iAN
132009
STATE
OF
LUNOJS
OFFICE OF
THE
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
Pollution
Control
Board
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS
Lisa
Madigan
X1”IORNEY QENERAL
January
5,
2009
John
T.
Therriault,
Assistant
Clerk
Assistant
Clerk
of
the
Board
Illinois Pollution
Control
Board
James
R.
Thompson Center,
Ste.
11-500
100
West
Randolph
Chicago,
Illinois
60601
Re:
People
v.
Pekin
Paperboard
Co.
PCB
No.
05-1
63
Dear
Clerk:
Enclosed
for filing
please
find
the
original
and
ten
copies
of a
Notice
of
Filing,
Motion
for
Relief
from
Hearing Requirement
and
Stipulation
and
Proposal for
Settlement
in regard
to
the
above-captioned
matter.
Please
file
the
originals
and
return
file-stamped
copies
to me
in
the
enclosed
envelope.
Thank
you
for
your
cooperation
and
consideration.
Verrul
Andrew
J.
Nicholas
Environmental
Bureau
500
South
Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
(217)782-9031
AJN/pjk
Enclosures
500 South
Second
Street,
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
• (217)
782-1090
• TTY:
(877)
844-5461
• Fax:
(217)
782-7046
100
West
Randolph
Street,
Chicago,
Illinois
60601
• (312)
814-3000
• ‘1FY:
(800)
964-3013
• Fax:
(312)
814-3806
inn,
in_
rn
,Th
Tm__
Finn,
—
,,-,nVr.-,n,A,,,-S —
,...,.,S
BEFORE
THE
ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE
OF
THE
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
vs.
)
PCB
No. 05-1
63
)
(Enforcement)
PEKIN
PAPERBOARD
COMPANY, L.P.,
a
Delaware
limited
partnership,
)
Respondents.
)
NOTICE
OF
FILING
p
To:
Ms.
Jane
DiRenzo
Pigott
so060’
Attorney
at
Law
One
N.
LaSalle
St.,
Suite
1904
Chicago,
IL 60602
PLEASE
TAKE
NOTICE
that
on
this
date
I mailed
for
filing
with
the Clerk
of the
Pollution
Control
Board
of the
State
of
Illinois,
a
MOTION
FOR
RELIEF
FROM
HEARING REQUIREMENT
and
STIPULATION
AND
PROPOSAL
FOR
SETTLEMENT,
copies
of
which
are
attached
hereto
and
herewith
served
upon
you.
Respectfully
submitted,
PEOPLE OF
THE
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS
LISA
MADIGAN,
Attorney
General
of
the
State
of
Illinois
MATTHEWJ. DUNN,
Chief
Environmental
Enforcement/Asbestos
LWg
ati
ANDREW
JrNICHOLAS
Assistant
Attorney
General
Environmental
Bureau
500
South
Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
21
7/782-9031
Dated:
January
8, 2008
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I
hereby
certify
that
I did on January
8, 2009,
send
by First Class
Mail, with
postage
thereon
fully
prepaid,
by depositing
in a
United States
Post Office
Box
a
true
and
correct
copy
of
the
following
instruments
entitled
NOTICE
OF
FILING, MOTION
FOR
RELIEF
FROM
HEARING
REQUIREMENT
and
STIPULATION
AND
PROPOSAL
FOR SETTLEMENT:
To:
Ms.
Jane
DiRenzo
Pigott
Attorney
at
Law
One
N.
LaSalle
St., Suite
1904
Chicago,
IL 60602
and
the
original and
ten copies
by
First
Class
Mail
with postage
thereon
fully
prepaid
of
the
same
foregoing
instrument(s):
To:
John
T.
Therrault,
Assistant
Clerk
Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board
James
R.
Thompson
Center
Suite
11-500
100 West
Randolph
Chióago,
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
Avenue East
Springfield,
IL 62794
Assistant
Attorney General
This filing
is
submitted
on
recycled
paper.
BEFORE
THE ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL
BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
vs.
)
PCB No. 05-163
(EnforceO*0
PEKIN PAPERBOARD
COMPANY,
L.P,
)
a Delaware
limited partnership,
)
Respondents.
