ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 14,
1986
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
)
Complainant,
)
)
v.
)
PCB 83-60
)
PIERCE WASTE OIL SERVICE,
INC.,
)
a Delaware corporation, and
)
CENTRAL REFINING COMPANY,
)
a Delaware corporation,
)
Respondents.
)
MR. JOSEPH
F. MADONIA, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL,
APPEARED ON
BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT.
WOLFSON
&
PAPUSHF(EWYCH (MR.
MICHAEL McGRAW, OF COUNSEL) APPEARED
ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by W.J.
Nega):
This matter comes
before the Board on the April 26, 1983
Complaint brought by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(Agency).
After extensive discovery and numerous
pre-hearing
procedural matters had been disposed of, the Agency filed
a
Motion to Amend the Complaint and a First Amended Complaint on
July
2,
1985.
On July 11,
1985,
the Board entered an Order which referred
the Agency’s July
2,
1985 motion to the Hearing Officer for
disposition.
A hearing on
a proposed settlement agreement was held on
November
18, 1985 at which no members
of the public were
present.
(R.
2).
On January
3,
1986,
the Agency filed a Motion to Amend the
Complaint and a Motion for Leave to file
its Second Amended
Complaint.
In its January
3,
1986 motion,
the Agency represented that
“since the hearing in this case was held on November
18,
1985,
and since Respondents have agreed to the filing of this Second
Amended Complaint as part
of
a Settlement Agreement, Respondents
are not disadvantaged because
of surprise with the amendment of
the First Amended Complaint”.
-2-
Accordingly,
on January
9,
1986,
the Board entered an Order
which granted the Agency’s motion to amend the Complaint and
granted the Agency leave
to file its Second Amended Complaint.
Count
I of the eight-count Second Amended Complaint alleged
•that, intermittently from April
17,
1980 until approximately
June
15,
1983, Respondents Pierce Waste Oil Service,
Inc.
(Pierce
Waste Oil) and Central Refining Company (Central Refining) have,
alone and
in combination with each other, caused air pollution by
the emission into the atmosphere of odors and other contaminants
in sufficient
quantities and of such characteristics
and duration
as to be
injurious
to human
life,
to plant
life,
to health and to
property or which have unreasonably interfered with the enjoyment
of life and property in violation of former Rule 102 of Chapter
2: Air Pollution Regulations
(now 35 Ill. Adm. Code 201.141) and
Section 9(a)
of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act
(Act).
Count
II alleged that,
on various occasions
since
approximately January,
1981,
Respondent Central Refining has
caused
or
allowed
the
construction
or
modification
of
specified
emission
sources
or
air
pollution
control
equipment
(namely,
its
reboiler, Condenser System
B,
and Pipe Stills
#4) without first
obtaining the requisite Construction Permits from the Agency in
violation of former Rule 103(a)(1) of Chapter
2: Air Pollution
Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm. Code 201.142) and Section
9(b) of
the Act.
Count
III alleged
that, intermittently since approximately
January,
1981 and continuing at least through
1982, Respondent
Central
Refining
has
caused
or
allowed
the
operation
of
its
new
emissions
sources
or
new
air
pollution
control
equipment
(i.e.,
its
Reactor
#2,
Condenser
Systems
A
and
B,
Contactor,
and
API
Separator) without first obtaining the necessary Operating
Permits from the Agency in violation of former Rule 103(b)(1)
of
Chapter 2: Air Pollution Regulations
(now 35
Ill. Adm.
Code
201.143) and Section
9(b)
of the Act.
Count IV alleged that, intermittently since at least
January,
1981 and continuing until approximately June,
1983,
Respondent
Central
Refining
has
caused
or
allowed
the
operation
of existing emission sources
(i.e.,
its Reactor
#1,
Boiler
Bi,
and Pipe Stills
#1-3) without first obtaining the required
Operating Permits
from the Agency in violation of former Rule
103(b)(2) of Chapter 2: Air Pollution Regulations
(now
35 Iii.
Adm. Code 201.144) and Section
9(b) of the Act.
