ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March 29,
    1979
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 78—311
    OLIN CORPORATION,
    )
    Respondent.
    PATRICK J.
    CHESLEY, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON
    BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT;
    RANDALL ROBERTSON,
    LUEDERS, ROBERTSON
    & KONZEN, APPEARED ON
    BEHALF OF RESPONDENT.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by Mr. Goodman):
    On December 27,
    1978 the Illinois Environmental Protection
    Agency
    (Agency) filed this complaint before the Board alleging
    that Olin Corporation
    (Olin) had violated certain of
    the
    Board~sWater Pollution Regulations.
    A hearing was held
    in
    this matter on February 22,
    1979;
    no citizens appeared at
    the hearing, and the Board has received no public comment.
    Olin owns and operates
    a brass
    strip and small
    arms
    ammunition plant
    in East Alton, Madison County,
    Illinois
    employing approximately 5,300 workers.
    The facility occupies
    an area of approximately 1,700 acres, and the annual payroll
    is approximately $100,000,000 per year.
    The different
    manufacturing processes are known as zones.
    The subject
    of
    this complaint is the waste water treatment facility at zone
    6 which treats water discharges from zones
    1,
    2,
    4 and 7 and
    which discharges approximately 3,000,000 gallons per day.
    During normal conditions,
    the zone
    6 water treatment plant
    treats all flows directed to
    it before discharge to the Wood
    River,
    However, during occasions
    of high rainfall,
    a portion
    of the inflow to zone
    6
    is necessarily bypassed to the east
    fork of Wood River which subsequently discharges
    into the
    Mississippi River without any treatment.
    Olin has been before the Board previously and had obtained
    a
    variance in PCB 77—177,
    which was granted until March
    1,
    1978 and required Olin to implement the interim control
    measures it had specified in its variance petition.
    Currently
    33—203
    2
    a petition for extension of the variance granted previously
    is before the Board in PCB 78-60,
    Although no testimony was given at the hearing,
    the
    parties herein filed
    a stipulation for the Board’s considera-
    tion pursuant to Procedural
    Rule
    331.
    The stipulation
    recites the history of the situation
    and the technological
    problems surrounding
    it.
    The stipulation sets forth the
    efforts made by Olin to rectify the problem and outlines the
    procedures to be used to alleviate the effect of further
    discharges during heavy rainfall.
    It
    is alleged that the
    only method of immediate compliance would he plugging of the
    overflow outfalls,
    resulting in flooding the company’s plant
    and causing extensive damage.
    The company agrees to undertake
    a program which
    is described
    in Exhibit A and amplified by
    the stipulation,
    and the Agency approves and accepts this
    program.
    In the stipulation,
    Olin does not admit that it violated
    or
    is violating any provisions of Federal
    or State
    law,
    and
    neither party waives its right of appeal
    in any dispute
    between the parties with regard to interpretation of the
    provisions
    of the stipulation.
    Olin,
    in consideration of
    the Agency’s promise not to institute or
    to assist any other
    enforcement action for storm—related discharges, agrees to
    pay $10,000.00 to the State of Illinois within
    30 days of
    the receipt of the Board’s Order adopting the stipulation.
    In addition the stipulation contains paragraphs concerning
    the rights of the Agency to inspect equipment and facilities
    and the duty of Olin to provide progress reports and to
    procure permits.
    The total estimated cost of the program contained
    in
    Exhibit A
    is approximately $800,000.
    Completion
    of the
    project
    is scheduled for May of 1979, and the improvements
    are designed to control discharges for all rain storms
    having a frequency of 10 years or less and result
    in
    a much
    decreased discharge for a greater than 10 year frequency
    rain storm.
    The parties propose that the stipulation is the best
    way to resolve the problem without expensive
    and protracted
    legal proceedings.
    Considering all the factors of the case
    including the proposed compliance program,
    the Board will
    accept the stipulation as proposed by the parties
    in settle-
    ment of this case.
    This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and
    conclusions of law of the Board
    in this matter.
    33—204
    3
    ORDER
    It
    is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:
    1)
    The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and
    Olin Corporation shall execute the applicable
    provisions
    of the stipulation between the parties
    filed before the Board on March
    1,
    1979, which
    stipulation is incorporated by references
    as
    if
    fully set forth herein.
    2)
    In consideration of settlement of this action,
    Olin Corporation shall pay $10,000.00
    to the State
    of I1linoi~within 45 days of the date
    of this
    Order,
    said payment to be delivered
    to the Divi-
    sion of Fiscal Services of the Illinois Environ-
    mental Protection Agency,
    2200 Churchill
    Road,
    Springfield,
    Illinois
    62706.
    3)
    The Complaint herein
    is hereby dismissed.
    I, Christan
    L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board,
    hereby certify the ahoy9 Opinion and Order
    was adopted on the
    4q~’
    day of
    ft) ~
    ,
    1979 by a
    vote of
    ~5~o
    Christan
    L. Moff~j~,,Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    33—205

    Back to top