![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Enforcement Action Summary FY 2006 - December
December 5, 2005United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio Enters Consent Decree Resolving Violations of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts by the Former USS/KOBE Steel Co. in Lorain, Ohio On November 30, 2005, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio entered a consent decree between the United States and U.S. Steel Corp. resolving violations of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts by the former USS/KOBE Steel Company at its steel plant in Lorain, Ohio ( Civil Action No. 1:05CV2220). On September 21, 2005, the United States filed a complaint against U. S. Steel Corp., a successor to certain liabilities of USS/KOBE, and simultaneously lodged a consent decree resolving the violations. No comments were received on the consent decree during the public comment period. The steel plant in Lorain, Ohio is currently owned and operated by U.S. Steel. The violations include violations of the Ohio State Implementation Plan governing the emission of fugitive dust or particulate matter and violations of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The State of Ohio intervened in the action as a plaintiff. The consent decree requires U.S. Steel: (i) to comply with particulate emission limits in a Title V permit issued by the Ohio EPA pursuant to the Clean Air Act, (ii) to perform a stack test to verify compliance with applicable particulate emission limits; (iii) to comply with effluent limits in its NPDES permit , (iv) to pay a civil penalty of $100,025, divided evenly between the United States and the State of Ohio, and (v) to perform a Supplemental Environmental Project involving the removal from service and disposal of up to 13 transformers containing PCBs, at a cost not to exceed $294,500. Primary Contact: Christine Liszewski, 312/886-4670 Region 5 signs a combined Complaint and Consent Agreement with Anderson Development Company. On December 1, 2005, Region 5 signed a combined Complaint and Consent Agreement (CCCA) with Anderson Development Company (Anderson) of Gary, Indiana. The CCCA settles one violation of Section 103(a) of CERCLA, involving a release of 63 pounds of 1,3 butadiene, which occurred on October 22, 2002, and Anderson’s failure to immediately notify the National Response Center of the release. The CCCA requires Anderson to pay a civil penalty of $11,172. Contact: Susan Tennenbaum, 312-886-0273; Ruth McNamara, 312-353-3193 December 12, 2005CAFO Filed Settling Risk Management Program Violations On December 7, 2005, U.S. EPA filed a CAFO with the Regional Hearing Clerk settling potential claims against Willmar Municipal Utilities Commission (Respondent) for violations of Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 112(r). Under this settlement, Respondent will pay a civil penalty of $18,000. In a Finding of Violation issued to Respondent on November 8, 2004, U.S. EPA alleged that Respondent failed to comply with certain Risk Management Program regulations promulgated pursuant to Section 112(r) of the Act. The violations occurred in Willmar, Minnesota. Docket No. CAA-05-2006-0008. Contact Richard M. Murawski, primary contact, 312-886-6721; Greg Chomycia, additional contact, 312-353-8217 Region 5 receives six petitions to object to Title V permits issued by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to eleven coal-fired utilities. On or about November 23, 2005, Region 5 received six petitions challenging the permits proposed by IEPA for five Dynegy Midwest Generation, five Midwest Generation, and a Southern Illinois Power Cooperative coal-fired electric generating plants. In three of the petitions, the permittees requested that U.S. EPA object to the permits, alleging that IEPA failed to include statements of basis, included periodic monitoring and inspection requirements that exceed its authority to gapfill, and included a testing requirement that is not an applicable requirement. In its petition requesting U.S. EPA to object to the permits proposed for the five Dynegy Midwest Generation facilities, the permittee also alleged that IEPA created duplicative and unnecessary permit conditions relative to the consent decree, and included in the proposed permits provisions from consent decrees that are not within the timeframes of the permits. In two petitions, the Chicago Legal Clinic on behalf of Citizens Against Ruining the Environment, and the Environmental Law and Policy Center on behalf of a coalition of environmental groups, requested that U.S. EPA object to the permits for four Midwest Generation facilities because IEPA failed to include compliance schedules to address alleged opacity and new source review