ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
May 23,
1991
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
)
Complainant,
)
AC 90-81 (Docket A
&
B)
)
(IEPA Docket No.
368-90—AC)
v.
)
(Administrative Citation)
GEORGE RIBBLE,
)
)
Respondent.
MR.
WILLIAM
SELTZER
APPEARED
ON
BEHALF
OF
THE
COMPLAINANT.
MR.
GEORGE
RIBBLE,
RESPONDENT,
APPEARED
PRO
SE.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by J.
C. Marlin):
This
matter
is
before
the
Board
upon
a
two-count
administrative
citation
filed
by
the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency (“Agency”) against George Ribble on September 6,
1990.
The citation alleges that Ribble violated provisions of the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Act
(“Act”)
concerning
open
dumping resulting in both litter and the proliferation of disease
vectors.
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1989,
ch.
111
1/2,
par.
1021(q) (1)
and
(q)(5).
The Respondent is subject to a civil penalty of $500.00
for each violation of each provision pursuant to Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1989,
ch.
111 1/2, par.
1042(b)
Hearing was held
in this matter on December
6,
1990 at the
Macoupin
County
Courthouse,
Carlinville,
Illinois.
Mr.
Dale
Elenberger,
Mr.
Clifford
Wheeler,
and
Mr.
James
W.
Pitchford
testified on behalf of the Agency.
Mr. Ribble testified on his own
behalf.
One member of the public, Mr. Craig Bussman, also offered
testimony.
Closing arguments were waived in favor of post—hearing
briefs.
The Agency
filed
its brief on February 13,
1991.
Mr.
Ribble did not file a brief.
BACKGROUND
Mr. George Ribble is the owner of a site located in Macoupin
County,
Illinois
designated
by
the
Agency
as
No.
117000002,
commonly known as “Hettick/Ribble No. 2.”
The site, of undescribed
size, contains a pond at its western edge flanked by an access road
and
trailers
on
its
northern
and
southern
perimeter
and
is
designated “Area
1” by the Agency.
Another portion of the
site
contains woods and a field and is located to the north of Area
1.
It
is called “Area 2” by the Agency.
122—2 87
2
On July 28,
1990 and July
30,
1990,
Dale Elenberger,
Agency
field
inspector,
inspected the site.
A
copy of his inspection
report was filed with the citation.
On the basis of his direct
observation the Agency determined that Ribble has caused or allowed
open dumping at the site in a manner which resulted in litter and
the proliferation of disease vectors.
The administrative citation
requested the Board to impose a penalty of $1,000 plus any hearing
costs incurred by the Board and the Agency.
The Respondent filed
a timely Petition for Review.
APPLICABLE
LAW
Section 21(q)
of the Act states:
No person
shall
in violation of subdivision
(a)
of Section
21,
cause
or allow
the open
dumping of any waste in a manner which results
in any of the following occurrences at a dump
site:
1.
litter;
5.
proliferation of disease vectors;
Penalties in actions of this type are $500 for each provision,
plus any hearing costs incurred by the Board and the Agency.
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1989,
ch.
111 1/2,
par.
1042(b) (4).
DISCUSSION
Mr. Elenberger testified that the Respondent’s site first came
to the Agency’s attention in November of 1980 when James Pitchford,
Coordinator
for Macoupin County Emergency Services and Disaster
Agency contacted the Agency
(R. 8
,
86).
The concern expressed by Mr.
Pitchford
was
a
large
quantity
of
used tires
on
Respondent’s
property being near a waterway leading to the lake which served as
the City of Hettick’s main supply of water
(R.45,70).
The Agency first inspected this site on November 7,
1989 and
later,
on November
20,
conducted
a
“fly—over”
of the property.
Elenberger took several photographs of the property which were then
introduced as a group exhibit
(R.14; IEPA Gr. Exh.
2).
As a result of the fly over,
the Agency contacted Mr. Ribble
through a compliance
inquiry
letter
(R.20).
Glen Savage of the
Agency
also
met
personally
with
the
Respondent.
Mr.
Ribble
122—288
3
allegedly agreed to obtain a shredder to shred the tires
(R.2l).
On April
26,
1990 the Agency received a complaint from a citizen
concerning
the
property.
