HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 702 Draft 01 2006-2008COUNTY OF HAWAII
STATE OF HAWAII
RESOLUTION NO. 02 08
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO: (1) ENTER INTO A CONSENT
AGREEMENT AND FINAL ORDER ("CAFO") WITH THE UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY TO SETTLE VIOLATIONS OF THE
FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT RELATING TO ANNUAL GAS EMISSIONS REPORTS AND
CONTROLS FOR THE WEST HAWAII LANDFILL, AND (2) ENTER INTO A FUNDING
AGREEMENT WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT OF HAWAII, INC., FOR RECEIPT OF
FUNDS AND FOR COUNTY RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLETION OF A
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT AT THE CLOSED KAILUA-KONA
LANDFILL IN SATISFACTION OF THE: CAFO.
WHEREAS, the County of Hawaii ("County") contracted with Waste Management of
Hawaii, Inc. ("WMH") to construct and manage the West Hawaii Landfill; and
WHEREAS, under said contract, WMH was responsible for compliance with all
environmental laws in its management of the West Hawaii Landfill, and to indemnify the
County against fines or penalties that might arise from violation of such laws; and
WHEREAS, The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") is authorized to
enforce the Clean Air Act, including 42 U.S.C. sections 7401-7617q, (the "Act") and to settle
violations of said Act; and
WHEREAS, under the Act, for operation of the West Hawaii Landfill, WMH was
required to calculate the landfill's nonmethane organic compounds ("NMOC") emissions
potential and report this to the EPA annually; and
WHEREAS, WMH failed to comply with Clean Air Act requirements to timely submit
Annual Emission Rate Reports with the EPA for the West Hawaii Landfill, for the years 2001,
2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005; and
WHEREAS, WMH failed to comply with Clean Air Act requirements, based on the
NMOC emissions potential for 2002, to submit to EPA a gas collection and control plan within
one year, and install a gas collection and control system ("GCCS") within 30 months, or in the
alternative to provide a revised report within 180 days, based on Tier 2 NMOC sampling and
analysis that shows emission rates below the threshold requirement for a GCCS; and
WHEREAS, in lieu of the EPA's demand for a civil penalty of $135,000, the EPA is
willing to settle the foregoing violations for a civil penalty of $33,500, with the remaining
$101,500 to be used by the County and WMH to complete a Supplemental Environmental
Project ("SEP") to cost at least $184,400 intended to provide significant environmental or public
health protection and improvements at the Old Closed Kailua-Kona Landfill, as set forth in the
proposed CAFO set forth as Attachment "A"; and
WHEREAS, the SEP will consist of (1) investigation of landfill subsurface conditions to
find hotspots that probably mark subsurface fires by infrared imagery, mapping thermal and
topographic changes using shallow temperature probes, photoionization detectors and methane
meters; and (2) a Fire Suppression Demonstration Project using fire retardant Class -A fire
suppression foam to suppress an existing subsurface fire at the landfill. This will involve
excavation of burning material 10 feet deep in about a 65 -foot square demonstration area,
suppression of burning material with foam on an adjacent crushed rock suppression deck before
replacement, and trial of an innovative in-situ foam extinguishment, mixing foam into infiltration
trenches dug another 10-20 feet into the underlying burning material, to allow the foam to
penetrate and extinguish underlying burning waste; and (3) ongoing air and temperature
monitoring; and
WHEREAS, WMH is willing to pay the $101,500 SEP amount, and the Department of
Environmental Management has funding available for the additional minimum of $82,900 to
comprise the $184,400 which EPA requires to be spent on the SEP; and
WHEREAS, the County is ultimately responsible for environmentally responsible
management and closure of the Closed Kailua-Kona Landfill, in compliance with EPA
requirements, and this CAFO and SEP provides the County with a great EPA -approved
opportunity to try an innovative fire -suppression demonstration project at this site, with most of
the financing coming from WMH in lieu of a penalty paid to EPA; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environmental Management views the SEP as a cost-
effective and beneficial alternative to litigating the violation issues, or installing a GCCS, and is
willing to take responsibility for implementing the SEP and fulfilling SEP completion and
certification terms of the CAFO, and paying any additional fines that may arise from failure to
comply with said terms, all as set forth in the proposed Settlement and SEP funding Agreement
("Funding Agreement") attached as Attachment `B"; and
WHEREAS, the CAFO is an agreement with the federal government which settles a
claim against the County in excess of $1,500 and requires Council approval pursuant to Hawaii
Revised Statutes Section 46-7, as an agreement for the County to take action, furnish, and
expend funds or other assistance in undertaking the SEP, and may possibly require payment of
funds of more than one fiscal year, if the County fails to timely complete and certify the SEP in
compliance with the CAFO; and
WHEREAS, the Funding Agreement requires Council approval for the receipt of funds
from WMH pursuant to Hawaii County Charter section 13-12, and may possibly require the
payment of funds from more than one fiscal year, if the County fails to timely complete and
certify the SEP in compliance with the CAFO;
2
NOW, THEREORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF
HAWAII, in accordance with HRS Section 46-7 and Hawaii County Code Section 2-162, that
the Mayor of the County of Hawaii is authorized to execute, on behalf of the County, the CAFO
in substantially the form attached hereto as Attachment "A" and the Funding Agreement in
substantially the form attached hereto as Attachment `B," to enable the County to settle the
above-mentioned Clean Air Act violations at the West Hawaii Landfill, and complete the SEP
for better public health and environmental protection of the Closed Kailua-Kona Landfill; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County accepts WMH's contribution of
$101,500 for the SEP pursuant to the terms of the CAFO and the Financing Agreement; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk of the County of Hawaii is directed to
transmit copies of this resolution to: (1) Mayor Harry Kim; (2) Finance Director William
Takaba; (3) Deputy Corporation Counsel Ivan Torigoe; and (4) Department of Environmental
Management.
Dated at Kona Hawaii, this 13thday of
5K11IM161111
COUNTY COUNCIL
County of Hawaii
Hilo, Hawaii
I hereby certify that the foregoing RESOLUTION was by the
vote indicated to the right hereof adopted by the COUNCIL of
the County ofHawai`ion August 13, 2008
ATTEST:
COUNTY CLERK
August 2008.
HAWAII
ROLL CALL VOTE
Reference
C-1334/FC-301
RESOLUTION NO. 702 08
AYES NOES ABS EX
FORD
X
HIGA
X
HOFFMANN
X
IKEDA
X
JACOBSON
X
NAEOLE
X
PILAGO
X
YAGONG
X
YOSHIMOTO
X
9 0 0 0
Reference
C-1334/FC-301
RESOLUTION NO. 702 08
Prepared for:
County of Hawaii
Dept. of Environmental
Management
Solid Waste Division
Kailua-Kona Landfill
Supplemental Environmental Project
Workplan
March 14, 2008
www.erm.com
Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world ERM
ATTACHMENT "A"
County of Hawaii
Dept. of Environmental Management
Solid Waste Division
Kailua-Kona Landfill
Supplemental Environmental Project
Workplan
March 14, 2008
Project # 0061204
William G. Cutler, P.G.
Managing Director
J. Lawrence Hosmer, P.E.
Senior Consultant
Larry N. Hottenstein
Partner
Environmental Resources Management
733 Bishop Street, Suite 1872
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
T: 808-521-4404
F: 808-521-49:08
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1
1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY
1
1.2 PROBLEM DEFINITION
3
1.3 PROPOSED SCOPES OF WORK AND COST ESTIMATE
4
2.0
EVALUATION OF LANDFILL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
5
2.1 BACKGROUND
5
2.2 REMEDIAL STRATEGIES
7
2.3 SITE INVESTIGATION APPROACHES
7
2.3.1 General Approaches
7
2.3.2 Landfill -Specific Approaches
8
2.3.3 Proposed Investigation Scope
8
2.4 FIRE SUPPRESSION DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
9
2.4.1 Conceptual Design
9
2.4.2 Perimeter Air Monitoring
11
3.0
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
12
4.0
REFERENCES
13
LIST OF FIGURES
(Figures immediately follow the text)
1 Project Location Map
2 TMK Site Map
3 Aerial Photograph with Surroundings
4 Aerial Photograph, Close Up
5 Fire Suppression Demonstration Layout
LIST OF TABLES
(Tables immediately follow the figures)
1 Cost Estimate
1.0 INTRODUCTION
A scope of work with associated cost estimate is herein provided for
further investigation and a subsurface fire suppression demonstration at
the Kailua-Kona Landfill.. This work may be incorporated into a
Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) as determined by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the County of
Hawaii.
1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY
The Kailua-Kona Landfill is a closed municipal waste landfill in the North
Kona District, about 3 miles north of Kailua-Kona on the west coast of the
Island of Hawaii (Figure 1). The landfill operated from about 1975 until
1993. The landfill is approximately 20 acres in size, located east of the
Queen Kaahumanu Highway (Tax Map Key 7-4-08:16, Figure 2).
Neighbors include the Kailua Police Station and Kealakehe Elementary
School (Figures 3 and 4). The closest residence is nearly 1 mile east of the
landfill. During operation, several landfill fires were known to exist, and
waste combustion is believed to have continued after landfill closure to
the present time. Based on discussions with the County of Hawaii and
USEPA and review of available historical documents, ERM has developed
project objectives and a scope of work to achieve stated objectives.
