STIPULATION AGREEMENT

EX-10.30 3 a03-5753_1ex10d30.htm EX-10.30

Exhibit 10.30

 

STATE OF MINNESOTA
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

American Crystal
Sugar Company

STIPULATION AGREEMENT

 

Part 1.                                                           PARTIES.  This Stipulation Agreement (“Agreement”) applies to and is binding upon the following parties:

 

a.                                       American Crystal Sugar Company, (“Regulated Party”); and

 

b.                                      The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (“MPCA”).

 

Unless specified otherwise in this Agreement, where this Agreement identifies actions to be taken by the MPCA, the Commissioner or the Commissioner’s designees shall act on the MPCA’s behalf.

 

Part 2.                                                           PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STIPULATION AGREEMENT. The purpose of this Agreement is to resolve the alleged violations set out in Part 7 of this Agreement by specifying actions the Regulated Party agrees to undertake. By entering into this Agreement, the Regulated Party is settling a disputed matter between itself and the MPCA and does not admit that the alleged violations set out in Part 7 of this Agreement occurred. The Regulated Party agrees, however, that the MPCA may rely upon the alleged violations set out in Part 7 as provided in Part 12 of this Agreement. Except for the purposes of implementing and enforcing this Agreement, nothing in this Agreement constitutes an admission by either Party, or creates rights, substantive or procedural, that can be asserted or enforced with respect to any claim of or legal action brought by a person who is not a party to this Agreement.

 

Part 3.                                                           AUTHORITY. This Agreement is entered under the authority vested in the MPCA by Minnesota Statutes Chapters 115 and 116.

 

1



 

Part 4.                                                           DEFINITIONS. Unless otherwise explicitly stated, the definitions in Minnesota Statutes Chapters 115, 115B, 115C, 116, 116B and in Minnesota Rules Chapters 7000 to 7150 apply, as appropriate, to the terms used in this Agreement.

 

Part 5.                                                           BACKGROUND. The following is the background of this Agreement:

 

a.                                       The Regulated Party operates three sugar beet processing factories located in Crookston, Polk County, Minnesota; East Grand Forks, Polk County, Minnesota; and Moorhead, Clay County, Minnesota hereafter as “Crookston”, “East Grand Forks” and “Moorhead”.

 

CROOKSTON

 

b.                                      Minn. R. 7009.0080, establishes the state ambient air quality standard for Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S). The state ambient air quality standard for H2S is 0.05 parts per million (ppm) as a half hour average not to be exceeded more than twice per year and 0.03 ppm as a half hour average not to be exceeded more than twice in any five consecutive days.

 

c.                                       Air Emission Permit No. 11900001-023, Part 6.6, requires the Crookston facility to demonstrate compliance with the H2S standard by establishing an H2S monitoring network to measure the ambient concentration of H2S coming from the facility.

 

d.                                      The Regulated Party collected H2S data from May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999. The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2



 

1999 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/27/99-5/31/99

 

26

 

37 ppb

 

6/2/99-6/6/99

 

61

 

39 ppb

 

6/7/99-6/11/99

 

35

 

42 ppb

 

6/19/99-6/23/99

 

30

 

34 ppb

 

6/25/99-6/29/99

 

24

 

39 ppb

 

7/3/99-7/7/99

 

36

 

40 ppb

 

7/8/99-7/12/99

 

15

 

38 ppb

 

7/13/99-7/17/99

 

30

 

39 ppb

 

7/18/99-7/22/99

 

9

 

37 ppb

 

8/25/99-8/29/99

 

1

 

42 ppb

 

9/2/99-9/6/99

 

1

 

50 ppb

 

9/7/99-9/11/99

 

14

 

42 ppb

 

9/11/99-9/15/99

 

11

 

41 ppb

 

9/15/99-9/19/99

 

6

 

38 ppb

 

9/20/99-9/24/99

 

16

 

36 ppb

 

 

1999 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/30/99

 

6

 

60 ppb

 

6/3/99-6/6/99

 

14

 

60 ppb

 

6/8/99-6/9/99

 

12

 

69 ppb

 

6/10/99-6/11/99

 

3

 

72 ppb

 

6/25/99-6/26/99

 

4

 

56 ppb

 

7/3/99-7/7/99

 

11

 

64 ppb

 

7/8/99-7/9/99

 

8

 

63 ppb

 

7/12/99

 

6

 

59 ppb

 

7/14/99-7/15/99

 

11

 

63 ppb

 

9/4/99

 

1

 

51 ppb

 

9/10/99-9/14/99

 

34

 

73 ppb

 

9/15/99-9/16/99

 

25

 

71 ppb

 

9/17/99

 

27

 

83 ppb

 

9/20/99-9/21/99

 

3

 

56 ppb

 

 

3



 

e.                                       The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2000, through October 2000. The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2000 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/1/00 – 4/6/00

 

17

 

48.3

 

4/20/00 – 4/25/00

 

67

 

37.8

 

4/26/00 – 5/1/00

 

43

 

43.7

 

5/4/00 – 5/9/00

 

3

 

44

 

5/12/00 – 5/17/00

 

10

 

40.6

 

5/20/00 – 5/25/00

 

22

 

49.4

 

5/29/00 – 6/3/00

 

4

 

42.6

 

6/4/00 – 6/9/00

 

3

 

50

 

6/12/00 – 6/17/00

 

22

 

49.5

 

6/17/00 – 6/22/00

 

86

 

50

 

6/22/00 – 6/27/00

 

33

 

49.4

 

6/28/00 – 7/3/00

 

52

 

50

 

7/8/00 – 7/13/00

 

36

 

48.3

 

7/13/00 – 7/18/00

 

32

 

48.5

 

7/20/00 – 7/25/00

 

3

 

50

 

7/26/00 – 7/31/00

 

5

 

50

 

7/31/00 – 8/5/00

 

6

 

39.6

 

8/5/00 – 8/13/00

 

45

 

38.4

 

8/13/00 – 8/18/00

 

50

 

39.1

 

8/18/00 – 8/23/00

 

25

 

38

 

8/24/00 – 8/29/00

 

1

 

34

 

9/6/00 – 9/11/00

 

2

 

33.5

 

9/15/00 – 9/20/00

 

1

 

31

 

10/18/00 – 10/23/00

 

1

 

37

 

 

4



 

2000 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

8/6/00 – 8/7/00

 

2

 

88.5

 

8/8/00 – 8/9/00

 

4

 

88.2

 

8/10/00 – 8/12/00

 

24

 

75.7

 

8/13/00 – 8/15/00

 

17

 

77.8

 

8/17/00 – 8/18/00

 

6

 

57.8

 

8/19/00 – 8/22/00

 

14

 

81.8

 

8/24/00 – 8/25/00

 

3

 

90

 

8/27/00 – 8/28/00

 

10

 

90

 

8/29/00 – 8/30/00

 

6

 

90

 

9/1/00

 

6

 

90

 

9/4/00

 

1

 

90

 

9/7/00 – 9/9/00

 

6

 

90

 

9/10/00

 

5

 

90

 

9/13/00

 

2

 

90

 

9/15/00

 

1

 

90

 

9/16/00 – 9/18/00

 

23

 

90

 

9/28/00 – 9/30/00

 

17

 

90

 

10/10/00 – 10/13/00

 

20

 

88.3

 

10/18/00 – 10/19/00

 

14

 

90

 

10/23/00 – 10/26/00

 

16

 

90

 

 

5



 

f.                                         The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001, through October 2001. The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2001 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE THE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above 0.03
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/6/01 – 4/11/01

 

17

 

39.6

 

4/12/01 – 4/17/01

 

9

 

41.3

 

4/18/01 – 4/23/01

 

2

 

34.5

 

4/23/01 – 4/28/01

 

25

 

43.2

 

4/29/01 – 5/4/01

 

24

 

42

 

5/4/01 –5/9/01

 

40

 

39.1

 

5/9/01 – 5/14/01

 

52

 

37.7

 

5/15/01 – 5/20/01

 

36

 

37.9

 

5/20/01 – 5/25/01

 

41

 

39.9

 

5/27/01 – 6/1/01

 

54

 

40

 

6/2/01 – 6/7/01

 

85

 

40.1

 

6/7/01 – 6/12/01

 

29

 

37.5

 

6/13/01 – 6/18/01

 

48

 

40.3

 

