Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 1 of 27
`
`
`
`MATTHEW C. MACLEAR (SBN 209228)
`mcm@atalawgroup.com
`ERICA A. MAHARG (SBN 279396)
`eam@atalawgroup.com
`AQUA TERRA AERIS (ATA) LAW GROUP
`4030 Martin Luther King Way
`Oakland, CA 94609
`Telephone: (510) 473-8793
`
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`SAN JOAQUIN RAPTOR/WILDLIFE RESCUE CENTER
`CENTRAL VALLEY SAFE ENVIRONMENT NETWORK
`PROTECT OUR WATER
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`
`Civil Case No.:
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND
`INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL
`PENALTIES UNDER THE CLEAN AIR
`ACT (42 U.S.C. § 7604)
`
`
`
`
`SAN JOAQUIN RAPTOR/WILDLIFE RESCUE
`CENTER a non-profit corporation, CENTRAL
`VALLEY SAFE ENVIRONMENT NETWORK,
`a non-profit association, and PROTECT OUR
`WATER, a non-profit association,
`
` Plaintiffs,
`
`vs.
`
`ARDAGH GLASS INC., a corporation and
`ARDAGH GROUP S.A., a corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
` Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 2 of 27
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`Plaintiffs San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Center (“SWR/WRC”), Central
`Valley Safe Environment Network (“CVSEN”), and Protect Our Water (“POW”) (collectively,
`“Plaintiffs”) bring this suit under the citizen suit enforcement provision, 42 U.S.C. § 7604, of the
`federal Clean Air Act (“CAA”) to redress and prevent violations of the CAA by Ardagh Glass Inc.
`and Ardagh Group S.A. (“Defendants”) at its facility located at 24441 Avenue 12, Madera,
`California, 93637 (“Facility”). Among other things, the suit seeks declaratory relief, injunctive
`relief, and the assessment of civil penalties for violations of permits and requirements under Title V
`(i.e., the federal operating permits program) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661-7661f, and the State
`Implementation Plan (“California SIP”) adopted by the State of California and approved by the
`Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7410,
`codified at 40 C.F.R. § 52.220. In this lawsuit, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have repeatedly
`violated and continue to violate requirements in the Title V permit to operate the Facility.
`This court has subject matter jurisdiction under the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7604 (citizen
`suit provision), and the federal jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction)
`because the sources of the violations are located within this judicial district. The relief requested is
`authorized pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7604 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202.
`The violations complained of occurred and continue to occur in the Eastern District
`of California. Venue is therefore proper in the Eastern District of California, pursuant to the Clean
`Air Act, 42 US.C. § 7604(c)(1), and the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)-(c).
`Consistent with the CAA’s citizen suit provision, 42 U.S.C. § 7604(b)(1)(A), on
`March 18, 2022, Plaintiffs notified in writing the Administrator of the EPA (the “Administrator”),
`the Regional Administrator of Region 9 EPA, the Governor of California, the California Air
`Resources Board (“CARB”), Defendants, and the plant manager of the Facility of the violations
`alleged in this complaint and of Plaintiffs’ intent to sue. More than sixty (60) days have passed
`since this notice (“Notice of Intent to Sue”) was sent via certified U.S. mail.
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that neither EPA nor CARB
`have commenced or are diligently prosecuting a court action to redress the ongoing violations
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`1
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 3 of 27
`
`
`
`alleged in the Notice of Intent to Sue and in this complaint. The Notice of Intent to Sue and its
`exhibits are attached hereto as Exhibit A and fully incorporated herein by reference.
`A copy of this complaint will be sent to the Attorney General of the United States
`
`and the Administrator, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7604(c)(3).
` PARTIES
`
`Plaintiff SJR/WRC is a California non-profit corporation and plaintiffs CVSEN and
`
`POW are non-profit associations sponsored by SJR/WRC. SJR/WRC, CVSEN, and POW’s
`organizational purposes are protecting and preserving wildlife habitats and the environment,
`including combating pollution of the air and waterways in the San Joaquin Valley.
`Plaintiffs SJR/WRC, CVSEN, and POW’s members use the resources in the San
`
`Joaquin Valley airshed most immediately impacted by Defendants’ violations of the CAA.
`Members reside, visit, work, and recreate near the Facility and are exposed to the Facility’s
`emissions.
