Nutrient Management Regulations
|
The proposed regulation is significantly improved over the 1997
version. Concentrated Animal Operations (CAOs) with 2,000 lb. animal weight per acre available for manure application, must have a Nutrient Management Plan, since Act 6 passed in 1993 and the Section 83 regulation [25 Pa. Code Ch. 83] was implemented in 1997. The State Conservation Commission developed this proposed revision of the regulations through an open process with the Nutrient Management Advisory Board and anyone who attended the meetings throughout 2002 and 2003. Proposed Regulations Are an ImprovementHorse operations are included in the regulation for the first time. It requires careful planning and tracking of manure that is shipped from one farm to another. The proposed regulation requires that phosphorus be addressed in all nutrient management plans, not just nitrogen as previously. Animal access to surface water must be controlled, so that livestock may not directly deposit their manure in streams. Manure application on bare ground is prohibited. The nutrient management plans that CAFOs and other qualifying operations must file must be consistent with the finalized Section 83 nutrient management regulations. Tell the State Conservation Commission that you support the closing of the “export loophole”, the requirement for exporters and importers of manure to have signed agreements, and the requirement for proper handling of manure at the import site, under Section 83.301. Weaknesses Need to Be AddressedThere remain some serious weaknesses in the proposed regulation, that must be addressed if Pennsylvania is going to effectively control the nutrient pollution of our streams and downstream waters including the Chesapeake Bay. Controlling Phosphorus PollutionThe proposal to require indexing of phosphorus, to limit the application of phosphorus where it is already built up in excessive amounts in the soil, is an important move in the right direction. However, as designed, the phosphorus index, defined in Section 83.201, is not adequate to meet the needs for controlling and reducing phosphorus pollution. The threshold for limiting manure application is set at 200 ppm of phosphorus, which is way above crop needs. Tell the State Conservation Commission that a phosphorus balancing approach should be used instead, which would limit phosphorus application on a larger scope of farms where the level of P is already very high. In addition, Section 83.301 should be modified to require that nutrient management plans for importing of manure should include balance sheets for phosphorus as well as nitrogen. Setback RequirementWhen applying manure to land, a setback of 100 feet (or 200 feet on steep slopes) from surface water is only required when the ground is frozen, snow-covered or saturated, although there is serious potential for water pollution throughout the year. Tell the State Conservation Commission that Sections 83.294(f) should be changed to make the manure application setbacks apply year round. In addition, the setback should apply to sinkholes at all times. Manure Storage on FieldsUnder proposed Section 83.294(h), operations are permitted to stockpile dry manure uncovered, as long as they apply it before the next growing season. Runoff from uncovered manure piles is a known source of nutrient pollution, and must be more effectively addressed. Tell the State Conservation Commission that dry manure must not be stored uncovered in fields for longer than 2 weeks. Manure Storage FacilitiesUnder revisions proposed for Section 83.351, setbacks for manure storage facilities would not apply to intermittent streams or wetlands. In addition, the SCC or Conservation Districts would have the authority to waive setback requirements. These provisions are invitations to serious pollution problems. Tell the State Conservation Commission that Section 83.351 must be changed to require setbacks for manure storage facilities from all surface waters, and the provision allowing the SCC or a Conservation District to waive the setback requirements should be stricken. Water MonitoringFinally, there are no requirements for surface or ground water monitoring, neither for the baseline or for follow up to determine the success of management practices. Nevertheless, some management practices might turn out to be ineffective in preventing nutrient loadings, or have limited effect in certain topographic and other conditions. Tell the State Conservation Commission that monitoring of ground water and downgradient surface water should be required as part of all nutrient management plans approved for CAFOs, to verify that there are no manure releases. Click here to return to Where to send
comments page Sierra Club® and "Explore,
enjoy and protect the planet."® are registered trademarks
of the Sierra Club. |