Jim Ryan

ATFORNEY GENERAL

The Honorable Dorothy Gunn

Illinois Pollution Control Board

State of Illinois Center

100 West Randolph

Chicago, Illinois 60601

RECEIVED

CLERK’S fl~’~’

JS4N - 8

?UO?

STATE OF ILLkNO!S

Pollution Control Bo~rc~

Re:

People v. Bernie C. Morris

PCB No.

02-13

Dear Clerk Gunn:

Enclosed forfiling please find the original and ten copies of a NOTICE OF FILING, MOTION

FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT and STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR

SETTLEMENT in regard to the above-captioned matter. Please file the original and return a file-

stamped copy of the document to our office in the enclosed self-addressed, stamped envelope.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration.

EAP/pp

Enclosures

500 South Second Street, Springfield, Illinois 62706 (217) 782-1090

TTY: (217) 785-2771

.

FAX: (217) 782-7046

100 West Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois 60601 (812) 814-3000

•

TTY: (312) 814-3374

.

FAX: (312) 814-3806

~

1001 East Main, Carbondale, Illinois 62901 (618) 529-6400

TTY: (618) 529-6403

.

FAX: (618) 529-6416

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

STATE OF ILLINOIS

January 3, 2002

Elizabeth Ann Pitrolo

Environmental Bureau

500 South Second Street

Springfield, Illinois 62706

(217) 782-9031

---

CLI!RK’~

OPPICE

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

J~N- ~ 2002

MOULTRIE COUNTY, ILLINOIS

PollutionSTATE

OF

Control

ILLINOIS

Board

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

)

Complainant,

vs.

)

No.02-73

)

(Enforcement-Water)

BERNIE C. MORRIS,

)

)

NOTICE OF FILING

To:

Bernie

C. Morris

23404 Illinois Highway I

Chrisman, IL 61924

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on this date I mailed for filing with the Clerk of the Pollution

Control Board of the State Of Illinois, a MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT

and STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT, copies of which are attached hereto

and herewith served upon you.

Respectfully submitted,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

JAMES E. RYAN

Attorney General of the

State of Illinois

MATTHEW J. DUNN, Chief

Environme .taLEpforcementlAsbestos

Litiga~

i on

BY:

~

ELIZ)BETH A. PITROLO-~

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

500 South Second Street

Springfield, Illinois 62706

217/782-9031

Dated: January 3, 2002

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I did on January 3, 2002, send by First Class Mail, with postage

thereon fully prepaid, by depositing in a United States Post Office Box a true and correct copy

of the following instruments entitled NOTICE OF FILING, MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM

HEARING REQUIREMENT and STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT:

To:

Bernie C. Morris

23404 Illinois Highway I

Chrisman, IL 61924

and the original and ten copies by First Class Mail with postage thereon fully prepaid of the

same foregoing instrument(s):

To:

Dorothy Gunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

State of Illinois Center

Suite 11-500

100 West Randolph

Chicago, Illinois 60601

A copy was also sent by First Class Mail with postage thereon fully prepaid

To:

Steven C. Langhoff

Hearing Officer

Illinois Pollution Control Board

600 South Second Street, Ste. 402

Springfield, IL 62704

Elizabeth A. Pitrolo

Assistant Attorney General

This filing is submitted on recycled paper.

---

RECEIVED

CLERK’S OFFICE

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JAN

~ 2002

EDGAR COUNTY, ILLINOIS

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

)

Complainant,

)

)

vs.

)

PCB No. 02-73

)

(Enforcement-Water)

)

BERNIE C. MORRIS,

)

)

NOW COMES Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by JAMES E.

RYAN, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, and pursuant to Section

31 (c)(2) of the Illinois

Environmental Protection Act (“Act”), 415

ILCS 5/31(c)(2)(2000), moves that the Illinois

Pollution Control Board grant the parties in the above-captioned matter

relief from the hearing

requirement imposed by Section 31(c)(I) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31(c)(I)(2000).

In support of

this motion, Complainant states

as follows:

1.

On

December II, 2001, the State filed

a

Complaint alleging

that the Respondent

violated Sections

12(a), (b), (c) and (f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12(a), (b), (c) and

(f)(2000),

and

Section 309.102(a) and 309.202(a) of the Board’s Water Pollution Regulations, 35 III. Adm.

Code 309.102(a) and 309.202(a)(1996).

2.

The parties have reached agreement on all outstanding issues in this matter.

3.

This agreement is presented to the Board in a Stipulation and Proposal for

Settlement, filed contemporaneously with this motion.

I

---

4.

All parties agree that a hearing on the Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement is

not necessary, and respectfully request relief from such a hearing as allowed by Section

31 (c)(2) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31 (c)(2) (2000).

