EPA v. MARTIN MARIETTA ALUMINUM

Case summary

SYNOPSIS OF THE CASE MARTIN MARIETTA (COMPANY) OPERATES A PRIMARY ALUMINUM REDUCTION PLANT NEAR GOLDENDALE, WASHINGTON. (ATTACHMENT 1) IN MARCH OF 1978, MARTIN MARIETTA APPLIED FOR A PSD PER- MIT TO MODIFY THE GOLDENDALE FACILITY. THE PLANNED MODIFI- CATION INCLUDED THE ADDITION OF A NEW POTLINE AND VARIOUS TECHNICAL CHANGES TO THEIR EXISTING POTLINES TO REFLECT THE NEW SUMITOMO DESIGN. THE NET RESULT WAS TO BE ADDITIONAL PRODUCTION OF 65,000 T/YR OF ALUMINUM AND A REDUCTION IN EMISSIONS OF ALL POLLUTANTS. THE SUMITOMO DESIGN WAS EX- PECTED TO RESULT IN A LOWER EMISSION RATE FROM THE CELLS, SMOOTHER OPERATION AND A MAJOR INCREASE IN THE CAPTURE EFFI- CIENCY, THAT IS, THE PERCENTAGE OF EMISSIONS THAT GO TO THE PRIMARY CONTROL SYSTEM. ON AUGUST 30, 1978, EPA GRANTED THE COMPANY A PSD PERMIT FOR AN ADDITIONAL POTLINE UTILIZING THE NEW SUMITOMO TECHNOLOGY. (ATTACHMENT 2) THE EMISSION LIMITATIONS IN THE PSD PERMIT WERE BASED ON THE EXPECTED EMISSION CONTROL PRESENTED BY MARTIN MARI- ETTA IN THE PSD PERMIT APPLICATION. HOWEVER, EPA USED A MORE CONSERVATIVE EMISSIONS CONTROL OUTCOME TO DEVELOP THE EMISSION LIMITATIONS RATHER THAN RELY EXCLUSIVELY ON THE COMPANY'S PROJECTED EMISSIONS WHICH WERE LOWER THAN EPA'S AND APPEARED TOO OPTIMISTIC. THE PSD PERMIT REQUIRES THE COMPANY TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH ITS PERMIT EMISSION LIMITS WITHIN 180 DAYS AFTER STARTUP (I.E., NO LATER THAN JULY 1, 1983). THE ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS IN TSP AND F EMISSIONS AT THE MARTIN MARIETTA GOLDENDALE FACILITY HAVE NOT OCCURRED. ON THE BASIS OF EMISSIONS TESTING TO DATE, THERE HAS BEEN NO SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN EMISSIONS PER TON OF ALUMINUM PRODUCED COMPARED TO THE PREMODIFICATION CASE. (ATTACHMENT 3) ON DECEMBER 12, 1982, THE COMPANY REQUESTED A MODIFICA- TION OF ITS PSD PERMIT TO REFLECT OPERATING EXPERIENCE. (ATTACHMENT 4) THE COMPANY'S REQUEST WAS ACCOMPANIED BY IN- SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO JUSTIFY THE REQUESTED MODIFICA- TION. THE COMPANY REQUESTED A REVISED PARTICULATE LIMIT OF 11.4 LB/TON WHICH EPA'S MODELING INDICATES WOULD RESULT IN AN INCREMENT VIOLATION. WHILE THE MODELING EFFORT CONDUCTED BY THE COMPANY DEMONSTRATES THAT NO UNCERTAINTIES IN THE DATA AND IN THE COMPANY'S USE OF A NONGUIDELINE MODEL TO IN- VALIDATE THE COMPANY'S CONCLUSION. IN ADDITION, THE COM- PANY'S REQUESTED MODIFICATION DID NOT PROVIDE A SUFFICIENT DEMONSTRATION THAT ITS PROPOSED NEW EMISSION LIMITS ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF BACT. (ATTACHMENT 5) THE WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY (WDOE) CONDUCTED SOURCE TESTS ON FEBRUARY 28 THROUGH MARCH 3, 1983. (ATTACH- MENT 3) THE SOURCE TEST RESULTS INDICATED THAT THE COMPANY WAS IN SERIOUS VIOLATION OF THE PSD PERMIT LIMITS. THE MOST RECENT AVAILABLE MONTHLY TEST REPORT SUBMITTED TO WDOE BY THE COMPANY FOR THE MONTHE OF AUGUST INDICATES THAT THE COMPANY CONTINUES TO VIOLATE ITS PERMIT LIMITS AND THE NSPS LIMITS FOR FLUORIDE. (ATTACHMENT 6) THE PLANT CLEARLY DID NOT ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH ITS PSD PERMIT LIMITS FOR TSP AND F BY JULY 1, 1983. ADDITIONALLY, BECAUSE THE COM- PANY'S REQUESTED MODIFICATION WAS ACCOMPANIED BY INSUFFI- CIENT INFORMATION TO AUTHORIZE A PERMIT MODIFICATION AT ITS REQUESTED LEVELS, MODIFICATION OF THE PERMIT COULD NOT TAKE PLACE BY JULY 1 OR ANY REASONABLE TIME THEREAFTER. EPA ISSUED THE COMPANY A NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NOV) ON JULY 20, 1983. (ATTACHMENT 7, INCLUDING NOV STAFF REPORT) WHILE RESERVING THE RIGHT TO REQUEST RESCISSION OF ITS PER- MIT PURSUANT TO 40 C.F.R. 52.21(W)(2), THE COMPANY REQUESTED A MEETING WITH THE REGION TO DISCUSS A COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE. (ATTACHMENT 8) A MEETING WAS HELD ON AUGUST 2, 1983 AND INFORMAL MEETINGS WITH TECHNICAL AND PROGRAM STAFF HAVE BEEN HELD SINCE THAT TIME. THE COMPANY

Defendants (1)

• MARTIN MARIETTA ALUMINUM INC.Named in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• GOLDENDALE ALUMINUM CO

  85 JOHN DAY DAM RD, GOLDENDALE, WA, 98620

  Registry ID: 110000490781

Statutes cited

• CAA 113 — Clean Air Act
• CAA 114 — Record keeping, Inspection, Information Request
• CAA 111 — New Source Performance Standards

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• MARTIN MARIETTA ALUMINUM INC.entered 1984-10-10

  Primary law: CAA

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 1983-11-02Referred To Headquarters
• 1983-12-08Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1984-10-09Complaint Filed With Court
• 1984-10-10Final Order Lodged
• 1984-10-10Final Order Entered
• 1984-10-10Concluded
• 1988-08-12Enforcement Action Closed