ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

June

30, 1983

TEXACO, U.S.A.

)

Petitioner,

PCB 83—80

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent,

CONCURRING OPINION

(by

J.D,

Dumelle):

The pleadings in this case do not seem to support the need

for a provisional variance rather than the usual variance subject

to public scrutiny, comment and possible public hearing.

The theory for a

provisional variance

is that unexpected

and unanticipated

events occur which necessitate

immediate

protection from enforcement

through

this mechanism. The Agency

Recommendation characterizes the Texaco request as one ilto allow

the discharge of wastewater should it become necessary during

maintenance dredging of its,. .settling basins,. .(underlining added),

The key word is ~maintenance”, Settling basins can be

sounded to determine the level of solids. Dredging schedules can

be anticipated well in advance of the loss of capacity. Thus

ample time existed for the Board~s consideration of a variance

by the usual method,

Since I feel that this proceeding does not meet the test

for a provisional variance, I concur.

The above Concurring Opinion was filed on the

____ ____

of

.-.~

,

1983,

..~ ~.

I

Christan L. Moffet~, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

____ ____

day