BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD~~E~~
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
W~R24 2005
by LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General
)
of
the State of Illinois,
)
STATEOF~L1JNOIS
PuUutLofl
Contro’
Bo.Qrc~
Complainant,
V.
GF OFFICE FURNITURE, LTD. L.P.,
)
PCB No. 04-135
a Limited Partnership,
(Enforcement
-
Air)
OFFICE SUITES, INC., an Illinois
Corporation and Subsidiary of
GF Office Furniture, Ltd. L.P., and
GF FURNITURE HOLDING, INC.,
a Foreign Corporation and General
Partner of GF Office Furniture,
Ltd. L.P.,
Respondents.
NOTICE OF FILING
TO: Mr. Edward V. Walsh, III
Sachnoff & Weaver
10 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606-7507
Mr. Bradley P. Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-500
100 West Randolph Street
Chicago, Illinois 60601
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today, March 24, 2005, caused
to be filed with the Office of the Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board the Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement and
Motion for Relief from Hearing Requirement, true and correct copies
of which are attached hereto and herewith served upon you.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
by LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney General
of the State of Illinois
BY:
MICHAEL C. PARTEE
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau/North
188 West Randolph Street, Suite 2001
Chicago, Illinois
60601
Tel.: (312)814-2069
2
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
REc..E~vED
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
CLERK’S OFFICE
by LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General
)
7
of the State of Illinois,
)
-~
STATE OF ~LL~NOIS
Complainant,
)
Po~ut~onControa Board
v.
GF OFFICE FURNITURE, LTD. L.P.,
)
PCB No. 04-135
a Limited Partnership,
)
(Enforcement
-
Air)
OFFICE SUITES, INC., an Illinois
Corporation and Subsidiary of
GF Office Furniture,
Ltd. L.P., and
)
GF FURNITURE HOLDING, INC.,
)
a Foreign Corporation and General
Partner of GF Office Furniture,
Ltd. L.P.,
Respondents.
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM HEARING REQUIREMENT
NOWCOMES the Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by
LISA
MADIGAN,
Attorney General of the State of
Illinois, and hereby
moves for relief from the hearing requirement
in this case pursuant
to Section 31(c) (2) of
the Illinois Environmental Protection Act
(“Act”), 415 ILCS 5/31(c) (2) (2002), and Section 103.300 of the
Illinois Pollution Control Board (“Board”) Procedural Rules, 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 103.300.
In support of this Motion, the Complainant
states as follows:
1.
Section 31(c) (2) of the Act allows the parties in certain
enforcement cases to request relief from the mandatory hearing
requirement where the parties submit to the Board a Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement.
Section 31(c) (2) provides as follows:
Notice; complaint;
hearing.
*
**
(c) (2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (1)
of this subsection (c), whenever a complaint has been
filed on behalf of the Agency or by the People o~the
State of Illinois, the parties may file with the Board a
stipulation and proposal for settlement accompanied by a
request for relief from the requirement of a hearing
pursuant to subdivision (1)
.
Unless the Board, in its
discretion, concludes that a hearing will be held, the
Board shall cause notice of the stipulation, proposal and
request for relief to be published and sent in the same
manner as is required for hearing pursuant to subdivision
(1) of this subsection. The notice shall include.a
statement that any person may file a written demand for
hearing within 21 days after receiving the notice. If any
person files a timely written demand for hearing, the
Board shall deny the request for relief from a hearing
and shall hold a hearing in accordance with the
provisions of subdivision (1)
2. Board Procedural Rule 103.300 provides, in relevant part,
as follows (emphasis in original)
Request for Relief from Hearing Requirement in State
Enforcement Proceeding.
(a)
Whenever a complaint has been filed oi~behalf of the
Agency or by the People of the State of Illinois, the
parties may file with the Board a proposed stipulation
and settlement accompanied by a request for relief from
the requirement of a hearing
pursuant to Section 31(c) (2)
of the Act
. . .