6/21/01 – 6/26/01

 

16

 

37.3

 

6/28/01 – 7/3/01

 

1

 

31

 

7/18/01 – 7/23/01

 

1

 

42

 

7/26/01 – 7/31/01

 

10

 

39.9

 

8/3/01 – 8/8/01

 

40

 

38.5

 

8/8/01 – 8/13/01

 

2

 

36.5

 

8/22/01 – 8/27/01

 

14

 

41.8

 

8/29/01 – 9/3/01

 

6

 

37.6

 

9/4/01 – 9/9/01

 

7

 

43

 

9/15/01 – 9/20/01

 

9

 

41.3

 

9/20/01 – 9/25/01

 

7

 

32.8

 

9/25/01 – 9/30/01

 

37

 

37.2

 

10/1/01 – 10/6/01

 

11

 

37.4

 

10/31/01

 

2

 

31

 

 

6



 

2001 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE THE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
0.05 Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/7/01

 

5

 

80.2

 

4/9/01

 

1

 

54

 

4/23/01 – 5/1/01

 

225

 

86.1

 

5/3/01 – 5/10/01

 

202

 

86.4

 

5/11/01 – 5/16/01

 

172

 

88.7

 

5/18/01 – 5/22/01

 

55

 

75.6

 

5/27/01 – 6/1/01

 

71

 

66.5

 

6/4/01 – 6/18/01

 

283

 

78.6

 

6/20/01 – 6/21/01

 

5

 

75

 

6/25/01 – 6/26/01

 

11

 

77.7

 

7/21/01 – 7/22/01

 

9

 

90

 

8/3/01 – 8/5/01

 

22

 

63.8

 

8/7/01 – 8/8/01

 

11

 

86.5

 

8/23/01 – 8/24/01

 

24

 

77.5

 

8/26/01

 

3

 

86.6

 

8/29/01

 

6

 

76.2

 

9/1/01

 

14

 

88.3

 

9/4/01 – 9/5/01

 

5

 

64.6

 

9/17/01

 

1

 

54

 

9/19/01 – 9/20/01

 

9

 

64.2

 

9/25/01 – 9/27/01

 

8

 

81.4

 

9/29/01

 

9

 

53.2

 

10/8/01

 

2

 

90

 

10/21/01

 

1

 

90

 

 

g.                                      The Regulated Party referenced the MPCA’s Ambient Air Monitoring Procedures entitled Exhibit M in the H2S Monitoring Plan that it submitted for MPCA approval.  The MPCA approved the Regulated Party’s H2S Monitoring Plan with the reference to Exhibit M.  Exhibit M, Part 6, Item (C), states that the requirement for data recovery is 75 percent of all data possible from each sampling quarter.

 

h.                                      Crookston’s H2S Monitoring Summary for the period of May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999, reported that Monitor C1 collected a total of 4,119 out of 6,336 possible values (or 65 percent) and Monitor C3 collected a total of 3,942 out of 6,336 possible values (or 62 percent).  Monitors C1 and C3 failed to meet the minimum data recovery requirement.

 

7



 

MOORHEAD

 

i.                                          On May 13, 1999, the MPCA amended Air Emission Permit No. 0270000-1-015, which it had issued to the Regulated Party for the Moorhead facility.

 

j.                                          As amended, Air Emission Permit No. 0270000-1-015, Table A (pages A-2 to A-3) requires the Moorhead facility to demonstrate compliance with the H2S standard by establishing an H2S monitoring network to measure the ambient concentration of H2S coming from the facility.

 

k.                                       The Regulated Party collected H2S data from May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

1999 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/28/99-6/1/99

 

7

 

32 ppb

 

6/1/99-6/5/99

 

10

 

36 ppb

 

6/6/99-6/10/99

 

20

 

37 ppb

 

6/25/99-6/29/99

 

1

 

39 ppb

 

7/5/99-7/9/99

 

4

 

37 ppb

 

7/10/99-7/14/99

 

1

 

32 ppb

 

9/9/99-9/13/99

 

9

 

36 ppb

 

9/14/99-9/18/99

 

11

 

40 ppb

 

 

1999 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/31/99

 

1

 

90 ppb

 

6/6/99

 

8

 

78 ppb

 

6/7/99-6/9/99

 

4

 

61 ppb

 

9/12/99

 

14

 

90 ppb

 

9/15/99

 

2

 

61 ppb

 

9/18/99-9/20/99

 

37

 

89 ppb

 

 

8


 


 

l.                                          The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2000, through October 2000.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2000 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/10/00 – 5/15/00

 

51

 

43.8

 

5/17/00 – 5/22/00

 

32

 

49.5

 

5/22/00 – 5/27/00

 

25

 

47.6

 

5/30/00 – 6/4/00

 

9

 

42

 

6/10/00 – 6/15/00

 

29

 

49.3

 

6/18/00 – 6/23/00

 

64

 

49.3

 

6/27/00 – 7/2/00

 

82

 

48.8

 

7/2/00 – 7/7/00

 

138

 

49.9

 

7/9/00 – 7/14/00

 

40

 

50

 

7/20/00 – 7/25/00

 

26

 

50

 

8/12/00 – 8/17/00

 

7

 

48

 

8/22/00 – 8/27/00

 

6

 

34.8

 

9/7/00 – 9/12/00

 

3

 

36.3

 

9/12/00 – 9/17/00

 

5

 

40

 

9/24/00 – 9/29/00

 

8

 

33

 

10/16/00 – 10/21/00

 

5

 

37.8

 

10/21/00 – 10/26/00

 

2

 

38.5

 

 

2000 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

8/23/00 – 8/26/00

 

35

 

90

 

9/4/00 – 9/21/00

 

261

 

88.9

 

9/24/00

 

1

 

51

 

9/27/00 – 10/2/00

 

190

 

90

 

10/5/00

 

2

 

90

 

10/10/00 – 10/11/00

 

15

 

90

 

10/12/00

 

2

 

90

 

10/17/00 – 1023/00

 

56

 

87.7

 

 

9



 

m.                                    The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001, through October 2001.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2001 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
0.03 Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/30/01 – 5/5/01

 

16

 

39.8

 

5/8/01 – 5/13/01

 

2

 

33

 

5/30/01 – 6/4/01

 

7

 

34

 

6/4/01 – 6/9/01

 

22

 

39

 

6/27/01 – 7/2/01

 

2

 

46

 

9/14/01 9/19/01

 

42

 

38.5

 

9/20/01 – 9/25/01

 

17

 

36.8

 

9/25/01 – 9/30/01

 

1

 

33

 

10/6/01 – 10/11/01

 

10

 

37.8

 

 

2001 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
0.05 Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/5/01

 

10

 

71.1

 

6/4/01

 

2

 

52

 

9/1/01 – 9/7/01

 

180

 

89.9

 

9/9/01 – 9/10/01

 

31

 

90

 

9/11/01 – 9/23/01

 

227

 

86.3

 

9/24/01

 

2

 

90

 

9/25/01 – 9/30/01

 

61

 

89.7

 

10/2/01

 

8

 

86.3

 

10/9/01 – 10/10/01

 

8

 

90

 

10/11/01

 

7

 

90

 

10/17/01

 

3

 

80

 

 

n.                                      The Regulated Party referenced the MPCA’s Ambient Air Monitoring Procedures entitled Exhibit M in the H2S Monitoring Plan that it submitted for MPCA approval.  The MPCA approved the Regulated Party’s H2S Monitoring Plan with the reference to Exhibit M.  Exhibit M,

 

10



 

Part 6, Item (C), states that the requirement for data recovery is 75 percent of all data possible from each sampling quarter.

 

o.                                      Moorhead’s H2S Monitoring Summary for the period of May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999, reported that Monitor C1 collected a total of 3,224 out of 6,336 possible values (or 51 percent); Monitor C2 collected a total of 4,335 out of 6,336 possible values (or 68 percent); and Monitor C3 collected a total of 2,652 out of 6,336 possible values (or 42 percent).  Monitors C1, C2 and C3 failed to meet the minimum data recovery requirement.

 

p.                                      On September 30, 1999, the Regulated Party performed compliance testing on the Lime Kiln at the Moorhead facility.

