ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March 7,
    1996
    COAL CITY CITGO,
    )
    )
    Petitioner,
    )
    )
    PCB96-173
    v.
    )
    (UST Fund
    -
    90-Day Extension)
    )
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
    )
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    )
    Respondent.
    )
    ORDER OF
    THE BOARD (by M. McFawn):
    On January 31,
    1996,
    petitioner Coal City Citgo filed a notice of extension ofthe 35-day
    appeal period pursuant to
    Section 40 of the Act, relating to an October
    25,
    1995 Illinois
    Environmental Protection Agency
    (Agency) UST determination.
    On February 23,
    1996 the
    Agency filed a motion to dismiss,
    seeking to dismiss petitioner’s request for an extension due to
    lack ofjurisdiction.
    Coal City Citgo filed a response to the motion to dismiss on February 28,
    1996.
    In its January
    31,
    1996 notice ofextension, Coal City Citgo states that it mailed its
    request for extension to the Agency, but that its letter was lost either in the mail or at the Agency.
    Coal City Citgo has attached to
    its notice ofextension a copy ofa letterto the Agency, dated
    November
    15,
    1995,
    which asks the Agency to request a 90-day extension from the Board.
    In
    its motion to
    dismiss, the Agency states that a search of its records indicates it did not
    receive petitioner’s request.
    The Agency further states that petitioner did not contactthe Agency
    until
    January 22,
    1996.
    The Agency asserts that petitioner did not appeal the Agency’s decision
    within the 35
    day time limit,
    and that no
    request for extension to file the appeal was filed with the
    Board.
    The Agency therefore
    requests that the Board dismiss this matter for lack ofjurisdiction.
    In its response to the motion to dismiss, Coal City Citgo states that the Agency did not
    prove that it did not receive the request. Coal City Citgo also disputes the assertion that it did not
    contact the Agency until January 22,
    1996, and states that it made earlier attempts to contact the
    Agency.
    It asserts that it previously attempted to contact the Agency by phone beginning the last
    week in December, but was unsuccessful in reaching the correct persons. Coal City Citgo asserts
    that basing the motion to
    dismiss on its reaction time to the Agency’s non-response is not
    appropriate, especially since there is no guideline as to how quickly the Agency will respond to a
    written request.
    2
    P.A. 88-690 (SB1724) effective January 24,
    1995, amends Section 40(c) ofthe
    Environmental Protection Act,
    which governs the appeal process, to provide:
    the 35-day period for petitioning for a hearing may be extended for a period oftime not to
    exceed 90 days by
    written notice provided to the Board from the applicant and the
    Agency within the initial appeal period.
    Accordingly, since the parties agree the Agency
    issued its final determination letter on
    October
    25,
    1995,
    any complete notice was due to be filed or postmarked no later than November
    29,
    1995. (See 35 Adm. Code
    101.102(d) and 101.109.) Coal City Citgo’s notice was not
    received by the Board until January 31,
    1996,
    and the Agency has never filed an agreement to
    the requested extension.
    Coal City Citgo ‘s assertions concerning the Agency’s receipt and loss
    ofits letter notwithstanding, neither party filed an extension request “within the initial appeal
    period” as required pursuant to amended Section 40(c). Because the statutory conditions for the
    extension have not been met, the Board cannot grant a 90-day extension ofthe time in which to
    file an appeal pursuant to Section 40(c).
    The Agency’s motion to dismiss
    is hereby granted, and petitioner’s request for a 90-day
    extension is denied.
    This matter is dismissed and the docket is closed.
    IT IS
    SO ORDERED.
    Section
    41 ofthe Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS
    5/41
    (1994)) provides for the
    appeal of final Board orders within 35
    days ofthe date ofservice ofthis order.
    The Rules ofthe
    Supreme Court ofIllinois establish filing requirements. (See also 35
    Ill.Adm.Code
    101.246
    “Motions for reconsideration”.)
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk ofthe Illinois Pollution Control Board, hereby certify that the
    above order was adopted on the
    7
    ~
    day of
    2t
    t&~JY,
    1996, by a vote of
    Clerk
    Control Board
    Illinois

    Back to top