3. On January 30, 2004, the Complaint was filed on behalf of
the People of the State of Illinois with the Board.
4. Simultaneous with the filing of this Motion, a
Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement was filed with the Board,
and no hearing is currently scheduled in this case.
WHEREFORE, the Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by
LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General of the State of Illinois,
respectfully moves for relief from the requirement of a hearing
pursuant to Section 31(c) (2) of the Act and Board Procedural Rule
103. 30Q.
2
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
by LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General
of the State of Illinois
BY:
MICHAEL C. PARTEE
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau/North
188 West Randolph Street, Suite 2001
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Tel.: (312)814-2069
3
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
RE~Ew~r3
CLE~RK’S
OFRCE
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
F
by LISA MADIGAN,. Attorney General
)
~
200~
of the State of Illinois,
STATE
OF ~LLINO~S
Po~~ut~oriContro’ Board
Complainant,
v.
GF OFFICE FURNITURE, LTD. L.P.,
)
PCB No. 04-135
a Limited Partnership,
)
(Enforcement
-
Air)
OFFICE SUITES, INC., an Illinois
Corporation and Subsidiary of
GF Office Furniture, Ltd. L.P., and
GF FURNITURE HOLDING, INC.,
a Foreign Corporation and General
Partner of GF Office Furniture,
Ltd. L.P.,
Respondents.
STIPULATION AND
PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney General of the State of Illinois, at the request of the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois EPA”), and the
Respondents, GF OFFICE FURNITURE, LTD. L.P., a limited partnership,
OFFICE SUITES,
INC. (“Office Suites”), an
Illinois corporation and
subsidiary of GF Office Furniture, Ltd. L.P., and GF FURNITURE
HOLDING, INC., a foreign corporation and gelieral partner of GF
Office Furniture, Ltd. L.P., pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 103.302,
do hereby agree to this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement
(“Settlement”) and submit it to the Illinois Pollution Control
Board (“Board”) for acceptance. The parties stipulate that the
statement of facts contained herein represents a fair summary of
the evidence and testimony that would be introduced by the parties
if a hearing were held. The parties further stipulate that the
facts stated herein are made and agreed upon for purposes of
settlement only and that neither the fact that a party has entered
into this Settlement nor any of the facts stipulated herein shall
be used for any purpose in this or any other proceeding, except to
enforce the terms hereof by the parties to this Settlement, and as
otherwise provided herein. If the Board accepts and enters this
Settlement, the parties agree to be bound by it and not to contest
its validity in any subsequent proceeding to implement or enforce
its terms, except for purposes of interpretation as provided for
under Section VI (Applicability) herein.
:1:.
JURISDICTION
The Board has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and of
the parties consenting hereto pursuant to the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act (“Act”), 415 ILCS 5/1,
et seq.
(2002)
II.
AUTHORIZATION
The undersigned representatives for each party certify that
they are fully authorized by the party whom they represent to enter
into the terms and conditions of this Settlement and to legally
bind them to it. This Settlement may be signed in counterparts,
all of which shall be considered one Settlement.
2
III.
STATEMENT
OF FACTS
A. Parties
1. On January 30, 2004, a Comp1air~twas filed on behalf of
the People of the State of Illinois, by Lisa Madigan, Attorney
General of the State of Illinois, on her
own
motion and at the
request of the Illinois EPA against Respondents pursuant to Section
31 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31 (2002)
.
On February 5, 2004, the
Board issued an Order finding that the Complaint met the applicable
content requirements and accepting it for hearing.
.
2. The Illinois EPA is an administrative agency of the
State of Illinois, created pursuant to Section 4of the Act, 415
ILCS 5/4 (2002)
.
3. At all times relevant to the Complaint, Respondent GF
Office Furniture,. Ltd. L.P., was and is a limited partnership
organized in Delaware.
