ilLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
May 2,
 1985
SPI\D()NI,
 FRANKIEWICZ
 & ZULLO,
Complainants,
)
 PCB 84—167
BOLl
~)STi~E,; GREEK ORTHODOX
CHURCFU
Respondent.
ORDER OF THE BOARD
 (by J, Marlin):
rhjs matter comes before the Board upon
the November ~l, 1984
fi1:~ngof
 a complaint by Don and Carol Spadoni, Bob and Beth
Frankiewicz, and Don and Diane
 Zullo (complainants) against the
Holy Apostles Greek Orthodox Church (respondent).
 Respondent
filed an answer on December 19, 1984 denying the complainants’
allegations while neither admitting nor denying the content of
the documents submitted with the complaint.
 A hearing was held
in Westchester,
 Illinois on March 18,
 1985.
The complaint alleges that respondent violated the noise
regulations located
 at
 35 til. Adm.
 Code 900.102
 (old rule 102),
901,102(a)
 (old rule
 202), and 901.102(b)
 (old rule 203).
Section
900.102 provides that
 “(nb
 person shall cause or allow
the emission of sound
 beyond the
 b~oundariesof his property,...,
so
 as
 to
 cause noise pollution
 in Illinois, or so as
 to violate
 any
provision
of
 this Chapter.”
 Sections 901.102(a)
 and
 (b)
contain octave
band sound pressure levels
which shall
 not be
exceeded.
Respondent
 is located at
 2501
 S. Wolf Road
 in Westchester.
Complainants
 Zullo, Spadoni,
 and
 Frankiewicz reside at
 2524,
2528~, and 2532
 S.
 Wellington
 in Westchester, respectively,
directly
 east of the
respondent’s property,,
 The respondent has
five
 air
 conditioning
 units
 that are located
 -just
 west
 of
 the
property lines
of
complainants and which complainants allege
 are
the source of excessive noise.
Although other documents have
been filed
with the complaint,
the
 parties and the
 Illinois
 Environmental Protection Agency
(IEPA)
 have filed
 a joint settlement agreement entitled
~sti.pu1ation
 for settlement”
 (agreement).
 Although not
 a party,
the IEPA assented to the agreement,
 The
signatories request that
 the
 Board
 approve
 the
 agreement.
The
 a.qreE~er~
provides
 that
 the
 respondent
 will
 move
 the
existing
 ~r
 coi~iitioners
 from
the
 east
 to
 the
 west
 side
 of
 its
64-09
2
building
 or will remove
 the existing units and install new units
on the south of the building.
 Either option will place
 the
units
 at least 75
 feet from the complainants’ property lines
behind
 the south side of the
respondent’s building.
 Residences
to
 the
 south
 of
 the
 proposed unit relocation will be separated by
275
 feet
 and residences to the west by
 150
 feet.
 The total cost
of respondent’s proposed actions would be
 in the range of thirty
to fifty thousand dollars.
 The agreement also contains
 a
timetable which the Board
 need not address and
 a denial
 by the
respondent that
 it has “caused or committed” noise pollution.
Th~
Boay~
hereby rejects the settlement agreement based on
 it~~or~iusion
 that it lacks statutory authority to accept
~ett1ements
 imposing
 compliance
 conditions
 without
 a
 Board
finding
 of violation.
 IEPA v. Chemetco, Inc.,
 PCB 83—2, February
20,
 1985,
 interlocutory
appeal, No.
 5—85—143
 (5th District);
People of the State of Illinois and IEPA
 ~.
 Archer Daniels
Midland Corporation, PCB 83—226,
 March
 22,
 1985,
 interlocutory
~
 No, 3—85—0222 (3rd District),
In order
 to bring this proceeding
 to
 a áonclusion
 the
parties may file an amended settlement agreement containing
sufficient
admissions of violation for~theBoard
 to order
implementation of the agreed modifications and schedule.
Alternatively,
 the parties
may wish to draft
 a private settlement
agreement between themselves
 and when
 the controversy has been
resolved,
 to seek
 a joint dismissal of the action before the
Board,
IT
 IS SO ORDERED.
Board Member J.D. Dumelle dissented.
Dorothy
 M.
 Gunn,
 Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
hereby
 certify
 that
 the
 above
 Order
 was
 adopted
 on
_____________
 day of
__________________,
 1985 by
 a vote
-
 -
 ~.
 ~
 ~.
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
64-10