ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

March 7,

1996

IN THE MATI’ER OF:

)

CABOT

CORPORATION PETITION

)

AS 96-3

FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM

)

(Adjusted

Standard-UIC)

ILL.

ADM. CODE PART 738,

)

SUBPART B

)

OPINION

AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by R.C. Flemal):

This matter comes before the Board upon a Petition

for Modification and Reissuance of

Adjusted Standard

filed by Cabot Corporation (Cabot).

The purpose is to conform the

exemption Cabot currently holds under Illinois underground injection control (UIC) law with

exemptions granted to Cabot under federal UIC law.

The requested modifications consist of clarification that leachate and purge water may

be disposed in Cabot’s UIC wells,

in conformity with a similar finding of the United States

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued in November 1994;

and that injection of

restricted waste may take place in Cabot’s new UIC Well #3,

in conformity with

a finding of

USEPA issued in January

1996.

The Board’s responsibility in this matter arises from the Environmental Protection Act

(Act)

(415

ILCS

5/1

et seq.).

The Board is charged therein to

“determine,

define and

implement the environmental control standards applicable in the State of Illinois”

(Act at

Section 5(b)) and to

“grant

an adjusted

standard for persons who can justify

such an

adjustment”

(Act at Section

28.1(a)).

More generally, the Board’s responsibility in

this matter

is based on the system of checks and balances integral to Illinois environmental governance:

the Board is charged with the rulemaking and principal

adjudicatory functions,

and the illinois

Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) is responsible for

carrying out the principal

administrative duties.

The Act also provides that “the Agency shall participate in

adjusted

standard

proceedings”.

(415 ILCS 28.l(d)(3).)

On February

15,

1996 the Agency filed a

recommendation that the instant requested adjusted standard be granted.

The recommendation

was accompanied by a motion to

file instanter.

The motion is hereby

granted.

Based upon the record before it and upon review of the factors involved

in the

consideration of adjusted

standards,

the Board finds that Cabot has demonstrated that grant of

an adjusted standard in

the instant matter is warranted.

The adjusted

standard accordingly will

be granted subject to conditions set out by USEPA on a similar federal exemption.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Cabot has previously been granted an exemption from the general prohibition against

underground injection of restricted waste.

That exemption was initially granted by USEPA in

1990 upon petition from Cabot with support of the Agency’,

and subsequently issued by the

Board in docket AS 92~82. The exemption was

then, as now, based on the “no-migration”

provisions found

under both

federal and Iffinois law.

In late 1994 Cabot sought clarification of its federal UIC exemption from USEPA

such

as to make explicit that certain leachate and purge water could be disposed in the UIC wells.

On November 4,

1994 USEPA entered

this clarification into Cabot’s federal exemption.

(Petition Exh. D.)

Cabot did not at that time request that the Board also introduce the

clarification into State law.

In August

1995 Cabot made a second request regarding its

federal exemption,

specifically requesting that the exemption allow disposal in a new UIC

well, known as Well

#3.

This request was proposed to be granted by USEPA by publication on November 28,

1995 at 60 Fed. Reg.

58623

et seq.

In addition, a public notice,

pursuant to 40

CFR 124.10,

was

published in

the local

papers on December 5,

1995,

and a public hearing was tentatively

set for January

1996; USEPA subsequently canceled the hearing “due

to lack of public interest

the decision”

(Supp.

Exh.

3).

The

USEPA has now reissued the exemption3,

including

exemption for Well #3,

with an effective

date ofJanuary

22,

1996.

Simultaneously with

filing ofits

federal request regarding Well #3,

Cabot

filed the

instant matter with the Board.

The initial filing

occurred on August

17,

1995;

the petition was

filed under the old docket number, AS 92-8.

By order of September 7,

1995

the Board found

that Cabot’s petition was sufficiently different from the adjusted standard

granted in AS 92-8

to require opening a new docket.

The Board also found the petition insufficient and required

that Cabot submit additional

material to

meet the requirements of Section

106.705 of the

Board’s procedural rules.

(35

111. Mm. Code 106.705.)

Cabot filed an

amended petition curing the insufficiency on October 19,

1995.

Among

the additions made to the peitition was requested language for

the adjusted standard.

‘See 55 Fed. Reg.

49340 (November 27,

1990) and 56 Fed. Reg.

5826

(February

13,

1991).

In the Matter of:

Petition of Cabot Corporation for an Adjusted

Standard from 35

Ill. Adm.

Code 738.Subpart B, AS 92-8,

February 17,

1994.

