ÿWPC³ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw@å4% 9 H 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ U,- 0dY U,½ U>é B)'DCP AM“U*à B #'v~JvÓÈ D3› 0@Î AOÆ] 0D# D/g B–˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- )*D+,-./D01Ó€;nnG 3|x;2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial d Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌMarch€13,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€VXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑLAIDLAW›€ENVIRONMENTAL€SERVICES)ÌOF€NASHVILLE,€INC.,à àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellant,à àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)à àDavidson€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)à àNo.€€94„2747„IIIÌœVS›.à àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)à à01„A„01„9507„CH„00310ÌMETROPOLITAN€BOARD€OF€HEALTHà à€€)ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€#&";+'h|Ûül` ç `€€Lß›FOR€NASHVILLE€AND€DAVIDSON€à à€€)ÌCOUNTY,à àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)ÌROBERT€œORR›/œSYSCO›€FOOD€SERVICES€€€)ÌCOMPANY,à àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)ÌBRING€URBAN€RECYCLING€TOà àà à€€)ÌNASHVILLE€TODAY,à àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àDefendants/Appellees.à àà à€€)ÌÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àHONORABLE€ROBERT€S.€œBRANDT›,€CHANCELLORÌÒ€X€ÒÌÉÉÒÒThomas€V.€WhiteÌTUNE,€œENTREKIN›€&€WHITEÌFirst€American€Center,€œ21st›€FloorÌNashville,€Tennessee€37238ÌÌJOHN€P.€WILLIAMSÌ1900€Cedar€LaneÌNashville,€Tennessee€37212ÌATTORNEYS€FOR€PLAINTIFF/APPELLANTÌÌJames€L.€Murphy,€IIIÌDirector€of€LawÌJohn€L.€KennedyÌMetropolitan€AttorneyÌLiz€FosterÌMetropolitan€AttorneyÌDEPARTMENT€OF€LAWÌMETROPOLITAN€GOVERNMENT€OF€NASHVILLEÌ204€Metropolitan€CourthouseÌNashville,€Tennessee€37201ÌFOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLEEÌMETROPOLITAN€BOARD€OF€HEALTH€FORÌNASHVILLE€AND€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌÌÌGARY€A.€DAVISÌPost€Office€Box€2346ÌKnoxville,€Tennessee€37901ÌÌFrank€M.€FlyÌBULLOCK,€FLY€&€œMcFARLAND›ÌPost€Office€Box€398ÌMurfreesboro,€Tennessee€37133„0398ÌATTORNEYS€FOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLEEÌROBERT€œORR›/œSYSCO›€FOOD€SERVICES€COMPANYÌÌÌDAVID€œBORDENKIRCHER›Ì3221€œNolensville›€Road,€Suite€207ÌNashville,€Tennessee€37211ÌATTORNEY€FOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLEEÌBRING€URBAN€RECYCLING€TO€NASHVILLE€TODAYà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌœSAMUEL›€L.€LEWIS,€œJUDGE,€CONCURS;›ÌœAND€WILLIAM›€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€œJUDGE,€FILESÌSEPARATE€CONCURRING€OPINION.›ÇœLAIDLAW›€ENVIRONMENTAL€SERVICES)ÌOF€NASHVILLE,€INC.,à àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellant,à àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)à àDavidson€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)à àNo.€€94„2747„IIIÌœVS›.à àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)à à01„A„01„9507„CH„00310ÌMETROPOLITAN€BOARD€OF€HEALTHà à€€)ÌFOR€NASHVILLE€AND€DAVIDSON€à à€€)ÌCOUNTY,à àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)ÌROBERT€œORR›/œSYSCO›€FOOD€SERVICES€€€)ÌCOMPANY,à àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)ÌBRING€URBAN€RECYCLING€TOà àà à€€)ÌNASHVILLE€TODAY,à àà àà à€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€)Ìà àDefendants/Appellees.à àà à€€)ÌÌÌà@ àòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€captioned€plaintiff€has€appealed€from€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€affirming€theÏadministrative€action€of€the€captioned€Board€reversing€the€previous€action€of€the€Director€of€theÏMetropolitan€Department€of€Health€in€renewing€six€permits€previously€issued€for€operation€of€aÏwaste€disposal€plant.€€The€other€captioned€parties€initiated€and€prosecuted€the€administrativeÏproceedings€before€the€Board€to€reverse€the€renewal€of€the€permits€and€actively€defended€theÏaction€of€the€Board€in€the€Trial€Court€and€this€Court.ÌÌà àThe€issues€presented€by€the€parties€require€a€thorough€review€of€the€background€of€theÏpresent€controversy.ÌÌà àThe€subject€plant€was€constructed€in€1990€by€œOsco›€Treatment€Systems,€Inc.€€In€June,Ï1991,€the€Director€of€Health€issued€six€annual€permits€for€operating€the€plant€and€the€plantÏbegan€operations€consisting€of€converting€hazardous€wastewater.€€Copies€of€said€permits€areÏnot€found€in€the€record,€but€it€appears€from€the€renewal€licenses€that€various€activities€wereÏauthorized€to€neutralize€and€to€separate€metals,€oils€and€other€toxic€wastes€and€ship€them€toÏother€disposal€sites.€€The€remaining€wastewater€was€to€be€rendered€non„hazardous€in€biologicalÏtreatment€tanks€and€discharged€into€the€public€sewer€system.€€Annual€permits€for€this€operationÏwere€renewed€in€June,€1992,€by€the€Director€of€œHealth;›€and€œOsco›€Treatment€Systems,€Inc.Ïcontinued€the€operation.€€ÌÌà àOn€December€23,€1992,€œOsco›€Treatment€Systems,€Inc.,€became€a€subsidiary€ofÏplaintiff,€œLaidlaw›€Environmental€Services€of€Nashville,€Inc.ÌÌà àOn€February€26,€1993,€the€Director€of€the€Health€Department€issued€the€followingÏorder:ÌÓ  ÓÓÓà8 àà8 àTHE€METROPOLITAN€GOVERNMENT€OF€NASHVILLEÏANDÌDAVIDSON€COUNTY,€TENNESSEEÌÌActing€By€and€ThroughÌÌTHE€METROPOLITAN€BOARD€OF€HEALTHÌÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àIN€THE€MATTER€OFà àÌà8 àà8 àTHE€METROPOLITAN€DEPARTMENT€OFÌà8 àà8 àHEALTH,€œFREDIA›€S.€œWADLEY›,€M.D.,Ìà8 àà8 àDIRECTOR€OF€HEALTH,Ìà8 àà8 àà àComplainant,Ìà8 àà8 àvs.à àà àà àà àà àCase€No.€A„93„001ÌÌà8 àà8 àœOSCO›€TREATMENT€SYSTEMS,€INC.,Ìà8 àà8 àà àRespondent.ÌÌÓ  ÓòòORDERóóÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àà àPursuant€to€the€authority€of€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏSections€68„25„101,€et€seq.€and€the€Code€of€Laws€of€TheÏMetropolitan€Government€of€Nashville€and€Davidson€CountyÏChapter€10.56,€the€Metropolitan€Department€of€HealthÏ(ð ðDepartmentðð)€has€issued€the€following€Order:ÌÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àòòFINDINGS€OF€FACTóóÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àà à1.€€œOSCO›€Treatment€Systems,€Inc.,€(ð ðRespondentðð)€isÏthe€owner€and/or€operator€of€a€wastewater€treatment€facilityÏlocated€at€7230€Centennial€Place,€Nashville,€Tennessee.€€TheÏRespondent€is€a€ð ðpersonðð€within€the€meaning€of€SectionÏ10.56.010€of€the€Metropolitan€Code€of€Laws€ð ðCodeðð€and€isÏthereby€subject€to€the€provisions€of€Section€10.56.170€of€theÏCode.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà à2.€€On€September€16,€1992,€the€Department€received€aÏcomplaint€regarding€odor€in€the€Centennial€Boulevard€area.€ÏUpon€investigation,€the€Department€determined€that€the€odor€inÏquestion€was€a€sulfide€type€and€was€emanating€from€a€sodiumÏœhydrosulfide›€(œNaHS›)€delivery€system€on€RespondentððsÏpremises.€€According€to€the€Respondent,€the€œNaHS›€tank€wasÏfilled€with€a€substantial€excess€of€free€sulfide€which€had€beenÏintroduced€into€the€tank€by€employees€of€the€Respondent.€€TheÏensuing€chemical€reaction€released€excess€sulfide€at€a€rateÏexceeding€the€capacity€of€the€thermal€oxidizer€odor€controlÏsystem.