RECEIVED
CLERK’S OFFICE
MAY
2
52004
STATE
OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control
Board
OFFICE
OF THE AITORNEY GENERAL
STATE
OF ILLINOIS
Lisa Madigan
ATTORNEY GENERAL
May 20, 2004
~
The Honorable
Dorothy Gunn
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James
R.
Thompson Center, Ste.
11-500
100 West Randolph
Chicago,
Illinois 60601
Re:
People v.
Clinton Landfill, Inc.
Dear Clerk Gunn:
Enclosed
for
filing
please
find
the
original
and
ten
copies
of
a
NOTICE
OF
FILING,
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT, COMPLAINT, and STIPULATIONAND
PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
in regard to theabove-captioned matter.
Pleasefile the originals
and
return
file-stamped
copies of the
documents
to
our office
in
the enclosed
self-addressed,
stamped envelope.
Thank you for your cooperation
and
consideration.
Very truly yours,
Thomas
Davis,
Chief
Environmental Bureau
500
South Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois 62706
(217)
782-9031
TD/pp
Enclosures
500
South
Second
Street,
Springliefti,
Illinois
62706
•
(217)
782-1090
•
‘ITY:
(217)
785-2771
•
Fax:
(217)
782-7046
100
West
Randolph
Street,
Chicago.
Illinois
60601
•
(312)
814—3000
.
‘
1”l’Y:
(312) 814—3374
•
Fax:
(312)
814—3806
1001
I
~st
\1 on
(
rl,ond ik
Illinois
62001
(o(’-~(
Y~)o400
I
Ii
(6l~)
~‘9
640,
1
i\
(615)
729
6416
RECEIVED
CLERK’S OFFICE
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
MAY 25
2004
PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE OF
)
STATE OF ILLINOIS
IL
)
Pollution Control Board
Complainant,
vs.
)
PCB
No.
CLINTON LANDFILL, INC.,
)
an
Illinois corporation,
)
Respondent.
NOTICE
OF FILING
To:
Brian Meginnes
Elias,
Meginnes,
Riffle
& Seghetti,
P.C.
416
Main Street,
Suite
1400
Peoria,
IL 61602-1153
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,
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-_____________________
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
500 South
Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
May 20, 2004
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I
hereby certify that
I d~don
May 20, 2004, send
by
First
Class MaH~withpostage 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,
MOTION
FOR RELIEF FROM
HEARING
REQUIREMENT,
COMPLAINT
and
STIPULATION AND
PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT:
To:
Brian
Meginnes
Elias,
Meginnes,
Riffle &
Seghetti,
P.C.
416 Main
Street,
Suite
1400
Peoria,
IL 61602-1153
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
James
R.
Thompson Center
Suite
11-500
100 West
Randolph
Chicago,
Illinois 60601
Thomas
Davis,
Chief
Assistant Attorney General
This filing
is submitted
on
recycled paper.
LERKS OFFICE
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
MAY
2 52084
STATE OF ILLINOIS
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF
)
POllution Control Board
ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCBNo.
“
)
(Enforcement)
CLINTON
LANDFILL, INC.,
)
an
Illinois
corporation,
)
Respondent.
MOTION
FOR RELIEF
FROM
HEARING REQUIREMENT
NOW
COMES
Complainant,
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS, by LISA
MADIGAN,
Attorney General
of the State of Illinois,
and pursuant
to Section
31 (c)(2) of the
Illinois Environmental
Protection Act (“Act”),
415
ILCS
5/31 (c)(2)
(2002),
moves that the
Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board
grant the parties
in the above-captioned matter relief from the hearing
requirement imposed
by
Section
31 (c)(1) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/31 (c)(1)
(2002).
In support of
this
motion,
Complainant
states as follows:
1.
A
Complaint is
being filed
contemporaneously with
this motion.
2.
The
parties have
recently reached an
agreement on
all outstanding
issues
in this
matter.
3.
This agreement is presented to the
Board
in
a Stipulation and
Proposal for
Settlement,
also filed contemporaneously with
this motion.
4.
All
parties agree that a hearing
on the Stipulation
and
Proposal for Settlement is
not necessary,
and
respectfully request
relief from
such a
hearing
as allowed
by Section
31 (c)(2) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/31 (c)(2)
(2002).
WHEREFORE, Complainant,
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS, hereby request
that the Board
grant this
motion for relief from
the hearing
requirement set forth
in
Section
31 (c)(1) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/31 (c)(1)
(2002).
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA MADIGAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
MATTHEW
J.
DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation
Division
BY:_________________
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
500 South
Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
217/782-7968
Dated:
May
19, 2004
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
MAY 252004
Complainant,
)
~
~1~OIScI
v.
)
PCBN0.VI
)
(Enforcement)
CLINTON LANDFILL, INC.,
)
an Illinois
corporation,
)
Respondent.
COMPLAINT
The 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,
complains of the Respondent,
CLINTON
LANDFILL,
INC.,
as follows:
COUNT
I
HAZARDOUS WASTE
DISPOSAL AT A
NON-HAZARDOUS WASTE
DISPOSAL SITE
1.
