ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December 19, 1974
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
    )
    COMPLAINANT
    v.
    )
    PCB 74—225
    )
    )
    MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING CO.,
    )
    CHEMICAL DIVISION, a Delaware Corp-
    )
    oration,
    RESPONDENT
    )
    MR. FREDERIC
    J.
    ENTIN, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, in behalf of
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
    MR. ROBERT H. TUCKER, GENERAL COUNSEL, AND MR. REINO 0. LAINE, ASSOC-
    IATE COUNSEL, in behalf of MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Marder)
    The People of the State of Illinois by Attorney General William
    Scott filed its Complaint alleging that Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing
    Company (hereinafter referred to as 3 M) violated Sec. 12 (a) of the
    Environmental Protection Act on December 14-15, 1973, January 17-18,
    1974, and March 26, 1974. Specific violations of the Board’s Rules and
    Regulations are as follows: December 14, 1q73, December 15, 1973, Jan-
    uary 17, 1974, January 18, 1974, and March 26, 1974, violated Rule 403
    of chapter 3, Water Pollution Regulations, by causing or allowing dis-
    charge from its Cordova facility into the Mississippi River that
    con-
    tained obvious levels of color or turbidity; March 26, 1974, violated
    Rule 408 (a) as it applies to iron by allowing a discharge to the Miss-
    issippi River that contained 18 mg/i; violated Rule 408 (a) as it app1iE~’
    to lead, by allowing a discharge to the Mississippi River that containec
    0.25 mg/i lead. The Complaint was filed on June 14, 1974, with an Amenc
    ed Complaint filed June 25, 1974.
    Hearing was held August 19, 1974, in Rock Island, Illinois.
    At hearing the parties presented a Stipulation of Fact and Proposal
    of Settlement pursuant to Rule 333 of the Board’s Procedural Rules.
    This Opinion shall summarize that Stipulation. (For a more detailed dis-
    cussion of the matter, the reader is referred to the Stipulation filed
    August 23, 1974, in this matter.)
    The alleged violations in the Complaint pertain to 3 M’s magnetic
    recording tape manufacturing faci,lity located six miles north of Cordova,
    Illinois, along the Mississippi River. There are two plants in the Cord—
    ova facility. One is a chemical plant, which discharges waste water
    containing BOD5 and suspended solids. The second plant is a magnetic
    14—709
    —2—
    audio visual plant, whose discharge contains iron oxide, as suspended
    solids, iron, and ammonia sulphate.
    The chemical plant was completed in 1969, with its water treatment
    plant coming into service in early 1970. The magnetic plant was com-
    pleted in 1973, with the waste treatment plant completed when the plant
    went into operation.
    The treatment plant for the chemical plant has a design capacity
    of 300 gpm, and 8000 lbs. of BOO per diem. It is an activated sludge
    treatment plant. In 1970 this plant cost $834,000.
    The treatment plant for the magnetic plant is a chemical treatment
    plant designed to handle 900 gpm of waste water. It is designed to re-
    move 10,800 lbs/day of suspended solids, consisting of iron oxide and
    ferrous sulphate. In 1973 this plant cost $400,000.
    On November 19, 1973, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    (hereinafter referred to as Agency) issued a permit for 3 M to take the
    stabilization lagoon of the treatment system out of service, in order
    to fix the sludge and remove
    it from the lagoon. 3 M took the lagoon
    out of service on December 13, 1973. On December 14, 1973, a Mr. Howe
    of the Illinois Department of Conservation noted a yellow—colored ef f-
    luent coming from 3 M’s outfall. On December 17 the lagoon was put
    back into service, as it was too cold to complete the sludge fixing.
    The lagoon was taken out of service again on January 16, 1974,
    through January 20, 1974. This was done in order to finish fixing the
    sludge in the lagoon. On January 17, Mr. Howe again saw a colored dis-
    charge coming from 3 M’s outfall. On that date he notified 3 M of his
    observations. Also on January 17, 1974, a Mr. Kraft of the Agency was
    present inspecting the fixing operation. Upon receipt of the complaint
    from Mr. Howe, Mr. Kraft and representatives
    of 3 N went to inspect the
    outfall and found the discharge clear. On January 18, 1974, the Agency
    discussed the complaint of Mr. Howe with 3
    M and decided on an inspect-
    ion the next day.
    Inspection was made on January 19, 1974, by Mr. Kehoe
    of the Agency.
    Mr. Howe accompanied Mr. Kehoe on the inspection.
    On
    that date the outfall effluent was clear. A sample of the effluent at
    that time showed the following levels of contaminants in the effluent:
    Constituent
    Level
    State Standard
    Suspended Solids
    6 mg/i
    25 mg/i
    Iron
    .5 mg/i
    2.0 mg/l
    pH
    8.0
    6.0—9.0
    On March 26, 1974,
    there was
    a breakdown in the treatment plant that
    services the magnetic plant. There was trouble with the pH in the sys-
    tem, as well as a broken collection flight.
    3 M denies violation in December 1973 or January 1974. 3 N claims
    that the work being done was covered by a permit to shut down the lagoon.
    Further, Agency inspection at the site in January showed a clear outfall
    effluent.
    14
    —
    710
    —3—
    3
    M further denies any violation of the lead sta’ndard.
    The stipula-
    tion does not have any facts in it which would tend to prove the viola-
    tion of the lead standard.
    In fact, Agency samples showed that the lead
    standard was being met.
    3
    N admits violation of the
    iron standard found in Rule 408 (a) of
    Chapter 3 on March 26, when its treatment plant failed.
    3 N has both short- and long-range programs that will prevent any fut-
    ure incidents of this type.
    The short—range program consists of the following items:
    1) Awareness program
    —
    begun February 1974.
