THIS FILING SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
WAYNE HASER, )
)
C om pl ai n an t, )
)
v. ) PCB No. 05-216
) (Enforcement – Noise)
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA )
I N C . ,
)
)
Respondent. )
NOTICE OF FILING
TO: Ms. Dorothy M. Gunn Bradley P. Halloran, Esq.
Clerk of the Board Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street 100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500 Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL)
(VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL)
(PERSONS ON ATTACHED SERVICE LIST)
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of
the Illinois Pollution Control Board an
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF EDWARD W.
DWYER, ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF THOMAS G. SAFLEY, and
RESPONDENT’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO
COMPLAINANT’S COMPLAINT,
copies of which are herewith served upon you.
Respectfully submitted,
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH
AMERICA INC.,
Respondent,
By:/s/ Thomas G. Safley
Dated: August 12, 2005
One of Its Attorneys
Edward W. Dwyer
Thomas G. Safley
HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
(217) 523-4900
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 12, 2005
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Thomas G. Safley, the undersigned, hereby certify that I have served the
attached ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF EDWARD W. DWYER, ENTRY OF
APPEARANCE OF THOMAS G. SAFLEY, and RESPONDENT’S ANSWER AND
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO COMPLAINANT’S COMPLAINT upon:
Ms. Dorothy M. Gunn
Clerk of the Board
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
via electronic mail on August 12, 2005; and upon:
Bradley P. Halloran, Esq.
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Mr. Wayne Haser
25763 Willowcreek Lane
Monee, Illinois 60449
by depositing said documents in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Springfield,
Illinois on August 12, 2005.
/s/ Thomas G. Safley
Thomas G. Safley
TNTL:002/Fil/NOF-COS – Answer – Haser
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 12, 2005
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
WAYNE HASER, )
)
C om pl ai n an t, )
)
v. ) PCB No. 05-216
) (Enforcement – Noise)
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA )
I N C . ,
)
)
Respondent. )
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF EDWARD W. DWYER
NOW COMES Edward W. Dwyer, of the law firm of HODGE DWYER
ZEMAN, and hereby enters his appearance on behalf of Respondent, TNT LOGISTICS
NORTH AMERICA INC.
Respectfully submitted,
TNT LOGISTICS
NORTH AMERICA INC.,
Respondent,
By:/s/ Edward W. Dwyer
Edward W. Dwyer
Dated: August 12, 2005
Edward W. Dwyer
HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
(217) 523-4900
TNTL:002/Fil/EOA-EWD-Haser
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 12, 2005
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
WAYNE HASER, )
)
C om pl ai n an t, )
)
v. ) PCB No. 05-216
) (Enforcement – Noise)
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA )
I N C . ,
)
)
Respondent. )
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF THOMAS G. SAFLEY
NOW COMES Thomas G. Safley, o f the law firm of HODGE DWYER ZEMAN,
and hereby enters his appearance on behalf of Respondent, TNT LOGISTICS NORTH
AMERICA INC.
Respectfully submitted,
TNT LOGISTICS
NORTH AMERICA INC.,
Respondent,
By:/s/ Thomas G. Safley
Thomas G. Safley
Dated: August 12, 2005
Thomas G. Safley
HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
(217) 523-4900
TNTL:002/Fil/EOA-TGS-Haser
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 12, 2005
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
WAYNE HASER, )
)
C om pl ai n an t, )
)
v. ) PCB No. 05-216
) (Enforcement – Noise)
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA )
I N C . ,
)
)
Respondent. )
RESPONDENT’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE TO COMPLAINANT’S COMPLAINT
NOW COMES Respondent, TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC.
(“TNT”), by its attorneys HODGE DWYER ZEMAN, and for its Answer and
Affirmative Defense to Complainant’s Complaint, states as follows:
ANSWER
1. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny the allegations
contained in paragraph one of Complainant’s Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
2. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny the allegations
contained in paragraph two of Complainant’s Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
3. TNT admits that it operates a facility at the address and telephone number
identified by Complainant in paragraph three of Complainant’s Complaint (“Facility”).
To the extent that paragraph three of Complainant’s Complaint contains any further
factual allegations, TNT denies the same.
