HB6142 96TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

LRB096 17614 JDS 32972 b

96TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois
2009 and 2010
HB6142

Introduced 2/11/2010, by Rep. Richard P. Myers

SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED:

415 ILCS 5/31.3 new

Amends the Environmental Protection Act. Prohibits any person from bringing a civil suit based on potential nuisance with respect to a proposed livestock facility until all federal, State, and local permits and approvals required for the proposed facility have been granted. Provides that a prevailing defendant in any action in which a proposed livestock management facility is alleged to be a nuisance shall recover certain costs and fees. Defines "prevailing defendant". Effective immediately.

A BILL FOR

AN ACT concerning safety.

Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly:

Section 5. The Environmental Protection Act is amended by adding Section 31.3 as follows:

(415 ILCS 5/31.3 new)

Sec. 31.3. Nuisance; livestock management facilities.

(a) The General Assembly finds and declares that the federal, State, and local governmental entities that have been empowered to regulate siting, design, construction, and operation of a proposed livestock management facility are, with respect to the matters subject to their respective authorities, in the best possible position to determine whether a proposed facility is likely to create an actual or potential nuisance when sited, designed, constructed, and operated as authorized.

(b) A person may not bring a civil suit based on potential nuisance with respect to a proposed livestock management facility until all required federal, State, and local permits and approvals required for the proposed facility, including without limitation any permits or approvals required under this Act or the Livestock Management Facilities Act and any applicable local siting approval, zoning, land use, or other authorizations, have been granted.

(c) This Section does not limit (i) the authority of the Agency to consider or determine any matter or question relating to the siting, design, construction, or operation of a proposed livestock management facility, (ii) the right of any person to raise a question about the likelihood of creating an actual or potential nuisance while lawfully participating in a public hearing or permit appeal process, or (iii) the right of any person to bring a civil suit based on actual or potential nuisance with respect to all or any part of a livestock management facility in actual operation.

(d) Costs and fees associated with any nuisance action in which a proposed livestock management facility is alleged to be a nuisance, together with a reasonable amount for attorney fees, shall be recovered by a prevailing defendant in any action in which a proposed livestock management facility is alleged to be a nuisance. For the purposes of this subsection (d), a prevailing defendant is a defendant in a lawsuit in whose favor a final court order or judgment is rendered. A defendant shall not be considered to have prevailed if, prior to the entry of a final court order or judgment, he or she enters into a negotiated settlement agreement or takes any corrective or other action that renders unnecessary the entry of a final court order or judgment against the defendant.

Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon becoming law.