ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
December 20, 1973
)
VILLAGE OF WINNETICA
)
)
)
v.
)
PCB 73-338
)
)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
)
)
MR. DEAN C. CAMERON and MR. SHELDON A. ZABEL, SCHIFF, HARDIN ~
WHITE, appeared on behalf of the Village of Winnetka
MR. KENNETH J.
GUMBINER,
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY
GENERAL,
appeared
on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Dumelle):
The Village of Winnetka (Village) filed a Petition for Variance
from Rule 3-3.112 of the Rules and Regulations for the Control
of Air Pollution (Air Rules) on August 13, 1973 and filed an
Amendment to the Variance Petition on October 15, 1973. The
Agency filed a Recommendation on December 12, 1973. On September 25,
1973, the Agency filed an Enforcement Action against the Village
alleging that the Village had operated its electric generating
plant in violation of Rule 3-3.112 of the Air Rules; operated the
electric power generation station without an operating permit,
in violation of Rule 103(b) of the Air Pollution Control
Regulations (Air Regulations); and operated its• generating plant
in violation of Section 9(a) and 9(b) of the Environmental Pro-
tection Act. The Village of Winnetka has filed a waiver of the
90-day decision period until December 20, 1973.
The Village and the Agency filed a joint motion to consolidate
the variance petition with the enforcement action on November 7, 1973.
The Board denied the motion in an Order entered on November 15,
1973, because the hearing in the variance petition was proceeding
on that.day. The parties filed a Stipulation for Settlement and
an additional motion to consolidate the two actions of November 15,
1973 at the hearing held pursuant to the variance petition. A
hearing in the enforcement action was held on November 12, 1973,
at which time the parties again submitted the Stipulation for
Settlement and filed a motion to consolidate. The Board again
denies the motion to consolidate the two cases.
10—423
-2-
The Village owns and operates an electric generating station
known as the Winnetka Electric Plant located at Tower Road and
Lake Michigan in Winnetka, Cook County, Illinois. The plant
consists of five boilers and four turbines used to generate
electricity. All boilers exhaust through a single stack 250 ft.
tall. Boiler number 8 is equipped with a multicone type collector,
and boilers 4 through 7 are equipped with baffled settling
chambers. Boilers 5 through 7 are exclusively coal-fired; boiler
4 may alternately be fired by coal or natural gas; and boiler 8
may be fired by coal or natural gas together or separately. All
coal used as a fuel in the Plant, at least since 1971, has been
Eastern Kentucky coal, with a sulfur content of less than 1.
Operating data for 1971 and 1972 show that approximately 30
of the power sold by the utility is produced by burning natural
gas in the boilers, 30 of the power is provided by an intercon-
nection with the Edison system, and approximately 40 is produced
by burning coal. The 17.5 megawatt of gas generating capacity,
when combined with the 20 mw of interconnection capacity, should
under normal conditions be sufficient to meet the peak demand of
32.25 mw of electricity reached in August, 1972. The Village pro-
blem is that natural gas is not always available nor is inter-
connection power from Edison always available. Therefore, the
Village must occasionally burn coal to meet the demand for electri-
city.
The Village on March 12, 1973, filed an application with the
Agency for an operating permit. Following this filing, Agency
personnel suggested to the Village that a variance might be needed
with respect to boilers 4 through 7, if such boilers were to use
coal as a fuel, before an operating permit could be granted. On
April 12, 1973, the Village filed a petition with the Board
(PCB 73-148) asking for a variance in the event that the boilers
4 through 7 were shown to fail to comply with the applicable
emissions standards in a stack emission test program to be con-
ducted by the Village. This petition was dismissed by the BoardTs
Order dated April 17, 1973, as premature because the test had not
beeen conducted and no violation had been established.
On April 25, 1973, the Agency issued a letter denying an
operating permit to the Village on the grounds that the
Village had failed to prove that the plant had been constructed or
modified so as not to cause a violation of the applicable regula-
tions or had been granted a variance. During May and June, 1973,
the Village conducted stack emission tests of the boilers while
burning coal. These tests indicated that all of the boilers, under
certain operating conditions, failed to meet the particulate
emission standards of the Air Rules. After the stack emission
tests were presented to the City Council, the Village again
10 —424
-3-
applied for a variance on August 13, 1973. On September 25,
1973, the Agency filed a formal complaint alleging that the
Vill&ge was operating the plant in violation of Air Rule
3-3.112 and operating without an operating permit in violation
of Rule 103(b) (2) of the Air Regulations, and Section 9(a) and
9(b) of the Environmental Protection Act.
