IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
R06-25
PROPOSED NEW 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 225
)
(Rulemaking – Air)
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM
)
LARGE COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY) )
NOTICE
TO:
Dorothy Gunn
Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph St., Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601-3218
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of the
Illinois Pollution Control Board the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLIES TO THE RESPONSES OF DYNEGY
AND MIDWEST GENERATIONS, AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING COMPANY, AND
KINCAID GENERATION LLC TO THE AGENCY'S MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING
PROPOSAL and REPLIES TO THE RESPONSE OF DYNEGY AND MIDWEST
GENERATIONS, AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING COMPANY, AND KINCAID
GENERATION LLC TO THE AGENCY'S MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING
PROPOSAL, a copy of which is herewith served upon you.
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By: ______________________
Gina Roccaforte
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
DATED: June 7, 2006
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P. O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794-9276
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED
217/782-5544
ON RECYCLED PAPER
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JUNE 7, 2006
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
R06-25
PROPOSED NEW 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 225
)
(Rulemaking – Air)
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM
)
LARGE COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY) )
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY TO THE RESPONSE TO IEPA MOTION TO
AMEND PROPOSAL
NOW COMES the Proponent, the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY (Illinois EPA or Agency), by its attorneys, and pursuant to 35
Ill. Adm. Code 101.500(e), hereby requests that the Illinois Pollution Control Board
(Board) grant the Illinois EPA leave to file a Reply to the Response to IEPA Motion to
Amend Proposal (Response) filed by Ameren Energy Generating Company,
AmerenEnergy Resources Generating Company, and Electric Energy, Inc. (Respondents)
on the basis that the Reply should be considered by the Board to prevent a material
prejudice in the consideration of, and ruling upon, the Illinois EPA's Motion to Amend
Rulemaking Proposal (Motion). In support of its Reply, the Illinois EPA states as
follows:
1.
In their Response, the Respondents requested that should the Board allow
the amended proposal, that the Board also extend the date for submitting pre-filed
testimony before the August 12 hearing to no earlier than July 28. This request, if
unresponded to, creates a material prejudice against the Illinois EPA given the November
17, 2006 deadline for submission of a State plan to the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under the Clean Air Mercury Rule.
2
2.
The Illinois EPA notes that Respondents do not object to the Motion, thus
it should be granted. However, Respondents ask for a modification to the Hearing
Officer's schedule for pre-filing testimony, and the Illinois EPA must be allowed an
opportunity to respond to such request.
3.
The Illinois EPA’s Reply, which is filed contemporaneously with this
motion for leave to file, is as short and concise as possible so as to not create any further
burden upon the Board than is necessary.
4.
The Illinois EPA is filing this motion for leave to file and the Reply as
expeditiously as possible. The Illinois EPA received service of the Response on June 6,
2006. This motion and the Reply have been prepared and filed quickly so as not to delay
the Board’s consideration of the pleadings in this case.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the Illinois EPA hereby respectfully
requests that the Board grant the Illinois EPA leave to file a Reply to the Response.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:
__________________
Charles E. Matoesian
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
__________________
Gina Roccaforte
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
DATED: June 7, 2006
3
1021 N. Grand Ave., East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
R06-25
PROPOSED NEW 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 225
)
(Rulemaking – Air)
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM
)
LARGE COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY) )
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S REPLY TO THE
RESPONSE TO IEPA MOTION TO AMEND PROPOSAL
NOW COMES the Proponent, the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY (Illinois EPA or Agency), by its attorneys, and pursuant to 35
Ill. Adm. Code 101.500(e), hereby replies to the Response to IEPA Motion to Amend
Proposal (Response) filed by Ameren Energy Generating Company, AmerenEnergy
Resources Generating Company, and Electric Energy, Inc. (Respondents). In support of
its Reply, the Illinois EPA states as follows:
1.
On May 4, 2006, the Hearing Officer issued an order that set forth prefiled
testimony deadlines and ordered that persons wishing to testify at the second hearing
scheduled for August 12, 2006, prefile their testimony by July 17, 2006.
See
, Hearing
Officer Order, May 4, 2006.
2.
On May 23, 2006, the Illinois EPA filed a Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal (Motion), Motion for Leave to File Instanter Amended Testimony of James E.
Staudt, Ph.D., and Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D.
3.
On May 24, 2006, a pre-hearing phone conference was held to attempt to
identify and limit issues of disagreement among the participants to promote efficient use
of hearing time.
See
, Hearing Officer Order, May 24, 2006. One point of discussion
included the necessity of the Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D., to support
the Illinois EPA's Motion. The Motion is, at the earliest, scheduled for consideration by
the Board at the June 15 Board meeting.
