ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
July
11,
1991
RICHARD WORTHEN, CLARENCE BOHM,
)
HARRY PARKER, GEORGE ARNOLD,
)
CHARLES CRISWELL, THOMAS GIBSON,
CITY OF EDWARDSVILLE, CITY OF
)
TROY, VILLAGE OF MARYVILLE,
)
VILLAGE OF GLEN CARBON, SAVE ALL
)
FARMLAND AND ENVIRONMENTAL
RESOURCES, and MADISON COUNTY
CONSERVATION ALLIANCE,
Petitioners,
v.
)
PCB 91—106
(Landfill Siting)
VILLAGE OF ROXANA and LAIDLAW
WASTE SYSTEMS (MADISON),
INC.,
Respondent.
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by B. Forcade):
This action
is a
third—party appeal filed June
24,
1991
pursuant
to Section 40.1
(b) of the Environmental Protection Act
(“Act”)
(Ill.Rev.Stat.
Ch.
111—1/2, par. 1040.1
(b)).
Richard
Worthen, Clarence Bohm, Harry Parker, George Arnold,
Charles
Criswell, Thomas Gibson, City of Edwardsville, City of Troy,
Village of Maryville, Village of Glen Carbon, Save All Farmland
and Environmental Resources, and Madison County Conservation
Alliance, appeals the decision of the Village of Roxana granting
site location suitability approval.
It appears that the petition
is not duplicitous
or
frivolous
and that Petitioner participated
in the hearing below
(See,
Pet.
p.
4).
Record Before the County Board
P.A.
82—682,
also known as SB—172,
as codified in Section
40.1(a) of the Act, provides that the hearing
before the Board
is
to “be based exclusively on the record before the county board or
governing body of the municipality”.
The statute does not
specify who
is to file with the Board such record
or who is
to
certify to the completeness or correctness of the record.
As t~eVillage of Roxana alone can verify and certify what
exactly
is the entire record before
it,
in the interest of
124—83
—2—
protecting the rights of all parties to this action, and in order
to satisfy the intention of SB—172, the Board believes that the
Village of Roxana must be the party to prepare and file the
record on appeal.
The Board suggests that guidance
in so doing
can be had by reference
to Rules
321 through 324 of
the Illinois
Supreme Court Rules.
The record shall contain legible versions
of all documents, transcripts,
and exhibits deemed to pertain to
this proceeding from initial filing through and including final
action by the local government body.
The record shall contain
the originals of all documents,
shall be arranged as much as
possible
in chronological sequence,
and shall be sequentially
numbered, placing the letter
“C” before the number
of such
page.
In addition to the actual documents which comprise the
record, the Village of Roxana Clerk
shall also prepare
a document
entitled “Certificate
of Record on Appeal” which shall
be an
index of
the record that lists
the documents comprising the
record and shows
the
page number upon which they start and end.
Seven copies
of
the certificate, seven copies of the transcript
of the Village of Roxana hearing and three copies of any other
documents
in the record shall be filed with the Board, and
a copy
of the certificate shall be served upon the petitioner(s).
The
Clerk of
the Village of Roxana
is given
21 days from the date of
this Order
to “prepare, bind and certify the record on appeal”
(Ill. Supreme Court, Rule 324).
If the record
is not
legible,
is
not sequentially numbered, or fails
to include an appropriate
index of record, the Clerk of the Pollution Control Board may
refuse
to accept the document for filing.
Waiver of Decision Deadline
Section 40.1(a)
provides that
if there
is no final action by
the Board within 120 days, petitioner may deem the site location
approved.
The Board has construed identical “in accordance with the
terms of” language contained
in Section 40(b)
of the Act
concerning third—party
appeals of the grant of hazardous waste
landfill permits as giving the person who had requested the
permit a) the right
to a decision within the applicable statutory
time frame
(now 120 days), and b)
the right
to waive
(extend)
the
decision period (Alliance for a Safe Environment,
et al.
v. Akron
Land Corp.
et al., PCB 80—184, October
30,
1980).
The Board
therefore construes Section 40.1(b)
in like manner, with the
result that failure of this Board
to act
in 120 days would allow
the site location applicant to deem the site location approved.
Pursuant to Section 105.104 of the Procedural Rules,
it
is each
party’s responsibility to pursue
its action,
and
to insist that
a
hearing on the petition is timely scheduled in order to allow the
Board to review the record and to render
its decision within 120
days of the filing of the petition.
124—84
—3—
Transcription Costs
The issue
of who has the burden of providing transcription
in Board site location suitability appeals has been addressed
in
Town of Ottawa,
et al.
v.
IPCB,
et al.,
129
Ill. App.
3rd,
472
N.E.2d 150
(Third District,
1984).
In that case,
the Court
ordered the Board to assume transcription costs
(472 N.E.2d at
155).
The Supreme Court denied leave
to appeal on March 14,
1985.
In cognizance of this ruling,
the Board will provide for
stenographic transcription of the Board hearing
in this matter.
This matter
is accepted for hearing.
Hearing must
be
scheduled within 14 days of
the date of this Order and completed
within 60 days of the date of this Order.
The hearing officer
shall inform the Clerk of the Board of the time and location of
the hearing at
least
40 days
in advance of hearing so that public
notice of ~.earingmay
be published.
After hearing,
the hearing
officer shall submit an exhibit
list, written schedule for
submission of briefs
if any and all actual exhibits
to the Board
within
5 days of
the hearing.
Any briefing schedule shall
provide for
final filings as expeditiously as possible and
in no
event
later than 70 days from the date of this Order.
If after appropriate consultation with the parties, the
parties fail to provide an acceptable hearing date
or
if after
an
attempt the hearing officer
is unable to consult with the
parties,
the hearing officer shall unilaterally set
a hearing
date
in conformance with the schedule above.
This schedule will
only provide the Board a very short time period
to deliberate and
reach a decision before the due date.
The hearing officer and
the parties are encouraged to expedite this proceeding as much as
possible.
The hearing officer may extend this schedule only on a
waiver of the decision deadline by the site location suitability
applicant and only for the equivalent or fewer number of days
that the decision deadline
is waived.
Sucn waivers must be
provided
in writing
to the Clerk
of the Board.
Any waiver must
be an “open waiver”
or
a waiver
of decision until a date notice
of hearing,
no scheduled hearing may be canceled unless the site
ocation suitability applicant provides an open waiver or a
~aiver to a date at least
120 days beyond the date of the motion
to cancel hearing.
This should allow ample time for the Board
to
republish notice of hearing and receive transcripts from the
hearing before the due date.
Any order
by the hearing officer
granting cancellation of hearing shall include
a new hearing date
at least
40 days
in the future and at least
30 days prior to
the
new due date and the Clerk
of the Board shall
be promptly
informed of the new schedule.
Because this proceeding
is the type for which the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act sets
a very short statutory deadline
124—8 5
—4—
for making a decision, absent
a waiver,
the Board will grant
extensions or modifications only in unusual circumstances.
Any
such motion must set
forth an alternative schedule for notice,
hearing, and final submissions, as well as the deadline for
decision,
including response time to such a motion.
However,
no
such motion shall negate the obligation of
the hearing officer
to
establish a Scheduling Order pursuant
to the requirements of this
Order,
and
to adhere to that Order until modified.
IT
IS SO ORDERED.
I,
Dorothy M.
Gunn, Clerk
of the Illinois Pollution Control
Boa~~hereby certi
that the above Order was adopted on the
//~-1--
day of
_________________,
1991,
by a vote of
7—c
Dorothy M.~unn, Clerk
Illinois P~’llutionControl Board
124—86