ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September
22,
1988
IN THE MATTER OF:
MANAGING SCRAP TIRE ACCUMULATIONS
FOR THE CONTROL OF MOSQUITOES
)
R88-24
PART 849
PROPOSED RULE.
FIRST NOTICE.
PROPOSED OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(By J. Marlin):
On April
21,
1988
the Board adopted an emergency
rule
in
Docket R88—12, Managing Tire Accumulations to Limit
the Spread of
the Asian Tiger Mosquito.
In the Opinion
in that matter
(hereinafter
referred
to as The Opinion or
NO”.)
the Board
suggested
that
a permanent rulemaking
be initiated
by some person
no later than November
1,
1988.
The Board
is opening
this docket
to expedite
that process.
By today’s Order,
the Board
is
proposing
a
rule
for First Notice.
Public Hearings will
be held
on this proposal and the public may file written comments within
45 days after
it
is published
in
the Illinois Register.
This proposal,
if adopted, will provide permanent
regulations on scrap tire accumulations for controlling
the Asian
Tiger Mosquito (Tiger Mosquito)
and other mosquito species
in
Illinois.
The proposed permanent
rule
is subject to change based
on
First Notice written comments and information
received at
hearing.
Given
this fact the public
is encouraged
to advise
the
Board on the proposal’s workability and potential
effectiveness.
The reasons
for the substantial
changes from the
emergency
rule are presented
below.
The 31 Exhibits admitted
in R88—l2 are incorporated
into
this record and will keep their original exhibit numbers.
The
transcript of
the Special Board Meeting
(Meeting)
of April
15,
1988
is exhibit
32..
For purposes
of this Opinion,
references
to
exhibit
32 will be
in the form of
RI
.
The Board
admits,
as
Exhibit 33,
a document entitled ~Mosquito
Species Known
to
Inhabit Tires
and Other Artificial
containers
in Illinois”.
This
document was provided by Dr. Robert Novak of the Illinois Natural
History Survey,
(INHS)
a division of DENR.
This Opinion
is largely drawn
from the Opinion
in R88—l2.
The information
included
recaps the testimony received at the
meeting on
the emergency
rule
and provides
the basis of
this
First Notice.
92—627
The emergency
rule was specifically promulgated
to
limit
the
spread of
the Asian Tiger Mosquito
(Tiger Mosquito) which
is new
to Illinois.
The record
in that proceeding identified scrap
tires
as
a prime breeding habitat
for
this mosquito.
The
movement
of scrap tires
about the country was found to be the
primary means
by which
this mosquito spreads
to new localities.
The Board
also found
that at least
two other mosquitoes known to
spread disease in Illinois breed
in scrap tires.
Exhibit 33
lists 13 mosquitoes which breed
in scrap tires
in Illinois.
Nine
of these are known
to carry diseases that
infect humans.
Some
of
these species were originally brought
into
the State
in tires,
as
was the Tiger Mosquito.
Given
this situation,
the permanent rule
will address
the control
in scrap tires
of mosquitoes,
in
general,
rather than just the Tiger Mosquito.
The emergency
rule was
in force during
the 1988 mosquito
breeding season.
The impact of
the rule and 1988 drought on the
Tiger Mosquito has not yet been
reported.
However,
it appears
that the infestation
in Chicago
survived
the winter but
is
generally limited
to
the same neighborhoods as
in 1987.
The St.
Clair county infestation appears
to have spread to Madison
County.
The Board
is unaware
of the status
of the Jefferson
County infestation.
Through Section
27 and
22 of
the Act,
the Board may adopt
substantive regulations
to. promote the purposes
of Title V of
the
Act which
is entitled
“Land Pollution and Refuse Disposal.”
Section
20(b)
of the Act which
sets forth
the purposes
of Title V
states:
It
is
the
purpose
of
this
Title
to
prevent
pollution
or
misuse
of
land,
to promote
the
conservation
of
natural
resources
and
minimize environmental damage by reducing the
difficulty
of
disposal
of
wastes
and
encouraging
and effecting
the re—cycling
and
re—use
of
waste
materials,
and
upgrading
waste
collection,
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal practices....
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1985,
ch.
111 1/2,
par.
1020(b).
Further,
Section
2 of the Act states:
(a)
The General Assembly finds
(1)
that environmental damage seriously
endangers
the
public
health
and
welfare.
92—628
3
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1985,
ch.
111
1/2 ~
par.
1002(a)(l)
Reflecting
this
legislative finding,
the Supreme Court
has
held that
impairing
the Board’s ability
to “protect health,
welfare, property,
arid the quality of
life”
is inconsistent with
the objectives of the Act because of “the Act’s emphasis on
public health.”
Monsanto Company
v.
Pollution Control Board, 67
Ill.
2d
276,
367 N.E.2d
684,
10
Ill.
Dec.
231,
235
(1977).
Similarly,
courts have held that actions
of
the Board may
be
classified
as
an exercise of the State’s police power which can
require
individuals
to expend funds
in “the
interests of public
health and welfare.”
A.E. Staley Manufacturing Company
V.
Environmental Protection Agency,
8
Ill.
App.3d.
1018,
290 N.E.2d
892 (1972);
Cobin
v.
Pollution Control Board,
16
Ill. App.
3d.
958,
307 N.E.2d 191,
199
(1974).
In the instant situation,
the Board has proposed rules
that
regulate scrap tires
for
the benefit of public health.
It
is
the
Board’s position that
the promulgation
of these
rules
is well
within the authority granted
to the Board under
the Act.
The storage, transport
and disposal
of scrap
tires
is
a
solid waste management problem.
Such matters are commonly dealt
with by the Board.
Th~Board has traditionally promulgated rules
to control pests and vectors associated with solid waste.
The
best example
is regulatio~s to control rodents
and birds
associated with landfills.
The Board also regulates hospital
wastes and the bacterial levels
of raw and finished water.
Other
Board regulations concern
the safe transportation and storage of
a variety
of materials.
The adoption of
regulations
to control
mosquitoes
in
scrap tires
is consistent with the Board’s other
regulatory
functions.
MEETING PARTICIPANTS
At the Meeting held on April
15,
1988,
four research
scientists specializing
in entomology testified on
the Tiger
Mosquito problem.
This group
is collectively referred to as the
Scientific Panel.
Dr. George Craig, Jr.
is
an entomologist
and Director of
the
Vector Biology Laboratory at the University of Notre Dame,
and
a
Fellow of the National Academy of Sciences.
He has served on
expert committees
for numerous entities including the World
Health Organization and Pan American Health Organization and has
authored over 400 scientific papers on Aedes mosquitoes.
Dr. Robert Metcalf
is
a Professor Emeritus at
the University
of Illinois and Principal Scientist of the Illinois Natural
History Survey
(INHS).
He
is
a member of the National Academy
of
92—629
4
Sciences, has served on the Expert
Committee on Insecticides of
the World Health Organization; Pesticide Science Advisory Panel
of U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency;
and a variety of
committees
of
the National Academy including
that on Urban Pest
Management.
He
is the author of more
than
400 scholarly
publications.
Dr. Robert Novak,
is currently with the INHS
and Macon
Mosquito Abatement District.
Previous appointments were with the
University
of Puerto Rico;
and the Centers
for Disease Control
in
San Juan and Atlanta.
His career has been focused on mosquito
research including identification, ecology, behavior and
control.
He has been
the
lead person
for the INHS on the Tiger
Mosquito since
its discovery
in Illinois last year.
Dr. Chester
D.
Moore
is
a research entomologist at
the
Arbovirus Ecology Branch,
Division of Vector—Borne Viral
Diseases, Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers
for Disease
Control
(CDC),
Fort Collins, CO.
He was an army entomologist
at
the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research and served with the
CDC
in Puerto Rico.
He has authored over
30 scientific papers
and
is an
advisor
to many organizations including the World
Health Organization.
The statement
of Bernard 3.
Turnock, M.D.,
M.P.H.,
Director
of the Illinois Department
of Public Health
(IDPH) was given by
Dr. Linn Haramis,
a medical entomologist and program manager
of
the Arbovirus Surveillance Program.
He has managed
a Mosquito
Abatement District and authored seven publications.
Other witnesses
included:
Dr.
Lorin
I. Nevling, Chief of
the I.N.H.S.,
of the Illinois
Department
of Energy and Natural Resources
(DENR);
Dr. Daniel
D.
Brown, Director
of the Macon Mosquito
Abatement District on behalf of the North Central Region of the
American Mosquito Control Association;
Leslie Nickels, Program Director, Environmental and
Occupational Health, City of Chicago Department of Health
(CDH);
Mosi Kitwana, Deputy Commissioner, Department
of Streets
and
Sanitation
(COSS),
City of Chicago;
Philip
3.
Mole,
P.E.
representing Sun Eco Systems;
Jay Lauterback, President,
Illinois State Tire Dealers and
Retreaders Association;
Ronald Lakin, Vice—President,
Lakin General
Corp.;
92—630
5
Phillip Van Ness,
Attorney,
Enforcement Programs;
Harry
Chappel,
Manager, Compliance Monitoring;
and Glenn Savage,
Manager,
Field Operations represented
the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency (Agency), Division of Land Pollution Control.
In addition, written comments or exhibits were received from
the Illinois Department of Agriculture
(IDA),
Department of
Energy and Natural Resources
(DENR), Office of Solid Waste
and
Renewable Resources (OSWRR),
the National Group of Companies,
Triple/S Dynamics, the Illinois Farm Bureau,
Dr.
Bettiria Francis
and the DesPlaines Valley Mosquito Abatement District.
THE
INFESTATION PROBLEM
The bulk of this section of
the Opinion was contained
in the
Opinion of April
7,
1988.
The Scientific
Panel agreed
that the
information
in
that document was scientifically accurate.
(RI.
21,
27 and 51).
The record developed
at the meeting clearly
indicated that dengue
fever
is not likely to be
transmitted in
Illinois.
