WASHINGTON, D.C.
Methane digester tax credit included in financial plan
As the dust settles from the massive Congressional financial rescue bill, items of interests to the dairy industry are beginning to come to the surface. Western United Dairymen’s legislative advocate in Washington, D.C., Charlie Garrison of The Garrison Group, reports that included in the legislation is what is termed as a tax extenders package, which includes the tax credit for production of electricity from open-loop biomass, including methane digesters. Garrison says the credit is inflation-adjusted and currently is approximately 1-cent-per-kilowatt hour. The Senate bill extends the placed-in-service date for open-loop biomass facilities to qualify for the tax credit to December 31, 2010. Expansions of existing facilities now would specifically qualify as well.

Other significant elements include a one-year Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) patch that would increase the exemption amounts from $44,350 for individuals and $66,250 for jointly-filed couples to $46,200 and $69,950 respectively.

Second, the package contains a series of extenders, including extensions of the tax credits for the production of and investment in energy projects, energy efficiency projects, and the development of new green and carbon-reducing technologies. Specifically, this bill provides extensions of the tax credit for qualified wind facilities through 2009, extensions of the tax credits for closed/open loop biomass, geothermal, solar, small irrigation, municipal solid waste, trash combustion and qualified hydropower through 2011, and extends through 2014 the investment tax credits for solar property, fuel cell property, and micro-turbine property. This bill also allows a new tax credit for investment in qualified new clean renewable energy bonds, it increases the rates for tax credits for biodiesel and renewable diesel, and it creates a new tax credit for the production of plug-in electric vehicles.

—From WUD weekly news update

NEW MEXICO
New Mexico agency proposes to fine dairy $15,000
The New Mexico State Environment Department alleges High Lonesome Dairy failed to install a monitoring well to check groundwater conditions beneath its property, and issued a compliance order and a proposed $15,000 penalty to Eddie Schaap, High Lonesome Dairy owner.

Schaap told the Associated Press he has installed three wells on his property but that he and the agency have not been able to agree on some parameters for the fourth well, including its screen length and location.

Schaap said the agency wanted him to put the well near a feed area and manure lines.

“I’ve been in this business for 22 years and my experience has been that sooner or later somebody is going to hit it and it’s going to get damaged and it’s going to cause groundwater contamination,” he said. “I don’t want to risk that.”

Schaap said he hoped to continue negotiations with the state to resolve the issue.

The Environment Department acknowledged that Schaap installed three of the four wells required, but the order requires him to install the fourth within 30 days. The well is required under a permit for Schaap’s dairy, which lies near several residences that have drinking water wells.

Department Secretary Ron Curry said Schaap agreed to permit terms designed to protect groundwater resources and public health, but failed to live up to them.

State Water Quality Control Commission Regulations require dairy owners to install monitoring wells to detect whether a dairy’s pollution prevention measures protect public health and water quality.

Schaap said samples taken from the wells already completed show that nitrate levels are well below tolerable amounts.

—From AP newswire report

WASHINGTON, D.C.
USDA proposes organic pasture rule
USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is proposing to amend the livestock provisions of the National Organic Program. The revisions are intended to provide greater detail for livestock regulations of pasture and ruminant animals. According to the proposed rule, “By specifying in greater detail that producers are to provide ruminants with pasture, recognize pasture as a crop, and incorporate pasture into their organic system plan, producers will have better records and tools for managing pasture and demonstrating compliance with the livestock regulations. Certifying agents will have better tools for measuring compliance with the livestock regulations. [The] proposed rule would also clarify the replacement animal provision for dairy animals.” Deadline for public comments on the proposed rule is December 23, 2008.

—From USDA report

WISCONSIN
Pollution suit settled over Sheboygan County plant
State Justice Department officials report a settlement of a pollution lawsuit targeting a whey processing plant in Sheboygan County.

The complaint filed against Milk Specialties Co. at the request of the Department of Natural Resources said restrictions on its wastewater discharge permit were violated in July 2007, resulting in pollutant discharges into an Adell tributary of the Milwaukee River over six days.

State lawyers said Thursday that terms of the settlement include payment of $75,000 in penalties and assessments and a $50,000 contribution to the Great Lakes Conservancy for water quality improvement projects in the Milwaukee River’s North Branch watershed.

The company must submit a wastewater treatment capacity assessment and accept modifications to its wastewater permit.

—From AP newswire report

CALIFORNIA
Carcass disposal problem
This group has been meeting on a regular basis since the carcass disposal problem that arose out of the July 2006 heat wave. Internally we call ourselves the “mortality committee” but the real name of the group is the “Emergency Animal Disposal Workgroup”.

The workgroup consists of almost every group with an interest in the issue and there are plenty beside the dairy groups. It operates under the guidance of Dr. Michael Payne (Western Institute for Food Safety and Security) and Bob Holmes (California Integrated Waste Management Board).

It may not surprise readers to learn that the issues are complex and that there are a lot of existing laws and regulations -- each existing for good and understandable reasons – which stand in the way of common sense reactions to emergency situations. But There is light at the end of this tunnel. The group has conducted significant research in the measured and controlled composting of carcasses. They have also pulled together what we hope is a full listing of laws and regulations that apply to this issue and have compiled a list of landfills that do accept carcasses, or are willing to do so in emergencies.

There is no question that it is critical that we have meaningful systems to clear the routine animal carcasses that are part of the livestock industry but also that we have additional procedures and systems in place for the various kinds of likely “emergencies”.

The workgroup is now preparing a White Paper that will describe the situation in this state in a way that will lead to a set of proposed actions (legal and regulatory) that will improve our entire system. This paper will be fully examined by our workgroup and should be ready by the middle of 2009.

—From Alliance of Western Milk Producers weekly update

KANSAS
Kansas mulls tighter labels for milk
The Kansas Department of Agriculture is studying a proposal to limit labels advertising milk and dairy products as coming from cows not injected with artificial growth hormones. “We believe in consumer choice, but what we are doing is trying to level the playing field for everyone with some level of guidance about what is and is not acceptable,” said Lisa Taylor, spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Agriculture. The department contends that lab analysis cannot confirm that a dairy product is free of rbGH or rBST, because cows produce the same hormones naturally.

Opponents contend a stricter labeling rule is unnecessary and would make it harder for small and medium-sized producers to market their dairy products.

The proposed rule would let manufacturers label a product as coming from cows who were not supplemented with rBST, or something similar. But they would also have to add a disclaimer that U.S. Food and Drug Administration has determined that there is no significant difference between milk from rBST supplemented and non-rBST supplemented cows.

Manufacturers would also need a milk producers affidavit that the milk is not supplemented with artificial growth hormones, and have other written records supporting the claim.

A public hearing on the proposed labeling rules is planned for 10 a.m. on Dec. 2 at the Kansas Department of Agriculture in Topeka.  PD

—From AP newswire report