ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

January

B

,

1976

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

)

and ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Complainants,

V.

)

PCB 74—373

HARCO ALUMINUM,

INC.,

an Illinois

corporation,

Respondent.

Jeffrey

S. Herndon, Assistant Attorney General, Attorney for

Complainants

Norman Hanflinq,

Fein

& Hanfling, Attorney for Respondent

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr. Young):

This case arises

out

of

a Complaint, filed

by the People

of the State

of Illinois

(People) on October 16, 1974 and amended

to include the Environmental Protection Agency

as

a Complainant

on December

5, 1974.

The Amended Complaint alleges that Respondent,

Harco Aluminum,

Inc.,

an Illinois corporation

(Harco),

owned and

operated an aluminum alloy smelting and reclamation facility at

4528 West Division Street, Chicago,Cook County,

Illinois from

February 15,

1973 through December

5,

1974 which discharged particu-

late matter into the atmosphere in such

a manner and in such quantity

to cause a violation of Section 9(a) of the Environmental Protection

Act

(Act);

Rule

202(b)

and Rule 203(b)

of the Air Pollution Regu-

lations

(Chapter 2);

and Rule 3-3.111 of the Rules and Regulations

Governing the Control of Air Pollution.

A hearing was held on November

25, 1975 at which time a Stipu-

lation and Proposed Settlement

(Stipulation) was entered into the

record.

No additional evidence was adduced at the hearing; no

members of the public were present.

Motion was made to allow with-

drawal of the original Stipulation for execution by the Agency;

the

fully executed Stipulation was filed with the Board on December 4,

1975.

The source of the emissions which gave rise to this action are

four reverberatory furnaces and one sweat furnace which are used

by

Harco to process scrap aluminum for reuse by others.

An average of

3,117,650 pounds of scrap was processed during the six months ending

in August 1974.

19—539

---

—2—

At the date of the hearing,

Ifarco was completing installation

of

a scrubber system which will bring the facility into compliance

with the applicable sections of the Act and Chapter

2.

Harco admits emission of smoke and odors on several occasions

which caused discomfort

to some residents

in the vicinity of their

facility but offer in mitigation that excess particulate matter and

smoke were emitted as

a result of equipment failure,

impurities

,in

the scrap which were not ascertainable until melting began and delays

in the installation of the scrubber system which would have eliminated

the violations

(Stip.

p.

5)

The parties further agree to payment of $6000.00

in satisfaction

of the violations found;

and Harco agrees to cease and desist from

further violations;

to take steps

to properly maintain the scrubber

system to provide maximum efficiency

in operation and to keep mainte-

nance records

of the systam.

In this case the violations are admitted and the Stipulation

and Proposed Settlement

filed complies with the requirements of our

Procedural Rule 333 for settlement

(EPA v. City of Marion,

1 PCB 591).

On the basis of the foregoing and the Stipulation and Proposed

Settlement, which constitute the entire record

in this matter,

we

find that Harco did violate the Act and Regulations as charged in

the Complaint by causing or allowing the emission of smoke or other

particulate matter into the atmosphere with opacity greater than

30

and in excess of the allowable emission rates for the periods alleged

in violation of Rules

202(b)

and 203(b)

of Chapter

2,

of

Rule 3-3.111

of the Air Rules, and of Section 9(a)

of the Act.

A penalty of

$6000.00 is assessed for these violations.

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and cop-

clusions of law in this matter.

ORDER

1.

Respondent, Harco Aluminum,

Inc.,

is

found to have operated

its facilities

in violation of Section 9(a)

of the Environmental Pro-

tection Act, Rule

3-3.111 of the Rules and Regulations Governing

the Control of Air Pollution,

and Rules

202(b)

and 203(b) of the

Air Pollution Regulations and shall pay a penalty of $6000.00 for

such violations.

Penalty payment by certified check or money order

payable to the State of Illinois within

30 days of this Order

to:

Control Program Coordinator,

Division of Air Pollution Control,

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,

2200 Churchill Road,

Springfield,

Illinois,

62706.

2.

Respondent,

Harco Aluminum,

Inc., shall cease and desist

from further violations of the Environmental Protection Act or

Board Regulations.

19— 540

---

—3—

3.

Respondent,

Harco Aluminum, Inc.,

shall ensure that the

air pollution control scrubber system installed at its facilities

is properly maintained

to provide maximum efficiency

in

operations

and shall keep maintenance records

of said systems.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Con-

trol Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were

adopted on the

________

day of _______________________, 1976

by a vote of

~

Christan L. Moffetiiy~lerk

Illinois Pollution c~bf~trolBoard