4. At all times relevant to the Complaint, Respondent
Office Suites was and is an Illinois corporation and a subsidiary
o~gespondent GF Office Furniture, Ltd. L.P. At all times relevant
tO the Complaint, Office Suites was and is the operator of a wood
furniture manufacturing facility located at 1034 South Kostner
Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, Illinois (“facility”)
5. At all times relevant to the Complaint, Respondent GF
Furniture Holding, Inc., was and is a Nevada corporation and a
general partner of GF Office Furniture,. Ltd. L.P. At all times
3
relevant to the Complaint, GF Furniture Holding, Inc., was and is
the owner of the facility.
B. Facility Description
1. Since about 1994, seven wood furniture coating spray
booths and convèyorized infrared drying ovens, an adhesive spray
booth, various woodworking equipment, and four natural gas-fired
boilers have been operated at the facility.
2. As a. result of the woodworking and Ooating operations at
the facility, volatile organic material (“VOM”) and particulate
matter (“PM”) were and are emitted to the environment.
3. On December 20, 2000, pursuant to the Clean Air Act
Permit Program (“CAAPP”) under Section 39.5 of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/39.5 (2002)
,
the Illinois EPA issued permit no. 96020120 to
Office Suites for the facility.
CAAPP
permit no. 96020120 has an
expiration date Of December 20, 2005.
4. In relevant part, Section 9.2.1 of
CAAPP
permit no.
96020120 generally requires compliance with the Act.
5. Section 6.3(b) of CAAPP permit no. 96020120 requires
that, in the event the facility’s VOM emissions during the ozone
seasonal allotment period equal or exceed 10 tons, the facility
shall become a participating source in the Emissions Reduction
Market System (“ERMS”) unless it obtains an exemption from the
ERMS.
.
4
C. Allegations of Non-Compliance
The Complainant alleges that the Respondents violated the
following provisions of the Act, Board’s Air Pollution Regulations,
and CAAPP permit no. 9.6020120:
Count I:
Causing or allowing air pollution in violation
of Section 9(a) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/9(a)
(2002)) and Section 201.141 of Board’s Air
Pollution Regulations (35 Ill. Adm. Code
201.141);
.
Count II:
Failure, to participate in the ERMS in
violation of Section 39.5 of the Act (415 ILCS
5/39.5 (2002)), Section
205.200 of the Board’s
Air Pollution Regulations (35 Ill. Adm. Code
205.200), and Section 9.2.1 of
CAAPP
permit
no. 96020120; and
Count III:
. .
Failure to apply foran
ERNS
exemption in
violation of Section 39.5 of the Act, Section
205.205 of the Board’s Air Pollution
Regulations, and Sections 6.3(b) and 9.2.1 of
CAAPP permit no. 96020120.
D. Non-admission of Alleged Violations
The Respondents do not admit the violations alleged ‘in the
Complaint filed in this case and referenced herein.
IV.
APPLICABILITY
This Settlement shall apply to and be binding upon the
Complainant and the Respondents, and any officer, director, agent,
or employee of the Respondents, as well as any successors or
assigns of the Respondents. The Respondents shall not raise as a
defense to any enforcement action taken to enforce this Settlement
the failure of any of their officers, directors, agents or
5
employees to take such action as shall be required to comply with
the provisions of this Settlement.
V.
COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS
This Settlement in no way affects the Respondents’
responsibility to comply with any other federal, state or local
laws or regulations, including, but not limited to, the Act,
regulations promulgated thereunder, and
CAAPP
permit no. 96020120.
VI.
FORUM
The parties agree that the forum of any action commenced for
the purposes of interpretation and enforcement of the terms and
conditions of this Settlement shall be the Circuit Court of Cook
County, Illinois.
VII.
SEVERABILITY
It is the intent of the parties that the provisions of this
Settlement shall be severable, and should any provision be declared
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be inconsistent with state
or federal law, and therefore unenforceable, the remaining
provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
6
VIII.
FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES BEARING UPON THE
REASONABLENESS OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS
Section 33(c) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/33.(c) (2002), provides as
follows:
(c) In making its orders and determinations, the Board
shall take into consideration all the facts and
-
circumstances bearing upon the reasonableness of the
emissions, discharges or depo~its involved including,
but not limited to:
(i) the character and degree of injury to, or,
interference with the protection of the health,
general welfare and physical property of
the
people;
(ii) the social and economic value of the pollution
source;
(iii)
the suitability ,or unsuitability of the
pollution source to the area in which it is
located, including the question of priority of
location
in the area involved;
(iv) the technical practicability and economic
reasonableness of reducing or eliminating the
emissions, discharges or deposits resulting
from
such pollution source; and
(v) any subsequent compliance.
In response to
the factors set forth in Section 33(c) of the
Act, the parties state as follows:
1. This case involved air pollution and the ERNS. Air
pollution constitutes an environmental and public health threat.
Further, as explained in Section 6.1 of CAAPP permit no. 96020120,
the ERMS is a “cap and trade” market system for major stationary
sources located in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. The ERNS
is designed to reduce VOM emissions from stationary sources to
‘7
contribute to reasonable further progress toward attainment, as
required by the Clean Air Act.
2. The manufacture of wood furniture, when done in
accordance with the Act, Board’s Air Pollution Regulations and
applicable CAAPP
permit, has social and economic value.
3.
.
Operation of the facility is suitable’ for the area in
which it is located.
4.
The reduction of seasonal VOM emissions from the
facility and/or the purchase of allotment trading units (“ATUs”)
within the ERNS for the ~ubject
facility’s
actual seasonal VOM
emissions was and is
a technically practicable and economic
reasonable way of reducing or eliminating the emissions, discharges
or deposits from the facility.
5.
Subsequent to the time frame of the alleged violations,
the Respondents ‘have acted in compliance with the Act,, Board’s Air
Pollution Regulations, and CAAPP permit no. 96020120.
Ix.
CONSIDERATION OF THE SECTION 42(h) FACTORS
Section 42(h) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(h) (2002), provides as
follows:
(h) In determining the appropriate civil penalty to be
imposed under subdivisions (a)
,
(b) (1)
,
(b) (2)
/
(b) (3)
,
or (b) (5) of this Section, the Board is authorized to
consider any matters of record in mitigation or
aggravation of penalty; including but not limited to the
following factors:
8
(1) the ‘duration and gravity of the violation;
(2) the presence or absence of due diligence on’ the
part of the respondent in
attempting to comply with
requirements of this Act and regulations thereunder
or to secure relief therefrom as provided by this
Act;
(3) any economic benefits accrued by the respondent
because of delay in compliance with requirements,
in which case the economic benefits shall be
determined by lowest cost
alternative for achieving
compliance;
(4)
.
the amount of monetary penalty which will serve
to deter further violations by the
respondent and
to otherwise aid in enhancing voluntary compliance
with this Act by the
respondent and other’persons
similarly subject to the Act; and
(5)
the number, proximity in time, and gravity of
previously adjudicated violations, of this Act by
the respondent;
(6)
whether the respondent voluntarily
self-
disclosed, in
accordance with subsection (i)
of
this Section, the non-compliance to the Agency; and
(7) whether the respondent has agreed to undertake
a “supplemental environmental project,” which means
an environmentally beneficial project that a
respondent agrees to undertake in settlement of an
enforcement action brought under this Act, but
which the respondent is not otherwise legally
obligated to perform.
In response to the above factors set forth
in Section 42(h) of
the Act, the parties state as follows:
1. The Complainant contends that the, duration of the ERMS
violations was two years, which was a lengthy period of time.
The
Complainant contends that the
gravity of the violations was high
because the subject facility is located in the Chicago ozone
nonattainment area and because Respondents’ failure to hold
sufficient ATU5 for 2000 and 2001 affected the value of all ATUs
9
within the ERMS and compromised the integrity of the ERMS. The
Complainant also cOntends that approximately half of the $3b,000
civil penalty against the Respondents is duration and gravity-
based.
