ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

March 25, 1976

APECO CORPORATION,

Petitioner,

)

v.

)

PCB 75—329

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Zeitlin):

On March 8, 1976 the Environmental Protection Agency (Agency)

filed a Motion to Reconsider the Board’s final Opinion and Order

in this matter which was entered on February 26, 1976. Apeco

responded to the Agency’s Motion on March 18, 1976.

The Agency’s Motion asks that we reverse our finding with

regard to the application of the hydrocarbon limitations of Rule

205(f) of Chapter 2: Air Pollution. The essence of our finding

there was that the exemption of Rule 205(f) (2) (D) applied, in the

absence of an odor problem, to a reduction of “photochemically

reactive” hydrocarbons, rather than to “total hydrocarbons.” We

decline to reverse that finding.

The Agency’s Motion contains no information that was not

considered in the principal Opinion and Order of February 26, 1976.

The Agency’s Motion misconstrues our findings as an “amendment” of

Rule 205(f); those findings were in fact an interpretation of the

existing Rule, well within our authority under the Act.

While we sympathize with the Agency’s concern with the result

of this interpretation of Rule

205(f),

we find that we must stand

by what we determine to be the plain meaning of that Rule. The

Agency’s Motion is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Contro1~oard, hereby ce tify the above Order was adopted on

the ~

~ day of

___________,

1976, by a vote of

.~‘. o

Christan L. Moffe ~c1er

Illinois Pollution Control Board