ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 28, 1972
KRAFT FOODS DIVISION OF
KRAFTCO CORPORATION
V.
)
PCB 71—388
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Richard M. Keck, Attorney for Kraft Foods Division
Thcmas J. Immel, Attorney for the Environmental Protection Agency
Opinion and Order of the Board (by Mr. Aldrich):
Kraft Foods Division (~Kraft”) of Kraftco Corporation requests a
variance from the sewer ban of the Agency (November 20, 1970) and
from Paragraph 6 of the Order of this Board in PCB 71-8, City of
Mattoon
V.
EPA, (April 14, 1971) to attach its waste discharge to
the Nattoon municipal sewer.
In October 1969, Kraft reached agreement with the City of Mattoon to
locate and construct a food processing plant. The City assured Kraft
that its sewage treatment facilities were being upgraded and would
be capable of accepting 200,000 gallons per day of plant effluent of
normal domestic strength. Petitioner let the contract June 24, 1970,
and construction commenced September 1970, with expected completion by
March 15, 1972.
Petitioner’s waste discharges consist mainly of edible food products
including BOD material, suspended solids and grease. Petitioner has
expended approximately $1,000,000 for pretreatment installations in
order to bring the BOD and suspended solids down to levels that are
acceptable to the City for discharge into the municipal sewer system.
Production of the plant is to be initiated stepwise with 140,000 gallons
flow per day planned for 1972—73, 160,000 gallons per day in 1974-75,
and 200,000 gallons at some future date. In addition tothe materials
already listed, there will be small amounts of caustic, acids and
detergents discharged intermittently in connection with cleaning
operations, but no strong chemicals, toxic solutions or heavy metals
will be used.
Prior to the hearing, Kraft and the Agency entered into a stipulation
detailing among other items the nature and amount of proposed discharge,
the dates of permits, the general design and expected completion dates
of pretreatment facilities, the size and location of a retention basin,
the status of the sewaqe treatment facilities of the City of Mattoon,
and the condition
of
t~:ereceiving stream, Eickapoo Creek.
The City as of February 8, 1972, has raised its capacity for primary
and secondary treatment from 3,2 mgd when the sewer ban was
imposed up to 4.4 mgd. An additional 4 mgd can receive primary treat-
merit, Numerous other improvements have been completed. The City is
thus prepared to handle all dry weather flow including the proposed
discharge from Kraft in compliance with present recuirements of
20 mg/l BOD and 25 mq/l suspended solids. Prior to March 7, 1972,
the City was behind schedule in meeting the interim planning and
construction dates needed to meet the final compliance date of July 1,
1972, for 4 BOD and 5 suspended soLids in its effluent and for
disinfection of all its effluent as required in SWB—l4. On ‘~arch7,
1972, however, the Board in adopting Water Quality Standards, R 71—14,
postponed until December 31, 1973, the date for meeting the 4 BOD and
5 SS standards. Kraft discharges will not cause the City effluent to
exceed present standards of 20 mg/i POD and 25 mq/l SS under normal
flow conditions.
In order not to add to the volume of storm water that bypasses the
sewage treatment plant following heavy rainfall, Respondent has installed
an aerated retention basin of 600,000 gallons (See POP 71-218, Mars
Development Company of Illinois, Inc.) capable of holding 5 days of
processing water for the 1972-73 schedule and 3 1/2 c~ayswhen operations
are increased to the maximum design (200,000 gallons per day)
.
Additional
temporary retention capacity can be quickly constructed if needed in
an emergency. The retention basin will discharge into the sewer system
only after
by-passing
of storm water has ceased and the city agrees that
the treatment plant can accommodate it.
The League of Women Voters asks us to ‘order Kraft to undertake a study
of the feasibility of recycling its waste on the land.’ We support the
principle of recycling and would welcorre a response by Kraft to the
suggestion of the League but are unwilling to order Kraft to undertake
such a study when they have alread.y developed a plan that is acceptable
to both the Agency and to the City of Mattoon,
The Agency recommends that, in case the variance is granted, we set a
limit of 140,000
gallons and 350
pounds BOD per day. Petitioner’s response
to this is that the limitation should be 200,000 gallons and 500 pounds
BOD per day inasmuch as those are the
intended
future discharges from
the plant. In the hearing, Petitioner stated categorically that “the
appropriate limit would be 350 pounds,” (B. 40). That is acceptable to
us. The statutory limit on variances is one year, thus it will impose
no hardship on Kraft to limit the discharge to 350 pounds per day during
the first year of operation. We find no reason to set a limit on the
quantity of water to be discharqed since the City can handle the
anticipated flow in dry weather and since the flow will be retained
when the sewer is full because of storm runoff.
We are convinced that Petitioner acted in good faith in orginally relying
on the statement from the City that its sewage treatment facilities
would be upgraded and in compliance with standards prior to the completion
4—
114
of the construction of Petitioner’s plant. We feel that Petitioner has
in addition taken all steps that could reasonably be expected in order
to minimize the impact of its discharges. We do not feel that Eraft,
the community~ and prospective employees should be unnecessarily penal-
ized because of failure of the City to meet its schedule for compliance
with the then applicable standards, To deny the petition would result
in
the
Kraft plant standing idle with a consequent loss
of 140 jobs
in the first year with a payroll of approximately $1,000,000. As a
result of pretreatment of its wastes by Kraft, retention in case of
storm runoff, and improvements made by the City in its sewage treat-
ment, the effect on the receiving stream from granting the variance
appears to be slight.
The Revised Recommendation of the Agency is that the variance be granted
subject to certain limitations. We concur and hereby grant the request
for a variance as specified in the
Order.
ORDER
1. Kraft
Food Division of Kraftco Corporation is hereby granted a
variance until March 28, 1973, from the sewer ban imposed
in POP
71-8, City of Mattoon v. EPA, in order to attach its food processing
plant to the Mattoon municipal sewer.
2. Superintendents and operators
of Kraft’s waste pretreatment
facility
shall be certified under
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Rules and Regulations for certification
of operators:
3. Eraft shall provide facilities
for the temporary retention
of all
treated process waste water on
its property, such facilities to
include a retention basin designed for
3
1/2 days detention
of
waste.
4. The retention basin shall be equipped with aeration devices to
reduce the possibility
of odor during periods of storage.
5. Kraft shall install a rain gauge that will permit a determination
of when the discharge of wastes from its aerated storage basin
should be stopped in order to prevent overloading the interceptor
sewer of the City of Mattoon.
6. Kraft shall not begin operation of the plant until its pretreatment
facilities
are completed.
7. During the period from start up to March 28, 1973, Kraft shall limit
its discharges to no more than 350 pounds BOD per day.
4— 115
8. Kraft shall close the valve at the aerated storage basin whenever
storm water is being bypassed or in case of temporary upsets at
the City plant. The valve shall not be opened until the City
informs Petitioner that bypassing has ceased and the city sewage
treatment plant can accommodate the additional load.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Pollution Control Board, certify
that the Board adopted the above opinion and order this 28th day of
March, 1972, by a vote of 5—0.
4— 116