STATE OF INDIANA ) BEFORE THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT
) SS: OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COUNTY OF MARION )
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT )
OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, )
)
Complainant, )
) CAUSE NO. B-1935
v. )
)
CHURCHILL GROUP, LTD., )
)
Respondent. )
AMENDED 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.
I. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Complainant is the Commissioner ("Complainant") of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, a department of the State of Indiana created by IC 13-13-1-1.
2. Respondent is the Churchill Group, LTD. ("Respondent"), which owns and operates a semi-public wastewater treatment plant that serves the Kokomo Regency Mobile Home Park and is located approximately 3 miles southeast of Kokomo, near the intersection of C.R. 200 South and C.R. 400 East, in Howard County, Indiana. In accordance with the terms and conditions of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. IN 0031844 ("the Permit"), Respondent is authorized to discharge to waters of the stated named Kokomo Creek to Wildcat Creek to the Wabash River.
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 cited prior violations of the Permit which had occurred in a Notice of Violation dated May 15, 1996, and sent via Certified Mail to:
Anne Marie Wiseman Mr. Michael Mannion
Director of Operations Certified Operator
Churchill Group, Ltd., Owner Kokomo Regency Mobile Home Park
Kokomo Regency Mobile Home Park 4508 E. 200 S.
40 North 4th Street Kokomo, Indiana 46901
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
IDEM approved and adopted as the Department=s Final Order, Agreed Order, Cause No. B-1935, on May 7, 1998. Among other things, the Respondent was to: complete a comprehensive evaluation of the WWTP; perform a comprehensive analysis of the mobile home park's collection system; complete collection system repairs; and monitor flow to demonstrate a reduction of influent flow to a level at or below the design capacity of the treatment plant and to determine compliance with effluent limitations.
On November 5, 1999, the Respondent submitted notification to IDEM that the collection system improvements were completed at the Kokomo Regency Mobile Home Park in mid May of 1999. The notification indicated that the Respondent had determined that the existing treatment plant would not be able to meet the proposed NPDES permit limits, and Respondent's engineer was recommending to the Respondent that a new waste water treatment plant be constructed.
On March 14, 2000, IDEM sent the Respondent notification that the Respondent was not able to successfully complete the performance period pursuant to Paragraph 3 of the Order, and it was therefore necessary for the Respondent to submit a Phase III compliance plan.
On May 4, 2000, the Respondent submitted a proposed a Phase III Compliance Plan, which included Phase III plan, and a Phase III Alternate plan. The Phase III compliance schedule set forth that actions the Respondent would take to complete construction of wastewater treatment plant improvements, should the Respondent proceed with treatment plant improvements. Alternatively, if the Respondent was able to come to terms to connect into a regional sewer district that was being formed to construct a new publicly owned wastewater treatment works (POTW), the Phase III Alternate compliance schedule set forth the actions the Respondent would take to construct a force main and pump station to connect the Kokomo Regency Mobile Home Park wastewater collection system to the POTW.
On August 11, 2000, IDEM approved the Phase III Compliance Plan, and notified the Respondent that, pursuant to Paragraph 4 of the Order, the Respondent was to complete the actions described in Phase III Compliance Plan within one year. IDEM also notified the Respondent that, in addition to the treatment plant improvements, the Respondent should take additional efforts to identify and correct sources of clear water inflow, and also remove solids and duckweed from the area of final effluent outfall to improve treatment.
On September 18, 2000, the Respondent submitted notification that it was pursuing connection into the regional sewer district pursuant to the Phase III Alternate plan, and the Respondent requested that IDEM extend the schedule under the Phase III Alternate plan by 3 months.
On November 16, 2000, the Respondent submitted notification that the regional sewer district had not yet been formed, but the Respondent had received verbal acceptance of the Respondent's discharging its wastewater into the regional sewer discharge, but it had not received official acceptance or settled on the terms and conditions necessary to discharge to the regional sewer district. The Respondent indicated that delays in development of the regional sewer district would effect the time schedule in the Agreed Order.
