**FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AFFECTING AGRICULTURE**

**A Project of the**

**National Association of State Departments**

**of Agriculture Research Foundation**

**through the**

**National Center for Agricultural Law**

**Research and Information**

III

**Website: http://www.nasda-hq.org/ under the Research Foundation
Section**

**FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AFFECTING AGRICULTURE**

**Table of Contents**

This document has two components: the state guide and federal guide. To
complete this guide, please download the appropriate state guide also
found on NASDA's website.

The Project Participants FED-iii

Disclaimer FED-iv

Quick Reference Guide FED-v

I. Water Quality FED-1

A. Federal Clean Water Act FED-1

1\. Overview FED-1

2\. Water Quality Standards FED-2

3\. NPDES Permits FED-3

a\. Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations FED-4

b\. Unified National Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations FED-5

4\. Wetlands FED-5

5\. Non-point Source Pollution FED-7

6\. Oil Spill Liability FED-8

7\. Special Programs FED-8

8\. Enforcement and Judicial Review FED-8

B. Federal Coastal Zone Management Act and Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 FED-9

II\. Groundwater FED-12

A. Federal Groundwater Laws and Regulations FED-12

1\. Safe Drinking Water Act FED-12

a\. Source Water Quality Partnership Petition Program FED-13

b\. Underground Injection Control Program FED-13

2\. Groundwater Pesticide Management Plans FED-15

III\. Air Quality FED-15

A. Federal Clean Air Act FED-15

IV\. Solid Waste and Hazardous Waste FED-16

A. Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act FED-17

1\. Disposal FED-17

2\. Underground Storage Tanks FED-17

3\. Used Oil FED-18

4\. Penalties FED-18

B. Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and

Liability Act FED-19

C. Federal Toxic Substances Control Act FED-19

D. Federal Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act FED-20

E. Occupational Safety and Health Administration FED-20

V. Pesticides and Chemigation FED-21

A. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act FED-21

1\. Use of Pesticides FED-21

2\. Record Keeping Requirements FED-22

3\. Disposal of Pesticides and Pesticide Containers FED-24

4\. Worker Protection Standard FED-24

VI\. Protection of Wildlife FED-25

A. Federal Endangered Species Act FED-25

B. Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act FED-26

VII\. 1996 Farm Bill FED-26

A. Environmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program FED-27

1\. Conservation Reserve Program FED-27

a\. Early Termination FED-28

b\. Enhancement FED-28

2\. Wetlands Reserve Program FED-30

3\. Environmental Quality Incentives Program FED-30

B. Swampbuster, Sodbuster, and Conservation Compliance Programs FED-32

1\. Swampbuster FED-32

2\. Sodbuster FED-34

3\. Conservation Compliance FED-35

C. Other Conservation Programs FED-35

1\. Conservation Farm Option FED-36

2\. Flood Risk Reduction FED-36

3\. Farmland Protection Program FED-36

4\. Everglades Ecosystem Restoration FED-37

5\. Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program FED-37

6\. Conservation of Private Grazing Land FED-38

7\. Commodity Credit Corporation Uses FED-38

Appendix A - Agencies FED-39

Appendix B - Glossary FED-41

**The Project Participants**

**National Association of State Departments of Agriculture Research
Foundation**

The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) is
a nonprofit, nonpartisan association of public officials comprised of
the Commissioners, Secretaries, and Directors of the fifty State
Departments of Agriculture in the fifty states and the territories of
Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands. NASDA's
mission is to represent the State Departments of Agriculture in the
development, implementation, and communication of sound public policy
and programs which support and promote the American agricultural
industry while protecting consumers and the environment. The NASDA
Research Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, tax-exempt corporation for
education and scientific purposes.

**National Center for Agricultural Law Research and Information**

The National Center for Agricultural Law Research and Information
(Center) was created in 1987 under Public Law 100-202, 101 Stat. 1329-30
to address the complex legal issues that affect American agriculture.
The Center focuses its efforts on research, writing, publishing,
development of library services, and the dissemination of information to
the public. The Center is located at the University of Arkansas School
of Law in Fayetteville, Arkansas.

**Natural Resources Conservation Service**

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), formerly known as the
Soil Conservation Service (SCS), is a federal agency within the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA). NRCS conservationists work with
private landowners and operators to help them protect their natural
resources.

**U.S. Environmental Protection Agency**

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is a federal agency with
primary responsibility for implementation of most federal laws designed
to protect, enhance, and conserve the nation\'s natural resources.

**Disclaimer**

This guide is designed for use by farmers, ranchers, landowners, and
their consultants in understanding the effect environmental laws have on
agricultural operations. It is not a substitute for individual legal
advice. Producers should always consult with their own attorneys,
consultants, or advisors as well as federal, state, and local
authorities responsible for the applicable environmental laws.

This guide has been prepared in part with funding from the United States
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) cooperative agreement number NRCS 68-75-5-174 and the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grant number
CX-825088-01-0.

The contents and views expressed in this guide are those of the authors
and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of the USDA's
NRCS or EPA.

Although every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the
information contained in this book, environmental statutes, regulations,
and ordinances are constantly changing. In addition, the overwhelming
complexity and extent of environmental law make it impossible for a
single publication to describe in complete detail and depth all of the
environmental laws and regulations impacting agricultural operations.
The following material is simply a basic primer on environmental law for
agricultural producers. For these reasons, the utilization of these
materials by any person constitutes an agreement to hold harmless the
authors, contributors, reviewers, the National Center for Agricultural
Law Research and Information, the University of Arkansas, the United
States Department of Agriculture, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service, the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture
Research Foundation, and the United States Environmental Protection
Agency for any liability, claims, damages, or expenses that may be
incurred by any person or organization as a result of reference to, or
reliance on, the information contained in this book.

The background research and final documents were completed in December
2000. Updates of the information contained in the guide will occur on an
as needed basis and will be available on the internet.

Anyone with comments concerning the guide should contact the NASDA
Research Foundation at 1156 15th Street, N.W., Suite 1020, Washington,
D.C. 20005, or phone (202) 296-9680.

**Quick Reference Guide**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** The following chart is intended as a quick reference
  guide to permits that may be necessary for a particular operation. If a
  permit is necessary, refer to the listed page numbers that reference
  that section for further information. Contact the agencies listed in
  the final column for information on applications and the procedures for
  securing a permit for an operation. A list of agencies and contact
  information is also provided in Appendix A.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| **Regulatory    | **Type of      | **Permit       | **Agency**     |
| Area**          | Activity**     | Required**     |                |
+=================+================+================+================+
| Water Quality   | Livestock and  | NPDES permits, | EPA Regional   |
|                 | aquaculture    | state general  | Office and     |
| *pp. 1-12*      | operations,    | permit, land   | various state  |
|                 | depending on   | disposal       | agencies       |
|                 | size, and all  | permit, and    |                |
|                 | animal waste   | animal waste   |                |
|                 | management     | management     |                |
|                 | systems        | system permit  |                |
|                 |                | (operators     |                |
|                 |                | must be        |                |
|                 |                | certified)     |                |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                 | Wetlands       | Section 404    | U.S. Army      |
|                 | dredge and     | permit         | Corps of       |
|                 | fill activity  |                | Engineers with |
|                 | or dam, dike,  |                | EPA and        |
|                 | or bridge      |                | various state  |
|                 | building       |                | agency         |
|                 | activities     |                | approval       |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                 | Water usage    | Registration   | Various state  |
|                 |                | may be         | agencies       |
|                 |                | required,      |                |
|                 |                | permit may be  |                |
|                 |                | required in    |                |
|                 |                | capacity use   |                |
|                 |                | areas,         |                |
|                 |                | depending on   |                |
|                 |                | circumstances  |                |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                 | Water well     | Permit         | Various state  |
|                 | construction   | required in    | agencies       |
|                 | and use        | some           |                |
|                 |                | circumstances, |                |
|                 |                | especially in  |                |
|                 |                | capacity use   |                |
|                 |                | areas, and     |                |
|                 |                | construction   |                |
|                 |                | standards must |                |
|                 |                | be followed    |                |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Groundwater     | Groundwater    | Permit         | Various state  |
|                 | protection     | required for   | agencies       |
| *pp. 12-15*     |                | point source   |                |
|                 |                | discharges;    |                |
|                 |                | BMPs must be   |                |
|                 |                | followed       |                |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Air Quality     | Grain          | Permit         | EPA Regional   |
|                 | terminals and  | required       | Office and     |
| *pp. 15-16*     | grain          |                | various state  |
|                 | elevators      |                | agencies       |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                 | General        | No permit, but | EPA Regional   |
|                 | agricultural   | animal         | Office and     |
|                 | operations     | operations are | various state  |
|                 | including      | required to    | agencies       |
|                 | odor, dust, or | comply with    |                |
|                 | flies          | best           |                |
|                 |                | management     |                |
|                 |                | plans for the  |                |
|                 |                | control of     |                |
|                 |                | odors. In some |                |
|                 |                | cases these    |                |
|                 |                | BMP plans must |                |
|                 |                | be submitted   |                |
|                 |                | to various     |                |
|                 |                | state agencies |                |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                 | Burning        | Depends on the | Various state  |
|                 |                | circumstances, | agencies plus  |
|                 |                | but a permit   | local          |
|                 |                | is usually     | governments    |
|                 |                | required       | may also       |
|                 |                |                | require a      |
|                 |                |                | permit         |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Solid Waste and | Storage,       | Permit         | EPA Regional   |
| Hazardous Waste | treatment, or  | required for   | Office and     |
|                 | disposal of    | disposal,      | various state  |
| *pp. 16-21*     | hazardous or   | treatment, or  | agencies       |
|                 | solid waste    | storage        |                |
|                 |                | activities     |                |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                 | Public notice  | No permit      | Various state  |
|                 | of hazardous   |                | agencies and   |
|                 | waste          |                | perhaps local  |
|                 |                |                | emergency      |
|                 |                |                | planning       |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Pesticides and  | Application    | License        | EPA and        |
| Chemigation     | and use of     | required for   | various state  |
|                 | pesticides     | commercial     | agencies and   |
| *pp. 21-25*     |                | applicators.   | perhaps state  |
|                 |                | Certification  | pesticide      |
|                 |                | usually        | board          |
|                 |                | required for   |                |
|                 |                | all            |                |
|                 |                | applicators.   |                |
|                 |                | Permit may be  |                |
|                 |                | required in    |                |
|                 |                | some cases,    |                |
|                 |                | including      |                |
|                 |                | emergency      |                |
|                 |                | application of |                |
|                 |                | restricted use |                |
|                 |                | pesticide      |                |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                 | Use of         | No permit, but | Various state  |
|                 | pesticides     | training and   | agencies and   |
|                 | around         | notification   | perhaps local  |
|                 | farm-workers   | is required    | pesticide      |
|                 |                |                | board          |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                 | Record keeping | No permit, but | Various state  |
|                 |                | all            | agencies and   |
|                 |                | requirements   | perhaps local  |
|                 |                | must be met    | pesticide      |
|                 |                |                | board          |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| Wildlife        | Taking of      | Permit         | U.S. Fish and  |
| Protection      | wildlife       | required if    | Wildlife       |
|                 |                | endangered or  | Service        |
| *pp. 25-26*     |                | threatened     |                |
|                 |                | species may be |                |
|                 |                | affected       |                |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+

**[Federal Environmental Laws Affecting Agriculture]{.smallcaps}**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Agricultural producers are faced with many
  challenges in today\'s rapidly changing world. Changes in
  industrialization, use of computer-based technology, governmental
  involvement in market dynamics, and environmental regulation are
  affecting producers in a number of ways. Environmental regulation is a
  complex area with both federal and state government involvement.
  Keeping informed is the producer\'s most useful instrument for meeting
  the challenges of today\'s agriculture. This information on
  environmental regulation is provided to inform producers of the breadth
  and scope of environmental laws which may impact daily production
  activities.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

**[I. Water Quality]{.smallcaps}**

> **A. Federal Clean Water Act**
>
> ***1. Overview***

The Clean Water Act[^1] (CWA) is an important federal environmental
statute affecting agriculture. The law was originally enacted by
Congress in 1972 and has been amended several times since. Its objective
is to reduce or eliminate water pollution in the nation\'s rivers,
streams, lakes, and coastal waters. A variety of mechanisms are employed
by the CWA to control domestic, industrial, and agricultural pollution.
Several types of agricultural activities and practices are regulated
under the statute. Direct discharges from feedlots are a primary
example. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
charged with enforcing the CWA.

The EPA, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and several
other federal agencies, marked the 25^th^ anniversary of the CWA by
drafting and releasing the *Clean Water Action Plan: Restoring and
Protecting America's Waters* (Action Plan). The Action Plan builds upon
the successes of 25 years of progress and provides more than 100
recommendations for continued improvement by using the following four
tools:

-   A Watershed Approach - A new, collaborative effort by federal,
    state, tribal, and local governments by the public and by the
    private sector to restore and sustain the health of watersheds in
    the nation. The watershed approach is the key to setting priorities
    and taking action to clean up rivers, lakes, and coastal waters.

