ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 11, 1989

IN THE MATTER OF:

)

)

MARATHON PETROLEUM COMPANY

)

R87-2

SITE—SPECIFIC

)

PROPOSED RULE

FIRST NOTICE

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by B.

Forcade):

This matter

is before the Board

on the January 28,

1987

petition of the Marathon Petroleum Company (“Marathon”)

pursuant

to Section 28

of the Environmental Protection Act

(“Act”),

Ill.

Rev..

Stat.

ch.

lii

1/2,

par.

1028.

That petition seeks site—

specific relief from Section 304.105 of the Board’s water

pollution

rules,

35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 304.105, as

it applies

to the

total dissolved solids

(TOS)

and chloride

(Cl) content of

Marathon’s wastewater discharges

from outfall

001, under NPDES

permit No.

1L0004073,

into an unnamed tributary

of

Sugar Creek,

in the Wabash River Basin,

at Robinson,

in Crawford County.

The

signatures

of more than 200 persons accompanied Marathon’s

petition.

The public hearing occurred

on June

21, 1988.

The Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency (“Agency”)

and Illinois

Department

of Energy and Natural Resources (“Department”)

participated.

No member of

the public attended.

R.

4.

The

Department filed

its Negative Declaration, stating

that an

economic impact study

(EcIS) was unnecessary,

on October 20,

1988

and indicated

the concurrence

of the Environmental and Technical

Advisory Committee by

a letter filed November

2,

1988.

Marathon

filed

a post—hearing

brief on February

17, 1989.

The Agency

filed

a reply brief

on ~4arch 13,

1989.

The Board has received

three public comments on the

Marathon-proposed

rule revision.

Public Comment number one

(P.C.

#1),

dated August

19, 1988 from Marathon

included only

a request

to extend the record.

P.C.

~2, dated November

4,

1988 from the

Department,

includes an observation

that

a review of

an EcIS

from

another proceeding

(R86—14 on

the site—specific rule proposal

of

Borden Chemical Company for TDS and Cl) and

a USX 1987 annual

report

(the parent company of Marathon) might interest

the

Board.

The Department enclosed copies of

those two documents.

(On January

9,

1989,

,the hearing officer denied Marathon’s

November

14,

1988 motion to strike P.C.

~2.)

P.C.

43, dated

September

2,

1988

from the Agency,

includes calculated attainable

TDS and Cl water quality standards and effluent limitations

for

the subject discharge.

This

comment expresses the

gency’s

opinion as

to the probable impact these would likely have

on the

99..- 73

---

—2—

receiving stream.

Marathon filed similarly calculated values on

a motion to supplement the record on September 8,

1988.

Facts

Marathon owns and operates

a petroleum refinery

at Robinson,

Illinois.

This facility produces finished petroleum products

from crude oil.

Marathon acquired the facility

in 1924 and has

expanded and modernized

it

to

a present refining capacity of

205,000 barrels of crude oil per day

(‘BPD).

The estimated annual

production level

is about 130,000 BPD.

The facility has

a weekly

payroll

of $415,000 and employs about 638 persons.

Robinson has

a population of 7,300,

and Crawford County has

a population of

20,000.

Marathon annually pays $5.2 million

in state

and local

taxes and $46 million

for goods

and services.

Process wastewater originates

from numerous individual,

independent sources

in

the plant.

Crude oil contains salt, which

winds up in

a

few of these discharges.

Four or five of these

process discharges contain higher

levels

of TDS and Cl.

The

highest

is

“desalter water,” which contains over 5,600 milligrams

of TDS per

liter

(mg/l).

Marathon’s wastewater treatment plant

has

a primary system capacity of about 3.5 million gallons per

day

(MGD).

It presently treats

1.3

to

1.7 MGD.

Marathon

recycles

a significant amount

of

its wastewater

for plant use.

It concedes that this recycling may elevate TDS and Cl contents

in its effluent.

Eliminating this practice would

lower discharge

TDS and Cl concentrations,

but would not reduce the

total amount

of TDS and Cl discharged

in

its effluents.

R.

44.

Wast~waterDischarges

and Stream Impact

Marathon discharges wastewater

from two outfalls into an

unnamed

tributary of Sugar Creek.