~USEPA’s Notice of Reissuance is in the record of this matter as an attachment to

Cabot’s

filing ofJanuary 23,

1996,

and is identified as Supplemental Exhibit

cited as

“Supp. Exh.”.

Cabot has waived hearing in this matter.

No other person has requested a hearing,

and

accordingly

none has been held.

Cabot has requested expedited consideration by the Board.

By order ofJanuary

18,

1996

the Board granted this request consistent with the Board resources and the need to

complete the record in

this matter.

NATURE OF THE FACILITY AND DISCHARGE

The

facility at issue is located at Tuscola,

Illinois.

It occupies approximately

100 acres

and is located three miles west of Tuscola on Route 36.

Cabot employs

184 people at the

facility which has been in operation

since

1958.

The facility is an inorganic

chemical

manufacturing plant which manufactures fumed

silicon dioxide

(or fumed silica,

SiC)2)

marketed under the registered trademark of Cab-O-Sil®,

Silicon dioxide is used as an additive

in many products.

The production process involves the hydrolysis/oxidation of a chlorosilane feedstock to

produce Si02 and hydrochloric acid (HCI).

(Pet. at 2.)~The

chlorosilane feedstocks include

silicon tetrachioride (SiCl4),

methyl

trichlorosilane (CH3SiC12), and trichlorosilane

(HSiC12).

(Id.)

The central reaction in the manufacturing process is combination of silicon tetrachloride

with oxygen and hydrogen to produce both

fumed

silica and hydrogen chloride vapor.

(USEPA Notice of Intent to Reissue Exemption,

FR 58623, 58624.)

Separation results in

fumed silica, product hydrochloric acid, and wastewaters contaminated

with hydrochloric acid;

the latter requires disposal.

Cabot usually injects this waste, along with

rainwater runoff and

seepage into

its UIC wells.

(60 FR

58624.)

Other hazardous waste streams are also generated

at the facility, of which many are

injected into its UIC wells.

(Pet.

at 2.)

Those waste streams injected into the UICs include

acidic wastewater from air pollution control scrubbers,

stack drains,

fan drains,

other

equipment drains and washdown (D002);

surface water drainage,

seepage,

leachate,

monitoring well purge water and groundwater (F039);

spent acetone from

the QC

laboratory

(F003);

and unsalable by-product HC1

(D002).

(Id.)

The

facility has

three UIC wells which have been issued UIC

permits from the Agency.

Wells #1

and #2 have been used pursuant to the existing federal/state exemption

to inject

hazardous waste.

UIC Well #3 has not been used to inject hazardous waste.

However, Cabot

intends to replace Well #1

with Well #3

once Well #3 is authorized; at that time Cabot will

plug and abandon Well #1.

(Id.)

“Cabot’s August

17 petition will be cited as “Pet, at

“;

the Agency’s recommendation

will

be cited as “Agency at

“.

UIC ADJUSTED STANDARD PROCEDURE

The illinois Environmental Protection Act at

Section 28.1(415 ILCS 5/28.1(1994))

provides that a petitioner may request, and the Board may impose, an environmental

standard

that is different from the standard that would otherwise apply to the petitioner as the

consequence of the operation ofa rule of general applicability.

Such a standard is called an

adjusted standard.

The general procedures that govern an adjusted

standard proceeding are

found at Section 28.1 of the Act and within the Board’s

procedural rules at 35

Ill. Adm.

Code

Part 106.

Cabot seeks an adjusted

standard from the requirements set forth

at 35

Ill. Adm.

Code

Part 738, Subpart B which prohibit the underground injection of certain restricted hazardous

wastes.

The procedures

via which an adjusted standard from the UIC prohibitions may be

sought, and the level ofjustification required

for a petitioner to qualify for a UIC adjusted

standard, are set out at 35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 738.Subpart C.

738.Subpart C has the following

organization:

PART 738

HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION

RESTRICTIONS

SUBPART C:

PETITION STANDARDS AND

PROCEDURES

Section

738.120

Petitions

to Allow Injection of Prohibited Waste

738.121

Required Information

to Support Petitions

738.122

 Submission, Review

and Approval or Denial of Petitions

738.123

Review of Adjusted Standards

738.124

Termination of Approved Petition

Each

 of the

Part 738

sections is identical-in-substance

with the federal UIC exemption

provisions,

with

the correspondence as follows:

State Regulation

Federal Regulation

Section 738.120

 40CFR 148.20 (1988)

Section 738.121

 40CFR 148.21 (1988)

Section 738. 122

 40CFR 148.22 (1988)

Section 738. 123

 40CFR 148.23 (1988)

Section 738.124

 40CFR 148.24 (1988)

Section 738.120(a) specifies:

Any person seeking

 an exemption from a prohibition under SubpartB for the

injection of a restricted hazardous waste into

an injection well or wells shall submit

a petition for

an adjusted

standard to the Board,

pursuant to

 35 Ill. Adm. Code

106.Subpart G, demonstrating that,

to a reasonable degree of certainty, there will

be no migration of hazardous constituents from the injection zone for as long as the

waste remains hazardous.

