**Exhibit 10.30**

 

**STATE OF MINNESOTAMINNESOTA 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.                                       AmericanCrystal Sugar Company, (“Regulated Party”); and

 

b.                                      TheMinnesota Pollution Control Agency (“MPCA”).

 

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

 

**Part 2.****                                                           PURPOSEAND SCOPE OF STIPULATION AGREEMENT.** The purpose of this Agreement is toresolve the alleged violations set out in Part 7 of this Agreement byspecifying actions the Regulated Party agrees to undertake. By entering intothis Agreement, the Regulated Party is settling a disputed matter betweenitself and the MPCA and does not admit that the alleged violations set out inPart 7 of this Agreement occurred. The Regulated Party agrees, however, thatthe MPCA may rely upon the alleged violations set out in Part 7 as provided inPart 12 of this Agreement. Except for the purposes of implementing andenforcing this Agreement, nothing in this Agreement constitutes an admission byeither Party, or creates rights, substantive or procedural, that can beasserted or enforced with respect to any claim of or legal action brought by aperson who is not a party to this Agreement.

 

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

 

1

----

 

**Part 4.****                                                           DEFINITIONS.**Unless otherwise explicitly stated, the definitions in Minnesota StatutesChapters 115, 115B, 115C, 116, 116B and in Minnesota Rules Chapters 7000 to7150 apply, as appropriate, to the terms used in this Agreement.

 

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

 

a.                                       TheRegulated Party operates three sugar beet processing factories located inCrookston, Polk County, Minnesota; East Grand Forks, Polk County, Minnesota;and Moorhead, Clay County, Minnesota hereafter as “Crookston”, “East GrandForks” 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 is0.05 parts per million (ppm) as a half hour average not to be exceeded morethan twice per year and 0.03 ppm as a half hour average not to be exceeded morethan twice in any five consecutive days.

 

c.                                       AirEmission Permit No. 11900001-023, Part 6.6, requires the Crookston facility todemonstrate compliance with the H2S standard by establishing an H2Smonitoring network to measure the ambient concentration of H2Scoming from the facility.

 

d.                                      TheRegulated Party collected H2S data from May 27, 1999, throughSeptember 30, 1999. The following tables summarize the readings above thestandard documented during the monitoring period:

 

2

----

 

**1999 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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.                                       TheRegulated Party collected H2S data from April 2000, through October2000. The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documentedduring the monitoring period:

 

**2000 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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.                                         TheRegulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001, through October2001. The following tables summarize the readings above the standard documentedduring the monitoring period:

 

**2001 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE THE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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.                                      TheRegulated Party referenced the MPCA’s Ambient Air Monitoring Proceduresentitled Exhibit M in the H2S Monitoring Plan that it submitted forMPCA approval.  The MPCA approved theRegulated Party’s H2S Monitoring Plan with the reference to ExhibitM.  Exhibit M, Part 6, Item (C), statesthat the requirement for data recovery is 75 percent of all data possible fromeach sampling quarter.

 

h.                                      Crookston’sH2S Monitoring Summary for the period of May 27, 1999, throughSeptember 30, 1999, reported that Monitor C1 collected a total of 4,119 out of6,336 possible values (or 65 percent) and Monitor C3 collected a total of 3,942out of 6,336 possible values (or 62 percent). Monitors C1 and C3 failed to meet the minimum data recovery requirement.

 

7

----

 

**MOORHEAD**

 

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

 

j.                                          Asamended, Air Emission Permit No. 0270000-1-015, Table A (pages A-2 to A-3)requires the Moorhead facility to demonstrate compliance with the H2Sstandard by establishing an H2S monitoring network to measure theambient concentration of H2S coming from the facility.

 

k.                                       TheRegulated Party collected H2S data from May 27, 1999, throughSeptember 30, 1999.  The followingtables summarize the readings above the standard documented during themonitoring period:

 

**1999MOORHEAD 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      |   |

 

**1999MOORHEAD 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.                                          TheRegulated Party collected H2S data from April 2000, through October2000.  The following tables summarizethe readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

**2000 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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.                                    TheRegulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001, through October2001.  The following tables summarizethe readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

**2001 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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.                                      TheRegulated Party referenced the MPCA’s Ambient Air Monitoring Proceduresentitled Exhibit M in the H2S Monitoring Plan that it submitted forMPCA approval.  The MPCA approved theRegulated Party’s H2S Monitoring Plan with the reference to ExhibitM.  Exhibit M,

 

10

----

 

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

 

o.                                      Moorhead’sH2S Monitoring Summary for the period of May 27, 1999, throughSeptember 30, 1999, reported that Monitor C1 collected a total of 3,224 out of6,336 possible values (or 51 percent); Monitor C2 collected a total of 4,335out of 6,336 possible values (or 68 percent); and Monitor C3 collected a totalof 2,652 out of 6,336 possible values (or 42 percent).  Monitors C1, C2 and C3 failed to meet theminimum data recovery requirement.

 

p.                                      OnSeptember 30, 1999, the Regulated Party performed compliance testing on theLime Kiln at the Moorhead facility.

 

q.                                      OnOctober 14, 1999, the MPCA received the September 30, 1999, compliance testreport.  The test report demonstratesthat Moorhead’s Lime Kiln failed to demonstrate compliance with the PM emissionlimit of 5.0 lb/hr during normal operation and failed to demonstrate compliancewith the PM10 limit of 5.0 lb/hr during normal operation.  The test demonstrated that Moorhead’s LimeKiln had PM emissions of 9.6 lb/hr (or 92 percent over) and had PM10emissions of 9.9 lb/hr (or 98 percent over). Additionally, the test report demonstrated that Moorhead’s Lime Kiln hadfailed to demonstrate compliance with the PM grain loading limit of 0.3 grainsper dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf) during normal operation.  The test demonstrated that Moorhead’s LimeKiln had a grain loading of 0.53 gr/dscf (or 76 percent over).

 

**EAST GRAND FORKS**

 

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

 

s.                                       AirEmission Permit No. 11900002-001, Table A (pages A-2 to A-3), requires the EastGrand Forks facility to demonstrate compliance with the H2S standardby establishing an H2S monitoring network to measure the ambientconcentration of H2S coming from the facility.

