BROCK OIL COMPANY,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph Street
Suite
11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
RECE~VED
CLERK’S OFFICE
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
PCBNo.04-
1q1
)
(LUST Appeal
—
Ninety Day Extension)
)
)
NOTICE
Corey Eversgerd, Project Manager
United Science Industries
P.O. Box 360
6295
East illinois Highway
15
Woodlawn, IL
62898-0360
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
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent
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)
Dated: May6,
2004
BEFORE THE POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
MAY
102004
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Petitioner,
V.
)
)
)
Respondent.
RECE~VED
CLERK’S OFFICE
BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
MAY
102004
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
STATE
OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
BROCK OIL COMPANY,
)
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
PCB No. 04-
/
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
(LUST Appeal
—
Ninety Day Extension)
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 ofthe thirty-five
(35)
day period for petitioning for a
hearing to
August 4,
2004,
or any other date not more than a total of one hundred twenty-five
(125)
days from April
1, 2004, the date of service ofthe Illinois EPA’s final decision.
In support
thereof, the Illinois EPA respectfully states as follows:
1.
On March
31,
2004,
the Illinois
EPA issued
a
final
decision to
the
Petitioner.
(Exhibit A)
2.
On April 26, 2004, the Petitioner made a written reque~t
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
represented that the final decision was received on April
1, 2004.
(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 maybe necessary to resolve this matter.
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
Joh~~~2~
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)
Dated: May 6, 2004
This filing submitted on recycled paper.
2
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
e
1021
NORTH
GRAND AVENUE
EAST,
P.O.
Box
19276,
SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS
62794-9276,
217-782-3397
JAMES
R.
THOMPSON
CENTER,
100
WEST
RANDOLPH,
SUITE
11-300,
CHICAGO,
IL 60601,
312-814-6026
ROD R.
BLAGOJEVICH,
GOVERNOR
RENEE
CIPRIANO,
DIRECTOR
217/782-6762
CERTIFIED MAIL
7002
31B0
0000
1255
8~5~
M4R
31
2OO~
Brock Oil Company
Attn: JeffBrock
601 North Clinton Street
Bloomington,
II 61701
Re:
LPC #1130205274
--
McClean County
BloomingtonfBrock Oil Company
601 North Clinton Street
LUST Incident No. 20000434
LUST Technical File
Dear Mr. Brock:
L1~CEr\?ED
I
A~R01 ~EC’D
~‘r
,, -_-_,_,,,~
_________
______
The Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois EPA) has reviewed the High Priority Site
Investigation Corrective Action Plan (plan) submitted forthe above-referenced incident.
This
information, dated January 20, 2004, was received by the Illinois EPA on
January
22, 2004.
Citations
in this letter are from the Environmental Protection Act (Act) and
35 Illinois
Administrative Code
(35
Ill. Adm. Code).
Pursuant to
Section 57.7(c)(4) ofthe Act and 35
Ill.
Adm. Code 732.405(c), the plan is modified.
The modifications listed below are necessary, in addition to
those provisions already outlined in
the plan, to demonstrate compliance with Title XVI ofthe Act and
35
Ill. Adm. Code 732.
Please note that the activities proposed in the plan are for investigative purposes only.
Final
approval for corrective action activities is
contingent upon the submittal ofa High Priority
Corrective Action Plan that documents the results ofthe proposed investigation and satisfies the
requirements set forth in Section
57.7(c)(1)
ofthe Act and
~5
Ill. Adm.
Code 732.404.
The
required modification(s) is/are as follows:
1.
One (1) additional soil boring may be required to
conform to the IEPA guidelines offive
(5)
soil and
five
(5)
groundwater samples with in the plume.
A copy ofthe Feasibility
and Design Determination for Bioremediation has been provided as an attachment.
2.
If the High Priority Plan proposes to remediate soil
contamination that
is not in the
saturated zone, then please provide information on how the permeox will:
ROCKFORD —4302 North
Main Street,
Rockford,
IL
61103
—
(815) 9
ELCIN
—595 South
State, Elgin,
IL 60123— (84?)
608-:
BURtAU
OF
LAND
-
PEORIA
—
7620 N. University
St.,
Peoria,
IL 61614
—
(3(
SpRINGFIELD—4500
S.
