STATE OF
INDIANA |
) |
SS: |
BEFORE THE
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF |
||||
|
) |
|
|
||||
COUNTY OF
MARION |
) |
|
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT |
||||
|
|||||||
COMMISSIONER
OF THE DEPARTMENT |
) |
|
|||||
OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, |
|
) |
|
||||
|
|
) |
|
||||
Complainant, |
|
) |
|
||||
|
|
) |
|
||||
|
v. |
|
) |
Case No. 2017-24283-H |
|||
|
|
) |
|
||||
AAR Aircraft Services, inC., |
|
) |
|
||||
|
|
) |
|
||||
Respondent. |
|
) |
|
||||
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 AAR Aircraft Services
(“Respondent”), which owns/operates the facility with United States
Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) ID No. IN0 000 055 152, located at 2825
West Perimeter Road, in Indianapolis, Marion County, Indiana (“Site”).
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”) to:
John
Holmes, President |
United
Agent Group, Inc. |
AAR
Aircraft Services, Inc. |
Registered
Agent for |
1100
N. Wood Dale Rd. |
AAR
Aircraft Services, Inc. |
Wood
Dale, IL 60191 |
105
E. Jefferson Boulevard #800 |
|
South
Bend, IN 46601 |
5.
Respondent provides aircraft maintenance,
repair and overhaul, landing gear services, engineering services and component
repair for major and regional passenger aircraft carriers, government agencies and
aircraft leasing companies.
6.
Respondent last updated its hazardous waste
activities on February 27, 2008.
Respondent notified as a large quantity hazardous waste generator.
7.
329 Indiana Administrative Code (“IAC”) 3.1
incorporates certain federal hazardous waste management requirements found in
40 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) Parts 260 through 270, and Part 273
including those identified below.
8.
During an investigation including an inspection
April 4, 2016 conducted by a representative of IDEM, the following violations
were found:
a. Pursuant to 40 CFR 262.11, a person who
generates a solid waste must determine if that waste is hazardous.
As noted during the investigation,
Respondent did not make hazardous waste determinations on aerosol cans, which
contained solid wastes generated by Respondent.
Respondent contends the aerosol cans are
recognized and determined hazardous. The
aerosol cans are accumulated in satellite areas within the facility. Photographs of the satellite accumulation
drums were submitted. Respondent has
been managing the aerosol cans as a hazardous waste since it open in 2004.
b. Pursuant to
40 CFR 268.7(a), a generator must determine if a hazardous waste is restricted
from land disposal and if the waste has to be treated before being land
disposed. This is done by determining if
the hazardous waste meets the treatment standards in 40 CFR 268.40, 40 CFR
268.45, or 40 CFR 268.49. This
determination can be made in either of two ways: testing the waste or using
knowledge of the waste. With the initial
shipment of hazardous waste (meeting or not meeting the treatment standards in
40 CFR 268.40 and 40 CFR 268.42), the generator must send a one-time written
notice to each treatment or storage facility receiving the waste, and place a
copy in the file. No further
notification is necessary until such time that the waste or facility change, in
which case a new notification must be sent and a copy placed in the generator's
file.
As noted during the investigation,
Respondent did not transport hazardous waste aerosol cans to a permitted
treatment, storage, and disposal facility; therefore a one-time land ban
notification and certification was not provided with the initial shipment of
hazardous waste as required. Respondent
did not determine if the hazardous waste aerosol cans had to be treated before
being land disposed.
Respondent contends the aerosol can was
mistakenly disposed into the wrong drum by Respondents’ technician, followed by
Industrial Service Group (ISG), an environmental waste management company which
Respondent relies on to dispose and transport all hazardous waste in accordance
with the law.
c. Pursuant to 40 CFR 262.20, a generator
who transports, or offers for transportation, hazardous waste for offsite
treatment, storage, or disposal, must prepare a manifest. A generator must designate on the manifest
one facility which is permitted to handle the waste described on the
manifest. A generator may designate an
alternate facility to handle his waste in the event that an emergency prevents
delivery of the waste to the primary designated facility.
As noted during the investigation, Respondent
offered hazardous waste for transportation for offsite treatment, storage, or
disposal without preparing a manifest.
Specifically, Respondent offered hazardous waste aerosol cans to a nonpermitted facility without preparing a manifest. The aerosol cans were recorded on a
non-hazardous waste manifest stating that all the aerosol cans were RCRA
empty. The aerosol cans were transported
to ISG’s 86th Street location in Indianapolis, IN. IDEM inspectors observed partially full
hazardous waste aerosol cans originating from Respondent’s Site at ISG during
their March 29, 2016 inspection.
d. Pursuant to 40 CFR 262.12(c), a generator
must not offer its hazardous waste to transporters or to treatment, storage, or
disposal facilities that have not received an EPA identification number.
