Alternative EAW Form for Animal Feedlots ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

Transcription

1

2 Alternative EAW Form for Animal Feedlots ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Note to reviewers: The Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. This EAW was prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), acting as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU), to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared. The project proposer supplied reasonably accessible data for, but did not complete the final worksheet. Comments on the EAW must be submitted to the MPCA during the 30-day comment period which begins with notice of the availability of the EAW in the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Monitor. Comments on the EAW should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that are reasonably expected to occur that warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS. A copy of the EAW may be obtained from the MPCA by calling An electronic version of the completed EAW is available at the MPCA Web site 1. Basic Project Information. A. Feedlot Name: Manox 3 - Manthey Hog Barns B. Feedlot Proposer: Harold Manthey C. RGU: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Technical Contact Person Nick McCabe, I&S Group Contact Person Nancy Drach and Title Natural Resources Specialist and Title Principal Planner Address 1409 N Riverfront Drive Address 520 Lafayette Road North Mankato, Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota Phone Phone Fax Fax nick.mccabe@is-grp.com nancy.drach@pca.state.mn.us D. Reason for EAW Preparation: (check one) EIS Scoping Mandatory EAW X Citizen Petition RGU Discretion Proposer Volunteered If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number and name: Minn. R , subp. 29 Animal Feedlots E. Project Location: County Waseca City/Twp Vivian Township NE SE Section 7 & 8 Township 105 North Range 24 West Watershed (name and code): Major: Le Sueur Minor: 32013, 32029, 32031, 32032, 32033, 32034, 32041, 32045, p-ear1-05 TDD (for hearing and speech impaired only): Printed on recycled paper containing 30% fibers from paper recycled by consumers

3 F. Attach each of the following to the EAW: Exhibit A: County map showing the general location of the project Exhibit B: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map Exhibit C: Site plan showing all significant project and natural features Exhibit D: Map showing wells, tile inlets, residences, and sensitive receptors within a one-mile radius of the feedlots Exhibit E (1-4): Maps showing wells, tile inlets, residences, and sensitive receptors on or adjacent to manure application sites Exhibit F: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Natural Heritage Database Review Correspondence Exhibit G: State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) Correspondence Exhibit H: Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Correspondence Exhibit I: Cumulative Potential Effects Map The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Permit application and required attachments (Manure Management Plan for Transferred Manure, Air Emissions and Odor Management Plan, Emergency Response Plan, Operation and Maintenance Plan, and Animal Mortality Plan) have been submitted to the MPCA Mankato office. Contact Kate Brigman in the Mankato office at to review this information. G. Project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. The Manox 3 Manthey Hog Barns project (Manox 3) proposes to add one wean-to-finish hog barn in Section 7 of Vivian Township, to an existing 51-foot by 528-foot wean-to-finish barn (Manox Site2) with 3,300 wean-to-finish hogs, located in Section 8 of Vivian Township. The proposed barn will be 102 feet by 260 feet. Upon completion of the project, there will be 3,300 wean-to-finish hogs (990 animal units) in each barn for a total of 6,600 swine (1,980 animal units) at the two locations. Manure will be stored underneath the barns in eight-foot deep engineered concrete pits and pumped out annually during the fall. Manure ownership will be transferred and subsequently land-applied in accordance with the manure management plan requirements in Minn. R , when ownership of manure is transferred. H. Please check all boxes that apply and fill in requested data: Animal Type Number Proposed Type of Confinement Finishing hogs 6,600 head total for Total Confinement two sites Sows Nursery pigs Dairy cows Beef cattle Turkeys Layer hens Chickens Pullets Other (Please identify species) Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 2 Worksheet

