ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
December 17,
1992
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
PETITION OF JEFFERSON SMURFIT
)
AS 92-3
CORPORATION FOR AN ADJUSTED
)
(Adjusted Standard)
STANDARD
FROM 35 ILL. ADM.
)
CODE 304.105
AND
302.208
)
OPINION
AND
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by G. T. Girard):
On April 16,
1992, petitioner filed an adjusted standard
petition with the Board seeking an adjusted standard from 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 304.105
& 302.208, setting the standard fo.r.the release
of boron.
The Board requested additional information in an order
dated May 7,
1992.
On May 20,
1992, the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency
(the “Agency”) filed a recommendation
supporting the granting of the adjusted standard request.
The
petitioner filed an amended petition on June 22,
1992,
and the
Agency filed an amended recommendation on July 20,
1992.
The
amended recommendation again supported the granting of the
adjusted standard but suggested certain conditions.
The
petitioner then filed a response to the amended recommendation on
August
6,
1992,
which accepted the conditions suggested by the
Agency.
A hearing was not held in this matter.
Background
Jefferson Sanurfit’s facility is located in Alton,
Madison
County,
Illinois and borders on the Mississippi River..
The site
encompasses 107 acres.
(Am. Pet,
at 3.)’
The facility employs
51 salaried and 230 union personnel and produces approximately
600 tons of paperboard per day from 100
recycled fiber.
(Am.
Pet. at 3.)
The site discharges from two outfalls known as
“outfall 001” and “outfall 002”.
Only outfall 002
is subject to
this request for adjusted standard.
At the site,
fly ash is deposited in the ash pond.
Fly ash
contains soluble boron which dissolves in the ash pond water and
then escapes the pond through the levee into the North Ditch
Holding Pond.
It is from the North Ditch Holding Pond that
outfall 002 discharges.
Under normal conditions, there is no discharge from outfall
002.
(Am. Pet, at 6.)
During normal operations,
the purpose of
the pond is to capture the boiler blowdown, ash pond seepage and
The petition will be cited as “Pet.
at
“;
the amended
petition will be cited as “Am. Pet. at
“;
the Agency
recommendation will be cited as “Rec. at
“
and the amended
recommendation will be cited as “Am.
Rec. at
“.
O/38...0203
2
storm water and pump those flows for use in the mill’s process
water system.
(Am. Pet. at 6.)
The pumps are capable of pumping
the normal flow from the pond.
Discharges from outfall 002 are
rare and petitioner maintains that only a “rainfall event in
excess of 0.80 inches in 24 hours will create a discharge.”
(Am.
Pet. at 8.)
Ad-iusted Standard
Petitioner requests thit the Board grant an adjusted
standard from 35 Iii. Adm. Code 304.105 as it applies to the
water quality standard for boron at 302.208.
The adjusted
standard requested is for the intermittent discharges from
outfall 002 located at Jefferson Smurfit’s facility in Alton,
Illinois.
Petitioner requests that the standard for boron be
raised from
1 mg/i to a level of 15 mg/i to apply from outfall
002 downstream to the point of the discharge from the Illinois
Power Company.
(Am. Pet,
at 11.)
The Agency recommends that the petition be granted with
certain conditions.
(Am. Rec. at 1.)
Specifically, the Agency
requests that the standard to apply should be 8.0 mg/i, rather
than 15 mg/l,
at the point of outfall 002 discharge based on the
5.6 mg/i reported maximum for boron at this. .putfall.
The Agency
states that the, “8.0 mg/i standard would not cause a substantial
impact on the environment and would provide sufficient margin for
petitioner to comply with the adjusted standard.”
(Am. Rec. at
6—7.).
On August
6,
1992, the Board received a filing from
petitioner indicating that petitioner agrees with the conditions
stated in the Agency’s amended recommendation.
Discussion
Section 28.1 of the Act allows,
in pertinent part,
for an
adjusted standard from a rule of general applicability upon
adequate proof that:
1.
factors relating to that petitioner
are substantially and significantly
different from the factors relied
upon by the Board in adopting the
general regulation applicable to
the petitioner;
2.
the existence of those factors
justifies an adjusted standard;
3.
the requested standard will not
result in environmental or health
effects substantially and
significantly more adverse than the
effects considered by the Board in
0138
O2Oi~
3
adopting the rule of general
applicability; and
4.
the adjusted standard is consistent
with any applicable federal law.
The petitioner asserts that the boron water quality standard
was adopted to avoid any harm from farm crop irrigation and with
the belief that compliance would not be difficult.
(Am.
Pet. at
2.)
The petitioner further points out that the outfall 002
discharges into the “North Ditch” and the “North Ditch”
discharges into the Miami drainage ditch.
The Miami drainage
ditch meanders for a short distance and then discharges into Wood
River Creek.
(Am. Pet.
at 8.)
The petitioner states:
A pipe coating plant is located directly east
of outfall 002.
The other land surrounding
the Miami drainage ditch and Wood River Creek
is vacant, undeveloped land all the way to
the Illinois Power Company plant.
(Am. Pet.
at 8.)
Thus, petitioner reasons, there is little human contact with the
discharge waters until the time that the discharge reaches Wood
River Creek.
