EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - ENFORCEMENT MATTER
Page 1 of 4DOCKET NO.: 2o10-0824-AIR-E TCEQ ID: RN1oo777648 CASE NO.: 39730
RESPONDENT NAME: Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
ORDER TYPE:
X 1660 AGREED ORDER _FINDINGS AGREED ORDER _FINDINGS ORDER FOLLOWINGSOAR HEARING
_FINDINGS DEFAULT ORDER _SHUTDOWN ORDER _IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIALENDANGERMENT ORDER
AMENDED ORDER _EMERGENCY ORDER
CASE TYPE:
X AIR JMULTI-MEDIA (check all that apply) _INDUSTRIAL AND HAZARDOUSWASTE
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY _PETROLEUM STORAGE TANKS OCCUPATIONAL. CERTIFICATION
-WATER QUALITY SEWAGE SLUDGE UNDERGROUND INJECTIONCONTROL
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE _RADIOACTIVE WASTE _DRY CLEANER REGISTRATION
SITE WHERE VIOLATION(S) OCCURRED: The Printing Bureau, 4545 Cambridge Road, Fort Worth, Tarrant County
TYPE OF OPERATION: Commercial printing plant
SMALL BUSINESS:
Yes
X No
OTHER SIGNIFICANT MATTERS: A complaint was received on February 17, 2010, alleging excessive smoke emanating fromthe oxidizer stack. There is no record of additional pending enforcement actions regarding this facility location.
INTERESTED PARTIES: A complaint was received, but the complainant has not expressed a desire to protest this action or tospeak at Agenda.
COMMENTS RECEIVED: The Texas Register comment period expired on October 18, 2010. No comments were received.
CONTACTS AND MAILING LIST:TCEQ Attorney/SEP Coordinator: NoneTCEQ Enforcement Coordinator: Mr. James Nolan, Enforcement Division, Enforcement Team 4, MC 149, (512)239-6634; Ms. Laurie Eaves, Enforcement Division, MC 219, (512) 239-4495Respondent: Ms. Stephanie Giotes, General Counsel, Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd, 1130 Avenue H East, Arlington, Texas76011Mr. Shawn Petersen, CEO, Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd, 1130 Avenue H East, Arlington, Texas 76011Respondent's Attorney: Not represented by counsel on this enforcement matter
execsum/5-23-081app-26c.doe
RESPONDENT NAME: Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Page 2 of 4DOCKET NO.: 2010-0824--AIR-E
VIOLATION SUMMARY CHART:
VIOLATION INFORMATION PENALTY CONSIDERATIONS CORRECTIVE ACTIONSTAKEN/REQUIRED
Type of Investigation: Total Assessed: $22,245 Corrective Actions Taken:X Complaint_Routine Total Deferred: $4,449 The Executive Director recognizes that
Enforcement Follow-up X Expedited Settlement the Respondent has implemented the__ Records Review following corrective measures at the
Date(s) of Complaints Relating tothis Case: February 17, 2010
Financial Inability to Pay
SEP Conditional Offset: $o
Plant:
a. On March 3, 2010, hired an
Date of Investigation Relating to Total Paid to General Revenue:environmental consultant on anongoing basis, in order to ensure:
this Case: February 22, 2010 $17,796
Date of NOV/NOE Relating to this Person Compliance Historyi. Timely sampling . of the catalyst bedfrom the catalytic oxidizer and all of the
Case: April 21, 2010 (NOE) Classification add-on control systems are conducted;
Background Facts: This was a_ High _Average _ Poor
ii. Timely submittal of proposedcomplaint investigation. Site Compliance History sampling methods for TCEQ approval;
AIRClassification_ High _ Average
X Poor iii. Pre-test meeting scheduling at least
1) Failed to ensure that all waste inks, Major Source:
X No_Yes45 days in advance of sampling; and
solvents, and cleanup rags/towels were iv. Timely submittal of samplingstored in closed containers. Applicable Penalty Policy: September reports.Specifically, a container of waste 2002solvent, a container of waste inks, and b. By March 19, 2010, established anda container of cleanup rags were open began maintaining a record system toto the air [New Source Review ("NSR") track HAP emissions; andPermit No. 47553, Special Conditions( "SC" ) 5.B., 26.A,, and 26.C., 30 TEX. c. On April 14, 2010, completed trainingADMIN. CODE §§ 116.115(c) and designed to ensure that all waste inks,115.442(a) (1)(F)(ii), and TEx. HEALTH & solvents, and cleanup rags/towels areSAFETY CODE § 382.085(b)]. properly handled and stored.
2) Failed to ensure that oxidizers were Ordering Provisions:in proper operation at all times duringthe operation of printing presses. The Order will require the RespondentSpecifically, emissions from the full to:web press, facility identificationnumber ("FIN") Press 3, were required a. Within 30 days after the effectiveto be abated by the catalytic oxidizer, date of this Agreed Order, either:but that oxidizer was shut down onDecember 17, 2008, and emissions i. Complete repairs, replacements,from Press 3, including visible and/or adjustments to the catalyticemissions observed during the oxidizer (EPN EP-3) and/or theinvestigation, continued unabated until thermal oxidizer (EPN EP-1) designedFebruary 22, 2010, when Press 3 was to comply with the requirementsshut down. In addition, emissions of NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 3, 6, 9, 18,
from the half web press, FIN Press 1, and 24.A.; or in the alternativewere required to be abated by thethermal oxidizer, but on September 23, ii. Submit an administratively complete2008, that oxidizer was shut off and request to amend NSR Permit No.emissions from Press i were 47553, in order to allow for alternativeimproperly diverted to the catalytic requirements related to one or both ofoxidizer until December 17, 2008, the oxidizers' operations.when the catalytic oxidizer was shutdown, and since then, emissions from b. In the event the Respondent elects to
execsomf 5-23-08fapp-26c.doc
RESPONDENT NAME: Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Page 3 of 4DOCKET NO.: 2oto-0824-AIR-E
Press 1 have gone unabated.Furthermore, the catalytic oxidizer,when tested on December 5, 2oo8, wasfound to have a destruction efficiencyof 60.66%, while the requirement is95% [NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 3, 6,9, 18, and 24.A., 3o TEx. ADMIN. CODE §116.115(c), and TEx. HEALTH & SAFETYCODE § 382.085(1?)].
3) Failed to ensure that arepresentative core bed sample wasremoved from the catalytic oxidizerand submitted to a laboratory forcatalyst activity testing by December 1
of each year. Specifically, no sampleswere submitted to a laboratory forcatalyst activity testing for the year2009 [NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 23,30 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 116.115(0), andTEx. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE §382.085(b)].
4) Failed to conduct a timely stack testof the catalytic oxidizer. Specifically,the catalytic oxidizer was installed inJanuary 2008, and one-time, initialstack test was due within 18o days ofthat installation (by July 29, 2008),but did not occur until December 5,2008 [NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 24,30 TEx. ADMEN. CODE § 116.115(c), andTL+x. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE §
382.085(b)].
5) Failed to timely submit proposedstack sampling methods. Specifically,the Respondent was required to submitproposed stack sampling methods forthe catalytic oxidizer within 30 daysafter it reached normal operatingconditions in May 2008, but thosemethods were not submitted untilSeptember 5, 2008 [NSR Permit No.47553, SC 24•C•1•, 30 TEx. ADMIN. CODE
§ 116.115(c), and TEx. HEALTH & SAFE'T'Y
CODE § 382.085(b)].
6) Failed to schedule a pretest meetingwith the TCEQ Regional Office at least45 days in advance of the catalyticoxidizer stack sampling. Specifically,for the December 5, 2008 catalyticoxidizer stack sampling, theRespondent failed to schedule a pretestmeeting [NSR Permit No. 47553, SC24.C.2. , 30 TEX. ADMIN. CODE §116.115(c), and TEx. HEALTH & SAFETY
CODE § 382.085(b)].