The USEPA and the County of Hawaii provided ERM with historical
documents regarding the landfill. A list of documents received and
reviewed is provided in the References section of this report.
Municipal solid waste was disposed of at the facility from the late 1970s
until 1993. Waste was placed directly on basalt bedrock without an
underliner system; high permeability lava tubes are thought to be present
beneath placed wastes. Subsurface fires within the waste material and
odor complaints from neighbors are documented as early as 1991.
Also in the early 1990s, before final landfill closure, studies were
performed to evaluate landfill gas and ambient air at the landfill and the
adjacent Police Station. Air samples were analyzed for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), but none were detected above blank control
concentrations. At the time, landfill fires ("hotspots") were known to
landfill employees; the h.otspots would result in visible flames when
exposed. Parametrix (1992a) interpreted temperature probe
measurements to indicate that perimeter landfill areas with greater
ERM 1 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
subsurface air supply were combusting (most or all of these temperature
probes are believed to have been destroyed during landfill closure). They
recommended engineering considerations for landfill closure to control
landfill fires, including a cover system with an impermeable
geomembrane and a gas collection system. Parametrix (1992a) recognized
that permeable lava tubes could supply air for subsurface combustion
even after closure with the recommended engineering controls, and
recommended that geophysical surveys be performed to identify lava
tubes and such tubes be grout -sealed to prevent air flow.
A Landfill Closure/Post Closure Plan was approved in 1993. ERM has
not yet obtained a copy of this plan; however, we did review the response
to comments on the plan by Parametrix (1993a). The Hawaii Department
of Health (HDOH) expressed concerns on the heat resistance of the
geomembrane liner system. ERM understands based on discussions with
the County of Hawaii that this liner has in fact failed in certain locations
due to excessive heat. Parametrix (1993b) stated that during closure,
"sealing these [landfill] side slopes off, air will be eliminated from the
refuse, thereby shutting off the oxygen supply, and 'smothering' the
subsurface fires ... If temperature monitoring indicates that there are areas
which are not cooling off as rapidly as others, a barrier trench, filled with
low -permeability grout will be installed in native soil adjacent to the
elevated temperatures, to effectively block lava tubes in the area."
During closure of the landfill in 1992 and 1993, a gas -collection system
consisting of perforated HDPE piping within 3 -foot -square, gravel -filled
trenches at 150 -foot centers was installed and operated. Due to low
methane concentrations in the collected gas stream that were not suitable
for combustion treatment, the system ceased operations in February 1993
(Parametrix 1993b). A final cover system with 30 -mil PVC geomembrane
liner and 2 feet of cover soil was installed in late 1993. Temperature and
gas monitoring probes were installed during Phase II cover installation,
and routinely monitored after closure (Parametrix, 1995a). Temperatures
above 120°F were observed in several temperature probes; however,
landfill gases were not identified at perimeter gas monitoring locations.
By September 1995, during Phase 3 Closure Work, temperatures in
vertical gas extraction wells reached 182 °F, exceeding material design
capabilities (Parametrix, 1995a). Several depressions or sinkholes were
identified, with several feet of subsidence and smoke odors. Parametrix
(1997a) summarized six quarterly monitoring events from 1995 through
February 1997. Although they concluded that the landfill was fairly
stable, they indicated that "Although temperatures are fairly stable and
not alarmingly high, they do not reflect what may be happening deep in
the landfill. With the collection wells and trenches closed, there is no flow
ERM 2 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
past the monitoring ports." Parametrix (1998c) provides a status of
sinkhole monitoring (including thermocouple temperature probes) and a
map showing seven sinkhole locations where water injection probes were
installed to help extinguish subsurface fires associated with sinkhole
subsidence. Thermocouple temperatures over 1,000 °F were observed,
indicating active combustion. Liner repairs at sinkhole locations were also
proposed.
Due to failure of water injection at sinkholes to prevent continued
subsurface fires, the County of Hawaii contracted Walker Consultants,
Inc., to attempt alternative mitigation techniques. Walker recommended
injection of water and liquid carbon dioxide to quench fires, and sealing of
liner leaks with wetted soil. In December 2001, 24 carbon dioxide (CO2)
injection probes and 58 eater injection probes were installed. In June
2003,18 addition CO2 probes were installed. Water and CO2 were injected
episodically from January 2002 through at least January 2004 (Walker
2004). Walker describes "areas of concern" as having methane (CH4)
levels greater than 5 percent and oxygen (02) levels greater than 4 percent,
and therefore prone to combustion. Walker (2004) describes a general
decrease in the extent of "areas of concern" following water/CO2
injection. The geographic areas of highest concern were the east -center,
north -center and northwest portion of the landfill (Walker, 2004).
1.2 PROBLEM DEFINITION
ERM understands that the Kailua-Kona Landfill continues to support
subsurface waste combustion, with potential associated air emissions of
combustion gases (along with decomposition by-products). A
Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) is proposed to achieve the
following principal objectives:
1) Better understand the nature and extent of subsurface fires and
associated gas by-products to facilitate development of effective
mitigation strategies;
2) Conduct a demonstration of subsurface landfill fire suppression using
a fire -retardant foam;
3) Extinguish a known area of burning waste material and improve
subsurface conditions at the landfill; and
4) Develop a plan and cost estimate for extinguishing all existing landfill
fires.
ERM 3 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
1.3 PROPOSED SCOPES OF WORK AND COST ESTIMATE
To fulfill the principal project objectives, a scope of work and associated
costs has been developed for consideration. The work falls into two
categories: (1) landfill physical/ chemical investigation to address
Objective 1; and (2) a demonstration subsurface fire suppression project to
extinguish an existing fire and determine the efficacy of the fire retardant
foam suppression technique, as per Objective 2.
ERM has developed cost estimate for the various scope elements based on
technical experience and price quotations from analytical laboratories and
for subcontracted services.
ERM 4 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
2.0 EVALUATION OF LANDFILL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
2.1 BACKGROUND
Post -operations air emissions from the Kailua Kona Landfill have
reportedly included low levels of VOCs, including benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, carbon monoxide (CO), and hydrogen sulfide (H2S)
(ATSDR,1994). Other constituents monitored in the emissions from the
site include 02, CO2, and CH4, basic atmospheric gases that are tracked to
determine possible subsurface fires. However, an active landfill gas
management system is not currently operational at the site. Therefore, an
analysis of the current condition of the landfill from a physical and
chemical perspective is required to assess the nature and extent of landfill
emissions, and the potential for subsurface fires within the waste mound.
The investigation and monitoring activities should include both existing
gas monitoring probes and extraction wells, as well as supplemental,
focused subsurface explorations. Critical to this assessment is knowledge
of the east -center, north -center and northwest portions of the landfill,
which have been identified most recently as areas of concern.
Several techniques for subsurface fire suppression have been attempted at
the landfill. Smothering the fires, involving eliminating the supply of 02
to the fire source either via soil cover and compaction, cover and leakage
repair, and/or the injection of a suppressing gas, such as CO2, has been
attempted. None of these previous efforts were performed to an extent or
duration necessary to substantially suppress subsurface fires. Excavating
the cover material within the landfill waste and flooding burning material
with water and/or suppressants such as a fire -retardant foam is a method
that has been attempted at other landfill sites with mixed results (TriData,
2002). A version of removing the cover material and burning waste
material from a known hot zone, and extinguishing by way of foam
flooding is proposed for the Kailua-Kona Landfill to suppress ongoing
subsurface fires.
If the fire is extensive and temperatures are high, applied water may
convert to steam upon contact with the burning waste material, and may
limit fire -suppression effectiveness. Large volumes of suppression water
could potentially infiltrate to the underlying groundwater aquifer,
potentially impacting groundwater quality by leaching contaminants from
waste materials. Use of a foam suppression material is less likely to result
in contaminant leaching and is believed to be a more environmentally -safe
suppression technique.
ERM 5 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
It should be noted that the use of cells in the construction of any landfill,
and the application of a soil daily cover, was conceived initially, and is
intended primarily as a firebreak feature. The goal was to isolate any fire
in a single cell. Often, this requires bulk excavation of the landfill waste
material to physically separate the "hot" waste from the remaining "fuel";
this ex -situ separation and extinguishment can be costly with associated
air emissions difficult to control. Incomplete removal of all burning waste
can permit the fire to re -kindle and eventually migrate from one cell to
another as long as there is 02 available. Another limitation of bulk waste
excavation is that it makes 02 available and can exacerbate the fire.
Alternatively, the burning waste may be surgically removed to prevent it
from igniting other combustible waste, however this requires knowledge
on the precise location of the subsurface fire, which can be difficult to
obtain.
The incorporation of cells during landfill construction also introduces a
limitation on extinguishing fires through in-situ inundation. The cellular
structure; i.e., entombment of waste in soil cells, creates discontinuities in
the vertical flow regime for water, foam, or any other delivered fire -
suppression fluid through the waste mound. Infiltrating fluids are
redirected by the soil layers and may circumvent certain cells. Therefore,
inundation from the landfill surface is difficult to assure due to the
difficulty of delivering fluid to the precise location of the fire.
Further, the application of water creates potentially -contaminated
leachate. This may not be a significant environmental issue if the resulting
fluids are collected, extracted, and properly disposed, but at a site such as
the Kailua-Kona Landfill, that does not have an underlying liner and
leachate collection system, leachate may discharge directly to the
underlying groundwater. In this instance, leachate discharges to
groundwater which could itself discharge to the Pacific Ocean would be
counter to the state and federal policies on leachate management.
