ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September
6,
1973
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB 72—501
VILLAGE OF IPAVA,
Respondent.
Larry E.
Eaton, Assistant Attorney General,
on behalf of
Complainant;
George P. Proctor, on behalf of Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Seaman):
On February 22, 1973,
the Agency filed its amended complaint
against Respondent, Village of Ipava,
the operator of
a landfill
facility in Fulton County,
Illinois.
In its amended complaint,
the agency alleges the following violations:
1.
Violation of Section 21
(e)
of the Environmental
Protection Act in that Respondent allegedly operated its afore-
said facility without a permit issued by the Agency.
2.
Violation of Section 21
(a)
of the Act in that Respondent
allegedly caused or allowed open dumping of garbage at said
facility.
3.
Violation of Section 21
(b)
of the Act in that Respondent
allegedly caused or allowed open dumping of refuse at said
facility.
4.
Violation of Section
9
(c)
of the Act in that Respondent
allegedly caused or allowed the open burning of refuse at said
facility.
5.
Violation of Rule
3.04 of Rules for Refuse
Disposal
Sites and Facilities in that Respondent allegedly caused or allowed
open dumping of refuse at said facility.
6.
Violation of Rule 3.05 of the Rules in that Respondent
allegedly caused or allowed open burning at said facility.
7.
Violation of Rule 5.06 of the Rules in that Respondent
allegedly failed to properly spread and compact refuse admitted
to said facility.
9—
193
—2—
8.
Violation of Rule 5.07
(a)
of the Rules in that
Respondent allegedly failed to provide proper daily cover at
said facility.
9.
Violation of Rule 5.03 of the Rules in that Respondent
allegedly failed to confine its refuse disposal operations
to
the smallest practicable area.
10.
Violation of Rule
5.12
(b)
of the Rules in that
Respondent caused or allowed or failed to prohibit feeding or
grazing of cattle, farm or domestic animals at said facility.
On July 23,
1973,
a hearing was held on the cause.
At
that hearing,
Mr. David Toberman, an Agency technician, testified
that he inspected Respondent~sfacility on twelve separate
occasions between October
27,
1971 and July 9,
1973
(R.lO).
Mr. Toberman stated that on numerous occasions
(R,l2,20,22,29)
he observed the failure of Respondent
to spread, compact and
cover the refuse and garbage at its facility. Mr. Toberman
further testified that on several occasions he observed open
burning of refuse and garbage
(R.l2,2l,32,39),
Mr. Toberman
stated that he observed many of the same items exposed as he
inspected from time to time
(R.2l,29,30)
and that on at least
two visits he observed cattle feeding or grazing in the garbage
area
(R.39,47)
Respondent has never applied for a permit from the Agency
to operate its facility
(R,l0)
.
As of May 22,
1973, Respondent~s
site had been properly spread and compacted and final cover had
been applied over the entire facility
(R,5l).
The facility
has been closed and planted and vegetation has appeared thereon
(R.53)
Mr. Dave
L. Beck,
an Agency sanitary inspector visited
RespondentTs facility on March 24,
1972,
and testified that he
observed many of the same violations
as did Mr. Toberman
—
failure
to spread, compact and cover, smoldering garbage, presence of
cattle.
Mr.
Raymond
T,
Engel, President of the Village of
Ipava
for the past fifteen years, testified on behalf of Respondent.
Mr. Engel stated that the facility was located on land leased
from
one Clio Branson and that the site ceased operation on
November 1,
1972
(R..6,7),
Mr. Engel testified that the testimony
of the Agency witnesses regarding their observation of violations
was substantially true
(R.94,94),
9
—
194
—3—
Mr. Engel stated that Respondent made
a standard practice
of open burning its garbage and refuse “because we didn’t have
enough landfill site to actually cover everything.
Any by
burning the waste, cardboards and papers,
it didn’t take as
much to cover,’
(R.82).
Finally, Mr. Engel estimated that daily
cover was applied only half the time
(R.89).
This Board is satisfied,
from the above, that Complainant
has proven the allegations
of. its complaint.
The Agency’s
investigations were numerous and thorough and Respondent has,
in effect, admitted to most of the violations alleged.
Although
the Board has sympathy for the plight of Respondent,
a small
village with limited resources,
we cannot allow continuous
violations of the sort detailed herein to go unchecked,
and a
penalty will,
therefore,
be assessed.
Respondent’s
lease on the property in question has expired
and Respondent has, hopefully,
solved its problem by hauling
its garbage and refuse to the county landfill in nearby Cuba,
Illinois.
This opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the Board.
IT IS THE OFDER of the Pollution Control Board that
Respondent shall:
1.
Cease and desist from the violations found in this
opinion.
2.
Receive a permit from the Agency prior to resuming
operation of the instant facility or operating a new disposal
facility.
3.
Within
35 days from the date of this
Order pay to the
State of Illinois the sum of
$100.00.
Penalty payment by
certified check or money order payable
to the State of Illinois
shall be made to:
Fiscal Services Division, Illinois Environ-
mental Protection Agency,
2200 Churchill Road,
Springfield,
Illinois
62706.
Mr. Odell abstains.
I, Christan L. Moffett,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, certify that the above Opinion and Order was adopted by
the Board on the
~
day of~S~
,
1973, by
a vote
of
3
to
~
.
0
—
195
I’