ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April
21,
1988
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
MANAGING TIRE ACCUMULATIONS
)
TO LIMIT THE SPREAD OF THE
)
R88—12
ASIAN TIGER MOSQUITO
)
ADOPTED EMERGENCY
RULE.
)
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by J.
Marlin):
SUMMARY OF TODAY~SACTION
The Board
is adopting this
ufast
track” emergency rule in
order
to discourage
the spread of
the Asian Tiger Mosquito (Aedes
Albopictus)
in Illinois.
This rule
is aimed at preventing
the spread
of the Tiger
Mosquito and the building of its population
to the point
that
it
can transmit diseases.
As of this point in time the Tiger
Mosquito
is known
to be present
in small areas
in three
counties.
The Board agrees with the Illinois Department
of
Public Health (IDPH)
that “it is
impottant
for the public
to
understand
that the emergency
is the spread of
the Tiger Mosquito
and not an imminent outbreak
of disease.”
(P.C.
No.
7
attachment).
The regulations
target accumulations of scrap
tires
in which
the mosquito can breed.
Scrap tire movement
is the primary means
by which the insect
is spread
to new localities.
It
is the
intention of the Board to have these regulations be effective
during the 1988 mosquito breeding season.
These
rules will be
in effect from May
1,
1988 through
September
28, 1988,
a period of 150 days.
This
is the maxiir~um
amount of time allowed by statute
for emergency
rules.
The rule
requires that certain management standards
for the storage of
scrap tires be followed after May 15,
1988.
This will allow time
for affected parties
to comply.
The Board anticipates opening
a
docket on
a permanent
rule
in the near future.
The Board gratefully acknowledges
the assistance provided by
John M.
Vandlik, Kathleen Crowley,
and Morton Dorothy
in
assisting
in the preparation of
this regulation.
SS~479
2
NOTICE AND COMMENT PROCEDURES EMPLOYED
In routine rulemaking proceedings,
the Board
is required by
Section
28 of the Act
to hold public hearings which must be
preceded by publication of
a newspaper notice
20 days
in advance
of
the hearing
date.
Given
the imminent start of the mosquito
breeding season,
the Board
felt that
it could
not reasonably
delay adoption of
a regulation until
after
a Section 28
hearing.
On
the other
hand,
the Board believed
it prudent
to
solicit public comment on
the
rule prior
to its adoption,
given
the compliance deadline.
Accordingly,
on April
7,
1988 the Board
issued
a proposed Opinion and Order containing proposed
regulatory language and the Board’s supporting
rationale.
It also announced
that
a Special Board Meeting would be held
on April
15,
1988
to receive testimony concerning
this issue.
The date,
place, and time
of this meeting were set forth
in the
Board’s Proposed Opinion and Order adopted
on April
7,
1988.
That Proposed Opinion and Order was sent to representatives
of
various governmental agencies,
including the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency,
Illinois Department
of Public
Health,
the Illinois Natural ~1istory Survey,
the Department
of
Energy and Natural Resources,
the Small Business Office of
the
Illinois Department of Commerce and Community Affairs,
the
Attorney General’s Office,
and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
Also,
representatives of various mosquito abatement
districts,
located throughout the State,
the Illinois Tire
Dealers and Retreaders Association, Illinois Petroleum Marketers
Association,
Illinois Petroleum Council
and Illinois
Environmental Regulatory Group, and specific businesses dealing
with
tires were notified
of the proposed rule.
In the Board’s
April 7th Proposed Opinion and Order,
the Board specifically
requested
the aid of persons,
agencies, and associations
in
spreading
the news of the Board’s proposed rule
to persons who
might have an interest
in this matter.
In addition,
the Office
of the Governor issued
a press release on April
11,
1988 which,
again, announced
the date,
time,
and place of the Board’s Special
Meeting in this matter.
Although the Board
is not presently
aware of the number of newspapers which reported this matter, the
Board notes
that the Chicago Sun—Times reported the particulars
concerning
the meeting
on April
15,
1988.
The press release and
news story are entered
into the record
as Exhibits No.’s
30 and
31.
The April
15 meeting was attended
by all seven members.
Cross questioning was permitted
to the extent
feasible consistent
with time constraints and the number of witnesses.
At the close
of
the meeting, the Board set a public comment period
for the
proposed rule.
Written comments were due by 12:00
p.m.
on April
20,
1988.
The Board received post—hearing comments.
A list
of
witnesses and commenters
is contained on page
6.
88—480
3
Today’s Opinion and Order will be sent to all the persons
that were sent the Board’s April 7th Proposed Opinion and
Order.
In addition,
anyone who filed comments
or testified at
the Special Board Meeting
on April
15th will
also be sent copies
of the adopted
rule,
to the extent their addresses are known.
