ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
    BOARD
    November23
    ,
    1971
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    #PCB71-227
    V.
    MILLER LUMBER COMPANY
    MR. JOHN A.
    PARKHURST
    AND
    MR. PRESCOTT BLOOM, FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY
    MR. MISHAEL 0.
    GARD,
    SWAIN, JOHNSON
    &
    GARD,
    FOR RESPONDENT
    OPINION OF THE BOARD
    (BY MR. LAWTON):
    Complaint was filed by
    the Environmental Protection Agency
    against Miller Lumber Company, alleging that Respondent,
    on or about
    April
    22, May
    10, June
    8,
    June
    24
    and June
    25,
    1971, and continuing
    up to the date
    of hearin~, caused or allowed the open burning
    of
    tree
    slabs, sawdust and other contaminants,
    in violation of Sec-
    tion 9(c)
    of the Environmental Protection Act and caused air pollution
    in violation of Section
    9(a)
    of the Act.
    Answer was
    filed by
    Carl Eugene Miller,
    doing business as
    Miller Lumber Company,
    denying the material allegations
    of the
    complaint, but agreeing
    to the entry of
    a cease and desist order
    providing no penalty is assessed.
    We
    find that the evidence of the
    Agency supports
    the allegations of open burning on the dates charged
    and that Respondent has violated Section
    9(c)
    of the Act in causing
    or allowing the open burning of materials as alleged.
    Respondent is ordered to cease and desist open burning
    in
    violation of Section 9(c)
    of the Act.
    Penalty in the amount of
    $500.00
    is assessed on the basis
    of $100.00
    for each day of open
    burning having taken place.
    In view of our finding,
    it is not necessary to
    consider
    whether Respondent has also caused air pollution,
    in violation of
    Section 9(a)
    of the Act,
    Respondent,
    Carl Eugene Miller,
    doing business
    as Miller
    Lumber Company,
    operates
    a sawmill in Peoria County, near Orchard
    Mines,
    Illinois.
    The area is characterized by industrial activity
    and bounded on two sides by railroads.
    The record supports Respon—
    dent’s contentions
    that smoke
    and particulate matter are emitted by
    adjacent
    and nearby industrial operations.
    Open burning
    of wood
    chips, being one of the waste products
    of Respondent’s sawmill
    3—
    145
    operation was observed by employees of the Environmental Protec-
    tion Agency on April
    22,
    1971
    (R.16,28)
    ,
    May
    10,
    1971
    (R,50)
    June
    8,
    l971(R,l4), June
    24, 1971
    (R.lO),
    and June
    25,
    1971
    (R.5).
    While Respondent has filed
    a general
    denial,
    the answer states that
    his discontinuation of “further burning of certain wood refuse”
    has been only since July,
    1961.
    Respondent,
    in his testimony,
    concedes the open burning of the character alleged.
    Respondent’s defense consisted principally of testimony of
    persons
    in the area, both residents and employees of nearby com-
    panies, who acknowledged the open burning but expressed no discom-
    fort resulting from it or desire to see it abated.
    Respondent
    also contends that suitable alternatives
    to open burning
    are not
    available,
    that chippers and other devices are toO expensive,
    and that landfill is impracticable and costly.
    Variance was granted to Respondent by the Air Pollution
    Control Board on July
    14,
    1967, which expired December
    31,
    1967.
    This variance appears to have been based on the representation that
    small amounts of scrap wood would be disposed of and that open burn-
    ing would be eliminated thereafter.
    No steps were taken subsequent
    to the expiration of the variance for its renewal,
    and open burning
    has continued down to the present date.
    We are not unmindful that Respondent’s operation takes place
    in an area where industrial emissions are undoubtedly
    far worse
    than those coming from Respondent’s site.
    Likewise, we~recognize
    that the type of emissions resulting from Respondent’s
    open burning
    do not appear to be causing any substantial burden on the neighbor-
    hood,
    nor seriously interfere with
    the well-being of residents
    living nearby.
    It may well be that there are other polluters
    in
    the immediate area that would better justify the time and efforts
    of the Agency and the Board.
    However,
    there is no question that
    Respondent has violated the statute as alleged,
    and that if we are
    to forbid open burning within
    the state,
    it must apply to all who
    violate the
    law.
    See Opinion and Regulations,
    #R70-ll, Open Burning
    Regulations dated September
    2,
    1971.
    See Environmental Protection
    Agency v. Frank Cobin,
    d/b/a Cobin Salvage Co.,
    #PCB71—234,
    dated
    November
    11,
    1971.
    The relatively mild penalty is assessed in con-
    sideration of the minimum burdens imposed
    on, the neighborhood
    as
    a
    consequence of Respondent’s violation.
    This order constitutes
    the findings
    of fact and conclusions
    of law of the Board.
    3
    —
    146
    IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that
    Respondent,
    Carl Eugene Miller, doing business
    as Miller Lumber
    Company,
    cease and desist the open burning of wood refuse and by-
    products
    at his Peoria County site.
    Penalty
    in the amount of
    $500.00
    is assessed against Respondent,
    for violations occurring
    on April
    22, May
    10, June
    8,
    June
    24,
    and June
    25, l97l~ as charged.
    I,
    Christan Moffett, Acting Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board,
    certify that the above Opinion was
    adopted on the
    ~3
    day
    of November,
    1971.
    L.
    /
    3
    —
    147

    Back to top