ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December 5,
    1972
    SOUTH SIDE FOUNDRY COMPANY
    )
    #72—105
    v.
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    )
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    v.
    )
    #72—187
    SOUTH SIDE FOUNDRY COMPANY
    )
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (BY SAMUEL T.
    LAWTON,
    JR.):
    On October
    3,
    1972,
    Order was entered in the above consolidated
    proceedinq providing inter alia as follows:
    “3.
    South Side Foundry Company shall submit to the
    Board and the Agency within 30 days from the date of this
    Order, a specific program for Air Contaminant Emission
    Control and abatement of particulate and carbon monoxide
    emissions from
    its
    foundry. operation,
    including a specific
    program of purchase, acquisition and installation of equip-
    ment,
    to bring its foundry operation into compliance with
    all relevant regulations and statutory provisions relative
    to the control of air pollution.
    4.
    South Side Foundry Company shall provide
    a bond
    in the amount of $10,000 payable to the Environmental
    Protection Agency and mailed to Fiscal Services Division,
    Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,
    2200 Churchill
    Drive, Springfield,
    Illinois 62706.
    The bond shall be in
    the form satisfactory to the Agency and shall guarantee
    that the program of compliance required by paragraph 3
    of this Order shall be submitted in the time provided and
    in the form required.
    5.
    The company shall install a spark arrester in
    its stack preventing any emission of sparks into the
    atmosphere, within two weeks from the date hereof.
    6
    —
    379
    6.
    The Board retains jurisdiction for such other and
    further orders as are appropriate, based upon the fore-
    going orovisions of the Order.”
    We have received a petition from South Side Foundry Company
    recuesting
    that our order be modified by deleting the provision for
    the costing of a
    “performance” bond.
    The petitioner incorrectly
    interprets paragraph
    4 of the Order as requiring the posting of a
    performance bond with respect
    to the ultimate compliance program.
    However, a careful reading of paragraph
    4
    makes clear that the bond
    related
    to
    the
    obligation
    to
    submit
    the
    abatement
    program
    required
    by
    paragraph
    3
    of
    the
    Order
    and
    not
    to
    guarantee
    performance
    of
    the
    ~rogram
    as
    submitted.
    In
    its
    petition,
    petitioner
    has
    submitted
    drawings and correspondence which it represents to be a program
    of compliance which would,
    in effect,
    satisfy paragraph
    3 of the
    Order, providing Agency approval is obtained.
    If,
    in fact,
    this
    has occurred than the need for the bond,
    so far as the submission
    of the program is concerned, has been eliminated.
    We will direct
    the
    Agency to analyze the program submitted and advise the Board
    of its evaluation within 14 days from the date hereof.
    Upon re-
    ceipt of the Agency’s advice with respect to the foregoing, we will
    enter such other and further orders as may be appropriate in
    modification or extension of our previous order.
    I,
    Christan
    Moffett,
    Clerk
    of
    the
    Illinois
    Pollution
    Control
    Board,
    certify
    that
    the
    above
    Opinion
    and
    Order
    was
    adopted
    on
    the
    5th
    Day
    of
    December,
    1972,
    by
    a vote of
    ~/
    to
    (D
    —2—
    6
    —
    380

    Back to top