FEB
03
2009
OFFICE
OF
STATE
THE
ATTORNEY
OF
ILLINOIS
GENERALSTATE
Zflilution
OF
Control
‘LUNo,Boa%
Lisa Madigan
.V1JORNEY
GENERAL
January 29, 2009
Assistant
John
T. Therriault,
Clerk of the
Assistant
Board
Clerk
P
Illinois Pollution
Control Board
James
R. Thompson Center,
Ste. 11-500
100 West Randolph
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Re:
People
v.
Brent
Speckhart,
d/b/a
Brent Speckhart
Swine
Farm
Dear Clerk:
Enclosed for filing
please find
the
original
and
ten
copies
of
a
Notice
of
Filing,
Complaint,
Motion for Relief from
Hearing Requirement
and
Stipulation
and
Proposal
for Settlement
in regard
to the
above-captioned
matter.
Please file
the
originals
and
return file-stamped
copies to me
in
the
enclosed
envelope.
Thank
you
for
your cooperation
and
consideration.
Very
truly yours,
Jane E.
McBride
Environmental
Bureau
500 South
Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
(217) 782-9031
J
E M/pj k
Enclosures
500 South
Second
Street, Springfield,
Illinois
62706
• (217)
782-1090 • TTY:
(877) 844-5461
• Fax: (217) 782-7046
100 West
Randolph Street,
Chicago, Illinois 60601
• (312) 814-3000
• TTY:
(800) 964-3013
•
Fax: (312) 814-3806
BEFORE
THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
Complainant,
v.
)
PCBNo.
(II
)
(Enforcement)
BRENT SPECKHART,
dlb!a
BRENT SPECKHART
SWINE
FARM,
)
Respondent.
:ECVED
NOTICE OF
FILING
CLERK’S
OFFICE
FEB03
2009
To:
Brent
Speckhart
STATE
dibla Brent
Speckhart Swine
Farm
435
East
900th
Road
oard
Quincy,
Illinois 62305
PLEASE
TAKE
NOTICE
that on this date I
mailed for
filing
with
the
Clerk of the Pollution
Control Board
of the State
of Illinois,
a
COMPLAINT,
MOTION
FOR
RELIEF
FROM
HEARING
REQUIREMENT
and
STIPULATION
AND PROPOSAL
FOR
SETTLEMENT, copies
of which
are
attached
hereto
and
herewith served
upon you.
Respectfully
submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS
LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney
General of
the
State of
Illinois
MATTHEWJ. DUNN,
Chief
Environmental
Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation
Division
BY:
-:2—
449dL.-
JANE E.
McBRIDE
Sr. Assistant
Attorney
General
Environmental Bureau
500
South
Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois 62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
January
29, 2009
CERTIFICATE
OF
SERVICE
I hereby certify
that I did on January
29, 2007, send by
First
Class
Mail, with postage
thereon
fully
prepaid, by
depositing
in
a
United
States Post Office Box
a true and
correct
copy
of the following instruments
entitled NOTICE
OF
FILING,
COMPLAINT, MOTION
FOR RELIEF
FROM
HEARING
REQUIREMENT
and STIPULATION
AND
PROPOSAL
FOR SETTLEMENT:
To:
Brent Speckhart
d/b/a
Brent Speckhart
Swine Farm
435
East
900
th
Road
Quincy,
Illinois
62305
and
the original
and ten
copies
by
First Class Mail
with postage thereon
fully prepaid
of the
same foregoing
instrument(s):
To:
Dorothy
Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution
Control Board
James R. Thompson
Center
Suite
11-500
100 West
Randolph
Chicago,
Illinois 60601
.ZstantomeyGen
This filing
is
submitted on recycled
paper.
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL
BOARD
PEOPLE
OF
THE
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS,
)
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCBNo.
LI
)
(Enforcement)
BRENT SPECKHART,
d!bla
)
ECEVED
BRENT SPECKHART
SWINE FARM,
)
CLERK’S
OFFICE
Respondents.
FEB
032009
STATEo
utinn
OF
Control
tLLINOIS
Board
MOTION
FOR
RELIEF FROM HEARING
REQUIREMENT
NOW
COMES
Complainant,
PEOPLE OF
THE STATE
OF
ILLINOIS,
by LISA
MADIGAN, Attorney
General of the
State of
Illinois,
and pursuant
to
Section
31(c)(2)
of the
Illinois Environmental
Protection Act (“Act”),
415 ILCS
5/31
(c)(2)
(2006); moves that the
Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board grant the
parties in
the
above-captioned
matter relief
from the hearing
requirement
imposed by
Section
31(c)(1) of the
Act,
415 ILCS
5/31(c)(1) (2006).
In support
of
this
motion, Complainant
states as
follows:
1.
The parties
have
reached
agreement on
all outstanding issues
in this matter.
2.
This
agreement
is presented
to the
Board
in
a
Stipulation
and
Proposal for
Settlement, filed
contemporaneously
with this
motion.
3.
All
parties
agree
that a hearing
on the
Stipulation
and Proposal for
Settlement is
not
necessary,
and
respectfully
request relief from
such
a
hearing
as
allowed
by Section
31(c)(2)
of
the
Act, 415 ILCS 5!31(c)(2)
(2006).