4 I. Project magnitude data. Total acreage of farm: 10 acres Number of animal units (AUs) proposed in this project: 1,980 AUs total for the existing and proposed sites Total animal unit (AU) capacity at this location after project construction: 1,980 AUs Acreage required for manure application: 1,485 acres J. Describe construction methods and timing. Construction is anticipated to begin after the environmental review process and permitting has been completed. The tunnel/power-ventilated, 102-foot by 260-foot barn to be constructed at the Manox Site 3 in Section 7 will consist of concrete stem walls, wood stud walls and rafters, and a metal roof. Manure will be stored in an eight-foot deep, poured, reinforced concrete pit below the barn. The barn at Site 2 in Section 8 was constructed in K. Past and future stages. Is this project an expansion or addition to an existing feedlot? Yes No Are future expansions of this feedlot planned or likely? Yes No If either question is answered yes, briefly describe the existing feedlot (species, number of animals and animal units, and type of operation) and any past environmental review or the anticipated expansion. This project includes the addition of one hog barn to the proposer s existing feedlot operation located in Vivian Township, Waseca County. Both the existing and proposed barns are total confinement with poured, reinforced concrete manure storage pits beneath the barns. There has been no previous environmental review on either site. The project proposer currently has a Waseca County Feedlot Permit and a NPDES/SDS general permit from the MPCA for the existing Manox Site 2, and will be required to have NPDES/SDS Feedlot Permit coverage for Manox Site 3. No future expansion is anticipated. 2. Land uses and noteworthy resources in proximity to the site. A. Adjacent land uses. Describe the uses of adjacent lands and give the distances and directions to nearby residences, schools, daycare facilities, senior citizen housing, places of worship, and other places accessible to the public (including roads) within one mile of the feedlot and within or adjacent to the boundaries of the manure application sites. The existing Manox Site 2 is located 1.5 miles west southwest of the city of Waldorf. The proposed Manox Site 3 is located 1.5 miles west southwest of Manox Site 2 (See Exhibit A - Site Location Map). Both sites are located on land zoned for agricultural land use. The lands surrounding both sites are zoned agricultural as well. Access to the Manox Site 2 is from Township Road 24 immediately to the north. Access to the proposed barn at the Manox Site 3 will be from the west via Township Road 201. There are currently 12 residences within one mile of Manox Site 2 and nine residences within one mile of the proposed Manox Site 3. The closest residence to the Manox Site 2 is located approximately 1,200 feet to the northwest, at the intersection of Township Road 24 and Township Road 195. The closest residence to the proposed Manox Site 3 is 2,200 feet to the south, on Township Road 23. A cemetery is located north of the intersection of Township Road 23 and Township Road 194, Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 3 Worksheet

5 approximately one mile southeast of the proposed Manox Site 3 and approximately one mile southwest of the existing Manox Site 2. This cemetery is shown on the USGS Topographic map (Exhibit B) as Zoars Cemetery. There are no schools, daycare facilities, or senior citizen housing units, places of worship, or other places accessible to the public within one mile of either feedlot site or on or adjacent to any of the manure application fields. Exhibit E (1-4) shows residences and public roads adjacent to the feedlot and manure application sites. B. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to any of the following adopted plans or ordinances? Check all that apply: local comprehensive plan land use plan or ordinance shoreland zoning ordinance flood plain ordinance wild or scenic river land use district ordinance local wellhead protection plan Is there anything about the proposed feedlot that is not consistent with any provision of any ordinance or plan checked? Yes No. Are there any lands in proximity to the feedlot that are officially planned for or zoned for future uses that might be incompatible with a feedlot (such as residential development)? Yes No C. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the feedlot, manure storage areas, or within or adjacent to the boundaries of the manure application sites? Drinking Water Supply Management Areas designated by the Minnesota Department of Health? Yes No Public water supply wells (within two miles)? Yes No Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? Yes No Designated public parks, recreation areas or trails? Yes No Lakes or Wildlife Management Areas? Yes No State-listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat, colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities? Yes No Scenic views and vistas? Yes No Other unique resources? Yes No If yes, describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. Refer to attached Exhibits F, G, and H to review correspondence from the MDH, SHPO, and DNR regarding nearby resources. Public Water Supply Wells There are two public water supply (PWS) wells within two miles of the feedlot sites according to the MDH (Exhibit H). The city of Waldorf PWS well is located approximately two miles northeast of the existing Manox Site 2. In addition, there is a PWS well for St. John s Church in the NW¼, NW¼ of Section 24, Danville Township (T105N, R25W) two miles southwest of the proposed Manox Site 3. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 4 Worksheet

6 The Manure Management Plan (MMP) and record requirements of Minn. R will apply to both the feedlot owner and the entity receiving transferred manure. Manure is to be immediately incorporated at the land application sites. The MMP has identified site-specific best management practices including, but not limited to, setbacks for each land application site. According to correspondence with the MDH hydrogeologist, the geological conditions in the area and the thick, clayrich till over the bedrock indicate that the incremental risk to a PWS well from this facility is minimal. No impacts to public water supply wells are anticipated. Archaeological, Historical or Architectural Resources Information was received from SHPO regarding significant sites in proximity to the feedlot and manure application fields (Exhibit G). No archaeological sites or historical structures were identified at or adjacent to the feedlots. One recorded archaeological site, Indian Trail (21FAz), has been located on the Oak Ridge Farms, Marions Home manure application field in Section 5 of Dunbar Township, T104N, R24W, Faribault County. In addition, features are documented in Sections 10 and 14 of Vivian Township (T105N, R24W) in the vicinity of the Joecks Farms, Cliffs and Burts manure application fields. In the historical database, Bridge No. 9204: TH 83 over Little Cobb River (WE-VIV-006) is listed in the NW¼ of the NW¼ of the NE¼ of Section 10 and Bridge No. L4100: carries unpaved TR over Little Cobb River 2 M S. of Waldorf (WE-VIV-007) is listed in Section 14. The transferred manure will be applied at sites that all have histories of agricultural land use. Manure application is not expected to have an impact on archaeological, historical, or architectural features. According to the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program (NHNRP), there is one record of a state-listed threatened plant species and no record of rare plant communities in proximity to the proposed barn location and manure management sites. Records indicate the presence of Sullivant s Milkweed (Asclepias sullivantii) in Sections 14 and 23 of T105N, R24W, Waseca County. According to the correspondence with the DNR (Exhibit F), it does not appear the project will negatively affect any known occurrences of rare features given the nature and location of the proposed project. 3. Geologic and soil conditions. A. Approximate depth (in feet) to: Feedlot/ Manure Storage Manure Application Sites Area Ground Water* (minimum) 5.5 (Section 7, Proposed) 0.0 Based on Soil Survey Data. MMP includes requirements for prohibiting land application of manure in ponded areas. (average) > 5.5 (Section 7, Proposed) 0.8 Bedrock (minimum) 185 (Section 7, Proposed) (Section 8, Existing) (average) 185 (Section 7, Proposed) 160 (Section 8, Existing) 140 *Groundwater depths are from three soil borings at Site 3. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 5 Worksheet

