ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December 20, 1973

IN THE MATTER OF:

)

PEABODY COAL COMPANY

)

 R 72-20

PROPOSAL TO AMEND RULES AND

REGULATIONS, CHAPTER

4,

SECTION 201

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

 (by Mr. Henss)

Peabody Coal Company, on October

25,

 1972, submitted a

Proposal to Amend Rule 201 of Chapter

 4, Mine Related Pollution.

Peabody’s Proposal was not supported by signatures of 200 persons

and was of questionable merit.

 Therefore, under Section

 28 of

the Environmental Protection Act and Procedural Rule 204, the

scheduling of hearings on the Proposal was discretionary with

the Board.

 On December 5,

 1972 the Board directed the Environ-

mental Protection Agency to submit its analysis and comments

respecting the Proposed Amendment.

 Pending receipt of the

Agency comment, we withheld decision on whether to order hearing.

As of the date of this Order the Agency has not filed anything

in this matter whatsoever.

The Peabody Amendment would have changed Rule 201 .to read

as follows:

“It shall be unlawful for an operator, unless he

holds

 a permit therefore from the Agency,

 to open,

reopen or abandon any mine or refuse area,

or,

nine months after the effective date of these

Regulations,

 to conduct any mining operation or

 to dispose of any mine refuse.

 Applications for

permits under existing mines must be filed at

least

 90 days prior to that time.

 Application

for subsequent permits and permits on new mines

must be filed at least 90 days prior to first

operations

.“

This Amendment would have given mine operators an additional

three months to obtain operating permits after the May 25, 1972

adoption of the Chapter

 4 Regulations.

 Rule 201 granted mine

operators a six month period after the effective date of the

Regulations in which to obtain permits to conduct their mining

10—483

—2—

operations.

 Peabody alleges that the Agency did not provide

permit application forms until September 17,

 1972.

 This delay

in furnishing the application forms, according to Peabody,

made it impossible

 to “meet the requirement for Agency action

within 90 days.. .before November 25, 1972.”

Section 39 of the Act provides that the Agency must adopt

procedures

 to carry out its obligation

 to issue permits.

It

is further provided that the Agency shall have 90 days to act

on permit applications.

 However, Peabody acknowledged that the

Agency had verbally and informally agreed to act on permit appli-

cations within 30 days if such application was made by October 25,

1972.

 This was an Agency procedure which gave mine operators the

opportunity to use Agency application forms and still meet the

November 25, 1972 deadline for obtaining permits.

Further, we note that a mine operator who wished to file

at an early date could have done so by furnishing the information

required by Rule 204.

 There is no need to use an Agency appli-

cation form until the Agency actually prepares the form.

 Early

applications .may be in such form as is sufficient to give the

required information.

A third procedure would have been to request temporary

variance from any Rule which

 could not be met due to Agency

inaction.

Peabody’s contention that it was impossible to meet the

requirements of Rule 201 is simply without foundation.

 The mine

operators did not need an additional three months in which to

secure operating permits.

 This fact was clear enough when the

proposal was filed and it is even more clear at this time.

Neither party has filed anything relative to this issue

for

over one year.

 The problem which had been anticipated by Peabody

apparently did not develop.

 The Peabody proposal is without

merit and we choose not to schedule hearings on it.

ORDER

The Proposed Amendment to Rule 201 of Chapter

 4, Mine Related

Pollution is hereby dismissed.

I, Christan L. Moffett,

 Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certi y the above Opinion and Order was adopted

 this ~

 day of.

 1973 by

 a vote of ____to

/12

—

484