EPA v. FRANK W WHITCOMB CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION

Case summary

06/21/2017: The purpose of the SPCC program is to prevent oil spills before they happen, thus the need for a properly prepared and implemented plan is critical to the success of the program. This settlement will ensure that the Respondent is implementing necessary precautions to reduce the occurrence and severity of oil spills at its facility. The SPCC program is a direct implementation program. On June 21, 2017, Region 1 entered into an expedited settlement agreement with Frank Whitcomb Construction Corporation (Whitcomb Construction) addressing violations of the Oil Pollution Prevention regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 112, promulgated under Section 311(j) of the Clean Water Act at its facility in Colchester, Vermont. An EPA Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) inspection at the company revealed that the facility did not have a fully implemented SPCC plan and had poor oil storage practices. Pursuant to the agreement, Whitcomb Construction will pay a $3,100 penalty. Whitcomb Construction operates a quarry and hot mix asphalt plant from a facility located in Colchester, Vermont. The facility stores more than 115,000 gallons of fuel (including gasoline, off-road diesel, lubricant and emulsifier, and waste oil) in aboveground tanks. On November 15, 2016, an authorized representative of EPA conducted an SPCC inspection at the facility. The facility was unable to provide the inspector with a copy of the SPCC Plan. On November 22, 2016, the facility sent EPA a copy of an SPCC Plan dated December 2000. The EPA inspector reviewed the SPCC Plan provided by the facility and determined that the SPCC Plan was not being fully implemented. Specifically, the facility failed to document five year reviews of the plan. In addition, the SPCC Plan failed to: (1) identify all fixed and portable oil storage containers on the property; (2) include a signature by management or the certifying professional engineer; (3) include documentation procedures for drainage waters from the facility quarry sump; and (4) include an accurate site diagram. The inspector also observed the following poor oil storage practices at the facility: (1) oil storage containers without content and warning signage at transfer locations; and (2) oil stained soils and fuel hose/pipe dispensers lying on the ground at transfer locations. Although Whitcomb Construction stores oil in amounts above the thresholds requiring the preparation and implementation of a SPCC plan under 40 C.F.R. Part 112, it did not have an adequate SPCC plan. The purpose of the SPCC program is to prevent spills before they happen, thus the need for a properly prepared and implemented plan is crucial to the success of the program. Because of the size of the facility and other factors, EPA is utilizing the ESA enforcement tool. In the event of an oil spill there is a probability of oil discharging to Sunderland Brook via the quarry sump.

Defendants (2)

• FRANK W WHITCOMB CONSTRUCTION COMPANYNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• FRANK L WHITCOMBNamed in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• FRANK WHITCOMB CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION

  160 WHITCOMB STREET, COLCHESTER, VT, 05446

  Registry ID: 110069994185

Statutes cited

• CWA 311J — SPCC and/or Federal Response Plan Violations

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• FRANK W WHITCOMB CONSTRUCTION CORPORATIONentered 2017-06-21

  Primary law: CWA

  Federal penalty: $3,100

Timeline (3 milestones)

• 2017-06-21Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 2017-06-21Complaint Filed/Proposed Order
• 2017-06-21Final Order Issued