[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