STATE OF INDIANA ) BEFORE THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF
) SS: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COUNTY OF MARION )
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT )
OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, )
)
Complainant, )
) CAUSE NO. 2000-9471-W
v. )
)
ROLL COATER, INC. )
)
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.
1. Complainant is the Commissioner ("Complainant") of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management ("IDEM"), a department of the State of Indiana created by IC 13-13-1-1.
2. The Respondent, Roll Coater, Inc. ("Respondent"), owns and operates a Class C, 0.1377 MGD design average daily flow industrial wastewater treatment plant, which is currently operating at 0.06 MGD average daily flow on production days. The facility is authorized by NPDES Permit No. IN 0038172 ("Permit") to discharge to receiving waters named the Travis Ditch in accordance with stated effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions. The facility is located in Kingsbury, LaPorte County, Indiana.
3. The monitoring requirements for the existing Permit include: flow; total suspended solids (TSS), Oil and Grease (O&G), Chlorides, Sulfates, Total Chromium, Hexavalent Chromium, Copper, Lead, Zinc, Total Cyanide, and pH. The Permit became effective February 1, 1993 and expired December 31, 1997. The Respondent timely submitted a permit renewal application on June 27, 1997, and by rule its existing permit continues to be effective.
4. IDEM has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of this action.
5. Pursuant to IC 13-30-3-3, IDEM issued a Notice of Violation via Certified Mail to:
Mr. Donald E. Evert, President and Registered Agent
Roll Coater, Inc.
102 Royal Pine Lane
Cicero, IN 46034
6. Pursuant to 327 IAC 5-2-8(1), the NPDES permit requires the Respondent to comply with all terms and conditions of its NPDES permit; any non-compliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Environmental Management Act (EMA) and is grounds for enforcement action.
7. Respondent violated its NPDES permit monthly discharge limitations for Oil and Grease in the months of November and December 1998; January 1999; and January through March 2000. Respondent violated discharge limitations for Total Chromium in the months of August 1998; January, September, October, and November 1999; and October, 2000. Respondent violated discharge limitations for Hexavalent Chromium in the months of June and July 1998; and January 1999; and July, 2000. Respondent also violated discharge limitations for Total Recoverable Zinc in the months of January and October, 2000. Based upon a records review by IDEM, Respondent has been in Significant Noncompliance (SNC) status for Oil and Grease on two occasions and for Total Chromium on one occasion. The failure to meet NPDES permit discharge limitations is in violation of the permit and 327 IAC 5-2-8(1).
8. A settlement conference was held on December 21, 2000, at which Respondent noted that several actions had already been taken to achieve compliance with the effluent limitations in its NPDES permit. Respondent listed these actions in a proposed compliance plan, that was enclosed with a conference follow-up letter dated and received January 16, 2001. Listed actions included:
enhancement of the back-washing cycle on the sand filters to improve effluent polishing; increase of computerized preventative maintenance frequency on the oil separation system from once to four times per year; re-treatment of filter press effluent prior to final discharge; installation of a 10,000 gallon holding tank for collection of treated wastewater from the oil separation system; provision of secondary treatment for removal of additional amounts of oil and grease;
modification of the periodic process of removing "build-up" from the collection system so that solids are properly disposed and only residual wastewater is returned to the treatment system;
purchase of a spectrophotometer and development of a sampling protocol to expeditiously detect chromium treatment issues; return of all test results from the sampling laboratory within 24 hours of collection.
9. In subsequent negotiations, by letter dated March 5, 2001, Respondent requested that the Findings of Fact be updated to reflect that Mr. A.R. Sayles, is the new President of Roll Coater, Inc.
10. 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.
11. 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 her delegate, and has been received by the Respondent. This Agreed Order shall have no force or effect until the Effective Date.
2. In addition to the actions that the Respondent has heretofore completed, the Respondent shall provide tertiary treatment to the wastewater from the new chromium treatment system, consisting of secondary hydroxide precipitation followed by clarification and filtration, and submit a written report to document completion, within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreed Order.
3. The Respondent shall be under a performance period, during which it must demonstrate six (6) consecutive months of compliance with its NPDES permit, or other such compliance mechanism as IDEM finds acceptable, and all applicable rules and statutes effective at the time. The performance period shall begin November 1, 2000, the month following the Respondent's last violation of its NPDES permit effluent limitations. Upon the Respondent's satisfaction of this performance period, IDEM shall issue a close-out letter to this Agreed Order.
4. All submittals required by this Agreed Order, unless notified otherwise in writing, shall be sent to :
Dave Knox, case manager
Water Enforcement Section
Office of Enforcement
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, Indiana 46206-6015
5. Respondent is assessed a Civil Penalty of $27,560. Said penalty amount shall be due and payable to the Environmental Management Special Fund within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date.
6. 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 amounts:
Violation Penalty
Paragraph 2 $500 per week written report is late, or any milestone date for completion is not met.
7. 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 assessment of the stipulated penalty 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.
8. 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:
Cashier
IDEM
100 N. Senate Avenue
P.O. Box 7060
Indianapolis, Indiana 46207-7060.
9. In the event that the civil penalty required by paragraph 5 is not paid within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreed Order 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.
10. This Agreed Order shall apply to and be binding upon the Respondent, its officers, directors, principals, agents, successors, subsidiaries, and assigns. The 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.
11. 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 requirements of its applicable NPDES Permit or with any other applicable federal or state law or regulation.
12. 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 the Clean Water Act, its NPDES Permit, or state law.
13. 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 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 by contract require that all contractors, firms, and other persons acting for it comply with the terms of this Agreed Order.
15. If the Respondent or the Respondent's agent or contractor fails to comply with any requirement of this Order, such failure may constitute a "Force Majeure" event. "Force Majeure", for the purposes of this 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.
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 event, 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.
16. 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
By: _________________________ By: _________________________
Mark Stanifer, Section Chief A. R. Sayles, President
Office of Enforcement Roll Coater, Inc.
Date: _______________ Date: _______________
COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT: COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT:
Department of Environmental Management
By: _________________________ By: ________________________
Sierra L. Cutts
Office of Legal Counsel
Department of Environmental Management
Date: _______________ Date: _______________
APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT THIS _______________________ DAY OF ____________________, 2001.
FOR THE COMMISSIONER:
Signed4/10/01
Felicia A. Robinson
Assistant Commissioner of Enforcement