 

q.                                      On October 14, 1999, the MPCA received the September 30, 1999, compliance test report.  The test report demonstrates that Moorhead’s Lime Kiln failed to demonstrate compliance with the PM emission limit of 5.0 lb/hr during normal operation and failed to demonstrate compliance with the PM10 limit of 5.0 lb/hr during normal operation.  The test demonstrated that Moorhead’s Lime Kiln had PM emissions of 9.6 lb/hr (or 92 percent over) and had PM10 emissions of 9.9 lb/hr (or 98 percent over).  Additionally, the test report demonstrated that Moorhead’s Lime Kiln had failed to demonstrate compliance with the PM grain loading limit of 0.3 grains per dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf) during normal operation.  The test demonstrated that Moorhead’s Lime Kiln had a grain loading of 0.53 gr/dscf (or 76 percent over).

 

EAST GRAND FORKS

 

r.                                         On June 2, 2000, the MPCA issued Title V Air Emission Permit No. 11900002-001 to the Regulated Party for the East Grand Forks facility.

 

s.                                       Air Emission Permit No. 11900002-001, Table A (pages A-2 to A-3), requires the East Grand Forks facility to demonstrate compliance with the H2S standard by establishing an H2S monitoring network to measure the ambient concentration of H2S coming from the facility.

 

11



 

t.                                         The Regulated Party collected H2S data from June 12, 2000, through October 31, 2000.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2000 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/24/00 – 4/29/00

 

168

 

50

 

4/29/00 – 5/4/00

 

38

 

43.2

 

5/15/00 – 5/20/00

 

1

 

40.5

 

5/26/00 – 5/31/00

 

34

 

42.5

 

6/3/00 – 6/8/00

 

18

 

42.6

 

6/13/00 – 6/18/00

 

2

 

40.5

 

6/19/00 – 6/24/00

 

29

 

45.3

 

6/24/00 – 6/29/00

 

8

 

41.2

 

6/29/00 – 7/4/00

 

57

 

46.2

 

7/4/00 – 7/9/00

 

56

 

45.7

 

7/9/00 – 7/14/00

 

31

 

47.9

 

7/15/00 – 7/20/00

 

61

 

44.9

 

7/29/00 – 8/3/00

 

24

 

40.3

 

8/3/00 – 8/8/00

 

5

 

41

 

8/10/00 – 8/15/00

 

9

 

35.4

 

8/16/00 – 8/21/00

 

25

 

38.8

 

8/21/00 – 8/26/00

 

14

 

35.9

 

8/26/00 – 8/31/00

 

6

 

41.3

 

9/2/00 – 9/7/00

 

1

 

44

 

9/7/00 – 9/12/00

 

18

 

41.3

 

9/12/00 – 9/17/00

 

6

 

36.8

 

9/19/00 – 9/24/00

 

8

 

44.2

 

9/25/00 – 9/30/00

 

32

 

38.8

 

9/30/00 – 10/5/00

 

1

 

46

 

10/16/00 – 10/21/00

 

3

 

34

 

10/22/00 – 10/27/00

 

18

 

39.4

 

10/29/00 – 10/31/00

 

57

 

39.5

 

 

12



 

2000 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

8/10/00

 

1

 

51

 

8/14/00

 

3

 

90

 

8/16/00 – 8/17/00

 

12

 

78

 

8/19/00 – 8/21/00

 

13

 

60.4

 

8/22/00 – 8/30/00

 

300

 

87.5

 

8/31/00 – 9/13/00

 

308

 

87.4

 

9/15/00 – 9/19/00

 

121

 

89.2

 

9/21/00

 

29

 

88.8

 

9/23/00 – 9/25/00

 

38

 

78.4

 

9/27/00 – 9/29/00

 

20

 

63.5

 

9/30/00 – 10/1/00

 

21

 

74.8

 

10/23/00

 

1

 

90

 

10/25/00

 

6

 

78

 

10/29/00

 

2

 

66

 

10/30/00 – 10/31/00

 

19

 

70.6

 

 

13



 

u.                                      The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001, through October 2001.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2001 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
0.03 Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/24/01 – 4/29/01

 

34

 

38.3

 

4/30/01 – 5/5/01

 

20

 

39.3

 

5/6/01 – 5/11/01

 

7

 

39

 

5/11/01 – 5/16/01

 

24

 

37.7

 

5/16/01 – 5/21/01

 

32

 

40.6

 

5/26/01 – 5/31/01

 

17

 

37

 

5/31/01 – 6/5/01

 

11

 

43.4

 

6/6/01 – 6/11/01

 

45

 

39.5

 

6/11/01 – 6/16/01

 

21

 

40.8

 

6/17/01 – 6/22/01

 

20

 

38.6

 

6/22/01 – 6/27/01

 

48

 

41.6

 

6/27/01 – 7/2/01

 

31

 

39.3

 

7/3/01 – 7/8/01

 

14

 

38.3

 

7/8/01 – 7/13/01

 

3

 

45.3

 

7/14/01 – 7/19/01

 

26

 

36.7

 

7/19/01 – 7/24/01

 

1

 

35

 

7/26/01 – 7/31/01

 

10

 

37.7

 

8/7/01 – 8/12/01

 

21

 

41.9

 

8/13/01 – 8/18/01

 

16

 

38.9

 

8/25/01 – 8/30/01

 

20

 

35.9

 

8/31/01 – 9/5/01

 

42

 

37.4

 

9/5/01 – 9/10/01

 

12

 

34.1

 

9/10/01 – 9/15/01

 

7

 

38.6

 

9/15/01 – 9/20/01

 

15

 

40.6

 

9/20/01 – 9/25/01

 

5

 

38.8

 

9/26/01 – 10/1/01

 

36

 

42.7

 

10/3/01 – 10/8/01

 

28

 

41.2

 

10/8/01 – 10/13/01

 

9

 

35.3

 

 

14



 

2001 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
0.05 Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/27/01 – 4/28/01

 

31

 

74.3

 

4/30/01 – 5/2/01

 

50

 

83.4

 

5/4/01 – 5/9/01

 

209

 

89.3

 

5/11/01 – 5/21/01

 

229

 

83.1

 

5/27/01

 

3

 

66.6

 

5/30/01 – 5/31/01

 

45

 

74.7

 

6/3/01 – 6/12/01

 

144

 

74.3

 

6/15/01 – 6/20/01

 

44

 

73

 

6/21/01 – 6/26/01

 

98

 

75.8

 

6/28/01 – 6/29/01

 

12

 

72.8

 

7/2/01

 

2

 

70

 

7/3/01

 

2

 

60

 

7/14/01

 

3

 

80.3

 

7/16/01

 

1

 

90

 

7/17/01

 

7

 

74

 

7/22/01

 

1

 

90

 

7/26/01

 

6

 

62.8

 

8/7/01 – 8/8/01

 

5

 

57.4

 

8/10/01

 

3

 

51.6

 

9/1/01

 

18

 

85.8

 

9/3/01 – 9/5/01

 

30

 

67.8

 

9/10/01 – 9/11/01

 

26

 

87.8

 

9/14/01 – 9/17/01

 

103

 

86.7

 

9/18/01 – 9/22/01

 

138

 

89.8

 

9/24/01 – 9/29/01

 

193

 

79.8

 

9/30/01 – 10/1/01

 

9

 

55

 

10/3/01

 

3

 

71.3

 

10/6/01 – 10/7/01

 

3

 

54.6

 

 

v.                                      Air Emission Permit No. 11900002-001 (EGF Permit) requires the Permittee to conduct a visible emissions check on the stacks associated with the following emission units: 1)Remelt Conveyor Dust Control System (EU026); 2)Pulp Pellet Loadout (EU007); 3)Weibull Bin #1 Dust Control System (EU020); 4)Wiebull Bin #2 Dust Control System (EU021); 5)Conveying Dust System (EU022); 6)8A Tower Central Vacuum (EU023); 7)Weibull Bin #3 Dust Control System (EU024); 8)Weibull Bin #3 Central Vacuum (EU025); 9)Sugar Bagger Dust Control System (EU028); and 10)Screening Tower Dust Control System (EU030).  The

 

15



 

EFG Permit also requires the Permittee to record the time and date of the visible emissions check.

 

w.                                    On January 31, 2001, the MPCA received East Grand Forks’ fourth quarter 2000 Excess Emission Report (EER) and Deviation Report Form (DRF).

