F H LAWSON COMPANY

DOC 01 OF 01

JUDGMENT ORDER

05-84-C001

CAA

METAL

19840307

OHD088656046

LAWSON F H CO THE

CINCINNATI, OH

C-1-83-0717

05

JUDGMENT ORDER US V. F.H. Lawson Company Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

v.

F.H. Lawson Company,

Defendant.

Pursuant to Defendant's motion, and before the taking of any testimony, and without any admission or denial of the violation alleged in the Complaint filed on May 6, 1983, and the Court having been duly advised of the premises, enters the Order set forth below:

I

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of entering this Consent Decree pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1345 and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413. The Complaint of the United States states a claim upon which relief can be granted against Defendant.

II

The provisions of this Order shall apply to and be binding upon the parties of this action, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, successors, and assigns. ++EP++

Page 2 III

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant complete the following specified acts, on or before the dates set forth below, at each of Defendant's coating systems at its Cincinnati, Ohio facility, and achieve, demonstrate and maintain compliance with the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq. (hereinafter "the Act"), specifically Ohio Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-09(U). Defendant shall utilize coatings which have been reformulated to high-solid coatings with volatile organic compound contents as applied not to exceed 3.0 pounds per gallon of coating, excluding water, except for Lustre White coating, on all of its coatings systems in accordance with the following schedule:

Project Completion Date a. Complete conversion to high solids coatings Completed of white low heat, black b. Complete conversion to high solids coatings Completed of walnut grd., char. brown, G.F.P. gray, putty, and desert sage c. Complete conversion to high solids coatings Completed of olive drab d. Complete conversion of remaining coatings December 31, 1983 to high solids coatings e. Achieve and demonstrate compliance with Ohio December 31, 1983 Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-09(U)

Lustre White coating shall have a volatile organic compound content of 3.5 pounds per gallon of coating, or less, as applied. If Lawson startup paint baking oven #8, it shall only use coatings which comply with Ohio Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-09(U).

IV

F.H. Lawson (hereinafter "Lawson") shall demonstrate compliance with Ohio Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-09(U) pursuant to the methods and procedures specified Ohio Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-10. ++EP++

Page 3

The volatile organic compound content of the coatings shall be demonstrated pursuant to Ohio Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-10(B) for Class I coatings.

V

Defendant shall report to the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA") on October 15, 1983 and January 10, 1984 on its compliance status, including written certification of its compliance or noncompliance with requirements contained in Paragraph III. The October report shall include a list of each interim compliance requirement coming due in the preceding quarter and a statement that the requirement was accomplished, or a complete explanation of any delay, the Company's efforts to minimize any delay, and an estimate of the new completion date. The January submission shall include the determination of volatile organic compound content of surface coatings, as made pursuant to paragraph V herein, for each coating utilized at Lawson's Cincinnati facility. The report shall provide all computations performed in making the determination. The reports shall also include the following information for each test of a reformulated coating: identification of coating supplier, color of coating, number of gallons of coating used, type and number of articles sprayed, identification of coating system used, volatile organic compound content of the coating as applied in pounds volatile organic compound per gallon of coating as determined by the method provided in Ohio Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-10(B), date of test, number of trial runs, and whether the coating is acceptable for use on Lawson's coating systems. If the coating is not acceptable, include a description of the problems identified during testing and the reasons for nonacceptability. If Defendant resumes operation of paint baking oven#8, Lawson must notify U.S. EPA in writing of such occurrence twenty days prior to start up and certify in writing its compliance with Ohio Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-09(U). ++EP++

Page 4

Lawson shall retain all production and solvent data concerning its Cincinnati plant on file at the facility for a period of three years. All submission and notifications to U.S. EPA pursuant to this Order shall be made to the Chief, Air Compliance Branch, U.S. EPA, Region V, 230 South Dearborn, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

VI

Within two weeks of entry of this Order, Defendant shall pay a civil penalty in the amount of $1,000 to the United States. Payment shall be made by certified check payable to the "Treasurer, United States of America" and delivered to Administrative Officer, Office of Regional Counsel, Region V, U.S. EPA, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

VII

Failure by Defendant to meet the final compliance date for achieving compliance with Ohio Admin. Code Rule 3745-21-09(U) as specified in paragraph III(e) herein, shall result in the payment of money penalties in the amount of $750 per day for each day such, failure continues.

VIII

Failure by Defendant to meet interim requirements set out in paragraph III herein or reporting requirements set out in paragraph V herein, shall result in the payment of money penalties in the amount of $500 per day for each day such failure continues. Any penalty liability under this paragraph for failure to meet interim requirements shall be forgiven if Lawson meets the final compliance date contained in paragraph III(e) of this Order. ++EP++

Page 5 IX

Penalties payable under paragraph VII and paragraph VIII shall be paid by certified check to the Treasurer of the United States and delivered to Administrative Officer, Office of Regional Counsel, Region V, U.S. EPA, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

X

If any event occurs which causes or may cause a delay in the achievement or demonstration of compliance with any requirement of this Decree, Defendant shall notify U.S. EPA in writing within twenty (20) days of the event, describing in detail the anticipated length of the delay, the precise cause or causes of delay, the measures taken and to be taken by Defendant to prevent or minimize the delay and the timetable by which those measures will be implemented. Defendant will adopt all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such delay.

If the parties agree that the delay or the anticipate delay has been or will be caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of Defendant, the parties may stipulate to an extension of the particular compliance requirement affected, by a period not exceeding the delay actually caused by such circumstances. In such event, the parties may apply to this Court for an appropriate modification of this Order. In the event the parties cannot agree, any party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. The burden of proving that any delay was caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of the Defendant shall rest with Defendant. Failure by Defendant to comply with the notice requirements of this paragraph shall render this paragraph void and of no force and effect as to the particular incident involved and constitute a waiver of the Defendant's right to request an extension of its obligations under this Order based on such incident. ++EP++

Page 6

An extension of one compliance date based on a particular incident does not mean that Defendant qualifies for an extension of a subsequent compliance date or dates. Defendant must make an individual showing of proof regarding each incremental step or other requirement for which an extension is sought.

XI

This Order in no way affects Lawson's responsibility to comply with any other State, Federal or local laws or requirements or any superseding or promulgated regulations approved or promulgated by U.S. EPA as part of the Ohio State Implementation Plan.

This Order in no way affects the ability of the U.S. EPA to bring an action pursuant to Section 303 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7603.

Defendant acknowledges that it has been notified that it may be subject to penalties under Section 120 of the Act, but reserves the right to contest the assessment or collection of noncompliance penalties under Section 120.

The provisions of paragraphs VII and VIII shall not be construed to limit any other remedies available to Plaintiff for violation of this Order or other provisions of law.

XII

U.S. EPA and/or its authorized representative including contractor shall have the right of entry into and upon the Defendant's plants and facilities which are the subject of this Order for the purpose of carrying out any inspections and conducting any tests which the U.S. EPA believes are necessary to ensure that the purposes of this Order are effectuated. ++EP++

Page 7 XIII

This Order shall be in settlement of this civil enforcement action brought by the United States pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 7413. This Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of construing and enforcing the rights and obligations of the parties under this Order. This Order shall terminate six months after compliance with its terms and provisions has been demonstrated, provided that Defendant maintains compliance continuously during that time.

ENTERED:

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

United States District Judge ++EP++

CLARK OIL & REFINING

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-79-C011

CAA

PETRO

19791217

19791217

IND042361139

CLARK OIL & REFINING CO CLERMO

CLERMONT, IN

IP79-314

05

CONSENT DECREE USA V. CLARK OIL & REFINING CORPORATION

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CLARK OIL & REFINING CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Pursuant to the joint motion of the United States of America and the Clark Oil and Refining Corporation (hereafter "Clark"), and before the taking of any testimony, and without any admission or denial of the violations alleged in the Complaint, the Court hereby issues these agreed Findings of Fact and Consent Decree in settlement of the above matter.

1.

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 42 U.S.C. 7413 for the purpose of entering this Consent Decree. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted against Defendant Clark.

II

The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply and be binding upon the United States of America and Clark, its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and any successors in interest until completion of the program set forth in Part IV herein; in addition, the provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to all persons, firms, and corporations having notice of the Consent Decree and who are or who will be acting in concert and privity with the United States of America and the Company or its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and any successors in interest prior to transfer of ownership, and shall simultaneously verify to the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA"), Region V, Enforcement Division, and the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana, that such notice has been given. ++EP++

Page 2 III. AGREED FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Clark Oil is a Wisconsin corporation qualified to do business in the State of Indiana and is currently doing business at its facility in Clermont, Indiana ("the Clermont facility") within the Southern District of Indiana.

2. Clark is and for several years has been operating in its exclusive control a gasoline loading rack at its Clermont facility. The gasoline loading rack has been and is discharging volatile organic materials ("VOM") into the ambient air.

3. The Clermont facility handles forty-thousand or more gallons per day of VOM and is a major stationary source subject to the provisions of the State Implementation Plan ("SIP") for the State of Indiana, 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart P.

4. On April 12, 1978, James O. McDonald, Director of Enforcement, U.S. EPA, Region V, pursuant to authority delegated to him under Section 113(a) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7413(a), notified Clark that the gasoline loading rack at its Clermont facility was operating in violation of U.S. EPA approved Indiana Air Pollution Control Regulation APC-15 ("Indiana APC-15"). A copy of the Notice of Violation was simultaneously sent to the State of Indiana. ++EP++

Page 3

5. In the Notice of Violation, U.S. EPA found Clark in violation of U.S. EPA approved Indiana APC-15, in that the regulation requires for gasoline loading racks a vapor collection and disposal system properly installed, in good working order, and in operation, and the Clermont facility's gasoline loading rack does not have such a system.

6. In satisfaction of Section 113(a)(4) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7413(a)(4), an opportunity to confer with the Administrator's delegate was extended to Clark in the Notice of Violation.

7. It has been determined by U.S. EPA that violations of U.S. EPA approved Indiana APC-15 have continued beyond the 30th day after the date of notification by the Director, Enforcement Division.

8. On April 3, 1979, at the request of U.S. EPA, the United States of America filed a civil complaint against Clark pursuant to Section 113 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7413, for equitable relief and civil penalties. The complaint alleged that the Clermont facility's gasoline loading rack was operating in violation of U.S. EPA approve Indiana APC-15.

9. On May 29, 1979, Clark filed an answer to the complaint denying that the Clermont facility's gasoline loading rack was operating in violation of U.S. EPA approved Indiana APC-15.

10. Subsequent to the filing of the complaint, Clark initiated settlement negotiations. Clark stated an intention to install a vapor recovery and disposal system at its Clermont facility for the purpose of expeditiously resolving the pending litigation.

IV.

After a thorough investigation of all relevant facts, it is determined that the schedule for compliance set forth in this Consent Decree is as expeditious as practicable, and in consideration of the foregoing and the representations made in open Court by the parties hereto, IT IS HEREBY DECREED:

1. Clark shall achieve compliance with the State of Indiana Implementation Plan Air Pollution Control Regulation APC-15 as approved by the U.S. EPA on May 14, 1973, which requires the installation of a vapor collection and disposal unit on the gasoline loading rack at the Clermont, Indiana facility. ++EP++

Page 4

Such installation shall be in accordance with the following schedule:

a. May 31, 1979 - Place equipment orders for process equipment b. March 1, 1980 - Equipment received; start construction and installation c. May 1, 1980 - Complete construction; start operation d. May 31, 1980 - Complete manufacturer's performance tests, submit results, achieve and demonstrate compliance.

2. Clark shall adopt and implement operations and maintenance procedures to maximize the control efficiency of the vapor collection and recovery systems and submit a copy of such procedures to the U.S. EPA by May 31, 1980. Such procedures shall be considered a part of this Consent Decree and shall be enforceable as such.

3. Clark shall continue to use submerged loading as the best practicable interim system of emission reduction at its Clermont facility's gasoline loading rack so as to minimize hydrocarbon emissions, avoid any imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons, and minimize product spillage.

4. Clark shall comply with the following emission monitoring and record keeping and reporting requirements on or before the dates specified below.

a. Emission Monitoring

(1). Clark shall, on or before January 1, 1980, maintain a record of the quantity of volatile organic materials processed through the above mentioned Clermont facility.

b. Record Keeping and Reporting Requirements

(1). Clark shall, immediately upon achieving compliance with the equipment installation schedule set forth in paragraph 1 above, maintain a record of any malfunctions of the vapor recovery and disposal systems (including the reasons for such malfunctions) and the down time of the vapor recovery and disposal systems, whether caused by malfunction or other causes.

(2). No later than fifteen (15) days after any date for achievement of an incremental step of the compliance schedule specified in paragraph 1 of this Consent Decree, Clark shall notify EPA and the United States of America in writing of its compliance or non-compliance with the requirement. ++EP++

Page 5

If Clark fails to complete any of the actions required by the dates specified in the Consent Decree, it shall include a detailed explanation of such failure in the notification required by this subparagraph 4.b.(2).

(3). Clark shall, beginning with the calendar quarter January-March, 1980, report on a quarterly basis the information required to be maintained under paragraph 4.a of this Consent Decree. This requirement shall terminate with the submittal for the calendar quarter April-June, 1981.

(4). All submittals, notifications and reports to U.S. EPA pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be made to Mr. Eric Cohen, Chief, Air Compliance Section, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

5. This Consent Decree in no way affects Clark's responsibility to comply with any other State, Federal or local regulations or any Order of this Court including but not limited to Section 303 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7603.

6. This Consent Decree shall be in settlement of the civil enforcement action brought by the United States of America pursuant to Section 113 of the Act for violation of U.S. EPA approved Indiana APC-15. No other enforcement action will be initiated against Clark's Clermont facility for violations of U.S. EPA approved Indiana APC-15 so long as the Clermont facility is in compliance with each and every requirement of this Consent Decree. U.S. EPA shall enforce the requirements of this Consent Decree by applying to this Court for relief.

7. Upon final entry of this Consent Decree, in consideration of settlement of this action Clark agrees to pay to the United States of America the amount of $ 9,000.00. Payment shall be by certified check payable to the "Treasurer, United States of America", and delivered to Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Chicago, Illinois.

8. It is hereby stipulated and agreed between the parties that failure by Clark's Clermont facility to achieve final compliance with U.S. EPA approved Indiana APC-15, as set forth by the terms of this Consent Decree, shall result in the payment of money penalties for civil contempt in the amount of $ 2,000.00 per day for each day that such failure continues. Clark is hereby notified that agreement concerning such penalties shall not be considered the exclusive remedy for violation of this Consent Decree and shall not be considered a waiver of U.S. EPA's right to seek non-compliance penalties pursuant to Section 120 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7420, arising out of Clark's failure to achieve final compliance with U.S. EPA approved Indiana APC-15 at its Clermont facility. ++EP++

Page 6

9. Clark's obligation to meet any requirement set out in this Consent Decree, including achievement of compliance with any specific emission standard or regulations, shall be excused to the extent caused by Act of God or the public enemy, unforeseen strikes, unforeseen work stoppages, fire, explosion, flood, tornado, earthquake, lightening, riot, sabotage, war, and other similar circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Clark including delay caused by the failure of any governmental agency to issue permits or licenses required pursuant to the program set forth herein. Should any of the foregoing events occur, the parties agree to meet and negotiate a reasonable extension of time for achieving the requirements of this Decree. Should the parties fail to agree upon such extension, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution.

Wherefore, this Consent Decree is hereby issued with agreement and concurrence of the parties hereto.

It is so Ordered. ++EP++

Page 7

The reasonable control of Clark including delay caused by the failure of any governmental agency to issue permits or licenses required pursuant to the program set forth herein. Should any of the foregoing events occur, the parties agree to meet and negotiate a reasonable extension of time for achieving the requirements of this Decree. Should the parties fail to agree upon such extension, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution.

WHEREFORE, this Consent Decree is hereby issued with agreement and concurrence of the parties hereto.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FOR DEFENDANT

Clark Oil Refining Corporation

/s/ Paul J. Sheedy

PAUL J. SHEEDY,

Senior Vice President, Operations

FOR PLAINTIFF

United States of America

/s/ Virginia Dill McCarty

VIRGINIA DILL McCARTY

United States Attorney ++EP++

Page 7

FOR DEFENDANT

Clark Oil & Refining Corporation

Paul J. Sheedy,

Senior Vice President, Operations

FOR PLAINTIFF

United States of America

James W. Moorman

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Div

United States Department of Justice

Virginia Dill McCarty

United States Attorney ++EP++

^Z

J&D ENTERPRISES, INC

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

CAA

1992

STEAM GENERATING PLANT

JAMESTOWN, ND

3-92-143

08

CONSENT DECREE, U.S.A. V. J&D ENTERPRISES, INC

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA

UNITED STATES of AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v

J&D ENTERPRISES, INC.,

Defendant.

I. BACKGROUND

WHEREAS, Plaintiff, the United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), filed a Complaint concurrently herewith, alleging that J&D Enterprises, Incorporated, (the "Defendant") violated certain regulations promulgated under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act prior to the CAA Amendments of 1990 ("the Act"), 42 U.S.C. Section 7412; and

WHEREAS, the Administrator of EPA has listed asbestos as a hazardous air pollutant under the authority of Section 112(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7412(b), and has promulgated a National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants governing the emission, handling, and disposal of asbestos during renovation or demolition activities, ("Asbestos NESHAP"), which is codified at 40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subpart M Sub-Section 61.140-61.154); and

WHEREAS, the Complaint alleges that the City of Jamestown owned an unused steam generating plant ("the Facility")located at the corner of First Avenue East and Third Avenue South in the City of Jamestown, North Dakota, which contained a "Stationary Source" within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. Sub-Section 7411(a)(5), 7412(a)(3); 40 C.F.R. Section 61.02; and ++EP++

Page 2

WHEREAS, the Complaint alleges that from on or about April 1, 1989 through May 1, 1989, inclusive, J&D Enterprises, Inc., as an Operator, conducted demolition activities (within the meanings of "Owner," "Operator," and "Demolition" as those terms are defined in 40 C.F.R. Section 61.141) at the Facility, including the removal, stripping, and disposal of Asbestos Containing Material from steam generating equipment; and

WHEREAS, the Complaint alleges that the Defendants failed to comply with the work practices for removal of Asbestos Containing Material (or "ACM") by properly wetting and containing the material during removal, collection, and disposal, as required by 40 C.F.R. Section 61.147;

WHEREAS, J & D Enterprises denies the allegations made against it by the United States in the Complaint; and

WHEREAS, this Consent Decree resolves all claims brought by the United States against J&D Enterprises, Inc., (or "J&D") in this action or which could have been brought pursuant to the asbestos NESHAP regulations, 40 C.F.R. Sub-Section 61.146 and 61.152(b), arising out of the demolition operation which is the subject of the Complaint; and

WHEREAS, in consideration of, and in exchange for, the promises and mutual undertakings and covenants herein, and intending to be bound hereby, the United States and J&D Enterprises, Inc., each stipulate and agree to the making and entry of this Consent Decree prior to the taking of any testimony, and based solely upon the pleadings; and ++EP++

Page 3

WHEREAS, the undersigned representatives of J&D Enterprises, Inc., and its representatives certify that they are fully authorized to enter into the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree, and to execute and legally bind J&D; and

WHEREAS, the undersigned representatives of the United States certify that they are collectively fully authorized to enter into the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree and to execute and legally bind the United States; and

WHEREAS, this Consent Decree is not intended to be nor shall it be construed as an admission of liability on the part of J & D; and

WHEREAS, the United States and J&D Enterprises, Inc., agree, and the Court, by entering this Consent Decree, finds, that entry of this Consent Decree is fair, reasonable, in the public interest, and will avoid prolonged and complicated litigation between the parties hereto;

NOW, THEREFORE, without trial or other adjudication, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that:

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the parties to this action under Section 113(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b), and 28 U.S.C. Sub-Section 1331, 1345 and 1355. J&D Enterprises, Inc., shall not challenge the terms of this Consent Decree or this Court's jurisdiction to enter, modify or enforce this Consent Decree. ++EP++

Page 4

Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. Section 1391(b) and (c). Notice of this action has been given to the State of North Dakota as required by Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b). The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted.

III. PARTIES

The parties to this Consent Decree are the United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and J&D Enterprises, Inc., an asbestos removal contractor located in Duluth, Minnesota, and doing business in the State of North Dakota.

IV. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

The purpose of this Consent Decree is: (1) to resolve the United States' claims against J&D Enterprises, Inc., for violation of regulations promulgated under Section 112 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section7412, on April 19 and 20, 1989, as stated in the Complaint, which claims are denied by J & D and (2) to protect public health and the environment.

V. DEFINITIONS

Terms used in this Consent Decree that are defined in Section 112(a) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7412(a), or in 40 C.F.R. Section 61.02, or 40 C.F.R. Section 61.141, shall have the meanings set forth in those definitions. ++EP++

Page 5 VI. BINDING EFFECT

A. The terms of this Consent Decree apply to and are binding upon: (1) J&D Enterprises, Inc., and its successors and assigns; and (2) J&D's directors, officers, employees, and agents, when acting within the scope of their duties on behalf of J&D Enterprises, Inc., or its successors or assigns.

B. If, within the duration of this Consent Decree, J&D Enterprises, Inc., sells, assigns, or otherwise transfers its asbestos demolition and/or renovation activities or operations, it shall notify the purchaser, assignee or other transferee, in writing, of the existence of this Consent Decree, and of its binding effect upon said purchaser, assignee or other transferee. The existence of this Consent Decree and its binding effect shall be noted in any agreement between J&D and the party(ies) to whom any ownership or management interest is being assigned, sold or transferred. It shall be a condition of any such sale, assignment or transfer that the purchaser, assignee, or transferee execute a document agreeing to be bound by the provisions of this Consent Decree and to submit to the jurisdiction of this Court for purposes of enforcement of this Consent Decree. Notice of any sale, assignment or transfer shall be provided to the Director, Air, Radiation, and Toxics Division, EPA Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado, 80202-2405, no later than thirty (30) days after any such sale, assignment, or transfer. ++EP++

Page 6

C. This Consent Decree shall also be binding upon the United States and its officers, employees, agents, contractors, and representatives who act within the scope of their duties for or on behalf of the United States.

VII. COMPLIANCE

J&D Enterprises, Inc. shall hereafter comply with all requirements of the Asbestos NESHAP, 40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subpart M, including all amendments thereto.

VIII. REQUIRED ASBESTOS TRAINING

A. No person subject to this Consent Decree shall engage in the demolition or renovation of any facility, or inspect such a facility for the presence of ACM, unless he or she has successfully completed a course of asbestos training, as hereinafter specified.

B. All persons whose duties include inspection of facilities for the presence of ACM shall successfully complete, or have already completed, an "Inspector" training course, meeting or exceeding the requirements set forth in 40 C.F.R. Part 763, Subpart E, Appendix C, or an equivalent course approved by EPA. Persons subject to this Section who have not successfully completed an EPA-approved course by the date of entry of this Consent Decree, shall, within 90 days of entry of this Consent Decree, be enrolled in such a course offered within the EPA region where the person is employed or, at his or her election, an earlier course offered in any other EPA region. Persons who become subject to these requirements after the date of entry of this Consent Decree, either by hiring or assignment of new work responsibilities, shall not engage in work involving ACM until they have successfully completed the required course of study. ++EP++

Page 7

C. Persons who perform day-to-day supervision of asbestos removal work shall successfully complete, or have already completed, an EPA-approved "Contractor/Supervisor" training course meeting or exceeding the requirements set forth in 40 C.F.R. Part 763, Subpart E, Appendix C, or an equivalent EPA-approved course. All such persons who have not successfully completed this course of study by the date of entry of this Consent Decree shall, within 90 days of entry of this Consent Decree, be enrolled in the next EPA-approved "Contractor/Supervisor" course of study, or EPA-approved course, offered within the EPA Region where the person is employed or, at the person's election, an earlier course of study offered in any other EPA region. Persons who become subject to these requirements after the date of entry of this Consent Decree, either by hiring or assignment of new work responsibilities subsequent to that date, shall not engage in work involving ACM until they have successfully completed the required course of study.

D. All persons who will engage in asbestos removal, handling, transportation and/or disposal activities, shall successfully complete, or have already completed, an EPA-approved "Abatement Worker" training course meeting or exceeding the requirements set forth in 40 C.F.R. Part 763, Subpart E, Appendix C, or an EPA-approved equivalent. ++EP++

Page 8

Persons subject to the requirements of this paragraph, who have not successfully completed this course of study by the entry of this Consent Decree, shall within 90 days of entry of this Consent Decree be enrolled in the next EPA-approved "Abatement Worker" course of study, or an EPA-approved equivalent offered within the EPA region where the person is employed or, at his or her election, an earlier course of study offered in any other EPA region. Persons who become subject to these requirements after the date of entry of this Consent Decree, either by hiring or assignment of new work responsibilities subsequent to that date, shall not engage in work involving ACM until they have successfully completed the required course of study.

E. Appropriate tests shall be administered at the conclusion of the courses identified in Sections IX(B), (C), and (D). Such tests shall be administered by the organization conducting the course, and shall be in writing to those persons who read English. The tests shall be administered orally, in the native language of the employee, to those persons not fluent in English. The passing grades for such tests, whether written or oral, shall be those established in 40 C.F.R. 763, Appendix C to Subpart E--EPA Model Contractor Accreditation Plan, (I)(2), Examinations. No person will be deemed to have "successfully completed" his training, as that term is used in this Consent Decree, until he has passed the test associated with the relevant course of study or training program. ++EP++

Page 9

F. J&D Enterprises, Inc., shall maintain the training records of its employees for the duration of this Consent Decree and make such records available to EPA within 48 hours of receiving a request from EPA for access to such records.

G. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as relieving J&D Enterprises, Inc., from any more stringent training obligations imposed or to be imposed by any federal, state or local law or regulation, including but not limited to EPA's regulations promulgated under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 2601, et seq., and its amendments.

IX. FACILITY ACCESS

A. For the duration of this Consent Decree, J&D Enterprises, Inc., shall not withhold consent from EPA and/or state or local air pollution control agencies, and/or their authorized contractors, consultants, agents, or representatives, to enter upon, through, or about the site of any facility demolition or renovation operation over which J&D has an ownership interest or control, at reasonable times, and without notice, to inspect, to take samples and photographs, to speak with workers, agents, or employees of J&D or its contractors, and to copy any records necessary to determine J&D's compliance with the requirements of the Asbestos NESHAP and the provisions of this Consent Decree.

B. The provisions of Section IX(A) are in addition to, and not a limitation upon, any rights of physical access, or access to information, afforded by any statute, regulation, or other law. ++EP++

Page 10 X. PENALTIES

A. J&D Enterprises, Inc., shall pay a civil penalty of five thousand and five hundred dollars ($5,500). This civil penalty shall be paid within thirty days of the date of entry of this Consent Decree by a cashier's check or certified check made payable to the "United States of America" which shall reference this Decree and be forwarded to:

United States Attorney's Office

District of North Dakota

Civil Division

Post Office 2505

Fargo, North Dakota 58108-2505

Notification of this payment and a photocopy of the cashier's check or certified check shall be sent to:

Regional Counsel

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region VIII

999 18th Street, Suite 500

Denver, Colorado 80202-2405,

and

Chief

Environmental Enforcement Section

U.S. Department of Justice

Post Office Box 7611

Ben Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044

J&D shall pay interest on any portion of the civil penalty amount not paid within the time specified, with such interest to be calculated in accordance with 28 U.S.C. Section 1961.

B. The payment specified in paragraph A, above, shall be in full satisfaction of the United States' claims for civil penalties against J&D Enterprises, Inc., for the violations set forth in the Complaint. ++EP++

Page 11

C. Penalty payments made under this Consent Decree are not tax

deductible.

XI. STIPULATED PENALTIES

A. In the event J&D Enterprises, Inc., fails to comply with any provision of this Consent Decree, J&D shall pay one thousand dollars ($1000) for each day that each such violation occurs or continues. EPA shall send J&D a written demand for stipulated penalties, setting forth the basis for EPA's demand for Stipulated Penalties. J&D shall either pay Stipulated Penalties within fifteen (15) business days of its receipt of a written demand by EPA for such penalties, or shall initiate the dispute resolution procedures set forth in paragraph (B) below. After fifteen business (15) days from receipt of a written demand for payment, J&D shall also pay interest on any unpaid stipulated penalties, with such interest accruing at the rate established by 28 U.S.C. Section 1961.

B. If J&D Enterprises, Inc. believes it is not liable for the demanded Stipulated Penalties, it may make a written request to EPA that EPA reconsider its imposition of Stipulated Penalties. Such request must be made within fifteen (15) business days of EPA's written demand for Stipulated Penalties, and must set forth the reasons J&D believes it is not liable for Stipulated Penalties. The request for reconsideration shall be sent to the Director, Air, Radiation and Toxics Division, EPA Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado, 80202-2405, with copies to the United States Department of Justice and the Regional Counsel, EPA Region VIII at the address set forth above. ++EP++

Page 12

After EPA has received the request for reconsideration, the parties shall have a period of 30 days in which to resolve their disagreements as to J&D's liability for stipulated penalties. After 30 days have passed, if the disagreements have not been resolved, either party may petition the Court for appropriate relief. Except as provided in Section 113(e)(2) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(e)(2), EPA shall have the burden of proving violations of this Consent Decree. Payment of Stipulated Penalties shall be stayed pending review by EPA and the Court, but interest on such Stipulated Penalties shall continue to accrue at the rate set forth in 28 U.S.C. Section 1961.

C. Stipulated penalties shall be paid by a cashiers check or certified check made payable to the United States of America, which references this Decree and shall be forwarded to:

United States Attorney's Office

District of North Dakota

Civil Division

Post Office 2505

Fargo, North Dakota 58108-2505

Notification of this payment, and a photocopy of the check, shall at the same time be sent to:

(1) Director

Air, Radiation, and Toxics Division

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region VIII

999 18th Street, Suite 500

Denver, Colorado 80202-2405 and

(2) Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section ++EP++

Page 13

Environment and Natural Resources Division

U.S. Department of Justice

P.O. Box 7611

Ben Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044

D. EPA may, in its unreviewable discretion, forego the imposition of stipulated penalties for violations of the provisions of this Decree.

XII. GENERAL PROVISIONS

A. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to limit the application of any provision of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7401, et seq., or to relieve J&D Enterprises, Inc., of its obligations under the Asbestos NESHAP set forth in 40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subpart M. Plaintiff reserves the right to seek such additional relief for violations of this Consent Decree and/or applicable law as is available in law or equity.

B. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for the duration of this Consent Decree, for the purposes of issuing such further orders or directions as may be necessary or appropriate to construe, implement, modify at the written request of the parties, enforce, terminate, or reinstate the terms of this Consent Decree, or to provide any additional relief as justice may require.

C. Any modification of this Consent Decree shall be in writing and approved by the Court. EPA reserves the right to seek modification of this Consent Decree to conform with any Asbestos NESHAP requirements made applicable by reason of any revision to the Clean Air Act and/or its implementing regulations. ++EP++

Page 14

D. This Consent Decree is neither a permit nor a modification of any existing permit, and in no way relieves J&D Enterprises, Inc., of its obligation to comply with all applicable federal, state or local laws or regulations.

E. Nothing herein shall limit the authority of the United States to undertake any action against any person, including J&D Enterprises, Inc., in response to conditions that may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health, welfare, or the environment. The United States reserves any and all legal and equitable remedies available to enforce the provisions of this Consent Decree, and of the Clean Air Act and its implementing regulations.

F. Nothing herein shall be construed to be a release of J&D Enterprises, Inc., by the United States of liability for any criminal violations or violations of any law or regulation other than the civil violations of the Clean Air Act and the Asbestos NESHAP set forth in the Complaint in this matter.

G. This Consent Decree is not intended to create or affect any rights or interests of individuals or entities not parties to this Consent Decree. ++EP++

Page 15 XIII. SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS AND TERMINATION

Entry of this Consent Decree and compliance with the requirements contained herein shall constitute full settlement of the United States' claims against J&D Enterprises, Inc., for violations of the Asbestos NESHAP, as they are alleged in the Complaint. This Consent Decree shall terminate by Order of the Court, upon motion of either party, which may be filed after J&D has been in full compliance with the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree for a period of not less than two years.

XIV. COSTS

Each party to this Consent Decree shall bear its own costs, including attorney's fees, for this action.

XV. PUBLIC NOTICE

The parties agree that final approval and entry of this Consent Decree is subject to the public notice requirements of 28 C.F.R. Section 50.7. The United States reserves the right to modify this Consent Decree or to withdraw its consent if public comments reveal that the settlement this Consent Decree embodies is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

XVI. EFFECTIVE DATE

This Consent Decree is effective upon the date of its entry by the Court. ++EP++

Page 16

JUDGMENT IS THEREFORE ENTERED pursuant to all of the terms and conditions recited above, this day of ,1992.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The parties hereby consent to the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree set forth above and consent to entry thereof.

FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

/s/ John C. Cruden

John C. Cruden

Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section

Environment and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

Date 8-12-92

Julie B. Kaplan

Trial Attorney

Environmental Enforcement Section

Environment and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

Date

Stephen D. Easton

United States Attorney

Eastern District of North Dakota

Civil Division, Post Office Box 2505

Fargo, North Dakota 58108-2505

Date ++EP++

Page 17

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

for Herbert H. Tate, Jr.

Assistant Administrator

Office of Enforcement

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Date 7/26/92

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

for Thomas A. Speicher

Regional Counsel

United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Region VIII

999 18th Street, Suite 500

Denver, Colorado 80202-2405

Date 6/5/92

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Steven B. Moores

Assistant Regional Counsel

United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Region VIII

999 18th Street, Suite 500

Denver, Colorado 80202-2405

Date 6/5/92

FOR DEFENDANT J&D ENTERPRISES, INC.:

By SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Date May 1992

Approved as to Form by:

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Gregory P. Spalj

Fabyanske, Svoboda, Westra, Davis & Hart

1210 Minnesota World Trade Center

Thirty East Seventh Street

Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101

Date 5/29/92 ++EP++

ARMCO INC

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-81-C010

CAA

STEEL

19810220

19810220

OHD980618169

ARMCO STEEL CORP-MIDDLETOWN

MIDDLETOWN, OH

C-1-79-146

05

CONSENT DECREE, U.S.A. AND EPA, ET AL V. ARMCO INC.,

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

ARMCO INC.

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY, et al.

Defendants, and

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Intervenor-Defendant.

Plaintiff, Armco Inc., filed the Complaint herein against defendants, United States Environmental Protection Agency (hereafter "U.S. EPA"), Douglas M. Costle, Administrator, U.S. EPA, John McGuire, Regional Administrator, Region V, U.S. EPA and Sandra S. Gardebring (substituted for James O. McDonald), Director, Enforcement Division, Region V, U.S. EPA, on March 7, 1979. Intervenor-Defendant, United States of America (hereafter "United States"), filed on behalf of the Defendants the Counterclaim herein on October 31, 1980.

Plaintiff, Armco Inc. (hereafter "Armco") is an Ohio corporation which owns and operates an integrated iron and steel mill in Middletown, Ohio, in the Southern District of Ohio, known as the Middletown Works.

NOW, THEREFORE, without trial of any issue of fact or law and upon the consent of the parties, by their attorneys and authorized officials, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

I.

That this Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of entering this Decree.

II.

That the provisions of this Decree apply to and be binding upon the parties to this action, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees and successors. ++EP++

Page 2 III. COKE PLANT NO. 2

That Armco shall comply with AP-3-07 and AP-3-12, as approved by U.S. EPA on April 15, 1974, and the provisions herein at the Middletown Works, No. 2, Wilputte Coke Plant (hereinafter referred to as "Coke Plant No. 2") according to the schedules set forth below.

A. Charging Emissions

1. Charging emissions are defined as any emissions occurring during the introduction of coal into the coke oven from the time that the gate(s) on a larry car coal hopper is (are) opened or mechanical feeders start the flow of coal into the oven until the last charging port seal (cover) is replaced. These emissions include any air contaminant emitted from one or more charging ports, spaces between charging port rings and oven refractory, drop sleeves, larry car hoppers, or any devices for the capture and cleaning of air contaminants during charging but not including any air contaminants emitted during the temporary removal of a charging port cover, for the purpose of sweeping excess coal spillage into the oven just charged, after all covers have been firmly seated over the charging ports following the removal of the larry car.

2. Armco shall operate and maintain the charging system known as "stage charging" by December 15, 1980; and achieve and demonstrate compliance at Coke Plant No. 2 with the emission limitations in Paragraphs III A(3) and (4) by the dates stated therein, according to the testing procedures in Appendix A.

3. On and after July 1, 1982, charging emissions at Coke Plant No. 2 shall not exceed 170 seconds during any 5 consecutive charges.

4. On and after December 29, 1982, charging emissions at Coke Plant No. 2 shall not exceed 125 seconds during any 5 consecutive charges, except that a person designated by Armco may, on the day of the observation, choose to exclude any one charge out of a group of twenty-one (21) consecutive charges, provided that the U.S. EPA observer is informed of the decision to exclude the charge. ++EP++

Page 3

The exception of one charge out of twenty-one (21) consecutive charges shall be applied in accordance with the procedures in Appendix A.

B. Doors

1. Door area is defined as the vertical face of a coke oven between the bench and the top of the battery and between two adjacent buckstays, including, but not limited to, the door, chuck door, door seal, and jamb.

2. On or after December 15, 1982, there shall be no visible emissions from more than 10% of the doors on operating coke ovens of Coke Plant No. 2, excluding two doors, representing the last oven charged. Armco shall demonstrate compliance with this emission limitation by December 15, 1982, according to the testing procedures in Appendix A.

C. Standpipes

1. Standpipe is defined as the pipes or ducts by which the gaseous by-products of coking are transported from one end of an oven to a coke oven gas collector main, including the standpipe, standpipe cap and slipjoint.

2. On and after December 15, 1980, there shall be no visible emissions from more than 10 percent of the standpipes on operating coke ovens of Coke Plant No. 2. Armco shall demonstrate compliance with this emission limitation by December 15, 1980, according to the testing procedures in Appendix A.

D. Charging Ports

1. Charging port is defined as any opening through which coal is, or may be, introduced into a coke oven, whether or not such opening is regularly used for that purpose.

2. On and after December 15, 1980, there shall be no visible emissions from more than 5 percent of the charging ports on operating coke ovens on Coke Plant No. 2. Armco shall demonstrate compliance with this emission limitation by December 15, 1980, according to the testing procedures in Appendix A. ++EP++

Page 4

3. For purposes of this Decree, visible emissions from a maximum of three ovens with their lids removed for the purpose of decarbonization prior to pushing the coke from the oven shall not be counted as having visible emissions.

E. Pushing

1. Pushing emissions are air contaminants emitted into the outdoor atmosphere which occur at any time during the pushing operation. The pushing operation is defined as the operation by which coke is removed from a coke oven and transported to a quench station, beginning when the coke guide is in the final spotted position and continuing until the coke receiving car enters the quenching station.

2. Armco shall install a pushing emission control system consisting of either (i) a fixed duct, land based, coke guide evacuated pushing control system, (ii) a single spot, coke guide evacuated enclosed quench car/scrubber car system, or (iii) a shed system, for the capture and cleaning of particulate emissions resulting from the pushing of coke from Coke Plant No. 2, in accordance with the following schedule:

Place initial purchase orders

and submit copy of vendor's

guarantee May 1, 1981

Start construction March 1, 1982 Complete construction and start-up December 15, 1982 Achieve and demonstrate Compliance with the emission limitations in Paragraphs III, E3 and E4 December 29, 1982

3. If Armco elects a pushing emission control system consisting of either a fixed duct, land based, coke guide evacuated pushing control system, or a single spot, coke guide evacuated enclosed quench car/ scrubber car system, it shall be operated and maintained such that the emissions from the gas cleaner constructed in accordance with the above schedules shall not exceed .030 gr/dscf or 0.040 pound per ton of coke pushed (filterable) during the pushing operation. If Armco elects a pushing emission control system consisting of a shed, it shall be operated and maintained such that the emissions from the gas cleaner constructed in accordance with the above schedules shall not exceed 0.010 gr/dscf (filterable) during the pushing operation. ++EP++

Page 5

4. Visible emissions from the gas cleaning device outlets and fugitive emissions from any portion of any pushing emissions control system shall comply with AP3-07. If Armco elects to install a pushing emission control system consisting of a single spot or conventional quench car and a land based hood and gas cleaning system, then the hood used to cover the quench car during the push need not travel with the car to the quenching station if the resultant "travel emissions" do not equal or exceed 20 percent opacity. However, the car shall be designed in such a way that a hood or other device may be added to further minimize emissions if opacities equal or exceed 20 percent.

5. For the purposes of this Decree, a shed is defined as a canopy hood mounted over the entire coke side of a coke battery, extending at least 50 feet beyond each pinion wall, and containing an evacuation duct which exhausts the collected emissions from the pushing operation to a particulate emission cleaning device. In the event Armco elects a pushing emission control system consisting of a shed, the shed system serving the battery shall have an evacuation capacity of 200,000 acfm.

Within six months of start-up of the pushing emissions control device, Armco may elect to determine the minimum exhaust rates at which the system can be operated. If Armco demonstrates that it has achieved compliance with the emissions limitations in Paragraphs III, E4 of this Decree on the coke battery at exhaust flow rates less than capacity, Armco may operate the shed for the battery at any such exhaust flow rate. In the event the parties are unable to agree upon appropriate exhaust flow rates less than capacity, Armco shall have the burden of proving that it has demonstrated compliance. During the pendency of any dispute brought to this Court over exhaust rates, Armco shall not operate at any exhaust rate below that for which the parties have agreed that compliance has been demonstrated. ++EP++

Page 6

6. If Armco elects to employ any type of land based pushing emissions control system, one spare fan wheel, one set of motor bearings, and one set of bags shall be maintained. One spare coke receiving car shall be maintained for the operating unit.

