(C) Wisconsin Watch This story was originally published by Wisconsin Watch and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Iowa environmental groups ask EPA to protect drinking water from agricultural runoff [1] ['Doapp', 'Erin Jordan', 'Brittney J. Miller', 'Vanessa Miller', 'Caleb Mccullough', 'Gazette-Lee Des Moines Bureau', 'Jared Strong', 'Iowa Capital Dispatch', 'Todd Dorman', 'Elijah Decious'] Date: 2024-06 Hogs at a Washington County confined animal feeding operation. (Southeast Iowa Union) Iowa environmental groups — inspired by a successful campaign in Minnesota — are asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to step in and protect drinking water in northeast Iowa from agricultural runoff. The petition was announced Tuesday, hours after the Iowa Environmental Protection Commission unanimously approved largely status quo rules governing animal feeding operations. “The Environmental Protection Commission has once again proven who they really serve — not the Iowa public, but big ag polluters,” said Alicia Vasto, water program manager for the Iowa Environmental Council, one of the 13 groups that filed the petition with the EPA Tuesday. The petition asks the EPA to use its emergency authority to intervene in Iowa to “address groundwater contamination that presents an imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of residents in northeastern Iowa.” “The well-documented nitrate contamination of drinking water in the karst region necessitates prompt and decisive EPA emergency action,” the petition states. “Elevated levels of nitrate in drinking water are known to increase the risk of a wide range of very serious health problems …” A 2018 review of 30 academic studies showed a link between ingesting nitrate from drinking water and adult diseases, including colorectal cancer. Other University of Iowa studies show nitrate consumption may cause bladder and ovarian cancer in older women, The Gazette reported last month. Nitrate is found at potentially harmful levels in 1-in-20 Iowa public drinking water systems and in more than 12,000 private wells in Iowa. The petition focuses on Iowa’s Driftless region, where porous karst terrain makes streams and groundwater particularly vulnerable to fertilizer or manure runoff. Just across the state border to the north, the EPA in November told the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to develop a plan for addressing nitrate levels in drinking water sources in southeastern Minnesota. This EPA demand came six months after environmental groups in Minnesota filed a petition comparable to what Iowa groups filed Tuesday. “We’ve seen similar increases in nitrate in drinking water sources just like in Minnesota,” said Michael Schmidt, an attorney for Iowa Environmental Council. “We would expect the EPA to do at least as much in Iowa.” Other groups included on the petition are: Allamakee County Protectors — Education Campaign, Center for Food Safety, Environmental Law & Policy Center, Environmental Working Group, Food & Water Watch, Iowa Alliance for Responsible Agriculture, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, Izaak Walton League of America — Iowa Division, Sierra Club Iowa Chapter, Socially Responsible Agriculture Project, Iowa Coldwater Conservancy, and Trout Unlimited — Iowa Driftless Chapter 717. Iowans ask for tougher rules on CAFOs Before approving revisions to Chapter 65 of Iowa’s Administrative Rules, the Iowa Environmental Protection Commission on Tuesday held a public hearing at which 11 people asked for tougher regulations on how developers build feeding operations and dispose of manure. “Iowa has over 10,000 factory farms that contribute to over 750 impaired waterways,” said Tom Mohan, of Cedar Rapids. “We believe clean water is a human right.” Rich Gradoville, of Johnston, said he recently was diagnosed with bladder cancer and his urologist mentioned the possibility of agricultural pollution in drinking water as a factor. “Since our body deals with all our drinking water through our bladder, that makes sense to me,” Gradoville said. “I’d like to see you strengthen these regulations as much as possible.” Three people representing agricultural groups spoke in favor of the rules. “The Iowa Cattlemen’s Association supports the rules you have before you,” said Eldon McAfee, an attorney with the Brick Gentry law firm and a former dairy farmer. He said the rules protect soil and water without infringing on farmers’ rights. Commission Chair Harold Hommes asked DNR staff whether it was possible to change the proposed rules at Tuesday’s meeting. Staff said any major changes would start the rules review process over again. Karst protections stripped from an early rules draft The DNR’s first version of the Chapter 65 revision last fall included additional requirements for feeding operations in the karst terrain of northeast Iowa. The version released in September said new CAFOs proposed to be built between 5 and 15 feet from karst would have been required to have a 5-foot continuous layer of low-permeability soil, nonsoluble bedrock or a 2-foot synthetic clay liner. However, revisions sent to the EPC in November removed those additional separation requirements after the Governor’s Office told the DNR the proposed revision violated an executive order from Gov. Kim Reynolds that barred more restrictive rules. One change that remained in the final version says the DNR will adopt a 100-year flood plain map so developers will know where feeding operations can’t be built. Timeline of changes to feeding operation rules Sept. 26: Agricultural groups, including the Iowa Cattlemen’s Association, Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, Iowa Pork Producers Association and the North Central Poultry Association ask the Department of Natural Resources to reconsider their previous comments about a proposed revision to Chapter 65 governing animal feeding operations. The DNR had proposed additional requirements for operations in karst terrain. "We remain concerned about the unintended consequences of the new requirements," the groups wrote. Kelli Book, with DNR’s legal services team, forwards these comments to other DNR staff. Oct. 3: Book sends the earlier version of Chapter 65 to DNR General Council and Legal Services Bureau Chief Tamara McIntosh. This version includes new requirements for new feeding operations in karst terrain. Oct. 6: McIntosh sends the stronger version to Nate Ristow, the administrative rules coordinator on Gov. Kim Reynolds’ staff. Nov. 7: Ristow verbally tells DNR Director Kayla Lyon the proposed Chapter 65 would not be approved because it did not comply with Reynolds’ executive order. Nov. 8: McIntosh sends Ristow an updated Chapter 65 that removes additional protections for feeding operations in karst terrain. Nov. 8: Ristow approves this version to move forward with the formal rule making process. Nov. 9: Revised Chapter 65 is included in the Environmental Protection Commission’s packet for rules to consider for approval. Nov. 30: DNR Spokeswoman Tammie Krausman tells The Gazette the earlier draft of Chapter 65 wasn’t moved forward for rule making because “the various stakeholders were unable to come to a consensus within the parameters and time frames required by Executive Order 10.” Dec. 4: Krausman tells The Gazette the Governor’s Office did not approve the earlier draft “because it did not comply with EO 10, III.” Feb. 14 and 19: Public hearings held on Chapter 65. April 16: Environmental Protection Commission unanimously approves Chapter 65 rules, which go into effect in June. Comments: (319) 339-3157; erin.jordan@thegazette.com [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.thegazette.com/environment-nature/iowa-environmental-groups-ask-epa-to-protect-drinking-water-from-agricultural-runoff/ Published and (C) by Wisconsin Watch Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons BY-ND 4.0 Intl. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/wisconsinwatch/