BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDOF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
NOTICE
PETITION FOR REVIEW OF FINAL AGENCYLEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK DECISION
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
1. sealed and addressed envelopes and by depositing said sealed envelopes in a U.S.
2. postage affixed thereto, upon the following named persons:

•

c~v~

~JAN

2004

BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

KRAMER

SERVICE

STATION,

)

•~i~:

ur ~

POLLUT~

COl~ffROL

HOARD

Petitioner,

)

vs.

)

PCB No.

04-52

)

(UST Appeal)

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

)

NOTICE

Dorothy M.

Gunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution

Control Board

State

of Illinois Center

100 West Randolph Street

Suite

11-500

Chicago, IL

60601

John J.

Kim

Assistant

Counsel

Special Assistant

Attorney

General

Division ofLegal Counsel

1021

North Grand Avenue, East

P.O.

Box

19276

Springfield,

62794-9276

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that

I have today filed with the office ofthe Clerk of

the Pollution Control Board

a Petition for Review of Final Agency Leaking

Underground Storage Tank Decision, a copy ofwhich is

herewith served upon you.

Robert

Shaw

IL ARDC No. 03123632

Curtis W. Martin

IL ARDC No. 06201592

SHAW

MARTIN,

P.C.

Attorneys

at Law

123

10th Street, Suite

302

P.O.

Box

1789

Mt.

Vernon, Illinois

62864

Telephone

(618)

244-1788

/Curtis

W. Martin,,4torney

for

(

Kramer Service

tation,

Petitioner

RECE~/~

BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

jpj~

2004

KRAMER’S SERVICE

STATION

)

OLLW1ON

COWFROL ~OA$U)

Petitioner,

)

vs.

)

PCB No.

04-52

)

(UST Appeal)

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

)

PETITION FOR REVIEW OF FINAL AGENCY

LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK DECISION

NOW COMES the Petitioner,

Kramer’s Service Station,

(“Kramer”),

by one of

its attorneys, Curtis W. Martin of Shaw

& Martin,

P.C., and, pursuant

to Sections

57.7(c)(4)(D) and

40 of the Illinois Environmental

Protection Act (415 ILCS

5157.7(c)(4)(D)

and 40) and 35

Ill. Adm.

Code 105.400-412, hereby requests

that the

Illinois

Pollution Control Board (“Board”) review the final decision ofthe Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency (“Agency”) in the above cause, and in support

thereof, Kramer respectfully states

as follows:

On September

2003, the Agency issued a Final Decision to Kramer,

a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit

On September

19,

2003, Kramer made a written request to the Agency

for an extension of time by which to file a petition for review to ninety

days, a copy

ofwhich is attached hereto as Exhibit

On October

10,

2003, the Agency joined in Kramer’s request that the

Board extend the thirty-five

day period for filing a petition to ninety days, a copy of

which is attached hereto as Exhibit

On December

2003, the Board entered an Order extending the time

which Kramer could file a petition to and including January

2004, a copy of

which is attached hereto as Exhibit

The

grounds for the Petition herein are as follows:

On May

15,

2003, Kramer submitted to the Agency,

through its

consultant,

United Science Industries,

Inc.

(“USI”), a revised Site Classification

Work Plan

(“Plan”).

The costs included within the budget for the Plan were

reasonable

and in accordance with

generally accepted engineering practices

and

consistent with the Act and its regulations.

By its letter of September

2003, the Agency modified the Plan

and

conditionally approved it with such modifications.

The history of this appeal leads

back to August

1, 2002 when Kramer submitted a Site Classification Work Plan

which the Agency rejected by letter of November 27,

2002, requiring a Leaking

Underground Storage Tank (“LUST”) pollutant

sample to be performed.

accordance with the Agency’s instructions,

Kramer performed the LUST pollutant

sample and analysis and the results

and costs

for same were included in the revised

Site Classification

Work Plan

and Budget submitted

on May

15,

2003.

The Agency

then issued its September

2003 letter

currently under appeal.

