ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    July 1,
    1982
    TEXACO, INC.,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 82—45
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
    )
    AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by J,D. Dumelle):
    This matter comes before the Board upon an April
    20,
    1982
    petition for variance filed by Texaco,
    Inc. requesting variance
    from Rules 203(d) and 402 of Chapter
    3:
    Water Pollution as they
    relate to dissolved oxygen discharges from Texaco’s petroleum
    sales terminal facility located on New Avenue in Lockport.
    On
    June
    18, 1982 the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency)
    filed a recommendation that the variance be granted,
    subject to
    certain conditions.
    Hearing was properly waived, and none was
    held.
    Texaco owns and operates
    a petroleum sales terminal
    facility
    which is located east of its refinery.
    Currently, domestic waste-
    water from the facility is treated at its refinery’s wastewater
    treatment plant
    (WWTP)
    and discharged under NPDES Permit No.
    1L002305.
    However, Texaco has now closed the refinery and
    is
    phasing out operation of the
    WWTP.
    Consequently,
    a new WWTP is
    needed to treat the 1,225 gpd wastewater flow which is generated
    from the sales terminal.
    Texaco proposes to install
    a Cavitte system which will pro-
    vide aeration,
    settling, filtration and chlorination.
    Texaco
    alleges, and the Agency does not disagree, that the Cavitte
    system will be capable of treating the sales terminal’s waste—
    load in such a manner that all applicable effluent standards will
    be met.
    Discharge is proposed to be into Little Run Creek which
    is tributary to Big Run Creek which flows into the Illinois and
    Michigan Canal.
    Pursuant to Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
    Act, NIPC (Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission) developed
    an areawide waste treatment management plan for the north-
    eastern portion of Illinois, including Cook, DuPage, Kane,
    McHenry,
    Will and Lake Counties.
    The study upon which this plan is based
    indicates that the dissolved oxygen water quality standard of
    47-323

    —2—
    Rule 203(d)
    is being violated at numerous points throughout the
    northeastern Illinois area.
    Thus, any direct discharges containing
    deoxygenating wastes are in probable violation of Rule 402 through
    the discharge of effluents which cause or contribute to water
    quality violations.
    On October 19, 1978 the Board granted a five-year variance
    to 280 individual dischargers within the six-county NIPC area
    from the dissolved oxygen standards of Rules
    203(d) and 402 in
    order to allow the continued operation of wastewater treatment
    facilities within that area (Bloomingdale v.
    IEPA, PCB 78—174,
    31 PCB 675).
    Since that time the Board has granted additional
    variances to those facilities which were either unintentionally
    excluded from the Bloomingdale proceeding or which are new
    facilities which would have been included in that proceeding
    had they been in existence at the time.
    Texaco alleges, and it is not ~ebutted, that there are no
    other treatment facilities which are economically accessible to
    the sales terminal and that, due to the shallowness of the bed-
    rock in the area,
    it is unable to utilize a septic field system.
    Further,
    due
    to
    the
    very
    small
    quantity
    of
    the
    discharge
    and
    the
    good
    quality
    of
    the
    proposed
    effluent,
    any
    adverse
    environmental
    impact
    should
    be
    minimal.
    While Texaco probably could have
    obtained
    and
    presented
    some
    data
    regarding
    the
    dissolved
    oxygen
    concentrations in the stream reaches which may be impacted by
    its discharge and, thereby, presented a less speculative assess-
    ment of the environmental impact,
    based upon the evidence pre-
    sented,
    the Board finds that granting of the requested variance
    will result
    in minimal
    adverse environmental impact and that
    denial of the variance would result in an arbitrary and unrea-
    sonable hardship.
    Texaco has not requested variance for any specific length
    of time.
    Therefore,
    the Board will follow the Agency’s recom-
    mendation that variance be granted until October 19,
    1983, the
    termination date of the Bloomingdale variance.
    The Board recog-
    nizes that this is a fairly short variance period.
    However,
    the Board finds that the administrative convenience in keeping all
    Bloomingdale—type variances on the same time schedule outweighs
    any expense that Texaco may incur in petitioning for a variance
    extension and that any such expense may well be lessened by its
    being considered along with other such petitioners.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    Texaco,
    Inc.
    is hereby granted a variance from Rules 203(d)
    and 402 of Chapter
    3 as they relate to dissolved oxygen until
    October 19,
    1983 subject to the following conditions:
    47-324

    —3—
    1.
    Texaco shall seek amendment of the 208 Water Quality
    Management Plan.
    2.
    Texaco
    shall cooperate in the implementation of the
    208 Water Quality Management Plan;
    3.
    Texaco shall obtain the necessary construction and
    operating permits from the Agency;
    4.
    Texaco shall operate the proposed WWTP under the best
    practicable operation and maintenance practices.
    5.
    Within 45 days of the date of this Order Texaco shall
    execute and forward to the Board and to the Illinois
    Environmental Protection Agency, Compliance Assurance
    Unit, Water Pollution Control Division,
    2200 Churchill
    Road, Springfield,
    Illinois 62706,
    a Certification of
    Acceptance and Agreement to be bound to all terms and
    conditions set forth in the Order.
    The 45 day period
    shall
    he held in abeyance during any period in which
    this matter is being appealed.
    The form shall be shown
    as follows:
    CERTIFICATION
    I
    (we),
    ,
    hereby accepts and agrees
    to be bound by all terms and conditions of the order of the Pol-
    lution Control Board in PCB #82-45, dated
    -.
    Petitioner
    By
    Title
    Date
    authorized
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I,
    Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order
    was adopted on the
    ,/~t
    day of
    __________________,
    1982
    by a vote of
    ____________.
    Christan L.
    Moffett,
    C~(frtk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    47-325

    Back to top