ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December 20,
    1990
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE
    )
    OF ILLINOIS,
    )
    Complainant,
    )
    V.
    )
    PCB 90—127
    )
    (Enforcement)
    WESTVACO CORPORATION,
    a Delaware 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 from December 1988 to December
    1989 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 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
    $1,600 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.
    117—89
    2
    For these reasons,
    I dissent.
    J. theodor~Meyer
    Board Member
    I,
    Dorothy M.
    Gunn,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereb
    certify t
    the above Dissenting Opinion was filed
    on the
    _______
    day of
    ________________,
    1991.
    Dorothy M//Gunn,
    lerk
    Illinois ~llution
    Control Board
    117—90

    Back to top