As noted during the investigation,
Respondent sent its hazardous waste to a treatment, storage, or disposal
facility that did not have an EPA identification number. Specifically, Respondent manifested aerosol
cans as RCRA empty on a non-hazardous waste manifest to ISG. IDEM inspectors confirmed partially full
aerosol cans were accepted by ISG which is not a permitted treatment, storage,
disposal facility during the March 29, 2016 inspection at ISG.
Respondent contends the aerosol can was
mistakenly disposed into the wrong drum by Respondents’ technician, followed by
Industrial Service Group (ISG), an environmental waste management company which
Respondent relies on to dispose and transport all hazardous waste in accordance
with the law. Respondent contends ISG
failed to puncture the aerosol cans before transporting them to ISG’s facility.
e. Pursuant to IC 13-30-2-1(12), a person
may not cause or allow the transportation of a hazardous waste without a
manifest if a manifest is required by law.
As noted during the investigation,
Respondent caused or allowed the transportation of a hazardous waste without preparing
a manifest as required by law.
Specifically, Respondent offered hazardous waste aerosol cans to a nonpermitted facility without preparing a manifest. The aerosol cans were recorded on a
non-hazardous waste manifest stating that all the aerosol cans were RCRA
empty. The aerosol cans were transported
to ISG’s 86th Street location in Indianapolis, IN. IDEM inspectors observed partially full
hazardous waste aerosol cans originating from Respondent’s Site at ISG during
their March 29, 2016 inspection.
Respondent requires that all hazardous
waste from the facility is to be properly and accurately manifested and
Respondent has robust procedures in place to ensure compliance. Respondent submitted a copy of the training
presentation titled “Welcome to Environmental, Health & Safety New Employee
INDOC Training”. This training is given
to all employees when they join the company to ensure that they have the
knowledge and skills to properly handle the hazardous materials they will utilize
in the course of their work.
Respondent contends the aerosol can was
mistakenly disposed into the wrong drum by Respondents’ technician, followed by
ISG which Respondent relies on to dispose and transport all hazardous waste in
accordance with the law, failed to puncture the aerosol cans before
transporting them to ISG’s facility.
f. Pursuant to 40 273.13(d)(1), a small quantity handler of universal waste
must contain any lamp in containers or packages that are structurally sound,
adequate to prevent breakage, and compatible with the contents of the lamps. Such containers and packages must remain
closed and must lack evidence of leakage, spillage or damage that could cause leakage
under reasonably foreseeable conditions.
As noted during the investigation,
Respondent had approximately four universal waste light bulb containers located
throughout the facility stored open.
Respondent sent an email dated April 6,
2016, demonstrating the universal waste containers had been properly closed.
Respondent contends staff technicians
were actively disposing of light bulbs from two 757 aircraft (each in a
separate hanger) and unfortunately the lids were not tightly replaced during that
exercise. Respondent conducted a
“stand-down” and crew briefing with respect to this issue and expressly
reminded technicians of the importance of replacing the lids tightly. In addition, Respondent has placed stickers
on the Universal Waste Containers that state “Replace Lid Tightly” to ensure
compliance.
g. Pursuant to 40 CFR 262.20(a), a generator
who sends hazardous waste off-site must ensure that manifests are fully filled
out and contain accurate information.
As noted during the investigation,
Respondent did not accurately fill out the required information on one (1)
hazardous waste manifest. Specifically,
Manifest Tracking Number 008656470 JJK had Respondent’s Duluth, Minnesota
location Generator ID Number (Item 1) and Generator Site (Item 5) address
rather than the Respondent’s EPA ID Number and Site address. The generator’s signature (Item 15) was
signed by Respondent’s employee located in Indianapolis. Furthermore, the Transportation Security
Administration (“TSA”) records document the transporter who signed the manifest
(Item 17) on March 29, 2016 entering the Site, therefore, the transporter could
not have been in Minnesota when the manifest was signed.
Respondent contends this was a clerical
error which was promptly corrected.
h. Pursuant to 40
CFR 262.42(a), (1) a generator of 1,000 kilograms or greater of hazardous waste
in a calendar month, or greater than 1 kg of acute hazardous waste listed in
§261.31 or §261.33(e) in a calendar month, who does not receive a copy of the
manifest with the handwritten signature of the owner or operator of the
designated facility within 35 days of the date the waste was accepted by the
initial transporter must contact the transporter and/or the owner or operator
of the designated facility to determine the status of the hazardous waste.