EXPEDITED RULEMAKING
As will be discussed
in more detail later
in this Opinion,
the Tiger Mosquito
is
a serious disease transmitter
in its native
Asia.
It
is known
to be present
in limited numbers
in three
Illinois counties.
At least two serious viral diseases which
commonly occur
in Illinois can be transmitted
by this mosquito
under
laboratory conditions.
In addition, one serious
viral
disease which
is occasionally brought
into Illinois
is
transmittied by this insect.
The movement
of scrap tires
is the
primary means of spreading
this insect
to new localities.
Unless
steps are taken
to control scrap tire movement and storage, this
mosquito
is expected to spread rapidly throughout Illinois.
Once
spread throughout the State,
the mosquito will be
in close
proximity to reservoirs of viral diseases that
it may potentially
transmit
to the human population.
The proposed rule,
although
it
does not specifically address
tire management, will
reduce the
number
of new infestations expected in the State,
greatly slow
the spread of existing infestations, prevent the buildup of
existing populations
to dangerous levels,
and reduce the numbers
of other disease spreading mosquitoes
in Illinois.
Action must
be taken quickly before the 1988 mosquito breeding season begins.
Obviously,
the Board’s usual rulemaking proceedings, which
can take
a year,
are inappropriate for quick response
to this
problem.
*
Both the Act and the APA do, however, contemplate the
existence
of exceptional situations which can appropriately be
handled only by adoption of
rules
in
a shorter—than—usual time
period.
The Board believes that the Tiger Mosquito situation is
one of
those cases which requires expedited rulemaking.
Pursuant to Section 27(c)
of the Illinois Environmental
Protection Act
(Act)
and Section
5.02 of the Illinois
Administrative Procedure Act (AP~), the Board may adopt
a
temporary emergency
rule effective for 150 days, without
utilizing
the usual rulemaking procedural steps.
The 150 days
*
Routine
rulemaking under Section
5.01
of the APA cannot be
accomplished
in less than
90
days,
as
a
rule must proceed through
two 45 day notice periods.
The Act establishes additional
procedural requirements such as the drafting
of an Economic
Impact Statement which may lengthen the process
by
a year or
more.
88—481
4
will encompass the breeding season this year and allow
time for
consideration of other
steps
to address the situation next year.
Under Section 27(c),
paragraph
2,
of the Act and Section
5.02
of the APA, the Board may adopt a temporary rule which
remains
in effect for up
to 150 days.
The APA terms this an
“emergency rulemaking,” and defines “emergency”
as “the existence
of any situation which an agency finds reasonably constitutes
a
threat
to the public
interest, safety, or welfare.”
The Board
believes that the potential spread and further establishment of
this
insect, which
is capable of transmitting
a number
of
diseases,
reasonably constitutes
such
a threat.**
At the meeting,
the scientific panal agreed that the
potential spread
of the Tiger Mosquito meets the required
definition
of “emergency.”
Dr. Turnock of IDPH and Ms. Nickels
of CDH also agreed.
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
**
The Board also notes
that under Section
27(c), paragraph
1,
of
the Act,
the Board may promulgate
a permanent
regulation that
“shall take effect without delay and the Board
shall proceed with
hearings and studies required by
this Section while the
regulation continues
in effect.”
This procedure may be used
“when
the Board finds
that
a severe public health emergency
exists.”
The Board does not believe that the present situation
regarding the Tiger Mosquito constitutes a “severe public health
emergency.”
88—482
5
(1)
that environmental damage seriously
endangers
the
public
health
and
welfare....
Ill. Rev.
Stat.
1985,
ch.
111
1/2 ~
par.
l002(a)(l)
Reflecting
this legislative
finding,
the Supreme Court has
held
that impairing the Board’s ability
to “protect health,
welfare, property,
and 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); Cabin v.
Pollution Control Board,
16
Ill. App.
3d.
958,
307 N.E.2d
191,
199 (1974).
In the instant situation,
the Board has adopted rules that
regulate the storage
of 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 are
a
solid waste management problem.
Such matters are commonly dealt
with by the Board.
The Board has traditionally promulgated
rules
to control pests
and vectors associated with solid waste.
The
best example
is regulations
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.
The Board could not have reasonably acted
in this matter
before this time given that the extent of the infestation
arid the
Tiger Mosquito’s ability
to survive Illinois’ winters did not
become known
to the Board
until recently.
Delaying action on
this matter while routine rulemaking procedures are followed
would allow the mosquito
to spread during
the entire
1988
breeding season.
The Board
is aware
that other agencies and local governments
are
in the process of considering responses
to this problem.
