Complaint ID 108310 — Public Copy

I called Ms. Cannady to inform her of my findings. I stated that I did not find anything I could take enforcement actions on at this time, but we will still be communicating with Mr. Delassus about how to decrease the amount of dust leaving the property. I asked her to call again if the problem reoccurs.

I arrived at Logistec around 10 am. I did not observe any fugitive emissions or excessive dust on the road leading to the site. I also did not observe dust on the vehicles near the site. I conducted an industrial stormwater inspection during the visit. There were no deficiencies with Logistec's records. At the time of inspection, there were a few storm drains that had some debris. I told Mr. Delassus that it needed to be cleaned. While going around the property, I did not observe emissions from the vessel, which was being loaded with wood pellets. We also drove around the area near the facility to see what dust and debris was present on the road. At that time, much of what was present was sand, dirt, and pine needles, but there was some dust that may have come from the facility. At the end of the inspection, Mr. Delassus mentioned that much of the dust leaving the facility may be due to the trucks tracking mud from the washing stations. He stated that the mud tracks into the roadway and then dries, leading to a more dusty road. He proposed the idea that only the trucks that enter the warehouses should be rinsed before leaving the property. The trucks that do not enter a warehouse, and therefore are not getting dusty, could leave the property without rinsing. This would reduce the number of trucks tracking mud into the road and possibly reduce the amount of dust that enters the roadway. Mr. Delassus stated that he will continue communications with the city to have them regularly sweep the roadway once a new truck arrives. At the time of my visit, Logistec was in compliance with its permits. All recommendations from the industrial stormwater inspection will be addressed through the inspection report.

I sent an email to Mr. Delassus asking for an update on the wood pellet vessels and if he talked to the City. He stated that a wood pellet vessel may arrive on 6/19. He also said the city sent a street sweeper in May, but it was not running properly so it didn't do a good job.

I emailed Mr. Delassus to see if he had spoken to Ms. Cannady. He stated that he did and that she suggested talking to the City to see if they could sent a street sweeper more often. He stated he would inform me when they would be loading/unloading another wood pellet vessel so I could observe their operations.

I received an email response from Mr. Delassus stating he would speak to Ms. Cannady and attempt to address her concerns.

I spoke with Ms. Cannady again, who stated that the dust had returned after being washed away the previous week. She stated that the homes behind hers are also covered, meaning the dust has traveled far from Logistec property. She stated there is also debris from trucks that falls into the road. She shared photos of the dust on her property and in the air. Ms. Cannady expressed that Logistec should no longer be allowed to carry wood pellets due to fires in previous years. I explained that while Logistec's previous operating permit had a list of approved materials, the current permit, issued in November 2021, does not, so we cannot prevent them from handling wood pellets. Ms. Cannady agreed to have her contact information shared with Mr. Delassus so she could detail her experience to him directly. She stated that she did not want any financial compensation or other services (car washes, home pressure washing) provided for her, and she would much rather have the dust issue resolved. I forwarded Ms. Cannady's information to Mr. Delassus via email and expressed to him that Logistec needs to start considering their options for additional emissions control.

I spoke with one of the complainants, Theresa Cannady, about the dust. She stated that in recent months, the dust issue has gradually gotten worse, though it used to be better several months ago. She stated that the dust gets into her AC unit, and she has called someone to fix it several times. I asked Mr. Delassus to let me know when the next vessel will be loaded/unloaded so that I could observe their operation. I visited Logistec and spoke with operations manager Lin Delassus. He provided records of the "pre-vessel check" that is conducted 48 hours before each vessel is docked. He also provided records of the monthly preventative maintenance checks conducted on their emission control units. He stated that every truck must be completely rinsed before leaving the property. Logistec received a new vessel on March 20th, and the pre-vessel check dated March 17 showed that the dust collector system was in working operation prior the the vessel's arrival. Mr. Delassus stated that the vessel was loaded overnight, which aligned with the information given in the complaint. He stated it was possible that dust could have left Logistec property due to changing wind directions and staff not moving the Dust Boss fans accordingly.

I called the operations manager, Lin Delassus, to ask about operations on March 21. He stated the air pollution control devices were operating on that day, but there were heavy winds which were beyond the capability of the facility to control.