IL~L1L~I.S

POLLUTION

CONTi~.OLBOARD

August 20,

1987

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AG~NC1,

Complainant,

v.

)

PCB 83—150

ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND COMPANY,

Respondent.

MR. JAMES

L.

MORGAN,

ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEkRED

ON

BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT;

MR. WAYNE

L.

bICKES.

ROSENBERG,

ROSENBERG.

BICKES,

JOHNSON AND

RICHARDSON, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.

OPIi10N

AND

C’RDLR

OF

ThE

BOARD

(by J.D.

Dumelle):

This matter

comes before the Board upon

a seven—count

Complaint filed

on

October

3,

1963,

by the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency (Agency) alleging certain violations

of the

Illinois Environmental Protection Act

(Act)

and Board regulations

by Arcner Daniels Midland Company

(ADM).

Hearing was held June

15, 1967,

at which

the parties submitted

an unsigned Stipulation

and Proposal

for Settlement.

The parties

filed

the signed

Stipulation

and Proposal

for Settlement

on August

5,

1987,

ADM

owns and operates

a facility located at

4666 Farris

Parkway in Decatur,

Macon County,

Illinois.

The facility,

commonly referred

to as

the “East Plant”,

consists

of

a soybean

oil refinery~ a corn sweetener plant,

a grain—milling and

alcohol-refining plant,

and associated buildings and

transportation network.

On August

29,

1980,

the Agency issued

NPDES Permit No. IL006l425

(“1980 Permit”) covering certain

discharges from the East Plant.

The 1980 permit authorized ADM

to discharge effluent at four discharge points.

Discharge point

001

is approximately

a 48” diameter concrete storm sewer

located

just north of

the corn sweetener plant which

discharges storm

water

runoff into

the north branch of the Faries Park Creek.

Discharge point

002

is approximately

a

12” diameter tile located

just north

of the former site of

a now dismantled wooden cooling

tower which discharges

storm water runoff

into the north branch

of Faries Park Creek.

Discharge point 003

is

a pipe located

south

and west of the syrup plant which discharges into

an

unnamed stream

tributary to Lake Decatur.

Discharge point

004

is

approximately

a

36” diameter tile originating just east of the

ADM corporate office parking lot which discharges storm water

runoff into the south branch of

the Farris Park Creek.

80—305

---

The

~

Permit contained conditions

establishing

3w day

average effluent limitations of 10/12 mg/i

for BOD/TSS

and daily

maximum effluent limitations

of 20/25 mg/i

for BOD/TSS

for all

four discharge points.

In addition,

the 1980 Permit imposed

a

dail~’maximum effluent limitation

of

2.0 mg/l

for

total

Iron

for

discharge point

003.

Discharge points 002 and 004 were also

required

to comply with

the dissolved oxygen water quality

limitations of

6 mg/l and

to maintain a pH

in the range of 6.0 to

9.0.

The Agency’s seven—count Complaint alleged numerous

violations

of Section

12(a)

and 12(f)

of

the Act and of various

sections of

the Board’s hater Pollution Control

regulations.

In

summary,

the Agency has alleged that ADM has,

on various

occasions,

dischar~edeffiwent containing contaminants

in

concentrations exceeding those established

by Permit No.

IL006l425 and

by Board regulations.

In addition,

the Agency

alleged

that ADM failed

to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports

for all

of

the discharge points,

and failed

to notify the Agency

within five days after

it became aware

that it had discharged

effluent containing contaminants

in excess

of allowable

limits.

Finally,

the Agency alleged that

on various dates ADM’s discharge

contained settleable

solids,

floating debris, visible solids,

obvious colcr~ odor and/or turbidity.

Tne proposed

settlement agreement provides

that ADM agrees

to pay a $10,000 penalty

to the Environmental Protection Trust

Fund within tnirty

(3(i)

days of the date

of this Board Order.

However, ADM neither

admits nor denies violation of

the Act

or

regulations

in question.

ADM also agrees that Lynch Engineering,

Inc. will conduct

a comprehensive engineering study to

identify

any potential

sources which may contribute

to the violations

alleged

in

the Complaint and

to develope appropriate remedial

measures.

This study

is

to

be

completed within ninety

(90)

days

of this Order,

weather conditions reasonably permitting.

Altnough not clearly articulated

in the Stipulation and Proposal

to Settlement,

the Board assumes

that,

upon its receipt, ADM will

immediately submit

a copy

of the engineering study

to the Agency

for its review.

Based upon this engineering study

and within

seventy-five

(75)

days from submission

of the engineering study

to the Agency, ADM agrees

to submit

a proposed compliance plan

arid schedule to the Agency for

its approval.

The Board notes

that

the settlement agreement

is silent on what

is to occur

in

the event

that the Agency disapproves

of the proposed

compliance

plan.

The Board assumes

the intent of

the agreement

is that ADM

will submit

an approvable compliance plan, even

if

it requires

more than one attempt.

In the event that the parties cannot

agree

on

a compliance plan, either party

is free

to request

relief pursuant

to Section 103.241 of the Board’s procedural

rules.

Upon receipt

of Agency approval,

ADM will implement the

proposed compliance

plan.

ADM also agrees

to submit

to the

Agency all discharge monitoring

reports, and any other similar

data,

that

it may have

in its possession

for the East Plant

from

January

1,

1982

to the present.

And henceforth, ADM agrees

to

80—306

---

submit

all discharge monitoring

reports

as required

by

its NPDES

Permit.

In evaluating

this enforcement action and proposed

settlement a~reement, the Board

has taken

into consideration all

the tacts

and circumstances

in light

of the criteria set forth

in

Section 33(c)

of

the Act and finds

the proposed settlement

agreement acceptable

under

35 Ill.

Adm,

Code 103.180.

Accordingly,

the Board will order ADM

to pay the stipulated

penalty of $l~J,00U into the Illinois Environmental Protection

Trust Fund

as agreed upon,

and will order ADM

to follow the

settlement a~reementas

Set forth in the following Order.

This Opinions constitutes

the Board’s finding

of facts

and

conclusions

of law

in this matter.

ORDER

It

is the Order

of the Illinois Pollution Control Board

that:

1.

within

3u

days

of the date

of this Order,

the

Respondent, Archer Daniels Midland Company,

shall,

by

certified

check

or money

order

payable

to the State

of

Illinois and designated

for deposit

into the

Environmental Trust

Fund,

pay the stipulated penalty

of

$10,000 which

is

to be sent

to:

Manager,

Fiscal Services

Section

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield,

IL 62706

2.

Archer Daniels Midland Company shall comply with all

the terms and conditions

of the Stipulation and

Proposal

for Settlement

filed August

5,

1987,

which

is

attached hereto and incorporated

as

if fully set forth

herein.

IT

IS SO ORDERED.

I,

Dorothy

M.

Gunn, Clerk

of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certify

that the above Opinion and Order was

adopted

on the

_______________

day of

~

,

1987

by

a vote

of

_____________

Dorothy

M. G~n, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

80-307