Document v1qL6wLonmQXGagmoZG6mz0vE

M innesota Pollution Control Agency July 18, 2006 CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 7005 3110 0002 5656 2476 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Gary Hohenstcin Environmental Manager, Special Projects 3M Company P.O. Box 33331 Building 42-2E-27 Si. Paul, MN 55133-3331 RE: PFO Data Scl Request Dear Mr. Hohenstcin: Minnesota Pollution Control A gency (MPC'A) staff arc requesting information regarding om ission o f effluent data submittal by 3M Company (3M ). This effluent data specifically pertains to analysis o f perfluorochem ical compounds (PFCs) in the 3M Cottage Grove Plant (3M plant) effluent discharges. The 3M plant discharges process wastewater and cooling water to the M ississippi River pursuant to authorization by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDKS) / Slate Disposal System (SDS) Permit M N 0001449. M PCA staff have determined that 3M conducted analytical testing o f the 3M plant effluent discharge on several occasions during the period o f January-March 2001, pursuant to a 3M project titled "Fluorochem ical Characterization o f Facility W astewaters", but did not submit that analytical data, as requested by the M PCA and required by Federal and State R ules. Pursuant to review o f the 3M Fluorochemical Data Assessm ent Report (3M FC Report), recently submitted to the M PCA on April 7, 2006, MPCA staff discovered that a scries o f analyses for PFCs had been com pleted by 3M on the 3M Cottage Grove wastewater treatment plant effluent (discharge) during the period o f January through March 2001. The April 7. 2006 3M FC Report lists the average PFC concentrations o f 5 individual PFC com pounds, and stated that these PFC compound averages were based on 8 separate data points during this period o f testing. This PFC effluent data is listed in Table 4 -1 0 o f the April 7, 2006 3M FC Report. (N ote that the April 7, 2006 3M FC Report incorrectly listed the dates as January-March 2000, later corrected b y 3M ).520 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; Saint Paul MN 55155-4194: (651 >296-6300 (Voice) (651) 282-5332 (TTY): www.pca.state.mn us St. Paul Brainerd Detroit l akes Duluth * Mankato * Marshal! Rochester Willrnar Etyjal Opportunity Employer Printed on recycled paper containing at toast 20 porconl fibore from paper recycled bv consumers 3M M N04942289 Mr. Gary Hohenstein Environmental Manager, Special Projects 3M Company Page 2 July 18,2006 M PCA staff find that effluent analyses for PJ:Cs were com pleted by 3M on 8 separate occasions during this January-March period in 2001, including January 8-14, January 15-21, January 22-29, January 29-Fcbruary 4, February 5-11, February 12-18, February 19-25, and February 26-March 4. During these 8 sampling periods, composite samples were collected over approximate one w eek periods for each sam pling event. Pursuant to the discovery that effluent PFC data existed for the January-March 2001 period for 8 separate w eeks o f com posite sam pling events, M PCA requested that 3M submit all o f this data. This request was stated in an e-mail from D on Kriens o f MPCA staff to 3M sta ff on April 18, 2006. 3M responded with submittal o f the January-March 2001 PFC effluent data via an e-m ail dated April 20 . 2006. 3M later follow ed up with the laboratory reports for this January-March 2001 PFC effluent data on M ay 9, 2006. M PCA staff had previously requested that 3M submit all PFC effluent data for the 3M plant 4 years ago in March 2002. At that tim e M PCA staff were in the process o f drafting the N P D E S/SD S permit for reissuancc for the 3M plant. Just prior to that timeframe M PCA staff had learned o f the PFC contamination problem and toxicity o f PFCs, and that PFCs had been discharged to the M ississippi River from the 3M plant for many years. This was pursuant to discussion with 3M staff and disclosure o f som e PFC effluent data submitted in the N PD E S/SD S permit application, dated February 8, 2002. PFCs had not been routinely monitored in the 3M plant effluent. M PCA sta ff w as interested in any and all PFC effluent data com piled by 3M since it was pertinent to our understanding o f the extent o f the PFC problem, and understanding the extent to which PFCs had been discharged from the 3M plant in the past, in order to begin to assess environmental impacts and evaluate the need for any environmental investigations. MPCA staff also needed to be able to assess the capability o f the then proposed activated carbon treatment system to be installed at the plant. Although the activated carbon treatment system was being installed to remove acute effluent toxicity caused by alkyl phenol elhoxylatcs, MPCA believed that this system was needed at the 3M plant to remove other organic contaminants generated at the plant and discharged to wastewater, including PFCs. As noted above, MPCA staff initially learned that 3M had tested the 3M plant effluent (discharge to the M ississippi River) for PFCs from data submitted in the N PD E S/SD S application o f J-'cbruary 8, 2002. The data submitted in the February 2002 N PD E S/SD S permit application show ed that PFCs had been monitored and analyzed in the 3M plant effluent on 3 occasions in September through October o f 2001. The September-Octobcr 2001 data listed average concentrations for 5 PFC compounds. Based on review o f this N PD ES/SD S permit application data show ing the presence o f PFCs, MPCA then requested that 3M submit any other PFC dischargc/efflucnt data com piled by 3M. This request was made via e-mail from Don Kriens o f M PCA staff on March 7, 2002, and via a telephone call from Don Kriens to 3M sta ffjust prior to that e-m ail. (The March 7, 2002 e-mail is attached). 