Clean Water Act Class II: Proposed Administrative Settlement, Penalty Assessment and Opportunity To Comment Regarding Kmart Holding Corporation, 58390-58393 [E6-16293]
Download as PDF
58390
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 3, 2006 / Notices
Under the contract, Bionetics
provides enforcement support to the Air
Enforcement Division, Office of
Regulatory Enforcement, Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
in a number of activities primarily
related to the Clean Air Act. The
contractor may also be called upon to
provide support to other EPA offices
under the other statutes. The activities
in which Bionetics provides
enforcement support include, but are
not limited to:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Inspections and audits of facilities that
produce, import, store, transport, dispense or
analyze fuel used in mobile source vehicles
and engines; and Inspections and audits of
facilities that manufacture, import, distribute,
sell or repair motor vehicles, motor vehicle
engines, or non-road engines.
The type of information that may be
disclosed includes, but are not limited
to: Records related to the production,
importation, distribution, sale, storage,
testing and transportation of gasoline,
gasoline blendstocks, diesel fuel, diesel
fuel blendstocks, and detergent
additives; and records related to the
manufacture, importation, emission
certification, emission testing, emission
control warranty, repair, modification
and fueling of mobile source vehicles
and engines, including, but not limited
to, motor vehicles, motor vehicle
engines, non-road engines, locomotives
and marine engines, and stationary
source engines.
It is necessary for Bionetics to have
access to these records in order to
prepare reports that EPA uses to
evaluate whether regulated parties are
in compliance with applicable
regulatory requirements under the above
listed statutes.
In accordance with 40 CFR
2.301(h)(2), EPA has determined that
disclosure of confidential business
information to Bionetics and its
subcontractor is necessary for these
entities to carry out the work required
by this contract. EPA is issuing this
notice to inform all submitters of
information to the EPA under the Clean
Air Act that EPA may allow access to
CBI contained in such submittals to
Bionetics and their subcontractor as
necessary to carry out work under this
contract. Disclosure of CBI under this
contract may continue until August 31,
2011.
As required by 40 CFR 2.301(h)(2), the
Bionetics contract includes provisions
to assure the appropriate treatment of
CBI disclosed to contractors and
subcontractors.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:59 Oct 02, 2006
Jkt 211001
Dated: September 27, 2006.
John Fogarty,
Acting Director, Air Enforcement Division.
[FR Doc. E6–16298 Filed 10–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OECA–2006–
0753; FRL–8226–4]
Clean Water Act Class II: Proposed
Administrative Settlement, Penalty
Assessment and Opportunity To
Comment Regarding Kmart Holding
Corporation
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA has entered into a
consent agreement with Kmart Holding
Corporation (‘‘Kmart’’ or ‘‘Respondent’’)
to resolve violations of the Clean Water
Act (‘‘CWA’’), the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act
(‘‘EPCRA’’), and the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
(‘‘RCRA’’) and their implementing
regulations.
The Administrator is hereby
providing public notice of this consent
agreement and proposed final order, and
providing an opportunity for interested
persons to comment on the CWA,
EPCRA, and RCRA portions of this
consent agreement, in accordance with
CWA section 311(b)(6)(C).
DATES: Comments are due on or before
November 2, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted electronically, by mail, or
through hand delivery/courier. Follow
the detailed instructions as provided in
Section I.B of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beth
Cavalier, Special Litigation and Projects
Division (2248–A), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone (202) 564–3271; fax: (202)
564–0010; e-mail:
cavalier.beth@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. How Can I Get Copies of This
Document and Other Related
Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established an
official public docket for this action
under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OECA–
2006–0753.
The official public docket consists of
the Consent Agreement, proposed Final
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Order, and any public comments
received. Although a part of the official
docket, the public docket does not
include Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
The official public docket is the
collection of materials that is available
for public viewing at the Enforcement
and Compliance Docket Information
Center (ECDIC) in the EPA Docket
Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room
B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC. The EPA Docket
Center Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the ECDIC
is (202) 566–1752. A reasonable fee may
be charged by EPA for copying docket
materials.
2. Electronic Access. You may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
An electronic version of the public
docket is available through EPA’s
electronic public docket and comment
system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA
Dockets at https://www.epa.gov/edocket/
to submit or view public comments,
access the index listing of the contents
of the official public docket, and to
access those documents in the public
docket that are available electronically.
Once in the system, select ‘‘search,’’
then key in the appropriate docket
identification number.
Certain types of information will not
be placed in the EPA Dockets.
Information claimed as CBI and other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute, which is not
included in the official public docket,
will not be available for public viewing
in EPA’s electronic public docket. EPA’s
policy is that copyrighted material will
not be placed in EPA’s electronic public
docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public
docket. To the extent feasible, publicly
available docket materials will be made
available in EPA’s electronic public
docket. When a document is selected
from the index list in EPA Dockets, the
system will identify whether the
document is available for viewing in
EPA’s electronic public docket.