    2) Sewer drains capped in magnetic plant to prevent accidental
    spills
    -
    February 1974.
    3) Dry and landfill any out-of-spec iron oxide
    —
    begun February 1974.
    4) Full-time environmental engineer assigned to plant
    -
    Feb. 1974.
    5) Hourly inspection of outfall
    -
    begun February 1974.
    6) 24-hr. treatment plant operators
    -
    begun March 1974.
    7) Backup pH control system
    -
    installed April 1974.
    8) Upgrade and replacement of sludge pumping equipment
    -
    to be done
    by September 1974.
    9) Use of new flocculating agent, NALCO 677 and alum
    —
    April 1974.
    10) Permanent alum feed system
    -
    winter, 1974.
    11) Inventory spare parts for treatment plant
    -
    done April 1974.
    12) Lower caustic used for neutralization to prevent freezing
    —
    winter operation.
    13) Color turbidity unit installed
    -
    July 1974.
    14) Program to reduce production to meet effluent standards
    —
    started
    May 1974.
    3 M further agrees to notify the Attorney General’s office of progress
    on this program.
    The long-range program will involve expanding the present waste water
    system
    to provide for backup so as to prevent effluent
    standard viola-
    tions. This includes an extension of the outfall and an additional stab-
    ilization lagoon. This is to be done relatively soon and will cost about
    $367,000. Construction will take place in the third quarter of 1975 to
    build an equalization tank for the system. This should cost
    about $360,000
    As far as adverse ecological impact on the river, it should be noted
    that this was not a continuing violation.
    It is stated in the Stipula-
    tion that there is less turbidity and color in the effluent than that
    which naturally occurs in the river. On the date of violation (March 26,
    1974), 615 pounds of iron were deposited in the river.
    At hearing, Mr.
    Howe stated that down—river from the outfall there were dead clams, but
    no dead clams up-river from Respondent’s outfall.
    R. 53. Other than this
    observation,
    as no samples were taken, the record contains no correlation
    between the events at Respondent’s plant and the death of the clams. As
    mentioned above, the lead samples taken showed compliance with the ef f—
    luent standards.
    14—711
    —4—
    As a settlement, the
    parties have proposed that 3 M will complete
    both the short- and long-range programs described above within the fol-
    lowing schedule:
    (Time runs from date Respondent obtains all applicable permits to
    construct.)
    1. Construct and extend outfall pipe into Mississippi River
    -
    3
    months. Construct manhole on bank of river in the event the
    extension of the outfall into the river is approved by the
    respective agencies
    -
    3 months.
    2. Construct additional stabilization pond
    -
    9 months for perman-
    ent installation. If temporary equipment can bp obtained, the
    pond will be put into operation within 4 months.
    3. Provide flow equalization and segregation of process waste-
    water from magnetic plant
    -
    9 months.
    4. Final startup and adjustments for items
    2 and 3
    -
    10 months.
    5. Progress reports, including duplicate copies
    of specifications,
    plans, and permit applications,
    as submitted to the Illinois
    EPA on the above installations, will
    be submitted during the
    construction, to
    the Office of the Attorney General of
    Illinois.
    Further, 3
    N will furnish monitoring reports to the Agency and U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency as discharge permits require. Such mon-
    itoring shall include (beginning 60 days from the date of the Agreement)
    monitoring of the three storm sewer outlets twice weekly. When there is
    runoff along with normal visual observations, 3 M shall analyze the eff-
    luent for BOD5, COD, and suspended solids. These results shall be sup-
    plied to the Agency in monthly reports.
    Dates stipulated in the Agreement may only be extended with a Board
    Order, and only after notice to all parties.
    The conditions of this Agreement shall end if either the Board re-
    leases by Order 3 N from its obligations, or 3 N ceases operation at
    Cordova permanently.
    Inspectors employed by the Attorney General’s office shall have the
    right to make unannounced inspections, subject to conditions in the Agree-
    ment.
    3 N agrees to install a motion switch on the skimmer in the settling
    tank with an alarm signal.
    3 M will send duplicate copies of all reports to
    the Illinois Attorn-
    ey
    General.
    During construction, 3 M will notify the Attorney General within 24
    hours of any upset that may tend to a violation.
    14—712
    —5—
    3 M agrees to post a $100,000 compliance bond to insure
    compliance
    with
    this
    Agreement and pay a $1,000 civil penalty for the iron viola-
    tion on March 26, 1974.
    The Board finds this an acceptable agreement which will preserve
    the quality of the environment by preventing future unlawful discharges.
    This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of law
    of the Board.
    ORDER
    IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that:
    1. Respondent, Minnesota Mining
    &
    Manufacturing Company, has viol-
    ated Rule 408 (a) as it applies to iron on March 26, 1974. All
    other charges are dismissed.
    2. Petitioner shall cease and desist all violations of the applic-
    able Water Pollution Control Regulations and shall fo11ow~all
    the terms of the Stipulation Agreement entered into by the par-
    ties and filed with the Board August 23, 1974, and summarized
    above.
    3. Respondent shall pay to the State of Illinois as penalty the
    sum
    of
    $1,000 within 35 days from the
    date
    of this Order.
    Pen-
    alty 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.
    4. Respondent shall, within 35 days from the date of this Order,
    post a performance bond in
    a form satisfactory to the Agency
    in the amount of $100,000 guaranteeing compliance with the
    terms of the Stipulation Agreement. Bond shall be forwarded
    to the Agency at 2200 Churchill Road, Springfield, Illinois,
    62706.
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, certify that the above Opinion and Order was ado~ed by the
    Board on the 19th day of December, 1974, by a vote of L~ to
    C
    ~j’. ‘i)?~
    14—713

    Back to top