BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
C1.FRK’SOFFT(~
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
DEC.
2S2
2003
Complainant,
STATE OF
ILLiNOIS
pollutton
Control
Board
-vs-
)
No.
PCB 03-73
(Enforcement)
RIVERDALE RECYCLING,
INC.,
an
Illinois corporation,
and
TRI-STATE DISPOSAL,
INC.,
an
Illinois corporation,
Respondents.
TO:
Mr. Mark LaRose
Bradley Halloran
Attorney for Respondents
Hearing Officer
734 N. Wells
100 West Randolph Street
Chicago,
IL.
60610
11th
Floor
Chicago,
IL.
60601
NOTICE OF FILING
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE
that we have today,
December
22,
2003,
filed
with the Office of the Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board
an original and nine copies of a Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement and a Motion to Request Relief from Hearing Requirement,
copies of which are attached herewith and served upon you.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA
MADIGAN
Attorney General of the
State of Illinois
/
I
BY:
~
./~.
~
~
PAULA BECKER WHEELER
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
188
W.
Randolph St.,
~
Flr.
Chicago,
IL 60601
(312)
814-1511
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
REEIVED
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
DEC
22
2003
Complainant,
)
STATEOF ILLINOIS
-VS-
)
No. PCB 03-73
Pollution
Control Board
(Enforcement)
RIVERDALE
RECYCLING,
INC.,
an
Illinois
corporation,
and
TRI-STATE
DISPOSAL,
INC.,
an
Illinois
corporation,
Respondents.
MOTION TO REQUEST RELIEF
FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT
NOW COMES the Complainant,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General
of the
State of Illinois, and requests
relief from the hearing requirement in the above-captioned matter.
In
support thereof,
the Complainant states as follows:
1.
On November 19,
2002,
a Complaint was filed with the
pollution Control Board
(“Board”)
in this matter.
On December 22,
2003,
a Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement was filed with the
Board.
2.
Section 31(c) (2)
of the Illinois Environmental Protection
Act
(~~Acts),415 ILCS 5/31(c) (2),
effective June
26,
2002,
allows the
parties in certain enforcement cases to request relief from the
mandatory hearing requirement where the parties have submitted to the
Board a stipulation and proposal for settlement.
Section 31(c) (2)
provides:
Notwithstanding the provisions
of subdivision
(1)
of this
subsection
(c), whenever a complaint has been filed on behalf of
the Agency or by the People of the State of Illinois,
the parties
may file with the Board a stipulation and proposal for settlement
accompanied by a request for relief from the requirement of a
hearing pursuant to subdivision
(1)
.
Unless the Board,
in its
1
discretion,
concludes that a hearing will be held,
the Board
shall cause notice of the stipulation, proposal and request for
relief to be published and sent in the same manner as is required
for hearing pursuant to subdivision
(1)
of this subsection.
The
notice shall include a statement that any person may file a
written demand for hearing within 21 days after receiving the
notice.
If any person files a timely written demand for hearing,
the Board shall deny the request for relief from a hearing and
shall hold a hearing in accordance with the provisions
of
subdivision
(1)
3.
No hearing is currently scheduled in the instant case.
4.
The Complainant requests the relief conferred by Section
31(c) (2)
of the Act.
WHEREFORE,
the Complainant,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, requests
relief from the requirement of a hearing pursuant to 415 ILCS
5/31(c) (2),
effective June 26,
2002.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA
MADIGAN
Attorney General of the
State of Illinois
By:
~I(j
~
PAULA BECKER WHEELER
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
188 W. Randolph St.,
20th Fl.
Chicago, Illinois
60601
(312)
814-1511
2
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
CLERK’S OFFICE
DEC
222003
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
STATE
OF ILLINOIS
Complainant,
)
Pollution
Control Board
-vs-
)
No. PCB 03-73
(Enforcement)
RIVERDALE RECYCLING,
INC.,
an Illinois corporation,
and
TRI-STATE DISPOSAL,
INC.,
an Illinois corporation,
Respondents.
STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
Complainant,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by LISA
MADIGAN, Attorney General of the State of Illinois,
at the
request of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,
and
Respondents,
RIVERDALE RECYCLING,
INC.,
an Illinois corporation,
and TRI-STATE DISPOSAL,
INC.,
an Illinois corporation,
do hereby
agree to this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement
(“Stipulation”)
.
