MINUTES

AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY BOARD

Rachel Carson State Office Building, Harrisburg, PA

April 23, 1997

There being a majority of the Board members present, the meeting was called to order at 10:05 a.m. by Chairperson Brenda Shambaugh, PA State Grange.

Attendance

Members

Brenda Shambaugh, PA State Grange
Dr. Herb Cole, Penn State University
Carl Shaffer, Vegetable Producer
Robert Pardoe, Jr., Dairy Producer
Samuel Elkin, Livestock Producer
Frank Long, PA Association of Conservation Districts
Janet Oertly, USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service
Bill Adams, PA Farm Bureau
Jay Howes, House, Agriculture and Rural affairs Committee (Rep. Bunt)
Lynn Slabicki, House, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee (Rep. Cappabianca)
David Brubaker, Agri-business Representative
Donald Lichtenwalner, Grain Producer
Thomas Oyler, Jr., Fruit Producer
William Baumgartner, USDA, Farm Service Agency
Bruce Holbrook, PA Department of Environmental Protection

Agencies, Advisors, and Guests

Egide Nizeyimana, Penn State University
Mohammad Farooq, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Barry Evans, Penn State University
Don Fiesta, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Patrick Bowling, DEP, Bureau of Water Supply Management
Joe Lee, DEP, Bureau of Water Supply Management
Gail Phelps, DEP, Office of Chief Counsel
Ken Murin, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Ken Reisinger, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Kervin Smith, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Bill Zett, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Bill Gerlach, DEP, Office of Chief Counsel
Sharon Freeman, DEP, Office of Policy
John Mank, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Dean Auchenbach, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection

Minutes

The minutes of the February 26, 1997 meeting were approved as distributed. Several Board members expressed their concern that they did not receive the materials at least two weeks prior to the meeting. The members stated that receiving the materials less than two weeks prior to the meeting does not allow for sufficient review time prior to the meeting. The members also questioned the need for the Department’s review and approval of the meeting agenda, and questioned what would happen if the Board wanted to discuss a particular topic and the Department did not approve it.

Review/Comment on the Proposed Revisions to the Chapter 102, Erosion Control Regulations

Ken Murin, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection, provided an overview of the revisions made to the Chapter 102 , Erosion Control Regulations, based on comments received after the first draft (see attachment # 1.) Jay Howes made a motion that the term "conservation plan" be deleted from the definition section 102.1, and that the phrase " a plan that identifies best management practices for agricultural plowing and tilling activities" be used in lieu of the term "conservation plan" as it appears in 102.4(d) and 102.5(c) of the regulations. This motion was seconded by Frank Long and the motion was passed unanimously by the Board. There was also considerable discussion over the terms "minimize" and "prevent" as they appear in 102.4(a). The Board questioned whether the use of the two terms would be understood by the average person. The Board recommended that the word "prevent" be deleted and the word "minimized" be used in 102.4(a). The board also recommended that the term "prevent" be deleted from the definition of best management practices in 102.1, and the term "minimized" be inserted in its place. Chairperson Brenda Shambaugh directed that a letter outlining the Board’s comments on the proposed revisions to the Chapter 102, Erosion Control Regulations be sent to Ken Murin. (see attachment # 2.)

Ken Murin also addressed a concern raised by the Board in its January 14 comment letter regarding PennDOT discharging stormwater off of roadways onto agricultural fields. Ken stated that the Department has met and will continue to meet with PennDOT officials regarding this issue. This concern will probably not be addressed by any revisions made to the Chapter 102 regulations. PennDOT has stated that any discharges into its right of way would require a highway occupancy permit. The fee for this permit would be waived by PennDOT if the landowner goes through the conservation district or Natural Resources Conservation Service Office.

Status Report on the Chapter 105, Dam Safety and Waterways Management Regulation Revisions

Ken Reisinger, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection, informed the Board that the Chapter 105, Dam Safety and Waterways Management Regulations are currently being revised to delete redundancies and clarify waiver requirements. Once the regulation revisions are complete the Department will present them to the Wetland Management Advisory Committee and the Agricultural Advisory Board. Ken requested that the Board appoint a committee to meet with him to review the proposed revisions, once they are complete, prior to the regularly scheduled Board meeting. Chairperson Shambaugh appointed Bill Adams to chair this committee. Other committee members include Dr. Herb Cole, Brenda Shambaugh, Walt Peechatka and Bob Junk.

