1
1 BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
2 MINNESOTA MINING and )
MANUFACTURING COMPANY, )
3 (Bedford Park Plant), )
)
4 Petitioner, )
)
5 vs. ) PCB 1999-114
)
6 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL )
PROTECTION AGENCY, )
7 )
Respondent. )
8
9
10
11 REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS before JOHN C.
12 KNITTLE, Hearing Officer for the Illinois Pollution
13 Control Board, James R. Thompson Center, 100 West
14 Randolph Street, 11th Floor, Chicago, Illinois,
15 commencing at 1:15 p.m. on the 20th day of August
16 A.D., 1999.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
2
1 APPEARANCES:
2 SONNENSCHEIN, NATH, & ROSENTHAL
BY: MR. JEFFREY C. FORT and
3 MS. CYNTHIA A. FAUR
8000 Sears Tower
4 Chicago, Illinois 60606
(312) 876-2380
5
Appeared on behalf of the Petitioner.
6
7 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
BY: MS. LAUREL L. KROACK
8 2200 Churchill Road
P.O. Box 19276
9 Springfield, Illinois 62794
(217) 524-3333
10
Appeared on behalf of the Respondent.
11
12 ALSO PRESENT:
13 Mr. Kris C. Grover, P.E.
Mr. Paul F. Narog
14 Mr. Christopher Romaine
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
3
1 I N D E X
2 OPENING COMMENTS BY HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE. . 4
OPENING STATEMENTS BY MR. FORT . . . . . . . . 6
3 OPENING STATEMENTS BY MS. KROACK . . . . . . . 8
4
5 WITNESSES:
6 PAUL F. NAROG
7 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. FORT . . . . . . . . 10
8
9 CLOSING COMMENTS BY HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE. . 24
10
11
12
13
14 EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE PAGE
15 3M Exhibit No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3M Exhibit No. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
16 3M Exhibit No. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3M Exhibit No. 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
17 3M Exhibit No. 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3M Exhibit No. 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
18 3M Exhibit No. 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Respondent's Exhibit No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . 20
19
20
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
4
1 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Let's go on the
2 record.
3 Hello. My name is John Knittle. I'm the
4 hearing officer with the Illinois Pollution Control
5 Board. I'm also the assigned hearing officer to
6 this case which is PCB 1999-114, Minnesota Mining
7 and Manufacturing Company, Bedford Park Plant vs.
8 the Illinois Environment Protection Agency.
9 Today's date is August 20th, 1999. It's
10 approximately 1:15 p m. I notice there are no
11 members of the public currently here.
12 Just for the record, I'm sure everybody
13 here knows this, but I do not make the ultimate
14 decision in this case. The ultimate decision is
15 made by the Illinois Pollution Control Board which
16 is comprised of seven members situated throughout
17 the state of Illinois. My job is to ensure an
18 orderly transcript and to rule on any evidentiary
19 issues that come up.
20 This hearing will be conducted pursuant to
21 sections 103.202 and 103.203. That's the
22 enforcement regulation, but the appropriate variance
23 regulation tells us to look to those for guidance.
24 As you know, the burden of proof lies with the
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
5
1 Petitioner in this matter who must prove each fact
2 alleged in the petition.
3 I don't think there are any preliminary
4 motions, are there?
5 MR. FORT: No, sir.
6 MS. FAUR: No.
7 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. At this point,
8 could we have the parties introduce themselves with
9 the Petitioner going first?
10 MR. FORT: Sure. I'm Jeff Fort, Sonnenschein,
11 Nath, & Rosenthal, representing the Petitioner 3M.
12 With me is my colleague Cindy Faur from
13 Sonnenschein. Also here on behalf of 3M is Paul
14 Narog who is an environmental engineer with 3M and
15 Chris Grover who is with the 3M Bedford Park plant
16 as an environmental coordinator for 3M. Please
17 don't accept those designations as their official
18 titles, but that is essentially their functional
19 duties.
20 MS. KROACK: I'm Laurel Kroack with the
21 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. I'm here
22 on behalf of the agency.
23 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: And I take it as of
24 now, you are alone, Ms. Kroack.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
6
1 MS. KROACK: I am. Chris Romaine, our
2 engineer, was supposed to be with us today to answer
3 any technical questions, but we're assuming he was
4 held up in traffic on the drive here.
5 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Well, since
6 there are no preliminary motions, let's start with
7 opening statements, if you have them. If not, we
8 can skip right to the case-in-chief.
9 MR. FORT: I just want to make a very brief
10 statement, if I may.
