ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

April 27, 1989

INDIAN REFINING COMPANY AND

OPA REFINING AND MARKETING, INC.,

(FORMERLY TEXACO REFINING AND

MARKETING, INC.),

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 88—178

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

ORDER OF THE BOARD (by J. Anderson):

On January 19, 1989, the Board issued an Order in this

proceeding in which the parties were directed to advise it by

January 30, 1989, of the status of one of several volumes of the

Agency record in this permit denial appeal, entitled “Exhibit 3:

Confidential Documents”. Specifically, the Board noted its

inability to determine whether this volume contains documents

which were either claimed to be trade secrets pursuant to 35 Iii.

Adm. Code Part 120, or claimed to be “confidential” on some other

basis. The ~½gency’s responsive statement was filed on February

3, 1989. The Agency does not request that Exhibit 3 be excluded

from the Board’s public inspection files.

Noting that the Petitioner had not filed a responsive

statement, the Board on February 23, 1989, issued a second Order,

requiring Petitioner to respond within 10 days (March 6, 1989).

On March 6, 1989, the firm of Feldman and Wasser filed its

Entry of Appearance in this proceeding together with a Motion to

Substitute Parties based upon, which motion was granted by the

Board on March 9, 1989. No mention was made by OPA or by Feldman

and Wasser of the Board’s information request in this matter.

However, in consideration of the substitution of parties and

counsel, and in view of Petitioners’ waiver of decision date to

December 1, 1989, the Board again extended the time for the

Petitioners to provide the Board the requested information, to

March 20, 1989.

In spite of the foregoing repeated requests from this Board,

and despite having been twice contacted personally by a Board

assistant on this matter, there again was no formal response from

98—257

---

—2—

OPA’s legal counsel on this issue. Therefore, on April 6, 1989,

the Board entered an Order to the effect that, unless a formal

response were received from CPA by Monday, April 17, 1989, this

docket would be dismissed, and the Clerk would be directed to

make appropriate arrangements for returning Exhibit

3

materials

to Petitioner.

No formal or other response was received by the Board from

OPA by the close of business on April 17. On April 19, 1989, the

Board received from OPA’s legal counsel a “Response Regarding

Record”, which document was, according to the Certificate of

Service, mailed to the Board on April 18, 1989, one day following

the most recent of the four deadlines set by the Board for

response on this matter.

This Board has previously held that a pattern of disregard

of Board Orders may result in the imposition of the extreme

sanction of dismissal (Modine Manufacturing Corporation v.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, PCB 87—124, November

17, 1988, Motion to Reconsider denied, March 9, 1989). Such a

pattern is evident in this case. The Board and its staff have

extended every opportunity to Petitioner to respond to its

Orders. The Petitioner’s response, when finally received, was

tardy and will not be accepted. At some point, the Board must

draw the line if it is to enjoy any credibility and assert any

meaningful control over the conduct of matters before it.

Therefore, the Board will, consistent with its Order of April 6,

1989, dismiss this docket. The clerk is directed to make

appropriate arrangements for returning Bxhibit J materials to

Petitioner.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3. Dumelle dissented.

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certif that~.the above Order was adopted on

the ~‘7?~Tday of

______________,

1989, by a vote of ~

/~—J

Dorothy M.,4Tunn, Clerk

Illinois P’d’llution Control Board

98—258