UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL

JUl 2 9 2016

PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 2
.
290 BROADWAY
NEW YORK. NY 10007-1866

CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Global Companies, LLC
Attn: Eric Slifka, President and Chief Executive Officer
800 South Street, Suite 200
Waltham, MA 02454-9161
Re: Notice of Violation: EPA Docket No. CAA-02-2016-1310
Dear Mr; Slifka:
Pursuant to Section 113(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act ("CAA"), 42 U.S.C. 7413(a)(I), Region 2 of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issues the enclosed Notice of Violation ("NOV") to Global
Companies LLC ("Global"). The NOV identifies Global's violations of the Act and the federally
enforceable New York State Implementation Plan ("SIP") by increasing the throughput of crude oil at its
.petroleum storage facility located at 50 Church Street, Albany, New York ("Albany Terminal") without
complying with the New Source Review requirements of the New York SIP.
If Global would like to schedule a face-to-face conference to discuss the NOV, please have your legal
counsel contact Anhthu Hoang, Assistant Regional Counsel, at Hoang.Anhthu@epa.gov, within ten days
of your receipt of this letter and the enclosed NOV.
Sincerely,

f1'n.v"e.~.~

. (if. ~

Dore LaPosta, Director

Division of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance
.Enclosure
cc:

Thomas Christoffel, Regional Air Pollution Control Engineer

NYSDEC Region 4
1130 North Westcott Road
Schenectady, NY 12306-2014
Edward J. Faneuil
. Executive Vice President and General Counsel
Global Companies, LLC

.
IntemetAddress (URL). hltp:/IwWw.epa.gov
Recyc:llCIlRecyc:labl. Printed with Vegetable 011Bald Inks on Rec:yc:1edP~r (Minimum 50%PostGonsumer c:ontent)

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 2

In the Matter of:

Global Companies LLC Albany Terminal
Respondent

NOTICE OF VIOLATION

In a proceeding under
Section 113 of the Clean Air Act

CAA-02-2016-131O

Summary

The Director of the Division of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance ("Director") for the
United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") Region 2 issues this Notice of Violation
("NOV") to Global Companies LLC ("Global" or "Respondent"), pursuant to Section 113(a) of the
Clean Air Act ("CAA" or "the Act"), 42 U.S.C. 7413(a). The NOV describes EPA's findings that
Global violated the Act and the federally enforceable New York state implementation plan ("SIP") by
increasing the throughput of crude oil at its petroleum storage facility located at 50 Church Street,
Albany, New York ("Albany Terminal") without complying with the new source review (''NSR'')
requirements of the New York SIP.

Statutory and Regulatory Background

1.

Under Section 109 of the CAA, the EPA Administrator is required to promulgate

regulations establishing national ambient air quality standards ("NAAQS") for each pollutant for which
air quality criteria have been issued pursuant to Section 108 of the Act. 42 U.S.c. 7409.
2.

Under Section 107( d) of the CAA, each state is required to identify a list of areas within

the state and designate each area as one of three categories: "nonattainment,"

"attainment," and

"unclassifiable" for each criteria pollutant. 42 U.S.C. 7407(d).

3.

Under Section 107(d) of the CAA, a "nonattainment" area for a given criteria pollutant is

"any area that does not meet (or contributes to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet)"
the NAAQS for that pollutant. 42 U.S.C. 7407(d).
4.

Under Section 107(d) ofthe CAA, an "attainment" area for a given criteria pollutant is

"an area (other than an area identified as "nonattainment")" that meets the NAAQS for that pollutant.

'

42 U.S.C. 7407(d).
5.

Under Section 107(d) ofthe CAA, an "unclassifiable" area for a given criteria pollutant is

"any area that cannot be classified on the basis of available information as meeting or not meeting" the
NAAQS for that pollutant. 42 U.S.C. 7407(d).
6.

Under Section 1l0(a)(l) ofthe CAA, each state is required to adopt and submit to EPA

for approval a plan that provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each of the
NAAQS. Such plans, once approved by EPA, are known as State Implementation Plans, or SIPs.
42 U.S.c. 7410(a)(l).
7.