`Plaintiff SJR/WRC also rescues and cares for injured or ailing raptors and other
`
`wildlife affected by air and water pollution throughout the San Joaquin Valley.
`The health-related, aesthetic, recreational, environmental, and economic interests of
`
`SJR/WRC, CVSEN, and POW’s members are and have been injured by Defendants’ failure to
`comply with its CAA permit, which is designed to achieve healthy air quality for people and the
`environment. Interests of SJR/WRC, CVSEN, and POW’s members that are directly injured by
`Defendants’ violations at the Facility include, but are not limited to: (1) breathing air in the San
`Joaquin Valley free from excessive pollution and without the impact of and concern over negative
`health effects caused by such pollution; (2) enjoying outdoor recreation that is unimpaired by
`pollution from the Facility’s emissions; (3) using and enjoying property and viewing and enjoying
`natural scenery, wildlife, and a sky that is unimpaired by pollution from the Facility’s excessive
`emissions; and (4) protecting the natural ecology, including raptors and other wildlife, of the region
`from air pollution-related impacts.
`Defendant Ardagh Glass Inc. (“Ardagh Glass”) is a company organized under the
`
`laws of Delaware and registered in California. According to the Title V permit issued by the San
`
`2
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 4 of 27
`
`
`
`Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (“Air District”) to operate the Facility, Ardagh Glass
`is the legal owner and operator of the Facility.
`On information and belief, Plaintiffs allege that Ardagh Glass is a wholly owned
`
`subsidiary of Ardagh Group S.A.
`Defendant Ardagh Group S.A. (“Ardagh Group”) has its executive office at 56, rue
`
`Charles Martel, L-2134 Luxembourg, Luxembourg. On information and belief, Plaintiffs allege that
`the address for Ardagh Group S.A. in the United States is 10194 Crosspoint Blvd, STE 410,
`Indianapolis, Indiana 46256. Defendants Ardagh Glass and Ardagh Group are collectively referred
`to herein as “Ardagh.”
`
` STATUTORY BACKGROUND
`
`A.
`
`CLEAN AIR ACT CITIZEN ENFORCEMENT PROVISION
`The CAA is designed “to protect and enhance the quality of the Nation’s air
`
`resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and the productive capacity of its
`population.” 42 U.S.C. § 7401(b)(1).
`Any person may commence a civil enforcement action under the CAA against any
`
`party “who is alleged to have violated . . . or to be in violation of [] an emission standard or
`limitation.” Id. at § 7604(a). An “emission standard or limitation” is, among other things, any term
`or condition of a permit issued under an approved State Implementation Plan, any standard or
`limitation under any approved State Implementation Plan, or any permit term of a Title V operating
`permit. Id. at § 7604(f)(4).
`STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS (SIPS)
`B.
`The EPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”) for a
`
`number of “criteria pollutants,” such as particulate matter. 42 U.S.C. § 7409; 40 C.F.R. pt. 50. An
`area that meets the NAAQS for a particular criteria pollutant is deemed to be in “attainment” for
`that pollutant. Id. at § 7407(d)(1). An area that does not meet the NAAQS is a “nonattainment” area.
`Id.
`
`Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7410, each state must adopt and submit to EPA for approval
`
`a SIP that provides for the attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. Specifically, SIPs set forth
`
`3
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 5 of 27
`
`
`
`requirements for permitting programs and specific emission standards and limitations to assure that
`geographic areas either remain in attainment or regain attainment status. Compliance with permit
`terms and conditions is a critical component of NAAQS attainment and maintenance. Once a state’s
`SIP is approved by EPA, it is published in the Code of Federal Regulations and becomes
`enforceable federal law. 42 U.S.C. § 7413; 40 C.F.R § 52.23.
`The California SIP can be found at 40 C.F.R. § 52.220.
`
`
`The California SIP includes the rules and regulations adopted by the various air
`districts statewide.
`TITLE V OPERATING PERMITS
`C.
`Title V of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661 -7661f, establishes an operating permit
`
`program for “major sources” of air emissions, such as the Facility. The purpose of the Title V
`program is to ensure that all “federally-enforceable” requirements for a source’s compliance with
`CAA are collected in one place—the Title V Operating Permit. Thus, for example, the SIP
`provisions applicable to a source are incorporated into the source’s Title V permit. EPA has stated
`that the Title V program “will enable the source, States, EPA, and the public to understand better
`the requirements to which the source is subject, and whether the source is meeting those
`requirements. Increased source accountability and better enforcement should result.” 57 Fed. Reg.