Scientists
and public health officials
are
particularly concerned that
the Tiger Mosquito may prove capable
of transmitting La Crosse Encephalitis
in Illinois.
There was
also some question as
to whether
St.
Louis
Encephalitis will
actually be transmitted by this insect.
Early in
1986,
the Tiger Mosquito was discovered in Harris
County, Texas and quickly spread to other Texas counties and
to
Louisiana.
The Centers
for Disease Control
(CDC), Division of
Vector—Borne Viral Diseases,
after investigating the infestation
made the following observations:
The
CDC
views
the
introduction
of
Ae.
albopictus
as
a
potentially
serious
public
health
problem,
both
for
the
United
States
and for other countries
in the hemisphereL we
are devoting
a major portion
of our
time and
effort
to the matter.
*
*
*
We
are
strongly encouraging
state
and
local
agencies
that
find
this species within
their
jurisdictions
to
initiate
control
measures
against
it.
Eggs
and
larvae
mosquito
young
which
live
in
water
seem
to
move
from
one
area
to
another
in
shipments
of
used
tire
casings
for
the
retreading
and
recycling
industry.
Thus,
a
major
component
in
confining
infestations
involves
the
cooperation,
and
possible
regulation,
of
these
businesses.
It
is
a
large
business,
92—631
6
and
tires
are
routinely
shipped
over
long
distances.
Tire
retreaders
and
recyclers
need
to
be
made
aware
of
the
seriousness
of
the
problem
and
ensure
that
they
are
not
helping
to spread the mosquito.
(Exh.
1.)
The Tiger Mosquito
is of Asian origin.
It
is known to
transmit dog heartworm
(Exh.
1)
and a number
of human viral
diseases
including dengue.
Under laboratory conditions,
it has
been infected with other viral diseases
including St. Louis
encephalitis
(SLE)
and La Crosse encephalitis
(LAC),
both
of
which occur
in Illinois.
These viruses
can be transmitted from
a
female to her
eggs.
SLE
is normally transmitted by Culex pipiens
(Northern House Mosquito)
and LAC by Aedes triseriatus
(Tree Hole
Mosquito).
Both of these species occur throughout Illinois.
At
this point
in time the transmission of LAC and SLE
to humans by
the Tiger Mosquito have not been documented.
(Exh.
3).
Dengue
is
a serious viral disease
in humans which
is
clinically similar to measles.
Dengue has been occasionally
bought into the United States by persons returning from the
Carribean.
IDPH records show that only one Illinois resident has
had a confirmed
case
of dengue during the past three years,
and
that only 61 have had clinical
and epidemiological histories
compatible
with
dengue
(O.at
8).
According
to
CDC,
transmission
of
the
virus
occurred
in
the
U.S.
in
1986.
Transmission
in
1986
was
of
particular
concern
for
two
reasons.
First,
indigenous
transmission
occurred
in
Texas
for
the
second
time
in
6
years——the
last
previous
transmission
prior
to
1980
had
occurred
in
1945(s).
Second,
confirmed
dengue
cases
were
reported
in
areas
where
Ae.
aegyptL
~and
.Ae.
albopictus,
two
efficient
vectors
of
dengue,
occur.
The
recent
introduction
of
Ae.
albopictus
into
the
United
States
is
of
special
concern
because
this
species
is
an
exceptionally
efficient
host
for
dengue
viruses
and
is
capable
of
transmitting
both
horizontally
(human
to
human)
and
vertically
(from
infected
female
to
her
offspring)
(3,4).
Moreover,
Ae.
albopictus
has
become
established
in
northern
as
well
as
southern
states
(5).
The
presence
of
this
species
increases
the
potential
for
more
widely
distributed
secondary
transmission
and
for
the
maintenance
of
dengue
viruses
in
the
United
States.
CDC
is
currently
collaborating
with
state
health
departments
92—632
7
to
improve
surveillance
for
both
the
introduction
of
dengue
virus
and
for
the
presence
of the mosquito vectors.
(Exh.
10).
SLE
is
a viral disease which causes inflamation
of the
human
central
nervous
system.
Disease
symptoms
appear
in
infected
persons
of
all
ages,
but
are
most
severe
in
the
elderly.
Symptoms include head.~che, fever, stiff
neck,
drowsiness,
lethargy,
nausea
and
vomiting,
mental
confusion,
and
sometimes
seizures
and
death.
Mortality
rates
range
as
high
as
30
percent
of
diagnosed
cases.
During
a
1975
epidemic
in
Ohio,
29
of
416
infected
people
died.
The
average
age
of
those
who
died
was
70
years.
(Exh.
7).
SLE
is
well
established
in
Illinois.
LAC
has
similar
symptoms
to
SLE.
Children
are
most
at
risk
of
contracting
this
disease.
The
mean
age
of
618
infected
persons
in Ohio between
1963
and 1985 was slightly
less than nine
years.
Five of the cases were fatal.
(Exh.
7).
LAC
is well
established
in
Illinois.
In
1987,
CDC
said
the
following
regarding
the
potential
relationship
between
LAC
and
the Tiger Mosquito:
La
Crosse
encephalitis
is
the
second
most
common form of mosquito—borne encephalitis
in
the U.S.
La Crosse
(LAC) virus,
a member
of
the
California
serogroup
of
viruses,
is
distributed
throughout
the
eastern
U.S.
and
is especially common
in hardwood forest areas
of
the
upper
Mississippi
and
Ohio
River
valleys.
It
is
transmitted
primarily
in
a
transovarial
infection
cycle
in
Ae.
triseriatus,
with
seasonal
amplification
in
small
mammals.
Humans
typically
encounter
the virus in heavily wooded suburban or
rural
environments.
Probably
because
of ~
stable
vector—virus
cycle,
there
is
a
rather
constant
annual
number
of
about
75
human
cases
(range
of
30
to
1160
cases)
reported
to CDC.
Laboratory
studies
have
shown
that
Ae.
albopictus
is
an
efficient
vector
of
LAC
virus.
It
also transovarially transmits
the
virus.
If Ae.
albopictus becomes involved in
the
LAC virus cycle
in the eastern U.S.,
the
epidemiology
of
the
disease
might
be
dramatically altered.
First,
such
a new
(and
presumably
less
stable)
vector—virus
relationship could result
in greater year—to—
year
fluctuation
in
numbers
of
cases.
Second,
Ae. albocictus
is better adapted
than
92—633
8
Ae.
triseriatus
to
urban
environments.
An
urban
LAC
virus
cycle would
lead
to increased
man—mosquito
contact
and,
therefore,
increased
virus
transmission.
Third,
involvement
of Ae. albopictus
could result
in
increased
LAC
virus
activity
in
the
southeastern U.S.
(Exh.
5).
Unlike many Illinois mosquitos that are active
in the
evening,
the Tiger Mosquito
is
a day biter.
It
is active when
people are about
their work and play.
It has a reputation
as
a
particularly noxious pest because of
its bite
(Exh.
3).
It
is
well adapted
to human habits and breeds
in tires, bottles,
jars,
plugged gutters,
and most other
small water—filled containers.
This close association with man makes
it potentially more
dangerous than many other
species.
The Tiger Mosquito was found
in Illinois
in small
areas of
Jefferson and St. Clair counties
in 1986 and
in one location in
Cook County
in 1987.
(Exh.
6).
The infestations were
in piles
of
tires.
Scrap
tires
also provide excellent breeding areas for the
Nothern House Mosquito and the Tree Hole
Mosquito as well
as
Aedes aegypti
(Yellow Fever Mosquito).
(Exh.
7).
Dr. Moore pointed
out
that the Tiger Mosquito combines the
worst characteristics of
the mosquitoes that transmit SLE and LAC
in Illinois:
“it has
a strbng attraction
to humans for its blood
meals,
and
is
quite
at
home
in
either an urban or suburban
setting.”
He also pointed out that
“removal of tires and other
major producer habitats may reduce populations of the mosquito
to
a level where disease agents cannot effectively be transmitted.”
(Exh.
l9A).
Regarding
the proposed
rule,
Dr. Moore stated
that:
If
you
have
full
and
total
compliance,
I
think
that
you
can
expect
essentially,
obviously,
a
total
shutdown
of
movement.,
of
the
mosquito
at
least
by
human
activity
within
the
State.
Any
proportional
lack
of
compliance
would
give
a
proportionately
less
optimistic
picture
of
what’s
going
to
happen.
(RI.
90)
In
response
to
a
direct
question,
Dr.
Moore
emphatically
stated,
“There
is
no
evidence
that
the
Asian
Tiger
Mosquito,
any
other
mosquito,
or
any
other
blood—sucking
insect,
can
transmit
the
AIDS
virus.”
(RI.
64).
Dr.
Craig
said,
“Those
who
know
anything
about
the
public
health
menace
of
this
mosquito
in
Asia
are
deeply
concerned
about
its
introduction
to
the
Americas.”
He
pointed
ou~ that
the
insect
by
1987
had
spread
to
77
counties
in
18
states,
has
eggs
92—634
9
that
tolerate
freezing
and
is
a
major
biting
pest.
He
listed
20
organizations
dealing
with
public
health
and
entomology
which
have
expressed
concern
over
the
threat
posed
by
the
Tiger
Mosquito
(Exh.
l4A).
On
the
importance
of
acting
quickly,
Dr.
Craig
said,
“You
have
got
your
last
chance
to
get
them
out
of
Chicago
this
spring
and
summer.
You
won’t
have
a
chance
after
this
fall.”
(RI.
217).
Dr.
Novak
and
the
INHS
have
studied
the
Chicago
infestation.
It
has
spread
from
a
tire
yard
to
adjacent
neighborhoods.
In
addition,
a
search
of
72
tire
accumulations
in
32
Illinois
counties
failed
to
find
a
fourth
infestation.
