OFFICE
OF THE
A’TTORNEY GENERAL
STATE OF
ILLINOIS
RECEMVED
CLERK’S OFFICE
JUN
092004
STATE OF ILLINOIS
POIIutjo~
Control Board
June
4, 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.
Whiteway Sanitation,
Inc.
PCB No.
04-1 40
Dear
Clerk Gunn:
Enclosed forfiling please find the original and ten copies of a NOTICE OF FILING,
MOTION
FOR
RELIEF
FROM
HEARING
REQUIREMENT
and
STIPULATION
AND
PROPOSAL
FOR
SETTLEMENT in
regard to the above-captioned
matter.
Please file 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.
JH/pp
Enclosures
Very truly yours,
500 South
Second
Street, Springfield,
Illinois
62706
•
(217)
782-1090
•
~1’1’Y:
(217) 785-2771
•
Fax:
(217)
782-7046
100
\Vest
Randolph Street,
Chicago,
Illinois
6060!
•
(312)
814—3000
•
“11:
(312)
814—3374
•
Fax:
(312)
814—3806
100!
East \lain,
Carbondale,
Illinois
629(11
•
(61$)
529—64(1))
•
1’~l’Y:(618)
529—6403
•
Fax:
(618)
529—64!
6
Lisa Madigan
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
loman
Envininmental
Bureau
500
South Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois 62706
(217)
782-9031
RECE~VED
CLERK’S OFFICE
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL
BOARD
JUN
092004
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
)
STATE OF ILLINOIS
ILLINOIS,
)
Pollution Control Board
Complainant,
vs.
)
PCB
No. 04-140
WHITEWAY SANITATION,
INC.,
)
an
Illinois corporation,
)
Respondent.
)
NOTICE
OF FILING
To:
Clifford
C.
Emons
Attorney at
Law
123 West
Pearl
Street
P.O.
Box 290
Jerseyville,
IL 62052
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 MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT
and
STIPULATION AND
PROPOSAL
FOR SETTLEMENT,
copies of which are
attached
hereto
and
herewith served
upon you.
Respectfully
submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS
LISA MAD IGAN,
Attorney General of the
State
of Illinois
MATTHEW
J.
DUNN, Chief
Environmental
Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigati
Division
-—
BY:_________________________
I~.JAV9NNA
HOMAN
/
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
500 South
Second Street
Springfield, Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated: June
4,
2004
1
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I
hereby certify that
I did
on
June
4, 2004,
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, MOTION
FOR RELIEF
FROM
HEARING
REQUIREMENT and
STIPULATION AND
PROPOSAL
FOR SETTLEMENT
To:
Clifford
C.
Emons
Attorney at Law
123 West
Pearl
Street
P.O.
Box 290
Jerseyville,
IL 62052
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
A copy was also sent
to:
Carol Sudman
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution
Control
Board
1021
N.
Grand Avenue East
Springfield,
IL 62794
-
/
/1
Javo~ia
.1~loman
A~.~tant
Attorney General
This filing is submitted
on
recycled paper.
RECE~VED
-
CLERK’S OFFICE
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
JUN
092004
-
STATE OF ILLINOIS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
)
Pollution Control Board
ILLINOIS,
Complainant,
vs.
)
PCB No. 04-140
WHITEWAY SANITATION, 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.
On
February 9, 2004,
Complainant filed a
Complaint with the Board, alleging
violations
by the Respondent of the Environmental Protection
Act open dumping
regulations.
2.
The parties
have
reached agreement on all outstanding
issues
in this
matter.
3.
This agreement is presented
to the
Board
in
a Stipulation and
Proposal for
Settlement, 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).
1
WHEREFORE,
Complainant,
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
hereby requests
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
~i~ior~
BY:____________
JXVO N l’/i~HO MAN
/Environr~nentalBureau
Assistant Attorney General
500 South
Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
June 4,
2004
2
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
RECEfl/ED
CLERK’S OFFICE
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
JUN
092004
Complainant,
)
STATE OF ILLINOIS
PQll~ti~~
Control Board
vs.
