Op11

OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

°~½~11on

o,~~-fiPvyis

h’j/

j:

STATE OF ILUNOIS

Lisa Madigan

ATTORNEY GENERAL

June

4,

2003

Via

Federal Express

Mail

The Honorable Dorothy

Gunn

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board

State of Illinois Center

100 West Randolph

Chicago,

Illinois 60601

Re:

People

v.

Peabody Coal Company

PCB No. 99-1 34

Dear

Clerk Gur’rn:

Enclosed for

filing please

find

the original and

five copies of a

NOTICE

OF

FILING

and

COMPLAINANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER in regard to the above-captioned matter.

Please file the original and return a file-stamped copy of the document to our office in the enclosed,

self-addressed,

stamped

envelope.

Thank you for your cooperation and

consideration.

Very truly yours,

C2~

‘ine

E.

McBride

Environmental

Bureau

500

South

Second Street

Springfield,

Illinois 62706

(217) 782-9031

JEM/pp

Enclosures

300 Sooth

Second Street,

Springfield, Illinois

62706

•

(217) 782-1090

•

rn:

(217)

785-2771

•

Fax:

(217)

782-7046

101) West

Randolph Street,

Chicago,

Illinois

6060)

•

1312) 814-3000

•

Ti’\’:

(312) 8)4-3374

•

Fax:

(3)2) 814-3806

loll)

East Main, Carbondale,

Illinois

1,291))

•

(1,18) 529-641)0

•

‘IFV

(6)8)

329—6403

•

Fax:

(618) 529—6416

-e

---

BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL BOARD

PEABODY

COAL COMPANY,

a Delaware corporation,

Respondent.

PCB NO. 99-1 34

(Enforcement)

)

)

S’IAIE of:

JtJi1q()~~

Po//u

tioyj

CO1-1 trol Boa

p4

NOTICE OF FILING

To:

David

R. Joest

Peabody

Coal Company

1951

Barrett Court

P.O.

Box 1990

Henderson,

KY 42420-1990

W.

C.

Blanton

Blackwell

Sanders Peper

Martin

LLP

2300

Main

Street,

Suite

1000

Kansas

City,

MO

64108

Stephen

F. Hedinger

Attorney at Law

2601 South

Fifth

Street

Springfield,

IL 62703

PLEASE

TAKE

NOTICE

that on this date

I

mailed for filing with

the Clerk of the

Pollution

Control

Board of the State of Illinois, COMPLAINANT’S MOTION

FOR PROTECTIVE

ORDER.

Respectfully

submitted,

PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS

LISA

MADIGAN

Attorney General of the

State of Illinois

500 South

Second Street

Springfield,

Illinois 62706

217/782-9031

Dated:

June 4,

2003

MATTHEW

.J. DUNN, Chief

Environmental

Enforcement/Asbestos

Litigation

Division

BY:

~

~

VJANE

E.

McBRIDE

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

Complainant,

V.

CLEflFc

C3FRCE

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that

I did

on June 4, 2003,

send by First Class Mail, with postage thereon fully

prepaid, by depositing

in a

United

States Post

Office

Box a true

and correct copy of the following

instruments entitled

COMPLAINANT’S MOTION

FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

To:

David

R.

Joest

Stephen

F. Hedinger

Peabody

Coal Company

Hedinger Law

Office

1951

Barrett Court

2601

South

Fifth

Street

P.O.

Box

1990

Springfield,

IL

62703

Henderson,

KY 42420-1990

(Also

via facsimile

No. 523-4366

without Exhibits)

W.

C.

Blanton

Blackwell

Sanders Peper

Martin

LLP

2300

Main Street,

Suite

1000

Kansas

City,

MO

64108

(Also via facsimile

No.

(816)

983-9151 without Exhibits)

and

the original

and five copies by

Federal Express

Mail of the same foregoing

instrument(s):

To:

Dorothy Gunn, Clerk

Illinois

Pollution

Control Board

State

of

Illinois

Center

Suite

1 1-500

100 West

Randolph

Chicago,

Illinois 60601

(Also via

facsimile

No.

(312)

814-3669 without Exhibits)

A copy was

also

sent by Federal Express

Mail

To:

Brad

Halloran

Hearing

Officer

Pollution

Control

Board

James R. Thompson Center,

Ste.

11-500

100

West Randolph

-

Chicago,

IL 60601

(Also via

facsimile

No.

(312) 814-3669 without

Exhibits)

‘~

7.____

~t

?~‘

Jane E~,.M~rIde

Assisfant Attorney General

This filing is

submitted

on

recycled

paper.

---

k!~~K~c

BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

-Jiii~

PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

)

p0/’~t/~

(F

iLL1;w~

)

1

Control Bo~

rot

Complainant,

)

v.

)

PCB NO.

99-1 34

(Enforcement)

)

PEABODY COAL COMPANY, a Delaware

corporation,

Respondent.

COMPLAINANT’S MOTION

FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

Complainant, PEOPLE

OF THE STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

by LISA

MADIGAN,

Attorney

General of the

State of

Illinois,

hereby respectfully moves the Hearing Officer for the issuance

of a Protective

Order regarding the additional written

discovery requests propounded by

the

Respondent,

and

states as

follows:

1.

Section

101.616

of the

Board’s Procedural

Rules,

35111.

Adm.

Code

101.616,

provides generally that

all

discovery disputes will be handled

by the assigned

hearing

officer.

In

particular,

Section

101.616(b)

provides that,

if the parties cannot agree on the scope

of

discovery,

the hearing

officer has the authority

to deny requests

for discovery.

Section

101.616(d) provides that the ‘hearing officer may,

on

his or her own

motion

or on the motion

of

any

party or witness,

issue

protective

orders that deny,

limit,

condition or regulate discovery to

prevent

unreasonable

expense, or harassment,

to expedite

resolution of the proceeding

This is the

relief sought

by the Complainant.

2.

As

background,

Peabody propounded

its First

Request for Production

of

Documents

to

the Complainant on July 28,

1999.

This was a very broad request for documents

from

the files of the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection Agency,

the

Illinois

Department of Natural

Resources, and

the Illinois Department

of Public

Health.

Respondent’s

First Set of

1

---

Interrogatories was propounded

upon the Complainant on

November 4,

1999,

and

included 45

separate interrogatories.

Respondent’s Second Request for Production of Documents was

propounded

upon

Complainant on

November

5,

1999,

and included

additional broad requests

for documents from the

Illinois

EPA and the

Illinois

DNR as well

as

the files of the

Illinois

State

Geological

Survey and

the

Illinois

State Water Survey.

Respondent propounded its

Second Set

of

Interrogatories and

Third

Request for Production

of Documents on

March

15,

2000.

The

additional

interrogatories requested

disclosure of opinion and fact witnesses.

Said disclosure

was

completed

by Complainant on

May 23,

2003,

pursuant to the discovery schedule

that has

been established

by the

Hearing

Officer in this

matter.

3.

On May

27, 2003, the Complainant was served with

additional written discovery

requests, identified

as

Peabody’s

Third

Set of Interrogatories through Seventh

Request for

Production of Documents;

these

requests are

attached

hereto as

Exhibit A.

The Respondent

had

already propounded

47 interrogatories.

The recently received

sets

of interrogatories

consist of a third

set

of 12 interrogatories, a fourth set of 30 interrogatories,

a fifth

set of

17

interrogatories,

and

a

sixth set of

15 interrogatories.

Further,

also as stated above,

the

requests

to

produce propounded

prior to the

most recent requests

were very broad requests

concerning the files of five

State agencies.

The most recently

received

requests

number as

follows: a fourth set of

21

individual

requests for

production,

a fifth

set of

57

individual requests

for production,

a sixth set of

26 individual

requests,

and

a

seventh set of 24 individual

requests.

Many

of the requests and

interrogatories contained

within the third through seventh

requests

recently propounded

are

duplicative

of prior requests.

The recent disclosure

by the

Complainant concerning witnesses and

the opinions and

conclusions of controlled experts are

responsive to

all

the formerly outstanding requests

and many

of the

some

of the recently

propounded

requests.

2

---

4.

The Board’s Procedural Rules govern the conduct of discovery.

Moreover,

Section

101.100(b) indicates that “the Board

may look

to the Code of Civil

Procedure and

the

Supreme Court Rules for guidance where the Board’s procedural rules

are silent.”

In pertinent

part,

Section

101.614

provides that the “hearing officer will deny,

limit or condition the

production

of information

when necessary to

prevent undue

delay, undue

expense, or

harassment.

.

,

.“

Section

101.620(a) explicitly limits the number of interrogatories:

“Unless

ordered otherwise

by

the hearing

officer,

a party may serve a maximum of 30 written

interrogatories,

including subparts,

on

any other party

5.

The Complainant objects

on several grounds.

First,

the Respondent never

sought leave from the Hearing

Officer to propound the additional

interrogatories, which vastly

exceed the

limit

of 30.

It was

incumbent upon the Respondent to justify these additional

interrogatories.

Peabody’s failure

to do so

does

not shift the burden

to the

People

to object to

each

interrogatory as

would otherwise

be generally required by

Section

101.620(b) and

(c).

The Respondent also failed

to comply with

Illinois Supreme

Court Rule 201(k)

prior to serving

these additional written

discovery requests; this would

have been necessary where the

Respondent may have

believed that the Complainant’s

previous responses were somehow

inadequate.

Secondly,

the Complainant reasonably believes

that any effort to address

these

additional

interrogatories with

responses and objections would

result in

undue delay,

undue

expense, or harassment.

