Helena Chemical Company Responds to Claims Made By New Mexico Environment Department

LAS CRUCES, N.M., Aug. 29 /PRNewswire/ — Helena Chemical Company (Helena) today requested that the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) reconsider 11 alleged air quality permit violations against the company’s dry fertilizer warehouse facility in Mesquite. Helena also requested a public hearing on the matter in its response to a July compliance order from NMED.

Helena, whose custom-blended dry fertilizers support pecan, chili and other important crops for local farmers, denied all of NMED’s allegations and detailed a series of attempts by the company to cooperate with agency officials before, during and after a number of site inspections last year. Helena has operated its warehouse in Dona Ana County for nearly 20 years.

“Since 1989, we have been committed to serving the needs of local farmers in New Mexico and beyond. We have an unwavering commitment to be a good corporate citizen and to be a responsible steward of our environment and our operations in Mesquite reflect that,” said Ed Brister, director of regulatory compliance and engineering for Helena. “We are asking NMED to reevaluate the allegations of violations and recognize our ongoing attempts to address any concerns from the state, above and beyond what is required.”

In its response, Helena asks NMED to honor the terms and conditions of the air quality permit that NMED granted in 2005. The permit requires that the company perform its dry fertilizer storage, handling and blending in an enclosed building. At the time the permit was issued to Helena, the approved warehouse consisted of a building with walls, a roof, but no doors.

“Our Mesquite warehouse was granted a permit in its current state as an enclosed facility in November of 2005, after multiple site investigations and a series of independent air quality studies,” said Brister. “The permit application process was exhaustive and we are just asking that the rules and definitions established remain the same.”

As proof that Helena operations are conducted in an enclosed building approved by NMED, the company also cited written communications from NMED from 2005 and 2007, public notices issued by NMED and other official materials, including NMED’s review of the company’s air permit application and air quality modeling. The NMED compliance order also alleges that Helena violated its air quality permit on several clerical and administrative issues and had not swept roads.

Helena contends that it has maintained its roads in accordance with the permit, and has gone the extra step of purchasing a street sweeper that it uses on a regular basis to clean the dust off of these roads.

“In its own reports of seven inspections between March and June 2007, NMED’s inspector noted only one instance of dust emissions from any of the paved roads on our property,” said Brister. “There was not a single allegation of any emissions of fertilizer or other Helena products crossing our property line.”

The company noted ongoing efforts to work with NMED officials to resolve matters cited in a notice of violation (NOV) issued on November 14, 2007. Prior to the NOV, the company had been in frequent contact with NMED and had been conducting tests and performing work to comply with NMED’s direction. Despite Helena’s diligent compliance efforts throughout the fall of 2007, the NOV was released publicly without any prior indication that the company was not meeting NMED’s expectations.

Most importantly, the company has conducted extensive air-quality testing that demonstrates the facility’s emissions are very low and do not impact or harm the area’s air quality in any way.

“Actual air samples taken earlier this year showed that the amount of dust particles in the air around our plant are only a fraction of the EPA’s National Ambient Air Quality Standards,” said Brister. “The sampling indicated that dust particles were actually higher when our facility was not operating due to high winds blowing dust across the property.”

The company cited ongoing efforts to improve and upgrade the facility such as adding doors to the blending facility to secure material during times when the facility was not in operation, covering process areas and the recent addition of new material handling equipment. The company’s desire to perform further improvements and upgrades is pending approvals from NMED.

For more information about Helena, visit http://www.helenachemical.com/

Helena Chemical Company

CONTACT: Linda Lockett, +1-505-266-1100, for Helena

Web site: http://www.helenachemical.com/