RECEFW
E!)
CLERK’S
OFFICE
OCT 03 2003
STATE OF IWNOIS
Pollution Control Board
OFFICE OF THE AT’ORNEY GENERAL
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Lisa Madigan
C)
ATTORNEY GENERAL
October 2, 2003
The Honorable Dorothy Gunn
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center, Ste. 11-500
100 West Randolph
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Re:
People v. Marathon Ashland Pipeline, LLC
Dear Clerk Gunn:
Enclosed for filing please find the original and ten copies of a NOTICE OF FILING,
APPEARANCE, COMPLAINT, MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT and
STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT in regard to the above-captioned matter.
Please file the original and return a file-stamped copy of the document to our office in the enclosed
self-addressed, stamped envelope.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration.
Very truly yours,
£~.
~
Sally A. Carter
Environmental Bureau
500 South Second Street
Springfield, Illinois 62706
(217) 782-9031
SAC/pp
Enclosures
500 South Second
Street, Springfield, Illinois
62706
• (217) 782-1000 •
‘ITY: (217) 785-2771
• Fax:
(217) 782-7046
100 \Vest
Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois
60601 • (312) 814-300() •
‘ITT:
(312) 814-3374 •
Fax:
(312) 814-3806
1001 l~
s’,t \l on (
trbond
tic Illtnot, 62901
(618) ~296400
1 I ‘~ (61~)~‘9 64() I
I ix (618) 529 6416
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
-
BOARDCLER
-
C
KSO~!~E
‘~I~
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
)
OCT’ 0 3 20
ILLINOIS
STATE
Or
03
ILLINOIS
vs.
Complainant,
))
No.
~
~
~-Ontro/8~
)
MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE
)
L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability
company,
Respondent.
)
NOTICE OF FILING
To:
Mr. Robert
W.
Everett
Marathon Ashland Petroleum, L.L.C.
539 South Main Street
Findlay, OH 45840-3295
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on this date I mailed for filing with the Clerk of the Pollution
Control Board of the State of Illinois, a COMPLAINT, APPEARANCE, MOTION FOR RELIEF
FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT and STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT, a
copy of which is attached hereto and herewith served upon you.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney General of the
State of Illinois
MATTHEW J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation Division
BY:
4aIi~,~
SALL&A. CARTER
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
500 South Second Street
Springfield, Illinois 62706
217/782-9031
Dated: October 2, 2003
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I did on October 2, 2003, send by First Class Mail, with postage
thereon fully prepaid, by depositing in a United States Post Office Box a true and correct copy
of the following instruments entitled NOTICE OF FILING, APPEARANCE, COMPLAINT,
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT and STIPULATION AND
PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT:
To:
Mr. Robert W. Everett
Marathon Ashland Petroleum, L.L.C.
539 South Main Street
Findlay, OH 45840-3295
and the original and ten copies by First Class Mail with postage thereon fully prepaid of the
same foregoing instrument(s):
To:
Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
State of Illinois Center
Suite 11-500
100 West Randolph
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Sally A. Carter
Assistant Attorney General
This filing is submitted on recycled paper.
REC~~VED
CLERK’S
OFF?~
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OCT 0 3 2003
STATE OF IWNOJS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
POllUtiOn Control Board
Complainant,
v.
)
PCBNO.
)
(Enforcement)
MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE, L.L.C.,
a Delaware limited liability company,
)
Respondent.
APPEARANCE
I, SALLY
A.
CARTER, Assistant Attorney General of the State of Illinois, hereby file my
appearance in the proceeding on behalf of the Plaintiff, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
LISA MADIGAN
Attorney General
State of Illinois
MATTHEW J.
DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation Division
BY:
O
SALLY~’A.CARTER
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
500 South Second Street
Springfield, Illinois 62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
Ic/;jO3
1
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOA~ECE~V~ED
CLERK’S
OCT 0 2
OP~1,~
2003
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
STATE OF
ILLINOIS
Complainant,
)
POllUtion Control Board
)
v.
)
PCBNO.
)
(Enforcement)
MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE, L.L.C.,
)
a Delaware limited liability company,
Respondent.
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT
NOW COMES the Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by Lisa
Madigan, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, and pursuant to subsection 32(c)(2) of the
Illinois Environmental Protection Act (‘the Act”), 415 ILCS 5/32(c)(2) (2002), moves that the
Illinois Pollution Control Board (“the Board”) grant the PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
and MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE, L.L.C, relief from the hearing requirement in the above-
captioned matter. In support of this motion, Complainant states as follows:
1.
