ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 23,
1989
MONSANTO COMPANY,
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 88—194
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by B. Forcade):
This matter
is before the Board
on the December
2,
1988
petition (“Petition”)
of Monsanto Company
(“Monsanto”)
for
a
variance from
35 Iii. Adm. Code
215.966.
Such variance would
i-elate
to Monsanto’s emissions of volatile organic materials
(“VOM”)
from
it p—dichlorobenzene
(“PDCB”) flaking/block process
at
Sauget.,
St. Clair County, Illinois.
The Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
(“Agency”) filed
its variance
recommendation (“Agency Recommendation”)
on January 18,
1989,
urging the Board
to grant
the variance with conditions.
The
public hearing occurred February 10, 1989 at Sauget,
Illinois.
No member
of the public attended.
R.
31.
Background
Monsanto produces,
inter
alia, chlorinated
benzenes at
its
W.G.
Krumrnrich
plant
at Sauget,
IllinoIs.
This proceeding
directly
involves Monsanto’s PDCB flaking/block process at that
plant.
The W.G.
Krummrich plant
is
a major source of employment
and revenue
in the
area.
Monsanto has two domestic (outside
Illinois)
and five foreign competitors
in PDCB production.
Monsanto employs
41 persons
in
its PDCB flaking/block process.
R.
21—23;
Ex.
9.
PDCB
is
a co—product of benzene chlorination, together with
o-dichlorobenzene
(“ODCB”)
and chlorobenzene
(“MCB”).
Following
chlorination, PDCB and ODCB are first separated from MCB,
then
PDCB
is refined
by separation from ODCB.
In the PDCB
flaking/block process, PDCB
is molded into 24—pound blocks of
high purity product.
These are prepared
for shipment as blocks
(plastic wrapped on pallets)
further processed
for shipment
as
crushed material
(in 55—pound bags)
or
a bulk liquid
(in railcars
or semi—trailers).
PDCB
is
a solid
at room temperature,
but
it
readily
sublimates
to
a vapor.
R.
10—11;
Ex.
8.
97—193
—2—
Monsanto has identified six VOM emissions sources
in its
PDCB flaking/block process
(sources numbered 120,
130,
104,
105,
107, and 109).
The aggregated VOM emissions
from these sources
is 476 tons per year:
460 tons
of PDCB,
14 tons of ODCB,
and 2
tons
of MCB.
R.
5
& 11—12; Ex.
8 at
3.
St. Clair County
is
in
a
non—attainment area for ozone
(Metropolitan St. Louis Interstate
Air Quality Control Region).
See
40 CFR 81.18 & 81.314 (1987).
The nearest ozone monitor,
in East St. Louis,
Illinois, has
registered one ozone excursion since
1986.
Monsanto’s VOM emissions are not subject
to regulation until
April
1,
1989.
Monsanto must
then achieve
an overall reduction
of 81 percent
of
its uncontrolled VOM emissions.
35
Ill. Mm.
Code 215.966
(1988)
(adopted at
12
Ill.
Reg.
7284,
7335
(Apr.
22,
1988), effective Apr.
8,
1988).
To achieve compliance, Monsanto
could install activated carbon controls
at an initial capital
cost
of $1,500,000 and an annual operating cost
of $7,000,000.
The installation
of
these controls would first achieve compliance
in March
1990.
The only means by which Monsanto could achieve
immediate compliance,
by the April
1,
1989 effective date
of
Section 215.966,
is
to shut down its PDCB flaking/block pro-
cess.
Instead, Monsanto desires
to install
a new PDCB crystalli-
zation process
that would achieve
a 99.8 percent reduction
of its
uncontrolled VOM emissions by March 31,
1990*.
Monsanto
commenced work on this new process
in January 1988.
It would
result
in overall annual VOM emissions
of 1.1 tons from the PDCB
process
(the subject of the requested variance)
and about 2.5
tons from its overall
chlorinated benzene process.
R.
5—7 & 13—
18;
Ex.
4,
6,
8
&
9.
Discussion
The Board
finds
that a PDCB flaking/block process shutdown,
directed towards achieving
immediate compliance with
35
Ill. Mm.
Code 215.966, could impose an unreasonable hardship on
Monsanto.
Monsanto maintains that a process shutdown,
in order
to achieve compliance
by April
1,
1989, would impose an arbitrary
and unreasonable hardship.
It would result
in direct financial
losses,
irreparable losses
of business,
and direct and indirect
losses of
jobs.
