ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

November

6,

1975

CORPS OF ENGINEERS,

)

ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT,

)

)

Petitioners,

)

v.

)

PCB 75—265

)

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

AGENCY,

Respondents.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr.

Zeitlin):

On July

7, 1975, the United States Army Corps

of Engineers,

Rock Island District,

(Corps)

,

filed a Petition for Variance

from Rules 102 and 205 of Chapter

2: Air Pollution,

of the

Pollution Control Board,

(Board), Rules and Regulations.

PCB

Regs.,

Ch.

2,

Rules

102,

205.

This Variance was sought by the

Corps

to allow the painting of various lock gates at Lock

&

Dam 13,

(2 miles north of Fulton, Illinois),

and Lock

& Dam 15,

(at Rock Island,

Illinois),

on the Mississippi River.

The hydro-

carbon emissions from this painting operation will exceed the

eight pounds per hour limit under Rule

205.

On July

10,

1975, the Board entered an Interim Opinion and

Order granting the Corps until September 19,

1975,

to provide

further information on the effect of the United States Supreme

Court Decision in Train

v.

N.R..D.C.,

43 U.S.L.W. 4467

(U.S.,

April 16,

1975).

Information on the effect of the possible

grant of this Variance on the achievement or maintenance of

national ambient air quality standards was received by the

Board on September 22,

1975.

The Environmental Protection Agency submitted its Recom-

mendation

in this matter on October

23, 1975.

No hearing was

held.

We agree with the Agency that this Variance must be

dismissed for lack of a definite compliance plan, and in

addition find that the information submitted to deal with the

question of Train v.

N.R.D.C.,

supra,

is inadequate and requires

dismissal.

—

243

---

—2--

First,

on the matter of compliance, the Corps states only

that the Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory at

Champaign,

Illinois,

“.

.

.

is developing and testing substitute

paint formulations

.

.

.

that.

.

.will be available in about 12

months.”

The Corps also notes that one substitute paint was

tried

in 1972, but rejected because it may be causing

“peripheral

neuropathy” in humans.

The compliance plan stated here is simply

not of the definitive nature which we need to assure ourselves

that the offending paints covered in this Petition will not be

the subject of another Variance next year, or that these paints

simply cannot be altered sooner and still meet the Corps’

stringent

quality control standards.

Second, on the issue of Train, the information offered by

the Corps is not sufficient to show that the emissions from the

Corps’ painting activities will not cause or contribute to the

high ozone levels that the Corps admits occur in the area which

may be affected by such painting, during the period covered by

the Corps’ proposed work schedule.

The additional allegation

that the painting will take place in the middle of the river,

away from populated areas,

is not enough to overcome the deficiency.

We sympathize with the Corps’

problems in this case;

they

are subject to both time and materials constraints of a serious

nature.

However, we are unable

to grant the Variance requested

until

the deficiencies noted above have been resolved.

We shall

dismiss without prejudice, and shall allow the Corps to refile

a new Variance Petition addressing those

issues.

This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law of the Board in this matter.

ORDER

IT

IS THE ORDER OF THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD that the

Variance Petition in this matter be dismissed without prejudice.

Mr. Dumelle dissents.

I,

Christan

L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, heieby certify the above Opinion and Order were

adopted on the

(~tV\

day of

~

1975 by a vote of

s-.)

~

Illinois Pollution

trol Board