ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    May 29,
    1975
    ALLIED METAL COMPANY,
    )
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 75—217
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    Respondent.
    INTERIM ORDER OF TUE BOARD
    (by Mr.
    Zeitlin):
    Petitioner Allied Metal Company
    (Allied)
    filed the instant
    Petition for Variance on May 23,
    1975,
    seeking relief from
    Rules 203(a) and 103(b)
    of the Pollution Control Board
    (Board) Air Pollution Regulations, and Section 9(a)
    of the
    Environmental Protection Act.
    Ill. Rev.
    Stat., Ch.
    111 1/2,
    Sec.
    1009(a) (1973); PCB Regs.,
    Ch.
    3,
    Rules 103(b),
    203(a).
    The Petition for Variance~in this matter is inadequate
    for several reasons.
    Petitioner fails in its Petition to comply with
    the Board’s Procedural Rule 401(a) (iv), which requires an estimate
    of the quantity and type of contaminants discharged.
    In fact,
    on page
    4 of the instant Petition, Allied states that
    “we have
    never regarded our plant as not being in compliance.” On page
    3
    of the Petition, Allied states that,
    “up until now there have been
    emissions of certain particulate matter”, but nowhere does A1Iie-~
    state the quantity or nature of such emissions.
    Allied does state
    t1~a
    “your agencies” claim its equipment can exceed the emission standard
    when operating at capacity,
    although Allied’s calculations have
    “always contradicted that position.”
    Petitioner states quite plainly,
    in Paragraph II, that
    it does not believe it
    is seeking a variance from the
    applicability of any statutory provisions or rules or regulations
    applying to emission standards from its plant.
    They state that
    they seek only a grant of sufficient time to achieve certain com-
    pliance goals set out in the Petition.
    The reason given for seeking
    such a variance is
    “to more than meet the requirements, without
    the burden of having to defend a multiplicity of legal
    action arising out of your offices, or out of the office of
    the Attorney General.”
    17—
    221
    —2—
    While the purpose of a variance is,
    in part, to provide
    a shield from prosecution,
    such a shield cannot be granted
    in the form sought here;
    that is to say,
    in the form of
    a
    blanket permission to pollute where the Board is given no
    indication of the quantity or quality of the pollutants to
    be emitted.
    The Petition herein plainly fails to comply
    with Procedural Rule 401 (a) (iv).
    Nor, does the Petition
    meet the requirements of Rule 401 (a)
    (v), requiring a showing
    of the nature and extent to which present emissions fail to
    meet the particular provisions from which the variance is
    sought.
    Further, the Petition in this matter wholly fails to
    comply with the requirements for variances laid down in the
    recent United Supreme Court decision of Train v. Natural Resources Defense
    Council.
    43 U.S.L.W. 4467
    (April 16, 1975).
    Under that
    decision,
    this Board cannot grant a variance absent a showing
    that such grant will not result in a violation of the national
    ambient air quality standards,
    or a failure to maintain these
    standards,
    See, King-Seeley Co.
    v. EPA, PCB 75-159
    (April
    24,
    1975)
    (Interim Order of the :B~ard); see also,
    Great Lakes
    Carbon Corp.
    v.
    EPA,
    PCB 75-85
    (Nay
    22,
    1975). No such
    showing has been made,
    or even attempted,
    by Petitioner
    Allied,
    For the reasons stated above,
    the instant Variance
    Petition is inadequate.
    Petitioner shall, within 45 days of
    the date of this Interim Order, file an Amended Petition,
    correcting the deficiencies noted above.
    Failure to timely
    file such an Amended Petition shall render this matter
    subject to dismissal for inadequacy.
    The 90 day decision
    period set by statute shall run from the date of filing of
    the Amended Petition.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I,
    Christan
    L.
    Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board.hereby certify that the above Interim Order
    ~g’t”?
    day of
    _________________
    Christan L. Moff
    Clerk
    ILLINOIS POLLUTIO
    ONTROL BOARD
    17
    —
    222

    Back to top