7. If Armco elects to employ a pushing emissions gas cleaning car, at a minimum, one spare hot coke container, and replacement parts, such as motors, pumps, bearings, etc., shall be maintained for the gas cleaning car. Additionally, Armco shall maintain a record of all pushes of coke and the availability of the emission control equipment on each push for a period of twenty-four (24) months after December 29, 1982. If the pushing emissions gas cleaning car is in place and the control system operates to capture and clean emissions from 95% of the total pushes of coke during every consecutive six-month period, then Armco need not obtain or have available a spare pushing emissions gas cleaning car. If, however, the pushing emissions control system does not operate to capture and clean emissions from 95% of the total pushes of coke during any consecutive six-month period, then Armco shall order, install and operate one spare pushing emissions gas cleaning car within twenty (20) months from the end of such six month period.

IV. BASIC OXYGEN FURNACE ("BOF")

That Armco shall comply with AP 3-07, as approved by the U.S. EPA on April 15, 1974, at the Middletown Works BOF Shop according to the schedule set forth below:

A. Secondary Emission Controls:

Armco shall replace the existing secondary particulate emission collection system, including the duct and low energy wet scrubber, with a particulate emission gas cleaning system which shall be sufficient to capture and clean secondary emissions to the level required in AP3-07 during hot metal charging, turndown, the first two minutes of oxygen blowing, slagging-off and tapping operations. Said secondary emission collection system shall hood and duct said secondary emissions to either a high energy wet scrubber, a fabric filter, baghouse collector or an electrostatic precipitator. ++EP++

Page 7

Such secondary particulate emission collection system shall have a gas cleaning capacity of at least 300,000 scfm. Said secondary emission control system shall be operated at full capacity during all charging, turndown, slagging-off, and tapping operations, and during the first 2 minutes of the oxygen blow.

B. The above pollution control system will be constructed in accordance with the following schedule:

Submit final engineering plans to U.S. EPA April 1, 1981 Issue initial purchase orders and submit copy of specifications and orders May 1, 1981 Start construction January 2, 1982 Complete construction and start-up October 30, 1982 Achieve and demonstrate compliance with AP 3-07 and paragraph IV C December 29, 1982

C. Any fabric filter, baghouse collector which is installed shall be operated and maintained such that emissions from said fabric filter, baghouse collector shall not exceed 0.012 gr/dscf (filterable) when the system is in use. Any high energy wet scrubber or electrostatic precipitator which is installed shall be operated and maintained such that emissions from said collection device shall not exceed 0.022 gr/dscf (filterable) when the system is in use.

D. Armco shall implement and maintain the following operating and maintenance procedures for reducing secondary emissions from the Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF) Shop no later than November 30, 1980:

1. Hot metal charging of the vessels shall be done with the vessel tilted no more than 40 degrees from the vertical position.

2. Hot metal charging shall be conducted with full draft on the primary exhaust system.

3. Scrap inspection and segregation procedures shall be implemented to assure that excessively oily scrap will be excluded from charging to the vessels. ++EP++

Page 8

4. No turnings or borings will be charged to the vessel.

5. Scrap graded as No. 2 Bundles which are charged to the vessel shall not exceed five percent of the metallic charge averaged on a weekly basis.

6. Oxygen lance sequencing with hood skirt position will be optimized for minimizing emissions at the beginning of the oxygen blows.

7. Furnace tapping shall be conducted with full draft on the primary exhaust system.

E. In lieu of the flow rate, and/or the fugitive emission capture system and associated gas cleaning device described in paragraph IV A, Armco may attempt to demonstrate to U.S. EPA that the standards of AP3-07 can be achieved with some alternative flow rate and/or fugitive emission capture system and associated gas cleaning device. Such demonstration shall be made through the submission of an engineering study which shall include:

(i) analyses which address vessel and hood location, characteristics of generated emissions, required capture velocity and volume for such emissions and systems;

(ii) an explicit consideration of other systems installed at existing BOF shops, containing vessels of equivalent size;

(iii) an analysis of system design constraints imposed by existing physical conditions in the BOF shop, and any alternative system design efforts intended to respond to such constraints, and consideration of an independent engineering analysis for any alternative deemed infeasibile; and

(iv) an analysis of a truss level canopy hood ducted to a new pollution control device sufficient to achieve compliance with Ohio Regulation AP-3-07.

F. On or before March 1, 1981, Armco shall submit to U.S. EPA the results of the engineering study specified in Paragraph IVE for its approval. U.S. EPA shall expeditiously evaluate the results of Armco's engineering study and shall, no later than forty-five (45) days after receipt, notify Armco of the result of its review. If the U.S. EPA determines that Armco has not demonstrated that an alternative air pollution control system will provide for compliance with applicable standards and if Armco believes that it has made such a demonstration, the dispute may be referred to this Court. ++EP++

Page 9

Armco shall have the burden in this Court of proving that compliance can be obtained by installation of the alternative air pollution control system. The U.S. EPA shall expeditiously and reasonably review Armco's alternative air pollution control system and will take all reasonable steps to expedite judicial review of its determination. Notwithstanding the referral of a dispute to this Court, Armco shall adhere to the compliance schedule in paragraph IVB while the dispute is before the Court. Armco agrees that it shall not seek a judicial stay of such compliance schedule except to the extent that the U.S. EPA fails to fulfill its agreement in this order to proceed expeditiously.

G. If Armco elects to make such demonstration as described in paragraph IV E and F involving alternative flow rates and/or fugitive emission capture system and associated gas cleaning device, and if U.S. EPA approves such program, installation of the alternative fugitive emission capture system and device shall be in accordance with the following schedule:

Issue initial purchase orders and submit copy of specification and orders to U.S. EPA May 1, 1981 Start construction January 2, 1982 Complete construction and start up November 1, 1982 Demonstrate compliance with AP 3-07 and paragraph IV C December 29, 1982

H. When Armco begins operation of the control system described in paragraph IV A or paragraph IV E (as approved according to paragraph IV F), then Armco may discontinue implementation of the operating and maintenance procedures set forth in IV D.

V. BLAST FURNACE

That Armco shall comply with AP3-07 and AP3-12, as approved by U.S. EPA on April 15, 1974, at the Middletown Works No. 3 Blast Furnace according to the schedule set forth below: ++EP++

Page 10

A. Armco shall install, in both the east and west casthouses of the No. 3 Blast Furnace, vertical partitions to form stationary elevated hoods ("canopy hoods") above the iron notches and iron troughs to capture fugitive particulate emissions. These "canopy hoods" shall be ducted to a gas cleaning device consisting of either a fabric filter baghouse collector, a high efficiency wet scrubber, or an electrostatic precipitator. The "canopy hoods" and gas cleaning device serving these casthouses shall be evacuated at a minimum exhaust rate of 250,000 acfm at the fan.

B. The above air pollution control systems shall be constructed in accordance with the following schedule:

Submit final engineering plans to U.S. EPA April 1, 1981 Issue initial purchase orders and submit May 1, 1981 copy of specifications and orders@@ Start construction March 1, 1982 Complete construction and start-up November 1, 1982 Complete compliance program December 29, 1982

C. Any fabric filter baghouse collector which is installed shall be operated and maintained such that emissions from said collector shall not exceed 0.012 grs/dscf (filterable). Any high efficiency wet scrubber or electrostatic precipitator which is installed shall be operated and maintained such that emissions from said devices shall not exceed 0.022 gr/dscf (filterable).

D. In lieu of the flow rate, and/or the fugitive emission capture system described in paragraph V(A), Armco may attempt to demonstrate to U.S. EPA that the standards of AP-3-07 and AP-3-12 can be achieved with some alternative flow rate and/or fugitive emission capture system and associated gas cleaning device in conjunction with the use of the primary control system. Such demonstration may be made through the submission of an engineering study which shall include:

(i) analyses which address iron and slag pool configuration and hood location, characteristics of generated emissions, required capture velocity and volume for such emission and systems; and ++EP++

Page 11

(ii) an analysis of system design constraints imposed by existing physical conditions in the blast furnace casthouses, and any alternative system design efforts intended to respond to such constraints.

E. On or before March 1, 1981, Armco shall submit to U.S. EPA the results of the engineering study specified in Paragraph V (D) for approval. U.S. EPA shall expeditiously evaluate the results of Armco's engineering study and shall, no later than forty-five (45) days after receipt, notify Armco of the results of its review. If the U.S. EPA determines that Armco has not demonstrated that an alternative air pollution control system will provide for compliance with applicable standards and if Armco believes that it has made such a demonstration, the dispute may be referred to this Court. Armco shall have the burden in this Court of proving that compliance can be obtained by installation of the alternative air pollution control system. The U.S. EPA shall expeditiously and reasonably review Armco's alternative air pollution control system and will take all reasonable steps to expedite judicial review of its determination. Notwithstanding the referral of a dispute to this Court, Armco shall adhere to the compliance schedule in paragraph V B while the dispute is before the Court. Armco agrees that it shall not seek a judicial stay of such compliance schedule except to the extent that the U.S. EPA fails to fulfill its agreement in this order to proceed expeditiously.

F. If Armco elects to make such demonstration as described in paragraph V D, and E, involving alternative flow rate and/or fugitive emission capture system and associated gas cleaning device and if U.S. EPA approves such program, installation of such system and device, shall be in accordance with the following schedule:

Issue initial purchase orders and submit copy of specification and orders to U.S. EPA May 1, 1981 Start construction January 2, 1982 Complete construction and start up November 1, 1982 Demonstrate compliance with AP 3-07 and paragraph V C December 29, 1982

++EP++

Page 12 VI.OPEN HEARTH SHOP

That Armco shall comply with AP3-07 and AP3-12, as approved by the U.S. EPA on April 15, 1974, at the Middletown Works Open Hearth Shop according to the schedule set forth below:

A. In addition to operating and maintaining the present primary emission controls, Armco shall install, operate and maintain the following equipment and systems and implement the following operating practices and procedures:

1. Install and operate at each open hearth furnace a solid state programmable controller to allow positive control of fuel trains during reversal of open hearth furnace flues, thereby assuring proper fuel-to-air mixtures for optimum hydrocarbon combustion.

2. Install and operate at the open hearth shop a central process computer to provide proper ratios of atomizing agent to hydrocarbon fuel, thereby assuring proper atomization of fuels for maximum combustion efficiency for each open hearth furnace.

3. Install and operate at each open hearth furnace new liquid hydrocarbon fuel flow meters to provide accurate fuel flow measurements required for functioning of the process computer described in VI (A) (2) above.

4. Make modifications to each open hearth furnace damper hardware and control system logic to allow for responsive, accurate control of furnace pressure, thereby minimizing emissions escaping from the furnace openings during oxygen lancing and flue reversals.

5. Armco shall institute a program to ensure that each of the open hearth furnace checkers shall be maintained at the maximum efficiency by periodic cleaning.

6. Hot metal charging shall be performed such that spilling is minimized.

7. The door opening of furnaces being charged shall be minimized.

8. Armco shall take all reasonable measures to limit hot metal charges to not more than 20% of the total charge to the Open Hearth shop on a quarterly basis. Furthermore, Armco shall maintain at its Middletown, Ohio plant offices, monthly production data reflecting the percentage of hot metal charge at the open hearth shop. ++EP++

Page 13

B. Armco shall institute the operating practices, make modifications and install the equipment called for in paragraph VI(A) above according to the following schedule:

Complete subparagraphs 1 through 7 of paragraph VI(A) at furnace No. 9 November 1, 1980 Complete subparagraphs 1 through 7 of paragraph VI(A) at furnaces No. 10-14 November 1, 1981 Complete subparagraph 8 of paragraph VI(A) at all furnaces November 1, 1980 VII.NONCOMPLIANCE PENALTIES

A. Armco acknowledges that it has been advised that it may be subject to penalties under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420, but reserves the right to contest the assertion, the assessment and attempted collection of noncompliance penalties under that section. Any penalties paid by Armco pursuant to Section 120 of the Clean Air Act may be deducted from any stipulated penalties which accrue under this Decree if the violations which give rise to the Section 120 penalties are identical to the violations which give rise to the Section 120 penalties are identical to the violations which give rise to the stipulated penalties.

B. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed as an admission of non-compliance by Armco for purposes of Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420. The entering into and execution of this Decree shall not, in and of itself, constitute evidence supporting a finding of violation of the Clean Air Act.

VIII. STIPULATED PENALTIES

A. Unless excused by the provisions of Section X of this Decree (force majeure), the following stipulated penalty provisions shall apply and be enforced by the United States: ++EP++

Page 14

B. Construction Schedules

1. If Armco does not complete the construction or installation of pollution control equipment on a facility by the scheduled date in this Decree, Armco shall pay a stipulated penalty of $7,500 for each day Armco operates the facility after the scheduled date without the required control equipment.

2. If Armco fails to meet an interim date in a schedule for the construction or installation of pollution control equipment on a facility, Armco shall be liable for a stipulated penalty of $5,000 for each violation for each day the violation continues. Any penalty liability under this subparagraph will be forgiven if Armco meets the final compliance date in the applicable schedule for the construction or installation of equipment, or if Armco does not operate the facility without the required control equipment after the scheduled completion date.

3. The provisions of this Section of this Decree shall not be construed to limit any other remedies available for violations of this Decree or other provisions of law.

4. Stipulated penalties under this Section shall be paid by check payable to the Treasurer of the United States and deposited with the Clerk of this Court within 30 days after U.S. EPA has made a demand for payment of the penalty, or, in the event of a dispute, no later than 10 days after this Court so orders payment.

IX.

Nothing in this Decree shall affect the right of Armco to petition the State of Ohio and U.S. EPA for modification of the applicable emission limitations set forth in the Ohio State Implementation Plan (hereafter SIP) in regard to, but not limited to, Armco's BOF shop and/or Blast Furnace, including the right of Armco to petition for approval of an alternative emission reduction program (also commonly referred to as a "bubble" demonstration). Approval by the U.S. EPA of an alternative emission reduction program as a SIP revision, which specifically addresses the secondary (fugitive) emissions from the Middle-town Works BOF shop and Blast Furnace casthouses and revises the emission limitations of AP3-07 and AP3-12 for those sources, shall relieve Armco of the obligations set forth in paragraphs IV(A)-(C) and V(A)-(C) of this Decree. ++EP++

Page 15

U.S. EPA's approval of an alternative emission approach shall not be granted unless such approach is in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act and U.S. EPA's Policy Statement "Alternative Emission Reduction Options Within State Implementation Plans," 44 Fed.Reg. 71780 (December 11, 1979). Armco's petition for revision of the applicable emission limitations set forth in the Ohio SIP, shall in no way relieve Armco of its obligations to fully and timely comply with all increments of progress and final compliance requirements as set forth in this Decree. U.S. EPA agrees to use its best efforts to expedite review of any SIP revision.

In the event that U.S. EPA approves any revision to the Ohio SIP pursuant to Section 110 of the Clean Air Act, then either of the parties to this Decree may petition the Court for modification of this Decree. However, except as stated in the following sentence with respect to blast furnace casthouse controls in Paragraphs VA-C and/or BOF shop controls in Paragraphs IVA-C, approval by U.S. EPA of any such revision to the Ohio SIP shall not, in any way, relieve Armco of its obligations to fully and timely comply with all increments of progress and final compliance requirements as set forth in this Decree unless and until the Court has granted a petition to modify the Decree pursuant to an application made in accordance with this paragraph. Of U.S. EPA approves a revision to the Ohio SIP which specifically addresses the secondary (fugitive) emissions from the Middletown Works blast furnace casthouses and/or BOF shop and revises the emission limitations of AP-3-07 and AP-3-12 for the source(s) of emissions, then, as to only the source(s) addressed by the revision, Armco shall be relieved of its obligations to comply with the increments of progress and final compliance requirements which are to be achieved on dates following U.S. EPA approval of said SIP revisions.

In the event that U.S. EPA disapproves any proposed revision to the Ohio SIP which had been submitted for approval by the State of Ohio, Armco shall not be precluded, by the terms of this Decree, from petitioning for judicial review, pursuant to Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7607(b)(1), of final agency action disapproving a proposed revision. ++EP++

Page 16 X. FORCE MAJEURE CLAUSE

If any event occurs which causes or may cause a delay in the achievement or demonstration of compliance with any requirement of this Decree, Armco shall notify the Director, Enforcement Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, in writing within twenty (20) days of the event as appropriate, describing in detail the anticipated length of the delay, the precise cause or causes of delay, the measures taken and to be taken by Armco to prevent or minimize the delay, and the timetable by which those measures will be implemented. Armco will adopt all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such delay.

If the parties agree that the delay or the anticipated delay has been or will be caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of Armco, the parties may stipulate to an extension of the particular compliance requirement affected, by a period not exceeding the delay actually caused by such circumstances. In such event, the parties may apply to this Court for an appropriate modification of this Decree. In the event the parties cannot agree, any party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. The burden of proving that any delay was caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of Armco shall rest with Armco. Failure by Armco to comply with the notice requirements of this Paragraph shall render this Paragraph void and of no force and effect as to the particular incident involved and constitute a waiver of Armco's right to request an extension of its obligations under this Decree based on such incident. An extension of one compliance date based on a particular incident does not mean that Armco qualifies for an extension of a subsequent compliance date or dates. Armco must make an individual showing of proof regarding each incremental step or other requirement for which an extension is sought. ++EP++

Page 17 XI.

For the purpose of determining or demonstrating compliance with the emission limitations applicable to air emission sources in this Decree, the inspection and testing methods set forth in Appendix A to this Decree shall be followed, to the extent Appendix A addresses the source.

XII.

Nothing contained in this Decree shall be construed to prevent or limit the application of the provisions of Section 303 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7603.

XIII. REPORTING

A. Armco shall submit to the Court, U.S. EPA and Ohio EPA no later than thirty (30) days after the end of each quarter, commencing with the October 1 to December 31 quarter of 1980, a progress report for the sources and point sources subject to this Decree. These reports shall describe actual progress as compared to scheduled progress toward each milestone and, where requested, copies of contracts and vendors guarantees.

B. Armco shall provide the U.S. EPA twenty (20) days notice prior to conducting any performance tests required by or provided for under this Decree in order to afford the U.S. EPA an opportunity to approve the test procedure and to have observers present at such tests. Said procedure shall be in conformance with the provisions of Appendix A of this Decree. A written report of the results of said performance tests shall be submitted to the U.S. EPA promptly, but no later than sixty (60) days after completion of each of said tests.

XIV.

All reports, notices, control plans and other information that must be submitted in satisfaction of a requirement of this Decree shall be submitted to:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region V

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Attention: Director, Enforcement Division ++EP++

Page 18

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

361 E. Broad Street

Columbus, Ohio 43215

XV.

This Decree shall terminate as to each air emission source covered herein six (6) months following initial demonstration of compliance with the final emission limitations of this Decree for that facility.

Until such termination, jurisdiction is retained by this Court to enable the Court to issue such further orders, directions or relief which may be appropriate to interpret, construe or effectuate this Decree or any provision thereof.

XVI.

A. The United States has determined that Armco has derived economic benefit as a result of its failure to comply with the Clean Air Act with regard to certain of the sources which are the subject of this Decree. Further, the United States has calculated the amount of such benefits and the environmental harm caused by Armco's violations, and has determined, in consideration of the Civil Penalty Policy of April 11, 1978, and Section 113 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413, that Armco should pay a civil penalty of $ 950,000.00. Armco does not acknowledge liability for civil penalties and does not agree that the United States should recover civil penalties on the basis of any alleged delayed compliance. Armco does not admit to any violation of the Clean Air Act or regulations of the Ohio State Implementation Plan.

B. In consideration of United States' agreement to settle the action filed herein, Armco agrees to undertake the pollution abatement programs contained in this Decree and to establish, within forty-five (45) days of the date of entry of this Decree, an environmental trust fund, which shall be funded by a $950,000.00 sum from Armco. The Trustee of such fund shall be appointed by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio. The monies deposited, plus interest thereon, shall be expended for environmentally beneficial purposes, as approved by U.S. EPA, which are above and beyond expenditures made pursuant to this Decree or to comply with any existing legal requirements relating to water or air pollution abatement. ++EP++

Page 19

The identity of environmentally beneficial projects and associated expenditures shall be submitted to U.S. EPA by Armco no later than 4 months from the date of entry of this Decree. U.S. EPA will review these projects within two months of receipt of Armco's proposals to determine whether the projects are acceptable to U.S. EPA and conform to the requirements of U.S. EPA's Civil Penalty Policy. If appropriate credit projects are identified by U.S. EPA from among those submitted by Armco for U.S. EPA approval, the total monies deposited in the Environmental Trust Fund, including the interest thereon shall be expended within a period of three years from the date of entry of this Decree. The funds referenced above shall be deposited in the First National Bank of Southwestern Ohio, in Middletown, Ohio. In the event that appropriate credit projects cannot be identified by U.S. EPA from among the proposals submitted by Armco, within 6 months after the entry of the Decree, the Environmental Trust Fund will be dissolved and all monies deposited plus interest thereon will be forfeited and shall be paid by check payable to the Treasurer of the United States and tendered to the U.S. Attorney within 30 days after U.S. EPA has made a demand for payment.

XVII.

This Decree shall be in full settlement and satisfaction of Armco's action filed herein, with the exception of Count Four of Armco's Complaint, and in full settlement and satisfaction of the Counterclaim by the United States filed by the United States herein pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b). Counts One, Two, and Three of Armco's Complaint and the United States' Counterclaim are dismissed with prejudice. The United States does not, by the entering into and execution of this Decree, in any way agree or admit that this Court has jurisdiction of Count Four of Armco's Complaint. No other civil enforcement suit shall be brought pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b) (except Section 120 of the Clean Air Act penalty recovery actions), by the U.S. EPA for failure of the air emission sources described herein, to comply with Ohio Regulations AP-3-07 or AP-3-12, prior to the termination of the terms of this Decree, as long as Armco is in compliance with the provisions of this Decree. ++EP++

Page 20

The United States reserves the right to enforce subsequent violations of the existing Ohio State Implementation Plan or more stringent emission limitations in any revised State Implementation Plan. The entering into and execution of this Decree by Armco shall not be construed as an admission or acquiesence by Armco that the testing procedures set forth herein are reasonable or lawful for the purpose of determining compliance with the Clean Air Act by air emission sources other than those covered by this Decree.

WHEREFORE, this Consent Decree is hereby issued with agreement and concurrence of the parties hereto.

/s/ David S. Porter

Honorable D.S. Porter. U.S.D.J

Date 2/20/81

FOR UNITED STATES:

FOR ARMCO INC.

By/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

James W. Moorman

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

Department of Justice

By/s/ Robert E. Boni

Robert E. Boni

Group Vice President

Armco Inc.

By/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

James C. Cissel

United States Attorney

Southern District of Ohio

By/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

J. Jeffrey McNealey

Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur

Counsel for Armco Inc.

By/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

John McGuire

Regional Administrator

Region V

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

By/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

James G. Headley

Frost & Jacobs

Trial Counsel for Armco Inc. ++EP++

APPA-1 TESTING PROCEDURES 1.1 Visible Emissions from the Coke Battery

A. Charging Operations.

1. For the purpose of determining compliance with paragraphs III A (3) and III A (4) of this Decree, the following procedures shall be utilized. The observer shall stand on the topside of the coke oven battery such that a good view of all charge ports of the oven being charged and the charging system is possible. The observer may move laterally to obtain a clear view of all oven ports, drop sleeves, and hopper. During the charging period, the observer shall watch all the potential emission sources including the charge ports and the entire charging system. Upon observing the release of any visible emission, an accumulating stopwatch shall be started. The watch shall be stopped when the visible emission stops and shall be restarted when a visible emission reappears. The observer shall continue this procedure for the entire charging period. If visible emissions should occur simultaneously from several points during a charge, the visible emissions shall be timed collectively as one continuous visible emission. Furthermore, visible emissions which may start from one source immediately after those from another source shall be timed as one continuous visible emission. The following visible emissions shall not be timed: steam vapor, visible emissions from burning coal that is spilled on top of the oven or oven lid during charging, visible emissions from any equipment other than the charging system or charging ports, visible emissions from standpipes during charging, visible emissions from coke oven doors which may rise above the battery and be windblown across its topside. The time recorded on the stopwatch shall represent the total cumulative time that visible emissions are observed during a charge. The number of seconds of visible emissions observed for each charge shall be recorded on a data sheet.

2. For the purposes of determining compliance with paragraphs III A(3) and III A(4) of this Decree, a set(s) of five consecutive charges shall be observed and the time in seconds of visible emissions during such charges shall be totalled, except as provided in subparagraph 1.1 A(3) below. ++EP++

APPA-2

If the observations of any set (or group as in subparagraph 1.1. A(3) below) of consecutive charges is interrupted by an event not in the control of the observer, then the data for the interrupted charge(s) shall be discarded and additional charges shall be observed to complete the set (or group).

3. For the purposes of determining compliance with paragraph III A(4) of this Decree, U.S. EPA will observe group(s) of no greater than 21 consecutive uninterrupted charges. U.S. EPA may elect to observe less than twenty-one consecutive charges. If U.S. EPA elects to observe less than twenty-one consecutive uninterrupted charges, Armco may elect to exclude one charge. Compliance with the standard will be determined on the basis of a set(s) of five consecutive uninterrupted charges.

B. Oven Doors

For the purposes of determining compliance with Section III(B), the observer shall walk completely around the coke oven battery at a steady pace, observing visible emissions from a ground level position just outside the pusher machine and quencher car tracks as close to the battery as safety and visibility conditions permit. The observer shall traverse each side of a battery expeditiously, recording the time of the beginning and end of each side traverse, the identity of each door having visible emissions, and the identity of any door not observable during the traverse. A visible emission of an individual door shall be noted on an inspection sheet when an observer determines any visible emission is occurring from any location on the perimeter of a coke oven door or chuck door, but not when emissions are seen to come from the area between a buck stay and adjacent jamb. Visible emissions observed at the top of the battery above a specific oven door but not clearly attributable to such door shall not be counted in this procedure. An observer shall observe each oven door only once while scanning the perimeter for any visible emissions. After a brief scan of an oven door, the observer shall move along his traverse, checking subsequent doors on the battery in a like manner. If a temporary machine obstruction occurs which blocks the view of a series of ovens, the ovens shall be bypassed and the remaining oven doors on that side of the battery shall be observed. ++EP++

APPA-3

After the traverse of such side of the battery, the bypassed oven doors, and only those oven doors, shall be reobserved. After completing one side, the observer shall proceed directly to the opposite side of the battery and proceed to perform a like traverse while repeating the above procedures.

The percentage of oven doors with visible emissions shall be determined by totalling the number of doors with visible emissions, excluding two doors, representing the last oven charged, dividing that sum by the total number of observed doors on operating ovens, and multiplying the result by one hundred percent.

For the purpose of observing coke side doors by the methods of this Appendix, Paragraph 1.1, Armco shall make the necessary arrangements to permit an observer to safely traverse the length of the quench car tracks underneath a shed (if present) consistent with the procedures of Appendix A.

Upon beginning a coke side door observation traverse, the observer shall note whether there is insufficient illumination which creates an effective interference with coke side door leakage observations.

C. Standpipes (offtake piping) and charging ports (charging hole lids).

For the purpose of determining compliance with Section III(C) (standpipes) and Section III(D) (charging ports), the observer shall walk down the center of the battery, but may deviate from this path if necessary to obtain a better view of any offtake assembly or lid. Topside potential emission points shall be observed expeditiously without the observer pausing except to make entries of visible emissions. The observer shall record the identity of visible emissions from all topside emission points in a single traverse of the topside of the battery, except the following: visible emissions from charging hole lids and standpipe caps that are opened during a decarbonization or charging period, visible emissions caused by maintenance work in progress at an oven, and steam emissions, including steam caused by the vaporization of wet luting materials. Regardless of the number of points from which visible emissions are observed from any one charging hole or lid offtake system, the maximum entry for an oven shall be two. ++EP++

APPA-4

The maximum lid leaks recorded for an oven shall be three.

Visible emissions from the offtake piping assembly shall include: visible emissions from any leaks from cracks and/or defects in the piping, visible emissions from any leaks coming from the jointure of any pipes including the final jointure with the main, visible emissions from any leaks coming from the standpipe cap or its seal with the standpipe, and visible emissions from any leaks coming from the offtake piping assembly which are not within one of the above categories. Visible emissions from lids shall include all emissions from the casting lid interface, but shall not include water vapor or smoke from burning or smoldering excess topside coal.

The percentage of offtake pipes or charging hole lids with visible emissions shall be determined by totalling the number of such pipes or lids with such emissions, dividing that sum by the total number of such pipes or lids on the battery and multiplying the result by one hundred percent.

Offtake piping and charging hole lids may be separately observed, providing that the observer shall complete any separate inspection expeditiously.

D. Pushing Emissions

For the purpose of determining compliance with Section III(E)4, visible emissions shall be determined according to Test Method 9 as set forth in the "Appendix on Test Methods" in 40 CFR Part 60 "Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources" with the following modifications:/*/ ((/*/ All references to 40 CFR Part 60 in this Appendix are to the 1978 volumes.))

(1) The provisions of Paragraph 2.5 ("Data Reduction") of Method 9 shall not apply. Each individual instantaneous reading which is recorded shall be deemed representative of the opacity of emissions for a fifteen (15) second period.

(2) In viewing the pushing operation, the observer shall stand on the coke side of the battery where a clear view of the push can be obtained. This generally should be a location on the ground, in the coke side yard, outside the hot car tracks approximately perpendicular to the observed oven. ++EP++

APPA-5

However, the observer is not restricted to the ground level. If it is an overcast day or if the plume is in a shadow, the reader need not follow the requirement of positioning his back to the sun.

(3) During the pushing operation, the reader(s) shall observe all the potential pushing emissions including fugitive emissions from the pushing emission control device and open quench cars during travel and note the point where emissions are observed. If Armco elects to install a shed visible emissions from the interface of the shed and the coke side of the battery may be observed from the top side of the battery.

(4) Observations may begin any time after the coke side door machine is in the final spotted position and ready to receive coke at the oven to be pushed.

(5) AP3-07 shall not be read so as to require three consecutive minutes of readings equal to or greater than 20 percent opacity.

1.2 Particulate Emissions Test Methods and Procedures

A. Test Methods.

(1) For the purpose of determining compliance with Sections III(E) (3), IV(C), V(C), particulate emissions shall be determined according to Test Methods 1 through 5 as set forth in the "Appendix on Test Methods" in 40 CFR Part 60 "Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources," (front half analysis), and 40 CFR Section 60.46(a) and (b).

(2) During each stack test performed, simultaneous visible emission evaluations shall be conducted according to the methodology specified in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 9 except for the provisions of Section 2.5 to Method 9. A copy of the raw data sheets shall be included with the stack test report. The report should include actual sampling times to allow a comparision between the visible emissions and the stack test results.

(3) During each stack test performed Armco shall provide the U.S. EPA access to production data and other parameters that are necessary for determining compliance. ++EP++

APPA-6

(4) Compliance shall be determined by averaging three runs using the test procedures stated above, except as provided in Appendix A, Paragraphs 1.2(B)(2), (C), (D), and (E); and except that pushing

emissions shall be measured over one complete traverse.

(5) During each run of a stack test, the facility to be tested will be operated at a production level which is at least as large as the average of the actual level during normal operation for the coke plant, or at a coking rate of one inch per hour, whichever is greater. All emission points which are to be aggregated in determining compliance shall be tested simultaneously.

B. Testing Procedures for Pushing Emissions Control Devices

(1) Armco shall provide the U.S. EPA with a test protocol for each pushing emission control device outlet test at least thirty (30) days prior to the test dates. The protocol shall indicate how Armco plans to accommodate the required number of test points and testing time during the pushing schedule.

(2) If a mobile emissions control system is used, compliance with Section III(E) (3) shall be determined by performing each test run over a complete pushing operation. The pushing emissions test car, which is required to perform these tests, shall contain the necessary horizontal duct extension to perform the test.

(3) For either land based system, the pushing emissions test protocol shall be based upon the procedures set forth in Appendix A, Paragraph 1.2. For a shed system the emissions from the gas cleaner shall be determined by the procedures set forth in Appendix A Paragraph 1.2(E).

C. Positive Pressure Baghouse Test Procedure

(if applicable)

(1) The velocity and volumetric flow rate of gases going into the baghouse will be tested on the plenum connecting the fans to the bag-house. The number of traverse points will be selected according to EPA Method 1. EPA Method 2 will be used to determine the volumetric flow rate. ++EP++

APPA-7

The volumetric flow rate will be determined for each run of particulate testing.

(2) The concentration of particulate matter in the baghouse exhaust gases will be determined by the use of high volume (hi-vol) samplers of the type described in 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.

(3) (a) Each compartment will be sampled for 3 consecutive hours with 2 hi-vols per compartment.

(b) Each compartment will be divided in half and one sampler located at the center of each half. If desired, two or more compartments may be sampled simultaneously. All compartments must be sampled once during the compliance determination

(c) The samplers will be located above the bag support mechanism and positioned so that the filter is facing into the gas flow. If temperature conditions preclude placement of the samplers at the locations specified above, flexible duct work will be used to duct the emissions to each sampler which will be located in a "safe" area. The inlet to the flexible duct will be positioned at the sampling locations specified above with the plan of the open end perpendicular to the gas flow.

(4) The starting flow rate through each high volume sampler shall be approximately 60 cfm. If the flow volume through any high volume sampler decreases by more than 20 percent from the starting flow rate, sampling with that hi-vol shall then be terminated. Armco shall record when the sampling period of each hi-vol sampler run commenced and terminated and shall record the physical location of each high volume sampler. These data shall be included in the test report. As soon as one such hi-vol sampler run is terminated, the filter shall be immediately replaced in that hi-vol and another run shall be started. ++EP++

APPA-8

(5) Any gratings of the baghouse compartments which may admit outside air into the baghouse will be sealed during the sampling periods.

(6) Temperature of the gases leaving the baghouse compartment will be measured by one thermocouple located at each compartment being tested. This thermocouple will be located in the vicinity of one of the high volume samplers used to test the compartment.

(7) Moisture content of the gases going to the baghouse will be measured at the plenum connecting the fans to the baghouse. The sampling method to be used will be agreed upon by U.S. EPA and Armco.

(8) High volume sampler mass concentration test results will be determined and reported separately for each compartment.

(9) In determining compliance with the emissions limitations these steps will be followed:

(a) A compartment average concentration will be computed by arithmetically averaging the concentrations from the two hi-vol sampler locations. If more than one run per hi-vol sampler is needed during any 3-hour test, each of the individual concentrations per hi-vol sampler shall first be flow weight averaged to determine a concentration for that hi-vol sampler location.

(b) The separate compartment average concentrations shall be arithmetically averaged to determine an overall concentration for the entire test.

(c) In computing compliance, the overall concentration determined in (b) above shall be used, in conjunction with the flow rate measured according to the provisions of (1) above.

D. Modular Baghouse Test Procedure

(1) Stack sampling procedures for determining compliance with particulate emission standards of sources equipped with modular baghouses shall be the methods set forth in Appendix A, Paragraph 1.2(A). ++EP++

APPA-9

(2) If the baghouse contains more than five stacks, the averaging provisions of Appendix A, Paragraph 1.2(A)(4) shall not apply and Armco shall perform one test run per stack. Compliance shall be determined by (a) computing the mass emission rate, in pounds per hour, for each stack and then (b) summing each of these mass emission rates. During all sampling periods, the production rate shall be maintained within ten percent of the mean rate for the entire sampling period.

E. Stack Test Procedures for Shed System

(1) In addition to the other provisions of Appendix A, Paragraph 1.2, this Appendix at Paragraph 1.2(E) specifies procedures for testing pushing emissions control devices in the event Armco elects to install a shed system. Other provisions of Appendix 1.2 not addressed and replaced in this Appendix A, Paragraph 1.2(E) shall apply.

(2) For demonstrating compliance with the emissions limitations in Paragraph III, (E)(3) of this Decree for the pushing mode on any gas cleaning device, Armco shall perform a single test run on each of four module outlet stacks selected by U.S. EPA, in accordance with U.S. EPA Methods 1-5, and:

(a) Each test run shall consist of 48 pushes sampled, one at each of 48 traverse points per module.

(b) Each such sample shall be conducted over a coke push, beginning when coke has first begun to be moved into the quench car and continuing for two and a half (2 1/2) minutes thereafter.

(3) Test results shall be determinative of compliance for the battery served by the tested gas cleaning device.

1.3 Visible Emission Inspection Procedures

The following specifies the visible emission procedures that shall be utilized in performing visible emission observations. Except as stated herein, the provisions of 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A, Method 9 shall apply.

A. The provisions of Method 9, Section 2.5, shall not apply in that averaging shall not be used to determine compliance with visible emission standards. ++EP++

APPA-10

B. The visible emission standards shall not be construed to require three consecutive minutes of readings equal to or greater than 20% opacity.

C. Each instantaneous observation that is recorded shall be deemed to represent the opacity of emissions for a 15-second period.

1.4 Particulate Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnace

(BOF) Shop.

For the purpose of determining compliance with Paragraph IV, the particulate emissions testing procedure shall be EPA Methods 1 through 5 of 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A except that the sampling described in Appendix 1.2(A) shall be performed during periods for which the secondary emissions control device is used to capture emissions occurring from of hot metal charging, first two minutes of the oxygen blowing, slagging off, and/or tapping. Sufficient weight of sample shall be collected for analytical purposes by repeated tests during such operations. ++EP++

HF PERKINS INSULATION COMPANY

DOC 01 OF 01

Partial consent order

05-89-C040

CAA

MISC

19890831

19890905

OHD981535420

B & O WAREHOUSE

CINCINNATI,OH

C-1-86-1239

05

PARTIAL CONSENT ORDER, USA V. H.F. PERKINS INSULATION CO., et al.,

Page 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

H.F. PERKINS INSULATION CO.,

et al.,

Defendants.

This matter having come before the Court upon the application of the United States of America for Entry of this Order; and

WHEREAS, Plaintiff, United States of America, on behalf of the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (hereinafter "the U.S. EPA"), filed a first amended Complaint herein on October 6, 1987; and

WHEREAS, the first amended Complaint alleges that Defendant R.E. Schweitzer Construction Company and Defendant Second Street Associates (hereafter "Defendants") violated the Clean Air Act (hereafter "the Act"), 42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq., by failing to provide timely notice of an asbestos renovation operation to the Southwestern Ohio Air Pollution Control Agency ("SWOAPCA"), contrary to 40 C.F.R. Sub-Section 61.145 and 61.146 and in violation of Sections 112(c) and 114(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7412(c) and 7414(a)(1), and by failing during said renovation operation to adequately wet and carefully lower to the ground friable asbestos materials that had been stripped from facility components, contrary to 40 C.F.R Sub-Section 61.145 and 61.147(e) and in violation of Section 112(c) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7412(c); and ++EP++

Page 2

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants have agreed that settlement of this matter is in the public interest and that entry of this Order without further litigation is the most appropriate means of resolving this matter; and

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants have moved this Court to enter this Consent Order, subject to the provisions of 28 C.F.R. Section 50.7;

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, upon the pleadings, without adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and upon consent and agreement of the parties to this Order,

It is hereby ORDERED and DECREED, pursuant to Rule 65(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as follows:

JURISDICTION

1. This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter and of the parties consenting hereto pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sub-Section 1331, 1345 and 1355, and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413. Venue is proper in this Court. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief may be granted against the Defendants.

APPLICABILITY

2. The undersigned representatives of each party to this Consent Order certify that he or she is fully authorized by each party whom he or she represents to enter into this Order and to execute and legally bind that party to it. ++EP++

Page 3

3. The provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to and be binding upon all the parties to this agreement, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, successors and assigns, and all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Consent Order and who are, or will be, acting in concert and privity with Defendants or their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, successors or assigns.

STIPULATIONS AND FINDINGS

4. Terms used in this Consent Order are defined in 42 U.S.C. Section7411(a)(3), 7412(a), 40 C.F.R. Section 61.02 and 40 C.F.R. Section 61.02 and 40 C.F.R. Section 61.141, and shall have the meanings contained therein.

5. Defendant Second Street Associates is a partnership registered to do business in the State of Ohio. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Second Street Associates owned the B & O Warehouse facility identified in the Complaint.

6. Defendant R.E. Schweitzer Construction Company ("Schweitzer") is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Ohio. It is engaged in building construction in Ohio. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Schweitzer operated a renovation operation at the B & O Warehouse facility identified in the Complaint, in that it contracted with the owners of said facility to conduct said renovation.

7. Defendants are "persons" within the meaning of Section 302(e) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7602(e).

8. Pursuant to Section 112 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7412, the Administrator of the U.S. EPA promulgated regulations requiring owners and operators of certain demolition and renovation operations to, inter alia, notify U.S. EPA of, and control asbestos emissions from, such operations. ++EP++

Page 4

40 C.F.R. Sub-Section 61.140, et seq. (For purposes of this Consent Order, all applicable asbestos renovation and demolition regulations shall hereinafter be referred to as the "asbestos standard.")

9. The renovation operation at the B & O Warehouse involved the removal and stripping of friable asbestos in excess of 160 square feet and therefore the operation was subject to the asbestos standard.

COMPLIANCE

10. Defendants shall at all times comply with all requirements of the asbestos standard, 40 C.F.R. Section 61.140 et seq.

11. On and after the date of entry of this Consent Order, Defendants shall implement the office procedure set forth as Attachment 1 to this Consent Order and ensure that any and all employees responsible for preparation of notices of asbestos demolition or renovation are familiar with said office procedure. Defendant shall use the notification format set forth as Attachments 2 and 3 to this Consent Order for providing notice of all asbestos removal/renovation operations subject to the asbestos standard. The procedure requires, among other things, that notice be sent simultaneously to U.S. EPA and the state or delegated local agency.

