ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September
13, 1973
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Complainant,
v.
PCB 73—150
BRESLER ICE
CREAM
COMPANY, an
Illinois corporation,
Respondent.
Mr. James Jenks, Assistant Attorney General, on behalf of
the Complainant;
Mr. Barry Kroll, on behalf of the Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Seaman)
On April
12,
1973,
the Agency filed complaint against
Respondent, Bresler Ice Cream Company,
the
owner and operator
of an ice cream production facility located in Chicago, County
of Cook,
Illinois.
This cause comes before the Board with
a Stipulation of
Facts entered into between the respective parties.
According
to said Stipulation, Respondent operated an incinerator
at its facility during the period between July
1,
1970
and
January 20,
1973.
Articles incinerated were primarily wastes
and by—products from Respondent’s operation.
By paragraph 10 of the Stipulation,
Respondent admits
that the emission of contaminants from the subject incinerator
constituted air pollution as defined
in Section 3
(b)
of the
Environmental Protection Act.
The said contaminants were
emitted in sufficient quantities and were of such characteristics
and duration as to unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment
of life or property.
Numerous complaints
to this effect were
received by the Agency from persons residing in
the vicinity.
The substance of
the complaints related primarily to the escape
of fly ash and odors from the incinerator.
It is noted that
nowhere in the record before this Board is there any indication
of the magnitude of pollutants emitted from Respondent’s incinerator.
We are merely informed that such emissions were in violation
of the Act.
9
—
253
—2—
During the three years in question,
it is stipulated
(paragraph
9)
that Respondent
was attempting
to remedy
the
situation and, pursuant thereto, consulted
with
experts
and expended sums of money in an effort to eliminate or reduce
emissions.
Here,
again,
the Board has no further information
regarding
the
experts involved or the amount of money expended.
According to the Stipulation
(paragraph
11)
,
Respondent
realized that its efforts to modify its incinerator were
unavailing and terminated the use of said incinerator on
January
20,
1973.
It is noted that operation of the incinerator
was terminated prior to the filing of the complaint herein.
The incinerator has been rendered inoperable and Respondent
states
(paragraph
11)
that it will not be operated in
the
future.
From the above,
this Board is satisifed that Respondent
has, for a period of approximately three years, been in
violation of the Act,
and a penalty will be assessed.
Respondent stresses,
in mitigation, that it unilaterally
terminated the use of the subject incinerator prior to
the
date
of the Agency complaint
(R.6).
This fact would carry more
weight if Respondent had not waited approximately three years
to take remedial action.
Further,
it would have been well
for Respondent
to have introduced evidence regarding the
amount of money expended, rather than content itself with the
bare stipulation
that sums were expended.
This opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the Board.
IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that
Respondent, Bresler Ice Cream Company, shall:
1.
Cease and desist from the violations found herein.
2.
Refrain from operating the subject incinerator
without prior Agency approval.
3.
Respondent shall pay to the State of Illinois the sum
of $1~500.00within
35 days from the date of this Order.
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,
Springfield,
Illinois
62706.
9
254
I,
Christan
L.
Moffett,
Clerk
of
the
Illinois P~liution
Control
Board,
hereby
certif~y
the
above
Opinion
and
Order
was
adopted
this
/J~’
day
of
~,
1973
by
a
vote
of
_____________
to
~
.
S