STATE
OF
|
)
|
|
BEFORE
THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT
|
|||
|
|
) |
SS: |
OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT |
|||
|
|
) |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT |
) |
|||||
|
OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT, |
) |
|||||
|
|
|
) |
||||
|
Complainant, |
|
) |
CAUSE NO. A-4548 |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CAUSE NO. A-4572 |
|||
|
v. |
|
) |
CAUSE NO. A-4592 |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CAUSE NO. A-4596 |
|||
|
ISPAT INLAND INC. a/k/a |
|
) |
CASE NO. 1999-8501-A |
|||
|
ISPAT INLAND STEEL
COMPANY |
|
) |
CASE NO. 2000-8958-A |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CASE NO. 2002-11357-A |
|||
|
Respondent |
|
) |
CASE NO. 2002-11816-A |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CASE NO. 2003-13433-A |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CASE NO. 2004-13956-A |
|||
|
. |
|
) |
CASE NO. 2004-14009-A |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CASE NO. 2004-14193-A |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CASE NO. 2004-14294-A |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CASE NO. 2005-14486-A |
|||
|
|
|
) |
CASE NO. 2005-14823-A |
|||
AGREED ORDER
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, 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 (hereinafter
referred to as “Complainant”) of the Indiana Department of Environmental
Management, a department of the State of
2.
Respondent is Ispat
Inland, Inc., a/k/a Ispat Inland Steel Company
(hereinafter referred to as (“Respondent”), which owns and operates an
integrated steel mill, located at
3.
The Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (“IDEM”) has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of
this action.
4.
Pursuant to IC 13-30-3-3, IDEM issued Notices of
Violation via Certified Mail to:
A.
|
Mr. Jim Carson |
C. T. Corporation Systems |
|
Environmental Affairs |
Registered Agent FOR |
|
Ispat Inland Steel Company |
Ispat Inland Steel Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
i.
in the Cause No.
A-8501;
ii.
in the Cause No. A-4548;
iii.
in the Cause Nos.
A-4572, A-4592, and A-4596; and
iv.
in the Case No. 2001-8958-A;
B.
|
Mr. Peter D. Southwick |
C. T. Corporation Systems |
|
President |
Registered Agent FOR |
|
Ispat Inland Steel Company |
Ispat Inland Steel Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
i.
in the Case Nos. 2004-13956-A and 2004-14009-A;
ii.
in the Case No. 2004-14193-A;
iii.
in the Case No. 2004-14294-A;
iv.
in the Case No. 2005-14486-A; and
v.
in the case No. 2005-14823-A.
C.
The Respondent waives issuance of Notices of
Violation and the settlement period of sixty (60) days as provided for by IC
13-30-3-3:
i.
in the Case No. 2002-11357-A;
ii.
in the Case No. 2002-11816-A; and
iii.
in the Case No.
2003-13433-A.
5.
Inspections, visible emissions evaluations, and
records review were conducted at and/or nearby the Site by representatives of IDEM’s Office of Air Quality (“OAQ”). The following violations were observed at the
time of these inspections, visible emissions evaluations, and records review:
6.
Pursuant to 326 IAC 5-l-2(2)(B), sources of
opacity located in designated areas in Lake County shall not exceed twenty
percent (20%) opacity in any single 6-minute averaging period.
a.
On January 11, 2000, visible emissions from the
number 6 blast furnace cast house roof monitor exceeded the 20% 6-minute
average in violation of 326 IAC 5-l-2(2)(B).
b.
On January 25, 2000, visible emissions from the
number 6 blast furnace cast house roof monitor exceeded the 20% six 6-minute
average in violation of 326 IAC 5-l-2(2)(B).
c.
On October 18, 2000, opacity of visible
emissions from the number 6 blast furnace cast house roof monitor exceeded the
20% 6-minute average in violation of 326 IAC 5-l-2(2)(B).
d.
On November 23, 2004, opacity of the visible emissions
from the sinter plant main stack exceeded the 20% 6-minute average in violation
of 326 IAC 5-1-2(2)(B).
7.
Pursuant to 326 IAC 6-1-10.1(e),both the Number
2 and the Number 4 Basic Oxygen Furnaces’ (“BOF”) roof monitors shall comply
with a twenty percent (20%) visible emissions opacity limit over a 3-minute
average.
a.
On March 11, 1999, this facility exceeded the
20% 3-minute average visible emissions opacity limit in violation of 326 IAC
6-1-10.1(e).
b.
