ED
NOV
252009
OFFICE
OF
THE
STATE
OFIWNOI
STATE
ATTORNEY
OF
GENERAL
POUUtjon
Control
80$d
ILLOIS
Lisa
Madigan
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
November
20,
2009
John
T.
Tberriau!t,
Asstrt
Crk
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.
Tate
and
Lyle
Ingredients
Americas,
Inc.
PCB
#09-1
07
Dear
Clerk:
Enclosed
forfiling
please
find
the
original
and
ten
copies
of a
Notice
of
Filing,
Complainant’s
Motion
to
File
Amended
Complaint
and
Amended
Complaint
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.
Steplieh
J. Janasie
Environmental
Bureau
500
South
Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
(217)
782-9031
SJJIpp
En
closures
500
South
Second
Street,
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
• (217)
782-1090 • ‘T”T’Y:
(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
lAfli U._
f2..
TlIfl!_
fflfl1
—
,,,nrnn
tan,,
- mm,
/“
,-,r
-
Very
truly
BEFORE
THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
Complarnant,
vs.
)
PCB No. 09-107
)
(Enforcement)
TATE AND LYLE INGREDIENTS
AMERICAS, INC., an Illinois
corporation,
Respondent.
)
NOTICEOFFILING
CRK’s
OFFICE
To:
Jeryl L. Olson
Seyfarth Shaw
LLP
L
oo9
131 South Dearborn Street
STATE
OF
ILUNOIS
Suite 2400
PollutiOfl
control
Board
Chicago, IL 60603-5803
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on this date I mailed for filing with the Clerk of the Pollution
Control Board of the State of Illinois, COMPLAINANT’S MOTION TO FILE AMENDED
COMPLAINT
and AMENDED COMPLAINT, a copy of which is 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
BY
500
South Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois 62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
November 20, 2009
Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I hereby certify
that I did on November
20, 2009, 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,
COMPLAINANT’S
MOTION
TO
FILE
AMENDED,
COMPLAINT
and AMENDED COMPLAINT
To:
Jeryl
L. Olson
SeyfarthShaw
LLP
131 South
Dearborn
Street
Suite
2400
Chicago,
IL
60603-5803
and
the original
and ten copies by
First Class Mail with
postage thereon
fully prepaid of the
same foregoing
instrument(s):
To:
John
T.
Therriaut,
Assistant
Clerk
fllinois
Pollution Control
Board
James R. Thompson
Center
Suite 11-500
100
West
Randolph
Chicago,
Illinois 60601
A
copy
was also
sent
by First Class Mail with
postage thereon fully
prepaid
to:
Carol
Webb
Hearing
Officer
Illinois Pollution Control
Board
1021 North Grand
Avenue East
Springfield,
IL 62794
STE?N
. KNASlE
Assistant
Attorney
General
This
filing
is submitted on
recycled paper.
BEFORE
THE
ILIJNOIS
POLLUTION
CONTROL
BOARD
PEOPLE
OF
THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB
NO. 09-107
(Enforcement)
TATE
AND
LYLE
INGREDIENTS
AMERICAS,
)
INC,
an
Illinois
corporation,
)
CLEF
(‘S
OFFICE
Respondent.
)
NOV
25
2009
STATE
OFILLINO1S
COMPLAINANVS
MOTION
TO
FILE
AMENDED
COM)ff
Control
Board
Complainant,
PEOPLE
OF
THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
by LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney
General
of
the
State
of
Illinois,
respectfully
moves,
pursuant
to
Section 103.206(d)
of
the
Board’s
Procedural
Rules
for
leave
to file
the attached
Amended
Complaint
in order
to
add
alleged
violations
to
Counts I,
II, and
Ill.
Complainant
had
filed
the
Complaint
on May 11,
2009.
Subsequently,
the
Complainant
was
informed
of the
violations
now
in
additional
paragraphs
of Counts
I,
II,
and
Ill.
In
the
interests
of administrative
efficiency,
the
inclusion
of these
additional
violations
within
the
pending enforcement
proceeding
is
necessary.
The
additional
claims
arise
out
of
the
occurrences
that
are
the
subject
of the
proceeding,
thereby
satisfying
the requirement
of
Section
103.206(e)(1)
of the
Board’s
Procedural
Rules.
The claims
are
brought upon
the
Attorney
General’s
own
motion
and at
the
request
of
the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
The
Respondent
has
waived
the
requirements
of Section
31
of the Act,
415 ILCS
5/31
(2008),
regarding
the allegations
within
these
additional
paragraphs.
Pursuant
to
Section
103.204(f)
of
the
Board’s
Procedural
Rules,
the Respondent
is
hereby
notified:
Failure
to
file
an answer
to
this
complaint
within
60 days may
have severe
1
consequences.
Failure
to answer
will mean
that all allegations
in
the complaint
will be
taken
as
if admitted
for purposes
of this
proceeding.
lf you have
any questions
about
this
procedure,
you should
contact
the hearing
officer assigned
to
this proceeding,
the
Clerks
Office or an
attorney.
WHEREFORE,
Complainant
respectfully
asks
that
this Motion
to
File
Amended
Complaint
be
granted
and that
the
Amended
Complaint
be
allowed
in this pending
matter.
Respectfully
submitted,
PEOPLE
OF
THE
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS,
LISA
MADIGAN
Attorney
General
State of Illinois
MATTHEWJ.
