HB1305 amends the Illinois Environmental Protection Act to reduce several Pollution Control Board filing fees. The bill lowers the fee for petitions for site-specific regulations, variances, permit reviews, local government decision contests, adjusted standards, and time-limited water quality standards from $250 to $75, with the time-limited water quality standard fee set at $75 per petitioner. It also preserves the current rule that a petitioner who already paid the variance filing fee does not have to pay an additional fee if that variance petition is later converted into a petition for a time-limited water quality standard under Section 38.5.
In practical terms, the bill makes it less expensive for individuals, businesses, and other parties to seek administrative relief or regulatory changes before the Pollution Control Board. The reduced fees would affect the Environmental Protection Act’s filing-fee provisions and the funding stream for the Pollution Control Board Fund, which receives these fees. The bill does not change the substantive standards for obtaining variances, adjusted standards, or other petitions; it only changes the cost to file them.
Impact
HB1305 directly amends Section 7.5 of the Environmental Protection Act by lowering specified filing fees from $250 to $75 and clarifying that no second fee is owed when a variance petition is converted into a time-limited water quality standard petition. The main legal effect is on administrative access and the revenue collected by the Pollution Control Board Fund, rather than on environmental permitting or compliance standards themselves. Parties most affected include petitioners before the Pollution Control Board, regulated entities, and local governments involved in environmental disputes or regulatory requests.
Sentiment
The available vote history suggests the bill had meaningful support but was not unanimous, passing Third Reading in the House by a 76-40 vote. That margin indicates a generally favorable view of reducing filing costs, likely framed as improving access to administrative processes, while still drawing substantial opposition. No committee transcripts are available, so the broader discussion record is limited, but the floor vote shows the measure was supported by a majority and contested by a sizable minority.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the tradeoff between lowering barriers for petitioners and reducing fee revenue that helps support the Pollution Control Board Fund. Supporters would view the fee reduction as making environmental administrative remedies more affordable and accessible, especially for smaller petitioners or local stakeholders. Opponents may have been concerned about the fiscal impact, the precedent of reducing regulatory filing fees, or whether lower fees could encourage more petitions and administrative workload.