Count V alleged that,
on various and intermittent dates from
at least May, 1979 until approximately June
15,
1983 (including,
but not limited to, August 21,
1979, December
5,
1979, May 11,
1981,
June 26,
1981,
January
28,
1982,
April
12,
1982, May 24,
1982, and February 22,
1983), Respondents Pierce Waste Oil and
Central
Refining
have
caused
or
allowed
oils
and
other
—3—
contaminants
to be spilled or deposited on plant grounds and/or
into lagoons,
ponds, pits, and ditches
so as to create
a water
pollution hazard
in violation of Section
12(d) of the Act.
Count VI alleged that,
on various dates from at least June,
.19.81 until at least May,
1982 (including, but not limited to,
January 28,
1982 and April 12, 1982), Respondents Pierce Waste
Oil and Central Refining caused or allowed facilities
constituting treatment works to
be used and operated without the
requisite Operating Permits first being issued by the Agency in
violation of former Rule 953(a)
of Chapter
3:
Water Pollution
Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm. Code
309.204) and Section
12(b) of
the Act.
Count VII alleged that,
on
various
dates
from
at
least
January
8,
1981 until approximately June
15, 1983
(including, but
not limited to, June
8,
1981,
April 12,
1982, May 24,
1982, and
January
28,
1982),
Respondents
Pierce
Waste
Oil
and
Central
Refining received waste materials at their existing solid waste
management
site without
an Agency permit; modified the site
without
an Agency permit, and disposed of waste without
an Agency
permit in violation of former Rule 201 of Chapter
7:
Solid Waste
Regulations
(now
35 Ill.
Adm.
Code 807.201),
former
Rule 202 of Chapter
7: Solid Waste Regulations
(now 35 Ill.
Adm.
Code 807.202),
and former Rule 210 of Chapter
7:
Solid Waste
Regulations
(now 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 807.210) and Section
21(d)
of
the Act.
Count VIII alleged
that,
on various dates from at least
June,
1981 until approximately September,
1982, Respondents
Pierce
Waste
Oil
and
Central
Refining
delivered
or
accepted
special
wastes
for
disposal
in
Illinois
without
the
necessary
manifests
in
violation
of
former
Rules
301,
501(A),
501(B),
and
501(E) of Chapter
9:
Special Waste Hauling Regulations
(now 35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 809.301; 809.501(a);
809.501(b);
and 809.501(e),
respectively) and Section
21(d)
of the Act.
The parties
filed their Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement
on February 27,
1986.
At all times
pertinent to the Agency’s Second Amended
Complaint, Respondent Pierce Waste Oil Service,
Inc. was a
Delaware corporation duly licensed and authorized to do business
in Illinois which owned and operated
a used oil collection and
storage facility
(PWO facility) located at
1925 East Madison
Street
in Springfield,
Sangamon County,
Illinois.
(Stip.
3).
Concomitantly,
at all times
pertinent to the Agency’s Second
Amended
Complaint,
Respondent
Central
Refining
Company
owned
and
operated
a
used
oil
re-refining
and
reclamation
facility
(CR
facility) located
at
2000
East
Madison
Street
in
Snringfield,
Sangamon County,
Illinois.
(Stip.
3).
—4—
The businesses conducted by the Respondents at the PWO
facility and at the nearby CR facility consisted of the recycling
and reuse of waste oil and similar waste materials,
an activity
that is specifically encouraged in Section 20(b)
of the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act
(Act).
(Stip.
3).
It
is stipulated that:
(1) Respondent Pierce Waste Oil
ceased operating the
PWO
facility
in
February,
1983
and
has
not
operated the PWO facility since that time;
(2) Respondent Central
Refining ceased operating the CR facility in February,
1983 and
has
not
operated the
CR facility since that date;
and (3) on June
15,
1983,
both
Pierce
Waste
Oil
and
Central
Refining
“consummated
the
transfer
and
sale
of
all
the
realty,
structures
and
equipment
comprising the Pierce Waste Oil and Central Refining Facilities,
to Moreco Energy,
Inc.,
an Illinois corporation doing business
in
Illinois”.
(Stip. 3—4).
AIR POLLUTION VIOLATIONS
It
is
stipulated that,
intermittently since approximately
January,
1981 and continuing at least through 1982, Respondent
Central Refining operated new emission sources
(i.e., Reactor
#2,
Condenser Systems A and
B,
the Contactor and API Separator)
at
the
CR facility without first obtaining the necessary Operating
Permit from the Agency
in violation of former Rule 103(b)(l) of
Chapter
2: Air Pollution Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm. Code
201.143) and Section
9(b)
of the Act.