 

x.                                        The 4th quarter EER/DRF demonstrated that visible emission checks were missed throughout the quarter.  The following table summarizes the missed visible emission checks as reported:

 

Emission
Unit

 

PCE

 

Parameter

 

Total
Readings

 

Missed
Readings

 

% Missed
Readings

 

Remelt Conveyor Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

78

 

60

 

43%

 

Pulp Pellet Loadout

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

122

 

31

 

20%

 

Weibull Bin #1 Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Weibull Bin#2 Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Conveying Dust System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

8A Screening Tower Central Vacuum

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Weibull Bin #3 Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Weibull Bin #3 Central Vacuum

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Sugar Bagger Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Screening Tower Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

 

16



 

Part 6.                                                           REGULATED PARTY STATEMENT.  The Regulated Party for its statement, says as follows:

 

a.                                       Alleged Ambient Air Violations.  The Regulated Party disputes both the number and degree of alleged ambient air violations for several reasons, including the following:

 

1.)                                   The Regulated Party’s hydrogen sulfide monitors were positioned, during the relevant time periods, to measure emissions from its wastewater ponds as part of a risk analysis required by its air permits; the monitors were not intended to measure hydrogen sulfide concentrations in the ambient air, nor were they positioned to do so;

 

2.)                                   Though the SPM monitors used by the Regulated Party have been approved by the MPCA as one of two authorized methods for measuring hydrogen sulfide, various types of hydride tape used in the SPM monitors during relevant time periods proved very sensitive to distortion by temperature and humidity; in addition, the SPM monitors do not work well in low temperatures, and the SPM monitors also exhibit a tendency to record both extended periods of 90 ppb readings and abrupt jumps or drops in measured concentrations, neither of which appear related to actual hydrogen sulfide levels;

 

3.)                                   The monitor data was not corrected for wind direction.

 

As a result of these potential problems with the monitor data, ACS believes that most of the ambient air violations alleged by the MPCA concern hydrogen sulfide concentrations that were: 1) not representative of actual ambient air concentrations; 2) derived from corrective mathematical calculations rather than accurate measurements; 3) based on erroneous measurements; and/or 4) caused entirely by offsite sources.

 

Though it disputes the accuracy of the monitor data as a measure of hydrogen sulfide concentrations in the ambient air, the Regulated Party has nevertheless spent a great deal of money to control its hydrogen sulfide emissions.  Since it installed its monitoring networks in 1999 and began collecting hydrogen sulfide data, the Regulated Party has spent approximately $13.37 million to control its hydrogen sulfide emissions, including approximately $1.26 million

 

17



 

to control emissions from the Crookston facility’s wastewater ponds, approximately $ 2.89 million to control emissions from the Moorhead facility’s wastewater ponds, and approximately $9.22 million to control emissions from the East Grand Forks facility’s wastewater ponds.  In addition, the Regulated Party spent at least $8 million on odor control projects before its hydrogen sulfide monitoring networks were installed in 1999.  Prior to 1999, when no hydrogen sulfide emission data was available, the focus of both the Regulated Party and the MPCA was on controlling odors from the wastewater ponds.

 

b.                                      Alleged Violations of Exhibit M Requirements.  During the summer of 1999 — the first few months of operation of the Regulated Party’s completely new hydrogen sulfide monitoring network — a primary cause of the network’s downtime was the type of data logger used.  The Regulated Party replaced the original data loggers with an alternate type in time for the 2000 monitoring season, and, as a result, the uptime of the Crookston network improved to 99% during the 2000 season and the uptime of the Moorhead network improved to 85% during the 2000 season.  To further improve its performance, the Regulated Party began purchasing extra monitors in 2000, so that ultimately each of its facilities would have redundant monitoring capacity in case any one monitor failed.  The Regulated Party’s hydrogen sulfide plan states that “[t]he plan conforms with the requirements of . . . the MPCA’s Exhibit M — Ambient Air Monitoring Procedures for Determination of Compliance,” but the plan does not include any specific provision defining the uptime requirement for the monitoring network.

 

c.                                       Alleged Particulate Matter Violations.  With regard to the September 30, 1999 compliance test at the Moorhead facility, the Regulated Party determined that during the performance test, there was inadequate airflow through the cyclone.  As a result, the Regulated Party increased the airflow, and in a subsequent performance test of the lime kiln conducted on December 23, 1999, the equipment demonstrated compliance with all applicable particulate matter standards.

 

d.                                      Alleged Opacity Violations.  Following the cited lapse in visible emission readings at its East Grand Forks facility during the fourth quarter of 2000, the Regulated Party

 

18



 

made certain personnel changes to ensure that such lapses would not occur again, and they have not occurred again.

 

Part 7.                                                           ALLEGED VIOLATIONS.  The MPCA alleges that the Regulated Party has violated the following requirements of statute, rule and/or permit condition:

 

Crookston

 

1)             7009.0080 STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS.

 

The following table contains the state ambient air quality standards.

 

Pollutant/
Air Contaminant

 

Primary
Standard

 

Secondary
Standard

 

Remarks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hydrogen Sulfide

 

0.05 ppm by volume (70.0 micrograms per cubic meter)

 

 

 

1/2 hour average not to be exceeded over 2 times per year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.03 ppm by volume (42.0 micrograms per cubic meter)

 

 

 

1/2 hour average not to be exceeded over 2 times in any 5 consecutive days

 

19



 

The Regulated Party collected hydrogen sulfide (H2S) data, at Crookston, from May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period.

 

1999 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/27/99-5/31/99

 

26

 

37 ppb

 

6/2/99-6/6/99

 

61

 

39 ppb

 

6/7/99-6/11/99

 

35

 

42 ppb

 

6/19/99-6/23/99

 

30

 

34 ppb

 

6/25/99-6/29/99

 

24

 

39 ppb

 

7/3/99-7/7/99

 

36

 

40 ppb

 

7/8/99-7/12/99

 

15

 

38 ppb

 

7/13/99-7/17/99

 

30

 

39 ppb

 

7/18/99-7/22/99

 

9

 

37 ppb

 

8/25/99-8/29/99

 

1

 

42 ppb

 

9/2/99-9/6/99

 

1

 

50 ppb

 

9/7/99-9/11/99

 

14

 

42 ppb

 

9/11/99-9/15/99

 

11

 

41 ppb

 

9/15/99-9/19/99

 

6

 

38 ppb

 

9/20/99-9/24/99

 

16

 

36 ppb

 

 

1999 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/30/99

 

6

 

60 ppb

 

6/3/99-6/6/99

 

14

 

60 ppb

 

6/8/99-6/9/99

 

12

 

69 ppb

 

6/10/99-6/11/99

 

3

 

72 ppb

 

6/25/99-6/26/99

 

4

 

56 ppb

 

7/3/99-7/7/99

 

11

 

64 ppb

 

7/8/99-7/9/99

 

8

 

63 ppb

 

7/12/99

 

6

 

59 ppb

 

7/14/99-7/15/99

 

11

 

63 ppb

 

9/4/99

 

1

 

51 ppb

 

9/10/99-9/14/99

 

34

 

73 ppb

 

9/15/99-9/16/99

 

25

 

71 ppb

 

9/17/99

 

27

 

83 ppb

 

9/20/99-9/21/99

 

3

 

56 ppb

 

 

20



 

The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2000, through October 2000.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2000 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/1/00 – 4/6/00

 

17

 

48.3

 

4/20/00 – 4/25/00

 

67

 

37.8

 

4/26/00 – 5/1/00

 

43

 

43.7

 

5/4/00 – 5/9/00

 

3

 

44

 

5/12/00 – 5/17/00

 

10

 

40.6

 

5/20/00 – 5/25/00

 

22

 

49.4

 

5/29/00 – 6/3/00

 

4

 

42.6

 

6/4/00 – 6/9/00

 

3

 

50

 

6/12/00 – 6/17/00

 

22

 

49.5

 

6/17/00 – 6/22/00

 

86

 

50

 

6/22/00 – 6/27/00

 

33

 

49.4

 

6/28/00 – 7/3/00

 

52

 

50

 

7/8/00 – 7/13/00

 

36

 

48.3

 

7/13/00 – 7/18/00

 

32

 

48.5

 

7/20/00 – 7/25/00

 

3

 

50

 

7/26/00 – 7/31/00

 

5

 

50

 

7/31/00 – 8/5/00

 

6

 

39.6

 

8/5/00 – 8/13/00

 

45

 

38.4

 

8/13/00 – 8/18/00

 

