There being a majority of the Board members present, the meeting was called to order at 10:05 a.m. by Acting Chairperson Bill Adams, PA Farm Bureau, who was chairing the meeting for Robert Junk, who had to be in Washington, D.C. for another meeting.
Attendance
Members
Bill Adams, PA Farm Bureau
Donald Lichtenwalner, Grain Producer
Janet Oertly, USDA, Natural Resource Conservation Service
Walt Peechatka, PA Department of Agriculture
David Brubaker, Agri-business Representative
Jay Howes, House, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee
Carl Shaffer, Vegetable Producer
John Cameron, USDA, Farm Service Agency
Robert Pardoe, Jr., Dairy Producer
Cass Peterson, Sustainable Agriculture Representative
Dr. Herb Cole, Penn State University
Sam Elkin, Livestock Producer
Brenda Shambaugh, PA State Grange
Robert Wagner, PA Association of Conservation Districts, Inc.
Agencies, Advisors, Guests
Gail Phelps, DEP, Bureau of Regional Counsel
Dan Drawbaugh, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Cedric Karper, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Kenneth Murin, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Management
John Mank, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Management
Karl Brown, State Conservation Commission
Bill Zett, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection
Steve Socash, DEP, Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management
Tom Woy, Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management
Richard Shipman, Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management
Marc Roda, DEP, Bureau of Regulatory Counsel
Nicki Kasi, DEP, Bureau of Watershed Conservation
Pat Pingel, DEP, Bureau of Watershed Conservation
Dean Auchenbach, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Management
Minutes
The minutes of the October 23, 1996 meeting were approved as distributed.
Business Items
A certificate of appreciation, signed by DEP Secretary James Seif, was presented to Gordon Hiller, formally State Master of the PA State Grange, for his years of service to the Board. Gordon Hiller's term of office with the Grange expired on October 31. Brenda Shambaugh, PA State Grange, accepted the award on behalf of Gordon who was not available to attend the meeting.
A letter from Chairperson Robert Junk, PA Farmers Union, was distributed to the members, explaining that he had to attend a meeting in Washington D.C. and would not be able to attend this Board meeting. The letter also thanked the members for their work and support this year.
A draft of a letter, dated December 18, to Commissioner Martin F. Horn, PA Department of Corrections, was distributed to the members for review (attachment # 1.) This letter was requested by the Department of Corrections to clarify the Board's proposal to use inmates to clean bottles, cans, and other debris out of farm fields adjacent to roadways. The Board had reviewed the Department of Corrections Community Work Programs Policy at its October meeting. The Board members felt that the letter was adequate and recommended that it be sent.
It was noted that the Water Management Deputate was reorganized on December 9, 1996. This has resulted in the renaming of Bureau's, Division's, and Section's within the Deputate. Some staff have also been shifted to other program areas. A copy of the reorganization chart was distributed to the members. It was noted that the reorganization will have little impact on the Board. Dean Auchenbach will continue to serve as the DEP Liaison to the Board. The Board members requested that a copy of the reorganization chart which shows the names of the people in the positions be provided. Department staff will provide members with this information.
Report from the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Manual for Agriculture Committee
Janet Oertly, Natural Resource Conservation Service, who chaired this committee, noted that the committee met with John Mank, DEP, in the NRCS State Office on December 6, to review and comment on the October draft of the manual. Janet highlighted some of the revisions the committee recommended at that meeting. In part 1, the committee recommended that references to Act 6 be deleted from the fourth paragraph, and moved to another paragraph were it was more appropriate. The fourth paragraph was also rewritten to include information regarding "acts of god" when pollution occurs where a conservation plan is fully implemented and maintained. In part 2, the committee requested that in the section titled "operations considered to be agricultural activities", that the Department use the definition of "normal farming operations", in bullet form, as defined in the Agricultural Security Act. It was noted that definitions needed to be consistent throughout the manual . It was recommended that language be added to the paragraph regarding whether your plan is working, to note that most practices are designed for a 10 to 25 year frequency storm. It was also suggested that the term "landowner" replace the term "farmer" regarding the responsibility for the implementation of the plans to address the tenant farmer situations. In part 3, the committee noted that the reference to "USLE" should be changed to "RUSLE." Also, the "Pennsylvania Technical Guide" should be changed to the "Pennsylvania Soil and Water Conservation Technical Guide." Under part 4, there was considerable discussion among the committee members regarding whether the list of best management practices should include barnyard runoff control, roof runoff management, and runoff management systems. The manual was revised to reflect these and other recommendations made by the committee, and all Board members were provided a copy of the December 9 draft, to review prior to the meeting. Jay Howes, House Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee, suggested that the last paragraph on page 5 of the December 9 draft be clarified by referencing the Chapter 102 regulations in regards to the landowner being responsible for the implementation of the plan.