Petition at 12—13;
Ex.
9 at
4
The Agency agrees
that
a plant shutdown
to achieve
immediate compliance
is
“economically unreasonable.”
Agency Recommendation
at
3.
*
In its December
2,
1988 petition, Monsanto projected
a June
1990 completion
date
for
this project and requested
a variance
until July
1,
1990.
Petition at
8
& 15.
The Agency disagreed
with these dates, Agency Recommendation at 3—4, and Monsanto
revised
them to March
30,
1990.
Ex.
9 at
5.
97—194
—3—
The record indicates that the requested variance offers the
more viable means of achieving greater environmental benefits
than are possible with add—on controls.
Monsanto maintains
that
the installation of activated carbon controls would ultimately
achieve
a lesser reduction
in VO~4emissions than is possible with
the new PDCB process.
The addition of
such add—on controls would
constitute
a substantial cost, and these controls would not
achieve compliance
at an earlier date than
is possible with the
new PDCB crystallization process.
Petition at 11—12;
Ex.
6.
The
Agency agrees that the date upon which compliance
is possible
with activated carbon controls
is
“not significantly different
than the proposed plan.”
Agency Recommendation at
3.
The Board
finds
that employing activated carbon controls on the existing
flaking/block process would not result
in the same degree of VOM
emissions reduction as
is possible with the hew crystallization
process.
The Board also finds
that such add—on controls would
not likely achieve compliance at
a materially earlier date than
the proposed new process would allow.
The record further
indicates secondary environmental
benefits would
arise through Monsanto’s proposed variance
compliance plan.
Monsanto asserts
that its new PDCB
crystallization process would eliminate
25
to 40 tons of
dichlorobenzerie from its wastewater effluents each year.
R.
14;
Ex.
8 at
5.
The Board believes that
this secondary environmental
benefit
is desirable.
The record supports a conclusion that the requested relief
is consistent with federal
law.
Monsanto and the Agency both
observe
that Monsanto’s PDCB flaking/block process VOM emissions
will
initially become subject to regulatory control
under
35
Ill.
Mm.
Code Part 215 on April
1,
1989.
Petition at 10—11; Agency
Recommendation at
2.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(“USEPA”) has not yet approved the proposed State Implementation
Plan
(“SIP”)
revision
for new (April
1988) Section 215.966.
Monsanto and the Agency agree
that the proposed variance
is not
inconsistent with
federal law,
although
it might require
a SIP
revision
if the USEPA approves the pending Section 215.966
revision before
this variance action
is final.
Petition at
13;
Agency Recommendation
at
2.
The record also supports
a conclusion
that
a grant
of
variance will not adversely affect ambient air quality.
Monsanto
commits itself
to maximum VOM emission rates of 483
tons per year
for all its refined dichlorobenzene sources
and 476 tons per year
for those sources involved
in this proceeding during
the term of
the variance.
MonsaRto maintains
that these VOM emissions
“will
not cause any additional environmental
impacts beyond the current
operation,
...“
and highlights
the lowered emissions
rates
after
installation of the new PDCB crystallization process.
Petition
at
9.
The Agency believes
that during the variance term
“Monsanto’s emissions should not cause any violations of the
97--195
—4—
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard
for
ozone).”
Agency
Recommendation
at
2.
The
Agency
recommends
a
grant
of
the
requested
variance
from
Section 215.966, with certain conditions.
R.
31; Agency Recom-
mendation at
4.
First, the Agency would
limit the term of
variance
to
the
period
from
April
1,
1989
to
March
31,
1990.
Second,
the
Agency
maintains
that
the
information
Monsanto
has
presented
is
inadequate to determine if Monsanto will achieve
broader compliance with
35
Ill. Mm. Code 215. Subpart RR.
Other
sources
in the plant,
not mentioned in Monsanto’s petition,
are
subject to
this rule.
The Agency recommends
that Monsanto
certify
that
all
sources
subject
to Subpart RP (Sections 215.960
through
215.966)
will
comply
by
the
end
of
the
variance
term.
Finally,
the
Agency
recommends
that
Monsanto submit quarterly
progress reports
as
a condition of the variance.
Agency
Recommendation at
3—4.
Monsanto
is willing to accept these three
conditions.
R.
5
&
26—27;
Ex.
9
at
5.
For
the
foregoing
reasons,
the
Board
will
grant
Monsanto
the
requested
variance
from
Section
215.966
with
the
Agency—
recommended conditions.
