BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
Complainant,
)
)
)
)
vs.
)
)
COMMUNITY LANDFILL COMPANY, INC.,)
an
Illinois Corporation, and the CITY OF
)
MORRIS,
an Illinois Municipal
Corporation,
)
)
RE
e
E EVE D
CLERK’S
OFFICE
JUN
132003
STATE OF
ILLINOIS
PCB No.
03-191
P011L’tb0~~
Control Board
Respondents.
)
APPEARANCE
NOW
COMES,
CHARLES
F.
HELSTBN
law
firm of HINSHAW
&
CULBERTSON
does hereby
enter
his
Appearance
in
the
above-captioned
matter
on
behalf of the
CITY
OF
MORRIS, an Illinois Municipal Corporation.
Dated:
HINSHAW AND CULBERTSON
100 Park Avenue
P.O. Box
1389
Rockford, IL 61105-1389
815-490-4900
Respectfully
Submitted,
On behalfof the CITY OF
MORRIS, an Illinois
Municipal Corporation
Charles F. Helsten
One ofIts Attorneys
This document utilized 100
recycled paper products
AFFIDAVIT
OF SERVICE
The undersigned, pursuant to the provisions of Section 1-109 ofthe Illinois Code of Civil
Procedure,
here,b~i
under penalty of perjury under
the
laws of the United
States
of America,
certifies that on~?~&~ I~
,
she served a copy ofthe foregoing upon:
Mr. Christopher Grant
Assistant
Attorney General
Environmental
Bureau
188 W. Randolph St., 20th Fl.
Chicago, IL
60601
Scott Belt
Scott Belt and Associates
105
V2
West Washington St.
Morris,
IL
60450
Mark A. LaRose
LaRose & Bosco, Ltd.
734 N. Wells Street
Chicago, IL 60610
Ms. Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Pollution Control Board
100 W. Randolph, Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
By
depositing
a copy thereof,
enclosed in
an
envelope
in
the United
States Mail
at Rockford,
Illinois, proper postage prepaid, before the hour of 5:00 P.M., addressed as above.
HINSHAW & CULBERTSON
100 Park Avenue
P.O.Box 1389
Rockford, IL61105-1389
(815)
490-4900
70365631v1 806289
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOAR~.~fljED
CLER~’S
c~’~”~
PEOPLE OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
)
JUN
132003
Complainant,
)
STATE OF ILLINOIS
vs.
pollution
Control Board
)
PCBNo.03-191
COMMUNETYLANDFILLCOMPANY, INC.,)
an Illinois Corporation, and the CITYOF
)
MORRIS, an
Illinois Municipal Corporation,
)
)
Respondents.
)
ANSWER AND
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
NOW COMES the City of
Morris,
an Illinois
Municipal
Corporation, and for
Answer and
Affirmative Defense to the Complaint filed by the State ofIllinois herein, states as follows:
COUNT I
1.
The Respondent City ofMorris denies the allegations set
forth in
¶
1
of Count
I
for lack ofinformation and belief,
and demands strict proofthereof.
2.
The Respondent City ofMorris admits the allegations set
forth in
¶
2 of Count I
ofthe Complaint.
3.
The Respondent City ofMorris admits so much of
¶
3 ofCount
I which alleges it
is
an Illinois
municipal corporation, organized
and operating according to
the laws ofthe
State of Illinois,
and
located in
Grundy County,
Illinois.
The City
further affirmatively
states that
it
is
the title
holder of certain property
upon which
the Morris
Community
Landfill is located.
4.
The Respondent City of Morris admits the allegations set forth
in
¶
4 of Count I
ofthe Complaint.
5.
The Respondent City of Morris admits the allegations set forth in
¶
5
of Count I
oftheComplaint.
6.
The Respondent Cityof
Morris
denies the allegations set forth in
¶
6 ofCount I of
the
Complaint,
and
further affirmatively
states
that
(as
alleged
by
the
State
in
¶
5
of
Count
I of
its
Complaint)
the
Respondent
Community
Landfill
Company,
Inc.
is
the
operator of such landfill, and manages the
day
to
day
operations of both parcels at
that
site.
Accordingly,
the
Respondent City
of Morris
further affirmatively
states
that,
as
such, all
arrangements for activities
conducted with respect to the deposit of waste at the
landfill have been conducted by the Respondent Community Landfill Company,
Inc.
7.
The Respondent City ofMorris is unable to
either admit or answer the allegations
set forth in
¶
7 ofCount I ofthe
Complaint, as such allegations are ambiguous, vague and
overly broad.
Accordingly, and based
upon the same, for lack of information and belief,
the Respondent denies the same.
8.
The Respondent
City of Morris
admits
so much of
¶
8
as
alleges
that
various
permits
(as
detailed
in
such
paragraph)
were
issued
with
respect
to
the
facility
in
question, and denies the balance ofthe allegations set
forth in such paragraph.
9.
The Respondent City ofMorris denies so much of~J
9
ofCount I
of
the Complaint
which alleges that both Respondents conducted disposal operations at parcels A and B of
the Morris Community
Landfill, and
again based upon the allegations set
forth in
¶
5
of
the Complaint that CLC
is the operator of the Morris Community
Landfill and manages
day
to
day
operations
of both
parcels
of
the
site,
the
Respondent
City
of
Morris
affirmatively states that
any
and all
activities
conducted
at the
site were
undertaken by
2
Respondent
Community
Landfill,
Inc.