Sugar Creek,

in turn,

discharges into the Wabash River.

Outfall 001

is involved

in

this proceeding;

it discharges process wastewater.

Outfall 002,

which primarily discharges

storrnwater

runoff,

is not involved.

Outfall 001

is about ten stream miles upstream of the confluence

of Sugar Creek

and

the Wabash River.

The unnamed tributary has

a

7—day, 10—year

low flow (7Q10)

of zero at

the point

of

discharge.

The Wabash River

at

its confluence with Sugar Creek,

where

it ultimately receives

the Marathon effluent, has

a 7QlO of

820 MGD.

The unnamed tributary that receives Marathon’s effluent has

a degraded water quality,

as indicated by the absence

of fish and

an elevated macroinvertebrate biological diversity index

(MBI).

(‘481 values

range

from

0

to

11,

and

vary inversely with macroin—

vertebrate diversity.)

There

are

fish upstream of Marathon, but

the Agency observes that there

is

a “near extirpation”

of

fish

for over eight stream miles

below the outfall, despite the lack

of

an in—stream barrier.

Ex.

9,

p.

3.

The City of Robinson and

99—74

---

—3—

other point sources discharge upstream of Marathon.

The MBI

is

6.0 upstream and 8.3 immediately downstream of

the Robinson

outfall.

The MBI subsequently improves to 6.3

immediately

upstream

of Marathon, but

it

increases

to 9.8

a short distance

downstream.

It improves

to 8.6 one mile downstream of

Marathon.

The Agency observed that there

is “severe degradation”

of the macroinvertebrate community downstream of Marathon.

Ex.

9,

p.

2.

Overall,

the Agency observed that “severe stream

degradation”

is attributable

to Marathon and that the Marathon

wastewater discharges have a “pronounced and often variable

effect” on stream discharge and water quality.

Ex.

9,

p.

1.

Stream water quality

is also degraded

as

indicated by

its

TDS and Cl contents.

Upstream of Marathon,

the average TDS

content of

the stream was 1,225 mg/i,

as observed by the Agency

in

1978.

It was between 1,390 and 2,740 mg/i downstream.

Ex.

10, pp.

13

& 16.

The Agency observed that the majority of the

TDS water quality violations occurred downstream of Marathon.

Ex.

10,

p.

2.

Marathon notes

that some upstream source

is

responsible

for an elevated TOS content

of 8,000 to 9,000 mg/i

and

a Ci content

of about

4,000 mg/i

in

a tributary discharging

near its outfall, whereas its own highest individual wastewater

stream contains only 5,600 mg/i TDS.

Marathon’s average effluent

contains about 2,045 mg/i TDS and

588 mg/i

Cl,

as

indicated by

its discharge monitoring reports.

Ex.

11.

The causative factor

for the degraded stream water quality

and the adverse effect of Marathon’s effluent on the stream

is

unknown,

but

it

is not likely due to the TDS

and Cl content of

Marathon’s discharges.

Radian Corporation,

a consulting

engineering

firm retained by Marathon, pointed out that the

stream water exceeds the TOS and Ci standards even without

the

Marathon discharges,

and that the elevated contents are quickly

diluted

in the stream when Sugar Creek discharges

into the Wabash

River.

This fact would minimize

the

impact

on groundwater

quality.

R.

83—84.

Radian found, using synthetic brine

solutions,

that TDS and

Ci at the levels found

in Marathon’s

effluents did not increase fathead minnow or Daphnia magna

mortality within

96 hours, although 2,360 mg/i TDS did produce

stress

in fathead minnows.

The lethal concentration

to 50

percent

(LC5O)

of fathead minnows

is 3,085 mg/i TDS.

The LC5O

for Daphnia magna

is 3,240 mg/i TDS.

Radian did not believe that

TDS and Cl are responsible for

the observed biological

impacts

in

the stream.

Ex.

4,

pp.

2—5

&

2—6;

R.

78.

Radian was unaware

of

the suitability of the water for use

in

irrigation.

R.

85—86.

The Agency agrees that Marathon TDS and Cl discharges are not

likely causing the ob~ervedstream degradation.

R.

104.

The record further

indicates

that

a decrease

in stream TDS

and

Cl content would not likely enhance

its aquatic biology.

R.

50.

