ILLINOIS

POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

January

1975

ENVIRON)WNTAL

PROTECTION

AGENCY,

Comp~.ainant,

)

v.

)

PCB

74—264

)

ALCO

SPRING

INDUSTRIES,

INC.,

)

Delaware

Corporation,

)

Respondent.

)

Mr

•

Marvin

•

 Benn,

attorney

for

ComplaInant.

Mr

•

James

Levin,

attorney

for

Respondent.

OPINION

AND

ORDER

OF

THE

BOARD

 (by Dr.

Odell)

On July 10, 1974,

 the Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency) filed a formal Complaint against the Respondent charg-

ing a violation of Rule 903 (a) of the Water Pollution Regulations

(Chapter Three) in that from January 1, 1973, until the filing of

the Complaint, Respondent operated its treatment works and waste-

water sources without first having obtained permits from the

Agency.

Alco Spring Indbstries, Inc.

 (Alco) operates a spring

manufacturing company at 23rd and Euclid Avenue, Chicago Heights,

Cook County, Illinois.

 Alco..cools oil, by the use of water as one

step in its manufacturing process.

 The resulting industrial waste-

water is discharged into Thorn Creek.

 The system was designed to

avoid the water’s being contaminated by the oil

•

 Additional pre-

cautions included installation, before 1940, of two oil separators

(weirs).

 tn 1970 and August, 1973 Alco installed air—cooled heat

exchangers in place of most of the water—cooled heat exchangers.

Alco

 had never received a permit for the operation of its waste-

water

 treatment

facility.

A hearing took place on November 8, 1974, in Chicago,

Illinois.

 A Stipulation of Facts and Agreed Settlement was read

into the record.

 The Factual Background revealed that Alco had

applied for an operating permit on February 4, 1974.

 On March 28

the Agency denied this application.

 On April 2, 1974, the Agency

requested Alco to submit plans to further reduce the possibility

of oil discharges.

 Shortly afterwards, Alco discussed with the

United

States

 Environmental Protection Agency

 (USEPA) a plan it

believed would be satisfactory to the Agency. The USEPA representa-

tive suggested that Alco should delay submission of its proposed

plan to the Agency until after Alco’s officers approved it.

 Alco

believed that this representative was employed by the Agency, not

USEPA,

and

relied

 on its conversations with the USEPA in not sub-

mitting its proposed plan.

 Alco officers approved the plan on

July 24,

 1974.

 This plan required the removal of water-cooled

exchangers and the spending of $160,000 by the end of September,

1974.

 Alco had spent $145,000 prior to September,

 1974.

 Alco’s

plan is conceptually acceptable to the Agency.

Alco admitted in the Factual Stipulation Regarding Alleged

Violations that it had failed to resubmit the operating permit

application by July 10,

 1974,

 and had never received an operating

permit.

 The parties agree that Alco has not violated any statute

or regulation prohibiting substantive pollution.

In the Agreed Settlement, the parties stated that:

“The EPA

 (Agency)

 and Alco have agreed to the following in

full settlement of all EPA enforcement proceedings against Alco

for alleged violations occurring to the date hereof.

“A.

 Alco has accomplished the following:

1.

 Fill the storm ditch and cover any oil

spills on the ground around the oil

separator.

2.

 Clean the oil separator.

3.

 Paint the inside of the oil separator.

“B.

 Alco will accomplish the following by December

31,

 1974, unless prevented from doing so by

delays not attributable to Alco:

Eliminate all water discharge from heat

exchangers into Thorn Creek, including

the completion of the transition from

water-cooled to air—cooled heat ex-

changers.

“C.

 Alco will pay to the State of Illinois a fine

of One Thousand Dollars

 ($1,000)

 in full settle-

ment of all EPA enforcement proceedings against

Alco for alleged violations occurring prior to

the date hereof.

 Payment of that penalty shall

be upon the immediate receipt of the Order, sub-

sequent to the decision of the Pollution Control

Board.

 Respondent shall pay the penalty of $1,000

to the State of Illinois to:

Fiscal Services Section

Environmental Protection Agency

Springfield, Illinois

62706

15

—

“D,

Alco

will

not

be

chargeable

with

violation

of

Rule

 903(c) (1), Chapter

 3, of the Illinois

Pollution Control Board Rules and Regulations

during the period of time the Agency is review-

ing Alco~spermit application, provided that

Alco shall obtain the required permit,

 if needed,

by no later than December 31,

 1974,

 Alco shall

not be responsible for any delay in obtaining

said

permit caused by delays not attributable to

Alco

We accept the Stipulation and Proposal For Settlement

entered into between the parties.

 We construe the reference to

903 (c) (1)

 in paragraph

3

of the Factual Background as amending

the July 10 Complaint to charge a violation of Rule 903 (c) (1),

not 903(a),

We

 find that the Respondent violated Rule 903(c) (1)

of Chapter

3

from July

1,

 1973, through July 10,

 1974.

The

penalty and program of environmental protection are satisfactory

under the circumstances of the case.

This constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of

law of the Board.

ORDER

IT

 IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that:

 Alco shall carry out all the terms of the Agreed

Settlement by the dates and in the manner as stated above.

 Pay-

ment of the $1,000 penalty shall

be

made within fifteen

 (15)

 days

of the receipt of this Order,

2.

 Alco shall cease and desist from violating Rule 903

(c) (1)

 of Chapter

 3 by December 31, 1974.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order was adopted

onthe~3!~

day

 1974,

by a vote of

to

15—71