BEFORE THE ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

STRICT OF

1

DECATUR,

Petitioner,

PCB

(Variance - Water)

ILL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

TAL

NOTICE OF FILING

Illinois Pollution Control Board

100 W. Randolph Street

Chicago, Illinois 60601

with the Office of the Clerk of

the Illinois

KATHER

LURKINS,

etfully s ubmitted,

E

CATUR

Dated: June 15, 2009

By: /s/Katherine

Katherine D. Hodge

Lauren

C.

Lurkins

HODGE DWYER & DRIVER

3150 Roland Avenue

Post

Office

Box 5776

62705-5776

(217) 523-4900

T HIS FILING SUBMITTED ON

RECYCLED PAPER

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL BOARD

v.

Respondent.

DISTRICT

OF

Petitioner,

ENTRY OF A

OF KATHERINE

D. HODGE

NOW COMES Katherine D. Hodge, of the law firm

HODGE DWYER &

ER, and hereby enters her appearance

in this matter on behalf of Sanitary District

of

Decatur.

2009

3150 Roland Avenue

Post Office Box 5776

llinois

(217) 523-4900

By: /s/Katherine D. Hodge

Katherine D. Hodge

S DOD-00 ITifingsTOA - KDH

---

L

TROL BOARD

SANITARY DISTRICT OF

}

DECATUR,

}

}

Petitioner,

}

}

PCB

(Variance - Water)

}

Respondent.

}

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

OF LAUREN C. LURKINS

N OW CO

k

ins, of the law frtn HODGE DWYER &

by enters her appearanc

of Decatur.

Dated: June

matter an behalf

of Sanitary

District

submitted,

By /s/Lauren C. Lurkil

Past Office Box

5776

linois 62705-5776

217}

523-4900

S DOD-00 ITilings\EOA

- LCL

---

BEFORE

THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL BOARD

SANITARY DISTRICT OF

DECATUR,

Petitioner,

PCB

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

AGENCY,

Respondent.

ITION FOR

VARIANCE

N OW COMES the Sanitary

a ttorneys, HODGE DW

of Decatur ("District"), by and through its

ER, and, pursuant to Section 35(a)

of the

Illinois

415 ILLS 5135 a), and

Part 104 of Title 35 of the

Code, 35 Ill. Admin. Code

§

104. 100 et sec ., hereby petitions the

Illinois

Pollution Control Board ("Board") for a variance authorizing

continued

rges of nickel and zinc, from its wastewater

treatment plant ("Main

Sangamo

Pet

suant to the terms and conditions outlined in this Petition

for

rant it a five-year

variance to

allow it

time to continue its evaluation

of the

issues

a

solutions regarding

its nickel and zinc d

invest

's variance request

stems

from the Board's adoption of more stringent nickel

and zinc water quality standards,

which at the time,

were

not

anticipated to adversely impact any

gers.

al Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System

") permit was renewed, the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency ("Illinois

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

EPA" or "Agency") imposed

new effluent limits for

stringent standards.

Since the District

water within Lake Decatur for

the City of Decatur's water

supply, du

rict's

effluent limits directly reflect

the water quality standards,

there are times

when there may be no discharge

downstream to the

Sangamon River into

which the District discharges.

As a result, the District could not

be granted a mixing

zone, and t

Although the District undertook immediate

action to

nd Company ("ADM"),

one

kel and zinc in its

discharge and to investigate compliance

options, the District

could

not

design, permi

chase, construct

and commence operation of any

adequate

rdance

wit

and zinc to meet

the more

s located

downstream of the

dam that reta

compliance schedule

set forth

detailed

herein. Similarly, Archer Daniels

M

weather,

of the District's most

significant

ributor to nickel

and zinc

loa

ommence

dentify

the sources of the

Further, human

hea

mpliance

antrng of this variance since the

amount of nickel and zinc to

be discharged

would not increase

beyond historical levels. This variance

is necessary far the District to

ions.

