“When we first heard about it, they were accepting some shingles without having a permit or a BUD, and we issued a violation notice to them at that time,” Rominger said. “What they did was they came in and they could have gotten a permit or a BUD, and they chose to get the BUD. I believe they got the BUD and started accepting shingles again, but we found out since then that they are not complying with the BUD.” Tony Lanzone, the owner of ONEWAY Construction, said his company had a violation because of the Illinois Department of Transportation. “It took IDOT a long time to approve my material so that I could sell it,” Lanzone said. “So that’s the only reason I was out of compliance, and I’m actually getting back into compliance. I’ve got contracts for everything that go over and above. So really it’s an allegation at this point.” Willardet first learned of the situation because he received a few calls complaining about nails on the nearby road from loads of shingles being brought to the site. He said ONEWAY Construction is now responsible for sweeping up the road daily to clear it of any nails that may have spilled during transportation of the …show more content…
“Mostly, it’s a nuisance factor,” he said. “If there’s nails on the road, that would be a nuisance. And piles of shingles could have a scenic blight.” Kohler agreed, saying the pile of shingles hurt “the aesthetics of Granite City.” “It still doesn’t help that we’re looking at that back there and the eyesore,” Kohler said. “To me, it looks like a landfill.” At this point, Rominger said the IEPA referred the case to the Illinois Attorney General, the typical protocol for a situation like this. “They are under a referral for enforcement,” Rominger said. “The attorney general may seek a penalty. Ultimately (the goal is) to get them back into compliance and make sure they are complying with the BUD.” Rominger said the next step for the IEPA involves assisting the attorney general. “(The next step) would be working with the attorney general on an enforcement case,” he explained. “So it would be a suite on behalf of the state against ONEWAY Construction.” Lanzone said it was his impression he was now in good standing with the