(See: Count III of the
Second Amended Complaint).
In reference to the required permits,
the Agency has
indicated that,
on June
8,
1981,
September
30,
1981, January
11,
1982,
and May
19,
1982,
Respondents
Pierce Waste Oil and Central
Refining did submit applications
to the Agency for a permit to
operate certain equipment
at the
CR facility
(i.e., this
equipment included Reactor
#2, Condenser Systems A and
B,
the
Contactor, and the API Separator).
However, the Agency
subsequently denied each
of
these
applications
and
the
Respondents did not appeal from these Agency permit denials.
(Stip.
5).
Nonetheless,
since approximately February,
1983, Respondent
Central Refining has not operated its Reactor
#2, Condenser
Systems A and
B,
the Contactor and the API Separator.
(Stip.
5).
Moreover, the Agency issued an Operating Permit on
December
7,
1984 to Moreco Energy,
Inc. to allow authorized
operation of the former Condenser System B.
(Stip.
5).
It
is also stipulated that,
intermittently since about
January,
1981 and continuing
until
approximately
February,
1983,
Respondent
Central Refining operated certain existing emission
sources
(i.e.,
its Reactor
#1, Boiler Bi, and Pipe Stills
tl-3)
at its CR facility without
Eirst obtaining the required Operating
—5—
Permits from the Agency in violation of former Rule 103(b)(2) of
Chapter
2:
Air Pollution Regulations
(now 35
Ill.
Adm. Code
201.144) and Section
9(b) of the Act.
(See:
Count
IV of the
Second Amended Complaint).
The Agency has stated that,
in reference to these required
permits, on June
8,
1981,
September 30,
1981,
January 11,
1982,
and May 19,
1982,
Respondents Pierce Waste Oil and Central
Refining submitted applications to the Agency for a permit to
operate specified equipment
at the
CR facility (i.e.,
this
equipment included Reactor
#1, Boiler
Bl,
and Pipe Stills
#1-3).
However, the Agency subsequently denied each of these
applications and no appeal from this permit denial was taken by
either
of the Respondents.
(Stip. 6).
Since approximately February, 1983, Respondent Central
Refining has not operated any of the previously mentioned
existing emission sources
(namely, Reactor
#1, Boiler
Bi, and
Pipe
Stills
#1-3).
The Agency issued an Operating Permit on
December
7,
1984 to Moreco Energy,
Inc. which allowed operation
of former Pipe
Stills #1-3 by that successor firm.
(Stip. 6).
WATER POLLUTION VIOLATIONS
In
reference
to alleged water pollution violations,
it
is
stipulated that,
on various
dates from approximately June,
1981
until July,
1982
(including January 28,
1982 and April
12, 1982),
Respondents Pierce Waste Oil and Central Refining caused or
allowed facilities constituting treatment works
to be used and
operated without the necessary Operating Permits first being
issued by the Agency in violation of former Rule 953(a)
of
Chapter
3: Water Pollution Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
309.204) and Section
12(b)
of the Act.
(See:
Count VI of the
Second Amended Complaint).
It is specifically admitted that the Respondents allowed the
collection of waste water and runoff
in
a lagoon
(which was
located in the northeast area of
the
CR
facility)
and
a
cooling
pond
(which
was
located
in
the
southern
area
of
the
CR
facility).
(Stip.
7).
The Respondents then recovered oil for
processing from the lagoon and cooling pond which were admittedly
treatment works
capable of causing or contributing to water
pollution
violations
in
the
vicinity
of
the
Pierce
Waste
Oil
and
Central Refining facilities
from about
June,
1981 until
July,
1982.
(Stip.
7).
The parties have stipulated that the Respondents eliminated
the
southern
area
cooling
pond
in
approximately September,
1981
and
later
eliminated
the
northeast
area
lagoon
in
about
July,
1982.
(Stip.
8).
—6—
LAND POLLUTION VIOLATIONS
Because the Respondents stored and processed waste oils
at
the Pierce Waste Oil and Central Refining facilities,
it is
admitted that the facilities
(and concomitant equipment)
used by
these Respondents during their processing and storage operations
constituted an existing solid waste management site within the
meaning of former Rule 201 of Chapter
7: Solid Waste Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm. Code
807.201).