Review/Comment on the 12-9-96 Draft of the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Manual for Agriculture
John Mank, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection, noted that he had received oral and written comments from the Board, DEP and NRCS staff, and approximately 10 conservation districts in regard to the October draft of the manual. After the Board's committee meeting on December 6, the manual was revised to incorporate the suggestions and recommendations. John noted that he had met with Walt Peechatka, Department of Agriculture, concerning the intent of the Chapter 102, Erosion Control regulations regarding conservation plans. A farmer can comply with the regulations in two ways: (1) develop a full conservation plan for the farm, (2) develop an erosion and sedimentation control plan that would address tilled areas.
Jay Howes, questioned whether the definition of "agricultural operations" on page 11 was consistent with the definition on page 4 for "operations considered to be agricultural activities." He also questioned whether it was necessary to have the term "farm" defined in the manual. John stated he will look into these items. The definition of "farm" will be deleted if it is not referenced in the manual text. There was some discussion as to whether barnyard runoff control, roof runoff control, and runoff management systems should be listed as best management practices to be considered in a conservation plan. Bob Wagner, PACD representative, noted that older conservation plans only addressed plowing and tilling. It was not until the Chesapeake Bay Program started that farmers began to look at barnyard and roof runoff controls for conservation plans. Jay Howes questioned what effect the revisions to the Chapter 102 regulations would have on this manual. John Mank noted that the manual is consistent with the proposed Chapter 102 regulation revisions. Once the revised Chapter 102 regulations are finalized it may require some changing of definitions and terms in the manual. Janet Oertly suggested that perhaps the Board should not approve this manual until the chapter 102 regulations are finalized. Walt Peechatka cautioned the Board that they should not necessarily wait for final rulemaking for the Chapter 102 regulations before approving the manual, since that can often be a time consuming process. Dan Drawbaugh, Department of Environmental Protection, suggested that the Board monitor the actions of the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) regarding the Chapter 102 regulation revisions. Bill Adams asked whether it would be acceptable to hold approval of the manual until after the March 18 EQB meeting. John Mank indicated that this would be acceptable. Bill Adams encouraged members to individually review the manual, and contact John Mank if they have any additional comments or concerns.
Review/Comment on the Proposed Revisions to the Chapter 102 , Erosion Control Regulations
Ken Murin, DEP, Bureau of Water Quality Protection, distributed a copy of the proposed revisions to the Chapter 102, Erosion Control Regulations (attachment # 2.) He reviewed the executive summary and the proposed revisions in Annex A. The language in brackets are to be deleted, and the language that is underlined in capitol letters is to be added. Ken noted that the proposed regulations will also be reviewed by the Department's Air and Water Technical Subcommittee, and are scheduled to go before the EQB at its March 18 meeting. The proposed regulations will refer to erosion control measures and facilities as "best management practices" (BMPs.) The regulations will also clarify what the Department is looking for in terms of a conservation plan. The proposed regulations will also replace the word "sedimentation" with "sediment pollution." Bob Pardoe, Jr., Dairy Producer questioned the difference between the two definitions. Ken explained that "sedimentation" refers to the layering of sediments in a stream that may occur some distance from the source of the sediment discharge. "Sediment pollution," refers to the actual discharge of sediment into a waterway of the Commonwealth. The Board members commented that they liked the fact that in section 102.5(b) the Department replaced the word "prevent" with "minimize."
There was some discussion regarding the language in section 102.4(b), which requires the landowner to develop and implement a conservation plan which contains erosion and sediment pollution control best management practices. It was noted that a conservation plan may involve more than erosion and sediment pollution control best management practices, and there are different types of conservation plans, so as currently written this may be confusing. It was also questioned whether this standard exceeds the content of the Clean Streams Law. Ken Murin noted that the intent of the Department was to note that a conservation plan should contain erosion and sediment pollution control best management practices. The Department will clarify the language to avoid confusion. Sam Elkin, livestock producer, questioned why the responsibility for the development and the implementation of the plan lies with the landowner and not the tenant or lessee if the land is rented? Walt Peechatka cautioned that placing that responsibility on the tenant or lessee would limit the landowners ability to make decisions regarding what happens on the rented land. The Board discussed this issue of responsibility on rented land, and remained divided on who should be responsible. It was noted that under the current Chapter 102 regulations the landowner is ultimately responsible for what occurs on the land. Carl Shaffer, vegetable producer, questioned the proposed revisions to section 102.4(a), which states that an erosion control plan is not required for projects consisting of less than 5,000 square feet of earth disturbance, unless the earth disturbance activity is within 50 feet of a watercourse. Ken Murin explained that the current regulations require all earthmoving projects, irregardless of size to develop an erosion control plan. The requirement that a plan is still required in all cases if the project is within 50 feet of a watercourse was put into the proposed regulations in order to be consistent with the stream encroachment requirements.
