Journal of the House of Representatives
of the Second Session of the 111th General Assembly
of the State of South Carolina
being the Regular Session Beginning Tuesday, January 9, 1996

Page Finder Index

| Printed Page 4550, May 29 | Printed Page 4570, May 29 |

Printed Page 4560 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

The question then recurred to the motion to concur or non-concur in the Senate amendments.

Rep. SCOTT demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Yeas 23; Nays 81

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Anderson             Baxley               Breeland
Brown, G.            Brown, J.            Brown, T.

Printed Page 4561 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

Byrd                 Canty                Cave
Cobb-Hunter          Govan                Howard
Inabinett            Lee                  Lloyd
McElveen             McMahand             Moody-Lawrence
Neal                 Quinn                Rogers
Scott                Wilkes

Total--23

Those who voted in the negative are:

Allison              Askins               Bailey
Beck                 Boan                 Brown, H.
Cain                 Carnell              Cato
Chamblee             Cooper               Cotty
Cromer               Dantzler             Davenport
Delleney             Felder               Fleming
Fulmer               Gamble               Hallman
Harrell              Harris, J.           Harvin
Hodges               Hutson               Jennings
Keegan               Kelley               Keyserling
Kinon                Kirsh                Klauber
Knotts               Koon                 Lanford
Law                  Limbaugh             Limehouse
Littlejohn           Loftis               Martin
Mason                McAbee               McCraw
McTeer               Meacham              Neilson
Phillips             Rhoad                Rice
Richardson           Riser                Robinson
Sandifer             Seithel              Sharpe
Sheheen              Shissias             Simrill
Smith, D.            Smith, R.            Spearman
Stille               Stoddard             Stuart
Townsend             Tripp                Trotter
Tucker               Vaughn               Waldrop
Walker               Wells                Wilder
Wilkins              Witherspoon          Wofford
Wright               Young                Young-Brickell

Total--81
Printed Page 4562 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

So, the House refused to agree to the Senate amendments, and a message was ordered sent accordingly.

H. 3446--RECONSIDERED, DEBATE ADJOURNED

The motion of Rep. R. SMITH to reconsider the vote whereby the Senate amendments were amended to the following Bill was taken up.

H. 3446 -- Rep. Sharpe: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 46-45-70 SO AS TO PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LOCATION OF AGRICULTURAL FACILITIES AND AGRICULTURAL WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS; TO AMEND SECTION 46-45-30, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH AGRICULTURAL FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS ARE NOT NUISANCES, SO AS TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE FACILITY OR OPERATION MUST BE IN OPERATION FOR ONE YEAR OR MORE; AND TO AMEND SECTION 46-45-60, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO LOCAL ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO AGRICULTURAL FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH RELATED PERMITS MUST NOT BE SUSPENDED, DENIED, OR REVOKED.

Rep. MEACHAM moved to table the motion and demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Yeas 49; Nays 55

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allison              Anderson             Baxley
Beck                 Breeland             Brown, J.
Brown, T.            Byrd                 Canty
Clyburn              Cobb-Hunter          Cotty
Davenport            Fulmer               Govan
Hallman              Harrell              Harris, J.
Hodges               Howard               Hutson
Jennings             Keegan               Kelley
Keyserling           Lanford              Limehouse
Mason                McElveen             McMahand
Meacham              Moody-Lawrence       Neal
Neilson              Richardson           Rogers
Scott                Seithel              Sheheen
Shissias             Simrill              Smith, R.

Printed Page 4563 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

Stille               Tucker               Wells
Whipper, L.          Whipper, S.          Wofford
Young-Brickell       

Total--49

Those who voted in the negative are:

Bailey               Boan                 Brown, G.
Brown, H.            Cain                 Carnell
Cave                 Chamblee             Cooper
Cromer               Dantzler             Delleney
Felder               Fleming              Gamble
Harvin               Inabinett            Kinon
Kirsh                Klauber              Knotts
Koon                 Law                  Lee
Limbaugh             Littlejohn           Lloyd
Loftis               Martin               McAbee
McCraw               McTeer               Phillips
Quinn                Rhoad                Rice
Riser                Robinson             Sandifer
Sharpe               Smith, D.            Spearman
Stoddard             Stuart               Townsend
Tripp                Trotter              Vaughn
Waldrop              Walker               Wilder
Wilkes               Wilkins              Witherspoon
Wright

Total--55

So, the House refused to table the motion to reconsider.

