ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March
    10, 1988
    LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS,
    INC.,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 88-27
    THE MCHENRY COUNTY BOARD,
    Respondent.
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by
    3.
    Marlin):
    This matter comes before
    the Board on a Petition to
    Intervene or File an Amicus Curiae Brief
    (Petition)
    jointly filed
    by the Village of Algonquin
    (Algonquin)
    and the Village of
    Lake
    in the Hills
    (LITH)
    on February
    24,
    1988.
    Algonquin
    and LITH
    will
    be referred
    to collectively as “the Villages.”
    Laidlaw
    Waste Systems,
    Inc.
    (Laidlaw)
    filed
    a Response on March
    7,
    1988.
    The Villages assert that they actively participated
    in the
    site location suitability hearings before the McHenry County
    Board (County Board)
    and that they filed jurisdictional
    objections
    with the County Board.
    First, according
    to the
    Villages,
    a portion of the site proposed
    by Laidlaw is within the
    corporate boundaries
    of
    LITH.
    Also,
    the petition states that as
    a part of
    its application, Laidlaw has proposed
    to move LITH’s
    municipal well.
    The petition contends that
    no permission
    for
    this has been
    sought or received from LITH.
    The other jurisdiction objections concern service of
    notice.
    However, Algonquin and L1TH do not detail
    in
    their
    petition how the notice was defective.
    Finally, the Village claims that if the Board approves of
    Laidlaw’s application
    for site location suitability,
    it will be
    adversely affected because
    the proposed landfill
    is located
    on
    top of the aquifer supplying water
    to the residents of the
    Villages.
    Also,
    the Villages claim that their municipal
    water
    wells which pump water
    from that aquifer
    are located
    200 feet
    from
    the proposed site.
    The Villages argue
    that even though McHenry County Landfill,
    Inc.
    v.
    Illinois Environmental Protecti9j~Aency, 154 Ill.App.3d,
    506 N.E.2d 372
    (1987)
    has precluded cross appeals on “substantive
    issues”, third party intervention should
    be allowed
    to contest
    “jurisdictional
    issues.”
    In its response, Laidlaw states that
    the Board should permit
    the Villages
    to intervene consistent with
    Illinois
    law.
    87—37
    2
    In McHenry County Landfill,
    Inc.
    v.
    Illinois Pollution
    Control Board,
    154
    Ill. App.
    3d 89,
    506 N.E.
    2d 372
    (2nd Dist.
    1987),
    the Appellate Court ruled
    that Section 40.1 of the Act
    does not allow for cross—appeals by objectors
    in the case of
    a
    denial of site location suitability approval.
    In Waste
    Management of Illinois,
    Inc.
    v.
    Lake County Board, PCB 87—75,
    (July
    16, 1987),
    the Board, basing its decision on McHeriry County
    Landfill,
    rejected an attempt to intervene
    in a SB—l72 appeal of
    a denial of site location suitability approval.
    However,
    in
    AR.F.
    Landfill,
    Inc.
    v.
    Lake County,
    PCB 87—51
    (August
    20,
    1987),
    the Board allowed
    the submission of an
    amicus curiae brief
    by an interested person.
    Similarly,
    the Board denied
    intervention
    to
    a citizen’s group and treated
    the group’s brief
    as an amicus curiae
    in City of Rockford
    v. Winnebago County
    Board, PCB 87—92
    (November
    19,
    1987).
    The Board also allowed
    the
    filing of
    amicus curiae briefs
    in
    Waste
    Management
    of
    Illinois,
    Inc.
    ci.
    Lake County Board, PCB 87—75
    (December
    17,
    1987).
    The Board does not agree with the Villages that McHenry
    County Landfill only applies
    to an appeal of substantive
    issues
    and not
    to
    an appeal based on jurisdiction
    issues.
    Since
    the
    instant case concerns an appeal of
    a denial
    of site location
    suitability,
    the Board will not allow the Village
    to intervene.
    However, they may voice
    their concerns to the Board
    by way of an
    amicus curiae brief.
    The
    timing of the brief’s submission shall
    be determined
    by the Hearing Officer when the briefing schedule
    is
    set.
    At hearing,
    the parties to this proceeding should address
    the jurisdiction issue.
    Additional maps may be submitted
    if the
    maps already in
    the record are inadequate.
    All briefs,
    including
    the Village’s amicus curiae briefs,
    shall address the
    jurisdiction issues with citations
    to the record.
    Maps may be
    utilized with the briefs
    in order
    to graphically argue the
    respective positions.
    IT
    IS SO ORDERED.
    I,
    Dorothy
    M.
    Gunn,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereby certify that the above Order was adopted on
    the
    ~~-rj
    day of
    ______________,
    1988,
    by a vote
    of
    ‘7.-c’
    Dorothy
    M.
    Gunn,
    Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    87—38

    Back to top