The parties agree that the statement of facts
contained herein represents a fair summary of the evidence and
testimony which would be introduced by the parties if a full
hearing were held.
The parties further stipulate that this
statement of facts is made and agreed upon for purposes of
settlement only and that neither the fact that a party has
entered into this Stipulation, nor any of the facts stipulated
herein,
shall be introduced into evidence in this or any other
proceeding except to enforce the terms of this agreement.
Notwithstanding the previous sentence,
this Stipulation and
-1-
Proposal for Settlement and any Illinois Pollution Contro.1 Board
(“Board”)
order accepting same may be used in any future
enforcement action as evidence of a past adjudication of
violation of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act
(“Act”)
for purposes of Sections 39(i)
and 42(h)
of the Act,
415 ILCS
5/39(1) and 5/42(h) (2002).
I.
JURISDICTION
The Board has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and
of
the
parties
consenting
hereto
pursuant
to
the
Act,
415
ILCS
5/1
et
seq.
(2002)
II.
AUTHORIZATION
The
undersigned
representatives
for
each
party
certify
that
they are fully authorized by the party whom they represent
to
enter into the terms and conditions of this Stipulation and
Proposal
for
Settlement
and
to
legally
bind
them
to
it.
III.
APPLICABILITY
This Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement shall apply to
and be binding upon the Complainant and Respondents, and each of
them,
and on any officer, director,
agent, employee or servant of
Respondents,
as well as Respondents’
successors and assigns.
Respondents shall not raise as a defense to any enforcement
action taken pursuant
to this settlement the failure of its
-2-
officers,
directors,
agents,
servants or employees to take such
action as shall be required to comply with the provisions of this
settlement.
Iv.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
A.
Parties
1.
The Attorney General of the State of Illinois brought
this action on her own motion,
as well as
at the request of the
Illinpis Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois EPA”),
pursuant to the statutory authority vested in her under Section
31 of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/31
(2002)
2.
Illinois EPA is an agency of the State of Illinois
createdpursuant
to Section 4 of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/4
(2002),
and is charged,
inter alia,
with the duty of enforcing the Act.
3.
Respondent,
RIVERDALE RECYCLING,
INC.
(“RRI”),
is an
Illinois corporation,
duly authorized to transact business in
Illinois.
4.
Respondent,
TRI-STATE DISPOSAL,
INC.
(“TSD”),
is an
Illinois corporation,
duly authorized to transact business in
Illinois.
B.
Facility Description
At all times relevant to the Complaint,
RRI owned property
commonly known as 13901 South Ashland, Riverdale,
Cook County,
Illinois
(“Site”)
.
At the Site,
Respondents jointly operate a
waste transfer and recycling business on an 11.47 acre portion of
-3-
the Site,
permitted by Illinois EPA for municipal waste transfer.
C.
Noncompliance
1.
violations Al1ec~edinthe Complaint
The Complaint has alleged the following violations of
the Act and Illinois Pollution Control Board
(“Board”)
regulations against the Respondents:
COUNT
I:
OPEN DUMPING OF WASTE, violation of 415 ILCS 5/21(a)
(2092)
COUNT II: WASTE STORAGE WITHOUT A PERMIT,
violation of 415 ILCS
5/21(d)
(2002);
2.
Additional Alleged Violations
a.
On October 30,
2002, the Illinois EPA conducted a
Compliance Evaluation Inspection of the facility.
b.
On December 16,
2002,
the Illinois EPA issued
letters
to each Respondent informing them of the results of
the inspection.
The letters advised each Respondent that they
were in apparent violation of the following environmental
statutes and regulations:
i.
Section 21(a)of the Act:
open dumping of
waste; and
ii. Section 21(d)
of the Act: waste storage
without
a permit.
c.
On March 28,
2003,
the Illinois EPA conducted a
Compliance Evaluation Inspection of the facility.
The following
violations were alleged to be continuing in the Inspector’s
-4-
reports dated April
2,
and April
3,
2003:
i.
Section 21(a)
of the Act:
open dumping of
waste;
ii.
Section 21(d)
(1) of the Act: operating a
waste storage operation in violation of its
Permit,
by not conducting its load checking
program in accordance with 35
Ill.
Adm.
811.323, by not having the eastern and
southern portions of the perimeter fence
completed,
and by using loading and unloading
areas outside of the transfer building.
iii.
Section 21
(d)(1)
of the Act: conducting a
waste storage bperation outside the permitted
area.
