EPA v. Sparkle Cleaners

Case summary

Respondent operated two (2) Hoffman 2010 dry-to-dry machines equipped with refrigerated condenser. Respondent failed to keep on site receipts of perc purchased; failed to keep a log of the volume of perc purchased each month; failed to keep a log for the annual perc consumption level calculated on the first of each month reflecting usage for the past 12 months; Respondent did not conducted sensor monitoring relevant to the proper operation of the refrigerated condenser, did not calculate the difference between the temperature of the air-per gas-vapor entering and exiting the refrigerated condenser on the washer to determine that the difference is greater than or equal to 20 degrees Fahrenheit, did not keep and maintain a log of the dates when the dry cleaning system components are inspected for perceptible leaks, and did not keep a log showing the temperature sensor monitoring results relevant to the proper operation of the refrigerated condenser and the date(s) on which the temperature monitoring was performed, as rquired by 40 CFR 63.324(d), 63.324(d)(1), 63.324(d)(2), 63.323(a)(1), 63.323(a)(2), 63.324((d)(3), 63.324(d)(5).

Defendants (1)

• Sparkle CleanersNamed in complaint

Facilities (1)

• SPARKLE CLEANERS

  304 CENTRAL AVENUE, JERSEY CITY, NJ, 07307

  Registry ID: 110004191981

Statutes cited

• CAA 112 — Hazardous Air Pollutants

Timeline (2 milestones)

• 2003-03-31Complaint Filed/Proposed Order
• 2003-04-18Enforcement Action Data Entered