)
PCBO4-140
WHITEWAY SANITATION,
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,
the
Illinois Environmental
Protection
Agency (“Illinois
EPA”), and
Whiteway Sanitation,
Inc., (“Respondent”),
have agreed to
the making of this Stipulation and
Proposal
for Settlement
(“Stipulation”) and
submit it
to the Illinois
Pollution Control
Board
(“Board”)
for approval.
The parties
agree that the statement of facts contained
herein
represents a fair summary of the evidence and testimony
that would
be
introduced
by the
parties if a
hearing were held.
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,
nor any of the facts stipulated
herein, shall
be introduced
into
evidence in
any other proceeding regarding the claims asserted
in
the Complaint except as
otherwise
provided
herein.
If the
Board
approves and
enters this Stipulation,
Respondent
agrees to
be
bound
by
the Stipulation and
Board
Order and not to
contest their validity
in any
subsequent proceeding to
implement or enforce their terms.
JURISDICTION
The Board
has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and
of the parties
consenting
1
hereto pursuant to the
Illinois
Environmental Protection Act (“Act”), 415
ILCS 5/1
et seq.
(2002).
II.
AUTH0 RIZATION
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 to
legally bind them to
it.
Ill.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
A.
Parties
1.
On
February
9,
2004,
a
Complaint was filed
on behalf of the People of the State
of
Illinois by Lisa
Madigan, Attorney General
of the
State of Illinois,
on her own
motion and
upon
the request of the Illinois EPA,
pursuant to
Section
31
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/31(2002),
against
the Respondent.
2.
The Illinois EPA
is an administrative agency of the State of Illinois, created
pursuant to Section 4 of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/4 (2002).
3.
At all times relevant to the Complaint, Respondent was and
is an
Illinois
corporation that is authorized
to transact business in the
State
of Illinois.
B.
Site Description
1.
At all times relevant to the Complaint,
Respondent owned
and
operated a
garage
facility located
at 98
Curtis
Street, Jerseyville,
Jersey
County,
Illinois (“site”).
Myrtle Pointer
(‘Pointer”),
is the registered agent for Whiteway
and
may be
reached at 98
Curtis
Street,
Jerseyville,
Illinois 620052-2202.
2.
On
May 28, 2003,
the Illinois
EPA received
complaints that waste was
being
stored
at the
site.
2
3.
On
May 28, 2003,
the Illinois
EPA conducted
an
inspection
of the
site.
Over
thirty dumpsters,
some covered
and
some
uncovered,
containing trash bags and
household
refuse were observed.
Two inoperable garbage packer trucks,
one containing household
refuse,
and five garbage packer truck beds were noted.
4.
One inoperable
garbage packer truck referenced
in
paragraph 3 was
located
north of the southeast corner of the site.
The area around this truck was
contaminated with
spilled
used oil.
5.
On
the same
date, the Illinois
EPA observed
an inoperable
flatbed truck,
loaded
with old
mattresses and
furniture exposed to
the elements.
A
panel truck bed containing
cardboard
and scrap
metal were
also
present at the site.
6.
The
Illinois EPA further observed eleven 5-gallon
plastic buckets
of used
oil,
none properly labeled and
four without lids,
with evidence
of oil spillage.
7.
On the same date, the
Illinois EPA further noted, scattered throughout the site,
scrap
metal, old furniture, wood waste, white goods, demolition waste,
used
and waste tires,
and
general refuse.
8.
Pointer was
present at the site during
the
May 28, 2003,
inspection
and claimed
that
most of the waste had
come from a village-wide cleanup
the previous weekend
in Kane,
Illinois.
9.
While the Illinois
EPA found newspapers from
May 17
and
18,
2003,
in
some
dumpsters, waste
in other dumpsters appeared
to be weathered.