The question then recurred to the motion to reconsider.

Rep. MEACHAM demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Yeas 53; Nays 48

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Bailey               Boan                 Brown, G.
Brown, H.            Cain                 Carnell
Cave                 Chamblee             Cooper

Printed Page 4564 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

Cromer               Dantzler             Delleney
Felder               Fleming              Gamble
Harvin               Inabinett            Kinon
Kirsh                Klauber              Knotts
Koon                 Lee                  Limbaugh
Littlejohn           Lloyd                Loftis
McAbee               McCraw               McTeer
Phillips             Quinn                Rhoad
Rice                 Riser                Robinson
Sandifer             Sharpe               Smith, D.
Spearman             Stoddard             Stuart
Townsend             Tripp                Trotter
Vaughn               Waldrop              Walker
Wilder               Wilkes               Wilkins
Witherspoon          Wright

Total--53

Those who voted in the negative are:

Allison              Anderson             Baxley
Beck                 Breeland             Brown, J.
Byrd                 Canty                Cobb-Hunter
Cotty                Davenport            Fulmer
Govan                Hallman              Harrell
Harris, J.           Hodges               Howard
Hutson               Jennings             Keegan
Kelley               Keyserling           Lanford
Law                  Limehouse            Martin
Mason                McElveen             McMahand
Meacham              Moody-Lawrence       Neal
Richardson           Rogers               Scott
Seithel              Sheheen              Shissias
Simrill              Smith, R.            Stille
Tucker               Wells                Whipper, L.
Whipper, S.          Wofford              Young-Brickell

Total--48

So, the motion to reconsider was agreed to.


Printed Page 4565 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

Reps. MEACHAM, HODGES and YOUNG-BRICKELL proposed the following Amendment No. 1A (Doc Name P:\amend\PFM\9403AC.96), which was tabled.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:

/SECTION 1. Title 47 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"CHAPTER 20

Confined Swine Feeding Operations

Section 47-20-10. As used in this chapter:

(1) `Agricultural facility' means a lot, building, or structure which is used for the commercial production of swine in an animal feeding operation.

(2) `Animal' means a domesticated animal belonging to the porcine species.

(3) `Animal feeding operation' means an agricultural facility where animals are confined and fed or maintained for a total of forty-five days or more in a twelve-month period and crops, vegetative, forage growth, or post-harvest residues are not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the lot or facility. Structures used for the storage of animal waste from animals in the operation also are part of the animal feeding operation. Two or more animal feeding operations under common ownership or management are considered to be a single animal feeding operation if they are adjacent or utilize a common system for animal waste storage.

(4) `Animal waste' means animal excreta or other commonly associated organic animal wastes including, but not limited to, bedding, litter, feed losses, or water mixed with the waste.

(5) `Annual pollutant loading rate' means the maximum amount of a pollutant that can be applied to a unit area of a waste utilization area during a three hundred sixty-five-day period.

(6) `Cumulative pollutant loading rate' means the maximum amount of a pollutant that can be applied to an area of land.

(7) `Department' means the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control.

(8) `Ephemeral stream' means a stream that flows only in direct response to rainfall or snowmelt in which discrete periods of flow persist no more than twenty-nine consecutive days per event.

(9) `Intermittent stream' means a stream that generally has a defined natural water course which does not flow year-round but flows beyond periods of rainfall or snowmelt.


Printed Page 4566 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

(10) `Lagoon' means an impoundment used in conjunction with an animal feeding operation, the primary function of which is to store or stabilize, or both, organic wastes, wastewater, and contaminated runoff.

