ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    Nay
    23,
    1974
    ENVIRONIENTAL
    PROTECTION
    AGENCY,
    )
    )
    Complainant,
    )
    )
    vs.
    )
    PCB
    73—109
    )
    ARNOLD
    N.
    MAY;
    H1~LLVIEW FARMS
    )
    FERTILIZERS,
    INC.,
    a
    domestic
    )
    corporation;
    and
    ARNOLD
    N.
    MAY
    )
    BUILDERS,
    INC.,
    a
    domestic
    )
    corporation,
    )
    Respondent.
    )
    DISSENTING OPINION (by Mr. Dumelle):
    While I agree with the findings that violations were proven,
    I
    emphatically
    disagree
    with
    the
    miniscule
    penalty
    levied
    by
    the
    majority.
    The $2,500 penalty is far too low
    and
    $25,000
    in
    my
    mind
    would
    have
    been far more appropriate.
    We have here the situation of a knowledgeable, experienced
    aggressive businessman, Mr. Arnold N.
    May, irresponsibly continuing
    this enterprise while severely interfering
    with many others and their
    own
    rights
    to a clean and pleasant environment
    as guaranteed by both
    the Illinois
    Constitution
    and the Environmental Protection Act.
    The record in
    this proceeding is replete with references
    to the
    odor nuisance and its consequences
    (see pages
    77,
    79, 83,
    102,
    125,
    159,
    161,
    169, 213,
    321,
    397, 402, 408,
    469; 476, 504, 545,
    552, 555,
    564, 571,
    644, 749,
    761, and 809).
    Let me cite just two of the many
    instances
    of citizen testimony
    Mrs.
    McNish
    (an adjacent farm owner to
    the permit
    area)
    Q
    Has
    this
    ever
    caused
    you
    any physical
    A
    It makes you really sick.
    It really does.
    Q
    We~Ll,when you say sick, what do you mean by
    that?
    A
    You get sick to your stomach from something
    that smells bad.
    12—333
    Q
    Has
    that
    happened?
    A
    Oh,
    yes.
    Last
    year
    I
    went
    outside.
    It
    was so
    bad one day
    I
    went
    to
    do
    some
    work
    and I up—
    chucked
    over
    the
    bannister.
    (R.
    79)
    And an
    industrial physician at International Harvester, Dr. Roland
    Olsson, who resides
    in Spring
    Grove, testified as follows:
    Q
    Would you describe these odors
    that you have
    mentioned?
    A
    Well,
    it was foul.
    I would say it was comparable
    to an open box latrine in the Army.
    That is
    as
    close to it
    as
    I can come.
    It wasn’t chemical.
    It wasn~tthat of a paint factory or a refinery.
    It was,
    as I said,
    comparable to an Army
    latrine, which I am quite familiar with.
    (R. 545)
    The language of the majority opinion (p.
    11) reduces the penalty
    because the “social
    value
    of such projects
    is
    very
    important and weighs
    heavily
    in
    mitigation.t’
    The
    very
    abuse
    of
    placing
    unsuitable
    and
    partially digested sludge on land,
    as was done in this proceeding,
    may make
    it
    difficult for other sanitary districts and cities to ever
    go
    to land disposal of their sludge.
    Put another way,
    the user of any new technology has a responsibility
    to
    act responsibly.
    The environment
    is not hi8 laboratory
    to
    do with
    it what he will, regardless of consequences.
    The immediate world ought
    not to smell like
    an “Army open box latrine” and farm women ought not
    to have to “upchuck over the bann:ister”.
    Nowhere in the record does any attempt appear on the part of
    Mr. Arnold N. May to reject loads
    of sludge or to ask that they be
    properly digested,
    To me, mitigation
    would only be called for in this
    case had a good faith effort been made
    to cease
    causing a nuisance.
    Mr. May’s sworn testimony stands on its own
    o
    Now, have you ever rejected a load of
    material
    from Mr. Larsen’s trucking company on the
    basis of odors associated with the material?
    A
    I have not.
    (R.
    1399)
    The
    penalty in this
    case should have been at least
    $25,000.
    12
    334
    —3—
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois
    Pollution
    Control
    Board,
    hereby
    certify
    that
    the
    above
    Dissenting
    Opinion
    was
    filed
    this
    of
    1974.
    ,...i
    ~
    q?..:.•......~T....
    ....
    12
    —
    335

    Back to top