Rule 217 Staff Report

- 1

- IMPERIAL COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

STAFF REPORT For the Proposed Revisions to Amended

R ule 217

– Large Confined Animal Facilities (LCAF) Permits Required

RULE 202

- Exemptions

RULE 101

- Definitions

I BACKGROUND

The Imperial Count y is currently designated as a nonattainment area for the federal ozone, PM 10 and PM 2.5 standards. The Imperial County Air Pollution Control ( Air District ) maintains the responsibility of regulating air pollution from all sources within the County of Impe rial. As required under state law, the Air

District adopts rules to achieve ambient air quality standards and enforces the provisions of local, state, and federal air quality laws.

On December 2, 2014, t he Air District adopted the Imperial County 2013 P M 2.5 State Implementation Plan for the PM 2.5 Nonattainment (NA) demonstrating that Imperial County is in attainment “but

- for” emissions from Mexico and as such

ammonia emissions do not need to be reduced to address PM 2.5 standard. However, to improve the public health and further reduce VOC and ammonia

emissions to prepare for th e new annual PM 2.5 NAAQS, the Air District committed

to the United States Environment al Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) to examine the potential role of ammonia within the Imperial Co unty PM 2.5 NA. The Air District

has identified three main sources of ammonia emissions.

• Confined Animal Facilities ( Air District Rule 217) • Composting Facilities (Permitted Facilities) • Agricultural Fertilizers

To address emissions from Confined Anim al Facilities, on October 10, 2 0 06, the

Air District adopted t he current version of Rule 217 , Large Confined Animal Facilities (LCAF) Permits Required. Rule 217 was adopted in response to legislative enactment of Senate Bill 700 (SB700)

– Florez

– Agricul tural Sources. The purpose of Rule 217 is to limit emissions of VOC’s and ammonia from Large Confined Animal Facilities (LCAF). This Rule applies to facilities operations that are corralled, penned, or otherwise restricted to areas of defined dimension an d are fed by means other than grazing. Such facilities include, but are not limited

to, cattle, calves, chickens, ducks, goats, horses, sheep, swine, rabbits, and turkeys. The Imperial County mainly has 2 types of facilities: Beef Operations and Dairy Oper ations.Rule 217 Staff Report

- 2

- The Air District proposes to amend Rule 217 to further reduce Volatile Organic Compound (VOCs) and Ammonia emissions to improve public health and to prepare for the annual PM 2.5 NAAQS which will require the Air District to develop

a new PM 2.5 SIP . The proposed amendment to this rule would strengthen the current rule requirements, lower threshold limits, and tighten mitigation measures. In addition, clarifying and compliance language was added including monitoring, testing, and recordkeeping sectio ns to improve enforcement of the

rule.

In addition, the threshold for LCAF’s has been revised to reflect the threshold proposed by the San Joaquin’s Rule 4570 and with direction of the U.S. EPA and California Air Resources Board (CARB) . Therefore, the Ai r District is also amending Rule 101

– Definitions and Rule 202

– Exemptions to reflect the

revised thresholds where applicable

.

The Air District ha s been working closely with U.S. EPA

- Region IX and CARB representatives to address any deficiencies in th e proposed Rule. The proposed rule contains required elements that would improve the rule and assist with meeting federal requirements.

The proposed revision is expected to have a net positive environmental impact, and no significant adverse economic im pacts. The proposed revision also complies with restrictions imposed by California law that prohibit the Air District from adopting changes to certain rules that make them less stringent.

II REASON FOR RULE AMENDMENT

Air monitoring data in Imperial Coun ty indicate s high levels of PM 2.5 that exceeds

the PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) . As a result, the U.S.

EPA classified a portion of Imperial County as “moderate” nonattainment for

PM 2.5 . Nona ttainment areas are required by the Federal Clean Air Act to develop State Implementation Plans (SIP) to achieve attainment of the National Ambien t Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and protect public health and welfare. Table 2 identifies the number of days over the Federal PM 2.5 Standard.

Table 2, Number of Days over the Federal PM 2.5 Standards.