By its

September

2003 letter, the Agency eliminated substantial

~ersonne1

time and in particular,

the costs

associated with the LUST pollutant

sample and analysis.

More specifically:

The Agency adjusted $638.40 in handling charges but

failed to clarify to which subcontract or field purchase costs the adjustment is

associated.

Such adjustment

is therefore arbitrary and capricious.

The $1,000.00 adjustment by the Agency for the LUST

pollutant sample costs was arbitrary and capricious in that the Agency required

such sampling

and analysis

by its letter

dated November 27,

2002, but now

disapproves

of the costs associated with it.

Such adjustment

also in

contravention

of 735

Ill. Adm.

Code 732.312

in part that

if,

upon

completion of early action requirements pursuant

to sections 732.200 through

732.204, the requirements

of subsection

(b) of Section 732.3 12 have not been met,

then the owner or operator, prior to conducting any site evaluation activities, shall

submit to the Agency a site classification plan including,

but not limited to,

contaminant

identification,

and groundwater investigation plan, satisfying the

minimum requirements

for site evaluation

activities as set forth in Section 732.3 12.

(Emphasis

added).

Therefore,

the

LUST sample and analysis and its associated

costs were necessary to meet the minimum requirements

of the site evaluation

required under Section

732.312.

Such sample is not required exclusively to be

collected prior to site classification

during early action.

Moreover,

USI, the current

consultant for Kramer,

was not the

consultant during the early action phase

of this

remediation project and was simply complying with the Agency’s requirements.

Requiring Kramer

to perform the work necessary to

comply with the Agency

requirements

and then to deny the costs

associated

with such compliance is not only

arbitrary

and capricious, but simply unfair.

The Agency’s adjustment of $250.00 for mobilization is

the costs incurred by Kramer associated with the transportation

of the equipment

necessary for the LUST sampling.

For the reasons stated

in paragraph

3 above,

such adjustment

is arbitrary

and capricious.

The Agency’s adjustment of $300.00

for PVC risers is

merely on a cost basis without any technical justification

and is therefore

arbitrary

and capricious.

The Agency’s adjustment of $7,553.50 in total

personnel

charges is merely

a cost basis

with no technical justification

and further fails to

advise Kramer of the particular personnel charges adjusted or the reasons

therefore.

Such adjustment

is therefore

arbitrary and capricious.

The

adjustment by the Agency of $10.00 for the PID is

merely on a cost basis

and without technical justification and is therefore

arbitrary

and capricious.

The Agency’s adjustment of $102.00 in transducer and

data logger charges is merely on a cost basis and without technical justification and

is therefore

arbitrary

and capricious.

The Agency’s adjustment of $50.00 related to the number

of sample shippings

is arbitrary

and capricious in that

the shipping costs were

incurred with regard to the LUST pollutant sampling and are, for the reasons

stated

in paragraph

above, subject to reimbursement.

The Agency’s adjustment

of$60.00 for the number of per

diem charges

is arbitrary

and capricious in that such costs were incurred with

regard to the LUST pollutant sampling and are, for the reasons

stated in paragraph

above,

subject to reimbursement.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner,

Kramer Service Station,

for the reasons stated

above, requests that

the Board reverse the decision of the Agency and rule in favor

of the Petitioner’s request for approval of the High Priority

Corrective Action Plan

and Budget and that

Petitioner recover its attorney’s fees and costs incurred herein

pursuant

to 415

ILCS

5/57.8(1) and

35 III. Adm.

Code 732.606(1).

Respectfully ~ubmitted,

SHAW & MARTIN,

P.C.

Curtis

W. Martin

ARDC

No. 06201592

SKAW & MARTIN, P.C.

Attorneys

at Law

123

10th Street, Suite

302

P.O.

Box

1789

Mt.

Vernon, Illinois

62864

Telephone

(618)

244-1788

Kramer

for

Petitioner

•

4’-...

‘,,-

ILLINOIS

ENV~O.NMENTALPRdTECTION

AGENCY

1021

NORTH

C~ANO

AVENI.iE

6~sr,P.O.

