REC~’J~0
~
GLER~O~F~C~
\
~PR71997
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF
I-
ILU~OIS
Complainant,
)
~
vs.
)
PCB
No.
)
(Enforcement)
MIDWEST GRAIN
PRODUCTS
OF
)
ILLINOIS,
INC., an
Illinois corporation,
)
Respondent.
NOTICE
OF FILING
To:
Charles
Merrill,
Esq.
Husch
&
Eppenberger
100
N.
Broadway, Suite
1300
St.
Louis,
MO
63102-2789
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
copy of the following
instrument entitled
COMPLAI NT.
FURTHER,
please take
notice that financing
may
be available,
through the
Illinois
Environmental
Facilities
Financing
Act,
20
ILCS
3515/1
(1994),
to
correct the pollution
alleged
in
the complaint
filed
in
this
cause.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
JAMES
E.
RYAN, Attorney
General
of the State
of Illinois
MATTHEW J.
DUNN, Chief
Environmental
Enforcement/
Asbestos
Litigation
Division
BY:
~
~
)ANE
E.
MCBRIDE
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental
Bureau
500
South
Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated:
7
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOAF
TAZEWELL COUNTY,
ILLINOIS
______________
PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCBNO.
MIDWEST GRAIN PRODUCTS
OF
)
ILLINOIS,
INC.,
an
Illinois
corporation,
)
)
Respondent.
COMPLAINT
Complainant,
PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
by JAMES
E.
RYAN, Attorney
General of the State
of
Illinois, complains
of the Respondent,
MIDWEST GRAIN
PRODUCTS
OF
ILLINOIS,
INC.,
an
Illinois
corporation,
as
follows:
COUNT
I
PREVENTION
OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION VIOLATION
1.
This Complaint
is brought
by the Attorney General
on
his
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
(1996).
2.
The
Illinois
EPA
is an
agency of the
State of Illinois
created
by the General
Assembly
in
Section
4 of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/4 (1996),
and which
is charged,
uiter aha,
with
the duty of enforcing the Act
in
proceedings
before
the Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board
(“Board”).
R~cIE~VED
CLEt~4KSOFFICE
D
APR
71997
STATE
Oh ~LUNOIS
CONTROL
BOARD
1
3.
This
Complaint
is brought pursuant
to
Section
31
of the Act,
415
ILCS
5/31
(1996),
after
providing the Respondent with
notice
and the opportunity for a meeting
with
the
Illinois
EPA.
4.
The
Respondent,
Midwest
Grain
Products
of Illinois,
Inc.,
is an
Illinois
corporation
in
good standing.
Its registered agent
is Frank
G.
Reeder,
222
North
LaSalle
Street,
Suite
2600,
Chicago,
Illinois
60601.
5.
At
all
times relevant
to this
Complaint,
Respondent
has operated
a facility that
produces ethyl
alcohol for
beverages
and
industrial
purposes,
anhydrous
fuel
alcohol,
wheat
gluten and
distiller’s feed
located
at
South
Front Street
and
Distillery
in
Pekin,
Tazewell
County,
Illinois
(“facility”).
6.
In
1993,
Respondent applied to the
Illinois
EPA for a construction permit
in
order to
replace two existing feed dryers
with
two
new
feed dryers
each
controlled
by
cyclones
in
series with
two new scrubbers
in
series.
7.
The Illinois
EPA
issued Construction Permit #93020061
(originally
issued
May
11,
1993
and
revised
on
May 3,
1995)
and Construction
Permit #93080045 (issued
December
30,
1993
and
revised
December
6,
1995) for the two new feed dryers
to
the
Respondent.
8.
Permit Condition #lb(i)
of Construction
Permit #93020061
limits
particulate
matter emissions
from
dryer #651
to
1.1
pounds
per
hour.
Permit Condition #2a
Table
IA of
Construction
Permit #93080045
limits
particulate
matter emissions
from
dryer #651
and
dryer
#661
combined
to 3.2
pounds per hour.
9.
Both Construction
Permits #93080045 and
#93020061
require
secondary
scrubbers
after both
feed dryers.
2
10.