DUNN,
Chief
Environmental
Enforcement
Division
BY:__________________________
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
Environmental
Bureau
Assistant
Attorney
General
500
South
Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois 62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
November
20, 2009
2
BEFORE
THE ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL
BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
Complainant,
V.
TATE AND
LYLE
INGREDIENTS AMERICAS,
INC, an Illinois corporation,
Respondent.
)
PCB NO.
09-107
)
(Enforcement)
RECEIVED
)
.
CLERKS
OFFICE
N0V252009
STATE
OF ILLINOIS
Pollution
Control
Board
A1iNDU iANT
NOW COMES Complainant, PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
by
LISA
MADIGAN, Attorney General of
the State of Illinois, and complains
of Respondent, TATE
AND
LYLE INGREDIENTS AMERICAS, INCORPORATED,
as follows:
COUNT
I
EMISSION OF CONTAMINANTS
IN
VIOLATION
OF
REGULATIONS
OR
STANDARDS
1.
This Complaint is brought
by the Attorney General of the State of Illinois
on her
own motion.
2.
The
Illinois EPA
is an
agency
of the State of Illinois created
by the
Illinois
General
Assembly in Section 4 of the Act, 415 ILCS 514
(2006), and charged, inter a/ia, with
the duty
of
enforcing
the
Act in proceedings before
the
Illinois Pollution
Control Board.
3.
Respondent, Tate & Lyle Ingredients
Americas, Inc. (“TLIA”)
is an
Illinois
corporation
registered with the Secretary of
State’s Office and
is
in
good
standing.
Its
registered agent is CT
Corporation
System, 208 South LaSalle
Street,
Suite 814,
Chicago,
Illinois
60604. TLIA’s corporate offices are
located
at
2200
East Eldorado Street, Decatur,
Illinois.
4.
At
all times relevant
to
this Complaint,
Respondent has owned and operated
a
Corn
Wet
Mill
multi-plant complex
(“the Complex”) at
2200
East Eldorado Street,
Macon
County,
Decatur,
Illinois.
5.
The
Complex
is a
grain processing
facility engaged
in
the
manufacture of
various
food and
industrial grade
ingredients from
renewable crops.
6.
One
of the
plants
located
within the
Complex
is the Utilities
Area
Plant,
also
known
as
the Co-Generation
Plant.
The Co-Generation
Plant
is comprised
of
two
buildings
containing
a
combined
total of six
boilers. These
boilers provide
steam,
compressed
air,
cooling and
process
water services
to
the Complex.
7.
Emissions sources
at the
Co-Generation
Plant include two coal-fired
boilers;
boiler numbers
1 and
2. Each
boiler is a
source of
sulfur dioxide (“S02”)
emissions.
8.
On August
12, 2003,
based upon
information contained
within Respondent’s
Clean
Air
Act
Permit
Program
(“CAAPP”)
permit
application, the
Illinois EPA
issued
CAAPP
permit number
96020099
(‘CAAPP permit”)
to Respondent
as
a
CAAPP
source.
The
CAAPP
permit would
allow operation
of the
Complex as a
major source.
9.
The
CAAPP permit
contains
permit
condition
7.7.3(g),
stating
coal
boiler
numbers 1
and 2 are subject
to New Source
Performance
Standards
(‘NSPS”)
and
emissions
standards
applicable
to
steam
generating
boilers.
Permit
condition 7.7.3(g),
CAAPP
permit
96020099,
provides, in
pertinent part:
g.
The affected
boilers #1
and
#2 are
subject to
emission
limits
and
requirements
of 40 CFR
Part 60
Subparts
D and
Db
and
shall not
exceed
the following
limits:
ii.
802:
1.2
lb/mmBtu
(Subpart D)
10.
On
September
28,
2005,
Respondent
informed Illinois
EPA
that,
during the
period
July
through
September
2005,
coal-fired
boiler
operations
at boiler
numbers 1
and
2
caused
excess
S02
emissions.
11.
On November
3,
2005,
the
Illinois
EPA
received
Respondent’s
third
quarter
2005
2
excess
emissions
report
and
compliance
emission
monitor
downtime
performance
report
(“the
Third Quarter
2005
Reports”).
Respondent
submitted
the
Third
Quarter
2005
Reports
for
the
period
July through
September
2005,
as prescribed
by
CAAPP
permit
condition
7.7.10.
12.
The Third
Quarter
2005 Reports,
in part,
informed
Illinois
EPA that
coal-fired
boiler #1
ceased operation
during
the period
September
9 through
15,
2005
to facilitate
the
replacement
of three
broken
primary air
nozzles
that
had caused
fuel
solids
to
fuse
within
the
boiler’s
combustion
chamber,
resulting
in S02 emissions
in
excess
of the
applicable
NSPS
and
CAAPP
permit
limit.
13.
The Third
Quarter
2005 Reports
also
informed
Illinois EPA
that
limestone
utilized
by
the
facility
from September
15 through
29, 2005,
as a measure
to
control
S02
emissions
during coal-fired
boiler
operations,
was introduced
into the
fuel
combustion
system
wet, causing
the
emission
of
S02
in
excess of
CA\PP
permit and
regulatory
limits.
14.
On
November
3,
2008,
Illinois
EPA received
Respondent’s
third
quarter
2008
excess
emissions
report
and
compliance
emission
monitor
downtime
performance
report (“the
Third
Quarter
2008
Reports”).
Respondent
submitted
the Third
Quarter
2008
Reports
for the
period
July through
September
2008,
as
prescribed
by
CAAPP
permit
condition
7.7.10.
15.
