Office
    of the
    State’s
    Attorney
    McHENRY
    COUNTY
    NINETEENTH
    JUDICIAL.
    CIRCUIT
    OF
    ILlINOIS
    CLERK’S OFFiCE
    JUN
    23
    2004
    STATE OF ILLINOIS
    W COUNT\Y~~W~~
    2200
    NORTH
    SEMINARY
    AVENUE
    WOODSTOCK,
    ILLINOIS
    60098
    815 / 334-4159
    FAX
    815/337-0872
    ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    JAMES R.
    THOMPSON CENTER STE
    11-500
    100 W. RANDOLPH STREET
    CHICAGO IL
    60601
    ATTN CLERK
    Dear Reader:
    In Re:
    State v. Stringini PCB 0 1-43
    Enclosed you will find an original and TEN copies of:
    MOTION FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL OF HEARING
    OFFICERSORDER OF JUNE 21, 2004 PURSUANT TO
    35
    IL ADC
    101.518
    This
    motion is directed
    to the Board.
    Please return a
    file stamped copy ofthe MOTION in the self addressed envelope.
    Thank
    you.
    Assistant State’s Attorney
    GARY W.
    PACK
    STATE’S
    ATTORNEY
    June 22, 2004
    BOARI~ECE~VED
    CLERK’S
    OFFICE
    JUN23
    2004
    STATE OF ILLINOIS
    Pollution Control Board
    vs.
    )
    PCB
    01-43
    )
    (RCRA Enforcement)
    MICHAEL STRING1NI,
    )
    )
    Respondent.
    )
    MOTION FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL OF HEARING OFFICERS
    ORDER OF JUNE 21, 2004 PURSUANT TO 35 IL ADC
    101.518
    Now comes the Complainant, People ofthe State ofIllinois ex.rel. Gary W. Pack,
    McHenry County State’s Attorney, by his Assistant
    States Attorney, David N. Stone and moves
    the Pollution Control Board to reverse the order entered by Hearing Officer, Bradley P. Halloran
    on June 21, 2004 and in support ofsaid motion states as follows:
    1.
    The Hearing Officer entered an order granting an
    extension oftime for Respondent to
    file a post hearing brief (Exhibit A attached)
    2.
    The Hearing Officer by ex
    parte communication with the Respondent allowed
    Respondent to file a motion (by facsimile) to extend time to file a post hearingbrief
    (See Exhibit B attached)
    3.
    Complainant filed an objection to the requestby facsimile (Exhibit C)
    4.
    The Hearing Officer notes that he did not authorize Complainant
    to
    file by facsimile,
    but fails to mention in his ruling how the Respondent got such authorization.
    The
    Hearing Officer is obligated under 35 IL
    ADC
    101.114 to make ex parte
    communications part ofthe record. There being no writtenrecord ofsuch facsimile
    authorization it can only be concluded that the authorization came in an
    ex parte
    communication with the Respondent.
    5.
    35 IL ADC
    10 1.522 provides that extensions shall be granted only on good cause
    shown.
    6.
    The motion to extend contains no factual basis upon which the hearing officer could
    find good cause.
    7.
    On the same day and prior to
    the time that the Respondent filed his motion to
    extend
    by facsimile, the Hearing Officer contacted the Complainant’s counsel to get the
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINO
    ex rel. GARY W. PACK,
    McHenry County State’s Attorney,
    Complainant,
    )
    )
    telephone number ofthe Respondent ostensibly for the reason that it had come to
    his
    attention the no post hearing brief was filed by Respondent.
    8.
    35
    IL ADC
    101.114 prohibits Board Members
    and Board employees from engaging
    in an ex parte communication designed to
    influence a party’s action with respect to
    a
    pending regulatory proceeding.
    9.
    The actions ofthe Hearing Officer on June 21, 2004 violated this Pollution Control
    Board Rule to the prejudice ofthe Complainant.
    Respectfully submitted,
    GARY W. PACK
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I, David N. Stone,
    an Assistant State’s Attorney in this
    case, do certify that I caused to be mailed
    this 22ND
    day ofJune, 2004, the foregoing
    MOTION FOR INTERLOCUTORY
    APPEAL OF HEARING OFFICERSORDER
    OF JUNE 21,
    2004 PURSUANT
    TO
    35
    IL ADC
    101.518 upon the persons
    listed on the attached service list by certified mail
    in an envelope bearing sufficient postage with the Uni
    Sfat
    s Postal Service located at 1050
    Country Club Road, Woodstock, Illinois 60098.
    David N.
    Stone
    SERVICE
    LIST
    Case No.
    PCB
    01-43
    NAME:
    INTEREST:
    CLERK OF ILL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    CLERK OF BOARD
    JAMES R THOMPSON CENTER STE
    11-500
    100 W RANDOLPH STREET
    CHICAGO IL 60601
    Assistant
    State’s Attorney
    0: \WPSECURE\- STONE\L2590 STRINGINI\PLEAD\INTERLOCTJTORY APPEAL 062104
    .doc
    2
    NAME:
    INTEREST:
    MR
    MICHAEL STR1NG1NI
    Defendant
    437SPRUCE CT
    SCHAIJMBIJRG IL
    60193
    PAUL JAGIELLO
    Non
    record
    Attorney for IEPA
    ILLINOIS EPA
    951 1WEST HARRISON ST
    DESPLAINES IL 60016
    DATE:
    June 21, 2003
    Gary W. Pack, McHenry County State’s Attorney
    David N. Stone, Assistant State’s Attorney
    McHenry County Government Center
    2200 N.
    SeminaryAve.
