ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

BEFORE TIlE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

PEOPLE OF

THE STATE OF IlLINOIS,

Complainant,

)

PCB97-179

(Enforcement- Air)

MOP INGREDIENTS OF ILLINOIS. INC.,

)

Respondent.

RESPONDENT’S AMENDED SECOND SET OF

INTERROGATORIES

COMPLAINANT

COMES NOW Respondent MOP Ingredients ollilinois, Inc., (‘MOP”), by its attorneys.

I-lusch & Eppenberger, LI ~Cpursuant to Section 101.616 of the Board’s Procedural Regulations,

Hearing Officer Order dated October 12, 2005 and Illinois Supreme Court Rule 213, requests that

Complainant, People of the State of Illinois. answer in writing, under oath, the following

interrogatories.

INSTRUCTIONS

FOR INTERROGATORIES

Complainant is required, in answering these interrogatories to furnish all

information available to Complainant or its employees, agents, contractors, experts, or

consultants, or which is ascertainable by reasonable inquiry whether or not the requested

information might be available from another entity.

If an interrogatory has subparts. Complainant is required to answer each part

separately and in full.

If Complainant cannot answer an interrogatory in full, they are required to

answer all parts of the interrogatory to the extent possible and speci~’the reason for its inability

to provide additional information.

2186836.01

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

As to each interrogatory, or portion thereof, identify in the answer every oral

communication, document or writing which relates to the interrogatory or response, whether or

not such identiflcation is specifically requested by the interrogatory.

In answering each interrogatory, identib’ each document, person, communication

or meeting, which relates to, corroborates, or in any way krms the basis for the answer given.

Pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 213(3), Complainant is requested to

serve upon Respondent corrected, supplemented or augniented answers hereto, documents or

other forms of information from whatever source, which arguably tends to show that

Complainant’s prior answers are, might be, were or might have been in a sense incorrect,

incomplete, potentially in i slead ing or less than fully responsive or truthful.

Complainant shall supplement its answers and responses as new information and

documents become available.

If dates are requested, the exact date should be given, if possible. However, ii

the exact date cannot be determined due to absence or inadequacy of records, the best estimate

should he given to the interrogatory and labeled as such.

In construing these interrogatories:

a. the singular shall include the plural and the plural shall include the singular; and

b. a masculine or feminine pronoun shall not exclude the other gender.

10.

If you encounter any ambiguity in construing any interrogatory or any definition

or instruction pertaining to any interrogatory, set forth the matter deemed “ambiguous” and the

construction chosen or used in responding to the interrogatory.

II.

In producing documents in response to an interrogatory (See Illinois Supreme

Court Rule 213(e)), you are requested to furnish all documents or things in your actual or

constructive possession, custody, control, or known or available to you, regardless of whether

such documents or things are possessed directly by you or by your attorneys, agents, employees,

representatives or investigators.

2186836,01

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

12.

This discovery is deemed continuing, necessitating supplemental answers by

Complainant, or anyone acting on its hehalt, when or ii they obtain additional information, which

supplements or alters the answers now provided.

II.

CLAIMS

OF PRIVILEGE

With respect to any interrogatory which Complainant refuses to answer on a

claim of privilege, provide a statement signed by an attorney representing Complainant, setting

forth each such assertion of privilege. The statement should include:

a. the name and job title of every person involved in the conversation or

cc mm un icat ion;

b. the nature of the information disclosed;

c. all facts relied upon in support of the claim of privilege;

d. all documents related to the claim of privilege:

e. all events, transactions or occurrences related to the claim of privilege, and

f. the statute, rule or decision which is claimed to give rise to the privilege or the

reason for its unavailability.

If the objection relates to only part ofan interrogatory, the balance of the

interrogatory should be answered in full.

If you claim the attorney-client privilege or any other privilege is applicable to

any document, with respect to that document:

a. state the date of the document;

b. identifS’ each and every author of the document;

c. identify each and every other person who prepared or participated in the

preparation olthe document;

d. identify each and every person who received the document;

e. state the present location of the document and all copies thereol~

2 1868ThM I

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

identify each and every person having custody or control of the document and all

copies thereof; and

g. provide sufficient further information concerning the document to explain the

claim or privilege and to permit adjudication of the property of that claim.

III.