This Complaint
is
brought on
behalf of the
People
of the State of
Illinois,
by
Lisa
Madigan, the Attorney General of the
State of Illinois, by her own motion and at the request of the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(“Illinois
EPA”)
pursuant
to
Section
31
of
the
Illinois
Environmental Protection Act (“Act”), 415 ILCS
5/31
(2000).
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 (2000),
and
charged,
inter
a/ia,
with the duty of
enforcing the Act in
proceedings
before the Illinois Pollution
Control
Board
(“Board”).
3.
Respondent,
Clinton
Landfill,
Inc.,
(“Clinton”)
is
an
Illinois
corporation
in
good
standing.
Its
Registered
Agent
is
Brian
Meginnes,
416
Main
Street,
Suite
1400,
Peoria,
Illinois
61602.
4.
The Respondent is a permitted, municipal
solid waste landfill
located on Route 51,
1
Clinton, DeWitt County,
Illinois.
5.
The Respondent’s facility
is an
existing municipal solid waste and
non-hazardous
special waste landfill
operating
pursuant to
Illinois EPA approved operating
permit number 1996-
102-LFM,
modified
in
2000 with
permit modification number 2000-1 32.
6.
On September15, 2000, the Illinois EPA conducted a multi-media RCRA inspection
at Alloy Engineering and Casting
in Champaign, Illinois (“Alloy”).
During the inspection, the Illinois
EPA inspectors collected
samples of bag-house dust from
seven dust collectors
in
the facility.
7.
Additional samples were taken on September 28, 2000, (at Alloy’s Counter Gravity
Casting bag-house),
and also on October 6, 2000,
and
October 19,
2000.
8.
Sample results indicated two of the seven waste streamswere hazardous for heavy
metals.
Results indicate that these waste streams exceeded the TCLP limits for selenium,
as well
as
the TCLP regulatory threshold for lead.
9.
Subsequent
to
the
September
28,
2000,
inspection,
Alloy
identified
19
waste
streams
generated
at
the
facility.
Alloy
had
analysis
completed
and
made
hazardous
waste
determinations
on
all
19 of them
at
the point
of generation.
The
dust from the same
two bag-
houses again tested TCLP hazardous.
10.
The following table identifies various sample results taken from the two bag-houses:
Date
Sample
No.
Constituent
Sample results
Regulatory Lev.*
09/15/00
IEPA
X
104 -TCLP
(1)
Lead
33.0
MG/L
5.0
MG/L
09/15/00
IEPA
X
107 -TCLP
(2)
Selenium
1.2 MG/L
1.0
MG/L
09/15/00
IEPA
X 104 -TCLP
**
(1)
Lead
45.3
MG/L
5.0
MG/L
09/15/00
IEPA
X 107 -TCLP
**
(2)
Selenium
1.12
MG/L
1.0
MG/L
09/28/00
IEPA
X
101
-TCLP
(1)
Lead
17
MG/L
5.0 MG/L
09/28/00
IEPA
X 101~2~TCLP**
(1)
Lead
32.9
MG/L
5.0 MG/L
10/06/00
Alloy
108395-9 TCLP
(2)
Selenium
.529 MGIL
1.0 MG/L
2
10/19/00
Alloy
001020F-TCLP
(2)
Selenium
1.10 MG/L
1.0
MG/L
10/19/00
Alloy
0010201-TCLP
(1)
Lead
54.7
MG/L
5.0
MG/L
*
35
III. Adm.
Code 721
**Split sample analyzed
by Prairie Analytical; (1)=Arc Furnace,
(2)=CGC bag-house
11.
During the September 28, 2000,
inspection,
the
Illinois
EPA discovered
that the
waste from all processes in the facility (19 separate waste streams), including the hazardous bag-
house dust, were being placed in common dumpsters and disposed of as non-hazardous, special
wastes
at Clinton landfill.
The waste was all manifested as foundry sand.
A waste profile created
by Alloy indicated
that the waste was
non-hazardous.
The waste
profile
had
been generated
by
taking a composite sample from one of the dumpsters and not from the point of generation of each
waste as
required
by regulations.
12.
After being first notified of the sample results, Alloy immediately began segregating
the hazardous waste
dust and
began
managing
it as
a hazardous
waste.
Since
September 26,
2000, Alloy has manifested
the waste
generated off-site as a hazardous waste and
has sent it to
a
hazardous waste
landfill
near Peoria,
Illinois.
13.
Since
September 26, 2000,
Alloy’s records
indicate
that
as
much
as
3/4 ton
per
month
of hazardous waste bag-house dust
has
been produced.
Based
on
information obtained
form
Alloy, the processes producing
this dust
have
not basically
changed
since
March
of
1999.
Consequently,
as
much
as
3/4
ton
per
month
of
hazardous
waste bag-house
dust
has
been
improperly disposed
of each month
since March
1999.
14.