2
4.
The Hearing Officer granted the Illinois EPA's Motion for Leave to File
Instanter Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D., and allowed the filing of the
Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D.
5.
On June 6, 2006, the Respondents filed their Response and did not object
to the Illinois EPA's Motion. Rather, the Respondents requested that should the Board
allow the amended proposal, that the Board also extend the date for submitting pre-filed
testimony before the August 12 hearing to no earlier than July 28.
6.
On June 6, 2006, Dynegy Midwest Generation Inc. and Midwest
Generation, LLC (Dynegy) also filed a Response to the Illinois EPA’s Motion. The relief
sought by Dynegy is similar in nature to that sought by the Respondents.
7.
On June 6, 2006, Kincaid Generation, LLC (Kincaid), also filed a
Response to the Illinois EPA’s Motion. The relief sought by Kincaid is similar in nature
to that sought by the Respondents.
8.
At the time of the May 24 pre-hearing phone conference, the Board and
the Hearing Officer were both aware of the Illinois EPA's Motion, and the Hearing
Officer acknowledged that the earliest that the Board could rule on the motion would be
at the June 15 Board meeting.
9.
The Illinois EPA notes that Respondents do not object to the Motion, thus
it should be granted.
10.
As to the Respondents’ separate request to alter the Hearing Officer's
schedule for pre-filing testimony, the concerns of Respondents can be met by allowing
additional time for submission of pre-filed testimony. Specifically, the Illinois EPA
proposes that the July 17 pre-filing of testimony deadline be moved to July 24, and the
Illinois EPA's pre-filed questions to Respondents remain due on July 31. Allowing
3
Respondents this additional time for the submission of pre-filed testimony allows the
Respondents the same period of time between receipt of pre-filed questions and the
second hearing as provided for in the May 24, 2006 Hearing Officer order. This
additional time also allows the Board to maintain the current hearing schedule as set forth
by the Hearing Officer in her order dated May 4, 2006.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the Illinois EPA hereby respectfully
requests that should the Board grant the Illinois EPA's Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal and extend the date for the submission of pre-filed testimony before the August
12 hearing to no later than July 24, 2006, with no further modification of the Hearing
Officer’s May 24, 2006 order.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:
__________________
Charles E. Matoesian
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
__________________
Gina Roccaforte
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
DATED: June 7, 2006
1021 N. Grand Ave., East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
R06-25
PROPOSED NEW 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 225
)
(Rulemaking – Air)
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM
)
LARGE COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY) )
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY TO THE RESPONSE OF KINCAID GENERATION
LLC TO THE AGENCY'S MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING PROPOSAL
NOW COMES the Proponent, the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY (Illinois EPA or Agency), by its attorneys, and pursuant to 35
Ill. Adm. Code 101.500(e), hereby requests that the Illinois Pollution Control Board
(Board) grant the Illinois EPA leave to file a Reply to the Response of Kincaid
Generation (Kincaid) to the Agency's Motion to Amend Rulemaking Proposal
(Response) on the basis that the Reply should be considered by the Board to prevent a
material prejudice in the consideration of, and ruling upon, the Illinois EPA's Motion to
Amend Rulemaking Proposal. In support of its Reply, the Illinois EPA states as follows:
1.
In its Response, Kincaid requests the Board to direct the Hearing
Officer to ensure that the prefiling date for rebuttal testimony not occur until 30 days or
later after the conclusion of the cross-examination of all proponent’s witnesses, that the
prefiling date for questions related to the rebuttal testimony not occur until 14 days after
the prefiling date for rebuttal testimony, and that the second hearing not begin until 30
days or later after the prefiling date for rebuttal testimony. These requests, if
unresponded to, create a material prejudice against the Illinois EPA given the November
17, 2006 deadline for submission of a State plan to the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under the Clean Air Mercury Rule.
2
2.
The Illinois EPA notes that Kincaid does not object to the Motion to
Amend Rulemaking Proposal, thus it should be granted. However, Kincaid also asks for
a modification to the Hearing Officer's schedule for pre-filing testimony, questions, and
hearings, and the Illinois EPA must be allowed an opportunity to respond to that separate
request.
3.
The Illinois EPA’s Reply, which is filed contemporaneously with this
motion for leave to file, is as short and concise as possible so as to not create any further
burden upon the Board than is necessary.
4.