 

11

----

 

t.                                         TheRegulated Party collected H2S data from June 12, 2000, throughOctober 31, 2000.  The following tablessummarize the readings above the standard documented during the monitoringperiod:

 

**2000 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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.                                      TheRegulated Party collected H2S data from April 2001, through October2001.  The following tables summarizethe readings above the standard documented during the monitoring period:

 

**2001 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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.                                      AirEmission Permit No. 11900002-001 (EGF Permit) requires the Permittee to conducta visible emissions check on the stacks associated with the following emissionunits: 1)Remelt Conveyor Dust Control System (EU026); 2)Pulp Pellet Loadout(EU007); 3)Weibull Bin #1 Dust Control System (EU020); 4)Wiebull Bin #2 DustControl System (EU021); 5)Conveying Dust System (EU022); 6)8A Tower CentralVacuum (EU023); 7)Weibull Bin #3 Dust Control System (EU024); 8)Weibull Bin #3 CentralVacuum (EU025); 9)Sugar Bagger Dust Control System (EU028); and 10)ScreeningTower Dust Control System (EU030).  The

 

15

----

 

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

 

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

 

x.                                        The4th quarter EER/DRF demonstrated that visible emission checks weremissed throughout the quarter.  Thefollowing 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.****                                                           REGULATEDPARTY STATEMENT.**  The RegulatedParty for its statement, says as follows:

 

a.                                       AllegedAmbient Air Violations.  The RegulatedParty disputes both the number and degree of alleged ambient air violations forseveral reasons, including the following:

 

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

 

2.)                                   Though the SPMmonitors used by the Regulated Party have been approved by the MPCA as one oftwo authorized methods for measuring hydrogen sulfide, various types of hydridetape used in the SPM monitors during relevant time periods proved verysensitive to distortion by temperature and humidity; in addition, the SPMmonitors do not work well in low temperatures, and the SPM monitors alsoexhibit a tendency to record both extended periods of 90 ppb readings andabrupt jumps or drops in measured concentrations, neither of which appearrelated to actual hydrogen sulfide levels;

 

3.)                                   The monitor data wasnot corrected for wind direction.

 

As a result of these potential problems with the monitor data, ACSbelieves that most of the ambient air violations alleged by the MPCA concernhydrogen sulfide concentrations that were: 1) not representative of actualambient air concentrations; 2) derived from corrective mathematicalcalculations rather than accurate measurements; 3) based on erroneousmeasurements; and/or 4) caused entirely by offsite sources.

 

Though it disputes the accuracy of the monitor data as a measure ofhydrogen sulfide concentrations in the ambient air, the Regulated Party hasnevertheless spent a great deal of money to control its hydrogen sulfideemissions.  Since it installed itsmonitoring networks in 1999 and began collecting hydrogen sulfide data, theRegulated Party has spent approximately $13.37 million to control its hydrogensulfide 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’swastewater ponds, and approximately $9.22 million to control emissions from theEast Grand Forks facility’s wastewater ponds. In addition, the Regulated Party spent at least $8 million on odorcontrol projects before its hydrogen sulfide monitoring networks were installedin 1999.  Prior to 1999, when nohydrogen sulfide emission data was available, the focus of both the RegulatedParty and the MPCA was on controlling odors from the wastewater ponds.

 

b.                                      AllegedViolations of Exhibit M Requirements. During the summer of 1999 — the first few months of operation of theRegulated Party’s completely new hydrogen sulfide monitoring network — aprimary cause of the network’s downtime was the type of data logger used.  The Regulated Party replaced the originaldata 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 the2000 season and the uptime of the Moorhead network improved to 85% during the2000 season.  To further improve itsperformance, the Regulated Party began purchasing extra monitors in 2000, sothat ultimately each of its facilities would have redundant monitoring capacityin case any one monitor failed.  TheRegulated Party’s hydrogen sulfide plan states that “[t]he plan conforms withthe 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 uptimerequirement for the monitoring network.

 

c.                                       AllegedParticulate Matter Violations.  Withregard to the September 30, 1999 compliance test at the Moorhead facility, theRegulated Party determined that during the performance test, there wasinadequate airflow through the cyclone. As a result, the Regulated Party increased the airflow, and in asubsequent performance test of the lime kiln conducted on December 23, 1999,the equipment demonstrated compliance with all applicable particulate matterstandards.

 

d.                                      AllegedOpacity Violations.  Following the citedlapse in visible emission readings at its East Grand Forks facility during thefourth quarter of 2000, the Regulated Party

 

18

----

 

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

 

**Part 7.****                                                           ALLEGEDVIOLATIONS**.  The MPCA alleges thatthe Regulated Party has violated the following requirements of statute, ruleand/or permit condition:

 

**Crookston**

 

**1)****             7009.0080 STATEAMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS.**

 

The followingtable 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 readingsabove the standard documented during the monitoring period.

 

**1999 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 followingtables summarize the readings above the standard documented during themonitoring period:

 

**2000 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 followingtables summarize the readings above the standard documented during themonitoring period:

 

**2001 CROOKSTON READINGS ABOVE THE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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, Crookstonrecorded 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 andsixty-five(165) exceedances of the 0.05 ppm standard contained in Minn. R.7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2000 through October 2000, Crookstonrecorded 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 October2000, 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.

 

Duringthe period of April 2001 through October 2001, Crookston recorded exceedenceevents which demonstrated six hundred and twenty-five (625) exceedances of the0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2001 through October2001, Crookston recorded exceedence events which demonstrated one thousand onehundred and fifty-four (1,154) exceedances of the 0.05 ppm standard containedin Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

**2)****            ****Exhibit M - Ambient AirMonitoring Procedures for Determination of Compliance.**

 

**...**

 

Part 6.  Data Submittal

 

**...**

 

C)            Data Validation

 

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

 

**...**

 

Crookston’s H2S Monitoring Summary for the period of May 27,1999, through September 30, 1999, reported that Monitor C1 collected a total of4,119 out of 6,336 possible values (65 percent) and Monitor C3 collected atotal of 3,942 out of 6,336 possible values (62 percent).  Monitors C1 and C3 failed to meet theminimum data recovery requirement.

 

**Moorhead**

 

**1)****             7009.0080 STATEAMBIENT 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, fromMay 27, 1999, through September 30, 1999.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standarddocumented during the monitoring period.

 

**1999 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 followingtables summarize the readings above the standard documented during themonitoring period:

 

**2000 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 H2Sdata from April 2001, through October 2001. The following tables summarize the readings above the standarddocumented during the monitoring period:

 

**2001 MOORHEAD READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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, Moorheadrecorded exceedence events which demonstrated sixty two (62) violations ofMinn. R. 7009.0080.

 

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

 

During the period of April 2000 through October 2000, Moorhead recordedexceedence 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 recordedexceedence 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 recordedexceedence events which demonstrated one hundred and nineteen (119) exceedencesof the 0.03 ppm standard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2001 through October 2001, Moorhead recordedexceedence 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 – AmbientAir Monitoring Procedures for Determination of Compliance.**

 

**...**

 

Part 6. Data Submittal

 

**...**

 

C)            Data Validation

 

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

 

**...**

 

Moorhead’s H2S Monitoring Summary for the period of May 27,1999, through September 30, 1999, reported that Monitor C1 collected a total of3,224 out of 6,336 possible values (51 percent); Monitor C2 collected a totalof 4,335 out of 6,336 possible values (68 percent); and Monitor C3 collected atotal of 2,652 out of 6,336 possible values (42 percent).  Monitors C1, C2 and C3 failed to meet theminimum data recovery requirement.

