Bassett Furniture to pay $575,000 fine for EPA violations.

Bassett Furniture Ind. Inc. has agreed to pay a $575,000 penalty and spend $1.6 million on two internal pollution prevention projects to settle alleged Clean Air Act violations at two plants in Bassett, VA.

The agreement between Bassett, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Justice Department was announced July 21.

In a complaint fried in federal court in Danville, VA, the government says that two boilers at the Bassett Table plant and two boilers at the J.D. Bassett Manufacturing plant violated federally enforceable Virginia limits on particulate pollution. Since April 1997, the EPA has issued five notices of violations against the company - three in 1997 and two in 1998, according to EPA spokesperson Donna Heron.

Four boilers at the two plants allegedly exceeded Virginia's allowable particulate emission rates, according to the EPA's complaint. The boilers at the Bassett Table plant also allegedly violated limits on visible emissions.

After the EPA issued violation notices to Bassett in 1997, the company permanently shut down one of the boilers at the J.D. Bassett Manufacturing plant, and performed extensive renovations on the remaining three boilers, according to the EPA. Recent, test results show that these boilers now comply with particulate and visible emission limits, according to the EPA.

"One of our stated goals is to take a leadership role in the area of environmental compliance," Rob Spilman, Bassett president, tells the Associated Press. "Our work with the EPA over the last two years has taken the company a long way toward meeting that goal."

"The consent decree deals fairly with past violations, contains safeguards to ensure continuing compliance, and reduces particulate pollution above and beyond the law's requirements," says EPA Regional Administrator W. Michael McCabe.

The agreement also included a commitment by Bassett to implement an EPA-approved "environmental management plan." The plan includes smokestack testing, emission monitoring, environmental training for company managers, regular auditing at all Bassett facilities for compliance with all environmental requirements, and a one-time audit of compliance with air pollution requirements at all Bassett facilities in Virginia.

Additionally, Bassett will undergo two supplemental environmental projects which are not otherwise required by Virginia or federal law. The company will install and operate 14 baghouse filters at four furniture plants in Bassett. This project could potentially reduce particulate emissions from its woodworking operations by up to 352 tons annually, the EPA says. The company will also conduct a $30,000 evaluation of pollution prevention options at these four plants.

EPA Also Proposes Fine Against Stanley Furniture

The EPA has proposed a fine of nearly $175,000 against the Stanley Furniture Co. for Clean Air Act violations at its furniture manufacturing plant in Stanleytown, VA. The EPA alleges that a wood and coal-fired boiler emitted excessive amounts of particulates for five years before an EPA-ordered emission test in July 1998. The boiler has since been brought into compliance.

The company may request a hearing to contest or negotiate the proposed penalty. It is not known if the company has made, or will make, that request.

Albert Prillaman, chairman of Stanley Furniture Co. says that as soon as the results of the July 1998 test were known, the boiler was shut down and brought into compliance. When the boiler, one of two in the plant, was retested in December it did meet the federally enforceable Virginia regulations for particulate pollution. According to the EPA's complaint, the company spent nearly $54,000 to bring the boiler into compliance.

Prillaman disputes the EPA's claim that the boiler was not in compliance for five years. "There is absolutely no evidence indicating the boiler exceeded particulate emission rates before that time," Prillaman says. "Instead the available evidence indicates that the boiler had no previous emission problems."

Donna Heron, an EPA spokesman involved in the case, says there had been no testing done on the boilers prior to the July 1998 test. However, during that time all the equipment and conditions were believed to be the same which prompted the additional time-related penalties. By statutory limit, the EPA can fine a company for five years prior to the test, Heron says. In this case, that amounts to a proposed $50,000 penalty, or nearly 30 percent of the overall proposed fine.

According to the EPA's complaint, the particulate emission rate exceeded allowable limits in three runs at both a low steam production rate and a high steam production rate.

None of the particulates released are considered a hazardous air pollutant (HAP), according to the complaint. HAPs are chemicals that the government has identified as being especially harmful to humans and the environment.