7) Failed to prepare and distribute thestack sampling report to the TCEQwithin 30 days after the completion ofsampling. The catalytic oxidizer stack
submit a request to amend NSR PermitNo. 47553, respond completely andadequately, as determined by theTCEQ, to all requests for informationconcerning the amendment requestwithin 30 days after the date of suchrequests, or by any other deadlinespecified in writing;
c. Within 45 days after the effective dateof this Agreed Order, submit writtencertification and include detailedsupporting documentation includingphotographs, receipts, and/or otherrecords to demonstratecompliance with Ordering Provision a.i.or a.ii.; and
d. Within 18o days after the effectivedate of this Agreed Order, in the eventthe Respondent elects to submit arequest to amend NSR Permit No.47553, submit written certification thateither authorization to construct andoperate the Plant's catalytic oxidizerand/or thermal oxidizer has beenobtained or that construction/operationhas ceased until such time thatappropriate authorization is obtained.
execsuml5-23-08Iapp-26c.doc
RESPONDENT NAME: Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Page 4 of 4DOCKET NO.: 2010-0824-AIR-E
sampling was performed on December5, 2008, making the sampling reportdue by January 4, 2009, but the reportwas not submitted until February 2,2009 [NSR Permit No. 47553, SC24.C.4., 30 TEx. ADMIN. CODE §116,115(c), and TEX. HEALTH & SAFETYCODE § 382.085(b)].
8) Failed to maintain a monthly recordof individual and total hazardous airpollutant ("HAP") emissions in tonsper year for the previous rolling 12months [NSR Permit No. 47553, SC25.D,, 30 TEx. ADMIN. CODE §116.115(c), and TEx. HEALTH & SAFETYCODE § 382.085(b)]•
Additional ID No(s).: TA4116R
execsund5-23-087app-26c.doc
Penalty Calculation Worksheet (PCW)ai,tvPolicy Revision 2(September2002)
DATES
RESPONDENT/FACILITY INFORMATIONRespondent
Reg. Ent. Ref. No.FacilitylSite Region
PCW Revision October 30, 2008
Assigned 26-Apr-2010PCW 24-Jun-2010Screening EPA Due14-May-2010 I
Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauRN1007776484-Dallas/Fort Worth
Ma orlMinor Source !Minor
397302010-0824-AIR-EAir
CASE INFORMATIONEnf./Case ID No.
Docket No.Media Program(s)
Multi-Media
No. of ViolationsOrder Type
Government/Non-ProfitEnf, Coordinator
EC's Team
81660NoJames NolanEnforcement Team 4
Admin. Penalty $ Limit Minimum $0 Maximum
I $10,000 l
Penalty Calculation Section
TOTAL BASE PENALTY (Sum of violation base penalties)
Subtotal I
$17,100
ADJUSTMENTS (+1-) TO SUBTOTAL 1Subtotals 2-7 are obtained by multEplying the Total Base Penalty (Subtotal 1) by the indicated percentage.
Compliance History 20,0%Enhancement Subtotals 2, 3, & 7
Notes
The penalty was enhanced by one 1660-style agreed order.
Culpability
No 1 0.0%Enhancement Subtotal4
Notes
The Respondent does not meet the. culpability criteria.
$3,4201
$0I
Economic Benefit, Total EB Amounts
Approx. Cost of Compliance
0.0% Enhancement"'Capped at the Total ER $ Amount
Subtotal 5
Subtotal 6
$1,2751
$O1
Good Faith Effort to Comply Total Adjustments
$6,348$33,000
SUM OF SUBTOTALS 1-7
Final Subtotal
$19,245
OTHER FACTORS AS JUSTICE MAY REQUIREReduces or enhances the Final Subtotal by the Indicated percentage.
15.6% Adjustment
Recommended enhancement to capture the avoided cost ofcompliance associated with Violations 3 and 6.
Final Penally Amount
STATUTORY LIMIT ADJUSTMENT
Final Assessed Penalty
$22,245
Notes
$3,0001
$22,2451
DEFERRAL
20.0% Reduction
Reduces the Final Assessed Penalty by the indicted percentage. (Enter number only; e.g. 20 for 20%reduction.)
Notes
Deferral offered for expedited settlement.
Adjustment 44,449
PAYABLE PENALTY
$17,796
>>
Screening Date 14-May-2010
Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E
PCW
Respondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Policy Revision 2 (September20U2'!
Case ID No. 39730
PC0Revision Ortober30, 2DO8
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648
Media [Statute] Air
Ent. Coordinator James Nolan
Compliance History WorksheetCompliance History Site Enhancement (Subtotal 2)
Component Number of...
Enter Number Were Adjust.
NOVsWritten NOVs with same or similar violations as those in the current enforcement action(number of NOVs meeting criteria)
0 0^/n
Other written NOVs 0 0%
Orders
Any agreed final enforcement orders containing a denial of liability (number of ordersmeeting criteria )
1 20^%n
Any adjudicated final enforcement orders, agreed final enforcement orders without a denialof liability, or default orders of this state or the federal government, or any final prohibitoryemergency orders issued by the commission
0 0%
Judgments
Any non-adjudicated final court Judgments or consent decrees containing a denial of liabilityof this state or the federal government (number of judgements or consent decrees meetingcriteria )
0 0%
and ConsentDecrees Any adjudicated final court judgments and default judgments, or non-adjudicated final court
judgments or consent decrees without a denial of liability, of this state or the federalgovernment
0 0%
Convictions Any criminal convictions of this state or the federal government (number of counts) 0 0%Emissions Chronic excessive emissions events (number of events) 0 0%
A u dits
Letters notifying the executive director of an intended audit conducted under the TexasEnvironmental, Health, and Safety Audit Privilege Act, 74th Legislature, 1995 (number ofaudits for which notices were submitted)
0 0%
Disclosures of violations under the Texas Environmental, Health, and Safety Audit PrivilegeAct, 74th Legislature, 1995 (number of audits for which violations were disclosed )
0 D%
Please Enter Yes or No
Environmental management systems in place for one year or more No 0%
Voluntary on-site compliance assessments conducted by the executive director under a No 0%Other
special assistance program
Participation in a voluntary pollution reduction program No 0%
Early compliance with, or offer of a product that meets future state or federal government No 0%environmental requirements
Adjustment Percentage (Subtotal 2)
:>> Repeat Violator (Subtotal 3)
20%
No
>> Compliance History Person Classification (Subtotal 7)
Adjustment Percentage (Subtotal 3) I 0%
NIA
Adjustment Percentage (Subtotal 7)
0%
'>> Compliance History Summary
The penalty was enhanced by one 1660-style agreed order.Compliance
HistoryNotes
Total Adjustment Percentage (Subtotals 2, 3, 8 7) 20%
Screening Date 14-May-2010_
Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E
FCVV
Respondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
PolicyPr:Oman 2(Srolnua,i,v2003)
Case ID No. 39730
POW Revision Ocher 30, 2008
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648Media [Statute] Air
Enf. Coordinator James NolanViolation Number
Rule Cite(s)
Failed to ensure that all waste Inks, solvents, and cleanup ragsltoweis were stored inclosed containers, as documented during an investigation conducted on February 22,
2010. Specifically, a container of waste solvent, a container of waste inks, and a containerof cleanup rags were open to the air.
Violation Description
1 1New Source Review ("NSR") Permit No. 47553, Special Conditions ("SC")
26.A and26.C., 30 Tex. Admin. Code §§ 116.115(c) and 115.442(a)(1)(F)(ii), and Tex. Health &
Safety Code § 382.085(b)
Percent
Percent
» Enviroitlpenta; r pt'op0ijy and Human k-l alth matrixHarm
Release
Maior
Moderate
MinorOR
ActualPotential
>>Programmatic MatrixFalsification
11II
Major1
Minor
Base Penalty
0%
$10,0001
Human health or the environment were exposed to Insignificant amounts of pollutants not exceeding levelsprotective of human health or environmental receptors as a result of this violation.
$9,0001
$1,0001
Violation Events
Number of Violation Events
Number of violation days
MatrixNotes
mark orgy one
with an x
dailyweeklymonthlyquarterly
semiannualannual
single event x
Violation Base Penalty $1,0001
One single event is recommended, based on the date of the investigation.
Good Faith Efforts to Compl} ReductionBefore NOV NOV la EDPRPISettlemenl Offer
L $25025.O%1
Extraordinary
OrdinaryNIA (mark wilh xl
NotesThe Respondent completed corrective actions by April 14, 2010,
and the NOE is dated April 21, 2010.
