ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September
6
,
1979
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB 79—26
CONTINENTAL
GRAIN
COMPANY,
)
a Delaware corporation,
Respondent.
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Dr. Satchell):
This matter comes before the Board upon
a motion to strike
and dismiss filed by Respondent on July 26,
1979.
The amended
complaint alleges
a violation of Rule 203(d) (9) (B) (iv) (c) (2) of
Chapter
2:
Air Pollution.
This rule applies only to grain
handling facilities located in a major population area, which,
according to Rule 201, includes the townships of Stites, Canteen,
Centreville, Caseyville,
St. Clair, Sugarloaf and Stookey in St.
Clair County.
Respondent has presented an affidavit and exhibits
purporting to show that for tax purposes the subject grain ele-
vator is located in East St.
Louis Township which is not one of
the
listed townships.
The Environmental Protection Agency in
response refers
to the testimony and exhibits
in P12—18, the
proceeding in which the instant rule was adopted,
and also to an
Atlas and Plat Book of St. Clair Co.,
Ill., published by the
Rockford Map Publishers.
This plat book does not show an East
St. Louis Township.
Apparently
a portion of Canteen Township has
been excised and a new “co—terminus” township created pursuant to
Ill.
Rev. Stat.
(1977),
ch.
139, §127.
East St.
Louis Township is
a densely populated area surrounded
by the named townships and the Mississippi River.
The testimony
and exhibits in R72-18 show that it was intended to have been
included in the major population area.
It would be contrary to
the intent of the rule to exclude
a region of high population
density from the center of the major population
area.
Chapter 2 does not define township.
There are at least three
meanings of the word “township” shown in the exhibits.
There are
congressional townships,
local government townships created under
Ill.
Rev. Stat.,
ch.
139,
§6 and co—terminus townships created
under ch.
139,
§127.
There
is nothing in the Environmental Pro-
tection Act, Chapter 2:
Air Pollution or in Chapter 139:
Townships
35— 319
—2—
that requires the Board to specify major population areas according
to any one of these schemes.
If Chapter
2 contained a delegation
of jurisdictional authority to township government, then it would
be necessary to be more specific to avoid overlapping jurisdictions.
Such
is not the case.
The intent of the Board was to designate
a
certain area of high population density in an understandable manner.
The question
is simply whether the regulation reasonably informed
Respondent that it was
in a major population area.
Respondent must know that the rule
is intended to regulate
elevators in regions of high population density and that its ele-
vator is
in such a region.
Furthermore, Respondent was represented
at the hearing through the Grain and Feed Association and is prop-
erly chargeable with knowledge of the exhibits and testimony.
Moreover, Respondent’s application for an operating permit was
denied by the Agency on October 21, 1976.
Respondent apparently
did not raise this issue before the Agency and did not appeal.
(Since this case was docketed, Respondent has reapplied for a
permit and appealed the denial in PCB 79-167).
Respondent waited
four months after the original complaint was
filed in this pro-
ceeding to raise the issue by a motion to dismiss.
Respondent has
proceeded on the assumption that the elevator was located in a
major population area.
The regulation was therefore sufficient
to actually inform Respondent of the intent.
The motion is denied.
IT
IS SO ORDERED.
Mr.
Young concurs.
I, Christan L.
Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois PollutiorLcgntrol
Board, he eby certify the above
rder was adopted on the (~1 day
o
_________
1979 by a vote of
~O
Q#Moff~~t
Illinois Pollution
ol Board
35—320