ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

June

22,

1978

ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY

(HENNEPIN STATION),

Petitioner,

PCB 78—66

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY,

Respondent.

MR. SHELDON A.

ZABEL OF SCHIFF,

HARDIN

& WAITE,

APPEARED

FOR THE

PETITIONERS;

HONORABLE WILLIAM J. SCOTT, ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF

ILLINOIS, BY MS. SUSAN SHUMWAY, APPEARED FOR

THE

RESPONDENT~

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by

Mr.

Goodman):

This case is before the Board upon

a petition for variance

filed by the Illinois Power Company

(IPC)

on March

13,

1978,

IPC

seeks a variance from Rules

103 and 204(g)

(~)

of the Board~sAir

Pollution Regulations

for

its

sulfur

diox:ide

emissions

until

December

21,

1978.

Though IPC waived its right

to

a hearing in

this

matter,

the

Board did not receive sufficient notice

in

tiLLe

to

cancel

the

hearing.

Hearing was held on May

17,

1978;

no

members of the public attended.

IPC

is

a public utility, and the subject of

Ls

pc’t:ltion

is

its Hennepin Station, one of IPC~sfive major qeneratinq

stations.

The Hennepin Station consists of two boilers and associated elec-

tric generators, having an aggregate capacity of

320

megawatts

(MW).

The boilers burn coal exclusively.

IPC alleges

that,

due to circumstances existing prior

to the

recent

coal

strike

and

aggravated

by

the

United

Mine

Workers

(UMW)

strike,

IPC

is

unable

to

comply

with

Rule

204(g)

(3)

and,

there-

fore,

is unable

to

obtain an

operating permit.

IPC alleges

that,

until signing

a five year contract with Freeman United Mine Company

30-5’41

---

(Freeman)

IPC

~

to obtain coal for its

Hennepin Station through

~hort

tern or so~rpurchase agreements.

This method resulted

in

a lack of uniformity

in the quality of the coal supply.

The Free-

man contract wa~ o take effect on January

1, 1978, but,

on

December

n

~9/,,

~he Freeman mine was closed by the UMW

strike.

As a result of

~c

is occurrence,

IPC claims that

it was forced to

increase the nuiriber of spot purchases and Lad to

divert coal from

its Ha a

a Station, currently under construction.

IP~alleges

ti-at

under the circumstances,

there could be no

unrforrn~ty in

ti-s quality of the coal suppl~edto the Hennepin

Station

mdccl,

IPC feels that, because ot

the

diversion

of

-oal

f’.

r~i the F’~-

ara

Station,

a higher number of samples above

the 204(g) (3) lLits resulted than would have occurred normally.

Havana Statior re~uires a higher quality

(lower sulfur content)

coal than the Fernepin Station; if the normal coal required for

Henrepin had been available,

there would have been fewer samples

above the 204(gi (3)

limits.

The UMW sbrike ended on

March

26,

1978 but was still on-going

at thc time of

r 1mg of the petition,

IPC estimates

that, once

~egu~ar

deliver

~s of substantially similar coal are received and

i,~i3

zed at Her, ~ n~it will

take

270

days after

the end of the

UMW strike, or u

il December

21, 1978,

to comply with the 204(g)

3)

liriits~

rfhe Auencj recommends that the Board grant the

request for

a

variance from R~i,204(g)(3),

subject to

certain conditions,

and

deny the reques~t rcr a variance from Rule

103.

The Agency is of

the

pirion tha

here will be no environmen

damage caused if

tfe requect is jr~nted since the sulfur di

Ic emissions will

not exceed any

1

bbtantmve emission standams.

The Agency also

notes that if

variance

from Rule 204(g) (3)

is granted,

IPC

will be eIigibl

Lu obtain an operating permit.

ite Hoard

rj~

thaL the

granting of the variance from Rule

2~

(3

(3)

is war

antc’t in this case.

IPC has shown good faith

e~~for

~s t

comp~

i*h

t~.

e limitation set by 204(g) (3).

