NOTICE OF FILING

RECE~VED

CLERK’S OFFICE

APR

14

2005

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

To:

Charles J.

Northrup

Sorling, Northrup,

Hanna,

Cullen

&

Cochran

Suite 800 Illinois

Building

607

East Adams,

P.O.

Box 5131

Springfield,

IL 62705

Carol Webb

Hearing Officer

Illinois

Pollution Control

Board

1021

N.

Grand Ave.

East

P.O.

Box 19274

Springfield,

IL 62794-9274

500

South Second Street

Springfield,

Illinois

62706

21 7/782-9031

Dated:

April

11, 2005

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

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

PEOPLE OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

)

Complainant,

)

V.

)

PCB NO.05-66

)

(Water-Enforcement)

PETCO

PETROLEUM CORPORATION,

)

an

Indiana corporation,

)

Respondents.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE

that on this

date

I mailed for filing with the Clerk of the Pollution

Control

Board

of

the

State

of

Illinois,

COMPLAINANT’S

MOTION

FOR

LEAVE

TO

AMEND

COMPLAINT

and

AMENDED

COMPLAINT, copies of which

are

attached

hereto

and

herewith

served

upon you.

---

REC~vED

CLERK’S OFFICE

BEFORE

THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

APR

142005

PEOPLE OF THE STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

)

POliutlon Control

Board

Complainant,

V.

)

PCB No.

05-66

)

(Water-Enforcement)

PETCO PETROLEUM CORPORATION,

)

an

Indiana corporation,

)

Respondent.

)

FOR

LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT

NOW

COMES Complainant,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

ILLINOIS,

and

moves

for

leave to amend the Complaint in this matter, for the following reasons:

1.

On

Octob~.r

13,

2004, the Complaint

in six counts was filed

in

this

matter.

2.

Section 2-616(a) of the Illinois Code of Civil

Procedure, 735

ILCS 5/2-616(a),

provides,

in

pertinent part:

Amendments.

(A) At any time before final judgment, amendments may be

allowed on just and

reasonable terms,

introducing any party who ought to have

been

ined

as pbintiff or defendant., disrn~ingany party, changin~the cause of

action

or defense or adding

new cause of action or defenses,

and

in any matter,

either

of form or substance, in

any process,

pleading, bill of particulars or

proceedings, which may enable the plaintiff to sustain the claim for which

it was

intended

to be

brought or the defendant to

make a defense or assert

a cross

claim.

3.

An Amended

Complaint

is

being

submitted

in conjunction with this

Motion

to

provide Respondent with

notice of the amendment in full

and for filing upon

Board

order

granting

this

Motion.

4.

‘The Amended Complaint corrects the regulatory violation

alleged

in

paragraph

22 of Count

I, paragraph

21

of Count

IV,

and

paragraph

21

of Count VI.

Additional factual

information not available

at the time of the initial filing is added to

paragraph

19

of Count V.

5.

The Amended Complaint pleads

additional claims of violation

for releases that

occurred

on May

31, 2004 (Counts VII

and VIII),

November 2,

2004

(Counts

IX and X),

---

Respectfully submitted,

PEOPLE

OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General

of the

State of Illinois

MATTHEW

J.

DUNN, Chief

Environmental Enforcement

Division

BY:

A~AVIS~~ef~

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental

Bureau

500

South

Second Street

Springfield,

Illinois

62706

‘

‘

‘

(217)

782-9031

Dated:

December

2,

2004 (Counts

XI and XII),

and

February 15,

2005 (Count XIII).

Information

regarding the May 31, 2064, release was

not provided

to the Attorney General’s Office until

subsequent to

the time of the initial filing.

The other three releases

had

obviOusly not yet

occurred as of that time.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests

that this

Motion for Leave to Amend

Complaint be granted and that the Amended

Complaint be filed upon entry of the Board’s order

granting

leave.

2

---

RECE~VED

CLERK’S OFFICE

BEFORE

THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

APR

~I

42005

STATE OF ILLINOIS

PEOPLE OF THE STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

)

Pollution Control Board

)

Complainant,

)

)

v.

)

PCB No.

05-66

)

(Water-Enforcement)

PETCO

PETROLEUM CORPORATION,

)

an

Indiana corporation,

)

)

AMENDED COMPLAINT

Complainant,

PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,

by

LISA MADIGAN, Attorney

General of the State of

Illinois,

complains

of Respondent,

PETCO PETROLEUM

CORPORATION,

an

Indiana corporation,

as follows:

COUNT

WATER POLLUTION

VIOLATIONS

(MAY 24, 2004)

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

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.

3.

Petco Petroleum Corporation

(“Petco”) is

an

Indiana

corporation authorized

to

do

business

in

Illinois.

4.

Petco is authorized

to

operate oil production

and

Class

Il

UIC (injection) wells in

accordance with

permits issued

by the

Department of Natural Resources

pursuant to

Subsection 6(2) of the Illinois Oil and

Gas Act, 225

ILCS 725/6(2) (2002).

1

---

5.

Section

12 of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12

(2002),

provides

in pertinent part that:

No

person

shall:

a.