)
&
oo”°
MOTION FOR
RELIEF FROM HEARING
REQUIREMENT
NOW
COMES Complainant,
PEOPLE
OF THE STATE OF
ILLINOIS, by LISA
MADIGAN,
Attorney
General of the State
of Illinois,
and pursuant to Section
31 (c)(2) of the
Illinois
Environmental Protection
Act (“Act”),
415 ILCS 5131(c)(2)
(2006),
moves
that
the Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board grant the
parties in the
above-captioned
matter relief from
the hearing
requirement
imposed by
Section 31(c)(1)
of the Act, 415
ILCS
5/31(c)(1)
(2006). In support
of
this
motion,
Complainant
states
as
follows:
1
The
parties
have
reached agreement
on
all outstanding
issues in this matter.
2.
This agreement
is presented
to the
Board
in a Stipulation
and Proposal for
Settlement,
filed
contemporaneously
with this
motion.
3.
All parties
agree
that
a
hearing
on
the Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement
is
not
necessary,
and
respectfully
request
relief from such
a hearing as allowed
by Section
31 (c)(2)
of the Act,
415 ILCS
5/31 (c)(2) (2006).
1
500
South Second
Street
Springfield, Illinois
62706
217/782-9031
Dated: January 8,
2009
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE
OF
THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA
MADIGAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
MATTHEWJ. DUNN, Chief
Environmental
Enforcement/Asbestos
Litigation
Division
BY:
ANDREW
JØICHOLAS
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney
General
WHEREFORE,
Complainant, PEOPLE
OF
THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, hereby requests
that the
Board grant this motion for relief
from
the
hearing requirement
set
forth in
Section
31(c)(1) of the Act, 415
ILCS 5131(c)(1) (2006).
2
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE
OF THE STATE OF
ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
-vs-
)
PCB
No. 05-1 63
)
(Enforcement
- Water)
PEKIN PAPERBOARD
COMPANY,
)
L.P.,
a
Delaware
limited partnership,
)
Respondent.
)
STIPULATION
AND PROPOSAL
FOR
SETTL1’JT
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
PEKIN
PAPERBOARD
COMPANY,
L.P.,
a
Delaware limited
partnership,
(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. This
stipulation of facts is
made
and agreed upon
for purposes
of settlement
only and
as a factual basis for
the
Board’s
approval
of
this
Stipulation and
issuance of
relief. None of the
facts stipulated herein
shall be
introduced
into evidence
in any
other
proceeding
regarding
the violations
of the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Act (“Act”), 415 ILCS
5/1
et
seq.
(2006),
and
the Board’s
Regulations,
alleged
in the
Complaint and Amended
Complaint
except as otherwise
provided
herein.
It is the
intent
of the parties to
this Stipulation
that it
be
a final
adjudication
of
this
matter.
I.
STATEMENT
OF FACTS
A.
Parties to the
Stipulation
1.
On
March 11,
2005, a
Complaint
was filed on
behalf of the
People of
the State of
Illinois
by
Lisa
Madigan,
Attorney
General of the
State
of Illinois,
on her
own
motion
and
upon
the
request of the
Illinois EPA, pursuant
to
Section
31 of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/31 (2006), against
1
the
Respondent.
An Amended
Complaint
will
be
filed simultaneously with this Stipulation.
2.
The Illinois
EPA is an administrative
agency
of
the State of Illinois, created
pursuant to Section
4
of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/4 (2006).
3.
At all times relevant
to the Complaint, Respondent was
and
is
a
Delaware
limited
partnership
that
is authorized to transact business
in the State
of Illinois.
At all times relevant
to
the
Complaint, Respondent
owned and operated a manufacturing facility located
at
1525
South
Second Street,
Pekin,
Tazewell County, Illinois (“site”).
4.
The Respondent manufactures cereal containers using
recycled materials.
5.
The
Respondent’s facility includes a wastewater treatment plant (“WWTP”)
which receives and treats process wastewater from the production operations. The
effluent
from the
WWTP is discharged via
an
outfall
designated as AOl to a storm sewer which
discharges to a ditch.
This “effluent
ditch” flows into a canal which connects
Crystal
Lake to
the
Illinois River.
6.
In addition to storm water from the facility site, which includes storm water from
the
facility’s waste and paper storage and handling areas, the storm sewer also receives
discharges of noncontact cooling water from a turbine generator and well water storage tank
overflow via outfall
DOl, neutralized zeolite
softener
regeneration water via outfall COl,
boiler
blowdown
via
outfall
BOl, and acid regenerated demineralizer column wastewater from a water
purification process.
