ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    January 13, 2005
     
    TERESA L. SHEPRO, as executor of the
    estate of JUSTICE W. SHEPRO, deceased, and
    FRANK WILEMERSLAGE, as beneficiaries
    under Trust No. 898 of the Chicago Trust
    Company,
     
    Complainants,
     
    v.
     
    NEWBY OIL COMPANY, DAVID E. TRIPP,
    and JANICE L. TRIPP,
     
    Respondents.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    PCB 04-12
    (Enforcement – Land, Water)
     
    HEARING OFFICER ORDER
     
    On October 29, 2004, the complainants filed a motion to compel discovery with the
    Board. On October 25, 2004, respondents David E. Tripp and Janice L. Tripp (Tripp) filed their
    response to the motion to compel. On October 26, 2004, respondent Newby Oil Company
    (Newby) filed its objections to the motion to compel. As evidenced by the filing dates above,
    complainants served the respondents prior to filing their motion to compel with the Board.
    In this enforcement matter, the complainants contend that contamination found on their
    premises is the proximate cause of a release, spill or leaching from the respondents’ site. In the
    motion, the complainants represent that the respondents have refused access to their site for the
    purposes of conducting soil borings. The complainants contend that these borings are relevant
    and that pursuant to Section 101.614 and 101.616 of the Board’s procedural rules, the hearing
    officer may compel discovery that is relevant or information calculated to lead to relevant
    information.
    In the respondents’ respective responses and objections, both argue that the complainants
    cite no authority which would allow the Illinois Pollution Control Board or the hearing officer to
    compel access to the site to allow soil borings. Additionally, the respondents represent that on
    April 23, 2004, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) took soil samples from
    the respondents’ property. The Agency’s narrative attached to Newby’s objections, indicate that
    no contaminants were found above Tier 1 objectives. The respondents argue that any further
    testing would be burdensome and duplicative.
    The complainants correctly state that soil borings may be relevant to this matter.
    However, the complainants cite to no authority, nor is the hearing officer aware of any, that
    would allow the Board or the hearing officer to compel access to the respondents’ site to allow
    soil boring. Further, the requested access to the respondents’ property to allow for soil boring
    2
    appears to be duplicative where the Agency has previously inspected the site. The complainants
    motion to compel is denied.
    The parties or their legal representatives are directed to participate in a telephonic status
    conference with the hearing officer on January 18, 2005, at 2:00 p.m. The telephonic status
    conference must be initiated by the complainants, but each party is nonetheless responsible for
    its own appearance. At the status conference, the parties must be prepared to discuss the status
    of the above-captioned matter and their readiness for hearing.
    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

    Back to top