On December 3, 2009, the Illinois Pollution Control Board accepted the proposed settlement in the case of People v. Montalbano Builders, Inc., PCB No. 09-30.  The allegations concerned Montalbano’s development property known as the Huntington Ridge subdivision located on the southwest corner of Harvard Hills and Crowley Road in Harvard, McHenry County, Illinois. The State alleged that Montalbano violated environmental law "by (1) causing, threatening, or allowing the discharge of silt-laden runoff from the site into the waters of the State resulting in water pollution, (2) allowing disturbed soils and soil stockpiles with inadequate erosion controls to remain adjacent to wetland areas resulting in a water pollution hazard, and (3) failing to maintain adequate stormwater pollution prevention measures and discharging silt-laden runoff from the site into the adjacent wetland and waters of the State in violation of Montalbano’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit." Under the settlement, Montalbano agrees to pay a civil penalty of $10,000.00 but does not affirmatively admit the violations alleged by the State. Stay tuned to the Illinois Environmental Law Blog for more news and developments.

On December 4, 2009, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District, issued an opinion in the case of County of Kankakee v. Illinois Pollution Control Board, No. 3-04-0271.  At issue in this case was an application by Town & Country Utilities, Inc. and Town & Country and Kankakee Regional Landfill, LLC to site a landfill within the City of Kankakee, Illinois.  The proposed landfill was located 1 & 3/4 miles away from an existing landfill run by Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. Under Illinois law (415 ILCS 5/39.2), a county board or governing body of a municipality has authority to approve or disapprove a request for local siting approval for landfills.  Local siting approval shall be granted only if the proposed facility meets the following criteria: (i) the facility is necessary to accommodate the waste needs of the area it is intended to serve; (ii) the facility is so designed, located and proposed to be operated that the public health, safety and welfare will be protected; (iii) the facility is located so as to minimize incompatibility with the character of the surrounding area and to minimize the effect on the value of the surrounding property; (iv) for a facility that is a sanitary landfill or waste disposal site, the facility is located outside the boundary of the 100‑year floodplain, or (under certain circumstances) if the site is flood‑proofed; (v) the plan of operations for the facility is designed to minimize the danger to the surrounding area from fire, spills, or other operational accidents; (vi) the traffic patterns to or from the facility are so designed as to minimize the impact on existing traffic flows; (vii) if the facility will be treating, storing or disposing of hazardous waste, an emergency response plan exists for the facility which includes notification, containment and evacuation procedures to be used in case of an accidental release; (viii) if the facility is to be located in a county where the county board has adopted a solid waste management plan consistent with the planning requirements of the Local Solid Waste Disposal Act or the Solid Waste Planning and Recycling Act, the facility is consistent with that plan; and (ix) if the facility will be located within a regulated recharge area, any applicable requirements specified by the Pollution Control Board for such areas have been met. The County of Kankakee case dealt primarily with the eighth criterion (whether the facility is consistent with the county's solid waste management plan).  The Kankakee County Solid Waste Management Plan had been amended to prohibit landfills within Kankakee County, except for "an expansion of the existing landfill on the real property that is contiguous to the existing landfill" run by Waste Management. The issue was whether the proposed landfill was "contiguous to the existing landfill", even though the proposed landfill was located 1 & 3/4 miles away from the existing landfill.  The Kankakee City Council and the Illinois Pollution Control Board ruled that the proposed landfill was, in fact, contiguous.  However, the Appellate Court of Illinois disagreed and held that the proposed landfill was not contiguous.  The Court found that the "proposed landfill was the immediate object of the County's decision to preclude 'non-contiguous landfilling.  As such, the County intended its use of the word 'contiguous' to prevent what Applicants were proposing--a new landfill located 1 3/4 miles away from Waste Management's existing landfill."  Therefore, the Court held that the Pollution Control Board "erred in finding that the proposed landfill was contiguous to the existing landfill for purposes of the County's solid waste management plan."  As a result, the Court decided that the request for local siting approval must be denied. Stay tuned to the Illinois Environmental Law Blog for more news and developments.