7 B. NRCS* Soil Feedlot Manure Storage Area Manure Application Sites Classifications (if known) Marna Silty Clay Loam, Brownton-Lura Depressional Complex *Natural Resources Conservation Service Marna Silty Clay Loam, Brownton-Lura Depressional Complex See Below Soil and groundwater data was acquired from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Surveys of Waseca (2004), Blue Earth (1978), and Faribault (1994) Counties, Minnesota. Bedrock depth was acquired from the Minnesota Geology Survey. More information, including soil maps, can be referenced in the proposer s Manure Management Plan for Transferred Manure (MMP), available upon request. Manure application soils are listed below: Waseca County Brownton silty clay loam, Clarion loam, Delft, overwash-delft complex, Guckeen silty clay loam, Klossner soils, Klossner muck, lake plain depressional, Lura silty clay, Marna silty clay loam, Nicollet clay loam, Omsrud-Storden complex, Marna-Barbert, depressional complex, Lester-Ridgeton complex, Nicollet silty clay loam, Webster silty clay loam, Brownton-Lura, depressional, complex, Omsrud loam, Clarion clay loam, Coland silty clay loam, Terril loam Blue Earth County Brownton silty clay loam, Glencoe silty clay loam, Guckeen silty clay loam, Hamel clay loam, Klossner muck, Lura silty clay, Marna silty clay loam, Nicollet clay loam Faribault County Brownton silty clay loam, Canisteo clay loam, Darfur loam, Fostoria loam, Guckeen silty clay loam, Kingston silt loam, Madelia silty clay loam, Marna silty clay loam, Nicollet clay loam, Spicer silt loam, Webster clay loam, Canisteo-Glencoe complex, Please refer to Exhibit E to view manure application site boundaries. C. Indicate with a yes or no whether any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water are present at the feedlot, manure storage area, or manure application sites. Feedlot Manure Storage Area Manure Application Sites Karst features (sinkhole, cave, resurgent spring, disappearing No No No spring, karst window, blind valley, or dry valley) Exposed bedrock No No No Soils developed in bedrock (as shown on soils maps) No No No For items answered yes (in C), describe the features, show them on a map, and discuss proposed design and mitigation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 6 Worksheet

8 4. Water Use, Tiling and Drainage, and Physical Alterations. A. Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells, appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering), or connection to any public water supply? Yes No If yes, as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; the source, duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations or public supply connections; and unique well numbers and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) appropriation permit numbers, if available. Identify any existing and new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on-site, explain methodology used to determine that none are present. Manox Site 2, where the existing hog barn is located, has an existing private well (unique well no ). There is no well log on file in the MDH County Well Index for this well. A private well will be put in for the proposed hog barn at Manox Site 3. The DNR authorizes, under its General Permit , groundwater appropriations of up to five million gallons per year for each well for livestock watering and sanitation purposes. According to the University of Minnesota Extension Services, wean-to-finish hog operations require three to four gallons of water per day per hog for consumption and wash water. The total of each well for both sites will result in an average annual water use of approximately 9.6 million gallons (6,600 hogs, 4 gallons per day per hog). B. Will the project involve installation of drain tiling, tile inlets or outlets? Yes No If yes, describe. A perimeter drain will be installed around the foundation of the proposed hog barn at the Manox Site 3 to dewater the soil and reduce hydro-static pressure on the walls of the pits. No contaminated water will be discharged through the tile. The perimeter tile will connect to an existing field drainage tile. The NPDES/SDS Feedlot Permit requires monitoring ports or drain tile outlets, and weekly inspections of these for water flow and/or signs of discoloration or odor in any water flowing in the existing field drain tile. There will be no installation of new drain tiles, tile inlets, or outlets installed on any of the manure application sites as a result of this expansion project. C. Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment of any surface waters such as a lake, pond, wetland, stream or drainage ditch? Yes No Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 7 Worksheet

