JAN

132009

OFFICE OF

STATE

THE

ATTORNEY

OF ILLINOIS

GENERAL

c)fIutjon

STATE

Control

ILLINOIS

Board

Lisa Madigan

V1”I’ORNEY

GENERAL

January

9, 2009

John T. Therriault

Assistant

Clerk of the Board

Illinois

Pollution Control

Board

James R.

Thompson

Center,

Ste.

11-500

100

West Randolph

Chicago,

Illinois 60601

Re:

People

v. Vertellus

Specialties,

Inc.

PCB No. 03-182

Dear Clerk:

Enclosed

for

filing

please

find the original and

Copies

Notice of

Filing, 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,

Thomas

Davis, Bureau

Chief

Environmental

Bureau

500

South Second Street

Springfield,

Illinois

.62706

(217)

782-9031

TD/pjk

Enclosures

500

South

Second Street, Springfield, Illinois

62706

(217)

782-1090 • TI’Y: (877) 844-5461

Fax: (217)

782-7046

100

West

Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois

60601

• (312)

814-3000 • ‘PLY: (800) 964-3013

• Fax: (312)

814-3806

BEFORE

THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

PEOPLE

OF THE STATE

)

ILLINOIS,

Complainant,

)

vs.

)

PCB

No. 03-182

)

(Enforcement)

REILLY

INDUSTRIES, INC.,

)

an Indiana corporation,

)

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

OFFG

To:

Edward W. Dwyer

•

HodgeDwyerZeman

jM4

3150 RolandAvenue

P.O.

Box 5776

Springfield, IL 62705-5776

polUt’

PLEASE

TAKE NOTICE that on this date I mailed for filing with the Clerk of

the Pollution

Control Board of the State of

Illinois,

MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING

REQUIREMENT

and STIPULATION

AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT, a copy of which is attached hereto

and

herewith served upon you.

Respectfully

submitted,

PEOPLE

THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS

LISA MADIGAN,

Attorney General of the

State of Illinois

MATTHEWJ. DUNN, Chief

Environmental

Enforcement/Asbestos

Litigation Division

BY:_____________________

THOMAS

DAVIS, Chief

Assistant Attorney

General

Environmental Bureau

500

South Second Street

Springfield, Illinois

62706

217/782-9031

Dated:

January 9, 2009

CERTIFICATE

SERVICE

I hereby certify

that I did on January 9, 2009, send

First Class Mail, with postage

thereon fully prepaid, by depositing in a United States Post Office Box

true and correct copy

of the following

instruments

entitled NOTICE OF FILING, MOTION FOR

RELIEF FROM

HEARING

REQUIREMENT

and STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT

To:

Edward W. Dwyer

Hodge Dwyer Zeman

3150

Roland Avenue

P.O.

Box

5776

Springfield, IL 62705-5776

and the

original and ten copies by

First Class Mail with postage

thereon fully prepaid

of the

same

foregoing

instrument(s):

To:

John

Therriault,

Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

State

of Illinois Center

Suite 11-500

100 West

Randolph

Chicago,

Illinois 60601

a copy

was also

sent to:

Carol Webb

Hearing Officer

Illinois Pollution

Control Board

1021 N. Grand

Avenue East

Springfield, IL

62794

THOMAS

DAVIS, Chief

Environmental Bureau

Assistant Attorney

General

This

filing

submitted on recycled paper.

BEFORE

THE ILLINOIS

POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

PEOPLE

THE STATE

ILLINOIS,

)

Complainant,

vs.

)

PCB

No. 03-1 82

(Enforcement)

REILLY

INDUSTRIES,

INC.,

)

an Indiana

corporation,

)

Respondents.

)

U4OiS

MOTION

FOR RELIEF

FROM

HEARING

REQUIREM9oBQ

POIU

NOW

COMES

Complainant,

PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE

ILLINOIS,

LISA

MADIGAN,

Attorney

General

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

5131(c)(1)(2006).

support of

this

motion, Complainant

states as

follows:

The

parties have

reached

agreement

on all

outstanding

issues

in this

matter.