(Stip.
9).
Additionally,
it ‘is stipulated that the Agency granted
Respondent Pierce Waste Oil an Operating Permit #1980-17-OP on
May
5,
1981 to operate its solid waste management site.
(Stip.
9).
Special Conditions
#1 and #5 of its Operating Permit
#1980-17-OP read as follows:
“1.
This facility shall
be developed
in accordance
with Chapters
2,
7 and
9 of the Illinois
Pollution Control Board Rules and Regulations;
*
*
*
5.
Special
wastes
received
at
the
site
for
recovery
shall
be
transported
to
the
facility
utilizing
the
Agency’s
supplemental
permit
system and manifest system.”
Despite the previously delineated Special Conditions
#1 and
#5 of
its Operating Permit,
Respondent Pierce Waste Oil
admittedly
received
special
wastes
(i.e.,
waste
oils)
without
possessing
a
valid
Supplemental
Permit
from
the
Agency
on
twenty-four
separate
occasions
between
January
8,
1981
and
June
8,
1981.
(Stip.
9).
However,
on
February
10,
1982,
the
Agency
issued
Respondent
Pierce Waste Oil
a Supplemental Permit
#1982-15.
Special
Condition
#10 of this Supplemental Permit provided:
“10.
Any modification to the facility,
treatment
process, types
or amounts
of wastes handled
shall
be subject to an application for
supplemental permit for site modification
submitted to this Agency.”
Although Special Condition #10 of Supplemental Permit
#1982-15 mandated that any modifications
be
preceded by an
application to the Agency for appropriate authorization,
in
approximately April, 1982, the Pierce Waste Oil/Central Refining
facilities
were modified without the necessary notification to,
or approval by, the Agency.
At that time, the Respondents
constructed
a pit in order to hold a planned underground storage
—7—
tank, but did not file with the Agency an application for
modification
of
their
facilities
pertaining
to
the
underground
storage tank pit or the treatment works.
(Stip.
10).
The parties have stipulated that,
in approximately July,
.19.82, the Respondent removed the treatment works
and, in
approximately August,
1982,
the underground storage tank pit was
removed.
(Stip.
10).
PROPOSED
SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT
The proposed settlement agreement provided that the
Respondents admitted certain specified violations and agreed
to
pay
a
stipulated
penalty
of
$20,000.00
into
the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Trust
Fund
in
three
installments.
Additionally,
the
parties
have,
in
Item
F
on
page
12.
of
the
Stipulation,
in effect, requested that the Board dismiss
all
counts
of the Agency’s Complaint, all counts
of the First Amended
Complaint,
and Counts
I,
II,
V, and VIII
of the Second Amended
Complaint
with
prejudice.
(Stip.
10-13).
The Board believes that,
in light
of the proposed settlement
agreement worked out between the parties, such a dismissal of the
aforementioned
counts
of
the
Agency’s
various
Complaints
is
reasonable
and
appropriate,
and
therefore
will
dismiss
these
counts
as requested by the parties.
The
parties
have
stipulated
that,
for
the
purposes
of
this
proceeding
only,
Respondent
Central
Refining
admits
the
violation
alleged
in
Count
III
of
the
Agency’s
Second
Amended
Complaint
in
that,
during
the
time
period
specified
in
the
Stipulation
of
Facts,
Respondent
Central
Refining
operated
Reactor
#2,
Condenser
Systems
A
and
B,
the
Contactor,
and
the
API
Separator
at
the
CR
facility
without
first
obtaining
the
necessary
Operating
Permits
from
the
Agency
in
violation
of
former
Rule
103(b)(1)
of
Chapter
2: Air Pollution Regulations
(now
35 Ill.
Adm.
Code 201.143) and
Section
9(b)
of
the
Act.
(Stip.
10-11).
Additionally, Respondent Central Refining also admits the
violations alleged
in Count
IV of the Agency’s Second Amended
Complaint
in that,
during the specified time period,
it operated
Reactor
#1, Boiler Bi, and Pipe Stills
#1-3 without first
obtaining the required Operating Permits from the Agency in
violation of former Rule 103(b)(2)
of Chapter 2: Air Pollution
Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 201.144) and Section
9(b) of
the Act.
