Jump to main content.


Project XL Logo

Andersen Corporation

Anderson Corporation: Project XL Final Project Agreement

Bayport, Washington County, Minnesota

This Final Project Agreement (FPA) is entered into between the Andersen Corporation, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Washington County (the County), herein referred to as the parties.

The Andersen Corporation Community Advisory Committee (CAC) was instrumental in the preparation and review of this document. This FPA sets forth commitments, goals and measurements for the success of this pilot project that are necessary to the successful implementation and evaluation of this project. This FPA provides additional information on the Andersen Project XL pilot including: a description of the project; how the project meets the criteria for Project XL; and the legal mechanisms intended to provide regulatory flexibility. Each signatory represents that he is fully authorized to enter into this FPA.

Donald L. Garofalo
President & CEO
Andersen Corporation
Wally Abrahamson
Chairman
Washington County Board of Commissioners


Karen A. Studders
Commissioner
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Francis X. Lyons
Regional Administrator
United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Region V

Table Of Contents
Section Description Page
  Glossary of Terms 3
I Executive Summary 7
II Project Description 10
III Project XL Acceptance Criteria 26
IV Implementation 31
V Amendments and Reissuance 33
VI Duration 35
VII Termination 35
IX Dispute Resolution 38
X Right to Other Legal Remedies Retained 38
XI Transfer of Project Benefits and Responsibilities 39
XII FPA Contacts 40
  ATTACHMENTS
  Attachment A - The Performance Ratio Approach 41
  Attachment B - Stakeholder Involvement Plan 43
Attachment C - Environmental Management System Outline 54
  Attachment D - Compliance Plan (Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting) 56

"Fourth Avenue Site" where the discussion applies only to the existing site;
"Andersen West Site" where the discussion applies only to the as yet undeveloped property located approximately one mile West of the Fourth Avenue Site at 4001 Stagecoach Road North, Bayport, MN; and
"Bayport Facility" where the discussion applies to both the 100 Fourth Avenue Site and Andersen West Sites.


Glossary of Terms
Andersen Corporation
Project XL Proposal
Terms and descriptions of the terms contained in this glossary are solely to assist the public in understanding this FPA. Therefore the terms contained in this glossary do not supersede or modify or otherwise affect any term or definition in state or federal law and regulations.

Bag-house Filter Collectors -- Vacuum-like systems used to collect sawdust generated by milling operations.

Best Available Control Technology (BACT) -- A case-by-case technology determination that considers energy, environmental and economic impacts in determining the maximum achievable pollutant reduction.

Commentors -- People or organizations with an interest in an XL project, but not the need to participate intensively in its development. The project development process should inform and be informed by commentors on a periodic basis. The views of informed commentors are a strong indicator of the broad potential for wider applicability of the innovation being tested in a project.

Community Advisory Committee (CAC) -- The body formed to assist Andersen Corporation in development of its XL proposal. The CAC is made up of direct participants: individuals representing a variety of stakeholders including local residents, employees, business, environmental groups and government.

Criteria Pollutant -- Currently, there are eight criteria pollutants that have ambient air concentration limits for how much of these pollutants can be in the air. The standards are intended to protect health and welfare. The criteria pollutants are particulate matter (PM), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10), particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrous oxides (NOx), lead (Pb), and ozone (O3).

Diptank -- A piece of process equipment used to apply wood preservative to pallet loads of milled wood pieces. The process equipment consists of an open-top tank containing wood preservative and carriages which convey pallet loads of wood pieces into and out of the preservative solution.

Direct participants -- People or organizations representing a variety of stakeholders who work intensively with project sponsors to build a project from the ground up. For example, the CAC is made up of direct participants.

Emissions -- Airborne discharges resulting from sources such as industrial processes.

Emissions Cap -- A limit on total emissions established at a facility.

Environmental Management System (EMS) -- A comprehensive, documented program implemented by a company to promote compliance with environmental laws and promote environmental performance.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) -- The federal government agency charged with implementing U. S. environmental laws and the sponsoring agency for XL projects.

EPA 33/50 Program -- An EPA-sponsored program which sought voluntary industry reductions in emissions of certain hazardous substances.

Fibrex -- Andersen Corporation's reclaimed wood/vinyl composite used in production of window and patio door components.

Final Project Agreement (FPA) -- The negotiated agreement describing a Project XL pilot.

General Public -- The broad category of people and organizations who are not direct participants in the Project XL development process, but who have an interest in and wish to be informed about progress on the project.

Groundwater Remediation System -- A system designed to remove groundwater contamination. Often, such systems use wells to recover contamination.

Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) -- Air emissions regulated for potentially hazardous effects.

Milling -- Milling operations shall be all those activities that involve the cutting and shaping of wood or Fibrex except that shaping by extrusion shall not be considered milling.

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) -- The regulatory agency charged with implementing environmental laws in the State of Minnesota.

Minnesota XL Permit -- a permit issued under Minn. Stat. 114C authorizing a Project XL pilot in Minnesota and which the parties agree is expected to contain all Federally enforceable air permits.

Multi-media Agreement -- In the context of Project XL, an agreement that encompasses air, water, waste and, potentially, other issues.

New Source Review (NSR)-- The federal regulatory program establishing pre-construction permitting requirements for certain facilities based on the potential emissions of the facility and/or the modification to be permitted.

Non-milling -- Non-milling operations shall be all those activities that generate PM/PM10 emissions and which are not milling operations.

PM -- Particulate matter; dust.

PM10 -- Small particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter.

Penta -- Short for Pentachlorophenol.

Pentachlorophenol -- A wood preservative compound that was once widely used.

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) -- The new source review program for areas that are in attainment or unclassifiable for the Federal ambient air concentration limits.

Project XL -- A Federal program to conduct pilot projects that promote eXcellence and Leadership through negotiated agreements with regulated parties.

Regulatory Innovation -- Efforts to seek more flexible or cost-effective means of attaining beyond compliance results.

