Free Brief - District Court of California - California

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 1 of 18

EXHIBIT A

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 2 of 18

Page 1 of 1

From: inkeca25~sudden1ink.net Sent: Friday, November 02,20071:18 AM
To: ENRD, PUBCOMMENT-EES (ENRD) Subject: United States et aL. vs. Evergreen Pulp,Inc. D. J. Ref. 90-5-2-17-08786 Attention: Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division United States et al. vs. Evergreen Pulp, Inc. D. J. Ref. 90-5-2-17-08786

When Evergreen Pulp Mill, Inc. started its operation, we the people that have to breathe the hazardous air pollutants that they have been emitting through their operations were guaranteed by the mill that everything was safe and pollutant free. We were told that they had installed the latest type of equipment that would ensure that very little harmful emissions would get into the air so that the people of Eureka, California wouldn't be breathing anything that could be damaging to their health. These emissions are particularly harmful to people with lung diseases. I don't live in Eureka but I work eight hours a day directly in the path of the Evergreen Pulp Mill's emissions. I am livid that this mill has been allowed to operate all of these years spewing out emissions that violated the federal emission standard for hazardous air pollutants "by approximately 230 percent, and they also were to violate monitoring, reporting and record-keeping requirements." Who is the agency that is supposed to be watching this mill and its operations? Is it the the North Coast Air Quality Management District? If so they just received $300,000 in penalties payments from Evergreen Pulp Mill for not doing their job. The United States and the California Air Resources Board each got $300,000 in penalty payments to them paid by the pulp milL. The people that have been breathing this toxic air get absolutely nothing but the strong possibility of developing Bronchitis and Emphysema and maybe even cancer. How do I know that the Evergreen Pulp Mill will install all of the equipment required to guarantee that the hazardous air pollutants will no longer be coming out of their smoke stacks? Wouldn't it be easier for them to continue to just pay the fines than to install the expensive equipment that is required to stop the toxic emissions? Also who is guarding the hen house? I don't know that I can count on the North Coast Air Quality Management District because where were they all of these years when Evergreen was supposed to be
environmentally safe?

Carolyn Campbell
1988 Blair Ln. Fortuna, Ca. 95540

fie:/JC:\Documents and Settings\AHURLEY\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK1E9\90-5-2- 1 7-0... 12/6/2007

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 3 of 18

From: ha 1 onetØsudden 1 i nk. net

Evergreen Pul p Inc No C 07-05067 SBA_10-24-07. txt

Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 8: 50 PM To: ENRD, PUBCOMMENT-EES (ENRD) subject: Public Comment on Consent Decree US et al v. Evergreen pulp, Inc. No. C 07-05067 SBA

waste clouds emanati ng from the Evergreen Pul p Mi 11. when i bought my house in

It's a beauti ful day on the North Coast except that it is marred by the toxi c

There was no publ i c input or counci 1 heari ngs that i'm aware of. But, now i'm in
a position of having to disclose to any buyer that my home sits in the shadow of

Eureka in 2005 the mill had been shut down. It was not disclosed on any realty documents as an environmental concern or threat. But, as a property owner I was not consulted or notified when it came time for them to go back in business.

thi s si ni ster and nasty nei ghbor.

I keep my windows shut because the stench overwhelms my cooking. I am a gourmet

cook and you have taken thi s joy out of my 1 i fe. I cannot no 1 onge r enj oy
get into my sheet rock and is pe rmanent 1 y in my home.

dinner or a glass of wine. All you can smell is some acrid concoction of sulfur, methane or other chemicals coming from the pulp Mill. The smell has managed to
if i had known that woul d be my future, i woul dn i t have bought the almost

they don't want to come to my smell y house and "enj oy" an eveni ng. i di dn 't know
thi s unti 1 someone fi nall y admi tted it.