WHEREFORE, Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, hereby request

that the Board grant this motion for relief from the hearing requirement set forth in Section

31(c)(1) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31(c)(I)(2000).

Respectfully submitted,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

JAMES E. RYAN,

Attorney General, State of Illinois

MATTHEW J. DUNN, Chief

Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos

Liiga-tieQ~ivision

BY:____________________

ELIZABETH ANN PIT

LO

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

500 South Second Street

Springfield, Illinois 62706

217/782-9031

Dated: January 2, 2002

2

---

CLEAR’S OFr?~(-.

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

J/~1N

- 8

2002

EDGAR COUNTY, ILLINOIS

POllution

STATE OF

Contro!ILLINOISBoard

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

Complainant,

vs.

)

PCB No. 02-73

)

(Enforcement-Water)

)

BERNIE C. MORRIS,

)

STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT

NOW COMES

the Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by JAMES E.

RYAN, Attorney General of the

State of Illinois, at the request of the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency, and Respondent,

BERNIE C. MORRIS, and hereby submit this Stipulation

and Proposal for Settlement. The parties agree that the statement of facts contained herein

represents a fair summary of the evidence and testimony which would be introduced by the

parties if a full hearing were held. The parties agree that this Settlement is a compromise of a

disputed claim. The parties further stipulate that this statement of facts is made and agreed

upon for the purposes of settlement only and that neither the fact that a party has entered into

the Stipulation, nor any of the facts stipulated herein, shall be introduced into evidence in this or

any other proceeding except to enforce the terms hereof by the parties to this agreement.

Notwithstanding the previous sentence, this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement and any

Illinois Pollution Control Board (“Board”) order accepting same may be used in any future

enforcement action as evidence of a past adjudication of violation, as provided in Section 42(h)

of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (“Act”), 415 ILCS 5/42(h) (2000). This agreement

shall be null and void unless the Board approves and disposes of this matter on each and every

one of the terms and conditions of the Settlement set forth herein.

---

JURISDICTION

The Board has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of the parties consenting

hereto pursuant to the Act, 415 ILCS 5/1

et seq.

(2000). The Complaint states a cause of

action upon which relief may be granted.

AUTHORIZATION

The undersigned representatives for each

party certify that they are fully authorized by

the party whom they represent to enter into the terms and conditions of this Stipulation and

Proposal for Settlement and to legally bind them to it.

APPLICABILITY

This Stipulation

and Proposal for

Settlement shall apply to and be binding upon the

Complainant and Respondent and the Respondent’s successors and assigns.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1.

The Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency (“Illinois EPA”) is an administrative

agency established in the executive branch of the State government by Section 4 of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/4 (2000), and is charged,

inter a/ia,

with the duty of enforcing the Act.

2.

At all times relevant to the allegations in the People’s Complaint filed in this

matter, the Respondent, Bernie C. Morris (“Morris”), was the developer of Wood Ridge

Subdivision, a residential development north of the City of Chrisman, Illinois Highway 1, Edgar

County, Illinois (“Wood Ridge Subdivision”).

2

---

3.

Complainant alleges Respondent constructed a sewer extension without the

required construction permit, thereby violating Section 12(a), (b) and (c) of the Act 415 ILCS

5/12(a)(b)(c)(2000) and Section 309.202(a) of Board’s Water Pollution Regulations, 35 III. Adm.

Code 309.202(a)(1999).

4.

Complainant alleges Respondent engaged in construction activities at Wood

Ridge Subdivision which threatened or allowed offsite discharge of contaminants without an

NPDES permit, thereby violating Section 12(f) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/12 (f) (2000) and

Sections 309.102(a) and 304.141(b) of the Board’s Water Pollution Regulations, 35111. Adm.

Code 309.102(a) and 304.141(b)(1999).

5.

Respondent has subsequently obtained the required permits from the Illinois

EPA, and is acting to resolve the circumstances which lead to the alleged violations.

FUTURE PLANS OF COMPLIANCE

Respondent shall continue to diligently conform to the Act,

415 ILCS 5/1

et seq.

(2000),

and the Board’s Water Pollution Regulations, 35 III. Adm. Code Subtitle C.

IMPACT ON THE PUBLIC RESULTING FROM NON-COMPLIANCE

Section 33(c) of the Act, 415

ILCS 5/33(c) (2000), provides;

c.

In making its orders and determinations, the Board shall take into consideration

all the facts and circumstances bearing upon the reasonableness of the

emissions, discharges, or deposits involved including, but not limited to:

the character and degree of injury to, or interference with

the protection of the health, general welfare and physical

property of the people;

ii.

the social and economic value of the pollution source;

iii.

the suitability or unsuitability of the pollution source to the

area in which it is located, including the question of priority

of location in the area involved;

3

---

iv.

the technical practicability and economic reasonableness

of reducing or eliminating the emissions, discharges or

deposits resulting from such pollution source; and

v.

any subsequent compliance.

