ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

August 10, 1989

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 89—18

PLASTICS, INC., a

foreign corporation,

)

Respondent.

CHRISTINE S. BUCKO, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON

BEHALF OF PETITIONER.

CHARLES F. HELSTEN APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.

DISSENTING OPINION (by J. Theodore Meyer):

I dissent from the majority’s acceptance of the settlement

stipulation.

Neither the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency) nor the Illinois Attorney General has promulgated any

standards as to what factors should be considered when

negotiating a fine to be imposed pursuant to a settlement

agreement. I believe that the $1,000 fine agreed upon in the

instant case is not sufficient. If this enforcement action had

been brought by a State’s Attorney or by the Attorney General in

the name of the people of the State of Illinois, Respondent could

have been assessed costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. Ill.

Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. lll~,par. 1042(f). I am concerned that the

instant fine may not even cover the Agency’s costs and fees.

Additionally, the proposed settlement included no

information on the amount of money respondent may have saved by

not complying with the Act and the Board’s regulations.

Respondent may have realized quite a savings by failing to use

the appropriate controls, and the $1,000 fine may be merely a

“drop in the bucket” compared with those savings. Such a low

fine in the face of possibly large savings through non—compliance

does not encourage the regulated community to comply with the Act

and the Board’s regulations.

102—23

---

—2--

For these reasons, I dissent.

J. ‘~ieodoreMeyer

Boar~Member

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

Board, hereby certify that the above Dissenting Opinion was filed

on the

/c~~

day of

~

,

1989.

Dorothy M.,4unn, Clerk

j,~J

Illinois P~’l1utionControl Board

102—24