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

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

3. 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. 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. 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/ag reements/caa/cafo-agr-0501.html www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/ag reements/caa/cafo-agr-0501.html

6. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 agreemen t. Guidance and/or regulations developed in conjunction with overall AFO strategy encompassing industry, co- regulators, and USDA.

14. 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. 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. 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. 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