 

**3)****             Minn. R. 7011.0610STANDARDS 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 tobe discharged into the atmosphere from the direct heating equipment any gaseswhich:

 

(1) contain particulate matter in excess of the limits allowed by parts7011.0700 to 7011.0735; or

 

29

----

 

**...**

 

**Air Emission Permit No. 0270000-004**

 

Subject Item:EU 004 Vertical Lime Kiln

 

Emission andOperational 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 duringnormal operation.

 

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

 

On September 30, 1999, the Regulated Party conducted performancetesting on the Lime Kiln during normal operation.  On October 14, 1999, the MPCA received the test report forthe September 30, 1999, performance tests. The test report demonstrated the following Lime Kiln emissions: PM of9.6 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 todemonstrate compliance with the applicable PM, PM10 and PM grainloading limits.

 

**East Grand Forks**

 

**1)****             7009.0080 STATEAMBIENT 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 H2Sdata from June 12, 2000, through October 31, 2000.  The following tables summarize the readings above the standarddocumented during the monitoring period:

 

**2000 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 2001through October 2001.  The followingtables summarize the readings above the standard documented during themonitoring period:

 

**2001 E. GRAND FORKS READINGS ABOVE 0.03 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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 PPMSTANDARD**

 

| **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, EastGrand Forks recorded exceedence events which demonstrated seven hundred andthirty (730) exceedences of the 0.03 ppm standard contained inMinn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of June 12, 2000, throughOctober 31, 2000, East Grand Forks recorded exceedence events whichdemonstrated eight hundred and ninety-four (894) exceedences of the 0.05 ppmstandard contained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

During the period of April 2001 throughOctober 2001, East Grand Forks recorded exceedence events which demonstratedfive hundred and seventy-five (575) exceedences of the 0.03 ppm standardcontained in Minn. R. 7009.0080.

 

34

----

 

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

 

**2)****             Air Emission PermitNo. 11900002-001**

 

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

 

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

 

35

----

 

East Grand Forks’ 4th quarter 2000 EER/DRF demonstrates thatvisible emission checks were missed throughout the quarter.  The following table summarizes the missedvisible 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 emissionschecks as required by the EGF Permit.

 

**Part 8.****                                                           CIVILPENALTY.**  The Regulated Partyagrees to pay one hundred and seventeen thousand dollars ($117,000) to the MPCAas a civil penalty for the violations alleged in Part 7 within 30 days afterthe effective date of this Agreement. Payment of the penalty amount of one hundred and seventeen thousanddollars ($117,000) is to be by check or money order payable to the MinnesotaPollution Control Agency.  The checkshould be mailed to:  EnforcementPenalty Coordinator, Metro District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520Lafayette Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194.

 

36

----

 

If the Regulated Party fails to make timely payment, the MPCA mayassess and the Regulated Party agrees to pay a late payment charge, in additionto 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 equalto ten percent (10%) of the unpaid civil penalty.  Sixty (60) days after the effective date of this Agreement, theRegulated Party shall be obligated to pay an additional late charge in anamount equal to twenty percent (20%) of the unpaid civil penalty.

 

**Part 9.****                                                           REGULATEDPARTY REQUIREMENTS.**  TheRegulated Party agrees to the following requirement:

 

a.                                       TheRegulated Party shall implement the Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring and CorrectiveAction Plan and schedule attached as Exhibit A to bring its Crookston, Moorheadand East Grand Forks facilities into compliance with the hydrogen sulfidestandards.  Exhibit A is herebyincorporated into and made an enforceable part of this Agreement.

 

**Part 10.****                                                    PENALTIESFOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT.**

 

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

 

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

 

37

----

 

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

 

c.                                       TheRegulated Party shall pay a penalty under this Part within 30 days afterreceiving written notice from the MPCA that the penalty is due.  The written notice shall specify theprovision of the Agreement that the Regulated Party has not fulfilled andindicate the date penalties began to accrue. If the Regulated Party fails to make timely payment, the MPCA may assessand the Regulated Party agrees to pay a late payment charge, in addition to thestipulated penalty, to be assessed as follows. Forty-five (45) days after receipt of written notice, the RegulatedParty 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 Partyshall be obligated to pay an additional late charge in an amount equal totwenty percent (20%) of the unpaid stipulated penalty.

 

d.                                      Indispute resolution before the Commissioner under Part 13, the Regulated Partycan contest the factual basis for the MPCA’s determination that the RegulatedParty has not fulfilled a requirement of this Agreement covered by thisPart.  However, the Regulated Partywaives its right to challenge, on legal grounds, the requirement that it paypenalties under this Part.

 

38

----

 

e.                                       TheRegulated Party shall not be liable for payment of penalties for failure tocomply with requirements of Part 9 of this Agreement covered by this Part if ithas submitted to the MPCA a timely request for an extension of schedule underPart 15 and the request has been granted. The MPCA’s grant of an extension of schedule waives the payment ofpenalties covered by this Part only on the requirements for which an extensionof schedule is granted and only for the time period specified by the MPCA inthe grant of an extension.  An extensionof schedule for one requirement of Part 9 does not extend the schedule for anyother requirement of Part 9.

 

f.                                         Anyrequirement of this Agreement may be enforced as provided in Minn. Stat. §115.071 (1998).  Payment of a stipulatedpenalty does not relieve the Regulated Party from its obligation to fulfill andcomplete requirements under the Agreement and to otherwise comply with theterms and conditions of the Agreement.

 

**Part11.****                                                  COVENANTNOT TO SUE****AND RESERVATION OFREMEDIES****.**So long as the Regulated Party performsaccording to and has complied with the terms, covenants, and agreementscontained in this Agreement, the MPCA agrees not to exercise anyadministrative, legal or equitable remedies available to the MPCA with respectto the Regulated Party to address the violations alleged and described in Part7, in the Notices of Violation dated October 11, 1999 and April 5, 2001,or any other violations of air quality statutes, rules, permits, or plansrelated to hydrogen sulfide which the MPCA could have pleaded in a civil actionbased on written information in the possession of the MPCA at the time thisAgreement becomes effective. In addition, for so long as the Regulated Party isin compliance with the provisions of Part 5.0 of the Hydrogen SulfideMonitoring and Corrective Action plan and schedule attached as Exhibit A, theMPCA agrees not to exercise any administrative, legal or equitable remediesavailable to the MPCA to address future violations of the state ambient airquality standards for hydrogen sulfide set forth inMinn. Rule 7009.0080, until after the requirements of Part 5.0 ofExhibit A are complete. The MPCA reserves the right to enforce this Agreementor take any action authorized by law, if the Regulated Party fails to complywith the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Further, the MPCA reserves theright 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 conductwarrant such action.  Nothing in thisAgreement shall prevent the MPCA from exercising these rights nor shallanything in this Agreement constitute a waiver of these rights.

 

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

 

**Part 12.****                                                  ****REPEAT VIOLATIONS****.**Federal and state environmental programsestablish harsher penalties for violations of environmental laws or rules thatconstitute repeat violations.  In aproceeding by the MPCA to resolve alleged violations by the Regulated Party, ifany, occurring after the date of the alleged violations set out in Part 7 ofthis Agreement, the Regulated Party may argue about the extent to which theviolations alleged in Part 7 of this Agreement should affect the penalty amountfor the later violations, but waives the right: (1) to contend that theviolations 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 thisAgreement.