This

agreement

presented

to the

Board

Stipulation

and

Proposal

for

Settlement,

filed

contemporaneously

with this

motion.

All

parties

agree

that a

hearing on

the Stipulation

and Proposal

for Settlement

not

necessary,

and respectfully

request relief

from such

a hearing

as allowed

Section

31(c)(2)

of the

Act,

415

ILCS

5/31(c)(2)

(2006).

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

USA MADIGAN

ATTORNEY

GENERAL

MATTHEW J. DUNN,

Chief

Environmental

Enforcement/Asbestos

Litigation

Division

BY:____________________________

THOMAS

DAVIS, Bureau Chief

Environmental

Bureau

Assistant

Attorney General

500

South

Second Street

Springfield,

Illinois 62706

217/782-9031

Dated:

January 9,

2009

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS

POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

PEOPLE

OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

Complainant,

)

PCB NO.

03-182

)

(Enforcement)

)

VERTELLUS

SPECIALTIES, INC.,

)

an Indiana corporation,

)

ECEVED

CLERKS

OFFICE

Respondent.

)

JAN

2009

STATE OF

ILUNOIS

STIPULATION

AND PROPOSAL FOR

SETTLErII

Control

Board

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

VERTELLUS SPECIALTIES, INC., formerly known as Reilly Industries, Inc.,

(“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

the facts

stipulated

herein shall be

introduced

into

evidence

any other proceeding regarding the

violations of the Illinois

Environmental Protection Act (“Act”), 415 ILCS 5/1 et seq. (2006),

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

final adjudication of this matter.

—1—

I. STATEMENT

OF FACTS

Parties

On February

3, 2005, a Second

Supplemental

Complaint

was filed

behalf

the People of the State

Illinois

by Lisa Madigan, Attorney

General of the State

Illinois,

her own motion and upon the request of the Illinois

EPA, pursuant to Section

31 of the

Act,

415

ILCS 5/31

(2006), against the Respondent.

The

Illinois

EPA is an administrative agency of

the State of Illinois, created

pursuant to

Section 4 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/4 (2006).

At all times relevant to the Complaint, Respondent was and is an Indiana

corporation that

authorized to transact business in

the State

of Illinois. At all times relevant

the

Complaint,

Respondent owned and operated

coal tar distillation process plant at 1450

Edwardsville Road,

Granite City, Madison County, Illinois (“facility”). In January 1996,

Respondent ceased

production of coal tar products. The facility was converted to a terminal that

transferred

coal tar

products

from rail cars to tanker trucks.

Allegations

Non-Compliance

Complainant contends that the Respondent has violated

the following provisions of the

Act

and Board

regulations:

Count

The

Respondent

operated

its batch stills with less

than the requisite efficiency

required by 35

Iii. Adm. Code

219.501(a) and thereby violated Section 9(a) of the Act.

Count

II:

The

Respondent

failed to

comply

Condition

2(d)

its construction permit

and

thereby

violated

Section 9(b)

of the Act.

Count

III:

The

Respondent operated the stills and scrubbers after the expiration of

the

270-

day

operating

period without first

obtaining

an operating

permit

required

by 35

Ill.

Adm.

Code

201.143

and

thereby violated Section 9(a) of the Act.

-2-

Count IV:

The

Respondent

in June and July 2000

allowed

roll-off boxes

to leak

hazardous

waste upon the ground

at a disposal site

or facility which

did not meet

the

requirements

of the

Act and of the associated

regulations

and thereby violated

Section 21(e)

of the Act.

Count V;

The

Respondent,

land

disposing hazardous

waste at

the facility

in June and

July 2000, operated

a hazardous waste facility

without

permit

issued

by the Illinois EPA,

thereby violated

Section

21(f)

of the Act and 35 Ill.

Adm. Code

703.121(a).

Count VI:

The Respondent,

by failing to maintain

and operate the

facility in June

and July

2000 in a manner to minimize

the possibility of

fire, explosion

or any

unplanned sudden

non-sudden release of hazardous waste

to the soil or air which would

threaten

human

health

the

environment,

thereby violated Section 21 (f)

the

Act and 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 725.131.