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€3.€€On€numerous€occasions€during€September€and€October,Ï1992,€the€Department€received€complaints€of,€and€did,€in€fact,Ïdetect,€odors€in€the€Centennial€Boulevard€area.€€UponÏinvestigation,€the€Department€determined€such€odors€were€beingÏgenerated€by€bio„sludge€stored€in€various€roll„off€boxes€locatedÏon€Respondentððs€premises.€€Such€fact€was€confirmed€byÏemployees€of€the€Respondent.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€4.€€The€Respondent€was€acquired€by€œLaidlaw›€EnvironmentalÏServices,€Inc.€on€December€23,€1992.€€On€the€date€ofÏacquisition€there€were€approximately€ninety€roll„off€containersÏwhich€held€œodiferous›€bio„sludge€material€on€site.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€order€also€contains€the€following:ÓÓà8 àÌÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àòòCONCLUSION€OF€LAWóóÌÓ  Óà àà8 àà8 à€€1.€€Respondent€has€violated€Section€10.56.170Ïof€the€Code€on€repeated€occasions.ÌÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àòòORDERóóÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 à€€IT€IS€ORDERED€that€the€Respondent€is€hereby€assessed€a€civilÏpenalty€in€the€amount€of€One€Hundred€Fifty€Thousand€andÏNo/100€Dollars€($150,000.00)€for€violation€of€SectionÏ10.56.170€of€the€Metropolitan€Code€of€Laws.€€Said€penalty€shallÏbe€paid€by€certified€check,€payable€to€the€order€of€theÏMetropolitan€Department€of€Health,€within€thirty€(30)€days€ofÏthe€executed€date€of€this€CONSENT€AGREEMENT€and€shall€beÏmailed€or€delivered€to:€.€.€.€.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€April€2,€1993,€the€Director€issued€an€ð ðAmendmentðð€to€the€February€26,€1993,€orderÏcontaining€the€following:ÌÓ  ÓÓÓÌà8 àà8 àòòAMENDMENT€TO€ORDER€ASSESSING€CIVIL€PENALTYóóÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 à€€Comes€the€Director€of€Health€to€amend€the€Order€issued€onÏFebruary€26,€1993,€assessing€a€civil€penalty€in€the€above„styledÏmatter,€by€deleting€paragraph€3€of€said€Order€and€in€its€placeÏsubstituting€the€following€paragraph€3.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 à3.€€In€addition€to€the€incident€referenced€above,Ïthe€Department€received€numerous€complaints€of,Ïand€staff€members€did€in€fact,€detect,€odors€in€theÏCentennial€Boulevard€area€on€the€following€datesÏin€October,€1992;€December,€1992;€January,Ï1993;€February,€1993;€and€March,€1993:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àOctober€5,€1992Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àOctober€8,€1992€(two€occasions)Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àOctober€9,€1992Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àOctober€13,€1992€(two€occasions)Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àOctober€15,€1992Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àDecember€1,€1992€(two€occasions)Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àDecember€2,€1992Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àDecember€15,€1992Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àDecember€17,€1992Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àJanuary€21,€1993Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àFebruary€12,€1993Ìà8 àà8 àà8 àFebruary€16,€1993ÌÌà8 àà8 àUpon€investigation,€staff€members€of€the€Health€DepartmentÏdetermined€that€the€odors€originated€in€bio„sludge€stored€inÏvarious€roll„off€boxes€located€on€Respondentððs€premises.€€TheÏorigin€of€the€odors€detected€in€October,€1992,€was€confirmed€byÏemployees€of€the€Respondent.ÌÌà8 àà àTHE€METROPOLITAN€GOVERNMENT€OF€NASHVILLE€ANDÏà àà àDAVIDSON€COUNTY€DEPARTMENT€OF€HEALTHÌÌà8 àà8 àà à/s/_______________________________________Ìà8 àà8 àà àà àœFREDIA›€S.€œWADLEY›,€M.D.Ìà8 àà8 àà àà àDirector€of€HealthÌÌà8 àà8 àDated:€òòApril€2,€1993óóÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€April€28,€1993,€plaintiff€applied€for€renewal€of€the€six€permits€for€operation€of€theÏplant.€€On€June€28,€1993,€after€inspection€of€the€plant,€the€Director€of€Health€renewed€theÏpermits.ÌÌà àEach€of€the€six€permits€describes€a€specific€ð ðEmission€Sourceðð€and€specific€ð ðEmissionÏPointsðð€with€specified€conditions€of€operation.€€A€copy€of€Permit€No.€6„1,€is€attached€to€thisÏopinion€as€ð ðExhibit€A.ððÌÌà àOn€July€26,€1993,€and€July€28,€1993,€the€second€and€third€captioned€appelleesÏappealed€to€the€Board€to€reverse€the€renewal€of€the€permits.€€The€Board€adopted€the€contestedÏcase€provisions€of€the€Uniform€Procedures€Act,€T.C.A.€Section€7„7„105,€and€requested€anÏAdministrative€Law€Judge€(œALJ›)€to€preside€over€the€proceedings.ÌÌà àOn€November€8,€1993,€prior€to€the€administrative€hearing,€a€ð ðconsent€agreementðð€wasÏapproved€by€the€Board.€€The€agreement€was€signed€by€the€Director€of€Health€and€the€presidentÏof€œOsco›€Treatment€Systems,€Inc.€€It€contains€the€following€caption€and€ð ðFactual€Background:ððÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIN€THE€MATTER€OFÌà8 àà8 àTHE€METROPOLITAN€DEPARTMENT€OFÌà8 àà8 àHEALTH,€œFREDIA›€S.€œWADLEY›,€M.D.,Ìà8 àà8 àDIRECTOR€OF€HEALTH,ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àComplainant,ÌÌà8 àà8 àV.ÌÌà8 àà8 àœOSCO›€TREATMENT€SYSTEMS,€INC.,ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àRespondent.ÌÌà8 àà8 à.€.€.€.ÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àòòFACTUAL€BACKGROUNDóóÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àà à1.€€Respondent€became€a€subsidiary€of€œLaidlaw›ÏEnvironmental€Services,€Inc.,€effective€December€23,€1992.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà à2.€€Operational€control€of€Respondent€was€assumed€byÏits€current€management€in€early€1993.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà à3.€€Respondentððs€current€management€has€taken€aÏnumber€of€steps€to€minimize€the€potential€emission€of€odorsÏfrom€the€facility.€€These€steps€have€included€the€following:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àA.€€Respondent€has€undertaken€an€ongoingÏcomprehensive€review€of€the€facility€and€its€operations.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àB.€€Approximately€90€œrolloff›€boxes€containingÏœbiosludge›,€which€were€on€the€premises€when€RespondentððsÏcurrent€management€assumed€control,€were€removed€byÏRespondent.€€The€removal€was€completed€three€weeks€inÏadvance€of€the€date€promised€to€the€Department€by€currentÏmanagement.€€œBiosludge›€is€a€potential€source€of€odors.€€ThisÏaccelerated€removal€cost€about€$51,000.00€in€addition€to€theÏnormal€removal€expense.ÌÌà8 àà àà àC.€€Since€about€February€1993,€œbiosludge›€has€been€accumulated€à8 àfor€a€shorter€period€of€time€than€before,€and€shipped€offsite€for€final€disposalÏmore€frequently.€€Respondent€has€incurred€more€than€$300,000.00€in€additionalÏexpense€(through€July€1,€1993)€resulting€from€these€more€frequent€shipments.ÌÌà8 àà àà àD.€€Respondent€installed€an€air€œsparger›€for€the€equalization€tank€à8 àat€a€cost€of€more€than€$13,000.00.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àE.€€Respondent€has€added€hydrogen€peroxide€andÏpowdered€activated€carbon€to€the€biological€treatment€tanks€as€aÏpart€of€its€routine€wastewater€processing€procedures.