Pointer stated that the
inoperable
garbage packer truck containing household
refuse
had been
sitting there
since
winter.
10.
A Violation
Notice (“VN”) was
issued to Whiteway on June
12,
2003.
The VN
recommended that all wastes be
removed from the site and
properly disposed or recycled
by
August
15, 2003.
Whiteway submitted
a Compliance Commitment Agreement (“CCA”)
to the
3
Illinois
EPA by facsimile
on July 30, 2003,
indicating that much
of the waste
had
already been
removed from the
site, that the used and waste tires would
be
removed within thirty days,
and
that a licensed testing
company would be addressing the
used
oil issues.
11.
The CCA was rejected
by
the
Illinois
EPA on August
15, 2003, since no
commitment to
complete waste
removal
was made,
other
commitments lacked completion
deadlines, and the CCA
was submitted
after the 45-day response period
had
expired.
12.
The Illinois EPA performed
a follow-up
inspection on July 30, 2003.
The
Illinois
EPA found
that most of the waste that caused
the previous VN to be issued was still
present.
13.
A Notice of Intent to
Pursue Legal Action
was issued
to Whiteway on August 29,
2003.
14.
The
Illinois EPA
returned to
the site on
September 19,
2003.
The inspection
showed
that a considerable amount
of the general
refuse
had
been removed and
the previously
inoperable garbage
packer truck containing waste had been
repaired.
Pointer said
that the
truck
had
been sold
to a waste disposal company.
15.
While at
the site
on
September 19, 2003, the
Illinois EPA observed
one of the
garbage packer truck
beds being
loaded on
to a semi-trailer.
Two inoperable trucks, three
truck beds,
approximately twelve damaged
dumpsters,
scrap
metal, and twelve
used or waste
tires were
still present at
the site.
16.
The Illinois
EPA further noted
that the previously observed
oil-contaminated soil
had
still
not been
cleaned
up by September 19,
2003.
17.
This site does not have an
Illinois EPA permit to develop and
operate a landfill.
18.
This site does not have an
Illinois EPA permit to conduct
a waste
storage or
waste disposal
operation.
C.
Allegations of Non-Compliance
4
Complainant
contends that the Respondent has violated
the following
provisions
of the
Act and
Board
regulations:
Count I:
1.
On
or before
May 28, 2003,
and
continuing through the date on which
this Complaint is filed, the Respondent has caused
or allowed the open
dumping
of waste at
a disposal site upon
its
property through the
consolidation of
refuse from
numerous sources.
The site is not permitted
by the Illinois
EPA as
a sanitary landfill
nor does
the disposal site meet
the requirements of the Act and of the regulations and the standards
promulgated thereunder.
2.
By causing or allowing the open dumping
of waste,
the Respondent has
violated Section
21(a) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21(a) (2002).
3.
On
or before
May 28, 2003,
and continuing through the date on
which
this Complaint is filed, the Respondent has
conducted
a waste-storage
or
waste-disposal operation
upon
its property without a permit granted
by
the Illinois
EPA or
in violation of any regulations or standards
adopted
by
the Board.
4.
By conducting
a waste-storage or waste-disposal
operation
upon
its
property without a permit granted
by the Illinois
EPA or in
violation
of any
regulations
or standards adopted by
the Board, the Respondent has
violated
Section
21(d)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
21(d)
(2002).
5.
On
or before
May 28, 2003,
and
continuing through the date on which
this Complaint is filed,
the Respondent has
disposed or stored
waste at
a
site upon
its property,
or transported waste for disposal or storage to
a
site upon
its property,
and
such site does
not meet the requirements of
the Act and of the standards and
regulations promulgated thereunder.
6.
By
disposing or storing
or transporting waste at
or to a site which does
not meet the requirements of the Act and of the standards and
regulations promulgated thereunder,
the Respondent has
violated
Section
21(e) of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/21 (e) (2002).
7.