The
Respondent
City
of
Morris
further
affirmatively states that financial assurance of closure/post closure costs were provided to
IEPA in the
form ofthree separate performance bonds underwritten by Frontier Insurance
Company.
10.
The Respondent City ofMorris denies the allegations set forth in
¶
10 of Count I
of
the Complaint for lack ofspecific
information and belief.
11.
The Respondent City ofMorris denies the
allegations set forth in
¶
11 ofCount I
ofthe Complaint forlackofspecific
information and belief.
12.
The Respondent City of
Morris
admits the
allegations set forth in
¶
12 ofCount I
ofthe
Complaint.
13.
The Respondent City of Morris admits the allegations set forth in
¶
13 ofCount I
ofthe
Complaint.
14.
The Respondent City ofMorris admits the allegations set forth in
¶
14 ofCount I
ofthe
Complaint.
15.
The Respondent City ofMorris admits the
allegations set
forth in
¶
15 ofCount I
ofthe
Complaint.
16.
The Respondent City of Morris admits the allegations set forth in
¶
16 ofCount I
ofthe
Complaint.
17.
The Respondent City of
Morris
denies the
allegations set
forth in
¶
17 ofCount I
of said Complaint,
and further affirmatively states that the only “person(s)”
as defined by
3
Section
3.26
of the
Act
that
may have potentially
violated the
statutory provisions
set
forth
in
Count
I
of the Complaint
are the
Respondent,
Community
Landfill,
Inc.,
and
possibly
those
officers,
agents, representatives
or employees of the
company who may
have assisted in decisions concerning the day-to-day management of Community Landfill
Company.
18.
The Respondent City ofMorris admits the allegations set forth in
¶
18 ofCount I
ofthe Complaint.
19.
The Respondent City ofMorris admits the allegations set forth in
¶
19 of Count I
ofthe Complaint.
20.
The Respondent City ofMorris admits the allegations set forth in
¶
20 ofCount I
ofthe Complaint.
21.
The Respondent City of Morris admits
the allegations set forth in
¶
21 of Count I
ofthe Complaint.
22.
For answer to
¶
22 of Count
I of the Complaint, the Respondent
City of Morris
realleges its answer to
¶
6 ofCount I ofthe Complaint as if fully and completely set forth
herein.
Further,
the Respondent City ofMorris denies the balance of the allegations set
forth in
¶
22
concerning
the conducting of a
“waste disposal
operation” (as that term
is
defined
in
the
Act)
and
further
affirmatively
states
that
it
has
not
arranged
for
or
supervised the deposit ofspecial waste, municipal solid waste, garbage and other waste at
the Morris Community Landfill.
(The
State again having already
alleged in
Paragraph 5
4
of
Count
I
of said
Complaint
that:
“CLC
is
the
operator of the
Morris
Community
Landfill, and manages day-to-day operations at both parcels at that site.”).
23.
To
the extent
that
¶
23
of Count
I of the Complaint
alleges that the Respondent
City of Morris has conducted
waste
disposal
operations at
the
facility in
question,
the
Respondent City of Morris realleges and incorporates herein
its
answer to
¶
22
above as
if fully and completely
set forth herein.
With respect to the balance ofthe allegations set
forth in such paragraph, the Respondent City ofMorris accordingly denies the
same.
WHEREFORE,
and
for all
the
reasons
stated
herein,
the
Respondent
City
of Morris
respectfully requests that the Board
enter an Order dismissing this
Complaint,
all
at the cost of
the Complainant,
the People of the
State of Illinois,
and for such other and further relief as the
Board deems appr
priate
d just.
Dated:
~
,~6
~4
Illinois
HINSHAW AND CULBERTSON
100 Park Avenue
P.O. Box 1389
Rockford,IL 61105-1389
815-490-4900
This document utilized
100
recycled paper products
Respectfully Submitted,
On behalfofthe
Charles F. Helsten
One ofIts
Attorneys
70365654v1
806289
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
The undersigned, pursuant to the provisions of Section
1-109 ofthe Illinois Code of Civil
Procedure,
hereby under
penalty of perjury
under
the laws of the United
States
of America,
certifies that on
.
.
3
,
she served a copy ofthe foregoing upon:
Mr. Christopher Grant
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
188 W. Randolph St.,
20th Fl.
Chicago,IL 60601
Scott Belt
Scott Belt and Associates
105’/2
West Washington St.
Morris, IL
60450
MarkA. LaRose
LaRose& Bosco, Ltd.
734 N. Wells Street
Chicago, IL 60610
Ms. Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Pollution Control Board
100 W.
Randolph, Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
By depositing
a
copy
thereof,
enclosed in
an
envelope
in
the United States Mail
at Rockford,
Illinois, proper postage prepaid,
before the hour of5:00 P.M., addressed as above.
*
HINSHAW &
CULBBRTSON
100 ParkAvenue
P.O. Box 1389
Rockford, IL 61105-1389
(815) 490-4900
70365631v1
806289