ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    July
    17, 1975
    CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY, INC.,
    )
    Metals Division,
    )
    Petitioner
    PCB 75—199
    v.
    )
    PCB 75—200
    PCB 75—201
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    Respondent.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by Mr. Goodman):
    This matter comes before the Pollution Control Board
    (Board) pursuant to the Board’s May 15,
    1975 more infor-
    mation Orders.
    Continental Can Company, Inc.
    (Can)
    filed its amended
    petitions on June 27,
    1975.
    The amended petitions seek to
    remedy defects in the original petitions.
    The Board ordered
    Can
    to provide information relating to the ambient air
    quality in the area affected by the proposed variances and
    whether the grant of the variances would cause or contribute
    to the area’s failure to meet ambient air quality standards.
    Can’s amended petition included an allegation that
    Can’s emissions would “not materially interfere with the
    attainment or maintenance of national or state ambient air
    quality standards.”
    We hold that Can’s variance petition
    states
    a prima facie cause of action entitling it to a
    hearing.
    However, we caution Petitioner that,
    in said
    hearing, it will have the burden of proof
    in substantiat-
    ing its allegation by a preponderance of the evidence.
    Petitioner raised several issues in its amended peti—
    tions concerning the credibility of the regulation from
    which the variances are requested.
    These issues included:
    1)
    the relevance of hydrocarbon levels in a given AQCR to
    impairment of public health and welfare in that region,
    2)
    the validity of the data base used for the Chicago NMA AQCR
    to determine its level of violation and priority for air
    quality control of hydrocarbons, and
    3)
    the relevance of the
    limitations of emissions set out in Rule 205(f)
    to overall
    air quality.
    These issues are not subject to being resolved
    in an adjudicatory proceeding.
    The proper method, pursuant
    to the Procedural Rules
    202,
    203,
    and 204, would be to pro-
    pose an amendment to the regulation in question and submit
    that proposal with a statement of facts
    in support of it,
    18— 150
    —2—
    together with
    a petition signed by 200 persons with home
    addresses specified,
    to the Board.
    These are the procedural
    prerequisites
    to the Board’s ordering a regulatory hearing.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact
    and law in this matter.
    ORDER
    It is the Order of the Board that the petitions in
    PCB 75-199, PCB 75-200,
    and PCB 75—201 be set for hearing.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Christan L.
    Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board,
    hereby certify the above Opinion and Order
    were a opted on the
    I1~”
    day of July,
    1975 by a vote
    of
    .~
    Illinois Pollution
    Board
    18
    —
    151

    Back to top