On
or before May 28, 2003,
and
continuing through the date on which
this Complaint
is filed, the Respondent has
caused
or allowed the open
dumping
of waste
in
a manner which
has
resulted
in
litter.
8.
By causing or allowing the open dumping of waste
in a manner which
has
resulted
in litter
at or from the dump site, the Respondent has violated
Section 21(p)(l) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21 (p)(1)
(2002).
9.
On or before
May 28, 2003,
and
continuing through the date on which
5
this Complaint
is filed, the Respondent has
caused
or allowed the open
dumping
of waste in
a manner which has
resulted
in the deposition of
general
construction or demolition debris.
10.
By causing
or allowing the open dumping of waste in a manner which
has
resulted
in the deposition of general
construction or demolition debris, the
Respondent has violated
Section 2l(p)(7) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21(p)(7)
(2002).
Count II:
On
or before
May 28, 2003,
and continuing through the date on which this
Complaint is filed,
the Respondent has
developed and
operated
a landfill without
a permit issued by the
Illinois
EPA, thereby violating 35
III.
Admin.
Code
812.101 (a) (1994) and
Section 21(d)(2)
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21(d)(2)
(2002).
Count III:
1.
On or before
May 28, 2003,
and
continuing through the date on which
this Complaint
is filed, the Respondent has
developed
a solid waste site
without a Development Permit issued
by the Illinois
EPA,
thereby
violating
35
III.
Admin.
Code
807.201.
2.
By allowing the
use or operation of any solid waste management site for
which
a Development Permit is required without an Operating Permit
issued
by the
Illinois EPA, the Respondent has
violated 35
III. Admin.
Code 807.202(a).
3.
By violating 35
Ill. Admin.
Code 807.201
and
807.202(a),
the Respondent
has violated
Section
21 (d)(2) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/21 (d)(2)
(2002).
Count
IV:
1.
The Respondent has
caused
or allowed the open
dumping
of used or
waste tires thereby
violating
Section 55(a)(1) of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/55(a)(1)
(2002).
2.
The Respondent has
caused
or allowed the storage of any used tires
capable of accumulating water, thereby violating
Section 55(a)(3)
of the
Act, 415 ILCS 5/55(a)(3) (2002).
Count V:
1.
Waste
brought to this site
was
dumped on the ground or stored
at the
site for more than
24 hours
in the
same
receptacle that brought it to
the
site,
making
this site
a transfer station pursuant to
Section
3.500 of the
Act, 415
ILCS 5/3.500
(2002).
This facility is located within 1000 feet of a
dwelling.
6
2.
By establishing
a pollution control facility for use
as
a garbage transfer
station, located
less than
1,000 feet from the nearest property zoned for
primarily residential uses or within
1,000 feet of any dwelling, the
Respondent violated
Section
22.14(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/22.14(a)
(2002).
Count VI:
1.
By generating a solid
waste and failing
to determine whether the waste is
a
hazardous
waste, the Respondent
has
violated
35
Ill. Admin.
Code
722.111
(1994)
and
Section
21 (d)(2) of
the Act, 415
ILCS
5/21(d)(2)
(2002).
2.
By generating a waste
and failing
to determine whether the waste is a
special waste,
the Respondent has
violated 35
Ill.
Admin.
Code
808.121
(1994) and
Section 21(d)(2) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21(d)(2)
(2002).
Count VII:
1.
By failing to label the containers storing
used oil,
the Respondent has
violated
35
III. Admin.
Code 739.122(c)
(1994).
2.
By violating
35
Ill.
Admin.
Code 739.122(c), the Respondent has violated
Section
21(d)(2) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21(d)(2)
(2002).
Count VIII:
1.
Upon detection of a release of used
oil
to the environment,
the
Respondent failed
to stop the release, contain the released
used oil,
clean-up
and
properly manage the released
used
oil and
other material,
and
repair or replace any
leaking used oil storage
containers or tanks
prior to
returning
them to service.