The
Board recognizes that these
regulations address only one facet,
albeit an
important one,
and has appreciated
the assistance
of
these entities
in revising the original proposal.
88—483
6
MEETING PARTICIPANTS
At the special Board meeting
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
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 INUS on the Asian
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 J. 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);
88—484
7
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
(CDSS), City of Chicago;
Philip
J. Mole,
P.E. representing Sun Eco Systems;
Jay Lauterback, President,
Illinois State Tire Dealers and
Retreaders Association;
Ronald Lakin,
Vice—President,
Laken General Corp.;
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. Bettina Francis
and the DesPlaines Valley Mosquito Abatement District.
A large
number
of exhibits were received by the Board.
THE INFESTATION PROBLEM
The bulk of this section of
the Opinion was contained
in the
Proposed Opinion of April
7, l988~ The scientific panel agreed
that the information
in that document was scientifically
accurate.
(R.
21,
27 and 51).
Some additions have been made and
these generally reference exhibit numbers greater than “ten.”
The record developed at the meeting clearly indicated that dengue
fever
is not likely to
be transmitted
in Illinois.
(P.C.
#5).
Scientists and public health officials are particularly concerned
that the Tiger Mosquito may prove capable
of transmitting La
Cross 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.
88—485
8
albopictus
as
a
potentially
serious
public
health
problem,
both
for
the
United
States
and for other countries
in the hemisphere; 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
tmosquito 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,
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.
(Bd. 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
(P.C.
*5).
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
88—436
9
1945(s).
Second,
confirmed dengue cases were
reported
in
areas
where
Ae.
aegypti
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.
COC
is
currently
collaborating
with
state
health
departments
to
improve
surveillance
for
both
the
irttroductin
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 headache,
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
trarisovarial
infection
cycle
in
Ae.
triseriatus,
with
seasonal
amplification
in
88—487
10
small
mammals.
Humans
typically
encounter
the virus
in heavily wooded suburban or
rural
environments.
Probably because
of
a
stable
vector—virus
cycle,
there
is
a
rather
constant
annual
number
of
about
75
human
cases
(range
of
30
to
1
60 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
epidmiology
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.
albopictus
is better adapted than
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
(Ex.
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.
(Bd.
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).
The scientific
panel agreed that the expedited approach is
justified
(R.
85)
and that delaying implementation of the
proposed rule would
lead to a
50 percent increase
in the number
of
infested counties this year and spread of
existing
infestations to cover
20
to
25 square miles.
(R.
70).
They
agreed that implementation would have
a beneficial effect and
should not be delayed.
They also agreed with IDPH that the rule
will
reduce the numbers
of other mosquito species known
to
transmit diseases
in Illinois.
88—488
11
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 strong 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.
(R.
90)
In response
to a direct question,
Dr. Moore emphatically
stated,
“There is no evidence that the ~sian Tiger Mosquito, any
other mosquito,
or any other blood—sucking insect,
can transmit
the AIDS virus.”
(R.
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 out that the
insect by 1987 had spread
to 77 counties
in 18 states,
has eggs
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.”
(R.
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
38—489
12
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,
dewatering,
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
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
sage
and
effective
mosquito
88—490
13
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.
l6A).
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 CPH 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
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,
88—491
14
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
fin
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
or 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.
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
Gorer,
the
Mediterranean
fruit
fly
and
many
other
species
that have come
to
us
from elsewhere,
will
be with us forever.
88—492
15
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
we have
the
last chance
to find out.
(R.
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
desireable,
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:
Preventinc~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
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
88—493
16
very
high
dosages);
thus,
it
is
imperative
that
tires
be
dry before
fumigation.
Scrap
tires,
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
inaccessible
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 employed 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
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:
88—49 4
17
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
indiscriminantly
dumped
(into
ravines,
abandoned
coal
strip
pits,
etc.)
admittedly,
and
0.74
million
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
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)
88—495
13
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 currently 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
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
88—49 6
19
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
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.
88—49 7
20
I
have
to
question
whether
it
places
too
great
an
emphasis
on
the
large
tire
accumulations 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
(P.C.
#8)
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:
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.
88—498
21
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
eff~ortsto 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.
(R.
282).
He also indicated that over 300
tire piles
in excess
of 100 tires were recently discovered during
survey of Chicago.
(R.
118).
At the meeting,
the Agency opposed the proposed
rule and
questioned
the Board’s authority
to act
in this matter which it
perceives
as
a public health rather than solid waste problem.
The Agency also raised questions
as
to the enforceability of the
proposed rule, particularly the transportation section.
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,
R.
at 233—280).
The Agency did not recommend
any action for this breeding season
to control the spread
of the
mosquito.
In Public Comment
#6,
the Agency maintained
its objections,
but offerred alternative language that it felt would improve the
rule.