Cause or threaten or allow the discharge of any contaminants into

the

environment

in any State

so as to

cause or tend

to cause water pollution

in

Illinois, either alone or in

combination with

matter from other sources,

or so

as to violate regulations or standards

adopted by the Pollution

Control

Board

under this Act;

*

*

*

d.

Deposit any contaminants

upon the land in

such place

and

manner as to

create a water pollution hazard;

*

*

*

6.

Section

3.165 of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/3.165

(2002)

provides:.

“Contaminant”

is any solid,

liquid,

or gaseous matter,

any odor,

or any form

of

energy,

from whatever source.

7.

Section 3395 of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/3.395

(2002)

provides

in

pertinent part:’

“Release” means any spilling,

leaking,

pumping,

pouring,

emitting, emptying,

discharging, injecting,

escaping,

leaching, dumping,

or disposing

into the

environment.

8.

Section

3.545

of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/3.545

(2002)

provides:

“Water pollution” is such alteration

of the physical, thermal,

chemical, biological

or radioactive

properties of any waters of the State,

or such

discharge of any

contaminant

into any waters

of the State,

as will or is likely

to create a

nuisance

or render such waters

harmful or detrimental or injurious to

public health,

safety

or welfare,

or to

domestic,

commercial, industrial,

agricultural,

recreational, or

other legitimate

uses, or to

livestock, wild animals, birds, fish,

or other aquatic

life.

9.

Section

3.550 of the Act, 415 ILCS 3.550

(2002) provides:

“Waters” means all accumulations of water,

surface and

underground,

natural,

and artificial,

public and

private, or parts thereof, which are

wholly or partially

within,

flow through,

or border upon this

State.

10.

Section

302.203

of the Board’s Water Pollution

Regulations,

35

III. Adm.

Code

302.203, provides:

Offensive Conditions

2

---

H

Waters of the State shall

be free from sludge or bottom deposits,

floating

debris, visible oil,

odor, plant or algal

growth,

color or

turbidity of’other than

natural origin.

The allowed mixing

provisions of

Section 302.102 shall not be

used to

comply with the

provisions of this Section.

11.

Section

302.208(g) of the Board’s Water Pollution

Regulations,

35

III.

Adm.

Code

302.208(g),

provides a general use water quality standard for chloride

(total) of 500 milligrams

per

liter

(“mgIL”).

12.

Section

304.105

of the Board’s Water Pollution

Regulations,

35

III.

Adm.

Code

304.105, provides:

Violations of Water Quality Standards

In

addition

to

the other requirements of this

Part,

no effluent shall,

alone

or in combination with other sources,

cause a violation of

any applicable

water quality standard.

.

.

.

‘‘

.~

13

Section

304.106 of the Board’s Water Pollution

Regulations,

35111. Adm.

Code

304.106, provides:

‘

Offensive Discharges

~Ir~

~ditksii

‘to theother requirements’of this ParLno.effu~.itshall

‘~“~

“~

‘.‘‘

contain settleable solids,

floating debris,

visible oil,

grease,

scum

or sludge

solids.

Color,

odor and

turbidity must be reduced to’

below obvious levels.

14.

On

May 24, 2004,

Petco reported the release of approximately 50 barrels of salt

water from a corrosion hole

in

a four-inch

steel disposal

pipeline

at the R.T.

Hopper lease near

St.

Elmo

in

Fayette County,

Illinois.

15.

The salt water is a

produced fluid

generated

by

Petco’s oil production

activities

and

contains a large

concentration of chlorides and

varying

amounts of petroleum constituents,

which are “contaminants” as that term is defined

in the Act,

415

ILCS 5/3.165

(2002).

16.

The salt water was

deposited

upon the

land

in such

place and manner as to

create

a water pollution hazard

in that it eventually flowed approximately

150 feet across the

3

---

ground

before

entering a

small tributary to

Big

Creek.

Approximately one-quarter of a mile of

this stream was

impacted.

17.

By depositing contaminants

upon the

land

in such

place and

manner as

to create

a water pollution hazard,

Petco has violated

Section

12(d)

of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(d)

(2002).

18.

The Illinois

EPA investigated the spill on

May 25, 2004,

and observed

the

surface of the water in the stream to

be discolored.

Unnatural

bottom deposits were also

observed

in the stream.

Samples were

collected from the stream

and subsequently analyzed

for chlorides; the results included

10,300 and

13,900 mg/L.

19.

Petco’s discharge of salt water to the small stream altered

its physical

and

chemical

properties so as to

likely create a

nuisance or render such waters

harmful or

detrimental

or

injurious to

public”health, safetiorwefare,

ortodomestic, commercial,

‘

industrial,

agricultural,

recreational, or other legitimate ‘uses,

or to

livestock, wild animals,

birds,

fish,

or other aquatic life.

20.

By causing

or allowing the discharge of salt water. into the “waters”

of the State,

th~

Respondent hascaused water poliu’i~n

‘in

the

State of Illinois,

and the~eb~

~ioF~ed

Section

‘

12(a) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(a)

(2002).

