~c~vED

~.RKSOFFICE

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

APR

262004

OF THE STATE OF

ILLINOIS

STATE

ILLINOIS

Oiiution Controj Boar

SUTTER SANITATION, INC. and

)

LAVONNE HAKER,

)

Petitioners,

)

Case No. PCB

)

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

)

PETITION FOR

REVIEW

OF AGENCY

PERMIT DENIAL

NOW COMES the Petitioner, Sutter

Sanitation, Inc.,

and LaVonne Haker, (“Petitioners”)

and

through their attorneys,

Sorling,

Northrup,

Haima,

Cullen

Cochran,

Ltd.,

Charles

Northrup, of counsel,

and

pursuant to

415

ILCS

5/40(1)

and

Il1.Adm.

Code

105.204

hereby

petitions

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board

review the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency’s

(“Agency”)

denial

of Petitioners’s

Application

for

Permit

develop

solid

waste

management site in Effingham County.

In support of the Petition,

Sutter states:

On or about September 29, 2003, Petitioners filed with the Agency an Application

for Permit to

develop

solid

waste management

site, specifically

a garbage transfer

station,

Effingham County, Illinois.

OnMarch 31,2004 theAgency issued a denial ofPetitioner’s Application forPermit

referenced in paragraph one above.

The denial was served upon

Petitioners on April

2004.

copy ofthe denial is attached as Exhibit A.

The Agency’s denial ofPetitioners’ Application for Permit referencedin paragraph

one’above was improper in a number ofrespects including, but not limited to, the following:

Printed on

RecycledPaper

a.)

The Agency’s denial point no.

predicated upon an insufficient demonstration that

the “tipping floor” might not prevent the release ofwaste such that Sections 12(a) and 21(a) ofthe

Act

might be

violated:

not

supported

the

administrative

record;

inconsistent

with prior

Pollution Control Board findings and orders;

and is otherwise improper;

b.)

The Agency’s denial pointno.

2 predicated upon a failure to include “specific waste

handling and management procedures:” is not supported by the administrative-record-is-incons-istent

with prior Pollution

Control Board findings

and orders; fails to

identify any specific

statutory or

regulatory prohibition that might

be violated, and is otherwise improper;

c.)

TheAgency’sdenial pointno.3 predicatedupon a possible violation ofSection 22.14

ofthe Act is:

a misinterpretation ofthe statutory provision at

issue;

inconsistent with prior legal

precedent; inconsistent with public policy, and otherwise improper;

d.)

The Agency violated Petitioner’s due process rights

by relying upon information

submitted by

third parties

outside of the application and

by failing to

notify Petitioners of such

information and allowing Petitioner’s to respond;

e.)

The Agency further erred in denying the Application for Permit in that none of the

proper grounds

set forth in Section

39 of the Act

existed in the present case and that

granting the

Application

for Permit

would

not

have resulted in

the

violation

of any

section of the Act

associated regulations.

Printed on Recycled Paper

WHEREFORE, SufferSanitation respectfullyrequests that thisBoard accept this Petition for

Review; schedule this matterforhearing, reversethe decisionoftheAgency, and any otherreliefthat

the Board deems appropriate.

Respectfully submitted.

SUTTER SANITATION, INC., and

LAVONNE HAKER, Petitioners

By:

~77

One OfTheir Attorneys

Sorling, Northrup, Hanna

Cullen & Cochran, Ltd.

Charles J. Northrup, of Counsel

Suite 800 Illinois Building

P.O. Box

5131

Springfield, IL

62705

Telephone:

217.544.1144

Printed on Recycled Paper

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that

copy of the foregoing

document

was served

placing same in a sealed envelope addressed:

Dorothy M Gunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100

West Randolph Street

Suite 11-500

Chicago, Ii. 60601

John J. Kim, Attorney

Renee Cipriano, Director

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Division ofLegal Counsel

1021

N. Grand Avenue, East

Springfield,

Ii.

62794-9276

and by depositing same in the United States mail in Springfield, Illinois, on the

day of April,

2004, with postage fully prepaid.

Printed on

Recycled Paper

AFR—~2—2O~4 a8:~8

77S2~8~J7

~J.

( (o~~~J

(

ILLINOIS

ENViRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

AGENCY

1021

NORTii

G~NoAvir~uE

EAST.

P.O.

Box

19276,

Sp~1Nc~lELD.

ILLINOIS

62794-9276, 217-782-3397

JAMES

Ti-ioMesoN

CENTER,

100

WEST

RANDOLPH,

SUITE

11-300,CHIcACO,

IL 60601, 312-814-6026

ROD

BLACOJEvcH,

GOVERNOR

RENEE CIPRIANO,

DIRECTOR

217/524-3300

March

30,

2004

Owner

Mrs.

LaVonne Haker

303

South Main Street

Altamont,

Illinois

62411

Re:

0490305004-- Effingham County

Sutter Transfer Station

Log No. 2003 -366

Permit File

Dear Mrs.

