INC S Pu UTIC CONTROL BOARD

Septesber 15 1977

COLLIER CARBOi. Alu CHENICAL

coRpoRArloN,

ENVIRONMENTAL PR&ILuTIOL AGENCY,

Reep nde t.

OPINION

AND ORtER OF THE BOARD (by Rr Weiner)

I

LEGAl BA~KCP

This matter r~c~bet e

d

upor the Feburary 14,

1977

Petition for Variance bio ghL o~ 311~ierCarbon and. Chemical

Corporation

(Collier) seeking reli~t I~m particulate

emissions

standards

until Feburary 1, 197 ~ Enviro~rnenta1

Protection

Agency (Agency)

filed its Agency Hecommendation on May

2, 1977

in support

of

a

variance but with conditions attached.

A hearing

was held

on July 21, 1977 Both parties filed Closing

Statements

in support

of their respective positions.

II FACTUAL BACKGROU1D

Collier owns and perates a facility used for the

calcining

of green

petroleum coke, located in Lerno~~uWill County

Illinois

llinois.

Equipment at the facility inc~des

a rotary kiln, a

pyroscrubber, a

rotary cooler, and storage areas, The

facility

was operating

in compliance with the particulate

emissions

standard set

by Rule 203(b) of Chapter

2: Air Pollution from

at least May,

1975 (Ex, 4) until July, 1976, when

a waste heat

boiler was

installed and put into operation. The

boiler was

designed to

produce steam from the

heat given off by the rotary

kiln which

would in turn be used to produce electricity

at a

nearby facility

owned

by Union Oil Company.

However,

operation

of the boiler

caused particulate

emissions to exceed allowable

levels (Ex. 5),

The

installation of the waste heat boiler does

not constitute

a umodificationil

under Rule 101

of Chapter 2.

Co1lier~s

particulate

emissions will

be governed by Rule

203(b)

as an

existing source.

The granting

of a variance from

Rule 203(b)

would

allow

Collier

time to

properly shake down its system and to design

additional

emission

control equipment, if any is necessary.

---

Collier cla~ms

F

~ ~

an

enforcement ~‘ri

f

shakedown

per iod

the ~r t

compliance

wou~d roice

C

mm

boiler.

The rer~orI sh~mm v~

standard

arisirg at er ~1’e

The

Board finds that expo r

and

Regulations

would ca

ise

it

The environrental

i

pa

increased

particulate cries r

to

some presenEly unknowr co ~

consists

largely of comirercial

result,

we find that the ten~

variance

outweigh any hair t

dL

t e~ u~dl~liable

in

Nc~e

)fli(

mmring the

c~. I

i

xequii g immediate

~ase sing

It)

waste heat

I

~i

pctr mm late

emission

i.

w~ jr~ rib operation (Ex.5)

mm

f

abilu ~ under

the

Act

1

mm iid ,ieaaonable

hardship.

ar ance would

be

her facility,

due

mmrrounding the

facility

trial Iroperties.

As a

from ti~egrant of a

Collier is granted

ci ‘.

111

Air

Pollution unti Febr ax

conditions.

First, Coil cx

permits.

Second Collier s1~

schedule

and subm t mor fly

the

Board Collier~s compli

because

of the complexitj ot t

(R,

l4~l5)

.

We note ttat nude

the

variance period ~1 ws

i

emission

control equipment ~h

Collier

require additional

ito

Rule

203 (b)

,

it may pet Li

this

variance

cc

c p Os

~ I er

Ic c1r

d

cii

co ach

Board

uie

203(b)

of Chapter 2:

je~t to the

following

a I necesoary

Agency

~ its compliance

~o t~ o tIe Agency

and

e is iore appropriate

nbei performance

study

cocat iiance

timetable,

~ thc design of

additional

e equired. Should

~omNliance with

IN r ar ex~cnsion

of

Although rot necessar

to g~antJng of a variance,

the

Board wishes to resolv~

t ?

~ estio. or whether the

weight

of quench water shoud t~. ircirled ir detcrxining the

Process

Weight Rate at the C 1 acuity. Based on the

definition

of Process Weigh

Ic

e found in Rule 201 of Chapter

2:

Air

Pollution the weigit Cf Ic quench water slould not

be

included.

This Opunlur and Or3e~.. c r~tiiute tI?. findings of

fact

and

conclusions of

1a~ of the Board

oi

t

I

lim

Irli

IN

---

It is

the Order ot the Pollution

Control

Board that

Collier

shall te granted a ~jariance

from Rule

203(b) or

Chapter 2:

Air Pollution Uttli T~’ebruary1, 1978, subject

to

the following

conditions:

l~

Collier shall adopt and adhere to the fellowing

compliance

schedule:

Study

pyroscrubber performance

Complete by June

1, 1977

Modify

pyroscrubber

June 1, 1977

through

September

1, 1977

Shakedown

*Systern and design

September 1, 1977

emission control

system

through February

1,

1978

(if

necessary)

Should

Collier require ddditiOnal

time for

shakedown or

to

install any

emission control system, it may petition the Board

for an

extension of this variance~

2.

Commencing 28 days atte the date of this Order and

continuing on

or before the tenth of each month thereafter,

Collier

shall submit

written reports to the Agency and the Board

detailing

all progress

made toward compliance during the reporting

period.

The reports

shall be sent to:

Illinois EnvIronmental Protection Agency

Control Program Coordinator

2200

Churchill Road

Springfield, Illinois 62706

lilinois Pollution Control Board

309 West Washington Street

Suite 300

Chicago liiinois 60606

3.

Collier shall apply to the

Agency

for all necessary

construction

and operating permits within 45 days of the

date of

this Order,

4, Within 28 days ot the date of this Order, Collier shall

execute and

forward to ~he Agency and

the

Board

at the

addresses

specified in

Condition 2, supra, a

Certification

of Acceptance

and

Agreement to

be bound to all

terms

and conditions

of the

variances

The form of said

Certification shall

be as

follows.

~2

y-

---

CERTIFICATION

fully understanding the Order of the Illinois

Pollution Control Board in

PCB

77-48 hereby accept

said Order and

agree

to be

boul!d

and conditions thereof.

SIGNED_______________________________

TITLE _______________________________

DATE ________________________________

I,

Christan

L, Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois

Pollution

Control Board, hereby

certify the

above

Opinion and

Order

were adopted ~

19

77

C

istari