MOBILE, Ala. - Poultry growers use fans and other methods to deal with ammonia, which is generated by chicken waste and in extreme concentrations can blind or kill the flock as well as cause health problems for those entering the chicken house.

"You have got to keep it out," said Jimmy Miller, who operates four poultry houses in Blount County.

The "nose test" works for most growers who can walk into a poultry house and with a sniff determine if the ammonia level is too high and immediately switch on a fan.

But is anyone outside the chicken house threatened when the noxious fumes escape into the air?

Farm groups, including the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the poultry industry, don't think so. But environmentalists and others supporting air quality in farm communities say the fumes need to be monitored - and they are objecting to a proposal to end such monitoring.

A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rule from the mid-1980s requires that animal-waste emissions such as ammonia and hydrogen sulfide be reported to the government when they reach a certain level. Miller said he was unaware of the rule, but it is now getting a lot more attention.

After it drew enforcement actions by the federal agency and the courts in the last few years, EPA proposed exempting farms from reporting hazardous emissions from poultry and livestock waste.

In a 2003 case over ammonia emissions, EPA settled with Ohio-based Buckeye Egg Farm, which pledged to invest $1.4 million in research and air pollution controls, according to Justice Department records.

Responding to the EPA proposal, Earthjustice attorney Keri Powell of New York told the agency that the exemption, if granted, will make it harder for emergency responders who keep track of emissions to protect communities.

EPA's public comment period for the proposed change ended March 27 and the agency received hundreds of responses. It's unclear when EPA will rule on the proposed change, which was published in the Federal Register on Dec. 28, when Congress was on its winter recess.

In March, Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, sent a letter to EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson arguing that the proposed reporting exemption "appears ill-considered and contrary to the public interest." The letter was also signed by Reps. Hilda Solis (D-Calif.) and Al Wynn (D-Md.) As of Friday, the EPA chief had not responded to the letter, a Dingell spokesman said.

Nationwide, the total animal waste generated by animal feeding operations - 500 million tons, according to USDA - is equivalent to 3.3 times the solid waste produced by the entire U.S. population. Potential health risks from exposure to animal waste emissions include respiratory illness, lung inflammation and increasing vulnerability to asthma.

A University of Iowa air quality study says the worst hazard is hydrogen sulfide poisoning. This life-threatening situation only occurs in workers in and around livestock operations that store manure in liquid form, where gases can be trapped in a confined space. Sudden exposure to high levels of this gas has been blamed for 19 deaths over the years, said Dr. Kelley J. Donham of the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health at Iowa, who worked on that study.

Donham said he doesn't favor an exemption to the EPA rule. He said the current policy gives residents some "feeling of control in their neighborhoods" and can provide guidance in deciding where farms should be located.

"It's some mechanism to look out for their welfare," Donham said in a telephone interview.

Donham said he's worked for the last 25 years to develop regulations that "strike a balance between (farm) production and health."

The EPA controversy is over whether or not low levels of emissions are really that hazardous, he said.

Richard L. Lobb, spokesman for the National Chicken Council, described EPA's proposal as a "common-sense rule that carries out the initial intent of Congress, which certainly did not mean to put ordinary agriculture operations in the same category as spills from chemical plants."

The federal Superfund law and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act both contain emission reporting requirements that can trigger a toll-free phone call to the National Response Center. EPA determines whether a response is appropriate.

But EPA says it has not initiated a response to any NRC notifications of ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, or any other hazardous substances released to the air where animal waste at farms is the source of that release.

The poultry industry petitioned EPA for the reporting exemption in 2005 in response to federal court rulings against it. EPA came back last year with a proposal that covers not just poultry, but all farms, including research farms.

While reporting emissions may not require hazardous materials crews to race out to a farm, the data is crucial for communities struggling with pollution from factory farms, or those with extreme concentrations of farm animals, according to Earthjustice, based in Oakland, Calif. Earthjustice officials say they represent some family farmers and environmental advocates in 27 states in protesting the EPA rule change.

A joint statement by the National Chicken Council, National Turkey Federation, and U.S. Poultry & Egg Association said EPA has "wisely proposed to grant to poultry farmers a narrowly tailored exemption from rules that would otherwise require them to report 'emissions' that are actually nothing more than the normal consequences of livestock and poultry operations."

Lobb said there may be some scientific way to measure emissions, but "no farm is set up that way."

Ammonia and hydrogen sulfide both have a reportable quantity of 100 pounds. The EPA rule requires any person in charge of an animal feeding facility to immediately notify the National Response Center when they have knowledge of a release equal to or greater than 100 pounds.

A report is also required for state emergency response agencies and local emergency planning committees. These reports to date have generally estimated emissions coming from barns and lagoons, EPA says.

According to EPA, an estimated 140 animal-feeding operations reported ammonia releases exceeding the 100 pound-per-day level in the 2006 fiscal year, and an estimated 130 operations in the 2007 fiscal year. Some facilities regularly exceeded the reporting levels.

The EPA is conducting a study to determine how much ammonia is actually produced by animals in typical settings.

"At this time, there is no good science on how much ammonia a house full of chickens actually produces. There is a good chance that it is actually below the reporting threshold that would apply under the industrial-type rules," Lobb said.

On the Net:

Proposed exemption: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/2007/December/Day-28/a25231.htm

Earthjustice: www.earthjustice.org

University of Iowa study: http://www.public-health.uiowa.edu/ehsrc/cafostudy.htm

Comment on this Story