Regulatory Flexibility -- The ability of a facility to make certain changes or undertakes certain activities that may otherwise be subject to specific regulatory approval.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) -- The main federal statute regulating solid and hazardous waste storage, treatment and disposal activities.

Solvent-based -- Coatings that primarily are borne by solvents, usually leading to emissions of VOCs.

Stakeholders -- People and organizations with varying degrees of interest and involvement in a XL project. Stakeholders are categorized into Direct Participants, Commentors and the General Public in XL projects.

Stakeholder Involvement Plan -- The process for informing and involving a variety of people and organizations in the development of a Project XL initiative.

Substantial consensus -- Agreement on a particular position by most members of the Andersen Project XL CAC as outlined in Attachment B.

Superior Environmental Performance (SEP) -- An important requirement for Project XL. Generally, using current actual loading to the environment and assuming continued operation of any voluntary controls, a facility must demonstrate it will attain performance superior to what otherwise would have happened outside of Project XL.

Synthetic Minor Limit -- A permit condition placing federally enforceable emission limits on a facility or modification such that the source or modification falls below an applicable major source or major modification permit threshold.

Title V Air Permit -- An operating permit required under Title V of the Federal Clean Air Act that consolidates all Federal air requirements into one document.

Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) -- The compilation of facility toxic emissions and discharges reported by facilities to state and federal regulators.

Tracking Period -- An increment of time for summarizing business performance. Andersen Corporation operates with an accounting system based on 13 periods per year. The first period of the year is 3 weeks long, the second through twelve periods are 4 weeks in duration and the thirteenth period is 5 weeks. Existing air emission permits require Andersen Corporation to summarize emissions each period.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) -- Hydrocarbon compounds. VOCs may contribute to the formation of lower atmosphere ozone (smog) and/or may be toxic. Examples of VOC sources include solvents, coatings, and lubricants.

Waterborne Preservative -- A preservative formulation wherein water replaces solvent as the carrier for preservation agents which results in significantly lower VOC emissions on a per unit basis.


I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Andersen Corporation pilot will be conducted under EPA's Project XL program. The parties to this agreement have four overarching goals in conducting this project at the Andersen Corporation's Bayport Facility:
Type of Emission Vinyl-Clad Profile
Air Emissions (tons)
Fibrex Profile
Air Emissions (tons)
VOC 96.2 tons 5.6 tons
PM/PM10 0.69 tons 1.88 tons
HAP 0.19 tons 0.03 tons
Type of Emission Solvent-based Wood Treatment Air Emissions (tons) Waterborne Wood Treatment
Air Emissions (tons)
VOC 87.0 tons 13.3 tons
HAP 0.16 tons 0 tons
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

III. PROJECT XL ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

A. Environmental Results

B. Cost Savings/Paperwork Reductions

1. Air Permit Amendments

3. Combined Reporting and Recordkeeping

4. Emergency Response Planning and Training Integration

C. Stakeholder Support

D. Innovation/MultiMedia

This project represents an innovative approach to allowing changes in manufacturing processes that will result in reduced air emissions per standardized measure of production. The project also provides an opportunity to test whether a tiered air emission ratio system with both rewards and penalties can provide a better incentive for reducing air emissions per standardized measure of production. The project will result in a new, flexible, performance based approach designed to achieve superior environmental results and cost savings. This project does not attempt to regulate air emissions on an emissions unit by emissions unit basis, but is instead focused on the overall environmental impact of the Bayport Facility. In addition, to preserve the air quality in the area surrounding the facility, a facility-wide VOC cap is a component of the project. Thus, regardless of increases in production, the facility-wide VOC cap will ensure that VOC emissions from the facility do not exceed past actual levels. The main measure of VOC efficiency is a comparison of the performance ratio to the CAC Limit. This community-driven limit, set below the Enforcement Limit, provides a means to encourage Andersen to go beyond compliance without exposing them to penalties if they should fail, and establishes the important role of a stakeholder group in ensuring Bayport Facility performance.

The Internet will be used to provide the Bayport community and other interested parties the actual performance information demonstrating the Bayport Facility's environmental performance under the pilot. The Minnesota XL Permit is intended to facilitate multi-media permitting approaches to environmental protection. The performance-based nature of the pilot allows the Bayport Facility to undertake cost effective pollution reduction programs that encourage pollution prevention.
H. Shifting the Risk Burden

IV. IMPLEMENTATION

To implement the project, the parties intend to take the following steps:

Washington County will propose, subject to public hearing or comment, to amend its hazardous waste management ordinance or take administrative action, whichever is appropriate in the view of the County, to allow this project to proceed. If the County determines that the hazardous waste management Ordinance must be amended, a public hearing will be set to consider the amendment. The Ordinance will only be amended to the extent necessary to implement the two hazardous waste related elements of the proposal as described in section II.C.2. Any amendment to the Ordinance made for this project will be limited in applicability to the Andersen Corporation and limited in duration to the 10-year period of this project or earlier if the project is terminated, for any reason, before the end of the 10-year period.

Except as provided in the rules, permit provisions, or other implementation mechanisms that may be adopted to implement the project, the parties do not intend that this FPA will modify or otherwise alter the applicability of existing or future laws or regulations to the facilities.

By signing this FPA, EPA, MPCA, Washington County, and Andersen acknowledge and agree that they have the respective authorities and discretion to enter into this FPA and to implement the provisions of this Project, to the extent appropriate.

V. AmendmentS and Reissuance

A. Amendments.

This FPA may be amended by mutual agreement of all parties at any time during the duration of the project. The parties recognize that certain modifications to the project may necessitate modification of any existing implementation mechanisms or may require development of new implementation mechanisms. In that case, EPA, MPCA, and Washington County expect to work together with Andersen and the CAC to identify and pursue any modifications or additions to the implementation mechanisms required in accordance with applicable procedures. If the parties agree to make a material modification of the project, notice of the modification and an opportunity to participate in the process will be provided to the general public.

