GRAHAM C-STORES COMPANY,
)
Petitioner,
)
)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
)
BEFORE
THE
POLLUTION CONTROL BOAR)
OF
THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS
NOTICE
PCBNo.03-
(LUST
—
Ninety Day Extension)
RECEIVED
CLERK’S
OFFiCE
JUN
9 2O~3
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
Ronald W. Schrack, P.E.
Schrack Environmental Consulting, Inc.
1415 West 22nd Street
Tower Floor.
Oak Brook, IL
60523
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the office of the Clerk of the Pollution
Control Board a REQUEST FOR NINETY DAY EXTENSION OF APPEAL PERIOD, copies of which
are herewith served upon you.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVJRONIvIENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent
Assistant Counsel
Special Assistant Attorney General
Division of Legal Counsel
1021 North Grand Avenue, East
P.O.Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
217/782-9143 (TDD)
Dated: June 4, 2003
BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OF
THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS
GRAHAM C-STORES COMPANY,
)
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
. )
Respondent.
)
REQUEST
FOR
NINETY
DAY EXTENSION
OF APPEAL PERIOD
NOW COMES the Respondent, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois
EPA”), by one of its attorneys, John J. Kim, Assistant Counsel and Special Assistant Attorney
General, and, pursuant to Section 40(a)(1) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (415
ILCS 5/40(a)(1)) and
35
Ill. Adm. Code 105.208, hereby requests that the Illinois Pollution
Control Board (“Board”) grant an extension of the thirty-five
(35)
day period for petitioning for a
hearing to September 2, 2003, or any other date not more than a total of one hundred twenty-five
(125)
days from the date of the Illinois EPA’s final decision. In support thereof, the Illinois EPA
respectfully states as follows:
1.
On April 30, 2003, the Illinois EPA issued a final decision to the Petitioner
regarding a request for reimbursement from the Underground Storage Tank Fund. (Exhibit A)
2.
On May 28, 2003, the Petitioner made a written request to the Illinois EPA for an
extension oftime by .which to file a petition for review, asking the Illinois EPA join in requesting
that the Board extend the thirty-five day period for filing a petition to ninety days. The Petitioner
did not representwhen the final decision was received. (Exhibit B)
3.
The additional time requested by the parties may eliminate the need for a hearing
in this matter or, in the alternative, allow the parties to identify issues and limit the scope of any
hearing that may be necessary to resolve this matter.
CLERK’c (~r’-y,-r-
JUN 9 2~3
STATE
OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
PCBNo.03-
(LUST
—
Ninety Day Extension)
1
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the parties request that the Board, in the
interest of administrative and judicial economy, grant this request for a ninety-day extensiOn of
the thirty-five day period forpetitioning for a hearing.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent
Jo~
Assistant Counsel
Special Assistant Attorney General
.
Division of Legal Counsel
1021 North Grand Avenue, East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
.
217/782-9143 (TDD)
Dated: June 4, 2003
This filing submitted on recycled paper.
2
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1021
NORTH GRAND AVENUE EAST,
P.O.
Box 19276,
SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS
62794-9276
JAMES
R.
THOMPSON CENTER,
100
WEST RANDOLPH, SUITE
11-300,
CHICAGO,
IL
60601
ROD
R.
BLAGOJEVICH, GOVERNOR
RENEE CIPRIANO, DIRECTOR
217/782-6762
APR30 2003
Graham C-Stores Company
Attn: Michael .0. Graham
33978 North Highway
45,
P.O. Box 89
Grayslake, illinois 60030
Re:
LPC#0894385182--KaneCounty
ElginlElgin Citgo (Unoven)
1580 Larkin Avenue
LUST Incident #920
155
LUST FISCAL FILE
Dear Mr. Graham:
The Agency has completed the review ofthe request for reimbursement ofcorrective action costs
from the Illinois Underground Storage Tank Fund for the above-referenced facility. The invoices
reviewed covered the period from August 8, 2001 to December 31, 2002. The amount requested
was $28,112.38.
The deductible amount for this claim is $10,000.00, which was previously deducted from the
Invoice Voucher dated August 25, 1994. This deductible was associated with Incident #920
155.
The $10,000.00 deductible that is associated with Incident #930813 is being taken from this
billing package. In addition to the deductible, there are costs from this request that are not being
reimbursed. Listed in Attachment A are the costs which are not being reimbursed from this
request and the reasons these costs are not being reimbursed.
