Enforcement Action Summary FY 2005 - April

April 4, 2005

United States Files Complaint Against Apex Oil Company. On April 5, 2005 the United States Department of Justice filed a complaint in the Southern District of Illinois against Apex Oil Company (“Apex Oil”) seeking injunctive relief under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq. Apex Oil is the successor by merger to former owners and/or operators of a refinery and associated pipelines and sewers located in Hartford, Illinois from which releases of gasoline, diesel fuel, and other petroleum-based substances have occurred. Such releases contributed to a large subsurface plume of petroleum-based substances, from which oil and vapors have infiltrated certain homes in Hartford, resulting in fires, explosions and evacuations.

The complaint seeks a declaration under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 that a request for injunctive relief pursuant to RCRA Section 7003(a), 42 U.S.C. § 6973(a), is not precluded by the discharge of debts and claims provided by Bankruptcy Code Section 1141(d), 11 U.S.C. § 1141(d). The injunctive relief requested pursuant to RCRA Section 7003(a) is an order requiring Apex Oil to cooperate and participate in the investigation and clean up of the large plume of petroleum-based substances beneath Hartford. The plume is the result of commingled releases from pipelines, refineries, and other petroleum facilities in the area. Currently, three responsible parties are conducting an investigation and implementing interim measures pursuant to a RCRA 7003/CWA 311 Administrative Order on Consent.

Contact: Brian Barwick, primary contact (312) 886-6620.

Region 5 enters into a Consent Agreement and Final Order with Michelman, Inc. - In August 2002, Michelman, Inc. self-disclosed two recently discovered violations of Section 313 of EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 110232. Michelman, Inc. violated EPCRA by failing timely to submit “Form Rs” for toxic chemicals (1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, Ethylene Glycol and Zinc compounds) manufactured, processed or otherwise processed at its facility for the calendar years,1999 and 2000. In disclosing the violations, Michelman, Inc. invoked U.S. EPA’s “Audit Policy” (65 Fed. Reg. 19618 (April 11, 2000). Region 5 calculated a gravity-based civil penalty of $112,200. Region 5 subsequently reviewed additional information provided by Michelman, Inc and determined that Michelman, Inc. could satisfy all nine conditions of the Audit Policy and had gained no economic benefit from the violations. On March 24, 2005, Region 5 filed a Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO), resolving the matter. The CAFO allows for a 100% reduction of the gravity-based penalty, provided that Michelman, Inc. implements fully either a “Self-Policing Plan,” approved by Region 5, or all corrective measures identified through an EPCRA compliance audit approved by Region 5 shortly after the CAFO becomes effective. The settlement will promote voluntary self-policing, encourage self-disclosure and future compliance with EPCRA and its implementing regulations.

Contact: Diana Embil, 312 886-7889, or Kenneth Zolnierczyk, 312- 353-9867

Region 5 enters into a Consent Agreement and Final Order resolving self-disclosed TSCA section violation by Akzo Nobel Polymer Chemicals, LLC. - On February 25, 2005, the Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5, signed a Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO) resolving a self-disclosed violation of TSCA Section 5 by Akzo Nobel Polymer Chemicals, LLC. In 2002, Akzo Nobel Polymer Chemical, LLC (“AKPC”) voluntarily disclosed a violation of TSCA Section 5, failure to file a Notice of Commencement within 30 days after commercial compliance audit being conducted by Akzo Nobel at all of its subsidiaries. The self-disclosed violation occurred at a Pasadena, Texas facility. AKPC took steps to immediately correct the violation by filing a NOC. AKPC sought 100% penalty reduction under EPA’s Policy “Incentives for Self-Policing: Discovery, Disclosure, Correction and Prevention of Violations” (“Audit Policy”). Since AKPC discovered the violation through a first time audit, EPA Region 5 determined that AKPC could not meet the first criterion of the Audit Policy – that the violation be discovered through an environmental audit – unless AKPC committed to at least a second audit of the Pasadena Texas facility. Environmental audits, by definition, must be must be “periodic” and a first time audit with no commitment to look back again would not meet this periodic requirement. AKPC agreed to conduct a second audit of the Pasadena, Texas facility within a year of execution of the CAFO. The proposed penalty of $6,600 in the complaint was reduced 100% based on Akzo-Nobel meeting all the criteria of the Audit Policy.

Contact: Gaylene Vasaturo 312-886-1811; Robert Allen 312-353-5871

April 11, 2005

Plant Manager Sentenced for Clean Water Act Violation; United States v. Paul Vinje.

