ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
October 14,
 1971
TEXACO, INC.
v.
 )
 #
 71—235
 (70—29)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Philip
 R. Wimbish,
 for Texaco,
 Inc.
Delbert
 0.
 Haschemeyer,
 for the Environmental Protection
Agency
Opinion of the Board
 (by Mr.
 Currie)
Texaco
 was
 granted
 a variance February
 17,
 1971,
 to complete
the installation
 of equipment designed to bring under control
emissions
 of hydrogen sulfide from
 a brine lagoon at its
 oil
production
 facility near
 Salem.
 The order required the company
to determine ambient concentrations of the gas,
 to evaluate
the efficiency of its
 new equipment,
 and to apply by August
 1
for an extension if more time was needed.
 It was recognized that
the application
 of
 the electrolytic
 technology
 then under
consideration to oil field wastes was experimental,
 and that
even
 if the unit worked well
 it might be necessary
 to ~insta1l
additional
 units
 in order to achieve
 an acceptable level of air
quality
Texaco filed
 a timely request to extend the variance until
 December
 1
 of this
 year,
 and we held
 a second hearing.
 The
Agency recommends we grant
 the brief extension
 on conditions,
and we
 agree.
The evidence established that
 the electrolytic
 installation
was completed
 in June;
 that while it removed
 a considerable
amount of hydrogen sulfide
 it was only 50-60
 as effective
 as
anticipated;
 that its operation resulted
 in
 a
 low
 pH
 that required
large quantities
 of caustic to avoid corrosion;
 that there were
severe scaling and plugging problems imcairing dependability;
and that
 in sum the unit proved unsatisfactory
 (R.
 19-28).
 Texaco
immediately developed an alternative ylan
 that has been demonstrated
successful in
 field experiments.
 The
 new system
 involves
 the oxidation
of hydrogen sulfide to elemental sulfur by the introduction
 of
compressed air
 in the presence
 of nickel chloride
 as
 a catalyst
(R.
 57-60).
 Complete removal
 of the hydrogen sulfide from
 the
water—-an estimated 7500 pounds per day
 (P.
 74)--
 is expected
(P.
 53,
 68).
 As much
 as
 65 to 130 ~ounds
 of the gas will he
stripped
 from the water by
 the rising air,
 but this will be collected
in
 a closed vessel and introduced
 into
 a second nair
 of tanks
where further oxidation will take place, and the ultimate emissions
of hydrogen sulfide to the atmosphere from these second tanks
are expected to be on the order of six and one half pounds per
day
 (P.
 68-72).
 This compares extremely favorably with
 the estimated
pre-control emissions of 3,000 pounds
 a day.
The construction of the new system has already begun
 (P.
 113).
The company first estimated
 that
 it would be able to complete
 this
completely revised and much more effective program within the
 time
allotted for finishing the single electrolytic unit, but minor
delays have interfered that cannot be blamed upon Texaco,
 such
as difficulties with
 the soil
 in excavation
 (P.
 114).
 Completion
is now expected
 in the first half of November
 (P.
 150), but could
be delayed by seasonal rains
 (P.
 151).
 We think the December
 1
date entirely reasonable
 and commend Texaco
 for its application
to the solution of
 this difficult problem.
 The company has provided
 a large number
 of sampling reports that demonstrate that
 in the
meantime there should be no serious health danger,
 although at
times. the concentrations near homes within a mile of the lagoon
reach the level of detectible odor
 (P.
 l21).l
 Several
 of the lagoon’s
nearest neighbors,
 stressing that odors have been something
 of
a problem, have submitted statements
 indicating they do not
object to this beief extension
 (E.g., Petitioner’s
 Ex.
 2).
 To
close down production for this period could have enormous adverse
consequences,
 as detailed
 in our earlier opinion,
 and it would
not be warranted by the seriousness of the pollution problem.
We shall condition
 this extension on the posting of
 further
security,
 as required by statute,
 and on the company’s performing
additional ambient tests after completion of the project.
1.
 The Agency’s sampling showed that concentrations tend to be
highest with low wind in the evening or early morning,
with the highest two-hour concentration 0,019 ppm
 (EPA
Ex.
 1).
 The Litton report to the federal air pollution
authorities
 (NAPCA Publication APTD
 69-37,
 p.
 83, Petitioner’s
Ex.
 15)
 recites
 “no reported injury
 to health”
 at levels
 up to 0.030 mom, though
 the “odor threshold”
 is said to
be lower.
 Texaco reported
 a number of readings above 0.1
ppm,
 ranging up
 to about 0.8, but generally for periods of
only
 two to
 five minutes
 (Petitioner’s Exs.
 20-25).
 Litton
reports that smell
 is “slightly perceptible”
 at 0,100 ppm
and “definitely perceptible”
 at 0.330, while giving
 10 ppm
as the “minimum concentration causing eye irritation.”
2
—
656
This opinion constitutes
 the Board’s findings
 of fact and
conclusions
 of
 law.
ORDER
Texaco,
 Inc.,
 is hereby granted an extension
 of the variance
of February
 17,
 1971,
 to emit hydrogen sulfide gas
 from its
brine lagoon near Salem,
 Illinois, until December
 1,
 1971,
 on
the following conditions:
1.
 Production
 at the facilities in question shall not be increased
during the period of this variance;
2.
 The$lO,000 security required by the February
 17 order shall
be extended to secure compliance with
 the terms of
 this
order;
3.
 The nickel catalyst oxidation facility described
 in this
 opinion shall be in full operation by December
 1,
 1971;
4.
 Monthly progress reports shall be filed with
 the Agency and
with
 the Board, and
 a final report within thirty days after
completion of the facility;
5.
 Texaco shall submit to the Agency and
 to the Board
 the
results of an independent sampling of ambient air quality
in the lagoon area and in nearby inhabited areas within thirty
days after completion
 of the facility.
I,
 Regina
 E.
 Ryan, Clerk of the Pollution Control Board,
 certify
that the Board adopted the above Opinion of the Board this
14
 day of
 October
 1