The basaltic rock that forms the basement floor and portions of the
sidewalls of the landfill exhibits a fractured structure and, further, the
intact rock is itself relatively porous. This porosity is supplemented by
"lava tubes" formed during deposition that provide open conduits for the
exchange of air with the waste in the landfill, as well as the discharge of
leachate and groundwater downgradient toward receptors. Injected
materials or vertical containment barriers in the vicinity of the lava tubes
have been considered to intercept these pathways, but it is expected that
these approaches will not significantly reduce the air exchange or water
transmission, given the mass porosity of the surrounding rock through
both fractures and porous structure.
ERM 6 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
2.2 REMEDIAL STRATEGIES
Subsurface landfill fires are difficult to extinguish, potentially requiring an
extended period of time and significant labor and financial resources.
Historically, fire suppression methods consisted of inundation or
suffocation, where one of the three requirements for combustion (fuel, 02,
and ignition) was eliminated.
Given that the landfill is composed of a high percentage of combustible
waste products, the fuel supply cannot be readily eliminated except
through separation or completion of the combustion cycle. Such an
approach may include the continued, although controlled combustion of
the waste in the landfill with the implementation of external emissions
capture systems to prevent downstream impacts.
Suffocation eliminates the 02 supply by interrupting the source or by the
introduction of agents that replace the 02 in the surrounding
environment, thereby starving the 02 pathway. Suffocation may
alternatively involve excavation, segregation, and smothering the
smoldering waste with soil or fire -retardant materials.
Inundation extinguishes fire by eliminating the ignition source (the
ongoing fire), may be accomplished by applying fire suppressants such as
water, foams (such as Class A foam [CIWMB, 2007]) and other chemicals.
The success of the inundation technique was proven during a subsurface
fire suppression demonstration at an undeveloped landfill area within the
Candlestick Point State Recreation Area in San Francisco, California. The
suppression technique involved trenching to expose the on-going fire and
spraying it with a fire retardant foam to extinguish the fire. A similar
technique is proposed for demonstration at the Kailua-Kona Landfill.
2.3 SITE INVESTIGATION APPROACHES
2.3.1 General Approaches
To gain a better understanding of the nature and extent of the subsurface
fires that currently exist at the landfill, and to predict the future potential
of subsurface fires, a physical and chemical investigation will be
conducted. According to the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB) (2007) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) (TriData, 2002), a subsurface fire can be confirmed by:
• Substantial settlement over a short period of time;
ERM 7 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
• Smoke or smoldering odor emanating from the gas extraction system
or landfill;
• Elevated levels of CO in excess of 1,000 parts per million;
• Combustion residue in extraction wells or headers;
• Increase in gas temperature in the extraction system (above 140°F); and
• Temperatures in excess of 170°F.
These and other indicators will be considered at the Kailua-Kona Landfill.
2.3.2 Landfill -Specific Approaches
The three broad approaches available for fire management at the Kailua-
Kona Landfill therefore include:
• Inundation;
• Suffocation; and
• Controlled Combustion.
• To assess the potential for success of each approach, and provide
information for design and implementation, certain field investigations
are appropriate.
In general, the investigations would consist of surficial investigations
using remote sensing techniques and monitoring of subsurface well
points. Investigations would consist of non -intrusive evaluations, i.e.,
non-destructive to the current cover system, and in particular the
geomembrane.
2.3.3 Proposed Investigation Scope
Locating the "hotspots" that may be representative of subsurface fires
with a reasonable degree of accuracy will permit developing subsequent
investigations and response action strategies that are focused rather than
broad. However, the difficulty of identifying localized areas has been
demonstrated on this and other landfills (Walker, 2004). Nevertheless,
remote sensing techniques should be evaluated as one mechanism for
identifying hotspots. This would consist of infrared imagery utilized to
identify higher temperature differential zones across the landfill surface.
This technique will be limited by the presence of hotspots near the surface.
In support of the thermal imagery, topographic mapping of the surface
and comparison with prior surveys may be utilized to identify locations
where subsurface collapse as a result of waste combustion may have
occurred. Thermal and topographic changes can be confirmed in the field
ERM 8 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
through sensory identification by field staff conducting a reconnaissance
survey across the landfill surface, coupled with interviews and historical
information available from the operating period of the landfill.
In addition, the remote sensing would be ground-truthed through a field
reconnaissance of landfill temperature using shallow temperature probes
on a grid pattern. At the grid nodes, field screening with a
photoionization detector and methane meter would be utilized to aid in
detecting potential emissions through breaches in the geomembrane and
the cover system. During the investigation, vertical profiling for
temperature, and screening for emissions would be conducted in
currently -existing wells at the site. While the screening evaluations will
not detect hotspots at depth in the waste or low temperature differentials,
this approach will assist in locating a probable subsurface fire for the fire -
suppression demonstration project. The result of this investigation will be
the consolidated thermal mapping of the landfill surface.
2.4 FIRE SUPPRESSION DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
To fulfill the principal project objectives with the ultimate goal of
complete fire suppression at the Kailua-Kona Landfill, ERM will conduct a
demonstration project to suppress an existing subsurface fire at the
landfill using fire retardant Class -A fire suppression foam. Site selection
for the demonstration project will be determined based on the findings of
the supplemental investigation (Section 2.3.3). In addition to developing
optimal procedures for extinguishing "hot spots", this demonstration will
actually attempt to extinguish a known problem area of active burning
waste, thus improving conditions at the landfill.
A detailed fire suppression work plan will be prepared upon completion
of the site investigation to optimize the location of the demonstration area.
The fire suppression demonstration project will be conducted in
collaboration with the County of Hawaii Fire Department. [ERM has
received verbal confirmation from Fire Chief Darryl Oliveira that the Fire
Department will participate].
2.4.1 Conceptual Design
A conceptual design for the fire suppression demonstration project is
provided, however the final design will be determined after the
investigation work has been completed. Once a suitable site has been
selected, an approximate 75 foot by 75 foot demonstration area will be
surveyed and cordoned off. The fire suppression technique will consist of
1) implementation of a proven fire suppression technology consisting of
ERM 9 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
excavation of burning waste material and suppression on an adjacent
suppression deck using a fire -retardant foam product; and 2) trials of an
innovative in-situ suppression approach using foam infiltration and waste
blending (to the extent necessary to improve foam/ waste contact) in an
attempt to extinguish burning waste without removal of waste material.
The demonstration area will be selected based on evidence of active
shallow waste combustion activity. A suppression deck will be created
using crushed stone materials adjacent to the area to be excavated. A
dozer or excavator will be employed to remove the two (2) feet of cover
materials overlying the existing polyvinyl chloride (PVC) geomembrane,
exposing the underlying waste material. Waste material, anticipated to be
in part burning, will be excavated in approximate 1 -foot lifts and
transferred to the adjacent suppression deck for Class A foam
suppression. The material on the suppression deck will be worked with a
dozer or excavator and foam added to complete the extinguishment.
Extinguished waste material will then re -positioned for staging and
eventual re -deposition. Excavation and ex -situ waste suppression will
occur to approximately 10 feet deep into the waste pile within the
footprint of the demonstration area (approximately 65 feet by 65 feet in
dimension).
Once ex -situ excavation and above -ground foam fire -suppression has
been completed, a trial of in-situ foam fire extinguishment will be
performed. Infiltration trenches will be excavated an additional 10-20 feet
below the bottom of the existing excavation to facilitate downward
penetration of the fire retardant foam into the underlying burning
subsurface waste. Trenches will be developed with proper safety
precautions and then filled with fire -retardant foam which is intended to
penetrate into the underlying burning waste to extinguish combustion.
Based on observations of foam infiltration effectiveness, the excavator will
be utilized to the degree necessary to loosen waste material facilitating
foam penetration.
Once the in-situ foam suppression testing has been completed, the prior
removed and foamed waste material will be re -deposited and compacted
in the excavation. A 4 -foot thick cover of crushed stone material will be
placed above the re -buried waste as final cover.
To assess the longer-term effectiveness of the fire -suppression
demonstration project, underground temperatures will be monitored over
time. Well points containing thermocouples will be placed within the
demonstration site near the base of excavated material (and/or near the
base of the constructed trenches and in-situ treated materials).
Temperatures will be monitored periodically over several months to
ERM 10 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
determine whether the fire -suppression techniques were temporary or
more permanent.
Existing monitoring probes adjacent to the demonstration area will be
measured for subsurface temperature and carbon monoxide content prior
and subsequent to the fire suppression demonstration.
2.4.2 Perimeter Air Monitoring
Prior to and during intrusive waste trenching and foam application, ERM
will perform air monitoring to assess both worker health risk and
appropriate levels of personal protective equipment and potential
downwind air impacts resulting from exposure and disruption of the
burning waste mass. Conventional landfill gases including hydrogen
sulfide and methane will be monitored within the active work zone and at
"exclusion zone" perimeter locations to ensure worker safety. In addition,
toxic air emissions will be quantified as described below.
The target air toxic compounds to be measured will include VOCs, PAHs,
and the dioxin/furan congeners. The VOCs will be measured using
USEPA Method TO -15 with collection in a 6 -liter, evacuated SUMMA
canister. The canister will be equipped with a pre-set flow controller to
maintain a constant sampling rate over the sampling period. Analysis will
be performed by Columbia Analytical Services in Simi Valley, California,
by gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry (GC/MS).
