HF 1243

2nd Engrossment - 82nd Legislature (2001 - 2002) Posted on 12/15/2009 12:00am

  1.1                          A bill for an act 
  1.2             relating to agriculture; establishing a feedlot 
  1.3             specialist program; providing funding; appropriating 
  1.4             money; amending Minnesota Statutes 2000, section 
  1.5             116.07, subdivision 7; proposing coding for new law in 
  1.6             Minnesota Statutes, chapter 17.  
  1.7   BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 
  1.8      Section 1.  [17.131] [FEEDLOT PERMIT SPECIALIST PROGRAM.] 
  1.9      Subdivision 1.  [PURPOSE.] The feedlot specialist program 
  1.10  is primarily, but not exclusively, intended to assist operators 
  1.11  proposing to permit a feedlot with a capacity of under 500 
  1.12  animal units.  
  1.13     Subd. 2.  [SPECIALISTS; DUTIES, ASSIGNMENT.] (a) The 
  1.14  commissioner shall employ or contract for feedlot permit 
  1.15  specialists to support operators of small and medium sized farms 
  1.16  that wish to develop or expand animal agriculture operations in 
  1.17  the state.  The support must include review of draft business 
  1.18  plans; assistance with preparing and submitting applications for 
  1.19  any necessary local or state permits; support before and during 
  1.20  any public hearings; and advocacy during any permit appeals. 
  1.21     (b) Farm operators may apply to the commissioner for the 
  1.22  services of a feedlot permit specialist.  The application must 
  1.23  include reasonable details on the existing farm operation and a 
  1.24  business plan related to the development or expansion of the 
  1.25  proposed livestock operation.  From the information submitted, 
  1.26  the commissioner shall determine the applicant's eligibility and 
  2.1   whether or not to grant the request for a specialist.  An 
  2.2   applicant whose request is declined may reapply after six months.
  2.3      (c) If the request for the services of a specialist is 
  2.4   granted, the commissioner shall appoint a specialist qualified 
  2.5   to assist the applicant based on the type of livestock proposed 
  2.6   in the plan, the geographic area of the state, and other factors 
  2.7   determined by the commissioner. 
  2.8      (d) A specialist appointed by the commissioner shall have 
  2.9   primary responsibility for assisting the applicant throughout a 
  2.10  given permit process.  The specialist may work with other 
  2.11  specialists to provide optimal service to the applicant. 
  2.12     Sec. 2.  Minnesota Statutes 2000, section 116.07, 
  2.13  subdivision 7, is amended to read: 
  2.14     Subd. 7.  [COUNTIES; PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR ANIMAL 
  2.15  LOT PERMITS.] Any Minnesota county board may, by resolution, 
  2.16  with approval of the pollution control agency, assume 
  2.17  responsibility for processing applications for permits required 
  2.18  by the pollution control agency under this section for livestock 
  2.19  feedlots, poultry lots, or other animal lots.  The 
  2.20  responsibility for permit application processing, if assumed by 
  2.21  a county, may be delegated by the county board to any an 
  2.22  appropriate county officer or employee, an appropriate officer 
  2.23  or employee of a contiguous county, an appropriate employee of 
  2.24  another governmental unit, or a qualified employee of an 
  2.25  institution of higher education.  
  2.26     (a) For the purposes of this subdivision, the term 
  2.27  "processing" includes: 
  2.28     (1) the distribution to applicants of forms provided by the 
  2.29  pollution control agency; 
  2.30     (2) the receipt and examination of completed application 
  2.31  forms, and the certification, in writing, to the pollution 
  2.32  control agency either that the animal lot facility for which a 
  2.33  permit is sought by an applicant will comply with applicable 
  2.34  rules and standards, or, if the facility will not comply, the 
  2.35  respects in which a variance would be required for the issuance 
  2.36  of a permit; and 
  3.1      (3) rendering in cooperation with the commissioner of 
  3.2   agriculture, providing to applicants, upon request and at no 
  3.3   cost if the applicant is proposing a feedlot with a capacity of 
  3.4   under 500 animal units, the services of a feedlot permit 
  3.5   specialist to provide assistance necessary for the proper and 
  3.6   timely completion of an application the permit process, 
  3.7   including assistance with local and state applications, public 
  3.8   hearings, and appeals. 
  3.9      (b) For the purposes of this subdivision, the term 
  3.10  "processing" may include, at the option of the county board, 
  3.11  issuing, denying, modifying, imposing conditions upon, or 
  3.12  revoking permits pursuant to the provisions of this section or 
  3.13  rules promulgated pursuant to it, subject to review, suspension, 
  3.14  and reversal by the pollution control agency.  The pollution 
  3.15  control agency shall, after written notification, have 15 days 
  3.16  to review, suspend, modify, or reverse the issuance of the 
  3.17  permit.  After this period, the action of the county board is 
  3.18  final, subject to appeal as provided in chapter 14.  For permit 
  3.19  applications filed after October 1, 2001, section 15.99 applies 
  3.20  to feedlot permits issued by the agency or a county pursuant to 
  3.21  this subdivision. 
  3.22     (c) For the purpose of administration of rules adopted 
  3.23  under this subdivision, the commissioner and the agency may 
  3.24  provide exceptions for cases where the owner of a feedlot has 
  3.25  specific written plans to close the feedlot within five years.  
  3.26  These exceptions include waiving requirements for major capital 
  3.27  improvements. 
