[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 19 (Monday, January 31, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4958-4977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1536]
[[Page 4957]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Animal Feeding Operations Consent Agreement and Final Order; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 19 / Monday, January 31, 2005 /
Notices
[[Page 4958]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[OAR-2004-0237; FRL-7864-4]
Animal Feeding Operations Consent Agreement and Final Order
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of consent agreement and final order, and request for
public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is offering animal feeding operations (AFOs) an
opportunity to sign a voluntary consent agreement and final order
(henceforth referred to as the ``Air Compliance Agreement'' or the
``Agreement''). A copy of the Air Compliance Agreement is attached as
an Appendix to this notice. The sign-up period for eligible AFOs to
sign the Agreement will run for 90 days from the date of this notice.
AFOs that choose to sign the Air Compliance Agreement will share
responsibility for funding an extensive, nationwide emissions
monitoring study. The monitoring study will lead to the development of
methodologies for estimating emissions from AFOs and will help AFOs to
determine and comply with their regulatory responsibilities under the
Clean Air Act (CAA); the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA); and the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA). Once applicable emission
estimating methodologies have been published by EPA, the Agreement will
also require each participating AFO to certify that it is in compliance
with all relevant requirements of the CAA, CERCLA and EPCRA.
EPA is requesting comment on the Air Compliance Agreement, with
particular emphasis on implementation of the Agreement. All comments
should be submitted within 30 days of the date of this notice.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 2, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2004-
0237, by one of the following methods:
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET,
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred
method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: Air Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a total of two copies.
Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B102, Washington, DC 20460. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0237.
The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index
at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other information,
such as copyrighted materials, is not placed on the Internet and will
be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
copy form at Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0237, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202)
566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the Air Compliance
Agreement, contact Mr. Bruce Fergusson, Special Litigation and Projects
Division, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, U.S. EPA,
Ariel Rios Building, Washington, DC 20460, telephone number (202) 564-
1261, fax number (202) 564-0010, and electronic mail:
[email protected].
For information on the monitoring study, contact Ms. Sharon Nizich,
Organic Chemicals Group, Emission Standards Division, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711, telephone number (919) 541-2825, fax number (919) 541-3470, and
electronic mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Overview of the Air Compliance Agreement: By offering AFOs this
opportunity to sign an Air Compliance Agreement, the Agency will help
participating AFOs pool their resources to lower the cost of measuring
emissions and ensure that they comply with all applicable environmental
regulations in the shortest amount of time. While EPA has the authority
on a case-by-case basis to require AFOs to monitor their emissions and
to come into compliance with applicable Federal laws, that process has
proven to be difficult and time consuming, partly due to the
uncertainty regarding emissions from AFOs, which was reiterated in a
recent report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).\1\ Moreover,
even when EPA has reached a successful resolution of an enforcement
case, only the facilities that are the subject of the enforcement
action were directly affected. Consequently, EPA believes that the Air
Compliance Agreement will be the quickest and most effective way to
address the current uncertainty regarding emissions from AFOs and to
bring all participating AFOs into compliance with all applicable
regulatory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NAS, ``Air Emissions From Animal Feeding Operations: Current
Knowledge, Future Needs,'' National Research Council, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Air Compliance Agreement will not affect in any way EPA's
ability to respond to an imminent and substantial endangerment to
public health, welfare or the environment. Nor will participation in
the Agreement provide protection for criminal violations of
[[Page 4959]]
environmental laws. Finally, the Air Compliance Agreement is not
intended to affect compliance by AFOs with any requirements of the
Clean Water Act (CWA) and the implementing regulations applicable to
concentrated animal feeding operations.
AFOs that choose not to sign an Air Compliance Agreement will be
subject to potential enforcement action by the Federal Government for
any CAA, CERCLA, or EPCRA violations, as would any AFO that signs the
Agreement but later drops out by not complying with the terms of the
Agreement.
EPA recognizes that AFOs can have a negative impact on nearby
residents, particularly with respect to objectionable odors and other
nuisance problems that can affect their quality of life. EPA also
recognizes that concerns have been raised recently regarding the
possible health impacts from AFO emissions. It is important to note,
however, that under existing Federal laws, EPA has an important but
limited role in dealing with many of the potential impacts from AFOs.
To the extent that certain pollutants from AFOs are regulated under the
CAA and are emitted in quantities that exceed regulatory thresholds,
EPA can and will require AFOs to comply with all applicable CAA
requirements, including limiting those emissions where appropriate.
However, many of the negative impacts resulting from AFOs, such as
odor, are not currently regulated under Federal laws, but are addressed
by State and local laws. EPA supports local and State efforts in those
areas and relies on them to enforce their State and local laws for odor
and nuisance problems, health code violations, and zoning challenges
posed by AFOs. The Air Compliance Agreement will explicitly require
participants to comply with final State nuisance orders. In addition,
the Agreement will not affect the ability of States or citizens to
enforce compliance with nonfederally enforceable State laws, existing
or future, that are applicable to AFOs.
Sources may also emit fugitive emissions, but this notice does not
address fugitive emissions. Guidance on fugitive emissions will be
issued along with other appropriate guidance/and or regulations after
the conclusion of the monitoring study.
Relevant Air Pollutants and Applicable Laws: AFOs emit several air
pollutants, including ammonia (NH3), hydrogen sulfide
(H2S), particulate matter (PM), and volatile organic
compounds (VOC). NH3 and H2S are hazardous
substances under CERCLA and EPCRA, and the release of these gases may
need to be reported under CERCLA and EPCRA if released in sufficient
quantities. H2S, PM, and VOC are all regulated under the CAA
and subject to various requirements under that statute and the
implementing Federal and State rules and regulations. Emissions of
these pollutants come from many different areas at AFOs, including
animal housing structures (e.g., barns, covered feed lots) and manure
storage areas (e.g., lagoons, covered manure piles). An important issue
that arises under the CAA is whether emissions from different areas at
AFOs should be treated as fugitive or nonfugitive. The Agency plans to
issue regulations and/or guidance on this issue after the conclusion of
the monitoring study.
Applicability: The Air Compliance Agreement is being offered to
AFOs in the egg, broiler chicken, turkey, dairy and swine industries
that meet the definition of an AFO under the CWA. The Agreement will
address emissions coming from buildings or structures that house
agricultural livestock, and from lagoons or similar structures that are
used for storage and/or treatment of agricultural livestock waste at
participating AFOs. The Air Compliance Agreement will not address AFOs
that only have open-air feedlots, such as cattle feedlots. Nor will it
address emissions from sources other than animal housing structures or
agricultural livestock waste storage and treatment units.
Major Terms of the Air Compliance Agreement: The Air Compliance
Agreement establishes specific obligations that will apply to all
participating AFOs and includes limited, conditional covenants not to
sue and liability releases from EPA. AFOs that choose to participate
will agree to pay a civil penalty which is based on the size of the
AFO. The penalty ranges from $200 to $1,000 per AFO, depending upon the
number of animals at the AFO. The threshold ranges depend upon the
species of animal. The total penalty is capped and ranges from $10,000
for a participant having 10 or fewer farms to $100,000 for a
participant having over 200 farms. Participation in the Air Compliance
Agreement and payment of a penalty will not be an admission of
liability by an AFO.
In addition, participating AFOs, except for certain contract
growers, will be responsible for the payment of approximately $2,500
per farm into a fund to conduct a nationwide emission monitoring study
and for making their facilities available for emissions testing under
the nationwide monitoring study. In general, the monitoring study,
which is described more fully below and in Attachment B to the Air
Compliance Agreement (included as an appendix to this notice), will
undertake over a 2-year period, emissions monitoring at a
representative sample of animal housing structures and manure storage
and treatment units across the country. At the end of the monitoring
study, EPA will use the data from the monitoring study and any other
relevant, available data to develop emissions estimating methodologies.
These emissions estimating methodologies will then be used by the AFO
industry to estimate their annual emissions.
EPA's publication of the emissions estimating methodologies will
trigger the obligation of participating AFOs to determine their
emissions and to comply with all applicable CAA requirements, including
applying for all required permits, and to make any requisite hazardous
release notices under CERCLA and EPCRA. EPA expects to apply these
emission estimating methodologies to all AFOs, whether or not they
participate in the Air Compliance Agreement.
Please note that the Air Compliance Agreement does not define the
scope of the term ``source'' as it relates to animal agriculture and
farm activities. The Agency plans to provide guidance on this issue at
the conclusion of the monitoring study.
Any AFO that fails to comply with the requirements as described
will not receive the limited conditional release and covenant not to
sue described later in this notice. Any conditional release and
covenant not to sue offered as part of the Air Compliance Agreement
will be revoked, and the AFO will remain liable for all past and
ongoing violations.
AFOs that choose to participate in the Air Compliance Agreement and
meet all its conditions will receive from EPA a limited release and
covenant not to sue from liability for certain past and on-going CAA,
CERCLA and EPCRA violations. The release and covenant not to sue will
cover an AFO's liability for failing to comply with certain provisions
of CERCLA, EPCRA, and the CAA up to the time the AFO reports its
releases under CERCLA or EPCRA and applies for and receives the
requisite CAA permits.
Participating AFOs will also be obligated to comply with all final
actions and final orders issued by the State or local authority that
address a nuisance arising from air emissions at the AFO. Failure to
comply with the final action or order to correct the nuisance will void
the conditional release and covenant not to sue offered in the Air
Compliance Agreement.
[[Page 4960]]
Some very large AFOs will be required to immediately report
estimated releases of NH3, solely for purposes of the Air
Compliance Agreement and not for purposes of reporting under CERCLA or
EPCRA.
Finally, AFOs that install waste-to-energy systems that convert
animal manure into electricity will get an extra 180 days to apply for
CAA permits and to make the requisite hazardous release notifications
under CERCLA and EPCRA.
Terms Applicable to Contract Growers and Integrators: Many AFOs,
particularly in the swine, broiler chicken, and turkey industry, raise
livestock for separate corporations that usually own the animals,
provide feed and medical services, and that process and market the meat
products. In those cases, the AFO that grows the animals is referred to
as a ``contract grower,'' and the separate corporation that processes
and markets the meat products is referred to as an ``integrator.''
The Air Compliance Agreement includes provisions that will allow
both integrators and contract growers to participate. Among other
things, a contract grower will not be responsible for the payment of
monies into the monitoring fund if an integrator has already agreed to
be responsible for the payment of such monies. The contract grower/
integrator provisions in the Agreement will also apply to AFOs that
produce milk under contract with a cooperative or that supply heifers
to dairy herds owned by a separate entity.
Emissions Monitoring Study: The purpose of the monitoring study is
to: collect data and aggregate it with appropriate existing emissions
data; analyze the monitoring results; and create tools (e.g., tables
and/or emission models) that AFOs could use to determine whether they
emit pollutants at levels that require them to apply for permits under
the CAA or submit notifications under CERCLA or EPCRA. The monitoring
study is designed to generate scientifically credible data to provide
for the characterization of emissions from all major types of AFOs in
all geographic areas where they are located. To provide a framework for
the monitoring study and to generate a comprehensive field sampling
plan from representative farms in the United States, a protocol
(Attachment B to the Air Compliance Agreement, included as part of the
Appendix to this notice) was developed through the collaborative
efforts of industry experts, university scientists, government
scientists, and other stakeholders knowledgeable in the field. Although
the protocol development was facilitated by the U.S. EPA and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), it represents the opinions of the
scientists, government experts, and stakeholders involved. In addition,
there was extensive internal review and input by representatives from
U.S. EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Office of
Air and Radiation, and Office of Research and Development.
As recommended in the NAS 2003 report, ``Air Emissions From Animal
Feeding Operations,'' and paraphrased here, EPA and USDA should for the
short term, initiate and conduct a coordinated research program
designed to produce a scientifically sound basis for measuring and
estimating air emissions from AFOs. Specific recommendations being
addressed with the protocol that were discussed in the NAS 2002 Interim
Report \2\ are related to direct measurements at sample farms by
utilizing information on the relationships between air emissions and
animal types, nutrient outputs, and manure handling practices;
conducting studies to evaluate the extent to which ambient atmospheric
concentrations of the various pollutants of interest are consistent
with estimated emissions; and using scientifically sound and practical
protocols for measuring pollutant concentration emission rates. EPA's
longer-term strategy involves additional recommendations from the NAS
which entail developing a process-based model that considers the entire
animal production process. The data collected in the monitoring study
will lay the groundwork for developing these more process-related
emission estimates. However, as with any large and complex effort, this
work must be conducted over a period of years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ NAS, ``The Scientific Basis For Estimating Air Emissions
From Animal Feeding Operations.'' Interim Report, National Research
Council, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Air Compliance Agreement, the participating AFOs will set
up an umbrella nonprofit entity (referred to here as the nonprofit
organization or NPO) to handle the funds contributed by the individual
participating facilities. The NPO will then subcontract to a Science
Advisor and independent monitoring contractor (the ``IMC'') to run the
nationwide monitoring study. The IMC will submit a proposed plan for
review and approval by EPA that is consistent with the monitoring
protocol outlined in Attachment B to the Air Compliance Agreement. The
proposed plan would also include a list of recommended candidate
facilities to be monitored.
EPA will review and approve or disapprove the proposed plan within
30 days of receiving it from the IMC. If the proposed plan is
disapproved, EPA will specifically state why the plan is being
disapproved and what changes need to be made. The IMC will then have 30
days to modify the proposed plan to address the changes required by EPA
and to submit the modified plan to EPA for review and approval. Once
the plan is approved, all participating AFOs, through the NPO, will be
obligated to fully fund the nationwide emission monitoring study and to
establish a binding contract with the IMC to carry out the approved
plan.
Monitoring will be conducted pursuant to EPA protocols and be done
by a fleet of mobile labs purchased by the NPO and overseen by the IMC
hired to run the study. Emissions at the facilities will be monitored
at both buildings and waste lagoons and will include H2S,
VOC, PM and NH3. Monitoring will occur at facilities across
the country to get a representative sample of the facility types in
major geographic regions. EPA expects that the monitoring will begin in
2005 and continue for 2 years. Two years of monitoring is the minimum
time needed because emissions from AFOs can vary greatly over the
course of a year and may vary significantly from year to year. The data
generated during the monitoring study will be made fully available to
the general public.