-   Strong Federal and State Standards - This calls for federal, state,
    and tribal agencies to revise standards when needed and to make
    existing programs more effective. Effective standards are key to
    protecting public health, preventing polluted runoff, and ensuring
    accountability.

-   Natural Resource Stewardship - Most of the land in the nation's
    watersheds is cropland, pasture, rangeland, or forests, and most of
    the water that ends up in the nation's rivers, lakes, and coastal
    waters falls upon these lands first. Clean water depends on the
    conservation and stewardship of these natural resources. The Action
    Plan calls upon federal natural resource and conservation agencies
    to apply their collective resources and technical expertise to
    protect and restore state and local watersheds.

-   Informed Citizens and Officials - Clear, accurate, timely
    information is the foundation of a sound and accountable water
    quality program. Informed citizens and officials make better
    decisions about their watersheds. The Action Plan calls on federal
    agencies to improve the information available to the public,
    governments, and others about the health of their watersheds and the
    safety of their beaches, drinking water, and fish.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Many of the recommendations in the Clean Water
  Action Plan will have an impact upon agriculture and, in particular,
  upon agricultural non-point sources of pollution. It is important that
  farmers participate in watershed-level stakeholder meetings and take
  the opportunity to present their views. Farmers should keep informed
  about the Clean Water Action Plan recommendations and about the impacts
  that may result from adopting these recommendations by contacting the
  local USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), their
  State's Department of Agriculture, or the local Cooperative Extension
  Service. Also, it is important to note that in some states, state
  standards and permit requirements differ from the federal standards;
  these standards and their differences are summarized in the
  corresponding state books which deal specifically with each state's
  water quality standards.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> ***2. Water Quality Standards***

The CWA requires each state in the nation to adopt water quality
standards for most water bodies located within that state's borders.
Rivers and streams are often divided into segments for this purpose. The
water quality standards specify appropriate uses to be achieved and to
be protected for each segment of water. Appropriate uses include use as
public water supplies, protection and propagation of fish, shellfish,
and wildlife, recreational uses, navigation, and agricultural uses such
as irrigation or livestock watering. Each state\'s water quality
standards also include numerical or narrative criteria that are designed
to protect these uses. The standards are then used to establish
treatment controls and strategies to protect the water quality, and they
may include specific requirements as written conditions on permits that
are issued for point sources of pollution. However, there are no federal
laws or regulations that require the control of non-point sources of
pollution to achieve water quality standards. Control of non-point
sources of pollution falls under state authority and control. In
addition, as part of an anti-degradation policy, water quality standards
may also prohibit any new waste discharges into waters of exceptionally
high quality.

> ***3. NPDES Permits***

Discharges of waste from point sources into navigable waters are
regulated through a permit system known as the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Permits are issued either by the
EPA or by the state under a program approved by the EPA. It is illegal
to discharge waste from point sources into navigable waters without a
permit or in violation of the terms of the permit. The CWA defines a
point source as follows:

> The term \"point source\" means any discernible, confined and discrete
> conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel,
> tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock,
> concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel or other floating
> craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged. This term,
> however, does not include agricultural storm-water discharges and
> return flows from irrigation.

The term "navigable waters" is defined by the CWA as \"waters of the
United States.\" However, this phrase has been interpreted broadly by
EPA regulations and the courts to include most rivers, streams, lakes,
and wetlands. Navigable waters do not have to be accessible by boats to
meet the interpreted definition.

NPDES permits contain written effluent limitations and specify the
amounts of pollutants that may be discharged. The permits contain other
terms and conditions as well. Operational practices may also be
specified. Monitoring, record keeping, and reporting requirements are
usually included. If the EPA is issuing the permit, then the applicant
must obtain certification from the state in order to verify that the
applicant is in compliance with the CWA and with all applicable state
laws. In some cases, a permit may prohibit all discharges into water.

The permit issuance process normally involves:

-   Submission of an application;

-   Agency review of the application for completeness;

-   Tentative permit decision by the agency;

-   Time for public comment or a hearing; and

-   Final permit decision.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Many animal feeding operations and aquatic feeding
  operations are considered point sources and, therefore, require
  permits. If an individual or an enterprise discharges a pollutant into
  waters of the United States without a permit, then the individual or
  the owners and operators of the enterprise may be subjected to serious
  penalties. Producers should contact state and federal authorities to
  determine if a permit is required for a particular operation.
  Generally, an NPDES permit application must include the name, address,
  telephone number, and ownership status of the operation along with
  information concerning activities occurring at the facility including a
  description of the nature of the business, a topographical map, and a
  statement as to whether or not the facility is located on tribal land.
  In addition, the applicant must provide a list of all other
  environmental permits or construction approvals that have been received
  or for which application has been made.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> ***a. Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations***

Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO) are required to obtain an
NPDES permit. A facility is a CAFO if it is an animal feeding operation
(AFO) that has more than 300 animal units and discharges directly into
navigable waters or if the operation has more than 1,000 animal units. A
feeding operation does not need a permit if it would only discharge as a
result of a 25-year, 24-hour storm event. An animal unit is defined as
1.0 unit per animal for slaughter and feeder cattle, 1.4 units per
animal for mature dairy cattle, 0.4 unit per animal for swine, 0.1 unit
per animal for sheep, and 2.0 units per animal for horses.[^2]

Generally, the 300 animal unit is the equivalent of 300 slaughter or
feeder cattle, 200 mature dairy cattle, 750 swine over 55 pounds, 150
horses, 3,000 sheep or lambs, 16,500 turkeys, 30,000 laying hens or
broilers with overflow watering, 9,000 laying hens or broilers with a
liquid manure system, or 1,500 ducks. In addition, the 1,000 animal unit
is the equivalent of 1,000 slaughter and feeder cattle, 700 mature dairy
cattle, 2,500 swine that are over 55 pounds, 500 horses, 10,000 sheep or
lambs, 55,000 turkeys, 100,000 laying hens or broilers with continuous
overflow watering, 30,000 laying hens or broilers with a liquid manure
system, or 5,000 ducks.

Concentrated aquatic feeding operations require an NPDES permit if they
produce more than 9,090 harvest weight kilograms (20,000 pounds) per
year of cold water fish (e.g., trout, salmon) or 45,454 harvest weight
kilograms (100,000 pounds) per year of warm water fish (e.g., catfish,
sunfish, minnows). Discharges into aquaculture projects also require a
permit. An aquaculture project is a \"defined managed water area which
uses discharges of pollutants into that designated area for the
maintenance or production of harvestable freshwater, estuarine, or
marine plants or animals.\"

> ***b. Unified National Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations***

To help implement the Clean Water Action Plan, on March 9, 1999, the EPA
and the USDA jointly issued the final "Unified National Strategy for
Animal Feeding Operations." The strategy for AFO sets forth a national
program for addressing water pollution caused by livestock operations.
The strategy contains the following basic components:

> ! Approximately 450,000 animal feeding operations are expected to
> develop and implement Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMP)
> by 2009;
>
> ! CNMP will be voluntary for most AFO but will be encouraged through
> environmental education and financial and technical assistance
> programs;
>
> ! CNMP will be mandatory for CAFO that require NPDES permits under the
> CWA or equivalent state laws;
>
> ! Approximately 20,000 CAFO will require either a general or
> individual permit by the year 2002. This is a much greater number than
> in the past. CAFO that will require permits will be larger facilities
> with significant manure production, facilities with unacceptable
> conditions, and facilities that are significant contributors to water
> quality impairment;
>
> ! CNMP will be required to address feed management, manure handling,
> manure storage, on-farm and off-site land application of manure, land
> management, record keeping, and alternative uses of manure;
>
> ! The EPA may amend its regulations so that the definition of a CAFO
> will include poultry operations that use dry waste systems thus
> requiring such operations to obtain NPDES permits; and
>
> ! The EPA may also require corporate integrators in the poultry and
> hog industries to be co-permittees with their contract producers.
>
> ***4. Wetlands***

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** When agricultural operators conduct dredging and
  filling activities that affect water sources, those activities may
  require a permit. Failure to obtain a required permit may expose the
  operator to serious penalties.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

A separate permit, known as the Section 404 Permit,[^3] is required by
the CWA for discharges of dredge and fill materials into navigable
waters of the United States. These permits are issued by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) and are subject to review and approval by the
EPA and the state. The dredging or filling of wetlands and the
construction of structures in streams such as irrigation gates or docks
will often require a Section 404 Permit.

Although minor wetlands dredging or filling activities may be covered by
a Section 404 general or nationwide permit, substantial dredging or
filling will usually require an individual permit. Permits may be denied
if the activity causes significant adverse effects on the water body or
the surrounding environment and practical alternatives are available.

There are now more than forty Section 404 general or nationwide permits.
The following agricultural activities are allowed under the permits:

> ! Fish and wildlife harvesting, enhancement, and attraction devices
> and activities (Permit #4);
>
> ! Wetland and riparian restoration and creation activities (Permit
> #27);
>
> ! Cranberry production activities (Permit #34);
>
> ! Emergency watershed protection and rehabilitation (Permit #37); and
>
> ! Farm buildings (Permit #40).

In addition, a number of permitted activities may relate to a farming
operation including maintenance, utility line backfill and bedding, bank
stabilization, road crossing, return water from upland contained
disposal areas, minor discharges, minor dredging, oil spill cleanup,
headwater and isolated water discharges, temporary construction and
access, and the cleanup of hazardous and toxic wastes. On December 13,
1996, the Army Corps of Engineers reissued the then existing nationwide
permits with some modifications and issued two new nationwide
permits.[^4] The two new permits allowed moist soil management for
wildlife (Permit #30) and maintenance of existing flood control
facilities (Permit #31). The Corps also proposed to allow the former
Permit #26 to expire, to issue six new nationwide permits, and to modify
six of the existing nationwide permits.

On March 9, 2000, the Corps published the final new and modified
nationwide permits in the Federal Register. Thereafter, the former
Permit #26 expired in June 2000, the six permits were modified, and five
new nationwide permits came into effect.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** All producers are encouraged to check with state and
  federal environmental officials to determine if a specific farming
  activity will be covered by a Section 404 general or nationwide permit
  or if the activity requires an individual permit. If the activity is
  covered by a general or nationwide permit, a producer should obtain a
  copy of the permit for reference and guidance. Copies can be requested
  from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

A permit may include either onsite or offsite mitigation requirements.
Mitigation requirements include restoring altered wetlands and
permanently protecting other wetlands from alteration.

Many normal farming, ranching, and logging practices such as plowing,
seeding, cultivating, minor drainage, and harvesting are exempt from
permit requirements under Section 404(f) of the CWA if the activities
are already occurring and will be ongoing and continuous.[^5] However, a
permit may still be required if major changes to the operation occur.

> ***5. Non-point Source Pollution***

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Section 319 of the CWA was enacted in 1987 and
  guides the states in conducting non-point source pollution assessments
  and developing non-point source management programs. Because Section
  319 authorizes the states to act, there are no federal regulatory
  requirements in Section 319.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Non-point source pollution is generally caused by runoff or snowmelt
from cropland, pastures, barnyards, and impervious surfaces such as
roads, parking lots, and roofs. The runoff may carry sediment,
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and other chemicals into adjacent
waters causing pollution. The CWA recognizes that cleaning up the
nation\'s waters requires control of non-point pollution as well as
point source pollution and that regulation of non-point source pollution
involves cooperative programs with the states.

Under Section 319 of the CWA, the state must assess the impact of
non-point source pollution on its streams and lakes. The state must also
develop a comprehensive management plan to control non-point source
pollution and submit the plan to the EPA for federal approval. Control
efforts are centered on the voluntary adoption and implementation of
Best Management Practices (BMP) by farmers and ranchers. When a state's
Section 319 non-point source plan is approved, the state becomes
eligible for federal grants that may be used to share the implementation
costs of BMP between the state and the farmer or rancher. These funds
are also used for demonstration projects, technical assistance,
education, and training.

> ***6. Oil Spill Liability***

The CWA imposes strict liability on the operators of facilities that
spill oil or other hazardous wastes into navigable waters including
spills from petroleum storage tanks located on farms. The CWA requires
the operator to promptly notify the EPA of any spill (see Appendix A for
hotline phone numbers). A failure to give EPA notice of the spill is a
violation of the statute.