For calendar year 1999,
manifests indicate that Clinton accepted waste from Alloy
on
March 3,8,
15, 16,29,30
and 31; April 5,6,8,9,
12-16,
19-23 and 26-30;
May 3-7,
10-14,
17-
21,
and
24-28;
June
1-4,
7,
15,
17,
21,
22, 24,
26
and
29; July
1,
6,
9,
12,
16,
22,
24
and
27;
August 4,
10,
17,26
and
30; September 3,9,
16,21
and
23; October 1,5,7,
13,
15
and
18-21;
November
3,
4,
9,
12,
17 and
19;
and
December
9,
16,
17,
20, 22,
27
and
28.
3
15.
For calendar year 2000,
manifests indicate that Clinton accepted waste from Alloy
on January 5,
13,
18, 24,
25 and 28;
February 2,
9,
15,
16, 22,
25 and
28; and
March 6, 7, 8,
13,
16 and
17.
16.
Additionally,
on September 25, 2000,
Clinton accepted for disposal
five drums
of
waste
materials from
Scherer Industrial Group,
Inc.
(“Scherer”),
one or more of which contained
hazardous waste.
One drum
of hazardous waste solvent from
Scherer was subsequently found
and
removed from the Clinton
landfill.
17.
Section
21
of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/21
(2000),
provides
in relevant part:
No person shall:
d.
Conduct
any
waste-storage,
waste-treatment,
or
waste-disposal
operation:
1.
without a permit
granted bythe Agency or in
violation of any
conditions imposed by such permit, including periodic reports
and
full
access
to
adequate
records
and
the
inspection
of
facilities,
as may
be
necessary
to
assure
compliance with
this
Act
and
with
regulations
and
standards
adopted
thereunder;
provided,
however,
that,
except
for
municipal
solid
waste
landfill
units
that
receive
waste
on
or
after
October
9,
1993,
no
permit
shall
be
required
for
(i)
any
person
conducting
a
waste-storage,
waste-treatment,
or
waste-disposal
operation
for
wastes
generated
by
such
person’s own activities which are stored, treated, ordisposed
within
the
site where such
wastes
are
generated,
or
(ii)
a
facility
located
in
a county
with
a population over 700,000,
operated
and
located
in
accordance
with
Section
22.38
of
this
Act,
and
used
exclusively for
the transfer,
storage,
or
treatment of general
construction or demolition debris;
***
e.
Dispose, treat,
store or abandon any waste, or transport any waste
into
this
State
for
disposal,
treatment,
storage
or
abandonment,
except at a site or facility which meets the requirements of this Act
and of regulation and
standards thereunder.
f.
Conductany hazardous waste-storage, hazardous waste-treatment
or hazardous waste-disposal operation:
4
1.
without
a
RCRA permit
for
the
site
issued
by
the Agency
under subsection
(d) of Section
39 of this Act, or in violation
of any condition
imposed by such permit, including
periodic
reports
and
full
access
to
adequate
records
and
the
inspection
of
facilities,
as
may
be
necessary
to
assure
compliance with this Act and with regulations and standards
adopted thereunder; or
2.
in
violation
of any
regulations or standards adopted
by the
Board under this Act; or
***
18.
By
permitting
the disposal
of
hazardous
waste
bag-house
dust from
Alloy
and
hazardous
waste
solvent
from
Scherer
at
the
Clinton
landfill,
a
site
that
does
not
meet
the
requirements
of
the Act
and
of
the
regulations
and
standards thereunder for
the storage
and
disposal
of
hazardous
waste,
the Respondent has
violated
Section
21(e)
of the Act,
415
ILCS
5/21(e)
(2000).
PRAYER
FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant, the
People
of the State of Illinois, respectfully requests that
the Board
enter an order against the Respondent,
Clinton Landfill,
Inc.:
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) (2000),
impose a civil penalty
of up to fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) for each violation that occurred on orafter July 1,
1990,
and
an
additional
penalty of ten thousand
($10,000.00) for each
day during which such violations
continued;
E.
Pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(f) (2000), award to Complainant
5
its costs and
reasonable attorney’s fees; and
F.
Granting
such
other relief as the Board
may deem appropriate.
COUNT II
PERMIT VIOLATIONS
1-17.
Complainant realleges and incorporates herein by reference paragraphs
1 through
17 of Count las
paragraphs
1
through 17
of this Count
It.
18.
Permit Number 1996-1 02, Modification
15,
provides
in
relevant part:
111.1
This facility is authorized to accept non-hazardous special waste that
meets the definition
of industrial
process waste or pollution control
waste as found
in Section
3.17 and
3.27, respectively, of the Act.
***
III.2.f
The
operator
of
this
solid
waste
facility
shall
not
conduct
the
operation
in
a
manner which results
in
acceptance
of
hazardous
waste.
***
19.
Section
3.17 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/3.17
(2000) provides the following definition:
“INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WASTE” means any liquid, solid,
semi-solid, orgaseous
waste generated as
a direct or indirect result of the manufacture of a product or the
performance of a service.