Violation Subtotal
Statutory Lirnit Test
Violation Final Penalty Total
$750
$1,0961
EdbtiOnlic Benefit (EB) for this violation
Estimated EB Amount
$141
This violation Final Assessed Penalty (adjusted for limits)
$1,098
Economic Benefit Worksheet
sondentWgp+s+@q,md The Printing BureauCase ID No. 397a
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648
Media AirViolation No. 1
item CostItem Description Nocommas.or$
| l am $0 $0 $0L $ I 0.00 $0 $0 $0
II ; .
^ mE $0 $0 $0I I t
L cm $0 $0 $0
E m
I UO $0 $0I [ 0.00 $0 .:
w
. $02 000 ^ 22@&2@0 ! iGA
eo E Q4 q4 ..» + $14I I L UO $0 $0IL § o o $0 nla $0
I I I .
l 0.00 $0 \d«
<n $0
Estimated costs to provide for increased waste handling training. The Date Required is the date of theinvestigation, and the m« Dat. is the date the additional training was provided.
ANNUALIZE 1 avoided costs before entering item (except for one-lime avoided costs)|
!
l oo $0 $0 wI
E
IL G^ m m r
r
I o o r $ mIL
t
1 ^ o $0 $ $0I 0
I a o $0 $ $0
I
I
l1 a o r $ $0I
m
! Uo $0 q $0
Depreciation ,
: P
121e^^
Final e
r Interest &ed Onetime cs EBBAmount
! Percent Interest
Notes for DELAYED costs
Avoided costsDisposal
Personnelm_ _#a m
s A A_tFinancial Assurance (21
ONE-TIME avoided costs (a]_«w needed )
Notes for AVOIDED costs
Approx, Cost of Compliance km( TOTAL
Screening Date 14-May-2010
Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E
PCWRespondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Rees Rev)sivu z(Sree niiwer 2oazi
Case ID No. 39730
PC:WRevrsfon Wolfer 30, 2000
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648Media [Statute] Air
Enf. Coordinator James NolanViolation Number
itRule Cite(s) NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 3, 6, 9, 18, and 24.A., 30 Tex. Admin. Code § 116.116(c), and Tex. Health & Safety
Code § 382.085(b)
Failed to ensure that oxidizers were in proper operation at all times during the operation of printing presses, asdocumented during an investigation conducted on February 22, 2010. Specifically, emissions from the full webpress, facility identification number ("FIN") Press 3, were required to be abated by the catalytic oxidizer, but that
oxidizer was shut down on December 17, 2008, and emissions from Press 3, including visible emissions observedduring the investigation, continued unabated until February 22, 2010, when Press 3 was shut down. In addition,
emissions from the half web press, FIN Press 1, were required to be abated by the thermal oxidizer, but onSeptember 23, 2008, that oxidizer was shut off and emissions from Press 1 were improperly diverted to the
catalytic oxidizer until December 17, 2008, when the catalytic oxidizer was shut down, and since then, emissionsfrom Press 1 have gone unabated, Furthermore, the catalytic oxidizer, when tested on December 5, 2008, was
found to have a destruction efficiency of 60.66%, while the requirement is 95%.
Base Penalty
>> Envirop rtenta , t P Y and Human Health Ma fixHarm
Major Moderate
MinorOR
Violation Description
1 $10,0001
Percent 1
>>Progra.m. matic MatrixFalsification Moderate Minor
1 PercentMajor
MatrixNotes
Human health or the environment were exposed to Insignificant amounts of pollutants not exceeding levelsprotective of human health or environmental receptors as a result of this violation.
,; dj' ,sitneet
$9,0001
stow]
Violation Events.
mark only onewith an x
quarterly
Number of Violation Eventsdaily
weeklymonthly
12
1
598
Number of violation days
X
Violation Base Penalty
$12,0001semiannua
annualsingle event.I
Twelve quarterly events are recommended: Five for the catalytic oxidizer from December 17, 2008 (dateemissions from Press 3 unabated) to February 22, 2010 (the date Press 3 was shut down), and seven for
the thermal oxidizer from September 23, 2008 (date emissions from Press 1 improperly routed to EPN EP-3) to May 14, 2010 (the enforcement screening date).
Good Pauli Efforts to Comply 0:0%1Before NOV
Red,NOV to EDPRP/Se111emenl Offer
Extraordinary
OrdinaryNIA 1
1x (1(mark with x}
Notes
;Economic Beriet t (EB) for this violatioi
The Respondent does not meet the good faith criteria for thisviolation.
1Violation Subtotal
Statufary l1.t T s# .
$12,000]
Estimated EB Amount $2,4731 Violation Final Penalty Total 1 $16,645
This violation Final Assessed Penalty (adjusted for limits)
$16,6451
Economic Benefit Worksheet
Respondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Case 113 No. 39730Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777645
Media AirViolation No. 2
Item Cost
Date Required.
Final Date
Yrs
Item Description No commas or $
1 Percent Interest
Years ofDepreciation
Interest Saved Onetime Costs EB Amount
Delayed CostsEquipment
BuildingsOther (as needed)
Engineering/constructionLand
Record Keeping SystemTraining/Sampling
RemedlatlonfDisposalPermit Costs
Other (as needed)
Notes for DELAYED costs
Avoided CostsDisposal
PersonnelInspection/Reporting/Sampling
SuppllesfequlpmentFinancial Assurance [2]
ONE-TIME avoided costs [3]Other (as needed)
Notes for AVOIDED costs
II II I 0.00 $0 $0 $0II II I 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I 1 1 II
1 0.00 $0 $0 $010 000 1
23-Seo-2008 II
1-May-2011
] 2.60 $87 $1,735 $1,822II
1 1 1 0.00 $0 n/a $0I II 11 1 0.00 $0 nla $0I. 1 1 I I I 0.00 $0 nfa $0
I 4 II I 0.00 $0 nia $0_5 000 I
23-Sep-2008 11
1-May-2011 I 2.60 $651 nla $651
L II
l 1 1 0.00 . $0 hlar $0
Estimated costs to adjust oxidizer operations ($10,000), and/or amend the permit to provide for alternativemethods of control ($5,000). The Date Required is the date the thermal oxidizer was shut down, and the Final
Date Is the date the Respondent is expected to return to compliance.
ANNUALIZE [1] avoided costs before entering Item (except for one-time avoided costs)
I
II
II 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I
lI
11 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0ILI
II
] 0.00 $0 $0 $011
II 1 . 0.00 $0 $0 $011
11 I 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I
u11-
1
0.00 $0 $0 $0I
II
II L 0.00 $0 $0 $0
oeee,ee
Screening Date 14-May-2010
Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E
PCW
Respondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Percy Romeo 2 (Septembor 2002)
Case ID No. 39730
Pew Revision OctoberReg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648
Media [Statute] Air
Enf. Coordinator James NolanViolation Number
Rule Cite(s)) NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 23, 30 Tex. Admin. Code § 116.115(c), and Tex, Health &Safety Code § 382,085(b)
Failed to ensure that a representative core bed sample was removed from the catalyticoxidizer and submitted to a laboratory for catalyst activity testing by December 1 of each
Violation Description
year, as documented during an investigation conducted on February 22, 2010.Specifically, no samples were submitted to a laboratory for catalyst activity testing for the
year 2009.
'>> Environmental, Property arid Human Health MatrixHarm
Release Major ModerateOR
ActualPotential
Minor
Percent
Base Penalty
5%I
$10,0001
>>Prograinntatic Ma"ir•xFalsification
0%1U
MinorModerateMajorPercent
MatrixNotes
Failure to sample, and potentially adjust, the oxidizer could result in human health or the environment beingexposed to insignificant amounts of pollutants not exceeding levels protective of human health or
Adjustme`
$9,5001
1
$500
-Violation Events
Number of Violation Events
environmental receptors as a result of this violation.
r
[ 365 1 Number of violation days
mark nary onewith an x
dailyweeklymonthlyquarterly
semiannualannual
single event
Violation Base Penalty $5001
x
One single event is recommended, based on the one sampling failure,
Good with Efforts to Comply $12525.0/o1 deductionBefore NOV NOV to EDPRPJSelilement Offer
Extraordinary
Ordinary
NIA
x
mark with x)
NotesThe Respondent completed corrective actions by March 3, 2010,
and the NOE is dated April 21, 2010.