On April 6, 2005, Paul Vinje was sentenced for illegally discharging low-pH wastewater into the City of Piqua sewer system. Mr. Vinje was sentenced to six months of probation. Mr. Vinje was the Plant Manager of Stripco, Inc. (“Stripco”). Stripco was engaged in the business of metal stripping and fabricating. The low-pH wastewater generated from these operations is treated and discharged to the Piqua sewer system. Previously, Mr. Vinje pled guilty to negligently discharging or causing the discharge of wastewater, with a pH below 5.5, into the City of Piqua sewer system. The City of Piqua requires that all discharges to the sewer system must have a pH between 5.5 and 11.

This case was investigated, in a joint investigation, by the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, the City of Piqua Division of Wastewater, and U.S. EPA CID, all members of the Dayton Environmental Crimes Task Force. Primary Contact: Brad Beeson at (440) 250-1761.

April 18, 2005

Region 5 reaches $2.6 million settlement with OMC Bankruptcy estate and separate prospective purchaser agreement for purchase of OMC site with City of Waukegan.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5, the State of Illinois and U.S. Department of Justice have completed two settlements involving cleanup at Waukegan Harbor. One is a $2.6 million agreement with Outboard Marine Corp.’s (OMC) bankruptcy estate to help pay for additional Superfund ground water cleanup at OMC’s Plant 2 site in Waukegan, IL The second settlement, a supplemental consent decree with the city of Waukegan, ensures the continued operation and maintenance of PCB containment cells on the Plant 2 site.

EPA has a long history of involvement at the 75-acre OMC site. The site was placed on the Superfund National Priorities List in 1984 due to the presence of widespread PCB contamination in Waukegan Harbor. EPA later filed a civil action against the OMC, which resulted in a consent decree requiring a $20 million harbor cleanup. OMC performed the cleanup and under the decree, placed contaminated sediment from the cleanup in containment cells on its Plant 2 property. OMC thereafter operated and maintained the cells.

OMC declared bankruptcy in 2000, selling off most of its assets and halting its operation and maintenance of the containment cells. In 2002 the estate petitioned for legal abandonment of the site, which the government opposed due to the environmental hazards remaining there. Subsequently, the parties reached a settlement in 2002 requiring the estate to perform a limited amount of emergency cleanup work at Plant 2 and to pay EPA $221,250 to fund further work prior to abandonment of the site. Separately, EPA and the State also filed a civil complaint in 2002 seeking the cleanup of chlorinated solvents in the ground water beneath Plant 2.

Under the settlement, the OMC estate will place $2.6 million in a Superfund special account to be used toward cleanup of the ground water beneath Plant 2. In addition, the agreement grants EPA and Illinois EPA allowed unsecured claims against the estate totaling approximately $2 million. The second settlement frees Waukegan from future liability for the existing, historic contamination at the now-unoccupied Plant 2 site — enabling potential redevelopment for the broader lakefront area. In return, the City will operate and maintain the containment cells and buildings on the site to prevent environmental problems from occurring in the future. In addition, the second settlement addresses the possibility of a windfall to the City upon the sale of the site attributable to the government cleanup, and reserves the government’s ability to dedicate any windfall funds to future required cleanup at the site.
Contact: Thomas Martin (312) 886-4273

Minnesota Auto Shop sentenced for discharges to storm sewer. On April 21, 2005, Robert Steinmetz of Prior Lake, Minn was sentenced to 2 years on probation, a fine of $10,000 and 300 hours of community service following his guilty plea to discharging wastewater containing petroleum-based chemicals into a storm sewer that connects with the Minnesota River. Steinmetz was also ordered to pay $28,164.42 to the City of Bloomington and Hennepin County as restitution as a result of governmental costs to remediate the effects of the dumping. In addition, Steinmetz was ordered to pay $20,000 in extraordinary restitution to the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. Steinmetz was the former owner of two businesses located in Bloomington, Minnesota: Riverwood Auto, an auto repair firm, and Diamondback Bedliner, an applicator of automotive bedliner coatings. According to the indictment, in November 2003, Steinmetz knowingly discharged a pollutant into a water of the U.S., and subsequently falsely claimed that he had only dumped two drums of water.
Contact: David M. Taliaferro (312)886-0815

Three Electronic Parts Firm Owners sent to prison for 18 months. Three owners of a now-defunct electronic parts manufacturing company in Bensenville, IL were each sentenced to 18 months in prison by a federal judge on April 20, 2005. The three pleaded guilty to conspiring to illegally discharge contaminated acidic and caustic liquid waste into the Bensenville sewer system about every three weeks between April 3, 1997 and December 19, 2001. The waste would have qualified as RCRA hazardous waste if hauled off for proper off-site disposal. The defendants also admitted conspiring to dilute the pollutants by running a garden hose into a manhole to conceal the discharges, and to parking a vehicle over the manhole to hide the hose. The defendants also admitted as a part of the conspiracy to constructing a bypass pipe to route the illegal discharges around New-Tech’s on-site wastewater treatment system directly into the Bensenville sewer system. Finally, as a part of the conspiracy Bensenville was falsely informed that the illegally discharged wastewater was being hauled off-site for proper disposal. The conspirators also periodically arranged for proper shipments of waste to ward off suspicion.