21.

Petco has

previously been

adjudicated

in violation of Section

12 of the Act in

Jefferson

County Circuit Court No.

99-CH-55.

These

presently alleged

violations constitute

repeated violations

pursuant to

Section 42(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek attorney’s fees and

costs.

PRAYER

FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Complainant, the PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the Board enter an

order against the Respondent,

PETCO PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

4

---

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.

Assessing against Respondent a civil penalty of fifty thousand dollars

($50,000)

for each

violation of the Act,

and an additional

penalty of ten thousand dollars

($10,000) for

each day during which each violation

has continued thereafter; and

E.

Granting

such other relief as

the

Board

may deem appropriate.

COUNT II

WATER QUALITY VIOLATIONS (MAY 24, 2004)

‘.

1-20.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates herein

by reference paragraphs

1

through 20 of Count

I as paragraphs

1

through 20 of this Count

II.

21.

Petco’s

discharge of salt water has

caused offensiveconditions

in

the tributary to

‘‘:~“‘Big

Cre~kin that’

th~

waters contained’ bOttof~Jepusits

~n’d

‘visible oil; arid

were

discolored

and” ‘~4~’’

turbid.

Respondent has thereby violated 35

III.

Adm.

Code 302.203, 304.105,

and

304.106...

22.

Petco’s discharge of salt water has

caused the concentration of chlorides

in thefl

tributary to

Big

Creek to

exceed the general

use water quality standard

of 500

mg!L.

Respondent has thereby violated 35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 302.208(g).

23.

By discharging contaminants

into

waters of the

State

so as

to

violate regulations

or standards adopted

by the Pollution

Control

Board

under this Act,

Petco has thereby violated

Section

12(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS

5/12(a) (2002).

24.

Petco has

previously been

adjudicated

in violation of Section

12 of the Act in

Jefferson

County Circuit Court

No.

99-CH-55.

These

presently alleged

violations constitute

5

---

repeated

violations

pursuant to

Section 42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek

attorney’s fees and

costs.

PRAYER

FOR

RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Complainant, the PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the Board

enter an order against the Respondent, PETCO

PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

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.

Assessing against Respondent a

civil penalty of fifty thousand dollars

($50,000)

for each violation

of the Act,

and an

additional penalty

of ten thousand

dollars ($10,000) for

each day during which

each violation

has

continued thereafter; and

3r~iting~such

otherrelief’as the’Board

may deem..a~p’ropriate.’”~’

‘

‘

‘

COUNT III

WATER POLLUTION VIOLATIONS

(AUGUST 21, 2004)

..

‘

1-13.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates herein

by reference paragraphs

1

through

13

of Count las

paragraphs

1

through 13

of this Count

Ill.

14.

On August 21, 2004,

Petco reported the release of approximately 200

barrels of

salt water from a large

corrosion hole in

a steel

pipeline at

the Hopper Cummins #3

production

well near St. Elmo in

Fayette County,

Illinois.

6

---

15.

The salt water is a produced fluid generated by Petco’s oil

production activities

and

contains

a large concentration of chlorides and

varying

amounts of petroleum constituents,

which are “contaminants” as that term is defined

in the Act, 415

ILCS 5/3.165

(2002).

16.

The salt water was

deposited

upon the land

in such

place and

manner as to

create a water pollution hazard

in that it eventually flowed approximately 50

feet across the

ground

before entering

Little

Moccasin Creek, which is a tributary to

Big Creek.

Approximately

one-half of a mile of these streams were

impacted.

17.

By

depositing contaminants upon the

land in

such place

and manner as to create

a water pollution hazard,

Petco

has violated

Section

12(d) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(d)

(2002).

18.

The

Illinois EPA investigated the spill

on August 21, 2004, and

observed the

surface of t~ie

water in the

stream

to b’.~discoiored.

Dead

and dying fish were

also observed

in

the stream.

Samples were collected from

the streams and subsequently analyzed

for chlorides;

the results included 26,000

mg/L in

Little

Moccasin

Creek and

30,500 mg/L one-quarter of a

mile downstream

in Big

Creek.

19.

The

Illinois

EPA ‘reLjmned’to the spill site to further its

~n~atig~iionon August 22

‘

and

24, 2004.

Samples

were collected from the streams and

subsequently analyzed for

chlorides;

the results

included 8,990

mg/L in

Little Moccasin

Creek on August 22~

and

7,760

mg/L one-half of a mile downstream

in Big

Creek on August

24th~

20.

Petco’s discharge of salt water to the small stream altered

its

physical

and

chemical

properties so

as to

likely create a nuisance or render such waters harmful or

detrimental

or injurious to

public health,

safety or welfare,

or to domestic,

commercial,

industrial,

agricultural,

recreational,

or other legitimate

uses,

or to

livestock,

wild animals,

birds,

fish,

or other aquatic life.

7

---

21.

By causing or allowing the discharge of salt water into the “waters”

of the State,

the Respondent has caused water pollution in the State of Illinois,

and thereby violated

Section

12(a) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(a)

(2002).

22.

