ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    January 10, 2002
     
    DAVID P. HOUGHTALING,
     
    Complainant,
     
    v.
     
    TIRE MANAGEMENT, INC.,
     
    Respondent.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
     
     
     
     
    PCB 01-154
    (Citizens Enforcement – Noise)
     
     
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by G.T. Girard):
    On November 19, 2001, Tire Management, Inc., (respondent) filed a motion to dismiss
    this citizens noise enforcement action. The Board has not received a response to the motion to
    dismiss from David P. Houghtaling (complainant). Pursuant to the Board’s procedural rules at
    Section 101.500(d) the complainant is deemed to have waived objection to the granting of the
    motion. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.500(d).
     
    On May 11, 2001 complainant filed a complaint alleging that the respondent violated
    Section 23 and 24 of the Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/23 and 24 (2000)) and
    35 Ill. Adm. Code 900.102, “900.102, a & b,” and 901.104 on real property located at 725
    Aurora Avenue, Aurora. On June 21, 2001 the Board struck the allegations as to violations of
    Section 23 of the Act and Section 900.102 (a) and (b) of the Act and directed that the remaining
    counts proceed to hearing. The complaint states that the “relief sought is to require the
    respondent to cease and desist the noise pollution caused from the operation of the Automotive
    Tire & Service Center in any manner that is necessary and appropriate to bring about compliance
    with the regulations of the Pollution Control Board.” Comp. at 3.
     
    In the motion to dismiss, respondent maintains that it no longer operates the business
    adjacent to complainant’s property and has moved the business one half mile from the previous
    address. Respondent maintains that because it no longer operates any business at that address
    respondent “cannot possibly be in violation of the Act.”
     
    The Board will grant the motion to dismiss. The Board notes that relocation of the
    business does not alleviate any potential liability for potential past violations. However, the
    complainant, in the complaint, is simply seeking an order from the Board that the respondent
    cease and desist from any noise pollution. The relocation of the business would appear to be
    sufficient relief for the complainant. Therefore, the Board will grant the motion to dismiss.
     
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    Section 41(a) of the Environmental Protection Act provides that final Board orders may
    be appealed directly to the Illinois Appellate Court within 35 days after the Board serves the
     
    2
    order. 415 ILCS 5/41(a) (2000);
    see also
    35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.300(d)(2), 101.906, 102.706.
    Illinois Supreme Court Rule 335 establishes filing requirements that apply when the Illinois
    Appellate Court, by statute, directly reviews administrative orders. 172 Ill. 2d R. 335. The
    Board’s procedural rules provide that motions for the Board to reconsider or modify its final
    orders may be filed with the Board within 35 days after the order is received. 35 Ill. Adm. Code
    101.520;
    see also
    35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.902, 102.700, 102.702.
     
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, hereby certify that the
    Board adopted the above order on January 10, 2002, by a vote of 6-0.
     
    Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
     

    Back to top