ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
October 7, 1993
LEO G. FORE,
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
PCB 93—171
(Enforcement)
)
MIDSTATE KART,
)
Respondent.
ORDER OF THE BOARD (by M. Nardulli):
On September 9, 1993, Leo G. Fore filed a complaint against
Midstate Kart Club. Mr. Fore alleges that Midstate’s Go-Kart club
emits noise in violation of Sections 23 and 24 of the Environmental
Protection Act (Act).
Section 31(b) of the Act states that when a citizen’s
enforcement complaint is filed:
Unless the Board determines that such complaint is
duplicitous or frivolous, it shall schedule a hearing.
415 ILCS 5/31(b) (1992)
Also, the Board regulations in part provide:
If a complaint is filed by a person other than the
Agency,
~
the Chairman shall place the matter on the
Board agenda for Board determination whether the
complaint is duplicitous or frivolous. If the Board
rules that the complaint is duplicitous or frivolous, it
shall enter an order setting forth its reasons for so
ruling and shall notify the parties of its decision. If
the Board rules that the complaint is not duplicitous or
frivolous, this does not preclude the filing of motions
regarding the insufficiency of the pleadings.
35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.124
A complaint is frivolous if it fails to state a cause of
action upon relief can be granted. (See, Nandel V. Ku1~akaPCB 92-
33 (August 26, 1993); Section 31(b) of the Act.) For instance, a
complaint is frivolous if it alleges violations of sections of the
Act which do not fall within the Board’s purview. In such a case,
the complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which the Board
may grant relief.
The Board notes that Section 25 of the Act places restrictions
2
on the Board’s ability to hear noise violations proceedings
involving certain sporting activities:
No Board standards for monitoring noise or regulations
prescribing limitations on noise emissions shall apply to
any organized or amateur or professional sporting
activity except as otherwise provided for in this
Section.
415 ILCS 5/25 (1992)
In addition, the Board notes that Section 3.25 of the Act
defines “Organized Amateur or Professional Sporting Activity” as:
an activity or event carried out at a facility by
persons who engaged in that activity as a business or for
education, charity or entertainment for the general
public, including all necessary actions and activities
associated with such an activity. This definition
includes, but is not limited to, skeet, trap or shooting
sports clubs in existence prior to January 1, 1975,
organized motor sports, and sporting events organized or
controlled by school districts, units of local
government, state agencies, colleges, universities or
professional sports clubs offering exhibitions to the
public.
415 ILCS 5/3.25 (1992).
The Board directs each party in this proceeding to file a
written document with the Board addressing whether the complained
of activity is an “organized amateur or professional sporting
activity” and whether the claim alleges violations of the Act which
fall within the Board’s purview. The Board directs the parties’
attention to the Appellate Court ruling in Hinsdale golf Club v.
Kochanski (2d Dist. 1990), 197 Ill.App.3d 634, 555 N.E.2d 31; and
to this Board’s decision in Pecka v. Skylarks Remote Control
Airplane Club, PCB 92-27 (May 7, 1992). The Board notes the
Hinsdale and Pecka cases contain interpretations of the “organized
amateur or professional sporting activity” exemption that may be
applicable to this proceeding. The Board reminds the parties that
they must follow Board’s procedural rules governing filing and
service requirements. The documents must be received by the Board
on or before november 7, 1993.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify ha~jthe above order was adopted on the
7~
day of __________________________, 1993, b a vote of
7-~ .
M
_____
~Dorothy M. ,G~Ann, Clerk
Illinois P4jilution Control Board