BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
)
ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
)
PCB 04-16
(Enforcement - Air)
v .
)
PACKAGING PERSONIFIED, INC ., an
)
Illinois Corporation
)
Respondent .
)
NOTICE OF FILING
To
:
See Attached Certificate of Service
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on April 12, 2006, we filed with the Clerk of the Illinois
Pollution Control Board the attached Motion For
Leave To File Instanter and Reply In
Support of Respondent's Motion to Compel on behalf of Packaging Personified, Inc., copies
of which are attached hereto and hereby served upon you
.
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: April 12, 2006
PACKAGING PERSONIFIED, INC .
By:
GARDNER CARTON & DOUGLAS LLP
Roy M. Harsch
191 N. Wacker Drive Suite 3700
Chicago. IL 60606-1698
Telephone: (312) 569-1000
Facsimile: (312) 569-3000
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
RE C,EIV I
ED
APR 12 2006
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
RE C,EIVI
ED
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
APR 1 2 P006
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
)
ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
)
PCB 04-16
(Enforcement - Air)
v .
)
PACKAGING PERSONIFIED, INC ., an
)
Illinois Corporation
)
Respondent .
)
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE INSTANTER
Now comes Respondent, Packaging Personified, Inc . by Roy M. Harsch, Gardner Carton
& Douglas LLP, and moves the Hearing Officer for Leave to File Instanter, the attached
Response to Respondent's Motion to Compel . In support of this Motion for Leave to File
Instanter, Respondent states as follows
:
1
.
At the last status conference, the Hearing Officer informed counsel that he would
not be ruling on the Motion to Compel for some period of time
.
2 .
Because of the extreme press of other business, counsel for Respondent has been
unable to file the attached reply to respond to this Motion to Compel until this time .
3
.
Complainant will not be prejudiced by allowing filing of this Reply
.
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully requests the Hearing Officer to allow the filing
of the attached Reply to Response to Respondent's Motion to Compel
.
Dated: April 12, 2006
GARDNER CARTON & DOUGLAS LLP
Roy M. Harsch
191 N. Wacker Drive Suite 3700
Chicago, IL 60606-1698
Telephone: (312) 569-1000
Facsimile: (312) 569-3000
C1101/ 12469686.1
Respectfully submitted,
PACKAGING PERSONIFIED, INC .
By:
2
0
ne
i
of its attorn
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
)
ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
)
PCB 04-16
(Enforcement - Air)
v .
)
PACKAGING PERSONIFIED, INC., an
)
Illinois Corporation
)
Respondent
.
)
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
Now comes Respondent, Packaging Personified, Inc ., by Roy M . Harsch and Gardner
Carton & Douglas LLP, and states in reply to Complainant's Response to Respondent's Motion to
Compel written discovery the following :
1 .
Complainant would have the Hearing Officer believe that the requested discovery
is not relevant to the case at hand. This is simply not true . The case at hand is an enforcement
action brought against a small flexographic printing operation for violations of flexographic
printing rack regulations adopted in R93-9 . Plaintiff seeks a substantial penalty from
Respondent for the alleged failure of Respondent to timely comply with these regulations
.
2 .
Respondent respectfully believes that as part of its defense, it should be allowed
to show what entities received notice of the adoption of these Flexographic rack regulations,
including similarly situated Flexographic printers that had not complied with the Flexographic
regulations adopted in R93-9 . While these similarly situated printers had not complied with the
regulations, they were nevertheless were allowed to pursue variances and adjusted standard relief
with the apparent approval by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, and without any
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
enforcement actions being brought by Respondent. Thus, the questions of notice, who was
involved in rack regulations, subsequent IEPA discussions with similar situated Flexographic
printers, and the decisions to authorize relief without accompanying enforcement actions is
directly relevant to Respondent's defense to the enforcement action brought in this case
.
3 .
Respondent would have the Hearing Officer believe that the requested
information is overly burdensome because it would require respondent to evaluate the
rulemaking records as well as other proceedings .
4 .
The fact that it is estimated that it will take 37 hours to search for this information
is irrelevant and unpersuasive: Complainant is seeking thousands and thousands of dollars in
penalty. Even if this estimate is correct, any burden placed on Complainant by having to spend
37 hours is a direct result of the baseless allegations raised in the complaint and the relief sought,
and therefore is completely reasonable
.
GARDNER CARTON & DOUGLAS LLP
Roy M. Harsch
191 N. Wacker Drive Suite 3700
Chicago, IL 60606-1698
Telephone: (312) 569-1000
Facsimile : (312) 569-3000
CHOI! 12469716 .1
2
c110u 124r9991
.1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that copies of the foregoing Motion For Leave To File
Instanter and Reply In Support of Respondent's Motion to Compel were served upon :
Christopher Grant
Assistant Attorney General
Office of the Illinois Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
188 W. Randolph St
.
20' x' Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
Dorothy Gunn
Clerk of the Board
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 W. Randolph St
.
Suite I1-500
Chicago, IL 60601
Bradley P. Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
by First Class U.S. Mail on this 12 °i day of April, 2006
.