DEFINITIONS

“Complainant” shall mean PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS and the

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TIlE STATE OF ILLINOIS, and any of Complainant’s employees,

agents, representatives, successors or assigns, or any other person acting or believed by

Complainant to have acted on their behalf

“Document” shall be construed in its customary broad sense and shall include,

but is not limited to, the original and non-identical copy, whether different from the original

because of notes made on said copy or otherwise, or any agreement, bank record or statement;

book of account, including any ledger, sub—ledger, journal or sub-journal; brochure; calendar;

chart; check; circular: communication (intra- or inter-company or governmental entity or agency

or agencies); contract; copy; correspondence: diary; draft of any document; graph; index;

instruction: instruction manual or sheet; invoice; job requisition; letter; license: manifest;

memorandum: minutes; newspaper or other clipping; note; notebook; opinion; pamphlet; paper;

periodical or other publication; photograph; print; receipt; record; recording report; statement;

study; summary including any memorandum, minutes, note, record or summary of any (a)

telephone, videophone or intercom conversation or message; (b) personal conversation or

interview; or (e) meeting or conference; telegram; telephone log: travel or expense record;

voucher; worksheet or working paper; writing; any other handwritten, printed, reproduced,

recorded, typewritten, or otherwise produced graphic material from which the information

inquired of may be obtained, or any other documentary material of any nature, including

electronic mail, in the possession, custody or control of Complainant.

2186836.01

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

“Comm nil ication’ shall mean, ~ ithont him itation. any’ and all forms of

transferring information, including discussions, conversations, meetings, conferences, interviews,

negotiations, agreements. understandings, inquiries, correspondence, documents, or other

transfers of information whether written or oral or by any other means, and includes any

document which abstracts, digests, transcribes or records any communication.

“Facility” and/or “Site” shall mean the property located at South Front Street and

Distillery in Pekin, Tazewell County, Illinois, as referenced in paragraph 5. Count I of the

Complaint.

“Person” shall include, but is not limited to, any natural person; business or

corporation, whether for profit or not; firm, partnership, or other non-corporate business

organization: charitable, religious, education, governmental, or other non—proFit institution,

foundation, body, or other organization; or employee, agent or representative of any of the

forego ing.

“Describe” when used with respect to a communication, means to provide the

following information:

a. the date ofthe communication;

b. the type of communication (telephone, electronic mail, facsimile, letter, etc.);

c. the identity of all individuals involved in the communication;

d. the identity of all individuals who witnessed the communication; and

e. the subject matter of the communication.

I a description of any documents generated relating to these communications.

“Identify” when used with respect to a person, means that you are to state the full

name, present residence and business addresses, present residence and business telephone

numbers, present and last-known position and business olsuch person and, if different, the

business and position of the person at the time to which the interrogatory has reference.

“ldentiñ” when used with respect to a document, means:

218683601

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

a. to specify the nature of the document (For example a letter or memorandum):

b. to state the date, if any, appearing on the document or, if none, the date on which

the document was prepared and/or received; and

c. to describe the substance of each document for which no privilege is claimed, or

to specify the nature and extent of any claimed privilege.

d. If the document is not in your possession, identify the person who has actual or

constructive possession or control of the document.

“Or” shall mean and/or wherever appropriate.

10.

“Related to” or “relating to” or “in relation to” shall mean anything which

directly or indirectly, concerns, consists of, pertains to, reflects, evidences, describes, sets forth,

constitutes, contains, shows, underlies, supports. refers to in any way, is or was used in the

preparation of. is appended to, or tends to prove or disprove.

II.

“Relied upon” shall mean being or having been depended upon or referred to or

being or having been arguably appropriate for such reliance.

12.

“Constructive Possession” means documents not in actual possession, hut to

which you have power to inspect, a right to control, review or otherwise access.

13.

“Knowledge” means first-hand information and/or information derived from any

other source, including hearsay.

14.

“IEPA” means the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.

15.

“Board” shall mean the Illinois Pollution Control Board.

16.

“Current” or “Present” means the filing date of these Interrogatories.

17.

All terms not specifically defined herein shall have their logical ordinary

meaning, unless such terms are defined in the Act or the regulations promulgated thereunder, in

which case the appropriate or regulatory definitions will apply.

