09-06-95 PCSummer 1995
if'ltat is the Feedlot Rule [ nydate?
Over the next several years, the MPCA will revise the State's animal fe to aL s (Minn. Rules Chapter
7020). With this update, we will inform interested parties of major activities and issues related to this
rulemaking. Beginning with this issue, we will publish this update on a quarterly basis and will include:
1) an explanation of proposed changes to the rule, 2) summaries of comments and recommendations received
from industry, agencies, and citizens, and 3) notifications of public participation events planned over the
course of the rulemaking process.
il✓hy is the JfPCA Revising the State Feedlot Rule9
Since 1968, the MPCA has has been responsible for developing standards that protect our surface and ground
waters. This means that the MPCA must regulate a wide variety of pollutants, including those that come from
agricultural operations such as the raising of livestock and poultry.
!Minnesota's Feedlot Rules Chapter 7020 were first adopted during the early 1970's. The rules have been
amended twice since then, with the last major revision occurring in 1978. Since then, agriculture in
Minnesota has undergone major changes. Animal housing and production techniques have chariged
dramatically, there are greater concentrations of animals on farms than before, and the potential impacts cf
animal feedlots on water quality are now better understood. As a result, the N1PCA has made revision of tile
feedlot rule a priority.
There are approximately 40,000 livestock and poultry operations in Minnesota. Animal manure generated by
these facilities can become a serious water pollution hazard if it is not used, stored, transported or disposed of
properly. By developing rules for managing animal manure, the MPCA can create safeguards to ensure that
animal manure is stored, transported, used, or otherwise disposed of in a manner that will protect water
quality.
Iffi 9 U11111.0 For Public Comments Ead-L in the_Rttletttaking Process
T1te MPCA €Je ,an its rulemaking process in May of 1995. During the spring and summer of 1995, the
MPCA will be askint; the public to submit comments regarding changes they xish to see in the feedlot rr:le.
By the end of the sumn?er, using public comments, the N1PCA will finalize the list of issues to be addressed
over the course of the rule revision process. During the fall, the MPCA will begin to draft rule amcndn.ents.
By the spring of 1996, MPCA staff will have develop;;d a first draft of the amended feedlot rule. Public
hearings on the feedlot rule will take place in the fall of 1997. MPCA is aware that the feedlot rule revision
will be of-r::at interest to agricultural producers and othk-r organizations in Minnesota. For that reason, the
a --enc
y will do its best to i:;form interested parties of critizal issues and will sponsor a number ofevents to
familiarize• the public With t€le content of the proposed rule.
A
In an effort to develop an effective and reasonable feedlot rule, the MPCA will be working closely with
representatives of the agricultural i}dustry. The MPCA will have an opportunity to solicit advice on a
regular basis through participation in the Feedlot and Manure Management Advisory Committee (FMMAC).
FMMAC, a committee established by the legislature to "identify needs, goals, and suggested policies for
research, monitoring and regulatory activities regarding feedlots and manure management", will assist the
MPCA in developing a rule that is fair to landowners, but which protects surface and ground waters
effectively. In preparation for the rule revision process, FNIMAC has established several taskforces to
research and provide technical advice to the MPCA on matters related to feedlot and manure management.
FMMAC's Task Forces are entitled: Land Application of Manure, Alternative Methods for Treatment of
Feedlot Runoff, and Earthen Basins.
jTfPCA Considers A 3roarf Rait of Issues in the Rule Revision Process
Thi T.(D� iiuj i. ♦ •J^a" tl. C. I) .. u '.] .,J a.. _[ L _ r _ Jl.,a r. 0.1
process.
.it ye. U L r1,,ined „e f-11 scopc of issucs tc, a cor,3rUeeC,-u during the IeCdlot ru,G reviJiil;i
process. There are a number of issues, however, that have been discussed over the last several years and will
be among those that the hIPCA will consider as staff revise the rule. The issues are:
1. environmental impacts of abandoned feedlots;
2. unpermitted earthen basins and their impacts on ground water;
3. changes in the permitting process (for example, raising of aii;,Itdl Units;
�vhich require a permit);
4. financial assurance for large animal confinement facilities;
5. seepage limits for earthen manure basins;
6. land application requirements for manure;
7. manure stockpiling requirements;
S. fees for feedlot permits,
9. setbacks for feedlots to protect water quality; and
10. permit by rule for small feedlots.
V'e'il Lire to Hear From You !
