Laserfiche WebLink
9 <br />The need for an air quality permit will be determined <br />after the design specifications for the facility are <br />corn-)leted. The air emission facility permits would <br />inc_ude requireme-ts from (a) Minnesota Rules Part <br />7005.0450-7005.0520, Standards of Performance for <br />Industrial Process Equipment, which includes particulate <br />matter emission and opacity limits, (b) Minnesota Rules <br />Part 7005.0900-7005.0960 for control of odors in the <br />ambient air, and (c) Minnesota Rules Part 7010, the <br />Agency's noise pollution control regulations. Minnesota <br />Rulep Part 7005.0300-7005.0400 apply if a boiler is to be <br />installed. [1, 2] <br />IV. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAN BE ANTICIPATED <br />AND CONTROLLED AS A RESULT OF OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES <br />UNDERTAKEN BY PUBLIC AGENCIES ON THE PROJECT PROPOSED OR OF <br />EIS'S PREVIOUSLY PREPARED ON SIMILAR PROJECTS <br />A similar, much smaller scale facility, the Sperry Univac <br />precious metals recovery system at Mendota Heights, has been <br />permitted by the Division of Air Quality to control hydrogen <br />cyanide emissions. Many businesses producing inorganic non- <br />hazardous wastes containing metals have obtained NPDES permits <br />from the Agency. In addition, many companies have been <br />permitted as hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities <br />by the Agency. Presently, one company has been permitted for <br />hazardous waste processing. <br />Wastewater treatment processes to be used by the proposed <br />facility are the same or are comparable to processes that form <br />the basis for the federal categorical pretreatment <br />regulations. <br />Most important, essentially the same project proposed by MRC, <br />was considered at the September 27, 1983 MPCA Board meeting <br />and the Board issued a negative declaration (no EIS) for the <br />project. The new proposal differs from the original proposal <br />because of one project change. The new project will involve <br />the storage and disposal of liquid organic wastes and organic <br />sludges. In addition, it will be located in Roseville instead <br />of northeast Minneapolis. [1, 9] <br />V. SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND ALTERNATIVES <br />A. Air Quality and Noise <br />The amount of air emissions are expected to be negligible <br />from the facility since water -based, not organic solvent - <br />based processing will occur at the facility. Air quality <br />surveillance/monitoring systems of the storage and <br />prcessing equipment may be required through RCRA or the <br />state permit. <br />