PURPOSE: This rule restricts the emission of excessive odorous matter.

1. (1) General Provisions.

   1. (A) No person shall emit odorous matter as to cause an objectionable odor on or adjacent to—

      1. 1. Residential, recreational, institution-

al, retail sales, hotel or educational premises;

1. 2. Industrial premises when air contain-

ing odorous matter is diluted with twenty (20) or more volumes of odor-free air; or

1. 3. Premises other than those in para-

graphs (1)(A)1. and 2. when air containing odorous matter is diluted with four (4) or more volumes of odor-free air.

1. (B) The previously mentioned requirement shall apply only to objectionable odors. An odor will be deemed objectionable when thirty percent (30%) or more of a sample of the people exposed to it believe it to be objectionable in usual places of occupancy, the sample size to be at least twenty (20) people or seventy-five percent (75%) of those exposed if fewer than twenty (20) people are exposed.

1. (2) Exception. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to the emission of odorous matter from the raising and harvesting of crops, nor from the feeding, breeding and 10 CSR 10-5

management of livestock or domestic animals or fowl except as described in section (3) of this rule. (3) Control of Odors from Class 1A Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations.

1. (A) Notwithstanding any provision in any other regulation to the contrary, all Class 1A concentrated animal feeding operations as defined in section 640.703(3), RSMo, operating on or after January 1, 1999, shall prepare and implement an odor control plan describing measures to be used to control odor emissions. The plan shall identify all sources of odor emissions and describe the measures to be used to reduce the overall odor emissions associated with the facility operations. The schedule for these activities shall be as follows:

   1. 1. Not later than July 1, 2000, an odor

control plan shall be submitted to the Air Pollution Control Program (APCP). The odor control plan shall contain the following:

1. A. A listing of all potentially innova-

tive and proven odor control options for the facility. Odor control options may include odor reductions achieved through: odor prevention, odor capture and treatment, odor dispersion, add-on control devices, modifications to feed-stock or waste handling practices, or process changes;

1. B. A detailed discussion of feasible

odor control options for the facility. The discussion shall include options determined by the facility to be infeasible. Determination of infeasibility should be well documented and based on physical, chemical and engineering principles demonstrating that technical difficulties would preclude the success of the control option;

1. C. A ranking of feasible odor control

options from most to least effective. Ranking factors shall include odor control effectiveness, expected odor reduction, energy impacts and economic impacts;

1. D. An evaluation of the most effective

odor control options. Energy, environmental and economic impacts shall be evaluated on a case-by-case basis;

1. E. Description of the odor control

options to be implemented by the facility;

1. F. A schedule for implementation.

The schedule shall establish interim milestones in implementing the odor control plan prior to the implementation deadline; and

1. G. An odor monitoring plan;
2. 2. The APCP, in consultation with the

Water Pollution Control Program, shall review and approve or disapprove the odor control plan.

1. A. After the APCP receives an odor

control plan they shall perform a completeness review. Within thirty (30) days of receipt, the APCP shall notify the facility if the plan contains all the elements of a complete odor control plan. If found incomplete, the APCP shall give the facility a written explanation of the plan’s deficiencies.

1. B. Within sixty (60) days after deter-

mining an odor control plan submittal is deemed complete, the APCP shall approve or disapprove the plan. During this sixty (60)- day technical review period, the APCP may request additional information needed for review. If the plan is disapproved, the APCP shall give the owner or operator a written evaluation explaining the reason(s) for disapproval;

1. 3. Not later than March 1, 2001, the

facility shall submit to the APCP a written progress report on implementing the odor control plan. The progress report shall, at a minimum, compare the actual schedule of implementation to that approved in the odor control plan; and

1. 4. Not later than January 1, 2002,

implementation of the odor control plan shall be complete and controls shall be operational.

1. (B) Notwithstanding any provision in any other regulation to the contrary, all new Class 1A concentrated animal feeding operations, prior to commencement of construction, shall obtain approval from the APCP of an odor control plan as described above.

2. (C) After January 1, 2002, no Class 1A concentrated animal feeding operation may cause, permit or allow the emission of odorous matter, beyond the property boundary of the facility or beyond the property boundary of a remote spreading location—

   1. 1. In concentrations and frequencies or

for durations that the odor can be perceived when one (1) volume of odorous air is diluted with five and four-tenths (5.4) volumes of odor-free air for two (2) separate trials not less than fifteen (15) minutes apart within the period of one (1) hour. This odor evaluation shall be taken at a site not at the installation and will be used as a screening evaluation. A positive screening evaluation for odor shall require an odor sample to be taken and evaluated by olfactometry as described in paragraph (3)(C)2. of this rule. These measurements may be made with a Scentometer as manufactured by the Barnebey & Sutcliffe Corporation or by a similar technique that will give equivalent results, as agreed to at the time by the source operator and the staff director; and

1. 2. When one (1) of the following condi-

tions is met:

1. A. In concentrations with a best esti-

mate detection threshold, represented as ZOL (cid:1)(cid:2) 7, as determined using American Society for Testing and Materials Standard E 679-91 (Reapproved 1997) at an olfactometer flow rate of twenty (20) liters per minute; or

1. B. At intensities greater than that of

two hundred twenty-five (225) parts per million of n-butanol odorant in air, which serves as the reference scale, as determined by an olfactometry panel evaluation of a sample of the odorous air.

1. (D) The director may require an ambient air monitoring quality assurance project plan. This plan shall be approved by the director and include or reference the documented and approved standard operating procedures for monitoring, field collection and analysis for any Class 1A CAFO that exceeds the odor emission limits found in paragraph (3)(C)2. of this rule following implementation of its odor control plan. Monitoring shall be done for pollutants or gases reasonably expected to be emitted by the CAFO and implemented on a schedule as agreed to by the source operator and the staff director. Monitoring shall begin and continue as approved in the plan and shall not exceed eight (8) quarters of complete data unless subsequent violations are determined.

AUTHORITY: section 643.050, RSMo Supp. 1997.* Original rule filed March 14, 1967, effective March 24, 1967. Amended: Filed Aug. 15, 1983, effective Jan. 13, 1984. Amended: Filed Nov. 2, 1998, effective July 30, 1999. *Original authority 1965, amended 1972, 1992, 1993, 1995.