Under Section 184 of the CAA, the State of New York is established as part of the Ozone

Transport Region ("OTR") by operation oflaw. 42 U.S.C. 7511c(a).

8.

Under Section 184 of the CAA, a stationary source that is located within an OTR and that

emits or has the potential to emit at least 50 tons per year ("tpy") of volatile organic compounds
("VOCs") shall be considered a major stationary source and subject to the requirements which would be
applicable to major stationary sources if the area were classified as a "Moderate" nonattainment area.
42 U.S.c. 7511c(b)(2).
9.

Under 40 C.F.R. Part 50, EPA established NAAQS for criteria pollutants, including

10.

Under 40 C.F.R. 51.165(a)(I)(xxxvii),

ozone.
VOC and nitrogen oxides ("NOx") are regulated

NSR pollutants for purposes of permitting under the CAA.

11.

Under 40 C.F.R. 51.165(a)(l)(xxxvii),

VOCs and NOx are also regulated as precursors

to the formation of ozone in all ozone nonattainment areas.

12.

Under 40 C.F.R. 52.23, "[fJailure to comply with ...any permit limitation or condition

contained within an operating permit issued under an EPA -approved program that is incorporated into
the State implementation plan, shall render the person or governmental entity so failing to comply in
violation of a requirement of an applicable implementation plan and subject to enforcement action under
section 113 of the Clean Air Act."
13.

Under Section 302(e) of the CAA, a "person," as used in the Act, includes any individual,

corporation, partnership, association, state, municipality, political subdivision of a State, and any
CAA-02-2016-1310

agency, department, or instrumentality of the United States and any officer, agent, or employee thereof.
14.

New York has adopted a SIP ("New York SIP" or ''NY SIP") that has been approved by

EPA under Section 110 of the Act for New Source Review for New and Modified Facilities.
75 Fed; Reg. 70142 (November 17,201'0).1
15.

The New York SIP includes various regulations promulgated by the New York State

Department of Environmental Conservation ("NYSDEC"), including Title 6 of the New York Codes,
Rules and Regulations 200.1 (6 NYCRR 200.1). See 6 NYCRR 200.1; see also 78 Fed. Reg.
41846 (JuJ. 17,2013).
16.

The definitions that are part of the New York SIP are set forth in 6 NYCRR 200.1:
a. Under 6 NYCRR 200.1 (ak), the "lowest achievable emission rate" ("LAER") is
defined as, among other things, the most stringent emission limitation achieved in
practice, or which can reasonably be expected to occur in practice for a category of
emission sources taking into consideration each air contaminant which must be
controlled.
b. Under 6 NYCRR 200.1 (ba) an "operator" is defined as "any person who leases,
operates, 'controls or supervises a facility at which air contaminants are emitted."
c. Under 6 NYCRR 200. 1(be), an "owner" is defined as "any person who has legal
or equitable title to an emission source; or of the control equipment at such source."
d. Under 6 NYCRR 200. 1(bi), a "person" is defined as "any individual, public or
private corporation, political subdivision, government agency, department or bureau
of the State, municipality, industry, copartnership, association, firm, trust, estate or
any other legal entity whatsoever."

17.

The New York SIP includes 6 NYCRR 201-7.1, which States, inter alia, that a "source

may elect to accept federally enforceable permit terms and conditions which restrict or cap emissions
from a stationary source or emission unit in order to avoid being subject to one or more applicable
requirements that the source or unit would otherwise be subject to." See 70 Fed. Reg. 57511 (Oct. 3,
2005).
18.

The New York SIP includes the requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 231, "New Source

Review (''NSR'') for New and Modified Facilities," which includes requirements pertaining to contents
of applications and criteria for obtaining NSR permits in nonattainment areas as required by Sections

1 All SIP requirements referenced in this NOV point to the provisions as they were approved into the New York SIP
(available at https:/lwww3.epa.gov/region02/air/sip/nYJeg.htm).

CAA-02-2016-1310

172(c)(5) and 173 ofthe CAA. 6 NYCRR Part 231; see also 75 Fed. Reg. 70142 (Nov. 17,2010).
19.

