ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 27,

1982

CARGILL, INC.,

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 81—37

ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

AGENCY,

Respondent,

DISSENTING OPINION

(by

I. Goodman):

Focusing on industrial waste and its definition as

the

pollutant, the majority of the Board held that since the origin

of pollutants contained in Petitioner’s discharge to the Fox

River could not he traced to Petitioner~sindustrial process,

no

NPDES

permit

was

required for its point discharge.

The

majority reasoned that NPDES permits are only required when

pollutants are discharged, and “industrial waste” was the only

relevant term contained in the definition of “pollutant.”

However,

“pollutant” as defined in the Act and Chapter

3 also

includes the term “chemical waste.”

The contaminants found

in Petitioner’s discharge do constitute chemical waste, and

as such are pollutants.

The nexus between the contaminants

and their origin is irrelevant.

Rather the control and inven-

tory of pollutants into waters of the State,

intended by the

NPDES permit program, properly takes precedence.

Therefore,

I would hold that the contaminants discharged into the Fox River

by Petitioner’s 24 inch pipe are chemical waste pollutants, and

despite the de minimis

character,

a NPDES permit is required

under the Clean Water Act,

the Act,

and Rule

901 of Chapter

3.

Irvin G.

o

man, Board Member

I, Christan

L. Moffett, clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, do hereby certify that the above Dissenting

Opinion was filed on the

~

day of

~

1982.

Christan

L.

Moffett,

~.

rk

Illinois Pollution

rol Board

47-133