 

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

 

a.                                       Either party, acting through its casecontact, may initiate dispute resolution by providing to the case contact ofthe 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 tosupport its position. The other party, acting through its case contact, shallprovide a written statement of its position and supporting information to thecase contact of the initiating party within fourteen (14) calendar days afterreceipt of the initial written statement.

 

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

 

40

----

 

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

 

c.                                       TheCommissioner’s decision shall become an integral and enforceable part of thisAgreement unless the Regulated Party timely challenges the decision in a courtof competent jurisdiction. Failure to timely challenge means the RegulatedParty agrees to comply with the MPCA Commissioner’s decision on the matter indispute and to pay any penalties that accrue pursuant to Part 10 for failure tofulfill requirements of this Agreement that are the subject of the disputeresolution. Further, if the Commissioner’s decision assesses penalties pursuantto Part 10 of this Agreement, the Regulated Party agrees to and shall pay theamount of penalty determined by the Commissioner within 60 days after receivingthe Commissioner’s decision.

 

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

 

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

 

**Part 15.****                                                    EXTENSIONOF SCHEDULES.** If the Regulated Party wants an extension of a deadlineincluded in a schedule set out in Part 9, the Regulated Party must request theextension in writing at least 10 days before the scheduled deadline, or as soonas possible before that date if the reason for the extension request arisesless than 10 days before the deadline. Each deadline extension request shallseparately specify the reason why the extension is needed. No requestedextension shall be effective until approved in writing by the MPCA, actingthrough the MPCA Case Contact or the Commissioner. The MPCA shall grant anextension only for the period of time the MPCA determines is reasonable underthe circumstances. The written approval or grant of an extension request shallbe considered an enforceable part of the Agreement.

 

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

 

41

----

 

a.                                       circumstancesbeyond the reasonable control of the Regulated Party; and

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

**Part 16.**                                                    **CASE CONTACT**. The MPCA and theRegulated Party shall each designate a Case Contact for the purpose ofoverseeing the implementation of this Agreement. The MPCA Case Contact is CaryHernandez. The Regulated Party’s Case Contact is Joel Smith. Either party maychange its designated Case Contact by notifying the other party in writing, within5 days of the change. To the extent possible, communications between theRegulated Party and the MPCA concerning the terms and conditions of thisAgreement shall be directed through the Case Contacts. The address andtelephone number of the MPCA’s Case Contact is: 714 Lake Avenue, Detroit Lakes,Minnesota 56501. (218) 846-0746.

 

**Part 17.****                                                    REGULATEDPARTY INFORMATION**. The Regulated Party shall not knowingly make anyfalse statement, representation or certification in any record, report, plan orother document filed or required to be submitted to the MPCA under thisAgreement. The Regulated Party shall immediately upon discovery report to theMPCA any errors in such record, report, plan or other document.

 

**Part 18.****                                                    REVIEWOF SUBMITTALS**. The MPCA, acting through its Commissioner, Case Contact,or other designated MPCA staff, shall review all submittals made by theRegulated Party as required by this Agreement and shall notify the RegulatedParty in writing of the approval or disapproval of each submittal. The MPCA andthe Regulated Party shall consult with each other upon the request of eitherparty during the review of submittals or modifications.

 

42

----

 

If any submittal is disapproved in whole or in part, the MPCACommissioner or designated MPCA staff shall notify the Regulated Party of thespecific inadequacies and shall indicate the necessary amendments or reviews.Within 15 calendar days after receipt of any notice of disapproval, theRegulated Party shall submit revisions and take actions to correct theinadequacies.

 

**Part 19.****                                                    ACCESS**.During the term of this Agreement, the Regulated Party agrees to provide theMPCA and its staff access to the Regulated Party’s Facilities and its recordsand documents related to the implementation of this Agreement to the extentprovided under Minn. Stat. § 116.091 (1998) or other law, conditioned only uponthe presentation of credentials.

 

**Part 20.****                                                    SAMPLINGAND DATA AVAILABILITY**. The Regulated Party shall make available to theMPCA the results of any sampling, tests, or other data generated by theRegulated Party, or on its behalf, to implement the requirements of thisAgreement. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to waive or alter anyprotection afforded by statute to data that qualifies for an exception topublic disclosure.

 

**Part 21.****                                                    RETENTIONOF RECORDS**. The Regulated Party shall retain in its possession allrecords and documents related to this Agreement. The Regulated Party shallpreserve these records, documents, reports and data for three years after thetermination of this Agreement despite any document retention policy of theRegulated Party to the contrary, and shall promptly make all such documentationavailable for review upon request by the MPCA.

 

**Part 22.****                                                    APPLICABLELAWS AND PERMITS**. All actions required to be taken pursuant to thisAgreement shall be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of allapplicable state and federal laws and regulations. Except when the MPCA hasspecified and authorized a different compliance method in Part 9, the RegulatedParty must also comply with all applicable permits, orders, stipulationagreements and schedules of compliance. Nothing in this Agreement exempts orrelieves the Regulated Party of its obligation to comply with localgovernmental requirements.

 

43

----

 

**Part 23.****                                                    OTHERCLAIMS**. Nothing herein shall release any claims, causes of action ordemands in law or equity against any person, firm, partnership or corporationnot a signatory to this Agreement for any liability it may have arising out ofor relating to the release of any pollutant or contaminant from its operationsor from a facility. Neither the Regulated Party nor the MPCA shall be held as aparty to any contract entered into by the other party to implement therequirements of this Agreement.

 

**Part 24.****                                                    HOLDHARMLESS AGREEMENT**. The Regulated Party agrees to indemnify, save andhold the MPCA, its agents and employees harmless from any and all claims orcauses of action arising from or on account of acts or omissions of theRegulated Party, its officers, employees, agents, or contractors inimplementing the activities conducted pursuant to this Agreement; provided,however, that the Regulated Party shall not indemnify the MPCA or save or holdits employees and agents harmless from any claims or causes of action arisingout of the acts or omissions of the MPCA, or its employees and agents. When theRegulated Party is required to hold the MPCA harmless, the Regulated Partyshall be given notice by the MPCA of any claim or cause of action subject tothis Part and have the right to participate in the defense against any claim orcause of action, and no settlement shall be effective against the RegulatedParty unless the Regulated Party agrees to the settlement.

 

**Part 25.****                                                    SUCCESSORS**.This Agreement shall be binding upon the Regulated Party and its successors andassigns and upon the MPCA, its successors and assigns. If the Regulated Partysells or otherwise conveys or assigns any of its right, title or interest inthe Facility, the conveyance shall not release the Regulated Party from anyobligation imposed by this Agreement, unless the party to whom the right, titleor interest has been transferred or assigned agrees in writing to fulfill theobligations of this Agreement and the MPCA approves the transfer or assignment.