The
Third
Quarter
2008 Reports,
in
part, informed
Illinois
EPA
that,
during the
period
July
3
through
July
27,
2008, limestone
gravimetric
feeder
R7,
utilized
to convey
limestone
material
into
boiler
#1,
ceased operation
on
numerous
occasions
and
introduced
limestone
into the
boiler at
an
inconsistent
rate.
This
issue
resulted
in S02
emissions
in excess
of the
applicable
NSPS
and CAAPP
permit
limit.
16.
ln
addition,
the
Third Quarter
2008 Reports
informed
Illinois
EPA
that on
various
dates,
during the
period
July through
September
2008, events
that include
process
problems,
boiler
load
changes,
soot blowing,
and
the failure
of
its boiler
equipment
control
process,
in
3
addition
to
undetermined
causes,
resulted in the emission
of
S02 in
excess of
CAAPP
permit
and
regulatory limits.
17.
On February 2, 2009,
IHinois EPA received
Respondent’s
fourth quarter
2008
excess emissions
report
and
compliance emission
monitor
downtime
performance
report
(“the
Fourth
Quarter
2008 Reports”). Respondent
submitted
the Fourth Quarter
2008 Reports
for
the
period October
through December
2008, as prescribed
by
CAAPP
permit condition
7.7.10.
18.
The Fourth
Quarter
2008 Reports,
in
part, informed
Illinois EPA
that, during
the
period October through
December
2008, friction belts located
on limestone
gravimetric
feeders
utilized to convey
limestone
material
into boilers
#1
and
#2
ceased
operation
on numerous
occasions, as
the
result of
large limestone
blocks becoming
wedged between
discharge chutes
and friction
belts.
Due
to this issue, the limestone
gravimetric
feeders
introduced
limestone
into
each
boiler
at
an
inconsistent rate.
The
issue resulted
in SO2
emissions
in
excess
of the
applicable NSPS
and
CAAPP
permit limit.
19.
In addition,
the
Fourth
Quarter
2008 Reports
informed
Illinois EPA
that on
various dates,
during the
period
October
through
December 2008,
events
that include
process
problems,
boiler load
changes, soot blowing,
and
the
failure of its
boiler
equipment
control
process, in addition
to
undetermined
causes,
resulted in the
emission of
S02 in
excess
of
CAAPP permit and
regulatory
limits.
20.
On
May
1, 2009,
Illinois
EPA received
Respondent’s first
quarter 2009
excess emissions
report and compliance
emission
monitor
downtime
performance report
(“the
First
Quarter
2009 Reports”).
Respondent
submitted the
First
Quarter
2009
Reports for the
period
January
through
March 2009,
as
prescribed
by
CAAPP
permit condition
7.7.10.
21.
The
First
Quarter
2009
Reports,
in part, informed
Illinois
EPA that,
during the
period
January
2, 2009 through
February
2, 2009,
limestone
feeders
utilized to
convey
4
limestone
material
into
boiler #1
choked
resulting
from packed
limestone
fines
causing
the
material
to be
introduced
into
each boiler
at
an
inconsistent
rate. The
failure
of
the
limestone
gravirnetric
feeder
to properly
convey
limestone
into
boiler
#1
resulted
in S02
emissions
in
excess
of the
applicabie
NSPS
and
CAPP
perrnit
limit.
22.
In
addition,
the
First
Quarter
2009 Reports
informed
Illinois
EPA that
on
various
dates,
during
the
period
January
through
February 2009,
events
that include
process
problems,
boiler load
changes,
soot
blowing,
and
the failure
of its boiler
equipment
control
process,
in addition
to
undetermined
causes,
resulted in
the
emission
of S02
in
excess
of
CAAPP
permit
and
regulatory
limits
during
operation
of
boilers #1
and #2.
23.
Another
facility
within the
Complex
is
the
Xanthan
Gum
Plant.
The Xanthan
Gum
Plant
operations
include
batch
fermentatiOn,
alcohol
mix and precipitation,
desolventization,
drying,
distillation,
packaging
and
storage operations
to
facilitate
the
manufacture
of
xanthan gum.
24.
The
Xanthan Gum
Plant’s
emissions
include
isopropyl
alcohol (“IPA”)
emissions
and
volatile
organic
material
(“VOM”)
emissions
generated
during
xanthan
gum
production.
25.
On
July 10,
2003,
the Illinois
EPA
received
Respondent’s
construction
permit
application
to construct
the
Xanthan
Gum Plant
situated
within the
multi-facility
complex.
Data
contained
within the
application
documented
xanthan
gum
production
would result
in total IPA
and
VOM
emissions
discharged
to
the
atmosphere
of
less than
31 .5 tons
per year (“tlyr”)
and
35 t/yr,
respectively,
determined
based
upon rolling,
12-month
average
emissions
data.
26.
On
February
25, 2004,
based
upon
information
contained
within
the
construction
permit
application,
the Illinois
EPA issued
to
Respondent
construction
permit
03070016
(‘the
construction
permit”).
27.
The
construction
permit
contains
construction
permit
condition 6(a),
which
states
5
that:
a.
Total
facility
emissions
of
VOM
shall
not exceed
35
tons
per
year.
Compliance
with
this
limit
shall
be
determined on
a
rolling
12
month
basis,
calculated
monthly
in
accordance
with
Condition
12.
28.
The
construction
permit
also contains
construction
permit
condition
5(a)(ii),
which
states
that:
ii.
