STATE OF |
) |
|
BEFORE
THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT |
||
|
|||||
COMMISSIONER
OF THE DEPARTMENT Complainant, v. GENERAL
MOTORS CORPORATION, Respondent. |
) |
|
|||
The
Complainant and the Respondent desire to settle and compromise this action
without hearing or adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and consent to the
entry of the following Findings of Fact and Order. Pursuant to IC 13-30-3-3(c), entry into the
terms of this Agreed Order does not constitute an admission of any violation
contained herein. Respondent’s entry into this Agreed Order shall not
constitute a waiver of any defense, legal or equitable, which Respondent may
have in any future administrative or judicial proceeding, except a proceeding
to enforce this Order.
I. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Complainant is the Commissioner
(“Complainant”) of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, a
department of the State of
2.
Respondent is General Motors Corporation (“Respondent”),
which owns and operates a Class D Industrial wastewater treatment plant
(“WWTP”), at the GM Powertrain-Bedford Facility located at
3.
Respondent’s NPDES permit No. IN0003573 (the “Permit”),
effective April 1, 2004, authorizes Respondent to discharge from the WWTP
Outfall 002 to receiving waters identified as an unnamed tributary to the
Bailey Branch of Pleasant Run Creek in accordance with the effluent
limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in the
Permit.
4. The
5. Pursuant
to IC 13-30-3-3, IDEM issued a Notice of Violation (“NOV”) on March 29, 2006,
via Certified Mail to Mr. G. Richard Wagoner, Jr., CEO of General Motors
Corporation, and C.T. Corporation, Registered Agent.
6.
A review of records pertaining to the Site was conducted by
a representative of IDEM. The violations
described in Findings Paragraph Nos. 7 through 9 below were noted at the time
of this record review and were cited in the NOV.
7. Pursuant to 327
8. Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(1), Part
II.A.1 of the Permit, 327 IAC 5-2-8(8), and Part II.B.1 of the Permit,
Respondent is required to, at all times, maintain in good working order and
efficiently operate all waste collection, control, treatment, and disposal
facilities.
9. Part I.A.1 of
the Permit contains the final effluent limitations applicable to the discharge
from Respondent’s WWTP at Outfall 002.
Discharge Monitoring Reports and Monthly Reports of Operation submitted by
Respondent to IDEM for the period between October 2004 and November 2005 reveal
that the Respondent failed to meet final effluent limitations contained in Part
I.A.1 of the Permit as follows:
The daily maximum and
monthly average concentration effluent limitations for Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD5) were exceeded in January, March, April, June, August, September
and October of 2005.
The monthly average
concentration effluent limitation for Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3) was exceeded in
April of 2005.
Respondent's failure to
meet effluent limitations contained in the Permit is in violation of 327 IAC
5-2-8(1), Part II.A.1 of the Permit, Part I.A.1 of
the Permit, 327 IAC 5-2-8(8), and Part II.B.1 of the Permit.
10. Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs)
submitted by Respondent for the period of December 2005 through March 2006
reveal that Respondent failed to comply with the daily maximum and the monthly
average effluent limitations for Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) in the months
of December, 2005 and January and February, 2006. The March, 2006 BOD monthly average was 17
mg/l, which was a minor exceedance of the 15 mg/l monthly average effluent
limitation. These violations were not
cited in the March 2006 Notice of Violation.
The Respondent waives issuance of a Notice of Violation and to the
settlement period of 60 days as provided for by IC 13-30-3-3 for these
violations.
11.
On April 19, 2006, Respondent submitted to IDEM the
following:
a.
Chronological summary of the numerous corrective and
preventative actions taken from February, 2005 through April, 2006 to address
the BOD exceedances.
b.
Copies of the monthly DMRs that addressed corrective actions
taken during each particular month.
c.
Copies of Respondent’s responses to IDEM’s prior Violations
Letters on this issue.
12.
Respondent has submitted a DMR for the month of April, 2006
which demonstrates compliance with the BOD permit limits. It is Respondent’s position that the series
of corrective and preventative actions resulted in Respondent achieving
compliance with the BOD permit limits as of April, 2006. Data from May, reported to IDEM, confirms
continued compliance with the BOD permit limits.
13.