The

demonstration that must be made to gain the “no-migration exemption”

here

requested is found at Section 738. 120(a)(1)(A).

showing is required that:

Fluid movement conditions are such that the injected

fluids will not migrate

within

10,000 years:

i)

Vertically upward

out

of the injection zone;

ii)

Laterally within the injection zone

to a point of discharge or interface

with

an Underground Source ofDrinking Water (USDW) as defined in

Ill, Adm.

Code 730.

USEPA’SMODIFICATIONS OFEXEMPTION

Cabot’s instant request is for two modifications of the existing State exemption.

These

are (1)

that there be explicit identification that multi-source leachate from Cabot’s leachate

collection system or purged

from on-site monitoring wells (purge water) is among the wastes

for which underground injection may occur,

and (2)

that Well #3 be explicitly identified as a

well within which underground injection may

occur.

Both

modifications have already been

granted

by USEPA with respect to federal

 law.

The multi-source leachates at issue

are

 classified asRCRA F039 wastes. The original

USEPA exemption did specifically identifyF039 waste as one of the wastes for which

exemption

was granted;

so did the Board’s February 1994

grant of adjusted standard.

However,

the content of Cabot’s specific multi-source leachates did not correspond fully with

the chemical constituents listed

the original federal exemption.

To rectify this situation,

Cabot in August

1994 requested that USEPA modify the

exemption.

Cabot supplied USEPA

with the full

additional list ofconstituents.

(Petition Exh.

C.)

On November 4,

1994

USEPA issued Cabot a modification of the exemption that added

the new constituents in question to the list of exempted wastes for Wells

and #2.

(Petition

Exh. D.)

 USEPA found

that Cabot’s original no-migration demonstration remained valid even

considering

the disposal

 of the leachate

and purge water.

(Id.;

Pet, at 4.)

Cabot’s argument to

USEPA regarding the use of Well #3 was made on

the same basis

as the original grant of exemption for Wells #1

and #2.

That is,

Cabot

argued, and USEPA

agreed,

that use of Well #3 presented a no-migration hazard.

In awarding the exemption for

Well#3, USEPA noted:

6

As required by 40 CFR part

148, Cabot has demonstrated,

to a reasonable

degree of certainty,

that there will be no migration of hazardous constituents

from the injection zone for as long as the waste remains hazardous.

This fmal

decision allows the initiation of underground injection by Cabot of specific

restricted hazardous wastes, including

hydrochloric acid and wastewaters

contaminated with hydrochloric

acid which are hazardous because

they are

corrosive (Waste Code D002), a multi-source leachate (Waste Code F039)

contaminated with

small amounts of 1. l-dichloroethylene,

1.2-dichloroethylene,

methylene chloride, phenol, tetrachloroethylene,

and trichloroethylene from a

closed waste storage impoundment, and low concentrations of residual,

spent

acetone (Waste Code F003)

rinsed from laboratory

glassware cleaned with

solvent, into a Class I hazardous waste injection well, specifically identified as

Well No.

3, at

the Tuscola facility.

This reissuance also incorporates

conclusions based on geological data gathered during construction of that well

and contained

in the petition for reissuance dated August 16,

1995,

into the

Administrative Record of the decision to grant Cabot Corporation an exemption

from the Land Disposal Restrictions.

This

decision constitutes a final USEPA

action for

which there is no administrative appeal.

(Supp.

Exh. at 3.)

DISCUSSION

AND

 CONCLUSION

In its granting the original UIC exemption to Cabot in AS 92-8,

the Board

 placed

weight both on the quality ofUSEPA’s technical review and on the need to

keep Illinois’

identical-in-substance environmental

programs in conformity with the corresponding federal

programs.

The

Board today again gives weight to

both of these considerations.

As regards the technical merits of the Cabot’s request, the Board observes that

awarding of any exemption for underground injection of wastes requires a substantial

demonstration on the

part of an applicant.