> ***7. Special Programs***

The CWA establishes special pollution control programs for certain
waters including the Chesapeake Bay, the Great Lakes, and the Gulf of
Mexico. Producers in Alabama, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana,
Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington, D.C., and Wisconsin may be
affected by these programs. In addition, the National Estuary Program
protects estuaries of national significance such as the Puget Sound area
in Washington, Buzzards Bay in Massachusetts, and Albemarle-Pamlico
Sound in North Carolina.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** There are currently 28 estuaries in the National
  Estuary Program. These are located in Alabama, California, Connecticut,
  Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New
  Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
  Rhode Island, Texas, Washington, and Puerto Rico. Additional areas may
  be named in the future. Producers should regularly check information
  sources such as the EPA or the local NRCS for affected waters in their
  areas.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> ***8. Enforcement and Judicial Review***

Violators of the regulatory requirements of the CWA may face substantial
penalties. These include both civil and criminal fines. Incarceration is
possible for severe violations. The EPA or the state may enjoin or stop
producers\' activities in order to force compliance with the statute.
The CWA also allows citizens to file suits to enforce CWA requirements
in certain circumstances. However, if a producer disagrees with the way
CWA requirements are applied to an operation, opportunities are
available for both administrative and judicial review of EPA and state
decisions.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** In order for producers to maintain compliance with
  water quality legislation, they must be aware of state water quality
  standards, NPDES permit requirements, state and local non-point source
  pollution programs, wetlands permits, oil spill liability, and whether
  there are any waters in their area that require special protection. The
  states take active roles in ensuring that producers comply with these
  requirements.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> **B. Federal Coastal Zone Management Act and Coastal Zone Act
> Reauthorization Amendments of 1990**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Coastal zone management (CZM) programs only apply in
  those states with coastal areas. There are 35 states or territories in
  which the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) has some application. At
  this time, 33 states have federally approved CZM programs. The CZMA is
  important because it is the first law to require states to implement
  programs designed to address non-point source pollution. Some state
  programs are more restrictive than the federal requirements.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Historically, the nation's water pollution control programs emphasized
managing point source pollution. As those program efforts progressed,
non-point source pollution became a more significant proportion of total
water quality problems. The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA)
authorizes each state with coastal zone areas to adopt a state Coastal
Zone Management (CZM) program to control non-point source pollution for
coastal areas. CZMA created federal incentives for coastal states to
plan and manage their coastal resources including the protection of the
natural, commercial, recreational, ecological, industrial, and aesthetic
resources. The intent was to encourage and assist coastal states to
exercise their responsibilities in coastal zone management, to implement
effective land and water resource uses, and to attain and maintain
applicable water quality standards under Section 303 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA). Coastal areas include the Great Lakes area. The term "coastal
areas" means the coastal waters and adjacent areas of islands, salt
marshes, wetlands, transitional and intertidal areas, beaches, and any
inland areas that could affect coastal zone water quality. Federal
grants and technical assistance are provided for coastal states to
develop and implement their state CZM programs with public and private
participation. CZM programs must include:

-   Identification of coastal zone boundaries:

-   Permissible land and water uses;

-   Prioritization of land uses that degrade coastal waters;

-   Identification of critical coastal areas;

-   Planning mechanisms for energy, shoreline erosion, and beach
    protection;

-   Identification of the state's authority for control over coastal
    areas and the plan of control; and

-   Identification of the management structure which will implement the
    program.

CZMA has been re-authorized by Congress several times and amended to
reflect changing views.[^6] Accordingly, the Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA) updates and expands the
coastal portion of state non-point source management programs under
Section 319 of the CWA. CZARA recognized that non-point source pollution
was a key factor in the continuing degradation of many coastal waters,
and a new program was established under Section 6217 to address this
problem. Congress recognized the clear link between coastal water
quality and land use activities along the shorelines and that coastal
zone management should be given a larger role in improving the coastal
zone water quality. The intent of Section 6217 was to strengthen links
between state coastal zone management and water quality control
programs.

Unlike CZMA programs which are voluntary, Section 6217 under CZARA is
mandatory. Under Section 6217, those states with a federally approved
state CZM program[^7] are required to develop a state Coastal Non-point
Pollution Control (CNPC) program to restore and protect coastal waters.
The state CNPC program must include specific management measures to
address the control of non-point pollution, establish enforceable
policies, and contain mechanisms to ensure implementation of management
measures of the program.

The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the Department
of Commerce administers the programs authorized by CZARA, however, EPA
and NOAA share responsibility for the CZARA program framework.[^8] This
coordination between the agencies brings together land use management
expertise and water quality expertise. CZARA requires EPA to develop
specific management measures[^9] to address and reduce non-point
pollution. CZARA then charges the states with implementing these
management measures. EPA's guidance manual[^10] sets forth management
measures identified for each of the five leading sources of non-point
pollution which includes agriculture run off.[^11] EPA's management
measures must be "economically achievable and reflect the best available
practices, technologies, processes, siting standards, operating methods,
and other alternatives for controlling non-point source pollution." The
management measures addressing agriculture runoff are listed under the
subcategories of:

-   Erosion and sediment control;

-   Confined animal facility (large units);

-   Confined animal facility (small units);

-   Nutrient management;

-   Pesticide management;

-   Grazing management; and

-   Irrigation water management.

States with CZM programs may require farmers and ranchers to adopt and
implement management measures or use BMP or other technologies to reduce
or eliminate non-point pollution of coastal waters in order for the
individual state CNPC program to be in compliance with CZMA and receive
federal funds.[^12] The states are not necessarily required, however, to
require farmers to adopt or implement any particular one or more of the
management measures.

If after adopting and implementing the specified management measures,
the measures fail to produce the necessary water quality improvements,
the state must implement additional management measures to address the
remaining water quality problems.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** The EPA has issued a guidance manual[^13] for the
  control of non-point pollution in coastal waters. The manual, which
  applies generally to all coastal states, identifies agriculture as one
  of the five chief sources of coastal area non-point pollution. The EPA
  manual reports that nutrients, sediment, animal wastes, salts, and
  pesticides are the pollutants that cause agricultural non-point
  pollution. The manual further reports that the sources of these
  agricultural pollutants are cropland erosion, concentrated animal
  feeding operations, the application of nutrients to farmland, the
  application of pesticides to farmland, poor grazing management, and the
  irrigation of cropland. To control agricultural non-point pollution,
  the manual presents specific management measures and management
  practices for each reported source of agricultural pollution. The
  individual states' coastal non-point pollution control programs must
  require farmers to implement management measures in order to be in
  compliance with the CZMA and receive federal funds. The states are not
  necessarily required, however, to mandate that farmers implement any
  particular one or more of the manual's proposed management practices.
  The manual's discussion of the proposed management practices, however,
  is informative and may be of some benefit to farmers who are striving
  to implement mandatory management measures. A few examples of the kinds
  of management practices that are discussed include: conservation
  tillage, contour strip cropping, sediment retention ponds, water and
  sediment control basins, grassed waterways, delayed seed bed
  preparation, filter strips, crop residue use, and a number of other
  practices.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

**[II. Groundwater]{.smallcaps}**

> **A. Federal Groundwater Laws and Regulations**
>
> ***1. Safe Drinking Water Act***

The Safe Drinking Water Act[^14] (SDWA) is the principal federal statute
addressing groundwater quality. Under the act, the EPA establishes
tolerance levels for a host of pollutants potentially present in public
drinking water. Thus, the direct regulatory impact of the SDWA is on
providers of public drinking water rather than farmers and ranchers.

The SDWA does, however, have indirect effects on farmers and ranchers,
and these effects may become more direct in the future. The SDWA was
amended in 1996 to require public reporting of detections of chemical
contaminants in drinking water. Since many of these contaminants could
be agricultural chemicals, it is likely that public concerns about
pesticides and herbicides will be heightened.

> ***a. Source Water Quality Partnership Petition Program***

The SDWA authorizes federal assistance for local programs that identify,
assess, and address groundwater quality problems. One approach is to
promote the creation of local, voluntary incentives programs to protect
source water quality. Farmers and ranchers may find it in their interest
to participate in these programs especially where local concerns about
public water contaminants are heightened by the release of information
about contamination.

A Source Water Quality Partnership Petition Program is initiated by a
local government or community water system by petitioning the state for
assistance in establishing an incentive-based partnership between the
petitioner and persons likely to be affected by water quality problems.
A variety of funding sources support the installation of a pollution
prevention infrastructure. One of these sources, established by the
SDWA, is the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. Using these funds,
several municipalities and public water systems have provided 100
percent cost-sharing to farmers and ranchers who install best management
practices designed to reduce sediment, nutrient, and chemical loading.
For public water systems, investment in pollution prevention is
considerably less expensive than the cost of treating contaminated
water.

> ***b. Underground Injection Control Program***

The injection of fluids into the earth by means of injection wells is
practiced by many

industries. These industries include petroleum, chemical, food
manufacture, products manufacture, geothermal energy development, retail
businesses, and agriculture. Public concern for groundwater quality
protection has lead to numerous state and federal programs. One such
program is the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program established
under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (SDWA).

Underground injection means the subsurface emplacement of fluids by well
injection. Injection wells have been identified as wells which may pose
a significant risk to underground sources of drinking water (USDW) and
include agriculture drainage wells and wells commonly located at
automobile service stations, print shops, dry cleaners, shopping
centers, equipment manufacturers, and other commercial and industrial
establishments. [^15]

Agriculture drainage well fluids may include field drainage from
precipitation and floodwaters, irrigation return flow, drainage from
animal yards and feedlots, or dairy runoff. Potential contaminants
include suspended solids, pesticides, nutrients (nitrogen and
phosphorous compounds), salts, organics, metals, and microbes including
pathogens. Contamination from injection wells may adversely affect
public health or otherwise result in noncompliance with drinking water
regulations.[^16]

Farmers and ranchers with agricultural drainage wells can minimize the
impact on USDW through the use of Best Management Practices (BMP)
including conservation tillage, crop rotation, fertility or nutrient
management, integrated pest management, livestock waste management,
improvement of subsurface drainage, erosion control, and retention ponds
and by following recommendations[^17] such as:

-   Mix or store pesticides or fertilizers away from the immediate
    vicinity of a drainage well;

-   Mix or store pesticides or fertilizers in a manner that prevents
    spills, runoff, or leachate to enter the well directly;

-   Apply pesticides or fertilizers efficiently and only at the rates
    necessary using proper methods and equipment calibrated properly to
    achieve realistic crop yields; and

-   Avoid pesticide or fertilizer applications at improper times such
    when soils are frozen and during periods of leaching or runoff.

Agricultural drainage wells should be located away from unsuitable areas
such as locations with excessively drained or highly erodible soils and
areas overlaying fractured bedrock or solution cavities that drain
directly into an USDW. Appropriate separation distances should be based
on a variety of factors including soil type, hydrogeologic conditions,
fertilizer type, nutrient type, pesticide type, and application rates.

Under the UIC program, EPA also has the authority to regulate septic
systems including shallow holes, septic tanks, and leachfield
combinations intended for sanitary waste disposal; however, septic
systems that serve single-family homes, are used only for sanitary
waste, and have the capacity to serve fewer than 20 people a day are
exempt from regulation.

> ***2. Groundwater Pesticide Management Plans***

The EPA has proposed a regulation that permits the continued use of the
agricultural chemicals, alachlor, atrazine, cyanazine, metolachlor, and
simazine in states that have adopted groundwater management plans that
provide specific safeguards for the use of those chemicals. However, the
EPA must approve the details of each plan before they may become
effective. When the regulation is finalized, states will have two years
from the date of the final regulation in which to develop their plans.
The EPA will have one year from the receipt of a plan to review it and
either approve or reject the plan.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Producers should contact their State Department of
  Agriculture, USDA, or EPA to determine the current status of the
  regulation and the groundwater pesticide management plan for their
  state.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

**[III. Air Quality]{.smallcaps}**

> **A. Federal Clean Air Act**

The Clean Air Act[^18] (CAA) is a comprehensive and complex piece of
environmental legislation. Under the 1990 amendments to the CAA, sources
that may cause air pollution are required to obtain operating permits.
These permits include a comprehensive statement of the pollution
source\'s CAA obligations regarding emission limits, fee requirements,
inspection, monitoring, and reporting duties. Violators may become the
subjects of administrative compliance orders and federal court
injunctions.

Certain violations of the CAA may be criminally prosecuted as felonies
in federal court. Although the exact amount of any fine must be
determined by application of the sentencing guidelines found in Title of
18 of the United States Code, generally, fines up to \$250,000 per day
may be imposed against individuals and up to \$500,000 per day against
corporations. Negligent release of an airborne hazardous substance that
places another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm
may be punished by a substantial fine and up to one year of
incarceration. If the release is conducted knowingly rather than merely
negligently, however, then the offense may be punished by a fine up to
\$250,000 and up to 15 years of incarceration. Also, knowingly failing
to pay any fee owed to the government under the CAA may subject a person
to criminal prosecution, a significant fine, and incarceration up to one
year. Making false statements on reports or tampering with monitoring
devices may result in fines up to \$250,000 per day and incarceration up
to two years. In all cases, the maximum penalties are doubled if the
offense is the offender's second or subsequent offense. Corporations or
other organizations may be fined up to \$1,000,000.

In April of 1994, the EPA announced a reward program for citizens who
report companies that violate the CAA. Rewards up to \$10,000 may be
awarded to citizens whose information results in a criminal conviction
or fine under the CAA.

