ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    April 4, 1974
    CENTRAL
    ILLINOIS LIGHT COMPANY
    )
    PETITIONER
    )
    v.
    )
    PCB 73-65
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    )
    RESPONDENT
    )
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Marder)
    This case comes to the Board on Petition of Central Illinois
    Light Company (CILCO) for Rehearing arid Reconsideration of Opinion.
    The Board, in its Opinion of March 7, 1974, dismissed a variance
    request from Rule 204 (c) of Air Regulations, Chapter 2, by CILCO
    as premature. It was determined by the Board that because Rule
    204 (c) is not effective until May, 1975, the Board could not grant
    this variance because there is in fact no viol&tion, since the rule
    does not yet exist (Opinion dated March 7, 1974, P. 2). The Board
    concluded that since a variance is no more than a shield from pros-
    ecution from Board Rules and Regulations, a variance is not proper
    without a violation.
    Since the Petition was not ripe for adjudica-
    tion, tl’e Board ceuld
    not grant the requested relief.
    ?hc ~oard has taken notice of Lhe extensive time and
    funds which
    went int.c
    the creation of this
    record, and has sugges’:ed that it
    be
    incorporated as part of any future variance record.
    In th’ Petition now
    under consideration, CILCO argues certain
    concluou~cf the harch
    7, 1974, Opinion of the Board. The conclus-
    ions reached in
    thz~t. Opinion are strictly informational and do not
    apply to the question here considered.
    CILCO further argues that it cannot receive operating permits as
    required by Rule i~ (b) (~ (G) of Chapter 2 without a
    compliance
    plan or proof of ccrnplianoe.
    The Beard aqrees with this point, but
    reaches no conclusions as to its vaLidity.
    This question was never
    in issue during the case
    CILCO~s .~eie request was variance
    from
    Rule 204 Cc).
    In fact, th:~~-~
    qu tic~ was never presented until
    CILCO’s final brief was fi:cd wit.~ the r~oard.
    The Board does not agree that
    1.t
    estopped from reaching this
    decision.
    This decision was ioade ~m1y after a full study of the
    record in question.
    12—3
    —2—
    Therefore, this motion
    to
    reconsider is denied.
    IT IS SO
    ORDERED.
    Mr. Henss dissents.
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, certify that the above Order was adopted by the Board on
    the 4th day of April, 1974, by a vote of 4 to 1.
    12 —4

    Back to top