FHCE
C
ion Mate~s
Recy~mg
Association
~
630/585
7530
faK 630/585
7593
)
0~’
To:
Illinois Pollution Control Board
RE:
Case AS
2004-002
N ~
D
The CMRA is a 501c3 non-profit organization that promotes the recycling of construction and
demolitioh (C&D) materials. Included in that purview are asphalt shingles, which hold
promise
as one ofthe more recyclable
materials in construction and
demolition activity. Proof ofthat
comes from the website we developed
under a grant from US EPA,wyshjnglerecycling.org.
Indeed, that agency, as well as most state environmental agencies, and
virtually all recycling
professionals, consider us the leading experts on recycling
C&D materials, especially asphalt
shingles.
It is with
great interest we have followed Illinois EPA’s attempts to thwart Falcon Waste &
Recycling’s plans to recycle asphalt shingles. No other state in the union has ever questioned that
the processing of this manufacturer’s waste is a safe, environmentally friendly activity, or that
the activity should fall under their regulations regarding waste. It is obviously
recycling. In fact,
a look
at Illinois recycling statutes verify this: “any process by which materials that would
otherwise be disposed of or discarded are collected, separated or processed and returned to
the
economic mainstream in the form of materials or products...”
But it doesn’t take a recycling professional to realize what Falcon proposes to
do
is recycling,
and only the first step toward making Illinois
more environmentally friendly. One suspects there
is
more to the IEPA opposition thanjust a grasp to maintain control of another material. Also,
any
company that tries to recycle shingles in this state knows the IEPA won’t give them
a permit
for the activity. Why? For one
thing, the landfill company currently accepting the waste will be
out probably nearly $1
million annually in disposal costs if the IKO shingle material is diverted
to
a recycling activity, and no landfill company will
let that go easily. Landfill lobbyists camp in
the IEPA Springfield office, and only
someone naïve or from another state would think there is
not pressure being brought to bear on IEPA
in this matter. In addition,
whatever governmental
entity—state, county, or local—receiving a host fee from the disposal of that material is
going to
fight to stop the flow of the material to anotherjurisdiction.
We deal with virtually all
state environmental agencies
across the country, in
addition to the US
EPA and innumerable local
agencies. Illinois EPA is probably the most detrimental to recycling
and
reuse ofall the state environmentally agencies, and sadly is an embarrassment to all
of us
residents working to improve the environment. We hope IEPA will come to its
senses, quit
grasping at the straws outlined in its
response to the petitioner’s brief, and join the rest of the
country into supporting the environmental benefits of shingle recycling.
William Turley
Executive Director