ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 21,
1996
PEOPLE
OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
)
)
Complainant,
)
)
v.
)
PCB96-122
)
(Enforcement
-
Air)
EUGENE GROTHAUS,
)
)
Rcspondcnt.
)
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by
J.
Theodore Meyer):
This matter comes before the Board upon a one-count complaint filed December
5,
1995, by the Attorney General of the State of Illinois,
on behalf of the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency and thePeople of the State ofIllinois,
against Eugene Grothaus, regarding
his property located at Central and South First Streets,
Benld, Macoupin County.
The com-
plaint alleges that Eugene Grothaus has violated Section 9(d)(1) of the Illinois Environmental
Protection Act (Act),
(415
ILCS
5/9(d)(1)
(1994)) by failure to provide demolition
notification.
Pursuant to
415
ILCS
5131(a)(2),
the parties filed a joint motion requesting relief from
the Act’s hearing requirement on January 29,
1996.
TheBoard published a notice of the
waiver on February 8,
1996;
no objection
to the granting of the waiver was received.
Waiver
of hearing is hereby granted.
The parties filed a Stipulation and Settlement Agreement on January 29,
1996.
The
Stipulation sets forth facts relating
to the nature, operations and circumstances surrounding the
claimed violations. Eugene Grothaus admits the alleged violations and agrees to pay a civil
penalty of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00).
The Board finds the settlement agreement acceptable under 35 Ill.
Adm.
Code 103.180.
This settlement agreement in no way affects respondent’s responsibility to
comply with any
federal,
state or local regulations,
including but not limited
to the Act and the Board’s
pollution control regulations.
matter.
This opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and conclusions of law in
this
2
ORDER
1)
The Board hereby accepts the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement executed by
the
People of the State
of
Illinois and against Eugene Grothaus, regarding his
property located at Central and South First Streets,
Benid, Macoupin County.
The Stipulation and Settlement Agreement are incorporated by reference as
though
fully set forth herein.
2)
Eugene Grothaus
shall pay the sum of two thousand five hundred dollars
($2,500.00)
in two installments of one thousand two hundred fifty dollars
($1,250.00) each and due within 60 days and
120 days respectively of the date
of this Order.
Such payment shall be made by certified check or money order
payable to the Treasurer of the State of Illinois, designated
to the Environmental
Protection Trust Fund, and
shall be
sent by First Class mail to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Services Division
2200 Churchill Road
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL62794-9276
The certified
check or money order shall clearly indicate on its faceEugene
Grotbaus’s Federal
Employer
Identification Number
and
that payment is
directed to the Environmental Protection
Trust Fund.
Any such penalty not paid within
the time prescribed shall incur interest at the
rate set forth in
subsection (a) of Section
1003 of the Illinois Income Tax Act,
(35
ILCS
5/1003),
as now or hereafter
amended, from the datepayment is due
until the date payment is received.
Interest shall not accrue during the pendency
of an appeal
during which payment of
thepenalty has been stayed.
3)
Eugene Grothaus
shall cease and
desist from
the alleged
violations.
Section 41 ofthe
Environmental Protection Act
(415 ILCS
5/4
1) provides
for the
appeal of final
Board
orders within
35
days ofthe date of service of this order.
(See also 35
Ill. Adm. Code 101.246, Motion for
Reconsideration.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
I, Dorothy M. dunn,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board,
hereby certify that
the above opinion and
order was adopted on
the~/~~
day of ?~7
~-‘~t,
1996,
by a vote
of
T-~o
Dorothy M. ~1nn,
Clerk
Illinois Po114/on Control Board
BEFORE THE
ILLiNOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
BOARE
PEOPLE. OF
THE STATE OF
ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
vs.
)
PCB
No.
96-1 22
)
(Enforcement)
EUGENE GROTHAUS,
)
Respondent.
STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
Complainant,
PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS, by JAMES
E.
RYAN,
Attorney
General of the State
of
Illinois, at the
request of the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency,
and
Respondent,
EUGENE GROTHAUS,
do
hereby submit this
Stipulation and
Proposal
for
Settlement.
The parties
agree
that the statement of facts
contained
herein represents
a fair
summary
of the
evidence
and testimony which would
be
introduced
by the
parties
if a full
hearing
were
held.
The
parties agree that this Settlement is a
compromise of a disputed
claim.
The parties
further stipulate that this
statement of facts is
made and
agreed
upon for
purposes
of settlement only
and
that neither the fact that
a party has entered into the
Stipulation,
nor any
of
the
facts sLipulated
liejein,
shall be inti-oduced
into evidence
in
this or
any other proceeding
except
to enforce the terms
hereof by the
parties
to
this
agreement.
