ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    July 12, 1973
    )
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    )
    )
    )
    v.
    )
    PCB 72-242
    )
    )
    INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY,
    )
    WISCONSIN STEEL DIVISION
    )
    )
    OPINION AND ORDER OP THE BOARD (by Mr. Dumelle)
    This is an enforcement action alleging violations of Section 12(a)
    of the Environmental Protection Act and Rules 5.0 and 1.04.1(c) of
    SWB 19 and 15 respectively, caused by a liquid discharge from respon-
    dent’s vessel on the Calumet River on July 23, 1971.
    The respondent has filed a motion to dismiss the case for the
    reason that the statutes and regulations charged are invalid under
    the supremacy clause because of conflict with or pre-emption by
    federal legislation, interference with interstate commerce and vio-
    lation of federal maritime jurisdiction. We have examined respondent’s
    memoranda in support of their motion but find no valid arguments upon
    which we could dismiss the action. To the contrary, the Agency’s
    memorandum cites the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, (33 U.S.C.
    H
    1151 (b) and (c)) which place the primary responsibility of water
    pollution control upon the states and expressly preserves local juris-
    diction. The motion to dismiss is therefore denied.
    As to the merits of the case, there is direct eyewitness testimony
    from two Agency inspectors that on July 23, 1971 they saw a red,
    spurting discharge coming from the side of the respondent’s boat
    (Tr. 11-20, 87). They also observed that the red liquid had discolored
    the river in an area around the vessel of about fifty by two hundred
    feet (Tr. 20). Furthermore, photographs taken at the scene clearly
    show the red discharge (Agency Ex. 1-8, Resp. Ex. 1-5). One of the
    respondent’s witnesses admitted that the cargo hold of the ship had
    been hosed down prior to the discharge and that the hold drains
    directly to the river. The reason for doing this was to remove
    iron ore residues preparatory to loading coal (Tr. 191-2).
    Rule 5.0 prohibits the discharge of contaminated or pollutional
    bilge. Rule 1.04.1 Cc) prohibits discharges producing color, odor
    or other conditions in such a degree as to create a nuisance. The
    Act itself defines “water pollution” as, among other things, the
    B-. 453
    -2-
    discharge of any contaminant into the water as will or is likely
    to create a nuisance. From the testimony and the photographs we
    clearly find all violations as alleged. We are pleased to see that
    the respondent has taken certain precautions so as to prevent such
    a spill in the future. We will, however, assess a penalty of $500.00
    simply because the spill did occur at the hands of the respondent
    and they must be held responsible.
    This opinion constitutes the Boardts findings of fact and
    conclusions of law.
    ORDER
    Respondent shall pay to the State of Illinois by August 15, 1973
    the sum of $500.00. 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 Drive, Springfield, Illinois 62706.
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Boarc~, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were adopted on the
    ______day of July, 1973 by a vote of _______________________________
    Christan L. Moffett~ Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    a
    —
    454

    Back to top