ILLIt’IOIS POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

February

10,

1983

FRISK’S INDUSTRIAL WASTE, INC.,

Petitioner,

)

v.

)

PCB 83—10

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

AGEt’~CY

Respondent.

ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by I.G. Goodman):

On January 27, 1983 the Board granted Petitioner a temporary

stay to maintain the status ~

of the Frink’s Industrial Waste,

Inc.

(Frink’s) operation pending the receipt of the Illinois Envi-

ronmental Protection Agency’s (Agency’s) Response to Petitioner~s

Emergency Motion for Stay.

That Response was received on February

4,

1983.

Petitioner filed a Reply on February

8,

1983 which is

accepted.

Solely at issue in this matter are the operating permits

from the Division of Air,

Land,

and Water

for four storage tanks

owned and operated by Petitioner

which

were

denied

on

January

19,

1983.

(Pet.

Ex.

19).

Petitioner is seeking to stay the effect

of denial of these operating permits,

since

its experimental per-

mits expire on February 5,

1983,

so that

it

may

continue

operating

pending the outcome of this appeal.

Petitioner argues that it

developed these tanks under development permits issued by the

Agency and has operated them for several years under Agency issued

experimental permits.

Without the requested stay,

Petitioner

would have to cease operations, depriving its customers of service,

and possible forcing Petitioner out of business.

Petitioner

further argues that proof of the tanks~integrity has been certi-

fied to on August 23,

1983 with a September

3,

1982 addendum

(Pet.Ex.

12) and accepted by the Agency on September 15,

1982

(Pet.Ex.

14) and yet the Agency denied the operating permit due

to inadequate proof that Section 39(a)

of the Act was satisfied.

The Agency argues that beginning in August,

1982 samples

taken

from monitoring wells reveal increasing concentrations of

chlororganics.

When

first detected,

the Agency states that its

source was speculated to be contamination

from sludge

in

a nearby

lagoon,

leaking underground tanks,

and “even”

a 1981 caustic spill.

Nowhere, other than

in the permit denial

letter,

does the Agency

51-141

---

-2—

link

the contamination to the four storage tanks, at issue.

The

Agency’s principal argument is

that

operation of the

same

should

cease until they

are

definitely ruled out as a contributing source

of the pollution.

Beyond

the

scope

of

this

appeal,

but

of

import

because

both

parties

have

alleged

it

to

be

the

possible

source

of

the

detected

land

and

groundwater

contamination,

are

the

June

events

involving

the

nearby

sludge

lagoon

previously

operated

by

Frink’s.

Prior

to

Jane,

1982

soil

and

groundwater

samples

taken

in

connection

with this lagoon did not reveal any contamination.

On

June

23,

1982 and continuing thereafter this closed lagoon was distdrbed

by sampling

and

excavatiol.

It has been the samples taken since

that time, the most recent being an December 30, 1982 sample,

which

reveal

contamination.

Based

on

this sequence of events

involving the lagoon

and

certification

of

the

tanks”

integrity,

the

Board is not persuaded that these tanks are a contributing

source of the environmental

amage

now

evidenced.

The

stay

is

granted

until

final

action

in

this

matter.

Petitioner’

s

Reply

brought to the Board’s attention

that

32

supplemental permits .(Pet.Ex.

30) were denied renewal on January 27,

1983

by,

the Agency.

These permits are attendant to the operating

permits

denied

in

that

they

involve

the special waste streams to

be

accepted

for

storage

by

Petitioner.

(The

Board

notes

that

Petitioner had granted

the

Agency

a

90-day

waiver

on the renewal

decision period, so decision on these permits need not to have

been made at this time.)

Since the grant of the previous temporary

stay on January 27,

1983 and this stay invalidates the reasons given

in

denying

the

supplemental

permits,

the

Board

anticipates

that

the

Agency

will reconsider its actions.

IT

IS

SO

ORDERED.

Board

Member

Joan

Anderson

concurred.

I,

Christan

L.

Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control

Boarft,

hereby

certify

that

the

above

Order

was

adopted

onthe

‘C~

dayofXlt-z.ws

-

,

1983by

a

vote

of

4~~t

~

-

7)

__

j4frt(

Christin

L.

MoftetV,

Clerk

Illinois

Pol1ution~’Control

Board