The Permittee
shall track
solvent
(isopropyl
alcohol)
inventory
and
perform
mass
balance
calculations
sufficient
to
verify
whether
losses
to
the atmosphere
are
less
than
31.5
tons on
a
12-month
rolling
basis
(see
Condition
6(a).)
29.
On
March
6, 2006,
the
Illinois
EPA
receivod..from
Respondent
a
etter nntifying
the
Illinois
EPA
of the
emission
of
VOM
in
excess
of
the
limits
set forth
in construction
permit
condition
6(a),
as
well
as
the emission
of
IPA in
excess
of construction
permit
condition
5(a)(ii),
30.
On
March
6, 2006,
Respondent
informed
the
lllino
EPA
that based
upon
an
internal
audit,
Respondent
determined
material
balance
calculations
utilized
to calculate
IPA
losses
discharged
to the environment
incorrectly
determined
IPA
and VOM
emissions.
Revised
mass
balance
calculations
based
upon
12-month,
rolling
average
data
for the
periods
December
2004
through
November
2005,
January
2005
through
December
2005,
and
February
2005
through
January
2006
revealed
IPA
and
VOM
emissions
totaled
43.41
t/yr,
41.96
t/yr,
and
40.06
t/yr,
respectively.
31.
Section
9 of
the Act,
415
ILCS 5/9
(2006),
provides,
in pertinent
part:
No
person
shall:
a.
Cause
or
threaten
or allow
the
discharge
or emission
of
any contaminant
into
the
environment
in
any
State so
as
to cause
or tend
to
cause
air
pollution
in
Illinois,
either
alone
or in
combination
with contaminants
from
other
sources,
or
so as
to
violate
regulations
or
standards
adopted
by
the
Board
under
this Act;
*
**
32.
Section
201.141
of
the
Board’s
Air
Pollution
Regulations,
35111.
Adm.
Code
6
201 141
provides,
as
follows:
Prohibition
of Air Pollution
No
person shall
cause or
threaten or allow
the
discharge or emission
of any
contaminant
into the environment
in any State so as, either
alone
or
in
combination with
contaminants
from
other sources,
to cause
or tend to
cause
air
pollution
in Illinois, or
so
as to
violate the provisions
of this Chapter,
or
so
as
to
prevent
the attainment
or maintenance
of
any
applicable
ambient
air quality
standard.
33.
Section 3.06 of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/3.06
(2006),
defines
“contaminant” as
follows:
“CONTAMINANT” is
any solid, liquid, or gaseous
matter,
any
odor, or any
form
negy’frcm “h?’”
o’r”
34.
During
the
period July
through
September
2005, Respondent’s
coal-fired
boiler
operations at the
Co-Generation
Plant resulted
in the emission of
SO2 in excess
of the
regulatory
standard
specified in 40 CFR
Part 60,
Subparts
D and DB, in violation
of
Section
9(a)
of
the
Act, 415
ILCS 5/9(a) (2006)
and
35111, Adm.
Code Section
201.141.
35.
During the
period July through
September
2008, Respondent’s
coal-fired boiler
operations
at the
Co-Generation
Plant
resulted in the
emission of
S02 in
excess
of the
regulatory
standard specified
in
40 CFR
Part 60,
Subparts
D and DB, in
violation of
Section
9(a)
of
the Act, 415
ILCS 5/9(a)
(2006) and 35111. Adm.
Code Section
201.141.
36.
During the
period October
through
December 2008,
Respondent’s
coal-fired
boiler
operations
at the
Co-Generation Plant
resulted in the
emission
of
SO2 in excess
of the
regulatory
standard
specified in
40 CFR
Part
60, Subparts
D and DB, in
violation
of
Section
9(a)
of the Act,
415
ILCS
5/9(a) (2006) and
35111. Adm. Code
Section
201.141.
37.
During the period
January through
February 2009,
Respondent’s
coal-fired
boiler
operations
at
the
Co-Generation
Plant resulted in
the emission
of S02 in
excess
of the
regulatory
standard
specified
in
40 CFR Part 60,
Subparts D and
DB, in violation
of
Section
9(a)
of
the Act,
415
ILCS
5/9(a)
(2006)
and
35
III. Adm. Code
Section 201.141.
7
38.
During the period beginning approximately December 2004
through at east
March 2006,
TLIA’s xanthan gum
production
operations at the Xanthan Gum Plant resulted
in
the emission of PA and VOM in excess
of
construction permit
conditions
6(a)
and 5(a)(ii) in
viclation
of
Section 9(a)
of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/9(a)
(2006 and 35 iii. Adm. Cede
Section
201.141.
PRAYER FOR
RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant, People
of
The
State of Illinois, respectfully
requests
that
this
Board
enter an order against the
Respondent,
TATE
AND LYLE INGREDIENTS
AMERICAS,
INCORPORATED:
A.
Authorizing a
hearing in
this
matter at which time the
Respondent will be
required to
answer the
allegations herein;
B.
Finding
that the Respondent has violated the
Act and
regulations
as
alleged
herein;
C.
Ordering Respondent to cease and
desist from any
further violations of
the
Act
and
associated
regulations;
D.
Pursuant to Section
42(a)
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/42(a) (2006),
impose
upon the
Respondent a
civil penalty
of
not
more than the statutory
maximum;
E.
Pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/42(f)
(2006), award the
Complainant
its costs
in this matter, including
reasonable attorney’s fees
and costs; and
F.
Grant
such
other
and further
relief as
the
Board deems
appropriate.
COUNT Il
CLEAN AIR ACT PERMIT PROGRAM
PERMIT VIOLATIONS
1.
