DNR finds hundreds of violations of ethanol plant's permit
MILTON The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has named United Ethanol a “high-priority violation” after finding hundreds of violations of the plant’s permit.
An inspection report released earlier this month by Brian Barbieur, air management engineer, recommends the DNR refer the case to the Wisconsin Department of Justice for fines and forfeitures.
“This is a very serious case in our view,” said Eileen Pierce, DNR regional air and waste leader.
United Ethanol does not agree with all of the DNR’s characterizations, Dori Lichty, a spokeswoman for the plant, wrote in an e-mail to The Janesville Gazette. Some parts of the report refer to matters the plant already has fixed, and the plant is working to fix other problems, she wrote.
The 60-page report details each item in the plant’s permit and the plant’s compliance status through Feb. 29. Of 371 items in the permit, the plant was found to be out of compliance with 178.
“The facility was not constructed in accordance with the permit or permit application,” the report concludes. “The permittee did not install all process equipment consistent with the permit of application.
“The permittee did not install all pollution control devices prior to operation. The permittee did not inspect any pollution control devices prior to operation. The permittee has not operated in accordance with the permit.”
Pierce said a high-priority violation designation sets in motion actions prescribed by the federal Clean Air Act. The DNR has 60 days to issue a notice of violation and 270 days to either bring the plant back to compliance or refer the case to the Department of Justice. If the DNR doesn’t meet the deadlines, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could take over the case.
But Pierce expects the DNR to take action quicker than that, she said.
“I expect timely action, and we’re not waiting 60 days,” she said.
In most cases, the DNR would resolve the issue by sending a notice of violation and asking the plant to correct the problems, but Barbieur, the engineer who handled the report, believes this case is serious enough to send it to the Department of Justice, Pierce said. The action would require approval of the DNR secretary, Matthew Frank, she said.
According to Wisconsin air quality statutes, the Department of Justice could fine the plant between $10,000 and $25,000 per day for each offense, Pierce said.
The Clean Air Act also includes provisions for residents to bring suit against plants in federal court in certain situations.
In February, the DNR notified the plant it had tested over the limit in October for emissions of particulate matter, volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxide.
Volatile organic compounds are pollutant gasses. Particulate matter is extremely small particles and liquid droplets made up of acids, chemicals, metals, soil or dust.
At the time, the plant said it had corrected the problem that caused the high emissions.
The plant was retested June 3 and 4, but the results aren’t yet available, Pierce said.
The plant hopes to install a new regenerative thermal oxidizer to fix some of the problems in the report, but it’s waiting for permission from the DNR, Lichty wrote.
“United Ethanol maintains regular communication with the DNR, and … employees are working hard to operate the facility according to our permit to stay in compliance,” she wrote.
The DNR is reviewing the permit application and hopes to open a 30-day public comment session on it in mid-July, Pierce said.
Plant neighbors have been following the DNR’s actions and are concerned about the inspection results, said Ginny Goodman, who lives near Milton’s Eastside Industrial Park that houses the plant.
“I feel like from the very beginning we had concerns and issues, and I feel that (the plant) might have addressed some of them,” she said. “But from the very beginning, it wasn’t done correctly. Just by reading that DNR report, you can see that for yourself.”
Goodman and others are concerned about possible health risks from plant emissions, she said. Neighbors need to keep questioning the way the plant is operating, she said.
“The building is there,” she said. “We just want it to run properly, to be in compliance.”
Jul 20, 2008 at 6:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
Satch thats the typical lefty talking points. Can't you come up with ur own?
Jul 5, 2008 at 1:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
The land we have isn't proven to have any oil on it at all. That's a myth hatch. You swallow that liberal BS hook line and sinker.
Jul 5, 2008 at 1:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Thank a liberal for the rise in gasoline prices and the mandate to put ethanol in our fuel. We are using a food to produce a fuel and forcing the refineries to use the corn. Well whats going to happen when the southern states have to start using it? The ethanol has to be trucked to the refineries and where is corn grown? In the Midwest so the longer it takes to get to the south the higher the price is because of the transportation costs are higher. The United States exports more ethanol than we use. Hatch your a fool if you think that it doesn't have anything to do with higher costs at the grocery store.
Jul 2, 2008 at 9:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
Big oil is grinning from (corn)ear to ear because some here have bought into the notion that ethanol is the reason food prices are rising.
