We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
On Sept. 5, 2012, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in the case of
Rumpke Sanitary Landfill, Inc. vs. Colerain Township,
Ohio, Case No. 2011-0181, that the landfill operated by Rumpke
was subject to local zoning regulations and was not an exempt
"public utility." The decision essentially thwarts future
expansion of the landfill and allows the local zoning commission to
regulate the facility based on quality of life issues for
surrounding neighbors.
After pursuing an action in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court
against the Township Trustees for denying the company's
application for expansion of its nearly 350 acre landfill
operation, the Common Pleas Court ruled that the landfill was
exempt from local zoning regulations because it fell within the
legal definition of a "public utility". The First
District Court of Appeals upheld the Trial Court's decision and
the Township appealed again. The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the
lower courts and found that Rumpke Sanitary Landfill does not meet
the definition of a "public utility" according to the
Ohio Revised Code Section 519.211 and therefore is subject to local
zoning requirements.
The Court's analysis focused on determining whether the
facility met the standards for a "public utility"
including considering the factors related to the "public
service" and "public concern" characteristics of a
public utility. The Supreme Court further analyzed whether the
landfill was regulated as a "public utility" and citing a
1939 case found that:
"factors utilized in determining whether an enterprise
conducts itself in such a way as to become a matter of public
concern including the good or service provided, competition in the
local marketplace, and regulation by governmental authority. None
of these factors is controlling. Nevertheless, in a case where the
business enterprise serves such a substantial part of the public
that its rates, charges and methods of operation become a public
concern, it can be characterized as a public utility."
The Court found that the Rumpke Sanitary Landfill operates as a
private sanitary landfill and is not regulated as a public utility
because of the lack of governmental regulation over the
public-service and public-concern factors. In a 7 to 0 decision,
the Ohio Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Court's decision
affirming the Trial Court's declaration that Rumpke is a
"public utility" and not subject to local zoning
requirements and remanded the case back to the Trial Court for
further proceedings.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has published a proposed rule entitled Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction.
Last week, the European Parliament rejected a proposal to reduce the quantity of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions allowances in order to fix a supply-demand imbalance in the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS).
It may be time for our federal courts to rethink their reluctance to accept major environmental claims that the courts of other countries are simply not yet able to handle.
After being taken to task by states and its own Inspector General for lack of final guidance on Vapor Intrusion, EPA has just released draft guidance documents for hazardous substances and petroleum products for comment.
California's cap-and-trade program mandates that certain covered entities acquire allowances for each metric ton of greenhouse gas (GHG) they emit during specified compliance periods.
Last Friday, EPA announced release of its draft proposal to revise the effluent guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating industry, last revised in 1982.
On April 19, 2013, EPA released the proposed "Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category" (Steam Electric ELG). The proposed Steam Electric ELG would revise the existing technology-based effluent limitations guidelines [40 CFR 423] for most steam electric power plants and their discharges to U.S. waters or POTWs.
In a decision that should not have come as a surprise to anyone, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday, in "Conservation Northwest v. Sherman", that the Bureau of Land Management and other agencies implementing the Northwest Forest Plan could not amend the NFP.