Respondent commenced
construction
of each
new feed dryer,
after obtaining
Construction
Permit #9302006
and #93080045,
on
a date or dates
better known to
Respondent.
11.
In
May
1995,
Respondent conducted
a stack test
of one
of its
grain dryers
(dryer #661) that
indicated
actual
patriculate
matter emissions of
17.1
pounds per
hour.
12.
Stack testing
conducted
May 1995 on
dryer #661
served
as representative
of
both
dryers,
and
indicated
actual
emissions of
17.1
pounds per hour p~dryer.
13.
On
September
21,
1995,
Illinois
EPA inspected
Respondent’s facility.
14.
At this
inspection,
the Illinois
EPA inspector determined
Respondent operated
equipment
covered
by Construction
Permits #93020061
and
#93080045
unpermitted;
operated
the dryers
in
excess
of allowable
particulate
matter
emission
limitations
specified
within the permits;
operated the dryers
absent the secondary
scrubbers;
and
constructed
a
major
modification
without first
applying for and
obtaining
a Prevention
of Significant
Deterioration
(PSD)
construction permit
setting
forth the best available
control
technology
(“BACT”)
emission
limitation
and
installing the BACT system,
as required
by the federal
Prevention
of Significant Deterioration
regulations.
15.
Section
9.1(d)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/9.1(d)
(1996),
provides:
d.
No person shall:
1.
Violate any
provisions
of Sections
III, 112, 165 or 173 of the Clean
Air Act, as now or
hereafter
amended, or federal
regulations
adopted
pursuant
thereto; or
2.
Construct,
install,
modify
or operate
any
equipment,
building,
facility,
source
or installation
which is
subject
to
regulation
under Sections
111,
112,
165
or
173
of the Clean
Air Act,
as
now
or hereafter
3
amended, except
in
compliance
with
the requirements
of such
Sections and
federal regulations
adopted pursuant thereto, and
no
such
action
shall
be undertaken
without a
permit
granted by the
Agency or in
violation
of any
conditions
imposed
by
such
permit.
Any denial
of such
a
permit
or any
conditions
imposed
in
such
a
permit
shall reviewable
by the Board
in
accordance with
Section
40
of this
Act.
16.
Section
165
of the Clean Air Act, 42
U.S.C.
7475(a)
(1983
and
Supp.
1992),
states
in
pertinent
part:
(a)
Major
emitting facilities
on which construction
is
commenced
No
major emitting
facility
on which construction
is
commenced
after August 7,
1977,
may
be
constructed
in
any
area to
which this part applies
unless:
1)
a permit
has
been
issued for such
proposed
facility
in
accordance with
this part setting
forth
emission
limitations for
such facility which
conform to
the requirements
of this
part;
4)
the proposed
facility is subject
to
the best available
control
technology
for each
pollutant
subject to regulation
under this
chapter emitted
from,
or which
results
from,
such
facility;
17.
Section
52.21 (j)
of Title 40
of the
Code of Federal Regulation, 40
C.F.R.
Section
52.21(j)
(1991),
provides
in
pertinent
part:
4
***
(j)
Control technology
review.
(1) A major stationary
source
or major
modification
shall meet
each
applicable emissions
limitation
under the State
Implementation
Plan
and
each
applicable
emissions standard
and
standard
of performance
under 40
C.F.R.
parts 60
and
61.
(3)
A
major modification
shall apply
best available
control technology for
each
pollutant
subject
to
regulation
under the Act for which
it would
result
in
a significant
net emissions
increase
at the source.
This
requirement
applies
to
each
proposed
emissions
unit at
which
a
net emissions
increase
in the
pollutant would
occur as
a
result
of
a physical
change
or change
in the
method
of operation
in the
unit.
***
Section
52.21
(j)
of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
40
C.F.R. Section
52.21 (j)
(1991),
was
promulgated
pursuant to
Section
111
of the Clean Air Act,
42
U.S.C.
Section
7411
(1983
and
Supp.
1992).
18.
Sections
52.21 (b)(1)(i)(b)
and
(b)(23)(i)
of Title 40
of the
Code of
Federal
Regulations, 40
C.F.R.
