BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
1
1
1
Complainant,
1
1
1
1
PCB 02-186
v.
1
1
Enforcement
-
Air
1
1
PERFETTI VAN MELLE USA INC. f/Wa
1
VAN MELLE USA INC., a Kentucky
1
corporation,
1
1
Respondent.
1
NOTICE OF FILING
To:
See attached Service List
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on the 18th day of May, 2006, the People of the State of Illinois,
filed with the Illinois Pollution Control Board, a
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING
REQUIREMENT
and a
STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT,
true and correct
copies of which are attached hereto and is hereby served upon you.
PEOPLEiOF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
ex
rel.
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General
By:
~ssistant~~ttorne~
General
Environmental Bureau
188 West Randolph Street,
2oth F1.
Chicago, IL 60601
(312) 814-6986
DATE: May 18,2006
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
SERVICE LIST
Mr. Bradley P. Halloran, Esq.
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100
W. Randolph Street, Suite 11-500
Chlcago,
IL
60601
Ms. Maureen Wozniak, Esq.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
102 1 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
IL
62794-9276
Mr. Jon S.
Faletto, Esq.
Hinshaw
&
Culbertson, LLP
456 Fulton Street
Peoria,
IL
61602
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
1
1
1
Complainant,
1
)
1
1
PCB 02-186
v.
1
1
Enforcement
-
Air
1
1
PERFETTI VAN MELLE USA INC. f/Wa
1
VAN MELLE USA INC., a Kentucky
1
corporation,
)
1
Respondent.
1
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT
NOW COMES the Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by LISA
MADIGAN, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, and hereby moves for relief from the hearing
requirement in this case pursuant to Section
31(c)(2) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act
(
"Act"), 415 ILCS 5/31(c)(2) (2004), and Section 103.300 of the Illinois Pollution Control Board
(
"Board) Procedural Rules, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.300. In support of this Motion, the Complainant
states as follows:
1.
Section
3
1(c)(2) of the Act allows the parties in certain enforcement cases to request
relief
from the mandatory hearing requirement where the parties submit to the Board a Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement. Section 3
1(c)(2) provides as follows:
Notice; complaint; hearing.
(c)(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (1) of this subsection (c), whenever
a complaint has been filed on behalf of the Agency or by the People of the State of
Illinois, the parties may file with the Board a stipulation and proposal for settlement
accompanied by a request for relief from the requirement of a hearing pursuant to
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
subdivis'ion (1). Unless the Board, in its discretion, concludes that a hearing will be held,
the Board shall cause notice of the stipulation, proposal and request for relief to be
published and sent in the same manner as is required for hearing pursuant to subdivision
(1) of this subsection. The notice shall include a statement that any person may file a
written demand for hearing within 2 1 days
afier receiving the notice. If any person files
a timely written demand for hearing, the Board shall deny the request for relief from a
hearing and shall hold a hearing in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (1).
2.
Board Procedural Rule 103.300 provides, in relevant part, as follows (emphasis in
original):
Request for Relief
fiom Hearing Requirement in State Enforcement Proceeding.
(a)
WItenever a co~nplai?lt has been filed on behalf of tlie Agency or by the People of tlte
State of Illinois, the parties may file with the Board a proposed stipzilrtion and
settlement
acconipariied bj) a request for relief from tlte requirement of a hearing
pursuant to Section 3 1 (c)(2) of the Act
. .. . .
3.
On
Apri123,2002, the Complaint in this matter was filed with the Board.
4.
Subsequently, the parties to this action reached agreement on a Stipulation and Proposal
For Settlement, which is being filed with the Board concurrently with this motion.
No hearing is
currently scheduled in this case.
WHEREFORE, the Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE ,OF ILLINOIS, by LISA
MADIGAN, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, respectfully moves for relief from the requirement
of a hearing pursuant to Section
31(c)(2) of the Act and Board Procedural Rule 103.300.
