Air Quality Compliance & Enforcement: What YOU Need to Know

1. Air Quality Compliance & Enforcement:What YOU Need to Know Steve Palzkill Pollution Control Specialist steven.palzkill@state.mn.us 218-302-6653

2. Why is Enforcement Important? • Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) • State Implementation Plan • Permits • Piece of paper • Enforcement • Levels the playing field  every Regulated Party is treated the same under the law • Protects human health and the environment (by enforcing the permit) • Provides on-site verification • Face of the agency  out in the field often

3. Who We Are / Where We Are Enforcement • St. Paul • Sarah Kilgriff - Supervisor • Vacant - Compliance Coordinator • Brent Rohne – PCS Sr. • Jennifer (Lovett) Carlson – PCS Sr. • Lad(islaus) Strzok – PCS • Brainerd • Dave Crowell – PCS Sr. • Rachel (Peters) Studanski – PCS Sr. • Duluth • Steve Palzkill – PCS Sr. Stack Testing and Monitoring Program (STAMP) • St. Paul • Andy Place – State Program Admin Prin • Curt Stock – State Program Admin Prin • Marc Severin – PCS Sr. • Jim Kolar – PCS Sr. • Lad(islaus) Strzok – PCS

4. Industries We Regulate • Waste Combustors • Ethanol Production • Taconite • Sugar Beets • Electrical Utilities • Pulp & Paper • Printing & Coating • Refineries • Foundries • Fiberglass • Wood products • Mining • Frac Sand

5. Enforcement “Tool Box” • Letter of No Action (LONA) • Notice of Noncompliance (NON) • Notice of Compliance (NOC) • Alleged Violations Letter (AVL) • Letter of Warning (LOW) • Notice of Violation (NOV) • Administrative Penalty Order (APO) • Schedule of Compliance (SOC) • Stipulation Agreement (STIP) • Consent Decree

6. Most Common “Tools” • LOW’s • Less formal – enforcement letter, alleged violations, corrective actions, no penalty • NOV’s • More formal, alleged violations, corrective actions, no penalty • APO’s • Violations, corrective actions, penalty (forgivable vs nonforgivable), corrective actions, penalty (< $10k), due process (can be appealed), 30 day time limit for corrective actions • STIP/SOC • Negotiated settlement (Agency and company), background, alleged violations, corrective actions, schedule (no time limit, set in document), penalty (except SOC, no limit), stipulated penalties (failure to complete corrective actions on time)

7. New Case Flowchart

8. How We Get Cases • Inspections • Announced/Unannounced • Full/Partial • Complaints • Smoke • Odor • Review of Submittals • DRF-2’s (deviations reports) • DRF-1’s (CEMS/COMS deviations reports) • Stack Tests • Referrals from Permitting • Construction/Modifications without a permit • Permitting staff help by providing facts of the case (dates, PTE’s, applicability status, etc)

9. Failed Stack Tests • Permits, state, & federal rules limit emissions of: • PM • PM10 • SO2 • NOx • etc • Permits and rules require stack testing every 1-5 years • NOC’s set a “testing frequency” (can also be set through a separate letter) • Based on tested result • Failed tests are serious violations • May indicate long periods of noncompliance • 1 failure usually results in a nonforgivable APO • RP can retest or apply for a permit amendment to increase the limit

10. Modification w/out a Permit • Serious Violation • RP avoided • Public input • Review of suitable emission controls • Modeling • EAW/EIS • etc • Pan O Gold Bakery in St. Cloud built & expanded without AQ permits • Required to • Obtain a backward PSD permit (constructed w/out a PSD permit) • Install current control technology on all 3 baking lines, which were installed in 1983, 1989, and 2008. • Installed catalytic oxidizer, SEPS • Large penalty based on • History (RP knew permit was required  had a similar facility in Wisconsin) • Economic benefit • Large emissions rates for VOCs

11. Penalty Calculation • Gravity/Severity • Potential for harm to human health or environment • Deviation from compliance (duration, # of violations, margin of compliance) • Adjustments • History (past violations, similarity, elapsed time) • Culpability/Willfulness (awareness/purposefulness of the action) • Other Factors (unique circumstances) • Economic Benefit (avoided/delayed costs, profit gained)

12. Interaction w/EPA • Good, close working relationship • Contact on big enforcement cases, to insure buy-in, cooperation (also referrals) • AQ staff monitor EPA consent decrees in MN to verify terms are incorporated into permits and are filed correctly • Monthly update phone calls on status of state and federal High Priority Violations (HPV) • EPA inspections in MN • Corn Plus – criminal vs. civil case

13. Multimedia Cases • American Crystal Sugar • $186k penalty • 3 beet plants caused emissions of H2S (odors, headaches) from wastewater systems, beet storage. • Major upgrades to wastewater systems, beet storage. • US Steel, Minntac • $119,544 • WQ – Not meeting discharge limits, and discharged clarifier underflow when lines plugged - fixed • AQ – Many scrubbers had too low water flow or pressure drop to meet permit limits, lowering particulate removal efficiency – violations corrected.

14. MPCA Enforcement Actions per State Fiscal Year (July 1 – June 30)

15. MPCA Total Penalty Assessed per State Fiscal Year (July 1 – June 30)

16. Questions?