2186836.01

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERKS OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

IV.

INTERROGATORIES

Please identify:

a. the individual(s) answering these interrogatories on behalf of the Complainant,

including his or her relationship to Complainant, and how long he or she has

been associated with Complainant.

b. Each person who provided information or who otherwise consulted, participated

or assisted in connection with providing answers to these interrogatories, the

nature of any such consultation or assistance, whether Ihe information was based

on personal knowledge. and if not on the basis of personal knowledge, on what

basis it was provided.

c. For each person identified in the proceeding section 1(b), specify the particular

interrogatories to which each such person contributed.

ANSWER:

Pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 213(f), with respect to any hearing

witnesses, please state the following:

a. the name, address and employer of each witness;

b. a summary of the relevant facts within the knowledge of, or which said witnesses

will testify to; and

c. a listing of any documents or photographs, which any such witness has relied

upon, will use or which may be introduced into evidence in connection ~yiththe

testimony of said witness.

ANSWER:

218683601

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

Furnish tile identity and addresses of all expert witnesses who will testify at hearing

for Complainant, together with the subject matter on which each expert witness is expected to

testify: the conclusions and opinions of each expert witness and the basis therefore; and the

qualifications of each expert witness and a copy of all reports of such witnesses.

ANSWER:

With respect to any witness(es) interviewed by Complainant who Complainant does

not intend to call to testify at hearing, state the name and address of any such witness, state

whether a transcript of any interview with said witness was prepared, or a memorandum prepar~

in connection with any such interview, and provide a summary of the flicts and opinions relevant

to this proceeding which were secured from said witness.

ANSWER

Pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 213(g), identif~’any and all opinion

witnessesthat Complainant has interviewed and/or expects to call at hearing. Specify:

a. The subject matter on which the opinion witness is expected to testify as well as

the conclusions, opinion and/or expected testimony of any such witness;

b. ihe qualifications, including, but not limited to, the opinion witness’ educational

background, practical experience in the area he or she is expected to testify in,

any articles and papers he or she has written, any and all seminars and post-

graduate training he has received, his experience, if any, as a teacher or lecturer

and his or her professional appointments and associations;

c. The identity of each document examined, considered, or relied upon by him or

her to form his or her opinions;

d. All proceedings in which each opinion witness has previously testified as an

opinion witness; and

2186836.01

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERKS OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

e. Any and all reports of the opinion witness.

ANSWER:

Furnish the identity and addresses of all persons that communicated with

Complainant regarding the facts alleged in Complainant’s Complaint: and identify all persons

known b’v you to have knowledge of the facts alleged in the Complaint or in the Answers to these

interrogatories.

ANSWER:

Describe the base or bases for

tile

State’s contention that the MGP facility continued

to he a ‘‘major stationary source’ for particulate matter after the shutdown of the fluidized bed

coal boiler in 1994.

ANSWER:

Describe the hase or bases for any “major modification” determinations at the MGP

facility from 1993 to the present and identify all individuals involved in any such determination..

ANSWER:

Describe any and all communications, between the parties listed below, relating to air

particulate permits or air particulate emission issues at MGP from 1992 to the present. Dates of

relevant phone conversations include, but are not limited to, 8/13/96, 8116/96,

8/28/96, 9/4/96,

9/16/96, 9/17/96, 9/20/96, 9/24/96, 10/15/96, 11/1/96, I 1/14/96, 12/11/96, 1/28/97, 1/30/97,

3/19/97, 3/25/96, 3/27/97,

4/9/97,

and 4/23/97.

IEPA and August Mack Environmental, Inc., (“August Mack”) and/or any other

con sultants;

b. IEPA and MCP:

218683601

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERKS OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

c. Internal ILPA communications;

d. IEPA and the United States Environmental Protection Agency

ANSWER:

10.

Itemize the penalties which Complainant seeks to recover for each violation asserted

in the Complaint: identify the manner or means and any assumptions used by which Complainant

ci etcrmi ned the penalty amounts to be sought (including hut not limited to, t lie

Ill

anrier in wh ic Il

any statutory criteria, policy or guidance was employed in determining the penalty amounts);

describe any and all internal IEPA comniunications or communications between IEPA and

USEPA related to any penalty determination addressed above; identify the relevant facts

considered in making the penalty determinations and in employing such statutory criteria, policy

or guidance; and identify and explain the manner or method employed in attributing any

economic benefit accruing to Respondent by reason of the violations asserted.