Year Calculated Number of Days over the Federal

PM 2.5 Standard

2014 2

2013 1

2012 4

2011 6

2010 2Rule 217 Staff Report

- 3

- O n December 2, 2014, Air District adopted the 2013 SIP for the 2006 24

- hr PM 2.5 Moderate Nonattainment Area (2006 24

- hr PM 2.5 SIP)

. The Air District PM 2.5 SIP is comprised of regulatory measures to redu ce emissions of VOC and Ammonia which are precursors of PM 2.5

. The proposed amendments to Rule 217 are intended to suppo rt the attainment goals of the Air District 20 13 24

- hr PM 2.5 SIP

. The proposed amendments are intended to reduce VOC and Ammonia from

LCAFs “as expeditiously as practicable”.

To address VOC and Ammonia Emissions, on October 10, 2006, the Air District adopted Rule 217

– Large Confined Animal Facilities. The purpose of the Rule 217 is to limit emissions of VOC’s and ammonia from Large Confined Animal Facilities (LCAF). This Rule applies to facilities operations that are corralled, penned, or otherwise restricted to areas of defined dimension and are fed by

means other t han grazing. Such facilities include, but are not limited to cattle, calves, chickens, ducks, goats, horses, sheep, swine, rabbits, and turkeys. The Imperial County mainly has 2 types of facilities: Beef Operations and Dairy Operations. After adoption by o ur Air Board, Rule 217 was submitted to U.S. EPA to be included into the Imperial County SIP; however, the U.S. EPA and

CARB identified some deficiencies in this rule and recommended to withdraw

and revised this rule with an enhanced version which can meet SIP approval. On May 3, 2013, the Air District requested the withdrawal of Rule 217 from SIP

submittal.

Amending Rule 217 will enhance reductions of VOC and ammonia emissions

, which is a n important control measure for the A nnual PM 2.5 SIP. Therefore, the

Air District proposes to revise Rule 217, to further reduce Volatile Organic Compound (VOCs) and Ammonia emissions. The Air District will submit the revised Rule 217 to be included into the Imperial County’s SIP. The U.S. EPA

has recommended that the proposed Rule 217 be revised following San Joaquin

CAFs Rule.

Amendments to Rule 101 Definitions

Due to the thresholds for proposed amended Rule 217 for dairy, chicken, and

duck being proposed to be decreased, Rule 101 will be amended to be

consistent the proposed Rule 217 thresholds . The amendment will be in particular for the Large Confined Animal Facility (LCAF) definition under Rule

101

.

Amendments to Rule 202 Exemptions

Similarly to Rule 101 , Section E.10 Agricultural Sources, section E.10.b of Rule

202 will be amended to be consistent with the thresholds for the proposed amended Rule 217 for dairy, chicken, and duck.Rule 217 Staff Report

- 4

- III EMISSIONS AND EMISSION REDUCTION ANALYSIS

VOCs are the principal category of pollutants emitted from Confined Animal

Fac ilities (CAFs). Research is continuously being carried

- out in order to determine and analyze emission factors of VOCs from livestock operations, especially in regards to dairies and beef feedlots operations. The VOC emission

factors from Air District

, 11 lbs/head

- year for beef feedlots and 1 3.94 lb/head

year for dairies, were also used to evaluate VOC emissions for the Imperial County. The Air District has esti mated VOC reductions of 6.9 tons per year for

dairies and 452.7 tons per year for beef feedlots due to the application and enforcement of the control measures proposed in Rule 217 ( Appendix A)

. Appendix A thoroughly discusses the emission factors and control efficiency for VOC for the proposed Rule 21 7.

I ncreases in atmospheric ammonia emissions have been reported in recent years in areas of animal agriculture. Ammonia is a common by

- product of animal waste due to the conversion of feed nitrogen into animal product. Livestock and poultry are often fed high

- protein feed, which contains surplus nitr ogen, to ensure that the animals' nutritional requirements are met. Nitrogen that is not metabolized into animal protein (i.e., milk, meat, or eggs) is excreted in the urine and feces of livestock and poultry where further microbial action releases

ammonia into the air during manure decomposition.

Currently, ammonia emissions from animal agriculture are not directly regulated.
However, in 1997, the U.S. EPA issued national Ambient Air Qual ity Standards (NAAQS) for PM 2.5 . Because a portion of PM2.5 is der ived from ammonia, regulations aimed at reducing PM 2.5 concentrations and emissions will require reductions in ammonia emissions from animal production operations.