(11) `Vector' means a carrier that is capable of transmitting a pathogen from one organism to another including, but not limited to, flies and other insects, rodents, birds, and vermin.

(12) `Waste storage pond' means a structure used for impounding or storing manure, wastewater, and contaminated runoff as a component of an agricultural waste management system. Waste is stored for a specified period of time, one year or less, and then the pond is emptied.

(13) `Waste Utilization area' means land on which animal waste is spread as a fertilizer.

(14) `Watershed' means a drainage area contributing to a river, lake, or stream.

(15) `Waters of the State' means lakes, bays, sounds, ponds, impounding reservoirs, springs, artesian wells, rivers, perennial and navigable streams, creeks, estuaries, marshes, inlets, canals, the Atlantic Ocean within the territorial limits of the State, and all other bodies of water, natural or artificial, public or private, inland or coastal, fresh or salt, which are wholly or partially within or bordering the State or within its jurisdiction. This definition does not include ephemeral or intermittent streams. This definition includes wetlands as defined in this section.

(16) `Wetlands' means lands that have a predominance of hydric soil, are inundated or saturated by water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions, and, under normal circumstances, do support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation. Normal circumstances refer to the soil and hydrologic conditions that are normally present without regard to whether the vegetation has been removed. Wetlands must be identified through the confirmation of the three wetlands criteria: hydric soil, hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. All three criteria must be met for an area to be identified as wetlands.

Section 47-20-20. (A) All siting requirements for animal feeding operations must be measured from property lines.

(B) After June 30, 1996, these setback limits for new or expanded animal feeding operations which utilize a lagoon or a waste storage pond, or both, apply:

(1) For an animal feeding operation with a capacity of 160,000 to 480,000 pounds of normal production animal live weight at any one time, the minimum separation distance required between a lagoon and a waste


Printed Page 4567 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

storage pond and real property owned by another person is 1,000 feet. The minimum separation distance required between an agricultural facility and real property owned by another person is 1000 feet.

(2) For an animal feeding operation with a capacity of 480,001 to 960,000 pounds of normal production animal live weight at any one time, the minimum separation distance required between a lagoon and a waste storage pond and real property owned by another person is 1,250 feet. The minimum separation distance required between an agricultural facility and real property owned by another person is 1000 feet.

(3) For an animal feeding operation with a capacity of 960,001 to 1,440,000 pounds of normal production live weight at any one time, the minimum separation distance required between a lagoon and a waste storage pond and real property owned by another person is 1,500 feet. The minimum separation distance required between an agricultural facility and real property owned by another person is 1000 feet.

(4) For animal feeding operations with a capacity of more than 1,440,001 pounds of normal production animal live weight at any one time, the minimum separation distance required between a lagoon and a waste storage pond and real property owned by another person is 1,750 feet. The minimum separation distance between an agricultural facility and real property owned by another person is 1000 feet.

(5) The minimum separation distance between a lagoon and a waste storage pond and a public or private drinking water well is 500 feet.

(6) The minimum separation distance required between a lagoon and a waste storage pond and waters of the State is 1,320 feet (1/4 mile). If the waters of the State are designated Outstanding Resource Waters, Critical Habitat Waters of federally endangered species, or Shellfish Harvesting Waters, the minimum separation distance required between a lagoon and a waste storage pond and waters of the State is 2,640 feet (1/2 mile). A minimum 100-foot vegetative buffer of plants and trees is required. However, if an owner or operator of an animal feeding operation has a Natural Resource Conservation Service employee or a state-certified engineer create a waste management plan design to control the discharge from a failed lagoon so that it will not enter waters of the State and certify that the plan has been implemented as specified, then the minimum separation distance between a lagoon and a waste storage pond and waters of the State is 500 feet.

