HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.a. Dakota County Incinerator UpdateCITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
PORT AUTHORITY MEETING DATE:October 6, 1992
AGENDA ITEM:Dakota County Incinerator Project
AGENDA SECTION:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS
RPT
PREPARED BY: Stephan JIlk
AGENDA IRM #
9A
ATTACHMENTS: Appeals Court Decision
APP OVE BY:
MPCA/DAK. CTY AGREEMENT
...........
The Minnesota Court of Appeals provided a decision which awarded Dakota
County the opportunity to be granted a permit for the construction and
operation of the proposed incinerator. Following that decision Dakota
County and the MPCA entered into discussion on the possible appeal to that
decision. The outcome of that discussion was an agreement between the MPCA
and Dakota County which provided for the issuance of a permit for a smaller
incinerator. The "design" capacity of the incinerator will be 600tons per
day versus 500. The actual throughput will be 510 tons per day versus 640
tons per day with original design.
There are two environmental action groups which have appealed the decision
to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Whether the Supreme Court will hear the
appeal is yet to be determined. There is a strong feeling that since the
MPCA and Dakota County have reached agreement for the issuance of the
permit that it is unlikey that the Supreme Court will hear the case.
Meanwhile, Dakota County is proceeding with planning the project,
completing the financing for the project and initiating the permiting
process they will need to go thru with the City of Rosemount. City and
County staff have met to review the process which will have to be completed
by the County for this project and discuss project schedules etc.
In order to ''re-educate" the City Council and City Commissions on the
project we are arranging to have County Staff to make a presentation to the
council and commissions at a meeting very soon.
At this time this item is brought to you for an update and an opportunity
for discussion.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:NONE
PORT AUTHORITY ACTION:
%//NAZ-
OA KOTA COUNTY ADMINISTRATION DONEEPARTMENT
TELEPH
(612) 438-4418
DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMPLEX 1590 W H'NY. 55. HASTINGS, MINNESOTA 55033-2392
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Marie Coutu, 438-4532
September 23, 1992
Dakota County reaches agreement
with MPGA on waste -to -energy plant
The Dakota County Board of Commissioners reached an agreement
Wednesday with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency that should
allow the County to stop the unnecessary landfilling of raw garbage
produced in the county.
The compromise proposed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPGA) gives the County a permit for a waste -to -energy facility that
will burn an average of 510 tons per day instead of the 640 ton -per -
day average the County had requested. The County Board approved the
agreement 4-1 at a special meeting Wednesday night.
"Our concern today, as it has been for the last 10 years, is to
manage the solid waste produced in Dakota County in the most
environmentally responsible and cost-effective manner," said County
Board -Chairman Donald R. Chapdelaine. "The MPCA and the County have
reached a reasonable agreement which allows us to proceed with an
environmentally sound plan for the garbage that is not recycled."
Dakota County has one of the best recycling records in the state,
and has a goal of recycling 50 percent of the waste stream by the year
2000. The compromise with the MPCA means that 90 percent of residents
will need to recycle 90 percent of their recyclable items.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
News Release
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency LPrinted
520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 n Recycled Paper
For Release: September 23, 1992 Contact: Susan Brustman (612) 296-7769
MPGA, Dakota Co. Agree on Smaller Incinerator
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) announced today that the state and Dakota
Co. have resolved their dispute concerning the Dakota Co. incinerator by agreeing to a reduced -size
incinerator for the county.
"After Dakota Co. won its appeal and the court directed the MPCA to issue a permit for the
incinerator, we were ready to appeal to the Supreme Court," said MPCA Commissioner Charles
Williams. "Then we worked out this settlement that satisfies many of our objections to the original
proposal. ,I feel that while this settlement may not satisfy the extremes at either end of the issue, it is a
balanced settlement that is fundamentally a win for all sides, and the Appeals Court decision doesn't
impair the MPCA's authority to act on future cases.
The MPCA said that Dakota Co. permit has been amended to reflect the downsizing of the
proposed incinerator. The actual capacity and annual amount of waste allowed to be burned have been
reduced by percent. The same type of incinerator and control technologies that would have been
required for the original facility have been included, but reduced in size. Emissions will be less than for
the larger incinerator because of the reduced size of the facility. The height of the stacks and other
details of the stacks will remain equivalent while less waste will be burned.
The Appeals Court ordered the MPCA to issue the disputed permit to Dakota Co. On September
24, the MPCA, through Commissioner Williams, will approve issuing the permit for the smaller facility.
If no other party appeals the Appeals Court decision to the Supreme Court, Dakota Co. may begin
construction 30 days after the MPCA approves the permit
Star,,
r�tf� �}ktLtt)�'%,y�f ! �? ( '�� f r �f:�� ,�� f1bune
I g�r � 4' �1� ft F�t,1 , � I,L?�Z �r{,�,� ;E6,'��%i��lt�ti,�(} � , )tt�J,�!t� r �',�'�,b!c>�`� {y, 1� !��9ti;�l�Nf, r"�KiYJ�.. l,f ,r<,�s. i,.'�..Y}} �}D,li? r;;t�q. 'a ��yti4l r���$��, �d 7 77�� r�yt��(.1�P �j N�. nt �Y��.
; 11 ii F,i. ,. �414,�P¢7J,f�v.�' 1! Y, c, Atr,,11' �.1 ', ;.,,..r?��"1� o tf�f�3tt ii,'fl'R),, f 1�1iI � Yf,tV� f 1, � } � f��� }F'�r 1 ,Iri;7 r! ' 7 ,)y, r,. i� j 1 ,;ch.y�r�j�� r"l� �tNf�e7,, i, �f�+1, �r��tti �} tt` (1 f! .7t, 7' it ,t n 5tt� r , c r t ti, lti� 1' r �fS�tt � Sytdt). 6 �(v�t,(N,R
i 1�1 l f tW ,4: ,ll,� yyy -,�ti t r,fa !. ,,or r � ;Et,!tu •�:Il ,.5. >df. ; ��, 7�,fr `���ii{t(t.,(1 r,,.,q�!,' •,� 1;�.,. n;�'�,�'
-THURSDAY/September-24/1992,
Pact reached for small& incinerator
r
in DakotaCountynappeals planned
7
By Dennis Cassano of any plant. Thcy hope their own
and Bob Von Sternberg appeals to the Minnesota Supreme
Staff Writers Court will eventually derail Dakota
County's plans.
The Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency and the Dakota County
Board agreed Wednesday to a settle-
ment that would permit a scaled-
down version of a trash incinerator
that would produce electricity.
The settlement will pit the county
and state against environmental
r groups that oppose the construction
The MPCA refused in November to
issue a permit for the plant, a• deci-
sion the County Board appealed to
the Minnesota Court of Appcals. Tile
court ovcrrule.d the MPCA in Au-
gust, calling the decision a political
action that violated procedures and
exceeded the agency's authority.
Attorneys for the county, the MPCA
and A1313 Resource Recovery Sys-
tems Inc., which would build and
operate the plant, have been negotiat-
ing since the decision was issued.
The MPCA board approved the
terms of� the settlement after closed
meetings that ended Tuesday. The
County Board approved the terms
last night by a 4-1 vote.
Incinerator continued on page 19A
SAINT VAI II, VV I,'\
Y
2IV
5`W T1 I #. 3SEPTEMISER 1992 e t
Ar_rr '^ h ■
k'
_ ',�, r. ti t +•i{...i. � � 1'y .sy�'t..�s-��-ft yryj(f;�r. � y�.'hr.M's � M?,..- n.'� ea?. J; ..+ c^ v..^r"`�
:fes
Da*
of 1t.s`----
TIM NELSON STAFF WRITER
®akota County has scaled back by
about a quarter plans for a solid waste
incinerator after reaching an agreement
with the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency on a'= permit for the proposed
j plant.
The county board of commissioners
voted 4-1 Wednesday night to approve
the compromise, which calls for the
1 i`1PCA to permit an incinerator that will
i burn up to 600.Aons of waste a day.
"We -still have some legal hoops left,"
�nty cuts size
said `Dakota County spokeswoman Marie
Coil'iu - ViJi 11iis -Vas the last major hur-
d1e'; Barring;x.further complications, she
said,, -.69 structioA-would likely start in a
few rgofiths t . ''
Dalepdt ` County: had been planning to
build 2nz 800;ton-per-day operation, but
opted f ithe�smaller facility to get the
long-delayed; project back on track, off i-
cials sai&,after the meeting.
The agreement apparently also avers
at least one, other, court battle over the
plant.
The state ?Court of Appeals in August
overturned a previous MPCA denial of a
BU E
♦ CONTINUED FROM 1 D
operate the $85 million incinera-
tor.
Also ahead - may be a further
appeal of the August ruling to the
Supreme Court by at least two
citizens groups opposed to an in-
cinerator of any size. The Clean
Crater Action Alliance and Dakota
County Citizens for Alternatives to
Burning said earlier this week that
they will carry on the court battle
where the MPCA left off.
Another group, Earth Protec-
tors,said they were also consider-
zng-joining the effort.
•; Dakota County Board Chairman
Don Chapdelaine said he would
like to see the burner up and run-
ning quickly.
"Our urgent need is to stop
permit for the incinerator, but the MPCA
was reportedly considering taking the
matter to the state Supreme Court for a
final ruling. The agency dropped those
plans in return for the smaller operation.
The incinerator is scheduled to be com-
pleted by the end of 1995.
Before it can start construction, how-
ever, the county must wwit out a manda-
tory 30 -day delay after the permit is
issued, and renegotiate a contract with _
ABB Resource Recovery Systems, the
Connecticut firm planning to build and
burying raw garbage as soon as
possible," Chapdelaine said in a
prepared statement after the
meeting. "Repeated delays have
prolonged the burial of 1,000 tons
of garbage daily in Dakota County
landfills."
Not all of that waste can be
diverted to the incinerator agreed
to Wednesday, however. County
officials said the compromise
means that 90 percent of Dakota
County residents will have to turn
in 90 percent of their recyclable
materials to cut the amount of
solid waste to what the burner can
handle.
"The. smaller facility will re-
quire unprecedented levels of re-
cycling and waste reduction,"
Chapdelaine said. "County resi-
dents will have to recycle every-
thing possible so that we don't
have to expand the facility."