The Respondent's NPDES permit, which became effective June 1, 1999, provided, under Part I.D, that the Respondent comply with all final requirements no later than 36 months from the effective date of the permit. The effective date of the permit was June 1, 1999. Therefore the Respondent was to comply with the final requirements of its permit by June 1, 2002.
On April 29, 2002, the Respondent submitted a progress report that noted that a polyethylene liner had been installed in approximately 50% of the sanitary sewers within the mobile home park which had significantly reduced the amount of infiltration and inflow. Additionally, a new final settling tank, a sludge holding tank, and air piping in the effluent outfall had been installed which had improved the performance of the plant. The Respondent also indicated that the second lagoon increased the ammonia nitrogen level. Therefore the Respondent was planning on discharging effluent from the first cell. The Respondent also noted that they were awaiting construction of the new regional sewer district's wastewater treatment plant, although the Respondent understood that the construction of new plant may be two years away.
On June 27, 2002, IDEM sent a letter in response to the Respondent's April 29, 2002 submittal that notified the Respondent that IDEM approved the extension of the compliance schedule to allow the Respondent to continue to pursue connection into the regional sewer district. However, if at any time it became apparent that the regional sewer district would not become available for the Respondent to connect into, then the Respondent would be required to submit a plan and schedule for any necessary improvements to the Respondent's WWTP. The letter also notified the Respondent that if the discharge from the first cell continues to result in improved effluent, and the Respondent decided to eliminate the second cell as part of its treatment process, then the Respondent should submit a request for a modification of the treatment facility description contained in its NPDES permit.
On July 9, 2002, the Respondent submitted a request to IDEM to allow the Respondent's wastewater treatment plant operator to bypass one or both of the treatment plant's lagoon cells at the facility at the operator's discretion.
On January 6, 2003, the Respondent submitted notification that the regional sewer district anticipated IDEM's approval of the preliminary engineering report for the new regional treatment system, and the Respondent had received verbal commitment from the regional sewer district's engineer indicating their agreement and capacity to receive the waste from the Respondent's system.
On February 17, 2003, the Respondent submitted notification that it was unable to come to agreement on terms with representatives of the Regional Sewer District regarding connection of the mobile home park sanitary sewer into the Regional Sewer District's proposed wastewater treatment system, and therefore the Respondent was planning on constructing improvements to its wastewater treatment plant. The Respondent included a proposed plan and schedule to install a new pump station, bar screen, aeration basin, final clarifier(s) and disinfection system to treat the wastewater from the Kokomo Regency Mobile Home Park. The existing wastewater treatment plant will be converted into an aerobic digester and sludge holding tank, and the tertiary ponds will be cleaned and utilized for the site of the new treatment plant. The Respondent proposed the schedule to complete these improvements that is contained in the Order Section of this Agreed Order.
5. Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(1), and Part II.A.1, Part I.A, and Part I.D of the Permit, as of June 1, 2002, the Respondent was to comply with all final limitations for Dissolved Oxygen, Total Suspended Solids (TSS), pH, Ammonia-nitrogen, and Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD5).
6. Discharge Monitoring Reports, Monthly Reports of Operation, and letters submitted by the Respondent to IDEM for the period from January 2002 through November 2002, reveal that the Respondent failed to meet final effluent limitations contained in Part I.A of the Permit as follows:
A. The daily minimum concentration effluent limitation for Dissolved Oxygen (which became effective on June 1, 2002) was violated during June, July, August, and September of 2002.
B. The daily maximum concentration effluent limitation for pH was violated during March and April of 2002.
C. The weekly average concentration effluent limitation for TSS was violated during March, April, May, and August of 2002.
The weekly average loading effluent limitation for TSS was violated during March and April of 2002.
The monthly average concentration effluent limitation for TSS was violated during March and April of 2002.
The monthly average loading effluent limitation for TSS was violated during March and April of 2002.
D. The weekly average concentration effluent limitation for Total Ammonia Nitrogen (which became effective on June 1, 2002) was violated during June, July, and August of 2002.
The weekly average loading effluent limitation for Total Ammonia Nitrogen (which became effective on June 1, 2002) was violated during June, July, and August of 2002.
The monthly average concentration effluent limitation for Total Ammonia Nitrogen (which became effective on June 1, 2002) was violated during June, July, and August of 2002.