In recognition that the Project is an experiment designed to test new approaches to environmental protection, and of the uncertain nature of the environmental benefits and costs associated with the activities to be undertaken in this Project, the parties to this FPA agree to evaluate the appropriateness of a modification or "reopener" to the FPA according to the provisions set forth below.

B. Permit Reissuance.

Eighteen months prior to the five-year point of the Minnesota XL permit Andersen shall submit a timely and complete application for renewal of the permit. The reissuance of the Minnesota XL permit will be subject to the same public notice and comment, and opportunity for EPA objection and public petition as the initial Title V permit. However, unless one of the events listed below occurs or new issues are raised by the public or any party, the parties anticipate that the Minnesota XL permit will be reissued at the five-year point. The MPCA expects to expeditiously reissue the Minnesota XL permit unless it finds good cause not to reissue. Examples of good cause not to reissue include but are not limited to, the following:
VI. Duration

While this FPA is expected to remain in effect for a maximum of 10 years from the effective date of the Minnesota XL permit, this FPA is not intended to create legal rights or obligations and is not an enforceable contract or a regulatory action such as a permit or rule. This applies to both the substantive and the procedural provisions of the FPA. Thus, for example, the FPA establishes procedures that the parties intend to follow with respect to termination under the FPA. However, while the parties fully intend to follow these procedures, they are not legally obligated to do so. The parties intend that such provisions will be contained in the legally enforceable elements of the Minnesota XL permit. Because this FPA is not legally enforceable, it is not an agency "action" that could be reviewable; in addition, no action or omission by any party to the FPA could give rise to any claim against the party for penalties, damages or other compensation based solely on the claim that the action or omission was at variance with a provision or provisions of the FPA.

The EPA rule, Minnesota XL permit, Washington County ordinance(s), and any other legal mechanisms or documents to implement this project shall all contain "sunset" provisions ending authorization for this project 10 years after the effective date of the Minnesota XL permit, and also providing for Termination as provided in Section VII. This project shall not extend past this date, and Andersen shall comply with all then applicable requirements following this date, unless all parties agree to an amendment to the project term pursuant to Sections II.F., V, and/or VII.

VII. Termination

A. Expectations Concerning Termination

This FPA is not a legally binding document and any party may withdraw from the FPA at any time. However, it is the desire of the parties that this FPA should remain in effect through the expected duration, and be implemented as fully as possible. Accordingly, each of the parties do not intend to unilaterally terminate this project during its expected duration of 10 years unless one of the conditions set forth below occurs:

In addition, EPA, MPCA, and Washington County do not intend to withdraw from the FPA based on Andersen's failure to comply with this FPA or the implementation mechanisms, unless such non-compliance constitutes a significant failure to comply with the implementation mechanisms, taking into account its nature and duration. EPA, MPCA and Washington County retain their discretion to address non-compliance through existing enforcement authorities available to EPA, MPCA, and Washington County, including termination of this project, as appropriate. As set forth in Section IX, Andersen Corporation retains all rights to defend against enforcement actions.

B. Procedures for Early Termination

C. Termination in the Event of Completion of Project Term

At least two years prior to the project's expected conclusion, Andersen, MPCA, and EPA will initiate a process to evaluate the project. The goal of the evaluation will be to establish a process to evaluate the project and to determine the terms of the final permit for the facility at the end of the 10-year project term. This evaluation shall conclude by no later than 18 months prior to the project's expected conclusion. The evaluation will review the project's environmental results and impact, Andersen's performance, and other relevant factors, as determined by all parties. If the evaluation proves the project a success, Andersen may propose to MPCA, EPA and the CAC to extend the project term and the XL permit conditions described in this FPA through issuance of a final permit. The final permit may incorporate limits similar to the limits applicable during the project. If the parties do not agree to extend the project, Andersen will submit an implementation schedule (as discussed below) to achieve compliance with all requirements applicable at the end of the 10-year project term.

If, based on the evaluation, the project should not be extended, Andersen will submit to EPA and MPCA an implementation schedule specifying how Andersen will transition into compliance with all then applicable requirements at the end of the 10-year project term. No later than 12- months prior to the expiration of the project term, the parties will agree to a 12-month implementation schedule. The implementation schedule is intended to reflect Andersen's best efforts to transition into compliance with all then applicable requirements as quickly as practicable within the 12-month transitional period. In no event will the implementation schedule extend beyond the end of the 10-year project term. The implementation schedule submitted by Andersen must contain interim calendar, or milestone, dates for the purchase and installation of any necessary equipment, performance testing, and other necessary measures.

The enforceable limits established as part of the project (i.e., the VOC and PM/PM10 emissions caps, as well as the per unit of production limit) will continue to be enforceable during the project evaluation process and any transitional period as described above.

In any event, a final permit will be issued to either 1) extend the project through the issuance of a final permit, or 2) transition Andersen to compliance with all requirements applicable at the end of the 10-year project term. The final permit will be based on the permitting requirements which are applicable at the conclusion of the project. The applicable requirements that will govern the facility at the end of the project's 10-year term will be included in the final permit.

VIII. Dispute Resolution

Any dispute that arises with respect to the meaning, application, implementation, interpretation, amendment, termination or modification of the FPA will in the first instance be the subject of informal discussions. To initiate informal discussions, any party that believes it has a dispute with any other party will simultaneously notify all of the parties in writing, of the matter(s) in dispute.

If the dispute cannot be resolved by the parties within thirty-five (35) days of receipt of such notice (or such longer time as agreed to by the parties to the dispute), then one or both of the parties may invoke non-binding mediation by setting forth the nature of the dispute with a proposal for its resolution in a letter to the EPA Region 5 Administrator, with a copy to all parties. The EPA Regional Administrator or the disputants may request an informal mediation meeting. The disputants may request an opinion from the Regional Administrator in lieu of or in addition to the mediation meeting. Any opinion expressed by the Regional Administrator will be non-binding. Any party may request a written opinion from the Regional Administrator.

Nothing in this Section alters the parties' expectations regarding the ability to terminate or withdraw from the FPA set forth in Section VII above.