The three defendants were equal owners and executive officers of New Tech Electronics, Inc., which produced electronic printed circuit boards. Kanubhai Patel was New Tech’s president; his brother, Manubhai Patel, was New Tech’s treasurer; and Mukesh Patel, was New Tech’s vice president. In addition to the prison sentences, each defendant was fined $4,000 and required to serve three years of supervised release following the prison term. The wastewater discharged by New Tech into sewer drains connected to a wastewater treatment plant owned and operated by Bensenville, which, after treatment, discharged wastewater into Addison Creek, a protected waterway.
Contact: David M. Taliaferro (312) 886-0815

Property Owner Charged in Illegal Asbestos Removal; United States v. Michael A. Pace. On April 18, 2005, Michael A. Pace was charged in a one-count information for the illegal removal of asbestos. According to the information, Mr. Pace owned several storage buildings in Akron, Ohio. The information charges that from November 2003 through February 2004, Mr. Pace directed other individuals to remove and dispose of more than 160 square feet of friable asbestos. The removal was done contrary to the asbestos abatement regulations.
The defendant’s sentence in this case, if convicted, may be determined by the Court after consideration of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, which depend upon a number of factors unique to each case, including the defendant's prior criminal record, if any, the defendant's role in the offense and the unique characteristics of the violation. In all cases the sentence will not exceed the statutory maximum and in most cases it will be less than the maximum.
An Information is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. A defendant is entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government's burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
This case was investigated, in a joint investigation, by the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, the Akron Regional Air Quality Management District, and U.S. EPA CID, all members of the Northeast Ohio Environmental Crimes Task Force.
Contact: Brad Beeson (440) 250-1761

Region 5 Signs Consent Agreement and Final Order with WT Chemical Inc. Region 5 initiated this enforcement action in September of 2004. On April 12, 2005, the Region signed a consent agreement and final order (CAFO) with WT Chemical, Inc. of Chagrin Falls, Ohio to settle violations of Section 7(c)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(c)(1). The alleged violations arose out of WT Chemical’s failure to file an Annual Pesticide Production Report for 2003. FIFRA Section 7(a), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(a), prohibits the production of any pesticide unless the establishment in which it is produced is registered with the EPA. FIFRA Section 7(c)(1) and 40 C.F.R. § 167.85 require companies registered with EPA to produce pesticides to notify the Agency annually of the types and amounts of pesticides the company produced during the reporting year. Federal regulations at 40 C.F.R. § 167.85(d) require registered companies to complete the form even if they produced no pesticides during the reporting year. WT Chemical did not produce pesticides in 2003, and is no longer producing pesticides. As part of the settlement, the company has agreed to give up its EPA establishment number and pay a reduced civil penalty of $330.
Contact: Erik Olson, primary contact 312-886-6829; Bruce Wilkinson, additional contact 312-886-6002

Region 5 Signs Consent Agreement and Final Order with Hukill Chemical Corporation. Region 5 initiated this enforcement action in September of 2004. On April 4, 2005, the Region signed a consent agreement and final order (CAFO) with Hukill Chemical Corporation of Bedford, Ohio to settle violations of Section 7(c)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(c)(1). The alleged violations arose out of Hukill’s failure to file Annual Pesticide Production Reports for 2002 and 2003. FIFRA Section 7(a), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(a), prohibits the production of any pesticide unless the establishment in which it is produced is registered with the EPA. FIFRA Section 7(c)(1) and 40 C.F.R. § 167.85 require companies registered with EPA to produce pesticides to notify the Agency annually of the types and amounts of pesticides the company produced during the reporting year. Federal regulations at 40 C.F.R. § 167.85(d) require registered companies to complete the form even if they produced no pesticides during the reporting year. Hukill did not produce pesticides in either 2002 or 2003, and is no longer producing pesticides. As part of the settlement, Hukill has agreed to give up its EPA establishment number and pay a reduced civil penalty of $550.
Contact: Erik Olson, primary contact 312-886-6829; Bruce Wilkinson, additional contact 312-886-6002

Court enters Consent Decree for Industrial Excess Landfill (IEL). In 1989, the United States filed a cost recovery action under CERCLA § 107, seeking to recoup EPA’s response costs at IEL, an NPL site in Uniontown, Ohio. On April 7, 2005, Judge John Manos, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio, entered a Consent Decree under which 5 settling defendants will pay over $18 million in past costs and will implement the remedy EPA selected in an amended record of decision in September 2002: a vegetative cap and monitored natural attenuation. The Consent Decree also resolves cost recovery claims brought by the State of Ohio.
Contact: Timothy Thurlow, 312-886-6623.

