1
|
|
2
|
|
3
|
- Revises Duty to Apply:
- Replaces the 2003 requirement for all CAFOs to apply for NPDES perm=
its;
instead requires only those CAFOs that discharge or propose to
discharge to apply for permits.
- New certification option:
- Adds voluntary “no discharge certification” option for
CAFOs that do not discharge or propose to discharge.
- Additional nutrient management plan (NMP)-related requirements:
- Adds requirements for operators to submit NMPs w/ permit applicatio=
ns
or notices of intent (NOIs) for general permit coverage ; permit
authorities and public review of NMPs; terms of NMP into permit
- Allows two approaches for rates of application as terms of NMP
- Alternative NSPS provision for new sources swine, poultry and veal c=
alf
facilities
- Affirms BCT limitations:
- Best Conventional Technology (BCT) limitations established in 2003
represent the Best Conventional Control Technology for achieving fe=
cal
coliform reductions.
|
4
|
- Which CAFOs Must Seek Permit Coverage
- How does a CAFO know if it needs to apply for permit coverage?
- The Final Rule calls for a case-by-case determination of whether the
CAFO does or will discharge from its production or land application
area based on an objective assessment of the CAFO’s design,
construction, operation, and maintenance.
- If an unpermitted CAFO previously discharged and has permanently fix=
ed
the cause of the discharge, does it need to apply for a permit?
- A CAFO that has had a discharge in the past and has taken the steps
necessary to permanently fix the cause of the discharge is not requ=
ired
to apply for a permit if it is designed, constructed, operated, and
maintained for no discharge.
- Does a CAFO need to obtain permit coverage to claim the agricultural
stormwater exemption for precipitation-related discharges from land
application?
- A CAFO that does not have any discharge other than agricultural
stormwater and that does not propose to discharge is not required to
seek permit coverage. In the Final Rule EPA clarifies the applicabi=
lity
of the agricultural stormwater exemption to unpermitted CAFOs.
|
5
|
- Voluntary No Discharge Certification Option
- What is the incentive for an unpermitted CAFO to certify?
- A properly certified CAFO makes an up-front demonstration to the
Director that it does not have to get a permit. In the event of a
discharge from a CAFO with a valid certification, the CAFO would on=
ly
be subject to liability for the unpermitted discharge, not for fail=
ure
to seek permit coverage prior to the discharge.
- What are the qualifications for the voluntary certification option?<=
/li>
- In order to properly certify under the voluntary option, a CAFO mus=
t be
designed, constructed, operated and maintained for no discharge in
accordance with rigorous eligibility criteria, including a technical
evaluation of open manure storage structures and development and
implementation of an NMP that ensures no discharge.
- The CAFO also must submit a signed statement, general information a=
bout
the facility, and description of eligibility. If a CAFO meets all of
the eligibility and submission requirements its certification will
become effective upon submission without required review by the
permitting authority.
- If a properly certified CAFO discharges, can it recertify?
- After a discharge from a properly certified CAFO, the CAFO can
recertify if it permanently fixes the cause of the discharge and it=
has
not previously recertified after a discharge from the same cause. T=
he
CAFO’s recertification is submitted for a 30-day review.
|
6
|
- NMP-related requirements
- Is the entire NMP required to be publicly noticed?
- Yes, the permitting authority is required to make the entire NMP and
the draft terms of the NMP available to public.
- Is the entire NMP incorporated into the permit?
- The permitting authority must incorporate the terms of the NMP into=
the
permit, which include the information, protocols, best management
practices (BMPs) and other conditions in the NMP necessary to meet =
the
NMP requirements of the 2003 rule.
- What are the two approaches in the final rule for expressing rates of
application?
- The “linear approach” expresses field-specific maximum
rates of application in terms of the amount of nitrogen and phospho=
rus
from manure, litter, and process wastewater allowed to be applied.<=
/li>
- The “narrative rate approach” expresses the field-speci=
fic
rate of application as a narrative rate prescribing how to calculate
the amount of manure, litter, and process wastewater allowed to be
applied.
|
7
|
- NMP-related requirements, cont.
- Do either of the two approaches in the final rule for identifying te=
rms
of the NMP for expressing rates of application address the concern
regarding flexibility of the NMP?
- Yes. The narrative rate approach allows CAFO operators to change th=
eir
crop rotation and form and source of manure, litter, and process
wastewater, as well as the timing and method of application. The narrative rate approach
allows the use of “real time” data for determining rate=
s of
application and provides the most flexible approach for farmers.
- What are substantial changes to the NMP and that require a permit
modification?
- The final rule includes a list of changes to the NMP that constitut=
e a
substantial change that would trigger permit modification. These
include addition of new land application areas not previously inclu=
ded
in the CAFO’s NMP and addition of any crop not included in the
terms of the CAFO’s NMP and corresponding field-specific rate=
s of
application.
|
8
|
- Water Quality-based Effluent Limitations
- EPA clarifies that permit writers may require water quality-based
effluent limitations (WQBELs) in CAFO permits if necessary to meet
applicable water quality standards
- To further limit discharges from the production area; and/or
- With respect to any non-agricultural stormwater discharges from the
land application areas.
|
9
|
- What are the best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT)
effluent limitations for fecal coliform?
- EPA did not identify any economically achievable, technologically
available, and cost reasonable technologies on which to establish
national effluent limitations for fecal coliform.
- EPA affirmed the BCT limitations are the same as the 2003 rule BPT =
and
BAT limitations:
- No discharge from production area.
- Limited exemption for precipitation-based overflows under specified
conditions.
- Land application rates that minimize transport of nutrients; requi=
red
setback or vegetated buffer.
- What are the requirements for new source swine, poultry, and veal ca=
lf
CAFOs?
- Basic new source requirements are the same as 2003 CAFO rule:
- No discharge from production area.
- No exemption for precipitation-based overflows for new swine, poul=
try,
and veal calf CAFOs.
- Alternative provision in the rule for demonstrating the new CAFO is=
a
no discharge facility based on well-established USDA models.
- Flexibility for Director to approve other models
|
10
|
- Any extensions to compliance deadlines?
- No. EPA is not extend=
ing
the existing February 27, 2009, compliance deadlines for newly defi=
ned
facilities to apply for NPDES permits and to develop NMPs.
- How much time will States have to update their programs?
- One year to update programs; two years if statutory changes are
needed. States are not
required to adopt the provisions for no discharge certification in =
this
time period.
|
11
|
- Updates to EPA website, including Federal Register notice and outrea=
ch
materials
- Press release, fact sheet, Qs & As
- Rollout email to key stakeholders on 10/31/08
- Conference calls/meetings with stakeholders
- Public webcast scheduled for November 19 (see website for details an=
d to
register)
|
12
|
- Training for NMP development and for permit writers and inspectors=
li>
- Permit writer’s manual and producer’s guide
- Example permit; detailed Qs & As; technical standards review
- Implementation of “Manure Management Planner” (MMP) R=
11;
coordinating with USDA
|
13
|
- $8 million grant to ERC/RTI for technical assistance to livestock
operators — offers no-cost environmental assessments and no-co=
st
NMPs
- MMP developed under grants to Purdue Univ. to aid with NMPs/ CNMPs=
li>
- Grant to Iowa Cattlemen’s Association to monitor effectiveness=
of
alternative technologies
|
14
|
- For copies of the latest updates and outreach materials….
- http://www.epa.gov/npdes/afo
|