The Board has accepted many
of these suggestions.
The Illinois Department of Agriculture
(IDA)
initially
opposed the proposal largely on the grounds that
it covered 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.
The IDA
supported the Agency alternative presented
in P.C.
#6.
(Exh.
27
and attachment
to P.C.
#6).
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
throughout the State where ownership
is not identified or
88—499
22
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 tiresin
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 stockpiled
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
longterm
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.
88—500
23
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 regulations
if
they went into force and covered the City.
He supported the
rule
and emphasized Chicago’s desire to manage
its tire problem.
CR.
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
gasoiline
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
available given enough time
to have orders
filled.
He urged
88—501
24
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.
(R.
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.
(R.
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 with maintenance
estimated at $65,000 per million tires.
(P.C. #3).
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.
(P.C.
#1).
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
88—502
25
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.
(R.
201—232).
Section 849.105
is specifically included to address situations like this by
providing for alternate control plans.
Lakin General
is
frequently the victim of people who
illegally dump scrap tires at
or near its facility.
(R. 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.”
(R.
227—229).
THE BOARD’S RULE AND RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
Given
the clear
guidance of CDC and expert testimony
in this
record,
the Board will proceed with
a regulation to address the
problem during the 1988 mosquito breeding season.
The Board’s
rule includes
identifying tire piles within the State and
requiring generators and receivers of used tires to keep them dry
or unsuitable
for mosquito breeding.
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.
(R.
79—81;
Exh.
l4A,
p.
1;
Exh.
16A,
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.
(R.
59).
The Tiger Mosquito breeding season may have already begun in
Southern Illinois
(Exh.
20,
p.
1),
and there
is
a high
probability that temperature conditions
for larval development
will be optimal by Mid—May.
(P.C.
#9,
p.
1).
Given that tires
move into Illinois from southern states and Asia,
it
is likely
that immature mosquitoes on an earlier development timetable are
going
to enter Illinois this spring.
(R.
44 and 221).
The Tiger Mosquito reaches adulthood from an egg in 7—14
days,
depending upon various conditions.
(R.
15; Exh.
9,
p.
1).
The mosquitoes can then produce a new generation every 20 days
(Exh.
14B—l8,
p.
42).
The eggs can be transported
in
tires
(wet
or dry) and can survive freezing
to a certain extent.
(R.
15;
88—503
26
Exh.
14B—20,
l4B—l9).
A hard winter, may cut back the population
in areas
like Chicago,
allowing possible eradication.
(R.
280).
Postponement of Regulations of
Interstate and Intrastate Tire
Transport
The most sensible approach to the Tiger Mosquito problem
would begin with the federal government restricting
the
interstate movement of
tires that have not been certified
as
being dry, clean,
and free of insects.
The federal government
has required this as of January
1,
1988 for used tire casings
coming into the country from Asia
(Exh.
6).
This was after
the
Tiger Mosquito was well established
in the Gulf States.
As of
this date,
the US.
Public Health Service
(PHS)
through the Food
and Drug Administrative
(FDA)
has not proposed regulations on the
interstate transportation of tires as recommended by CDC in
Exhibit
5.
Because the mosquito can be spread from loads
of
contaminated tires
in transit
in the State,
effective control
will eventually require regulation of tires
in interstate
commerce, including
tires shipped into or across the State.
At
a
minimum this will require that tires be shipped dry and
covered.
A certificate of inspection from authorities
in
Illinois, other states or
the federal government may also be
necessary.
This poses
a question
as
to whether the State has the
authority to regulate this interstate commerce.
This
type of quarantine or sanitary regulation
is common
with respect to the shipment of agricultural products.
Generally
a state,
in the exercise
of the police power reserved to
it, and
in the absence
of conflicting federal regulations,
may pass
reasonable sanitary and quarantine laws which are valid,
although
to a certain extent they necessarily affect interstate
and
foreign commerce.
Mintz
v. Baldwin 53 S.Ct.
611,
289 U.S.
346,
77 L.Ed.
1246;
Kassel
v. Consolidated Freightways,
101 S.Ct.
1309,
450 U.S.
662, 67 L.Ed.
2d 580.
The federal government has authority to promulgate
regulations affecting interstate and foreign commerce in
contaminated tires.
42 CFR 71.41 requires inspection of foreign
shipments
to determine
if there
is
insect infestation requiring
measures
to prevent the introduction, transmission or spread of
communicable disease.
42 CFR 71.54 prohibits the importation of
arthropods capable of being
a host or vector
of human disease.
21 CFR 1250.49 requires that “conveyances”
be kept free
of
mosquitos while
in transit,
and that they be placed out of
service until effectively treated
for
the destruction of
vermin.