Petco

has previously been adjudicated

in violation

of Section

12 of the Act in

Jefferson

County Circuit Court No. 99-CH-55.

These presently alleged violations

constitute

repeated violations

pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to

seek attorney’s fees and

costs.

PRAYER

FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, the PEOPLE

OF THE STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the Board enter an

order against the Respondent,

PETCO

PETROLEUM

‘

CORF’ORATION:

‘“

‘

“

‘

“:

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 ~u~ea~eana de~ist

from any.further violations

of the Ac’’

and

associated

regulations;

D.

‘

Assessing against Respondent a civil penalty of fifty thousand

dollars ($50,000)

for each

violation

of the

Act,

and an

additional penalty of ten thousand

dollars

($10,000) for

each day during

which each

violation

has

continued

thereafter; and

E.

Granting such

other relief as the Board

may deem

appropriate.

WATER QUALITY VIOLATIONS

(AUGUST 21, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein by reference paragraphs

1

through

13 of Count

I as paragraphs

1

through

13 of this Count

IV.

8

---

14-19.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein by reference paragraphs 14

through

19 of

Count III as paragraphs

14

through

19

of this Count

IV.

20.

Petco’s discharge of salt water has

caused offensive

conditions

in

the tributary to

Big

Creek in that the waters were discolored and turbid.

Respondent has

thereby violated

35

III. Adm. Code

302.203; 304.105,

and

304.106.

21.

Petco’s discharge of salt water has caused

the concentration of chlorides

in the

Little Moccasin

Creek and

Big

Creek to

exceed the general use water quality standard of

500

mg/L.

Respondent

has thereby violated 35

III.

Adm.

Code 302.208(g).

22.

By discharging

contaminants

into waters of the State so as to

violate regulations

or standards

adopted

by the Pollution

Control Board

under this Act,

Petco

has thereby violated

Section

12(a)

of the Act,’415

ILCS 5/12(a)

(2002’);’

‘

23.

Petco

has

previously been

adjudicated in violation of

Section

12 of the Act in

Jefferson

County Circuit Court

No.

99-CH-55.

These

presently alleged violations

constitute

repeated violations pursuant to

Section 42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek attorney’s fees

and

costs~

‘‘

~“

“

‘

~“~‘

‘“~“

“‘~

‘

‘

PRAYER

FOR

RELIEF

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, the

PEOPLE OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the

Board

enter an order against the Respondent,

PETCO PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

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;

9

---

D.

Assessing

against Respondent a

civil penalty of fifty thousand dollars

($50,000)

for each violation of the Act, and

an additional penalty

of ten thousand

dollars

($10,000) for

each day during which each violation

has continued thereafter; and

E.

Granting

such other relief as the Board

may deem

appropriate.

WATER POLLUTION VIOLATIONS

(OCTOBER 4, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein by reference paragraphs

1

through

13 of Count

I as paragraphs I

through

13

of this Count V.

14.

On

October 4,

2004,

Petco reported the release of approximately 300 barrels of

salt water from a pipeline from the Edith

Durbin Sump to

the Benny Shaw Water Flood

Plant

near St. Eln3

in

Fayette County,

Illinois.

‘~

‘

‘

‘

15.

The salt water is a

produced fluid

generated

by Petco’s oil

production activities

and

contains a large

concentration

of chlorides and varying

amounts

of

petroleum constituents,

which are “contaminants”

as that term

is defined in the Act, 415

ILCS 5/3.165

(2002).

6:

The salt water was deposi’ted~uri‘~ie

lard

in such p~aceand manner as to

‘-

~.‘~c~’””’’”’

create ‘a water pollution hazard

in that it eventually flowed through a

previously dry creek bed

before entering

Little Creek.

Approximately three-quarters of a mile of this stream was

L

impacted.

17.

By depositing

contaminants

upon the

land in

such

place and

manner as to create

a water pollution hazard,

Petco

has violated

Section

12(d) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(d) (2002).

18.

The Illinois EPA investigated the spill on October 4, 2004,

and observed a

black

suspended

precipitate on the bottom of Little Creek at

locations one-half and three-quarters of

a mile downstream of the discharge

into the stream.

10

---

19.

The Illinois EPA collected field

samples for chlorides at locations one-half and

three-quarters of a mile downstream

of the discharge into the stream with respective results of

6,263 and

5,488 mg/L.

The Illinois

EPA also collected

samples for laboratory analysis for

chlorides at

locations one-eighth

and three-quarters of a mile downstream of the discharge

into

the stream with respective results of 56,400 and

1,030

mg/L.

20.

Petco’s discharge of salt water to the small stream altered its

physical and

chemical

properties so as to likely create a nuisance

or render such waters

harmful or

detrimental or injurious to

public health,

safety or welfare,

or to domestic,

commercial,

industrial,

agricultural,

recreational,

or other legitimate

uses, or to

livestock,

wild animals, birds,

fish,

or other aquatic life.

21.

‘:

‘By causing or allowing the ~‘schargeof salt water

into t~ie”Waters”

of the State,

.,

.

the Respondent has caused water pollution in the

State of Illinois,

and thereby violated Section

12(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS

5/12(a) (2002).