The Illinois EPA is filing this motion for leave to file and the Reply as
expeditiously as possible. The Illinois EPA received service of the Response on June 6,
2006. This motion and the Reply have been prepared and filed quickly so as not to delay
the Board’s consideration of the pleadings in this case.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the Illinois EPA hereby respectfully
requests that the Board grant the Illinois EPA leave to file a Reply to the Response.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:
__________________
Charles E. Matoesian
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
__________________
Gina Roccaforte
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
3
DATED: June 7, 2006
1021 N. Grand Ave., East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
R06-25
PROPOSED NEW 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 225
)
(Rulemaking – Air)
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM
)
LARGE COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY) )
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S REPLY TO THE
RESPONSE OF KINCAID GENERATION, L.L.C. TO THE AGENCY'S
MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING PROPOSAL
NOW COMES the Proponent, the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY (Illinois EPA or Agency), by its attorneys, and pursuant to 35
Ill. Adm. Code 101.500(e), hereby replies to the Response of Kincaid Generation, L.L.C.
(Kincaid) to the Agency's Motion to Amend Rulemaking Proposal. In support of its
Reply, the Illinois EPA states as follows:
1.
On May 4, 2006, the Hearing Officer issued an order that set forth prefiled
testimony deadlines and ordered that persons wishing to testify at the second hearing
scheduled for August 12, 2006, prefile their testimony by July 17, 2006.
See
, Hearing
Officer Order, May 4, 2006.
2.
On May 23, 2006, the Illinois EPA filed a Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal (Motion), Motion for Leave to File Instanter Amended Testimony of James E.
Staudt, Ph.D., and Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D.
3.
On May 24, 2006, a pre-hearing phone conference was held to attempt to
identify and limit issues of disagreement among the participants to promote efficient use
of hearing time.
See
, Hearing Officer Order, May 24, 2006. One point of discussion
included the necessity of the Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D., to support
the Illinois EPA's Motion. The Motion is, at the earliest, scheduled for consideration by
the Board at the June 15 Board meeting.
2
4.
The Hearing Officer granted the Illinois EPA's Motion for Leave to File
Instanter Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D., and allowed the filing of the
Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D.
5.
On June 6, 2006, Kincaid filed its Response to the Illinois EPA's Motion.
While the Respondents did not object to the Motion, they requested the Board to direct
the Hearing Officer to ensure that the prefiling date for rebuttal testimony not occur until
30 days or later after the conclusion of the cross-examination of all proponent’s
witnesses, that the prefiling date for questions related to the rebuttal testimony not occur
until 14 days after the prefiling date for rebuttal testimony, and that the second hearing
not begin until 30 days or later after the prefiling date for rebuttal testimony.
6.
On June 6, 2006, Ameren Energy Generating Company, AmerenEnergy
Resources Generating Company, and Electric Energy, Inc., (Ameren, collectively) also
filed a Response to IEPA Motion to Amend Proposal. Ameren also did not object to the
Illinois EPA's Motion. Rather, Ameren requested that should the Board allow the
amended proposal, that the Board also extend the date for submitting pre-filed testimony
before the August 12 hearing to no earlier than July 28.
7.
On June 6, 2006, Dynegy and Midwestern Generations also filed a
Response to the Illinois EPA’s Motion. The relief sought in that response is similar in
nature to that sought by Kincaid.
8.
At the time of the May 24 pre-hearing phone conference, the Board and
the Hearing Officer were both aware of the Illinois EPA's Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal, and the Hearing Officer acknowledged that the earliest that the Board could
rule on the motion would be at the June 15 Board meeting.
3
9.
The Illinois EPA notes that Kincaid does not object to the Motion, thus it
should be granted.
10.
As to Kincaid’s separate request to alter the Hearing Officer's schedule for
pre-filing testimony, questions, and hearings, the concerns of Kincaid can be met by
allowing additional time for submission of pre-filed testimony. Specifically, the Illinois
EPA proposes that the July 17 pre-filing of testimony deadline be moved to July 24, and
the Illinois EPA's pre-filed questions to Respondents remain due on July 31. Allowing
Respondents this additional time for the submission of pre-filed testimony allows the
Respondents the same period of time between receipt of pre-filed questions and the
second hearing as provided for in the May 24, 2006 Hearing Officer order. This
additional time also allows the Board to maintain the current hearing schedule as set forth
by the Hearing Officer in her order dated May 4, 2006.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the Illinois EPA hereby respectfully
requests that should the Board grant the Illinois EPA's Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal and extend the date for the submission of pre-filed testimony before the August
12 hearing to no later than July 24, 2006, with no further modification of the Hearing
Officer’s May 24, 2006 order.