1
WHEREFORE,
Complainant, PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS,
hereby requests
that
the
Board grant this
motion for relief from the hearing requirement set forth in Section
31(c)(1) of
the
Act,
415 ILCS
5/31(c)(1)
(2006).
Respectfully
submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA MADIGAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
MATTHEWJ. DUNN, Chief
Environmental
Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation
Division
BY:
Z7e_-
-1ANE E. McBRIDE
Environmental
Bureau
Sr. Assistant Attorney
General
500 South
Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
January 29,
2009
2
BEFORE
THE ILLINOIS
POLLU11ON CONTROL
BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS
)
Complainant,
)
IL.,
)flt-I’
)
No.
v.
BRENT
SPECKHART dlb!a
)
BRENT
SPECKHART SWINE
FARM
)
Respondent
)
FEB
D3
2009
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS
COMPLAINT
otlutiO’
Control
Board
The PEOPLE
OF
THE STATE
OF
ILLINOIS,
by Lisa Madigan,
Attorney
General
of
the
State
of
Illinois,
complain
of
Respondent BRENT
SPECKHART,
dlbla
BRENT SPECKHART
SWINE FARM, as
follows:
COUNT I
WATER POLLUTION
VIOLATIONS
1.
This
Count is brought
on behalf of the
People of
the State
of Illinois,
by
Lisa
Madigan, Attorney
General
of
the
State
of Illinois, on
her own motion pursuant
to
Sections
42(d)
and (e) of the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Act (“Act”),
415
ILCS 5/42(d), (e).
2.
Respondent
Brent Speckhart
d/b/a
Brent Speckhart Swine
Farm
(“Speckhart”)
owns a
unpopulated
1,040
capacity hog operation.
The
facility is located southwest
of
Payson
in
Adams County.
The facility is
specifically located
in the
northeast
corridor of Section
23,
Township
3
South, Range
8 West (the
“facility” or “site”).
3.
The facility
consists of three swine
confinement
buildings with
partial
manure
pits
and a
two-cell
livestock waste lagoon.
Respondent
Speckhart removed
all the
animals
from
the
facility
in January of 2007.
4.
Section 3.545
of
the
Act, 415
ILCS 5/3.545,
provides:
“WATER
POLLUTION”
is such alteration of the physical, thermal,
chemical,
biological, or radioactive properties of any waters of
the
State, or such discharge
of any contaminant
into any
waters of the State,
as
will or
is
likely
to
create a
nuisance
or
render
such
water harmful
or detrimental
or injurious
to
public
health,
safety or
welfare,
or to domestic, commercial, industrial,
agricultural,
recreational, or other legitimate uses, or
to
livestock, wild animals, birds,
fish,
or
other aquatic life.
5.
Section 3.550 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/3.550,
provides:
“WATERS” means all accumulations of water, surface and underground, natural,
and
artificial, public and private, or
parts
thereof,
which are wholly or partially
within, flow through, or
borderupon this
State.
6.
Section 3.165 of theAct, 415 ILCS 5/3.165, provides:
“CONTAMINANT” is any solid, liquid, or gaseous matter,
any
odor or any form of
energy,
from whatever
source.
7.
Section 12(a) and (d) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(a),(d), provides,
in pertinent
part,
as follows:
No
person
shall:
a.
Cause or
threaten
or
allow the discharge of any contaminants
into
the
environment in
any State so as
to cause or tend to cause
water pollution
in Illinois, either alone or in combination with matter from other
sources,
or
so as to
violate regulations or standards adopted by the
Pollution
Control Board under this Act;
***
d.
Deposit any contaminants
upon
the land in such place and manner so as
to create
a
water pollution hazard.
***
8.
On April 30, 2008, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois EPA”)
received a
neighbor citizen’s
complaint that “sewage”
was
exiting a
pipe through
a
lagoon berm
at
Respondent
Speckhart’s facilty, located
adjacent to
the complainant’s property. The
complainant
indicated the pipe had
a
valve in
it
and
it
was dripping
at the
time
the
neighbor
2
made
the
observation.
The neighbor
complainant
indicated
that the “gully” downstream
of
the
pipe contained
sewage and
the surrounding vegetation
was
“burnt”.
The complainant further
indicated that he believed
the
content
level of the facility
lagoon
was
down, and the complainant
estimated that
half of the contents
of the
lagoon
had
discharged from the
lagoon.
9.
On
May 1, 2008,
an Illinois EPA inspector
conducted an inspection
of
Respondent
Speckhart’s facility.
At the time
of
the
inspection, the manure
pits associated with
the three
swine
confinement
buildings
at the facility were full
of
livestock
waste
and
the two
cells of
the earthen
lagoon
at
the facility were
both partially full
of livestock waste.
The
lagoon
contained
liquid
and
solid
livestock
waste and
measured
approximately
fifty
by
seventy five
feet.
The
north
cell of
the
lagoon had
an excess of
three feet of freeboard
at the height of the
overflow pipe
to
the south
cell, and the
south
cell had
an
excess of six feet
of freeboard. A
6
inch
diameter
sewer pipe
exited the south berm
on the south
cell at the same
elevation
as the
livestock
waste
remaining
in the cell.