`32,250, 32,251 (July 21, 1992).
`California implements the Title V program pursuant to EPA-approved regulations.
`
`California Health & Safety Code § 40001; 40 C.F.R. § 52.220(c).
`It is unlawful for any person to violate any requirement of a permit issued under Title
`
`V or to operate a major source except in compliance with a permit issued by a permitting authority
`under Title V. 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(a).
`THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
`D.
`Regional air pollution control districts within California are charged with
`
`implementing Title V permits. California Health & Safety Code §§ 39002, 40001.
`Defendants’ Facility is under the authority of the Air District. See California Health
`
`& Safety Code § 40600.
`
`4
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 6 of 27
`
`
`
`The Air District issues, renews, revises, reopens, revokes, and terminates Title V
`
`operating permits pursuant to Air District Rule 2520, in accordance with EPA regulations codified
`at 40 C.F.R. § 70.
`The Air District has adopted rules and regulations that are approved by EPA, are part
`
`of the California SIP, and govern permits issued by the Air District, as well as operations at major
`sources of air emissions, such as the Facility.
`The California Legislature has declared: “Residents of the San Joaquin Valley suffer
`
`some of the worst air quality in the world. This poor air quality poses a significant threat to public
`health, the environment, and the economy of the valley.” California Health and Safety Code §
`40610(a).
`According to the Air District website, the San Joaquin Valley is not currently
`
`attaining federal air quality standards for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and eight-hour ozone and is
`not attaining state air quality standards for coarse particulate matter (PM10), PM2.5, and one-hour
`and eight-hour ozone.
`
` STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`Defendants own and operate the Facility, a glass manufacturing plant located at
`
`24441 Avenue 12, Madera, California, 93637.
`The Facility is located in the San Joaquin Valley and is under the authority and
`
`jurisdiction of the Air District.
`At all times relevant to this civil action, the Facility and its glass melting furnace was
`
`a “major source” within the meaning of Title V of the CAA and the California SIP.
`At all times relevant to this action Defendants’ Facility was operating under a Title V
`
`permit to operate.
`The Air District issued a Title V permit for the Facility on July 15, 1998, which was
`
`renewed on April 15, 2013.
`On or about March 30, 2017, the Air District renewed the Title V Permit, and, on
`
`information and belief, Plaintiffs allege that this remains the operative permit for the Facility (“Title
`V Permit”).
`
`5
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 7 of 27
`
`
`
`Various amendments to the Title V permit were made including on or about
`
`September 8, 2017 (Permit Unit C-801-3-13, Permit Unit C-801-5-12, and Permit Unit C-801-37-
`3), on or about December 3, 2018 (Permit Unit C-801-44-4), and on or about March 24, 2020
`(Permit Unit C-801-50-1).
`The Title V Permit includes Facility-Wide Requirements (Permit Unit C-801-0-4), as
`
`well as requirements for the individually permitted units, including its two glass melting furnaces.
`Defendants’ 75 MMBTU/Hr glass melting furnace (“Furnace #1”) was permitted in the Title V
`permit as Permit Unit C-801-1-21. Defendants’ 85 MMBTU/Hr glass melting furnace (“Furnace
`#2”) was permitted in the Title V permit as Permit Unit C-801-2-14.
`The Title V Permit states: “The permittee must comply with all conditions of the
`
`permit including permit revisions originated by the District. All terms and conditions of a permit
`that are required pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA), including provisions to limit potential to
`emit, are enforceable by the EPA and Citizens under the CAA. Any permit noncompliance
`constitutes a violation of the CAA and the District Rules and Regulations, and is grounds for
`enforcement action, for permit termination, revocation, reopening and reissuance, or modification;
`or for denial of a permit renewal application. [District Rules 2070, 7.0; 2080; and 2520, 9.8.1 and
`9.13.1] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-0-4,
`Requirement 5.