Box 19276,

SPRr~cREW,

U.LINOtS

62794-9276, 217-732-33~’

•

JAMES

R. TICN.PSON

C~i.~lER,

100

WE5T

RANDO~.PH,

SUITE

11-300, C~-uc.;Go,IL 60601,312-814-6026

•

Roo

BLAGOJEVICH,

GOvERNOR

RENEE C~PgIANO,DIRECTOR

2171782-6762

CERTTh’IEL) MAXL

?flD2

~1SD

DflDO

12~4 ~4?7

SEPO52flfl.~

Kramer’s Service Station

bun Kramer

3107

?eriysvifle

IRoad

•

Danville, flliriois 6i~34

•

~e:

LPC

#1830205099

Vermifliori County

Da~avil1e

/ Kramer’s

Service Station

•

1015 E.MaixiStreet

LUST Incident No. 96l6~8

LUST Technical File

Dear Mr. Kramer:

The illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois EPA) has reviewed the Site Classificatièn

Wor~ Plait (plan) submitted for the above~referencedincident.

The Illinois EPA received this

plan, datedMay

15, 2003,

on May 16, 2003.

Citations in this

letter are from the Environmental

Protection Act (Act) and 35 illinois Administrative Code

(35

III. Adm. Code).

The Illinois EPA requires modification of theplan;

therefore, the plan is conditionally approved

with the fllinois EPA’s modifications.

The flhinoj~IEPA has detemi±nedthat the modifications

listed

Atr4chmerrt A

are necessary to demonstrate compliance with Title XVI ofthe

Act

and

~.1.Adm.

Code 732

(Section

57.7(a)(1)

ofthe Act and 35 fli. Adm. Code 732305(c) or

732312(j)).

In addition, the budget is modified pursuant to Section

57,7(a)(l)

of the Act and 35

111. Adni.

Code 732,305(c) or 732.312(j).

Based on

themodifications

listed in Section 2 of Att~chtnent

the amounts Ji~ted

in Section

of AttachmentB are approved.

Please note that the costs must be

incurred in accordance with the approved plan.

Be aware that the amount of reimbursement may

~e limited by Sections

57.8(e),

57.8(g),.and 57.8(d) of the Act, as well as 35

Dl. Adm. Code

732.604, 732.606(s), and 732.611.

Please note that, if

the

owner or operator agrees with the Illinois EPA~s

modifications,

submittal

of an

amended plait andior budget, if applicable, is npt required (Section

57.7(c)(4)

of the Act

•

and 35

Iii.

Mm.

Code

732.503(f)).

Additionally, pursuant to

Section

57.S(aX5)

of the Act ~nd

fli.

Adni.

Code 732.305(e) or 732312(I), if reimbursement will be sought for any additional

costs

that

i-nay be incurred as a resuit of the. Illinois

EPAs mQdifications, an amended budget

—4302

North M~Th

Street.

R~~(dord,

(. ~l 103

—

(815) 987-7760

•

D~?

PLAJNcS

—

9511

)~2$Ti~On

St.. c~

F(~Jn85,

60016— (84~)

294-4000

ELaN

595

Scjuth

St~t~,

El~ir,,

-~~1

6)4

—

(309)

693-54&3

Lfr~w

—

7~20

Un,’~rft~t,

Charnp~~,

61 820

—

(2)7) 278-5800

5pgN~tEt.c—450O

5(xth

S~r~t

(d~~ri

1”~1~

—.—.(rn~,iI)~,

IL 62234

(6)8) 34e-5120

Page 2

must be submitted.

NOTE:

Amended plans andlor budgets must be submitted and

approved prior to the issuance ~f

a No Further

.~mediatian

(NFR) Letter.

Casts

associated with a plan orbudget that have not

been approved prior tc’ the issuance of an NFR Letter will not be reimbursable.

Pursuant to

111.

Admn.

Code 732.301

a Site Classification Completion Report must be

submitted within 90 days ofthe date of this letter to:

Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency

•

Bureau ofLand

#24

Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section

1021 North (land Avenue East

Post Office Dcx

19276

Springfle1d~

IL.