BURNER CONTINUED ON 3D ►
—e , l
j - "I
STATE OF MINNESOTA
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
In the Matter of the Application
for Combined Air and Solid Waste
Permit No. 2211 -91 -OT -1 for the
Dakota County Mixed Municipal
Solid Waste Incinerator
SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, on November 26, 1991, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPGA) issued an order denying the permit application of Dakota County and ABB
Resource Recovery Systems, Combustion Engineering, Inc. (ABB) for a mixed
municipal solid waste incinerator;
WHEREAS, on December 30, 1991 and January 2, 1992, Dakota County and ABB
appealed the decision of the MPCA to the Minnesota Court of Appeals;
WHEREAS, on August 25, 1992, the Court of Appeals, in Appellate Court Case
Numbers C8-92-9 and C7-91-2551, reversed the decision of the MPCA, remanded this
matter to the MPCA and ordered issuance of the permit without further proceedings;
WHEREAS, the MPCA had before it on November 26, 1991, a proposed permit for
the incinerator, had responded to and resolved all public comments on the proposed
permit, had heard the oral comments of all persons interested in appearing before it,
and on or by November 26, 1991, had denied all requests for a contested case hearing;
WHEREAS, the MPCA has until September 24, 1992 to petition the Minnesota
Supreme Court for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals;
WHEREAS, the entry of the judgment of the Court of Appeals will be stayed if the
MPCA petitions the Minnesota Supreme Court for review of the decision of the Court of
Appeals;
WHEREAS, at its September 14, 1992 closed special meeting, the MPCA fully
considered the Court of Appeals' decision and the options to appeal or to issue the
proposed permit, and authorized the MPCA Commissioner to determine if a settlement
option to reduce the size of the proposed incinerator might be possible, and authorized
the MPCA Chair and the MPCA Commissioner, if such a settlement could be reached,
to execute a settlement agreement to that effect;
WHEREAS, at its September 14, 1992 closed special meeting, the MPCA
recognized that, in light of the Court of Appeals' order to issue the permit without
further proceedings, the MPCA Commissioner could, upon reaching such a settlement,
issue a modified permit for a down -sized incinerator pursuant to existing delegations,
which include Minn. Rules pt. 7001.0190, subp. 3(A),(C)(1991) and the October 22,
1991 delegation of authority from the MPCA to the MPCA Commissioner;
WHEREAS, Minn. Rules pt. 7001.0190, subp.3(A),(C)(1991) allows the MPCA
Commissioner, upon the consent of the permittee and without following the procedures
of Minn. Rules pts. 7001.0100 to 7001.0130 (1991), to modify a permit to correct
typographical errors and to:
change a provision in the permit that will not result in allowing
an actual or potential increase in the emission or discharge of
a pollutant into the environment, or that will not result in a
reduction of the agency's ability to monitor the permittee's
compliance with applicable statutes and rules;
WHEREAS, after considering the settlement proposal, Dakota County and ABB
agree to accept a permit for a nominal 800 ton per day incinerator and consent to the
-2-
immediate modification of that permit to reduce the nominal incineration capacity of the
proposed incinerator to 600 tons per day, which would reduce the estimated annual
average throughput of the proposed incinerator from 640 tons per day to 510 tons per
day;
WHEREAS, a reduction in the capacity of the proposed incinerator will not change
the permit emission limitations, but will reduce the total emissions from the proposed
incinerator into the environment by incinerating a reduced amount of mixed municipal
solid waste, and will maintain the equivalent emission dispersion characteristics by
utilizing equivalent stack height and stack parameters;
WHEREAS,. this Settlement Agreement is entered into pursuant to the authority
vested in the MPCA and the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and the State of
Minnesota by Minn. Stat. chs. 8, 115, 116 (1990); and
WHEREAS, the MPCA, the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and the State
of Minnesota, Dakota County and ABB have entered into this Settlement Agreement in
good faith to avoid expensive and protracted litigation and to settle the claims raised in
this action.
NOW THEREFORE, the MPCA, the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and
the State of Minnesota, Dakota County and ABB agree as follows:
1. The MPCA Commissioner, pursuant to the Court of Appeals' order and
existing delegated authority, shall approve issuance to Dakota County and ABB on
September 24, 1992, of the attached permit for a nominal 800 ton per day capacity
mixed municipal solid waste incinerator (Attachment 1).
2. The MPCA Commissioner, acting through existing delegated authority and
Minn. Rules pt. 7001.0190, subp. 3(A), (C)(1991), shall then immediately approve
-3-
issuance to Dakota County and ABB on September 24, 1992, of the attached Modified
Permit (Attachment 2) for the construction and operation of a nominal 600 ton per day
capacity mixed municipal solid waste incinerator. The Modified Permit will wholly
supersede and modify the permit issued under Paragraph 1 of this Settlement
Agreement. The Modified Permit incorporates the following changes from the permit
for the nominal 800 ton per day facility:
a. Parts 1.1 and 2.3.6.1 have been amended to reflect the downsizing
of the proposed incinerator. In Part 1.1, the nominal capacity of
each incinerator unit is now 300 tons per day, rather than 400. Also
in Part 1.1, the average annual throughput of each incinerator unit is
now 255 tons per day, rather than 320. In Part 2.3.6.1, Fuel
Limitations, the annual amount of mixed municipal solid waste
allowed to be burned is now 219,000 tons, rather than 292,000 tons.
Also in Part 2.3.6.1, annual incineration capacity of each incinerator
unit is now 126,000 tons, rather than 168,000 tons. The allowable
amount of natural gas will be adjusted to reflect the downsizing of
the equipment.
b. Parts 1.2, 3.2.5.1, and 5.2 require the same type of incinerator and
control technologies that would have been required for the larger
incinerator,. but have been amended to reflect the need to change
the size of the equipment to fit the smaller incinerator facility. These
amendments also require that the stack height and other stack
parameters of the smaller incinerator must be equivalent in emission
dispersion characteristics to those of the larger incinerator. This
In
maintains the equivalent air emission dispersion characteristics
already analyzed for the larger incinerator. Since the incinerator will
now be smaller, and therefore incinerate less waste, the emission
rates will be less than those analyzed for the larger incinerator,
C. Parts 2.3.11.2 and 4.3.2 have been amended to add a required
removal efficiency for sulfur dioxide from the incinerator stack. This
requirement does not change the emission limit for sulfur dioxide for
the incinerator. This change was required by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency in its review of the permit in
November of 1991, and would have been added to the permit had a
permit been issued at that time.
d. Part 2.2.7 has been amended to correct a typographical error in the
permit by replacing ,minerals,, with Minn. Rules.,,
e. Part 4.1, Test No. B.2 has been amended to correct a typographical
error in the permit by relocating the number 1 under the column
,,Pollutants,, to its intended place under 'the column
,, Frequency/Emission Point.
f. Exhibit H5, section II.A.12 has been amended to more precisely
identify the physical location of the testing port, which is to be
located at the breeching between the baghouse outlet and the stack.
3. Dakota County and ABB agree to accept, consent to, and not challenge in
any way the Modified Permit described in Paragraph 2 of this Settlement Agreement.
Dakota County and ABB also agree not to challenge in any way the modification and
replacement of the permit described in Paragraph 1 of this Settlement Agreement.
-5-
4. Dakota County, ABB, the MPCA and the Attorney General on behalf of the
MPCA and the State of Minnesota agree to defend, in any legal challenge, including an
appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court, this Settlement Agreement and issuance of
the Modified Permit as a reasonable compromise within the authorities of the MPCA.