In recognition of the settlement reached, Respondent waives
any right to administrative and judicial review of this Agreed Order.
II. ORDER
1.
This Agreed Order shall be effective (the “Effective Date”)
when it is approved by the Complainant or his delegate, and has been received
by the Respondent. This Agreed Order
shall have no force or effect until the Effective Date.
2.
The Respondent is assessed a civil penalty of Twenty One
Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Dollars ($21,870). Said penalty amount shall be due and payable
to the Environmental Management Special Fund within 30 days of the Effective
Date.
3. The
civil penalty is payable by check to the Environmental Management Special
Fund. The check shall include the Case
Number (2006-15323-W) of this action and shall be mailed to:
Indiana
Department of Environmental Management |
Cashiers Office – Mail Code 50-10C
|
|
|
4. In
the event that the civil penalty required by Order Paragraph 2, is not paid
when due, the Respondent shall pay interest on the unpaid balance at the rate
established by IC 24-4.6-1-101. The
interest shall continue to accrue until the civil penalty is paid in full.
5. This
Agreed Order shall apply to and be binding upon the Respondent, its successors,
and assigns. The Respondent's
signatories to this Agreed Order certify that they are fully authorized to
execute this document and legally bind the parties they represent. No change in ownership, corporate, or
partnership status of the Respondent shall in any way alter its status or
responsibilities under this Agreed Order.
6. In
the event that any terms of the Agreed Order are found to be invalid, the
remaining terms shall remain in full force and effect and shall be construed
and enforced as if the Agreed Order did not contain the invalid terms.
7. The
Respondent shall provide a copy of this Agreed Order, if in force, to any
subsequent owners or successors before ownership rights are transferred.
8.
This Agreed Order is not and shall not be interpreted to be a
permit or a modification of an existing permit, nor shall it in any way relieve
Respondent of its obligation to comply with the applicable requirements of
federal or state law or regulation.
9. The Complainant does not, by its
approval of this Agreed Order, warrant or aver in any manner that the
Respondent’s compliance with any aspect of this Agreed Order will result in
compliance with the provisions of any permit or order or any applicable federal
or state law or regulation.
Additionally, IDEM or anyone acting on its behalf shall not be held
liable for any costs or penalties the Respondent may incur as a result of
Respondent’s efforts to comply with this Agreed Order.
10. Nothing in this Agreed Order shall
prevent or limit IDEM’s rights to obtain penalties or injunctive relief under
any applicable federal or state law or regulation, except that IDEM may not
seek additional civil penalties for the violations specified in the Notice of
Violation or the above Findings of Fact.
11. Nothing in this Agreed Order shall
prevent IDEM or anyone acting on its behalf from communicating with the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or any other agency or entity
about any matters relating to this enforcement action. IDEM or anyone acting on its behalf shall not
be held liable for any costs or penalties the Respondent may incur as a result
of such communications with the EPA or any other agency or entity.
12. This
Agreed Order shall remain in effect until the Respondent complies with the
terms of Order Paragraph Nos. 2 through 4.
IDEM will promptly issue a Close-Out letter to the Respondent.
The remainder of this page
intentionally left blank.
TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION: |
|
RESPONDENT: |
|||||
Department of Environmental Management |
|
General Motors Corporation |
|||||
|
|
|
|||||
By: |
|
|
By: |
|
|||
|
Mark Stanifer |
|
Printed: |
Thomas W. Nulands |
|||
|
Water Enforcement Section |
|
Title: |
Group Director |
|||
|
Office of Enforcement |
|
|
|
|||
Date: |
|
|
Date: |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||||
COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT: |
|
COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT: |
|||||
Department of Environmental Management |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|||||
By: |
|
|
By: |
|
|||
|
J. C. Alexander |
|
|
Laura L. Fitzpatrick |
|||
|
Office of Legal Counsel |
|
|
Attorney, General Motors Corp. |
|||
Date: |
|
|
Date: |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL |
|||||||
MANAGEMENT THIS |
|
DAY
OF |
|
, 2006. |
|||
|
|||||||
|
For The Commissioner: |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Signed on August 9, 2006 |
||||||
|
Linda Runkle |
||||||
|
Assistant Commissioner |
||||||
|
of Legal Affairs |
||||||