ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

August 2, 1984

MODINE MM4UFACTURING COMPANY,

)

Petitioner,

)

V.

)

PCB 82—111

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

AGENCY,

Respondent.

DISSENTING OPINION (by 3. 0. Durnelle):

While I generally agree with other aspects of the majority

order, I do not agree on the un-ionized

ammonia

portion.

The Board agrees that un--ionized ammonia content of the

effluent follows the variables of temperature, pH, and total

ammonia, I agree that 10 mg/i total ammonia is appropriate to

use since the highest value measured in a recent 12—month period

was 7.8 mg/i. But to set the un-ionized ammonia limit based upon

a pH or a temperature different than what can occur is not rea-

sonable

Is Modine to refrigerate the lagoon discharges? Is Modine

to add acid to the discharges to reduce the pH well below

90?

At’.

what cost? And where is the basis for all of this in the record?

Whatever un-ion:Lzed ammonia levels are occurring now will

continue to occur. The instant variance is a short one designed

to gather more data for a better determination by this Board in

the near

future I would not have computed the un—ionized ammonia

iimits at conditions other than the maxima possible for temperature

~-~~n(~ipH~.

I. Dorothy M~ C~unn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

~oa

hereby certify that the above Dissenting Opinion was filed

on the

~

day of

~,

1984.

Dorothy M.# Gunn,

~).

Clerk

2Z~J

Illinois Pollution Control Board

~i9-187