Technical experts on emissions monitoring at EPA and from a number
of universities believe that monitoring the farms described in the
attached protocol will provide sufficient data to get a valid sample
that is representative of the vast majority of the participating AFOs.
Significantly increasing the number of farms to be monitored would be
prohibitively expensive and would not add substantially to the value of
the data collected.
Throughout the course of the monitoring study, EPA will review and
analyze the data as they are generated. EPA will use the data generated
from the monitoring and all other available, relevant data to develop
methodologies for estimating annual emissions from swine, dairy, egg
laying, broiler chicken, and turkey AFOs. Within 18 months after the
conclusion of the nationwide emissions monitoring study, EPA expects
that it will publish on its Web site, on a rolling basis as work is
completed, the methodologies for estimating emissions for the vast
majority of AFOs in the eligible animal groups.
[[Page 4961]]
Relationship Between the Air Compliance Agreement and Other Actions the
Agency May Take To Address AFO Air Emissions
In September 2001, EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) and the
USDA jointly commissioned the NAS to prepare a report recommending
approaches for characterizing emission profiles and identifying
emission mitigation techniques, including:
Review industry characterization and use of model farms;
Evaluate emission factors, measurement methods, and
modeling approaches;
Recommend fate and transport methodologies;
Identify mitigation technologies and management practices;
and
Identify critical research needs.
The NAS concluded its report in 2003 with a number of key findings,
some of which are quoted here from the report:
* * * EPA and USDA should use process-based mathematical models
with mass balance constraints for nitrogen-containing compounds,
methane, and hydrogen sulfide to identify, estimate, and guide
management changes that decrease emissions for regulatory and
management programs.
* * * measurement protocols, control strategies and management
techniques must be emission and scale specific * * *
* * * There is a general paucity of credible scientific
information on the effects of mitigation technologies on
concentrations, rates, and fates of air emissions from AFOs.
However, the implementation of technically and economically feasible
management practices (e.g., manure incorporation into soil) designed
to decrease emissions should not be delayed.
* * * scientifically sound and practical protocols for measuring
air concentrations, emission rates, and fates are needed for the
various elements (nitrogen, carbon, sulfur), compounds (e.g.,
ammonia [NH3], CH4, H2S) and
particulate matter.
The EPA is planning to proceed in a manner that is consistent with
the recommendations of the NAS. EPA's plan is focused on the
achievement of real environmental benefits to protect public health and
the environment while supporting a sustainable agricultural sector. EPA
plans to continue to work with USDA and others to:
Collect data and information related to operations at
AFOs;
Determine emissions from individual AFOs; and
Identify appropriate regulatory and nonregulatory (e.g.,
best management practices, environmental management systems, etc.)
responses for each farm.
The Air Compliance Agreement with individual AFOs is an integral
component of the data collection and emissions determinations of this
effort. As discussed earlier in this notice, as part of the Air
Compliance Agreement, AFOs will fund a 2-year nationwide emissions
monitoring study to gather emissions data and mass balance information
from AFOs. It is anticipated that emissions monitoring will be
conducted at farms that represent the major animal sectors, types of
operations, and different geographic locations.
The information gathered during the emissions monitoring study will
be used to more adequately characterize emissions from individual
farms. Individual farm emissions estimates will be used, along with
other relevant information, to determine appropriate regulatory and
nonregulatory responses to address the emissions. As recommended in the
NAS report, EPA will then move forward to develop a process-based model
which entails considering the entire animal feeding process. Similar to
other large and complex efforts, the work must be conducted in stages
over a period of years. The monitoring study, and the resulting
emission estimating methodology, is a critical first step in this
multiyear effort.
Conclusion: EPA believes that the Air Compliance Agreement will be
the quickest and most effective way to address the current
uncertainties regarding air emissions from AFOs and to bring the entire
AFO industry into compliance with the CAA, section 103 of CERCLA, and
section 304 of EPCRA. The Air Compliance Agreement's terms, conditions,
and protections will be available only to those facilities that are
eligible, that elect to participate, and that comply with the terms of
the agreement. As appropriate, nonparticipants, and those who sign up
but later drop out due to noncompliance with the Air Compliance
Agreement, will be subject to enforcement actions in which significant
penalties and injunctive relief could be sought for violations of the
CAA, section 103 of CERCLA, and section 304 of EPCRA.
This notice describes an Air Compliance Agreement that EPA is
offering certain types of AFOs and requests public comment on that
Agreement. No new rights or obligations on behalf of EPA or any other
party are created beyond what is contained in a fully executed and
approved Agreement.
This notice provides a general description of the Air Compliance
Agreement. Interested parties are encouraged to carefully read the Air
Compliance Agreement and its Attachments (included as an Appendix to
this notice) to fully understand what is being offered to AFOs. To the
extent that provisions of the Air Compliance Agreement and its
Attachments are inconsistent with this notice, the provisions of the
Agreement will prevail.
Participation in the Air Compliance Agreement is voluntary. The
Agreement is not intended to affect in any way EPA's ability to respond
to an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, welfare
or the environment. Participation in the Agreement will not provide
protection for criminal violations of environmental laws. In addition,
the Agreement is not intended to affect the ability of States or
citizens to enforce compliance with nonfederally enforceable State laws
applicable to AFOs.
EPA recognizes that State and local agencies are undertaking
efforts to improve emissions estimation methodologies for AFOs. EPA
supports continued action to improve emissions information for all
source categories and will use the best information available as we
implement our programs. EPA also supports State and local efforts to
demonstrate improved emissions reduction strategies and recognizes the
value of State or local control requirements tailored to the needs of
specific geographic areas. For these reasons, nothing in the Air
Compliance Agreement will be used to delay or otherwise interfere with
the implementation and enforcement of existing State statutes that
eliminate exemptions to CAA requirements for agricultural sources of
air pollution.
Request for Public Comment: As stated above, EPA is requesting
comment on the Air Compliance Agreement, with particular emphasis on
implementation of the Agreement. All comments should be submitted
within 30 days of the date of this notice.
Earlier drafts of the Air Compliance Agreement have been circulated
publicly. EPA requested and received comments on those drafts from,
among others, representatives of state governments, environmental
groups, local citizens' groups, and the AFO industry. Those comments
were considered, and, where appropriate, changes were made to the draft
agreement. In addition, the emission monitoring protocol for the
nationwide emission monitoring program (Attachment B to the Agreement,
included in the Appendix to this notice) was developed by a group of 30
leaders in the area of AFO air emissions, including scientists from
EPA, the AFO industry, environmental groups, and several colleges and
universities.
[[Page 4962]]
Sign Up Procedures: To participate in the Air Compliance Agreement,
eligible AFOs should sign the Air Compliance Agreement and fill out
Attachment A to the Agreement (the Farm and Emission Unit Information
Sheets). A copy of the Agreement and all attachments can be downloaded
from EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov. The signed Agreement should
be returned to EPA during the 90-day sign-up period that commences on
the date of this notice. EPA will not sign the Agreement and forward it
to EPA's Environmental Appeals Board for approval until after the
conclusion of the public comment period.
Owners and operators of AFOs who want to sign Air Compliance
Agreements with EPA will need to provide all of the following
information on the Farm and Emission Unit Information Sheets for each
AFO they would like to be covered by the Compliance Agreement:
The name and address of the Respondent signing the Air
Compliance Agreement;
The name of each facility to be covered by the Agreement;
The name of the owner and operator of each facility,
including whether it is a contract grower facility;
The location of all the covered facilities;
The animal type and number of animals at each facility;
The type of animal housing structure and number of
structures at each facility;
The type of manure handling system and the number of
manure storage areas (e.g., manure piles or lagoons) at each facility;
The capacity and surface area, if applicable, of all
manure storage areas at each facility; and,
A description of any emission control technology or
nontraditional manure treatment systems at each facility.
Signed Air Compliance Agreements, including all properly filled out
attachments, should be sent to: Special Litigation and Projects
Division (2248A), Attn: Air Compliance Agreements, Office of Regulatory
Enforcement, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, U.S. EPA,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
At the end of the sign-up period, EPA will determine whether a
sufficient number of AFOs of each species have elected to participate.
The determination will be based on whether the number of participants
is sufficient to fully fund the monitoring study and whether the number
of participants for each type of operation is sufficient to provide a
representative sample to monitor. If the total number of participants
is insufficient, EPA will not sign any Air Compliance Agreements and
will not proceed with the monitoring study. If, however, the total
number of participants is sufficient but there are an insufficient
number of AFOs with a particular species or type of operation, EPA may
decline to sign Air Compliance Agreements with those particular
operations and decide not to proceed with the monitoring of that type
of operation. No later than 30 days after the end of the sign-up
period, EPA will decide whether to proceed with all, part, or none of
the monitoring study and will sign the Air Compliance Agreements and
forward them to EPA's Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) for final
approval.
Additional Sources of General Information: To find out more about
compliance with the CAA or section 103 of CERCLA, or EPCRA 304, please
access the EPA Web site at
http://www.epa.gov/air/oaq_caa.html/ or
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/action/law/cercla.htm.
Dated: January 21, 2005.
Thomas V. Skinner,
Assistant Administrator for Enforcement.
Jeffrey R. Holmstead,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
Appendix 1--Air Compliance Agreement With Attachments A and B;
Attachment A--Farm Information Sheet; Attachment B--National Air
Emissions Monitoring Study Protocol
Appendix 1
In the Matter of [Participating Company]; Consent Agreement and Final
Order; CAA-HQ-2005-XX; CERCLA-HQ-2005-XX; EPCRA-HQ-2005-XX
I. Preliminary Statement
1. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
[Participating Company] (Respondent) voluntarily enter into this
Consent Agreement and Final Order (Agreement) to address emissions
of air pollutants and hazardous substances from certain animal
feeding operation(s) that may be subject to requirements of the
Clean Air Act, the hazardous substance release notification
provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the emergency notification provisions
of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).
2. The purpose of this Agreement is to ensure that
[Participating Company] complies with applicable requirements of the
Clean Air Act and applicable release notification provisions of
CERCLA and EPCRA. To that end, this Agreement requires
[Participating Company], among other things, to be responsible for
the payment of funds towards a two-year national air emissions
monitoring study that will lead to the development of Emissions-
Estimating Methodologies that will help animal feeding operations
determine and comply with their regulatory responsibilities under
the Clean Air Act, CERCLA and EPCRA.
3. This Agreement is issued pursuant to section 113 of the Clean
Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7413 (federal enforcement of the Clean Air Act);
sections 103 and 109 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9603 and 9609 (federal
enforcement of notification provisions); section 325 of EPCRA, 42
U.S.C. 11045 (federal enforcement of EPCRA notification provisions);
and 40 CFR 22.13(b) and 22.18(b)(2) and (3) (procedural requirements
for the quick resolution and settlement of matters before the filing
of an administrative complaint). Respondent's participation in this
Agreement is not an admission of liability. At this time, Respondent
neither admits nor denies that any of its Farms is subject to CERCLA
or EPCRA reporting or Clean Air Act permitting requirements, or is
in violation of any provision of CERCLA, EPCRA or the Clean Air Act.
The execution of this Agreement by Respondent is not an admission
that any of its agricultural operations has been operated
negligently or improperly, or that any such operation is or was in
violation of any federal, state or local law or regulation.
4. As described more specifically in paragraphs 26 and 35 below,
this Agreement resolves Respondent's civil liability for certain
potential violations of the Clean Air Act, CERCLA and/or EPCRA at
[Participating Company's] Farm(s) listed in Attachment A. The
release and covenant not to sue found in paragraph 26 resolves only
violations identified and quantified by applying the Emissions-
Estimating Methodologies developed using data from the national air
emissions monitoring study described herein.
5. This Agreement is one of numerous identical agreements
between EPA and animal feeding operations across the nation. Through
these agreements, EPA and participating animal feeding operations
aim to assist in the development of improved Emissions-Estimating
Methodologies for air emissions from animal feeding operations and
to ensure that all animal feeding operations are in compliance with
applicable Clean Air Act, CERCLA and EPCRA requirements.
Notwithstanding any other provision, this Agreement shall not delay
or interfere with the implementation or enforcement of State
statutes that eliminate exemptions to Clean Air Act requirements for
agricultural sources of air pollution.
6. EPA may decline to enter into this Agreement with animal
feeding operations (and their successors and assigns) that have been
notified by EPA or a State that they currently may be subject to a
Federal or State Clean Air Act, CERCLA section 103 or EPCRA section
304(a) enforcement action.
II. Definitions
7. Unless otherwise defined herein, terms used in this Agreement
shall have the same meaning given to those terms in the Clean
[[Page 4963]]
Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.; the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.;
the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, 42 U.S.C.
11001 et seq., and the implementing regulations promulgated
thereunder. For purposes of this Agreement only, the following terms
shall have the following meanings.
8. The term ``Agricultural Waste'' or ``Agricultural Livestock
Waste'' means Livestock manure, wastewater, litter including bedding
material for the disposition of manure, and egg washing or milking
center waste treatment and storage. ``Agricultural Livestock'' or
``Livestock'' include dairy cattle, swine and/or poultry among
others.
9. The term ``Contract Grower'' means the owner or operator of a
Farm that raises Livestock or produces milk or eggs under a contract
with Respondent.
10. The term ``Emissions-Estimating Methodologies'' means those
procedures that will be developed by EPA, based on data from the
national air emissions monitoring study and any other relevant data
and information, to estimate daily and total annual emissions from
individual Emission Units and/or Sources. These methodologies will
be published on EPA's Web site (http://www.epa.gov).
11. The term ``Emission Unit'' means any part of a Farm that
emits or may emit Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Hydrogen
Sulfide (H2S), Ammonia (NH3), or Particulate
Matter (TSP, PM10 and PM2.5) and is either: (a) A building,
enclosure, or structure that permanently or temporarily houses
Agricultural Livestock; or (b) a lagoon or installation that is used
for storage and/or treatment of Agricultural Waste.