12. On and after the date of entry of this Consent Order, Defendants Schweitzer and Second Street Associates shall provide to U.S. EPA, Region V, at least 10 days notice of any and all asbestos renovation and/or demolition operations with respect to which defendants Schweitzer and Second Street Associates are "owners" or "operators," as those terms are defined as 40 C.F.R. Section 61.02. ++EP++

Page 5

Defendants shall further provide U.S. EPA, Region V, with documentation chronicling defendants' efforts in selecting and overseeing asbestos removal personnel so as to ensure that any asbestos removal is done in accordance with the asbestos standard.

Defendants shall further require each employee or contractor utilized on an asbestos demolition or renovation operation subject to the asbestos standard to adhere to the work practices set forth at 40 C.F.R. Section 61.147 at all times during the course of such operation. Defendants shall inform each employee/contractor that failure to adhere to said work practices shall result in his/her immediate dismissal from the job.

13. Defendants shall provide to U.S. EPA, Region V, within 30 days of the entry of this Order, a list of asbestos renovation or demolition operations which they or either of them implemented and/or sought to have others implement, from April 5, 1984, to the date of entry of this Order. This list shall include:

(i) the addresses of the facilities to be renovated or demolished;

(ii) the dates of the renovations or demolitions; ++EP++

Page 6

(iii) the approximate amount of friable asbestos material present in the facilities; and

(iv) the names and addresses of the persons or entities responsible for the asbestos removal component of such renovations or demolitions.

PENALTIES

14. Defendants shall pay a civil penalty of $ 10,000 (ten thousand dollars) pursuant to Section 113 of the Act. Payment shall be made by certified check, payable to "Treasurer, United States of America," and sent within fifteen (15) calendar days of entry of this Order to:

United States Attorney

Southern District of Ohio

220 U.S. Post Office and Courthouse

100 East Fifth Street

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Attention: General Kaminski

Assistant United States Attorney

A copy of the transmittal letter, identifying this Order and this Paragraph, shall be sent simultaneously to:

Branch Secretary

Air, Water, Toxics and General Law Branch (5CA-TUB-3)

Office of Regional Counsel

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region V

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

U.S. Department of Justice

10th & Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20530 ++EP++

Page 7

The civil penalty payment made under this Consent Order is not tax deductible. Upon final entry of this Consent Order, the United States shall be deemed a judgment creditor for purposes of enforcement of this Order.

15. Interest shall accrue on any amounts overdue under the terms of this Consent Order at the rate established by the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. Section 3717. A late payment handling charge of $20.00 will be imposed after 30 days, with an additional charge of $10.00 for each subsequent 30-day period over which an unpaid balance remains. In addition, a ten percent per annum penalty will be applied on any principal amount not paid within 90 days of the due date.

STIPULATED PENALTIES

16. Over the life of this Order, Defendants shall pay a stipulated penalty of $1000 per day for each violation of Paragraphs 11, 12, or 13 of this Order. Payment of a stipulated penalty owing pursuant to this Paragraph shall be made in the same form and manner as stated in Paragraph 14. Stipulated penalties are not the Plaintiff's exclusive remedy for the Defendant' violations of this Order and Plaintiff reserves its right to seek all relief, monetary and injunctive, to which it is entitled.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

17. All notifications and reports required by this Consent Order to be given to U.S. EPA, Region V shall be sent to: ++EP++

Page 8

Chief, Air Compliance Branch (5AC-26)

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Defendants are responsible for sending to the proper Agency all notifications required by this Consent Order and the asbestos standard to be given to state and/or local agencies.

If asbestos demolition or renovation work is to be done in states other than Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Minnesota, Wisconsin or Indiana, then the required notice is to be sent to the appropriate EPA regional office and the appropriate delegated state or local agency, with a copy to U.S. EPA, Region V.

18. This Consent Order in no way affects Defendants' responsibility to comply with any and all federal, state or local laws or regulations or any Order of the Court. Moreover, this Order in no way limits the power of U.S. EPA under Sections 114 and 303 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Sub-Section 7414 and 7603.

19. All information and documents submitted by Defendants pursuant to this Order shall be subject to public inspection.

COSTS

20. Each party in this action shall bear its own costs.

TERMINATION

21. One year after the date of entry of this Order, the United States shall move the Court to terminate the Order, as to each Defendant, provided said Defendant has fully satisfied all conditions of this Order, including payment of the civil penalty. ++EP++

Page 9

Until termination of this Order, the Court shall retain jurisdiction to modify and enforce the terms and conditions of this Order and to resolve disputes arising hereunder as may be necessary or appropriate for the construction or execution of this Order.

RELEASE

22. This Consent Decree constitutes the full settlement of the civil liability of the defendants, Second Street Associates and R. E. Schweitzer Construction Company, for the violations alleged in the compliant filed in this action.

FOR PLAINTIFF - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

for ROGER J. MARZULLA

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

Dated: 9/29/88

/s/ Frederick S. Phillips

FREDERICK S. PHILLIPS

Attorney

Environmental Enforcement Section

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

D. MICHAEL CRITES

United States Attorney

Southern District of Ohio

BY:/s/ Gerald F. Kaminski

GERALD KAMINSKI

Assistant United States Attorney

Southern District of Ohio

Dated: 10/7/88 ++EP++

Page 10

/s/ Valdas V. Adamkus,

VALDAS V. ADAMKUS

Regional Administrator

United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Region V

Dated: Aug. 1st 1988

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

for THOMAS L. ADAMS, JR.

Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and

Compliance Monitoring

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Date: Aug. 18/88

OF COUNSEL:

DONNA D. DUER

Assistant Regional Counsel

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

CHARLES GARLOW

Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring

United States Environmental Protection Agency

401 M Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20460

FOR DEFENDANT - SECOND STREET ASSOCIATES:

ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

Ronald E. Schweitzer/Partner

513-542-4950

Dated:6/27/88 ++EP++

Page 11

FOR DEFENDANT - R. E. SCHWEITZER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY:

ILLEGIBLE WORDS

Ronald E. Schweitzer/President

513-542-4950

Dated: 6/27/88

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

James L. O'Connell

Trial Attorney for the Defendants, Second Street

Associates and R.E. Schweitzer Construction Company

LINDHORST & DREIDAME

1700 Central Trust Center

201 East Fifth Street

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202-4116 (513) 421-6630

Dated: 6/29/88

Consent Order entered in accordance with the foregoing this 31st day of August, 1989.

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

Judge Herman Neber

United States District Court

Southern District of Ohio

Copies of Consent Decree and Judgment mailed regular mail on September 5, 1989 to signatories listed above.

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

Deputy Clerk ++EP++

^Z

WHEELING BRAKE BLOCK MFG CO

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-82-C008

CAA

MISC

19820517

19820517

OHD048207666

WHEELING BRAKE BLOCK MFG CO

BRIDGEPORT, OH

C-2-79-841

05

CONSENT DECREE, USA V. WHEELING BRAKE BLOCK MANUFACTURING COMPANY

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

WHEELING BRAKE BLOCK

MANUFACTURING COMPANY,

Defendant.

Plaintiff, United States of America, having filed the Complaint herein at the request of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA") and plaintiff and defendant, by their respective attorneys and officials, having consented without trial to the entry of this Decree; and the parties, in order to avoid the expense and further delays and uncertainties of protracted litigation, believe this Decree to be in furtherance of the public interest; THEREFORE IT IS FOUND:

I. JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1345 and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413, for the purpose of entering the Consent Decree. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted against the defendant, Wheeling Brake Block Manufacturing Company ("Wheeling Brake").

II.FINDINGS OF FACT

Defendant Wheeling Brake owns and operates an industrial and truck brake block manufacturing facility located at 100 West Boyd Avenue, Bridgeport, Ohio ("the Wheeling Brake facility or plant"). The Complaint alleges that the Wheeling Brake facility has been in violation of the National Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants, pertaining to asbestos, 40 CFR Section 61.20 et seq., Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7412, and an Administrative Order No. EPA-5-74-A-15. The allegations arise from defendant's use of asbestos control devices, known as baghouses, and asbestos waste practices. In its Answer, Wheeling Brake denies these allegations. ++EP++

Page 2

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, and upon the pleadings and the consent of the parties hereto, with the Court being advised of the premises, and without trial, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

III. APPLICATION

The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the defendant to this action, its officers, directors, employees and successors. Defendant Wheeling Brake shall give notice of this Consent Decree to any successors in interest prior to transfer of ownership, and shall simultaneously verify to the Chief, Air Enforcement Branch, United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA"), Region V, that such notice has been given.

IV. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE

Wheeling Brake shall perform the following acts with respect to controlling asbestos emissions at the Wheeling Brake facility in order to maintain compliance with the asbestos standard and Order cited in Paragraph II:

A. On and after the date of entry of this Decree, Wheeling Brake shall comply with 40 CFR Section 61.20 et seq., at its baghouses vented to the outside air, identified as baghouses 1, 2, 3 and 4, and all asbestos waste disposal operations at the Wheeling Brake facility.

B. On and after the date of entry of this Decree, Wheeling Brake shall operate at no more than 3:1 feet/minute air-to-cloth ratio at its mechanically shaken baghouses (currently baghouses 2, 3 and 4) and no more than a 5:1 feet/minute air-to-cloth ratio at its pulse-jet baghouse(s) (currently baghouse 1).

C. On and after the date of entry of this Decree, Wheeling Brake shall operate all waste disposal operations so that no visible emissions are generated.

D. On and after the date of entry of this Decree, Wheeling Brake shall maintain a minimum 250 feet/minute face velocity at the hood of the V-type mixer charge opening during charging of the mixer with asbestos. ++EP++

Page 3 V. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Within 30 days of the date of entry of this Decree, Wheeling Brake shall submit to U.S. EPA for approval an operation and maintenance plan for baghouses 1, 2, 3 and 4 and all asbestos waste disposal equipment and operations. The plan submitted shall include provisions for insuring adequate baghouse air cleaning capacity, daily inspections of baghouse internals, same-day repair for baghouses, and a minimum of six spare bags on hand and prompt availability from a supplier.

VI. MONITORING

A. On or before the date of this Decree, Wheeling Brake shall install, calibrate, operate and maintain the following monitoring equipment at baghouses 1, 2, 3 and 4:

1. Magnehelic gauges, or other pressure drop monitors as approved by U.S. EPA. Such gauges shall be read and logged once daily (for mechanically-shaken baghouses, immediately before a "shake").

2. Airflow monitoring devices as approved by U.S. EPA. Such devices shall be read and logged once daily (for mechanically-shaken baghouses, immediately after a "shake").

B. The operating logs required above shall be kept by defendant for at least one (1) full year following the calendar year in which they were generated, and be open to inspection by U.S. EPA or its consultants at any time.

VII. REPORTING & INSPECTIONS

A. Defendant shall submit in writing monthly to U.S. EPA, from the logs kept pursuant to Paragraph VI. of this Decree, all pressure drop readings in excess of 4" W.G. for mechanically-shaken baghouses, readings in excess of 6" W.G. for the pulse-jet baghouse(s), all airflow readings indicating an air-to-cloth ratio of greater than 3:1 for mechanically-shaken baghouses and readings indicating an air-to-cloth ratio in excess of 5:1 for the pulse-jet baghouse(s). Such reports shall be submitted within twenty (20) days following the calendar month in which the readings were taken.

B. Defendant shall submit in writing to U.S. EPA a detailed report of any operating occurrence which has caused or threatens to cause noncompliance with the provision of this Decree, within five (5) days of such occurrence. ++EP++

Page 4

C. Notification to U.S. EPA of any violation shall not excuse the violation. All written reports required by this Decree shall be submitted to Chief, Air Enforcement Branch, U.S. EPA, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

D. Wheeling Brake shall permit such reasonable inspection of the Wheeling Brake facility by U.S. EPA or its contractors as are reasonably necessary to assure compliance with this Decree.

VIII. EMERGENCY POWER

Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed or interpreted to affect U.S. EPA's authority to enforce Section 303 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7603, and the other portions of the Act relevant thereto.

IX. NON-APPLICABILITY

Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed or interpreted to relieve defendant of its responsibility to comply with any state law or regulation, local ordinance, or any Federal law or regulation.

X.SECTION 120 OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT

Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to relieve Wheeling Brake from its responsibility to pay noncompliance penalties that may be assessed under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420. Defendant acknowledges that it has been notified that it may be subject to such penalties.

XI. SEVERABILITY

It is the intent of the parties hereto that the provisions of this Consent Decree be severable, and should any provision(s) be declared by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be inconsistent with state or Federal law and therefore unenforceable, the remaining clauses shall remain in full force and effect.

XII.STIPULATED PENALTIES

A. In the event that the defendant fails to submit a report of any operating occurrence which has caused or is likely to cause noncompliance with the provisions of this Decree within five (5) days of such occurrence as required by Paragraph VII.B. above, or if defendant fails to submit a report required by Paragraph VII.A., above, defendant shall pay a stipulated penalty of $100.00 for each day beyond five (5) of such failure to submit a report. ++EP++

Page 5

In the event that defendant fails to submit a report within fifteen (15) days of such occurrence, defendant shall pay a stipulated penalty of $200.00 for each day beyond fifteen (15) of such failure to submit a report. In the event that defendant fails to submit such a report within thirty-five (35) days of such occurrence, defendant shall pay a stipulated penalty of $300.00 for each day beyond thirty-five (35) of such failure to submit a report.

B. In the event that the defendant fails to comply with the provisions of Paragraphs V. and VI.A. of this Decree, defendant shall pay a stipulated penalty of $100.00 for each day of violation. In the event that any such violation continues for more than ten (10) days, defendant shall pay a stipulated penalty of $250.00 for each day of violation. In the event that any such violation continues for more than thirty (30) days, defendant shall pay a stipulated penalty of $500.00 for each day of violation.

C. In the event that the defendant fails to keep any operating log as required by Paragraph VI.B. above; it shall be presumed that such operating log would have disclosed a violation of the compliance parameter which such operating log was intended to record, and the stipulated penalty provisions of Paragraph XII.D. below shall apply.

D. In the event that the defendant fails to comply with the requirements of Paragraph IV. of this Decree, the defendant shall pay a stipulated penalty of $1,000.00 for each day of violation.

E. Unless the defendant can prove that a violation of this Decree referenced in Paragraphs XII.A.-D., above, is subject to the defense provision in Section XIII. below, payment of the stipulated penalty for said violation shall be made by delivery to the United States Environmental Protection Agency by certified check payable to the order of "Treasurer, United States of America", within thirty (30) days of demand by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and tendered to Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604. ++EP++

Page 6

F. The provisions of Paragraphs XII.A.-E. of this Decree shall not be construed to prohibit plaintiff from seeking injunctive relief available to it for violations of this Decree or other provisions of law.

XIII. DEFENSE TO STIPULATED PENALTIES

Defendant shall be relieved of the obligation to pay a stipulated penalty under Section XII. above in this Decree in the event that any such violation was caused by act of God or third party beyond the control and without the fault of the defendant, provided that defendant formally notifies EPA in writing as soon as possible but in no event more than ten (10) days after the occurrence of any and each such cause and reports those actions which will be taken to mitigate such cause and to comply with each requirement of this Decree as soon as possible.

XIV. CIVIL PENALTIES

Defendant Wheeling Brake shall pay to the United States of America the total amount of $25,000.00. Payment shall be made in five installments, by certified checks payable to the order of "Treasurer, United States of America" and tendered to the Director, Enforcement Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, according to the following schedule:

Within 30 days of the date of entry of this Decree: $5,000.00 Within 60 days of the date of entry of this Decree: $5,000.00 Within 90 days of the date of entry of this Decree: $5,000.00 Within 120 days of the date of entry of this Decree: $5,000.00 Within 150 days of the date of entry of this Decree: $5,000.00

$25,000.00

XV. TERMINATION

This Consent Decree shall terminate one year after the date of entry of this Decree, provided that compliance with Paragraphs IV. and VI.A. of this Decree shall be maintained for such one year period. In the event of a violation of Paragraph IV. or VI.A. during such one year period, this Consent Decree shall terminate when Wheeling Brake has complied with Paragraphs IV. and VI.A. herein for a continuous period of one year. During the life of this Decree, this Court shall retain jurisdiction to enable the Court to issue such further Orders, directives, or relief that it may deem appropriate. ++EP++

Page 7 XVI. SETTLEMENT

Compliance with this Consent Decree shall be in full settlement of the Complaint filed herein, and full and complete discharge of any civil penalties which were claimed in the Complaint filed herein.

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

The parties do hereby consent:

WHEELING BRAKE BLOCK

MANUFACTURING COMPANY

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

/s/Carol E. Dinkins

CAROL E. DINKINS

Assistant Attorney General

/s/ Christopher K. Barnes

CHRISTOPHER K. BARNES

United States Attorney

/s/ James E. Rattan

JAMES E. RATTAN

Assistant United States Attorney

85 Marconi Blvd (Rm 200)

U.S. Courthouse

Columbus, Ohio 43215

614-469-5715

/s/ Valdas V. Adamkus

Valdas V. Adamkus

Regional Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region V

/s/ David M. Taliaferro

David M. Taliaferro, Attorney for the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region V

230 S. Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

(312)353-2084 ++EP++

^Z

WATERVLIET PAPER CO

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-81-C032

CAA

PAPER

19810622

19810622

MID005479308

WATERVLIET PAPER COMPANY

WATERVLIET, MI

K81-102CAB

05

CONSENT DECREE, USA V. WATERVLIET PAPER CO

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE ILLEGIBLE DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

WATERVLIET PAPER COMPANY, INC.

Defendant.

Pursuant to the joint motion of Plaintiff United States of America and Defendant Watervliet Paper Company, inc. ("Watervliet" or "Company"), without trial of any issue of fact or law, it is hereby Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed as follows:

I.

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of entering this Consent Decree. Plaintiff United States of America, filed the Complaint herein on 4/28/81. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted against the Defendant.

II.

The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the Company, its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and any successors in interest; in addition, the provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Consent Decree and who are or who will be acting in concert and privity with the Company or its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and any successors in interest. The Company shall give notice of this Consent Decree to any successors in interest prior to transfer of ownership, and shall simultaneously verify to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, Enforcement Division, that such notice has been given.

III.

In accordance with Department of Justice policy, 28 CFR Section 50.7, this proposed Consent Decree shall be available for public inspection and comment for thirty days. Counsel for the United States shall inform the Court and the defendant of the date notice of the proposed decree appears in the Federal Register. ++EP++

Page 2

At the expiration of the thirty day public comment period, counsel for the United States will inform the Court and the defendant as to whether there have been any comments on the proposed Consent Decree. Any substantive comments, and the governments's evaluation of them, including an indication of the advisability of entering the Consent Decree in light of the comments, will be provided to the Court and the defendant. If no comments or no substantive comments are received by the government, the Consent Decree may be entered.

IV.

1. Watervliet, a Delaware corporation, owns and operates a paper mill in Watervliet, Berrien County, Michigan, within the Western District of Michigan. This facility includes three (3) spreader stoker coal-fired boilers which provide power to operate the process equipment at the plant. Two of the three boilers are required to be operated simultaneously to generate sufficient steam to power the plant. The Third is a back up boiler only.

2. On May 31, 1972, pursuant to Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 7410(a)(1) ("the Act"), the Administrator of U.S. EPA approved, as part of the Michigan State Implementation Plan ("State Implementation Plan" or "SIP"), Michigan Air Pollution Control Commission Rules 336.41 and 336.44 ("Rule 336.41" and "Rule 336.44"), regulating visible emissions and particulate matter, respectively, from industrial sources of such pollutants.

3. Each boiler at Watervliet's paper mill has a steam capacity of 45,000 pounds per hour. Under Table 1 of Rule 336.44, particulate emissions from the boilers are limited to 0.65 pounds per 1,000 pounds of exhaust gases (corrected to 50% excess air).

4. On May 6, 1980, pursuant to Section 172(b) of the Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 7472(b), the Administrator of U.S. EPA approved, as part of the Michigan State Implementation Plan, Michigan Air Pollution Control Commission Rules 336.1301 and 336.1331 ("Rule 301" and "Rule 331"). Particulate emitting sources remain subject of Rules 336.41 and 336.44 and, further, must comply with the requirements of Rules 301 and 331 by the dates such requirements are made applicable to said sources under said rules. ++EP++

Page 3

Rule 301 limits visible emissions from Watervliet's boilers to less than 20 percent opacity (except as specified therein) as of the date of the Administrator's approval of said rule. Under Table 31 of Rule 331, particulate emissions from the boilers shall be limited to 0.45 pounds per 1,000 pounds exhaust gas (corrected to 50% excess air) as soon as practicable but not later than July 1, 1981.

5. On or about July 9, 1979, U.S. EPA issued a Notice of Violation (hereafter "NOV" or "Notice") to Watervliet pursuant to Section 113(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a)(1). The Notice cited the boilers for violations of Rules 336.41 and 336.44 of the Michigan State Implementation Plan.

6. In satisfaction of Section 113(a)(4) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a)(4), an opportunity to confer with the Administrator's delegate was extended to the Company in the NOV and a conference was held on the record on July 26, 1979.

7. The violations of Rules 336.41 and 336.44 have continued beyond the thirtieth day after the date of notification of the violations by U.S. EPA.

V.

In consideration of the foregoing, Watervliet HEREBY CONSENTS AND, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Watervliet achieve compliance with the Michigan State Implementation Plan as set forth below:

1. From the effective date of this Consent Decree, Watervliet shall comply with Rule 336.44.

2. From the effective date this Decree visible emissions from boilers 1, 2 and 3 shall not exceed the limits set forth in Rule 336.41.

3. On or before April 30, 1981, Watervliet shall submit to U.S. EPA for approval the outline of a particulate control program for boilers 1, 2 and 3 specifying equipment to be installed and other measures to achieve and maintain compliance with Rules 301 and 331, in the event that Watervliet, before July 31, 1981 elects to comply with the schedule set forth in Paragraph V.4. below, and thereafter on said date submits the items outlined in Paragraph V.4.A. below.

4. Defendant shall achieve compliance with Rules 301 and 331 by ceasing operation of the boilers on July 31, 1981; alternatively, Watervliet may elect to comply with Rules 301 and 331 by implementing a control program for boilers 1, 2 and 3 which has been approved by U.S. EPA, in accordance with the schedule set forth below: ++EP++

Page 4 a. July 31, 1981 Submit engineering plans and bid specifications to U.S. EPA. b. October 31, 1981 Place order with vendor for control equipment. c. March 31, 1982 Begin on-site construction of@@ control equipment. d. July 31, 1982 Complete construction and installation control equipment and start up. e. August 31, 1982 Achieve compliance with Rules 301 and 331; begin performance tests in accordance with Paragraph VII. f. September 30, 1982 Demonstrate compliance with Rules 301 and in accordance with Paragraph VII.

5. Watervliet shall notify U.S. EPA on or before July 15, 1981 of the substance of its election under Paragraph V.4. above. If the Company elects to cease operation of the boilers, it shall certify to U.S. EPA no later than August 5, 1981, that such operations have ceased by July 31, 1981. Failure by the Company to give U.S. EPA said notification on or before July 15, 1981, shall constitute an election by Watervliet to cease operation of the boilers by July 31, 1981 and shall subject Watervliet to the provisions of paragraph IX.E. hereof.

VI. INTERIM REQUIREMENTS

During the interim period preceding achievement and demonstration of final compliance with Rules 301 and 331, in accordance with Paragraph V.4. of this Decree, Watervliet shall take all reasonable measures to reduce visible emissions from boilers 1, 2 and 3 to the limits specified in Rule 301. Such measures shall include, but not be limited to the following restrictions on operation of boiler#3:

Boiler#3 shall not be operated except during periods of necessary downtime of boilers#1 or#2, as specified below:

1. One week during each calendar quarter from the last quarter of 1980 through September 30, 1982 for maintenance on each boiler, provided that U.S. EPA receive notice of such scheduled downtime in accordance with Paragraph VIII.2. of this Decree,

2. One week in May 1981 and one week in September 1981 for annual State inspections on each active boiler. ++EP++

Page 5

3. One week per active boiler in 1982 for annual State inspections.

4. An undeterminate amount of time, but not to exceed three months, during the installation of the air pollution control equipment necessary to comply with this Decree, provided that U.S. EPA is notified in accordance with Paragraph VIII.2. hereof.

5. Downtime of boilers 1 and 2 caused by unscheduled malfunctions of the boilers, such period not to exceed two weeks per year. Watervliet shall notify the District Engineer, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Air Quality Division as soon as possible after start-up of Boiler#3, and will notify U.S. EPA if such downtime extends beyond eight (8) hours.

Compliance with the applicable Michigan State Implementation Plan shall be demonstrated as follows:

1. Compliance with Rule 331 pursuant to Paragraph V.4.f. of this Decree shall be demonstrated by submitting results of stack tests conducted at the boiler stack in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Methods 1-5 published at 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, or, alternatively, in accordance with the procedures set forth in a letter from Environmental Instrument Systems, Inc. to U.S. EPA attached hereto as Exhibit A. One test will be performed during combined operation of boilers#1 and#2. A second test will be performed during combined operation of boiler#3 with either boiler #1 or #2. A test will consist of three hourly runs conducted under representative operating conditions so sampling is obtained during all phases of operation of the boilers. During all testing pursuant to this Decree the boilers shall be operated at no less than 80 percent rated capacity. Watervliet will provide U.S. EPA with supplier's coal analysis data sheets pertaining to coal burned during tests.

2. Compliance with Rule 301 shall be determined by smoke readings made by Michigan Department of Natural Resources or U.S. EPA certified smoke readers in accordance with EPA Reference Method 9 published at 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. Such readings will be made simultaneously with stack tests required pursuant to this Decree. ++EP++

Page 6

3. Watervliet shall notify U.S. EPA at least fifteen (15) days prior to the dates of any stack tests to be conducted pursuant to this Decree, so as to give U.S. EPA adequate opportunity to observe the tests.

VIII. RECORD-KEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

1. Beginning 30 days from the date this Decree is entered, and every three months thereafter, Watervliet shall submit to U.S. EPA a written report describing all malfunctions of pollution control equipment and all equipment affecting visible emissions, including the reasons for such malfunctions, any downtime of such equipment whether from malfunction or other causes; and the corrective action taken.

2. Watervliet shall notify U.S. EPA at least fifteen (15) days in advance of any scheduled routine maintenance work on Boilers #1 and #2; and, of the downtime anticipated during installation of the pollution control equipment. Such notice shall specify by dates the projected time period during which Boiler#3 will be operated.

3. No later than fifteen (15) days after any date for achievement of an incremental step specified in Paragraph V of this Consent Decree, Watervliet shall notify U.S. EPA in writing of its compliance or non-compliance with the requirement, including a detailed explanation of the reasons for non-compliance.

4. All submittals, notifications and reports to the U.S. EPA pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be made to Chief, Air Compliance Section, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, 230 South Dearborn, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

IX. CIVIL PENALTIES

A. Upon entry of this Consent Decree, Watervliet, in consideration of settlement of this action, agrees to pay a civil penalty in the amount of $5,000.00. Payment to the United States shall be by certified check payable to "Treasurer, United States of America", and delivered to Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, Chicago, Illinois 60604. ++EP++

Page 7

B. If Watervliet violates Rule 336.41 or 336.44 during the period this Order is in effect, Watervliet shall pay a stipulated penalty of $500 for each violation for each day the violation continues.

C. If Watervliet fails to conduct compliance tests or submit results as required by Paragraphs V.4.e. and f. herein, Watervliet shall pay a stipulated penalty of $1,000.00 for each day of operation until a compliance test has been conducted, or results submitted, respectively, in accordance with Paragraph VII.

D. If Watervliet fails to demonstrate compliance with the emission limitations in Rules 301 and 331 by the date set forth in Paragraph V.4.f. hereof, Watervliet shall pay a stipulated penalty of $1,000.00 for each day of violation until compliance has been demonstrated in accordance with this Decree.

E. If Watervliet elects to cease operation of the boilers under Paragraph 4 hereof to achieve compliance with Rules 301 and 331, failure to shut down by July 31, 1981, or start-up of any boiler out of compliance with either Rule 301 and Rule 331 shall subject Watervliet to a stipulated penalty of $5,000.00 per day of operation after July 31, 1981 in violation of said rules. This provision shall not apply if Watervliet elects on or before July 15, 1981 to comply by completing the program set forth in Paragraph V.4., and so notifies U.S. EPA of its election in accordance with Paragraph V.5. hereof.

F. The stipulated penalties which are assessable under this Section shall not be considered the exclusive remedy for violations of this Decree or other provisions of law.

G. Stipulated Penalties under this Section shall be paid by check-payable to "Treasurer, United States", and deposited with the Clerk of this Court within thirty (30) days after Plaintiff has made a demand for payment of the penalties.

X.

Notwithstanding any of the requirements of this Decree, Watervliet has the right to cease operation of the boilers at any time. Penalties under Paragraph IX.B. and IX.D. shall not accrue subsequent to shutdown of a boiler if the boiler is not operated after the scheduled compliance date. However, if such boiler is again placed in operation, Watervliet shall be ILLEGIBLE stipulated penalties under IX.B or IX.D. as of the date of resumed operations if such operations are not in compliance with Rules 336.41, 336.44, 301 or 331 after the final compliance dates started in Paragraph V.4. ++EP++

Page 8

The entry of this Consent Decree in no way relieves Watervliet of any liability for non-compliance penalties pursuant to Section 120 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420.

XII.

This Consent Decree in no way affects Watervliet's responsibility to comply with other State, Federal or local regulations, any superceding regulations approved by U.S. EPA as part of the Michigan State Implementation Plan, or any Order of this Court pursuant to Section 303 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7603.

XIII.

This Consent Decree shall terminate one hundred eighty (180) days after compliance with its terms has been demonstrated. Until such termination, jurisdiction is retained by this Court to issue such further Orders, directions or relief which may be appropriate to interpret, construct or effectuate this Decree or any provisions thereof.

WHEREFORE, this Consent Decree is hereby issued with agreement and concurrence of this parties hereto.

IT IS SO ORDERED

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Judge, U.S. District Court

PLAINTIFF

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

By:/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

ANGUS MACBETH

Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

Department of Justice

/s/ Robert C Gene

United States Attorney for the Western District

of Michigan

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

ILLEGIBLE

Regional Administrator

United States Environmental Protect Agency,

Region V

DEFENDANT

WATERVLIET PAPER COMPANY

By:/s/ Richard G. Osborne

Richard G. Osborne

President

December 5, 1980 ++EP++

^Z

WARREN, CITY OF

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-81-C030

CAA

INCIN

19810519

19810519

OHD980618573

WARREN WWTP

WARREN, OH

C79-1430-Y

05

CONSENT DECREE, USA V. CITY OF WARREN

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DISTRICT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF WARREN, a

Municipal Corporation,

Defendant,

Plaintiff, United States of America, having filed the Complaint herein on July 20, 1979, and with the plaintiff and defendant by their respective attorneys having consented to the entry of this Decree;

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, upon the pleadings without any admission or denial of the violations alleged in the Complaint, and without any adjudication of any issue of fact or law in this action, it is hereby Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed as follows:

I

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 7413 and 28 U.S.C. Section 1345, and of the parties to this action. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted against the defendant under 42 U.S.C. Section 7413.

II

The provisions of this Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the parties to this action, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and successors and assigns; and all persons, firms and corporations having notice of this Consent Decree by personal service or otherwise who are, or will be, in active concert or privity with the defendant, its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, successors, or assigns and all persons, firms, and corporations acting under, through or for it. ++EP++

Page 2 III

1. The City of Warren ("Warren"), an Ohio municipality, owns and operates a Waste Water Treatment Plant ("the plant") at 2323 Main Street, S. W., Warren, Ohio. The plant includes two incinerators (#1 and #2) that are major stationary sources of air emissions subject to the provisions of the State Implementation Plan for the State of Ohio, 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart KK. The plant is located within the Northern District of Ohio.

2. On March 24, 1977, Mr. Dale S. Bryson, Acting Director, Enforcement Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA"), sent a Notice of Violation to Warren and a copy of the Notice of Violation to the State of Ohio pursuant to Section 113(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (the "Act"), 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a)(1), formerly 42 U.S.C. Section 1857(c)-8(a)(1), alleging violations of Ohio Air Pollution Control Board Regulations AP-3-07 and AP-3-10 (now recodified as 3745-17-07 and 3745-17-09, respectively) by incinerators #1 and #2 at the plant.

3. Ohio Air Pollution Control Board Regulations AP-3-07 (3745-17-07) and AP-3-10 (3745-17-09) are requirements of an "applicable implementation plan" as the term is used in Section 113(a) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a).

4. Pursuant to Section 113(a)(4) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a)(4), opportunity to confer with representatives of the U.S. EPA was given to the City of Warren on May 2, 1977, at which time a conference to discuss the violations was held in the City of Warren.

5. U.S. EPA found that violations of Ohio AP-3-07 (3745-17-07) and AP-3-10 (3745-17-09) by incinerators #1 and #2 at the plant continued beyond the thirtieth day after the date of U.S. EPA's Notice of Violation. ++EP++

Page 3

6. On August 3, 1977, U.S. EPA issued an Administrative Enforcement Order pursuant to Section 113(a) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a), (formerly 42 U.S.C. Section 1857(c)-8(a)(1)) which called for Warren to bring its two incinerators into compliance with Ohio Air Pollution Control Board Regulations AP-3-07 (3745-17-07) and AP-3-10 (3745-17-09) by May 1, 1980.

7. On August 7, 1977, Public Law 95-95, known as the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, 42 U.S.C. Section 7401, et seq., became law. Public Law 95-95 introduced significant changes to the sections pursuant to which the Administrative Enforcement Order described in the preceding paragraph was issued. These amendments to the Act included a new Section 113(d), 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(d), providing for Delayed Compliance Orders, and detailed the procedures for the issuance of such Delayed Compliance Orders as well as limitations on their content. Section 113(d)(12) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(d)(12), provided that any Administrative Enforcement Order issued by U.S. EPA under Section 113(a), 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a),which was in effect on August 7, 1977, and which provided for an extension in the compliance schedule beyond July 1, 1979, would be void unless modified by August 7, 1978, to conform with the requirements of the newly enacted Section 113(d) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(d).

8. The Administrative Enforcement Order of August 3, 1977, does not comply with the requirement of Section 113(d) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(d), because it provides for an extension for compliance beyond July 1, 1979. ++EP++

Page 4

9. The City of Warren hereby agrees to achieve compliance as expeditiously as practicable and in any event no later than the dates specified in Part IV of this Decree.

IV

In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. The City of Warren shall complete the following specified acts with respect to its incinerators #1 and #2 at the Warren Waste Water Plant on or before the dates set forth below:

i. The City of Warren shall comply immediately with Ohio Air Pollution Control Board Regulations AP-3-07 (3745-17-07) and AP-3-10 (3745-17-09) and shall maintain compliance at all times in the future.

ii. The City of Warren shall not incinerate sludge, except for testing purposes, unless it can demonstrate compliance with Ohio Air Pollution Control Board Regulation AP-3-10 (3745-17- 09), by submitting test data from a stack test made in accordance with procedures set forth in Methods 1 thru 5 of Appendix A of 40 CFR Part 60. Test protocol shall be submitted at least thirty (30) days Prior to testing, and results shall be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after testing.

2. The City of Warren shall install a continuous monitoring system for the measurement of opacity at all stacks venting flue gas generated by incinerators #1 and #2 at the plant not later than December 31, 1983. The continuous monitoring system shall be installed, calibrated, maintained, and operated in accordance with the procedures set forth in Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 60. Data recorded by the monitoring system shall be retained by the City for a period of two years after it is obtained. ++EP++

Page 5

3. Progress reports and required information with regard to compliance with the schedules set forth in paragraphs IV 1. and IV 2. of this Part IV shall be submitted by the defendant to the Chief, Air Compliance Section, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, with copies to the Ohio EPA, Northeast District Office, 2110 E. Aurora Road, Twinsburg, Ohio 44087, and the Mahoning-Trumbull Air Pollution Control agency, Metropolitan Tower, 1 Federal Plaza West, Youngstown, Ohio 44503. The first of such reports shall be three months from the date of entry of this Decree. Reports thereafter shall be submitted every three (3) months until such time as the facilities subject to this Decree attain final compliance. Reports shall indicate whether milestones to be met during the quarter have been met.

4. On January 1, 1984, and every three months thereafter, a quarterly report shall be sent by defendant to the U.S. EPA, the Ohio EPA, Northeast District Office, and Mahoning-Trumbull Air Pollution Control Agency reporting all 6-minute data averages from the continuous monitoring system described in Paragraph 2 of this Part IV reduced as specified in 40 C.F.R. Section 60.13(h) in excess of 20 percent opacity. This reporting requirement shall terminate one year after final compliance is achieved.

5. This Decree supersedes Order No. EPA-5-77-A-42.

6. This Decree in no way affects the City of Warren's responsibility to comply with any other State, Federal, or local regulations or any Order of this Court.

7. The City of Warren acknowledges that it has been notified that it may be subject to penalties under Section 120 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420. ++EP++

Page 6

8. It is hereby stipulated and agreed between the parties that any failure by the City of Warren to comply with the terms of this Decree shall result in the payment of penalties for civil contempt in the amount of $500 per day for each day such failure continues. Such penalties shall not be the exclusive remedy for violation of this Consent Decree.

9. The parties agree and acknowledge that final approval and entry of this Decree is subject to the requirements of 28 CFR Section 50.7, which provides that notice of proposed Consent Decrees be given to the public, and the public shall have at least thirty (30) days in which to make any comments.

10. This Consent Decree shall be in settlement of this civil enforcement action brought by plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 7413. This Court retains jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of enforcing the rights and obligations created under this Decree.

11. This Decree shall terminate 120 days after the City of Warren completes the work set forth in Section IV, 1 and 2, and achieves compliance with the regulations specified therein, and maintains continuous compliance during the 120 day period.

PLAINTIFF

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

JAMES W. HOORMAN

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

JAMES R. WILLIAMS

United States Attorney

JOHN McGUIRE

Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA

DEFENDANT

CITY OF WARREN

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

MAYOR

(Per Resolution No. 3211/78, pass

by Warren City Council on 12-11-

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

CITY ATTORNEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ++EP++

MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-82-C006

CAA

MISC

19820427

19820427

MID006016117

MARTIN MARIETTA CHEMICAL CORP

MANISTEE, MI

C-81-932-CA7

05

CONSENT DECREE, USA V. MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, v.

MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION,

Defendant.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff United States of America, at the request of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), filed a Complaint on against defendant Martin Marietta Corporation, alleging violations of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq.) (the Act) and the Michigan State Implementation Plan approved thereunder;

WHEREAS, defendant Martin Marietta Corporation (Martin Marietta) owns and operates a magnesium oxide refractory product manufacturing facility at Manistee, Michigan (Manistee plant), at which the allegations contained in said Complaint arose;

WHEREAS, plaintiff and defendant, in order to avoid litigating the claims contained in said Complaint, agree that settlement of this matter is in the public interest and is the most appropriate means of resolving this matter;

WHEREAS, plaintiff and defendant have jointly moved this Court to enter this Consent Decree;

NOW, THEREFORE, without trial of any issue of fact or law and without any admission by defendant of the violations alleged in the Complaint, and upon consent of the parties, by their attorneys and authorized officials, it is hereby Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed:

I

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein under 28 U.S.C. Section 1345 and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413, and jurisdiction over the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of entering this Decree. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted against defendant. ++EP++

Page 2 II

The provisions of this Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the defendant, its officers, directors, employees, and successors. Defendant shall give notice of this Decree to any successor in interest prior to transfer of ownership of the Manistee plant, and shall simultaneously verify to the Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA Region V, that such notice has been given.

III

The opacity of emissions from the Manistee plant is limited by Michigan Air Pollution Control Commission General Rule 336.1301, as approved by U.S. EPA on May 6, 1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 29790). A copy of R 336.1301 is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked Exhibit A.

IV

The amount of particulate matter emitted from each of the Manistee plant processes is limited by Michigan Air Pollution Control Commission General Rule 336.1331, as approved by U.S. EPA and May 6, 1980 (45 Fed. reg. 29790). A copy of R 336.1331 is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked Exhibit B.

V

This decree requires compliance with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331 at the following processes at defendant's Manistee plant: rotary kiln cooler 1, shaft kiln 1, shaft kiln 2, and shaft kiln 3. The stacks, the processes and pollution control devices for shaft kilns 1,2 and 3, are as follows:

Processes Vented to the Stack Pollution Control Devices Stack (directly or via bypass) (including devices for bypassed flow) A Shaft kiln 1 cyclone 1 B Shaft kiln 1, Herreshoff furnace 1 cyclone 1 (Herreshoff 1) C Shaft kiln 1, Herreshoff 1 cyclone 1, electrostatic precipitator (ESP) 1 D Shaft kiln 2 cyclone 2 E Shaft kiln 2, Herreshoff 2, and cyclone 1, cyclone 2 shaft kiln 1 F Shaft kiln 2, Herreshoff 2, and cyclone 1, cyclone 2, ESP 2 shaft kiln 1 G Shaft kiln 3 cyclone 3, pilot baghouse H Shaft kiln 3, Herreshoff 3, cyclone 2, cyclone 3, ESP 3 shaft kiln 2 (operating by 7/1/81) ++EP++ Page 3

A. On or before the date of entry of this Decree, the defendant shall achieve and thereafter maintain compliance with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331 at rotary cooler 1, shaft kiln 1 and shaft kiln 2 at the Manistee plant.

