STATE OF INDIANA

COUNTY OF MARION

)
)
)


SS:

BEFORE THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

 

COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT,

Complainant,

v.

SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC,

Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)






Case No. 2012-21207-A

 

 

AGREED ORDER

 

Complainant and 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, 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 (“IDEM”), a department of the State of Indiana created by Indiana Code (“IC”) 13-13-1-1.

 

2.            Respondent is SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC, which owns and operates the plastics manufacturing plant with Plant ID No. 129-00002, located at One Lexan Lane, in Mt. Vernon, Posey County, Indiana.

 

3.            IDEM has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action.

 

4.            Pursuant to IC 13-30-3-3, IDEM issued a Notice of Violation (“NOV”) via Certified Mail in conjunction with this Agreed Order on December 20, 2012.

 

5.            Respondent owns and operates a plastics manufacturing plant for the manufacture of plastics.

 

6.            During an investigation conducted by a representative of IDEM, the following violations were found:

 

a.            Respondent owns and operates a Plastics manufacturing facility with Plant I.D. No. 129-00002 located at One Lexan Lane in Mt. Vernon, Posey County, Indiana.

 

b.            Pursuant to 326 IAC 6-2-3(a), Permit Condition E.4.2 of Operating Permit Number 30384, Respondent shall limit particulate matter emissions from the Phenol Boiler H530-B not to exceed 0.19 pounds per MMBtu heat input.

The results of the stack test that was conducted on April 17, 2012 showed the Respondent’s H530-B stack averaged 0.295 pounds of particulate matter per MMBtu in violation of 326 IAC 6-2-3(a), Permit condition E.4.2

 

c.            Pursuant to 40 CFR 63, Subpart FFFF, Permit Condition V.1.4, Respondent shall limit HAPS Emissions from H-2100 Oxidizer to a reduction of < 98% or an outlet concentration of < 20 parts per million (ppm).

The results of the stack test that was conducted on May 23, 2012 showed the Respondent’s H-2100 Oxidizer stack averaged a 69.9% emission rate reduction and an outlet concentration was 221 ppm in violation of 40 CFR 63, Subpart FFFF, Permit condition V.1.4.

 

d.            Pursuant to 326 IAC 20 and 40 CFR 63, Subparts H, I, SS, TT and YY, Permit Conditions G.5.1(a), Q.1.2, V.1.8, E.8.1(a), F.1.5 and F.1.7.1(b), Respondent shall install a plug, cap, blind flange or a second valve on an open-ended valve or line.

The Respondent failed to install a plug, cap, blind flange or second valve on an open-ended line in violation of 326 IAC 20 and 40 CFR 63, Subparts H, I, SS, TT and YY, Permit Conditions G.5.1(a), Q.1.2, V.1.8, E.8.1(a), F.1.5 and F.1.7.1(b).  The Respondent reported the violations on the 2011 Annual Compliance Certification.

 

e.            Pursuant to 326 IAC 2-7-6(1), Permit Conditions O.1.3(a), G.2.6(a) and Q.2.20(a), Respondent shall conduct visible emission notations from exhaust stacks once per week during normal daylight operations when exhausting to atmosphere.

The Respondent failed to conduct visible emission notations from exhaust stacks once per week during normal daylight operations when exhausting to atmosphere violation of 326 IAC 2-7-6(1), Permit Conditions O.1.3(a), G.2.6(a) and Q.2.20(a).  The Respondent reported the violations on the 2011 Annual Compliance Certification.

 

f.             Pursuant to 326 IAC 20 and 40 CFR 63, Subpart F and G, Permit Condition E.1.4, E.3.3 and E.3.5, Respondent shall route the C-650 process vent to the existing thermal combustion unit.

 

The Respondent failed to route the C-650 process vent to the existing thermal combustion unit in violation of 326 IAC 20 and 40 CFR 63, Subpart F and G, Permit Condition E.1.4, E.3.3 and E.3.5.  The Respondent reported the violation on the 2011 Annual Compliance Certification.

 

g.            Pursuant to 326 IAC 20 and 40 CFR 63, Subparts H, I, SS, TT and YY, Permit Condition G.5.1, Respondent shall conduct leak monitoring of valves.

 

The Respondent failed to conduct leak monitoring in violation of 326 IAC 20 and 40 CFR 63, Subparts H, I, SS, TT and YY, Permit Condition G.5.1.  The Respondent reported the violations on the 2011 Annual Compliance Certification.

 

h.            Pursuant to 326 IAC 20 and 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart FFF, Permit Conditions V.1.2(d), V.1.4 and V.2.1(a), the Respondent shall vent to H2100 Inlet through a closed-vent system to any combination of control devices.

 

The Respondent failed to vent to the H2100 inlet through a closed-vent system to any combination of control devices in violation of 326 IAC 20 and 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart FFF, Permit Conditions V.1.2(d), V.1.4 and V.2.1(a).  The Respondent reported the violations on the 2011 Annual Compliance Certification.

 

i.              Pursuant to 326 IAC 3-5 Permit Condition Q.2.10(a)(1), Respondent shall conduct calibration tests on NOx analyzers.

 

The Respondent failed to conduct calibration tests on NOx analyzers in violation of 326 IAC 3-5 Permit Condition Q.2.10(a)(1).  The Respondent reported the violation on the 2011 Annual Compliance Certification.