The
land
on top
of the lagoon berms
did not
contain
any
evidence
of
machine or
human tracks that
would indicate
a
recent
land
application.
10.
At the
time
of
the
inspection,
Illinois EPA inspector
observed
an area of burned
vegetation that
was approximately
50 yards
in length
that started at the south
cell sewer
pipe
and
ended at
Fall Creek.
The area of burned vegetation
contained
manure
solids
in
several
locations
and
there
was a slight odor
associated
with livestock waste.
Although at the
time
of
the
inspection
there
was’no
direct evidence
that livestock
waste
flowed
into Fall Creek because
of
the recent
precipitation, the
area of
burned
vegetation indicated
that livestock
waste from
the
lagoon
may
have
flowed
from
the sewer pipe, down
a ravine
and
into Fall Creek.
11.
At the time
of the inspection,
the
Illinois
EPA
inspector observed
a ring of burned
vegetation
within
the
upper
walls of the south
cell of
the
lagoon
and based on the
size of the
lagoons,
the
Illinois EPA
inspector
estimated that
approximately
140,000 gallons
of livestock
3
waste
had
discharged
from
the
sewer pipe
on
the
south
cell
of
the lagoon.
At
the time of
the
inspection,
the
pipe in the
berm of the
south
cell
continued
to discharge
a
small amount
of
liquid
livestock waste
onto
the land.
12.
At the time
of the
May 1 2008
inspection,
the illinois
EPA inspector
spoke with
Respondent
Speckhart
who
stated
that he had
failed
to perform
a land
application
the
previous
fall. Respondent
Speckhart
stated
that
with
the precipitation
in the winter
and spring
the
livestock
waste
reached
a
level
that
could overtop
the
berms
of
the
lagoon.
Respondent
Speckhart
stated
that
due
to
the recent
rain a
land
application
was
impossible
so
he
had
opened the
sewer
pipe to
discharge
the livestock
waste
in order
to
ensure
the integrity
of
the
structure.
The
Illinois
EPA inspector
told
Respondent
Speckhart
to
cap
the
sewer pipe.
13.
On May
2, 2008,
Respondent
Speckhart
informed
the
Illinois
EPA
inspector
that the
discharge
pipe
was
capped
on the
end outside
of
the
lagoon
and
that
he would
attempt
to
cap
the pipe
inside the
lagoon. Respondent
Speckhart
also
stated
he
planned
to land
apply
the remaining
waste
to a neighbor’s
crop land.
14.
On
May 5,
2008,
the
Illinois
EPA
inspector
re-examined
the
facility
and found
that Respondent
Speckhart
had
capped
both the
inside
and outside
ends
of
the
pipe in the
berm
of
the lagoon.
15.
The
Respondent
has threatened,
allowed
or caused
the
discharge
of
contaminants
to
waters
of
the
State as
will or
is
likely
to create
a nuisance
or
render such
water
harmful
or detrimental
or injurious
to public health,
safety
or welfare,
or to
domestic,
commercial,
industrial,
agricultural,
recreational,
or
other legitimate
uses.
16.
By
discharging
livestock
waste
upon the
land in
such a
place
and manner
so
as
allow
contaminants
to
drain
into
waters
of
the State, Respondent
Speckhart
caused,
threatened
or
allowed
the discharge
of contaminants
into the
environment
to cause
or tend
to cause
water
4
pollution
in Illinois,
and
has
thereby
violated
Section
12(a) of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/12(a).
17.
By
depositing livestock
waste
upon the
land
by
allowing it
to
discharge
from
the
pipe in
such
a place and manner
so as
to
create
a water
pollution,
Respondent
Speckhart
caused, threatened
or allowed
the discharge of
contaminants
into the environment
to cause
or
tend
to cause a water pollution
hazard
in Illinois,
and
has thereby violated
Section 12(d)
of the
Act,
415 ILCS 5/12(d).
PRAYER
FOR
RELIEF
WHEREFORE,
the Complainant, the
People
of the
state of Illinois,
respectfully requests
that the Board
enter an order
against the Respondent
Speckhart:
A.
Authorizing
a hearing in
this matter
at
which time the
Respondent will
be
required
to answer the
allegations
herein;
B.
Finding
that Respondent Speckhart
has violated
the Act and regulations
as
alleged herein;
C.
Ordering Respondent
Speckhart
to cease and
desist from
any further violations
of the Act and associated
regulations;
and
D.
Assessing
against
Respondent
Speckhart
a civil penalty
of fifty thousand
dollars
($50,000)
for each violation of
the Act,
and
an additional penalty
of
ten thousand
dollars
($10,000)
for each day
during which
each violation has continued
thereafter,
pursuant
to
Section 42(a)
of the Act, 414 ILCS
5/42(a).
COUNT
II
NPDES
VIOLATIONS
1.
This Count
is brought on
behalf of the
People of the
State of Illinois, by
Lisa
Madigan, Attorney
General of the
State of Illinois,
on her own motion
pursuant
to Sections 42(d)
5
and (e) of the
Illinois
Environmental Protection Act
(“Act”), 415 ILCS
5/42(d),
(e).
2-13. Complainant re-alleges and
incorporates
by
reference
herein paragraphs
2
through 13 of Count
las
paragraphs 2 through 13 of
this Count II.
