![]() |
The suit, filed in Athens County Common Pleas Court in June, alleged that Hayes has repeatedly violated state law, including water pollution regulations, at four different construction sites in Athens and Vinton counties.
In an answer filed Aug. 18, Hayes' attorney, Frederick L. Oremus, wrote that Hayes and his company, J.B. Hayes Excavating and Pipeline, Inc., "specifically deny" some of the most central claims in the EPA suit.
Allegations in the original complaint that the defendants have specifically denied include claims that they:
In addition, the answer to the lawsuit specifically denied a sentence that stated simply: "Defendant J.B. Hayes Excavating & Pipeline, Inc., is a commercial and residential real-estate development company that has been incorporated under the laws of the state of Ohio since April 23, 1986."
The defendants also denied a paragraph that said Hayes is owner and president of the corporation, and that "by virtue of his position" with the company, took part in and/or ordered the allegedly illegal actions referenced in the EPA suit.
"In addition or in the alternative," this paragraph had alleged, Hayes "knew about or should have known about these violations and, by himself or in conjunction with others, had the authority to prevent or stop these violations but failed to exercise his authority to do so."
This paragraph, specifically denied by the defendants, also claimed that Hayes is personally liable for the alleged violations.
The EPA suit dealt with four construction sites: the Hayes Professional Building Site on U.S. Rt. 33 in Dover Township; the Harmony Road borrow pit site in Canaan Township; the Hamden Elementary School borrow pit site in Vinton County; and the four-building site on Rt. 50.
The answer to the lawsuit denied sections in the complaint that had asserted, regarding each of the first three sites, that the defendants were the owners and/or developers of the sites, and that runoff from the site flows into "waters of the state" in each case (thus presumably triggering state water pollution laws).
The answer admitted, however, that Hayes and his company were the owners and/or developers and/or operators in the case of the fourth site on Rt. 50.
Regarding the first three sites, the answer denied in each case that the defendants engaged in construction activities at the site, disturbing land, without first having the proper stormwater-related permit coverage from the state to do so.
Hayes also denied in connection with each site that he broke state laws regarding water pollution control, violation of which leaves the offender liable for a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day, per violation.
Regarding the Rt. 50 site, the answer specifically denied that the defendants installed sewage treatment systems without proper permitting another offense that carries a $10,000 per-day, per-violation civil penalty.