Sixth Street Rd., Springfield,
IL 62706
—121;
M~ION
—
2309 W. Main
Harrison
St.,
Des
Plaines,
IL
60016 —(847)
294-4000
sity
St.,
Peoria,
IL 61614—1309) 693-5463
25 South
First
Street, Champaign, II 61820— (217) 278-5800
9
MalI
Street, Collinsville,
IL 62234
—(618) 346-5 120
18) 993-7200
4
EXHIBIT
Page 2
a.
Remain moist in the unsaturated zone.
The concern is that the Permeox will dry
out and not fully react in the unsaturated zone due to loss ofmoisture.
b.
How the Pernieox will
be transportedldistributed in the unsaturated contaminated
soil zone.
The concern is that pockets and or incomplete
dispersion ofpermeox
may be possible in the unsaturated zone.
In addition, the budget for the High Priority Site Investigation Corrective Action Plan is modified
pursuant to Section
57.7(c)(4)
ofthe Act and
35111. Adm.
Code 732.405(c).
Based on the
modifications listed in Section
2 ofAttachment A, the amounts listed in Section
1 of Attachment
A are approved.
Please note that the costs must be incurred in accordance with the approved
plan.
Be aware that the amount ofreimbursement may be
limited by Sections
57.8(e), 57.8(g)
and
57.8(d)
ofthe Act, as well as 35 Ill. 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
ofan amended plan andlor budget, if applicable, is not required (Section
57.7(c)(4)
ofthe Act
and 35
111. Adm.
Code
732.503(f)).
Additionally, pursuant to
Section
57.8(a)(5)
ofthe Act and
35 Ill. Adm. Code
732.405(e), if reimbursement will be sought for any additional costs that may
be incurred as a result ofthe Illinois EPA’s modifications, an amended budget must be submitted.
NOTE:
Amended plans andlor budgets must be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of
a No Further Remediation (NFR) Letter.
Costs associated
with a plan or budget that have not
been approved prior to the issuance ofan NFR Letter will not be reimbursable.
Pursuant
to 35
111. Adm. Code 732.401, the site investigation results
and a High Priority
Corrective Action Plan demonstrating compliance with the requirements set forth in Section
57.7(c)(1)
ofthe Act and 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 732.404
must be
submitted within 90 days ofthe
date of
this
letter to:
Illinois Envitorimentai Protection Agency
Bureau ofLand
-
#24
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
1021
North Grand Avenue East
Post Office Box
19276
Springfield, IL
62794-9276
Please submit all correspondence 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 rights
are attached.
Page 3
Ifyou
have any questions or need further
assistance,
please contact Wayne Zuehlke at
217/557-6937.
Sincerely,
~
Clifford L. Wheeler
Unit Manager
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
Division of Remediation Management
Bureau of Land
CLW:WZ\20000434IHPCAPMOD.doc
Attachment:
Attachment A
Feasibility and Design Determination for Bioremediation
Appeal Right
cc:
USI, Inc.
Division File
Attachment A
Re:
LPC #1130205274
--
McClean County
BloomingtonfBrock Oil Company
601
North Clinton Street
LUST Incident No. 20000434
LUST Technical File
Citations in this attachment are from the Environmental Protection
Act (Act)
and 35 Illinois
Administrative Code
(35
Ill. Adm. Code).
SECTION
1
As
a result ofthe Illinois EPA’s mo4ification(s) in Section
2 of this Attachment A, the following
amounts are approved:
$3,019.60
Investigation Costs
$2,817.00
Analysis
Costs
$4,120.00
Personnel
Costs
$620.00
Equipment Costs
$3,359.50
Field Purchases and Other Costs
-
$26.64
Handling Charges
SECTION ~
1.
$1,355.00
for an adjustment in Investigative Costs Costs.
The Illinois EPA has
determined that these costs are not reasonable as submitted (Section 57.7(c)(4)(C) of the
Act and 35 III. Adm. Code 732.606(hh)).
One ofthe overall goals ofthe 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.
A.
$750.00 in Mobilization Charges.
The one-day rate includes mobilization charges.
B.
$600.00 in Geoprobe Drilling Costs.
C.
$
5.00 in Disposable Bailer Costs.
2.
$1,280.00 for an adjustment in Investigative Costs.
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
Ill. Adm.
Code
732.505(c)).
A.
$
280.00 in
55
Gallon Drum Costs.
These costs
are associated with Site
Classification and are not considered part ofCorrective Action.