violations. Finally, the Illinois Attorney General petitioned U.S. EPA to object to permits proposed for five Midwest Generation facilities because IEPA failed to include in the permits compliance schedules to address alleged opacity violations, and failed to require Midwest Generation to provide all information necessary to determine compliance with NSR requirements. The Clean Air Act provides that any person who commented on a draft Title V permit can petition U.S. EPA to object to the permit within 60 days after the end of U.S. EPA’s 45 day review of the proposed permit. IEPA originally had issued draft and proposed Title V permits for the subject utilities in 2003. December 19, 2005 Region 5 signs a combined Complaint and Consent Agreement with Hiawatha Metalcraft, Inc. Region 5 initiated this enforcement action against Hiawatha Metalcraft, Inc. (Hiawatha), Minneapolis, Minnesota, via a PreFiling Notice letter issued on January 21, 2005, which notified Hiawatha of its intent to file a complaint alleging violations of Section 312(a) EPCRA by its failure to timely submit complete Tier Forms for calendar years 2001, 2002, and 2003. On December 1, 2005, Region 5 signed a combined Complaint and Consent Agreement (CCCA), which requires Hiawatha to perform a pollution prevention Supplemental Environmental Project that will eliminate its use of hexavalent chrome, a hazardous chemical, by converting its production process to use trivalent chrome, a non-reportable chemical. The value of the SEP is $14,148. In addition, Hiawatha will pay a penalty of $9,190 for a total settlement of $23,338. Contact: Susan Tennenbaum, 312-886-0273; Ruth McNamara, 312-353-3193 On December 15, 2005, U.S. EPA filed a CAFO with the Regional Hearing Clerk simultaneously commencing and concluding an action against Diesel Radiator Company (Diesel), pursuant to Section 325(c) of the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), 42 U.S.C.§1045(c). The CAFO requires Diesel to pay a penalty of $18,233 and to perform a Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) consisting of switching to low-lead radiator tubing in its manufacturing process in Melrose Park, Illinois. By performing the SEP, Diesel will reduce its use of lead by approximately 30,000 pounds per year. On May 5, 2004, U.S. EPA inspected the Melrose Park, Illinois Facility and determined that Diesel had failed to file a Form R for lead and copper used at its Melrose Park facility in 2002, as required by Section 313 of EPCRA and 40 C.F.R. Part 372. Following issuance of U.S. EPA =s pre-filing letter, Diesel voluntarily disclosed that it had also failed to File Form R for lead and copper in 1999-2001. Diesel met with U.S. EPA and proposed conducting a SEP as part of a settlement of this case in which Diesel would replace its high-lead radiator tubing with radiator tubing containing less than 0.15% of lead. In consideration of Respondent's cooperation, voluntary disclosure of its failure to file Form R for the use of lead and copper from 1999-2001 and performance of the SEP valued at $79,703, U.S. EPA reduced the proposed penalty of $72,930 to $18,233. Primary Contact: Randa Bishlawi, (312) 886-0510. Region 5 files Consent Agreement and Final Order with Baleco International, Inc. On December 15, 2005, Region 5 and Baleco International, Inc., (Baleco) entered into a Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO) simultaneously initiating and resolving U.S. EPA's claims alleging that Baleco violated the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136, et seq., for alleged sales of unregistered pesticides, adulterated pesticides, and misbranded pesticides. In the CAFO, the Baleco agrees to pay a civil penalty of $15,000. Region 5 files Consent Agreement and Final Order with Caraustar Industries, Inc. On December 15, 2005, Region 5 and Caraustar Industries, Inc., (Caraustar) entered into a Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO) resolving U.S. EPA's claims alleging that Caraustar violated the Emerg11045, et seq., by failingency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986, (EPCRA), 42 U.S.C.