Violation Subtotal
Statutory Limit Test
Violation Final Penalty Total
$3751
$5491
Economic Benefit (ED) for this violation
Estimated EB Amount
$1,837j
This violation Final Assessed Penalty {adjusted for limits)
$5491
Economic Benefit WorksheetRespondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Case ID No. 30730
Rea. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648
Media Air
Violation No. 3I Percent Interest
Years ofDepreciation
15Item Cost
Item Description No commas or $
Date Required
Final Date
Yrs Interest Saved Onetime Costs
EB Amount
Delayed CostsEquipment
BuildingsMacias needed)
EngineeringtconslructlonLand
Record Keeping SystemTralningiSampling
Remedlation)DlsposalPermit Costs
Other [as needed)
Notes for DELAYED costs
I I II 1`
0.00 $0 $a $0I II
1 1 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I II II 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I II II I 0.00 $0 $0 $0I I I II 1 0.00 $0 nla- $0I II 1 0.00 $0 nla $0
10 000 30-Jun-2008I
n-2008 II 3-Mar-2010 J 1.67 $837 n!a $837II II 1 0.00 ._
$0 n!a $0
11 II. 1 0,00 $0 rJa $0
II I I I o.oo $0 n^a $0
Estimated costs to hire a specialized consultant to oversee compliance with envionmenta] requirements, includingtimely sampling and report. submittal . The Date Required is the due date of the sample in Violation 5, and the
Final Date is the date an environmental consultant was hired on an ongoing basis.
Avoided Costs
ANNUALIZE . [1]avoidedcosts before enteringitem (except fo one-time avoided costs)Disposal
PersonnelIn specilonlReporttnglSampling
Supplies!equlpmentFinancial Assurance [2]
ONE-TIME avoided costs [3]Other (as needed)
o.oo .
Estimated costs to sample, submit; and report results. The Date Required and the Final Date are the last day ofthe year for which the annual sampling was required.
Approx. Cost of Compliance
$11,000
TOTAL
$1,8371
I 31-Dec-2009 I
]
I 31-Dec-2009 I
0.00ono0.000.000.000.00
so$0$o$a$0$0 $1,000
$0$0$0
$.1,000
$0
$o$0$0
$o $0 $o
Notes for AVOIDED costs
Screening Date 14-May-2010
Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E
PC:W
Respondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Policy ReveiOn 2(Sopirwifee2002)
Case ID No. 39730
POW Renew October 30, 2008
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648
Media [Statute] Air
Enf. Coordinator James NolanViolation NumberMI
Rule Cite(s)
NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 24, 30 Tex. Admin. Code § 116.115(c), and Tex. Health &Safety Code § 382.085(b)
Failed to timely conduct a stack test of the catalytic oxidizer, as documented during aninvestigation conducted on February 22, 2010. Specifically, the catalytic oxidizer was
Installed in January 2008, and-one-time, initial stack test was due within 180 days of thatInstallation (by July 29, 2008), but did not occur until December 5, 2008.
Base Penalty
$10,0001
Violation Description
>> Environment ptlie P' :0,,
ReleaseOR
Actual
Potential 5%1
Major
0R 1104;11 lYlOArix_Harm
Moderate Minor
1 1
11.
1x Percent
>>Programmatic MatrixFalsification Major Moderate
MinorPercent 1 ,0%i lI
MatrixNotes
,Vioiatioh Events
Failure to sample, and potentially adjust, the oxidizer could result in human health or the environmentbeing exposed to insignificant amounts of pollutants not exceeding levels protective of human health or
environmental receptors as a result of this violation.
Adjustment) $9,5001
Number of Violation Events
130 1 Number of violation days
Violation Base Penalty
One single event is recommended, based on the one late test.
mark only onewilts an x
dailyweeklymonthlyquarterly
semiannualannual
single event
$500
$5001
Good Faith Efforts to Comply 25,0%IBefore NOV
ReciijcjpqNOV to EOPRPiSelllement Offer
$125
Extraordinary
Ordinary
N/A
1
1(rnerk with x)
1
x
Econoniijt Benefit (EB) for this violation
The Respondent completed corrective actions by March 3,2010, and the NOE. is dated April 21, 2010.
Violation Subtotal
Statutory Li tit Test
Notes
$3751
f $5491Estimated EB Amount Violation Final Penalty Total
This violation Final Assessed Penalty (adjusted for limits)
$5491
Economic Benefit Worksheet
Respondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauCase ID No. 39730
Reg. Ent, Reference No. RN100777848Media Air
Violation No. 4
Item Cost
Date Required
Final Date
YrsNo commas or $
I II I I
1 0.00 $0 0 $0
I I I II
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I I I I l
I 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I 1 1 } I
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I II II
1 0.00 $0 rila $0
f II II
1 0.00 $0 n/a = ' -'
r $0
I ' 1 000 I 29-Jul-2008 II
5-Dec-2008
I 0.35 $18 1/a $18I II 1 1
1 0.00 $0 nla $0
I II 11
1 0.00 $0 n7a $0II II
1 0.00 $0 nIa $0
Estimated costs to sample the oxidizer ($1,000). The Date Required is the due date of the sampling, and theFinal Date Is the date the sampling was conducted. Estimated costs to ensure future timely sampling is included
in Violation 3,
ANNUALIZE [1];avoided costs before entering item (except for one-time avoided costs)I
I I
II
I (loci $( _ $0 $oI
I I
II
I o.oo $0 $( $oI
! I
11
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I
I I
JI
I 0.00 $o $0 $0I
1 II
I 0.00 $0 $0 $0I I
II
1 0.00 $0 $0 $oI I
II
I (.(( $o $a $(
Approx. Cost of Compliance
$1,000'
TOTAL
1 Percent Interest
Years ofDepreciation
5.01
15
Interest Saved Onetime Costs EB AmountItem Description
Delayed CostsEquipment
BuildingsOther (as needed)
EngrnseringlconslructtonLand
Record Keeping SystemTralntngfSampling
Remedlalloo)DleposalPermit Casts
Other (as needed)
Notes for DELAYED costs
Avoided CostsDisposal
PersonnelInspection/Reporting/Sampling
SuppllesfegmdpmentFinancial Assurance [2]
ONE-TIME avoided costs [3]Other (as needed)
Notes for AVOIDED costs
Screening Date 14-May-2010
Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E
PCWPoky Revision 2 (September 2002)
PC W Revfsron October 30, 2008
Respondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauCase ID No. 39730
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648Media [Statutel Air
Enf. Coordinator James NolanViolation Number
Rule Cite(s)
Failed to timely submit proposed stack sampling methods, as documented during aninvestigation conducted on February 22, 2010. Specifically, the Respondent was required
Violation Description to submit proposed slack sampling methods for the catalytic oxidizer within 30 days alter itreached normal operating conditions in May 2008, but those methods were not submitted
until September 5, 2008.
Base Penalty
$10,0001
5NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 24.C,l„ 30 Tex. Admin, Code § 115,115(c), and Tex. Health &
Safely Code § 382.085(b)
Major
Percent 0%1
>> Environmental, Property and Human Health MatrixHarm
ModerateOR
ReleaseActual
Potential C1
Minor
>>Prograrn 7atic MatrixFalsification Major Moderate Minor
Percent,x 1l
The Respondent failed to comply with 100% of the requirement.
AjJ,ttstiern
$0,0001
$1,000
'Violation Eyehts
1
67
Number of violation days
MatrixNotes
mark only onewith an x
dailyweeklymonthlyquarterly
semiannualannual
single event
1
1x
Violation Base Penalty $1,000)
One single event is recommended, based on the one late submittal.