12. The term ``Environmental Appeals Board'' or ``EAB'' means
the permanent body with continuing functions designated by the
Administrator of EPA under 40 CFR 1.25(e) whose responsibilities
include approving administrative settlements commenced at EPA
Headquarters.
13. The term ``Facility'' shall mean ``CERCLA Facility and/or
EPCRA Facility.'' The term ``CERCLA Facility'' shall have the
meaning given that term under section 101(9) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.
9601(9). The term ``EPCRA Facility'' shall have the meaning given
that term under section 329(4) of EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. 11049(4).
14. The term ``Farm'' shall mean the production area(s) of an
animal feeding operation, adjacent and under common ownership, where
animals are confined, including animal lots, houses or barns; and
Agricultural Waste handling and storage facilities. ``Farm'' does
not include land application sites for Agricultural Waste. This
definition is limited exclusively to this Agreement and establishes
no precedent for the interpretation of any statute, regulation or
guidance.
15. The term ``Nuisance'' is defined according to State and
local common law, statutes, regulations, ordinances or usage.
16. The term ``Permitting Authority'' means the local, State or
Federal government entity with jurisdiction to require compliance
with the permitting requirements of the Clean Air Act.
17. The term ``Independent Monitoring Contractor'' means a
person or entity that is not affiliated with Respondent or any other
animal feeding operation, that has sufficient experience and
expertise to fully implement the national air emissions monitoring
study described herein, that meets the qualifications set forth in
Attachment B to this Agreement, and that is approved by EPA.
18. The term ``Qualifying Release'' means a release that
triggers a reporting requirement under section 103 of CERCLA or
section 304 of EPCRA.
19. The term ``Respondent'' means [Participating Company].
20. The term ``Source'' shall have the meaning given to the term
``stationary source'' in the implementing regulations of the Clean
Air Act at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(5) through (6), as interpreted by
applicable guidance issued by EPA.
21. The term ``State or Local Authority'' means a state or local
government entity with jurisdiction over Respondent's Farm(s).
III. Consent Agreement
22. EPA and Respondent have agreed to resolve this matter by
executing this Agreement, as further set forth herein.
23. Respondent asserts that it either owns, operates or
otherwise controls, or contracts with Contract Growers who own,
operate or otherwise control, the Farm(s) listed in Attachment A to
this Agreement. Respondent agrees that this Agreement applies only
to the Farm(s) that are listed in Attachment A and contain one or
more Emission Unit(s) as defined in paragraph 11 and described in
Attachment A.
24. For the purpose of this proceeding, Respondent does not
contest the jurisdiction of the Environmental Appeals Board.
25. As specified more fully below, Respondent consents to pay a
civil penalty, to be responsible for the payment of funds to the
national air emissions monitoring study, and to facilitate
implementation of the monitoring study, including making certain
Farms available for monitoring.
26. In consideration of Respondent's obligations under this
Agreement and subject to the limitations and conditions set forth in
paragraphs 27-30, 33, 34, 36, 37 and 43, EPA releases and covenants
not to sue Respondent, with respect to the listed Emission Units
located at the Farm(s) in Attachment A, for:
(A) Civil violations of the permitting requirements contained in
Title I, Parts C and D, and Title V of the Clean Air Act, and any
other federally enforceable State implementation plan (SIP)
requirements for major or minor sources based on quantities, rates,
or concentrations of air emissions of pollutants that will be
monitored under this Agreement, namely Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOCs), Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S), Particulate Matter (TSP,
PM10 and PM2.5), and Ammonia (NH3); and
(B) civil violations of CERCLA section 103 or EPCRA section 304
from air emissions of Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) or Ammonia
(NH3) that are not singular unexpected or accidental
releases such as those caused by an explosion, fire or other
abnormal occurrence.
27. (a) The releases and covenants not to sue described in
paragraphs 26 and 35 extend only to violations of the requirements
identified in those paragraphs and apply only to emissions from
Agricultural Waste at Emission Units (as defined in paragraph 11).
They do not extend to any other requirements including but not
limited to: (i) Any possible requirements that relate to emissions
generated by other equipment or activities co-located at the Farm,
including waste-to-energy systems; (ii) activities at open cattle
feedlots for beef production; (iii) Clean Air Act permitting
requirements triggered by an expansion of a Farm beyond its design
capacity as of the date this Agreement is executed; or (iv)
requirements that are not triggered by the quantity, concentration
or rate of emission of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Hydrogen
Sulfide (H2S), Particulate Matter (TSP, PM10 and PM2.5)
or Ammonia (NH3), including work practice requirements
and equipment specifications.
(b) The release and covenants not to sue in paragraphs 26 and 35
shall apply to the liability of a Contract Grower with respect to a
Farm if and only if the Contract Grower executes an Agreement with
EPA covering that Farm.
28. The release and covenant not to sue described in paragraph
26 covers Respondent's liability for violations with respect to an
Emission Unit located at a Farm listed in Attachment A if and only
if Respondent complies with all applicable requirements of this
Agreement and, with respect to that Emission Unit:
(A) Within 120 days after receiving an executed copy of this
Agreement, for any Farm that confines more than 10 times the ``large
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation'' threshold of an animal
species,\3\ the animal feeding operation provides to the National
Response Center (NRC) and to the relevant local and state emergency
response authorities written notice describing its location and
stating substantially as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This definition is being used in this Agreement solely for
the purpose of determining the penalty assessed, and for certain
limited reporting purposes. ``Large Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operation'' is defined as: (a) 2,500 swine weighing more than 55
pounds; (b) 10,000 swine weighing less than 55 pounds; (c) 82,000
laying hens; (d) 125,000 broilers; (e) 55,000 turkeys; or (f) 700
mature dairy cows or 1000 dairy heifers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This operation raises [species] and may generate routine air
emissions of Ammonia in excess of the reportable quantity of 100
pounds per 24 hours. A rough estimate of those emissions is [--]
pounds per 24 hours, but this estimate could be substantially above
or below the actual emission rate, which is being determined through
an ongoing monitoring study in cooperation with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. When that emission rate has been
determined by this study, we will notify you of any reportable
releases pursuant to CERCLA section 103 or EPCRA section 304. In the
interim, further information can be obtained by contacting [insert
contact information for a person in charge of the operation].
[[Page 4964]]
Respondent shall provide to EPA, at the address in paragraph 64, a
copy of any written notice given pursuant to this subparagraph. This
interim notice shall be provided to satisfy the terms of this
Agreement only and is not intended to establish a precedent or
standard for reporting under CERCLA or EPCRA.
(B) Where application of the Emissions-Estimating Methodologies
establishes that no Clean Air Act requirements or that no CERCLA or
EPCRA notifications are required for a Source or Facility,
Respondent shall so certify to EPA in writing within 60 days after
EPA publishes Emissions-Estimating Methodologies applicable to the
Emission Units at the Source or Facility. Any such certification
shall identify each Source or Facility covered by the certification
and the Emissions-Estimating Methodology used to calculate its
emissions. If EPA notifies Respondent that this certification is not
correct because application of the Emissions-Estimating
Methodologies indicates that the Source or Facility is subject to
such requirements, Respondent shall have 90 days from notification
by EPA to comply with the provisions in paragraph 28(C) or submit,
in writing, clear and convincing proof to EPA that Respondent's
certification is correct.
(C) Respondent complies with all of the applicable requirements
set forth below:
(i) Within 120 days after EPA has published Emissions-Estimating
Methodologies applicable to the Emission Units at Respondent's
Source, Respondent submits all Clean Air Act permit applications
required by the Permitting Authority for the Source, based on
application of those Emissions-Estimating Methodologies.
(a) For a Source whose emissions exceed the major source
threshold in Title I, Part C or D, based on the area's attainment
status (e.g., in an attainment area, more than 250 tons per year of
a regulated pollutant), this requirement includes:
(1) Applying for and ultimately obtaining a permit that contains
a federally enforceable limitation or condition that limits the
potential to emit of the Source to less than the applicable major
source threshold for the area where the Source is located; or,
(2) Installing best available control technology (BACT) in an
attainment area, or technology meeting the lowest achievable
emission rate (LAER) if the Source is located in a nonattainment
area, as determined by and in accordance with the schedule provided
by the Permitting Authority for the Source, and obtaining a
federally enforceable permit that incorporates an appropriate BACT
or LAER limit. For the purposes of this Agreement, compliance with
the requirements found in 40 CFR 52.21(k) through (p) is not a
condition of the release and covenant not to sue described in
paragraph 26. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit a state
or local government's authority to impose applicable permitting
requirements. Emission reductions that result from installing BACT
or LAER may not be used in netting calculations to offset emissions
from a future modification to the Source.
(b) The annual emissions from a particular Source shall be
determined based on Respondent's current operating methods and on
the maximum number of animals housed at the Source at any time over
the 24 months prior to EPA's publication of the applicable
Emissions-Estimating Methodologies.
(c) Respondent promptly and fully responds to any notices of
deficiency (or other equivalent notification that the permit
application is incomplete or incorrect) issued by the Permitting
Authority with respect to the permit application(s).
(d) As described in paragraph 34, below, Farms installing waste-
to-energy systems will have an additional 180 days to submit the
above-referenced permit applications.
(ii) Within 120 days after EPA has published Emissions-
Estimating Methodologies applicable to Emission Units at
Respondent's Facility, Respondent reports all Qualifying Releases of
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) and Ammonia (NH3) in
accordance with section 103 of CERCLA and section 304 of EPCRA.
(iii) Respondent timely installs all emission control equipment
and implements all practices required by this Agreement or contained
in the Clean Air Act permits issued in response to the applications
submitted in accordance with subparagraph (i) of this paragraph.
(iv) Respondent provides EPA with written certification that it
has timely installed all emission control equipment and implemented
all practices required by this Agreement or contained in the Clean
Air Act permits issued in response to the applications submitted in
accordance with subparagraph (i) of this paragraph, within 30 days
of meeting those requirements or within 30 days of acknowledgment of
compliance by the Permitting Authority if such acknowledgment is
required.
(D) Respondent's failure to comply with any of the above
requirements in this paragraph at any particular Source shall affect
the release and covenant not to sue for the noncompliant Source only
and shall not affect the release and covenant not to sue for
Respondent's complying Sources. In addition, Respondent's failure to
comply with any of the above requirements in this paragraph at any
particular Facility shall affect the release and covenant not to sue
for the noncompliant Facility only and shall not affect the release
and covenant not to sue for Respondent's complying Facilities.
29. For any Farm listed in Attachment A that is owned and
operated by a Contract Grower, Respondent is not responsible for
complying with paragraphs 28, 30 and 60. However, the release and
covenant not to sue described in paragraph 26 covers Respondent's
liability for violations with respect to the Emission Units located
at such Farm if, and only if, the Contract Grower complies with all
the requirements of paragraph 28. The Contract Grower's liability
for violations with respect to the Emission Units located at that
Farm is not covered by any of the releases and covenants not to sue
set forth in this Agreement. However, the Contract Grower may enter
its own agreement with EPA (thus becoming a respondent in its own
agreement) and obtain similar conditional releases and covenants not
to sue with respect to the emission units at its farm.
30. In addition, the release and covenant not to sue described
in paragraph 26 covers violations with respect to the Emission Units
located at a Farm listed in Attachment A if, and only if, Respondent
complies with the following requirements, with respect to that Farm:
(A) During the period in which potential violations at the Farm
are covered by the release and covenant not to sue as described in
paragraph 26, Respondent complies with all final actions and final
orders issued by the State or Local Authority that address a
Nuisance arising from air emissions at the Farm and that are:
(i) Issued after Respondent has been given notice and
opportunity to be heard (including any available judicial review) as
required by applicable state or local law; and,
(ii) Issued during the time period in which potential violations
at the Farm are covered by the release and covenant not to sue as
described in paragraph 26.
(B) Within 60 days of coming into compliance with the final
action or order of the State or Local Authority, Respondent provides
EPA with written certification that Respondent has complied with the
final action or final order and within the time schedule approved by
the State or Local Authority.
31. Respondent agrees that the statute of limitations for all
claims covered by the release and covenant not to sue in paragraph
26 will be tolled from the date this Agreement is approved by the
EAB and until the earlier of: (a) 120 days after Respondent files
the required certifications in accordance with paragraph 28(B) or
paragraph 28(C)(iv), or (b) December 31, 2011. This time period can
be extended by written agreement of both parties.
32. EPA will publish Emissions-Estimating Methodologies within
18 months of the conclusion of the monitoring period and will
publish such Methodologies on a rolling basis as soon as they are
developed. If EPA's Science Advisory Board determines that EPA is
unable to publish Emissions-Estimating Methodologies applicable to a
particular type of Emission Unit in Attachment A within 18 months of
the conclusion of the monitoring period because of inadequate data,
EPA will attempt to resolve such data problems as soon as possible.
EPA's inability to publish an Emissions-Estimating Methodology for a
particular type of Emission Unit in Attachment A within 18 months
shall have no effect on any other deadline or provision of this
Agreement for any other type of Emission Unit listed in Attachment
A.
33. As a condition of its participation in this Agreement,
Respondent agrees to accept, regardless of any collateral
proceeding, the study protocols employed in and the emissions data
developed by, the national air emissions monitoring study conducted
under the plan described in paragraphs 53 through 63 below. If
Respondent challenges the protocols employed or the data developed,
the release and covenant not to sue described in paragraph 26 of
this Agreement will become null and void and will have no effect on
Respondent's past or future liability.
34. Respondent may choose to install and operate one or more
systems that process
[[Page 4965]]
Agricultural Livestock Waste to produce electricity (a waste-to-
energy system). If Respondent selects this option, it will have,
with respect to a Farm at which such a system will be installed, an
additional 180 days to comply with the requirements of paragraph 28
provided the following requirements are met, with respect to that
Farm:
(A) Within 120 days after EPA has published Emissions-Estimating
Methodologies applicable to the Emission Units at Respondent's
Source, Respondent provides EPA with a written certification that it
intends to install a waste-to-energy system, identifies each Farm at
which such a system is or will be installed, and describes the type
of waste-to-energy system installed and the percentage by volume of
Agricultural Waste processed by the system at each Farm.
