, 

Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/200rr-~~~~~ _ 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and ) 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA, ) 

) 

Plaintiffs, ) 

v. 

) 

) Civil Action No: 1·.Ol.e~ c-V .... O~ ) 

) 

MINNKOTA POWER COOPERATNE, Inc. and ) 

SQUARE BUTTE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, ) 

) 

Defendants. ) 

) 

COMPLAINT 

The United States ofAmerica ("United States"), by authority ofthe Attorney General of 

the United States and through the undersigned attorneys, acting at the request ofthe 

Administrator ofthe United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), and the State of 

North Dakota, acting at the request ofthe North Dakota Department ofHealth ("NDDH"), allege 

as follows: 

NATURE OF THE ACTION 

1.	 This is a civil action brought against Minnkota Power Cooperative, Inc. (''Minnkota'') and 

Square Butte Electric Cooperative ("Square Butte") pursuant to Sections 113(b) and 167 

ofthe Clean Air Act ("the Act"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 7413(b) and 7477, for injunctive relief and 

the assessment of civil penalties for violations ofthe Prevention ofSignificant 
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 2 of 19 

Deterioration ("PSD") provisions ofthe Act, 42 U.S.c. §§ 7470-92, Title V of the Act, 42 

U.S.C. § 7661 et seq., and the federally approved and enforceable North Dakota State 

Implementation Plan ("SIP"). 

2.	 As set forth more fully herein, between 1980 and the present, Minnkota and Square Butte 

(collectively, the "Settling Defendants'') modified and thereafter operated certain coalfired electricity generating units without first obtaining a PSD permit authorizing the 

construction and without installing the best available technology to control emissions of 

sulfur dioxide (S02)' nitrogen oxides (N0x), and particulate matter (PM), as required by 

the Act, applicable federal regulations, and the SIP. 

3.	 As a result ofthe Settling Defendants' operation ofthe unlawfully modified electricity 

generating units ("Units") without appropriate pollution controls, massive amounts of 

NOx, S02' and PM have been, and still are being, released into the atmosphere, 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

4.	 This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this action pursuant to Sections 113(b) 

and 167 ofthe Act, 42 U.S.c. §§ 7413(b) and 7477, and pursuant to 28 U.S.c. §§ 1331, 

1345, and 1355. 

5.	 Venue is proper in this District pursuant to Sections 113(b) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.c. 

§§ 7413(b), and 28 U.S.c. §§ 1391(b), (c) and 1395(a), because violations occurred and 

are occurring in this District, and the facility at issue is owned and/or operated by the 

Settling Defendants in this District. 

- 2 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 3 of 19 

NOTICES
 

6.	 The United States has provided notice ofthe commencement of this action to the State of 

North Dakota as required by Section 113(b) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b). 

7.	 The 30-day period established in 42 U.S.C. § 7413, between issuance of the Notice of 

Violation and commencement of a civil action, has elapsed.
 

THE DEFENDANTS
 

8.	 Minnkota is a regional power generator and cooperative electric utility serving eleven 

member-owner distribution cooperatives and utilities in Minnesota and eastern North 

Dakota. Minnkota has a service area of approximately 35,000 square miles. Minnkota is 

a "person" within the meaning of Section 302(e) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7602(e). At all 

times relevant to this action, including the present, Minnkota has operated Units 1 and 2 

of the Milton R. Young Station in Center, North Dakota, and has owned Unit 1 at the 

facility. Both Unit 1 and Unit 2 at the Milton R. Young Station are coal-fired Units. 

9.	 At all times relevant to this action, including the present, Square Butte has owned Unit 2 

ofthe Milton R. Young Station.
 

STATUTORY AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND
 

10.	 The Clean Air Act is designed to protect and enhance the quality of the nation's air so as 

to promote the public health and welfare and the productive capacity of its population. 

See Section 101(b)(l) of the Act, 42 U.S.c. § 740l(b)(l). 

- 3 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSI\I1 Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 4 of 19 

A. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

11.	 Section 108(a) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.c. § 7408(a), requires the Administrator ofEPA to 

identify and promulgate air quality criteria for each air pollutant which may endanger 

public health or welfare when emitted, and which results from numerous or diverse 

mobile or stationary sources. For each such pollutant, Secti~n 109 ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. 