This was

the opinion held by Radian.

Radian did not know

the upper tolerance limit

for TDS and Cl

in the stream, but found

9 9—75

---

—4—

that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicated that

15,000 mg/i

is unsuitable and

the National Academy

of Sciences

indicated a limit of 5,000

to 10,000 mg/i TDS, depending

on other

in—stream factors.

R.

76.

Control Alternatives

Marathon found numerous processes for

reducing effluent TDS

and Cl contents

in the literature:

reverse osmosis,

electro—

dialysis, distillation,

freezing,

ion exchange, polymer,

ultrafiltration,

activated carbon,

and magnetic treatment

methods.

Ex.

2.

Radian selected three

alternative control

schemes

and investigated

those.

Alternative No.

1 would involve segregation

of the

individual high TDS and Ci waste streams from the

rest of the

process

flows, separate treatment of

those streams

to reduce

their TDS and Cl contents,

and disposal

for the 30,000,000

gallons per year of

resulting brine.

These individual streams

include desalter water

(average 0.31 MGD

at 5,640 mg/i TDS and

2,880 mg/i Ci), cooling tower blowdown water

(average 0.36 MGD

at

1,720 mg/l TDS and 170 mg/l Cl), demineralizer regeneration

wastes

(average 0.09 MGD at 3,040 mg/i TDS and

80 mg/i Ci),

and

boiler blowdown water (average 0.17 MGD

at 1,010 mg/i TDS and 200

mg/i

Cl;

for aggregated average total flow of 0.93 MGD at 3,000

mg/i TDS and 300 mg/i Cl).

Problems with this approach include

the presence of free oil

in the desalter water, which affects

treatability;

the difficulty of segregating the presently

combined flows;

and the environmental hazards of disposing of

resulting brines or

salt cake by deep well injection or

landfiliing.

Radian considered reverse osmosis the most viable

treatment method

for the high TDS and Cl wastewater streams.

The

capital cost of this alternative

is about $1,320,000,

and the

annual operating cost

is about $271,000 without deep well

injection.

The costs are about $2,550,000

and $300,000,

respectively, with deep well injection.

Ex.

5;

R.

49

& 80—81.

Alternative No.

2 would

involve holding effluents

for

discharge only during times when there

is sufficient flow

in the

unnamed tributary to provide adequate dilution.

This would

involve construction

of

a 99,000,000 gallon reservoir for four

months’ wastewater retention capacity.

The capital cost of this

alternative

is about $5,580,000,

and the annual operating cost

is

about $212,000.

Ex.

5;

R.

49—50.

Alternative No.

3 would involve dilution of

the effluent

with well water during periods of low stream flow in the unnamed

tributary.

This would

require installation

of

a five—mile

long

14—inch water main and other necessary transport equipment

to

obtain diiuent from

a well having sufficient

capacity.

The

capital cost

of this alternative

is about $1,700,000,

and

the

annual operating cost

is about $80,000.

Marathon believes that

99—76

---

—5--

this alternative would waste groundwater, which

is

a resource.

Ex.

5;

R.

50.

The Agency agrees that none of these

three alternatives

is

viable.

R.

93—94.

However,

the Agency asserted

at hearing

that

Marathon neglected

a fourth alternative:

construction of an

outfall at the Wabash River.

The Agency maintained that this

would

result

in compliance with the water quality standards and

have

less impact than the present discharge into the unnamed

tributary.

R.

93—95.

Marathon states

that this would require

installation of

a nine—mile long,

14—inch discharge pipe and the

acquisition of necessary easements.

R.

13.

The record indicates

that five miles

of such pipe cost about $1,660,000.

Ex.

5,

p.

3—

24.

Therefore, associated with this alternative are costs at

least equivalent

to those of the three considered by Radian.

The Agency ultimately asserted at hearing that

it did not

oppose site—specific relief

for Marathon.

Rather,

it suggested

that the Board should impose an alternative water quality

standard,

instead of merely imposing an effluent limitation on

Marathon’s TDS and

Cl.

discharges.

R.

91—93

& 99—100.

In

its

post—hearing brief,

the Agency stated

its

support

for site—

specific relief that would

impose effluent limitations

and water

quality standards in the unnamed tributary and the affected

reach

of Sugar Creek.