By so doing, the Respondent has
violated
Section
739.122(d)
of the Board’s Waste
Disposal Regulations,
35
III.
Admin.
Code 739.122(d).
2.
By violating
Section
739.122(d) of the Board’s Waste
Disposal
Regulations,
35
Ill.
Admin.
Code 739.122(d), the Respondent has
violated
Section
21(d)(2) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/21(d)(2)
(2002).
0.
Admission of Violations
The Respondent admits
to the violations alleged
in the Complaint filed
in
this matter and
referenced
herein.
E.
Compliance Activities
to
Date
7
The Respondent removed and
properly disposed
of the household wastes, construction
or demolition debris,
loose scrap metal,
55 gallon drums,
buckets, tires,
vehicles and
other
waste from the site.
In addition, the Respondent removed
and properly disposed
of 45.27 tons
of contaminated soil
previously located
where the 5-gallon
buckets of used
oil and
heavy
oil
staining were first observed
during the May 28, 2003,
inspection. Crushed
limestone
was used
to
backfill the areas where contaminated
soil was removed from the site.
IV.
APPLICABILITY
This
Stipulation
shall apply to
and
be
binding upon
the Complainant
and
the
Respondent, and
any officer,
director,
agent,
employee or servant of the Respondent, as well
as any
successors
or assigns of the
Respondent.
The Respondent shall
not raise as
a defense
to
any enforcement action
taken
pursuant to
this Stipulation
the failure of any
of its officers or
agents to
take such
action
as shall
be required
to comply with the provisions
of this Stipulation.
V.
COMPLIANCE WITH
OTHER LAWS
AND REGULATIONS
This
Stipulation
in
no
way affects the responsibilities of
the Respondent to
comply with
any other federal,
state or local
laws or regulations including, but not limited
to,
the Act and the
Board
regulations, 35
Ill. Adm.
Code,
Subtitles A through
H.
VI.
IMPACT ON
THE PUBLIC
RESULTING FROM
ALLEGED
NON-COMPLIANCE
Section
33(c) of the
Act, 415 ILCS
5/33(c)(2002),
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
8
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 the following:
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
a
potential for land 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 the Respondent’s facility was of social and
economic
benefit;
3.
The Respondent’s garage facility was
located
in Jerseyville and was
suitable for
the area
in which
it occurred.
However, the facility was
not an
appropriate location for
an
unpermitted waste-storage
or waste-disposal operation;
4.
The parties agree that complying with the Act and
regulations
is technically
practicable and
economically reasonable;
and
5.
Respondent has
removed
and properly disposed
of the household wastes,
construction or demolition debris,
loose scrap
metal, 55 gallon drums, buckets,
tires,
vehicles
and
other waste
from the site.
In
addition,
the Respondent removed
and
properly disposed of
45.27 tons of contaminated
soil
previously located where the 5-gallon
buckets
of used
oil and
heavy oil staining were
first observed
during
the
May 28,
2003,
inspection.
Crushed
limestone
9
was used
to
backfill the areas where contaminated
soil was
removed from the
site.
VII.
CONSIDERATION OF SECTION
42(h) FACTORS
Section 42(h)
of
the
Act,
415
ILCS 5/42(h)(2002),
provides
as follows:
In
determining the appropriate civil penalty
to
be imposed under.
.
.
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
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 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:
The
Respondent open dumped general
solid waste at an
unpermitted
transfer
station
in
Jersey County.
Wastes
included inoperable trucks, garbage
packer truck beds,
old
10
mattresses and furniture,
cardboard,
scrap
metal, used
oil,
damaged dumpsters, wood waste,
white goods, demolition waste, used/ waste tires, and general
refuse. The violations
began on
or around
May 28, 2003, and were
individually resolved at various times
in that year.
Compliance
was ultimately achieved
on site
in
December 2003.
2.
Respondent was
diligent in
attempting
to
come
back
into compliance with
the
Act,
Board
regulations
and
applicable federal regulations, once the
Illinois EPA notified
it of its
noncompllance.
