IL~L1t’~O1SPOLLUTI~COt~TROLHOARD
August
6,
1967
hOWARD
S.
SPURGEON, d/b/a
HIGUVIE~~S~TES
SUbDIVISION,
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 87-111
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTEC~lONAGENCY,
)
Respondents.
ORDt~ROF
THE
BO~D
(by J,D. Dumelle):
This matter
comes before
the Board upon
a July
31,
1987,
petition
for variance filed
by Howard
S.
Spurgeon
(Spurgeon).
The petition
is deficient in that it fails
to include:
a)
A clear
and complete statement of the precise extent of
the relief sought including specific identification of
the
particular provisions
of the regulations or Board
Order from which
the variance
is sought;
b)
A description
of
the business
or activity
of the
petitioner including
the size of the business and
number
of employees and
a description
of the location
and area affected by petitioner’s operations;
c)
The quantity and types
of material usec in
the process
or activity for which the variance
is required and
a
full description
of
the p&rticular process
or activity
in which the materials are used;
d)
The quantity
anci types of materials discharged
from the
process of activity requiring the variance,
the
location of the points
of discharge and
as applicable,
the identification of the receiving waterway or
land,
or
location of the nearest air monitoring station
maintained by the Agency;
e)
Data describing
the nature and extent of
the present
failure
to meet the numerical standards or particular
provisions from which
the variance
is sought and
a
factual statement why compliance with
the Act and
regulations
was not
or cannot be achieved by the
required compliance date;
80—121
f)
A detailed description
of the existing and proposed
equipment or proposed method of
control
to be under-
taken
to acnieve
full compliance with the Act anã
regulations,
including
a time schedule
for
the
implementation of
all
phases of the control program
from initiation of design
to program completion and the
estimated costs involved for each phase
and the total
cost to achieve compliance;
g)
An assessment with supporting factual
information,
of
the environmental impact that the variance will impose
on human, plant,
and animal life
in the affected
area,
including,
where applicable, data describing
the
existing air and water quality which
the discharge may
affect;
h)
Past efforts to achieve compliance including costs
incurred,
results
achieved,,
permit
status,
and,
for
publicly—owned treatment works
or connections thereto,
construction grant status;
i)
A discussion
of
tile availability of alternate methods
of compliance,
the extent that such methods were
studied,
and the comparative factors leading
to the
selection of the control program proposed to achieve
compliance;
3)
h
statement
of
the measures
to
be undertaken during
the
period
of the variance
to minimize the impact of the
discharge of
contaminants on human,
plant,
and animal
life in the affected areas,
including the numerical
interim discharge limitations which
can be achieved
during the period of the variance;
k)
A concise factual
statement of the reasons
the
petitioner believes that compliance with the particular
provisions
of the regulations or Board Order
would
impose an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship;
and
1)
An indication
as
to whether the
Board may grant
the
relief consistent with the Clean S~aterAct
(33 VS.C.
1251),
U.S.E.P.A.
effluent guidelines
and standards,
any other Federal regulations,
or any wide area waste
treatment management plan approved
by the Administrator
of U.S.E.P.A. pursuant to Section 201 of the Clean
hater Act.
Unless
an amended petition
is filed within
45 days of the
date of
this Order, curing
the above—noted defects, this matter
will besubject
to dismissal.
IT
IS SO ORDERED.
80—122
—3—
I,
Lorothy
M. ~unn, Clerk of
the Illinois Pollution Control
tne
_______________
day of
.
,
1967
by a vote
Board, her,e~t—certifythat ~~~above
Order was adopted
on
of
________________
Doro~Gunn,
Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
80—123