rr

~r

e~

rn

LiLno

i~

or

Os

e

~

P

e

~

~lec

r

~owe~

at

pl~nt

1oca~e

Pi~k

0

nty

e

t

dea~1

The

~acJ1~tt

2

nocyaqat

o~

~

~

t~an

~u

na

rwer

o

~rt

‘~sist’

g

~

ore

~

fou~ Lirnor

~

PCI3

2~44l

ti.

s

Boarci

gra

~ed

°et

ro

e~ a

a~. a~ce

~ri

tule

2

5~ o

tne

~ules

and

~egu~ations

ver~ir~athe

~ontr

1..

~

ir

Po~thtior

tor

a

ner~od ot

one

year

~uci

ect

to

cx

r~i~r. ~y

ti~

Board

f

r

he

ru:poce

oL

rst~l’

no

~t

sor

uhe_

~o

~arthcala

cortro1~

~n

PCB

~

r~rc

WLS Cx

July

31

~914~

qi~rn

~

~g

e’

~n

~

~

~

e..~n

ar~ance

stating

toiL

r~sta1iat

or

-f

e

q~L

cr

L

er

as

de~.aved

oy

design

problems

?~e~e’~a1uatio~

n2

the

ori~

i

p

in

r~ i~a

that

the

H

~t

the

scrubber

etf’eeob

o~1d

e

md

that

‘~own

~rearrof

I~edernist

anes the ph

~ou1d be

is

mecesscta~e

the re~eva~uation

of

~he retals

to be

sea lox tbc

‘an and certai.

other oq~xpmen~aue L~the atfec.~of the low

‘H or

..ae mater~a1s

In

addition

cmrrent date on wet ~crubbers discloses an unsaLis~

factory operating reliabi1~ty ecause

t

partic~aate

buildup

on

fan and blades

causing

imbalance

and

~ecessitatina frequent

shutdowns for caeaning~ The redesign of the

Lstallation will

incorporate a dry induced draft fan downstre~of

the mechanica~.

collector and in front of the wet gas cleaning device~ This

redesign is to elIminate or minimize the

low

pH

problem as well

as

the imbalancing of the fan~

13

—

145

---

—2—

The new time schedule calls for start—up on December

16,

1974 and testing on January

6,

1975.

WIPCO

believes that

January

30,

1975

is a realistic date for placing the scrubber

in operation.

The Agency recommends that the Company be granted this

extension of the variance.

The EPA states “while there is

a

certain amount of dismay as a result of Petitioner~sfailure

to comply by July 31, 1974 the Agency recognizes that scrubber

technology for Petitioner~soperation has not fully evolved~

Therefore,

the Agency believes that Petitioner should not be

penalized for delays caused by changing techno1ogy~ Agency

engineers 1~elievethe additional si~xmonths requested by Petitioner

is reasonable, and that no conditions are known at the present time

to warrant a refusal of Petit~ioner~srequest.”

We agree with the Agency and shall grant the six month

extension of variance subject

to conditions imposed in our prior

Order.

This Opinion constitutes the Board~sfindings of fact and

conclusions of law.

ORDER

The variance granted to Western Illinois Power Cooperative,

Inc.

in PCB 72-441 and PCB 73-471 is extended until January

30,

1975 subject to the following conditions:

a)

WIPCO shall continue to sub~iitquarterly

reports to the Agency indicating its progress

toward completion of its control program.

b)

WIPCO shall continue to blend fuels

to

minimize emissions from the Pearl facility,

and

shall include in its quarterly reports the

types of fuel used and the percentages of

each;

and

c)

The performance bond in the amount of $250,000

which was previously ordered shall be extended

to January

30,

1975.

I, Christan L, Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order w

s adopted

this j~~day

of

1974 by a vote of

........,

13

—