ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
August
4, 1977
E.W. KNEIP,
INC.,
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 77—46
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
OPINION
AND
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Goodman):
This matter is before the Board on a petition filed February
9,
1977 by E.W.
Kneip,
Inc.
(Kneip)
requesting a variance from
applicable effluent and water quality standards.
Kneip requests
variance until October, 1978 from Rules
203,
402,
404,
405,
407,
408 and 903 of Chapter
3:
Water Pollution Regulations
(Regulations)
and from Section 12 of the Environmental Protection Act.
No hearing
was held in this matter.
Kneip has filed a waiver of the statutory
90-day decision period.
Kneip owns and operates
a slaughtering and packing plant in
Elburn, Kane County.
The source of the compliance problem is the
400,000 gallons of water used daily in the slaughtering process.
Kneip and the Agency have been working together since 1973 to develop
a practical means to bring Kneip into full compliance with applicable
effluent and water quality standards and various variance grants
reflect these efforts.
(PCB 73—147,
74—372,
75—171,
76—50).
After
the initially proposed treatment plant became economically unfeasible,
time was needed to study alternatives until
a consolidated system was
agreed upon, whereby Kneip would install a pretreatment system
(costing over $400,000)
to connect to a sewage treatment plant to be
built by the Village of Elburn with contribution from Kneip.
The
last variance granted in PCB 76-50 on May
6,
1976 resulted from the
delay in compliance with the Regulations necessitated by Elburn’s
failure to complete its sewage treatment plant on the date originally
anticipated.
That variance, from the same regulations as are in-
volved here, was granted until April
1, 1977 and was conditioned on
Kneip investigating an interim program to reduce BOD from the effluent
from its pretreatment facility.
Kneip~s
pretreatment
facility
was
completed
in
July of 1976,
six months
in
advance
of the originally
scheduled
completion date.
Pursuant to the
Board
Order
in
POE
76~-50, Kneip
investigated
alternative
interim compliance orcgramsy including
the construction
of a lagoon
suggested
in
that
Order.
The cost was
estimated to be
over
several
hundred
thousand
~LI
lars,
far
in
excess
of
the
interim
benefits.
Using
the
vi:L1age~*s la~con
until
completion
of their
system
proved
impossible
because
as
Xneip
learned,
their
system
does
not
employ
a
lagoon.
Bioxidation
,~
cortined
either
with
the
newly
constructed
pretreatment facility
ca: rim
mechanical
aeration,
was
rejected
as
well
for reasons
iucluthn~
cIa
high
costs,
the
lengthy
construction
period
reguimed,
and
the
posambil.ty
that
the
whole
process
could
prove
iriethective,
Accordi~:gly,
an
interim
compliance
program
is impractical.
The
Agenc~’
Recommendation tiled he::ein indicates the Agency~s
position that Kneip has shown the requisite good faith and hardship
to warrant
an extended variance
hut
racmmmends denial based on a
legal conclusion
concerning Seot~cns101 and 510 of the Federal Water
Pollution
Control
Act Amendments
of
I0~~2
(P.L.
92-500) with regard
to achieving
best practical
cont:ccl
machnology currently available
(BPT),
and
Section
35
of
the
ifli~i~
.Im.vironmental
Protect
Act.
The
Board
has
stated
its
position
on
thOm
thsue
in
City
of
Quincy
v.
Environmental
P~~tionAencv,
POE.
7~
102,
Not
having
authority
under
P.L.
92-500
to
deter
BPT,
the
Board
may
grant a variance
from
Illinois
Regulations
beyond
July
1;
1977
to
the
extent
consistent
with
relevant
limitations
determined
ry
the
U.
S.
EPA,
the
Agency
charged
with
administration
of
P.L.
92~5C0.
Kneip
has
acted expeditiously
and
in
good faith in
seeking
compliance.
The
company
undertook
immediate
investigation
of
alternative
interim
measures,
finished
the
~gretreatment
facility
ahead of schedule,
and has already spent a
substantial
amount on a
program
of
compliance.
The
present
delay
is
through
no
fault
of
its
own.
Under
these
circutnstancesr
the
Board
finds
denial
of
the
variance
requested
would
create
an
unreasonable
and
arbitrary
hard-
ship
for
Kneip,
and
the Board will therefore grant
Kneip
a
variance
subject
to
conditions
set
forth in the
previous
Board
Order.
The
variance
is
granted
either until April 1~
1979,
a
date
the
Agency
believes more
accurately
reflects wnen Elburn~s
system
will
be
com-
pleted,
or the date
of
completion
whichever
is
first.
Because
Rule
903 is not yet
in
effect,
the
request
for variance from that
particular
Rule
is
dismissed.
This Opinion constitutes the Board~s finding of fact and
conclusions of law in this matter.
—3—
ORDER
It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:
1)
E.W.
Kneip,
Incorporated
be
granted
variance
from
Section
12
of
the
Environmental
Protection
Act
and
Rules
203,
402,
404,
405,
407
and
408
of
Chapter
3:
Water
Pollution
Regulations
for
its
facility
in
Elburn,
Kane
County,
Illinois until April
1, 1979 or until
the
Village
of Elburn completes its sewage treatment plant, whichever
is first, subject to conditions
2,
3 and
4 as set forth
in the previous variance, PCB 76-50.
2)
Knei~’srequest for variance from Rule 903 is hereby
dismissed without prejudice.
3)
Within twenty-eight days after the date of the Board’s
Order granting said variance, Petitioner shall execute
and forward to Respondent a Certificate of Acceptance
and Agreement in the following form:
CERTIFICATION
I
(We), ____________________________havir~g read and fully
understanding the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board in
PCB 77-46,
hereby accept said Order and agree to be bound to all of
the terms and conditions thereof.
SIGNED_________________________________
TITLE________________________________
DATE____________________________________
I,
Christan
L.
Moffett,
Clerk
of
the
Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
hereby
certify
the
above
Opinion
and
Order
we~ adopted
on
the
day
of
,
1977 by a vote of
~
0