5. The Attorney General, acting on behalf of the MPCA and the State of
Minnesota, agrees not to petition the Minnesota Supreme Court for review of the
decision of the Court of Appeals. If any party to this appeal other than the MPCA and
the State of Minnesota petitions the Minnesota Supreme Court for review of the
decision of the Court of Appeals, -the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and the
State of Minnesota shall file a timely response opposing Minnesota Supreme Court
review on the basis that this Settlement Agreement is a reasonable compromise within
the authorities of the MPCA and that the Court of Appeals decision does not impair the
authority of the MPCA to protect the environment. If the Minnesota Supreme Court
decides to review the decision of the Court of Appeals, the Attorney General on behalf
of the MPCA and the State of Minnesota reserves the right to participate as a
respondent or amicus, but will limit its argument to issues concerning MPCA authority
to protect the environment, that the Court of Appeals decision does not impair the
authority of the MPCA to protect the environment, and that Dakota County, ABB and
the MPCA have reached a reasonable compromise within the authorities of the MPCA.
The MPCA and the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and the State of Minnesota
will not oppose any requests by Dakota County or ABB for any bond requested of
parties who appeal this matter to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
6. . The Modified Permit issued pursuant to Paragraph 2 shall be effective 30
days after the entry of the judgment in Appellate Court Case Nos. C8-92-9 and C7 -91-
M
2551 if no party petitions the Minnesota Supreme Court for review, or if the Minnesota
Supreme Court denies all petitions for review. If the Minnesota Supreme Court decides
to review the Court of Appeals order, the parties to this Settlement Agreement agree to
amend the issuance date of the Modified Permit to the date the Clerk of Appellate
Courts enters a judgment affirming the Court of Appeals' order to issue a permit. If the
Minnesota Supreme Court reverses the order of the Court of Appeals to issue the
permit, this Settlement Agreement terminates upon the date the Clerk of Appellate
Courts enters a judgment reversing the Court of Appeals' order, and the Modified
Permit issued pursuant to the terms of this Settlement Agreement is thereby revoked.
Dakota County and ABB agree to'not challenge in any way a revocation of the Modified
Permit under these circumstances.
7.
This Settlement Agreement
is effective
upon execution by all of the
following:
the MPCA Commissioner and
MPCA Chair,
Dakota County, ABB Resource
Recovery Systems, Combustion Engineering, Inc. and the Attorney General or his
designee.
8. Dakota County and ABB reserve the right to oppose an appeal of the Court
of Appeals' order or any other legal action to impair Dakota County's and ABB's
interests in a permit for the Dakota County incinerator.
9. The MPCA and the Attorney General acting on behalf of the MPCA and the
State of Minnesota reserve the right to: a) enforce the terms and conditions of the
Modified Permit under any administrative, legal and equitable remedies available to the
State; b) exercise its emergency powers pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 116.11 (1990) in the
event that conditions warranting such emergency action shall arise; and c) require the
permittee to undertake actions to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of
-7-
the Modified Permit, and any applicable federal or state statutes. rules. sLandardS.
orders, stipulation agreements, and schedules of compliance. Dakota County = u ABE
retain the right to defend in accordance witn applicable law against any suc:.q a:::.-- , cv
the MPCA or the Attorney General acting on behalf of the MPCA and the Stat' of
Minnesota.
10. Each party to this Settlement Agreement agrees to bear its own cosi and
attorney fees in all proceedings before the MPCA in this matter up to the date :of this
Settlement Agreement and in this appeal before the Minnesota Court of Appeals and
the Minnesota Supreme Court.
11. This Settlement Agreement terminates upon the expiration of the five year
term of the Modified. Permit.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement.
For the State of Minnesota:
Zz/ z
Da -.e
Dat;.
DR. DANIEL FOLEY
Chair
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
520 Lafayette u ��
St. P/,N 5 1455
CHARLES W. WILLIAMS
Commissioner
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
520 Lafavette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155
Date ELDON G. KAUL
Assistant Attorney General
520 Lafayette Road
Suite 200
St. Paul, MN 55155
For Dakota County:
Date DONALD CHAPDELAINE
Chair
Dakota County Board of
Commissioners
Dakota County Administrative
Center
1550 West Highway 55
Hastings, MN 55033
Date JAMES C. BACKSTROM
Dakota County Attorney
Dakota County
Judicial Center
1560 West Highway 55
Hastings, MN 55033
-9-
For ABB Resource Recovery Systems, Combustion Engineering, Inc.:
Date
Date
JHOMAS J. KEHOE
Associate General Counsel
ABB Resource Recovery
Systems, Combustion
Engineering, Inca
7 Waterside Crossing
Windsor, CT 06095
MARY R cCONNELL
Lindquist & Vennum
4200 IDS Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402
MINNESOTA
Olmsted County Receives MPCA Permit To
Build Ash Cell
The Citizens Board of the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) has approved a permit modification which will
allow Olmsted County to construct an ash -disposal cell at its land-
fill. The 6.7 acre cell at the Olmsted -Kalmar Landfill will be used
for the disposal of ash from the Olmsted County incinerator as
well as coal ash from the Rochester Public Utilities power plant
and medical waste ash from the Mayo Clinic incinerator. The per-
mit will allow the county to dispose of 370,000 cubic yards of ash
at the landfill, which is an estimated 10 years of operating capacity.
In April, the MPCA Citizens Board approved the agency's environmental assessment of
the ash cell area. The board concluded that with proper environmental safeguards and
maintenance,the landfill would not pose a threat to the environment or public health.
According to MPCA reports, Olmsted County's ash landfill design incorporates the
most stringent bottom liner system of any landfill currently operating in Minnesota, as
required under the agency's new statewide ash -disposal rules approved earlier this year.
Under the ash disposal area, a double -composite liner will be constructed, which will
consist of two -and -a -half feet of compacted clay with a 60 -millimeter synthetic liner over
the clay, plus another two feet of clay covered by another 60 -millimeter synthetic liner.
Incorporated into the liner system will be a leak -detection network. Any leachate from
the landfill will be pumped into tanker trucks and hauled to Rochester's municipal waste-
water treatment plant for treatment and disposal.