Although not all docket materials may
be available electronically, you may still
access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the docket
facility identified in Section I.A.1.
For public commentors, it is
important to note that EPA’s policy is
that public comments, whether
E:\FR\FM\03OCN1.SGM
03OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 3, 2006 / Notices
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public
viewing in EPA’s electronic public
docket as EPA receives them and
without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. When EPA
identifies a comment containing
copyrighted material, EPA will provide
a reference to that material in the
version of the comment that is placed in
EPA’s electronic public docket. The
entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available
in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on
computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be
transferred to EPA’s electronic public
docket. Public comments that are
mailed or delivered to the Docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA’s
electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be
photographed, and the photograph will
be placed in EPA’s electronic public
docket along with a brief description
written by the docket staff.
B. How and To Whom Do I Submit
Comments?
You may submit comments
electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper
receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate
docket identification number in the
subject line on the first page of your
comment. Please ensure that your
comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments
received after the close of the comment
period will be marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not
required to consider these late
comments.
1. Electronically. If you submit an
electronic comment as prescribed
below, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address,
and an e-mail address or other contact
information in the body of your
comment. Also include this contact
information on the outside of any disk
or CD ROM you submit, and in any
cover letter accompanying the disk or
CD ROM. This ensures that you can be
identified as the submitter of the
comment and allows EPA to contact you
in case EPA cannot read your comment
due to technical difficulties or needs
further information on the substance of
your comment. EPA’s policy is that EPA
will not edit your comment, and any
identifying or contact information
provided in the body of a comment will
be included as part of the comment that
is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA’s electronic
public docket. If EPA cannot read your
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:59 Oct 02, 2006
Jkt 211001
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA’s
electronic public docket to submit
comments to EPA electronically is
EPA’s preferred method for receiving
comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets
at https://www.epa.gov/edocket, and
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once in the
system, select ‘‘search,’’ and then key in
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OECA–2006–
0753. The system is an ‘‘anonymous
access’’ system, which means EPA will
not know your identity, e-mail address,
or other contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by
electronic mail (e-mail) to
docket.oeca@epa.gov, Attention Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–OECA–2006–0753. In
contrast to EPA’s electronic public
docket, EPA’s e-mail system is not an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to the
Docket without going through EPA’s
electronic public docket, EPA’s e-mail
system automatically captures your email address. E-mail addresses that are
automatically captured by EPA’s e-mail
system are included as part of the
comment that is placed in the official
public docket, and made available in
EPA’s electronic public docket.
iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit
comments on a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to the mailing address
identified in Section I.A.1. These
electronic submissions will be accepted
in WordPerfect or ASCII file format.
Avoid the use of special characters and
any form of encryption.
2. By Mail. Send your comments to:
Enforcement and Compliance Docket
Information Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2201T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC, 20460, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OECA–2006–
0753.
3. By Hand Delivery or Courier.
Deliver your comments to the address
provided in Section I.A.1., Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OECA–2006–
0753. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket’s normal hours of
operation as identified in Section I.A.1.
C. How Should I Submit CBI to the
Agency?
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI electronically
through EPA’s electronic public docket
or by e-mail. You may claim
information that you submit to EPA as
CBI by marking any part or all of that
information as CBI (if you submit CBI
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
58391
on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside
of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD ROM the specific information that is
CBI). Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
In addition to one complete version of
the comment that includes any
information claimed as CBI, a copy of
the comment that does not contain the
information claimed as CBI must be
submitted for inclusion in the public
docket and EPA’s electronic public
docket. If you submit the copy that does
not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM,
mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
clearly that it does not contain CBI.
Information not marked as CBI will be
included in the public docket and EPA’s
electronic public docket without prior
notice. If you have any questions about
CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI,
please consult the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACTsection.
II. Background
Kmart Holding Corporation, doing
business as Kmart Corporation,
(‘‘Respondent’’) is owned by Sears
Holding Corporation, a retail company
located at 3333 Beverly Road, Hoffman
Estates, Illinois 60179, and is
incorporated in the state of Delaware.
Kmart disclosed, pursuant to the EPA
‘‘Incentives for Self-Policing: Discovery,
Disclosures, Correction and Prevention
of Violations’’ (‘‘Audit Policy’’), 65 FR
19618 (April 11, 2000), violations of the
Clean Water Act (‘‘CWA’’), the
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (‘‘EPCRA’’), and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (‘‘RCRA’’) and their implementing
regulations.
Specifically, Kmart (‘‘Respondent’’)
disclosed that it failed to prepare and
implement an SPCC plan for the
following facilities: Canton, MI,
Chambersburg, PA, Denver/Brighton,
CO, Greensboro, NC, Lawrence, KS,
Manteno, IL, Morrisville/Fairless Hills,
PA, Newnan, GA, Ocala, FL, Ontario,
CA, Shakopee, MN, Sparks, NV, and
Warren, OH, and, in addition, failed to
install adequate secondary containment
at its Denver/Brighton, CO and
Morrisville/Fairless, PA facilities in
violation of the CWA section 311(j) and
40 CFR part 112. EPA, as authorized by
CWA section 311(b)(6), 33 U.S.C.