On April 28, 1999, this facility exceeded the
20% 3-minute average visible emissions opacity limit in violation of 326 IAC
6-1-10.1(e).
c.
On July 12, 2001, this facility exceeded the 20%
3-minute average visible emissions opacity limit in violation of 326 IAC
6-1-10.1(e).
d.
On January 29, 2003, this facility exceeded the
20% 3-minute average opacity limit in violation of 326 IAC 6-1-10.1(e).
e.
On February, 20, 2003, this facility exceeded
the 20% 3-minute average opacity limit in violation of 326 IAC 6-1-10.1(e).
f.
On April 26, 2004, this facility exceeded the
20% 3-minute average visible emissions opacity limit in violation of 326 IAC
6-1-10.1(e).
e.
On March 26, 2004, this facility exceeded the
20% 3-minute average in violations of 326 IAC 6-1-10.1(e).
f.
On July 12, 2005, this facility exceeded the 20%
3-minute average visible emissions opacity limit in violation of 326 IAC
6-1-10.1(e).
8.
Pursuant to 326 IAC 6-1-10.1(e), opacity of
visible emissions from this source’s electric arc furnace (‘EAF”) roof monitor shall
not exceed 20% over a 6-minute average.
a.
On July 7, 2004, multiple 6-minute averages of
opacity of visible emissions from Respondent’s EAF roof monitor exceeded 20% in
violation of 326 IAC 6-1-10.1(e).
b.
On August
17, 2004, multiple 6-minute averages of opacity of visible emissions from
Respondent’s EAF roof monitor exceeded 20% in violation of 326 IAC 6-1-10.1(e).
9.
Pursuant to 326 IAC 6-1-11.1(d)(1), average
instantaneous opacity of fugitive emissions from a paved road or parking lot
shall not exceed ten percent (10%) over a 12-readings average.
a.
On July 9, 2001,
a 12-readings average instantaneous opacity of the fugitive emissions from the
paved road at this facility, located at Rt. 46, Section 27, exceeded 10% in
violation of 326 IAC 6-1-11.1(d)(1).
10.
Pursuant to 326 IAC 6-4-2(4), no source shall allow fugitive emissions
to visibly cross the boundary or property line of a source.
a.
On August 14,
2003, this source allowed fugitive emissions that originated in the process of
the coke cars unloading at the number 5 and number 6 blast furnaces rotary
dump, to cross property lines at ground level in violation of 326 IAC 6-4-2(4).
b.
On November 23,
2004, this source allowed fugitive emissions that originated at the Sinter Plant to cross property lines at ground
level into
11.
Pursuant to 326 IAC 6-1-11.1(d)(7)(D), there
shall be zero percent (0%) frequency of visible emissions observations from a
building enclosing all or a part of the material process equipment, except of
the vent.
a.
On November 23, 2004, fugitive emissions were
escaping from openings on the north side of the building enclosing the
sintering operations in violation of 326 IAC 6-1-11.1(d)(7)(D).
12.
A Title V permit application number T089-6577,
submitted by Respondent on September 16, 1996, contained a self-disclosure of
non-compliance of:
a.
The number five and six blast furnaces’ cast
house emissions (326 IAC 5-1-2);
b.
The pugh ladle maintenance,
ladle burning, and iron pigging with a baghouse (326
IAC 5-1-2);
c.
The lime plant’s kiln (326 IAC 6-1-11.1(d));
d.
The lime plant’s storage silo with a baghouse (326 IAC 6-1-11.1(d)); and
e.
The sinter plant’s discharge end with a baghouse (326 IAC 5-1-2);
which this Agreed Order resolves.
13.
Since December of 1996, Respondent completed the
following corrective actions to remediate the non-compliance referred to in
Findings of Fact Paragraph Nos. 7, 8, 10, and 11:
a.
evaluation and optimization of the existing
control equipment; and upgrade of the existing control systems and associated
equipment based on the evaluation;
b.
installation of an improved close capture,
partial enclosure at the present lancing operation station at the north end of
the mold foundry building; upgrade of the existing mold foundry baghouse to capture and monitor the lancing fumes;
c.
the lime plant emission control upgrade that
includes equipment to collect and control dust from the truck loading and
related sources at the kiln area, new ductwork, and loading spouts;
d.
the lime plant emission control upgrade that
includes equipment to collect and control dust from truck loading and related
sources at the silo areas, new baghouse and truck
loading spouts;
e.
the sinter plant emission control upgrade that
includes recycling vibrating conveyor system to collect fines at the sinter
cooler, a baghouse with the ductwork to capture
emissions from the upper screening station area;
f.