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àF.€€Respondent€has€retained€consultants€to€assist€it€inÏaddressing€the€potential€for€emission€of€odors€from€the€facility.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€agreement€also€contains€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€1.€€This€Consent€Agreement€constitutes€a€full€and€finalÏsettlement€of€all€complaints€alleging€violations€of€CodeÏðð10.56.170€by€Respondent€through€the€date€of€this€ConsentÏAgreement.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€3.€€The€Department€has€taken€the€cost€to€Respondent€of€pastÏand€future€remedial€measures€into€account€in€determining€anÏappropriate€penalty€and€corrective€measures€incorporated€intoÏthis€Consent€Agreement.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€4.€€Respondent€will€pay€a€civil€penalty€to€the€Department€in€theÏamount€of€eighty€thousand€dollars€($80,000.00)€to€settle€theÏallegations€of€the€order.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€5.€€Respondent€will€purchase,€install,€and€operate€a€new€two„stage€scrubber€for€the€biological€treatment€tanks€to€replace€theÏexisting€scrubber.€.€.€.€€The€estimated€project€cost€of€purchasingÏand€installing€this€scrubber€is€a€minimum€of€$90,000.00.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€7.€€Respondent€will€install€a€new€multi„stage€scrubber€to€serveÏcertain€tanks€known€as€the€T„1,€T„14,€T„15,€T„18,€and€T„19Ïtanks.€.€.€.€€The€estimated€project€cost€of€purchasing€andÏinstalling€this€scrubber€is€$250,000.00.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€8.€€.€.€.€€As€long€as€Respondent€is€proceeding€in€a€mannerÏwhich€reasonably€may€be€expected€to€result€in€completion€of€theÏagreed€actions€by€the€target€dates,€and€otherwise€is€inÏcompliance€with€this€Consent€Agreement,€Respondent€shall€beÏdeemed€to€be€in€compliance€with€Code€ðð10.56.170.€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€9.€€After€the€completion€of€the€compliance€schedule€referred€toÏin€the€preceding€paragraph,€as€long€as€the€equipment€installed€byÏRespondent€pursuant€to€this€Consent€Agreement€is€in€goodÏworking€order€and€is€in€normal€operation,€Respondent€shall€notÏbe€subject€to€enforcement€action€under€Code€ðð10.56.170€unlessÏand€until€Code€ðð10.56.170€is€substantially€amended.€.€.€.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€April€4,€1994,€plaintiff€moved€the€Administrative€Judge€to€dismiss€the€appeal€fromÏthe€order€of€the€Director€renewing€the€permits€on€the€grounds€of€the€Consent€Order.€€On€AprilÏ5,€1994,€the€motion€was€overruled.ÌÌà àOn€June€15,€1994,€after€a€hearing€on€the€merits€of€the€appeal,€the€Board€voted€4€„€1€toÏreverse€the€renewal€of€permits€granted€by€the€Director€on€June€28,€1993.€€On€July€12,€1994,Ïthe€Board€approved€written€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€under€the€followingÏcaption:ÌÓÓÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àBEFORE€THE€METROPOLITAN€BOARD€OF€HEALTH€ÌOF€THE€METROPOLITAN€GOVERNMENT€OFÌNASHVILLE€AND€DAVIDSON€COUNTY,€TENNESSEEÌÌÓ  ÓÌà8 àà8 àROBERT€œORR›/œSYSCO›,€INC.Ìà8 àà8 àAndÌà8 àà8 àBRING€URBAN€RECYCLING€TO€NASHVILLEÌà8 àà8 àTODAY€(BURNT)Ìà8 àà8 àà àPetitioners,ÌÌà8 àà8 àV.à àà àà àà àà àNo.€43.01„34œ„0597J›ÌÌà8 àà8 àœOSCO›€TREATMENT€SYSTEMS,€INC.,Ìà8 àà8 àà àRespondent.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€findings€of€fact€include€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àòòBackgroundóóÌÌà8 àà8 à.€.€.€12.€€Under€the€current€zoning€regulations€activities€inÏIndustrial€Restrictive€Districts,€such€as€œOSCO›,€must€beÏperformed€in€enclosed€buildings.€€At€œOSCO›,€sources€of€some€ofÏthe€offensive€odors,€the€waste€storage€and€treatment€tanks,€areÏnot€in€enclosed€buildings€[IV„75„76].ÌÌà8 àà8 àòòImpact€of€œOSCO›€on€Neighboring€Businesses€and€InstitutionsóóÌÌà8 àà8 à€€13.€€During€the€period€April€1,€1991,€to€March€24,€1994,€thereÏwere€at€least€131€air€pollution€complaints€to€the€MetropolitanÏHealth€Department€from€neighbors€of€œOSCO›€concerning€airÏpollution€from€the€œOSCO›€facility.€€Of€the€total€of€131Ïcomplaints,€90€(70%)€of€those€complaints€were€received€afterÏJanuary€1,€1993,€when€œLaidlaw›€began€operating€the€œOSCO›Ïfacility.€€[II„142;€Ex.€S„6].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€15.€€Of€the€131€documented€air€pollution€complaints€receivedÏby€the€Metropolitan€Health€Department,€the€presence€of€an€odorÏfrom€œOSCO›€was€confirmed€by€a€Metropolitan€inspector€or€wasÏconfirmed€by€œOSCO›ððs€own€admission€for€at€least€82€of€theÏcomplaints.€€[Ex.€S„5,€6].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 àòòObjectionable€Odors€from€the€œOSCO›€FacilityóóÌÌà8 àà8 à€€20.€€When€the€original€air€pollution€permit€application€was€Ïpending€for€the€œOSCO›€facility,€œOSCO›ððs€consultant,€ResourceÏConsultants,€Inc.,€assured€the€Director€of€the€Bureau€ofÏEnvironmental€Health€Services€of€the€Metropolitan€HealthÏDepartment€that€there€would€be€no€odor€problems.€€(VI„144„147;€VII„129„131)€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€21.€€Instead,€in€the€three€years€that€the€facility€has€beenÏoperating,€there€have€been€40„50€emissions€of€objectionableÏodors€beyond€the€property€line€which€were€considered€to€beÏviolations€of€Section€10.56.170€of€the€Air€Pollution€CodeÏ(Emission€of€Gases,€Vapors,€or€Objectionable€Odors)€by€theÏMetropolitan€Health€Department.€€[VI„140].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€23.€€.€.€.€€There€have€been€at€least€nineteen€days€since€January,Ï1993€when€the€Metropolitan€Health€Department€foundÏobjectionable€odors€emitted€by€œOSCO›€beyond€the€property€lineÏthat€met€the€standard€set€out€in€Section€10.56.170.€€[VI„141].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€32.€€œOSCO›€maintained€log€sheets€of€pH€measurements€of€theÏscrubbing€liquid€in€the€œbioscrubber›.€€During€the€two„year€periodÏfrom€April,€1991,€to€April,€1993,€there€were€at€least€296Ïreadings€that€were€below€a€pH€of€9.0,€each€of€which€constitutedÏa€violation€of€the€operating€permit.€€On€several€days€the€pH€wasÏpermitted€to€remain€well€below€9.0€for€hours€at€a€time.€€[II„136„139;€VI„44;€VI„164;€Ex.€S„13].€€In€addition,€in€1993€œOSCO›Ïallowed€the€pH€in€the€œbioscrubber›€to€fall€below€9.0€more€thanÏtwo€times€in€January,€1993,€once€in€March,€1993,€once€in€April,Ï1993,€and€once€in€September,€1993.€€[VI„27;€44„45].€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€34.€€œOSCO›€has€agreed€to€replace€the€ineffective€œbioscrubber›Ïwith€a€new€thermal€oxidizer.€€This€thermal€oxidizer,€however,Ïwill€not€solve€all€of€the€odor€problems€from€the€biologicalÏtreatment€units,€since€there€would€not€be€an€effective€backupÏcontrol€device€for€the€times€when€the€thermal€oxidizerÏmalfunctions€or€is€out€of€service€for€maintenance.€€TheÏbiological€treatment€units€cannot€be€simply€turned€off€when€thisÏoccurs€because€of€the€necessity€to€keep€the€bacteria€alive,€andÏodors€would€continue€to€be€generated.€€[II„148;€IV„134].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€36.€€The€only€backup€planned€for€the€proposed€new€thermalÏoxidizer€is€a€scrubber.€€As€with€the€existing€œbioscrubber›,€such€aÏbackup€scrubber€would€not€be€very€effective€at€removing€odors.