Ammonia emissions occur at several different stages of livestock production.

These emission s vary significantly among farms due to differences in methods of collecting, storing, and treating manure. In general, the greatest ammonia

emissions are associated with land application of manure and housing. Significant emissions can also occur from gra zing land , if applicable, and manure storage. As a result, the amended Rule 217 provides opportunities to reduce ammonia emissions from animal operations.

It is estimated that amended Rule 217 should generate reductions of 452.7 tons

per year of VOC , refe r to Table 3 . A more detailed summary of the reductions may be found in Appendix A. Appendix A summarizes VOC emissions for the proposed amended Rule 217.Rule 217 Staff Report

- 5

- Table 3: Summary of Reductions

Pollutant VOC Emissions Dairy Beef

Feedlot

Uncontrolled Emis sions (tons/day) 0.08 5.39 Controlled Emissions (tons/day) 0.06 4.15 Reductions from Proposed Control Requirements (tons/day) 0.02 1.24

Reductions from Proposed Control Requirements (tons/year) 6.9 452.7

I V PROPOSED RULE AMENDMENTS:

The proposed rule amendments will strengthen the rule by lowering the threshold limits, proposing additional mitigation measures, and add compliance language including exemptions, monitoring requirements

, administrative requirements, test
methods, and recordkeeping to improve enforceability. The Air District is

prop os ing the rule applicability thresholds shown in Table 5 :

Table 5

– LCAF Proposed Thresholds

During the workshop, stakeholders

, which were either owners or operators of LCAF’s, mentioned that Fe edlots and calf operations in Imperial County feed dry

gra ins which does not include silage. Therefore, emissions from the feed from feedlot and calf operations are assumed negligible. However, the proposed rule amendments include a silage category as prec aution should a silage type feed is fed to the animals. Where applicable, facilities where silage is fed must comply with the silage mitigation measures to ensure that emissions are being

controlled. Large CAF Definition By Livestock Category Livestock Category Large CAF Definition

Beef Feedlots 3,500 beef c attle Dairy 500 milking cows Other Cattle Facility 3,500 calves, heifers, or other cattle
Poultry Facility

Chicken 400,000 head

Duck 400,000 head
Turkey 100,000 head Swine Facility 3,000 head

Horses Facilit y 2,500 head Sheep and Goat Facilities 15,000 head of sheep, goats, or any combination of the two

Any livestock facility not listed

above 30,000 headRule 217 Staff Report

- 6

- The inclusion of the menu options of mitigation measur es for the amended Rule 217, are applicable to LCAFs the day of the adoption of the rule. The proposed mitigation measures are more stringent than th e current measures in the rule

. The impacts to the owner and operators as well as to the public and the ind ustry in general, due to the rulemaking process and the amendments of this rule will be

minimal.

A. Beef Feedlots

• The silage mitigation measures would reduce VOC emission s through a combination of compaction standards, silage quality, and face and pile s ize management.

• Options require multiple required measures as well as frequent monitoring.

B. Dairies

• The regulatory threshold has been modified from 1,000 milking cows to 500 milking cows.

• The silage mitigation measures would reduce VOC emission through a combination of compaction standards, silage quality, and face and pile size management.

• Menu options are mandatory for feed and housing mitigation

measures.

• Solid manure handling menu are required for dairy LCAFs.

C. Other Cattle

• The silage mitigation mea sures would reduce VOC emission through a combination of compaction standards, silage quality, and face and pile size management.

• Options require multiple required measures as well frequent monitoring.

D. Swine

• Mitigation measures provide potential measures from a mandatory list of required measures.

E. Layer

• Mitigation measu res provide potential measures from a mandatory list of required measures.

F. Broiler, Duck, or Turkey

• Mitigation measures provide potential measures from a mandatory list of required mea sures.

• The regulatory threshold has been modified from 600,000 to 400,000 for chicken and duck.

G. ExemptionsRule 217 Staff Report

- 7

- • Except for recordkeeping, LCAFs below the threshold at all times are exempt from administrative requirements.