B. In order to maintain compliance with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331 at rotary cooler 1, shaft kiln 1, and shaft kiln 2, and to minimize emissions at shaft kiln 3 pending compliance as provided in Section VII of this Decree, defendant shall perform the following acts by the time provided:

1. Rotary Cooler 1

a. Martin Marietta shall permanently weld shut the cooling air vent to the atmosphere from rotary cooler 1 on or before the date of entry of this Decree, and shall thereafter vent emissions from the rotary cooler only through a rotary kiln.

b. Martin Marietta shall shut down rotary kiln 1 and rotary cooler 1 on or before the date of entry of this Decree.

c. Martin Marietta shall thereafter operate rotary cooler 1 only if it complies with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331, and:

(1) at least 60 days prior to operation defendant gives written notice to U.S. EPA of the method to be used to comply with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331 and,

(2) defendant submits stack and opacity test results demonstrating compliance within 60 days of startup. ++EP++

Page 4 2. Shaft Kilns 1,2 and 3

a. As of the date of entry of this Decree, only magnesium oxide that has already been fully sintered in a shaft kiln shall be fed to any shaft kiln during its startup or shut down.

b. As of the date of entry of this Decree, Martin Marietta shall operate shaft kilns 1,2 and 3 so that all shaft kiln flue gas is combined with the flue gas from a Herreshoff furnace and is vented to an electrostatic precipitator (ESP). Any shaft kiln whose flue gas ceases to be so combined shall be shut down within two hours.

c. As of the date of entry of this Decree, no more than one shaft kiln at a time shall be vented to ESP 1, and no more than two shaft kilns at a time shall be vented to ESPs 2 or 3.

d. As of the date of entry of this Decree, defendant shall vent emissions through stacks A or D only during startup or shutdown of shaft kiln 1 or 2, respectively. Defendant shall vent emissions to stacks B or E only from Herreshoff furnace 1 or 2, respectively, and only when such Herreshoff furnace is placed on standby (i.e., nothing is being fed to the Herreshoff).

e. As of July 1, 1981, defendant shall vent emissions to the ESP bypass stack for shaft kiln 3 (Stack G) only during startup or shutdown of shaft kiln 3. ++EP++

Page 5 VII

Martin Marietta shall achieve and maintain compliance with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331 at shaft kiln 3 by performing the following acts, on or before the dates specified:

A. Initiate on-site construction of electrostatic precipitator (ESP) 3 and Herreshoff furnace 3

:Completed

B. Complete construction of outer shell for ESP 3

:Completed

C. Install ESP 3 internal and electrical equipment, and complete construction of Herreshoff furnace 3

:Completed

D. Complete the construction of ESP 3 and the during of shaft kiln 3 to ESP 3

:Date of entry of Decree

E. Achieve final compliance with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331 and perform stack and opacity testing

:Date of entry of Decree

F. Demonstrate final compliance with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331 at shaft kiln 3, and submit stack and opacity test results to U.S. EPA

:Date of entry of Decree

G. Maintain final compliance with R 336.1301 and R 336.1331 at shaft kiln 3, on and after

:Date of entry of Decree ++EP++

Page 6 VIII

As of the date of entry of this Decree, defendant shall comply with the operation and maintenance plan, attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked Exhibit C.

IX

A. Defendant shall install, calibrate, maintain and operate continuous opacity monitoring equipment on each of the stacks known as stacks C and F, in accordance with the procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B, and any amendments thereto.

B. Continuous opacity monitors shall be installed on or before the date of entry of this Decree.

C. On or before the date of entry of this Decree, defendant shall calibrate and thereafter operate and maintain continuous monitoring equipment, and submit to U.S. EPA specification tests results.

D. Defendant shall submit to U.S. EPA and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) each calendar quarter a written report of all six minute periods of monitored emissions at each stack in excess of 20 percent opacity, including the opacity of such emissions, their cause, if known, and corrective action taken. All such reports shall include time periods during which any emissions were not monitored and the reason therefor. Reports shall be submitted on or before the 20th day following the end of each calendar quarter. All records produced by monitoring equipment shall be retained for a period of not less than two years following their production. ++EP++

Page 7 X

All stack testing and opacity testing required by this Decree shall be performed in accordance with the procedures as set forth in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A and Michigan Air Pollution Control Commission General Rules 336.2001 through 336.2004, inclusive, as approved by U.S. EPA on May 6, 1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 29790). Separate testing of shaft kiln 3 shall be performed while: a) shaft kilns 2 and 3 and Herreshoff 3 are vented to ESP 3; b) shaft kiln 3 and Herreshoff 3 are vented to ESP 3; and, c) only Herreshoff 3 is vented to ESP 3. Twenty days prior to any testing to be performed under this Decree, defendant shall notify U.S. EPA of such testing and submit written test procedures to be used. Defendant shall permit U.S. EPA representatives or consultants to observe testing.

XI

A. Not later than twenty (20) working days after each date specified in Paragraphs VI.B.1.b., VII.D., VII.E. and IX.C. of this Decree, defendant shall notify the Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, in writing, that defendant has or has not completed the acts required by such date, and the reasons therefor. Notification to U.S. EPA of any anticipated delay shall not excuse the delay.

B. Defendant shall maintain a record of pollution control device operations including at a minimum periods of process equipment and pollution control device downtime, and an on-going record of the process equipment being vented to each pollution control device.

C. All reports or submittals required by this Decree shall be made to Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, and Chief, Air Quality Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, P.O. Box 30028, Lansing, Michigan 48909.

XII

Nothing in this Decree shall affect U.S. EPA's authority to enforce Section 303 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Section 7603) and the other portions of the Act relevant thereto. ++EP++

Page 8 XIII

Nothing in this Decree shall affect defendant's responsibility to comply with any State law or regulation, local ordinance or federal law or regulation.

XIV

Nothing in this Decree shall affect defendant's responsibility to pay noncompliance penalties that may be assessed under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Section 7420). Defendant acknowledges that it has been notified that it may be subject to such penalties.

XV

The provisions of this Decree shall be severable, and should any provision(s) be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be inconsistent with state or federal law and therefore unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect.

XVI

If defendant fails to complete any requirements of this Decree specified below, defendant shall pay to U.S. EPA, within 30 days of demand, a penalty of $1000 per day for each failure to submit a report required by Paragraphs VII.F., IX.C., IX.D., and XI.A. of this Decree, $5000 per day for each failure to comply with Paragraphs VI.A., VI.B.1.a.-c., VI.B.2.a.-c., or VII.G. of this Decree and $10,000 per day for each failure to comply with Paragraphs VI.B.2.d.-e. or VII.E. of this Decree. Payment shall be made by certified check payable to the order of "Treasurer, United States of America," and tendered to U.S. EPA. Such stipulated penalties shall not be considered the exclusive remedy for violations of this Decree or other provisions of law.

XVII

Martin Marietta Corporation shall pay to the United States of America the amount of $100,000. Payment shall be made by certified check payable to the order of "Treasurer, United States of America" and tendered to the United States Environmental Protection Agency within 30 days of the entry of this Decree. ++EP++

Page 9 XVIII

A. If any event occurs which causes or may cause a delay in the achievement or demonstration of compliance with any requirement of this Decree, defendant shall notify the Court and the Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA in writing within twenty (20) days of the event describing in detail the anticipated length of the delay, the precise cause or causes of delay, the measures taken and to be taken by defendant to prevent or minimize the delay and the timetable by which those measure will be implemented. Defendant will adopt all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such delay. Failure by defendant to comply with the notice requirements of this Paragraph shall render this Section void and of no force and effect as to the particular incident involved and constitute a waiver of defendant's right to obtain an extension of its obligation under this clause based on such incident.

B. Defendant shall not raise as a defense to any action taken to enforce this Decree, a failure to act or perform by any of its agents, servants or employees.

C. If U.S. EPA and the defendant agree that the delay or the anticipated delay has been or will be caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of such defendant, time for performance may be extended for a period not exceeding the delay resulting from such circumstance. In such event, the parties may apply to this Court for an appropriate modification of this Decree. In the event the parties cannot agree, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. Increased costs shall not be considered a reason beyond the control of the defendant. The burden of proving that any delay was caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of the defendant shall rest with the defendant.

D. Compliance with any requirement of this Decree, by itself, shall not constitute compliance with any other requirement. A delay in achievement of any compliance date does not necessarily effect an extension of a subsequent compliance date or dates. Defendant must make an individual showing of proof regarding each delayed incremental step or other requirement for which an extension is sought. ++EP++

Page 10 XIX

This Decree shall terminate when defendant has demonstrated and maintained compliance with all the requirements herein for twelve consecutive months. Until the termination of this Decree, this Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action to enable the Court to issue such further orders, directives or other relief as it may deem appropriate.

XX

This Decree shall be full settlement and satisfaction of the Compliant filed herein.

The parties do hereby consent:

MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION

By:/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Vice President

By:/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Assistant General Counsel

Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

United States Attorney

Western District of Michigan

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

Valdas V. Adamkus

Acting Regional Administrator

United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Region V

By:/s/ David M. Taliaferro

David M. Taliaferro, Attorney

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region V ++EP++

EXH A-1 Exhibit A

R 336.1301. Standards for density of emissions.

Rule 301. (1) A person shall not cause or permit to be discharged into the atmosphere, from a single source of emission, a visible air contaminant with a density of more than 20% opacity, except in the following situations:

(a) A visible air contaminant with a density of not more than 40% opacity may be emitted for not more than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period, but this emission shall not be permitted on more than 3 occasions during any 24-hour period.

(b) Where the presence of uncombined water vapor is the only reason for failure of an emission to meet the requirements of this rule.

(c) Where specifically permitted by the commission in a case where compliance is not technically and economically feasible and where all other requirements of the commission's rules are being met.

(2) The provisions of this rule shall not apply to visible emissions from slot-type coke ovens. ++EP++

EXH B-1 Exhibit B

R 336.1331. Emission of particulate matter.

Rule 331. (1) It is unlawful for a person to cause or allow the emission of particulate matter from any source in excess of any of the following limits:

(a) The maximum allowable emission rate listed in table 31.

(b) The maximum allowable emission rate listed by the commission on its own initiative or by application. A new listed value shall be based upon the control results achievable with the application of the best technically feasible, practical equipment available. This applies only to sources not assigned a specific emission limit in table 31.

(c) The maximum allowable emission rate specified as a condition of a permit to install or a permit to operate.

(d) The maximum allowable emission rate specified in a voluntary agreement, performance contract, stipulation, or an order of the commission.

(e) The maximum allowable emission rate as determined by table 32 for sources not covered in subdivisions (a) to (d).

(2) Compliance with any emission limit specified in this rule shall be determined by using the corresponding reference test method specified in table 31. ++EP++

EXH B-2 TABLE 31 Particulate matter emission schedule

TABLE OMITTED ++EP++

EXH B-3 TABLE CONT'D

TABLE OMITTED ++EP++

EXH C-1 Exhibit C MALFUNCTION ABATEMENT PLAN MARTIN MARIETTA CHEMICALS October, 1979 ++EP++ EXH C-2 FOREWORD

This Malfunction Abatement Plan is submitted to Michigan's Department of Natural Resources, Air Quality Division, by Martin Marietta Chemicals and will apply to dust collecting equipment located at the Manistee, Michigan Refractories plant. ++EP++

EXH C-3 INTRODUCTION

The Malfunction Abatement Plan, Rule 336.911, as proposed on February 20, 1979 and entered as part of Michigan's Air Quality Implementation Plan must contain a preventative maintenance program, operational variables and prevention of air contamination procedures during malfunction.

Martin Marietta's Malfunction Abatement Plan satisfies Rule 336.911 and is reviewed in three sections of this report; (1) Section I - Preventative Maintenance, (2) Section II - Operation, and (3) Section III - Air Contamination Abatement.

Martin Marietta Chemicals presently uses electrostatic precipitators, fabric baghouses and cyclones for dust collection. The Malfunction Abatement Plan includes only control equipment which operates at flow rates greater than 5,000 ACFM due to the size of the Manistee plant and the number of dust collecting equipment items within the plant. ++EP++

EXH C-4 I. PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE

Maintenance of dust control equipment is accomplished by a centralized maintenance department. Supervisors in each section of the plant are responsible to insure preventative maintenance is completed to their satisfaction. These Supervisors as of 30 August 1980 are:

W. Sawhill - Periclase Supervisor

C. Hoban - Packhouse Supervisor

D. Etheridge - Rotary Kiln Supervisor

T. Rodgers - MgOH Slurry Supervisor

W. Zouck - Maintenance Supervisor

A. Electrostatic Precipitators (ESP)

To insure proper emission control obtained by ESP's, maintenance must be performed both the prevent serious damage and to correct improper operation. The following maintenance schedule will apply to all existing and future ESP's located at Martin Marietta's Manistee plant:

Repair and Inspection Frequency Procedure Annually A. Internal Inspection 1. Observation of dust deposit on the collection plates. One quarter inch is considered normal; whereas, more than one quarter inch coating means rapper system operating improperly and a clear plate means collection plate may be shortened. Corrective Action: repair necessary parts. ++EP++ EXH C-5 INTRODUCTION

The Malfunction Abatement Plan, Rule 336.911, as proposed on February 20, 1979 and entered as part of Michigan's Air Quality Implementation Plan must contain a preventative maintenance program, operational variables and prevention of air contamination procedures during malfunction.

Martin Marietta's Malfunction Abatement Plan satisfies Rule 336.911 and is reviewed in three sections of this report; (1) Section I - Preventative Maintenance, (2) Section II - Operation, and (3) Section III - Air Contamination Abatement.

Martin Marietta Chemicals presently uses electrostatic precipitators, fabric baghouses and cyclones for dust collection. The Malfunction Abatement Plan includes only control equipment which operates at flow rates greater than 5,000 ACFM due to the size of the Manistee plant and the number of dust collecting equipment items within the plant.

I. PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE A. Electrostatic Precipitators (ESP)

To insure proper emission control obtained by ESP's, maintenance must be performed both to prevent serious damage and to correct improper operation. The following maintenance schedule will apply to all existing and future ESP's located at Martin Marietta's Manistee plant:

Repair and Inspection: Frequency Procedure Annual A. Internal Inspection 1. Observation of dust deposit on the collection plates. One quarter inch is considered normal; whereas, more than one quarter inch coating means rapper system operating improperly and a clear plate means collection plate may be shortened. Corrective Action: repair necessary parts.

++EP++

EXH C-6 Repair and Inspection Frequency Procedure Annual 2. Observation of dust buildup on the discharging wires. Corrective Action: Excessive buildup must be eliminated. 3. Observation for interior corrosion. Corrosion is caused by excessive moisture and air leakage. Corrective Action: note location of corrosion for cause and correct. 4. Observation of collection plates for alignment and spacing. Corrective Action: repair plates which are warped or misaligned. 5. Observation of the location of the discharge wire and hangers. Corrective Action: Measure the spacing to see if the wire is midway between the collecting plates. Adjust to insure proper location. 6. Observation of discharge wire conditions. Corrective Action: replace all wires which are broken, brittle or appear overstressed. B. Penthouse Area Inspection: 1. Observation for corrosion. Corrective Action: determine cause for corrosion and repair. 2. Observation and cleaning of high tension insulators. 3. Check all electrical connections. Corrective Action: replace all damaged components and wiring. C. Transformer - Rectifier Inspection 1. Check liquid level 2. Observation and cleaning of lines, insulators, busing and terminals. 3. Observation for oil leakage. ++EP++ EXH C-7 Repair and Inspection Frequency Procedure Annual D. Control Inspection 1. Observation and cleaning of control cabinet relay contacts. Corrective Action: replace if excessively worn or burnt. 2. Observation and calibration of instrument controls. Corrective Action: replace excessively worn controls. Quarterly A. Rapper System 1. Observation of distribution switch contacts. Correction Action: clean and lubricate contacts. Replace all worn parts. 2. Observation of operation for free movement. Corrective Action: adjust or replace items which cause sticking or erratic movement. 3. Observation of operational intervals Corrective Action: adjust frequency to predescribed time intervals. Daily 1. Record electrical reading for each unit. Check for abnormal readings. 2. Check rapper controls for time intervals and operation. 3. Inform supervision of any abnormal observations. ++EP++ EXH C-8 B. Baghouse Collectors

The following maintenance schedule applies to the major baghouses located at the Manistee plant:

Frequency of Inspection Procedure Annual A. Internal Inspection 1. Observation of dust abrasion. The inlet and

out let sides of filters should be checked for wear

due to dust abrasion. Corrective Action: repair and replace parts affected. 2. Observation of dust buildup in clean air plenum. Corrective Action: seal all bag holders and check for leakage if dust buildup is present. Annual B. External Inspection 1. Observation of shell conditions. Check for pin holes or other sources for dust leakage. Check port hold gaskets for leakage, brittleness or wear. 2. Observation of ducts. Check ducts for abrasion, leakage at all seams and for pluggage. 3. Observation of solenoid valves. Check for proper operation and wear. Check electrical wiring for worn insulation and looseness. Check electrical timer for proper cleaning intervals. Annual C. Motor and Fan Inspection Including 1. Observation of belts and shaft. Check belt tension and general conditions. 2. Observation of fan. Check rpm of fan. Check conditions of impellers for abrasion wear. Lubricate all bearings and bushing where necessary. 3. Observation of motor. Lubricate all necessary spots. Check electrical connections and current draw. Excessive current draw may mean binding or dust buildup in the fan or shaft. 4. Observation of fan housing. Check damper for proper setting and operation. Clean any buildup or dust from inside housing. ++EP++ EXH C-9 Frequency of Inspection Procedure Quarterly GENERAL INSPECTION INCLUDING 1. Observation of dust hopper. Check operation of discharge valves and air lock valves. Repair or replace if needed. 2. Observation of inlet damper. Check for proper setting. Check for operation and replace when worn. 3. Observation of baghouse operation. Check air pressure to bag filter to maintain 90-100 psig. Check static pressure on inlet and effluent sides of baghouse. Check mechanical shakers and vibrators for operation. Lubricate all shaker bearing, etc. Check all timers for cleaning frequencies both air pulse and shaker style baghouses. Daily GENERAL INSPECTION INCLUDING 1. Observation of pressure drop across the baghouse. Check for pressure drop abnormalities. Zero drop means bags are ruptured, excessive leakage, or manometer plugged. Excessive pressure drop over 9" water pressure means bags are blinding. 2. Observation of hopper pluggage. Check hopper for fullness by striking the side. A hollow sound should be heard. 3. Observation of pickup points. Check all areas where ducts pick up dust for vacuum. If no vacuum is found, duct is plugging or disconnected. 4. Observation of discharge vent opening. Check to determine presence of dust. If excessively dusty, then check for bag ruptures. Check for dust buildup around vent and clean when necessary. ++EP++ EXH C-10 C. Cyclone Collectors

The following maintenance schedule applies to all cyclones located in the Manistee plant.

Frequency of Inspection Procedure Annual GENERAL INSPECTION 1. Observation of ducts. Check inlet and effluent ducts for leakage. Check cyclone and ducts for wear due to dust abrasion. 2. Observation of fans and motors. Check fans for proper air flow. Check rpm of fan. Check and lubricate all bearings of fan and motor. 3. Observation of dust hopper. Check hopper valves and transfer systems for wear and buildup. Lubricate all gearboxes and bearings on transfer system. Daily GENERAL INSPECTION 1. Check pressure drop across cyclone. Report any excessive readings. 2. Check all dampers and diverters for proper setting. Check all dampers for operability. 3. Check discharge vents to determine visible dust discharge and buildup. ++EP++ EXH C-11

Major replacement parts which should be inventoried are summarized below:

Equipment ESP Discharge wires Hanger wires Gasket material for sealing flanges Sealing material for penthouse area Gears and bearings for collection transfer equip. Electrical wire Baghouse Fabric filter bags Bag retainers Miscellaneous hardware for shaker mechanism Manometers Damper and hopper valves Sealants for dust work Gaskets for porthole seals Cyclone Sealant for duct repairs ++EP++ EXH C-12

II. OPERATIONS

The following table lists the major dust collection equipment, operational parameters, and identification of monitoring required for malfunction abatement: ++EP++

EXH C-13

TABLE OMITTED ++EP++

EXH C-14 ESP OPERATIONAL RANGES

TABLE OMITTED ++EP++

EXH C-15

Monitoring of the designated operational parameters will be accomplished daily, once per shift. If any abnormal readings are detected, the shift foreman will be contacted immediately, at which time he will determine the corrective action to be taken.

Operational guidelines will be issued to each foreman for his reference.

III. AIR CONTAMINATION ABATEMENT

The corrective measures taken to prevent excessive emissions will be initiated as soon as the malfunction is discovered. The method description for repair will vary with the problem and the control equipment.

The malfunction of an electrostatic precipitator may indicate the need to replace internal parts. In this case, the kilns and furnaces will be shut down until the ESP is repaired. Internal repair will take 4-6 hours for cool down and 4-6 hours for repair. External repairs will take 4-8 hours while the ESP is operating.

Cyclone malfunction is usually infrequent because of the few movable parts. In most cases, repairs can be made in 4-6 hours during which time the process source will be shut down. The replacement of manometers, etc. can be accomplished with no shut down of equipment.

Malfunction of baghouses are usually caused by defective fabric bags. Repair or replacement of the baghouse malfunction will vary from 4 hours for a small unit to 16 hours for a large unit. During this period of repair, the sources being controlled by the baghouse will be shut down or be routed to other dust collectors. External repair can be accomplished with no shut down of the baghouse unit.

If malfunction of any unit mentioned creates excessive emissions for more than one (1) hour, the Air Quality Division will be notified. If immediate repair cannot be initiated, all process sources for the malfunctioning unit will be shut down as soon as mechanically and chemically possible. ++EP++ ^Z

IRONTON COKE CORP

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT ORDER

05-79-C003

CAA

STEEL

19790326

OHD082739632

IRONTON COKE CORP

IRONTON, OH

C-2-79-253

05

CONSENT ORDER, US. V. IRONTON COKE CORP

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

IRONTON COKE CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Plaintiff United States of America having filed the Complaint herein on March 9, 1979;

And the plaintiff, and defendant Ironton Coke Corporation ("Ironton") having consented without trial or adjudication of any issue of fact or law herein to the entry of this Consent Order, and without this Order constituting any evidence or admission by any parties hereto with respect to any such issue,

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows:

I

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of entering this Consent Order. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted against the defendant.

II

The provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to and be binding upon the parties to this action, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and successors; in addition, the provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Consent Order and who are, or will be, acting in concert and privity with the defendant to this action or its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees and successors. ++EP++

Page 2 III

In consideration of the foregoing and the representations made in open Court by the parties hereto, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

A. Ironton shall complete the following acts at its coke plant and shall achieve compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11 (previously Ohio Air Pollution Regulation AP-3-07 and AP-3-11, respectively):

1. Ironton shall operate the coke plant batteries in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Appendix to this ORDER.

2. Ironton shall modify the coke plant batteries so as to charge coal by the process known as stage charging (except that after No. 3 Battery's larry car has been modified for stage charging, stage charging shall be employed at Battery No. 2 only when the existing pipe line charging system is not in operation) and achieve compliance by August 1, 1978.

3. Ironton shall, not later than December 31, 1980, or the date upon which it ceases to operate Battery No. 3 as it now exists, whichever is earlier, have the exclusive option either to install baffles in the No. 1 Quench Station, or to cease operation of the No. 1 Quench Station altogether. If owner at its exclusive option decides to install baffles, construction of such baffles shall be completed at the earlier of the following dates: December 31, 1980, or 10 months subsequent to any earlier date upon which owner ceases operation of the No. 3 battery as it now exists.

4. Ironton shall control emissions from Batteries No. 1 and No. 2 during pushing operations by installing control equipment. Pushing operations shall be defined as commencing when doors are removed and concluding when the quench car enters the quench tower. ++EP++

Page 3

Ironton may elect to install any type of pushing control system (including, but not limited to, a scrubber car, a shed or other technology) approved by U.S. EPA, according to the following schedule:

a. Selection of control equipment 5-1-78 b. Submission of plans and demonstration of effectiveness to the Administrator 7-1-78 c. Completion of engineering 4-1-79 d. Commencement of construction 6-1-79 e. Completion of construction 12-1-79

5. Ironton shall shut down Battery No. 3 no later than December 31, 1980, provided, however, that Ironton at its exclusive option, may replace such Battery by building a Battery No. 4 on site, or by rebuilding Battery No. 3 in kind. Ironton shall incorporate the Best Available Control Technology in rebuilding Battery No. 3 in kind or in replacing Battery No. 3 with a Battery No. 4 on site. If Ironton elects either to rebuild battery No. 3 in kind or to replace Battery No. 3 with a Battery No. 4 on site, Ironton shall comply with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11 and meet the following emission limitations (which for purposes of this facility at this time shall be defined as LAER) at its new coke making facility;

a. No coke-oven gas from the new battery shall be burned unless it contains a concentration of sulfur compounds, expressed as H2S, of less than 35 grains per 100 dscf of coke-oven gas produced. Included in this concentration are all sulfur compounds, expressed as H2S, emitted from sulfur recovery equipment, including the tail gas, used to process the sulfur compounds removed from coke-oven gas. ++EP++

Page 4

b. The new battery must meet the following limitations:

i. The duration of visible emissions during charging operations shall not exceed a total of 84 seconds for seven consecutive charges.

ii. No emissions of particulates from the waste gas stack shall exceed 0.03 grains/dscf (filterable).

iii. At no time shall there be visible emissions from greater than 5% of the offtake piping, 2% of charging hole lids, and 10% of the coke oven doors (for purposes of this standard the chuck door and pusher side door shall be considered one door).

iv. Emissions from pushing operations shall not exceed 0.03 pounds of particulate matter per ton of coke pushed for not less than 90% of total emissions during the pushing operation.

6. In regard to coke oven battery stack operations on Battery No. 1 and No. 2, Ironton shall proceed in the following manner to achieve compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11:

a. Ironton shall complete a program of spraying, patching, and ultimate rehabilitation of coke ovens designed to bring emissions from the stacks of Battery No. 1 and No. 2 into compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11 by July 15, 1978. ++EP++

Page 5

b. U.S. EPA shall conduct visible emission testing by August 15, 1978, to determine whether the coke battery stacks for such batteries are in compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11. Such testing shall be conducted by qualified U.S. EPA "smoke observers" and shall consist of visible emissions observations in accordance with U.S. EPA Method 9. If such visible emissions observations should be inconclusive to prove compliance with OAC-3745-17-11, stack tests shall also be conducted.

Based on such testing, U.S. EPA shall notify Ironton whether coke battery stacks 1 or 2 are in compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11. If Ironton in good faith believed that the test results were not representative or that the readings were incorrect, Ironton may request a retesting in the same manner within a period of 10 days. In such event, a retest shall occur within 15 days of the request.

c. In the event that either or both of the stacks at Battery Nos. 1 or 2 are not in compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11, then for each stack which is not in compliance Ironton shall, by September 1, 1978, submit a schedule to U.S. EPA for the installation of control equipment which shall include dates certain for each of the following increments: selection of control equipment and demonstration of effectiveness to the Administrator; completion of construction; provided, however, that the completion shall be no later than April 15, 1980, for Battery No. 1 stack and June 1, 1980, for Battery No. 2 stack. ++EP++

Page 6 1V

Ironton's obligation to meet any requirement set forth in this Consent Decree, including achievement of compliance with any specific emission standard or regulation, shall be excused to the extent caused by Act of God or the public enemy, fire, explosion, flood, tornado, earthquake, lightning, riot, sabotage, war, strike, or work stoppage, or failure of a subcontractor to timely perform (provided Ironton has made all efforts to prevent or minimize any such failure). Should any of the foregoing events occur, the parties shall stipulate to a reasonable extension of time for achieving the requirements of this Decree and shall so inform the Court. Should the parties fail to agree on the period of such extension, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution.

V

Commencing January 15, 1979, progress reports shall be submitted to this Court and the Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, with a copy to the Director, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216. Reports thereafter shall be submitted every four (4) months until such time that the facilities subject to this Order attain compliance. Reports shall indicate whether milestones to be met during the quarter have been met.

VI

Under the authority of Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section7413(b) and pursuant to the U.S. EPA Penalty Policy dated April 11, 1978, EPA has calculated civil penalties in the amount of $2,496,000.00. Because an Administrative Order issued by U.S. EPA on May 13, 1977, included the same schedules contained herein, and in consideration of defendant's substantial compliance with the terms thereof, no penalty has been demanded of defendant as a condition of the entry of this Consent Decree. ++EP++

Page 7 VII

This Order shall be in full settlement and satisfaction of the action filed herein and of defendant's liability for the violations alleged in the Complaint. No other enforcement action shall be pursued against Ironton based upon the failure of any facility covered by the Order to comply with the requirements as they now exist of the Implementation Plan for the State of Ohio for the attainment of particulate matter during the period this Order is in effect and Ironton is in compliance with the requirements of this Order applicable to that facility.

VIII

This Order supersedes Order No. EPA-5-77-A-24 issued by U.S. EPA on May 13, 1977.

IX

This Order in no way affects Ironton's responsibility to comply with any other State, Federal, or local regulations or any Order of Court pursuant to Section 303 during any period of imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons.

X

This Decree shall terminate as to each of the emission sources specified in paragraph III upon demonstration of compliance and the issuance of an operating permit by the Ohio EPA. ++EP++

Page 8 XI

Except for purposes of this Order, Ironton has reserved the right to contest any Federal, State, or Local regulation or Order now or hereinafter proposed or adopted which is or becomes applicable to the units covered by this Order.

XII

Ironton acknowledges that it has been notified that it may be subject to penalties under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section7420, but reserves the right to contest the assessment and attempted collection of non-compliance penalties under Section 120.

XIII

It is hereby stipulated and agreed between the parties that any material failure by Ironton to comply with the terms of this Decree shall result in the payment of penalties for civil contempt in the amount of $7,500 per day for each day such failure continues.

XIV

Within thirty days of the entry of this Decree, defendant shall submit to plaintiff a surety bond or other security in the amount of $1,200,000 payable to the U.S. Treasury. Said security shall be immediately forfeited in full upon the failure of defendant to cease operation of Coke Oven Battery No. 3 on or before the date set forth in Paragraph III hereof. Plaintiff shall have no discretion to modify this Order with respect to this provision or to compromise the bond maintained hereunder. ++EP++

9

Wherefore, this Order is hereby issued with agreement and concurrence of the parties hereto.

/s SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Judge, United States District Court

We hereby consent to the entry of the foregoing

Consent Decree.

United States of America, Plaintiff

James C. Cissell, United States Attorney

/s/ James W Moorman

James W. Moorman

Assistant Attorney General

/s/ James E. Rattan

James E. Rattan, Assistant

United States Attorney

U. S. Courthouse (Rm 200)

Columbus, Ohio 43215

Ironton Coke Corporation, Defendant

By:/s Donald A. Lochhead

Donald a. Lochhead

Vice President

McLouth Steel Corporation ++EP++

^Z

GULF & WESTERN IND (NJ ZINC)

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-80-C012

CAA

METAL

19801020

19801020

OHD061029682

GULF & WESTERN NAT RES

ASHTABULA, OH

C79-1513-Y

05

CONSENT DECREE, USA V. GULF & WESTERN IND (NJ ZINC)

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

JERSEY TITANIUM COMPANY,

Defendant.

Pursuant to the joint motion of the United States of America and Jersey Titanium Company ("Jersey"), and before the taking of any testimony, and without any admission or denial of the violations alleged in the Complaint, the Court hereby issues these agreed Findings of Fact and Consent Decree in settlement of the above-styled matter.

I.

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b) for the purpose of entering this Consent Decree. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted.

II.

The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply and be binding upon the parties, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and any successors in interest; in addition, the provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Consent Decree and who are or who will be acting in concert and privity with the parties or their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and any successors in interest. Jersey shall give notice of this Consent Decree to any successors in interest prior to transfer of ownership, and shall simultaneously verify to the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA"), Region V, and the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, that such notice has been given. ++EP++

Page 2 III.

Defendant Jersey is a Delaware corporation qualififed to do business in Ohio and is doing business at its titanium dioxide facility in Ashtabula, Ohio, within the Northern District of Ohio.

IV.

Defendant Jersey owns and operates at the Ashtabula facility a coal-fired steam boiler designated as BF-101. Boiler BF-101 is a major stationary source of air pollution discharging particulate matter to the ambient air and as such is subject to the provisions Ohio Pollution Control Regulation AP-3-11 (recodified 3745-10-11) of the State Implementation Plan ("SIP") for the State of Ohio, 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart KK.

V.

Subsequent to the filing of the Complaint, during informal settlement negotiations, Jersey demonstrated that it had installed sufficient air pollution control technology to assure compliance with Ohio Regulation AP-3-11 (3745-10-11) at its coal-fired steam boiler, BF-101. Jersey further stated it intends to maintain such equipment or its equivalent to assure continued compliance with Ohio Regulation AP-3-11 (3745-10-11).

VI. DECREE

In consideration of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY DECREED: Jersey shall continue to operate and maintain air pollution control equipment installed at its Ashtabula, Ohio titanium dioxide facility to assure continuing compliance with Ohio Regulation AP-3-11 (3745-10-11) as approved by U.S. EPA on April 15, 1974 or as may be subsequently modified and approved by the U.S. EPA. ++EP++

Page 3

In particular, Jersey shall operate and maintain the air pollution control equipment presently in place, or its equivalent, at its coal-fired steam boiler, BF-101, to maintain the emission limitation applicable under the U.S. EPA approved Ohio SIP.

VII.

Defendant shall notify U.S. EPA, Enforcement Division, Region V of any replacement or modification to the design or operation of the air pollution control equipment presently in place at its Ashtabula, Ohio coal-fired steam boiler, BF-101, within 15 days of the effected change or modification.

VIII.

Jersey shall have the right at any time, to cease operation of its coal-fired steam boiler, BF-101, to assure compliance with Ohio Regulation AP-3-11 (3745-10-11).

IX.

Agreement to the terms of this Consent Decree by U.S. EPA does not constitute a waiver of U.S. EPA's right to seek non-compliance penalties pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 7420.

The parties agree that this paragraph does not constitute a notice of noncompliance initiating the period of covered noncompliance pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 7420.

X.

This Consent Decree in no way affects Jersey's responsibility to comply with other State, Federal, or local regulations or any Order of this Court, including but not limited to Section 303 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7603. ++EP++

Page 4 XI.

This Consent Decree shall be in settlement of the civil enforcement action brought by the United States of America pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7413(b), for violation of Ohio Regulation AP-3-11 (3745-10-11). No other enforcement action will be initiated against Jersey's Ashtabula, Ohio coal-fired steam boiler, BF-101, for violation of Ohio Regulation AP-3-11 (3745-10-11) so long as Jersey is in compliance with each and every requirement of this Consent Decree. Any penalty assessed pursuant to an enforcement action brought by U.S. EPA for violation of the terms of this Decree shall be calculated from the day of violation. U.S. EPA shall enforce the requirements of this Consent Decree by applying to this Court for relief.

XII.

Upon final entry of this Consent Decree, in consideration of settlement of this action, Jersey agrees to pay to the United States of America a civil penalty in the amount of $10,000.00. Payment shall be by certified check payable to the "Treasurer, United States of America," and delivered to Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Chicago, Illinois.

XIII.

This Decree shall terminate one hundred eighty days from the date of its entry. Until such termination, jurisdiction is retained by this Court to enable it to issue further orders, directions or relief which may be appropriate to interpret, construe or effectuate this Decree or any provision thereof. ++EP++

Page 5

WHEREFORE, this Consent Decree is hereby issued in full settlement of this matter with agreement and concurrence of the parties hereto.

It is so Ordered.

Jersey Titanium Company

By/s/ Lawrence A. Demase, Esquire

Lawrence A. Demase, Esquire

Rose, Schmidt, Dixon, Hasley Whyte & Hardesty

900 Oliver Building

Pittsburgh, PA 15222

(412) 434-8610

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Honorable

United States of America

/s/ James R. Williams

JAMES R. WILLIAMS, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Assistant Attorney General

Land & Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

/s/ John McGuire

John McGuire

Regional Administrator

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Region V ++EP++

^Z

ERIE COKE AND CHEMICAL CO

DOC 02 OF 02

MODIFICATION OF CONSENT ORDER

05-80-C005

CAA

STEEL

19800521

OHD081780009

ERIE COKE & CHEMICAL CO

FAIRPORT, OH

C79-224

05

MODIFICATION OF CONSENT ORDER, USA V. ERIC COKE AND CHEMICAL CO

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, v.

ERIE COKE AND CHEMICAL COMPANY

Defendant.

On May 21, 1980, a Consent Order in the above matter was approved by the Court and filed with the Clerk. Since that time, several events have occurred which make it appropriate for the said Consent Order to be modified in certain respects:

And the Plaintiff and Defendant, having moved the Court to enter this Modification of Consent Order:

And the Court in open hearing having been fully advised of the premises;

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby Ordered, Adjusted, and Decreed as follows:

I.

Erie Coke and Chemical Co., an Ohio corporation formerly The Eracq Corporation, the successor in interest to Erie Coke and Chemical Company, the Defendant, herein is hereby substituted as the party Defendant in this case and henceforth shall be solely responsible for compliance with the provisions and orders set forth in the said Consent Order as modified herein. ++EP++

Page 2 II

Article X is hereby adopted as an additional paragraph to the Consent Order of May 21, 1980 such paragraph to be regarded as though originally included in said Consent Order:

X

Defendant may, at any time, elect to comply with the terms and conditions of this Order by ceasing operation of its two coke batteries at Fairport Harbor, Ohio. In the event of such a cessation of operation, Defendant shall notify Region V U.S. EPA and a stipulation as to the fact that said operations have closed shall be filed with the Court. Defendant shall demonstrate compliance with each of the emission limitations in Paragraph III A. and B.1. by not later than 90 days after the date that operation recommences.

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Judge, United States District Court

We hereby consent to the entry of the foregoing Modification of Consent Order

United States of America, Plaintiff

By:/s/ F Henry Habicht

F. Henry Habicht, II

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

PATRICK M. McLAUGHLIN

United States Attorney

By:/s/ Solomon Oliver, Jr

Solomon Oliver

Assistant United States Attorney ++EP++

Page 3

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

By:/s/ Courtney M. Price

Courtney M. Price

Acting Associate Administrator for Legal and

Enforcement Counsel and General Counsel

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Valdas V. Adamkus

Regional Administrator, Region V

ERIE COKE AND CHEMICAL COMPANY

By:/s/ Martin Deward

President

Approved:

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

By:/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE ++EP++

^Z

ERIE COKE AND CHEMICAL CO

DOC 01 OF 02

CONSENT ORDER 05-80-C005

CAA

STEEL

19800521

OHD081780009

ERIC COKE & CHEMICAL CO

FAIRPORT, OH

C79-224

05

CONSENT ORDER, USA V. ERIC COKE AND CHEMICAL CO

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ERIE COKE AND CHEMICAL COMPANY

Defendant.

Plaintiff, United States of America, having filed the Complaint herein on February 5, 1979;

And the plaintiff and defendant Erie Coke and Chemical Company (Erie) having moved the Court to enter this Consent Order;

And the Court in open hearing having been fully advised of the premises;

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, and without any admission or denial of the violations alleged in the Complaint, it is hereby Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed as follows:

I

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of entering this Consent Order.

II

The provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to and be binding upon the parties to this action, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and successors. In addition, the provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Consent Order and who are, or will be acting in concert and privity with the defendant in this action or its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees and successors. Erie shall give notice of this Consent Order to any successors in interest prior to transfer of ownership, and simultaneously notify Region V, U.S. EPA, that notice has been given.

III

In consideration of the foregoing and the representations made in open Court by parties hereto, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Erie shall complete the following specified acts with respect to its two coke batteries located at Fairport Harbor, Ohio, on or before the dates set forth below: ++EP++

Page 2

A. By not later than April, 1, 1980, Erie shall commence operation of its new larry car and demonstrate compliance with Ohio Air Pollution Control Regulation AP-3-07 (OAC-3745-17-07) and the following emission limitations at the stacks, doors, lids, standpipes, and during charging operations on coke batteries #1 and #2.

1. Charging

Visible particulate emissions during the charging operation shall not exceed 125 seconds during any five consecutive charges.

a. For purposes of this Decree, the charging operation is defined as the introduction of coal into a coke oven, beginning when the larry car slide gate(s) open or mechanical feeder(s) start the flow of coal into the oven and ending when the last charging port lid is replaced.

b. These emissions include particulate emitted from one or more charging ports, spaces between charging port drop sleeves and oven refractory, drop sleeves, larry car hoppers or any devices for the capture and cleaning of air contaminants during charging but not including particulate emitted during the temporary removal of a charging port lid, for the purpose of sweeping excess coal spillage into the oven just charged, after all the lids have been firmly seated over the charging port. Simultaneous emissions from more than one emission point shall be timed and recorded as one emission and shall not be added individually to the total time. Charging emissions shall not include any emissions observed after all the charging port covers have been firmly seated. The total number of seconds of visible emissions observed, clock time for the initiation and completion of the charging operation, battery identification and oven number for each charge shall be recorded by the observer. In the event that observations of emissions from a charge are interrupted due to events beyond the control of the observer, the data from that charge shall be invalidated and the observer shall note on his observation sheet the reason for invalidating the data. ++EP++

Page 3

The charge immediately preceding the interrupted charge and the charge immediately following the interrupted charge shall constitute consecutive charges.

