ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

November

10, 1976

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Complainant,

PCB 75—384

SOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS COAL

)

CORPORATION,

Respondent.

Mr. George

W. Tinkham, Assistant

Attorney General, appeared for

the Complainant.

Mr. Robert

S.

Cohen appeared for the Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER

OF

THE BOARD

(by Dr. Satchell):

This matter

comes

before the Pollution Control Board

(Board)

upon a complaint filed

on

October

8,

1975 by the Environmental

Protection Agency

(Agency).

The complaint was amended at the

hearing to correct the references to the “main pit”

to the

“6360 pit.”

The

amended

complaint alleges that Respondent

operates

in Perry County,

Illinois an open pit mining operation,

designated as

the Captain Mine, and a coal processing facility

and that this mine consists of two active operating areas: the

6360 pit located in Sections

7

and 9

of

Township

6 South, Range

4 West of the Third Principal Meridian, and the Denmark pit

located

in Sections

18 and 19 of Township

6 South, Range

3 West

of the Third Principal Meridian.

The complaint further alleges

that the 6360 pit flows into Pipestone Creek and the Denmark

pit flows into unnamed tributaries

of Galum

Creek;

that pump-

age from both these pits has caused such amounts of settleable

solids consisting of coal and clay fines

to flow to Pipestone

Creek and an unnamed

tributary of Galum

Creek

so as to cause

the receiving waters

to become turbid and discolored and to

cause unnatural bottom deposits

in violation of Section 12(a)

of the Environmental Protection Act

(Act)

and Rule 203(a) of

the Chapter

3: Water Pollution Regulations

(Chapter

3)

and

Rules

605(a)

and

605(b)

of the Chapter

4: Mine Related Pol-

lution Regulations

(Chapter 4); that these aforementioned

violations are violations of Condition 10 of Southwestern’s

permit for Captain Mine in violation of Section

12(b)

of the

24

—

203

---

—2—

Act;

that amounts of iron in excess of the standard of

Rule 203(f)

of Chapter

3 has leached from settled—out

coal fines deposited by Southwestern

in the Denmark pit

drainage ditch and unnamed tributary of Galum

Creek, to

the waters flowing over those fines and thence to Galum

Creek

in violation of Rule 605(a)

of Chapter

4 and Section

12(a)

of the Act;

that amounts of sulfate and total dissolved

solids

in excess of the standard of Rule 203(f) Chapter

3

have

leached

from

the

settled-out

coal

fines

by

Southwestern

in the 6360 pit drainage ditch and Pipestone Creek, to the

waters flowing over them in violation of Rule 605(a)

of

Chapter

4 and Section 12(a)

of the Act;

and that the con-

tinuing nature of the violations indicate Respondent know-

ingly and willingly caused the violations or in the alter-

native that if such violations are due to fortuity and

represent emergency situations, Southwestern has not reported

such emergencies

w::~1ich

have caused or threatened to cause the

sudden

discharge of contaminants into waters of the State in

violation

of

Rule 20~(a) of Chapter

4 and of Standard Condi-

tion

7 of Sout1iwe~L:~iYsPermit which constitutes an additional

violation of Section

12(b)

of the Act.

The answer filed Decem-

ber

5, 1975 corre:;ted the

location

of

the

6360

pit

to

Sections

8 and

9 of Township

6 South, Range 4 West, rather than

in

Sections

7 and 9 as stated.

A

hearing was held in this

matter

on

August

20,

1976

at

which

time

a

stipulated settlement was presented for Board

approval.

No testImony was given at the hearing.

The

stipulated

facts

are

as

follows.

Respondent

has

operated an open p:~tmine known as the Captain Mine and a

coal processing facility since before February 1973.

Pumpages

from the active mining area known as the Denmark pit flow

through drainage ditches heretofore constructed by farmers

to

connect to Galum Creek.

Pumpages from the 6360 pit flow

through drainage d~.t~chen to Pipest:onc Creek

-

The parties

stipulated

that Galum Creek, the unnamed tribuLaries to Galum

Creek

and Pipestone Creek are “waters of

the State.”

Respon-

dent stipulates

that on June 13, 1975 Respondent caused 6360

pit

pumpages

to

flow into

a drainage ditch and thence to

Pipestone Creek with such amounts of settleable

solids, con-

sisting of coal and clay fines,

as

to cause those receiving

waters

to become turbid and discolored and to cause unnatural

bottom deposits in the drainage ditch and Pipestone Creek.

Respondent further stipulates that on June 11, 1975 the

Denmark pit pumpages flowed into a drainage course tributary

to Galum Creek causing turbidity and unnatural bottom deposits.

