AQ_F_1700005_20100413_ENF_Enf-FND

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COUNTY OF CASWELL COMMISSION
FILE NO, DAQ 2010-031
IN THE MATTER OF: )
W—L CONSTRUCTION & PAVING, )
INC. —ASPHALT PLANT 44318 ) CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT
FOR VIOLATION OF: )
AIR PERMIT NO. 01902RI 7 )
CONDITIONS A.I I AND A.12 )
Acting pursuant to North Carolina General Statutes (G.S.) 143-215.114A, I, Margaret A.
Love, P.E,, Regional Supervisor of the Division of Air Quality ("DAQ" or "Division"), make the
following:
I. FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. W—L Construction&Paving, Inc. —Asphalt Plant#4318 operates a hot mix
asphalt facility in Pelham,North Carolina.
B. W—L Construction & Paving, Inc. —Asphalt Plant #4318 was issued Air Permit
No. 01902RI 7 on April 13, 2007.
C. Permit Conditions A.I I and A.12 require annual reporting of asphalt production
and emissions, and waste oil usage to demonstrate compliance with 15A NCAC 2Q .0315
and 2Q .0317, respectively.
D. W—L Construction&Paving, Inc. —Asphalt Plant#4318 was required to submit
the annual reports no later than January 30, 2010. These reports were not received until
February 22, 2010.
E. A Notice of Violation and Notice of Recommendation for Enforcement dated
February 16, 2010 was sent to W—L Construction & Paving, Inc. —Asphalt Plant#4318
relative to the above noted violations. Although the reports were received on February
22, 2010, no response addressing the violations was received.
F. W—L Construction&Paving, Inc. —Asphalt Plant#4318 has prior violations of
conditions A.I I and A.12. A Notice of Violation was issued on February 11, 2009 for
violations of conditions A.11 and A.12 for late reporting.
G. The costs of investigation or inspection in this matter totaled $ 191.
Based on the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:

W—L Construction&Paving, Inc.—Asphalt Plant#4318
DAQ 2010-031
Page 2
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. W—L Construction &Paving, Inc. —Asphalt Plant#4318 was in violation of
permit conditions A.I I and A.12 for failure to submit the annual reports. These permit
requirements are necessary for the permittee to comply with rules codified at 15A NCAC
2Q .0315 and 2Q .0317.
B. G.S. 143-215.114A provides that a civil penalty of not more than twenty-five
thousand dollars per violation may be assessed against a person who violates or fails to
act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a permit required by G.S.
143-215.108 or who violates any regulation adopted by the Environmental Management
Commission.
C. G.S. I43-215.3(a)(9)provides that the costs of any investigation or inspection
may be assessed against a person who violates or fails to act in accordance with the
terms, conditions, or requirements of a permit required by G.S. 143-215.108 or who
violates any regulation adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
III. DECISION:
W—L Construction&Paving, Inc. —Asphalt Plant#4318 is hereby assessed a civil
penalty of:
$ I D DO for two violations of Air Permit No. 01902R17,
occurring on January 30, 2010 by failing to
report as required by permit conditions A.I I and
A.12.
$ G00 TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY, which is
percent of the maximum penalty authorized by
NCGS 143-215.114A.
$ 191.00 Investigation Costs
$ 7 E G TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
Pursuant to G.S. 143-215.114A, in determining the amount of the penalty, I considered
the factors listed in G.S. 14313-282.1(b) and 15A NCAC 2J .0106,which are the following:
1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public
health, or to private property resulting from the violation(s);
2) The duration and gravity of the violation;

W—L Construction &Paving, Inc.—Asphalt Plant#4318
DAQ 2010-031
Page 3
3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs
over which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority;
and
8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
Date Margaret . Love, P.E., Regional Supervisor
Division of Air Quality