Approved AQC Meeting Summary_09March2022

1
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
AIR QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING SUMMARY March 9, 2022 512 N. Salisbury Street Archdale Building – Ground Floor Hearing Room Raleigh, North Carolina 10:15 – 11:15 A.M.
AQC MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE
Ms. Shannon M. Arata, AQC Chair Ms. Marion Deerhake
Mr. Charlie S. Carter, AQC Vice-Chair Dr. Suzanne Lazorick
Ms. Yvonne Bailey Ms. Maggie C. Monast
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE Mr. Chris Duggan, EMC Mr. Michael Pjetraj, DAQ Deputy Director
Mr. John McAdams Mr. Minor Barnette, Forsyth County EAP
Mr. Phillip Reynolds, EMC Counsel DEQ Staff
Mr. Mike Abraczinskas, DAQ Director Members of the public
PRELIMINARY MATTERS
Agenda Item I-1, Call to Order and the State Government Ethics Act, N.C.G.S. §138A-15
AQC Chair Arata called the meeting to order and inquired, per General Statute §138A-15, as to whether
any member knows of any known conflict of interest or appearance of conflict with respect to matters
before the EMC’s AQC. None stated.
MEETING BRIEF
During the March 9, 2022 meeting, the Air Quality Committee (AQC) of the Environmental Management
Commission (EMC) heard:
•Concept item on correction of errors introduced during the rule readoption process.
•Concept item on revisions to allow electronic submittal of documents.
•Informational Item from the Director of Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and
Protection presented an update on the fire at the Winston Weaver fertilizer plant.

2

Agenda Item I-2, Review and Approval of the January 12, 2022 Meeting Minutes
Chair Arata requested approval of the January 12, 2022 Meeting Minutes. Commissioner Lazorick made
the motion and Commissioner Monast seconded the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved
without amendment.

RULEMAKING CONCEPTS
Agenda Item II-1, Revisions to Correct Errors Introduced During Rule Readoption Process (555)
(Carrie Pickett, DAQ)
Ms. Pickett presented a concept for cleaning up necessary corrections identified following the H74 rule
readoption process. This includes grammatical errors, outdated references to the federal code, clarification
issues, misspellings, punctuation mistakes. Because the rule readoption packages were large in scope, minor
errors were introduced but flagged quickly after the process was completed for follow-up. The goal of this
action is to make the necessary amendments as a result of the readoption process, known as “Readoption
Cleanup”, which will be split into two categories. First category will be strictly technical changes not
requiring a public comment period. The second category will include changes that may require a public
comment period, such as updating definitions and introducing clarifying language. Neither cleanup group
will change a rule in such a way to affect stakeholders, so no impact to the air quality goals of the state will
be indicated by the cleanup process. The first set of corrections are anticipated to go before the AQC for
their July 2022 meeting for review and approval.
Discussion:
Chair Arata asked for questions from the Committee. No questions were raised.
Agenda Item II-2, Revisions to Allow Electronic Submittal of Documents (556)
(Katherine Quinlan, DAQ)
Ms. Quinlan presented a concept for revisions to the rules in 15A NCAC, Subchapters 02D and 02Q, to
allow increased electronic document submittals. Some of the current air quality rules require hard copy
submittals of documents, while other rules do not specify the format of such documents and may benefit
from clarification. Throughout the last two years, many documents have been received and reviewed
electronically as staff work remotely in response to the pandemic. Further, DEQ is developing a digital
document repository, using Laserfiche, to store official agency records. Receiving documents in electronic
format has the potential to save agency resources and preserve the quality of the records. Three examples
of language that may be revised were presented: 1) Rule 02Q .0505(5) requires three copies of a letter;
which implies hard copies are required; 2) Rule 02Q .0546(f)(2) requires a quarterly summary report be
postmarked; and 3) Rule 02Q .0104 requires application forms be filed at physical mailing addresses and
references Rule 02Q .0507, a rule that requires at least 3 copies of permit applications. The tentative timeline
for this rulemaking projects an effective date of January 2023.
Discussion:
Commissioner Deerhake asked if the revisions will still allow the option for submitting hard copy
documents or eliminate that option entirely. Ms. Quinlan stated that the exact revisions or path forward has
not yet been determined, but this comment would be kept in mind.

