Paper mill air pollution standards 25 years out of date, environmental groups sue EPA Pulp mills emit hazardous pollutants that have been linked to heart and lung disease

"Three advocacy groups sued the Environmental Protection Agency last week over concerns that regulations for paper mills emissions are 25 years out of date.

Greenpeace, the Center for Biological Diversity and Port Townsend AirWatchers filed suit on Dec. 6 under a clause of the Clean Air Act that allows citizens to hold the EPA accountable for carrying out the provisions of the act.

The EPA last reviewed the New Source Performance Standards for kraft pulp mills in 1986. The mills use a chemical process to turn wood chips into pulp to make paper. The standards, by law, are supposed to be reviewed every eight years.

“This is about how much pollution that people living near paper mills have to breathe,” said Helen Kang, the lawyer representing Greenpeace and Port Townsend AirWatchers. “Why does it take a lawsuit from the citizens to do a job that the agency has neglected for 25 years, when the duty is so clear?”

EPA said it is reviewing the lawsuit and could not comment in detail. Asked why it hasn’t reviewed the regulations since 1986, the agency said it has requested and received data from the kraft pulp mill industry to be used in developing rules next year.

Kraft pulp mills emit a host of pollutants, including some that have been linked to heart and lung disease and global warming.

Reviews every eight years are supposed to ensure regulations keep up with new technology for reducing pollution. Allowing 25 years to pass without reviewing regulations means they’re sorely out of date, the groups said.

“When you’re protecting people’s health and protecting the environment, it’s even more important to follow through and do these reviews,” said Gretchen Brewer, director of Port Townsend AirWatchers.

Under the existing New Source Performance Standards, only particulate matter and total reduced sulfur are regulated. Kraft pulp mills also emit pollutants including volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxide and greenhouse gases.

Without an EPA review, it’s difficult to determine which other air pollutants should be regulated, Kang said.

The EPA acknowledges in a public notice that the data used to determine the New Source Performance Standards is dated. The agency said it is aware of “significant changes … in the number of affected facilities, in industry ownership practices and in emission collection and control configurations.”

EPA and the environmental groups have until the end of February to reach an agreement before the case proceeds in court. “We want either EPA to agree to a schedule of when they’re going to complete the rulemaking, or if they’re not willing to agree, we’ll have the court decide that,” Kang said."

Source
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2011/12/15/7674/paper-mill-air-pollution-standards-25-years-out-date-environmental-groups-sue-epa

"PT mill's discharge permit, expired in 2009, now up for public review"

"The first in a series of stories on the Port Townsend Paper Corp.’s proposed new discharge permit.
It’s affectionately called “the pond” at the Port Townsend Paper Corp. and less affectionately referred to as “the thing that stinks” by people who live near it or pass by it.

It is the largest industrial wastewater treatment plant in Jefferson County.

And starting April 24, paper company officials and the community have an opportunity to start discussing what conditions should apply to what is technically an aerated stabilization basin (ASB), when the state Department of Ecology issues a draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Waste Discharge Permit.

A public workshop and hearing follow, with comments taken through June 21.

The mill’s discharge permit, last written in 2004, expired in 2009. A new draft contains new requirements for monitoring groundwater, monitoring sediment under the outfall and well as studying the efficiency of the pond. These requirements are now up for public review, including at a public hearing likely to occur in late May or early June.

The mill’s permit to use, reuse, treat and then discharge more than 12 million gallons of water daily into Port Townsend Bay is likely to be controversial.

Both the PT AirWatchers and the Port Townsend Citizen Watchdogs, two organizations that have been critical of the mill’s practices, have been eyeing the state’s progress on the permit review for months.

It is the third permit in four years that Jefferson County’s largest private employer has had to review with the public watching and commenting."

Source and Full Article
http://www.ptleader.com/main.asp?SectionID=36&SubSectionID=55&ArticleID=33384

Roger Hagan new president of Port Townsend Paper Corp. - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems Permit (NPDES)

"Hagan arrives at an interesting time, but then again, the last several years have been interesting all around. Clear challenges await him and the mill. From the mill’s perspective, increasing efficient production, building market share and making the profits that keep the doors open and 300 families directly employed are at the top of the list.

For both the mill and the surrounding community, environmental issues are also front and center.

Current attention is on the 33 acres of treatment ponds that address the mill’s ample wastewater – about 12 million gallons per day, eventually flowing into Port Townsend Bay. The ponds are responsible for most of the mill’s singular smell.

Last week, PT Paper announced it would invest $1 million to install an auto-dredging system that should, over time, dredge out the odoriferous sludge and otherwise assist in the decomposition process.

Both that project and the broader conditions of a new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems Permit (NPDES) are under scrutiny, with the 54-page draft permit now open to public review until June 21.

A debate over the proper level of regulation of the mill’s 25-acre solid waste site – a huge ash pile – has gone legal with administrative and court reviews in the future.

These reviews come on the heels of a lengthy local public debate over PT Paper’s $55 million proposal to rebuild and expand the biomass-burning ability of Power Boiler 10 into a cogeneration plant (producing heat and electricity).

The burning of additional tons of biomass would have reduced the burning of petroleum as an energy source, but would have increased particulate matter and some gases. But the mill also proposed a $10 million upgrade to its air pollution scrubbing equipment that would have, according to the mill, produced a 70 percent reduction in the current level of particulates that reach the air.

While there was an environmental outcry, it appears that energy economics are primarily responsible for pushing the biomass project to the back shelf, if not into the waste bin. For economic reasons related mostly to cheap natural gas and California regulations, the number of potential customers for the exported electricity has dissipated. Of course that also delays the proposed investment in new air pollution control equipment.

Still, the mill is moving ahead with other green efforts, including a 2012 reduction of fuel oil consumption by 1.85 million gallons, with more cuts expected this year, according to PT Paper’s environmental director, Kevin Scott. And, as outgoing president Loney always reminded people, PT Paper remains one of the largest recyclers and reusers in Washington state, processing tons of old cardboard daily into new containerboard or unbleached pulp for resale, and reusing tons of wood waste as fresh wood fiber.

Regarding the profit-and-loss statement, hard information is hard to come by, as the mill’s books are no longer public. But the signs should be positive: Chip supply is cheaper, thanks to busier sawmills; weaker competing pulp mills have washed out of the market; prices for packaging are picking up across the board."

Source and Full Article
http://www.ptleader.com/main.asp?SectionID=5&SubSectionID=5&ArticleID=33488