ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
December 19, 1974
WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE
PETITIONER
I
V.
)
PCB 74—394
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
RESPONDENT
MR.
T.
C. RAMMELKAMP, ATTORNEY,
in behalf of
WESTERN
ILLINOIS POWER
COOPERATIVE
MR. MICHAEL GINSBERG, ATTORNEY,
in behalf of the ENVIRONMENTAL PRO-
TECTION AGENCY
OPINION
AND
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Marder)
This action involves a request for variance from Rule 2—2.53 of
the Rules and Regulations governing the control of air pollution.
The Petition,
filed on October 29, 1974, requested relief for a coal-
fired boiler.
On November 18, 1974,
an amendment to the Petition was
filed, seeking additional relief from Rules
203 and 204
as they would
apply subsequent to May
31,
1975.
Relief is requested until July
1,
1975.
No hearing was held on this matter and ~the Agency recommended
(October 29,
1974)
a grant of said variance.
This request is for a
continuation of variances granted in the following previous docket
numbers: PCB 72-441, January
30,
1973; PCB 73—471, January 24, 1974;
PCB 74—150,
July 18, 1974.
Said variances granted relief to Petition-
er to allow the installation
of a wet scrubber control system.
The
reader is referred to the above records for a more detailed discussion
of the relevant facts.
Petitioner owns and operates an electric generating facility loc-
ated in Pearl Township, Pike County,
Illinois.
The maximum load of
this station is
22 mw, and is generated by four pulverized coal-fired
boilers.
Fuel for the boilers
is an 80
coal,
20
coke mixture.
The Petitioner has, since the inception of the original variance
(PCB 72-441), been engaged in a compliance plan to meet the require-
ments of Rules 203 and 204.
Said compliance plan entails the use of
a Riley Stoker Corporation wet scrubber.
This scrubber is alleged to
be capable of meeting the particulate limits dictated by Rule
203,
as
well as reducing the SO2 emissions to conform with Rule 204.
Petition-
er’s emissions and regulatory requirements are as follows:
Emissions
Rule 2—2.53
Rule 203
(g)
Rule 204(c)
Control
Part.
l.51#/mmBTU
0.8#/mrnBTU
0.l#/mmBTU
-
93
SO2
6.5#/mmBTU
6.0#/mInBTU
8
14
—
769
—2—
Although no detail is given
as regards the operation of the proposed
scrubber, it is assumed that by using water as a scrubbant, the 8
re-
duction can be obtained.
In an affidavit attached to Petitioner’s variance request, the prob-
lems in attaining compliance by the anticipated January 30, 1975,
date
were discussed.
Mr. John
L. O’Donnell
(affiant)
stated that delivery
of
by-pass
damper
valves
and
piping
systems
has
been
delayed
until
March
1975.
Petitioner alleges, and the Agency concurs, that the deliv-
ery delays were beyond the control of Petitioner.
Petitioner then de-
tails a new compliance schedule which anticipates testing of the sys-
tem by June
2,
1975.
Petitioner further alleges that a date of July
1,
1975, would provide a needed cushion for slippage.
The Agency agrees
that the
proposed
timetable
is
reasonable
in
light
of
the
equipment
delays.
It
must
be
noted
that
this
is
the
second
delay
in
Petitioner’s
orig-
inal
compliance plan
(see PCB 74-150).
Unexpected design problems nec-
essitated a six—months’ delay until January 30, 1975, and here we have
equipment delays necessitating yet another six months.
The Board, how-
ever,
feels that in both instances Petitioner has diligently attempted
to comply in as short a time as possible.
It is hoped that this will
be the last such delay
—
any further variance requests will require de-
tailed explanation from Petitioner.
The
environmental impact caused by Petitioner’s emissions is alleged
to be small,
in that they are located in a sparsely settled area, and
the Agency has had no public comment on the facility.
Details in re-
gard to environmental impact were spelled out in the Board’s first Opin-
ion on this matter
(PCB 72-441), and would still apply in the instant
case.
The Board feels that the installation of
a wet scrubber to eliminate
particulates and to
a lesser degree sulphur dioxide is
an excellent com-
pliance plan, and one that should be encouraged.
Balancing all fact-
ors,
the Board finds an extension of the variance to be in order.
This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of
law
of
the
Board.
ORDER
IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that Petitioner is
granted variance from Rule 2—2.53 until May 31, 1975, and from Rules
203 and 204 from May 31, 1975,
until July 1,
1975, subject to the fol-
lowing:
All conditions imposed by the Board in PCB 74-150
14
—
770
—3—
shall remain in full force and effect.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, certify that the above Opinion and Order was adopted by the
Board on the
l9thday of
December
,
1974, by
a vote of
4
to
0
14
—
771