$500,000 home near the golf course in Eureka. i don't entertain friends because

So while Evergreen is making profit they are doing it at the expense of families

and 1 i festyl e and people's health. i have asthma. when my 1 ungs gi ve out is

Evergreen going to pay for a new replacement set? And where are they going to find one. i have B negative blood and only 2% of the world's population has that blood type, never mind tissue compatibility.

What about all the lungs of all of the 30,000 people living in Eureka? The

they could breathe easily.
Frankenstei n .

hearts and 1 ungs of babi es? The hearts and 1 ungs of seni or ci ti zens who reti red vi ronment where
here in the 1 ast real estate boom thi nki ng it was a pri sti ne en

The rude awakeni ng is when they started up the beast AGAIN. We thought it was

dead but 1 i ke a bad sci ence fi cti on movi e it came back to 1 i fe 1 i ke

There is no amount of money in the world which could justify the sacrifice of
fl esh for the benefi t of chi na. why are we the sacri fi ce? The fi nes are not enough. Maybe a $100 mi 11 i on a day woul d be more 1 i ke for every day they are out

of compliance, but the mill needs to be closed finally and permanently and then torn down.
if indeed they are honorabl e and good nei ghbors, then they can offer fai r market pri ce to those homeowners who have been stuck wi th the property that they have deva 1 ued by thei r busi ness practi ces. Ever~reen shoul d take a full page ad in the Ti mes-Standard and Eureka Reporter maki ng thi soffer. It's the ri ght thi ng to do.

page i

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 4 of 18

EXHIBIT B

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

ADYANCE BUS GRAP I CS N-CA 51 Q9292geZ

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 5 of 18

P. Ø2

1 RONALDJ. TENPAS

Acr Assistat Att Geeral 2 Environmen and Nat Resources Division
3 U.S. Depent of Justice
-1 Deputy Chief

ELL MA
Envint Enft Secion
Tel: (41.5) 744-680

Environn Enorceen Secton 5 AN C. HUEY? DC Bar No. 375676
6 Tral Attorney

7 U.S. Depent of Sute i 050 301 How Stret Justi~
8 San Francisco, CA 9410S

9 Fax: (415) 744-6476 . F.-maal: ant'.hur1~u~doJ.gov
i 0 Attrney for PlaitiffUnit Staes of Amcirica
11

(Addítiona Attrneys on Ne"-'' Page)

12 13

14
15

NORTIRN DISTRCT OF CALIFORN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

i 7PEOPL OF TIE AMRICA 1he ) UND STATES OF STATE OF )

18 CALIFORNIA, ex rei. CALIFORN) Am RESOURCES BOARD, and )
19 NORm COAST UND AI QUALITY )

MAAGEMENT DISTRCT, )
Plaitis.
v.
¡

20
21

No. C 07-05067 SBA

DECLARATION OF CYN STEINER
IN SUPPORT OF UNOPPOSED RBQUEST TO ENTE CONSENT DECREE

22
23

)
) )

EVERGREEN PULP. INC.,

)
J

24
25

Defant.

26

27 28

ADVANce BUS CRAP I CS N-CA 5108292983

P.03

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 6 of 18

EDWJ G. BROWN JR
Attey Geen of

the Sta ofCa\ifo1Y\a

MAY HACKENRACHT, Assstat Att01'l0Y GcnerW 2 JOHN DAVIDSON, Supeeising Attorney General

ANITA E. 3 Offce of RUU, Depty Attrney Geer CA :eiu No. 072483 the Caifo Attey Ge
455. Golden Gate A venue, Suite i 1000
4 San Fraci:5CiO. CA 94102

Tel: (415)703-5533
5 Fax: (415) 703-5480
6 E-~ail: Anta.Rnud~doj .ca.gov Attmeg for Plaintff C-'1.:f Air R~50\U'e9 Boar

7

8 NANCY DIOND CA BII No. i 30963
Nan Diamond Law Offces of 9 822 0 SÚ'ct Su..le 3 AI CA 9~.521 10 Tel: (707) 826-8540
Fax: (701) 826-8541 11 E-mal: ndiamOßd~boidtl.com

