ILLINOIS

POLLUTION

CONTROL

BO/\RD

September

26,

1972

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

AGENCY

v.

)

~72—5O

GA?

CORPORATION

ORDER

For

reasons

to

be

given

in

a

subsequent

opJ ni on

,

t:he

Board

hereby

approves

and

adopts

as

its

order

the

in II owinq

settlement

agreement

submitted

by

both

parties.

Mr.

Dumeile dissents.

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

The parties hereby stipulate

and aqree

that

the settle-

ment

of

the above entitled enforcement

action shall be as

set forth below.

This proposed settlement

is expressly

conditioned

upon,

and effective only with approval thereof

in

all

respects

by

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board,

of

both

this

Stipulation

and

Proposal

for

Settlement;,

the

Stipu—

lation

and

Settlement

dated

September

26,

1972

filed

in

PCB

71_ill

(Hereinafter

uStipulation

in

Water

Case”)

and dis-

missal with prejudice

of Case Number 71-65 now pendinq

in

the Illinois Appellate Court,

Third Judicial

District.

If,

for any reason,

the Pollution Control Board

fails

in any

respect

to approve

the aforesaid Stipulation

in Water Case,

then

the Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement

i.n

the

instant cause

is null, void

and

of

flO

effect.

The parties

further stipulate

that any admissions

and all statements

contained herein shall be null, void

and

of

no effect

in

the event that

the Board

fails

to approve

the

followinq

terms

of settlement

in

all respects

or

the terms

of settle-

ment contained in

the Stipulation

in Water Case

in all

respects:

NOW, THEREFORE,

in consideration

of

the promises and

the following covenants

and agreements

the parties hereto do

each compromise

and settle

all disputes

and matters and do

further remise,

release and forever discharge

the other

from

any and

all

claims, demands,

actions and causes

of action of

1.

See the Board’s order in #71-li,

entered today.

5

—

457

---

whatever

kind

and character,

known or unknown, which either

party may now have or hereafter have growing

out of

or con~

nected

in any way with

the matters

and things set forth

in the

Comp1.~aint of the Environmental

.Protection Agency filed

in

t.he above

ent.it.L ed cause on

the

following

basis:

a,

GAO’ denies

that

it violated any statutory or

regulatory prohib~Lions as complained

of

in the

Complaint

Ill.. ed

in

the

instance

cause;

b.

GAi~’ has

undertaken

to

install

and

will

corn—

~iete

installation

of

the

pollution

abatement

equipment,

dosc.ribed

in

FOxhibits

A

and

B

attached

hereto,

by

January

31,

.1.973;

GAP

estimates

that

it

will

expend

$1. ,555,802

in

air

pollution

abatement

equipment

at

the

Joliet

facility;

d.

GAP

will

post

a

performance

bond

with

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

in

the

amount of $1,555,802 within one week of

the

decision of

the Poll.ution Control Board

in this

matter,

if this settlement is adopted

This

bond will

be

in the same

form and

substance

as the bond form attached

and made

a nart

hereof as Exhibit

B;

e.

GfF will,

file with

the Environmental

Protection

Agency

and with the Board,

monthly progress reports

regarding

GAF~s

porformance

in installing the

air pollution abatement equipment;

I,

GAP agrees it

sha

be

in compliance with any

and

al.

I. applicable statutes or regulations relating

to

the Environmental

Protection Act,

or regulations

presently promulgated

thereunder,

by

Janua.ry

31,

1973;

p.

GAP

will

continue

and.

be

perm.i~tted

to

operate

its

plant

located

at

Joliot,

Illinois

at

present

emission

levels

until

January

31,

1.973;’

h.

GAP

agrees

to

pay

$15,000

to

the

State

of I1linois~

I,

Christan

Moffett,

Clerk

of

the

Pollution

Control

Board,

certify

that

the

above

Order

was

adoptee

this

26thday

of

September,

1972,

by

a

vote

of

---

CAF

Corporation

140

West 51

Street

~_-

~

,

New

York,

New

York

10020

Telephone

(212)

582-7600

May

18,

1972

James

Rubin,

Esq.

Illinois

Attorney

Generals

Office

Environmental Control 1)ivision

188

W.

Randolph

Chicago,

Illinois

60601

Re:

Joliet

Air

Pollution

Control Facility

Dear

Mr.

Rubin:

In accordance

with

our

telephone

conversation

of

yesterday,

this

is

to

advise

you

that

the

total

cost

of

construction

of

the

air

pollution

control

facility

to

be

located at

Joliet,

illinois

is

expected

to

he

$1, 613;

000.

Thi.s

is

allocated

as

follows:

I..ist

of

Capital._Expenditures

Materials

and

equipment

$

429,

790

Costs

payable

to

sabaontrae.tor~

for

mechanical

and

electrical

installa-

tion

of

equipment

479,

660

Field

costs

of prime

contractor

258,

550

Fee

payable

to

prime

contractor

41,

160

Design

and engineering

costs

Prime

contractor

150,

000

Costs

of

GAF

Corporation

engineering

department

40, 000

Premium

pay

(salaries

and

wages)

36,

000

Fund

for

contingencies

137,

840

Total

Capital

Expenditures

List

of Non-Capital

Expenditures

(including

charges

and modifications

of

existing

equipment,

taxes

and

insurance)

$

40,000

Total

Project

Cost

$1,

613,

000

~

-~

r

(~.~

5

—

459

---

James

Itubin,

Esq,

Illinois

Attorney

GeneraPs

Office

Page

2

May

18,

1972

The

proposed

schedule

from

the

date

hereof

to completion

of

the project

is

as

follows:

1,

Start

of foundation

in

May

2,

Delivery

of all

control

units

in June

3.

