BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
COMMUNITY LANDFILL COMPANY, INC.,
EDWARD PRUIM, an individual, and
ROBERT PRUIM, an individual,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
by
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney
General
of the State of Illinois,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
by
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney
General
of the State of Illinois,
PCB No. 04-207
PCB No. 97-193
(Consolidated)
(Enforcement)
-vs-
-vs-
Complainant,
Respondents.
Complainant,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
---------------)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
\ .
)
to: Mr. Mark La Rose, Ms. Clarissa Grayson
La Rose
&
Bosco
200 N. La Salle Street, #2810
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(312) 642-0434
Mr. Bradley
P. Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 W. Randolph, #2001
Chicago, IL 60601
(Via Hand Delivery)
NOTICE OF FILING
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that we have today,
February 25,2008, filed with the Office of
the Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, by electronic filing, Complainant'sResponse to
the Respondents' Motion to Cancel Hearing, a copy
of which is attached and herewith served
upon you.
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 25, 2008
BY:
Respectfully Submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
ex rei.
LISA MADIG N
Atto ey General o(he
of Illinois
RISTOPHER GRANT
ssistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
69 W. Washington St., #1800
Chicago, IL 60602
(312) 814-5388
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 25, 2008
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
by
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney
)
General
of the State of Illinois,
)
)
Complainant,
)
)
-vs-
)
)
)
EDWARD PRUIM; an individual, and
)
ROBERT PRUIM, an individual,
)
)
Respondents.
)
---------------)
)
)
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
by
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney
)
General
of the State of Illinois,
)
)
Complainant,
)
)
-vs-
)
)
COMMUNITY LANDFILL COMPANY, INC.,
)
)
Respondent.
)
PCB No. 04-207
PCB No. 97-193
(Consolidated)
(Enforcement)
COMPLAINANT'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENTS'
MOTION TO CANCEL HEARING
NOW COMES Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, and responds in
opposition to the Respondents', COMMUNITYLANDFILL COMPANY, INC., EDWARD
PRUIM, and ROBERT PRUIM'S Motion to Cancel Hearing, as follows:
On February
21,2008, Respondents filed their Motion to cancel the hearing in this
matter, now scheduled for April 7 through April 10, 2008. This is the Respondents' second
1
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 25, 2008
request for cancellation of hearing. While Complainant did not object to the Respondent's
previous cancellation request (i.e. in this case) , it now believes that the prejudice resulting to
Complainant and the Board from delay in hearing outweighs any inconvenience to the
Respondents. Complainant therefore requests that Respondents Motion
to Cancel Hearing be
denied.
I.
HEARING IN THIS MATTER HAS BEEN LONG DELAYED
Unfortunately, there has been a significant
de.lay in resolving this 1997-filed matter. The
State concedes that it is partially responsible by seeking several amendments to add additional
counts and parties. However, there is no question that the consolidated cases have been ripe for
hearing since early 2006'. Since that date, any and all delay has been solely attributable
to the
Respondents.
Following the Board'sApril 20, 2006 Order, the Hearing Officer held several telephone
conferences in an attempt
to set hearing. Scheduling was initially delayed by the unavaiiability
of engineer Michael McDerrnone.
In
accommodation, the Hearing Officer eventually set
hearing for December 11-14,2006. On September 22,2006 (one day after the Notice of Hearing
had been issued), the Respondents filed their first Motion
to Cancel Hearing, on the basis of
Respondent Edward Pruim's heart surgery and subsequent health issues. The State did not
object
to cancellation on that basis. However, the Hearing Officer should note that 13 months
IOn April 20, 2006, the Board denied Edward and Robert Pruim'sMotion for Summary
Judgment, and stated that it "...expects that the hearing will be scheduled and completed within
the next six months".
4/20/06 Board Order,
slip op. at 8.
2S
ee
: Affidavit
ofR. Michael McDerrnopt, filed with the Board June 13,2006, stating
that he was unavailable to testify through October, 2006.
2
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 25, 2008
passed before the Parties were able to establish a new hearing date3.
II.
RESPONDENTS FAIL TO DEMONSTRATE A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR
CANCELLATION OF HEARING
Obviously, counsel for Complainant sympathize with Ms. Grayson regarding her injury,
and agree that she has been a valuable participant in this matter. However, the limitations
described in her affidavit simply do not provide a sufficient basis for cancellation.
In
sum,. Ms. Grayson states that she is unable to effectively use her left hand, and
therefore will have difficulty handling documents. She does not explain why she could not, with
assistance from staff, fully and completely handle and review documents with only her right
hand.
S~e
does not claim that she is unable to perform other normal work activities during this
period, nor does she provide a detailed explanation as to the volume
of documents that need to be
handled.
Moreover, though Ms. Grayson has been working on this case since 2001, her partner
Mark LaRose has been actively involved
from the initial filing. Mr. LaRose is intimately
familiar with this case and its subject matter, the Morris Community Landfill ("Landfill"). He
has handled Landfill related matters in three contested hearings, most recently in September,
20074. Clearly, Mr. LaRose has sufficient knowledge
of the facts to prepare the case for hearing.
III.
CANCELLATION OF HEARING WOULD RESULT IN AN EXTENDED DELAY
Respondents propose rescheduling hearing to mid-summer. While Complainant has not
3The current hearing date was set on October 25,2007.
4Mr. LaRose participated in Board hearings in PCB 01-48/01-49, PCB 01-170, and PCB
03-191. At hearing in
People
v. Community Landfill and City ofMorris,
PCB 03-191 ,Mr.
LaRose presented Community Landfill Company'sonly witness.
3
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 25, 2008
yet checked with its witnesses for this period, vacation schedules generally make the summer
difficult for securing witness availability. Moreover, it would certainly present a hardship for
Complainant'scounsel. Ms. Jennifer Tomas, who has actively participated in the Morris
Community Landfill matters, is unavailable during May and
June due to her upcoming wedding
and honeymoon. Also, the undersigned is unavailable during the latter part
of July and early
August because
of a planned vacation.
It
is therefore likely that cancellation of the April hearing
dates would result in a significant delay
in hearing of this matter.
IV.
CONCLUSION
For a number
of reasons, hearing in this matter has been long delayed. Any further delay
should be avoided, and the pending hearing in this matter should not cancelled or rescheduled
without evidence
of extreme prejudice. The reasons provided by Respondents in their Motion to
Cancel are insufficient even to demonstrate significant inconvenience. The Hearing Officer
should therefore deny Respondent'sMotion, and issue a Notice
of Hearing for the previously-
scheduled dates
of April 7 through April 10, 2008.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
ex ret
LISA MADIGAN
Atto ey General
of the tate of Illinois
BY:
C RISTOPHER GRANT
nvironmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
69
W. Washington Street, #1800
Chicago, IL 60602
(312) 814-5388
4
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 25, 2008
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, CHRISTOPHER GRANT, an attorney, do certify that I caused to be served this 25
th
day
of February 2008, Complainant'sResponse in Opposition to Respondents' Motion to Cancel
Hearing, and Notice
of Filing, upon the persons listed on said Notice of Filing, by placing same
in an envelope bearing sufficient postage with the United States Postal Service located at 100
W.
Randolph, Chicago.
CHRISTOPHER GRANT
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 25, 2008