Respectfully submitted,
BY:
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
THEOPHILOS
Environmental
BureauNorth
188 West Randolph Street, Suite 2001
Chicago, Illinois 60601
3
12-8 14-6986
DATE: May 18,2006
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
1
)
)
PCB 02-186
v.
)
).
Enforcement
-
Air
PERFETTI VAN MELLE USA INC.
f/k/a
)
VAN MELLE USA INC., a Kentucky
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 PERFETTI VAN
MELLE USA INC. f /k/a VAN MELLE USA INC.
,
a Kentucky corporation,
authorized to do business in the State of Illinois
("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 which 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
1
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
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,
Complainant and Respondent agree to be bound
by the Stipulation and
Board Order, and Respondent agrees not to contest their validity in
any subsequent proceeding to implement or enforce their terms.
I. JURISDICTION
The Board has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of
the parties consenting hereto pursuant to the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act (
"Act"), 415 ILCS
5/1
et
seq.
(2002)
.
11. AUTHORIZATION
The undersiqned 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.
111. STATEMENT OF FACTS
A.
Parties
1. On'April 23, 2002, 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
..I
2
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
the Illinois EPA, pursuant to Section 31 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31
(2002), against the Respondent.
2. The I'llinois EPA is an administrative agency of the
State of Illinois,
~reated'~ursuant to Section 4 of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/4 (2002).
3. At all times relevant to the Complaint; Respondent was
and is
a Kentucky corporation that is authorized to transact
business in the State of Illinois.
B. Site Description
1. At all times relevant to the Complaint, Respondent
operated a candy manufacturing facility that it leased at 151 North
Hastings Lane, Buffalo Grove, Lake County, Illinois ("facility"),.
2: On or about April 4, 2000, Respondent submitted an
application for a state operating permit to the Illinois EPA.
3. On or about June 30, 2000, the Illinois EPA denied
Respondent's permit application.
.As reasons for its denial,
I1,linois EPA stated that the application indicated the facility had
the potential to emit 249 tons of Volatile Organic Material
(VOM)
per year yet had failed to demonstrate'compliance with the eighty-
one percent (81%) VOM control requirements under 35 Ill. Adm. Code
Part 218 and the new source review
(NSR)
requirements of 35 Ill.
Adm. Code Part 203.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
4. On or about July 25, 2000, Respondent 'submitted
additional information to the Illinois EPA Permit Section in the
form of a revised permit application.
5. On or about October 13, 2000, the Illinois EPA denied the
revised application. As reasons for its denial, Illinois EPA
stated that the application, failed to substantiate the emission
rate of
VOM from the candy coating and did not properly address
emissions from the receiving and handling of flour and sugar.
6. On or about February 6, 2002, Respondent filed an
application for a Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit
("FESOP") for the existing candy manufacturing processes and
relat,ed equipment at the facility.
7. On or about May 7, 2002, Illinois EPA denied Respondent's
FESOP application.
C. Allegations of Non-Compliance
In its Complaint, Complainant alleged that the Respondent has
violated the
following~provisions of the Act and Board regulations:
Count I
:
Operation of emissions sources without a permit, in
violation of Section
9(b) of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/9
(b)
(2002), and Section 201.143 of the Board's
.
regulations, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 201.143.
Count
11: Failure to timely submit CAAPP application, in
violation of Section
39.5(6) (b) of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/39.5 (6) (b) (2002), and Section 270.301 (b)of
the Board's regulations, 35 Ill. Adrn. Code
270.301
(b)
.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
Count I I I
:
Count IV
:
Count V:
D. Admission
Failure to timely submit ERMS application, in
violation of Section 9.8
(b)
of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/9.8
(b)
(2002), and in violation of
205.310'(a),
205.300 (a) and 205.150 (c)
,
(d)
,
and (el of the
Board's regulations, 35
Ill. Adm. Code 205.310(a),
205.300 (a) and 205.150 (c)
,
(d)
,
and (e)
.