7.
The discharges from the WWTP and
the
designated outfalls are authorized
pursuant to
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) Permit No. lL0037729.
Congruent with
Section 304.120 of the Board’s Water Pollution Regulations,
35
Ill.
Adm. Code
304.120 (2005),
Pekin Paperboard’s NPDES Permit
imposes
effluent concentration limitations
for
total
suspended solids (“TSS”) and five-day carbonaceous biochemical
oxygen demand
2
(“CBOD
5
”),each of which is a “contaminant” as that
term
is defined in Section 3.165 of the
Act,
415 ILCS 5/3.165 (2006). Discharge Monitoring Reports (“DMR5”)
are
submitted monthly
in
accordance
with
the
NPDES Permit
to
report
the
concentrations
of contaminants
in
the effluent.
8.
The effluent concentration limitations for CBOD5are 25 milligrams per liter
(“mg/I”)
on
a
monthly average and 50 mg/I
for
a daily maximum. The concentration
limitations
for TSS are 30 mg/I on a
monthly
average
and 60
mg/I
for a daily
maximum.
9.
Pekin
Paperboard
reported
in
its
DMRs for
the
months of January,
February, and
March of 2001; February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, and
November of 2002;
January, February, April, and May of 2003; November of 2005, February,
April, May,
October and December of 2006; January February, March, April, May, June, July,
September, October,
November,
and December of 2007; and January, February,
March,
April,
August,
September,
October, and November of 2008, that it had exceeded the
monthly average
effluent
limitation of 30
mg/I for TSS.
10.
Pekin Paperboard reported
in its DMRs for the months of March of 2001;
February,
April, May, June, August,
September, and October of 2002; January and February
of
2003; February,
April,
May,
and December of 2006; January, February, March, September, and
December of
2007;
and January, February, March,
April,
August, September,
October,
and
November of
2008,
that it had exceeded the
daily
maximum effluent limitation of 60
mg/I
for
TSS.
11.
Special
Condition
12
of Pekin Paperboard’s NPDES Permit requires the facility
to
implement
the
provisions
of a storm
water pollution prevention plan
at
the facility. The storm
water
pollution
prevention plan must
include, among other items, storm water management
controls which
will be
implemented by
the
facility. These controls must include
good
housekeeping
and
storm
water management practices such as containment and
debris control.
3
12.
On
August
30,
2002,
the
Illinois
EPA inspected the WWTP
to evaluate its
compliance
with
the NPDES
Permit.
The Illinois EPA inspector
observed
that
there were
at
least two
storm drains near the
powerhouse that
receive paper waste
runoff and spillage
from
the
compactor box
storage area. The
Illinois EPA
inspector
observed paper
waste
on the
ground in this
area, and
covering
one
of
the storm
inlets. Paper waste
is a “contaminant”
as
that term
is
defined
in
Section 3.165 of the
Act, 415 ILCS 5/3.165
(2006). On August
30,
2004,
the
effluent being
discharged via outfall
AOl
and
the
water within the effluent
ditch were
brown
and turbid. The
Illinois
EPA
inspector noted that
sludge had last been
removed
from the lagoon
in
1997.
There were
paper
solids
and
wastewater sludge
within the ditch. The
lagoon screens
at the
outfall
were clogged, thereby
causing
the
lagoon to be overfilled.
13.
The
Illinois EPA issued
a
violation notice
to
Pekin Paperboard
on September
30,
2004.
A meeting
was
held
on
November 25, 2004.
14.
On
December
5,
2002,
the Illinois
EPA again inspected
the WWTP
to
evaluate
its
compliance
with the
NPDES Permit. The
effluent being
discharged via outfall
AOl and the
water
within
the
effluent
ditch were
brown and
turbid. There were
additional paper solids
and
wastewater
sludge within
the ditch.
15.
On January 29, 2003,
the
Illinois EPA conducted
a reconnaissance
inspection
of
the WWTP.
There were
not only
solids
and sludge in the
ditch
but also
wastewater.
A sample
of the effluent
was
determined
to
contain 140
mg/I of
TSS.
16.
On
March 5, 2003, the
Illinois EPA conducted
another
reconnaissance
inspection of
the
VW’JTP.
The
effluent
was brown
and
turbid; the
water
in
the
effluent ditch
contained
floating
solids.