(2)
a generator of 1,000 kilograms or greater of hazardous waste in a calendar
month, or greater than 1 kg of acute hazardous waste listed in §261.31or
§261.33(e) in a calendar month, must submit an Exception Report to the Commissioner
if he has not received a copy of the manifest with the handwritten signature of
the owner or operator of the designated facility within 45 days of the date the
waste was accepted by the initial transporter. The Exception Report must
include:
(i)
A legible copy of the manifest for which the
generator does not have confirmation of delivery;
(ii)
A cover letter signed by the generator or his
authorized representative explaining the efforts taken to locate the hazardous
waste and the results of those efforts.
As
noted during the investigation, Respondent had not received a signed copy of
Manifest Tracking Number 008656470 JJK with the designated facility signature.
9.
Respondent submitted a response dated August
23, 2017 addressing the issued Notice of Violation dated June 28, 2017.
10. 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 the statutes,
rules, and/or permit conditions listed in the findings above.
3.
Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date,
Respondent shall comply with 40 CFR 262.42(a)(2). Specifically, Respondent shall submit to IDEM
an Exception Report for Manifest Tracking Number 008656470 JJK.
4.
Upon the Effective Date, Respondent shall
ensure compliance with 40 CFR 268.7(a).
Specifically, Respondent shall ensure that a land ban one-time notice
with all the proper waste codes and manifest number is provided with each
initial shipment to each treatment, storage, disposal facility receiving the
waste and a copy placed in the file. The
one time notice shall include a certification statement, with the exact wording
found in 40 CFR 268.7 as applicable, certifying either the waste complies or
does not comply with the treatment standards.
5.
Upon the Effective Date, Respondent shall
ensure compliance with 40 CFR 262.20 and IC 13-30-2-1(12). Specifically, Respondent shall not allow the
transport of hazardous waste without a manifest.
6.
Upon the Effective Date, Respondent shall
ensure compliance with 40 CFR 262.12(c).
Specifically, Respondent shall only offer its hazardous waste to
transporters or treatment, storage, or disposal facilities that have received an
EPA identification number.
7.
Upon the Effective Date, Respondent shall
ensure the hazardous waste manifests are filled out accurately according to the
instructions in the Appendix to Part 262.
8.
All submittals required by this Agreed Order,
unless Respondent is notified otherwise in writing by IDEM, shall be sent to:
Christina Halloran, Enforcement Case
Manager |
Office of Land Quality |
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management |
100 North Senate Avenue |
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251 |
9.
Respondent is assessed and agrees to pay a
civil penalty of Nine Thousand and Two Hundred Dollars ($9,200). 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”.
10.
In the event the terms and conditions of the
following paragraphs are violated, Complainant may assess and Respondent shall
pay a stipulated penalty in the following amount:
Paragraph |
Penalty |
|
|
3 |
$200/week
late |
11.
Stipulated penalties shall be due and payable
no later than the 30th day after Respondent receives written notice
that Complainant has determined a stipulated penalty is due; the 30th
day being the “Due Date”. Complainant
may notify Respondent at any time that a stipulated penalty is due. Failure to notify Respondent in writing in a
timely manner of stipulated penalty assessment shall not waive Complainant’s
right to collect such stipulated penalty or preclude Complainant from seeking
additional relief against Respondent for violation of this Agreed Order. Neither assessment nor payment of stipulated
penalties shall preclude Complainant from seeking additional relief against
Respondent for a violation of this Agreed Order; such additional relief
includes any remedies or sanctions available pursuant to Indiana law,
including, but not limited to, civil penalties pursuant to IC 13-30-4.
12.
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 |
Office of Legal Counsel |
IGCN, Room N1307 |
100 North Senate Avenue |
Indianapolis, IN 46204 |
13.
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 12, above.
14.
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.
15.
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.
16.
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.
17.
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 permits or any applicable Federal or State
law or regulation.
18.
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.
19.
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.
20.
This Agreed Order shall remain in effect until
IDEM issues a Resolution of Case letter to Respondent.
TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION: |
RESPONDENT: |
||||
Department of
Environmental Management |
|
||||
|
|
||||
By:
_________________________ |
By: _________________________ |
||||
|
Nancy Johnston, Section
Chief |
|
|||
|
Enforcement Section |
Printed:
______________________ |
|||
Office of Land Quality |
|
||||
|
Title:
________________________ |
||||
|
|
||||
Date: __________________ |
Date:
_______________________ |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT: |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
By:
________________________ |
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Date:
______________________ |
||||
|
|||||
APPROVED AND
ADOPTED BY THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL |
|||||
MANAGEMENT
THIS |
_________ |
DAY
OF |
________________________, |
20__. |
|
|
|||||
|
For the
Commissioner: |
||||
|
|
||||
|
Signed
02/14/2018 By: |
||||
|
Peggy Dorsey, Assistant Commissioner |
||||
|
Office of
Land Quality |
||||