HICH VARIANCE

IS SOUGHT

The District is seeking a five-year

quality standards for nickel

and zinc, w

Board

rules and from 35

based effluent limits.

sped to the general

use water

hich are set forth in

Section 302.208(e) of the

de § 304.105 as it applies to establishing

water

The

water quality standards for nickel

and zinc are defined

2

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

in terms of conversion factor multipliers

for dissolved metals. See 35 1.11. Admin.

Code

302.208(e).

The acute standard ("AS") for nickel (measured

as microgram

is

defined

as follows:

eA

+BIn(H)

x

0.998 *,

ter ("fig/L"))

where:

A =

0.5173

B = 0.8460

ex = base

of

natural

logarithms raised to the x-power

In (H) = natural logarithm of Hardness (STORET

00900)

* = conversion factor multiplier for

disso

(measured as wg/L) is defined as follows:

e

A +Bln(H)

x

0.997

where:

A = -2.286

B =

0.8460

Id.

= natural logari

multiplier for dissolved

metal

The AS for zinc (measured as pg/L) is defined as follows:

B In

H ) x 0.978 *,

where:

A =

0.9035

B = 0.8473

e-' = base of natural logarithms raised to the x-power

In (H) = natural logarithm

of Hardness (STORET 00900)

ersion factor multiplier for

I d.

---

The CS for zinc (measured

as pg/L) is defined as follows:

B ln(H)

X 0 .986*,

where:

A = -0.8165

B =

0.8473

ex = base of natural

logarithms raised to the x-power

In (H) = natural logarithm of Hardness

(STOFLET 00900)

* = conversion

factor multiplier for dissolved metals

I d.

The AS

for both nickel and zinc "shall not

be exceeded at any time," except as

provided in Section 302.208(4

nickel an nc

"s

. 3 5 Ill. Admin. Code 02.208(a). The

CS for both

be exceeded by the arithmetic average

of at least four

Ilected

over any period of at least four days," except as provided

tion

302,208(d). 35 Ill. Adm

(d)

.208(4) provides as follows:

1)

roved

a zo

.1

eeeded in any waters

except

allowed pursuant to Section

302.102, the

The

CS shall not be exceeded outside of waters

is allowed pursuant

to Secti

3) The [human health standard] HHS shall not

be exceeded

outside of waters in which mixing is allowed pursuant

to

Section 302.102.

35 Ill. Admin.

Code § 302.208(4).

ict is also seek g a variance from

the rule establishing the methodology

ent limits at Section 304.105

of the Board rules.

35 1.11. Admin.

Code § 304.105.

---

04.105 provides as follo

In addition to the other requirements

of this Part, no

effluent shall, alone

or in combination with other

sources, cause a violation

of any applicable

water quality

standard. When the Agency

finds that a discharge

which

would comply

with effluent standards contained in

this Part would cause

or is causing a violation of water quality

standards, the Agency

shall take

appropriate

action under Section 31

or Section 39 of the Act to require

the

discharge to

meet whatever effluent limits

are necessary to ensure

compliance with the water

quality standards. When

such a violation is

caused by the cumulative effect

of more than one source,

several sources

may

be joined in an enforcement

or variance proceeding, and measures

for

necessary

effluent reductions will be determined

on the basis of technical

feasibility, economic reasonableness

and fairness to all dischargers.

35 Ill. Admin.

Code § 304.105.

e Board to o

nois EPA, pursuant

to

309.184 of the

Board rules, to modify the District's NPDES

p

s:

by the CWA and the Ac

request

ed by these

uld impose

an

e hardship

on the app

Iicýint

or permittee. Any

in 6iceoýrdance

with Section

104.101 and Part 104

shall govern the proceeding. If such

a variance is

granted the Board shall order the Agency

to issue or modify an NPDES

Permit

consistent with the Board Order, the

CWA, Federal

Regulations and

the Act.

(Note: Prior to codification, Rule

401 and Part

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

11.

A. The District

lant and Operations

Description

The District, located in Macon

County, Illinois, is engaged in the treatment

of

domestic and industrial wastewater

for the City of Decatur, the Villages

of Forsyth and

Mt. Zion, and for industrial and commercial users in

the Decatur, Illinois, metropolitan

area. The District employs approximately

61 full time employees, and was formed in

1917. The original Main Plant, located at 501 Dipper

Lane, Decatur, Illinois, was

924. Major

expansions and plant upgrades were made in 1928, 1957,

1964 and 1976, and the current plant was completed in 1990. The Distric

s

ly 90,000 residents of

the City of Decatur and the Villages of Forsyth and

Mt. Zion, and 26

sign

industrial and commercia

An average of appro

S .