50

 

39.1

 

8/18/00 – 8/23/00

 

25

 

38

 

8/24/00 – 8/29/00

 

1

 

34

 

9/6/00 – 9/11/00

 

2

 

33.5

 

9/15/00 – 9/20/00

 

1

 

31

 

10/18/00 – 10/23/00

 

1

 

37

 

 

21



 

2000 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

8/6/00 – 8/7/00

 

2

 

88.5

 

8/8/00 – 8/9/00

 

4

 

88.2

 

8/10/00 – 8/12/00

 

24

 

75.7

 

8/13/00 – 8/15/00

 

17

 

77.8

 

8/17/00 – 8/18/00

 

6

 

57.8

 

8/19/00 – 8/22/00

 

14

 

81.8

 

8/24/00 – 8/25/00

 

3

 

90

 

8/27/00 – 8/28/00

 

10

 

90

 

8/29/00 – 8/30/00

 

6

 

90

 

9/1/00

 

6

 

90

 

9/4/00

 

1

 

90

 

9/7/00 – 9/9/00

 

6

 

90

 

9/10/00

 

5

 

90

 

9/13/00

 

2

 

90

 

9/15/00

 

1

 

90

 

9/16/00 – 9/18/00

 

23

 

90

 

9/28/00 – 9/30/00

 

17

 

90

 

10/10/00 – 10/13/00

 

20

 

88.3

 

10/18/00 – 10/19/00

 

14

 

90

 

10/23/00 – 10/26/00

 

16

 

90

 

 

22



 

The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001, through October 2001.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2001 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE THE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above 0.03
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/6/01 – 4/11/01

 

17

 

39.6

 

4/12/01 – 4/17/01

 

9

 

41.3

 

4/18/01 – 4/23/01

 

2

 

34.5

 

4/23/01 – 4/28/01

 

25

 

43.2

 

4/29/01 – 5/4/01

 

24

 

42

 

5/4/01 – 5/9/01

 

40

 

39.1

 

5/9/01 – 5/14/01

 

52

 

37.7

 

5/15/01 – 5/20/01

 

36

 

37.9

 

5/20/01 – 5/25/01

 

41

 

39.9

 

5/27/01 – 6/1/01

 

54

 

40

 

6/2/01 – 6/7/01

 

85

 

40.1

 

6/7/01 – 6/12/01

 

29

 

37.5

 

6/13/01 – 6/18/01

 

48

 

40.3

 

6/21/01 – 6/26/01

 

16

 

37.3

 

6/28/01 – 7/3/01

 

1

 

31

 

7/18/01 – 7/23/01

 

1

 

42

 

7/26/01 – 7/31/01

 

10

 

39.9

 

8/3/01 – 8/8/01

 

40

 

38.5

 

8/8/01 – 8/13/01

 

2

 

36.5

 

8/22/01 – 8/27/01

 

14

 

41.8

 

8/29/01 – 9/3/01

 

6

 

37.6

 

9/4/01 – 9/9/01

 

7

 

43

 

9/15/01 – 9/20/01

 

9

 

41.3

 

9/20/01 – 9/25/01

 

7

 

32.8

 

9/25/01 – 9/30/01

 

37

 

37.2

 

10/1/01 – 10/6/01

 

11

 

37.4

 

10/31/01

 

2

 

31

 

 

23



 

2001 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE THE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above 0.05
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/7/01

 

5

 

80.2

 

4/9/01

 

1

 

54

 

4/23/01 – 5/1/01

 

225

 

86.1

 

5/3/01 – 5/10/01

 

202

 

86.4

 

5/11/01 – 5/16/01

 

172

 

88.7

 

5/18/01 – 5/22/01

 

55

 

75.6

 

5/27/01 – 6/1/01

 

71

 

66.5

 

6/4/01 – 6/18/01

 

283

 

78.6

 

6/20/01 – 6/21/01

 

5

 

75

 

6/25/01 – 6/26/01

 

11

 

77.7

 

7/21/01 – 7/22/01

 

9

 

90

 

8/3/01 – 8/5/01

 

22

 

63.8

 

8/7/01 – 8/8/01

 

11

 

86.5

 

8/23/01 – 8/24/01

 

24

 

77.5

 

8/26/01

 

3

 

86.6

 

8/29/01

 

6

 

76.2

 

9/1/01

 

14

 

88.3

 

9/4/01 – 9/5/01

 

5

 

64.6

 

9/17/01

 

1

 

54

 

9/19/01 – 9/20/01

 

9

 

64.2

 

9/25/01 – 9/27/01

 

8

 

81.4

 

9/29/01

 

9

 

53.2

 

10/8/01

 

2

 

90

 

10/21/01

 

1

 

90

 

 

During the period of May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999, Crookston recorded exceedence events which demonstrated three hundred and fifteen(315) exceedances of the 0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999, Crookston recorded exceedence events which demonstrated one hundred and sixty-five(165) exceedances of the 0.05 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2000 through October 2000, Crookston recorded exceedence events which demonstrated five hundred and sixty-nine (569) exceedances of the 0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

24



 

During the period of April 2000 through October 2000, Crookston recorded exceedence events which demonstrated one hundred and ninety-seven (197) exceedances of the 0.05 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2001 through October 2001, Crookston recorded exceedence events which demonstrated six hundred and twenty-five (625) exceedances of the 0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2001 through October 2001, Crookston recorded exceedence events which demonstrated one thousand one hundred and fifty-four (1,154) exceedances of the 0.05 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

2)             Exhibit M - Ambient Air Monitoring Procedures for Determination of Compliance.

 

...

 

Part 6.  Data Submittal

 

...

 

C)            Data Validation

 

The requirement for data recovery is 75 percent of all data possible from each sampling quarter for automated and manual methods.  Minimum recovery for the meteorological parameters of wind speed and wind direction is 80 percent from each sampling quarter.

 

...

 

Crookston’s H2S Monitoring Summary for the period of May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999, reported that Monitor C1 collected a total of 4,119 out of 6,336 possible values (65 percent) and Monitor C3 collected a total of 3,942 out of 6,336 possible values (62 percent).  Monitors C1 and C3 failed to meet the minimum data recovery requirement.

 

Moorhead

 

1)             7009.0080 STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS.

 

The following table contains the state ambient air quality standards.

 

Pollutant/
Air Contaminant

 

Primary
Standard

 

Secondary
Standard

 

Remarks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hydrogen Sulfide

 

0.05 ppm by volume (70.0 micrograms per cubic meter)

 

 

 

1/2 hour average not to be exceeded over 2 times per year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.03 ppm by volume (42.0 micrograms per cubic meter)

 

 

 

1/2 hour average not to be exceeded over 2 times in any 5 consecutive days

 

25



 

The Regulated Party collected H2S data, at Moorhead, from May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999.   The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period.

 

1999 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/28/99-6/1/99

 

7

 

32 ppb

 

6/1/99-6/5/99

 

10

 

36 ppb

 

6/6/99-6/10/99

 

20

 

37 ppb

 

6/25/99-6/29/99

 

1

 

39 ppb

 

7/5/99-7/9/99

 

4

 

37 ppb

 

7/10/99-7/14/99

 

1

 

32 ppb

 

9/9/99-9/13/99

 

9

 

36 ppb

 

9/14/99-9/18/99

 

11

 

40 ppb

 

 

1999 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/31/99

 

1

 

90 ppb

 

6/6/99

 

8

 

78 ppb

 

6/7/99-6/9/99

 

4

 

61 ppb

 

9/12/99

 

14

 

90 ppb

 

9/15/99

 

2

 

61 ppb

 

9/18/99-9/20/99

 

37

 

89 ppb

 

 

26



 

The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2000, through October 2000.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2000 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

5/10/00 – 5/15/00

 

51

 

43.8

 

5/17/00 – 5/22/00

 

32

 

49.5

 

5/22/00 – 5/27/00

 

25

 

47.6

 

5/30/00 – 6/4/00

 

9

 

42

 

6/10/00 – 6/15/00

 

29

 

49.3

 

6/18/00 – 6/23/00

 

64

 

49.3

 

6/27/00 – 7/2/00

 

82

 

48.8

 

7/2/00 – 7/7/00

 

138

 

49.9

 

7/9/00 – 7/14/00

 

40

 

50

 

7/20/00 – 7/25/00

 

26

 

50

 