The overall objective of the CAA is to protect human health, human
welfare, and the environment by maintaining and improving air quality
through the development of air quality standards. To achieve this goal,
the CAA requires states that are affected by the act to create and
implement a State Implementation Plan (SIP). Standards that control
ambient air emissions from such farming practices as prescribed burning
are geographically specific within each SIP. The SIP may also provide
visibility standards. Geographic locations that are categorized as "air
non-attainment areas" under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
are subjected to more rigorous restrictions.

Finally, grain terminal elevators having a permanent storage capacity of
more than 2.5 million bushels and grain storage elevators with a
permanent storage capacity of more than one million bushels, including
their loading and unloading facilities, are governed by regulations that
control grain emissions from the loading and unloading of grain and the
discharge of gases.

Offensive odors are a source of common complaints in regard to
agricultural facilities. The CAA currently has no application to odor
problems, however, and these complaints usually fall within the
jurisdiction of state nuisance laws, state environmental laws, and local
ordinances. Nevertheless, farmers and ranchers should stay informed of
changes in the CAA that might affect them in the future, and they should
also be aware that a strict interpretation of the CAA might bring
discing, combining, or other farm and ranch operations within the realm
of activities that are legitimately regulated by the provisions of the
CAA.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** While most agricultural operations are not air
  pollution sources under the CAA, formal or legal complaints concerning
  odor and dust resulting from agricultural operations may still arise.
  These complaints normally come in the form of actions filed against an
  agricultural producer in a state court under state law. "Nuisance" is
  the most common legal theory asserted as the basis of these complaints.
  Nuisance is a legal term of art and is described in more detail in
  corresponding state sections.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

**[IV. Solid Waste and Hazardous Waste]{.smallcaps}**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** There are several sources of law that control the
  use, the disposal, as well as the cleanup of hazardous wastes.
  Producers who use hazardous chemicals or who use petroleum or other
  products stored in storage tanks must be aware of the requirements
  governing their actions.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> **A. Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act**

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act[^19] (RCRA) controls the
treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes as well as the
disposal of municipal solid wastes. The RCRA also regulates the storage
of petroleum and other products in underground storage tanks.

The RCRA could have the following impacts on producers:

> ! Disposal of hazardous wastes on a farm could subject producers to
> significant liability including closure and post-closure care;
>
> ! Recalled pesticides intended for disposal may subject producers to
> manifest requirements and transportation requirements; and
>
> ! Offsite disposal of hazardous wastes could subject producers to
> hazardous waste generator requirements.
>
> ***1. Disposal***

Farmers who dispose of hazardous wastes that are their own used, waste
pesticides may be exempt from certain hazardous waste requirements. To
qualify for the exemption, however, the producer must strictly follow
the instructions on the pesticide label, triple-rinse the emptied
containers, and dispose of the pesticide residue on the farm in a manner
that is consistent with instructions on the pesticide label. If,
however, the chemical is an RCRA waste, then the agricultural producer
exception does not apply, and the producer must dispose of the
triple-rinsate at an approved hazardous waste site.

The RCRA permits farmers to dispose of non-hazardous agricultural wastes
on their own property provided that the disposal is not prohibited by
other state or local laws. These wastes include manure and crop residues
returned to the soil as fertilizers or soil conditioners and solid or
dissolved materials in irrigation return flows.

> ***2. Underground Storage Tanks***

Generally, an Underground Storage Tank[^20] (UST) is a tank that
together with its piping is located 10% or more underground. However,
tanks that together with their associated piping hold less than 1,100
gallons of motor fuel for noncommercial purposes, tanks that hold
heating oil used on the premises, and septic tanks are not included in
the RCRA definition of a UST.

Some UST owners or operators mistakenly think they can avoid
environmental and safety requirements by changing to Aboveground Storage
Tanks (AST). However, there are also important state and federal laws
and regulations that regulate AST.

All new, regulated UST are required to meet standards related to
construction, monitoring, operation, reporting (to state or federal
regulatory agencies), owner record keeping, and financial
responsibility.

Significant penalties, which may include civil fines up to \$25,000 per
day, may be imposed for failing to comply with the regulations. Other
civil fines or criminal prosecution may also be possible.

> ***3. Used Oil***

Producers who in a calendar year generate an average of 25 gallons or
less per month of used oil from vehicles or machinery are exempt from
regulation. Producers who exceed 25 gallons are required to store the
used oil in tanks that meet the required technical standards for
underground or aboveground storage tanks and are required to use waste
transporters with EPA authorization numbers for removal of the waste
from the farm. Storage in unlined surface impoundments that are wider
than they are deep is banned.

> ***4. Penalties***

Violations of the RCRA may be prosecuted as federal criminal offenses.
It is a criminal offense under the RCRA to transport waste to an
unpermitted facility or to transport, treat, store, or dispose of waste
without a permit. It is a criminal offense to knowingly violate any
material condition or requirement of a permit. In addition to other
criminal offenses not mentioned here, it is a criminal offense to make
false statements in or knowingly omit material information from
applications, manifests, or reports.

Civil fines may be as high as \$25,000 per day per violation. Depending
on the violation, criminal fines may be as high as \$50,000 per day, and
imprisonment may be from two to five years. If a violation of the RCRA
is committed "knowingly" and the violation exposes another person to
imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury, then the penalty may
be a fine up to \$250,000 and incarceration up to 15 years. The term
"knowingly" is a legal term of art; therefore, ignorance of the law,
e.g., ignorance that one's conduct or the consequences of one's conduct
is a criminal offense, is probably not a relevant legal defense to
criminal prosecution.

Subsequent convictions may result in a doubling of the applicable
maximum penalties. A corporation found guilty of knowing endangerment is
subject to a fine up to \$1,000,000.

Persons who suspect they may be in violation of the RCRA should seek
legal counsel immediately.

> **B. Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
> Liability Act**

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act[^21] (CERCLA) was passed to rectify perceived inadequacies of
earlier environmental legislation, especially the RCRA which was
considered inadequate to address past hazardous waste disposal sites.

The federal government is authorized under CERCLA to conduct cleanup
operations with funds from the \"Superfund.\" The government may then
seek to recover the costs of a cleanup from \"Potentially Responsible
Parties\" (PRP). The government is also authorized to issue cleanup
directives or to seek injunctive relief ordering PRP to conduct
responsive actions to abate an \"immediate and substantial endangerment
to public health or the environment.\" In addition, private parties are
authorized to seek reimbursement from the \"Superfund,\" or they may
file cost recovery actions against PRP.

CERCLA and the courts have broadly defined the term "persons" to include
individuals, corporations, and other corporate actors such as corporate
officers as well as other types of business entities.

Under CERCLA, criminal penalties may be levied for failing to report
releases, knowingly reporting false or misleading information, or
knowingly destroying or falsifying records. Fines may be as high as
\$250,000 for individuals and \$500,000 for corporations. Incarceration
up to three years for a first conviction and up to five years for
subsequent convictions may also be imposed. An individual who provides
information leading to the arrest and conviction of a person who has
failed to report a release may receive an award up to \$10,000.

> **C. Federal Toxic Substances Control Act**

The Toxic Substances Control Act[^22] (TSCA) allows the EPA to regulate
new commercial chemicals prior to sale on the market and to regulate the
distribution and use of existing chemicals when they pose an
unreasonable risk to human health or to the environment. The TSCA also
prohibits the use of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) transformers in
areas that could affect food or feed. An exposure risk to food or feed
is caused if PCB are released in any way and the release has a potential
pathway to human food or animal feed. The EPA considers human food or
animal feed to include items regulated as human food or animal feed by
the USDA or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) including direct
additives. Food and feed stored in private homes are excluded.

> **D. Federal Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act**

The objectives of the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know
Act[^23] (EPCRA) are to: (1) allow state and local planning for chemical
emergencies; (2) allow for emergency release notification; and (3) allow
for toxic and hazardous chemical right to know.

The EPCRA requires businesses that store chemicals that are subject to
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration\'s (OSHA) Hazard
Communication Standard to submit information or a list of those
chemicals to state and local authorities. This information is intended
to facilitate emergency planning and response. Annual reporting to state
and local authorities is required for businesses where regulated
chemicals are present at the facility in amounts above a certain
threshold. However, hazardous chemicals used for routine agricultural
operations or fertilizers when held for resale by a retailer are
excluded from the EPCRA.

Farms storing and using hazardous chemicals for routine agricultural
operations are excluded from the EPRCA Material Safety Data Sheet
reporting requirements. However, farms storing any amount of an
extremely hazardous substance above specified thresholds must notify
state and local emergency planning committees.

Businesses that produce, store, or use extremely hazardous substances or
CERCLA hazardous chemicals must report any non-permitted releases of a
listed chemical above threshold amounts to federal, state, and local
authorities. This requirement applies regardless of whether the release
is into the atmosphere, surface water, or groundwater.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Farmers and ranchers should work with their Local
  Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) to ensure that the LEPC has
  sufficient information regarding their farm chemicals and toxic or
  hazardous substances to properly respond should a local emergency
  occur. Excluded from the emergency planning requirements are activities
  that involve the proper application of pesticide products regulated by
  the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) as well
  as the handling and storage of these pesticide products by an
  agricultural producer.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> **E. Occupational Safety and Health Administration**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** State OSHA or Labor Department officials can assist
  the operator in fully understanding worker training and safety
  requirements particularly in the area of exposure to hazardous
  chemicals.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has regulations
that impose certain training requirements to protect workers from
hazardous chemicals. Of course, employers must comply with these
regulations. These regulations cover workers involved in cleanup
responses under CERCLA and the RCRA.

OSHA has more than 100 standards which include some training
requirements. OSHA has also promulgated a right to know law for
employees exposed to hazardous chemicals, and many states have similar
laws. RCRA regulations require treatment, storage, and disposal facility
personnel to have expertise in their areas of work assignment.

**[V. Pesticides and Chemigation]{.smallcaps}**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** The use of pesticides and other farm chemicals is
  regulated by federal and state statutes. Most states have some form of
  licensing or certification requirements controlling those who use
  pesticides. In addition, if a producer employs agricultural workers,
  there are regulations that address safety concerns about pesticide use
  by those workers or around those workers.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> **A. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act**

The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act[^24] (FIFRA),
which is the major federal statute governing pesticide use in the United
States, is administered by the EPA. The FIFRA establishes minimum
national standards for the use of pesticides, and it regulates the
registration, production, and sale of pesticides.

FIFRA grants primary, but not exclusive, enforcement responsibility for
pesticide use to the states. States retain the authority to further
regulate the sale or use of any federally-registered pesticide or device
in the state, but only if state regulations do not permit the sale or
use of pesticides that are prohibited under FIFRA. States, however, may
not impose any requirements for pesticide labeling or packaging that are
in addition to or different from those required under FIFRA.

> ***1. Use of Pesticides***

Under FIFRA, it is unlawful for any person to use a registered pesticide
in any manner that is inconsistent with its labeling. Based on the
pesticide\'s toxicity or the degree of adverse effects on humans and the
environment, the EPA divides pesticides into two broad groups as either
unclassified (general-use) or restricted-use pesticides.[^25]

Pesticides for unclassified or general use may be purchased and used by
any person in any manner that is consistent with the pesticide\'s label.
Restricted-use pesticides may be applied only by a certified applicator
or under the direct supervision of a certified applicator. Note that
\"under the direct supervision of a certified applicator\" means that
the pesticide is applied by a competent person acting under the
instructions and control of a certified applicator who is available if
and when needed. This means that the certified applicator need not be
physically present at the time and place the pesticide is applied unless
the pesticide label imposes a greater degree of supervision.

FIFRA requires the certification of applicators of restricted-use
pesticides and provides for EPA-approved state certification programs.

