ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
November 17, 2005
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
Complainant,
v.
INTERMATIC INCORPORATED, a
Delaware corporation,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PCB 04-13
(Enforcement - Air)
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by N.J. Melas):
On July 28, 2003, the Office of the Attorney General, on behalf of the People of the State
of Illinois (People), filed a nine-count complaint against Intermatic Incorporated (Intermatic).
See
415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2004); 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.204. The People allege that Intermatic
violated several provisions of the Environmental Protection Act (Act) and Board rules (415 ILCS
5/9(a) and (b), 9.1(d)(1), 39.5(6)(a) and (b) (2004); 35 Ill. Adm. Code 201.142, 203.201,
203.203(a) and (b), 205.150(c), 205.205(a), 205.720, 218.105(d)(2)(A)(iii)) by way of operating
five sheet-fed offset printing presses.
The People further allege that Intermatic violated these provisions by: (1) failing to
obtain a construction permit for any of the five presses; (2) failing to modify a Clean Air Act
permit before operating the fifth press; (3) failing to comply with Emission Reduction Marketing
fication to a source (the fifth press) without
complying with New Source Review requirements; (5) failing to comply with volatile organic
material emissions limitations; (6) failing to comply with idling emission limitations; (7) failing
to properly maintain and operate a carbon adsorber; (8) failing to submit idling emission limit
exceedance reports and compliance certifications; and (9) failing to submit annual compliance
certifications. The complaint concerns Intermatic’s facility located at 7777 Winn Road, Spring
Grove, McHenry County, where it manufactures electrical items such as low voltage lighting,
professional lighting, photo controllers, surge suppressor strips, and timers.
On October 11, 2005, the People and Intermatic filed a stipulation and proposed
settlement, accompanied by a request for relief from the hearing requirement of Section 31(c)(1)
of the Act (415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2004)). This filing is authorized by Section 31(c)(2) of the Act
(415 ILCS 5/31(c)(2) (2004)).
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.300(a). The Board provided notice of
the stipulation, proposed settlement, and request for relief. The newspaper notice was published
in the Northwest Herald on October 14, 2005. The Board did not receive any requests for
hearing. The Board grants the parties’ request for relief from the hearing requirement.
See
415
ILCS 5/31(c)(2) (2004); 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.300(b).
Section 103.302 of the Board’s procedural rules sets forth the required contents of
stipulations and proposed settlements. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.302. These requirements include
stipulating to facts on the nature, extent, and causes of the alleged violations and the nature of
Intermatic’s operations. Section 103.302 also requires that the parties stipulate to facts called for
by Section 33(c) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/33(c) (2004)). The People and Intermatic have satisfied
Section 103.302. Intermatic neither admits nor denies the alleged violations but agrees to pay a
civil penalty of $30,957. In addition to the civil penalty, Intermatic agrees to undertake a
supplemental environmental project (SEP). Intermatic has agreed to reduce its penalty demand
of $90,000, or 70%, exclusive of alleged economic benefit of noncompliance, in recognition of
the performance of the SEP.
Pursuant to the stipulation and proposed settlement, Intermatic must replace the
halogenated solvent trichloroethylene degreaser it currently uses with the non-halogenated
solvent, Durr Universal Model 81C. According to the stipulation and proposed settlement, the
SEP will significantly reduce the volatile organic material (VOM) and hazardous air pollutant
emissions from the facility. Intermatic estimates the reduction in VOM emissions of at least nine
tons per year. The Board accepts the stipulation and proposed settlement.
This opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.
ORDER
1. The Board accepts and incorporates by reference the stipulation and proposed
settlement.
2. Intermatic Incorporated (Intermatic) must pay a civil penalty of $30,957 no later
than December 2, 2005, which is the 14th day after the date of this order.
Intermatic must pay the civil penalty by certified check, money order, or
electronic funds payable to Environmental Protection Trust Fund. The case
number, case name, and Intermatic’s social security number or federal employer
identification number must be included on the certified check or money order.
3. Intermatic must send the certified check or money order to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Services Division
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
Intermatic must send a copy of the certified check, money order, or record of
electronic funds transfer and any transmittal letter to:
Christopher P. Perzan
Assistant Attorney General
Envrionmental Bureau
188
W.
Randolph
Street, 20th Floor
Chicago,
Illinois
60601
Maureen
Wozniak
Assistant
Counsel
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O.
Box
19276
Springfield,
Illinois
60294-9276
4.
Intermatic must begin implementation of the supplemental environmental project,
in accordance with the stipulation and proposed settlement, on or before
December 2, 2005, which is the 14th day after the date of this order.
5.
Penalties unpaid within the time prescribed will accrue interest under Section
42(g) of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/42(g) (2004)) at the rate
set forth in Section 1003(a) of the Illinois Income Tax Act (35 ILCS 5/1003(a)
(2004)).
6.
Intermatic must cease and desist from the alleged violations.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Section 41(a) of the Environmental Protection Act provides that final Board orders may
be appealed directly to the Illinois Appellate Court within 35 days after the Board serves the
order. 415 ILCS 5/41(a) (2004);
see also
35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.300(d)(2), 101.906, 102.706.
Illinois Supreme Court Rule 335 establishes filing requirements that apply when the Illinois
Appellate Court, by statute, directly reviews administrative orders. 172 Ill. 2d R. 335. The
Board’s procedural rules provide that motions for the Board to reconsider or modify its final
orders may be filed with the Board within 35 days after the order is received. 35 Ill. Adm. Code
101.520;
see also
35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.902, 102.700, 102.702.
I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the Board
adopted the above opinion and order on November 17, 2005, by a vote of 4-0.
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board