ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    June 10,
    1981
    ILLINOIS
    ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 80—182
    ~‘1ASTE
    CONTROL,
    INC.,
    a
    Delaware corporation, and
    )
    IRVIN W.
    STEVENS, an
    )
    individual,
    )
    Respondents.
    CHRISTINE ZEMAN, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF
    THE COMPLAINANT.
    ROSENBERG, ROSENBERG, BICKES, JOHNSON & RICHARDSON, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
    (MR. JEFFREY D. RICHARDSON,
    OF COUNSEL), APPEARED ON BEHALF OF
    THE RESPONDENT.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by N.E.Werner):
    This matter comes before the Board on the October
    3,
    1980
    Complaint brought by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    (“Agency”).
    *
    Count
    I of the Complaint alleged that, on specified occasions
    between April
    1,
    1979 and October 3,
    1980, the Respondents accepted
    special wastes
    (such as liquid wastes,
    sludges, and solid wastes) at
    their solid waste management site
    (“site”) without having a supple-
    mental permit from the Agency in violation of Rules
    210,
    301,
    302,
    and 310(b) of Chapter
    7:
    Solid Waste Regulations
    (“Chapter 7”) and
    Sections 21(a) and 21(b) of the Illinois Environmental Protection
    Act (“Act”).
    Count II alleged that, intermittently from November
    1,
    1979
    until October
    3,
    1980, the Respondents failed to properly unload
    refuse
    (i.e., to deposit all refuse into the toe of the fill or into
    the bottom of the trench) in violation of Rules 301 and 303(a) of
    Chapter
    7 and Sections 21(a)
    and 21(b) of the Act.
    Count III alleged that, from November 1,
    1979 until October
    3,
    1980, the Respondents sometimes failed to adequately spread and
    compact refuse as rapidly as it was deposited in violation of
    Rules 301 and 303(b) of Chapter 7 and Sections 21(a)
    and 21(b) of
    the Act.
    *This
    is a case of first impression pertaining to special waste manifests.
    42—29
    —2—
    Count IV alleged that,
    from April
    1, 1979 until October
    3,
    1980,
    the Respondents occasionally failed to provide sufficient equipment,
    personnel, and supervision at the site in violation of Rules 301
    arid
    304 of Chapter
    7 and Sections
    21(a) and 21(b) of the Act.
    Count V alleged that, on certain dates between July 1,
    1979
    until October
    3,
    1980, the Respondents failed to place adequate
    daily cover on refuse in violation of Rules 301 and 305(a)
    of
    Chapter 7 and Sections 21(a) and 21(b)
    of the Act.
    Count VI alleged that,
    intermittently from July
    1,
    1979 until.
    October
    3,
    1980, the Respondents failed to apply adequate final cover
    over certain sections of the fill in violation of Rules
    301 and 305(c)
    of Chapter 7 and Sections 21(a)
    and 21(b) of the Act.
    Count VII alleged that, on various specified occasions between
    October 1,
    1979 and October
    3,
    1980,
    the Respondents violated certai.n
    conditions in their Operating Permit by not having proper dikes,
    grade stakes, and litter fences in violation of Rules 301 and 302 of
    Chapter
    7 and Sections 21(a) and 21(b) of the Act.
    Count VIII alleged that, intermittently from October
    1,
    1979
    until October 3,
    1980, the Respondents failed to collect all litter
    by the end of each working day in violation of Rules 301 and 306 of
    Chapter
    7 and Sections 21(a) and 21(b) of the Act.
    Count IX alleged that, on ten specified dates between August
    1,
    1979 and October
    3,
    1980, the Respondents failed to require
    a
    completed,
    signed manifest on special wastes that were accepted at
    the site in violation of Rules 302(a) and 501(E)
    of Chapter
    9:
    Special Waste Hauling Regulations (“Chapter
    9”) and Sections 21(a)
    and 21(b) of the Act.
    Count X alleged that,
    on December
    21, 1979, the Respondents
    accepted a special waste that was permitted and destined for a site
    other than the Respondents’ landfill as the final destination point,
    as indicated by the manifest, in violation of Rule 501(C) of Chapter
    9
    and Sections 21(a)
    and 21(b)
    of the Act.
    A hearing was held on April
    20,
    1981 at which the substance of
    the proposed settlement agreement was presented.
    The parties filed
    their executed Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement on May 18,
    1981.
    Accordingly, the Board finds that this procedure was
    in
    substantial compliance with the Board’s Procedural Rule 331.
    Waste Control,
    Inc.
    (the “Company”),
    a Delaware corporation
    which has been licensed to do business in Illinois since October 22,
    1974, operates a sanitary landfill on about 35 acres of leased
    property at 960 Moffett Lane in Decatur, Macon County,
    Illinois
    pursuant to Agency Operating Permit No. 1976—28—OP.