14.
Section 12 (f)
of
the
Act, 415 ILCS 5/12
(f),
provides,
in pertinent part,
as
follows:
No person shall:
f.
Cause, threaten or allow the discharge
of any contaminant into
the waters
of the State, as defined herein, including
but not
Iiniited
to,
waters
to
any
sewage works, or into
any
well
or from any point source within
the
State,
without an NPDES
permit for point source discharges
issued by the
Agency
under
Section 39(b) of this Act, or in violation
of any term
or
condition imposed
by such
permit,
or
in violation
of
any
NPDES
permit
filing requirement established
under Section 39(b), or in violation
of
any
regulations adopted
by the Board or of any order adopted
by
the
Board
with
respect to the
NPDES
program.
***
15.
Section 309 .102 of the Board’s water pollution regulations, 35 Ill . Adm.
Code
309.102(a),
states,
in pertinent part:
NPDES Permit Required
a.
Except as in compliance with
the
provisions of
the Act,
Board
regulations,
and
the CWA, and the provisions
and
conditions of
the
NPDES
permit
issued to the
discharger,
the discharge
of
any contaminant or pollutant
by
any person into the waters of the State from a point source or into a
well
shall
be unlawful
16.
At the
time of the
May 1,
2008
inspection, Respondent Speckhart’s facility
did
not
have a
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit (“NPDES”),
and
had
not applied
for an NPDES permit.
17.
By causing the discharge of livestock waste from the facility
so as to threaten,
cause or allow the
discharge of contaminants into Fall Creek, Respondent Speckhart has
discharged contaminants
into the waters of the state from
a
point source without an NPDES
6
permit, and has thereby violating
Section 12(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(f).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, the Complainant, the
People
of
the state of
Illinois,
respectfully
requests
that the Board enter an order
against the
Respondent
Speckhart:
A.
Authorizing a hearing in
this
matter at which time the Respondent will
be
required
to
answer the allegations herein;
B.
Finding that Respondent Speckhart has
violated
the Act and regulations
as
alleged herein;
C.
Ordering Respondent Speckhart to
cease and
desist
from
any further
violations
of the Act and associated regulations;
and
D.
Assessing against Respondent Speckhart a civil penalty often thousand
dollars
($10,000) per day of
violation, pursuant to Section 42(b)(1) of the Act, 414 ILCS
5!42(b)(1).
COUNT III
AGRICULTURE RELATED
POLLUTION VIOLATIONS
1.
This Count is
brought on behalf of the People of the State of Illinois, by Lisa
Madigan, Attorney General of the
State of Illinois, on her own motion pursuant
to
Sections
42(d)
and
(e) of the
Illinois Environmental Protection
Act
(“Act”), 415 ILCS 5/42(d),
(e)
(2008).
2-17.
Complainant
re-alleges and incorporates by reference herein paragraphs 2
through 17
of Count las paragraphs 2 through 17 of this Count III.
18.
Section 501 .404(c)(3) of the
Board’s Agriculture
Related
Pollution
Regulations,
35111.
Adm.
Code 501 .404(c)(3), provides, in
pertinent part, as follows:
3)
The contents of livestock waste-handling
facilities
shall
be
kept
at levels
such that there is adequate storage capacity so that an overflow does
not
occur except
in
the case of
precipitation
in excess of a 25-year, 24-hour
storm.
7
19.
Section
501 .404(c)(4)(A) of the Board’s Agriculture
Related Pollution
Regulations,
35
III.
Adm. Code 501 .404(c)(4)(A),
provides, in pertinent
part, as
follows:
c)
Livestock Waste-Holding
Facilities
4)
Liquid
Livestock Waste
A)
Existing livestock
management
facilities
which
handle
the
waste in
a
liquid
form shall have adequate storage
capacity in
a liquid manure-holding tank, lagoon, holding
pond, or any combination thereof so as not
to
cause air
or
water pollution as defined in the Act or applicable
regulations,
the Agency may require that additional
storage time
be
provided. In such
cases,
interim
pollution
prevention measures
may be required by the Agency.
***
20.
Respondent Speckhart
did not keep the
levels of the facility’s livestock
waste
lagoons adequately
below
levels that would
appropriately
prevent overflow
nor
did he maintain
adequate
storage
capacities for the facility’s storage lagoon, and, due to this failure,
Respondent Speckhart
purposefully
discharge
livestock
waste
from
his lagoon
and thereby
threatened, cause
or allowed contaminants
to
flow into Fall Creek.
21.
By
failing
to properly manage the facility’s
livestock waste lagoon and timely
land
apply waste, Respondent Speckhart
failed
to
maintain lagoon levels such that there was
adequate
storage
capacity to
prevent
an overflow, and has
thereby violating Section 12(a) of
the
Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(a), and Section 501.404(c)(3) of the
Board’s Agriculture
Related
Pollution
Regulations, 35 III. Adm. Code 501
.404(c)(3).
22.
By
failing
to take proper measures to handle the
volume
of waste in
the
facility’s
two-cell lagoon, Respondent Speckhart did not have adequate storage capacity in the
facility’s two-cell lagoon, and has thereby violated Section 12(a) of the
Act,
415 ILCS
5/12(a),
and
Section 501
.404(c)(4)(A) of
the Board’s Agriculture
Related Pollution
Regulations, 35
Ill.