On February 28, 2003, the. Agency received your complete request for payment for this claim. As
a result of the Agency’s review ofthis claim, a voucher for $12,382.72 will be prepared for
submission to the Comptroller’s Office for payment as funds become available based upon the
date the Agency received your complete request for payment ofthis claim; Subsequent claims
that have beenlare submitted will be processed based upon the date complete subsequent billings
requests are received by the Agency.
This constitutes the Agency’s final action with regard to the above invoices. An underground
storage tank owner or operator may appeal this final decision to the Illinois Pollution Control
R0CKFORD —4302 North Main Street, Rockiord, IL 61103 —(815) 987-7760 •
DEs PLAINES
—9511
W. Harrison St., Des Plaines, IL 60016—1847) 294-4000
ELGIN —595 South State, Elgin, It (.nl ~t — (g47I ~ttEt.~1~1
•
PFüRIA
—5415 N. University St.. Peciria, IL 61614— (309) 693-5463
BUREAU OF LAND- PEORIA — 7620 N. University St.,
El, Champaign, IL 61820 —1217) 278-5800
SPRINGFiELD —4500 S. Sixth Street Rd., Sprir
insville, IL 62234 —(618) 346-5120
M~
PRINTED
ON
RECYCLED PAPER
Page 2
Board (Board) pursuant to Section 22.18b(g) and Section 40 of the Act by filing apetition for a
hearing within 35 days after the date ofissuance ofthe final decision. However, the 35-day
period may be extended for a period of time not to exceed 90 days by written notice from the
owner or operator and the Illinois EPA within the initial 35-day appeal period. Ifthe owner or
operator wishes to receive a 90-day extension, a written request that includes a statement of the
date the final decision was received, along with a copy ofthis decision, must be sent to the Illinois
EPA as soon as possible.
For information regarding the filing ofan appeal, please contact:
Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
State ofIllinois Center
100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
312/814-3620
For information regarding the filing of an extension, pl’ease contact:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division ofLegal Counsel
1021 North Grand Avenue East
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
If you have any questions, please contact Nancy Moore of my staff at 217/782-6762.
DEO:NM:ct\03250 12.doc
Attachment
E. Oakley, Manager
LUST Claims Unit
Planning & Reporting Section
Bureau ofLand
cc:
Schrack Environmental Consulting, Inc.
Attachment A
Accounting Deductions
Re: LPC #0894385 182
-~
Kane County
Elgin/Elgin Citgo
(Unoven)
1580 Larkin Avenue
LUST Incident No. 920155
LUST FISCAL FILE
Item # Description of Deductions
.
$136.55’,
deduction in costs that the owner/operator’ failed to demonstrate were
reasonable (Section 22.1 8b(d)(4)(C) ofthe’ Environmental Protection Act).
These deductions are being taken from Schrack Environmental Consulting, Inc. (SEC1)
Invoice #3770 dated December 9, 2002:
a. The rate forMacrocore Sampler Liners is being reduced on GeoServe Invoice
#021121.03 dated~November21, 2002 ($37.00)
b. A deduction is being made from Equipment Costs for a support vehicle. Only one
support vehicle is
eligible per day. The Weekly Worksheet shows both vehicles
were charged on November 21, 2002
($50.00).
-
c. The Mileage that is associated with the second support vehicle on November 21,
2002 is being
deducted from Field Purchases
($45.05).
d. The rate charged for Mileage is being reduced ($4.50).
2.
$127.50, deduction for an adjustment in costs due to a lack of supporting
documentation (Section 22.1 8b(d)(4)(C) of the Environmental Protection Act);
These deductions are being taker~from SECI Invoice #3370 dated December 9, 2002:
a. The additional Support Vehicle, not previously
deducted, is disallowed. The
Equipment summary sheet indicates that the support vehicles were rented, but
therewas no evidence from the rental company included in the claim. Also, the
mileage for this vehicle is being paid, so the charge for the vehicle is ineligible.
Only a vehicle or mileage can be claimed, not both ($50.00).
b. The Equipment summary sheet indicates that the copier was rented, so there must
be a receipt from the company where the copies were made ($77.50).
3.
$630.00, deduction for costs associated with seeking reimbursement from the
Underground Storage Tank Fund (Section 22.18 (e)( 1 )(C) and 22.1 8b(a)(3) of the
Environmental Protection Act).
a. The
personnel charges
for Project Manager (9.0 hours
@
$70.00)
for the task
“Expenditure Review” is
being
deducted from Remediation Unlimited, Inc.
