Court Opinion

ID: 9744322
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 22:00:52.623569+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:48.608619
License: Public Domain

Mr. JUSTICE SIMKINS, dissenting: I dissent. The hearing officer found that the “primary purpose” of the gas fired boilers was to produce heat. It seems clear to me that the primary purpose was to eliminate pollution. Appellee concededly had a system of coal fired boilers which were entirely adequate to their function which was identical to the function performed by the new equipment. It is also clear that appellee neither sought nor gained any economic benefits from its decision to purchase the gas fired boilers. The “primary purpose” and the “reason” for the purchase were identical. The gas fired boilers are a system or a method, within the purview of the statute, and, in my view, were primarily used for the elimination of the pollution problem. Had it not been for that problem the gas fired boilers would not have been used. I would affirm the judgment of the circuit court.