Comments on the Proposed Wellhead Protection Program

Chairperson Shambaugh requested comments from Board members on the proposed Wellhead Protection Program that was presented by Joe Lee, DEP, Bureau of Water Supply Management, at the Board’s February meeting. Dr. Herb Cole questioned whether there will be coordination with the Pesticide Advisory Board regarding this program. Joe Lee stated that a representative from the PA Department of Agriculture sits on an internal work group, and that the Department regularly communicates with Dave Bingamon, PDA, regarding this program. Bill Adams questioned what the implications would be for agriculture in the various zones associated with the program. Joe stated that the Wellhead Protection Program would not place additional statutory requirements on agriculture. The program assists local authorities in implementing a Wellhead Protection Program. A water authority could not require a farmer to reveal the pesticides they use. Any contamination found would be handled through other programs. If an area of concern is found, a wellhead protection committee would be formed, and agriculture should be represented as one of the stakeholders on this committee. Joe stated that the proposed Wellhead Protection Program is no more stringent than the requirements that municipalities and water authorities can currently impose. The Board members were satisfied with the proposed Wellhead Protection Program and determined that they had no comments to provide to the Department.

Nutrient Management Act Studies

Don Fiesta, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection, distributed an executive summary of the Act 6 Studies as required by the Nutrient Management Act (attachment # 3.) Section 5 of the Nutrient management Act (Act 6 of 1993) charged DEP with the task of assessing to what extent malfunctioning on-lot sewage systems; improper water well construction; chemical fertilizers and plan nutrients for non-agricultural purposes; storm water runoff; and atmospheric deposition contributes to the pollution of waters of the Commonwealth. DEP requested the assistance of the Pennsylvania State University in conducting the assessment. Don reviewed the results of the study with the Board. The Board members noted that agriculture has been blamed for most environmental ills, and cautioned the Department that the results of this study need to be carefully presented and explained. Sam Elkin questioned why the study did not look at both non-point and point sources of pollution since total pollution should be the concern. Mohommad Farooq, DEP, noted that the Act only required that a non-point source pollution assessment be conducted. Don Fiesta stated that the Department will now develop recommendations based on the studies results. The Department will present these recommendations to the Board once they are completed sometime this summer.

Committee Report on the Use of Inmates to Clean-up Trash in Farm Fields Along Roadways

Mike Brendle, who chairs this committee was not able to attend the Board meeting. Dean Auchenbach, DEP, reported that he had contacted Bob Morash from PennDOT regarding their "Adopt A Highway" Program. During the conversation Mr. Morash mentioned that a trial program of using inmates to pick up litter along roadways was done in five counties last summer. This program was so successful that it will be expanded statewide in 1997. The limitations are that inmates can only work within a 25 mile radius of the state prison, and they may only pick up trash in the roadway right-of-way, and may not enter onto private property. Dean also reported that the Department in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Resources Council, has established a telephone number that the public may use to report highway litter violations. The offender will be mailed a letter noting that litter was observed being thrown from their vehicle. they will also receive a litter bag with the program logo on the outside. This campaign was started in February 1997 and is currently averaging 250-300 calls a week.

Chairperson Brenda Shambaugh noted that Representative Arthur Hershey introduced legislation (H.B. 922) which would place at least a five cent deposit on bottles and cans. Brenda noted that a press conference was held on April 21 to support this legislation. The Chairman of the House State Government Committee also held hearings April 21 regarding the bottle bill. During the hearing many committee members stated that they had never before heard the farmers concerns over discarded bottles and cans. Groups that support this legislation are attempting to build support for a non-binding referendum regarding the bottle bill.

Report on the Meeting Between the PA Farm Bureau and DEP Regarding the Citizen’s Volunteer Monitoring Program

Bill Adams, PA Farm Bureau, reported that Farm Bureau President Guy Donaldson, Al Myers, Carl Shaffer and he attended a meeting with Secretary James Seif, Deputy Secretary Hugh Archer, Deputy Secretary Dave Hess, and Diane Wilson regarding Farm Bureau concerns over the Citizen’s Volunteer Monitoring Program (CVMP.) During this meeting the Farm Bureau expressed concerns regarding liability, private property rights, damage to property, and quality of samples. The Department stated that the CVMP will be part of DEP’s water quality efforts and requested that the Farm Bureau assist them in developing the program. Bill stated that the Farm Bureau requested more information regarding the CVMP in order to keep the dialogue going with the Department.