Due to

the 1on~range ~?fecLs

of the UMW

strike and

the necessity of

utilizlno exiatarg stockpiles, the Board finds that the

270 day

variance is a r~asnab1e length of time.

The Board agrees with

Petiti~er that denial of the variance from Rule 204(g) (3) would

imposc ~

arbitrary and unreasonable hardship, since there are no

substantive violations of sulfur dioxide emission standards,

and

tnere are no ot~

at

“iable alternatives available to IPC.

The

Board als~flats

Li-at the petition for variance from Rule 103

should ne denies’

Jmnce it is unnecessary in light of the granting

of the variance tiom Rule 204(g)

(3).

30-5~2

---

—

3—

Th~ Ilcard.

-i

:is

that

Petitioner

raiised

a

question

as

to

the

correctness

oi:

‘~o ‘tqency~s

construction

of

Rule

204(g)

(3).

How-

ever,

since

Petini.oner~s

request

for

a

variance

from

the

rule

is

being

gr3ntc~

:s

unnecessary

to

rule

on

the

question

at

this

time.

The Hoard

~‘~nts iPC~srequest for a variance from Rule 204

(g) (3) uctil Dec~rrLer21,

1978

and

denies

their

request

for

a

var:Lanca

item

tiL

tiD

3

rhic Opietor

enstitutes

the

findings

of

fact and conclusions

of

:ta~i of

the

Pc

~t

tin

this matter.

ORDER

it i~the

~‘eer of

the

Pollution

Control

Board

that

the

Illinois Power C~~ean~

be

granted

a

variance

from

Rule

204(g)

(3)

of Ciepter

2

el

~

Board~s

Regulations

until

December

21,

1978

for

:Ltc

Hinee:~

,cation

under

the

following

conditions:

i~

With:

r

:

rty

(30)

days

of

the

date

of

this

Ord’~r

t~e

Petitioner

shall

apply

to

the

Agency

for

i’

-‘

r, operating permits

to

be

valid

for

the d~n’~

t~on

of the variance.

2)

Petitne

~

ai-1

comply

with Rules

204(c) (1) (B)

(i)

:eascd.

~.

sixty

(60)

day

average,

204(e)

and

308

of

Ctn~’

3)

3i~t~

H

days

from

the

date

of

this

Order

and

cvsr~

s:imi

days

thereafter,

Petitioner

shall

ubm~

t

ty--day

coal

analysis

reports

to

the

rimentai Protection Agency

re~

h~ion

of

Air

Pollution

Control

~cuion

I

—

Field Operations

Section

Ben 915

Rockiord,

Illinois

61105

4)

On or

befe

a

September

22, 1978,

Petitioner

shall

apply

to

cLe

Agency for

all necessary

operating

permits,

Iasd

permits

shall

demonstrate

compli—

anca

~iith

Rule

204(g)

(3)

of

Chapter

2.

If

said

perratnt~

cite issued prior to December 21,

1978,

this

~Tci

:anee

30-542

---

5)

Within

45 days of the

adoption

of

this Order,

Illinois

Power

Company

shall

execute and

forward

to

the

Illinois

Environmental Protec-

tion

Agency,

2200

Churchill

Road, Springfield,

Illinois

62706

a

Certification

of

Acceptance

and

Agreement

to

be

bound

to

all

terms and

conditions

of

this

Order.

The

45

day period

shall

be

held

in

abeyance

during

any period

this

matter

is

being

appealed.

The

form of

said certification shall be as

follows:

CERTIFICATION

I

(We),

____

____having read and

fully

understanding

the

Order

of

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board

in

PCB

78~66 hereby

accept

said

Order

and

agree

to

be

bound

by

all

of

the

terms

and

conditions

there-

of.

SIGNED

________________

DATE

____

__________________

Petitioner~s

request

for

a

variance

from

Rule

103 of Chapter

2

is

denied.

I,

Christan

L.

Moffett,

Clerk

of

the Illinois Pollution

Control

Board,

hereby

certify

the

above

Opinion and Order

were

ado~ed~on

the~

day

~

1978 by a

Christan

L.

Moff

Clerk

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board

30-~5’44