62794-9276

Please submit all corrospondence in duplicate and include the Re: block shown at the beginning

ofthis letter,

•

An underground storage tank system owner or operator may appeal this decision to the Illinois

Pollution Control Board.

Appeal tights are attached.

•

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please contact Biian Bauer at 217/782-3335.

HarryA.. Chappel, P.1g.

Unit Manager

Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section

Division àf Remediatiozi Management

Bureau ofLand

HAC:BPB\

Attachment:

Attachments A and B

Electhm not to

proceed forfli

cc:

United Science Industries

Division File

Appeal Rights

underground storage tank owner or operatormay appeal this fmai decision to the flhinois

Pollution

Control Board pursuant to Sect.ions 40 and 57.7(c)(4)(D) ofthe Act by filing a petition

for a hearirig within

days afterthe date of issuance of the final decision.

However, the

35-day

period maybe extended for a period of time not to exceed

90 days by written, notice from the

owner or operat~r

and

theIllinois EPA within the initial

35-day

appesi pericd.

if the owner or

operator wishes ‘to receive a

90-day extensio~,

a writtenrequest 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 Qunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

State of Illinois Center

100 West Randolph, Suite

11-500

Chicago, IL

60601

312/814-3620

Forinformation regarling the filing ofan extension, please contact:

Illinois £nvircnmental Protection Agency

Division ofLegal Counsel

1021 Nqrth Grand Ave~iue

East

Post Office Box 19276

Springfield, IL

62794-9276

217t782-5544

AttachmentA

Re:

•

LPC #1830205099

Vermillion County

Danville

Kramer’s Service Station

1015E.MainStreet

LUSTincident No. 961668

LUST Techriic~J

‘File

Citations in this

attachment are from theEnvironmental Protection Act

(Act) and

Illinois

Administrative Code

(35 Ill.

Adm. Code).

For

used oil, the indicator contaminants shallbe determined by the results of a used oil

soil sample analysis (35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 732.310(g)).

Prior to

the submission of a site

classification pan

the Owner or operator shall collect a grab sample

from

location

representative ofsoil that ‘is the most contairilnated as a result of the release froth the used

oil UST.

if an area ofcOntamination cannot be identified, the sample shall be collected

from beneath the used oil TJST.

The sample shall be analyzed for:

AU volatile, base/neutral, polynuclear aromatic, and metal parameters listed at

Appendix

B- of Part 732

amid

any otherparameters the Licensed Professional

Engineer or Licensed Professional Geologist suspects may be present based on

liST us~ge.The Illinois EPA may add

degradation products or nuixtuies

ofany of

the above pollutants in accordance with 35

Adm.

Code

620.615.

• b.

The used oil indicator contaminants shall be those volatile, base/neutral,

•

polynucleararomatic, and metal parameters listed at Appendix B of’P~rv

732 or as

,othérw:tse identi±iedat

subsection (g)(l) of this Section that exceed- their

remediation ~bjective at

Ill. Adm.

Code 742 in addition to benzene,

•

ethybenzene,

toluene, total xylenes, and ?NAs.

•

If none ofthe parameters exceed their cleanup objective, the used oil indicator

•

contaminants shall be benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, total xylemies, amid

the

• polynu clear aronaatics listed

in Appendix B

of35~

Ill. Adm. Code 732.

The indicator contaminant

forthis incident must be beazene, ethylbenzene, toluene, total

xylenes,

and’the polynuclear aromatics listed

in Appendix B

of 35 Ill. Adtn. Code 732.

Please note thc results of the metal analysis in the screening sample do not appear to be

over theirrespective remediation objective th~refore,

they are not indicator contaminants.

‘The plan indicates that the owner/operator is electing to

opt the pre-1974 kerosene fuel’

1.1ST out ofth~

UST Program.

In order for the Agency to’ consider this option the

attached fori~

must be

completed áñd signed by the owner/operator.