This dispute resolution process does not apply to disagreements arising from enforcement actions.

IX. Right to Other Legal Remedies Retained

Except as expressly provided in the legal implementation mechanisms described in Section II.E., nothing in the FPA shall be construed to affect or limit either Andersen's legal rights or MPCA, EPA, or the County's rights to seek legal, equitable, civil, criminal or administrative relief regarding the enforcement of present or future applicable federal and state codes, rules, or regulations with respect to the facility.

Although Andersen does not intend to challenge agency actions implementing the project (including any rule amendments or adoptions, permit actions, or other action) that are consistent with this FPA, Andersen nonetheless reserves its right to appeal or otherwise challenge any and all agency actions implementing the project. Nothing in this FPA is intended to limit Andersen's right to administrative or judicial appeal or review of any modification or termination of those legal mechanisms in accordance with the applicable procedures for such review.

X. Transfer of Project Benefits and Responsibilities

The implementation mechanisms are expected to allow for the transfer of Andersen's rights and obligations under the project to any future owner or operator upon request of Andersen and such owner/operator, provided that the following conditions are met:



XI. FPA CONTACTS

Each party has designated a representative to serve as its contact person for inquiries concerning the project. These representatives are as follows:

1. For Andersen Corporation:

Kirk Hogberg
Andersen Corporation
100 4th Avenue North
Bayport, MN 55003-1096
Ph: (651)430-7437 fax: (651)430-5089
Email: khogberg@andersencorp.com
3. For MPCA:

Andrew Ronchak
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
ph: (651)296-3107 fax: (651)297-8676
email: andrew.ronchak@pca.state.mn.us
2. For EPA:

Rachel Rineheart
EPA Region 5
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
Ph: (312)886-7017 fax: (312)886-5824
Email: rineheart.rachel@epa.gov
4. For Washington County:

Jeffrey Travis
Washington Cty Dept of Health & Environment
14949 62nd Street North
PO Box 3803
Stillwater, MN 55082-3803
ph: (651)430-6732 fax: (651)430-6730
email: travis@co.washington.mn.us

If any party desires to change the contact person designated above, the party will provide notice of such change and the name of the new designee to all other parties, stakeholders and interested persons.
Attachment A

The Performance Ratio Approach



The cornerstone of this project is the creation of a novel performance ratio approach to the regulation of VOCs. This approach, which could not be imposed under existing law, is intended to "lock-in" existing efficient manufacturing methods and processes while encouraging continued improvement.

On a per tracking period basis Andersen Corporation will calculate the ratio of pounds of VOCs emitted per cubic feet of product shipped (performance ratio) for the preceding 13 tracking periods. This calculation establishes the annual performance ratio. The annual performance ratio will be compared to the following series of tiered limits established as part of this project:
CAC Limit - The CAC limit will serve as the main limit for evaluating Andersen's ongoing environmental performance. The CAC limit is the average of the prior five years' performance ratios. The CAC limit will be recalculated once every three years, will decline if appropriate, but will increase only if the CAC approves the change, with the concurrence of EPA and MPCA. In addition, the CAC limit could not decline below the Reward Limit (see below). If Andersen's annual performance ratio exceeds the CAC limit, Andersen will be required to provide a specific explanation of the exceedance to the CAC as well as establish a CAC - approved corrective action plan to bring the performance ratio back below the limit.
Enforcement Limit - A static enforcement limit for the ten-year duration of the project will be established utilizing the initial CAC limit plus two standard deviations. Two standard deviations allow for fluctuations in VOC emission performance due to normal and routine operating events. If the facility's annual performance ratio exceeds the enforcement limit, the company could be subject to the enforcement actions that are available under current law.
Project Limit - The adjusting project limit will be set at two standard deviations above the CAC limit. It will be the same as the enforcement limit for the initial three-year period, but will be adjusted at the same time as the CAC limit. The project limit will never exceed the enforcement limit. If Andersen's performance ratio exceeds the project limit, the project will end unless Andersen demonstrates to the satisfaction of the CAC, EPA, and MPCA, each acting in its independent capacity, why the project should continue.

Reward Limit - The reward limit will be set at two standard deviations below the CAC limit. The reward limit will not increase and will only decline if Andersen remains below it for three consecutive years. If the facility operates below the reward limit, it will potentially receive rewards as discussed in Section II.F. of the FPA.

Evaluation of Production Measure
The performance ratio described above uses cubic feet of product shipped as the unit to measure factory production. This number is derived based on Andersen's method of tracking "factory loads" of product shipped and is believed to be the most reliable measure for tracking factory output over time. The parties recognize that the use of this measure should be evaluated and that the performance ratio may need to be refined during the course of the project.

As part of that evaluation process Andersen will develop and implement a system for tracking wood and Fibrex composite usage (in board feet or equivalent) for three years, unless the parties agree to terminate the data tracking sooner. This data will be evaluated in three years or sooner to determine if that method provides a better measure of production than the cubic foot measure set forth above.


Attachment B

Stakeholder Involvement Plan





Andersen Corporation

Project XL

Stakeholder Involvement Plan





November, 1997
Revision, March 31, 1999


Table of Contents


I. Introduction

II. Goal and Objectives

III. Stakeholders

IV. Community Advisory Committee

V. Strategies and Tactics

I. Introduction

Andersen Corporation is a market-leading manufacturer of high quality windows and patio doors. Andersen products are among the most energy and environmentally efficient in the industry. Product development, manufacturing and environmental programs at Andersen meet the objective stated in the corporate mission "to engage in responsible stewardship of the environment." The Andersen decision to pursue a Project XL initiative is an extension of that objective.

Environmental protection is more than a catch phrase at Andersen --- it is a standard operating procedure. The magnificent St. Croix River Valley has been the home of the Andersen family and manufacturing plant since the company's founding in 1903, long before the St. Croix was designated as a Wild and Scenic River. Care for this great resource is part of the Andersen ethic.

