ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December 5, 1973

AUROR REFINING COMPANY,

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 74—321

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,)

Respondent.

Mr. John 0. Heimdal, attorney on behalf of Petitioner.

Mr. Peter E. Orlinsky, attorney on behalf of Respondent.

OPINION

AND

ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Dr. Odell)

On September 3, 1974, the Pollution Control Board

(Board)

received from the Petitioner a Motion seeking an extension of

the Board’s Orders 1 and 2 of April 18, 1974, in Environmental

Protection Agency v. Aurora Refining Company, PCB 73-334. The

Board had ordered Petitioner to cease and desist all violations

of Section 9(a) of the Environmental Protection Act (Act) and

Rule 3-3.111 of the Rules and Regulations Governing the Control

of Air Pollution by August 16, 1974 (PCB 73—334). Petitioner’s re-

quest in the current case, which is considered as a Petition for

Variance, asked for additional time to install the planned bag—

house system to achieve compliance. A letter from the supplier

indicated that shipment of the baghouses was delayed because of

“fabrication and assembly p~ob1ems.” Petitioner operates a

facility in Aurora for the recovery of aluminum from dross,

On November 25, 1974, a Recommendation was received from

the Environmental Protection Agency (Agency). The Torit bag-

houses, which are to be installed to achieve compliance, were

ordered on May 25, 1974. When an Agency engineer visited

Petitioner’s facility on October 29, 1974, the baghouse components

were on the Petitioner’s premises, but actual installation had

not yet begun. Petitioner stated that installation of the bag-

houses “would require an additional six weeks.” The Agency believes

that the Petitioner’s installation schedule is reasonable and

that the Petitioner’s control program will bring it into compliance.

Since Petitioner has been diligent in its attempts to comply with

the Board’s Order, but was deterred by circumstances beyond its

control, the Agency felt that denial of the Petitioner’s request

for a Variance would constitute an unreasonable hardship. The

Agency recommended that Petitioner be granted a Variance from

the Board’s Order 1 in PCB 73-334 until December 10, 1974, subject

to certain conditions.

14—617

---

—2—

The Board agrees that a Petition for Variance should be

granted. In fact, the Variance is granted under Section 38 of

the Act, since the Board failed to take final action upon this

variance request within 90 days after the filing of the Petition.

In the light of information supplied by Petitioner and in the

Agency Recommendation, the Board interprets this Variance to

extend to January 16, 1975, which provides six weeks of installa-

tion time after the date of this Order.

ORDER

IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that

Petitioner be and is hereby granted a Variance from the Board’s

Order 1 of April 18, 1974, in PCB 73—334, from August 16, 1974,

to January 16, 1975, in order to install baghouses for control

of emissions from its facilities.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby cer~ifythat t e above Opinion and Order was

adopted on the

~‘

day of

_____________,

1974, by a vote of

~ toO

Christan L.~9ffett

14—818