 

7.            The Respondent has conducted the following actions to return the operation back into compliance:

 

a.            During and after testing of the Phenol Boiler H530-B, the waste feed system was investigated to determine the cause of the high fuel feed line pressure.  The higher feed line pressure was thought to have contributed to the stack test failure.  Calibration check on the boiler instrumentation and pressure line cleanout did not identify any abnormalities with the system.  The Respondent retested the boiler on May 10, 2012 and the retest showed that the unit is in compliance with the particulate matter emission limit.

 

b.            After the H-2100 unit failed the test, the portion of the plant that vents to the unit was shut down and the control unit was inspected.  The visual inspection revealed that part of the structural support on which the catalyst bed rests had failed allowing the bed level to become uneven causing the exhaust gas to short circuit through the bed.  The Respondent immediately took the bed out of service and placed an alternate bed into service.  The Respondent retested the H-2100 oxidizer on June 27, 2012 and the retest showed that the unit is in compliance with the HAPS limit.

 

c.            The Respondent corrected the open-ended valves or lines using either a plug, cap, blind flange or second valve on open-ended valves of lines within the same day of discovery.

 

d.            The Respondent conducted visible emission notations during the next weekly inspection period.

 

e.            The Respondent took corrective action of venting the C651 vent to the thermal oxidizer once the venting was discovered during field calibration.  The bypass occurred to a total of nine (9) minutes.

 

f.             The Respondent conducted leak detection monitoring during the next monitoring cycle which occurred in January 2012.  None of the valves were found to be leaking during the January 2012 sampling.

 

g.            The Respondent corrected the bypass once it was discovered during limit switch and valve function testing.  The bypass occurred for a total of two (2) minutes.

 

h.            The Respondent’s Continuous Emissions Monitoring was re-calibrated on January 1, 2012 within a day of the failed calibration.  The unit failed the calibration on December 31, 2011.

 

8.            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 (“Effective Date”) when it is approved by Complainant or Complainant’s delegate, and has been received by Respondent.  This Agreed Order shall have no force or effect until the Effective Date.

 

2.            Respondent shall comply with rules and permit conditions listed in the findings here.

 

3.            All submittals required by this Agreed Order, unless Respondent is notified otherwise in writing by IDEM, shall be sent to:

 

David L. Harrison, Compliance and Enforcement Manager

Compliance and Enforcement Branch – Mail Code 61-53

Indiana Department of Environmental Management

100 North Senate Avenue

Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251

 

4.            Respondent is assessed and agrees to pay a civil penalty of Seventeen Thousand Six Hundred dollars ($17,600.00).    Said penalty amount shall be due and payable to the Environmental Management Special Fund within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date; the 30th day being the “Due Date”.

 

 

 

5.            Civil and stipulated penalties are payable by check to the “Environmental Management Special Fund.”  Checks shall include the Case Number of this action and shall be mailed to:

 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management

Cashier – Mail Code 50-10C

100 North Senate Avenue

Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251

 

6.            This Agreed Order shall apply to and be binding upon Respondent and its successors and assigns.  Respondent’s signatories to this Agreed Order certify that they are fully authorized to execute this Agreed Order and legally bind the party they represent.  No change in ownership, corporate, or partnership status of Respondent shall in any way alter its status or responsibilities under this Agreed Order.

 

7.            In the event that the monies due to IDEM pursuant to this Agreed Order are not paid on or before their Due Date, Respondent shall pay interest on the unpaid balance at the rate established by IC 24-4.6-1.  The interest shall be computed as having accrued from the Due Date until the date that Respondent pays any unpaid balance.  Such interest shall be payable to the Environmental Management Special Fund, and shall be payable to IDEM in the manner specified in Paragraph 5, above.

 

8.            In the event that any terms of this 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 this Agreed Order did not contain the invalid terms.

 

9.            Respondent shall provide a copy of this Agreed Order, if in force, to any subsequent owners or successors before ownership rights are transferred.  Respondent shall ensure that all contractors, firms and other persons performing work under this Agreed Order comply with the terms of this Agreed Order.

 

10.         This Agreed Order is not and shall not be interpreted to be a permit or a modification of an existing permit.  This Agreed Order, and IDEM’s review or approval of any submittal made by Respondent pursuant to this Agreed Order, shall not in any way relieve Respondent of its obligation to comply with the requirements of its applicable permit or any applicable Federal or State law or regulation.

 

11.         Complainant does not, by its approval of this Agreed Order, warrant or aver in any manner that Respondent’s compliance with any aspect of this Agreed Order will result in compliance with the provisions of any permit, 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 Respondent may incur as a result of Respondent’s efforts to comply with this Agreed Order.

 

12.         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, and hereby waives its right to, seek additional civil penalties for the same violations specified in the NOV.

 

13.         Nothing in this Agreed Order shall prevent IDEM or anyone acting on its behalf from communicating with the 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 Respondent[s] may incur as a result of such communications with the EPA or any other agency or entity.

 

14.         This Agreed Order shall remain in effect until IDEM issues a Resolution of Case letter to Respondent.

 

 

TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION:

 

RESPONDENT:

Department of Environmental Management

 

SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC

 

 

 

By:

 

 

By:

 

 

Craig L. Henry, Chief

 

Printed:

 

 

Compliance and Enforcement Section 3

 

Title:

 

 

Office of Air Quality

 

 

 

Date:

 

 

Date:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Date:

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

MANAGEMENT THIS

 

DAY OF

 

, 2013.

 

 

For the Commissioner

 

 

 

Signed on February 5, 2013

 

Keith Baugues, Assistant Commissioner

 

Office of Air Quality

 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management