17.
On
April
29, 2003, the
Illinois EPA
again
inspected the WWTP
to
evaluate
its
compliance with
the
NPDES
Permit.
The
Illinois
EPA
determined
that
the permitted
outfalls
4
B01,
COl,
and
DOl
were
not
being separately
sampled
as required by the
NPDES Permit.
The
solids
and
sludge
in the
ditch
had been removed.
The water in
the effluent ditch
was
brown.
18.
On May
29, 2003, the Illinois
EPA conducted
a followup
inspection and
observed
that the water in the
effluent ditch
was
brown.
19.
On June 23,
and
July
30,
2003, the Illinois
EPA again inspected
the WWTP,
primarily
to observe
the
dredging
of the lagoon.
On the latter occasion,
the
effluent was
gray
with
a
strong
septic
odor;
the water in the
effluent ditch
was also gray with unnatural
algal
growth
and sludge
deposits. A sample
of the effluent
taken
on July 30,
2003, was
determined
to contain
190 mg/I of BOD
5.
20.
On
August 28,
and September 18, 2003,
the Illinois EPA again
inspected
the
WWTP after
the
completion
of the lagoon
dredging.
On
both occasions, the
effluent was
brown
with a slight
septic
odor.
21.
On October
28, 2003, the Illinois
EPA
conducted
a reconnaissance
inspection of
the
WWTP.
There was sludge
in a low
area near
the
access gate to the
lagoon.
22.
On July
15, 2004,
the Illinois EPA again
inspected the WWTP.
The lagoon
effluent was
not discharging, as
the pump
was
air
locked. The Illinois
EPA noted some
gray
sludge
deposits present
in the receiving stream.
Paper sludge
was
present in
the low area
downstream
of
the
overflow
pipe.
B.
Allegations of
Non-Compliance
Complainant
and the Illinois
EPA
contend
that
the Respondent
has violated the following
provisions
of the Act and Board
regulations:
Count I:
Pekin Paperboard
has caused
or
allowed
the discharge
of’
contaminants
into waters
of the State in violation
of the
terms
or
conditions
of
its
NPDES
Permit
and
has thereby
violated
Section 12(f) of the
Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(f)
(2004).
By discharging
contaminants
into waters
of
the State in
5
violation of the
terms
or conditions of its NPDES Permit,
Pekin Paperboard
has
thereby violated Sections 304.120,
304.141(a),
and
309.102(a)
of the
Board’s Water Pollution
Regulations, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120,
304.141(a), and
309.102(a).
By discharging contaminants into waters of the State so as
to violate
regulations
or
standards
adopted by the
Pollution
Control Board under this Act, Pekin Paperboard has
thereby
violated Section 12(a) of
the
Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(a)
(2004).
By failing to maintain adequate storm water management
controls at its facility as required by its NPDES
Permit,
Pekin Paperboard has caused, threatened or allowed the
discharge of any contaminant into the waters of the State
in
violation of its NPDES permit, and has thereby violated
Section 12(f) of the
Act,
415 ILCS 5/12(f) (2004).
Count II:
By
failing to sample each of the permitted
outfalls
as
required and discharging contaminants into waters
of the
State
in violation of the terms or conditions of
its NPDES
Permit,
Pekin Paperboard has thereby
violated Section
12(f)
of
the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(f) (2004), and
Section
309.102(a) of
the
Board’s Water
Pollution
Regulations, 35
Ill. Adm. Code
309.102(a).
By
allowing bypasses and
overflows
of untreated
wastewater to
occur, Pekin Paperboard has violated
Section 306.102
of
the Board’s
Water Pollution
Regulations, 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 306.102.
By
discharging contaminants into waters of the State so as
to
violate regulations or standards adopted by the
Pollution
Control
Board
under this Act, Pekin Paperboard has
thereby
violated Section 12(a) of the Act,
415 ILCS 5/12(a)
(2004).
Count
Ill:
Pekin
Paperboard has caused
or
allowed the
discharge of
effluent in violation of Section 304.106
of the Board’s
Water Pollution Regulations, 35 III.
Adm. Code
304.106. Since these
offensive
discharges resulted
in violations of water quality
standards,
Pekin Paperboard also violated
Sections
302.203 and 304.105 of the Board’s
Water
Pollution Regulations, 35
Ill. Adm.
Code
302.203,
304.105.