.
2.
Following the time frame of the violations, the
Respondents exhibited due diligence by remedying the violations and
exhibited due, diligence in its methods of operation thereafter by
complying with the requirements of the Act, Board’s Air Pollution
Regulations, and CAAPP permit no. 96020120.
3.
In addition to a civil penalty, Respondent Office Suites
agrees to provide emissions excursion compensation to the Illinois
EPA, including a lat.e surcharge, pursuant to Section 205.720(b) of
the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations, 35 Iii. Adm. Code
205.720(b), for’ the emissions excursions in 2000, 2001 and 2002 in
the total amount of $38,590.26 pursuant to the Illinois EPA’s
emission compensation notice, dated May 25, 2004.
The parties
stipulate that this emissions excursion compensation negates any
economic benefit accrued by the Respondents because of a delay in
compliance with. requirements.
4. The Complainant contends that the civil penalty will
serve to’deter any future violations of the Act, regulations
‘ -
promulgated thereunder, and CAAPP permit no. 96020120, and will
enhance voluntary compliance with federal and state environmental
laws. The Complainant further contends that approximately half of
the $30,000.00 civil penalty against the’ Respondents is deterrence-
based.
10
5. Respond~ntsrepresent that they have no previously
adjudicated violations of t~eAct.
6. P.espondé~.nts did not voluntarily self-disclose, in
accordance with Se~ction42(1) of the Act, the alleged violations to
the Illinois EPA.
, -
7. Respondents have not agreed to undertake a supplemental
environmental proj~ect in settlement.
x.
TERMS OF SETTLEME~
A. Penalty
1. Respondent Office Suites shall pay a civil penalty of
Thirty Thousand Do~l1ars ($30,000.00) within 30 calendar days after
the date upon whi~ithe Board issues a final order accepting this
Settlement.
2. Office suites’ civil penaJ.ty payment shall be made by
check
or money ord~’er, payable to the
Illinois EPA for deposit in
the Environmental ~rotectjon TriJ.St Fund (“EPTF”) and shall be sent
by first class mai~J. ax~ddelivered to:
Il1inoi~Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal serVices Division
1021 Not’th Grand Avenue East
P.O. Bo~ 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
3. The nam~e, case number, and Office Suites’ Federal
Employer Identifi~ationNumbers (1,FEIN,,),.,~bT-?7jO~N~,shall appear
on the face of th~check or money order. A copy of the check or
money order and the transmittal letter shall be sent to:
11
Michael C. Partee (or other designee)
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau/North
188 West Randolph Street, Suite 2001
Chicago, Illinois 60601
4. For purposes of payment and collection, Office Suites
may be reached at the following, address:
Vytas P. Ambutas
National Material LP
1965 Pratt Boulevard
-
Elk Grove Village, Illinois 60007
5. In the event ‘of def~ult, the Complainant shall be
entitled to reasonable costs of collection, including reasonable
attorney’s fees, as determined by the Circuit Court.
B.
‘
Interest on Penalties
1. As required by Section 42(g) of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/42 (g) (2002), interest shall accrue on any penalty amount owed by
Office Suites’not paid within the time prescribed herein, at the
maximum rate allowable under Section 1003(a) of the Illinois Income
Tax Act, 35 ILCS 5/1003(a) (2002).
2. Interest on any unpaid penalty shall begin to accrue
from the date the penalty is due and continue to accrue to the date
payment is received by the Illinois EPA.
3. Where partial payment is made on the ‘penalty amount that
is due, such partial payment shall be first applied to any interest
on the unpaid penalty then owing.