Invoice #11012 dated May 17, 2002. This invoice lists “Reimbursement
Application” as one of the tasks billed.
4.
$4,835.61,
deduction for costs associated with ineligible Tanks (Section 22.18b(a)(5)
of the Environmental Protection Act).
a. It was discovered that the costs for pulling the
two
ineligible tanks
(550
gallon
Used Oil
tank and
1,000 gallon Heating Oil
tank)
on August 18, 1992
and
August
19, 1992 were paid in error. These were submitted in the billing package received
by the Agency on December 29, 1993 requesting $77,904.00. These costs are
being re-claimed in this current billing submitt~1.Following
are
the specific
charges associated with the ineligible tanks that
are
included in this deduction:
i. Dames & Moore Invoice #007-11740 dated August 14, 1992 for the period
covering July 11, 1992 through August 7, 1992 includes a memo to
Richard Horn of Unocal outlining the activities completed
and
billed on
this invoice. All three tasks listed
are
for preparation to remove the
two
ineligible tanks ($2,431.23).
ii. Dames & Moore Invoice #007-11970 dated October 9, 1992 for the period
from August
15,
1992 to September 11, 1992:
1. Personnel costs for the week ending August 21, 1992
($2,159.60)
2. Expenses on August 18, 1992 and August 19, 1992 for meals, gas,
mileage and film ($58.11)
3. Equipment used the week en4ing August 21, 1992 ($100.00)
This invoice lists “Removal of USTs” on the front page,
and
there
is a memo to Richard Horn of Unocal from Dames & Moore dated
August 14, 1992 that states that this invoice includes costs for the
task “Removed and disposed of the two
USTs”.
iii. Dames and Moore Invoice #007-12143 dated October 30, 1992:
1. Film developing for the film that was used during the tank removals
($9.17)
.
2. Equipment rental on August 18, 1992
($77.50).
NM:ct\032472.doc
Environmental Site Assessments
and
Remediation Management Services
May28, 2003
Mr. John Kim
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Legal Counsel
1021
NorthGrand
Avenue East
Springfield,
Illinois
62794
-
9276
RE: LPC#0894385182--KaneCounty
Elgin/Elgin CITGO
-
Graham
C
-
Stores Co.
1580
Larkin
Avenue
LUST Incident Number: 920155
Dear
Mr. Kim:
This correspondence is
being
submitted to request a 90
day
extension to resolve the issues associated
with the LUST reimbursement request filed for the above referenced property. A copy ofthe April
30,
2003 determination letter received fromthe IEPA for the subject site is provided as Attachment
A.
SECT, the consultant and agent for the owner ofthe subject property, submitted a correspondence
to Ms. Nancy Moore of the LUST Claims
Unit
responding to the deductions made in the
aforementioned determination letter. A copy of the May 7, 2003 response letter submitted by SECT
is provided in Attachment B.
The property owner would prefer to resolve this issue without
filing
an appeal with the Illinois
PollutionControl Board. If you have
any
questions concerning this correspondence, please feel free
to contact me at 630 -2 43
-
1777. Thank you for your assistance withthis matter.
Sincerely,
Ronald W.
Schrack, P.E.
President
PN: 99934.01
CC: Mr.
Michael
0. Graham
-
Graham C
-
Stores Company
•a
SCHRACK ENVIRONMENTkL CONSULTING, lNt~.
I
1415
West 22nd
Street
Tower Floor
Oak Brook, illinois 60523
r’~L....
.~,,
io’,ro.
~O
4~~T7 ~
i5T~t~
‘,4lEtcUt
Printed on recycledpaper
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned attorney at law, hereby certify that on June 4, 2003, I served true and
correct copies of a REQUEST FOR NINETY DAY EXTENSION OF APPEAL PERIOD, by
placing true and correct copies in properly sealed and addressed envelopes and by depositing
said sealed envelopes in a U.S. mail drop box located within Springfield, Illinois, with sufficient
First Class Mail postage affixed thereto, upon the following
named persons:
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Ronald W. Schrack, P.E.
Illinois Pollution
Control Board
Schrack Environmental Consulting, Inc.
James R. Thompson Center
1415 West 22’~”Street
100 West Randolph Street
Tower Floor
Suite 11-500
OakBrook,IL 60523
Chicago, IL 60601
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Res ondent
Assistant Counsel
Special Assistant Attorney General
Division ofLegal Counsel
1021 North Grand Avenue, East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
217/782-9143 (TDD)