2. Door Areas

There shall be no visible emissions from more than 10% of all coke oven doors at any time.

a. For purposes of this Decree, door area is defined as the vertical face of a coke oven between the bench and the top of the battery and between two adjacent buckstays, including, but not limited to the door, chuck door, door seal, jamb, and refractory.

b. Observation of door area emissions shall be made from a minimum distance of 25 feet from each door. Compliance shall be determined by a one pass observation of all coke oven doors on the pusher machine side. Each door area shall be observed in sequence for only that period necessary to determine whether or not, at the time, there are visible emissions from any point on the door areas while the observer walks along the side of the battery. If the observer's view of a door area is more than momentarily obstructed, as, for example, by door machinery, pushing machinery, luter truck, or opaque steam plumes, he shall record the door area obstructed and the nature of the obstruction and continue the observations with the next door area in sequence which is not obstructed. The observer shall continue this procedure along the entire length of the battery recording the battery identification, battery side, and oven door identification number of each door area exhibiting visible emissions. Before completing the traverse or immediately thereafter he shall attempt to reobserve the obstructed doors. Compliance with this section shall be calculated by application of the following formula, which excludes obstructed door areas from the denominator:

(# of door areas with visible emission) / (# of door areas on operating ovens - (# of door areas obstructed from view) % 100% = 10% or less ++EP++

Page 4

3. Coke Oven Ports and Charging Port Seals

There shall be no visible emissions from more than 5% of all coke oven charging ports at any time. For the purposes of this Decree, charging port is defined as any opening through which coal is, or may be, introduced into a coke oven, whether or not such opening is regularly used for that purpose, and shall include any jumper pipe port. For purposes of determining compliance with this subparagraph, observations of any visible emissions from coke oven topside, other than charging or pushing emissions, shall be made and recorded during the time an observer walks the topside of a battery from one end to the other. Each oven shall be observed in sequence. The observer shall record the battery identification, the points of topside emissions from each oven and the oven number, and the number of operating ovens and charging ports open to the atmosphere. Compliance with this subparagraph shall be determined by application of the following formula:

(# of charging ports with visible emissions)/ # of charging ports on operating ovens) X 100% = 5% or less

4. Coke Oven Offtake Piping

There shall be no visible emissions from more than 10% of all coke oven offtake piping at any time. For the purposes of this Decree, offtake piping is defined as the pipes on ducts by which the gaseous by-products of coking are transported from an oven to a coke oven gas collection main, including the standpipe cap and standpipe connections. For purposes of determining compliance with this subparagraph, observation of any visible emissions from the offtake piping shall be made by traversing the topside of the battery. During the traverse, the observer may walk as close as possible to the offtake piping to determine whether an observed emission is emanating from the offtake piping or from some other point. The observer shall traverse the battery once per each collector main.

Each oven shall be observed in sequence. The observer shall record the battery identification, the number of operating ovens, the points of offtake piping emissions from any oven and the oven number, and all offtake lids open to the atmosphere. ++EP++

Page 5

Compliance with this subparagraph shall be determined by application of the following formula:

(# of offtake piping with visible emissions) (# of offtake piping on operating ovens) X 100% = 10% or less

5. Topside Emissions

There shall be no topside emissions from any point on the topside of any coke battery other than allowed from charging port seals and offtake piping pursuant to Paragraphs III.A.3 and III.A.4.

6. Stacks

Visible emissions from the coke battery waste heat stack shall equal or exceed 20% opacity except for a period or periods aggregate not more than 3 minutes in any one hour and shall never exceed 600 opacity.

Opacity is to be measured by EPA Method 9 except for the average provisions of Section 2.5 therein. Each monitoring observation shall represent a 15-second period.

B. Install controls to collect and clean emissions from pushing operating according to the schedule set forth in Paragraph III.0.2, below:

1. The pushing emission control system to be operated pursuant to this Decree shall meet the following emission limitations:

a. Particulate emissions from the gas cleaning device shall not exceed an outlet concentration of 0.030 grains per dry standard cubic foot (dscf) during the pushing operation. This method shall be measured using the methodology specified 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Methods 1 through 5 (front half).

b. Visible emissions resulting from the pushing operation, including both fugitive emissions and emissions from the pushing emissions gas cleaning outlet, shall not exceed 20% opacity.

Opacity is to be measured by EPA Method 9 except for the averaging provisions of Section 2.5 therein. Each monitoring observation shall represent a 15-second period. ++EP++

Page 6

2. To achieve compliance, pushing controls shall be installed in accordance with the following schedule:

a. March 1, 1979 - Commenced engineering b. November 1, 1979 - Place equipment orders c. March 1, 1980 - Complete foundations d. July 1, 1980 - Complete installation of gas cleaning equipment e. August 1, 1980 - Commence operation f. October 1, 1980 - Achieve and demonstrate compliance with the emission limitations and requirements of Paragraph III.8.1

g. In the event that cross winds interfere with collection of pushing emissions, Erie shall enclose the ends of the system, eliminate such interference, and demonstrate compliance by not later than December 31, 1980.

C. Defendant shall continue to use water with less than 750 mg/l total dissolved solids to quench coke. Compliance with this standard shall be measured at the supply line to the overhead tank by grab samples taken at a frequency of once per quench for a period of 15 consecutive quenches or for over a period of time not exceeding 4 hours, whichever is less. Analysis shall be as specified in 40 CFR Section 136.

IV

Every three months from the date of entry of this Order, and until achievement of final compliance with the terms of this Order, Erie shall submit to the U.S. ERA (c/o Compliance Section, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, 230 S. Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60604), and Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, a report describing the progress of Erie in meeting each of the then incomplete requirements of this Order.

V

Erie shall provide the U.S. EPA with twenty (20) days notice prior to conducting any performance tests required by this Order to afford them an opportunity to approve the test procedure and to have an observer present at such tests. A written report of the results of each of said performance tests shall be submitted to the U.S. EPA and the Ohio EPA promptly, but not later than thirty (30) days after completion of each of said tests. ++EP++

Page 7 VI

This Order shall be in full settlement and satisfaction of the action filed herein and other claims pre-existing the date of this Decree which could have been brought by U.S. EPA for violations of Ohio Air Pollution Control Regulations at the two coke batteries.

VII

Erie acknowledges that it has been notified that it may be subject to penalties under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 1420, but reserves the right to contest the assessment and attempted collection of non-compliance penalties under that section.

VIII

Any failure to meet the final compliance dates for the installation of control equipment required by this Order shall constitute civil contempt and will subject the noncomplying party to a penalty of $7,500 for each day such failure continues. This provision is not intended to limit other remedies available for violations of this Decree.

IX

If any event occurs which causes or may cause delays in the achievement of the compliance schedules at the Defendant's facilities called for in this Settlement Agreement, the Defendant shall notify this Court; the Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604; and the appropriate State Agency immediately in writing of the delay or anticipated delay, as appropriate, describing in detail the anticipated length of the delay, the precise cause or causes of the delay, the measures taken and to be taken by the Defendant to prevent or minimize the delay, and the timetable by which those measures will be implemented. The Defendant will adopt all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such delay.

If U.S. EPA and Erie agree that the delay or anticipated delay has been or will be caused by circumstances beyond the control of Erie, the parties shall request the Court for an extension of the time for performance hereunder for a period equal to the delay resulting from such circumstances. In the event the parties cannot agree, then any party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. ++EP++

Page 8

The burden of proving that any delay is caused by circumstances beyond the control of Erie shall rest with Erie.

Judge, United States District Court

We hereby consent to the entry of the foregoing Consent Decree

United States of America, Plaintiff

James W. Moorman

U.S. Attorney

Erie Coke and Chemical Company Defendant

By:/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Approved:

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

By:/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE ++EP++

^Z

DELTA REFINING CO

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT JUDGEMENT

04-82-C013

CAA

PETRO

19821008

19821008

TND097902639

MEMPHIS

C-80-2175-M

04

CONSENT JUDGEMENT, USA VS. DELTA REFINING COMPANY

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

Vs.

DELTA REFINING COMPANY,

Defendant.

WHEREAS, on April 8, 1980, the Plaintiff, United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (hereinafter referred to as "EPA" or the "Plaintiff"), filed a Complaint against the Defendant, Delta Refining Company (hereinafter referred to as "Delta" or the "Defendant"), in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee alleging that the Defendant's Thermol Catalytic Cracking Unit (hereinafter referred to as "TCC Unit") at its petroleum refinery located in Shelby County, Memphis, Tennessee, was being operated in violation of the City of Memphis Air Pollution Control Code (hereinafter referred to as "Memphis City Code"), Chapter 3, Article II, Section 3-17(b), which is part of the Tennessee State Implementation Plan, 37 Fed. Reg. 10894 (May 31, 1972) which is federally enforceable pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act (hereinafter "the Act"), 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b) (Supp. III 1979);

WHEREAS, Delta has permanently ceased operation of the TCC unit;

WHEREAS, the Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed and consented to the entry of the following Consent Judgment without trial or adjudication of any issue of fact or law herein and without the entry of this Judgment or any matter contained herein constituting any admission of fact, law, or any liability on the part of the Defendant; ++EP++

Page 2

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, and upon consent of the parties hereto, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:

I. Jurisdiction

This court has jurisdiction over the subject matter herein and the parties hereto, and this action is properly in this District Court.

II. Regulatory Requirements

Nothing contained in this Consent Judgment shall be construed in any way to relieve the Defendant from complying with all applicable requirements of Municipal, State or Federal law.

III. Settlement

This Consent Judgment is entered in full satisfaction of all matter alleged in Plaintiff's Complaint and the Defendant shall pay a civil penalty of $28,500.00 in settlement thereof. Within thirty (30) days after the entry date of this Consent Judgment, the Defendant shall tender a certified check made payable to "Treasurer of the United States of America" in the amount of $28,500.00 to the United States Attorney for the Western District of Tennessee.

IV. Consent

The parties hereby consent to the entry of this Consent Judgment without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED this 8th day of October, 1982.

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Consent to:

For the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

/s/ Carol E. Dinkins

Carol E. Dinkins

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

ILLEGIBLE

For DELTA REFINING COMPANY

/s/ Robert G. Alexander

Robert G. Alexander, President ++EP++

Page 3

/s/ W. Hickman Ewing, Jr.

W. Hickman Ewing, Jr.

United States Attorney

Western District of Tennessee

U.S. Department of Justice

1026 Federal Building

Memphis, Tennessee 38103

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

for Judson W. Starr

Attorney

Land and Natural Resources Division

Environmental Enforcement Section

Room 1734

U.S. Department of Justice

Ninth and Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 10530

/s/ John H. Johnson, Jr.

John H. Johnson, Jr.

Chief, Air Section

Office of Regional Counsel

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

345 Courtland Street, N.E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30365

/s/ Lynn H. Dugas

Lynn H. Dugas

Attorney

Office of Regional Counsel

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

345 Courtland Street, N.E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30365 ++EP++

^Z

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

04-80-C012

CAA

ELECT

19801015

19801015

NCD024783763

ROXBORO UNIT 3

ROXBORO

C-80-442-D

04

CONSENT DECREE, USA V. CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY,

Defendant.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff, United States of America, by the Attorney General, and on behalf of the Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency (hereinafter referred to as "EPA"), has filed a Complaint in this cause alleging violations of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq.) and of the federally-approved North Carolina State Implementation Plan, adopted pursuant to Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Section 7410); and

WHEREAS, Defendant Carolina Power and Light Company ("CP&L"), a public utility, is a North Carolina corporation which has its principal place of business in Raleigh, North Carolina; and

WHEREAS, CP&L owns and operates a coal-fired electric generating unit known as "Roxboro Unit 3" located in Roxboro, Person County, North Carolina, which is situated within the Middle District of North Carolina; and ++EP++

Page 2

WHEREAS, CP&L's operation of Roxboro Unit 3 involves the utilization of two boilers designed to burn pulverized coal resulting in visible emissions and emission of particulate matter into the ambient air; and

WHEREAS, Plaintiff alleges in its Complaint that violations of the Clean Air Act and of the federally-approved North Carolina State Implementation Plan have resulted from the emission of particulate matter into the ambient air from CP&L's Roxboro Unit 3; and

WHEREAS, the Plaintiff and CP&L, by their undersigned attorneys and officials, having consented without trial of any issue of fact or law herein before entry of this Decree, and without this Decree now or hereafter constituting any evidence or admission by any party hereto with respect to any issue of fact or law herein;

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, upon the pleadings, upon consent of the parties hereto, and without adjudication of any issue of fact or law, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED as follows:

I JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b). ++EP++

Page 3 II SCOPE OF DECREE

This Decree shall extend to CP&L's ownership and operation of Roxboro Unit 3. The provisions of this Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the parties to this action, their officials, officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and successors.

III ROXBORO UNIT 3 COMPLIANCE PROGRAM A. PARTICULATE MATTER COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE AND VISIBLE

EMISSIONS TEST

1. CP&L shall comply with the following schedule for the installation of sampling test ports, for the performance of a particulate and visible emission compliance test, and for the reporting of said compliance test to EPA:

Item Completion Deadline a) Begin bid specification January 18, 1980 preparation for installation of sampling ports. b) Submit sampling port bid March 1, 1980 specification to vendors. c) Receive vendor bids for sampling March 31, 1980 port installation. d) Review quotations and select April 30, 1980 vendor to install sampling ports. e) Issue purchase order for May 15, 1980 installation of sampling ports. f) Notify EPA of progress of on-site July 1, 1980 construction. g) Complete installation of sampling July 15, 1980 ports. ++EP++ Page 4 h) Achieve and demonstrate compliance August 15, 1980 with the then-applicable, federally-approved North Carolina particulate emission standard by means of a particulate emission compliance test performed in accordance with EPA Test Re- ference Methods 1 through 5 and/ or modified Method 5 (Method 17) C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix A i) Achieve and demonstrate com- August 15, 1980 pliance with either the interim visible emission standard set forth in Section C, paragraph 2 of this Part, or with the then- applicable, federally-approved North Carolina visible emission standard, by means of a test performed in accordance with EPA Test Reference Method 9 C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix A j) Certify the compliance status of August 30, 1980 Roxboro Unit 3 to EPA by sub- mitting the complete test reports for the particulate and applicable visible emission standard compliance tests. k) In the event the visible emission Not later than thirty test provided for in item i) (30) days after final above indicates that emissions EPA action on the from Roxboro Unit 3 have an opacity pending State Im- greater than that allowed by the plementation Plan (SIP) then-applicable, federally-approved Revision for Visible North Carolina visible emission Emissions. standard, then CP&L shall cause to be performed further compliance tests of the visible emissions from Roxboro Unit 3, in accordance with EPA Test Reference Method 9, and shall achieve and demonstrate compliance with the then-applicable, federally- approved North Carolina visual emission standard. l) If CP&L is required to perform Within two (2) weeks subsequent visible emission com- after the completion pliance tests as provided in item deadline for item k). k) above, CP&L shall certify to EPA the compliance status of Roxboro Unit 3 with the then-applicable, federally- approved North Carolina visible emissions regulation by CP&L's sub- mission of all visible emission test results for the final test to EPA. ++EP++ Page 5

2. The items and completion deadlines specified above are subject to the Reporting and Certification Requirements of Part IV of this Decree.

3. CP&L shall provide EPA with an opportunity to participate in an on-site conference with CP&L on June 19, 1980, to evaluate the test procedures, and notice and an opportunity to have an EPA observer present at such tests.

B. INSTALLATION, CALIBRATION, AND CERTIFICATION

REQUIREMENTS OF CONTINUOUS VISIBLE EMISSIONS MONITORS

CP&L shall comply with the following requirements, procedures, and deadlines concerning continuous visible emissions monitors at Roxboro Unit 3:

1) CP&L shall provide EPA with at least fifteen (15) days advance notice before conducting the tests required by this Part. This advance notice will allow EPA to participate in an on-site conference with CP&L at least five (5) days before said test, to evaluate test procedures and to permit EPA observers to be present during the tests.

2) CP&L shall conduct tests to verify the representative nature of the measurements of the continuous visible emission monitors currently installed on the unit by July 30, 1980. The tests shall be conducted and interpreted in accordance with the procedures specified in Exhibit A.

3) If the results in the test report indicate that the current locations of the transmissometers on Roxboro Unit 3 are not where the most representative opacity measurements will be made, then CP&L shall relocate the transmissometers in the vertical plane of the ducts to monitor the most representative portion of the flue gas by September 18, 1980. If the transmissometers must be relocated, their proper location shall be determined using the procedure described in Exhibit B.

4) By October 18, 1980, if either transmissometer has to be relocated, CP&L shall conduct the following additional tests on each transmissometer system which is relocated after its proper location has been determined by the methods prescribed in Exhibit B:

a) a calibration error test

b) a system response time test ++EP++

Page 6

c) an optical alignment and, if the most recent acceptable zero alignment was conducted more than one (1) year before signature of the parties to this Decree, a zero alignment

d) a 168-hour operational test period.

5) By November 3, 1980, CP&L shall certify by a report sent to EPA that the Roxboro Unit 3 transmissometer systems are fully operational and comply with all of the installation specifications, design specifications, and performance specifications of Performance Specification 1 in 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix B.

C. FINAL COMPLIANCE EMISSION LIMITS

CP&L shall be in compliance with the following emission limits at Roxboro Unit 3 as indicated below:

1) By August 15, 1980, with the then applicable federally-approved North Carolina particulate emission standard;

2) By August 15, 1980, with either an interim visible emission standard of 40% opacity, or with the then-applicable, federally-approved North Carolina visible emission standard. The interim visible emission standard shall apply to Roxboro Unit 3 until the pending proposed North Carolina (SIP) revision for visible emissions is determined after final EPA action subject to judicial review, if any, of such action, unless CP&L has earlier demonstrated compliance with the then-applicable, federally-approved North Carolina visible emissions standard in the manner provided in Section A, paragraph 1, items i) or k) above.

3) Upon final action by EPA on the pending proposed North Carolina SIP revision for visible emissions, as described in paragraph 2) above, with the then-applicable, federally-approved North Carolina visible emission standard, unless CP&L has previously demonstrated compliance with the then-applicable, federally-approved North Carolina visible emission standard in the manner provided in Section A, paragraph 1, items i) or k) above, in which case this requirement shall be deemed satisfied. ++EP++

Page 7 IV REPORTING AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

All certifications, source performance test reports, interim reports, and other reports required by this Decree shall be sent, via certified mail, by CP&L to:

1) The Director, Enforcement Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30356; and

2) The Director, Division of Environmental Management, North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611.

CP&L shall submit interim reports, with supporting documentation, to the parties specified above within ten (10) days of completion of each interim step of the Particulate Matter Compliance Schedule and of the Installation, Calibration, and Certification Requirements of Continuous Visible Emissions Monitors provisions found in Part III, Sections A and B, respectively, of this Decree. In executing this Decree, EPA acknowledges that all compliance measures required by this Decree to have been completed prior to execution of this Decree have been completed. CP&L shall notify EPA of known excess emissions on the first working day following discovery of such emissions and shall cause written notice to be sent to EPA and the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development no later than the end of the fifth working day following the start of such excess emissions. ++EP++

Page 8 V

A. EXCUSABLE DELAY

1) If any event occurs which causes or may cause delays in the achievement of compliance with any provision of this Decree, CP&L shall notify the Court and EPA in writing within 20 days of the delay or anticipated delay, as appropriate, describing in detail the anticipated length of the delay, the precise cause or causes of the delay, the measures taken and to be taken by CP&L to prevent or minimize the delay, and the timetable by which those measures will be implemented. CP&L shall adopt all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such delay. Failure by CP&L to comply with the requirements of this paragraph, specifically, shall render paragraph 2 of this section void and of no effect as to the particular incident involved.

2) If the delay or anticipated delay in compliance with this Decree has been or will be caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of CP&L, the time for performance hereunder shall be extended for a period no longer than the delay resulting from such circumstances. In such event, the parties shall stipulate to such extension of time and so inform the Court. In the event the parties cannot agree, then any party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution.

3) The burden of proving that any delay is caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of CP&L shall rest with CP&L. Delay in achievement of one interim step shall not necessarily justify or excuse delay in achievement of subsequent steps. ++EP++

Page 9 B. PREVENTION AND MITIGATION OF EXCESS EMISSIONS DUE

TO MALFUNCTIONS OR BREAKDOWNS

CP&L shall perform operation and maintenance practices on Roxboro Unit 3 as prescribed in the operation and maintenance manual for Roxboro Unit 3 ("O&M Manual") to prevent malfunctions or breakdowns that would result in emissions in excess of the visible and particulate emission limits, specified in Part III, Section C, of this Decree. CP&L shall, during any malfunction or breakdown, promptly take steps to eliminate excess emissions resulting from such malfunction or breakdown, as specified in the O&M Manual. In addition, CP&L shall, during the malfunction or breakdown, comply with requirements specified in writing by EPA to reduce emissions to the particulate and visible emission limits specified in Part III, Section C, of this Decree.

C. NOTICE OF MALFUNCTION OR BREAKDOWN

When emissions, due to sudden and unforeseen malfunctions or breakdowns at Roxboro Unit 3, are or may be in excess of the emission limits specified herein for greater than four (4) hours, CP&L shall notify EPA and the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development by telephone or telegram as promptly as possible, but in no event later than the first working day following the start of excess emissions due to said malfunction or breakdown; and shall cause written notice to be sent to EPA and the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development no later than the end of the fifth working day following the start of such malfunction or breakdown. ++EP++

Page 10

Such written notification shall specify the address and telephone number of the person responsible for the Roxboro facility, the nature and cause of the malfunction if known, the date and time when excess emissions due to such malfunction were first observed, the expected duration, and an estimate of the amounts and characteristics of the emission in question.

D) EFFECT OF MALFUNCTION NOTIFICATION AND NON-NOTIFICATION

1) Verbal and written notification by CP&L of a malfunction or breakdown as specified herein shall not automatically excuse any excess emissions described in the submitted malfunction and breakdown report. Failure by CP&L to comply with Section C of this Part shall constitute a waiver of its right to assert a malfunction or breakdown as an excuse or defense in any proceeding by Plaintiff to enforce the terms of this Decree.

2) EPA shall review CP&L's written notice and malfunction and breakdown report required by this Decree to determine if the malfunction or breakdown could have been anticipated and/or avoided and to determine if the assessment of stipulated penalties under Part VII of this Decree is warranted. EPA shall notify CP&L in writing whether the reported malfunction or breakdown was excusable or not excusable in regards to the assessment of stipulated penalties under Part VII of this Decree. If EPA does not agree with CP&L that the malfunction or breakdown is excusable as a basis for the assessment of stipulated penalties under Part VII of this Decree, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. ++EP++

Page 11

The burden of proving that any malfunction or breakdown resulting in excess emissions from Roxboro Unit 3 could not have been anticipated and/or avoided shall rest with CP&L.

E. MALFUNCTION AND BREAKDOWN REPORT

Within twenty (20) days after the termination of the malfunction or breakdown requiring the above notifications, CP&L shall submit to EPA and to the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development a report detailing:

1) The time the excess emission began and ended; and

2) The time of the beginning and end of the malfunction or breakdown which is asserted to be the cause of the excess emission; and

3) An estimate of the amount and characteristics of emissions which occurred, and where continuous monitoring is required or is in effect (including visible emission detector), the strip charts with plots of all emissions monitored versus time, including a summary of the monitoring instruments written record expressed in units of the applicable standard; and

4) An explanation and, where appropriate, an engineering analysis of the cause of the malfunction or breakdown; and

5) A description of those operating and/or maintenance procedures and practices in use prior to and during the occurrence, which were designed to prevent or minimize the extent and duration of the malfunction or breakdown; and

6) Any other steps taken to minimize the extent or duration of the malfunction or breakdown; and

7) An analysis of what steps will be taken to prevent or minimize similar occurrences in the future; and

8) Such additional information as EPA may require.

The Plaintiff may, for good cause, waive or extend the time periods for filing the notices or reports required by this Part. ++EP++

Page 12

Failure by CP&L to comply with the requirements of this Section shall have the same consequences stated in Section D of this part -- a waiver by CP&L of the right to assert said malfunction or breakdown as a defense or excuse in a proceeding by Plaintiff to enforce this Decree.

F. START-UPS AND SHUT-DOWNS

1) The emission limits specified in Part III, Section C, shall not be applied to periods of start-ups or shut-downs of Roxboro Unit 3 boilers. "Start-ups" are defined as periods from light-off at the burners until stack gas temperatures, measured for each Unit 3 boiler between the air heater and the precipitator inlets, have reached 210 degrees Fahrenheit for both operating Unit 3 boilers, plus three hours thereafter for precipitator "dry-out." "Shut-downs" are defined as periods beginning when the stack gas temperature, measured in the same fashion, of either Roxboro Unit 3 boiler has fallen below 200 degrees Fahrenheit, and ending five (5) hours thereafter.

2) CP&L shall maintain a record of "start-ups" and "shut-downs" for Roxboro Unit 3 for the period of this Decree.

VI CIVIL PENALTY

CP&L agrees to the payment of a civil penalty under Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, in the amount of $50,000. This civil penalty sum is chargeable pursuant to Section 113(b) for any violations of the particulate and visible emission requirements of the Clean Air Act through the date of entry of this Decree at Roxboro Unit 3. In payment thereof, CP&L shall tender to the United States Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina a certified check for $50,000, payable to "Treasurer of the United States of America," no later than thirty (30) days after the date of the Court's approval of this Decree. ++EP++

Page 13 VII PAYMENT OF STIPULATED PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS DECREE

Subject to the provisions of Part V of this Decree, CP&L shall be liable for stipulated penalties for violation of the requirements of this Decree as set forth below.

A. CP&L shall pay a daily stipulated penalty of $500 a day for each occurrence constituting an unexcused violation of any of the scheduled notice, testing, reporting and certification requirements listed below:

1) any reporting and certification requirements specified in Part IV of this Decree (except for items "h," "i," "j," "k," and "l" of Part III, Section A, paragraph 1);

2) any items and completion deadlines (except those for "h," "i," "j," "k," and "l," of Part III, Section A, paragraph 1), any interim reports, or advance notice to EPA requirement specified in Part III, Section A, paragraphs 1 and 2, of this Decree;

3) any requirements or deadlines specified in Part III, Section B, of this Decree.

The stipulated penalties due under this Section shall not exceed a total of $2,000 for any one day and shall not, for any one occurrence, be imposed for more than a total of forty-five (45) days. No more than $500 a day per occurrence shall be imposed if this same occurrence violates one or more requirements. ++EP++

Page 14

B. CP&L shall pay a weekly stipulated penalty of $4,000 per week for not more than 8 weeks, for:

1) any and all unexcused violations of the final or interim compliance emission limits of items "h," "i," and "j" (and completion deadlines) specified in Part III, Section A, paragraph 1, of this Decree and of Part III, Section C, paragraphs 1 and 2, of this Decree.

2) any and all unexcused violations of the final compliance emission limits of items "k" and "l" (and completion deadlines) specified in Part III, Section A, paragraph 1, of this Decree and of Part III, Section C, paragraph 3, of this Decree.

C. Stipulated penalties under this Part shall be paid by a certified check payable to "Treasurer of the United States of America," tendered to the U.S. Attorney, within thirty (30) days after Plaintiff has made a written demand for payment of such penalty. CP&L shall report by letter to EPA the tendering of any payment made under this Part.

VIII

This Consent Decree shall be in full settlement and satisfaction of the action filed herein and of CP&L's liability under Section 113(b), if any, for the alleged violations contained in the Complaint and for any other particulate or visible emissions violations from Roxboro Unit 3, if any, occurring prior to the date of this Decree. No action at common law or other civil enforcement action under Section113 or Section 304 of the Clean Air Act shall be pursued by Plaintiff against CP&L based upon the failure of Roxboro Unit 3 to comply with particulate or visible emissions standards during any period prior to the date of this Decree, or during the term of this Decree as it applies to compliance with particulate and visible emission limitations.

During the period stipulated penalties are in effect under Part VII above, those penalties shall be the sole source of civil monetary penalties for violations of the requirements of this Decree to which they pertain, provided, however, that nothing contained in this Consent Decree shall preclude the Plaintiff from seeking relief other than monetary penalties for violations of the requirements of this Decree during the period stipulated penalties are in effect. ++EP++

Page 15

If after forty-five (45) days following any date set for compliance with any requirement subject to penalties under Part VII, Section A, or if after fifty-six (56) days following any date set for showing compliance with any requirement subject to penalties under Part VII, Section B, CP&L has not certified compliance and the date has not been extended pursuant to Part V, then:

(a) Plaintiff may apply to the Court for such further legal and equitable relief as the circumstances may justify, and additional measures to insure compliance, and further penalties, if any, shall be as set forth in a subsequent order of this Court;

(b) CP&L may apply to the Court for such further legal and equitable relief as the circumstances may justify, provided, however, that CP&L shall not seek such relief without notifying the Court and EPA of the nature and known or suspected causes of any noncompliance and without first providing the type and quantity of information specified in Part V of this Decree.

IX NONCOMPLIANCE PENALTIES

CP&L may be subject to administratively-imposed noncompliance penalties in accordance with Section 120 of the Act only in accordance with duly promulgated final regulations of EPA.

Notices of noncompliance penalties will be forwarded to alleged violators in the manner specified by final noncompliance penalty regulations when said regulations are published and promulgated in the Federal Register. ++EP++

Page 16 X EFFECTIVE DATE OF CONSENT DECREE

This Decree shall become effective upon approval and filing by the parties hereto and adoption and entry by the Court.

XI COMPLETION OF AND EXPIRATION OF DECREE

A. As to the requirements of this Decree relating to compliance with particulate and visible emission limitations, the obligations of this Decree shall expire when CP&L has certified to EPA that emissions from Roxboro Unit 3 are in compliance with the particulate and visible emissions standards set forth in Part III, Section C, paragraphs 1 and 3, provided that EPA does not object to such certification in writing within thirty (30) days after receipt, specifying with particularity the nature of the failure to comply. If EPA does object to either the certification of compliance with the particulate emission standard set forth in Part III, Section C, paragraph 1), or the certification of compliance with the final visible emission standard set forth in Part III, Section C, paragraph 3), then this Decree shall expire upon EPA's subsequent notification of compliance with the relevant standard. If EPA objects to both certifications, this Decree shall expire at such time as EPA has notified CP&L that both standards have been complied with. ++EP++

Page 17

If CP&L and EPA should disagree regarding the validity of any CP&L compliance certification, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution.

B. As to the requirements of this Decree relating to the Installation, Calibration, and Certification of Continuous Visible Emissions Monitors, contained in Part III, Section B, the obligations of this Decree shall expire when CP&L has certified to EPA that the Roxboro Unit 3 transmissometer systems are fully operational and comply with all of the installation specifications, design specifications, and performance specifications identified in Part III, Section B, paragraph 5), provided that EPA does not object to such certification in writing within thirty (30) days after receipt, specifying with particularity the nature of the failure to comply. If EPA does so object, then this Decree shall expire as to these requirements upon EPA's subsequent notification of compliance with them. If CP&L and EPA should disagree regarding the validity of any CP&L compliance certification, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. ++EP++

Page 18

For the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

By:/s/ Angus Macbeth

Angus Macbeth

Acting Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

Department of Justice

Washington, D.C. 20530

/s/ David T Buente

David T. Buente

Attorney

Pollution Control Section

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

Washington, D.C. 20530

H.M. Michaux, Jr.

United States Attorney

Middle District of North Carolina

By:/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Assistant United States Attorney

Middle District of North Carolina

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Sanford W. Harvey, Jr.

Director

Enforcement Division

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region IV

345 Courtland Street, N. E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30308

For CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY:

By:/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

E.E. Utley

Executive Vice President

Power Supply & Engineering/Construction

Carolina Power & Light Company

P.O. Box 1551

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602

/s/ Charles B. Robson, Jr

Charles B. Robson, Jr.

Associate General Counsel and Manager - Legal

Department

Carolina Power & Light Company

P.O. Box 1551

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Richard E. Jones

Associate General Counsel

Carolina Power & Light Company

P. O. Box 1551

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602

/s/ William B. Ellis

William B. Ellis

Attorney

Hunton & Williams

Attorneys

707 East Main Street

P.O. Box 1535

Richmond, Virginia 23212 ++EP++

Page 19

/s/ James F. Bycott

James F. Bycott

Attorney

Air & Hazardous Materials Section

Legal Branch, Enforcement Division

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region IV

345 Courtland Street, N. E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30308

Judgment entered and jurisdiction retained in accordance with the foregoing Consent Decree this 15th day of October, 1980.

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ++EP++

EXH A-1 EXHIBIT A

Test Procedure for Evaluating Representativeness of Transmissometer Location

The test procedure for evaluating the representativeness of data generated by the transmissometers in their current locations utilizing a LIDAR technique shall be as follows:

Pretest Procedure

1. Calibrate LIDAR using screen targets in the range of 14 to 52 opacity.

2. Certification of the transmissometers on each outlet duct must have occurred within one year prior to the test, except for the following which shall be re-checked within one week prior to and immediately after the test:

a. response time

b. manually activated zero and span checks

c. optical alignment

Test Procedure

1. All tests shall be conducted while maintaining stable and essentially balanced loads between boilers (as measured by feedwater flows). NOTE: Boiler loads shall be considered stable and essentially equal if feedwater flows on both boilers are within ten percent of one another.

2. At least two and preferably three different levels of opacity within the range of 15 to 40 percent shall be selected for comparison opacity readings obtained from LIDAR with those obtained from the permanently installed transmissometers.

3. The initial level of opacity for evaluation shall be obtained with the unit operating at the maximum stable load (variations in net electrical load not to exceed 25 MW) achievable subject to:

a. equipment availability

b. fuel supply

c. Outlet emission (less than or equal to 40 percent opacity)

Subsequent levels of opacity may be obtained by either reductions in unit electrical load (and corresponding reductions in boiler load), isolation of the transformer rectifier sets serving the precipitators, reductions in transformer rectifier power levels, or a combination of these methods. ++EP++

EXH A-2

4. Measurements of stack exit opacity shall be obtained by use of LIDAR ten times within a four to six consecutive minute period to generate a six-minute average opacity. This six-minute average opacity shall represent one data point. In the event that ten valid LIDAR shots are taken in a time interval of less than four minutes but not less than two (2) minutes, they may be used to represent one data point; provided that coincident transmissometer averages are determined according to Step 1 (under Data Evaluation) for the period and provided further that real-time strip chart recorders are used on the transmissometers to generate coincident averages for shorter periods, since the existing data reduction systems without real-time strip chart recorders only generate six-minute averages.

5. Ten six-minute averages or data points at each level of opacity shall be generated for the purposes of this test. If ten data points cannot be collected at each opacity level, a lesser number may be used with the approval of EPA Region IV.

6. The strip chart data from the two transmissometers shall be collected over the same time frame as the collection of LIDAR data for subsequent analysis.

Data Evaluation

1. The coincident average opacity for each transmissometer shall be averaged arithmetically to provide a unit opacity to be compared against the correspondingly coincident LIDAR data points. NOTE: If the condition of balanced load between boilers as required in Step No. 1 (and as measured by a difference in boiler feedwater flows which is greater than 10 percent during the collection of LIDAR readings) cannot be obtained during the test, weighted average opacities for the two boilers (weighted on the basis of flows) shall be employed in obtaining the unit opacity from the transmissometers for comparison with the LIDAR measured opacities.

2. The transmissometers shall be considered to be located at representative points in the outlet ducts if the deviation between the arithmetic average of all transmissometer opacity results during the test period agree with the LIDAR opacity results during the same measurement period within the limits defined by the following relationship:

Acceptable variance = (3 opacity units for LIDAR error + 2 opacity units for transmissometer error + 10% of average opacity reading from LIDAR for acceptable stratification). ++EP++

EXH A-3 Reporting

1. The report shall include all raw data collected, the reduction of same and all calculations. (NOTE: Raw data shall include the actual opacity, the net unit electrical output, and the feedwater flow on each boiler during the test period as recorded on strip charts.)

2. The report shall be submitted to EPA within 30 days of completion of field measurements. ++EP++

EXH B-1 EXHIBIT B

Test Procedure for Evaluating Transmissometer

Location and/or for Relocating Transmissometer

If the results of the evaluation procedure outlined in Exhibit A indicate that one or both of the permanently-mounted transmissometers should be relocated in order to generate representative data, the following procedure shall be followed:

Pretest Procedure

1. Four (4) additional ports will be placed in the outlet duct from each boiler in a vertical plane with the existing (permanently-mounted) transmissometer. Three (3) of the additional ports will be located above and one (1) of the additional ports will be located below the existing (permanently-mounted) transmissometer to divide the vertical distance above and below the beam of the transmissometer into segments which are as nearly equal as is practical considering the physical layout and arrangement of duct and supporting structures.

2. Install mounting brackets to facilitate the movement and use of a portable transmissometer alternately at each of the additional port locations.

3. Certification of the permanently-mounted transmissometers must have occurred within one year prior to the test, except for the following which shall be rechecked within one week prior to and immediately after the test:

A. Response time test.

B. Manually activated zero and span checks.

C. Optical alignment.

4. Certification of the portable transmissometer (less cold alignment) on one boiler and in one port shall have occurred within the 90-day period just prior to testing. In addition, prior to and after each test on a port, the portable transmissometer shall be checked for:

A. Manually activated zero and span.

B. Optical alignment.

C. Response time.

Test Procedure

1. Operate unit during test at maximum stable load (variations in net electrical load not to exceed 25 MW) achievable subject to:

A. Equipment available.

B. Fuel supply.

C. Outlet emission (less than or equal to 40 percent opacity). ++EP++

EXH B-2

2. Maintain stable and essential equal loads on each boiler (maintain feedwater flows on both boilers within ten percent of one another). Testing may be conducted with one boiler in service at a time.

3. Collect continuous opacity data (in the form of six-minute averages) for each of the two permanently-installed transmissometers (one on each boiler) for the duration of the test.

4. For each outlet duct, alternately monitor and record continuous opacity data (in the form of six-minute averages synchronized with the continuous data collection from the permanently installed instruments described in Step No. 3 above) at each of the additional ports using a portable transmissometer. Each six-minute average shall represent one data point. A minimum of four six-minute averages shall be generated at each additional monitoring port while synchronously monitoring at the present location of the permanently-installed transmissometer. The opacity recorded on the permanently-installed transmissometer shall not vary over a range of greater than ten opacity units, and if it does, data gathered outside the ten opacity unit bank will be discarded and shall not be used. If it is necessary to discard data because the range of opacities measured by the permanently-installed monitor exceeds ten opacity units, the test program shall be continued until four six-minute average opacities on each new monitoring port are obtained (and obtained during a period when the corresponding six-minute average opacities from the permanent monitor are within a ten-opacity unit range).

5. Date from the five port locations (four additional and one existing) on each duct shall be averaged in accordance with Attachment No.1 titled "Mathematics for Averaging Duct Opacity".

Relocation of Permanent Transmissometers

1. The permanent transmissometer on each duct shall be relocated to the port on its respective duct which provided an adjusted port average opacity which most closely agreed with the average overall duct opacity obtained during the test; provided the difference between the average overall duct opacity and the port providing the closest agreement with the average overall duct opacity do not differ from one another by more than four (4) opacity units.

2. If the overall duct opacity and the port providing the closest agreement with the average overall duct opacity differ by more than four (4) opacity units, an additional port (a fifth new port) shall be installed in the vertical plane with the other ports. This new port shall be located at a point to be mutually selected by EPA and CP&L on the basis of opacity profiles established from the test data collected pursuant to the procedure outlined above and within two working days of presentation of the data by CP&L to EPA for consideration in relocating the transmissometer. ++EP++

EXH B-3

3. If the permanent transmissometer in either duct or both ducts is relocated (according to Step No. 2 above) to a port upon which data have not been obtained in accordance with the test procedure outlined herein, CP&L may, at its option, repeat the test procedure (appropriately modified for the additional test port(s)) to verify (as judged by the criteria established in Step No. 1 above) the adequacy of the selected port for relocation of the permanent transmissometer. NOTE: The addition of test ports and the ultimate location of the permanent transmissometer in other than one of the initial five test ports shall extend the scheduled completion dates established in Item Nos. 4 and 5, Part III, Section B, of the Roxboro Unit No. 3 Consent Decree by two (2) weeks, provided the entire test procedure is repeated.

Reporting

1. The report shall include all raw data collected, the reduction of same and all calculations. (NOTE: raw data shall include the actual opacity, the net unit electrical output, and the feedwater flow on each boiler during the test period as recorded on strip charts.)

2. The report shall be submitted to EPA within 30 days of completion of field measurements. ++EP++

ATT 1-1 ATTACHMENT 1 MATHEMATICS FOR AVERAGING DUCT OPACITY (EXHIBIT B) TABLE OMITTED ++EP++

CAROLINA STALITE CO

DOC 01 OF 01

FINAL (CONSENT) JUDGEMENT

04-82-C012

CAA

MISC

19820831

19820831

NCD003233053

GOLD HILL

C-80-367-S

04

FINAL (CONSENT) JUDGEMENT, USA V. CAROLINA STALITE COMPANY

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SALISBURY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLINA STALITE COMPANY,

Defendant.

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, upon the pleadings, upon consent of the parties hereto, and without adjudication of any issue of fact or law, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED as follows:

1. This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties hereto pursuant to Section113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section7413(b).

2. The Court finds venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section1391(b) and pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section7413(b).

3. In final and full settlement of this action, Carolina Stalite Company shall pay a civil penalty pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section113(b), in the amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) for an alleged violation of the North Carolina State Implementation Plan by defendant's partial construction of two rotary kilns at its lightweight aggregate facility in Gold Hill, Rowan County, North Carolina, without prior authorization of a prevention of significant deterioration of air quality (PSD) permit alleged to have occurred from, at the latest, October 1979 until issuance of PSD Permit No. PSD-NC-082 on November 5, 1981. ++EP++

Page 2

In payment thereof, the defendant shall tender to the United States Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina a certified check in the above sum, payable to Treasurer of the United States of America, no later than thirty (30) days after the entry of this Judgment.

4. Nothing contained in this judgment shall be construed in any way to relieve the defendant from complying with all other applicable requirements of municipal, state, or federal law.

5. This judgment is entered upon consent of the parties in settlement of only those issues raised in the Amended Complaint filed in this case and shall not constitute evidence or admission by any party with respect to any issue of law or fact raised in this action.

6. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys fees.

