10—333

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December 13, 1973

GOODYEAR TIRE AND RUBBER CONPANY,

(North Chicago plant)

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 73—339

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

Richard R. Wilfong, Attorney for Petitioner

Lee A. Campbell, Assistant Attorney General for the EPA

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Henss)

Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company filed a Petition requesting

variance from Rule 408(a) (lead) of the Water Pollution Control

Regulations of Illinois. Petitioner is engaged in the manufacture

of wire and textile reinforced rubber hose at its North Chicago plant.

The plant employs about 700 persons, operates 24 hours per day, 7

days per week and produces about 300,000 ft. each day of automotive,

industrial and hydraulic hoses.

Part of the operation is the forming of rubber and wire or

yarn into various types of hose and curing it into a finished

product. The curing process involves use of a lead sheath which

serves as a temporary mold for the hose. The hose, encased in lead,

is placed in a heater where temperatures of from 300°F. to 310°F.

are maintained for 30 to 60 minutes in order to vulcanize or cure

the hose. Heat for this vulcanizing process is supplied by steam.

After the vulcanization has been completed, the lead sheath is

cooled by spraying water from high velocity nozzles for a period

of from 8 to 12 minutes. Lead oxide formed on the outer surface

of the lead sheath is dislodged from the sheath during the cooling

period and is carried away in a solid form in the waste cooling

water. The lead sheath is then removed and melted for reuse.

Petitioner uses the vulcanizing process about 40 times per day

which requires an average of 400,000 gallons of well water per day

10—333

for cooling. The water is used on a once through basis and is

then discharged into a treatment facility which serves primarily

as an oil-water separation basin. Approximately 1.2 MGD of

effluent are discharged through the plant outfall to the Skokie

Drainage Ditch, tributary to the Skokie River. Petitioner’s

outfall normal1~ serves as 

the

“head ~aters” oi 

the

Sko1~c.~eDitch

(R. 76). Flow in the ditch near the point of discharge has a

7-day, 10 year low flow value of 0.84 MGD.

Rule 408(a) limits Petitioner after December 31, 1973 to a

lead concentration in the effluent of 0.1 mg/i (or about 100 ppb).

Monthly operation reports submitted by Petitioner to the Agency

for the first 9 months of 1973 show that lead concentration in 24

hour composite samples were as follows:

MONTHLY OPERATION REPORTS-- INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT

Lead cppb~

Month                 

Average

Jan/73                  

260

Feb/73                 

270

Mar/73                 

350

Apr/73                 

240

May/73                 

100

Jun/73                 

100

Jul/73                 

220

Aug/73                 

250

Sep/73                  

233

Goodyear stated that all constituents in the plant effluent

were within regulatory standards except for BOD and lead. The

variance request did not apply to the excessive BOD concentration

since Petitioner plans to connect the plant sanitary system to the

North Shore Sanitary District system in the near future.

Recognizing the problem caused by the excessive lead discharge,

Petitioner engaged the Nalco Chemical Company to conduct a process

waste water study. This study was to determine the source of the

2 lbs./clay lead discharge and the most effective means to reduce

the concentration to meet the Standard. Upon determining that

the lead oxide from the sheath is the source of the. lead discharc~e,

Nalco recommended installation of a special filtering system to

handle the water waste from the vulcanizing process. Total cost

for the system was estimated to be $189,530.

Goodyear accepted the Nalco recommendation and received

corporate approval for inclusion of the project cost in the plant

budget. Goodyear 

then

submitted its Project Completion Schedule

to the Agency stating that compliance would be achieved through

the use of the filter system by December 31, 1973. The Agency

approved the Project Completion Schedule on June 28, 1973.

10

—

334

—3—

For some time before completing its Project Completion Schedule,

Goodyear had an intensive research project underway to determine

the process requirement for the lead sheath could be eliminated.

several of its other hose plants, Goodyear had developed a new

curing method called the 

“open

steam” process. Success at 

the

other plans was 

part 

due to the less critical

tolerance 

dimensions and physical 

properties required of the hose produced

at these plants. In addition to providing a more economical

method of producing hose, the steam process completely eliminated

the requirements for lead sheathing thereby eliminating any lead

in the plant effluent.