Lastly,

as clearly allowed

by Section

101.616(d),

the

People seek a

protective order

to “deny,

limit, condition or regulate discovery to prevent

unreasonable

expense,

or harassment,

to

expedite resolution

of the proceeding

3

---

WHEREFORE,

Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

ILLINOIS,

by

LISA

MADIGAN,

Attorney General of the State of Illinois,

hereby respectfully requests

that the

Hearing

Officer issue

a

Protective

Order to

deny or strike the additional written

discovery

requests

propounded by the Respondent.

Respectfully submitted,

PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

LISA MADIGAN

Attorney General

State of Illinois

MATTHEW J.

DUNN, Chief

Environmental

Enforcement Division

BY:

C.)

~JANE

E.

MCBRIDE

Environmental Bureau

Assistant Attorney General

Of Counsel:

THOMAS

DAVIS

500 South

Second Street

Springfield,

Illinois

62706

Dated:

June 4,

2003

4

---

LAW

FIRM

BLACKWELL SANDERS

PEPER MARTIN

—

I LP

W.C. BLANTON

DIREa: (8i6)

98~-ai~i

2300

MAIN STREET SUITE

taco

KANSAS CITY,

MO

64108

P.O.

BOX

~

KANSAS CITY, MO

64141-ám

TEL:

(8t6)

983-8000

FAX: (Sté) g8~-8o8a

WEBSITE: w~w.bIa~kweIIsanders.com

DIRECt FAX: (8th)

983-9151

E-MAIL:

whlanton@blaclcwellsanden.con,

March

25,

2002

Jane B. McBride

Environmental Bureau

Assistant

Attorney General

500

S.

Second St.

Springfield,

IL

62706

AUQRNPV

~?E~tERAL

MM

2

7

2003

Re:

People ofthe State ofIllinois

v

Peabody Coal Company

PCB

Case No. 99-134

Our File No.

2597-3

Dear Jane:

Enclosed

and

hereby

served

upon

you

are

copies

of the

following discovery

requests

directed

to

the

State

by

Peabody

Coal

Company

(“PCC”)

in

connection

with

the

above-

referenced matter:

•

Peabody’s

•

Peabody’s

•

Peabody’s

•

Peabody’s

•

Peabody’s

•

Peabody’s

•

Peabody’s

•

Peabody’s

Third

Set Of Interrogatories To The State;

Fourth Set Of Requests

To

The State For The Production OfDocuments;

Fourth Set Of Interrogatories To The State;

Fifth Request To The State For The Production Of Documents;

Fifth Set Of Interrogatories To The State;

Sixth Request To The State For The Production OfDocuments;

Sixth Set Of Interrogatories To The

State;

and

Seventh Request To

The State For The Production Of Documents.

As

I indicated

to

you

a

couple of weeks ago,

we believe the information and

documents

sought by these discovery requests

are

subject

to

discovery given the nature and

scope of issues

in this case.

However, we recognize that

the requests

are numerous;

and

it

is

not our intention to

cause the State to

undertake efforts that are not

necessary to

locate and provide us the

KC.IOOI 300.

Exhibit

A

KANSAS

CITY.

MISSOURI

-

ST.

LOUIS,

MISSOURI

•

OVERLAND

‘ARK.

KANSAS

•

OMALIA,

?4LBR:~SKA

SI’IIjNCEIELD,

MISSOURI

•

EDWARDSV)LLE,

ILLINOIS

‘

\VASIIINOTO4.

D.C.

‘

LONDON,

UNITED

KINGDOM

AI’VILIATES:

LEEDS

•

MANCHESTER

-MEXICO

ott’

•

~ittNtI4E.’L

-

TURJNVII

-

VANCOLIVER

---

r

-

BLACKWELL

SANDERS

PEPER MARTIN

IL?

Jane McBride

March2l,2002

Page

2

information we need

in

order

to

respond to

the

State’s claims

against PCC asserted

in

this

case.

Accordingly, please call

me

to

discuss

any

questions or concerns

that you

have

regarding these

discovery requests.

Best

regards

--

Very truly yours,

W.C.

Blanton

WCB/cs

Enclosures

cc:

Steve Hedinger

Dave Joest

KC-IOYI3O’)-I

---

BEFORE THE rLLINOLS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

PEOPLE

OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

)

Complainant,

)

)

V.

)

PCB

99-134

)

PEABODY COAL COMPANY, a Delaware

corporation,

)

Respondent.

PEABODY’S THIRD SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO THE

STATE

Respondent,

Peabody

Coal

Company

(“PCC”),

hereby

directs

the

following

interrogatories

to

Complainant,

People

of the

State

of Illinois

(“State”),

to

be

answered

within

twenty-eight (28) days of the receipt hereof.

INSTRUCTIONS

•

Unless

stated

otherwise,

provide

the

information

sought

by

each

Interrogatory

with respect to

the time period January

1,

1965

to present.

2.

If your answers

to

these

Interrogatories

are

supported

by

(or if an

Interrogatory

inquires as to the existence of) a record of any type, ~

documents, photographs,

notes, memos,

statements, investigative journals, complaints, test

results,

etc., please attach

a

copy of the

same

to your answers identifying which answer each record supports.

3.

These

Interrogatories

shall

be

deemed

continuing

so

as

to

require supplemental

answers

if

you

obtain

further

or

supplemental

information

between

the

time

answers

to

the

within

Interrogatories are

served

and

the

time

of hearing.

If for any

reason

you

are unable

to

KC-I0763 59-I

2597/3

---

answer

any

Interrogatory

in

full,

such

Interrogatory

should

be

answered

to

the extent

possible

and the reason forthe inability to

answer in full should be clearly stated.

4.

Verification under oath of all interrogatory responses is required.

5.

With

respect

to

information

which

is

withheld

or

not

disclosed

as

requested

pursuant

to

these interrogatories due

to

a

claim

of privilege of non-disclosure,

a

statement shall

be provided by counsel

setting forth

as to

each such withholding or non-disclosure:

a.

a brief description of the nature

and

subject matter of and

the reason

for

withholding or non-disclosure of the information;

b.

the statute, rule, decision or other basis which

is claimed to

give rise

to the

privilege or any otherjustification for the non-disclosure or withholding of

the requested information.

6.

If you

exercise

your option under

Illinois

Supreme

Court Rule

213(e)

to

produce

certain of your business

records

as your “answer” to an

interrogatory

set forth below,

documents

submitted

in response to

that request

should be

produced

as they are kept

in

the usual

course of

your business or organized and

labeled

according to the individual categories of the interrogatory

to

which

the documents

respond.

If you

choose

the

latter method,

(i)

within each

group,

the

documents

should

be

arranged,

to

-the

extent

possible,

in

chronological

order,

and

(ii)

if

any

document

is responsive

to

more than one category,

you

may provide a

single copy

indicating the

categories to which it

is responsive, in lieu ofproviding multiple copies.

7.

It

is

not

PCC’s

intention

by

these

interrogatories

to

seek

information

that

is

protected by the attorney-client privilege or by

the

work

product

doctrine.

Therefore,

all

of the

interrogatories

below

should

be

construed

as

consistent

with

that

intention,

even

if

an

interrogatory

by

its

terms

could

be

construed

to

seek

to

elicit

such

information,

so

that

no

KC-IO76359-I

259 7/3

---

objection

on

those

grounds

is

necessary.

However, if you

contend

that

any

documents

you

possess

that

contain

information responsive

to

these interrogatories as

a

matter of substance

are

privileged, then prepare a privilege log containing the following information:

a.

the

name

of the

author(s)

of

the

document

and

the

employer

of such

author(s);

b.

the name ofeach recipient of the document,

including

all

persons to whom

a

copy

was

sent

and

persons

with

knowledge

of

the

contents

of

the

document,

and each recipient’s employer;

c.

the

name

of

each

person

who

participate

in

the

preparation

of

the

document;

ci.

the nature or subject matter ofthe document;

e.

the

date

on

which

the

document

was

first

created

and

the

date

the

document bears, if different;

and

£

the specific

basis

for the

privilege claimed with

respect

to

the

document,

including

but not

limited

to

all

facts

relied upon in

support of the claim or

privilege,

arid the

identity of

all

persons having

knowledge of any

facts

related

to the claim of privilege.

8.

It

is

not

PCC’s

intention

by

these

interrogatories

to

seek

information

that

has

previously been provided by the

State

in

its

responses

to

interrogatories previously directed

to

it

by PCC.

Therefore,

all

of the interrogatories below

should

be

construed

as consistent with

that

intention,

even

if

an

interrogatory

by

its

terms

could

be

construed

to

seek

to

elicit

such

information,

so

that

no

objection

on

those

grounds

is

necessary.

However, if you

contend that

any

information

sought

by

any

interrogatory

below

has

been

previously provided

to

PCC

in

KC.10763$9-I

3

2597/3

---

response

to

an

interrogatory previously directed

to

the

State,

identifS’ the

interrogatory response

by which that information was previously provided to PCC.

DEFINITIONS

As used herein, the words

and phrases set

out below

shall have the meaning or meanings

as follows:

1.

“Act”

means

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Act,

415

ILCS

5/1

et

~g

(1998).

•

2.

“Board” means the Illinois Pollution Control Board.

3.

“Attorney General” means the Attorney General of the State of Illinois.

4.

“Complaint” means the Third Amended Complaint,

filed

by

the

State

on

or about

October 24, 2002.

5.

“District” means the Saline

Valley Conservancy District.

6.