Section
52.21(b)(1)(i)(b)
and
(b)(23)
(1991),
provide the following
definitions:
***
(1)(i)
Major Stationary
source
means:
(b)
Notwithstanding the stationary
source size
specified
in
paragraph
(b)(1 )(i)
of this section,
any
stationary
source
which
emits,
or
has
the potential to
emit,
250 tons
per year or more of any
air
5
pollutant subject
to
regulation under
the Act; or
(23)(i)
Significant
means,
in
reference
to
net emissions
increase or the potential
of a source
to
emit any
of the following
pollutants,
a
rate of emissions that
would
equal
or exceed any
of the following
rates:
Pollutant
and
Emission
Rate
Particulate
Matter:
25
tons per year of particulate
matter emissions.
19.
Particulate
matter
emissions of
17.1
pounds
per
hour revealed
during the May
1995 stack test of dryer #661
indicate
annual
particulate matter emissions discharged by
Respondent exceed
allowed dryer emissions.
20.
Particulate matter emissions discharged
by
Respondent exceed the statutory
emission
rate of 25
tons per year,
thus resulting
in a major
modification
at
a major stationary
so uice.
21.
Emission limitations
in
Construction
Permits #93080045 and #93020061
limit
particulate
matter emissions
to
less than
the threshold
level which triggers
applicability of the
PSD program.
Respondent constructed
two dryers
which discharged
into the environment
particulate
matter
emissions
in
excess
of the 3.2 pounds
per
hour permit
limit
for both
dryers
triggering
applicability
of the
PSD program.
22.
Respondent’s dryers
are
exceeding the statutory
emission
rate for particulate
matter of 25 tons
per year,
and
are
considered
a “major modification”,
as that term
is defined
in the PSD regulations,
subject to
PSD regulations.
23.
Further,
Respondent’s facility
has the potential to
emit 250 tons per year of air
pollutants
subject
to
regulation under the Clean Air Act,
and
thus is
a major stationary source
subject to
PSD regulations.
6
24.
Respondent’s facility was
considered
a major source
for
particulate
matter
at
the time
it constructed
a fluidized
bed
boiler in
1982,
and
has
been considered
a major
source
for
particulate
matter
ever since.
25.
As
a
result of being subject
to
PSD
regulations,
Respondent
must
apply best
available
control
technology (BACT)
to
dryers #651
and
#661.
In
order to
determine
BACT,
Respondent
must
conduct a
BACT
analysis
as
required
by federal
regulations.
26.
Under PSD federal
regulations,
Respondent was
required
to
conduct the
requisite
BACT analysis
consisting of a
control
technology review
to
arrive
at
an
emission
limitation
which
is determined
to
be
BACT and
obtain a
PSD construction permit
setting
forth
the
BACT emission
limitation
prior to
initiating
construction of the
major
modification to
a
major stationary
source.
Respondent was
also
required
to
install the BACT
system.
Respondent violated 40 CFR 52.21(j) when
it
began
construction of each
dryer after receiving
construction permits
in
May 1993 and
December
1993.
The exact dates Respondent began
construction of the dryers
are
better known
by
Respondent.
27.
By exceeding the statutory
emission
rates that trigger application
of the PSD
regulations,
and
by not completing
a
BACT
analysis, obtaining
a
PSD
construction
permit,
and
installing the BACT system,
Respondent
has thereby violated
40
CFR 52.21(j)
and
Section
9.1(d)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/9.1(d)
(1996).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE,
Complainant,
People
of the State of
Illinois, respectfully requests
that
the Board
enter
an
order
against the Respondent,
Midwest
Grain
Products
of Illinois,
Inc.:
A.
Authorizing
a
hearing
in
this matter
at which time the
Respondent will
be
required
to
answer the allegations
herein;
7
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
($50,000.00)
for each
violation
of the Act,
and
an
additional
penalty of ten thousand
dollars
($10,000.00)
for each
day
during which
each violation
has continued
thereafter;
E.
Awarding
to
Complainant
its costs
and
reasonable attorney’s fees;
and
F.
Granting
such
other relief as the
Board
may deem
appropriate.
COUNT II
AIR POLLUTION
1-14.
Complainant realleges and
incorporates
by reference
paragraphs
I
through
14
of Count
I
as paragraphs
1
through
14 of this Count
II.