 

**Part 26.****                                                    AMENDMENTS**.Except with respect to extensions of schedules granted under Part 15 andapproved submittals under Part 18, this Agreement may be amended only bywritten agreement between the parties.

 

44

----

 

**Part 27.****                                                    EFFECTIVEDATE**. This Agreement shall be effective on the date it is signed by theMPCA.

 

**Part 28.****                                                    TERMINATION**.The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed satisfied and terminated whenthe Regulated Party receives written notice from the MPCA that the RegulatedParty has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the MPCA, that all terms of theAgreement have been completed.

 

**Part 29.****                                                    SURVIVAL**.The provisions of Parts 2, 11, 12, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 29 of thisAgreement; the provisions of Exhibit A to the Agreement (except Part 5.0 ofthat exhibit); and the rights, duties and obligations of the MPCA and theRegulated Party created in those provisions shall survive termination of thisAgreement.

 

45

----

 

**BY THEIR SIGNATURES BELOW, THE UNDERSIGNEDREPRESENT THATTHEY HAVE AUTHORITY TO BIND THE PARTIES THEY REPRESENT, ANDTHEIR AGENTS, CONTRACTORS, AND SUBSIDIARIES**

 
| **AMERICAN CRYSTAL SUGAR  COMPANY** | **STATE OF MINNESOTA  POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY**             |
|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                |                                                         |
|                                |                                                         |
|                                |                                                         | By: | /s/ Gordon E. Wegwart, Asst. Comm. |   |
| By:                                 | /s/ David A. Walden                                          |   |   | for James Warner, Director |
|                                | David A. Walden                                              |   | Majors and Remediation Division |
|                                | Vice President of Operations  American Crystal Sugar Company |   |
|                                |                                                         |
|                                |                                                         |
| Date:                               | 8/5/03                                                       |   | Date: | 8/5/03 |   |
|                                     |                                                              |  |  |  |  |  |

 

46

----

 

**Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring and CorrectiveAction Plan**

 

 

**American Crystal Sugar Company**

 

 

**Moorhead, Crookston, and East GrandForks Sugar Beet Processing Plants**

 

**April 23, 2003**

 

1

----

 

**Table of Contents**

 
| 1.0             | Background                                           |   |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|            |                                                 | 1.1    | Facility Description |   |
|            |                                                 | 1.2    | History of Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring and  Control Measures |   |
| 2.0             | Monitoring  Plan                                     |   |
|            |                                                 | 2.1    | Monitoring Background |   |
|            |                                                 | 2.2    | Monitoring Network |   |
|            |                                                 | 2.3    | Monitoring Locations |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 2.3.1 | Crookston  Facility |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 2.3.2 | Moorhead  Facility |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 2.3.3 | East Grand Forks Facility |   |
| 3.0             | Monitoring Methodology                               |   |
|            |                                                 | 3.1    | Monitoring Equipment |   |
|            |                                                 | 3.2    | Monitoring Schedule |   |
|            |                                                 | 3.3    | Routine Monitoring |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 3.3.1 | Standard Operating Procedures |   |
|            |                                                 | 3.4    | Calibration and Reference Standards |   |
|            |                                                 | 3.5    | Audits |   |
|            |                                                 | 3.6    | Quality  Control |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 3.6.1 | Field Monitor Accuracy Evaluation (Gas Challenges) |   |
| 4.0             | Data Reporting                                       |   |
|            |                                                 | 4.1    | Recording and Validating Data |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 4.1.1 | Data Collection |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 4.1.2 | Data  Recording |   |
|            |                                                 | 4.2    | Data Review and Validation |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 4.2.1 | Data  Zeroing |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 4.2.2 | Substitute Meteorological Data |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 4.2.3 | Data Not Applicable to ACS |   |
|            |                                                 | 4.3    | Reporting |   |
|            |                                                 |   | 4.3.1 | Reporting Format |   |
| 5.0             | Corrective Action Plan                               |   |
|            |                                                 | 5.1    | Crookston  H2S Plan |   |
|            |                                                 | 5.2    | Moorhead H2S Plan |   |
|            |                                                 | 5.3    | East Grand Forks H2S Plan |   |
| 6.0             | Amendments                                           |   |
|            |                                                 |   |   |   |   |
| **Appendices**  |                                                 |   |
|            |                                                 |   |   |   |   |
|            | Appendix A Crookston Facility Monitor Site Locations |   |
|            | Appendix B Moorhead Facility Monitor Site Locations  |   |
|            | Appendix C East Grand Forks Facility Monitor Site    |   |
|            |                                                 |   |   |   |   |
| **Attachments** |                                                 |
|            |                                                 |   |   |   |   |
|            | Attachment #1 Standard Operating Procedures          |   |

 

2

----

 

**Introduction**

 

This plan ishas been adopted pursuant to the Stipulation Agreement entered into in 2003 bythe Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and American Crystal SugarCompany (ACS). It sets forth the general procedures and methods by which ACSwill monitor concentrations of hydrogen sulfide in the ambient air at theboundaries of its facilities and describes corrective actions which ACS willundertake to control emissions of hydrogen sulfide from its wastewater ponds.This plan supersedes all previous plans and existing permit conditions relatingto the monitoring or control of hydrogen sulfide at ACS facilities.

 

**1.0    Background**

 

ACS Companyoperates five sugar beet processing plants in the Red River Valley. Three ofthese facilities are located in Minnesota at Crookston, East Grand Forks andMoorhead.

 

The principalproducts of all three facilities are sugar derived from beets, dried pulp andpulp pellets, and beet molasses. Harvested beets are delivered to each facilityby truck. Final products (beet sugar, molasses, dried pulp and pellets) areshipped by rail and truck. Processing consists of raw beet receiving andstorage, beet processing to produce juice, sugar production, dried pulp andpulp pellet production. During a typical beet processing campaign, the plantswill operate 24 hours per day from September until approximately mid-May.Actual operating time varies with crop quality, tons of beets stored andweather conditions.

 

1

----

 

**1.1****          Facility Descriptions**

 

The Crookstonfacility is located on Highway 75 South, at the intersection of PolkCounty Road No. 9, and occupies an existing site of approximately 465 acres.Two additional pieces of property, 240 acres south of County Road No.9 and 159 acres immediately opposite the gravel road bordering the west edge ofthe main site, are also owned by ACS. A portion of the property south of CountyRoad No. 9 is used for application of excess pond water. The properties westand south of the main site are leased for agricultural purposes. North and westof the site is privately owned agricultural land and also the location ofmunicipal water treatment lagoons. One acre of ACS property is leased to PolkCounty for storage of road work equipment, and 79 acres of ACS property arepresently used for non-agricultural crop land, which is covered with rangegrass. East of the site are commercial properties occupied by implementdealers.

