ILLINOIS
    POLLUTION
    CONTROL
    BOARD
    December 20, 1995
    SPILL, MADISON COUNTY
    )
    CONSERVATION ALLIANCE, SIERRA
    )
    CLUB, NAMEOKI TOWNSHIP CLERK
    )
    HELEN HAWKINS, KATHY ANDRIA,
    )
    SHIRLEY CRAIN, GLENDA
    )
    FULKERSON, JOHN GALL, THELMA
    )
    ORR, RON SHAW and PEARL
    )
    SPOGSDILL
    Petitioners,
    v.
    )
    PCB 96-91
    )
    (Pollution Control Facility
    CITY OF MADISON and METRO-
    )
    Siting Review)
    EAST,
    LLC,
    Respondents.
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by M. McFawn):
    This matter is before the Board on a November 27,
    1995
    motion to dismiss filed by respondent Metro-East, LLC (Metro—
    East).
    Petitioners responded on December 8,
    1995, and also filed
    a motion to strike Metro-East’s motion.
    Metro—East has not filed
    a response thereto.
    In the motion to dismiss, Metro—East asserts that the
    petition for review in this matter was not timely filed within 35
    days of the siting decision,
    as required by Section 40.1(b) of
    the Environmental Protection Act
    (Act), and that the matter
    should therefore be dismissed.
    Metro-East asserts that the City
    of Madison granted approval of the siting application on
    September 18,
    1995.
    In support of this, Metro-East references
    the minutes of a September 18, 1995 special meeting of the City
    Council of the City of Madison.
    These minutes were adopted by
    the City on September 26,
    1995.
    (See Exhibit A to Metro-East’s
    motion.)
    In their response, petitioners point out that a written
    decision as required by Section 39.2(e) of the Act was not issued
    on September 18,
    1995.
    In the amended petition filed November
    20,
    1995, petitioners included a copy of the City of Madison’s
    Ordinance No.
    1271, approving the site location of the pollution
    control facility proposed by Metro—East.
    The ordinance is dated
    September 21,
    1995.
    The petitioners respond that this is the
    date from which the appeal must be filed.
    2
    Section 39.2(e)
    of the Act provides in relevant part:
    Decisions of the county board or governing body shall
    be in writing, specifying the reasons for the decision
    (415 ILCS 5/39.2(e)
    of the Act.)
    Thc Board
    thcrefore
    looks
    to
    the date
    of
    the ordinance
    granting site location suitability approval when determining the
    timeliness of an appeal to the Board.
    The ordinance is dated
    September 21,
    1995.
    The proof of service included with
    petitioners’ original appeal shows that petitioners initially
    filed their appeal by depositing it in the U.S. mail on October
    26,
    1995.
    Pursuant to the Board’s procedural rules at 35 Ill.
    Adm. Code 101.102(d), the appeal was therefore timely filed
    within 35 days of the City of Madison’s siting decision.
    The
    motion to dismiss is denied.
    Finally, petitioners seek to strike Metro—East’s motion on
    the grounds that it was not timely filed and was not filed on
    recycled paper as required by Section 101.103 of the Board’s
    procedural rules
    (35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.103).
    While petitioners’
    arguments are unopposed and appear procedurally correct, the
    Board instead has ruled upon Metro—East’s motion to dismiss in
    petitioners’ favor so that there is no question as to whether
    this petition was timely filed.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Dorothy M.
    Gunn,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereby certif
    that the above order was adopted on the
    ~gittti
    day of
    ________________,
    1995,
    by a vote of
    7-0
    ~
    Dorothy M//Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois(~b1lutionControl Board

    Back to top