Acting Chairperson Bill Adams, requested that Board members individually review these regulations, and forward any comments to him at the PA Farm Bureau by January 15, 1997. Bill Adams also appointed a committee to review and provide comments on the proposed revisions to the Chapter 102, Erosion Control Regulations. This committee will consist of Bill Adams, Chair; a representative of the PA State Grange; a representative of the PA Farmers Union; Jay Howes; and Donald Lichtenwalner. A meeting date for this committee will be scheduled once an agreeable date is selected. The committee will bring its comments back to the full Board at its February 26 meeting.
Nutrient Management Regulation Update
Karl Brown, Executive Secretary of the State Conservation Commission, noted that the reorganization within the Water Management Deputate has resulted in new staff working in the Nutrient Management Program. Dan Drawbaugh, is Bureau Director of the Bureau of Water Quality Protection. Cedric Karper will be the Division Chief of the Division of Conservation Districts and Nutrient Management within that Bureau. Lynn Langer, who had been the Section Chief of the Nutrient Management Section has left to work in another Bureau. She has been replaced with Mohammed Farooq. Gail Phelps has replaced Dave Gromelski as legal counsel. The final vacancy in the Nutrient Management Section within the Department of Agriculture has been filled with Johan Berger. Johan had previously worked with the Bureau of Land and water Conservation's Chesapeake Bay Program. Johan's primary duties will be financial assistance responsibilities.
The Commission has received 56 responses back from the 58 invitations sent to conservation districts to participate in a delegation agreement to administer the Nutrient Management Program. Of these 56 responses, 47 have accepted the delegation agreement (27 as single county programs and 6 as multi-county programs, involving 20 districts); 4 have declined to participate in the program (Allegheny, Schuylkill, Luzerne, and Wyoming); and 5 districts are currently in discussions/negotiations regarding the delegation agreements. Karl stated that the Commission had hoped to have conservation district staff in place to administer the program by January, but it doesn't appear this will happen. The target date is to now have district staff in place by March 1997. The Department of Agriculture will offer background workshops, precertification training, and certification exams, in various locations around the state, for those who need to be certified to develop and/or review nutrient management plans. A Pennsylvania Interagency Nutrient Management Newsletter was distributed which has a schedule of the workshops, precertification workshops, and certification exams.
In regards to the planning regulations, the Nutrient Management Advisory Board meet on December 11, and approved the regulations, by a vote of 11-0, to go to the State Conservation Commission, to be approved for final rulemaking. The Commission will review the regulations at its January 9 meeting in Grantville. If the regulations are approved by the Commission at its January meeting , they will then be forwarded for internal approvals and signatures. The Commission will then be ready to grant final approval of the regulations at its March meeting. If approved in March, the regulations will be published in the PA Bulletin as final in May, with an effective date of October 1, 1997. All Board members will be sent a copy of the regulations.
The next priority of the Commission will be to develop a program of financial assistance. Staff have already met with staff of the State's Revolving Fund, and will met again, to see if grants or loans may be offered to farmers to implement nutrient management plans. The State Conservation Commission does not want to be in the position of making loans to farmers across the state, and needs to find an appropriate mechanism in order to do this.
Report from the Pesticide and Ground Water State Management Plan Regulation Committee
Bill Adams, chair of this committee, which was formed at the Board's October meeting, noted that the committee members met on November 6 in the Department of Agriculture Building. The committee discussed its concerns regarding the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Pesticides and Ground Water State Management Plan Regulation; Proposed Rule (OPP-36190.) The committee drafted a letter, dated December 2, 1996 (attachment # 3) which was sent to EPA to meet the comment deadline. Bill reported that the committee did not oppose the state management plans, but argued that EPA needs to reconsider what is required in these plans, and ensure that they are workable. The Board has not yet received any response from EPA regarding our comments.
Review/Comment on the Draft Mushroom Composting Manual
Steve Socash, DEP, Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management, distributed a draft of the Mushroom Composting Manual which is titled "Best Practices for Environmental Protection in the Mushroom Farm Community." Steve stated that the committee, that developed the manual, met recently with over 100 mushroom growers in Avondale, PA to discuss the manual. Comments from this meeting were then incorporated into the December draft of the manual that the Board received. The manual addresses practices for the management of spent mushroom compost. The primary focus of the manual is Chapter 5, Management of Wastes from Mushroom Growing Operations, and Chapter 6, Mushroom Farm Environmental Management Plans. Steve noted that mushroom growers will be required to keep records regarding their waste handling, but the amount of record keeping has been greatly reduced from what was first proposed. He noted that if compost is stored more than 180 days, it must be stored on a pad. For passive composting operations the pile may be no greater than two feet, and may not be weathered for more than three years. Steve noted that the manual addresses groundwater and surface water protection, and does not specifically address odor issues
Steve indicated there was no specific deadline established for final approval of this manual, but requested that the Board provide comments within 90 days. Acting Chairperson Bill Adams, asked that the Board members individually review the manual and provide him with any comments they may have prior to the Board's February 26 meeting. The Board also indicated that that they would like to have a mushroom grower present at their next meeting so they could provide their perspective of the manual. The Department will follow-up on this request.