€Ï[IV„135].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€38.€€There€was€no€testimony€by€any€expert€witness€that€theÏproposed€thermal€oxidizer€would€eliminate€all€objectionableÏodors€emitted€from€the€œOSCO›€facility.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€39.€€œOSCO›€has€not€demonstrated€the€ability€to€properly€operateÏthe€relatively€simple€air€pollution€control€equipment€that€itÏcurrently€has€at€the€plant.€€It€is€likely€that€operational€problemsÏwill€increase€with€the€more€technically€sophisticated€andÏdifficult„to„operate€equipment€that€œOSCO›€is€planning€to€install.€Ï[III„49„50].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€40.€€Another€source€of€odor€from€the€œOSCO›€plant€is€the€filterÏpress€area,€which€filters€odorous€sludge€from€the€biologicalÏunits€and€is€in€an€open€building€without€any€air€pollution€controlÏdevices.€€[IV„120].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€41.€€The€storage€of€œrolloff›€€boxes€containing€sludge€from€theÏbiological€units€is€also€a€potential€source€of€odor,€which€isÏsomewhat€œmitiated›€when€they€are€covered.€€[IV„121].€€TheseÏœrolloff›€boxes€have€been€the€source€of€odor€complaints€in€theÏpast.€€(Ex.€S„5)ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€42.€€Another€source€of€odors€is€overflow€of€foam€and€liquidÏfrom€the€biological€treatment€units,€which€have€frequentlyÏoverflowed€through€foaming€into€the€dike€around€the€tanksÏproducing€a€biological€sewer€odor€that€would€not€be€routedÏthrough€the€new€thermal€oxidizer.€€[III„88].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€43.€€The€odor€problems€with€the€œOSCO›€facility€have€not€beenÏsolved€by€œLaidlaw›€Environmental€Services€since€it€acquiredÏœOSCO›.€€[VI„142].€€It€is€likely€that€there€will€be€objectionableÏodors€from€the€œOSCO›€facility€in€the€future,€even€with€theÏinstallation€of€a€new€thermal€oxidizer.€€[II„149].€€The€thermalÏoxidizer€to€be€installed€on€the€biological€treatment€units€will€notÏaddress€odors€from€the€filter€press€area€or€the€roll„off€boxes€orÏany€other€fugitive€emissions€from€the€facility.€€[IV„131].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€44.€€œOSCO›€has€accepted€numerous€shipments€of€hazardousÏwaste€with€very€strong€odors€as€determined€by€œOSCO›€laboratoryÏpersonnel.€€[VI„33„40].€€Hazardous€waste€codes€œD001›€andÏœD002›€were€those€that€were€most€frequently€designated€as€havingÏvery€strong€odors.€€[VII„263].€€These€include€shipmentsÏaccepted€for€treatment€in€parts€of€the€plant€without€air€pollutionÏcontrols.€€Many€of€these€shipments€with€very€strong€odors€areÏfrom€other€œLaidlaw›€facilities.€€[VI„33„40].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€45.€€Toxic€waste€disposal€plants€like€œOSCO›€cannot€operateÏanywhere€without€potentially€creating€odors,€and€œOSCO›Ïtherefore€needs€a€more€remote€site€with€a€buffer€zone€to€reduceÏthe€impact€on€neighboring€businesses.€€[III„54].€€The€lack€of€aÏbuffer€zone€contributes€to€œOSCO›ððs€odor€violations.€€[IV„154].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€46.€€œOSCO›ððs€own€consultant,€Resource€Consultants,€Inc.,Ïwhich€confidently€predicted€that€there€would€be€no€odorÏproblems€before€the€facility€began€operation,€is€unable€to€state,Ïeven€with€the€proposed€addition€of€new€odor€controls,€thatÏodors€from€œOSCO›€will€not€be€a€problem€in€the€future.€[VII„148].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 àòòEmissions€of€Volatile€Organic€CompoundsóóÌÌà8 àà8 à€€47.€€The€œOSCO›€facility€accepts€hazardous€and€other€industrialÏwaste€with€volatile€organic€compounds€(œVOCs›),€some€with€overÏ4„5%€volatile€organic€compounds,€and€some€of€which€haveÏthousands€of€parts€per€million€of€benzene,€which€is€aÏcarcinogen.€€œOSCO›€also€accepts€hazardous€waste€with€volatileÏorganic€compounds€that€are€chlorinated€solvents,€many€of€whichÏare€carcinogens.€€[VII„115;€II„152].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€48.€€Odors€from€the€œOSCO›€facility€are€related€to€œVOCs›Ïemissions,€since€odor„causing€compounds€are€for€the€most€partÏœVOCs›.€€[III„23].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€49.€€œOSCO›€has€a€thermal€oxidizer€in€place€for€the€control€ofÏœVOCs›€emissions€from€certain€storage€and€treatment€tanks€at€theÏfacility,€but€not€all€of€the€œVOCs›€emissions€from€the€œOSCO›Ífacility€are€routed€to€the€thermal€oxidizer.€€œVOCs›€emissions€fromÏthe€biological€system€are€routed€to€the€œbioscrubber›,€as€discussedÏin€the€section€above,€and€there€are€several€sources€of€fugitiveÏemissions€not€controlled€by€any€air€pollution€control€device.€€[II„135].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€50.€€The€drum€storage€and€drum€decant€building,€where€drumsÏare€stored€and€unloaded€into€tanks,€does€not€have€any€airÏpollution€controls.€€Also,€in€the€same€building€is€the€chemicalÏfixation€system,€where€certain€liquids€and€œsludges›€are€mixedÏwith€cement€material€for€solidification.€€Volatile€organicÏcompounds€emitted€from€these€operations€are€not€controlled€andÏare€released€to€the€atmosphere.€€[II„125„128].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€55.€€The€œOSCO›€1993€operating€permits€at€issue€in€the€hearingÏcontrol€volatile€organic€compound€emissions€only€through€aÏcalculation€of€emissions€based€upon€the€amount€of€œVOCs›€inÏwaste€processed€at€the€facility.€€There€is€no€direct€measurementÏof€œVOCs›€emitted,€and€the€calculations€are€done€once€per€year€byÏœOSCO›ððs€consultants,€in€spite€of€the€fact€that€the€operatingÏpermits€have€daily€and€hourly€limits€on€œVOC›€emissions.€€[II„149].€€œOSCO›€does€not€report€to€Metro€on€compliance€with€dailyÏœVOC›€throughput€limits,€only€annual.€€[VII„112„113].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€56.€€No€œVOCs›€monitoring€from€emission€points€or€in€ambientÏair€is€required€by€the€permits.€€[VI„147].€€The€permits€do€notÏspecifically€regulate€the€emissions€of€any€toxic€chemicals,Ïincluding€benzene.€€[VI„147].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€57.€€The€permit€requirement€for€analyzing€œVOCs›€in€incomingÏwaste€is€unclear€and€has€not€always€been€followed€by€œOSCO›.Ï[V„33;€Ex.€S„20].€€Waste€shipments€have€been€unloaded€prior€toÏdetermining€the€pounds€of€œVOCs›€contained€in€them€forÏdetermination€of€compliance€with€daily€throughput€limits.€€[VI„45„46;€Ex.€S„30].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€59.€€The€1993€operating€permits€do€not€adequately€controlÏemissions€of€volatile€organic€compounds€and€particularly€do€notÏadequately€control€emissions€of€volatile€organic€compounds€thatÏare€carcinogenic.€€[II„160„161].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 àòòHazardous€Waste€Accepted€by€œOSCO›óóÌÌà8 àà8 à€60.€€œOSCO›€accepts€both€drums€of€hazardous€waste€and€bulkÏshipments.€€Drums€of€hazardous€waste€come€to€œOSCO›€by€truck.€ÏBulk€hazardous€waste€comes€to€the€œOSCO›€facility€by€rail€tankerÏand€by€truck€tanker.€€[II„123;€125„126;€130„132;€Ex.€S„12].€ÏAlthough€the€hazardous€waste€permit€for€the€œOSCO›€facilityÏallows€only€two€rail€cars€to€be€present€on€the€œOSCO›€facility€atÏany€given€time,€several€more€are€stored€at€any€time€on€the€railÏsiding€immediately€adjacent€to€the€œOSCO›€facility.