The term "Project XL" stands for Excellence and Leadership. Project XL is a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initiative to enable companies to achieve greater environmental progress by implementing innovative and more cost effective alternatives to existing regulations in the operation and expansion of existing and new facilities.

Andersen's Project XL initiative carries the company's respect for the environment into new directions of regulatory innovation by achieving greater environmental benefits while affording the company more flexibility in developing and manufacturing its products.

An important requirement of Project XL is the involvement of stakeholders throughout the process of developing the technical and legal framework for a Final Project Agreement or FPA. Andersen has established a Community Advisory Committee representing and involving stakeholders with a direct interest in the project.

The Andersen Stakeholder Involvement Plan establishes a process for informing and involving a variety of people and organizations interested in the company's development of a Project XL initiative. The Stakeholder Involvement Plan is designed to be modified to respond to and meet changing conditions throughout the Project XL process.

II. Goal and Objectives

The goal and objectives of the Andersen Stakeholder Involvement Plan are directed to facilitating communications among the people and organizations -- the stakeholders -- involved in Andersen's Project XL initiative.

Goal
The goal of the Andersen Stakeholder Involvement Plan is to obtain substantial consensus on the development and implementation of a Project XL permit and Final Project Agreement that provides enhanced protection to the environment and human health while at the same time providing regulatory flexibility to Andersen Corporation to increase its ability to compete successfully in the global marketplace.

Objectives
The objectives for the Andersen Stakeholder Involvement Plan are four in number:

Identify stakeholders and their role in the project.
Develop a system to communicate the project development process to stakeholders.
Create an environment that will allow effective participation by stakeholders.
Foster meaningful communications and dialogue among all stakeholders and Andersen.

III. Stakeholders

As noted in the most recent EPA guidance document on Project XL published in the Federal Register on April 23, 1997, "Stakeholder involvement is critical to the success of each XL project. Stakeholders provide information about the preferences of the community. They may identify issues that have escaped the notice of project sponsors and regulators."

Further, EPA noted in the May 23, 1995 Federal Register notice defining the XL program that an important factor in the agency's approval of projects is "the extent to which project proponents have sought and achieved the support of parties that have a stake in the environmental impacts of the project."

EPA divides stakeholders into three categories. "Direct participants in project development work intensively with project sponsors to build a project from the ground up. The views of direct participant stakeholders will strongly influence the details of the project as well as EPA's ultimate decision to approve or not approve the project."

"Commentors have an interest in the project, but not the desire to participate as intensively in its development. The project development process should inform and be informed by commentors on a periodic basis. The views of informed commentors are a strong indicator of the broad potential for wider applicability of the innovation being tested in a project."

"Members of the general public should have easy access both to the project development process and to information about the environmental results of the project once it is implemented, and should have the ability to participate more actively if they so choose."

Andersen's stakeholders are many and varied and certainly cut across all three EPA categories. The Andersen stakeholder group begins with Andersen employees. Andersen stakeholders extend into those living in the immediate Bayport and St. Croix Valley communities. Stakeholders also extend beyond the immediate geographic area and include those interested and/or involved in Andersen Corporation in a variety of ways. These broader stakeholders include government officials and regulators, the news media, environmental groups and other businesses throughout the region.

Direct Participants
Success for the Andersen project development process will be measured by obtaining a substantial consensus on a Final Project Agreement. The direct participants involved in the project development process are those with interests likely to be affected by the project. The following stakeholders are direct participants in Andersen's Project XL initiative.

Andersen Corporation as the project sponsor
Andersen employees
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and EPA
Bayport residents
Local public officials
St. Croix Valley area residents
Local environmental groups
Local business groups
Washington County public officials

Commentors
There are a variety of people and organizations who are not direct participants in the Andersen Project XL development process but who have an interest in and wish to be informed about progress on the project. As an important part of the Stakeholder Involvement Plan, Andersen will share information about Project XL and seek input from a number of interested parties.


St. Croix County public officials
St. Croix Valley municipal officials
Legislators
Members of Congress
Environmental community
St. Croix River management agencies

General Public
The broader category made up of people and organizations who do not have as much ongoing interest in Andersen's Project XL initiative deserve to be kept informed of progress on the project. The news media as noted above and listed in this section is the primary conduit to the general public. An increasingly important means of reaching the public is through Internet access. Information about Andersen's Project XL initiative will be posted on EPA/MPCA Websites to facilitate access by the general public and those more directly interested in the project. Communications outlets to be used in the process include:

Stillwater Gazette
Washington County Bulletin
St. Paul Pioneer Press
Hudson Star-Observer
Minneapolis Star Tribune
EPA/MPCA Websites

IV. Community Advisory Committee

The Andersen Community Advisory Committee is the foundation of the Andersen Stakeholder Involvement Plan. Made up of representatives of stakeholders, the Community Advisory Committee is intended to include Direct Participants as noted in the Stakeholder Involvement section of the USEPA guidance dated April 23, 1997.

In order to be effective in representing stakeholders and working with the sponsor of a project, a community advisory committee must have its tasks and responsibilities clearly spelled out. To that end, the Andersen Community Advisory Committee is governed by a Charter, Members Roles and Responsibilities and Operating Guidelines.



Charter

Andersen Community Advisory Committee

Andersen Corporation values our community and the views and concerns of community members. The Andersen Community Advisory Committee is organized to provide a forum for the exchange of views and information about existing and new Andersen operations in the community of Bayport. The Committee is formed initially to provide comments on the implementation of Project XL and other environmental issues.

The Community Advisory Committee is organized to broadly represents the Bayport area and broader community. Mutual communication among Andersen people and community members will build trust and a sense of community through accurate, timely information exchange and discussion.

Members of the Andersen Community Advisory Committee serve as contacts for community members to convey points-of-view and information to the Committee and Andersen people. Information and advice from the Group is valuable for Andersen to use in making decisions about current and future operations in the Bayport Community.