Piping work

starting

in June

4.

Electrical

work starting

in July

5,

Sheet

metal

work

starting

in

July

6,

Inside

hooding

for

the

saturators

during November

and

December

7.

Project

completion

December

31,

1972

At

our

conference

held

on

May

15,

1972

in Ottawa,

Mr.

Liebling

indicated

that

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

would

be

agreeable

to a

variance

to

February

1,

1973,

This

would certainly

be

desirable

from

the

Corporation~s point

of

view

since

it

would

provide

an

allowance

for

contingencies

and

a

reasonable

shakedown

period,

If

I can

be

of

any

further

assistance

to

you

in this matter,

please

do

not

hesitate

to

telephone

me,

Very truly

yours,

~

.

~

Kenneth

D,

Archer

Associate

Counsel

5

—

460

---

GAF

Corporation

140We3151 Street

F

p~e~yoaçNewVork10020

Telephone

(212)

582-7600

May

31,

1972

James

Rubin,

Esq.

Illinois

Attorney General’s Office

Environmental

Control

Division

188

W.

Chicago,

Illinois

Re:

Joliet Air Pollution

Dear

Mr.

Rubin:

In accordance

with our

telephone conversation of last

week,

here

is

the estimated

construction schedule

setting forth

Interim

dates:

1.

All

thermal

oxidizers

to be

shipped

June

23,

1972.

2.

Site

preparation to be

comple Led

June

30,

1972.

3.

Piping

to be

completed November

30,

1972.

4.

Electrical work to be

completed December

17,

1972.

5.

Sheet metal work to be

completed December

17,

1972.

6.

hoods

to be

completed December

17,

1972.

Further

in accordance

with your

request,

here

is

a breakdown

of estimated

equipment

and

material

costs

for

the subject project:

5 Thermal oxidizers

$174, 934

4

Knockout pots

6, 160

Pumps and

motors

1,

998

Piping,

valves

and

fittings

10, 800

Instruments

4,

840

Motors,

controls

and

wiring

128, 320

Concrete

4,550

Structural steel

29, 290

Buildings

2,

100

Painting

940

Hoods,

ducts

and

dampers

8,720

‘lag

f*~kt

13

TWo

bust

Is on OAF Bend; it can be nsd dl~s~fty

for (flozo

RsDroducllon

(zpc~s)

5—461

---

James

Robin,

Esq.

Illinois

Attorney

General

1s

Office

Page

2

May

31,

1972

Please

note

that

the

dollar

amounts

vnr’y

somewhat

from

the

total

previously

suppi icc

you

since

some

of

the

amounts

set

forth

have

been

revised

as

a

result

of our

current

audit,

of costs.

Needless

to

say,

the

remaining

estimated

costs

may,

likewise,

vary.

Very

truly

yours,

Kenneth

1).

Archer

Associate

Counsel

N1)A:ma

5

—

462

---

STATE OF ILLINOIS

)

55

COTJNTY 0? WILL

BEFORE

THE

POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

OF

THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS

ENVIRON~NTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

)

OF

THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

Complainant,

)

PCB

72—50

)

PCB

71—Il

GAP

CORPORATION,

formerly

General

Aniline

&

Film

Corporation,

a

Delaware

Corporation.

Respondent

KNOW

ALL

MEN BY

THESE

PRESENTS:

That

GAP

CORPORATION

(GAF~

a

Delaware

corporation

having

a

plant

for

the

manufacture

of

felt

arid

certain

felt

products

in

Joliet,

Illinois

(the

~Piant~)

is

held

and

firmly

bound

unto

the

Environmental

~Protection

Aaency

of

the

State

of

Illinois

(the

~EPA~’)

in

the

s~n of

up

to

ONE

MILLION

FIVE

HUNDRED

FIP~~

FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT

HUNDRED

~IWO ($1,555,

802

00)

DOLLARS,

lawful money of the United States of

America,

to

~ich

payment well and truly

to

be

made,

it

does bind and

EXHIBIT

I

---

j

t:3~~~

~fl~

Lt~

ucc~~or~

~nc1ass~gns, firuly by

thc~c~

~rr~ent::~.

\~HEREAS,GAF has

Illinois plant

Illinois Environmental Protection Act and the regulations

in

force

thereunder;

WHEREAS,

GAP

haS

submitted plans and specifications

to the

EPA

setting

forth the manner, method,

type and com-

though fully set forth herein,

and made a part

hereof;

WHEREAS,

the EPA has approved these plans of

GAP

though fully set forth herein,

and made a part hereof;

5

464

---

—3—

system so that,

expended and the amount of this Bond;

WHEREAS,

correction within the time prescribed;

NOW,

THEREFORE,

Pollution Control Board approves and enters an order

consistent with the

terms of

the Settlement Agreement in

the above—entitled cause

and,

if GAP

the aforesaid air pollution abatement system in substantial

---

conformity with the plans and specifications referred to

herein or as may be modified, amended

or

changed by reg.uest

of OAF and by order of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board,

on or by January31,

1973,

or to such other time as

the

parties may in writing mutually agree,

then this undertaking

is to be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force

and effects

In the event OAF fails to install the afore-

said air pollution abatement system as set forth herein, the

amount then due shall be payable five days after receipt of

written notice of demand for payment from the EPA,

Signed and sealed this

____

day of

______

1972

ATTEST:

OAF

CORPORATION

By

5

—

466