Keep drinking the neo-con koolaid.
Big oil and their teet sucking neo-con spin strategist want us small minded people to start eating our own. "Yes......look at the shiny gas nozzle.......your getting sleepy. You will not notice the fact that we have 40 million acres in the usa on land and sea tnat we lease now but don't drill on. You will buy or propaganda and feel sorry for us because we only have 1,900 drilling rigs available to drill with so we just can't get to all of those acres. We can't build any more rigs or refinerys because our profits are only in the billions. Don't look past our borders because if you do you might see that third world countries are coming of age and using more oil. Blame ethanol for the rising food and fuel prices. Forget that it cost money to transport the products to the store shelves. Now go fight amongst yourselves and keep drinking our koolaid".
Let's just pass this problem off on future generations. Our grand kids will understand. We need our oil....
Jul 2, 2008 at 7:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Actually, hockeyjocky, the lack of open meetings and the problems they are having now are directly connected. BEFORE you allow a plant to move in you should ask how they are going to coduct their business.
Jul 1, 2008 at 10:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Actually, starski, I was not one of the ones who "helped ramroad (sic) this through," but I will cop to being one who was in support of bringing this industry to town. I do not apologize for that; I heard the arguments from both sides and I felt that the arguments from those in support were stronger. Reasonable people can agree to disagree on that point. The open meetings errors made by Milton officials are an entirely different subject than the merits of the plant itself.
If it's "whining" to be thoroughly appalled at a company's refusal to follow the rules after knowing how badly it tore a community apart, then so be it.
Jul 1, 2008 at 9:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
ethnol is not and never will be the answer to our energy crisis...I dont care what they use to make it, Milton wanted it before any one else got it and they are going to pay for it.
Jul 1, 2008 at 9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Give me a break Hockey Jockey! We didn't need this to justify all of our complaints - the courts did that for us.
Sounds like you were ones of the ones who helped ramroad this through. And it sounds like you are still justifying your actions. Everyone makes mistakes... although recognizing you made a mistake and an apology would have been nice... Enough whining already. Now that you got us here – what are you going to do to try to fix it? How can you help make the situation better?
Jun 30, 2008 at 6:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
John Doe.. you're DEAD on... but alot of political decisions have come about in Milton, with less community involvement. If they want it bad enough, the back door is wide open.
Jun 30, 2008 at 3:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
The two lines below sum up this situation.
"The plant was retested June 3 and 4, but the results aren’t yet available, Pierce said."
"The plant hopes to install a new regenerative thermal oxidizer to fix some of the problems in the report, but it’s waiting for permission from the DNR, Lichty wrote."
Once the results come back then more pressure can be applied to the plant. It is amazing to me how political the topic of ethanol has become. The same people who were completely on board are now acting as though they always knew it was a bad idea and would increase food prices. Granted, the idea of using food for fuel hasn’t resulted in the best outcome. However, from these same ethanol plants may come a bio fuel that does not require a food source. And for the person who asked where we would grow the grass; how about your own backyard? There is tons of grass dropped off at the sanitary land fill every day. Granted, that technology may be years away, but let’s not stop it before it has a chance to develop. The plant should be in compliance with the law. However, too much public outcry could lead to another major layoff in the area and eliminate Rock County’s potential growth in the bio fuel area.
Jun 30, 2008 at 3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
I still smell a rat......
Jun 30, 2008 at 2:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
They broke their part of the agreement. How can they ever be trusted? No jobs at the cost of the health and safety of the community and of the children.
Jun 30, 2008 at 1:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hemp or switchgrass are great bio-fuel sources. It's really a shame that this company (or whoever is responsible) built the plant with all of these violations in place. Where is the regulation committee and who were they?
Jun 30, 2008 at 12:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Agreed, thekid3477! Hemp is a fiber for processing, a fabric, a paper, a nutricious food, a fuel, a crop that revitalizes and enriches the land and can produce multiple crops each year. If people could get beyond the mind-set that some varieties are only a drug (whose benefits are just beginning to be understood!), it could truly become the cash crop of the world providing profit and unlimited sustainable quality of life. As society looks for alternative renewable fuels, let's all be careful that we "first do no harm" as has now been indicated with ethanol. Perhaps there is valuable insight that previous generations growing hemp can teach if we only look to their knowledge and apply it to contemporary needs.