€€[I„146;€II„130„132;€Ex.€S„12;€Ex.€S„1].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€61.€€Under€its€hazardous€waste€permit€œOSCO›€is€permitted€toÏaccept€virtually€every€type€of€hazardous€waste€from€anyÏlocation.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€76.€€The€August€25,€1993,€nitrogen€dioxide€release€from€tankÏT„1€created€a€large€orange€cloud€that€extended€far€above€theÏœOSCO›€facility€and€migrated€off€the€plant€site.€€[Ex.€S„2,€16].€ÏThe€small€scrubber€on€tank€T„1€was€overwhelmed€by€the€gas,Ïand€much€of€the€gas€exited€from€the€top€of€the€tank€instead€of€theÏscrubber.€€[III„139;€V„110;€Ex.€S„16].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€90.€€In€order€to€prevent€sudden€releases€of€toxic€chemicals,Ïsuch€as€those€that€have€occurred€at€œOSCO›,€it€is€normal€practiceÏin€the€chemical€industry€and€in€the€hazardous€waste€industry€toÏhave€a€formalized€preventative€maintenance€program,€whichÏœOSCO›€does€not€have.€€[III„158].€€Although€œOSCO›€may€haveÏcommenced€the€development€of€a€preventative€maintenanceÏprogram€since€the€beginning€of€the€hearing€of€this€appeal,€it€isÏnot€yet€fully€documented.€€[V„26].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€94.€€The€œOSCO›€facility€as€it€is€currently€operated€is€not€a€safeÏoperation.€€There€are€many€potential€accidents€that€can€occur€thatÏwould€release€toxic€chemicals.€€[III„159„160].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 àòòMonitoring€for€ComplianceóóÌÌà8 àà8 à€104.€€Monitoring€of€emissions€for€compliance€with€permit€limitsÏfor€the€œOSCO›€facility€is€technically€and€economically€feasibleÏand€is€the€trend€under€the€federal€Clean€Air€Act€Amendments€ofÍ1991.€€It€is€required€in€some€permits€now€in€the€State€ofÏTennessee.€€[VII„252„254;€271„272].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€105.€€Continuous€stack€monitoring€was€available€in€June€1993.€Ï[III„25„27].€€Continuous€monitoring€devices€are€sufficientlyÏsensitive€to€monitor€for€odor€causing€compounds.€€[III„63].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€106.€€Other€air€pollution€permits€in€the€State€of€TennesseeÏinclude€odor€restrictions€and€specific€limits€on€and€monitoringÏrequirements€for€odor€causing€compounds.€€[VII„256„257].€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€107.€€Continuous€œfenceline›€monitoring,€where€a€monitoringÏdevice€detects€low€levels€of€chemicals€in€the€ambient€air€at€aÏfacility€property€boundary,€is€technically€and€economicallyÏfeasible€for€œOSCO›.€€[VII„252;€VII„265„266].ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€108.€€None€of€these€conditions€in€a€permit€for€a€wasteÏmanagement€facility€would€be€a€new€precedent.€€[VII„281].ÌÌà8 àà8 àòòConclusions€of€LawóóÌÌà8 àà8 à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à5.€€Section€10.56.170€of€the€Air€Pollution€Chapter€states:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àNo€person€shall€cause,€suffer,€allow€or€permitÏany€emission€of€gases,€vapors,€or€objectionableÏodors€beyond€the€property€line€from€any€sourceÏwhatsoever€which€causes€injury,€detriment,Ïnuisance€or€annoyance€to€any€considerableÏnumber€of€persons€or€to€the€public,€or€whichÏcauses€or€has€a€natural€tendency€to€cause€injuryÏor€damage€to€business€or€property.ÌÌà8 àà8 à6.€€Odor€falls€within€the€definition€of€air€pollution€in€theÏTennessee€Air€Pollution€Control€Act,€and€it€is€within€the€BoardððsÏauthority€to€regulate€odor€emissions.€€Tenn.€AG.€Op.€No.€83„299.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€conclusions€of€law€include€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à7.€€Section€10.56.170€is€valid€without€the€promulgation€ofÏregulations€for€its€implementation€and€is€not€unconstitutionallyÏvague€or€œoverbroad›.€€It€is€within€the€experience€and€expertise€ofÏthe€Metropolitan€Health€Department€to€enforce€this€provisionÏthrough€consideration€of€complaints€from€the€public€andÍverification€by€Metropolitan€inspectors€of€the€source,€nature,€andÏintensity€of€emissions.€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à12.€€By€allowing€the€pH€of€the€œbioscrubber›€to€fall€below€9.0,ÏœOSCO›€has€violated€Operating€Permit€Number€6„4€over€300Ïtimes€in€its€three€years€of€operations.ÌÌà8 àà8 à13.€€Under€the€air€operating€permits€reissued€to€œOSCO›€on€JuneÏ28,€1993,€compliance€with€the€requirements€of€SectionÏ10.56.170€of€the€Air€Pollution€Chapter€is€specifically€required€inÏthe€permits.€€By€violating€Sections€10.56.170€œOSCO›€has€alsoÏfailed€to€comply€with€the€provisions€of€its€operating€permits.ÌÌà8 àà8 à14.€€Based€upon€the€design,€constructions,€and€operation€of€theÏœOSCO›€facility,€and€the€types€of€hazardous€waste€that€œOSCO›Ïaccepts€and€is€permitted€to€accept,€it€is€likely€that€œOSCO›€willÏoperate€in€violation€of€the€Air€Pollution€Control€Chapter€in€theÏfuture.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€decision€of€the€Board€reads€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€WHEREFORE,€the€Metropolitan€Nashville€and€DavidsonÏCounty€Board€of€Health€hereby€reverses€the€decision€of€theÏMetropolitan€Health€Department€approving€the€œOSCO›€TreatmentÏSystems,€Inc.,€application€for€Operating€Permits€Number€6„1Ïthrough€6.5.€€These€operating€permits€are€considered€void€andÏof€no€effect€as€of€the€effective€date€of€this€Order.€€ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€the€same€date,€plaintiff€filed€a€motion€for€stay€supported€by€an€affidavit€that€plaintiffÏhad€spent€or€obligated€itself€for€payment€of€$2,679,302€in€good€faith€compliance€with€theÏð ðConsent€Agreementðð€approved€by€the€Board€on€November€8,€1993.€€The€Board€denied€theÏstay.ÌÌà àUpon€filing€of€petition€for€judicial€review,€plaintiff€again€applied€for€stay€supported€byÏaffidavit€of€the€Director€of€Health€that:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€Since€the€installation€of€the€new€air€pollution€control€equipmentÏat€the€œLaidlaw›€facility,€it€is€my€opinion€that€the€facility€will€poseÍno€risk€to€human€health€which€is€greater€than€that€posed€byÏseveral€other€facilities€in€œCockrill›€Bend.€€It€is€also€my€opinionÏthat€the€likelihood€of€odors€has€been€reduced€substantially€by€theÏaddition€of€this€new€equipment.ÌÓÓÌà àStay€was€granted€and€continued€during€this€appeal.ÌÌà àAs€stated€above,€the€Trial€Court€affirmed€the€action€of€the€Board.€€On€appeal,€plaintiffÏpresents€the€following€issues:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à1.€€Whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€holding€that€it€was€notÏarbitrary€and€capricious€for€the€Metropolitan€Board€of€Health€toÏrevoke€œLaidlaw›'s€permits€even€though€the€Board€had€orderedÏœLaidlaw›€to€install€expensive€new€air€pollution€control€equipmentÏjust€eight€months€earlier.ÌÌà8 àà8 à2.€€Whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€holding€that€the€applicableÏsection€of€the€air€pollution€control€ordinance€for€Nashville€andÏDavidson€County€is€not€unconstitutionally€vague.ÌÌà8 àà8 à3.€€Whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€holding€that€the€Board'sÏchoice€of€remedies€was€not€arbitrary,€capricious,€or€abusive€ofÏits€discretion.ÌÌà8 àà8 à4.