Complainant
repeats and realleges
paragraphs I
through
30 of
Count I
as
paragraphs
1 through
30 of Count II.
8
31.
Respondent’s
excess
emission report
for
the
period
of
July
through
September
2005
states
that
S02
emissions
generated
during
the
operation
of
coal-fired
boilers
#1
and
#2
exceeded
1.2
lb!mmtu.
32.
Respondent’s
excess
emission
report
for
the
period
of
July
through September
2008
states
that
S02
emissions
generated
during
the
operation
of
coal-fired
boilers
#1
and
#2
exceeded 1.2
lb/mmBtu.
33.
Respondent’s
excess
emission
report
for
the
period
of
October
through
uecember 2U0
states
mat
S02
emissions
generateu
aunrig
cie
optTon
oicuai-ired
bü
#1
and
#2 exceeded
1.2
lb/mmBtu.
34.
Respondent’s
excess
emission
report
for
the
period
of
January
through
March
2009
states
that
602
emissions
generated
during
the
operation
of coal-fired boilers
#1
and
#2
exceeded
1.2
lb/mmBtu.
35.
Based
upon
emissions
data
received
from
Respondent
on
March
6,
2006,
Respondent’s
IPA
and
VOM
emissions
from
approximately
December
2004
through at
least
March
2006
exceed
the
limits
set
by construction
permit
conditions
5(a)(ii)
and
6(a).
36.
Section
39.5
of the
Act,
415
ILCS
5/39.5
(2006),
provides,
in pertinent part:
6.
Prohibitions.
a.
It shall
be
unlawful
for
any
person
to
violate
any
terms
or conditions
of a
permit
issued
under
this
Section,
to operate
any
CAAPP
source
except
in
compliance
with
a
permit
issued
by
the
Agency
under
this
Section
or
to violate
any
other
applicable
requirements.
All
terms
and
conditions of
a permit
issued
under
this
Section
are
enforceable
by
USEPA
and
citizens
under
the
Clean
Air
Act,
except
those,
if
any,
that
are
specifically
designated
as
not
being
federally
enforceable
in
the
permit
pursuant
to paragraph
7(m)
of
this
Section.
b.
After
the
applicable CAAPP
permit
or
renewal
application
submittal date,
as
9
specified
in subsection
5
of
this
Section,
no person
shall
operate a CAAPP
source
without
a
CAAPP permit
unless
the
complete
CAAPP
permit or
rene’al
application
for such
source
has
been
timely
submitted
to the Agency.
37.
Section
39.5 of the
Act. 415
ILCS 5/39.5
(2006),
provides.
in pertinent
part:
6. Definitions.
**
*
“CAAPP”
means
the
Clean Air
Act Permit
Program,
developed
pursuant
to
Title
V
of
the
Clean
Air
Act.
*
*
*
•“CAAPP
Permit” or
“permit” (unless
the contexIuggests
otheise)
means
any.
permit
issued,
renewed,
amended,
modified
or
revised pursuant
to
Title V
of the
Clean
Air Act.
“CAAPP
source”
means
any
source
for which the
owner
or
operator
is required
to
obtain
a
CAAPP permit
pursuant
to subsection
2 of this Section.
**
*
“Major source”
means
a
source
for which
emissions
of one
or more
air pollutants
meet
the criteria
for major
status
pursuant
to
paragraph
2©)
of this Section.
**
*
“Owner
or
operator”
means
any person
who
owns, leases,
operates,
controls,
or
supervises
a
stationary
source.
***
“Source”
means
any
stationary
source
(or any
group of
stationary
sources)
that
are located
on
one
or more contiguous
or
adjacent
properties
that are
under
common control
of the
same person
(or persons
under common
control)
and
that
belongs
to
a
single
major
industrial
grouping.
For the
purposes
of defining
“source,”
a
stationary
source
or group
of
stationary
sources
shall
be
considered
part of
a
single
major
industrial
grouping
if all of the
pollutant
emitting
activities
at
such
source
or group of
sources
located
on contiguous
or
adjacent
properties
and
under common
control
belong
to
the same
Major
Group
(i.e., all
have the
same two-digit
code)
as
described
in the
Standard
Industrial
Classification
Manual,
1987,
or
such
pollutant
emitting
activities
at
a
stationary
source
(or
group
of stationary
sources)
located
on contiguous
or
adjacent
properties
and
under
common control
constitute
a support
facility.
The
determination
as
to
whether
any
group of stationary
sources
are located
on contiguous
or
adjacent
properties,
and/or
are
under
common
control,
and/or
whether
the
pollutant
10
emitting
activities
at
such
group
of
stationary
sources
constitute
a
support
facility
shall be
made
on a
case
by
case
basis,
“Stationary
source’
means
any
building,
structure,
facility,
or
installation
that
emits
or
may
emit any
regulated
air
pollutant
or
any
pollutant
listed
under
Section
112(b)
of
the Clean
Air
Act.
*
**
38.
Respondent
caused
or allowed
the
emission
of
S02
in excess
of
the
1.2
lb/mmBtu
NSPS
emission
standard
so
as
to cause
air pollution
in violation
of
CAAPP
permit
condition
7.7.3(g),
as
well as
Section
39.5(6)(a)
of the
Act,
415
ILCS
39.5(6)(a)
(2006).
39.
Respondent
caused
or allowed
the
excess
emission
of
IPA
for the
period
beginning
approximately
December
2004
through
at
least
March
2006,
resulting
in
the
exceedance
of
VOM
emission
limits
prescribed
by
construction
permit
conditions
5(a)(ii)
and
6(a).