§ 7409, requires EPA to promulgate national ambient air quality standards ("NAAQS") 

requisite to protect the public health and welfare. Pursuant to Sections 108 and 109, EPA 

has identified and promulgated NAAQS for N02, S02. PM (now measured in the ambient 

air as PM-1 0) and ozone. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 50.4 - 50.11. 

12.	 Under Section 107(d) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.c. § 7407(d), each state is required to designate 

those areas within its boundaries where the air quality is better or worse than the NAAQS 

for each criteria pollutant, or where the air quality cannot be classified due to insufficient 

data. An area that meets the NAAQS for a particular pollutant is an "attainment" area. 

An area that does not meet the NAAQS is a "nonattainment" area. An area that cannot be 

classified due to insufficient data is "unclassifiable." 

13.	 At all times relevant to this action, the Milton R. Young Station was located in areas that 

had been classified as attainment for S02' NO". PM/PM-l 0, and ozone. 

B. The Prevention of Significant Deterioration Requirements 

14.	 Part C of Title I ofthe Act, 42 U.S.c. §§ 7470-7492, sets forth requirements for the 

prevention of significant deterioration of air quality in those areas designated as either 

attainment or unclassifiable for purposes ofmeeting the NAAQS standards. These 

- 4­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 5 of 19 

requirements are designed to protect public health and welfare, to assure that economic 

growth will occur in a manner consistent with the preservation of existing clean air 

resources, and to assure that any decision to permit increased air pollution is made only 

after careful evaluation of all the consequences of such a decision and after public 

participation in the decision making process. These provisions are referred to herein as 

the "PSD program." 

15.	 Sections 110(a) and 161 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 741O(a) and 7471, require each state to 

adopt a SIP that contains emission limitations and such other measures as may be 

necessary to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in areas designated as either in 

attainment with NAAQS or unclassifiable. 

16.	 A state may comply with Sections 110(a) and 161 of the Act by having its own PSD 

regulations approved by EPA as part of its SIP, which must be at least as stringent as 

those set forth at 40 C.F.R. § 51.166. If a state does not have a PSD program that has 

been approved by EPA and incorporated into the SIP, the federal PSD regulations set 

forth at 40 C.F.R. § 52.21 may be incorporated by reference into the SIP. 40 C.F.R. 

§ 52.21(a). 

17.	 The PSD provisions ofthe State ofNorth Dakota SIP is set forth in Chapter 33-15-15 of 

the North Dakota Administrative Code. EPA first approved these SIP provisions on May 

26, 1977 at 42 Fed. Reg.26977. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 52. 1820(c)(6) and 52.1829. The SIP 

has since been amended on a number of occasions, and EPA has also approved each 

subsequent amendment. The North Dakota regulations provide that no construction or 

- 5 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 6 of 19 

operation of a major stationary source or modification of a major stationary source may 

occur in an area designated as attainment without first obtaining a PSD permit. The 

North Dakota PSD regulations are federally enforceable. 

18.	 Under North Dakota's PSD regulations, a "major stationary source" is defined to include 

fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants ofmore than 250 million British thermal units (Btu) 

per hour heat input which emit or has the potential to emit 100 tons per year or more of 

any regulated air pollutant. N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-15-0I(l)(y); 40 C.P.R. § 

52.21 (b)(I). 

19.	 The North Dakota PSD regulations define the term "construction" as "any physical 

change or change in the method of operation (including fabrication, erection, installation, 

demolition, or modification of an emissions unit) which would result in a change in actual 

emissions." N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-15-01(1)(1); 40 C.P.R. § 52.21(b)(8). See also 

42 U.S.C. § 7479(2)(C) ("construction" includes the "modification" of a source or 

facility). 

20.	 The North Dakota PSD regulation defines the term "major modification" as "any physical 

change in, or change in the method ofoperation of a major stationary source that would 

result in a significant net emission increase of any air contaminant subject to regulation 

under North Dakota Century Code chapter 23-25." N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-15­

01(1)(x); SIP approved on August 8, 2005 at 70 Fed. Reg. 45542; 40 C.F.R. §52.21(b)(2). 

