ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December 20, 1990

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

)

Complainant,

PCB 90—88

V.

ELDON SWEDBERG, d/b/a ELDON

SWEDBERG SWINE

FARM,

)

Respondent.

DISSENTING OPINION (by J.D. Dumelle):

I dissent from the Majority’s approval today of the

stipulation for the following reasons.

It is my belief that enforcement of the permit requirements

constitutes a crucial aspect of the Illinois regulatory control

system. Yet the way it is being handled currently, as reflected

by the instant case, is so deficient as to render consent to the

stipulation impossible. The current process merely runs through

the criteria in a generic manner which sheds no understanding as

to why this case was settled or how the fine stipulated to was

calculated. It is virtually impossible to discern one

stipulation from another.

The case at bar not only reflects poorly on a significant

aspect of regulatory enforcement, but continues this Board’s

years of ratification of low fines in the absence of mitigating

factors. The resulting message to the regulated industry is

hardly one which could be said to “enhance compliance with the

Act”. On the contrary, the clear message being sent by the

approval of stipulations such as the one at bar remains that the

permit requirements in Illinois can always be ignored at little

or no cost. I come to this conclusion when the majority of this

Board regularly approves stipulated agreements as personified by

the instant case where there exists no explanation of which 33(c)

factors were applicable or considered or

why, in direct

contravention of the complaint, were attorney’s fees recoverable

to Illinois not requested.

For these reasons, I

ssent

acob D.

LCDR-CEC-EJSNR (Ret)

Board Member

117—85

---

—2—

IT IS SO ORDERED

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board hereby certify ~ the above Dissenting Opinion was

submitted on the

A’~-’--1

day of

,

1991.

I 11 i no

Control Board

117—86