The petitioner further asserts that the Board has already
acknowledged the limited environmental impact of the proposed
levels of boron by granting-Illinois Power Company an 15 mg/i
site—specific standard for boron for the same receiving stream,
eighth-tenths of a mile below petitioner’s property
(In the
Matter of:
The Proposed Amendments to Rule 203.1 of the Water
Pollution Recrulations
(March 16,
1978), R76—18,
29 PCB 395).
Smurfit cites Exhibit 7 from the above cited case which presented
information noting that,
“toxicity concerns for low level boron
concentrations
(30 ppm) toward fish life have been reported
to be minimal.”
This exhibit also identifies Wood Creek River,
the receiving stream, as having no fishery value.
The petitioner
also states that the Agency noted in its initial recommendation
that boron is not considered a threat to aquatic life at levels
proposed by the petitioner and that the environmental impact is
expected to be
minimal.
(Am. Pet. at 12-13.
The Agency also noted that the primary purpose for
development of the boron standard was to.avoid harm from farm
crop irrigation.
The Agency further noted that “there is
virtually no irrigation using the surface water in the area of
the proposed adjusted standard”.
(Am. Rec. at 9.)
The Agency
went on to note that it believes that “in this situation the
boron concentrations expected to be involved will not pose a
threat to the aquatic life and plant life”.
(Am. Rec.
at
9.)
The petitioner maintains that there are only two methods of
°I38~o2o5
4
compliance available to insure that the discharge does not exceed
the general standard.
The first method would require totally
revising the method by which petitioner operates its coal fired
boilers by installing a dry ash handling system.
(Am. Pet.
at
8-
9.)
Such a revision would require considerable construction cost
and result in substantial interference with the plant’s
operations.
In addition, the environmental problem the revision
could create include wind blown emissions from the dry ash as
well as handling and disposal.
(Am. Pet. at 9.)
The second alternative would be to deliver the overflow to a
stream with sufficient flow so that water quality based
limitation to the discharge could be met.
Such a diversion would
require discharge directly to the Mississippi River.
(Am. Pet at
9.)
Construction costs alone for such diversion would ccst over
$1,000,000.
(Am. Pet. at 10.)
The Agency agrees that compliance alternatives are limited
and further agrees that both suggested methods, although
technically feasible, are economically unreasonable.
(Am. Pet.
at 8.)
Thus, the petitioner and the Agency agree that the
environmental impact of the adjusted standard would be minimal.
Further, the general standard is not a federal requirement and
the Agency agrees that granting this adjusted will not be
inconsistent with federal law.
Conclusion
The petitioner has requested an adjusted standard from
Section 304.105 which generally prohibits violations of water
quality standard.
The Agency has recommended granting the
adjusted standard from that provision.
The Board will grant the
adjusted standard to Section 304.105 only as it relates to boron
releases to the level set forth in the adjusted standard.
Thus,
a violation of the adjusted standard will also be enforceable
pursuant to Section 304.105.
The Board finds that the petitioner has demonstrated that
compliance with the standard of general applicability is
economically unreasonable.
Further, the Board finds that the
granting of the adjusted standard will have a minimal
environmental impact.
Therefore, the Board finds that the
petitioner has justified the need for the adjusted standard and
the Board hereby grants the following adjusted standard from 35
Ill. Adm. Code 304.105 and 302.208:
Jefferson Smurfit is granted an adjusted
standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.208 for
the discharge from Jefferson Smurfit’s Alton
Mill facility located in Alton,
Illinois, at
0138-0206
5
outfall 002.
The standard for the discharge
from outfall 002 is 8.0 mg/i.
In addition,
Jefferson Smurfit is granted an adjusted
standard from 304.105 as it applies to the
discharge of boron from Jefferson Smurfit’s
Alton Mill facility located in Alton,
Illinois,
at outfall 002.
This opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
conclusions of law in this matter.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 28.1(b), the Board hereby grants an
adjusted standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.104 and 302.208 to
Jefferson Smurfit.
The following standard becomes effective on
the date of this order:
Jefferson Smurfit is granted an adjusted
standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.208 for
the discharge from Jefferson Smurfit’s Alton
Mill facility located in Alton, Illinois, at
outfall 002.
The standard for the discharge
from outfall 002 is 8.0 mg/i.
In addition,
Jefferson Smürfit is granted an adjusted
standard
from
304.105 as it applies to the
discharge of boron from Jefferson Smurfit’s
Alton Mill facility located in Alton,
Illinois, at outfall 002.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Section 41 of the Environmental Protection Act
(Ill.Rev..Stat.
1991,
ch.
111 1/2,
par. 1041) provides for the
appeal of final orders of the Board within 35 days.
The Rules of
the Supreme Court of Illinois establish filing requirements.
(But see also
35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.246, Motions for
Reconsideration,
and Castenada v.
Illinois Human Rights
Commission
(1989),
132 Ill.2d 304,
547 N.E.2d 437.)
I, Dorothy N. Gunn,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, do hereby certif
that the aboye opinion and order was
adopted on the
___________
day of
iQ
-vvt?~_J
,
1992, by a
vote of
‘7~
~
~borothy N.
G)~1)~in,Clerk
Illinois Pct~9/utionControl Board
0138-0207