21.	 Under the North Dakota PSD regulation, "Net emissions increase" means "the amount 

by which the sum ofthe following exceeds zero: (a) Any increase in actual emissions 

- 6 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 7 of 19 

from a particular physical change or change in method of operation at a stationary source; 

and (b) Any other increases and decreases in actual emissions at the source that are 

contemporaneous with the particular change and are otherwise creditable." N.D. Admin 

Code § 33-15-15-01{l)(aa); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(b)(3); see a/so N.D. Admin Code § 33-15­

15-01{l)(a) (Definition of actual emissions). "Significant" means a rate of emissions that 

would equal or exceed any ofthe following rates for the following pollutants: NOx, 40 

tons per year; S02. 40 tons per year; and PM, 25 tons per year. N.D. Admin Code §33­

15-15-01(1)(hh); 40 C.F.R. §52.21(b)(23). 

22.	 As set forth in 42 U.S.c. § 7475(a)(4) and N.D. Admin chapter 33-15-15, a source with a 

major modification in an attainment or unc1assifiable area must install and operate the 

best available control technology ("BACT"), as defined in North Dakota regulation N.D. 

Admin Code § 33-15-15-01{l)(g); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(b){l2) and 42 U.S.C. § 7479(3), 

where the modification would result in a significant net emissions increase of a pollutant 

subject to regulation under the Act. 42 U.S.C. § 7475(a)(4). 

23.	 Any application for a PSD permit must be accompanied by an analysis of ambient air 

quality in the area. N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-15-01(4)(g); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(m). 

24.	 The North Dakota PSD regulations also require any person who wishes to modify a major 

source in an attainment area to demonstrate, before construction commences, that the 

construction will not cause or contribute to air pollution that is in violation of any 

national ambient air quality standard or the maximum allowable increase in emissions of 

that pollutant. N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-15-01(4)(e); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(k). The North 

- 7 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 8 of 19 

Dakota PSD regulations further require any person who wishes to modify or construct a 

major source in an attainment area to provide to North Dakota all information necessary 

to conduct the analysis or make the necessary determinations under N.D. Admin Code 

§ 33-15-15-01(4)(h); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(m), (n), & (0). 

C.	 Title V Operating Permit Requirements 

25.	 Title V ofthe Act, 42 V.S.c. §§ 7661-7661f, establishes ail operating permit program for 

certain sources, including "major sources." The purpose oftitle V is to ensure that all 

"applicable requirements" for compliance with the Act, including PSD and NSPS 

requirements, are collected in one place. 

26.	 North Dakota's title V operating permit program was granted final approval by EPA on 

June 17, 1999, at 64 Fed Reg. 32,433, and since amended on a number of occasions. 

Each amendment has also been approved by EPA. North Dakota's title V operating 

permit program is currently codified in the North Dakota Air Pollution Control Act, 

N.D.C.C. chapter 23-25, as implemented by N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-14-06 . 

27.	 Section 502(a) of the Act, 42 V.S.c. § 7661a(a), and the North Dakota title V operating 

permit program, N.D.C.C. chapter 23-25, as implemented by N.D. Admin Code § 33-15­

14-06, have at all relevant times made it unlawful for any person to violate any 

requirement of a permit issued under title V or to operate a major source except in 

compliance with a permit issued by a permitting authority under title V. 

28.	 Section 504(a) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. § 766 1c(a), implementing regulations ofthe Act, 40 

C.F.R. § 70.2, and the North Dakota title V operating permit program, N.D.C.C. chapter 

- 8 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 9 of 19 

23-25, as implemented by N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-14-06, have at all relevant times 

required that each title V pennit include, among other things, enforceable emission 

limitations and such other conditions as are necessary to assure compliance with 

applicable requirements ofthe Clean Air Act and the requirements of the applicable SIP, 

including any applicable PSD requirement to comply with an emission rate that meets 

BACT and any applicable NSPS requirement. 

29.	 The North Dakota title V operating pennit program, N.D.C.C. chapter 23-25, as 

implemented by N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-14-06, requires that a source submit a 

complete pennit application which, among other things, identifies all applicable 

requirements (including any requirement to meet BACT pursuant to PSD and to comply 

with NSPS), certifies compliancewith all applicable requirements, and contains a 

compliance plan for all applicable requirements for which the source is not in 

compliance. 

