ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March 3, 2005
     
    MATHER INVESTMENT PROPERTIES,
    L.L.C.,
     
    Petitioner,
     
    v.
     
    ILLINOIS STATE TRAPSHOOTERS,
    ASSOCIATION, INC.,
     
    Respondent.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
     
     
     
     
     
    PCB 05-29
    (Citizens Enforcement - Land)
      
     
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by J.P. Novak):
     
    On February 14, 2005, respondent Illinois State Trapshooters Association, Inc.
    (Trapshooters) filed an Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to File an Answer or to Otherwise
    Plead (Agreed Mot. 3). Trapshooters requested an additional 90 days to May 17, 2005, in which
    to file an answer or other responsive pleading, stating that “the parties remain engaged in serious
    settlement talks, but will need some additional time to reach final settlement.” Agreed Mot. 3 at
    1. On February 23, 2005, petitioner Mather Investment Properties, L.L.C. (Mather) filed a
    Response to Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to File an Answer (Resp. 3), in which it
    stated that it did not object to the Board granting Trapshooters’ motion. Resp. 3 at 1. Mather
    also referred to ongoing settlement discussions that need more time to bear fruit.
    See
     
    id
    .
     
    On August 17, 2004, Trapshooters filed a one-count citizens complaint (Comp.) against
    Mather. Trapshooters allege that Mather violated Section 21(e) of the Environmental Protection
    Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/21(e) (2002)). Trapshooters further allege that Mather violated this
    provision by abandoning lead fragments, broken clay targets, and associated contamination
    constituting waste at a site that was not permitted as a waste disposal, treatment, or storage site
    under the Act or the regulations or standards promulgated under it. Comp. at 5-6.
     
    On October 13, 2004, Trapshooters filed an Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to File
    an Answer (Agreed Mot. 1) in which it sought 60 additional days to December 15, 2004, in
    which to file its answer. Trapshooters stated “the parties are presently engaged in serious
    settlement talks, but will need some additional time to reach final settlement.” Agreed Mot. 1 at
    1. On October 18, 2004, Mather filed a Response to Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to
    File an Answer (Resp. 1) indicating that it had no objection to the Board granting the agreed
    motion. Resp. 1 at 1. In an order issued October 14, 2004, Board Hearing Officer Carol Webb
    (
    née
    Sudman) granted the motion.
     
    On December 15, 2004, Trapshooters filed another Agreed Motion for Extension of Time
    to File an Answer (Agreed Mot. 2) in which it sought 60 additional days to February 15, 2005, in
     
    2
    which to file its answer. Trapshooters stated “the parties remain engaged in serious settlement
    talks, but will need some additional time to reach final settlement.” Agreed Mot. 2 at 1.
    On December 17, 2004, Mather filed a Response to Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to File
    an Answer (Resp. 2) indicating that it had no objection to the Board granting the agreed motion.
    Resp. 1 at 1. In an order issued December 21, 2004, Board Hearing Officer Carol Webb granted
    the motion.
     
     
    The Board notes that, as of the date of this order, more than six months have passed since
    Mather filed its complaint. As a consequence of the parties’ requests, the Board has not yet
    determined whether the complaint is frivolous or duplicative (35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.212(b),
    see
     
    35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.202) and has not accepted the case for hearing (35 Ill. Adm. Code
    103.212(b)).
     
     
    The Board grants the parties’ agreed motion for an additional 90 days in which to file an
    answer, which is now due no later than May 17, 2005. If the parties do not file a stipulation and
    proposed settlement on or before that date, the Board will reach a determination whether the
    complaint is frivolous or duplicative and whether to accept the case for hearing.
    Id
    . The
    May 17, 2005 deadline is nine months after the filing of the complaint, and the Board will look
    with disfavor upon a fourth motion for an extension of the deadline for filing an answer.
     
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
     
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the Board
    adopted the above order on March 3, 2005, by a vote of 5-0.
     
    Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board

    Back to top