Any such waste which would pose a present or potential
threatto human health orto the environment or with inherent properties which make
the disposal
of such waste
in
a
landfill difficult
to
manage by normal means
is an
industrial
process waste.
“Industrial
Process Waste”
includes
but is not limited to
spend pickling
liquors, cutting
oils, chemical catalysts, distillation bottoms, etching
acids,
equipment
cleanings,
paint
sludges,
incinerator
ashes
(including
but
not
limited to ash resulting from the incineration of potenti
ilyinfectious medical waste),
core
sands,
metallic
dust
sweepings,
asbestos
dust,
and
off-specification,
contaminated
or recalled
wholesale or retail
products.
Specifically
excluded
are
uncontaminated
packaging
materials,
uncontaminated
machinery
components,
general
household waste, landscape waste and construction or demolition debris.
20.
By
accepting
hazardous
industrial
process
waste
without
proper
authorization
included
in
the permit, the Respondent has violated
Condition
II!.1
of
Permit Number
1996-102,
6
Modification
15.
21.
By
conducting
the
operation
of
the
Clinton
landfill
in
a
manner that
results
in
acceptance of hazardous waste,
the Respondent has violated Condition
III.2.f of Permit Number
1996-1 02,
Modification 15.
22.
By conducting
a waste-storage, waste-treatment,
or waste-disposal
operation
in
violation
of conditions
imposed
within
its operating
permit, the Respondent
has violated Section
21 (d)(1)
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21 (d)(1) (2000).
PRAYER
FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant, the People of the State of Illinois, respectfully requests that
the
Board
enter an order against the Respondent,
Clinton Landfill,
Inc.:
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) (2000), impose a civil penalty
of up to fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) for each violation that occurred on or after July 1,
1990,
and an additional
penalty of ten thousand
($10,000.00) for each day during which such violations
continued;
E.
Pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act,415
ILCS 5/42(f) (2000), award to Complainant
its costs and
reasonable attorney’s fees;
and
F.
Granting
such other relief as the
Board
may deem appropriate.
7
COUNT
III
FAILURE TO ATTAIN REQUIRED
PERMITS
1-17.
Complainant alleges and incorporates herein by referenceparagraphs
1 through
17
of Count
I
as paragraphs I
through
17 of this Count III.
18.
Section
703.121
of
the
Board’s Waste
Disposal
regulations,
35
III.
Adm.
Code
703.121, provides,
in
relevant part:
a.
No person shall conduct any hazardous waste storage,
hazardous
waste treatment,
or hazardous waste disposal operation:
1.
Without
a
RCRA
permit
for
the
HWM
(hazardous
waste
management) facility;
***
b.
Owners and
operators of HWM units shall have permits
during the
active
life
(including
the closure
period)
of
the
unit.
Owners
and
operators of surface
impoundments,
landfills,
land treatment units
and waste pile units that received wastes after July 26,
1982, or that
certified
closure
(according
to
35
III.
Adm.
Code
725.215)
after
January 26,
1983, shall have post-closure care
permits, unless they
demonstrate
closure
by removal
or
decontamination,
as
provided
under
Sections
703.159
and
703.160,
or
obtain
enforceable
documents containing
a/ternative requirements,
as provided
under
Section 703.161.
If a post-closure care permit is required, the permit
must
address
applicable
35
III.
Adm.
Code
724
groundwater
monitoring, unsaturated zone monitoring, corrective action, and post
closure care requirements.
***
19.
By conducting a hazardous waste storage, hazardous waste treatmentor hazardous
waste
disposal
operation
without
a
RCRA permit
for
the
facility, the
Respondent
has
violated
Section
21(f)(1) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21(f)(1) (2000) and
Section 703.121
of the Board’s Waste
Disposal
regulations,
35
III. Adm.
Code 703.121.
20.
By conducting a hazardous waste storage, hazardous waste treatment orhazardous
waste
disposal
operation
in
violation
of
regulations
or
standards
adopted
by
the
Board,
the
8
Respondent has violated
Section
21 (f)(2) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21 (f)(2) (2000).
PRAYER
FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant, the People of the State of Illinois, respectfully requests that
the Board
enter an order
against the Respondent,
Clinton
Landfill,
Inc.:
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) (2000),
impose a civil penalty
of up to fifty thousand dollars
($50,000.00) for each violation that occurred on or after July
1, 1990,
and an additional
penalty of ten thousand
($10,000.00) for each day during which such violations
continued;
E.
Pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),
award to Complainant
its costs and
reasonable attorney’s fees; and
9
F.
Granting such other relief as the
Board
may deem
appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
ex re/.
LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney General of the
State of Illinois
MATTHEW J.
DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation
Division
BY:___________________
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
500
South Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois 62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
~
/0
(~~f
10
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
VS.
)
~No.
O~’)~
CLINTON
LANDFILL, INC.,
)
an
Illinois corporation,
)
Respondent.