4
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:
__________________
Charles E. Matoesian
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
__________________
Gina Roccaforte
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
DATED: June 7, 2006
1021 N. Grand Ave., East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
R06-25
PROPOSED NEW 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 225
)
(Rulemaking – Air)
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM
)
LARGE COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY) )
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY TO THE RESPONSE OF DYNEGY AND MIDWEST
GENERATIONS TO THE AGENCY'S MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING
PROPOSAL
NOW COMES the Proponent, the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY (Illinois EPA or Agency), by its attorneys, and pursuant to 35
Ill. Adm. Code 101.500(e), hereby requests that the Illinois Pollution Control Board
(Board) grant the Illinois EPA leave to file a Reply to the Response of Dynegy and
Midwest Generations (Respondents) to the Agency's Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal (Response) on the basis that the Reply should be considered by the Board to
prevent a material prejudice in the consideration of, and ruling upon, the Illinois EPA's
Motion to Amend Rulemaking Proposal. In support of its Reply, the Illinois EPA states
as follows:
1.
In their Response, the Respondents request the Board to direct the Hearing
Officer to redesignate the August hearing to be for the conclusion of the Proponent's case
and direct the Hearing Officer to set a date at least 30 days after the end of the August
hearing for the opponents to submit their prepared testimony and schedule other hearings
or deadlines as the Hearing Officer determines to be appropriate. These requests, if
unresponded to, create a material prejudice against the Illinois EPA given the November
17, 2006 deadline for submission of a State plan to the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under the Clean Air Mercury Rule.
2
2.
The Illinois EPA notes that Respondents do not object to the Motion to
Amend Rulemaking Proposal, thus it should be granted. However, Respondents also ask
for a modification to the Hearing Officer's schedule for pre-filing testimony, questions,
and hearings, and the Illinois EPA must be allowed an opportunity to respond to that
separate request.
3.
The Illinois EPA’s Reply, which is filed contemporaneously with this
motion for leave to file, is as short and concise as possible so as to not create any further
burden upon the Board than is necessary.
4.
The Illinois EPA is filing this motion for leave to file and the Reply as
expeditiously as possible. The Illinois EPA received service of the Response on June 6,
2006. This motion and the Reply have been prepared and filed quickly so as not to delay
the Board’s consideration of the pleadings in this case.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the Illinois EPA hereby respectfully
requests that the Board grant the Illinois EPA leave to file a Reply to the Response.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:
__________________
Charles E. Matoesian
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
__________________
Gina Roccaforte
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
3
DATED: June 7, 2006
1021 N. Grand Ave., East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
R06-25
PROPOSED NEW 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 225
)
(Rulemaking – Air)
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM
)
LARGE COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY) )
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S REPLY TO THE
RESPONSE OF DYNEGY AND MIDWEST GENERATIONS TO THE
AGENCY'S MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING PROPOSAL
NOW COMES the Proponent, the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY (Illinois EPA or Agency), by its attorneys, and pursuant to 35
Ill. Adm. Code 101.500(e), hereby replies to the Response of Dynegy and Midwest
Generations (Respondents) to the Agency's Motion to Amend Rulemaking Proposal. In
support of its Reply, the Illinois EPA states as follows:
1.
On May 4, 2006, the Hearing Officer issued an order that set forth prefiled
testimony deadlines and ordered that persons wishing to testify at the second hearing
scheduled for August 12, 2006, prefile their testimony by July 17, 2006.
See
, Hearing
Officer Order, May 4, 2006.
2.
On May 23, 2006, the Illinois EPA filed a Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal (Motion), Motion for Leave to File Instanter Amended Testimony of James E.
Staudt, Ph.D., and Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D.
3.
On May 24, 2006, a pre-hearing phone conference was held to attempt to
identify and limit issues of disagreement among the participants to promote efficient use
of hearing time.
See
, Hearing Officer Order, May 24, 2006. One point of discussion
included the necessity of the Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D., to support
the Illinois EPA's Motion. The Motion is, at the earliest, scheduled for consideration by
the Board at the June 15 Board meeting.
2
4.
The Hearing Officer granted the Illinois EPA's Motion for Leave to File
Instanter Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D., and allowed the filing of the
Amended Testimony of James E. Staudt, Ph.D.
5.
On June 6, 2006, Respondents filed their Response to the Illinois EPA's
Motion. While the Respondents did not object to the Motion, they requested the Board to
direct the Hearing Officer to redesignate the August hearing to be for the conclusion of
the Proponent's case and direct the Hearing Officer to set a date at least 30 days after the
end of the August hearing for the opponents to submit their prepared testimony and
schedule other hearings or deadlines as the Hearing Officer determines to be appropriate.
6.