D.
Response To Allegations
Respondents neither admit nor deny the alleged violations
in
the Complaint or as stated in SECTION IV.C.2.
of this
Stipulation.
V.
IMPACT ON THE PUBLIC RESULTING FROM NONCOMPLIANCE
Section 33(c)
of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/33 (c) (2002)
,
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
-5-
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.
ANALYSIS:
The parties mutually state as follows:
1.
Character and Degree of Injury:
The
impact
to
the
public
from
the
alleged
violations
of
the
Act is the threat of uncontrolled accumulation of waste at
locations not permitted for the storage or disposal of waste.
2.
Social and Economic Benefit:
The
parties
agree
that
operation
of
Respondents’
business
is
of social and economic benefit, provided it operates in
conformance with the requirements of the Act and pertinent Board
waste disposal regulations.
3.
Suitability to the Area:
Operation of Respondents’
business at the Site is suitable
to the area, provided that all refuse is handled and disposed in
conformance with the Act and Illinois Pollution Control Board
regulations.
4.
Technical Practicability:
Proper handling of waste and refuse at the Site
is both
technically practicable and economically reasonable.
-6-
5.
Subsequent Compliance:
Respondents have received a permit under Permit Log No.
2003-55 for modifications to its facility, including the
management of construction and demolition debris on the southeast
portion of the site.
outdoor storage and are now in full
compliance.
VI.
CONSIDERATION OF SECTION 42(h)
FACTORS
Section 42(h)
of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/42(h) (2002),
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 violator 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
violator
because of delay in compliance with requirements;
4.
the amount of monetary penalty which will serve to
deter
further
violations
by
the violator
and
to
otherwise
aid
in
enhancing
voluntary
compliance
with this Act by
the violator
and other persons
similarly subject to the Act; and
5.
the
number,
proximity
in
time,
and
gravity
of
previously
adjudicated violations
of
this Act by
the violator.
-7-
.~NALYSIS:
1.
Duration and Gravity of the Violation:
The Violations that are the subject of the Complaint and that
are stated in Section IV.C.2 of this Stipulation have existed for
over three years and resulted in no
known injury to the public.
2.
Diligence of Respondents:
The Respondents have removed waste and refuse from outside
of the Permitted Area,
as described in the Complaint,
and have
applied for and received the permit for modifications to its
facility,
including the management of construction and demolition
debris on the southeast portion of the site.
3.
Economic Benefit of Noncompliance:
The Respondents may have received an economic benefit from
the alleged noncompliance, however the exact value of the
economic benefit
is difficult to quantify at this time.
4.
Deterrence:
A penalty of Nine Thousand Dollars
($9,000.00)
against the
Respondents,
jointly and severally,
will deter future
noncompliance by the Respondents and others.
5.
Compliance History:
The Respondents have no previously adjudicated violations of
the Act and Board Regulations.
VII.
TERMS
OF SETTLEMENT
1.
The Respondents neither admit nor deny the violations
-8-
as alleged in the Complaint.
2.
Respondents are now in full compliance.
3.
The Respondents shall pay,
jointly and severally,
a
penalty of Nine Thousand Dollars
($9,000.00) within 30 days of
the date the Board issues an Order accepting this Stipulation.
4.
All Payments shall be made by certified check or money
order, payable to the Illinois EPA,
designated for deposit into
the Environmental Protection Trust
Fund,
and shall be sent by
first class mail
to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
FiscalServices
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
IL
62794-9276
Copies of the certified checks or money orders, and all
related correspondence,
shall be sent by first class mail
to:
Paula Becker Wheeler
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
188 West Randolph,
~
Flr.
Chicago,
Illinois 60601
5.
Respondents’
FEIN numbers must be on the certified
check or money order.
For issues relating to the payment
of the
penalty, the Respondents may be reached at the following address:
For purposes of payment and collection,
the Respondents’
attorney may be reached at the following address:
Mr. Mark La Rose, Attorney
La Rose
& Bosco
734 North Wells Street
Chicago,
Illinois 60610
-9-
For purposes of payment and collection, Respondents may be
reached at the following address:
13903 South Ashland Avenue
Riverdale Illinois 60872
6.
Pursuant to Section 42(g)
of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/42(g)
(2002),
interest shall accrue on any penalty amount owed by the
Respondents not paid within the time prescribed herein,
at the
maximum rate allowable under Section 1003(a)
of the Illinois
Income Tax Act,
35
ILCS 5/1003 (a) (2002)
7.
