ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March
    22,
    1990
    THOMAS
    S. FREDETTE,
    )
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 89—61
    (Enforcement)
    VILLAGE OF BEECHER,
    )
    Respondent.
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by J. Marlin):
    This matter comes before the Board on Complainant’s second
    Motion for Judgement by Dafault filed February
    26,
    1990.
    The
    motion asks that a default judgement be entered against
    Respondent Village of Beecher due
    to their repeated failures to
    comply with Hearing Officer Orders concerning discovery.
    For
    reasons given below, the motion is granted.
    On April
    5,
    1989,
    Complainant filed an eight count Complaint
    against the Village which alleged, among other
    things,
    violations
    of contaminant discharge laws and regulations
    in the operation
    of
    the Village’s municipal wastewater treatment plant.
    Elements of
    the violations concerned fecal coliform levels which exceeded
    legal standards,
    wastewater
    flows exceeding design average flow
    contained
    in the Village’s NPDES permit, violations of total
    suspended solids limitations, concentrations
    of biochemical
    oxygen demand which were greater
    than permitted levels,
    reporting
    and operating violations, and air pollution.
    The Village
    responded to these allegations by filing a motion
    to dismiss the
    complaint.
    The Board denied the motion after hearing oral
    argument on the matter
    in its April
    27,
    1989 meeting.
    The Board
    found the matter neither duplicitous or
    frivolous as alleged by
    the Village.
    On January
    16,
    1990,
    the Complainant
    filed his Motion
    for
    Judgement by Default due to Respondent’s
    failure
    to comply with
    discovery.
    The Board denied that motion by Order dated February
    8,
    1990 due
    to procedural defects contained within
    it and advised
    the Complainant and the Hearing Officer
    of
    the manner
    in which
    the filing may be cured.
    On February
    26,
    the Complainant filed
    his second motion
    for Judgement
    by Default which cured
    the
    deficiencies contained
    in his January
    16,
    1990 filing.
    The
    Hearing Officer followed with an Order Regarding Motion
    for
    Judgement by Default dated February
    27,
    1990 and filed with the
    Board March
    1,
    1990.
    The Complainant’s motion states
    that Interrogatories and a
    Request for Production
    of
    Documents were filed upon Respondent on
    —2—
    August
    17,
    1989
    (Exh. A to Complainant’s Motion).
    Thereafter,
    a
    Motion to Compel Compliance was filed with the Hearing Officer
    requesting that an Order be entered compelling responses
    to
    Complainant’s discovery requests
    (Exh.
    B).
    The Hearing Officer
    entered an Order on December
    13, 1989.
    The Order gave Respondent
    until December
    26, 1989
    to comply with
    it.
    When no responses
    were received,
    the Complainant
    filed his first Motion
    for
    Judgement by Default.
    The Hearing Officer’s latest Order dated
    February
    27,
    1990 demanded that Respondent show cause why his
    Order of December
    13, 1989 was ignored;
    re—ordered compliance
    with discovery requests by March
    19,
    1990;
    and, set forth
    the
    Hearing Officer’s intention to issue findings regarding the
    Respondent’s failures to comply should Respondent fail
    to
    answer
    by March 19,
    1990.
    These were received by the Board on March
    21,
    1990.
    Once again,
    the Hearing Officer’s Order went unheeded.
    The Board
    noted
    in its Order
    dated February 8,
    1990 regarding
    this matter that
    a party’s failure to comply with a Hearing
    Officer’s Order
    is
    a serious matter.
    The matter becomes
    “doubly
    serious” when
    these failures are repeated.
    In this the Board
    finds the Village of Beecher’s continued insistence
    to ignore the
    clear directives of the Hearing Officer
    as sufficient
    to impose
    the remedy of default
    judgement.
    It appears nothing less will
    stir the Respondent from the course
    it has chosen
    ——
    that
    of
    contravening the authority vested
    in the Hearing Officer by the
    Board through adoption of
    its rules and by the Legislature
    through committee approval
    of those rules.
    The Board hereby grants Complainant’s second Motion for
    Judgement by Default upon the merits of this case.
    The Hearing
    Officer
    is directed to schedule a hearing
    to take evidence on the
    relief requested by the Complainant as to each of his claims.
    IT
    IS SO ORDERED.
    I,
    Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of
    the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board,
    hereby certify that the above Order was adopted on the
    ~-~‘~c-’
    day of
    •~
    ,
    1990,
    by a vote of
    2’
    Dorothy M. /Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    109—5fl4

    Back to top