April 25, 2005

Chief Judge Biro issues favorable decision in Strong Steel RCRA case.  On April 7, 2005, Chief Administrative Law Judge Susan L. Biro issued an initial decision ordering Strong Steel Products, LLC to pay a civil penalty of $269,527 and to complete closure clean-up of its hazardous waste disposal activities. This case is part of the Region’s Detroit urban area and scrap yard initiative. The Region initiated enforcement against Strong Steel as a result of a collaborative effort with the City of Detroit, Wayne County and the State of Michigan. In addition to the decision by Judge Biro the enforcement case has prompted Strong Steel to build a secondary facility for the collection of automobile fluids from scrapped vehicles prior to its shredding operations.

Strong Steel Products is located in the City of Detroit. Strong Steel Products is one of the larger scrap shredder operations in the Detroit Metropolitan area. It is affiliated with Soave Enterprises and may be one of the ten largest scrap recycling operations nationally. Strong Steel is located in an area of Detroit that is minority and low income. Automobiles are a major source of scrap metal at this facility. Over the course of a year it receives over 100,000 crushed and uncrushed automobiles. Prior to the enforcement action Strong Steel routinely would crush automobiles on the ground at its facility allowing the automobile fluids to leak onto the ground.

Chief Judge Biro imposed a penalty which was 88% of the proposed penalty of $307, 450. In her initial decision Judge Biro agreed with the Region that over the course of approximately 2 years Strong Steel had discharged onto the ground at least 8,234 gallons of gasoline and used oil. She found that this mixture of used oil and gasoline was a hazardous waste and that Strong was disposing of it (not storing) on the ground. She found that Strong Steel was operating a hazardous waste disposal facility without a permit; failed to provide a complete notification since it failed to identify all of the hazardous wastes it generated and failed to notify of its storage and disposal activities; disposed of hazardous waste without meeting the land ban treatment standards; failed to retain records of its land ban determination; and failed to adequately responded to the releases of hazardous waste. With this decision the Region has completed its multi-media enforcement action against Strong Steel. Strong Steel entered into an administrative settlement worth $500,000 for violations of the Clean Air Act, chloroflourocarbon (CFC) regulations.
Contact: Richard Clarizio 312-886-0559; Crissy Pellegrin 312-353-5263; and Jeff Gahris 312-886-6794.

Region 5 issues a stipulated penalty demand to Ohio Fresh Eggs in the matter of U.S. v. Buckeye Egg Farm, L.P., et al. On April 21, 2005, Region 5, in consultation with the Department of Justice, issued a stipulated penalty demand to Ohio Fresh Eggs (OFE), which purchased the poultry barns formerly owned and operated by Buckeye Egg Farm. The stipulated penalty demand is in the amount of $533,300 for violations of the Consent Decree that have occurred through March 31, 2005. The demand notes that stipulated penalties shall continue to accrue until OFE complies with the Consent Decree requirements. The Consent Decree requires payment of stipulated penalties within 30 days of receipt of EPA’s demand. In July 2004, the court entered the Consent Decree requiring that OFE conduct particulate matter and ammonia testing at OFE’s Croton, Marseilles and Mt. Victory poultry facilities in Ohio. Except for particulate matter testing at the Croton facility, OFE has failed to perform the air emissions testing required by the Consent Decree.
Contact: Mary McAuliffe, 312-886-6237; Kevin Vuilleumier, 312-886-6188