9 5. Manure management. A. Check the box or boxes below which best describe the manure management system proposed for this feedlot. Stockpiling for land application Containment storage under barns for land application Containment storage outside of barns for land application Dry litter pack on barn floors for eventual land application Composting system Treatment of manure to remove solids and/or to recover energy Other (please describe) B. Manure collection, handling, and storage. Quantities of manure generated: total 1,976,432 gallons (for both the existing and proposed site) by species 1: Swine By species 2: NA Frequency and duration of manure removal: number of days per cycle Total days per year ~10 Once a year Give a brief description of how manures will be collected, handled (including methods of removal), and stored at this feedlot: Manure and wastewater will be stored in poured, reinforced concrete pits underneath each barn. The pits are designed to have a 14-month storage capacity. The annual quantity of manure generated at both sites will total 1,976,432 gallons. Manure will be agitated prior to removal from the pits and then pumped and hauled in a tanker to the manure application fields. C. Manure utilization. Physical state of manure to be applied: liquid solid other - describe: D. Manure application. 1. Describe application technology, technique, frequency, time of year and locations. Ownership of all manure will be transferred. According to the proposer s MMP for transferred manure, in the fall, after October 1, manure will be agitated in the pits and pumped into a 6,000 gallon tanker. The manager of the transferred manure will inject the manure into the soil at agronomic rates. The MMP includes transfer of manure documents for approximately 1,485 acres within Waseca, Blue Earth, and Faribault Counties. Manure will be land applied in October and November, weather permitting. Manure will be applied on the fields with a liquid manure tank and incorporated unless the ground is frozen. Application of liquid manure on frozen soils is prohibited except under emergency situations, and only with prior MPCA approval. Such occurrences will be closely monitored by MPCA staff. 2. Describe the agronomic rates of application (per acre) to be used and whether the rates are based on nitrogen or phosphorus. Will there be a nutrient management plan? Yes No Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 8 Worksheet

10 All manure will be transferred to another party; as a result, the proposer does not make decisions regarding the crop rotation, nutrient planning, or manure application timing or rate. It is the responsibility of the party receiving the manure to ensure manure is applied at agronomic rates and best management practices are utilized. The party receiving the manure is required to follow state and local requirements for the application of manure. The manager of the transferred manure is required to follow agronomic rates based on the type of crop produced, yield goals, soil type, and nutrient content of the manure. According to the proposer s MMP, annual manure produced at both the Manox 2 and 3 Sites will total 1,976,432 gallons, containing 104,751 pounds of nitrogen, 77,081pounds of phosphorus, and 57,317 pounds of potassium. Manure testing will is required annually prior to application to determine accurate application rates. Soil sampling and testing for organic matter, ph, phosphorous, and potassium will be conducted on each application field at least once every four years. Testing for residual nitrate is recommended annually. Application equipment will be calibrated and maintained to ensure manure application rates do not exceed projected rates by more than 15 percent. 3. Discuss the capacity of the sites to handle the volume and composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. As previously stated, after transfer of ownership of the manure, 1,485 acres are available for manure application. According to the proposer s MMP for transferred manure, the manager of the transferred manure will apply to fields with corn/corn or corn/soybean rotations and the application rates will be based on nitrogen levels in the soil. According to the USDA, which includes the Farm Service Agency and the NRCS, the following table summarizes the soils in the manure management areas that are classified as Highly Erodible Land (HEL) or Potentially Highly Erodible Land (PHEL): Table 2. Highly Erodible Land in Manure Management Areas Category Map Symbol Map Unit Name HEL L110E Lester-Ridgeton Complex, percent slopes L102D2 Omsrud-Storden Complex, percent slopes PHEL L117C2 Omsrud Loam, 6-12 percent slopes, Eroded L102C2 Omsrud-Storden Complex, 6-12 percent slopes The Waseca County Feedlot Ordinance states that manure may not be applied to frozen or snowcovered land within 300 feet of any lake, stream, public waters, wetland, drainage ditch, or intermittent stream. The Blue Earth County Feedlot Ordinance does not allow manure application on slopes greater than six percent without immediate incorporation when soils are frozen. Soils that are not frozen with slopes greater than six percent must comply with setback distances from surface waters. The setback for soils with coarse texture is 200 feet from a surface water and medium to fine textured soils have a setback of 300 feet from surface waters. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 9 Worksheet

