ILLINOIS
POLLUTION
CONTROL
BOARD
September
21,
1978
IN
THE MATTER
OF:
)
)
A~NDMENTS TO
THE
AGRICULTURE
)
RELATED
POLLUTION
REGULATIONS
)
R76-15
OF
THE
ILLINOIS
POLLUTION
)
CONTROL
BOARD
)
OPIi~TION
AND
ORDER
OF
THE BOARD
(by
Dr.
Satchell):
This regulatory proceeding was initiated before the Board
by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(Agency)
by
filing a petition on July
9,
1976 for amendments to the
Chapter
5:
Agriculture Related Pollution Regulations
(Chapter 5).
This proposal
was
numbered R76-l5
arid published in Environmental
Register #130, July 30,
1976.
Public hearings were held on
this matter on August 23,
1977 in Mt. Vernon, Illinois and
August
25,
1977 in Moline, Illinois.
Economic impact hearings
were held on February
7,
1978 in Galesburg, Illinois and
February
8,
1978 in Jacksonville, Illinois.
The purpose of these amer~d~entsis
largely to comply with
Federal requirements.
These amendments will make the Board’s
Chapter 5 consistent with tue revised
(as of March 18,
1976)
USEPA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES)
program on animal feeding operations.
The second reason for
the amendments
is to set
a fixed date for compliance ~‘rithpart
one of Chapter
5 for all feedlots not subject to NPDES authority.
The current dates, established in March,
1975, were set to be
effective for new facilities when Illinois received NPDES
authority from USEPA and for existing facilities thirty months
after receipt of NPDES authority.
This authority was believed
imminent at the time
(R.
12).
however, Illinois did not receive
the authority as expected and the compliance dates were conse-
quently pushed forward.
Thus in this proceeding the Agency has
sought to establish a date certain for compliance.
It should
be noted at this point Illinois received NPDES authority in
October 1977 and notice was filed with the Secretary of State
on October 24,
1977.
Hearings concerning livestock waste were held in 1972 and
1973; however, these were stayed pending further agricultural
input and developing federal regulations.
On July 5,
1973 the
federal regulations were finalized.
The Board adoptsdregulations
on August 29,
1974.
These were amended on September 5,
1974
and again on March 26,
1975.
This final amendment set the
current compliance dates.
The Agency believes there has been adecuate notice to
those facilities not needing NPDES permits to obtain compliance
31—537
—2—
with the regulations
(R.
12,
13) and that thirty months from
October of 1977 is an unwarranted amount of time to achieve
compliance
(R.
13).
The Agency proposes a December 31, 1978
compliance date
(Aug.
22, 1977 amendment).
This would allow a
complete construction season for facilities not already in
compliance to comply.
The Agency further submits that con-
sidering the lengthy proceedings in this cause there is no
element of surprise to livestock producers
(R.
13).
The Agency
estimated that 300 to 500 facilities would need to make major
modifications to meet Rule 203 and that a “goodly number” of the
40,000 feedlots in Illinois would need to make minor modifica-
tions to meet the requirements of the regulations
(R.
16, 46).
Dr. Donald W. Lybecker, the author of the economic impact
study, made the following observation concerning compliance dates.
“The point is that if a farmer is going to have
to make a capital investment in animal waste pollution
abatement facilities,
in general the investment is
better made sooner than later.
Given the range of
interest rates during the last five years and the
increase in the cost of labor and materials for the
construction of the pollution control systems,
a
return of from nine to 13 percent above the cost of
capital would be realized.
Exceptions
to this generalization must, how-
ever,
be noted.
Those producers who are short of
capital and find themselves with relatively large
debt
loads
may
not
be
able
to
finance
the
necessary
capital
improvements
or
if
so,
they
may
be
required
to pay a premium for the required additional
funds.
Table 3.13 shows the variation of returns for hogs,
feeder cattle and dairy cattle for the period 1966—75.
During these ten years, only hog producers have been
able to cover all of their feed and nonfeed costs.
Both the dairy and feeder cattle operators show
losses on average.
Projected nonfeed costs for future
production show increases of from 38 to
50 percent,
indicating
additional
income
pressure
for
these
livestock operators.”
(IIEQ Doc. No.
77/23,
pp.
37,41)
This
analysis
was
brought
into
question
at
the
economic
impact
hearing because it compares interest rates with price indices.
This would cause the “return from nine to
13 percent” to
disappear.