12 Attrney for Planl Nort Co~ UJÙfied Air Quality Msnenen Di5tct
13

DECLARA nON OF CYNTIA STEINR

14 L Cynti Steer, delar the followig:
1.5

1.

i am an EnvinmentalEngee employed by the U.S. Environmenta Prtetion ~enl;!
Region IX (~egion IX), in San Francisco, Californa. i obted a. mas of science

16

17
i8

degee in chemca engig nom the Univef$ty QfCaliforn Los Aneles, in 1992

19

and a bachelor of science dcgr in chem;cal euinccg ftm Univem.ty of Caifora,
San Diego in 1986. Sinæ t 9977 I M¥C ben employed at i:r A Regon IX 8B an

20
21

Emrirent Ennee in the Air Division. Iri th;~ CAps1(~ity) i deelop enreeren
22
21

cas ag reguted enties subject to the reuiements of th Clea Ai Act
2.
i submit ths Declation in sup of

24
25 26
27

the United States' Motion to Ente Co.c

Dec. I have peonal knowledge of the mat se fort her exce for th .i
std to be ba upn inottion and belief. For those ite baed upn inClrron

28

2

ADVANCE BUS GRAP res N-CA 51e82B298~ Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA Document 11-2 Filed 12/13/2007 Page 7 of 18

P. Ø4

an belief, I have relied upon in.nnation reaonably relied on by professionas in my
2
3
4field to inform our professonal

judgment and opinion, an as to those mattrs I am

mfonned an believe them to be tre as expressl ~ herejn, 1Id jf caled to testify I

could and would compey testfy mereto.
3.

5

Since apximly May 2005, I have been assigned to me matt now known as Unite
States v. Ever Pup. Inc.. Civil Action No. C07-05067 SBA. Tb9 aos oonCler
violations of

6

7
8

th Clea Air Act at a krft pulp mill owned and opat by Evergr

9
. 10

Pup, Inc. (the "Faclity~') The míJl ii~ locatd in Samor (Humboldt Co), Caiforta.
4.

Since July 2005, El A hii worked closely with enfore:ent staf frm the Nor Coas

11

Air Quty Maemen District ("Distrct"') and the CaJjforna Air Resours Boad
(~CARB") in invesgag, negotiti, and Tesolving emssions a. monitor
violaons at two of

12
13

14

the Facility's emissions unts: the smelt dissolvi ta eSDT') and

l~
16

the lime .kln

BaekPun~ ~\i; Operationa Hì!¡torv
5.

17
18

Du my iirgaon of the Evergren Pulp roi compliance issue tog~cr with oter
EP A s~ the Distct and th CAR, I discovered the followíng informon. Fot roam

19

20
21

years followig the Faclity's consction in t 965: it wa owned and opeted by
Louisiana Pacfic, Inc. In Februar 200t, Louisiana Pacifc sold the Facity to Saoa

22
23

Pacfic CeUul080, LLC. SaxoaPacifc owned and ope.rted the Faclity unti Augu

2003, when ownerbjp of th mill pase to Stockton Pacific Ente LtC. Stocktn
Pacflc Enter own and operated the Fa.ciUty uptil Jønua 2005, when control wa

24 25

26

27 28

)

ADVAHCE BUS GRAP I CS N-CA 51 e8282983

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 8 of 18

P.05

assumed by Evegrn Pup, Inc. Ev1egree. Pulp is the curnt own and opetor.
1

2
3

Evergr Pulp commence pup prducton in March 2005.
SDT~ ViQlatiiws.

4
5

6.

