BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
~Q~A1M~
VE P
CLERIS
OFFICE
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
OCT
L
12005
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Complainant,
)
pollution control Board
-vs-
No.
PCB 05-181
PATTISON ASSOCIATES
LLC, an
)
(Enforcement
—
Air)
Illinois lin1ited liability company,
and 5701
SOUTH CALIJMET LLC, an
Illinois limited liability company,
)
Respondents.
NOTICE OF FILING
PLEASE
TAKE NOTICE that
we
have today, October 21,
2005,
filed with the
Office of
the
Clerk of
the
Illinois Pollution Control
Board
an original
and
fourteen (14)
copies of
the attached
Respondents’
Requests for Admissions
to
Plaintiff,
a
true and
correct
copy of which
is hereby served upon
you.
DATED:
October21,
2005
Respectfully submitted,
PATTISON ASSOCIATES, LLC and
5701
SOUTH CALIJMET, LLC
By:______________________
One of Their Attorneys
Neal
H. Weinfield, Esq.
Allyson
L.
Wilcox, Esq.
Bell,
Boyd
&
Lloyd LLC
70
West
Madison
Street
Suite 3100
Chicago.
IL
60602
312.372.1121
408466/F/I
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Allyson
L.
Wilcox,
an attorney, hereby certifies
that she caused a copy of the
attached Respondents’
Requests for
Admissions
to Plaintiff to be served
upon:
Paula Becker Wheeler
Office of the Attorney General
188
West Randolph,
20th
Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
Bradley P. Halloran
Hearing
Officer
Illinois
Pollution Control Board
James R.
Thompson Center,
Ste.
11-500
100W.
Randolph Street
Chicago,
Illinois 60601
via regular U.S.
Mail, postage pre-paid, on
October 21,
2005.
Allyson
L.
Wilcox
408466/111
BEFORE THE
ILLNOIS
POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
CLep~ss
PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS
)
OCr
2
1
200
S147e
Complainant,
)
~°“Ution
c~4~NOis
)
IBoard
vs
)
No.
PCB
05-181
PATTISON ASSOCIATES LLC, an
)
(Enforcement
—
Air)
Illinois
limited liability company,
)
and 5701
SOUTH CALUMET LLC, an
)
Illinois
limited liability company,
)
)
Respondents.
)
RESPONDENTS’ REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS
TO
PLAINTIFF
NOW
COME
respondents,
PATTISON
ASSOCIATES
LLC
and
5701
SOUTH
CALUIMET LLC, by their attorney,
Neal
H. Weinfield of the
law
firm Bell, Boyd
&
Lloyd
LLC,
pursuant to
Illinois Supreme
Court Rule 216,
hereby request that
the plaintiff, PEOPLE
OF THE
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS
(“State”), admit
the
truth
of the
following
facts
and
the
genuineness of
certain documents within twenty-eight (28) days of service hereof:
REQUESTS TO
ADMIT
1.
Admit
that this action
is brought
against PATTISON ASSOCIATES LLC
(“Pattison”)
pursuant to
Section
31
of the Illinois Environmental
Protection Act,
415
ILCS
5/31
(2002) (“Act”).
ANSWER:
2.
Admit that
this
action
is brought
against 5701
SOUTH CALUMET LLC
(“Calumet”)
pursuant to
Section 42(d)
ofthe
Act,
415
ILCS 5/42(d)
(2002).
ANSWER:
3.
Admit that October
15,
2003, was
the first
time that the Illinois
Environmental Protection
Agency (“IEPA”)
performed an
inspection ofthe subject apartment complex.
ANSWER:
4.
Admit that the IEPA only
discovered possible
asbestos containing material
in one room
of the basement
at the subject site.
ANSWER:
5.
Admit that
the IEPA has no evidence that Pattison preformed any renovation and/or
demolition
of any nature in the room where the possible asbestos containing materials
were discovered.
ANSWER:
6.
Admit
that the IEPA failed to
conduct any air sampling to determine the presence of air-
borne
asbestos at the subject property or in
the basement room
where the asbestos
containing material was discovered.
ANSWER:
7.