6
By
so violating
the
Board’s
Water
Pollution
Regulations,
Pekin
Paperboard
has
thereby
violated
Section
12(a)
of
the Act,
415
ILCS 5/12(a)
(2004).
Pekin
Paperboard
has
caused,
threatened
or
allowed
water
pollution
in
that such
discharges
of contaminants
likely
rendered
the
waters
of
the
State harmful
or
detrimental
or
injurious
to public
health,
safety
or welfare,
or
to agricultural,
recreational,
or
other
legitimate
uses,
or
to
livestock,
wild
animals,
birds, fish
or
other
aquatic
life
and have
likely
created
a nuisance.
By
causing
or allowing
the
discharge
of contaminants
in
such
a
manner
as
to cause
or
threaten
water
pollution,
Pekin
Paperboard
has
violated
Section
12(a)
of the
Act,
415
ILCS
5/12(a)
(2004).
C.
Admission
of
Violations
The
Respondent
neither
admits
nor
denies
the
violations
alleged
in the
Complaint
and
Amended
Complaint
filed
in
this
matter
and
referenced
within
Section
lB.
herein.
D.
Compliance
Activities
to
Date
Pekin
Paperboard
has implemented
the following
actions
to
achieve
compliance:
•
Pekin
Paperboard
hired
an
outside
engineering
consultant
and
has
implemented
the
consultant’s
recommendations
as
to the
adequacy
of
each
treatment
unit
to
meet
all
applicable
effluent
and
water
quality
standards.
•
Pekin
Paperboard
implemented
measures
to
eliminate
raw
waste
bypassing
at
the
lift
station
and
now
has
permanent
measures
in
place.
•
The
facility
provided
equipment
as
needed
to enable
indicating,
totalizing,
and
chart
recording
of
flow for
the
raw influent,
clarifier
underflow
and
final effluent.
The
facility
provides
annual
factor
calibration
of
all flow
measuring
equipment
with routine
checks
by
operating
staff.
•
Pekin
Paperboard
has
performed
process
control
testing
as
needed
to
achieve
compliance.
o
The
facility
has implemented
measures
to
ensure
that
contaminated
storm
water
is
not
discharged
from
the
site.
These
measures
included
elimination
of
storm
water
contact
with
wastes,
dumpsters,
stockpiled
materials,
etc. and
improved
housekeeping
and
spill control
measures.
•
Pekin
Paperboard
has
an
Operation
and
Maintenance
(“O&M”)
plan
which
has
7
been reviewed
by an outside third party technical
consultant
and
found
acceptable.
This plan is available for inspection.
o
The O&M plan addresses
sludge
removal
in
a manner that its
outside third
party
technical consultant found acceptable.
•
Pekin Paperboard installed
a
mechanical bar screen as a voluntary plant
upgrade.
•
Pekin Paperboard conducted multiple trial tests to evaluate
process
changes
and
new equipment.
•
Pekin Paperboard
has
filed
a
renewal application for its NPDES
permit
that
addresses
IEPA
concerns
stemming from inspections related to this
enforcement
action.
•
Pekin
Paperboard filed an application for and received a
supplemental permit
to
construct
and/or operate
a
rotary drum precoat filter.
•
Pekin Paperboard installed a precoat
filter
for
the WVVTP.
II.
APPLICABILITY
This
Stipulation
shall
apply
to
and be binding upon the
Complainant,
the
Illinois EPA
and
the
Respondent, and any officer,
director, agent,
or
employee of the Respondent, as
well
as
any
successors
or assigns of the Respondent.
The Respondent shall not raise as a defense to
any enforcement
action taken pursuant to
this Stipulation the failure of any of
its officers,
directors, agents,
employees
or
successors or assigns to take such
action as shall be
required
to
comply
with the
provisions
of
this Stipulation. This
Stipulation
may
be used against the
Respondent
in any subsequent
enforcement action or permit proceeding as
proof of a past
adjudication of
violation of the Act and the
Board Regulations for
all violations alleged in the
Complaint
in
this matter, for purposes of
Sections
39
and 42 of
the
Act, 415 ILCS 5/39 and 42
(2006).