The PAHs and dioxins/furans will be measured using a high-volume
sampler equipped with a quartz filter, followed by Tenax or XAD-2 resin
sandwiched between two plugs of polyurethane foam (PUF) in
accordance with USEPA Methods TO -13A and TO -9A, respectively. The
downwind sampling station will consist of one SUMMA canister and one
PUF sampler. If power is not available to run the high-volume samplers,
portable generators will be deployed, placed downwind of the sampling
stations and as far away as possible to avoid biasing the samples.
The PAH and dioxin/furan samples will be shipped overnight at 4`C
under chain -of -custody to Vista Analytical Laboratory in Sacramento,
California, for analysis. These compounds are analyzed using high
resolution GC/ MS after solvent extraction of the sampling media.
ERM 11 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
3.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ERM has developed a scope of work and associated costs for a
supplemental investigation of subsurface conditions at the Kailua-Kona
Landfill and a demonstration of subsurface fire suppression using fire -
retardant foam. The developed work scope is designed to evaluate
landfill subsurface conditions to aid in remedial solutions for
extinguishing subsurface fires. This project is intended to extinguish an
existing subsurface fire and provide valuable information for developing a
comprehensive landfill -wide fire suppression program.
An opinion of probable cost for implementing a supplemental
investigation and demonstration fire suppression project at the Kailua-
Kona Landfill is $202,840 as detailed in the attached Table 1.
ERM 12 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
4.0 REFERENCES
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).1994. Health
Consultation: Kailua-Kona Landfill, Kona, Hawaii (9P07). July 29, 1994.
California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). 2006. Last
Rubble Area Suppression Project. Candlestick Point State Recreation
Area. San Francisco, California. Version 2. September 18, 2006
California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). 2007. Landfill
Fires Guidance Document. CIWMB Local Enforcement Agency
Central. Last updated January 2, 2007
County of Hawaii. 1993a. Kailua Landfill Closure-DLNR Permit. Letter
dated May 20,1993.
County of Hawaii. 1996. Kailua Landfill Sinkhole Investigation and Repair.
Letter dated May 4, 1996.
County of Hawaii. 1997a. Letter regarding Kailua Landfill sinkholes and
depressions dated April 21, 1997.
Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH). 1995. Underground Injection
Control (UIQ Permit No. UH -1922 for Kailua Landfill Closure Phase 3
Construction (Drywells). Permit issued November 30, 1995.
HDOH. 2001. Initial Fire Investigation Report and Recommendation, Kailua-
Kona Landfill, North Kona District, Hawaii. Letter dated November
23, 2001.
Parametrix, Inc. 1992a. Kailua Landfill, Landfill Gas and Subsurface Refuse
Fire Investigations, Report of Findings and Recommendations.
Preliminary Draft Technical Memorandum. March 1992.
Parametrix, Inc. 1992b. Police Station Air Monitoring, Kailua Landfill Closure
Project. Letter dated December 31, 1992.
Parametrix, Inc. 1993a. Final Draft Closure/Post Closure Plan, Kailua Landfill
(Response to Comments on C/PC Plan). Letter dated February 19,
1993.
Parametrix, Inc. 1993b. Kailua Landfill Closure, Phase I and Phase II
Construction. Letter dated August 25, 1993.
Parametrix, Inc. 1993c. Final Environmental Assessment for Kailua Landfill
Closure. September 7,1993.
Parametrix, Inc. 1995a. Kailua Landfill - Gas and Temperature Probe
Monitoring. Letter Report dated February 17, 1995.
ERM 13 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
Parametrix, Inc. 1995b. Modifications to the Landfill Gas Piping and Pipe
Boots, Kailua Landfill Closure Phase 3. Letter dated September 21,
1995.
Parametrix, Inc. 1997a. Letter regarding Kailua Landfill monitoring dated
March 3, 1997.
Parametrix, Inc. 1997b. Letter regarding Kailua Landfill monitoring dated
May 21,1997.
Parametrix, Inc. 1998a. Kailua Landfill -1St Quarter 1998 Post -Closure
Monitoring Report. February 27,1998..
Parametrix, Inc. 1998b. New Sink Hole @ Kailua. Fax transmittal
memorandum dated May 29,1998.
Parametrix, Inc. 1998c. Sinkhole Monitoring Status Report - Kailua Landfill.
November 16,1998.
Parametrix, Inc. 1998d. Transmittal showing "Layout of existing network of
water injection probes, sketch of a water injection probe, and water
charges. November 20,1998.
Stirrat & Associates. 2007. Demonstration Work Plan, Kailua Kona Landfill,
Hawaii. June 2007.
Thorneloe, S.A. 2007. U.S. EPA's Research to Update Guidance for
Quantifying Landfill Gas Emissions. Proceedings of Eleventh
International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium.
Cagliari, Italy. October 2007.
TriData Corporation. 2002. Landfill Fires: Their Magnitude, Characteristics,
and Mitigation. Prepared for Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA), United States Fire Administration, National Fire
Data Center. May 2002.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1989. Hawaii
Landfill Air Monitoring Report. Memorandum dated April 4,1989.
USEPA. 2005. Guidance for Evaluating Landfill Gas Emissions from Closed or
Abandoned Facilities. Office of Research and Development. EPA -
600R/ R -015-123a. September 2005.
Walker Consultants, Inc. 2004. Fire Control Report at Kailua Landfill, North
Kona District, Hawaii. March 2004.
Woodward -Clyde. 1998. Stormwater Pollution Control Plan for the Kailua
Landfill, Kailua, Hawaii. January 22, 1998.
ERM 14 KAILUA-KONA LANDFILL/ 0061204 - 3/14/2008
Figures
733 Bishop St., Figure 1. Project Location Map
Pacific Guardian Center
R Suite 1872 Kailua-Kona Landfill
Honolulu, HI 96813 TNM: 74-020:016
..!/ NDIIIW�-wM
i a
"ns Vxd eLY tl✓. ••mart r•in h1k .rat• AWrw rerrawur.♦iraarrw.. .P•e• fol is ISSEiSiEia - fkAif7 C€wtH
cpm
tkigeq
733 Bishop St.,
Pacific Guardian Center Figure 2. TMK Site Map
Suite 1872 Kailua-Kona Landfill
ERM Honolulu, HI 96813 TMK: 74-020:016
PLAT
af--
ite
Project Site-
X44
lur ew r. rr.
V f
ara.tar� `- t•
ts}
�
\._
MrJItR4
�QO 7
�.f
PLAT
..!/ NDIIIW�-wM
i a
"ns Vxd eLY tl✓. ••mart r•in h1k .rat• AWrw rerrawur.♦iraarrw.. .P•e• fol is ISSEiSiEia - fkAif7 C€wtH
cpm
tkigeq
733 Bishop St.,
Pacific Guardian Center Figure 2. TMK Site Map
Suite 1872 Kailua-Kona Landfill
ERM Honolulu, HI 96813 TMK: 74-020:016
I North
Kailua-Kona Landfill
40'x4'xI
percolation
Y deep
100'
40' x 4' x 1p' deep
Monitoring probe
Not to scale
733 Bishop St., Figure 5. Fire Suppression
Pacific Guardian Center
z Suite 1872 Demonstration Layout (Conceptual)
ERM Honolulu, HI 96813
Tables
Table 1
Opinion of Probable Cost
SEP Workplan Implementation, Kailua-Kona Landfill
Item
A. Workplan Development
$7,500
Workplan incl. SAP/QAPP
B. Screening Level
$35,900
Aerial Photogrammetry (Infrared and B&W imagery, 2 events)
Land Surveying (topographic tie-in, 2 events)
Topographic & Thermal Mapping (2 events)
Interviews/ Historic Data Accumulation
Site Reconnaissance/ Surface Screening
Surface Temperature Probes (22 probes)
Existing Well Screening (assume 4 wells, PID and methane)
Data Interpretation, Mapping, Report Preparation
C. Fire Suppression Pilot Demonstration
$141,000
Suppression Work Plan Preparation
Construct Suppression Deck
Class A Fire Retardant Foam
Excavation/Ex-Situ Foam Suppression
Trenching/ In -Situ Foam Suppression
Fire Suppression Demonstration
Backfill Treated Waste/Place Cover Materials
Install Thermocouples
Post -Suppression Monitoring
Report Preparation
SUBTOTAL:
$184,400
Contingency @ 10 Percent
$18,440
TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS:
$202,840
ERM Kailua-Kona Landfill / 0061204 - 03/14/2008
Supplement to the Old Kailua-Kona Landfill Workplan
"Communication, Security, and Public Interaction Plan"
This exhibit may be attached to the CAFO
The components of the Communications, Security, and Public Interaction Plan consists of:
• Contact Information
• On-site communications System
• Radio Distribution List
• Off -Site Communication
• Site Security
• Public and Media Liaison
The following outline entails components of the Communications, Security, and Public
Interaction Plan which will include the Right -to -Know Public Relations portion.
❖ Contact Information List
➢ Comprehensive list will be prepared as part of the Pre -Plan
■ Contact Position or role in Command Structure
■ Contact Name
■ Emergency Number (911 or 24 hour contact number)
■ Office Number
■ Cell -phone Number
■ Home Number
■ Pager Number (if carried)
■ Fax Number
■ E-mail Address (if available)
➢ In Emergency situation, list can be built quickly by copying business cards of
participants.