Hose produced at the North Chicago plant was required to meet

more demanding tolerances than hose from the other plants because

of the critical service under which it would~have to perform.

In early 1973, Petitioner claims a major breakthrough was achieved

for the North Chicago plant. It was discovered that cosmetic type

blemishes and flat spots which developed in the hose during the

vulcanizing process could be effectively controlled by corrugating

the hose prior to vulcanization. Trials using the new technology

began at the plant in early 1973 and, after internal testing had

convinced corporate officials that the project was successful,

samples were sent out for customer approval.

Goodyear now proposes to abandon the waste water filter system

in favor of conver.ting a significant portion of the vulcanizing

process

to the open steam method. Plant Manager Jerome F. Wolf

estimated that ii to 20 of the conversion had already been.

achieved (F. 36)  Petitioner has compared data ~for the last six

months of 1972 (before conversion to open steam commenced) with

data for the first six months of 1973 (after conversion commenced)

This comparison allegedly shows a reduction from 269 ppb to 222 ppb

or about 17.5 in the effluent lead concentration. Petitioner

attributes this reduction directly to the conversion to th.e open

steam method of vulcanization.

Based on the reduction thus achieved and on future conversions,

Goodyear estimates that compliance with Rule 408(a~ can be

achieved by Decerr~er31, 1974 with.out need for the 

$189,350 

filter

system.

After making the decision to convert, the vulcanization process

to the open steam method in lieu of the proposed Nalco filter

system, Petitioner contacted Nalco for information on the effects

of the lead on the receiving stream. Nalco~sProject Manager

Frank J. Pokorny, performed a study which included contact with

university professors, a literature search and personal observations,

—4—

Pokorny testified that as a result of his study, he “arrived

at the conclusion that there is no significant detrimental effect

to the receiving stream from the amount of lead being discharged

from your North Chicago Goodyear hose plant”. (R. 155) It was

his belief that the Skokie Ditch at the point of discharge would

not support higher aquatic forms such as fish (R. 158).

In making this determination, Pokorny testified that he

used a Goodyear study of grab samples taken at various distances

downstream from the plant’s outfall. The grab samples were taken

on September 11, 1973 at the plant outfall, one-fourth mile

downstream from the outfall, one—half mile and one mile downstream.

Analysis of the samples revealed lead concentrations of less than

100 ppb at the outfall, 200 ppb at the one—fourth mile point, and

less than 100 ppb at both the one-half mile and one mile points.

(Ray Warner, Goodyear Manager of Engineering, testified that

the low outfall concentration was probably because the sample was

taken at a time when no hose cooling was taking place. However,

Warner’s conclusion does not conform entirely to other evidence

concerning Petitioner’s waste water treatment system. It is

difficult to understand how the low lead concentration in the

effluent could be directly attributable to Petitioner’s cyclical

water cooling periods since the effluent apparently emanates from

a large holding pond rather than direct and immediate discharge

from the process. While this point is not critical to Petitioner’s

position, the apparent discrepancy should have been explained more

clearly.)

Pokorny also testified that his conclusion was based in part

on information published in the document Water Quality Criteria

by McKee and Wolf. A section of that’ document relating to lead

oxide states “apparently insoluble lead is not toxic to fish”

(R. 160)

The Agency produced no witnesses or evidence to refute

Pokorny’s testimony but did argue the point in its Recommendation.

The Agency said:

“Based on presently available data, the Agency believes

that Petitioner’s allegations concerning the negligible

adverse environmental impact associated with its lead

discharge cannot be conclusively substantiated nor

refuted. Excessive aqueous lead concentrations are

readily dissipated through the sedimentation of

particulate lead and the sedimentary adsorption of

ionic lead species. However, the physiochemical

dynamics of lead transport between the sediment-water

10— 

336

—5—

interface are not well defined. Additionally,

there remain many questions surrounding the potential

for sedimentary lead to enter benthic organisms and

ultimately higher levels of the aquatic food web.”

While we find this statement interesting, it fails to refute

the Pokorny testimony in any manner. We shall, therefore, accept

Pokorny’s conclusion for the purpose of this variance only.