€€Whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€holding€that€the€BoardÏcorrectly€applied€ðð10.56.040(A)€of€Nashville's€air€pollutionÏcontrol€ordinance€to€the€facts€of€this€case.ÌÌà8 àà8 à5.€€Whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€holding€that€the€Board'sÏdecision€was€not€made€upon€unlawful€procedure€even€thoughÏthe€Director€of€the€Metropolitan€Department€of€Health€made€noÏeffort,€during€the€proceedings€before€the€Board,€to€defend€herÏdecision€to€issue€the€permits€to€œLaidlaw›.ÌÌà8 àà8 à6.€€Whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€holding€that€the€Board'sÏreliance€upon€the€location€of€the€œLaidlaw›€facility€as€a€basis€for€itsÏdecision€was€not€arbitrary,€capricious,€or€illegal.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€Board€presents€and€plaintiff€discusses€the€issue€of€whether€this€judicial€review€isÏgoverned€by€the€Administrative€Procedure€Act,€T.C.A.€ðð4„5„322,€or€certiorari€as€provided€byÏT.C.A.€ðð27„8„101.€€The€question€was€presented€to€the€Trial€Judge€who€ruled:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€It€is€unclear€whether€judicial€review€of€the€Boardððs€decision€isÏgoverned€by€the€œUAPA›,€T.C.A.€ðð€4„5„322,€or€by€the€commonÏlaw€writ€of€certiorari,€T.C.A.€ðð€27„8„101.€€By€its€own€terms,Ïthe€œUAPA›€applies€only€to€judicial€review€of€state€agencyÏdecisions.€€But€in€1994,€the€Tennessee€General€AssemblyÏpassed€a€law€that€permits€Metropolitan€Government€boards€andÏcommissions€to€conduct€contested€case€hearings€ð ðsubstantially€inÏaccordance€with€the€contested€case€provisionsðð€of€the€œUAPA›.€ÏThe€legislature€did€not,€however,€specify€whether€the€œUAPA›ððsÏjudicial€review€standards€or€the€common€law€certiorari€standardsÏshould€apply€to€appeals€from€Metropolitan€GovernmentððsÏœUAPA›„conducted€contested€case€decisions.€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€There€is€a€difference€between€the€standards.€€Under€the€œUAPA›,Ïthe€agency€decision€must€be€supported€by€ð ðsubstantialððÏevidence.€€T.C.A.€ðð€4„5„322(h).€€Under€common€law€certiorari,Ïthe€agency€decision€need€only€be€supported€by€ð ðanyðð€evidence.€ÏòòTennessee€Cartage€Co.€v.€œPharr›,€óó199€œS.W.2d›€119,€120„21Ï(Tenn.€1947).€€The€difference€between€the€two€standards,Ïthough€subtle,€can€be€important€when€there€is€a€dispute€over€theÏsufficiency€of€the€evidence.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€In€this€case€though,€the€distinction€between€the€two€standardsÏis€not€important.€€œLaidlaw›€attacks€the€Board€of€Healthððs€decisionÏnot€to€renew€its€permits€on€a€number€of€grounds,€but€sufficiencyÏof€the€evidence€is€not€one€of€them.€€In€its€brief,€œLaidlaw›€does€notÏraise€the€issue.€€Therefore,€this€court€does€not€need€to€decideÏwhether€the€œUAPA›ððs€ð ðsubstantialðð€evidence€standard€orÏcertiorariððs€ð ðanyðð€evidence€standard€applies.€€In€other€respects,Ïthe€standard€of€review€under€both€types€of€review€is€the€same.ÌÌÌÓÓà àT.C.A.€Section€7„7„105,€provides€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€(a)€In€lieu€of€appointing€a€hearing€officer€as€authorizedÏhereinabove,€any€county€having€a€metropolitan€form€ofÏgovernment€and€a€population€of€over€four€hundred€fiftyÏthousand€(450,000)€according€to€the€1990€census€or€anyÏsubsequent€federal€census€is€empowered€to€contract€with€theÏsecretary€of€state€for€use€of€administrative€law€judges,€dulyÏappointed€pursuant€to€ðð€4„5„102(1),€on€a€case„by„case€basis€toÏconduct€hearings€on€any€matters€appealed€to€boards€andÏcommissions€of€the€county.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€(b)€Any€appeal€conducted€by€an€administrative€law€judge€underÏthis€section€shall€be€conducted€substantially€in€accordance€withÏthe€contested€case€provisions€of€the€Uniform€AdministrativeÏProcedures€Act€compiled€in€title€4,€œch›.€5,€part€3.€€The€board€orÍcommission€that€considers€such€appeals€shall€promulgate€rulesÏwhich€specify€the€provisions€of€the€Uniform€AdministrativeÏProcedures€Act€compiled€in€title€4,€œch›.€5,€part€3€applicable€toÏsuch€appeals.ÌÌÌÓÓà àNothing€is€found€in€the€quoted€statue€to€authorize€the€judicial€review€of€administrativeÏactions€under€T.C.A.€Section€4„5„322,€which€is€applicable€only€to€state€agencies.€€T.C.A.€ðð€4„5„102(2).€€ÌÌà àAccordingly€this€judicial€review€of€the€decision€of€a€municipal€agency€is€by€certiorari€Ïas€provided€by€T.C.A.€ðð€ðð27„8„101,€òòet€seq,óó€and€or€ðððð€27„9„101,€òòet€seq.€€œMcCallen›€v.€City€ofÏMemphis,€óó1990,€786€œS.W.2d›€633;€òòWheeler€v.€œMemphis,›€óóTenn.€App.€1984,€685€œS.W.2d›€4.€ÏThe€Boardððs€action€may€be€invalidated€when€it€is€ð ðillegal,€arbitrary€or€capricious,ðð€òòœMcCallen›€v.ÏCity€of€Memphis,€supra.óó€€The€reviewing€court€is€required€to€determine€whether€there€is€anyÏmaterial€evidence€that€supports€the€action€of€the€administrative€agency.€€òòœLansden›€v.€Tucker,Ïóó204€Tenn.€388,€321€œS.W.2d›€795€(1959).ÌÌà àPlaintiffððs€first€and€third€issues,€above,€assert€that€the€decision€of€the€Board€to€ð ðrevokeððÏthe€plaintiffððs€permits€was€arbitrary€and€capricious.€€The€Board€did€not€ð ðrevokeðð€plaintiffððsÏpermits.€€It€reversed€the€renewal€of€the€permits€as€granted€by€the€Director€on€June€28,€1993.€€ÌÌà àSome€consideration€must€be€given€to€the€change€of€ownership€of€the€plant€on€DecemberÏ23,€1992.€€Even€though€the€change€in€ownership€resulted€in€the€continuation€of€existence€ofÏœOsco›€Treatment€Systems,€Inc.,€as€a€subsidiary€of€plaintiff,€the€record€shows€convincingly€that,Ïupon€the€assumption€of€ownership€by€plaintiff,€changes€and€improvements€were€begun.€ÏShortly€after€the€transfer,€plaintiff€removed€an€accumulation€of€€ð ðroll„off€€boxesðð€of€waste,€sentÍthem€to€another€state,€and€reduced€the€number€of€roll„off€boxes€permitted€on€the€premises€toÏthree.€€The€Director€of€air€pollution€control€of€the€Health€Department€testified€withoutÏcontradiction€and€the€Board€found€that€the€accumulation€of€roll„off€boxes€was€the€principalÏcause€of€the€odor€complaints.€€Plaintiff€undertook€other€corrective€measures€which€wereÏeffective€but€inadequate€to€satisfy€the€Board.ÌÌà àIt€is€not€denied€that€employees€of€neighboring€industries€suffered€ill€effects€from€theÏdischarge€of€gases€from€the€subject€plant.€€It€is€not€asserted€that€the€plant€is€without€fault€inÏdesign€or€operation.€€However,€it€is€clear€and€uncontroverted€that€on€November€8,€1993,€theÏBoard€approved,€(i.e.€joined€in)€a€settlement€agreement€which€bound€plaintiff€to€makeÏexpensive€improvements€in€the€plant€and€agreed€that:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€As€long€as€respondent€is€proceeding€in€a€manner€which€mayÏreasonably€be€expected€to€result€in€completion€of€the€agreedÏactions€by€the€target€dates,€and€otherwise€is€in€compliance€withÏthis€Consent€Agreement,€respondent€shall€be€deemed€to€be€inÏcompliance€with€Code€ðð€10.56.170.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThis€record€contains€no€evidence€that€plaintiff€has€not€ð ðproceeded€in€such€a€mannerÏwhich€may€reasonably€be€expected€to€result€in€completion€of€the€agreed€actions€by€the€targetÏdatesðð€or€is€not€ð ðotherwise€in€compliance€with€the€Consent€Agreement.