Haker and Mr. Sutter:

CERTIFIED

MAIL

7001 2510 0002 1279 4630

7001 2510 0002 1279 4647

Operator

Suffer Sanitation Service, Inc.

Attention:

Mr. Tracy Suffer

Post Office Box

569

Shumway, Illinois

62461

This will acknowledge receipt of your Application for Permit to develop a solid waste

management site, dated September 29, 2003, etc., and received by

the Illinois EPA on October

2003, etc.

The application for Log 2003-366 consists of the following documents:

_________

Dated

_____________

Document

Date Received

Original Application

Additional Information

Additional

Information

Additional Information

Additional. Information

September

29, 2003

November 24, 2003

December 3, 2003

December

12,

2003

December

12, 2003

December 23,

2003

January 21, 2004

January

 29, 2004

January 30, 2004

October 1, 2003

November 26, 2003

December 4, 2003

December

15,

2003

December

16, 2003

December 29, 2003

January 26, 2004

January 30,

2004

January 30,

2004

Your permit application for a transfer station for municipal

waste including garbage, is denied.

You have failed to provide proof that granting this permit would

not result in violations ofthe

llli~oisEnvironmental Protection

Act

(Act).

Section

39(a)

of the Act 415

ILCS

5/39(a)J

requires the Illinois

EPA to provide the applicant with

specific reasons for the denial of permit.

The following reason(s) are given:

.;J~

North M~un

Sirc~t,

Rockford

IL 6

103

—

Ji~7•~760

•

Dzs PLMN~S

—

‘N

I I,itr’~~

Des

PI.~ir~c~,

60016

—

(347)

294.4000

ELc.,N

—

595 SOuth 5i.o~,EI~iri,IL (0123

(847)

(th3-3

•

I’))~

—

54)5

•\

L,C1t~~~r~ily

St..

i.r~i.

IL (1114

(309) 593-5463

l1~

~‘

‘

—

7610

IJniv~r~iIy

Si..

(~l

c~i

—

(109’ c~3).5~(,2

•

CIA~rMr~.\

—

F,rs~

S~-e~i.

Ch4mp~ign,IL

61820

—(2171

276-5)100

—

4’~t)t)

S. S’~th

crr,-~-

lid., Sprts~~tiicId.

IL 62706

—

t2 I 7’ 7~(,.(,~92

•

~.,•,

MI)

~V~V’

C~tI”~vIIe

IL 62234

—

(6181

34G.5

—

231)9W.

M,lin

~-!

MMi~,fl, IL

62~’

Ill

‘0) L7~,li)

~FR—O2—2~O4

(

Page 2

The application states the floor ofthe transfer building will be

inspected and improved,

but failed to

describe the procedures for inspection or repair.

Specifically,

the

application failed to identify what the inspection might accomplish or reveal, or what

improvement might be necessary to the floor to make it suitable for use as a transfer

station.

Additional information requested in response to this

issue, dated December

12,

2003, and received December 16, 2003, proposed no testing or criteria for pass/fail, only

that the concrete floor consisted of

8.5

inches of concrete over 2-3 inches of aggregate

subbase.

The application indicated the two cores were removed from the floor, but test

results on the cores and procedure for sealing were

not provided.

The applicant has not

submitted adequate proof that the tipping floor is designed to prevent a release ofwaste

to the environment in

accordance with Sections

12(a) and 2 1(a) ofthe

Act.

The application failed to include specific handling and management procedures to be

followed when certain wastes not allowed for landfill disposal by Title V ofthe Act are

discovered mixed

in the waste

received at the transfer station:

Lead acid batteries

(automotive), landscape waste,

potentially infectious

medical waste (P1MW), FOB waste,

and used oil.

The application failed to include

handling and

management procedu~es

be followed when wastes that require additional or special

handling:

Asbestos and used

tires.

Issuance ofa permit for this

facility would violate

Section 22.14 of the Act because the

proposed garbage transfer station would be located closer than

1000 feet from a dwelling

that was so located before the application was submitted to

the Illinois EPA.

Based upon the deficiencies noted

above, the

application does not adequately demonstrate

compliance with 35

IAC 807.207(a).

Within

35 days after the date of mailing ofthe Illinois EPA’s final decision, the applicant may

petition for a hearing before the Illinois Pollution Control Board

to contest the decision ofthe

Illinois EPA, however,

the 35-day period for petitioning for a hearing may be

extended for a

period of time not to exceed 90

days by written notice provided to the Board from the applicant

and the Illinois EPA within the 35-day initial appeal period.

Sincerely

Joyce L. Muni9~(P.E.

Manager, Per?flit Section

Bureau ofLand

JLM-:bjh\04276

1 s.doc

cc:

David

Kimmic, P.E., Hurst-Rosche Engineers Inc.

Charles J. Northrup, Sorlirig, Northrup, Hanna, Cullen & Cochran, Ltd.

TOTAL

F.~3