ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April
25,
1974
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Complainant,
V.
)
PCB 73—456
CITY OF LOVES PARK,
an Illinois
)
Municipal Corporation;
Neil Scott,
individually; American National Bank,
a banking corporation;
and Rogers Dry-)
wall,
Inc.,
an Illinois Corporation,
)
Respondents.
Mr. Marvin Medintz, attorney for Complainant.
Mr. Philip Nicolosi, attorney for Respondent Loves Park.
Messrs William Snively and Philip Nyc, attorneys
for
Respondent Neil Scott.
American National Bank did not appear.
Messrs Charles Rogers and Ray Rogers appeared for Rogers
Drywall, Inc.,
without the aid of counsel.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Dr. Odell)
The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)
filed its
Complaint against the Respondents on October 31, 1973, alleg-
ing violations of the Environmental Protection Act
(Act) and
Rules and Regulations For Refuse Disposal Sites and Facilities
(Rules and Regulations)
for the operation of the landfill in
which each Respondent owned
a parcel of land.
The site, commonly
known as Ballard Pit,
is located on Harlem Road in or near the
City of Loves Park, Winnebago County, Illinois.
The Complaint
was composed of four counts
——
one for each Respondent
--
and
stated:
Count I:
Loves Park owned and operated the landfill
without a permit from July 1,
1970,
to October
31,
1973,
in
violation of Section 21(e) of the Act.
From July 1,
1970,
to
October
31, 1973
--
including certain specified dates
-—
Loves
Park vio.~ated21(b)
of the Act ar~~
Rule 3.04
of the Rules and
Regulations
(open dumping of refuse)
,
21(b)
of the Act and Rule
5.03 of the Rules and Regulations
(failure to confine refuse to
smallest practical area)
,
21(b)
of the Act and Rule
5.05 of the
Rules and Regulations
(failure to provide sufficient equipment
at the landfill according to the approved plan)
,
Rule
5.06 of the
Rules and Regulations
(failure to properly spread and compact
refuse as admitted to the site), and 21(b)
of the Act and Rule
5.07(a)
of the Rules and Regulations
(failure to provide adequate
daily cover for refuse)
12
—
f45
—2—
Count
II:
Neil Scott owned and operated the landfill
without a permit from January
1,
1973,
until October
31,
1973,
in violation of Section 21(e)
of the Act.
From January
1,
1973,
to October
31, 1973
-—
including certain named dates
-—
Neil
Scott violated Section 21(b)
of the Act and Rules 3.04,
5.33,
5.05,
5.06,
and 5.07(a)
of the Rules and Regulations.
Count III:
American National Bank (ANB)
owned and
operated the landfill without a permit from January
1,
1973,
to
October 31, 1973,
in violation of Section 21(e)
of the Act.
From
January
1,
1973,
to October 31, 1973
——
including certain
designated dates
——
ANB violated Section 21(b)
of the Act, Rules
3.04,
5.03,
5.05,
5.06, and 5.07(a)
of the Rules and Regulations.
Count IV:
Rogers Drywall,
Inc.
(Rogers) owned and
operated the landfill without a permit from July
1,
1970,
to
October
31,
1973,
in violation of Section 21(e)
of the Act.
From July
1,
1970,
to October
31,
1973
--
including certain
indicated dates
--
Rogers violated Section 21(b)
of the Act and
Rules 3.04,
5.03,
5.05,
5.06,
and 5.07(a)
of the Rules and
Regulations.
The hearing took place in Loves Park, Illinois,
on
January
21,
1974.
The parties and the Hearing Officer visited
Ballard Pit before the morning session began.
The landfill
site is
a former gravel pit measuring more than one thousand
feet in circumference.
It serves as a major recharge area for
a large underground aquifer which supplies the community with
its potable water supply.
A portion of the west side of Ballard
Pit is the subject of this Complaint.
Refuse, which was dumped
along the middle of the west bank, measured 300 feet long and
75 feet wide.
At the hearing pursuant to Stipulation,
the EPA
introduced
19 exhibits
(Comp.
Ex.
1 through
19)
to establish
possible violations as to Respondent Loves Park.
The City ad-
mitted having no permit,
but contended that it never conducted
a refuse disposal operation at the site
(R—7).
The remainder
of the morning session’s testimony went to the issue of who owned
the property along the refuse-laden west bank
(R—13 to R-6l)
The parties and Hearing Officer reexamined the landfill
during the noon recess and entered,
in pertinent parts,
the
following Stipulation into the record when the afternoon session
began:
“1. That the City of Loves Park owns a part or portion
of the dumping area,
including the west bank.
“2.
That there has been no dumping in that area since
April of
1971.
“3.
That since April of 1973 the City has made great
efforts
to cover the west bank;
their testimony would indicate
approximately 400 truckloads with
10 cubic yards per truckload.