Drought
conditions
at
the
time
could
have
caused
an
infestation
to
be
missed
due
to
low
mosquito
production.
According
to
Novak:
This
pestiferous
daytime
biting
behavior
of
this
mosquito,
coupled
with
its
potential
disease—carrying
capabilities,
could
create
a
severe
personnel
and
economic
burden
on
mosquito
abatement
districts
as
well
as
on
public
health
and
veterinary
agencies
throughout
the
State.
It
adds
yet
another
insect—and—disease—control
responsibility
for
these
agencies,
many
of
which
are
unfamiliar
with
control
practices
necessary
to
abate
container—inhabiting
mosquitoes.
(Exh.
l6A)
Dr.
Turnock
pointed
Out
that,
“Case
investigations
by
the
State
Health
Departments
of
Minnesota
and
Ohio
have
determined
that
discarded
tires
were
present
at
50—80
of
residences
where
cases
of
LaCrosse
encephalitis
occurred...
.Mosquito
control
workers
have
found
that
tire
casings
are
one
of
the
most
common
artificial
encontainers
near
private
residences.
Consequently,
eliminating
tire
casings
from
private
residences
will
help
minimize
risk
of
disease
to
citizens.”’
He
also
said
that
one
reason
attempts
to
eliminate
the
Yellow
Fever-Mosquito
failed
in
the
1960’s
was
that
“clean
areas
were
reinfested
by
eggs
transported
in
tire
casings.”
Dr.
Metcalf
said
that
many
people
are
seeking
his
advice
on
mosquito
control
programs.
He
stated:
The
history
of
practical
mosquito
control
is
essentially
that
of
the
past
50
years.
It
has
been
abundantly
demonstrated
over
that
time
that
elimination
of
breeding
sites
for
larval
mosquitoes
by
drainage,
dewateririg,
grading,
filling,,
etc.
or
by
ancillary
larviciding
activities
is
the
most
practical
method
for
mosquito
abatement.
It
is
obvious
that
this
must
be
true
especially
in
suburban
and
urban
locations
where
mosquito
breeding
92—635
10
sites
are
generally
conspicuous
and
can
readily
be
mapped
and
where
the
mosquitoes
are
concentrated
in
a
relatively
immobile
and
and
innocuous
life
stage.
A
tiny
pond
a
hundred
square
meters
in
area
can
contain
several
million
mosquito
larvae.
Yet
after
emergence
from
the
pupal
stage,
the
winged
biting
adults
can
colonize
an
area
of
several
square
miles.
The
same
can
be
said
of
the
larvae
of
Ae.
albopictus
breeding
in
a
few
automobile
tires
containing
rain
water.
Apart
from
source
reduction
by
drainage,
etc.:
emergence
larviciding
by
granular
or
pelletized
products
containing
very
small
amounts
of
insecticide
can
readily
be
accomplished
by
treating
relatively
small
areas
in
an
entirely
safe
and
unobjectionable
way
using
either
the
microbial
insecticides
Bacillus
thuringiensis
israelensis
(Bti)
or
Bacillus
sphaericus
(B.s.);
or
such
relatively
safe
and
effective
mosquito
larvacides
as
temepyhos,
fenthion,
methylchlorpyrifos,
or
even
kerosene.(Exh.
15)
He
also
cautioned
against
the
use
of
ground
fogs
(adulticiding)
stating
that
they
are
inefficient,
have
toxicity
hazards,
invade
privacy,
damage
natural
insect
enemies,
and
lead
to
pesticide
resistance
in
mosquitoes.
He
pointed
out
that
“more
than
200
species
of
mosquitoes
have
developed
resistant
strains
to
the
entire
armamentarium
of
insecticides
available.”
(Exh.
15).
The
scientific
panel
agreed
that
habitat
source
reduction,
particularly
by
removing
tires,
is
the
desirable
way
to
approach
control
of
this
insect.
Dr.
Novak
presented
data
on
the
positive
effectiveness
of
the
granular
formulations
mentioned
by
Dr.
Metcalf
(Exh.
16A).
Dr.
Turnock
stated:
Any
adult
control
(fogging)
should
be
directed
towards
adult
tiger
mosquitoes
at
or
near
sources
of
production,
usually
tire
accumulations.
A
general
fogging
of
a
community
to
control
day—biting
species
such
as
the
tiger
mosquito
or
the
tree—hole
mosquito
is
unlikely
to
be
effective.
(Exh.
2lA)
Leslie
Nickels
of
CPU
observed
that:
Controlling
this
mosquito
before
it
becomes
a
public
health
problem
is
an
opportunity
that
now
exists.
Intervention
at
this
point
in
time
allows
for
controlling
the
spread
of
the
9 2—636
11
mosquito
to
new
areas.
This
can
begin
by
reducing
the
breeding
sites
in
currently
infested
areas
and
preventing
the
mosquito
from
becoming
a
vector
in
the
transmission
of
La
Crosse
encephalitis.
(Exh.
22)
The
expert
witnesses
agreed
that
controlling
the
Tiger
Mosquito
is
generally
feasible
and
eliminating
it
in
some
areas
is
possible.
Dr.
Turnock
said:
In
Jefferson
and
St.
Clair
counties,
the
tiger
mosquito
populations
are
small,
thus
treatment
or
removal
of
the
tire
casings
will
probably
eliminate
the
infestations.
In
Chicago,
the
tiger
mosquito
has
been
found
outside
of
the
original
infestation
site,
which
will
be
treated
with
insecticides.
An
intense
campaign
to
remove
containers
or
treat
them
may
eliminate
it
in
the
areas
surrounding
the
infestation.
(Exh.
2lA)
Dr.
Moore
stated:
It
is
quite
likely
that
the
infestation
in
Mount
Vernon
will
be
eradicated,
and
I
think
it
is
probably
feasible
to
eradicate
the
Chicago
infestation.
I
seriously
doubt
that
this
can
be
done
‘in
East
St.
Louis
because
of
the
magnitude
of
the
infestation
in
Missouri
and
the
fact
that
two
states
would
have
to
agree
on
the
same
goal.
(Exh.
l9A)
According
to
Dr.
Brown:
Once
the
tiger
has
escaped
from
its
tire
cage
and
become
established
in
domestic
.~.r pen—
domestic
foci,
erradication
is
bionomically
unlikely,
and
economically
unreasonable,
if
a
localized
population
is
sufficiently
managed
by
appropriate
abatement
strategies
and
kept
at
a
low
absolute
density,
it
may
prove
over
time
to
be
no
more
of
a
threat
to
the
public
than
endemic
native
species.
(Exh.
20)
Dr.
Craig
summed
up
the
situation
as
follows:
There
is
quite
a
science
developed
of
introduced
insects.
About
half
of
all
the
pests
in
this
country
came
from
somewhere
else.
And
we
have
learned
quite
a
lot
from
agricultural
experiences
over
the
years.
2—637
12
The
thing
that we
have learned
is
that every
day wasted
is
a day lost.
And
the more they
dig
in,
the better
is the chance
that we will
never
get rid of them again.
The more you wait,
the more
the chances
that
things
like
the European Corn Goner
Borer
the
Mediterranean
fruit
fly
and
many
other
species
that have come
to us from elsewhere,
will be with us forever.
We
already
recognized
that
the
Asian
Tiger
Mosquito
it
is
too
late
as
far
as getting out
of the barn.
But in these northern latitudes
where
it
is cut back by winter
there
is still
a
chance
of
pushing
it
back.
We don’t know
that
it
is
going
to
stay
here,
and
this
year
1988
we
have
the
last
chance
to
find
out.
(RI.
279)
The
presence
of
the
Tiger
Mosquito
in
isolated
tire
piles
in
two
urban
counties
and
one
rural
county
provides
the
State
with
the
opportunity
to
slow
or
stop
its
spread.
Eradication
would
be
desirable,
but
is
unlikely.
Given
this
insect’s
ability
to
spread
disease
and
its
annoying
bite,
it
is
in
the
public
interest
to
take
steps
to
control
its
spread.
This
is
particularly
true
if
the
mosquito
proves
capable
of
transmitting
LAC
in
the
field.
The
virus
is
largely
in
rural
and
suburban
areas.
The
mosquito
is
currently
in
isolated
urban
areas.
To
allow
the
mosquito
and
the
virus
to
come
together
due
to
inaction
is
ill
advised
at
best.
The
Board
believes
that
slowing
or
halting
the
spread
of
the
Tiger
Mosquito
will
protect
many
Illinois
communities
from
both
its
annoying
bite
and
potential
health
threats.
Any
time
bought
for
a
community
by
this
action
can
be
used
by
public
officials
to
determine
the
true
extent
of
the
health
threat--and.to
prepare
appropriate
control
efforts.
Control
of
the
Tiger
Mosquito
requires
a
three—phased
effort.
First,
the
spread
to
new
areas
must
be
stopped.
Second,
new
infestations
must
be
attacked.
Third,
breeding
habitat
in
infested
areas
must
be
reduced.
As
of
June
of
1987
CDC
recommended
the
following:
Preventing
introduction.
The
primary
role
of
introduction
of
Ae.
albopictus
appears
to
be
through
the
movement
of
tires——within
states,
between
states,
and
between
counties.
If
this
movement
of
infested
tires
can
be
halted,
the
spread
of
Ae.
albopictus
can
be
stopped
or
greatly
reduced.
As
long
as
tires
are
stored
and
shipped
dry,
there
will
be
no
92— 638
13
problem
with
Ae.
albopictus
or
any
other
mosquito.
Thus,
regulations
requiring
proper
storage
and
shipment
should
be
prepared
and
enforced.
Tire
casings
coming
from
an
infested
area can
be
treated by heat
(dry or
steam,
120 F for
30 minutes)
or
by fumigation
(methyl
bromide,
2
lb./l,000
cu.
ft.
for
24
hours).
