Wisconsin

Scuba

(53,475 posts) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 02:41 PM Jul 2015

Wisconsin: Write, Call and Be Vocal by Thursday 16th...RE: DNR & Richfield CAFO permit!

From my email ...

This is important… Please read, write the DNR and share widely…. We won the case, don’t let the DNR go around the Judge’s order…

Friends of the Central Sands
www.FriendsofCS.org

As shared with you two weeks ago the DNR is poised to issue a modified WPDES permit (waste spreading) to the Richfield CAFO without taking into consideration the Judge’s comments in our successful appeal. You may recall that Judge Boldt’s decision in the WPDES portion of our appeal discussed our request for an Animal Unit cap, i.e. a cap on the number of animal units (cows) Richfield Dairy can put on its property. This effectively limits the waste the facility can generate. Judge Boldt agreed a cap was appropriate, and further said: “The Department should establish a sustainable cap on animal units in conjunction with the revised permit reducing the maximum annual pumping in the companion high-capacity well cases.”

Richfield Dairy originally applied for 6,270 Animal Units (AU) or about 4,550 cows and steers. Well to us this was pretty clear. Less water = less animals. After Judge Boldt’s decision came down, Richfield Dairy still asked for 6,270 Animal Units. Friends of the Central Sand's legal counsel protested to the DNR that this number was too high, given the reduced 52.5 million gallons per year (MGPY) pumping limit, and argued that a cap of 4,279 AU was appropriate based on the dairy’s own documentation.

Well, the DNR has tentatively decided to modify the WPDES permit and include a cap of 6,270 AU—just what Richfield Dairy asked for. The notice is available here, the draft permit is here, and the supporting documents are here. They did not provide strong justification for their decision, so FOCS legal counsel contacted DNR staff directly. Our legal counsel was told that the DNR didn’t believe that Judge Boldt actually required the AU number to be tied to the pumping limit.

We obviously disagree. It’s pretty clear from Judge Boldt’s own words that he intended the AU cap to be tied to the pumping limit, that he wanted DNR to attempt this analysis, and that the expectation was that the AU limit would be lower as a result of the pumping limit. The DNR couldn’t set a random AU cap and let the Dairy determine how to comply with the pumping limit.

Tell them what you think….

The public notice period on the proposed permit change expires this Thursday, July 16. Please send comments to Ms. Casey Jones, DNR Oshkosh Service Center, 625 E. County Road Y, Oshkosh, WI 54901, (920) 303- 5426, Casey.Jones@Wisconsin.gov Let her know what you think of the DNR’s decision to basically do the CAFO’s bidding.

Talking points…

- This letter is regarding the DNR’s proposal to modify Richfield Dairy WPDES permit to impose an animal unit cap of 6,270.

- FOCS successfully petitioned the court regarding high capacity wells resulting in Judge Boldt’s final order limiting Richfield Dairy’s pumping to 52.5 million gallons per year given the area’s declining water resources.

- The Judge’s order said … “The Department should establish a sustainable cap on animal units in conjunction with the revised permit reducing the maximum annual pumping in the companion high-capacity well cases.”

- Based on Richfield Dairy’s own numbers, provided during the contested case proceeding as part of sworn discovery responses, we believe that number to be 4,279 AU.

- The DNR’s proposed permit modification fails to comply with the administrative law judge’s order and fails to exercise any discretion on the matter of the AU cap as it relates to pumping.