EPA classifies milk as oil, forcing costly rules on farmers
Monica Scott The Grand Rapids Press
Update: State Senate calls for EPA to change rule classifying cow’s milk as oil
GRAND RAPIDS — Having watched the oil gushing in the Gulf of Mexico, dairy farmer Frank Konkel has a hard time seeing how spilled milk can be labeled the same kind of environmental hazard.
But the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is classifying milk as oil because it contains a percentage of animal fat, which is a non-petroleum oil.
The Hesperia farmer and others would be required to develop and implement spill prevention plans for milk storage tanks. The rules are set to take effect in November, though that date might be pushed back.
“That could get expensive quickly,” Konkel said. “We have a serious problem in the Gulf. Milk is a wholesome product that does not equate to spilling oil.”
But last week environmentalists disagreed at a Senate committee hearing on a resolution from Sen. Wayne Kuipers, R-Holland, calling for the EPA to rescind its ruling.
“The federal Clean Water Act requirements were meant to protect the environment from petroleum-based oils, not milk,” he said. “I think it is an example of federal government gone amuck.”
But Gayle Miller, legislative director of Sierra Club Michigan Chapter, said agricultural pollution probably is the nation’s most severe chronic problem when it comes to water pollution.
“Milk is wholesome in a child’s body. It is devastating in a waterway,” Miller said. “The fact that it’s biodegradable is irrelevant if people die as a result of cryptosporidium, beaches close for E. coli and fish are killed.”
…
Also, the International Dairy Foods Association said it has learned the EPA will exempt the industry from the rule. But state lawmakers say they won’t let up until that is official.
…
“This is an example of where we have overreach by the department that defies common sense,” said Matt Smego, legislative counsel for Michigan Farm Bureau.
Smego said its an unnecessary regulatory burden that creates additional costs. He said it could cost $2,500 for a certified engineer to safeguard milk, plus more to construct secondary containment structures.
…
“The federal government has gotten out touch what’s going on in rural America,” said Konkel. “This is our livelihood.””
More at http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2010/06/epa_classifies_milk_as_oil_for.html
The EPA should push for legislation banning the unregulated transport, and interstate transport of unhomogenized or unpasteurized milk in containers exceding 38DD.
First order of business is to set up inspection stations along major thoroughfares…
Elizabeth says:
June 25, 2010 at 9:14 am “Most people understand that ‘natural’ water must be boiled to be sterilized for drinking.”
Just a bit of nit picking- water is disinfected before meeting potable standards not sterilized. (A matter of degree- disinfection does not cause a complete kill). Crypto forms tough little spores that are resistant to chlorine and are best removed by filtration. Because of crypto spores EPA requires all surface water drinking water supplies (except NYC) or wells subject to surface water influence to be filtered. As such Sierra Club’s comments are inane. Crypto is also known as beaver fever- given this animal is known to be a crypto vector— where is the Sierra Club initiative to get rid of the beavers?
Matt: June 25, 2010 at 1:17 am
I know this isn’t the popular thing to do, but how about having a look at the actual regulation than reading some FUD news article: http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/docs/oil/spcc/spccfarms.pdf
And the “animal fat” wording in the actual regulation has been ruled — *by the EPA* — as applying to milk. If the article was just about an internet interpretation, I’d agree with you, but it’s a full-fledged EPA ruling, genuine news, complete with a hearing before a Senate committee and typical commentary during the hearing from the eco-know-nothings.
I’m glad the EPA will protect us from industries planning to drill for milk in the gulf. This is the kind of pro-active work we really appreciate from our public servants. 😉
There is A SOLUTION:
Health and human rights
WHO Constitution: “the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being…”
SO….we are obliged to make possible that all this nuts could ” enjoy the highest attainable standard of health, as this is one of the fundamental rights of every human being…”
THEN, call the closest lunatic asylum, get your local environnuts and provide them “the highest attainable standard of health”, after providing and dress them with straightjackets.
http://www.who.int/hhr/en/
Think a lobotomy would work or….rather propofol?
Somebody trying to manipulate the dairy market????
http://news.morningstar.com/newsnet/ViewNews.aspx?article=/DJ/201006251416DOWJONESDJONLINE000572_univ.xml
In a quick search, I could find three main causes of E.coli closing beaches in Michigan: overwhelmed storm drains, comprised sewer mains and septic systems, and sea gull poop. I could not find a single instance of milk spillage causing a problem to a body of water in Michigan.
I lived in Grand Haven, Michigan for 11 years. Everyone knew not to go swimming on the beaches next to the Grand River after a rainstorm, unless you wanted to end up with a severe case of River Rash.