Releasing VOM emissions into the atmosphere without
demonstrating compliance with New Source Review
requirements, in violation of Section
9(a) of the
Act, 415 ILCS
5/9(a') (2002), and Sections 201.141
and 203.201 of the Board's regulations, 35
Ill.
Adm. Code 201.141 and 203.201..
Failure to reduce uncontrolled VOM emissions, in
violation of Section
9(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/9 (a) (2002)
,
and Sections 201.141 and 218.986 of
the Boards regulations, 35
Ill. Adm. Code 201.141
and 218.986.
of Violations
The Respondent neither admits nor denies the violations
alleged in the Complaint filed in this matter and referenced
herein.
E. Compliance Activities to Date
Respondent has represented that candy manufacturing operations
at the facility have been terminated and the operation of all
emission units at the facility ceased. Respondent further
represents and acknowledges that it
wil1,withdraw its pending
application
f0r.a FESOP by sending a letter to the Illinois EPA on
or before the date of entry of this stipulation and Proposal for
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
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) (20021, 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:
the character and degree of injury to, or
interference with the
protection of the health,
general welfare and physical property of the
people,;
the social and economic value of the pollution
source
;
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;
the technical practicability and economic
reasonableness of reducing or eliminating the
emissions, dischar
g
es or dep0sit.s resulting from
such pollution source; and
any subsequent compliance.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
In response to these factors, the parties state the following:
1.
Complainant asserts that the environment was threatened
by the Respondent's alleged violations and
,the Illinois EPA1s
information gathering responsibilities were hindered. Further, the
Respondent's alleged violations were contrary to the goals and
purpose of the Act which establishes a unified state
-wide program
"to restore, protect and enhance the quality of the environment,
and to assure that adverse effects upon the environment are fully
considered and borne by those who cause them.
" See Section 2(b) of
the Act,
415
ILCS
5/2 (b)
(2002)
.
2. There is social and economic benefit to the facility.
3. Operation of the facility was suitable for the area in
which it occurred.
'
4. Obtaining the proper permits for operation of the
facility.and compliance with the terms thereof, and compliance with
the NSR,
ERM, and Part 218 requirements of the Board's regulations,
was both technically practicable and
economica4ly reasonable.
5. Respondent represents.that it has permanently terminated
all
.candy manufacturing operations and the operation of all
emission units at the facility. Respondent will provide written
confirmation of the termination of candy manufacturing and emission
unit operations to the Illinois EPA on or before the date of entry
of this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
VII. CONSIDERATION OF SECTION 42(h) FACTORS
Section 42 (h) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42
(h) (2002), provides as
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:
the duration and gravity of the violation;
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 there from as provided by this
Act;
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;
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;
the number, proximity in time, and gravity of
previously adjudicated violations of this Act by
the respondent;
whether the respondent voluntarily self
-disclosed,
in accordance with subsection.
i of this Section,
the non
-compliance to the Agency; and
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.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
In response to these factors, the parties state as follows:
1. Complainant asserts that the Respondent failed to obtain
a permit for the facility even though Respondent was emitting
significant quantities of
VOM into the air. The violations began
during the 1999 calendar year and lasted until at least June 29,
2001.
2. Aft,er the Complaint was filed, Respondent diligently made
an .effort to resolve the alleged violations and come into
compliance with the Act, Board regulations and applicable federal
regulations.
3. Complainant asserts that Respondent failed to purchase
the required ATUs for the '2000 and 2001 emissions seasons.
Respondent also failed to secure the necessary permit to operate
the facility and failed to comply with the NSR and Part 218
requirements of the Board's regulations. Respondent obtained an
economic benefit as a result. However, the penalty and other
payments obtained negate the economic benefit accrued.
4. Complainant has determined, based upon the specific facts
of this matter, that a penalty of One Hundred Twenty Thousand
Dollars ($120,000.00)
,
as well as an additional payment of Sixty
Thousand Nine Hundred Nine Dollars and Thirty
-Nine Cents
($60,909.39) for purchase of 'ATUs from the Illinois EPA1s
Alternative Compliance Market Account (ACMA) and payment of the
2004 annual air pollution site fee of $1,800 will serve to deter
10
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
further violations and aid in future voluntary compliance with the
Act and Board regulations.
