ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    February 21, 1974
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    vs.
    PETER ECKRICH
    &
    SONS, INC., an
    )
    PCB 73-55
    Indiana corporation qualified to
    )
    CONSOLIDATED
    do business in Illinois; and
    E.W. KNEIP, an Illinois corporation,
    )
    PCB 73-174
    Respondents.
    E.W. KNEIP, INC., in Illinois
    corporation,
    Petitioner,
    Vs.
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Dr. Odell)
    On January 3, 1974, the Pollution Control Board approved
    and adopted the Settlement Proposal entered into between
    the parties. In the Conditions and Provisions of Settlement,
    Petitioner stated (page 15)
    ‘6. Kneip will pay a fine of $9,000 as the full and
    only penalty for any and all the admitted violations.”
    On February 1, 1974, Petitioner filed a motion with
    the Board to extend time for payment of this penalty until
    after the Illinois Supreme Court resolves the issue of the Board’s
    power to impose variable penalties. On February 4, 1974,
    the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) responded to
    Petitioner’s motion and agreed (page 2):
    “5. Kneip, by agreeing to pay the $9,000 fine, has
    surrendered all the claims and defenses available to it on that
    issue.
    . .
    A Stipulation is in the nature of a contract which has
    the effect of a binding agreement upon the parties. It is
    11 —321
    —2--
    enforced like a consent decree and constitutes a waiver of
    the right to appeal. Such agreements can only be set aside
    where the petitioning party can prove that the contract is
    invalid due to fraud, duress, or faulty execution. This
    agreement could be modified if the petitioning party could
    show that the payment of the $9,000 penalty was conditioned
    on the decision to be subsequently handed down in City of
    Waukegan et al v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.
    (Docket No. 45984). The plain language of the Stipulation,
    read as a whole, reveals no intention that payment be postponed.
    Petitioner presents no evidence to show fraud or duress
    when he entered into the Stipulation. Petitioner’s motion
    is denied.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, certify that he above Order
    was
    adopted
    on this
    ~j4~
    day of
    _______________,
    1974 by a vote of
    11
    —
    322

    Back to top