`The Title V Permit requires that all documents submitted to the Air District be
`
`certified by a responsible official for truth and accuracy:
`a. “Deviations from permit conditions must be promptly reported, including deviations
`attributable to upset conditions, as defined in the permit. For the purpose of this
`condition, promptly means as soon as reasonably possible, but no later than 10 days
`after detection. The report shall include the probable cause of such deviations, and
`any corrective actions or preventive measures taken. All required reports must be
`certified by a responsible official consistent with section 10.0 of District Rule 2520
`(6/21/01). [District Rules 2520, 9.5.2 and 1100, 7.0] Federally Enforceable Through
`Title V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-0-4, Requirement 11.
`
`6
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 8 of 27
`
`
`
`b. “With each report or document submitted under a permit requirement or a request for
`information by the District or EPA, the permittee shall include a certification of
`truth, accuracy, and completeness by a responsible official. [District Rule 2520,
`9.13.1 and 10.0] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit,
`Permit Unit C-801-0-4, Requirement 26.
`c. “The permittee shall submit certifications of compliance with the terms and
`standards contained in Title V permits, including emission limits, standards and work
`practices, to the District and the EPA annually (or more frequently as specified in an
`applicable requirement or as specified by the District). The certification shall include
`the identification of each permit term or condition, the compliance status, whether
`compliance was continuous or intermittent, the methods used for determining the
`compliance status, and any other facts required by the District to determine the
`compliance status of the source. [District Rule 2520, 9.16] Federally Enforceable
`Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-0-4, Requirement 36.
`Air District rules also require that a permittee be truthful when submitting
`
`information. See District Rule 2520, Sec. 10.
`Opacity is a measure of the amount of soot and/or particulate matter emitted in a
`
`smokestack’s gas stream over a specified time period. The measurement is used to ensure
`compliance with emission standards for particulate matter (“PM”). Particulate matter is a mixture of
`small particles, including organic chemicals, metals, and ash, which can cause health and
`environmental problems.
`The Title V Permit includes an emissions limit for opacity. Specifically, the Title V
`
`Permit states that “No air contaminants shall be discharged into the atmosphere for a period or
`periods aggregating more than 3 minutes in any one hour which is as dark or darker than
`Ringelmann #1 or equivalent to 20% opacity and greater, unless specifically exempted by District
`Rule 4101 (02/17/215).” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-0-4, Requirement 22 (“Opacity
`Emission Limit”). This limit is also incorporated into the California SIP, 40 C.F.R. § 52.220 et seq.,
`and Air District Rule 4101, Section 5.
`
`7
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 9 of 27
`
`
`
` Within the last five years, according to “Breakdown/Title V – Deviation Reporting
`Forms” (“Deviation Reports”) Ardagh submitted to the District and/or “Breakdown Investigation
`Reports” (“Breakdown Reports”) prepared by the Air District, Defendants exceeded the Opacity
`Emission Limit at least 359 times over the last five years based on a count of exceedances of more
`than three minutes in any hour. These exceedances occurred over sixteen separate days.
`The Quarterly CEMS Excess Emissions and Downtown Summaries (“CEMS
`
`Reports”) submitted by Ardagh also show that for the Furnace #1 and #2 Electrostatic Precipitator
`(“ESP”), Ardagh reported excess opacity above the Opacity Emission Limit for the first quarter of
`2017; the first, second, and fourth quarters of 2018; the third and fourth quarters of 2019; the first,
`third, and fourth quarters of 2020; and the first and third quarters of 2021.
`The Title V Permit includes the following requirements for Defendants to operate
`
`and maintain continuous emissions monitoring systems (collectively referred to herein as “CEMS
`Requirements”):
`a. “The furnace shall be equipped with a continuous emission monitor (CEM) for NOx,
`CO, and O2. This CEM shall be located in the duct for furnace #1 upstream of the
`point where furnace #1 and furnace #2 emissions merge into a common duct.
`[District Rule 4354] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit,
`Permit Unit C-801-1-21, Requirement 4.
`b. “The common exhaust stack for furnaces #1 and #2 shall be equipped with a
`continuous emission monitor (CEM) for SOx at the inlet of the scrubber and
`downstream of the control equipment. Continuous emissions monitor(s) shall meet
`the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, 40 CFR parts 60.7 and 60.13, 40 CFR part 60
`Appendix B (Performance Specifications) and Appendix F (Quality Assurance
`Procedures), and applicable sections of Rule 1080 (Stack Monitoring) (as amended
`December 17, 1992). [District Rule 1080] Federally Enforceable Through Title V
`Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-1-21, Requirement 7; Title V Permit,
`Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 16.