5. To Complainant's knowledge, Respondent has no previously
adjudicated violations of
.the Act.
6. Self-disclosure is not at issue in this matter.
7. The settlement of this matter does not include a
supplemental environmental project.
VIII. TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
A. Penalty,
ATU and Site Fee Payments
1. The Respondent shall pay a civil penalty in the sum of
One Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars ($120,000.00) to be paid to
Illinois EPA within thirty (30) days from the date the Board issues
an order accepting this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement.
Within thirty (30) days from the date the Board issues an order
accepting this Stipulation, Respondent shall also pay Sixty
Thousand Nine Hundred Nine Dollars and Thirty
-Nine Cents
($60,909.39)
fo,r past due ATUs as provided in the ACMA bill issued
to Respondent by Illinois EPA on or about June 25, 2004 and $1,800
for the 2004 air pollution site fee as provided
.in the invoice
issued to the Respondent by the
Illinois EPA on December 8, 2004.
The Respondent stipulates that payment for the penalty,
ATUS, and
2004 air pollution site fee has been tendered to
~es~ondent's
attorney of record in this matter in a form acceptable to that
attorney. Further, Respondent stipulates that said attorney has
,
11
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
been directed to make the penalty
,
ATU, and site fee payments on
behalf of Respondent. The penalty described in this Stipulation
shall be paid by certified check, money order or electronic funds
transfer payable to the Illinois EPA, designated to the Illinois
Environmental Protection Trust Fund.
A .certified check or money
order shall be and submitted to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Services Section
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794
-9276
The name and number of the case and
Respondent's Federal Employer
Identification Number
(FEIN) shall appear on the certified check or
money order. If submitting an electronic funds transfer to the
Illinois EPA, the electronic funds transfer shall be made in
accordance with specific instructions to be timely provided to
Respondent prior to the date of the entry of the Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement. Payment for the ATUs shall be made as
directed in the
ACMA
bill issued to Respondent by the Illinois EPA
,
on or about June 25, 2004 and payment of $1,800 for the 20'04 air
pollution site fee shall be made as directed in the'invoice issued
to Respondent by the Illinois EPA on or about December
8, 2004. A
copy of the certified check, money order or ,record of electronic
funds transfer and
any.transmitta1 letter for the penalty, ATUs and
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
permit fees shall be sent to:
George
D. Theophilos
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
188 W. Randolph St.
,
2oth Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60601
and
Maureen E. Wozniak
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 payment 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 payment
shall be
first applied to any interest on unpaid payment then due
and owing.
All
interest on payment owed shall be paid by certified
check, money order
'
or electronic funds transfer, 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's
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
attorney may be reached at the following address:
Jon S.
Faletto
Howard
&
Howard Attorneys, P.C.
One Technology Plaza
211 Fulton street, Suite 600
'
Peoria, IL 61602-1350
4. In the event of default of this Section VIII.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. Compliance Plan
Respondent shall remit the required penalty, ATU payments, and
2004 air pollution site fee to the Illinois EPA as described above.
Respondent, having represented that it has terminated all candy
manufacturing and emission unit operations at the facility, agrees
that it shall not re
-commence operations at any time in the future
without first obtaining all permits and approvals from the Illinois
EPA required under law.
C. Future Use
Notwithstanding any other language in this Stipulation to the
contrary, and in consideration of the mutual promises and
conditions contained in this Stipulation, including the Release
from Liability contained in Section
VIII
.
E,
below, the Respondent
hereby agrees that this Stipulation may be used against the
14
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
Respondent in any subsequent enforcement action or permit
proceeding 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 or permit
proceeding, any allegations that these alleged violations were
adjudicated.
,
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
I11 .C ("Allegations of Non-
Compliance") of this Stipulation.
