ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
August 23,
1979
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB 76—190
ILLINOIS CENTRAL GULF RAILROAD CO.,
Respondent.
MR. REED NEUMAN, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON BEHALF
OF COMPLAINANT;
MR. TERRY N. BROWN,
GUNDLOCK, LEE, EGGMAN, BOYLE AND ROESSLER,
APPEARED ON BEHALI? OF RESPONDENT.
OPINION
ANI) ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Goodman):
This enforcement action was filed before the Board on
August
9,
1976 by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(Agency) alleging violation of Section
9(a) of the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act
(Act) by Illinois Central Gulf
Railroad
(ICG), Monsanto Corporation
(Monsanto), Amax Zinc
Company,
Inc.
(Amax),
and General
American Transportation
Company
(GATX).
Monsanto,
Amax and GATX were later dismissed
from the action on the Agency’s motion.
At the May 14, 1979
hearing,
the Agency and ICG submitted a Proposed Stipulation
and Settlement Agreement
(Stipulation).
No testimony was
offered, nor were any witnesses called.
No members of the
public were present.
The Pro7osed Stipulation asserts that at approximately
2:15 p.m.
on May 29,
1976,
a train owned and operated by ICG
derailed
for undetermined causes approximately 200 feet west
of Illinois Highway 157 and 200 feet north of
Illinois High-
way 163
in St. Clair County, near Centerville,
Illinois.
Two
of the fourteen derailed cars contained chemical materials.
A car consigned by Monsanto contained approximately 140,000
pounds of chiorosulfonic acid.
A car consigned by
Ainax con-
tained approximately 100,000 pounds of sulfuric acid in 93
concentration.
Surfuric acid leaked from the car after damage to its
safety vent assembly,
caused when the car rolled on its side.
When the acid flowed into
a ditch between the main rail line
and a parallel
track,
a sulfuric acid mist developed.
A fire—
35—183
—2—
man treating the spill received minor burns.
By 4:00 p.m.
on
May 29,
1976, after approximately 15 tons of
acid
had been
released,
Amax personnel had stopped the leak.
Standing acid
was drained into a pit and neutralized with limestone
dust.
The derailed car containing chlorosulfonic acid stood
upright, but acid leaked from its east end and formed a pool
underneath the car.
The acid decomposed as
it reacted with
moisture
in the ambient air and it formed a dense cloud of
hydrochloric acid and sulfur dioxide approximately 200 feet
high and 100 feet
in diameter.
By 6:45 p.m.,
ICG workmen
had set the car on its side to locate the rupture, but were
prevented
from doing
so by dense
fumes.
Crewmen drained the
chlorosulfonic acid into a trench and pit they had dug and
appreciably reduced the fumes by applying earth as
a cover.
Approximately 20 tons of
chlorosulfonic acid had spilled from
the
car.
Hulcher Emergency Service,
Inc.
(Hulcher), upon ICG’s
request,
sent
a
chemical team to the scene by 5:00 p.m. on
May
29,
1976.
At
6:00
p.m.,
Hulcher’s
re—railing
team
was
contacted when the ICG crews and Huicher’s chemical team
could not stop the leak.
At 10:00 p.m.,
the re—railing crew
arrived, cleared the area,
located the rupture and sealed the
leak.
J3y 10:00 a.m. on May 30,
1976,
the chiorosulfonic acid
had been transferred to empty cars.
The damaged car which had
prevented access
to the acid spill was removed.
The spilled
acid was then covered with
lime and earth.
The fumes were
brought under control by 1:30 p.m. on May 30,
1976,
at which
time nearly 500 evacuees were allowed
to return.
Approximately
28 citizens were treated or examined at Centerville Hospital
for fume—related injuries and were released; one was admitted.
For purposes of the Proposed Settlement,
the parties
stipulate that ICG caused or allowed the discharge of contam-
inants into the atmosphere
so as to cause or tend to cause
air pollution
in Illinois
in violation of Section
9(a) of the
Act.
The parties, however,
further stipulate that the viola-
tions by ICG were unintentional.
Although ICC submits that
it acted promptly and diligently to correct the problems and
dangers,
the Agency maintains that ICG did not swiftly enough
recognize
its inability to solve the acid problem and the need
for re—railing
crews
to he called to the scene.
In any event,
the parties are aware
that
the
Board
in
EPA v.
Chicago
& North
Western Transjportation
Co.,etal.,
30 PCB
365,
PCB 76—155
(June
8,
1978)
held
that
operators
of
a
potential
source
of
pollution
have
a
duty
to
anticipate
and
make
preparations
to
abate
possible
pollution
before
it
occurs
see
Phil
l~sPetro—
~c..
EPA and Chicago
&
Northwestern
Transportation
Co.,
—
Ill.
App.
3rd
(2nd
District,
1979)1.
The parties sub-
mit
that
their controversy,
if fully litigated, would conclude
in a similar
result.
35—184
—3—
The Board
finds that ICG violated Section
9(a)
of the
Act.
In the lack of evidence to the contrary,
the Board pre-
sumes
that ICG followed a prepared emergency plan and respon-
ded promptly in abating the pollution problem caused by the
accident.
Considering the significant economic
loss exper-
ienced by ICG in this matter,
and ICG’s recognition of and
attempts to resolve the problem, the Board holds that impos-
ing a fine would not further the enforcement of the Act in
this case.
The Board hereby accepts the Proposed Stipulation and
Settlement Agreement as presented at the hearing of May 14,
1979,
and incorporates the document by reference as
if fully
set forth herein.
This Opinion constitutes
the findings
of fact and conclu-
sions of
law of the Board in this matter.
ORDER
It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:
1)
the Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Company violated
Section 9(a)
of the Environmental Protection Act.
2)
the
Proposed Stipulation and Settlement Agreement as
presented during the hearing of May 14, 1979 is incor-
porated by reference as
if fully set forth herein and
is
to be given full
effect.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board,
Opinion and Order were
on the
1979 by
a vote of
Christan L. Moffe~
Illinois Pollution~~trolBoard
day of
35—185