Judgment entered this 31 st day of August, 1982.

/s/ Eugene A. Gordon

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Consented to:

For the Plaintiff:

/s/Carol E. Dinkins

CAROL E. DINKINS

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources

Division

United States Department of Justice

A True Copy

Tests:

Carmon J. Stuart, Clerk

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

Deputy Clerk ++EP++

For the Defendant:

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

CAROLINA STALITE COMPANY ++EP++

Page 3

/s/Dean K. Dunsmore

DEAN K. DUNSMORE

Attorney

Environmental Defense Section

Land and Natural Resources

U.S. Department of Justice

Washington, D. C. 20530

KENNETH W. McALLISTER

United States Attorney

Middle District of North Carolina

/s/By:John W. Stone, Jr.

JOHN W. STONE, JR.

Assistant United States Attorney

Middle District of North Carolina

/s/Andrew F. Hodges

ANDREW F. HODGES

Attorney

Office of Regional Counsel

Region IV

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

345 Courtland Street, N. E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30365

/s/William C. Kluttz, Jr

WILLIAM C. KLUTTZ, JR.

Attorney

Kluttz, Hamlin, Reamer, Blankenship & Kluttz

131 North Main Street

Post Office Drawer 1617

Salisbury, North Carolina 28144 ++EP++

IRONTON COKE CORP

DOC 01 OF 01

AMENDED CONSENT ORDER

05-79-C003

CAA

STEEL

19790326

OHD082739632

IRONTON COKE CORP

IRONTON, OH

C-2-79-253

05

AMENDED CONSENT ORDER, USA V. IRONTON COKE CORPORATION.

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

IRONTON COKE CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Plaintiff United States of America having filed the Complaint herein on March 9, 1979; and the Plaintiff and Defendant having entered an Agreed Order on March 19, 1979;

And the plaintiff, and Defendant Ironton Coke Corporation ("Ironton") having consented without trial or adjudication of any issue of fact or law, herein to the entry of this Amended Consent Order, and without this Order constituting any evidence or admission by any party hereto with respect to any such issue, and the parties having agreed that the compliance schedules herein require compliance as expeditiously as practicable and the measures required herein represent the best practicable system of interim emission reductions for this facility,

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows:

I

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of entering this Consent Order. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted against the Defendant.

II

The provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to and be binding upon the parties to this action, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and successors; in addition, the provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Consent Order and who are, or will be, acting in concert and privity with the Defendant to this action or its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees and successors. ++EP++

Page 2 III

That Defendant shall comply with AP-3-07 and AP-3-12 (recodified as OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11, respectively) and the provisions herein at coke oven batteries 1, 2, and 3 according to the schedules set forth below.

A. Charging Emissions

1. Charging emissions are defined as any emissions occurring during the introduction of coal into the coke oven from the time that the gate(s) on a larry car coal hopper is (are) opened or mechanical feeders start the flow of coal into the oven until the last charging port seal (cover) is replaced. These emissions include any air contaminant emitted from one or more charging ports, spaces between charging port rings and oven refractory, drop sleeves, larry car hoppers, or any devices for the capture and cleaning of air contaminants during charging but not including any air contaminants emitted during the temporary removal of a charging port cover for the purpose of sweeping excess coal spillage into the over just charged after all covers have been firmly seated over the charging ports following the removal of the larry car.

2. After the dates set forth below charging emissions shall not exceed the cumulative total of seconds during any five consecutive charges set forth in the following table:

October 1, 1980 March 1, 1981 November 1, 1981 Battery No. 1 & 2 175 sec./5 charge 150 ses./5 charge 125 sec./5 charge Battery No. 3 250 sec./5 charge 175 sec./5 charge 150 sec./5 charge

B. Doors

1. Door area is defined as the vertical face of a coke oven between the bench and the top of the battery and between two adjacent buckstays, including, but not limited to, the door, chuck door, door seal, jamb and refractory.

2. After the dates set forth below there shall be no visible emissions from more than the following percentages of the doors on each battery. ++EP++

Page 3 December 15, 1980 July 1, 1981 December 1, 1981 Battery No. 1 & 2 25% 25% 10% Battery No. 3 40% 25% 16%

C. Standpipes

1. Standpipe is defined as the pipes or ducts by which the gaseous by-products of coking are transported from one end of an oven to a coke oven gas collector main, including the standpipe, standpipe cap and slipjoint.

2. On and after October 1, 1980, there shall be no visible emissions from more than 10 percent of the standpipes of any coke battery.

D. Charging Ports

1. Charging port is defined as any opening through which coal is, or may be, introduced into a coke oven, whether or not such opening is regularly used for that purpose.

2. On and after December 1, 1980, there shall be no visible emissions from more than 5 percent of the charging ports on any coke oven battery.

3. For purposes of this Decree, charging ports with their lids removed from a maximum of 3 ovens for the purpose of decarbonization prior to pushing the coke from the oven shall not be counted as having visible emissions.

E. Pushing

1. Pushing emissions are air contaminants emitted into the outdoor atmosphere which occur at any time during the pushing operation. The pushing operation is defined as the operation by which coke is removed from a coke oven and transported to a quench station, beginning with the removal of the coke side door from the oven and continuing until the coke receiving car enters the quenching station or 2 1/2 minutes thereafter, whichever occurs later.

2. Defendant has completed installation of a pushing control system on coke batteries No. 1 and 2. On and after the date of this Order and in addition to compliance with AP-3-07 during the pushing operation, Defendant shall not emit more than 0.060 pounds of particulate matter per ton of coke pushed from the gas cleaning outlet on the pushing control system. ++EP++

Page 4

F. Ironton shall shut down Battery No. 3 no later than December 31, 1982, provided, however, that Ironton at its exclusive option, may replace such Battery by building a Battery No. 4 on site, or by rebuilding Battery No. 3 in kind. Ironton shall incorporate the Best Available Control Technology in rebuilding Battery No. 3 in kind or in replacing Battery No. 3 with a Battery No. 4 on site. If Ironton elects either to rebuild Battery No. 3 in kind or to replace Battery No. 3 with a Battery No. 4 on site, Ironton shall comply with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11 and meet the following emission limitations (which for purposes of this facility at this time shall be defined as LAER) at its new coke making facility;

1. The duration of visible emissions during charging operations shall not exceed a total of 55 seconds for five consecutive charges.

2. No emissions of particulates from the waste gas stack gas stack shall exceed 0.015 grains/dscf (filterable).

3. At no time shall there be visible emissions from greater than 4% of the offtake piping on operating ovens, 1% of charging hole lids on operating ovens, and 5% of the coke oven doors on operating ovens (for purposes of this standard the chuck door and pusher side door shall be considered one door).

4. Emissions from pushing operations shall not exceed 0.040 pounds of particulate matter per ton of coke pushed. Visible emissions shall not exceed 20% opacity for more than 20 seconds during any five consecutive pushing operations.

G. In regard to coke oven battery stack operations on Battery No. 1 and No. 2, Ironton shall proceed in the following manner to achieve compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11:

a. Ironton shall complete a program of spraying, patching, and ultimate rehabilitation of coke ovens designed to bring emissions from the stacks of Battery No. 1 and No. 2 into compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and OAC-3745-17-11 by November 1, 1980, and conduct stack tests on each of said stacks by not later than December 15, 1980. ++EP++

Page 5

If Ironton believes that the test(s) was not representative or that the readings were incorrect, Ironton may retest any time prior to March 31, 1981.

b. In the event that particulate concentrations from either or both of the stacks at Battery Nos. 1 or 2 exceed 0.05 gr/dscf then for each stack which exceeds 0.05 gr/dscf Ironton shall install control equipment as follows:

Place Initial Purchase Order March 31, 1981 Start Construction December 1, 1981 Complete Construction & Start-up December 1, 1982 Achieve nd Demonstrate Compliance with OAC-3745-17-07 and 0.05 gr/dscf December 30, 1982

H. By not later than 90 days after coal is next charged in battery No. 2, Defendant shall stack test the stack on the preheater scrubber. In the event the results of said test show that particulate emissions exceed the limitation of OAC-3745-17-11, Defendant shall submit a program and schedule to Plaintiff which shall require Defendant to comply with OAC-3745-17-11 at said preheater by not later than December 31, 1982.

IV

Ironton's obligation to meet any requirement set forth in this Consent Decree, including achievement of compliance with any specific emission standard or regulation, shall be excused to the extent caused by Act of God or the public enemy, fire, explosion, flood, tornado, earthquake, lightning, riot, sabotage, war, strike, or work stoppage, or failure of a subcontractor to timely perform (provided Ironton has made all efforts to prevent or minimize any such failure). Should any of the foregoing events occur, the parties shall stipulate to a reasonable extension of time for achieving the requirements of this Decree and shall so inform the Court. Should the parties fail to agree on the period of such extension, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. ++EP++

Page 6 V

Commencing January 15, 1979, progress reports shall be submitted to this Court and the Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, with a copy to the Director, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216. Reports thereafter shall be submitted every four (4) months until such time that the facilities subject to this Order attain compliance. Reports shall indicate whether milestones to be met during the quarter have been met.

VI

Under the authority of Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b) and pursuant to the U.S. EPA Penalty Policy dated April 11, 1978, EPA has calculated civil penalties in the amount of $2,496,000.00. Because an Administrative Order issued by U.S. EPA on May 13, 1977, included the same schedules contained herein, and in consideration of Defendant's substantial compliance with the terms thereof, no penalty has been demanded of Defendant as a condition of the entry of this Consent Decree.

VII

This Order shall be in full settlement and satisfaction of the action filed herein and of defendant's liability for the violations alleged in the Complaint. No other enforcement action shall be pursued against Ironton based upon the failure of any facility covered by the Order to comply with the requirements as they now exist of the Implementation Plan for the State of Ohio for the attainment of particulate matter during the period this Order is in effect and Ironton is in compliance with the requirements of this Order applicable to that facility.

VIII

This Order supersedes Order No. EPA-5-77-A-24 issued by U.S. EPA on May 13, 1977 and the Consent Order entered herein on March 19, 1979.

IX

This Order in no way affects Ironton's responsibility to comply with any other State, Federal, or local regulations or any Order of Court pursuant to Section 303 during any period of imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons. ++EP++

Page 7

X

This Decree shall terminate as to each of the emission sources specified in paragraph III upon demonstration of compliance and the issuance of an operating permit by the Ohio EPA.

XI

Except for purposes of this Order, Ironton has reserved the right to contest any Federal, State, or local regulation or Order now or hereinafter proposed or adopted which is or becomes applicable to the units covered by this Order.

XII

Ironton acknowledges that it has been notified that it may be subject to penalties under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420, but reserves the right to contest the assessment and attempted collection of non-compliance penalties under Section 120.

XIII

It is hereby stipulated and agreed between the parties that any material failure by Ironton to comply with the terms of this Decree shall result in the payment of penalties for civil contempt in the amount of $7,500 per day for each day such failure continues.

XIV

Within thirty days of the entry of this Decree, defendant shall submit to plaintiff a surety bond or other security in the amount of $1,200,000 payable to the U.S. Treasury. Said security shall be immediately forfeited in full upon the failure of defendant to cease operation of Coke Oven Battery No. 3 on or before the date set forth in Paragraph III hereof. Plaintiff shall have no discretion to modify this Order with respect to this provision or to compromise the bond maintained hereunder. ++EP++

Page 8 XV

Compliance with the terms of this Decree shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of The Appendix hereto.

Wherefore, this Order is hereby issued with agreement and concurrence of the parties hereto.

Judge, United States District Court

We hereby consent to the entry of the foregoing

Consent Decree.

United States of America, Plaintiff

/s/ James W. Moorman

James W. Moorman

Acting Assistant Attorney General

James C. Cissell, United States Attorney

U.S. Courthouse (Rm 200)

Columbus, Ohio 43215

Ironton Coke Corporation, Defendant

By:/s/ Donald A. Lochhead

Donald A. Lochhead

Vice President

McLouth Steel Corporation

/s/ J. Jeffrey McNealey

J. Jeffrey McNealey

Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur

37 West Broad Street

Columbus, OH 43215

(614) 227-2074

Trial Attorney for Defendant ++EP++

APP 1-1 APPENDIX 1 TESTING PROCEDURES

1.1 Visible Emissions from Coke Batteries

A. Charging Operations

For the purpose of determining compliance with the standards during Charging Operations, the observer shall stand on the topside of the coke oven battery such that a good view of all charge ports of the oven being charged and the charging system is possible. The observer may move laterally to obtain a clear view of all oven ports, drop sleeves, and hoppers. During the charging period, the observer shall watch all the potential emission sources including the charge ports and the entire charging system. Upon observing the release of any visible emission, an accumulative stopwatch shall be started. The watch shall be stopped when the visible emission stops and shall be restarted when a visible emission reappears. The observer shall continue this procedure for the entire charging period. If visible emissions should occur simultaneously from several points during a charge, the visible emissions shall be timed collectively as one continuous visible emission. Furthermore, visible emissions which may start from one source immediately after those from another source shall be timed as one continuous visible emission. The following visible emissions shall not be timed: steam vapor, visible emissions from burning coal that is spilled on top of the oven or oven lid during charging, visible emissions from any equipment other than the charging system or charging ports, visible emission from standpipes during charging, visible emissions from coke oven doors which may rise above the battery and be windblown across its topside. The time recorded on the stopwatch shall represent the total time that visible emissions are observed during a charge. The number of seconds of visible emissions observed for each charge shall be recorded on a data sheet.

A total of five consecutive charges shall be observed and the time in seconds of visible emissions during such charges shall be totalled. If the observations of a set of consecutive charges is interrupted by an event not in the control of an observer, then the data for the interrupted charge(s) shall be discarded and additional charge(s) shall be observed until the total number of uninterrupted charges equals five. ++EP++

APP 1-2 B. Oven Doors

For the purpose of determining compliance at coke oven doors, the observer shall walk completely around the coke oven battery at a steady pace, observing visible emissions from a ground level position just outside the pusher machine and quencher car tracks as close to the battery as safety and visibility conditions permit. The observer shall traverse each side of a battery expeditiously, recording the time of the beginning and end of each side traverse, the identity of each door having visible emissions, and the identity of any door not observable during the traverse. A visible emission of an individual door shall be noted on an inspection sheet when an observer determines any visible emission is occurring from any location of the perimeter of a coke oven door or chuck door, but not when emissions are seen to come from the area between a buck stay and adjacent jamb. Visible emissions observed at the top of the battery above a specific oven door but not clearly attributable to such door shall not be counted in this procedure. An observer shall observe each oven door only once while scanning the perimeter for any visible emissions. After a brief scan of an oven door, the observer shall move along his traverse, checking subsequent doors on the battery in a like manner. If a temporary machine obstruction occurs which blocks the view of a series of ovens, the ovens shall be bypassed and the remaining oven doors on that side of the battery shall be observed. After the traverse of such side of the battery, the bypassed oven doors, and only those oven doors, shall be reobserved. After completing one side, the observer shall proceed directly to the opposite side of the battery and proceed to perform a like traverse while repeating the above procedures. A row of two or more continuous batteries shall be observed by battery only.

The percentage of oven doors with visible emissions shall be determined by totalling the number of doors with visible emissions, excluding two doors, representing the last oven charged, dividing that sum by the total number of observed doors on operating ovens, and multiplying the result by one hundred percent. ++EP++

APP 1-3 C. Standpipes (offtake piping) and charging ports

(charging hole lids).

For the purpose of determining compliance at (standpipes) and (charging ports), the observer shall walk down the length of the top of the battery and shall complete the inspection within a total number of seconds which is less than or equal to a value of six times the total number of ovens. When safety considerations permit, the observer shall walk down the center of the battery, but may deviate from this path if necessary to obtain a better view of any offtake assembly or lid. Topside potential emission points shall be observed expeditiously without the observer pausing except to make entries of visible emissions. The observer shall record the identity of visible emissions from all topside emission points in a single traverse of the topside of the battery, except the following: visible emissions from charging hole lids and standpipe caps that are opened during a decarbonization or charging period, visible emissions caused by maintenance work in progress at an oven, and steam emissions, including steam caused by the vaporization of wet luting materials. Regardless of the number of points from which visible emissions are observed from any one charging hole or lid offtake system, the maximum entry for a oven with a single offtake system shall be one, for a double main oven the maximum entry shall be two. The maximum lid leaks recorded for an oven with four ports shall be four.

Visible emissions from offtake piping assembly shall include: visible emissions from any leaks from cracks and/or defects in the piping, visible emissions from any leaks coming from the jointure of any pipes including the final jointure with the main, visible emissions from any leaks coming from the standpipe base, visible emissions from any leaks coming from the standpipe cap or its seal with standpipe, and visible emissions from any leaks coming from the offtake piping assembly which are not within one of the above categories. Visible emissions from lids shall include all emissions from the casting lid interface, but shall not include water vapor or smoke from burning or smoldering excess topside coal. ++EP++

APP 1-4

The percentage of offtake pipe or charging hole lids with visible emissions shall be determined by totalling the number of such piping or lids with such emissions, dividing that sum by the total number of such piping or lids on the battery and multiplying the result by one hundred percent.

Offtake piping and charging hole lids may be separately observed, providing that the observer shall complete any separate inspection expeditiously.

D. Pushing Emissions

For the purpose of determining compliance during pushing operations visible emissions shall be determined according to the provisions specified above for charging except that:

(1) In viewing the pushing operation, the observer shall stand on the coke side of the battery where a clear view of the push can be obtained. This generally should be a location on the ground, in the coke side yard, outside the hot car tracks approximately perpendicular to the observed oven. However, the observer is not restricted to the ground level, but may make the observation from some elevated level. If it is an overcast day or if the plume is in a shadow, the reader need not follow the requirement of positioning his back to the sun.

(2) During the pushing operation, the reader(s) shall observe all the potential pushing emissions including fugitive emissions from the pushing emission control device and open quench cars during travel and note the point where emissions are observed.

(3) Observations may begin any time after the coke side door machine is in the final spotted position and ready to receive coke at the oven to be pushed.

1.2 Particulate Emissions Test Methods and Procedures

A. Test Methods.

Particulate emissions shall be determined according to Test Methods 1 through 5 as set forth in the "Appendix on Test Methods" in 40 CFR Part 60 "Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources," (front half analysis), and 40 CFR Section 60.40(a) and (b). All references to 40 CFR Part 60 in this Appendix are to the 1978 volumes. ++EP++

APP 1-5

(2) During each stack test performed, simultaneous visible emission evaluations shall be conducted according to the methodology specified in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 9 except for the provisions of Section 2.5 of Method 9. A copy of the raw data sheets shall be included with the stack test report. The report should include actual sampling times to allow a comparison between the visible emissions and the stack test results.

(3) During each stack test performed, the Defendant shall provide the Plaintiffs access to production data and other parameters that are necessary for determining compliance.

(4) Compliance shall be determined by averaging three runs using the test procedures stated above, except as provided in Appendix 1.2(B)(2), (C) and (D); and except that pushing emissions shall be measured over one complete traverse.

(5) During each run of a stack test, the facility to be tested will be operated at a production level which is at least as large as the average of the actual level during the preceding three months before the first day of the test, or, for the coke plant, at a coking rate of one inch per hour or greater, whichever is greater. All emission points which are to be aggregated in determining compliance shall be tested simultaneously. Defendant may petition the Plaintiff for a variance from the above requirements but such petition must be made at least one month prior to the scheduled stack test date. ++EP++ ^Z

ALSIDE, INC

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-82-C004

CAA

MISC

19820310

19820310

OHD004163549

ALSIDE INC SUB OF US STEEL

NORTHAMPTON, OH

C80-1383A

05

CONSENT JUDGMENT AND CONSENT DECREE, US V. ALSIDE, INC.,

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ALSIDE, INC.,

Defendant.

Pursuant to the joint motion of Plaintiff, United States of America, and Defendant, Alside, Inc. ("Alside"), and before the taking of any testimony, and without any admission or denial of the violations alleged in the Complaint filed on August 4, 1980, the Court hereby issues these Findings of Fact and Consent Decree in settlement of the above-styled matter.

I. JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1345 and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413, for the purpose of entering this Consent Decree. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted. ++EP++

Page 2 II. APPLICABILITY

The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the parties to this action, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and any successors in interest; in addition, the provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Consent Decree and who are or who will be acting in concert and privity with Alside or its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and any successors in interest. Alside shall give notice of this Consent Decree to any successors in interest prior to transfer of ownership of the Northampton Township, Ohio, plant and shall simultaneously verify to the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA"), Region V, Enforcement Division, and the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, that such notice has been given.

Except as provided in Paragraph XIV of this Decree, Alside shall not raise as a defense to any enforcement action taken pursuant to this Decree the failure by any of its agents, servants, or employees to take such action as shall be required to comply with the provisions of this Decree.

Nothing in this Decree shall be construed as an admission by Alside of violations of any provisions of the Ohio State Implementation Plan, and nothing contained in this Decree shall be construed to limit any defenses Alside may raise in any other enforcement action or administrative proceeding. ++EP++

Page 3 III. PUBLIC COMMENT

Final approval and entry of this Consent Decree is subject to the requirements of 28 C.F.R. Section 50.7, which provides that notice of the proposed Consent Decree be given to the public, and the public shall have at least 30 days in which to make any comments.

IV. FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Alside, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, owns and operates a facility for the manufacture of building siding. Such facility exists and is doing business at 3773 Akron-Cleveland Road, Northampton Township, Ohio, within the Northern District of Ohio. The Akron-Cleveland Road facility includes four coil coating strip lines, two top coating siding lines, with one oven attached to each line, and one corner booth and corner oven, which emit organic materials into the ambient air.

2. On April 15, 1974, pursuant to Section 110(a) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, ("the Act"), 42 U.S.C. Section 7410(a), the Administrator of the U.S. EPA approved as part of the Ohio State Implementation Plan, ("Ohio SIP"), Ohio Air Pollution Control Regulation AP-5-07(G), recodified Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-21-07(G) "Ohio Regulation AP-5-07(G)" .

3. A revised Ohio SIP was approved by the Administrator of the U.S. EPA at 45 Fed. Reg. 72113 (October 31, 1980). Such plan includes Ohio Administrative Code Rules 3745-21-04, 3745-21-07 and 3745-21-09, ("OAC Rules").

4. On June 22, 1978, the U.S. EPA, Region V, notified Alside that it found Alside's three strip lines, two siding lines and attached ovens, one corner booth and corner oven in violation of Ohio Regulation AP-5-07(G)(1)(2) and (3). ++EP++

Page 4

A copy of this Notice of Violation was sent to the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.

5. In satisfaction of Section 113(a)(4) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a)(4), an opportunity to confer with the U.S. EPA was extended to Alside. A conference was held between representatives of the U.S. EPA and Alside on September 12, 1978.

6. U.S. EPA has determined that the violations of Ohio Regulation AP-5-07(G)(1), (2), and (3) have continued beyond the thirtieth day after the date of U.S. EPA's notification of the violations for No. 3 coil coating strip lines, both top coating siding lines and attached ovens and the corner booth and attached oven.

In consideration of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

V. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE

Alside shall achieve compliance with the revised Ohio SIP by completing the following specified acts with respect to its three coil coating strip lines, two top coating siding lines, including attached ovens, and one corner line, including attached oven, at its aluminum and steel siding facility located in Northampton Township, Ohio, in accordance with the schedule set forth below:

1. Alside has achieved compliance with OAC Rule 3745-21-09(E) by ceasing operation of coil coating strip lines No. 1 and No. 2. Any further operation of these lines will constitute a violation of this Decree, unless these air emission sources operate in compliance with OAC Rule 3745-21-09(E) and all other applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations at start up time. ++EP++

Page 5

If Alside resumes operation of said lines, it must notify the Ohio EPA, the U.S. EPA and the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio of such occurrence twenty days prior to start up time.

2. Alside has achieved and demonstrated final compliance with OAC Rule 3745-21-09(E) for coil coating strip line No. 3.

3. Alside shall achieve final compliance with OAC Rule 3745-21-09(S) on top coating siding lines No. 1 and No. 2, including the attached ovens, by implementing a control program in accordance with the schedule set forth below:

a. Begin on-site construction of ACHIEVED emission control equipment b. Complete construction and installation ACHIEVED of emission control equipment and start-up c. Achieve final compliance with OAC Rule July 1, 1981 3745-21-09(S) d. Begin performance tests in accordance July 10, 1981 with Paragraph VI e. Demonstrate final compliance with OAC October 1, 1981 Rule 3745-21-09(S) in accordance with Paragraph VI

4. Alside shall not operate its corner booth and oven after July 1, 1981, unless such operation is in compliance with the emissions limitations set forth in OAC Section 3745-21-09(S), or unless Alside has applied for, and obtained, approval of an alternative emissions reduction option pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph VII of this Decree. If Alside operates said sources after July 1, 1981, for coating other than steel corners, it must notify the Ohio EPA, the U.S. EPA and the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio of such occurrence twenty days prior to commencing such operation. ++EP++

Page 6 VI TESTING METHODS

For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with the emission limitations applicable to Defendant's air emission sources, as specified in Paragraph V of this Decree, the applicable Ohio EPA testing methods and procedures shall be followed. In demonstrating compliance, Alside shall use those of its coatings which contain the highest aromatic hydrocarbon solvent content.

VII. ALTERNATIVE EMISSIONS REDUCTION OPTION

1. Alside may apply to the State of Ohio and the U.S. EPA for approval of an alternative emission reduction approach to accomplish the emission reductions which are otherwise necessary to meet the emission limitations required to be met pursuant to Subparagraph V(4) of this Decree.

2. Within 14 days after application to the State of Ohio for approval of an alternative emission reduction approach, Alside shall submit a copy of such application, including any supporting documentation, to the U.S. EPA.

3. Such alternative compliance plan may be submitted by the Ohio EPA to the U.S. EPA for approval as a revision to the Ohio SIP. The U.S. EPA shall use its best efforts to promptly review and act upon such submission. Such approval shall not be granted unless such approval is in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Act and U.S. EPA policy.

4. Alside shall not be relieved of its obligation to fully and timely comply with all increments of progress and final compliance requirements as set forth in Subparagraph V(4) of this Decree by virtue of having applied to the State of Ohio for an alternative emission reduction approach unless and until said approach has been approved by the State of Ohio and the U.S. EPA. ++EP++

Page 7

5. If the U.S. EPA has not published a final rule as to such alternative emission reduction approach within 90 days after the State of Ohio has submitted such plan to the U.S. EPA, the United States will defer collection of civil or stipulated penalties for the operation of the corner line after the expiration of the 90-day period. If the U.S. EPA subsequently approves such alternative compliance plan and if the Defendant operates its corner line after the 90-day period in compliance with the subsequently approved plan, then the United States waives its rights to civil or stipulated penalties for operation of the corner line during such period. If the U.S. EPA subsequently disapproves such alternative compliance plan, then the United States may collect civil or stipulated penalties for the entire period of Defendant's failure to comply with subparagraph V(4) of this Decree. Nothing contained herein limits the right of the United States to collect civil or stipulated penalties from the Defendant for its operation of the corner line prior to the expiration of the 90-day period.

VIII. CIVIL PENALTY

The United States has determined that Alside has derived an economic benefit as a result of its failure to comply with the Clean Air Act with regard to certain sources which are the subject of this Decree. Upon final entry of this Decree, Defendant shall pay a civil penalty in the amount of $75,000 to the United States of America. Payment shall be by certified check payable to the "Treasurer, United States of America", and delivered to the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio. ++EP++

Page 8 IX. NONCOMPLIANCE PENALTIES

1. Alside acknowledges that it has been advised that it may be subject to penalties under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420, but reserves the right to contest the assertion, the assessment and attempted collection of noncompliance penalties under that section.

2. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed as an admission of noncompliance by Alside for purposes of Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420. The entering into and execution of this Decree shall not, in and of itself, constitute evidence supporting a finding of violation of the Act.

X. STIPULATED PENALTIES

Unless excused by the provisions of Paragraph XIV of this Decree (force majeure), the following stipulated penalty provisions shall apply and may be enforced by the United States:

1. Failure by Defendant to achieve final compliance with OAC Rule 3745-21-09(S) by the dates set forth in Paragraph V of this Decree shall result in the payment of $2,500.00 per day for each day such failure continues, until Alside initially achieves final compliance with Paragraph V.

2. The provisions of this Paragraph of this Decree shall not be construed to limit any other remedies available for violations of this Decree or of other provisions of law.

3. Stipulated penalties under this Section shall be paid by certified check payable to "Treasurer, United States of America" and mailed to the Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, within 30 days after U.S. EPA has made demand for payment of the penalty or, in the event of a dispute, no later than 10 days after a judicial decision upholding the penalty. ++EP++

Page 9 XI. OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS SHALL APPLY

This Decree in no way affects Alside's responsibility to comply with any other local, state or federal law or regulation.

This Decree in no way affects the ability of U.S. EPA to bring an action pursuant to Section 303 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7603.

U.S. EPA reserves the right to impose more stringent emission limitations on Alside's sources by reason of any revised state or federal law or regulation, including any revised implementation plan.

XII. INSPECTIONS

Alside agrees that U.S. EPA and/or its authorized representative shall have the reasonable right of entry into and upon its plants and facilities which are the subject of this Decree for the purpose of carrying out any inspections and conducting any tests which the U.S. EPA believes are necessary to ensure that the purposes of this Decree are effectuated.

XIII. REPORTING

1. No later than ten (10) working days after any date for achievement of an interim or final compliance requirement specified in Paragraph V of this Decree, Alside shall certify in writing to the U.S. EPA its compliance or noncompliance with the requirement and reasons therefore. ++EP++

Page 10

Notification to U.S. EPA of any anticipated delay shall not excuse the delay. Such report shall include a statement of compliance or noncompliance with all incremental steps included in this Decree completed prior to the date of entry of this Decree.

2. Alside shall provide the U.S. EPA twenty (20) days prior notice to conducting any performance test required by this Decree to afford an opportunity to review the test procedure and to have an observer present at such test. If the performance test must be rescheduled, it shall be scheduled by mutual agreement of Alside and the U.S. EPA. A copy of the written report of the results of all performance test or tests shall be submitted to the U.S. EPA promptly, but no later than thirty (30) days after completion of each test.

3. All production and solvent data from its Akron-Cleveland Road facility shall remain on file at its facility for a period of three (3) years.

4. All submittals, notifications and reports to the U.S. EPA pursuant to this Decree shall be made to Chief, Air Compliance Section, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, 230 South Dearborn, Chicago, Illinois 60604. In addition, all submittals and notifications required in this Decree shall simultaneously be transmitted to the appropriate Ohio EPA local office.

5. No later than thirty (30) days after the date of entry of this Decree, Defendant shall submit in writing to the U.S. EPA operation and maintenance procedures for the air pollution control equipment located at its Akron-Cleveland Road facility. ++EP++

Page 11 XIV. FORCE MAJEURE

Alside's time for achievement of compliance as set forth in this Order may be extended upon the occurrence of, and to the extent of, any delay caused by circumstances entirely beyond its control.

1. If any event occurs which causes or may cause a delay in the achievement or demonstration of compliance at Alside's facilities provided in this Decree, Alside shall notify the Director, Enforcement Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, in writing within 20 days of the delay, describing in detail the anticipated length of the delay, the precise cause or causes of the delay, the measures taken and to be taken to minimize any such delays and the timetable by which those measures will be implemented. Alside shall adopt all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such delay. Failure by Alside to comply with the notice requirements of this subparagraph, specifically, shall render Paragraph XIV void and of no effect as to the particular incident involved and constitute a waiver of Alside's right to request an extension of its obligations under this Decree based upon such incident.

2. If the parties agree that the delay or anticipated delay in compliance with this Decree has been or will be caused by circumstances entirely beyond the control of Alside, the time for performance hereunder may be extended for a period no longer than the delay resulting from such circumstances. In such event, the parties shall stipulate to such extension of time and jointly petition the Court for modification of this Decree accordingly. In the event the parties cannot agree, then any party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. ++EP++

Page 12

3. The burden of proving that any delay is caused by circumstances beyond the control of Alside shall rest with Alside. Increased costs or expenses associated with the implementation of actions called for by this Decree shall not, in any event, be a basis for changes in this Decree or extensions of time under subparagraph B above. Delay in achievement of one interim step or one final compliance date based upon a particular incident does not necessarily justify or excuse delay in achievement of subsequent steps. Alside shall make an shall make an individual showing of proof regarding each incremental step or other requirement for which an extension is sought.

XV. SEVERABILITY

It is the intent of the parties hereto that the provisions of this Decree shall be severable, and should any provisions be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be inconsistent with state or federal law, and therefore unenforceable, the remaining clauses shall remain in full force and effect, except to the extent affected by the provisions which have been declared unenforceable.

XVI. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

1. Plaintiff reserves the right to seek a modification of this Decree to impose more stringent emission limitations on Alside's sources by reason of any revised (federally enforceable) state or federal law or regulation, including any revised implementation plan.

2. Alside reserves the right to seek a modification of this Decree if the U.S. EPA promulgates or approves a revised SIP that contains requirements which are less stringent than the emission limitations set forth in the Ohio SIP as of the date of entry of this Decree. ++EP++

Page 13

3. It is the intent of the parties that any such modification of this Decree be accomplished through mutual agreement on a revised control strategy or compliance schedule, followed by a joint application to the Court.

4. If Alside elects to permanently shut down any hydrocarbon emissions source, this Decree shall not be construed to preclude the banking of the allowable emission levels from such source prior to shut down, provided said banking is approved by the Director of the Ohio EPA and is not otherwise prohibited by law. ++EP++

Page 14 XVII. TERMINATION

This Decree shall terminate six months after Alside demonstrates final compliance under Paragraph V.

Wherefore, the Consent Decree is issued with agreement and concurrence of the parties hereto.

Entered Nov. 11, 1981

Defendant

Alside, Inc.

By/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Secretary

By /s/ Lee Larson

Lee E. Larson

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey

Attorneys for Defendant,

Alside, Inc.

/s/ Leroy J. Contie, Jr.

Plaintiff

United States of America

By: /s/ Carol E. Dinkins

Carol E. Dinkins

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources

Division

U.S. Department of Justice

By: /s/ James R. Williams

United States Attorney

Northern District of Ohio

By:/s/ Valdas V. Adamkus

Valdas V. Adamkus

Regional Administrator

U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region V ++EP++

TUSCAN DAIRY FARMS, INC.

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

02-89-C011

CAA

FOOD

19890508

19890508

NYD986867455

TUSCAN DAIRY INC

LINDENHURST, NY

CV-89-0354

02

CONSENT DECREE, US V TUSCAN DAIRY FARMS, INC.

Page 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

TUSCAN DAIRY FARMS, INC.

and

AVERSA BROTHERS CONTRACTORS, INC.,

Defendants

Plaintiff, United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), having filed a Complaint alleging violations of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ("NESHAP") for asbestos, codified at 40 C.F.R. Section 61.140 et seq., and the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq., and requesting permanent injunctive relief and civil penalties;

And Plaintiff and Defendants having agreed that settlement of this action is in the public interest and that entry of this Consent Decree without further litigation is the most appropriate means of resolving this action, avoiding protracted litigation costs and expenses; ++EP++

Page 2

And Plaintiff and Defendants having moved this Court to enter this Consent Decree, subject to the provisions of 28 C.F.R. Section 50.7;

NOW THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, upon the pleadings, without adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and with no finding or admission of liability against or by Defendants, and upon consent of the parties to this Consent Decree, it is hereby Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed as follows:

I. JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under 28 U.S.C. Sections 1331, 1345, and 1355, and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b) and over the parties consenting to this Consent Decree. Venue is proper in this Court. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief may be granted against Defendants.

II. DEFINITIONS AND PARTIES

A. "Defendants" shall mean Tuscan Dairy Farms, Inc. and Aversa Brothers Contractors, Inc.

B. "Plaintiff" shall mean the United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency. ++EP++

Page 3

C. Terms used in this Consent Decree which are defined in 42 U.S.C. Section 7412(a), 42 U.S.C. Section 7602, 40 C.F.R. Section 61.02, and 40 C.F.R. Section 61.141 shall have the meanings contained therein.

III. APPLICABILITY

A. Each undersigned representative of a party to this Consent Decree certifies that he or she is fully authorized by the party whom he or she represents to enter into the terms and conditions of this Decree, and to execute and legally bind that party to it.

B. The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the Defendants, as well as their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, successors, and assigns, and all persons, firms and corporations having notice of this Consent Decree and who are, or will be, acting pursuant to this Consent Decree, or on behalf of, in concert with or in participation with the Defendants to this action in furtherance of this Decree.

C. The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to all of Defendant Tuscan Dairy Farm, Inc.'s facilities in all states, territories, and possessions of the United States of America.

D. The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to all of Defendant Aversa Brothers, Inc.'s demolitions or renovations in all states, territories, and possessions of the United States of America. ++EP++

Page 4

E. During the effective period of this Consent Decree, Defendants shall condition any and all contracts for demolitions or renovations subject to this Decree on compliance with the terms of this Decree.

IV. COMPLIANCE PROGRAM

A. Defendants shall hereafter comply with the requirements of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for asbestos in 40 C.F.R. Section 61.140 et seq., including the requirement that Defendants submit written notification for demolition or renovation operations to be postmarked or delivered at least ten (10) days before each demolition or renovation begins if the amount of asbestos is as stated in 40 C.F.R. Section 61.145(a), or at least twenty (20) days before each demolition or renovation begins if the amount of asbestos is as stated in 40 C.F.R. Section 61.145(b).

B. In the case of an emergency renovation as defined in 40 C.F.R. Section 61.141, Defendants shall provide written notice to the appropriate EPA regional office and the appropriate delegated state or local air pollution control agency as early as possible prior to the commencement of any renovation operation involving asbestos. ++EP++

Page 5

C. All notifications required by this Consent Decree shall be sent by certified mail or hand delivered to the appropriate EPA Regional office and the appropriate delegated state or local air pollution control agency. Defendants shall maintain records of said notifications together with proof of mailing by certified mail for the duration of this Decree.

D. This Consent Decree in no way affects 1) the Defendants' responsibility to comply with any State, Federal or local law or regulation or any Order by the Court, including all applicable NESHAP requirements; and 2) enforcement of any NESHAP requirements made applicable by reason of any revision of the Clean Air Act and its implementing regulations.

V. CIVIL PENALTY

Defendants shall pay a total civil penalty of $15,120.00. Said payment shall be in full satisfaction of Plaintiff's claims against Defendants for the violations alleged in the Complaint in this action. Payment shall be made by cashier's or certified check payable to "Treasurer of the United States of America" and tendered within 30 days after final entry of this Decree to the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York 11201. ++EP++

Page 6

Defendants shall send a copy of the check to the Office of Regional Counsel, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, NY 10278, and to the Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Land and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 10th & Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20530. Civil penalty payments under this decree are not tax deductible.

VII. STIPULATED PENALTIES

A. Defendants shall pay stipulated penalties of $5000.00 per day per violation of any provision of Section IV of this Consent Decree.

B. All payments of stipulated penalties shall be made within thirty (30) days of the date of noncompliance by cashier's or certified check made payable to the "Treasurer of the United States" and mailed to the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York 11201. A copy of the letter forwarding such check, together with a brief discription of the noncompliance, shall be mailed to the Office of Regional Counsel, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, New York 10278 and to the Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Land and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 10th & Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20530.

C. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prevent or limit the rights of the Plaintiff to obtain any other remedy, sanction, or relief which may be available to it by virtue of Defendants' failure to comply with this Consent Decree, the Clean Air Act, or the asbestos NESHAP. ++EP++

Page 7 VIII. TERMINATION

This Consent Decree shall terminate 3 years from the date of its entry, provided the Defendants have complied with its terms, including the payment of any accrued stipulated penalties. The United States shall have the right to seek extension of this period in the event of any violation of the Decree. The Court will retain jurisdiction over this matter to enforce the provisions of this Decree.

IX. PUBLIC NOTICE

Final approval by the United States and entry of this Consent Decree by the Court are subject to the requirements of 28 C.F.R. Section 50.7, which requires, inter alia, notice of this Consent Decree and an opportunity for public comment. Defendants consent to the entry of this Consent Decree without further notice.

X. COSTS

Each party shall bear its own costs and attorney fees in this action. ++EP++

Page 8

If either of the defendants is subsequently found to have violated the terms or conditions of this Consent Decree, then that defendant shall be liable to the United States for any costs and attorney fees incurred by the United States in any action arising from or related to such noncompliance.

XI. MODIFICATION

This Consent Decree may not be modified except upon the written consent of all parties hereto, or their successors and assigns, and the approval of the Court.

FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

/s/ Donald A. Carr

Donald A. Carr, Acting

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

Dated: 1-17-89

/s/ Thomas L. Adams

Thomas L. Adams, Jr.

Assistant Administrator for

Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring

United States Environmental Protection

Agency

Dated: 9-16-88

/s/ Robin L. Greenwald

Robin L. Greenwald

Assistant United States Attorney

Eastern District of New York

Dated: 1/30/89 ++EP++

Page 9

/s/ Peter I. Stinson

Peter Stinson

Trial Attorney

Land and Natural Resources Division

Environmental Enforcement Section

United States Department of Justice

Dated: January 9, 1989

FOR DEFENDANT AVERSA BROTHERS CONTRACTORS, INC:

/s/

Dated: August 19, 1988

FOR DEFENDANT TUSCAN DAIRY FARMS, INC:

/s/ E Madill

Eugene Madill

Senior Vice President

Dated: August 12, 1988

ENTRY OF CONSENT DECREE

Judgment entered in accordance with the foregoing Consent Decree this day of , 1988. ++EP++

ATT 1-1 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING

FORM OMITTED ++EP++

QUEEN CITY BARREL COMPANY

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-89-C030

CAA

MISC

19890727

19890727

OHD004477634

QUEEN CITY BARREL C0

CINCINNATI, OH

C-1-89-495

05

CONSENT DECREE, US V. QUEEN CITY BARREL COMPANY

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, and

STATE OF OHIO,

Plaintiff-Intervenor

v.

