Oklahoma's secretary of the environment is asking the Missouri Department
of Natural Resources to withhold issuing permits for egg producer Moark's
planned expansion in Newton County until the locations of waste-disposal
sites are identified..."Joplin Globe"
Official DNR didn't inform state about Newton County expansion proposal
By Melissa DeLoach
Globe Staff Writer
6/28/05
Oklahoma's secretary of the environment is asking the Missouri Department
of Natural Resources to withhold issuing permits for egg producer Moark's
planned expansion in Newton County until the locations of waste-disposal
sites are identified.
In a letter to the DNR, Miles Tolbert also states that the Missouri agency
failed to inform Oklahoma regulators or any other state agencies of Moark's
plans, as required by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
Moark is seeking approval from the DNR to build 13 houses in Newton County
that would hold 200,000 chickens each, totaling 2.6 million birds. Moark
says it now has 1.3 million birds in the county. The company has said new
technology will help with an odor problems and will substantially reduce
the operation's water consumption.
"Without the location of the potential waste disposal sites, the state of
Oklahoma cannot realistically assess the potential environmental impacts of
the draft permits at this time," Tolbert stated in the letter addressed to
Peter Goode, chief of the permit and engineering section of the DNR's water
protection program.
Kerry Cordray, the DNR's information officer for water protection and soil
conservation, confirmed that the DNR received Tolbert's letter, but said he
could not respond at this time to the secretary's comments.
Mark Adams, who is among 2,500 Newton County residents who backers say have
signed a petition against the expansion plan, said Tolbert's comments show
that Moark's expansion proposal is not just limited to Missouri.
Waste and its potential effects on water quality are among Adams' concerns.
"If Missouri decides 'Well, OK Moark, don't send anything to Oklahoma,'
there goes the Oklahoma dumping ground," Adams said. "Well, if Kansas says
the same thing, then where is the waste going to go? What is Moark going to
do with it?
"Oklahoma is tired of being the dumping ground."
Cordray said Tolbert's letter would be treated "very much like the other
public comment" that the DNR has received.
"A (letter) will be forthcoming, and at the same time that we provide the
response to all the comments that were received," Cordray said. "The normal
time for that to occur is when the permit decision is made. As I understand
it, we are on track for the normal time frame."
A decision on Moark's request for a permit for expansion is to be made by
summer's end.
Oklahoma is weighing in on the issue because the draft permits are for
proposed activities upstream of Oklahoma and potentially may involve
permitted activities in the state, Tolbert said in the letter. The letter
stated that his chief concerns are related to Elk River and Spring River
tributaries, both of which flow into Oklahoma.
Both of these streams are in the watershed of Fort Gibson Reservoir, which
is designated as "nutrient-limited" in the Oklahoma Water Quality
Standards. Tolbert stated in the letter that the draft permits do not
address how Moark would protect the approved water-quality standards for
Elk River in Oklahoma.
Tolbert's letter said Oklahoma is concerned about Moark's environmental
record in Missouri.
"Moark has consistently violated the terms and conditions of their existing
permits," he said. "What assurances are there that the proposed permits
will not just be a continuation of past problems and an undocumented source
of additional nutrient loads to an already sensitive area?"
Dan Hudgens, Moark's Midwest regional manager, could not be reached for
comment Monday. But, company officials have defended the plan, saying that
technology will make the expansion environmentally friendly and that the
company will continue to be a good neighbor.