Good Fait) Efforts to Comply 25:0% RedUeLel lBefore NOV NOV to EOPRP/Setllement Offer
$260
Extraordinary
Ordinary xN!A
mark with x)
The Respondent completed corrective actions by March 3,2010, and the NOE is dated April 21, 2010.Notes
Violation Subtotal
Statutory 004 Test
Violation Final Penalty Total
$7501
$1,0981
Economic Benefit (EB) for this violation
Estimated EB Amount
$0I
This violation Final Assessed Penalty (adjusted for limits)
$1,098
Economic Benefit Worksheet
Respondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Case ID No. 39730Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777048
Media AirViolation No. 5
5.01
15
Date Required
Final Date
Yrs Interest Saved Onetime Costs
EB Amount
1
I I
I I
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I I I I
1 0.00 $o $0 $0
I
I I
I I
1 0.00 $0 $0 $01 II
7 1
I _0.00 $0 $0 $0
II
1 1
1 0,00 $0 nla $0I
1 1 I I
1 0.00 $0 nla $0
1 1 I I
1 0.00 $0 nla $01 II I[
1 0.00 $0 nla $0I 11 11
l 0.00 $0 nla $0
11 11
1 0.00 $0 ilia $0
Delayed economic benefits for this violation are included In Violation 3,
ANNUALIZE [1] avoided costs before entering Rent (except for one-time avoided costs)I[ l
1 0.00 $o $o $o1
II 1
I 0,00 $0 $0 $01
11
-11
I 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I
If 11
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I
II 11
1 0.00 $o $0 $0
11 II
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
it li
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
Approx. Cost of Compliance
$01
TOTAL
$0I
1 Percent Interest
Years of.Depreciation
Item Cost
Item Description No commas or $
Delayed CostsEquipment
BuildingsOther (as needed)
EnglneeringfconstructIanLand
Rocerd Keeping SystemTralningl5ampling
RemedlatlonlDisposalPermit Costs
Other (as needed)
Notes for DELAYED casts
Avoided CostsDisposal
PersonnelInspectlonfReporttnglSampling
SupplieslequipmontFinancial Assurance [2]
ONE-TIME avoided costs [3]Other (as needed)
Notes for AVOIDED costs
Screening Date 14-May-2010
Docket No, 2010-0824-AIR-E
PCWRespondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Policy Revision 2(Sep(emteeor 2002)
Case ID No. 39730
PCW Revision OclobarsO, 2006
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648Media [Statute] Air
Ertl. Coordinator dames NolanViolation Number
Rule Cite(s)& Safety Code § 382.085(b)
Failed to schedule a pretest meeting with the TCEQ Regional Office at least 45 days inadvance of the catalytic oxidizer stack sampling, as documented during an investigation
Violation Description conducted on February 22, 2010. Specifically, for the December 5, 2008 catalytic oxidizerstack sampling, the Respondent failed to schedule a pretest meeting; however, they
provided a corrective action plan on March 3, 2010.
1 6 1NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 24.C.2., 30 Tex. Admin. Code § 116.115(o), and Tex. Health
>> Environmental, Proper arid Human Het
;'t'jxHarm
Release Major ModerateOR
ActualPotential
Minor
Percent
Base Penalty
0%1
$10,000j
»Progran' matie aalxFalsificationFa
Matrix
10%Major Moderate
1Minor
Percent
Notes
The Respondent failed to comply with 100% of the provision.
Ailjustinent
$9,000[
$1,000
Violation Events
mark reify onewe an x
dailyweeklymonthlyquarterly
semiannualannual
single event
1 Number of violation days
Violation Base Penalty $1,0001
One single event Is recommended, based on the one scheduling failure.
Good Faith Efforts to Comply $25025.0%[ ReducjionNOV NOV la EDPRPlSetllement OfferBefore
Extraordinary
OrdinaryNIA
Notes
(mark with x)
The Respondent completed corrective actions by March 3,2010, and the NOE is dated April 21, 2010.
1 x1
11
Econoin .ic Benefit [EB) for this violation
$1,0981
Violation Subtotals
Statutory Limit Test
Violation Final Penalty Total
$7501
This violation Final Assessed Penalty (adjusted for limits) $1,0981
Economic Benefit WorksheetRespondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Case ID No. 39730
Rep. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648
Media Air
Violation No. 6
Item Cost
Date Required
Final Date
Yrs
Item Description No commas or$
I I I I I 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I 1 1 I I
.0.00 $0 $0 $0
II IL 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I 1 1 I I 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I 1 1 I I 1 0.00 $o n!a $0
I 1 1 11 I
0.00 $0 nla $01 1 I I J 0.00 $0 nfa $0
I 1 1 1 1 1
0.00 $0 nra $0
II IF I o,oo $o nla $0[ II II 1 0.00 $0 ri7a $0
Delayed economic benefits for this violation are included In Violation 3.
Years of1 Percent Interest Depreciation
Interest Saved Onetime. Costs EB Amount
Delayed CostsEquipment
BuildingsOther (as needed)
Engineering/constructionLand
Record Keeping SystemTraining/Sampling
Rsmedlat[oniDlsposalPermit Costs
Other (as needed)
Notes for DELAYED costs
Avoided CostsDisposal
PersonnelInspectlonlRoportingfSampling
Supplies/equipmentFinancial Assurance [2]
ONE-TIME avoided costs [3]Other (as needed)
Notes for AVOIDED costs
ANNUALIZE [1] avoided costsbefore entering item (except for one-time avoided costs)
Estimated costs to prepare for and conduct a pretest meeting. The Date Required and the Final Date is 45•daysprior to the test that occurred on December 5, 2008.
7
0.000.000,000.000.000.000.00
I 21-Oct-2008 1 21-act-2008 . 111
$o
$
$0
$
$
$0$0$0$0$0
$2,0000$
Approx. Cost of Compliance $2,0001 1 $2,0001TOTAL
Screening Date 14-May-2010
Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E
PCWRespondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Policy Rees= 2(Snpinmlrer2aa2}
Case ID No. 39730
PcwP.svislonoc[ouar30,2008
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648
Media [Statute] Air
Enf. Coordinator James NolanViolation Number
7Rule Cite(s) NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 24.C.4., 30 Tex. Admin. Code § 116.116(u), and Tex. Health &
Safety Code § 362.085(b)
Failed to prepare and distribute the stack sampling report to the TCEQ within 30 days afterthe completion of sampling, as documented during an investigation conducted on February
Violation Description
22, 2010. The catalytic oxidizer stack sampling was performed on December 5, 2008,making the sampling report due by January 4,2009, but the report was not submitted until
February 2, 2009.
Base Penalty
$10,0001
>s EnvirorijnentaI, Oro'ertjr and Human Health Nfati'ixHarm
Minor
Percent 0%1
:>>Programmatic MatrixFalsification Major Moderate Minor
MatrixNotes
1111111•111"
Percent ( 10%!
The Respondent failed to comply.with 100% of the requirement.
Adjt stment
$9,000
$1,000]
Violation Events
Number of Violation Events
nark only onewithanx
dailyweeklymonthlyquarterly
semiannualannual
single event
Number of violation days
Violation Base Penalty $1,0001
129
One single event is recommended, based on the one late report.
Good Faith! Eftprt to Comply
25.0% F.uc uctionBefore NOV NOV to EDPRPISe111emenl Offer
Extraordinary
Ordinary
N/A
x 11(mark with x)
NotesThe Respondent completed corrective actions by March 3,
2010, and the NOE is dated April 21, 2010.
Violation Subtotal $750
1 $01
Economic Benefit (EB) for this violation
Estimated EB Amount
Statutory hiiit Test
Violation Final Penalty Total $1,093)
This violation Final Assessed Penalty (adjusted for limits)
$1,0881
Respondent Unl-Graphlcs Printing, Lid dba The Printing Bureau
Case ID No. 39730
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777048Media Air
Violation No. 7
50
15
Item Cost
Date Required
Final Date
Yrs Interest Saved Onetime Costs
EB Amount
No commas or $
I I
I I
1 0.00 $0 $0 $01
I I
1 1
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I I
I I
1 0,00 $0 $0 $01 1
1 1
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
1 I I
1 1
1 0.00 $0
$0
Economic Benefit Worksheet
lVe $0
11 1 1 1
I 0.00 $0 nla $0
I 11 1
1 0.00 $0 n/a $0
1 1
I I
1 0.00 $0 nla $0
1I 11 1
1 0.00 $0 nla $0
1 1
1 1
1 0.00 $0 _ rife $0
The economic benefits for this violation are included In Violation 3.