A
representative
of
the
Illinois
Livestock
Association,
John Killaxn, observed at the February 7,
1978 hearing that the
variables affecting the industry are
so great that it is dif-
ficult to put numbers on the economic impact
(R.
109—113).
31—539
—3—
It was noted at the hearing that the two methods of
compliance chosen for economic analysis, the vegetative filter
and the holding pond, are perhaps the most expensive methods of
compliance
arid that by use of some simpler methods costs might
be decreased
(R. 94-96).
One such method might be shifting a
feedlot from one side on a
hil.
to another to avoid direct
runoff into a stream.
Assuming some farmers have some such
options available the costs would be lower than estimated.
It
should be noted that data in this area are not readily available.
Much of the economic impact analysis was done with reliance on an
unpublished Soil Conservation Service
(SCS)
document (Reference
*30 of IIEQ Doc. No.
77/23).
This document reflects estimates
of numbers of feedlot operations in Illinois that would be
believed to be in violation of specified effluent guidelines
(R.
101—103).
These estimates were received through a survey
of people working with
SCS
and extension services
(R.
102).
The Board observes that feedlot operators have had sub-
stantial notice of these regulations because of the on-going
regulatory process since 1972.
These operators even without
Chapter
5 would have to be concerned with compliance with Chapter
3:
Water Pollution Regulations and Section 12 of the Environ-
mental Protection Act (Act),
Ch.
ill 1/2 Ill. Rev.
Stat.
S1012
(1977).
The economic impact of these proposed regulations
considered in this light become negligible.
The fact that these
regulations emulate already existing Federal Regulations raises
the question:
Is there any new economic impact as
a result of
action by the State of Illinois?
The Board will enact an earlier compliance date for Rule
401(a)
of Chapter
5.
However, due to the time delay since the
Agency’s proposal the Board will extend the date beyond its
proposal to June 30,
1979.
The Agency has indicated that those
operations inclined to come into compliance will have already
done so
(R.
12,
13);
however,
this will provide an additional
six months notice to those who might be awaiting official action
on the regulation.
Other than the compliance dates all the proposed changes
in the Chapter
5 Regulations are in response to amendments to
the Federal NPDES program on Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operations published in the Federal Register on March 18,
1976
(R.
41, 51).
The changes include six new definitions which
are animal feeding operation, animal unit, man—made, man—made
ditch, navigable waters and silvicultural point source.
An
animal feeding operation is defined as a facility where
animals are confined for 45 days or more per year and the
entire lot is void of vegetation during the normal growing
season.
This exempts pasture operations with proper management
CR.
51).
The definition of an animal feeding operation is
substituted for the term livestock feedlot.
This means that
31—541
—4-
minor changes occur in Rule 104(c)
and to the definitions for
feedlot runoff, livestock management facility and livestock
waste.
The definition for silviculture point source reflects the
latest USEPA revision to clarify that the discharge must be
specifically related to silvicultural activities
(R. 52).
There
are no silvicultural point sources in Illinois
CR.
79).
The definition of animal unit is quite similar to that
promulgated by USEPA.
To make the list more nearly complete the
Agency proposed to add multiplier numbers for young dairy stock,
swine weighing under
55 pounds, turkeys,
laying hens or broilers,
and ducks
CR.
53).
During the course of the hearing the term
“brood cows” was added to the slaughter and feeder cattle
category and “lambs or goats” was added to the sheep category.
These changes were also made to assure ease of understanding
in computing animal units.
The definitions of man—made and man—made ditch were included
to make it clear that a vegetative filter would be considered a
treatment device and not a man—made ditch.
The navigable waters definition is that of 40 CFR 125.1(p).
Rule 104(a)
has been modified to simply state that all
persons must comply with the Environmental Protection Act and
all Board regulations.
This is simply a restatement of the law.
Rules 202 and 203 deal with N?DES permits.
The amendments
break down requirements in greater detail than the existing form.
As previously stated the modifications in the requirements are
made in accordance with the revised USEPA program on Concentrated
Animal Feeding Operations.
Rule 202(a) requires an NPDES permit
for operations with more than 1,000 animal units.
The single
exception to this
is if the operation discharges only in the
event of a 25-year, 24-hour storm event.
Rule 202(b)
requires
an NPDES permit for operations with 300 to 1,000 animal units
if either of two conditions are met:
(1)
pollutants are dis-
charged directly into navigable waters through a man-made device,
or
(2)
pollutants are discharged directly into a stream or
other body of water which comes into contact with the confined
animals.
