ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
May 5,
1994
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS
TO
)
R92-8
35 ILL.
AD?.!.
CODE SUBTITLE C
)
(Rulemaking)
(WATER TOXICS
AND
BIOACCUNULATION)
)
ORDER OF THE
BOARD
(by R.
C.
Fiemal):
On April
4,
1994, the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency
(Agency)
filed a motion for clarification of the record
with regard to the March 15,
1994 status report and incorporated
documents filed by the joint proponents
--
Illinois Chapter of
the Sierra Club, Citizens for
a Better Environment, Lake Michigan
Federation and McHenry County Defenders.
On April 22,
1994,
the
joint proponents filed a response accompanied by a motion for
leave to file instanter.
The motion for leave which cites mail
delays in receipt of the motion and delays in responding due to
personal illness,
is hereby granted.
This docket was open in
July,
1992 upon receipt of the joint proponents’ regulatory
proposal, and five merit hearings have been held.
The last
hearing were held in this matter on April 14-15,
1993,
and an
amended proposal was filed
in late June,
1993.
Beginning in
August, 1993,
the proponents have filed a series of requests for
continuance of the hearing schedule, to allow the joint
proponents, the Agency, and various participants to meet to
“negotiate differences among the participants”.
The requested
stays have been granted by Hearing Officer order
(see orders of
December 10,
1993, and February 25,
1993.)
On March 15,
1994,
the joint proponents filed a motion to
resume hearings, on the grounds that there did not appear to be
“complete agreement on any one of the issues under discussion”.
This motion was accompanied by a status report, to which the
joint proponents appended Agency position papers which were
distributed at the informal meetings held during the hiatus in
hearings.
Having received no response from the Agency or any
other person, the hearing officer granted the motion by order of
March 25,
1994.
The hearing officer order stated in part:
In the interests of facilitating orderly resumption of
these proceedings,
I am enclosing with this order
copies of the status report and Agency position papers
which accompanied the March 15,
1994 motion.
I am
doing so in an attempt to give all persons who were not
participants at the Agency—organized meetings some idea
of what has informally occurred during the last several
months.
This may give you all a better idea as to what
level of participation you may wish to have in future
hearings.
2
In its April
4,
1994 motion for clarification, the Agency
states that:
The Agency’s position papers were intended solely to
facilitate discussion within the work group so that a
consensus on revisions to the regulatory proposal could
be pursued.
The Agency did not give permission for the
position papers to be filed in this proceeding and is
concerned that those papers, along with the joint
proponents’ representations in the status report, will
be misconstrued as setting forth the Agency’s official
stance on the issues addressed.
(Accordingly,
the Agency moves that the Board clarify
that said status report and Agency position papers are
for the limited purpose of advising the Board on the
resumption of hearings in this matter and do not
constitute part of the formal hearing record, exhibits
or testimony.
In their April 22 response, the joint proponents reiterated
their appreciation of the Agency’s efforts to organize the
informal meetings and to facilitate them by preparation of Agency
position papers concerning the various topics contained in the
proposal.
The joint proponents state that they placed these
papers in the record for the benefit of interested persons who
did not participate in the work group meetings.
The response
goes on to state that:
The joint proponents do not presume that the status
report, or any of the attachments, filed to comply with
the Hearing Officer order, would be additional
testimony or exhibits for the formal hearing record.
The joint proponents were not aware that the Agency had
further qualifications to its carefully prepared
positions on the key components of the Water Toxics
Rule Proposal.
The Agency’s motion to clarify is granted.
The status report
and position papers remain a part of the record for the sole
purpose of advising the Board that the participants have in fact
been meeting during the hiatus in hearing, and that the joint
proponents have been diligent in pursuing progress concerning
their proposal on an informal basis,
justifying resumption of
hearings.
Finally, the Board observes that the timing of the
scheduling of additional hearings in this proceeding
is
contingent on the demands placed on the Board’s rulemaking
resources generally.
The Board anticipates receipt from the
Agency of
a number of Clean Air Act ruleniakings pursuant to
3
Section 28.5 of the Act which must be completed before the end of
the calendar year.
The Board currently has other rulemakings
pending which also have completion deadlines.
1
While the Board
will make every effort to accomodate the joint proponents’
desire
to have this proceeding advance expeditiously, this rulemaking
may be deferred if necessary to allow timely completion of
deadline—driven proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Dorothy N.
Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
B~rd,hereby c rtify that the above order was adopted on the
~
day of
____________,
1994, by a vote of
________
~.
Dorothy M.,~unn,Clerk
Illinois ~llution
Control Board
I
~
R93-29, Regulation of Landscape Waste ComDost
Facilities,
35 Ill.
Adni.
Code 830—832, due to be completed on or
before December 1,
1994 pursuant to Section 22.33 of the Act,
R94—l, Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.202.
302.208.
302.212.
302.23.3.
302.407. 304.122 and 304.301
(Ammonia Nitrogen. Lead and
Mercury), due to be completed on or before December 5,
1994
pursuant to Section 28.2 of the Act (see order of May 5,
1994),
and R94-2. Regulation of Petroleum Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks.
35 Ill.
Adni.
Code 732. due to be completed on or before
December 15,
1994 pursuant to Section 57.14 of the Act.