11 We're here today because of the need to
12 extend the prior variance for the 3M Bedford Park
13 plant. That relates to an extension of the
14 compliance plan which for the plant involves
15 obtaining an environmental management system
16 agreement under the applicable provisions of the
17 Environmental Protection Act.
18 The VOM issues -- emissions at issue here
19 relate to the compounding areas at the plant which
20 are a very small fraction of the plant-wide
21 emissions. The environmental effect of this
22 variance is positive because the overall emissions
23 from the facility are substantially less than what
24 would otherwise be allowed under the applicable
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
7
1 regulations.
2 Our evidence today really is to update the
3 board on the status of our efforts to obtain an
4 environmental management system agreement. We're
5 almost there. The draft EMSA document has been
6 formally submitted to Illinois EPA. We formed a
7 stakeholders group. We have submitted an executive
8 summary of the EMSA to appropriate elected officials
9 and other individuals as designated by the
10 applicable rules, and we're looking forward to
11 finalizing that agreement in the very near future
12 following input from USEPA and stakeholders and
13 members of the public.
14 The compliance plan here and the EMSA,
15 E-M-S-A, provide benefits both to the company and to
16 the people of the state of Illinois. It provides
17 reduced VOM emissions through the cap on VOM
18 emissions that the plant is accepting. It follows
19 the prior donations of environmental -- of remission
20 reduction credits made by the 3M Bedford Park plant,
21 and it also provides an incentive for the plant to
22 achieve more emission reductions.
23 The benefits to 3M relate to permitting
24 flexibility and reduced paperwork so that the plant
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
8
1 is in a better position to respond to market forces
2 and to compete in the marketplace.
3 The emission cap that we project to result
4 from the EMSA agreement we see as being part of the
5 title 5 permit for the plant, and it will provide
6 benefits to the company in a simplified permit.
7 For the public, we think that the aspects
8 of the EMSA in terms of the reporting, increased
9 transparency in the process, as well as providing an
10 avenue for input from the local citizens near the
11 plant, and an understandable environmental reporting
12 document are substantial benefits to the public as
13 well so that this extension meets all of the
14 criteria for extension of the variance because the
15 benefits to the public are substantial. And, in
16 fact, everything here we see as a win-win situation
17 for the public, as well as for 3M.
18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Anything from the
19 IEPA?
20 MS. KROACK: Other than we support the granting
21 of this variance for the reasons Mr. Fort just
22 stated, and we hope to finalize the EMSA shortly.
23 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Thank you.
24 Let's start up then with the
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
9
1 case-in-chief.
2 MR. FORT: Ms. Faur, will you call our
3 witness?
4 MS. FAUR: We have one witness today, Paul
5 Narog, who's a senior environmental engineer with
6 3M. Yesterday, we prefiled testimony for
7 Mr. Narog. It was dated August 20th, however,
8 because it missed the filing deadline. And at this
9 time, I guess we could swear the witness.
10 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Can we swear him in?
11 (The witness was duly sworn.)
12 MS. FAUR: As I said, we had prefiled testimony
13 yesterday, and at this time, we'd like to submit
14 that testimony as read.
15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Is there any
16 objection?
17 MS. KROACK: None.
18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Do I have
19 that? I'm sorry. I thought they were left up
20 here.
21 MR. FORT: Do you want the stapled one?
22 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We have a marked
23 one.
24 MS. FAUR: No. Remember, we decided not to
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
10
1 mark that.
2 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That's right. I
3 understand now.
4 MS. FAUR: We're actually going to enter them
5 as separate exhibits.
6 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: As well?
7 MS. FAUR: Yes. The prefiled testimony
8 contains the testimony of Mr. Narog, as well as
9 exhibits to his testimony.
10 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. We'll accept
11 this and enter it as if it has been read.
12 MS. FAUR: Any questions? Any additional
13 questions for Paul?
14 PAUL F. NAROG,
15 called as a witness herein, having been first duly
16 sworn, was examined upon oral interrogatories, and
17 testified as follows:
18 DIRECT EXAMINATION
19 BY MR. FORT:
20 Q Mr. Narog, in the body of your testimony,
21 there is a reference to 3M's efforts to -- instead
22 of putting money into add-on control equipment with
23 respect to the compounding area that it was going to
24 invest those funds in other activities that would
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
11
1 have an environmentally beneficial purpose.
2 Do you recall that testimony?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Can you explain a little bit, give the
5 board a couple of examples of what 3M has been doing
6 over the last few years in that regard?
7 A Yes. There are four specific projects
8 that come to mind in regard to this issue.
9 The first is the over-control of emissions
10 from 6G through the installation of permanent total
11 enclosure in which emissions are reduced greater
12 than required by environmental regulation.