“Document”

means each writing

and record

of every type

and

description

in

the

possession,

control, under contract

with

or by,

or in

the custody of the

State,

including,

but not

limited

to,

correspondence,

memoranda,

stenographic

or

handwritten

notes,

reports,

manifests,

bills

of

lading,

contracts,

studies,

books,

pamphlets,

retrievable

electronic

data,

laboratory

analyses, picture

or voice recordings,

and

shall

mean

a copy where

the

original

is not

in

control

of the

State.

The term

“document”

means

and

includes

each

and

every

medium

upon

which

information

can

be

printed,

or

reproduced

in

any

manner

by

mechanical

means,

by

hand

or

otherwise,

that

is

or has

been

in

your possession,

custody

or

control

or which

will

lead

to

the

discovery

of

the

whereabouts

of

a

responsive

document,

including

logs,

e-mail

records,

publications,

photographs,

recordings

of

every

kind

or

records,

transcripts,

cover

sheets,

transmittal

records

of

meetings,

conferences,

telephone

or

other

communications,

diagrams,

charts, computer printouts, pictures, magazines,

texts, video or audio tapes, drawings, summaries

KC-1076359-I

259 7/3

---

of telephone conversations, summaries or reports of investigations or negotiations,

and sketches,

every

copy of such writing or record where

the

original

is

not

in

your possession,

custody

or

control, and

every copy of such writing or record where such copy

contains any commentary or

notations whatsoever that do not appear in the original, and drafis ofany of the foregoing.

7.

“Enforcement Action” means

any process initiated either by JEPA or the Attorney

General

against any

person

in

which

that person was

alleged

to

have violated

any

provision

of

the Act or the GPA

and in which IEPA or the Attorney General

at any time

sought the imposition

against that person of some sanction authorized by the

Act or the CPA.

S.

“Identification” or “identify” means:

a.

As to

an individual, stating his or her:

i.

Full

and customarily used name or names;

ii.

Present business or residential address;

and

iii.

Every

title,

office,

position,

or

other

relationship

held

with

the

State,

both currently and during the relevant

time period.

b.

As to

any “person” other than an individual, stating:

i.

Its

legal name and any other names used by

it;

ii.

The

form

or

manner

of

its

organization

(e.g.,

partnership,

corporation, etc.);

and

iii.

The State ofits incorporation

(if it is incorporated)

and

the address

of its

principal

place

of business

and

identity

of its

Registered

Agent.

c.

As to

a document, stating:

i.

the date ofits

creation;

ii.

its author or signatory;

iii.

its addressee and any other recipient;

iv.

its

type

or

nature

(e.g.,

letter,

memorandum,

etc.),

including

its

subject matter (which shall

be stated with particularity);

KC-1076359.!

5

2597/3

---

v.

the identity and business or home address ofthe custodian;

and

vi.

the present location ofthe document.

9.

“IDNR”

means

the

Illinois

Department

of

Natural

Resources

and/or

its

predecessor agency.

10.

“GPA” means the Illinois

Groundwater Protection Act,

415

ILCS 55/I et~q.

11.

“IEPA”

means

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

and/or

its

predecessor agency.

12.

“In

the possession of’ means

in the physical

possession of,

or under

or subject to

the control of or

available

to

as to

matter of right,

the person

or body

named or

any

person or

body

subject to

the control or

direction of such person or body

in

regard

to

the record

or item

named.

13.

“NOV

I” means Notice of Violation M-l997-000l0

issued

to PCC

by IEPA on or

about January 28,

1997.

14.

“NOV

II”

means

Notice of Violation M-l997-00133

issued

to

PCC

by

IEPA

on

or about December23, 1997.

15.

“0MM”

means

the

Office

of

Mines

and

Minerals

of

the

IDNR

and/or

its

predecessor agency.

16.

“PCC”

means

Peabody

Coal

Company,

its

divisions,

subsidiaries,

related

companies

or

corporations,

predecessors,

successors,

and

all

present

and

former

officers,

directors, agents, attorneys, employees and

all

other persons

acting or purporting to

act on

behalf

ofthem.

17.

“Predecessor agency” means any agency or subdivision of the State of Illinois that

at some point

in time prior to

the creation of an

existing State Agency had

substantially the same

KC-1076359.l

6

2597/3

---

•

CONSTRUCTION

In

construing these requests:

a.

The

singular

shall

include

singular;

b.

A

masculine,

feminine

or

genders;

c.

The

terms

“and”

as

well

conjunctively

as

“and/or”

responsibilities as the existing

State

Agency, specifically

including

responsibility

for

the matter

that

is the subject of a request set forth below.

18.

“Related

to”

or

“relating

to”

means

directly

or

indirectly,

mentioning

or

describing,

consisting of,

pertaining

to,

being

connected

with,

reflecting

upon,

or

having

any

logical or factual connection with

a stated matter.

19.

“Relied

upon”

means

being

or

having

been

depended

upon

or

referred

to

in

relation to

the matter at

issue.

20.

“State

Agency” means any

state agency as that term is defined in 30

ILCS

5/1-7.

21.

“The State” means Complainal)t,

People of the

State

of Illinois,

in

the context of

references to

parties

to

this

case.

In all

other contexts, “the State”

has the

same meaning as the

word “you”

as defined immediately below.

22.

“WQS” means water quality standard(s).

23.

“You”

means

the

State

of

Illinois,

its

agencies,

and

their

respective

officers,

agents,

employees,

representatives,

or any

other person

or

persons

acting

for,

or

purportedly

acting

on behalf of or in

concert

with

them,

individually and

collectively;

and

“your” means the

possessive of“you.”

the

plural

and

the

plural

shall

include

the

neutral

pronoun

shall

not

exclude

the

other

as

“or”

shall

be

construed

disjunctively

or

or

as

otherwise

necessary

in

order

to

bring

KC1076359.l

259713

7

---

within the

scope of the Interrogatory

all responses which might

otherwise

be construed to be outside

its scope.

2.

It

is

not

PCC’s

intention

by

these

Interrogatories

to

seek

information

that

is

protected by

the attorney-client privilege or by

the work

product

doctrine.

Therefore,

all

of the

Interrogatories

below

should be

construed consistent

with that

intention, even if an

Interrogatory

by its

terms

could

be

construed

to

seek

to

elicit

such information,

so

that

no

objection

on that

basis

is required.

INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY

NO. 1:

State the

full

name, occupation, title and business address

of the person or persons providing information

in response to

these Interrogatories, including

all

individuals

responding

on

behalf of any

person who

is

not

an

individual,

and

indicate

which

person or person answered each Interrogatory.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

2:

State

the

name,

address

and

phone

number

of

each

witness

who

will

testify on

behalf of the

State

at

the hearing of this

matter and

state the subject

matter of each witness’ testimony.

RESPONSE:

KC-10763 59-I

25 9 7/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO.

3:

As

to

any

controlled

expert

witness

who

will

offer

opinion testimony on behalf of the State at the hearing ofthis

matter:

a.

Describe

in

detail

the subject matter

on

which

the witness

is

expected

to

testify;

b.

Provide

and

describe

in

detail

the

conclusions

and/or

opinions

of

the

witness

and the basis

therefore,

including reports ofthe witness, if any;

c.

Describe

in

detail the qualifications of the witness,

and

identify

whether a

curriculum vitae and/or resume is available for the witness;

d.

Identify

all

documents

and

other

things

that

provide

the

basis

for

the

witness’s opinions,

or on which

the witness relied

in

developing his

or her

opinions;

e.

Identify

any

and

all

occasions

on

which

the

witness

has

given

opinion

testimony in

a

deposition, trial,

arbitration, mediation,

or other evidentiary

proceeding;

£

State

the

witness’s

fees

for

consulting

and

providing

testimony

in

this

matter.

g.

Identify all

occasions

on

which

the

State

has

retained

the

witness

in

the

past,

h.

Identify

all

documents

that

constitute, contain,

report, or otherwise

relate

to the witness’s opinions;

i.

State

whether

the

witness

has been

involved

in

the

past,

or

currently

is

involved,

in

any

way, as

a

consultant

or

otherwise,

in

any

effort

by

any

KC-1076359-I

9

2 59 7/3

---

coal

mine

to

come

into

compliance

or

to

remain

in

compliance

with

Illinois’, any other state’s, or federal

groundwater standards

and/or WQS;

j.

State

whether the witness

has been

involved

in

the

past,

or

currently

is

involved,

in

any

way,

as

a

consultant

or

otherwise,

in

any

Enforcement

Action undertaken by the State;

and

k.

State

the contractual

or employment relationship between the witness

and

the State.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 4:

As

to

any

independent

expert

witness

who

will

offer

opinion testimony on behalfof the State

at the hearing ofthis matter:

a.

Describe

in

detail

the subject

matter on

which

the witness

is

expected

to

testify;

b.

Provide

and

describe

in

detail

the

conclusions

and/or

opinions

of the

witness and the basis therefore,

including reports of the witness, if any;

c.

Describe in

detail the qualifications of the witness,

and

identify whether a

curriculum vitae

and/or resume is available for the witness;

d.

Identify

all

documents

and

other

things

that

provide

the

basis

for

the

witness’s opinions, or on which the witness

relied

in developing his

or her

opinions;

e.

Identify

any

and

all

occasions

on

which

the

witness

has

given

opinion

testimony

in

a deposition,

trial,

arbitration, mediation,

or other evidentiary

proceeding;

KC-1076359-I

259 7/3

---

11

State

the

witness’s

fees

for

consulting

and

providing

testimony

in

this

matter.

g.

