ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

January

20,

1972

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

v.

)

PCB 71—307

C.M.

FORD

Mr.

John Parkhurst,

Special Assistant Attorney General for the

Environmental Protection Agency

Mr.

C.M.

Ford,

appeared pro se

OPINION OF THE BOARD

(by Mr. Dumelle)

This enforcement action was filed on October

5,

1971 by the

Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA).

The complaint asserted that

Mr.

C.M.

Ford owned and operated

a refuse disposal site near

Kankak~e in Kankakee County and that several violations of the

I~-ivi~ronmenta1

Protection Act and the landfill Rules

(Rules

and

Regulations

for Refuse Disposal Sites

and Facilities,

hereafter

“Rules”)

were connected with its operation.

Specifically

the corn—

p1aint,~after amendment, alleged that Ford had caused,

or allowed,

open dumpir~g.ofrefuse on his site

on or about August

5 and August

6,

1971 contràry~tothe Environmental Protection Act and Rules.

Further

ttte complaint averred that Ford had violated several housekeeping

provisions of the Rules inasmuch

as the

site was

not adequately

fenced, did not have an entrance gate which could be

locked,

and did

not have posted the opening and closing hours

of operation.

Further

violations were alleged of provisions which state that “Dumping of

refuse.. .shall beconfined

to the smallest practical area”;

that a

shelter

be provided on

the

site;

that earth moving equipment be on the

site;

that spreading and compacting of refuse be accomplished;

and

that

a daily earth cover be placed over

the deposited refuse.

The

EPA

asked

that

a cease

and desist order be entered and that Mr. Ford

be fined

for

each, violation.

A hearing was held

in Xankakee on

November

29, i97~in which Mr. Ford appeared unrepresented by counsel.

He

asked

for

a p~ublicdefender and was properly advised that

such was

not available in a non—criminal, administrative hearing.

Both the

hearing officer and counsel for

the

EPA were courteous

to Mr. Ford and

cognizant and protective of his rights.

Mr.

Ford, when called as

a

witness, was both uncooperative and recalcitrant.

3

—

503

---

We find Respondent Ford to have caused open dumping of refuse,

to have failed to confine the dumping to the smallest practical

area,

to have failed to spread and compact the refuse,

to have failed to

provide

a daily cover,

to have failed to provide

a shelter on the

site,

to have failed

to provide the requisite equipment on

the

site,

to

IBve failed to provide adequate fencing of the site,

and

to have allowed

the open dumping by other persons on his

site.

All

of the foregoing constitute violations of the Act or Rules.

Mr. Rene Van Someren,

an inspector of solid waste disposal

sites and a Sanitarian

for the EPA, visited

the site on August

5

and

6,

1971

(R.65—66).

On the morning of August

5 Mr. Van Someren

was on the site

in the company of

a state trooper.

The precaution of

being accompanied by

a peace officer was necessitated by

the fact

that Mr.

Ford had threatened Mr. Van Someren at their first and only

previous meeting.

Mr. Van Someren stated that

the site was deserted

at that

time and

that he observed demolition material, bricks, and

wood

in various places on

the site

(R.70-7l).

In the northeast

portion of the

site, about

a hundred yards from the demolition

materials,

an impenetrable accumulation of trees and other landscape

waste approximately eight feet high and

25—30

feet

long was observed

(R.72)

.

There was

other’ uncovered refuse elsewhere on the site

(R.73)

Mr. Van Someren took photographs on both August

5 and

6.

The

photographs vividly show the principal violations

found above.

Great quantities

of uncovered refuse are evident on the photographs

(R.74—78,

Cornp.

Ex.

2-8).

Mr. John McLane,

another EPA employee who is an Environmental

Protection Engineer, visited the

site on the day before the hearing

in this

case and observed debris piled on the site without covering

(R.8l—88).

He also testified that he observed a

fire in progress and

took two photographs which showed the

fire

(Comp.

Ex.

9,

10).

The

open burning is clearly illegal but we

cannot,

in accordance with

due process of law,

find this

fire to be

a violation of

the Act or

Rules

as there was

no notice

to the Respondent of the occurrence.

Mr. McLane’s testimony and photographs are useful, however,

as

being corroborative of part of Mr. Van Someren’s

testimony.

It is clear that in the area of dealing with management of

solid waste disposal sites we must have uniform rules

and uniform

enforcement of

the rules;

we cannot allow Mr. Ford

to openly dump

refuse in defiance of

the rules as

a matter of course and not

allow other persons

to do the same.

As we have pointed out before,

the reason for the existence of rules relating to landfills and

refuse disposal sites

is

to keep them sanitary.

If improperly

handled,

refuse can become a public health hazard by providing

food

and refuge for rodents

and insects

and possibly contaminating ground

water among other things.

See EPA

V.

C1~yProducts~~an~~,

PCB

71—41, dissenting opinion, July

2,

1971.

3

—

504

---

Mr. Ford indicated that he has ceased to use the

site

for

dumping.

The rules impose a duty to cover or remove all remaining

refuse on the site

IRule 5.07

(b).

As part of our order we will

require that Mr. Ford expeditiously proceed with the

final clean

up of

the site.

Mr. Ford will be required to cease dumping on the

site,

to

cover or remove the refuse presently on the site within

30 days,

and

to pay

a penalty of

$1000.

for the numerous,

repeated and deliberate

violations found in this

case.

This opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and

conclusions of

law.

3

—

505

---

ORDER

Having considered the complaint,

transcript and exhibits

in this case it

is hereby ordered:

1.

That Mr.

C.M. Ford cease and desist from causing or allowing

the deposit of refuse on his site near Kankakee.

2.

That Mr.

C.M. Ford either remove from the premises

or cover,

in accord with the Rules and Regulations

for Refuse Disposal

Sites

and Facilities,

all refuse presently on the

site, within

30 days

from date.

3.

That Mr.

C.M.

Ford pay to

the State

of Illinois, by February

15,

1972,

the sum of One Thousahd Dollars

($1000,)

as

a penalty for

the violations found in this case.

Penalty payment by certified

check or money order payable

to the State of Illinois

shall be

made

to the Fiscal Services Division, Illinois~Environmental

Protection Agency,

2200 Churchill Drive,

Springfield,

Illinois

62706.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of

the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby certify that

the Board adopted the above

Opinion and Order on the~c’~’_dayof January,

1972 by

a vote of

4/~0

Christan L. Moffett,~..~lerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

—