1321(b)(6), has assessed a civil penalty
for these violations.
Respondent further disclosed that it
had failed to comply with:(1) CWA
section 402(p), 33 U.S.C. 1342(p), and
the regulations found at 40 CFR 122.26
when it failed to obtain a stormwater
E:\FR\FM\03OCN1.SGM
03OCN1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
58392
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 3, 2006 / Notices
permit and/or prepare a stormwater
pollution prevention plan at the
Billerica, MA, Canton, MI,
Chambersburg, PA, Denver/Brighton,
CO, Groveport, CA, Greensboro, NC,
Manteno, IL, Newnan, GA, Ontario, CA,
Shakopee, MN, Sparks, NV, Warren,
OH, and Forest Park, GA facilities;
(2) CWA section 402(a), 33 U.S.C.
1342(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 122.26
when it failed to obtain an NPDES
permit at its Denver/Brighton, CO and
Lawrence, KS facilities;
(3) CWA section 402(a), 33 U.S.C.
1342(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 122.41 and
122.48 when it failed to comply with
monitoring requirements and exceeded
its permit limits at its Warren, OH
facility;
(4) CWA section 402(a), 33 U.S.C.
1342(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 403.5 and
403.12 when it failed to analyze effluent
discharge and failed to obtain or renew
its discharge permit at its Manteno, IL
facility; and
(5) CWA section 402(p), 33 U.S.C.
1342(p) and the regulations found at 40
CFR 122.26 and 122.28 when it failed to
conduct stormwater monitoring and
failed to file a Discharge Monitoring
Report at its Greensboro, NC facility.
EPA, as authorized by CWA section
309(b), 33 U.S.C. 1319, has assessed a
civil penalty for these violations.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with EPCRA section
302, 42 U.S.C. 11002, and the
regulations found at 40 CFR 355.30,
when it failed to notify the State
Emergency Response Committee
(‘‘SERC’’), and EPCRA section 303, 42
U.S.C. 11003, and the regulations found
at 40 CFR 355.30, when it failed to
notify the Local Emergency Planning
Committee (‘‘LEPC’’) of the identity of
the emergency coordinator who would
participate in the emergency planning
process at the following facilities:
Billerica, MA, Canton, MI,
Chambersburg, PA, Denver/Brighton,
CO, Forest Park, GA, Greensboro, NC,
Groveport, CA, Lawrence, KS, Manteno,
IL, Mira Loma, CA, Morrisville/Fairless
Hills, PA, Newnan, GA, Ocala, FL,
Ontario, CA, Shakopee, MN, Sparks,
NV, and Warren, OH. EPA, as
authorized by EPCRA section 325, has
assessed a civil penalty for these
violations.
In addition, Respondent disclosed
that it had failed to comply with EPCRA
section 311, 42 U.S.C. 11021 and the
regulations found at 40 CFR 370.21,
when it failed to submit a Material
Safety Data Sheet (‘‘MSDS’’) for a
hazardous chemical(s) or, in the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:59 Oct 02, 2006
Jkt 211001
alternative, a list of such chemicals, at
the following facilities: Billerica, MA,
Canton, MI, Chambersburg, PA, Denver/
Brighton, CA, Forest Park, GA,
Greensboro, NC, Groveport, CA,
Lawrence, KS, Manteno, IL, Mira Loma,
CA, Morrisville/Fairless Hills, PA,
Newnan, GA, Ocala, FL, Ontario, CA,
Shakopee, MN, Sparks, NW and Warren,
OH. Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with EPCRA section
312, 42 U.S.C. 11022 and the regulations
found at 40 CFR 370.25, when it failed
to prepare and submit emergency and
chemical inventory forms to the LEPC,
the SERC and the fire department with
jurisdiction over each facility, at the
Ontario, CA facility. EPA, as authorized
by EPCRA section 325, has assessed a
civil penalty for these violations.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3001(d), 42 U.S.C. 6921(d) and the
implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 261.5 when it failed to comply with
requirements for Conditionally Exempt
Small Quantity Generators at its Denver/
Brighton, CO facility.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a), and the
implementing regulations listed below
relating to large quantity hazardous
waste generators, at the Billerica, MA
facility:
(1) 40 CFR Part 262 for failure to make
hazardous waste identification;
(2) 40 CFR 262.12, for failure to obtain
an EPA ID number;
(3) 40 CFR 262.34, for exceeding
hazardous waste accumulation times;
(4) 40 CFR 262.30–262.33, for failure
to properly package and label wastes;
(5) 40 CFR 262.40, for failure to
maintain proper records;
(6) 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart C, for
failure to meet preparedness and
prevention standards;
(7) 40 CFR 262.34(d) and 265.16 for
failure to provide employee training
regarding hazardous handling and
management practices;
(8) 40 CFR 273.2 and 273.5; for failure
to properly manage and dispose of
universal wastes;
(9) 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart D, for
failure to follow emergency response
procedures; Additionally, Respondent
disclosed that it had failed to comply
with RCRA section 3004(d), 42 U.S.C.
