ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    May 29,
    1980
    CONTINENTAL
    GRAIN
    COMPANY,
    Petitioner,
    PCB 79—221
    ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION
    AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    OPINION
    ~ND
    ORDER
    OF THE BOARD
    (by D.
    Satcheli):
    This matter comes before the Board upon a petition and amended
    petition for variance filed October 19 and December
    4,
    1979 by
    Continental Grain Company
    (Continental Grain).
    The amended peti-
    tion requests a variance through June,
    1980 from the requirements
    of Rule 203(d) (8) (B)* of Chapter
    2:
    Air Pollution Control Regula-
    tions which relate to the requirement of induced draft equipment
    for control of total suspended particulate
    (TSP)
    emissions from
    grain elevators,
    On January
    18,
    1980
    the
    Environmental Protection
    Agency
    (Agency)
    recommended that the variances be granted with
    conditions.
    A public hearing was held
    in Carmi on April 24,
    1980
    at which time the parties presented
    a stipulation of fact
    (Joint
    Ex.
    1)
    -
    ~o members of the public attended,
    although written com-
    ment was received from
    a Mrs.
    Edwin E.
    Potter.
    Continental Grain operates a grain elevator in Crossville,
    White County.
    The town has a population of 850.
    The elevator is
    located just south of town, northwest of Illinois Route
    1,
    about
    300 feet from the nearest residence
    (Rec.,
    Ex.
    C)
    .
    It is a point—
    of—origin elevator which receives grain from area farmers
    for
    transshipment by truck to Continental Grain~sterminal elevator in
    Mt. Vernon, Indiana.
    It receives grain by way of two truck dump
    pits within the same enclosure.
    The enclosure
    is equipped with
    quick closing doors
    to limit particulate emissions during dumping.
    Apparently this
    is the only air pollution control equipment at this
    elevator.
    At one time the Agency issued
    an operating permit for
    the facility even though it lacked induced draft controls required
    by Rule 203(d) (8) (B) (ii)
    .
    Since
    it was
    an existing facility hand-
    ling not more than 2,000,000 bushels annually and located outside
    a major population area,
    it was exempt under Rule 203(d) (8) (D),
    *The pleadings actually refer to Rule 203(d) (9) which has recently
    been renumbered and is now Rule 203(d) (8).

    —2—
    On September
    1, 1979 the Agency denied Continental Grain’s
    request for a renewal of its operating permit
    (Rec.
    3).
    However,
    on August 24,
    1979 the Agency granted a permit to construct dust
    collection equipment.
    Continental Grain intends to use a bag—
    house rated at 18,000 cfm with an air to cloth ratio of
    8 to 1
    (Stip. 2).
    Control equipment will be installed not only in the
    truck dump area but also in internal transfer areas for fire
    and
    explosion protection, even though this is not required by Board
    rules
    (Amended
    Pet.
    4).
    The Agency expects the equipment to be
    99.9
    efficient1
    in
    excess
    of
    the
    90
    required
    by
    Rule 203(d) (8)
    (B) (ii) (a) (2).
    The
    equipment
    will cost $143,000, $100,000 of
    which is attributable to the truck dump area (Amended
    Pet.
    4).
    Since
    1976 Continental Grain’s annual through-put has been
    between 2.3
    and
    3.2 million bushels
    (Amended
    Pet.
    2,
    3).
    The
    increase is attributed to bumper crops
    and
    reduced
    barge
    traffic
    on rivers frozen by severe winter weather.
    According to the
    Agency, using the definition of “annual grain through-put” from
    Rule 201,
    the 1979 through—put was 2.73 million bushels
    (1ec.
    3).
    Since this represents an increase of more
    than
    30
    over the 2.0
    million bushels originally permitted, the elevator is a modified
    operation under Rule 203(d) (8) (F), the exemptions for existing
    facilities are inapplicable and induced draft controls under Rule
    203(d) (8) (8) (ii)
    arc required.
    Although Continental Grain dis-
    putes this conclusion, it has elected to install control equipment
    of even greater efficiency
    than
    that required by the Agency’s in-
    terpretation
    (Stip.
    3).
    The parties have specifically requested
    that the Board not decide the issue concerning annual through-put
    (R.
    9, 20; Stip.
    5).
    Continental Grain’s compliance schedule provides for delivery
    of
    equipment
    by April 15, completion of construction by June 1 and
    operation
    by
    July
    1,
    1980
    (Stip.
    3).
    Actual
    equipment
    delivery
    was expected on April 25 at the time of the hearing.
    This would
    not delay the July 1980 operation date
    (R. 16, 18).
    On May 21,
    1980 Continental Grain filed an agreed motion to supplement the
    record indicating that the equipment actually arrived on April 29,
    1980.
    White County is an
    attainment
    area
    for
    TSP.
    The
    Agency
    con-
    siders
    the facility a major source by its standards.
    It has the
    potential to
    emit
    more than 100 tons per year of particulates.
    The Agency calculates that it actually emits fifty-three tons per
    year,
    twenty-seven from the truck dump area (Stip.
    3).
    The facil-
    ity is an existing source
    and
    is not subject to review for preven-
    tion
    of
    significant
    deterioration
    of
    air
    quality
    in
    attainment
    areas.
    The
    nearest
    TSP
    air
    monitoring
    station is fifty miles to
    the west at Mt. Vernon, Illinois.
    The
    Agency
    does
    not
    believe