In doing
so,
Respondent
operated
a
CAAPP
source
without
first
submitting
a
revised
permit
application
accurately
setting
forth
VOM
emissions
discharged
by
the facility
in
violation
of
Section
39.5(6)(a)
of
the Act,
415
ILCS
39.5(6)(a)
(2006).
40.
Due
to
PA
and
VOM
emissions
in
excess
of
limits
set
by
construction
permit
conditions
5(a)(ii)
and
6(a),
Respondent
operates
a
facility
without
the
requisite
CAAPP
permit
for the
entire
source,
in
violation
of
Section
39.5(6)(b)
of the
Act,
415 ILCS
5139.5(6)(b)
(2006).
PRAYER
FOR
RELIEF
WHEREFORE,
Complainant,
People
of
The State
of
Illinois,
respectfully
requests
that
this
Board
enter
an
order
against
the
Respondent,
TATE
AND
LYLE
INGREDIENTS
AMERICAS,
INCORPORATED:
A.
Authorizing
a hearing
in
this
matter
at
which
time
the
Respondent
will be
required
to answer
the
allegations
herein;
B.
Finding
that
the
Respondent
has
violated
the
Act and
regulations
as
alleged
11
herein;
C.
Ordering
Respondent
to cease and
desist from
any
further
violations
of the
Act
and associated
regulations;
D.
Pursuant
to Section
42(a)
of the
Act, -415
ILCS
5/42(a)
(2006;,
impose
upon
the
Respondent
a
civil
penalty
of not
more than
the statutory
maximum;
E.
Pursuant
to Section
42(f)
of
the Act,
415
ILCS 5/42(f)
(2006),
award the
Complainant
its
costs
in
this
matter, including
reasonable
attorney’s
fees and
costs;
and
F.
Grant such
other and
further
relief
as
the Board
deems
appropriate.
COUNT
III
VIOLATION
OF
NEW
SOURCE
PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
1.
Complainant
repeats
and
realleges
paragraphs
1
through
22 of
Count
I
as
paragraphs
1
through
22
of
Count Ill.
23.
Respondent’s
excess
emission
report
for the period
of July
through
September
2005 states
that
S02
emissions
generated
during
the operation
of
coal-fired
boilers #1
and #2
exceeded
1.2 lb/mmBtu.
24.
Respondent’s
excess
emission
report
for
the
period of
July through
September
2008
states
that
S02 emissions
generated
during
the operation
of
coal-fired
boilers
#1
and #2
exceeded
1.2 lb/mmBtu.
25.
Respondent’s
excess
emission
report for the
period of
October
through
December
2008
states
that
S02
emissions
generated
during
the operation
of coal-fired
boilers
#1 and
#2
exceeded
1.2 lb!mmBtu.
26.
Respondent’s
excess
emission
report
for the
period
of
January
through
March
2009
states that
S02 emissions
generated
during
the
operation
of
coal-fired
boilers
#1
and
#2 exceeded
1.2 lb/mmBtu.
12
27.
Section 9.1
of
the
Act,
415
ILCS
5/9.1
(2004),
provides,
in
pertinent
part;
(d)
No
person shall:
(1)
violate
any
provisions
of
Sections
111,
112,
165
or
173
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
as
now
or hereafter
amended,
or
federal
regulations
adopted
pursuant
thereto:
or
(2)
construct,
install,
modify
or
operate
any
equipment,
building, facility,
source
or
installation
which
is
subject
to
regulation
under Sections
111,
112, 165
or
173
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
as
now or hereafter
amended,
except
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
such
Sections
and
federal
regulations
adopted
pursuant
thereto,
and
no
such
action
shall
be
undertaken
without a
permit
granted
by
the
Agency
or
in
violation
of
any
noo’
by
such
nm
Any
denil of
such
a.mitor
any
conditions
imposed
in such
a
permit
shall
be
reviewable
by
the
Board in
accordance
with
Section
40
of
this
Act.
28.
Section
60.43
of
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations,
40
CFR
60.43,
provides,
in
pertinent
part;
(a)
On
and
after
the
date on
which the
performance
test
required
to
be
conducted
by
§
60.8
is
completed,
no
owner
or
operator
subject
to the
provisions
of
this
subpart
shall
cause
to
be
discharged
into
the
atmosphere
from
any
affected
facility any
gases
which
contain
sulfur
dioxide in
excess
of:
(2)
520
nanograms
per
joule
heat input
(1.2
lb per
million
Btu)
derived
from
solid
fossil
fuel
or
solid
fossil
fuel
.and
wood
residue,
except
as
provided
in
paragraph
(e)
of
this
section.
29.
TLIA
caused
or
allowed
the
emission
of
SO2
in
excess of
the
applicable
New
Source
Performance
Standard,
Section
60.43(a)(2)
of
the
Code
of
Federal Regulations,
40
CFR
60.43(a)(2),
and
therefore
in
violation
of
Section
9.1(d)
of the
Act,
415
ILCS
5/9.1(d)
(2006).
PRAYER
FOR
RELIEF
WHEREFORE,
Complainant,
People
of
The
State
of
Illinois,
respectfully
requests that
this
Board
enter
an
order
against
the
Respondent,
TATE
AND
LYLE
INGREDIENTS
11
AMERJCAS.
INCORPORATED:
A.
Authorizing
a hearing
in
this
matter
at
which
time
the
Respondent
wW
be
required
to
answer
the allegations
herein;
B.