These are

 detailed in the Board’sorder in AS 92-8,

and

 will not berepeated in full here.

As regards the identical-in-substance nature of today’s adjusted

standard request,

the

Board observes, as it did in

AS 92-8, that because

 the Illinois

UIC program is identical-in-

substance with

the federal UIC program, it is intended to be no more (or less) stringent than

the federal program.

(AS 92-8 at p. 7.)

The

Board today finds,

also as it did in

AS 92-8

(Id,),

 that

State denial of the exemption granted Cabot under federal law would cause a more

stringent

State law to apply to

Cabot.

In sum, the Board finds that Cabot has

demonstrated that grant of an adjusted

standard

is warranted.

The Board has also reviewed thejustification

provided by

Cabot to

USEPA, and

fmds that Cabot has made all

the

demonstrations required pursuant to the identical-in-substance

regulations at 35 Ill, Adm.

Code 738.Subpart C.

The Board further finds that the conditions imposed by USEPA on

the similar federal

exemption are necessary limitations on the grant

 ofthis adjusted standard.

 Accordingly, the

adjusted

 standard will be

granted subject to those conditions.

These include addition to the

Board’s

February

 1994 grant of

adjusted standard language that reflects the USEPA

modifications of November

 4, 1994 regarding limits onF039

waste

 and of

January

22,

1996

regarding use of Well #3.

This opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and conclusions of law in this

matter.

ORDER

Cabot Corporation is hereby

granted an adjusted

standard from the requirements of 35

Ill. Adm, Code 738, Subpart B, for

the

 underground injection control

Wells #1,

 #2, and

at

its Tuscola,

illinois,

facility.

This adjusted

standard constitutes an exemption from

the

prohibitions of Subpart B such as to allow the underground injection disposal of wastes

classified as acidic water (D002), by-product hydrochloric (D002),

spent acetone (F003) and

multi-source leachate (F039).

This adjusted standard

is subject to the following conditions:

a)

 The monthly average injection rate must not exceed

400

 gallonsper minute;

b)

 The concentrations of the

constituents included in the injected leachate will not

exceed the following values:

Acetone

47,000.00

mg/L

Tetrachloroethylene

 1.66mg/L

Methylene chloride

 59.0 mg/L

Trichioroethylene

 1.66mg/L

1,2 Dichloroethylene

 .33mg/L

1,1 Dichloroethylene

 2.33mg/L

Phenol

12,000.00

 mg/L

1,1 Dichloroethane

 .33mg/L

1,2 Dichloroethane

 1.66mg/L

Trans 1,2 Dichioroethane

 33.33mg/L

Cis 1,2 Dichioroethane

 23.33mg/L

1,1,1 Trichloroethane

 66.66mg/L

1,1,2 Trichloroethane

 1.66mg/L

Vinyl Chloride

 .66mg/L

Chioroethane

3.33

 mg/L

Chloroform

.33 mg/L

Ethylbenzene

233.33 mg/L

Xylene

(Total)

 3333.33mg/L

Toluene

 333.33mg/L

1,1,1,2 Tetrachioroethane

 .33mg/L

1,1,2,2 Tetrachioroethane

 .33mg/L

Cyanide

(Total)

 66.66mg/L

Barium

666.66

mg/L

Cadmium

1.66 mg/L

Chromium

33.33 mg/L

Direct

injection shall occur only into the Franconia, Potosi, and Eminence

Dolomites and the Gunter Sandstone;

The injection zone consists of the Franconia, Potosi, Eminence and Oneota

Dolomites

and the Gunter Sandstone, found between 4,421

and 5,400 feet in

Cabot’s Well #1,

between 4,442

and 5,400 feet in Cabot’s Well

#2,

and

between 4,452

and 5,400 feet in Cabot’s Well #3; and

Cabot must be in

full compliance with all conditions of its permits

 and other

conditions relating to

the exemption found in

Ill. Adm.

Code 738.123

and

738. 124.

IT IS SOORDERED.

Section 41 of the Environmental Protection Act, 415 ILCS 5/41 (1994), provides for

appeal of final orders of the

Board

 within

 days. The Rules of the Supreme Court of Illinois

establish filing

requirements.

(See also 35 Iii. Adm.

Code

101.246,

Motions for

Reconsideration.)

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, hereby certify that

theabove opinion and order

was

 adopted on the

 day of

L07

~&c-(:i’

1996,byavoteof

7-/)

Dorothy M.,’~unn,Clerk

Illinois Pol~y~ion

 Control Board