ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 30, 1972

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

v.

)

PCB

71-86

STATE LINE FOUNDRIES,

INC.

ALVIN LIEBLING, Assistant Attorney General, appeared

for Environ-

mental Protection Agency

EUGENE BRASSFIELD appeared for State Line

Foundries,

Inc.

OPINION OF THE BOARD

(by Mr.

Kissel):

On March

13,

1972,

State Line Foundries,

Inc.

(~StateLine~)

flied a Motion with

the Board to modify its previous Order of August

5,

1971

with

regard

to

the

penalty.

That

Order provided in

part

as follows:

EState

Line

shall

pay

a

penalty in the amount

of

$7,500

for

violation

of

the

Act

and

the

Rules

and

Regu-

lations

promulgated

thereunder,

as

described

in

the

document

hereinbefore

referred

to,

and

in

this

ooinion.’~

State

Lin&s

Motion

contends

that

the

$7,500

penalty

will

impose

a

severe

and

extreme

hardship

upon

it,

State

Line

indicates

that

it

has

completed

the

installation

of

the

electric

induction

furnace

pro-

vided

for

under

the

variance.

The

president

of

State

Line

has

sub-

mitted an affidavit showing that

the

Company

expended

$113,000

to

in-

stall the induction furnace

and

the

accompanying

facilities.

To

meet

its current obligations

and pay

for the pollution abatement instal-

lation,

State

Line

is

presently

attempting

to

induce

its

stockholders

to

personally

guarantee

the

COmpany~s notes.

An

audit

completed

prior

to

the

installation

of

the

new

furnace

showed

that the liabili-

ties of State Line exceeded its assets by over $25,000.

Net profits

for 1971 were approximately

$7,900.

State Line also directs the

Board~s attention to the generally poor current economic situation

of most foundries.

State Line asks that the Board suspend the penalty,

reduce it

to 10 to 20

of State Line’s 1971 net profits,

or assess

State Line an amount commensurate with

State Line’s ability

to pay.

4

—

531

---

The Board’s opinion of August

1971 indicated that the monetary

penalty was being imposed due to State Line’s

“inaction

.

.

.

in

failing to follow the basic fundamentals of State

law on air pollution.”

State Line had never sought

a permit from the Agency;

and, since

May,

1968, its operations had emitted substantially more particulates

than allowed under State regulation.

In regard to the amount of the

penalty, the Board expressly stated,

“the penalty would be much

greater

in

amount

if

State

Line

were

not

so

heavily

committed

finan-

cially

now.”

Despite

the

passage

of

time

and

State

Line’s

good

faith

efforts to comply with

its

variance

and

with

the

existing

Illinois

regulations,

the reasons

for the imposition of

the $7,500 penalty

still

remain.

Further,

the

original

opinion

in

this case

was

filed

in

August,

1971;

this

Motion

was

not

made

until

March

1972.

After

this seven—month hiatus,

we

are

not

inclined

to

re-open

the

case

for

a reconsideration of the amount of the penalty imposed.

If State

Line had sought to mitigate

the amount of the penalty,

it should have

applied within

a reasonable amount of time after the entry of the

original order, not seven months later.

We commend State Line

for

the completion of its pollution abatement program but do not find

cause

at this late

date to re-open the case

for any further dis-

cussion of the penalty.

The Motion

is hereby denied,

Mr.

Dumeile

dissents.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the

Pollution Control Board,

certify that the above Opinion and Order

was adopted on this

~3&”7

day of

~

1972, by a vote of

~“.../

4

—

632