I also deted th the Facilty's SOT exceded a limit on paculat matt ("PM')
emisiQns of 0.2 poun of

PM pe ton ofB1.k Liquor Solids ("ib/ton BLS"). 11s lin:t

6 7 8

is impse thugh thee sepaate f'¡ultttoi: P(ogrs: tbe fed New Sour
Perormane Stadar reuirements at 40 C.P.R. Par 6(, Subp BB, §§60.280-28S
("NSPS"); the FadJity's Title V Ope1a~J:g Pert (#NCU 037~12, issue August 31,

9
10
11

2001); and th fedml Muium Achjevle Contrl Technology eMACT')
reuients fot Chemical Recver Combuson Sources at Kr Sod Sulfrt, and

12

Sta-Alone Semdiemca Pulp Mills al iW C.P .R. Par 63, S11bp MM, §§63.860-868
13

14
15

(uKr pulp mill MACr), which becae effecve in Mah 2004.

7.

.B8.!u~d on:wur tet inrmtion th I reíewè:d, I dei.rriiuçJ ti11 Deft:nWtt bad

16
17

be in violaton of

th SDT pscul:tte em.ssioo limit frm apimly Janua 2005

thug Sebe 1St 2005.
8.

is
I am inormed and believe and on tbat basis asse that in ealy Sepbe 2005,
Ever Pulp ined and commence operaon of a "spray cur" beore tbe we
19

20
21

scbbe to reuc SDT PM emissiol1ls, If propedy mataed and opeted, th spy
cur may help ree TRS emssions.

22
23
9.

i am inormd an beieve an on t.t bais assert tbat on September 15,2005, a sour

24

te conduct at the Facilty demoi\5t.d that the SDT W3 achievig complice with
25

26 27

tbe 0.2 lbloo BLS limit when the we ~crboor and "spray cnrtin" are opmt. pr.

28

4

AUVAN~~ ~u~ b~AP 1 ~~ H-~R ~ 1~~¿~¿~~6

l-. lab

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 9 of 18

10.
1

Basd on my review of 9Oure test information, I estÙDat tht the Facility ha reuced

2
3

emssion ofhafu air pollutat! from the 3DT by as much as 100 toIl per Ye3. Ths
quatity reprege a reducon of approximately 77% compad to the SDrs emssion
before iDstaIlation of th Uspry curain."
11I am inord an believe that except fur a short peod of

4
5

tie ~n November 21,

6

7
11

2005 ssnd ~I: 7, 2005, when the Facility expeened mior non~1iance lÏely
associat with the updng of monitoring equipment, soure te at the Facility ha
indica th th SDT ca opete a 1Net) below the PM !lt of

9 10
11

0.2 Iblton BLS. When

both th wet scrbbe and spray cuin are oprate properly.
Lime l~jJn Violatíons

12
12.
13
My invesgaon also led me to determine that the Facility's

lime kiln viola emssons

14
15

liits for PM imse by its Titlo V Operating Perit whch restrct PM emissions to

0.2 gi:al:: pe.r stada cubic foo (at i 0 percem oxyge) or 1 poun pe to ofkt pup

16
17
18

prucio.
13.

I am iionned an believe that a source test conducte at th Faclity in Mar 2005
indicate th th Facilty wa in compliance with thse limts; aner test conducted in

19

20
21

Aug 2005 indica tht the Facility was not in compliance with these ürnhs. EP A
therfore de:incd th th Facilty wa in violation of

th limts fr Augu-r 2005.

22
23

14.

My inv~tigaton also led me to dee.in.e that the lime kiln is subjec in the Kr pulp
mill MACT, whch rects th ki)n)s emissions of

har ai pollutts to 0.064 gns

24
2S

pe dr stad cubic fool.

26 27 28
5

P.87 ADVANCE BUS GRAP X CS H-CA 5188282983 Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA Document 11-2 Filed 12/13/2007 Page 10 of 18

15.
1

Bas on source test ìnonation that I reviewed, I deteed ûû the FQCiHiy had ben
viola ths stadad at leat since Marh 2005, when the Defendant began pulp

2
3

prducon. .
16.
I am inommed an believe and on that basis as th in April 2007, Evern Pulp

4
5

con'.plet instAlation and commenced opet~on of an eleestc prcipitr ('ESP")

6
to reduce ems.~ons from th liie kiln.