STIPULATION AND
PROPOSAL
FOR SETTLEMENT
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
(“Illinois EPA”),
and
Respondent,
Clinton Landfill,
Inc., (“Clinton”) do
hereby agree
to 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 purposes
of settlement only and that
neither the fact that a
party has
entered
into this Stipulation
and
Proposal for Settlement,
nor any of the facts stipulated
herein,
shall
be introduced
into
evidence
in this or any other proceeding except to
enforce the terms of
this agreement by the parties
hereof.
Notwithstanding the previous sentence, this Stipulation
and
Proposal for Settlement and any
Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board
(“Board”) order
accepting
the same may be
used as
a matter of record
in any future permitting
or enforcement action to
be considered for purposes of Sections 39(i)
and 42(h) of the Illinois
Environmental Protection
Act (“Act”), 415
ILCS
5/39(i), 42(h)
(2000).
This 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.
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 seq.
(2000).
It.
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
on any officer,
director,
agent,
employee or servant of
Respondent, as well
as any
successors and
assigns of Respondent.
Respondent shall not
raise as a defense to any enforcement action taken pursuant to this Settlement the failure of its
officers,
directors, agents, servants, employees,
successors or assigns to take such action as
shall be
required
to comply with the provisions of this settlement.
2
IV.
STATEMENTOF FACTS
A.
Parties
1.
The Attorney General of the State of Illinois, brings this action on her own
motion, as well as at the request of the
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency (“Illinois
EPA”),
pursuant to the statutory authority vested
under Section
31
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/31
(2000).
2.
The Illinois
EPA is an agency of the
State of Illinois
created pursuant to Section
4 of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/4 (2000),
which
is charged,
inter alia,
with the duty of enforcing
the Act.
3.
Respondent,
Clinton Landfill,
Inc., is
an
Illinois corporation
in good
standing.
Its
registered agent is Brian
Meginnes, 416 Main
Street, Suite
1400,
Peoria,
Illinois 61602.
B.
Facility
Description
The Respondent is a permitted,
municipal
solid waste
landfill
located
on
Route 51,
Clinton, DeWitt County,
Illinois.
The Respondent’s facility is
an existing municipal solid waste
and
non-hazardous special waste landfill
operating
pursuant to
Illinois
EPA approved
operating
permit number 1996-I 02-LFM, modified
in 2000 with
permit modification
number 2000-132.
C.
Noncompliance
Complainant alleges that
the Respondent has violated the following
provisions of the
Act,
Board
Regulations and
Permit Conditions:
1.
Count
I:
By accepting
the disposal of hazardous waste bag-house dust from
Alloy Engineering and
Casting and
hazardous
waste solvent from
Scherer Industrial Group,
Inc.
at the Clinton
landfill, a
site that does
not meet the requirements
of the Act or the
Board
regulations and standards thereunder for the storage
and disposal of hazardous waste, the
Respondent has violated
Section 21(e)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/21 (e)(2000).
3
2.
Count II:
a.
By accepting hazardous
industrial
process waste without proper
authorization included in
its
permit, the Respondent has
violated Condition
11.1
of Permit
Number 1996-1 02-LFM
Modification
15;
b.
By conducting
the operation
of the Clinton
landfill
in a manner that
results in the acceptance of hazardous waste, the Respondent has violated
Condition
111.2(f)
of
Respondent’s
Permit Number 1996-102-LFM Modification
15; and
c.
By conducting
a waste
storage, waste treatment, or waste
disposal operation
in violation of Clinton’s operating
permit, the Respondent has violated
Section 21 (d)(1) of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/21 (d)(1)
(2000).
3.
Count Ill:
a.
By conducting
a hazardous waste
storage,
hazardous waste
treatment or hazardous waste disposal
operation without a Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery Act (“RCRA”) permit for the facility, the Respondent has violated
Sections
21 (f)(I) of
the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21(f)(1)(2000) and
Section 703.121of the Board’s Waste
Disposal
Regulations,
35
III. Adm.
Code 703.121.
b.
By conducting
a hazardous waste storage,
hazardous waste
treatment or hazardous
waste disposal operation
in
violation of any
regulations or standards
adopted
by the Board, the Respondent has violated
Section 21 (f)(2) of the Act, 415 ILCS
5121 (f)(2)
(2000).
V.
FUTURE PLANS OF COMPLIANCE
Respondent shall cease and
desist from future violations
of the Act and
Board
Regulations,
including
but not limited to,
those
Sections of the Act
and
Board Regulations that
4
were the subject matter of the Complaint as
outlined
in
Section
IV.
C.
of this Stipulation
and
Proposal for Settlement.
VI.
IMPACT ON
THE
PUBLIC RESULTING
FROM NONCOMPLIANCE
Section 33(c)
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/33(c) (2000),
provides as follows:
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
of 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:
1.
The purpose of excluding hazardous
waste from
the landfill and compliance with
Permit Conditions is to protect the public from the threat of or actual
land and water pollution;
2.