4. In response to paragraph four of Complainant’s Complaint, TNT admits
that its Facility conducts warehousing and distribution activities. To the extent that
paragraph four of Complainant’s Complaint conta ins any further factual allegat ions, TNT
denies the same.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 12, 2005
5. Paragraph five of Complainant’s Complaint states a legal conclusio n that
does not call for a response. To the extent that paragraph five of Complainant’s
Complaint contains any factual allegations, TNT denies the same. TNT further
specifically denies that it has vio lated the numeric no ise limitations referenced in
paragraph five of Complainant’s Complaint.
6. TNT denies that any alleged activities referenced in paragraph six of
Complainant’s Co mplaint const itut e “pollut ion” or have resulted in t he vio lat ion o f any
of the numer ic no ise limitations referenced in paragraph five o f Co mplainant’s
Complaint. To the extent that paragraph six of Complainant’s Complaint contains any
further factual allegations, TNT denies the same.
7. TNT denies the first sentence of paragraph seven of Complainant’s
Complaint. In response to the second sentence of paragraph seven of Complainant’s
Complaint, TNT admits that the Facilit y’s “hours of operation continue past 10 P.M.,”
but denies that the Facility’s hours of operation commence “before 6 A.M.,” except in
unusual circumstances. Rather, TNT affirmatively states that, normally, its emplo yees’
operations at the Facility occur between 6:00 A.M. and 11:30 P.M., but that third parties
may deliver trailers to or remove trailers from the Facility between 11:30 P.M. and 6:00
A.M. In response to the third sentence of paragraph seven of Complainant’s Complaint,
TNT denies that “building operations commenced Oct[.] 2004,” but rather, affirmatively
states that the Facility began warehousing and distribution operations on November 22,
2004. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny any allegations contained in the
remaining sentences of paragraph seven of Complainant’s Complaint, and therefore
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 12, 2005
denies the same. To the extent that paragraph seven of Complainant’s Complaint
contains any further factual allegations, TNT denies the same.
8. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny the allegations
contained in paragraph eight of Complainant’s Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
9. TNT denies that Complainant is entitled to the relief he requests in
paragraph nine of Complainant’s Complaint. To the extent that paragraph nine of
Complainant’s Co mplaint conta ins any factual allegations, TNT denies the same.
10. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny any allegations
contained in paragraph 10 of Complainant’s Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
11. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny any allegations
contained in paragraph 11 of Complainant’s Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
12. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny any allegations
contained in paragraph 12 of Complainant’s Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
WHEREFORE, Respondent TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC., by its
attorneys HODGE DWYER ZEMAN, prays that Complainant take nothing by way of his
Complaint, and that the Board award TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC. all
relief just and proper in the premises.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
For its affirmat ive defense to Complainant’s Co mplaint, TNT states as fo llows:
1. TNT operates the Facility in order to warehouse and distribute tires.
2. Trucks deliver trailers of tires to the Facility.
3. TNT does not own or operate these trucks.
4. Trucks also transport trailers of tires from the Facility.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 12, 2005
5. TNT does not own or operate these trucks.
6. Complainant in part appears to allege that noise from these trucks, which
TNT does not own or operate, has, at Complainant’s property, violated the numeric noise
limitations cited by Co mplainant in paragraph 5 of his Complaint.
7. TNT has no evidence that this is the case.
8. However, if this is the case, such alleged violations relating to trucks
which TNT does not own or operate do not constitute violations of the numeric noise
limitations by TNT.
WHEREFORE, Respondent TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC., by its
attorneys HODGE DWYER ZEMAN, prays that the Illinois Pollution Control Board find
in favor of TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC. on this Affirmative Defense, that
Complainant take nothing by way of his Complaint, and that the Board award TNT
LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC. all relief just and proper in the premises.
Respectfully submitted,
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH
AMERICA INC.,
Respondent,
By:/s/ Thomas G. Safley
One of Its Attorneys
Dated: August 12, 2005
Edward W. Dwyer
Thomas G. Safley
HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
(217) 523-4900
TNTL:002/Fil/Answer - Haser
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 12, 2005