Member Roles and Responsibilities

Andersen Community Advisory Committee


Members of the Andersen Community Advisory Committee represent various segments of the Bayport community and surrounding community. Committee member responsibilities include relaying information from the meetings of the Group to the community. In turn, members are expected to convey and represent the viewpoints of the community to the Community Advisory Committee.

If unable to attend a Committee meeting, each member of the Community Advisory Committee will notify Andersen and, if they have an alternate, arrange for that alternate to attend. To ensure community representation, members will be expected to attend scheduled meetings on a regular basis.

Members of the Advisory Committee will decide on agendas with the advice of Andersen representatives who will prepare agendas and meeting summaries. Each Committee member will be sent draft summaries of meetings and will bring any comments to the following Committee meeting.


Guidelines

Andersen Community Advisory Committee

The operating guidelines for the Andersen Community Advisory Committee are designed to facilitate the formation and functioning of the Group as a key conduit between the Bayport area community and Andersen Corporation. CAC members, local community members and other stakeholders must be informed about Project XL through the provision of easily accessible, understandable, verifiable and timely information.

Membership
The membership of the Community Advisory Committee will total up to 15 regular members. Alternate members may be appointed at the discretion of members or the bodies' members represent. Members will serve staggered three-year terms. The chair and vice-chair of the committee will be elected by the full Community Advisory Committee.

On September 17, 1998 the Community Advisory Committee decided on the following categories of stakeholders for membership in the 15-member Andersen Community Advisory Committee. At that time, the CAC also decided that the committee as composed on September 17, 1998, would make decisions on the Final Project Agreement approval. The Community Advisory Committee will be composed of members representing:

Bayport residents -- two representatives
Bayport City Council representative
Baytown Township residents -- two representatives
Baytown Township board
Bayport business
Andersen Bayport resident employee
Andersen employee
Washington County Commissioner or appointed representative
Environmental group representative
Stillwater Area Chamber of Commerce representative
Stillwater Area School District representative
At-large members (two representatives, optional unfilled seats)

Members will be selected by a two-thirds vote of CAC members (present in person or by proxy). At-large members shall be nominated by the CAC. Members representing a specific organization shall be nominated by that organization.

Duration of Membership
Members shall serve three-year terms. The initial CAC shall divide in half and designate members to serve two- and three-year terms so that only half the terms end at any given time. There shall be no limit on the terms a member can serve. A member may resign his or her membership at any time. A member may be replaced for missing four consecutive meetings without a valid excuse. Removal and replacement shall require a two-thirds vote of the CAC (present or voting by proxy).

Officers
The CAC shall elect annually a chair and vice chair upon a majority vote. The election shall take place at the first meeting after January 1 of any given year.

The chair shall preside at all CAC meetings and may not serve three consecutive terms. The vice chair shall preside in the chair's absence and may not serve three consecutive terms. If both the chair and vice chair are unable to attend a meeting, a chair pro tempore shall be selected by a majority of the CAC members present.

Meetings
In its initial stages of operation, the Community Advisory Committee will meet monthly to ensure all members are fully briefed and that all community interests are heard. Eventually, both the Committee and communication needs should dictate meeting frequency, which is likely to be quarterly.

Meetings will take place at the Bayport Public Library in order to ensure adequate rooms, facilities and parking. To facilitate participation, meetings will begin promptly at 7:00 p.m. and end no later than 9:00 p.m., unless otherwise scheduled. Meetings will be scheduled well in advance to help ensure attendance. Meetings will be open to members of the public, should they wish to attend.

Two-thirds of the members present in person or by proxy shall constitute a quorum. Unless designated otherwise, a majority of votes present shall be sufficient to transact business.

Management and Staffing
The work of the Community Advisory Committee will be managed by the chair or vice chair.

The Community Advisory Committee will be staffed by Andersen representatives. In consultation with the chair, Andersen representatives will: prepare and distribute meeting announcements, agendas and materials; and facilitate the CAC meetings. Andersen representatives will make arrangements for tours, briefings, etc. Meeting summaries will be prepared and distributed by Andersen representatives to Committee members for review and comment to ensure an accurate record of Committee proceedings is kept.

Substantial Consensus on Final Project Agreement
While it may not be possible to achieve full consensus on all matters that come before the Community Advisory Committee, it is the intent to achieve substantial consensus on the Final Project Agreement as a key measure of project success. Substantial consensus means that, as the advisory body to the project, most members of the Community Advisory Committee agree on a particular position.

V. Strategies and Tactics

The Andersen Community Involvement Plan is designed to ensure every stakeholder category -- direct participant, commentor and member of the general public - will be appropriately informed about and involved in the Andersen Project XL process. This design is accomplished through a set of strategies and tactics designed to compliment and reinforce one another.

For example, the Community Advisory Committee will meet regularly, giving Committee members the opportunity to consider and provide input about Project XL progress. Residents, the news media and other interested parties will have the opportunity to attend meetings. News reporters attending meetings will write articles for their newspapers. Residents and others on the Andersen mailing list will receive The Andersen Community Update (described later). Taken together, the combination of communications is designed to provide meaningful information and an opportunity for involvement for all parties.

The strategies and tactics to be employed in the Andersen Stakeholder Involvement Plan are as follows.

Community Advisory Committee Meetings
As the foundation for the Andersen Project XL process, the Community Advisory Committee will meet on a regularly scheduled basis following the Charter, Rules and Responsibilities and Operating Guidelines noted earlier. Committee meetings will be open to the public. Committee members are a direct communications and stakeholder involvement conduit to and from the community. It is their job to present and reflect community views and convey information about Project XL and the work of the Committee to their constituencies. Meeting times and schedules for Community Advisory Committee meetings will be publicized throughout the community.

Community Information Meetings
Periodic community information meetings will be held to brief the general public about Project XL progress, announce the achievement of key benchmarks and receive input and answer questions from those in attendance. It is likely the community information meetings will be convened by the Community Advisory Committee. The Bayport Public Library is an ideal location for such meetings.