22.

Petco

has previously

been

adjudicated

in violation

of Section

12

of the Act

in

Jefferson’c~’untyCircuit Court

No’.

99-CH-55.

These presently” a~yedviolations constitute

‘

~

~‘

repeated violations

pursuant to

Section 42(f) of the Act

415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000)

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek attorney’s fees and

costs.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, the PEOPLE

OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, respectfully

request that the Board enter an’order against the Respondent,

PETCO

PETROLEUM

‘

CORPORATION:

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;

11

---

C.

Ordering Respondent to

cease and desist from any further violations of the Act

and

associated

regulations;

D.

Assessing against Respondent a civil penalty of fifty thousand

dollars ($50,000)

for each

violation

of the Act,

and an

additional

penalty of ten thousand

dollars

($10,000) for

each day

during which each violation

has

continued

thereafter; and

E.

Granting

such other relief as the Board

may deem

appropriate.

COUNT VI

WATER QUALITY VIOLATIONS

(OCTOBER 4, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant

realleges and

incorporates

herein

by reference paragraphs

1

through

13

of Count las paragraphs

.1

through

13 of this Count VI.

‘14-~9.Complainant realleges~dnd’incorporates herein

by reference’paragraphs

14

‘

through

19 of

Count V as paragraphs

14 through

19 of this Count VI.

20.

Petco’s discharge

of salt water has

caused offensive conditions

in

Little Creek in

that the waters were

discolored and turbid.

Respondent has

thereby violated

35

III.

Adm.

Code

302.203, 304.105,

and 304.106~

‘:‘‘

‘“

‘

“

‘

‘

‘

‘

“‘

‘

‘

‘

21

Petco s

discharge of salt water has

caused the concentration of chlorides in the

Little Creek to

exceed the general

use

water quality standard of

500

mg/L.

Respondent has

L

thereby violated 35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 302.208(g).

22.

By discharging

contaminants into waters

of the State

so as to

violate regulations

or standards adopted

by the Pollution

Control

Board

under this Act, Petco has

thereby violated

Section

12(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(a) (2002).

23.

Petco has previously been

adjudicated

in violation of Section

12

of the Act in

Jefferson County Circuit Court

No. 99-CH-55.

These

presently alleged

violations constitute

12

---

repeated violations pursuant to

Section 42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek attorney’s fees and

costs.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, the PEOPLE OF THE

STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that

the

Board

enter an order against the Respondent, PETCO

PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

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 &.“sociated

regulations;

-‘‘‘

‘

‘

..

“;

‘

‘

‘

D.

Assessing against Respondent a civil

penalty of fifty thousand dollars

($50,000)

for each

violation

of the Act,

and an

additional penalty of ten thousand

dollars ($10,000) for

each day

during which each violation

has

continued thereafter; and

Granting such

other ro~as”ihe

bOard

may

deem appropriate.

‘

‘

-~.“

‘

WATER POLLUTION VIOLATIONS (MAY 31, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant realleges and incorporates

herein

by reference paragraphs

1

through l3of Count las

paragraphs

1 through l3of this Count VII.

14.

On

May 31,

2004,

Petco reported the release of approximately

10 to

15

barrels

of crude

oil from the Ada

Clow Sump near

St.

Elmo in

Fayette

County,

Illinois.

The crude

oil

was within a cement pit with the dimensions of

50 feet wide,

100 feet long,

and

8 feet deep

until

heavy rains and

flooding

caused the sump

pump to

malfunction, which then allowed the crude

13

---

oil to overflow the

pit.

The Ada

Clow Sump

is located in

a flood plain and had

been flooded

in

2002.

15.

The crude oil is a produced fluid

generated

by

Petco’s oil

production activities and

contains petroleum constituents, which are “contaminants”

as that term

is defined

in the Act,

415

ILCS 5/3.165

(2002).

16.

The crude oil was deposited

upon the

land

in such

place and

manneras to

create

a water pollution

hazard in

that it affected

an area approximately

100

feet wide and

660 feet

long within a

slough

and eventually flowed one-third of a mile before

discharging into Wolf

Creek.

17.

By depositing contaminants upon the

land

in such

place and

manner as to

create

a water

pollution hazard,

Petco has’viokled

Section

12(d) of the A~t,-’.4i’5’lLCS5/12(d)’(2002).

.~

18.

The Illinois

EPA investigated the spill on

June

1, 2004,

and observed oil sheens

on the surface of Wolf Creek.

19.

The

Illinois EPA also observed

Petco workers skimming

oil from the surface of

Wolt’Cr~K

arid

removing oil-contaminated vegetation.

‘

~•

‘

‘

20.

Petco’s discharge of crude oil

to the small stream altered

its

physical and

chemical

properties so as to likely create a

nuisance or render such waters harmful or

detrimental or injurious to

public health,

safety or welfare, or to domestic,

commercial,

industrial,

agricultural,

recreational, or other legitimate

uses, or to

livestock,

wild animals,

birds,

fish,

or other aquatic life.