M ain Plant consists of screening,

maximum

flow of 125.0 MGD. Treatment at the

sludge, secondary clarification, disinfection,

dechlorination,

anaerobic digestion, flotation

thicken ng, and land application

-stage activated

to surface water,

Judge on area farmland.

ategorical SIUs and 9

Receiviniz Waterway

nd more than 1,000 other

ain discharge is via Outfall 001 to the Sangamon River

at 39°

49' 56" North Latitude, 89° 0' 7" West Longitude. At the discharge point,

the Sangamoi

6

---

R

esignated

as a General Use Water under

Section 303.201 of the Board's

rules.

As discussed above, the general use

water quality standards for nickel

and zinc are set

in Section

302.208(e).

The segment o

on River that receives discharge from

the Main Plant

ID

IL-E-09) is listed on Illinois' 303(d)

list of impaired waters for

2008.

See Partially Approved 2008 Illinois

303(4) List at 54, available at

http://www.epa.gov/regions/water/wshednps/pdf/att

3 partial_approval_final.pdf.

The

for this segment are aquatic life, fish

consumption and primary contact

potential causes

of

impairnient

given for the segment are

manganese,

yls and fecal

coliform. Id. The potential

sources associate

s5

y/road/bridge

runoff (non-construction related), crop production

(crop land or dry

land), agriculture, urban

*f/storm sewers and

source unknown. See Appendix B-2,

ms, 2008 at 1-2 and 87, avai

http://www.epa.state.i1.us/water/tmdl/303-appendix/2008/appendix-b2-streams.pdf,

C.

Tire District's

Current NPDES Permit

The District holds an NPDES pe

which became e

y Illinois

EPA on April 20, 2007,

2007, and

expires on June 30, 2012, a copy of which is

ins effluent limits for nickel

and z

calculated in accordance with the formulae set forth

08(e). The

ted effluent concentration limit for nickel is 0.011 milligrams per liter ("mg/L")

;

a monthly average with no daily maximum concentration

limit. The permitted effluent

---

concentration limit

for zinc is 0.046 mg/L as a monthly average

and 0.258 mg/L as a

daily maximum.

According to an Illinois

EPA memorandum regarding the water quality based

rict's permit, the nickel and zinc

standards were "based on

hardness data

collected at AWQMN station E-05, Sangamon River, SE of Niantic, with a

/L as CaCU3." Illinois EPA

Memorandum from S.

Hah.n regarding Water Quality Based Effluent

Limits, Decatur Sanitary

District,

NPDES

#IL0028321 (Macon County) (November 9, 2006), attached hereto as

In

addition,

pursuant to Special Condition 17 of its NPDES permit, the District

anslator Study, the main reference for which was "The

Metals

Translator.

ted States Environmental Protection Agency ("USEPA"), EPA823-B-96-007, June

discusse

dvised the District that, based on the Translator Study, the permit limits

Recoverable Permit

Limit from a Dissolved Criterion,"

her 20, 2007, as part of

t forwarded this Translator

ore detail below and which is attached hereto as Exhibit C. Subsequently,

ed to 0.015 mg/L

for zinc. See email from

S.

Twait at Illinois

monthly average) for nickel and 0.075 mg/L (monthly

average) and 0.416 mg/L (daily max

e at the District (January 2, 2008

d

hereto

as Exhibit D.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

The

for ach

ES permit

also includes at Special

Condition 18 the following

schedule

liance with the above-mentioned

effluent

im Report on

effluent and

f; months

from the effective

stream sampling to date and

date of this Permit

what measures

are necessary to

ith Final Nickel

and

itations

(2) Interim Report

12

months from the effective

date of

this Permit

Interim Report

18

months from the effective

date of this

Permit

(4) Permittee

Achieves

24

months fro

Comp

and Zinc Effluent Limitations

ber 20, 2007.

