Burning Hazardous Chemical Wastes in the City:
Industrial Container Services in Northeast Minneapolis
While the Xcel Riverside Generating Plant continues to receive a great
deal of attention as a major pollution source, it is far from the only
one in northeast Minneapolis. I would like to outline some concerns
over Industrial Container Services, a facility currently the subject of
enforcement actions by city and state authorities due to air quality
permit violations.
Most upper northeast residents are unaware of the source of an acrid
noxious smell that periodically permeates their neighborhoods. At times
the emissions are so unpleasant that they give people instant headaches,
cause a burning sensation in the eyes, or force people to go inside.
These emissions come from a smokestack on a "thermal oxidizer" owned by
Industrial Container Services, located near the intersection of 27th
Avenue and University Avenue NE. The facility is in the Marshall
Terrace neighborhood and close to the Columbia Park, Bottineau, and
Holland neighborhoods. If you are driving north on University past
Lowry, this smokestack is visible off to the left as you start over the
bridge over the BNSF railroad tracks at the east throat of Northtown
Yard.
For years the facility was owned locally and known as the Continental
Container Corporation. Several years ago, Continental Container carried
out a consolidation of its operations, closing another facility that had
been located in north Minneapolis. This led to an increase in
operations at the 27th and University facility. In early 2002
Industrial Container Services completed its purchase of Continental
Container. ICS is a large multinational corporation headquartered in
California. It has operations in twelve states and in many countries in
Latin America and Europe.
What it does:
ICS takes used chemical containers-mostly they are 55 gallon steel
drums--and reconditions them. Unfortunately, these containers often
still contain remnants of the chemicals they carried. Many, if not
most, of these chemicals are potential health hazards-solvents,
corrosives, acids, paint resins, epoxies, etc. According to information
ICS filed with Hennepin County, some of these chemicals cause skin and
eye irritation and are inhalation hazards. Several chemicals "may be
toxic." Many of the barrels on site carry hazard warning labels. The
scoured drums are then repainted, a process that reportedly normally
causes even more air pollution than does the chemical burning process.
In 2001 ICS reported to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
that it released close to 50 tons of pollutants into the atmosphere of
northeast Minneapolis. These included 27.67 tons of Volatile Organic
Compounds, over 15 tons of Particulate Matter, over four tons of
Nitrogen Oxide, and .02 tons of Sulfur Dioxide.
Supposedly, if there is less than one inch of chemicals left in a
barrel, ICS can burn out the residue. This happens in a furnace that
can process 180 drums per hour. The fumes then flow into the "thermal
oxidizer" which is meant to function as sort of an afterburner. When it
is working right, no visible smoke or noticeable smells are supposed to
emerge from the smokestack. Unfortunately, things aren't working right.
Complaints and Violations
According to the city of Minneapolis Environmental Inspector office,
there have been "many many complaints" regarding the emissions from this
facility. There would probably be many more, but, given other pollution
sources in the area, shifting winds, and the thermal oxidizer's location
at the far rear of the ICS complex, it takes some effort to pinpoint
where exactly these unpleasant orders are coming from. Pollution from
ICS is bad enough, however, that it has been an issue for union workers
at the Thiele Manufacturing plant next door. The union steward there
has reported that at times some rooms at their plant become unusable due
to fumes coming from ICS.
City records show complaints over smoke problems at the site dating back
to 1966. State and county records show a long history of past problems
at the facility. A 1990 state report noted that the MPCA had received
"numerous citizen complaints between 1987 and the present." There was a
series of citations in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The facility
failed a 1987 EPA inspection and was cited for its visible emissions.
The MPCA cited the facility at least four more times in 1987-89. Then
in March, 1990 new violations led to a $50,000 fine being assessed and a
stipulation agreement being made over Continental Container's
noncompliance with its air emission permit. But then in 1993 there was
another permit violation over emissions and then in 1997 there were at
least two enforcement actions by the MPCA. In 1998 smoke emissions from
the facility were so bad that a nearby resident called the fire
department mistakenly believing there was a fire inside the facility.
An inspector expressed additional concerns in 1999.
