Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cafo Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Governor's budget would add $850,000 to stand up CAFO permitting, database and inspection capacity
Summary
Agency of Natural Resources staff told the committee the governor's budget proposes $850,000 for CAFO permitting work: database development, temporary inspection capacity, equipment and training, and two additional FTEs proposed in the operating budget; EPA delegation and reporting requirements drive the timeline.
Bethany Sargent, deputy director of the Watershed Management Division at the Department of Environmental Conservation, told the committee the governor's proposed budget includes $850,000 to help the agency stand up required concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO) permitting.
"That program is staffed with 2 FTEs. We've proposed also through the governor's budget 2 additional FTEs to support this work," Sargent said, describing needs that include database development, contractor inspectors for an initial assessment of farms, field equipment, and training. She said the database must be able to track permitting and inspections, contain nutrient management plans, and produce reports for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as part of NPDES CAFO permitting requirements.
Keith Latlam, director of the Watershed Management Division, said the agency needs capacity to inspect farms and determine which operations require CAFO permits under EPA rules. "EPA has made it clear in their communication to the agency that we need to be present on, you know, for inspecting all farms that have the potential to discharge to surface waters to evaluate whether or not a CAFO permit would be necessary," Latlam said. He gave counts the agency is using for planning: 37 large CAFOs, roughly 100 medium CAFOs, and upwards of 1,000 small farms.
Why it matters: as the delegated NPDES authority, the Agency of Natural Resources must meet federal reporting and permitting standards. Committee members asked whether federal funds will cover new obligations; agency staff said existing EPA funding supports delegated NPDES work but no additional federal dollars have been promised to cover new CAFO implementation costs.
Committee members asked about the long‑term staffing need. Latlam said the agency is drafting a corrective action plan that will report recommended staffing based on initial inspections and assessments; whether more permanent positions will be required depends on the number of farms that ultimately need CAFO permits.
Other points from the hearing: the CAFO general permit for medium farms exists, but the agency has not yet received notices of intent for coverage or issued an individual CAFO permit. The agency and committee discussed Region 1 (Boston) as the EPA contact office and noted that Vermont's delegated status means EPA could rescind delegation if obligations are not met. Committee members asked staff to provide further details about permit standards and differences between existing LFO (large farm operations) requirements and CAFO permit conditions.
Next steps: the committee will include the one‑time $850,000 request in its letter to House Appropriations for consideration and requested follow‑up information about long‑term staffing estimates and technical permit differences.
