ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 5, 2009
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
ex rel
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General
of the State of Illinois,
Complainant,
v.
CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION, a
Delaware corporation,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PCB 09-64
(Enforcement - Land)
ORDER OF THE BOARD (by G.T. Girard):
On February 23, 2009, Lisa Madigan, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, on behalf
of the People of the State of Illinois (People), filed a three-count complaint (Complaint) against
Citgo Petroleum Corporation, a Delaware corporation licensed to do business in Illinois
(respondent), concerning respondent’s petroleum refinery located in Lemont, Will County,
Illinois. The parties now seek to settle without a hearing. For the reasons below, the Board
accepts the complaint as meeting the applicable content requirements of the Board’s procedural
rules.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.204. The Board further directs the Clerk to provide public
notice of the parties’ stipulation, proposal for settlement, and request for relief from the hearing
requirement.
Under the Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5 (2006)), the Attorney
General and the State’s Attorneys may bring actions before the Board on behalf of the People to
enforce Illinois’ environmental requirements.
See
415 ILCS 5/31 (2006); 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.
In this case, the People allege that respondent Citgo violated Sections 21(e) and 21(i) of the Act,
(415 ILCS 5/21(e) and (i) (2006)), and Section 722.120(a)(1) of the Board’s regulations. 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 722.120(a)(1). Comp. at 6-9.
Specifically, the People allege that respondent Citgo violated the provisions of the Act
and Board’s regulations by diposing of hazardous waste at a facility not permitted to accept
hazardous waste (Count I); by failing to manage the waste respondent produced as a hazardous
waste (Count II); and, by failing to prepare a Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest for the
hazardous waste respondent produced (Count III).
On February 23, 2009, the People and respondent Citgo also filed a stipulation and
proposal for settlement, accompanied by a request for relief from the hearing requirement of
Section 31(c)(1) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2006)). The stipulation and proposal for
settlement includes a fourth count not listed in the complaint alleging violations of Section 21(i)
of the Act (415 ILCS 5/21(i) and Section 722.111 of the Board’s regulations. This filing is
authorized by Section 31(c)(2) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/31(c)(2) (2006)), which requires that the
2
public have an opportunity to request a hearing whenever the State and a respondent propose
settling an enforcement action without a public hearing.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.300(a).
Under the proposed stipulation, Citgo neither admits nor denies the alleged violations, and agrees
to pay a civil penalty of $5,000.00.
Unless the Board determines that a hearing is needed, the Board must cause notice of the
stipulation, proposal for settlement, and request for relief from the hearing requirement. Any
person may file a written demand for hearing within 21 days after receiving the notice. If anyone
timely files a written demand for hearing, the Board will deny the parties’ request for relief and
hold a hearing.
See
415 ILCS 5/31(c)(2) (2006); 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.300(b), (c). The Board
directs the Clerk to provide the required notice. In addition, the Board directs the complainant to
file an amended complaint or an amended stipulation and proposal for settlement addressing the
inconsistency between the complaint and the stipulation and proposal for settlement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, John Therriault, Assistant Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the
Board adopted the above opinion and order on March 5, 2009, by a vote of 5-0.
___________________________________
John Therriault, Assistant Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