 

The Moorheadfacility is located at 2500 North 11th Street in Moorhead,Minnesota, and occupies an existing site of approximately 378 acres. On thenorth side, the Moorhead facility is bordered by privately owned agriculturalland, the St. Joseph Cemetery, the Riverside Cemetery, the Moorhead Rod and GunClub (also used as the Oak Port Town Hall), and ACS Research Centeragricultural test plot acreage. The east side of the Moorhead facility isbordered by privately owned agricultural land. The City of Moorhead municipalwaste water treatment plant is located to the southeast of the facility. Thearea south of the Moorhead facility is taken up by the ACS Research Center anda portion of the Moorhead waste water treatment plant. West of the site, across11th Street, is residential housing.

 

The East GrandForks facility is located in an agricultural, residential and commercial areaon the east side of the City of East Grand Forks. Specifically, the facility islocated on U.S. Highway 2 East, approximately 1/2mile east of the City of East Grand Forks. Agricultural land borders thefacility to the north, west, east and south. The Burlington Northern Railroadis adjacent to the northern property line of the facility, while beyond therailroad to the northwest is commercial property with agricultural fields

 

2

----

 

beyond the commercial property. The closest private residences lie directly to the west of thefacility’s west-central property line. The property directly east of the facility is used for agriculturalpurposes.  The Burlington NorthernRailroad also exists south of the property.

 

3

----

 

**1.2****          History of Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring and ControlMeasures**

 

Each of thethree Minnesota plants has a wastewater treatment system to prepare excesswater for discharge.  Wastewater comesfrom the beet flume, from washing the sugar beets, and from the processing ofthe beets to extract the sugar.  Theflume and beet washing operation result in the highest strength waste stream(in terms of Biological Oxygen Demand or BOD) in the wastewater system.  These waste streams are sent to wastewateror mud ponds prior to treatment.  Theseponds can become a source of hydrogen sulfide. Both the Moorhead and East Grand Forks factories have mechanicalanaerobic treatment processes to treat these wastes after their discharge tothe ponds.  ACS’s Crookston factory,however, relies entirely on a pond system for treatment.

 

The air quality permits for the three Minnesota facilities require ACSto establish a hydrogen sulfide air monitoring network at each facility, andACS has conducted such monitoring pursuant to plans approved by the MPCA since1999.  Since 1999, ACS has also investedsignificant funds in projects to reduce its hydrogen sulfide emissions.  Expenditures for 1999-2002 are shown inTables 1-3.

 

Table 1

Crookston

 

| **Project**                                                                                                                                                                                                   |   | **Finished  Date** |   | **Cost** |      |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------|--------|----------|-----------|
| Pond Aeration and Dike Upgrading to improve  treatment and ensure that ponds are available for storing and treating  wastewater.  This included cleaning  out a mud pond to be used as a treatment pond. |   | 10/30/2000         |   | $        | 1,217,245 |   |
| Odor neutralizer spray system.                                                                                                                                                                                |   | 07/30/1999         |   | $        | 48,094    |   |
| TOTAL                                                                                                                                                                                                         |   |               |   | $        | 1,265,339 |   |

 

4

----

 

Table 2

East Grand Forks

 
| **Project**                                                                                                                                |   | **Finished  Date** |   | **Cost** |      |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------|--------|----------|-----------|
| EGF Aerobic Upgrade to improve efficiency  of wastewater treatment and reduce BOD.                                                         |   | 09/01/2001         |   | $        | 2,612,090 |   |
| East Grand Forks Mud Press installed to  eliminate sediments going to ponds and to get rid of mud ponds that are a  source of H2S.         |   | 08/31/2001         |   | $        | 4,261,486 |   |
| Install an anaerobic clarifier to improve  wastewater treatment efficiency.  This  reduces the amount of high BOD water in the ponds. |   | 10/01/1999         |   | $        | 2,346,373 |   |
| TOTAL                                                                                                                                      |   |               |   | $        | 9,219,949 |   |

 

Table 3

Moorhead

 

| **Project**                                                                                                                                                                         |   | **Finished  Date** |   | **Cost** |      |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------|--------|----------|-----------|
| Waste water pumps to improve ability to  treat and discharge wastewater.                                                                                                            |   | 08/31/2001         |   | $        | 181,824   |   |
| Anaerobic clarifier to improve treatment of  high BOD wastewater.                                                                                                                   |   | 09/01/2000         |   | $        | 2,052,137 |   |
| Anaerobic upgrade to improve efficiency.                                                                                                                                            |   | 08/31/2000         |   | $        | 154,507   |   |
| Condenser water treatment system to reduce  BOD in this pond.                                                                                                                       |   | 07/31/2000         |   | $        | 92,432    |   |
| Pond piping to improve ability to discharge  and to keep treated and high BOD wastewater separated thus avoiding  excessively large quantities of water that can not be discharged. |   | 08/15/1999         |   | $        | 245,324   |   |
| Pond odor spray systems                                                                                                                                                             |   | 06/01/1999         |   | $        | 80,896    |   |
| Moorhead straw blower for covering ponds  with straw.                                                                                                                               |   | 06/01/1999         |   | $        | 16,116    |   |
| Wastewater screen to improve treatment.                                                                                                                                             |   | 08/31/1999         |   | $        | 62,641    |   |
| TOTAL                                                                                                                                                                               |   |               |   | $        | 2,885,877 |   |

 

5

----

 

**2.0Monitoring Plan**

 

ACS willcontinue to operate and maintain a hydrogen sulfide air monitoring systemconsisting of a hydrogen sulfide monitoring network at each of its threeMinnesota facilities.  However, ACS willrevise its current monitoring system so that the revised system conforms to theprovisions outlined below.  Theseprovisions are intended to ensure that the monitoring networks will measureconcentrations of hydrogen sulfide in the ambient air at the propertyboundaries of the ACS facilities in Crookston, Moorhead, and East Grand Forks,rather than concentrations of hydrogen sulfide near the wastewater ponds, whichare located on facility properties not accessible to the general public.

 

**2.1****          Monitoring Plan Background**

 

This planpresents how the monitoring will be conducted and specifies the monitoringprocedures that will be used.  The planaddresses monitor siting, quality control procedures, calibrations, audits,data validation, and reporting.

 

**2.2****          Monitoring Networks**

 

The monitoringsystem will consist of six H2S ambient air monitors, threetemperature and relative humidity monitors, and three wind speed/wind directionsensors.  A monitoring network of two H2Sambient air monitors and one set of meteorological instruments will be placedat strategic locations at each of the three facilities owned by ACS inMinnesota.

 

**2.3****          Monitoring Locations**

 

The two H2Sambient air monitors and one set of meteorological instruments (temperaturegage, relative humidity monitor, and wind speed/wind direction sensor) for eachfacility will be located in strategic unobstructed areas on ACS property nearor on

 

6

----

 

the property boundaries.  Eachof the monitoring sites in this plan, including each weather station site, areindicated more specifically in Appendices A, B, and C and each has alreadyreceived approval from the MPCA in accordance with the applicable sitingcriteria for closed path SO2 monitors set forth in 40 CFR 58, AppendixE.2.  These criteria are not directlyapplicable for hydrogen monitoring but in the absence of specific criteria forhydrogen sulfide monitoring they are reasonable criteria to use.

