RE
CE ~VED~
CLER1~SOFFICE
THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
~
1 9 2003
PAUL and DONNA FREDRICKSON,
)
STATE OF ILLINOIS
husband and wife
)
Pollution Control Board
Complainants
)
)
V.
)
PCB04-19
Jeff Grelyak,
)
Respondent.
)
NOTiCE OF FILING
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of the Pollution
Control Board the following:
1. my appearance as attorney for Respondent Jeffrey S. Grelyak,
2. Motion to Dismiss on behalf of Respondent Jeffrey S. Grelyak,
3. Motion for Leave to File Instanter.
Ge~geW. Tin kham
attorney for Respondent
ARDC reg. #2836149
423 W. Vine Street
Springfield, IL 62704
(217) 753-2737
THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PAUL and DONNA FREDRICKSON,
)
husband and wife
)
Complainants
)
)
v.
)
PCB04-19
)
Jeff Grelyak,
)
Respondent.
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, certify that I have today served the attached Appearance, Motion to Dismiss,
Motion for Leave to File
Instanter,
and Notice of Filing to the persons listed below by the
methods indicated:
1. Illinois Pollution Control Board by telefax and by mail,
2. Complainants by mail, and
3. Jeremy W. Shaw, Esq., attorney for Complainants.
The signed original and nine duplicate copies were mailed to the Board by placing said
documents in an envelope with proper postage affixed and by giving said envelope to a Postal
Service employee at a post office in Springfield, Illinois. Said envelope being addressed to:
Illinois Pollution Control Board
Attention: Cerk
100 W. Randolph Street
James R. Thompson Center
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Likewise the other copies were placed in envelopes with proper postage affixed and mailed at a
US post office in Springfield, Illinois. Those envelopes were addressed to:
PAUL and DONNA FREDRICKSON
Jeremy W. Shaw, Esq.
8915 Ferris Road
40 Brink Street
Harvard, Illinois 60033
Crystal Lake, Illinois 60014
Date: 17 September 2003
G orge W. Tinkham,
attorney for Respondent
ARDC reg. # 2836149
423 W. Vine Street
Springfield, IL 62704
(217) 753-2737
CLERK’S OFFICE
SEP 192003
THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PoJIutjSTATE0~OFControlILLINOISBoard
PAUL and DONNA FREDRICKSON,
)
husband and wife
)
Complainants
)
)
v.
)
PCB04-19
)
Jeff Grelyak,
Respondent.
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE
INSTANTER
COMES NOW Respondent Jeffrey S. Grelyak by counsel and asks the Illinois Pollution Control
Board to allow the filing of his Motion to Dismiss
instanter.
In support of this Motion,
Respondent states that he received the Complaint initiating this proceeding on or about 18
August 2003. Although Respondent believes the U.S. Postal Service will post mark the
envelopes containing said Motion with today’s date, he is not certain that will happen. If the
envelopes have a later date, Respondent would like his Motion to Dismiss to be accepted.
Furthermore, a facsimile copy of the Motion to Dismiss has been sent telephonically to the Clerk
of the Board pursuant to authorization of Bradley Halloran, the hearing officer assigned to this
case. Respondent asks that the telefax copy be accepted and considered by the Board until
such time as the hard copies arrive by mail.
A telefax copy of an affidavit by Respondent supporting this Motion is attached.
G~6rgeW.Tinkham,
attorney for Respondent
ARDC reg. # 2836149
423 W. Vine Street
Springfield, IL 62704
(217) 753-2737
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PAUL and DONNA FREDRICKSON,
)
husband and wife
)
Complainants
)
)
v.
)
PCBO4-19
)
Jeff Grelyak,
)
Respondent.
APPEARANCE
I hereby file my appearance in this proceeding, on behalf of Jeffrey Grelyak,
Respondent.
George W. Tinkham
attorney for Respondent
ARDC reg. #2836149
423 W. Vine Street
Springfield, IL 62704
(217) 753-2737
THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
CLERK’S
OFFICE
PAUL and DONNA FREDRICKSON,
)
SEP
192003
husband and wife
)
STAT
Complainants
)
~
~~EOFILLINOIS
)
ollutIon Control Board
v.
)
PCBO4-19
Jeff Grelyak,
)
Respondent.
MOTION TO DISMISS
Comes now, George W. Tinkham attorney for Respondent Jeffrey Grelyak, and moves the
Illinois Pollution Control Board to dismiss the Complaint, in whole or in part, in this matter for the
following reasons:
1. The Complaint does not state the time or dates on which the alleged pollution occurred.
Without this essential information, Respondent is unable to determine what activities and
conditions were taking place on or near his property that might tend to affect the
environment.
2. The Complaint fails to identify what law prohibits the alleged noise pollution. Reference is
made to “Title 35, Subtitle II, Chapter J, Part 900.102
I
Title 35, Subtitle H, Chapter I, Part
900.102(a).” This citation is incomplete because it does not indicate whether the provisions
allegedly violated are statutory (i.e., part of the Illinois Compiled Statutes) or regulatory (i.e.,
found in the Illinois Administrative Code). Unless Respondent is informed of what laws he
has supposedly violated, he cannot answer or defend against charges made against him.
3. Although the Complaint does state which statute (~9(a)of the Illinois Environmental
Protection Act) Respondent allegedly violated by causing air pollution, the Complaint does
not state how Respondent may have caused a violation. §9(a) prohibits air pollution which
violates “regulations or standards adopted by the Board under this Act... .“ Nowhere in the
Complaint is there an indication of which specific regulations or standards have been
violated.
4. Illinois is a “fact-pleading” state. A complaint must state facts sufficient to bring its claims
within the scope of the cause of action asserted. Vernon v. Schuster, 179 III.2d 338, 688
N.E.2d 1172 (1997). §101.100(b) of the Board’s General Rules (35 III. Adm. Code
101.100(b)) states that “the Board may look to the Code of Civil Procedure and the
Supreme Court Rules for guidance where the Board’s procedural rules are silent.” Because
the Illinois Supreme Court has ruled that a complaint must state sufficient facts to support
the claims made, Respondent respectfully asks this Board to do likewise. In this matter,
Complainants have not alleged sufficient facts to support a finding of impermissible air- or
noise pollution.
Fredrickson v. Grelyak, PCB 04-19
-2-
Motion to Dismiss
5. A complaint so devoid of discernible facts as that of Complainants should be considered
frivolous and without merit.
NOW THEREFORE, Respondent requests that the Illinois Pollution Control Board dismiss the
complaint in this matter and close this proceeding.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeff
S. Grelyak
By:
G or
W. Tinkham, his attorney
Date: 17 September 2003
George W. Tinkham
attorney for Respondent
ARDC reg. #2836149
423 W. Vine Street
Springfield, IL 62704
(217) 753-2737