Olmsted County will be removing ash from the Dodge/Olmsted ash landfill in
Kasson to the new ash landfill this fall. The ash has been stored at the Dodge County site
since Olmsted County's garbage incinerator began operation in 1987. According to
Olmsted officials, the county decided to close the Dodge ash facility due to new incinera-
tor disposal rules and economic concerns over the capping and long-term maintenance of
the -facility. The ash from the Dodge County site will be needed to cover the Olmsted -
Kalmar ash landfill's liner to protect it from freezing this winter. ■
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
PORT AUTHORITY MEETING DATE:October 6, 1992
AGENDA ITEM:Dakota County Incinerator Project
AGENDA SECTION:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS
RPT
PREPARED BY: Stephan JIlk
AGENDA
11CM #
9A_
ATTACHMENTS: Appeals Court Decision
APP OVEDBY
MPCA/DAK. CTY AGREEMENT
�,,,
The Minnesota Court of Appeals provided a decision which awarded Dakota
County the opportunity to be granted a permit for the construction and
operation of the proposed incinerator. Following that decision Dakota
County and the MPCA entered into discussion on the possible appeal to that
decision. The outcome of that discussion was an agreement between the MPCA
and Dakota County which provided for the issuance of a permit for a smaller
incinerator. The "design" capacity of the incinerator will be 600tons per
day versus 800. The actual throughput will be 510 tons per day versus 640
tons per day with original design.
There are two environmental action groups which have appealed the decision
to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Whether the Supreme Court will hear the
appeal is yet to be determined. There is a strong feeling that since the
MPCA and Dakota County have reached agreement for the issuance of the
permit that it is unlikey that the Supreme Court will hear the case.
Meanwhile, Dakota County is proceeding with planning the project,
completing the financing for the project and initiating the permiting
process they will need to go thru with the City of Rosemount. City and
County staff have met to review the process which will have to be completed
by the County for this project and discuss project schedules etc.
In order to "re-educate" the City Council and City Commissions on the
project we are arranging to have County Staff to make a presentation to the
council and commissions at a meeting very soon.
At this time this item is brought to you for an update and an opportunity
for discussion.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:NONE
PORT AUTHORITY ACTION:
� 7
FI NA)
DAKOTA COUNTY ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
TELEPHONE
(612) 438-4418
DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMPLEX 1590 W. H11N. 55. HASTINGS. MINNESOTA 55033-2392
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 23, 1992
Dakota County reaches agreement
with MPCA on waste -to -energy plant
CONTACT: Marie Coutu, 438-4532
The Dakota County Board of Commissioners reached an agreement
Wednesday with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency that should
allow the County to stop the 'unnecessary landfilling of raw garbage
produced in the county.
The compromise proposed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPGA) gives the County a permit for a waste -to -energy facility that
will burn an average of 510 tons per day instead of the 640 ton -per -
day average the County had requested. The County Board approved the
agreement 4-1 at a special meeting Wednesday night.
"Our concern today, as it has been for the last 10 years, is to
manage the solid waste produced in Dakota County in the most
environmentally responsible and cost-effective manner," said County
Board'Chairman Donald R. Chapdelaine. "The MPGA and the County have
reached a reasonable agreement which allows us to proceed with an
environmentally sound plan for the garbage that is not recycled."
Dakota County has one of the best recycling records in the state,
and has a goal of recycling 50 percent of the waste stream by the year
2000. The compromise with the MPCA means that 90 percent of residents
will need to recycle 90 percent of their recyclable items.
News ;elegise
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Printed on Recycled Paper
For Release: September 23, 1992 Contact: Susan Brustman (612) 296-7769
MPCA Dakota Co Agree on Smaller Incinerator
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) announced today that the state and Dakota
Co. have resolved their dispute concerning the Dakota Co. incinerator by agreeing to a reduced -size
incinerator for the county.
"After Dakota Co. won its appeal and the court directed the MPCA to issue a permit for the
incinerator, we were ready to appeal to the Supreme Court," said MPCA Commissioner Charles
Williams. "Then we worked out this settlement that satisfies many of our objections to the original
proposal. I feel that while this settlement may not satisfy the extremes at either end of the issue, it is a
balanced settlement that is fundamentally a win for all sides, and the Appeals Court decision doesn't
impair the MPCA's authority to act on future cases."
The MPCA said that Dakota Co. permit has been amended to reflect the downsizing of the
proposed incinerator. The actual capacity and annual amount of waste allowed to be burned have been
reduced by 25 percent. The same type of incinerator and control technologies that would have been
required for the original facility have been included, but reduced in size. Emissions will be less than for
the larger incinerator because of the reduced size of the facility. The height of the stacks and other
details of the stacks will remain equivalent while less waste will be burned.
The Appeals Court ordered the MPCA to issue the disputed permit to Dakota Co. On September
24, the MPCA, through Commissioner Williams, will approve issuing the permit for the smaller facility.
If no other party appeals the Appeals Court decision to the Supreme Court, Dakota Co. may begin
construction 30 days after the MPCA approves the permit
La
Star,,
lQj �1�� �4 , 4r '!� ' k tii�{ Y�ibune %� i! � y+r•C ��� f i � :'�Et,���i�b tii .ba
� a;� b� , ,.,rY, � St,� it, k , t . .•, . , ,.F�,!.,"A ,�'''P't'!I,fS'Fy ��' ti�rts!, 1,�� t�l��'"fl'. 'i't1 }•,'.,` r'�{14j.•.
-• •:
Pact reached for small6r incinerator
in -Dakota OUIT ° appeals planned
IIy Dennis Cassano of any plant, 'rhey hope their own Attorneys for the county, the MPCA
and e0 Von Sternberg appeals to the Minnesota Supremc and A1313 Resource Recovery Sys
Staff Writers Court will e�'cntu;tlly derail: Dakota tcros Inc., which would build and
County's pLeve operate the plant, have been ncgotint-
I d ` ' n was issued
The Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency and the Dakota County
Board agreed Wednesday to a settle-
ment that would permit a scnled-
down version of a trash incinerator
that would produce electricity.