Identify all

occasions

on

which

the

State

has retained

the witness

in

the

past,

h.

Identify

all

documents that

constitute, contain,

report,

or otherwise relate

to the witness’s opinions;

i.

State

whether

the

witness

has

been

involved

in

the

past,

or

currently

is

involved,

in

any

way,

as

a

consultant

or

otherwise,

in

any

effort

by

any

coal

mine

to

come

into

compliance

or

to

remain

in

compliance

with

Illinois’,

any other state’s, or federal

groundwater standards and/or WQS;

j.

State

whether

the witness

has

been

involved

in

the

past,

or currently

is

involved,

in

any

way,

as

a

consultant

or

otherwise,

in

any

Enforcement

Action undertaken by the State;

and

k.

State

the contractual

or employment

relationship

between the

witness

and

the State.

RESPONSE:

KC-IO76359-~

II

2 597

3

---

INTERROGATORY NO. 5:

State

the

names,

address

and

phone

numbers

of

all

persons

known

to

the

State,

other

than

the

individuals

identified

in

response

to

the

three

preceding Interrogatories,

who

are

likely

to

have discoverable information relevant

to matters

at

issue in

this lawsuit

and to

all allegations contained within the Complaint,

and include with

each

a

statement ofthe subject matter ofsuch knowledge.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 6:

Describe

with

particularity

the

relationship

between the

State

and

Thomas

A. Prickett with respect to

the

State’s investigation

of the

matters that

are

the

subject

of this

proceeding,

the

State’s

analysis of the

groundwater

system

near

the

Mine,

the

State’s

determination

and

evaluation

of water

quality

in

the

groundwater

near

the

Mine,

the

State’s

prosecution

of

this

action,

and

any

other

aspect

of

this

matter;

and

identify

every

document

related

in

any

way

to

the

State’s

relationship

with

Mr.

Prickett

in

this

regard,

specifically

including

all

reports

and

other documents prepared by

Mr. Prickett

on

behalf of the

District, the

State,

or any other person that address in

any way any

aspect of the

matters

that are

the subject of the Complaint or otherwise relating in any way to this

matter.

RESPONSE:

KC-1076359-I

2 59 7/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO. 7:

Identify

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of EPA

and

all

persons acting

on behalf of the Attorney

General in connection

with IEPA’s referral ofNOV Ito

the Attorney General.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY

NO. 8:

Identify

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of

IEPA

and

all

persons

acting on

behalfof the

Attorney General

in

connection

with

IEPA’s

referral of NOV

II

to

the Attorney General.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

Identify

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of IEPA

and

all

persons

acting

on

behalf

of the

Attorney

General

in

connection

with

IEPA’s

provision

of

documents

to

the

Attorney

General

relating

to

the

allegations

set

forth

in

Count II

of

the

Complaint.

RESPONSE:

XC-1076359-i

13

2597/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

Identify

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of IEPA

and

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of the

Attorney

General

in

connection

with

IEPA’s

provision

of

documents

to

the

Attorney

General

relating

to

the

allegations

set

forth

in

Count

ifi

of

the

Complaint.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

11:

Identify

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of

IEPA

and

all

persons

acting

on behalf of the Attorney General

in

connection

with

JEPA’s

provision of other

documents to the Attorney General relating to the matters that

are the subject ofthe Complaint or

otherwise relating to

this matter.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

12:

Identify

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of

the

Attorney

General

and

all

persons acting

on

behalf of IEPA

in

connection

with

the determination

by

the

State to

assert Count

II ofthe Complaint.

RESPONSE:

KC-107a359-I

2597/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO.

13:

Identify

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of the

Attorney

General

and

all

persons

acting

on

behalf of IEPA

in

connection with

the determination

by

the

State to assert

Count III ofthe Complaint.

RESPONSE:

Date:

May 23, 2003

PEABODY COAL COMPANY

By its attorneys

r

W.

C.

Blanton

BLACKWELL SANDERS PEPER MARTIN LLP

Two Pershing Square, Suite

1000

2300 Main Street

Post Office Box 419777

Kansas City, Missouri

64141-6777

(816) 983-8000 (phone)

(816) 983-8080 (fax)

wblanton@blaekwellsanders.com

(e-mail)

~‘

L~c4_~

Stephen F.

Heding’er

HEDINGER LAW OFFICE

2601

South Fifth Street

Springfield,

IL

62703

(217) 523-2753 (phone)

(217) 523-4366 (fax)

hedinger~cityscape.net(e-mail)

KC-10763594

15

2597/3

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby

certifies

that

a

copy

of the

foregoing Peabody’s

Fifth

Set Of

Interrogatories

To The State

has, this

23rd day of May, 2003,

been placed

in

the

U.S.

Mail,

first-class postage paid, addressed to:

Jane E. McBride

Environmental Bureau

Attorneys General’s Office

500 South

2nd

Street

Springfield,

Illinois

62706

~

W.

C. Blanton

BLACKWELL SANDERS PEPER MARTIN LLP

2300 Main Street, Suite

1000

Kansas City, MO

64108

KC-1076359-l

25973

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

PEOPLE OF THE STATE

OF ILLINOIS,

)

)

Complainant,

)

)

v.

)

PCB 99-134

)

PEABODY COAL COMPANY,

a Delaware

)

corporation,

Respondent.

)

PEABODY’S FOURTH

SET OF REQUESTS TO THE

STATE

FOR THE

PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

Respondent,

Peabody

Coal

Company,

through

its

undersigned

attorneys hereby

submits

to

Complainant,

People of the

State of Illinois,

PCC’s fourth set of requests

for the production of

documents.

INSTRUCTIONS

1.

Except

to

the

extent

stated

otherwise

in

a

specific

request

below,

produce

all

documents described by a

specific request created on or after January

1,

1960.

2.

Documents

are

to

be

produced

for

purposes

of

inspection

and

copying within

28 days

of service

of these

requests

at

the

offices

of Stephen

F.

Hedinger,

2601

South

Fifth

Street, Springfield,

Illinois.

3.

Produce

all

original

responsive

documents, as well as nonconforming copies

and

any

copies

with

markings

or other matter

not

appearing

on

the face of the original,

including

blind copies for persons other than the recipient shown

on the document.

ICC.1076353-I

259 7/3

---

4.

Produce

all requested documents

as they are

kept

in

the

usual

course of business

or organized

and

labeled

to

correspond

with

the categories

in

the

request,

and

all

retrievable

information in

computer storage is to

be produced in both

electronic and printediorm.

5.

For any responsive

document that

previously was

in

your possession,

custody, or

control but

is

no

longer

in

your possession

or custody or subject to

your control,

or which

was

known to

you but is no

longer in existence, state what disposition was made ofsuch document

or

what became of it.

6.

Any

objections

to

the

request

for

production,

full

or

partial,

under

claim

of

privilege ofany kind whatsoever are to

be made

in compliance with Illinois

Supreme Court Rule

201(n) by fully stating the nature of the claim of privilege, stating all

facts relied

upon in support

of the

claim

of privilege,

identifying

with

specificity

all

documents

related

to

the

claim

of

privilege along with

a

complete description of the contents

of the withheld

documents, identify

all

persons

having

knowledge

of

any

facts

related

to

the

claim

of privilege,

and

provide

an

Affidavit attesting under oath to the factual assertions

made in the claim ofprivilege.

7.

For

any

responsive

document

that

is withheld

from

production based

on

a

claim

of privilege,

set forth the following information

in

a privilege log:

a.

the

name

01

•the

author(s)

of the

document

and

the

employer

of

such

author(s);

b.

the name of each recipient of the document,

including all persons

to whom

a

copy

was

sent

and

persons

with

knowledge

of

the

contents

of

the

document, and each recipient’s employer;

c.

the

name

of

each

person

who

participate

in

the

preparation

of

the

document;

KC-1076353-I

2597/3

---

d.

the nature or subject matter of the document;

e.

the

date

on

which

the

document

was

first

created

arid

the

date

the

document bears, if different;

and

£

the specific

basis

for the privilege claimed

with

respect

to

the document,

including but not limited

to

all

facts relied upon

in

support

of the claim or

privilege,

and

the

identity of all

persons

having knowledge of any

facts

related to

the claim ofprivilege.

8.

Furnish

at

the

time

and place

stated above

an Affidavit stating

under oath that

the

production is

complete

in

accordance

with

the request, or if incomplete,

in

what

manner

it

is

incomplete.

9.

Seasonably

supplement

any

response

to

the

extent

any

responsive

documents,

objects or tangible things subsequently come into your possession or control or become known to

you.

10.

It is not

FCC’s

intention by

these production requests to

seek

documents that have

previously been provided by the

State

in its responses

to production requests previously directed

to it by

FCC.

Therefore,

all

of the production requests below

should

be

construed

as consistent

with

that

intention,

even

if

a

production request

by

its

terms

could

be

construed

to

seek

such

documents, so that no objection on those grounds is necessary.

However, if you

contend that any

document

sought

by

any

production

request

below

has

been

previously,

provided

to

PCC

in

response to

a production request previously directed to

the State,

identify the production request

response by which that document was previously provided to PCC.

DEFINITIONS

As

used herein, the words

and phrases set out

below shall have the meaning or meanings

as follows:

Kc.107e353-I

3

2597/3

---

1.

“Attorney General” means the Attorney General ofthe State of Illinois.

2.

“Board” means the Illinois Pollution Control Board.

3.

“Chemicals of concern” means sulfates, chlorides, iron, manganese, and TDS.

4.