Displays, Exhibits and Open Houses
Andersen has the capability to produce displays or exhibits about Project XL. It is likely that the Bayport Public Library is an excellent location for a small display about project progress to be placed when there is information to convey. For example, the display might be developed and placed at the library at the beginning of the formal stakeholder involvement process, perhaps to coincide with the first regular meeting of the Community Advisory Committee. Andersen will also hold periodic open houses at which CAC members, Andersen and regulatory agency representatives will be present along with Project XL exhibits and materials.

The Andersen Community Update
Andersen will create and publish The Andersen Community Update on an as-needed basis as work on Project XL moves forward. The publication will employ a simple, easy-to-read newsletter format of two-to-four pages containing articles, graphics and/or photos to clearly and concisely describe progress on Project XL. The Update will be published on a timely basis when there is useful information about the project to convey. The first issue will be published to coincide with the inaugural meeting of the Community Advisory Committee. A mailing list of interested parties will be established for the Community Update. Copies of the Update will be posted on company bulletin boards and EPA/MPCA Internet Websites.

Responding to Community Inquiries
Andersen Corporation is committed to open communication with the community. Andersen formed the Community Advisory Committee and established Standard Procedures for Communications in the Andersen Environmental Management System (EMS) to facilitate communication with stakeholders/community members.

Andersen Corporation wants to hear about any issues or concerns that our stakeholders have with our operations. All community members should feel free to contact the company. It is Andersen's obligation to provide accurate answers to all inquiries on a timely basis. Stakeholders are encouraged to contact the Andersen Public Affairs Department at 651-439-5150.

If community members prefer to not contact Andersen directly, they are encouraged to contact any member of the Community Advisory Committee. The CAC member will relay the inquiry to the Public Affairs Department and the answer back to the community member. The anonymity of community members will be maintained, if desired.

The Public Affairs Department will follow the communications procedures set forth in the Andersen Environmental Management System to address all community inquiries.

Media Relations
The news media outlets listed in the Commentors section will be kept informed about work on Project XL by being notified of the schedule for Community Advisory Committee meetings and by being placed on the mailing list for The Andersen Community Update. When warranted, news releases, interviews, and other media relations techniques will be used. Additional matters will be brought to the media's attention by Andersen, just as it does in its regular media relations program.

ATTACHMENT C

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OUTLINE


The Andersen Corporation Environmental Management System (EMS) is a management system based on ISO 14001. The EMS supports the corporation's mission, vision, values, and environmental policy.

Andersen Corporation Mission vision Values Statement


Andersen Corporation Environmental Policy
Support the environmental goal to eliminate pollution at the source.
Conserve natural resources through reduction, reclamation, reuse and recycling of materials.
Develop long-lasting products that have a minimal effect on the environment.
Assure that its facilities, processes and products meet or exceed all applicable governmental standards and regulations relating to the environment.

The EMS was developed in 1993 based on the structure of British Standard 7750. In 1995, the EMS was completed and approved by executive management. As ISO 14001 was developed, the Andersen EMS was revised to conform to this standard. A number of unique concepts have been incorporated into the EMS to address Andersen's mission, vision, values, and environmental policy. The EMS is reviewed at least semi-annually to ensure that it addresses all of the company's actions and environmental aspects.

The EMS consists of an Environmental Manual, 19 Standard Procedures, and numerous Department Procedures. The EMS becomes more detailed as one goes from the high level manual to the department procedures.

In the EMS, a system is created that recognizes the invention and design of products as the primary area to address negative environmental impacts. The Technology and Business Development group is a critical element in conforming to the company's environmental policy. In the development of new products, materials, and processes, environmental issues are considered so that impacts can be avoided rather than addressed later.

Pollution prevention projects are developed for existing processes, materials, and products. The impacts of these projects are evaluated and resources are prioritized to complete projects that have the greatest impact. This process creates a competitive system that includes rewards and recognition for project completion.

Operational control procedures address concerns such as; water usage, hazardous waste generation, storm water run-off, storage tank compliance, material review/approval, air permit compliance, by-product/waste management, toxic substance usage and asbestos abatement. The procedures create mechanisms that not only ensure compliance with existing regulations but, routinely go beyond existing regulatory requirements and create information mechanisms to continually improve the system.

Emergency planning provisions are incorporated into the EMS to ensure a consistent mechanism to prevent accidents that could impact the operation, community, or environment.

EMS audits review regulatory compliance and system conformance. These audits verify the company meets the requirements of the EMS. The results of the audits are reported to executive management.

The EMS also includes a mechanism to communicate environmental issues internally to the employees and externally to stakeholders.

ATTACHMENT D

COMPLIANCE PLAN


The monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting conditions described below are the best estimate of these conditions at this time by the parties and the CAC. However, the parties and the CAC believe that additional monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting conditions may be added to this estimate during permit development, including any additional needs indicated by the outcome of the PM10 and HAP modeling and air toxics review to be completed by Andersen prior to obtaining the Minnesota XL Permit or pursuant to a schedule contained in the Minnesota XL Permit and agreed upon by the parties and the CAC.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

Monitoring

Andersen will monitor the outflow of preservatives and paints from the paint vault and bulk tanks using flow meters or daily logs. In order to determine emissions from vinyl, Andersen will track machine throughput using daily logs. For Fibrex, combustors, adhesives, silicones, and other miscellaneous sources, the parties and the CAC will identify the remaining VOC monitoring conditions in the Minnesota XL Permit. These conditions will be consistent with Andersen's routine business practices to the extent practicable.

Recordkeeping

On a weekly basis, Andersen will calculate and record VOC emissions from the wood preserving and paint source categories using flow meters or daily logs. As discussed above, Andersen plans to demonstrate that longer recording periods are appropriate for the Fibrex, storage tanks, combustion, adhesives, fugitive, and miscellaneous categories. The appropriate recording frequency will be determined based on current policy, and will be established in the Minnesota XL Permit. Andersen also will track cubic feet of product shipped per tracking period.

