VIA CERTIFIED MAIL: __________________________
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
To: Andrew Prater, President
Mulberry Town Council
P.O. Box 515
Mulberry, Indiana 46058
Cause No. B-2253
Designated representatives of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management
(IDEM), Offices of Water Management and Enforcement have conducted inspections and a
records review of the Town of Mulberry's wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) located in
Clinton County. The WWTP is a Class I extended aeration facility which is authorized to
discharge 0.165 MGD of treated wastewater to waters of the State named the South Fork of
Wildcat Creek under National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
Number IN 0031976 (the "Permit"). The Permit authorizes such discharge in accordance with
stated effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions.
Based on IDEM's inspections conducted on December 31, 1996, March 6, July 29, and
September 9, 1997, and associated records review conducted by IDEM, the Municipality has
been found in violation of the following provisions of the Indiana Code (IC), the Indiana
Administrative Code (IAC) and the Permit:
IC 13-30-2-1 states, in substance, that a person may not discharge, emit, cause, allow, or
threaten to discharge, emit, cause, or allow any contaminant or waste including any noxious
odor, either alone or in combination with contaminants from other sources, into the environment
or into any publicly owned treatment works in any form which causes or would cause pollution
which violates rules, standards, or discharge or emission requirements adopted by the
appropriate board pursuant to this article.
327 IAC 5-2-8 states, in substance, that the following conditions apply to all NPDES
permits and shall be incorporated into the permits either expressly or by reference:
1. The permittee must comply with all terms and conditions of the NPDES permit.
Any permit non-compliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act
(CWA) and the Environmental Management Act (EMA) and is grounds for
enforcement action;
2. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or correct any adverse
impact on the environment resulting from noncompliance with the permit;
3. The permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and efficiently
operate all facilities and systems (and related appurtenances) for collection and
treatment which are installed or used by the permittee and which are necessary for
achieving compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit;
4. The permittee shall comply with monitoring, recording, and reporting
requirements established in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-13, 327 IAC 5-2-14,
and 327
IAC 5-2-15.
Part II.A. of the Permit states, in part, "All discharges authorized herein shall be
consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit. The discharge of any pollutant more
frequently than, or at a level in excess of, that identified and authorized by this permit shall
constitute a violation of the terms and conditions of this permit. Such a violation may result in
the imposition of civil and/or criminal penalties as provided for in Chapter 13 of the
Environmental Management Act."
327 IAC 2-1-6(a)(1) states, in substance, that all waters at all times and at all places,
including the mixing zone, shall meet the minimum conditions of being free from substances,
materials, floating debris, oil or scum attributable to municipal, industrial, agricultural, and other
land use practices or other discharges:
1. that will settle to form putrescent or otherwise objectionable deposits;
2. that are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious;
that produce color, odor or other conditions in such degree as to create a
nuisance;
4. which are in amounts sufficient to be acutely toxic to, or to otherwise severely
injure or kill aquatic life, other animals, plants, or humans;
5. which are in concentrations or combinations that will cause or contribute to the
growth of aquatic plants or algae to such degrees as to create a nuisance, be
unsightly, or otherwise impair the designated uses.
Violation of 327 IAC 5-2-8 and the Permit, as noted above is based on a records review
for January 1996 through November 1997, which indicated that the Respondent was in violation
of the Permit final effluent limitations for:
1. Total Suspended Solids (TSS) for the months of March and May, 1996
and February and May, 1997;
2. Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) for the months of May, June, July, August,
September, October, 1996 and July and August 1997.
IC 13-18-4-5 states that a person may not:
1. . . . dispose into any of the streams or waters of Indiana; or
2. cause, permit . . . or otherwise dispose into any waters; any organic or
inorganic matter that causes or contributes to a polluted condition of any
waters, as determined by a rule of the board . . .
During an inspection of the Respondent's wastewater treatment facilities conducted on
September 9, 1997, an IDEM representative observed sewage solids and sanitary debris at
Outfall 001. The above noted conditions are in violation of 327 IAC 2-1-6, 327 IAC 5-2-8, IC
13-30-2-1 and IC 13-18-4-5.