> ***2. Record Keeping Requirements***

Under FIFRA regulations, commercial applicators must keep and maintain
routine operational records containing information on the kinds,
amounts, uses, dates, and places of application of restricted-use
pesticides. Records must be maintained and kept for at least two years.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Individual states may have requirements that are
  more restrictive than FIFRA. Please see corresponding state sections.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1990 Farm Bill added the following record keeping and disclosure
requirements for pesticide use:

> ! All pesticide applicators, whether private or commercial, must
> maintain restricted-use pesticide application records;
>
> ! Records must be recorded within 14 days of each application and must
> be maintained for two years; slightly abbreviated records are
> permitted for "spot applications" which are applications of
> restricted-use pesticides that occur on the same day in a cumulative
> or total area of less than 1/10 of an acre;
>
> ! Within 30 days of a restricted-use pesticide application, pesticide
> applicators must give a copy of the record of the pesticide
> application to the person for whom the application was provided;
>
> ! Upon request, records must be made available to any federal or state
> agency that deals with health, pesticide use, or environmental issue
> related to the use of pesticides. However, a government agency may not
> release data from records that directly or indirectly reveal the
> identity of individual producers. USDA is charged with administering
> federal agency access to pesticide records while the states must
> designate a lead agency to administer access by state agencies;
>
> ! When a health professional determines that pesticide information is
> necessary to provide medical treatment or first aid to an individual
> who may have been exposed to pesticides, persons required to maintain
> the records must promptly provide the record and any available label
> information to the health professional upon request, and in the case
> of an emergency, the information must be provided immediately;
>
> ! Penalties in the form of fines may be imposed by the USDA for
> failure to comply with pesticide use and reporting requirements; and
>
> ! The USDA and the EPA are required to use the records to develop and
> maintain a database that is sufficient to enable the USDA and the EPA
> to publish annual comprehensive reports concerning agricultural and
> nonagricultural pesticide use.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Certified private pesticide applicators must record
  information no later than 14 days following the pesticide application.
  The information must include the brand or product name of the federal
  restricted-use pesticide; the product\'s EPA registration number; the
  total amount applied; the size of the area treated; the crop,
  commodity, stored product, or site to which the pesticide was applied;
  the location of the application; the month, day, and year of the
  application; and the certified applicator\'s name and certification
  number.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** For reporting as spot applications, certified
  private pesticide applicators may record information as spot
  applications or spot treatments if they apply restricted-use pesticides
  on the same day in a cumulative or total area of less than 1/10th of an
  acre. The slightly abbreviated information must include the brand or
  product name of the federal restricted-use pesticide; the product\'s
  EPA registration number; the total amount applied; the location of
  treatment designated as \"spot application,\" followed by a description
  (e.g., the location could be recorded as \"spot application\" followed
  by \"treatment for noxious weeds on Field A, C, and all pastures\");
  and the month, day, and year of the application. This provision does
  not pertain to greenhouse and nursery applicators who are required to
  keep all data elements.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> ***3. Disposal of Pesticides and Pesticide Containers***

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Producers must take special care in disposing of
  pesticide containers. Although permits for disposal are not required
  under the FIFRA, the pesticide labeling itself will reflect the
  necessary disposal requirements to be met in order to prevent
  violations of the law.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

A pesticide\'s label may contain specific procedures for disposal of the
pesticide and its container. Disposal of the pesticide in a manner
inconsistent with the labeling violates the FIFRA. The EPA regulates the
disposal of any pesticides that can no longer be legally used due to
cancellation of their registration. The EPA also recommends special
procedures for the disposal of unwanted pesticides.[^26]

To facilitate the collection and proper disposal of canceled and other
unusable or unwanted pesticide products, the EPA has enacted the
Universal Waste Rule (UWR).[^27] Many states have enacted rules similar
in content and intent to the UWR. Some states sponsor collections of
these products on a regular basis.

> ***4. Worker Protection Standard***

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Producers are also required to take precautions to
  protect farm workers from pesticides. Producers must properly train and
  notify workers of pesticide dangers. Producers should refer to the EPA
  publication entitled *The Worker Protection Standard for Agricultural
  Producers Ä How to Comply: What Employers Need to Know* for specific
  explanations of the farm worker requirements. Contact the EPA or your
  State Department of Agriculture for the most current requirements.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Agricultural employers must also comply with the Worker Protection
Standard (WPS) for Agricultural Pesticides. The WPS covers all
agricultural employers and their employees. The WPS contains
requirements for training employees who handle pesticides, provisions
for protecting employees from pesticide exposure, and instructions for
providing emergency assistance to exposed employees.

**[VI. Protection of Wildlife]{.smallcaps}**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Agricultural producers also have responsibilities
  concerning wildlife and migratory birds that may have habitat on the
  producer\'s property. Federal and state laws contain measures designed
  to protect or enhance wildlife or wildlife habitat.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> **A. Federal Endangered Species Act**

The Endangered Species Act[^28] (ESA) is designed to protect endangered
and threatened species from federally funded or federally directed
activities including pesticide use and wetlands manipulation.

The ESA also prohibits private persons from taking any animal species
that is listed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) as
an endangered or threatened species unless the person has first obtained
a permit for the taking such as an "incidental takings" permit or there
is a statutory or regulatory exemption that allows the taking. The term
"taking" is defined as harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting,
wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, or collecting. No reported cases
involve the taking of animals by pesticide poisoning, but the FWS has
taken administrative action against farmers and ranchers who killed
protected animals with meat illegally laced with pesticides. For
example, in *Christy v. Hodel,*[^29] a court upheld the authority of the
FWS to assess penalties against livestock owners who deliberately killed
grizzly bears, an endangered species, in order to protect their
livestock.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** An unlawful taking can result in serious criminal
  and civil penalties. Producers may apply for "incidental takings"
  permits if a contemplated activity might result in an inadvertent
  taking of a protected species. Permits are granted by the United States
  Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

The ESA makes it unlawful for anyone to import, take, possess, sell,
deliver, or transport an endangered fish, plant, or wildlife species.
Any person who knowingly violates the ESA is subject to a criminal fine
up to \$50,000 and imprisonment up to one year. All other ESA
violations, such as reporting violations, are punishable by a criminal
fine up to \$25,000 and imprisonment up to six months.

Through FIFRA, mandatory limitations on pesticide use are included on
pesticide labels and in county-specific use bulletins. If producers use
pesticides in an area where mandatory limitations exist, they should
follow the directions and limitations described in the use bulletins.
Voluntary limitations on pesticide usage may also be employed to protect
endangered and threatened species and are contained in interim pamphlets
available through the EPA or your State Department of Agriculture.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** The Endangered Species Act can be a powerful tool in
  the protection of wildlife and its habitat through the imposition of
  serious criminal and civil penalties for the destruction or harming of
  protected species. Producers must be aware of any endangered or
  threatened species existing on their property and must take steps to
  ensure that activities do not harm those species.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> **B. Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Treaty provisions like those that protect migratory
  birds will be taken into account by regulatory officials when making
  certain determinations. For example, treaty provisions are considered
  by an agency when determining whether to grant or deny permits for
  CAFO.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act[^30] implements conventions between the
United States and Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the former USSR for the
protection of migratory birds. Birds protected under the Act are not
necessarily endangered. The Act provides that, except as permitted by
regulation, it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture, or kill any
migratory bird. Penalties may include fines up to \$15,000 per violation
and imprisonment up to two years in certain cases. Federal courts have
split on the question of whether intent must be present in order to
impose liability under the Act in cases where birds have been poisoned
by pesticides.[^31]

**[VII. 1996 Farm Bill]{.smallcaps}**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** This section only discusses the environmental or
  conservation provisions of the 1996 Farm Bill.[^32] For a more thorough
  examination of flexibility programs, export programs, dairy marketing,
  risk management, and other provisions of the 1996 Farm Bill, resources
  such as the local Farm Service Agency office, a producers\'
  association, or appropriate governmental offices should be consulted.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> **A. Environmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program**

The Environmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program (ECARP) includes
the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), the Wetlands Reserve Program
(WRP), and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). Under
ECARP, USDA may designate watersheds, multi-state areas, and regions of
special environmental sensitivity as priority areas eligible for
enhanced federal assistance. The USDA may also designate areas in which
it will assist farmers and ranchers in meeting federal, state, and local
environmental laws and regulations.

> ***1. Conservation Reserve Program***

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** The Conservation Reserve Program[^33] (CRP) has been
  re-authorized and extended by the 1996 Farm Bill. Farmers and ranchers
  who wish to participate in this program may submit an offer to enroll
  land during specified signup periods. A continuous signup is provided
  for certain special practices including filter strips, riparian
  buffers, shelterbelts, grassed waterways, field wind breaks, living
  snow fences, salt tolerant vegetation, and shallow areas for wildlife.
  The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) administers the program through
  the state and county offices of Farm Service Agency (FSA). The owner or
  operator submits a per acre rental offer. If accepted, the CCC enters
  into a contract with the owner or operator to convert the land into a
  conserving use for a minimum of 10 years in return for financial and
  technical assistance. Conservation plans approved by the local
  conservation district are required on eligible acreage.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

The CRP has been extended through the year 2002 at the current level of
36.4 million enrolled acres. Under the 1996 Farm Bill, land ownership
requirements prior to enrollment have been reduced from three years to
one year.

Enrollment in CRP has been actively targeted to the most environmentally
cost-effective acres. All offers are ranked competitively, based on an
environmental benefits index which takes into account the government
cost of the contract, soil erosion, water quality, wildlife habitat, and
other costs.

Total acreage placed in the CRP combined with that placed in the
Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) may not exceed 25 percent of the total
cropland of the county. In addition, no more than 10 percent of the
cropland in the county can be subject to a CRP or WRP easement. CRP
participants must comply with the CRP contract, implement approved
conservation plans, establish required vegetative cover or water cover,
comply with state noxious weed laws, and control all weeds, insects, and
pests on the land. CRP participants must not produce agricultural
commodities or allow grazing or harvesting on land subject to the
contract without the approval of the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.

> ***a. Early Termination***

The USDA is authorized to allow current participants in the CRP to
terminate by written notice any CRP contract which was entered into
prior to January 1, 1995, as long as the contract has been in effect at
least five years. This early termination provision does not, however,
apply to those enrolled lands which are determined to be of high
environmental value.

CRP contracts which are not eligible for early termination include:

-   Contracts entered into after January 1, 1995;

-   Contracts entered into before January 1, 1995, which are less than
    five years old;

-   Land with an erodibility index greater than 15;

-   Land devoted to useful life easements, field windbreaks, grass
    waterways, shallow water areas, filter strips, shelterbelts, and
    bottomland timber on wetlands;

-   Land enrolled under the wetland eligibility criteria; and

-   Land located within an average of 100 feet of a stream or other
    permanent water body.

> ***b. Enhancement***

The 1985 statute authorizing the CRP also authorizes "enhancement
programs." Although regulatory and statutory rules must still be
respected, Enhancement Programs provide a mechanism by which USDA, after
evaluation, can deviate from some standard program policies.

A valuable benefit of Enhancement Programs is that states may develop
coordinated efforts and combine multiple programs to address problems
comprehensively. The Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) is
an outgrowth of the CRP and is such an enhancement program.

In the fall of 1996, the Environmental Defense Fund[^34] proposed to the
USDA that it allow states to submit \"Enhancement Programs\" to combine
the CRP with state funds to address the problems of a particular
estuary, river, or ecosystem in a comprehensive fashion. Hence, the CREP
was established.

The CREP provides financial incentives to farmers and ranchers who
participate in CRP and take sensitive lands out of agricultural
production. As these agricultural lands are planted in trees, grass, and
other types of vegetation, the results are reduced soil erosion,
improved air and water quality, and the establishment of millions of
acres of wildlife habitat.

The CREP enhances the CRP in several important ways. First, it is
designed to address specific state and local concerns since proposals
are developed in consultation with local citizens including farmers and
ranchers. Second, the CREP is targeted to specific geographic areas of
state and national significance such as the restoration of important
habitat for endangered plant or animal species. Third, the CREP's
flexibility permits the design of conservation strategies that address
specific issues and concerns.[^35] And finally, the CREP is a
results-oriented program that requires measurable goals and the
monitoring of annual progress toward those goals.

Under the CREP, federal CRP funds and state funds are combined[^36] to
provide special financial incentives[^37] to farmers and ranchers to
participate in CRP and help solve agriculture-related environmental
problems. In exchange for CREP payments, farmers and ranchers agree to
follow the CRP requirements and any other state determined requirements
imposed.

CREP projects have already begun in environmentally sensitive areas of
several states. Federal contributions committed to these programs by the
USDA and the land areas targeted are: \$367 million for 100,000 acres in
Illinois to reduce sedimentation in the Illinois River, \$170 million
for 100,000 acres in Maryland to reduce nutrient inflow to the
Chesapeake Bay, \$163 million for 100,000 acres in Minnesota to improve
the water quality of the Minnesota River, \$7.7 million for 5000 acres
in New York to protect drinking water quality for New York City through
nutrient management and sediment reduction, \$220 million for 100,000
acres in the Albemarle-Pamlico System areas and the Jason Lake watershed
in North Carolina to improve water quality and wildlife habitat, and
\$193 million for 100,000 acres in Oregon and \$200 million for 100,000
acres in Washington, respectively, for the protection of dwindling
salmon stocks. Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Utah, Wisconsin,
and Wyoming are currently developing CREP proposals.

> ***2. Wetlands Reserve Program***

The Wetlands Reserve Program[^38] (WRP) has been re-authorized through
the year 2002 with a maximum enrollment of 975,000 acres. Generally, the
intent of the program changes is more flexibility and a goal of no net
loss of wetlands.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Producer Note: To participate in the WRP program, a farmer or rancher
  may enroll acreage at any time by applying for program participation
  with the local NRCS office.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Emphasis will be given to enrollment of lands that:

-   Maximize wildlife benefits;

-   Maximize wetland area;

-   Achieve cost-efficient wetlands restoration; and

-   Have the least likelihood of being reconverted.

Conservation plans are required for WRP program participation.
Eligibility determination for participation in the program is made by
NRCS. New acreage enrollments begun after October 1, 1996, require
one-third of total program acres as permanent easements, one-third in
30-year easements, and one-third in restoration only agreements.
Cost-sharing may be provided for wetland restoration at levels of 75
percent to 100 percent for permanent easements, 50 percent to 75 percent
for 30-year easements, and 50 percent to 75 percent for restoration only
agreements.

