ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September 11, 1986
CENTRAL ILLINOIS UTILITY CO.,
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 86—53
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
CONCURRING OPINION
(by J.
D.
Dumelle):
My reasons
for concurring
lie
in the length of the variance;
the lack of demonstrated progress under
the previous variance~
and possible Federal complications.
The majority has granted
a five year variance.
I would have
preferred
a three year variance
to make certain that progress
toward compliance
is actually achieved.
The previous variance, PCB 80—234, was granted April 16,
1981.
It required;
(a)
six month communication with IEPA on
fluoride removal techniques,
(b)
a compliance program by January
1, 1984,
(c)
no levels
of fluoride above 4.0 mg/i,
and
(d)
written notice every three months (after June 30, 1981)
to all
users that
a variance had been granted and information on most
recent measured fluoride levels.
Neither the Petition nor the Recommendation mention
compliance with any of these
four conditions.
The record
is
silent and this Board
is uninformed.
If the Petitioner
in fact
filed
a compliance plan by January 1,
1984 why
is
a new date of
March 11,
1988
(18 months after September 11, 1986)
now being set
in the instant case?
Finally,
the matter
of Federal complications
is important.
The majority decision set no upper
limit
for fluoride.
Thus the
Petitioner legally is not under
the Safe Drinking Water Act
standards for fluoride.
The Agency,
in its Recommendation at
Paragraph
14 stated,
“As a result,
the requested variance may be
granted
in
a manner consistent with federal law provided that the
Board’s Order specify that fluoride levels not exceed 4.0
mg/i.”
This was not done.
acob D.
Dumelle, P.E.
Chairman
72.269
—2—
I, Dorothy M.
Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify that the4~~~çoncurring
Opinion was filed
on the
_____________
day of
-~u~’1986.
Dorothy M.
G~mnn,Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
72-270