ELECTRONIC
FILING,
RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFiCE,
DECEMBER
1,
2005
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OF THE STATE OF
ILLINOIS
THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD,
)
a municipal
corporation,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
v.
)
PCB 2006-75
)
(CAAPP Permit Appeal)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
)
Respondent.
)
NOTICE
To:
Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Cynthia A. Faur
Illinois Pollution Control Board
Mary A. (lade
100 West Randolph Street
Elizabeth A.
Leifel
Suite
11-500
Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, LLP
Chicago, Illinois 60601
8000 Sears Tower
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Carol Sudman
William Murray
Hearing
Officer
City Water Light & Power
Illinois Pollution Control Board
800 East Monroe Street
1021 North Grand Avenue East
4~’~
Floor
P.O. Box
19274
Springfield,
IL 62701
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of
the Illinois Pollution Control Board the MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO
FILE
RECORD of the Respondent, illinois Environmental Protection Agency, a copy of
which is herewith served upon the assigned Hearing Office and the attorney for the
Petitioner.
Respectfully submitted by,
Ajia
~k~t
Sally
~
Assistant Counsel
Dated: December 1,2005
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency
1021
North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box
19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
ELECTRONIC
FILING,
RECEIVED, CLERK’S
OFFICE,
DECEMBER
1,
2005
BEFORE THE ILLiNOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD,
)
a municipal corporation,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
v.
)
PCB 2006-75
(CAAPP
Permit
Appeal)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION
AGENCY,
)
)
Respondent.
)
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RECORD
NOW COMES thc Respondent, ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY (“Illinois EPA”), by and through
its attorneys, pursuant to 35
III. Adm. Code
105.116
and moves the ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD (“Board”) for an’
extension of the time to
file the record of its determination in the
above-captioned matter.
I.
Petitioners filed their Petition with the Board on November 3, 2005,
seeking a review of certain permit conditions contained within the Clean AirAct Permit
Program (“CAAPP”) permit issued to the
City of Springfield (“Springfield”) by the
Illinois EPA on September 29, 2005.
The pcrmit authorized
the operation of an electrical
power generation facility known collectively as Dallman and Lakeside Stations.
The
facility is located at 3100
Stevenson Drive, in Springfield, Illinois. Formal notice of the
appeal was served upon the Illinois EPA on November
7, 2005.
2.
On November 17,
2005, the Board accepted Springfield’s Petition for
hearing.
In
addition,
the Board ordered the Respondent to
file the entire record of its
determination within 30 days of receipt of the Petition.
If an extension of time to file the
1.
ELECTRONIC
FILING,
RECEIVED,
CLERK’S
OFFICE,
DECEMBER
1,
2005
record
would be sought by
the
Respondent, the Board’s
order instructed that such request
was also due within
30 days after
the Illinois
EPA received the Petition.
3.
The undersigned attorney and a staff paralegal became involved with the
compilation of the administrative record relating
to Springfield as
early as mid-August
2005 and since that time, most of this attorney’s and the staff paralegal’s resources have
been devoted to the
compilation of (his voluminous record and related records pertaining
to the twenty CAAPP permit appeals involving other electrical power generation
facilities in the State.
At this juncture, Springfield’s record consists generally of five to
six trial boxes of material.
Approximately two to three boxes are particular
to Springfield
alone,
while three other boxes are more aptly characterized as general reference material
and documents relevant to the decision underlying the issuance of all twenty-one CAAPP
permits
to the State’s electrical power generation facilities.
The only remaining
documents to be assembled
and reviewed for this record preparation generallyconsists of
several hundred miscellaneous electronic mail messages of Illinois EPA personnel.
Some, but not all, of these emails may contain information that were relied
upon by
the
Illinois EPA
in its permit decision.
4.
The other assigned attorney, Robb Layman, became involved with the
compilation ofthe administrative record relating to this proceeding in November 2005.
Due to the press of other permit appeals before
the United States
Environmental
Protection Agency’s Environmental Appeals Board (“EAB”) and enforcement case
matters unrelated to the
present appeal, Mr. Layman was generally unable to assist in
the
compilation of the
record until this past month.
2
ELECTRONIC
FILING,
RECEIVED, CLERKS
OFFICE,
DECEMBER
1,
2005
5.