Jun 30, 2008 at 9:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
use hemp for fuel. its literally a weed and will grow ANYWHERE. we can grow a crop AFTER we grow the food. it actually RESTORES soil quality and takes NO FERTILIZERS to grow. www.hemp4fuel.com
Jun 30, 2008 at 6:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
I knew that all of the protesters would think that this news justifies everything they accused Milton officials of in the first place.
All it does, in reality, is show that this particular ethanol company welched on its word. And it is particularly galling that after everything Milton did for this plant, that UE won't keep their end of the bargain. I supported this plant and thoroughly researched the concept and company and was satisfied that they would be good neighbors. Instead, they just spat in the face of people who put their reputations on the line for this plant. This is why corporate America gets a bad name. I will find it very difficult to ever trust the word of a company official again.
Jun 29, 2008 at 11:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
chainsawchuckie... I am very sure! Thanks for covering my back, though! lol
Jun 29, 2008 at 10:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
Whether you believe in ethanol or not, there's no denying the back door way the city administration went about getting it in the first place. And there's no denying the violations that are taking place now.
.
Those are the issues that were not addressed at the beginning because the citizenry were not allowed to be a part of the governmental process this country was founded on.
.
Perhaps the citizens should now be allowed to meet in secret to decide what they want to do with the plant and the administrators who voted for it.
Jun 29, 2008 at 10:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
those who live near the ethanol plant who believe in it have not had any issues with the operation, those who dont believe in it find lot of problems... for me, its a steping stone to celluose and its better than sending semi loads of cash to fuel wars in the mid-east. (unless u own stock in exxon or mobil) also Oil money is turning south america to socialisum and bringing back the soviet union.
Jun 29, 2008 at 9:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Time for some re-call petitions.
Jun 29, 2008 at 6:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Everyone goes broke? I have a feeling some Milton big-wigs (or so they think) are making a few bucks off this "wonderful safe" Ethanol plant WHICH PEOPLE KNEW WOULD BE AS CRAPPY,STINKY AND UNSAFE AS WE ALL KNEW FROM THE GET-GO! I agree with "woody",shame on Nate Bruce and all his "disciples" - they don't live near the nasty smelly plant. Gee HONEST MILTON RESIDENTS could have told you this was coming,but did they listen??? NO! SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!
Jun 29, 2008 at 6:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
i smell a rat oh wait it's the new "E" plant
Jun 29, 2008 at 4:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ethanol = Everyone Goes Broke
Jun 29, 2008 at 4:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ethenol is a boondoggle. I've also wondered where the "grass" (weeds, really) will be grown, and not effect the food supply.
Jun 29, 2008 at 1:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Although I think the environmental issues should be addressed, I also think cool heads should prevail. These are good paying jobs and the last thing the area needs is another layoff. Let’s wait and see if the new test results prove in compliance before creating uproar. Although this plant may currently provide ethanol through food sources the long term potential may be bio fuels from non food sources like grass.
Jun 29, 2008 at 1:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
maven are you sure you want us to do that??
have you read the bessie the cow comments??
LOL have a great day and STAY SAFE!!!!
Jun 29, 2008 at 12:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
I'd like to invite you all to also post on www.discovermiltonwisconsin.com Sticks'nStones Forum. Thanks, Linda
Jun 29, 2008 at 11:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Just another reason why making a food source to fuel. It not only is raising the cost of gasoline and the costs of food. It also pollutes the environment. This stuff was suppose to help the environment. Where's Al Gore now?
Jun 29, 2008 at 11:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Just one more example of a private company cutting corners and putting a community's health at risk to make a profit. What ever happened to personal responsibility and doing what's right instead of what is politically and financially expedient and profitable? I guess we have to go to fantasy world to experience those attributes anymore.
...not to mention the fiscal boondogle that is ethanol production to begin with.
Jun 29, 2008 at 11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
The people that were fighting against getting the ethanol plant knew this was going to happen unless they were very careful. Nate Bruce and his cronies instead pushed forward without care because none of them would have to put up with living next to the plant. You don't hear about them trying to fix what they allowed to happen...do you. Shame on them!
Jun 29, 2008 at 5:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Well, there's a surprise: A company promising the world about safety/noise/pollution/odor. People who don't believe them are labled as naysayers, or worse. And then it happens, and leaders scratch their collective heads, wondering if this has ever happened before....sheesh!
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.