3M did not submit any further PFC data even though more PFC effluent data existed. 3M M N04942290 Mr. Gary Hohenstein Environmental Manager, Special Projects 3M Company Page 3 July 18, 2006 The om ission o f effluent data submittal by 3M , although specifically requested by MPCA staff, is particularly notable since the omitted January-March 2001 PFC 3M plant effluent data demonstrates that significantly higher concentrations o f PFCs were actually being discharged to the river from the plant versus the data provided to the MPCA in the February 2002 N PD E S/SD S permit application. Based on the recently acquired January-March 2001 PFC effluent data M PCA staff calculate that the average total o f PFC com pounds in the 3M plant effluent discharged was 4409 ppb, whereas the data submitted in the 2002 N PD ES permit application calculates a significantly lower average total PFC com pounds discharged at 582 ppb. These calculations are based on the same 5 PFC com pounds. It should be noted that 21 individual PFC com pounds were analyzed by 3M in January-March 2001, from which M PCA stafT calculates an average total o f 6809 ppb o f PFC compounds discharged. The omitted January-March 2001 PFC sam pling and analytical data w as also more com prehensive with approximately 8 separate w eeks o f testing, versus the data submitted in the February 2002 N P D E S/SD S pennit application, and therefore w ould have provided the most representative assessm ent o f PFCs in the 3M discharge. M PCA staff also now find that 3M did not submit all o f individual PFC compound analytical data in the N P D E S/SD S pennit application for the Scptember-October 2001 PFC analyses, including additional data for total, free, and organic fluorine, although additional PFC compound data existed. The M PCA alleges that 3M is in violation o f the follow ing Federal requirements pertaining to the N PD ES/SD S permit application. 1. 4 0 C F R 122.21 Application for a Permit (g) A pplication requirem ents fo r existing manufacturing, com m ercial, mining, anil silvicu ltu ral dischargers. Existing manufacturing, commercial mining, and silvicultural dischargers applying for NPDES permits, except for those facilities subject to the requirements of122 .2 1 (h ), shall provide the following information to the Director, using application forms provided by the Director.13 (13) A d d itio n a l in form ation. In addition to the information reported on the application form, applicants shall provide to the Director, at his or her request, such other information as the Director may reasonably require to assess the discharges o f the facility and to determine whether to issue an N PD E S permit. The additional information m ay include additional quantitative data and bioassays to assess the relative toxicity o f discharges to aquatic life and requirements to determine the cause o f the toxicity. 3M MN04942291 Mr. Gary Hohenstein Environmental Manager, Special Projects 3M Company Page 4 July 18,2006 2. 40 CFR 122.41 Conditions applicable to all permits (applicable to State programs, sec Minn. Stat. 123.25). Reporting Requirements. (8) O th e r inform ation. Where the permittee becom es aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report to the Director, it shall promptly submit such facts or information. The MPCA alleges the Regulated Party violated these requirements in the submittal o f the NPD ES/SD S permit application dated February 8, 2002. The MPCA requests the follow ing information: 1. Submit all 3M plant effluent PFC data, including all previously submitted data, compiled prior to February 8, 2002. In addition, please include any lab sheets pertaining to each PFC analysis. 2. Submit any other 3M plant effluent PFC data not previously submitted to the MPCA (not to include the discharge monitoring report data beginning January 2003), and any other PFC data for internal wastewater stream monitoring, wastewater treatment system and activated carbon system performance testing, or other PFC testing related to the 3M plant effluent not previously submitted. 3. Submit a response identifying the reasons why the previously collected PFC sample results for January-March 2001 and any other PFC data com piled prior to February 8, 2002 and not previously submitted, were not included in the N PD E S/SD S permit application dated February 8, 2002. 4. Submit a plan which will prevent this from occurring in the future. 3M M N04942292 Mr. Gary Hohenstcin Environmental Manager, Special Projects 3M Company Page 5 July 18, 2006 Please submit the information requested above within 30 days o f the date o f this letter to the address listed below. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at TE:dac Enclosure cc: Steve Giddings, MPCA Beth Lockwood, MPCA Don Kriens, MPCA Address Questions and Submittals Requested Above To: Tod Eckbcrg Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (651)296-7737 3M M N04942293