  3.28     (d) For purposes of this subdivision, a discharge caused by 
  3.29  an extraordinary natural event such as a precipitation event of 
  3.30  greater magnitude than the 25-year, 24-hour event, tornado, or 
  3.31  flood in excess of the 100-year flood is not a "direct discharge 
  3.32  of pollutants." 
  3.33     (e) In adopting and enforcing rules under this subdivision, 
  3.34  the commissioner shall cooperate closely with other governmental 
  3.35  agencies. 
  3.36     (f) The pollution control agency shall work with the 
  4.1   Minnesota extension service, the department of agriculture, the 
  4.2   board of water and soil resources, producer groups, local units 
  4.3   of government, as well as with appropriate federal agencies such 
  4.4   as the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Farm 
  4.5   Service Agency, to notify and educate producers of rules under 
  4.6   this subdivision at the time the rules are being developed and 
  4.7   adopted and at least every two years thereafter. 
  4.8      (g) The pollution control agency shall adopt rules 
  4.9   governing the issuance and denial of permits for livestock 
  4.10  feedlots, poultry lots or other animal lots pursuant to this 
  4.11  section.  A feedlot permit is not required for livestock 
  4.12  feedlots with more than ten but less than 50 animal units; 
  4.13  provided they are not in shoreland areas.  A livestock feedlot 
  4.14  permit does not become required solely because of a change in 
  4.15  the ownership of the buildings, grounds, or feedlot.  These 
  4.16  rules apply both to permits issued by counties and to permits 
  4.17  issued by the pollution control agency directly.  
  4.18     (h) The pollution control agency shall exercise supervising 
  4.19  authority with respect to the processing of animal lot permit 
  4.20  applications by a county. 
  4.21     (i) Any new rules or amendments to existing rules proposed 
  4.22  under the authority granted in this subdivision, or to implement 
  4.23  new fees on animal feedlots, must be submitted to the members of 
  4.24  legislative policy and finance committees with jurisdiction over 
  4.25  agriculture and the environment prior to final adoption.  The 
  4.26  rules must not become effective until 90 days after the proposed 
  4.27  rules are submitted to the members.  
  4.28     (j) Until new rules are adopted that provide for plans for 
  4.29  manure storage structures, any plans for a liquid manure storage 
  4.30  structure must be prepared or approved by a registered 
  4.31  professional engineer or a United States Department of 
  4.32  Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service employee. 
  4.33     (k) A county may adopt by ordinance standards for animal 
  4.34  feedlots that are more stringent than standards in pollution 
  4.35  control agency rules. 
  4.36     (l) After January 1, 2001, a county that has not accepted 
  5.1   delegation of the feedlot permit program must hold a public 
  5.2   meeting prior to the agency issuing a feedlot permit for a 
  5.3   feedlot facility with 300 or more animal units, unless another 
  5.4   public meeting has been held with regard to the feedlot facility 
  5.5   to be permitted. 
  5.6      (m) After the proposed rules published in the State 
  5.7   Register, volume 24, number 25, are finally adopted, the agency 
  5.8   may not impose additional conditions as a part of a feedlot 
  5.9   permit, unless specifically required by law or agreed to by the 
  5.10  feedlot operator. 
  5.11     (n) For the purposes of feedlot permitting, a discharge 
  5.12  from land-applied manure or a manure stockpile that is managed 
  5.13  according to agency rule must not be subject to a fine for a 
  5.14  discharge violation.  
  5.15     (o) For the purposes of feedlot permitting, manure that is 
  5.16  land applied, or a manure stockpile that is managed according to 
  5.17  agency rule, must not be considered a discharge into waters of 
  5.18  the state, unless the discharge is to waters of the state, as 
  5.19  defined by section 103G.005, subdivision 17, except type 1 or 
  5.20  type 2 wetlands, as defined in section 103G.005, subdivision 
  5.21  17b, and does not meet discharge standards established for 
  5.22  feedlots under agency rule. 
  5.23     (p) Unless the upgrade is needed to correct an immediate 
  5.24  public health threat under section 145A.04, subdivision 8, the 
  5.25  agency may not require a feedlot operator: 
  5.26     (1) to spend more than $3,000 in total operator cost to 
  5.27  upgrade an existing feedlot with less than 300 animal units 
  5.28  unless cost-share money is available to the feedlot operator for 
  5.29  75 percent of the cost of the upgrade; or 
  5.30     (2) to spend more than $10,000 in total operator cost to 
  5.31  upgrade an existing feedlot with between 300 and 500 animal 
  5.32  units, unless cost-share money is available to the feedlot 
  5.33  operator for 75 percent of the cost of the upgrade or $50,000, 
  5.34  whichever is less. 
  5.35     Sec. 3.  [APPROPRIATION; FEEDLOT PERMIT SPECIALISTS.] 
  5.36     $500,000 in fiscal year 2002 and $500,000 in fiscal year 
  6.1   2003 are appropriated from the general fund to the commissioner 
  6.2   of agriculture to fund the feedlot permit specialist program. 
  6.3      Sec. 4.  [APPROPRIATION; STAFF FOR FEEDLOT DELEGATED 
  6.4   COUNTIES.] 
  6.5      $....... in fiscal year 2002 and $....... in fiscal year 
  6.6   2003 are appropriated from the general fund to the commissioner 
  6.7   of the pollution control agency for grants to feedlot delegated 
  6.8   counties to compensate for direct and actual costs of the county 
  6.9   feedlot officers while performing duties related to permitting 
  6.10  animal feedlots.