State of Illinois
Pollution Control Board
James
R Thompson
Center
100
W Randolph Street Suite
11500
InThe Matter of
}
(
3
r.
}
‘OIIUtir
5g’
Jerrald R
West
II
}
Complainant[s}
-vs-
}
PCB 2009-
}
}
Nokomis Quarry Company
}
P.O. Box#90
}
Nokomis, Ii
62075
}
AKA: P.O. Box #500244
}
St
Louis,
MO.
63150-0244
}
}
Respondent[sJ
}
Plaintiffs Answer
to Respondents
Motion to Dismiss formal
Complaint
filed
by
Jerrald R West II
NOW
COMES
JERRALD R WEST
II,
An
Individual, serving
as
his
own
counsel
in
support of
denying Nokomis Quarry
Companies
Motion for
dismissal, Now states the
following.
Answer To Introduction
Please
note:
This
Plaintiffs
Formal Complaint, page#5,
numbered line 12.
The
Prompt
for
signature is not followed
by
a prompt for
a date.
This
Plaintiff
has simply
completed the form
as provided. As well in reference
to
this Plaintiffs
lack of
completed “certification”
Page #5, Center
page,
under
title
“Certification” clearly
states in Parenthesis {Optional
but
Encouraged).
This Plaintiff
has
deliberately chosen not
to complete
the
“Optional”
Certification simply
because it
was presented
as Optional to
do so.
This
1
plaintiff has found no Prompt for
any
date
in completion of
the “Provided
complaint
form”.
Therefore; the Respondent’s attorney is pointing
out a flaw
in
the State
provided
fonn not this plaintiffs
case.
This
Plaintiff
has no problem with the
date of January 14,
2009.
as
acknowledged
in
the Respondents
own motion
to dismiss.
This Plaintiff has
as
well
requested
Mr.
Costa to return the provided
“Respondents Copy” Which he Acknowledges receiving
but
has not
yet
sent
back
as
of February, 1
3
th,
2009
so
this plaintiff can mail it
to the
Respondent.
This Plaintiff
has chosen to send the Respondent
the “original”
Respondents copy. Not “A
copy”.
Therefore, eliminating
any possible future
accusations
of the transposing of documents for
inappropriate purposes.
Some history between this
Plaintiff and the Respondents
attorney
should
be
stated. Note: the February 21, 2008 hearing
transcript
will reflect
that
judge
Mcguire made
a statement to both parties. To
this Plaintiff he stated
“Just
because
you
can should
you?”
Furthemore
this Plaintiff witnessed
judge
Mcguire
ask
the respondent’s attorney “Why
wouldn’t he have
a cause
of
action?”
These questions lead this plaintiff
to believe his filing
was
adequate, specific,
but
perhaps not wise
for
whatever reason?
Judge
Mcguires
questions “after meditation”
caused this
plaintiff
to narrow
the attack with
a
third
filing march 10, 2008
and
subsequent hearing April
22,
2008.
At which time
judge Mcguire again dismissed the filing
without
prejudice and simply
stated he probably
wasn’t
going
to
be the
Judge
for
any
future
hearing in this
matter.
The Board
may as well want to keep in
mind
when
ruling
that
my uncle Billy
{Blue Eyes}
West a
Mining
College
Graduate
had just died on March 3, 2008
Suddenly! This
Eliminated
a
very
credible and
historically informed potential
witness. To
date
2/13/09
no
Autopsy results
have been
provided
to
the
widow or family
even though an
autopsy
was conducted
at
the time
of his death.
The FBI for Christ
sake won’t even return this Plaintiffs
calls and
neither has
Fitzgeralds team. I am
currently living in
a partially completed 14’
by
60’
with my
blameless chronically
IL
wife
and
children
on
$1,200
a month.
This
is quickly turning into
a situation which other
potential witnesses may
be
in danger including
my own family.
Keep in mind affidavit’s
witnessing
sample
collection were made
and
many
independent
observations sought.
Identities of
individuals involved
are at this time protected.
2
Please note
exhibit
C
of the
Respondents
own
motion
to
dismiss
with
specific
attention
to
Evidence
Submission
and
Extended
exhibit list
reflecting
video,
Pictures,
and
samples
easily
supported
by
affidavit.
This
Plaintiff
is
really
praying
that
someone
with authority
to
grant
relief
steps
in
soon.
If
left
void
of
hope and
resources
my only
consolation
shall
be
the
realization
I’m not
alone
in my
despair.
I
tried to
contact
the FBI
regarding
information
I
possess
including
possible
“Perjury”.
Related
to
the
Amount
of
rock
sold
to
the
City
of
Witt,
and
the
removal
of public
record
originals
from
Witt
city
custody.