8
Adm. Code 501
.404(c)(4)(A).
PRAYER
FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, the Complainant,
the People of the
state of
Illinois,
respectfully requests
that
the Board
enter
an
order against the Respondent
Speckhart:
A.
Authorizing
a hearing in this matter at which time
the Respondent will be
required
to answer the allegations
herein;
B.
Finding that Respondent Speckhart
has
violated
the Act and regulations
as
alleged herein;
C.
Ordering Respondent Speckhart to cease and desist from any further
violations
of the Act and
associated regulations; and
D.
Assessing against Respondent Speckhart
a
civil penalty
of
fifty
thousand dollars
($50,000)
for each
violation of the Act, and an additional penalty of ten thousand dollars
9
($10,000)
for
each
day during
which
each violation
has
continued thereafter,
pursuant
to
Section 42(a)
of
the Act,
414 ILCS
5/42(a).
Respectfully
submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
exrei. LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney
General of the
State of Illinois
MATTHEWJ. DUNN,
Chief
Environmental
Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation Division
BY:___________________
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
Environmental
Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
Of Counsel
JANE
E.
MCBRIDE
Assistant
Attorney
General
500
South
Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated:_________
10
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF
THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
)
Complainant,
)
PCBNo.
0
q5
v.
)
(Enforcement - Water)
)
BRENT
SPECKHART dlb/a
)
FIECEVED
BRENT SPECKHART
SWINE FARM
)
CLERK’S
OFFICE
Respondent
)
FEB03
OIlUtj
STATE
OF
Control
ILLINOIS
Board
STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS, by LISA MADIGAN, Attorney
General of the State of Illinois, the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois EPA”),
and
Brent Speckhart, dlb/a Brent Speckhart Swine Farm
(“Respondent”), have agreed
to the
making of this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement
(“Stipulation”)
and
submit it
to
the
Illinois
Pollution Control Board (“Board”) for approval. This stipulation of facts
is made and
agreed
upon for purposes of
settlement only and as a factual
basis
for the Board’s approval
of
this
Stipulation and
issuance of relief.
None of
the facts stipulated herein
shall
be introduced into
evidence
in
any
other proceeding regarding the violations of the Illinois Environmental
Protection Act (“Act”),
415 ILCS 5/1
et seq.,
and the Board’s Regulations, alleged
in
the
Complaint except as otherwise provided
herein.
It is the intent of the
parties
to
this
Stipulation
that
it
be a final
adjudication
of
this matter.
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
A.
Parties to the
Stipulation
1
Contemporaneously
with this Stipulation, a Complaint was
filed
on
behalf
of the
People
of
the State of Illinois
by
Lisa Madigan, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, on her
own motion and upon the request of the Illinois EPA,
pursuant
to Section 31
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/31,
against the Respondent.
2.
The Illinois EPA is an administrative agency of the State of
Illinois,
created
pursuant
to
Section
4
of
the Act, 415 ILCS 5/4.
3.
At
all times relevant
to the
Complaint, Respondent was and is an
individual
who
owns an
unpopulated 1,040 capacity hog operation located southwest of Payson in Adams
County. The
facility is more specifically
located
in
the
northeast corridor of Section 23,
Township 3 South,
Range
8 West (the
“facility” or
“site”).
B.
Allegations
of Non-Compliance
Complainant
and the Illinois EPA
contend that
the
Respondent has violated the following
provisions of the
Act and Board regulations:
Count I
1.
By
discharging livestock waste upon the
land in
such a place
and manner
so as
allow
contaminants to
drain into waters of
the
State, Respondent Speckhart caused, threatened
or allowed
the discharge of
contaminants into
the
environment
to cause or tend to cause water
pollution
in Illinois, and has
thereby violated Section 12(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(a).
2.
By
depositing livestock waste upon the land
by
allowing
it
to discharge from a
pipe in
such a place and
manner
so as to create a water
pollution, Respondent Speckhart
caused,
threatened
or
allowed
the
discharge of contaminants
into the
environment to cause
or
tend to
cause a
water pollution hazard in Illinois, and has thereby violated Section 12(d) of the
2
Act,
415
ILCS
5/12(d).
Count
II
3.
Respondent
does
not
have an
NPDES
permit
for the subject
facility.
By causing
the
discharge
of livestock
waste from
the
facility
so
as
to
threaten,
cause
or
allow
the
discharge
of
contaminants
into
Fall
Creek,
Respondent
Speckhart
has
discharged
contaminants
into
the
waters of
the state
from
a
point
source
without an
NPDES
permit, and
has thereby
violating
Section
12(f)
of
the
Act,
415 ILCS
5/12(f).
Count
Ill
4.
By failing
to
properly
manage
the
facility’s
livestock
waste
lagoon and
timely
land
apply
waste, Respondent
Speckhart
failed
to maintain
lagoon
levels
such
that
there was
adequate
storage
capacity
to prevent
an
overflow,
and
has
thereby
violated
Section
12(a) of
the Act,
415
ILCS
5/12(a), and
Section
501.404(c)(3)
of the
Board’s
Agriculture
Related
Pollution
Regulations,
35 III. Adm.
Code 501
.404(c)(3).