Simultaneously with the filing of this motion, the Complainant is filing a Complaint
with the Board, alleging that the Respondent lost 3,998 barrels of gasoline and emitted over
470 tons of volatile organic material over the course of 3 1/2 days in July 2001.
2.
The People of the State of Illinois and the Respondent, Marathon Ashland
Pipeline, L.L.C., have reached agreement on all outstanding issues in this matter.
3.
This agreement is memorialized and presented to the Board in a Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement, filed contemporaneously with this motion.
4.
The parties, the People of the State of Illinois and Marathon Ashland Pipeline,
L.L.C. agree that a hearing on the Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement is not necessary, and
request relief from such a hearing as provided pursuant to subsection 31 (c)(2) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/31(c)(2) (2002).
WHEREFORE, Complainant, People of the State of Illinois, hereby respectfully requests
that the Board grant this Motion for Relief from the Hearing Requirement between Marathon
Ashland Pipeline L.L.C. and the People of the State of Illinois, as set forth in subsection
31 (c)(2) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31 (c)(2) (2002).
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA MADIGAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
MATTHEW J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement Division
BY:
~ALLY~.
~a&i~
á~’~Z
CARTER
4
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
500 South Second Street
Springfield, Illinois 62706
21 7/782-95J31
Dated:
1O/Q/OS
CLERK’S On~r’r
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOAR~CTSTATE
OF
o
ILLINOIS
3
2003
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
PO!lUtiOfl Control Board
Complainant,
v.
)
PCBNO.
)
(Enforcement)
MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE, L.L.C.,
)
a Delaware limited liability company,
)
Respondent.
COMPLAINT
Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by LISA MADIGAN, Attorney
General of the State of Illinois, and at the request of the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY, complains of the Respondent, MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE,
L.L.C., as follows:
COUNT I
AIR POLLUTION
1.
This Complaint is brought by the Attorney General on her own motion and at the
request of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois EPA”), pursuant to the terms
and provisions of Section 31 of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (“Act”), 415 ILCS 5/31
(2002).
2.
The Illinois EPA is an agency of the State of Illinois created by the Illinois
General Assembly in Section 4 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/4 (2002), and charged,
inter a/ia,
with the
duty of enforcing the Act in proceedings before the Illinois Pollution Control Board (“Board”).
3.
The Complaint is brought pursuant to Section 31 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31
(2002), after providing the Respondent with notice and opportunity for a meeting with the Illinois
EPA.
1
4.
Respondent, Marathon Ashland Pipeline, L.L.C. (“MAPL”), is a Delaware
corporation authorized to do business in Illinois. Its registered agent is C.T. Corporation
Systems, 208 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois.
5.
At all times relevant to this Complaint, MAPL has owned and operated a pipeline
at 5825 East Cumberland Road, Martinsville, Clark County, Illinois (“facility”).
6.
MAPL’s Martinsville facility includes storage tank #19 in its tank farm. Tank #19
has a capacity of 260,000 barrels. During the time period that is the subject of this Complaint,
tank #19 was equipped with an external floating roof constructed of 3/8” steel. Tank #19 was
being used to store gasoline, a volatile organic liquid. At all times prior to the incident that is the
subject of this Complaint, the roof and roof drain on tank #19 were operating properly.
7.
On July 9, 2001, unusually heavy rain fell at MAPL’s Martinsville facility. At the
time the rain began falling, the roof drains on all the storage tanks were closed.
8.
At roughly 5:30 a.m. on July 9, 2001, MAPL personnel responded to a lightning
strike at the tank farm. Originally, MAPL informed the Illinois EPA that MAPL personnel began
to open the roof drains on the tanks. When the drain was opened on tank #19, the MAPL
operator noticed the smell of gasoline and immediately shut the drain. However, MAPL stated
in a subsequent letter that when an employee opened the roof drains on the tanks, he noted the
smell of gasoline. At that time, the operator climbed the tank #19 and saw that the roof had
folded and that gasoline was accumulating on the roof. After inspecting tank #19 and noting
product on the roof, the operator decided not to open the roof drain.
9.
MAPL allowed the roof to sink for about 15 hours. After the roof sank, MAPL
transferred the gasoline to two (2) other tanks. The transfer was completed approximately 3 1/2
days later.