Rule 203 provides for case-by-case determination for NPDES
permits other than those coming under Rule 202.
After consideration
of the factors set forth in the regulation the Agency may designate
a facility as requiring an NPDES permit.
Prior to requiring a
permit the Agency must make an onsite inspection and notify the
owner or operator in writing.
No permit may be required if
the animal feeding operation discharges only in the event of a
25-year, 24-hour storm event.
Under Rule 203 NPDES permits can
be required only if either of the following conditions
is met:
(1)
there is
a discharge through a man-made device,
or
(2)
a
stream or other water comes into contact with the confined
animals.
~1—54~
—5—
A
new paragraph will be added to Rule 207.
Rule 207(c)
concerns land trust disclosure.
This once again simply states
the law of Illinois.
In the economic analysis Dr. Lybecker considered most of
the changes proposed other than the compliance date,
as having no
economic impact.
The one exception in the analysis was the
300—1,000 animal unit operation.
If it is assumed these operations
are not covered under current regulations then about 6,300
livestock operations would be affected
(IIEQ Doc.
77/23 p.
2).
For 128 farms with surface runoff problems the investment costs
for pollution abatement would be about
$1.6 million, and an
additional net operating cost of over $192,000 would be incurred
annually,
id.
This of course is based on the assumption;
however,
these operations could possibly come under the current Rule 203
and would come under Federal regulation if not covered by the
State.
Consequently,
as stated earlier there is a question if
there
is any economic impact.
Many of the problems discussed
with the economic analysis of the compliance date arise again
now:
the great variability in the industry, the availability of
data,
the choice of compliance methods, and the requirements of
the Environmental Protection Act and other Board regulations.
Based on the information presented the Board will make the
changes requested by the Agency in Rules
103,
104, 202,
203,
207
and 303 of Chapter
5:
Agriculture Related Pollution Regulations.
Rule 401 will be modified as consistent with this opinion.
ORDER
It is the order of the Pollution Control Board that the
following modifications shall be made to Chapter
5:
Agriculture
Related Pollution Regulations:
In Rule 103 the definition of Livestock Feedlot is repealed.
Rule 103 will contain the following new or modified
definitions:
Animal Feedin~Operation:
A lot or facility
(other than
an aquatic animal production facility) where the
following conditions are met:
Ci)
Animals have been,
are,
or will be stabled or
confined and fed or maintained for a total of
45
days or more in any 12-month period, and
(ii)
Crops, vegetation,
forage growth or post-
harvest residues that are grown in place are not
sustained in the normal growing season over any
portion of the lot or facility.
Two or more animal feeding operations under common owner-
ship are deemed to be a single animal feeding operation
if they are adjacent to each other or if they utilize a
common area or system for the disposal of wastes.
31—543
—6—
Animal Unit:
A unit of measurement for any animal
feeding operation calculated by adding the following
animal numbers:
Brood cows and slaughter and feeder cattle multi-
plied by 1.0
Milking dairy cows multiplied by 1.4
Young dairy stock multiplied by 0.6
Swine weighing over 55 pounds multiplied by 0.4
Swine weighing under 55 pounds multiplied by 0.03
Sheep,
lambs or goats multiplied by 0.1
Horses multiplied by 2.0
Turkeys multiplied by 0.02
Laying hens or broilers multiplied by 0.01
(if
the facility has continuous overflow watering)
Laying hens or broilers multiplied by 0.03
(if the
facility has
a liquid manure handling system)
Ducks multiplied by 0.2.
FeedJ.ot Runoff:
Polluted liquid flowing from any
animal feeding operation caused by precipitation or
other water sources falling on or flowing onto an
animal feeding operation.
Livestock Management Facility:
Any animal feeding opera-
tion,
livestock shelter,
or on-farm milking and ac-
companying milk-handling area.
Livestock Waste:
Livestock excreta and associated feed
losses, bedding, wash waters, sprinkling waters from
livestock cooling, precipitation polluted by falling on
or flowing onto an animal feeding operation,
and other
materials polluted by livestock
Man—made:
Constructed by man and used for the purpose
of transporting waste.
Man-made Ditch:
A discrete fissure or channel excavated
iñ~theearth for the purpose of transporting livestock
waste directly to navigable waters.