ACTION ITEMS

3

None

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
Agenda Item V-1, Update on fire at Winston Weaver fertilizer plant
(Minor Barnette, Director of the Forsyth County Environmental Assistance and Protection (FCEAP))
Director Abraczinskas provided an introduction, noting that North Carolina has three local air quality
programs that are authorized by the EMC, underpinned by authority in General Statute 143-215.112. The
Those three programs, the Asheville-Buncombe Air Quality Agency, the Mecklenburg County local air
agency, and Forsyth County local air agency, carry out the permitting, compliance, and monitoring
activities in their respective jurisdictions; however, the DAQ works very closely with these agencies. Minor
Barnette has been the Director of the Forsyth County local program for ten and a half years and has over
34 years of public service to the county.
Description:
Mr. Barnette presented an update on the fire at the Winston Weaver fertilizer plant that occurred in late
January and early February of 2022. The fire began on the evening of January 31 at a fertilizer facility that
blended the components needed for different fertilizer recipes. The facility was in an extremely densely
populated area with a lot of homes, neighborhoods, businesses, and a shipping hub nearby. Due to
awareness of nearby quantities of ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3), including a railcar thought to have over
100 tons and an additional 400-500 tons stored at the facility, as well as hundreds of tons of other
compounds used to make fertilizer, experts determined that everyone within a 1-mile radius of the facility
needed to be evacuated. This facility had over twice as much NH4NO3 as that of the 2013 fertilizer facility
explosion in Texas, which killed 15 people and damaged over 150 buildings. For this event, over 6,500
citizens were affected and had to evacuate late at night. The fire was allowed to burn for two days;
meanwhile, an eight-person team of EPA staff and contractors set up four temporary enhanced air
monitoring sites. Monitors also drove in between the stationary sites to collect data throughout
neighborhoods and businesses. During the first 6-hour monitoring period, PM levels averaged over 1700
micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3), with a peak of over 9000 µg/m3, which is well over the “hazardous”
level in EPA’s standard operating guidelines for monitoring PM during fires, an 8-hour average over 300
µg/m3. Daily press releases advised citizens to exercise caution. Twenty compounds were reported to be at
the facility. Most of the county was not affected by air quality impacts, but the area downwind of the fire
to the southwest was heavily impacted for an extended period. NO2 and NH3 were also monitored but not
detected in significantly elevated levels. The FCEAP communicated with other air quality and health
professionals, including Director Abraczinskas, DAQ staff, the Health Director, the EPA, the Department
of Health and Human Services, the Poison Control Center, and other subject matter experts.
Unavoidable runoff of contaminated fire suppression water ran into a local storm drain and a creek system
spanning several miles, after which water samples were collected and a water advisory issued. Water
samples taken upstream showed unusually high background levels, which led to the discovery that the same
company also owned a storage facility with bulk quantities of granular dry materials that were subject to
rainfall, creating contaminated runoff. Stormwater enforcement staff delivered a Notice of Violation (NOV)
with a short deadline for abating the contaminated stormwater runoff. The presentation concluded with a
map of the initial water sampling locations with respect to the waterways and facility. The water advisory
was lifted after monitoring concluded levels had dropped close to normal.

4

Discussion:

