ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    November
    11, 1971
    ILLINOIS
    POWER CO.
    v.
    )
    PCB 71—193
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    Order on Motion for
    Stay and Petition for Further Proceedings~
    Our order of September
    30,
    1971 approved the company’s
    revised program for. complying
    with the particulate
    emission
    regulations
    on certain conditions.
    The company asks
    that we
    reexamine those parts
    of
    the order pertaining
    to penalty, bond,
    and operating restrictions
    and stay those portions pending
    rehearing and appellate review.
    We
    grant the motion
    in part
    as hereinafter described.
    The decline to reconsider the penalty or bond provisions,
    on
    which
    the factual
    issues were amply explored at the hearing
    and
    th.e legal issues settled
    by
    prior decisions of the Board.
    The company has had its opportunity on those issues.
    Details
    of
    the
    bond
    or
    other
    security
    can
    be
    worked
    out
    with
    the
    Agency.
    As in
    prior
    cases,
    we
    shall
    stay
    the
    penalty
    but
    not
    the
    security
    oending
    appeal.
    See
    Spartan
    Printing
    Co
    v.
    EPA,
    #
    71-19
    (Sept.
    16,
    1971).
    The
    company
    suggests
    that
    the operating restrictions
    imposed
    by
    our
    order
    will
    unreasonably
    hamper
    its
    operations.
    The
    company
    may
    submit
    particulars
    to
    supoort
    this
    claim,
    and
    we
    shall
    consider
    the
    issue
    or.
    its
    mer~tia.
    But since
    the
    conditions
    were
    meunt
    to
    restrict
    use
    of
    the
    units
    in
    cuestion
    only
    when
    other
    sources
    of
    power
    are available, we
    see r~o emergency
    that
    would
    induce
    us
    to
    stay
    these
    important
    provisions
    without
    proof
    of
    how
    they
    are
    said
    to
    interfere.
    The
    stay
    is
    therefore
    denied
    on
    this
    issue.
    On
    November
    9
    we
    received
    a
    recuest
    for relief from
    the
    rc~uiremcnt
    that
    equipment
    for
    Wood
    River
    units
    1—3 be ordered
    by
    January
    1,
    1972.
    We
    recognize
    t.hat
    the
    time
    is short and
    what
    counts
    is
    ultimate
    compliance.
    Given
    these
    facts
    we
    accept
    the
    company~s
    assurance
    of
    compliance
    with
    the
    date
    for beginning construction
    as an adequate interim checkpoint.
    The date
    fcr ordering equipment
    is
    stricken.
    I,
    Christan ~4offett, Acting Clerk of
    the Pollution Control Board,
    certify that the Board adopted the above Order this
    ,.
    day
    of
    .
    ..
    ..
    .
    /
    ,
    1971.
    3
    —
    63

    Back to top