ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

March

8,

1990

CITIZEN UTILITIES COMPANY

OF ILLINOIS,

Petitioner,

V.

)

PCB 88—151

(Variance)

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

DISSENTING OPINION

(by R.

C. Flemal):

I

believe that

the requested variance

in this matter

should

have been granted.

Citizens has made the requisite showing that

denial

of variance would constitute

an arbitary or

unreasonable

hardship:

1)

Citizens has shown

that substantial hardship

would be incurred

if immediate compliance

is

required.

2)

The hardship cannot be said

to be self—imposed,

notwithstanding Citizens questionable

lack

of

forthrightness

regarding certain peripheral

matters.

3)

There is no dispute

that significant health risk

would not be incurred by the persons who are

served by any new water main extensions, assuming

compliance

is timely forthcoming.

Citizens has thereby demonstrated

that the hardship resulting

from denial

of variance would outweigh the injury of the public

from grant

of the petition,

consistent with the standard

articulated

in Caterpillar Tractor

Co.

V.

IPCB

(48 Ill.App.3d

655,

363 N.E.2d 419,

1977).

Moreover, Citizens provides a firm commitment

to compliance

by tenable means and reasonable dates certain, consistent with

Monsanto Co.

v.

IPCB

(67 Il1.2d 276,

367 N.E.2d 684,

1977).

Ronald

C.

Flemal

Board Member

109—271

---

—2—

I,

Dorothy M.

Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certify

that the above Dissenting Opinion was

submitted on the

~2(~ZZ

day of

__________________,

1990.

/~

7:

~

/r4~-~~

Dorothy M. ~3~nn,Clerk

Illinois Po)(iution Control Board

1fl~—272