6924(d) and implementing regulations
found at 40 CFR 268.1 and 40 CFR 268.7
when it failed to meet land disposal
requirements at its Billerica, MA
facility.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3014(a), 42 U.S.C. 6935(a) and the
implementing regulations found at 40
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
CFR 279.22 when it failed to properly
label used oil storage drums at its
Canton, MI facility.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the
implementing regulations listed below
at its Greensboro, NC facility:
(1) 40 CFR 265.15, 40 CFR 265.174
and 40 CFR 265.195, for failure to
conduct weekly inspections of
hazardous waste storage containers:
(2) 40 CFR 262.34(d), for failure to
designate an emergency coordinator and
failure to post information relating to
the emergency coordinator by the
phone; and
(3) 40 CFR 262.34(d) and 40 CFR
265.16, for failure to provide hazardous
waste handling and management
training to employees.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the
implementing regulations listed below
at its Lawrence, KS facility:
(1) 40 CFR 262.34(a) and (c), when it
failed to properly label hazardous waste
containers and place accumulation start
date on the label;
(2) 40 CFR 265.174; 40 CFR 265.15;
and 40 CFR 265.195, when it failed to
conduct weekly inspections of
hazardous waste storage areas and
containers; and
(3) 40 CFR 262.34(d), for failure to
designate an emergency coordinator and
failure to post information relating to
the emergency coordinator by the
phone.
Respondent disclosed that at its
Morrisville/Fairless Hills, PA facility it
had failed to comply with:
(1) RCRA section 3014(a), 42 U.S.C.
6935(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 279.22,
when it failed to properly label oil
storage drums;
(2) RCRA section 3002(a), 42 U.S.C.
6922(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR Part 262,
when it failed to comply with all
hazardous waste storage and disposal
requirements for large quantity
generators of hazardous waste;
(3) RCRA section 9003, 42 U.S.C.
6991b and the implementing regulations
found at 40 CFR 280.20; 280.34; and
280.40–41, when it failed to maintain
information concerning construction,
leak detection, or periodic monitoring
for emergency generator tank 002A; and
(4) RCRA section 9002, 42 U.S.C.
6991a and the implementing regulations
found at 40 CFR 280.22, when it failed
to maintain a current underground
storage tank (UST) registration
certificate.
E:\FR\FM\03OCN1.SGM
03OCN1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 3, 2006 / Notices
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the
implementing regulations listed below
at its Newnan, GA facility:
(1) 40 CFR 265.15, 40 CFR 265.174
and 40 CFR 265.195 when it failed to
conduct weekly inspections of
hazardous waste storage areas and
containers; and
(2) 40 CFR 262.34(d) for failure to
designate an emergency coordinator and
failure to post information relating to
the emergency coordinator by the
phone; and
(3) 40 CFR 262.34(d) and 40 CFR
265.16, for failure to provide hazardous
waste handling and management
training to employees.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the
implementing regulations listed below
at its Ocala, FL facility:
(1) 40 CFR 265.15, 40 CFR 265.174
and 40 CFR 265.195, when it failed to
conduct weekly inspections of
hazardous waste storage areas and
containers; and
(2) 40 CFR 262.34(d), for failure to
designate an emergency coordinator and
failure to post information relating to
the emergency coordinator by the
phone; and
(3) 40 CFR 262.34(d) and 40 CFR
265.16, for failure to provide hazardous
waste handling and management
training to employees.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3014(a), 42 U.S.C. 6935(a) and the
implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 279.22, when it failed to properly
label oil storage drums at its Warren,
OH facility.
Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section
3014(a), 42 U.S.C. 6935(a) and the
implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 279.22, when it failed to properly
label used oil containers at its Sparks,
NV facility.
EPA, as authorized by RCRA section
3008(g), 42 U.S.C. 6928(g), has assessed
a civil penalty for these violations.
EPA determined that Respondent met
the criteria set out in the Audit Policy
for a 100% waiver of the gravity
component of the penalty for the EPCRA
violations, and for certain CWA and
RCRA violations. For those violations
meeting the audit policy, EPA waived
the gravity based penalty of $1,608,382
and proposed a settlement penalty
amount of $21,967. This is the amount
of the economic benefit gained by
Respondent, attributable to its delayed
compliance with the CWA, RCRA, and
EPCRA regulations. Of this amount,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:59 Oct 02, 2006
Jkt 211001
$8,260 is attributable to the CWA-SPCC
violations; $7,117 is attributable to the
CWA violations; $6,400 is attributable to
the RCRA violations; and $190 is
attributable to the EPCRA violations.