Part II.A.7. of the Permit prohibits any diversion from or bypass of facilities necessary to
maintain compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit, except where unavoidable to
prevent loss of life, personal injury, severe property damage, or there is no feasible alternative to
the bypass, and requires the permittee to promptly notify the commissioner immediately of such
occurrences by telephone and in writing within five days of such diversion or bypass.
The Clinton County Health Department has documented bypasses from the manhole on
West Street in Mulberry on May 15 and 28, 1996, June 16, 1996, January 11 through 13, 1997,
and February 27, 1997. The manhole is not authorized as a bypass point by the Permit. IDEM
has observed evidence of bypasses of untreated wastewater from a manhole on West Street in
Mulberry, numerous times in 1997, in violation of 327 IAC 2-1-6, 327 IAC 5-2-8, IC 13-30-2-1
and IC 13-18-4-5 and Part II.A.7. of the Permit.
IDEM did not receive any notification from the Town of Mulberry that any bypassing
occurred, in violation of Part II.A.7 of the Permit.
On March 6, 1997, an IDEM representative met with members of Mulberry's Town
Council to discuss the bypassing in Mulberry. The IDEM representative explained that the
discharge of sewage from a manhole is a permit violation and that the cause(s) for such
discharge(s) must be addressed efficiently and expediently. A letter from the Town was
requested, to outline milestone dates as to the commitment to remediate the inflow and induced
overflow of sanitary sewers on West Street in Mulberry. Specifically, the letter was to be
postmarked no later than March 28, 1997, and the milestone dates included in the letter were to
be as follows:
1. Locate possible source(s) for inflow; 3 months
2. Verify Locations (Televise, etc.); 3 months
3. Break Ground for repair; within 6 months
4. Repair complete; 9 months to 1 year
A letter from Jerry Stillings, former Town Council President of Mulberry, was sent to
IDEM outlining the plan to solve the bypassing in Mulberry. The letter specifically stated that if
a source of inflow could not be located by June, then the Town would begin working on an
alternative plan for solving the problem. Mr. Stillings continued to say that if an alternative plan
had to be put in place then engineering plans and funding could be in place for construction to
begin in the fall of 1997.
On September 3, 1997, a letter from Andrew Prater, Town Council President, was
received by IDEM. Mr. Prater informed IDEM that there had been insufficient rainfall to
schedule video-taping in July or August. Smoke testing was done, but was negative for the
inflow problem. The letter stated that a petition for reconstruction of the William Gery Drain
would be referred to an engineer for a reconstruction report. No further progress on this matter
has been reported by the Respondent.
In accordance with IC 13-30-3-3, the Commissioner is required to notify the
Municipality in writing that he believes a violation exists and offer the Municipality an
opportunity to enter into an Agreed Order providing for the actions required to correct the
violations and for the payment of a civil penalty. The Commissioner is not required to extend
this offer for more than sixty (60) days.
If settlement is not reached within sixty (60) days of your receipt of this Notice, the
Commissioner may issue an Order pursuant to IC 13-30-3-4, containing the actions you must
take to achieve compliance, the required time frames, and an appropriate civil penalty. Pursuant
to IC 13-30-4-1, the Commissioner may assess penalties of up to $25,000 per day of any
violation.
The timely entry into an Agreed Order will prevent the necessity of an Order of the
Commissioner being issued or the filing of a civil action under IC 13-14-2-6. Advantages of
entering into an Agreed Order are:
1. You may not be required to admit that any violation occurred.
2. The civil penalty may be less than that imposed under an Order of the
Commissioner.
Please contact Terri Van Zant, Enforcement Case Manager at 317/232-8408 within
fifteen (15) days after receipt of this Notice regarding your intent to settle this matter. If you are
willing to resolve this matter as provided for in the enclosed Agreed Order, please sign and
return it to the Office of Enforcement at the above address within the sixty (60) day settlement
period.
FOR THE COMMISSIONER:
Date:_______________ Signed 4/16/98
David J. Hensel
Director
Office of Enforcement
cc: Jim Filippini, Chief, Compliance Unit 2
U.S. EPA, Region 5, Water Section
Clinton County Health Department
http:/www.ai.org/idem/
Converted by Andrew Scriven