2
10.
Over the course of 3 1/2 days, MAPL lost 3,998 barrels of gasoline and emitted
over 470 tons of volatile organic material (“VOM”).
11.
On July 9,2001, at approximately 10:30 a.m., MAPL notified the Illinois EPA by
phone of the roof’s failure. The telephone call was followed by a letter explaining the
circumstances of the incident.
12.
In a subsequent letter on July 19, 2001, MAPL clarified the circumstances
causing the roof failure. Specifically, the letter addressed MAPL’s failure to open the roof drain
prior to or during the rainfall, which was the proximate cause of the release.
13.
In its July 19, 2001, letter, MAPL further stated that it was MAPL’s standard
operating procedure to keep all roof drain valves closed unless they are monitored to prevent
the release of hydrocarbons or have fail-safe devices installed. Further, MAPL’s standard
operating procedure includes the draining of the roof after every rain resulting in reasonable
accumulation.
14.
Section 9(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2002), provides:
No person shall:
a.
Cause or threaten or allow the discharge or emission of any contaminant
into the environment in any State so as to cause or tend to cause air
pollution in Illinois, either alone or in combination with contaminants from
other sources, or so as to violate regulations or standards adopted by the
Board under this Act;
***
15.
Section
3.115 of the
Act, 415 ILCS 5/3.115 (2002), defines “air pollution” as
follows:
“AIR POLLUTION” is the presence in the atmosphere of one or more
contaminants in sufficient quantities and of such characteristics and duration as
to be injurious to human, plant, or animal life, to health, or to property, or to
unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment of life or property.
3
16.
Section 3.165 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/3.165 (2002), defines “contaminant” as
follows:
“CONTAMINANT” is any solid, liquid, or gaseous matter, any odor, or any form
of energy, from whatever source.
17.
Section 215.121(b)(1) of the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations, 35111. Adm. Code
215.121(b)(1), provides:
No person shall cause or allow the storage of any volatile organic liquid with a
vapor pressure of 17.24 kPa (2.5 psia) or greater at 293.3 k (70°F) or any
gaseous organic material in a station tank, reservoir or other container of more
than 151 cubic meters (40,000 gal) capacity unless such tank, reservoir or other
container:
(b)
Is designed and equipped with one of the following vapor loss control
devices:
(1)
A floating roof which rests on the surface of the volatile organic
liquid and is equipped with a closure seal or seals between the
roof edge and tank wall. Such floating roof shall not be permitted
if the volatile organic liquid has a vapor pressure of 86.19 kPa
(12.5 psia) or greater at 294.3 k (70°F). No person shall cause or
allow the emission of air contaminants into the atmosphere from
any gauging or sampling devices attached to such tanks, except
during sampling or maintenance operations.
18.
Section 215.123(b)(1) of the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations, 35 III. Adm. Code
215.123(b)(1), provides:
Subject to subsection (a) above no owner or operator of a stationary storage
tank shall cause or allow the storage of any volatile petroleum liquid in the tank
unless:
(1)
The tank is equipped with one of the vapor loss control devices specified
in Section 215.121(b) of this Part;
19.
Respondent caused or allowed emissions from tank #19 to be uncontrolled for a
period of 3 1/2 days, resulting in the loss of 3,998 barrels of gasoline and the emission into the
atmosphere of over 470 tons of VOM.
4
20.
The loss of 3,998 barrels of gasoline and the emission into the atmosphere of
over 470 tons of VOM has caused or tended to cause air pollution in the State.
21.
By allowing the loss of 3,998 barrels of gasoline and by emitting VOM in excess
of 470
tons, the Respondent is in violation of Section 9(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2002).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant, the People of the State of Illinois, respectfully request that
the Board enter an order against the Respondent, Marathon Ashland Pipeline, L.L.C.:
A.
Authorizing a hearing in this matter at which time the Respondent will be
required to answer the allegations herein;
B.
Finding that Respondent has violated the Act and regulations as alleged herein;
C.
Ordering Respondent to cease and desist from any further violations of the Act
and associated regulations;
D.
Pursuant to Section 42(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(a) (2002), impose a civil
penalty of not more than the statutory maximum;
E.
Pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(f) (2002), awarding to
Complainant its costs and reasonable attorney fees; and
F.
Granting such other relief as the Board may deem appropriate.