Discovery
relating
to Nokomis
quarry
companies
Sharing
of scales
and
equipment
needs to
be done,
and the extent
of
the intermingling
of
business
with Hanson
Material
Service and
other
AG issues
relating
to chemical
compounds.
Page
#2,
Line
#18
of
the
Nokomis
quarry
Companies
motion
to dismiss
Clearly
states
the
Quarry
is in
the
business
of
manufacturing
“State
Inspected
Limestone.
Yet
page
#3,
Line#6
states
the product
specifically
Purchased
by
the
City of
Witt
was inspected
by
an independent
Consultant,
NOT
THE
STATE
as
contended
on page
#2.
Answer
to
Motion
to
Dismiss
1.
The Respondent
referrs
to section
31
{d}
{
1
}
of
the Environmental
Protection
act
on
page
#3
beginning
on
line
#16
of
the Motion
to
dismiss.
Yet
page
#120
of
this
Plaintiffs
Copy
of
the
Act has only
section
31
{d}. Subheading
{d}
1 Does
not exist.
The
Attorney
General
is the
entity
which finally
referred
me
to the
control
Board
and
the Montgomery
County states
attorney
does
not
handle
Environmental
situations
such as
present
to
them.
Therefore,
Nokomis
Quarries
Attorney
is
pursuing
an Irrelevant
and none
existant
reference.
2. This
plaintiffs
answer
to Question
#9
of the
State provided
form
Prompted
me
to
describe
the
relief
sought
not
draw
into question
the
Boards Authority.
Next,
there
are many
ways to
state a
cause
of
Action
such
as Exhibit
C
of
the Respondents
own motion
to
dismiss
3
which
“CLEARLY”
reflects
a
“specific”
Cause
of action.
This
is
really
quite simple.
If
this
Plaintiff
went
in his
Nieghbors
Yard
and
started
to choke
ones
neighbor
til he
was
blue
and
unconscious
from
lack of
oxygen would
I and
shouldn’t
I go to
Jail and
be forced
to pay
any damages
my mehbor
incurs.
Such
as
loss of
wages,
healthcare
cost,
Pain and
suffering
etc...
Furthermore
Ii
Adm
Code
202.101
“Definitions”
does
not
appear
to contain
the
definition
for
“cause
of
action”.
At
least
this
Plaintiffs
copy
provided
by
the
Board
shows no
definition
for
cause
of action.
3. Void
of
facts?,
Factually
Deficient?.
Please
refer
again
to
exhibit
C of
Nokomis
quarry
companies
motion
to
dismiss.
Fact
is Lime
appears
and
is
reported
to be
in
part
the
remains of
ancient
shell creatures
Rich
in
calcium Carbonate
which
may
contain
dormant
ancient
bacteria
which should
never
be
left airborne
and
fugitive
for
any
reason.
4.
Have
no doubt
this
case is
the
same
case as
07-L-25
and
Judge
Eders
did
dismiss With
Prejudice
after
judge
Mcguire
Dismissed
3
prior
times
Without
Prejudice.
As well
the Attorney
Generals
office
was
contacted
and
this
Plaintiff
received
a Letter
Dated 2/27/2008
which
stated
in some
instances
AG
staff members
will
attempt
to
mediate
the
dispute.
Subsequently
I received
another
letter
dated
4/9/2008
from
Thomas
Davis,
Chief
of the
Environmental
Bureau
Outlining
the
Pollution
Control
process.
Almost
immediately
I
again
contacted
the
Ag office
and
spoke with
a
Jennifer
Ginter
217-782-9016.
She
advised
this Plaintiff
at this
time the
Attorney
General
can’t
get
involved
in
private
litigation
and
informed
this
Plaintiff
the
case
must
be
dismissed
before
the AG
can
get
involved.
In
the definition
of
duplicative
it
states “before
the
Board
or
another
forum”.
This
again simply
points
out
a
flawed
defmition
based
on
the
broadness
of
the
term
“Another
Forum”.
Based
on the broadness
of
the
term
I
could
have
gone
in
front
of the
Ladies Auxillary
or
The
Montgomery
County
Court
and
if
dismissed
with
Prejudice
I
now
have
no right
to
be
heard
even though
I
was never
allowed
to even
give
a
presentation
before
the
court.
Or
even have
evidence
viewed.
5.
“None is
accurate”,
Same
case
which
was
dismissed
and
refiled
with
an
Educated
Pollution
control
Board
better
suited
to
judge the
facts
of
this
case.
Thus
insuring
the individuals
right to remedy
under
the
Constitution.
4
6.
