![The city's waste water treatment plant located at 1210 South Elm Street. The city's waste water treatment plant located at 1210 South Elm Street.]()
The city's waste water treatment plant located at 1210 South Elm Street.
The City of Washington Court House has responded to allegations and a contempt filling by the Ohio EPA stating that the city continues to pollute a nearby natural flowing creek at its waste-water treatment plant on South Elm Street.
The contempt motion (read here), filed by Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWeine on behalf of the EPA requests that Judge Steven Beathard hold the city in contempt of court for failing to follow milestone goals and for failing to pay over $3,000,000 in fines.
According to documents filled with the Fayette County Common Pleas Court last week, the city has denied any wrongdoing.
Among the charges denied include discharging untreated wastewater from the separate sanitary sewer system portion of its wastewater collection system, via locations known as sanitary sewer overflows (“SSOs”), to Paint Creek and tributaries of Paint Creek, which are “waters of the state.”
The city furthermore denies that they failed to comply with the consent order, and denies that as of the date of the filing the charges in contempt, Washington Court House has not submitted an approvable SECAP or an implementation schedule.
According to the Ohio Attorney General, Section V, Paragraph 13, Page 7 of a 2007 Consent Order signed by the city provides that Washington Court House “shall submit to Ohio EPA for review and approval a System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan (“SECAP”) including an implementation schedule.”The SECAP and implementation schedule were to be submitted by July 1, 2008 and include an end date for the implementation schedule of no later than July 1, 2011.
The consent order further reads that the city shall have achieved the goals of the SECAP required by Paragraph 13 no later than July 1, 2011.
The acts alleged in the Charge demonstrate noncompliance by the city with the Consent Order for which the city should be found in contempt of Court and is liable for stipulated penalties, as provided in the Consent Order.
Section X, Paragraph 27, Page 15 of the Consent Order provides that the Washington Court House is “immediately and automatically” liable to pay a stipulated penalty for each day of failure to meet the specified deadline for the SECAP and implementation schedule. The city denies this charge.
The Consent Order provides that the city hall pay a stipulated penalty on an annual basis for each Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSOs) event or WWTP bypass that occurred in the prior year according to a schedule. Since the entry of the Consent Order, Washington Court House has experienced 47 SSOs and 38 bypasses, as follows:
Washington Court House owes $3,150,500 in stipulated penalties but has paid only $58,000, according to the Attorney General. That’s $222.35 for every man, woman and child in the city, or $533.61 per household.
According to the EPA, the city has violated the Clean Water Act and a consent order previously signed by the city in 2007 on dozens of occasions at their waste water treatment plant on South Elm Street.
In 2007, the EPA alleged that the city was operating its waste water treatment plant and sewer system in such a manner as to result in violations of the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit issued to the city and in violation of the water pollution control laws of the state.
The state’s allegations included that the city had unauthorized discharges from its sewer system and waste water treatment plant.
The city denied those allegations, but as a result, signed the consent order (read here) agreeing to reach milestone goals spanning from 2007 to 2011 that would satisfy the EPA.
Many of those milestones included repairing or constructing equipment that would prevent the pollution from further occurring.
“Washington Court House signed a consent order in January 2007. By signing the document, the city agreed to rehabilitate and construct equipment at the plant and to improve or construct adequate sanitary sewer lines,” said EPA representative Heather Lauer.
According to the EPA, toxic waste is continuing to be dumped into Paint Creek from the city’s waste water treatment plant — in violation of the 2007 consent order and the law. They say the water can contain pathogens, radiation, heavy metals and chemicals. These toxins can damage ecosystems and harm or kill vital plants, fish and animals.
Many of these toxins also have serious side effects on humans, including birth defects, neurological damage, and even cancer. They enter the body through drinking or swimming in contaminated water or by eating fish that live in the contaminated water.
The consent order read that if the city failed to meet the deadline of each milestone, they would be forced to pay hundreds, even thousands of dollars in stipulated penalties for failure to meet a specific deadline:
The consent order also read that the city was forced to pay $50,000 up front in penalties to the EPA for violations occurring prior to 2007.
After an inspection was preformed on the facility in August by the EPA, the city was placed on “Significant Non-Compliance (SNC)” by the EPA for failing to follow the orders set forth in the 2007 consent order and for allegedly continuing to allow pollution to flow into nearby Paint Creek.
“This isn’t a human health issue right now. It’s more of an issue for aquatic life,” said Ohio EPA spokesperson Heidi Griesmer. “We find most cities are meeting their limits. It is not uncommon to have one or two violations per year, but it is uncommon to be in significant non-compliance.”
Sources directly related to the day-to-day operations of the city said that the city doesn’t have the financial means to make the necessary changes to the waste water treatment plant that would prevent these violations from further occurring; this was confirmed by the Ohio EPA.
“After signing the (2007 consent) orders, city representatives then said they could not afford to follow (the) orders. We renegotiated the orders and they refused to sign new orders,” said Lauer.