Notwithstanding the
previous
sentence,
this Stipulation
and
Proposal for Settlen-tent
and any
Illinois
Pollution
Control Board
(“Board”)
Order accepting
same may
be
used
in
any future
enforcement
action as
evidence of a
past adjudication of violation,
as
provided
in
Sections
39(i)
and
42(h)
of the
Illinois
Environmental Protection Act (“Act”),
415 ILCS
5/39(i)
and 42(h)
RECEIVED
CLERK’S
OFFICE
JAN
291996
STATE OF ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
1
(19911).
The agreement
shall be
null and
void
unless the
Roard approves
and disposes of
this matter
on each
and
every one
of the terms
and
conditions
of the Settlement set forth
herein.
JURISDICTION
The
Board
has jurisdiction
of the subject matter
herein and of the parties consenting
hereto
pursuant to the Act, 415
ILCS 5/1
at seq.
(1994).
II.
AUTHORIZATION
The
undersigned
representatives for each
party
certify that they are fully
authorized by
the
party whom
they represent to enter into the terms and
conditions
of this Stipulation and
Proposal
for Settlement
and to legally bind them
to
it.
Ill.
APPLICABILITY
This
Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement
shall
apply to
and
be
binding
upon the
Complainant
and Respondent
and any officer,
director,
agent,
employee or servant of
Respondent,
as
well as
the Respondent’s successors
and
assigns.
The Respondent shall
not raise
as
a defense to any
enforcement
action taken
pursuant to this Settlement the failure
of its officers,
directors,
agents,
servants,
or employees
to take such
action
as shall
be
required
to
comply with the
provisions of this
Settlement.
Iv.
STATEMENT OF
FACTS
1.
The Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency (“Agency”)
is an administrative
agency established
in
the
executive
branch of the State government
by Section
4
of the Act,
2
415
ILCS 5/4
(1994),
and
is charged, jia~j:a!i~.
with the duty of enforcing the Act.
2.
Respondent,
Eugene Grothaus,
owned a
lumber yard
located
at Central and
South
First Streets,
Benld,
Macoupin
County,
Illinois 62009
(“the facility”).
3.
On
or before
February
23.
1995,
the exact date
known only
to
Respondent,
Respondent performed
a
demolition
of the facility.
4.
The Respondent did
not submit a demolition
notification to
the Agency
prior to
the
demolition
date,
in violation of Section 9.1(d)(1)
of the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Act, 415
ILCS 5/9.1(d)(1)
(1994),
and 40
C.F.R. 61.145(b)
(1993).
V.
FUTURE
PLANS
OF COMPLIANCE
Respondent shall diligently conform
to
the Act, 415
ILCS 5/1 ~
(1994),
and
the
Board’s Air Pollution
Regulations,
35
III. Adm.
Code Subtitle
B.
VI.
IMPACT
ON THE
PUBLIC RESULTING FROM
NON-COMPLIANCE
Section
33(c) of the Act,
415
ILCS 5/33(c)
(1994),
provides:
C.
In making
its orders
and
determinations,
the Board
shall take
into consideration
all the facts and cIrcumstances
bearing
upon
the reasonableness of the
emissions,
discharges,
or deposits
involved including,
but not
limited to:
1.
the
character and degree of
injury
to, or interference
with
the
protection of the
health,
general welfare
and physical
property of the
people;
2.
the
social
and economic value of the pollution source;
3.
the
suitability or unsuitability of the
pollution source to the
area
in which it
is located, including the
question or
priority
of location in the area
involved;
4.
the technical practibility and
economic reasonableness of
reducing
or climinoting the emissione,
discharges
or
deposits resulting from
such
pollution source;
and
3
5.
any subsequent compliance.
In
response
to these factors,
the
parties state as
follows:
1.
If the
Complainant’s
allegations
are
accepted as
correct,
the injury to,
or
interference
with
the protection of the health,
general welfare,
and
physical
property
of the
People would
be characterized
as
a potential for exposure
to asbestos-containing materials
and
the
degree
of injury would be
dependent upon the extent of exposure;
2.
The
parties agree that the activity
arising
from the demolition
of a
building may
be of social and economic
benefit;
3.
The
issue of
suitability or unsuitability of the pollution
source
has no
applicability
in this
instance;
4.
The
parties agree
that complying with the Act and
regulations
is technically
practicable
and
economically
reasonable;
and
5.