D.	 Clean Air Act Enforcement Provisions 

30.	 Section 113(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(a)(1), provides that: 

Whenever, on the basis of any infonnation available to the 

Administrator, the Administrator finds that any person has violated or is in 

violation of any requirement or prohibition of an applicable 

implementation plan or permit, the Administrator shall notify the person 

and the State in which the plan applies of such finding. At any time after 

the expiration of 30 days following the date on which the notice of 

violation is issued, the Administrator may ... 

... ... ... 

(C) bring a civil action in accordance with subsection (b) ofthis section. 

- 9 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 10 of 19 

31.	 Section 113(a)(3) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(a)(3), provides that: 

"except for a requirement or prohibition enforceable under the 

preceding provisions ofthis subsection, whenever, on the basis of 

any infonnation available to the Administrator, the Administrator 

finds that any person has violated, or is in violation of, any other 

requirement or prohibition ofthis subchapter ... including, but not 

limited to, a requirement or prohibition of any rule, plan, order, 

waiver, or pennit promulgated, issued or approved under those 

provisions or subchapters ...the Administrator may ... bring a 

civil action in accordance with subsection (b) ofthis section ...." 

32.	 Section 113(b)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b)(1), authorizes the Administrator to 

initiate a judicial enforcement action for a pennanent or temporary injunction, and/or for 

civil penalties, against any person whenever such person has violated, or is in violation of 

any requirement or prohibition of an applicable implementation plan. The violator is 

subject to civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day of violation for violations occurring 

before January 30, 1997, up to $27,500 per day for such violations occurring on or after 

January 30, 1997, pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 

1990,28 U.S.C. § 2461, as amended by31 U.S.C. § 3701, and up to $32,500 per day per 

violation on or after March 15,2004, pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 19. 

33.	 Section 113(b)(2) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b)(2), authorizes the Administrator to 

initiate a judicial enforcement action for a pennanent or temporary injunction, and/or for 

civil penalties against any person whenever such person has violated, or is in violation of, 

requirements of the Act other than those specified in Section 113(b)(1), 42 U.S.C. § 

7413(b)(1), including violations of Section l65(a), 42 U.S.c. § 7475(a). The violator is 

subject to civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day of violation for violations occurring 

- 10­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 11 of 19 

before January 30, 1997, up to $27,500 per day for such violations occurring on or after 

January 30, 1997, pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 

1990,28 U.S.C. § 2461, as amended by 31 U.S.C. § 3701, and up to $32,500 per day per 

violation after March 15,2004, pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 19. 

34.	 Section 167 ofthe Act, 42 U.S.c. § 7477, authorizes the Administrator and a state to 

initiate an action for injunctive relief, as necessary, to prevent the construction, 

modification or operation of a major emitting facility that does not conform to PSD 

requirements. 

D.	 General Allegations 

35.	 At all times pertinent to this civil action, the Settling Defendants have been and are the 

owners and/or operators ofthe Milton R. Young Station, including all ofthe boilers at 

this facility. 

36.	 At all times pertinent to this civil action, the electricity generating units within the Milton 

R. Young Station were each a "major stationary source," within the meaning ofthe Act 

and the North Dakota SIP for NOx, S02' and PM for purposes ofthe PSD program. 

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
 

(PSD Violations at the Milton R. Young Station)
 

37.	 Paragraphs 1 through 36 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference. 

- 11 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 12 of 19 

38.	 At various times, the Settling Defendants commenced construction and operation of 

major modifications, as defined in Paragraph 20 herein, at its Milton R. Young Station. 

These major modifications included, but are not limited to: 

a.	 Replacement of the Unit 1 secondary superheater in 1997; 

b.	 Partial replacement of the Unit 1 reheat superheater in 1997; 

c.	 Modification of the Unit 1 coal crushing and coal handling systems in 1991; 

d.	 Replacement ofthe Unit 2 secondary superheater in 1995; 

e.	 Replacement of the Unit 2 reheater in 1995; 

f.	 Replacement of the Unit 2 top bank primary superheater in 1995; 

g.	 Replacement of the Unit 2 gas recirculation fans in 1988, 1995, and 1998; 

h.	 Modifications to the Unit 2 feedwater heater in 1988; and 

i.	 Modifications to the Unit 2 coal handling system in 1996. 