On June 6, 2006, Ameren Energy Generating Company, AmerenEnergy
Resources Generating Company, and Electric Energy, Inc., (Ameren, collectively) also
filed a Response to IEPA Motion to Amend Proposal. Ameren also did not object to the
Illinois EPA's Motion. Rather, Ameren requested that should the Board allow the
amended proposal, that the Board also extend the date for submitting pre-filed testimony
before the August 12 hearing to no earlier than July 28.
7.
On June 6, 2006, Kincaid Generation, LLC (Kincaid), also filed a
Response to the Illinois EPA’s Motion. The relief sought by Kincaid is similar in nature
to that sought by the Respondents.
8.
At the time of the May 24 pre-hearing phone conference, the Board and
the Hearing Officer were both aware of the Illinois EPA's Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal, and the Hearing Officer acknowledged that the earliest that the Board could
rule on the motion would be at the June 15 Board meeting.
9.
The Illinois EPA notes that Respondents do not object to the Motion, thus
it should be granted.
3
10.
As to the Respondents’ separate request to alter the Hearing Officer's
schedule for pre-filing testimony, questions, and hearings, the concerns of Respondents
can be met by allowing additional time for submission of pre-filed testimony.
Specifically, the Illinois EPA proposes that the July 17 pre-filing of testimony deadline
be moved to July 24, and the Illinois EPA's pre-filed questions to Respondents remain
due on July 31. Allowing Respondents this additional time for the submission of pre-
filed testimony allows the Respondents the same period of time between receipt of pre-
filed questions and the second hearing as provided for in the May 24, 2006 Hearing
Officer order. This additional time also allows the Board to maintain the current hearing
schedule as set forth by the Hearing Officer in her order dated May 4, 2006.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the Illinois EPA hereby respectfully
requests that should the Board grant the Illinois EPA's Motion to Amend Rulemaking
Proposal and extend the date for the submission of pre-filed testimony before the August
12 hearing to no later than July 24, 2006, with no further modification of the Hearing
Officer’s May 24, 2006 order.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:
__________________
Charles E. Matoesian
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
__________________
Gina Roccaforte
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
4
DATED: June 7, 2006
1021 N. Grand Ave., East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
SERVICE LIST 06-25
Marie Tipsord
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph St., Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601-3218
James T. Harrington
David L. Rieser
McGuire Woods LLP
77 West Wacker, Suite 4100
Chicago, IL 60601
Bill S. Forcade
Katherine M. Rahill
Jenner & Block LLP
One IBM Plaza
Chicago, IL 60611
William A. Murray
Special Assistant Corporation Counsel
Office of Public Utilities
800 East Monroe
Springfield, IL 62757
S. David Farris
Environmental, Health and Safety
Manager
Office of Public Utilities
City of Springfield
201 East Lake Shore Drive
Springfield, IL 62757
Faith E. Bugel
Howard A. Lerner
Meleah Geertsma
Environmental Law and Policy Center
35 East Wacker Drive
Suite 1300
Chicago, IL 60601
Keith I. Harley
Chicago Legal Clinic
205 West Monroe Street, 4th Floor
Chicago, IL 60606
Christopher W. Newcomb
Karaganis, White & Magel, Ltd.
414 North Orleans Street
Suite 810
Chicago, IL 60610
Katherine D. Hodge
N. LaDonna Driver
Hodge Dwyer Zeman
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, IL 62705-5776
Kathleen C. Bassi
Sheldon A. Zabel
Stephen J. Bonebrake
Joshua R. More
Glenna L. Gilbert
Schiff Hardin LLP
6600 Sears Tower
233 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606
Bruce Nilles
Attorney
Sierra Club
122 W. Washington Ave., Suite 830
Madison, WI 53703
James W. Ingram
Senior Corporate Counsel
Dynegy Midwest Generation, Inc.
1000 Louisiana, Suite 5800
Houston, TX 77002
STATE OF ILLINOIS
)
)
SS
COUNTY OF SANGAMON
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, an attorney, state that I have served electronically the attached
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE REPLIES TO THE RESPONSES OF DYNEGY AND MIDWEST
GENERATIONS, AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING COMPANY, AND KINCAID
GENERATION LLC TO THE AGENCY'S MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING
PROPOSAL and REPLIES TO THE RESPONSE OF DYNEGY AND MIDWEST
GENERATIONS, AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING COMPANY, AND KINCAID
GENERATION LLC TO THE AGENCY'S MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING
PROPOSAL upon the following person:
Dorothy Gunn
Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph St., Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601-3218
and mailing it by first-class mail from Springfield, Illinois, with sufficient postage affixed
to the following persons:
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
__________________________
Gina Roccaforte
Assistant Counsel
Division of Legal Counsel
Dated: June 7, 2006
1021 North Grand Avenue East
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
(217) 782-5544