The New York SIP states that "no owner or operator of a proposed major facility, NSR

major modification, or existing major facility which undertakes a significant modification but avoids
NSR applicability through netting, shall be allowed to begin actual construction, commence operation,
or operate such new facility or modification, as appropriate, without a permit which incorporates the
requirements of [6 NYCRR Part 231]." 6 NYCRR 231-3.5.
20.

<

The New York SIP defines a "modification" as "any physical change in, or change in the

method of operation of, a facility which results in a level of annual emissions in excess of the baseline
actual emissions of any regulated NSR contaminant emitted by such facility or which results in the
emission of any regulated NSR contaminant not previously emitted." 6 NYCRR 231-4.1.
21.

The New York SIP defines a facility that emits 50 tpy or more ofVOCs and is located in

the OTR as a "major facility." 6 NYCRR 201-21(iv)(c) and 6 NYCRR 231-13.1.

22.

The New York SIP defines "project emission potential" as "the difference between the

baseline actual emissions and the proj ected actual emissions of the emission source" for existing
emission sources at a major facility. 6 NYCRR 231-4.1(b)(39).
23.

The New York SIP provides that, where a permit establishes an emission cap that allows

a source owner or operator to avoid the requirement to obtain a Title V facility permit or comply with an
applicable requirement, the emission of pollutants in exceedance of the applicability thresholds for
obtaining a title V facility permit or other applicable requirements is a violation of Part 201 and of the
Act. 6 NYCRR 201-7.2.
24.

The New York SIP requires that fugitive emissions are included in the project emission

potential if the facility belongs to one of the source categories listed at 6 NYCRR 231-13.9.
6 NYCRR 231-4.1(b)(39).
25.

The New York SIP lists petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage capacity

exceeding 300,000 barrels as a source category under 6 NYCRR 231-13.9.

26.

The New York SIP defines "net emission increase" as, among other things, the project

emission potential of a modification for existing major facilities. 6 NYCRR 231-4.1 (b)(29).
27.

The New York SIP defines a "NSR major modification" as, among other things, a

modification of an existing major facility located in the OTR that would exceed a project emission
potential threshold of 40 tpy or more ofVOCs and would result in a net emissions increase of 40 tpy or
more ofVOCs. 6 NYCRR 231- 4.1(31) and 13.3.
28.

The New York SIP requires that when a modification results in a NSR major

CAA-02-2016-1310

modification, the facility owner or operator must comply with the appropriate provisions of
6 NYCRR 231-6.1, "Modifications to Existing Major Facilities in Nonattainment Areas and
Attainment Areas of the State within The Ozone Transport Region." 6 NYCRR 231-6.1 (c).
29.

The New York SIP requires that a permit application submitted to the NYSDEC for a

modification which results in a NSR major modification must include all the relevant information
required by 6 NYCRR 231-6.3(a)-(e). 6 NYCRR 231-6.3.
30.

The New York SIP requires LAER implementation for NSR major modifications at

existing major facilities located in the OTR for each emission source that emits the applicable
nonattainment contaminant. 6 NYCRR 231-6.5.
31.

The New York SIP requires that project emission potential must be offset for NSR major

modifications at existing major facilities located in the OTR. 6 NYCRR 231-6.6.

Findings of Fact

32.

The following fmdings of fact are based on an investigation conducted by EPA Region 2

pursuant to Section 114 of the CAA, 42 D.S.C. 7414. The investigation included, among other actions,
an information request letter ("IRL") to the Respondent on February 12,2016; follow-up emails
requesting additional information and clarification of the Respondent's responses to EPA's IRL on May
18,2016 and June 23,2016, respectively; reviewing Respondent's response records; obtaining relevant
documents from the NYSDEC Region 4 offices; and reviewing these NYSDEC documents.
33.

Respondent operates a petroleum product terminal located at 50 Church Street, Albany,

New York 12202.

34.

The Albany Terminal is located in the state of New York.

35.

Thomas Keefe ("Mr. Keefe") is the Vice President of Environmental Health & Safety for

36.

Mr. Keefe provided the certified responses to the EPA's information requests on behalf

Global.

of the Respondent by letters with attachments dated March 21,2016, April 15, 2016, May 31,2016, and
June 27, 2016 (collectively, "Section 114 Information Request Responses").
37.