the
number 5 and number 6 blast furnaces rotary dump enhanced
dust control and replacement of the missing sheeting on the building housing
the dump;
g.
installed meters to monitor steam ring flow and
reprogrammed computer logic that prevents oxygen blowing at the No. 2 BOF if there
are flux gate or steam ring flow malfunctions associated with the No. 2 BOF OG
Systems;
h.
adjustments to material charging models aimed at
reducing the frequency of reactions when making steel heats at the No. 4 BOF
i.
fixed internal perforation of the
water jacket on the cooled portion of the vertical duct and cleaned the duct at
the EAF exhaust system; and
j.
employed a certified
visible emissions reader.
14.
On August 25, 1998, Respondent entered into the
Agreed Order in the Cause No. A-4218 stipulating to a penalty of Five Thousand
Dollars ($5,000.00) per each count per each day of violation of 326 IAC
6-1-10.1(e) related to scrap management.
15.
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 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.
Attached to this Agreed Order as “Exhibit A” are
standard operating procedures (“SOPs”) detailing proper control equipment
inspection procedures relating to violations associated with (1) the No. 2 BOF
OG System; (2) the No. 2 BOF Secondary Ventilation System; and (3) the No. 6
Blast Furnace Casthouse Emissions Control System. The
SOPs have been developed by the Respondent and include a regularly scheduled
preventative maintenance program. Upon
the Effective Date of the Agreed Order Respondent shall ensure the following
when the respective facilities are in operation:
a.
Ductwork associated with No. 2 BOF Secondary
Ventilation System capture is inspected semiannually for problems;
b.
Drains associated with the No. 2 BOF OG System fans
are inspected weekly for blockage;
c.
Hatch plates associated with the No. 2 BOF OG
Capture System are properly replaced and sealed, when the furnace skirt seal is
cleaned. Additionally, at least every
calendar quarter, Respondent shall inspect the hatch plates and properly
replace and seal them if necessary;
d.
The scrubber associated with the No. 6 Blast
Furnace Casthouse Control System is inspected
quarterly for debris or other buildup;
3.
Each SOP attached hereto and incorporated by
reference at Exhibit A shall be an enforceable component to this Agreed
Order. Upon agreement by IDEM, which
shall not be unreasonably withheld, the Respondent may submit, and then shall
comply with, revised SOPs, as may be necessary for improved operations. Respondent shall comply with the terms of
this Agreed Order, including the SOPs in Exhibit A, until Respondent’s final
Part 70 operating permit is effective, or until the May 22, 2006 effective date
of the Integrated Iron & Steel Manufacturing NESHAP, whichever occurs first.
4.
If the Respondent identifies any
“problems,” “blockages,” “debris or other buildup,” or any other potential
problem observed during the inspections, preventive maintenance, and/or repair
procedures required by the SOPs in Exhibit A (as required by Order Paragraph
No. 1), and such problem causes the source to exceed an emission limitation or
standard due to increases in emissions attributable to the problem,
Respondent shall:
a.
Immediately and successfully implement all
reasonably necessary and appropriate corrective actions, which may include, but
are not limited to, production slowdown and/or shutdown (“Corrective Actions”)
until such “problems,” “blockages,” “debris or other buildup,” or any other
potential problems have been resolved; and
b.
Record such Corrective Actions and store the
records at the Respondent’s facility for at least three years. The records must be available for IDEM’s inspection.
Respondent shall report such activities to IDEM within forty-eight (48)
hours as provided in Order Paragraph 5.
Respondent shall also comply with 326 IAC 2-7-16.
5.
All submittals required by this Agreed Order,
unless notified otherwise in writing, shall be sent to:
|
Mr. Michael Stonik |
|
Office of Compliance and
Enforcement Mail Code: 60-02 |
|
Indiana Department of
Environmental Management |
|
|
|
|
6.
Respondent is assessed a civil penalty of
Eighty-Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars ($87,700.00). Said penalty amount shall be due and payable to
the Environmental Management Special Fund within thirty (30) days of the
Effective Date of this Agreed Order.
7.
In the event the terms and conditions of the
following Paragraphs are violated, the Complainant may assess and the
Respondent shall pay a stipulated penalty in the following amount:
|
|
Violation |
Penalty |
|
|
|
|
|
a. |
Failure to comply with Order Paragraph Nos. 2(a) through (d) and/or
4(a) |
Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) per each day of violation per each Sections
(a) through (d) and 4(a); |
|
|
|
|
|
b. |
Failure to comply with Order Paragraph No. 4(b) |
One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per each day of violation per each
Section 4(b). |
Stipulated penalties
shall not apply to “problems” which qualify as a malfunction pursuant to 326
IAC 1-2-39, provided Respondent properly documented and reported a malfunction.
