Spectro Alloys Corp., a Rosemount, Minn.-based secondary aluminum smelter, has pled guilty in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota to two counts of violating the federal false statements statute. The plea is related to Spectro’s alleged failure to disclose violations of limits placed on its emissions of hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. The company was charged in April of 2012.
According to a press release by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Minnesota District, emissions from Spectro’s secondary smelter, , including its furnaces, are regulated under the Federal Clean Air Act, and the company is required to operate subject to a permit that sets out the legal limits for pollutants. The permit also requires the company to disclose to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) all known instances where emissions exceed those limits.
Spectro admitted that in May of 2007 it submitted a semi-annual compliance report to the MPCA and the EPA that falsely indicated that its facility was in compliance with all pollution limits, the DOJ states, failing to disclose that its own testing had revealed excessive dioxin/furans emissions. Spectro also admitted that in a letter sent to the EPA in March of 2007, which was submitted in response to a violation notice issued by the EPA, the company knowingly failed to disclose those excessive dioxin/furan emissions.
The plea agreement requires Spectro to pay a criminal fine of $500,000. The company also was placed on probation for two years. Spectro has been ordered to develop, implement and maintain procedures to ensure complete and accurate reporting in the future. In addition, Spectro must retain a full-time environmental health and safety manager and report the results of all emissions testing, whether required by law, to the MPCA and EPA.
Spectro also is required under terms of a parallel civil settlement to install additional pollution-control equipment relating to its emissions, the DOJ reports.
“In order to safeguard public health, it is absolutely essential that government officials assure compliance with environmental regulations through accurate testing, measurement and honest reporting,” says Randall Ashe, special agent-in-charge of the U.S. EPA’s criminal enforcement program in Chicago, whose region includes Minnesota. “Violators who submit false information undermine our efforts to protect the public and the environment.”
In addition to the guilty plea, a settlement has been reached with Spectro regarding civil claims filed by the EPA for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act and civil administrative claims of the EPA for alleged violations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The civil settlement, embodied in a consent decree, is awaiting final court approval.
The consent decree resolves allegations that in 2009 the company emitted dioxin/furans and hydrochloric acid in amounts exceeding federal emissions limits; failed to install, operate and inspect an adequate system to capture and treat its emissions; and violated various Clean Air Act regulations regarding monitoring, reporting and temperature maintenance between 2004 to 2008. The consent decree also settles alleged violations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act for operating a hazardous waste storage facility without a permit or interim status and failing to comply with hazardous waste management requirements at the Spectro facility.
Under the proposed consent decree, Spectro will pay a civil penalty of $600,000, install additional pollution control equipment, conduct additional emissions testing and accurately comply with all reporting requirements.
“Spectro Alloys recently settled disputes with the U.S. EPA and the Department of Justice dating back to 2003,” the company writes in a statement. “Under the terms of these settlements, Spectro admitted to two allegations involving failure to report one air quality engineering test done in 2006. Spectro acknowledges that the test should have been reported and is sorry for the mistake. The test was undertaken to learn how the company would comply with EPA regulations in the future and was successful. However, the company and its advisors believed at the time that it wasn’t necessary to report the test. Spectro’s commitment to environmental compliance has been and remains strong.”
Spectro adds, “In addition, Spectro settled other EPA issues from 2003 to 2009. All such issues were corrected and individuals responsible for those lapses are no longer with the company.”