Over the course of this process, the staff at the MPCA invites you to call us at any time to provide your
comments, insights, and recomniendations. W.- will be Nvorkino, hard to find a reasonable balance amon-
the varied interests involved in the feedlot issue. Your opinions matter to us. Please let us know how we
are doing.
For your convenience, %%e are including the names of MPGA s,aff «ho are available to answer your questions about technical, policy
or procedural issues related to the feedlot rule revision. Please feel free to give us a call at the following numbers:
St. Paul Staff -
Randy Ellingboe 612-296-9209
Kim Brynildson 612-296-7366
Ron Leaf 612-296-7316
Chris Lucke 612- 296-9332
Clark Steuart 612-296-7313
Lynne Kolze 612-296-8431
Da% a Wall 612-296-3440
(permitting issues, earthen and concrete basin
construction requirements, general technical questions)
(permitting issues, general technical questions,
county delegation agreements, requests for data)
(permit application status, engineer review of manure
stora^e systems)
(permitting issues, en-ineer review of manure storage s)stems)
(enforcement issues, complaints)
(rulemaking process, pubic me!ings and hearings)
(ground water quality, landai pli.aroII rases)
printed on recycled paper
Regional Office Staff:
Kevin Molloy 507-537-6.194 Marshall
Alike Vavricka 218-847-1519 Detroit Lakes
John Archambo 218-828-2492 Brainerd
Heidi Bauman 218-723-4660 Duluth
Jerry Hildebrandt 507-285-7343 Rochester
STATE OF MINNESOTA
POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
Notice of Solicitation of Outside Information or Opinions Regarding Proposed
Amendments to Minnesota Rules Governing Odorous Emissions and Processing Animal
Matter
Notice is hereby given that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is seeking
information or comments from sources outside the MPCA in preparing to propose amendments
to Air Quality rules governing Odorous Emissions and Processing of Animal Matter. The
MPCA is considering repealing its existing odor rule (Minn. R. 7011.0300 - 7011.033U) in its
entirety and replacing it with a new odor rule. If the MPCA proposes these changes, it will also
propose to amend the standaid or processing animal matter to reflect the changes in the odor
rule.
The adoption of the proposed rule is authorized by Minn. Stat. § 116.07, subd. 4, which
authorizes the MPCA to adopt rules and standards for the prevention, abatement and control of
air pollution.
MPCA staff have prepared a draft new odor rule with assistance from a Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC). The TAC consists of representatives from industry, local units of
government and technical experts in the field of odor testing. The TAC was formed after the
\-1PCA published a Notice of Intent to Solicit Outside Comments in the State Register on April
27. 1992. The TAC met between July 1992 and September 1993. A subgroup was formed from
the TAC known as the Odor Task Force. The Odor Task Force met on a monthly basis between
January and August of 1993 to work on the final details of the draft rule.
The draft new odor rule replaces a rule which was based on numerical limits with a rule
based on citizen complaints. Under the draft new rule, complaints regarding odors are reported
to and investigated by local units of government and may be forwarded to the MPCA when the
minimum number of complaints to define a "community annoyance" has been reached. The
draft new odor rule provides for mitigation of odors at sources that fall within the scope of the
rule.
The MPCA is also considering amending the animal matter processing standard to relax the
incineration criteria where a source can operate at a lower temperature or with alternate control
measures provided that the draft new odor rule is not violated. References to the current odor
rule that appear in various sections of Minnesota rules would be updated to reflect the new rule
citations.
This rulemaking would affect persons who complain of odorous emissions and the sources
that generate the odorous emissions. Insofar as the draft new odor rule would require local units
of government to record and investigate complaints before referring them to the NNIPCA, the draft
nc%% rule would also affect local units of government.
The MPCA requests information and comments concerning the subject matter of the rule.
Interested persons or groups may submit data or views in writing or orally to:
Stuart Arkley
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Air Quality Division
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194
Telephone: (612) 296-7774
Oral statements will be received during regular business hours over the telephone at (612)
296-7774 and in person at the above address.
For a copy of the draft new odor rule, please contact:
Linda Grant
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Air Quality Division
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194
Telephone: (612) 296-8326
All statements of information and opinions shall be accepted until 4:30 p.m., September 27,
1995. Any written material received by the MPCA shall become part of the rulemaking record to
be submitted to the attorney general or administrative law judgei the event that the rule is
adopted.
Date:
CHARLES W -ILLIA IS
t
MANURE QUANTITY
The chart below summarizes animal unit comparisons and related population
equivalents.