•'• On-site Communications
• ➢ Effective communications are vital:
➢ Instructions should flow through Incident Command structure hierarchy.
➢ On major fires, meetings should be organized twice a day. Safety meetings in morning,
and debriefings in afternoon.
➢ All group leaders should participate in meetings, all team members should participate in
morning safety meetings.
❖ Radio Distribution List
➢ Incident Commander (if on site)
➢ Site Commander
➢ Incident command Post (base station)
➢ Fire Fighting Group Leader
➢ Landfill Staff and Equipment Group Leader
➢ Health and Safety Group Leader
➢ Logistics Support Group Leader
➢ Engineering Support Group Leader (if on site)
➢ Spotters working with heavy equipment (or PCS radios can be used).
❖ Off -Site Communications
➢ Achieved via telephone (land line or cellular).
➢ Communications logs should be maintained.
➢ Critical decisions / information should be shared to all impacted team members during
morning or afternoon de -briefings.
4- Site Security
➢ Key elements of security include:
■ Accountability / Log in
■ Keeping unauthorized people off site.
➢ Area of fir should be secured. On large fires, landfill property should be closed to non-
essential people.
➢ Security should be established at gate to control access and to sign in and sign out all
people coming on site.
❖ Public and Media Liaison
➢ Managing Public Relations
■ Access to site restricted, security put in place.
■ Public relations person appointed and fully informed.
■ Fire fighting team instructed to direct questions to public relations person.
■ News releases provided at key times.
■ Publish the Public Interaction Plan (see below for more details)
■ Briefing and photo opportunities should be provided to newspaper media.
■ Press coverage to be positive and accurate.
■ Media Liaison Spokesperson must provide cohesive, factual and timely information.
■ Issue press releases.
■ All fire -staff (including fire-fighters) should direct incoming questions or Media
Liaison.
The "Public Interaction Plan" will identify the project goals, and methodology. It will identify
points of contact and time schedule (which may fluctuate). The school schedule will be
reviewed and they will be regularly contacted and alerted if for some reason (due to school
schedule moving to an all year round program) school remains in operation while the pilot
project is underway. There will be a website created on the county web that will be updated as
the project develops with pictures, and description of the progress. County of Hawai'i E-mail
distribution to over 3,000 readers on a weekly basis will be notified of the project and kept up to
date of the progress. There will be, as mentioned, a contact point for expressing appreciation
and possibly complaints regarding the burning landfill situation. Weather patterns during the
project will be closely monitored as strong winds could impact the surrounding area. These will
all be responded to in a timely manner, as set forth currently by the Mayor, who as you may
recall was the County of Hawai' i Civil Defense Administrator for many years prior to being
Mayor. The Mayor has very strict public notification rules that will be adhered to on this project
as well as natural or other manmade disasters.
Copy to be forwarded to:
Brian P. Riedel
Assistant Regional Counsel (ORC-2)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 972-3924 tel.
(415) 947-3570 fax
riedel.brian@epa.gov
SETTLEMENT AND SEP FUNDING AGREEMENT
This SETTLEMENT AND SEP FUNDING AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and
entered into between WASTE MANAGEMENT OF HAWAII, INC. ("WMH") and the
COUNTY OF HAWAII ("County"). The parties shall be collectively referred to herein as the
"Parties" and individually as a "Party", unless specifically identified otherwise.
RECITALS
WHEREAS the County owns the West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill (the "Landfill") located
at 71-1111 Queen Kaahumanu Highway, Waikoloa on the Island of Hawaii;
WHEREAS WMH operates the Landfill pursuant to the Landfill Construction,
Operation, and Closure Agreement between the County of Hawaii and Waste Management of
Hawaii, Inc. April 23, 1993), and as thereafter amended (the "Operating Agreement");
WHEREAS on or about April 4, 2006, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
("EPA") issued to WMH and the County the Finding and Notice of Violation, Docket No. R9-
06-07 in which EPA alleged various violations of the federal Clean Air Act in connection with
WMH's operation of the Landfill;
WHEREAS pursuant to Section 7.1 of the Operating Agreement, WMH has agreed to
hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the County from and against the violations alleged by
EPA;
WHEREAS WMH, the County, and EPA have negotiated a settlement of the alleged
violations and wish to enter into the Consent Agreement and Final Order Pursuant to 40 CFR
§§ 22.13 and 22.18 (the "CAFO"), attached hereto as Exhibit A, in order to resolve fully and
finally the alleged violations;
WHEREAS in lieu of EPA's demand for a civil penalty in the amount of $135,000 (the
"Settlement Amount"), EPA has agreed that WMH and the County shall satisfy the civil penalty
of the CAFO by paying $33,500 in cash to EPA and completing a Supplemental Environmental
Project (the "SEP") for the closed Kailua-Kona Landfill at a cost of no less than $184,400, as
more fully described in the SEP Workplan dated March 14, 2008 and more fully described in the
CAFO;
WHEREAS WMH has agreed to pay to EPA a civil penalty in the amount of $33,500
and to pay the remaining balance of the Settlement Amount — i.e., $101,500 — to the County to
help pay for the SEP, and the County has agreed to pay for the balance of the costs of the SEP
and to assume responsibility for performing the SEP;
WHEREAS the Parties wish to enter into this Agreement to define each Party's
respective obligations and responsibilities for payment of the civil penalty, for payment of the
SEP costs, and for ensuring completion of the SEP in accordance with the CAFO;
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained
herein, the Parties mutually agree, represent, and warrant as follows:
ATTACHMENT "B"
1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective upon date that the CAFO is
effective pursuant to Paragraph 54 of the CAFO.
2. WMH's Obligations. WMH hereby agrees to the following obligations:
2.1. WMH shall timely pay to EPA the civil penalty amount of THIRTY THREE
THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($33,500.00) as required by Paragraph 31 of
the CAFO;
2.2. Within TWENTY (20) days after written demand by the County, WMH shall
pay to the County the amount of ONE HUNDRED AND ONE THOUSAND FIVE
HUNDRED DOLLARS ($101,500.00) for the County to use to pay for the costs of the
SEP (the "SEP Fund");
2.3. WMH shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the County from and
against any and all liabilities, liquidated damages, penalties, fines, forfeitures, fees,
demands, claims, causes of action, suits, judgments and costs and expenses incidental
thereto, including attorneys' fees (collectively, "Damages"), which the County may
hereafter suffer, incur, be responsible for or pay out, arising from or in connection with
any future WMH breach of the following paragraphs of the CAFO:
(a) Paragraphs 31 and 32 (Penalty Assessment);
(b) Paragraph 35 (Tax Treatment of SEP expenditures);
(c) Paragraph 36 (Certification of SEP), with respect to WMH's
certifications thereunder;
(d) Paragraph 43 (Stipulated Penalties for Failure to Pay Penalty); and
(e) Paragraphs 45 and 46, to the extent such Damages arise as a result of
WMH's failure to pay the penalty in accordance with Paragraph 31.
3. County's Obligations. The County hereby agrees to the following obligations:
3.1. The County shall use the SEP Fund only for the purpose of performing and
completing the SEP in accordance with the CAFO;
3.2. The County shall pay for and cause the completion of the SEP, as required by
Paragraphs 33 through 42 of the CAFO, including, but not limited to, completing the SEP
Workplan, paying all consultants and contractors hired to complete the SEP, preparing
and submitting to EPA all documentation required in connection with SEP, preparation of
the SEP Completion Report, and responding to and correcting any deficiencies identified
by EPA in the SEP Completion Report;
3.3. To the extent permitted by law, and subject to any necessary appropriations
and financial procedures, the County shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend WMH
from and against any and all liabilities, liquidated damages, penalties, fines, forfeitures,
fees, demands, claims, causes of action, suits, judgments and costs and expenses
Page 2 of 5
incidental thereto, including attorneys' fees (collectively, "Damages"), which WMH may
hereafter suffer, incur, be responsible for or pay out, arising from or in connection with
any future County breach of the following paragraphs of the CAFO:
(a) Paragraphs 33, 34, and 37 through 42 (Supplemental Environmental
Project);
(b) Paragraph 36 (Certification of SEP), with respect to the County's
certifications thereunder;
(c) Paragraph 44 (Stipulated Penalties for Failure to Complete SEP or
Spend 90% of SEP amount); and
(d) Paragraphs 45 and 46, to the extent such Damages arise as a result of
the County's failure to complete the SEP in accordance with Paragraphs 33, 34,
and 37 through 42.
4. Limitation on Damages. Neither Party shall be liable for any special, indirect,
incidental, consequential, or punitive damages of any nature arising out of the performance of
this Agreement, including, without limitation, loss of actual or anticipated income, revenue,
profits, financing, business, or reputation, loss of use of facilities, or loss of management or
employee productivity or of the services of such person.
5. No Waiver or Admission. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as an
admission by either Party hereto of any allegation or statement contained in the CAFO, unless
and to the extent that such allegation or statement is expressly admitted therein by the Party.
6. Legal Fees. In the event any legal action is taken by either Party against the other
Party to enforce any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, it is agreed that the
unsuccessful Party to such action shall pay to the prevailing Party therein all court costs,
reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses incurred by the prevailing Party.
