ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December 7,
    1995
    SIERRA
    CLUB, MADISON COUNTY
    )
    CONSERVATION ALLIANCE, and
    )
    JIM BENSMAN,
    )
    Petitioners,
    v.
    )
    PCB 95—174
    (Pollution Control Facility
    CITY OF WOOD RIVER,
    )
    Siting Appeal)
    WOOD RIVER PARTNERS,
    L. L.C.,
    )
    Respondents.
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (R.C.
    Flemal):
    On November
    14,
    1995 the Sierra Club, Madison County
    Conservation Alliance, and Jim Bensman
    (petitioners)
    filed a
    motion to reconsider the Board’s October
    5,
    1995 opinion and
    order in this matter.
    On November 27,
    1995 and November 28,
    1995, the Board received responses from Wood River Partners,
    L.L.C.
    (Wood River Partners) and the City of Wood River
    (City)
    respectively.
    Petitioners filed a reply to respondents’ response
    to petitioners’ motion to reconsider on December
    1,
    1995.
    Initially the Board must rule on petitioners’ motion for
    leave to file a reply.
    Petitioners do not have the right to
    reply,
    except as permitted by the Board or hearing officer to
    prevent material prejudice.
    (35 Iii. Adm. Code 101.241(c).)
    To
    prevent material prejudice the Board hereby grants petitioners’
    motion for leave to file a reply.
    Next the Board must determine whether Wood River Partners’
    response which exceeds the 15 page limit will be accepted by the
    Board.
    Pursuant to the Board’s procedural rules,
    “(n)o brief
    in
    support of or in opposition to any motion shall exceed
    15 pages
    without prior approval of the Board or hearing officer”.
    (35
    Ill.
    Adm. Code 101.104(a).)
    In the interests of
    a complete and
    thorough decision, the Board will accept Wood River Partners’
    response.
    In ruling upon a motion for reconsideration the Board is to
    consider, but is not limited to, error in the previous decision
    and facts
    in the record which may have been overlooked.
    (35 Ill.
    Adiu.
    Code 101.246(d).)
    In Citizens Against Regional Landfill v.
    The County Board of Whiteside County
    (March 11,
    1993), PCB
    93—156, we stated that “(t)he 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 the
    hearing,
    changes in the law,
    or errors in the court’s previous
    application of the existing law”.
    (Korociluyan v. Chicago Title
    &
    2
    Trust Co.
    (1st Dist.
    1992),
    213 Ill. App.3d 622,
    572 N.E.2d
    1154.)
    The Board finds that the motion for reconsideration does
    not present the Board with new evidence,
    a change in the law, or
    any other reason to conclude that the Board’s October
    5,
    1995
    decision was in error.
    The information which petitioners now
    submit in its motion to reconsider was “available” at the time of
    the hearing upon request.
    Nothing in the motion to reconsider
    convinces the Board that an “error in the decision” was made.
    Further, the Board finds that the motion to reconsider does not
    point to any “facts in the record which are overlooked”,
    or any
    other reason to conclude that the Board’s decision was in error.
    Therefore,
    the motion to reconsider is denied.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    Section 41 of the Environmental Protection Act
    (415
    ILCS
    5/41
    (1994)) provides for the appeal of final Board orders within
    35 days of the date of service of this order.
    The Rule of the
    Supreme Court of Illinois establish filing requirements.
    (See
    also
    35
    Ill. Adm. Code 101.246, Motions for Reconsideration.)
    I, Dorothy M.
    Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, do hereby certify that the above order was adopted ~onthe
    7~Z
    day of
    ~
    ,
    1995,
    by a vote of
    ~‘
    Dorothy ~7Gunn,
    Clerk
    Illinois(’ollution Control Board

    Back to top