ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

February

2,

1978

WINNETKANS

INTERESTED

IN

PROTECTING

THE

ENVIRONMENT

(WIPE),

Complainant,

v.

)

PCB

77—320

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

and

THE VILLAGE OF WINNETKA,

Respondents.

ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr.

Goodman):

On December

5,

1977,

the Winnetkans Interested in Protecting

the Environment

(WIPE)

filed a Complaint against the Environmental

Protection

Agency

and the Village of Winnetka alleging that

Winnetica’s construction permit to install two diesel electric gene-

rators at its

Tower Road site was

issued by the Agency in excess

of its authority.

On January

17,

1978,

WIPE filed a First Amended

Complaint alleging the same cause

of

action.

Both the Agency and

the Village of Winnetka have filed Motions

to Dismiss.

The Amended Complaint

alleges

that,

because Winnetka gave no

proof of and the Agency gave no consideration to either the poten-

tial noise emissions from the subject generators

or the potentially

carcinogenic effects of

diesel

engine exhaust fumes and combustion

products, the Agency issued the permit in excess of its statutory

authority.

However,

the Board

finds

that neither Winnetka nor the

Agency were required to

consider

these factors as part of the per-

mit process.

There

is no permit requirement for noise sources,

and an applicant for a permit

to

construct an air emission source

is not required to prove in

its permit

application,

nor

is the

Agency required to determine,

that the source will comply with the

noise standards.

Furthermore,

the

permit process is not the appro-

priate procedure

for determining the health effects of the

fumes to

be emitted from Winnetka’s generators, and Winnetka was not re—

quired to prove

in its application, nor was the Agency required to

determine,

that the fumes would not be carcinogenic.

The Board

29

185

---

—2—

finds that the Complaint does not state a cause of action.

The

Amended Complaint

is hereby dismissed.

The Board notes that any

source

is

required to comply with the Noise Regulations and the

prohibition

against air pollution regardless of the existence of

a permit.

An

issue raised in the Motions to Dismiss was whether the

45-day limit for filing a permit appeal pursuant

to Rule 502(a)

(2)

of the

Board’s Procedural Rules applies to the filing of an

action seeking revocation of a permit pursuant to Rule 503(a).

The Board

finds that the 45-day limit is intended to apply to Rule

503(a)

Mr.

Dumelle

concurs.

~1r.

Young

dissents.

I,

Christan L.

Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, ~ereby

certify the above Order was a~optedon the

~

day

,

1978 by a vote of

~-/

Illinois Pollution

:rol Board

29

—

186