7
g

17.

Basd on my rew of

soce test c.onducted at the Fa.Hity on Septebe 9,2007, r

9
10
11

have detd tha whe th lime kiln emissions ar controlled by the ESP, the lim
kiln can ope welJ below its emission limits.
18.
Based on my review of so test information, i estiat that the Facty ha reduc

12
emissions ofho ai pollutts ff'om the lime kin by as much as 240 to pe ye.

13

14
15

Ths quati reesets a reucton of approximately 98% compaed to th k:'s

çnÏ3ison befo instalation Qfu~ ESP.
Mon.itQ:riiui:. Reortin., a:d Recordkeeini¡ Violatio7:
19.

16

17
18

My invesgation alo led to the deernination that the Facility wa in violaton of

19

monnrig, reg im record.ing ("MRR") requient9 impse by th Ktaf
pup uùUMACT.
20.

20
.21

The Kra pup mil MACT reires the ins laon and opon of a contuous opacit

22
23

mooiri sys r(COMS") on the lime kiln emÍ39ions stak.
2L
1 am inOt an believe tbú Everreen complete instalation of

the lie kiln COMS

24
in App2001, an cr;ed UU~ ~;r Qperation of1hc: COMS in July 2007.

25

26 27 28
6

ADYAHCE BUS GRAP 1 CS N-CA 51 G82829Bõ

P. laS

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 11 of 18

Cos Assoi~ted with CompJi;wce aQ Civil Penaltie~
2
3
'I

22.

Bas 00 my exence and expert.i¡e, Evergren's eemate that it bas expeded

apply $4 mion to comply with aplicable emssion stada is reonble.
23.
Under th te of

th auaed Decree~ Evergreen agees to pay a civi pety of

5
$900,000. T1ùs amun i:ccts th s.ignificace of

the violation and reups aay

6
ecnomic beefit potetially e:1.ned hy l"ior nnn-compHanc. at the Facilty, and is

7
R

COn8istt with BPA's Clea Air A.ct Stationary Souce Civil Penaty PoHcy, da
October 25, 1991.

9
10
11

24.

In addiûoD, th De specifies th Evergn must pay the civi pety in equa shar
to the thee goveren entities tht!:t a.tìve1y purued th violations in ths Cmi. The
peal-sha ast of

12
th ca is coniste-t with EP A a;dace entled "Joint

13

14
15

Collecon ofPenaJties wi Stte and Local Gcernents and Federly Recgoize
Indian Tribe,'" dad Maxh 11,2005, signed by l1).omas v. Sk:incr, Acting

16
17

Admstor ('"Joint Col1econ ofPen::ll:e$ Mi'.Io''). Accoing to th metadum
"EP A genetsy enur~ ~ta, local and trbal pacipation in fedet environmen
e.t acon.

18 19

"

20 i decla un penty of peur that the foregoing is tnu and COp:t to the be of my

21 knowled~. Exected ths 1 3 + h day of~ ( - rrJ.er 2007 at
n Pinole, Caiforna.

23

24
25

(~k~~ ~ ~Stciner
7

26
27 28

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 12 of 18

EXHIBIT C

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 13 of 18

RONALD J. TENPAS
Acting Assistat Attorney General 2 Environment and Natural Resources Division
3

U.S. Deparment of Justice
ELLEN MAHAN
Deputy Chief

4
5

Environmental Enforcement Section ANN C. HURLEY, DC Bar No. 375676 6 Trial Attorney Environmental Enforcement Section 7 U.S. Deparment of Justice
8

9
10

301 Howard Street, Suite 1050 San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel: (415) 744-6480 Fax: (415) 744-6476
E-mail: an.hurley~usdoj .gov
Attorneys for Plaintiff

ii
12
13

United States of America

(Additional Attorneys on Next Page)