Both methods will kill
eggs
as long
as
the tires are dry,
but methyl bromide will
not
kill
eggs
submerged
in water
(except
at
very
high
dosages);
thus,
it
is
imperative
that
tires
be
dry before
fumigation.
Scrap
tines,
which
have
little
or
no
commercial
value,
should
be
rendered
unsuitable
for
mosquito
breeding
by
shredding
and
burning,
burying,
or
other
environmentally
sound
means.
When
scrap
tires
are
simply
transported
out
of
the
jurisdiction
and
dumped,
an
infestation can be spread quickly.
Control
of
existing
infestations.
The
primary method
of
control
for
Ae.
albopictus
should
be
source reduction——that
is,
removal
of
potential
breeding
sites.
Container
habitats,
such
as
tires,
tin
cans,
etc.,
should
be
properly
disposed
of.
Breeding
sites
that
cannot
be
removed
should
be
rendered
inacdessible
to
ovipositing
mosquitoes
or
incapable
of
holding
water
(e.g.,
by
storing
under
cover,
installing
drain
holes,
etc.).
A
strong
community
awareness
and
education
program
is
necessary
to
accomplish
thorough
source
reduction
and
to
maintain
community
cleanliness.
Frequently,
public
service
organizations
and
clubs
can
have
a
major
impact
on
community
awareness.
Chemical
control
(larvicides,
adulticides)
can
be
emoloyed
as
a
supplement
to
a
properly
designed
source
reduction
effort.
However,
Ae.
albopictus
has
already
been
found
to
be
tolerant
to
malathion,
temephos,
and
bendiocarb.
There
are
technical
problems
in
getting
sufficient
quantities
of
larvicides
into
containers
such
as
tires
in
piles,
and
the
cost
of
treating
scattered
container
habitats
in
urban
areas
can
be
prohibitive.
(Exh.
5).
The
Ohio
Environmental
Protection
Agency
sponsored
a
study
of
Used
Tire
Recovery
and
Disposal
in
Ohio
in
1987
(Exh.
7).
That
report
pointed
out
that
used
tires
are
an
ever
increasing
92—6 39
14
solid
waste
disposal
problem
given
that
whole
tires
are
considered undesirable by landfills and
do not degrade over
time.
About one used
tire
is generated per capita per year and
they are accumulating at an alarming rate.
Abandoned tire piles
are
a fire hazard
and tire fires are most difficult
to combat
when tires are piled
haphazardly. The
report documented
the
generation and disposition of used tires
in Ohio and contains the
following
summary:
Of
the
14.7
million
used
tires
generated
annually
in Ohio,
1.3 million
are
recapped,
0.8 million are graded out
for reuse,
and 0.4
million
are
going
to
other
uses.
Of
the
remaining
12.2
million
entering
the
scrap
stream
in
Ohio
annually,
2.5
million
are
disposed
of
in
landfills,
1.0
million
are
incinerated
for
energy recovery,
1.1
million
are
processed
through
the
rubber
reclaim
industry
in—state,
0.52 million are shredded
with
the
shredded
product
being
marketed
or
landfilled,
0.3
million
(bias—ply
truck
casings
only)
are
utilized
in
the
manufacturing
of
fabricated
rubber
products,
0.4
million
are
consumed
by
farm
or
other
uses
(i.e.,
brush
burning,
erosion
control,
construction
uses,
etc.),
and
0.75
million
are
transported
out—of—state
for
recycling,
reuse,
or disposal.
Subsequently,
a total
of
54
percent
(6.6
million)
of
the
total
scrap
casings generated
in Ohio are being
recycled,
reused,
or
disposed
of
properly,
leaving
46
percent
(5.6 million) unaccounted
for.
Based
upon survey
results,
an
estimated 0.6 million
casings
are
being
indiscniminantly
dumped
(into
ravines,
abandoned
coal
strip
pits,
etc.)
admittedly,
and
0.74
millio~n scrap
casings
are
being
stockpiled,
totaling
to
only
11
percent
of
the
scrap
generated
in
Ohio.
Obviously,
there
is a large percentage
(35
percent)
of
scrap
tires
which
are
also
most
likely
being
indiscriminantly dumped
or
stockpiled.
*
**
Information
collected
during
this
study
indicates
that
there
are
a
minimum
of
28
million
tires
stockpiled
in
larger
piles
(greater
than
500,000
tires)
throughout
Ohio.
It
is important
to emphasize that this
number
is
exclusive
of
innumerable
piles
ranging
in
size
from 500
to
500,000
casings
which
are
scattered
across
Ohio
in
need
of
92—640
15
abatement,
with
particularly
high
concentrations
in
the
rural
southeastern
portion
of
the
State.
Consequently,
the
total
number
of
tires
present
in
all
stockpiles
and
illegal
dump
sites
in
Ohio
greatly
exceeds
28
million.
(Exh.
7,
pp.
39
and
52)
The
Ohio
Study
went
into
great
detail
on
the
association
of
discarded
tires
and
mosquitoes.
It
pointed
out
that
the
Tree
Hole
Mosquito’s
population
in
nature
is
controlled
by
available
habitat
(tree
holes
which
are
limited
in
number).
However,
tire
piles
provide
artificial
habitat
allowing
populations
to
build,
increasing
the
chance
of
humans
being
bitten.
The
Tiger
Mosquito
is
quite
similar
to
the
Tree
Hole
Mosquito
in
this
respect,
although
it
is
already
adapted
to
man’s
artificial
containers.
The
Ohio
Department
of
Health
(ODH)
has
documented
the
direct
association
of
human
cases
of
LAC
with
Tree
Hole
Mosquitoes
breeding
in
“indiscriminately
dumped
or
improperly
stored
scrap
tires.”
The
Tiger
Mosquito
lays
its
eggs
above
the
waterline
in
containers.
The
eggs
hatch
when
the
water
level
rises
and
wets
the
eggs.
The
eggs
can
survive
more
than
a
year
in
a
dry
container.
The
result
is
that
shipped
tires
can
carry
viable
eggs
even
when
shipped
dry.
If
tires
are
never
allowed
to
accumulate
water,
the
mosquito
will
not
lay
eggs
in
them.
Likewise,
eggs
in
a
tire
that
is
drained
and
kept
dry
will
not
hatch.
The
mosquito
is
also
transported
in
water
filled
tires
that
contain
larvae.
During
transport,
the
larvae
can
continue
development
and
become
adults.
When
this
happens,
the
adults
can
fly
from
trucks
along
the
route.
Draining
tires
before
shipment
kills
the
larvae
and
prevents
the
spread
of
adults
during
transport.
Although
some
aspects
of
the
Ohio
study
are
not
directly
applicable
to
Illinois,
much
of
the
general
information
on
tire
use
and
disposal
and
the
mosquito
problem
can
provide
an
idea
of
the
general
situation
in
Illinois
given
the
similarities
of
the
two
states.
A
number
of
municipalities
have
taken
steps
to
control
the
accumulations.
The
ordinance
of
Massillon,
Ohio,
is
contained
in
Exhibit
8.
The
Houston
area
has
seen
a
considerable
reduction
in
tire
dumps
according
to
a
mosquito
control
official:
We
are
cur’rently
trying
to
answer
many
of
the
questions
posed
by
these
circumstances.
We
have
just
completed
a
“windshield”
survey
of
an
area
of
the
city
where
a
1980
survey
found
over
2,000
used
tire
dumps.
In
1986,
we
92—64
1
16
counted
about
one—tenth
that
number,
a
significant
reduction.
We
have
been
instrumental
in
working
with
the
City
of
Houston
in
the
development
of
a
tire
hauling
and
storage
ordinance
which
is
apparently
beginning
to
show
good
results.
Houston
requested
that
we
provide
them
with
a
copy
of
the
sites
where
we
recently
found
tire
dumps
so
that
they
can
take
additional
action.
The
public
information
provided
to
the
local
news
media
is
partly
responsible
for
the
instigation
of
the
calls
being
made
to
the
city
requesting
that
they
take
action
on
tire
dumps.
An
important
consideration
in
removing
tires
is
how
to
dispose
of
them.
In
Houston,
many
used
tire
dealers
are
grinding
up
tires
for
other
uses.
On
April
1,
1986,
a
new
tire
facility
capable
of
grinding
up
3,000
tires
per
hour
started
operation,
and
is
not
charging
for
disposal
since
they
are
selling
the
rubber
for
a
fuel
source.
The
tire
dumps
are
now
beginning
to
call
the
piles
of
used
tires
“inventory.”
Competition
may
even
require
that
the
grinding
plants
purchase
or
haul
tires
to
their
plants
as
the
large
stockpiles
disappear
and
particularly
if
the
demand
for
this
fuel
source
increases.
(Exh.
2).
Dr.
Dan
Brown
presented
a
statement
for
the
North
Central
region
of
the
American
Mosquito
Control
Association.
He
strongly
supported
the
proposal
as
a
“first
step
in
the
right
direction.”
He
did,
however,
express
some
concerns
from
the
point
of
view
of
persons
involved
in
actual
control
as
opposed
to
research.
His
concerns
included
the
following:
The
probability
of
dengue
fever-
virus
transmission
in
Illinois
must
surely
approach
zero.
This
should
not
be
considered
as
part
of
this
proposed
action
to
the
“threat
to
the
public
interest,
safety,
or
welfare.”
The
interstate
shipment
of
infested
scrap
tires
is
probably
a
greater
threat
to
the
public
welfare
than
intrastate
shipment
and
storage
within
Illinois.
At
least
as
concerns
the
potential
for
the
spread
of
Aedes
albopictus.
Small
existing
tire
piles
can
be
eliminated
as
breeding
sites
by
cultural
means
as
set
forth
in
this
proposal
with
no
use
of
92—642
17
toxicants.
Larger
sites
would
be
most
economically
treated
with
granular
formulations
with
a
field
persistance
of
at
least
8—10
weeks.
Much
field
testing
will
be
required
to
fulfill
local
needs
in
this
area.
