City of Monmouth v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 72--86
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
| Writing for the Court | STOUDER; ALLOY, P.J., and DIXON |
| Citation | 295 N.E.2d 136,10 Ill.App.3d 823 |
| Parties | CITY OF MONMOUTH, Illinois, Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, and Pollution Control Board, Respondents. |
| Docket Number | No. 72--86 |
| Decision Date | 28 March 1973 |
Page 136
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, and Pollution Control
Board, Respondents.
Rehearing Denied April 24, 1973.
[10 Ill.App.3d 824]
Page 137
Bufford W. Hottle, Jr., Counsel, Monmouth, Kenneth R. Shorts, Waukegan, for petitioner.William J. Scott, Atty. Gen., Environmental Protection Agency, Springfield, before Pollution Control Board, Chicago, Prescott Bloom, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Peoria, of counsel, for respondents.
STOUDER, Justice:
On this appeal the City of Monmouth seeks review of an order of the Pollution Control Board which order levied a fine against the City of Monmouth in the amount of $2,000 and required the City to cease and desist from other conduct relating to odors. This is a direct review of the Board's action as provided by the Environmental Control Act, Sec. 1001 et seq., Chap. 111 1/2, Ill.Rev.Stat., and comes to us pursuant to the Administrative Review Act, Sec. 264 et seq., Chap. 110, Ill.Rev.Stat.
The Pollution Control Board, pursuant to complaint instituted by the Environmental Protection Agency, found the City of Monmouth guilty of air pollution in conjunction with operation of a three-cell sewage lagoon system. The first cell was an anaerobic lagoon approximately 275 feet by 275 feet square and 15 feet deep. There were two other lagoons each of slightly less that 40 acres. These lagoons were constructed by the City of Monmouth pursuant to an agreement entered into between the City of Monmouth and Agar Packing Company on March 4, 1964. A construction permit was granted by the Sanitary Water Board of the State of Illinois on July 31, 1964 for construction of the sanitary lagoons and they were put into operation upon the completion of the construction of the packing plant facility.
All construction was done pursuant to the plans submitted to the Sanitary Water Board. After construction, the City became aware that an odor problem existed, consulted with the Sanitary Water Board regarding the operation of the lagoon and received a number of suggestions from the Sanitary Water Board regarding methods of eliminating the odor problem. The suggestions included recirculation facilities, the addition[10 Ill.App.3d 825] of paunch manure to create a grease cap or seal on the lagoon and the elimination of all possible blood waste from the lagoon.
The City of Monmouth installed first two and then two more pumps in an effort to aerate the first stage of the lagoon by inducing more oxygen in the lagoon and further entered into a contract for the introduction of enzymes to combat the odor problem.
Numerous witnesses, mostly residents of the area, testified on behalf of the Agency that a strong smell like that of rotten eggs came from the area surrounding the first lagoon. It also appeared that the hydrogen sulfide fumes causing the strong smell also caused discoloration of paint on houses situated in the general area.
The order of the Board found generally that there were noxious odors emitted from the lagoon system, the City of Monmouth as the operator of the lagoon, permitted the emission of such noxious odors and that therefore the Environmental Control Act was violated. They City was fined $2,000 and was ordered to cease and desist from permitting the emission of such noxious odors within six months from the date of the order.
Page 138
On this appeal both the petitioner and respondent have devoted the major portions of their briefs to a discussion of the question of the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Environmental Control Act. In particular the petitioner has argued there has been an unconstitutional delegation of legislative and judicial powers to an administrative agency in violation of the separation of powers required by the Illinois constitution. Furthermore petitioner has argued the power of the administrative agency to assess a penalty deprives petitioner of property without due process of law.
At the time the briefs were filed in this case the constitutional question raised by the parties had not then been passed upon by any Illinois court of review. Since then this court in C. M. Ford v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Southern Illinois Asphalt Co., Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 71--163
...is an unconstitutional usurpation of judicial power. Ford v. E.P.A., 9 Ill.App.3d 711, 292 N.E.2d 540; City of Monmouth v. E.P.A., 10 Ill.App.3d 823, 295 N.E.2d 136; Bath, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board, 10 Ill.App.3d 507, 294 N.E.2d I find the reasoning in the above cases and the dissent ......
-
Hazelton v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of City of Hickory Hills, Cook County, No. 76--484
...upon facts, data, and testimony which do not appear in the record. (City of Monmouth v. Environmental Protection Agency (1973), 10 Ill.App.3d 823, 295 N.E.2d 136, Modified, 57 Ill.2d 482, 313 N.E.2d 161 (1974); North Shore Sanitary Dist. v. Pollution Control Bd. (1972), 2 Ill.App.3d 797, 27......
-
Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co. v. Pollution Control Bd., No. 56629
...540, Bath, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board, 10 Ill.App.3d 507, 294 N.E.2d 778, and City of Monmouth v. Environmental Protection Agency, 10 Ill.App.3d 823, 295 N.E.2d 136, that the authority and powers bestowed on the Board to make Page 357 rules and adjudicate cases are in keeping with the ......
-
Mystik Tape v. Illinois Pollution Control Bd., No. 58660
...has also been recognized that alternate kinds of violation are possible. (City of Monmouth v. Environmental Protection Agency (1973), 10 Ill.App.3d 823, 295 N.E.2d The complaint in the instant case alleges: Respondent did and does operate said plant * * * in such a manner as to cause, threa......
-
Southern Illinois Asphalt Co., Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 71--163
...is an unconstitutional usurpation of judicial power. Ford v. E.P.A., 9 Ill.App.3d 711, 292 N.E.2d 540; City of Monmouth v. E.P.A., 10 Ill.App.3d 823, 295 N.E.2d 136; Bath, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board, 10 Ill.App.3d 507, 294 N.E.2d I find the reasoning in the above cases and the dissent ......
-
Hazelton v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of City of Hickory Hills, Cook County, No. 76--484
...upon facts, data, and testimony which do not appear in the record. (City of Monmouth v. Environmental Protection Agency (1973), 10 Ill.App.3d 823, 295 N.E.2d 136, Modified, 57 Ill.2d 482, 313 N.E.2d 161 (1974); North Shore Sanitary Dist. v. Pollution Control Bd. (1972), 2 Ill.App.3d 797, 27......
-
Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co. v. Pollution Control Bd., No. 56629
...540, Bath, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board, 10 Ill.App.3d 507, 294 N.E.2d 778, and City of Monmouth v. Environmental Protection Agency, 10 Ill.App.3d 823, 295 N.E.2d 136, that the authority and powers bestowed on the Board to make Page 357 rules and adjudicate cases are in keeping with the ......
-
Mystik Tape v. Illinois Pollution Control Bd., No. 58660
...has also been recognized that alternate kinds of violation are possible. (City of Monmouth v. Environmental Protection Agency (1973), 10 Ill.App.3d 823, 295 N.E.2d The complaint in the instant case alleges: Respondent did and does operate said plant * * * in such a manner as to cause, threa......