ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
    BOARI)
    September 20, 1973
    MARQUETTE
    CEMENT
    MANUFACTURING
    COMPANY
    )
    )
    v.
    )
    PCB 73-115
    )
    ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION
    AGENCY
    )
    Dissenting Opinion
    (By
    J~Ir.
    Dume lie)
    My dissent
    in this
    case
    is based upon the operation by
    Marquette of its Kiln No.
    3 so as to create
    a health hazard.
    The grant of the variance by the Board shields Marquette
    from prosecution from April
    6,
    1973 to May 26, 1973
    for vio-
    lating particulate emission levels.
    I question whether the
    original variance
    (PCB 70-23,
    1 PCB 145, January
    6,
    1971) con-
    templated below ground level emissions
    of 6,500
    lbs.
    per hour
    at any time.
    But even saying
    that
    the
    period from March
    1,
    1973
    (when
    the precipitator fire occurred)
    to April
    6,
    1973 somehow came
    under the original variance grant
    does not excuse operation from
    April
    6
    to May 26.
    High-volume air samplers were first installed by
    the Agency
    on May
    I
    (Amended Recommendation,
    p.
    3).
    Their data was pre-
    :;uiiiably available
    a few days
    later.
    So even had Marquette
    :Jted until the May
    1, and May
    8 and
    9 readings were available,
    iey
    should have shut down by May 12
    at the latest.
    The addi-
    1or~aloperation for
    14 days until May 26 may have shortened
    ~meone?s
    life
    or caused permanent health damage.
    While the record is not clear,
    it would appear reasonable
    that Marquette itself could see,without measurement, the enormity
    of their dust emissions.
    And in good conscience
    they should
    have voluntarily cut back production much sooner
    -
    even
    in
    April,
    if the problem occurred then.
    The Agency may wish
    to consider the requirement
    for a tall
    stack as
    a “fail-safe~device
    in future permits involving
    precipitators with short stacks on processes which cannot be
    shut down instantly.
    Not only would the effects
    of the con-
    trolled emissions be
    reduced. by
    a tall stack but should control
    equipment
    fail
    (by fire,
    or electrical failure), then the tall
    stack might be the sole protection for people’s lives.
    9
    291

    —2--
    /
    ,1
    ,
    /
    //~
    ~/
    I
    Jacob
    D.
    Dumelle
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, certify that the above Dissenting Opinion was filed on
    the
    ~
    day of September,
    1973.
    9
    292

    Back to top