~J’4~

.Lr~

Lur-J:

:~, ic

DJUJDrJJ.DLJ

D~SPOSAL MANAGEMENT

SYSTEMS~ 1NC~

E~e~e~t

~

7~e

~e

Dispatch

420

Cutters

MIII

Lane

Schaurnburg,

Illinois 6Oi~5

s~i7-3~iO-O30O

www.disposalmanacjement.com

~47-375-g626

877-4-CONTAINER

Fax:

847-375-9635

Wednesday. April

16~2003

CLERK’S

OFFICE

Illinois Pollution Control Board

~PR

1

6

2003

100 W. Randolph

St.

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Suite

11-500

Pollution Control Board

Chicago,

Ii 60601

Attention Ms.

Dorthy M.

Gunn

Re:

Objection

to Petition for Hearing To

Contest Site

Location Approval, No. PCB 03-

161

Dear Ms.

Gunn:

We are requesting dismissal ofthe petition siibmittcd on behalf ofthe

Solid Waste

Agenc’~’ofNorthern

Cook County

\\‘e ask for this dismissal based on the foil

owing

tw’o

items

-.

I

Item #1

—

In SW.~NCC’spetition item #2 they

state

that DMS

submitted our request for a

site approval with the City of iJesPlaincs

II

on August

5

2002

Section

39

2(e) ofthe

Environmental Pr~tectionAct

of

Ilirnois states ‘Ifthere is no

final action by the county

hcaacl

oi

gbvcinin~body ofthe inumcipality

within

180 days after filing ofthe rcquc5t

for site approval the applicant may deem the request approved.”

Therefore, the City of

DesPlaines had until February 4,200~to

approve our request. otherwise the request is

deemed approved. Section 40.1(b) ofthe Environmental Protection. Act states “applicant

who participated in the public hearing conducted by the county board or governing body

of the municipality may petition the

board. within 35

days for a hearing to contest the

approval.”

SWANCC had

35

days to file their petition frorr. 2/4/2003. Thirty-five days

from February 4,2003

i.s March. i1~2003.Their petition was filed on March 24,2003,

13

days to

late, and is thus untimely and should he dismissed.

The City ofDesPlaines did

approve our request on Februaryl8. 2003. This action was a mere formality since

approval occurred February 4~2002.Please reference Section

107.204 ofTitle

35 for

details

on this matter.

Item #2

—

Section 40.

1 (b2) ofthe Environmental Protection

Act. states that the Board

does not need to hear the appeal if’~th.e

petitioner is

so

located as to not be

affected by the

proposed.

facility~

SWANC’s transfer station facility is

located 4.5 miles away, as the

crow flies, from the DMS

facility, We do not see how our facility could affect

Prinled on 100

r~cycIbdp~por

---

U~/

J~f

~

rJ~.

.LQ

U.JL~.J’_IUJLJ.I

.‘~

I

~

UL

SWANCC’s

faci1.ity~which

bandies mainly municipal garbage. Our facility handles only

construction and

demolition waste.

Desed on the appeal being untimely

and

SWANC not being ~ff~u~d

by

our facility, we

respectfully ask that their request for ~peal

be denied

by the Board.

Respe:tfull4,~7

e Anderson

~~~Prcsident