12
—
146
—3—
“4.
That in the future they have plans to continue
covering that area,
and to generally rehabilitate it.
“5.
That those plans further include the installation
of a gate,
a fence and other necessary matter to prevent
further dumping.
“6.
That Mr. Neil Scott is an owner of land in that
general vicinity, but that his ownership may or may not include
part of the west bank.
That the testimony that would be presented
would not indicate either that he did own or that he did not own
(part of the refuse area)
,
but that he did own property in that
general
area.
“7.
That Rogers Drywall, Inc.,
an Illinois corporation,
up to some point in time in 1971 did own such a business; and
that in the act of their ownership they did dump drywall, only,
in that area.
.
.
.
Since 1971 they have made no deposits in
that particular area.
.
.
.
The area involving the Rogers Dry-
wall portion of this enforcement case also has apparently, based
on the inspection this morning, been significantly covered and
improved.
“8.
That
Mr.
Scott has
in fact owned the property since
sometime in 1971,
and apparently he owned
it after the dumping
was stopped; and that he has not been active in any way, in any
of the dumping or any of the other refuse in that area.”
9.
ANB was the prior owner of the property sold to the
City of Loves Park
(R-67)
sometime in 1970
(R-78).
Loves Park offered additional evidence of its attempts to clean
up the site;
it stated the final cover could he applied by
September
1,
1974
(R—72).
The attorney for the EPA closed by
stating that substantial penalties were not appropriate when all
that needed to be done was final cover on those areas as yet
uncovered
(R—79)
We find that ANB and Neil Scott have not violated the Act
and Rules and Regulations.
Neil Scott owned no property in the
area when the refuse disposal occurred
(see
#8 of Stipulation set
out above), and insufficient evidence has been introduced to show
any violations
as to ANB.
We find that Rogers has violated Section 21(b)
of the Act
and the spreading and compacting requirements of Rule
5.06,
as
well as the daily cover requirements of Rule 5.07(a)
of the Rules
and Regulations.
Rogers admitted dumping drywall at the site in
1971
(see
#7 of Stipulation set out above).
Photographs taken
in October 1973
(Comp.
Ex.
20 and 21)
show the drywall on the
west bank and establish
a violation of Section 21(h)
of the Act
and 5.06 and 5.07(a)
of the Rules and Regulations for that
period
in
1971 when such dumping occurred.
12
—
147
—4—
Loves Park admitted not having
a permit, but argued
(R—7)
that the facility was not operated as
a refuse disposal
area.
However, we find that the City has violated Section 21(e)
of the Act.
The deposition of
large amounts of refuse in one
area
(Comp. Ex.
3,
6 and
8)
create a presumption that the area
was
inter.ded to be used as
a refuse disposal site.
Since Loves
Park introduced
no evidence to rebut this presumption,
a permit
violation has been proven.
Furthermore,
we find that Loves Park
has violated Section 21(b)
of the Act and Rules 5.06 and 5.07(a)
of the Rules and Regulations.
Rule
5.06 was violated on June 21
and 22,
1971
(Comp. Ex.
3(a) and 3(c)), February
28, 1972
(Comp.
Ex.
4(a), bottom photograph),~March17,
1972
(Comp.
Ex.
6(a)), and
April
12,
1972
(Comp.
Ex.
8(a)
and 8(b)).
Rule 5.07(a) was
violated on March 17,
1972
(Comp.
Ex.
6(a)
shows the same uncovered
refuse as Comp.
Ex.
8(a)
taken approximately one month later)
We hold that Rules 3.04,
5.03 and 5.05 of the Rules and
Regulations have not been violated by either Loves Park or Rogers.
First,
no garbage was dumped so no violation of Rule 3.04 has
been established,
Second, insufficient evidence was offered to
establish that refuse
was
not confined to the smallest practical
area,
as mandated by Rule 5.03.
Third, no evidence was introduced
by the EPA concerning the inadequacy of equipment at the site;
therefore, we find no violation of Rule 5.05.
Mitigation is called for in this case where the parties
have in good faith attempted to correct long-past violations
causing minimal environmental harm,
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.
Loves Park shall
apply final cover
to its part of
the landfill site by September
1,
1974.
By that time, Loves
Park shall also install
a gate,
fence and other necessary equip-
ment to prevent further dumping as agreed to in point number
5
of
the
Stipulation as set out in the body of the Opinion.
2.
Rogers ~rywa1l,
Inc.
shall
apply final cover to its part
of the landfill site bySepternber 1,
1974.
I, Christan L. Moffett,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify that the ab~oveOpinion and Order was
adopted on the~_~day of
___________
,
1974, by a vote of
~toO.
(1’
Christan L. Mofft~t-~,Clerk
12
—