ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

September 4, 1987

REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY,

Petitioner,

vs.

)

PCB 87—63

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENC’~Y

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF 

THE

BOARD (by 

3.

Theodore Meyer):

This matter is before the Board on a petition for variance

filed by Reynolds f~ieta1s Company (Reynolds). Reynolds seeks

relief until July 1, 1988, from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120(c) as

it relates to the bio—chemical oxygen demand (BOO) effluent

limitations applicable under its National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) permit for its ~1cCook, Illinois,

aluminum fabricating facility. The Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency (Agency) has filed its Recommendation in

support of grant of variance, subject to certain conditions. On

July 23, 1987, Reynolds filed a motion for expedited

consideration, in which it stated that it agreed with those

conditions. On August 6, 1987, the Board granted the motion for

expedited consideration. Hearing was waived.

Reynolds1 McCook plant casts and imports alloyed aluminum

ingots which are then hot and cold rolled into sheet, coil, and

plate products. Oil and water emulsions are used as lubricants

in hot rolling the ingots into sheet and plate. These emulsions

are treated with an emulsion breaking system of steam heat and

acid treatment. The wastewater from this emulsion treatment

system is then neutralized with a caustic soda and discharged

into the plant’s wastewater treatment system. The wastewater

treatment process consists of oil skimming, chemical

precipitation, and settling. The treated wastewater is

subsequently discharged, througn Reynolds’ Outfall 001, into the

the Summit 

—

Lyons Ditch and then by siphon to the Chicago

Sanitary and Ship Canal (Canal). Outtall 001 is the only one of

Reynolds’ three outfalls which is limited for BOD, and Reynolds

states that the wastewater from the emulsion breaking system is

the only major source of BOD.

Reynolds’ existing NPDES permit provides for BOD load limits

of 98.2 lbs/day (30 

—

day average) and 286.9 lbs/day (daily

maximum), and concentration limits of 10 mg/l (30 

—

day average)

81—51

—2--

and 20 mg,’l (daily maximum). Reynolds asks that the BOO limits

be revised to load limits of 150 lbs/day (30 

—

day average) and

450 lbs/day (daily maximum), and concentration limits of 20 mg/l

(30

—

aay average) and 40 mg/l (daily maximum). In the fifteen

month period between January 1986 and March 1987, the maximum

concentration limits have been exceeded in eight months and the

average concentration limits have been exceeded in five months.

The maximum load limit was surpassed once, and the average load

limits were exceeded twice. With the exception of three of the

maximum concentration violations, all of the excesses occurred in

the last five months of that period. Reynolds states that

changes in quality and production requirements for aluminum

rolling operations have forced it and other manufacturers to use

more stable oil and water emulsions. These more stable emulsions

contain a greater percentage of water—soluble organics, which

result in more BOD in the treated wastewater.

Reynolds proposes to eliminate the discharge of the oil and

water emulsion breaking system from the wastewater treatment

system by routing it to the sanitary sewer of the Metropolitan

Sanitary District of Greater Chicago (MSDGC). This would require

the design and installation of piping to allow the neutralized

wastewater from the emulsion breaking system to be discharged to

the sanitary sewer. This proposal is based upon a 1986 report

prepared by an outside environmental consultant for Reynolds.

Reynolds anticipates that the applicable permits will be obtained

and the system designed and installed by July 1, 1988. The

preliminary estimated cost of re—routing the emulsion breaking

system wastewater is approximately $100,000.

An alternative method for handling the present BOD load

would be to install additional tertiary treatment to remove

water—soluble organics from the emulsion breaking system

effluent.. However, Reynolds contends that additional treatment

systems would be expensive to install and maintain, and would not

guarantee that the BOD levels would be in compliance with the

point limits. Reynolds states that MSDGC, on the other hand,

already has a biological degradation treatment system in place

which would effectively treat the BOD. Thus, Reynolds asserts

that routing the emulsion breaking system wastewater to the

sanitary sewer is the most efficient way to treat the wastewater

containing the highest concentration of BOD, and would insure

compliance with existing NPDES permit levels. Reynolds does not

believe that the requested variance will have any significant

environmental impact on the quality of the receiving water.