“Complaint” means the

Third Amended Complaint, filed by the

State

on

or about

October 24, 2002.

5.

“Document” means

each writing

and

record of every type

and

description

in

the

possession,

control, under

contract

with

or by,

or in

the custody of the State,

including,

but not

limited

to,

correspondence,

memoranda, stenographic

or

handwritten

notes,

reports,

manifests,

bills

of

lading,

contracts,

studies,

books,

pamphlets,

retrievable

electronic

data,

laboratory

analyses, picture or voice recordings,

and

shall mean

a

copy where

the original

is not

in control

of the

State.

The

term

“document” means

and

includes

each

and

every

medium

upon

which

information

can

be

printed,

or

reproduced

in

any

manner

by

mechanical

means,

by

hand

or

otherwise,

that

is

or has been

in

yourpossession,

custody

or

control

or which

will

lead

to

the

discovery

of

the

whereabouts

of

a

responsive

document,

including

logs,

e-mail

records,

publications,

photographs,

recordings

of

every

kind

or

records,

transcripts,

cover

sheets,

transmittal

records

of

meetings,

conferences,

telephone

or

other

communications,

diagrams,

charts, computer printouts, pictures, magazines,

texts,

video or audio

tapes,

drawings, summaries

of telephone conversations, summaries or reports

of investigations

or negotiations,

and

sketches,

every

copy

of such

writing

or record

where

the

original

is

not

in

your possession,

custody

or

control,

and

every copy of such writing or record where

such copy

contains

any commentary or

notations whatsoever that do not appear in the original, and drafts of any of the foregoing.

6.

“Groundwater”

means

any

groundwater

as

that

term

is

defined

in

415

ILCS

55/3(g).

KC-10763$3-l

4

2597/3

---

7.

“Henry

Formation

Aquifer”

means

the

groundwater

aquifer

located

in

Saline

County,

Illinois

that

in

part consists

of geological

formations and

groundwater at

and

near the

Mine and at and near the District’s Production Wells.

8.

“IEPA”

means

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

andior

its

predecessor agency.

9.

“In

the possession of’ means

in the physical possession of, or under

or subject to

the control of or

available

to

as to

matter of right, the person or

body

named or any

person

or

body

subject to

the control or

direction of such person or body in

regard

to

the record or item

named.

10.

“Interrogatories”

means

Peabody’s Third

Set Of Interrogatories To

Complainant,

served herewith.

11.

“Mine” means FCC’s Eagle No.

2 Mine,

an underground coal mine,

including the

surface

area

thereof,

located

approximately

one

mile

northwest

of Shawneetown,

Illinois

in

Gallatin County,

Illinois.

12.

“NOV

1” means Notice of Violation M-1997-000l0

issued

to

FCC

by

IEPA on or

about January 28,

1997.

13.

“NOV

II”

means Notice of Violation

M-l997-00133 issued

to

PCC

by

IEPA

on

or about December 23,

1997.

14.

“0MM”

means

the

Office

of

Mines

and

Minerals

of

the

IDNR

and/or

its

predecessor agency.

15.

“FCC”

means

Peabody

Coal

Company,

its

divisions,

subsidiaries,

related

companies

or

corporations,

predecessors,

successors,

and

all

present

and

former

officers,

KC.1076353.I

5

259713

---

directors, agents, attorneys, employees

and all other persons acting or purporting to act on behalf

of them.

16.

“Predecessor agency” means any agency or subdivision of the State of Illinois that

at some point in time prior to the creation of an

existing State Agency had substantially the same

responsibilities

as the existing

State

Agency,

specifically

including

responsibility

for the

matter

that

is the subject of a request set

forth below.

17.

“Related

to”

or

“relating

to”

means

directly

or

indirectly,

mentioning

or

describing,

consisting

of,

pertaining

to,

being

connected

with,

reflecting

upon,

or

having

any

logical or factual connection with

a stated matter.

18.

“Relied

upon”

means

being

or

having

been

depended

upon

or

referred

to

in

relation to

the matter at issue.

19.

“State

Agency” means any state agency as that term is defined in 30

ILCS

5/1-7.

20.

“The State”

means Complainant,

People of the

State

of Illinois,

in

the

context of

references

to

parties

to

this

case.

In all

other contexts,

“the State”

has the same

meaning

as the

word “you”

as defined immediately below.

21.

“You”

means

the

State

of Illinois,

its

agencies,

and

their

respective

officers,

agents,

employees,

representatives,

or

any

other person

or

persons

acting

for,

or

purportedly

acting

on

behalf of or in

concert with

them,

individually

and collectively;

and

“your” means

the

possessive of “you.”

CONSTRUCTION

I.

In construing these requests:

a.

The

singular

shall

include

the

plural

and

the

plural

shall

include

the

singular;

KC-~O76353-I

2597’)

---

b.

A

masculine,

feminine

or

neutral

pronoun

shall

not

exclude

the

other

genders;

c.

The

terms

“and”

as

well

as

“or”

shall

be

construed

disjunctively

or

conjunctively

as

“and/or”

or

as

otherwise

necessary

in

order

to

bring

within

the

scope

of the

request

all

responses which

might

otherwise

be

construed to be

outside

its scope.

2.

It is

not

PCC’s

intention

by these production requests

to

seek

information

that

is

protected by

the attorney-client privilege or by the work product

doctrine.

Therefore,

all

of the

production

requests

below

should

be

construed

consistent

with

that

intention,

even

if

a

production request

by

its

terms

could

be

construed

to

seek

to

elicit

such information,

so

that

no

objection on

that basis

is required.

However, if you contend that

any document you possess that

is substantively responsive to

these production requests

is privileged,

then prepare a privilege

log

in accordance with Instruction 6 above.

REQUESTS

FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

PCC requests the State to produce the following documents:

REQUEST NO.

1:

All

documents not previously produced which

you

have identified in

response to the Interrogatories.

REQUEST

NO. 2:

All

documents

not

previously

produced

which

you

consulted

in

preparing your response

to the Interrogatories.

REQUEST NO.3:

All

documents consisting of or containing any

information regarding

or

map(s)

of the

area

of the

Mine

for

which

groundwater

flow

modeling,

solute

transport

modeling

and

particle

tracking

modeling

has

been

initiated

and/or

completed

at

any

point

in

time.

KC-~O76)53.!

2597/3

---

REQUEST NO. 4:

All

documents

relating

to

oral

or

written

communications

with

consultants

regarding the presence of any

chemical

of concern

in

the groundwater

at

the Henry

Formation Aquifer and/or the significance of the presence of such chemicals at any time.

REQUEST NO.

5:

All

documents relating to

IEPA’s referral of NOV Ito

the Attorney

General.

REQUEST NO.6:

All

documents relating to

IEPA’s

referral of NOV11

to

the Attorney

General.

REQUEST NO.

7:

All

other documents relating

to

the

Mine

provided by

IEPA

to

the

Attorney

General prior

to

the

filing

of the

initial

complaint

in

this

case

on

or

about

March

23,

1999.

REQUEST NO.8:

relating to the matters that

REQUEST NO.

9:

with the decision to

file and

REQUEST NO.

10:

connection with the decision

REQUEST NO.

11:

with the decision to file and

REQUEST NO.

12:

connection with the decision

REQUEST NO.

13:

All

other

documents

provided

by

JEPA

to

the

Attorney

General

are the subject ofthe

Complaint or otherwise relating to

this matter.

All

documents relied

upon

by

the

Attorney General

in

connection

prosecute Count II of the

Complaint.

All

other

documents

considered

by

the

Attorney

General

in

to

file and

prosecute Count II of the Complaint.

All

documents

relied

upon

by

the

Attorney General

in

connection

prosecute Count III of the Complaint.

All

other

documents

considered

by

the

Attorney

General

in

to

file and prosecute Count III of the Complaint.

All

documents which

constitute

a

source

of any

information

upon

which

you base

any allegation of fact set forth in paragraph

15

of Count I ofthe Complaint.

KC-1076)5)-

2597/3

8

---

REQUEST NO.

14:

All

documents which

constitute

a

source of any

information

upon

which

you base any allegation of fact set

forth in paragraph 20 ofCount

I ofthe Complaint.

REQUEST NO.

15:

All

documents which

constitute

a

source of any

information

upon

which

you base any allegation offact set

forth in paragraph 27 of Count II of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO.

16:

All

reports

and

other documents prepared by any

witness

who will

offer

opinion testimony on behalf ofthe

State

at the hearing of this

matter;

all

documents relied

upon

by each

such witness

in

developing the opinions

that will be

offered on

behalf of the

State

at the hearing ofthis

matter; all

other documents considered by

each such witness

in developing

the opinions

that

will be offered on behalf of the

State at the hearing of this

matter; and

all

other

documents relating to each such opinion.

REQUEST NO.

17:

All

documents

that constitute or contain

information

relating

to

the

contractual or employment relationship between each witness

to be

called by the State

who will

offer any testimony,

and the State.

REQUEST NO.

18:

All

documents

possessed

by

the

State

that

constitute

or

contain

information relating to

Thomas A. Prickett’s direct

and indirect

relationships

with the

State with

respect

to

the

State’s

investigation

of the

matters

that

are

the

subject

of this

proceeding,

the

State’s analysis

of the groundwater ~systemat

and

near the

Mine,

the

State’s determination

and

evaluation of water quality

in

the groundwater

at

and

near

the

Mine,

the State’s prosecution of

this

action,

and

other

any

aspects

of this

matter, specifically

including

(but

not

limited

to)

all

reports

and

other documents prepared by Mr.