Please
note I have
not “just talked
about the
situation” I provided
video
and
Picture
evidence
to
the
Respondents
attorney
and
submitted
receipts
provided
by
the City
of
Witt
to
the
Respondent
under oath.
I
will again describe
the relief
I am seeking.
6 Million Dollars
for
Damages incurred
both
Economic
and none economic.
I
was set to
inherit
my fathers Furniture
business
but
declined
do to exhaustive
countermeasures
needed
to maintain
a healthy
working
environment
and
Breathing problems
associated
with
exposure
to what is certainly
Weaponized
Lime
based product produced
without
real containment
pulverized
with
a
Particle
size less
than
10
Micrometers
and Noteable
Government
protection
to
do so.
WHEREFORE,
This Plaintiff
now asks
the Board in
its
educated
wisdom
to
Deny
Nokomis
Quarry
Companies
Motion
to
Dismiss
and Assign
a hearing
officer.
Please
find
attached
an Affidavit {Exhibit
A} Which
reflects
Real
damages,
Sample
collection “witnessed
by
me”,
and the existence
of other
witnesses who’s
identities
are currently
being
protected
by
this Plaintiff
in
light of the
Plaintiffs
uncles
suspicious
death. These
individuals initially
prepared
affidavits
which will
need
to be
updated
if
they
will still
cooperate.
Sincerely
Jerrald
R
West
II
By:%%
Date3
/41
ó9-
5
State
of Illinois
Before
me the undersigned
Notary
esc.
{Name}
On
this
A’
day
of
Jccn
{Month}
cc%
{yr} Personnaly
appeared
Q.
{name of
Affiant}
Known
to me
to
be
a
credible
person
and of lawful
age,
who being
by
me
first
duly sworn,
on
cLr
{His/her}
Oath
Deposes and
says:
AFFIANT
FACT
STATEMENT
fA
T4p-
Prij
2Ebri
r
pC/tI.%c
Fa.o)
D
&y
Ah$
f1oJc7i’1
flf
UV5
A—
“u
.9
c-
‘,f-A
1) A ,
zV
n1
A
kr/ii
6AMg4
/
7
/n
QAb
‘
£-ci-
/y
ik
j
/7jjl
y
Z
A/1&i
i,iI1
/
h”ôW..a.
ij
Z
ffT
70
cZ,iA-s-CT
/ ,vt’/
Oic-
177
kYAj7’
o4
’Y
Signature
of Afflf3y’
Printed
Name
4/A
icT
7
AFFIANT
ADDRESS
75
w4
é÷I
1
77i2
//7/1/
37/10
Subcribed
to and sworn
to
before
me,
this
4th
{Day}
of
jj32
- {Month}
2(9
{YE4R}
{NOTARY
SEAL}
Signature
ofNotaryipC
Printed
Name
Tc
Commission
Expires
!T/2&
69
State
of
Illinois
Pollution
Control Board
James
R
Thompson
Center
100
W
Randolph
st.
Suite
1 150O
AFFIDA
VIT
20
MAR
7
2
2009
‘fO
/,YC6
State of
Illinois
Pollution
Control Board
James
R Thompson
100
W
Randolph
street
Suite 11-500
In
the
Matter of:
}
}
Jerrald R West
II
}
}
Complaintant{s}
-vs-
}
}
PCB 2009-45
Nokomis
Quarry Company
}
P.O.
box#90
}
Nokomis,
IL 62075
}
AKA
P,O,
Box #500244
}
St
Louis, MO.
63150
}
}
Respondent{s}
}
Entry of Appearance
NOW
COMES Jerrald
R West II, Representing
Himself,
and hereby
entering
his appearance
on behalf of Himself
in the
above
entitled
cause
By: Jerrald R
West
II
9
1?
C
8
jrp(’
OFFICE
J
L,.
Certificate of
service
$
Oftjt
ion
E
O
Controj
LUNOIS
Board
The undersigned hereby
certifies
that on the
day
of February, 2009
he
served
a copy of the
foregoing
entry
of appearance
by depositing the same in
the
United states post
office box
enclosed
in an envelope with
postage
fully
prepaid upon the following.
Nokomis Quarry company
P0 Box#90
Nokomis, Ii. 62075
AKA P.O. Box #5 00244
St
Louis,
MO
63150-0244
Pollution
Control Board Attn: Clerk
100
West Randolph
Street
James R
Thompson Center, Suite 11-500
Chicago,
IL 60601-3218
Signed_______________________
Jerrald
R West II
765
Wash Roberts Road
McMinnville,
Tn. 37110
Ph: 931-668-7367
oo
SENDER
COMPLETE
THIS
SECTION
COMPLETE
THIS
SECTION
ON
DELIVERY
I
Complete
items
1,
2,
and
3.
