ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December
    20,
    1990
    MADISON COUNTY CONSERVATION
    ALLIANCE, RICHARD WORTHEN,
    CLARENCE
    BOHM,
    HARRY
    PARKER,
    )
    GEORGE
    ~4.RNOLD,CLINTON
    )
    AUFDERHEIDE,
    MARY
    AUFDERHEIDE,
    )
    WILLIAM DORRIS and
    MARY
    DORRIS,
    )
    )
    Petitioners,
    v.
    )
    PCB 90—239
    (Landfill Siting)
    MADISON COUNTY and
    )
    ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
    )
    SYSTEMS, INC.,
    )
    Respondents.
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by
    B. Forcade):
    This action is a third—party appeal filed December
    18,
    1990,
    pursuant
    to Section 40.1
    (b)
    of the Environmental Protection Act
    (“Act”.)
    (I1l.Rev.Stat. Ch.
    111—1/2,
    par. 1040.1
    (b).
    Madison
    County Conservation Alliance, Richard Worthen, Clarence Bohm,
    Harry Parker, George Arnold, Clinton Aufderheide, Mary
    Aufderheide, William Dorris and Mary Dorris,
    (“Madison County
    Conservation Alliance”)
    appeal the decision of Madison County
    granting site location suitability approval.
    It appears that the petition
    is not duplicitous or
    frivolous
    and that Petitioner participated
    in the hearing below
    (See,
    Pet.
    P.
    2).
    Record Before the County Board
    PA.
    82—682, also known as SB—172, as codified
    in Section
    40.1(a)
    of the Act, provides that the hearing before the Board
    is
    to “be based exclusively on the record before the county board or
    governing body of
    the municipality”.
    The statute does not
    specify who is to file with the Board such record or who
    is
    to
    certify to the completeness or correctness of the record.
    As Madison County alone can verify and certify what exactly
    is the entire record before
    it,
    in the interest of protecting the
    rights of all parties to this action, and
    in order
    to satisfy the
    intention of SB—l72,
    the Board believes that Madison County must
    be the party to prepare and file the record on appeal.
    The Board
    suggests that guidance in so doing can be had by reference to
    Rules 321 through 324 of the Illinois Supreme Court Rules.
    The
    record shall contain legible versions of all documents,
    117—185

    transcripts,
    and exhibits deemed to pertain to this proceeding
    from the initial filing by the siting applicant through and
    including final action by the local government body.
    The record
    shall contain the originals of all documents, shall be arranged
    as much as is possible •in chronological sequence, and shall be
    sequentially numbered, placing the letter
    “C” before the number
    of such page.
    In addition to the actual documents which comprise
    the record,
    the Madison County Clerk shall also prepare a
    document entitled “Certificate of Record on Appeal” which shall
    list the documents comprising the record.
    Seven copies of the
    certificate, seven copies of the transcript of the Madison County
    hearing
    and
    three
    copies
    of
    any
    other
    documents
    in
    the
    record
    shall
    be
    filed
    with
    the
    Board,
    and
    a
    copy
    of
    the
    certificate
    shall
    be
    served
    upon
    the
    petitioner(s).
    The
    Clerk
    of
    the
    Madison
    County is given 21 days from the
    date
    of
    this
    Order
    to
    “prepare,
    bind and certify the record on appeal”
    (Ill. Supreme Court, Rule
    324).
    If
    the
    record
    is
    not
    legible,
    is
    not
    sequentially
    numbered,
    or
    fails
    to
    include
    an
    appropriate
    index
    or
    record,
    the
    clerk
    of
    the
    Pollution
    Control
    Board
    may
    refuse
    to
    accept
    the
    document for filling.
    Waiver of Decision Deadline
    Section 40.1(a) provides that
    if there
    is no final action by
    the Board within 120 days,
    petitioner may deem the site location
    approved.
    The
    Board has construed identical “in accordance
    with
    the
    terms of”
    language contained in Section 40(b)
    of
    the Act
    concerning third—party
    appeals of the grant of hazardous waste
    landfill permits as giving the person who had requested the
    permit
    a)
    th~ right
    to
    a
    decision
    within
    the
    applicable
    statutory
    time frame
    (now 120 days), and b)
    the right to waive
    (extend)
    the
    decision
    period
    (Alliance
    for
    a
    Safe
    Environment,
    et
    al.
    v.
    Akron
    Land
    Corp.
    et
    al.,
    PCB
    80—184,
    October
    30,
    1980).
    The
    Board
    therefore construes Section 40.1(b)
    in like manner, with the
    result that failure of this
    Board
    to
    act
    in
    120
    days
    would
    allow
    the site location applicant to deem the site location approved.
    Pursuant to Section 105.104 of the Procedural Rules,
    it
    is each
    party’s
    responsibility
    to
    pursue
    its
    action,
    and
    to
    insist
    that
    a
    hearing on the petition is timely scheduled in order
    to allow the
    Board to review the record and to render
    its decision within 120
    days of the filing of the petition.
    Transcription Costs
    The
    issue
    of
    who
    has
    the
    burden
    of
    providing
    transcription
    in Board site location suitability appeals has been addressed in
    Town
    of
    Ottawa,
    et
    al.
    v.
    IPCB,
    et
    al.,
    129
    Ill.
    App.
    3rd,
    472
    N.E.2d 150
    (Third District, 1984).
    In that case,
    the Court
    ordered the Board to assume
    transcription
    costs
    (472
    N.E.2d
    at
    155).
    The
    Supreme
    Court
    denied
    leave
    to
    appeal
    on
    March
    14,
    117—186

    1985.
    In cognizance of this ruling, the Board will provide for
    stenographic transcription of the Board hearing in this matter.
    This matter
    is accepted for hearing.
    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, written schedule for
    submission of briefs
    if any and all actual exhibits
    to the Board
    within
    5 days of the hearing.
    Any briefing schedule shall
    provide for final filings as 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 decision before the due date.
    The hearing officer and
    the parties are encouraged to expedite this proceeding as much as
    possible.
    The hearing officer may extend this schedule only on a
    waiver of the decision deadline by the site location suitability
    applicant 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.
    Because of requirements regarding the publication of notice
    of hearing,
    no scheduled hearing may be canceled unless the site
    location suitability applicant 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 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
    117—187

    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
    Board,
    hereby
    certify
    th
    t the above Order was adopted on
    the
    öZ~day of _______________________,
    1990,
    by a vote
    of
    ~
    Clerk
    Illinois
    Pol
    ution
    Control
    Board
    117—188

    Back to top