ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

November 5, 2009

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

Complainant,

v.

COMMUNITY LANDFILL COMPANY,

INC,

Respondent.

______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

PCB 97-193

(Enforcement - Land)

(consolidated)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

Complainant,

v.

EDWARD PRUIM and ROBERT PRUIM,

Respondents.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

PCB 04-207

(Enforcement – Land)

ORDER OF THE BOARD (by G.T. Girard):

On September 28, 2009, Community Landfill Company, Inc. and Edward Pruim and

Robert Pruim (collectively respondents) filed a motion asking the Board to reconsider the August

20, 2009 opinion and order. The Board’s August 20, 2009 opinion and order found that

respondents had violated several sections of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/1

et.

seq.

(2008)) as well as the Board’s landfill regulations and permit conditions. On October 13,

2009, the People of the State of Illinois (complainant) filed a response opposing the motion to

reconsider.

In ruling on a motion for reconsideration, the Board will consider factors including new

evidence or a change in the law, to conclude that the Board’s decision was in error. 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 101.902. In Citizens Against Regional Landfill v. County Board of Whiteside, PCB 93-

156 (Mar. 11, 1993), we observed that “the intended purpose of a motion for reconsideration is

to bring to the court’s attention newly discovered evidence which was not available at the time of

hearing, changes in the law or errors in the court’s previous application of the existing law.”

Korogluyan v. Chicago Title & Trust Co., 213 Ill. App. 3d 622, 627, 572 N.E.2d 1154, 1158 (1st

Dist. 1992). The Board finds that the motion to reconsider merely reargues the positions put

forth by respondents in the substantial record considered by the Board in making the decision

---

2

that respondents had violated the Act, Board regulations and permit conditions. Thus, the

respondents have not pointed to newly discovered evidence, changes in the law, or errors in the

application of the existing law. Therefore, the motion to reconsider is denied.

On September 17, 2009, the Board granted a request to modify the Board’s August 20,

2009 opinion and order by extending the deadline by which the civil penalties assessed were to

be paid. The Board extended the deadline until “October 1, 2009 or until such date set by the

Board when considering any motion to reconsider that may be filed.” The Board directs the

parties to pay all civil penalties within 30 days of the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Section 41(a) of the Environmental Protection Act provides that final Board orders may

be appealed directly to the Illinois Appellate Court within 35 days after the Board serves the

order. 415 ILCS 5/41(a) (2008);

see also

35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.300(d)(2), 101.906, 102.706.

Illinois Supreme Court Rule 335 establishes filing requirements that apply when the Illinois

Appellate Court, by statute, directly reviews administrative orders. 172 Ill. 2d R. 335. The

Board's procedural rules provide that motions for the Board to reconsider or modify its final

orders may be filed with the Board within 35 days after the order is received. 35 Ill. Adm. Code

101.520;

see also

35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.902, 102.700, 102.702.

I, John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that

the Board adopted the above opinion and order on August 20, 2009, by a vote of 5-0.

___________________________________

John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board