ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    November 20, 2008
    KIBLER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    and MARION RIDGE LANDFILL, INC.,
    Petitioners,
    v.
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    PCB 07-43
    (Permit Appeal - Land)
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by N.J. Melas):
    By order of August 7, 2008, the Board granted the petitioners’ motion for voluntary
    dismissal of this action, dismissed the appeal, and closed the docket. The Board denied as moot
    the motion to intervene filed by the State’s Attorney of Williamson County, Charles Garnati, in
    his official capacity, on behalf of the People of Williamson County. Among other things, the
    order stated that:
    Considering the circumstances of this case, at this time there is no existing case or
    controversy between the original parties in which to allow the movant to
    intervene. Kibler Development Corporation and Marion Ridge Landfill, Inc. v.
    IEPA, PCB 05-35, slip op. at 3 (Aug. 7, 2008).
    On September 11, 2008, the State’s Attorney filed a motion for reconsideration of the
    August 7, 2008 order, accompanied by a brief in support of the motion. Petitioner filed a
    response in opposition on September 25, 2008. The respondent filed a response in opposition on
    September 30, 2008. The latter response was accompanied by a motion for leave to file, to
    which no response has been filed. The motion for leave to file is granted.
    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).
    After review of the filings, the Board finds that the State’s Attorney has failed to point
    out any newly-discovered evidence, citation to change in law, or error in the Board’s previous
    2
    application of existing law that would lead the Board to conclude that the August 7, 2008
    decision was in error. The Board accordingly denies the motion for reconsideration.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that
    the Board adopted the above order on November 20, 2008, by a vote of 5-0.
    ___________________________________
    John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board

    Back to top