15.
Section
9(a)
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/9(a)
(1996),
provides
that:
No
person
shall:
a.
Cause or threaten
or allow the discharge
or
emission
of any
contaminant
into the environment
in
any State
so
as
to
cause
or tend
to
cause air
pollution
in
Illinois.
***
16.
Section
201.141
of the Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board
(“the Board”)
regulations,
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
201.141
(1994),
provides
that:
No
person
shall cause or threaten
or allow the discharge
or
emission
of any
contaminant
into
the environment
in
any State
so as,
either alone
or
in
combination with
contaminants from
other sources,
to
cause
or tend
to
cause
air pollution
in
Illinois.
***
8
17.
Respondent discharged into the environment
particulate
matter
in
excess
of
permitted
emission
limitations contained within
Construction
Permit #93020061
and
#93080045,
so as to
cause
or tend to
cause air pollution
in
Illinois
in violation
of Section
9(a)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/9(a)
(1996),
and
35
III.
Adm.
Code
201.141
of the Board
regulations.
PRAYER
FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant,
People
of the State
of Illinois,
respectfully requests that
the
Board
enter
an
order
against the
Respondent,
Midwest
Grain
Products
of Illinois,
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.
Assessing against
Respondent a
civil penalty of fifty thousand
dollars
($50,000.00)
for each
violation
of the Act,
and
an
additional
penalty of ten thousand dollars
($10,000.00)
for each
day
during
which
each violation
has
continued thereafter;
E.
Awarding to
Complainant
its
costs
and
reasonable attorney’s
fees;
and
F.
Granting
such
other relief as the Board
may
deem
appropriate.
9
COUNT
III
PERMIT VIOLATIONS
1-14.
Complainant realleges and
incorporates
by reference paragraphs
I
through
14
of Count las
paragraphs
1
through 14
of this Count
Ill.
15.
Section
9(b)
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/9(b)
(1996),
provides
that:
No
person
shall construct,
install,
or operate any equipment,
facility, vehicle, vessel, or aircraft capable
of causing or
contributing
to
air pollution or designed to
prevent
air pollution,
or any type
designated by Board
regulations,
without
a
permit
granted by the Agency,
or in
violation
of any conditions
imposed
by such
permit.
16.
The May
1995
stack test on
dryer #661,
as representative
of both
dryers,
indicated
Respondent discharged
actual
particulate
matter emission
of 17.1
pounds
per hour
per dryer
into the environment,
in violation
of Construction
Permit Condition #1 b(i)
and
Section
9(b)
of the Act.
17.
On September
21,
1995,
and
other
dates
better known
only
to
Respondent,
Respondent failed to
operate the secondary
scrubbers
required
for each
dryer
by
Construction
Permits #93080045 and
#93020061.
18.
Standard
Permit Condition 3,
contained
in
Construction
Permits #93020061
and
#93080045, specifies
that
a permittee
shall not deviate from
the approved
plans
and
specifications
unless the permittee
requests
a modification
in writing
and
the Illinois
EPA
issues
a supplemental
permit.
19.
Respondent failed to
operate the secondary scrubbers
and
failed to
modify the
construction
permit,
in violation
of Standard
Construction Permit Condition
3
and,
thereby
violated
Section
9(b)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/9(b)
(1996).
20.
By
continuing to
operate
its
new feed dryers
in
excess of construction
permit
emission
limitations,
and
by continuing to
operate the same
dryers without
secondary
10
scrubbers,
Respondent
has violated
Section
9(b)
of the Act,
415
ILCS
5/9(b)
(1996),
and
Permit Condition
1 b(i)
of Construction
Permit #93020061
and
Standard Condition
3 of both
Construction
Permit #93020061
and
Construction
Permit #93080045.
PRAYER FOR
RELIEF
WHEREFORE,
Complainant,
People
of the State
of Illinois,
respectfully
requests
that
the
Board
enter an
order against the Respondent,
Midwest
Grain
Products
of
Illinois,
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.
Assessing against Respondent a
civil penalty
of fifty thousand
dollars
($50,000.00)
for each
violation
of the Act,
and
an
additional
penalty of ten thousand
dollars
($10,000.00)
for each
day during
which each
violation
has continued
thereafter;
E.