Finding
that
the
Respondent
has
violated
the
Act
and regulations
as
alleged
herein;
C.
Ordering
Respondent
to
cease
and
desist
from
any
further
violations
of the
Act
and associated
regulations;
D.
Pursuant
to
Section
42(a)
of
the Act,
415
ILCS
5/42(a)
(2006),
impose
upon
the
Respondent
a civil
penalty
of
not
more
than
the
statutory
maximum;
E.
Pursuant
to
Section
42(f)
of
the
Act, 415
ILCS
5/42(f)
(2006),
award
the
Complainant
its
costs
in this
matter,
including
reasonable
attorney’s
fees
and
costs;
and
F.
Grant
such
other
and
further
relief
as
the
Board
deems
appropriate.
COUNT
IV
CONSTRUCTION
PERMIT
VIOLATIONS
1.
Complainant
repeats
and
realleges
paragraphs
1
through
6
and
20 through
27
of
Count
I
of
this
Complaint,
as
paragraphs
1 through
14 of
Count
IV.
15.
Section
9
of the
Act,
415 ILCS
5/9
(2006),
provides,
in pertinent
part:
No
person
shall:
b.
Construct,
install,
or operate
any
equipment,
facility,
vehicle,
vessel,
or
aircraft
capable
of
causing
of
contributing
to
air
pollution
or
designed
to
prevent
air pollution,
of
any
type
designated
by
Board
regulations,
without
a
permit
granted
by the
Agency,
or
in
violation of any
conditions
imposed
by
such
permit
***
14
16.
Based
upon
emissions
data
llHnois EPA
received
from
Respondent
on
March
6,
2006,
PA
and
VOM
emissions
generated
by
TLIA
beginning
approximately
December
2004
through
at
least
March
2006
exceed
the
limits
set
by
construction
permit conditions
5(a)(ii)
and
6(a),
respectively,
in
violation
of
Section
9(b)
of the
Act,
415
ILCS
5/9(b)
(2006).
PRAYER
FOR
RELIEF
WHEREFORE,
Complainant,
People
of
The
State
of
Illinois,
respectfully
requests
that
this
Board
enter
an
order
against the
Respondent,
TATE
AND
LYLE
INGREDIENTS
AMER!C.t\S,
ir,mppTEn
A.
Authorizing
a
hearing
in
this
matter
at which
time
the
Respondent
will
be
required
to
answer
the
allegations
herein;
B.
Finding that
the
Respondent
has
violated
the
Act
and
regulations
as
alleged
herein;
C.
Ordering
Respondent
to
cease
and
desist from
any
further
violations
of
the
Act
and
associated
regulations;
D.
Pursuant to
Section
42(a)
of
the
Act,
415
ILCS
5/42(a)
(2006), impose
upon
the
Respondent
a
civil
penalty
of
not
more
than
the
statutory
maximum;
E.
Pursuant to
Section
42(f)
of
the
Act,
415
ILCS
5/42(f)
(2006),
award the
Complainant
its
costs
in this
matter,
including
reasonable
attorney’s
fees
and
costs; and
F.
Grant
such
other
and
further
relief
as
the
Board
deems
appropriate.
COUNTV
VIOLATION
OF
PSD
REQUIREMENTS
1.
Complainant
repeats
and
realleges
paragraphs
1
through
6 and
20
through 27
of
Count
I of
this
Complaint,
as
paragraphs
1
through
14
of Count
V.
15
15.
Information
and
emissions
data
contained
within
Respondent’s
construction
permit
application,
dated
July
7,
2003,
states
that
construction
of
the
Xanthan
Gum
Plant
would
not
result
in
a
significant
increase
in VCM
emissions
and,
therefore,
the
project
is not
subject
to
Prevention of
Significant
Deterioration
(“PSD”)
requirements.
16.
The
application
also
indicated the
multi-facility
complex
was
a
major
source
for
VOM
emissions
prior
to
the
submission
of
the
permit
application
to
construct
the
Xanthan
Gum
Plant.
17.
Section
165
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
42
USCS
7475(a)
(1997)
states
in
pertinent
part:
(a)
Major
emitting
facilities
on
which
construction
is
commenced
No
major
emitting
facility
on
which
construction
is
commenced
after
August
7,
1977,
may
be
constructed
in
any
area
to
which
this
part
applies
unless-
1)
a
permit
has
been
issued
for
such
proposed
facility
in
accordance
with
this
part
setting
forth
emission
limitation
for
such
facility
which
conform
to
the
requirements
of
this
part;
*
**
4)
the
proposed
facility
is
subject
to the
best
available
control
technology
for
each
pollutant
subject
to regulation
under
this
chapter
emitted
from,
or
which
results
from,
such
facility;
*
*
*
18.
Section
52.21
of Title
40
of the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations,
40
CFR
52.21
(1995),
provides
in
pertinent
part:
Prevention
of
significant
deterioration
of
air
quality.
16
*
*
*
(2)
Applicability
procedures.
(ii)
The
requirements
of
paragraphs
U)
through ®)
of
this
section
apply to
the
construction
of
any
new
major
stationary
source
or
the
major
modification
of
any
existing
major
stationary
source, except
as
this
section
otherwise
provides.
()
N:
:.‘
,-
which
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
U)
through
(r)(5)
of
this
section
apply shall
begin
actual
construction
without a
permit
that
states
that
the
major
stationary
source
or
major
modification
will
meet
those
requirements.
The
Administrator
has
authority
to
issue
any
such
permit.
