RECEiVED

CLERK’S

OFFICF

BEFORE

THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JUL30

2003

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

STATE

OF ILLINOIS

Complainant,

)

Pollution

Control Board

v.

)

No.

PCB

03-51

DRAW DRAPE

CLEANERS,

INC.,

an

Illinois corporation,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

TO:

See Attached Service List

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on July 30,

2003,

the People of the

State of Illinois filed with the Illinois Pollution Control Board

COMPLAINANT’S MOTION TO REOPEN WRITTEN DISCOVERY,

true and

correct copies of which are attached and hereby served upon you.

Respectfully submitted,

LISA MADIGAN

Attorney General

State of Illinois

BY:

_________

JOEL

J. STERNSTEIN

Assistant Attorney General

•

Environmental Bureau

188 W. Randolph St.,

20th Floor

Chicago,

Illinois

60601

(312)

814-6986

THIS FILING

IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

---

SERVICE LIST

Mr. Bradley Halloran,

Esq.

Illinois Pollution Control Board

1DO W. Randolph Street,

Suite 11-500

Chicago,

Illinois

60601

Ms. Maureen Wozniak, Esq.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

1021 North Grand Avenue East

P.O. Box 19276

•

Springfield,

Illinois

62702

Ms. Michele Rocawich,

Esq.

Weissberg and Associates,

Ltd.

401

S. LaSalle Street,

Suite 403

Chicago,

Illinois 60605

---

•

RECEIVED

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDCLFR~.’Sfl~J~F

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

JUL

~

0

2003

Complainant,

•

S1AFE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution

Control Board

v.

•)

PCB 03-51

(Enforcement

-

Air)

DRAW DRAPE CLEANERS,

INC.,

an Illinois corporation,

Respondent.

MOTION TO REOPEN WRITTEN DISCOVERY

Complainant,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

ex rel.

LISA

MADIGAN,

Attorney General of the State of Illinois, hereby

requests that the hearing officer issue an order reopening

written discovery in the above-identified case for the following

•reasons.

•

•

Holding Proper

Parties

Responsible

The proper parties must be held responsible for violating

the Illinois Environmental Protection Act

(“Act”),

the

regulations thereunder, and the Code of Federal Regulations.

Complainant Is considering adding Richard J.

Zell,

Steven M.

Press, and/or other individuals as additional defendants in the

above-identified case.

If these individuals are individually

responsible for the alleged violations in the Complaint through

their ownership or operation of Draw Drape Cleaners,

Inc.

(“Draw

Drape”),

then Complainant must be allowed to name them in the

Complaint in addition to Draw Drape.

Complainant requires

further written discovery with respect to these individuals in

1

---

order to determine their culpability for the alleged violations

of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act

(“Act”),

the

Pollution Control Board’s

(“Board”)

regulations, and the Code of

Federal Regulations

(“CFR”).

Bankruptcy

of Draw Drape

Draw Drape has recently disclosed highly relevant

information regarding its possible or pending bankruptcy.

Bankruptcy raises a new issue which bears directly on any’

penalties that the Board may eventually award in this matter.

Penalties serve the purpose of aiding in the enforcement of

the Act,

the Board’s regulations,

and the CFR.

Penalties are

imposed on those parties,

either corporations or individuals, who

are found to have violated the Act.

Section 42(h)

of the Act provides as follows:

In determining the appropriate civil penalty

to be imposed

.

.

.

the Board is authorized

to consider any matters of record in

mitigation or aggravation of penalty,

including but not limited to the following

factors:

*

*

*

(4)

the amount of monetary penalty which will

serve to deter further violations by the

violator and to otherwise aid in enhancing

voluntary compliance with this Act by the

violator and other persons similarly subject

to the Act;

See also People v. Aabott Asbestos,Inc.,PCB 99-189

(April

5,

2001); Wasteland Inc.

v. Pollution Control Board,

118 Ill.App.3d

2

---

1041,

1055,

456 N.E.2d 964,

976

(3d Dist.

1983)

If Complainant cannot reopen written discovery and Draw

Drape goes bankrupt,

it will be difficult

if not• impossible

to,

collect a penalty if the Board levies one.

Enforcement of the

Act, the Board’s regulations,

and the CFR will suffer as a

result.

No Undue Burden or Delay

Complainant

is

not

attempting

to

needlessly

delay the case

as

this

case

was filed on October 15,

2002,

and the deadline for

the first set of written discovery was just over two and a half

months ago on May 14,

2003.

In its first set of interrogatories,

Complainant was well below the limit established for

interrogatories

in Supreme Court Rule 213 (c).

Complainant will

not unduly burden Respondent with an extensive second written

discovery request.

Complainant intends to file a second set of

interrogatories,

request to admit facts, and request to produce

documents.

However they will be shorter than the first set.

Complainant will be prejudiced if

it

is not allowed to

reopen written discovery.

For the foregoing reasons, Complainant

respectfully requests that the hearing officer reopen written

discovery.

3

---

Respectfully submitted,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Ex rel.

LISA MADIGAN, Attorney

General of the State of Illinois

MATTHEW J.

DUNN,

Chief

Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos

Litigation Division

ROSEMARIE CAZEAU,

Chief

Environmental Bureau

BY:

JOEL STERNSTEIN

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

188 West Randolph, 2O~Floor

Chicago,

IL 60601

(312)

814-6986

4

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I,

JOEL J.

STERNSTEIN,

an Assistant Attorney General,

certify that on the 30th day of July,

2003,

I caused to be served

by First Class Mail the foregoing COMPLAINANT’S MOTION TO REOPEN

WRITTEN DISCOVERY to the parties named on the attached service

list,

by depositing same in postage prepaid envelopes with the

United States Postal Service located at 100 West Randolph Street,

Chicago, Illinois 60601.

•

____

JOEL J. STERNSTEIN