H. Monitoring Requirements

• Monitorin g requirements section was included for the enforcement purposes of the mitigation measures in the Emission Mitigation

Plan.

I. Administrative Requirements

• Detailed requirements were included to the records for each mitigation measure, to ensure measures we re utilized regularly.

J. Test Methods

• Test methods section was included to ensure the proper and approved method was utilized when testing.

K. Compliance Determination

• Clarifying language was added to this section.

L. Recordkeeping

• Clarifying language was a dded to this section.

V

. CATEGORY BACKGROUND

There are 5 Categories that were either amended or are new to Rule 217 . These categories are : Beef Cattle, Dairy Cattle, Ot her Cattle, Swine, and Poultry. Each category has a set of mitigation measures from which some are mandatory

.

A. BEEF CATTLE FEEDING OPERATIONS Beef cattle operations include adult beef cattle such as heifers and steers. Beef cattle feeding operations is the largest source for Imperial County Large Confined animal facilities

. Beef opera tions have approximately
357,888 head count based on 2013 Imperial County Agriculture Crop & Livestock Report. Due to the National Beef Company processing facility
closure, t he Imperial County does not boast a slay operation currently

.

B. DAIRY CATTLE OPERA TIONS Dairy Cattle Operations are operations that produce milk or animals for facilities that produce milk. The Imperial County has one Dairy operation ( Bullfrog ) with a head coun t of approximately 4,000

. The information was gathered from the Imperial Cou nty Air Pollution Control District source files.

C. OTHER CATTLE OPERATIONSRule 217 Staff Report

- 8

- The “Other Cattle Operations”, captures cattle in Confined Animal Facilities that do not fit in the definition of dairy or feedlots operations. For instance, heifers and calf ranche s fit the definition of Other Cattle Operations. Heifers and Calf ranches raise young fem ale diary until the

cow is mature enough to breed. At this stage she is moved to a dairy for breeding.

D. SWINE OPERATIONS Swine operations are operations that produce pigs or hogs. The production cycle includes the traditional approach from birth to finish hog production (all stages from breeding until slaughter). Breeder facilities produce pigs from birth and raise the pigs to 40 to 60 pounds. The grower/finisher facil ities raise the pigs from 60 pounds to market weight of 250 pounds. Currently there no such operations in Imperial County are under permit.

E. POULTRY OPERATIONS Poultry Operations is the raising birds such as chickens , ducks, and turkeys for the purpose o f farming meat or eggs for the fresh meat market. Layer ranches raise chickens for eggs while broiler ranches raise chicken

for meat. Currently there no such operations in Imperial County are under permit.

V I. PROPOSED RULE 217 STRUCTURE

A. Menu Approac h

Rule 217 amendments contain menu options for mitigation measures for each
category : Beef, Dairy, Other Cattle, Swine, and Poultry. The mitigation measures are more stringent than the previous version of Rule 217. Several categories ha ve m itigation m easu res that are mandated for various LCAFs.
However, the Air District acknowledges that not all facilities operate in the

same manner due various reasons such as infrastructure, permit conditions, soil types, production contr acts, and other limitations. There fore, as categories have mandated mitigation measures, there are also mitigation

measures by which owners/operators ma y choose that provide flexibility to the various Imperial County LCAF operations

.

B. Section B

– Definitions
In this section, 5 3 definiti ons were added for the purpose of this rule. Any

other definitions not included in this rule are found in the Air District Rule

101. The purpose of the definitions is for clarity and specification purposes for current and new control requirements.

The de finitions include

– Aerated Static Pile, Aerobic Digester, Aerobic Lagoon, Alternative Mitigation Measures, Anaerobic Treatment, Anaerobic Treatment Lagoon, CDFA, Certified Nutritionist, Composting, Corral, Day,Rule 217 Staff Report

- 9

- D ry Manure/Dry Separated Solids, Dry Rolled Corn, Emission Mitigation

Plan , Facility, Feed Bunk, Feedlane, Freestall Barn, High Moisture Corn,

Air District permitted Compo s ting Facility, In

- Corral Mounds, Lagoon, Large Confined Animal Facilities (LCAF), Licensed Veterinarian, Mature Cow, Medium Dair y CAF, Milking Cow, Mitigation Measure, Maximum

One

- Time Capacity, Molt, NRC, NRCS, Phototropic Lagoon, Poultry, Poultry Litter, Overall VOC Capture and Control, Oxygen Barrier Film, Phase Feeding, Processed Cereal Grain or Processed Corn, Rain Event, Sepa rated Solids, Shade Structure, Solid Separators System, Split

- Sex Feeding Program, Steam

- Flaked Cereal Grains, Steam

- Flaked Corn, Storage Pond, Swine, VOC Control Device, Weatherproof Covering/Storage Structure, and Year.