ðð€€Therefore,€forÏpurposes€of€this€action,€plaintiff€must€be€ð ðdeemed€to€be€in€compliance€with€Code€ðð10„56„170,ððÏwhich€is€the€applicable€air€pollution€ordinance.ÌÌà àMoreover,€the€issue€before€the€Board€was€not€whether€the€six€permits€should€beÏrevoked,€but€whether€to€reverse€the€June€28,€1993€renewal€of€existing€permits.€€The€criteria€forÏissuance€and€renewal€of€permits€is€set€out€in€pertinent€parts€of€ðð10.56.040€of€the€ð ðNashvilleÏAir€Pollution€Control€Ordinanceðð€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àò òOperating€permit.ó óÌÌà8 àà8 à€€A.€€After€the€construction€permit€has€been€issued€and€it€isÏdemonstrated€to€the€satisfaction€of€the€director€that€the€fuel„burning€equipment,€incinerator,€process€equipment,€controlÏdevice€or€any€equipment€pertaining€thereto€can€be€operated€inÏcompliance€with€this€chapter,€an€application€for€an€operatingÏpermit€shall€be€filed€in€duplicate€in€the€office€of€the€director€onÏforms€adopted€by€the€director€and€supplied€by€the€metropolitanÏhealth€department.€€òòIf€the€director€determines€that€the€sourceÏdoes€or€will€operate€in€violation€of€this€chapter,€or€if€the€sourceÏwill€operate€so€as€to€prevent€attainment€or€maintenance€of€anyÏlawful€national€ambient€air€quality€standard,€he€shall€eitherÏimpose€conditions€on€the€face€of€the€operating€permit€that,€in€hisÏopinion,€will€promote€compliance€with€this€chapter,€or€he€shallÏdeny€the€application€for€an€operating€permitóó.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€B.€€The€operating€permit€shall€be€issued€for€a€one„year€periodÏor€for€such€longer€period€as€the€director€may€designate€but€not€toÏexceed€five€years.€€Applications€for€renewal€of€the€operatingÏpermit€shall€be€made€in€writing€upon€forms€furnished€by€theÏmetropolitan€health€department€and€shall€be€made€not€less€thanÏsixty€days€prior€to€expiration€of€the€certificate€for€which€renewalÏis€sought.€€òòDisclosures€of€information,€tests€and€otherÏprerequisites€to€the€issue€of€a€construction€permit,€temporaryÏoperating€permit,€or€operating€permit€may€be€required€by€theÏdirector€prior€to€the€renewal€of€an€operating€permit.óó€€€(EmphasisÏsupplied.)ÌÌÌÓÓà àPresumably,€when€the€Director€renewed€the€permits€on€June€28,€1993,€she€determinedÏthat€the€ð ðsource€does€or€will€not€operate€in€violation€of€this€chapter.ðð€€In€order€to€reverse€theÏaction€of€the€Director,€it€would€be€necessary€for€the€Board€to€find€that€ð ðthe€sourceðð€did,€onÏJune€28,€1993,€or€would€thereafter€ð ðoperate€in€violation€of€this€chapter.ðð€€During€the€pendencyÏof€this€proceeding,€and€prior€to€its€decision,€the€Board€joined€in€a€Consent€AgreementÏestablishing€compliance€with€this€chapter€by€compliance€with€the€terms€of€the€ConsentÏAgreement.€€For€this€reason,€the€Board€acted€arbitrarily,€capriciously,€without€factualÏjustification€illegally€in€reversing€the€renewal€of€the€permits.ÌÌà àThis€conclusion€is€based€upon€justice€and€fair€dealing.€€Even€though€the€Board€actedÏout€of€a€zealous€care€for€the€comfort€and€safety€of€individuals€in€the€vicinity,€the€effect€of€itsÏaction€was€so€inconsistent€with€fairness€and€justice€as€to€be€unconscionable€and€irrational.€€ToÏenter€into€a€solemn€compact€promising€amnesty€in€exchange€for€$2.5€million€worth€of€plantÏimprovements,€and€to€abrogate€the€terms€of€that€compact€before€it€can€be€carried€out€under€itsÏterms€is€not€within€the€bounds€of€decency€and€justice.€€ÌÌà àThis€is€not€to€say€that€the€public€or€the€Board€is€without€means€of€relief€from€violationsÏof€the€air€pollution€ordinance.ÌÌà àThe€Board€improperly€dealt€with€six€permits€as€if€they€were€one€permit.€€Each€permitÏallowed€the€use€of€a€particular€outlet€for€gases€into€the€atmosphere.ÌÌà àUnder€the€provisions€of€the€Air€Pollution€Control€Ordinance,€quoted€above,€it€was€theÏduty€of€the€Director€and,€upon€appeal,€of€the€Board€to€evaluate€the€facts€relating€to€each€permitÏseparately€and€to€make€separate€determinations€of€whether€the€equipment€authorized€by€thatÏpermit€ð ðcan€be€operated€in€compliance€with€this€Chapter.ðð€€Following€such€determination,€aÏseparate€conclusion€was€required€as€to€whether€to€renew€the€particular€permit,€to€imposeÏadditional€conditions€of€operation,€or€to€refuse€renewal€of€the€particular€permit€for€statedÏreasons.ÌÌà àThe€record€does€not€reflect€whether€this€process€was€followed€by€the€Director,€but€theÏrecord€plainly€reflects€that€this€process€was€not€followed€by€the€Board.€€Instead,€the€BoardÍchose€to€determine€generally€that€the€operation€of€the€plant€should€be€terminated€by€refusingÏrenewal€of€all€permits.ÌÌà àMoreover,€reasonable€procedure€would€require€that€the€operators€of€the€plant€be€placedÏon€notice€of€deficiencies€and€allowed€reasonable€time€to€correct€deficiencies€before€refusal€toÏrenew€a€permit.€€The€Board€had€the€inherent€right€and€duty€to€monitor€and€regulate€theÏoperation€of€the€processes€and€equipment€producing€the€gases€discharged€through€eachÏpermitted€outlet.€€The€record€indicates€that€this€duty€was€not€performed,€but€that€the€principalÏmeans€of€monitoring€was€complaints€from€the€public€of€offensive€odor.ÌÌà àThe€record€indicates€and€the€Board€found€that€a€major€cause€of€pollution€was€theÏð ðP.H.ðð€(acid„alkali€balance)€of€the€liquid€in€various€processing€tanks€was€not€adequatelyÏmonitored€or€maintained.€€This€factor€was€remediable€by€the€addition€of€a€condition€to€theÏappropriate€permits€to€require€responsible€monitoring€and€control€of€PH€by€an€employee€of€theÏBoard€at€the€expense€of€plaintiff.ÌÌà àOther€objectionable€emanations€were€shown€to€be€amenable€to€monitoring€and€controlÏby€an€employee€of€the€Board€at€the€expense€of€the€plaintiff.ÌÌà àð ðConditions€on€the€face€of€the€permitðð€could€have€required€that€the€permittee€bear€theÏexpense€of€necessary€monitoring€for€the€daily€information€of€the€Board.€€Any€unacceptableÏlevel€of€discharge€of€dangerous€product€would€justify€the€suspension€of€operations€producingÏthe€excessive€discharge€until€the€cause€was€corrected.€€This€action€would€affect€only€the€permitÏof€the€involved€outlet€and€not€the€operation€under€the€other€five€permits.ÌÌà àIt€has€been€well€said€that€it€is€seldom€necessary€to€burn€a€barn€to€get€rid€of€its€rats.ÌÌà àIt€is€true€that€the€administrative€proceeding€in€which€the€ð ðConsent€Agreementðð€wasÏmade€was€not,€technically,€the€proceeding€under€review€in€this€appeal.€€However,€the€twoÏproceedings€were€contemporaneous,€related€to€the€same€subject€matter,€œthe›€same€parties€and€theÏsame€œpurposes,€and,€for€the€most€part,€the€same€improper€discharges€from€the€plant.€›ÏFurthermore,€by€its€express€terms,€the€ð ðConsent€Agreementðð€in€one€case€stipulated€facts€whichÏwere€determinative€of€the€other.ÌÌà àThe€disposition€of€this€appeal€is€without€prejudice€to€reasonable€measures€by€the€BoardÏand€its€staff€€to€discover,€correct€and€prevent€the€illegal€discharge€of€pollutants€by€plaintiff.ÌÌà àThe€foregoing€discussion€of€the€first€and€third€issues€is€dispositive€of€this€appeal€andÏthe€remaining€issues€are€therefore€pretermitted.ÌÌà àThe€action€taken€by€the€Board€is€not€the€only€relief€available€to€the€neighboring€propertyÏowners€and/or€those€individuals€endangered€or€injured€by€the€wrongful€discharge€of€pollutantsÏinto€the€atmosphere.