate what factory farms need a Clean Water Act permit and what those permits should look like. This guidance is the first action step taken by EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) since they released their Unified National Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations in March, so this is our first chance to judge how committed the two agencies are to addressing factory farm pollution.

Although the guidance has good aspects, like language on integrator liability, it hands off major decisions on most issues to the USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service (a non-regulatory agency), and the state permitting agencies, which would likely have weak enforcement standards.

Write a letter to Gregory Beatty at EPA with these points about the "Draft Guidance Manual and Example NPDES *Permit for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations." This guidance is EPA’s first concrete step in implementing the AFO ** Strategy, so it’s important that we flood them with comments to strengthen the proposed standards! COMMENTS ARE DUE OCTOBER 25, 1999. Since these comments are lengthy, it may be helpful to simply cut and paste the points below into a new document. In your letter, tell Mr. Beatty that:

_ EPA is to be commended for requiring that Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) obtain Clean Water Act permits. Clean Water Act permits allow for protections such as citizen lawsuits against polluters and penalties for polluters.

_ However, the content of the permits is just as important as the effort to issue the permits. EPA’s Unified National Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations promised the creation of a national program for CAFOs that established minimum national standards for pollution controls at factory farms. But EPA’s Draft Guidance Manual and example NPDES * Permit for CAFOs grant far too much discretion to the states as they create their permit programs. The result will be continued weak and variable state programs and pollution problems and public health threats from factory farms. The draft documents also fail to provide citizens with the information that they will need to make polluters accountable for the environmental harm that they cause. And the draft documents inappropriately delegate standard-setting and other significant powers to USDA, which has no regulatory role in the protection of waterways.

_ There is no independent review process required for manure management plans, or Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMPs). Only the third-party consultants hired by the factory farms to write CNMPs will evaluate the plans for adequacy. Despite the obvious conflict of interest and the heavy reliance on these plans as the "heart" of the permits, no oversight or review role is anticipated by any government agency. Plans will be kept on-site rather than kept on file along with the permit, making it hard for citizens to access the information. Moreover, USDA standards on which the plans will be based are minimal, open-ended, inadequate at the national level, and are not designed to assure compliance with the Clean Water Act. In fact, USDA’s national standards may be based upon the weakest state standards, anticipating (sometimes erroneously) that they will be strengthened at the state level. We recommend that the draft documents establish minimal permit conditions that are included in all permits, not just in CNMPs. Additionally, CNMPs for regulated entities should all include a baseline of measures that are included in every plan across the country, and standards should be based upon the strongest state programs, not the weakest. All CNMPs should be reviewed by water quality agency personnel to ensure that they protect water quality, do not conflict with other CNMPs within a particular watershed, and address cumulative impacts. If a CNMP is deemed to be inadequate, the Clean Water Act permit associated with it should be revoked. Finally, CNMPs should be included in the permit documents that are kept on file with the state water quality agency or EPA.

_ The draft documents fail to ensure that all CAFOs with more than 1,000 animal units will be captured in the permitting system. First, the draft documents allow certain facilities to be exempt from permit requirements altogether if they claim that they will not discharge in waterways. Second, the draft documents fail to establish criteria for how states will make such a no-discharge determination. Third, it will be hard to capture many poultry operations since first proof must be provided that they are either over-applying the litter to the land or storing the litter uncovered. The draft documents should mandate that all CAFOs obtain Clean Water Act permits.

_ The draft documents recommend too much reliance on general permits, which allow no public involvement in the permit terms for specific facilities, and elicit very little regulatory oversight by water quality agencies for the facilities requesting these permits. While a helpful subset of facilities is identified for individual permits, states are given too much discretion is determining what types of facilities meet the criteria (with the notable exception of the mandate for new facilities to obtain individual permits). Instead, individual permits should be recommended for all CAFOs.

Please send your comments by mail to:

Gregory Beatty, US EPA, Mail Code 4203, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460.

Submit comments electronically to beatty.gregory@epa.gov

If you have questions, contact Pam Moe-Merritt at West Virginia Rivers Coalition at pmoe@neumedia.net or call 304/637-7201.

Thanks for writing to EPA, and thanks for helping protect West Virginia’s exceptional rivers and streams!

* National Pollution Discharge Elimination System

** Animal Feeding Operation _