Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture Water Quality topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ANR alternative proposed to shift CAFO permitting under federal NPDES rules; EPA urges urgency but flags remaining work
Summary
Stakeholders proposed an ANR-led alternative on April 2 that would let the Agency of Natural Resources adopt federal NPDES permitting for concentrated animal feeding operations immediately while a broadened stakeholder group and later state rulemaking work through Vermont-specific definitions and coordination.
A coalition of stakeholders told the House Natural Resources & Energy Committee on April 2 that ANR already has statutory authority to administer a CAFO permitting program under federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) rules and proposed a slimmed-down alternative to the broader S.124 draft to let ANR begin inspections and permitting without rewriting state law.
Eric Carpenter and colleagues said their alternative "disturbs existing law as little as possible" and uses existing statutory authority to adopt federal NPDES permitting and related procedures as a starting point while ANR convenes an expanded stakeholder group to advise on implementation and later state rulemaking.
An EPA letter delivered to the committee urged "a sense of urgency" and said EPA would support forward motion while acknowledging further work remains to build an "effective and functional" state program. Committee members and stakeholders repeatedly noted the unresolved question of how to govern areas where jurisdiction between the Agency of Agriculture and ANR overlaps.
Key elements of the proposal include: directing ANR to adopt federal NPDES permitting rules for CAFO discharges, expanding inspection and information-collection authority for ANR, authorizing the secretary to appoint assistance and hire consultants to implement a CAFO program, and broadening the stakeholder group to include agricultural and environmental actors and the public.
One notable policy change recommended in the proposal is removing a statutory "presumption of compliance" for farms that implement Required Agricultural Practices (RAPs). Presenters argued that removing the presumption would allow ANR to determine whether a discharge exists rather than automatically treating RAP-compliant farms as non-discharging.
Opposition and concerns: Some members and advocacy groups worried the alternative relies temporarily on federal definitions rather than embedding Vermont-specific definitions in statute. Senator Hardy said she was uncomfortable "leaving up a lot of the definitions and framework to federal law," and others warned that removing detail from statute could create ambiguity for farmers and regulated parties. Stakeholders suggested the stakeholder group could consider clarifying the dual-authority question and return recommendations during rulemaking.
Next steps: Presenters said the approach is designed to let ANR begin permitting and inspections quickly under established federal frameworks, then pursue Vermont rulemaking informed by the stakeholder group. Committee members asked for written redlines and for ANR and the Agency of Agriculture to continue to refine language with legislative counsel.