39.	 These modifications resulted in significant net emissions increases, N.D. Admin Code 

§ 33-15-15-0l(l)(aa); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(b)(3), ofone or more of the following pollutants: 

NOx, S02' and PM. 

40.	 The Settling Defendants violated and continue to violate Section 165(a) ofthe Act, 42 

U.S.C. § 7475(a), and the PSD regulations set forth in the North Dakota SIP, as codified 

in N.D. Admin Code chapter 33-15-15, by, inter alia, undertaking such major 

modifications at the Milton R. Young Station and operating these modified units without: 

a.	 obtaining a PSD permit, as required by N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-15-0l(4)(b); 40 

C.F.R. § 52.21 (a)(2)(iii), and the North Dakota SIP; 

- 12 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 13 of 19 

b.	 applying best available control technology for NOx' S02, and PM, as required by 

N,D. Admin Code § 33-15-15-01(1)(g); N.D, Admin Code § 33-15-15-01(4)(c); 

40 C.F,R, § 52.21(b)(12), and the North Dakota SIP; 

c.	 demonstrating that construction or modification in conjunction with all other 

applicable emissions increases or reductions, including secondary emissions, from 

any other sources would not cause or contribute to air pollution in violation of any 

national and/or North Dakota ambient air quality standard or any applicable 

maximum allowable increase over the baseline concentration in any area, as 

required by N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-15-01(4)(e); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(k), and the 

North Dakota SIP; 

d.	 performing an analysis of the ambient air quality in the area, as required by North 

N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-15-01(4)(g); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(m), and the North 

Dakota SIP; 

e.	 submitting to EPA or North Dakota all information necessary to conduct the 

analysis or make the necessary determinations under N.D.C.C. chapter 23-25 and 

N.D. Admin Code chapter 33-15-15, as required under N.D. Admin Code § 33­

15-15-01(4)(h); 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(m), (n), & (0) ; and 

f.	 obtaining the required North Dakota permits. 

41.	 Based upon the foregoing, the Settling Defendants have violated and continue to violate 

Section 165(a) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. §7475(a), and the North Dakota SIP, the North 

Dakota PSD regulation, N.D.C.C. chapter 23-25 and N.D. Admin Code chapter 33-15-15. 

- 13 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 14 of 19 

Unless restrained by an order ofthis Court, these and similar violations of the PSD 

provisions of the Act will continue at the Milton R. Young Station. 

42.	 As provided in Section 113(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.c. § 7413(b), and Section 167 ofthe 

Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7477, the PSD violations set forth above subject the Settling Defendants 

to injunctive relief and civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day for each violation at the 

Milton R. Young Station prior to January 30, 1997, $27,500 per day for each such 

violation on or after January 30, 1997, pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation 

Adjustment Act of 1990,28 U.S.C. § 2461, as amended by 31 U.S.C. § 3701, and up to 

$32,500 per day for violations on or after March 15,2004, pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 19. 

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
 

(Title V Violations at the Settling Defendants's Milton R. Young Station)
 

43.	 Paragraphs 1 through 42 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference. 

44.	 As set forth above, the Settling Defendants commenced one or more major modifications, 

as defined under the PSD regulations in the North Dakota SIP, at the Milton R. Young 

Station. As a result, these modifications triggered the requirements to, inter alia, undergo 

a new BACT determination, to obtain a PSD permit establishing emissions limitations 

that meet BACT pursuant to such a determination, and to operate in compliance with 

such limitations. The Settling Defendants failed to satisfy these requirements. 