•

Attachment B

Re:

LPC

#1830205399

Vermillioti County

•

Danvillel Krsnaer’s Service Station

1015 E.

Main Street

•

LUST ~cident

No. 961668

•

•LTJSTTêchniCa-1~ile

Citation~

this attachment are from the Environmental Protection Act (Act) and 3~

1Jinois

Administrative Cnde (35 111. Adru. Code).

TIQN~,

‘

•

‘a result of theillinois EPA’s niodification(s)

ii,.

Section 2 ofthis Attachment ,B, the follo~ving

amounts are approved:

$8,474.55

Investigation Costs

$1,950.00

J~.nalysisCosts

$13,400.00

Personnel Costs

$768.00

•

Equipment Costs

$420.00

Field Purthases and Other Casts

$279.60

Handling Charges

SECTIO?LZ

• 1.

$4,800.00 for costs

associated’with theanalysis forRCRA Metals. ‘Costs.associated with

•

the analysis oflaboratory samples for constituents other than applicable indicator

contaminants or groundwater objectives

are ineligible forpayment from the

Fund

(35

III.

•

Adm. Code 732.606(r)).

These costs are foractivities in excess of those necessary to

meet the thinimum requirements ofTitle XVI ofthe Act (Section

57.5(a)

of the Act

and

35 lii.

Adm. Code

732.606(a)).

•

$63&40.fcran adjustment in ha~idling

charges.

Handling charges are eligib~e,

for

payment only if they are equal to ar less than the amount determined by the following

table

(Section 57.8(g) of the Act and 35

flI. Adnu. Code 732.607):

Subconflact or Field

Eligible Handling Charges as a

Purchase Co~t:

Percentage of Cast:

$0-$5,000

‘

•

‘$5,001

$15000

$600 plus

of amount over

$5,000

~i~,ooi’-$5O,000

~1,60Opius

amount

over $15,000

•

$50,001

-$100000

$4,400 plus 5

of amount over$50,000

sioo,00l

$17000,000

•

$6,900

plus 2

of amount over $100,000

•

si ,000.Oo

for an adjustment in

LUST pollutant sample.

These costs are inconsistent with

•

the associated technical plan.

One ofthe overall goals ofthe financial review IS to assure

•

that costs associated with materials, activities,

and services shall be consistent with the

•‘associated technical plan

(35

Iii. Adm.

Code 732.505(c)).

The LUST pollutant sample is required to be collected prior to site classification and-is

therefore an Early Action cost, not a Size Classification cost.

$250.00 for an adjustment in mobili~ation.The flhinais EPA has determined that’these

‘costs axe not reasonable as submitted

(Section 57.7(c)(4)(C) of the Act and 35 ill. Adm.

Code

732.606(hh)).

One ofthe overall goals ofthe firianciai review is to assure

that

costs

associated

with materials, activities, and services are reasonable

(35 Iii.

Adm. Code

“732.505(c)).

Please note that additional information and/or supporting documentation

may be providi~d

to demonstrate the costs are reasonable,.

5300.00

for an adjustment

PVC

risers.

The Illinois EPA has determined that these

costs

are not reasonable as subtuitted (Section 57.7(c)(4)(C) of the Act and -35 DI. Adm.

Code 732.606(hb)).

One ofthe overall goals ofthe financial review is

to assure that costs

associated with materials, activities, and services are reasonable

(35

Dl.

Mm.

Code

732.505(c)).

Please note that additional information and/or supporting documentation

may be provided to demonstrate the costs

are reasonable.

‘

$7~553.50

for an adjustment in total personnel charges.

The Illinois EPA has determined

that these

COStS

are not r~asonab1e

as submitted (Section

57.7(c)(4)(C)

ofthe Act

and 35

Dl. Mm. Code 73Z606(hh)).

One of the overall goals of the financial review is to

assure

that costs associated with materials, activities, and services are reasonable (35 lB. Adm..

Code

732.505:c))..

Please note that additional information and/or supporting

documentation may be provided to ‘demonstrate the costs are reasonable.

$10.00 for an

adjustment in PD.’