C. Section C

- Requirements The req uirement section includes specification to facility mitigation plans and permit requirements. Rule 217 amendments propose the all mitigation measures as contained in the permit applications must be implemented

th e day operations at a LCAF commence. In addi tion, Emission Mitigation Plans must be submitted by owner/operators of a non diary, beef feedlot, swine, or poultry operations which demonstrate facility wide reductions or an Emission Mitigation Plan that adheres to requirements of a Facility

Emission Mi tigation Plan found in s ection C.5.

D. Section D

- Exemptions The exemption section is for facilities meet ing the definition of exemptions which remain below the regulatory thresholds at all times. However, owner/operators will still need to comply with Adm inistrative Requirements

found in section F of the rule.

E. Section E

- Monitoring Requirements Owners/Operators shall comply with t he requirements of Lagoon Monitoring if applicable.

F. Section F

- Administrative Requirements This section provides details for the Administrative Requirements for each mitigation measure category. Records must be maintained on a quarterly basis. Example s of records that are permitted are records for the purpose of animal inventories maintained for financial purposes and the

C attlemen’s Association Records, and Water Board records.

G. Section G

- Test Methods This section provides the certified and approved versions of test methods.

H. Section H

- Compliance Determination Language was included to clarify the need of permits renew als and or updates.Rule 217 Staff Report

- 10

- I. Section I

- Annual Renewal Permits No changes were proposed to this section.

J. Section J

- Recordkeeping Clarifying language in recordkeeping information was included to this

section.

K. Section K

- Public Review Clarifying language w as included in this section.

L. Section L

- Non

- duplication No changes were proposed to this section.

M. Section M

- Other Provisions No change s were proposed to this section.

Feedlot Mitigation Measures Summary of Feedlot Mitigation Measures

Area Amended Rule

Feed Requires i mplementation of 2 measures from the 4 practices

. Silage Requires implementation of 1 measure from the 3 practices. Housing Requires implementation of 4 mandatory measures plus 1 additional practice from the 7 practices

. Solid Ma nure Requires i mplementation of 1 measure from the 2 practices. Liquid Manure Requires i mplementation of 1 measure from the 5 practices. Land Application Requires i mplementation of 2 measures from the 2 practices.

Total 12 of 23

Dairy CAF Mitigation Measures Summary of Dairy Mitigation Measures

Area Amended Rule

Feed Requires Implementation of 4 mandatory measures plus 1 additional practice from the 8 practices

. Silage Requires implementation of 1 measure from the 3 practices. Milking Parlor Re quires implementation of 1 measure from the 2 practices.

Freestall Barn Requires Implementation of 2 mandatoryRule 217 Staff Report

- 11

- measure s plus 1 additional practice from the 6 practices

. Corrals Requires Implementation of 6 mandatory

measure s plus 1 additional from the 10 practices

. Solid Manure Requires Implementation of 1 measure from the 3 practices. Liquid Manure Requires Implementation of 1 measure from the 5 practices. Land Application Requires Implementation of 2 measure s from the 2 practices.

Total 2 1 of 3 9

Other Cattle Mitigation Measures Summary of Other Cattle Mitigation Measures

Area Amended Rule

Feed Requires Implementation of 2 measures from the 4 practices. Silage Requires implementation of 1 measure from the 3 practices.

Freestall Barn Requires Implementation of 2 mandatory measures plus 1 additional practice from the 5 practices

. Corrals Requires Implementation of 5 mandatory measures plus 1 additional from the 9 practices

. Solid Manure Requires Implementation of 1 measure from the 3 practic es. Liquid Manure Requires Implementation of 1 measure from the 5 practices. Land Application Requires Implementation of 2 measure s from the 2 practices.