An
effective
response
must
be
adaptable
to
local
conditions.
I
have
to
question
whether
it
places
too
great
an
emphasis
on
the
large
tire
accumula
ions
and
shipments.
In
Decatur,
at
least
most
tires
that
are
currently
infested
with
Ae.
triserriatus
and
C.
pipiens
are
not
in
the
large
discrete
aggregations
of
scrap
tires,
but
in
those
that
are
illegally
dumped.
I
strongly
agree
that
‘existing
or
potential
infestations’
can
best
be
handled
locally.
However,
at
least
in
downstate
Illinois,
most
‘local
governments
with
appropriate
authority’
do
not
have
sufficient
resources
to
effectively
‘take
action
appropriate
to
local
conditions.
‘
(Exh.
20)
Paul
Geery
of
the
DesPlaines
Valley
Mosquito
Abatement
District
(0.
at
20
and
21).
agreed
that
there
is
a
clear
need
for
immediate
action.
He
recommended
that
any
rule
apply
statewide
for
the
following
reasons:
First,
the
known
sites
of
infestation
are
not
necessarily
all
the
sites
of
infestation
in
the
state
of
Illinois.
What
we
don’t
know
can
hurt
us.
Secondly,
it
is
in
the
places
that
do
not
currently
have
an
infestation
that
the
proposed
ruling
could
be
most
beneficial.
In
places
where
the
mosquito.has
already
arrived,
this
ruling
by
itself
would
have
little
effect.
The
cat
is
already
out
of
the
bag
there!
Keeping
new
cats
from
the
area
would
have
minimal
impact.
Thirdly,
the
likelihood
of
tires
in
an
infested
county
finding
their
way
into
surrounding
counties
to
avoid
the
ruling
would
probably
result
in
further
movement
of
the
mosquito.
He
expressed
concerns
that
if
the
rule
is
not
enforced,
it
may
do
more
harm
than
good.
He
also
cautioned
against
creating
a
panic
situation
and
lulling
officials
into
a
false
sense
of
security:
92—643
18
We
have
witnessed
the
public
panic
from
news
articles
about
Ae.
albopictus
that
distort
its
current
and
future
possible
effects.
If
the
proposed
emergency
ruling
is
passed,
the
media
will
likely
cause
more
public
concern
than
is
justifiable.
As
you
have
stated,
this
ruling
is
only
a
beginning
in
trying
to
deal
with
this
problem.
Unfortunately,
some
state,
county,
or
local
authorities
might
consider
this
a
full
solution
and
stop
or
reduce
other
efforts
to
control
the
problem.
At
the
Meeting,
John
Clark
said
that,
“I
have
never
had
any
mosquito
control
problem
come
up
in
the
past
40
years
that
has
generated
as
many
calls
as
the
publicity
of
the
Asian
Tiger
Mosquito
has
done
this
year.”
He
pointed
out
that
control
and
enforcement
problems
should
be
somewhat
lessened
in
Cook
County
given
that
a
large
percentage
of
it
is
covered
by
Mosquito
Abatement
Districts.
(RI.
282).
He
also
indicated
that
over
300
tire
piles
in
excess
of
100
tires
were
recently
discovered
during
survey
of
Chicago.
(RI.
118).
At
the
Meeting,
the
Agency
opposed
the
proposed
emergency
rule
and
questioned
the
Board’s
authority
to
act
in
this
matter
which
it
perceived
as
a
public
health
rather
than
solid
waste
problem
(0.
at
21).
The
Agency
also
raised
questions
as
to
the
enforceability
of
the
proposed
rule.
It
also
pointed
out
that
its
resources
for
enforcement
are
quite
limited.
As
an
alternative,
it
proposed
gathering
data
on
tire
accumulations,
forming
an
inter—Agency
study
group
with
the
goal
of
proposing
regulations
to
be
in
force
by
1989,
and
using
existing
authorities
as
needed
to
address
localized
problem
areas.
(Exh.
28,
RI.
at
233—280).
The
Illinois
Department
of
Agriculture
(-IDA)
initially
opposed
the
proposal
largely
on
the
grounds
that
it
cover’ed
too
many
small
tire
piles,
would
apply
to
tires
on
farms,
could
create
an
administrative
burden
for
its
pesticide
application
certification
program,
and
had
enforceability
problems
(0.
at
21).
Philip
Mole
of
Sun
Eco
Systems
generally
supported
tire
regulation
and
reclamation.
He
pointed
out
that
tires
are
a
serious
solid
waste
problem.
He
suggested
that
tires
be
regulated
as
a
special
waste,
that
persons
dealing
with
tires
be
registered,
that
the
movement
of
tires
be
tracked,
and
that
a
“generator
fee
schedule,
to
fund
the
chemical
spraying
of
abandoned
waste
tires
for
the
estimated
50
percent
of
the
tires
which
are
not
moved
and
unaccounted
for
through
an
industrial
process
and/or
are
illegally
dumped
in
thousands
of
locations
92—644
19
throughout
the State where ownership
is not identified
or
established.”
He
urged
the
development
of
a
strategy
to
reclaim
tires
for
energy
or
other
use,
pointing
out
that
a
tire
contains
the
energy
equivalent
of
about
two
gallons
of
oil.
(Exh.
23).
Tim
Warren
of
DENR
submitted
the
following
information
on
scrap
tires
in
Illinois:
The
Department
of
Energy
and
Natural
Resources,
Office
of
Solid
Waste,
is
responsible
for
minimizing
the
State’s
dependence
on
landfill
disposal
of
solid
wastes.
Scrap
passenger
and
heavy
duty
vehicles
tires
constitute
a
component
of
the
solid
waste
stream
that
is
difficult
to
manage
in
an
environmentally
and
economically
effective
manner.
This
is
because
of
the
dispersed
nature
of
tire
generation,
the
special
problems
whole
tires
create
when
landfilled,
and
the
general
lack
of
markets
for
used
tires.
*
**
Using
national
averages,
Illinois
generates
11—12
million
used
tires
annually,
the
majority
of
which
are
not
landfilled
or
recycled,
but
s.tqckpiled
in
various
locations
throughout
the
state.
This
is
roughly
equivalent
to
1.6
million
cubic
yards
of
tires
generated
each
year
in
the
state.
Landfill
disposal
of
tires
is
becoming
more
difficult
and
costly,
as
diminishing
landfill
capacity
allows
landfill
operators
to
be
selective
as
to
the
types
and
quantities
of
materials
they
receive.
Burial
of
whole
tires
in
landfills
creates
operating
and
iongterm
care
problems,
since
whole
tires
will
“float”
to
the
surface
in
a
landfill,
and
may
effect
the
integrity
of
landfill
cover
and
capping
practices.
An
informal
survey
by-this
Office
in
1987
indicated
that
only
a
few
landfills
had
a
total
prohibition
on
tire
disposal
at
their
facilities.
Most
have
invoked
a
premium
tipping
fee
that
is
two—to—four
times
that
charged
for
other
solid
wastes.
(Exh.
26)
Commissioner
Mosi
Kitwana
said
that
his
department
is
responsible
for
cleaning
lots
in
Chicago.
The
City
stores
the
thousands
of
tires
it
collects
annually
from
various
lots.
Chicago
has
been
attempting
to
purchase
a
shredder
to
deal
with
its
accumulation
which
he
estimated
at
40,000.
92—64 5
20
He
cited
illegal
“fly
dumping”
of
tires
on
empty
lots
as
a
major
problem
for
the
City.
Kitwana
believes
that
this
illegal
dumping
has
increased
as
landfill
costs
have
risen.
He
said
that
the
coming
of
the
Tiger
Mosquito
has
given
his
department
the
opportunity
to
join
with
the
Chicago
Department
of
Health
to
“kill
two
birds
with
one
stone.”
He
did
not
believe
that
the
City
could
comply
immediately
with
the
proposed
emergency
regulations
if
they
went
into
force
arid
covered
the
City.
He
emphasized
Chicago’s
desire
to
manage
its
tire
problem.
(RI.
140—
157).
Mr.
Jay
Lauterback
appeared
for
the
Illinois
Tire
Dealers
and
Retreaders
Association.
He
stated:
The
membership
consists
of
independent
tire
dealers
and
retreaders
and
many
of
the
vendors
who
sell
them
service,
supplies
and
equipment.
We
do
not
represent
manufacturer—owned
stores
or
department
stores
such
as
Sears,
Wards
and
so
on.
Independent
tire
dealers,
in
my
opinion,
are
responsible,
small
businessmen,
in
all
matters
concerning
the
business
and
particularly
on
social
and
public
health
matters
such
as
the
subject
you
are
addressing
today.
We
have
members
in
all
of
the
metropolitan
areas
of
the
state
and
in
114
other
cities.
We
estimate
that
there
are
1,788
independent
dealers
in
Illinois
and
in
addition,
if
you
include
gasoline
service
stations
and
department
stores,
there
must
be
5,000
to
6,000
establishments
that
sell
tires.
If
you
conclude
that
the
mosquito
problem,
in
this
state,
at
this
time,
is
a
clear
and
immediate
public
health
problem,
then
I
have
to
say
to
you
that
we
will
do
all
we
can,
as
an
organization,
to
help
you
overcome
the
problem.
In
commenting
on
the
proposal,
he
said
that
tires
are
generally
dry
when
generated,
but
difficult
to
drain
after
becoming
wet,
that
keeping
them
dry
out
of
doors
is
cost
prohibitive
because
of
labor
costs
and
the
fact
that
a
covering
will
not
stay
in
place
and
that
tire
shredders
and
slitters
are
92—646
21
available given enough time
to have orders filled.
He urged
incentives
to
make
it
feasible
to
utilize
scrap
tires
for
energy
or
other
purpose
and
estimated
that
there
are
in
excess
of
20
million
scrap
tires
in
Illinois.
(Exh.
24).