QUEEN CITY BARREL COMPANY,

Defendant.

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs, the United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA"), and the State of Ohio ("the State") filed the Complaint herein on ; and

WHEREAS, the Complaint alleged that the Defendant, Queen City Barrel Company, violated the Clean Air Act ("the Act"), 42 U.S.C. Section 7401, et seq., and the Ohio State Implementation Plan ("the SIP") adopted under the Act; and

WHEREAS, the Complaint states a claim for which relief can be granted; and,

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Defendant have agreed that settlement of this matter is in the public's interest and that entry of this Consent Decree without admission as to fact or liability for any purpose, to settle and resolve claims which are contested as to validity and amount and without further litigation is the most appropriate means of resolving this matter; and ++EP++

Page 2

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Defendant have moved the Court to enter this Consent Decree;

NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, upon the pleadings, and without adjudication of any issue of fact or law herein, and upon consent of the parties hereto, it is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED as follows:

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. The Court has jurisdiction over the parties to this Consent Decree and the subject matter of this action, pursuant to Sections 113 and 304 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 7413 and 7604 and under 28 U.S.C. Sections 1331, 1345 and 1355. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b), and under 28 U.S.C. Sections 1391(b) and (c). The parties shall not challenge this Court's jurisdiction to enter and enforce this Consent Decree.

II. APPLICABILITY

2. The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the Queen City Barrel Company, its officers and directors. In the event that Defendant sells or transfers its interest in the facility, as defined below, which is the subject of this Consent Decree, it shall advise the purchaser or transferee of the existence of this Decree, and shall notify Plaintiffs of such sale or transfer. Defendant's successors and assigns of the facility which is the subject of this Consent Decree shall be bound by the terms of this Consent Decree. ++EP++

Page 3

Defendant shall provide a copy of the Consent Decree to each contractor it employs to perform work described in paragraphs 16 and 18 of this Consent Decree.

III. DEFENDANT'S PLANT

3. Defendant is a corporation, organized under the laws of the State of Ohio, which owns and operates a drum reclamation facility located at 1937 South Street, Cincinnati, Ohio (herein, "the facility"). The facility contains numerous operations including a drum reclamation incinerator ("N001"), and several paint coating lines.

4. On April 15, 1974, the Administrator of the U.S. EPA approved certain regulations as part of the Ohio SIP. Among those regulations approved were Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Rules AP-3-07 and AP-3-10. 39 Fed. Reg. 13,542 and 13,541.

5. On July 12, 1982, the Administrator of the U.S. EPA approved Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Rule 3745-35-02 as part of the Ohio SIP.

6. On June 29, 1982, the Administrator of the U.S. EPA approved certain regulations regarding the control of volatile organic compounds. Among those regulations approved were Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Rules 3745-21-09(U)(1)(a)(vi) and 3745-21-04(C)(28). 47 Federal Register 28,097. ++EP++

Page 4

7. AP-3-07 states that no stack shall have a discharge into the ambient air of any particulate emissions of a shade or density greater than or equal to 20 percent opacity (except that 12 observations per hour, at 15-second intervals, may equal or exceed 20 percent, but not exceed 60 percent).

8. AP-3-10 limits emissions of particulate matter into the ambient air from incinerator sources.

9. Rule 3745-35-02 states that "no person may cause, permit or allow the operation or other use of any air contaminant source without applying for and obtaining a permit to operate from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency."

10. On December 8, 1988, the Director of the Air and Radiation Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, issued a Notice of Violation to Defendant, pursuant to Section 113(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a)(1), notifying Defendant that source N001 at its facility was in violation of the Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP) regulations AP-3-07, AP-3-10, and 3745-35-02.

11. Following the issuance of the December 8, 1988, Notice of Violation, and continuing for more than thirty (30) days thereafter, Defendant has continued to operate source N001 in violation of the Ohio SIP.

12. Rule 3745-21-04(C)(28) requires compliance with 3745-21-09(U)(1)(a)(vi) by December 21, 1982. Rule 3745-21-09(U)(1)(a)(vi) limits the volatile organic compound content of coatings employed for the exterior coatings of a steel pail or drum to 3.5 pounds of VOC per gallon of coating less water. ++EP++

Page 5

13. On March 23, 1989, the Director of the Air and Radiation Division, Region V, U.S. EPA, issued a Notice of Violation to Defendant, pursuant to Section 113(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a)(1), notifying Defendant that sources K003 and K004 at its facility were in violation of the Ohio Administrative Code Rules 3745-21-04(C)(28) and 3745-21-09(U)(1)(a)(vi). Compliance with this decree by Defendant will resolve that Notice.

IV. COMPLIANCE ORDER

14. Defendant Queen City Barrel is hereby enjoined and ordered to achieve, demonstrate and thereafter maintain compliance with the Act and the Ohio SIP throughout the pendency of this Consent Decree.

V. COMPLIANCE PROGRAM

15. The Queen City Barrel Company agrees to undertake and fully implement the following program, according to the schedules set forth below and in conformance with Ohio EPA "Permits to Operate", at sources N001, K001, K002, K003 and K004. The Queen City Barrel Company shall assign an operator to operate and provide preventive maintenance to the air pollution control equipment in order to maintain it in good operating condition. If the air pollution control equipment described in paragraphs 16 and 18, after the dates specified in Paragraphs 16(e), 18(B)(3) or 18(4) and 18(A)(5), is temporarily down for any reason, the production facilities served by this equipment shall be taken out of service until the equipment is back in service unless the affected production facilities related to Paragraph 18 are applying only coatings with a VOC content of less than or equal to 3.5 pounds/gallon of coating less water for exterior coating and less than or equal to 5.0 pounds/gallon of coating less water for interior coating and the continued operation is of a short term while the incinerator malfunction is evaluated and rectified. ++EP++

Page 6

The Queen City Barrel Company shall also comply with the terms and conditions of any installation and operation permits issued by Ohio EPA for these sources, subject to Queen City Barrel Company's right to appeal as provided for in the Ohio Revised Code.

VI. DRUM RECLAMATION INCINERATOR

16. The Queen City Barrel Company shall bring the drum reclamation incinerator into compliance with Ohio SIP rules AP-3-07 and AP-3-10 by not later than February 28, 1990 and shall maintain compliance thereafter. In order to accomplish this, the Company shall install a high efficiency, air pollution control device designed to reduce, and capable of reducing, the emissions from the incinerator to 0.10 lbs per 100 lbs of combustible material. This system shall also reduce the visible emissions from source N001 such that they do not equal or exceed 20 percent opacity except for a period(s) aggregating no more than three minutes in any hour (except that 12 observations per hour, at 15-second intervals, may equal or exceed 20 percent, but not exceed 60 percent). ++EP++

Page 7

The Queen City Barrel Company shall implement the following control program by not later than the deadlines in the following schedule:

Milestone Completion Date (a) Conduct Particulate Size Testing Complete (b) Award contracts or issue orders for the control device for N001 by June 21, 1989 (c) Submit copy of purchase order, performance specifications and vendor guarantee to the Plaintiffs by August 15, 1989 (d) Initiate on-site installation of the control device November 15, 1989 (e) Complete on-site installation of the control device for N001 and initiate operation by January 28, 1990 (f) Conduct emission tests according to 40 C.F.R., Part 60, Methods 1-5, and 9 February 28, 1990 (g) Achieve and thereafter maintain compliance with AP-3-07 and AP-3-10 by February 28, 1990 (h) Submit revised application for a permit to operate March 28, 1990

17. Installation of the control device will not relieve the Defendant of the responsibility to comply with all applicable State and Federal regulations. If source N001 does not achieve the requirements of the Ohio SIP, Defendant will take any necessary steps to achieve compliance with the applicable requirements. ++EP++

Page 8 VII. DRUM PAINTING EMISSION CONTROL

18. Defendant shall reduce the VOC emissions and maintain compliance with the Ohio SIP at the exterior and interior drum coating lines K001, K002, K003 and K004. Defendant shall modify the fume collection system to capture and eliminate solvent fumes and visible emissions from the existing interior and exterior drum spray booth and drying oven operations. Such fume collection system will consist of an enclosure of the paint spraying booths and modification of the existing hooding system on the drying ovens to ensure that the fumes generated by the paint spraying booths and drying ovens are captured and directed into the exhaust ducts. Oven exhausts and drum exterior and drum interior paint spraying booth exhausts shall be directed through fume incinerator(s). These Air Pollution Control Systems shall be designed and operated such that "maximum reasonable capture efficiency" is achieved in accordance with the requirements of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Rules 3745-21-09(U)(1)(b)(i) and at least 75 percent of the volatile organic compounds are captured, and at least 90 percent (combustion efficiency) of the captured volatile organic compounds are destroyed. VOC emission test contained in Appendix A shall determine the percent VOC captured and percent VOC destroyed. On July 1, 1989, the Defendant will choose either to install two separate incinerators and follow the schedule at 18(A), or to install one large incinerator incorporating heat recovery and follow the schedule at 18(B). ++EP++

Page 9

This Air Pollution Control Program shall be carried out according to the following schedules:

Milestones for Installation of Ductwork and First Incinerator:

(1) Award contract, issue purchase orders and submit copies with vendors guarantee or design criteria to Plaintiffs Completed (2) Initiate on-site construction of incinerator and modification of booths and hoods Completed (3) Complete installation of incinerator and initiate operation Completed (4) Continue to operate the first incinerator on the exterior spray booths and ovens and choose either option 18(A) or 18(B) by July 1, 1989 A. Milestones for Installation of a Two Incinerator System: (1) Award contract, issue purchase orders and submit copies with vendors guarantee or design criteria for the second incinerator to Plaintiffs by July 1, 1989 (2) Conduct emission tests on the first incinerator, demonstrate attainment of the above design parameters in accordance with Appendix A, and demonstrate maximum reasonable capture by July 15, 1989 ++EP++ Page 10 (3) Submit test results to Plaintiffs by August 15, 1989 (4) Initiate on-site construction of second incinerator and modification of booths and hoods by September 1, 1989 (5) Complete installation of second control system and initiate operation by October 1, 1989 (6) Conduct emission tests of the entire system, demonstrate attainment of the above design parameters in accordance with Appendix A, and demonstrate maximum reasonable capture for entire system by November 1, 1989 (7) Submit test results to Plaintiffs by December 1, 1989 B. Milestones for the Installation of a Single Large Incinerator with Heat Recovery: (1) Award contract, issue purchase orders and submit copies with vendors guarantee or design criteria to Plaintiffs by September 1, 1989 (2) Initiate on-site construction of the incinerator and modification of booths and hoods by November 1, 1989 (3) Complete installation of control system and initiate operation by December 1, 1989 (4) Cease operation of the first incinerator no sooner than December 1, 1989 (5) Conduct emission test, demonstrate attainment of the above design parameters in accordance with Appendix A ++EP++ Page 11 and demonstrate maximum reasonable capture by January 1, 1990 (6) Submit test results to Plaintiff by February 1, 1990

C. At all times the paint spraying booths or drying ovens are operating, Defendant shall continue to operate the control systems described above according to the specified parameters (except as provided for in Paragraph 15).

19. Parties to this action agree that the above-referenced Control Plan in paragraph 18 is being implemented to reduce emissions beyond the level required for compliance with Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-21-09.

VIII. RECORDKEEPING AND MONITORING

20. Defendant shall maintain all records required by this Decree for two (2) years after the date the record was made.

21. Within 10 days following each of the applicable completion dates specified above, Queen City Barrel shall submit a written progress report to the Plaintiffs. The person submitting these reports shall certify whether or not each applicable requirement was met by the corresponding completion date. If an applicable requirement was not met by the corresponding completion date, the person shall explain, in detail, why the requirement was not met.

22. On or before February 28, 1990 Queen City Barrel shall install, calibrate, operate and maintain a photohelic sensor and recorder with set-point alarm on each fume incinerator installed pursuant to Paragraph 18. The photohelic sensor shall measure and be operated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. ++EP++

Page 12

The set-point for the photohelic sensor shall be determined during the emission tests performed to demonstrate attainment of the design parameters. Following the emission tests the fume incinerator shall be operated with a static pressure at or below the set point.

23. By not later than the date specified in Paragraphs 16(e) and either 18(B) (3) or 18(4) and 18(A) (5), Queen City Barrel shall install, calibrate, operate, and maintain in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications, monitoring equipment to continuously record the drum afterburner outlet exhaust gas temperature, the fume incinerator(s) exhaust gas temperature, the drum reclamation incinerator collector differential pressure and the flow rate.

24. Until the Consent Decree is terminated, monthly reports shall be submitted to the Plaintiffs documenting all instances during which the drum incinerator control device pressure drop or water flow rate, the drum afterburner outlet exhaust gas temperature, the temperature in the fume incinerator(s), or the static pressure at the fume incinerator(s) deviate from the level observed during the respective compliance/performance demonstration test. These reports shall include the date, duration, value and corrective action taken during the occurrences. If there are no instances where these parameters fall below the compliance test conditions, a negative declaration shall be made. The reports shall be due 15 days after the end of each calendar month. ++EP++

Page 13

25. Queen City Barrel shall submit a Volatile Organic Compound emission report on or before the 15th of the month following the month reported. For each coating line provide on a daily basis:

(a) Identification of each coating used, including the coating identification number and color;

(b) The coating density, expressed as pounds per gallon, on as applied basis;

(c) The solids content of each coating, expressed as percent-by-volume, as applied;

(d) The VOC content of each coating, expressed as percent-by-volume, as applied;

(e) The amount of each coating used, expressed as gallons minus water of coating per day;

(f) The amount of solvent, and identity of solvent, added to each as-received (i.e., virgin) coating prior to application, including the solvent cut ration, expressed as gallons of solvent per gallon of as-received coating; and

(g) The as-applied VOC content, expressed as pounds per gallon, excluding water.

These reports shall be submitted, individually by line, beginning within 30 days of the effective date of this decree and for each month thereafter until the requirements of paragraphs 18(A) (7) or 18(B) (6) are achieved. These reports shall also be submitted for any period that Defendant operates the coating lines and/or ovens without the operation of the control devices.

26. The emission tests required by paragraphs 16 and 18 shall be conducted while the drum reclamation incinerator and painting lines are operating at or near maximum capacity. Not later than 30 days prior to the proposed test date(s), Queen City Barrel shall submit an "intent to Test" notification to Plaintiffs at the addresses listed under Paragraph 27 which shall describe, in detail, the proposed test methods and procedures, the operating parameters, the time(s) and date(s) of the tests, and the person(s) who will be conducting the tests. ++EP++

Page 14

Failure to submit such notification for review and approval prior to the tests may result in the U.S. EPA and Ohio EPA refusal to accept the results of the emission test. The Plaintiffs shall be permitted to witness the tests, examine the testing equipment, and acquire data and information regarding the source operating parameters. A comprehensive written report on the results of the emission tests shall be submitted to the Plaintiffs within 30 days following completion of the test. The drum incinerator test report shall include but not be limited to: the incinerator operating conditions, the rate of drums fed into the incinerator, the weight of drums in and out of the incinerator, the afterburner and scrubber operating conditions during the tests. The painting line test report shall include all items set forth in Appendix A.

27. All reports required pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be submitted by Defendant to the following addresses:

Chief, Air Compliance Branch

Air and Radiation Division

Region V (5AC-26)

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Chief, Division of Air Pollution Control

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

1800 WaterMark Drive

Columbus, Ohio 43266-0149 ++EP++

Page 15

Director, Southwestern Ohio Air

Pollution Control Agency

2400 Beekman Street

Cincinnati, Ohio 45214

IX. CIVIL PENALTIES

28. Queen City Barrel shall pay a total civil penalty of $25,000. Said payment shall be in full satisfaction of Plaintiffs' claims against Defendant for the violations alleged in the complaint in this action. One half of the total civil penalty shall be paid to the State of Ohio and one half paid to the United States of America. Payments shall be made by cashier's or certified checks. The check for the United States of America shall be made payable to "Treasurer of the United States," and is to be tendered within 30 days after final entry of the Decree to the United States Attorney at the following address:

U.S. Attorney's Office

Attn: Chief of Collection

220 U.S. Post Office and Courthouse

5th and Walnut Streets

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

The check for the State of Ohio shall be tendered within the time stated above and made payable to "Treasurer, State of Ohio." This check shall be sent to Counsel for Plaintiff, State of Ohio at the following address:

30 East Broad, 25th Floor

Columbus, Ohio 43266-0410 (OH)

X. STIPULATED PENALTIES

29. If Queen City Barrel fails to comply with the requirements specified in Paragraphs 16(g), 18(C), 18(B)(5),18(A)(2) or 18(A)(6), Defendant shall pay a stipulated penalty of five hundred dollars ($500) per day of violation of each such Paragraph. ++EP++

Page 16

30. Stipulated penalties are not the exclusive remedy for Defendant's violation of this Consent Decree.

XI. ENFORCEMENT OF THIS DECREE

31. Defendant shall give prompt notice to Plaintiffs of any failure to meet any of the requirements of this Consent Decree. Plaintiffs shall provide Defendant with an opportunity to meet and discuss any failures in accordance with the relevant paragraph. Nothing in this Section shall prevent the Plaintiffs' from seeking full compliance with any provision of this decree and/or the Act including payment of penalties to the maximum extent allowed under the Clean Air Act.

32. If Defendant discovers that it will be unable to meet any requirements of this Consent Decree for any reason, including circumstances beyond its control, it shall notify Plaintiffs of the anticipated delay and reasons therefore. Upon receipt of such notice, Plaintiffs may agree to waive or defer one or more requirements herein or the enforcement thereof. If the Plaintiffs and Defendant agree that the delay, or anticipated delay, has been or will be caused by circumstances beyond the control of Defendant and agree on the length of delay, the time for performance hereunder will, with court approval, be extended for a period equal to the delay resulting from such circumstances. A decision by Plaintiffs to defer enforcement of any milestone date set forth in this Consent Decree shall not constitute a waiver of enforcement action with regard to the other terms of this Consent Decree unless the Plaintiffs expressly so agree. ++EP++

Page 17

33. If the Plaintiffs do not agree that the delay, or anticipated delay, has been or will be caused by Acts of God, circumstances beyond the control of Defendant, or acts beyond the control of Defendant and/or do not agree on the length of the delay, Defendant may submit the matter to the Court for resolution. Plaintiffs do not agree, for purposes of this Consent Decree, that such a defense necessarily exists, but agree to adjudicate the existence of such a defense when the defense is either presented to the Court by Defendant for confirmation, or when an enforcement action is commenced by Plaintiffs.

34. In any such proceeding, Defendant shall bear the burden of demonstrating that the delay, or anticipated delay, has been or will be caused by circumstances beyond its control and of the necessity of the proposed length of the delay. Increased costs or expenses associated with the implementation of activities required by this Consent Decree shall not be considered circumstances beyond the control of Defendant.

35. Defendant shall be entitled to the benefits of this Section only if Defendant has given the Plaintiffs notice of the delay, or anticipated delay, as set forth in the first paragraph of this Section. ++EP++

Page 18 XI. GENERAL PROVISIONS

36. Effect. This Consent Decree constitutes full settlement of the Defendant's civil liability for claims alleged in the Complaint filed in this action. This Consent Decree also constitutes full settlement of all claims related to Defendant's past liability under Ohio Admin. Code 3745-15-07(1986) as alleged in the complaint.

37. Entry. Any authorized representative of the Plaintiffs upon presentation of proper identification, shall have the right of entry upon the premises of Defendant's facility at any reasonable time for the purpose of monitoring compliance with all provisions of this Consent Decree. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall limit the Plaintiffs' authority to obtain access and conduct tests and inspections under the existing legal authorities.

38. Other Laws. This Consent Decree in no way affects Defendant's responsibility to comply with any other State, Federal or local laws or regulations, or with any Order of the Court, including, but not limited to an Order pursuant to Section 303 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7603.

39. Reservation of Rights. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to limit the authority of Plaintiffs to seek relief for claims or conditions not alleged in the Complaint including violations which occur after the filing of the Complaint. ++EP++

Page 19

40. Admissibility. This Consent Decree shall not be admissible in any judicial or administrative proceeding other than for the enforcement of any provisions of this Consent Decree or where Defendant may seek to admit it in the defense of any administrative or judicial action brought against it by Plaintiff.

41. Costs. Each party in this action shall bear its own costs and attorney fees.

42. If at any time, Defendant chooses to cease operation of source N001 or the painting lines, Defendant's responsibilities under the relevant paragraph shall end. Subsequent re-activation of source N001 will occur after milestones (a) through (e) of paragraph 16 have been completed. If, at any time, Defendant chooses to cease operation of the paint coating lines, Defendant's responsibility under paragraph 18 shall end. Subsequent re-activation of the paint coating lines will occur only after the relevant Control Plan has been implemented.

43. Dispute Resolution. Any party to this Consent Decree may apply to the Court for resolution of a dispute concerning this Consent Decree, provided that the party making such application has made a good faith attempt to resolve the matter with the other parties. This provision does not apply to any final actions by the Director of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, regarding issuance of permits to install or operate. Appeal of the Director's final actions shall be to the Ohio Environmental Board of Review as described in RC 3745.04. ++EP++

Page 20

44. Modification. Any modification of this Consent Decree must be in writing by agreement of the parties and approved by the Court. Any such written modification must be signed by all parties to this Consent Decree.

45. Severability. Should any provision of this Consent Decree be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be inconsistent with state or federal law and therefore unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect.

46. Retention of Jurisdiction. Until termination of this Consent Decree, the Court shall retain jurisdiction to modify and enforce the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree and to resolve disputes arising hereunder, as may be necessary or appropriate for the construction or execution of this Consent Decree.

47. Termination. After Defendant has maintained continuous compliance (subject to terms of Article XI Enforcement of This Decree) for a period of one (1) year with the Act, with the Ohio SIP, with the provisions contained in this Consent Decree, and has paid the civil penalty required by this Consent Decree, Defendant shall so certify to the Plaintiffs. This Consent Decree shall terminate within 30 days after receipt by Plaintiffs of such certification unless Plaintiffs notify Defendant of their objections with said certification. Notwithstanding the termination of this Decree, the Defendant shall continue to comply with the requirements of Paragraph 18 C. ++EP++

Page 21

FOR PLAINTIFF, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

/s/ Donald Carr

DONALD A. CARR,

Acting Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

P.O. Box 7611

Ben Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044

Dated: 7-5-89

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

Environmental Enforcement Section

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

P.O. Box 7611

Ben Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044

Dated: 6/26/89

D. MICHAEL CRITES

United States Attorney

Southern District of Ohio

DONETTA D. WIETHA

Assistant United States Attorney

/s/ Edward E Reich

EDWARD E. REICH

Acting Assistant Administrator for Enforcement

and Compliance Monitoring

United States Environmental Protection Agency

401 M Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20460

Dated: 6/22/89 ++EP++

Page 22

/s/ SIGNATURE ILLEGIBLE

VALDAS V. ADAMKUS

Regional Administrator

United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Region V

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Dated: 6/19/89

/s/ Michael G Smith

MICHAEL G. SMITH

Associate Regional Counsel

NICHOLAS R. BOLLO

Assistant Regional Counsel

United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Region V

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Dated: 6/19/89

FOR PLAINTIFF-INTERVENOR, THE STATE OF OHIO

Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr.

Attorney General of Ohio

/s/ Karen S. Cleveland

KAREN CLEVELAND

MARGARET A. MALONE

Assistant Attorney General

State of Ohio

30 East Broad, 25th Floor

Columbus, Ohio 43266

Dated: 6/16/89 ++EP++

Page 23

FOR DEFENDANT, QUEEN CITY BARREL COMPANY

/s/ Jerome H Kearns

Jerome H. Kearns

Dated: June 16, 1989

/s/ Philip J Schworer

Philip J. Schworer

DINSMORE & SHOHL

2100 Fountain Square Plaza

511 Walnut Street

Cincinnati, OH 45202-3172

(513) 977-8200

OF COUNSEL:

Vincent B. Stamp

DINSMORE & SHOHL

/s/ Edward Paul

Edward Paul, President

QUEEN CITY BARREL COMPANY

1937 South Street

Cincinnati, OH 45204

Dated: 6-16-89

Consent Decree entered in accordance with the foregoing this day of , 1989.

United States District Court Judge

for the Southern District of Ohio ++EP++

APP A-1 Appendix A VOC EMISSION TEST PROTOCOL

1. Determine within 0.01 pound the total coating applied for hourly period of each individual test run. Analyze each coating for VOC content, excluding water by 40 C.F.R. 60 Appendix A, Method 24 or 24A. Analyze each coating as applied for total carbon content by either 40 C.F.R. 60 Appendix A, Method 24B (Candidate Test Method) or by analysis of the organic structure of coating as applied to determine the percent carbon of the total molecular weight of the compound being applied. From the total coating consumed for each hourly period and the percent total carbon content of the coating compute total pounds of carbon applied per hour at the source.

2. Conduct simultaneously with the coating measurements contained in Items No. 1 an analysis of the total gaseous carbon emissions delivered to the air pollution control device. This analysis shall be conducted by performing 40 C.F.R. 60 Appendix A, Methods 1-4 and 25 at a suitable sampling location at the inlet to the air pollution control device. The result of this analysis shall determine total pounds of carbon per hour captured. The following equation shall be utilized to determine percent capture efficiency.

% Capture Efficiency = Total Carbon Applied - Total Carbon Captured / Total Carbon Applied x 100

3. Conduct simultaneously with the measurements contained in Items No. 1 and 2 an analysis of the total gaseous carbon emissions from the air pollution control device. This analysis shall be conducted by performing 40 C.F.R. 60 Appendix A, Methods 1-4 and 25 at a suitable location at the outlet to the atmosphere from the air pollution control device. The result of this analysis shall determine total pounds of carbon per hour emitted. The following equation shall be utilized to determine per cent control efficiency.

% Control Efficiency = Total Carbon Captured - Total Carbon Emitted / Total Carbon Captured x 100

4. Queen City Barrel (QCB) shall operate each source tested at its maximum production rate, its highest coating application rate and the highest VOC content coating. A test shall consist of at least 3 individual hourly tests, analyses and coating measurements. QCB shall submit notification of the date it intends to conduct aforementioned test at least 21 days in advance to U.S. EPA. QCB shall submit to U.S. EPA at 14 days in advance of the testing a test protocol which at a minimum shall describe all test methods and procedures, sampling locations, production operating rates, and coating formulations, as applied. The complete results of the test shall be submitted 30 days subsequent to the date of the test. ++EP++ ^Z

PEREZ INTERBORO ASPHALT CO., INC .,

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

02-89-C013

CAA

MISC

19890605

19890605

NYD098832181

PEREZ INTERBORO ASPHALT CO INC, OR HOT MIX ASPHALT PLANTS

BROOKLYN, NY

CV-85-1170

02

CONSENT DECREE, US V PEREZ INTERBORO ASPHALT CO. INC.

Page 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

PEREZ INTERBORO ASPHALT CO., INC.,

Defendant.

Plaintiff, United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), filed the compliant in this action on March 28, 1985, and an amended complaint on February 23, 1987. The complaint alleges that the defendant, Perez Interboro Asphalt Co., Inc., violated Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7411, and the New Source Performance Standard for Hot Mix Asphalt Plants, 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and I.

Defendant, Perez Interboro Asphalt Co., Inc., (hereinafter "Perez" or "Defendant") filed an answer in which it denied violating the above-referenced law and regulations.

Defendant is a New York corporation with its principal place of business located at 99 Paidge Avenue, Brooklyn, New York. ++EP++

Page 2

Defendant is the owner and/or operator of a batch-type, asphalt concrete manufacturing facility located at 99 Paidge Avenue, Brooklyn, New York (hereinafter the "plant" or "Perez Interboro plant"). The plant includes systems for storing, screening and handling stone aggregate, a rotary-drum stone aggregate dryer, mineral filler storage and handling facilities, and an air pollution control system. The plant is a hot mix asphalt facility as that term is defined by 40 C.F.R. 60.90(a) and 60.91.

Defendant shall achieve and demonstrate compliance with the applicable emission standards under the Clean Air Act. Defendant has agreed to undertake programs relating to the operation and maintenance of its emission control devices, and general maintenance of the plant for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the New Source Performance Standards.

The parties to this Decree agree that settlement of this action without further litigation is in the public interest and that entry of this Consent Decree is the most appropriate means of resolving these matters.

NOW THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, without this Decree or any action taken to comply with its terms constituting any evidence or an admission of liability by the Defendant, and upon consent of the parties to the Decree, by their attorneys and authorized officials, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: ++EP++

Page 3 I. JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and the parties to this Consent Decree pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sub-Section 1331, 1345 and 1355, and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b). Defendant waives any objections it may have to the jurisdiction of the Court and agrees that venue is proper in this Court. The compliant states a claim upon which relief may be granted against Defendant under Section 113(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b).

II.APPLICABILITY

The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the Defendant, its officers, directors, employees, agents, servants, successors, and assigns, and all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Decree and acting in concert with the Defendant, with respect to any portion of the Perez Interboro plant that is, or may hereafter be owned, operated, or leased by the Defendant or its successors and assigns. Defendant shall give notice in writing, and a copy, of the Consent Decree to any successor in interest prior to a change in ownership or a transfer of right to operate the plant. Defendant shall verify that such notice has been given by providing a copy thereof to EPA and the United States Department of Justice within seven (7) days after a change in ownership or a transfer of right to operate the plant. ++EP++

Page 4 III. COMPLIANCE PROGRAM

1. Upon entry of this Decree, Defendant shall comply with Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7411, and the New Source Performance Standard, 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and I, as these regulations now exist or may hereafter be amended.

2. Upon entry of this Decree or at such time as may be specified herein, Defendant shall undertake and perform the following acts:

(a) Inspect the plant daily for any disrepair which may cause particulate matter ("PM") to leak from any part of the affected facility, as defined at 40 C.F.R. 60.90, before it can be treated by the PM emissions cleaning device, i.e., baghouse. Any and all repairs necessary to maintain the plant in condition to prevent the PM emission shall be made as soon as possible. If any repair is estimated to require greater than 48 hours to complete, notice shall be given to EPA in writing as soon as it is evident that the repairs will require more than 48 hours. Such notice shall specify the location at the plant at which repairs are necessary and the estimated time for completion of the repairs. It shall be Defendant's burden to demonstrate that any visible emission of PM was not the result of inadequate maintenance and/or improper plant operation and that all repairs have been made within a reasonable time. ++EP++

Page 5

(b) Inspect the PM control device, i.e., baghouse, and auxiliary control equipment, including, but not limited to duct work, fan and stack, in accordance with the schedule and at the intervals prescribed in the Monthly Baghouse Maintenance Report, Appendix A hereto. The inspection shall be performed by the plant Manager or an employee under the supervision of the Plant Manager. The Report form shall be filled out as each item is inspected and each space on the form shall be marked with either the word "good" which shall indicate an operating deficiency which must be repaired or preventively maintained. The reports shall be kept up-to-date, filled out completely and made available for EPA inspection at all times. They shall be reviewed by the Plant Manager at the end of each month and signed by the Plant Manager indicating that he is familiar with the findings therein.

(c) Any item in the Monthly Baghouse Maintenance Report which is marked "Def" shall be repaired as soon as possible. A Deficiency Correction Sheet, Appendix B hereto, shall be completed for all such items immediately upon completion of the work. All such reports shall be kept up-to-date, filled out completely and made available for EPA inspection at all times.

(d) Defendant shall perform monthly ultraviolet dye leak detection tests to locate broken bags and loose connections in the baghouse. Such test shall be performed during the first full week of each calendar month. A Monthly Baghouse Dye Check Report, Appendix C hereto, shall be completed for each such test. ++EP++

Page 6

All such reports shall be kept up-to-date, filled out completely and made available for EPA inspection at all times. Any repairs required to repair or replace broken bags or loose connections revealed by the dye test shall be made before the plant is put back into operation.

(e) Defendant shall maintain an inventory of spare parts consisting of, at a minimum, the following items:

(1) Bags, at least 10 percent of the total used in the

baghouse.

(2) Bag clamps, at least 2 clamps for each spare bag.

(3) Bag Hangers, at least 1 hanger for each spare bag, and

(4) Any other parts which the baghouse manufacturer recommends be kept on hand. Such parts need not be kept on hand provided that the manufacturer has committed, in writing, that such parts may be delivered for installation within 24 hours of a telephone order. The complete list of spare parts to be maintained on-site, including quantities where appropriate, and the manufacturer's commitment for parts to be delivered within 24 hours of a telephone order shall be provided to EPA on or before the thirtieth calendar day after entry of this decree.

(f) Defendant shall install an electrical type pressure gauge for the baghouse, and it shall be connected to a real time recorder in the control room. ++EP++

Page 7

The pressure gauge and recorder shall be installed and fully operational on or before the thirtieth calendar day after entry of this decree.

(g) Defendant shall install a temperature sensing device in the outlet of the baghouse. The device shall be connected to a meter in the control room and shall be connected to an interlock such that wet aggregate cannot be dried unless the outlet temperature of the baghouse is at least 250 degrees F. The temperature sensing device, meter, and interlock shall be installed and fully operational on or before the thirtieth calendar day after entry of this decree.

3. The requirements of paragraph 2 above are intended to be minimum requirements applicable to the Perez Interboro plant and shall not be construed as a waiver or interpretation of the requirements of any applicable regulation. Compliance with any an all provisions of the requirements of paragraph 2 above shall not relieve Defendant of the obligation to comply with all applicable requirements of Federal, State, and local law.

4. Defendant shall test the performance of the facility in accordance with the test methods and procedures specified in 40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subpart A, Section 60.8 and Subpart I. Performance of the test shall depend on EPA approval of the test protocol and plant maintenance at the time of the test. The following schedule shall apply to performance of the test: ++EP++

Page 8

(a) The test protocol shall be submitted to EPA not later than the thirtieth calendar day after the date of entry of this decree.

(b) The test shall be performed not later than the twentieth calendar day after EPA has approved the test protocol. The date on which the test will be performed shall be part of the protocol and subject to EPA approval. Any revisions to the protocol required by EPA shall be made promptly and completely and the revised protocol shall be returned to EPA within seven calendar days after EPA requested the revision. Plant maintenance and repair at the time of the test shall be such that the test will be representative of the plant operating in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practice for minimizing emissions. EPA may inspect the plant prior to the scheduled date of the test. Delay in performance of the test shall not be excused by any dispute over the adequacy of the protocol or plant maintenance.

(c) The complete report of the test results shall be submitted to EPA not later than the thirtieth calendar day after the date on which the test is performed.

5. If the performance test in paragraph 4, above, demonstrates that the rate of emission of PM is not in compliance with the PM emission limitation of 40 C.F.R. 60.92, Defendant shall submit to EPA, for its review and approval, a plan and a schedule for achieving compliance. Such plan shall be submitted not later than the thirtieth calendar day after submission of the test report to EPA. ++EP++

Page 9

The United States reserves the right to seek appropriate relief and/or amendment of this decree, including but not limited to injunctive relief and civil penalties in addition to that which is provided herein.

6. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Decree, EPA may require that the performance of the facility be tested, in addition to the test required by paragraph 4, above, prior to termination of this decree pursuant to Article IX paragraph 10.

IV. CIVIL PENALTIES

Within thirty (30) days after entry of this Decree, Defendant shall pay a civil penalty in the amount of $30,000.00. Payment shall be made by certified check payable to the "Treasurer, United States of America", marked with the Court's Civil Action Number, CV-85-1170, and tendered to the Plaintiff at the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York, United States Court House, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York 11201 (Attn: Suzanne M. Skinner, Assistant U.S. Attorney). A copy of the letter transmitting the payment shall be sent simultaneously to EPA addressed to Chief, Air and Pesticides Branch, Office of Regional Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, New York 10278.

V. STIPULATED PENALTIES

1. In the event Defendant fails to take or complete any of the measures specified in paragraph 2, 4 or 5 of Article III of this Consent Decree within the times prescribed therein, Defendant shall notify EPA within thirty (30) days of such failure and shall pay stipulated penalties in accordance with the following schedule: ++EP++

Page 10

(a) $500 per day for each day that the plant is operating and any part of the plant is in disrepair which could have been detected by reasonable daily inspections as required by paragraph 2(a) above. Where such disrepair results in any visible emission of PM, the penalty shall be $1,000 per day.

(b) $2,500 for any failure to perform the particulate control device inspection required by paragraph 2(b) or for any failure to perform the ultraviolet dye leak detection tests required by paragraph 2(d).

(c) $500 for any failure to complete the Monthly Baghouse Maintenance Report, Deficiency Correction Sheet, or Monthly Baghouse Dye Check Report. To be considered complete, each space in each form shall be completed with legible and meaningful explanations and information.

(d) $500 for each day that the inventory of spare parts is deficient. Where a repair has been made which require use of one or more of the required spare parts, the inventory shall not be considered deficient if an order has been placed for the requisite parts within 24 hours of removing the parts from the inventory. As part of its obligation to maintain the inventory of parts, Defendant shall confirm the manufacturer's commitment under paragraph 2(e)(4) at six month intervals. ++EP++

Page 11

(e) $500 for each day for failure to install and have fully operational the pressure gauge and recorder as required in paragraph 2(f).

(f) $500 for each day for failure to install and have fully operational the temperature sensing device, meter, and interlock as required in paragraph 2(g).

(g) $5,000 for each day for failure to submit the protocol, revisions to the protocol, to complete the performance test or to submit the complete test report as required in paragraph 4.

(h) If a plan is required under paragraph 5, $5,000 for each day that the plant is in operation after the complete test report is submitted until a plan and schedule is approved by EPA. $3,000 for each day that the plant is in operation after the plan and schedule is approved until compliance has been demonstrated by a test protocol approved by EPA.

2. All payments of stipulated penalties under this Decree shall be made within thirty (30) days of the date of non-compliance, by certified check, made payable to the "Treasurer, United States of America", marked with the Court's Civil Action Number, CV-85-1170, and mailed to the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York, United States Court House, 225 Cadman Plaza, Brooklyn, New York 11201 (Attn: Suzanne Skinner, Assistant U.S. Attorney). A copy of the letter transmitting the payment shall be sent simultaneously to EPA addressed to: Chief, Air and Pesticides Branch, Office of Regional Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, New York 10278. ++EP++

Page 12

3. Payments made under Articles IV and V of this Decree are penalties within the meaning of Section 162(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. Section 162(f), and are not tax deductible expenditures for purposes of Federal, State or local law.

VI. FORCE MAJEURE

1. If any event occurs which causes or may cause a delay in achieving compliance with any requirement of this Consent Decree, Defendant shall notify EPA and the United States Department of Justice in writing, within thirty (30) days after Defendant first learns of the occurrence or anticipated occurrence of the event. The notice shall describe in detail the anticipated length of the delay, the precise cause of the delay, the measures taken or to be taken by Defendant to prevent or minimize the delay, and the timetable by which those measures will be implemented. Defendant shall adopt all reasonable measures to prevent or minimize any such delay. Defendant shall be presumed to have knowledge of any event of which it should reasonably have known.

2. If the parties agree that the delay or anticipated delay in compliance with any requirement of this Decree has been or will be caused by circumstances beyond the control of Defendant, and that Defendant could not reasonably have foreseen and prevented such delay, the time for performance of such requirement may be extended for a period not to exceed the actual delay resulting from such circumstances. ++EP++

Page 13

In such event, the parties shall stipulate to such extension of time in writing. In the event the parties cannot agree, either party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution pursuant to Article VIII of this Decree.

3. Defendant shall bear the burden of proving that any delay is caused by circumstances beyond its control and that such delay could not reasonably have been foreseen and prevented. Increased costs or expenses associated with the implementation of actions called for by this Decree shall not be a basis for changes in this Decree or extensions of time. Delay in achievement of a requirement of any provision of this Decree shall not necessarily justify or excuse delay in achievement of subsequent requirements.

4. Failure by Defendant to comply with the notice requirements of paragraph 1, above, shall render the force majeure provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 inapplicable to the circumstances as to which notice was not given according to the provisions of paragraph 1.

VII ENTRY AND INSPECTION

During the pendency of this Decree, any authorized representative or contractor of EPA, upon presentation of credentials, shall have the right to enter the Perez Interboro plant during normal business hours for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this Consent Decree. ++EP++

Page 14

Nothing contained in this paragraph shall limit or otherwise affect any right of entry held by the Plaintiff pursuant to any applicable law, regulation, judgment or agreement. All report forms required by this Consent Decree shall be maintained on-site and there shall be a person on-site during normal business hours or at any and all times that the plant is operating who can produce the forms for inspection.

VIII DISPUTE RESOLUTION

In the event a dispute arises with respect to the meaning or application of any provision of this Decree, the parties shall first attempt to resolve the dispute by informal means. If the parties cannot resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days from the date the dispute arises, either party, upon notice to the other party, may file a petition with the Court setting forth the matter in dispute and the relief requested. In any such dispute, Defendant shall have the burden of proof that it has complied and is in compliance with all provisions of this Consent Decree and all applicable requirements of Federal, State and local law.

IX GENERAL PROVISIONS

1. Definitions. Terms used in this Decree that are defined in Section III of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7411, or the New Source Performance Standard, 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and I, shall have the meanings set forth in those definitions. ++EP++

Page 15

2. Headings. The headings used in this Consent Decree are for convenience only and do not affect or restrict the terms of the Decree.