Commissioner Lazorick asked about the follow up to determine the cause of the fire, appropriateness of
the facility’s location with respect to the community, and future preventative or enhanced response
measures. Mr. Barnette responded that the facility was constructed in 1939 and became operational in 1940
when the area was much less populated. Everything on the site is being removed to leave a clean slate for
the future. Members of the community have expressed opinions at public meetings, regarding whether such
a facility should be located in a densely populated area. Any new facility constructed in that area would be
different because the one that was lost lacked a lot of the modern features that would be required today.
The fire chief announced that the cause may be known; however, it has not been released. The destructive
nature of the fire has made the cause difficult to conclude. Commissioner Lazorick has asked if there will
be any study of long-term effects for people who live downwind of the site or in areas with contaminated
water runoff. Mr. Barnette replied that this type of study would be outside the scope of his focus as Director
of the air quality regulatory agency; however, there have been concerns expressed about visible deposition
on local properties. Commissioner Lazorick stated that there should be some long-term monitoring plan
due to the very high levels of pollution. Chair Arata asked for any comments from Director Abraczinskas
about follow up from the DAQ. Director Abraczinskas stated appreciation for the collaboration amongst
the agencies and divisions that aided local emergency response officials in decision making. The DAQ used
to have an emergency response function but had to disinvest in it about 10-15 years ago due to funding. In
the meantime, local emergency responders are equipped to make the initial decision making, and this
coordination amongst subject matter experts is an example of how responses occur today.
Commissioner Monast asked how often safety or pollution inspections are conducted on this type of
facility, and the amount of the NOV fine for the storage facility. Mr. Barnette responded that some are done
at least once a year, and possibly others more frequently. He could not recall the amount of the fine, but it
was published in the Winston-Salem Journal newspaper. Commissioner Monast reemphasized the desire
for longer-term monitoring of environmental and human health factors, particularly with respect to
disproportionate impacts, and asked about the logistics of evacuating that large volume of people. Mr.
Barnette responded that the evacuation was determined to not be mandatory, but instead a strongly
encouraged voluntary evacuation; it was largely, but not completely, successful. Reverse-911, social media,
and PA systems on police and fire vehicles were used to convey the evacuation. There were not many
people at the emergency shelter, but many went to hotels or to stay with family members. Since the incident,
the City of Winston-Salem City Council has allocated a $1 million fund to reimburse hotel and meal
expenses. A couple of public meetings were held the week after the fire, with over 150 attendees at each.
Commissioner Bailey asked for background on the permits and compliance status of the facility. Mr.
Barnette stated that the compliance record with the air quality agency was good, and the facility was
generally responsive. He was unaware of the storage facility until after the fire when the runoff was
discovered; it is managed by the stormwater staff. The storage site had a small retention pond with a lot of
contamination; however, some runoff bypassed the pond. Commissioner Bailey asked if that company has
other facilities or is now out of business. Mr. Barnette stated that the facility was family-owned until about
the last 10-15 years.
Commissioner Deerhake asked if the references to particulate matter pertained to PM10 or PM2.5 and
agreed that the long-term health effects should be monitored, especially indoor quality due to exposure to
what settled inside homes. She asked if the DAQ could speak with the Division of Environmental Health.
Mr. Barnette responded that the data he referred to was PM2.5, but there was also a lot of PM10 and so the
public messaging referred to total PM. Director Abraczinskas confirmed that DAQ could speak with the

5

Division of Environmental Health, in coordination with the local public health director. Commissioner
Deerhake commented that although it could be expensive, the state would be wise to assist the local
government with such a monitoring program and asked if any of the materials listed were CERCLA- or
EPCRA-listed chemicals. Mr. Barnette was unable to recall if those designations were included on the Tier
2 report used to form that list; rather, the report listed characteristics such as irritant or carcinogenic
designations. He did not recall any carcinogenic compounds, but there were irritants and possibly some
oxidizers. Commissioner Deerhake commented that the hazmat division in the area would have that
information, which may be useful for a health perspective too, and asked which agency issued the NOV for
the storage facility. Mr. Barnette responded that the County stormwater agency carried out that enforcement
action.
Agenda Item V-2, Director’s Remarks (Mike Abraczinskas, DAQ)
The Director wished to highlight an achievement of the Division being the 2022 Greenhouse Gas Inventory.
The Greenhouse Gas Inventory for North Carolina demonstrates the best Science and Data. The Division’s
website homepage has all the details. The next update will be for year 2024. The reason the Division
performs an inventory every two years is because the data does not change fast enough to warrant the work
hours required for performing a full inventory more than every other year. CLOSING REMARKS AND MEETING ADJOURNMENT
Chair Arata noted the next meeting of the AQC is scheduled for May 11, 2022, and adjourned the meeting.