Prickett

on

behalf of the District,

the

State,

or any

other

person

that

address

in

any

way

any

aspect

of

the

matters

that

are

the

subject

of

the

Complaint or otherwise relating in

any way

to

this

matter, specifically

including

all

documents

consisting of or containing

any

information

regarding communication between Mr. Prickett and

KC-W76)S)-i

9

2

597/3

---

either

JEPA

or the

Attorney

General

regarding

or

relating

to

the

allegations

set

forth

in

the

Complaint or otherwise relating in any way to this

matter.

REQUEST NO.

19:

All

documents that State

intends to offer as exhibits at the hearing

in

this

case, both as part ofits case-in-chief and as part of its presently anticipated case on

rebuttal.

REQUEST NO. 20:

All

documents

that

contain

information

regarding

the

alleged

violation

of

WQS

referenced

in

Edwin

C.

Bakowski’s

January

6,

1987

letter

to

David

G.

McDonald of PCC, a copy ofwhich is

attached as Exhibit

1.

REQUEST NO.

21:

All

documents

that

contain

information

regarding

the

alleged

violation

of WQS referenced

in

Joyce

Munie’s May

22,

1992

letter

to

Robert

Hill

of PCC,

a

copy of which is attached as Exhibit

2.

KC-107653-I

10

259

7/3

---

Date:

May 23, 2003

PEABODY

COAL COMPANY

By its attorneys

I

W. C. Blanton

BLACKWELL SANDERS PEPER MARTIN LLP

Two Pershing Square, Suite

1000

2300 Main Street

Post Office Box 419777

Kansas

City, Missouri

64141-6777

(816) 983-8000 (phone)

(816) 983-8080 (fax)

wblanton@blackwellsanders.com (e-mail)

Stephen F.

Hedii1ger

HEDINGER

LAW OFFICE

2601

South Fifth Street

Springfield, IL

62703

(217) 523-2753 (phone)

(217) 523-4366 (fax)

hedinger~cityscape.net(e-mail)

KC-1076353-I

11

359Z)

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies

that

a

copy of the foregoing Peabody’s

Fourth

Set Of

Requests

To

The

State For The

Production

Of Documents

has,

this

23rd day of May, 2003,

been placed in the U.S. Mail, first-class postage paid, addressed to:

Jane

E. McBride

Environmental Bureau

Attorneys

General’s Office

500 South

2nd

Street

Springfield,

Illinois

62706

I

W.

C. Blanton

BLACKWELL SANDERS

PEPER MARTIN

LLP

2300 Main Street, Suite

1000

Kansas

City, MO

64108

KC.1076353-l

2597/3

---

BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

PEOPLE OF

THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

)

Complainant,

)

)

PCB99-134

)

PEABODY COAL COMPANY, a Delaware

)

corporation,

)

)

Respondent.

)

PEABODY’S FOURTH

SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO THE STATE

Respondent,

Peabody

Coal

Company,

through

its

undersigned

attorneys,

hereby directs

the

following

interrogatories

to

Complainant,

People

of the

State

of Illinois,

to

be

answered

within twenty-eight (28) days of the receipt hereof.

INSTRUCTIONS

1.

Unless

stated

otherwise,

provide

the

information

sought

by

each

Interrogatory

with respect to the time period January

1,

1965

to present.

2.

If your answers

to

these Interrogatories

are supported

by

(or if

an

Interrogatory

inquires as to the existence of) a record of any type, ~

documents, photographs,

notes, memos,

statements,

investigative journals, complaints,

test results,

etc., please attach

a

copy of the same

to

your answers

identifying which answer each record supports.

3.

These

Interrogatories

shall

be

deemed

continuing

so

as

to

require supplemental

answers

if

you

obtain

further

or

supplemental

information

between

the

time

answers

to

the

within

Interrogatories are served

and

the

time of hearing.

If for any

reason

you

are

unable to

KC-lO7659~-

2597/3

---

answer

any

Interrogatory

in

fhll,

such Interrogatory

should

be

answered

to

the

extent

possible

and the reason for the inability to

answer in full should be clearly stated.

4.

Verification under oath ofall

interrogatory responses is required.

5.

With

respect

to

information

which

is

withheld

or

not

disclosed

as

requested

pursuant

to

these interrogatories due

to

a

claim of privilege of non-disclosure,

a

statement shall

be

provided by counsel setting forth as to each such withholding or non-disclosure:

a.

a brief description

of the nature and

subject

matter of and

the

reason

for

withholding or non-disclosure ofthe information;

b.

the statute, rule, decision or other basis which

is claimed to

give rise

to the

privilege or any otherjustification

for the non-disclosure or withholding of

the requested information.

6.

If you

exercise

your option

under Illinois

Supreme Court

Rule 213(e)

to

produce

certain of your business records

as your “answer”

to

an interrogatory

set forth

below,

documents

submitted

in response

to

that

request should

be produced

as they are kept

in

the

usual

course of

your business or organized and

labeled according to the individual categories of the interrogatory

to

which

the documents

respond.

If you

choose

the latter

method,

(i)

within each

group,

the

documents

should

be

arranged,

to

the

extent

possible,

in

chronological

order,

and

(ii) if

any

document

is responsive

to more

than

one category,

you

may provide

a single copy indicating

the

categories to

which it is responsive, in

lieu ofproviding multiple copies.

7.

It

is

not

PCC’s

intention

by

these

interrogatories

to

seek

information

that

is

protected

by

the attorney-client privilege or by the work product

doctrine.

Therefore,

all

of the

interrogatories

below

should

be

construed

as

consistent

with

that

intention,

even

if

an

interrogatory

by

its

terms

could

be

construed

to

seek

to

elicit

such

information,

so

that

no

KC-!076591-I

2

2 59

7/3

---

objection

on

those

grounds

is

necessary.

However,

if

you

contend

that

any

documents

you

possess

that

contain

information responsive

to

these interrogatories as

a

matter of substance

are

privileged,

then prepare a privilege log containing the following information:

a.

the

name

of the

author(s)

of the

document

and

the

employer

of

such

author(s);

b.

the name of each recipient of the document, including

all persons to whom

a

copy

was

sent

and

persons

with

knowledge

of the

contents

of the

document, and each recipient’s employer;

c.

the

name

of

each

person

who

participate

in

the

preparation

of

the

document;

d.

the nature or subject matter ofthe document;

e.

the

date

on

which

the

document

was

first

created

and

the

date

the

document bears, if different; and

f.

the specific

basis

for the privilege

claimed with

respect

to

the document,

including but not

limited

to

all

facts relied

upon

in

support of the claim or

privilege,

and

the identity

of

all

persons having knowledge

of any

facts

related to

the claim ofprivilege.

8.

It

is

not

PCC’s

intention

by

these

interrogatories

to

seek

information that

has

previously been provided

by

the State in

its

responses

to

interogatories previously directed

to

it

by PCC.

Therefore,

all

of the interrogatories below

should

be

construed

as consistent

with

that

intention,

even

if

an

interrogatory

by

its

terms

could

be

construed

to

seek

to

elicit

such

information,

so

that

no

objection on

those

grounds

is

necessary.

However, if you

contend that

any

information

sought

by

any

interrogatory

below

has

been

previously provided

to

PCC

in

KC.lO7659J-~

3

259

7 (3

---

response

to

an

interrogatory previously directed

to

the

State,

identify

the interrogatory response

by which that information was previously provided to PCC.

DEFINITIONS

As

used herein, the words

and phrases set

out below shall have the meaning or meanings

as follows:

1.

“Act”

means

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Act,

415

ILCS

5/1

et

seq.

(1998).

2.

“Board” means the Illinois Pollution

Control Board.

3.

“Chemical of concern” means chloride, iron, manganese,

sulfate, or TDS.

4.

“Coal mining” or “Mining of coal”

means the excavation and extraction ofnatural

underground coal deposits

by the use of any mechanical operation.

5.

“Coal

mining

refuse”

means

gob,

coal,

rock,

slate,

shale,

mill

tailings,

boney,

clay, pyrites and

other unmerchantable solid

or slurry material intended

to

be

discarded which

is

connected

with

the

cleaning

and

preparation

of

mined

materials

at

a

preparation

plant

or

washery.

6.

“District” means the

Saline Valley Conservancy District.

7.

“District’s

Production

Wells”

means

those

wells

designated

by

the

District

as

Well No.

1,

Well No.

2,

Well

No.

3,

Well No.

4, Well

No.

5,

and Well

No.

6,

located

in

Gallatin

County,

Illinois

by

which

the

District

extracts

or

formerly

extracted

groundwater

which

is

processed at its treatment

facility for distribution to

its customers.

8.

“Document”

means

each

writing

and

record of every

type

and

description

in

the

possession,

control,

under contract with

or by,

or in

the custody of the

State,

including,

but

not

limited

to,

correspondence,

memoranda,

stenographic

or handwritten

notes,

reports,

manifests,

bills

of

lading,

contracts,

studies,

books,

pamphlets,

retrievable

electronic

data,

laboratory

KC-~O7659I-I

2597/3

---

analyses, picture

or voice recordings,

and

shall mean

a copy

where

the original

is

not

in control

of the

State.

