ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
February 26, 1986
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION
AGENCY,
)
Complainant, )
)
V.
)
PCB 85-132
)
GENERAL FIRE EXTINGUISHER
)
CORPORATION, a Delaware
)
Corporation doing business
)
in Illinois,
)
)
Respondent.
)
MR. JOSEPH J. ANNUNZIO, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON
BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT.
KATZ, FRIEDMAN, SCHUR
& EAGLE (MR. STANLEY EISENSTEIN, OF
COUNSEL) APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
OPINION AND ORDER OF
THE BOARD (by W. J. Nega):
This matter comes before the Board on a single-count
Complaint filed on August 30, 1985, as amended on September 25,
1985, by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency)
which alleged that the Respondent failed to: (1) show
accumulation dates on its 55-gallon drums containing hazardous
waste; (2) maintain records that show if employees are trained to
work with hazardous wastes;
(3) have an emergency contingency
plan in case of an accident involving hazardous waste; (4) submit
an emergency contingency plan to local emergency response
organizations; and (5) seal 55-gallon drums containing hazardous
waste so as to avoid spillage from the drums in violation of 35
Ill. Adm. Code 722.l34(a)(2), 725.116, 725.151 and 725.153 and
Section 21(i) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (Act).
A hearing was held on December 17, 1985, at which no members
of the public were present. (R. 2). The parties also filed
their Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement on December 17,
1985.
The Respondent, the General Fire Extinguisher Corporation
(GFEC), is located at 1685 Shermer Road in Northbrook, Cook
County, Illinois and is a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of Delaware doing business in the State of
Illinois. GFEC is in the business of manufacturing fire
extinguishers which involves mixing various dry chemical powders
and making the metal canisters that these dry chemical powders go
into. Before the mixed dry chemicals are placed into the metal
canisters, the inside of the canisters are thoroughly cleaned.
-2-
Various solvents are used to rid the inside of the canisters of
contaminated grease or oil. Pertinently, 1,l,l-Trichloroethane,
a hazardous waste as defined by Section 3 of the Act, is
sometimes used as a chemical solvent to degrease the canisters.
After the cleaning process is completed, these chemicals become
waste which must be properly disposed of. (Stip. 2).
The hazardous nature of the solvent that the Respondent
sometimes utilizes (i.e., 1,1,l—Trichloroethane) is delineated in
35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.131 which reads, in pertinent part, as
follows:
SECTION 721.131 Hazardous Wastes From
Nonspecific Sources
Industry & EPA Hazardous Waste
Hazard Code
Hazardous Waste
Number
F002
l,l,l-Trichloroethane
(T)
The Federal
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
mandates an inspection of all facilities which generate, store,
or dispose of hazardous waste. The Agency, which is duly
authorized to make such inspections, administers the enforcement
functions vis-a-vis RCRA and concomitant state standards in
Illinois. Accordingly, on March 25, 1984, June 14, 1984, and
February 8, 1985, Agency investigators visited the Respondent’s
facilities to conduct site inspections as mandated by RCRA
provisions. At the inspections on March 25, 1984
and June 14,
1984, the Agency investigator observed that: (1) the drums
containing hazardous waste found at the site did not have
accumulation dates placed on them; (2) the drums containing
hazardous wastes had open bunges and spillage could be observed
in the container accumulation area;
(3) the company had no
contingency plan formulated in case of an accident involving
hazardous waste; and (4) there were no
records that showed if the
Respondent’s employees were trained in working with hazardous
waste. (Stip.
2-3). Moreover, the Agency inspection on February
8, 1985, showed that there were still
no records to show if
GFEC’s employees were trained in working with hazardous waste and
a contingency plan for hazardous waste accidents was not yet
formed. Additionally, the February 8, 1985, investigation
revealed that a drum containing hazardous waste found at the site
failed to have the requisite accumulation dates on it. (Stip.
3)
In reference to these observed violations, 35 Iii. Adm. Code
722.134 (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous Waste)
provides, in relevant part, as follows:
a) A generator may accumulate hazardous
waste on site for 90 days or less without
a permit or without having interim status
provided that:
—3—
1) The waste is placed in containers
and the generator complies with
Subpart I of 35 Ill. Adm Code
725....
2) The date upon which each period of
accumulation begins is clearly
marked and visible for inspections
on each container;
3) While being accumulated on-site,
each container and tank is labeled
or marked clearly with the words,
“Hazardous Waste”; and
4)
The generator complies with the
requirements for owners and
operators in Subpart C and D in 35
Ill. Adm. Code 725 and with 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 725.116.
Moreover, Section 21(i) of the Act provides, in pertinent
part, that:
No person shall:
i.
Conduct any process or engage in any
act which produces hazardous waste
in violation of any regulations
or
standards adopted by the Board under
subsections
(a) and (c) of Section
22.4 of this Act.
The parties have stipulated that: (1) the Respondent’s
failure to show accumulation dates on its 55-gallon drums
containing hazardous waste is a violation
of the Interim Status
Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment,
Storage, and
Disposal Facilities (Interim Status Standard) of 35
Ill. Adm. Code 722.134(a)(2) and Section 21(i) of the Act; (2)
the Respondent’s failure to seal its 55-gallon drums that contain
hazardous waste so as to avoid spillage from the drums is in
violation of the Interim Status Standard of 35 Ill. Adm. Code
725.273 and Section 21(i) of the Act; (3) the Respondent’s
failure to maintain records that show if employees are trained to
work with hazardous waste is a violation of the Interim Status
Standard of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 725.116 and of Section 21(i) of the
Act; (4) the Respondent’s failure to have an emergency
contingency plan is a violation of the Interim Status Standard of
35 Iii. Adm. Code 725.151 and Section 21(i) of the Act; and (5)
the Respondent’s failure to submit an emergency contingency plan
to local emergency response organizations is a violation of the
Interim Status Standard of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 725.153 and Section
21(1) of the Act. (Stip. 3-4).