21 CFR 1250.3(e) defines
“conveyance”
to include any
land carrier.
FDA has not yet used this authority to regulate
tire shipments.
These regulations are derived from Section 361 of
the Public
88—504
27
Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C.A.
264).
This authorizes
the
Surgeon General
to make regulations providing
for inspection and
extermination
as necessary to prevent the spread
of communicable
disease into the United States
or between states.
There is no
indication
in either
the statute or the regulations that federal
regulations are
to exclude state regulation.
Indeed,
42 U.S.C.A.
243(a)
requires that the federal government “cooperate with and
aid State and local
authorities
in the enforcement
of their
quarantine and other health regulations.”
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 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.
14A)
The Board has not imposed this requirement in the emergency
rule.
There
has not been sufficient time
to adequately consider
the State’s ability
to physically enforce such
a regulation which
would require
the close cooperation
of
a number
of agencies,
including
the State Police.
The Board believes that the rule as
adopted will be largely effective without this aspect since tires
must be drained upon receipt.
However,
such
a regulation
is
clearly desirable to prevent reinfestation
of Illinois and other
states.
This matter will be considered at
a later date
in full
consultation with other agencies.
Size of Accumulations Covered by Standards
A significant difference
in the adopted
rule is that the
storage requirements apply only
to accumulation, which exceed 50
scrap tires.
This change was requested by the Agency and
endorsed by the Illinois Department of Public Health and Illinois
Department
of Agriculture;
it also reflects the Board’s
regulatory intention that this emergency rule apply only to
relatively major scrap tire accumulations.
In addition, the
Board has specifically exempted accumulations which result from
S
8—505
28
personal,
non—business activities,
as well
as agricultural,
horticultural,
livestock raising activities.
Several persons opposed limiting the number
of
tires
in a
regulated accumulation and leaving them
to be controlled by local
authorities.
The opposition of
these individuals centered around
several concerns.
These included the fact that Mosquitoes do not
distinguish between
large and small
tire accumulations,
and that
local authorities lack either
the funds
or expertise
to approach
this problem.
(R.
60 and
83, Exh.
20, and P.C.
#10).
In reaching
its conclusion,
the Board has considered the
concerns
of the other agencies.
The IDPH
(P.C.
#7 and
attachments)
has convinced the Board
that small accumulations
will eventually be acted on by local authorities with the
assistance of
IDPH.
IDPH has developed
a proposal involving education, control
and surveillance
to deal with
vector control in Illinois.
The
proposal states:
The
appearance
of
the
tiger
mosquito
and
resulting
concern
among
the
public
and
scientists
create
both
an opportunity
and
a
responsibility
to
intensify
these
activities
with
the
expectation
of
more
widespread
participation than in the past.
The following excerpts from the comments detail
IDPFI’s
reasons for believing that the mosquito problem can be addressed
in small accumulations without
a Board rule:
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
88—506
29
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.
111
1/2
,
oara.
20c.Ol)
and the
Standards for Local Health Departments, local
health
departments must
perform
inspections,
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
(MAD5)
were
passed.
This
legislation
gives
NIADs
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
MAIDs
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 Board’s requirements apply to any accumulations of over
50 scrap tires
that are accumulated for business or
commercial
purposes
(other than agricultural) even though such an operation
happens
to be located on agricultural land.
With regard to
smaller scrap
tire accumulations,
it
is more appropriate,
at
this
88—507
30
time,
for the Department of Public Health or local authorities to
investigate and combat any infestations at such sites.
The rule does not include tire accumulations under the
jurisdiction
of local governmental units and entities which are
not conducting
a business or commercial activity resulting
in
tire accumulations.
This exemption along with the 50—tire
provision will allow State agencies
to concentrate
their efforts
more effectively
in areas with known infestations.
The Board
presumes that local authorities will exercise due concern for
the
welfare of their citizens
in managing such accumulations.
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 not 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.
For
the purpose of the rules adopted
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.
Any further altering of
the current
law with respect
to
tires
is more appropriate
in a subsequent, permanent rulemaking
legislation.
Reporting Requirement
The reporting requirement will generate
a data base on the
location and size
of tire accumulations in the State.
This will
allow state and local officials to more readily assess the extent
of the infestation
in the State.
It will also provide
a good
idea of the magnitude of the effort needed
to address
the solid
waste problem caused by abandoned tires.
No one
is exempt from
this reporting requirement.
The version of the rule that the Board proposed on April
7th,
1988,
required that all reports concerning scrap
tires be
submitted to the Agency by July
1,
1988.
Through testimony and
comments,
the Agency asserted that the Board’s reporting
requirement,
as originally proposed, was administratively
unworkable.
