ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April 12, 1979
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Complainant,
PCB 78—30
ARTHUR LIGHT,
Respondent.
MR. REED W. NEUMAN, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON BEHALF
OF THE COMPLAINANT.
MR.
ARTHUR LIGHT APPEARED PRO SE.
OPINION
AND
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Werner):
This matter comes before the Board on the February
6,
1978
Complaint brought by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(“Agency”).
On March 13,
1978, the
Agency
filed
a
Request
for
Admission of Facts and Genuineness of Documents.
On April
10,
1978,
the Complainant filed an Amendment to its Request for
Admission of Facts and Genuineness of Documents.*
On April 18,
1978,
the Agency requested leave to file an Amended Complaint in
this case, and the Board granted the Complainant’s motion on
April
27, 1978.
Count
I of the Amended Complaint alleged that,
from June
25, 1975 until the date of filing of the Amended Complaint,
the Respondent operated a solid waste management site
(“site”)
without an appropriate Operating Permit,
in violation of Rule 202
(b) (1)
of Chapter
7:
Solid Waste Regulations
(“Chapter 7”) and
Section 21(e)
of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act
(“Act”).
Count II of the Amended Complaint alleged that,
from May 1,
1974
until the date of filing of the Amended Complaint
(including, but
*The Respondent did not respond to this request for admissions,
and thus each of the matters of fact and the genuineness of each
document therein
is hereby deemed to be admitted under Rule 314(c)
of the Board’s Procedural Rules.
33—341
—2—
not limited to, the specific dates of June 25,
1975; September
25,
1975; February
4,
1976 and August 12,
1977), the Respondent failed
to place suitable final cover over portions of the site,
in
violation of Rule 301 and Rule 305(c) of Chapter
7 and Section 21(a)
and Section 21(b)
of the Act,
Count III of the Amended Complaint
alleged that from July
20, 1976 until the filing of the Amended
Complaint
(including, but not limited to, the specific dates of
July 20, 1976; July 30,
1976; September
2,
1976 and September 20,
1976),
the Respondent failed to place adequate daily cover on
exposed refuse,
in violation of Rule 301 and Rule
305(a)
of
Chapter
7 and Section 21(a)
and Section 21(b)
of the Act.
A hearing
was held on May 26,
1978.
The Respondent, Mr. Arthur Light, owns and operates a solid
waste management
site in Peoria County, near Pottstown,
Illinois.
Although the property consists of
a total of 48.4 acres,
Mr. Light
has been conducting his part-time landfill operations on a small
proportion of the ground
(i.e.,
about a half acre).
(R,58;R.87;R.89).
Yard and tree trimmings, old bicycles, and demolition wastes such as
wood, brick,
and concrete have been deposited on the site.
(R.
17;
R.
102).
At least three other solid waste management sites
are located within a ten-mile radius of the Respondent’s property.
On May
19,
1975, the Agency granted the Respondent a
Developmental Permit No. l975-34-DE to handle heterogeneous
construction and demolition materials in accordance with the
application and plans prepared by Dean Correll,
a registered
professional engineer.
(Resp. Group Exh. 1).
At the hearing,
Mr. John Taylor, an Agency employee, testified that his inspections
of the Respondent’s property revealed that the site had not been
developed in full accordance with the Developmental Permit.
(R.
39-40; Comp. Exh.
7-10).
Moreover,
a pre-operational inspection
of the landfill by Agency personnel indicated several deficiencies
in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Developmental
Permit.
(Resp.
Group Exh.
2).
The pre-operational inspection
noted that:
(1)
construction of a levee to exclude flood waters
from the site had not taken place;
(2) wastes were observed to
have been dumped into standing water in the old creek bed; and
(3)
the trenching method mentioned in the Developmental Permit
application had not taken place
Based on the above conditions,
the Agency denied the Respondent’s application for an Operating
Permit.
CR. 39—40;
IL 66—67).
At the hearing, Mr.
Light testified that no wastes were
dumped into standing water in the old creek bed and that “the
creek bed was dry
...
this water accumulated after
...
the rains
and after the ice” melted down.
(R.
64-65).
Mr. Light also
testified that he had exercised good faith in trying to comply
33—342
—3—
with the Board’s Solid Waste Regulations and the Act
(R.
85), by
drilling monitoring wells and making soil tests which
“took a lot
of time and expense”
(R.
99); by promptly covering all but a small
section of his landfill during poor weather conditions
(R.
87-90);
by accepting only demolition wastes which have limited environmental
impact
(R.
75;
R.
102); by obtaining a Developmental Permit
(R.
93);
by having a good driveway which provides adequate access to the site
(R.
92); and by conducting his covering operations
“better” than
the nearby Peoria County landfill
(R.
90).
Mr. Light also pointed
out that he felt that he had “done nothing wrong” and that the
enforcement action had the effect of attempting to deprive him of
a living on his own property.
(R.
4;
R.
90-91;
R.
94).
Moreover,
Mr. Light’s testimony at the hearing indicated that he did not seem
to realize the basic distinction between a Developmental Permit and
an Operating Permit, and that he felt the Developmental Permit
fully authorized him to operate the landfill.
On the other hand,
the Complainant’s evidence indicated that the Agency had engaged in
extensive correspondence with the Respondent
(see: Complainant’s
Exhibits 1—18)
and numerous inspections of the site
in an attempt
to see that full compliance was achieved.
In evaluating this enforcement action, 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.
Perhaps
it will be possible for the Respondent, after further consultation
with, and advice from, the appropriate Agency personnel,
to come
into full compliance.
Accordingly,
the Board will require that the
Respondent properly cover the filled portions of the site and apply
for and obtain an Operating Permit from the Agency within 120 days
of the date of this Order or cease operations.
The Board finds
that the Respondent has violated Rules
202(b) (1),
301,
305(a) and
305(c) of Chapter
7:
Solid Waste Regulations and Sections 21(a),
21(b)
and 21(e)
of the Act.
The Board hereby imposes a penalty of
$200.00 against the Respondent.
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 Respondent has violated Rules 202(b) (1),
301,
305(a)
and 305(c) of Chapter
7:
Solid Waste Regulations and Section 21(a),
21(b)
and 21(e)
of the Act.
33—343
—4—
2.
The Respondent shall properly cover the filled portions
of the site and apply for and obtain an Operating Permit from the
Agency within 120 days of the date of this Order or cease operations.
3.
Within 45 days of the date of this Order, the Respondent
shall pay a penalty of $200.00
,
payment to be made by certified
check or money order to:
State of Illinois
Fiscal Services Division
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
I, Christan L.
Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were
adopted op the
/~1*
day of
_______________,
1979 by a
vote of ~p
.
31v~~/Y)
~4It&&
Christan L. Moffe
lerk
Illinois Pollutio
ntrol Board
33—344