Agency Post—Hearing Brief

at

6.

Adverse Effects Versus Cost of Control

The Board agrees, based on this

record,

that site—specific

relief

is appropriate.

The reduction of TDS and Ci

concentrations would not likely result

in

a significant

improvement

in stream quality

or the range

of potential stream

uses.

The costs associated with the control alternatives appear

disproportionately high

in relation to any probable improvements

in the stream.

Further,

the record indicates

that the observed

biological degradation of

the receiving stream probably results

from some cause(s)

other

than Marathon’s TDS and Ci discharges.

The unnamed tributary is

a short intermittent stream,

and ample

dilution at the confluence with the Wabash River,

a short

distance away,

rapidly negates any adverse effects

resulting from

these discharges.

Proposed Rule

The Board’s water pollution rules do not include specific

effluent limitations

for TDS and Cl.

Rather,

they prohibit any

discharge

that would pause or contribute

to

a violation of

a

water quality standard.

35 Ill.

Adm. Code 304.105.

The

regulations impose in—stream water quality standards of 1,000

mg/i TDS and 500 mg/i Cl.

35 Ill. Mm.

Code 302.208.

It

is

relief from Section 304.105, as

it relates

to TDS and Cl,

that

Marathon now seeks.

Marathon proposes

a site—specific rule that

99—77

---

—6—

would except the unnamed

tributary from the TDS and Cl standards,

so

long as

its effluent does not exceed 3,000 mg/i TDS

or 700

mg/i

Cl.

The Agency would also impose water quality standards of

2,000 mg/i TDS and 550 mg/i Cl on the receiving stream.

In PCB 80—102, which expired on October

2, 1985,

the Board

granted Marathon a variance that allowed

it

to discharge

a 3,500

mg/i TDS and 700 mg/i Ci effluent from this outfall.

Ex.

8.

In

PCB 85—83,

the Board granted 2,500 mg/i TDS and 700 mg/l Cl.

Ex.

7.

Marathon concedes that its effluent has exceeded 2,500 mg/i

TDS about eight times and 3,000 mg/i TDS

three

or four times over

a three—year period.

R.

12.

The record

indicates that

Marathon’s outfall 001 effluent has exceeded 3,000 mg/i TDS four

times and 2,500 mg/i ten times between

1982 and

1987.

The

effluent exceeded 700 mg/i Cl thirteen times during this same

period.

Ex.

1;

see Ex.

11.

Marathon states that

it based

its

proposed limitation

for TDS on historical

data.

R.

11.

Marathon

states that it would

need to exert effort

to comply with the

proposed 3,000 mg/i TDS limit,

but could not consistently comply

with

2,500 mg/i.

R.

8

&

36—37.

Focusing on the proposed effluent limitations of 3,000 mg/i

TDS and 700 mg/l Cl,

both Marathon and the Agency agree on these

numbers.

The participants calculated achievable effluent and

water quality standards that would not cause further degradation

of

the receiving stream.

Both derived

the same effluent

limitations.

P.C.

#3; Marathon September

8,

1988 filing.

In the

absence

of

a dispute or any evidence that these numbers would

cause an adverse impact on the stream,

the Board will adopt them

for Marathon’s effluent from its outfall numbered

001.

As

to attainable in—stream TDS and Ci water quality

standards,

the Agency’s calculated values are within

the range of

those derived

by Marathon.

The Board infers agreement

to the

extent

of the overlap of calculated values.

Tiowever, this

overlap does not imply

total agreement.

The Board will adopt the

Agency’s 2,000 mg/i TDS and 550 mg/i Ci water quality standards

for the unnamed

tributary for first notice publication.

The

Board

invites comments as

to the acceptability of these proposed

water quality standards.

The Board believes that an alternative

water quality standard

is necessary to prevent further stream

degradation.

The rule the Board

today proposes for first notice follows

that proposed

by Marathon with the addition

of an alternative

water quality standard,

as suggested by the Agency.

The proposed

rule would

render

the, prohibition of Section 304.105 inapplicable

to the unnamed

tributary of Sugar Creek

as

it pertains

to TDS

and

Cl,

so

long as Marathon’s outfall 001 effluent does not exceed

either

3,000 mg/i TDS

or 700 mg/i Cl and the stream water quality

does not exceed either 2,000 mg/I TDS or

550 mg/i Cl.

