Water Quality Violations Cost Long Prairie Packing Co. $52000 - Water World

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency issued the following news release seems surprising. If, as seems to be being suggested in this news release the perpetrator was breaking the envirnomental law, these people are environmental criminals, so why was there an agreement when this should have gone to court? In such cases the litigant should pay all the costs and not the state, so what possible reason can these be for this?

Am I being too Machiavellian by noting that actually there was a reason for Long Prairie Packing to come to an agreement as they want to develop an AD Plant:

Long Prairie Packing Co., LLC, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) recently reached an agreement that requires the company to pay $52,000 for alleged water quality violations. The violations occurred between fall 2009 and spring 2010 at the company's facility in Long Prairie, Minn.

According to MPCA staff inspection reports, the company improperly stockpiled and land applied industrial byproducts, and failed to maintain a required 600-foot land application setback from surface waters at seven sites. Some of the land applications occurred within farmed wetlands. The company also failed to notify the MPCA or immediately recover blood-contaminated leachate which spilled out of a dumpster and a large storage tote; improperly stored more than 500 gallons of used oil; and operated parts of the facility without a required federal and state industrial stormwater permit.

Of the $52,000 civil penalty, half will be paid to the MPCA, and half will be spent on completing a supplemental environmental project. Long Prairie Packing Co. plans to construct an industrial anaerobic digester near the plant that will reduce the amount and toxicity of pollutants entering area waters, and significantly reduce the land application of industrial byproducts. The digester will produce biogas, which will help reduce dependency on coal-powered energy sources. The company has also completed a series of required corrective actions.

View the original article here

Fulton continues to work on landfill violations - Fulton Sun

He said the city also has completed supplemental environmental performance projects, which he described as "essentially an additional penalty designed to improve the situation, including a methane capture system. Slivka also addressed a concern from Ready regarding what happens when the landfill closes in May 2011.

"We will have a financial assurance instrument in place," he said.

"Essentially saying 'Here's this money to fix violation issues if it happens."

Fulton Director of Administration Bill Johnson said the city actually has been subject to more inspections since announcing its intention to close the landfill.

"DNR has an interest in ensuring we close it properly," Johnson said.

Regarding odor issues, Slivka said the Department of Natural Resources has been out to test air quality on a number of occasions -- as recently as the week of Sept. 6 -- and never found a problem.

"On odor violations, our litmus test is 7 to 1 dissolution," Slivka said. "We've gone out there a number of times and it's never been higher than 2 to 1."

Johnson addressed the most recent violations for exposed litter.

"This is not an excuse, but we are approaching our closure date, and there was an attempt to spread trash thinner over a wider area to even out the land," Johnson said, noting that process also included having to haul in more dirt. "The idea sounded good to use the trash to fill in, but it just didn't work out the way we thought.

"We did it, it was wrong, and we won't be doing it anymore."

As for methane levels, he said one supplemental environmental performance project currently in the works involves putting in a 10,000 gallon tank to pump water that flows down into the methane collection wells out of the landfill.

"This will allow our methane extraction wells to function better," Johnson said. "Hopefully by drawing the methane down into the wells it will stop it from migrating."

Another just-completed project is a storm water sediment pond "that will give sediment in the storm water time to settle out before water leaves the site."

Although Slivka said he could not give a number regarding how much the city has been fined for these violations, he did say DNR recently sent an agreement in principal regarding settlement.

"We're certainly sympathetic to Mrs. Ready, but we feel like we have been out there and we have been on the city's back," Slivka said.

Johnson acknowledged the city has received that agreement, noting DNR is proposing a fine of $10,000 as well as an additional $5,403 to pay for investigative costs.

Johnson said he is scheduled to meet with Department of Natural Resources officials later this week, and noted the agreement in principle will be presented to the Fulton City Council at its Sept. 28 meeting.

View the original article here