No
change
in ownership, corporate status or
operator
of the
facility shall in any way
alter
the
responsibilities
of the Respondent under this
Stipulation. In
the
event
that
the Respondent
8
proposes
to sell or
transfer any
real property
or operations
subject
to
this Stipulation,
the
Respondent
shall notify
the Complainant
and
the
Illinois
EPA thirty
(30) calendar
days
prior
to
the
conveyance
of title, ownership
or
other interest,
including
a leasehold
interest
in the facility
or
a portion thereof.
The
Respondent
shall make
as
a
condition
of
any such
sale or
transfer,
that
the
purchaser
or successor
provide
to Respondent
site
access and
all
cooperation
necessary
for Respondent
to
perform
to
completion
any
compliance
obligation(s)
required
by
this
Stipulation.
The
Respondent
shall provide
a copy
of this
Stipulation
to any such
successor
in
interest
and the
Respondent
shall
continue
to be bound
by and
remain
liable
for
performance
of
all obligations
under
this Stipulation.
In appropriate
circumstances,
however,
the
Respondent
and
a proposed
purchaser
or operator
of the
facility
may
jointly
request, and
the
Complainant
and
the
Illinois EPA,
in
their
discretion,
may
consider
modification
of this
Stipulation
to
obligate the
proposed
purchaser
or operator
to carry
out
future requirements
of
this
Stipulation
in
place of, or
in
addition
to,
the
Respondent.
This
provision
does
not
relieve the
Respondent
from
compliance
with
any
regulatory
requirement
regarding
notice
and transfer
of
applicable
facility
permits.
III.
IMPACT
ON THE
PUBLIC
RESULTING
FROM
ALLEGED
NON-COMPLIANCE
Section
33(c)
of the Act,
415 ILCS
5!33(c)(2004),
provides
as
follows:
In
making
its orders
and determinations,
the
Board
shall
take
into
consideration
all
the
facts and
circumstances
bearing upon
the
reasonableness
of the
emissions,
discharges,
or
deposits
involved
including,
but
not
limited
to:
1.
the
character
and
degree
of injury to,
or interference
with
the
protection
of the
health,
general welfare
and
physical
property
of
the
people;
2.
the
social and
economic
value of the
pollution
source;
3.
the
suitability
or
unsuitability
of the
pollution source
to the
area in
which
it
is
located,
including
the
question
of priority
of
location
in
the area
involved;
9
4.
the technical practicability
and economic reasonableness
of
reducing
or eliminating the
emissions,
discharges
or deposits
resulting
from such pollution
source; and
5.
any
subsequent
compliance.
In response
to
these
factors,
the parties state the
following:
1.
Complainant and
the
Illinois
EPA
contend that the
injury to, or interference
with,
the
protection
of
the health, general welfare,
and physical
property
of the People
would
be
characterized
as a failure to comply
with requirements
meant
to protect
water quality in the
State.
2.
The
parties agree that
Respondent’s
facility is
of
social and
economic benefit;
3.
Respondent’s
facility is
suitably located at 1525
South Second Street,
Pekin,
Tazewell County,
Illinois.
4.
The
parties
agree that
complying with the
Act and
regulations
is
technically
practicable
and
economically
reasonable; and
5.
Respondent
implemented
measures
subsequent
to the alleged
violations
that
are the
subject of
the Complaint
in this matter
in order to operate
in
compliance
with the Act.
IV.
CONSIDERATION
OF SECTION 42(h)
FACTORS
Section
42(h)
of the Act,
415
ILCS 5142(h)(2004),
provides as
follows:
In
determining
the
appropriate
civil penalty
to
be imposed under:.
. this
Section, the
Board is authorized
to
consider any
matters of record
in
mitigation
or
aggravation
of penalty,
including but
not limited to the
following
factors:
1.
the duration
and gravity
of the
violation;
2.
the presence
or absence of due
diligence
on the
part of the
respondent
in attempting to comply
with requirements
of this Act
and
regulations
thereunder or to
secure relief therefrom
as
provided
by
this Act;
3.
any
economic
benefits
accrued by the respondent
because
of
delay in compliance
with
requirements, in which
case the
10
economic benefits
shall be determined
by the lowest
cost
alternative
for achieving
compliance;
4.
the amount
of monetary penalty
which
will
serve todeter further
violations by
the respondent and
to otherwise aid
in enhancing
voluntary compliance
with this Act by
the
respondent
and
other
persons similarly subject
to the Act;
5.
the number,
proximity in time,
and gravity of
previously
adjudicated
violations of this Act
by the
respondent;
6.
whether
the respondent
voluntarily self-disclosed,
in
accordance
with subsection
I of this Section,
the non-compliance
to the
Agency; and
7.
whether
the respondent
has agreed to
undertake
a
“supplemental
environmental
project,” which
means an
environmentally
beneficial project
that
a
respondent
agrees to
undertake
in
settlement
of
an
enforcement action brought
under
this
Act,
but
which the
respondent
is not otherwise
legally required
to
perform.