Admit that the IEPA has no evidence proving
that Pattison caused
the discharge or
emission of asbestos into the air at the subject site.
ANSWER:
8.
Admit
that the
IEPA has no
evidence proving that Pattison threatened the discharge or
emission of asbestos into the air at
the subject site.
408159/n/I
2
ANSWER:
9.
Admit that the TEPA has no
evidence
proving
that Pattison allowed the discharge or
emission
of
asbestos
into
thc
air at
the subject
site.
ANSWER:
10. Admit that the IEPA has no evidence that respondents ever handled,
in any nianner,
asbestos at the subject site at
any time.
ANSWER:
Ii. Admit that the IEPA has
no
evidence that respondents were aware ofthe presence of
asbestos or possible asbestos containing material at
the subject site or in the particular
location it was
discovered prior
to October
15,
2003.
ANSWER:
12.
Admit that between March
25, 2003,
and October 30, 2003,
the
IEPA has no
evidence
that the respondents conducted “renovation activities” as defined in
the NESHAPs
regulations
at the subject site in the particular location asbestos was discovered.
13.
ANSWER:
14, Admit
that the IEPA has no
evidence that respondents preformed any wrecking or
removal of any load-supporting structural
member at
the subject site in the particular
location where
asbestos
was discovered
at any
time.
ANSWER:
408159/F/I
3
15.
Admit
that
the IEPA has no evidence
that
respondents preformed any intentional
burning
at the subject site
in
the particular location where asbestos was discovered
at
any time.
ANSWER:
16.
Admit that the
IEPA
has
no evidence that respondents preformed any alteration of the
subject site in
the particular areas where
the asbestos was discovered at any time
prior to
hiring Universal
Asbestos
Removal
Inc., to perform abatement at the subject site.
ANSWER:
17.
Admit that
that IEPA has no
evidence that the respondents stripped or removed any
possible
asbestos containing material
from
anywhere within
the subject site
prior to
hiring
Universal Asbestos Removal
Inc.,
to
perform
abatement
at the subject site.
ANSWER:
18.
Admit
that
respondents hired Universal Asbestos Removal
Inc.,
to
perform asbestos
abatement
at the subject site following the discovery of possible asbestos containing
material.
ANSWER:
19.
Admit that the
IEPA has no
evidence demonstrating
that respondents
removed asbestos
from
the subject site prior to
October 30,
2003.
ANSWER:
408159/F/I
4
20.
Admit
that Section 61.145(a) ofTitle 40
olthe Code of Federal Regulations,
40 CFR
61.145(a)
(July
1,
1998),
as adopted
in Section
9.1(d) of the Act,
titled Standard
for
demolition and renovation,
only requires inspection ofpart oft/ic facility
where
(lie
demolition
or renovation operation
will occurfor the presence of asbestos.
ANSWER:
21.
Adniit that
Section
6l.l45(b)(1)
ofUSEPA’S NESI-IAPs, 40 CFR 61.145(b)(l)
(July
1,
2002), only requires
notification
if demolition or renovation
is scheduled to
occur in a
part of a facility known to contain
asbestos.
ANSWER:
22.
Admit that
Section 61,145(c) of USEPA’s NESHAPs, 40 CFR 61.1 45(c)(July
1,
2002),
titled Procedures
for asbestos emission control,
is not applicable to dcmolition or
renovation of a
facility where
asbestos in
not present.
ANSWER:
23.
Admit that the IEPA has no
evidence that
the respondents failed
to deposit reguiated
asbestos-containing waste material
as soon
as practical
in
an
appropriate waste disposal
site.
ANSWER:
408159/F/I
5
24, Admit
that no renovation or demolition took
place or was ever schedule to take place
in
the room
in the basement where asbestos was discovered,
ANSWER:
Respectfully submitted,
PATTISON ASSOCIATES, LLC
and
5701
SOUTH CALUMET, LLC
By_
One of Their Attorneys
Neal
H. Weinfield, Esq.
Allyson
L. Wilcox,
Esq.
Bell, Boyd
& Lloyd
LLC
70
West Madison Street
Suite 3100
Chicago, IL 60602
312.372.1121
Firm Number: 90100
4081 59/li/I
6