(B) The waste-to-energy system processes at least 50 percent of
the Agricultural Waste by volume produced at the Farm.
(C) Respondent makes each Farm at which a waste-to-energy system
is installed available for inspection by EPA.
(D) Respondent agrees to operate the waste-to-energy system for
24 months from the first date of operation or the date EPA publishes
Emissions-Estimating Methodologies for the Emission Units at
Respondent's Source, whichever is later. If during that 24-month
period Respondent has to shut down the waste-to-energy system, the
benefits of this paragraph will still be applicable if Respondent
has made all reasonable efforts to maintain and operate the system.
(E) Respondent obtains, within applicable time limits, all
required federal and state permits needed to construct and operate
the waste-to-energy system at the Farm.
35. Subject to paragraphs 27, 37 and 43, if during the pendency
of the nationwide monitoring study, Respondent promptly reports and
corrects a civil violation of a federally approved SIP or an
approved Federal implementation plan (FIP) resulting from emissions
of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Hydrogen Sulfide
(H2S), Ammonia (NH3), or Particulate Matter
(TSP, PM10, and PM2.5) from a Farm listed in Attachment A that
causes or contributes to a violation of any provision of the
federally approved SIP that requires compliance with an ambient air
quality standard at the Farm's property line, EPA releases and
covenants not to sue Respondent for the reported and corrected
violation if, and only if, the conditions set forth below are met:
(A) Unless Respondent first learned of the violation through a
notice from EPA, Respondent provides notice of the violation to EPA
and the applicable Permitting Authority within 21 days of
Respondent's discovery of the violation or the final order of the
EAB approving this Agreement, whichever is later;
(B) Respondent corrects the violation, including making any
necessary adjustments to its operations at the Farm to prevent the
violation from happening again, within 60 days after notice is given
by Respondent or EPA as described in subparagraph (A) above. If the
violation cannot reasonably be corrected within 60 days, Respondent
must, before the end of the 60-day time period, submit a plan that
is ultimately approved by EPA and the applicable Permitting
Authority to correct the violation and must comply with the approved
plan in accordance with the specified schedule. Within 30 days of
correcting the violation, Respondent shall submit a written
certification to EPA indicating that it has corrected the violation
in accordance with the approved plan; and,
(C) The violation is not a repeated violation that Respondent
previously reported to EPA pursuant to this paragraph. Respondent
may rectify the loss of the above release and covenant not to sue
for the first instance of a repeat violation; however, if it pays a
stipulated penalty of $500 a day for each day that the Farm exceeds
the ambient air quality standard, and it meets the requirements of
subparagraphs (A) and (B), except that the time to correct the
violation shall be 30 days instead of 60 days.
36. All certifications that Respondent must submit to comply
with this Agreement shall include the following statement:
I certify under penalty of law that the information contained in
this submittal to EPA is accurate, true, and complete. I understand
that there are significant civil and criminal penalties for making
false or misleading statements to the United States government.
The above statement shall be signed by a responsible official
for the Respondent (i.e., the owner if Respondent is a sole
proprietorship, the managing partner if Respondent is a partnership,
or a responsible corporate official if Respondent is an incorporated
entity).
37. The releases and covenants not to sue described in
paragraphs 26 and 35 do not cover Respondent's liability for any
violation with respect to an Emission Unit located at a Farm if
Respondent fails to comply with any of the applicable requirements
of this Agreement with respect to that Emission Unit, including the
limitations and conditions in paragraphs 26-29 and 33-34 above. The
releases and covenants not to sue described in paragraphs 26 and 35
cover only violations with respect to the Emission Units located at
the Farm that occur before the earlier of: (a) The date Respondent
submits the last required certification covering those Emission
Units; or (b) 2 years after Respondent submits any permit
applications pursuant to paragraph 28(C)(i). This time period can be
extended by a period not to exceed 6 months upon written agreement
of both parties provided the Respondent's action or inaction is not
the cause of any delay in obtaining a permit.
38. EPA will notify Respondent if EPA has determined that it
cannot develop Emissions-Estimating Methodologies for any Emission
Units listed in Attachment A.
(A) This notice shall identify (individually or by category)
Emission Units, Sources and/or Facilities for which Emissions-
Estimating Methodologies cannot be developed.
(B) For the Emission Units identified in such a notice:
(i) No certification under paragraph 28 shall be required for
those Emission Units and any other related Emission Units that
comprise the Source or Facility; and,
(ii) The releases and covenants not to sue described in
paragraphs 26 and 35 shall cover potential violations that occur on
or before 120 days after the date the notice is mailed, but shall
not cover potential violations that occur more than 120 days after
that date.
(C) Notice required under this paragraph will be deemed proper
if sent via U.S. mail postage prepaid to the address listed in
Attachment A.
39. The execution of this Agreement is not an admission of
liability by Respondent, and Respondent neither admits nor denies
that it has violated any provisions of the Clean Air Act, CERCLA or
EPCRA.
40. Respondent waives its right to request an adjudicatory
hearing on this Agreement, and its right, created by Clean Air Act
section 113(a)(4), to confer with the Administrator before this
Agreement takes effect. Respondent further waives its right to seek
judicial review of the penalty assessed in paragraph 48.
41. Respondent and EPA represent that they are duly authorized
to execute this Agreement, and that the persons signing this
Agreement on their behalf are duly authorized to bind Respondent and
EPA, respectively, to the terms of this Agreement.
42. Respondent agrees not to claim or attempt to claim a federal
income tax deduction or credit covering all or any part of the civil
penalty paid to the United States Treasurer. Any payments made in
connection with the national air emissions monitoring study do not
constitute a fine or penalty and are not paid in settlement of any
actual or potential liability for a fine or penalty.
43. This Agreement is without prejudice to all rights of EPA
against Respondent with respect to any claims not expressly covered
by the releases and covenants not to sue contained in paragraphs 26
and 35. This Agreement does not limit in any way EPA's authority to
restrain Respondent or otherwise act in any situations that may
present an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health,
welfare or the environment. In addition, the releases and covenants
not to sue in paragraphs 26 and 35 do not cover any criminal
liability.
44. With respect to any claims not expressly released herein, in
any subsequent administrative or judicial proceeding initiated by
the United States for injunctive relief, penalties, recovery of
response costs or other relief relating to a Farm listed in
Attachment A, Respondent shall not assert, and may not maintain, any
defense or claim based upon the principles of waiver, res judicata,
collateral estoppel, issue preclusion, claim-splitting or other
defenses based upon any contention that the claims raised by the
United States in the subsequent proceeding were or should have been
brought in the instant proceeding.
45. Respondent recognizes that EPA may not execute this
Agreement if EPA determines that there will be inadequate funding
for the national air emissions monitoring study or if EPA determines
that there is inadequate representation of eligible animal groups
and types of Farms, Facilities or Emission Units.
46. Respondent and EPA stipulate to the issuance of the proposed
Final Order below.
[[Page 4966]]
[Participating Company], Respondent
By:-------------------------------------------------------------------
(Print Name):---------------------------------------------------------
Title:----------------------------------------------------------------
Dated:----------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Complainant
By:-------------------------------------------------------------------
Title:----------------------------------------------------------------
Dated:----------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Final Order
It is hereby ordered and adjudged as follows:
Compliance
47. Respondent shall comply with all terms of this Agreement.
Penalty
48. Respondent is hereby assessed a penalty based on the number
and size of the Farms listed in Attachment A as follows:
(A) If Respondent has only one Farm and that Farm is below the
``large Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation'' threshold for that
animal species,\4\ Respondent is assessed a penalty of $200.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) All other Respondents are assessed a penalty of $500 per
Farm, unless the Farm contains more than 10 times the total number
of animals that defines the ``large Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operation'' threshold. For those Farms, Respondent is assessed a
penalty of $1,000 per Farm.
(C) The total penalty paid by Respondent shall not exceed:
$10,000 if Attachment A lists 1-10 Farms
$30,000 if Attachment A lists 11-50 Farms
$60,000 if Attachment A lists 51-100 Farms
$80,000 if Attachment A lists 101-150 Farms
$90,000 if Attachment A lists 151-200 Farms
$100,000 if Attachment A lists more than 200 Farms.
49. Respondent shall pay the assessed penalty no later than 30
calendar days from the date an executed copy of this Agreement is
received by Respondent (hereinafter referred to as the ``Agreement
Date'').
50. All penalty assessment monies under this Agreement shall be
paid by certified check or money order, payable to the United States
Treasurer, and mailed to: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(Washington, DC Hearing Clerk), P.O. Box 360277, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 15251-6277. A transmittal letter, indicating
Respondent's name, complete address, and this case docket number
must accompany the payment. Respondent shall file a copy of the
check and of the transmittal letter by mailing it to: Headquarters
Hearing Clerk, US EPA, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy, Crystal Mall
2, Room 104, Arlington, VA 22202.
51. Failure to pay the penalty assessed under this Agreement may
subject Respondent to a civil action pursuant to section 113(d)(5)
of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7413(d)(5), to collect any unpaid
portion of the monies owed, together with interest, handling
charges, enforcement expenses, including attorney fees and
nonpayment penalties. In any such collection action, the validity,
amount or appropriateness of this Order or the penalty assessed
hereunder is not subject to review.
52. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 7413(d)(5) and 31 U.S.C. 3717,
Respondent shall pay the following amounts:
(A) Interest. Any unpaid portion of the assessed penalty shall
bear interest at the rate established pursuant to 26 U.S.C.
6621(a)(2) from the date an executed copy of this Agreement is
received by Respondent; provided, however, that no interest shall be
payable on any portion of the assessed penalty that is paid within
30 days of the Agreement Date.
(B) Attorney Fees, Collection Cost, Nonpayment Penalty. Should
Respondent fail to pay on a timely basis the amount of the assessed
penalty, Respondent shall be required to pay, in addition to such
penalty and interest, the United States' enforcement expenses,
including but not limited to attorney fees and costs incurred by the
United States for collection proceedings, and a quarterly nonpayment
penalty for each quarter during which such failure to pay persists.
Such nonpayment penalty shall be 10 percent of the aggregate amount
of Respondent's outstanding penalties and nonpayment penalties
accrued from the beginning of such quarter.
(C) Payment. Interest, attorney fees, collection costs, and
nonpayment penalties related to Respondent's failure to timely pay
the assessed penalty shall be made in accordance with subparagraphs
(A) and (B) of this paragraph.
Monitoring Fund
53. Respondent has a shared responsibility for funding and
implementing the national air emissions monitoring study described
in paragraphs 53 through 63.
(A) Respondent individually shall be responsible for paying the
lesser of: (a) $2,500 for each Farm listed in Attachment A to this
Agreement; or (b) Respondent's pro rata share of the amount needed
to fully fund the monitoring study (``Full Funding Level''),
including any unfunded balance of the monitoring study, consistent
with the provisions of paragraph 62. Respondent's pro rata share
shall be based on the number of Farms listed in Attachment A divided
by the total number of discrete Farms of the same species that share
responsibility for funding the national monitoring study. The Full
Funding Level is the amount of money actually needed to fully and
adequately fund the monitoring study described in this Agreement.
The Full Funding Level shall be initially estimated within 60 days
of the Agreement date and shall be included as part of the proposed
plan to conduct the monitoring described in paragraph 55. The
estimated Full Funding Level shall be used to determine the pro rata
share of the monitoring fund payment for which Respondent is
initially responsible. Any shortfalls that occur because the
estimated Full Funding Level was less than the actual Full Funding
Level shall be handled in accordance with this paragraph and
paragraph 62.
(B) Respondent shall have no obligation to contribute money to
the national monitoring study on behalf of a Farm listed in
Attachment A if: (a) That Farm has been listed as a contract farm in
another agreement that is identical to this agreement except for the
respondent involved, and (b) the respondent to the other Agreement
has agreed to be responsible for the payment of monies into the
monitoring study for that Farm.
54. Respondent shall have met its shared responsibility for
funding and implementing the national air emissions monitoring
study, including any individual payments by Respondent under
paragraph 53 or 62 if, and only if: (a) A nonprofit entity is
established for the purposes set forth below; (b) the monitoring
fund obligations to the nonprofit entity are fully satisfied; (c)
the nonprofit entity enters into a contract with an Independent
Monitoring Contractor (the ``IMC'') that obligates the IMC to
fulfill the requirements set forth in paragraphs 55 through 59 and
62 of this Agreement; and, (d) Respondent grants access to Farms
listed in Attachment A in accordance with paragraphs 60 and 61. The
purposes of the nonprofit entity shall include: collecting and
holding Respondent's contributions to the national air emissions
monitoring study, purchasing and holding title to research
equipment, contracting with an IMC to conduct the monitoring study,
and other responsibilities.
55. The contract identified in paragraph 54 shall require the
IMC to submit to EPA, within 60 days of the Agreement date, a
detailed plan to conduct the nationwide monitoring study set forth
in Attachment B. The proposed plan shall:
(A) Identify the IMC and its qualifications, including the
qualifications of any subcontracted science advisors, for
implementing the national air emissions monitoring study;
(B) Be consistent with, expand the explanation of, and include
all of the elements of the monitoring study outline set forth in
Attachment B to this Agreement, including the requirements that: (1)
All monitoring be completed within 2 years of EPA's approval of the
monitoring study; (2) a comprehensive quality assurance program be
implemented as part of the study; and (3) the emissions to be
monitored will be Particulate Matter (TSP, PM10, and PM2.5),
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S), Ammonia (NH3), and
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs);
(C) Identify the Farms to be monitored and the justification for
including those Farms based on the specifications for the monitoring
set forth in Attachment B; and,
(D) Require the IMC to submit detailed quarterly reports to EPA
and to the entity described in paragraph 54. Those reports shall
discuss the IMC's progress in implementing the approved monitoring
plan, including what it did during the previous 3 months and what it
intends to do during the next three months. The IMC shall submit
quarterly reports starting with the end of the first calendar
quarter (i.e., March 31, June 30, September 30 or December 31) after
the proposed monitoring plan is approved by EPA, unless the plan is
approved by EPA with less than 30 days left in the current
[[Page 4967]]
calendar quarter. If that occurs, the IMC shall submit the first
quarterly report at the end of the next calendar quarter. The
quarterly reports shall continue through the end of the calendar
quarter during which the national monitoring study is completed.
