ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

February 19,

1981

ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

AGENCY,

Complainant,

)

PCB

80—197

CITY

OF

JACKSONVILLE.

)

INTERIM ORDER

OF

THE

BOARD

(by L

Goodman):

On

January

26,

19&1

the

parties filed a Stipulation and

Pro-

posed

Settlement (Stipulation) with the Soard~ The parties sub-

mitted

the

Stipulation

to

the Hearing Officer at hearing

on

January

7,

1981.

At

that

hearing

it

was stated

that the parties had agreed

that the

City

of Jacksonville

would

remit

$2,305~65 to

the

Wildlife

and Fish

Fund of

the

State

Treasury in payment for fish killed by

the City~s

raw

sewage

discharge into Mauvaise Terre Creek and that

an

additional

$2,694~35

would be remitted

as a “penalty figure”~

(R,6).

However,

the

written Stipulation,

signed

by the

parties,

states

that the parties agree

that $1,~4~35,and not $2,694~35,

should

be

assessed as a

penalty~

(Stip~i2,13)~ 8ecause of this

ambiguity,

the Board rejects the

parties~Stipulations

The record

does not

show that the parties had a meeting of the minds regarding

the amount of the stipulated

penalty~

An

additional

ground for rejection of the

Stipulation

is

the parties~

failure to identify

by rule or

section

number

the

alleged

violations

of

Board rules and/or the Illinois environmental

Protection Act

(Act)~

Procedural Rule 331 provides that a “written

statement” of

stipulation and settlement “signed by the parties or

their authorized representatives” shall contain a “full stipulation

of all

material facts

pertaining

to the nature

of

the alleged

violations~”

A

written stipulation and settlement is neither

“full”

nor

replete with “all material facts pertaining to~~the nature

of the alleged

violations”

if ~t fails to specify enumerated

pro-

visions of the

Act

or

Board rules

that allegedly have

been violated~

Finally,

the Stipulation would be

improved if

the parties

referred to

the

sum to be paid to

the Wildlife

and ~jsh fund

as a

Section 42(b)

penalty.

Section 42(b) of the

~ct

states that

pay-

ment to this

fund for

the reasonable value of fish destroyed

may be

required “in

addition

to the other penalties provided by this

Act~”

The use of the word

“other”

indicates that payment to

the fund is

considered to

be

a

penalty~

Any other penalties m~y

be designated

as Section 42(a)

penalties~

40—527

---

—2--

The Board

hereby rejects the parties~Stipulation.

The casc~

is remanded for proceedings

consistent with this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I,

Christan

L~

Moffett

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board~hereby cer

if

that

the above Interim Order

as

adopted on

the

H~’

day of

1981 by a vote of

_____

Illinois Pollution

~oard