TheBhinois EPA has detenniried that these costs ar~

• not reasonable

as submitted

(Section 57,’7(c)(4)(C) of the Act arid

35.

DL Adrn. Code

732 606(hh)).

One of the overall goals of the financial review is to assure

that

costs

•

associated with matexials7 activities, and services are reasonable (35 DL Adm. Code

732.505(c)).

Please note that

additional information and/of supporting

documentation

‘may be provided to demonstrate the costs

are reasonable.

$102.00

for an adjustment in transducer and

datalogger charges.

The IllinOis EPA ha~

determined that these costs

are not reasonable as submitted (Section 57.7(cX4)(C) of the

Act and 35

Dl.

Ad.in.

Code 732.606(hh)).

One ofthe overall goals of the financial review

• is

assure that costs

associated with materials, activities, and services ai~e

reasonable (35

•

ill.

Mm.

Code

7~2.505(c)),

Please note that additional infonnation and/or supporting

•

documentation may be provided to demonstrate the costs are reasonable.

$50.00

for an adjustment in the number

sample shipping’s.

The I1linoi~EPA has

detennined that these costs are not reasonable as snbmitted (Section 57.7(c)(4)(C)

ofthe

Act and 35

III. Adm.

Code 732.606(Ith)).

One ofthe overall goals of the financial review

Is to

assure that costs associated with materials, activities,

and services are reasonable (35

Ill.

Adm. Code

732.505(c)).

Please note that additional information and/or supporting

documentation may be provided to demonstrate the costs are reasonable.

10.

$~0.00

for an adjustment in number ofper diem charges.

The fllinoi~EPA has

determined that these costs are not reasonable as submitted (Section 57.7(c)(4)(C) of the

-‘

Act and 35

111. Adm. Code 732.606(hh)).

One

ofthe overall

goals of the ftnancial re~iew

is to assure that costs associated with materials, activities,

and services are reasonable (35

Di.

Mm. Code 732.505(c)).

Please note that additional infonnation and/or s~ipporting

documentation may be provided to demonstrate the costs are reasonable.

•

~ ~

ioã,~

ü,dcr

~ic.t4~o

‘~is~

TI’IC XVI

£l,.*o’.luC,U~

rra~tois

(4Z~ll.~

~‘.

5/~7

57.17).

~v1ic

r~v~

p~uUyo~ ~ ~

ki’

U1C

~Q~a$QU

~1v1l

p~mM7o(

to a

O.~.O7(~~dt

___

•

My p~o

bill

m1t~TPl

12I~Ut~d~

0)~

1$bCl. IU*OI1a~.rcccnl. rIper.

ftccr~c.

~oiierx

(,kd.

r..~

o(~u,,~pé~jtm

W$~t

11d~

X’vl

coomi~i

C~&’

(doi~My i~~e~vI

3fr~o..y

(415 Jt~5

tl).

*ppr~

M*n~*ct~

Ccu~.

—

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

•

Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program

•

(tiilsfQrm a,cpIie.~

U’

re1er,se~

.rubjecl

41.5 JLCS .5/57

seq.

and

35 III. 4dm. Code Fwi

732)

Site Identilicatiofl

IEMA

Iric~dent

(6oi9dii;(t~

-•

IEPA Generator #

o~u~~:

Site

Name:

—•

•

Site

Address

~ci..

Baz):

•

City:

•

—•

County:

•

Office

the

State

Fire Marshal

facility ID #

(7d~il):

—

•

—•

Regu’atory Status

•

Was

this

incident reported

the illinois Emergency Management

Agency (TEMA) as a result of a

confirmed

release from

art

Underground Storage Tank (UST) or USTs taken

out

ofoperation

•

prior

to Januarj 2,

1974?

•

YesO

Was

this

incident reported

IEMA

as ~ result of a

confirmed

release from

an UST or

USTs used

e,~~jusivel

to !aore hearing oil for consumptive

use on the premises where stored

and which

serves

other

th:~n

farm

residential unit?