ANNUALIZE [1] avoided costs before entering Item (except for one-time avoided costs}
F
11
11
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I
II
111 000 $0 $0 $0II
11
1 0,00 $0 $0 $0
11 11
I 0.00 $0 $0 $0
11
II
1-
0.00 $0 $0 $0l
1111 0.00 $0 $0 $0II
11
1 0.00 $0 $0
Approx. Cost of Compliance
$01
TOTAL
$0
I Percent Interest
Years ofDepreciation
Item Description
Delayed CostsEquipment
BuildingsOther (as needed)
Engineering/constructionLand
Record Keeping SystemTraining/Sampling
RemedlallonfDlsposalPermit Costs
Other (as needed)
Notes for DELAYED costs
Avoided CostsDisposal
PersonnelInspection/Reporting/Sampling
Supplies/equipmentFlnanctal Assurance 12]
ONE-TIME avoided costs (3]Other (as needed)
Notes for AVOIDED costs
Screening Date 14-May-2010
Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E
PCWRespondent Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Polley Re:vvdon 2/Sopienreor Ar102)
Case ID No. 39730
PCW Revrsfon Oc[o6er30, 2000
Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648Media [Statute] Air
Enf. Coordinator James NolanViolation Number
Rule Cites}
Violation Description
8
NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 25.lJ., 30 Tex. Admin. Code § 116,115(c), and Tex. Health &Safety Code § 382,085(b)
Failed to maintain a monthly record of individual and total hazardous air pollutant ("HAP")emissions in tons per year for the previous rolling 12 months, as documented during an
investigation conducted on February 22, 2010.
>> Environmental, Property and Human Health MatrixHarm
/
Release Major Moderate MinorOR
ActualPotential Percent
Base Penalty
0%
$10,0001
>>Progranumatic
!IxFalsification
j x 1%ILPercent
Major MinorModerate
MatrixNotes
The Respondent failed to comply with less than 30% of the record keeping requirements.
F)ciji s"!,-O-t ISi00]
$9,9001
Violation EvehtS
Number of Violation Events
I
25
Number of violation days
mark only onewith ara x
dailyweeklymonthlyquarterly
semiannualannual
single event
Violation Base Penalty
One single event is recommended, based on the one set of records not being kept.
Good Faith Efforts to Comply
25.0%1 Rgc^licf^o^
$251Before NOV NOV to EOPRPISelllement Offer
Extraordinary
OrdinaryN/A
Notes
x
I(mark with x)
The Respondent completed corrective actions by March 19,2010, and the NOE is dated April 21, 2010.
Violation Subtotal
Statutory Limit Test
Violation Final Penalty Total
This violation Final Assessed Penalty (adjusted for limits)
ECOnOOC Benefit (EB) fibr this violation
$7] $110Estimated EB Amount
Economic Benefit Worksheet
Respondent Unl-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Case ID No. 39730Reg. Ent. Reference No. RN100777648
Media Air
Violation NO. 5
Item Cost
Date Required
Final Date
Yrs
Item Description No commas ors
I l
1 1 1 0.00 $0 $0 $01
1 1
f I
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
I II 11 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0II
I I 1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
1 II 1 1 0.00 $0 nla: $0x, 2 000 I
22-Feb-2010 11
19-Mar-2010 I 0.07 $7 nla $71 It II I 0.00 $0 nla $0
I I II 1 0.00 $0 nla $07 1 II 1 0.00 $0 rlla $0
1 1 11 I 0.00 $0 nla $0
Estimated costs to establish and maintain a record keeping system to track HAP emissions. The Date RequiredIs the date of the Investigation, and the Final Date is the date the Respondent provided compliance
documentation.
ANNUALIZE i1] avoided costs before entering item {exceptfor one- ime
.e 'cos s
I
II
II
I ono $0 $o $o11I
II
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0
II
.
II
I o.oo $o $0 $o11
11
1 0.00 $0 $0 $0I^
II
I 0.00 $0 $0 $oII
11
I ono $0 $0 $0If
11
I o.oo $o $a $0
Approx. Cost of Compliance
$2,0001
TOTAL
$71
Percent Interest
Years ofDepreciation
5.9
5=
Interest Saved Onetime Costs E13 Amount
Delayed CostsEquipment
BuildingsOther (as needed)
Engineering/constructionLand
Record Keeping SystemTraining/Sampling
RemediatlonlDIsposalPermit Costs
Other (as needed)
Notes for DELAYED costs
Avoided CostsDisposal
PersonnelInspection/Reporting/Sampling
Supplies/equipmentFinancial Assurance [2]
ONE-TIME avoided costs [3]Other (as needed)
Notes for AVOIDED costs
Compliance History ReportCustomer/Respondent/Owner-Operator:
CN603642695
UNI-GRAPHICS PRINTING, LTD
Classification:
Rating:
Regulated Entity:
RN100777648
THE PRINTING BUREAU
Classification: POOR
Site Rating: 270.00
ID Number(s):
Location:
STORMWATER
PERMIT
TXR05ZO29AIR NEW SOURCE PERMITS
PERMIT
47553AIR NEW SOURCE PERMITS
ACCOUNT NUMBER
TA4116R
4545 CAMBRIDGE RD, FORT WORTH, TX, 76155
TCEQ Region:
REGION 04 - DFW METROPLEX
Date Compliance History Prepared:
May 12, 2010
Agency Decision Requiring Compliance History:
Enforcement
Compliance Period:
May 12, 2005 to May 12, 2010
TCEQ Staff Member to Contact for Additional Information Regarding this Compliance History
Name:
Terry Murphy
Phone:
(512) 239-5025
Site Compliance History Components
1. Has the site been In existence and/or operation for the full five year compliance period?
Yes
2. Has there been a (known) change in ownership/operator of the site during the compliance period?
Yes
3. If Yes, who is the current ownerloperator?
UM-Graphics Printing Ltd
4. if Yes, who was/were the prior owner(s}loperator(s) ?
The Imaging Bureau, Inc.
5. When did the change(s) in owner or operator occur?
Feb. 1, 2010
6.
Components (Multimedia) for the Site :
A.
Final Enforcement Orders, court judgements, and consent decrees of the state of Texas and the federal government.
Effective Date: 03/12/2009
ADMINORDER 2008-1024-AIR-E
Classification: Minor
Citation:
30 TAC Chapter 116, Subchapter B 116,115(c)5C THSC Chapter 382 382.085(b)
Rqmt Nov: Permit Condition #11 PERMITSpecial Condition #15 PERMIT
Special Condition #2 PERMITDescription: Failure to post required Information to physically identify all equipment that has a potential of emitting air poilutants.Operatinginstructions were not established and posted such that they are available for all thermal and catalytic oxidizer operators.
Classification: Moderate
Citation:
30 TAC Chapter 115, SubChapter E 115.442(1)(F)(ii)30 TAC Chapter 116, SubChapter B 116.115(c)
5C THSC Chapter 382 362.085(b)
Rqmt Prow Special Condition #26.A. PERMITSpecial Condition #5.B. PERMITSpecial Conditon #26.C. PERMIT
Description: Failure to use cleaning solutions with VOC content less that 70% and incorporate a proper towel handling program. Sponges, clothes,or towels that have been used for cleaning were not being stored In closed containers. Waste inks and solvents were not being stored in closedcontainers.
Classification: Moderate
Citation:
30 TAC Chapter 116, SubChapter B 116.115(c)5C THSC Chapter 382 382.085(b)
Rqmt Prov: Special Condition #9 PERMITDescription: Failure to cease operation of the heatset press and dryer if the thermal oxidizer is not operating properly.