    Woodstock, IL.
    60098
    815
    3344159
    AttyNo. 02744309
    0: \WPSECURE\- STONE\L2590 STRINGINI\PLEAD\INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL 062104
    .doc
    3
    ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    June21, 2004
    PEOPLE
    OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
    )
    ex rel.
    GARY W. PACK, MCHENRY
    )
    COUNTY STATE’S ATTORNEY,
    )
    )
    Complainant,
    )
    )
    v.
    )
    PCB 01-43
    )
    (RCRA Enforcement)
    MICHAEL STRINGINI,
    )
    )
    Respondent.
    )
    HEARING OFFICER ORDER
    On June 21,
    2004, the respondent filed a motion for an extension of time to
    file his post-
    hearingbrief,
    to and including June 29, 2004.
    Also on June 21, 2004,
    the complainant faxed its
    objection to respondent’s motion.
    It is noted that complainant failed .to receive prior approval ofthe Clerk ofthe Board or
    the hearing officer to file
    its objection by facsimile as required by Section
    10 1.302 (d) ofthe
    Board’s procedural rules.
    Nonetheless, complainant’s objection will be filed and considered.
    Over the complainant’s objection, respondent’s motion for an extension oftime is
    granted.
    The respondent’s post-hearing brief is now due to be filed on or before June 29, 2004.
    To that end,
    complainant’s reply brief is now due to be filed on orbefore July
    16, 2004.
    IT IS
    SO ORDERED.
    Bradley P. Halloran
    Hearing Officer
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    •
    James
    R.
    Thompson Center, Suite
    11-500
    100
    W.
    Randolph Street
    Chicago, Illinois 60601
    312.814.8917
    EXHIBIT A
    OM
    :
    Industria1tJasteRec~c1ingCorp
    PHONE NO.
    :
    847+891+8331
    Jun.
    21 2884 81:51PM P1
    ~
    ~
    t~c7YL?
    ae&11~aL~
    ~,
    ~Z~Zzvn7
    6~q~
    •
    ~
    EXHIBIT
    B
    BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
    )
    cx rel. GARY W. PACK,
    )
    McHenry County. State’s Attorney,
    )
    )
    Complainant,
    )
    vs.
    )
    PCB 01-43
    •
    )
    (RCRA Enforcement)
    MICHAEL STRING1NI,
    )
    )
    Respondent.
    )
    OBJ~ECTION
    TO EXTENSION REQUEST
    The Complainant objects to the request to
    extend to
    June 29, 2004 and in support of said
    motion states:
    1.
    The request is unclear as to
    what is being extended, but it is assumed that Respondent
    wants the time for his post hearing brief extended.
    2.
    No reasons are given as to why the Respondent did not file a brief in response to
    Complainants briefwhich was filed on April
    14,
    2004 seven weeks prior to
    Respondent’s June 2, 2004 due
    date.
    3.
    This case is over three years old and the charges are twenty years old.
    A
    very lenient
    briefing schedule was set by the hearing officer in the first place.
    4.
    While
    it is true that the Respondent is pro Se, he is not disabled in any way and has
    understood all ofthe schedules that have heretofore been ordered.
    5.
    The request was made by Respondent only after the hearing officer called David N.
    Stone on June 21, 2004 and asked for the Respondent’s telephone number so he could
    call and inquire about his failure to file a post hearing brief, stating that
    since he is pro
    se, “the board tends to bend over backwards” apparently referring to
    concerns that the
    Respondent be given a full measure ofdue process.
    6.
    Due process is to be
    applied to all ofthe litigants, not just the pro se litigants.
    7.
    It would be an abuse of discretion for the hearing officer orthe board to grant an
    extension.
    8.
    This Respondent has been given more than “full due process” in this case.
    9.
    Its time for the People to
    be given a measure of “due process” by denying this very
    late request for extension.
    EXHIBIT
    C
    Respectfully submitted,
    MH
    ounty
    tate’s Attorney
    ~
    Assistant State’s Attorney
    DATE:
    June 21, 2003
    Gary W. Pack,
    McHenry County State’s Attorney
    David N.
    Stone, Assistant State’s Attorney
    Mdllenry County Government Center
    2200 N. Seminary Ave.
    Woodstock, IL.
    60098
    815 3344159
    AttyNo. 02744309
    PROOF OF
    SERVICE
    BY
    FAX
    David N. Stone, an attorney on oath, states as follows:
    That on
    the 21~
    day of June, 2004,
    at
    1:45
    o.k. the undersigned
    served a copy of attached
    OBJECTION TO EXTENSION REQUEST
    by sending the
    same
    fax
    transmission
    to
    Bradley
    Halloran at fax
    number312 814 3669
    and Michael
    0:\WPSECtJRE\-
    STONE\L2590
    STRINGINI\PLEAD\OJECTION
    TO
    EXTENSION
    062104.doc
    2

    Back to top