ANSWER:

II.

Identify and describe any and all internal IEPA communications,

EPA

communications with MCP and/or communications between ILiPA and any third-party relating to

a BACT determination for the

MCP

facility since Januaryl.

1990.

ANSWER:

12.

Describe the analysis conducted and methodology used by IEPA to determine the

BACT for emissions from feed dryers at the MGP facility, including but not limited to, emission

limitations and reductions.

ANSWER:

218683(d) I

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

13.

Identify all communications related to IEPA’s consideration of economic and

technological feasibility at the MOP facility.

ANSWER:

14.

Describe the technically feasible and economically reasonable technology available

to control the particulate matter emissions at the

MOP

facility as described in the Complaint.

ANSWER:

I 5.

Describe any and all communications related to IEPA’s consideration of potential

energy, environmental and economic impacts in determining the level of emission control that the

MOP facility could achieve pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7479(3).

ANSWER:

16.

Describe any and all communications relating to emission limits established for

MGP, including, hut not limited to, construction permits 82110006, 93020061 and 93080045 and

emission limits in any and all construction and/or operating permits relating to the MOP facility.

ANSWER:

17.

Identify and describe any and all internal and/or external IEPA communications from

January I. 1994 to the present relating to MOP feed dryers 651 and 661.

ANSWER:

18.

Describe any and all communications within IEPA and/or between

JEPA

and

MOP,

USEPA, August Mack or any third party regarding particulate air emission modeling related to

the MOP facility and identify all data relating to air emission tests conducted at the MOP site,

2186836.01

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

emission data associated with the MOP facility, arId/or air particulate modeling related to the

MOP facility.

ANSWER:

19.

Identify the time period used by IEPA to determine emission limits for the project

which is the subject of the Complaint for the MOP facility, including bitt not lim ted to the time

period used for the baseline actual emissions determination pursuant to 40 CFR 52.2 l(b)(48)(ii).

ANSWER:

20.

Identify any and all US Clean Air Act or Illinois Environmental Protection Act

exemptions that were considered by IEPA related to particulate matter emissions at the MOP

facility and the basis for the denial of such exemptions.

ANSWER:

21.

Describe any and all communications related to I EPA’s contention that all agency

modeling of particulates at the MOP facility and its environs must he complete before IEPA

would consider MOP’s proposal to install a regenerative thermal oxidizer.

ANSWER:

22.

Describe any communications related to IEPA’s 1999 decision to not assess an

economic benefit penalty beyond that date.

ANSWER:

23.

Identify and describe any and all mitigating factors considered by IEPA in its penalty

determination and the impact of these factors on IEPA’s penalty demand.

ANSWER:

218683601

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

24.

Describe any and all communications related to IEPA’s denial ofa construction

permit application for a wet electrostatic precipitator in and around 1997.

ANSWER:

25.

ldentif~the date by which IEPA completed the air eniission modeling necessary to

fully analyze an air emissions construction perniit application for feed dryer pollution control

eq uipliieiit subin i tted by MGI’.

ANSWER:

26.

Identify the date when IEPA communicated to MOP the completed the air emission

modeling necessary to fully analyze an air emissions construction permit application for feed

dryer pollution control equ

ipilient

stihm itted by MOP.

ANSWER:

Respectfully submitted,

HUSCH & EPPENBEROER, LLC

~~1~

By:l~J

(/‘ ~

I lusch & Eppenberger, I.LC

l90 Carondelet Plaza, Suite 600

St. Louis, Missouri 63105

(3l4)480-1500

2186836.01

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE, NOVEMBER 8, 2005

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I did on the 8th day of November, 2005, send a true and

accurate copy of

RESPONDENT’S AMENDED SECOND SET OF

ENTERROOATORIES TO

COMPLAINANT

by first class mail, postage prepaid to:

Jane F. McBride

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

500

South Second St.

Springfield, IL 62706

Carol Webb

I earing Officer

Illinois Pollution Control Board

1021

North Grand Ave. East

P.O.

Box 19274

Springfield. IL 62794-9274

Attorney

2081240.03