ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
August
8,
1991
VILLAGE OF FOX RIVER GROVE,
)
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
PCB 91—104
)
(Variance)
ILLINOIS.ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION -AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by J.D. Dumelle):
Currently before the Board in this case are
1) the Village of
Fox River Grove’s (“Village”) request for expedited hearing,
2) the
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency’s
(“Agency”)
motion
to
file
its variance recommendation
instanter,
and
3)
a request
to
set this matter for hearing.
Village Notion to Request Expedited Hearing
On August
1,
1991, the Village filed a motion requesting the
Board to expedite its decision on its petition for variance from
restricted status.
In support of its motion,
the Village states
that Gardner Terrace Development, Inc.,
a developer which holds an
option to purchase property within the Village on which it intends
to develop a subdivision,
filed
a request with the Board
on July
25,
1991
for
an
expedited
decision.
It
is
the
Village’s
understanding that the development of the subdivision is dependent
on
the availability
of
a
public
water
supply and that
Gardner
Terrace’s option
to purchase
the
land
for the development will
expire shortly.
The Village’s motion is granted.
The Board will act on this
case as soon as possible, consistent with hearing requirements (see
below)
and the Board’s workload and resources.
Agency Notion to File Agency Recommendation Instanter
On
August
5,
1991,
the Agency
filed
a motion
to
file
its
variance recommendation instanter.
The motion is hereby granted.
125—3 1
Request for Hearing
On August
5,
1991,
Ms.
Belinda Staurowsky,
a hydrogeologist,
filed a request to set this matter for hearing.
In her letter, Ms.
Staurowsky states that, although she is not a resident of Fox river
Grove,
several residents requested that she review the technical
aspects of the variance.
Ms. Staurowsky also states that:
...it
would be
in the best interest
of the
citizens
of
Fox
River
Grove
if
a
public
hearing would be conducted as it appears that
there are several issues on which the public
needs clarification.
Specifically,
I have not
seen any hydrogeologic information that shows
where the contamination is coming from, what
the dimensions of the contaminant plume
are,
any
groundwater
analysis,
or
a
schedule
of
remediation.
Section 37(a)
of the Environmental Protection Act
(“Act”),
Ill.
Rev. Stat.
1989,
ch.
111½,
par.
1037(a), states in part:
If
the
Board,
in
its
discretion,
concludes
that a hearing would be advisable,
or if the
Agency
or
any other
person
files
a
written
objection to the grant of such variance
...
a
hearing
shall
be
held,
under
the
rules
prescribed
in Sections
32
and
33(a)
of this
Act.
(Emphasis added).
Accordingly,
this matter
is accepted for hearing.
The Hearing
Officer is required to inform the objector of the hearing pursuant
to 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 104.200(b):
The Hearing Officer shall give notice of the
hearing in accordance with 35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
103.123(b),
at
least
21
days
before
the
hearing
to the
petitioner,
the
Agency,
and
anyone
who
has
filed
an
objection
to
the
petition.
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 hearing may be published.
After
hearing, the hearing officer shall submit an exhibit list and all
actual exhibits to the Board within
5 days of the hearing.
Any
briefing schedule shall provide for final filings as
125—32
3
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 ç~ecisionbefore the due date.
The hearing officer and
the parties are encouraged to expedite this proceeding as much as
possible.
Within 10 days of accepting this case, the Hearing Officer
shall enter a Hearing Officer Scheduling Order governing
completion of the record.
That Order shall set a date certain
for each aspect of the case including:
briefing schedule,
hearing date(s),
completion of discovery (if necessary)
and pre—
hearing conference
(if necessary).
The Hearing Officer
Scheduling Order may be modified by entry of a complete new
scheduling order conforming with the time requirements below.
The hearing officer may extend this schedule only on a
waiver of the decision deadline by the petitioner and only for
the equivalent or fewer number of days that the decision deadline
is waived.
Such 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 certain.
Any waiver shall extend the time
deadline of Section 104.180 regarding filing the Agency
recommendation by the equivalent number of days, but in any
circumstance the recommendation must be filed at least 20 days
before the hearing.
Because of requirements regarding the publication of notice
of hearing, no scheduled hearing may be cancelled unless the
petitioner provides an open waiver or a waiver 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 complete new scheduling order with 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
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
125—33
4
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~,~herebycertif
that the above Order was adopted on the
X~f’-
day of
,c-.--~-
,
1991 by a vote of
70
~
~
Dorothy N,/~unn,Clerk
Illinois Mllution Control Board
125—34