1. Air Quality Legislations in OR and WA Pius Ndegwa Animal Waste Nutrients and Air Quality Specialist, Biological Systems Engineering Washington State University

2. General Overview Background The implementation of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by states is delegated by the US-EPA just like for any other federal statutes. Mechanism: The state is required to submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for approval by the EPA. The SIP defines what portion of the CAA the state is implementing and may include elements that go beyond the federal requirements. In order to obtain federal approval, a state’s SIP must at a minimum contain regulatory elements that comply with the CAA.

3. Oregon’s Air Quality Program Oregon air quality program began in the 1960s exempted all agricultural operations from regulation except for field burning in the Willamete Valley. Oregon’s SIP thus exempts majority of agricultural sources from title V permitting requirements. Oregon was not the only state that had this exemption, CA too did until mid 2002 following lawsuits against EPA forcing EPA to repeal prior federal approval of CA’s SIP for failing to adequately regulate major agricultural pollution sources. CA today has permitting requirements on certain large agricultural operations in the state.

4. Oregon’s Air Quality Program Direction Pressure from Environmental Groups In Nov. 2005, borrowing from CA, several environmental groups in Oregon petitioned EPA to revoke its approval of Oregon’s air quality permitting program and SIP because of the state’s exemption of major agricultural sources. Oregon’s Response To avoid EPA action against Oregon’s air quality program, DEQ and interested stakeholders convened a ‘task force’ to formulate a strategy for bringing the State’s program into compliance with the CAA. The end result was a legislative proposal dubbed SB 235. The environmental group rejected this proposal and put forward their own legislative proposal, which sought a law that directed DEQ to set air pollution standards for CAFOs and other large agricultural operations that would allow for regulation of specific pollutants such as ammonia and hydrogen sulfide. This legislation did not pass.

5. Oregon’s Air Quality Program Direction Elements of SB 235 (Passed in 2007) Directs DEQ and ODA to enter into a memorandum of understanding that transfers agricultural air emissions authority and enforcement to ODA. Creates a task force of 15 members: Legislators, regulators, industry representatives, public interest organizations, and educators or researchers. Charges this task force with the evaluation of emissions from dairy operations and available alternatives for reducing those emissions. The task must report its findings to DEQ and ODA by July 1, 2008, which will in turn present a joint DEQ/ODA report to interim legislative committee that includes ‘proposed legislation to reduce the emission of air contaminants by dairies’ by October 1 st, 2008. In effect, the law preserves the State’s agricultural exemption while leaving to the discretion of the DEQ’s Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) the authority to implement any of the task force’s recommendations to comply with CAA.

6. Oregon’s Air Quality Program Status The task force completed their work and recommended a minimum of $2 million in funding for research and development of BMP’s. It also recommended starting the process of voluntary BMP adoption and cost-sharing when funding is available. Process and Scope: Identification of suitable BMPs, researching more BMPs, and producer education. Implementation of SB 235 begins Jan. 2009 while total compliance is expected by 2015!

7. Washington’s Air Quality Program The WA-SIP of CAA did not exempt major agricultural sources like in California or Oregon. Implication: Major agricultural sources can be held accountable under all the facets of the CAA. The six “criteria pollutants” potentially harmful to human health currently regulated (by EPA) under the Clean Air Act are: Sulfur Dioxide - SO 2 Nitrogen Dioxide - NO 2 Ozone (methane, non-methane VOCs, NOx) Particulate matter: PM 10 ; PM 2.5 (Ammonia is important here) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Lead

8. National Ambient Air Quality Standards Primary StandardsSecondary Standards PollutantLevelAveraging TimeLevelAveraging Time Carbon Monoxide 9 ppm (10 mg/m 3 ) 8-hourNone 35 ppm (40 mg/m 3 ) 1-hour Lead1.5 µg/m 3 Quarterly AverageSame as Primary Nitrogen Dioxide 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m 3 ) Annual (Arithmetic Mean) Same as Primary Particulate Matter (PM 10 ) 150 µg/m 3 24-hourSame as Primary Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) 15.0 µg/m 3 Annual (Arithmetic Mean)Same as Primary 35 µg/m 3 24-hourSame as Primary Ozone0.075 ppm (2008 std)8-hourSame as Primary 0.08 ppm (1997 std)8-hourSame as Primary 0.12 ppm1-hour (Applies only in limited areas)Same as Primary Sulfur Dioxide 0.03 ppmAnnual (Arithmetic Mean) 0.5 ppm (1300 µg/m 3 ) 3-hour 0.14 ppm24-hour

9. Livestock Industry Air Quality Legislations Major Pollutants suspected from Livestock Industry: 1.Ammonia – Not directly regulated under CAA 2.Hydrogen sulfide – Not regulated under CAA 3.Particulate matter (PM 2.5 & PM 10 ) – Regulated under CAA 4.Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) – Somehow regulated under CAA 5.Nitrogen oxides (NO x ) – Somehow regulated under CAA 6.Methanol – Not regulated under CAA (May be hazardous) 7.Odor – Not regulated under CAA 8.Methane – Somehow regulated under CAA

10. Additional EPA Legislations for Air Quality CERCLA (1980) – Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. EPCRA (1986) – Emergency Planning and Community Right-To- Know Act. Currently: H 2 S and NH 3 emissions of > 100 lb/day must be reported!