> ***3. Environmental Quality Incentives Program***

Four of USDA\'s conservation programs were combined in the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)[^39] including the Agricultural
Conservation Program, the Water Quality Incentives Program, the Great
Plains Conservation Program, and the Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Program. The EQIP was established by the 1996 Farm Bill to
provide a voluntary conservation program for farmers and ranchers who
face serious threats to soil, water, and other natural resources.
Eligibility is limited to persons who are engaged in livestock or
agricultural production. EQIP provides technical, financial, and
educational assistance primarily to designated priority areas. At least
half (50 percent) of the program is targeted to livestock-related
natural resource concerns; the remainder is targeted to other
significant statewide conservation priorities. The NRCS provides program
leadership for EQIP and consults with FSA to set the program\'s
policies, priorities, and guidelines.

EQIP works primarily in priority areas where significant natural
resource problems exist. In general, priority areas are defined as
watersheds, regions, or areas of special environmental sensitivity or
significant soil, water, or related natural resource concerns. These
concerns could include soil erosion, water quality, water quantity, air
quality, wildlife habitat, wetlands, forest, and grazing lands. Priority
areas are identified by a locally-led conservation process. A local work
group comprised of representatives of the conservation district, FSA
county committees, NRCS, Cooperative Extension Service, plus other
federal, state, and local agencies interested in natural resources
conservation identifies program priorities by completing a natural
resource needs assessment and, based on that assessment, develops
proposals for priority areas. The inclusion of conservation districts
helps ensure that the work groups develop and implement conservation
programs that fully reflect local needs and priorities. Proposals for
priority area determination are submitted to the NRCS State
Conservationist who selects those areas within the state based on the
recommendations from the state Technical Committee.

EQIP can also address additional significant statewide concerns that may
occur outside designated priority areas. At least 65 percent of the
funds are used in designated priority areas and up to 35 percent can be
used for other significant statewide natural resource concerns.
Additional emphasis is given to areas where state or local governments
offer financial or technical assistance and where agricultural
improvements will help meet water quality and other environmental
objectives.

All EQIP activities must be carried out according to a conservation
plan. Conservation plans are site specific for each farm or ranch and
can be developed by producers with help from NRCS or other service
providers. Producers\' conservation plans should address the primary
natural resource concerns. All plans are approved by the conservation
district and reviewed according to NRCS technical standards adapted for
local conditions. Producers are not obligated, but are encouraged, to
develop comprehensive or total resource management plans.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** A producer wanting to participate in EQIP may apply
  at NRCS for an EQIP contract at any time. The contract includes a plan
  approved by the local conservation district that indicates the
  practices to be applied and the amount of cost share to be received.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

EQIP offers 5- to 10-year contracts that provide incentive payments and
cost sharing for conservation practices set forth in the site-specific
plan. EQIP contract applications are accepted throughout the year. The
NRCS conducts an evaluation of the environmental benefits the producer
offers. Producer offers are then ranked and the highest priority
applications are approved for funding. Applications are ranked according
to environmental benefits that would be achieved but weighed against the
costs of applying the practices. Higher rankings are given to plans that
treat priority resource concerns on a sustainable level.

Cost sharing may pay up to 75 percent of the costs of certain
conservation practices such as grassed waterways, filter strips, manure
management facilities, wildlife habitat enhancement, and other practices
important to improving and maintaining the health of natural resources
in the area. Incentive payments may be included to encourage a producer
to perform land management practices such as nutrient management and
wildlife habitat management. These payments may be provided up to three
years to encourage producers to carry out management practices they may
not otherwise use without the program incentive.

Eligible land includes cropland, rangeland, pasture, forest, and other
farm or ranch lands where the program may be delivered. Owners of large
confined livestock operations are not eligible for cost share assistance
for animal waste storage or treatment facilities. However, technical,
educational, and financial assistance may be provided for other
conservation practices on these large operations. Total cost share and
incentive payments are limited to \$10,000 per person per year and
\$50,000 for the length of the contract.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** In general, USDA has defined a large confined
  livestock operation as an operation with more than 1,000 animal units.
  But because of differences in operations and environmental
  circumstances across the country, the definition of a large confined
  livestock operation may be modified in each state by the NRCS State
  Conservationist after consultation with the state Technical Committee
  and approval of the NRCS Chief.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> **B. Swampbuster, Sodbuster, and Conservation Compliance Programs**
>
> ***1. Swampbuster***

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** The Swampbuster program has been in place since 1985
  and was enacted to discourage farmers and ranchers from converting
  wetlands to croplands and, generally, to encourage landowners to
  preserve wetland areas. The 1985 law made producers ineligible for farm
  program benefits if wetlands were converted after 1985 to produce an
  agricultural commodity. A 1990 amendment strengthened the program by
  making conversion alone, even without cropping, a swampbuster
  violation. The USDA implements Swampbuster regulations, and the NRCS
  along with the FSA are the primary agencies involved in assuring
  compliance with Swampbuster provisions.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Wetland conservation provisions, known as Swampbuster, are continued
under the 1996 Farm Bill. New requirements specify that all wetland
determinations must be certified by NRCS and that previous wetland
determinations must be certified to verify their accuracy. Wetland
mitigation is allowed through restoration, enhancement, or creation as
long as wetland functions are maintained.

When a violation of the Swampbuster program occurs, the FSA has the
discretion to waive the penalty of ineligibility for USDA program
benefits if FSA determines the person acted in good faith and without
intent to violate the Swampbuster provisions. The NRCS, based upon
recommendations of the state Technical Committee, is authorized to
identify categories of actions that have a minimal effect on the
environment.

The 1996 Farm Bill made other policy changes in the Swampbuster program
to give landowners more flexibility. Those policies include:

-   Farmed wetlands and prior converted croplands which have been
    abandoned are not subject to Swampbuster as long as the use of those
    lands is limited to agricultural purposes and where both baseline
    hydrological and vegetative conditions that existed prior to
    abandonment are maintained;

-   Areas in which mitigation can be used are expanded; for example,
    individuals may be allowed to work with producers, conservation
    districts, and other relevant entities to select the best area for
    mitigating wetlands;

-   More options for mitigation including restoration, enhancement, or
    creation;

-   More effective and timely identification and determination of
    practices that have a minimal effect on the environment; and

-   Wetland conversion activities authorized by a section 404 permit
    which make agricultural production possible can accepted for
    Swampbuster program purposes if the permitted activities are
    adequately mitigated.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Prior converted cropland is a converted wetland
  where the conversion occurred prior to December 23, 1985, and the site
  did not meet the hydrological criteria for a wetland on December 23,
  1985. Additionally, an agricultural commodity must have been produced
  on the site at least once before December 23, 1985.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

In addition, the 1996 Farm Bill expanded the definition of agricultural
land contained in the Interagency Wetlands Memorandum of Agreement[^40]
to include cropland, pasture land, tree farms, rangeland, native pasture
land, and other land used for livestock production and placed the NRCS
in charge of making delineation decisions.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Regulations implementing Swampbuster changes found
  in the 1996 Farm Bill are in effect. Producers should make themselves
  aware of the new Swampbuster regulations by obtaining copies from the
  NRCS or other USDA offices and keep themselves informed of regional
  wetlands issues.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> ***2. Sodbuster***

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** The Sodbuster program began, as did the Swampbuster
  program, with the 1985 Farm Bill. This program was designed to conserve
  highly erodible land brought into crop production. Under Sodbuster,
  producers are ineligible for farm program payments unless they apply
  conservation systems that are designed to achieve tolerable levels of
  soil erosion on the land. Highly erodible land determinations are made
  by the NRCS.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

The highly erodible land conservation program, known as Sodbuster, is
retained under the 1996 Farm Bill. A new provision states that if CRP
lands are returned to production, those lands cannot be required to meet
a higher conservation standard than the standard applied to other highly
erodible cropland located within the same area.

In addition, a wind erosion pilot project is established under the 1996
Farm Bill. The pilot project targets farmers and ranchers in selected
counties who have nearly 100 percent of their cropland designated as
highly erodible and areas where wind erosion factors likely caused
inequitable application of highly erodible land factors to that
cropland. In this circumstance, the cropland must be redelineated.

> ***3. Conservation Compliance***

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Conservation compliance provisions of the 1985 and
  1990 Farm Bills were continued under the 1996 Farm Bill. These
  provisions required that in order to remain eligible for certain USDA
  program benefits, the producer must develop and implement a plan
  approved by the NRCS to address highly erodible cropland . These plans
  are continued by the 1996 Farm Bill with some changes. The term
  "conservation plan" describes the conservation systems or practices
  relative to the location, use, tillage system, and treatment measures
  used to improve soil condition.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1996 Farm Bill sets forth that following consultation with local
conservation districts, the USDA is required to establish expedited
procedures to grant temporary variances in conservation plans (formerly
referred to as conservation compliance plans). Decisions on variances
must be made within 30 days or the request is considered granted.

County committees may provide for appropriate relief where application
of a conservation system would impose an undue economic hardship on the
producer. This discretion is allowed by committee consideration and by
using variances and exemptions.

USDA employees are directed under the 1996 Farm Bill to work with
landowners to whom they are providing onsite technical assistance to
correct an observed potential compliance problem. If a landowner has
acted in good faith and without any intent to violate the law, up to one
year is available to take corrective action and to actively apply the
conservation plan for the farm before the violation will be reported.
This action helps ensure that penalties are in proportion to violations.

Farmers are encouraged to maintain records of residue measurement
including those provided by third parties. These measurements can be
used to determine erosion levels on annual review.

Public notice of future changes in any technical standards affecting
conservation compliance, Swampbuster, and CRP programs is required.

> **C. Other Conservation Programs**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Many additional conservation programs were created
  under the 1996 Farm Bill. Producers must contact the local NRCS or
  other USDA field office in order to obtain specific program
  regulations, applications for participation, technical assistance, and
  plan requirements. Some programs provide cost share payments.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> ***1. Conservation Farm Option***

The 1996 Farm Bill established a pilot program for producers of wheat,
feed grains, upland cotton, and rice who are eligible for market
transition agreements.[^41] Under this program producers may consolidate
their CRP, WRP, and EQIP payments into one annual payment.[^42]

Under the Conservation Farm Option (CFO), the producer must develop and
implement an approved conservation farm plan. Conservation farm
contracts are for 10 years and can be extended for an additional five
years. In exchange for payments under the CFO, the producer must forego
payments in the CRP, WRP, and EQIP programs. The total payment for
participation in CFO is the same as if the farmer or rancher had
received separate payments under each program in addition to production
flexibility contract payments.

> ***2. Flood Risk Reduction***

Market transition contracts may be entered into with producers who farm
lands that frequently flood. Participants agree not to receive any other
contract payments, commodity loans, crop insurance, conservation program
payments, or any disaster program payments on flood risk reduction
acreage but receive 95 percent of their previous seven-year federal
contract payments.[^43] These Flood Risk Reduction payments are designed
to reduce federal outlays on frequently flooded land.

> ***3. Farmland Protection Program***

Under the Farmland Protection Program (FPP), the USDA is authorized to
join state, local, or tribal governments to acquire conservation
easements or other interests in land from landowners for farmland
protection purposes. Up to 170,000 to 340,000 acres were authorized for
acquisition. The 1996 Farm Bill provided \$35 million for use over a six
year period.

Participating landowners must keep their land in agriculture uses and
agree not to convert the land for any non-agriculture uses. Landowners
retain all rights to use the property for agriculture. All lands
enrolled must have a conservation plan developed according to the NRCS
Field Office Technical Guide. Priority is given to perpetual easements,
although 30 years is the minimum time requirement. Locally significant
lands are considered if they are economically viable units. To qualify
for FPP, land offered must be:

-   Previously owned (not newly acquired);

-   Prime, unique, locally significant, or other productive soils; and

-   Subject to a pending offer by state, local, or tribal government to
    acquire the land for farmland protection purposes.

To date, the USDA has purchased FPP lands in California, Colorado,
Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North
Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and
Wisconsin to help purchase development rights from farmers to keep
productive farmland in production.

> ***4. Everglades Ecosystem Restoration***

The Everglades Ecosystem Restoration provisions apply only to Florida.
The program provides a total of \$200 million to conduct restoration
activities in the Everglades ecosystem. In addition, a separate fund of
not more than \$100 million derived from the sale of federal property in
Florida can be used for Everglades restoration activities.

> ***5. Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program***

The Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) is a voluntary program
for people who want to develop and improve wildlife habitat primarily on
a private land. WHIP authorizes \$50 million in funding through the year
2002 to establish a program to provide technical assistance and to make
up to 75 percent cost share payments to landowners in order to establish
and improve wildlife habitat. In order to receive cost share payments,
the landowner must submit an approved wildlife habitat development plan.
Generally, the total cost share amount cannot exceed \$10,000 per
agreement, however, the NRCS State Conservationist has authority to
exceed this limit on a case by case basis.[^44]

The WHIP program, in addition to providing payments and technical
assistance to landowners, provides education regarding wildlife needs
and fosters a positive public attitude regarding wildlife, wildlife
habitat, and land stewardship.