56. EPA will review and approve or disapprove the proposed plan
within 30 days of receiving it from the IMC. If the proposed plan is
disapproved, EPA will specifically state why it is being disapproved
and what changes need to be made. The IMC shall then have 30 days
from the date EPA disapproves the proposed plan to modify it and to
submit the modified plan to EPA for review and approval. If the IMC
does not submit a plan that is ultimately approved by EPA, the
releases and covenants not to sue set forth in paragraphs 26 and 35
of this Agreement shall be null and void.
57. Once the plan is approved, the contract between the
nonprofit entity identified in paragraph 54 and the IMC shall
require the IMC to fully implement the approved plan in accordance
with the approved schedule. Failure of the IMC to implement the
approved plan in accordance with the approved schedule, unless
specifically excused by EPA in writing, shall nullify the releases
and covenants not to sue set forth in paragraphs 26 and 35 of the
Agreement. The estimated Full Funding Level monies shall be
transferred to the nonprofit entity described in paragraph 54 within
60 days of EPA's approval of the monitoring plan.
58. The contract identified in paragraph 54 shall require the
IMC to schedule periodic meetings (either by phone or in person)
with EPA, and additional meetings upon request by EPA or the IMC, to
discuss progress in implementing the approved plan. The IMC shall be
required to promptly inform EPA of any problems in implementing the
approved plan that have occurred or are anticipated to occur or of
any adjustments that may be needed. No changes may be made to the
approved plan without the written consent of EPA.
59. All emissions data generated and all analyses of the data
made by the IMC during the nationwide monitoring study shall be
provided to EPA as soon as possible in a form and through means
acceptable to EPA. The parties agree that all emissions data will be
fully available to the public, and that Respondent waives any right
to claim any privilege with respect to such data.
60. Respondent agrees to make the Farms listed in Attachment A
available for emissions monitoring under the national air emissions
monitoring study if the Farm is chosen as a monitoring site under
the approved plan. As stated in paragraph 29, if the Farm is owned
by a Contract Grower, this requirement does not apply. However, a
Contract Grower who enters into its own agreement with EPA (thus
becoming a respondent in its own agreement) is subject to this
requirement.
61. Respondent also agrees to give EPA or its representative
access to those Farms for the purpose of verifying their suitability
for monitoring or to observe monitoring conducted under the approved
nationwide monitoring plan. EPA agrees that prior to entering a
Farm, it will comply with proper biosecurity measures as are normal
and customary. Nothing in this Agreement is intended in any way to
limit EPA's inspection, monitoring, and information collection
authorities under the Clean Air Act, CERCLA or EPCRA.
62. If, prior to completion of the national air emissions
monitoring study, it appears that there will be insufficient funds
to complete the study, the IMC shall notify EPA of this problem
within 30 days of making this determination. The notice shall
contain a detailed explanation of why there are insufficient funds,
account for all money spent, and identify how much more money is
needed to complete the monitoring study. If Respondent is not
required under paragraph 53 to contribute or secure the contribution
of additional money to the national monitoring study that will be
sufficient to complete the monitoring study, the IMC or the
nonprofit entity described in paragraph 54 shall make all reasonable
efforts to find additional funding to complete the monitoring study.
The IMC or the nonprofit entity described in paragraph 54 shall
advise EPA of the efforts to locate additional funding and shall not
commit to the use of additional funding sources without the prior
approval of EPA. If, despite the best efforts of Respondent or its
representative, the IMC, or the nonprofit entity described in
paragraph 54, the national monitoring study cannot be completed due
to lack of funding, then the releases and covenants not to sue set
forth in paragraphs 26 and 35 of this Agreement will no longer be in
effect. For Farms with animal types for which sufficient funds were
provided to fully and adequately fund their portion of the national
monitoring study, EPA shall make reasonable efforts to avoid
terminating the releases and covenants not to sue set forth in
paragraphs 26 and 35.
63. If, after completion of the national monitoring study, there
is unspent money in the national monitoring fund, the IMC shall
notify EPA within 90 days of completion of the monitoring study. The
notice shall contain a detailed explanation of why there are unspent
funds, including an accounting of all money spent to implement the
national monitoring study and how much is left unspent. The notice
shall also include a proposed plan for distribution of the leftover
money.
64. All certifications required by this Agreement shall be
submitted to: Special Litigation and Projects Division (2248A),
Attn: AFO/CAFO certifications, Office of Regulatory Enforcement,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
65. Except for a Farm for which Respondent, or the Contract
Grower, is able to certify under paragraph 27(B), this document
constitutes an ``enforcement response'' as that term is used in the
Clean Air Act Penalty Policy and an ``enforcement action'' as that
term is used in the EPCRA/CERCLA Penalty Policy.
66. Each party shall bear its own costs, fees, and disbursements
in this action, except where explicitly stated as otherwise in this
Agreement.
67. The provisions of this Agreement shall be binding on
Respondent, its officers, directors, employees, agents, successors
and assigns.
68. This Agreement is not binding and without legal effect
unless and until approved by the Environmental Appeals Board.
It is so ordered.
Dated this---------- day of ----------, 2005.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Appeals Judge
Environmental Appeals Board
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Attachment A to the Consent Agreement
This Attachment identifies and describes the Farms and Emission
Units covered by this Agreement. This Agreement has no effect on any
Farm or Emission Unit not specifically listed on this Attachment.
The terms used in this Attachment shall have the meaning given to
those terms in the Agreement.
The attached Farm Information Sheets and Emission Unit
Information Sheets provide information about each Farm and Emission
Unit(s) to be covered by this Agreement. A separate form for each
Farm and each Emission Unit covered by the Agreement is attached
below and as such is an integral part of this Attachment. By
identifying a Farm for coverage under the Agreement, Respondent is
asserting that the Farm meets the definition of a Farm in the
Agreement and contains at least one Emission Unit as defined in the
Agreement. Also by identifying an Emission Unit at a Farm for
coverage under the Agreement, Respondent is asserting that the
Emission Unit meets the definition of an Emission Unit in the
Agreement. Unless Respondent identifies a Contract Grower for a
Farm, Respondent is also asserting it owns, operates or otherwise
controls the Farm.
I certify under penalty of law that the information contained in
this submittal to EPA is accurate, true, and complete. I understand
that there are significant civil and criminal penalties for making
false or misleading statements to the United States Government.
[Signature]-----------------------------------------------------------
[Name] [Title] [Date]
[Participating Company]
[Participating Company's Address]
Farm Information Sheet (Example) (Fill Out One Sheet for Each Farm)
Name of Farm:---------------------------------------------------------
Is the Farm owned and operated by a Contract Grower or is
otherwise a contract farm?
------yes ------no
Name of Contract Grower (if applicable):------------------------------
Location:-------------------------------------------------------------
(street address, city, county, state)
Animal Type (check all that apply):
------Poultry (layers)
------Poultry (broilers)
------Poultry (turkeys)
------Dairy Cattle (heifers or milking cattle)
------Swine (nursery, sow or finisher)
------Other (please identify)
For all Farms that Respondent owns and/or operates, provide a
Farm sketch/diagram that numbers or otherwise identifies all
Emission Units listed on this Farm Information Sheet.
[[Page 4968]]
Emission Unit Information Sheet (Example) (Fill Out One Sheet for Each
Emission Unit)
Name of Farm where Emission Unit is located:--------------------------
Unit name and/or number:----------------------------------------------
Date placed in service:-----------------------------------------------
Design capacity (No. of animals or No. of gallons):-------------------
If the Emission Unit is a manure storage and treatment system in use
at the Farm, check all that apply:
------pull plug/flush/in-ground manure storage basin (if lagoon,
specify type)
------deep pit/in-ground manure storage basin (if lagoon specify
type)
------shallow pit/open manure storage
------shallow pit/closed manure storage
------deep pit/open manure storage
------deep pit/closed manure storage
------manure belt/closed manure storage
------manure belt/open manure storage
------flush/open manure storage
------flush/closed manure storage
------scrape/open manure storage
------scrape/closed manure storage
------other (briefly describe)
If the Emission Unit is a building, enclosure, or structure that
permanently or temporarily houses Agricultural Livestock, check all
that apply with respect to the ventilation type:
------natural
------mechanical
------other (please describe)
Emission Control Technology (please list type and briefly
describe if applicable):
Attachment B--National Air Emissions Monitoring Study Protocol;
Overview & Summary
Executive Summary
This document provides an overview and summary of a monitoring
study protocol for collecting air emissions data from the egg,
broiler chicken, turkey, dairy and swine industries. This protocol
was developed through a collaborative effort of industry experts,
university scientists, government scientists, and other stakeholders
knowledgeable in the field. Although the effort was facilitated by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), this product represents the
opinions of the scientists, government experts, and stakeholders
involved. In addition, there was extensive internal review and input
by representatives from U.S. EPA's Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance, Office of Air and Radiation, and Office of
Research and Development.
This protocol is designed to provide a framework for development
of a comprehensive field sampling plan for collecting quality-
assured air emission data from representative livestock and poultry
farms in the U.S. As recommended in the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) 2003 report,\5\ and paraphrased here, * * * EPA and USDA
should for the short term, initiate and conduct a coordinated
research program designed to produce a scientifically sound basis
for measuring and estimating air emissions from AFOs. Specific
recommendations being addressed with this protocol are related to
direct measurements at sample farms; utilizing information on the
relationships between air emissions and animal types, nutrient
outputs, manure handling practices, animal numbers, climate, and
other factors, conducting these studies to evaluate the extent to
which ambient atmospheric concentrations of the various pollutants
of interest are consistent with estimated farm emissions; and using
scientifically sound and practical protocols for measuring pollutant
emission rates. The research program will involve additional
recommendations from the NAS, which entails developing a process-
based model that considers the entire animal production process. The
data collected in the monitoring study will lay the groundwork for
developing these more process-related emission estimates. However,
as with any large and complex effort, this work must be conducted
over a period of years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ NAS, ``Air Emissions From Animal Feeding Operations: Current
Knowledge, Future Needs,'' National Research Council, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the development of this protocol, several alternate
techniques were considered. The Science Advisor, in designing the
monitoring study, may choose to use an alternate technique that is
deemed most appropriate for a particular study unit. (A listing of
alternate techniques can be found later in this protocol.) Thus,
this protocol does not exclude use or consideration of any
measurement methods or technologies that have been demonstrated to
be scientifically sound and/or widely accepted for application to
collecting air emissions data from the relevant farm sectors.
However, the use of alternate techniques is dependent upon EPA
approval of a comprehensive study design and budget.
The benchmark data collected and subsequent analyses and
interpretation will allow EPA and livestock and poultry producers to
reasonably determine which farms are subject to the regulatory
provisions of the Clean Air Act and reporting requirements of CERCLA
and EPCRA. Following sound scientific principles and using accepted
instrumentation and methods, the monitoring study will collect new
data from a number of farms across the country and will also
evaluate existing emissions data from other selected studies that
may meet EPA quality assurance criteria. Together, they will form a
database to which additional studies of air emissions and the
effectiveness control technologies can be compared.
EPA will review and approve (as described in the Consent
Agreement) a comprehensive study design and plan, including a
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), and a budget for all aspects
of the monitoring study. The QAPP will outline appropriate
procedures to ensure acceptable accuracy, precision,
representativeness, and comparability of the data; and will specify
the use of properly maintained and reliable instrumentation,
sampling schedules, ready supply of spare parts, approved analytical
methodologies and standard operation procedures, description of
routine quality control (QC) checks, external validation of data,
well-trained analysts, field blanks, electrical backups, audits,
documentation and format of data submission, and other procedural
requirements. Chain of custody documentation will be used for
samples of particulate matter. Wetted materials for gas sampling
will be Teflon[reg], stainless steel or glass. All sampling flow
rates will be calibrated.
Monitoring Study Responsibilities
Several groups of management and technical staff will be
responsible for success of the study. Their responsibilities are
discussed here and graphically illustrated in the following flow
chart.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[[Page 4969]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN31JA05.000
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
[[Page 4970]]
The Nonprofit Organization (NPO)
Industry has established a nonprofit entity (Agricultural Air
Research Council, or AARC, and referred to as the nonprofit
organization or NPO in the Consent Agreement) to handle the funds
contributed by individual participating organizations. The NPO will
operate like a company with voting members who elect a board of
directors. The board of directors will meet regularly, receive
reports on the progress of the study, approve the budget, and review
audits of expenditures.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN31JA05.001
The NPO will be responsible for:
Selecting the Science Advisor and Independent
Monitoring Contractor (IMC);
Holding and disbursing to the Independent Monitoring
Contractor the funds necessary to complete the study according to
its approved schedule, protocol and budget; and
Communicating progress of the study to livestock and
poultry producers, the media and other interested parties.
Selection of the IMC and Science Advisor
The NPO will choose an IMC and a Science Advisor based on
qualifications, experience and familiarity with all components of
the subject matter. The IMC and the Science Advisor must be well
staffed with accountants and contract managers who are well versed
in fiduciary management. EPA will review the NPO's selection. If EPA
believes the qualification criteria have not been met, the NPO will
have to select an alternate candidate.
Role of Science Advisor
To be technically qualified, the Science Advisor must have an
extensive background in animal agriculture, including expertise in
air emissions from animal feeding operations, data processing, and
engineering processes. The Science Advisor will be responsible for
drafting the comprehensive study design and QAPP and will submit
these to EPA for approval. He/She will also coordinate with the IMC
to oversee the work of the subcontracted Principal Investigators on
the study. The Science Advisor will be employed by the IMC.