Classification: Moderate
Citation:
30 TAC Chapter 115, SubChapter E 115.446(1)30 TAC Chapter 116, SubChapter B 116.115(c)
5C THSC Chapter 382 382.085(b)
Rqmt Prey: Special Condition #10 PERMITSpecial Condition #20 PERMIT
Description: Failed to equip the catalytic oxidizer with a continuous temperature recorder and calibrate the thermal oxidizer continuous temperature recorder
Classification: Moderate
Citation:
30 TAC Chapter 116, SubChapter B 116.115(c)5C THSC Chapter 382 362.065(b)
RgmtProv: Special Condition #12 PERMITSpecial Condition #13 PERMIT
Special Condition #18 PERMITSpecial Condition #22 PERMIT
Description: Failure to perform required inspections. Monthly visual Inspections of the thermal oxidizer were not being performed. The temperature of thethermal oxidizer was not being verified twice per eight hour shift. Audio, visual, and olfactory inspections of the catalytic oxidizer were not being performed.Monthly external Inspections of the catalytic oxidizer, including the burner system assembly and the fuel supply lines, were not being performed.
Classtfication: Minor
Citation: 30 TAC Chapter 115, SubChapter E 115.446(7)30 TAC Chapter 116, SubChapter l3 116.115(c)5C THSC Chapter 382 382.085(b)
Rqmt Prov: Special Condition #25.C PERMITSpecial Condition #25.D. PERMIT
Special Condition #25.1, PERMITDescription: Failure to maintain complete records. Thermal oxidizer efficiency data and calculations of rolling 12 month emissions totals for VOCs and HAP5were not found In the records
Classification: Moderate
Citation:
30 TAC Chapter 116, SubChapter B 116,115(c)5C THSC Chapter 382 382.085
Rqmt Prov: Special Condition #24(C)(1) PERMITDescription: Failure to submit proposed sampling methods lo the State within 30 days of reaching normal operating conditions of the printing press, dryer,and the catalytic oxidizer.
B. Any criminal convictions of the state of Texas and the federal government.
NIA
C. Chronic excessive emissions events.
NIA
D. The approval dates of Investigations. (CCEDS Inv. Track. No.)
NIA
E. Written notices of violations (NOV). (COEDS Inv. Track. No.)
NIA
F,
Environmental audits.
N/A
G. Type of environmental management systems (EMSs).
NIA
H. Voluntary on-site compliance assessment dates.
NIA
I. Participation in a voluntary pollution reduction program.
NIA
J. Early compliance.
NIA
Sites Outside of Texas
N/A
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
IN THE MATTER OF ANENFORCEMENT ACTIONCONCERNINGUNI-.GRAPHICS PRINTING, LTDDBA THE PRINTING BUREAURN100777648
BEFORE THE
TEXAS COMMISSION ON
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AGREED ORDERDOCKET NO. 2010-0824-AIR-E
I. JURISDICTION AND STIPULATIONS
At its agenda, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ("theCommission" or "TCEQ") considered this agreement of the parties, resolving an enforcement actionregarding Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau ("the Respondent") under the authority ofTEx. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ch. 382 and TEx. WATER CODE cli. 7. The Executive Director of theTCEQ, through the Enforcement Division, and the Respondent appear before the Commission andtogether stipulate that:
1.
The Respondent owns and operates a commercial printing plant at 4545 Cambridge Road in FortWorth, Tarrant County, Texas (the "Plant").
2.
The Plant consists of one or more sources as defined in TEx. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE
§ 382.003(12).
3.
The Commission and the Respondent agree that the Commission has jurisdiction to enter thisAgreed Order, and that the Respondent is subject to the Commission's jurisdiction.
4.
The Respondent received notice of the violations alleged in Section II ("Allegations") on or aboutApril 26, 2010.
5. The occurrence of any violation is in dispute and the entry of this Agreed Order shall notconstitute an admission by the Respondent of any violation alleged in Section II ("Allegations"),nor of any statute or rule.
Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauDOCKET NO. 2010-0824-AIR-EPage 2
An administrative penalty in the amount of Twenty-Two Thousand Two Hundred Forty-FiveDollars ($22,245) is assessed by the Commission in settlement of the violations alleged in SectionII ("Allegations"), The Respondent has paid Seventeen Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety-SixDollars ($17,796) of the administrative penalty and Four Thousand Four Hundred Forty-NineDollars ($4,449) is deferred contingent upon the Respondent's timely and satisfactory compliancewith all the terms of this Agreed Order. The deferred amount will be waived upon fullcompliance with the terms of this Agreed Order. If the Respondent fails to timely andsatisfactorily comply with all requirements of this Agreed Order, the Executive Director mayrequire the Respondent to pay all or part of the deferred penalty.
Any notice and procedures, which might otherwise be authorized or required in this action, arewaived in the interest of a more timely resolution of the matter.
8.
The Executive Director of the TCEQ and the Respondent have agreed on a settlement of thematters alleged in this enforcement action, subject to the approval of the Commission.
9.
The Executive Director recognizes that the Respondent has implemented the following correctivemeasures at the Plant:
a.
On March 3, 2010, hired an environmental consultant on an ongoing basis, in order toensure:
i. Timely sampling of the catalyst bed from the catalytic oxidizer and all of the add-on control systems are conducted;
ii. Timely submittal of proposed sampling methods for TCEQ approval;
iii. Pre-test meeting scheduling at least 45 days in advance of sampling; and
iv. Timely submittal of sampling reports.
b.
By March 19, 2010, established and began maintaining a record system to track hazardousair pollutant ("HAP") emissions; and
c.
On April 14, 2010, completed training designed to ensure that all waste inks, solvents, andcleanup rags/towels are properly handled and stored.
10. The Executive Director may, without further notice or hearing, refer this matter to the Office ofthe Attorney General of the State of Texas ("OAG") for further enforcement proceedings if theExecutive Director determines that the Respondent has not complied with one or more of theterms or conditions in this Agreed Order.
11.
This Agreed Order shall terminate five years from its effective date or upon compliance with allthe teens and conditions set forth in this Agreed Order, whichever is later.
12. The provisions of this Agreed Order are deemed severable and, if a court of competentjurisdiction or other appropriate authority deems any provision of this Agreed Orderunenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be valid and enforceable.
Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauDOCKET NO. 2010-0824-AIR-EPage 3
IL ALLEGATIONS
As owner and operator of the Plant, the Respondent is alleged to have:
1 Failed to ensure that all waste inks, solvents, and cleanup rags/towels were stored in closedcontainers, in violation of New Source Review ("NSR") Pennit No. 47553, Special Conditions("SC") 5.B., 26.A., and 26.C,, 30 TEx. ADMIN. CODE §§ 116.115(e) and I15.442(a)(l)(F)(ii), andTEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 382.085(b), as documented during an investigation conductedon February 22, 2010. Specifically, a container of waste solvent, a container of waste inks, and acontainer of cleanup rags were open to the air.
2. Failed to ensure that oxidizers were in proper operation at all times during the operation ofprinting presses, in violation of NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 3, 6, 9, 18, and 24.A., 30 TEX.
ADMIN. CODE § 116.115(c), and TEx. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 382.085(b), as documentedduring an investigation conducted on February 22, 2010. Specifically, emissions from the fullweb press, facility identification number ("FIN") Press 3, were required to be abated by thecatalytic oxidizer, but that oxidizer was shut down on December 17, 2008, and emissions fromPress 3, including visible emissions observed during the investigation, continued unabated untilFebruary 22, 2010, when Press 3 was shut down. In addition, emissions from the half web press,FIN Press 1, were required to be abated by the thermal oxidizer, but on September 23, 2008, thatoxidizer was shut off and emissions from Press I were improperly diverted to the catalyticoxidizer until December 17, 2008, when the catalytic oxidizer was shut down, and since then,emissions from Press 1 have gone unabated. Furthermore, the catalytic oxidizer, when tested onDecember 5, 2008, was found to have a destruction efficiency of 60.66%, while the requirementis 95%.
3. Failed to ensure that a representative core bed sample was removed from the catalytic oxidizerand submitted to a laboratory for catalyst activity testing by December 1 of each year, in violationof NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 23, 30 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 116.115(c), and TEx. HEALTH &
SAFETY CODE § 382.085(b), as documented during an investigation conducted on February 22,2010. Specifically, no samples were submitted to a laboratory for catalyst activity testing for theyear 2009.