13 The second project is the funding of
14 research to develop a water-based masking tape
15 product which would reduce emissions compared to
16 what the emissions are from the solvent-based
17 product.
18 The third issue is increases in
19 productivity at the plant that have been realized
20 over the last few years. Through the increases in
21 productivity, we are able to have a greater amount
22 of saleable product from the same amount of
23 production such that for the same amount of
24 emissions, we have more saleable product right now,
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
12
1 so we're not having to increase emissions just to
2 increase saleable product, but we're able to keep
3 emissions at a more standard rate.
4 And then finally, the fourth project is
5 the development of secondary markets for second
6 quality tape or by-product. Material that used to
7 be disposed of, scrapped out is now instead sold as
8 a by-product for future use. So we're trying to
9 find kind of a pollution prevention alternative to
10 move up the pollution prevention hierarchy.
11 So those are the four projects.
12 MR. FORT: Thank you.
13 Do we have the exhibits?
14 MS. FAUR: Yes. At this time, we'd like to
15 enter the various exhibits attached to Mr.'s Narog
16 testimony. At the outset, I'd like to request on
17 behalf of 3M that the -- this is a petition for an
18 extension of variance, and we would like to request
19 that the prior variance record which is 95-90 be
20 incorporated, the opinion and order in the record as
21 well.
22 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Ms. Kroack?
23 MS. KROACK: No objection.
24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. That's
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
13
1 granted.
2 MS. FAUR: The first two exhibits to Mr. Narog's
3 testimony are a part of that record, and we are
4 incorporating them now here and having them as
5 exhibits here for the ease of the board.
6 The first exhibit, do you recognize what
7 this is?
8 MR. NAROG: Yes.
9 MS. FAUR: What is this?
10 MR. NAROG: This is the -- it's the petition
11 for declaration of compliance, and the date on this
12 is March 1995.
13 MS. FAUR: This is the original petition that
14 was filed in 95-90, and we'd request that that be
15 admitted as Petitioner's Exhibit 1.
16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Ms. Kroack?
17 MS. KROACK: No objection.
18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That will be
19 admitted.
20 (3M Exhibit No. 1 admitted into
21 evidence.)
22 MS. FAUR: This is the second document which we
23 will request to be marked as Petitioner's Exhibit
24 Number 2.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
14
1 Mr. Narog, what is this?
2 MR. NAROG: This is the testimony of Thomas
3 Zosel from a previous hearing.
4 MS. FAUR: This was Tom Zosel's testimony from
5 the December 7th, 1997, hearing in PCB 95-90, and we
6 would request that this be admitted at Petitioner's
7 Exhibit Number 2.
8 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Ms. Kroack, any
9 objection?
10 MS. KROACK: No objection.
11 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: This is admitted as
12 Exhibit Number 2.
13 (3M Exhibit No. 2 admitted into
14 evidence.)
15 MS. FAUR: This is the third exhibit.
16 Mr. Narog, can you identify this?
17 THE WITNESS: This is a December 21st, 1998,
18 letter from 3M to the Illinois Environmental
19 Protection Agency. It's the letter of intent to
20 participate in the environmental management systems
21 pilot project.
22 MS. FAUR: We would request that this be
23 admitted as Petitioner's Exhibit Number 3.
24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Any objection?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
15
1 MS. KROACK: None.
2 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: This will be
3 admitted.
4 (3M Exhibit No. 3 admitted into
5 evidence.)
6 MS. FAUR: This is going to be the fourth
7 exhibit.
8 Mr. Narog, can you identify what this is?
9 MR. NAROG: Yes. This is a letter dated
10 August 19th, 1999, from 3M to the Illinois
11 Environmental Protection Agency. It's the submittal
12 of the draft environmental management system
13 agreement for the 3M Bedford Park facility.
14 MS. FAUR: Is there anything attached to that
15 letter?
16 MR. NAROG: The attachment is the preliminary --
17 the draft of the environmental management system
18 agreement along with appendix A.
19 MS. FAUR: And are there other attachments?
20 MR. NAROG: Yes, there are.
21 MS. FAUR: We would request that this be
22 admitted as Petitioner's Exhibit Number 4. This is
23 the draft EMSA that has been submitted to the agency
24 in accordance with the agency's procedural rules.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
16
1 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Any objection,
2 Ms. Kroack?
3 MS. KROACK: None.
4 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Just for the record,
5 you're referring to these as Petitioner's 4, and
6 this is a strictly a recordkeeping thing, but she's
7 already marked them as 3M 4. So in my hearing
8 officer order -- you can refer to them either way,
9 but in the hearing officer order, I'm going to refer
10 to them as 3M 4, 3M 3, 3M 2.