Due to the sheer magnitude of the documentation underlying the Illinois
EPA’s permitting decision in this matter and the additional twenty CAAPP permit
appeals, the
Illinois EPA was not able to compile the entire administrative record
on
or
before December
7, 2005.
Counsel expects that the compilation of the record
will
require
at least an additional
seven days.
Beyond this point, the timing of the
filingof the
administrative record will likely be determined by matters largely outside of counsel’s
control.
6.
First, while counsel for the Illinois EPA has
observed that many permit
appeals are of a type that could most aptly be described
as “protective appeals” that
do
not
necessarily require the filing of an administrative record, it
is counsel’s estimation
tha
some of the collective twenty-one appeals possess a much greater likelihood of
proceeding to
hearing, thus necessitating the filing of an administrative record.
While
this ease is admittedly at the earliest stage of litigation, the permitting of this facility
was
based upon years of work by the Bureau of Air’s permitting engineers and countless
communications with this facility and industry representatives at large.
In addition, it
is
also the Illinois EPA’s perception that the Board may not wish to accept voluminous
administrative records
in this and all of the other collective CAAPP appeals unless
it
appears that a settlement resolution cannot be reached.
7.
Second,
the Illinois EPA does not possess the support-staff to make the
necessary copies for filing before the Board, the assigned Hearing Officer and opposing
counsel.
For instance, if the Respondent
were
to seek leave from the Board for a waiver
of the applicable copying requirements, the Respondent would still be mailing
approximatelytwenty-five to thirty trial boxes to the Board for Springlield alone.
This
ELECTRONIC
FILING,
RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE
DECEMBER
1,
2005
does not include the five
to six boxes that would be required
for both the Hearing Officer
and opposing counsel.
Due to these constraints, counsel has been researching the
possibility of hiring an outside contractor to perform the required copying and/or
screening.
However, the State
is limited
by further constraints; for instance, the
Illinois
EPA must first seek to employ a contractor that
holds a State contract before turning to a
non-State contractor for copying services.
While counsel
has located State contractors
that would be willing
to make
10,000 copies
often documents, counsel has not found
a
State contractor willing to make seven copies of thousands of miscellaneous sized
documents.
8.
Based on the foregoing,
the Illinois EPA fonnally requests an extension of
time to file its administrative record with the Board to a date determined by the Board to
be
appropriate and/or consistent with
anydecisional deadline in this matter.
9.
The grant of this extension of the filing date will ensure that this
voluminous record is not needlessly filed but filed in the event that the matter does not
settle.
This will serve to
limit the expenditure ofconstrained
State resources on a
potentially unnecessary copying job.
Moreover, this will further minimize any potential
administrative burdens associated with the maintenance and storage of hundreds of trial
boxes for this appeal, together with the other twenty CAAPP appeals for the Board and
the assigned Hearing Officer.
In
addition, an extension
of this time period
will
not result
in
anyhardship or prejudice to Petitioner.
4
ELECTRONIC
FILING,
RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE,
DECEMBER
1,
2005
WHEREFORE, the Illinois EPA
respectfully requests
that the Board grant this
Motion
forExtension
of Time to
File Record
to a date determined by the Board to be
appropriate and/or consistent with any decisional deadline
in this matter.
Respeetthlly submitted by,
ILLINOIS ENVUtONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY.
Sally
A7Carter
Assistant Counsel
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency
1021
North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
(217)782-5544
5
ELECTRONIC
FILING,
RECEIVED, CLERK’S OFFICE,
DECEMBER
1,
2005
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
thereby certify that on the V day of December 2005,
I did
send, by electronic
mail with prior approval, the following instrument entitled
MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE
RECORD
to:
Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite
11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
and a true and correct copy of the
same foregoing instrument, by First Class Mail with
postage thereon filly paid and deposited into
the possession of the United
States Postal
Service, to:
Carol
Webb
Cynthia A.
Faur
Hearing Officer
Mary A. Gade
Illinois Pollution Control
Board
Elizabeth A.
Leifel
1021
North Grand Avenue East
Sonnenschein Nath
& Rosenthal,
LLP
P.O. Box
19274
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Springfield, Illinois 62794
William Murray
City Water Light &
Power
800 East Monroe Street
4th
Floor
Springfield, IL 62701
AaIA’-
dzaa
Sally Ca6fer
Assistant Counsel
L.~.