Count VII:

The Respondent, by failing

its contingency

plan by not reporting

the

release of hazardous waste in June and July 2000

the

proper authorities within

24 hours

after

the

reportable quantity was exceeded and

to submit a written report

to the Illinois EPA

15 days

after the implementation of the contingency plan, thereby

violated Section 21(f)

of the Act and

Ill.

Adm.

Code

725.15 1(b) and

725.156(j).

Count VIII:

The Respondent, by failing to manage hazardous

waste in July 2000 in a closed

container during storage,

thereby violated

Section 21(f) of the Act and 35 Ill.

Adm. Code

725.273(a).

Count IX:

The

Respondent,

failing to timely send

a copy of a manifest in June 2000

the

Illinois

EPA, thereby violated Section 21(f) of the Act and 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 722.123(a).

Count X:

The

Respondent,

allowing releases

of approximately 200 pounds

of electro

binder

pitch in August 2000, approximately 500 gallons of crude

coal

tar

in September 2000,

and

approximately 1,500

gallons of creosote in November

2000,

allowed

contaminants

to be

deposited

upon the land in such place and manner as to create a water pollution

hazard through

its

proximity to

groundwater and thereby violated Section 12(d)

of the Act.

Count XI:

The Respondent, by allowing the release approximately

1,500 gallons

of creosote

in November

2000, caused, threatened or allowed

the emission of contaminants

so as to cause

tend

to cause air pollution and thereby Section 9(a) of the Act.

Count XII:

This

allegation is withdrawn.

Count

XIII:

The

Respondent, by allowing the release

of approximately 16,000

gallons of

crude coal

tar in July 2003, failed to maintain and operate the facility

in a manner to minimize

the

possibility of a

fire, explosion or any unplanned

sudden or non-sudden release

of hazardous

waste to the

soil or air which would threaten human health or the environment,

and thereby

violated

Section

21(f) of the Act and 35 Iii. Adm.

Code

725.131.

-3-

Count XIII:

The

Respondent,

allowing

a still to explode in January 2004,

and the

resulting

fire to

emit particulate matter,

volatile

organic material

and

carbon

monoxide, caused,

threatened

or allowed the

emission of contaminants

so as to cause or tend

cause air

pollution and

thereby

Section

9(a) of the Act.

Non-Admission

of Violations

The Respondent represents

that it

has

entered into

this

Stipulation for the purpose

settling and compromising disputed

claims without having to incur the expense

of contested

litigation.

By entering into this Stipulation and complying with

its

terms,

the Respondent does

not affirmatively admit the allegations

of violation

within

the Complaint and referenced within

Section III.C herein, and this Stipulation shall not be interpreted as including such admission.

Compliance Activities to Date

The

Respondent has cleaned up the waste resulting from the releases and

corrected

the

permit deficiencies.

II. APPLICABILITY

This Stipulation

shall

apply

to and be

binding upon the Complainant,

the

Illinois EPA

and the

Respondent, and any officer, director, agent,

employee of the Respondent, as well

any

successors or assigns of the Respondent. The

Respondent shall not raise as a defense to

any

enforcement action

taken pursuant

this Stipulation the failure of any of its officers, directors,

agents,

employees

successors

assigns

take such action as shall be required to comply

with

the provisions of

this Stipulation.

IlL

IMPACT ON

THE PUBLIC RESULTING FROM ALLEGED

NON-COMPLIANCE

Section 33(c) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/33(c)

(2006), 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:

the character and

degree

of injury to,

interference

with the protection

the health,

general welfare

and physical property of the people;

the

social and economic

value

the pollution source;

the suitability or unsuitability

of the pollution source to the area in which

located, including

the question of priority of

location

in the

area

involved;

the

technical

practicability and economic reasonableness of reducing or

eliminating the emissions,

discharges or

deposits resulting from such

pollution source; and

any subsequent compliance.

response to these factors, the Complainant states the following:

Human health and the environment were threatened by the Respondent’s

violations.

There is

social and economic benefit

the facility.