The settlement will pit the county
and state against environmental
r groups that oppose the construction
The MPGA refused in November to
issue a permit for the plant, a•deci-
sion the County BOMA appcalcd to
the Minnesota Court of Appeals. The
court overruled the MPCA in Ali.gust, calling the decision a political
action that violated procedures and
exceeded the agency's authority.
tng since t tc costo
The MPCA board approved the
terms of - tile settlement after closed
meetings that ended Tuesday. The
County Board approved the lams
last night by a 4.1 vote.
Incinerator continued on page 19A
24 T1
SEPTEMBER 1993
TIIURSDAY
SHIN I 1W 'I. 1'It>-71F.1`1<
i'
'i
tik( -I"It )N
12 PAGES �I
a sets size
....0W."
ntV.
...
in inetrator
a. n. ..� 3 :a..-_ r_.
lam(
4*
�_.,
- 't f r the incinerator, but the MPCA
TIM NELSON STAFF WRITER
�akota County has scaled back by
about a quarter plans for a solid waste
incinerator after reaching an agreement
with the Minnesota Pollution Control
r,gency on a' permit for the preposed
plant.
The county board of commissioners
voted 4-1 Wednesday night to approve
the compromise, which calls for the
MPCA to permit an incinerator that will
burn up to.600:aons of waste a day.
"We:- still some legal hoops left,"
safo! Dakota County spokeswoman Marie
Col].*. 1-'`•.'bu�. this _'was the last major hur-
dle::'iBarring;Jurther' complications, she
saido'�1structlon would likely start in a
few-roo6thS.` : ` %
Dak}ota ;County' had been planning to
build _=2n�,800tor.-per-day operation, but
opted fortheJsmaller, facility to get the
long-delayed project back on track, offi-
cials said',after the meeting.
The agreement apparently also averts
at least one, other court battle over the
plant.
The state Court of Appeals in August
overturned e. previous MPCA denial of a
is H��'`
'T CONTINUED FROM 1D
operate the $85 million incinera-
tor.
Also ahead may be a further
appeal of the 'August ruling to the
Supreme Court by at least two
citizens groups opposed to an in-
cinerator of any size. The Clean
Water Action Alliance and Dakota
County Citizens for Alternatives to
Burning said earlier this week that
they will carry on the court battle
where the MPCA left off.
Another group, Earth.. Protec-
tors, said they were also consider-
ulg-joining the effort.
Dakota County Board Chairman
Don Chapdelaine said he would
like to see the burner up and run-
ning quickly.
"Our urgent need is to stop
perm! o
was reportedly considering taking the
matter to the.state Supreme Court for a
final ruling. The -agency dropped those
plans in return for the smaller. operation.
The incinerator is scheduled to be com-
pleted by the end of 1995.
Before it can start construction, how-
ever, the county must WZ it out a manda-
tory 30 -day delay after the permit is
issued, and renegotiate a contract with:
ABB Resource Recovery Systems, the .
Connecticut firm planning to build and
BURNER CONTINUED oN 3D
burying raw garbage as soon as
possible," Chapdelaine said in a
prepared statement after the
meeting. "Repeated delays have
prolonged the burial of 1,000 tons
of garbage daily in Dakota County
landfills."
Not all of that waste can be
diverted to the incinerator agreed
to Wednesday, however. County
officials said the compromise
means that 90 percent of Dakota
County residents will have to turn
in 90 percent of their recyclable
materials to cut the amount of
solid waste to what the burner can
handle.
"The. smaller facility will re-
quire unprecedented levels of re-
cycling and waste reduction,"
Chapdelaine said. "County resi-
dents will have to recycle every-
thing possible so that we don't
have to expand the facility."
STATE OF MINNESOTA
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
In the Matter of the Application
for Combined Air and Solid Waste
Permit No. 2211 -91 -OT -1 for the
Dakota County Mixed Municipal
Solid Waste Incinerator
SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, on November 26, 1991, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) issued an order denying the permit application of Dakota County and ABB
Resource Recovery' Systems, Combustion Engineering, Inc. (ABB) for a mixed
municipal solid waste incinerator;
WHEREAS, or, December 30, 1991 and January 2, 1992, Dakota County and ABB
appealed the decision of the MPCA to the Minnesota Court of Appeals;
WHEREAS, on August 25, 1992, the Court of Appeals, in Appellate Court Case
Numbers C8-92-9 and C7-91-2551, reversed the decision of the MPCA, remanded this
matter to the MPCA and ordered issuance of the permit without further proceedings;
WHEREAS, the MPCA had before it on November 26, 1991, a proposed permit for
the incinerator, had responded to and resolved all public comments on the proposed
permit, had heard the oral comments of all persons interested in appearing before it,
and on or by November 26, 1991, had denied all requests for a contested case hearing;
WHEREAS, the MPCA has until September 24, 1992 to petition the Minnesota
Supreme Court for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals;
WHEREAS, the entry of the judgment of the Court .of Appeals will be stayed if the
MPCA petitions the Minnesota Supreme Court for review of the decision of the Court of
Appeals;
WHEREAS, at its September 14, 1992 closed special meeting, the MPCA fully
considered the Court of Appeals' decision and the options to appeal or to issue the
proposed permit, and authorized the MPCA Commissioner to determine if a settlement
option to reduce the size of the proposed incinerator might be possible, and authorized
the MPCA Chair and the MPCA Commissioner, if such a settlement could be reached,
to execute a settlement agreement to that effect;
WHEREAS, at its September 14, 1992 closed special meeting, the MPCA
recognized that, in light of the Court of Appeals' order to issue the permit without
further proceedings, the MPCA Commissioner could, upon reaching such a settlement,
issue a modified permit for a down -sized incinerator pursuant to existing delegations,
which include Minn. Rules pt. 7001.0190, subp. 3(A),(C)(1991) and the October 22,
1991 delegation of authority from the MPCA to the MPCA Commissioner;
WHEREAS, Minn. Rules pt. 7001.0190, subp.3(A),(C)(1991) allows the MPCA
Commissioner, upon the consent of the permittee and without following the procedures
of Minn. Rules pts. 7001.0100 to 7001.0130 (1991), to modify a permit to correct
typographical errors and to:
change a provision in the permit that will not result in allowing
an actual or potential increase in the emission or discharge of
a pollutant into the environment, or that will not result in a
reduction of the agency's ability to monitor the permittee's
compliance with applicable statutes and rules;
WHEREAS, after considering the settlement proposal, Dakota County and ABB
agree to accept a permit for a nominal 800 ton per day incinerator and consent to the
-2-
immediate modification of that permit to reduce the nominal incineration capacity of the
proposed incinerator to 600 tons per day, which would reduce the estimated annual
average throughput of the proposed incinerator from 640 tons per day to 510 tons per
day;
WHEREAS, a reduction in the capacity of the proposed incinerator will not change
the permit emission limitations, but will reduce the total emissions from the proposed
incinerator into the environment by incinerating a reduced amount of mixed municipal
solid waste, and will maintain the equivalent emission dispersion characteristics by
utilizing equivalent stack height and stack parameters;
WHEREAS, this Settlement Agreement is entered into pursuant to the authority
vested in the MPCA and the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and the State of
Minnesota by Minn. Stat. chs. 8, 115, 116 (1990); and
WHEREAS, the MPCA, the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and the State
of Minnesota, Dakota County and ABB have entered into this Settlement Agreement in
good faith to avoid expensive and protracted litigation and to settle the claims raised in
this action.