ANTI LAL ANBIAL TWIT
EQUIVALENT
Slaughter steer (►," 1.0
Horse
1.0
Mature dairy cow
1.4
Pig (over 55 lbs.)
0.4
S1- c -,p
0.1
Duck
0.02
Turkey
0.018
Chicken
0.01
POPULATION
EQUIVALENT
9.4
14.0
1.8
0.5
An average dairy operation of 40 cows and 40 calves generates a waste loud
equal to about 750 people.
SOURCE: Minnesota Attorney General
APPENDIX A
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency May 1994
Comparison of waste strengths according to
oxygen depletion and phosphorus content
Typical oxygen -depleting properties of wastes
Type of Waste Oxygen Demand (milligrams per liter)
Municipal sewage, treated
25
Municipal sewage, untreated
.. �.�_ _..�. ..-�.. ...1
....v rr... .. .._. r_�.,.r. .a �. .u_.__�i .... 1 ♦.. ���..w...
.... ...! v...u�.�... r. ... .�... �... ..�..v.`...n,..
...ttar��LJa..� •.rte.._. _.. .._�__....._�..L. _.._ ... _.�.
APPENDIX A
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency May 1994
Comparison of waste strengths according to
oxygen depletion and phosphorus content
Typical oxygen -depleting properties of wastes
Type of Waste Oxygen Demand (milligrams per liter)
Municipal sewage, treated
25
Municipal sewage, untreated
G50
Cattle feedlot runoff (r�tvz ,,
1,000
Milkhouse wastes
1,500
Cattle or hog manure (�A:�)
50,000
Typical phosphorus content of wastes
k
A typical effluent limit for a discharge to a lake is 1 milligram per liter,
therefore tertiary trecTrnent is sometimes needed.
Printed on recycled paper with at least 10 percent `bers from paper recycled by ccnsumers
Type of Waste
Phosphorus (milligrams per liter)
Municipal sewage, treated'
3
Municipal sewage, untreated
8
Cattle feedlot runoff (, &%
35
Cattle or hog manure Com)
2500 -
k
A typical effluent limit for a discharge to a lake is 1 milligram per liter,
therefore tertiary trecTrnent is sometimes needed.
Printed on recycled paper with at least 10 percent `bers from paper recycled by ccnsumers
CITY OF
OTSEGO
8899 Nashua Avenue N.E. ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD (612) 441-4414
Elk River, MN 55330 Fax: (612) 441-8823
September 27, 1995
y1r Nlark Wallace
15152 NE 91ST Circle
Otsego, MN 55330
RE: YOUR LETTER OF RESIGNATION FROM THE
OTSEGO PLANNING COINIMISSION
Dear Mark:
This letter is to thank you for your time and commitment to the Park and Recreation
Commission and the Planning Commission.
The City Council considered your letter of resignation at the Council Meeting of
September 25, 1995 and approved your resignation. The Council would like to
thank you personally for being a civic minded citizen and if your schedule permits,
please consider applying for a position on one of our Boards or Commissions at a
future date. We understand your new time commitment to a new baby and an
advanced position with an extra night each week for schooling.
Thank you again Mark, for your commitment and time to the City of Otsego.
Sincerely,
CITY OF OTSEGO
Norman F Freske, Mayor
eb
CC: Mayor and Council
Otsego Boards and Commissions
Otsego Staff
Professional Staff
File
PFDIC
PEMF NEMC K2 BG
_?EMG
rEMC' YFOle' ?SSjC
SMC
R4S6F. PUaF FFO1C _ n.
T�.:
me
PEMC PF01B j PUBFx -- --
PUBFX
?EMC PUSfx ?tIBF PSS1G• �, PU$Fx \ \'
PUBFic� '
PEMC
• � Ci PEMF euaF _ r � PEM.
PFOIC � s- PUBFx Pu4�Gx
PEMF Pf01C?EMC' _ R2U6:
PEMA 'U��i_=.L�'`PEMA I?EMC PE,"nF PEMF
pPEnnC PEMC
PEttnt-
�' 1 �t 7EMC \•V \� � �.
PEr4f PEMAd PEMA{L� ;.P
IMA
-PEMe^
PEa1Fd PEMCd PUSF 1�-
i-7 PEMA PEMA I vEMF °t}oF. PU9fvua&
� � -
,'- C�Q � O—PEMAd PSSIC gyp_?Erne PuaFx PEMC �': PUBFxd �'
P' PEMC Pf.MF PEMq-� PFOICd---
PEMC PEMAA �-�`\ 6F J >7 .,:; rF01C PEMC ?SSICd PFOICd%
N PEMC PEM 43 O ' -- P£RAA - _.. _ _:._ `__ . EMC PEM4 d
6 PEMA PES 7£M 4EMF ?EMA PEi1n C
PEMA, C
--4t:1'M1F ll•!
