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

    Back to top