11 In Faribault County, land application may be prohibited on slopes that exceed six percent as classified by the Soil Survey of Faribault County as described in the site plan. Also, liquid manure shall not be applied on slopes greater than six percent during the winter months (December through March). All manure will be land applied annually in October and November, according to the MMP. Manure will be applied on the field with a liquid manure tank and incorporated unless the soil is frozen. Manure will not be applied on frozen soils with slopes greater than six percent. 4. Describe any required setbacks for land application systems. Sensitive areas within each manure application area have been identified and labeled on site maps; see Exhibit E (1-4). The manager of the transferred manure will be required to adhere to all setbacks outlined in the MPCA feedlot rules, and Waseca County, Blue Earth County, and Faribault County Feedlot Ordinances. Table 3. MPCA Setback Distances for Land Application of Manure (in feet). 5 Non-Winter With Immediate Incorporation Feature Winter (<24 hours) With P Mgmt. No P Mgmt. Non-Winter Not incorporated within 24 hours With Vegetated Buffer Inadequate Vegetated Buffer Lake, Stream Intermittent Stream* DNR protected wetlands** Drainage ditch w/o quarry* Open Tile Intake*** Well, mine or quarry Sinkhole with no diversion Downslope 50 Upslope Downslope 50 Upslope 300 Downslope 50 Upslope 300 *Intermittent streams and ditches pertain to those identified on USGS quadrangle maps, excluding drainage ditches with berms that protect from runoff into the ditch and segments of intermittent streams which are grassed waterways. USGS quadrangle maps can be found at County Soil and Water Conservation District Offices or can be viewed on the internet at (January 28, 2005). **Wetland setbacks pertain to all protected wetlands identified on DNR protected waters and wetlands maps (these maps are often located in County Soil and Water Conservation District offices and typically include all wetlands over ten acres). 5 Minnesota Feedlot Rules Chapter 7020 Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 10 Worksheet

12 Table 4. Waseca County manure application setbacks (in feet). 6 Location Surface Applied Incorporation or Injection Municipal Well 1,000 1,000 Private Well Municipality Residence, neighboring residence Cemeteries Year Flood Plain Prohibited Allowed Field Tile Intake 300 See * 1 Road Right-of-Way Prohibited Prohibited *Additional application requirements for land within three hundred (300) feet of open tile intakes. Manure must be injected or incorporated within 24 hours of being land applied and prior to rainfall when applied within 300 feet of open tile intakes, unless other MPCA approved water quality protection management practices are implemented in this 300-foot zone. Table 5. Blue Earth County manure application setbacks (in feet). 7 Setback from the following Physical Spreading without Injection or Incorporation within Irrigation Features/Structures Incorporation 48 Hours Streams or rivers Section Lakes Section Wetlands* Section Public and private drainage ditches Surface tile inlets Water wells Sinkhole Residential dwellings ,000 Public road (right-of-way) Floodplain Prohibited Permitted Prohibited *Nonexempted wetlands as defined in Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act of Waseca County Feedlot Ordinance No. 76, Section 7 Manure Application, Subdivision 712 Required Setbacks for Land Application of Manure Blue Earth County, Minnesota. Code of Ordinances: Chapter 6 Environment, Article 11. Livestock Manure Management, Section Ord. No. 130, , Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 11 Worksheet

13 Table 6. Blue Earth County setback for manure application without immediate incorporation. 8 Slope Soil Texture Time of Year Separation From Surface Waters 0-6 percent Coarse Not frozen 100 feet 0-6 percent Coarse Frozen 200 feet 0-6 percent Medium to fine Not frozen 200 feet 0-6 percent Medium to fine Frozen 300 feet > 6 percent Coarse Not frozen 200 feet > 6 percent Medium to fine Not frozen 300 feet > 6 percent All soils Frozen Prohibited Table 7. Faribault County Required Setbacks for Land Application of Manure. All feedlots shall meet the following setbacks for the land application of manure unless a land use plan approved by the SWCD recommends alternative distances. Location Surface Applied (in feet) Incorporation or Injection (in feet) Watercourses, streams, rivers, lakes, Wetlands and ditches Municipal Well 1,000 1,000 Private Wells Residential Area or Municipality Uncomposted Poultry Manure from Municipality 5,280 5,280 Residence, neighboring residence Cemeteries Year Flood Plain Prohibited 200 Field Tile Intake Drainage Ditches (with one rod buffer) 50 Edge/buffer Drainage Ditches (without buffer) Irrigation applied manure will need to be approved by the Faribault County SWCD Board in a land use plan. Soils Land application of manure may be prohibited on hydric soils previously occupied by natural wetlands (525) Muskego muck and (539) Palms muck. Land application of manure may be prohibited on soils that exceed 6% slopes as classified by the Soil Survey of Faribault County as described in the site plan. 8 Blue Earth County, Minnesota. Code of Ordinances: Chapter 6 Environment, Article 11. Livestock Manure Management, Section Ord. No. 130, , Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 12 Worksheet

