ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

March

11, 1976

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Complainant,

v.

)

PCB 75—34

PETTIBONE CORPORATION,

a

)

Delaware corporation,

)

Respondent.

Ms. Mary C.

Schlott, Assistant Attorney General, Attorney for

Complainant.

Mr. Robert

H.

Joyce,

Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather

& Geraidson,

Attorney for Respondent.

CONCURRING OPINION

(by Mr.

Goodman);

Although

I reluctantly agree with the final disposition of

this case in accordance with the Order of the Board today,

one of

the provisions of the Stipulation and Proposal For Settlement which

formed the basis of today’s Order requires comment.

Paragraph h of the Stipulation is apparently a limited variance

granted by the Agency to Pettibone with respect to emissions from

their electric arc furnaces during the term of the compliance sec-

tion of the Stipulation.

Although

I believe there is a very definite

question as to whether the Agency may make such

a covenant,

I do not

believe that such a promise has any place in

a Stipulation presented

to the Board for radification.

In any event, although this parti-

cular paragraph probably does

not go beyond what is a matter of fact,

it is nevertheless

a disturbing move by an Agency charged with the

duty of enforcement of the Environmental Protection Act and the Rules

and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

Certainly any liberalization

of such a clause would be cause for rejection of

the

Stipulation,

and I would prefer that future Stipulations ~

include any such

“variance”

by the Agency.

20— 217

---

—2--

I, Christan

L. Moffett,

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certify the above Concurring Opinion was submitted

on the

/~+~

day of

#7)4i.4~(

,

1976.

~

Illinois Pollution Control Board

20—218