Carl Shaffer stated that the CVMP scares him and questioned the motives of some of the groups that would do the monitoring. Many Board members questioned the need for this program and felt that this program is an intrusion and invasion of private property rights. The Board also questioned what the data collected would be used for. It was noted that in order to get credible results from water studies you need about five years to get complete and good data. Dr. Cole noted that PA needs to preserve the good relationship between landowners and citizen’s within the Commonwealth, or face some of the private land rights issues that are confronting the western United States. Chairperson Shambaugh suggested that perhaps the Board could present a counter proposal to the Department for the use of the money budgeted to go toward the CVMP. The Board members requested that Diane Wilson, the Department’s CVMP Coordinator attend the Board’s June meeting to address the Board’s concerns. Board members were provided copies of the April 9 letter from Diane Wilson in response to the Board’s March 18 letter to Secretary Seif (attachment # 4.)

Ozone and Particulate Matter Controls

Wick Havens, DEP, Bureau of Air Quality, provided the Board members with an overview of the state’s efforts at ozone and particulate matter controls. He also addressed the Board’s concerns regarding the EPA proposal to revise the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and particulate matter. Wick stated that under the proposed EPA standards for particulate matter, agriculture has been named as a significant source, however he doesn’t feel this is so. The proposed particulate matter standard of PM 2.5 is a very fine particulate that can penetrate deeply into the lungs and carry pollutants. PM 2.5 is usually produced by combustion, and is not produced by wind blown dust or cars driving on dirt roads. Wick stated that a PM 2.5 standard may cause problems in the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh areas of the state, but would have little impact on agriculture, with the exception of increased transportation costs. Wick stated that in regards to ozone standards, most areas of the country that are exceeding this standard are located near coal generated power plants. The air that comes into PA is already exceeding the ozone level standard. The state has voiced its concern to EPA that something needs to be done upwind of the state in order to reduce ozone levels. The proposed new ozone standard would be 0.08 ppm. This standard was recommended by the EPA Science Advisory Committee.

Wick stated that the new standards would set an attainment date for the year 2011. PA would need to submit a plan to EPA by the year 2002, which outlines how they will meet the new standards. In summary, the Department can see benefits with the proposed EPA standards, but not enough to support the proposed changes at this time. EPA will be making a decision later this summer on the NAAQS standards, after they have responded to the comments they have received on the proposal. Wick stated that things will probably move slowly on this issue. If the Board members have any further questions they may contact him at 717-787-4310. the Board thanked him for a very interesting and informative presentation.

Comments/Issues/Concerns of the Board

Board members discussed the concerns they have regarding the issue of backhauling which is affecting agriculture. Gail Phelps, DEP, Office of Chief Counsel, noted that there are three laws that pertain to the hauling of waste material one way and the transport of food products or produce back. These laws are the Federal Sanitary Food Transportation Act of 1990, for which regulations were never written by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The other two laws are state laws. The first is the PA Vehicle Code, which is enforced by the PA State Police, usually as a result of a traffic stop for some other offense. The second is Title 25, Chapter 285 Regulations, Section 219, which makes it illegal to transport, or provide a vehicle for the transportation of a food product or produce intended for human or livestock consumption, in a vehicle that has been used to haul waste. Gail noted that the PA State Police may enforce the chapter 285 regulations and the PA Vehicle Code as it pertains to this issue. DEP staff may not enforce the PA Vehicle Code, and do not inspect trucks to check for compliance with the regulation.

The Board members expressed concern that items which should not be considered waste, such as corn cobs and sawdust, are being defined as waste under the regulations. Also, the way the regulations are being interpreted, once a vehicle has been used to haul waste it may never again be used to haul food products or produce. The Board members stated that the regulations should allow for a truck that has hauled waste to be cleaned so that it may be used in the future to haul food products or produce. The Board cautioned that any truck cleaning standards imposed on the industry need to be reasonable. Dave Brubaker stated that most people in agri-business want to do the right thing, and laws like this get them upset and cause problems. Carl Shaffer requested that a representative from the PA State Police and the Department provide an update on this issue at the Board’s June meeting. Jay Howes stated that draft language is currently being developed in the Legislature to address this issue.

Sam Elkin questioned what is happening regarding the re-appointment or replacement for the nine producer members on the Board, whose terms expired in October 1996. He also asked if the Board’s proposal to stagger the terms of the producer members would be adopted so that in the future not all nine terms will expire at the same time. Department staff will check on the status of the producer member terms and report at the June meeting.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Dean M. Auchenbach
DEP Liaison