ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

February 19, 1976

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Complainant,

v.

)

PCB 75—314

ADMIRAL CORP., ADMIRAL GROUP OF

ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP.,

)

Respondent.

Mr. Steven Watts, Assistant Attorney General, Attorney for

Comp1aman t

Mr. Arnold W. Canfield, Attorney for Respondent

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr. Young):

This case arises out of a Complaint filed on August 11,

1975, by the Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency) alleging

that Admiral Corp., Admiral Group of Rockwell International

Corp., has owned and operated three paint spraying systems from

March

1, 1973, until August 11, 1975, in violation of the opera-

ting permit requirements of Rule 103(b) (2) of the Air Regulations

and in further violation of Section 9(b)

of the Environmental

Protection Act

(Act).

Hearing was held in Galesburg on January 14,

1976,

at which

time

a Stipulation of Parties and Proposed Settlement

(Stipulation)

was entered into the record.

No additional evidence was adduced

at the hearing; no members of the public were present.

The source of emissions which gave rise to this action are

three paint spraying systems utilized by Respondent at its indus-

trial facility in Galesburg,

Illinois.

Respondent admits use of

more than 5,000 gallons of paint annually

in its

painting opera-

tions.

Rule 103(b) (2) requires all painting operations using in

excess of 5,000 gallons of paint annually to have an operating

permit from the Agency no later than March

1,

1973.

The Stipula-

tion provides that Respondent has owned and operated the paint

spraying systems since March

1,

1973, without operating permits;

admits

the violations and agrees

to a penalty of $5,000.00 for

such violations.

20—101

---

—2—

Exhibit

1 to the Stipulation contains an agreed compliance

schedule and

a maintenance schedule for Respondent’s painting

systems.

The Stipulation also provides that Respondent will

apply for operating permits for all three painting systems by

March

31,

1976, and obtain such operating permits within 90

days thereafter.

In this case the violations are admitted and the Stipulation

of Parties and Proposed Settlement filed complies with the require-

ments of our Procedural Rule 333 for settlement

(EPA v. City of

Marion,

1 PCB 591).

On the basis of the foregoing and the Stipulation, which

constitutes the entire record in this matter, we find that

Respondent did violate the Act and Regulations by operating its

three painting systems without the necessary operating permits.

A penalty of $5,000.00 is assessed for these violations.

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and

conclusions of law in this matter.

ORDER

1.

Respondent, Admiral Corp., is found to have violated

Rule 103(b) (2)

of the Air Regulations and Section 9(b) of the

Act by operating three painting systems from March

1,

1973,

until August 11,

1975, without the necessary operating permits,

and shall pay a penalty of $5,000.00 for such violations.

Penalty

payment by certified check or money order payable to the State

of Illinois shall be made within 35 days of this Order to:

Fiscal

Services Division, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,

2200

Churchill Road,

Springfield, Illinois,

62706.

2.

Respondent, Admiral Corp.,

shall apply for operating

permits for its three paint systems by March 31,

1976, and obtain

such operating permits within 90 days thereafter.

3.

Respondent, Admiral Corp.,

shall follow the compliance

program contained in Exhibit

1

to the Stipulation.

IT

IS SO ORDERED.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby certify th

ab ye Opinion and Order were

adopted on the

/f”~

day of _________________________,

1976

by

a vote of

~

C ristan L. Moff

,

Clerk

Illinois Polluti

Control Board