Roles of the Independent Monitoring Contractor (IMC)
Technical & Administrative Oversight
The IMC will be contractually responsible for the conduct of the
study, and will:
Be a separate organization from the industry that funds
the study;
Oversee the performance of the Science Advisor;
Work closely with the Science Advisor in purchasing and
assembling equipment and developing contracts for principal
investigators; and
Directly administer all subcontracts, supervise budgets
and monitor expenditures, report progress and audit all financial
statements.
Reporting on Study Progress
The IMC will:
Report to EPA and the NPO on financial status of the
study;
Report to EPA and the NPO on the study progress; and
Create a Web site specifically for the monitoring study
and regularly post updates so that the public can follow the study's
progress.
Role of the Principal Investigators
Principal investigators will carry out the monitoring at each
site. They will report to the Science Advisor and, in turn, to the
IMC.
Site Selection
The NPO will be comprised of representatives from the various
animal husbandry industries who are knowledgeable of actual farming
operations as related to the farm sites proposed for monitoring.
They will compile a list of candidate farms from those operations
participating in the Consent Agreement and submit the list to the
Science
[[Page 4971]]
Advisor. The Science Advisor will then facilitate a process to
select farms for monitoring based on a set of pertinent factors
(e.g., differing regional and climatic conditions, number of
animals, different manure handling practices, and types of
ventilation (natural vs. forced air)). In addition, logistical
issues will be considered to reduce problems associated with egress
and convenience; such as, is there a principal investigator located
within 3 hours of the site, are there housing accommodations
available within 1 hour of the site, is there internet access at the
farm, and is 220 V power available? After comprehensive site plans
are approved by EPA, the Science Advisor will supervise the set up
of equipment at those farms selected, advise the cooperating farmers
of their responsibilities, verify utilities, arrange for high speed
computer data transmission service, initiate the study and implement
the quality assurance project plan. As the study progresses, some
investigators may want to alter their approved plans due to interim
findings (such as, collecting redundant data or discovering a need
to change equipment location). Any changes must be sent to the
Science Advisor, with EPA notification and concurrence, for approval
or disapproval.
Monitoring Plans by Species
On the following pages, the swine, egg layer, meat bird (broiler
and turkey) and dairy air emissions study components are summarized.
These were developed over several months by a peer review team of
scientists, industry and other stakeholders. While the study scope
varies from species to species in line with their data needs,
available funding, and industry characteristics, the technologies
and measurement methodologies selected by the team are consistent
across species.
1. Air Emission Monitoring Plan for Swine
Introduction: Swine production phases include sows (breeding,
gestation, and farrowing), nursery pigs, and finishing pigs. The
buildings are either naturally ventilated or mechanically ventilated
but many buildings have a combination of the two ventilation types.
Manure treatment and/or storage generally consists of either basins
(earthen, clay or synthetic lined earthen, concrete, glass lined
steel) that store manure collected from the barn, or clay/synthetic
lined earthen anaerobic treatment lagoons that treat and store
manure. Manure collection systems with external manure storage/
treatment are generally scrape, flush or pull-plug.
Overall, the U.S. hog inventory is located in three general
regions. The five top Midwest swine states, IA, MN, IL, MO, and IN
represent about 54 percent of the total inventory in the U.S. In the
Southeast, NC, AR, VA, KY, and MS represent about 19 percent, and in
the West, OK, NE, KS, SD, and TX represent about 15 percent.
Farm Selection for New Measurements: Swine production farm types
are identified by region, production phase, ventilation type, and
manure storage/treatment in Table 1. Farms selected will be
characterized by criteria such as facility age, size, design and
management, local topography and meteorology, swine diet and
genetics. The farm should be reasonably isolated from other
potential air pollution sources. Producers/farm managers must be
willing to attend a training session, make changes as needed to
accommodate the project, and maintain and share certain production
records to facilitate data analysis and interpretation. Farms to be
monitored will be further characterized using farm management data
and samples collected for analysis of water, feed and manure. Farms
will provide vital management information regarding ventilation
controls/management and scheduling of barn activities such as manure
management, animal load out, animal treatment, or feeding. At a
minimum, water, feed and manure samples will be collected and
analyzed for total nitrogen and total sulfur content.
Table 1.--Farm Sites Identified and Proposed for Monitoring
[G = gestation, F = farrowing, FI = finishing, MV = mechanically ventilated]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location of measurements
Production phase Ventilation type Number of units ----------------------------------------------------------
Barns or rooms Storage/lagoon treatment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOUTHEAST:
Sow.......................... MV.......................... 4........................... G & F.......................
Single or double............ ............................ Lagoon.
Finisher..................... MV.......................... 4........................... FI..........................
Single or double............ ............................ Lagoon.
MIDWEST:
Sow.......................... MV.......................... 4........................... G & F.......................
2........................... ............................ Deep pit.
Finisher..................... MV.......................... 4........................... FI..........................
1........................... ............................ Basin.
WEST:
Sow.......................... MV.......................... 4........................... G & F.......................
Single or double............ ............................ Lagoon.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methods: The mass balance technique will be used for measuring
emissions from mechanically ventilated barns. Micrometeorological
techniques will be used for manure storage/treatment systems located
outside the barn. Table 2 summarizes the methods and emissions that
will be measured from barns and manure storage/treatment systems. A
maximum of five farms will be selected for barn measurements and six
farms for manure storage/treatment system measurements. If possible,
at least one farm will have measurements conducted at both the barns
and the manure storage/treatment system.
Table 2.--Summary of Emissions Measurements and Methodologies
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Source units Methodology Targeted emissions Number of units to
farms monitor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barn.............................. Mass balance......... NH 3, PM10, PM2.5 \1\ 5 20
VOC, H2S, TSP, CO2.
Manure storage/treatment system... Micromet and Water 9. VOC, H2S, NH3........ \1\ 6 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Table 1.
[[Page 4972]]
Barn Measurements: An on-farm instrumentation shelter (OFIS)
will house the equipment for measuring pollutant concentrations at
representative air inlets and outlets (primarily by air extraction
for gases), barn airflows, operational processes and environmental
variables. Sampling will be conducted for 24 months with data logged
every 60 seconds. Data will be retrieved with network-connected PCs,
formatted, validated, and delivered to EPA for subsequent
calculations of emission factors. A multipoint air sampling system
in the shelter will draw air sequentially from representative
locations (including outdoor air) at the barns and deliver selected
streams to a manifold from which on-line gas monitors draw their
subsamples. Concentration of constituents of interest will be
measured using the following methods:
Ammonia will be measured using chemiluminescence or
photoacoustic ingrared.
Hydrogen sulfide will be measured with pulsed
fluorescence.
Carbon dioxide will be measured using photoacoustic
infrared or equivalent.
TSP will be measured using an isokinetic multipoint
gravimetric method.
PM2.5 will be measured gravimetrically with a federal
reference method for PM2.5 at least for 1 month per site. It will be
shared among sites.
PM10 will be measured in real time using the tapered
element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) at representative exhaust
locations in the barn and ambient air.
An initial characterization study of barn volatile
organic compounds (VOC) will be conducted on 1 day during the first
month at the first site (site 1). While total nonmethane
hydrocarbons (NMHC) are continuously monitored using a dual-channel
FID analyzer (Method 25A) along with building airflow rate, VOC will
be sampled with replication at two barns using Silcosteel canisters,
and all-glass impingers (EPA Method 26A). Each sample will be
evaluated using concurrent gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-
MS) and GC/FID for TO 15 and other FID-responding compounds. VOC
mass will be calculated as the sum of individual analytes. The 20
analytes making the greatest contribution to total mass will be
identified during the initial characterization study. A sampling
method that captures a significant fraction of the VOC mass will be
chosen for the remainder of the study.
The Method 26A sampling train is suitable for
collecting samples for analysis of formaldehyde and acetaldehyde
using NCASI 94.02, requiring only the addition of spectrophotometry
for the detection of formaldehyde. These compounds will be measured
during the initial characterization study and, if not found, will
not be analyzed during subsequent measurements.
Total VOC mass may be estimated (scaled) by multiplying
the total carbon as determined by Method 25A by the molecular
weight/carbon weight ratio derived from GC-MS or GC-FID speciation.
This should account for the VOC that are not identified by GC
methods due either to sampling bias or the analytical procedures
used, although some error is anticipated due to the imprecise
response of the Method 25A FID to oxygenated compounds. Acceptance
of a scaling factor will depend on whether the Method 25A analyzer
response is reasonable based on the manufacturer's stated response
factors, bench-scale verification, or judgmental estimation of the
mass of unaccounted for VOC.
By the middle of the second month, the Science Advisor
will report results of the initial VOC characterization to EPA with
recommendations on the appropriateness and validity of the selected
methodologies.
Quarterly VOC samples using the selected VOC sampling
method will occur at all sites, along with continuous Method 25A
monitoring at site 1 throughout the study.
Method 25A measurements will be corrected from an ``as
carbon'' basis to a total VOC mass basis by multiplying them by the
mean molecular weight per carbon atom established by GC-MS
evaluations during applicable intervals of time.
Mechanically ventilated barn airflows will be estimated by
continuously measuring fan operational status and building static
pressure to calculate fan airflow from field-tested fan performance
curves and by directly measuring selected fan airflows using
anemometers. Specific processes that directly or indirectly
influence barn emissions will be measured including pig activity,
manure management/handling, feeding, and lighting. Environmental
parameters including heating and cooling operation, floor and manure
temperatures, inside and outside air temperatures and humidity, wind
speed and direction, and solar radiation will be continuously
monitored. Feed and water consumption, manure production and
removal, swine mortalities, and animal production will also be
monitored. As noted above, samples of feed, water, and manure will
be collected and analyzed for total nitrogen and total sulfur. These
data will enable the development and validation of process-based
emission models in the future.
Table 1 identifies those types of farms where barn measurements
will be taken to provide the needed data to complete the objectives
of the monitoring study. A total of five farms will be selected as
measurement sites. Two farms in the Southeast representing the sow
and finishing phases of production with lagoon manure treatment will
be selected. Two farms in the Midwest representing a finishing farm
using an in-ground manure storage basin and a sow farm with a deep
pit gestation barn will be selected. Finally, one farm in the West
representing a sow farm with lagoon treatment will be selected. On
each of the farms, four barns will have measurements taken
simultaneously. Where applicable, the sow farms will have two
farrowing rooms and two gestation barn emissions measured and on
finishing farms, up to four barns will have emission measurements.
Lagoons: Micrometeorological techniques will be used to estimate
emissions of NH3, H2S, and a limited number of
VOC from lagoons. Fundamentally, this approach will use optical
remote sensing (ORS) downwind and upwind of the lagoon coupled with
3-dimensional (3D) wind velocity measurements at heights of 2 and 12
meters (m). The concentrations of NH3 and the various
hydrocarbons will be made using open path Fourier transform infrared
spectroscopy (FTIR). Measurements of H2S (and
NH3) will be made using collocated open path UV
differential optical absorption spectroscopy (UV-DOAS) systems. A
team of two persons with two scanning FTIR systems, two single-path
UV-DOAS systems, and two 3D sonics with supplementary meteorological
instruments will move sequentially from farm to farm.
Each of two ORS systems will be oriented parallel to the storage
side and approximately 10m from the lagoon edge. Each monostatic
FTIR system will scan five retroreflectors; three mounted at 1m
height equally dividing the length of the open path along the lagoon
side and two mounted on a tower at heights of 6 and 12m located at
the corners down the adjacent sides of the lagoon, resulting in scan
lines down each of the four sides of the lagoon. Two bistatic
single-path UV-DOAS systems will be located at a nominal 2m height
within 2m laterally of the FTIR scan lines on the two sides of the
lagoon oriented most closely with prevailing winds.
Emissions will be determined from the difference in upwind and
downwind concentration measurements using two different methods--a
Eulerian Gaussian approach and a Lagrangian Stochastic approach. The
Lagrangian approach is based on an inverse dispersion analysis using
a backward Lagrangian stochastic method (bLS). This approach will be
used to estimate NH3 emissions from concentration
measurements made using the FTIR and UV-DOAS systems and the
H2S emissions from concentration measurements made using
the UV-DOAS systems. The emission rate for NH3 will be
the ensemble average of the estimated emissions for each of the five
FTIR scans with a corresponding error of the emission estimate. The
Eulerian approach is based on a computed tomography (CT) method
using Eulerian Gaussian statistics and a fitted wind profile from
the two 3D sonics. Measurements of air and lagoon temperatures, wind
speed and direction, humidity, atmospheric pressure, and solar
radiation will also be conducted.
The bLS and CT emission estimates will be quality assured using
tests of instrument response, wind direction and wind speed,
stability, turbulence intensity, differences between the lagoon and
the surrounding surface temperatures, differences in the mean and
turbulent wind components with height, and the temporal variability
in emissions. Emission estimates using the CT method will be
qualified by the measured fraction of the estimated plume. To
estimate VOC emissions from lagoons, samples of the lagoon liquid
will be collected and analyzed for VOC, and the EPA model WATER9
will be used to estimate emissions based on measured VOC
concentrations, pH, and other factors.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC): QA/QC processes will
be established before data collection commences. The QA/QC
procedures will be based on EPA guidelines and will include the use
of properly maintained and reliable instrumentation, ready supply of
spare parts,
[[Page 4973]]
approved analytical methodologies and standard operating procedures,
external validation of data, well-trained analysts, field blanks,
electrical backups, audits, and documentation. Calibration and
maintenance logs will be maintained for each instrument.
2. Air Emission Monitoring Plan for Laying Hens
Introduction: Most U.S. layer housing types and manure
management schemes fall under one of four categories: (1) High-rise
houses with manure stored in the lower level and removed every 1 to
2 years, (2) belt houses with quasi-continuous manure transfer to an
external storage/treatment facility, (3) shallow-pit houses with
regular manure removal by scraping and temporary storage in
uncovered piles, and (4) liquid-manure houses with manure flushed
daily into a lagoon. The locations for four sites with specific
housing types were recommended for the monitoring study with
consideration of these four housing categories along with the
potential impact of climatic differences and the geographical
density of egg production (Table 3). Final site selections will also
depend on site-specific factors including representativeness of
facility age, size, design and management, and flock diet and
genetics. The facility should be reasonably isolated from other air
pollution sources and have potential for testing mitigation
strategies. Producers/farm managers must be willing to attend a
training session, make changes as needed to accommodate the project,
and maintain and share certain production records to facilitate data
analysis and interpretation.