8/12/00 – 8/17/00

 

7

 

48

 

8/22/00 – 8/27/00

 

6

 

34.8

 

9/7/00 – 9/12/00

 

3

 

36.3

 

9/12/00 – 9/17/00

 

5

 

40

 

9/24/00 – 9/29/00

 

8

 

33

 

10/16/00 – 10/21/00

 

5

 

37.8

 

10/21/00 – 10/26/00

 

2

 

38.5

 

 

2000 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

8/23/00 – 8/26/00

 

35

 

90

 

9/4/00 – 9/21/00

 

261

 

88.9

 

9/24/00

 

1

 

51

 

9/27/00 – 10/2/00

 

190

 

90

 

10/5/00

 

2

 

90

 

10/10/00 – 10/11/00

 

15

 

90

 

10/12/00

 

2

 

90

 

10/17/00 – 1023/00

 

56

 

87.7

 

 

27



 

The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001, through October 2001.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2001 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Exceedances

 

AVERAGE

 

4/30/01 – 5/5/01

 

16

 

39.8

 

5/8/01 – 5/13/01

 

2

 

33

 

5/30/01 – 6/4/01

 

7

 

34

 

6/4/01 – 6/9/01

 

22

 

39

 

6/27/01 – 7/2/01

 

2

 

46

 

9/14/01 – 9/19/01

 

42

 

38.5

 

9/20/01 – 9/25/01

 

17

 

36.8

 

9/25/01 – 9/30/01

 

1

 

33

 

10/6/01 – 10/11/01

 

10

 

37.8

 

 

2001 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Exceedances

 

AVERAGE

 

5/5/01

 

10

 

71.1

 

6/4/01

 

2

 

52

 

9/1/01 –  9/7/01

 

180

 

89.9

 

9/9/01 – 9/10/01

 

31

 

90

 

9/11/01 – 9/23/01

 

227

 

86.3

 

9/24/01

 

2

 

90

 

9/25/01 – 9/30/01

 

61

 

89.7

 

10/2/01

 

8

 

86.3

 

10/9/01 – 10/10/01

 

8

 

90

 

10/11/01

 

7

 

90

 

10/17/01

 

3

 

80

 

 

During the period of May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999, Moorhead recorded exceedence events which demonstrated sixty two (62) violations of Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999, Moorhead recorded exceedence events which demonstrated sixty six (66) violations of Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2000 through October 2000, Moorhead recorded exceedence events which demonstrated five hundred and thirty-two (532) exceedences of the 0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

28



 

During the period of April 2000 through October 2000, Moorhead recorded exceedence events which demonstrated five hundred and sixty-two (562) exceedences of the 0.05 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2001 through October 2001, Moorhead recorded exceedence events which demonstrated one hundred and nineteen (119) exceedences of the 0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2001 through October 2001, Moorhead recorded exceedence events which demonstrated five hundred and thirty nine (539) exceedences of the 0.05 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

2)             Exhibit M – Ambient Air Monitoring Procedures for Determination of Compliance.

 

...

 

Part 6. Data Submittal

 

...

 

C)            Data Validation

 

The requirement for data recovery is 75 percent of all data possible from each sampling quarter for automated and manual methods.  Minimum recovery for the meteorological parameters of wind speed and wind direction is 80 percent from each sampling quarter.

 

...

 

Moorhead’s H2S Monitoring Summary for the period of May 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999, reported that Monitor C1 collected a total of 3,224 out of 6,336 possible values (51 percent); Monitor C2 collected a total of 4,335 out of 6,336 possible values (68 percent); and Monitor C3 collected a total of 2,652 out of 6,336 possible values (42 percent).  Monitors C1, C2 and C3 failed to meet the minimum data recovery requirement.

 

3)             Minn. R. 7011.0610 STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR FOSSIL-FUEL-BURNING DIRECT HEATING EQUIPMENT.

 

Subpart 1. Particulate limitations.  Particulate limitations:

 

A. No owner or operator of any direct heating equipment shall cause to be discharged into the atmosphere from the direct heating equipment any gases which:

 

(1) contain particulate matter in excess of the limits allowed by parts 7011.0700 to 7011.0735; or

 

29



 

...

 

Air Emission Permit No. 0270000-004

 

Subject Item: EU 004 Vertical Lime Kiln

 

Emission and Operational Limits:

 

Particulate Matter < 10 Micron:  less than or equal to 5.0 lbs/hour during normal operation.

 

Total Particulate Matter:  less than or equal to 5.0 lbs/hour during normal operation.

 

Total Particulate Matter:  less then or equal to 0.3 grains/dry standard cubic foot of exhaust gas unless required to further reduce emissions to comply with the less stringent limit of either Minn. R. 7011.0730 or Minn. R. 7011.0735.

 

On September 30, 1999, the Regulated Party conducted performance testing on the Lime Kiln during normal operation.  On October 14, 1999, the MPCA received the test report for the September 30, 1999, performance tests.  The test report demonstrated the following Lime Kiln emissions: PM of 9.6 lb/hr (92 percent over); PM10 of 9.9 lb/hr (98 percent over); and PM grain loading of 0.53 gr/dscf (76 percent over).  The Regulated Party’s Lime Kiln failed to demonstrate compliance with the applicable PM, PM10 and PM grain loading limits.

 

East Grand Forks

 

1)             7009.0080 STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS.

 

The following table contains the state ambient air quality standards.

 

Pollutant/
Air Contaminant

 

Primary
Standard

 

Secondary
Standard

 

Remarks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hydrogen Sulfide

 

0.05 ppm by volume (70.0 micrograms per cubic meter)

 

 

 

1/2 hour average not to be exceeded over 2 times per year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.03 ppm by volume (42.0 micrograms per cubic meter)

 

 

 

1/2 hour average not to be exceeded over 2 times in any 5 consecutive days

 

30



 

The Regulated Party collected H2S data from June 12, 2000, through October 31, 2000.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2000 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/24/00 – 4/29/00

 

168

 

50

 

4/29/00 – 5/4/00

 

38

 

43.2

 

5/15/00 – 5/20/00

 

1

 

40.5

 

5/26/00 – 5/31/00

 

34

 

42.5

 

6/3/00 – 6/8/00

 

18

 

42.6

 

6/13/00 – 6/18/00

 

2

 

40.5

 

6/19/00 – 6/24/00

 

29

 

45.3

 

6/24/00 – 6/29/00

 

8

 

41.2

 

6/29/00 – 7/4/00

 

57

 

46.2

 

7/4/00 – 7/9/00

 

56

 

45.7

 

7/9/00 – 7/14/00

 

31

 

47.9

 

7/15/00 – 7/20/00

 

61

 

44.9

 

7/29/00  8/3/00

 

24

 

40.3

 

8/3/00 – 8/8/00

 

5

 

41

 

8/10/00 – 8/15/00

 

9

 

35.4

 

8/16/00 – 8/21/00

 

25

 

38.8

 

8/21/00 – 8/26/00

 

14

 

35.9

 

8/26/00 – 8/31/00

 

6

 

41.3

 

9/2/00 – 9/7/00

 

1

 

44

 

9/7/00 – 9/12/00

 

18

 

41.3

 

9/12/00 – 9/17/00

 

6

 

36.8

 

9/19/00 – 9/24/00

 

8

 

44.2

 

9/25/00 – 9/30/00

 

32

 

38.8

 

9/30/00 – 10/5/00

 

1

 

46

 

10/16/00 – 10/21/00

 

3

 

34

 

10/22/00 – 10/27/00

 

18

 

39.4

 

10/29/00 – 10/31/00

 

57

 

39.5

 

 

31



 

2000 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

8/10/00

 

1

 

51

 

8/14/00

 

3

 

90

 

8/16/00 – 8/17/00

 

12

 

78

 

8/19/00 – 8/21/00

 

13

 

60.4

 

8/22/00 – 8/30/00

 

300

 

87.5

 

8/31/00 – 9/13/00

 

308

 

87.4

 

9/15/00 – 9/19/00

 

121

 

89.2

 

9/21/00

 

29

 

88.8

 

9/23/00 – 9/25/00

 

38

 

78.4

 

9/27/00 – 9/29/00

 

20

 

63.5

 

9/30/00 – 10/1/00

 

21

 

74.8

 

10/23/00

 

1

 

90

 

10/25/00

 

6

 

78

 

10/29/00

 