The term

“document”

means

and

includes

each

and

every

medium

upon

which

information

can

be

printed, or

reproduced

in

any

manner

by

mechanical

means,

by

hand

or

otherwise,

that

is

or

has been

in

your possession,

custody

or control

or which

will

lead

to

the

discovery

of

the

whereabouts

of

a

responsive

document,

including

logs,

e-mail

records,

publications,

photographs,

recordings

of

every

kind

or

records,

transcripts,

cover

sheets,

transmittal

records

of meetings,

conferences,

telephone

or

other

communications,

diagrams,

charts, computer printouts, pictures, magazines, texts, video or audio tapes, drawings, summaries

oftelephone conversations,

summaries or reports of investigations or negotiations,

and

sketches,

every copy of such writing or record

where

the

original

is

not

in

your possession,

custody or

control, and

every

copy of such writing or record where such

copy

contains any

commentary or

notations whatsoever that do not

appear in the original, and drafts of any ofthe foregoing.

9.

“Finished

water”

means

water

distributed

to

a

public

water

supply

operator’s

customer.

10.

“GPA”

means the Illinois Groundwater

Protection Act, 415

ILCS

55/1

et ~g.

11.

“Groundwater”

means

any

groundwater

as

that

term

is

defined

in

415

ILCS

55/3(g).

12.

“Identification” or “identify” means:

a.

As to

an individual, stating his or her:

i.

Full

and customarily used name or names;

ii.

Present business or residential address;

and

iii,

Every

title,

office,

position,

or

other

relationship

held

with

the

State, both currently and during the relevant time period.

b.

As to any “person” other than an individual,

stating:

XC-)076591.J

2 59

7/3

---

i.

Its

legal name and any other names used by it;

ii.

The

form

or

manner

of

its

organization

(e.g.,

partnership,

corporation,

etc.); and

iii.

The State of its incorporation (if it

is incorporated)

and the address

of

its

principal

place

of business

and

identity

of

its

Registered

Agent.

c.

As

to a document, stating:

i.

the date ofits creation;

ii.

its

author or signatory;

iii.

its

addressee and any other recipient;

iv.

its

type

or

nature

(e.g.,

letter,

memorandum,

etc.),

including

its

subject matter (which

shall be stated with particularity);

v.

the identity and business or home address ofthe custodian;

and

vi.

the present location ofthe document.

13.

“IDNR”

means

the

Illinois

Department

of

Natural

Resources

andlor

its

predecessor agency.

14.

“IEPA”

means

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

andlor

its

predecessor agency.

15.

“In

the possession of’ means

in

the physical possession

of, or under or subject to

the control

of or

available to

as to

matter of right,

the person or body

named

or any

person

or

body

subject to

the control

or direction of such person or body

in

regard

to

the record

or

item

named.

16.

“Mine” means PCC’s

Eagle No.

2

Mine, an

underground

coal mine,

including the

surface

area

thereof,

located

approximately

one

mile

northwest

of

Shawneetown,

Illinois

in

Gallatin County,

Illinois.

KC-!076591-I

6

2597/3

---

17.

“Near

the Mine” means two miles or less

in distance

from

any property boundary

ofthe

Mine.

18.

“0MM”

means

the

Office

of

Mines

and

Minerals

of

the

IDNR

and/or

its

predecessor agency.

19.

“Part

620

Standards”

means

the

WQS

established

by

35

IlL

Adm.

Code,

Subtitle C, Part 620, Subpart D.

20.

“FCC”

means

Peabody

Coal

Company,

its

divisions,

subsidiaries,

related

companies

or

corporations,

predecessors,

successors,

and

all

present

and

former

officers,

directors, agents, attorneys, employees and

all other persons acting or purporting to act on

behalf

of them.

21.

“Person” means

any person asthat term is defined

in

Section 3.26

ofthe Act,

415

ILCS

5/3.26

(1998).

22.

“Predecessor agency” means any agency or subdivision of the State of Illinois that

at some point in time prior to the creation of an existing State

Agency had

substantially the same

responsibilities

as the existing

State Agency,

specifically

including

responsibility for the matter

that

is the subject of a request set forth below.

23.

“Raw

water”

means~

groundwater

extracted

by

the

District’s

Production

Wells

prior to any treatment.

24.

“Reftse

disposal area”

means

any

land

used for dumping, storage

or disposal

of

coal refuse which

is intended to serve as permanent disposal of such material.

25.

“Related

to”

or

“relating

to”

means

directly

or

indirectly,

mentioning

or

describing,

consisting

of,

pertaining

to,

being

connected

with,

reflecting

upon,

or

having any

logical or factual connection with

a stated matter.

KC-1076591-I

7

2597/3

---

26.

“Relied

upon”

means

being

or

having

been

depended

upon

or

referred

to

in

relation to

the matter at

issue.

27.

“State Agency” means any state agency as that term is defined in

30 ILCS

5/1-7.

28.

“TDS” means total dissolved

solids.

29.

“The

State”

means Complainant,

People of the

State

of Illinois,

in

the

context of

references

to

parties to

this

case.

In all

other context,

“The State”

has the

same meaning

as the

word “you” as defined immediately below.

30.

“Treatment Facility” means the

District’s facility located in

Shawneetown, Illinois

at

which water obtained by the operation of the District’s production wells

is

treated prior to

its

distribution to

the District’s customers.

31.

“WQS”

means water quality

standard(s).

32.

“You”

means

the

State

of

Illinois,

its

agencies,

and

their

respective

officers,

agents,

employees,

representatives,

or

any

other person

or persons

acting

for,

or

purportedly

acting

on

behalf of or in concert

with them,

individually and

collectively; and

“your”

means

the

possessive of“you.”

CONSTRUCTION

I.

In construing these requests:

a.

The

singular

shall

include

the

plural

and

the

plural

shall

include

the

singular;

b.

A

masculine,

feminine

or

neutral

pronoun

shall

not

exclude

the

other

genders;

c.

The

terms

“and”

as

well

as

“or”

shall

be

construed

disjunctively

or

conjunctively

as

“and/or”

or

as

otherwise

necessary

in

order

to

bring

KC-1076591-l

8

259 7/3

---

within the

scope ofthe Interrogatory all

responses which might

otherwise

be

construed to

be outside

its scope.

2.

It

is

not

PCC’s

intention

by

these

Interrogatories

to

seek

information

that

is

protected by

the attorney-client privilege or by the work product

doctrine.

Therefore,

all

of the

Interrogatories below should be

construed consistent with that

intention, even if an

Interrogatory

by

its

terms could

be

construed

to

seek

to

elicit

such

information,

so

that

no

objection

on

that

basis

is required.

INTERROGATORY NO.

I:

State the

full name,

occupation, title and

business

address

of the person or persons providing information

in response to

these interrogatories, including all

individuals

responding

on

behalf of any

person

who

is

not

an

individual,

and

indicate which

person or person answered each interrogatory.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

2:

State with

specificity all

possible

adverse health

effects

caused by the ingestion ofdrinking water containing sulfates,

and for each such possible

adverse

health

effect

stated,

further state

the concentrations of sulfates

in

drinking

water at which

the

possible

adverse

health

effect

may

occur,

and

identify

each

document

and

other

source

of

information upon which your answer is based.

RESPONSE:

KC40765911

9

2597

3

---

INTERROGATORY NO.3:

State with

specificity

all

possible

adverse

health

effects

caused

by

the

ingestion

of drinking

water

containing

chlorides,

and

for

each

such

possible

adverse

health

effect

stated,

further

state the

concentrations of chlorides

in

drinking

water

at

which the possible adverse health

effect may occur, and identi& each document and

other source

of information upon which your answer is based.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 4:

State with

specificity

all

possible

adverse

health

effects

caused

by

the

ingestion of drinking water containing

TDS,

and

for each

such possible

adverse

health

effect

stated,

further

state

the

concentrations

of

TDS

in

drinking

water

at

which

the

possible

adverse

health

effect

may

occur,

and

identify

each

document

and

other

source

of

information upon which your answer is based.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

5:

State with

specificity

all

possible

adverse health

effects

caused

by

the ingestion of drinking water

containing

iron,

and

for each

such

possible

adverse

health

effect

stated,

further

state

the

concentrations of

iron

in

drinking

water

at

which

the

possible

adverse

health

effect

may

occur,

and

identify

each

document

and

other

source

of

information upon which your answer is based.

RESPONSE:

KC-1076591-i

1

259 7/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO.

6:

State with

specificity

all possible

adverse

health

effects

caused

by

the

ingestion

of drinking

water

containing

manganese,

and

for

each

such

possible

adverse

health

effect

stated,

further state the concentrations

of

manganese

in

drinking water at

which the possible adverse health effect may occur, and identify each document and other source

ofinformation upon which your answer is based.

INTERROGATORY NO.

7:

Identify all

publications issued

by

a

State Agency

and

all

other documents either created by

or otherwise in

the possession of a State

Agency that

contain

summaries of water quality data pertaining to

groundwater that constitutes

a public water supply

source in

Illinois.

INTERROGATORY

NO.

8:

Identify

all

other

publications

issued

by

a

State Agency

and

all

other documents

either

created

by or

in

the possession of a

State

Agency

that

contain

summaries of Illinois groundwater quality data.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

9:

Has

the State

made

any

effort

to

determine the

direction

and/or rate

of groundwater flow near the Mine?

If so,

state

each

determination,

identify

each

person

involved in

the process of each such

determination

being made,

and

state

the bases

for

KC-1076591-l

II

2597/3

---

each

such

determination.

Identify the

owner,

location,

and

date

of installation

of

each

well

formerly or currently

in

existence near

the

Mine.

For

each

such well,

state the purpose of the

well and

state all

water

quality

data obtained

by

analyses of samples of groundwater obtained

from the well.

INTERROGATORY NO.