5.
By
failing
to
take proper
measures
to handle
the volume
of
waste
in the
facility’s
two-cell
lagoon,
Respondent
Speckhart
did
not
have
adequate
storage
capacity
in the
facility’s
two-cell
lagoon,
and
has thereby
violated
Section 12(a)
of
the Act,
415 ILCS
5/12(a),
and
Section
501
.404(c)(4)(A)
of
the
Board’s
Agriculture
Related
Pollution
Regulations,
35 Ill.
Adm.
Code
501
.404(c)(4)(A).
C.
Admission
of
Violations
The
Respondent
admits
to
the violation(s)
alleged
in the
Complaint
filed
in this
matter
and
referenced
within
Section
l.B
herein.ll.
II.
APPLICABILITY
This
Stipulation
shall
apply
to and be
binding
upon
the Complainant,
the
Illinois
EPA
3
and
the Respondent,
and
any
officer, director, agent, or employee of the Respondent, as well
as any successors
or assigns of the Respondent. The
Respondent
shall not raise
as a defense
to any enforcement action
taken pursuant to this Stipulation the
failure
of any of its officers,
directors, agents,
employees
or successors or assigns
to take such action as
shall
be required
to comply with the
provisions of this Stipulation. This Stipulation
may
be used against
the
Respondent in any
subsequent enforcement action or permit proceeding as proof of
a past
adjudication of violation of the
Act
and the Board Regulations for all violations alleged in
the
Complaint
in
this matter, for
purposes
of Sections
39 and
42
of the Act,
415
ILCS
5/39
and
42.
III. IMPACT ON THE PUBLIC
RESULTING
FROM
ALLEGED
NON-COMPLIANCE
Section 33(c)
of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/33(c),
provides
as
follows:
In making its orders and determinations, the Board shall take
into
consideration
all the facts and circumstances bearing upon the reasonableness of the
emissions,
discharges,
or
deposits
involved including,
but
not limited to:
1.
the character
and
degree of injury
to,
or interference with the protection
of
the health, general welfare and physical property of the people;
2.
the social and
economic
value
of
the pollution source;
3.
the suitability or
unsuitability
of the pollution source to the area
in
which
it
is located, including the question of priority of location in the area
involved;
4.
the technical practicability and economic reasonableness
of
reducing
or
eliminating the emissions,
discharges
or deposits
resulting
from such
pollution
source; and
5.
any
subsequent
compliance.
In response to these factors, the parties to this Stipulation state the following:
1.
The release that
is
the subject of this matter, was deposited in an area that
drained into a
waterway. This resulted in actual and threatened contamination of the
environment.
4
2.
There is no
social
and economic
benefit
to the
facility as
a
depopulated
hog
facility.
The
waste lagoons
associated
with
the
facility
have not been
properly closed
out,
or
otherwise
properly
maintained.
3.
When
properly
maintained
in compliance
with
the state’s
environmental
regulations,
the
facility is
suitable
for the area
in which
it
exists.
4.
Proper
waste
handling
and maintenance
of the hog
was
lagoons
at the
site
is
both technically
practicable
and economically
reasonable.
5.
Respondent
has subsequently
complied with
the
Act and the
Board Regulations.
IV. CONSIDERATION
OF
SECTION
42(h) FACTORS
Section
42(h) of
the Act, 415
ILCS
5142(h)(2006),
provides
as
follows:
In
determining
the appropriate
civil penalty
to be imposed
under. .
.
this Section,
the
Board
is
authorized
to consider
any
matters
of
record
in mitigation
or
aggravation
of penalty,
including
but not limited
to
the
following
factors:
1.
the duration
and gravity
of the
violation;
2.
the presence
or
absence
of
due diligence
on
the
part of the
respondent
in
attempting
to comply
with
requirements
of
this Act
and regulations
thereunder
or
to secure
relief therefrom
as
provided by
this Act;
3.
any economic
benefits
accrued
by the
respondent
because of
delay
in
compliance
with
requirements,
in which
case
the economic
benefits
shall
be
determined
by the
lowest
cost alternative
for achieving
compliance;
4.
the amount
of
monetary
penalty
which
will serve
to
deter
further
violations
by the respondent
and to
otherwise
aid in enhancing
voluntary
compliance
with this Act
by the respondent
and other
persons similarly
subject
to
the Act;
5.
the number,
proximity
in time,
and
gravity
of previously
adjudicated
violations
of this Act
by
the respondent;
6.
whether
the respondent
voluntarily
self-disclosed,
in
accordance
with
subsection
i
of this Section,
the non-compliance
to the
Agency; and
7.
whether
the
respondent
has agreed
to
undertake
a “supplemental
5
environmental project,”
which
means an environmentally
beneficial
project
that a respondent
agrees
to undertake
in
settlement of an
enforcement action
brought under
this Act, but which the respondent
is
not
otherwise
legally required
to perform.
In
response to these factors,
the parties to
this Stipulation state
as
follows:
1.
It is apparent that the release
of livestock waste from
the subject lagoon
began
prior to the neighbor complaint
and
Illinois
EPA inspector’s
observation of
the
release.
The
release
was discovered
on April 30, 2008.