The parties agree that Respondent’s
landfill
operation
is of social and
economic
benefit;
3.
The parties
agree that
Respondent’s landfill operation
is located
in a suitable
area;
4.
Complainant alleges that the acceptance
of hazardous waste at this facility is
strictly prohibited,
regardless of intent,
and
in this case
it
was practical
and
economically
5
reasonable for Respondent to
prevent the acceptance of the hazardous waste.
Respondent
maintains that it had
no
knowledge that the hazardous waste was accepted at the
landfill;
and
5.
Respondent implemented preventative
measures subsequent to the violations
that are the subject of the Complaint in
this matter;
Respondent removed the drum
of
hazardous waste solvent from the landfill and implemented screening
procedures for special
waste customers,
conducted employee training,
and
continues to
randomly check loads in
accordance with
its
Permit.
VII.
CONSIDERATION OF SECTION 42
(h)
FACTORS
Section 42 (h) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(h) (2000),
provides as follows:
In
determining the appropriate civil penalty to be
imposed under subdivisions (a),
(b) (1),
(b)
(2),
or (b)
(3) 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 respondent
in
attempting
to comply with
requirements of this Act and
regulations thereunder or
to
secure relief therefrom as
provided
by this Act;
3.
any
economic benefits accrued by
the respondent because of delay in
compliance with
requirements,
in which case
the economic
benefits shall
be
determined
by the lowest
cost alternative for achieving compliance;
4.
the amount of
monetary penalty which will serve to
deter further violations by
the
respondent and
to otherwise aid
in enhancing
voluntary compliance with this Act
by the respondent and other persons similarly subject
to the Act;
5.
the number,
proximity
in time,
and gravity of previously adjudicated violations of
this Act by the respondent;
6.
whether the respondent voluntarily self-disclosed,
in accordance with
subsection
i
of this Section,
the non-compliance to the Agency;
and
7.
whether the respondent has agreed to undertake
a “supplemental environmental
project, which means an
environmentally beneficial project that a respondent
6
agrees to undertake
in settlement of an enforcement action
brought under this
Act, but which the respondent is not otherwise legally required
to
perform.
In
response to these
factors,
the parties state as follows:
1.
The Respondent engaged in the practice of
relying upon the generators
non-
hazardous waste
determination based on analysis and
testing for the acceptance of waste
in
the form
of bag house dust since
at
least March
1999 and
continuing through dates better
known to the Respondent.
In addition, the Respondent engaged
in the practice of relying upon
the generators
non-hazardous waste determination
based on analysis
and testing for the
acceptance of waste
in the form of a drum of waste solvent since
at least September 2000 and
continuing through dates better known to the Respondent;
2.
Respondent implemented
preventative
measures subsequent to
the alleged
violations that are the subject of the Complaint in this matter;
Respondent implemented
screening
procedures
for special waste customers, conducted employee training,
and
continues
to
randomly check loads
in
accordance with
its permit.
Respondent suggests that
it had
no
knowledge that hazardous waste was accepted
at the landfill.
In
particular, the Respondent
offers that it had
no analytical
information indicating that the
bag house dust received
at the
facility was
hazardous waste.
Furthermore, the Respondent suggests in
mitigation that when
informed by the generator of the erroneous
shipment of hazardous waste in the form of a drum
of hazardous waste
solvent,
Respondent immediately notified the
Illinois EPA and
performed
remediation of the area to
remove the hazardous waste.;
3.
The economic
benefit accrued
by the Respondent’s noncompliance
is the fees
charged
to accept
such wastes.
However, the wastes could
have been
shipped to
the
Respondent’s
permitted
hazardous-waste disposal facility; thus, the
Respondent’s economic
benefit
is,
at
best,
nominal;
7
4.
The supplemental environmental project
credit is a reasonable amount based on
the violations
in the Complaint, wilt
serve to deter further violations of the Act
and will
aid
in
enhancing voluntary compliance with the Act; and
5.
Respondent
Clinton has
no previously
adjudicated violations of the Act.
6.
Self-disclosure is not at issue
in this matter.
7.
The settlement of this matter
includes a supplemental environmental project as
set forth
in Section VIII.2
of this Stipulation.
VIII.
TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
1.
NON-ADMISSION:
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
complying with
its
terms, the Respondent does
not affirmatively
admit the allegations of violation
within the
Complaint,
and this Stipulation shall not be
interpreted
as
including such
admission.
2.
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT:
In order to
promote the goals of the Act to
restore, protect and
enhance the quality of
the environment, Respondent shall perform the following supplemental environmental project
(“SEP”).
The settlement value of the SEP
is twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000.00)
and will
offset penalties sought by the State
in
this matter.
The parties agree that this project shall
consist of the following:
a.
Respondent will provide the Complainant with landfill
capacity for the
disposal
of 2,000 tons of waste
(“Landfill
Capacity”).
8
b.
The landfill capacity of municipal
solid waste
and non-hazardous
special
waste
shall
be at the municipal solid waste
landfill
located on
Route
51, Clinton, DeWitt
(‘landfill”).
c.