> ***6. Conservation of Private Grazing Land***

Federal personnel are to be made available for technical assistance
through the Conservation of Private Grazing Land program. The purpose of
the program is to promote conservation and enhancement of natural
resources on private lands. The NRCS administers the program, and
development of a conservation plan is required for participation.

> ***7. Commodity Credit Corporation Uses***

Under the 1996 Farm Bill, the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) Charter
Act was revised to allow the use of CCC funds for authorized
conservation programs. The intent of the revision was to reduce the
necessity for annual appropriations to carry out such programs.

**Appendix A - Agencies**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** Federal agencies are available to answer questions
  regarding environmental matters and a producer\'s compliance with
  environmental laws and regulations.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL AGENCIES:

**Environmental Protection Agency**

Ariel Rios Building

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20460

\(202\) 260-2090

[http://www.epa.gov/]{.underline}

National EPA Hotlines

Emergency Response Center\...\...\...\.....(800) 424-8802

AIR RISC Hotline\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....(919) 541-0888

Environmental Justice\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....(800) 962-6215

Hazardous Waste\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\.....(800) 262-7937

Pesticide Telecommunications\...\...\...\...(800) 858-7378

RCRA/Superfund/UST/EPCRA\...\...\...(800) 535-0202

Safe Drinking Water\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...(800) 426-4791

Wetlands Protection\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....(800) 832-7828

Environmental Protection Agency

Regional Offices:

Region 1 (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT)

1 Congress Street, Suite 1100

Boston, MA 02114-2023

[http://www.epa.gov/region01/]{.underline}

\(888\) 372-7341 toll free

\(617\) 918-1111

\(617\) 565-3660 fax

Region 2 (NJ, NY, PR, VI)

290 Broadway

New York, NY 10007-1866

[http://www.epa.gov/region02/]{.underline}

\(888\) 283-7626 toll free

\(212\) 637-3000

\(212\) 637-3526 fax

Region 3 (DC, DE, MD, PA, VA, WV)

1650 Arch Street

Philadelphia, Pa 19103-2029

[http://www.epa.gov/region03/]{.underline}

\(800\) 438-2474 toll free

\(215\) 814-5103

\(215\) 814-5103 fax

> Region 4 (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN)

Atlanta Federal Center

61 Forsyth Street, S.W.

Atlanta, GA 30303-3104

[http://www.epa.gov/region04/]{.underline}

\(800\) 241-1754 toll free

\(404\) 562-9900

\(404\) 562-8174 fax

Region 5 (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI)

77 West Jackson Boulevard

Chicago, IL 60604-3507

[http://www.epa.gov/region05/]{.underline}

\(800\) 621-8431 toll free

\(312\) 353-2000

\(312\) 353-4135 fax

Region 6 (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX)

Fountain Place 12th Floor, Suite 1200

1445 Ross Avenue

Dallas, TX 75202-2733

[http://www.epa.gov/region06/]{.underline}

\(800\) 887-6063 toll free

\(214\) 665-2200

\(214\) 665-7113 fax

Region 7 (IA, KS, MO, NE)

901 North 5th Street

Kansas City, KS 66101

[http://www.epa.gov/region07/]{.underline}

\(800\) 223-0425 toll free

\(913\) 551-7003

\(913\) 551-5218 fax

Region 8 (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY)

999 18th Street, Suite 500

Denver, CO 80202-2466

[http://www.epa.gov/region08/]{.underline}

\(800\) 227-8917 toll free

\(303\) 312-6312

\(303\) 312-6339 fax

Region 9 (AZ, CA, HI, NV)

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

[http://www.epa.gov/region09/]{.underline}

\(877\) 412-6124 toll free

\(415\) 744-1305

\(415\) 744-2499 fax

Region 10 (AK, ID, OR, WA)

1200 Sixth Avenue

Seattle, WA 98101

[http://www.epa.gov/region10/]{.underline}

\(800\) 424-4372 toll free

\(206\) 553-1200

\(206\) 553-0149 fax

**Natural Resources Conservation Service**

(United States Department of Agriculture)

14th Street and Independence Avenue, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20250

\(202\) 720-4525

[http://www.ncg.nrcs.usda.gov/]{.underline}

**United States Army Corps of Engineers - Headquarters**

Casimir Pulaski Building

20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20314-1000

\(202\) 761-0660

[http://www.nc.nrcs.usda.gov/]{.underline}

**United States Department of Agriculture**

14th Street and Independence Avenue, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20250

\(202\) 720-2791

[http://www.usda.gov/]{.underline}

**United States Fish and Wildlife Service**

Department of the Interior

1849 C Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20240

\(202\) 208-4717

[http://www.fcs.gov/]{.underline}

**United States Forest Service**

(United States Department of Agriculture)

P.O. Box 96090

Washington, D.C. 20090-6090

or

Sidney R. Yates Federal Building

201 14^th^ Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20024

\(202\) 205-8333

\(202\) 205-1610 fax

[http://www.fs.fed.us]{.underline}

**Appendix B - Glossary**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Producer Note:** The following definitions are included to further
  define information discussed in this document. Some variations may
  exist between state and federal definitions.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

***10-year, 24-hour storm***: A rainfall event of 24-hour duration and
10-year frequency that is used to calculate the runoff volume and peak
discharge.

***25-year, 24-hour storm***: A rainfall event of 24-hour duration and
25-year frequency that is used to calculate the runoff volume and peak
discharge.

***Animal unit***: A standard measure based on feed requirements used to
combine various classes of livestock according to size, weight, age, and
use.

***Aquaculture***: The production of aquatic plants or animals in a
controlled environment, such as ponds, raceways, tanks, or cages, for
all or part of their life cycle. In the United States, baitfish,
catfish, clams, crawfish, freshwater prawns, mussels, oysters, salmon,
shrimp, tropical or ornamental fish, and trout account for most of the
aquacultural production. Less widely established but growing species
include alligator, hybrid striped bass, carp, eel, red fish, northern
pike, sturgeon, and tilapia.

***Aquifer***: A geologic formation or structure that transmits water in
sufficient quantity to supply the needs for a water development; usually
saturated sands, gravel, fractures, and cavernous and vesicular rock.

***Best management practice (BMP)***: A practice or combination of
practices that are determined to be the most effective and practicable
(including technological, economic, and institutional considerations)
means of controlling point and non-point pollutants at levels compatible
with environmental quality goals.

***Chemigation***: Any process where pesticides or other chemicals are
added to irrigation water applied to land, crops, or both through an
irrigation distribution system.

***Composting***: A controlled process of degrading organic matter by
microorganisms.

***Conservation***: The continuing protection and management of natural
renewable resources, like soil, water, wildlife, and forests, in
accordance with principles that assure their optimum economic and social
enjoyment.

***Conservation compliance***: A provision authorized by the Food
Security Act of 1985 that required farmers with highly erodible cropland
to implement an approved conservation plan by 1990. Implementation of
the plan was tied to eligibility for federal USDA program benefits.

***Conservation easement***: A legal interest granted for the purpose of
restricting how property is used in order to protect various
environmental or natural resource values.

***Conservation practices***: Methods that protect or improve the soil,
water, or related natural resources. Major conservation practices
include conservation tillage, crop rotation, contour farming,
stripcropping, terraces, diversions, and grassed waterways.

***Constructed wetland***: Engineered systems designed to simulate
natural wetlands to exploit the water purification value for human use
and benefits. Constructed wetlands consist of former upland environments
that have been modified to create poorly drained soils and wetlands
flora and fauna for the primary purpose of contaminant or pollutant
removal from wastewaters or runoff.

***Cooperative Extension Service***: In general terms, a system of
state, local, and federal organizations working together to provide a
practical educational network linking research, science, and technology
to the needs of people where they live and work. The Cooperative
Extension Service provides educational services outside the classroom on
agriculture, household management, nutrition, and other topics. States
participate mostly through their land grant universities, while the
federal partner is the USDA\'s Cooperative State Research, Education,
and Extensions Service. Other partners are the Extension professionals
in nearly all of the nation\'s 3,150 counties, thousands of
paraprofessionals, and nearly three million volunteers.

***Diversion***: A channel, embankment, or other manmade structure
constructed to divert water from one area to another.

***Ecosystem***: The complex of a community and its environment
functioning as an ecological unit in nature; a basic functional unit of
nature comprising both organisms and their nonliving environment,
intimately linked by a variety of biological, chemical, and physical
processes.

***Effluent***: Solid, liquid, or gaseous wastes that enter the
environment as a by-product of man-oriented processes.

***Environmental audit***: The process of investigating the
environmental status and history of a property to determine if it
complies with applicable environmental laws and whether it contains any
sources of potential environmental liability.

***Erosion***: Wearing away of the land surface by running water,
glaciers, winds, and waves. The term erosion is usually preceded by a
definitive term denoting the type of erosion such as gully erosion,
sheet erosion, wind erosion, or bank erosion.

***Farm Bill***: Major omnibus agricultural legislation, usually enacted
every four or five years. The bill usually includes provisions on
commodity programs, trade, conservation, credit, agricultural research,
food stamps, and marketing.

***Fertigation***: Any process where fertilizers are added to irrigation
water applied to land, crops, or both through an irrigation distribution
system.

***Fertilizer***: Any organic or inorganic material of natural or
synthetic origin that is added to a soil to supply elements essential to
plant growth.

***Generally Accepted Agricultural Management Practices (GAAMP)***: A
form of right-to-farm law which gives nuisance protection to farms using
GAAMP as established by the state or common agricultural practices in
the area.

***Groundwater***: Water beneath the earth\'s surface between saturated
soil and rock that supplies wells and springs.

***Habitat***: The place where an organism naturally lives or grows.

***Hazardous waste***: Any waste or combination of wastes which poses a
substantial present and potential hazard to human health or living
organisms.

***Herbicide***: A chemical substance designed to kill or inhibit the
growth of plants, especially weeds.

***Highly erodible land***: Land that has an erodibility index of
greater than eight. This index is based on a soil\'s inherent tendency
to erode from rain or wind in the absence of cover crop or other
conservation practices. The erodibility index is based on factors from
the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the Wind Erosion Equation
(WEQ), along with a soil\'s T‑value, which is a measure of the amount of
erosion in tons per year that a soil can tolerate without losing
productivity. For most cropland soils, T values fall in the range of
three to five tons per acre per year.

***Holding pond***: A reservoir, pit, or pond, usually made of earth,
used to retain polluted runoff water for disposal on land.

***Insecticide***: A pesticide compound specifically used to kill or
control the growth of insects.

***Irrigation***: Application of water to lands, crops, or both for
agricultural purposes.

***Lagoon***: A reservoir or pond built to contain water and animal
wastes until they can be decomposed either by aerobic or anaerobic
action.

***Leachate***: Liquids that have percolated through a soil and that
contain substances in solution or suspension.

***Manure***: The fecal and urinary defecations of livestock and
poultry; may include spilled feed, bedding, or soil.

***Non-point source pollution***: Pollution that enters the environment
from diffuse areas instead of a single point of origin or a specific
outlet. Examples include areas in which fertilizer, animal manure, or
other chemicals have been applied.

***Noxious weeds***: Undesirable plant species, excepting those
protected by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, that are considered
harmful, exotic, injurious, or poisonous and are targeted for control
management under state and federal law. The U.S. Secretary of
Agriculture may provide cost sharing assistance to state and local
agencies to manage noxious weeds in an area if a majority of the
landowners in that area agree to participate in a noxious weed
management program.

***Nuisance***: An offensive, annoying, unpleasant, or obnoxious thing
or practice; a cause or source of annoyance, especially a continuing or
repeated invasion or disturbance of another\'s right, or anything that
works a hurt, inconvenience, or damage. Nuisances are commonly
classified as public, private, or mixed.

***Nutrients***: Elements or compounds essential as raw materials for
organism growth and development, such as carbon, nitrogen, and
phosphorus.

***Pesticides***: Chemicals, including herbicides, insecticides,
fungicides, nematicides, and rodenticides, used by farmers to control
plant and animal pests, to regulate plant growth, or to simplify
harvest.

***Point source pollution***: As defined by the Clean Water Act, a
source of pollution from \"any discernable, confined and discrete
conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel,
tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container rolling stock,
concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel or other floating
craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged.\"

***Pollutant***: Dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue,
sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological
materials, radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment,
rock, sand, cellar dirt, and industrial, municipal, and agricultural
waste discharged into water.

***Prescribed burning***: Controlled application of fire to wild‑land
fuels in either their natural or modified state, under such conditions
of weather, fuel moisture, and soil moisture as allow the fire to be
confined to a predetermined area and at the same time to produce the
intensity of heat and rate of spread required to further planned
objectives of silviculture, wildlife management, grazing, and fire
hazard reduction.