Total 16 of 31

Swine Mitigation Measures Summary of Swine Mitigation Measures

Area Amended Rule

Feed Requires implementation of 2 measures from the

3 practices. Housing Requires implementation of 3 measures from the

4 practices. Liquid Manure Requires implementation of 1 measure from the 4 practice. Land Application Requires implementation of 1 measure from the 2 practices.

Total 7 of 13Rule 217 Staff Report

- 12

- Layer Mitigation Measure Summary of Layer Mitigation Measures

Area Amended Rule

Feed Requires implementation of 1 measure from the 2 practices. Housing Requires implementation of 2 measures out of

the 3 practices.

Solid Manure/ Separated Solids Requires implementation of 1 measure out of the

2 practice. Liquid Manure Requires implementation of 1 measure from the 4 practices.

Total 5 of 11

Broiler, Duck or Turkey Mitigation Measures Summary of B roiler, Duck or Turkey Mitigation Measures

Area Amended Rule

Feed Requires Implementation of 1 me asure out of the

2 practices. Housing Requires implementation of 4 measures out of the 6 practices.

Solid Manure/Separated

Solids Requires Implementation of 1 measure out of the 2 practices.

Liquid Manure Requires Implementation of 1 measure out of the 4 practices.

Total 7 of 13

V II PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The Air District conducted two public workshops to collect comments from the regulated communi ty and the general public. A fir s t workshop was conducted on January 12, 2015. The general public was given an opportunity to comment on

the rule. As a result to the input and comments provided by the stakeholders

such as the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the Environmental Protection Agency ( U.S. EPA) ; Cattleman’s Association ; Imperial County Farm

Bureau ; and Coalition of Labor, Agr iculture, and Business or COLAB; the Air

District re vised Rule 217 . Several subsequent meetings were held with dif ferent stakeholders to gain a better understanding of the operations. In addition, Air

District held meetings with Federal and State agencies to have input and guidance to the Rule amendments and mitigation measures.

Due to the extensive revisions made to proposed Rule 217, the Air District conducted a second public workshop on September 24, 2015 to present theRule 217 Staff Report

- 13

- revised rule and seek comments from the public and stakeholders. Public comments were included in the proposed Rule 217 as appropriate.

The not ices for the workshops were conducted according to policy thus advertisements were placed January 7, 2015, September 13, 2015 and September 20, 2015 in the Imperial Valley Press announcing the workshops as well the Imperial County Air Pollution Control Web site.

The proposed Rule 217 and Final Draft Staff Report will be brought before the Imperial County Air Pollution Board of Directors on February 9, 2016 for their consideration and approval.

VI II STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:

APCD ADVISORY BOARD:

The Air Po llution Control Air District Advisory Board met to discuss the revised

rule s on December 2 , 2015. The APCD Advisory Board recommended the approval of the proposed rule.

STAFF:

The Imperi al County Air Pollution Control staff recommends adoption of the

ame nded R ule s 217 , 202 and 101 along with the accompanying staff report

, appendix , and its findings.

IX DECLARATION OF FINDINGS:

The Imperial County Air Pollution Control District Board hereby finds as follows:

The adoption of the staff report and it’s f indings are exempt from the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq . under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, in the California Code of Regulations Section 15061 (b)(3).

The Air District is a regulatory agency and t he public agency with the principle responsibility for carrying projects related to Air Pollution and the control thereof.

Clean air is a valuable and essential natural resource.

The staff report and its findings described herein will not significantly a ffect air quality or emissions limitations and therefore is exempt from Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 40728.5, which requires a socioeconomic analysis of the proposed action to be performed.Rule 217 Staff Report

- 14

- There has been no evidence presented to suggest that the implementation of the staff report and its findings will lead to or result in cumulative adverse impacts.

Health and Safety Code Sections 40701.5 and 40702 provide the authority to the

Air District to enact this staff report and its findings.

The finding s within the staff report are clear and capable of being understood by those persons directly affected by it.

The staff report and its findings do not conflict with or contradict any existing statute, court decision, or state or federal regulation.

The f indings of the staff report are not duplicative of any existing state or federal regulation.

The Imperial County has a population of less than 500,000 people.