(Stip.
11).
Moreover,
Respondents Pierce Waste Oil and Central Refining
admit
the
violations
alleged
in
Count
VII
of
the
Agency’s
Second
Amended Complaint
in that,
during the specified time period, they
received special wastes without first possessing
a valid
-8—
Supplemental Permit from the Agency and modified their facilities
without first applying for the appropriate Supplemental Permit,
thereby admittedly each violating former Rules
201 and 210 of
Chapter
7: Solid Waste Regulations
(now 35
Ill. Adm. Code 807.201
and
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 807.210,
respectively) and Section 21(d)
of
~the Act.
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 Act and finds the settlement
agreement acceptable under
35
Ill.
Adm. Code
103.180.
As admitted in the Stipulation, the Board finds
that
Respondent Central Refining has violated former Rules 103(b)(1)
and l03(b)(2) of Chapter 2: Air Pollution Regulations
(now 35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 201.143 and
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 201.144,
respectively) and Section
9(b)
of the Act.
Additionally,
as
admitted in the Stipulation,
the Board finds
that Respondents
Pierce Waste Oil and Central
Refining
have
each
violated
former
Rule 953(a) of Chapter
3:
Water Pollution Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm. Code 309.204);
former Rules 201 and 210 of Chapter
7:
Solid Waste Regulations
(now 35
Ill.
Adm. Code 807.201 and
35
Ill.
Adm. Code 807.210, respectively);
and Sections 12(b)
and
21(d) of the Act.
The Respondents will
be ordered to pay the
stipulated penalty of $20,000.00 into the Environmental
Protection Trust Fund
in three installments
as specified
in the
items
#4,
#5, and
#6 of the Board’s Order in the instant
case.
This Opinion constitutes
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.
All counts of the Agency’s Complaint, all
counts
of the First Amended Complaint,
and
Counts
I,
II,
V,
and VIII of the Second
Amended Complaint are hereby dismissed with
prejudice.
2.
As admitted in the Stipulation, Respondent
Central Refining Company has violated former
Rules
103(b)(1) and 103(b)(2) of Chapter
2:
Air Pollution Regulations
(now 35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 201.143 and
35 Ill.
Adm.
Code 201.144,
respectively) and Section
9(b)
of the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act.
—9—
3.
As admitted in the Stipulation, Respondents
Pierce Waste Oil Service, Inc.
and Central
Refining Company have each violated former
Rule
953(a) of Chapter
3:
Water Pollution
Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm. Code 309.204);
former
Rules
201
and
210
of
Chapter
7:
Solid
Waste Regulations
(now
35
Ill.
Adm. Code
807.201
and 35
Ill. Adm. Code 807.210,
respectively)
and
Sections
12(b)
and
21(d)
of
the Illinois Environmental Protection Act.
4.
Within 35 days of the date of this Order, the
Respondents shall,
by certified check or
money
order payable to the State of Illinois and
designated for deposit into the Environmental
Protection Trust
Fund, jointly and severally
pay the stipulated first installment of
$10,000.00 (on a
total
penalty
of
$20,000.00)
which is to be sent to:
Environmental
Control
Division
Office
of
the
Illinois
Attorney
General
500 South Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
5.
Within
90
days
of
the
date
of
this
Order,
the
Respondents
shall
pay
the
stipulated
second
installment
of
$5,000.00
(on
a
total
penalty
of
$20,000.00)
in
the
same
manner
and
fashion
as the first installment
payment as delineated
in item
#4 of this Order.
6.
Within 180 days
of the date of this Order,
the
Respondents
shall
pay the stipulated third
installment
of $5,000.00
(on a total penalty
of
$20,000.00)
in
the
same
manner
and
fashion
as
the first installment
as delineated in item
#4 of this Order.
Accordingly,
the timely
completion of the payment
of the stipulated
third installment shall result in the entire
stipulated
penalty
of
$20,000.00
being
paid
in
full.
7.
The Respondents shall comply with all the
terms
and conditions
of the Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement filed on February 27,
1986, which is incorporated by reference
as
if
fully
set
forth
herein.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
-10-
1,
Dorothy M.
Cunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order was
adopted
on
the
~
day of
___________________,
1986 by
a vote
of 7—c
:~-~~i
~
/~Z
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
