10/20/97 ON FEBRUARY 15, 1995, AN NOV WAS ISSUED FOR REMOVING A CATALYTIC CONVERTER AND REPLACING IT WITH A STRAIGHT PIPE. ON MARCH 10, 1995, A LETTER WAS RECEIVED FROM THE RESPONDENT STATING THAT HE HAD REPAIRED THE VEHICLE. ON JUNE 27, 1995, SETTLEMENT SENT TO RESPONDENT FOR 60% OF THE ORIGINAL PENALTY OR $900 TO BE PAID OVER THE PERIOD OF ONE YEAR BECAUSE THIS WAS A VERY SMALL FACILITY. NO RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM RESPONDENT. ON SEPTEMBER 25, 1995, EPA SENT A LETTER TO THE RESPONDENT TO REVIEW THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. ON OCTOBER 6, 1996, EPA RECEIVED A CALL FROM AN ATTORNEY WITH A FOLLOW-UP LETTER FROM THE ATTORNEY INDICATING THAT HE WOULD TALK SETTLEMENT WITH HIS CLIENT. ON OCTOBER 17, 1996, EPA SENT A REVISED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH A NEITHER ADMITS NOR DENIES FORMAT. SINCE THAT DATE, EPA HAS CALLED THE ATTORNEY OVER 50 TIMES AND HE NEVER HAS CALLED BACK. ON APRIL 11, 1996, EPA RECEIVED A CHECK FOR $250 AND A RETYPED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THIS AGREEMENT REMOVED THE PARAGRAPH DELINEATING THE OPTIONS IF RESPONDENT FAILED TO PAY AS WELL AS AN AGREEMENT FOR $250, NOT THE $900 IN THE SETTLMENT AGREEMENT. EPA INDICATED THAT THIS WAS NOT SUFFICIENT WITHOUT PROOF OF ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. ON MAY 26, 1996, EPA RECEIVED EVIDENCE THAT THE RESPONDENT, A SOLE PROPRIETOR WHOSE BUSINESS CONSISTS SOLEY OF ONE SMALL SHOP, OWES $35,305 IN TAXES TO