Reynolds notes that without a variance, it faces the

likelihood of continued violations of the existing BOO limits

until the re—routing is completed. Such violations subject

Reynolds to the possibility of enforcement action by the Agency

or by citizen suits. Because it has pursued its BOD non-

81—52

—3—

compliance problem and has specific actions underway to achieve

compliance, Reynolds asserts that the prospect of such liability

during the construction period constitutes an arbitrary and

unreasonable hardship.

The

Agency recommends that

the requested variance be

granted, subject to conditions.

The Agency believes that the re-

routing is the best way to handle Reynolds’ discharge. The

Agency also agrees that Reynolds has an arbitrary and

unreasonable hardship, since Reynolds cannot meet its SOD limits

even with good operation. As to the environmental impact of the

variance, the Agency states that the increased BOO in the

discharge should not significantly reduce dissolved oxygen (DO)

in the aitch or in the Canal. The Agency notes, however, that

its water quality sampling program has shown DO violations in the

Canal at Lockport, downstream from Reynolds’ discharge.

Furthermore, the Agency points out that the Board may grant the

variance consistent with tederal requirements, since the

regulation for the aluminum forming subcategory provides no

guidance or restriction on BOD. The Agency does express doubts

as to whether Reynolds’ compliance schedule is accurate. Since

it is in no better position to determine wkiat the schedule should

be, however, the Agency states that it accepts Reynolds’

compliance schedule as the most reasonable available.

Based on all of the facts and circumstances presented here,

the Board finds that denial of the variance would impose an

arbitrary or unreasonable hardship. Therefore, the Board will

grant the requested variance until July 1, 1988, or until the

emulsion breaking system wastewater is re—routed to the MSDGC

sewer system, whichever occurs first.

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and

conclusions of law in this matter.

ORDER

1. Petitioner, Reynolds Metals Company, is hereby granted a

variance from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.120(c) as it relates to

bio—chemical oxygen demand (BOD) and from 35 Ill. Adm. Code

304.14l(a) for Outfall 001 only, subject to the following

conditions:

a) This variance will expire on July 1, 1988, or upon the

re—routing of the emulsion breaking system wastewater to

the MSDGC sewer system, whichever occurs first.

b) Petitioner shall operate its facilities so as to meet the

SOD load limits of 150 lbs/day for the 30— day average

and 450 lbs/day for the daily maximum;

81—53

—‘~ —

c) Petitioner shall operate its facilities so as to produce

the best effluent possible and meet the BOD effluent

limits of 20 mg/l for the 30 

—

day average and 40 mg/l

for the daily maximum;

d) Petitioner shall apply for all applicable permits in a

timely manner; and

e) Petitioner shall complete the re—routing of the emulsion

breaking system wastewater to the MSDGC sewer system by

July 1, 1988

2. ~ithin forty—five days of the date of this Order, Petitioner

shall execute and forward to Jose Gonzalez, Jr., Enforcement

Programs, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, 2200

Churchill Road, Springfield, Illinois 62706, a certificate of

Acceptance and Agreement to be bound to all terms and

conditions of the variance. This forty—five day period shall

be held in abeyance during any period that this matter is

being appealed. The form of said Certification shall be as

follows:

CERTIFICATION

I, (ge), _______________________, having read the Order of

the Illinois Pollution Control Board in PCB 87—63, dated

September 4, 1987, understand and accept the said Order,

realizing that such acceptance renders all terms and conditions

thereto binding and enforceable.

Petitioner

By: Authorized Agent

Title

Date

IT IS SO ORDERED.

81—54

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certify that the aboye Opinion and Order was

aoopted on tne ~   

day of     

~

1987.~ by a

vote of 

a—C

~

Dorothy M. Gu’nn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

8 1—55