ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    September 21, 1978
    ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    )
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 78-4
    )
    RUEBEN MURBELL,
    )
    Respondent.
    MR.
    REED
    NEUMAN,
    ASSISTANT
    ATTORNEY
    GENERAL,
    APPEARED
    ON BEHALF OF
    THE
    COMPLAINANT;
    MR.
    JOHN
    F.
    BICK,
    APPEARED
    ON
    BEHALF
    OF
    THE
    RESPONDENT.
    OPINION
    AND ORDER
    OF THE
    BOARD
    (by Mr. Dumelle):
    This matter is before the Board upon a Complaint filed by
    the Agency on January
    4,
    1978 alleging that Respondent Murrell has
    operated a solid waste management site since July 27,
    1974 without
    an operating permit,
    in violation of Section 21(e)
    of the Act and
    Rule
    202(b)
    (1)
    of the Board’s Solid Waste Regulations
    (Chapter 7).
    The Complaint also alleges that Respondent accepted hazardous and
    liquid wastes, including petroleum oils, without a permit in
    violation of Rule 310(b) of Chapter
    7.
    A hearing in this matter
    was held on June 20, 1978.
    No members of the public were present.
    The parties stipulated to the following set of facts.
    Respondent Murrell and his wife have
    owned
    and operated a solid
    waste management site in Macon County since at least June 1,
    1974.
    (R.4).
    Respondent has never had a permit for the operation of the
    site or for the acceptance and/or disposal of any liquid waste on
    the
    40 by 40 yard site
    (R.5).
    There have been approximately 20
    barrels containing petroleum oils or petroleum by-products on the
    site,
    and these barrels were at one time the property of F.
    W. Means
    Company of Decatur.
    Most,
    if not all, of the barrels have been
    removed, but not until sometime around March 14,
    1978
    (R.8-9).
    Mrs. Murrell testified that her husband has
    a contract to haul
    garbage for F. W. Means
    (R.16).
    At the time that she and her husband
    acquired the property, there were refuse and solid wastes on the
    site
    (R.12)
    .‘
    Mrs. Murrell also testified that she and her husband
    have attempted to remove the barrels and to follow and complete
    proper cover procedures.
    Mrs. Murrell indicated her willingness
    to comply with any Board order pertaining to the site
    (R.14).
    The only point in controversy is whether the Murrells
    promptly responded to the Agency’s notices of violations.
    Mr. Terry
    Ayres,
    an inspector for the Agency, testified that he inspected
    the site in August of 1977 and notified the Murrells, by letter
    31—459
    dated August 11, 1977,
    of various conditions on the site which
    constitued violations of the Act and Chapter 7 of the Board’s
    Regulations, including the lack of an operating permit and the
    presence of the barrels
    (R.27-28, Exhibit 2).
    Mr. Ayres sent two
    subsequent letters, but the Murrells never replied to any of the
    three letters.
    The Nurrells took no action to
    remove
    the barrels
    until Mr. Ayres personally spoke to Mr. Murrell at the site on
    March 14,
    1978
    (R.29)
    Mrs. Murrell, however, testified that she personally tried to
    contact Mr.
    Ayres by phone sometime between August 11th and 15th.
    She called a total of three times and was unable to reach him.
    She did not attempt to contact him by letter
    (R.37—39).
    The Board finds that a penalty
    is in order here.
    While Mrs.
    Murrell was unable to reach Mr. Ayres by phone,
    she did admit to
    having notice of the violations
    (R.36), and under the circumstances,
    she should have answered the August 11th letter by mail.
    Two
    subsequent letters failed to produce any response or action on the
    part of the Murrells, and the reasons for this inaction are
    unexplained.
    However, the Murrells have indicated their willingness
    to comply with the Board’s order, and they did take prompt action
    following the conversation of March,
    1978.
    For these reasons,
    the Board finds that a $200 penalty is warranted and will aid in
    the enforcement of the Act as a deterrent to future violations.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings and facts and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:
    1.
    Respondent has violated Section 21(e)
    of the
    Environmental Protection Act and the Board’s Rules
    202(b) (1) and 310(b)
    of Chapter 7:
    Solid Waste
    Regulations.
    2.
    Respondent shall cease and desist all such violations,
    and shall close the waste management site until
    compliance with the Act and Board Regulations is
    achieved.
    Respondent shall cover the site,
    as
    required by Board Rule 305C, with a minimum of
    two feet of suitable cover material over all of
    the fill portion of the landfill site.
    3.
    Respondent shall remove all barrels containing
    liquid wastes,
    if any such barrels remain
    presently on the site.
    31—460
    —3—
    4.
    Respondent shall not operate said landfill or accept
    any refuse or discarded materials until the proper
    operating and other permits for the site have been
    obtained.
    5.
    Respondent shall pay a penalty of $200 within 45
    days of the date of this Order.
    Said penalty
    payment shall be made by certified check or money
    order payable 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 on the
    ~I~’
    day of~,
    1978 by a vote of
    ~
    Christan L. Mo~tt, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    31—461

    Back to top