3.
The economic benefit of Respondent’s
noncompliance is the savings realized
by
not operating
an
unpermitted
transfer station and
not timely disposing of wastes such
as
inoperable trucks, garbage
packer truck
beds,
old
mattresses and
furniture, cardboard,
scrap
metal,
used oil,
damaged
dumpsters, wood waste,
white goods, demolition waste, used! waste
tires, and
general refuse from the site.
4.
Complainant has
determined,
based upon the specific facts of this matter, that a
penalty of four thousand five hundred
dollars
($4,500.00) will serve to
recover any economic
benefit accrued
by the
Respondent, to
deter further violations
and aid
in future voluntary
compliance with the Act and
Board
regulations.
5.
Whiteway paid
a $500.00
penalty for a litter violation
in Administrative Citation
PCB
No.
89-98.
In addition,
Whiteway was a party in
People
v.
Donald Pointer,
Mitcheal
Holder,
and
Whiteway Sanitation,
Inc.,
PCB
No. 95-64.
This case concerned
operational
violations at
Pointer Landfill,
situated
on
property owned
by
Holder and
operated
by Pointer and
Whiteway.
The respondents were
assessed
a penalty of $5,000.00.
6.
Self-disclosure
is not at
issue
in this matter.
7.
The settlement
of this
matter does
not include
a supplemental environmental
project.
11
VIII.
TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
A.
Penalty Payment
1.
The
Respondent shall
pay
a total
civil penalty
in the sum
of
four thousand five
hundred
dollars ($4,500.00).
Within thirty (30) days from the date
the Board
adopts and
accepts this Stipulation, the Respondent shall
pay
one thousand dollars
($1,000.00)
to the
Illinois Environmental
Protection Trust Fund; within one
hundred and
twenty (120)
days from the
date the Board
accepts this Stipulation,
the Respondent shall pay one thousand dollars
($1 ,000.00) to
the Illinois Environmental Protection Trust Fund; within two hundred
and ten
(210) days
from the date the Board
accepts this Stipulation, the
Respondent shall pay one
thousand
dollars
($1 ,000.00) to the Illinois
Environmental
Protection Trust
Fund;
and within
three
hundred
(300) days from
the date the
Board
accepts
this Stipulation,
the Respondent
shall pay one
thousand five hundred
dollars
($1 ,500.00) to
the Illinois
Environmental Protection
Trust Fund. The penalty described
in this Stipulation shall
be paid
by
certified
check, money
order or wire transfer payable
to the Illinois
EPA, designated
to the Illinois Environmental
Protection Trust Fund and
submitted to:
Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Services Section
1021
North
Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
Illinois 62794-9276
The
name and
number of the case
and
Respondent’s
Federal Employer Identification Number
(FEIN),shall appear on the check.
A copy of the certified check or money order and
the
transmittal
letter shall
be sent to:
12
Thomas
Davis,
Chief
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
500
South Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62702
James Richardson
Assistant Counsel
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency
1021
North
Grand
Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
Illinois 62794-9276
2.
Pursuant to
Section 42(g)
of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/42(g) (2002),
interest shall
accrue
on any payments
not
paid within the time period
prescribed
above at the maximum rate
allowable
under Section
1003(a) of the Illinois Income
Tax Act,
35
ILCS 5/1003 (2002).
Interest
on
any unpaid
payment shall begin to accrue from the date the payment is
due and
continue to
accrue
until the date
payment is received.
When
partial payment(s)
are made,
such
partial
payments
shall be first applied to any interest
on unpaid
payments
then due and
owing.
All
interest on
payments owed
shall
be paid
by certified
check or money order,
payable
to the
Illinois EPA,
designated to
the Illinois
Environmental Protection Trust Fund
and delivered
to the
address and
in the manner described
above.
3.
For purposes of payment and
collection,
Respondent may be
reached at the
following
address:
Myrtle Pointer
98
Curtis
Street
Jerseyville,
Illinois 62052-2202
4.