Table 3.--Recommended Types and Locations of Laying Hen Houses To Be
Monitored in the Monitoring Study
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region/location House 1--type House 2--type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Midwest..................... High-rise with Manure belt (2) with
inside manure manure storage.
storage (2).
West........................ Shallow pit with Manure belt with
open manure storage. open manure
storage.
South....................... High-rise with High-rise with
inside manure inside manure
storage. storage.
East........................ High-rise with Flushing with
inside manure anaerobic treatment
storage. lagoon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methods: An on-farm instrument shelter (OFIS) will house the
equipment for monitoring pollutant concentrations at representative
air inlets and outlets (primarily by air extraction for gases), barn
and manure shed airflows, and operational processes and
environmental variables. Sampling will be conducted for 24 months
with data logged every 60 seconds. Data will be retrieved with
network-connected PCs, formatted, validated, and delivered to EPA
for subsequent calculations of emission factors. A multipoint air
sampling system in the OFIS will draw air sequentially from
representative locations (including outdoor air) at the hen houses
and manure sheds and deliver selected streams to a manifold from
which gas analyzers draw their samples.
Selected pollutants will be evaluated as follows:
Ammonia will be measured using chemiluminescence or
photoacoustic infrared.
Hydrogen sulfide will be measured with pulsed
fluorescence.
Carbon dioxide will be measured using photoacoustic
infrared or equivalent.
TSP will be measured using an isokinetic multipoint
gravimetric method.
PM2.5 will be measured gravimetrically with a federal
reference method for PM2.5 at least for 1 month per site. It will be
shared among sites.
PM10 will be measured in real time using the tapered
element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) at representative exhaust
locations in the barn, ambient air, and at manure storage exhaust
(if manure is disturbed).
An initial characterization study of barn VOC will be
conducted on 1 day during the first month at the first site (site
1). While total nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC) are continuously
monitored using a dual-channel FID analyzer (Method 25A) along with
building airflow rate, VOC will be sampled with replication at two
barns using Silcosteel canisters, and all-glass impingers (EPA
Method 26A). Each sample will be evaluated using concurrent gas
chromatography--mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and GC/FID for TO 15 and
other FID-responding compounds. VOC mass will be calculated as the
sum of individual analytes. The 20 analytes making the greatest
contribution to total mass will be identified during the initial
characterization study. A sampling method that captures a
significant fraction of the VOC mass will be chosen for the
remainder of the study.
The Method 26A sampling train is suitable for
collecting samples for analysis of formaldehyde and acetaldehyde
using NCASI 94.02, requiring only the addition of spectrophotometry
for the detection of formaldehyde. These compounds will be measured
during the initial characterization study and, if not found, will
not be analyzed during subsequent measurements.
Total VOC mass may be estimated (scaled) by multiplying
the total carbon as determined by Method 25A by the molecular
weight/carbon weight ratio derived from GC-MS or GC-FID speciation.
This should account for the VOC that are not identified by GC
methods due either to sampling bias or the analytical procedures
used, although some error is anticipated due to the imprecise
response of the Method 25A FID to oxygenated compounds. Acceptance
of a scaling factor will depend on whether the Method 25A analyzer
response is reasonable based on the manufacturer's stated response
factors, bench-scale verification, or judgmental estimation of
unaccounted for VOC mass.
By the middle of the second month, the Science Advisor
will report results of the initial VOC characterization to EPA with
recommendations on the appropriateness and validity of the selected
methodologies.
Quarterly VOC samples using the selected VOC sampling
method will occur at all sites, along with continuous Method 25A
monitoring at site 1 throughout the study.
Method 25A measurements will be corrected from an ``as
carbon'' basis to a total VOC mass basis by multiplying them by the
mean molecular weight per carbon atom established by GC-MS
evaluations during applicable intervals of time.
Mechanically ventilated barn airflows will be estimated by
continuously measuring fan operational status and building static
pressure to calculate fan airflow from field-tested fan performance
curves and by directly measuring selected fan airflows using
anemometers. Specific processes that directly or indirectly
influence air emissions will be measured including hen activity,
feeding, and lighting. Measured environmental parameters include
cooling system status, manure temperatures, inside and outside air
temperatures and humidities, wind speed and direction, and solar
radiation. Feed and water consumption, egg production, manure
production and removal, and bird mortalities will also be monitored
with producer assistance. Samples of feed, eggs, water, and manure
will be collected and analyzed for total nitrogen and total sulfur.
These data will enable the development and validation of process-
based emission models in the future.
Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC): QA/QC processes will
be established before data collection commences. The QA/QC
procedures will be based on EPA guidelines and will include the use
of properly maintained and reliable instrumentation, ready supply of
spare parts, approved analytical methodologies and standard
operating procedures, external validation of data, well-trained
analysts, field blanks, electrical backups, audits, and
documentation. Instrument calibration and maintenance logs will be
maintained.
3. Air Emission Monitoring Plan for Meat Birds (Broiler Chickens
and Turkeys)
Introduction: Meat birds include broilers and turkeys and are
raised in confinement barns on dirt or concrete floors covered with
litter. Broiler barns are typically mechanically ventilated and
turkey barns are typically naturally ventilated. The locations for
three sites with specific housing types were recommended for the
monitoring study with consideration of the potential impact of
climatic differences and the geographical density of poultry meat
production (Table 4). The final site selections will depend on site-
[[Page 4974]]
specific emission generating factors including representativeness of
facility age, size, design and management; and flock diet and
genetics. The facility should be reasonably isolated from other air
pollution sources and have potential for testing mitigation
strategies. Producers/farm managers must be willing to attend a
training session, make changes as needed to accommodate the project,
and maintain and share certain production records to facilitate data
analysis and interpretation.
Table 4.--Recommended Types and Locations of Meat Bird Houses To Be Monitored
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region Type Ventilation type Manure handling
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Midwest........................... Turkey............... Mechanical.......... Litter on floor.
West Coast........................ Broiler.............. Mechanical.......... Litter on floor.
Southeast......................... Broiler.............. Mechanical.......... Litter on floor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methods: An on-farm instrument shelter (OFIS) will house the
equipment for monitoring pollutant concentrations at representative
air inlets and outlets (primarily by air extraction for gases), barn
airflows, and operational processes and environmental variables.
Sampling will be conducted for 24 months with data logged every 60
seconds. Data will be retrieved with network-connected PCs,
formatted, validated, and delivered to EPA for subsequent
calculations of emission factors. A multipoint air sampling system
in the OFIS will draw air sequentially from representative locations
(including outdoor air) at the barns and deliver selected streams to
a manifold from which gas analyzers draw their subsamples. The
pollutants targeted for measurement will be evaluated as follows:
Ammonia will be measured using chemiluminescence or
photoacoustic infrared.
Hydrogen sulfide will be measured with pulsed
fluorescence.
Carbon dioxide will be measured using photoacoustic
infrared or equivalent.
TSP will be measured using an isokinetic multipoint
gravimetric method.
PM2.5 will be measured gravimetrically with a federal
reference method for PM2.5 at least for 1 month per site. It will be
shared among sites.
PM10 will be measured in real time using the tapered
element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) at representative exhaust
locations in the barn, and ambient air.
An initial characterization study of barn VOC will be
conducted on 1 day during the first month at the first site (site
1). While total nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC) are continuously
monitored using a dual-channel FID analyzer (Method 25A) along with
building airflow rate, VOC will be sampled with replication at two
barns using Silcosteel canisters, and all-glass impingers (EPA
Method 26A). Each sample will be evaluated using concurrent gas
chromatography--mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and GC/FID for TO 15 and
other FID-responding compounds. VOC mass will be calculated as the
sum of individual analytes. The 20 analytes making the greatest
contribution to total mass will be identified during the initial
characterization study. A sampling method that captures a
significant fraction of the VOC mass will be chosen for the
remainder of the study.
The Method 26A sampling train is suitable for
collecting samples for analysis of formaldehyde and acetaldehyde
using NCASI 94.02, requiring only the addition of spectrophotometry
for the detection of formaldehyde. These compounds will be measured
during the initial characterization study and, if not found, will
not be analyzed during subsequent measurements.
Total VOC mass may be estimated (scaled) by multiplying
the total carbon as determined by Method 25A by the molecular
weight/carbon weight ratio derived from GC-MS or GC-FID speciation.
This should account for the VOC that are not identified by GC
methods due either to sampling bias or the analytical procedures
used, although some error is anticipated due to the imprecise
response of the Method 25A FID to oxygenated compounds. Acceptance
of a scaling factor will depend on whether the Method 25A analyzer
response is reasonable based on the manufacturer's stated response
factors, bench-scale verification, or judgmental estimation of the
mass of unaccounted for VOC.
By the middle of the second month, the Science Advisor
will report results of the initial VOC characterization to EPA with
recommendations on the appropriateness and validity of the selected
methodologies.
Quarterly VOC samples using the selected VOC sampling
method will occur at all sites, along with continuous Method 25A
monitoring at site 1 throughout the study.
Method 25A measurements will be corrected from an ``as
carbon'' basis to a total VOC mass basis by multiplying them by the
mean molecular weight per carbon atom established by GC-MS
evaluations during applicable intervals of time.
Mechanically ventilated barn airflows will be estimated by
continuously measuring fan operational status and building static
pressure to calculate fan airflow from field-tested fan performance
curves and by directly measuring selected fan airflows using
anemometers. Specific processes that directly or indirectly
influence barn emissions will be measured including bird activity,
manure handling, feeding, and lighting. Measured environmental
parameters include heating and cooling operation, floor and manure
temperatures, inside and outside air temperatures and humidity, wind
speed and direction, and solar radiation. Feed and water
consumption, manure production and removal, bird mortalities and
bird production will also be monitored with producer assistance.
Samples of feed, water, and manure will be collected and analyzed
for total nitrogen and total sulfur. These data will enable the
development and validation of process-based emission models in the
future.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC): QA/QC processes will
be established before data collection commences. The QA/QC
procedures will be based on EPA guidelines and will include the use
of properly maintained and reliable instrumentation, ready supply of
spare parts, approved analytical methodologies and standard
operating procedures, external validation of data, well-trained
analysts, field blanks, electrical backups, audits, and
documentation. Instrument calibration and maintenance logs will be
maintained.
Open Manure Piles: Micrometeorological techniques will be used
to estimate emissions of NH3, H2S, and a
limited number of VOC from open manure piles. Fundamentally, this
approach will use optical remote sensing (ORS) downwind and upwind
of the source coupled with 3-dimensional (3D) wind velocity
measurements at heights of 2 and 12m. The concentrations of
NH3 and the various hydrocarbons will be made using open
path Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Measurements of
H2S (and NH3) will be made using collocated
open path UV differential optical absorption spectroscopy (UV-DOAS)
systems. A team of two persons with two scanning FTIR systems, two
single-path UV-DOAS systems, and two 3D sonics with supplementary
meteorological instruments will move sequentially from farm to farm.
Each of two ORS systems will be oriented parallel to the storage
side and approximately 10m from the storage edge. Each monostatic
FTIR system will scan five retroreflectors; three mounted at 1m
height equally dividing the length of the open path along the
storage side and two mounted on a tower at heights of 6 and 12m
located at the corners down the adjacent sides of the source,
resulting in scan lines down each of the four sides of the storage.
Two bistatic single-path UV-DOAS systems will be located at a
nominal 2m height within 2m laterally of the FTIR scan lines on the
two sides of the manure storage area oriented most closely with
prevailing winds.
Emissions will be determined from the difference in upwind and
downwind concentration measurements using two different methods--an
Eulerian Gaussian approach and a Lagrangian Stochastic approach. The
Lagrangian approach is based on an inverse dispersion analysis using
a backward Lagrangian stochastic method (bLS). This approach will be
used to estimate NH3 emissions from concentration
measurements made using the FTIR and UV-DOAS systems and the
H2S emissions from concentration measurements made using
the UV-DOAS systems. The emission rate for NH3 will be
the ensemble average of the
[[Page 4975]]
estimated emissions for each of the five FTIR scans with a
corresponding error of the emissions estimate. The Eulerian approach
is based on a computed tomography (CT) method using Eulerian
Gaussian statistics and a fitted wind profile from the two-3D
sonics. Measurements of air and storage temperatures, wind speed and
direction, humidity, atmospheric pressure, and solar radiation will
also be conducted.
The bLS and CT emission estimates will be quality assured using
tests of instrument response, wind direction and wind speed,
stability, turbulence intensity, differences between the storage and
the surrounding surface temperatures, differences in the mean and
turbulent wind components with height, and the temporal variability
in emissions. Emission estimates using the CT method will be
qualified by the measured fraction of the estimated plume.
4. Air Emissions Monitoring Plan for Dairy
Introduction: Dairy operations are naturally ventilated
buildings with different manure handling systems. Measurement of the
emissions from these operations is to be conducted with a series of
measurement systems that provide a concentration measurement along a
path that would be representative of the emission plume from the
building. In order to estimate the emissions rate, it is necessary
to couple the concentration with a measurement of the wind flow
through the building or facility.
Manure storage sites could be either liquid (lagoons or slurry
store) or piles of solid materials. These sites represent a
different source area for emissions than buildings and will have to
be considered separately in the measurement scheme.
The protocols that are developed for these studies are based on
the following assumptions.
The buildings are naturally ventilated and require a
measurement method that captures the entire plume leaving the
building. Mechanically ventilated facilities are beginning to enter
the industry.
Manure storage is separate from the building and will
have to be measured as a distinct entity as part of the farm
emission factor.
The primary emissions sources are the housing and
feeding areas and manure storage.