Awarding
to
Complainant
its
costs
and
reasonable
attorney’s
fees;
and
F.
Granting
such
other
relief as the
Board
may deem
appropriate.
COUNT IV
OPERATING WITHOUT OPERATING PERMIT
1-14.
Complainant realleges and
incorporates
by
reference paragraphs
I
through
14
of Count
I
as
paragraphs
I
through
14
of this Count
IV.
15.
Section
9(b)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/9(b)
(1996),
provides:
No
person shall construct,
install,
or operate any equipment,
facility, vehicle, vessel, or aircraft capable
of causing
or
contributing
to
air pollution or designed to
prevent air pollution,
or any type designated
by
Board
regulations,
without
a
permit
11
granted by the Agency,
or
in
violation
of any conditions
imposed
by
such
permit.
16.
Section
201.143 of the Board
regulations,
35
III. Adm.
Code 201.143
(1994),
provides:
No
person shall cause
of
allow the operation
of any
new
emission
source
or new air
pollution control
equipment
of a type
for which
a construction
permit
is required
by Section
201.142
without first obtaining an
operating
permit
from
the agency,
except for such
testing operations
as
may
be authorized
by the
construction
permit.
17.
On
March
7,
1996,
Respondent submitted
to the Illinois
EPA a
Clean Air Act
Permit Program
(CAAPP) application for the facility as it exists with the new dryers.
Respondent
has
not revised
its
State
operating
permits
so that the facility
is
in
compliance
during
the two-year
CAAPP review period.
18.
Special Condition
3a
of Construction
Permit #93020061
allowed operation
of
dryer #651
until
June
30,
1995.
19.
Upon information and
belief,
Respondent operated
dryer #651
as part
of its
daily production
process
and
has,
therefore,
been
in violation
of Section
9(b)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/9(b)
(1996),
and
35
III.
Adm.
Code 201.143
from
July
1,
1995,
until the
present date.
20.
Special Condition #6a of Construction
Permit #93080045
allows operation
of
the
new or modified
equipment addressed
by the permit
for
180 days
following
start-up.
21.
Upon
information
and
belief,
start-up
of dryer
#661
was
December 24,
1994
and
it has
continued
to
operate
as
part of Respondent’s
daily production
processes.
Therefore,
Respondent has violated
Section
9(b)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/9(b)
(1996),
and
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
201.143
(1994)
from
June
1995
until
the
present date.
12
22.
By
operating
dryer #651
and dryer #661
without first
obtaining an
operating
permit,
Respondent
has violated
Section
9(b)
of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/9(b)
(1994),
and
35
III.
Adm.
Code 201.143
(1994).
PRAYER FOR
RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Complainant, People of the State of
Illinois, respectfully
requests that
the Board
enter an
order against the Respondent,
Midwest
Grain
Products
of
Illinois, 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.
Assessing against Respondent a
civil penalty
of fifty thousand
dollars
($50,000.00)
for each
violation
of the Act,
and
an additional
penalty of ten
thousand
dollars
($10,000.00)
for each
day during
which each
violation
has
continued
thereafter;
E.
Awarding
to
Complainant
its
costs
and
reasonable attorney’s fees;
and
13
F.
Granting
such
other relief
as the Board
may deem
appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE OF
ILLINOIS,
JAMES
E.
RYAN,
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
Of Counsel
JANE
E.
MC
BRIDE
Assistant Attorney General
500 South
Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated:___________
midwest/bd
14
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I
hereby certify
that
I
did
on the 3rd
day
of April,
1997,
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
COMPLAINT
To:
Charles
Merrill,
Esq.
Husch
&
Eppenberger
100
N.
Broadway, Suite 1300
St. Louis,
MO
63102-2789
and the original
and
ten true
and
correct copies of the
same
foregoing
instruments
on the
same
date
by
First
Class
Mail with
postage thereon fully prepaid
To:
Dorothy Gunn,
Clerk
Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board
State
of
Illinois Center
100W. Randolph
Chicago,
IL
60601
~
,~~?-t
~
~JA1c1E
E.
MCBRIDE
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau/Springfield
This filing is submitted
on
recycled
paper.