14 E. Other methods of manure utilization. If the project will utilize manure other than by land application, please describe the methods. No additional manure utilization methods are planned. 6. Air/odor emissions. A. Identify the major sources of air or odor emissions from this feedlot. Potential sources of air and odor emissions include: manure storage pits, confinement barns, dead animal disposal, spilled or spoiled feed, and manure application sites during the scheduled manure application periods. Dust generated by truck traffic around the site can also contribute odor emissions. B. Describe any proposed feedlot design features or air or odor emission mitigation measures to be implemented to avoid or minimize potential adverse impacts and discuss their anticipated effectiveness. The existing barn at the Manox Site 2 is a total confinement facility. The proposed barn at the Manox Site 3 will also be a total confinement facility. Manure will be stored in concrete pits below the barns. The facility will be routinely cleaned. The proposer utilizes pit additives to reduce odor emissions from the manure storage pit. Manure will be agitated once per year prior to application. Some odor will be released during the agitation process, while emptying the concrete pits, and during land application of manure. Equipment must be kept in optimal condition to prevent leaks or spills on manure application sites and public roads. Incorporating manure immediately into the soil will minimize the release of odorous gases. If dust generated by truck traffic is an issue, the proposer will use a dust suppressant to control the dust. Composting of dead animals is a potential source of odor emissions. The proposer is required to follow Minnesota Department of Agriculture construction and management requirements/guidelines for animal composting; refer to Item 7: Dead Animal Disposal on page 15. C. Provide a summary of the results of an air emissions modeling study designed to compare predicted emissions at the property boundaries with state standards, health risk values, or odor threshold concentrations. The modeling must incorporate an appropriate background concentration for hydrogen sulfide to account for potential cumulative air quality impacts. Air quality modeling was performed to estimate concentrations of hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and odorous gases in the air that will be created by the existing Manox Site 2 and the proposed Manox Site 3. The air quality model provides an estimate for odorous gas concentrations and odor intensities at the property lines for the two feedlots and at the expanded feedlots 36 nearest neighbors located in the four-mile by three-mile grid around the existing Manox Site 2 and the proposed Manox Site 3. The model also considers the air emissions from the 15 neighboring feedlots in that same grid area. Hydrogen Sulfide The CALPUFF modeling indicates that the existing Manox Site 2 and the proposed Manox Site 3 will comply with the Minnesota ambient air quality standard for hydrogen sulfide. CALPUFF predicted a maximum hourly property-line hydrogen sulfide concentration of parts per billion (ppb). When a background concentration of 17 ppb is added to the CALPUFF prediction, the maximum property-line hydrogen sulfide concentration is ppb, which is below the ambient standard of 30 ppb. The ambient standard is at the property line and a ½-hour average of ppb cannot be exceeded more than twice in any five-day period. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 13 Worksheet

15 The CALPUFF results also indicate that the existing Manox Site 2 and proposed Manox Site 3 will not create exceedances of the subchronic hydrogen sulfide inhalation health risk value (ihrv) at the neighboring residences. The estimated maximum 13-week time-averaged hydrogen sulfide concentration for the feedlot s neighbors is 0.52 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m 3 ). When a background concentration of 1.00 µg/m 3 is added to the CALPUFF estimate, the maximum 13-week neighbor hydrogen sulfide concentration is 1.52 µg/m 3, which is below the subchronic hydrogen sulfide ihrv of 10 µg/m 3. Ammonia The modeling results suggest that the existing Manox Site 2 and the proposed Manox Site 3 will not create exceedances of the acute ammonia ihrv. CALPUFF predicted a maximum hourly property-line ammonia concentration of 1,585 µg/m 3. When a background concentration of 148 µg/m 3 is added to the CALPUFF prediction, the maximum property line ammonia concentration is 1,733 µg/m 3, which is below the acute ammonia ihrv of 3,200 µg/m 3. The CALPUFF results also indicate that the existing Manox Site 2 and proposed Manox Site 3 will not create exceedances of the chronic ammonia ihrv at the neighboring residences. The estimated maximum one-year time-averaged ammonia concentration for the feedlot s neighbors is µg/m 3. When a background ammonia concentration of 5.72 µg/m 3 is added to the CALPUFF estimate, the maximum annual ammonia concentration for a neighbor is 21,82 µg/m 3, which is below the chronic ammonia ihrv of 80 µg/m 3. Odor The CALPUFF modeling estimated the ground level odor intensities at the feedlot s property lines and at the feedlot s neighbors. As indicated in the following tables, the maximum odor intensity at both the existing and the proposed feedlot site property lines is 31 odor units (OU) at the existing Manox Site 2 and 22 OUs at the proposed Manox Site 3, both of which are below the faint odor threshold of 72 OUs. Existing Manox Site 2 Existing Site Property Boundary Hydrogen Sulfide Results (ppb) 9 Acute Ammonia Results (µg/m 3 ) 10 Maximum Hourly Odor Intensity (OU, d/t) 11 North South 20, East West , Proposed Manox Site 3 Existing Site Property Boundary Hydrogen Sulfide Results (ppb) 9 Acute Ammonia Results (µg/m 3 ) 10 Maximum Hourly Odor Intensity (OU, d/t) 11 North South , East , West The air quality standard for hydrogen sulfide is 30 ppb. The data results in the tables include the background concentration of 17 ppb for the results in the table. 10 The acute ihrv for ammonia is 3,200 µg/m 3. The data results in the tables include the background concentration of 148 µg/m Odor Impact assessment based on odor units. A value of 72 odor units is considered to be a faint odor detectable by most people. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 14 Worksheet