See Exhibit C. The Second

d ate

of thi

a ttached hereto as follows:

The First Interim Report

was submitted to

ois EPA on

on December

29, 2008, and is

attached hereto

as Exhibit F. Thus, the current deadline

for compliance with the nic

and zinc limits

in the District's NPDES

permi

of the water quality standards

for both nickel and zinc in the segment

of the Sangamon River to which

the District

harges, the

established

in the District's NPDES

permit, as well as the associated

compliance

schedule.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

Prior Variance(s) Issued to the District

or Any? Predecessor Re2ardin

Neither the District, nor any of its predecessors, has

regarding relief that

Similar Reli

District

of Decatur's Sewage Treatment Plant into the Sangamon

River, Macon

County,

Illinois.

However, on January 22, 1987, the Board granted the District

a

for variance

g it from 35 Ill. Admin. Code § 304.120(c),

which, at that time, limited

discharges

from the Districts Main Plant to 10 mg/L of five-day biochemical oxygen

demand ("BOD5") and 12 mg/L of suspended solids. Final

Opinion and Order of the

Board, In the Matter of.

Site-Specific Rulemaking for the Sanitary District of

Illinois, R85-15

Code

y 22, 1987). The Site-Specific

ilar

to what is requested in this Petition.

nd provides the following:

from the Sanitary

b)

The provisions of Section 304.120(c) shall not apply to said

discharges, provided that

said

discharges

shall not exceed 20 mg/1

biochemical oxygen

0) and 25 mg/1 of total suspended solids (STORPT

. Code § 304.212.

While

th

atur,

Rule is not

a variance and does not

discharge.

sed in this Petition, it is relevant for de

sly granted the District regulatory relief for its Main Plant

effluent

10

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

E.

Nature and Amount of Materials

Used In Activity for Which

ought

The District

provides treatment for wastewater

received from domestic,

ial and industrial sources. During

dry weather, two industrial

users, ADM and

Tate & Lyle Ingredients

Americas, Inc. ("Tate

&

Lyle"),

provide approximately 50

percent

of the wastewater flow received by

the District. The District conducts

an

ratory analysis program to monitor industrial

sources,

wastewater entering the treatment plant,

the treated discharge to the Sangamon

River and

other locations.

nitoring

program, the District has identified

sources of

nickel and zinc

in the incoming wastewater.

locations in the collection

system

ly

domestic and commercial wastewater has

indicated concentrations below

the laboratory detection limit. Average industri

ADM

9.403 pounds per day (0.102 mg/L)

0.351 pounds

per day (0.010 mg/L)

0.034 pounds per

day (0.006 mg/L)

egard to zinc, small amounts

are present in domestic and comme

wastewater,

although the majority of the Dist

follows:

like other

31.446 pounds per

day (0.319 mg/L

Tate & Lyle

4.487 pounds per day (0.124

mg/L)

All other industries

1.281

pounds per day (0.226 mg/L)

Domestic and commercial 7.507 pounds

per day (0.052 mg/L)

des

physica

load is from industry,

reatment

facilities,

and. biological treatment processes.

While specific treatment processes

for metals removal are not provided,

significant incidental removal of metals from

the

II

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

wastewater does occur. The District's removal efficiency is approximately

53 percent for

nickel and 77 percent for zinc.

The District regulates incoming wastewater constituents by ordinance, including a

pretreatment ordinance adopted pursuant to its 1`d'DBS

permit requirement to implement

an industrial pretr

with the

program.

The ordinance limits are incorporated into discharge

ed by the District to SIUs. Both ADM and Tate

&

Lyle

are in compliant

r current

ge permit limits for nickel and zinc.

mount of Discharges of Nickel and Zinc

Currently

Generated By the Activity

to the reissuance of th

ed its treated discharge and the Sangamon River

upstream ai

pint for nit

i

available in the Sangamon R

dry conditions occurred in

the fal

downstream nickel concentrat

of the

d from 0.01 to 0.03 mg/L during that period,

ods,

However, from December 2007 through March 2009, only one downstream

sample

exceeded the expected water quality standard of 0.015 mg/L. In addition, during the

mpling period, only one downstream sample exceeded the expected

rage concentration and none exceeded the maximum concentration.