45.	 Subsequently, the Settling Defendants failed to submit a complete application for a Title 

V operating permit for the Milton R. Young Station that identified all applicable 

- 14­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 15 of 19 

requirements, that accurately certified compliance with such requirements, and that 

contained a compliance plan for all applicable requirements for which the source was not 

in compliance (including the requirement to meet BACT pursuant to a new BACT 

determination under PSD). The Settling Defendants failed to obtain a proper or adequate 

title V operating permit for the Milton R. Young Station that contained emission 

limitations for NOx SOz, and/or PM that met BACT pursuant to a new BACT 

determination. The Settling Defendants thereafter operated the Milton R. Young Units 

without meeting such limitations and without having a valid operating permit that 

required compliance with such limitations or that contained a compliance plan for all 

applicable requirements for which the source was not in compliance. The Settling 

Defendants's conduct violated Sections 502(a) and 504(a) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. 

§§ 7661a(a) and 7661c(a), and the North Dakota title V operating permit program 

regulations, N.D.C.C. chapter 23-25, as implemented by N.D. Admin Code § 33-15-14­

06. Unless restrained by an order ofthis Court, these and similar violations will continue. 

46.	 As provided in Section 113(b) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b), the violations set forth 

above subject the Settling Defendants to injunctive relief and civil penalties of up to 

$25,000 per day for each violation prior to January 31, 1997, and $27,500 per day for 

each violation on or after January 31, 1997, pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties 

Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990,28 U.S.C. § 2461, as amended by 31 U.S.C. § 3701 

except for violations of Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act on or after March 15, 2004, 

- 15 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Pqge 16 of 19 

which subject the Settling Defendants to civil penalties of up to $32,500 per day pursuant 

to 40 C.F.R. § 19. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

WHEREFORE, based upon all the allegations contained in paragraphs I through 46 

above, the United States ofAmerica requests that this Court: 

I. Permanently enjoin the Settling Defendants from operating the electricity generating 

units at its Milton R. Young, including the construction of future modifications, except in 

accordance with the Clean Air Act and any applicable regulatory requirements; 

2. Order the Settling Defendants to remedy its past violations by, among other things, 

requiring the Settling Defendants to install in its Milton R. Young Station, as appropriate, the 

best available control technology for each pollutant subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act; 

3. Order the Settling Defendants to apply to the North Dakota Department ofHealth for 

permits that are in conformity with the requirements ofthe PSD program, the Title V program, 

and the North Dakota SIP; 

4. Order the Settling Defendants to conduct audits ofits operations to determine if any 

additional modifications have occurred which would require it to meet the requirements of the 

PSD program and report the results ofthese audits to the United States; 

5. Order the Settling Defendants to take other appropriate actions to remedy, mitigate, 

and offset the hann to public health and the environment caused by the violations of the Clean 

Air Act alleged above; 

- 16 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 17 of 19 

6. Assess a civil penalty against the Settling Defendants of $25,000 per day for each 

violation of the Clean Air Act and applicable regulations, $27,500 per day for each such violation 

after January 30, 1997, and $32,500 per day for each such violation on or after March 15,2004; 

7. Award Plaintiffs their costs of this action; and, 

8. Grant such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

FOR THE UNITED STATES: 

ELLEN WOOLDRIDGE 

Assistant Attorney General 

Environment and Natural Resources 

Division 

S

~~. TTHEWWM8~ Senior Counsel 

Environmental Enforcement Section 

Environment and Natural Resources 

Division 

Department of Justice 

P.O. Box 7611 

Washington, D.C. 20530 

(202) 514-3932 

- 17 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 18 of 19 

CAMERON W. YDEN 

Assistant U.S. A orney 

220 East Rosser Avenue, 

Suite 372 

Bismark, NO 58501 

701-530-2420 

N.D. Bar J.D. Number 03903 

OF COUNSEL: 

JEFFREY A. KaDISH 

Attorney Advisor 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

12345 West Alameda Parkway, Suite 214 

Lakewood, CO 80228 

BRENDA MORRIS 

Enforcement Attorney 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

999 18th Street 

Denver, CO 80202 

- 18 ­
Case 1:06-cv-00034-DLH-CSM Document 1 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 19 of 19 

FOR THE NORlH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & 

FOR THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA:	 WAYNE STENEHJEM 

Attorney General 

State ofNorth Dakota 

~t.Wt~~ Counsel of Record 

Assistant Attorney General 

State Bar ill No. 04118 

Office ofthe Attorney General 

500 North 9th Street 

,-19­