However, Respondent failed to satisfy
some of the conditions set forth in the
Audit Policy for certain CWA and RCRA
violations and was assessed an
appropriate and fair civil penalty of
$80,455 ($78,625 in gravity-based
penalties and $1,830 in economic
benefit) to settle those violations.
The total civil penalty assessed for
settlement purposes is one hundred and
two thousand four hundred and twentytwo dollars ($102,422). Respondent has
agreed to pay this amount. EPA and
Respondent negotiated and reached an
administrative consent agreement,
following the Consolidated Rules of
Practice, 40 CFR 22.13(b), on August 18,
2006 (In Re: Kmart Holding Corp.
Docket Nos. CWA–HQ–2006–6001,
RCRA–HQ–2006–6001, EPCRA–HQ–
2006–6001). This consent agreement is
subject to public notice and comment
under CWA section 311(b)(6), 33 U.S.C.
1321(b)(6).
Under CWA section 311(b)(6)(A), 33
U.S.C. 1321(b)(6)(A), any owner,
operator, or person in charge of a vessel,
onshore facility, or offshore facility from
which oil is discharged in violation of
the CWA section 311(b)(3), 33 U.S.C.
1321(b)(3), or who fails or refuses to
comply with any regulations that have
been issued under CWA section 311(j),
33 U.S.C. 1321(j), may be assessed an
administrative civil penalty of up to
$157,500 by EPA. Class II proceedings
under CWA section 311(b)(6) are
conducted in accordance with 40 CFR
Part 22.
Under EPCRA section 325, the
Administrator may issue an
administrative order assessing a civil
penalty against any person who has
violated applicable emergency planning
or right to know requirements, or any
other requirement of EPCRA.
Proceedings under EPCRA section 325
are conducted in accordance with 40
CFR part 22.
The procedures by which the public
may comment on a proposed Class II
penalty order, or participate in a CWA
II penalty proceeding, are set forth in 40
CFR 22.45. The deadline for submitting
public comment on this proposed final
order is November 2, 2006. All
comments will be transferred to the
Environmental Appeals Board (‘‘EAB’’)
of EPA for consideration. The powers
and duties of the EAB are outlined in 40
CFR 22.4(a).
Pursuant to CWA section 311(b)(6)(C),
EPA will not issue an order in this
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
58393
proceeding prior to the close of the
public comment period.
Dated: September 19, 2006.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Director, Special Litigation and Projects
Division, Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance.
[FR Doc. E6–16293 Filed 10–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–8227–1]
Notice of Determination for Dale
Hollow Lake To Qualify as a No
Discharge Zone
This notice of determination is for all
navigable waters of Dale Hollow Lake,
located on the border of Kentucky and
Tennessee. On March 23, 2006, notice
was published that the Army Corps of
Engineers (ACOE), State of Kentucky,
and State of Tennessee had petitioned
the Regional Administrator,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to concur with their determinations that
adequate and reasonably available
pumpout facilities exist on Dale Hollow
Lake. Zero comments were received
regarding this proposed action.
Therefore, Dale Hollow is designated
as No Discharge Zone in accordance
with Section 312(f)(3) of Public Law 92–
500 as amended by Public Law 95–217
and Public Law 100–4, that adequate
facilities for the safe and sanitary
removal of sewage from all vessels are
reasonably available for the waters of
Dale Hollow Lake to qualify as a No
Discharge Zone. This action is taken
under Section 312(f)(3) of the Clean
Water Act which states: ‘‘After the
effective date of the initial standards
and regulations promulgated under this
Section, if any State determines that the
protection and enhancement of the
quality of some or all of the waters
within such States require greater
environmental protection, such State
may completely prohibit the discharge
from all vessels of any sewage, whether
treated or not into such waters, except
that no such prohibition shall apply
until the Administrator determines that
adequate facilities for the safe and
sanitary removal and treatment of
sewage from all vessels are reasonably
available for such waters to which such
prohibition would apply.’’
EPA’s action allows prohibition
regarding discharge from vessels to be
applied by the States of Kentucky and
Tennessee for Dale Hollow Lake. EPA
found the following existing facilities
available for pumping out vessel
E:\FR\FM\03OCN1.SGM
03OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 3, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58390-58393]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16293]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0753; FRL-8226-4]
Clean Water Act Class II: Proposed Administrative Settlement,
Penalty Assessment and Opportunity To Comment Regarding Kmart Holding
Corporation
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA has entered into a consent agreement with Kmart Holding
Corporation (``Kmart'' or ``Respondent'') to resolve violations of the
Clean Water Act (``CWA''), the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act (``EPCRA''), and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(``RCRA'') and their implementing regulations.
The Administrator is hereby providing public notice of this consent
agreement and proposed final order, and providing an opportunity for
interested persons to comment on the CWA, EPCRA, and RCRA portions of
this consent agreement, in accordance with CWA section 311(b)(6)(C).
