ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September 20, 1979
INTi~1~NAT1UNAL
MINERALS
& CHEMICAL
CORPORATION,
)
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 79—150
~NV1J(UNM1~NTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
OPINION OF
THE
BOARD
(by Dr. Satchell)
:
This
matter comes before the Board upon a variance petition
filed July
30, 1979 by Petitioner International Minerals and
Chemical Corporation
(IMC),
a New York corporation authorized to
do business in Illinois.
IMC requests,
pursuant to §35 of the
Environmental Protection Act
(Act)
and Procedural Rule 401, a
variance from Rule
505 of Chapter
2:
Air Pollution, which provides
for
open burning of explosive wastes.
On August 27,
1979, IMC
filed
a motion to expedite which cited the “serious nature of the
aging military explosive”
as grounds for prompt action on the
variance request.
On August 29, 1979 the Environmental Protection
Agency
(Agency)
recommended that the variance be granted with
conditions.
In
an Order entered September 6,
1979 the Board
granted
the requested variance, subject to certain conditions.
No
hearing was held and no public comments have been received.
INC operates
a 608 acre plant in the Crab Orchard National
Wildlife Refuge in Sections
6 and
7
of T.
10 S.,
R.
2
E.
and
Sections
1 and 2
of
T.
10 S.,
R.
1
E.,
3 PM about
5.5
miles from
Marion
in
Williamson County.
The plant employs twenty-four persons
in
the
storage and distribution
of explosive products.
Apparently
production
of explosives at the site ceased
in
May,
1971.
Three
similar
open burning variances have been granted IMC for the plant:
PCB
71-57,
PCB 76-259 and PCB 77-229,
In
a related action IMC
requests a variance for open burning of explosive wastes and con-
taminated packaging material at its production facility about
twenty-eight miles away in Union County
(PCB
79-176).
The petition
requests
a
variance
to permit open burning of an
estimated 4,000,000
pounds
of
deteriorated flashless, non—hygro—
scopic propellant
(FNH), which is a mixture of nitrocellulose and
dinitrotoluene
with
small amounts of stabilizers and other compounds.
Nrr~1ii1r,~
decomposes with time and the rate of decomposition
35~-415
—2—
increases as the decomposition proceeds.
Addition of a stabilizer
to
the explosive during manufacture leads to a product which may
be
safe for decades,
However,
the stabilizer concentration de-
creases
as time passes.
When the stabilizer
concentration reaches
certain levels,
the Army recommends destruction within one year or
immediately.
The
latter alternative is indicated for some of the
FNH stored on the site.
IMC proposes to burn the FNH according to Army procedures.
The
explosive will be spread out
on straw in a cleared area, the straw
will be soaked in
fuel oil and ignited with a squib.
The FNH will
be burned between
8:00 a.m.
and 3:00 p.m.
in 5000 pound
lots, up to
20,000 pounds per day.
The burning will be
conducted by trained
personnel.
The Agency recommends that two trained persons
be on
the site with adequate fire fighting
equipment and that the neigh-
boring fire departments be placed on a standby basis.
Since the
burning will occur within the Crab Orchard Refuge,
the Board will
require notification of the Fish and Wildlife
Service of the United
States Department of the Interior.
The plant
is
located in a prevention of significant deterioration
(attainment)
area for particulates, ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
dioxide and carbon monoxide.
The nearest Agency air monitoring
station is in Marion,
The petition included no information on the effect the burning
is
expected to have on air quality in the region.
The Agency recom-
mended that the variance be conditioned on IMC providing an expert’s
assessment of the effect of the burning.
Two days prior to the
filing of the Agency recommendation, INC filed supplemental air
emission and air quality data.
Since the Agency had insufficient
opportunity to comment on these data prior to entry of the Board’s
Order, the variance was conditioned on providing the additional data.
This condition will be deemed satisfied unless the Agency objects
promptly.
The
data IMC presented was based on burning of
a similar material,
The FNH
is expected to burn quickly, producing a high temperature and
little soot.
The decomposition products will be nitrogen, carbon
dioxide, oxygen, water and 1.6
carbon monoxide.
INC estimated that
the FNH will generate 420 pounds of carbon monoxide per day based
on 20,000 pounds burned.
INC also estimated that burning sixteen
bales of straw per day will release another 76.8 pounds of carbon
monoxide along with 13.2 pounds of particulates and 10.2 pounds of
hydrocarbons.
Dispersion estimates based on these data indicate
that no violation of
ambient air quality will occur.
35—416
—3—
The Agency requested that it be notified by telephone each day
prior to burning.
The Agency will have the right to order the
burning postponed on account of unfavorable weather or ambient air
quality.
IMC will also be required to provide quarterly reports of
its burning activities.
IMC estimated that it will require eighteen
months to complete the burning, allowing sufficient time for unfavor-
able days.
INC’s petition does not discuss alternative methods of disposal.
One such alternative
is burning in an incinerator.
Olin Corporation
operates an explosive incinerator near Marion which
is close to the
site.
This facilit~is the subject of a site—specific regulation
in
PCB
R78-9.
Olin indicated to the Agency that it could accept only
fifteen pounds of FNH per day for destruction.
This is far short of
the required capacity.
It would also take too long to require INC
to construct a similar facility on the site.
The Board finds that
because of the hazard posed by the FNH and the lack of a practicable
alternative method of disposal an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship
has been shown.
The FNH has been stored on the site for a long time and is not
a product of IMC’s current operations.
INC apparently first became
concerned about the FNH on receipt of a March 14, 1979 letter from
the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Four and one—half months later this
was presented to the Board
as an emergency which could not await the
usual ninety day time schedule for variance proceedings.
Such
emergencies disrupt schedules and do not permit adequate time for
consideration of the issues presented.
In explosive burning cases
the delay effectively erodes the standard of review since the gravity
of the hardship necessarily increases as the explosive ages.
Accord-
ingly, the Board required as
a condition of this variance that INC
provide the Agency with a
list
of materials stored at the site which
may require open burning within the next five years.
Although INC
cannot know this with absolute certainty, the Board expects it to
make
a good faith effort to identify its
future problems.
Hopefully
this will enable the parties to conduct more orderly proceedings
in
the future.
This Opinion, supporting the Order of September 6,
1979, constit-
utes the Board’s findings of fact and conclusions
of law in this
matter.
35—417
—4—
I, Christan
L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, her by certify the above Opi ion was adopted on the ~C5~’ day
~
1979 by a vote of
_________
~
Illinois Pollution
ntrol Board
35—4 18