21.

By causing or allowing

the discharge of crude oil

into the “waters” of the State,

the Respondent has

caused water pollution

in the

State

of Illinois,

and thereby violated Section

12(a) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(a)

(2002).

14

---

22.

Petco

has

previously been adjudicated

in violation of Section

12

of the Act in

Jefferson County Circuit Court

No. 99-CH-55.

These presently alleged violations

constitute

repeated violations

pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(f)

(2000), and

Complainant is authorized

to seek

attorney’s fees and costs.

PRAYER

FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Complainant, the PEOPLE OF THE STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the Board enter an order

against the Respondent,

PETCO PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

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.

Assessing against Respondent a civil penalty of fifty thousand dollars

($50,000)

for each violation

of the AOL; and

an a’d~itionalpenalty of ten’L

o~a’nddoilais‘($i’0~000)”f~r

each

day during which each violation

has continued

thereafter

and

E.

Granting

such other relief as the

Board

may deem

appropriate.

WATER QUALITY VIOLATIONS (‘MAY 31, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein

by reference paragraphs

1

through

13

of Count

I

as paragraphs

1

through

13 of this Count VIII.

14-19.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein by reference paragraphs 14

through

19

of Count VII

as paragraphs 14

through

19

of this Count VIII.

15

---

20.

Petco’s discharge

of crude oil has

caused offensive

conditions

in Wolf Creek in

that the waters

contained

visible

oil.

Respondent has thereby violated

35

III.

Adm.

Code

302.203,

304.105,

and 304.106.

21.

By discharging

contaminants

into waters

of the State

so as to

violate regulations

or standards adopted

by the Pollution

Control

Board

under this Act,

Petco

has thereby violated

Section

12(a)

of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(a)

(2002).

22.

Petco has

previously been

adjudicated in violation

of Section

12 of the Act in

Jefferson

County

Circuit Court No.

99-CH-55.

These

presently alleged violations

constitute

repeated violations pursuant to Section 42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek attorney’s fees and

costs.

PRAYER

FOR RELIEF

.

‘

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, the

PEOPLE OF THE

STATE OF

ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the Board

enter an

order against the Respondent,

PETCO

PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

Authorizing

a hea’~’iF~’in~t’iis’

matter atwhich timethe’~espond~ntwilI’be~”

‘“~““~“

-“‘

req uired 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.

Assessing against Respondent a

civil penalty of fifty thousand

dollars ($50,000)

for each

violation of the Act,

and an

additional penalty of ten thousand

dollars

($10,000) for

each day

during which each violation

has continued thereafter; and

E.

Granting such

other relief as the

Board

may deem appropriate.

16

---

WATER POLLUTION VIOLATIONS

(NOVEMBER 8, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant realleges and incorporates

herein by reference paragraphs

1

through

13 of Count

I

as paragraphs

1

through

13

of this Count

IX.

14.

On

October 4,

2004,

Petco reported the release of approximately

100

barrels of

salt water and

1

barrel of crude oil from the Mary Scott

Disposal

Line near St.

Elmo in

Fayette

County,

Illinois.

15.

The salt water and

crude oil are

each

a produced fluid generated

by Petco’s oil

production

activities, the former contains a large concentration of chlorides

and varying

amounts of petroleum constituents and

the latter is mostly petroleum, which are

“contaminants”

as that term

is defined in

the Act, 415

ILCS 5/3.165 (2002).

16.

The salt water and

crude oil were

released

directly into a tributary of

Big

Creek.

17.

The Illinois

EPA investigated the spill on

November 8,

2004,

and observed

a

black

suspended precipitate in

the water and crude

oil on the surface of the water

18.

The Illinois

EPA collected field samples for chlorides at

a

locations one-quarter

of a mile downstream

of the discharge into

the stream with

results exceeding 6,722 mg/L.

19.

Petco’s discharge of salt water and crude oil

to the small stream altered

its

physical

and chemical

properties

so as to

likely create a nuisance

or render such waters

harmful or detrimental or injurious

to

public health,

safety or welfare,

or to domestic,

commercial, industrial,

agricultural, recreational,

or other legitimate

uses, or to livestock,

wild

animals,

birds, fish,

or other aquatic life.

20.

By causing or allowing

the discharge of salt water and crude oil

into the “waters”

of the State,

the Respondent has

caused water pollution

in the

State

of Illinois, and thereby

violated

Section

12(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(a)

(2002).

17

---

21.

Petco has

previously

been adjudicated

in violation

of Section

12 of the Act in

Jefferson

County Circuit Court No.

99-CH-55.

These

presently alleged violations

constitute

repeated violations pursuant to

Section 42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek

attorney’s fees and

costs.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, the PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the

Board

enter an order against the Respondent,

PETCO

PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

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.

Assessing against Respondent a civil penalty of fifty thousand

dollars

($50,000)

for each violation’of the Abt,

and an adaitional

penalty often tho~anddollars’ ($10,000) for

‘

each day during which each violation

has

continued thereafter; and

E.

Granting

such other relief as the

Board

may deem

appropriate.