2

 

66

 

10/30/00 – 10/31/00

 

19

 

70.6

 

 

32



 

The Regulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001 through October 2001.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2001 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Readings Above
Standard

 

AVERAGE

 

4/24/01 – 4/29/01

 

34

 

38.3

 

4/30/01 – 5/5/01

 

20

 

39.3

 

5/6/01 – 5/11/01

 

7

 

39

 

5/11/01 – 5/16/01

 

24

 

37.7

 

5/16/01 –5/21/01

 

32

 

40.6

 

5/26/01 – 5/31/01

 

17

 

37

 

5/31/01 – 6/5/01

 

11

 

43.4

 

6/6/01 – 6/11/01

 

45

 

39.5

 

6/11/01 – 6/16/01

 

21

 

40.8

 

6/17/01 – 6/22/ 01

 

20

 

38.6

 

6/22/01 – 6/27/01

 

48

 

41.6

 

6/27/01 – 7/2/01

 

31

 

39.3

 

7/3/01 – 7/8/01

 

14

 

38.3

 

7/8/01 – 7/13/01

 

3

 

45.3

 

7/14/01 – 7/19/01

 

26

 

36.7

 

7/19/01 – 7/24/01

 

1

 

35

 

7/26/01 – 7/31/01

 

10

 

37.7

 

8/7/01 – 8/12/01

 

21

 

41.9

 

8/13/01 – 8/18/01

 

16

 

38.9

 

8/25/01 – 8/30/01

 

20

 

35.9

 

8/31/01 – 9/5/01

 

42

 

37.4

 

9/5/01 – 9/10/01

 

12

 

34.1

 

9/10/01 – 9/15/01

 

7

 

38.6

 

9/15/01 – 9/20/01

 

15

 

40.6

 

9/20/01 – 9/25/01

 

5

 

38.8

 

9/26/01 – 10/ 1/ 01

 

36

 

42.7

 

10/3/01 – 10/8/01

 

28

 

41.2

 

10/8/01 – 10/13/01

 

9

 

35.3

 

 

33



 

2001 E. GRAND FORKS EXCEEDANCES OF 0.05 PPM STANDARD

 

DATES

 

# of Exceedances

 

AVERAGE

 

4/27/01 – 4/28/01

 

31

 

74.3

 

4/30/01 – 5/2/01

 

50

 

83.4

 

5/4/01 – 5/9/01

 

209

 

89.3

 

5/11/01 – 5/21/01

 

229

 

83.1

 

5/27/01

 

3

 

66.6

 

5/30/01 – 5/31/01

 

45

 

74.7

 

6/3/01 – 6/12/01

 

144

 

74.3

 

6/15/01 – 6/20/01

 

44

 

73

 

6/21/01 – 6/26/01

 

98

 

75.8

 

6/28/01 – 6/29/01

 

12

 

72.8

 

7/2/01

 

2

 

70

 

7/3/01

 

2

 

60

 

7/14/01

 

3

 

80.3

 

7/16/01

 

1

 

90

 

7/17/01

 

7

 

74

 

7/22/01

 

1

 

90

 

7/26/01

 

6

 

62.8

 

8/7/01 – 8/8/01

 

5

 

57.4

 

8/10/01

 

3

 

51.6

 

9/1/01

 

18

 

85.8

 

9/3/01 – 9/5/01

 

30

 

67.8

 

9/10/01 – 9/11/01

 

26

 

87.8

 

9/14/01 – 9/17/01

 

103

 

86.7

 

9/18/01 – 9/22/01

 

138

 

89.8

 

9/24/01 – 9/29/01

 

193

 

79.8

 

9/30/01 – 10/1/01

 

9

 

55

 

10/3/01

 

3

 

71.3

 

10/6/01 – 10/7/01

 

3

 

54.6

 

 

During the period of June 12, 2000, through October 31, 2000, East Grand Forks recorded exceedence events which demonstrated seven hundred and thirty (730) exceedences of the 0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of June 12, 2000, through October 31, 2000, East Grand Forks recorded exceedence events which demonstrated eight hundred and ninety-four (894) exceedences of the 0.05 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2001 through October 2001, East Grand Forks recorded exceedence events which demonstrated five hundred and seventy-five (575) exceedences of the 0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

34



 

During the period of April 2001 through October 2001, East Grand Forks recorded exceedence events which demonstrated one thousand four hundred and eighteen (1,418) exceedences of the 0.05 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

2)             Air Emission Permit No. 11900002-001

 

Visible Emissions Monitoring:  the Permittee shall perform a visible emission check on each stack/vent listed above under Associated Items once each day while its associated emission unit is in operation (during daylight hours).  A visible emission check shall consist of viewing the exhaust gas exiting the stack and recording whether visible emissions are present or not.

 

Visible Emissions Recordkeeping:  record the time and date of each visible emission inspection, and whether or not any visible emissions were observed.  If visible emissions were observed, also record a brief description of the type of corrective actions taken, and the time and date the actions were taken.

 

35



 

East Grand Forks’ 4th quarter 2000 EER/DRF demonstrates that visible emission checks were missed throughout the quarter.  The following table summarizes the missed visible emission checks:

 

Emission
Unit

 

PCE

 

Parameter

 

Total
Readings

 

Missed
Readings

 

% Missed
Readings

 

Remelt Conveyor Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

78

 

60

 

43%

 

Pulp Pellet Loadout

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

122

 

31

 

20%

 

Weibull Bin #1 Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Weibull Bin #2 Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Conveying Dust System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

8A Screening Tower Central Vacuum

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Weibull Bin #3 Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Weibull Bin #3 Central Vacuum

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Sugar Bagger Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

Screening Tower Dust Control System

 

Baghouse

 

Visible

 

138

 

22

 

14%

 

 

The Regulated Party failed to perform all of the visible emissions checks as required by the EGF Permit.

 

Part 8.                                                           CIVIL PENALTY.  The Regulated Party agrees to pay one hundred and seventeen thousand dollars ($117,000) to the MPCA as a civil penalty for the violations alleged in Part 7 within 30 days after the effective date of this Agreement.  Payment of the penalty amount of one hundred and seventeen thousand dollars ($117,000) is to be by check or money order payable to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.  The check should be mailed to:  Enforcement Penalty Coordinator, Metro District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194.

 

36



 

If the Regulated Party fails to make timely payment, the MPCA may assess and the Regulated Party agrees to pay a late payment charge, in addition to the civil penalty, to be assessed as follows.  Forty-five (45) days after the effective date of this Agreement, the Regulated Party shall be obligated to pay a late charge in an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the unpaid civil penalty.  Sixty (60) days after the effective date of this Agreement, the Regulated Party shall be obligated to pay an additional late charge in an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the unpaid civil penalty.

 

Part 9.                                                           REGULATED PARTY REQUIREMENTS.  The Regulated Party agrees to the following requirement:

 

a.                                       The Regulated Party shall implement the Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring and Corrective Action Plan and schedule attached as Exhibit A to bring its Crookston, Moorhead and East Grand Forks facilities into compliance with the hydrogen sulfide standards.  Exhibit A is hereby incorporated into and made an enforceable part of this Agreement.

 

Part 10.                                                    PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT.

 

a.                                       If the Regulated Party fails to comply with the deadlines contained in Parts 5.1.2 and 5.2.4, of the Plan (Exhibit A) required by Part 9. of this Agreement, the Regulated Party shall pay to the MPCA a penalty in the amount of five hundred dollars ($500) per requirement for each day of failure.  If the Regulated Party fails to comply with the deadlines contained in Parts 5.2.2, 5.2.3 and 5.3.1, of the Plan (Exhibit A) required by Part 9. of this Agreement, the Regulated Party shall pay to the MPCA a penalty in the amount of seven hundred and fifty dollars ($750) per requirement for each day of failure.  If the Regulated Party fails to comply with the deadlines contained in Parts 5.2.1 and 5.3.2, of the Plan (Exhibit A) required by Part 9 of this Agreement, the Regulated Party shall pay to the MPCA a penalty in the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per requirement for each day of failure.

 

Failure to comply with any other part of this Agreement or of Exhibit A, including Attachment #1 shall be referred for routine enforcement action by the MPCA.