7. Relationship of the Parties. The execution of this Agreement shall not create any
agency, partnership, joint venture, association, or any other relationship between the Parties other
than as independent contracting parties. Neither Party shall act as an agent for the other party.
Nor shall have the authority to bind or make commitments on behalf of the other Party.
8. Entire Agreement; Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement
among the Parties concerning the subject matter hereof and supersedes all previous
correspondence, communications, agreements and understandings, whether oral or written
among the Parties. This Agreement may not be modified, in whole or in part, except upon
unanimous approval of the Parties and by a writing signed by all the Parties.
9. Advice of Counsel. This Agreement was negotiated at arms -length with each Party
receiving advice from independent legal counsel. It is the intent of the Parties that no part of this
Agreement be construed against either of the Parties because of the identity of the drafter.
Page 3 of 5
10. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made solely and specifically
among and for the benefit of the parties hereto, and their respective successors and assigns, and
no other person will have any rights, interest, or claim hereunder or be entitled to any benefits
under or on account of this Agreement, whether as a third party beneficiary or otherwise.
11. Headings. The Headings used in this Agreement are inserted only as a matter of
convenience and for reference and in no way define, limit or describe the scope of this
Agreement nor the intent of any provision thereof.
12. Construction. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement
shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, that invalidity,
illegality, or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision in this Agreement and this
Agreement shall be construed as if the invalid illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been
contained in it.
13. Governing Law. This Agreement, and all amendments or supplements thereto, shall
be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Hawaii.
14. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each
of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same
instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties enter into this Agreement. Each person signing
this Agreement represents and warrants that he or she has been duly authorized to enter into this
Agreement by the Party on whose behalf it is indicated that the person is signing.
APPROVAL RECOMMENDED: COUNTY OF HAWAII
By:
By:
BOBBY JEAN LEITHEAD TODD
Name:
Director
Title:
Department of Environmental
Management, County of Hawai' i
Date:
Page 4 of 5
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGALITY:
L'In
IVAN M. TORIGOE
Deputy Corporation Counsel
County of Hawai'i
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGALITY:
IN
ANDREW M. KENEFICK
Senior Legal Counsel
Settlement Funding Agreement - Final (7/9/08)
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
HAWAII, INC.
Date:
Page 5 of 5
ROBERT E. LONGO
Vice President & Assistant Secretary
Exhibit A
Consent Agreement and Final Order Pursuant to
40 CFR §§ 22.13 and 22.18
1 NANCY J. MARVEL, Regional Counsel
BRIAN P. RIEDEL, Assistant Regional Counsel
2 Office of Regional Counsel
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9
3 75 Hawthorne Street (ORC-2)
San Francisco, CA 94105
4 Phone: (202) 972-3924; Fax: (415) 947-3570
5
6 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
7 BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR
8
9 In the Matter of:
10 Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc.
92-460 Farrington Highway
11 Kapolei, Oahu, Hawaii 96707, and
12 County of Hawaii
25 Aupuni Street
13 Hilo, Hawaii 96720
14 Respondents,
15 Proceeding under Section 113 of
the Clean Air Act,
16 42 U.S.C. § 7413
17
18
Docket No. CAA -09 -2008 -
CONSENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL
ORDER PURSUANT TO 40 C.F.R.
§§ 22.13 AND 22.18
CONSENT AGREEMENT
19 I. JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY
20 1. Pursuant to Section 113(d) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q ("CAA" or
21 "Act") and 40 C.F.R. §§ 22.13(b) and 22.18(b) of the Consolidated Rules of Practice
22 Governing the Administrative Assessment of Civil Penalties, the Director of the Air
23 Division ("Complainant"), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), Region 9, is
24 simultaneously commencing and concluding this proceeding against Waste Management
25 of Hawaii, Inc. ("WMH") and the County of Hawaii ("CH") (collectively,
26 "Respondents") through the filing of this Consent Agreement and Final Order Pursuant to
27 40 C.F.R. §§ 22.13 and 22.18 ("CAFO").
28 2. Complainant is duly delegated the authority to file this action and sign a consent
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 agreement settling this action.
2 3. Section I I3(d)(1) of the Act limits EPA's authority to issue administrative complaints to
3 matters where the total penalty sought does not exceed $270,000,1 and the first alleged
4 date of violation occurred no more than 12 months prior to the initiation of the action,
5 unless EPA and the Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") jointly
6 determine that a matter involving a larger penalty or longer period of violation is
7 appropriate for administrative action. Because this CAFO contains alleged violations that
8 occurred more than 12 months ago, Complainant has obtained the required joint
9 determination from EPA Headquarters and DOJ.
10 4. This CAFO notifies Respondents of Complainant's determination that Respondents have
11 violated Section 111 of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. §§ 60.757(b) and 60.757(c) at the West
12 Hawaii Sanitary Landfill ("West Hawaii Landfill").
13 II. STATUTORY AND REGULATORY AUTHORITY
14 5. Pursuant to Section 111 of the Act, EPA promulgated the Standards of Performance for
15 Municipal Solid Waste Landfills ("NSPS Subpart WWW" or "Subpart WWW"), at 40
16 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart WWW, §§ 60.750 — 60.759, effective March 12, 1996.
17 6. NSPS Subpart WWW applies to each municipal solid waste landfill ("MSW landfill" or
18 "landfill") that commenced construction, reconstruction or modification on or after May
19 30, 1991.
20 7. Pursuant to NSPS Subpart WWW, each owner or operator of an MSW landfill having a
21 design capacity > 2.5 million megagrams ("mg") and 2.5 million cubic meters ("m3")
22 must calculate its nonmethane organic compounds ("NMOC") emissions potential using
23 procedures specified in 40 C.F.R. § 60.754 and report the results to EPA on an annual
24 basis. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 60.752(b) and 60.757(b).
25 8. The annual NMOC emission rate report must include all the data, calculations, sample
26
27 1 As adjusted for inflation under the Debt Collection Improvement Act and implementing
regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 19.
28
2
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 reports and measurements used to estimate annual emissions. See 40 C.F.R.
2 § 60.757(b)(2).
3 9. If the calculated NMOC emissions > 50 mg/yr, the owner or operator must submit a gas
4 collection and control design plan ("design plan") within 1 year, and install a gas
5 collection and control system ("GCCS") within 30 months of the first report indicating
6 emissions > 50 mg NMOC/yr, unless the landfill performs site-specific Tier 2 or 3
7 measurements that show NMOC emissions < 50 mg/yr. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 60.752(b) and
8 60.757(c).
9 10. If the calculated NMOC emissions > 50 mg/yr and the owner or operator elects to
10 perform Tier 2 NMOC sampling and analysis pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 60.754(a)(3), a
11 revised NMOC emission rate report, with the recalculated emission rate, based on Tier 2
12 sampling and analysis, must be submitted to EPA within 180 days of the first calculated
13 exceedance of 50 mg/yr. See 40 C.F.R. § 60.757(c)(1).
14 11. On January 30, 2006, EPA delegated authority to implement and enforce NSPS Subpart
15 WWW to the State of Hawaii, Department of Health.
16 III. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
17 12. At all times relevant to this CAFO, WMH was a "corporation," incorporated under the
18 laws of Delaware, and CH was a "municipality," and both were "person[s]" within the
19 meaning of Section 302 of the Act.
20 13. At all times relevant to this CAFO, WMH was the operator and CH was the owner of the
21 West Hawaii landfill, an MSW landfill located at 71-1111 Queen Kahumanu Hwy.,
22 Waikoloa, on the Island of Hawaii.
23 14. WMH commenced construction of the West Hawaii Landfill on or after May 30, 1991.
24 15. Beginning March 12, 1996, the West Hawaii Landfill became subject to NSPS Subpart
25 WWW.
26 16. On March 12, 1996, the West Hawaii Landfill had a design capacity that exceeded 2.5
27 million mg and 2.5 million in
28 17. On June 9, 1996, WMH submitted an Initial Design Capacity Report and Initial NMOC
3
In the Matter o£ Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 Emission Rate Report (collectively, "Initial Report") for the West Hawaii Landfill to
2 EPA pursuant to 40 C.F.R. §§ 60.757(a)(1), 60.757(a)(2) and 60.757(b).
3 18. In the Initial Report for the West Hawaii Landfill, submitted by WMH to EPA on June 9,
4 1996, Tier 1 calculations indicated that the NMOC emission rate < 50 mg/yr.
5 19. By letter to EPA dated August 29, 2005, WMH voluntarily disclosed to EPA that WMH
6 failed to provide annual NMOC reports since 2001 and failed to perform a Tier 2 test of
7 NMOC emissions. After EPA review of WMH's disclosure, EPA concluded that it did
8 not satisfy the conditions of EPA's "Incentives for Self -Policing: Discovery, Disclosure,
9 Correction and Prevention of Violations," 65 Fed. Reg. 19618 (April 11, 2000).
10 20. EPA issued a Finding and Notice of Violation to Respondents dated April 4, 2006,
11 Docket Number R9-06-07 ("the NOV").
12 21. On April 18, 2006, WMH submitted to a Tier 2 Sampling and Analysis Report, and a
13 Fixed Gas Sampling and Analysis report.
14 IV. SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS
15 22. WMH or CH was required to submit Annual NMOC Emission Rate Reports for 2001,
16 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 for the West Hawaii Landfill to EPA on an annual basis.
