ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

February

3,

1977

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Complainant,

v.

)

PCB 75—486

CITY

OF HIGHLAND,

a municipal

corporation,

Respondent.

MR.

ROBERT N.

REILAND and MR. STEVEN WATTS, Assistant Attorney

Generals, appeared on behalf of Complainant;

MR.

JOHN P.

GEISMANN, appeared on behalf of Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF

THE

BOARD

(by Mr. Dumelle):

The

Complaint

in this matter was filed by the Environmental

Protection Agency against the City

of Highland

(Highland), Madison

County,

Illinois on December 19,

1975.

The Complaint alleges that

Highland operated its electric generation station at 501 North

Ninth

Street in Highland without an operating permit in violation

of Air

Pollution Control Regulation 103(b) (2)

from May

1,

1973

through the filing of the Complant.

A hearing was held on July

22,

1976

at which the parties announced that they had arrived at a proposal

for settlement of this matter.

On December

9, 1976 the parties

submitted a Stipulation of Facts and Proposal for Settlement.

Thc~

~LiI

1~it~

ion

~1(Ifl11

Ls

f

Il(’

dl

i(’(JQ(l

viI~iLioii

I

()1~

t1~~’

F)U~!)OSOS

of settlement.

It

is further stated that the violation ceased on

March

20,

1976.

The Proposal for Settlement provides for a penalty

of $25000 and Highland’s agreement that unless it has obtained

operating permits it will not operate the three coal-fired boilers

under any conditions or circumstances whatsoever.

The Board finds

the later part of the proposal to be unacceptable.

24

—

675

---

In the

contex

-

of the present

case

Lhe

aqreemenL

not

to

cuerete

the

coal—fIred

bo4 :Lers

withou

L

a

permit

1tunder

any

conch—

ni~s

or

circumstances

wharsoever~

can

only

La

read

as

including

a

prohib~tion

1rom

such

use

even

if

necessary

to

respond

to

an

ceurccncr

s itua~.ion,

The

Board

~

LI

i

not

accept

such

an

ir~

speisibi

a

tlcncu

~

La

~ard

has

cn~is

Lent lv

held

that

a

variance

,

end

h~ccc

a

permit,

ic;

not

rcqu~red

for

an

electrLcal

generating

plant

which

is

not

opera

.vinq

bun

merely

could

be

operated

If

a

genuine

emergency

developed.

City

of

Uicjhlarci

v.

EPA,

PCB

75—SC,

19

PCB

470

(December

18,

1c75)

.

Ouch

dilcugency

operation

of

a

source

requiring

a

cermi

t

woui

P

properly

come

bc~ore

he

Board

only

upon

a

Complaint.

The Board wi

LI

reje~:

the

precosed

scr.ti~u-~

nt

because,

in

effect,

it

is

a

cease

and

des: st

erUc r

against

~uLure

potential

emergency

operation

ot

the

coal—f

red

bol

-

ers

in

question

Such

an

order

would

be

~jrossly

irrespoiisibs’.

The

Board

will

not

participate

in

such

a

premature

interference

with

Iliqhland

s

potential

ability

no

~esponC

to

an

merqency

which

could

conceivably

place

human

lives

at

staku,

This

Opinion

constitutes

the

Board

s

findings

of

fact

and

conclusions

of

law.

ORDER

The

Stioulation

ef

Facts

and

Proposal

for

Settlement

submitted

on

December

9,

19Th

b~

the

prr

des

in

this

matter

is

hereby

rejected.

This

cause

is

hereh~

remanded

-to

the

Hearing

Officer

for

such

further

proceedings

as

may

be

necessary

to

bring

this

matter

to

a

final

resolution.

I

T

II S

SC)

ORI)E FF1)

1,

Christan

L.

Muffett,

Clerk

of

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Boar~,

hereby

ceitify

the

above

Opinion

and

Order

were

adopted

on

the

__day

of

February,

1977

by

a

vote

of

_________

__________

Illinois Pollut

Control Board

24

--