ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROLBOARD
R
E C E ~V E D
CLERK’S OFFICE
COUNTY OF VERMILION, ILLINOIS,
)
)
OCT-12004
Complainant,
STATE OF
ILLINOIS
)
AC No.
04-22
Pollution Control Board
v.
)
)
County File No. 03-03
VILLAGE OF
TILTON,
)
)
Respondent.
)
BRIEF OF COMPLAINANT
On June
25,
2003, Doug Toole, a health inspectorwith the Vermilion County
Health Department, inspected the propertyof Mildred Butler,
located near the corner of
15th
Street and
1st
Street in the Village of Tilton, Vermilion County, Illinois.
Doug Toole
inspected the property due to a complaint that the Health Department had received
concerning solid waste on the property.
Upon inspection, Doug Toole observed waste on
the property.
As a result ofthis inspection, Mildred Butler was given a compliance
date
forwhen she needed
to have her property cleaned up, and the waste properly disposed of.
In July 2003, Mildred Butler told Doug Toole that the Village ofTilton had an option to
purchase her property, and that they were now in charge ofcleaning up the property.
Doug Toole spoke to David Phillips, Mayor of the Village ofTilton, on July 7, 2003 and
he confirmed that the Village of Tilton had an option to purchase Mildred Butler’s
property, and was in the process of cleaningup the property.
On August
25,
2003, Doug Toole re-inspected the property ofMildred Butler, to
confirm that the Village ofTilton had removed the solid waste from the property.
Upon
arrival, Doug Toole observed that the items that had been scattered throughout the
property at the June
25,
2003 inspection had now been centralized in one pile and had
been burned.
In the pile ofwaste was brush, branches, scrap metal, demolition debris,
boards, fencing, and rims and
steel belts
from tires.
Doug Toole observed the pile of
waste to be smoldering,
observed scorch marks, and could smell smoke emanating from
the pile ofwaste.
Doug Toole then spoke to Mayor Phillips on August 26, 2003
concerning the burning pile ofwaste that he had observed on the property on August 25,
2003.
Mayor Phillips told Doug Toole that workers from the Village ofTilton piled the
debris and burned the brush and other items.
As
a result of the Village of Tilton’s
actions, the Village was cited with violating the Environmental Protection Act,
415
ILCS
5/21
@)(3).
The Environmental Protection Act provides that no person shall “cause or allow
the open dumping of any waste in a maimer which results in.. .open burning,”
415
ILCS
5/21 (p)(3).
The Environmental Protection Act defines “open dumping” as “the
consolidation ofrefuse from one or more sources at a disposal
site that does not fulfill the
requirements ofa sanitary landfill,”
415
ILCS
5/3.305.
“Refuse” means “waste,”
415
ILCS
5/3.3
85.
“Waste” is defined as “any garbage.
.
.or other discarded material,
including
solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous material resulting from
industrial, commercial, mining and
agricultural operations, and from community
activities..
.,“
415
ILCS
5/3.535.
The Village of Tilton caused or allowed open dumping of waste on the property
ofMildred Butler.
It is not disputed that during all times relevant to this complaint,
Mildred Butler owned the property at issue.
It is also not in dispute, that the Village of
Tilton, during all times relevant to this complaint, had an option to purchase the property
at issue and had taken control ofcleaning up the property.at issue.
Environmental Protection Agency v. Pollution Control Board and John Vander,
579
N.E.2d 1215 (1991), speaks directly to the issue
at hand.
In this case, John Vander
demolished two buildings
and then set fire to the debris on the site where the buildings
had stood.
The Environmental Protection Agency then issued an administrative citation
against John Vander charging him with “having caused or allowed the open dumping of
waste in a maimer which resulted in litter and open burning...”
Id. at
1216.
The
Pollution Control Board ruled that John Vander had not violated the Environmental
Protection Act because his conduct did not constitute “open dumping” within the
Environmental Protection Act’s definition.
However, the Appellate Court reversed the
Pollution Control Board’s ruling and found that John Vander’s actions did constitute
“open dumping.”
The Court held that” ‘open dumping’ happens not when refuse is
consolidated at the point ofdemolition, but when it is consolidated at a
disposal
site.
.
.Thus, there must be more than demolition.
There must also be
‘disposal,’, which is
defined as ‘the discharge, deposit, injection,
dumping, spilling,
leaking or placing of any
waste.
.
.into or on any land.
.
.
so that such waste.
.
.may enter the environment or be
emitted into the air...”
Id. at 1217.
“The demolition site became the disposal site when
Vander decided to incinerate the debris there instead ofmoving it away.”
Id. at 1218.
In the case at hand,
the property became a disposal sitewhen the Village ofTilton
deposited and burned the pile ofwaste, therefore causing the waste to
enter the
environment and be emitted into the
air.
Since the Village ofTilton’s actions caused the
property to be a disposal site, and the Village of Tilton consolidated the waste from the
property into one pile on the land, the Village ofTilton caused or allowed open dumping.
Whether the Village of Tilton placed the waste on the property is not an issue.
The
Village ofTilton had control ofthe property from at least July 7, 2003 until the
inspection ofAugust 25, 2003.
The Village of Tilton gathered the items that were
scattered across the property and placed them in one pile ofwaste,
therefore
consolidating the waste.
The pile ofwaste observed by Doug Toole on August 25, 2003
clearly meets the definition of “open dumping,” the Village ofTilton engaged in open
burning by burning the pile ofwaste; therefore the Village ofTilton is in violation ofthe
Environmental Protection Act, 415 ILCS
5/21 (p)(3).
~
‘1
i;~4
U
~
~
C
Frank R
Young
State’s Attorney for Vermilion County
By:
Jennifeji’~igg~)’
‘
U
Assist(~State’s Attorney
Prepared by:
Jennifer Riggs
Office ofthe State’s Attorney
7 N. Vermilion St.
Danville, IL 61832
217-554-7750