ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

February 17,

1977

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Complainant,

v.

)

 PCB 76—103

MATERIAL SERVICE CORPORATION,

Respondent.

Mr. Dennis

 R. Fields, Assistant Attorney General, appeared for the

Complainant;

Mr. Louis

 R, Hegeman, Attorney, appeared for the Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

 (by Mr. Zeitlin):

This matter is before the Board on an Enforcement Complaint

filed by the Environmental Protection Agency

 (Agency)

 on April

16,

1976.

 The first Count in that Complaint alleged that Respondent

Material Service Corporation

 (Material Service) had modified four

rotary kilns at its Ottawa,

 LaSalle County,

 lightweight aggregate

yards, without the requisite permit from the Agency,

 in violation

of Section

 9(b)

 of the Environmental Protection Act

 (Act)

 and Rule

103(a) (1)

 of the Board~sAir Pollution Control Regulations;

the

second Count alleged a violation of Section 12(b) sic

 of the Act

resulting from operating permit violations at the same location,

and requested permit revocation pursuant to Rule 103(f)

 of the Air

Regulations;

 Count III alleged visible emissions

 from that facility

on August 19,

 21, and 22,

 1975, and September

4,

 1975,

 in violation

of Section 9(a)

 of the Act and Rule 202(b)

 of the Air Regulations.

A hearing was held

 in the matter

 in Streator,

 Illinois on

January

 1 977

Lha

L

hear

Lhe

l~r

(;

i

 ~uin

 L ted

tipula—

tion of

Facts

and

Agreement

(Stipulation)

resolution

the

case.

No additional testimony or evidence was entered and no comments were

received from the public.

 The Stipulation submitted by the parties

forms the basis of this Opinion and Order.

Material Servic&s Ottawa facility processes mined shale into

a special, lightweight aggregate used to make lightweight concrete.

The shale is passed through various crushers and vibrating screens

(the “front end,”

 Stip.,

 ¶3),

 after which

 a 2,000°temperature in

the four kilns

 is used to expand the shale

 (the

 “back end,”

 id.).

The process also involves the use of various additional

 screening,

crushing,

 conveying, and storage steps.

—

779

—2—

Throughout Material Service’s plant a fine particulate matter

(called

 “fines”) may be emitted;

 These fines are quite difficult

to control, consisting of raw shale and not expanded shale.

An

additional problem appears to be a very high acid dewpoint temperature

in waste gas steams,

 (Stip.,

 Ex. A at p.7, Permit Application for

kiln No.

1).

Under the Stipulation, Material Service has commenced installation

of wet scrubbers to control its emissions,

 (Id.;

 see also, Stip.,

 ¶10).

The parties agree that these scrubbers should achieve compliance with

Rule 203(a)

 of Chapter

2,

 (StIp.,

 ¶11).

 Material Service has also

performed the following to achieve abatement:

1.

 The raw material crushers have been replaced

with a type that will produce fewer

 “fines” at a cost

of $235,000.

2.

 Moisture has been added to the kiln operation,

causing agglomeration of fines in the kilns.

3.

 A siphon system has been installed to remove

“fines” from the cyclone collection hopper, and convey

them in

 a slurry to settling ponds, at a cost of $210,000

(although the reclaimed materials may be sold as product

after reclamation).

4.

 Two additional baghouses were constructed

In

1975 at

 a cost of $250,000.

5.

 An enclosed stone chute in the “fines” stock-

pile was modified and replaced In 1975; water sprays have

also been applied to the final stockpile.

6.

 An extensive maintenance program has been enacted.

7.

 Other programs,

 at a total cost of $570,000,

have been implemented which should reduce particulate

emjssions

In addition to these abatement and compliance actions,

the

Stipulation provides for the following In settlement:

1.

 The Agency has agreed to withdraw Counts

 I and

II of its Complaint.

2.

 Respondent admits violation as alleged in Count

III of the Complaint.

3.

 Respondent agrees to a civil penalty of $5,000.

4.

 Respondent will apply for all applicable Agency

permits.

—

780

—3—

In light of the fact that complete compliance should be achieved

under this compliance plan,

 the Board finds the provisions

 of the

Stipulation acceptable.

 Under

 a timetable appended

 to the Stipuia-

tion,

 (Stip.,

Ex.

A)

 compliance may have already been achieved;

if

not,

 it will be achieved fairly soon.

 In light of the “extensive

cooperation” which the Agency stated that Material Service exhibited

in its efforts

 to achieve compliance,

 (R.,

 3), we find that stipulated

penalty of $5,000 will be adequate

 this case.

This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law of the Board

 in this matter.

ORDER

IT

 IS THE ORDER OF THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD that:

1.

 Respondent Material Service Corporation is found to have

operated its Ottawa,

 Illinois facility in violation of Section

 9(a)

of the Environmental Protection Act and Rule 202(b)

 of Chapter

2:

Air Pollution,

 of this Board’s Rules and Regulations,

 on August

19,

21 and 22,

 1975, and September

4,

 1975.

2.

 Respondent shall pay as

 a penalty for the above violations

the sum of Five Thousand Dollars

 ($5,000.00),

 in the manner provided

for

 in paragraph

 20 of the Stipulation of Fact and Agreement submitted

by the parties

 to this matter.

3.

 Respondent shall comply in all respects with the compliance

and permit provisions of the Stipulation of Fact and Agreement sub-

mitted by the parties

 in this matter.

4.

 Counts

 I and II of the Complaint

 in this matter are dismissed.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board,

 hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were

adopted on the

/7~4

day of

 1977,

 by a vote of

Christan

Moffett,

Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

781