DATES: Comments are due on or before November 2, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or
through hand delivery/courier. Follow the detailed instructions as
provided in Section I.B of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beth Cavalier, Special Litigation and
Projects Division (2248-A), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone (202) 564-
3271; fax: (202) 564-0010; e-mail: cavalier.beth@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0753.
The official public docket consists of the Consent Agreement,
proposed Final Order, and any public comments received. Although a part
of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of
materials that is available for public viewing at the Enforcement and
Compliance Docket Information Center (ECDIC) in the EPA Docket Center,
(EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the
telephone number for the ECDIC is (202) 566-1752. A reasonable fee may
be charged by EPA for copying docket materials.
2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
An electronic version of the public docket is available through
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may
use EPA Dockets at https://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official
public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that
are available electronically. Once in the system, select ``search,''
then key in the appropriate docket identification number.
Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets.
Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public
docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic
public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be
placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent
feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in
EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the
index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the
document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket.
Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you
may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through
the docket facility identified in Section I.A.1.
For public commentors, it is important to note that EPA's policy is
that public comments, whether
[[Page 58391]]
submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public
viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and
without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI,
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When
EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will
provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that
is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed
comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the
public docket.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public
docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph
will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief
description written by the docket staff.
B. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments?
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the
appropriate docket identification number in the subject line on the
first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are
submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after
the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not
required to consider these late comments.
1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as
prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing
address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body
of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside
of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying
the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA
will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information
provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the
comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made
available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to
submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for
receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at https://www.epa.gov/
edocket, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Once in the system, select ``search,'' and then key in Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0753. The system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to
docket.oeca@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0753. In
contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system is not
an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly
to the Docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket,
EPA's e-mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail
addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.
iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM
that you mail to the mailing address identified in Section I.A.1. These
electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file
format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption.
2. By Mail. Send your comments to: Enforcement and Compliance
Docket Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode:
2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0753.
3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to the
address provided in Section I.A.1., Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OECA-2006-0753. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's
normal hours of operation as identified in Section I.A.1.
C. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI
electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e-mail. You
may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part
or all of that information as CBI (if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM,
mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify
electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that
is CBI). Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion
in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit
the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside
of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information
not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's
electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any
questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACTsection.
II. Background
Kmart Holding Corporation, doing business as Kmart Corporation,
(``Respondent'') is owned by Sears Holding Corporation, a retail
company located at 3333 Beverly Road, Hoffman Estates, Illinois 60179,
and is incorporated in the state of Delaware. Kmart disclosed, pursuant
to the EPA ``Incentives for Self-Policing: Discovery, Disclosures,
Correction and Prevention of Violations'' (``Audit Policy''), 65 FR
19618 (April 11, 2000), violations of the Clean Water Act (``CWA''),
the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (``EPCRA''), and
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (``RCRA'') and their
implementing regulations.
Specifically, Kmart (``Respondent'') disclosed that it failed to
prepare and implement an SPCC plan for the following facilities:
Canton, MI, Chambersburg, PA, Denver/Brighton, CO, Greensboro, NC,
Lawrence, KS, Manteno, IL, Morrisville/Fairless Hills, PA, Newnan, GA,
Ocala, FL, Ontario, CA, Shakopee, MN, Sparks, NV, and Warren, OH, and,
in addition, failed to install adequate secondary containment at its
Denver/Brighton, CO and Morrisville/Fairless, PA facilities in
violation of the CWA section 311(j) and 40 CFR part 112. EPA, as
authorized by CWA section 311(b)(6), 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6), has assessed
a civil penalty for these violations.
Respondent further disclosed that it had failed to comply with:(1)
CWA section 402(p), 33 U.S.C. 1342(p), and the regulations found at 40
CFR 122.26 when it failed to obtain a stormwater
[[Page 58392]]
permit and/or prepare a stormwater pollution prevention plan at the
Billerica, MA, Canton, MI, Chambersburg, PA, Denver/Brighton, CO,
Groveport, CA, Greensboro, NC, Manteno, IL, Newnan, GA, Ontario, CA,
Shakopee, MN, Sparks, NV, Warren, OH, and Forest Park, GA facilities;
(2) CWA section 402(a), 33 U.S.C. 1342(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 122.26 when it failed to obtain an NPDES
permit at its Denver/Brighton, CO and Lawrence, KS facilities;
(3) CWA section 402(a), 33 U.S.C. 1342(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 122.41 and 122.48 when it failed to comply
with monitoring requirements and exceeded its permit limits at its
Warren, OH facility;
(4) CWA section 402(a), 33 U.S.C. 1342(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 403.5 and 403.12 when it failed to analyze
effluent discharge and failed to obtain or renew its discharge permit
at its Manteno, IL facility; and
(5) CWA section 402(p), 33 U.S.C. 1342(p) and the regulations found
at 40 CFR 122.26 and 122.28 when it failed to conduct stormwater
monitoring and failed to file a Discharge Monitoring Report at its
Greensboro, NC facility. EPA, as authorized by CWA section 309(b), 33
U.S.C. 1319, has assessed a civil penalty for these violations.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with EPCRA
section 302, 42 U.S.C. 11002, and the regulations found at 40 CFR
355.30, when it failed to notify the State Emergency Response Committee
(``SERC''), and EPCRA section 303, 42 U.S.C. 11003, and the regulations
found at 40 CFR 355.30, when it failed to notify the Local Emergency
Planning Committee (``LEPC'') of the identity of the emergency
coordinator who would participate in the emergency planning process at
the following facilities: Billerica, MA, Canton, MI, Chambersburg, PA,
Denver/Brighton, CO, Forest Park, GA, Greensboro, NC, Groveport, CA,
Lawrence, KS, Manteno, IL, Mira Loma, CA, Morrisville/Fairless Hills,
PA, Newnan, GA, Ocala, FL, Ontario, CA, Shakopee, MN, Sparks, NV, and
Warren, OH. EPA, as authorized by EPCRA section 325, has assessed a
civil penalty for these violations.