Instead,
the Agency proposed deadlines which would
stagger the submission of these reports.
According to the
Agency, such staggering will allow
the Agency to develop
a system
to properly assimilate
the reports
it will receive under the
rule.
The Board has altered the rule so as
to address the
38—508
31
Agency’s concern and at the same time set forth time
frames which
are consistent with
the 150—day effective period
for
this rule.
In summary, accumulations of scrap tires must be reported to the
Agency on the following schedule:
more then 50,000
scrap tires,
July
1,
1988;
between 5,000 and 50,000 scrap tires,
August
1,
1988;
between
50 and
5000 scrap
tires,
September
1.
The Board
has slightly compressed
the time frames requested by the Agency
so that data will be available
for consideration during the
development of
a permanent rule.
The substantive
requirements of
the report have essentially remained unchanged from the April 7th
version of the
rule.
However, some rearrangement of the
subsections has occurred for
improved efficiency
in the
regulatory
language.
Standards for the Management of Scrap Tires
Section 849.104
and 849.105 set forth management standards
on the storage of scrap tires which became scrap tires
(are
“generated”)
or were received after May 15,
1988.
The May
15
date
is two weeks
later
than the originally proposed date.
This
will allow more
time for compliance.
This Section deliberately
excludes scrap tires which were stored
or stockpiled before
May
15,
1988.
In the long run,
it will
be desirable to address
these
scrap tires;
however,
it
is the more recent accumulations
of scrap tires at active sites which are most likely to become
infested with the mosquito.
Newly generated scrap tires are
included since they are being currently handled and can be
readily and properly stored
to prevent the development
of
mosquitoes.
This will prevent magnification of the current
problem of large accumulations
of stored
tires.
The time frames
in Section 849.104 are intended
to require
certain actions quickly enough
to deny mosquitoes
time to
develop.
For example
a newly generated tire which
is “converted”
seven days after
being removed from
a wheel
is
unlikely
to
produce adult mosquitoes.
Section 849.104
(b)
provides several
options
for
the management
of scrap tires received after May 15,
1988.
This recognizes that some persons with scrap tires will
find
it impossible
to store
tires
in a dry manner.
These persons
must drain
the tires on the day of receipt.
This
is necessary
because some tires received,
especially those
from out
of state,
may contain water with larvae or pupae.
Drained
tires may
be
treated or converted within seven days.
Persons receiving
scrap tires from any source will be
required
to drain them or otherwise prevent their accumulating
water.
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
in a
is landfilled or otherwise converted on
the day or
receipt.
As
a practical matter,
it will be virtually impossible
to drain
a tire to the point where
it contains no moisture.
The
88—509
32
Board expects that
a “drained”
tire may contain up
to
one—fourth
inch of water when stood vertically.
The Board notes that “slit”
tires may still hold water
if
they are not properly stacked.
(R.
185; Exh.
26,
p.
2).
It is assumed that
to
be
in compliance,
slit tires must
be stacked
so as not
to hold water.
Operations may substitute an insect treatment program for
dry storage.
Treatment for
the prevention of mosquito
development may
include the use
of
a number of pesticides.
The
pesticides must
be properly applied and caution should be used
to
avoid
those
to which
the Tiger Mosquito has 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.
Certified pesticide applicators must apply
pesticies.
IDPU and
IDA have information for certification,
which
is possible
for 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,
“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).
Since one week is sufficient
for
mosquito development, treatment
is required within
a week.
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 1988 provided that the pesticide reaches most
tires
in a pile.
The INHS
has experimented with pesticide treatment on
stacked
tires.
(Exh.
l6B—3).
Researchers discovered that corncob
granules effectively penetrate random,
shingle and column
stacks,
Persons
in local
governments 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 B.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
88—510
33
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.
Given
the long—term effectiveness of
certain granular and
pelletized pesticides,
persons who generate scrap tires may find
it useful to cooperate
in treating their
tires.
A certified
applicator
could
treat newly generated tires once
a week
at
a
number of dealerships.
A generator could also have
a certified
applicator place pesticide granules into individual tires at the
end of each day.
Individual tires
or
those
in illegal dumps could
also be
treated
in this manner until
the resources exist to collect and
convert
them.
Some Mosquito abatement districts routinely treat
such tires.
The Board notes that the rule adopted today requires that
the scrap tires be
treated or converted within seven days after
receipt
or generation.
The April
7th version of the rule
required such actions within six days.
The adopted rule fits
a
standard work week.
Also,
the Board adopted the Agency’s
recommendation that the Board provide
a method
of compliance
which entails the draining of water from tires within
24 hours
after every precipitation event
if they are not treated with a
pesticide or properly converted.