11 MS. FAUR: That's fine.
12 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Petitioner's Number 4
13 or 3M Number 4, either one, is both admitted.
14 (3M Exhibit No. 4 admitted into
15 evidence.)
16 MS. FAUR: We're on to 3M Exhibit Number 5.
17 Mr. Narog, can you tell us what this is?
18 MR. NAROG: This is the executive summary of
19 the environmental management system agreement for 3M
20 Bedford Park.
21 MS. FAUR: Okay. We would request that this be
22 admitted as 3M's Exhibit Number 5. This is a
23 summary of the -- of 3M's Exhibit Number 4.
24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Ms. Kroack?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
17
1 MS. KROACK: No objection.
2 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: 3M Number 5 is
3 admitted.
4 (3M Exhibit No. 5 admitted into
5 evidence.)
6 MS. FAUR: This is going to be 3M Number 6.
7 Mr. Narog, can you identify this?
8 MR. NAROG: Yes. This is the public notice of
9 the draft of our management system agreement.
10 MS. FAUR: This is going to be a public notice
11 that will be filed in the Daily Southtown and the
12 Life Newspapers, I believe, citing that they have
13 submitted a draft EMSA to the agency.
14 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Do you move this,
15 Ms. Faur?
16 MS. FAUR: Pardon me?
17 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Do you move for the
18 admittance of that?
19 MS. FAUR: I move for the admittance of that as
20 3M Number 6.
21 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Any objection,
22 Ms. Kroack?
23 MS. KROACK: None.
24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: This is admitted.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
18
1 (3M Exhibit No. 6 admitted into
2 evidence.)
3 MS. FAUR: And finally, for the ease of the
4 board, I have one final exhibit.
5 Mr. Narog, can you identify what this is?
6 MR. NAROG: Yes. This is the testimony of
7 Paul F. Narog for today's hearing.
8 MS. FAUR: Is this your testimony?
9 MR. NAROG: Yes, this is.
10 MS. FAUR: We would request that this be
11 admitted as 3M's Exhibit Number 7.
12 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Ms. Kroack, is there
13 any objection to this exhibit?
14 MS. KROACK: No.
15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: This is admitted as
16 3M Number 7.
17 (3M Exhibit No. 7 admitted into
18 evidence.)
19 MS. FAUR: We have no further exhibits.
20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Any further questions
21 for this witness from the Petitioners?
22 MR. FORT: No.
23 MS. FAUR: No.
24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Ms. Kroack, do
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
19
1 you have any cross-examination for this witness?
2 MS. KROACK: I do not.
3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Thank you,
4 sir. You can step down but, of course, remain
5 seated.
6 Are you finished with your case-in-chief?
7 MR. FORT: Yes.
8 MS. FAUR: Yes, we are.
9 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Ms. Kroack, do you
10 have any case that you wish to present at this point
11 in time?
12 MS. KROACK: Well, we were hoping that
13 Mr. Romaine, our technical person from the agency,
14 would make it to give some testimony on behalf of
15 the agency.
16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: I have a suggestion
17 about that, if you would like. Can we go off the
18 record?
19 (Whereupon, a discussion was
20 held off the record.)
21 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We are back on the
22 record.
23 Pursuant to an off-the-record discussion.
24 Ms. Kroack, your witness is not yet here?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
20
1 MS. KROACK: I would like to submit as an
2 exhibit on behalf of the agency the testimony of
3 Christopher Romaine in the prior variance. It was
4 Pollution Control Board matter 95-90, variance for
5 3M. We held a hearing on December 5th, 1997.
6 My understanding is Mr. Romaine was going
7 to rely upon this and update it for the board mostly
8 with respect to where we were at in the
9 environmental management systems agreement process.
10 I'm going to submit that as an exhibit, although
11 it's already contained in the record below.
12 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Is there any
13 objection to Respondent's Exhibit Number 1 which is
14 the testimony of Christopher Romaine?
15 MR. FORT: No objection.
16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: This will be
17 admitted.
18 (Respondent's Exhibit No. 1
19 admitted into evidence.)
20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We talked about this
21 off the record, Ms. Kroack, and what I want to do is
22 leave your case-in-chief open for 30 minutes in an
23 attempt to get Mr. Romaine here to testify. I would
24 be doing this anyway because there are no members of
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
21
1 the public here yet. Members of the public are,
2 under the board's regulations, permitted to give
3 public comment on these variance proceedings, and I
4 want to allow that opportunity for them to come in
5 and give a public comment, so I would keep it open
6 until 2:00 o'clock anyway. Let's just keep it open
7 here, though.