The variance term will
run from April
1,
1989
through
March
31,
1990.
Monsanto
shall
certify
compliance
with
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
215.
Subpart
RR
by
March
31,
1990
for
all
sources
at
its
plant
that
are
subject
to
this
Subpart,
including
those
sources
not
part
of
this
proceeding.
Monsanto
shall
submit
quarterly
Subpart
BR
compliance
progress
reports
to
the
Agency
for
all
sources
within its plant, beginning with
the first
calendar
quarter
of
1989
and ending after
the first calendar
quarter of
1990.
Other Matters
The Board’s Opinion and Order of
December
15, 1988
in the
companion trade secrets docket, PCB 88—194 Docket
A,
included the
following language:
The
Board
determines
the
claimed
items
of
information
are
subject
to
protection
as
confidential
information.
The
Board
will
protect
this information pursuant to Part
120,
Subpart
C
of
Title
35
of
the Illinois Admini-
strative
Code,
until
...
such
a
time
as
PCB
88—19413 proceeding has terminated and Monsanto
has requested
the return
of all copies
of
the
variance
petition
containing
the
subject
information.,
Also,
Monsanto submitted
a vial
of PDCB
crystals at hearing
as “Petitioner’s Exhibit No.
3.”
This type of exhibit does not
reduce
to paper and microfiche
for ultimate record reduction and
storage.
Such physical exhibits therefore present
a storage and
97—196
—5—
maintenance difficulty for the Board.
The Board did not rely on
the
confidential
information
or
the
physical
exhibit
fortoday’s
decision.
The
Board
directs
Monsanto
to
reclaim
from
the
Clerk
of
the
Board
the
confidential
information
and
physical
Exhibit
No.
3,
within 45 days,
unless this matter
is appealed.
The Board
directs
the Clerk
to execute appropriate documentation verifying
the
return
of
the
materials
to
Monsanto.
The foregoing constitutes
the Board’s findings of
fact and
conclusions of law
in this matter.
ORDER
The Board hereby grants Monsanto’s p—dichlorobenzene
flaking/block process
(sources numbered
120,
130,
104,
105,
107,
and 109)
a variance from
35 Ill. Mm.
Code 215.966 on the
following conditions:
1.
The variance term shall run from April
1,
1989 through March
31,
1990;
2.
Monsanto
shall
certify
to
the
Agency
prior
to
the
end
of
the
variance
term,
its
compliance
with
35
Ill.
Adrn.
Code
215.
Subpart
BR
for
all
sources
at
its
W.G. Krummrich plant;
3.
Monsanto
shall
submit
quarterly
reports
to
the
Agency
relating
its
progress
towards compliance with
35
Ill. Mm.
Code
215.
Subpart
PR
for
all
sources
at
its
W.G.
Krummrich plant;
and
4.
Within
45
days
after
the
date
of
this
Opinion
and Order, Monsanto Company shall
execute and send to:
Ill inois
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Attention:
Thomas Davis
Enforcement Programs
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield,
IL 62794—9276
a
certificate
of
acceptance
of
this
variance
by
which
it
agrees
to
be
bound
by
the
terms
an~ conditions
contained
herein.
This
variance
will
be
void
if
Monsanto
Company
fails
to
execute
and
forward
the certificate within
the 45—day
97—197
—6—
period.
The
45—day
period
shall
be
in
abeyance
for
any
period
during
which
the
matter
is
appealed.
The
form
of
the
certification
shall
be
as
follows:
CERTIFICATION
I,
(We)
,
having
read
the
Opinion
and
Order
of
the
Illinois
Pollution Control
Board
in
PCB 88—194,
dated March
23,
1989,
understand
and accept
the
said
Opinion
and
Order,
realizing
that
such
acceptance
renders all terms and conditions
thereto binding and enforceable.
Petitioner
Authorized Agent
Title
Date
Section
41
of
the Environmental Protection Act,
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1985,
ch.
111—1/2,
par.
1041,
provides
for
appeal
of final
Orders of
the Board within
35 days.
The Rules of the Supreme
Court
of
Illinois
establish
filing
requirements.
IT
IS SO ORDERED.
I, Dorothy
M.
Gunn, Clerk of
the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify
that the abo
e Opinion and Order was
adopted on the
‘~-~
day of
~
,
1989, by
a
vote
of
7—o.
Illino
tion Control Board
97—198