§ to file completed Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory forms for stored number 6 fuel oil for the years 2001, 2002, and 2003. In the Complaint, U.S. EPA sought a penalty of $73,689. During alternative dispute resolution supervised by the Office of Administrative Law Judges, the parties agreed to settle this matter for $40,000. Contact: Jeffrey A. Cahn, primary contact 312-886-6670; James Entzminger, additional contact 312-866-4062. Federal Grand Jury Indicts Decatur IL Man for Illegal Dumping into the Sangamon River. On December 8, 2005, Ronald Mark Davenport, age 47, of Decatur, Illinois was charged with illegal dumping of a pollutant into the Decatur River. According to the charges filed, Davenport, an employee and partner of Able One Sealcoating, stopped at the Decatur Bulk Watering Station on September 19, 2004, to purchase water to clean tar and chemicals from his tank truck. The company uses a 1,000 gallon tank mounted on a pickup truck, known as "Big Sue," to haul waterproof coatings to work sites. Davenport pumped more than 250 gallons of water into the tank, then opened the tank drain and discharged at least 50 gallons of wastewater containing toxic pollutants into the water station's drain. The drain connected to the Sangamon River, about 100 yards away. If convicted of the charge, Davenport could be imprisoned for up to three years and fined. The public is reminded that an indictment is merely an accusation; the defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Primary contact: David Taliaferro, (312)886-0815. Environmental Cleanup Contractor arrested after being charged with Bank Fraud and Money Laundering. On December 19, 2005, Timothy A. Boisture was arrested following his indictment several days earlier by a federal grand jury on three counts of bank fraud and one count of money laundering. According to the Indictment, Boisture was a partner in Environmental Consulting and Engineering Co., Inc. (ECECI), an environmental clean-up firm. In 1999, ECECI conducted a remediation project for the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) which involved cleaning up an inactive oil production facility and plugging approximately 50 oil and injection wells. Leaking oil from the site had contaminated a pond and a tributary of the Ohio River. IDEM paid ECECI $369,954.51 for its work, known as the Claremark Oil and Bayou Creek projects. Boisture is charged with submitting false invoices to IDEM which included charges of $12,600 for installing non-existent cast iron bridge plugs during the well plugging, and splitting the proceeds with a subcontractor and a former Indiana DNR inspector. The subcontractor and the former inspector previously pleaded guilty to making false statements concerning the well plugging reports, and are now awaiting sentencing. According to the Indictment, Boisture also directed the preparation of 5 invoices to IDEM which contained charges of $32,224.80 for Atubing rental, despite the fact that Bi State Pipe Co., Inc. charged ECECI nothing for tubing rental. Boisture also allegedly received $100,200 from a scheme in which a company owned by the former Indiana DNR inspector submitted vastly inflated invoices to ECECI for disposing of contaminated wastewater from the Claremark Oil and Bayou Creek projects. The former inspector previously pleaded guilty to one count of bank fraud in connection with that scheme. The Indictment also alleges that Boisture induced a different subcontractor on the Bayou Creek project to submit a fraudulent invoice to ECECI for the disposal of contaminated material, based solely Boisture’s claim that he had disposed of material. ECECI subsequently paid the subcontractor $15,000 for the work, from which the subcontractor gave Boisture $7500. The Indictment also charges Boisture with engaging in a monetary transaction in property criminally derived from the bank fraud schemes by redeeming a certificate of deposit in the amount of $53,992.56. Finally, the Indictment charges Boisture with bank fraud arising from a separate remediation project known as the Johnson Fork Landfill in Kentucky, in which Boisture caused an ECECI subcontractor to submit an inflated invoice for work performed on the Johnson Fork Landfill. Boisture then received $33,313 of the fraudulently-obtained proceeds. Boisture faces punishment of up to 30 years imprisonment for each of the bank fraud counts as well as a fine of up to $1,000,000 if he is convicted as charged. On the money laundering count, Boisture faces punishment of up to 10 years imprisonment and a fine of up to $250,000 if he is convicted on that count. The indictment is an allegation only, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty at trial or by a guilty plea. Boisture was arrested without incident outside his home in Sacramento, Kentucky on December 19, 2005, by personnel from the U.S. EPA Criminal Investigation Division, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Law Enforcement Division and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Division of Law Enforcement. Michigan Plating Shop Employee Sent to Prison For Abandoning Chemicals. On December 19, 2005, James A. Vaandering was sentenced to 13 months in prison following his guilty plea to abandoning hazardous chemicals at the site of the former Sealmore Corporation facility located in Muskegon, Michigan. Vaandering was a supervisor