 

**2.3.1****       CrookstonFacility**

 

The attached aerial photographs in Appendix A indicate the locationswhere hydrogen sulfide monitors will be placed at the Crookston facility.  ACS will provide detailed site descriptionsby longitude and latitude to the MPCA when the monitors are placed intooperation in April 2003.

 

**2.3.2****       MoorheadFacility**

 

The attached aerial photographs in Appendix B indicate the locationswhere hydrogen sulfide monitors will be placed at the Moorhead facility.  ACS will provide detailed site descriptionsby longitude and latitude to the MPCA when the monitors are placed intooperation in April 2003.

 

**2.3.3****       EastGrand Forks Facility**

 

The attached aerial photographs in Appendix C indicate the locationswhere hydrogen sulfide monitors will be placed at the East Grand Forksfacility.  ACS will provide detailedsite descriptions by longitude and latitude to the MPCA when the monitors areplaced into operation in April 2003.

 

7

----

 

**3.0    Monitoring Methodology**

 

**3.1****          Monitoring Equipment**

 

Hydrogen sulfide ambient monitoring equipment and supplies will bethose which have been approved by the MPCA. All relevant monitoring equipment information such as vendor brochures,fact sheets, owner manuals, and standard operating procedures (SOPs), will bemaintained at a central location by ACS. All information will be made available to the MPCA upon request and/orduring a scheduled audit.

 

**3.2****          Monitoring Schedule**

 

Seasonal monitoring will be conducted from April 1 throughOctober 31, depending upon temperature and weather conditions.  Prolonged periods of adverse weatherconditions that will compromise the monitoring system will be discussed withMPCA staff to determine whether a delay in network start-up or a prematurenetwork shutdown is appropriate.

 

**3.3****          Routine Monitoring**

 

**3.3.1****       Standard Operating Procedures**

 

Routinemonitoring shall be done in accordance with standard operating procedures(SOPs), which are attached to this Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring and CorrectiveAction Plan as Attachment #1.

 

**3.4  Calibrationand Reference Standards**

 

Prior toinstallation in the field, each hydrogen sulfide monitor will be benchcalibrated or validated for field use by the manufacturer.  The manufacturer will be requested to supplyACS with proof of repairs/maintenance and calibration.  An independent laboratory calibration check,following the manufacturer’s recommendations

 

8

----

 

for calibration, may be conducted by ACS or its representative to supportthe manufacturer’s calibration and validation of the H2S monitors.

 

Meteorologicalequipment (which will measure wind direction, wind speed, air temperature, andhumidity) was calibrated by the manufacturer prior to shipping.

 

**3.5  Audits**

 

An audit is anindependent assessment of routine hydrogen sulfide monitoring networkperformance.  An audit of eachmonitoring network will be conducted at least once during theApril through October time period. Results of the audit will be recorded by ACS and provided to the MPCAupon request.  Additional site auditswill be conducted as needed by ACS upon review of overall network operationsand equipment functioning.  All auditswill be conducted by ACS employees who do not conduct the routine monitoringprocedures or by outside firms that have the ability to perform such audits.

 

An audit may include the following:

 

•                  An evaluation ofthe operation of the hydrogen sulfide monitor itself; including verification ofproper air flow and motor operations.

•                  An evaluation ofsite operator log book entries for documentation of visits, status ofequipment, corrective actions taken, or field maintenance of equipment.

•                  An evaluation ofthe meteorological data collection system.

 

**3.6 Quality Control**

 

Qualitycontrol for routine monitoring will be implemented by factory personnel throughthe use of checklists to be filled out for each site visit to a monitoringstation.  A site visit to eachmonitoring station will be made once per week. The checklists and SOPs will include control limits and actions to betaken if any of the quality control

 

9

----

 

checks are outside normal operating procedures.  The checklists and SOPs will be madeavailable upon request of the MPCA.

 

**3.6.1  FieldMonitor Accuracy Evaluations (Gas challenges)**

 

A gaschallenge may be used as an additional or alternative method to evaluate theaccuracy of hydrogen sulfide monitors in the field.  A gas challenge system will meter a certified calibration gas ofthe target analyte to the monitor at a known concentration and record themonitor’s response to the gas challenge. Monitor response will then be documented and accuracy will be evaluatedby the difference (or lack of difference) between the calibration gas concentrationof the target analyte and the monitor response.  An important parameter to track during a gas challenge will bethe amount of water vapor (absolute, or relative humidity) in the gas stream.

 

Gas challengesto the hydrogen sulfide monitors will be conducted a minimum of three (3) timesper year.  The results of the gaschallenges will be recorded by ACS and made available to MPCA uponrequest.  ACS will rely on data reviews,site visit checks, and SOPs to further assess monitor performance and accuracy.  Upon review of this additional informationACS may decide to conduct supplemental gas challenges.

 

Hydrogensulfide monitors found to be outside of the accuracy range specified by themanufacturer will be further evaluated and a determination made by ACS as towhether the instrument should be sent back to the manufacturer forrepair/maintenance.

 

Details of thegas challenge methodology will also be provided to MPCA upon request.

 

10

----

 

**4.0    Data Recording and Reporting**

 

Data recordingand reporting for the hydrogen sulfide monitors consists of data collection,data calculations for each one-half hour time period, data validation,formatting, documentation, and reporting to MPCA.

 

**4.1  Recording and ValidatingData**

 

**4.1.1.  Data Collection**

 

Each hydrogensulfide air monitoring network will achieve 75 percent data recovery of H2Sambient air data during each monitoring season (i.e., 75 percent of all datapossible from the April 1 through October 31 time period will becollected and considered valid).  Eachset of meteorological instruments will achieve 80 percent data recovery of windspeed and wind direction data during each monitoring season (i.e., 80 percentof all data possible for the April 1 through October 31 time periodwill be collected and considered valid).

 

**4.1.2 Data Recording**

 

Hydrogensulfide and meteorological monitoring will be conducted continuously during themonitoring season.

 

Each hydrogensulfide monitor will collect sample measurements at least once every 15minutes.  These measurements will thenbe used to calculate the air concentration of hydrogen sulfide ( in ppb).  An electronic data logger will record allmeasurements

 

Each set ofmeteorological instruments will collect meteorological data (wind speed inmiles per hour, wind direction in degrees of azimuth, temperature in degreesFahrenheit, and relative humidity in percent) for each one-half hour timeperiod.  An electronic data logger willrecord all measurements.

 

11

----

 

Electronicdata downloading will allow 30-minute averages to be calculated on the hour andhalf-hour (48 averages per day  in acontinuous manner) for both meteorological instruments and hydrogen sulfidemonitors.

 

The hydrogensulfide and meteorological monitoring systems will record the date and time ofsystem failures and this information will be supplemented with information fromthe site visits and log book entries.

 

**4.2****          Data Review and Validation**

 

Data will bedownloaded for general review, and ACS will conduct an initial qualityassurance/quality control (QA/QC) evaluation. This initial QA/QC evaluation will be an investigation of readings todetermine if the hydrogen sulfide and meteorological monitoring networks werefunctioning properly and to identify suspect readings.