In response
to these factors, the
parties
state
as follows:
1.
Excursions
at this
facility
occurred
for at
least
six
years,
and
particular
operation
and
maintenance
issues were
intermittent concerns
for an extended
period of approximately
seven years.
2.
Although
it took several years
for the
facility
to
fully resolve outstanding
compliance issues
due to
operation
and
maintenance
problems,
the
site
was in
constant
contact
with the
Illinois
EPA regarding
its ongoing trial
and
error
process, and the Respondent
was therefore
diligent in its
communications.
3.
The
Respondent
did
not
accrue
an economic
benefit in this matter.
4.
Complainant,
and
the
Illinois EPA, have
determined that
a monetary penalty
of
$65,000.00
will serve to deter
further violations
and aid in future
voluntary
enforcement
of the
Act
and
applicable
regulations.
5.
To Complainant’s,
and the
Illinois EPA’s knowledge,
Respondent
has
no
previously
adjudicated
violations
of the Act.
11
6.
Self-disclosure
is not at
issue in
this
matter.
7.
The
settlement
of
this
matter does
not include
an
supplemental environmental
project.
V. TERMS
OF
SETTLEMENT
A.
Penalty
Payment
1.
The
Respondent
shall
pay
a
civil penalty
in the sum of Sixty-Five
Thousand
Dollars
($65,000.00) within
thirty
(30) days
from
the date
the
Board adopts and accepts
this
Stipulation.
B.
Stipulated
Penalties,
Interest
and Default
1.
If the Respondent
fails to make
any payment
required
by this
Stipulation
on or
before
the date upon
which the payment
is due, the
Respondent shall be
in
default and
the
remaining
unpaid
balance
of the penalty,
plus
any
accrued
interest, shall
be
due and owing
immediately. In the
event of default,
the
Complainant
shall be entitled
to
reasonable
costs of
collection,
including
reasonable
attorney’s
fees.
2.
Pursuant
to
Section
42(g)
of the Act,
interest shall
accrue on any penalty
amount
owed by the
Respondent
not
paid within
the time prescribed
herein. Interest
on unpaid
penalties shall
begin to accrue
from the date such
are due and
continue
to
accrue
to the date
full
payment is
received. Where partial
payment is made
on
any penalty
amount that is due,
such partial
payment
shall be first applied to
any interest
on unpaid penalties
then owing.
C.
Payment
Procedures
All payments
required
by this Stipulation
shall
be
made by
certified check or
money
order
payable to
the
Illinois EPA for
deposit into
the
Environmental
Protection
Trust Fund
(‘EPTF”).
Payments shall
be sent by
first
class mail and delivered
to:
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Fiscal
Services
12
1021
North Grand
Avenue
East
P.O. Box
19276
Springfield,
IL 62794-9276
The
name,
case number
and
the Respondent’s
federal
tax identification
number
shall appear
on
the
face of the
certified
check
or
money
order.
A copy
of the certified
check or money
order
and any transmittal
letter
shall
be sent to:
Environmental
Bureau
Illinois
Attorney
General’s
Office
500
South
Second
Street
Springfield,
IL 62706
D.
Future
Compliance
1.
Pekin
Paperboard
agreesto
complete
the
following:
a.
The
facility
shall maintain
in inventory
spare parts
for the likely
failure
points
on the precoat
filter,
including
but
not
limited
to
a
gearbox
and
chain.
b.
The facility
shall
continue
to monitor
and adjust
the performance
of
its
precoat filter.
c.
The
facility shall
complete
all
tasks
described
in
this Compliance
Plan
by
September
1, 2009.
2.
In
addition
to
any
other authorities,
the
Illinois EPA,
its employees
and
representatives,
and
the
Attorney
General,
her
employees
and representatives,
shall
have the
right of
entry into
and
upon
the
Respondent’s
facility
which is the
subject of
this
Stipulation,
at
all
reasonable
times
for the
purposes
of conducting
inspections
and
evaluating
compliance
status.