at the facility. According to the charges filed in the case, the Sealmore Corporation facility was condemned in about November, 2000. The facility contained a number of chemicals and liquids in vats used in the plating process, including acid solutions containing hexavalent chromium and hydroflouric acid. The federal Superfund expended over $86,000 conducting an emergency removal of the hazardous chemicals from the facility. Vaandering was also fined $1,000 (payable at $30/month), required to perform 300 hours of community service, and was ordered to serve 3 years of supervised release following his prison term. Finally, Vaandering was ordered to pay $200 per month in restitution while he is on supervised release, subject to revision if his ability to pay changes. Contact: David M. Taliaferro at (312) 886-0815. Ford Signs RCRA CAFO for Chicago, Illinois facility In a combined Complaint/Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO) entered on September 26, 2005, Ford Motor Company agreed to pay a penalty of $20,394 for allegedly storing waste in violation of Section 3005 of RCRA and for minor violations of the land disposal restrictions. Ford Motor Company’s Torrence Avenue Facility in Chicago, Illinois is a large quantity generator that is required to comply with the permit exemption provisions of 40 C.F.R.§ 262.34 in order to be exempt from the requirements that the facility must obtain interim status or a permit to treat, store and dispose of hazardous waste. The Region alleged that Ford had failed to: a) mark two containers of F019 hazardous waste with the words “hazardous waste,” and make visible the date that the accumulation period of the F019 waste began; b) on three occasions, to conduct weekly inspections of its container storage area; c) store used rags contaminated with F003 and F005 hazardous waste in containers, mark the containers with the words “hazardous waste,” and make visible the date that the accumulation period of the F003 and F005 waste began; d) manifest containers containing used rags contaminated with F003 and F005 hazardous waste and meet the testing, tracking, and record-keeping requirements of the land disposal restrictions for these contaminated used rags; and e) on 27 separate occasions, meet the testing, tracking, and record-keeping requirements of the land disposal restrictions for F003 and F005 hazardous waste from the purge reclaim tank, by shipping this waste under the wrong hazardous waste code. Ford’s failure to meet the conditions of 40 C.F.R. § 262.34 meant that it stored hazardous waste in violation of Section 3005 of RCRA. In a complaint which was simultaneously resolved by the filing of a CAFO under Section 22.13(b) of the Consolidated Rules of Practice, Ford agreed to resolve this matter with a payment of a civil penalty amount of $20,394. Region 5 determined that a relatively low penalty was appropriate in this instance because there was little danger of harm to the environment from the violations. Contacts: Sherry L. Estes, ORC, 312-886-7164; Diane Sharrow, ECAB, 312-886-6199. For more information on RCRA hazardous wastes, please click on the hyperlink or go to: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/hazwaste.htm. December 26, 2005 Minnesota Sewage Plant Superintendent Charged With Illegal Discharges and False Reporting On December 21, 2005 David Meyer, the Superintendent of the Halstad Wastewater Treatment Plant, was charged in state court in Norman County, Minnesota with violating effluent or water quality standards, and with making false statements. According to the charges filed, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) inspected the plant in 2004, investigating concerns that, according to 2003 plant records submitted to the MPCA, the Plant was generating only about 10% of the expected amount of biosolids expected by a town the size of Halstad. Samples taken at the outfall from the Plant revealed violations of Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Total Suspended Solids, and pH. MPCA inspectors examined the facility’s records and determined that facility personnel had purposely avoided sampling at times when the Plant’s function was poor, had conducted sampling which was not reported to the MPCA, and had not reported analytic results which showed violations. Meyer was charged with making false statements and water pollution under State of Minnesota statutes. If convicted of the charges, Meyer faces possible imprisonment for up to 5 years, and a fine of up to $50,000 per day on the discharge count, and up to $10,000 on the false statement count. The filing of charges is an accusation only, and all defendants are presumed innocent of criminal charges unless they are convicted by a jury or plead guilty.
|
|