ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    May
    24,
    1979
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 78—38
    JOYCE E. FRYE
    & WATTS TRUCKING
    Respondents.
    MS JUDITH
    S. GOODIE, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON
    BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT.
    MR. MARVIN L. SCHRAGER, ATTORNEY AT LAW, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF
    THE
    RESPONDENTS.
    OPINION
    AND
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by Dr. Satchell):
    This matter comes before the Board upon a complaint filed
    by the Environmental Protection Agency
    (Agency)
    against Respond-
    ents Joyce E. Frye and Watts Trucking Service,
    Inc.,
    (Watts)
    ,
    an
    Iowa corporation registered and doing business in Illinois.
    The
    complaint charges violations
    of Section 21(b)
    of the Environmental
    Protection Act
    (Act)
    :
    “No person shall
    .
    .
    .
    cause or allow the
    open dumping of any other refuse in violation of regulations
    adopted by the Board.”
    The complaint alleges violations
    of Board
    Rules in connection with the ownership and operation of a thirty
    acre refuse disposal site on Breezy Hollow Road,
    2.5 miles north-
    west of Viola,
    in the N 1/2 of Sec.
    4,
    T.
    14 N.,
    R.
    2 W.
    4 PM,
    Mercer County, Illinois.
    The site
    is owned by Respondent Joyce
    E. Frye and operated by Watts through a wholly owned subsidiary,
    Jerry’s Disposal System,
    Inc.,
    an Illinois Corporation.
    The
    subsidiary, which holds
    an operating permit from the Agency,
    is
    not involved in this action.
    The following violations
    of the
    Act and Chapter
    7:
    Solid Waste are alleged to have occurred
    between January 14, 1976 and October 14, 1977:
    Count
    Section/Rule
    Gravamen
    I
    21(b)
    Six inches of suitable material on
    R.
    305(a)
    all exposed refuse daily.
    II
    21(b)
    Failed to deposit all refuse into
    R.
    303(a)
    toe of fill or bottom of trench.
    III
    21(h)
    Failed to rapidly spread and compact
    R.
    303(b)
    into layers not exceeding a depth of
    two feet.
    33—563

    —2—
    IV
    21(b)
    Twelve inches of suitable material
    R.
    305(b)
    on all surfaces where no additional
    refuse will be placed within sixty
    days.
    V
    21(b)
    Two feet of suitable material over
    R,
    305(c)
    entire surface not later than sixty
    days following placement of refuse in
    final
    lift.
    VI
    21(b)
    Caused or allowed development or
    R.
    314(c)
    operation of a sanitary landfill
    which does not provide fencing, gates
    or other measures to control access
    to the site.
    VII
    21(b)
    Failed to collect all litter from the
    R,
    306
    sanitary landfill site by the end of
    each working day.
    VIII
    21(b)
    Failed to provide sufficient equipment,
    R.
    304
    personnel and supervision at the site
    to ensure that operations complied with
    the permit, Act and Regulations.
    Much of 1978 was utilized in this case for discovery
    and motions for and against discovery.
    This phase terminated
    with the Board’s Order of October
    4,
    1978, which denied a motion
    to reconsider an Order compelling Respondents to answer inter—
    rogatories
    (34 PCB 441).
    Respondents have now changed attorneys
    and executed a stipulation and proposal for settlement which was
    presented at a hearing held in Rock Island on April
    17,
    1979.
    No
    objection was made to the settlement.
    The hearing was moved to
    Rock
    Island County from adjacent Mercer County by Order of
    the
    Hearing Officer pursuant to Rule 307(b).
    This was done for
    convenience of the parties who were also involved
    in
    a related
    enforcement action in Rock Island County, EPA
    v,
    Watts Trucking
    Service, Inc., PCB
    77—162.
    In the
    stipulation Respondents admit
    to violations on
    several
    instances
    as
    charged in Counts
    I, VI, VII and VIII.
    These violations are inadequate daily cover, failure to restrict
    access when supervisory
    personnel
    were absent,
    litter, and failure
    to provide sufficient
    equipment or
    personnel at the site to ensure
    compliance.
    The Board finds Respondents guilty of the violations
    charged in Counts
    I, VI, VII, and
    VIII,
    33—564

    —3—
    Respondents do not admit to the violations charged
    in Counts
    II, III and IV.
    These are failure to deposit refuse
    into the toe of the fill,
    failure to spread and compact and
    failure to apply intermediate cover in areas where no additional
    refuse will be placed within sixty days.
    The Agency “contends
    that” Respondents have committed these violations.
    The stipulation
    provides that:
    “Count V
    .
    .
    .
    final cover
    .
    .
    .
    is hereby dis-
    missed.”
    The Board has no evidence before it upon which to base a
    finding on Counts
    II,
    III,
    IV and V.
    These counts are therefore
    dismissed.
    Respondents have agreed to pay a penalty of $2000 and
    to bring the site into compliance.
    Respondents will operate in
    compliance with the Permit, Act and Rules.
    Watts will maintain
    at the site a
    pull scraper adequate for hauling cover material
    and a bulldozer with blade,
    adequate for spreading, compacting
    and pulling the scraper.
    In addition, Watts will maintain a D7
    bulldozer at its site in Andalusia, Illinois and transfer it to
    the Viola site “immediately” if a bulldozer there breaks down.
    Within four hours of breakdown Respondents will cease accepting
    refuse at Viola until the D7 or comparable equipment arrives.
    In addition, Respondents have agreed to submit to the
    Agency an application for modification of its permit which will
    include a list of equipment, hours of operation, number of
    personnel,
    job descriptions, hours and volume of refuse received
    daily.
    Respondents will also take steps to monitor and control
    formation and seepage of leachate, maintain monitoring wells and
    submit quarterly monitoring reports to the Agency.
    The Board finds the stipulation and proposal for
    settlement acceptable under Procedural Rule 331.
    The Board has
    reviewed the evidence and considered Section 33(c)
    of the Act
    and finds the $2000 penalty neceasary to aid enforcement of the
    Act.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s conclusions of
    law and findings of fact in this matter.
    ORDER
    It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:
    1.
    Respondents, Joyce E. Frye and Watts Trucking
    Service, Inc., are in violation of Section 21(b)
    of the Act and Rules
    304,
    305(a),
    306 and 314(c)
    of Chapter
    7:
    Solid Waste
    as charged in Counts
    I,
    VI, VII and VIII of the complaint.
    33—565

    —4—
    2.
    Counts
    II, III,
    IV and V of the complaint are
    dismissed.
    3.
    Respondents are ordered to comply with the terms
    of settlement, which are incorporated herein by
    reference.
    4.
    Respondents
    shall operate the site according to
    all terms and conditions of the operating permit,
    Act and Solid Waste Rules.
    5.
    Within thirty days of the entry of this Order,
    Respondents
    shall pay a penalty of $2000 by certified
    check or money order, payable to:
    State of Illinois
    Fiscal Services Division
    Environmental Protection Agency
    2200 Churchill Road
    Springfield
    Illinois 62706
    I, Christan L.
    Noffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board,
    hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were
    adopted on the
    ~iJ1L
    day of
    f~c~
    ,
    1979 by a vote of
    ~-Q
    Christan L.
    Moffett, $Z~é)~k
    Illinois Pollution Cth’I’trol Board
    33—566

    Back to top