ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    July 11, 1991
    INDIAN REFINING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP)
    and INDIAN REFINING COMPANY,
    )
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 91—84
    )
    (Permit Appeal)
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by N. Nardulli);
    This
    matter
    comes
    before
    the
    Board
    on
    the
    Illinois
    Environmental Agency’s
    (Agency)
    June
    24,
    1991 motion to exclude
    “Exhibit
    F”
    attached
    to
    petitioner
    Indian
    Refining
    Limited
    Partnership and Indian Refining Company’s
    (Indian)
    petition for
    review of permit conditions.
    On July
    1,
    1991,
    Indian filed its
    response.
    Also before the Board
    is the Agency’s motion to file
    record instanter.
    The Agency’s motion to file the record instanter is granted.
    We
    now
    address
    the
    Agency’s
    motion
    to
    exclude
    “Exhibit
    F.”
    “Exhibit
    F”
    is
    a
    letter
    dated
    May
    2,
    1991
    from
    the Agency
    tb
    Indian.
    The letter states that it is a response to Indian’s April
    19,
    1991 letter requesting information documenting the technical
    basis
    for
    the clean-up objectives
    imposed
    as conditions by
    the
    Agency in its April
    15, 1991 RCRA closure permit.
    The Agency moves
    to exclude this letter on the basis that it is beyond the scope of
    review because it is not part of the Agency permit record.
    Initially, the Board notes that although the Agency has moved
    to exclude “Exhibit F” from the redord, Indian has simply attached
    this exhibit to its petition and has not moved to supplement the
    Agency record.
    However,
    Indian’s response to the Agency’s motion
    indicates that
    it does indeed seek to include this letter in the
    Agency record.
    Indian responds that the letter should be included
    in the record because it merely clarifies information existing in
    the record.
    Indian cites Testor Corp. v. IEPA, PCB 88-91 (November
    2,
    1989)
    in support of its position.
    The general rule is that, in reviewing the Agency’s permitting
    decisions,
    the
    Board
    only
    considers
    evidence
    in
    the
    Agency’s
    possession
    at the time
    it rendered
    its
    decision.
    (Village
    of
    Saucret v.
    PCB,
    566 N.E.2d 724,
    729
    (1990); City of East Moline v.
    IEPA,
    PCB
    86-218
    (September
    8,
    1988).)
    The Board
    has granted
    limited exceptions to this rule where,
    for example,
    the evidence
    sought
    to be
    admitted
    is
    merely
    a
    reformulation,
    such
    as the
    graphic admitted in Testor, of evidence already in the record.
    124—73
    2
    We do not believe that an applicant may elicit information
    from the Agency after the permit decision has been rendered and
    then seek to include the Agency’s response in the Agency record on
    appeal.
    The Board’s ruling does not preclude other proper uses of
    the
    letter
    at
    hearing
    as
    allowed
    by
    the
    hearing
    officer.
    Therefore, because “Exhibit F” is outside of the Agency record, the
    Agency’s motion to exclude
    “Exhibit
    F”
    from being considered as
    part of the Agency record in this proceeding is hereby granted.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    3. Anderson concurs.
    I,
    Dorothy N. Gunn,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board
    hereby cez~t-i~fythat the above Order was adopted on the
    _____
    day of
    J~J~—-~
    ,
    1991, by a vote of
    7c
    Illinois
    :ion
    Control
    Board
    124—74

    Back to top