---

Monitoring results from March

2007 through March 2009 are summarized

in the

table below.

ýangamon

River approx. 2

miles

downstream

of

007 reissuance of the NPDES

permit. the

t l i

ained

therein,

compliance by July 1, 2009. As

soon as the permit became

ions of several alternatives including reduction

of

ough the existing industrial pretreatment

program, potent

adjustments to the permit limits (including

the Translator Study), and treatment

13

---

technology that could potentially

be employed to improve removal

at the District's

Plant.

The District has calculated tentative

pretreatment local limi

enable its

discharge to meet its current

NPDES permit limits. These

calculations were performed

following

USEPA, Region S guidance and have

formed the basis for discussions

with

reasons.

to & Lyle. The

District considers these numbers

to be tentative for several

the calculations are based on limits

in the District's April 20, 2007

s discussed further

below, revised permit limits

based on the

ator

Study

cently been included

in a proposed modified

dition, the District has

made a substantial effort to idet

that could arise

concerning alloc

lementation

of the limits. Finally, it has

been the

order to assure

camp

pliance schedule for nickel

contained in its

iicant changes to treatment processes

or operations. W

regard to treatment at the District's Main

Plant, any treatment process would need

to be

dle

at

least

the design average flow of 41 MGD,

and potentially the design

0

concentrations of metals

from such streams as electrop

ies for removing relatively

high

wastewater are well-

s limited by the very

low concentrations in the District's

14

---

wastewater

stream. For example, precipitation as

1 hydroxide is

one technology for

removing nickel from a solution. However, the solubility

of nickel hydroxide at the high

pfl level required

(pH 10 - 11) is approximately 0.12 mg/L, nearly an order of magnitude

effluent limit. Even under ideal conditions,

precipitation could

not achieve the limit.

Another common metals removal technology, filtration, would not

effectively

the D

ci

,trict's effluent. Mechanisms for improving

the incidental removal of metals

1 wastewater treatment plants vary depending on whether the metal

species is

particulate or dissolved (either as a metal ion or a metal

complexed with another

1 of particulates or dissolved metals adsorbed onto particulates

ed sludge floc) can potentially be improved by effluent filtr

sand or other

of effluent ni

Id not be removed by

Add-on chemical treatment technologies, such as ion exchange and reverse

osmosis, would be expected to remove dissolved nickel from the District's Main

Plant

. Both treatment technologies remove metals from the bulk effluent flow stream

and concentrate them into a smaller volume, high concentration stream

that

requires

further management. Both also require significant

operating costs for energy, labor, and

me

osmosis

(ion exchange).

The consulting firm

ided the District with a

istrict's

effluent, however, shows

of $4 per gallon per day capacity for reverse osmosis

treatment, not considering the cost of brine disposal and operating costs. At a

minimum,

15

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

appro

ly 2 5 MGD

tment system, perhaps by half.

However,

a

roposed permit limit of 0.016 mg/L, resulting in a minimum capital

cost of $100

million,

not considering brine disposal. A brine disposal system could double the capital

cost. This exceeds the construction cost of the District's entire plant, to achieve

a

removal of approximately

six

pounds

per day or

less

of

nickel

from the effluent.

In general, the capital cost of an ion exchange system would be expected to total

less than that of a reverse osmos

substantia

ch would be required to find an ion exchange resin suitable

for removing nickel that is likely to be in a complexed form in the District's

effluent.

lso depend on the removal efficiency that could be achieved,

ould

ndus

Regardless of the treatment technology con

1 cost. For

would need to be treated to meet the

al of nickel at the

Id minimize the volume of water to be treated and, therefore, the

he nickel limit on working with in

n, the District

ADM as the largest industrial. discharger o

calculated pretreatment local li

1 users and, in particular,

kel to its system. The District has

I

ischarge to meet its current

limit for

total

nickel from AD

day. ADM's current loc

of 15.6 pounds

mg/L dissolved nickel, correspon

day at a flow rate of I

pounds per

a loading

MGD. Based on

sampling

from

January 2008

through April 2009, ADM discharged an average of 6.382 pounds per day of dissolved

nickel and 9.403 pounds per day of total nickel. ADM would need to reduce its nickel

16

---

discharge to the District by nearly two-thirds in

order for the District to meet its NPDES

gations of nickel

reduction alternatives are discussed further

below.