E. Release from Liability
In consideration of the Respondent's payment of the One
Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollar Penalty
($120,000.00), payment of
the Sixty Thousand Nine Hundred and Nine Dollars and Thirty
-Nine
Cents
($60.'909.39) for purchase of the ATUs, payment of $1,800 for
the 2004 air pollution site fee, compliance with the Compliance
Plan in Section
VIII.B, to Cease and Desist as contained in Section
VIII.D., and upon the Pollution Control Board's acceptance and
approval of the terms of this
.
Stipulation and Proposal for
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
Settlement, the,Complainant releases, waives and discharges the
~es~ondent 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 Complaint filed on April 23, 2002. 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.
liabilit
y
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.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
F. Correspondence, Reports and Other Documents
Any and all correspondence, reports and any other
required under this Stipulation, except for payments
pi
documents
~rsuant to
Sections
VII1.A ("Penalty Payment") and of this Stipulation shall
be submitted as follows:
As to the Complainant
George
D. Theophilos
Assistant Attorney General Environmental Bureau
188
W. Randolph St.,
2oth
Floor
Chicago, Illinois
60601
and
Maureen E. Wozniak
Assistant Counsel
Illinois EPA
1021
North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box
19276
Springfield, ~llinois
62794 - 9276
As to the Respondent
Jon S.
Faletto
Howard
&
Howard Attorneys, P.C.
One Technology Plaza
211
Fulton Street, Suite
600
Peoria, IL
61602 - 1350
(309) 672
- 1483
and
William
Stepan
Vice President of Manufacturing
Perfetti Van
Melle USA Inc.
3645
Turfway Road
PO Box
18190
Erlanger, KY
41018 - 0910
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
G. Modification of Stipulation
The parties may, by' mutual written consent, agree to extend
any compliance dates or modify the terms of this Stipulation.
A
request for any modification shall be made in writing and submitted
to the contact persons identified in Section
V.II1.F Any such
request shall be made by separate document, and shall not be
submitted within any other report or submittal required by this
Stipulation. Any such agreed modification shall be in writing,
signed by authorized representatives of each party, and then
accompany a joint motion
to.the Illinois Pollution Control Board
seeking a modification of the prior Order approving and accepting
the Stipulation to approve and accept the stipulation as amended.
/
H. Enforcement .of Board Order
1.
'
Upon the entry of the Board's Order approving and
accepting this
Sti.pulation and Proposal for Settlement, 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 and Proposal for Settlement may be made by mail and
waives any requirement of service of process.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
3. The parties agree that, if the Board does not approve and
accept this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement, 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 Proposal for Settlement 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.
I. Termination
1. The provisions of Section VIII .C "Future Use," Section
VII1.D "Cease and Desist" and Section VII1.E "Release from
Liability
" shall survive and shall not be subject to and are not
affected by the termination of any other
provision(s)of this
Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement.
WHEREFORE, Complainant and Respondent re
q
uest that the Board
adopt and accept the foregoing Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement as written.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
LISA
MADIGAN
Attorney General
State of
~llinois
MATTHEW J.
DUNN,
Chief
Environmental 'Enforcement/
Asbestos Litigation Division
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
n
. .
BY:
Chief Legal Counsel
PERFETTI
vAP~
MELLE USA INC.
BY:
DATE
:
WILLIAM STEPAN
Vice President of Manufacturing
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
LISA
MADIGAN
.
Attorney General
State of Illinois
MATTHEW
J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental
~nforcement/
Asbestos Litigation Division
BY:
.
ROSEMARIE CAZEAU, Chief
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
BY:
ROBERT A. MESSINA
Chief Legal Counsel
PERFETTI VAN MELLE
USA INC.
BY:
President
&
~@ef Executive
Officer
DATE
:
DATE
:
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, George D. Theophilos, an Assistant Attorney General, do certify that I caused to be mailed,
this
lgth
day of May, the foregoing
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING
REQUIREMENT
and
STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
to the persons
listed on the attached Service List by first class mail, with postage pre
-paid.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, MAY 18, 2006
