ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
August
5,
1976
CITIZENS FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT,
an Illinois not-for--profit corporation,
Complainant,
v.
STEPAN CHEMICAL COMPANY,
)
a Delaware corporation,
)
Respondent;
STEPAN CHEMICAL COMPANY,
)
PCB 74-201
PCB 74—270
Petitioner,
)
PCB 74-317
)
(CONSOLIDATED)
v.
)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent;
)
STEPAN CHEMICAL COMPANY,
)
Petitioner,
V.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Zeitlin):
The Board’s Principal Opinion and Order in this matter was
entered on Februar~’14,
1975.
15 PCB 445;
15 PCB 467
(Mr.
Dumelle,
concurring);
15 PCB 469
(Dr.
Odell, dissenting
as to the penalty).
A Supplemental Opinion and Order of the Board
was subsequently
entered on May 8, 1975,
on Stepan’s Motion for Rehearing and Recon-
sideration, modifying certain portions of the February 14,
1975 Order.
The facts and history of this matter are summarized adequately
in
those Opinions, and need not be repeated here.
23
—
191
—2—
On July 14,
1976,
the Board received notification that the
Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District, had on Motion by CBE,
Stepan and the Agency,
issued
a Mandate remanding the matter to the
Board without prejudice to the pending appeal.
Stepan Chemical Co.
v.
Pollution Control Board, No. 75-187
(Dist. Ct. App.
3d Dist.
Ill.,
June
116,
1976).
The parties’ Motion before the Appellate Court was based on
a
Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement
(Stipulation)
submitted to
the Board on June
29, 1976.
In that Stipulation all three parties
ask that the Board amend certain portions of its February
14,
1975
Order
(as amended May 8,
1975).
The Stipulation
shows that:
I.
During the pendency of this case before the
Board and during the appeal by Stepan of the penalty and
Variance conditions set in our February
14 and May
8, 1975
Orders, Stepan has continued construction of additions
to
its wastewater treatment plant designed to bring
its
discharges into compliance with Rule 404(b)
of Chapter
3:
Water Pollution.
This has included installation of a
large pre-aeration tank
(for equalization and additional
BOD removal), and a pressure filtration system for treating
secondary effluent.
The capital and annual operating
costs for these improvements are $1,300,000 and $74,200,
respectively.
2.
Construction has been carried on pursuant to
a
construction permit issued by the Agency.
Said construction
should be completed by July
31, 1976.
3.
Stepan has filed
a new Variance case, PCB 75—503,
asking for Variance extension
to July
31,
1976.
(That
case is decided separately today.)
4.
Stepan constructed the pipeline from its plant
to the Des Plaines River, as required
by
our Orders,
at
a cost of over $45,000.
That construction was completed
by August
8,
1975.
5.
Stepan has, although not specifically required
under the Board’s prior Orders, installed process waste—
water recycle systems for certain production processes
and constructed a centralized truck loading collection
facility to allow waste recycle in case of large spills.
These projects have cost approximately $65,300.
6.
Prior
to completion of the above construction
projects, Ste~anhas improved the average quality of its
effluent by changing the primary operator of the waste—
water treatment plant, and making certain changes in plant
operating techniques.
Although the resulting levels of
75 mg/l and 80 rng/l for BUD and SS are not within the
limits set by our February 14 and May 8,
1975 Orders,
they are improvements over prior conditions at Stepan’s
Milisdale Plant.
(Compliance with the 20/25 mg/l limits
of Rule
404(b)
is to be achieved by July 31, 1976.)
23
—
192
—3—
Based on those facts, the parties have jointly asked that we
amend our prior Orders to allow for Stepan’s improved performance.
The proposed changes are
a reduction of the penalty imposed
(from
$15,000 to $8,000)
and a loosening of the conditions on Stepan’s
Variance.
Based on the Stipulation and the facts shown there,
the fact
that the parties
(including Complainant CEE in PCB 74-201)
have
jointly asked this relief, and the fact that this will provide an
acceptable end
(in light of Stepan’s imminent compliance)
to a long
and difficult adjudication process,
we shall accept the proposal.
We agree that it
is in the best interests of the public
in this case
to allow a final solution that will avoid further proceedings before
this Board or the Appellate Courts, while providing for compliance.
This Opinion constitutes
the findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the Board in this matter.
ORDER
IT IS THE ORDER OF THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD that the Orders
of February 14,
1975 and May
8,
1975 be amended as
follows:
1.
Paragraph 4 of the Board’s Order of February 14,
1975,
shall read as follows:
4.
Stepan Chemical Company shall pay to the
State of Illinois, within
30 days of the
date of this Order,
the sum of $8,000 as
a penalty for the violations found in this
proceeding.
Penalty payment by certified
check or money order payable to the State
of Illinois shall be made to Fiscal Services
Division,
Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency,
2200 Churchill Road,
Springfield,
Illinois 62706.
2.
Paragraph 1(b)
of the Board’s February 14, 1975 Order,
as
amended in Paragraph 1 of the Board’s May
8,
1975 Order, and Para-
graph 2(a)
of the Board’s May 8,
1975 Order are amended as follows:
1.
During the term of this variance Stepan’s
discharge to Cedar Creek
shall comply with
Rule 404(f)
and 404(h)
except that the
applicable 30—day average numerical limits
shall be 75 mg/i BOD and 80 mg/l SS.
23
—
193
—4—
2.
(a)
During the term of this variance
Stepan’s discharge to the Des Plaines
River shall comply with Rule 404(b) and
404(h)
except that the applicable 30-day
average numerical limits shall be 75 mg/i
BOD and 80 xng/l SS.
Mr. James Young abstained.
I,
Christan
L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board,
hereby certify the above Final Opinion and Order
were adopted on the
_____
day of
_________,
1976, by a vote of
~
Illinois Pollution Cc~Ø1 Board
23—
194