Southwestern states that on June

13, 1975 amounts of iron

leached from settled-out coal fines deposited by Respondent

24

—

204

---

—3---

in the Denmark pit drainage course and unnamed tributary

to Galum Creek sufficient to cause those waters to have a

concentration of iron in excess of 1.0 mg/l.

On June 13,

1975 Respondent

further stipulates that amounts of sulfate

and total dissolved solids leached from settled-out coal

fines deposited by Respondents in the 6360 pit drainage

ditch and Pipestone Creek sufficient to cause a concentra-

tion of sulfate in excess of 500 mg/l and total dissolved

solids in excess of 1000 mg/i.

The parties agreed that

these

incidents

were

foreseeably

incident

to

Respondent’s

operations.

During

the relevant time period, February 27,

1973 through October 8,

1975,

Southwestern

had

been

con-

ducting testing and experimentation by which

it might

attain compliance with the Environmental Protection Act and

various other environmental and mining laws.

During and

after April,

1974 Respondent requested from the Agency

recommendations and guidelines for the size of such pumps

to prevent overflows.

The Agency stipulates that it refused

or omitted to make such requested recommendations and guide-

lines.

The condiLlns complained of were caused by the use of

equipment of inadequate size to carry off overflow from the

Denmark pit and the 6360

pit.

Respondent was issued a permit for the operation of the

Captain Mine on February

2,

1973.

On February 24, 1976 the

Agency received

a Chapter

4 permit application from Respon-

dent which embodied the procedures which Respondent

felt

would insure compliance at the Captain Mine.

On April 16,

1976 the Agency requested more information.

A Chapter

4

permit was issued to Respondent on May 21,

1976.

A supple-

mental Chapter

4 permit was issued to Respondent on June 30,

1976.

According to the stipulation settling basins have been

built at the 6360 and Denmark pits and are functioning satis-

factorily.

The sumps

in the operating pits have been modified

so as to increase their capacity in accordance with standards

promulgated by the Agency as a requirement of the issuance

of the permits and to reduce the chance of coal fines being

picked up by the pumps.

Southwestern’s employees have been

instructed to follow certain procedures which will help pre-

vent coal fines from being dumped in the pit.

The bottom

deposits in the drainage course between the Denmark pit and

GaluxL~ Creek have been removed through natural scouring and

covered by subsequent siltation to the extent that

a signi-

ficant amount of contaminants are no longer being leached

from those deposits to the water in that drainage course.

24

—

205

---

—4—

The parties stipulated that the efforts made by

Respondent

to date to bring the mine into compliance

have been technically practicable and economically

reasonable,

The suitability of the site is not in

issue as the mine is where the sought after minerals

are located and can be operated without polluting the

waters of the State.

The parties further stipulated

that the mine has great social and economic value to the

community

and

that failure to be in compliance with the

Act

and

applicable

regulations is a potential injury to

the

general

health and welfare

of

the

people.

Respondent

agreed

to

pay

a

penalty of

$6,500.

The

Agency

found

this

acceptable

considering the

nature

of the conditions and

Respondent~s

efforts to

come

into compliance.

The

Board

finds this

stipulated

agreement

to be

acceptable

under Procedural

Rule

333.

The

Board

does find

Respondent

in

violation of

Rules

203(a)

and

203(f)

of Chap-

ter 3,

Rules 605(a)

and 605(b)

of Chapter

4 and Section 12(a)

and 12(b)

of the Acl~ The allegation of violation of Rule

205(a)

of Chapter

4

is dismissed.

A

penalty

of

$6500

will

be

sufficient

to aid in the enforcement of the Act.

This concludes the Board’s findings of fact and con-

clusions of

law.

ORDER

It is the order of the

Pollution

Control

Board

that:

1.

Respondent is found to have violated Rule 203(a)

and 203(f)

of Chapter

3: Water Pollution Regula-

tions and Rules

605(a)

and

605(b)

of Chapter 4:

Mine

Related Pollution Regulations and Sections

12(a)

and 12(b)

of the Act.

The allegation of

violation of Rule

205(a)

of

the

Chapter

4:

Mine

Related Pollution Regulations is dismissed,

2.

Respondent shall cease and desist further viola-

tions of the Act and the Regulations.

3.

Respondent shall pay a penalty of $6,500 within

thirty-five

(35)

days of

this

order,

Payment

shall be by certified

check

or

money

order

payable to:

State of Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency

Fiscal Services Division

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield, Illinois

62706

Mr. James Young abstained.24

—

206

---

—5—

I, Christan

L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order

were adopted on the

j~”- day of

___________,

1976 by a

vote of

L/..p

Illinois Pollution