ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    October
    11,
    1990
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE
    )
    OF ILLINOIS,
    Complainant,
    V.
    )
    PCB
    90—110
    (Enforcement)
    HOMAK MFG. CO,
    an Illinois corporation,
    Respondent.
    DISSENTING OPINION (by
    J. Theodore Meyer):
    I
    dissent
    from the majority’s acceptance of the settlement
    stipulation in this case.
    Although
    the
    proposed
    settlement
    agreement
    states
    that
    respondent’s noncompliance was economically beneficial
    in that it
    operated its unpermitted equipment without the delay
    of applying
    to and waiting for the Agency to issue permits, there
    is not any
    specific
    information
    on
    the
    amount
    of
    that
    economic
    benefit.
    Section 33(c)
    of the Environmental Protection Act (and new Section
    42(h)(3),
    as
    contained
    in P.A.
    86-1363,
    effective
    September
    7,
    1990)
    specifically requires
    the Board
    to consider
    any economic
    benefits accrued by noncompliance.
    I believe that this provision
    contemplates
    a consideration
    of the amount
    of the full
    economic
    benefit,
    not
    just
    a
    statement
    that
    an
    economic
    benefit
    was
    realized.
    Without more specific information,
    it is impossible to
    know
    if the penalty
    of
    $1,000
    even
    comes
    close
    to
    any
    savings
    realized by respondent.
    Finally,
    I am frustrated that,
    although this case was brought
    in the name of the people of the State of
    Illinois,
    there
    is no
    recognition that costs
    and fees could have been assessed against
    respondent.
    Ill.Rev.Stat.1989,
    ch.
    111 1/2,
    par.
    1042(f).
    I am
    pleased that the Attorney General is beginning to bring enforcement
    cases
    in the name
    of the
    People,
    but
    I
    believe that settlement
    agreements
    in such cases should,
    at a minimum, recognize that the
    Board could award costs and reasonable fees.
    115—291

    2
    For these reasons,
    I dissent.
    a.
    L~heodordMeyer
    Board Member
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereb~ycertify that the above Dissenting Opinion was filed
    on the
    ~
    day of
    ~
    ,
    1990.
    Dorothy N. mnn,
    Clerk
    Illinois Po~LutionControl Board
    115—29 2

    Back to top