ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

April

5,

1973

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Complainant,

v.

)

 PCB 72—384

EDWARD BROMI3EREK,

Respondent.

Mr.

 Steven C. Bonaguidi, Assistant Attorney General, on behalf

of Complainant;

Mr. Joseph L. Bromberek on behalf of Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

 (by Mr. Seaman):

The complaint in this case was filed by the Agency on

September 26,

 1972.

 The complaint alleges that the Respondent,

owner and operator of

 a solid waste disposal facility north of

the City of Lamont in Cook County, from January

 20, 1972 con-

tinuing to the date of the filing of the complaint committed

the following violations:

operating the facility without a permit from the Environ-

mental Protection Agency in violation of Section 21(e)

of the Environmental Protection Act (“Act~);

causing or allowing the open dumping of garbage in viola-

tion of Section 21(a)

 of the Act and Rule 3.04 of

the

Rules and Regulations for Refuse Disposal Sites and

Facilities

 (ttRulesfl)

 remaining in effect pursuant to

Section 49(c)

 of the Act;

causing or allowing the open dumping of refuse in viola-

tion of Section 21(b)

 of the Act and Rule

 3.04 of the

Rules;

operating the facility without having adequate fences,

lockable entrance gates, and posted signs showing

clearly the opening and closing hours and days of

operation,

 all in violation of Rule 4.03(a)

 of the Rules;

failure to confine dumping to the smallest practicable

area in violation of Rule 5.03 of the Rules;

7—461

failure to supervise unloading and failure to provide

portable fencing to prevent blowing litter ‘in viola-

tion of

 Rule 5.04 of the Rules;

failure to spread and compact refuse as rapidly as it

is admitted into the site into

 a completed cell in

violation of Rule 5.06 of the Rules;

failure to cover exposed refuse with a compacted layer

of six inchesof cover material daily in violation of

Rule 5.07(a)

 of the Rules; and

allowing scavenging in violation of Rule 5.12(a)

 of the

Rules.

A brief public hearing was held on February 9,

 1973,

at. which time the Agency~sexhibits were admitted into evidence

and stipulated as to their accuracy (R.

5).

 The Respondent

testified that he has barricaded the property in an attempt to

restrict access.

 He also testified that he did not operate the

site as

 a business venture.

 The facility has been closed and

there has been considerable work done by the Respondent to cover

the refuse.

 The site was,

 as of the date of hearing, closed.

The Agency inspections indicate a poorly controlled open

dump.

 The inspection of January

 20, 1972 (Agency Exhibit

1)

indicates that there were no entrance restrictions posted, no

site fencing, no confining of dumping area,

 no supervision of

the unloading,

 no on-site equipment,

 no daily cover, unsatis-

factory spreading and compacting, and no portable fencing.

Much the same conditions persisted when the Agency made its

inspections of April 14, 1972, May

1,

 1972, May 2,

 1972, October

19,

1972

 (Agency Exhibits 2 through 5).

 The site was closed when

the Agency inspected the facility on December 21,

 1972,

 at which

time the site did have signs posted restricting access to it.

The site,

 being closed, did not require daily cover.

 Photographs

were taken of the site on April 14, 1972, May

1,

 1972 and May 2,

1972

 (Agency Exhibits 9 and 10), graphically depicting many of

the violations charged in the complaint.

 There is no evidence

of cover material,

 no evidence of any attempts to confine the

dumping,

 no evidence of any site restrictions,

 no evidence of

any control over the facility whatsoever.

 Photographs taken in

December of 1972

 (Agency Exhibit

8)

 show the same conditions,

only with

 a coating of snow.

Analysis of the inspection reports

 (Agency Exhibits 1-6)

reveals

 that these

 violations occurred on the following dates:

January 20, April

14,

 and October 19, all in 1972;

 no permit

(Section 21(e)); open dumping of refuse (Section 21(b), Rule 3.04);

no entrance restrictions and no site fencing

 (Rule 4.03(a));

—2—

—

462

unconfined dumping

 (Rule 5.03); unsatisfactory spreading and

compacting

 (Rule 5.06); insufficient daily cover

 (Rule 5.07(a));

and failure to supervise unloading and provide fencing for

litter control

 (Rule

 5.04).

 On May 1 and May

2,

 1972,

the

same violations

 as above took place with the additional violation

of open dumping of garbage

 (Section 21(a)) having occurred.

The

site, having closed late in 1972, needs only completion of the

final cover requirements of the Rules to be in compliance with

the Rules and the Act.

 We find no violation of the prohibition

against scavenging.

 The inspectionreports merely recite that

the salvaging operation, permissable under the Rules, was un-

satisfactory, but the recitals are merely conclusory with no

corroborative documentation in the record.

Because the Respoindent has obtained a tractor and is

 completing a final cover of the site,

 the sanctions against the

Respondent are not as great as they otherwise might have been.

We will require the Respondent to place final cover on the

facility within 60 days of the entry of this Order, cease and

desist from violations of the Act and Rules found to have been

violated, and not reopen the facility until such time as a permit

to do

 so has been obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency.

We will also assess

 a penalty in the amount of $500.

This opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclu-

sions of law of the Board.

ORDER

1.

 Respondent shall place final cover on the site within

 60 days

of the entry of this Order.

2.

 Respondent shall cease and desist from all violations

as

found in the Opinion.

3.

 Respondent shall not open the facility until such time as a

permit to do so has been obtained from the Environmental

Protection Agency.

4.

 Respondent shall pay a penalty of

$soo.

 Payment shall be

made by certified check or money order payable to the State

of Illinois and shall be paid to Fiscal Services Section,

Environmental Protection Agency,

 2200 Churchill Road,

Springfield, Illinois 62706.

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

Board, certify that the above Opinion and Order was adopted by

Board on the

 day of

____________,

 1973, by

 a vote of

—

463