April

24,

1975

CITIZENS FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT

)

Complainant,

v.

)

PCB 74—105

LAUHOFF

GRAIN

COMPANY,

INC.

Respondent,

OPINION AND ORDER OF

THE

BOARD

(by Mr. Dumeile):

This

enforcement

action

was

filed

by

Citizens

for

a

l3etter

Environment

on March

21,

1974.

The

complaint

charges

Lsuhoff

Grain

Company

with

violation

of

the

Environmental

?irotection

Act

and numerous provisions of Pollution

Control

So~rd

egulations

,

Chapter ~3~c~aterPollution :E~egulations)

on

:~:o~era1occas:Lcns,

More

specificalLy,

the

complaint

alleges

i~tr~.

on

or

about

October

7,

:L973,

Lauhoff

discharged

into

reeh

~‘cot

dV

netod

matter

nciuLng

bu~rv’~t

L~i

ted

hexarie

and

c:i

,

it

violation

of

Section

~L2(a

of

the

The

compia

~n1:

further

a:L1e(;~~t~l~ discharge

re~u1ted

t~~r

Luq

V

0

t

JJF~

u

to~ WcitC

PcI

Ut

l~~fl

Regu Lat

OflS

Tct:OOer

e

/

3

viciation

ot

Section

20~

~c1)

ny

causing

no

d.iS

SOlved

oxvcen

to

be

present

in

the

stream;

October

8

,

9

10

,

1973

e:Lo Latic;n

of

Sect

ion

203 (a)

through

the

existance

of unnatural

.botton dopes its

visible oil

,

odor and unnatural

alqaL

growth;

Cetorer

9

1973

violation

of

Section

404

(a)

by

ones inq

and/er

ni lowing

to

be

discharged

effluent

containing

exces

S ~LVO

loveis

e t BOO

and

suspended

solids

The

complaint

realieqes

the

same

vio:L~tionsof

Sections

404

(a)

and

203 (a)

for

February

28

i ~72

F inai:Ly

,

the

comp:Laint alleges

that.

s:Lr~ceJune

17

•

:L97 1

through

March

19/

1974

Lauhoff

continuously

violated

SeCtfOn

203 CL)

1,

2,

3,

and

4

of

the Water Pollution

Regulations

through

its

discharge

of

non—cont:act cooling

water

of

excessive temperature into Stoney Creek,

A

public

hearing

was

held

on

January

13,

1975,

wherein

the parties entered into

a stipulation

and settlement.

This

stipulation

indicates that

Lauhoff Grain Company, owner and

operator of

a grain processing facility, discharges non-contact

cooling water to Stoney Creek,

a tributary

to

the

Salt Fork

of the Vermillion River,

in Danville, Illinois.

The effluent

16—423

---

—2—

flow rate

is

2.0

MGD.

Stoney Creek, classified as a general

use stream, has a 7-year 10-day low flow of zero cfs.

The

stipulation

provides

that

the

complaint

deals

specifically

with two discharges.

An accidental discharge on October

7,

1973, occurred in connection with Lauhoff’s non—contact

cooling water control system.

This system operates in

conjunction with the soybean processing plant.

In the

process of cleaning out condensers,

a new employee discharged

a cleansing substance, Oakite-62,

to the outflow system

which was tributary to the cooling water system.

When this

solution reached the solvent

trap, which is the last

stage

in the cooling

watet

system,

its

highly

alkaline

make~up

caused

the

solid

material

on

the

surface

of

the

solvent

trap

to

be

dispersed,

thus

causing

high BOD waste to enter

Si:oney

Creek

through

the

cooling

water

discharge

flow.

This

stipulation

further

provides

that

this

accidental

discharge

caused

Unnatural

bottom

deposits,

visible

o:Ll,

odor and

unnatural

algal

growth

to

appear

in

Stoney

Creek.

The

Danville

Sanitary

District

discovered

the

discharge

on

October

8,

1973.