On May 2, 2008, the Respondent
informed the
Illinois EPA
inspector that the pipe from which the
release occurred had been capped.
2.
Respondent was diligent in
attempting to come back into compliance with
the
Act, Board
regulations
and
applicable federal regulations,
once the
Illinois
EPA notified him
of
his
noncompliance.
3.
The
release occurred
because the Respondent failed
to
properly
draw down
the
level of waste in the lagoon
during
the fall season. As
a result, by
April,
when conditions were
not
appropriate for land application,
the
lagoon
waste levels were
too
high and
began to
discharge through
the pipe
in the lagoon berm. The economic benefit
of noncompliance
included
the
Respondent’s
cost savings
in
failing to properly manage the
lagoon and provide for
the
removal of waste
from the
lagoon and proper land application of
the waste.
In
response
to
the
release, Respondent
contracted
with a commercial applicator to
draw down the waste in
the
facility lagoons.
4.
Complainant and the Illinois
EPA
have
determined, based
upon the specific
facts
of this
matter,
that
a
penalty of seven
thousand dollars
($
7,000.00) will
serve to deter further
violations and aid in
future
voluntary
compliance with the
Act and Board regulations.
5.
To Complainant’s and the Illinois EPA’s knowledge,
Respondent has no
previously adjudicated
violations
of the Act.
6
6.
Respondent
failed to
report
the
waste
release.
He
was
required
to
do so
pursuant
to 35
Ill. Adm.
Code
580.105.
7.
The
settlement
of this
matter
does
not
include
a
supplemental
environmental
project.
V. TERMS
OF
SETTLEMENT
A.
Penalty
Payment
1.
The
Respondent
shall
pay
a
civil
penalty
in
the
sum
of
Seven
Thousand
Dollars
($
7,000.00)
within
thirty
(30) days
from the
date
the
Board
adopts
and
accepts
this
Stipulation.
B.
Stipulated
Penalties,
Interest
and
Default
1.
If the
Respondent
fails to
complete
any
activity
or
fails
to
comply
with any
response
or
reporting
requirement
by
the date
specified
in
this
Stipulation,
the
Respondent
shall
provide
notice
to the
Complainant
and
the Illinois
EPA
of
each failure
to
comply
with this
Stipulation
and
shall
pay
stipulated
penalties
in
the
amount
of
$50.00
per day
until
such time
that
compliance
is
achieved.
The
Complainant
may
make
a demand
for
stipulated
penalties
upon
the
Respondent
for
its noncompliance
with
this
Stipulation.
However,
failure
by the
Complainant
to
make
this demand
shall
not
relieve
the
Respondent
of
the obligation
to pay
stipulated
penalties.
All
stipulated
penalties
shall
be
payable
within
thirty
(30)
calendar
days
of
the date
the Respondent
knows
or
should
have
known
of its
noncompliance
with any
provision
of
this Stipulation.
2.
If the
Respondent
fails
to
make any
payment
required
by this
Stipulation
on
or
before
the
date upon
which
the
payment
is
due,
the
Respondent shall be
in
default
and
the
remaining
unpaid
balance
of the
penalty,
plus
any
accrued
interest,
shall
be due
and
owing
immediately.
In
the
event
of default,
the
Complainant
shall
be
entitled
to reasonable
costs
of
7
collection,
including
reasonable
attorney’s
fees.
3.
Pursuant
to
Section
42(g)
of the
Act,
interest
shall
accrue
on
any
penalty
amount
owed
by
the Respondent
not
paid within
the time
prescribed
herein.
Interest
on
unpaid
penalties
shall
begin
to
accrue
from
the date
such
are
due
and continue
to
accrue
to
the
date
full
payment
is received.
Where
partial
payment
is made
on
any
penalty
amount
that
is due,
such
partial
payment
shall
be
first applied
to
any
interest
on
unpaid
penalties
then
owing.
C.
Payment
Procedures
All payments
required
by
this
Stipulation
shall
be
made
by
certified
check
or
money
order
payable
to the
Illinois
EPA for
deposit
into
the
Environmental
Protection
Trust
Fund
(“EPTF”).
Payments
shall
be
sent by
first class
mail
and
delivered
to:
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Fiscal
Services
1021
North
Grand
Avenue
East
P.O.
Box 19276
Springfield,
IL 62794-9276
The
name,
case
number
and
the
Respondent’s
federal
tax
identification
number
shall
appear
on
the
face
of
the
certified
check
or
money
order.
A
copy
of
the
certified
check
or money
order
and
any
transmittal
letter
shall
be
sent
to:
Environmental Bureau
Illinois
Attorney
General’s
Office
500
South
Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
D.
Future
Compliance
1.
The
Respondent
shall,
by
the date
of entry
of the
Board’s
Order
accepting
this
Stipulation,
permanently
remove
or plug
all
pipes or
any
other
conveyance
permeating
earthen
berms
at
any
facility
he owns
that
has
livestock
waste
lagoons
or earthen
holding
cells.
2.
Until
such
time
as
Respondent
has
properly
closed
all waste
lagoons
and
holding
cells
existing
at any
livestock
production
facility
he
owns
and/or
controls,
Respondent
shall
8
maintain
a
freeboard
of two (2) feet in each lagoon
or
cell
and shall properly anticipate and
implement
seasonal management
of
each
such lagoon or holding cell,
as
well
as waste
pits
beneath
livestock buildings.
