TDEC Waives Permits for Mega-Tanks

By Walter F. Roche Jr.

Acting in less than a week Tennessee environmental officials have agreed that US Nitrogen can use two mega-tanks to hold ammonium nitrate without going through a permitting process.
In a letter dated today a deputy director of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation told US Nitrogen Plant Manager Andrew Velo that a department review had determined that use of the tanks would be classified as an insignificant activity under state laws and regulations. Therefore they will not require new permits.
According to US Nitrogen's application, which was received by TDEC on March 22, the two tanks will have a combined capacity of nearly 60,000 gallons. One tank holds 22,842 gallons, while the other has a 36,687 gallon capacity.
"It has been determined that the source described in your letter would constitute insignificant activity," John P. Johnson, a
TDEC deputy director wrote in a letter to Velo.
The delivery of the mega tanks earlier this year to US Nitrogen's Mosheim facility created a mini-spectacle as trucks manuevered over local roads.
"Specifically," Johnson continued, "this operation would result in potential emissions from this source of less than five tons per year of each air contaminant and each regulated air pollutant that is not a hazardous air pollutant and less than 1,000 pounds per year of each hazardous air pollutant."
He concluded by stating that US Nitrogen still must meet all other air pollution regulations that apply to its operation.
Contact: wfrochejr999@gmail.com

US Nitrogen Puts Mega-Tanks in Service

By Walter F. Roche Jr.

US Nitrogen has notified state environmental officials that it is putting two mega-tanks into service and the company contends that no state permit is required.

The two tanks will be used to store ammonium nitrate. One tank has a 22,842 gallon capacity, while the other holds 34,687 gallons for a total of nearly 60,000 gallons, according to the letter sent this week by US Nitrogen Plant Manager Andrew Velo.
In the letter to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Velo wrote that since the two tanks are projected to release less than five tons of air contaminants a year,the company does not believe any permits are required.
Velo wrote that the emissions would be classified as an "insignificant activity," under state laws and regulations.
"We believe they meet the definition," Velo wrote, adding that the company does not believe they require an air permit or a modification of any existing permits.

Contact: wfrochejr999@gmail.com

US Nitrogen Responds to Violations Notice

By Walter F. Roche Jr.

A Greene County chemical company has responded to some but not nearly all of a series of issues raised by state environmental following an inspection of the facility.

In an eight-page letter sent to the state this week US Nitrogen Plant Manager Andrew Velo also provided copies of several of  the company's Standard Operating Procedures and a timetable for implementing changes.

In response to seven specific issues however, Velo repeated his request for a meeting with officials of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation.

The responses are the latest volley in a battle of words between TDEC officials and US Nitrogen over the critical compliance inspection report. In its initial response US Nitrogen denied that the inspection had actually turned up any evidence that the company was in violation of any of its permits.

TDEC responded by stating that there were indeed permit violations.

TDEC Manager Chris Rhodes wrote that "any failure to comply with permit requirements is a violation."

In its latest response US Nitrogen agreed to provide TDEC with documents relating to a new emulsion facility and the emulsion product being produced but said it had not yet decided whether to produce another new product, aqueous ammonia.

"If US Nitrogen decides to produce AN-20, we will notify the division before production," the letter states.

As for alterations in a retention pond that TDEC had questioned, Velo described changes as minor modifications but also provided a water flow schematic requested by the state.

But for a series of questions raised by TDEC, Velo wrote, "US Nitrogen requests a meeting with division personnel regarding regulatory reporting to ensure complete understanding of protocols going forward."

Velo added, "US Nitrogen would like to thank TDEC for clarifying that US Nitrogen did not impact Nolichucky River water quality."

In its initial inspection report, TDEC had stated that both upstream and downstream readings in the river showed a failure to meet target standards.

"Thus both stations showed some impact to water quality," the report stated.

The report did not attribute the negative impact to US Nitrogen or any other party, though some published reports drew that conclusion.