16 In summary, the CALPUFF modeling results indicate that the existing Manox Site 2 and the proposed Manox Site 3 will comply with the ambient air quality standard for hydrogen sulfide and will not exceed the acute ammonia ihrv at its property lines. The CALPUFF results also suggest that the existing and proposed feedlots and the neighboring feedlots will not exceed the subchronic ihrv for hydrogen sulfide and the chronic ihrv for ammonia at the neighboring residences. D. Describe any plans to notify neighbors of operational events (such as manure storage agitation and pumpout) that may result in higher-than-usual levels of air or odor emissions. There are currently 12 residences within one mile of the existing Manox Site 2, and nine residences within one mile of the proposed Manox Site 3. The proposer will attempt to contact neighbors any time there is a scheduled odor release event, as indicated in the NPDES Air Emissions and Odor Management Plan E. Noise and dust. Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Noises and dust common to building construction are expected during construction of the proposed barn. After construction, noise and dust levels are expected to be consistent with current operation and general land use in the area. Noise will be produced from ventilation fans. Fan noise should not be heard beyond the property boundary. The nearest home is 1,200 feet from the Section 8 site and 2,200 feet from the proposed Manox Site 2. Trucks will utilize gravel surfaced Township Road 24 and gravel surfaced Township Road 201 to access the private driveways leading to the feedlots. Dust has not been an issue in past, but will be addressed and handled accordingly. Dust control products may be applied if needed. Animal feed is also a possible source of dust. To reduce the amount of dust, drop tubes will carry feed from the storage bins to the barns. Fat may also be added to the feed to reduce dust. Spills will be cleaned up promptly, and debris and dust buildup will be regularly removed from exhaust fans. Additionally, the proposer plans to install trees along the north side of both sites that will function as wind-breaks. 7. Dead Animal Disposal Describe the quantities of dead animals anticipated, the method for storing and disposing of carcasses, and frequency of disposal. The disposal of livestock mortalities is regulated by the Minnesota Board of Animal Health. Mortality for wean-to-finish swine with an average weight of 150 pounds is estimated to equal two to four percent. 12 The existing barn at the Manox Site 2 and the proposed barn at the Manox Site 3 have the total capacity to house 6,600 head (1,980 AUs). The facility operator plans to fill and empty the barns on both sites two times per year, resulting in a total of 13,200 head on both sites per year. Therefore, the anticipated mortality rate should range between 264 to 528 hogs per year. 12 Morse, D.E. (updated July 1996). Composting Animal Mortalities. Agricultural Resources Management and Development Division. Minnesota Department of Agriculture. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 15 Worksheet

17 Composting will be used to dispose of dead swine at both the existing and proposed feedlot sites. Barns will be inspected daily and dead animals will be promptly removed. The proposer will construct a pole shed composting structure for disposal of animal mortalities at each site. The facilities will be capable of handling the mortalities generated by the expansion and must comply with Minnesota Board of Animal Health guidelines. 8. Surface Water Runoff. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Project Site The proposed Manox Site 3 will be located on five acres of cultivated agricultural land. The Manox Site 2 is already an operational feedlot on five acres of land with a gravel surfaced driveway. This existing site was seeded this summer. Both feedlots are in the Unnamed minor watershed of the Le Sueur River major watershed. The quantity of stormwater runoff will slightly increase at the sites once the 102-foot by 260-foot hog barn is constructed. As previously stated, manure will be stored in pits entirely under the barns. No contaminated runoff is anticipated. An emergency management plan has been created in case of a spill. This is an enforceable condition of the NPDES/SDS Feedlot Permit. In the event of a spill, the plan requires the creation of temporary berms to redirect surface flow so that surface waters are not contaminated. Land Application Areas All manure rights will be transferred. According to the proposer s MMP for transferred manure, manure will be incorporated at the time of application and runoff is not expected to change since all of the manure application fields have been used for row crop agriculture for many decades. The potential impact to surface water resources from the project s land application activities will be further mitigated because, as discussed in Item 5 of the EAW, applicator(s) of the transferred manure must apply manure at agronomic rates based on the crop grown, yield goal, soil type, and residual nutrient content of the soil. In addition, the manure applicator(s) must adhere to required setbacks, as outlined in Item 5 of the EAW. Manure application sites are located in the following minor watersheds within the LeSueur River major watershed: Bull Run Cr (32013), Little Cobb R (32034), Co Ditch #5 (32067), Little Cobb R (32029), Unknown name (32033), Cobb R (32032), Cobb R (32031), Unknown name (32041), and Unknown name (32045). 9. Traffic and Public Infrastructure Impacts. A. Estimate the number of heavy truck trips generated per week and describes their routing over local roads. Describe any road improvements to be made. Based on Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) counts from 2006, the average annual daily traffic (AADT) volume for the roads to be utilized to access the feedlots is: o 1,050 for Trunk Highway (TH) 83 o 510 for TH 30 o 267 for County Road 161 o 135 for County Highway 4 Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 16 Worksheet