Reporting

Andersen will provide MPCA reports semi-annually showing the most recent 13tracking period rolling sum of total VOC and diptank VOC emissions and the most recent 13 period rolling average of VOC emissions per standardized production limit since the last report.

Compliance Tracking

For the facility-wide cap, any subcaps and the remaining VOC synthetic minor limit on the diptanks, compliance will be determined every tracking period, based on a 13 period rolling sum. For the performance ratio, compliance will be determined every tracking period based on a 13 tracking period rolling average.

For the first year after permit issuance because there may not be data for the 13 periods of the rolling limit, alternative limits or calculations will be established in the permit. If data is available for the 13 tracking periods prior to issuance, the facility will use this pre-permit data in the calculations. If no pre-permit data exists, alternative tracking period specific limits will be established for the first 13 tracking periods.

Particulate Matter (PM/PM10)

Monitoring

Andersen will verify that all milling equipment is exhausted to the baghouse filters. In addition, Andersen will perform weekly visual inspections of the baghouse filters to determine that the filters are properly operated and maintained. Andersen will use representative stack test data to ensure the BACT emission limitation is being met. Based on existing data, MPCA will determine the need for additional testing. Further monitoring of emissions from the Andersen West Site milling operations will be established in the permit.

For the non-milling equipment, Andersen will monitor the outflow of paints from the paint vault and bulk tanks using flow meters or daily logs. Monitoring requirements will be developed for the paint booth control equipment that ensures that the equipment is being operated properly. In order to determine PM/PM10 emissions from vinyl, Andersen will track machine throughput using daily logs. For Fibrex, combustors and other miscellaneous sources, the parties and the CAC will identify the remaining PM/PM10 monitoring conditions in the Minnesota XL Permit. These conditions will be consistent with Andersen's routine business practices to the extent practicable.

Recordkeeping

Andersen will record the results of its visual inspections of the baghouse filters on a weekly basis, and will record any corrective actions taken. The permit will specify what records are necessary for the paint booth control equipment.

Andersen will calculate and record non-milling PM/PM10 emissions and the Andersen West Site milling emissions on a weekly basis using the daily logs. As discussed above, Andersen plans to demonstrate that longer recording periods are appropriate for the Fibrex, combustion and miscellaneous categories. The appropriate recording frequency will be determined based on current policy, and will be established in the Minnesota XL Permit.

Reporting

Andersen will provide MPCA reports semi-annually showing the most recent 13 tracking period calculations since the last report.

Compliance Tracking

For the caps on PM/PM10 emissions from non-milling and milling equipment, Andersen will show compliance based on a 13 tracking period rolling sum.

For the first year after permit issuance, alternative limits or calculations will be established in the permit. If data is available for the 13 tracking periods prior to issuance, the facility will use this pre-permit data in the calculations. If no pre-permit data exists, alternative tracking period specific limits will be established for the first 13 tracking periods.

Deviation Reporting

Andersen will report deviations, which could endanger human health or the environment as soon as possible after discovery of the deviation in accordance with MN Rule 7019.1000. Andersen shall report all other deviations within 7 days after discovery of the deviation.

For purpose of this requirement, deviation shall be defined pursuant to MN Rule 7007.0100, subpart 8, as any noncompliance with an applicable requirement or permit condition.

Pre-Authorized Changes

In order for the permit to truly pre-authorize any change, the permit must contain several things:
Some type of description of what types of changes are pre-authorized. The description needs to be in sufficient detail for the parties to be able to determine how a proposed change would "fit" into the permit and to give the public sufficient notice of the types of changes that will be authorized;
All applicable requirements that would apply to the proposed change;
Any necessary periodic monitoring for the applicable requirements; and
Monitoring and recordkeeping procedures for the proposed change for any tracked pollutant. For this permit, this would include monitoring and recordkeeping requirements for the VOC caps, PM/PM10 caps (or BACT if it is a milling change), and any other limits (e.g., HAPs).

Let's say the company wants to be able to add new waterborne in-line treatment systems (ILTS). As and example the permit would need to (final permit language may differ):
Have a description of what changes are pre-authorized which clearly included these operations. Such a description might be -- A process that applies coatings to door or window components via a continuous conveyorized feed system.
Include the industrial process equipment rule (IPE), currently the only applicable requirement for these operations (assuming there are no NESHAP issues). This involves grain loading and an opacity limit.
Include any periodic monitoring that might be necessary for the IPE rule. This rule regulates particulate and opacity. For ILTS, there are no potential particulate or opacity emissions, so it is physically impossible for these operations to violate this rule. No periodic monitoring would be necessary for this applicable requirement.
Specify how VOC, PM/PM10 and HAP emissions are tracked from ILTS operations so that it is clear how these units will be included in the emissions calculations. For ILTS, there are no PM emissions, so only VOC and HAP would need to be in the permit. The following is an example of possible permit language for VOC tracking:


On each day of operation, the Permittee shall:

1). Measure and record the amount of VOC containing material dispensed using a flowmeter, for each material.

2). Record the name of each material, the quantity dispensed in pounds, and over what time period the record covers.
On a weekly basis, the Permittee shall calculate and record the total VOC dispensed for the previous week using the daily records and the certification of materials.
On a tracking period basis, the Permittee shall, using the weekly records, calculate and record:

1). The total VOC dispensed during the tracking period.

2). The rolling sum of total VOC dispensed for the previous 13 tracking periods.

This calculation and written record shall be complete by the 14th day of the tracking period for the previous tracking period.

A certification of material contents shall be maintained on site for all materials that contain VOC. <MPCA has standard permit language for this type of requirement regarding if the MPCA requests testing of contents, etc.>

Similar requirements can be in place for any HAP tracking that is found to be necessary.
Specify QA/QC requirements for any monitoring equipment. For example, annual calibration requirements for all flowmeters. This is standard permit language that goes in all MPCA permits.

If any of these items were missing (e.g., an applicable requirement was triggered that was not in the permit), some type of permit revision would be necessary in order to make the proposed change.



Jump to main content.