•

Yes

~o 0

Note: If

you marked

tt~’es”

number

and/ or 2

then please complete

the section below:

This

form

should

be used

official notification, to

the Agency

your

intention

NOT

préceed

accoz dance with the Leaking Underground Storage

Tank (LUST)

regulations,

in which case

you

should

mark

the

box

line “p:” below.. Please be advised

that this election shall

be deemed effe~tive

upon

• receipt by the

Agency and may not be withdrawn

once made. Alternatively, this

form may be used to

•

notif’ the Agency ofyour intention

to proceed in accordance with

the

LUSTreg~ilations,

in which case

•

you

should’riark the

bo~

line “B” below:

•

e1ectin~

l’10T0to proceed

(will not

subject

LUST regulations)

am elecdng

t.~

procted 0

(will be subject to

LUST regulations)

I).

g~iarures

Owner

Ope~ior

Name:

Address:

Phone:

•~

•

—

P~one:

i c:

___________

•

k~naturc:

Date:

P.O. Box 360

6295

East IIlindls

W~ghway

Woodlawn, IllinoIs 62298-0360

September

19, 2003

Phone:

(518)

735-24~1

Fax

(618) 7352907

E-Mail;

un~tedscIencsi~unttedsclence.coni

Illinois Environmeittal Protection Agency

Division ofLegal Counsel

1021 North

Grand

Avenue

East

Spring~.e1d,

62794-9276

Attn:

John

Kim

Re:

LPC# 1830205099

—

Verinillion County

Danville/Kramer’s

Service

Station

1015

East Main

St.

LUST Incident No. 961668

LUST

ThCHNICAL FIlE

Dear Mr. Kim:

United Science ladustries, Inc. (USI’),

behalfofour client, Kramer’s Service Station, is

requesting

90-day

extension

the

35-day

appeal

period

in.

regards

the

IEPA

correspondence of

September

2003,

included herein.

I appreciate

yotLr time

and

consideration

in this

matter.

If you have

any

questions

comments regarding this matter please contact me at 6l8~735-24I.lext.

140.

Sincerely yours,

UNITED

SCIENCE INDUSTRIES, NC.

Justin Overturf

Project Manager

Enclosures

~ECE~V~~

DJ~f~I~~

of Logaj COunsel

SEP

2003

Eflvfronme~a,Prote~j~

EXH~B1T

~‘1ITED

SCIENCE

INDUSTR1E~j

BEFORE TUE

POLLUTION

CONTROL BOAR)

01? TUE STATE

ILLINOIS

KRA~R’SSERVICE STATION,

)

Petitioner,

)

PCBNo,04-

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

)

(LUST Appeal

—

Ninety

Day

Extension)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

•

)

Respondent.

)

REQUEST

FOR

NTN1~TY

DAY EXTENSION’

OF APPEAL PERIOD

NOW

COMES

the Respondent,

the

Illinois Environme~ntalProtection Agency

(“illinois

EPA”), by

one of

it~

attorneys,

John

Kim,

Assistant

Counsel

and

Special

Assistant Attorney

Gen~ai,and,

pursuant

Section

40~a)(I)of the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Act

(415

ILCS

5(40(a)(l))

and

III.

Adm.

Code

105.20k,

hereby

requests

that

the

illinois

Pollution.

Control Board (“Board”) gram an extension ofthe thirty-five

(35) day

period

for petitioning for a

hearing to

January 8,

2004,

any other

date

not more

than a total

ofone

hundred twenty-five

(125)

days from

September

2003,

the

date of the

IlIinoi.s

EPA’s

final

decision.

In support

thereof,

the

Illinois

EPA

respectfully states as follows:

September

2003,

the

illinois

EPA

issued a final decision to the Petitioner.

(Exhibit A)

September

19, 2003,

the Petitioner

made

written request

the illinois EPA

for an

extension of time by

which to

file a petition

for review,

asking the Illinois

EPA join

requesting that

the Board

extend the

thirty-five

day period

for

filing

a petition to

ninety days.

The

Petitioner did

not

represent

when the final decision was received.