PEMF ?E#tC
-�� PEMC�PENIA' PEMF ?uqF P mea PEMC
Pf M F este ?E M.q
PEMA— of i °— PEMA
CD
PEMC PEMAd-C��-'; Ps�nc PcotC SIC i v—PEMC ?ui -_ /.
�J
PEMC ?f 01 C >� nFC11r'
?EMF ?EMFPEMC
?EMC
PEMAd--fl \`x)401c PEMCd oFlvtCd PEIACd 1
PFOIC PEMC OQ {J ; �L� PEMB?FOtCd
PEM
PEvIFdFDIBd ?EM� pEM ?EMA %' 01A ?UBF PU56
�' °EMC PEMA �l -
PF01B O� PEMC PEMF + vEMF
?rMFd'O ,EMA I C P ica Psslca
O PEMC EMC aft PUAC SS PUSFx
PEMCdpgm a�Emc� PEMF �PeMAa PEMF 1 PEMA PEMC PEvICd �PEMA
L..� NMI:Z\ PEMC\. L c� �PGMA 0 _ PEMC PSS�C �'
wd PEme-j, �'viCJPEMA''� � � FEMF PEM J
v r pEO PU9G -.. 3
PEMC 9EMAd C y PEMCd FKiJ C Q`
rwsG PEMC F 'PUB`~PEMCd
O--PEMF PEMCd PUSF `IUpG a P£MC E At- �A
PEMCd PEMCd: PEMCd '
PEMCd PEMAd Ci--PEMAPfO18dAC r
PfMFJ '\ I
PEMC \ PssiC PEMF t
PEMCd f) ,3p: '
rEMcd PEMF-
PEMCd .�- �- ` Pu _-7f:.gF'-
"...'' .r+:s. � is �-, � � 7✓ � P' i P MF
i" p---PEMC /r 'TPFOIC - PE Cd Pf1'iC` - \V
S P M►EMFa PFMBd�•ttBFPEM( PEMG MF PEM
,�,p 1) PEMC—• P551C _a. _ _ PFotC PFM\A rEr.IC ! YSSiC !,P IAF,,., X
!2 tJ PEMCJp PSS1C i PEMA PEM J `i�
PEMF / PEMA i /PEMCd PEMC QPU$F LIU$N', YErAC
PEMCd PUBFx PEMCd I PEMC PEMA , 1 . .+� e>' F' "`t�
Nsvx PEMC �' I i, _ �Ptl8F
' '^ ^ PEM" �� /� PEMCd' am
v ! PEMCd- G.� PEMEMce PEMFPEMC PEM a� 0 1 0 S'[ *, r ; C �PE(•'±Gd-
q {� PEMCd r' . t; r 4r --PEM
FEMC PEMAd-Fi v f FfllCdti_
_ -
-FEMA % PEMC w : Pc
PEMCd ,1646
, 8F PEjAC PEMCd QMC v `/ d AML v�s,c MF FotC Y B PEN1G':
QP.MA u- � P£Mc
--a --r> PEMca USF r,EMc
1
PEMC
Cf u a PE:ytC / PEMF' 5st �PfMG SI
.�.7 � Pssic- P��..�� �.
PEMA•,..`, PEMF PEMA - � EM"
c PEMC PEMC PEMF 1 PEMC PFOIC Ps518
L2UsC
^' PEMC PEMF PUBFx Q PEMA
-'� PFOIC
PEMC PEMF _ PEMC' LZUSC P�MGd
Q -PEMAd PEMC - PEW �� PEMAd EZUBG i
•-� ?EMA} ruBf
PEMC- ' • +
- - PEMCd
PUBG -- - —
>'EAnA
�..�E'NI�' _
Pf018 PUSF-� - PSSIr^.. - _. -•
Q
'� I
PF018 PEMAd 0—PEMAd PEMC PEMF 4 i
PEMCd: PUBFx PIA LIUBN ,LZUSC '
t 1) PEMC !� 5!C PFO1C PF
OIG
_ Ps -
O 4EMA+EPUBF,� f Pf i f1
1 - PFOfC'd Prmcd w
i1- PE018
PEMAd PEMC d PPM �£Mc
PEMAd £ °FOIC PEMAd i I
PEMA ?FDIC t PEMF _ PEMA i e PE.
