ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

November 19,

1981

DONALT) J.

HAt’4MAN,

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 80—153

tf~LINOISENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY,

Respondent.

D.tSSENTING OPINION

(by I. Goodman):

Although today’s majority Opinion considers the issues of

this

case in much greater detail than its prior Opinion, the

~o1ding and the end result remains the same~the Agency may not

deny a permit for the development or operation of a sanitary

ianclfill even if the access

roads to the site are admittedly

inadequate and the petitioner is unable to prove

that

he

is

able to correct the situation.

Today’s majority Opinion strains to refine the issue to

the precise wording of the Agency’s denial, citing an Agency

reference to the Petitioner’s

lack of a written agreement with

the Township Road Commissioner to allow the access roads to

the site to be upgraded.

At great

length, the Opinion comments

about the rights and duties of the Township Road. Commissioner

with

respect to Hainman’s site and its access roads.

I do not

5elieve that the Agency or this Board should even consider this

question, let alone base

a decision upon the results of such

consideration.

The majority Opinion

states on page 11,

“Denial

oE the Hamman permit for failure of a local

official, for what-

ever reason,

to agree

to do that

which

he

is

empowered to do,

and has the duty to do

—-

improve

township roads

—-

at the cost

of the permit applicant was improper~” The majority

misinterprets

the

Agency’s denial.

Denial was

based

upon the inability of the

Petitioner to prove to the Agency that

the access roads

to his

proposed landfill would ever be

upgraded to a suitable condition.

That the Agency demanded a written

agreement with the Township

Road Commissioner as the means of such proof is not

the

question.

After cutting away all of the extraneous issues discussed

so carefully in today’s Opinion,

the results remain the same.

The Board is ordering the Agency to issue

a permit for a pro~

posed landfill with absolutely no assurance that the access

roads to the facility will ever be adequate to convey the re-

fuse through the surrounding community to the site in a safe

44—85

---

2

and reasonable manner, Regardless of the reasons for the lack

of such assurance,

I do not believe the site should he permitted

until

that issue is resolved.

I, therefore, respectfully dissent

from today’s decision

I,

Christan

L.

Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, do hereby certify that the above Dissenting Opinion was filed

on

the

~

day

of

/7

4_~i~

,

1981.

Christan

L.

Moffet’tj.~lerk

Illinois Pollution Control Boar~

,

Board

Member

44—86