Once

the

origin

of

the

discharge

was

discovered, Lauhoff expended

over

the

three

days

following

October

8,

1973 approximately $8,000

and

around~the—c:Lock

manpower

to

bring Stoney

Creek

back

to

its

natural

state.

By

October

10

or 11,

1973,

the

Creek

was

almost

completely

cleaned

with

no

major

damage

being caused.

The discharge of

February

28.

1973

was

attributed

to

a

broken underground drain

tile

line

which

normally

dischares

to a settling pond.

Pt was determined that a

truck

belonging

to

a

contractor

doing

construction

at

Lauhoff

drove

over

the

area

where

the

tile

line

is

located,

causing

the

break

in

the

line.

The

stipulation

provides

that

upon

learning

of

the

discharge,

Lauhoff

immediately

took

steps

to

repair

the

drain

tile

and

to clean up the Creek.

Approximately

$5,300

was

spent

by

Lauhoff

in

repairing

and

setting

the

drain

so

that

the

accident

could

not

reoccur.

Another

$6,600

was

expended

to

clean

the Creek.

With

regard

to

the

allegation

of

caus:Lng

excessive

temperature

in

Stoney Creekthe stipulation provides that

Lauhoff

completed

a

cooling

tower in June,

1971,

reducing

thermal

content

of its effluent by 20.

It is agreed that

at the present time

the

effluent

is

in

compliance

with

thermal regulations.

Additional cooling towers being constructed

are expected to reduce thermal content by an extra 8.7.

The

Lauhoff

program

is

to

eventually

attain

100

recycling

of cooling water.

Finally, the stipulation provides that

in the past Lauhoff may have violated Rule 203(i)

1,

2,

3,

and

4 in the discharge of

its

non-contact cooling water.

However, ~no data have

been

collected

by Lauhoff nor has

there

been

a

program

of

surveillance

by

the

Agency

which

can

confirm

a

violation,

The

parties

further

stipulated

to

a

---

—3—

penalty of

$600,

to be directed to the Fish and Game “Department”

of the State of Illinois.

We find that the language attributing unnatural bottom

deposits, visible oil, odor and unnatural algal growth to

the October

7,

1973 discharge is sufficient

to establish a

violation of Section 12(a)

of the Act and Rule 203(a)

of the

Water Pollution Regulations.

There is nbthing

iii

the stipulation,

however, which can confirm the remaining allegations concerning

BOD, suspended solids, dissolved oxygen and thermal standards.

Since the stipulation constitutes the entire record in this

case we must dismiss those charges.

For the violations

found with regard to the October

7,

1973 discharge, we find

that the $600 penalty provided for in the settlement is

warranted.

Although Lauhoff’s initial carelessness was

responsible for the episodes described in the stipulation,

the company

is

to be praised for the speed and determination

with which it rectified its mistakes.

We elect to treat the parties’

stipulation that the

penalty be directed

to the Fish and Game “Department”

as an

admission that the $600

represents

the reasonable value of

aquatic biota destroyed as

a

result of the violations.

See

EPA v.

Alton Box

Board

Company,

and

LaClede

Steel

Company,

PCB74—51,

13 PCB 361,

365

(1974)

This

Opinion

constitutes

the

Board’s

findings

of

fact

and

ORDER

For violations of Section

12(a)

of the Environmental

Protection Act and Rule 203(a)

of the Water

Pollution

Regulations

found herein, Lauhoff Grain Company,

Inc.,

is ordered to

pay

a penalty of $600, within

35 days from the

date of this

Order,

to

the Fish and Game Fund of the State of Illinois.

Penalty payment by certified

check or money

order payable

to

the State of Illinois

shall

be made to: Fiscal Services

Division, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,

2200

Churchill Road,

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

Control Board, herqby certify the above Opinion and OrdeF were

adopted on the

.5(4~’

day of April,

1975 by

a vote of

q—o

Oc~cr)

~4~Jt

Christan L. Moffett,/~Lerk

Illinois

Pollution

c~8~ItrolBoard

16