NOW THEREFORE, the MPCA, the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and
the State of Minnesota, Dakota County and ABB agree as follows:
1. The MPCA Commissioner, pursuant .to the Court of Appeals' order and
existing delegated authority, shall approve issuance to Dakota County and ABB on
September 24, 1992, of the attached permit for a -nominal 800 ton per day capacity
mixed municipal solid waste incinerator (Attachment 1).
2. The MPCA Commissioner, acting through existing delegated authority and
Minn. Rules pt. 7001.0190, subp. 3(A), (C)(1991), shall then immediately approve
-3-
issuance to Dakota County and ABB on September 24, 1992, of the attached Modified
Permit (Attachment 2) for the construction and operation of a nominal 600 ton per day
capacity mixed municipal solid waste incinerator. The Modified Permit will wholly
supersede and modify the permit issued under Paragraph 1 of this Settlement
Agreement. The Modified Permit incorporates the following changes from the permit
for the nominal 800 ton per day facility:
a. Parts 1.1 and 2.3.6.1 have been amended to reflect the downsizing
of the proposed incinerator. In Part 1.1, the nominal capacity of
each incinerator unit is now 300 tons per day, rather than 400. Also
in Part 1.1, the average annual throughput of each incinerator unit is
now 255 tons per day, rather than 320. In Part 2.3.6.1, Fuel
Limitations, the annual amount of mixed municipal solid waste
allowed to be burned is now 219,000 tons, rather than 292,000 tors.
Also in Part 2.3.6.1, annual incineration capacity of each incinerator
unit is now 126,000 tons, rather than 168,000 tons. The allowable
amount of natural gas will be adjusted to reflect the downsizing of
the equipment.
b. Parts 1.2, 3.2.5.1, and 5.2 require the same type of incinerator and
control technologies that would have been required for the larger
incinerator,. but have been amended to reflect the need to change
the size of the equipment to fit the smaller incinerator facility. These
amendments also require that the stack height and other stack
parameters of the smaller incinerator must be equivalent in emission
dispersion characteristics to those of the larger incinerator. This
52
maintains the equivalent air emission dispersion characteristics
already analyzed for the larger incinerator. Since the incinerator will
now be smaller, and therefore incinerate less waste, the emission
rates will be less than those analyzed for the larger incinerator.
C. Parts 2.3.11.2 and 4.3.2 have been amended to add a required
removal efficiency for sulfur dioxide from the incinerator stack. This
requirement does not change the emission limit for sulfur dioxide for
the incinerator. This change was required by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency in its review of the permit in
November of 1991, and would have been added to the permit had a
permit been issued at that time.
d. Part 2.2.7 has been amended to correct a typographical error in the
permit by replacing ,minerals,, with Minn. Rules.,,
e. Part 4.1, Test No. B.2 has been amended to correct a typographical
error in the permit by relocating the number 1 under the column
Pollutants,, to its intended
„Frequency/Emission Point.,,
place under 'the column
f. Exhibit H5, section II.A.12 has been amended to more precisely
identify -,the physical location of_ the testing port, which is to be
located at the breeching between the baghouse outlet and the stack.
3. Dakota County and ABB agree to accept, consent to, and not challenge in
any way the Modified Permit described in Paragraph 2 of this Settlement Agreement.
Dakota County and ABB also agree not to challenge in any way the modification and
replacement of the permit described in Paragraph 1 of this Settlement Agreement.
-5-
4. Dakota County, ABB, the MPCA and the Attorney General on behalf of the
MPCA and the State of Minnesota agree to defend, in any legal challenge, including an
appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court, this Settlement Agreement and issuance of
the Modified Permit as a reasonable compromise within the authorities of the MPGA.
5. The Attorney General, acting on behalf of the MPCA and the State of
Minnesota, agrees not to petition the Minnesota Supreme Court for review of the
decision of the Court of Appeals. If any party to this appeal other than the MPCA and
the State of Minnesota petitions the Minnesota Supreme Court for review of the
decision of the Court of Appeals, -the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and the
State of Minnesota shall file a timely response opposing Minnesota Supreme Court
review on the basis that this Settlement Agreement is a reasonable compromise w;thin
the authorities of the MPCA and that the Court of Appeals decision does not impair the
authority of the MPCA to protect the environment. if the Minnesota Supreme Court
decides to review the decision of the Court of Appeals, the Attorney General on behalf
of the MPCA and the State of Minnesota reserves the right to participate as a
respondent or amicus, but will limit its argument to issues concerning MPCA authority
to protect the environment, that the Court of Appeals decision does not impair the
authority of the MPCA to protect the environment, and that Dakota County, ABB and
the MFPCA have reached a reasonable compromise within the authorities of the MPCA.