He
felt
that
many
tire
dealers
would
turn
to
tire
slitters
if
the
rule
is
passed
and
said
that
he
was
buying
a
slitter
for
his
dealership.
He
estimated
slitters
to
cost
between
$2,700
and
$9,500
and
shredders
in
the
vicinity
of
$100,000
and
up.
(RI.
173).
He
also
said:
The
National
Tire
Dealers
and
Retreaders
Association,
of
which
we
are
affiliated,
is
very
heavily
involved
in
this
subject.
In
fact,
they
are
part
of
an
ad
hoc
committee
with
the
National
Centers
for
Disease
Control
working
specifically
with
the
Asian
Tiger
Mosquito
problem.
And
they
have
a
proposal
for——when
I
say
they,
the
National
Tire
Dealers
and
Reschredders
Association,
has
a
proposal
for
what
they
are
referring
to
as
a
tire
monof ill.
This
would
be
a
landfill
devoted
exclusively
to
tires;
and
those
tires
would
be
accepted
in
a
landfill.
in
what
you
refer
to
as
a
convert
form,
either
slit
or
shredded,
and
they
would
be
located
either
above
or
below
ground,
depending
on
the
situation.
(RI.
175)
The
Board
received
comments
from
two
manufacturers
of
tire
conversion
equipment.
Among
the
machines
mentioned
was
a
portable
shredder
capable
of
processing
500
tires
per
hour
(TPH)
and
a
stationary
system
with
an
800
TPH
capacity.
The
cost
of
the
systems
is
in
the
$375,000
to
$400,000
range
wtth
maiptenance
estimated
at
$65,000
per
million
tires
(0.
at
24).
The
other
company
produces
slitters
as
well
as
shredders.
A
75
TPH
slitter
costs
$5,500.
A
360
TPH
mobile
chopper,
slitter
listed
at
$105,000;
Tire
choppers
ranged
from
$50,000
to
$150,000.
A
two
stage
chopper
listed
at
$147,000
(0.
at
24).
Ronald
Lakin
appeared
for
Lakin
General
Corp.
He
described
his
company’s
experience
with
the
Tiger
Mosquito
and
its
cooperation
with
city
and
state
officials
to
control
the
infestation.
He
has
had
a
contract
for
mosquito
control
since
1987.
He
pointed
out
that
he
drains
tires
upon
arrival,
but
keeping
them
drained
presents
a
problem.
(Exh.
25).
A
discussion
about
control
at
his
facility
lead
to
the
suggestion
that
the
rule
as
proposed
could
not
necessarily
be
workable
at
all
92—647
22
facilities.
The experts generally agreed that his
type
of
facility could be served by
a program involving weekly inspection
for mosquito larvae by
a properly trained
inspector
and treatment
upon discovery
of an
infestation.
(RI.
201—232).
Lakin General
is frequently the victim of people who illegally dump scrap tires
at or
near its facility.
(RI.
230).
Lakin General
Corp.
has the capacity to slit and
shred
tires.
In response
to
a question as
to whether
the company could
convert
tires from the infested area,
he replied,
“That would be
a very interesting concept.
We handle more tires
then anybody
in
the City of Chicago,
and we have all the capability
of doing all
the things you are suggesting.”
He also pointed
out that such
efforts would
take “time
and money.”
(RI.
227—229).
THE BOARD’S PROPOSED PERMANENT RULE
Given the clear guidance of CDC and expert testimony
in the
record
of
the emergency rulerr~aking, the the Board will proceed
with a permanent regulatory proceeding with the goal
to have a
rule take effect during the 1989 mosquito breeding season.
The
Board’s proposed rule includes requiring generators and receivers
of scrap tires
to keep them dry or unsuitable
for mosquito
breeding and
to keep certain records regarding treatment of
scrap
tires.
Biological Basis for Rule
The management standards in the rule are based
on the
following biological
factors.
Scrap tire movement
is the primary
means by which the Tiger Mosquito enters
an area and spreads over
wider
areas.
It
is also apparent that this mosquito finds tires
a particularly desirable breeding habitat
and
that
it builds
large populations in the tire piles.
From these tire piles,
it
can spread
into other containers.
(RI. 79—81;
Exh.
l4A,
p.
1;
Exh.
l6A,
p.
10).
Limiting
the mosquito population
in
a given
area can prevent disease outbreaks
even
if the~mosquito is
present
in that area.
According
to Dr. Moore of the CDC,
tire
removal alone might accomplish
this goal.
(RI.
59).
The Tiger Mosquito reaches adulthood from an egg
in 7—14
days,
depending upon various conditions.
(RI.
15; Exh.
9,
p.
1).
The mosquitoes can then produce
a new generation every 20
days
(Exh.
148—18,
p.
42).
The eggs can be transported
in tires
(wet or
dry)
and can survive
freezing
to a certain extent.
(RI.
15;
Exh.
143—20, l4B—l9).
A hard winter may cut back the
population
in areas
like Chicago, allowing possible eradication.
(RI.
280).
With some exceptions
the other twelve Illinois mosquitoes
which breed
in tires have
a similar relationship to tires.
2~648
23
Interstate
and Intrastate Transport of Scrap Tires
A
regulation
requiring
that
all
used
tires
in
transit
within,
through
or into Illinois be shipped dry and covered, and
be accompanied by a certificate of inspection would be wholly
consistent with federal
regulations, would be well within the
State’s police power and would be
a valid regulation
of
interstate
commerce.
The Board’s original emergency rule proposal required that
all scrap tires shipped through or within Illinois
be dry and
covered.
There
is little question that
the State
of Illinois can
legally impose such a requirement.
However,
it would
be
far more
desirable
for the FDA to impose
a regulation with national
uniformity.
As stated by Dr. Craig:
My only
regret
is
that nearly. every state
is
enacting
similar
(but
not
identical)
rules
and
the national
picture
for
the
used
tire
industry
is chaotic.
We must all work toward
a more uniform set of
rules nationally.
(Exh.
l4A)
The Board has not included this requirement
in
the proposed
rule.
The management standards
for newly received tires should
address most mosquitoes imported as larvae or pupae.
The Board
welcomes comment on this
issue during First Notice.
Accumulations Covered
by Standards
The emergency rule only applied
to commercial
scrap tires
accumulated or moved
after May 1,
1988.
It exempted
accumulations of under
50 tires and those from personal or
agricultural activities.
The proposed permanent
rule applies
to
all accumulations
in excess of
10 tires.
Persons believing that
exemptions are necessary or
that
the size
is inappropriate should
state their positions during First Notice.
The
50 tire cut—off
for the emergency rule was based on
suggestions by some
that smaller piles are best left
to local
authorities.
This view was reinforced
by the limited resouces
State agencies had
to enforce
the emergency rule
(0.
at 24 and
26).
On the other hand,
small accumulations are often found near
residences
and bring mosquitoes
into close proximity with
humans.
Drs.
Brown
(0.
at 20)
and Moore specifically pointed out
that small accumulations are biologically significant.
According
to
Dr. Moore:
The
tiger
mosquito
doesn’t
count
the
number
of
tires
before deciding
when
and
where
to
lay
her
eggs.
There
is
some
evidence
that
92—64 9
24
small
accumulations
of
tires
are
actually
more
attractive
than
large
piles
on
a
per—
unit basis.
This
is
probably due
to
the
fact
that
small
piles
are
more
likely
to
be
nearer
to
the
preferred hosts,
that is, man;
arid
individual
tires
scattered
about
may
have
more
leaf
litter
and
other
organic
material
that
are
needed
for larval development
(RI. 60).
The Board
notes that
a
ten tire limit would allow an
individual
to have two complete sets
of tires on
a property
without state regulation.
This
is easily enough
tires
to harbor
larger numbers of mosquitoes
and constitute an eyesore.
Such
a
limit
in the rule would
in no way bar units
of local government
or other agencies from using their own powers against smaller
accumulations.
These powers are formidable.
As pointed out
in
the IDPH quote
in the Opinion at
25 and 26:
With
regard
to
small
commercial
activities
and
personal activities
which
result
in
tire
accumulations,
the
Department
feels
that
local
health
department
and
State’s
Attorneys’
authorities
under
nuisance
statutes are adequate
to address any problems
that may be found.
***
Government
officials
are given
the authority
under
the Public Nuisances Act
(Chap.
100 1/2 ~
Sec.
221,
Para.
26)
to
cite
individuals who
are creating
a nuisance that
“is offensive or
dangerous
to the health of
individuals or
the
public.”
This approach was used
in 1986 and
1987
by
the
Franklin—Williamson
Health
Department
to
abate
a
mosquito
nuisance
created
by
improper
water
management
at
a
carbon—recovery
mine.
The
county
health
department
filed
a
nuisance
complaint
with
the
State’s
Attorney’s,
who
then
fined
the
operator
of
the
mine
$25
per
day
until
the
mosquito
nuisance
was
controlled
or
eliminated.
Ultimately,
the
owner
hired
a
mosquito
control contractor
and drained much
of
the
standing
water
at
the mine
site.
In
addition,
under
Local
Health
Department
statutes
(Public Health
and Safety,
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1985,
Ch.
ill l,,2
,
para.
20c.Ol)
and the
Standards for Local Health Departments,
local
health departments
must
perform
inspections,
92—650
25
investigations,
surveillance, and enforcement
of
the provisions
of
the Nuisance Program
as
required
by Sec.
III.
Rule
3.92.
There
are
nuisance
statutes
that
a
local
health
department can use to control
the breeding of
mosquitoes
in
tire
stockpiles
within
its
jurisdiction.
However,
local
officials
must
believe that this
is
a problem that
is
a high
priority.
Although
local
officials
can
control
specific
local problems,
the massive
accumulation of
tire casings
in Illinois
can
only be addressed by
a statewide program.
**
*
In 1927, statutes permitting the formation of
mosquito
abatement
districts
(MADs)
were
passed.
