ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
January
24,
1972
U.
S.
INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS COMPANY,
DIVISION OF NATIONAL DISTILLERS
AND
CHEMICAL CORPORATION
#71—44
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
)
SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(BY MR. LAWTON):
On
October
14,
1971,
the
following
order
was
entered
pursuant
to petition
for variance filed by
U.
S.
Industrial Chemicals Company:
‘IT
IS
THE
ORDER of
the Pollution Control Board that petitioner
be granted
a variance
to exceed the particulate emission limitations
set
forth in
the
Rules
and Regulations Governing the Control of Air
Pollution,
subject to the terms,
conditions and time schedules here-
inafter set forth:
1.
Variance is granted
to petitioner
to operate its four
uncontrolled coal-fired boilers in
a manner causing
emission of particulates
in excess of the regulation
limits pending the installation
of five electrostatic
precipitators,
the first of which has already been
installed.
Two additional precipitators
shall be
installed and in operation by May
30,
1972,
Emissions
from all boilers on which precipitators have or will
be installed shall meet particulate emission limits
as
set forth in the regulations.
This variance shall ex-
tend to October
13,
1972,
prior to which date petitioner
shall have initiated installation of the two remaining
electrostatic precipitators on Boilers
#4
and #5 for
operation by May
30,
1973,
and shall petition this
Board
90
days
in advance of expiration for an extension
of
this
variance
demonstrating
that
it has diligently
pursued
the
time schedule
for total installation
as set
forth in
its variance petition.
2.
Variance is granted to March
30,
1972 to operate the
sulphuric acid plant in
a manner causing particulate
emissions
in excess of those allowed in the Rules
and
Regulations Governing the Control of Air Pollution
cending operation
of the direct hydration alcohol plant.
On
March
30,
1972,
the sulphuric acid plant shall be
3
—
511
shut down.
No virgin acid shall be manufactured
for
sale
at any
time when emissions from the sulohuric acid
plant exceed maximum emission limits presently
in force
and effect in
the Rules
and Regulations Governing the
Control of Air Pollution.
3.
U.
S.
Industrial Chemicals Company,
through an inderendent
recognized consultant,
shall establish,
operate and
maintain continuous monitoring stations
for SO
for the
period
from April
1,
1972 to September
1, 1972~ in the
area where crop damage has occurred
in the vast.
Within
30
days after September
1,
1972,
the comoany st~allfile
with
the
Board
and
Agency
a
program
for
the
alleviation
of
excess
SO2
levels
~ufficient
to
cause
plant
damage.
The
Board
shall
issue
a
further
order
as
required.
4.
The
Company
shall,
within
thirty—five
days
after
receipt
of this order, post
with
the Agency ahond
or other secur-
ity
in
the
amount
of
$500,000.00,
in
a
form
satisfactory
to
the
Agency,
which
sum
shall
be
forfeited
to
the
State
of
Illinois
in
the
event
that
the
conditions
of
this
order
are
not
comp1i~ed with
or
the
facilities
in
auestior.
are
operated
after
expiration
of
these
variances
in
violation
of
regulation
limits.”
On
December
27,
1971,
pursuant
to
motion
of
oetitioner
for
Stay of Order pending review of the October
14,
1971 order,
asserting
that petitioner and the Environmental Protection Aqency had been unable
to agree on the
form of bond, we entered the following order:
“We stay
our Order of October 14,
1971
as
to the bond,
to
January
17,
1972, and direct the petitioner and
the Agency,
respectively,
prior
to
said
date,
to
submit
to
the
Board
the
form of bond proposed by each party.
After receipt of the pro-
posed bond forms,
we
shall issue
a further Order directing the
form of bond
to he posted,
and such further order
as
to stay
as
shall
be
appropriate
in
the
circumstances.
lo al
other respects,
the motion for stay of our October
14,
1971 order
is denied so
that petitioner may proceed with
its program of compliance
as
contemplated
by
our
order.”
The Agency complied with this Order.
Nothing has been received
in this
respect from
the petitioner.
On
January
10,
1972,
a
notion
to
amend
the
order
granting
variance
was received by
the Board which motion asks that
there he added to
the sentence appearing
in paragraph
1 of the order which
reads
“two
additional precipitators shall be installed and in ooeraticn by May
30,
1972” the following words
“or
the
two boilers on which these precivitators
3
—
514
are to be~installed shall not be operated after May
30, 1972
so that
emissions from these two boilers exceed maximum emission limits
presently
in force and effect in the Rules
and Regulations Governing
the Control of Air Pollution.”
In this respect,
we grant the motion
to amend the variance.
Petitioner will be
in compliance by May
30,
1972, pursuant to either program.
Petitioner further moves that paragraph
2 of the Order be modi-
fied by the deletion of the sentence,
“On March 30,1972,
the sulphuric
acid plant shall be shut down.”
This portion of the motion
is denied.
Contained in the original petition
for variance
and throughout the
hearing,
petitioner has represented that the sulphuric acid plant
would shut down by March
30,1972.
The opinion notes that crop damage
resulting from sulphur dioxide and/or sulphuric acid emissions has
taken
place.
This crop damage has conceivably resulted from emissions
from the sulphuric acid plant independently of whether the emissions
satisfy the particulate regulations.
Accordingly,
this presents
a
situation not uncommon where compliance with numerical particulate
emission limits
is not sufficient
to preclude air pollution and con-
sequential damage
to property.
We
noted
in
the
opinion that
“fly ash
and particulate emissions
attributable
to the boiler and sulphuric acid operations have signi-
ficantly interfered with the enjoyment of life and property
in the
community.
Damage to metals
and crops unquestionably have resulted
from emissions
from petitioner’s plant.”
We further provided for
a monitoring program for SO2
in the area
where crop damage has occurred in the past,
requiring a reporting pro-
gram which contemplated such further order of the Board as the circum-
stances would require.
Our variation allowance with respect to the sulphuric acid plant
was premised on its shutdown by March
30,
1972.
If petitioner wishes
to continue its operation,
it should file
a new petition
for variance
with
the
Board,
which
petition
and
subsequent
hearing
should
demonstrate
to the Board’s satisfaction
that the sulphuric acid plant operation
will not only meet particulate limit regulations, but will
also not
cause emissions which result in damage to crops
and air pollution
as
defined in
the Act.
IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board:
1.
That petitioner’s motion for amendment of paragraph
1
of the order entered on October
14,
1971 be granted by
the addition of the words
“or the
two boilers on which
these precipitators
are to be installed shall
not be
operated after May
30,
1972 so that emissions from these
two boilers exceed maximum emission limits presently in
force and effect in the Rules
and Regulations Governing
The Control of Air Pollution”, following the words
“two
3—515
additional precipitators shall be installed and in
operation by May
30,
1972” presently in said order.
In
all other respects,
the motion is denied.
2.
Variation heretofore granted as amended shall not be
effective until
bond
in the amount of $500,000.00 has
been approved by
the Board.
Petitioner
is directed to
con~p1ywith
the Board’s Order
of December
27,
1971
in
this
respect.
I, Christan Moffett, Clerk
of the Pollution Control B’ard,
ccrtifv
that
the above Supplemental Opinion and Order of the Board
was
adopted on the
~-/
day ~f January,
.1972, by
a vote
of
.
to ~
/
/
-
/
‘‘7/’
3—516