Loading...
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. ■