14 15 16
17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18 19

20
21

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, the ) PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,) ex rei. CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES ) BOARD, and NORTH COAST UNIFIED AIR) QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, )

22
23

vs. )

Plaintiffs, )
) ) )

No. C07-05067 SBA

24
25

EVERGREEN PULP, INC., ~ Defendant )
) )

DECLARA nON OF RICHARD L. MARTIN, JR., AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFICER, IN SUPPORT OF UNOPPOSED REQUEST TO ENTER CONSENT DECREE

26 27 28

U.S. et al. v. Evergreen Pulp Inc. No. C 07-05067 SBA

Plaintiffs'Memorandum

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 14 of 18

2
3

4
5

6
7
8

EDWIN G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of the State of California MARY HACKENBRACHT, Assistant Attorney General JOHN DAVIDSON, Supervising Attorney General ANITA E. RUUD, Deputy Attorney General CA Bar No. 072483 Offce of the California Attorney General 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102 Tel: (415) 703-5533 Fax: (415)703-5480 E-mail: Anita.Ruudêdoj.ca.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff California Air Resources Board
NANCY DIAMOND CA Bar No. 130963
Law Offces of

9
10
11

Nancy Diamond

822 G Street, Suite 3

12
13

Arcata, CA 95521 Tel: (707) 826-8540 Fax: (707) 826-8541 E-mail: ndiamondêhumboldt1.com
Attorney for Plaintiff

14
15

North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District

16
17
18

19

20
21

22
23

24
25

26
27
28

U.S. et at. v. Evergreen Pulp Inc. No. C 07-05067 SBA

Plaintiffs' Memorandum

-ii-

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 15 of 18

I, RICHARD L. MARTIN, JR. declare as follows:
2
3

1. I am the Executive Director, Air Pollution Control Offcer ("APCO") for the North Coast
Unified Air Quality Management District ("Distrct") and have been so employed since
September 29,2006.

4
5
2. I have personal knowledge of

the matters set forth herein, except for those items stated to

6
7 8 9

be based on information and belief. For those items based on information and belief, I have
relied upon information reasonably relied upon by professionals in my field to inform our
professional judgment and opinion, and as to those matters I am informed and believe them to be

10
11

true as expressly stated herein, and if called to testify I could and would competently testify
thereto.

12
13

3.' I submit this Declaration in support of Plaintiff s Request to Enter Consent Decree.
4. The APCO is responsible for permitting air emissions from all Title V sources in its

14

district, in accordance with federal and California laws and for enforcing alleged permit
15

violations and violations alleged of applicable rues and regulations adopted to achieve and
16 17 18 19

maintain ambient air quality standads.

5. The District has issued permit number NCD 037-12, a Permit to Operate, for five
specified permit unit emission sources at the Facility curently owned by Evergreen Pulp, Inc.,
pursuant to Title V of

20
21

the Federal Clean Air Act and the District's Rules and Regulations ("Title

V Permit"). All Title V permit sources including the Evergreen Pulp Mill receive full
compliance evaluations during regular inspections of

22
23

the Facility at least annually.

6. The specified Title V Permit unit emissions are: a recovery boiler, lime kiln, smelt
24
dissolver, non-condensable gas system, and HVLC other sources. For each of

these units, the

25

26 27
28

Title V Permit requires a specific monitoring and reporting schedule. As a consequence, the
District receives regular reports setting forth emissions from the various control units at the

U.S. et al. v. Evergreen PuJp Inc. No. C 07-05067 SBA

Plaintiffs' Memorandum

-~-

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 16 of 18

Facility, which District staff review as a routine part of their duties. Data indicating non2
3
7. In addition to receiving regular monitoring reports from a

compliance will initiate District enforcement as appropriate.

source, the District may also

4

receive public complaints. The chemical processes used to convert wood chips and sawdust into
5

wood pulp generate odorous compounds (some are called Total Reduced Sulfur, or TRS) as a
6
7 8

byproduct, which are controlled and regulated through permit conditions. However, the

occasional release of these odors can create an anoyance or nuisance to members of the public.
District staff wil investigate public complaints as they come in and take enforcement action as
appropriate.

