ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    August 26,
    1991
    STATE OIL COMPANY,
    )
    )
    Petitioner,
    PCB 90—102
    v.
    )
    (Water Well Setback Exception)
    )
    DR.
    AND
    MRS.
    JAMES
    KRONE and
    )
    the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
    )
    PROTECTIPN AGENCY,
    )
    Respondents.
    DISSENTING OPINION
    (by J.D. Dumelle):
    The
    majority has
    granted
    State
    Oil
    permission
    to
    install
    gasoline tanks only 146 feet from Dr. and Mrs. James Krone’s new
    well.
    If the Krone’s well becomes polluted the consequences are
    severe.
    A connection to the Crystal Lake water system could take
    a year or more to accomplish and cost $180,000.
    Would State Oil
    willingly
    pay
    such
    a
    sum
    or
    would
    it
    contest
    the
    cause
    of
    pollution?
    And
    even
    if
    the
    Krone
    veterinary
    hospital
    were
    eventually connected to the Crystal Lake water system that water
    would not be suitable because it is chlorinated.
    Dr. Krone stated:
    ...Chlorinated water is generally rejected by
    most pets.
    They wouldn’t drink it.
    I’d have
    to have another source of water.
    (R.182).
    The majority opinion makes no mention of Dr. Krone’s rejection
    of
    chlorinated
    water
    for
    his
    use.
    Would
    State
    Oil
    pay
    in
    perpetuity for a dechiorinating system for Dr. Krone?
    The majority opinion in two places
    (p.
    11 and p.
    14)
    makes
    much of the Krones “non—communication” with the Board after January
    1991.
    The implication by the majority is that the Krones are no
    longer interested in the outcome since constructing their new well.
    To me this is unwarranted.
    The Krones made their record and rested
    upon
    it.
    There
    is
    no duty
    to belabor the
    Board with
    filings
    stating that their position is unchanged.
    Since the consequences of pollution of the Krone’s well are
    so severe
    I would have required the installation of double-hulled
    steel tanks at this location.
    A detector system connected to the
    space between the hulls would have provided maximum protection.
    The statute providing for Board determinations in contested
    water well exception setback proceedings was enacted to balance
    the consequences of well pollution against the cost of protective
    measures.
    I
    would
    have more
    adequately
    protected this
    long—
    established veterinary hospital.
    125—48
    1
    2
    For these reasons,
    I dissent.
    I, porothy N.
    Gunn,
    Cle’~kof the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board
    b.ereby
    certify
    that
    the
    above j~Diss~jitingOpinion
    was
    submitted on the
    __________
    day of
    LZ~_-J-J...L-&J
    ,
    1991.
    Dorothy M.
    Illinois
    ob
    D.
    Dumelle, P.E
    rd Member
    t
    Control Board
    125—482

    Back to top