Operation of the facility was suitable for the

area in which it occurred.

As to the air

pollution

and RCRA counts,

obtaining a permit and

compliance with its terms are both technically practicable

and

economically reasonable.

As to

the releases, prevention measures are

also both technically practicable and economically

reasonable.

Respondent has subsequently complied with the Act and

the Board

Regulations.

IV.

CONSIDERATION

SECTION 42(h) FACTORS

Section 42(h) of the Act, 415 ILCS

5/42(h)(2006),

provides as follows:

determining the appropriate civil penalty

to be

imposed under.. . this Section,

the Board is authorized to

consider

any matters of record in

mitigation

aggravation of penalty, including but not limited to the following factors:

-5-

the duration

and

gravity

the violation;

the presence

or absence

due diligence

on the part

of the respondent

attempting to

comply

with requirements

of this Act

and regulations

thereunder or

to secure relief

therefrom

as provided

this

Act;

any economic

benefits

accrued

by the respondent

because

of delay

compliance

with requirements,

in which

case

the

economic

benefits

shall

be determined

the lowest

cost

alternative

for achieving

compliance;

the amount

of monetary

penalty

which will serve

to deter further

violations

by the respondent

and to

otherwise

aid

enhancing

voluntary

compliance with

this

Act

by the

respondent and

other persons similarly

subject to the

Act;

the number, proximity

in time,

and gravity of previously

adjudicated

violations

of this Act by the respondent;

whether the

respondent voluntarily

self-disclosed,

in accordance

with

subsection I of

this Section,

the non-compliance

the Agency;

and

whether

the respondent has

agreed to undertake

a “supplemental

environmental

project,”

which means an environmentally

beneficial

project

that a respondent agrees

undertake

in settlement of

enforcement

action brought

under this Act,

but which the respondent

not

otherwise

legally required

perform.

response to

these factors, the Complainant

states as follows:

The noncompliance

as to the

air pollution counts

lasted

from

September

30,

2000,

May 1, 2004.

The

impacts

of the

RCRA violations

and the

releases

and explosion were

remedied shortly

after

the incidents.

Respondent

was

diligent

attempting to come back

into compliance

with

the Act, Board

regulations and

applicable federal

regulations.

Respondent

accrued an economic

benefit

$58,648.

Complainant

has determined,

based upon the

specific facts

this

matter,

that a

penalty of

$140,000

will serve to deter

further violations

and aid

future voluntary

compliance

with the

Act

and

Board regulations.

-6-

Respondent

has been

previously adjudicated

to be in

violation

the Act

in PCB 00-31 and

paid

penalty of

$20,000.

Self-disclosure,

except

for the

timely

notification

of certain releases

required by law,

not at issue in this

matter.

The

settlement

of this matter does include

a supplemental

environmental

project

with expenditures

of at

least

$25,000.

TERMS

SETTLEMENT

Penalty Payment

The

Respondent shall pay

civil penalty

in the sum of One

Hundred

and

Forty

Thousand

Dollars

($140,000.00)

within

thirty

(30) days

from the date the Board

adopts

and

accepts this

Stipulation.

Stipulated

Penalties,

Interest and Default

If the

Respondent

fails to make

any

payment

required

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

collection,

including

reasonable

attorney’s

fees.

Pursuant

Section 42(g) of

the Act,

interest shall accrue

any penalty

amount

owed by

the

Respondent

not paid

within

the time

prescribed herein.

Interest

unpaid

penalties

shall

begin

accrue from

the

date such

are due

and

continue to

accrue

the date full

payment

received.

Where

partial

payment

made on

any

penalty

amount

that is due, such

partial

payment

shall

first

applied

any

interest on unpaid

penalties

then owing.

Payment

Procedures

-7-

All

payments required

by this Stipulation shall

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

the face of the certified check or money order. A copy of the certified check or money order

and

any transmittal letter shall

sent

to:

Environmental Bureau

Illinois Attorney General’s Office

500

South Second

Street

Springfield,

Illinois 62706

Future Compliance

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.

