Animal Feeding Operations

1. Animal Feeding Operations Status of the AFO Air Emissions Consent Agreement and Final Order February 9, 2006

2. Presentation Topics • Background information • Status report • Procedural • Data Summary • Monitoring Study • Future outlook for AFO strategy

3. Background Information • EPA & USDA charged the National Academy of Science (NAS) to conduct a review of AFO air emissions • NAS study conclusions: • No reliable emission factors for AFO exist • Additional data needed to develop estimating methodologies • Current methods for estimating emissions not appropriate • Use process-based approach

4. Background Information (cont.) • Consent agreement developed in response to: • Public concerns • NAS report • Consent agreement developed by: • EPA • Industry representatives • Proposed agreement coordinated with: • Agricultural industry representatives • State & local government officials • Environmental organizations • Citizen groups

5. Federal Register Notice • Signed on Jan. 21, 2005 • Published on Jan. 31, 2005 • 70 FR 4958 • “Initial” public comment period closed on March 2, 2005-final period closed May 2, 2005 • Signup period closed August 12, 2005 • Information available at: • www.epa.gov/fedrgstr • www.epa.gov/airlinks/airlinks3.html • www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/agreements/caa/cafo-agr-0501.html

6. Data Summary as of 11/23/2005 • Number of Agreements in database – 2719 • Number of farms within Consent Agreements– 6,795 • Dairy – 600 (2 in CO) • Swine – 4980 (91 in CO) • Layer, Pullets – 882 (14 in CO) • Broiler – 244 (4 in CO) • Turkey – 38 • Other - 51

7. Monitoring Study • Purpose: gather data for developing emission estimating methodologies • Funding provided by participating AFO • Monitor for: • Particulate matter • Hydrogen sulfide • Volatile organic compounds • Ammonia • Monitoring anticipated to begin in early 2006 and continue for 2 years • Validated and quality assured data made available to the public-

8. Monitoring Study • Focuses on three AFO sectors • Swine • Poultry • Dairy • Types of operations • Regional representation of AFO • Number of farms monitored depends on the number and type of participating AFO

9. Study Components • Nonprofit Organization – Agricultural Air Research Council (AARC)– • Contracts with the Independent Monitoring Contractor, collects funds and distributes, oversees budgets, communicates progress to EPA, USDA and public • Independent Monitoring Contractor (IMC) Responsible for conduct of air study, • Distributes funds from AARC, develops budgets, purchases equipment, audits financial statements, oversees Science Advisor

10. Study Components (cont’d) • Science Advisor (SA) • Drafts EPA approved study design and QAPP, chooses and advises Principal Investigators, oversees site selection, reports progress, problems and data to EPA • Principal Investigators • Subcontractors to IMC • Conducts monitoring study at specific sites, • Hires and supervises technicians, • Oversees payroll, reporting to Science Advisor • Most likely University agricultural air quality experts.

11. Where are we in the Process? • The Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) approved 20 consent agreements on January 27, 2005 • Awaiting approval of remaining consent agreements by EAB • Unofficially approved the Independent Monitoring Contractor and Science Advisor • Purdue University - IMC • Dr. Al Heber, Purdue University – SA • Completed entering Farm Information Sheet data into a database

12. After EAB Approval: • The IMC has 60 days to send the QAPP and site specific monitoring plans to EPA for approval. • EPA has 30 days to review and comment on plans. If EPA does not approve, they are returned to the IMC. • IMC has 30 days to then revise and submit back to EPA. • We expect monitoring to begin in the summer of 2006.

13. Next Steps • Emission estimating methodologies will be published within 18 months after completion of the monitoring study • Actual guidance and/or regulations will be a 3-to-5 year process, but will be concurrently developed with the monitoring study under the consent agreement. • Guidance and/or regulations developed in conjunction with overall AFO strategy encompassing industry, co-regulators, and USDA.

14. Phase-In Possibilities • Farming operations could be given 3 to 5 years to phase in controls. • Unlikely smaller operations will trigger CAA thresholds, but may trigger CERCLA/EPCRA thresholds (however how small is small? – the unknown we are trying to answer.) • Note CERCLA/EPCRA is not a cost issue but a reporting issue.

15. Future Outlook for AFO Strategy • National Academy of Sciences developed recommendations to characterize all AFO processes • Consent Agreement/Monitoring Study is just one piece of overall strategy • Farming operations both small and large will benefit from representation in monitoring study so that their processes are included • Air Office plans to issue strategy covering, but not limited to: • Regulations and/or guidance • Conservation practices (best management practices, technologies) • Emission estimating methodologies – short term • Process based emission model – long term • Outreach

16. Components of AFO Strategy • Developing guidance and/or regulations is designed to minimize the impact of animal agriculture on air quality • Size of farms regulated could cover small to large, depending on whether the operation is in a nonattainment area • Collecting as much data as possible ensures guidance and/or regulations will reflect realities of various farming operations

17. For More Information • Consent Agreement: • Bruce Fergusson, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), 202/564-1261, fergusson.bruce@epa.gov • Monitoring Study: • Sharon Nizich, Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), 919/541-2825, nizich.sharon@epa.gov • Air Issues: • Robin Dunkins, OAR, 919/541-5335, dunkins.robin@epa.gov • Bill Schrock, OAR, 919/541-5032, schrock.bill@epa.gov • Sharon Nizich, OAR, 919/541-2825, nizich.sharon@epa.gov • Larry Elmore, OAR, 919/541-5433, elmore.larry@epa.gov