Respondent represents that it is currently the owner and operator of the
landfill and that there is sufficient remaining
disposal capacity
at the landfill
to
provide the
Landfill
Capacity;
however,
if prior to the time Complainant uses all
of the
Landfill
Capacity,
Respondent ceases to own
or operate the landfill or if the Respondent determines that there
is
not sufficient disposal
capacity at
the landfill
to dispose of the Landfill
Capacity,
then the
Respondent shall pay the remaining amount of the SEP value into the Environmental Protection
Trust
Fund (“EPTF”)
as
calculated
under Subparagraph h(i)
below.
d.
Complainant
shall notify Respondent that it intends to
utilize all or a
portion of the Landfill
Capacity at
least 7
business days
prior to the date the Landfill
Capacity
will
be needed.
The Respondent and the Complainant will review the subject waste to
determine the acceptability of the waste
into the landfill
in accordance with state,
federal and
local
rules
and regulations.
All
waste will
be handled consistent with
regulations for regulated
asbestos
containing material.
Upon approval from the Respondent, the Complainant may
schedule the shipments of waste into the
landfill.
e.
Upon
disposal of the waste, Respondent shall prepare a gate receipt
evidencing
the amount of waste, in
volume and weight,
and
the date
of receipt.
Copies of all of
the receipts
shall be forwarded to
the parties named hereafter in
Subparagraph
i.
In
addition,
the Respondent will provide
reports
to the
parties
named
in Subparagraph
i as to
waste weights
received and waste
weights remaining
on
a quarterly
basis.
f.
Complainant shall
use
its best efforts to
utilize the Landfill
Capacity within
five years
from the date of a Board
Order accepting this Stipulation
(“five year
period”).
9
g.
In the event that Complainant is unable to
utilize the Landfill
Capacity
within the five year period
then, at
Respondent’s sole option
arid after receipt of a written
request from the Complainant as described below:
(i)
Respondent may pay the remaining amount of the SEP
value, as
calculated
under Subparagraph
h(i) below; or
(ii)
Respondent may extend the date
up to two
(2) years, but in
no
event shall the extension
last longer than
seven (7) years from
the date of a
Board
Order
accepting this Stipulation.
The Complainant shall make a written
request to
Respondent to
extend
the date no
later than
90 days
prior to the expiration
of the five year period. Respondent
shall respond to the request within
30 days
of receipt.
In the event that Respondent determines
to extend
the date then the remaining
amount of the SEP value,
if any,
at the date of the
expiration
of the extension
period,
as
calculated
under the formula
in
Subparagraph h(i)
below,
shall
be due and
owing within
60
days of the date of expiration
of the extension
period.
In
the
event that Respondent determines not to extend
the five year period
then the remaining
amount
of the SEP value, as calculated
in
Subparagraph h(i)
below,
shall
be due and owing
within
120
days of written notice of the non-extension.
Payment shall be
made to the
EPTF.
Non-payment of the SEP amount outstanding within this period
of time will
be subject
to
interest,
as
provided below.
Failure by either Complainant to request
an extension
of time
within the
90 days
prior to
expiration of the five year period shall not adversely
impact
Complainant’s
right to
utilize the Landfill Capacity under this SEP or right to
payment of any
remaining amount of
SEP value that
may be
due under Subparagraph
h(i);
h.
The remaining
amount of the
SEP value,
described
in
Subparagraph g
above,
shall
be
calculated as follows:
(i)
The remaining value of the SEP
shall
be the difference between
the 2,000 tons of Landfill
Capacity reserved
for the Complainant and
the amount of landfill
10
capacity utilized
by the Complainant.
A multiplier of $20.00 per ton shall be applied to
the
remaining tons of Landfill
Capacity that has
not been used
by the Complainant as taken from
the gate
receipts,
provided,
however, the remaining
tons of Landfill
Capacity shall not exceed
1,250 tons.
In the event that the remaining
tons of Landfill
Capacity exceeds
1,250
tons, a
multiplier of $20.00 per ton shall
be applied
to
1,250 tons.
(ii)
All
amounts
owed Complainant shall
be paid
by certified
check
payable
to the
Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency for deposit in
the Environmental
Protection Trust Fund and
delivered to:
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency
Fiscal
Services Division
1021
N.
Grand Avenue East
P.O.
Box 19276
Springfield,
IL 62702-9276
The name and
number of the case and
Respondent’s
FEIN
shall appear on the face of
the certified
check.
A copy of the payment transmittal and
check shall be
simultaneously submitted
to:
Office of the Attorney General
c/o Peggy Poitevint
Environmental Bureau
500
South
Second Street
Springfield,
IL
62706
For purposes
of the notice
provided for above,
the parties may be notified
by contact with the following
persons
or their designee:
For Complainant:
Dustin Burger
Illinois
EPA
2125 South
First Street
Champaign,
IL 61820
217/278-5800
11
For. Respondent:
Dennis
Porter
Clinton
Landfill,
Inc.