This is not to be
confused with a vegetative filter or acceptable disposal
area which is
a treatment device and may take the form
of
a man—made terrace or grass waterway system.
Navigable Waters:
All waters of the United States as
defined in 40 CFR 125.1(p):
(1)
All navigable waters of the United States;
(2)
Tributaries of navigable waters of the
United States;
(3)
Interstate waters;
(4)
Intrastate lakes, rivers,
and streams which
are utilized by interstate travelers for
recreational or other purposes;
(5)
Intrastate lakes, rivers,
and streams from
which fish or shellfish are taken and sold
in interstate commerce; and
31~54~
—7—
(6)
Intrastate la.kes, rivers, and streams which
are utilized for industrial purposes by
industries in interstate commerce.
Silvicultural Point Source:
Any discernible, confined
and discrete conveyance related to rock crushing, gravel
washing, log sorting or log storage facilities which are
operated in connection with silvicultural activities and
from which pollutants are discharged into navigable
waters.
Rule 104 (a):
104 LIVESTOCK MANAGEMENT FACILITY AND LIVESTOCK WASTE-
HANDLING FACILITY OPERATIONS
(a)
General Criteria
(1)
Besides the Regulations contained within this
Chapter, every person shall also comply with
the provisions of the Act and Board
Regulations.
(2)
The owner or operator of any livestock manage-
ment facility or livestock waste-handling
facility shall comply with the FWPCA,
NPDES
filing requirements, and the feedlot category
of point source effluent guidelines.
(3)
These Regulations shall apply to stockyards and
similar operations where animals are held
briefly,
as well as to conventional livestock
operations.
(4),
The transportation of livestock wastes shall be
planned and conducted so
as not to cause,
threaten,
or
allow
any
violation
of
the
Act
and
applicable regulations.
Rule 104(c):
Cc)
Protection of Livestock Mana~ementFacilities and
Livestock Waste-Handling Facilities
(1)
Existing livestock management facilities and
livestock waste—handling facilities shall have
adequate diversion dikes, walls,
or curbs that
will prevent excessive outside surface waters
from flowing through the animal feeding
operation and will direct runoff to an ap-
propriate disposal, holding, or storage area.
The diversions are required on all aforementioned
structures unless there is negligible outside
surface water which can flow through the
31—545
—8—
facility or the runoff is tributary to an
acceptable disposal area or a livestock waste-
handling facility.
If inadequate diversions
cause or threaten to cause a violation of the
Act or applicable regulations, the Agency may
require corrective measures.
(2)
New livestock management facilities and live-
stock waste-handling facilities shall have
adequate diversions, dikes, walls, or curbs
that will prevent excessive outside surface
runoff waters from flowing through the animal
feeding operation and will direct runoff
to an
appropriate disposal, holding,
or storage
area.
The diversions are required on all
aforementioned structures unless there is
negligible outside surface water which can
flow through the facility or the runoff is
tributary
to
an
acceptable
disposal
area
or
a
livestock waste—handling facility.
A holding
pond must be capable of storing a volume
equal
to or exceeding the area of the animal
feeding
operation,
plus
any
tributary
area
not
a part of the animal feeding operation
(including roof area if tributary to the
facility), multiplied by 12 inches for runoff
from earthen areas or 15
inches
for
runoff
from
concrete areas unless the operator
has
justifiable reasons substantiating that a lesser
storage volume is adequate.
If inadequate
storage volumes cause or threaten to cause a
violation of the Act or applicable regulations,
the
Agency
may require corrective measures.
In no case shall the storage volume of the
containment facility be less than the 25-year,
24-hour storm effluent guidelines as required
by the new source performance standards of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the
feedlot point source category.
Rule 202:
202 PERMITS REQUIRED
FOR
LARGE
OPERATORS
An NPDES permit shall be required for an animal feeding
operation which falls within the criteria set forth in
(a)
or
(b)
below:
provided, however, that no animal
feeding operation shall require a permit if it dis-
charges only in the event of a 25-year,
24-hour storm
event.
