459.205 Permit
required. (1)
Except as provided by ORS 459.215, a disposal site shall not be established,
operated, maintained or substantially altered, expanded or improved, and a
change shall not be made in the method or type of disposal at a disposal site,
until the person owning or controlling the disposal site obtains a permit
therefor from the Department of Environmental Quality as provided in ORS
459.235.
(2) The person
who holds or last held the permit issued under subsection (1) of this section,
or, if that person fails to comply, then the person owning or controlling a
land disposal site that is closed and no longer receiving solid waste must
continue or renew the permit required under subsection (1) of this section
after the site is closed for the duration of the period in which the department
continues to actively supervise the site, even though solid waste is no longer
received at the site. [1971 c.648 §6; 1983 c.766 §7; 1993 c.560 §21a]
459.209 [1993 c.526 §4; renumbered 459.046
in 1995]
459.210 [1969 c.90 §2; repealed by 1971
c.648 §33]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1981–2023 · leading case:
Kinzua Resources v. DEQ, 468 P.3d 410 (Or. 2020).
Kinzua Resources v. DEQ, 468 P.3d 410 (Or. 2020).
· cites it 20× “ORS 459.205; ORS 459.268. The Environmental Quality Commission found that petitioners had the legal author- ity to control an inactive landfill site, and on that basis held that petitioners were persons “controlling” the site.”
Kinzua Res., LLC v. Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 434 P.3d 461 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 24× “Acting under ORS 459.205 and ORS 459.268, the commission fined each of those parties on the theory that they were persons "controlling" a landfill site within the meaning of those statutes and were, therefore, required to comply with the applicable landfill permit and OAR…”
Adelsperger v. Elkside Dev. LLC, 529 P.3d 230 (Or. 2023).
· cites it 2× “165(1) and concluded that individual liability for LLC member- managers was permissible: “The commission contends that ORS 63.165(1) permits it to impose liability based on [the] petitioners’ own failure to perform obligations with which they were individu- ally charged in their…”
PNW Metal Recycling, Inc. v. DEQ, 317 Or. App. 207 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“ORS 459.205(1). The definition of “disposal site,” however, “does not include: * * * [a] site operated by a dismantler issued a certificate under ORS 822.”
Kinzua Res., LLC v. Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 437 P.3d 331 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 2× “That footnote states: "Like Frontier and ATR, Demers argues on appeal that the commission erroneously construed ORS 459.205 and ORS 459.268. Demers does not separately contend that, to the extent his personal conduct otherwise constituted 'controlling' under those statutes, he…”
Kinzua Resources v. DEQ, 523 P.3d 120 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 19× “Relevant to this particular remand are the following undisputed facts: Kinzua Resources, LLC, owned the Pilot Rock Landfill site.”
PNW Metal Recycling, Inc. v. DEQ (Or. 2023).
· cites it 4× “Under ORS 459.205, a person operating a solid waste disposal site must obtain a permit from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).”
PNW Metal Recycling, Inc. v. DEQ (Or. 2023).
· cites it 4× “Under ORS 459.205, a person operating a solid waste disposal site must obtain a permit from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).”
Land Reclamation, Inc. v. Dep't of Env't Quality, 632 P.2d 37 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 2× “ORS 459.205 et seq. Although both the department’s and the commission’s decisions appear to have been premised on the substantive conclusion that waste disposal would pollute the groundwater beneath the proposed site, the record discloses that petitioners had not filed a…”
Land Reclamation, Inc. v. Dep't of Env't Quality, 640 P.2d 699 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
“See ORS 459.205 et seq. In our previous consideration of the appeal, we concluded that the commission’s order was not final because petitioners had not completed their application for the permit and the order itself recited that “a permit may not be issued until the applicant…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 459.205(1) — 2 cases
Kinzua Resources v. DEQ, 468 P.3d 410 (Or. 2020).
“ORS 459.205; ORS 459.268. The Environmental Quality Commission found that petitioners had the legal author- ity to control an inactive landfill site, and on that basis held that petitioners were persons “controlling” the site.”
PNW Metal Recycling, Inc. v. DEQ, 317 Or. App. 207 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“ORS 459.205(1). The definition of “disposal site,” however, “does not include: * * * [a] site operated by a dismantler issued a certificate under ORS 822.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 459.205(2) — 1 case
Kinzua Res., LLC v. Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 434 P.3d 461 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“Acting under ORS 459.205 and ORS 459.268, the commission fined each of those parties on the theory that they were persons "controlling" a landfill site within the meaning of those statutes and were, therefore, required to comply with the applicable landfill permit and OAR…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.