17 23. WMH and CH failed to timely submit Annual NMOC Emission Rate Reports for 2001,
18 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 for the West Hawaii Landfill to EPA on an annual basis.
19 24. The failure of WMH and CH to timely submit Annual NMOC Emission Rate Reports for
20 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 for the West Hawaii Landfill to EPA on an annual
21 basis constitutes five (5) violations of Section 111 of the Act and 40 C.F.R. §§ 60.757(b).
22 25. On August 8, 2005, WMH completed Tier 1 calculations for the West Hawaii Landfill
23 that revealed an NMOC emission rate > 50 mg/yr in 2002.
24 26. In April 2006, Tier 2 calculations revealed an NMOC emission rate for the West Hawaii
25 Landfill < 50 Mg/yr in 2002.
26 27. WMH and CH failed to submit a revised NMOC emission rate report based on Tier 2
27 sampling and analysis for the West Hawaii Landfill within 180 days of June 9, 2002, or
28 by December 9, 2002.
4
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 28. WMH and CH also failed to submit a design plan for the West Hawaii Landfill to EPA
2 with one year of June 9, 2002 or by June 9, 2003, and failed to install a GCCS within 30
3 months of June 9, 2002 or by December 9, 2004.
4 29. The failures of WMH and CH described in the preceding two paragraphs constitute a
5 violation of Section 111 of the Act and 40 C.F.R. § 60.757(c).
6 V. RESPONDENTS' ADMISSIONS
7 30. Without trial or litigation of the issues or any adjudication of the facts set forth in this
8 CAFO, Respondents (i) admit that EPA has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this
9 CAFO and over Respondents; (ii) admit the general allegations contained in Section III
10 of this CAFO; (iii) neither admit nor deny the specific allegations contained in Section IV
11 of this CAFO; (iv) consent to the terms of this CAFO, including the assessment of the
12 civil administrative penalty under Section VI and implementation of a Supplemental
13 Environmental Project ("SEP") under Section VII of this CAFO; (v) waive any right to
14 contest the allegations in this CAFO; and (vi) waive the right to appeal the proposed final
15 order contained in this CAFO.
16 VI. PENALTY ASSESSMENT
17 31. In settlement of the violations and facts alleged in Section IV of this CAFO, and in
18 consideration of the statutory penalty factors set forth in Section 113(e)(1) of the CAA,
19 embodied in EPA's Clean Air Act Stationary Source Civil Penalty Policy ("Penalty
20 Policy"), dated October 25, 1991, Respondents shall pay a civil administrative penalty of
21 thirty-three thousand five hundred dollars ($33,500) within 30 calendar days after the
22 effective date of this CAFO. Payment shall be made by electronic fund transfer ("EFT")
23 or cashier's or certified check payable to the "Treasury, United States of America."
24 Payment by EFT shall be transferred to the following address:
25 Federal Reserve Bank of New York
ABA = 021030004
26 Account = 68010727
SWIFT address = FRNYUS33
27 33 Liberty Street
New York NY 10045
28 Field Tag 4200 of the Fedwire message should read,
5
In the Matter of: Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 "D 68010727 Environmental Protection Agency"
2 Payment by cashier's or certified check shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt
3 requested, to the following address:
4 US Environmental Protection Agency
Fines and Penalties
5 Cincinnati Finance Center
PO Box 979077
6 St. Louis, MO 63197-9000
7 The check shall note the case title and docket number. Concurrent with the delivery of
8 payment, Respondents shall send a copy of the transfer or check to the following
9
addresses:
Brian P. Riedel
10
Assistant Regional Counsel (ORC-2)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
11
Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street
12
San Francisco, CA 94105
13
Regional Hearing Clerk (ORC-1)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
14
Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street
15
San Francisco, CA 94105
16
32. Payment of the above civil administrative penalty shall not be used by WMH or any other
17
person as a tax deduction from WMH's federal, state, or local taxes.
18
VII. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT
19
A. General Description
20
33. Respondents shall cause the completion of the following SEP, which the Parties agree is
21
intended to secure significant environmental or public health protection and
22
improvements, at the Kailua-Kona Landfill located approximately three miles north of
23
Kailua-Kona on the Island of Hawaii. Respondents shall cause the completion of the
24
work described in the attached SEP Workplan, dated March 14, 2008, within 16 months
25
of the filing date of this CAFO. The SEP Workplan describes the following work to be
26
completed at the Kailua-Kona Landfill: a) a screening investigation of landfill conditions,
27
and b) a demonstration of subsurface fire suppression using fire -retardant foam.
28
6
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 34. Respondents shall expend no less than $184,400 for completion of the SEP in accordance
2 with the specifications set forth in the SEP Workplan. Respondents shall include
3 documentation of the expenditures made in connection with the SEP as part of the SEP
4 Completion Report.
5 35. Any expenditures made by WMH in implementing the SEP are, for purposes of federal
6 law, neither tax-deductible expenditures nor eligible to be added to the basis of assets or
7 property for depreciation purposes. WMH shall not use any expenditure associated with
8 this SEP to obtain favorable federal tax treatment.
9 36. Each Respondent hereby certifies that, as of date of this Consent Agreement, it is not
10 required to perform or develop the SEP by any federal, state or local law or regulation;
11 nor is it required to perform or develop the SEP by any other agreement, grant or as
12 injunctive relief in this or any other case. Each Respondent further certifies that it has not
13 received, and is not presently negotiating to receive, credit in any other enforcement
14 action for the SEP.
15 37. Any public statement, oral or written, in print, film, or other media, made by either
16 Respondent making reference to the SEP shall include the following language, "This
17 project was undertaken in connection with the settlement of an enforcement action taken
18 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for violations of the Clean Air Act."
19 B. SEP Completion Report
20 38. One or both Respondents shall submit a SEP Completion Report to EPA within 60 days
21 after completion of the SEP required in this CAFO. Documentation required under this
22 Paragraph shall be submitted to the following address:
23 Brian P. Riedel
24 Assistant Regional Counsel (ORC-2)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
25 75 Hawthorne Street
26 San Francisco, CA 94105
27 39. The SEP Completion Report shall contain the following information:
(i) A detailed description of the SEP as implemented;
28
7
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 (ii) A description of any operating problems encountered and the solutions thereto;
2 (iii) Itemized costs;
3 (iv) Certification that the SEP has been fully implemented pursuant to the provisions
4 of this CAFO; and
5 (v) A brief description of the environmental and public health benefits resulting from
6 the implementation of the SEP (with a quantification of the benefits and pollutant
7 reductions, to the extent feasible).
8 40. In the SEP Completion Report required by this CAFO, the Respondent or Respondents
9 submitting the report shall sign and certify that the information contained in the report is
10 true, accurate, and not misleading by signing the following statement:
11 I certify under penalty of law that I have examined and am familiar
with the information submitted in this document and all
12 attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe
13 that the information is true, accurate, and complete.
14 C. EPA Acceptance of SEP Completion Report
15 41. After receiving the SEP Completion Report, EPA shall notify Respondents whether they
16 have satisfactorily completed the SEP. If EPA has identified any deficiencies in the SEP
17 Completion Report, EPA will notify the Respondents, in writing, regarding such
18 deficiencies along with a grant of an additional thirty (30) days for Respondents to
19 correct any such deficiencies.
20 42. EPA shall permit Respondents the opportunity to object in writing to the notification of
21 deficiency given pursuant to this Paragraph within ten (10) business days of receipt of
22 such notification. EPA and Respondents shall have an additional thirty (30) days from
23 the receipt by EPA of the notification of objection to reach agreement on changes
24 necessary to the SEP Completion Report and/or to the SEP, as appropriate. If agreement
25 cannot be reached on any such issue within this thirty (30) day period, EPA shall provide
26 a written statement of its decision on the adequacy of SEP Completion Report and/or SEP
27 to Respondents, which decision shall be final and binding upon Respondents.
28 Respondents agree to comply with any requirements imposed by EPA as a result of any
8
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 failure to comply with the terms of this CAFO. In the event the SEP Completion Report
2 and/or SEP are not completed as contemplated herein, as determined by EPA, stipulated
3 penalties shall be due and payable by Respondents to EPA in accordance with Section
4 VIII of this CAFO.
5 VIII. STIPULATED PENALTIES
6 43. In the event that the full assessed penalty required under Paragraph 31 is not postmarked
7 on or before its due date, Respondents shall immediately pay the full assessed penalty,
8 along with stipulated penalties in the amount of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000)
9 immediately, plus interest and costs as allowed by law.
10 44. a. In the event that Respondents fail to comply with any of the terms or provisions of this
11 CAFO relating to the performance of the SEP and/or to the extent that actual
12 expenditures for the SEP do not equal or exceed the cost of the SEP described in
13 Paragraph 33 above, Respondents shall be liable for stipulated penalties according to the
14 provisions set forth below:
15 (i) Except as provided in subparagraph (ii) immediately below regarding a SEP
16 which has not been completed satisfactorily pursuant to this Consent Agreement,
17 Respondents shall pay a stipulated penalty to the United States in the amount of
18 $100,000.
19 (ii) If the SEP is not completed in accordance with this Consent Agreement, but EPA
20 determines that the Respondents A) made good faith and timely efforts to
21 complete the project; and B) certify, with supporting documentation, that at least
22 90 percent of the amount of money which was required to be spent was expended
23 on the SEP, Respondents shall not be liable for any stipulated penalty with respect
24 to SEP implementation.