(Exhibit B)

The

additional time requested

the

parties may eliminate the need for a hearing

this matter

or,

the alternative, allow

the parties

identify issues and limit the

scope

of any

bearingthat may b~necessaryto resolve this matter.

WHEREFORE,

for the

reasons

stated above,

the

parties

request

that

the

Board,

the

interest of administralive and judicial economy, grant

this request for

ninety-day extension

the thirty-five

day

period for

petitioning for a bearing.

Respeetfullysubmitted,

ILLfNOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent

—Th

Assistant Counsel

Special Assistant

Attorney General

Division ofLegal Counsel

1021 North Grand

Avenue,

East

P.O.Box 19276

Springfield, illinois 62794-9276

2171782-5544

2l7/782~9143

(TOD)

Dated: October 10, 2003

TZth3 ñE~ig

~ubm~acd

r~yc1~d

paper.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned attorney at law, hereby cer~fy

that on October

10, 2003, I served true

and

conect

copies of a

P~EQTJBSTFOR NiNETY

DAY EXTENSION

APPEAL

PERIOD,

by placing

true and correct

copies in properly

sealed and

addressed

envelopes

and

by depositing

said sealed

envelopes

a U.S.

mail

drop box located within

Springfield, Illinois, with

sij~icjent

First

Class Mail postage

aflixed thereto, upon

the

following named

persons:

Dorothy M.

Gumi.,

C1er~

Justha

Overturf, Project Manager

Illinois Pollution Control Board

United

Science

Indusiries

James

Thompson Center

P.O. Box 360

100 West Randolph

Street

6295

East

illinois Highway

S~iite

11-500

Woodlawn, IL

62898-0360

Chicago,

IL 60601

ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Assistant Counsel

Special

Assistant At:omey

General

Division of Legal

Counsel

1021 North Grand Avenue, East

P.O.Box 19276

Spring±leld,illinois 62794-9276

217/782-5544

217/782-9143 (TDD)

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December 4,

2003

KRAMER’S

SERVICE STATION,

)

Petitioner,

)

PCB

04-52

)

(UST Appeal)

)

(90-Day Extension)

ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL

)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

)

ORDER

THE BOARD

(by J.P. Novak):

October 14, 2003,

the

parties timely filed a joint notice to extend the

35-day

period

within which Kramer’s Service

Station may appeal a September

2003

determination of the

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency).

See 415

ILCS

5/40(a)(l)

(2002);

Ill.

Adm. Code

105.402,

105.406.

Because the

postmark

date of the joint request is within the time

for filing,

thejoint request was timely filed.

Ill. Adm.

Code

101.300(b)(2),

105.404.

The

Agency approved the site

classification plan, with modifications,

for Kramer’s

Service Station’s

leaking underground petroleum storage tank facility located at 1015

E. Main Street, Danville,

Vermilion

County.

The Board extends the appeal period until

January

8, 2004, as the parties

request.

See 415

ILCS

5/40(a)(1)

(2002);

Ill. Adm. Code

105.406.

If Kramer’s Service

Station fails to

file an appeal on or before

that date, the

Board will

dismiss this case and

close the

docket.

IT IS

SO ORDERED.

I, Dorothy M. Gunn,

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board,

certify that the Board

adopted the above order on December 4,

2003, by a vote of 5-0.

Dorothy M. Gunn,

Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

CERTIFICATE

SERVICE

I, the undersigned attorney at law,

hereby certify that on January

2004,

I served true and correct copies of a Petition

for Review of Final Agency Leaking

Underground Storage

Tank Decision,

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 Mt. Vernon, Illinois, with sufficient

Certified Mail

postage affixed thereto,

upon the following named persons:

Dorothy M.

Gunn,

Clerk

John J.

Kim

Illinois Pollution Control Board

Assistant

Counsel

State of Illinois Center

Special Assistant Attorney General

100

West Randolph Street

Division of Legal Counsel

Suite

11-500

1021

North Grand Avenue, East

Chicago,

60601

P.O. Box

19276

Springfield,

62794-9276

for

Petitioner,

Station