ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April
6,
1989
MINNESOTA MINING AND
)
MANUFACTURING COMPANY,
)
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 88—14
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent.
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by 8.
Forcade):
On March
8,
1989,
~1innesota Mining and Manufacturing Company
(“3M”)
filed
a Motion for Reconsideration
or Clarification in
this matter.
That motion identifies certain potential problems
with
the Board’s February
2,
1989, Opinion and Order.
On March
27,
1989,
the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(“Agency”)
timely responded.
The Board grants reconsideration,
but orders
additional memoranda on the matter.
3M asserts
that language chosen by the Board could create
the impression that
the control program for lines
2H and
3H would
be effective by April
1,
1989, when that would be contrary to the
intentions
of both parties.
The Agency agrees that there
is
an
inconsistency
in the Order
regarding those
lines,
and
that the
Board could address those
lines
in an Order
in this proceeding.
Neither patty has provided specific language
that could be added
to or
deleted
from
the Board’s February
2, Order
to cure
the
perceived inconsistency.
The Board’s February
2, Order was
clearly intended and written to grant
a
requested variance with
agreed conditions imposed verbatim.
See Opinion p.3.
The Board
is having difficulty
in determining
the matters
on
which
the parties agree
and what specific language would satisfy
that agreement.
Therefore,
the Board will
order
the parties
to
file memoranda,
not later
than May
5,
1989, which provides
specific language that would be added to
or deleted
from the
February
2, Order
to implement
the agreement
of the parties.
To
the extent
the parties cannot agree on language, each must file
their specific recommended language changes by May
5,
1989.
IT
IS SO ORDERED
98—27
—2—
I,
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
h~reby certify
t
at
t~,above
Order
was
adopted
on
the
e~
~
day
of
________________________,
1989,
by
a
vote
of
-7-a.
Ill
ution Control Board
98—28