ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December

4,

1975

TEXACO,

INC.

)

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 75—339

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

DISSENTING OPINION

(by Mr. Dumelle):

My dissent is based upon two reasons.

First,

I do not agree

that Texaco has shown good faith in achieving compliance with the

Regulations.

Texaco made a deliberate corporate decision in 1973

that compliance would not be achieved for this source in 1975 by

doing other, earlier compliance date projects first.

Texaco had

a duty under the Environmental Protection Act, and certainly the

resources,

to put enough effort and manpower,

to achieve all of

the dates

in timely fashion.

The Board, by its majority decision here,

is saying that

half a loaf on time excuses the other half which can be

15 months

late.

This is a dangerous precedent.

Second,

the analysis of air quality

is deficient under the

Train

V.

NRDC decision.

Joliet and Lockport are in Will County

which is part of the Metropolitan Chicago Interstate Air Quality

Control Region established by the U.S.

Government on March 31, 1971

(42 CFT 481.14).

The showing required under Train may well have

to be that no part of this Air Quality Control Region violates

ambient air quality standards for sulfur dioxide.

For these reasons,

I dissent.

Submitted by_______________________________

Jacob D.

Durnelle

I, Christan

L. Moffett, Clerk o

the Illinois Pollution Control

Boa~j~d.hereby certify the above Dissenting Opinion was submitted on the

of December,

1975.

Illinois Pollutioi

19

-