In addition, Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with
EPCRA section 311, 42 U.S.C. 11021 and the regulations found at 40 CFR
370.21, when it failed to submit a Material Safety Data Sheet
(``MSDS'') for a hazardous chemical(s) or, in the alternative, a list
of such chemicals, at the following facilities: Billerica, MA, Canton,
MI, Chambersburg, PA, Denver/Brighton, CA, Forest Park, GA, Greensboro,
NC, Groveport, CA, Lawrence, KS, Manteno, IL, Mira Loma, CA,
Morrisville/Fairless Hills, PA, Newnan, GA, Ocala, FL, Ontario, CA,
Shakopee, MN, Sparks, NW and Warren, OH. Respondent disclosed that it
had failed to comply with EPCRA section 312, 42 U.S.C. 11022 and the
regulations found at 40 CFR 370.25, when it failed to prepare and
submit emergency and chemical inventory forms to the LEPC, the SERC and
the fire department with jurisdiction over each facility, at the
Ontario, CA facility. EPA, as authorized by EPCRA section 325, has
assessed a civil penalty for these violations.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3001(d), 42 U.S.C. 6921(d) and the implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 261.5 when it failed to comply with requirements for Conditionally
Exempt Small Quantity Generators at its Denver/Brighton, CO facility.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a), and the implementing regulations listed
below relating to large quantity hazardous waste generators, at the
Billerica, MA facility:
(1) 40 CFR Part 262 for failure to make hazardous waste
identification;
(2) 40 CFR 262.12, for failure to obtain an EPA ID number;
(3) 40 CFR 262.34, for exceeding hazardous waste accumulation
times;
(4) 40 CFR 262.30-262.33, for failure to properly package and label
wastes;
(5) 40 CFR 262.40, for failure to maintain proper records;
(6) 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart C, for failure to meet preparedness
and prevention standards;
(7) 40 CFR 262.34(d) and 265.16 for failure to provide employee
training regarding hazardous handling and management practices;
(8) 40 CFR 273.2 and 273.5; for failure to properly manage and
dispose of universal wastes;
(9) 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart D, for failure to follow emergency
response procedures; Additionally, Respondent disclosed that it had
failed to comply with RCRA section 3004(d), 42 U.S.C. 6924(d) and
implementing regulations found at 40 CFR 268.1 and 40 CFR 268.7 when it
failed to meet land disposal requirements at its Billerica, MA
facility.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3014(a), 42 U.S.C. 6935(a) and the implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 279.22 when it failed to properly label used oil storage drums at
its Canton, MI facility.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the implementing regulations listed
below at its Greensboro, NC facility:
(1) 40 CFR 265.15, 40 CFR 265.174 and 40 CFR 265.195, for failure
to conduct weekly inspections of hazardous waste storage containers:
(2) 40 CFR 262.34(d), for failure to designate an emergency
coordinator and failure to post information relating to the emergency
coordinator by the phone; and
(3) 40 CFR 262.34(d) and 40 CFR 265.16, for failure to provide
hazardous waste handling and management training to employees.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the implementing regulations listed
below at its Lawrence, KS facility:
(1) 40 CFR 262.34(a) and (c), when it failed to properly label
hazardous waste containers and place accumulation start date on the
label;
(2) 40 CFR 265.174; 40 CFR 265.15; and 40 CFR 265.195, when it
failed to conduct weekly inspections of hazardous waste storage areas
and containers; and
(3) 40 CFR 262.34(d), for failure to designate an emergency
coordinator and failure to post information relating to the emergency
coordinator by the phone.