`c. “The furnace shall be equipped with a continuous emission monitoring system
`
`8
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 10 of 27
`
`
`
`(CEMS) for CO and O2. This CEM shall be located in the duct for furnace #2
`upstream of the point where furnace #1 and furnace #2 emissions merge into a
`common duct. [District Rule 4354] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.”
`Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 13.
`d. “The furnace shall be equipped with a continuous emissions rate monitoring system
`(CERMS) for NOx. This CERMS shall be located in the duct for furnace #2
`upstream of the point where furnace #1 and furnace #2 emissions merge into a
`common duct. [District Rule 4354] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.”
`Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 14.
`e. “Continuous emissions monitor(s) shall meet the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, 40
`CFR parts 60.7 and 60.13, 40 CFR part 60 Appendix B (Performance Specifications)
`and Appendix F (Quality Assurance Procedures), and applicable sections of Rule
`1080 (Stack Monitoring). [District Rule 4354] Federally Enforceable Through Title
`V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-1-21, Requirement 5; Title V Permit,
`Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 17.
`f. “Permittee shall comply with the applicable requirements for quality assurance
`testing and maintenance of the continuous emission monitor equipment in
`accordance with the procedures and guidance specified in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix
`F. [District Rule 1080] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V
`Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 23.
` Within the last five years, according to Deviation Reports and/or Breakdown
`Reports, Defendants did not operate and maintain continuous emissions monitoring systems in
`accordance with the CEMS Requirements on at least twenty-seven occurrences, spanning at least
`108 days.
`In all CEMS Reports submitted by Ardagh between the second quarter of 2017 and
`
`the third quarter of 2021, Ardagh reported periods of time where the CEMS for Furnace Numbers 1
`and 2, both individually and combined, were not monitoring emissions.
`The Title V Permit includes the following requirements for Defendants operate and
`
`
`9
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 11 of 27
`
`
`
`maintain monitoring systems (collectively referred to herein as “Monitoring Requirements”):
`a. “For each monitoring system required by this subpart, the permittee shall calibrate,
`operate, and maintain the monitoring system according to the manufacturer’s
`specifications and the requirements specified in Section 63.11454 paragraphs (a)(1)
`through (7). [40 CFR 63 Subpart SSSSSS] Federally Enforceable Through Title V
`Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-1-21, Requirement 69; see also Title V
`Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 87 (similar requirement).
`b. “The permittee shall always operate and maintain the affected source, including air
`pollution control and monitoring equipment, according to the provisions in Section
`63.6(e)(1)(i). [40 CFR 63 Subpart SSSSSS] Federally Enforceable Through Title V
`Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-1-21, Requirement 72; Title V Permit,
`Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 90.
`c. “For each affected furnace that is subject to the emission limit specified in Table 1 to
`this subpart, the permittee shall monitor the performance of the furnace emission
`control device under the conditions specified in Section 63.11454(a)(7) and
`according to the requirements in Sections 63.6(e)(1) and 63.8(c) and Section
`63.11455 paragraphs (c)(1) through (6). [40 CFR 63 Subpart SSSSSS] Federally
`Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-1-21,
`Requirement 73; Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 91.
` Within the last five years, according to Deviation Reports and/or Breakdown
`Reports, Defendants violated at least one or more of the Monitoring Requirements on at least
`seventeen occasions, occurring over seventy-two days.
`The Title V Permit includes the following requirements for Defendants to operate
`
`and maintain the electrostatic precipitator (“ESP”) (collectively referred to herein as “ESP
`Requirements”):
`a. “The permittee shall operate and maintain the electrostatic precipitator (ESP) system
`to reduce particulate emissions to 0.2 pounds of particulate per ton of glass pulled,
`using EPA Method 5 as set forth in 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix A, and 0.45 pounds
`
`10
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 12 of 27
`
`
`
`of particulate per ton of glass pulled, using the combined results of EPA Methods 5
`and 202 as set forth in 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix A. [District Rule 2201] Federally
`Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-1-21,
`Requirement 28; Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 43.
`b. “Monitoring of the ESP shall comply with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 64.
`[District Rule 4354] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit,
`Permit Unit C-801-1-21, Requirement 29; Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14,
`Requirement 44.
`c. “The ESP shall be operated at a secondary voltage of at least 12 kV. [District Rules
`2520 and 4354 and 40 CFR 64] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.”
`Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-1-21, Requirement 30; Title V Permit, Permit
`Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 45.
`d. “The ESP secondary voltage shall be monitored and recorded at a minimum during
`every one hour of operation. [District Rules 2520 and 4354 and 40 CFR 64]
`Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-
`1-21, Requirement 31.
` Within the last five years, according to Deviation Reports and/or Breakdown
`Reports, Defendants violated of one or more of these ESP Requirements on at least twelve
`occasions, occurring over at least fifty-two separate days.
`The Title V Permit includes the following requirement for Defendants to operate
`
`pollution control technology to control emissions of air pollutants: “The emission control systems
`shall be in operation at all times during normal operations, and whenever technologically feasible
`including during startup, idling, transition, and shutdown conditions. [District Rule 4354] Federally
`Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 10.
` Within the last five years, according to Deviation Reports and/or Breakdown
`Reports, Defendants violated this requirement on at least six occasions over the last five years, and
`these violations occurred over twenty-three separate days.
`The Title V Permit includes the following requirements for Defendants to limit the
`
`
`11
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 13 of 27
`
`
`
`emissions of SOx (collectively referred to herein as “SOx Emissions Limits”):
`a. “The permittee shall operate and maintain the semi-dry scrubber system to reduce
`SOx emissions by at least 85%, excluding days when the scrubber inlet's daily
`average concentration of SO2 is 353 ppmdv or less, in which case the scrubber
`outlet's daily average concentration of SO2 shall be reduced to at least 53 ppmdv,
`except during periods of scheduled or preventative maintenance. The averaging
`period for the reduction efficiency shall be calculated on a rolling 30-day average
`basis, excluding days when the scrubber inlet's daily average concentration of SO2 is
`353 ppmdv or less. Compliance with the SOx reduction efficiency and daily
`concentration standard shall be demonstrated by the combined ductwork scrubber
`inlet and downstream of the control equipment outlet SO2 continuous concentration
`monitoring. [District Rule 2201] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.”
`Title V Permit, Permit Unit C-801-1-21, Requirement 36; Title V Permit, Permit
`Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 51 (identical language except District Rule 1080 is
`cited instead).
`b. “Except during idling, start-up, or shutdown, emissions rates from this unit shall not
`exceed any of the following limits: 0.8 lb-SOx/ton of container glass pulled. . .. SOx
`emissions limit is based on a 24 hour rolling average.. . . [District Rules 2201 and
`4354] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit, Permit Unit
`C-801-1-21, Requirement 20.
`c. “Except during idling, transition, start-up, or shutdown, emissions rates from this
`unit shall not exceed any of the following limits: 0.8 lb-SOx/ton of container glass
`pulled . . .. SOx emissions limit is based on a 24 hour rolling average.. . . [District
`Rules 2201 and 4354] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V
`Permit, Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 33.
` Within the last five years, according to Deviation Reports and/or Breakdown
`Reports, Defendants exceeded one or more of the SOx Emissions Limits on at least eighteen
`occasions.
`
`12
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`ATA Law Group
`4030 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
`Oakland CA 94609
`510-473-8793
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-at-00353 Document 1 Filed 05/18/22 Page 14 of 27
`
`
`
`According to CEMS Reports submitted by Ardagh, Ardagh reported excess
`
`emissions of the SOx outlet (ppm) limit during the fourth quarter of 2018, the third quarters of 2019
`and 2020, and the first three quarters of 2021.Ardagh further reported excess emissions for the SOx
`outlet lbs/ton limit during the third quarter of 2019 and the second and third quarters of 2021.
`The Title V Permit includes the following requirements for Defendants to limit the
`
`emissions of NOx: “Except during idling, transition, start-up, or shutdown, NOx emissions from
`this furnace shall not exceed 1.3 lbs/ton of glass produced, on a 24 hour block average basis.
`[District Rules 2201 and 4354] Federally Enforceable Through Title V Permit.” Title V Permit,
`Permit Unit C-801-2-14, Requirement 35 (“NOx Emissions Limit”).
`Particles from NOx emissions can cause respiratory issues including lung tissue
`
`damage and contributes to smog and acid rain.
` Within the last five years, according to Deviation Reports and/or Breakdown
`Reports, Defendants exceeded the NOx Emissions Limit at least four times.
`The CEMS Reports sub