The monthly average loading effluent limitation for Total Ammonia Nitrogen (which became effective on June 1, 2002) was violated during June, July, and August of 2002.
E. The weekly average concentration effluent limitation for CBOD5 was violated during March of 2002.
The monthly average concentration effluent limitation for CBOD5 was violated during March of 2002.
These failures to meet effluent limitations contained in the Permit are in violation of 327 IAC 5-2-8(1), and Part II.A.1, Part I.A, and Part I.D of the Permit.
7. This Amended Agreed Order amends and replaces the origional Agreed Order that was adopted for Cause No. B-1935, on May 7, 1998. The Respondent waives its right to Notice of Violation and 60 day settlement period pursuant to IC 13-30-3-3 for the additional violations included in this Amended Agreed Order.
8. In recognition of the settlement reached, Respondent waives any right to administrative and judicial review of this Amended Agreed Order.
II. AMENDED ORDER
1. This Amended Agreed Order shall be effective ("Effective Date") when it is approved by the Complainant or her delegate, and has been received by the Respondent. This Amended Agreed Order shall have no force or effect until the Effective Date.
2. The Respondent shall operate its existing wastewater treatment facilities as efficiently and effectively as possible and shall comply with 327 IAC 5-2-8(1), and Part II.A.1, Part I.A, and Part I.D of the Permit.
3. The Respondent shall implement all corrective actions necessary to achieve and maintain compliance with the terms and conditions of the Permit, including the effluent limitations. The corrective actions shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, installation of a new pump station, bar screen, aeration basin, final clarifier(s) and disinfection system to treat the wastewater from the Kokomo Regency Mobile Home Park. The existing wastewater treatment plant will be converted into an aerobic digester and sludge holding tank. The tertiary ponds will be cleaned and utilized for the site of the new treatment plant. The corrective actions shall be completed according to the following schedule:
A. The Respondent shall complete the design of the new facility and submit a complete construction permit application to IDEM if a construction permit is required by July 6, 2003.
B. If a construction permit is not required, the Respondent shall request and receive bids for cleaning the lagoons and constructing the new treatment plant within 45 days of completing the design of the new facility. If a construction permit is required, the Respondent shall request and receive bids for cleaning the lagoons and constructing the new treatment plant within 45 days following IDEM's issuance of the construction permit.
C. The Respondent shall enter into a construction contract, and begin construction, within 45 days following the receipt of bids.
D. The Respondent shall complete all corrective actions necessary to achieve and maintain compliance with the terms and conditions of the Permit, including cleaning and properly disposing the sludge from the lagoons, and fully completing the construction, within 9 months after beginning construction.
4. The Respondent shall submit to IDEM written progress reports describing the corrective actions that have been completed beginning on the 28th day following the Effective Date, and by the 28th day of each month thereafter until the completion of the corrective actions.
5. The Respondent shall handle any sludge removed during the cleaning and rehabilitation of any of the wastewater treatment tanks, including the tertiary treatment lagoons, in a manner that prevents any release of sludge to the environment or waters of the state, and shall lawfully dispose of all sludge, as required by Part II.B.4 of the Permit. Additionally, the Respondent shall maintain detailed records pertaining to the sludge disposal, including but not necessarily limited to, landfill approval and disposal records, land application records, sludge disposal volumes, payment receipts, and hauling records.
6. Upon the completion of the corrective actions required pursuant to Order Paragraph 3 above, the Respondent shall be subject to the stipulated penalties provided for in Order Paragraph 13 below for the failure to comply with the terms and conditions, including the effluent limitations, contained in the Permit.
7. The Respondent shall, during the 6 month period beginning upon the completion of the corrective actions required pursuant to Order Paragraph 3 above ("Performance Period"), demonstrate 6 consecutive months of compliance ("Compliance Demonstration") with the terms and conditions, including the effluent limitations, contained in the Permit. In the event that the Respondent fails to make the Compliance Demonstration, the Respondent shall, within 60 days of becoming aware that the Compliance Demonstration cannot be achieved, develop and submit to IDEM, for approval, a plan ("action plan") that identifies the corrective actions that the Respondent will take to achieve and maintain compliance with the terms and conditions of the Permit. The action plan shall include an implementation and completion schedule, including specific milestone dates.