99—78

---

—7—

ORDER

The Board hereby proposes the following rule for

first

notice publication and directs the Clerk

of the Board

to file

them with the Office of the Secretary of State.

TITLE

35:

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE C:

WATER POLLUTION

CHAPTER

I:

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

PART 303

WATER USE DESIGNATIONS AND SITE SPECIFIC

WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

SUBPART

A:

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Section

303.100

303. 101

303.102

Scope and Applicability

Multiple Designations

Rulemaking Required

SUBPART

B:

NONSPECIFIC WATER USE DESIGNATIONS

Scope and Applicability

General Use Waters

Public and Food Processing Water Supplies

Underground Waters

Secondary Contact and Indigenous Aquatic Life

Waters

SUBPART

C:

SPECIFIC USE DESIGNATIONS AND SITE SPECIFIC

WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

Section

303.300

303. 301

303.311

303. 312

303.321

303.322

303. 323

303. 331

303.341

303. 351

303.352

303. 353

303.361

303.441

303.442

303. 443

Scope

and Applicability

Organization

Ohio River Temperature

Waters Receiving Fiuorspar Mine Drainage

Wabash River Temperature

Unnamed Tributary of the Vermilion River

Sugar Creek and Its Unnamed Tributary

Mississippi River North Temperature

Mississippi River North Central Temperature

Mississippi River South Central Temperature

Unnamed Tributary of Wood River Creek

Schoenberger Creek; Unnamed Tributary of Cahokia

Canal

Mississippi River

South Temperature

Secondary Contact Waters

Waters Not Designated

for Public Water Supply

Lake Michigan

Section

303. 200

303. 201

303.202

303.203

303. 204

99—79

---

—8—

SUBPART

D:

THERMAL

DISCHARGES

Section

303.500

Scope

and

Applicability

303.502

Lake

Sangchris

Thermal

Discharges

Appendix

A

References

to Previous Rules

Appendix

B

Sources

of

Codified

Sections

AUTHORITY:

Implementing

Section

13

and authorized by Sec

tion

27

of

the

Environmental Protection Act

(Ill.

Rev.

Stat.

1987,

ch.

111

1/2,

pars.

1013

and

1027).

SOURCE:

Filed

with

the

Secretary

of

State

January

1,

1978;

amended

at

2

Ill.

Reg.

27,

p.

221,

effective

July

5,

1978;

amended

at

3

111.

Reg.

20,

p.

95,

effective

May

17,

1979;

amended

at

5

Ill.

Reg.

11592,

effective October

19,

1981;

codified at

6

Ill.

Reg.

7818;

amended

at

6

Ill.

Reg.

11161,

effective September

7,

1982;

amended at

7

Iii. Reg.

8111,

effective June 23,

1983;

amended

in R87—27 at

12

Iii.

Reg.

9917,

effective May

27,

1988;

amended

in R87—2

at

Ill.

Reg.

effective _______________________

Section 303.323

Sugar Creek

and Its Unnamed Tributary

a)

This Section applies only to Sugar Creek

and

its

unnamed tributary from the point at which Marathon

Petroleum

Company’s

outfall

001 discharges

into the

unnamed tributary to

the confluence

of

Sugar

Creek

and the Wabash River.

b)

Section 304.105

shall

not apply to total dissolved

solids and chlorides discharged

by Marathon

Petroleum Company’s outfall

001,

so long

as both

of

the following conditions are true:

1)

Effluent from Marathon Petroleum Company’s

outfall

001 does not exceed either 3,000 mg/i

total dissolved solids

or 700 mg/i chlorides,

2)

The water

in the unnamed

tributary does not

exceed 2,000 mg/i total dissolved solids or

550 mg/i chlorides.

IT IS SO ORDERED,.

99—80

---

—9—

I,

Dorothy

M.

Gunn,

Clerk

of

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board,

hereby

certify

that the above First Notice Opinion and

Order

was

adopted

on

the

//T~

day

of

__________________________

1989,

by

a

vote

of

7—~9

.

4’

~

~

orothy

M.

G,4tin,

Clerk~

Illinois Poi2ution Control Board

99—81