In
conducting
such inspections,
the
Illinois
EPA, its employees
and
representatives,
and
the
Attorney
General,
her
employees
and
representatives,
may
take
photographs,
samples,
and
collect
information,
as
they
deem necessary.
3.
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.
13
4.
The
Respondent
shall
cease
and
desist from
future
violations
of the
Act
and
Board
Regulations
that
were
the
subject
matter
of the
Complaint.
E.
Release
from
Liability
In
consideration
of
the Respondent’s
payment
of the
$65,000.00
penalty, completion
of
all activities
required
hereunder,
and
upon the
Board’s
approval
of
this Stipulation,
the
Complainant
releases,
waives
and discharges
the
Respondent
from any
further
liability
or
penalties
for the violations
of the
Act
and
Board Regulations
that
were the
subject
matter
of
the
Complaint
and
Amended
Complaint
herein,
The release
set
forth
above
does
not
extend
to any
matters
other
than those
expressly
specified
in Complainant’s
Complaint,
filed
on
March
11,
2005, and
Amended
Complaint
filed
simultaneously
with this
Stipulation.
The
Complainant
reserves,
and
this
Stipulation
is without
prejudice
to,
all
rights of
the State
of Illinois
against
the
Respondent
with respect
to all
other matters,
including
but not
limited
to,
the
following:
a.
criminal
liability;
b.
liability
for future
violation
of state,
federal,
local,
and
common
laws
and/or
regulations;
c.
liability
for
natural resources
damage
arising
out
of the
alleged
violations;
and
d.
liability
or claims
based on
the Respondent’s
failure to
satisfy the
requirements
of
this Stipulation.
Nothing
in
this Stipulation
is intended
as
a
waiver,
discharge,
release,
or
covenant
not
to
sue
for any claim
or
cause
of action,
administrative
or
judicial,
civil or
criminal,
past or
future, in
law or in
equity,
which the
State of Illinois
or
the Illinois
EPA may
have against
any person,
as
defined
by Section
3.315 of the
Act, 415
ILCS
5/3.315
(2006),
or entity
other
than the
Respondent.
14
F.
Correspondence, Reports
and Other
Documents
Any and all correspondence, reports
and any
other documents required under this
Stipulation,
except for payments,
shall
be submitted as follows:
As to the Complainant
Andrew
J.
Nicholas
Assistant Attorney
General
Environmental Bureau
500 South Second Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62702
As to the
Illinois
EPA
Chuck Gunnarson
Illinois EPA
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
As to the
Respondent
Kimberly Peterson
1815
Land Meier Road
Elk
Grove, Illinois 60007
William R.
Dever, General Manager
Pekin
Paperboard Company, L.P.
1525 South Second Street
Pekin, Illinois 61554
G.
Enforcement and Modification of
Stipulation
1.
Upon
entry of the Board’s Order approving and
accepting
this Stipulation, that
Order
is a
binding and enforceable order of the Board
and may
be
enforced as
such through
any
and
all
available means.
2.
The
Complainant
in
consultation with the Illinois EPA and the
Respondent 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.F. Any such request
shall be made by separate
document,
and
15
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
to
this Stipulation.
H.
Execution
of Stipulation
The
undersigned
representatives
for
each party
to this Stipulation
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.
16
WHEREFORE,
the
parties
to
this
Stipulation
request
that
the
Board
adopt
and
accept
the
forgoing
Stipulation
and
Proposal
for
Settlement
as
written.
PEOPLE
OF
THE
STATE OF
ILLINOIS,
FOR
THE
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
LISA
MADIGAN
Attorney
General
State
of
Illinois
DOUGLAS
P.
SCOTT,
Director
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Agency
MATTHEWJ.
DUNN,
Chief
Environmental
Enforcement!
Asbestos
Litigation
Division
BY:
THOMAS
DAVIS,
Chief
BY:
Environmental
Bureau
ROBE
T
A.
MESSI
A
Assistant
Attorney
General
Chief
Legal
Counsel
DATE:
//O,/O9’
I
DATE:
if
PEKIN
PAPERBOARD
COMPANY,
L.P.
a
Delaw
e
limited
partnership
BY:____
Stephen
A.
He11run’J
Senior
Vice
President,
General
Counsel
and
Secretary
DATE:
December
15,
2008
17
