ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    July
    8,
    1976
    BIRD
    & SON,
    INC.,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 76—116
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT
    (by Mr. Dumelle):
    The Board Opinion issued today refers to “two unnamed
    methods” of mercury removal being investigated by the Petitioner.
    Since the methods are advanced by “manufacturers”
    (see Petition,
    p.
    5)
    it is probable that they are not secret or proprietary.
    In future variance petitions,
    if still necessary, the
    Petitioner should identify these methods by name so that the
    Board might be better informed.
    The Board is familiar with
    research using starch xanthate, for example,
    it is not clear
    from the proceedings in this case
    if this process was even
    considered.
    Dr. James W. Patterson’s book,
    “Wastewater Treatment Technology”
    which evolved from Board—requested research,
    lists four mercury
    removal methods which appear to give effluents
    in the range required
    by the regulation
    (P.
    157).
    We simply cannot make a judgment as
    to whether all of these possibilities were considered.
    Submitted by: __________________________________
    Jacob
    D. Dumelle
    I, Christan L~Moffett, Cler
    o
    the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, herçby
    certify the above Su
    lemental Statement was submitted
    on the
    ‘~~‘
    day of July,
    1976.
    Illinois Pollution
    ol Board
    23
    —
    57
    0
    .
    .

    Back to top