ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    November 7, 2002
    UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA
    d/b/a Unocal, a corporation,
    Complainant,
    v.
    BARGEWAY OIL COMPANY, INC.;
    JOSEPH KELLOGG; GERTRUDE
    KELLOGG; DUPAGE ENTERPRISES, INC.
    d/b/a DUNN RENT-A-CAR; JAN P.
    SKLADANY; and CARL J. SKLADANY,
    inclusive,
    Respondents.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    PCB 98-169
    (Citizens Enforcement - Land )
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by C.A. Manning):
    On August 26, 2002, Union Oil Company of California (Unocal) filed a motion for leave
    to file an amended complaint and an amended complaint in this matter. The hearing officer
    required Unocal to file a corrected amended complaint that included the required notice to
    respondents regarding the consequences of failing to answer the complaint.
    On September 30, 2002, Unocal filed an amended complaint.
    See
    415 ILCS 5/31(d)
    (2000),
    amended by
    P.A. 92-0574, eff. June 26, 2002; 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.204. The amended
    complaint seeks to accomplish two purposes. First, the amended complaint seeks leave to add
    DuPage Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Dunn Rent-A-Car, Jan P. Skladany, and Carl J. Skladany
    (DuPage Enterprises). Second, the amended complaint seeks to dismiss Robert F. Atkins,
    Bargeway Systems, Inc. and Robert Nielsen, with whom Unocal has settled its claims.
    Unocal alleges that DuPage Enterprises violated Sections 12(a) and 12(d) of the Act (415
    ILCS 5/12(a), (d) (2000),
    amended by
    P.A. 92-0574, eff. June 26, 2002). Unocal further alleges
    that DuPage Enterprises violated these provisions by owning or operating a gasoline service
    station at 600 E. North Avenue in Glendale Heights, Dupage County, where improper handling
    of solid waste, including petroleum products and other chemicals, contributed to contamination.
    Unocal seeks reimbursement of remedial costs pursuant to Section 22.2 of the Act (415 ILCS
    5/22.2,
    amended by
    P.A. 92-0574, eff. June 26, 2002).
    Although the Board has accepted these allegations for hearing with respect to respondents
    Bargeway Oil Company, Joseph Kellogg, and Gertrude Kellogg, the Board must determine
    whether the complaint is duplicative or frivolous with respect to the newly added DuPage
    Enterprises.
    See
    Section 31(d) of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/31(d) (2000),
    amended by
    P.A. 92-0574, eff. June 26, 2002);
    see also
    35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.212(a). A
    2
    complaint is duplicative if it is “identical or substantially similar to one brought before the Board
    or another forum.” 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.202. A complaint is frivolous if it requests “relief that
    the Board does not have the authority to grant” or “fails to state a cause of action upon which the
    Board can grant relief.”
    Id.
    Within 30 days after being served with a complaint, a respondent
    may file a motion alleging that the complaint is duplicative or frivolous. 35 Ill. Adm. Code
    103.212(b). DuPage Enterprises have filed no motion, and no evidence before the Board
    indicates that Unocal’s complaint against DuPage Enterprises is duplicative or frivolous.
    Accordingly, the Board amends the caption in this matter to include the new parties.
    Further, the Board grants Unocal’s motion to dismiss its complaint against Robert F.
    Atkins, Bargeway Systems, Inc. and Robert Nielsen, as reflected in the caption of this order.
    Unocal’s motion for leave to file the amended complaint also asks the Board to delete certain
    causes of action. This request is unnecessary, as those causes of action were dismissed by the
    Board’s order issued on January 7, 1999.
    The Board accepts the complaint for hearing.
    See
    415 ILCS 5/31(d) (2000),
    amended by
    P.A. 92-0574, eff. June 26, 2002; 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.212(a). All respondents named in this
    amended complaint may file an answer to the amended complaint. A respondent’s failure to file
    an answer to a complaint within 60 days after receiving the complaint may have severe
    consequences. Generally, if the respondent fails within that timeframe to file an answer
    specifically denying, or asserting insufficient knowledge to form a belief of, a material allegation
    in the complaint, the Board will consider respondents to have admitted the allegation. 35 Ill.
    Adm. Code 103.204(d). The Board directs the hearing officer to proceed expeditiously to
    hearing.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the Board
    adopted the above order on November 7, 2002, by a vote of 6-0.
    Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board

    Back to top