***Return flow***: That portion of the water diverted from a stream that
finds its way back to the stream channel either as surface or
underground flow.

***Right-to-Farm***: Protection from nuisance suits for existing
agricultural operations, so long as the agricultural operations meet
specific requirements. Generally, an operation is required to have been
in existence before the change in the area which resulted in the
nuisance suit (the farmer/rancher was there first), and the nuisance
must not have been created by the producer\'s actions.

***Rill erosion***: Erosion which leads to the land becoming scoured and
soil removed so that small channels, or rills, remain.

***Riparian rights***: Legal water rights to banks, beds, or waters of a
person owning land containing or bordering on a water course or other
body of water.

***Runoff***: That part of precipitation, snow melt, or irrigation water
that runs off the land into streams or other surface water. It can carry
pollutants from the air and land into the receiving waters.

***Sediment***: The product of erosion processes; the solid material,
both mineral and organic, that is in suspension, is being transported,
or has been moved from its site of origin by air, water, gravity, or
ice.

***Seepage***: Water escaping through or emerging from the ground along
an extensive line or surface as contrasted with a spring, where the
water emerges from a localized spot.

***Sheet erosion***: Erosion which leads to a generally uniform removal
of topsoil over all of a field as a result of strong rains.

***Soil***: A dynamic natural body composed of mineral and organic
materials and living forms in which plants grow on the surface of the
earth. In the U.S. there are about 70,000 kinds of soil recognized in a
nationwide system of soil classification.

***Soil Conservation District***: A legal subdivision of state
government, with a locally-elected governing body, responsible for
developing and carrying out a program of soil and water conservation
within a geographic boundary usually coinciding with county lines. The
nearly 3,000 districts (also called soil and water conservation
districts, natural resources districts, resource conservation districts,
resources districts, and conservation districts) provide assistance to
producers and landowners.

***Solid waste***: Generally, any garbage, refuse, sludge from a waste
supply treatment plant or air pollution control facility, and other
discarded material.

***Surface water***: All water whose surface is exposed to the
atmosphere.

***Underground storage tank***: Any one of a combination of tanks,
including connected underground pipes, which is used to contain an
accumulation of regulated substances, and the underground volume is 10
percent or more.

***Vegetated buffer***: Strips of vegetation separating a water-body
from a land use that could act as a non-point pollution source.
Vegetated buffers are variable in width and can range in function from
vegetated filter strips to wetlands or riparian areas.

***Vegetated filter strip***: Created areas of vegetation designed to
remove sediment and other pollutants from surface water runoff by
filtration, deposition, infiltration, adsorption, decomposition, and
volatilization. A vegetated filter strip is an area that maintains soil
aeration, in contrast to a wetland, which at times exhibits anaerobic
soil conditions.

***Vegetative cover***: Trees or perennial grasses, legumes, or shrubs
with an expected life-span of five years or more.

***Waste***: Material that has no original value or no value for the
ordinary or main purpose of manufacture or use; damaged or defective
articles of manufacture; a superfluous or rejected matter or refuse.

***Watershed***: A drainage area or basin in which all land and water
areas drain or flow toward a central collector such as a stream, river,
or lake at a lower elevation. The United States is generally divided
into 18 major drainage areas and 160 principal river drainage basins
containing some 12,700 smaller watersheds.

***Waterway***: A natural or artificially constructed course for the
concentrated flow of water.

***Wetlands***: Land that is characterized by an abundance of moisture
and that is inundated by surface or groundwater often enough to support
a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions.

***Zoning***: The division of an area by legislative regulation into
districts and the prescription and application in each district of
regulations having to do with structural and architectural designs of
buildings and of regulations prescribing uses to which buildings within
designated districts may be put.

[^1]:
    > ^?^ 33 U.S.C. \' 1251 *et seq.* (1994).

[^2]:
    > ^?^ 40 C.F.R. \' 122.23, app. B to pt. 122 (1996).

[^3]:
    > ^?^ 33 U.S.C. \' 1344 (1994).

[^4]:
    > ^?^ 61 Fed. Reg. 65874 (1996).

[^5]:
    > ^?^ 33 C.F.R. \' 323.4 (1996).

[^6]:
    > ^?^ Congress re-authorized CZMA in 1996 with no changes as CZARA.
    > Administrative changes, however, were made in 1998 to provide
    > flexibility for the states in targeting non-point pollution
    > sources and allowing them to exclude sources which are not
    > significant contributors to pollution.

[^7]:
    > ^?^ State CNPC programs must be approved by both NOAA and EPA and
    > implemented through 1) changes to the state's non-point source
    > program approved by EPA under Section 319 of the CWA and 2)
    > changes to the state CZM program approved by NOAA under Section
    > 306 of CZMA. States that fail to submit an approvable CNPC program
    > face statutory reductions in federal funds awarded under both
    > Section 306 of CZMA and Section 319 of CWA. States should
    > coordinate their coastal non-point pollution program with their
    > statewide non-point pollution program in order to focus technical
    > and financial assistance in priority watersheds.

[^8]:
    > ^?^ EPA and NOAA have proposed an administrative change that would
    > require the states to submit 5-year implementation plans for
    > controlling non-point source pollution for coastal areas
    > (including mechanisms for tracking and monitoring) within an
    > overall 15-year program strategy. This replaces the current
    > 30-month approval phase and the 3-year implementation phase. The
    > goal is to ensure improvement of all coastal zone water quality
    > within 15 years.

[^9]:
    > ^?^ Section 6217(g) of CZARA.

[^10]:
    > ^?^ The EPA guidance manual sets forth 56 management measures for
    > the five leading sources of non-point pollution that states must
    > implement on all applicable land uses within the coastal boundary.

[^11]:
    > ^?^ The five leading sources are identified as: agriculture
    > runoff, urban runoff, silvicultural (forestry) runoff, marinas and
    > recreational boating, and hydromodification (stream
    > channelization, channel modification, dams, streambank erosion,
    > and shoreline erosion).

[^12]:
    > ^?^ EPA's manual discussion of management measures is informative
    > and may be beneficial to farmers who are striving to adopt or
    > implement mandatory management measures. A few examples of the
    > kinds of management practices that are discussed are as follows:
    > conservation tillage, contour strip cropping, sediment retention
    > ponds, water and sediment control basins, grassed waterways,
    > delayed seed bed preparation, filter strips, crop residue use, and
    > a number of other practices.

[^13]:
    > ^?^ [Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
    > Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Non-point
    > Pollution in Coastal Waters]{.smallcaps} (1993).

[^14]:
    > ^?^ 42 U.S.C. \' 300g-1 *et seq.* (1996).

[^15]:
    > ^?^ EPA classifies underground injection wells based upon the type
    > and source of the injected fluid and the location of the fluid
    > relative to the lowermost USDW. EPA sets forth five classes of
    > injection wells: Class I wells contain fluids which include
    > industrial, municipal, or hazardous wastes located beneath the
    > geological stratum containing any USDW within 1/4 mile of the
    > well; Class II wells contain fluids which are non-hazardous fluids
    > produced in connection with oil and gas production; Class III
    > wells contain fluids which are used in the solution mining of
    > minerals; Class IV wells contain fluids which are hazardous or
    > radioactive wastes in or above the geological strata that contains
    > a drinking water source within 1/4 mile of the well; Class V wells
    > contain fluids other than those identified Classes I-IV including
    > air conditioning return flow wells, cooling water return flow
    > wells, drainage wells (including agricultural and stormwater
    > drainage wells), aquifer recharge wells, and sand backfill wells.

[^16]:
    > ^?^ Contaminants from underground injection wells can also pollute
    > private sources of drinking water that could adversely affect
    > farmers, ranchers, and their families that rely on their own well
    > for drinking water.

[^17]:
    > ^?^ Some states have additional guidelines for addressing
    > groundwater contamination by agricultural drainage wells. Farmers
    > and ranchers are urged to check their state laws regarding such
    > wells.

[^18]:
    > ^?^ 42 U.S.C. \' 7401 *et seq.* (1994).

[^19]:
    > ^?^ 42 U.S.C. \' 6901 *et seq.* (1994).

[^20]:
    > ^?^ 42 U.S.C. \' 6991 *et seq.* (1994).

[^21]:
    > ^?^ 42 U.S.C. \' 9601 *et seq.* (1994).

[^22]:
    > ^?^ 15 U.S.C. \' 2601 *et seq.* (1994).

[^23]:
    > ^?^ 42 U.S.C. \' 11001 *et seq.* (1994).

[^24]:
    > ^?^ 7 U.S.C. \' 136 *et seq.* (1994).

[^25]:
    > ^?^ Pesticides classified under FIFRA for restricted-use are
    > listed at 40 C.F.R. \' 152.175 (1996).

[^26]:
    > ^?^ 40 C.F.R. Part. 165 (1996).

[^27]:
    > ^?^ 40 C.F.R. Part. 273 (1996). This rule addresses widely
    > generated, low risk hazardous wastes that are frequently generated
    > by a vast community, other than the industrial community usually
    > associated with the generation of hazardous wastes, in sufficient
    > quantities to cause difficulties in managing the waste properly
    > for the regulated community and the regulators; the idea is to
    > separate these wastes from the municipal solid waste stream and
    > ensure proper waste management as well as to expand and facilitate
    > the collection of such universal wastes; examples of universal
    > wastes include batteries, pesticides, thermostats, and lamps.

[^28]:
    > ^?^ 16 U.S.C. \' 1531 *et seq.* (1994).

[^29]:
    > ^?^ 857 F.2d 1324 (9th Cir. 1988), *cert. denied* 490 U.S. 1114
    > (1989).

[^30]:
    > ^?^ 16 U.S.C. \' 703 *et seq.* (1994).

[^31]:
    > ^?^ *See* United States v. Van Fossan, 899 F.2d 636 (7th Cir.
    > 1990) *and* United States v. Rollins, 706 F. Supp. 742
    >
    > (D.C. Idaho 1989).

[^32]:
    > ^?^ Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform (FAIR) Act of 1996,
    > P.L. 104-127.

[^33]:
    > ^?^ Conservation Reserve Program-Long Term Policy, 61 Fed. Reg.
    > 49697-01 (1996) (to be codified at 7 C.F.R. pt. 704 and pt. 1410)
    > (proposed Sep. 23, 1996).

[^34]:
    > ^?^ The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), a leading national
    > NY‑based nonprofit organization, represents 300,000 members. EDF
    > links science, economics, and law to create innovative, equitable,
    > and economically viable solutions to today\'s environmental
    > problems.

[^35]:
    > ^?^ One of the benefits of Enhancement Programs is that states can
    > develop coordinated efforts to combine multiple programs to
    > address a specific problem comprehensively.

[^36]:
    > ^?^ Generally, the state must contribute 20% or more of the
    > federal amount contributed. The state contribution is supported by
    > other state programs including the Clean Water Management Trust
    > Fund, the Agriculture Cost Share Program and the Wetlands
    > Restoration Program. The Agriculture Cost Share Program funds
    > technical assistance and cost share funds for farmers to implement
    > BMP to reduce non-point source pollution. BMP include erosion
    > control practices and livestock exclusions from streams, stream
    > crossings, and animal waste lagoons.

[^37]:
    > ^?^ Under CRP, USDA pays 50 percent of the cost of restoring
    > vegetation or restoring natural flows of water to the land and 75
    > percent of restoring hydrology to wetlands.

[^38]:
    > ^?^ Wetlands Reserve Program, 61 Fed. Reg. 42137 (1996) (to be
    > codified at 7 C.F.R. pt. 620 and pt. 1467).

[^39]:
    > ^?^ 62 Fed. Reg. 28258 (1997) (to be codified at 7 C.F.R. pt.
    > 1466).

[^40]:
    > ^?^ [Natural Resources Conservation Service, Interagency Wetlands
    > Memorandum of Agreement]{.smallcaps} (1994). NRCS has the primary
    > responsibility within USDA for interagency coordination.

[^41]:
    > ^?^ Part of the 1996 Farm Bill policy shift from
    > government-supported to market-supported farm policy described in
    > Title 1 as the Agriculture Market Transition Agreement (AMTA)
    > section.

[^42]:
    > ^?^ Producers must agree to comply with highly erodible land (HEL)
    > provisions, Swampbuster requirements, and planting flexibility
    > requirements plus refrain from any use of the contracted land in
    > non-agricultural commercial or industrial use.

[^43]:
    > ^?^ The Secretary of Agriculture also has discretion to include in
    > the 95 percent payment calculation any projected crop insurance
    > payments.

[^44]:
    > ^?^ NRCS in Maine, in cooperation with other partners, removed a
    > dam on the Soudabscook River in 1998 providing Atlantic salmon,
    > river herring, sea run trout, and alewives access to a 160 square
    > mile watershed. Removal of the dam reduced flooding to homes on
    > the river and created more sport fishermen interest and use of the
    > area. This dam removal project was important to Maine where
    > tourism is a major source of income.