ILLINOIS
    POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March
    30,
    1978
    ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    vs
    )
    PCB 75—379
    TRI-NO
    ENTERPRISES,
    INC.,
    Respondent,
    and
    )
    CONSOLIDATED
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    vs
    )
    PCB 76—65
    NOBLE and GENEVA STARNES,
    Respondents.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by Dr. Satchell):
    On September 30, 1975 the Environmental Protection
    Agency
    (Agency)
    filed
    a complaint alleging that Tn-No
    Enterprises has operated
    a mine in violation of Section 12(b)
    of the Environmental Protection Act
    (Act)
    and Rule 201 of
    the Chapter
    4:
    Mine Related Pollution Regulations
    (Chapter 4).
    On March
    3,
    1976 the Agency filed
    a complaint alleging that
    Noble and Geneva Starnes have violated Rules
    203(a)
    and
    203(f)
    of the Chapter
    3:
    Water Pollution Regulations
    (Chapter
    3)
    and Section
    12(a)
    of the Act.
    On a motion by the
    parties these cases were consolidated on September 1,
    1977.
    On April 21~1977 a public hearing was held concerning
    P.CB
    76--65.
    On August 18,
    1977 a public hearing was held con-
    cerning PCB 75-379.
    One citizen offered comment at the
    April
    21,
    1977 hearing.
    The same stipulation and proposal
    for settlement was presented at both hearings for the Board’s
    approval.
    The stated facts are as follows,
    Respondents Noble and
    Geneva Starnes, are the owners
    of an abandoned mine area
    located
    in the Northeast Quarter of Section 33 of Township
    7
    North, Range
    3 West of the Fourth Principal Meridian in
    Fulton County, Illinois, consisting of approximately 400 acres.
    The Starnes purchased this property on February
    5,
    1974,
    To
    the knowledge of Respondents no mining operations had been
    29
    409

    conducted
    on
    this
    property for several
    years prior to 1970.
    The earlier coal mining operation had been conducted by
    Truax and Consolidation Coal Company.
    As a result of these
    mining operations there existed on a portion of the mine prop-
    erty, mine refuse consisting of gob piles, slurry ponds and
    pyrite.
    From and
    after October
    1974 and continuing to the date
    of stipulation, that portion of the property containing this
    refuse has been leased to and used by Respondent Tn—No
    Enterprises,
    Inc.
    for
    the removal and sale of gob,
    slurry,
    and pyrites.
    Respondent
    Nobel Starnes
    is President and
    majority
    shareholder in
    Tn-No Enterprises.
    The recovery operation
    is conducted from 8:00 a.m.
    to
    4:00
    p.m.
    daily,five days per week,
    weather permitting.
    At
    no time during this period has Respondent Tn-No possessed an
    operating permit issued by the Agency for mining activities.
    An
    application
    for a
    permit
    was
    filed with the Agency on
    March
    11,
    1976.
    This
    application was denied.
    On the property
    are
    located a number of unnamed tributaries
    of Put Creek.
    At
    all
    times subsequent to October
    1, 1974
    Respondents have
    caused
    or allowed contaminants from the sub-
    ject area to
    he
    discharged into the unnamed tributaries of
    Put Creek.
    These discharges on April
    9,
    1975 and October 20,
    1975 caused the unnamed tributaries of Put Creek to contain
    amounts of
    iron in
    exc:~ess of 1,0 mg/l,
    sulfate in excess of
    500 mg/i and total dissolved solids in excess of 1000 mg/l in
    violation of Rule
    203(f)
    of Chapter
    3.
    On
    April
    2L~ 19:77
    a
    tentative
    agreement was reached.
    Without admitting liab:ility the Respondents agreed to a con-
    trol program to
    be submitted in
    the form of a permit application.
    Due to unforeseen financial difficulties the Respondents were
    not able to achieve the stated objectives within the time
    period
    contemplated~
    The parties are now submitting the new
    agreement to the
    Board.
    No citizen
    compia:ints
    have
    been
    received
    in
    relation
    to
    the
    site.
    The
    parties
    agree
    that
    reclamation
    is
    beneficial
    to
    the
    environment
    and
    the
    economy
    in
    that
    it
    turns
    an
    abandoned
    refuse
    area
    into a
    productive
    source of energy,
    and removes
    from
    eyesight
    refuse piles that would cause scenic
    h1ight~ Furthermore, nearby tributaries are protected from
    water
    pollution.
    The
    terms
    of
    the
    current
    settlement
    require
    a
    permit
    application
    by
    October
    18,
    1977
    to
    construct
    and
    install
    the
    mine
    run-off
    control project
    previously
    described
    as
    being
    a
    series
    of
    ditches,
    retention
    ponds,
    berms,
    limestone
    treatment
    and
    chemical treatment of run—off.
    This
    application
    is
    to
    be
    submitted
    by
    a
    registered professional engineer.
    Construction
    is
    to
    commence
    within
    thirty
    days
    after
    the
    per-
    mit is granted and shall be completed within six months of
    start-up.
    28—410

    To insure that sufficient money
    is
    available for com-
    pletion of the program Respondents shall enter into an
    escnow agreement with the Rend Lake Bank of Christopher,
    Illinois
    in the
    sum of $50,000.00.
    The panties agreed to a penalty of $500.00,
    The penalty
    was arrived at in consideration of Respondents failure to
    obtain the necessary permits and failure to institute effective
    control programs although Respondent made good faith
    efforts
    to obtain the permits and the necessary financing.
    The Board finds the stipulation and proposal for settlement
    acceptable under Procedural Rule 331,
    The Board
    finds
    Respondents in violation of Rule 203(a) and 203(f)
    of Chapter 3,
    Rule 201 of Chapter
    4 and Sections
    12(a)
    and 12(b)
    of the
    Act.
    The Board considering Section 33(c)
    of the
    Act and
    the
    stipulation will assess the stipulated penalty of
    $500.00.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings
    of fact
    and conclusions of law in this matter,
    Mr.
    Young abstained,
    ORDER
    It
    is the order of the Pollution Control Board that:
    1.
    Respondents
    are found in violation of Rule 203(a)
    and 203(f)
    of Chapter
    3:
    Water Pollution
    Regulations
    and Rule 201 of Chapter
    4:
    Mine Related Pollution
    and Sections 12(a)
    and 12(b)
    of the Act,
    2.
    Respondents will follow the compliance plan of the
    stipulated agreement which
    is incorporated by
    reference as
    if completely set forth herein.
    3.
    Respondents will pay a penalty of $500.00 within 35
    days of this order,
    Payment shall be
    by certified
    check or money order payable
    to:
    State
    of
    Illinois
    Fiscal Services Division
    Environmental Protection Agency
    2200 Churchill Road
    Springfield, Illinois
    62706.
    I,
    Chnistan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order
    were adopted oq the ~
    day of
    ~
    1978
    byavoteof~~.
    ~stan L. Motre
    Illinois
    Pollution
    trol Board
    29—411

    Back to top