ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

June 22,

1978

REXENE STYRENICS COMPANY,

Petitioner,

V.

)

PCB 78-48

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr. Young):

On February 17,

1978,

Rexene Styrenics Company

(Rexene)

filed a Petition before this Board for a variance from Rule

408(b)

of Chapter

3:

Water Pollution Regulations.

Speci-

fically, Petitioner requests

a five-year variance from the

3500 mg/l m~ximumeffluent total dissolved solids

(TDS)

limitation for its resin manufacturing facility.

On March

2,

1978, the Board set this matter for hearing following

an Objection

to the variance

by

the Environmental Protection

Agency

(Agency)

.

On April

6,

1978,

the Agency submitted a

Recommendation in favor of a one—year variance from Rule

408(b).

On May 25,

1978, the Agency was granted leave

to

withdraw its Objection and to submit an Amended Recommenda-

tion filed on May 23,

1978,

in support of the one—year

variance subject to revised conditions.

Since Rexene

properly waived hearing in its Petition,

no hearing

is

necessary

in this matter.

The subject of this Petition is a manufacturing facility

owned and operated by Rexene Styrenics Company in Joliet,

Illinois, which discharges

to the DesPlaines River

in excess

of the maximum TDS effluent limitation of Rule 408(b)

in

Chapter

3.

PebiLioner’s operations employ approximately 175

people producing approximately

75 million nounds of resin

annually.

Manufacturing processes on site include facilities

for producing polystyrene resin, styrene/acrylonitrile and

acrylonitrile/butadiene/styrene

(ABS)

copolymer resins and

an ABS intermediate

(Pet.

p1).

Effluent generated from the

manufacturing facility is either recycled within the process

or treated in an activated sludge system before it is dis-

charged to the DesPlaines River.

30—535

---

—2—

Rule 408(b) prohibits any increase in TDS cor~centrations

more than 750

ing/l above background levels and ~sets as an

upmer TDS concentration limit of 3500 mq/l for effruent from

recycling or other pollution abatement practices.

In this

case,

Petitioner

reports

that

its

treated

discharges

have

consistently exceeded

the

3500

mg/l

TDS

effluent

limitation

in

monthly

averages

for

the

entire

1977

calendar

year

(Pet.

Append~)

.

Investigations were conducted to reduce TDS

concentrations

but,

to

date,

alternative

approaches

have

proved

unsuccessful,

The

Petition

indicates

that

the

use

of

substitutes

for

sulfuric

acid

increased

shutdown

time

or failed

to

improve

TDS

effluent

concentration

(R.

p3)

If

relief

were

granted

as

requested,

Rexene

claims

that

the

maximum

daily

discharge

of

15,000

pounds

would

have

no

significant

effect

on

water

quality

in

the

DesPlaines

River

or

on

points

downstream.

The

Agency

supports

Petitioner’s

contention

with

calculations

indicating

that

a

15,000

nound/day

increase in

the

mixing

zone

formed

at

the

Rexene

outfall

would

raise

the TDS

concentration

by

approximately

5

mg/l

during

7~-day

1D~-yea.,r low

flow

conditions

without

contribution

to

a

violation

of

the stream’s water quality standards

(Rec.

p3).

In

further

support

of

this

variance,

the

Petitioner

and

the

Agency cite

the

proposal

of

the

Illinois

Institute

of

anv~ronmental

Quality

(IEQ)

in

R76—2l

to

delete

the

Rule

408

(b)

TDS

effluent

limitation.

The

IEQ

justifies

elimination

of

the

TDS

effluent

limitation

on

the

basis,

among

others,

that no

other

States

regulate

TDS

exceut

as

a

water

quality

standard.

Furthermore,

the

IEQ

cites

studies

of

the

Illinois

Effluent

Standards

Advisory

Group

(IESAC~

which

states:

“There

is

no

proven

conventional

technology

for

control

of

total

dissolved

solids

in

wastewaters.

Application of non-conventional

control technology

is not warranted,

on the

basis

of high treatment costs.”

(Rec.

p4.)

The

Board will

accept

parties’

appraisal

of

existing

conditions

finding

that

it

would

be

an

arbitrary

and

unreasonable

hardshmo

to

require

Petitioner

to

comply

with

the

TDS

effluent

limitation

before

ruling

on

R76-2l.

We

find

that

the

prudent

course

to

be

to

grant

a

variance

for

two

years

or

until

the

Board

takes

final

action

on

R76-2l

and

to

include

interim

requirements

in

Petitioner’s

NPDES

Permit

0001619

as

may

reasonaoly

be

achieved

through

application

of

best

practicable

ooeratlon

and

maintenance

practices

at

the

Rexene

facility.

This

Opinion

constitutes

the

Board’s

findings

of

fact

and

conclusions

of

law

in

this

matter.

30-536

---

I

Rexon: Thyaenicc nomuany is granted a variance for

the cperaa~o

lci~camanufacturing facility from

Rule 40P(b’

Cr

3

~T0lirPollution Regulations until

June

22,

iThu

li

the

following conditions:

a)

th3s

va~ance

will terminate upon

m)d

li~’a~ion

~

Rule

408(b)

of

b)

nuranq

The

p~riod

of

this

variance,

PetiTho

er~s

effluent

levels of total

d~sso~n~ed

solids

an

its Joliet manu—

tacturlig

faci1it~

shall not exceed

15,000 pounds per day maximum.

c)

~e:it oner shall comply witfl modifica-

tion of

the total dissolved solids

effluent limitations when adopted by

the Poi ~d in R76

LI

2

Pa

~ oner

wit~in

3

~ days of

the

date

of this Order

shall requesa Aq~rc~modification of NPDES Permit IL

00fl1619

to incoro~a~ca

ccnditions

of the variance set forth herein.

3,

The

~er~v, pursuant to Rule 914 of Chapter

3,

shall

modliy wPDES ~crm~

~l 000l6li consistent with the conditions

set forth

in this truer including such inlirim effluent limita—

t~ons as aa~’~e~s ~nably be achieved throuch the application of

best praCt1c~lie ~psration

and maintenanca practices

in the

existina fa~a~1ties

S

~

~thin

ft

t

live

(45)

days of the

date

of

ths

Order~

the Petitioner sna~i

ubmit to the Manager, Variance Section,

Divisior of WaFer Pt

~tion Control,

Illinois Environmental

Proteccion Aqen y~

a

~.

Churchall Road,

Springfield,

Illinois,

62706, an execuac

i

O~

rtificati n of Acceptance and Agreement

to be bound

to ~

~er~s and conditions of the variance.

The

forty—five d

y

en. oh nerein shall be suspended durinq any

judicia~ review of this variance pursuant to Section

31 of

the Environmental Procertion Act.

The form of said certifica-

tion shall be as follovs’

CERTIFICATION

I,

(We),

___________

having read

the

O~dar

01

Lhe

Pollution

Control Board in PCB 78-48

underThar1~arid a~ceptsaid Order, realizing that such

acce~ a ce rcnders

all terms

and

conditions

thereto

binding and enforceable.

~

537

---

—4—

IT

IS

SC)

ORDERED.

TITLE

DATE

I,

Chnistan

L. Moffett, Clerk of

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board,

here~7

certify

the

above

Opinion

and

Order

were

adopted ~n

LIe

~

day

of

~

1978

by

a

vote

of~L~

4

~‘

L.

1)

a

Illinois Pollution

:01

Board