ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March 11,
    1993
    IN THE MATTER OF:
    )
    )
    JOINT PETITION OF
    )
    AS 92-12
    CUNMINS
    ENGINE
    COMPANY
    )
    (Adjusted
    Standard)
    AND
    THE
    ENGINE
    MANUFACTURERS
    )
    ASSOCIATION
    FOR
    ADJUSTED
    )
    STANDARDS FROM 35
    ILL.
    ADMIN.
    )
    CODE 240.141
    )
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by
    3.
    Anderson):
    On February 16,
    1993,
    joint petitioners Cuinmins Engine
    Company and the Engine Manufacturers Association
    (petitioners)
    filed a motion to stay the proceedings in this matter until
    January 29,
    1994.
    Petitioners seek to await a decision of the
    California Air Resources Board
    (CARB),
    where petitioners are
    apparently seeking relief in California similar to that being
    sought before this Board.
    Before the end of the stay,
    petitioners propose to provide the Board and the Agency with
    either
    a) information related to CARB’s decision or
    b)
    a status
    report on the California petition.
    Petitioners request that no
    hearing be scheduled by the Board until that time.
    The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    (Agency)
    agrees, stating that it recommends that “the Board delay making a
    decision until
    CARB
    completes its research and makes a final
    determination”.
    The Agency then states that it will reconsider
    the petitioners’ petition after Navistar either demonstrates that
    CARB
    has made a final decision or provides a detailed status
    report.
    (Agency amended response and recommendation at
    3,
    February 16,
    1993).
    The motion is denied.
    While the Board recognizes that the record supporting its
    regulation of general applicability reflects the California
    experience in certain respects, an adjusted standard decision by
    this Board will not flow from a decision made by CARB.
    The
    Board’s decision will be made in light of the Board’s general
    diesel exhaust opacity regulation as well as Illinois’ statutes
    and administrative law regarding adjusted standards.
    Also,
    while
    any
    CARB
    “research” data relevant to an adjusted standard
    petition is of course acceptable, we remind the petitioners that
    they cannot justify their adjusted standard by challenging the
    validity of the Board’s regulation of general applicability.
    We finally remind the petitioners that this petition was
    filed amost one year ago
    (at that time jointly with AS 92-4 and
    92-11), and served to stay the operation of the regulation of
    general applicability.
    See Section 28.1(e)
    of the Environmental
    UI
    1~Q-Ø
    125
    2
    Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/28.1(e)).1
    We suggest that the
    petitioners have been given a more than sufficient amount of time
    to perfect their justification.
    The hearing officer is instructed to schedule a hearing in
    this matter.2
    The petitioners are reminded of the issues and
    questions contained in the Board’s May 21,
    1992 order and the
    Agency’s request for information on page 3 of its February
    1,
    1993 amended response and recommendation.
    IT
    IS
    SO
    ORDERED.
    I, Dorothy H. Gunn,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, hereby cer
    fy that the above order was adopted on
    the
    //~1~
    day of
    i2A-c_I--’,
    1993, by a vote of
    ~7—~::)
    /~/
    ~
    /7L.
    Dorothy M.
    Gu9r17 Clerk
    Illinois
    Pollu
    ion Control Board
    Formerly Ill.RevStat. Ch.111 1/2,
    1028.1(e).
    2
    We note that on this day the Board adopted in AS 92-11
    an order identical to this one in all substantive respects.
    We
    also note that no hearing is being scheduled in AS 92-4
    OIL~O-ü126

    Back to top