ILCI”~OI3P3t~LUTI3~OO~TROL BOARD
February
25, 1988
WASTE MANAGEMENT
OF
ILLINOIS
INC.,
a Delaware Corporation,
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 87—75
L1~KECOUNTY BOARD,
Respondent.
ORDER OF
T~EBOkRD
(by
R.
C.
Flemal):
This matter comes before
the Board upon a Motion
to
Reconsider
filed
by
cqaste Management of
Illinois,
Inc. (“~1II”)
on January 21,
1988.
~MII moves
the
Board to
reconsider and
vacate
its Opinin
arid Order
eritered
December
17,
1987 which,
inter
alia, held that the landfill—siting proceeding conducted by
the Lake County Board
(“LCB”)
was fundamentally fair and
that the
decision reached by the LCB was not contrary to
the manifest
weight
of
the evidence.
On February
5,
19’38
the LCB filed
a
Response
to Motion to Reconsider
stating that the substance of
the arguments
raised
by ~MII in its motion remains unchanged
from
that previously stated
in
its briefs.
On February
16,
1988
WMII
filed Petitioner’s Reply to
Response
to Motion
to Reconsider.
On February 17,
1988 the LCB
filed
a Motion to Strike Petitioner’s
Reply
in which
it states
that the Board’s procedural
rules do not provide the moving party
with an opoortunity to reply to
a response
to
a motion
(Motion
to
Strike
at
1, citing A.R.F.
Landfill Corporation v. Village
of
Round Lake Park and Lake County,
PCB 87—34,
Board
Order
of
January
21,
1988.).
On
February 22,
1988 c~MIIfiled
a Response
to Motion
to Strike Petitioner’s Reply alleging that the Board’s
order
in A.R.F.
Landfill Corporation,
cited
above
is not on
point.
The Board believes that the above cited
order
is clearly
applicable here,
and
therefore grants the LCB’s Motion
to Strike
Petitioner’s Reoly.
In
its Motion
to Reconsider
W!111
contends that:
(a) the Lake
County Ordinance which governs landfill—siting
is fundamentally
unfair
on its face;
(b)
LOB member
F.T.
“Mike” Graham shoul~have
been disqualified from participation and vote on WMII’s
application;
(c)
the LOB decision on the Need Criterion
overlooked critical evidence and disregarded the standard
for
determining
need;
and
(d)
the Environmental Protection Act
requires that this Board decide
all contested criterion
decisions, not
just that which
is dispositive.
The Board
finds that
W1411 raises nothing new that would
86—353
—2—
persuade
it
to reconsider
or vacate
its prior
holdings as
~eflectei
in the
December
17,
1937 Opinion and Order.
On the
issue of whether
the Board acted improperly
in going only
to
that
portion
of the conteste~decision which
it found disoositive,
the
Board believes
it has sufficiently adhered
to the statutory
requirements
of
•Se:tion 40.1 of
the Act.
Accordingly,
WMII’s
Motion to Reconsider
is denied.
IT
IS
SO ORDERED.
Board Members Joan Anderson and
T.
Theodore Meyer dissented.
I,
Dorothy
NI.
Gunn,
Clerk
of the Illinois
Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify tl~tthe above Drder
was adopted
on
the
~CZ
day of
_______________,
1988,
by
a vote of
~
/J-~~
Dorothy
NI. Aunn,
Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
86—354