ILCS » Chapter 430 · Act 15

430 ILCS 15/6.1

Financial responsibility

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(430 ILCS 15/6.1) (from Ch. 127 1/2, par. 158.1)
    Sec. 6.1. Financial responsibility.
    (a) Each owner or operator shall establish and maintain evidence of financial responsibility, as provided in this Section, for taking corrective action and compensating third parties for bodily injury and property damage.
    (b) Each owner or operator shall maintain financial responsibility at the following minimum amounts:
        (1) $10,000 per occurrence for corrective action;
        (2) $10,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and
    
property damage to third parties.
    (c) Each owner or operator shall establish and maintain evidence of financial responsibility by any combination of the following:
        (1) commercial or private insurance, including risk
    
retention groups;
        (2) qualification as a self insurer; or
        (3) guarantee, surety bond, letter of credit,
    
certificate of deposit, or designated savings account.
    To qualify as a self insurer under this Section, the owner or operator must demonstrate net worth equal to or in excess of 10 times the amount specified in subsection (b) of this Section.
    (d) The establishment and enforcement of standards for the financial responsibility of the owners and operators of underground storage tanks and associated piping are exclusive powers and functions of the State. A home rule unit may not regulate or establish standards for the financial responsibility of the owners and operators of underground storage tanks. This Section is a denial and limitation of home rule powers and functions under subsection (h) of Section 6 of Article VII of the Illinois Constitution.
(Source: P.A. 87-323.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2024–2024 · leading case: Rice v. Marathon Petroleum Corp.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rice v. Marathon Petroleum Corp. (2024) ill “” 430 ILCS 15/6.1(a) (West 2018). ¶ 21 Plaintiff argues that RCRA, the LUST Program of the Act, and the Gasoline Storage Act, combined with the regulations promulgated under each, form an interconnected regulatory scheme to govern underground storage tanks in Illinois.”
Rice v. Marathon Petroleum Corp. (2024) ill “” 430 ILCS 15/6.1(a) (West 2018). ¶ 21 Plaintiff argues that RCRA, the LUST Program of the Act, and the Gasoline Storage Act, combined with the regulations promulgated under each, form an interconnected regulatory scheme to govern underground storage tanks in Illinois.”
— 430 ILCS 15/6.1(a) — 2 cases
Rice v. Marathon Petroleum Corp. (2024) ill “” 430 ILCS 15/6.1(a) (West 2018). ¶ 21 Plaintiff argues that RCRA, the LUST Program of the Act, and the Gasoline Storage Act, combined with the regulations promulgated under each, form an interconnected regulatory scheme to govern underground storage tanks in Illinois.”
Rice v. Marathon Petroleum Corp. (2024) ill “” 430 ILCS 15/6.1(a) (West 2018). ¶ 21 Plaintiff argues that RCRA, the LUST Program of the Act, and the Gasoline Storage Act, combined with the regulations promulgated under each, form an interconnected regulatory scheme to govern underground storage tanks in Illinois.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.