Route
51
Clinton,
IL
217/935-8028
3.
INTEREST:
Pursuant to
Section 42(g)
of the Act,
415
ILCS 5/42
(g) (2000),
interest shall accrue on
any amount not paid within the time prescribed
herein, at the maximum rate allowable under
Section
1003(a)
of the Illinois
Income Tax Act,
35 ILCS 5/1 003 (a) (2000):
a.
Interest on unpaid
amounts shall begin to
accrue from the date the
payment is due and
continue to accrue to
the date
payment
is
received
by the
Illinois EPA;
b.
Where partial payment is made
on any payment amount that is due, such
partial payment shall
be first applied to
any interest on
unpaid amounts then owing; and
c.
All
interest on amounts
owed Complainant shall
be
paid by certified
check
payable
to the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency for deposit in the Environmental
Protection Trust
Fund and
delivered to:
Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal
Services
Division
1021
N.
Grand Avenue East
P.O.
Box 19276
Springfield,
IL 62702-9276
A copy of the payment transmittal
and check shall be
simultaneously submitted
to:
Office of the Attorney General
c/o
Peggy Poitevint
Environmental Bureau
500 South
Second Street
Springfield,
IL
62706
The name and
number of the case and
Respondent’s
FEIN shall appear on the face of
the certified
check.
12
4.
PAYMENT, COLLECTION AND NOTIFICATION:
For issues
relating to
the payment of the penalty, Respondent may
be reached
at
the
following address:
Clinton
Landfill
Inc.
c/o Mr.
Ron
Edwards
4700
N.
Sterling Avenue
Peoria,
Illinois 61615
lx.
COMPLIANCE WITH
OTHER LAWS
AND REGULATIONS
This Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement in no way affects
Respondent’s
responsibility to comply with any federal, state or local regulations, including
but not limited to
the Act and
Board
Regulations,
35
III.
Adm.
Code,
Subtitle A through H.
x.
RIGHT OF ENTRY
In
addition
to
any other authority, the Illinois
EPA,
its employees and
representatives,
and the Illinois Attorney General, their agents and
representatives, shall
have
right of entry to
Respondent’s facility which
is the subject of this Stipulation and
Proposal for
Settlement at all-
reasonable times, for the purposes
of conducting inspections.
In
conducting
any inspection of
Respondent’s facility, the Illinois
EPA,
its
employees and representatives,
and
the Attorney
General,
their agents and
representatives, may take any photographs,
samples and
collect
information, as they deem necessary.
xl.
RELEASE FROM
LIABILITY
In
consideration of
Respondent’s completion of the SEP contained
herein
and
its
commitment to
refrain from future violations of the Act
and
Board
Regulations, Complainant
releases, waives and
discharges
Respondent from any
further liability or penalties for violations
13
of the Act and
regulations which were the subject matter of the Complaint herein,
upon the
completion of
all
activities required
hereunder and the payment of all
monies
owed.
The
release set forth above does not extend to any matters
other than
those expressly specified
in
Complainant’s Complaint filed
contemporaneously with the Stipulation and
Proposal for
Settlement.
Complainant
reserves, and
this Stipulation
is without prejudice to,
all rights
of the
State of Illinois against the Respondents with
respect to all
other matters,
including
but not
limited to,
the following:
a.
Criminal liability;
b.
Liability for future violation
of state,
federal,
local, and
common laws and/or
regulations;
c.
Any future liability for natural resources damage or for removal,
cleanup, or
remedial
actions as a result of a release of hazardous substances or the liability of the
Respondent under the Comprehensive
Environmental
Response
Compensation and
Liability
Act, 42
U.S.C.
Sections
9601-9675; and
d.
Liability or claims based on
the Respondents failure to
satisfy the requirements
of this Consent Order.
Nothing in this Stipulation
and
Proposal for Settlement is intended
as a
waiver,
discharge,
release, or covenant not to
sue
for any claim or cause of action, administrative or
judicial,
civil or criminal, past or future,
in
law or in equity, which the State of Illinois or the
Illinois
EPA may have
against any
person,
as defined by
Section 3.315
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/3.315,
or entity other than the Respondents.
14
WHEREFORE, Complainant and
Respondent request that the
Board
adopt and
accept
the foregoing
Stipulation
and Proposal
for Settlement as written
and
enter an
Order consistent
with the terms herein.
AGREED:
FOR THE
COMPLAINANT:
FOR THE
RESPONDENT:
PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
CLINTON
LANDFILL,
INC.
LISA MADIGAN
Attorney General, State
of Illinois
MATTHEW J.
DUNN, Chief
BY:________________________
Environmental
Enforcement/
Asbestos
Litigation
Division
Dated:
S(b
Jo’-~
BY:__________________________
THOMAS DAVIS,
Chief
Environmental
Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
Dated:
~/(c~
(@
(7/
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
BY:
~
~
JOSEP
.
SVOBODA
Chief Legal
Counsel
Dated:
15