There is a large diversity among dairy operations
across the U.S., and although there are similar characteristics in
general structure, the difference in building design, management,
and climate require measurements of facilities that represent these
factors.
Measurements will be conducted at facilities which
represent a diversity of systems in three general areas: California
and Southern U.S., Northeast U.S., and Upper Midwest.
Milk production facilities include cattle (dry cows, lactating
cows, and replacement heifers) and calves. The partially open barns
range from those with windows and flaps to fully open free stalls.
The buildings are most typically naturally ventilated except for
some mechanically ventilated free stall and tie stall houses. The
naturally ventilated barns range from partially open barns with
windows and flaps to fully open free stalls. External manure
storages generally consist of either earthen basins that store
undiluted manure collected from the barn, or anaerobic treatment
lagoons that treat manure that is diluted by a factor of about 5:1.
Manure collection systems generally are either scrape or flush. Four
dairy sites that consider climate and types of ventilation, manure
collection, and manure storage have been identified by the dairy
industry for collecting the comprehensive air emission data required
by the monitoring study (Table 5). Final site selections will also
depend on site-specific factors including representativeness of
facility age, size, design and management; and cow diet and
genetics. The facility should be isolated from other potential air
pollution sources and have potential for testing mitigation
strategies. Producers should be willing to make changes and keep
extra records to facilitate a quality study.
Table 5.--Recommended Types and Locations of Dairy Facilities To Be Monitored in This Study
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region Site type Ventilation ** Manure collection Manure storage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Midwest....................... Free stall....... Natural.......... Flush or scrape.. Lagoon.
Northeast..................... Free stall....... Natural.......... Scrape........... Basin.
West.......................... Open* free stall. Natural.......... Flush............ Lagoon.
South......................... Open free stall.. Natural.......... Scrape........... Basin.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Cattle are free to walk outside in open free stall barns.
** If warranted by current or future use, mechanically ventilated barns may be monitored.
Methods
Naturally Ventilated Buildings: To achieve the most
representative measurements of the emissions of the gases, it is
recommended that a FTIR system be used to quantify the concentration
of NH3, CO2, and, at levels above 50 parts per
billion (ppb), H2S in various paths through the
atmosphere. A variation of the horizontal gradient method utilizing
multiple paths through the airflow from the building, called radial
plume mapping, measures the concentrations. The FTIR method is
selected because of the extreme turbulence adjacent to the building
and the lack of a defined plume in this area of the facility. A
scanning system rotates among the paths to provide a serial
measurement of the paths utilizing horizontally and vertically
located retro-reflectors. A computer calculates the concentration
gradients in real time. FTIR measurements are coupled to two sonic
anemometers positioned at two locations along the length of the
building to provide the wind flow measurements needed to estimate
the flux from the measured concentrations.
Particulate load would be sampled using a series of particle
samplers located with a sampling height of 5m adjacent to one of the
sonic anemometer towers. These units would be designed to collect
2.5[mu]m, 10[mu]m and TSP values.
VOC would be sampled at the same position as the particulate
samples for the building emissions. VOC emissions from the manure
storage would be sampled with a system located both upwind and
downwind of the manure storage system. These units would be
positioned at heights of 2 and 12m.
Mechanically Ventilated Buildings: Mechanically ventilated
buildings have begun to be used in the dairy industry. If warranted
by current or future use, a mechanically ventilated facility will be
included in this project. An on-site instrument shelter (OSIS) will
house the equipment for monitoring pollutant concentrations at
representative air inlets and outlets (primarily by air extraction),
barn airflows, and operational processes and environmental
variables. Sampling will be conducted for 24 months with data logged
every 60 seconds. Data will be retrieved with network-connected PCs,
formatted, validated, and delivered to EPA as hourly averages for
subsequent calculations of emission factors. A multipoint air
sampling system in the OSIS will draw air sequentially from
representative locations (including ambient) at the barns and
deliver selected streams to a manifold from which on-line gas
monitors draw their subsamples. The pollutants targeted for
measurement will be evaluated as follows:
Ammonia will be measured using chemiluminescence or
photoacoustic infrared.
Hydrogen sulfide will be measured with pulsed
fluorescence.
Carbon dioxide will be measured using photoacoustic
infrared or equivalent.
TSP will be measured using an isokinetic multipoint
gravimetric method.
PM2.5 will be measured gravimetrically with a federal
reference method for PM2.5 at least for 1 month per site. It will be
shared among sites.
PM10 concentrations will be measured in real time using
the tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) at
representative exhaust locations in the barn and ambient air.
An initial characterization study of barn VOC will be
conducted on 1 day during the first month at the first site (site
1). While total nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC) are
[[Page 4976]]
continuously monitored using a dual-channel FID analyzer (Method
25A) along with building airflow rate, VOC will be sampled with
replication at two barns using Silcosteel canisters, and all-glass
impingers (EPA Method 26A). Each sample will be evaluated using
concurrent gas chromatography--mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and GC/FID
for TO 15 and other FID-responding compounds. VOC mass will be
calculated as the sum of individual analytes. The 20 analytes making
the greatest contribution to total mass will be identified during
the initial characterization study. A sampling method that captures
a significant fraction of the VOC mass will be chosen for the
remainder of the study.
The Method 26A sampling train is suitable for
collecting samples for analysis of formaldehyde and acetaldehyde
using NCASI 94.02, requiring only the addition of spectrophotometry
for the detection of formaldehyde. These compounds will be measured
during the initial characterization study and, if not found, will
not be analyzed during subsequent measurements.
Total VOC mass may be estimated (scaled) by multiplying
the total carbon as determined by Method 25A by the molecular
weight/carbon weight ratio derived from GC-MS or GC-FID speciation.
This should account for the VOC that are not identified by GC
methods due either to sampling bias or the analytical procedures
used, although some error is anticipated due to the imprecise
response of Method 25A FID to oxygenated compounds. Acceptance of a
scaling factor will depend on whether the Method 25A analyzer
response is reasonable based on the manufacturer's stated response
factors, bench-scale verification, or judgmental estimation of the
mass of unaccounted for VOC.
By the middle of the second month, the Science Advisor
will report results of the initial VOC characterization to EPA with
recommendations on the appropriateness and validity of the selected
methodologies.
Quarterly VOC samples using the selected VOC sampling
method will occur at all sites, along with continuous Method 25A
monitoring at site 1 throughout the study.
Method 25A measurements will be corrected from an ``as
carbon'' basis to a total VOC mass basis by multiplying them by the
mean molecular weight per carbon atom established by GC-MS
evaluations during applicable intervals of time.
Manure Storage Systems: Micrometeorological techniques will be
used to estimate emissions of NH3, H2S, and a
limited number of VOC from manure storage systems and storages.
Fundamentally, this approach will use optical remote sensing (ORS)
downwind and upwind of the storage coupled with 3-dimensional (3D)
wind velocity measurements at heights of 2 and 12m. The
concentrations of NH3 and the various hydrocarbons will
be made using open path Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy
(FTIR). Measurements of H2S (and NH3) will be
made using collocated open path UV differential optical absorption
spectroscopy (UV-DOAS) systems. A team of two persons with two
scanning FTIR systems, two single-path UV-DOAS systems, and two 3D
sonics with supplementary meteorological instruments will move
sequentially from farm to farm.
Each of two ORS systems will be oriented parallel to the storage
side and approximately 10m from the storage edge. Each monostatic
FTIR system will scan five retroreflectors; three mounted at 1m
height equally dividing the length of the open path along the
storage side and two mounted on a tower at heights of 6 and 12m
located at the corners down the adjacent sides of the storage,
resulting in scan lines down each of the four sides of the storage.
Two bistatic single-path UV-DOAS systems will be located at a
nominal 2m height within 2m laterally of the FTIR scan lines on the
two sides of the storage oriented most closely with prevailing
winds.
Emissions will be determined from the difference in upwind and
downwind concentration measurements using two different methods--an
Eulerian Gaussian approach and a Lagrangian Stochastic approach. The
Lagrangian approach is based on an inverse dispersion analysis using
a backward Lagrangian stochastic method (bLS). This approach will be
used to estimate NH3 emissions from concentration
measurements made using the FTIR and UV-DOAS systems and the
H2S emissions from concentration measurements made using
the UV-DOAS systems. The emission rate for NH3 will be
the ensemble average of the estimated emissions for each of the five
FTIR scans with a corresponding error of the emission estimate. The
Eulerian approach is based on a computed tomography (CT) method
using Eulerian Gaussian statistics and a fitted wind profile from
the two 3D sonics. Measurements of air and storage temperatures,
wind speed and direction, humidity, atmospheric pressure, and solar
radiation will also be conducted.
The bLS and CT emission estimates will be quality assured using
tests of instrument response, wind direction and wind speed,
stability, turbulence intensity, differences between the storage and
the surrounding surface temperatures, differences in the mean and
turbulent wind components with height, and the temporal variability
in emissions. Emission estimates using the CT method will be
qualified by the measured fraction of the estimated plume.
To estimate VOC emissions from lagoons, samples of the lagoon
liquid will be collected and analyzed for VOC, and the EPA model
WATER9 will be used to estimate emissions based on measured VOC
concentrations, pH, and other factors.
Alternate Techniques
1. For the circuit rider system, an instrumental system such as
the DustTrak by TSI could be used for continuous particle data for
PM2.5 and PM10. These systems provide optical light scattering
measurements of the concentration in mg/m3 and cost about $5,000 per
point including an environmental shelter.
2. A radial plume mapping approach could be applied to the
manure storage systems using a TDL system that has been approved by
EPA for use in the aluminum industry in a single path mode. One
upwind and three downwind paths provide the same type of data as the
FTIR except for a single compound. The single laser is scanned via
fiberoptic cables to the individual paths with a complete scan
taking 40 seconds. It provides a fast, direct measurement of the
flux of ammonia from these manure systems. A single 4-channel system
costs $68,000.
3. It is recommended that one short-term (2-week) measurement of
each facility be made with a LIDAR system to measure and quantify
the plume dynamics of particles, water vapor, and ammonia
surrounding the facility. This is recommended because the short-term
measurements will be made at different times throughout the year and
will be placed at a series of heights based on experience. These
associated data of the plume structure will provide evidence of
representativeness of the micrometeorological measurements for the
emission rates.
4. It is recommended that each building site be instrumented
with temperature and associated sensors to provide a continuous
measurement record of the microclimate within and adjacent to the
building. These systems can be linked with sensors to measure and
record animal activity and floor temperature. A similar system would
be located to measure the microclimate of the manure storage system
and would include air temperature, wind speed, wind direction,
surface temperature, and relative humidity of the manure storage
system. The continuous record from these manure storage units and
buildings would provide a reference for the short-term measurements
made with the FTIR systems.
5. A Dynamic Flux Chamber Technique could be used for performing
emission measurements from lagoons and/or a manure pile. Ammonia
flux is measured over a surface (lagoon and/or soil) using a dynamic
flux chamber system interfaced to an environmentally controlled
mobile laboratory. This flux chamber system is interfaced to an
environmentally controlled mobile laboratory in which two ammonia
chemiluminescence analyzers, gas dilution/titration calibration
system, and data logger with lap-top computer are located. The flux
calculation of ammonia using the flow-through chamber system is
given by the mass balance for ammonia in the chamber.
Typical Factors Used in Determining Farm Selection
Farm Characteristics
1. Did the producer sign up to the Consent Agreement and pay
EPA?
2. Does the producer's farm fit the description of any of the
farms listed?
3. Is there a principal investigator within 3 hours of the site?
4. Are there housing accommodations available within 1 hour of
the site?
5. Does your site have mechanical or natural ventilation for
barns? Do the fans blow out directly over the lagoon/ manure storage
area?
6. Is the producer/farm manager cooperative to attend a training
session and provide needed production information?
7. Is there internet access at the farm? Is 220 V power
available?
8. What is the general topography on the farm? Describe the
surrounding terrain
[[Page 4977]]
(rolling hills, flat, low lying, river bottom, etc.) specifically
for areas near the barns and the manure storage/treatment system.
9. Is the farm free from large disturbances such as trees and
other buildings?
10. What is the distance from a public road? Is it gravel?
11. Are there other potential air pollutant sources nearby?
Explain type (other farms, industrial site, grain elevator/
feedmill), distance and direction.
12. Are there other animal species housed on the site, or
planned for housing on site?
13. How many barns are located on the site? How many animals in
each barn? Please characterize the barns: Barn number/identifier,
production phase, rate your barn cleanliness (1-5; 1 being the
cleanest), age of barns, and air exchange rate.
14. How far are the land application fields from the lagoons and
barns?
15. How often is manure removed from the manure treatment/
storage system and land applied?
16. How often is manure removed from the buildings and sent to
the outdoor treatment/storage system?
17. Describe (in general terms) the rations fed to the animals.
18. Are the animals hand-fed or is feed delivered through an
automatic delivery system?
19. Is fat (vegetable or animal) added to the rations?
20. Are feed rations pelleted or ground?
Influences on Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Influences Producer provided Collected by study
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Climate........................................................... ..................... X
Air temperature................................................... ..................... X
Manure temperature................................................ ..................... X
Barn temperature.................................................. ..................... X
Wind speed........................................................ ..................... X
Solar radiation................................................... ..................... X
Rainfall.......................................................... ..................... X
Relative humidity................................................. ..................... X
Wind direction.................................................... ..................... X
Feed conversion/efficiency........................................ ..................... X
Feed analysis (N & P & S)......................................... X X
Phases............................................................ ..................... X
Feeding to recommendations........................................ X .....................
Manure production volume.......................................... X X
Management cycle.................................................. X .....................
Storage duration.................................................. X .....................
Stocking density (actual)......................................... ..................... X
Lagoon design..................................................... X X
Swine genetics.................................................... X .....................
Animal inventory.................................................. X .....................
Feed usage........................................................ X .....................
Water usage....................................................... X .....................
Closeouts......................................................... X .....................
Feed analysis..................................................... X X
Water analysis.................................................... ..................... X
Manure analysis................................................... X X
Animal/barn activity.............................................. X X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 05-1536 Filed 1-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P