Elenberger
followed
it
up
by re-
inspecting the property on July 28,
1990
(R.
23).
An additional
inspection
took
place
on
July
30
of
that
year.
The
alleged
violations
noted
on
those
two
days
gave
rise
to
the
instant
citation.
The Agency has alleged that Mr. Ribble caused or allowed open
dumping on his property which resulted in litter.
During his site
inspection of July
28,
1990 Elenberger testified that he
found
barrels and waste open-dumped in weeds
on Respondent’s property.
The waste
included pieces of
insulation, paper,
cans,
a stroller
and other miscellaneous waste
(R.
27).
In Area No.
1 lay a pile
of tires 150 feet long by 30 feet wide by 20—25 feet high (R.31).
In Area 2 a smaller tire pile existed (R.29).
The tires were whole
and uncovered.
An additional stack of tires was found in a grain bin at the
site
(R.37).
These had good tread on them and were for resale,
according to Mr.
Ribble, the inspector testified.
The inspector
testified that Mr. Ribble told him the tires on the property were
temporarily stored there
(R.38).
Mr. Elenberger testified that he
took samples of mosquito larvae from the tires in Area No.
2.
The
analysis showed the presence of mosquitos
(R.29—30,38).
When he
inspected these tires, mosquitoes also bit him (R.34).
The inspector testified Ribble also told him the tires were
treated by spraying them with insecticide spray on the top of the
pile
and
allowing
it
to
run
down
inside
the
pile
(R.39).
Elenberger told Ribble that the tires needed to be treated with an
approved pesticide or have holes drilled in so water would drain
out,
or
be
covered
or
inside
a
building
to
keep
water
from
accumulating (R.39).
Mr. Ellenberger also stated that he advised
Ribble that storage of the tires means having
a systematic process
of reuse, reprocessing or converting the tires in a regular course
of business (R.4l).
Mr. Elenberger testified that Ribble responded
he was going to sell the tires to Archer-Daniels—Midland to use in
their power station (R.41).
Elenberger also testified concerning several barrels on the
property.
Mr.
Ribble
refused the Agency
full
access to
these
barrels and did not let the Agency mark them or to photograph all
of them (R.25—26,42—48).
Finally, Elenberger testified that the Agency held a September
13,
1990
pre—enforcement
conference
in
hopes
of
resolving
the
situation
(R.54).
A letter dated September 21,
1990 was sent by
Paul Purseglove to Mr. Ribble to memorialize the results of that
conference.
The letter stated that Mr. Ribble should immediately
relocate the waste tires on the property away from the drainage
way to the nearby lake and store them in such a way to facilitate
122—289
4
extinguishing any fire that may occur.
Mr. Ribble was to treat the
tires with an approved pesticide and stack the tires.
Within 90
days Mr.
Ribb.le was to have a machine on site capable of altering
the tires so that they could no longer accumulate water.
All of
the tires were to be altered by April
1,
1991.
Tires newly brought
to the site ~st
be altered within 14 days.
The Respondent was to
agr~eeto these terms,
and others, within 15 days
(R.54—56).
The Respondent mailed his response to Mr.
Glenn Savage dated
October
6,
1990 the inspector testified.
The letter stated that
Mr.
Ribble was
“in the process of building a chopper which looks
like it will work.”
The letter also stated that Ribble had stopped
receiving tires and was moving tires but needed extra time (R.59).
Mr. Clifford Wheeler also testified on behalf of the Agency.
His testimony was mainly repetitive of Mr. Elenberger’s regarding
Ribble’s refusal to allow the Agency access to barrels at the site
(R.~61—64).
Mr. James W.
Pitchford,
the Macoupin County Coordinator for
Emergency Services,
also testified.
He participated in the fly
over and the July 28,
1990 inspection.
He testified that he also
saw tires, vehicles and garbage on the west side of the property
near the
Boy
Scout
Camp
(R.68-69).
He
testified that he was
concerned about possible contamination to Hettick’s water supply
(R. 70).
Mr. Ribb’le testified on his own behalf.
He stated that some
of ~thetires on his property were going to be used to construct a
drain tile (R73).
Others he was accumulating at a fee for future
saLe (R.74).
He testified that he “had a processing plant bought
fro~inPittsburgh, Kansas” which was apparently to slit or shred the
tirees.