Section 849.105
is designed
to give persons with over 5000
tires the ability to devise their own mosquito management
plans.
The 5000 tire cut—off comes from the comments
of the
Agency,
IDPH and IDA.
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 Lakin
General Corp. which was discussed
in detail at hearing
(R.
198—
219).
Given the Agency’s enforcement concerns, Section 849.104
requires persons
to keep some records as
to when tires
are
received, generated,
and treated.
It would be particularly
useful
if tires accumulated prior
to May 15 are separated
in some
fashion from those falling under
the rule.
Records may be kept
on
a lot or group basis
rather than on individual
tires.
38— 511
34
Enforcement Concerns
In the record,
the Agency has expressed concerns that
this
rule would put
a heavy burden
of enforcement on the Agency.
The
Agency,
in particular,
stated that
it did not have the resources
to marshal
an inspection and enforcement effort.
While the Board
fully appreciates the Agency’s concern,
it also notes that this
regulation can also be directly enforced by the Attorney General,
states attorneys and individual citizens.
And as with any
regulatory effort, much of the compliance is achieved on
a
voluntary basis, particularly when,
as here,
the regulation
itself contains the instructions
to those regulated
as
to what
control methods are
to be used.
Some witnesses expressed the belief that this rule will
receive
a substantial amount of voluntary compliance
(R.
78,
106).
Dr. Craig pointed out that the rule will stimulate
positive activity,
“The presence
of the rules on the books will
make
a
lot
of people look
at tires
that they would
never
look
at.”
(R.
281).
The Board also believes that the regulation will indirectly
enhance
the strategies
of other
state and local agencies in their
own participatory efforts,
including surveillance,
education,
inspection,
nuisance, enforcement,
research,
reporting,
direct
mosquito control,
etc.
The Board expects the Agency to exercise its prosecutorial
discretion and give priority
of enforcement
to accumulations that
present the greatest threat.
Similarly,
the Board
notes that the
Agency may delegate enforcement authority
to local authorities
pursuant to Section 4(r).
This avenue may aid
the Agency
in
enforcing this
rule.
The use
of Section
34 authority to “seal”
a
facility is expected only under
extreme conditions.
The Board realizes
that an ideal program would require that
all tires be properly stored or disposed no matter where
they are
or when they were received.
Any unit
of local government with
appropriate authority can take additional steps
to control any
existing or potential infestation.
A city with an infested pile
within its jurisdiction could treat
the pile itself or require
the owner
to properly store or
dispose an accumulation.
Given
that most accumulations in the State are not likely to be
currently infested,
leaving further immediate action
to the local
authorities makes sense.
They will be able
to take action
appropriate
to local conditions.
At a future date,
legislation
or
a permanent rule can address other possibilities.
The Board also believes that local authorities can best
control the breeding sites
in neighborhoods.
Public education
and local efforts will have
the best chance
of controlling
discarded containers near homes and schools.
Such containers are
88—512
35
integral
to
the spread of the Tiger
Mosquito from large tire
piles.
The Agency and
IDPFI have recommended
the formation of
an
interagency
task force
to develop further plans
in this area.
Such a group should
at
a minimum include the Agency,
IDPFI,
IDA,
DENR’s Office
of Solid Waste and Renewable Resources,
and DENR’s
Illinois Natural History Survey.
The Board will participate
in
such discussions
as are appropriate
to
its
role.
The IDPH proposal
(attached
to P.C.
#7) contains
a valuable
outline
of an approach
to the problem of vector control.
The
INHS attached to P.C.
#
9
a list of
research projects that would
among
other
items:
provide
an evaluation of pesticide and common
household products
(such as soaps,
salt and oil)
for controlling
container
mosquitoes; supply technical assistance
to local
governments and IDPH; determine the distribution of
the Tiger
Mosquito in Chicago,
St. Clair County;
and study the impact of
weather
and microclimate on the Tiger Mosquito.
The record shows
that as with most State programs,
the currently available
resources
for
the Agency,
IDPH and DENR
in this area are quite
limited.
For the development of
legislation or
a permanent rule some
coordination
is needed
to develop policy on this matter.
In
terms of
a permanent rule,
the Board should receive
a proposal
from interested persons or agencies no later than November
1,
1988.
This would enable
a rule to be
in force by Spring
of 1989
so as
to be useful during the 1989 breeding season.
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 emergency rule is economically reasonable and technically
feasible.
The Board notes that the more limited scope of
the
adopted rule in relation to the proposed
rule, has greatly
reduced
the cost of overall
implementation and number
of affected
individuals and businesses.
The Board
notes that any effort
to slow the spread
of
the
Tiger Mosquito
by eliminating discarded tire piles will have
other benefits.