(a)
More than the numbers of animals specified in any
of the following categories are confined:
ii—~4o
—9—
Number of
Animals
1,000
700
500
2,500
10,000
55,000
100,000
30,000
5,000
1,000
Kind of
Animals
Brood cows and slaughter and feeder
cattle
Milking dairy cows
Horses
Swine weighing over
55 pounds
Sheep, lambs or goats
Turkeys
Laying hens or broilers
(if the
facility has continuous overflow
watering)
Laying hens or broilers
(if the
facility has a liquid manure handling
system)
Ducks
Animal units
(b)
More than the following numbers and types of animals
are confined and either condition
(1)
or
(2) below
is met:
Number of
Animals
300
200
750
150
3,000
16,500
30,000
9,000
Kind of Animals
Brood cows and slaughter or feeder
cattle
Milking dairy cows
Swine weighing over 55
pounds
Horses
Sheep,
lambs or goats
Turkeys
Laying hens or broilers
(if
the
facility
has continuous overflow watering)
Laying hens or broilers
(if the facility
has
a liquid manure handling system)
41—547
—10—
1,500
Ducks
300
Animal units
(1)
Pollutants
are
discharged
into
navigable
waters through a man-made ditch,
flushing
system or other similar man—made device; or
(2)
Pollutants are discharged directly into
navigable waters which originate outside of
and pass over, across, through or otherwise
come into direct contact with the animals
confined in the operation.
None or the requirements listed in Rule 201,
202,
or 203 preclude the voluntary filing of an NPDES
application by the owner or operator of an animal
feeding operation.
Rule 203:
203 CASE-BY-CASE DESIGNATION REQUIRING NPDES PERMITS
(a)
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Part,
the Agency may require any animal feeding operation
not
falling
within
Rule
202
to
obtain
a
permit.
In
making such designation, the Agency shall consider
the
following
factors:
(1)
The size of the animal feeding operation and
the amount of wastes reaching navigable waters;
(2)
The location of the animal feeding operation
relative to navigable waters;
(3)
The means
of conveyance of animal wastes and
process wastewaters into navigable waters;
(4)
The slope, vegetation, rainfall, and other
factors relative to the likelihood or frequency
of discharge of animal wastes and process
wastewaters into navigable waters; and~
(5)
Other such factors bearing on the significance
of the pollution problem sought to be regulated.
The Agency, however, may not require a permit under
Rule 203(a)
for any animal feeding operation with
less than the number of animal units
(300)
set
forth in Rule 202(b)
above,
unless it meets either
of the following conditions:
(i) Pollutants are discharged into navigable waters
through a man-made ditch, flushing system or
other similar man-made device; or
—11—
(ii) Pollutants are discharged directly into
navigable waters which originate outside of
and pass over,
across, through or otherwise
come into direct contact with the animals
confined in the operation.
(b)
In no case may a permit application be required from
an animal feeding operation designated pursuant to
this Rule until there has been an onsite inspection
of the operation and a determination that the
operation should and could be regulated under the
permit program.
In addition, no application may
be required from an owner or operator of an animal
feeding operation designated pursuant to this Rule
unless the owner or operator is notified in writing
of the requirement to apply for a permit.
(c)
Upon receipt of the Agency’s notification that an
NPDES permit is required pursuant to Rule 203(b)
of this Chapter, the operator shall make application
to the Agency within
60 days.
The Agency may issue
an NPDES permit with a compliance schedule detailing
interim steps to be taken along with a final date,
not to exceed 14 months from the date the permit
is
issued, by which compliance with the Act and all
applicable regulations shall be achieved.
(d)
No animal feeding operation may be required to have
a permit if it discharges only in the event of a
25—year,
24—hour storm event.
A new Rule 207(c)
207 APPLICATIONS
-
FILING AND FINAL ACTION BY AGENCY
Cc)
Disclosure Required For Land Trusts.
An applicant
filing for
an
NPDES
permit
shall
satisfy
the
re-
quirements of Chapter 148, Section 72, of the
Illinois Revised Statutes
(1975)
before the Agency
grants the applicant its permit.
Rule 303:
303 SILVICULTURAL ACTIVITIES
NPDES permits are required for discharges from silvi-
cultural point sources.
Rule 401:
401 COMPLIANCE DATES
Compliance with the limitations of Part
I
of this Chapter
shall be achieved by the following dates:
(a)
With
respect
to existing facilities not required
31—549
—12—
to obtain NPDES permits, by June
30,
1979.
(b)
With respect to all other existing and new
facilities, as of the effective date of this
amendment.
-
I,
Control
adopted
vote of
Christan L. ~1offett,Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Board,
here~4~.certify
the above Opinion and Order were
on41the
~
I
day of
~
1978 by
a
Illinois Pollution
Board