The MPCA and the Attorney General on behalf of the MPCA and the State of Minnesota
will not oppose any requests by Dakota County or ABB for any bond requested of
parties who appeal this matter to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
6. , The Modified Permit issued pursuant to Paragraph 2 shall be effective 30
days after the entry of the judgment in Appellate Court Case Nos. C8-92-9 and C7 -91-
N
2551 if no party petitions the Minnesota Supreme Court for review, or if the Minnesota
Supreme Court denies all petitions for review. If the Minnesota Supreme Court decides
to review the Court of Appeals order, the parties to this Settlement Agreement agree to
amend the issuance date of the Modified Permit to the date the Clerk of Appellate
Courts enters a judgment affirming the Court of Appeals' order to issue a permit. if the
Minnesota Supreme Court reverses the order of the Court of Appeals to issue the
permit, this Settlement Agreement terminates upon the date the Clerk of Appellate
Courts enters a judgment reversing the Court of Appeals' order, and the Modified
Permit issued pursuant to the terms of this Settlement Agreement is thereby revoked.
Dakota County and ABB agree to*not challenge in any way a revocation of the Modified
Permit under these circumstances.
7. This Settlement Agreement is effective upon execution by all of the
following: the MPCA Commissioner and MPCA Chair, Dakota County, ABB Resource
Recovery Systems, Combustion Engineering, Inca and the Attorney General or his
designee.
8. Dakota County and ABB reserve the right to oppose an appeal of the Court
of Appeals' order or any other legal action to impair Dakota County's and ABB's
interests in a permit for the Dakota County incinerator.
9. The MPCA and the Attorney General acting on behalf of the MPCA and the
State of Minnesota reserve the right to: a) enforce the terms and conditions of the
Modified Permit under any administrative, legal and equitable remedies available to the
State; b) exercise its emergency powers pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 116.11 (1990) in the
event that conditions warranting such emergency action shall `arise; and c) require the
permittee to undertake actions to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of
-7-
the Modified Permit. and any applicable federal or state statutes. rules. s.andGrdS.
orders, stipulation agreements. and schedules of compliance. Dakota County End: ABE
retain th= right to defend to accordance wit- applicable law against any suc: - ac:::."',
the MPCA or the Attorney General acting on behalf of the MPCA and the State c
Minnesota.
10. Each party to this Settlement Agreement agrees to bear its own arc
attorney fees in all proceedings before the MPCA in this matter up to the daze -of this
Settlement Agreement and in this appeal before the Minnesota Court of Appeals and
the Minnesota Supreme Court.
11. This Settlement Agreement terminates upon the expiration of the five year
term of the Modified Permit.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement
For the State of Minnesota:
I -z z / Z
Da:;,
V
Da=.c
DR. DAiN!EL FOLEY
Chair
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
520 Lafayette c
St. P^ N 5 •55
CHARLES W. WILLIAMS
Commissioner
Minnesota Pollution.
Control Agency
520 Lafavette Road
St. Paul. MN 55155`
Date
For Dakota County:
Date
ELDON G. KAUL
Assistant Attorney General
520 Lafayette Road
Suite 200
St. Paul, MN 55155
DONALD CHAPDELAINE
Chair
Dakota County Board of
Commissioners
Dakota County Administrative
Center
1550 West Highway 55
Hastings, MN 55033
Date JAMES C. BACKSTROM
Dakota County Attorney
Dakota County
Judicial Center
1560 West Highway 55
Hastings, MN 55033
Ma
For ABB Resource Recovery Systems, Combustion Engineering, Inc.:
Date THOMAS J. KEHOE
Associate GeKeral Counsel
ABB Resource Recovery
Systems, Combustion
Engineering, Inc.
7 Waterside Crossing
Windsor, CT 06096
�I-a3-gd-
Date
MA5Y P;McCONNELL
Lindquist & Vennum
4200 IDS Center
Minneapolis, MN 56402
MINNESOTA
Olmsted. County
Build Ash Cell
Receives MPCA Permit To
The Citizens Board of the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPGA) has approved a permit modification which will
allow Olmsted County to construct an ash -disposal cell at its land-
fill. The 6.7 acre cell at the Olmsted -Kalmar Landfill will be used
for the disposal of ash from the Olmsted County incinerator as /
well as coal ash from the Rochester Public Utilities power plant
and medical waste ash from the Mayo Clinic incinerator. The per-
mit will allow the county to dispose of 370,000 cubic yards of ash
at the landfill, which is an estimated 10 years of operating capacity.
In April, the MPCA Citizens Board approved the agency's environmental assessment of
the ash cell area. The board concluded that with proper environmental safeguards and
maintenance,the landfill would not pose a threat to the environment or public health.
According to MPCA reports, Olmsted County's ash landfill design incorporates the
most stringent bottom liner system of any landfill currently operating in Minnesota, as
required under the agency's new statewide ash -disposal rules approved earlier this year.
Under the ash disposal area, a double -composite liner will be constructed, which will
consist of two -and -a -half feet of compacted clay with a 60 -millimeter synthetic liner over
the clay, plus another two feet of clay covered by another 60 -millimeter synthetic liner.
Incorporated into the liner system will be a leak -detection network. Any leachate from
the landfill will be pumped into tanker trucks and hauled to Rochester's municipal waste-
water treatment plant for treatment and disposal.
Olmsted County will be removing ash from the Dodge/Olmsted ash landfill in
Kasson to the new ash landfill this fall. The ash has been stored at the Dodge County site
since Olmsted County's garbage incinerator began operation in 1987. According to
Olmsted officials, the county decided to close the Dodge ash facility due to new incinera-
tor disposal rules and economic concerns over the capping and long-term maintenance of
the -facility. The ash from the Dodge County site will be needed to cover the Olmsted -
Kalmar ash landfill's liner to protect it from freezing this winter. ■