ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

November 8, 1972

CITY OF NORTH CHICAGO

*72-398

V.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

OPINION OF THE BOARD (BY SAMUEL T. LAWTON, JR.)

This opinion is in support of Order entered by the Board on

October 31, 1972 granting a variance to petitioner. Petition for

variance was filed by the City of North Chicago on October 6, 1972

requesting a variance to permit the open burning of landscape waste

created by a recent tornado. In our preliminary opinion of October 1G

1972,

5

PCB

,

we permitted petitioner to file supplementary infor-

mation by October 31, 1972 as to

“.. .

.why it was not practicable to

utilize an air curtain destructor or similar device, as required by

the regulations...”

Petitioner alleges and the Agency confirms in its Recommenda-

tion that a large number of trees (700) were felled and destroyed

by the tornado. Petitioner has provided for disposal of the stumps

and the logs but the considerable volume of branches remains to be

disposed. The original petition stated that petitioner had been

using “chippers” since the day of the disaster to reduce the amount

of debris. Petitioner has continued this procedure during the pendanc.

of its petition but has encountered problems with disposal of mud-

caked trees and branches similar to those encountered by petitioner

in City of Galena v. Environmental Protection Agency, #72-122, 4 PCB 1

and 5 PCB

(September 6, 1972).

Petitioner has filed supplementary information detailing its

attempts to purchase or rent an air curtain destructor or similar

device. Petitioner states that a rental air curtain destructor

would not be available for at least four weeks and a purchase could nc

be completed short of seven weeks. We find that petitioner’s efforts

have been diligent. It is estimated that six to eight weeks will be

necessary to destroy the remaining waste, using methods presently

employed. The waste allegedly poses a fire hazard and is a haven

for rodents. The Agency

has

recommended granting the petition

subject to certain conditions in which recommendation we concur.

The likely danger to the community in suspending disposal of the

refuse outweighs the possible impact on the community if the open

burning is permitted, particularly if subject to the conditions we

impose in granting this variance.

89

---

Petitioner estimates that less than five burning days will

he necessary

to

dis~ose of

the

waste. We allow petitioner 30 days

from the date of the Order to dispose of the waste. Petitioner

shall be res~onsible for providing adequate fire protection equip-

ment and all burning shall be under the supervision of a City

employee.

The burning shall take place only between the hours of

11:00 A. M. and 4:00

P. H.; and only when a wind of between 5 and

20

m.p.h.

is blowing, and

the sky

is not overcast. There shall be

no burning when a pollution watch alert or warning is in effect.

The

Agency shall inspect and approve the location within petitioner’s

iandfill where petitioner shall conduct the burning and petitioner

shall use no fuel of lesser quality than a No. 2 fuel oil. The ashes

shall be deposited daily in the landfill.

This oDinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law of the Board.

I, Christan Moffett, Cleric of the Illinois Pollution ,Control Board,

certify that the above Opinion was adopted on the _____day of

/

. ~

A. D. 1972, by a vote of

.

to

___________.

I

—2—

6

—

190