Based upon the EPA's review of the Section 114 Information Request Responses, the

violations described in this NOV are ongoing.

38.

The Albany Terminal has a total storage capacity for petroleum products greater than

300,000 barrels.
CAA-02-2016-1310

39.

The Albany Terminal currently operates under NYSDEC Air Title V Facility Permit 4-

0101-00112/00029 Modification 4, effective November 7,2012 ("Modification 4 of the Title V

Permit").
40.

Starting August 29,2011, and ending November 7, 2012, Respondent received a series of

Title V permit modifications that authorized the storage and marine loading of crude oil at the Albany
Terminal.
41.

The permit modifications that were issued between August 29, 2011 and

November 7,2012 authorized crude oil throughput increases up to 1,850,000,000 gallons per year
(collectively, the "crude oil modification").
42.

Modification 4 of the Title V Permit authorized an increase in storage and marine loading

of crude oil from 450,000,000 gallons to 1,850,000,000 gallons per 12-month rolling period.
43.

Modification 4 of the Title V Permit also authorized the construction of a new vapor

combustion unit ("VCU"), defined as "VCUM2" in the Modification 4 of the Title V Permit, to control
the emissions from the marine loading operations.
44.

At the time Modification 4 of the Title V Permit was issued, the Albany Terminal

operated under Modification 3 to the Title V Permit, which had an effective date of November 2,2011.
45.

Modifications 1,2, and 3 of the Title V Permit characterize the Albany Terminal as

having a potential to emit of 110.4 tpy ofVOC. See e.g., Condition 24 of Modifications 1,2, and 3 to the
Title V Permit.
46.

Since at least Modification 1 to the Title V Permit, the Albany Terminal has been a major

stationary source because its potential to emit was greater than 50 tpy ofVOC.
47.

On November 9, 2011, Respondent submitted to NYSDEC a permit application which

included, among other things, a request for modifications to the Albany Terminal in order to
accommodate increased storage and marine loading of crude oil from 450,000,000 gallons of crude oil
per year up to 1,850,000,000 gallons of crude oil per 12-month rolling period ("November 9,2011
Permit Application").
48.

On June 5, 2012, Respondent submitted to NYSDEC a revised permit application which

included, among other things, updated emission calculations ("June 5, 2012 Permit Application").
49.

The June 5, 2012 Permit Application included a table entitled "Project Summary"

("Project Summary table").

50.

The Project Summary table lists the following as emission sources for the requested

CAA-02-20 16-131 0

permit modification: four storage tanks (specifically, Tanks 30, 31, 114, ~d 115),2 marine loading of
crude oil, and "additional fugitive emissions."
51.

The Project Summary table includes a calculated "total project emission potential" of

39.19 tpy of V OC that would result from the requested increase in crude oil storage and marine loading
of crude oil.
52.

The Project Summary table lists the "projected actual emissions" associated with each of

Tanks 30, 31,114, and 115 as zero.

53.

Aside from the Project Summary table in the permit application for Modification 4 of the

Title V Permit, no other document related to this permit application nor to applications for any other
modification to Respondent's

Title V permit associated with the crude oil modification contains a past

actual to projected actual emission analysis for storage tanks to store crude oil-at the Albany Terminal.
54.

The Project Summary table lists the "projected actual emissions" associated with the

marine loading of crude oil as 39.50 tpy.

55.

The "projected actual emissions" in the Project Summary table included 0.08 tpy of

"additional fugitive emissions" associated with the requested permit modification.

56.

The Project Summary table lists an "actual emissions" (baseline) rate associated with the

marine loading of crude oil of 0.39 tpy, which was presented as the total average-emission rate for the
emission units associated with the requested permit modification for calendar years 2010 and 2011.
57.

The Project Summary table lists "actual emissions" of Tanks 30, 31, 114, and 115 of the

years 2010 and 2011 as zero.

58.