8. The action plan required pursuant to Order Paragraph 7 above shall be subject
to the approval of IDEM. If IDEM deems the action plan to be inadequate, a revised action plan shall be submitted within 15 days of receipt of notice from IDEM of the inadequacies thereof. If, after submission of the first revised action plan, IDEM still finds the action plan to be inadequate, then IDEM will request further modification of the action plan as necessary to meet IDEM’s requirements, and require re-submittal of the action plan by a specific date. If the subsequently submitted second revised action plan does not meet IDEM’s approval, IDEM will suggest specific modifications to be made to the action plan and require re-submittal by a specific date. If, by the specified date, the Respondent does not submit a third revised action plan that incorporates the IDEM-suggested modifications or submit an alternative adequate action plan (as determined by IDEM), the IDEM-suggested modifications will be deemed incorporated into the action plan.
9. The approved action plan shall be incorporated into the Agreed Order and shall be
deemed an enforceable part thereof. The Respondent, upon receipt of written approval from IDEM, shall immediately implement the approved action plan and adhere to the milestone dates contained therein.
10. The Respondent shall notify IDEM, in writing, within 10 days of completion of
each action contained in the approved action plan. The notification shall include a description of the action completed and the date it was completed.
11. All submittals required by this Agreed Order, unless notified otherwise in writing, shall be sent to:
Terry Ressler, Case Manager, Water Enforcement Section
Office of Enforcement, IGCN, Rm. 1315
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
100 N. Senate Avenue
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
12. In the event the following terms and conditions are violated the Complainant may assess and the Respondent shall pay a stipulated penalty in the following amount:
|
Paragraph |
Violation |
Penalty |
|
Order Paragraph 3 |
Failure to timely complete corrective actions |
$250 per week late |
|
Order Paragraph 4 |
Failure to timely submit progress reports |
$250 per week late |
|
Order Paragraph 5 |
Failure to adequately handle and/or lawfully dispose of sludge |
$5000 per violation |
|
Order Paragraph 5 |
Failure to maintain records |
$250 per violation |
|
Order Paragraph 6 |
Failure to comply with any term or condition, including any effluent limitation, contained in the Permit |
$1000 per violation |
|
Order Paragraph 7 |
Failure to timely submit action plan |
$250 per week late |
|
Order Paragraph 8 |
Failure to revise and/or re-submit action plan as required |
$250 per week late |
|
Order Paragraph 9 |
Failure to comply with any milestone date contained in the approved action plan |
$250 per week late |
|
Order Paragraph 10 |
Failure to timely submit notifications |
$250 per week late |
13. Stipulated penalties shall be due and payable within 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, Indiana law, or Respondent’s NPDES Permit, including, but not limited to, civil penalties pursuant to IC 13-30-4.
14. 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:
Cashier
IDEM
100 N. Senate Avenue
P. O. Box 7060
Indianapolis, IN 46207-7060
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. The provisions of this Agreed Order do not affect the limitations and requirements set forth in the Respondent’s Permit. Efforts by the Respondent to comply with provisions of this Agreed Order shall not serve as justification for not complying with limitations and requirements set forth in its Permit.
19. This Agreed Order shall remain in effect until the Respondent has complied with paragraphs 2 through 14 of this Agreed Order and IDEM issues a close out letter to the Respondent.
TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION: RESPONDENT:
Department of Environmental Management The Churchill Group, LTD.
Department of Environmental Man
By: _________________________ By: _________________________
Mark W. Stanifer, Chief
Chief, [Section] Water Enforcement Section Printed: ______________________
Office of Enforcement
Title: ________________________
Date: ________________________ Date: ________________________
COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT: COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT:
Department of Environmental Management
By: __________________________ By: ________________________
Office of Legal Counsel
Date: _______________________ Date: ______________________
APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT THIS _____ DAY OF ____________________, 200__.
For the Commissioner:
__Signed 5/1/03________
Felicia A. Robinson
Deputy Commissioner
for Legal Affairs