(7) The minimum separation distance between a lagoon and a waste storage pond constructed of concrete to standards outlined in department regulations and waters of the State is 500 feet. If the waters are designated Outstanding Resource Waters, Critical Habitat Waters of


Printed Page 4568 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

federally endangered species, or Shellfish Harvesting Waters, the minimum separation distance required between a lagoon and a waste storage pond constructed of concrete to standards outlined in department regulations and waters of the State is 1,000 feet. A minimum 100-foot vegetative buffer of plants and trees is required.

(8) If an animal feeding operation established as of July 1, 1996, wishes to expand and cannot feasibly do so under the requirements set forth in this section as determined by the department, the operation may be allowed to expand one time to 160,000 pounds of normal production animal live weight above its permitted number as of July 1, 1996, even if the operation cannot meet the requirements of this section.

(9) If a lagoon or waste storage pond, or both, breaches or fails in any way, the owner or operator of the animal feeding operation immediately must notify the department and the appropriate local government officials.

(C) The minimum separation distance in feet required between a ditch or swale which drains directly into waters of the State and all animal feeding operations is 100 feet.

(D) No new animal feeding operation or expansion of an established animal feeding operation may be located in the 100-year floodplain unless protected from flooding as provided for in regulations of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Flood Insurance Program on Floodplain Management. Such construction or expansion must be certified by the department.

(E) Streams or rivers used as surface intake for potable water supply may not be used as a receiving stream outflow from animal feeding operations, and there may not be any direct water linkage or flood facility drainage linkage between the animal feeding operation and a stream or river utilized as a supply of drinking water unless waste is treated to drinking water quality standards.

(F) The setback limits are minimum siting requirements. The department shall promulgate regulations specifying factors that the department shall evaluate in determining whether additional separation distances are required under certain circumstances. These factors include, at a minimum:

(1) proximity to 100-year flood plain;

(2) soil type;

(3) location in watershed;

(4) nutrient sensitivity of receiving waters;

(5) proximity to a State Designated Focus Area; Outstanding Resource Water; Heritage Corridor; Historic Preservation District; state


Printed Page 4569 . . . . . Wednesday, May 29, 1996

or national park or forest; state or federal research area; and privately-owned wildlife refuge, park, or trust property;

(6) proximity to other point and nonpoint sources; and

(7) slope of the land.

Section 47-20-30. A separation distance requirement as provided in Section 47-20-20(1)-(4) does not apply to an animal feeding operation which is constructed or expanded, if the titleholder of adjoining land to the animal feeding operation executes a written waiver with the title holder of the land where the animal feeding operation is established or proposed to be located, under terms and conditions that the parties negotiate. The written waiver becomes effective only upon the recording of the waiver in the office of the Register of Mesne Conveyances of the county in which the benefitted land is located. The filed waiver precludes enforcement by the State of Section 47-20-20 (B)(1) - (4) as it relates to the animal feeding operation and to real property owned by another person.

Section 47-20-40. (A) The department shall promulgate regulations relating to land application rates for animal waste for animal feeding operations of a capacity for more than 160,000 pounds of normal production animal live weight at any one time. These rates must be based on the waste's impact on the environment, animals, and people living in the environment. In developing annual pollutant loading rates and cumulative pollutant loading rates, the department shall consider:

(1) soil type;

(2) type of vegetation growing in land-applied area;

(3) proximity to 100-year flood plain;

(4) location in watershed;

(5) nutrient sensitivity of receiving land and waters;

(6) soil and sediment tests of receiving land and waters;

(7) nutrient, heavy metal, and pollutant content of the waste being applied;

(8) proximity to a State Designated Focus Area; Outstanding Resource Water; Heritage Corridor; Historic Preservation District; state or national park or forest; state or federal research area; and privately owned wildlife refuge, park, or trust property;

(9) proximity to other point and nonpoint sources;

(10) slope of land;

(11) distance to water table or ground water aquifer;

(12) timing of waste application to coincide with vegetative cover growth cycle;

(13) timing of harvest of vegetative cover;

(14) hydraulic loading limitations; and


| Printed Page 4550, May 29 | Printed Page 4570, May 29 |

Page Finder Index