COUNT II
FLOATING ROOF VIOLATIONS
1-19. The Complainant reallages and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through
19 of Count I as paragraphs 1 through 19 of this Count II.
20.
Respondent caused or allowed the storage of gasoline, a volatile organic liquid,
with a vapor pressure of 17.24 kPa (2.5 psia) or greater at 293.3 k (70°F) in a container with a
capacity of more than 151 cubic meters (40,000 gallons) without a floating roof resting on the
5
surface of the volatile organic liquid and a closure seal or seals between the rootedge and tank -
wall.
21.
By causing or allowing the storage of gasoline, a volatile organic liquid, with a
vapor pressure of 17.24 kPa (2.5 psia) or greater at 293.3 k (70°F) in a container with a
capacity of more than 151 cubic meters (40,000 gallons) without a floating roof resting on the
surface of the volatile organic liquid and a closure seal or seals between the roof edge and tank
wall, the Respondent has violated 35 Ill. Adm. Code 215.121(b)(1).
22.
By violating Section 21 5.121 (b)(1) of the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations, 35 III.
Adm. Code 215.121(b)(1), the Respondent has violated Section
9(a) of the
Act, 415 ILCS
5/9(a) (2002).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant, the People of the State of Illinois, respectfully request that
the Board enter an order against the Respondent, Marathon Ashland Pipeline, L.L.C.:
A.
Authorizing a hearing in this matter at which time the Respondent will be
required to answer the allegations herein;
B.
Finding that Respondent has violated the Act and regulations as alleged herein;
C.
Ordering Respondent to cease and desist from any further violations of the Act
and associated regulations;
D.
Pursuant to Section 42(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(a) (2002), impose a civil
penalty of not more than the statutory maximum;
E.
Pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(f) (2002), awarding to
Complainant its costs and reasonable attorney fees; and
F.
Granting such other relief as the Board may deem appropriate.
COUNT III
6
VAPOR CONTROL DEVICE VIOLATIONS
1-19. The Complainant reallages and incorporates by reference paragraphs I through
19 of Count
las paragraphs I through
19 of this
Count III.
20.
Respondent caused or allowed the storage of gasoline, a volatile organic liquid,
in a stationary storage tank without a vapor control device specified in 35 III. Adm. Code
215.121 (b)(1).
21.
By causing or allowing the storage of gasoline, a volatile organic liquid, in a
stationary storage tank without a vapor control device specified in 35 Ill. Adm. Code
215.121(b)(1), the Respondent has violated 35 III. Adm. Code 215.123(b)(1).
22.
By violating
Section 215.123(b)(1)of the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations, 35111.
Adm. Code 215.123(b)(1), the Respondent has violated Section
9(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/9(a) (2002).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant, the People of the State of Illinois, respectfully request that
the Board enter an order against the Respondent, Marathon Ashland Pipeline, L.L.C.:
A.
Authorizing a hearing in this matter at which time the Respondent will be
required to answer the allegations herein;
B.
Finding that Respondent has violated the Act and regulations as alleged herein;
C.
Ordering Respondent to cease and desist from any further violations of the Act
and associated regulations;
0.
Pursuant to Section 42(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(a) (2002), impose a civil
penalty of riot more than the statutory maximum;
E.
Pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(f) (2002), awarding to
Complainant its costs and reasonable attorney fees; and
7
F.
Granting such other relief as the Board may deem apprbpriate.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney General of the
State of Illinois
MATTHEW J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation Division
BY:__________________
THOMAS DAVIS, Chief
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
Of Counsel
SALLY A. CARTER
500 South Second Street
Springfield, Illinois 62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
/i~/ô
~-
marathonashland/common
8
RECEIVED
CLERK’S OFFICE
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OCT 032003
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
))
PollutionSTATE
OFILLINOIS
Control Board
Complainant,
)
PCBNO.
)
(Enforcement)
MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE, L.L.C.,
)
a Delaware limited liability company,
)
)
Respondent.
STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
NOW COMES
the Complainant, PEOPLE
OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS, by LISA
MADIGAN, Attorney
General of the State of Illinois, at the request of the Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency, and Respondent, MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE, L.L.C., and hereby
submit this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement. The parties agree that the statement of’
facts contained herein represents a fair summary of the evidence and testimony which would be
introduced by the parties if a full hearing were held. The parties agree that this Settlement is a
compromise of a disputed claim. The parties further stipulate that this statement of facts is
made and agreed upon for the purposes of settlement only and that neither the fact that a party
has entered into the Stipulation, nor any of the facts stipulated herein, shall be introduced into
evidence in this or any other proceeding except to enforce the terms hereof by the parties to
this agreement. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, this Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement and any Illinois Pollution Control Board (“Board”) order accepting same may be
used in any future enforcement action as evidence of a past adjudication of violation, as
provided in Section 42(h) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (“Act”), 415 ILCS 5/42(h)
(2002). The agreement shall be null and void unless the Board approves and disposes of this
matter on each and every one of the terms and conditions of the Settlement set forth herein.
1
JURISDICTION
The Board
has jurisdiction of
the subject matter herein and of the
parties consenting
hereto pursuant to the Act, 415
ILCS
5/1 et sea. (2002).
II.
AUTHORIZATION
The undersigned
representatives for each party certify that they are fully authorized by
the party whom they represent to enter into the terms and conditions of this Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement and to legally bind them to it.
III.
APPLICABILITY
This Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement shall apply to and be binding upon the
Complainant and Respondent and any officer, director, agent, employee or servant of
Respondent, as well as the Respondent’s successors and assigns. The Respondent shall not
raise as a defense to any enforcement action taken pursuant to this Settlement the failure of its
officers, directors, agents, servants, or employees to take such action as shall be required to
comply with the provisions of this Settlement.
IV.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1.
The Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois EPA”) is an administrative
agency established in the executive branch of the State government by Section 4 of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/4 (2002), and is charged, inter alia, with the duty of enforcing the Act.
2
2.
Respondent, Marathon Ashland Pipeline, L.L.C. (“MAPL”), is a Delaware
corporation authorized to do business in Illinois. Its registered agent is C.T. Corporation
Systems, 208 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois.
3.
At all times relevant to this Complaint, MAPL has owned and operated a pipeline
at 5825 East Cumberland Road, Martinsville, Clark County, Illinois (“facility”).
4.
MAPL’s Martinsville facility includes storage tank #19 in its tank farm. Tank #19
has a capacity of 260,000 barrels. During the time period that is the subject of this Complaint,
tank #19 was equipped with an external floating roof constructed of 3/8” steel. Tank #19 was
being used to store gasoline, a volatile organic liquid. At all times prior to the incident that is the
subject of this Complaint, the roof and roof drain on tank #19 were operating properly.
5.
On July 9, 2001, heavy rain fell at MAPL’s Martinsvil!e facility. At the time the
rain began falling, the roof drains on tank #19 were closed.
6.
At roughly 5:30 a.m. on July 9, 2001, MAPL personnel responded to a lightning
strike at the tank farm. Originally, MAPL informed the Illinois EPA that MAPL personnel began
to open the roof drains on the tanks. When the drain was opened on tank #19, the MAPL
operator noticed the smell of gasoline and immediately shut the drain. However, MAPL stated
in a subsequent letter that when an employee opened the roof drains on the tanks, he noted the
smell of gasoline. At that time, the operator climbed the tank #19 and saw that the roof had
folded and that gasoline was accumulating on the roof. After inspecting tank #19 and noting
product on the roof, the operator decided not to open the roof drain.
7.
MAPL allowed the roof to sink for about 15 hours. After the roof sank, MAPL
transferred the gasoline to two (2) other tanks. The transfer was completed approximately 3 1/2
days later.
3
8.
Over the course of 3 1/2 days, MAPL lost and emitted over 470 tons of volatile
organic material (“VOM”).
9.
On July 9, 2001, at approximately 10:30 a.m., MAPL notified the Illinois EPA by
phone of the roof’s failure. The telephone call was followed by a letter explaining the
circumstances of the incident.
10.
In a subsequent letter on July 19, 2001, MAPL clarified the circumstances
causing the roof failure. Specifically, the letter addressed MAPL’s failure to open the roof drain
prior to or during the rainfall, which was the proximate cause of the release.
11.
In its July 19, 2001, letter, MAPL further stated that it was MAPL’s standard
operating procedure to keep all roof drain valves closed unless they are monitored to prevent
the release of hydrocarbons or have fail-safe devices installed. Further, MAPL’s standard
operating procedure includes the draining of the roof after every rain resulting in reasonable
accumulation.
12.