PEMA A PEMCd `' PL'BF551 C i. �] l PFOICd R2UB;� PIOtC / P PEl41C
US
PEM/Ad-_ f�PEMC Q'� /EMCd/�'FU
I FDIC . I
(/ PEMAd �PEMN PEMF i PFD]td )-...! ?EMG -4
PEMC PEr,cd� * rFo,c;, u9F
PEMC PEMC - �` : PUBG \ EAy p P
rQfrl J
1 PEMCd: _ _. C
2�PFMC �PFOIC ?FDIC {� PSS IC -
W PCBFx aC
R71)9G - PUBG 7fote -PEMC
PEMCPFO18 v R2U66
PaIrkli Pi!RIx fFDtG PUBf
..: � :... �,�`, ` ""'�-' :`� —� '�+-� w.••p .. -.-,. '._ , .'�'. slr.�y�... ,.may �,� >
CIO
rs I Rin 1a' r •y
ir"i d 5.
•� S ,'� \ _ ^✓'•t.. 5°4 1' •-,_.t, Ifo t; -v t
7-1
fat M 1
\ y
71
4 I I �i `1_ rt iIr rte,- Mt i z i
(� P
O I r? t- t
Sn
y . iw a•:� t .. !q M IC ? C, -- 1�1 f
r{ .,^L f"a+3,�., J'ta.� +���^,;�,, 1.:�.3_ �� 1 `��"�,$ -"r's _ . p•U 1t� •rn': •[ -,i
_ -�`.. If 11K M
M
%
�� b hA' a' ,�„ i�.,i''. �� ,. � � �v`�, _,_ -... ....._„ , ,.� ..r. _..., ,..� .. ... _ _�.. .. :•Y ' s / ICS t� rfi {" a 1
nfye� 5
_ y C`a r�a F
s �
y, �.• -` ,� � T 7 ``� � ..... .: ➢ ,� "� of tea,.._„ „_ t•c
A
� 1 •x' 7w
F t` `; � x�• ` ms`s'' �."' � � s� 4:; _ ; - i t�. ' � t(� "r :'K �:.
�w
,
i
_. � �`ti ` �/ � [�w�,�mt,,, �4 ~.t �+ ' .. � R.r. . �j�S (� J,� � �'/� � \,F➢� - / /��V`� '.. -ro•db f«i 11.•Y: *t 16 `{f5
I i a t ; �j'3w`^-... Y.T' y} " ~ ' i �. V ~ + ' . v , :� V �C. �� y •. � I c -I r'[) _t .i'r• 1
lJ .' t .. -�+v ;,fin 'r• y f i �•i.,� t p _V. «. F
�„ � +;z3'a'3""'. •} 77 � _� 4 � a a1'• � s.����+�,. ,r`_ -f... �d L R�° '�M;.°""'F )��9`i^� b t �' i
•, . jfj � - �M; �� - � ty ..z J' . • � .. ., h ,."�*"u"..,r�-•.�.^,: F�+��'?�5�4• < .�„�=r�.ik� ° � �',\yyh i x - ria :.-'R i Q_
f °. �.. ``^ "• i bt F i� gp �*°' in It it it 1 v
tz
Y'
,�, - b•^:5 '^:,; �" 1 ...,, j IA #`5 is z
C' , a
J � '4 �i�.'i�t' '*`•r �, � F �, � �-` +i ? «a Y' �: S $• .� �t tS�y��
it x i
Nil
77y
VA' P' ^. �1 Ji.� V 4 . '. '3s.. n.•q :M }j 'f iiC.'tl4 � _ '"•,••e " S \,tom i..':e` •.. (jf «r .�. * i
t, ;Y s . • :t,.•� . r' v r- adl r s ,k- \� .,.yt{tty Z I,"i� j
4X+
,
jr— tit if o 0 ;
im —i fieri �,t m i
Im ms , '. Q') t
C -C 7-3 t '!'" t '.
I' T3 .P7 Jt' tr', t
p 1 r•t t-.
i 1 cl G'1 t
t tti (T► i < y m t
})
'C tc.3
• � 1 �a te) rg t
Or W fMt a s {
1-3 t «,7„ MI) C) f— a
Fr t s I't
i M z'+' i, t
rl +:I
a I r'S Jr
r i:� •' t
t'� f
rr
� z
i kr t i
1t)
`f
N
CD