ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

January 6, 1972

CITY OF ROCKFORD

)

71—311

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Mr. A. Curtis Washburn for City of Rockford

Mr. Alvin Liebling, Assistant Attorney General for Environmental

Opinion of the Board (by Mr. Currie):        

Protection Agency

Rockford has virtually run out of landfill space for its

continuing flow of refuse. Its present fill operation has

resulted in two mounds known as Mt. Trashmore #1 and Mt.

Trashmore #2, both of which started as pit operations but which

have grown to about 40 and 15 feet above ground level,

respectively. The sites were admittedly ill—chosen to begin

with, many years ago, in that the underlying strata are pervious

sand and gravel. Contaminated matter from refuse decomposition

has been found in nearby wells. In recent months the lack of

space has become acute. As refuse is piled higher above ground

level, compacting and covering it becomes progressively more

difficult, so that problems of rodent attraction of blowing

litter, and of gas dispersion are increased. Mt. Trashmore

#1 has reached such a height that its other dimensions are too

small to permit further operations, and its use has been dis-

continued. It is anticipated that the second mound will reach

a similar stage within a matter of weeks.

For some time the City has been seeking a solution to this

serious pollution problem, in terms of a new landfill site or a

contract for rail haul to a site more remote. One promising site

was dropped by the City Council because of local citizen opposition.

Another was selected, only to have the legality of the City’s

zoning outside its borders attacked in the courts. While a

decision by the Appellate Court in review of the trial court’s

order upholding the City is expected at any. time, a further appeal

is entirely possible, and months or more could intervene before

that site might be available. Initial rail—haul bids were

rejected as inadequate or inflated, and no further bids have

been requested. The City’s present intention is to seek approval

of still anOther site, for which it was preparing permit

applications at the time of the hearing (November 19). It is

unable to say when approval (including rezoning by the County,

which is said to be favorable to the project) is likely to be

obtained.

3

~—

367

In the meantime the City has filed a variance petition

seeking permission to deposit refuse in a pit adjacent to its

present operations until it settles the long—term landfill

question. It estimates that the pit has capacity for about

120 days’ refuse. The Agency denied a permit for this pit

because it, like the present site, is situated on pervious

strata that will permit the leaching of contaminated material.

But the Agency recommends that the variance be granted, since

something must be done with the refuse and since the pollution

would be just as great if the refuse continued to be dumped on

top of the present piles. We agree and therefore grant the variance

on conditions recommended by the Agency.

Refuse is going to continue being generated in P.ockford

whether or not a proper disposal site is available. It is

clearly preferable that it be deposited below ground in the

new pit than on top of the existing mounds, where it cannot even

be properly covered or compacted. There is no indication in

the record that the City has any short-term alternative to

these two courses. We approve the lesser of two evils.

The City agrees to the Agency’s conditions regarding

covering the bottom of’the pit to keep refuse from being dumped

into standing water, where its potential for pollution is at

its greatest, and for prior Agency approval of the nature of

the cover to be used (there having been doubts as to the adequacy

of cover material in the past) and of the final proposed contours

of the operation. The most critical condition suggested, however,

is that requiring the City to make its decision on a permanent

solution within 30 days and to institute that solution--whether

by rail haul or by use of an alternative site of its own--within

100 days after our order. The City says that it cannot guarantee

when it will complete its arrangements because of legal and other

uncertainties. Of course it cannot. But we think it imperative

to set a date beyond which the City will be subject to enforce-

ment proceedings if it does not reach a solution to the present

intolerable situation. If the City can show it has done all it

can, it may be entitled to additional relief at a later date.

Today, however, we shall limit the variance to 120 days. The

situation must be allowed to continue.

One additional condition is imperative. It is admitted that

there is now and will continue to be water pollution from leaching at

the landfill site, which must not be permitted to go on. We shall re-

quire the City to submit within 60 days a report as to methods of

preventing leaching to the waters after dumping at the site is completed.

It is unfortunate that the City allowed matters to come

to the present pass without finding on appropriate solution.

As this case shows, it can take a long time to arrange for a

landfill, and perhaps the City should have started its search

sooner. We are tempted to hold that no city that acts with

proper foresight runs out of landfill space, since the time when

a new site will be needed can be rather accurately predicted.

But the Agency has not asked that we impose penolties as a

—

368

condition of the present variance, and we do not do so, since

the City has not had an opportunity to show any justification

it may have for the delay. We stress that the City must do

everything it can to solve its problem as quickly as it can

and that we expect that in the future cities will not allow

themselves to run out of landfill space.

ORDER

The City of Rockford is hereby granted a variance for

120 days after receipt of this order from those portions of

the Rules and Regulations for Refuse Disposal Sites and

Facilities that would prevent issuance of a permit to deposit

refuse in the Sahlstrom pit, as described in the record, on

the following conditions.

1. Before refuse is deposited, the bottom of the pit shall

be graded, and fill material acceptable to the Agency

shall be placed in order to preclude the dumping of

solid waste into water; and

2. The cover material for this operation shall be approved

by the Agency before refuse is deposited; and

3. Final contours and elevations shall be submitted to the

Agency for approval before refuse is deposited; and

4. In all respects except as noted in this order, the City

shall conform to the Rules and Regulations in the

operation of the landfill; and

5. The City shall diligently seek an acceptable long-

term solution to its solid-waste problem and shall

file monthly progress reports with respect to 

its

efforts

to achieve such a solution; and

6. The City shall within 60 days after receipt of this 

order

submit to the Agency and to the Board a report regarding

methods of preventing leaching to the waters after dumping

is terminated, at which time the Board will take such further

action as may be appropriate.

I, Christan Moffett, Clerk of the Pollution Control Board, certify

that the Board adopted the pbove Opinion this ~ 

“

day of

January, 1972 by vote of 

~/-

—

369