ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

August

18,

1983

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Complainant,

PCB 82~84

SCHNOWSKE BY-PRODUCTS,

INC.,

an

Illinois

Corporation,

Respondent.

MR.

THOMAS

R.

CHIOLA,

ASSISTANT

ATTORNEY

GENERAL,

APPEARED

ON

BEHALF

OF

THE

COMPLAINANT.

MR. EVERETT SCHN~SKE AND MR. LARRY SCHN~SKE APPEARED PRO SE,

OPINION

AND

ORDER

OF

THE

BOARD

(by W.J~ Nega):

This matter comes before the Board on the June

23,

1982

24-count

Complaint

brought by

the Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency

(Agency)

which

alleged that the Respondent, Schnowske

By-Products,

Inc.

(Schnowske),

improperly operated its rendering

plant by discharging wastewaters into Illinois waters without the

requisite NPDES Permit and

by

violating the Board~seffluent and

water quality standards,

A hearing was

held on

June

6,

1983.

The

parties filed a

Stipulation and Proposal for

Settlcment

on July

20,

1983.

The Respondent

owns

and operates

an animal rendering plant

in Cambridge, Henry County,

Illinois,

Prior to 1974,

this plant

was operated by a partnership d/b/a/ Cambridge Rendering Works.

Mr.

Everett Schnowske was a partner in the Cambridge Rendering

Works and is currently President,

a member of the Board of Directors,

and a major shareholder

in Schnowske By-Products, Inc.

(R.

9).

Mr.

Larry Schnowske is Vice—President,

a member of the Board of

Directors, and owner of a substantial number of shares

in this

family enterprise.

The rendering facility processes livestock (such as

cattle and hogs), bones,

tallow,

animal

blood wastes, and paunch

manure and produces dry animal feed supplement, hides, and animal

fats.

Cookers, boilers,

and a condensor are used in the rendering

process.

Wastewater generated by the rendering process is sent

through septic tanks to a two—cell lagoon system.

The second

cell

of the treatment facility discharges from a pipe on a hillside

which slopes toward the South Fork of an unnamed tributary of

53-205

---

Spring Creek, with discharges entering the stream.

Boiler blowdown

water, excess chemically—treated boiler feed water, wastewater

from the water softener, and liquid wastes (primarily grease in

the form of tallow) have been discharged to

a hillside and have

flowed into an unnamed tributary to Spring Creek without the

requisite NPDES Permit,

On October

21,

1966, the Illinois Sanitary Water Board

(predecessor of the Illinois Pollution Control Board)

advised the

Cambridge Rendering Works

(predecessor of Schnowske By—Products,

Inc.) that

it

was

in

violation of Illinois law becuase it:

(1)

constructed the wastewater treatment facilities without the

required permit,

and

(2)

discharged inadequately treated wastewater

into Illinois waters,

(See:

Exhibit

1).

On November 22,

1966,

Beling Engineering Consultants responded to the Sanitary Water

Board’s letter and indicated that the requisite permits for the

facilities would be

promptly

obtained and that no discharges

would result until the necessary permits were obtained,

(See:

Exhibit 2). On December

6,

1966, the Sanitary Water Board,

in its

reply to the letter of the engineering

firm, noted that the

treatment lagoon should not have an overflow pipe (or other

structure) allowing a discharge.

(See:

Exhibit

3).

On September 14,

1967, the Sanitary Water Board again warned

Cambridge Rendering Works that discharges from the treatment

system violated state law and that past commitments to rectify

the situation remained unfulfilled,

(See:

Exhibit 4).

On

August

3,

1969,

Schnowske’s predecessor company was again warned

about the water pollution resulting from its improper discharges.

(See:

Exhibit 5),

Or:

January

17,

1973,

the Agency notified

Schnowske’s predecessor

that

construction and operating permits

for its wastewater treatment facilities were required.

(See:

Exhibit 6),

In July,

1980,

Schnowske was notified that an Agency

inspection had revealed that discharges from its rendering plant

and wastewater treatment facilities were causing violations of

applicable regulations and corrective action was suggested.

(See:

Exhibit 7),

Agency inspections of the Respondent’s rendering plant and

receiving streams were conducted on various occasions

(including

April

30, 1980; January 29,

1981;

April

14,

1981; July 22, 1981;

and September

3,

1981).

Sampling of effluent discharges and

water quality, stream sampling, and photos all indicate that

violations did,

in fact,

occur,

(See:

Exhibits 8,9,10,11 and

12).

Such violations included:

(1) discharges from t~ietreatment

lagoon without an NPDES Permit which exceeded the appropriate

effluent limits;

(2) improper discharges of boiler make—up water,

boiler blowdown water, various hide wastewaters, and water softener

water without an NPDES Permit which violated the requisite effluent

limits and water quality standards;

(3)

improper discharges from

the rendering plant and

from

an open dump site;

(4) failure to

have a properly certified operator for its treatment lagoon,

and

(5)

failure to file the necessary monthly reports.

(Stip.

