ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 12, 1977

IN THE MATTER OF:

)

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO

)

R 77-4

CHAPTER

8: NOISE POLLUTION

DISSENTING OPINION

(by Mr.

Zeitlin):

I cannot aqree with the Board’s action today denying Motions

by the Air Transport Association of America

(ATA)

(May

4,

1977)

and

the Chicago Association of Commerce and Industry

(May

9,

1977)

to

postpone or defer the hearings scheduled

in this matter.

As noted

by both parties, any hearings

to be held by the Board will largely

duplicate

a record compiled by the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)

in very recent hearings.

Any regulatory decision of the

Board in the face of pending federal action may raise serious

problems of inconsistency, primary jurisdiction, unnecessary dual

regulation

(with the attendant duplication of reporting and other

paperwork), and significant uncertainty

in economic and business

planning.

As the ATA Motion points out,

the Attorney General’s Proposal

very closely parallels proposals brought before the FAA by the

United States Environmental Protection Agency, and any record on

the proposal before us must

-—

of necessity

——

duplicate an existing

record; although the proposal before us is more limited

in terms

of fewer potential regulatees

than that before the FAA, we will be

hearing from many of the same parties who testified there on the

same limitations and options.

This seems

to me to be unnecessarily

wasteful of the Board’s

limited

regulatory resources,

and needlessly

onerous for any interested parties.

In addition,

the pendency of two very similar proposals before

different governmental bodies must be quite confusing

to the public

and those to be regulated.

Can we expect the full participation

and cooperation which we need?

In addition to the legal questions

of preemption,

etc.,

it should be clear to the Board that

a bureau-

cracy may be unnecessarily created by dual state/federal regulation.

Our experience in Illinois with NPDES should, by itself,

be sufficient

to convince the Board that such

a result

is to be avoided whenever

possible.

25

—

541

---

—2—

We may,

and should, assume that the FAA will properly perform

its legal duties

in a complete and timely fashion.

Absent proof to

the contrary, we should defer consideration of this matter.

I respectfully dissent.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby certify the above Dissenting Opinion was

submitted on the

~

day of

_________,

1977.

UAdi~i~’c~

Christan L. Moffe~Xy)Clerk

Illinois Pollutior’x-’?’ontrol Board

Board

25

—

542