Respondent disclosed that at its Morrisville/Fairless Hills, PA
facility it had failed to comply with:
(1) RCRA section 3014(a), 42 U.S.C. 6935(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 279.22, when it failed to properly label
oil storage drums;
(2) RCRA section 3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR Part 262, when it failed to comply with all
hazardous waste storage and disposal requirements for large quantity
generators of hazardous waste;
(3) RCRA section 9003, 42 U.S.C. 6991b and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 280.20; 280.34; and 280.40-41, when it
failed to maintain information concerning construction, leak detection,
or periodic monitoring for emergency generator tank 002A; and
(4) RCRA section 9002, 42 U.S.C. 6991a and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR 280.22, when it failed to maintain a
current underground storage tank (UST) registration certificate.
[[Page 58393]]
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the implementing regulations listed
below at its Newnan, GA facility:
(1) 40 CFR 265.15, 40 CFR 265.174 and 40 CFR 265.195 when it failed
to conduct weekly inspections of hazardous waste storage areas and
containers; and
(2) 40 CFR 262.34(d) for failure to designate an emergency
coordinator and failure to post information relating to the emergency
coordinator by the phone; and
(3) 40 CFR 262.34(d) and 40 CFR 265.16, for failure to provide
hazardous waste handling and management training to employees.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3002(a), 42 U.S.C. 6922(a) and the implementing regulations listed
below at its Ocala, FL facility:
(1) 40 CFR 265.15, 40 CFR 265.174 and 40 CFR 265.195, when it
failed to conduct weekly inspections of hazardous waste storage areas
and containers; and
(2) 40 CFR 262.34(d), for failure to designate an emergency
coordinator and failure to post information relating to the emergency
coordinator by the phone; and
(3) 40 CFR 262.34(d) and 40 CFR 265.16, for failure to provide
hazardous waste handling and management training to employees.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3014(a), 42 U.S.C. 6935(a) and the implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 279.22, when it failed to properly label oil storage drums at its
Warren, OH facility.
Respondent disclosed that it had failed to comply with RCRA section
3014(a), 42 U.S.C. 6935(a) and the implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 279.22, when it failed to properly label used oil containers at its
Sparks, NV facility.
EPA, as authorized by RCRA section 3008(g), 42 U.S.C. 6928(g), has
assessed a civil penalty for these violations.
EPA determined that Respondent met the criteria set out in the
Audit Policy for a 100% waiver of the gravity component of the penalty
for the EPCRA violations, and for certain CWA and RCRA violations. For
those violations meeting the audit policy, EPA waived the gravity based
penalty of $1,608,382 and proposed a settlement penalty amount of
$21,967. This is the amount of the economic benefit gained by
Respondent, attributable to its delayed compliance with the CWA, RCRA,
and EPCRA regulations. Of this amount, $8,260 is attributable to the
CWA-SPCC violations; $7,117 is attributable to the CWA violations;
$6,400 is attributable to the RCRA violations; and $190 is attributable
to the EPCRA violations.
However, Respondent failed to satisfy some of the conditions set
forth in the Audit Policy for certain CWA and RCRA violations and was
assessed an appropriate and fair civil penalty of $80,455 ($78,625 in
gravity-based penalties and $1,830 in economic benefit) to settle those
violations.
The total civil penalty assessed for settlement purposes is one
hundred and two thousand four hundred and twenty-two dollars
($102,422). Respondent has agreed to pay this amount. EPA and
Respondent negotiated and reached an administrative consent agreement,
following the Consolidated Rules of Practice, 40 CFR 22.13(b), on
August 18, 2006 (In Re: Kmart Holding Corp. Docket Nos. CWA-HQ-2006-
6001, RCRA-HQ-2006-6001, EPCRA-HQ-2006-6001). This consent agreement is
subject to public notice and comment under CWA section 311(b)(6), 33
U.S.C. 1321(b)(6).
Under CWA section 311(b)(6)(A), 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6)(A), any owner,
operator, or person in charge of a vessel, onshore facility, or
offshore facility from which oil is discharged in violation of the CWA
section 311(b)(3), 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(3), or who fails or refuses to
comply with any regulations that have been issued under CWA section
311(j), 33 U.S.C. 1321(j), may be assessed an administrative civil
penalty of up to $157,500 by EPA. Class II proceedings under CWA
section 311(b)(6) are conducted in accordance with 40 CFR Part 22.
Under EPCRA section 325, the Administrator may issue an
administrative order assessing a civil penalty against any person who
has violated applicable emergency planning or right to know
requirements, or any other requirement of EPCRA. Proceedings under
EPCRA section 325 are conducted in accordance with 40 CFR part 22.
The procedures by which the public may comment on a proposed Class
II penalty order, or participate in a CWA II penalty proceeding, are
set forth in 40 CFR 22.45. The deadline for submitting public comment
on this proposed final order is November 2, 2006. All comments will be
transferred to the Environmental Appeals Board (``EAB'') of EPA for
consideration. The powers and duties of the EAB are outlined in 40 CFR
22.4(a).
Pursuant to CWA section 311(b)(6)(C), EPA will not issue an order
in this proceeding prior to the close of the public comment period.
Dated: September 19, 2006.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Director, Special Litigation and Projects Division, Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.
[FR Doc. E6-16293 Filed 10-2-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P