ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
May 27,
1982
CARGILL, INC.,
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 81—37
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
)
AGENCY,
Respondent,
DISSENTING OPINION
(by
I. Goodman):
Focusing on industrial waste and its definition as
the
pollutant, the majority of the Board held that since the origin
of pollutants contained in Petitioner’s discharge to the Fox
River could not he traced to Petitioner~sindustrial process,
no
NPDES
permit
was
required for its point discharge.
The
majority reasoned that NPDES permits are only required when
pollutants are discharged, and “industrial waste” was the only
relevant term contained in the definition of “pollutant.”
However,
“pollutant” as defined in the Act and Chapter
3 also
includes the term “chemical waste.”
The contaminants found
in Petitioner’s discharge do constitute chemical waste, and
as such are pollutants.
The nexus between the contaminants
and their origin is irrelevant.
Rather the control and inven-
tory of pollutants into waters of the State,
intended by the
NPDES permit program, properly takes precedence.
Therefore,
I would hold that the contaminants discharged into the Fox River
by Petitioner’s 24 inch pipe are chemical waste pollutants, and
despite the de minimis
character,
a NPDES permit is required
under the Clean Water Act,
the Act,
and Rule
901 of Chapter
3.
Irvin G.
o
man, Board Member
I, Christan
L. Moffett, clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board, do hereby certify that the above Dissenting
Opinion was filed on the
~
day of
~
1982.
Christan
L.
Moffett,
~.
rk
Illinois Pollution
rol Board
47-133