ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December
    2, 1982
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
    )
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 75—80
    UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION,
    Respondent,
    and
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTP~,LPROTECTION
    ~
    AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 75—141
    )
    CONSOLIDATED
    UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION,
    )
    Respondent.
    CONCURRING OPINION (by J.
    Anderson):
    I appreciate the positive aspects of this settlement
    agreement,
    and feel
    that the Board’s Order resolves the legal
    infirmities
    in the best possible manner under the particular
    circumstances of this case.
    However,
    I trust that the Board’s Order, which only
    ameliorates the “cart before the horse” situation at the back
    end of this case,
    is not viewed as favoring this sort of approach.
    1~nenforcement proceeding,
    in particular one involving a
    stipulation,
    is not an acceptable
    forum
    for regulatory change.
    regulatory proceeding is intended to allow the public——not just
    “parties”-—notification of,
    access
    to, and participation in the
    full range of environmental and economic considerations.
    ~
    ~~3oanG.
    Anderson,
    “Board Member
    I,
    Christan L.
    Moffett, Clerk of thes Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, do hereby cejpify that the above Concurring
    Opinion was filed on the~~
    _day of
    ~
    ,
    1982.
    (
    I
    di
    ~i\
    1~.L/~L~
    1’
    /,
    ‘~hristanL. Mo~,~tt,Clerk
    Illinois Pollutièn Control Board
    50-15

    Back to top