While the EPA is fixing the non-problem of milk spills, what are they doing about the real problems, like sewage discharge?
This is a perfect example of the hazards of allowing the bean-counters to define exactly what constitutes a bean. Since many (if not most) of the current controls on our lives are now via “regulation” rather than by “laws,” the citizens at large need to keep a much closer eye on the regulators.
Bill –
Right, in the terms of the SPCC (Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure) program, yes, milk as an animal fat is treated the same as oil, because its effects on a waterway or lake would be similar (causing anaerobic conditions, etc). But this isn’t about the EPA crying over a glass of farmer’s spilled milk – its about asking farmers (and industry) to have a spill prevention plan in place if they have oil (milk, vegetable oil, etc) storage between 1320 and 10,000 gallons, or a PE certified plan if they have more than 10,000 gallons oil storage. And its not even ALL farmers, its only farmers who are position where they ‘could reasonably be expected to discharge oil to waters of the US.’
Classifying milk as oil is a simple classification in the same way Pluto is technically no longer classified as planet. In what the SPCC is trying to accomplish, it makes sense to classify milk in the same category as oil, given its similar environmental effects on waterways, and similar storage and containment methods.
With the constant stream of regulations being issued from Washington, is it any surprise that the unemployment rate has not come down. They are literally strangling all of the small businesspeople I know, the dry cleaners, contractors and doctors. Of course they are now after dairy farmers, we all know how evil the hardworking, productive independent farmers are to socialists everywhere. One would think that it is a conspiracy to allow the government to control almost everything and have big business control the rest- the two seem to be partners at this point in time. I do not think that the Obama administration cares at all about unemployment, if they keep people on unemployment compensation they have control over them.
Sumdood says:
June 25, 2010 at 12:31 pm
With the constant stream of regulations being issued from Washington, is it any surprise that the unemployment rate has not come down. [–snip–] I do not think that the Obama administration cares at all about unemployment, if they keep people on unemployment compensation they have control over them.
It thought that’s what the WHOLE GAME PLAN was, when people elected that jerk to office.
Are you telling me that’s not what they had in mind?
Milke spilled into waterways is a major pollutant. The problem is that being organic it causes a wide range of algae and bacteria to “bloom” and this,in turn, poisons fish, amphibians and sometimes even humans. As a now retired fire officer I can assure readers that it is a very serious problem, but then, so is the NH4NO3 that is used to fertise agricultural land and is leeching into water systems, again noursihing all “the wrong kinds” of algae and water plants, choking waterways…
We better not get started on the problems that arise when a farmers “organic” fertiser pile leeches fluids, bacteria and even nutrients into the ground water and then into the water supply. Your EPA may be run, as the EPA in the UK is, by “managers” who are unqualified and theorists who have no practical knowledge of the real world. They are certainly showing all the signs of following an agenda set by some polictican who follows the mantra “Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up!”
Matt: June 25, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Right, in the terms of the SPCC (Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure) program, yes, milk as an animal fat is treated the same as oil, because its effects on a waterway or lake would be similar (causing anaerobic conditions, etc).
No, it wouldn’t — milk is mostly *water*, with a small percentage of butterfat and solids. The EPA has classified it *as* an animal fat, not a liquid containing a small percentage of animal fat. Milk mixes readily with water and disperses — the solids settle out and the butterfat breaks down into minute globules.
But this isn’t about the EPA crying over a glass of farmer’s spilled milk – its about asking farmers (and industry) to have a spill prevention plan in place if they have oil (milk, vegetable oil, etc) storage between 1320 and 10,000 gallons, or a PE certified plan if they have more than 10,000 gallons oil storage. And its not even ALL farmers, its only farmers who are position where they ‘could reasonably be expected to discharge oil to waters of the US.’
According to the EPA, “waters of the US” includes anything from the Mississippi River all the way down to a seasonal stream, or an aquifer underlying the surface, regardless of the distasnce below ground. I’ve *dealt* with these idiots before, and they are nowhere as reasonable as you make them sound.
Matt, you are a reasonable man, making a reasonable man’s interpretation of the regulation. Problem is, the EPA hierarchy isn’t composed of reasonable people — they have an agenda, and they’ll put the most twisted, convoluted interpretation possible to *any* regulation in order to make it fit.
Classifying milk as oil is a simple classification in the same way Pluto is technically no longer classified as planet. In what the SPCC is trying to accomplish, it makes sense to classify milk in the same category as oil, given its similar environmental effects on waterways, and similar storage and containment methods.
Twitchy “post” thumb.