*
*
*
(b)
Definitions.
For
the
purposes
of
this
Section:
(1)(l)
Major
stationary
source
means:
(a)
Any
of
the
following
stationary
sources
of
air
pollutants
which
emits,
or
has
the
potential
to
emit,
100
tons per
year
or
more
of
any
regulated
NSR
pollutant.
.
.fossil-fuel
boilers
(or
combinations
thereof)
totaling
more
than
250
million
British
thermal
units
per
hour
heat
input.
*
*
*
(ii)
A
major
source
that
is
major
for
volatile
organic
compounds
or
NO
shall
be
considered
major
for
ozone.
*
*
*
(2)(l)
Major
modification
means
any
physical
change
in
or
change in
the
method
of
operation
of
a
major
stationary
source
that
would
result
17
in:
a
significant
emissions
increase
(as defined
in paragraph
(b)(40)
of this
section)
of a
regulated
NSR
pollutant
(as defined
in
paragraph
(b)(50)
of
this section);
and a significant
net
emissions
increase
of
that
pollutant from
the major
stationary
source.
*
*
*
(23)(l) Significant
means,
in reference
to a net
emissions
increase
or
the
potential
of
a
source
to emit any
of the following
pollutants,
a
rate
of
emissions
that would
equal
or
exceed any
of
the
following
rates:
Pollutant and
Emissions
Rate
***
Ozone:
40
tpy
of volatile
organic
compounds
or nitrogen
oxides
**
*
(j)
Control
Technology
Review.
(1)
A
major
stationary
source
or major
modification
shall
meet
each
applicable
emissions
limitation
under
the
State
Implementation
Plan and
each applicable
emissions
standard
and
standard
of
performance
under
40
CFR Parts
60
and
61.
*
**
(3)
A
major modification
shall apply
best
available
control
technology
for
each regulated
NSR
pollutant
for which
it would
result in
a
significant
net
emissions
increase at
the
source.
This
requirement
applies to
each proposed
emissions
unit
at which
a net
emissions
increase
in the
pollutant
would
occur as
a result of
a
physical
change
or change
in the
method
of operation
in
the
unit.
*
**
19.
Respondent’s
Complex
is a major
stationary
source
located in
an
attainment
18
area
for
ozone.
20.
Respondent’s
revised
mass
balance
calculations
for
the
periods
December
2004
through
November
2005,
January
2005
through
December
2005
and
February
2005
throucTh
January
2006
revealed
IPA
and
VOM
emissions
at
the
Xanthan
Gum
Plant
totaied
43.41
t/yr,
41.96
tlyr,
and
40.06
tlyr,
respectively.
21.
Respondent’s
construction
of
the
Xanthan
Gum
Plant
resulted
in
a
significant
net
increase
in
VOM
emissions
in
excess
of
40
t/yr.
As
a
result,
Respondent’s
construction
of
the
Xdnthan
Gum
Plant
constitutes
a
rnajormuon
o’rOiamajor
stiori
surcsibcLi.
Prevention
of
Significant
Deterioration
(‘PSD”)
requirements.
22.
Respondent
failed to
conduct
the
requisite
best
available
control
technology
(“BACT”)
analysis,
consisting
of
a
control
technology
review to
facilitate
calculation
of
an
emission
limitation
which
is
determined
to
be
BACT.
Respondent
failed to
acquire
the
requisite
Prevention
of
Significant
Deterioration
(PSD”)
construction
permit
setting
forth the
BACT
limitation
prior
to
constructing
the
facility,
and
thereafter
failed
to
implement
BACT,
in
violation
of
Section(s)
165(a)(1)
and
(4)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
42
USCS
7475(a)(1)
and
(4)
(1997),
as
well
as
Section(s)
52.21(a)(2)(ii)
and
(iii),
as
well
as
(j)(1)
and
(3)
of
Title
40
of
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations,
40
CFR
52.21(a)(2)(ii)
and
(iii),
(j)(1)
and
(3)
(1995).
PRAYER
FOR
RELIEF
WHEREFORE,
Complainant,
People
of
The
State
of
Illinois,
respectfully
requests
that
this
Board
enter
an
order
against
the
Respondent,
TATE
AND
LYLE
INGREDIENTS
AMERICAS,
INCORPORATED:
A.
Authorizing
a hearing
in
this
matter
at
which time
the
Respondent
will
be
required
to
answer
the
allegations
herein;
19
B.
Finding
that
the
Respondent
has
violated
the Act
and
regulations
as
alleged
herein;
C.
Ordering
Respondent
to
cease
and desist
from
any
further
violations
of
the
Act
and
associated
regulations;
D.
Pursuant
to
Section
42(a)
of
the
Act,
415 ILCS5142(a)
(2006),
impose
upon
the
Respondent
a
civil penalty
of
not
more than
the
statutory
maximum;
E.
Pursuant
to
Section
42(f)
of
the
Act,
415 1LCS
5142(f)
(2006),
award
the
C
Dmplainant
its
costs
In
this
itatter:
including
reesoaat&attornes•
fees
and
costs;
anti
F.
Grant
such
other and
further
relief
as
the
Board
deems
appropriate.
20
Of
Counsel:
Stephen
J.
Janasie
Assistant
Attorney
General
500
South Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
November
20,
2009
21
Respectfully
submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney
Gene ra of the
State of IHinois
MATTHEWJ.
DUNN,
Chief
Environmental
Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation Division
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
Environmental
Bureau
Assistant Attorney
General