ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December 6,
    1991
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
    )
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    AC 90—56
    )
    (IEPA Case No.
    295-90-AC)
    STEVE GILBERT,
    )
    (Administrative Citation)
    )
    Respondent.
    )
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by J.
    C. Marlin):
    This matter comes before the Board on a November 15,
    1991
    letter from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    (Agency).1
    The letter states that the respondent,
    Steve Gilbert,
    has refused to pay a portion of the hearing costs assessed
    against him in a July 25,
    1991 Board Order in this matter.
    The
    letter requests that the Board determine the validity of
    respondent’ s claim.
    Enclosed with the letter were copies of a July 31,
    1991
    letter from the respondent to the Board and an October 24,
    1991
    letter from respondent to the Agency.
    The first sentence of the
    July 31,
    1991 letter states that “e)nclosed
    is a check for the
    Pollution Control Board cost.”
    Respondent had been instructed by
    the July 25,
    1991 Board Order to send such payment to the Agency
    in Springfield.
    On the basis of this
    first sentence the
    misdirected letter and check were apparently sent on to the
    Agency without the letter being docketed into the Board’s filing
    system.
    The October 24,
    1991 letter to the Agency
    is apparently in
    response to an Agency inquiry concerning the unpaid portion of
    the costs assessed against respondent.
    In both letters the
    respondent stated that the unpaid portion was for an overnight
    stay by the hearing officer which the respondent felt was not a
    necessary or just expense.
    The amount unpaid is $37.74.
    In light of the Agency’s request for a determination on the
    issue of proper costs and the possibility of a filing error at
    the Board,
    the Board will reopen this docket.
    The July 31,
    1991
    letter will be construed in this one instance as a timely filed
    motion to reconsider the imposition of hearing costs.
    The Board
    notes that if the letter had not been forwarded to the Agency,
    1
    This
    letter has not been on the
    Board’s meeting
    agenda
    previously because it was not received by the Clerk’s office until
    recently.
    The letter was originally addressed to a Board Member.
    128—81
    2
    the Board would have taken this course of action upon receipt of
    the respondent’s letter in early August.
    The motion to reconsider is denied.
    The hearing costs
    contested by the respondent are of the type normally and
    consistently imposed by the Board.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    J.
    T. Meyer concurred.
    I, Dorothy N.
    Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board,
    hereby certify tk~tthe above Order was adopted on the
    __________
    day of
    _________________,
    1991,
    by a vote of
    ~
    Dorothy N. ç~nn,Clerk
    Illinois P~1’1utionControl Board
    128—82

    Back to top