WATER QUALITY VIOLATIONS (NOVEMBER

8, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant

realleges and incorporates

herein

by reference paragraphs

1

through

13 of

Count

I

as paragraphs

1

through

13 of this Count X.

14-18.

Complainant realleges and incorporates

herein

by reference paragraphs

14

through

18 of Count IX

as paragraphs 14 through

18

of this Count X.

18

---

19.

Petco’s discharge of salt water and crude

oil has

caused offensive conditions

in

Little Creek

in that the waters were discolored and turbid,

and

contained visible

oil.

Respondent

has thereby violated 35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 302.203,

304.105,

and

304.106.

20.

Petco’s

discharge of salt water has caused

the concentration of chlorides

in the

tributary to

Big

Creek to

exceed the general use

water quality standard of 500 mg/L.

Respondent has thereby violated

35

III.

Adm.

Code 302.208(g).

21.

By

discharging contaminants

into waters of the State so as

to violate regulations

or standards

adopted

by the Pollution

Control

Board

under this Act,

Petco

has thereby violated

Section

12(a) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(a) (2002).

22.

Petco

has

previously been

adjudicated in

violation of Section

12 of the Act in

‘Jefferson

County

Circuit Court

No. 99-CH-55.

These

presently alleged

violations const~ute

repeated violations

pursuant to Section

42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f)

(2000), and

Complainant is authorized

to seek attorney’s fees and costs.

PRAYER

FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Corrp~inaiit,

the PEOPLE OF THE

STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

~spect’iulIy

request that the

Board

enter an

order

against the Respondent

PETCO

PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

A.

Authorizing

a hearing

in

this matter

at which time the Respondent will

be

required to

answer the allegations

herein;

I’

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;

19

---

D.

Assessing against Respondent a civil penalty of fifty thousand dollars

($50,000)

for each

violation of the Act,

and an additional

penalty of ten thousand

dollars

($10,000) for

each day during which each violation

has

continued thereafter; and

E.

Granting

such other relief as the Board may deem

appropriate.

COUNT XI

WATER POLLUTION

VIOLATIONS

(DECEMBER 2, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein by reference paragraphs

1

through

13 of Count

I

as paragraphs

1

through

13 of this Count Xl.

14.

On

December 2,

2004,

Petco reported the release of approximately

1

barrel of

crude oil from

the Mabel Durbin #1

well near St. Elmo in

Fayette County,

Illinois.

15.

The crude oil

is

a

produced fluid

generated

by Petco’s oil

production activities

and

contains petroleum constituents, which are “contaminants” as that term

is defined

in the Act,

415

ILCS 5/3.165

(2002).

16.

The crude oil was

deposited

upon the

land

in

such place

and manner as

to

create

a water pollution hazard

in that it ‘affected an

area approximately 600

square feet

before

discharging into

a tributary of South

Fork Creek

17.

By depositing contaminants

upon the

land

in such

place and

manner as

to

create

a water

pollution hazard,

Petco

has

violated Section

12(d)

of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(d) (2002).

18.

The Illinois

EPA investigated the spill on

December 3,

2004,

and observed

crude

oil within the water and oil-stained vegetation along

approximately 100 feet of the stream.

19.

Petco’s discharge of crude oil

to

the small stream altered its physical

and

chemical properties so as

to likely create

a nuisance

or render such

waters

harmful or

detrimental

or injurious to public health,

safety or welfare,

or to domestic,

commercial,

industrial,

agricultural,

recreational,

or other legitimate

uses, or to

livestock, wild animals, birds,

fish, or other aquatic life.

20

---

20.

By causing

or allowing

the discharge of crude

oil

into the “waters”

of the State,

the Respondent has

caused water pollution

in

the

State of Illinois,

and thereby violated

Section

12(a)

of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(a)

(2002).

21.

Petco has

previously been adjudicated

in violation

of Section

12 of the Act

in

Jefferson

County Circuit Court No. 99-CH-55.

These presently alleged violations

constitute

repeated

violations pursuant to Section

42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek attorney’s fees

and costs.

PRAYER

FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, the

PEOPLE OF THE

STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the Board enter an

order against the Respondent,

PETCO

PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

~-

‘

.,

‘

.

.~.

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:’OicLhig

Respoiideritto cease and dc~..,or~any’~urthervio’Iations~ofthe’Act

and

associated

regulations;

D.

Assessing against Respondent a civil penalty of fifty thousand dollars

($50,000)

for each

violation of the Act,

and an

additional penalty of ten thousand

dollars

($10,000) for

each day during

which each violation

has continued

thereafter; and

E.

Granting

such

other relief as the Board

may deem appropriate.

WATER QUALITY VIOLATIONS

(DECEMBER 2, 2004)

1-13.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein by reference paragraphs

1

through

13 of Count

I

as paragraphs

1

through

13 of this Count XII.

21

---

14-18.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein

by reference paragraphs

14

through 18

of Count Xl

as paragraphs

14 through

18

of this Count XII.

19.

Petco’s discharge of crude oil

has

caused

offensive conditions

in the tributary to

South

Fork Creek in that the waters

contained visible oil.

