ILLINOI~P)iLL~ ON CONTROL BOARD
    Nay ~7, 2982
    OLIN
    CORPORATION,
    a Virginta Cc ~p~a
    2
    v~
    PCB 8l~1l7
    ILLINOIS
    ENVIRONMENTAL PRO~ECTTONAGENCY,
    ORDER
    OF THE BOARD
    (by ~
    Goodman)’
    On Apri1
    19,
    1982 (,li~fi1~d
    ~‘
    Thtter with the Board
    requesting an additional two days to bi~rnmaterials not listed in
    its
    August 17,
    1981 variance petition or included in the variance
    granted
    by the Board on February 17,
    1982,
    On April
    29 the
    Board
    construed
    said letter as a motion pursuant to Procedural Rule
    334(b)(1),
    and time was allotted for the Agency to responds
    No
    ruling
    on the motion was made,
    Inst?~adof
    a response, on
    May
    13,
    1982 the
    Agency filed a Motion to Reconsider that order,
    The
    Agency argued
    that Olin’s letter could not constitute a motion,
    even by
    Board order, since it was not accompanied by an
    affidavit
    or proof of
    service,
    Nevertheless, the Agency admits that
    it
    received
    the same on April
    16,
    1982
    The Agency’s procedural
    arguments are
    frivolous
    the Mction to Reconsider is denied,
    The Board
    will, however, use the tnformation submitted therein
    to rule on
    the Rule 334(b)(1) motion,
    The
    variance granted in this matter allowed Olin to
    openly
    burn
    buildings contaminat~d
    v’.j~td
    ~plo~ve
    wastes, obsolete
    pro~
    duction
    equipment, and solid propellant and pyrotechnic materials~
    Olin now requests
    that
    it be allowed to burn approximately
    20,000
    pounds
    of explosive compositions discovered by an
    inventory
    subsequent to filing
    its petition in this matter,
    The materials
    to be
    burned were further identified by Olin in a letter sent
    ~o
    the Agency
    on April
    22,
    1)82,
    ~rt’J ‘tas incThded in the
    Agency~s
    Motion
    to Reconsider,
    This information raises questions as
    to
    the environmental
    harm open burning these materials
    may cause and
    the
    appropriateness of the compliance plan formerly
    set
    out
    in the
    variance
    granted,
    Also tNe qLar2~tyof materials, almost
    double
    again that
    originally allowed, mandates that Olin prove
    anew its
    need
    for variance from Rule 502,
    Thc Rule 334(h)(1) motion is
    hereby
    denied,
    IT
    IS
    SO
    ORDERED,
    I, Christan
    L,
    Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control
    Board, hereby certify that the above Order was adopted
    on
    the
    ~~~day
    of
    ~,
    1982 by a vote of
    ~
    ci
    Christan L,
    Moffett, Cl~rk
    Illinois Pollution Control
    Board

    Back to top