This
legislation
gives
MADs
the
authority
to:
1)
levy
property
taxes
to
support
mosquito
control;
and
2)
abate
as
nuisances
all
stagnant
pools
of
water
and
other
breeding places
for mosquitoes,
flies,
or
other
insects
(Chap.
111 1/2
,
Sec.
7
Para.
80).
In
the
past,
MADs
have
worked
with
local
health
departments
to
remove
breeding
sites
for
mosquitoes
by
citing
property
owners under nuisance statutes.
It
is
important
to note that there are about
375
Public Mosquito Pest Control Applicators
certified
by
the
Illinois
Department
of
Agriculture who
are
not
associated with MAD5
of
IDPH.
These
individuals
represent
a
reserve
of
personnel
with
at
least
some
training
in mosquito control,
who could
help
provide information
to the public.
The proposed rule includes all accumulations of more than
ten scrap tires.
The exemptions
in the emergency rule were
primarily to ease enforcement problems,
not strain owners of
existing accumulations,
and
to focus on
tires which by being
moved might spread the Tiger Mosquito.
These exemptions are not
readily
defendable
in
the
context
of
a
rule
designed
to
control
all
tire
mosquitoes.
The
two
Illinois
mosquitoes
which
commonly
spread encephalitis breed
in
tire piles statewide and are
prevalent in rural
areas.
Under
these circumstances,
exempting
existing piles,
those on municipal property and those generated
by agricultural activities would be questionable.
It
is the Board’s intention that the rule apply
to such uses
of scrap tires
as racing track barriers, weights
to hold tarps
and erosion control on hills.
The use of tires which are
permanently submerged underwater
is not intended to be covered.
92—631
26
The ability
of individuals
and small businesses
to comply
rapidly and economically will be dramatically enhanced by the
recent signing of House
Bill 3799 which amends
the Illinois
Pesticide Act
of 1979.
This bill allows any individual
to apply
selected pesticides
to scrap tires.
Previously
a person had
to
be certified or hire a certified applicator
to apply any
pesticide to tires.
Definitions
Section 849.101 defines terms
that are used
in the
rule.
Any
term
not
defined
by
this
Section
shall
be
given
the
same
meaning as
it
is defined by the Act, unless
the context clearly
requires otherwise.
A scrap tire
is
a tire that has been removed
from use on a motor vehicle and has been separated from the wheel
or
rim.
A scrap tire is
“generated”
or becomes
a scrap tire at
the time and place
it
is removed from a wheel.
Scrap tires
are
commonly generated
by tire dealers,
and at gas stations and
department stores.
Tires which are “new”
or “reprocessed” are exempt from the
rule.
This includes those
in displays.
The proposed rule
defines “new”
or reprocessed
tires,
in part,
as tires which have
not yet been placed on
a wheel.
Once
a
“new”
or “reprocessed”
tire has been placed on a wheel,
it
is
no longer
a “new”
or
“reprocessed” tire.
It
is assumed
that such
tires receive better
care than scrap tires by being kept indoors
or at least
relatively
clean.
This
is an important consideration since
a
certain amount of organic debris must be present
in
a tire to
support mosquito development.
It should be noted
that tires
mixed
or commingled
with scrap tires are treated
as scrap tires
under
the rule.
The Board is interested
in comment or
testimony as
to the
adequacy of the proposed definitions and whether new and
reprocessed
tires should be exempt from the proposal.
In
particular the Board wishes
to know
if these tires
are likely to
be infested and what
kind of care they
receive that distinguishes
them from scrap tires.
The term “converted
tire”
is meant
to generally refer
to
tires which have been rendered incapable of holding water.
This
is most commonly done by physically altering the tire by
shredding or
some other means.
The rule envisions
the
continuation of
tire use
in certain recreational and other
applications.
Such tires should
be cut or drilled
so that water
drains from the tire.
A tire is assumed
to be
“fixed
in
position” by being hung from
a rope or
attached
to
a structure
so
that
it cannot
roll.
A tire which
is
free
to
rotate would need
sufficient holes so that it will drain
regardless of
its
position.
Holes should
be large
enough that they will not be
92—652
27
readily blocked by leaves or other common debris.
In
recreational applications,
tires could be cleaned out several
times
a year
to prevent blockage.
Tires used as bumpers or
cushions
for boats
and other equipment may be cut on the side
closest
to the ground.
For the purpose of the rules proposed
today,
the Board
is
regulating scrap
tires as
a waste.
However, other
than the
addition of these rules,
it
is not the Board’s
intention at this
time
to either broaden or narrow
the current applicability of the
Act,
or regulations promulgated thereunder,
to tires or scrap
tires.
Standards for the Management of Scrap Tires
Sections 849.104 and 849.105 are intended
to help control
mosquitoes.
The provisions of these sections account
for the
fact that these insects breed
in other containers and that
eradication
is virtually impossible.
The requirement
that tire management practices be in effect
between May 1
and November
1
is intended
to cover
the bulk of the
mosquito breeding season.
It
is recognized
that an earlier date
would be better
in some years and that the Northern and Southern
sections of the State differ.
The Board seeks technical input
regarding
the appropriateness
of
these dates
for the purpose
of
controlling those species most likely to spread disease
in
Illinois.
Sections 849.104
(a)(d) provide persons with
a range of
management options.
They are intended to take into account
widely varying circumstances.
A small operation may decide
to
drain tires initially and
then process them within two weeks,
thereby avoiding dry storage and treatment.
Others may find
it
appropriate
to immediately treat wet or dry tires with an
approved pesticide.
The two week minimum tirneframes will,
under certain
conditions allow mosquitoes
to fully develop.
The scrap tires
generally covered by this provision will be newly generated or
recently moved
to a processor or disposal point.
They are likely
to
be fairly clean -and are required to be drained or treated
initially.
To develop mosquitoes
they must contain eggs,
receive
rain, and be subjected to favorable conditions.
After
the two
weeks they are required
to be processed or treated
as often
as
necessary to prevent development.
The Board expects these
controls
to be adequate although not
as complete as that of the
emergency rule.
The intent of the rule is
to address aquatic mosquito
stages,
the larvae and pupae.
Adults which come
to tire piles
from adjacent areas may lay eggs,
but
it
is assumed that tire
92
—65 3
28
management will prevent
the development of significant numbers
of
new adult mosquitoes.
The rule does not envision adulticiding being required as
part
of
an alternative management plan.
This does not mean that
it may not be required by another authority.
Draining can
be accomplished by dipping the water
out, using
a suction device,
such as
a large shopvac,
or physically cutting
or shredding
the tires.
The Board notes that
the draining
requirement
is automatically accomplished
if
a scrap tire is
landfilled or
otherwise converted on the day
of receipt.
As
a
practical matter,
it will be virtually
impossible
to drain
a tire
to the point where
it contains no moisture.
The Board expects
that a “drained”
tire may contain up to one—fourth
inch of water
when stood vertically.
The Board
notes that longitudinally
“slit” tires may still hold water
if they are not properly
stacked.
(RI.
185;
Exh.
26,
p.
2).
It
is
assumed that
to be
in
compliance,
slit tires must be stacked
so
as not to hold water.
Slit tires may also prove acceptable
for some uses now made of
whole
tires such as weights and barriers.
Salvage yards may
choose
to meet 849.104(a)
by keeping tires mounted prior
to
disposal or processing.
Operations may substitute
an
insect
treatment program for
dry storage.
Treatment for
the prevention of mosquito larvae and
pupae development may include the use of
a number of
pesticides.
The pestcide~must be properly applied and caution
should be used
to avoid those
to which
the target mosquitoes have
developed
a high degree
of resistance.
Treatment must occur
often enough
to remain effective.
The selected pesticide or
toxicant must also be able
to penetrate the tire piles and reach
the insides of stored scrap
tires.
The signing of House Bill 3799 will make it easy for
individuals
to treat small tire accumulations.
This bill amended
the Illinois Pesticide Act
to allow uncertified persons
to apply
selected pesticides
to scrap tires.
Under
this Bill,
the
Interagency Committee on
the Use of Pesticides will specify
a
number
of appropriate pesticides
or toxicants for use
in scrap
tires.
Anyone may then use these compounds on scrap tires.
If
a
granular formulation such as B.t.i.
(discussed below)
is
approved,
a person with
a small
tire dealership or processing
facility could
treat tires each day with minimal inconvenience or
expense.
Certified pesticide applicators must apply most
pesticides.
IDPH and
IDA
have information
for certification,
which may be obtained by employees of
a business.
Information on
becoming
a certified pesticide applicator
is available
from the
Illinois Department of Public Health,
Division of Environmental
Health
in Springfield.
IDPH also has available
a booklet called,
92—654
29
“Mosquitoes
in Illinois:
Recommendations
for Prevention and
Control”.
(Exh.
2lD).
A variety of pesticides
are available
for mosquito
control.
Some are persistent
(effective)
for over 120 days when
applied
to tires.
Some are
in granular form
and can be either
placed into or
onto tires with a gloved hand or small implement
or blown into tires with
a backpack blower.
In Puerto Rico,
a
granular formulation
of temephos gave continuous larval control
in used automobile tires
for up to 164 days depending upon the
amount used.
(Exh.
16B—4).
A given tire on a tire pile need not
be treated again until
an infestation
is noticed or
the pesticide
is reaching the end of
its effective life, whichever occurs
first.
It
is likely that one or two treatments with the right
agent will suffice at a given pile
during
a season provided that
the pesticide reaches most tires
in
a pile.
The INUS has experimented with pesticide treatment on
stacked
tires.
(Exh.
l6B—3).
Researchers discovered
that corncob
granules effectively penetrate random,
shingle
and
column
stacks.
Persons
faced with
a large
tire accumulation may find
it
feasible
to have
the pile treated
in this manner with
a long—
lived pesticide such as
temephos or one
of the other approved
chemicals.
