Search Results for "information+technology"

Mitigation is the action of reducing the severity of a problem. In addressing the problem of nitrate contamination, mitigation levels will be based on nitrate data collected from public wells.

The MDA determines the mitigation levels for the DWSMAs of community supply wells based on monitoring data provided by the Minnesota Department of Health. All areas identified with elevated nitrate begin in a voluntary Mitigation Level (Level 1 or 2), unless the MDA determines there is a point source causing the well to exceed these levels or the MDA delays the determination of a mitigation level decision for good cause. A delay for good cause would allow MDA to collect additional information such as to evaluate a potential point source that may be a significant source of nitrate in the public well. 

The process for determining the mitigation level includes conducting a review of the quality of the monitoring data, the condition and vulnerability of the well, the hydrogeology and groundwater flow paths for groundwater flowing into the well, and potential point sources such as an agricultural chemical facility, septic system(s), feedlot(s) or a poorly constructed well that may be contributing significantly to nitrate levels in the well. View the current list of Mitigation Level Determinations.

Level One
Community public water supply wells (and their DWSMAs) with monitoring results of 5.4 to less than 8 mg/L nitrate-nitrogen fall under Level 1. At this mitigation level the MDA will encourage the voluntary adoption of the University of Minnesota nitrogen fertilizer BMPs and other practices which can reduce nitrate levels in groundwater such as precision agriculture, perennial crops, forages, cover crops, nitrification inhibitors, new hybrids, or taking targeted land out of production. These other practices are collectively referred to as alternative management tools or AMTs. Approved AMTs may substitute for nitrogen fertilizer BMPs.

DWSMAs at mitigation Level 1 are subject to Part 1 of the rule but are not subject to Part 2 of the rule.

Level Two
Community public water supply wells (and their DWSMAs) with monitoring results at or exceeding 8.0 mg/L nitrate- at any point during the previous 10 years, or projected to exceed the drinking water standard of 10 mg/L nitrate-nitrogen in the next ten years, will be included in Level 2.

For DWSMAs at Level 2, the MDA will work with local farmers to adopt practices that can reduce nitrate levels in groundwater. A local advisory team will be formed to include local farmers, agronomists, and others to help recommend the BMPs and AMTs that should be used. In addition, a local groundwater monitoring well network may be developed. The MDA will promote the implementation of appropriate nitrogen fertilizer BMPs and AMTs. To help facilitate AMT implementation, the MDA has worked with other agencies to make DWSMAs with elevated nitrate among the highest priority areas for state and federal funding. 

The MDA will conduct surveys to assess the adoption rates of BMPs and other practices and use computer modeling to estimate the change in nitrate losses over a DWSMA. The modeling will consider the soils, crops, agricultural practices and precipitation in the DWSMA and help local farmers estimate whether changes in practices will improve water quality.

Level Three
Level 3 is the first regulatory level. A Level 2 site will progress to Level 3 if one of the following occurs: after not less than 3 growing seasons or the estimated lag time, whichever is longer, the recommended BMPs are not adopted on 80% of the cropland acres (excluding soybean acres); or the nitrate concentrations in groundwater continue to increase; or, after not less than three growing seasons the residual soil nitrate below the root zone increases. The estimated lag time is the time it takes for changes in practices to have an effect on groundwater quality or on the public well with elevated nitrate. This time may vary significantly based on the local soils, hydrogeology and actual precipitation. Computer modeling and groundwater age estimates can be used to determine the estimated lag time. Residual soil nitrate testing below the root zone is a more difficult process of testing nitrate levels in soil. It is used to determine if nitrate is increasing or decreasing over time and may be used in locations with very long lag times.

The Commissioner of Agriculture – in consultation with a local advisory team – would then require landowners to implement actions such as BMPs, soil testing, record keeping, and educational programs. The Commissioner may delay moving to a regulatory level if computer modeling indicates that the adopted practices are going to be effective in reducing nitrate levels below 8 mg/L.

Level Four
Level 4 is the second regulatory level. If nitrate-nitrogen in the public water supply well exceeded 9 mg/L for any three samples in the previous 10 years; or after three years the residual soil nitrate below the root zone increases; or after three years or the estimated lag time, whichever is longer, the nitrate levels continue to increase, then the DWSMA would be given a Level 4 designation. The Commissioner of Agriculture – in consultation with a local advisory team – could require landowners to implement additional practices beyond best management practices. These practices would be determined on a site-specific basis following guidance outlined in MN Statutes Chapter 103H.275 Subd. 2(a). However, they shall not include restrictions on the primary crop or require fertilizer rates below the low end of the University of Minnesota recommended fertilizer rate range.

DWSMAs will be monitored and will move up or down a mitigation level according to changes in water quality. DWSMAs may only move up one mitigation level at a time. For example, a DWSMA will never go from Level 1 to Level 3 in a single cycle.

We issue many certificates that identify shipment by weight, bag count, lot number, bag tag or bag markings. You may have a contractual requirement or a customer demand to include container numbers on a phytosanitary certificate. That is a business-related issue. We can issue a phytosanitary certificate using the alternatives mentioned above as distinguishing marks which ensures the timely issuance of a phytosanitary certificate. Such a practice is the single most effective way to avoid missing various certification deadlines. Once the container number is confirmed you can request a replacement certificate that includes the container number if you choose. You will be responsible for paying the cost of the replacement certificate, but you avoid the serious problem of exceeding the 30-day limit. Replacement certificates cost the same as original certificates.

Any information that is related to phytosanitary certification contained in a letter of credit will be reviewed upon request to determine if it is eligible for inclusion. However, information that is not required for the phytosanitary certificate or is business-related will not be placed on the phytosanitary certificate. License number, contract identification, grade, quality or plant variety are not listed on a phytosanitary certificate because it is not considered phytosanitary information. We understand this business information is important to your documentation. However, much of it is not germane to the assessment of pest-free status and phytosanitary compliance and therefore cannot be included on the phytosanitary certificate.