Comment submitted by Doelas Landes, Director, Environmental Services, O. K. Industries, Inc.

Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0037-0585
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Received Date: August 29 2006, at 11:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: August 30 2006, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: June 30 2006, at 08:32 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: August 29 2006, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 801c1ade
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

The following comments are made to the Environmental Protection Agency relating to Water Docket ID No. OW-2005-0037. The goals of clean drinking water and healthy streams, lakes and estuaries are honored as highly by those in the animal agriculture industry as other segments of our society and this industry will be on board with reasonable regulations as whole heartedly as any other industry in our country. In the main it appears that the Agency has made good efforts to address the mandates of the Court relating to the CAFO regulations and as one familiar with the animal agriculture industry I found points of agreement easily. However, the following comments are given for consideration by the Agency in the revision of these regulations. EPA should drop consideration of requiring large CAFOs to comply with the elements of 40 CFR 412.4(c) in order to obtain the agricultural storm water exemption because: ? This goes beyond the court-endorsed agricultural storm water exemption contained in 40 CFR 122.23(e). ? In some ways, it defeats the purpose of ensuring agronomically and environmentally sound utilization of litter and manure in crop or forage production as dictated by a site specific nutrient management plan for the production unit. ? It may make it more convenient for producers to market litter or manure generated and purchase unregulated commercial fertilizer that is more likely to leach into the surface or ground water than an equivalent amount of the same nutrients in the form of litter or manure. Nutrient Management Plans are commonly looked upon as confidential documents and we believe that inclusion of these as a part of the NPDES permits will also encourage many producers to opt for selling their manure or litter rather than using it themselves. Effort should be made to develop a means to keep these plans as confidential documents. Certain documents can be classified as confidential in other industrial permitting processes and this option should also be extended to this permitting process also. Thanks for the opportunity to comment on these important regulations. Sincerely, Doelas Landes Director Environmental Services O. K. Industries, Inc. Fort Smith, Arkansas

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 38
Anonymous public comment
Public Submission    Posted: 08/14/2006     ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0037-0325

Aug 29,2006 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by D. Narveson
Public Submission    Posted: 08/16/2006     ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0037-0485

Aug 29,2006 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by I. Skelton
Public Submission    Posted: 08/16/2006     ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0037-0486

Aug 29,2006 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by J. Fiore
Public Submission    Posted: 08/21/2006     ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0037-0539

Aug 29,2006 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Andi Curtiss, Environmental Director, Cattle Empire, LLC
Public Submission    Posted: 08/28/2006     ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0037-0555

Aug 29,2006 11:59 PM ET