The record
is replete with references to the
fact that cleaning up tires will help control the Tree Hole
Mosquito and Northern House Mosquito both of which currently
spread disease
in Illinois.
A
rule governing tire accumulations
would
be
in the public interest even
if the Tiger Mosquito did
not exist.
ORDER
The Board hereby adopts
as final
the
following emergency
rules
to
be filed with the Secretary
of State.
88—513
36
TITLE
35:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SUBTITLE
G:
WASTE DISPOSAL
CHAPTER
I:
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
SUBCHAPTER M:
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 Storage of Scrap Tires
849.105
Alternate Management Programs For Storage
of Scrap Tires
Authority:
Implementing Section
22 and authorized by Section
27
of the Environmental Protection Act
(Ill. Rev.
Stat.
1985,
ch.
111 1/2
,
pars.
1022 and 1027)
(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.)
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:
shreaded;
chopped; converted
to
playground use by fixing into position and drilling holes of
sufficient size to allow drainage; or,
filled with cement or
similar material.
“New Tire”
means
a tire which has never been placed on
a
motor
vehicle
for use.
However,
a new tire
is considered to
be
a scrap tire
if it
is commingled with or placed within an
accumulation
of scrap tires.
“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
is considered
to be
a scrap tire
until
it
is placed on a motor vehicle wheel
(rim).
For the
purposes of this part only,
a scrap tire
is considered
to be
a waste.
“Storage” means the containment of waste,
either on
a
88—514
37
temporary basis or
for
a period of years,
in such
a manner as
not
to constitute disposal
of such waste.
“Tire”
means
a hollow
ring,
made of
rubber
or similar
material, which
is
intended
to be placed on the wheel
(rim)
of
a motor
vehicle,
and which, when stored or discarded,
is
capable
of holding accumulations
of water.
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
a)
On or before July
1,
1988,
any person who accumulates,
or who owns property which contains more than 50,000
scrap tires
shall report to the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency (Agency)
the information required
in
subsection
(d).
b)
On or before August
1,
1988 any person who accumulates
or who owns property which contains an accumulation
of
more than 5,000,
but not more than 50,000 scrap
tires
shall
report
to the Agency the information required
in
subsection
(d).
c)
On or before September
1,
1988,
any person who
accumulates, or who owns property which contains an
accumulation of more than
50, but not more than 5000,
scrap or used tires shall report
to the Agency the
information required in subsection
(d).
d)
Information required:
1)
The legal
name and post office address of the
person making
the report,
2)
The location of the accumulation including street
address, municipality or township,
county, and
if
appropriate, descriptions of
rural locations,
3)
The approximate
number
of scrap tires at the
location,
4)
Whether
the person ships or
receives scrap tires
to
or
from other
locations,
88—515
38
5)
What use or disposition
a person makes or plans
to
make
of the scrap
tires,
and
6)
The manner
in which
the accumulation
is stored
prior
to such use
or disposition.
e)
Reports required by this Section shall be sent
to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Land Pollution Control
2200 Churchill Road
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794—9276
Section 849.104
Management Standards for
the Storage of Scrap
Tires
a)
This Section applies only to accumulations of scrap
tires generated or
received on and after May 15,
1988.
This section does not apply
to scrap tires accumulated
solely as
a
result of personal activities and
agricultural, horticultural, and livestock—raising
activities.
b)
Except as otherwise provided in Section 849.105, no
person shall store scrap tires accumulating from that
person’s commercial or business activities where such
accumulation exceeds
50 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 impermeable material; 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 converted tires within
seven days:
or
3)
Drained of water on the day of generation or
receipt and treated
to prevent mosquito development
by a pesticide applicator certified by the
Department
of Agriculture pursuant to the Illinois
Pesticide Act of 1979,
as amended
(Ill.
Rev. Stat.
1985,
ch.
5,
par. 801 et seq.)
within seven days
of
generation or
receipt and as often as necessary
88—516
39
thereafter
to prevent mosquito development taking
into account the persistence
(effective
life)
of
the pesticide utilized.
c)
Any person who chooses
to utilize
the provisions
of
subsection
(b)(2)
and (b)(3)
above,
for the management
of scrap tires shall maintain documentation concerning
dates of receipt and dates and methods of tire
conversion and/or treatment.
Section 849.105
Alternate Management Programs For Storage
of
Scrap Tires
a)
A person with an accumulation of 5000 or more 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 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.
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 Health
525 W. Jefferson Street
Springfield,
IL
62761
IT
IS SO ORDERED.
Board Member J.D. Dumelle concurred.
I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of
the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order was
adopted on the
_________________
day
of
__________________,
1988
byavoteof
_____________.
~
~27.
Dorothy M. ~‘unn,Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
88—517