B.
$1000.00 in Disposal
Costs.
These costs are associated with Site Classification
and
are not considered part of Corrective Action.
I
3.
$831.00 for an adjustment in Analytical Costs.
The Illinois EPA has determined that
these costs are not reasonable as submitted (Section
57.7(c)(4)(C)
ofthe Act and 35 Iii.
Adm.
Code 732.606(1±)).One ofthe overall
goals ofthe 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 andlor supporting
documentation may be provided to demonstrate the costs are reasonable.
A.
$
60.00 in TPH Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
B.
$ 135.00.00 in BOD Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive. Samples are
not
required (Pleas refer to
Feasibility and Design Determination for Bioremediation).
C.
$
40.00 in
COD Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
D.
$
66.00
in pH Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive. Only one (1)
sample is required (Pleas refer to Feasibility
and Design Determination for
Bioremediation).
E.
$
90.00
in Microbe Plate Count Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
Only one (1) sample is required (Pleas refer to Feasibility and Design Determination
for Bioremediation).
F.
$
16.00 in Metal Prep Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
G.
$
45.00 in TPH Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
H.
$
30.00 in
COD Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
I.
$
6.00
in Paint Filter
Costs.
The Agency considers these costs
excessive.
J.
$
2.00 in Flash Point Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
K.
$
60.00
in
BOD Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive. Samples are not
required (Pleas refer to Feasibility and Design Determination for Bioremediation).
L.
$106.00.00.00 in pH Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive. Only one
(1) samples is required (Pleas refer to
Feasibility and Design Determination for
Bioremediation).
M.
$175.00 in Microbe Plate Count Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
Only one (1) samples is required (Pleas refer to Feasibility and Design Determination
for Bioremediation).
4.
$15,521.00 for an
adjustment in Personnel
Costs.
The Illinois EPA has determined that
these costs are not reasonable as submitted (Section
57.7(c)(4)(C)
ofthe Act and
35 Iii.
Adm. Code 732.606(1±)).One of the overall goals ofthe 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 tl~iecosts are reasonable.
A.
The Agency has reviewed the activities to be completed as part of the plan and
approved a reasonable
amount ofpersonnel dollars for this effort.
We do not specify number ofhours or type ofpersonnel expected to complete the
proposed activities,
only a reasonable total
amount.
How a consultant chooses to
use this amount (type of personnel used and number of hours) is up to them as
,~
long as the approved total amount
is not exceeded and the personnel rates are
reasonable.
5.
$130.00 for an adjustment in Equipment Costs.
The Illinois
EPA has determined that
these costs
are not reasonable as submitted (Section
57.7(c)(4)(C)
ofthe Act and 35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 732.606(hh)).
One ofthe overall goals ofthe financial 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 provided to demonstrate the costs are reasonable.
A.
$
20.00 in PID Costs.
The Agency considers these costs
excessive.
B.
$
50.00
in Pump Costs.
The Agency considers these costs excessive.
C.
$
60.00 in Vehicle Costs.
The Agency has reduced vehicle usage
by one (I) day.
6.
$1
125.00
for
an adjustment in Field Equipment and Other Costs.
The Illinois EPA has
determined that these costs are not reasonable as submitted (Section
57.7(c)(4)(C)
ofthe
Act and 35
Iii. Adm.
Code 732.606(hh)).
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.
A.
$
105.00 in Color Copies.
Considered excessive by the Agency.
B.
$1020.00
in
Treatability Study Costs.
Costs associated in personnel are considered
part ofthe Treatability Study.
WZ\20000434Attachment AJanO4.doc
Feasibility
and
Design Determination
for Bioremediation
Purpose:
This document is designed to
aid in the review of sites proposing
bioremediation
-
as a means of corrective action.
Each feasibility and
design criteria must be
considered in the design of a corrective action plan proposing bioremediation.
General Applicability
Contaminant Plume:
Soil and
groundwater contaminant
plume should be completely defined.
Free Product:
No Free Product should be present in area to be remediated.
Hydraulic Conductivity:
Should
be greater than I
X l0~.All contaminated saturated zones must be tested.
pH of groundwater:
Should be between 6.0 and 8.0.
Tested from
upper foot of groundwater, within
area ofhighest impact.
Total Microbial
Plate Count:
Soil sample must be taken at or below the groundwater surface, located in an
area
of little or no impact.