10:

State

the

background

level

of sulfates

in

groundwater

near

and

upgradient

from

the Mine near

the Mine

and

state with

specificity the

basis

for

your

answer.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY

NO. Ii:

State

the

background

level

of chlorides

in

groundwater

near

and

upgradient

from

the Mine

near the

Mine

and

state with

specificity the basis

for your

answer.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

12:

State the

background

level

of TDS

in

groundwater near

and

upgradient

from the Mine near the Mine

and state with

specificity thebasis

for your answer.

RESPONSE:

KC-1076591.I

2597’3

---

INTERROGATORY NO. 13:

State the background

level of

iron

in

groundwater

near

and upgradient from the Mine near the Mine and state with

specificity the basis for your answer,

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

14:

State the background

level of manganese

in groundwater

from

the

Mine

near

and

upgradient

from

the

Mine

near the

Mine

and

state with

specificity

the

basis for your answer.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

15:

What

are

the

uses

and

potential

uses

of groundwater

located

at and near the Mine?

RESPONSE:

16:

For

each

use

and

potential

use

of

the

groundwater

located

at

and near the Mine

identifkd in

your answer to

Interrogatory

15,

state whether that use

has

been

precluded,

adversely

affected,

or

threatened

to

be

adversely

affected

by

sulfates

generated

within

a

coal

mining

refuse

disposal

area at

the

Mine.

If your

answer

to

the

this

Interrogatory

is affirmative, state specifically

all

facts upon which

your answer is

based.

RESPONSE:

KC-1076591-l

2597/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO. 17:

For

each

use

and

potential

use

of

the

groundwater

located at

and near the Mine identified

in your answer to

Interrogatory

15,

state whether that use

has

been

precluded,

adversely

affected,

or

threatened

to

be

adversely

affected

by

chlorides

generated within

a

coal mining

refuse

disposal

area

at

the

Mine.

If your

answer

to

the

this

Interrogatory is affirmative,

state specifically all

facts upon which your answer is based.

INTERROGATORY NO. 18:

For

each

use

and

potential

use

of

the

groundwater

located at and near the Mine

identified in

your answer to

Interrogatory

15,

state whether that use

has been precluded,

adversely affected, or threatened

to

be

adversely affected

by TDS

generated

within

a

coal mining refuse disposal

area at the Mine.

If your answer

to

the this

Interrogatory

is

affirmative, state specifically all facts upon which your answer is based.

INTERROGATORY NO.

19:

For

each

use

and

potential

use

of

the

groundwater

located at and near the Mine identified in

your answer

to

Interrogatory

15,

state whether that

use

has been precluded,

adversely affected, or threatened

to be

adversely affected

by

iron

generated

within a coal mining refuse disposal

area at the Mine.

If your answer to

the

this

Interrogatory

is

affirmative,

state specifically

all facts upon which your answer is based.

RESPONSE:

KC-107&591-!

14

25

97/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO. 20:

For

each

use

and

potential

use

of

the

groundwater

located

at

and

near the Mine identified in

your answer

to

Interrogatory

15,

state whether that

use

has

been

precluded,

adversely

affected,

or

threatened

to

be

adversely

affected by

manganese

generated

within

a

coal

mining

refuse

disposal

area at

the

Mine.

If your

answer

to

the

this

Interrogatory is affirmative,

state specifically all

facts upon

which your answer is based.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 21:

pursuant to Section 8(d)

of the CPA?

If so,

describe each such

study

in

detail,

including

the purpose

of the

study,

the

nature

of the

study,

the results

of

the

study,

and

the

time

period

during

which

the

study

was

carried out;

and identify each publication that contains information regarding the study.

INTERROGATORY

NO. 22:

identify

each

document

that

contains

information

regarding the possible

adverse health

effects of sulfates relied

upon

by the Board

in

connection

with its promulgation ofthe Part

620 Standards.

RESPONSE:

KC-i076591-t

15

2

59 7/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO. 23:

Identify each

other

document

that

contains

information

regarding the possible

adverse health effects of sulfates

relied

upon by

the Board

in

connection

with its promulgation of the Part 620

Standards.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 24:

Identify

each

document

that

contains

information

regarding the possible adverse health

effects of chlorides considered by

the Board

in

connection

with its promulgation of the Part 620 Standards.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO.

25:

Identify

each

document

that

contains

information

regarding the possible adverse

health

effects of chlorides relied upon

by the Board

in

connection

with

its promulgation of the Part

620 Standards.

INTERROGATORY NO. 26:

Identify

each

document

that

contains

information

regarding the possible adverse health effects ofTDS considered by the Board

in

connection with

its promulgation ofthe Part 620 Standards.

RESPONSE:

KC-1076591.i

16

2597/3

---

INTERROGATORY NO. 27:

Identify

each

document

that

contains

information

regarding the possible

adverse health effects ofTDS considered by the Board

in connection with

its promulgation ofthe Part 620 Standards.

INTERROGATORY

NO. 28:

Identify

each

document

relied

upon

by

the

Board

in

evaluating

the

technical

feasibility

and

economic

reasonableness

of

coal

mine

operators

complying

with

the

Part

620

Standards

in

light

of

existing

physical

conditions

at

and

near

existing coal mine refuse disposal areas.

INTERROGATORY NO. 29:

Did

an

economic

technical

advisory

committee

make

any comments on

any document

identified in your answer to

the preceding Interrogatory?

If so,

identify

each person

who was a

member of each such committee,

describe all

such comments,

and

identify

each

publication

that

contains

information

regarding

the

activities

of each

such

committee and/or

any comments made by any such committee with respect to

any such study.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 30:

Has

the District

at

any

time

treated

raw water obtained

from

its production wells by

any

method that results

in

an increased

concentration

of sulfates

in

KC-107659$-i

17

2597(3

---

the District’s

finished

water as compared

to

that

existing

in

the pre-treated raw water?

If so,

describe each such method

and

state when each

such method was employed by the District

and

describe

any

action

taken

by

the

State

to

monitor,

prohibit,

or

limit

the

District’s

treatment

method

in this regard.

RESPONSE:

KC-1076591.I

259 7/3

---

Date:

May 23, 2003

PEABODY COAL COMPANY

By its attorneys

W.

C.

Blanton

BLACKWELL SANDERS PEPER MARTIN LLP

Two Pershing Square, Suite

1000

2300 Main

Street

Post Office Box

419777

Kansas City, Missouri

64141-6777

(816)

983-8000

(phone)

(816) 983-8080

(fax)

wblanton@blaclcwellsanders.com (e-mail)

Step1~n

F.

Hedinge’r

HEDINOER LAW OFFICE

2601

South Fifth

Street

Springfield,

IL

62703

(217) 523-2753 (phone)

(217) 523-4366 (fax)

hedinger~.cityscape.net(e-mail)

KC-1076591-l

19

25973

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies

that

a copy of the foregoing Peabody’s

Fourth

Set Of

Interrogatories

To

The

State

has, this

23rd day of May,

2003,

been

placed

in

the

U.S.

Mail,

first-class postage paid, addressed to:

Jane

E.

McBride

Environmental Bureau

Attorneys

General’s Office

500

South

2nd

Street

Springfield,

Illinois 62706

W.

C. Blanton

BLACKWELL SANDERS

PEPER MARTIN

LLP

2300 Main Street, Suite

1000

Kansas City, MO

64108

KC1 07659 I. I

2

597/3

---

BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

PEOPLE

OF

THE STATE OF

ILLINOIS,

)

)

Complainant,

)

)

v.

)

PCB

99-134

)

PEABODY COAL COMPANY,

a Delaware

)

corporation,

)

Respondent.

)

PEABODY’S FIFTH SET OF REQUESTS

TO THE STATE

FOR THE

PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

Respondent,

Peabody Coal Company

(“PCC”),

through

its undersigned

attorneys, hereby

submits

to

Complainant,

People of the

State

of illinois

(“State”),

FCC’s

fifth set of requests

for

the production of documents.

INSTRUCTIONS

1.

Except

to

the

extent

stated

otherwise

in

a

specific

request

below,

produce

all

documents described by

a specific request created on or after January

1,

1960.

2.

Documents

are

to

be

produced

for

purposes

of inspection

and

copying

within

28

days

of

service

of these

requests

at

the

offices

of Stephen

F.

Hedinger,

2601

South

Fifth

Street, Springfield,

Illinois.

3.

Produce all

original

responsive

documents, as well as nonconforming copies

and

any

copies

with

markings or

other matter

not

appearing

on

the

face

of the

original,

including

blind copies for persons other than the recipient shown on the document.

KC-1076600-

2597/3

---

4.

Produce

all requested documents

as

they

are kept

in

the usual

course of business

or

organized

and

labeled

to

correspond

with

the categories

in

the request,

and

all

retrievable

information in computer storage

is to be produced in both electronic and printed form.

5.

For

any responsive

document that previously

was

in

your possession,

custody,

or

control

but is

no

longer

in

your possession

or custody

or subject to

your control,

or which

was

known to

you but is no

longer in

existence, state what

disposition was made of such document or

what

became ofit.

6.

Any

objections

to

the

request

for

production,

full

or

partial,

under

claim

of

privilege of any kind whatsoever

are to

be made

in compliance with Illinois

Supreme Court Rule

201(n) by fully stating the nature of the claim ofprivilege, stating

all

facts

relied upon

in support

of the

claim

of privilege,

identifying

with

specificity

all

documents

related

to

the

claim

of

privilege along

with

a

complete description of the contents of the withheld documents, identify

all

persons

having

knowledge

of any

facts

related

to