ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March 16, 1978
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 78—39
    ORDMAN’S LEMONT PARK AND SHOP,
    INC.,
    Respondent.
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by Mr. Young):
    This matter before the Board concerns
    a Complaint filed
    on February
    7,
    1978,
    by the People of the State of Illinois
    against Respondent
    for operating
    an emission source without
    a permit in violation of the Act and Ruies.
    In response,
    Ordman’s Lemont Park and Shop submitted
    an operating permit
    dated February
    9,
    1978, issued by the Agency for emission
    source in question and filed a Motion to Strike Complaint
    on February 14,
    1978.
    Under Section 31(b)
    of the Act,
    the Board
    is required
    to hold a hearing unless the Complaint is found to be
    “duplicitous” or “frivolous.”
    This matter
    is not duplicitous;
    there is no indication of a duplicate action against Ordman’s
    Lemont Park and Shop,
    Inc.
    On the other hand,
    if this Board
    were not able to grant
    the requested relief based on allega-
    tion(s)
    of this Complaint, we would dismiss this
    action as
    frivolous.
    In this action, Complainant seeks
    a monetary penalty,
    an order to cease and desist permit violations, and response
    to the allegations
    in this Complaint ~qninst
    Respondent’s
    emission source which has received
    a permit from the Agency.
    The Board is mindful that a violation of the Act or Rules
    does not, in and of itself, warrant a monetary penalty.
    Southern
    Illinois Asphalt
    (1975)
    60 Ill.2d 204,
    326 N.E.2d 406.
    In fact,
    the Board is without authority
    to impose fines unless it serves
    to aid in the enforcement of the Act.
    Harris-Hub Company
    (1977)
    365 N.E.2d 1071;
    ~
    (1976)
    35 Ill.App.3d
    930,
    342 N.E.2d 784;
    Metropolitan Sanitary District
    (1975)
    62 Ill.2d
    38,
    338 N.E.2d
    392.
    29
    —
    391
    —2—
    In this case,
    the Board finds
    this allegation would not
    alone justify
    an imposition of a penalty; nor would this claim
    warrant a cease and desist order in the face of an operating
    permit granted by the Agency.
    In prior decisions,
    the Board
    has refused to schedule costly and time-consuming hearings
    when relief could not be granted even
    it all the allegations
    were proven.
    Farmers Opposed to Extension of
    the Illinois
    PCB 71-159,
    2 PCB 461
    (September 16,
    1971).
    Accordingly,
    the Board will not set a hearing for Respondent to answer to
    a technical violation which was cured on his own initiative.
    The Board will grant Respondent’s Motion
    to Strike.
    The
    Complaint is hereby dismissed.
    IT
    IS SO ORDERED.
    Mr.
    ~oodman
    dissented.
    I, Christan
    L,
    Moffett, Clerk
    of
    the
    Illinois
    Pollution
    Control Board, hereby certi1fy the above Order was adopted on
    the
    ____
    day of
    _______,
    1978 by.a vote of
    ‘/./
    Christan
    L. Mofett
    k
    Illinois Pollution C
    rd
    Board
    29
    —
    392

    Back to top