3. Notifications. Copies of information, reports or notifications that are required to be submitted to EPA under the terms of this Decree shall be clearly identified as pertaining to U.S. v. Perez Interboro Asphalt Co., Inc., and addressed as follows:

Director, Air & Waste Management Division

United States Environmental Protection Agency

26 Federal Plaza

New York, New York 10278

Attention: Chief, Air Compliance Branch

A copy of the letter of transmittal shall be sent simultaneously to:

Chief, Air and Pesticides Branch

Office of Regional Counsel

United States Environmental Protection Agency

26 Federal Plaza

New York, New York 10278

Attention: David P. Stone

4. Notice and Posting. Defendant shall give written notice and a copy of this Consent Decree to all management personnel who will be responsible for implementing the Decree. A copy of the Consent Decree shall also be posted prominently in a commonly used area at the Perez Interboro plant and shall remain posted until this Consent Decree has terminated.

5. Duty to Comply with Other Laws. This Consent Decree in no way affects or relieves the Defendant of its obligation to comply with all applicable Federal, State and local laws and regulations. ++EP++

Page 16

Implementation of the measures referred to in this Decree shall not relieve the Defendant of its obligation to comply with, or constitute a warranty or representation that it has in fact complied with, the Clean Air Act or the New Source Performance Standards.

6. Reservation of Rights. Nothing contained in this Consent Decree shall be construed to prevent or limit the rights of the Plaintiff to obtain any other remedy, sanction or relief that may be available to it by virtue of the Defendant's failure to comply with this Decree, the Clean Air Act, or any other applicable provision of law or regulation.

7. Severability. The provisions of this Consent Decree are severable, and should any provision be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be inconsistent with any Federal or State law and therefore unenforceable, the remaining provisions of the Decree shall remain in full force and effect.

8. Cost. Each party to this Consent Decree shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees.

9. Federal Register Notice. Plaintiff and Defendant consent to the entry of this Decree subject to the requirements of 28 C.F.R. Section 50.7, which provides that a notice of the proposed Consent Decree be published in the Federal Register at least thirty (30) days prior to its entry and that the public be afforded an opportunity to comment upon the proposed Decree.

10. Termination. This Consent Decree shall terminate two (2) years after its date of entry, provided that its terms have been met and all penalties have been paid. ++EP++

Page 17

11. Retention of Jurisdiction. This Court shall retain jurisdiction until termination of the Decree for the purpose of modifying or enforcing any provision of the Decree, or taking any other action deemed necessary or appropriate to effectuate the terms of the Decree.

12. Full Satisfaction. This Consent Decree shall be in full settlement and satisfaction of any and all claims arising under the New Source Performance Standards that were alleged against Defendant in the complaint, and shall release Defendant from any liability arising therefrom. ++EP++

Page 18

We hereby consent to the entry of this Decree subject to the requirements of 28 C.F.R. 50.7

FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Donald A. Carr

Acting Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

U.S. Department of Justice

10th Street & Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20530

ANDREW J. MALONEY

Unites States Attorney

Eastern District of New York

SUZANNE M. SKINNER

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Court House

225 Cadman Plaza East

Brooklyn, New York 11201

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

THOMAS L. ADAMS, JR.

Assistant Administrator for

Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Of Counsel:

DAVID P. STONE

Assistant Regional Counsel

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II

FOR PEREZ INTERBORO ASPHALT CO., INC

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

Perez Interboro

Asphalt Co., Inc.

99 Paidge Avenue

Brooklyn, New York

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

Frank J. Duval

Attorney for Perez Interboro Asphalt Co., Inc.

Consent Decree approved and entered this day of , 1988.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ++EP++

APP A-1 Appendix A (Sample Form) MONTHLY BAGHOUSE MAINTENANCE REPORT

FORM OMITTED ++EP++

APP B-1 Appendix B (Sample Form) DEFICIENCY CORRECTION SHEET

FORM OMITTED ++EP++

APP C-1 Appendix C (Sample Form) Monthly Baghouse Dye Check Report

FORM OMITTED ++EP++ ^Z

NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT DECREE

05-89-C026

CAA

OTHER

19890927

19890927

IND072039001

NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL TRACTOR

INDIANAPOLIS IN

IP89-418-C

05

CONSENT DECREE, US V NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORATION CORPORATION

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, v.

NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION,

Defendant.

This matter having come before the Court upon application of the United States of America for entry of this Consent Decree; and

WHEREAS, Plaintiff, the United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("U.S. EPA"), filed a Complaint against Navistar International Transportation Corporation ("Navistar") on , alleging that Navistar's facility located at 5565 Brookville Road, Indianapolis, Indiana 46219, had violated the Clean Air Act ("Act"), 42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq., and Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c), which is part of the federally approved Indiana State Implementation Plan ("SIP") adopted pursuant to Section 110 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7410; and

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Navistar have agreed that settlement of this matter is in the public interest and that entry of this Consent Decree without adjudication of any issue of fact or law is the most appropriate means of resolving this matter; ++EP++

Page 2

NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, pursuant to Rule 65(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as follows:

1. The Court has personal jurisdiction over the consenting parties hereto, and venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. Section 1391. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted against Navistar under Section 113(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b), and this Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sub-Section 1331, 1345, 1355 and 42 U.S.C. Section 7413.

2. Navistar is a corporation with its headquarters at 401 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611, doing business at 5565 Brookville Road, Indianapolis, Indiana 46219.

3. Each signatory to this Consent Decree certifies that he or she is fully authorized by the party whom he or she represents to enter into the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree, to execute the Consent Decree on behalf of such party, and to bind such party to it.

4. The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the United States and Navistar and upon Navistar's officers, directors, agents, trustees, servants, employees, successors, assigns, attorneys, and all persons, firms, and corporations acting under the control or direction of Navistar. ++EP++

Page 3

In the event that Navistar decides to sell or transfer its interest in the facility that is the subject of this Consent Decree, it shall advise the proposed purchaser or transferee of the existence of this Consent Decree.

5. In accordance with Section 109 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7409, the Administrator of the U.S. EPA, on April 30, 1971, promulgated primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulates. 36 Fed. Reg. 8187. Under Section 110 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7410, each State was required to adopt and submit to U.S. EPA for approval a State Implementation Plan ("SIP") containing procedures and regulations to implement, maintain and enforce the Standards.

6. On July 16, 1982, the Administrator of the U.S. EPA approved Indiana Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4 as part of the federally enforceable Indiana SIP. 47 Fed. Reg. 30973.

7. Subject to the exceptions set forth in 325 IAC 6-4-6, Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) provides that the concentration of fugitive dust at a primary (downwind) site cannot exceed 50 micrograms per cubic meter above the background (upwind) concentration for a 60-minute period.

8. Subject to the exceptions set forth in 325 IAC 6-4-6, Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) applies to Navistar's Indianapolis facility. ++EP++

Page 4

9. On November 20, 1986, the Director of the Air Management Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, by duly delegated authority, issued a Notice of Violation ("NOV") to Navistar pursuant to Section 113(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(a)(1), alleging that Navistar's Indianapolis facility had violated Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) on March 22, 1985.

10. On , U.S. EPA filed a Compliant, alleging that Navistar's Indianapolis facility had violated Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) more than thirty (30) days after November 20, 1986.

11. Navistar shall achieve and thereafter maintain compliance with Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) as required herein.

12. Navistar shall reduce particulate emissions by implementing the following particulate emission control programs:

a. West Sand Discharge System

(1) Spray nozzles shall be inspected once per day to ensure proper alignment and to ensure that nozzle orifices are not plugged. Completed.

(2) Water shall be applied to the sand conveyor at a continuous flow rate of 5.12 gallons/minute. Completed.

(3) The west sand belt shall be lowered to the floor level and shall be totally enclosed and rubber skirting shall be installed around the head pulley. Completed. ++EP++

Page 5

(4) The west sand discharge chute shall be removed from service. Completed.

b. Vacuum Sweeping of Access Roads

(1) Sweeping shall be done by a vacuum-type sweeper with wet dust suppressant for controlling fugitive dust. Already commenced.

(2) Except for days on which there is a cover of snow on the ground or rain is falling at a rate of .02 inches per hour, weekly sweeping shall be conducted from the center drive along the main drive to the West Gate as shown on the attached map. Beginning immediately, this will be performed by 7 a.m. each Monday morning, 12 months per year. Already commenced.

(3) Except for days on which there is a cover of snow on the ground or rain is falling at a rate of .02 inches per hour, weekly sweeping shall be conducted along the main drive, from the West Gate to the railroad crossing, as shown on the attached map. Beginning immediately, this will be performed by 7 a.m. each Wednesday, from April 1 to November 30 of each year. Already commenced.

(4) A sweeping log shall be kept which shall be initialed by the operator of the sweeper following each trip. Already commenced.

(5) During periods of plant shutdown, the above schedule need not be adhered to.

C. Baghouse Refurbish and Rebuild Program

(1) The program shall consist of the following tasks:

(a) repair ducts, hoppers, chutes and augers as necessary

(b) replace all bags

(c) clean hoppers and compartments

(d) check fans and repair as necessary ++EP++

Page 6

(e) work shall be conducted by an outside contractor who specializes in baghouse maintenance.

(2) Phase I and II of the electric melt baghouses shall be refurbished and rebuilt, the shaker mechanism reconditioned, and self-contained dust collection systems installed. Completed.

(3) The Phase III System shall be refurbished and rebuilt, and the shaker mechanism converted to pulse jet. Completed.

(4) Phase III and V baghouses shall be refurbished and rebuilt, and the pulse jet systems reconditioned. Completed.

(5) The M-3 baghouse shall be refurbished and rebuilt, and the shaker mechanism converted to pulse jet. Completed.

d. CKO Chute

(1) A rubber deflector shall be installed on the chute to reduce air turbulence and decrease the discharge velocity of

the conveyor material. Completed.

(2) The core knockout chute shall be removed from service. Completed.

e. Number 2 Molding Unit

(1) The west sand discharge shall be removed from service. Completed.

(2) The number 2 molding unit shall be removed from service. Completed.

13. Navistar shall relocate pressure-sensitive monitors for each baghouse collector to make them accessible for reading no later than December 31, 1988, or 120 days after entry of this Consent Decree, whichever is later. Following the relocation, Navistar shall immediately begin to read and record the pressure drop across each baghouse collector once per day, at the beginning of the first shift. ++EP++

Page 7

U.S. EPA certifies that it will not take enforcement action against or seek to recover penalties from Navistar based solely upon information submitted to U.S. EPA in the pressure drop log.

14. Navistar shall maintain each baghouse collector within design pressure drop ranges.

15. Commencing no later than thirty (30) days after entry of this Consent Decree, Navistar shall inspect baghouse emission points for visible emissions once each day during the first shift. The inspector shall note in a log the time at which the inspections are made and note whether there are any visible emissions. The inspector shall immediately contact the plant environmental engineer to report any visible emissions. The plant environmental engineer shall take appropriate actions to determine whether corrective action is needed. U.S. EPA certifies that it will not take enforcement action against or seek to recover penalties from Navistar based solely upon the results of such inspections for visible emissions.

16. Navistar shall conduct upwind/downwind tests following the protocol specified by U.S. EPA in the April 30, 1971, Federal Register for high volume sampling and analysis for at least one hour on four (4) days during the period between March 1, 1989, and June 30, 1989. Navistar shall not commence the tests (a) if one-half-inch of rainfall, as measured by the United States Weather Bureau Station at Indianapolis International Airport, has accumulated during the preceding 24-hour period; (b) when rain is falling at a rate of .02-inch per hour; (c) if less than one-tenth-inch of rainfall, as measured by the United States Weather Bureau Station at Indianapolis International Airport, has fallen during the preceding seven (7) days; or (d) at anytime during which an event defined in Attachment 1 as an adverse meteorological condition is occurring. ++EP++

Page 8

If any such tests do not demonstrate violations of Indiana Air pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c), this Consent Decree shall terminate as provided in Paragraph 29 hereof. If any of such tests demonstrates a violation of Indiana Air pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c), Navistar shall:

a. identify all equipment in operation at the time of such test(s) and provide operational information to U.S. EPA, including, but not limited to, production rate, expected particulate emission rate, and expected particulate type;

b. contract with an independent laboratory to perform microscopic analysis of particulate samples collected during the test(s), from both upwind and downwind samplers;

c. submit to U.S. EPA an expeditious program which is expected to enable the facility to comply with Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c);

d. implement the program, which shall be completed no later than March 1, 1990; and ++EP++

Page 9

e. conduct Upwind/downwind ambient air tests following the protocol specified by U.S. EPA in the April 30, 1971, Federal Register for at least one hour on four (4) days during the period between March 1, 1990, and June 30, 1990.

If such tests do not demonstrate any violation of Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c), this Consent Decree shall terminate as provided in Paragraph 29 hereof.

Exceedences of the limits contained in Indiana Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) which occur during periods of adverse meteorological conditions, as defined in Attachment 1, will not be considered to be violations of that Rule for purposes of this Consent Decree. Tests conducted during periods of adverse meteorological conditions shall not be considered completed tests for purposes of this Consent Decree.

17. Beginning with the calendar quarter ending June 30, 1989, and for every calendar quarter thereafter, until termination of this Consent Decree, Navistar shall submit, in writing, to U.S. EPA, Region V, a report containing the status and progress of projects under this Decree and information regarding compliance or noncompliance with the applicable requirements of this Decree, including any reasons for noncompliance. Such report shall also include a description of any work to be performed pursuant to this Decree during the following calendar quarter. Such report, along with copies of the sweeping log, the pressure drop log, and the visible emissions log for the quarter, shall be submitted within thirty (30) days following the last month of each calendar quarter. ++EP++

Page 10

18. If any event occurs which causes or may cause a delay in compliance with any requirement of this Consent Decree, Navistar shall notify U.S. EPA, Region V, in writing, within ten (10) days of the event, by describing the anticipated length of the delay, the cause or causes of the delay, the measures taken and to be taken to prevent or minimize the delay, and the timetable by which those measures will be implemented. Navistar shall take all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such violations. If Navistar fails to fulfil the notice requirements of this Paragraph, its failure to timely achieve or maintain compliance with any requirement of this Consent Decree shall not be excused pursuant to this Paragraph. If U.S. EPA and Navistar agree that the delay has been or will be caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Navistar, the parties may stipulate to an extension of the particular compliance requirement affected by a period not exceeding the actual delay caused by such circumstances. In such event, the parties may apply to this Court for an appropriate modification of this Consent Decree. In the event the parties cannot agree, any party may submit the matter to this Court for resolution. The burden of proof that any failure to timely achieve or maintain compliance was caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Navistar shall rest with Navistar. Notification to U.S. EPA pursuant to this paragraph or Paragraph 17, above, shall not, by itself, excuse the noncompliance or delay. ++EP++

Page 11

19. Navistar shall pay a civil penalty of $33,750 pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7413(b). Payment shall be made by certified check, payable to "Treasurer, United States of America," and sent within fifteen (15) calendar days of entry of this Consent Decree to:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

P.O. Box 70753

Chicago, Illinois 60673

A copy of the transmittal letter, identifying this Consent Decree and this Paragraph, shall be sent simultaneously to:

Branch Secretary

Air Compliance Branch

Air and Radiation Division

Region V

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

U.S. EPA expressly waives any right to seek additional penalties under the Act for any violations of Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) alleged in the NOV or Complaint as long as Navistar continues to comply with the terms of this Consent Decree.

20. Until termination of this Consent Decree, Navistar shall pay, on demand, a stipulated penalty of $100 per day for violating any of the requirements contained in Paragraphs 11 through 16.d. or any of the reporting requirements of Paragraph 17 or 18 of this Consent Decree. If Navistar fails to demonstrate compliance with the fugitive dust limits found in Indiana Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) if and when it performs the four (4) upwind/downwind tests required in Paragraph 16.e. of this Consent Decree, Navistar shall pay, on demand, a stipulated penalty of $1000 per day for each day of demonstrated noncompliance. ++EP++

Page 12

Payment of a stipulated penalty owing pursuant to this Paragraph shall be made in the same form and manner as stated in Paragraph 19, above. Stipulated penalties are not the Plaintiff's exclusive remedy for Navistar's violations of this Consent Decree, and Plaintiff reserves any right to seek such relief, monetary and injunctive, to which it is entitled.

21. Interest shall accrue on any amounts overdue under the terms of this Consent Decree at the rate established by the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. Section 3717. A late payment handling charge of $20.00 will be imposed after thirty (30) days, with an additional charge of $10.00 for each subsequent thirty-day period over which an unpaid balance remains. In addition, a six percent per annum penalty will be applied on any principal amount not paid within fifteen days of the date that this Consent Decree is entered in the United States District Court.

22. Navistar shall permit the U.S. EPA and its consultants, contractors and subcontractors, upon presentation of appropriate credentials, to enter its Indianapolis facility during regular business hours and at reasonable times for the purpose of conducting inspections to monitor compliance with this Consent Decree. ++EP++

Page 13

This paragraph in no way limits any right of inspection and entry provided to the U.S. EPA under any federal, state or local laws, permits or regulations.

23. Unless otherwise stated, whenever information, reports, notification and payments are required under the terms of this Consent Decree to be given by Navistar to U.S. EPA, such shall be directed to the individual specified below, at the address given, unless that individual gives notice in writing to Navistar that another individual has been designated to receive such communications. All such documents shall identify this Consent Decree and the applicable Paragraph.

Chief, Air Compliance Branch (5AC-26)

Region V

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

24. This Consent Decree in no way affects Navistar's responsibility to comply with any other applicable federal, state or local laws or regulations or any order of the Court. Moreover, this Consent Decree in no way limits the power of U.S. EPA under Sections 114 and 303 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Sub-Section 7414 and 7603.

25. This Consent Decree does not limit, enlarge, or affect the rights of Navistar or of the United States as against any third party, or of any third party as against Navistar or the United States. ++EP++

Page 14

26. By consenting to the entry of this Consent Decree and taking actions required herein, Navistar does not admit any allegation contained in the NOV, the Complaint, or in this Consent Decree or any other violation of federal, state, or local law or regulation.

27. Each party in this action shall bear its own costs.

28. All information and documents submitted to U.S. EPA by Navistar pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be subject to public inspection, except as such information and documents are identified by Navistar as confidential pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart B. Such confidential information and documents will be disclosed by U.S. EPA only in accordance with U.S. EPA regulations.

29. This Consent Decree shall terminate one year after the date that Navistar concludes four one-hour tests, demonstrating compliance with Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c), provided Navistar has fully satisfied all other applicable conditions of this Consent Decree. During the one-year period following conclusion of those tests, Navistar shall continue to submit quarterly to U.S. EPA copies of the sweeping log, the pressure drop log, and the visible emissions log required by Paragraphs 12(b)(4), 13 and 15 of this Consent Decree. No additional or different demonstrations of compliance or other requirements for determining compliance with Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) at Navistar's Indianapolis facility may be sought or imposed by U.S. EPA during that time as long as Navistar continues to comply with the requirements of Paragraphs 12(b), 13, 14, 15, 17 and 18 of this Consent Decree. ++EP++

Page 15

30. The parties reserve the right to seek a modification or termination of this Consent Decree (1) if U.S. EPA promulgates or approves a revised SIP containing requirements more or less stringent than the fugitive dust emission limitations set forth in Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) as of the date of entry of this Consent Decree, or (2) if a court of competent jurisdiction declares Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c) invalid. For purposes of this Paragraph, "court of competent jurisdiction" means the Indiana Supreme Court, or, if the Indiana Supreme Court does not hear a case involving the validity of Indiana Air Pollution Control Board Rule 325 IAC 6-4-2(c), an Indiana Court of Appeals.

31. Until termination of this Consent Decree, the Court shall retain jurisdiction to modify and enforce the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree and to resolve disputes arising hereunder as may be necessary or appropriate for the construction or execution of this Consent Decree.

32. Compliance with this Consent Decree shall constitute full settlement of the Complaint and the NOV. ++EP++

Page 16

Dated and entered this day of , 198 .

United States District Judge

Southern District of Indiana

WE HEREBY CONSENT to the entry of this Decree, subject to the public notice requirements of 28 C.F.R. Section 50.7.

FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICAN:

/s/ Donald Carr

DONALD A. CARR

Acting Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

Washington, D.C. 20530

DATE April 13, 1989

By:

Assistant United States Attorney

Southern District of Indiana

U.S. Court House

46 East Ohio Street

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 ++EP++

Page 17

/s/ ILLEGIBLE SIGNATURE

EDWARD E. REICH

Acting Assistant Administrator

Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Washington, D.C. 20460

DATE 3/30/89

FOR NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORATION

CORPORATION:

/s/ Timothy J. Cooney

TIMOTHY J. COONEY

Plant Manager

DATE 2/21/89 ++EP++

ATT 1-1 ATTACHMENT 1

For the purpose of this Consent Decree, Adverse meteorological Conditions shall consist of:

A. HIGH WINDS

Definition:

An hourly wind speed (as measured by the United States Weather Bureau Station at Indianapolis International Airport) of greater than or equal to 20 miles per hour ("mph"), or gusts equal to or greater than 40 mph (as measured by the United States Weather Bureau Station at Indianapolis International Airport), with no precipitation or only a trace of precipitation (observed as scattered drops that do not completely wet or cover an exposed area up to a rate of 0.02-inch/hr.).

The high wind, with no precipitation or only a trace of precipitation, must be associated with a significant contribution of crustal material in the sample.

B. SIGNIFICANT CRUSTAL MATERIAL IN SAMPLE

A contribution equal to or greater than 85% by weight of crustal material on the particulate matter sampling medium.

C. VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS

Definition:

The emission or ejection of volcanic materials at the Earth's surface from a crater or fissure. ++EP++

ATT 1-2 D. SANDBLASTING

Definition:

The temporary (generally 3 weeks or less) use of abrasive blasting with pressurized air for surface preparation purposes within 500 meters of monitoring site.

E. FOREST FIRES

Definition:

An uncontrolled fire in vegetation or associated flammable material that requires suppressive action to protect natural resources or values associated with natural resources, or that is destructive to natural resources.

Class Size, acres Class Size, acres A 0.00 - 0.25 D 100 - 299 B 0.26 - 9.00 E 300 - 999 C 10.00 - 99.00 F 1000 - 4999 G >5000

Data collected at downwind monitors within 3 miles of Class A and B fires shall be considered adverse meteorological conditions. For Classes C through G, the impact of the fire may be more widespread and should be supported by receptor or dispersion modeling. ++EP++

ATT 1-3 F. STRUCTURAL FIRES

Definition:

Any accidental fire involving some kind of structure (in general, a structural fire involves a building having at least 600 square feet) within 500 meters of a monitoring site. However, a much greater distance may be appropriate for large fires, such as a refinery, industrial, or commercial business area fires, provided a causal relation is supported by receptor or dispersion modeling.

G. HIGH POLLEN COUNT

Definition:

A pollen count index above 25 grains/cm2 or 1000 grains per cubic meter, as reported by the Marion County Health and Hospital Corporation or other reliable means, such as side-by-side pollen count testing.

H. CHEMICAL SPILLS AND INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS

Definition:

Emissions that result from accidents such as fire, explosions, power outages, train derailment, vehicular accidents, or combinations of these within 500 meters of a monitoring site.

I. UNUSUAL TRAFFIC CONGESTION

Definition:

A condition resulting from a major accident (rather than frequent minor accidents), or short-duration obstruction, such as demolition or construction, within 500 meters of a monitoring site. ++EP++

ATT 1-4 J. CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION

Definition:

The building/destroying/renovation of any residential, institutional, commercial, or industrial building (including apartment buildings with more than four dwelling units), structure, facility, or installation that lasts for only a short period of time, is reasonably controlled, and is within 500 meters of a monitoring site.

K. AGRICULTURAL TILLING

Definition:

The act of preparing dry soil for cultivation or for controlling the growth of weeds by the use of mechanical devices during periods with an hourly average wind speed of greater than 20 mph (as measured by the United States Weather Bureau Station at Indianapolis International Airport) within 500 meters of a monitoring site.

L. HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION

Definition:

The act of building a new, or repairing an existing, highway, road or street, if microscopic analysis of the filter indicates that 85 percent of material on the filter is related to construction activities.

M. SALTING/SANDING OF STREETS

Definition:

The application within 500 meters of a monitoring site of salt and/or sand to the road surface to increase traction and/or prevent the surface water from refreezing after it has melted, if microscopic examination shows that 85% of the material on the filter is salt and/or sand. Data collection is not limited to the date of salting or sanding of the street.

N. ROOFING OPERATIONS ++EP++ ATT 1-5

Definition:

The process of building, repairing, or recoating the external upper covering of a house or building that involves the application of a petroleum-based material (usually heavy residuals from a refining operation) to a roof within 500 meters of a monitoring site.

O. PRESCRIBED BURNING

Definition:

A controlled fire of vegetative material that is used to improve range lands, agricultural or forestry resources, or associated values within 500 meters of a monitoring site.

P. CLEAN UP ACTIVITIES AFTER A MAJOR DISASTER

Definition:

Major disasters are serious public misfortunes for which State or Federal relief has been granted. ++EP++

ATT 1-6 Navistar International Transportation Corp. INDIANAPOLIS PLANT MAP OMITTED ++EP++

DIVERSITECH GENERAL INC

DOC 01 OF 01

CONSENT ORDER

05-89-C008

CAA

MISC

19890216

OHD980279376

GENCORP POLYMER PROD TOLEDO PL

TOLEDO, OH

C-86-7130

05

CONSENT ORDER, US V DIVERSI TECH GENERAL INC

Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

DIVERSITECH GENERAL, INC.,

Defendant.

WHEREAS, plaintiff, United States of America, representing the United States Environmental Protection Agency (hereafter, "U.S. EPA"), has filed the Complaint herein on February 14, 1986, alleging violations of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7401, et seq., and the Ohio State Implementation Plan (hereafter, "SIP"), adopted thereunder, and requesting injunctive relief and civil penalties;

WHEREAS, DiversiTech General, Inc. (hereafter, "DTG"), is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Gencorp, Inc. organized under the laws of the State of Ohio, and owns and operates nine print and finish lines at a plant in Toledo, Ohio;

WHEREAS, plaintiff and defendant, DTG, have moved the Court to enter this Consent Order;

WHEREAS, the Court has been duly advised of the settlement; and

NOW THEREFORE, before taking any testimony, upon the pleadings, without adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and without any admission or denial of any issue of fact or law alleged in the Complaint, it is hereby Ordered and Decreed as follows: ++EP++

Page 2 I. JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of entering the Consent Order.

II. PUBLIC INTEREST

The parties agree and the Court finds that the settlement of these matters without further litigation is in the public interest, and the entry of this Consent Order is the most appropriate means of resolving these matters.

III. APPLICABILITY

The provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to and be binding upon the parties to this action, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, successors, and assigns; in addition, the provisions of this Consent Order shall apply to all persons, firms and corporations having notice of the Consent Order and who are, or will be, acting in concert and privity with defendant to this action, or defendant's officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, successors, and assigns. Defendant shall give notice in writing of this Consent Order to any successor-in-interest prior to transfer of ownership, and shall simultaneously notify Region V, U.S. EPA, that notice has been given. ++EP++

Page 3 IV. COMPLIANCE PROGRAM

Defendant shall comply with Ohio State Implementation Plan regulation OAC 3745-21-09(H), and achieve and maintain compliance with such regulation as set forth below:

A. Hooding Controls

Within one year following entry of this Consent Order by the Court, DTG shall install and thereafter operate the hooding modifications described in Appendix A of this Consent Order, except if DTG has permanently ceased operation or converted to waterbased coatings at such print and finish line.

B. Carbon Adsorption Capacity

1. DTG shall install and thereafter operate at least an additional 8,000 cubic feet per minute carbon adsorption capacity to the existing capacity provided by the four (4) current units, within eighteen (18) months following entry of this Consent Order by the Court.

2. After the additional carbon adsorption capacity is operational, DTG shall direct volatile organic compound (hereafter, "VOC") emissions from all lines operating in the color-matching mode to the carbon adsorption system.

3. DTG shall install the additional carbon adsorption capacity as follows: ++EP++

Page 4

a. six (6) months from entry of this Order by the Court - issue purchase order(s);

b. one year from entry of this Order by the Court-initiate on-site preparation;

c. eighteen (18) months from entry of this Order by the Court - complete installation and thereafter operate additional carbon adsorption capacity.

4. DTG reserves the right to request that U.S. EPA apply the capital and operating costs of the additional carbon adsorption capacity to any cost analysis associated with any proposed regulatory modification to the capture standard applicable to any of DTG's nine print and finish lines. Furthermore, DTG reserves the right to contend, and U.S. EPA agrees not to oppose any contention, that the additional carbon adsorption capacity will serve purposes other than providing capability to control VOC emissions during color-matching, for example, to enhance capture efficiency.

5. Nothing in this subpart IV.B. shall be construed to require DTG to continue to operate the additional carbon adsorption capacity or to capture and control VOC emissions during color-matching if DTG elects to discontinue the nine print and finish lines or convert to water-based coatings. ++EP++

Page 5

6. If DTG sends a written notice to U.S. EPA, prior to six (6) months after entry of this Order by the Court, that it will not comply with subparagraphs IV.B.3.a., b. and c. because it will permanently cease operation of the nine print and finish lines, DTG shall pay the forfeiture amount as provided in subpart IV.B.7., below. Notwithstanding such notification and forfeiture pursuant to subpart IV.B.7., below, DTG shall comply with subparagraph IV.B.3.c., if at eighteen (18) months after entry of this Order by the Court, DTG is still operating any of the nine print and finish lines.

7. Within thirty (30) days after DTG sends U.S. EPA any notice that it will permanently cease operations as specified in subpart IV.B.6., DTG shall forfeit $273,650. DTG shall make the payment of the forfeiture amount in accordance with part IX.

8. If prior to six (6) months after entry of this Order DTG elects to operate the facility with four (4) or fewer lines using organic coatings subject to OAC 3745-21-09 (H), DTG can propose to U.S. EPA a pollution control project to achieve compliance with OAC 3745-21-09(H) at such lines. U.S. EPA has the sole discretion as to whether it will propose such a pollution control project to the Court as a modification to the requirements in part IV.B. Unless U.S. EPA submits, and the Court approves, such an alternative pollution control project prior to six (6) months after entry of this Order, DTG remains obligated to comply with all the requirements of part IV.B. ++EP++

Page 6

C. Oven-Testing

1. Within six (6) months following entry of this Consent Order by the Court, DTG shall complete the oven-testing program described in Appendices B and D of this Order.

2. Within seven (7) months following entry of the Consent Order by the Court, DTG shall submit a report summarizing the testing results in accordance with Appendix B of this Consent Order.

3. Performance of the oven-testing program by DTG will not be construed in any way as an acknowledgment of the need for subsequent oven modifications on the nine print and finish lines.

4. Nothing in this subpart IV.C. shall be construed to require DTG to complete the oven-testing program described in paragraph C.I. above, if DTG has permanently ceased operation of the nine print and finish lines within six months following entry of this Consent Order by the Court, and provided notice of the same and paid the required forfeiture specified in paragraphs IV.B.6. and 7., above.

D. Capture and Control Demonstration

1. Within twenty-four (24) months following entry of this Consent Order by this Court, DTG shall achieve, demonstrate, and thereafter maintain compliance with the 75 percent capture and 90 percent control standards in OAC Rule 3745-21-09(H) on each of the nine print and finish lines and record the data specified in Appendices C and D. ++EP++

Page 7

2. Within eight (8) months following entry of this Consent Order by the Court, DTG shall submit to U.S. EPA a schedule to achieve compliance with paragraph IV. D. 1. above. That schedule shall include at a minimum the following information:

a. The DTG submittal to U.S. EPA of the proposed modifications on each print and finish line at least one (1) month prior to initial physical site preparation for any modifications on each line;

b. The specific date, consistent with the additional requirements contained in subparagraphs IV. D. 2. c. and d., below, by which DTG will complete all appropriate modifications to enhance capture efficiency of the oven(s) on each print and finish line;

c. A date, no later than fourteen (14) months following entry of this Consent Order by the Court, by which DTG shall complete all appropriate modifications to enhance capture efficiency of the ovens on three (3) of the print and finish lines;

d. A date, no later than twenty-one (21) months following entry of this Consent Order by the Court, by which DTG shall complete all appropriate modifications to enhance capture efficiency from the ovens on six (6) of the print and finish lines;

e. Nothing contained in subpart IV.D. shall be construed in any way as an acknowledgment by DTG of the need for oven modifications to achieve compliance with subpart IV.D. ++EP++

Page 8

f. DTG reserves the right to make changes in the schedule submitted in paragraph IV.D.2; provided, that DTG meets the dates in subparagraphs IV.D.2.c. and d. DTG shall give prior notification of any such changes to U.S. EPA in accordance with parts VI and VII.

3. Alternative Capture Standard - If U.S. EPA approves, as a State Implementation Plan revision, a capture standard for the nine print and finish lines, different from that in paragraph IV D. 1., prior to the date for achieving compliance with the 75 percent capture standard specified in paragraph IV. D. 1., that alternative standard shall be substituted for the 75 percent capture standard; provided, that DTG had submitted a complete application for such alternative capture standard to Ohio EPA no later than one year after entry of this Consent Order by the Court.

4. DTG reserves the right to achieve compliance with the SIP and obligations of this Consent Order at any line by permanently ceasing operation or converting to water-based coatings at such print and finish line.

V. FORCE MAJEURE

Any delay by DTG in completing the requirements set out in part IV, above, may only be excused to the extent such delay is beyond the control of DTG or could not be avoided by the due diligence of DTG. DTG shall notify the U.S. EPA in writing within twenty (20) days after DTG knew or reasonably should have known of the event which has caused or may cause the delay, describing in detail the anticipated length of the delay, the precise cause or causes of delay, the measures taken and to be taken by DTG to prevent or minimize the delay, and the timetable by which those measures will be implemented. ++EP++

Page 9

DTG will adopt all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such delay.

If the parties agree that the delay or anticipated delay is beyond the control of DTG or could not be avoided by the due diligence of DTG, they shall so stipulate and petition the Court for appropriate modification of this Order, unless the parties agree otherwise. If the parties are unable to reach such agreement, any party may petition the Court for appropriate relief. The burden of proving that any delay was beyond the control of DTG or could not be avoided by the due diligence of DTG, is on DTG. Failure by DTG to comply with the notice requirements of this part shall render this Force Majeure provision void and of no force and effect as to the particular incident involved and constitute a waiver of any DTG ability to request an extension of its obligations under this Consent Order based on such incident. Increased cost associated with complying with the terms of this Order in itself does not constitute an event beyond the reasonable control of DTG under this Force Majeure provision. ++EP++

Page 10 VI. PROGRESS REPORTS

Until achievement of final compliance with the terms of this Consent Order, DTG shall submit within thirty (30) days of the end of each calendar quarter to the U.S. EPA, Air Compliance Branch, Air and Radiation Division, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, a report describing DTG's performance in meeting the terms of this Consent Order and DTG's progress in meeting each of the remaining requirements of this Consent Order.

VII. NOTICES AND REPORTS

Any notice, submittal or report required by this Consent Order shall be considered sent upon its deposit in first class mail, certified mail, return receipt requested. DTG shall send all required notices, submittals and reports to the address in part VI, above. U.S. EPA shall send any notice under this Consent Order to W. E. Bachman, President DTG, Coated Fabrics Division, P.O. Box 875, Toledo, Ohio 43696-OE75. Either party can modify the designated addressee upon written notice to the other party.

VIII. NOTICE OF TESTS

DTG shall provide the U.S. EPA notice of any planned testing at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to conducting any test required by this Consent Order. DTG shall provide the U.S. EPA notice of the specific day(s) of any planned testing at least ten (10) calendar days prior to conducting any test required by this Consent Order. ++EP++

Page 11 IX. CIVIL PENALTY

DTG shall pay a civil penalty of $95,000. Payment of such penalty shall be made within thirty (30) days following entry of this Consent Order by the Court. Payment shall be made by submission of one cashier's check in the amount of $95,000 payable to "Treasurer, United States of America" and sent to the U.S. Attorney's Office, 1716 Spielbush Ave., 305 U.S. Courthouse, Toledo, Ohio 43624, with a copy of the cover letter to the Financial Management Branch, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

If DTG fails to make any timely payment of penalties, it shall be liable for interest and penalties for late payment. Such late payment penalties shall be made in accordance with Chapter 7 of the U.S. EPA Financial Management manual, which includes the following:

1. Interest of the percentage rate established by the Department of Treasury pursuant to 31 U.S.C. Section 3717, for any period after the due date in billing;

2. A handling charge of$ 20.00 at the end of each thirty (30) day late period; and, ++EP++

Page 12

3. A six percent per annum penalty charge if the penalty is not paid within 90 days of the due date.

X. STIPULATED PENALTIES

It is hereby stipulated and agreed that unless a violation is caused by a delay which is excused by the provisions of part V of this Consent Order, the following stipulated penalty provisions shall apply and may be enforced by the United States after written demand by U.S. EPA:

A. If DTG fails to complete the hooding modifications in accordance with the deadlines and specifications in subpart IV. A. and Appendix A, DTG shall be liable for a stipulated penalty of $500 for each day such failure continues;

B. Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs IV.B.6. and 7., above, if DTG fails to install and operate the additional carbon adsorption capacity or alternative project as specified in subpart IV. B., DTG shall be liable for a stipulated penalty of $1,000 for each day such failure continues. If DTG fails to meet the interim installation milestones specified in subparagraphs IV. B. 3. a. and b., but nonetheless succeeds to complete the installation and thereafter operate the additional carbon adsorption capacity or alternative project within eighteen (18) months after entry of this Order by the Court, the U.S. EPA will forgive and not collect any stipulated penalties pursuant to this subpart X.B. ++EP++

Page 13

C. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph IV.C.4., if DTG fails to conduct the oven-testing program as specified in subpart IV. C. and Appendix B., DTG shall be liable for a stipulated penalty of $500 for each day such failure continues.

D. Unless if otherwise not required by this Consent Order, if DTG fails to submit a compliance schedule as specified in paragraph IV. D. 2., DTG shall be liable for a stipulated penalty of $500 for each day such failure continues.

E. Unless if otherwise not required by this Consent Order, if DTG fails to demonstrate compliance as specified in subpart IV. D., DTG shall be liable for a stipulated penalty of $1,000 for each day any such failure continues. Stipulated penalties shall cease to accrue after 180 days of violation under this subpart X.E. U.S. EPA reserves the right to seek any available remedies for violations occurring after such 180 day period.

Parts IX and X do not limit plaintiff from seeking other available remedies for DTG's violation of the requirements of this Consent Order.

XI. FULL SETTLEMENT

This Consent Order shall be in full settlement and satisfaction of the action filed herein. Provided that DTG is in full compliance with the requirements of this Order, the entry of this Order serves to bar forever plaintiff from bringing any further civil action under Sections 113, 120 and 304 of the Clean Air Act or federal common-law for any violation or action relating to VOC emissions from DTG's Toledo facility occurring prior to the lodging of this Order. ++EP++

Page 14

Furthermore, provided that DTG is in full compliance with the requirements of this Order, the entry of this Order serves to bar forever plaintiff from bringing any further civil action under the Clean Air Act or federal common-law for violations or actions at the nine print and finish lines arising out of the allegations contained in the Complaint.

XII. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

Notwithstanding any provision contained in this Consent Order, DTG expressly reserves the ability to raise, as a position of law, the applicability of the "good engineering design" capture standard for the nine print and finish lines in any legal or administrative proceeding other than this action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Nothing contained in this Consent Order shall be construed as an admission by DTG of violations of any provision of the Clean Air Act or the Ohio SIP.

XIII. VACATION OF DECISION

The memorandum and Order dated May 11, 1987 (filed May 13, 1987), adjudicating plaintiff's motion for a partial summary judgement and defendant's motion for summary judgment, is vacated and is without any force and effect. ++EP++

Page 15 XIV. TERMINATION

All obligations created by this Consent Order shall terminate one year after DTG achieves and demonstrates compliance with all the requirements, including the payment of penalties, of this Consent Order.

XV. SECTION 120

DTG acknowledges that it has been notified that it may be subject to penalties under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7420 if U.S. EPA issues a notice of noncompliance pursuant to that Section. Nothing is this Consent Order shall be construed as an admission of noncompliance by DTG for purposes of Section 120. DTG reserves the right to contest the assessment and/or attempted collection of noncompliance penalties under Section 120.

XVI. OTHER LAWS

This Consent Order in no way affects DTG's responsibility to comply with any other applicable state, federal or local regulations or Order of this Court.

XVII. RIGHT OF ENTRY

Any employee or authorized representative of U.S. EPA may enter upon the premises of DTG's plant at any reasonable time for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this Consent Order. ++EP++

Page 16

This provision in no manner whatsoever limits U.S. EPA's authority to gather data, request information, require monitoring, conduct inspections, or perform other functions under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7414, nor does it waive or limit any DTG right to argue that U.S. EPA's authority under Section 114 is limited.

Any independent contractor or consultant, may enter upon the premises of DTG's plant at any reasonable time for the limited purpose of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this Consent Order; provided, that U.S. EPA provides a forty-eight (48) hour notice of the inspection which specifies the purpose for the inspection. All observations made and all documents or information obtained by any independent contractor or consultant shall be subject to the September 24, 1986 stipulation for protective order filed in this case.

XVIII. PUBLIC COMMENT

The parties agree and acknowledge that final approval and entry of this proposed Order is subject to the requirements of 28 CFR Section 50.7. That regulation provides that notice of a proposed Order shall be given to the public, and that the public shall have at least thirty (30) days to make any comments.

XIX. APPENDICES A, B, C, AND D

Appendices A, B, C and D of this Consent Order are expressly incorporated into and made a part of this Consent Order. ++EP++

Page 17

Consent Order entered in accordance with the foregoing this day of , 1988.

Judge Richard B. McQuade, Jr. ++EP++

Page 18

CONSENTED TO AND APPROVED FOR ENTRY:

The United States of America

By:/s/ Roger J. Marzulda

ROGER J. MARZULDA

Assistant Attorney General

Land and Natural Resources Division

U.S. Department of Justice

By:/s/ Fre