€€The€disposition€of€this€appeal€will€not€prejudice€the€rights€of€any€injuredÏparty€to€recourse€by€an€action€for€injunction€and/or€damages.€ÌÌà àPlaintiffððs€second€issue€asserts€that€Metropolitan€Code€ðð10.56.170€is€unconstitutionallyÏvague.€€Said€Section€reads€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€ò òEmission€of€gases,€vapors€or€objectionable€odors.ó óÌÌà8 àà8 à€€No€person€shall€cause,€suffer,€allow€or€permit€any€emission€ofÏgases,€vapors€or€objectionable€odors€beyond€the€property€lineÏfrom€any€source€whatsoever€which€causes€injury,€detriment,Ïnuisance€or€annoyance€to€any€considerable€number€of€persons€orÏto€the€public,€or€which€causes€or€has€a€natural€tendency€to€causeÏinjury€or€damage€to€business€or€property.€€(Prior€code€ðð€4„1„10)ÌÌÌÓÓà àPlaintiff€asserts€that€the€general€term,€œð ðobjectionable,ðð›€without€definition€renders€theÏsection€vague.€€œThe›€text€of€the€section€œsupplies›€adequate€definition€of€the€œword,€›Ïð ðobjectionable.ððÌÌà àPlaintiff€cites€authority€for€the€obscurity€of€the€words€ð ðdetriment,ðð€and€ð ðannoyanceðð€butÏthis€Court€is€satisfied€that€the€words€include€the€qualifying€adjective,€ð ðunreasonable,ðð€so€as€toÏpass€constitutional€muster.ÌÌà àPlaintiffððs€fourth€issue€challenges€the€application€of€Metropolitan€Code€ðð€10.56.040(A)Ï(quoted€above)€to€the€facts€of€this€case.€€Ìà8 àÌà àIf€the€Director€(and€on€appeal,€the€Board)€determines€that€ð ðthe€sourceðð€does€or€willÏoperate€in€violation€of€the€ordinance,€the€Director€(or€Board)€is€required€to€impose€suitableÏconditions€on€the€face€of€the€permit€or€deny€it€entirely.€€Subsection€B€of€the€quoted€sectionÏprovides€for€renewal€upon€the€ð ðprerequisites€to€the€issue€of€a€construction,€temporary€operatingÏor€operating€permit.ðð€€The€present€appeal€relates€to€applications€for€renewal€which,€accordingÏto€subsection€(B),€are€subject€to€the€same€conditions€as€prescribed€in€Subsection€A€for€theÏissuance€or€denial€of€an€original€permit.ÌÌà àPlaintiff€argues€that€the€ordinance€does€not€require€absolute€guarantee€against€anyÏaccidental€discharge€of€odors.€€The€ordinance€must€be€interpreted€and€applied€reasonably.€ÏThus,€the€words€ð ðdoes€or€will€operate€in€violation€of€this€chapterðð€refers€to€reasonableÏapprehension€of€present€or€future€violations;€and€ð ðimpose€conditions€.€.€.€or€.€.€.€denyððÏauthorize€such€actions€in€reasonable€conformity€with€the€facts€and€circumstances,€whichÏinclude€the€ð ðConsent€Agreement,ðð€which€stipulated€certain€extensive€improvements€on€agreedÏconditions.€€ÌÌà àPlaintiffððs€fifth€issue€asserts€that€the€procedure€of€the€Board€was€unlawful€because€theÏDirector€failed€to€defend€her€decision€to€renew€plaintiffððs€permits.€€Even€though€it€may€be€theÏgeneral€practice€of€subordinate€administrators€to€defend€their€actions€upon€appeal€to€higherÏadministrative€authority,€no€rule€of€law€is€cited€or€known€to€this€Court€which€would€requireÏsuch€practice€or€grant€any€relief€for€the€failure€to€follow€such€practice.€€Moreover,€it€does€notÏappear€that€plaintiff€raised€the€issue€before€the€Board.€€òòSeeóó€òòIn€Re:€Billing€and€Collection,ÏœóóTariffs€of€South€Central€Bell,›€Tenn.€App.€1989,€779€œS.W.2d›€375.ÌÌà àPlaintiffððs€sixth€and€last€issue€asserts€that€the€Board€improperly€acted€on€the€ground€thatÏplaintiffððs€plant€was€improperly€located€in€spite€of€its€location€in€a€zone€in€which€such€plantsÏare€permitted€and€in€spite€of€the€approval€of€the€location€by€the€Tennessee€Department€ofÏEnvironment€and€Conservation.ÌÌà àThe€ð ðFindings€of€Fact€and€Conclusions€of€Lawðð€by€the€Board€contains€a€sectionÏentitled€ð ðReasons€for€Decisionðð€which€in€turn€contains€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à.€.€.€2.€€Section€10.56.100€of€the€Air€Pollution€Chapter€directsÏthe€Board€to€consider€in€the€exercise€of€its€powers€such€pertinentÏfacts€and€circumstances,€including€but€not€limited€to:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àA.€€The€character€and€degree€of€injury€to,€orÏinterference€with,€the€protection€of€the€health,Ïgeneral€welfare€and€physical€property€of€theÏresidents€of€the€Metropolitan€Government€area;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àB.€€The€social€and€economic€value€of€the€airÏpollutant€source;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àC.€€The€degree€of€detrimental€effect€of€the€airÏpollutants€upon€the€achievement€of€the€nationalÏambient€air€quality€standard€for€such€pollutant;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àD.€€The€technical€practicability€and€economicÏreasonableness€of€reducing€or€eliminating€theÏemission€of€such€air€pollutants;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àE.€€The€suitability€or€unsuitability€of€the€airÏpollution€source€to€the€area€in€which€it€is€located;ÏandÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àF.€€The€economic€benefit€gained€by€the€airÏpollutants€source€through€any€failure€to€complyÏwith€the€provisions€of€this€Chapter€andÏregulations€adopted€pursuant€to€this€Chapter.à8 àÌÌà8 àà8 à3.à àThe€Board€has€considered€its€responsibilities€and€theÏfactors€listed€above€and€notes€that€paragraphs€A€and€E€areÏparticular€reasons€for€its€decision.€€It€is€obvious€that€the€œOSCO›Ïfacility€cannot€operate€in€its€location€without€unreasonablyÏinterfering€with€the€other€businesses€and€institutions€in€œCockrill›ÏBend.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€quoted€portions€of€the€ordinance€are€prefaced€by€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIn€the€exercise€of€its€powers€to€prevent,€abate€and€control€airÏpollution,€the€Board€shall€give€due€consideration€to€suchÏpertinent€facts€and€circumstances€including,€but€not€limited€to:ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€Board€is€clearly€authorized€to€consider€the€location€and€surrounding€area€of€theÏsource€of€pollution€ð ðin€exercising€its€powers,ðð€but€the€exercise€of€its€powers€must€beÍreasonable.€€This€Court€has€determined€that€the€reversal€of€renewal€of€all€permits€for€operationÏwas€not€a€reasonable€exercise€of€the€powers€of€the€Board€under€the€circumstances.€€TheÏð ðconsiderationðð€of€the€location€and€surroundings€of€the€plant€was€not€unreasonable,€butÏseverity€and€unfairness€under€the€circumstances€rendered€the€decision€of€the€BoardÏunreasonable.ÌÌà àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€the€judgment€of€the€Chancellor€affirming€the€action€of€theÏBoard€is€reversed€and€vacated.€€The€action€of€the€Board€in€reversing€the€renewal€of€plaintiffððsÏsix€operating€permits€is€reversed€and€vacated€without€prejudice€to€other€remedial€actions€whichÏthe€Director€or€the€Board€may€see€fit€to€assure€plaintiffððs€lawful€operation€under€its€permits.€ÏAll€costs,€including€costs€of€this€appeal,€are€assessed€to€the€Board.€€The€cause€is€remanded€toÏthe€Trial€Court€for€entry€and€enforcement€of€a€judgment€in€conformity€herewith.ÌÌÌÌÌÌà àReversed€and€Remanded.Ìà àÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌÌÌœ_____________________________________›ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€œJUDGE,€CONCURS›ÌÌÌÌœWILLIAM›€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€œJUDGE,€FILESÌSEPARATE€CONCURRING€OPINION.›Ì