He also stated he had
a
“permit” from EPA to stockpile
tires until he shreds them
(R.74).
The barrels on his property,
he explained,
are for use in his business at a future date (R.75).
On re—examination by the Agency, the Respondent identified a
Used and/or Waste Tire Activity Notification form as the “permit”
he was talking about (R.79-80).
He also testified that he has been
collecting tires
since
early
1989
(R.82).
He believes he has
fifteen thousand tires on site.
(Id.)
He testified that he planned
to ~~hipthe tires for sale although he has not sold any tires, he
admitted (R.83).
He also admitted that he cancelled his order for
a shredder (R~84).
Further, although he stated he had plans
to
hire
people
to
run
the
operation,
he
has
not
hired
anyone
(R.~83,86)
Mr.
Eleriberger
testified
on
re-direct
that
Mr.
Ribble’s
“permit” from the Agency is a form used to notify the Agency of the
type of activity being conducted.
It is not a permit
(R.88).
122—290
5
Finally,
Mr.
Craig
Bussman,
of the Macoupin
County Health
Department made a statement.
He testified that Macoupin County has
a severe tire problem and
is concerned about the threat of tire
fires
(R.90—9l).
ANALYSIS
The
evidence
in the record
is
largely unrebutted that
Mr.
Ribble’s property contains trash, vehicles and other debris which
has
been
openly
dumped
on
his
property.
Moreover,
the
site
contains approximately fifteen thousand tires.
While Mr. Ribble
may have planned to use the tires to conduct a shredding operation
for resale as fuel, he has not.
Nor does his method of storage and
treatment of these tires rise much beyond •an unmanaged site.
The
tires
are not altered
or recycled,
stacked or property treated.
The
Board,
therefore,
concludes
that
these
tires
have
been
improperly dumped.
The Agency has thereby proven a violation of
Section 21(q)(l)
of the Act.
The Agency has also charged Mr. Ribble with open dumping which
has resulted in the proliferation of disease vectors.
The tires
present have been tested and shown
to be
a breeding ground
for
several types of mosquitoes.
Therefore the Agency has also proven
a violation of Section 21(q) (5)
of the Act.
ORDER
1.
Respondent is hereby found to have been in violation on
July 28 and
30,
1990 of Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1989,
ch.
111 1/2,
pars.
102l(q)(l)
and
(q)(5).
2.
Within
45
days
of
this
Order
Respondent
shall,
by
certified check or money order, pay a civil penalty in the amount
of $1,000 payable to the Illinois Environmental Protection Trust
Fund.
Such payment shall be sent to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Service Division
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois 62706
Respondent
shall
also place his Federal
Employee Identification
Number or Social Security Number upon the certified check or money
order.
Any such penalty not paid within the time prescribed
shall
incur interest at the rate set forth in subsection
(a)
of Section
1003
of the Illinois Income Tax Act,
(Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1989,
ch.
120,
par. 10-1003),
from the date payment is due until
the date
payment is received.
Interest shall not accrue during the pendency
of an appeal, during which payment of the penalty is stayed.
122—29 1
6
3.
Docket A in this matter is hereby closed.
4.
Within
30 days of this
Order,
the Agency shall
file
a
statement of its hearing costs, supported by an affidavit, with the
Board and with service upon Respondent.
Within the same 30 days,
the Clerk of the Pollution Control. Board shall file a statement of
the Board’s costs,
supported by affidavit and with service upon
Respondent.
Such filings shall
be entered
in Docket
B in this
matter.
5.
Respondent
is
hereby
given
leave
to
file
a
reply/objection to the filings as ordered in paragraph
4 of this
Order within 45 days of this Order.
Section
41
of the Environmental Protection Act,
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1989,
ch.
111 1/2,
par.
1041,
provides for appeal of final
Orders of the Board within 35 days.
The Rules of the Supreme Court
of Illinois establish filing requirements.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
3.
Theodore Meyer and M. Nardulli concurred.
I, Dorothy M.
Gunn,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby cert~fythat the above Opinion and Order was adopted
on the
~
day of
~7)
~
,
1991 by
avoteof
_____________.
67~L~4
/7~. /j~*J
Dorothy M. G~n, Clerk
Illinois Po1~utionControl Board
122— 29 2