/Jso
complete
item
4
f
Restricted
Delivery
Is
desired.
W
Print
your
name
and
adss
on
the
reverse
so
that
we
can
return
the
card
to
you.
I
Attach
this
card
to
the
back
of
the
mailpiece,
or
on
the
front
if
space
permits.
1.
Artfcle
Addressed
to:
Y(f
fl
iLIv.
1
c*r5b.
/.LOO
Decaur
/b.
2.ArticleNumber
?OD8281DDDD2
263
6214
PS
fm
3811
February
2004
dnestic
Return
Receipt
Type
Certffled
Mail
C
Registered
C
Insured
Mai
4.
Restticted
Delivery?
(Estre
F
o(Y
1
O2595O2-M-1
540
ci
ci
ECtEWD
CLERK’S
OFFICE
12
2009
STATE
OF
LUNOIS
Pollution
Control
Board
m
-n
cc
ru
Postage
Certified
Fee
ru
ci
Return
Receipt
Fee
ci
(Endorsement
Required)
Rslricted
Delivery
Foe
(Endorsement
Required)
cc
Total
FoOtage
&
Fees
ru
/uc
v/
—‘,“
Os
0i
CY
V
,o
-a,
cri
0$
CO
c’
V
si
554
•‘DOQ
bOODD
095
b9
E
5:’EE
5
00b
ho:,
OlflDNID
13
NVO]NJ.S3N
UVDIIN3IflY
VNVd
NW
‘31neqJeJ
310810
808
3.LVOItN3HIflV
0!
(
—
ie.iu
ro
I
‘SW3ISAc1N3,çyd
IW8OA3NOW
tjue
I8
UOR3N
M
LO9OOgL9g
:MQJscl
4flOJq1aqeAe
::4
L.998L
L.999POLL
C
:N0ID)JNIa
SVi1OO
)‘JdG3NONflN3
A
A
INflOMV
SIH.L
A1NO
AVd
A
A
3
i
O
A
3
N
0
W
LO969LCL9
EOOfLO/,o
ES-St
01
c)
GO
9582A33
31-IL
NO
91(3118391083939119973313113539109
331199
nbA
ON
AN
‘N
NOd
OVt1I9
13(1
VWNI4
‘OaYNdWO)
/
IGMVIG
IO4
N]ND
0)
)DV93S
-
.LNV.flIOd)
V
:Jcl
NJO
co
v
V1
V
NVDVd
/:Jo
ao
H.LO.LAVd
J30H0
A3NOk
1VNOiIVNH1Ni
slep.iOAauoW
suosj.iqjy
LNNBV
ONiflSsI
7L300V3LV3IWJJTTJ3j
1000
O0Th3vsviwjeoa
L3O
100153
3191
5/)
9/:Q
b
C
SECURITYlN(ONALBANK
-
-
1
W
BROAD
wAi$b
BOX
427
i
WI7T
ILLINOIS
62094
0427
fz_L
3-’
—
I
ON
THIS
DATE
frHE
ANK
CHARGED
YdUR
ACdOUNTAS
INDICATED
BELOW
‘
—
CHECKS
(
KEY
.
.
‘.1
RAWN
Y2-
-:
-:,
DRAW
ON
-
AMOUNT
RETURNED
UNDS
Lf_
&4___’
t’P
4a_-
—
UNPAID&
‘i3-EN19NGtASDRAWN
.
..é-AM0UNTSDIFFER
.
.
.
.,
.
.
.
.
4
.
.j
—
ENDORSED
.
‘4i-NOT-0NUS
.
.
—bATEDA!-1EA0
.
:1
1&1’tt
/-%1
t-,rs4._—
.
.
)-_.—.
BY
YOU
i
0CHECK
—
.
.
OTHER
f
.
‘
.
.
.
.
.
CHARGES
.,.
.
.
..
.
.
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
DESCRIBED
‘•
.
..
.
/.,.
.-
.
.
..
..
.
.
.
/J_/
•
•.
TOTAL
ADVICE.OF
CHARGE
ACCOUNT
CHARGE
SLIP
-
WHITE
CUSTOMER
NOTICE
-
PINK
PERMANENT
RECORD
-
CANARY
AdCOUNT
—
‘-•-.
.
I
NUMBE395/t
Bankers
Systems
Inc.,
St.
Cloud,
MN
.
.
-
Form
2-1
NCR
0/3/98
.
.
.
00
o
01
0
r
DJz
oC
a.
co
rn
Qosm
‘-1
‘1
ofli