ILLINOIS
    POLLUTION
    CONTROL
    BOARD
    January
    3,
    1975
    FS
    SERVICES,
    INC.,
    Kingston
    Mines
    Termi.nal,
    Petitioner,
    PCB 74~358
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    Respondent.
    Evan
    A,
    Strawn,
    attorney in behalf of FS Services,
    Inc.
    Michael Ginsberg,
    attorney
    in beh~if of Environmental
    Protection
    Agency.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by Dr.
    Odeli)
    On October
    4,
    1974,
    FS Services,
    Inc.
    filed with the
    Pollution Control Board
    (Board)
    a request for a Variance from
    Rule 205(a)
    of Chapter
    2, Air Pollution Regulations
    (Chapter 2).
    An Amended Petition for Variance that was received by the Board
    on November 12,
    1974, requested a Variance from Rule 205(a)
    from
    October
    15,
    1974, to May 30, 1975, or until Petitioner achieved
    compliance, whichever is sooner.
    FS
    Services,
    Inc.
    is
    a regional cooperative providing
    wholesale manufacturing, purchasing, supplies, and services to
    140 member companies throughout Illinois,
    Iowa,
    and Wisconsin.
    The FS member companies are local farm cooperatives selling farm
    production supplies and services to the entire local community.
    The Kingston Mines terminal
    (one of three owned by
    Petitioner in Illinois),
    the subject
    of
    this Variance request,
    is a bulk storage terminal handling gasoline, heating oil, diesel
    fuel,
    and thermoline,
    At this facility, Petitioner uses a total
    of seven stationary storage tanks, each having a capacity of more
    than 40,000 gallons for the storage of volatile organic materials.
    Two of the seven storage tanks
    are presently in compliance with
    Rule 205(a)
    of Chapter
    2.
    Petitioner~sproposed compliance pro-
    gram, outlined in PCB 73-518, FS Services,
    Inc.
    V.
    Environmental
    Protection Agency,
    Il PCB 341
    (February 21, 1974), contemplated
    the installation of a vapor recovery unit on the storage tanks to
    achieve compliance with Rule 205(a),
    In PCB 73-518,
    the Board
    granted Petitioner
    “a
    Variance until October 15, 1974,
    or the
    completion of their compliance plan, whichever comes first.”
    15
    —83
    Petitioner
    is now requesting an extension of that
    Variance to May 30, 1975, or until completion of the installation
    of
    a vapor recovery unit, whichever comes sooner.
    Petitioner
    alleges that it is unable to meet the October 15, 1974, deadline
    because of delays in delivery of the vapor recovery unit by
    Parker-Hannifin, the manufacturer of said unit,
    and because of
    a
    strike by teamsters in the spring of 1974, which delayed modi-
    fication of the five storage tanks in question and construction
    of a vapor recovery manifold.
    Petitioner has submitted three
    letters
    (dated September 17, October
    3, and October 24, 1974,
    respectively)
    from Parker—Hannifin which explain the circumstances
    associated with delays in their delivery of the vapor recovery
    unit to Petitioner.
    The October 24, 1974, letter stated that
    this equipment is to be shipped to Petitioner on March 15,
    1975.
    Petitioner believes that said vapor recovery unit should be on
    site by April 15, 1975, and that installation and testing of the
    unit should be completed by May 30,
    1975.
    On November 19, 1974, the Environmental Protection Agency
    (Agency)
    filed
    a Recommendation, based in part on their inspection
    of Petitioner~sfacility on October 11 and 15, 1974.
    The Agency
    believes that the vapor recovery unit being installed on
    Petitioner~sstorage tanks is capable of achieving compliance with
    the applicable regulations.
    They have received no objections to
    the grant of this Variance from the public.
    The Agency is of the
    opinion that delays in shipment of the vapor recovery unit were
    beyond the control of Petitioner,
    The Agency recommends that
    Petitioner be granted a Variance from Rule 205(a)
    of Chapter 2
    until May 30,
    1975,
    or until completion of the installation of the
    vapor recovery unit, whichever is sooner, subject to the conditions
    that were specified in PCB 73-518.
    A joint Motion to Cancel Hearing was received on November
    27,
    1974, and this Motion was granted by the Board on December 5.
    Evidence indicates that Petitioner has acted in
    good
    faith.
    Since delays in shipment of the vapor recovery unit were
    beyond the control of Petitioner, the Board finds that denial of
    this Variance would impose an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship
    on Petitioner,
    Therefore,
    the Board will grant this Variance,
    This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and con-
    clusions of law of the Board.
    ORDER
    IT
    IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that
    Petitioner is hereby granted a Variance from Rule 205(a)
    of
    Chapter
    2, Air Pollution Regulations, from October 15,
    1974,
    to
    May 30,
    1975,
    or until completion of the installation of subject
    vapor recovery unit, whichever comes first,
    subject to continuation
    of the reporting conditions and bond specified in PCB 73-518.
    15
    —84
    —3—
    I,
    Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order was
    adapted on the
    ~
    day of
    ~
    1975, by
    a vote of
    ~
    to 0
    15 —85

    Back to top