18 An average of two heavy trucks per week will access each feedlot to deliver feed or to transport weaned or finished hogs to or from the Manox Site 3. Trucks will utilize paved TH 83 and/or TH 30 and gravel surfaced Township Road 24 and/or Township Road 201 to access the feedlots. Traffic counts were not available for Township Road 24 and Township Road 201. No road improvements are believed to be required or anticipated at this time. Traffic to and from the Manox Site 2 has not resulted in adverse impacts in the past. Only a small increase in truck traffic is expected since one site is currently in operation. B. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure, or public services be required to serve the project? Yes No 10. Permits and approvals required. Mark required permits and give status of application: Unit of government Type of Application Status MPCA NPDES Individual Feedlot Permit Submitted DNR General Water Appropriation Permit To be obtained 11. Other potential environmental impacts, including cumulative impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 10, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. This includes any cumulative impacts caused by the project in combination with other existing, proposed, and reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts. Examples of cumulative impacts to consider include air quality, stormwater volume or quality, and surface water quality. Cumulative impacts were addressed in relation to the feedlots, manure application sites, and will also address other planned or existing land uses in the landscape. Based on available data, there are 108 registered feedlots located within the nine minor watersheds in which land application of manure is to occur. Refer to Exhibit I Cumulative Potential Effects Map. The review evaluated impacts on groundwater, surface water, air quality, and land use in the area. Groundwater Appropriation and Quality There are three areas of concern related to groundwater. Contamination from manure storage structures, contamination from land application, and effects on water supply from increased demand. To protect groundwater, the project proposer is required to follow the design criteria in Minn. R. ch for the construction of the manure storage structures for the swine manure and the land application of the manure. These criteria were established to provide protection of groundwater quality. The proposed plans and specifications for the manure storage pits, the design and operation of the open lots, and the MMP for the land application of the manure have been reviewed and approved by MPCA staff, and will be enforceable conditions of the project s feedlot NPDES/SDS Permit. The producer is required to follow an MPCA-approved MMP for transferred manure, and submit an annual report to the MPCA. The approved MMP for transferred manure is an enforceable part the project s NPDES/SDS Permit. The proposed expansion is not expected to adversely impact groundwater from land application of manure. The MPCA reviewed the CWI to explore the nature of well depth and type to account for the other users of the same or nearby resources identified within approximately a one-mile radius of the project. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 17 Worksheet

19 Table 5. Summary of County Well Index (CWI) listings within a one-mile radius of the feedlots. Name Unique Well Depth Depth to Well # (feet) Bedrock (feet) Well Use Klinder, Victor Domestic Longenker, Jake Domestic Schweer, Dale & Scott Domestic Ewald, Lyle Domestic Gould, Robert Domestic Schweer, Dale & Scott Domestic Longenker, Mark Domestic Kamrath, Elvin Domestic Traynor, Terry Domestic Traynor, Terry Domestic After construction, approximately 9.6 million gallons of water will be expended annually using wells at the existing Manox Site 2, and the proposed Manox Site 3. The wells will be covered by general water appropriations permits after construction. A review of published geologic and hydrogeologic data indicates that the water-bearing characteristics of the surficial aquifer (including recharge) and the nature of its existing use as a groundwater source, water use for this project is not expected to interfere with other groundwater users. The proposed project is not expected to contribute to an adverse or irreversible cumulative potential impact on groundwater resources. Surface Water As previously stated, the proposed feedlot expansion and manure application sites are located in the Le Sueur River watershed. The Le Sueur River is a major watershed and also a tributary of the Blue Earth River. Row crop agriculture is the primary land use within the watershed and extensive drainage through public and private tile systems has occurred. The Cobb River is listed on the MPCA s Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) List for aquatic life. The Cobb River is a tributary of the Le Sueur River. The Le Sueur River is listed on the MPCA s Impaired Waters and TMDL List for aquatic life and consumption as well as aquatic recreation. The Le Sueur River has poor water quality caused by fecal coliform bacteria, turbidity, acetochlor, mercury, and PCB in the water. The Le Sueur River converges with the Blue Earth River south of Mankato. The Blue Earth River is also listed on the TMDL list for aquatic life and consumption. Site-specific best management practices identified in the MMP for transferred manure will prevent and minimize potential cumulative effects on water resources. To ensure water resources will not be impacted, several measures will be taken as indicated in the MMP. Soil and manure testing will specify the amount of manure to apply on application sites. Required setbacks from all surface waters and tile intakes will be maintained and manure will be immediately incorporated into the soil. All livestock will be housed in a total confinement building and will not have access to stream banks. Manure will be stored in below-barn concrete pits designed by a Professional Engineer and approved by the MPCA. The project site itself is required by the NPDES/SDS Permit to meet a zero discharge standard. The NPDES/SDS Permit requires stormwater pollution prevention and management plans for both the construction and operation of hog barns, and has specified requirements to be included in the MMP for the prevention of stormwater runoff at the land application sites. Manox 3- Manthey Hog Barns Environmental Assessment Vivian Township, Waseca County, Minnesota 18 Worksheet

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41