8 Is there any objection to that course of
9 action from the Petitioners?
10 MR. FORT: That's fine.
11 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Then I will
12 admit Respondent's Exhibit Number 1. We'll go off
13 the record for 30 minutes, unless we have
14 something.
15 MR. FORT: Do you have another copy of it,
16 Laurel?
17 MS. KROACK: I don't. I'm flipping through
18 here. I didn't intend to submit it. I just brought
19 it.
20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: I will make copies
21 for you guys.
22 All right. Let's take a 30-minute
23 recess.
24 (Whereupon, a recess was taken.)
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
22
1 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We're back on the
2 record.
3 It is still the Respondent's case, and as
4 luck would have it, Mr. Romaine has been able to get
5 to the hearing, so, Ms. Kroack, do you want to call
6 him as a witness?
7 MS. KROACK: Just a moment.
8 (Brief pause.)
9 MS. KROACK: Mr. Romaine and I will be happy to
10 rely on what the Petitioners put into the record and
11 what we've added as his testimony as our efforts
12 today.
13 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Thank you very
14 much.
15 Anything else from the Respondent?
16 MS. KROACK: No.
17 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Do you guys have any
18 rebuttal case to that?
19 MR. FORT: No, not to that.
20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. That leads us
21 to the statements from the public. I see no members
22 of the public here to issue statements or to provide
23 comments, so we'll move past that as well and hit
24 closing arguments, if you want them.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
23
1 MR. FORT: Mr. Hearing Officer, we don't see
2 the need for closing arguments. We think that the
3 record here is clear and straightforward. We're
4 relying upon our petitions and the exhibits in
5 evidence that we've presented today, as well, as
6 Ms. Faur pointed out, incorporating by reference the
7 prior variance hearing and evidence in that matter.
8 We are optimistic about proceeding and
9 achieving an environmental management system
10 agreement with the agency and think that is a great
11 pilot experiment authorized by the general
12 assembly. We're looking forward to that, and we
13 appreciate the board's extension of the existing
14 variance so that we can complete that process.
15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Thank you, Mr. Fort.
16 Ms. Kroack, do you have anything?
17 MS. KROACK: No.
18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Let's go off
19 the record again.
20 (Whereupon, a discussion was
21 held off the record.)
22 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Let's go back on the
23 record.
24 We're back on the record. Pursuant to an
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
24
1 off-the-record discussion, we do not intend to file
2 briefs in this case. Is that correct?
3 MR. FORT: Yes.
4 MS. KROACK: Yes.
5 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Both parties
6 acknowledge that is correct.
7 We are going to set a public comment
8 period of 14 days after the receipt of the
9 transcript in the board's office. If, in fact,
10 there are any public comments, the parties will have
11 the opportunity to address that. After that period
12 runs, that being 14 days after the receipt of the
13 transcript, the Petitioner will have 14 days to file
14 any public comment followed by a 14-day period from
15 the Respondent and then followed by a seven-day
16 period from the Petitioner to reply to any responses
17 that the Respondent chooses to issue or make.
18 However, that will be contingent upon the filing of
19 a public comment and won't be necessary unless any
20 public comments are filed.
21 If, in fact, there are no public comments
22 filed, the record will close at the end of the
23 14-day period after the receipt of the transcript.
24 None of that is exceptionally clear. However, I
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
25
1 will make it more clear in the hearing report that
2 will describe it. Hopefully I'll make it more
3 clear.
4 That's all I have. I'm required to make a
5 credibility statement. Sir, I found you to be
6 exceptionally credible as our only witness, so I see
7 no credibility issues here today.
8 That's all I have. Thank you very much.
9 MR. FORT: Thank you.
10 MS. KROACK: Thank you.
11 MS. FAUR: Thank you.
12 (Which were all the proceedings had
13 at the hearing of the above-entitled
14 cause on August 20, 1999.)
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
26
1 STATE OF ILLINOIS )
) SS.
2 COUNTY OF COOK )
3
4 I, CARYL L. HARDY, a Certified Shorthand
5 Reporter doing business in the County of Cook and
6 State of Illinois, do hereby certify that I reported
7 in machine shorthand the proceedings at the hearing
8 of the above-entitled cause.
9 I further certify that the foregoing is a
10 true and correct transcript of said proceedings as
11 appears from the stenographic notes so taken and
12 transcribed by me.
13
14
15
16
17 CSR No. 084-003896
18
19 Subscribed to and sworn to
before me this _____ day
20 of ________________, 1999.
21 ___________________________
Notary Public
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292