Persons with short—term requirements or
in need of
frequent applications or extra safety could use
a bacterial
pesticide such as B.t.i.
The cost of
the granules
to treat 1000
tires
for
a 90—day period was given at about $2.00
for temephos
and $5.70
to $6.90
for 8.t.i.
The cost of having them applied
increases the amount.
The cost of managing the Tiger Mosquito
in
a
“worst case scenario” at
a tire processing facility containing
up
to 65,000
tires at
a given time was estimated
at about $6,000
for
the 1988 season
(attachment to Exh.
25).
An accumulation
without constant turnover could probably be managed for
less.
Section 849.105
is designed
to give persons the ability
to
devise their own mosquito management plans.
This Section
recognizes
that some persons may have unique situations or
circumstances that are not readily or efficiently handled by the
general provisions.
This Section does not allow for one
to
utilize this provision
in order
to be subject
to less stringent
management requirements.
On the contrary,
the Department of
Public Health must -expressly determine that the proposed
alternative program
is expected
to deliver results that are
substantially
equivalent
to results which would be realized
if
the person complied with Section 849.104.
Once IDPH approves
a
program and
it
is filed with the Agency,
the alternative program
is considered accepted
and acceptable.
If
a program does not
meet with IDPH approval,
it will not be considered complete by
the Agency.
This Section
is specifically available
to handle
situations such
as
that of
Lakiri General
Corp. which was
discussed
in
detail
at
hearing
(RI.
198—219).
92—655
30
This section also provides for several persons with
tires
to
file
a joint alternate management plan.
For example,
a city or
mosquito abatement district may have an ongoing program of
regular
inspection with treatment
as necessary for tires within
its jurisdiction.
A tire dealer
in such an area would be
in
compliance
if his operation was covered by an approved plan on
file with the Agency.
Similarly several persons may develop a
plan
to combine resouces
to manage their respective
accumulations.
Each individual person whose accumulation is
included
in program must be listed, but need
riot file an
individual plan.
Given the Agency’s enforcement concerns, Section 849.104
requires persons
to keep records
as
to when tires
are received,
generated, and treated.
Records may be kept on
a lot or group
basis rather than on individual
tires.
Given
the cost
and
availability of pesticides
and
the
potential for using tire converting equipment such
as slitters,
detailed
in this opinion, the Board believes that compliance with
this proposed rule
is economically reasonable
and technically
feasible.
ORDER
The Board hereby proposes for First Notice the following
rule
to be published
in the Illinois Register.
TITLE
35:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SUBTITLE
G:
WASTE DISPOSAL
CHAPTER
1:
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
SUBCHAPTER
in:
MANAGEMENT OF SCRAP TIRES
PART 849
MANAGEMENT OF
SCRAP
TIRES
Section
849.101
Definitions
849.102
Severability
849.103
Reporting of
Scrap Tires and Their Disposition
849.104
Management Standards for the Accumulations of Scrap
Tires
849.105
Alternate Management Programs For Accumulations of Scrap
Tires
849.106
Persons Who May Apply Pesticides
Authority:
Implementing Section
22 and authorized by Section 27
of
the Environmental Protection Act
(Ill.
Rev. Stat.
1985,
ch.
111
,
pars.
1022 and 1027)
92—656
31
(Source:
Emergency rules adopted
in R88—l2
at 12
Ill.
Reg.
,
effective May
1,
1988,
for
a maximum of
150 days, which
is
September 28,
1988;
adopted
in R88—l2
at
12 Ill.
Reg.
effective
.)
Section 849.101
Definitions
Except hereinafter
stated,
and unless
a different meaning of
a
word
or term is clear
from
its context,
the definitions of words
or
terms as are used
in this Part shall be the same
as
those used
in the Environmental Protection Act.
“Converted
tire”
means
a tire which has been altered so
that
it
is
no longer capable
of holding accumulations of
rainwater.
Converted tires include but are not limited
to
tires which have been manufactured
into
a useable product
other
than
a tire such
as fuel or crumb rubber,
shredded,
chopped, slit longitudinally and stacked so as not
to
accumulate water;
have been fixed
in place
and drilled with
holes of sufficient size
to allow drainage;
or have been
filled wholly or partially with cement or other material.
“Generation” means
the creation
of
a scrap tire by removal
of
a
tire from a wheel
(rim).
“New Tire”
means
a tire which has never been placed on
a
motor vehicle wheel
(rim)
for
use.
“PERSON”
IS ANY INDIVIDUAL,
PARTNERSHIP, CO—PARTNERSHIP,
FIRM,
COMPANY, CORPORATION, ASSOCIATION, JOINT STOCK COMPANY,
TRUST, ESTATE,
POLITICAL SUBDIVISION, STATE AGENCY, OR ANY
OTHER LEGAL ENTITY, OR
THEIR
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE,
AGENT OR
ASSIGNS.
“Reprocessed Tire” means
a tire which has been recapped,
retreaded or
regrooved
and has not been p-laced ~on a motor
vehicle wheel
(rim) since being reprocessed.
“Scrap Tire” means
a tire which has been removed from use on
a motor vehicle and separated from the
wheel
(rim).
Any tire
which
is
not
a -new tire or reprocessd tire is considered
to
be
a scrap tire until
it
is placed
on a motor
vehicle wheel
(rim).
A reprocessed or new tire which
is commingled with or
placed
within an accumulation of scrap
tires
is considered
to
be
a scrap tire.
For the purposes of this Part only,
a scrap
tire
is considered
to be
a waste.
“Tire”
means
a hollow ring,
made of rubber
or
similar
material, which
is designed for placement on
the wheel
(rim)
of
a motor vehicle.
92—657
32
Section 849.102
Severability
If any provision of these
rules or regulations
is adjudged
invalid,
or
if the application
thereof
to any person or
in any
circumstance
is adjudged invalid,
such invalidity
shall not
affect the validity of this Part
as
a whole or
of any Subpart,
Section,
subsection, sentence or clause thereof not adjudged
invalid.
Section 849.103
Reporting of Scrap Tire Piles and Disposition
Vacant—There
is nothing proposed for this section
in permanent
rule
Section 849.104
Management Standards for Accumulations of
Scrap Tires
a)
Except as otherwise provided in Section 849.105, between
May
1 and November
1, no person shall accumulate scrap
tires from that person’s personal, commercial,
business,
or agricultural activities where such accumulation
exceeds
10
tires unless the tires
are either:
1)
Drained of water
on the day of generation or
receipt and kept dry by being:
A)
Placed within
a closed container or structure;
or
B)
Covered by material impermeable
to-’~.zater; or
C)
Drained
or otherwise managed so aS,to remove
water within
24 hours after each precipitation
event;
or
2)
Drained of water on
the day of generation or
receipt
and processed into convert~dor reprocessed
tires within
14 days;
or,
3)
Drained of water
on the day of generation or
receipt and treated within 14
days,- with
a
pesticide appropriate
to prevent the development
of
mosquito larvae and pupae,
and
treated again as
often as necessary to prevent such development,
taking into account
the persistence
(effective
life)
of the pesticide utilized;
or,
4)
Treated on the day of generation or receipt with
a
pesticide appropriate
to prevent the development
of
mosquito larvae and pupae and
treated again as
often as
necessary to prevent such development,
taking into account the persistence
(-effective
life)
of the pesticide utilized.
92—658
33
b)
Any person who chooses
to utilize
the provisions of
subsection
(a)(2),
(a)(3)
or
(a)(4)
of this section,
for
the management of scrap
tires shall maintain
documentation concerning dates of generation or receipt
and dates and methods
of tire conversion,
draining,
or
treatment.
Section 849.105
Alternate Management Programs For Storage
of
Scrap Tires
a)
A person with an accumulation of scrap
tires may employ
mosquito control or management programs different than
those specified
in Section 849.104
if,
and only if,
that
person files a complete plan
for an alternative program
with
the Agency which details
the control or management
measures which will be
taken.
An alternative program is
complete only
if
it
is accompanied
by
a statement from
the Illinois Department of Public Health that such
program is expected
to achieve results substantially
equivalent
to those which would be achieved by
full
compliance with the requirements of Section 849.104.
A
person may file
a plan on behalf or one or more persons
for the management
of
a number of different
accumulations.
Each person whose program
is
included in
the plan need not file a separate plan
,
but must
be
identified
in
the- submitted plan.
b,
Requests for statements of substantial equivalency shall
be submitted
to the Illinois Department
of Public Health
and shall
be accompanied by information sufficient
to
allow the Department
to assess the effectiveness of the
alternative program.
Such
requests shall be sent
to:
Division of Environmental Health
Office of Health Protection
Illinois Department of Public Hëálth
525 W. Jefferson Street
Springfield,
IL
62761
Section 849.106
Persons Who May Apply Pesticides
No
person shall
apply any pesticide to scrap tires,
unless:
a)
THE PERSON IS A CERTIFIED PESTICIDE APPLICATOR CERTIFIED
BY THE ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE PURSUANT TO
THE ILLINOIS PESTICIDE ACT OF 1979
(Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1987,
ch.5, par 801
et seq.);
or
b)
THE- PERSON IS APPLYING A GENERAL
USE PESTICIDE
SPECIFICALLY APPROVED BY THE INTER-AGENCY COMMITTEE ON
THE- USE OF PESTICIDES
FOR USE BY AN UNCERTIFIED
92—659
34
APPLICATOR ON SCRAP TIRES pursuant
to Section 11.1(7)
of
the Illinois Pesticide Act of 1979,
as
amended by P.A.
85—1327,
effective August 31,
1988
(Suppl.
to Ill.
Rev.
Stat.,
ch.5,
par.
811.1(7)).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Board Member
3.
Theodore Meyer concurred.
I,
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify ~hat
the above Opinio
and Order was
adopted on the
~
day of
________________,
1988
by a vo te
of
7
—~
.
/
~M~n7~erk
-
Illinois P&llution Control Board
92—660