9
10

II
12

8. I have reviewed the District's compliance and enforcement files for Evergreen Pulp, Inc.,
and on that basis am informed and belief that on June 25, 2005, as the result of

an APCO

13

initiated enforcement, the District Hearing Board issued an Order for Interim Variance # 200503, which granted Evergreen Pulp, Inc. an interim variance from particulate matter emissions

14
15

limits from the smelt dissolver, on the condition that Evergreen Pulp, Inc. install a "spray
16 17

curtain" to bring the smelt dissolving tan ("SDT") into compliance.
9. I am fuher informed and believe that on November 3,2005 the District Hearing Board

18 19

issued an Order for Interim Variance # 10-05-05-1, which granted Evergreen Pulp, Inc. an

20
21

interim variance from lime kiln pariculate matter limits, subject to the condition that Evergreen
prepare and submit Compliance Assurance Monitoring ("CAM") plans for the installation or
adoption of devices, procedures or practices to enable the District field staff to determine, on a real time basis, the performance of lime kiln and smelt dissolver tank emissions control

22
23

24

equipment by reference to appropriate operating parameters. In addition, this Variance Order
25

26
27 28

required a timeline for the design and installation of appropriate control technology that would

bring the lime kiln into regular, ongoing compliance with particulate matter limitations. Finally,
this Variance Order required Evergreen Pulp, Inc. to develop and submit a plan to mitigate lime
U.S. et al. v. Evergreen Pulp Inc. No. C 07-05067 SBA
Plaintiffs' Memorandum

-2-

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 17 of 18

kiln particulate matter emissions on an interim basis, before the permanent control could be
2
3

installed and become operationaL.

10. I am further informed and believe that on January 20, 2006, the District Hearing Board

4

issued an Order for Stipulated Abatement requiring Evergreen Pulp, Inc. to install an
5

electrostatic precipitator ("ESP") on the lime kiln, and in the interim, to mitigate excess
6
7 8

pariculate matter emissions by the installation and operation of additional control technology

referenced to as a "quench system."
1 1. I am further informed and believe that the District served Evergreen Pulp, Inc. with 11
different Notices of Non-Compliance ("NONs), resulting from the District's investigation of

9
10
11

the

Facility operation that would be settled in the Consent Decree, including the payment by

12
13

Evergreen of civil penalties. Several ofthese NONs allege particulate matter exceedances from
the lime kiln and smelt dissolver. These violations were discovered by District staff

when

14

reviewing compliance testing reports.
15

12. Other NONs issued by the District to Evergreen Pulp, Inc. allege violations of equipment
16
17

operation. These violations were discovered by District staff during plant inspections.
13. Other NONs issued by the District to Evergreen Pulp, Inc. allege exceedances of opacity,

18 19

which were discovered by the District upon reviewing monitoring data supplied by Evergreen
Pulp, Inc.
14. Finally, several of

20
21

the NONs issued by the District to Evergreen Pulp, Inc. allege the

22
23

creation of a nuisance as a result from excess odors. These NONs were initated after
investigating public complaints made to the District offces.

24
25
III

26 27 28

III

III

U.S. et al. v. Evergreen Pulp Inc. No. C 07-05067 SBA

Plaintiffs'Memorandum

-3-

Case 4:07-cv-05067-SBA

Document 11-2

Filed 12/13/2007

Page 18 of 18

I declare under penalty of

perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this

2 tJ day of De. ~ ~f~u;eka, California.
3

4
5

6
7
8

RICHARD L. MARTIN, Air Pollution Control Officer North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District

9
10
11

12
13

14
15

16

17
18 19

20
21

22
23

24
25 26

27
28

U.s. et al. v. Evergreen Pulp Inc. No. C 07-05067 SBA

Plaintiffs' Memorandum

-4-