The
Respondent is currently
in
compliance with
the Act
and
the
Board’s Air
Pollution
Regulations.
VII.
CONSIDERATION
OF
SECTION 42(hI
FACTORS
Section
42(h)
of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(h)
(1994),
provides:
h.
In
determining the appropriate civil penalty to be
imposed
under
subdivisions
(a),
(b)(1),
(b)(2)
or (b)(3)
of this
Section,
the
Board
is authorized
to
consider any
matters
of record
in
mitigation
or
aggravation of penalty,
including but not limited
to the following
factors:
1.
the duration
and gravity
of the
violation;
2.
the presence
or
absence of due
diligence on the part of
the violator in attcmpting
to comply with the
requirements
of this Act and
regulations thereunder
or to
secure
relief
therefrom
as
provided
by this Act;
3.
any economic
benefits accrued
by the violator because of
4
delay in
compliance
with
requirements;
4.
the
amount
of monetary
penalty which will serve to
deter
further
violations by the violator and to
otherwise
aid
in
enhancing voluntary compliance with this Act
by the
violator and
other persons similarly subject to
the Act;
and
5.
the
number,
proximity
in time,
and gravity
of previously
adjudicated
violations of this Act by the violator.
In
response
to these factors,
the parties
state as follows:
1.
The alleged violations occurred on
or about
February
23,
1995.
2.
The Respondent contends that
he
was
unaware of the
notification
requirement
prior
to
initiating
demolition
activity.
3.
The economic benefit
of Respondent’s
noncompliance
is the savings,
if any,
IeaItLed
by
riot
paying
the
expenses incurred
in
the preparation
and
submittal
of
documentation
required
to ensure
compliance with
applicable
regulations.
4.
Complainant
has determined,
in this instance,
that a penalty
of
two
thousand
five hundred
dollars
($2,500.00) will
serve to
deter further violations
and aid
in future
voluntary enforcement of the Act and
applicable regulations;
and
5.
Respondent has no
previously adjudicated violations.
VIII.
TERMS
OF
SETTLEMENT
A.
The Respondent admits violations
of Section
9.1(d)
of the Act,
415
ILCS
5/9.1(d)(1)
(1994),
and
40 C.F.R. 61.145
(1993).
B.
The Respondent shall
pay
a penalty of Two Thousand
Five
Hundred
Dollars
($2,500.00)
into
the Illinois
Environmental Protection Trust
Fund
payable
in two
installments
of One Thousand
Two
Hundred
Fifty Dollars
($1 .250.00)
each and due within 60
days and
5
120 days,
respectively,
from
the date on which
the Board
adopts a final
order approving this
Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement.
Payment shall be
made
by certified
check or
money
order,
payable to
the Treasurer
of the State of Illinois,
designated
to the Environmental
Protection Trust
Fund,
and
shall
be
sent by first class mail to:
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency
Fiscal
Services
Section
2200
Churchill
Road
P.O.
Box 19276
Springfield,
Illinois
62794-9276
Respondent’s
Federal Employer
Identification Number shall
be
written
upon the certified
check or money
order.
C.
Respondent shall comply
with
Section 9.1(d)(1)
of the
Act, 415
ILCS
5/9.1(d)(1)
(1994),
and 40
C.F.R.
61.145(b)
(1993),
and shall
cease
and desist from future
violations
of any
other federal,
state,
or local environmental
statutes
and regulations,
including the Act and the
Board
Rules
and
Regulations.
6
IX.
COMPLIANCE WITH
OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS
This
Stipulation
and
Proposal for Settlement
in no
way affects
the responsibility of
Respondent to comply with any federal,
state, or
local regulations,
including but not
limited to
the Act,
415
ILCS
5/1
~ ~q.
(1994),
and the Board’s
Rules
and
Regulations,
35
III.
Adm.
Code,
Subtitles A through
H.
WHEREFORE, Complainant
and
Respondent request that the
Board adopt and
accept
the
foregoing
Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement as written.
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS
JAMES
E.
RYAN
Attorncy Gcncral
of the
State
of Illinois
MATTHEW
J.
DUNN,
Chief
Environmental Enforcement
Division
DATED:
ii/Joi~~c
BY:___________________
THOMAS
DAVIS, Chief
Environmental
Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL
r~OTECTI
CV
DATED:__________
-~
‘I
/
1H SVOBODA
leral Counsel
of Legal
Counsel
EUGENE
GROTHAUS
R
ondent
DATED:
~
grothstp/Ip
7
