ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    January 18, 1979
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 77—248
    PHILLIP ROSENBAND d/b/a PARSTEEL
    PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC.,
    Respondent.
    MS. ANNE K. MARKEY, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, appeared on behalf
    of Complainant.
    MR. ROBERT I. BRISKMAN, TORME, HORWICH AND BRISKMAN, appeared on
    behalf of Respondent.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Dumelle):
    An Amended Complaint in this case alleges that Respondent
    constructed and operated an emission source and air pollution
    control equipment without the necessary Agency permits and violated
    Rule 205(f) of the Air Pollution Control Regulations. A hearing
    was held on October 18, 1978 in Chicago Heights.
    At the hearing the parties offered Joint Exhibits 1 and 2
    and a Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement as the entire record.
    No other members of the public were present.
    The Stipulation of Facts (Joint Ex.l) states that since
    June, 1976 Respondent has operated a plant manufacturing painted
    steel shelving in Chicago Heights. Respondent constructed and has
    operated three paint spray booths, an alkali solution washer, a
    gas—fired baking oven and a degreaser without Agency permits. On
    August 11, 1976 an Agency employee observed that Respondent was
    using 110 gallons of toluene per month to clean its spray
    painting equipment and 35 gallons of grey baking enamel per day.
    Both substances caused the emission of organic material in excess
    of the 8 lbs./hr. limitation in Rule 205(f). This inspection is
    summarized in Joint Exhibit 2. After the Agency inspection
    Respondent ceased using toluene and switched to an enamel which
    contains a blend of solvents exempt from Rule 205(f). The
    Stipulation of Facts attaches the Opinion and Order of the Board
    in EPA v. Par Steel Products Company, P03 72-405, 8PCB 387,
    June 28, 1973 which found, inter alia, that Respondent had
    installed pollution control equipment at a prior location without
    Agency permits.
    32—415
    —2—
    The Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement provides that
    Respondent shall obtain all the necessary Agency permits within
    six months and pay a penalty of $1,000 within nine months of the
    date of the Board~s approval of this settlement. The Board finds,
    after a review of the factors listed in Section 33(c) of the Act,
    that the settlement constitutes a reasonable and appropriate
    resolution of this case.
    This Opinion constitutes the Boardts findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this case.
    ORDER
    1) Respondent has violated Rules 103(a) (1), 103(b) (1), and
    205(f) of the Air Pollution Control Regulations and Sections
    9(a) and 9(b) of the Act.
    2) Within six months of the date of this Order, Respondent shall
    obtain all applicable Agency permits for the equipment listed
    in paragraph 3 of Joint Exhibit No. 1.
    3) Within 9 months of the date of this Order, Respondent shall
    forward the sum of $1,000, payable by certified check or
    money order, to:
    State of Illinois
    Fiscal Services Section
    Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    2200 Churchill Road
    Springfield, Illinois 62706
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, ereby certfy the above Opinion and Order were adopted on
    the
    /
    ~ day of
    ___________,
    1979 by a vote of
    ~9’._o
    ~inoisPol1ution’tro1BoarT~
    32—416

    Back to top