 

37



 

b.                                      Penalties for failure to comply with requirements of Part 9 of this Agreement shall accrue from the date the requirement was to have been fulfilled until the Regulated Party fulfills the requirement.  Penalties shall not accrue while the MPCA considers a timely extension request under Part 15 or during dispute resolution under Part 13, unless the MPCA determines that the Regulated Party filed the request or initiated dispute resolution solely for purposes of delay.  If the Regulated Party does not pursue dispute resolution under Part 13 for denial of a timely extension request, penalties shall accrue from the date the Regulated Party receives the MPCA’s notice that the extension request is denied.  If the Regulated Party pursues dispute resolution for denial of an extension request and does not file a timely challenge in a court of competent jurisdiction as provided by Part 13, penalties shall accrue from the date the Regulated Party receives notice of a Commissioner’s dispute resolution decision against the Regulated Party until the requirement that is the subject of the extension request is fulfilled.

 

c.                                       The Regulated Party shall pay a penalty under this Part within 30 days after receiving written notice from the MPCA that the penalty is due.  The written notice shall specify the provision of the Agreement that the Regulated Party has not fulfilled and indicate the date penalties began to accrue.  If the Regulated Party fails to make timely payment, the MPCA may assess and the Regulated Party agrees to pay a late payment charge, in addition to the stipulated penalty, to be assessed as follows.  Forty-five (45) days after receipt of written notice, the Regulated Party shall be obligated to pay a late charge in an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the unpaid stipulated penalty.  Sixty (60) days after receipt of written notice, the Regulated Party shall be obligated to pay an additional late charge in an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the unpaid stipulated penalty.

 

d.                                      In dispute resolution before the Commissioner under Part 13, the Regulated Party can contest the factual basis for the MPCA’s determination that the Regulated Party has not fulfilled a requirement of this Agreement covered by this Part.  However, the Regulated Party waives its right to challenge, on legal grounds, the requirement that it pay penalties under this Part.

 

38



 

e.                                       The Regulated Party shall not be liable for payment of penalties for failure to comply with requirements of Part 9 of this Agreement covered by this Part if it has submitted to the MPCA a timely request for an extension of schedule under Part 15 and the request has been granted.  The MPCA’s grant of an extension of schedule waives the payment of penalties covered by this Part only on the requirements for which an extension of schedule is granted and only for the time period specified by the MPCA in the grant of an extension.  An extension of schedule for one requirement of Part 9 does not extend the schedule for any other requirement of Part 9.

 

f.                                         Any requirement of this Agreement may be enforced as provided in Minn. Stat. § 115.071 (1998).  Payment of a stipulated penalty does not relieve the Regulated Party from its obligation to fulfill and complete requirements under the Agreement and to otherwise comply with the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

 

Part 11.                                                  COVENANT NOT TO SUE AND RESERVATION OF REMEDIES. So long as the Regulated Party performs according to and has complied with the terms, covenants, and agreements contained in this Agreement, the MPCA agrees not to exercise any administrative, legal or equitable remedies available to the MPCA with respect to the Regulated Party to address the violations alleged and described in Part 7, in the Notices of Violation dated October 11, 1999 and April 5, 2001, or any other violations of air quality statutes, rules, permits, or plans related to hydrogen sulfide which the MPCA could have pleaded in a civil action based on written information in the possession of the MPCA at the time this Agreement becomes effective. In addition, for so long as the Regulated Party is in compliance with the provisions of Part 5.0 of the Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring and Corrective Action plan and schedule attached as Exhibit A, the MPCA agrees not to exercise any administrative, legal or equitable remedies available to the MPCA to address future violations of the state ambient air quality standards for hydrogen sulfide set forth in Minn. Rule 7009.0080, until after the requirements of Part 5.0 of Exhibit A are complete. The MPCA reserves the right to enforce this Agreement or take any action authorized by law, if the Regulated Party fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Further, the MPCA reserves the right to seek to enjoin violations of this

 

39



 

Agreement and to exercise its emergency powers pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 116.11 (1998) in the event conditions or the Regulated Party’s conduct warrant such action.  Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent the MPCA from exercising these rights nor shall anything in this Agreement constitute a waiver of these rights.

 

The Regulated Party agrees to waive all claims it may now have, as of the effective date of this Agreement, under Minn. Stat. § 15.472 for fees and expenses arising out of matters leading up to and addressed in this Agreement.

 

Part 12.                                                   REPEAT VIOLATIONS. Federal and state environmental programs establish harsher penalties for violations of environmental laws or rules that constitute repeat violations.  In a proceeding by the MPCA to resolve alleged violations by the Regulated Party, if any, occurring after the date of the alleged violations set out in Part 7 of this Agreement, the Regulated Party may argue about the extent to which the violations alleged in Part 7 of this Agreement should affect the penalty amount for the later violations, but waives the right: (1) to contend that the violations alleged in Part 7 of this Agreement did not occur as alleged and (2) to require the MPCA to prove the violations alleged in Part 7 of this Agreement.

 

Part 13.                                                   RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES. The parties to this Agreement shall resolve disputes that arise as to any part of the Agreement as follows:

 

a.                                       Either party, acting through its case contact, may initiate dispute resolution by providing to the case contact of the other party an initial written statement setting forth the matter in dispute, the position of the party, and the information the party is relying upon to support its position. The other party, acting through its case contact, shall provide a written statement of its position and supporting information to the case contact of the initiating party within fourteen (14) calendar days after receipt of the initial written statement.

 

b.                                      If the parties, acting through their case contacts, do not reach a resolution of the dispute and reduce such resolution to writing in a form agreed upon by the parties within twenty-one (21) calendar days after the initiating party receives the statement of position from the responding party, the Commissioner shall issue a written decision resolving the dispute. The

 

40



 

written decision may address stipulated penalties assessed pursuant to Part 10. The Commissioner’s decision shall be considered a final decision of the MPCA for purposes of judicial review.

 

c.                                       The Commissioner’s decision shall become an integral and enforceable part of this Agreement unless the Regulated Party timely challenges the decision in a court of competent jurisdiction. Failure to timely challenge means the Regulated Party agrees to comply with the MPCA Commissioner’s decision on the matter in dispute and to pay any penalties that accrue pursuant to Part 10 for failure to fulfill requirements of this Agreement that are the subject of the dispute resolution. Further, if the Commissioner’s decision assesses penalties pursuant to Part 10 of this Agreement, the Regulated Party agrees to and shall pay the amount of penalty determined by the Commissioner within 60 days after receiving the Commissioner’s decision.

 

d.                                      Throughout any dispute resolution, the Regulated Party shall comply with all portions of the Agreement that the MPCA determines are not in dispute.

 

Part 14.                                                    VENUE. Actions brought by the MPCA to enforce requirements and terms of this Agreement shall be venued in Ramsey County District Court.

 

Part 15.                                                    EXTENSION OF SCHEDULES. If the Regulated Party wants an extension of a deadline included in a schedule set out in Part 9, the Regulated Party must request the extension in writing at least 10 days before the scheduled deadline, or as soon as possible before that date if the reason for the extension request arises less than 10 days before the deadline. Each deadline extension request shall separately specify the reason why the extension is needed. No requested extension shall be effective until approved in writing by the MPCA, acting through the MPCA Case Contact or the Commissioner. The MPCA shall grant an extension only for the period of time the MPCA determines is reasonable under the circumstances. The written approval or grant of an extension request shall be considered an enforceable part of the Agreement.

 

The Regulated Party has the burden of demonstrating to the satisfaction of the MPCA that the request for the extension is timely, and that good cause exists for granting the extension. Good cause can include, but is not limited to, the following:

 

41



 

a.                                       circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the Regulated Party; and

 

b.                                      delays caused by the MPCA in reviewing timely submittals required by this Agreement, that were submitted in complete and approvable form, which make it not feasible for the Regulated Party to meet the required schedules.

 

Good cause does not include unanticipated costs, increases in the cost of control equipment, or delays in MPCA review of submittals when the submittals are not in complete and approvable form.

 

Under Part 13, the Regulated Party may challenge a decision by the MPCA to deny a request for an extension.

 

Part 16.                                                    CASE CONTACT. The MPCA and the Regulated Party shall each designate a Case Contact for the purpose of overseeing the implementation of this Agreement. The MPCA Case Contact is Cary Hernandez. The Regulated Party’s Case Contact is Joel Smith. Either party may change its designated Case Contact by notifying the other party in writing, within 5 days of the change. To the extent possible, communications between the Regulated Pa