Respondent never presented its calculations for the baseline actual emissions to the

projected actual emissions analysis of the crude oil modification for any tank except in the application
for the Modification 4 of the Title V Permit, in which it lists the emissions of the tanks as zero.
59:

The June 5, 2012 Permit Application also included a table entitled "Emissions from

Marine Loading of Crude Oil" ("Emissions from Marine Loading of Crude Oil table").
60.

The Emissions from Marine Loading of Crude Oil table shows Respondent's calculations

ofVOC emissions and includes such information as assumptions made and emission factors used in
arriving at the 39.5 tpy ofVOC as the "projected actual emissions" listed in the Project Summary table.
61.

EPA has determined from the Emissions from Marine Loading of Crude Oil table that

2 Although the Project Summary table lists Tanks 30, 31, 114, and 115, the tanks actually used to accommodate the
throughput increase permitted in Modification 4 of the Title V Permit were Tanks 31, 32, and 39. This correction applies to
all other references to this set oftanks.

CAA-02-2016-1310

Respondent based the VOC emission calculations reported in the June 5, 2012 Permit Application on an
uncontrolled emission factor of 1.3590 lbs. ofVOC per 1,000 gallons of crude oil loaded and a capture
efficiency of98.7% for the VCU.
62.

EPA has determined from the Emissions from Marine Loading of Crude Oil table that

Respondent based the VOC emission calculations reported in the June 5, 2012 Permit Application on the
assumption that 1.3% of uncontrolled VOC emissions remain uncaptured by emission control equipment
(i.e., the VCU) and is emitted directly to the atmosphere.
63.

Respondent has also used the assumption that 1.3% of uncontrolled VOC emissions from

marine loading of crude oil remains uncaptured by emission control equipment (i.e., the VCU) and is
emitted directly to the atmosphere for calculations supporting annual emission inventory reports
submitted to NYSDEC.
64.

EP A has determined from the Emissions from Marine Loading of Crude Oil table that the

. controlled VOC emission calculations listed therein are based on a VCU outlet rate of3 milligrams of
VOC per liter of crude oil loaded, which is the enforceable limit contained in Modification 4 of the Title
V permit for the new VCU. See e.g., Condition 4-3 of Modification 4 ofthe Title V Permit.
65.

EPA has determined from the information listed in the Emissions from Marine Loading

of Crude Oil table that Respondent claimed the marine loading of crude oil from the requested permit
modification would result in 16.3 tpy ofVOC emissions that would not be captured and 23.2 tpy of
VOC that would be captured, but not combusted by the VCU.
66.

Modification 4 to the Title V Permit contains enforceable emission caps pursuant to

6 NYCRR 201-7.
67.

Condition 4-7 of Modification 4 to the Title V Permit includes enforceable emission caps

intended to keep the net emission increase resulting from Modification 4 to the Title V Permit below the
40 tpy ofVOC threshold that would trigger NSR applicability under 6 NYCRR 231-6.
68.

Because the Respondent's permit application estimated a net emissions increase

associated with the requested permit modification below the 40 tpy threshold set forth in
6 NYCRR 231-6, the NSR requirements applicable under 6 NYCRR 231-6 were not included in
Modification 4 of the Title V Permit.
69.

Conditions 4-3 and 4-7 of Modification 4 of the Title V Permit include an enforceable

emission cap that comprises crude oil throughput limits, an emission limit of3 milligram ofVOC
emissions per liter of crude oil loaded at the marine loading dock from the new VCU, and a requirement
to perform reference method testing of the new VCU.
CAA-02-2016-1310

70.

According to an August 7, 2013 submittal, entitled "Compliance Emissions Testing on

the John Zink Marine Vapor Combustion Unit," made by Global ("2013 VCu. Test Report"),
Respondent conducted compliance testing, pursuant to Condition 4-3 of Modification 4 of the Title V
,

Permit, on the new VCU on June 21, 2013 in order "to satisfy conditions of the facility source permit
issued by the State of New York, No. 4-0101-00112/00029."
71.

According to the 2013 VCU Test Report, the testing measured VOC concentrations and

vapor flow rates at the inlet and outlet of the VCU and the amount of crude oil loaded to the barge.
72.

According to the 2013 VCU Test Report, Respondent calculated the VOC mass emission

rate based on the VOC concentration and vapor flow rates at the inlet and outlet of the VCu.
73.