    From
    December 30,
    1976 until January
    1,
    1981,
    Mr.
    Irvin W.
    Stevens
    (“Mr. Stevens”) has operated the refuse disposal site for the Company.
    (Stip.
    2).
    Mr. Stevens “became the sole stockholder of Waste Control
    through a purchase agreement reached February 8,
    1979”.
    (Stip.
    2).
    42—30
    —3—
    All of the capital
    stock in the Company was transferred from
    Mr. Stevens to Mr.
    Gerald
    B.
    Reynolds on January
    1,
    1981.
    (Stip.
    3;
    See: Exhibit A).
    The purchase agreement between Mr. Stevens and
    Mr. Reynolds indicates that “Stevens relinquishes all right to
    operate said site and to benefit financially from the operation of
    the site by Waste Control,
    Inc. and Gerald B.
    Reynolds.”
    (Stip.
    3).
    On January
    20, 1981, the Agency “was sent notice of Stevens’
    relinquished interest in Waste Control,
    Inc. by David L. Beck of
    Andrews’ Environmental Engineering,
    Inc.”
    (Stip.
    3).
    The proposed settlement agreement provides that the Respondents
    admit that the violations delineated in Counts
    I through X of the
    Complaint did occur on one or more (but not all
    of) the specified
    dates alleged in the Complaint.
    (Stip.
    10).
    The parties have
    stipulated that the Respondents have subsequently “made steady
    improvement toward compliance.”
    (Stip.
    12).
    Additionally, the “Respondents represent that all of the capital
    stock of Waste Control, Inc. has heretofore been sold on an escrow
    agreement, which sale disposes of all
    interest, right of control or
    financial benefit in Waste Control, Inc.
    a corporation, on the part
    of the Respondent Irvin W.
    Stevens, with the exception of the
    forfeiture provisions contained therein which specify that in the
    event of failure or refusal of the purchaser of said stock to carry
    out the terms of the agreement forfeiture of the agreement results.”
    (Stip.
    11).
    Moreover,
    Mr. Stevens “represents that he is not now and does
    not intend in the future or at any time to engage in the landfill
    business in the State of Illinois or any other state” and “that the
    only possible involvement” of Mr. Stevens in the landfill business
    at any future date would be the result of “a breach in forfeiture”
    of the escrow agreement “with respect to the sale of the capital
    stock of Waste Control,
    Inc.”
    (Stip.
    11).
    Furthermore, the Respondents have agreed to jointly and severally
    pay a stipulated penalty of $1,500.00
    In evaluating this enforcement action and proposed settlement
    agreement, the Board has taken into consideration all the facts and
    circumstances in light of the specific criteria delineated in
    Section 33(c)
    of the Act and finds the settlement agreement acceptable
    under Procedural Rule 331.
    The Board finds that the Respondents, Waste Control,
    Inc.
    and
    Irvin W. Stevens, have violated Rules 210,
    301,
    302, 303(a),
    303(h),
    304,
    305(a),
    305(c),
    306,
    and 310(b) of Chapter 7:
    Solid Waste
    Regulations;
    Rules 302(a),
    501(C), and 501(E) of Chapter
    9:
    Special
    Waste Hauling Regulations, and Sections 21(a) and 21(b) of the
    Illinois Environmental Protection Act.
    The stipulated penalty of
    $1,500.00 will be jointly and severally assessed against the
    Respondents.
    42—31
    —4—
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    It is the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board that:
    1.
    The Respondents, Waste Control,
    Inc. and Irvin W. Stevens,
    have violated Rules 210,
    301,
    302,
    303(a),
    303(b),
    304,
    305(a), 305(c),
    306, and 310(b) of Chapter
    7:
    Solid Waste Regulations; Rules 302(a),
    501(C), and 501(E) of Chapter
    9:
    Special Waste Hauling Regulations,
    and Sections 21(a)
    and 21(b) of the Illinois Environmental Protection
    Act.
    2.
    Respondent Irvin W.
    Stevens shall cease and desist from
    further violations.
    3.
    Within 60 days of the date of this Order, Respondents
    Waste Control,
    Inc. and Irvin W.
    Stevens shall, by certified check
    or money order payable to the State of Illinois, jointly and
    severally pay the stipulated penalty of $1,500.00 which is to be
    sent to:
    Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    Fiscal Services Division
    2200 Churchill Road
    Springfield,
    Illinois
    62706
    4.
    The Respondents shall comply with all the terms and
    conditions of the Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement filed on
    May 18,
    1981, which is incorporated by reference as if fully set
    forth herein.
    I, Christan
    L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order were adopted
    on the
    1o~
    day of
    _____________,
    1981 by a vote of
    -v~~
    ___-.
    Christan L.
    Moff r?/,Clerk
    Illinois Pollutiori~óntrolBoard
    42—32

    Back to top