    —3—
    grant of the variance will cause violation of ambient air quality
    standards
    (Stip.
    5).
    The Agency believes the variance will be
    approved as a revision to the State Implementation Plan
    (Rec.
    7).
    The Agency agrees that denial of
    the
    variance
    would impose
    an
    arbitrary
    and
    unreasonable
    hardship.
    The
    Board
    finds
    that
    to
    require
    Continental
    Grain
    to shut down the facility or come into
    immediate
    compliance
    would
    impose
    an
    arbitrary
    and
    unreasonable
    hardship.
    The
    Agency
    received
    a
    letter
    from
    Mrs.
    Edwin
    B.
    Potter
    of
    Crossville, writtenNovember
    8,
    1979
    (Rec.,
    Ex.
    A).
    The
    letter
    complained of dust settling on structures
    in the immediate area
    of the elevator and inquired as
    to whether
    this variance would
    affect Continental Grain’s responsibility
    for this dust.
    The
    Agency responded negatively and advised Mrs.
    Potter of her right
    to file a written objection with the Board.
    No further objection
    has been received and Mrs.
    Potter did not attend the hearing
    (R.
    4)
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings
    of fact and
    conclusions
    of
    law
    in
    this
    matter.
    ORDER
    Petitioner,
    Continental Grain Company,
    is granted a variance
    from Rule 203(d) (8) (3) (ii)
    as
    it aoplies to the truck dump pit
    at Petitioner’s Crossville elevator,
    subject
    to the following
    conditions:
    1.
    This variance will expire on July
    1,
    1980.
    2.
    Within forty—five days of the date of this Order Peti-
    tioner shall apply
    for an operating permit for the
    Crossville elevator.
    3.
    Petitioner’s May 21,
    1980 motion to supplement record
    is
    granted.
    4.
    Within forty—five days of the
    date
    of
    this
    Order, Peti-
    tioner shall execute and forward
    to the Illinois Environ—
    mental Protection Agency, Variance Section,
    2200 Churchill
    Road,
    Springfield,
    Illinois 62706, a Certificate of Ac-
    ceptance and Agreement to be bound to all terms and condi-
    tions of this variance.
    This forty-five day period shall
    be
    held
    in
    abeyance
    for
    any
    period
    this
    matter
    is
    being
    appealed:
    The form of the Certificate shall be
    as follows:

    —4—
    CERTIFICATION
    I,
    (We),
    ___________________________,
    having read
    and
    fully
    understanding
    the
    Order
    in
    PCB
    79-221,
    hereby
    accept
    that
    Order
    and
    agree
    to
    be
    bound
    by
    all
    of
    its
    terms
    and
    conditions.
    IT
    IS
    SO
    ORDERED
    SIGNED
    TITLE
    DATE
    I, Christan
    L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board,
    hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order
    were adopted
    on the
    ______
    day of
    _____________,
    1980
    by
    a
    vote
    of
    ‘~O
    -
    ()
    Illinois
    Control Board

    Back to top