Emission stack tests conducted by the Village from May 30,
through June 8, 1973 showed that while operating each boiler at
an extreme energy input rate, the particulate emission rates
ranged from 0.5 to 1.75 lb/MBtu input. While the Village has
stated that 0.2 lb/MBtu is the appropriate emission limit; the
Agency stated in its recommendation that emission rate allowed.
by Air Rule 3-3.112 is 0.6 lb/MBtu. The allowable emission rate
to become effective on January 1, 1974 is 0.2 lb/MBtu. (Rule 203(g),
Air Regulation). A citizen appeared at the November 15, 1973
variance petition hearing to read a prepared statement objecting
to particulate emissions from the plant. The Board has received
one other complaint from a neighboring citizen objecting to
particulate emissions.
Paragraph six of the Stipulation states that stack emission
tests indicate that all of the boilers, at least under certain
operating conditions, fail to meet the particulate emission
standards of the Air Rules. These certain conditions are operating
each boilers individually while burning coal at the
maximum
allowable
energy input rate. Paragraph eleven of the Stipulation states
that the Village has agreed to select an engineering consultant
to prepare plans and specifications for the installation of emission
control equipment; and at its public meeting on November 6, 1973
adopted the recommendation of its utility committee to maintain
its electric generating plant in full operating condition through
the installation of control equipment. Paragraph eleven also
contains a tentative compliance schedule showing November 3, 1975
as the completion date for the installation of control equipment.
The Village is therefore seeking a variance to burn coal
in its existing coal-fired boilers during the times when the
supply of natural gas is interrupted and sufficient power is not
available by the interconnection system with Commonwealth Edison.
The Board will grant the Village a six month variance to operate
its plant according to the limitations found in paragraph 12 of
the Stipulation as set out in the Order below. The short period
for the variance is because the Village did not present modelling
data as to particulate levels which will be inflicted upon resi-
dents. We do not know if a health hazard is being created or
maintained by this grant.
•This opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of facts and
conclusions of law.
10—425
-4-
ORDER
The Pollution Control Board, hereby grants the Village of
Winnetka a variance to exceed the current particulate emission
standards found in Rule 3-3.112 of the Air Rules, until May 20,
1974, under the following conditions:
(a) Petitioner shall file a compliance schedule with
the Agency before March 15, 1974;
(b) •That Petitioner shall apply to the Agency for all
necessary permits;
(c) That by January 15, 1974, Petitioner shall submit
a performance bond in the amount of $25,000 in a form
approved by the Agency. Said bond shall ensure completion
of Petitioner’s control program
and
compliance with Rules 3-
3.112 and 203(g) by installing the necessary control or
interconnectioá equipment.
Cd) That Petitioner be allowed to bun coal as a fuel only
during the following situations:
1. When neither purchase power from the intercon-
nection with Commonwealth Edison nor gas fuel
for boilers #4 and #8 •is available in sufficient
quantity to supply needs of the community.
2. When purchase power from the interconnection,
on an interruptible or demand basis, is available,
but gas fuel for boilers #4 and #8 is not available,
and Village requirements ecceed the 20,000 1W
of maximum demand available in the contract with
Commonwealth Edison (Exhibit A of Variance Petition)
and exceed any additional power available from
Edison.
3.
When gas, as
a fuel, is not available, and it
is necessary to bank boilers and/or to heat the
generating plant. Coal usage, under these circumstances,
must not exceed 3 of rated fuel input.
4. When, as the result of an emergency, as defined in
Petitioner’s contract with Edison (Exhibit A of Va 1ance
Petition), in the Commonwealth interconnection sys oem, a
contribution of power to the interconnect system from
10—426
the Village system is required, and gas fuel is not
available for boilers #4 and #8 to the extent required
and necessary Village requirements plus system
requirements exceed the capacity of boilers #4 and #8,
5. When total capacity tests are required by the inter-
connecting utility pursuant to Petitioner’s contract
with CECO (Exhibit A of Variance Petition)
6. When there is an equipment or system failure which
results in a requirement for power generation by the
city
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were adopted on the
~day of December, 1973 by a vote of
~
Illinois Pollution