The 2013 VCU Test Report contains a table entitled "Table 2-1" ("Table 2-1 of the VCU

Test Report").
74.

Table 2-1 of the 2013 VCU Test Report states that it shows the results of the testing

conducted on June 21, 2013.

75.

According to the 2013 VCU Test Report, Table 2-1 of the 2013 VCU Test Report shows

the VOC mass emission rate calculated by Respondent as described above.

76.

The EPA used data Respondent reported in the 2013 VCU Test Report (i.e., VOC mass

emission rate and the amount of crude oil loaded d~ing the test), and the capture efficiency reported by
the Respondent in the June 5, 2012 permit application (i.e., 98.7%), to calculate an uncontrolled
emission factor for marine loading of the actual crude oil processed by the Respondent at the Albany
Terminal.
77.

The EPA's calculation, as described above, yields an uncontrolled VOC emission rate of

4.841b per 1,000 gallons of crude oil that is marine loaded.

78.

The EPA-calculated site specific uncontrolled emission factor of 4.841b per 1,000

gallons of crude that is marine loaded is over 3.5 times higher than the uncontrolled emission factor of
1.3590 lb per 1,000 gallons of crude oil used in the Respondent's June 5;2012 Permit Application.
79.

Based on the results of the 2013 VCU Test Report, information obtained in the Section

114 Information Request Responses, and information obtained at the NYSDEC office, the physical and
operational changes associated with the crude oil modification resulted in an emission potential for the
requested permit modification of over 40 tpy ofVOC.
80.

Based on the EPA-calculated uncontrolled VOC emission factor for marine loading of

crude oil throughput data, annual emission statements and supporting calculations for storage tanks, and

CAA-02-2016-1310

other information submitted by the Respondent in response to the IRL, the modification to increase the
facility's crude oil throughput also resulted in an actual significant net emission increase in VOC.
81.

Respondent did not submit to NYSDEC a permit application for the crude oil

modification that included a proposal for implementation of LAER and offsets for the emissions in
excess of the NSR threshold of 40 tpy.

Conclusions of Law
Based on the Finding of Fact set forth above, EPA reaches the following conclusions of law:

82.

Respondent is a "person" as defined by Section 302(e) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7602(e),

and the New York SIP.

83.

Respondent is the "owner" and "operator" ofthe Albany Terminal within the meaning of

Part 200 of the NY SIP.

84.

During the time the crude oil modification was made, the Albany Terminal was an

existing major stationary source under the NYSIP because its potential to emit was greater than 50 tpy
ofVOC.
85.

The Albany Terminal is located within an OTR, and therefore is located in an ozone non-

attainment area under the CAA.

86.

The crude oil modification, which authorized the increase in the allowable annual crude

oil throughput at the Albany Terminal to 1,850,000,000 gallons per year resulted in net emissions of
greater than 40 tpy ofVOC.
87.

The net emissions of greater than 40 tpy ofVOC resulting from crude oil modification is

a NSR major modification to an existing major facility under 6 NYCRR 231.

88.

Because the increase in annual crude oil throughput to 1,850,000,000 gallons per year

from the crude oil modification resulted in a significant net emissions increase in VOC, and the Albany
Terminal is a major facility, Respondent is required to implement LAER under the CAA and the NYSIP.
89.

Because crude oil modification to increase annual crude oil throughput to 1,850,000,000

gallons per year resulted in a significant net emissions increase in VOC, and the Albany Terminal is a
major facility, Respondent is required to implement offsets under the CAA and the NYSIP.
90.

Respondent failed to obtain a permit for the NSR major modification associated with

crude oil modification in violation of the New York SIP, 6 NYCRR 231-3.5.

CAA-02-2016-1310

10

91.

Respondent continues to operate the facility after the NSR major modification in

violation of the New York SIP, 6 NYCRR 231-3.5.

92.

Respondent Jailed to implement LAER for the crude oil modification in violation of

6 NYCRR 231-6.5.
93.

. Respondent failed to obtain VOC emission offsets for the crude oil modification in

violation of 6 NYCRR 231-6.6.

94.