5—8),

53-206

---

—3—

The proposed settlement agreement provides that the Respondent

admits the violations alleged in

the Complaint and agrees to:

(1) cease and desist from further violations;

(2) follow a specified

compliance schedule and timetable to obtain the requisite permits

and install the appropriate improvements to bring Schnowske into

full

compliance with all applicable regulations

for wastewater

discharges from its rendering plant;

(3) monitor discharges from

its present lagoon treatment system for 15 specified parameters

upon completion of the requisite improvements;

(4) limit dis’-

charges of contaminants from the lagoon;

(5) submit the necessary

discharge

monitoring reports and monthly operating reports to the

Agency;

(6) promptly employ a properly certified operator after

its upgraded treatment system is completed;

(7)

dispose of solid

and liquid wastes which do not go into the lagoon system at an

Agency—approved landfill;

(8)

apply for its NPDES Permit by

August

1,

1983;

and

(9)

pay a stipulated penalty of $9,000.00 in

installments.

(Stip.

8’-14;

See:

Exhibit 13).

In evaluating this enforcement action and proposed settlement

agreement,

the Board has taken into consideration all the facts

and circumstances in light of the specific criteria delineated in

Section 33(c)

of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (Act)

and finds the settlement agreement generally acceptable under

35 Ill. Adm, Code 103.180,

However, paragraphs 26 and 27 on pages 12—13 of the Stipulation

and

Proposal for Settlement contain unacceptable

language which

provides for contingent penalties if the construction

schedule is

not

met in a timely fashion and calls for an improper delegation

of the Board’s authority to the Agency

Thus, the Board will accept the proposed settlement agreement

with the proviso that paragraphs 26 and 27 of the Stipulation and

Proposal for Settlement be stricken.

A certification of

acceptance

and agreement to be

bound to all terms and conditions of the

Board’s

Order (including the deletion of paragraphs 26 and

27 of

the

proposed settlement agreement) has been included as paragraph

5

of the Board’s Order.

If the parties choose not to

accept the

modified settlement agreement,

the Stipulation

and Proposal for

Settlement is rejected in toto and the case

is remanded

to the parties for appropriate action.

The Board finds that the Respondent,

Schnowske By—Products,

Inc., has violated 35

Ill,

Adm. Code 302,203; 302,208; 304,105;

304106; 304.120; 304,201;

305,102;

309,102; and 312.101 and

Sections 12(a),

12(d),

12(f) and 21(a) of the Act.

The Respondent

will be ordered to cease and desist from further violations;

follow the compliance plan set forth in the modified ~tipulation;

and to pay the stipulated penalty of $9,000.00

in spe~ified

instaliments,

---

—4—

This Opinion constitues the Board’s findings of fact and

conclusions of law in this matter,

ORDER

It is the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board

that:

1.

The Respondent, Schnowske By—Products,

Inc., has

violated 35 111.

Adm, Code 302,203; 302,208;

304,105; 304,106;

304.120; 304.201; 305.102;

309,102; and 312.101 and Sections

12(a),

12(d),

12(f), and 21(a)

of the Illinois Environmental

Protection Act,

2,

The Respondent shall cease and desist from further

violations.

3,

Within

90 days of the date of this Order,

the

Respondent shall, by certified check or money order payable to

the State of Illinois, pay a first installment of $3,000.00 on

the total stipulated penalty of $9,000.00 which is to be sent to:

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Fiscal Services Division

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield,

Illinois

62706

The second installment of $3,000.00 shall be paid within 120

days after the first installment; and the third installment of

$3,000.00 shall be paid within 120 days after the second installment,

in the same manner and fashion as the first installment (i.e., by

certified check or money order payable to the State of Illinois

and

sent to the Agency).

4.

The Respondent shall comply with all the terms and

conditions of the Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement filed

on

July 20,

1983,

as modified, which

is incorporated by reference

as if fully set forth herein,

Paragraphs

26 and 27 on pages 12—13

of the Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement are hereby deleted.

5,

Within 45 days of the date

of

this

Order,

Schnowske By—

Products,

Inc. and the Agency shall execute

a Certification of

Acceptance and Agreement to be bound to all terms and conditions

of this Order,

If the parties choose not to accept the modified

settlement agreement, the Stipulation and Proposal fo~Settlement

is rejected in toto and the case

is remanded to the parties

for

appropriate action, This Certification shall be submitted

to

the Board and to the Agency at 2200 Churchill Road,

Springfield,

Illinois

62706,

The 45—day period shall be held

in abeyance during any period that this matter is being

appealed.

The form of said Certification shall be as follows:

53-208

---

CERTIFICATION

I,

(We)

,

hereby

accept and agree to be

bound

by all terms and conditions of

the

Order of the Ilinois Pollution Control Board in PCB 82-84, dated

August 18,

Schnowske By—Products,

Inc.

Illinois Environmental

Authorized Agent

Authorized Agent

Date

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I,

Christar~L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board hereby ceçtify that the above Opinion and Order

was adopted on ~jie~

J~’-

day of

_____________________,

1983

by a vote of

~

Illinois Pollution Control Board