Results should be
greater than
1,000 CFU (colony forming
units).
Soil
Porosity:
One sample taken from the contaminated zone.
This will be used in designing of
the remediation
system.
Heavy Metals:
Heavy metals should be tested at the groundwater surface.
These results should
be below 10mg/I for iron; 20 mg/i for copper; 20 mg/i for zinc, 900 mg/I for lead.
Additionally, total heavy metals should not exceed 2500 mg/i.
Oxygen Demand:
For contaminant plumes of
‘/2
acre or less, five borings should be completed and
groundwater
and soil samples collected.
One boring
should be located at the
highest gradient ofthe plume, one from lowest gradient, and three across the
center ofthe plume.
These samples should be tested for Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbon, Chemical Oxygen Demand, and Heavy Metals.
Contaminant plumes larger than
1/2 acre should
add one
more boring (one soil
and one groundwater sample) per additional
‘/2
acre.
I
Design Considerations
Determine mass ofcontaminants:
The mass ofcontaminants (measured by the higher amount ofTotal Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (TPH) or Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD))
to be treated must be
determined in both soil and groundwater.
Sampling will determine the
concentration of contaminants present in the soil and groundwater.
To estimate
the total amount ofoxygen required to remediate the contaminants, the following
example
can be followed:
Assume average concentration (TPH or COD)
=
10 ppm
Assume volume ofcontaminated mass (size ofplume) in cubic yards
=
1,000 (cy)
A cubic yard ofclay’(saturated) weighs 118
#/ft3
=
3200#
A cubic yard ofsand (saturated) weighs 124
#/ft3
=
3350#
The total mass ofcontaminants requiring treatment (clay):
101(1 x 106)x3200#/cyx
l000cy=32#’s
(10 ppm
=
10/(1
x
106))
Estimate of oxygen requirement:
-
Based on the extent of contamination and total mass ofcontaminants, the required
oxygen demand can be calculated.
COD or
TPH
need to be considered in
order to
determine the total amount ofoxygen required fordegradation ofcontaminants.
As a rule ofthumb, 3 lbs ofoxygen are required per lb ofhydrocarbon to be
remediated.
Benzene can be used as an example to determine the mass ratio of
oxygen to hydrocarbon.
Oxidation Equation: C6H6
+
7.5
02=
6C02+ 3 H2O
(126)+(16)~78
7.5
(16’2)= 240
If benzene were the only contaminant present it would take 240 lbs of oxygen to
completely degrade 78
lbs ofbenzene.
Meaning 3 lbs
(240/78
=
3.08) ofoxygen
are required to completely degrade each lb ofbenzene.
For a leaking UST site we
must consider all contaminants that will use oxygen in calculating the oxygen
requirement.
Example:
Total mass of contaminants from above =32 lb
Required Oxygen= 32
lb
*
3#I~4
=
96
lb.
I
If you
assume the oxygen delivery product provides
10
by weight it is capable
of delivering
.1 #~s
of oxygen, therefore:
Oxygen release capability
=
10
Required chemicals
=
960#
The manufacturer’s information regarding oxygen release capabilities should be
followed in calculating required chemicals.
A factor ofsafety of 20 to 30
ofthe
calculated
volume ofmaterial required will be allowed.
Layout ofinjection
wells:
Determining the location and number of injection wells required for a one time
application
is a critical factor in the designing of in-situ bioremediation.
The
design considerations are based on a one-time injection ofoxygen.
Injection
wells galleries should be located to provide distribution ofthe electron acceptor
and nutrients throughout the area targeted for remediation.
Amounts of material
injected at each location should be based in the estimated contaminant levels to be
remediated.
Determining the area of influence is a key parameter for proper distribution ofthe
product into the ground.
Injection pressure, hydraulic conductivity (K), hydraulic
gradient (i) and porosity (n) are important elements to
calculate an approximate
area of influence.
Darcy’s law can be used to estimate the area ofinfluence.
The
injection pressure used will drastically change the hydraulic gradient
in the
vicinity ofthe injection point.
Assuming the length (M) is half ofthe radius of
influence you should use the injection pressure (psi) and estimate ofthe radius of
influence to determine if the amount of time to achieve this radius of influence
makes sense.
