ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
August 22, 1991
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB 90-89
(Enforcement)
FRED JOHf~SON,JOHNSON & BRIGGS
)
TANK TRUáK SERVICE,
a/k/a
)
JOHNSON
& BRIGGS TANK TRUCK
)
& HEATER SERVICE,
an Illinois
corporation,
Respondents.
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB 91—123
(Enforcement)
HERMAN
L.
LOEB,
)
Respondent.
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by J.
Theodore Meyer):
This
case
is
before
the
Board
on
two
motions
filed
by
complainant the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (A~ency)
on August 14,
1991.
Respondents have not filed a response.
The Agency first asks that this case be consolidated with the
pending case of Illinois Environmental Protection Agency v.
Loeb,
PCB
91-123.
The Agency
notes
that
Mr.
Loeb
was
originally
a
respondent in the instant proceeding, and maintains that the issues
1
The Board notes that although respondents’ time to respond
to these motions has not yet expired, one of the motions involves
a requested continuance of the August
28 and 29,
1991 hearings in
this
case.
Therefore,
the Board
finds that material prejudice
would result
if we were to delay
a decision on the motions until
the
expiration
of
the
response
period.
(See
35
Il1.Adm.Code
101.241(b).)
125—313
2
in both cases arise from a common nucleus of operative facts, and
that
a complete determination of either case cannot be had without
the presence of all parties.
Thus, the Agency asks that the two
cases be consolidated.
The Board grants the motion to consolidate.
Section 103.141 of the Board’s procedural rules provides that the
Board may consolidate enforcement proceedings in the interests of
“convenient, expeditious, and complete determination of claims.”
The
Board
finds
that
this
case
and
PCB
91—123
would
be more
conveniently,
expeditiously,
and completely resolved if the two
cases ar~consolidated.
Second,
the Agency
asks
that the
Board
continue
hearings
presently scheduled in PCB 90-89 for August 28 and 29,
1991.
The
Agency states that discovery in PCB 90-89
is not yet complete,
in
part as a result of a stay issued in this case in 1990.
The Agency
also notes that it has been unable to take the deposition of an
out-of-state
witness,
and
that
it
wishes
to
take
Mr.
Loeb’s
deposition as well.
The Agency states that counsel for the other
parties in PCB 90-89 and PCB 91-123 have indicated that they have
no objection to this motion for continuance.
Because this case has
been consolidated today,
and because the Board believes that the
Agency
should
have
a
reasonable
opportunity
to
complete
its
discovery, the motion to continue hearings is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I,
Dorothy M.
Gunn,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
hereby ce~tifythat
the above
Order
was
adopted
on
the
~
day of ~L-~
~
,
1991, by a vote of
7~
Dorothy M. ~unn,
Clerk
Illinois Poflution Control Board
125—314