ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
    BOARD
    April 8, 1976
    AMERICAN FOUNDRY
    AND
    MANUFACTURING
    )
    COMPANY,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 75—345
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    Respondent.
    Mr. Charles Shaffer appeared on behalf of Petitioner.
    Mr. John Palincsar appeared on behalf of Respondent.
    OPINION
    AND
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Goodman):
    This matter comes before the Board upon Petition of the Ameri-
    can Foundry and Manufacturing, Salem Foundry Division, (American
    Foundry) for variance from the Air Pollution Control Regulations
    for its cupola operation near the city of Salem, Marion County,
    Illinois. On September 19, 1975, the Illinois Environmental Protec-
    tion Agency (Agency) moved to dismiss the petition without prejudice
    for failure to meet seven of the procedural requirements enumerated
    in Board Procedural Rule 401. On October 14, 1975, the Board granted
    Petitioner’s request that it consider the Motion to Dismiss with the
    facts of the case after a hearing on the matter.
    The Board deferred the consideration of the Agency’s Motion
    to Dismiss in hopes that the Petitioner, during the hearing, would
    rectify the deficiencies as noted by the Agency in their Motion,
    so as to allow the Board to make a decision on the merits of the
    case. Unfortunately Petitioner failed to cure the defects in its
    Petition at the hearing. Instead it proposed that variance be
    granted from the Air Regulations for their cupola solely upon the
    heavy financial burden which would be imposed upon it.
    The Agency’s Motion to Dismiss included seven specific defects
    in the Petition for variance under Procedural Rule 401, all of which
    concern themselves with the fact that Petitioner has no plans for
    eventual compliance with the Regulations and indeed has no intention,
    according to the Petition before the Board, to bring their facility
    into compliance. A certain amount of evidence was produced by
    21 —57
    —2—
    Petitioner at the hearing in support of their allegation of financial
    hardship, but this fact by itself, is not sufficient for the Board to
    grant a variance. The Board finds from the evidence presented that
    Petitioner, in addition to the failure to provide for a compliance
    plan and schedule for an eventual compliance with the Regulations,
    has not fully investigated potential sources of capital which would
    allow them to purchase the necessary abatement equipment.
    The Board will therefore grant the Agency’s September 22, 1975,
    Motion to Dismiss and orders the Petition for Variance dismissed with-
    out prejudice as inadequate.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that American
    Foundry and Manufacturing Company’s Petition for variance be, and
    is, hereby, dismissed without prejudice.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    Mr. Dumelle and Mr. Young concurs.
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereby certify t e above Opinion and Order were adopted on the
    _________day of
    ,
    1976 by a vote ~
    Christan L. Moffett, rk
    Illinois Pollution
    rol Board
    21 —58

    Back to top