ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    November 21, 1996
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
    Complainant,
    v.
    PRECISION CHROME, INC.,
    Respondent.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    PCB 97-55
    (Enforcement - Land)
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by J. Yi):
    On September 16, 1996, the Illinois Attorney General, on behalf of the People of the
    State of Illinois and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency), filed a formal
    complaint pursuant to Section 31 of the Environmental Protection Act (Act) naming as
    respondent Precision Chrome, Inc. (Precision), an Illinois corporation located at 105 Precision
    Road, Fox Lake, Lake County, Illinois. (415 ILCS 5/31.) The six (6) count complaint alleges
    that Precision failed to perform a hazardous waste determination in violation of 35 Ill. Adm.
    Code 722.111 and Section 21(f)(2) of the Act; failed to obtain a United States Environmental
    Protection Agency (USEPA) identification number prior to offering waste for transportation in
    violation of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 722.112 and Section 21(f)(2) of the Act; failed to prepare an
    annual report for the waste chrome solution prior to offering the solution for off-site
    transportation in violation of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 722.141(a) and Section 21(f)(2) of the Act;
    failed to prepare manifests for the waste chrome solution prior to offering the solution for off-
    site transportation in violation of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 722.120 and Section 21(f)(2) of the Act;
    operated a hazardous waste surface impoundment without a Resource Conservation and
    Recovery Act (RCRA) permit in violation of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 703.121(a) and Section
    21(f)(2) of the Act; and failed to implement a groundwater monitoring program while
    operating a surface impoundment in violation of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 725.190(a) and (b) and
    Section 21 (f)(2) of the Act. (415 ILCS 5/21(f)(2).)
    On September 24, 1996 the parties filed a joint motion for extension of time to answer
    or otherwise plead until November 15, 1996. The Board granted the motion for an extension
    of time until November 15, 1996.
    On November 15, 1996 the parties filed a second joint motion for an extension of time
    for the respondent to file its answer. The parties state that they believe settlement is within
    reach and request additional time to negotiate such settlement. The parties request an
    extension for the respondent until January 9, 1997.
    The Board grants the parties joint motion for an extension of time. Respondent’s
    answer is now due on or before January 9, 1997.
    2
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, hereby certify that
    the above order was adopted on the _____ day of ___________, 1996, by a vote of
    ______________.
    ___________________________________
    Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board

    Back to top