Interest on unpaid penalties
shall begin to accrue from
the date the penalty is due and continue to accrue to the date
payment is received by the Illinois EPA.
8.
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.
9.
All interest on penalties owed the Complainant shall be
paid by certified check or money order payable
to the Illinois
EPA for deposit
in the EPTF at the above-indicated address.
The
name,
case number, and the Respondents’
Social Security numbers
shall appear on the face of the certified check or money order.
A copy of the certified check or money order and the transmittal
letter shall be sent to:
-10-
Paula Becker Wheeler
Assistant Attorney General
(or other designee)
Environmental Bureau
188 W. Randolph ~
20th
Floor
Chicago,
Illinois 60601
10.
In the event of default, the Complainant shall be
entitled to reasonable costs of collection,
including reasonable
attorney’s
fees.
VIII.
CEASE AND DESIST
Respondents shall cease and desist from future violations of
the Act and Board regulations,
including but not limited to,
those sections of the Act and Board regulations that were the
subject matter of the complaint and as outlined in Section IV.C.
of this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement.
IX.
COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS
This Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement
in no way
affects the Respondents’
responsibility to comply with any
federal,
state or local regulations,
including but not limited to
the Act and Board regulations.
X.
RIGHT OF ENTRY
In addition to any other authority,
the Illinois EPA,
its
employees and representatives,
and the Attorney General, her
agents and representatives,
shall have the right of entry into
and upon the Respondents’ facility which is the subject of this
-11-
Consent Order,
at all reasonable times for
the purposes of
carrying out inspections.
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.
XI.
RELEASE FROM LIABILITY
In consideration of Respondents’
joint and several payment
of Nine Thousand Dollars
($9,000.00),
and each Respondents’
commitment to refrain from future violations of the Act and Board
regulations,
Complainant releases, waives and discharges the
Respondents from any further liability or penalties for
violations of the Act and regulations which were the subject
matter of the Complaint and as alleged in SECTION IV.C.2 of this
Stipulation,
upon the payment of all monies owed.
However,
nothing in this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement
shall be
construed as a waiver by Complainant
of the right to redress
future or heretofore undiscovered violations,
or obtain penalties
with respect thereto.
WHEREFORE, Complainant and Respondents request that the
Board adopt and accept the foregoing Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement
as written.
-12-
AGREED:
FOR THE COMPLAINANT:
FOR RESPONDENTS:
RIVERDALE RECYCLING,
INC.
LISA
MADIGAN
Attorney General of
BY:
_________________
the State of Illinois
Matthew J. Dunn,
Chief
Title:________________
Environmental Enforcement!
Asbestos Litigation Division
FEIN:
_________________
____________
ROSEMARIE CAZEAU, Ch~f
TRI-STATE DISPOSAL,
INC
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
BY:
__________________
Dated:
/~7/o7
Title:
______________
FEIN:
__________________
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
Chief Legal Counsel
Dated:___________________
-13-
AGREED:
FOR
THE
COMPLAINANT:
FOR
RESPONDENTS:
RIVERDALE RECYC~ING, INC.
LISA MADI
GAN
-
/
C\
Attorney General
of
~
~
the State of Illinois
Matthew J. Dunn,
Chief
Title:_________________
Environmental Enforcement/
Asbestos Litigation Division
FEIN:
~3(’~9~)99~7
ROSEMARIE
CAZEAU,
Chief
TRI-STATE DISPOSAL,
INC
Environmental Bureau
(r~
Assistant Attorney General
BY:
\U~~
L~a~’\
Dated: ______________________
Title
~
~J~IE
FEIN:
~C~-
f~1~5O
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:
JOSEPH E.
SVOBODA
Chief Legal Counsel
Dated:_______________________
-13-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I,
PAULA BECKER WHEELER,
an attorney,
do certify that I
caused
to be served this 22nd day of December,
2003,
the
foregoing Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement and Motion to
Request Relief from Hearing Requirement and Notice of Filing, by
U.S. Mail upon the following persons:
Mr. Mark LaRose
Mr. Bradley Halloran
Attorney for Respondents
Hearing Officer
734
N. Wells
100 West Randolph Street
Chicago,
IL.
60610
1lt~Floor
Chicago,
IL.
60601
PAULA BECKER WHEELER