Hazardous Waste, Universal Waste Rule Final Regulation
Richard Shipman, DEP Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management; and Marc Roda, DEP, Office of Counsel, informed the Board that the Universal Waste regulations are scheduled to go to the Environmental Quality Board in February for final rulemaking. The Board had unanimously approved the proposed Universal Waste Rule Regulations at its August 28 meeting. Richard pointed out that there are no significant changes between the proposed regulation approved by the Board and the final regulation. Since the regulations allow for additional waste to be classified as universal waste through a petition process, the Independent Regulatory Review Commission requested that the Department periodically review the list of waste as new items are added. Richard noted that Dave Bingamon, PA Department of Agriculture, provided comments, which were received after the comment deadline. Dave expressed concern over when the one year period for the storage of waste classified as universal waste would begin, since the regulations prohibit the storage of universal waste for more than one year. Richard pointed out that section 266.203, Applicability, Pesticides, spells out the conditions when a pesticide becomes a waste. This occurs on the first date of which both the generator of the pesticide issues a recall and the farmer agrees to participate in the recall. These conditions as spelled out in the regulations would alleviate the concern expressed by Dave Bingamon. Acting Chairperson Bill Adams, stated that since the Board had previously approved the draft regulations, and the final regulations have not changed, that no further action was necessary by the Board. Carl Shaffer, questioned whether the Board would have the opportunity to comment on petitions to add waste to be classified as universal waste. Richard stated that any petitions received would be published in the PA Bulletin for public comments. Carl Shaffer requested that the Board be notified by the Department if a petition is received. The Department agreed to do this.
Comments/Issues/Concerns of the Board
Nicki Kasi, DEP, Bureau of Watershed Conservation, provided the Board information regarding the 319 Program. This program administers grants to local groups to fund environmental projects and may also be used for conservation practices on farms as in the Evitt Creek watershed in Bedford County. Congress required each state to develop a management plan regarding non-point source pollution issues. Pennsylvania's plan was approved in 1989 and has not been updated since. The plan is now out of date and needs to be updated. This plan determines how resources in the 319 Program will be utilized. The Department will be forming a liaison committee, comprised of partners in the non-point source pollution program, to advise and assist in the rewrite of the state management plan. The agricultural community should be represented on this liaison committee, which will probably meet on a quarterly basis, with the first meeting anticipated for March in Harrisburg. It will probably take two years to rewrite the management plan. The state will also be forming a non-point source forum that will be chaired by the Governor. This forum will be broken into four workgroups based on priority watersheds. These work groups will be broken down by the Swatara, Schuylkill, Allegheny, and Lake Erie watersheds.
The Board members agreed that agricultural should be represented on these two projects. Bill Adams and/or Robert Pardoe, Jr., volunteered to represent the Board on the liaison committee. The Board members felt that due to the geographic areas of the work groups of the state non-point source forum, that perhaps the three major farm organization representatives could meet, and see if any of their membership, that are located within the watershed area, would be willing to serve. Sam Elkin, livestock producer, suggested that perhaps two representatives could be appointed for each priority watershed workgroup to ensure that agriculture is well represented. The representatives from the three farm organizations, PA State Grange, PA Farm Bureau, and PA Farmers Union, will meet to review their membership lists to select individuals who may be willing to serve on these workgroups. These names will then be submitted to the Department. Carl Shaffer asked if the Department could provide the Board with a brief written summary of the 319 Program. Nicki stated that this will be done, and also offered to provide an presentation on the 319 program at the Board's February 26 meeting.
It was noted that Robert Junk, PA Farmers Union, had contacted Joel Bolstein, DEP, Deputy Secretary for Special Projects, regarding the producer members of the Board. The nine producer member terms expired on October 6, 1996. All producer members agreed to continue to serve on the Board until reappointed or replaced. The Board had submitted a proposal to the Department to stagger the three year terms of the producer members, so they all do not expire at the same time. Mr. Bolstein indicated that it was likely that the existing producer members would be reappointed, but the Department has not yet determined what the terms would be.
The PA State Grange will Chair the Board in 1997. Brenda Shambaugh will be the Grange representative to the Board and will serve as Chairperson.
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dean M. Auchenbach
DEP Liaison