In other responses, US Nitrogen agreed to "re-evaluate" the drainage within a drainage basin "to confirm that there is no discrete conveyance of storm water within facility boundaries."

Velo also told TDEC the company was revising its sludge management plan and promised to provide a copy of that plan by July 31. But he wrote that the company was unable to locate past transformer inspection reports requested by the state.

"Improvements have been implemented to maintain transformer inspection reports," the letter concludes.

Contact: wfrochejr999@gmail.com

TDEC Seeks Answer on US Nitrogen Permit

By Walter F. Roche Jr.

Tennessee environmental officials are seeking detailed data before acting on US Nitrogen's request to renew a key permit for its Greene County chemical manufacturing facility.
In a 12-page letter, including a three-page attachment, a deputy director for the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation has asked the ammonium nitrate manufacturer to respond to the more than a dozen questions within 60 days. The renewal application was submitted on June 9 of last year but the company subsequently submitted several amendments.
Questions posed by Deputy Director James P. Johnson include backup data for calculations of carbon dioxide produced in the process of producing anhydrous ammonia.
Other data requested includes the amount of nitrous dioxide emissions produced in the two pieces of equipment, known as trains, used to produce ammonia.
The letter notes that US Nitrogen's actual production rate for nitric acid appears to be far below the limit set in its permit.
Johnson also wrote that an on site review at the Midway facility raised questions about whether storage tanks on the site were properly permitted.
"During the Feb. 21 site visit we discussed the possibility that some of the storage tanks at the facility may not be properly permitted," the letter states, adding that state rules set specific limits on the level of emissions permissible for a permit exemption.
"US Nitrogen should submit forms and calculations, as requested below, in order to document that the tanks do not need to be permitted," Johnson wrote
Other questions raised in the letter include the ammonia injection rates used during performance tests and the test reports on the volume of volatile organic compound emissions.
The questions come amid an ongoing dispute between the company and TDEC over the findings in a nearly month long site visit by TDEC officials.
Contact: wfrochejr999@gmail.com

US Nitrogen Pipeline Challenge Heating Up

By Walter F. Roche Jr.

A lawsuit challenging the legality of two controversial Greene County pipelines to the Nolichucky River is heating up as landowners are seeking to gather additional evidence that a permit issued by the state was illegal.
The suit filed in Davidson County Chancery Court was first tossed out by one judge but then revived on appeal. It is now before Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle, who has ruled that she will decide the latest issue without hearing oral arguments.
The landowners, including Don Bible, Ann Calfee and Jack Renner, charge that the Tennessee Department of Transportation unlawfully granted the permit to US Nitrogen and the Industrial Development Board of Greeneville and Greene County.
In the motion filed recently the landowners are asking Lyle to allow them to amend their complaint for the third time to raise the issue of whether the two 13 mile pipelines were installed on a lawful right of way, a requirement under state law.
Lawyers for the defendants are opposing the landowners' motion.The case is not scheduled for actual trial until Oct. 22.
The motion states the amendment will enable the landowners to determine "whether a lawful right of way exists" or "whether the pipelines were unlawfully installed on private property."
The motion states that US Nitrogen refused to answer questions about how the right of way was determined while TDOT claimed it was not their responsibility.
"Water quality is relevant to standing for the riverfront owners," the motion states, noting there were recent disclosures of an impact on water quality both above and below where the pipelines reach into the Nolichucky.
"Respondents were not allowed to use the permit until a lawful right of way was established," the motion continues. "They did it anyway."
A copy of the proposed amended complaint states that the pipelines "were forcibly installed with armed guards in willful disregard" of an agreed order in a separate but related case.
The pipelines are being used to pump water from the Nolichucky for use in the manufacture of ammonium nitrate solution, which is then shipped to US Nitrogen's parent, Austin Powder, for use in making explosives.
Contact: wfrochejr999@gmail.com