An example follows:
v= K ~h/zM,where v
=
Darcy Velocity
Va
=
Ki/n, where,
Va
=
Interstitial
Velocity, (ft/sec)
K
Hydraulic Conductivity, (ft/sec)
I
=
Hydraulic Gradient, dhldl (ft/fl)
n
=
Porosity ofAquifer Material,
()
Generally, the products are injected into the ground with a pressure ranging from
250 to 2500 psi.
To simplify the calculations, several assumptions
are made to
calculate the area ofinfluence and
interstitial velocity.
Assuming a pressure of
4
1500 psi, an approximate area of influence 4 feet, and K
=
I x
1 0~
cm/sec.
Va
=
Ki/n
K=1*l0~cm/sec
=
3.28*106 fl/sec
=3.28*I0~Wsec*3846
~h= (1500 lb/in2* 144 in2/&)/(62.4 lb/ft3)’ 3462 ft.
=
0.0126 fl/sec
=
2 ft. (halfofthe design influence)
0.75ft/min
i=Eih/~1=3462fl/2fl=1731ft/ft
n
=
45
(assumed)
i/n
=
173
1/0.45=
3846
p
Based on the assumptions, it is revealed that
4
feet
(0.75
ftimin.
*
5
mm.
=
3.75
4 feet) ofradius ofinfluence can be achieved in
5
minutes with an in)ection
pressure of 1500 psi.
You should then consider whether it is reasonable to expect
the design pressure (psi) to
be applied for the required time
(5
minutes) at each
injection point.
You can decrease the time required by increasing the injection
pressure andlor reducing the design radius ofinfluence.
Location ofthe injection points should maximize the area ofinfluence from each
injection point (i.e., offset or staggered centers).
Monitoring:
One round of groundwater samples should be collected and analyzed for all
contaminants ofconcern and TPH and COD prior (within one month) to injection
ofoxygenating compounds.
Six months after injection
another round of
groundwater sampling should be performed and results evaluated to determine the
effectiveness ofthe oxygenating compound.
This information should be
compiled in a status report and submitted to the Agency
Closure:
Sampling ofthe soil and groundwater should show compliance with the
applicable 742 criteria.
4
Appeal Rights
An underground
storage tank owner or operator may appeal this final decision to the Illinois
Pollution Control Board pursuant to Sections 40 and
57.7(c)(4)(D)
of the Act by filing a petition
for a hearing within 35
days after the date of issuance of the final decision.
However, the 35-day
period may be
extended for a period oftime 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 ofthe
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 of an appeal, please contact:
•
Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
State ofIllinois
Center
100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL
60601
312/814-3620
For information regarding the filing of an extension, please contact.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division ofLegal Counsel
1021
North Grand Avenue East
Post Office Box
19276
Springfield, IL
62794-9276
217/782-5544
P.O. Box
360
6295
East Illinois
Highway 15
Woodlawn, IHinois 62898-0360
April 26,
2004
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Legal Counsel
Attn: John
Kim
1021
North Grand Avenue
East
Springfield,
IL 62792-9276
Re:
LPC# 1130205274--McLean
Co.
Bloomington/Brock Oil Company
601 North Clinton
Street
LUST Incident No. 20000434
Dear Mr.
Kim,
Phone:
(618) 735-2411
Fax:
(618) 735-2907
E-Mail:
unitedscience@unitedscience .com
RECE
WED
Division of Legal Counsel
APR
272004
~nv~nmefltal
protection
Agency
United Science Industries,
Inc. (USI), on behalf of our client,
Brock Oil Company,
is
requesting
a 90-day
extension
to
the
35-day appeal
period
in
regards
to the
IEPA correspondence
included.
I
appreciate
your
time
and
consideration
in
this
matter.
questions
or comments
regarding
this
matter
please
contact
2411
Sincerely yours,
UNITED SCIENCE INDUSTRIES,
INC.
4~E/
Corey Eversgerd
Project Manager
Enclosures
I
I
If
you
have
any
me
at
(618)
735-
UNITED SCIENCE INDUSTRIES
r~t
1
I
~
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned attorney at law, hereby certify that on May
6, 2004,
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 envelopesin 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
Corey Eversgerd, Project Manager
Illinois Pollution Control Board
United Science Industries
James R.
Thompson Center
P.O. Box 360
100 West Randolph Street
6295
East Illinois Highway 15
Suite 11-500
Woodlawn, IL
62898-0360
Chicago,
ILL 60601
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Resp
en
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)
I