In response to these factors, the parties state as follows:

1.

Complainant contends that the injury to, or interference with, the protection of the

health, general welfare, and physical property of the People would be characterized as a

potential for water pollution and the degree of injury would be dependent upon the extent of the

pollution and the degree of exposure to that pollLltion.

2.

The parties agree that Respondent’s activities are of social and economic

benefit;

3.

Respondent’s subdivision development is located at a site which has been found

suitable for such use;

4.

The parties agree that complying with the Act and regulations is technically

practicable and economically reasonable; and

5.

Respondent has implemented measures subsequent to the alleged violations

that are the subject of the People’s Complaint in this matter in order to operate in compliance

with the Act and the Board’s Regulations.

CONSIDERATION OF SECTION 42(H) FACTORS

Section 42(h) of the

Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(h) (2000), provides:

h.

in determining the appropriate civil penalty to be imposed under

subdivisions (a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), or (b)(5) of this Section, the

Board is authorized to consider any matters of record in mitigation

or aggravation of penalty, including but not limited to the following

factors:

(1)

the duration and gravity of the violation;

4

---

(2)

the presence or absence of due diligence on the

part of the violator in attempting to comply with the

requirements of this Act and regulations thereunder

or to secure relief therefrom as provided by this

Act;

(3)

any economic benefits accrued by the violator because of

delay in compliance with requirements;

(4)

the amount of monetary penalty which will serve to

deter further violations by the violator and to

otherwise aid in enhancing voluntary compliance

with this Act by the violator and other persons

similarly subject to the Act; and

(5)

the number, proximity in time, and gravity of

previously adjudicated violations of this Act by the

violator.

In response to these factors, the parties state as follows:

1.

The alleged violations were distinct in nature and occurred due to Respondent’s

failure to obtain the necessary permits;

2.

In response to notices of noncompliance issued by the Illinois EPA, the

Respondent subsequently worked with the Illinois EPA and obtained the permits required to

comply with the Act;

3.

The economic benefit of Respondent’s alleged noncompliance is the savings, if

any, realized by the delayed cost of permit application;

4.

Complainant has determined, in this instance, that a penalty of two thousand five

hundred dollars ($2,500.00) will serve to deter further violations and aid in future voluntary

enforcement of the Act and applicable regulations;

5.

Respondent has no history of past noncompliance, with the Act.

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

A.

Respondent

admits the violations alleged in the People’s

Complaint;

5

---

B.

The Respondent shall pay a penalty of two thousand five hundred dollars

($2,500.00) into the Illinois Environmental Protection Trust Fund on or before November 30,

2002. Payment shall be made by certified check or money order, payable to “The Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency, for deposit in the Environmental Protection Trust Fund,” and

be delivered to:

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Fiscal Services Section

1021 North Grand Avenue East

Post Office Box 19276

Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276

Respondent’s Social Security Number (“SSN”) shall be written upon the certified check or

money order. Respondent’s SSN is:

~3

0

.~

3

/ ~ 9

A copy of the payment transmittal and check shall be simultaneously submitted to:

Office of the Attorney General

Donna Lutes, Environmental Bureau

500 South Second Street

Springfield, Illinois 62706

C.

Respondent recognizes its obligations under the Act to comply with the Board’s

Water Pollution Regulations, 35 III. Adm. Code Subtitle C. Respondent shall cease and desist

from future violations of any federal, state and local environmental statutes and regulations,

including, but not limited to, the Act, 415 ILCS 5/1

etseq.

(2000) and the Board’s Rules and

Regulations, 35 III. Adm. Code, Subtitles A through H.

COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS

This

Stipulation

and Proposal for Settlement in no way affects

the responsibility of

Respondent to comply with any

federal, state, or local regulations, including but not limited to

the Act, 415

ILCS 5/I

et seq.

(2000) and the Board’s

Rules and Regulations, 35 III. Adm.

Code,

Subtitles A through H.

6

---

WHEREFORE, Complainant and Respondent request that the Board adopt and accept

the foregoing Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement as written.

Respectfully submitted,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

JAMES E. RYAN,

Attorney General

State of Illinois,

MATTHEW J. DUNN, Chief

Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos

Litigation Division

Dated:_______

BY:

THOMAS DAVIS, Chief

Environmental Bureau

Assistant Attorney General

Dated:/~/(

~/OI

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PF~O1ECTION

ODA

Dated:1~-/~’-

“7

BY:

BERNIE C. MORRIS

B’

thief Legal Counsel

Division of Legal Counsel