4. Failed to conduct a timely stack test of the catalytic oxidizer, in violation of NSR Permit No.47553, SC 24, 30 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 116.115(c), and TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE §
382.085(b), as documented during an investigation conducted on February 22, 2010.Specifically, the catalytic oxidizer was installed in January 2008, and one-time, initial stack testwas due within 180 days of that installation (by July 29, 2008), but did not occur until December5, 2008.
5. Failed to timely submit proposed stack sampling methods, in violation of NSR Permit No. 47553,SC 24.C.1., 30 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 116.115(c), and TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE §
382.085(b), as documented during an investigation conducted on February 22, 2010. Specifically,the Respondent was required to submit proposed stack sampling methods for the catalyticoxidizer within 30 days after it reached normal operating conditions in May 2008, but thosemethods were not submitted until September 5, 2008.
6. Failed to schedule a pretest meeting with the TCEQ Regional Office at least 45 days in advanceof the catalytic oxidizer stack sampling, in violation of NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 24.C.2., 30
Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauDOCKET NO. 2010-0824-AIR-EPage 4
TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 116,115(c), and TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 382.085(b), asdocumented during an investigation conducted on February 22, 2010. Specifically, for theDecember 5, 2008 catalytic oxidizer stack sampling, the Respondent failed to schedule a pretestmeeting.
7. Failed to prepare and distribute the stack sampling report to the TCEQ within 30 days after thecompletion of sampling, in violation of NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 24.C.4., 30 TEX. ADMIN.
CODE § 116.115(c), and TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 382.085(b), as documented during aninvestigation conducted on February 22, 2010. The catalytic oxidizer stack sampling wasperformed on December 5, 2008, making the sampling report due by January 4, 2009, but thereport was not submitted until February 2, 2009,
8. Failed to maintain a monthly record of individual and total HAP emissions in tons per year for theprevious rolling 12 months, in violation of NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 25.D., 30 TEX. ADMIN.
CODE § 116.115(c), and TEx. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 382.085(b), as documented during aninvestigation conducted on February 22, 2010,
III. DENIALS
The Respondent generally denies each allegation in Section II ("Allegations").
IV. ORDERING PROVISIONS
1. It is, therefore, ordered by the TCEQ that the Respondent pay an administrative penalty as setforth in Section I, Paragraph 6 above. The payment of this administrative penalty and theRespondent's compliance with all the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreed Order resolveonly the allegations in Section II, The Commission shall not be constrained in any manner fromrequiring corrective action or penalties for violations which are not raised here.. Administrativepenalty payments shall be made payable to "TCEQ" and shall be sent with the notation "Re: Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau, Docket No. 2010-0824-AIR-E" to:
Financial Administration Division, Revenues SectionAttention: Cashier's Office, MC 214Texas Commission on Environmental QualityP.O. Box 13088Austin, Texas 78711-3088
2.
It is further ordered that the Respondent shall undertake the following technical requirements:
a.
Within 30 days after the effective date of this Agreed Order, either:
Complete repairs, replacements, and/or adjustments to the catalytic oxidizer (EPNEP-3) and/or the thermal oxidizer (EPN EP-1) designed to comply with therequirements of NSR Permit No. 47553, SC 3, 6, 9, 18, and 24.A.; orin the alternative
ii. Submit an administratively complete request to amend NSR Permit No. 47553, inorder to allow for alternative requirements related to one or both of the oxidizers'operations.
Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauDOCKET NO. 20 I 0-0824-AIR-EPage 5
b. In the event the Respondent elects to submit a request to amend NSR Permit No. 47553,respond completely and adequately, as determined by the TCEQ, to all requests forinformation concerning the amendment request within 30 days after the date of suchrequests, or by any other deadline specified in writing;
c. Within 45 days after the effective date of this Agreed Order, submit written certificationas described in Ordering Provision No. 2.e., and include detailed supportingdocumentation including photographs, receipts, and/or other records to demonstratecompliance with Ordering Provision No. 2.a.i. or
d. Within 180 days after the effective date of this Agreed Order, in the event the Respondentelects to submit a request to amend NSR Permit No, 47553, submit written certificationthat either authorization to construct and operate the Plant's catalytic oxidizerand/or thermal oxidizer has been obtained or that construction/operation has ceased untilsuch time that appropriate authorization is obtained; and
e. The certifications required by Ordering Provision Nos. 2.c. and 2.d. shall be notarized bya State of Texas Notary Public and include the following certification language:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were preparedunder my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure thatqualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on myinquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directlyresponsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of myknowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significantpenalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fines andimprisonment for knowing violations."
The certifications shall be submitted to:
Order Compliance TeamEnforcement Division, MC 149ATexas Commission on Environmental QualityP.O. Box 13087Austin, Texas 78711-3087
with a copy to:
Air Section, ManagerDallas/Fort Worth Regional OfficeTexas Commission on Environmental Quality2309 Gravel DriveFort Worth, Texas 76118-6951
3. The provisions of this Agreed Order shall apply to and be binding upon the Respondent. TheRespondent is ordered to give notice of the Agreed Order to personnel who maintain day-to-daycontrol over the Plant operations referenced in this Agreed Order.
4.
If the Respondent fails to comply with any of the Ordering Provisions in this Agreed Order withinthe prescribed schedules, and that failure is caused solely by an act of God, war, strike, riot, or
Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauDOCKET NO. 2010-0824-AIR-EPage 6
other catastrophe, the Respondent's failure to comply is not a violation of this Agreed Order, TheRespondent shall have the burden of establishing to the Executive Director's satisfaction that suchan event has occurred. The Respondent shall notify the Executive Director within seven daysafter the Respondent becomes aware of a delaying event and shall take all reasonable measures tomitigate and minimize any delay.
5. The Executive Director may grant an extension of any deadline in this Agreed Order or in anyplan, report, or other document submitted pursuant to this Agreed Order, upon a written andsubstantiated showing of good cause, All requests for extensions by the Respondent shall bemade in writing to the Executive Director. Extensions are not effective until the Respondentreceives written approval from the Executive Director. The determination of what constitutesgood cause rests solely with the Executive Director,
6,
This Agreed Order, issued by the Commission, shall not be admissible against the Respondent ina civil proceeding, unless the proceeding is brought by the OAG to: (1) enforce the terms of thisAgreed Order; or (2) pursue violations of a statute within the Commission's jurisdiction, or of arule adopted or an order or permit issued by the Commission under such a statute.
7. This Agreed Order may be executed in multiple counterparts, which together shall constitute asingle original instrument. Any executed signature page to this Agreed Order may be transmittedby facsimile transmission to the other parties, which shall constitute an original signature for allpurposes under this Agreed Order.
8. Under 30 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 70.10(b), the effective date is the date of hand-delivery of theOrder to the Respondent, or three days after the date on which the Commission mails notice of theOrder to the Respondent, whichever is earlier, The Chief Clerk shall provide a copy of thisAgreed Order to each of the parties.
Uni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing BureauDOCKET NO. 20 I0-0824-AIR-EPage 7
SIGNATURE PAGE
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
For the Commission
9)22)2DiO
I, the undersigned, have read and understand the attached Agreed Order. I am authorized to agree to theattached Agreed Order on behalf of the entity indicated below my signature, and I do agree to the termsand conditions specified therein. I further acknowledge that the TCEQ, in accepting payment for thepenalty amount, is materially relying on such representation.
I also understand that failure to comply with the Ordering Provisions, if any, in this order and/or failure totimely pay the penalty amount, may result in:• A negative impact on compliance history;• Greater scrutiny of any permit applications submitted;• Referral of this case to the Attorney General's Office for contempt, injunctive relief, additional
penalties, and/or attorney fees, or to a collection agency;• Increased penalties in any future enforcement actions;▪ Automatic referral to the Attorney General's Office of any future enforcement actions; and• TCEQ seeking other relief as authorized by law.In addition, any falsific '•^ f any compliance documents may result in criminal prosecution.
s/c8/001 oSignatu
Date
Sv,av,)n (EOName (Printed or typed)
TitleAuthorized Representative ofUni-Graphics Printing, Ltd dba The Printing Bureau
Instructions: Send the original, signed Agreed Order with penalty payment to the Financial Administration Division, RevenuesSection at the address in Section IV, Paragraph 1 of this Agreed Order.