Supplemental

Environmental Project

In order to promote the goals of the Act to

restore, protect and enhance the quality

of the

environment, the Respondent shall perform the

following supplemental enviromnental

project

(“SEP’). The settlement

value

of the SEP is at least

Twenty-Five

Thousand

Dollars

($25,000.00)

and

will offset penalties sought by the Complainant in this matter. The

parties

this Stipulation

agree that this SEP shall consist of the following: To enhance and

facilitate

ongoing

pump and treat system, the Respondent will modify some of

the groundwater extraction

-8-

wells for

injecting

food-grade

oil or air

sparging. The anticipated

result is a demonstration

that

when the effectiveness of pumping and

treating of contaminated

groundwater decreases,

the

corrective action may be supplemented

by these additional

measures.

The Respondent shall

complete the SEP no later

than December 31, 2010,

and,

within 30 days thereafter, shall submit

project

completion report, including

a summary of all

expenditures, to the contact persons identified

in Section V.G, for review

and confirmation that

the SEP was

performed pursuant to this Stipulation.

The project completion report

shall include

the following

certification

by a

responsible

corporate official of the Respondent:

I certify

under penalty of law that

this document

was

prepared under my direction

supervision in accordance with a system designed to

assure

that qualified

personnel

properly gather

and evaluate the information submitted based on my

inquiry of those

persons

directly

responsible

for gathering

the information, and

that the

information submitted in or accompanying this notification of final

compliance is to the best of my knowledge true, accurate and complete. I am

aware that

there

are significant penalties for submitting false information,

including the

possibility

of fine and or

imprisonment for knowing violations.

the event

that the SEP

cannot

be completed,

the Respondent shall

pay the

settlement value

the SEP

($25,000.00) as

an additional penalty pursuant to the procedures of Section V.A no

later than

the date by

which the SEP should have been completed.

signature on this Stipulation,

the

Respondent certifies

that, as of the date of

entry of

this Order,

it is not required to perform or develop the foregoing

SEP by any

federal,

state

or local law

regulation, nor is it required

perform or develop the SEP

agreement

injunctive relief

in any other case. The Respondent further certifies that it has not received,

and

is not

presently

negotiating to

receive

credit for, the SEP in any other enforcement action.

Any

public

statement, oral or

written,

print,

film

other media,

made

by the

Respondent

making

reference to any

SEP

shall include the following language: “This project

9..

was undertaken

in connection

with

the

settlement

enforcement

action taken

by the

Illinois

Attorney

General

and the

Illinois

EPA for

alleged

violations

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Act and

regulations

promulgated

thereunder.”

Release from

Liability

In consideration

of the Respondent’s

payment

of the

$140,000.00

penalty,

timely

performance

the

SEP,

and

upon the

Pollution

Control Board’s

acceptance

and approval

of the

terms

of this Stipulation

and

Proposal

for Settlement,

the Complainant

releases,

waives

and

discharges

the

Respondent

from

any further

liability

penalties

for violations

of the Act

and

Board Regulations

that

were

the

subject matter

the

Complaint

herein. The

release

set forth

above

does

not extend

to any matters

other

than those

expressly

specified in

Complainant’s

Complaint

filed on

February

2005. The

Complainant

reserves,

and

this Stipulation

without

prejudice

to, all

rights

the State

Illinois

against

the Respondent

with respect

all

other

matters,

including

but not

limited

to,

the

following:

criminal

liability;

liability

for

future violation

of state, federal,

local,

and common

laws and/or

regulations;

liability

for

natural

resources

damage

arising

out

of the alleged

violations;

and

liability

or claims

based

the Respondent’s

failure

to satisfy

the requirements

this

Stipulation.

Nothing

this

Stipulation

is intended

as a waiver,

discharge,

release,

or covenant

not to

sue for

any claim

cause of action,

administrative

judicial, civil

criminal,

past

or future,

10-

law or in

equity,

which the State of

Illinois

or the

Illinois

EPA

may

have

against

any person, as

defined

Section

3.315 of the Act,

415

ILCS

5/3.3

15,

entity other than the

Respondent.

Correspondence,

Reports

and