ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

March

20, 1980

WAGNER CASTINGS

COMPANY,

Petitioner,

V.

PCB 79—124

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent,

ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Dr. Satchell):

On June

15,

1979 Wagner Casting Com~anv (Wagner)

filed

a

petition for a variance from Rules

301,

302 and 501 of Chanter

9:

Special Waste Hauling Regulations

(Chapter 9).

The reanested

variance would authorize Wagner to transeort casting sand from

its foundry

to

a landfill without complyinq with the snecial

waste manifest requirements of Chanter

9.

The petition is de-

ficient in a number of resoects:

1.

It

is unclear whether the “sand” referred to in the

petition is

“core sand” within the meaning of the

definition of !~IndustrialProcess Waste”

found

in

Rule

103

of Chapter

9.

If the sand is not core

sand,

the petition may be deficient without a showing

that

it falls

under the general definition of industrial

process or hazardous waste.

2,

In the petition Wagner refers

to “sludge from wet dust

collectors” but fails to specify whether

a variance

is

requested also for the sludge.

If such variance

is

requested the petition may be deficient

in its descrip-

tion of the sludge.

3.

Wagner has not included in its estimated costs

of com-

pliance information on the cost of obtaining manifest

forms with the information which

is identical for each,

load preprinted on the forms

(Rule

103, definition

of

“manifest”)

4.

Wagner has not included information

on cost savinas

which would result from the use of manifest forms for

its own record keeping

(R76—10,

33 PCB 131,

147,

March

15,

1979)

---

—2—

5.

Wagner has requested

a variance from Rule

302

as well

as

Rule

301,

Rule

302(A)

proscribes

acceptance

of

waste

without

a manifest.

This refers

to

conduct

not

by

Waa-

ncr,

but

by

the

recipient

of

the waste,

the Rhodes

Land-

fill.

The Board may be unable to grant a meaningful

variance unless the landfill joins as

a petitioners

The petition

is

dismissed

IT IS SO

ORDERED

I,

Christan

1.

Moffett,

Clerk

of

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

~,ard,

hereby

cert~ fy

the

above

Order

was

adopted

on

the

~O

day

of

____________

,

1980

by

a

vote

of

Christan

L.

Mof7~erk

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board