Now, so far in 2003, ICS has been cited three times for violations. On
February 19, 2003 city inspectors visiting ICS to check on the black
smoke emissions issue found an uncontained blue ink spill covering their
entire parking lot that was headed for storm sewers leading to the
Mississippi River. This led to MPCA enforcement proceedings for
violations of Hazardous Waste and Storm Water regulations. While the
ink turned out to be considered not particularly hazardous, ICS had
failed to properly report or deal with the spill in a timely manner.
There appeared to be much evidence of operations being conducted in a
haphazard manner.
Following more resident complaints and inquiries, city environment
officials made an unannounced inspection of ICS on the morning of
September 29, 2003. New air quality violations were discovered and a
new round of enforcement proceedings are now underway. As the case is
currently in an enforcement proceeding, few details on the case are
available. However, it appears that some significant violations were
discovered.
The main concern is that when the facility emits black smoke this means
that the dangerous chemicals being burned out of the drums are being
released without proper treatment. The extent of the health hazard this
presents to residents in the area is unknown.
ICS points out that their level of reported emissions is well below what
is allowed on their permit and is now less than in past years. But what
if the permit itself is too lax? Also, it is the nature of the
emissions, not just the quantity, which is of concern. Black smoke
releases (indicating failure to properly contain and process dangerous
pollutants) are a regular occurrence at the facility.
A certain pattern seems to be apparent. Following resident complaints
inspectors find violations. The facility promises to resolve the
problems. But once the attention of the inspectors is elsewhere, the
problems re-emerge.
Company officials acknowledge problems and say that they are working to
tweak the process and improve operations. But this is a little
difficult to take seriously. This is not a new facility--the drum
furnace and many components of the facility appear to have been
installed in the late 1970s. There has been more than enough time to
work the bugs out of the system. If it was possible to run the facility
better, and if ICS was seriously committed to investing the money and
effort required to do so, it would seem that they would have done this
long ago.
Inadequate Monitoring
According to city and state sources, ICS is pretty much left to monitor
itself regarding the operations of its thermal oxidizer and for
reporting the types and quantities of emissions from its facility. One
person is supposed to monitor the quantity and nature of chemicals
inside the drums before burning them out, but for a facility processing
180 barrels an hour (8-10,000 per week) it is easy to imagine slip-ups
taking place. No regular independent monitoring of the emissions takes
place. No outside monitoring of the types of chemicals being burned is
conducted. An opacity monitor required following an earlier inspection
appears to have gone missing. No recent comprehensive outside
inspections of the facility appear to have taken place.
What can be done?
During November, the MPCA, in coordination with the city and county,
will be reviewing this new violation. This provides a good opportunity
to bring some increased public attention to ICS and to advocate for
long-term improvements. There are a number of questions that concerned
residents should make sure get addressed:
First, is the company operating in compliance with all existing permits
and environmental regulations? When was the last stack test conducted
on this facility by the MPCA and what where the results? Are there
available opacity readings? Has the plant had a recent comprehensive
outside inspection? Is ICS really adequately monitoring and reporting
on all of the chemicals being burned in its thermal oxidizer? Do our
regulatory agencies do enough independent monitoring to be able to
adequately know this? If not, what is needed for them to be able to do
so?
Even if the company is in compliance, are those existing regulations and
permits really adequate to protect our environment and the health of
residents? Is better pollution control for this facility possible? Are
there more modern technologies now available for plants such as this
that could result in reduced emissions and a cleaner and healthier
environment for people in northeast Minneapolis? How could ICS be
induced to modernize its facility and substantially reduce the level of
emissions?
Given this facility's long track record of problems and violations, it
is time for a more forceful response on the part of public regulatory
authorities. Perhaps ICS should be given a deadline for making
permanent improvement to the facility or else face having its permit to
pollute revoked.
Residents can help by contacting their state, county, and city elected
representatives with their concerns and by calling in specific emissions
related complaints to the City of Minneapolis environmental complaint
line: 612-673-5897. The state MPCA also has a complaint line at
651-296-7300.
Summary
It would be hard for anyone having the misfortune of being downwind from
ICS when thick clouds of acrid black smoke are being emitted to believe
that the current situation doesn't constitute a serious potential health
threat. A quick glance at the warning labels on the barrels stored all
over their facility doesn't provide much reassurance. Burning these
types of chemicals in a poorly functioning facility in a densely
populated urban area just doesn't look or sound right--and it sure
doesn't smell right.
Bruce Shoemaker
Holland Neighborhood
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