Respondent has

thereby violated

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 302.203,

304.105, and

304.106.

20.

By discharging

contaminants into

waters of the

State so as to

violate regulations

or standards

adopted by the

Pollution Control

Board

under this Act,

Petco

has

thereby violated

Section

12(a)

of the Act,

415

ILCS 5/12(a)

(2002).

21.

Petco has

previously been

adjudicated in violation

of Section

12 of the Act in

Jefferson

County Circuit Court No.

99-CH-55.

These presently alleged

violations constitute

repeated violations pursuant to

Section 42’(f)

of the Act, 4~

~ !LCS,

5/42(f) (2000.), and~~’:.’..-

~

‘

Complainant is authorized

to seek

attorney’s fees and costs.

PRAYER FOR

RELIEF

‘

‘

WHEREFORE, Complainant, the PEOPLE OF THE

STATE OF

ILLINOIS,

respectfully

request that the

Board

Ci

L.

dl)

urdet

against the Respondei

t

PETCO PETRC~

WM

CORPORATION:

‘

‘

A.

Authorizing

a hearing

in this matter

at

which time the Respondent will be

L

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.

Assessing against Respondent a civil penalty of fifty thousand

dollars ($50,000)

for each violation

of the Act, and

an additional

penalty of ten thousand

dollars

($10,000) for

each day during

which

each

violation

has continued

thereafter; and

22

---

E.

Granting

such other relief as the Board

may deem

appropriate.

COUNT XIII

WATER POLLUTION VIOLATIONS

(FEBRUARY 15, 2005)

1-13.

Complainant realleges and

incorporates

herein

by reference paragraphs

1

through

13 of Count las paragraphs

1

through

13

of this Count XIII.

14.

On

February 15,

2005,

Petco reported the release of approximately 20 barrels of

salt water and

3 barrels of crude oil from

a

pipeline

near St.

Elmo in

Fayette County,

Illinois.

15.

The salt water and crude oil are each

a

produced fluid

generated

by Petco’s oil

production activities, the former contains a large

concentration of chlorides and

varying

amounts of petroleum constituents ‘and

the latter is mostly petroleum,

which are

“contaminants”

as that term

is defined

in the Act, 415 ILCS 5/3.165 (2002).

16.

The salt water and

crude oil were released from

a pig

trap

in the pipeline and

impacted an

area approximately 12,000 square feet.

17.

The Illinois

EPA investigated

the spill on

November

8,

2004,

and determined that

any discharge

of the salt water

and crude oil into

the Little

Moccasin Creek was

not evident.

18.

The crude oil was deposited

upon

the land

in such

place and

manner as to

create

a water

pollution hazard

in that the

pig trap was located approximately 50 feet from the stream

and there were no

barriers between the large area of contaminated ground

and the stream.

19.

.

By depositing contaminants upon the

land

in such

place and

manner as to

create

a water pollution hazard,

Petco has violated

Section

12(d) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/12(d) (2002).

20.

Petco

has previously

been

adjudicated in violation

of Section

12

of the Act in

Jefferson

County Circuit Court No.

99-CH-55.

These

presently alleged

violations constitute

repeated violations

pursuant to

Section 42(f) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/42(f) (2000),

and

Complainant is authorized

to seek attorney’s fees and

costs.

PRAYER FORRELIEF

23

---

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, the PEOPLE OF THE STATE

OF ILLINOIS, respectfully

request that the Board enter an

order against the Respondent,

PETCO

PETROLEUM

CORPORATION:

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.

Assessing against Respondent a

civil penalty of fifty thousand

dollars

($50,000)

for each violation

of the Act, and

an additional

penalty of ten thousand

dollars ($10,000) for

F

each day-during w!

~ch

oac11 violation

has continued,thereafter; and

.:~

‘

‘.

E.

Granting

such other relief as

the

Board

may deem

appropriate..

Respectfully submitted,

‘

PEOPLE

OF THE STATE

OF

ILLINOIS,

LISA MADIGAN,

‘~to~ey

Coneral

‘

of the

State of Illinois,

MATTHEWJ. DUNN, Chief

Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos

Litigation

Division

L

BY:_____________________

THOMAS

DAVIS,

Chief

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

500

South

Second Street

Springfield,

Illinois 62706

217/782-9

31

Dated:____________

24

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I

hereby certify that

I

did

on April

11,

2005,

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 and

COMPLAINANT’S MOTION

FOR

LEAVE TO AMEND

COMPLAINT and AMENDED

COMPLAINT:

To:

Charles J.

Northrup

Sorling, Northrup,

Hanna,

Cullen

&

Cochran

Suite 800

Illinois

Building

607

East Adams,

P.O.

Box 5131

Springfield,

IL 62705

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

A copy was also

sent by First

Class

Mail with postage thereon fully prepaid

To:

Carol Webb

Hearing

Officer

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board

1021

North

Grand Ave.

East’

P.O.

Box 19274

Springfield,

IL 62794-9274

Thomas Davis

Assistant Attorney General

This filing is submitted

on recycled paper