Region 5 enters into a Consent Agreement and Final Order with LEIMCO Development Company, Ltd. et al., Painesville, Ohio - On June 5, 2003, Region 5 issued Findings of Violations and a Compliance Order to Respondents Lake Erie Iron & Metal Company, Inc., Martin Hathy and Richard M. Osborne, Sr., who are owners/members of LEIMCO Development Company, Ltd. The Order alleged that Respondents violated Section 301 of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. §1311, by discharging pollutants into approximately 34 acres of federal jurisdictional wetlands within LEIMCO Development-owned property without either a CWA Section 404 or Section 402 permit (33 U.S.C. §§ 1344, 1342); and failing to provide all information requested pursuant to CWA Section 308, 33 U.S.C. § 1318. The violations and related circumstances supported a proposed civil penalty of $137,500. Respondents subsequently provided additional information, indicating that approximately 28.72 acres of wetlands were impacted within the LEIMCO Development-owned property. On April 22, 2005, following a public comment period, Region 5 entered into a Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO), resolving the violation. The CAFO requires payment of a $75,000 civil penalty; compliance with the CWA; submission of a revised after-the-fact CWA Section 404 permit application to the U.S. Corps of Engineers, Buffalo District, including a Mitigation-Replacement Plan, detailing mitigation of approximately 44 acres within a 340-acre Mitigation Site to be purchased by Respondents and third-parties; restoration and enhancement with third-parties of approximately 71 acres of the Site; and performance of a SEP, consisting of the donation of the Site to Lake County Metroparks in perpetuity with land use restrictions and restoration of biological and habitat functions for approximately 23 acres of the Site. The SEP will accomplish environmental restoration and protection by enhancing hydrological and biological conditions and habitat within the Grand River watershed. Both the LEIMCO Development-owned property and the Mitigation Site are located within the Grand River watershed.
Contact Diana Embil, Associate Regional Counsel, primary contact, 312-886-7889, or David Schulenberg, Wetlands Enforcement Coordinator, additional contact, 312-886-6680.

Region 5 Signs Consent Agreement and Final Order with Whitehouse Grain, Inc., Region 5 initiated this enforcement action in September of 2004. On April 4, 2005, the Region signed a consent agreement and final order (CAFO) with Whitehouse Grain, Inc., of Whitehouse, Ohio, to settle violations of Section 7(c)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(c)(1). The alleged violations arose out of Whitehouse Grain’s failure to file Annual Pesticide Production Reports for 2003. FIFRA Section 7(a), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(a), prohibits the production of any pesticide unless the establishment in which it is produced is registered with the EPA. FIFRA Section 7(c)(1) and 40 C.F.R. § 167.85 require companies registered with EPA to produce pesticides to notify the Agency annually of the types and amounts of pesticides the company produced during the reporting year. Federal regulations at 40 C.F.R. § 167.85(d) require registered companies to complete the form even if they produced no pesticides during the reporting year. Whitehouse Grain did not produce pesticides in 2003, and is no longer producing pesticides. As part of the settlement, Whitehouse Grain has agreed to give up its EPA establishment number and pay a reduced civil penalty of $550.
Contact: Robert S. Guenther, primary contact 312-886-0566; Holly McDonald, additional contact 312-886-6012

Region 5 Signs Consent Agreement and Final Order with Malone Chemical, Inc. Region 5 initiated this enforcement action in September of 2004. On April 4, 2005, the Region signed a consent agreement and final order (CAFO) with Malone Chemical, Inc. of Kempton, Illinois, to settle violations of Section 7(c)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(c)(1). The alleged violations arose out of Malone Chemical’s failure to file an Annual Pesticide Production Report for 2003. FIFRA Section 7(a), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(a), prohibits the production of any pesticide unless the establishment in which it is produced is registered with the EPA. FIFRA Section 7(c)(1) and 40 C.F.R. § 167.85 require companies registered with EPA to produce pesticides to notify the Agency annually of the types and amounts of pesticides the company produced during the reporting year. As part of the settlement, the Region considered the facts of the violation and Malone Chemical’s past compliance efforts and demonstration that its registration issues have been resolved for several years. Thus, the CAFO assesses a final penalty of $100.
Contact: Robert S. Guenther, primary contact 312-886-0566; Holly McDonald, additional contact 312-886-6012

Region 5 Signs Consent Agreement and Final Order with Exacto, Inc. Region 5 initiated this enforcement action in September of 2004. On April 4, 2005, the Region signed a consent agreement and final order (CAFO) with Exacto, Inc. of Richmond, Illinois, to settle violations of Section 7(c)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(c)(1). The alleged violations arose out of Exacto’s failure to file an Annual Pesticide Production Report for 2003. FIFRA Section 7(a), 7 U.S.C. § 136e(a), prohibits the production of any pesticide unless the establishment in which it is produced is registered with the EPA. FIFRA Section 7(c)(1) and 40 C.F.R. § 167.85 require companies registered with EPA to produce pesticides to notify the Agency annually of the types and amounts of pesticides the company produced during the reporting year. As part of the settlement, the Region considered the facts of the violation Exacto’s prompt compliance efforts. Thus, the CAFO assesses a final penalty of $2640.
Contact: Robert S. Guenther, primary contact 312-886-0566; Holly McDonald, additional contact 312-886-6012