EPA v. OLIN CHEMICALS/ARCO CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC.

Case summary

1. SECTION 113 OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT ( CAA ), 42 U.S.C. SEC- TION 42 U.S.C. 7413. 2. OLIN CHEMICAL COMPANY/ARCO LAKE CHARLES, LOUISIANA 3. FOLLOWING AN INSPECTION OF THE OLIN CHEMICAL COMPANY LAKE CHARLES, LA. FACILITY ON SEPT. 3-5, 1996, EPA FOUND VIO- LATIONS OF THE STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATION- ARY SOURCES ( NSPS ). AS RESULT OF THIS INSPECTION EPA FOUND THAT OLIN HAD FAILED TO PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTIFICA- TION AND REPORTS OF VARIOUS EVENTS, FAILED TO CONDUCT TESTS FOR FLARES THAT ACT AS CONTROL EQUIPMENT FOR SOURCES SUBJECT TO NSPS REGULATIONS, FAILED TO REQUEST FROM EPA AN ALTERNATIVE MONITORING METHOD FOR CONTROL E- QUPMENT IN NSPS SERVICE, AND FAILED TO FOLLOW REQUIRED E- QUIPMENT STANDARDS FOR EQUIPMENT SUBJECT TO THE NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS. THIS CASE INVOLVES VIOLATION OF THE NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (40 CFR 60) AT SUBPARTS NNN, RRR, AND A AND SUBPART H OF THE NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARD- OUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES (40 CFR 63). ALTHOUGH THE POTENTIAL FOR EXCESS EMISSIONS ARE MINIMAL DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE VIOLATIONS, THE VIOLATIONS ARE CONSIDERED SERIOUS SINCE THEY UNDERMINE EPA'S REGULATORY SCHEME REGARDING THE NSPS AND NESHAP PROGRAMS. THE VIOLA- TIONS ARE 1) FAILING TO REQUEST FROM EPA AN ALTERNATIVE MONITORING METHOD FOR THE CAUSTIC SCRUBBER, 2) FAILING TO TEST A FLARE KNOWN AS THE TDA (TOLUENE DIAMINE) AMMONIA FLARE WHICH SERVES AS CONTROL FOR DISTILLATION UNITS IN THE TDA PRODUCTION UNIT, 3) FAILING TO INSTALL A FLOW IN- DICATOR, 4) FAILING TO CONDUCT PERFORMANCE TESTING, 5) FAILING TO PROVIDE NOTICES, 6) FAILING TO COMBUST THE E- MISSIONS IN A FLARE 7) FAILING TO PROVIDE SEMIANNUAL RE- PORTS, 8) FAILING TO INSTALLA FLOW INDICATOR FOR THE HYCO I FLARE, AND 9) FAILING TO EQUIP EACH OPEN-ENDED VALVE OR LINE WITH A CAP, BLIND FLANGE, PLUG OR SECOND-VALVE. 4. RELIEF SOUGHT PURSUANT TO SECTION 113 OF THE CAA, THIS CASE IS REFERRED TO DOJ FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS, OLIN CHEMICALS AND ARCO CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC. 5. THIS CASE WAS REFERRED ON MAR. 31, 1997. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES: THE RANKING VALUES UNDER THE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE INDEX PUT THE ONE MILE RADIUS AROUND THE FACILITY BELOW THE STATE PERCENTAGE. THE RANK- ING VALUES FOR THE 50 MILE RADIUS PLACE MINORITY RANKING VALUE (DVMAV) AND ECONOMIC RANKING VALUE BELOW THE STATE PERCENTAGE; HOWEVER, IT DOES PLACE THE POPULATION RANKING VALUE (PF) GREATER THAN THE STATE PERCENTAGE BUT LESS THAN 1.33 TIMES THE STATE PERCENTAGE.

Defendants (2)

• ARCO CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• OLIN CHEMICALSNamed in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (8)

• OLIN CORPORATION LAKE CHARLES PLANT

  900-960 INTERSTATE 10 WEST, WESTLAKE, LA, 70669

  Registry ID: 110000597300

• OLIN CORPORATION LAKE CHARLES PLANT

  900-960 INTERSTATE 10 WEST, WESTLAKE, LA, 70669

  Registry ID: 110000597300

• OLIN CORPORATION LAKE CHARLES PLANT

  900-960 INTERSTATE 10 WEST, WESTLAKE, LA, 70669

  Registry ID: 110000597300

• OLIN CORPORATION LAKE CHARLES PLANT

  900-960 INTERSTATE 10 WEST, WESTLAKE, LA, 70669

  Registry ID: 110000597300

• OLIN CORPORATION LAKE CHARLES PLANT

  900-960 INTERSTATE 10 WEST, WESTLAKE, LA, 70669

  Registry ID: 110000597300

• OLIN CORPORATION LAKE CHARLES PLANT

  900-960 INTERSTATE 10 WEST, WESTLAKE, LA, 70669

  Registry ID: 110000597300

• OLIN CORPORATION LAKE CHARLES PLANT

  900-960 INTERSTATE 10 WEST, WESTLAKE, LA, 70669

  Registry ID: 110000597300

• OLIN CORPORATION LAKE CHARLES PLANT

  900-960 INTERSTATE 10 WEST, WESTLAKE, LA, 70669

  Registry ID: 110000597300

Statutes cited

• CAA 112 — Hazardous Air Pollutants
• CAA 111 — New Source Performance Standards

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• OLIN CORPORATION, LAKE CHARLES, LOUISIANAentered 1998-02-02

  Primary law: CAA

  Federal penalty: $150,000

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 1996-09-05Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 1997-03-31Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1998-01-20Complaint Filed With Court
• 1998-01-20Final Order Lodged
• 1998-02-02Concluded
• 1998-02-02Final Order Entered
• 1998-11-25Enforcement Action Closed