 

Full data validation will be conducted by ACS for each monthlyreporting effort.  This full validationis intended to provide a measure of confidence that the data have beencollected according to approved methods and that the reported data meetspecified quality assurance and quality control limits.

 

Data validation/invalidation will consist of the following tasks:

 

•**                 **Review ofdata recorded by the monitoring networks (H2S, meteorological).

•                  Review of thesite log book entries for those days with one-half hour time periods identifiedto have suspect data.

•                  Review of phonecalls and e-mails with site operators with regard to specific monitoroperations.

 

Based on itsreview of the available information regarding the operation of the monitoringsystem, ACS or its representative will validate/invalidate data asappropriate.  Data will be considered tobe invalid if data loss occurs due to power outages, instruments being offline,instrument faults, etc.  Invalidateddata will be replaced with

 

12

----

 

MPCA’s approved data codes to identify the reason for data invalidationfor each specific one-half hour time period. If appropriate, comments will also be provided in the comment column foreach one-half hour time period for which data are invalidated.

 

MPCA staff canrequest the raw data files from ACS. MPCA staff will notify ACS if theydisagree with the invalidation of any data.

 

**4.2.1 Data Zeroing**

 

In accordance with MPCA’s practices and recommendations, data forspecific one-half hour time periods when ambient conditions are outside themanufacturer’s specified conditions for proper operation of the hydrogensulfide monitors will be set to zero and considered to be valid data.  The comment column for each one-half hourtime period in which data are set to zero will indicate that the ambientconditions are outside the manufacturer’s specified operating range.

 

**4.2.2 Substitute Meteorological Data**

 

For thoseone-half hour time periods in which onsite meteorological data are missing ordetermined to be invalid, ACS may use substitute meteorological data from thenearest airport or another MPCA-approved data source for the specific one-halfhour time period(s).  The comment columnfor each one-half hour time period in which substitute meteorological data areused will indicate that substitute data are being used and the source of thedata.

 

**4.2.3  Data NotApplicable to ACS**

 

ACS or itsrepresentative will review the hydrogen sulfide air concentration data withrespect to wind direction data.  When avalid hydrogen sulfide air concentration is reported for a one-half hour timeperiod that is greater than 30 ppb, but is believed to be from offsite sources,ACS will so note in the comment column for the specific time period thatoffsite sources are believed to be contributing.  MPCA staff will review the comments and determine if offsitesources were the only contributor to the monitored air

 

13

----

 

concentrations.  MPCA staff willnotify ACS if they disagree with any of the comments or interpretations withregard to the hydrogen sulfide concentrations identified as coming from otherthan ACS sources.

 

**4.3****          Reporting**

 

Routinereporting will be done monthly and a separate report for each factory will besubmitted to the MPCA within 30 days after the end of each month.  The monthly reports will contain, at aminimum, the date, time and 30-minute average H2S concentrationsfrom each of the H2S monitors, and 30-minute averages forwind speed, wind direction, temperature and relative humidity from themeteorological station.

 

As previouslystated in Section 4.1, the reports will use MPCA’s data codes for thoseone-half hour time periods that have invalidated or missing data, the commentcolumn for specific one-half hour time periods will identify when the H2S airconcentration has been set to zero, the comment column will also identify whenthe H2S air concentration is not applicable to ACS sources, and the commentcolumn will identify when substitute meteorological data are being used.

 

MPCA staff can request the raw data files for comparison to thereported (edited) data files.

 

The reports will be submitted via e-mail to Cary Hernandez and RickStrassman of the MPCA.

 

**4.3.1    Reporting Format**

 

Data will besubmitted electronically in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets, depending on theMPCA’s preferred method.

 

14

----

 

**5.0CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN**

 

Following arethe ACS plans for additional work for reducing emissions of hydrogen sulfidefrom its wastewater ponds

 

5.1 Crookston H2SPlan

 

5.1.1 Option A

 

Stage 1:          ACS has identified a biological product to beintroduced into the wastewater system at Crookston which will aid in theprevention of hydrogen sulfide emissions. This product will be applied at 2 different time periods.  The first application was already madebetween October 28 and November 8, 2002.  The second application will be made immediately after the icecover comes off of the waste water ponds in the spring of 2003.

 

Stage 2:          ACS has been vigorously exploring withseveral different professional consultants methods of preventing hydrogensulfide emissions at the Crookston facility. Several different treatment processes to be used in addition tothe Stage 1 biological treatment are available. Selection of the treatment optionshas been made and submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency forapproval.

 

Stage 3:          ACS will complete the selected treatmentprocess at Crookston during the spring and summer of 2003 assuming MPCAapproval.

 

Stage 4: ACS will monitor theeffectiveness of the hydrogen sulfide prevention program at Crookston and willmodify it as needed to obtain  thehighest level of prevention possible.

 

5.1.2 Option B

 

If the above measures do not prove effective at Crookston byJuly 31, 2003, ACS will test ferric chloride as treatment for hydrogensulfide.  The test will begin as soon aschemicals are available or by September 1, 2003, whichever is sooner.

 

If treatment by ferric chloride does not prove effective byOctober 31, 2003, ACS will initiate discussions with the MPCA byNovember 30, 2003 to consider other appropriate measures for futurecontrol.

 

15

----

 

5.2 Moorhead H2SPlan

 

5.2.1   Install wastewater pond cover

 

Start Date:  Engineering hasstarted as well as preparatory work.

Completion Date: September 1, 2003.

 

5.2.2   Add another mud belt press

 

Start Date:  Engineering hasstarted.

Completion Date: September 1, 2003.

 

5.2.3   Evaluate the installation and construction process as well as theeffectiveness of the cover to control H2S.

 

Start Date:  Summer 2003.

Completion Date:  June 15,2004.

 

5.2.4   Submit report to MPCA describing results of evaluation of constructionprocess and effectiveness of pond cover system.

 

Start Date:  Summer 2003.

Completion Date:  June 15,2004.

 

5.3           East Grand Forks H2SPlan

 

5.3.1 Clean ponds including existing mudpond, and install equipment to separate storm water from wastewater.

 

Start Date:  July 2003.

Completion Date: September 30, 2003

 

5.3.2 Installation of wastewater pondcover.

 

Cover installation will depend upon the results of the evaluation ofthe pond cover at Moorhead.  If theevaluation of the Moorhead cover shows that the cover is ineffective inreducing hydrogen sulfide or if technical failures occur, ACS will not proceedwith installation of the cover at East Grand Forks, but will return to the MPCAfor further discussions.

 

Start Date:  July 2004.

Completion Date:  If theevaluation of the Moorhead cover is positive, September 1, 2004.

 

16

----

 

**6.0AMENDMENTS**

 

This plan may be amended by mutual agreement of ACS and MPCA.  However, the standard operating procedures(SOP), which are attached to this plan as Attachment #1, may be amended by ACSat any time without MPCA approval, but ACS will provide a copy of any amendedSOP to the MPCA within ten (10) days of the amendment.

 

17

----