ILLINOIS POLLUTION 

CONTROL BOARD

January 

1975

ENVIRONMENTAIJ PROTECTION AGENCY,

Complainant,

)

PCB

74-165

N & W DISPOSAL COMPANY, 

INC.,

an

Illinois Corporation; 

& V DEVELOPMENT

COMPANY, an Illinois Corporation; and

MELVIN F. WATSON, an individual,

Respondent.

Mr. Jeffery S. Herden,

attorney for Complainant.

Mr. Lyman C.

Tieman, attorney for M and W Disposal Company,

Inc. and Mr. Melvin Watson.

Mr. Robert Quinn, attorney for C and V Development Company,

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Dr. Odeil)

On April 26, 1974, the Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency) filed a Complaint against Respondents and alleged

numerous violations in the operation of a landfill located in

Rockdaie, Will County, Illinois. In Count I, Complainant

charged that Respondents from 

March

22,

1973, until July 27,

1973, including certain specified dates:

1. Operated the landfill without a permit in violation

of Section 21(e) of the Environmental Protection Act (Act).

2. inadequately fenced the facility in violation of

Section 21(b) of the Act and Rule 4.03 of the Rules and

Regulations For Refuse Disposal Sites and Facilities (Rules

and Regulations).

3. Failed to provide daily cover in violation of

Section 21(b) of the Act and Rule 5,07(a) of the Rules and

Regulations.

4. Failed to provide final cover in violation of

Section 21(b) of the Act and Rule 5~O7(b) of the Rules and

Regulations.

Additional violations were charged in Count II for the

period July 27, 1973, to April 26, 

1974,

including specific

dates. During this period Complainant 

alleged

that Respondents:

2—

1. Failed to provide adequate fire protection,

fencing, gates and other measures to control access to the

site, and failed to control dust in violation of Section

21(b) of the Act and Rules 314(c), (d), and (f) of the

Pollution Control Boardus regulations for Solid Waste

(Chapter 7)

2. Failed to provide daily cover in violation of

Section 21(b) of the Act and Rule 305 of Chapter 7.

3. Failed to spread and compact refuse as rapidly

as it was deposited at the toe of the landfill in violation

of Section 21(b) of the Act and Rule 303(b) of Chapter 7.

4. Caused or allowed scavenging operations at the

site in violation of Section 21(b) of the Act and Rule 308

of Chapter 7.

In Count III, Complainant alleged that from June 22,

1973, until April 26, 1974, Respondents had not obtained all

necessary permits and from March 22, 1973, until April 26,

1974, Respondents had failed to close its facility since

necessary permits were not obtained. Both allegations were

violations of the former Order of the Pollution Control Board

(Board) in Environmental Protection Agency v. M and W Disposal

Company, #72—467; 7 PCB 379 (March 22, 1973). Point one of

that Order, payment of a $2,500 penalty, had been complied

with.

A hearing occurred in Joliet, Illinois, on June 21,

1974; the parties indicated that a tentative settlement agree-

ment had been reached (R-6). The Stipulation and Proposal For

Settlement was submitted to the Board in final form on July 12.

J and V Development Company owned the land occupied by the

landfill (Stipulation and Proposal For Settlement, page 3).

The settlement agreement provided for the dismissal of J and V

Development Company as a party Respondent because it did not

operate the landfill (R-9). The other Respondents admitted as

violations most of the charges indicated in Counts I and II;

Count III was dismissed ~because the Board cannot enforce its

own order~ (R-12). The two Respondents agreed to pay a $5,000

penalty (R-9) and comply with all Board regulations. The

program of compliance has already been undertaken in that a

conditional permit has been issued to Respondents for a new

landfill west of the present facility (R—l3) and plans are to

close down the present site on approximately September 1, 1974

(Stipulation and Proposal For Settlement, page 6). Finally,

the Stipulation provided that should the Board fail to approve

it and the $5,000 penalty, that the Stipulation would be held

for nought and that no admissions in the Stipulation would

prejudice either party in subsequent hearings.

Several witnesses testified at the hearing. An Agency

official stated that at his last visit in March, 1974, the

problem of the inadequacy of daily cover still existed (R-21~

Unimpeached citizen testimony 

vociferously

objected to the

15

—

54

inconvenience, the odor problems (R~23, 24, 27) 

the rat 

problems

(R—35), and the serious dust nuisance caused by Respondents in

operating the site (R~39, 40).

We rejected the Stipulation and Proposal For Settlement in

our Interim Order of September 5, 1974, because the penalty was

unreasonably 

low

and insufficient proof was submitted that the clos~

ing landfill site and the new site were in compliance with the Act.

A second hearing was held on November 15, 1974, in Chicago,

Illinois. The Stipulation and Proposal For Settlement was orally

amended on the record to provide for a civil penalty of $10,000.

Several additional exhibits were entered into the record. On

December 18, 1974, the attorney for the Complainant submitted a

letter of clarification regarding the designation of the landfills

on

the inspection reports already entered into evidence.

We accept the Stipulation and Proposal For Settlement as

amended~ We find that Rules 4,03(a) and 5,07(a) of the Rules and

Regulations were violated

on

April 12, May 24, and July 13, 1973,

Section 21(b) was also violated on those same dates,

From March 22,

1973, until July 27, 1973,

the

landfill was operated without a permit

in violation

of

Section

21(e) 

of the Act, Rule 308 of Chapter

7 was

violated on October 

30, 1973; Rule 

303(b) was violated on December 5

and 6, 1973. On August 23, October 30, December 5 and 6, 1973, and

January 24, 1974, Rules 305(a), 314(d), and 314(f) of Chapter 7 were

violated. Section 21(b) 

of

the Act was violated on these same dates,

Respondents M and W Disposal and Melvin F. Watson are the only

parties who are responsible for these violations. For the purposes

of carrying out the settlement, we 

agree

to

dismiss

J and V Develop-

ment 

Company. 

Count 

III will be dismissed for the sole reason that

the parties

made such dismissal 

an express term of their Stipulation

and Proposal For Settlement,

Final 

cover is being applied 

to the old landfill 

site which

has been 

closed since September 

11, 1974 (R—51, 59), The 

new ten—

acre site, on 

the western 

edge of the same 32—acre tract, 

is operat-

ing within all applicable rules and regulations 

(R.51),

The latest

report from the new site was for an inspection conducted on November

11, 1974, The stipulated penalty is reasonable and should 

serve as

a sufficient deterrent to improper operation of similar kinds of

facilities,

This constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of law

of the Board.

ORDER

IT IS THE ORDER of 

the

Pollution Control Board that:

1. Respondent J 

and V

Development Company and all allega-

tions in Count III of the Complaint 

are

dismissed,

2. Respondents M and W Disposal Company and Melvin F.

Watson shall complete the final cover requirements on the old site

by January 31, 1975.

15— 55

4—

3. Respondents N and W Disposal Company, Inc., and

Melvin F. Watson shall pay a penalty of Ten Thousand Dollars

($10,000) for their violations of the Act and Regulations

established in this Opinion. The Respondents are jointly

and severally liable for the violations and payments of this

civil penalty. Payment shall be by certified check or money

order payable to the State of Illinois, Fiscal Services

Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 2200 Churchill

Road, Springfield, Illinois 62706. Payment shall be made

within 35 days of the adoption of this Order.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and

Order was adopted on the~~ day of \   

1974,

by a vote of ~j 

to C~

Christan L.~~~ett