25 (iii) If the SEP is completed in accordance with this Consent Agreement, but
26 Respondents spent less than 90 percent of the amount of money required to be
27 spent for the project, Respondents shall pay a stipulated penalty to the United
28 States in the amount of $20,000.
9
In the Matter of Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 (iv) If the SEP is completed in accordance with this Consent Agreement, and
2 Respondents spent at least 90 percent of the amount of money required to be spent
3 for the project, Respondents shall not be liable for any stipulated penalty with
4 respect to SEP implementation.
5 (v) For failure to submit the SEP Completion Report required by Section VII.B. of
6 this Consent Agreement, Respondents shall pay a stipulated penalty in the amount
7 of $1,000 for each day after the due date until the report is submitted.
8 b. The determinations of whether the SEP and/or SEP Completion Report have been
9 satisfactorily completed and whether Respondents has made a good faith, timely effort to
10 implement the SEP and/or SEP Completion Report shall be in the sole discretion of the
11 EPA.
12 c. Respondents shall pay stipulated penalties not more than fifteen (15) business days
13 after receipt of written demand by EPA for such penalties. Method of payment shall be in
14 accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 31 of this Consent Agreement. Interest and
15 late charges shall be paid as stated in Paragraph 46 of this Consent Agreement.
16 d. Subject to the provisions of Section IX (Effect of Settlement/Retention of Rights),
17 nothing in this CAFO shall be construed as prohibiting, altering or in any way limiting
18 the ability of EPA to seek any other remedies or sanctions available by virtue of
19 Respondents' violation of this Agreement or of the statutes and regulations upon which
20 this Agreement is based, or for the violation by either or both Respondent(s) of any
21 applicable provision of law.
22 45. Additionally, Respondents' failure to pay any of the penalty installments by its due date
23 may lead to any or all of the following actions:
24 a. The debt being referred to a credit reporting agency, a collection agency, or the
25 Department of Justice for filing of a collection action in the appropriate United States
26 District Court. 40 C.F.R. §§ 13.13, 13.14 and 13.33. In any such collection action, the
27 validity, amount, and appropriateness of the assessed penalty and of this CAFO shall not
28 be subject to review.
10
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 b. The debt being collected by administrative offset (i.e., the withholding of money
2 payable to the United States to, or held by the United States for, a person to satisfy the
3 debt the person owes the Government), which includes, but is not limited to, referral to
4 the Internal Revenue Service for offset against income tax refunds. 40 C.F.R. Part 13,
5 Subparts C and H.
6 c. EPA may (i) suspend or revoke the licenses or other privileges of either or both
7 Respondent(s); (ii) suspend or disqualify either or both Respondent(s) from doing
8 business with EPA or engaging in programs EPA sponsors or funds; (iii) convert the
9 method of payment under a grant or contract from an advanced payment to a
10 reimbursement method; or (iv) revoke a grantee's or contractor's letter -of -credit. 40
11 C.F.R. §§ 13.14 and 13.17.
12 46. In accordance with the Debt Collection Act of 1982, 31 U.S.C. § 3717, and 40 C.F.R.
13 Part 13, interest, penalties charges, and administrative costs will be assessed against the
14 outstanding amount that Respondents' owe to EPA for Respondents' failure to pay in full
15 the civil penalty by its due date. Interest will be assessed at an annual rate that is equal to
16 the rate of current value of funds to the United States Treasury (i.e., the Treasury tax_ and
17 loan account rate) as prescribed and published by the secretary of the Treasury in the
18 Federal Register and the Treasury Fiscal Requirements Manual Bulletins. 40 C.F.R.
19 § 13.11(a)(1). Penalty charges will be assessed monthly at a rate of 6% per annum. 40
20 C.F.R. § 13.11(c). Administrative costs for handling and collecting Respondent's
21 overdue debt will be based on either actual or average cost incurred, and will include both
22 direct and indirect costs. 40 C.F.R. § 13.11(b). In addition, if this matter is referred to
23 another department or agency (e.g., the Department of Justice, the Internal Revenue
24 Service), that department or agency may assess its own administrative costs, in addition
25 to EPA's administrative costs, for handling and collecting Respondent's overdue debt.
26 IX. EFFECT OF SETTLEMENT/RETENTION OF RIGHTS
27 47. In accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 22.18(c), this CAFO only resolves Respondents' liability
28 for federal civil penalties for the violations and facts alleged in this CAFO. Nothing in
11
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 this CAFO is intended to or shall be construed to resolve (i) any civil liability for
2 violations of any provision of any federal, state, or local law, statute, regulation, rule,
3 ordinance, or permit not alleged in this CAFO; or (ii) any criminal liability. In addition to
4 any other authority, right, or remedy available to EPA, EPA reserves any and all
5 authorities, rights, and remedies available to it (including, but not limited to, injunctive or
6 other equitable relief or criminal sanctions) to address any violation of this CAFO or any
7 violation not alleged in this CAFO.
8 48. This CAFO does not exempt, relieve, modify, or affect in any way Respondents' duty to
9 comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, rules, ordinance, and
10 permits.
11 X. FORCE MAJEURE
12 49. If any event occurs which causes or may cause delays in the completion of the SEP as
13 required under this Consent Agreement, Respondents shall notify Complainant in writing
14 not more than 10 days after the delay or Respondents' knowledge of the anticipated
15 delay, whichever is earlier. The notice shall describe in detail the anticipated length of
16 the delay, the precise cause or causes of the delay, the measures taken and to be taken by
17 Respondents to prevent or minimize the delay, and the timetable by which those
18 measures will be implemented. The Respondents shall adopt all reasonable measures to
19 avoid or minimize any such delay. Failure by Respondents to comply with the notice
20 requirements of this paragraph shall render this paragraph void and no effect as to the
21 particular incident involved and constitute a waiver of the Respondents' right to request
22 an extension of its obligation under this Consent Agreement based on such incident.
23 50. If the parties agree that the delay or anticipated delay in compliance with this Consent
24 Agreement has been or will be caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of
25 Respondents, the time for performance hereunder may be extended for a period no longer
26 than the delay resulting from such circumstances. In such event, the parties shall
27 stipulate to such extension of time.
28 51. In the event that the EPA does not agree that a delay in achieving compliance with the
12
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1 requirements of this CAFO has been or will be caused by circumstances beyond the
2 control of the Respondents, EPA will notify Respondents in writing of its decision and
3 any delays in the completion of the SEP shall not be excused.
4 52. The burden of proving that any delay is caused by circumstances entirely beyond the
5 control of the Respondents shall rest with the Respondents. Increased costs or expenses
6 associated with the implementation of the actions called for by this Consent Agreement
7 shall not, in any event, be a basis for changes in this Consent Agreement or extensions of
8 time under Paragraph 50 of this CAFO. Delay in achievement of one interim step shall
9 not necessarily justify or excuse delay in achievement of subsequent steps.
10 XI. ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
11 53. Each party shall bear its own attorney's fees, costs, and disbursements incurred in this
12 proceeding, except as provided for elsewhere in this Consent Agreement.
13 XII. EFFECTIVE DATE
14 54. In accordance with 40 C.F.R. §§ 22.18(b)(3) and 22.31(b), this CAFO shall be effective
15 on the date that the Final Order contained in this CAFO, having been approved and
16 issued by either the Regional Judicial Officer or Regional Administrator, is filed.
17 XIII. BINDING EFFECT
18 55. The undersigned representative of Complainant and the undersigned representatives of
19 each Respondents each certify that he or she is fully authorized to enter into the terms and
20 conditions of this CAFO and to bind the party he or she represents to this CATO.
21 56. The provisions of this CAFO shall apply to and be binding upon Respondents and each of
22 its officers, directors, employees, agents, trustees, servants, authorized representatives,
23 successors, and assigns.
24 XIV. MISCELLANEOUS
25 57. In any future enforcement action, any violation alleged in this CAFO may be considered
26 a "prior violation," as that term is used in the Penalty Policy.
27
28
13
In the Matter of Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Date: —/—/2008
Date: —/—/2008
Date: —/—/2008
FOR THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION 9:
DEBORAH JORDAN
Director, Air Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, California 94105
FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT OF HAWAII, INC.
Name:
Title:
FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII
Name:
Title:
14
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FINAL ORDER
EPA Region 9, Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc., and the County of Hawaii,
having entered into the foregoing Consent Agreement,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Consent Agreement and Final Order
Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. §§ 22.13 and 22.18 (Docket No. CAA -09-2008- ) be entered, and
Respondents shall pay a civil administrative penalty and cause completion of the Supplement
Environmental Project in accordance with the terms set forth in the Consent Agreement.
Date: _/_/2008
Steven L. Jawgiel
Regional Judicial Officer
United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, California 94105-3143
15
In the Matter of: Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that the original of the foregoing Consent Agreement and Final Order Pursuant to 40
C.F.R. §§ 22.13 and 22.18, Docket No. CAA -09-2008- , was placed in the United States Mail,
certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the following person authorized to receive
service of process in this matter:
Certified Return Receipt No.
Date: —/—/2008
DANIELLE CARR
Regional Hearing Clerk
United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 9
75 Hawthorne Avenue
San Francisco, California 94105-3143
16
In the Matter of. Waste Management of Hawaii, Inc. and County of Hawaii