Respondent caused or allowed emissions from tank #19 to be uncontrolled for a
period of 3 ~/2 days, resulting in the loss of 3,998 barrels of gasoline and the emission into the
atmosphere of over 470 tons of VOM.
13.
The loss of 3,998 barrels of gasoline and the emission into the atmosphere of
over 470 tons of VOM has caused or tended to cause air pollution in the State.
14.
By allowing the loss of 3,998 barrels of gasoline and by emitting VOM in excess
of 470 tons, the Respondent is in violation of Section 9(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2002).
15.
Respondent caused or allowed the storage of gasoline, a volatile organic liquid,
with a vapor pressure of 17.24 kPa (2.5 psia) or greater at 293.3 k (70°F) in a container with a
capacity of more than 151 cubic meters (40,000 gallons) without a floating roof resting on the
4
surface of the volatile organic liquid and a closure seal or seals between the roof edge and tank
wall.
16.
By causing or allowing the storage of gasoline, a volatile organic liquid, with a
vapor pressure of 17.24 kPa (2.5 psia) or greater at 293.3 k (70°F) in a container with a
capacity of more than 151 cubic meters (40,000 gallons) without a floating roof resting on the
surface of the volatile organic liquid and a closure seal or seals between the roof edge and tank
wall, the Respondent has violated 35 III. Adm. Code 215.121(b)(1).
17.
By violating Section 21 5.121 (b)(1) of the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations, 35 III.
Adm. Code 215.12I(b)(I), the Respondent has violated Section
9(a) of the
Act, 415 ILCS
5/9(a) (2002).
18.
Respondent caused or allowed the storage of gasoline, a volatile organic liquid,
in a stationary storage tank without a vapor control device specified in 35 III. Adm. Code
215.121(b)(I).
19.
By causing or allowing the storage of gasoline, a volatile organic liquid, in a
stationary storage tank without a vapor control device specified in 35 III. Adm. Code
215.121(b)(1), the Respondent has violated 35 III. Adm. Code 2I5.123(b)(1).
20.
By
violating Section 215.123(b)(1)of the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations, 35111.
Adm. Code 215.123(b)(1), the Respondent has violated Section
9(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/9(a) (2002).
V.
FUTURE PLANS OF COMPLIANCE
Respondent shall continue to diligently conform to the Act, 415 ILCS 5/1 et ~g. (2002),
and the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations, 35 III. Adm. Code Subtitle B.
5
VI.
IMPACT ON THE PUBLIC RESULTING FROM NON-COMPLIANCE
Section 33(c) of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/33(c) (2002),
provides;
c.
In
making
its
orders and determinations, the Board shall take into
consideration
all the facts and circumstances bearing upon the
reasonableness of the emissions, discharges, or deposits involved
including, but not limited to:
1.
the character and degree of injury to, or
interference with the protection of the health,
general welfare and physical property of the
people;
2.
the social and economic value of the pollution
source;
3.
the suitability or unsuitability of the pollution source
to the area in which it is located, including the
question or priority of location in the area involved;
4.
the technical practicability and economic
reasonableness of reducing or eliminating the
emissions, discharges or deposits resulting from
such pollution source; and
5.
any subsequent compliance.
In response to these factors, the parties state as follows:
1.
Complainant contends that the injury to, or interference with, the protection of the
health, general welfare, and physical property of the People would be characterized as air
pollution and the degree of injury would be dependent upon the extent of the pollution and the
degree of exposure to that pollution;
2.
The parties agree that Respondent’s facility is of social and economic benefit;
3.
Respondent’s facility is located at 5825 East Cumberland Road, Martinsville,
Clark County, Illinois. The facility is located in a rural area approximately 1 mile from
Martinsville.
6
4.
The parties agree that complying with the Act and regulations is technically
practicable and economically reasonable; and
5.
Respondent implemented measures subsequent to the alleged violations that
are the subject of the Complaint in this matter in order to operate in compliance with the Act
and the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations.
VII.
