ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    August 19, 1999
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
    Complainant,
    v.
    STATE OIL COMPANY, WILLIAM
    ANEST f/d/b/a S & S PETROLEUM
    PRODUCTS, PETER ANEST f/d/b/a S & S
    PETROLEUM PRODUCTS, CHARLES
    ABRAHAM, JOSEPHINE ABRAHAM, and
    MILSTREAM SERVICES, INC.,
    Respondents.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    PCB 97-103
    (Enforcement - Land, Water)
    DISSENTING OPINION (by R.C. Flemal):
    I respectfully dissent from the majority’s order delivered today because I believe that the Board
    does not have authority to hear third-party cost recovery cases. As a creature of statute, the Board has
    no authority except that expressly provided by statute. See Village of Lombard v. Pollution Control
    Board, 66 Ill. 2d 503, 363 N.E.2d 814 (1977), (“An administrative Agency, such as the Pollution
    Control Board, has no greater powers than those conferred upon it by the legislative enactment creating
    it.”). Neither the Environmental Protection Act, nor any other statute, grants authority to the Board to
    hear third-party cost recovery cases. Absent any explicit authority, no authority exists.
    That portion of the cross-complaint that seeks recovery of remediation costs accordingly should
    have been dismissed as frivolous, because the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief
    requested.
    For this reason, I dissent.
     
    Ronald C. Flemal
    Board Member
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, hereby certify that the above
    dissenting opinion was submitted on the 19th day of August 1999.
      
    Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board

    Back to top