By the date
of
entry of
the
Board’s
Order accepting this
Stipulation,
Respondent
shall
install
a
freeboard
marker in each earthen livestock waste storage
structure under his ownership and control and record
the freeboard level on a weekly basis.
This record shall be reported
to
the Illinois
EPA on a monthly basis until all livestock
waste has
been removed and land
applied.
3.
By March 31, 2009, Respondent shall develop and submit for Illinois EPA
approval
a waste
management
plan for any
and
all livestock waste lagoons or earthen holding
cells
under
the
Respondent’s ownership and
control.
Said
plans
shall outline appropriate
utilization and disposal of the
contents of
said structures, including
land application
schedules,
a description
of
each
land application area, volumes and amounts to be
applied
to each land
application area,
and methods
of
land application to be utilized.
4.
In addition to
any other authorities, the Illinois EPA, its
employees and
representatives,
and the
Attorney General, her employees and representatives, shall
have
the
right of
entry into and upon
the Respondent’s facility which is the subject of this Stipulation, at
all
reasonable times for
the purposes of conducting inspections and evaluating compliance
status. In
conducting
such inspections,
the
Illinois EPA, its employees and representatives,
and
the
Attorney
General, her employees
and
representatives, may take photographs, samples, and
collect
information,
as they deem necessary.
5.
This Stipulation in no way affects the
responsibilities
of the Respondent to
comply
with any other
federal,
state
or
local laws or
regulations,
including but not limited to the
Act
and
the
Board
Regulations.
6.
The
Respondent shall cease and
desist
from future violations of the Act
and
9
Board
Regulations
that
were
the
subject
matter
of
the
Complaint.
E.
Release
from
Liability
In consideration
of
the Respondent’s payment
of
the
$7,000.00
penalty,
completion
of
all activities
required
hereunder,
and upon
the
Board’s
approval
of
this Stipulation,
the
Complainant
releases,
waives
and discharges
the Respondent
from
any
further
liability
or
penalties
for
the violations
of
the Act
and
Board
Regulations
that
were the
subject
matter
of the
Complaint
herein.
The release
set
forth
above
does
not
extend
to any
matters
other
than
those
expressly
specified
in
Complainant’s
Complaint
filed
contemporaneously
with
this
Stipulation.
The
Complainant
reserves,
and this
Stipulation
is
without
prejudice
to,
all rights
of
the
State of
Illinois
against
the
Respondent
with respect
to
all other
matters,
including
but not
limited
to, the
following:
a.
criminal
liability;
b.
liability
for future
violation
of
state,
federal,
local,
and
common
laws
and/or
regulations;
c.
liability
for natural
resources
damage
arising
out
of
the
alleged
violations;
and
d.
liability
or
claims
based
on the
Respondent’s
failure
to satisfy
the
requirements
of this
Stipulation.
Nothing
in
this
Stipulation
is intended
as a waiver,
discharge,
release,
or
covenant
not
to sue
for
any
claim
or
cause
of
action,
administrative
or
judicial,
civil
or
criminal,
past
or
future,
in law
or
in
equity,
which
the State
of
Illinois
or the
Illinois
EPA may
have
against
any person,
as
defined
by
Section
3.315
of
the Act,
415
ILCS
5/3.315,
or entity
other
than
the Respondent.
F.
Enforcement
and
Modification
of Stipulation
1.
Upon the
entry
of the
Board’s
Order
approving
and
accepting
this
Stipulation,
that Order
is
a
binding
and enforceable
order
of
the
Board
and may
be
enforced
as such
10
through
any and
all available
means.
2.
The Complainant,
in
consultation
with
the
Illinois
EPA, and
the Respondent
may,
by
mutual written
consent, agree
to extend
any compliance
dates
or
modify the
terms of
this
Stipulation.
A request
for any
modification
shall
be made
in writing
and submitted
to
the
contact
persons
identified
in
Section V.G.
Any such
request
shall be made
by
separate
document,
and
shall
not be submitted
within
any
other
report
or submittal
required
by
this
Stipulation.
Any such
agreed
modification
shall
be
in
writing,
signed by authorized
representatives
of each
party
to
this
Stipulation.
G.
Execution
of Stipulation
The
undersigned
representatives
for each
party to
this
Stipulation
certify
that
they are
fully
authorized
by
the party
whom
they
represent
to
enter
into
the
terms
and conditions
of this
Stipulation
and to
legally
bind
them
to it.
11
WHEREFORE,
the
parties
to this
Stipulation
request that the Board
adopt and accept
the foregoing
Stipulation and
Proposal for
Settlement
as
written.
PEOPLE
OF
THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
FOR
THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
LISA
MADIGAN
Attorney
General
State of Illinois
DOUGLAS P. SCOTT,
Director
Illinois Environmental
Protection
Agency
MATTHEW
J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement!
Asbestos
Litigation Division
BY:
BY:
ROBE
TA. ME SINA
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
Chief
Legal Counsel
Environmental
Bureau
Assistant
Attorney
General
I
DATE:
/
DATE:
i/27/ô
BRENT SPECKHART
DATE:
4
BY:
.
12