CONSIDERATION OF SECTION 42(H) FACTORS
Section 42(h) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/42(h)
(1998), provides:
h.
in determining the appropriate civil penalty to be imposed under
subdivisions (a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), or (b)(5) of this Section, the
Board is authorized to consider any matters of record in mitigation
or aggravation of penalty, including but not limited to the following
factors:
1.
the duration and gravity of the violation;
2.
the presence or absence of due diligence on the
part of the violator in attempting to comply with the
requirements of this Act and regulations thereunder
or to secure relief therefrom as provided by this
Act;
3.
any economic benefits accrued by the violator because of
delay in compliance with requirements;
4.
the amount of monetary penalty which will serve to
deter further violations by the violator and to
otherwise aid in enhancing voluntary compliance
with this Act by the violator and other persons
similarly subject to the Act; and
5.
the number, proximity in time, and gravity of
previously adjudicated violations of this Act by the
violator.
In response to these factors, the parties state as follows:
1.
The alleged violations, specifically the Respondent’s release of 470 tons of VOM,
occurred over 3 1/2 days in July 2001.
7
2.
In advance of as well as in response to notices of noncompliance issued by the
Illinois EPA, the Respondent worked with the Illinois EPA to resolve its violations in order to
comply with the Act. After the roof sank, MAPL transferred the gasoline to two (2) other tanks.
The transfer was completed approximately 3 ~/2 days later. Thereafter, MAPL equipped tank
#19 with a new roof containing decking to API 650 design criteria, a new primary and secondary
seal and a geodome. In addition, MAPL revised its operating procedures to require that
external floating roofs be drained and/or cleared of rain/ice/ snow during periods in which
precipitation amounts are greater than I inch in a 24 hour period, as required to prevent the
accumulation of more than 2 inches of water or ice (16 inches of snow). In addition, the
operating procedures require MAPL employees to drain from external floating roofs rainfall
amounts of up to 1 inch in 24 hours of said event
3.
The economic benefit of Respondent’s noncompliance is the savings realized by
not timely having reinstalled the hydrocarbon sensing valve on tank #19.
4.
Complainant has determined, in this instance, that a penalty of fifty-five thousand
dollars ($55,000.00) will serve to deter further violations and aid in future voluntary enforcement
of the Act and applicable regulations.
5.
Complainant is unaware of any previously adjudicated violations of the Act by the
Respondent.
VIII.
TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
A. MONETARY PAYMENT
The Respondent shall pay a penalty of fifty-five thousand dollars ($55,000.00) into the
Illinois Environmental Protection Trust Fund within thirty (30) days from the date on which the
Pollution Control Board adopts a final order approving this Stipulation and Proposal for
8
Settlement. Payment shall be made by certified check or money order, payable to the Illinois
EPA, designated to the Environmental Protection Trust Fund, and shall be sent by first class
mail to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Services Section
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
Respondent’s Federal Employer Identification Number (“FEIN”) shall be written upon the
certified check or money order. Respondent’s FEIN is:
~3t
1
55 1
Lj4.~Q
A copy of the payment transmittal and check shall be simultaneously submitted to:
Donna Lutes
Office of the Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
500 South Second Street
Springfield, Illinois 62706
B.
FUTURE COMPLIANCE
Respondent shall comply with Sections 9(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/9 (a) (2002), 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 215.121(b)(1) and 215.I23(b)(I), and shall cease and desist from future violations
of any other federal, state, or local environmental statutes and regulations, including the Act
and the Board Rules and Regulations.
C.
ADMISSION OF VIOLATIONS
The Respondent represents that it has entered into this Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement for the purpose of settling and compromising disputed claims without having to incur
the expense of contested litigation. By entering into this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement
and complying with its terms, the Respondent does not affirmatively admit the allegations of
violation within the Complaint, and this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement shall not be
interpreted as including such admission.
9
IX.
COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS
This Stipulation and Proposal
for Settlement in no way affects the responsibility of
Respondent to comply with any federal, state,
or
local regulations, including but not limited to
the Act, 415 ILCS 5/I ~
sea.
(2002), and the Board’s Rules and Regulations,
35
Ill. Adm. Code,
Subtitles A through H.
WHEREFORE, Complainant and Respondent request that the Board adopt and accept
the foregoing Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement as written.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
LISA MAD IGAN,
Attorney General
State of Illinois,
MATTHEW J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation Division
Dated: /~74z/o 3
BY:_____________________
THOMAS DAVIS, Chief
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
P OT ‘CTION AGENCY
Dated:_____
~
~~uBO0A
Division of Legal Counsel
MARATHON ASHLAND PIPELINE, L.L.C
a Delaware limited liability company,
Respondent
Dated:
(~~3
BY:_________________________
DONAL~.BO~ELL,President
0
10
