ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

March 14, 1986

IN THE MATTER OF:

APPLICATION FOR LAKE MICHIGAN

)

PCB 85—134

PERMIT NO. 114 LM FOR THE

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,

CHICAGO DISTRICT, CORPS OF

ENGINEERS

MR. GEORGE N. KARAFOTIAS, DISTRICT COUNCIL, APPEARED FOR THE US.

ARMY, CORPS OF ENGINEERS;

MR. DANIEL INJERD, APPEARED FOR THE ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION; AND

MR. HOWARD CHINN, APPEARED FOR THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY GENERAL.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by B. Forcade):

This matter comes to the Board on a September 3, 1985,

request to approve a permit filed by the Illinois Department of

Transportation (“IDOT”). On September 20, 1985, the Board

Ordered this matter to hearing. On November 6, 1985, the

Southeast Sportsman’s Club filed a letter inquiring about a

hearing. Hearing was held January 7, 1986, in Waukegan,

Illinois. Additional information was filed January 16, 1986, by

the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers (“Army Corps”).

Additional information was filed by IDOT on January 22, 1986.

The Attorney General filed comments January 31, 1986.

This request seeks approval of a permit to dredge 40,000

cubic yards of sand from the mouth of the Waukegan harbor

entrance channel. The present request is a modification of a

permit previously approved by the Board in PCB 85—110. The

previous permit was not implemented because of concern expressed

by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. At hearing, the

Army Corps testified that all work contemplated in the permit

application was in fact completed in October, 1985 (R. 19). The

participants were requested to advise the Board as to whether the

present request was then moot (R. 33), however, none of the

subsequent filings addressed this issue.

The relevant statues make clear that activities of this kind

undertaken in this case are not to take place in Lake Michigan

until the permit application receives authorization of the

Board. The Board’s role is to determine whether the information

in the record demonstrates that the proposed activity will not

cause a violation of the Environmental Protection Act or Board

---

—2—

regulations or adverse environmental impact. The Board has never

authorized Permit 114 LM, yet as stated above the work to be done

pursuant to that permit was completed months ago. The Board

finds that given the circumstances of this case, it cannot lend

its approval to the permit application.

The procedures established by the legislature to be applied

vis—a—vis permit applications such as 114 LM were designed to

ensure that disposition of materials into Lake Michigan occur

only after proper authorization for such activity has been given

by the Department of Transportation and the Board. Those

procedures were clearly not followed in this case insofar as

Board approval is concerned. For the Board to approve this

permit application after completion of the work would be contrary

to the intent of the permit granting process established by the

legislature to be followed where these permit applications are

involved.

This Opinion constitutes the Board~sfindings of fact and

conclusions of law in this matter.

ORDER

The Pollution Control Board does not authorize the Chairman

of the Board to sign Permit No. 114 LM. Therefore, the Illinois

Department of Transportation application for approval of Lake

Michigan Permit No. 114 LM is dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Chairman J.D. Dumelle dissented.

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certifies that the above Order was adopted on

the

~

day of

____________________,

1986, by a vote

of

_________

/~

(~

/

/

Dorothy M. Guv~n, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board