ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

February

6,

1975

NYCO PRODUCTS COMPANY

Petitioner

)

PCB 74-414

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Respondent

OPINION

& ORDER of

the Board

(by Mr.

Zeitlin)

The Petition for Variance filed by Nyco Products Company (Nyco)

on

November 7,

1974, seeks relief from the standards of Rule 702(a)

of

Chapter

3

of the Board’s Water Pollution Regulations regarding mercury

discharge into

a public sewer system.

Nyco states that

it cannot com-

ply with the 0.0005 mg/i as Hg standard under that rule.

Nyco is

a small manufacturer and compounder of chemical

specialties.

The Nyco Plant

is

located at 3021 W.

36th Street,

in Chicago.

Its man-

ufacturing processes generate an average of 1,200 gallons

of wastewater

daily, which

is discharged into sewers

tributary to the Metropolitan San-

itary District of Greater Chicago (MSDGC) West-Southwest Treatment Plant.

Sampling done by MSDGC

in 1974 yielded

the following evidence~of viola-

tions of the mercury standards of Rule 702(a)

in Nyco’s wastewater:

DATE

SAMPLE TYPE

mg/i as Hg

July 31,

1974

Composite

.0010

Aug.

2,

1974

Grab

.0064

Aug.

6,

1974

Grab

.0028

Nyco admits

to such violations

of

the mercury standards,

and included

the MSDGC sample results

as

a part of its Variance Petition.

Nyco claims,

however, these violations result from factors beyond

its control.

Nyco was originally notified by MSDGC that it was

in violation of

MSDGC

pH standards

in

1973.

As

a result, Nyco installed

a 2,000 gallon tank for

treatment of its waste with caustic soda (sodium hydroxide)

as

a neutral-

izing agent.

This process tends to add mercury to the effluent, however.

As stated

in Nyco’s Petition,”...by complying with one set of standards,

we develop

a violation of another set of standards.

—

3~5

---

-2-

Nyco alleges that mercury-free caustic soda

is not currently avail-

able,

a fact which

the Agency does not dispute

in its

Recommendation

in

this

case.

The use of mercury in the production of sodium hydroxide

(caustic soda)

was examined in

detail

by the Board in Monsanto Company

v.

EPA,

PCB 71-110, November 8,

1971,

3 PCB

9,

10.

In that Opinion,

the Board acknowledged

a growing trend toward the use of mercury cells

in sodium hydroxide production, but questioned on environmental

grounds

the advisability of such

a

trend.

The Board there also noted that only

about 38

of this country’s sodium hydroxide was expected to be pro-

duced

by the mercury cell method

in

1975.

While this would not indicate

that mercury-free caustic soda is unavailable,

as Nyco alleges,

the

Board will

nevertheless accept Nyco’s allegation

insofar as

the Agency

has not alleged otherwise.

See also, Sherwin-Williams

v.

EPA,

PCB 72-401,

November 21,

1972,

6 PCB 285.

The Agency’s Recommendation

in

this matter was

filed on December 13,

1974.

The Agency computed that Nyco is discharging approximately 0.25

pound

of nercury from its

plant each year.

The Agency points out that

this discharge

is not causing the effluent from MSDGC’s West-Southwest

Treatment Plant

to exceed the 0.0005 mg/i effluent standard, even when

combined with all

other sources tributary to that plant.

The Agency also notes that Nyco has apparently

acted

in good faith

in

this matter.

Nyco has taken steps

to correct other discharge problems

pointed out by the MSDGC with regard

to hexane solubles

and copper,

as

well

as the pH problem which

has seemingly led

to

the difficulty with mer-

cury.

The Agency also cited several Sherwin-Williams

v.

EPA cases where the

Board has found sufficient hardship.

PCB 74-275, Oct.

10,

1974; PCB 73—367,

Nov.

15,

1973,

10 PCB

121;

PCB 72-401,

Nov.

21,

1972,

6 PCB 285; PCB 71—111,

Nov.

11,

1971,

3 PCB

37.

The Agency Recommendation noted, however, that Nyco’s Petition did not

show

a plan of compliance.

The Agency felt that Nyco should at

least invest-

igate

the possibilities

of substitution to eliminate the caustic soda usage,

or of mercury removal

from the wastewater discharge.

At

a public hearing held

in

this matter,

on January 8,

1975,

the parties

determined that there was

in fact no dispute between the parties

to this mat-

ter.

Nyco agreed

to the Agency’s Recommendation.

The crux of the Recommend-

ation

is

an investigation by Nyco into the possibility

of using other chemi-

cals

for pH treatment, eliminating the need for caustic

soda.

This has also

been previously considered by the Board.

Sherwin-Williams

v.

EPA,

PCB 71-111,

Nov.

ii,

1971,

3 PCB 37,44.

Specifically,

Nyco will investigate the avail-

ability of mercury-free caustic soda,

and the possibility

of substituting other

chemicals for the caustic soda used in

pH treatment.

Nyco will

report the

results of such investigation within four months

of the grant of this variance,

and should that investigation prove fruitful,

it

will begin

a program of sub-

stitution no later than six months after the grant of

this variance.

Further,

should initial investigations not prove successful, Nyco shall

continue to

look for pH treatment methods which will

not add to the mercury discharge prob-

1em.

15

—

386

---

-3-

This Opinion

constitutes the findings

of fact anc conclusions

of law

of

the Board.

ORDER

IT

IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control

Board

that:

Petitioner Nyco Products Company is granted

a variance from the mercury

discharge standards of Rule

702(a)

of Chapter

3 of the Board’s Water Pollu-

tion

Regulations for a period

of one year from the date of this Order, sub-

ject to the following conditions:

1.

Petitioner’s mercury discharge into sewers tributary to the Metro-

politan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago West-Southwest Treatment Plant

shall

not exceed concentrations of

0.001 mg/i on

a monthly average,

or 0.007

mg/i for

a single sample.

2.

Petitioner will

investigate the feasibility

of substituting other

chemicals for caustic soda,

or the availability of mercury-free caustic soda

for the manufacture and compounding of

its products and the neutralization

of its wastewater.

3.

Petitioner

will

report the results of that investigation

to the

Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency and

the

Metropolitan Sanitary

District of Greater Chicago within four months of the date of this Order.

4.

If

such substitution or

use of mercury-free caustic soda

is

seen

to

be feasible, Petitioner shall

implement such substitution or use of

mercury-free caustic soda within

six months

of the date of this Order,

and

shall

notify

the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency of

its intent to

do

so.

5.

If

substitution

or

the use of mercury—free caustic soda

is

not

feasible, Petitioner shall

continue the investigation

of methods

to remove

mercury from its wastewater discharge by filtration or any other means which

is economically feasible,

and

shall

report its findings

in this matter to

theIllinois Environmental Protection Agency and the Metropolitan Sanitary

District of Greater Chicago should such

a method be found.

I,

Christan

L.

Moffett, Clerk

of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board,

her by certify the above Opinion

& Order were adopted on the

~

day

of

-___________________

,

1975 by

a vote of ~to

~

Q~42~4~L

Christan

L.

Moffet ~~ierk

Illinois Pollution tontrolBoavd