4. All interest on the penalty owed the Complainant shall
be paid by check or money order payable to the Illinois EPA for
deposit in the EPTF at the above-indicated address. The name, case
number,
and Office Suites’ FEIN shall appear on the face of the
12
check or money order. A copy of the check or money order and the
transmittal letter shall be sent to:
‘Michael C. Partee (or other designee)
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau/North
188 West Randolph S?reet, Suite 2001
Chicago, Illinois 60601
C. Future Use
Notwithstanding any other language in this Settlement, this
Settlement may be used against the Respondents, for purposes of
Section 39(a), 39(i) and/or 42(h) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/39(a),
5/39(i) and/or 5/42(h) (2002), in any subsequent enforcement action
or permit proceeding as evidence of a past adjudication of
violation of the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder.
D. Cease and Desist
The Respondents shall comply with the Act, regulations
promulgated thereunder, and CAAPP permit no. 96020120, including
but not limited to those sections of the Act, Board’s Air Pollution
Regulations, and CAA.PP permit no. 96020120 that were the subject
matter of the Complaint as outlined
in Section III.C of this
Settlement.
-
E.
Release from Liability
1. In consideration of Office Suites’ payment of a
$30,000.00 penalty and any accrued interest thereon, and Office
Suites’ payment of emissions excursion compensation of $38,590.26,
the Complainant, releases, waives and discharges the Respondents
from any further liability or penalties for alleged violations of
the Act, Board’s
Air Pollution Regulations, and CAAPP permit no.
13
96020120 that were the subject matter of the Complaint herein. The
release set forth above does not extend to any matters other than
those expressly specified in the Complainant’s Complaint filed
simultaneous with this Settlement. The Complainant reserves, and
this Settlement is without prejudice to, all rights of the State of
Illinois against the RespQndents with respect to all other matters,
including but not limited to, the following:
a. criminal liability;
b. liability for future violation of state, federal,
local, and common laws and/or regulations;
c. liability for natural resources damage arising out
of the alleged violations; and
e. liability or claims based on the Respondents’
failure to satisfy the requirements of this Settlement.
2. Nothing in this Settlement is intended as a waiver,
discharge, release, or covenant not to sue for any claim or cause
of action, administrative or judicial, civil or criminal, past or
future, in law or in equity, which
the State of Illinois or the
Illinois EPA may have
against any person, as defined by Section
3.315 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/3.315 (2002),
or entity which is not
bound by this Settlement.
F. Enforcement of Settlement
1. Upon the acceptance of this Settlement by the Board, any
party hereto, upon motion, may reinstate these proceedings solely
for the purpose
of enforcing the terms and conditions of.this
Settlement. This Settlement is a binding and enforceable order of
14
the Boardand may be enforced as such through any and all available
means.
2. The Respondents agree that notice of any subsequent
proceeding to enforce this Settlement may be made by mail and
waives any requirement of service of process.
WHEREFORE, the parties, by their representatives, enter into
this Settlement and submit it to the Board that it may be accepted
and entered.
The remainder of this page should be blankl
15
AGREED:
FOR THE COMPLAINANT:
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
by LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General
of the State of Illinois
MATTHEW J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement/
Asbestos Litigation Division
BY:
ROSEMARIE CAZE~ef
Environmental Bureau/North
Assistant Attorney General
I
~
DATE:
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
DATE:
_________
FOR THE RESPONDENTS:
GF OFFICE FURNITURE, LTD. L.P.
BY:
ITS:
DATE:
,~
DATE:
OFFICE SUITES, INC.
Th4~5~H
~eJ~?L~-t~
C~Lt~)~
~2
~
BY:
ITS:
GF OFFICE FURNITURE HOLDING, INC.
BY:
ITS:
DATE:
/
BY:
Legal Counsel
~-r-oc-
16
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
It is hereby certified that true and correct copies of
Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement, Motion for Relief from
Hearing Requirement and Notice of Filing were mailed, first class
postage prepaid, to the person listed on the Notice of Filing on
March 24, 2005.
BY:_____
MICHAEL C. PARTEE
It is hereby certified that the originals plus nine (9) copies
of the foregoing were hand-delivered to the following person oh
March 24, 2005:
Pollution Control Board, Attn: Clerk
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph Street, Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
BY:
MICHAEL C. PARTEE
3