—4—
The Agency has emphasized that, at all pertinent times, the
Respondent was “very close” to being a very small generator of
hazardous waste as defined in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.105(a) which
reads as follows:
Section 721.105 Special Requirements for
Hazardous Waste Generated by
Small Quantity Generators
a) A generator is
a small quantity generator
in a calendar month
if he generates less
than 1000 kilogams of hazardous waste in
that month.
35 Ill. Adm. Code 700
explains the relation of this to the 100
kg/mo exception of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 809.
Although the specific quantity of hazardous waste generated
by the Respondent was not stated either in the stipulation
itself
or
in the hearing record, it was implied in the hearing record
(R. 4-5) by both parties’ respresentatives that the amount of
hazardous waste generated was, at the present time, below the 100
kilogram (220 pound) per month exception delineated in 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 809.210 which reads as follows:
Section 809.210
General Exemption from
Special Hauling Permit
Requirements
Any person who generates a total quantity of
special waste 220 pounds (100
kilograms) or
less in any calendar month for disposal,
storage or treatment within Illinois is exempt
from the permit requirements of this Subpart
and from the manifest provisions in Subpart E
of this Part. This exemption shall not
constitute a defense to a violation of any
provision of the Act or any applicable
disposal, storage or treatment requirement of
35 Ill. Adm. Code 807.
While the usage of the term “very close” is somewhat
ambiguous in that it does not specifically indicate whether the
amount of hazardous waste generated was under 100 kilograms per
month or over 100 kilograms per month, the fact that the
Respondent entered into the proposed settlement agreement and
stipulated as to violations of applicable provisions and agreed
to pay a penalty of $5,500.00 indicates that the amount of
hazardous waste generated was over the applicable limit. (Stip.
4; R. 4-5). Moreover, it is agreed that the instant case deals
with past violations of applicable regulations
and it is believed
that the regulations
no longer apply to GFEC as long as
it
infrequently uses 1,l,1-Trichloroethane and as long as it
continues to be a small user of this product. (R. 4-6).
—5—
The proposed settlement agreement provided that the
Respondent admitted the aforementioned violations and agreed
to: (1) cease and desist from further violations; (2) authorize
the Agency to inspect the Respondent’s premises at any reasonable
time; and (3) pay a stipulated penalty of $5,500.00 into the
Environmental Protection Trust Fund within 30 days of the date of
the Board’s Order. (Stip. 4-6).
In evaluating this enforcement action and proposed
settlement agreement, the Board has taken into consideration all
the facts and circumstances in light of the specific criteria
delineated in Section 33(c) of the Act and finds the settlement
agreement acceptable under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.180. The
Respondent’s facility is suitable to the area in which it is
located provided that hazardous waste is appropriately handled.
GFEC’s facility, which employs about 10 individuals and provides
a needed service, clearly has a social and economic value when
properly operated and when hazardous waste is properly stored.
Additionally,
it was technically practicable and
economically
reasonable to have complied with the relevant Interim Status
Standards in the handling of hazardous waste.
Appropriate
handling and storage of hazardous waste is manifestly necessary
to protect the health, general welfare, and physical property of
people and can be readily accomplished by compliance with
applicable
standards.
On December 20, 1984 in R84-10, the Board adopted
specialized
procedures to be followed in RCRA cases.
Although
this is a RCRA enforcement action, the Board does not need to
follow the specialized
procedures of Section 103.260 et seq. in
that there is no necessity to order the issuance or modification
of a RCRA permit.
The Board finds that the Respondent, the General Fire
Extinguisher Corporation, has violated 35 Ill. Adm. Code
722.134(a)(2), 725.116, 725.151, and 725.153 and Section 21(i) of
the Act. The Respondent will be ordered to cease and desist from
further violations and to pay a stipulated penalty of $5,500.00
into the Environmental Protection Trust Fund.
This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
conclusions of law in this matter.
ORDER
It is the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board
that:
1. As admitted in the Stipulation, the Respondent, the
General Fire Extinguisher Corporation, has violated 35
Ill. Adm. Code 722.134(a)(2), 725.116, 725.151, and
725.153 and Section 21(i) of the Illinois Environmental
Protection Act.
—6—
2. The Respondent shall cease and desist from all further
violations.
3. As per the stipulated agreement between the parties, the
Agency is authorized to inspect the Respondent’s
premises, at any reasonable time to insure appropriate
compliance with applicable regulations
and the Act.
4.
Within 30 days of the date of this Order, the Respondent
shall, by certified
check or money order payable to the
State of Illinois
and designated for deposit into the
Environmental Protection Trust Fund, pay the stipulated
penalty of $5,500.00 which is to be sent to:
Fiscal Services Division
Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
5.
The Respondent shall comply with all the terms and
conditions of the Stipulation
and Proposal for
Settlement filed on December 17, 1985, which is
incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois
Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order was
adopted on the
‘~~-
day of
~
,
1986, by a
vote of
7—c) .
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois
Pollution Control Board