The North Chicago plant has experienced earnings deficits

since 1969. Testimony by Petitioner’s manager of accounting

revealed that while the Goodyear Corporation was experiencing

net profits of from 4.7 to 4.9, the North Chicago plant experienced

a net loss based on net sales of 4.5 in 1969, 7.16 in 1970, 7.4

in 1971 and 3.3 in 1972 (R. 120). However, current figures for

1973 show a net profit of about 0.1 (R. 42)’. The accounting

manager indicated that installation of the proposed filter plant

would severely jeopardize the potential net profit the plant

might experience for 1973.

Petitioner’s witnesses unanimously agreed that the degree of

conversion to the open steam method is dependent upon customer

acceptance of the new corrugated hose, but they did not agree on

methods to be employed in the event customer approval is not

obtained. Wolf testified that such an event would force Petitioner

to install the $190,000 filter system even if it could be used for

only one year (R. 55) 

On the other hand, Warner testified that

the strategy would probably be to select the heaters producing the

most lead discharge and install individual filter systems on those

units (R. 116). From this we conclude that there are several

control methods available, and the testimony is a positive indication

that some method~, either a small or large filter system or conversion

to the open steam method will be in operation by December 31, 1974.

Wolf and Robert H. Feucht, Development Manager were confident that

the proposed schedule for achieving compliance by December 31, 1974

could be bettered, although neither could say how much earlier

compliance would be achieved.

Based on the entire record, it is our opinion that Petitioner

has met the requirements for receiving a variance. Research by

Goodyear has shown that the source of lead in its effluent can be

significantly reduced by a change in process. Where such process

alterations have the capability of producing an acceptable effluent,

the Board will readily endorse the process alterations in lieu of

expensive control equipment. Eliminating lead in the process

rather than through waste water treatment unquestionably embodies

the best form of pollution abatement. To force Petitioner to

install the $190,000 filter system at a time when process changes

10—337

—6—

should achieve compliance within one year would indeed be

arbitrary and unreasonable.

Testimony by Pokorny relating to the environmental effects

of the lead in Petitioner’s effluent stands unrefuted. The

Pokorny testimony, the reductions in lead concentration already

achieved, the commitment to come into compliance during 1974,

all indicate that the economic impact from installing the

$190,000 filter system significantly outweighs the possible

detrimental effects of this effluent on the Skokie Ditch.

The Agency recommended denial of the variance unless

Petitioner could show that 1) continued lead discharges to the

Skokie Ditch would have no significant environmental impact,

and 2) that conversion to the open steam process could not have

been initiated at an earlier date or accelerated to enable

timely compliance with Rule 408(a). It is our opinion that Good-

year has made such proof. The EPA said that, if Petitioner

proved these two points, the variance should be granted subject

to a schedule calling for periodic decreases in the lead con-

centration based on 24—hour composite samples. This schedule

is precisely the same schedule Petitioner proposes to adhere to

(Petitioner Exhibit 1) and we shall grant the variance subject

to the agreed effluent reduction schedule.

ORDER

It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:

1. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, North Chicago

plant, is granted a variance from Rule 408(a)

of the Water Pollution Control Regulations of

Illinois until December 13, 1974, in order to

make such process alterations or such installation

of control equipment as may be required to achieve

compliance with said Rule.

2. This variance is subject to the following condition:

effluent lead concentrations shall not exceed 

the

following monthly average levels based on weekly

24 hour composite samples:

Date            

_____

January 1, 1974        

0.211

April 1, 1974         

0,179

July 1, 1974         

0.160

October 1, 1974        

0.154

December 1, 1974       

0.100

—7—

3. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company shall, by

January 3, 1974, post a bond in the amount

of $20,000 in a form acceptable to the

Environmental Protection Agency, such bond

to be forfeited in the event Petitioner fails

to make such process alterations or such

installation of control equipment. The bond

shall be mailed to: Fiscal Services Division,

Illinois EPA, 2200 Churchill Road, Springfield,

Illinois 62706.

4. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company shall provide

the Agency with quarterly progress reports,

commencing January 3, 1974. Such reports shall

completely detail all progress or lack of progress

towards achieving compliance with Rule 408 (a).

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

Board, hereby certify t~eabo~e Opinion and Order was dopted

this /3’~’~ day of ~     

1973 by a vote of ____to (~

~4ieeL