ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    January 6, 2005
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
    Complainant,
    v.
    CITY OF CAIRO,
    Respondent.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    PCB 05-117
    (Enforcement – Land, Cost Recovery)
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by A.S. Moore):
    On December 22, 2004, the Office of the Attorney General, on behalf of the People of the
    State of Illinois (People), filed a two-count complaint against the City of Cairo (City). The
    complaint concerns the removal of alleged used and waste tires from two sites owned by the
    City. Both sites are located in the City of Cairo, Alexander County: one at Second and Ohio
    Streets; the other at 105 Sixth Street. For the reasons below, the Board accepts the complaint for
    hearing. In the interest of administrative efficiency, the Board also grants the People leave to file
    an amended complaint to correct apparent typographical errors in the People’s requested relief.
    In count I of the complaint, the People allege that the City removed used and waste tires
    from an individual’s warehouse site in the City of Cairo to a property owned by the City and
    located at Second and Ohio Streets. The complaint states that the Illinois Environmental
    Protection Agency (Agency) issued a notice to the City, pursuant to Section 55.3(d) of the
    Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/55.3(d) (2002)), directing the City to remove
    the tires from the City’s property at Second and Ohio Streets. The People allege that the City
    failed without sufficient cause to perform the preventative or corrective action required under the
    notice. According to the complaint, the Agency’s tire removal contractor then removed
    approximately 191.17 tons of used and waste tires from the Second and Ohio Streets site at a cost
    of $35,170.75. Under count I, the People seek to recover from the City these cleanup costs
    expended by the State, punitive damages in the amount of $70,341.50, and costs and reasonable
    attorney fees.
    In count II of the complaint, the People allege that the City removed used and waste tires
    from the same warehouse site to a property owned by the City and located at 105 Sixth Street.
    The complaint states that the Agency issued a notice to the City, pursuant to Section 55.3(d) of
    the Act (415 ILCS 5/55.3(d) (2002)), directing the City to remove the tires from the City’s
    property at 105 Sixth Street. The People allege that the City failed without sufficient cause to
    perform the preventative or corrective action required under the notice. According to the
    complaint, the Agency’s tire removal contractor then removed approximately 75 tons of used and
    waste tires from the 105 Sixth Street site at a cost of $14,970.50. Under count II, the People seek
    to recover from the City cleanup costs expended by the State, punitive damages, and costs and
    reasonable attorney fees. However, the dollar amounts in the prayer for relief under count II are
    2
    the same as those sought under count I,
    i.e.
    , the complaint states that the People seek, under
    count II, removal costs of $35,170.75 and punitive damages of $70,341.50, as they do under
    count I.
    In the interest of expediting this proceeding, the Board accepts the complaint for hearing
    and grants the People leave to file an amended complaint correcting the apparent typographical
    errors in the prayer for relief under count II. The People must file the amended complaint by
    February 4, 2005. The time period for the City to file an answer or other responsive motion or
    pleading will begin upon service of the amended complaint. The City’s failure to file an answer
    to the amended complaint within 60 days after receiving it may have severe consequences.
    Generally, if the City fails within that timeframe to file an answer specifically denying, or
    asserting insufficient knowledge to form a belief of, a material allegation in the amended
    complaint, the Board will consider the City to have admitted the allegation.
    See
    35 Ill. Adm.
    Code 103.204(d).
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the Board
    adopted the above order on January 6, 2005, by a vote of 5-0.
    Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board

    Back to top