In the event of default of this Section Vlll.A, the Complainant shall be
entitled to
all
available relief including,
but not limited
to,
reasonable costs
of collection
and
reasonable
attorney’s fees.
B.
Future
Use
Notwithstanding any other language in this Stipulation
to
the contrary, the Respondent
13
agrees that this Stipulation
may be used
against the Respondent in any subsequent
enforcement action as
proof of a past adjudication
of violation of the Act and the
Board
Regulations promulgated thereunder for
all
violations alleged in the complaint in this
matter,
for
purposes of Section
39(a) and
(i) and/or 42(h) of the Act,
415
ILCS
5/39(a) and
(i) and/or
5!42(h)(2002).
Further,
Respondent agrees to
waive any rights
to
contest,
in
any subsequent
enforcement action,
any allegations that these alleged
violations were
adjudicated.
C.
Right of
Entry
In
addition
to any other authority, the
Illinois EPA,
its employees
and
representatives,
and the Attorney General,
her agents
and
representatives,
shall have the right of entry into
and
upon the
Respondent’s facility which is the subject
of this Stipulation,
at all reasonable times
for
the purposes of carrying out inspections.
In
conducting
such inspections,
the
Illinois EPA,
its
employees and
representatives,
and the Attorney General,
her employees
and
representatives
may take photographs,
samples, and
collect
information, as they deem necessary.
D.
Cease
and
Desist
The Respondent shall cease and desist from future violations of the Act and
Board
regulations that were
the subject matter of the Complaint as
outlined
in
Section
llI.C.
of this
Stipulation.
E.
Release from Liability
In consideration
of the Respondent’s
payment
of the $4,500.00
penalty,
upon
the
completion of all
activities required
hereunder,
and
upon the Pollution
Control
Board’s
acceptance and
approval of the
terms of this
Stipulation,
the Complainant releases, waives
and
discharges the
Respondent from
any
further liability
or penalties for violations of the Act
and
Board
regulations
that were the subject
matter of the Complaint
herein.
The
release set forth
above does not extend to
any
matters
other than those
expressly specified
in
Complainant’s
14
Complaint filed
on
February
9, 2004.
The Complainant reserves, and
this Stipulation
is without
-
prejudice to,
all
rights of the
State of
Illinois against the Respondent 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.
liability for natural
resources damage arising
out of the alleged
violations;
and
d.
liability or claims based on the
Respondent’s failure to
satisfy the requirements
of this Stipulation.
Nothing
in
this Stipulation
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 Respondent.
F.
Enforcement of Board Order
1.
Upon the entry of the Board’s Order approving and
accepting this Stipulation,
that Order is a binding and
enforceable
order
of the
Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board
and
may be
enforced as
such through any
and all available means.
2.
Respondent agrees
that notice of any subsequent proceeding to enforce the
Board Order approving and accepting this Stipulation may be made by mail
and waives any
requirement of
service of process.
3.
The parties agree
that,
if the Board does not approve
and accept this
Stipulation,
then
neither party
is bound
by the terms herein.
4.
It
is the
intent of the Complainant and
Respondent that the provisions
of this
Stipulation and any Board
Order accepting
and
approving
such shall be severable,
and should
any provision
be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
inconsistent with
state or
federal law, and
therefore
unenforceable, the remaining
clauses shall remain
in full force
and
effect.
15
WHEREFORE, Complainant and
Respondent request that the Board
adopt and accept
the foregoing
Stipulation
as written.
PEOPLE
OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
LISAMADIGAN
Attorney General
State of Illinois
MATTHEW J.
DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement!
Asbestos
Litigation
Division
BY:
______________________
DATE:________
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
ULIN
~
N-T
ROT
ONAGENCY
DATE:________
(~ief
Legal ~I~DA
WHITEWAY SANITATION, INC.
BY:
7y~i~
~L1
DATE:_~
16