Classifying milk as oil is a simple classification in the same way Pluto is technically no longer classified as planet. In what the SPCC is trying to accomplish, it makes sense to classify milk in the same category as oil, given its similar environmental effects on waterways, and similar storage and containment methods.
Putting milk into the same category as oil makes as much sense as putting carbon dioxide into the same category as carbon monoxide. The environmental effects of a 10,000 gallon milk spill on land or in water are orders of magnitude less than the environmental effects of a 10,000 gallon oil spill on land or in water.
Cheaper to clean up, too…
BTW, I’m in agreement with the need for a containment plan for large *petroleum* storage tanks. However, a four-foot rammed-earth berm surrounding the storage tank is all anyone needs to construct, and that’s only a morning’s work with a Bobcat. I’d be surprised that any farmer with a 10,000 gallon oil tank wouldn’t already have one in place.
Putting milk into the same category as oil makes as much sense as putting carbon dioxide into the same category as carbon monoxide. The environmental effects of a 10,000 gallon milk spill on land or in water are orders of magnitude less than the environmental effects of a 10,000 gallon oil spill on land or in water.
I’m glad we agree then! Carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide are both deadly to animals when present in sufficient quantities 😉
Anyway, the reason oil, milk, animal fat, vegetable oil, etc are considered harmful for waterways is because when present in large quantities, the bacteria that metabolize the energy in these substances simultaneously deplete the surrounding water of oxygen, killing any other living animals that happen to be there. Those are the facts. That is why regulations need to be in place.
The Deepwater Horizon event has demonstrated the need for strong regulations. But this is one of those areas where you lose either way on the PR side… try to implement regulations – people complain; when an accident happens that could have been prevented by stronger regulations – people complain.
Hundreds of starving third world kids , no doubt, would gladly receive a few drops of such milk spillages
That’s perhaps the consequence of an exaggeration of democracy. Not everyone is ethically qualified for important responsabilities.
Government and common sense don’t go together.
I live in Wisconsin, and we have some pretty strict rules about septic systems.
We must pay contractors to have our septic systems inspected every three years, and we must pay an administration fee as well.
Part of this fee is supposedly to help someone who can’t afford to have their septic system repaired.
Getting information on how these fees are actually used is just about impossible.
Of course it doesn’t matter if the house with the septic system has ten occupants or one, or what size the septic system is, they must be inspected every three years.
This is all needed of course because of the slim possibility that someone could actually continue to live in a house whose septic system doesn’t work, and that the septic system would be close enough to a river, stream or lake to contaminate it.
I’ve never heard of a septic system contaminating our water, but every few years we hear about a government run sewage system accidentally dumping millions of gallons of raw sewage into one of our lakes, with apparently no punishment since it was an “accident”.
We are required to have low flow faucets and toilets to save water, not because there is any shortage of water in Wisconsin, but because some of the cities are overdrawing their local aquifers or don’t want to spend to expand their surface water treatment plants.
I have a well, and all the water I use goes back into the ground through the septic system, none is wasted, a low flow faucet and toilet are simply not necessary.
Yet for some reason farmers can waste massive amounts of water for irrigation that mostly evaporates away.
tpb says:
June 25, 2010 at 2:40 pm
“Yet for some reason farmers can waste massive amounts of water for irrigation that mostly evaporates away.”
Farmers have the Dept of Agriculture to protect their interests– you have no one.
John Q Public said
I’m not American so forgive me for not understanding what’s going on, but is the EPA and the Obama Administration as nutty as it seems to be? Or, is this media spin? It’s sounds like they’re both doing their best to destabilize America. What’s going on?
I’m not sure that being or not being an American has anything to do with not understanding the wackiness of the Obama Administration. Remember the Obama is the darling of the media spin-meisters, so what we’re seeing is has been normalized for public consumption.
has anybody told the cows yet, when you tell them make shure you are on the other side of the fence
Pat Moffitt says:
June 25, 2010 at 10:44 am, “Just a bit of nit picking- water is disinfected before meeting potable standards not sterilized. (A matter of degree- disinfection does not cause a complete kill). Crypto forms tough little spores that are resistant to chlorine and are best removed by filtration.”
Actually, boiling water is the only effective way to kill cryptosporidium, as it it highly resistant to chlorine and filtration is only as successful as the filter being used. Also, beaver fever (giardiasis) is caused by a different organism, g. lamblia.
That said, I competely agree with your statement that the Sierra Club’s comments are completely inane. Perhaps we should eradicate the beavers and bovines..?
Once, a Minister from the Northern Territory Government introduced me as guest speaker to a few hundred mining people. He said I ” …. was a miner so mean that I would demand a bacterial count on the milk of human kindness.”
But in the Top End, we take that as a compliment.