8.
Stipulated penalties shall be due and payable
within thirty (30) days after Respondent receives written notice that the
Complainant has determined a stipulated penalty is due. Assessment and payment of stipulated
penalties shall not preclude the Complainant from seeking any additional relief
against the Respondent for violation of the Agreed Order. In lieu of any of the stipulated penalties
given above, the Complainant may seek any other remedies or sanctions available
by virtue of Respondent’s violation of this Agreed Order or Indiana law,
including, but not limited to, civil penalties pursuant to IC 13-30-4.
9.
Civil and stipulated penalties are payable by
check to the Environmental Management Special Fund. Checks shall include the Cause Number of this
action and shall be mailed to:
|
Indiana Department of
Environmental Management |
|
Cashier’s Office Mail
Code: 50-10C |
|
|
|
|
10.
In the event that the civil penalty required by
Order Paragraph No. 6 of this Agreed order is not paid within thirty (30) days
of the Effective Date of this Agreed Order or the stipulated penalties required
by Order Paragraph No. 7 of this Agreed Order are not paid within thirty (30)
days of the receipt of Complainant’s written notice, 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.
11.
“Force Majeure,” for purposes of
this Agreed Order, is defined as any event arising from causes beyond the control
of the Respondent that delays or prevents the
performance of any obligation under this Agreed Order despite Respondent’s best
efforts to fulfill the obligation. The
requirement that the Respondent exercise “best efforts to fulfill the obligation”
includes using best efforts to anticipate any potential force majeure event and best efforts to address the effects of
any potential force majeure event (1) as it is
occurring and (2) following the potential force majeure
event, such that the delay is minimized to the greatest extent possible. “Force Majeure”
does not include financial inability to complete the work required by this
Agreed Order or increases in costs to perform the work.
The Respondent shall notify IDEM by calling within three (3) calendar days and
by writing no later than seven (7) calendar days after any event which the
Respondent contends is a force majeure. Such notification shall describe the
anticipated length of the delay, the cause or causes of the delay, the measures
taken or to be taken by the Respondent to minimize the delay, and the timetable
by which these measures will be implemented.
The Respondent shall include with any notice all available documentation
supporting their claim that the delay was attributable to a force majeure. Failure to
comply with the above requirements shall preclude Respondent from asserting any
claim of force majeure for that event. The Respondent shall have the burden of
demonstrating that the event is a force majeure. The decision of whether an event is a force majeure shall be made by IDEM. Said decision shall be communicated to the
Respondent.
If a delay is attributable to a force majeure, IDEM
shall extend, in writing, the time period for performance under this Agreed
Order, by the amount of time that is attributable to the event constituting the
force majeure.
12.
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.
13.
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.
14.
The 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.
15.
This Agreed Order shall remain in effect until Respondent
has complied with all terms and conditions of this Agreed Order.
|
TECHNICAL
RECOMMENDATION: |
RESPONDENT: |
|
Department
of Environmental Management |
Ispat Inland Inc. |
|
|
|
|
By:
__________________________ |
By:
_____________________ |
|
David P. McIver |
Leonard H. Chuderewicz |
|
Chief, Air Section |
Vice President |
|
Office of Enforcement |
|
|
|
Printed:
__________________ |
|
|
|
|
|
Title:
____________________ |
|
|
|
|
Date:
_______________________ |
Date:
____________________ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COUNSEL
FOR COMPLAINANT: |
COUNSEL
FOR RESPONDENT: |
|
Department
of Environmental Management |
|
|
|
|
|
By:
___________________________ |
By:
__________________________ |
|
Office of Legal Counsel |
Mathew S. Scherschel,
Counsel |
|
|
|
|
Date:
______________________ |
Date:
________________________ |
|
|
|
||||||||
|
APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL |
|
|||||||
|
MANAGEMENT THIS |
____ |
DAY
OF |
________________ |
,
200 |
___ |
. |
||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
For The Commissioner: |
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
Signed on
January 24, 2006 |
|
||||||
|
|
Matthew T. Klein |
|
||||||
|
|
Assistant Commissioner |
|
||||||
|
|
of Compliance and
Enforcement |
|
||||||