Respondent failed to submit to NYSDEC a permit application for crude oil modification

that meets the requirements ofa NSR major modification in violation of the New York SIP,
6 NYCRR 231-6.
95.

Respondent emitted VOCs in exceedance of the NSR applicability thresholds in violation

of 40 C.F.R. 52.23.
96.

Respondent emitted VOCs in exceedance of the NSR applicability thresholds in violation

of6 NYCRR 201- 7.2(f).

Enforcement

Section 113(a)(l) of the CAA authorizes EPA to take any of the. following actions in response to
a respondent's violation( s) of a SIP, after the expiration of 30 days following the issuance of a notice of
violation:

Issue an order requiring compliance with the requirements or prohibitions of the SIP;

Issue an administrative penalty order in accordance with CAA Section 113(d); or

Bring a civil action in accordance with CAA Section 113(b) for civil penalties and/or
injunctive relief.

The Clean Air Act provides for civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day for each violation of the
Act and its implementing regulations.

This amount has been adjusted over time as required by the

Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (28 V.S.C. 2461 note; Pub. L. 101-410), as
amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, and most recently, by the Federal Civil
Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of2015 (28 V.S.C. 2461 note; Pub. L.114-74,
Section 701).
Furthermore, for any person who knowingly violates any requirement or prohibition of an
applicable SIP for more than thirty (30) days after the date of the issuance of an NOV, Section 113(c) of
the Act provides for criminal penalties or imprisonment, or both. In addition, under Section 306 of the
CAA-02-20 16-131 0

11

Act, the regulations promulgated thereunder (40 CFR Part 15), and Executive Order 11,738, facilities to
be utilized in federal contracts, grants and loans must be in full compliance with the Act and all
regulations promulgated pursuant thereto. Violation of the Act may result in the subject facility, or other
facilities owned or operated by Respondent, being declared ineligible for participation in any federal
contract, grant, or loan program.

Penalty Assessment Criteria

Section 113(e)(I) of the Act provides that if a penalty is assessed pursuant to Section 113 of the
Act, EPA or the court, as appropriate, shall, in determining the amount of the penalty to be assessed,
take into consideration the size of the business, the economic impact of the penalty on the business, the
violator's full compliance history and good faith efforts to comply, the duration of the violation as
established by any credible evidence (including evidence other than the applicable test method),
payment by the violator of penalties previously assessed for the same violation, the economic benefit of
noncompliance, the seriousness of the violation, and other factors as justice may require.
Section 113(e)(2) of the Act allows EPA or the court, as appropriate, to assess a penalty for each
day of violation. In accordance with Section 113(e)(2) of the Act, EP A will consider a violation to
continue from the date the violation began until the date Respondent establishes that it has achieved
continuous compliance. If Respondent proves that there was an intermittent day of compliance or that
the violation was not continuous in nature, EPA will reduce the penalty accordingly.

Opportunity for a Conference

Respondent may request a conference with EPA concerning the violations alleged in this NOV.
This conference will enable Respondent to present evidence regarding the findings of violation, the
nature of the violation, and any efforts it may have taken or it proposes to take to achieve compliance.
Respondent's request for a conference must be confirmed in writing within ten (10) days of receipt of
this NOV. The request for a conference, or other inquiries concerning this NOV, should be made by
I

email to hoang.anhthu@epa.gov

CAA-02-2016-1310

or in writing to:

12

Anhthu Hoang, Assistant Regional Counsel

u.s. Environmental Protection Agency - Region 2
Office of Regional Counsel- Air Branch
290 Broadway - 16th Floor
New York, NY 10007-1866
Notwithstanding this NOV and the opportunity for conference, Respondent must comply with all
applicable requirements of the CAA.

Issued:

S'"-tJ ~~

,2016
Dore LaPosta, Director
Division of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region 2

To:

Eric Slifka, President and Chief Executive Officer

Global Companies, LLC
800 South Street; Suite 200
Waltham, MA 02454-9161

cc:

Thomas Christoffel, Regional Air Pollution Control Engineer

NYSDEC Region 4
1130 North Westcott Road
Schenectady, NY 12306-2014

CAA-02-20 16-131 0

13