According to a recent article in the River Forest Leaves newspaper, the U.S. EPA conducted testing to confirm that the soil at St. Luke Parish School in River Forest is environmentally safe. The school is across the street from River Forest Dry Cleaners, located at 7613 Lake Street.  The dry cleaners is listed on Illinois EPA's Site Remediation Program database, and, according to the article, it is "contaminated with perchloroethylene, commonly used by dry cleaners."  Testing has apparently confirmed, however, that the contamination did not migrate to the school's property. Stay tuned to the Illinois Environmental Law Blog for more news and developments.

The Illinois Pollution Control Board recently issued its Environmental Register publication for November 2009. The Environmental Register features a letter from Chairman Girard, an appellate court update, a rulemaking update, a summary of actions of the Board, a summary of new cases, and the Board's calendar. I will be blogging about some of the news contained in this publication. Stay tuned to the Illinois Environmental Law Blog for more news and developments.

According to an Illinois EPA press release, the State of Illinois will award $3 million in federal stimulus money and llinois EPA grants and loans to improve old and ailing sewage and drainage systems in Ridgewood, near Joliet in Will County. The money will be used to "pay for installing modern sewage treatment and septic systems to more than 180 homes, which now have inadequate or non-existent sewage or septic systems.  Improvements will also be made to ensure a safe source of drinking water for 368 residential properties." Stay tuned to the Illinois Environmental Law Blog for more news and developments.

On December 3, 2009, the Illinois Pollution Control Board accepted settlements of two State enforcement actions alleging water pollution violations. The case of People v. City of Pekin, No. PCB 07-47, concerned the City of Pekin's waste water treatment plant ("WWTP") at 606 South Front Street, in Pekin, Tazewell County.  The State alleged that the City (1) caused or allowed the discharge of contaminants into waters of the State in violation of the terms or conditions of its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit, (2) discharged said contaminates in violation of the regulations or standards adopted by the Pollution Control Board, (3) discharged the contaminants so as to cause water pollution, (4) failed to ensure that all treatment works and associated facilities were constructed and operated as to minimize violations of applicable standards during such contingencies as flooding, etc., (5) failed to comply with the monitoring, sampling, recording and reporting requirements set forth in the NPDES permit, (6) allowed bypasses and overflows of untreated wastewater to occur, and (7) failed to have a certified Class I operator to supervise the operation of the WWTP. Under the settlement, the City will pay a civil penalty of $14,483.00. The case of People v. J.B. Timmermann Farms, Ltd., PCB 07-70, concerned a dairy operation that houses approximately 675 milking cows, located on the north side of Highline Road, in Section 28 of Breese Township, Clinton County.  The State alleged that the defendant allowed a livestock waste lagoon to overflow into Shoal Creek without a NPDES permit for the site and deposited contaminants on land in a manner that created a water pollution hazard. Under the settlement, the defendant will pay a civil penalty of $15,000. Stay tuned to the Illinois Environmental Law Blog for more news and developments.

On December 9, 2009, in a speech to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson signaled that the EPA intends to use its recent endangerment findings to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. In her speech, Administrator Jackson stated that "I’m proud to say that – hours before I stepped on the plane to come here, I announced EPA’s finalized endangerment finding that greenhouse gases pose a threat to our health and welfare."  On December 7, 2009, the Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: "Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases--carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)--in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. "Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare." Although the endangerment findings do not, by themselves, regulate greenhouse gas emissions, Administrator Jackson said in her speech in Copenhagen that "[b]y taking action and finalizing the endangerment finding on greenhouse gas pollution, we have been authorized and obligated to take reasonable efforts to reduce greenhouse pollutants under the Clean Air Act." The first step in those efforts, according to Administrator Jackson, will be to attempt to work with Congress to pass "clean energy reform": "And when we return home, we will work closely with our Congress to pass comprehensive clean energy reform through the U.S. Congress – reform that will promote clean energy investments and lower U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by more than 80 percent below current levels by 2050.  A strong program of reforms and incentives can help the market get to work – making clean energy the profitable kind of energy. Once legislation is passed, we’re betting on our entrepreneurs, innovators, and workers to accelerate the pace of clean energy development in the US and around the globe." However, Administrator Jackson also seems to be signaling that, if the Congressional efforts fail, EPA is authorized and obligated to regulate greenhouse gas emissions on its own. Stay tuned to the Illinois Environmental Law Blog for more news and developments.