Compliance with the Zinc NPDES_ Permit Limit

Cannot Be Achieved

By

the Compliance Date

The District also cannot meet the compliance

schedule for zinc contained in

out significant

changes to treatment processes or operations.

Treatment options for z

the District's Main Plant are the same

as described above

for nickel. The District has also calculated

pretreatment limits which would need to be

used on industrial users

to enable the District's discharge to meet permit limits.

However, the situation

ndustrial zinc sources

and control is quite different from

with nickel. Through discussions

with ADM and Tate & Lyl e, the District found that

er treatment chemicals were in use at

both facilities and were

the largest source of zinc in the District

cooling tower treatment programs.

Both industrial users have

riot

p ounds per day at

ed maximum is 88.97 pounds

per day. Based on samp

2008 through April 2009,

ADM discharged an average of 34.351 pounds

per day and a maximum of 81.908 pounds per day of zinc. Eight

of 18 samples exceeded

the average limit.

As noted above, effluent monitoring indicates that the District's discharge

is

pliance with the proposed NPDES zinc

average limit during the major

of sampling events. However,

additional time is needed to address several concerns

with

---

consistently achieve this limit. As

discussed in detail below, ADM is

management alternatives to determi

bether it can meet the District's tentative

g operation of its wastewater treatment plant ("WWTP") and in particular, solids

pretreatment local limit under all conditions.

Also, two new industrial facilities that will

discharge wastewater to the District's Main Plant are currently in the design phase. A

0

of these proposed wastewater streams

would consist of coo

blowdown streams and while the District would closely regulate any zinc-based cooling

tower treatment additives, any background zinc concentrations

would increase through

the cooling process. Additionally,

time is needed to verify the accuracy of assumptions

requ

ocal limit development process,

various industrial

users

and, in

the case of zinc, a very high (greater than 90 percent)

projected removal rate by the District's treatment process.

Based on samples taken by ADM since January 1, 2009, ADM would

be able to

to meet the proposed limit is almost solely based on the

amount

could achieve compliance with its zinc allocation (at least much of the

rough reduced sludge wasting. However, this would be only a very

short term

solution. The reduction of sludge wasting would cause the sludge to build up w

pretreatment system and cause major disruptions

within

a rn

likely compromise

the

District

to properly operate its Main Plant. To counteract

18

ids would carry over with their effluent to the District. These

solids would

ncluding allocation assumptions for

erobic portion

of the system

eeks. At that point, significant and uncontrollable amounts of

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

the solids "carry over," the volume through ADM's WWTP

would have to be reduced.

To that end, major

The

Distri

ions of

could not be restarted until a sludge removal and drying system could be

design, pe

. The

construction of such a system would be very costly and would

likely

take more than a year.

C .

The

's Decatur Complex would have to be shut down and

orts to Identify Compliance Options

s first effort toward compliance was to complete the Translator Study

tioned above. The work on the Translator Study started in March 2007,

prior to the

permit issuance

in April 2007, and continued through November 2007. As the

Study progressed, the District determined that it would provide very little relief. The

07, as part

4-5 of Exhibit C for the proposed nickel and

ted in

e data.,

ial samples, the District's effluent samples and stream sampling

compiled, which showed that the source of nickel in the District's

flow, and the most s

Also, w

including ADM and Tate & Lyle, in August and September 2007, to discuss

industrial flow from

both

ADM

and

Tate

&

Lyle. T

nickel and zinc

District's new ni

nd zinc limits at those meetings. The District then met with

0,

2007, to discuss the

situation.

Please

see

the

summary of

. Personnel from ADM and Tate & Lyle were made aware

of the

ranslator

Study.

sample data that was given to Illinois EPA personnel during the October 30, 2007,

19

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

meeting, attached hereto

as Exhibit G. During that meeting,

Illinois EPA advi

extend the compliance

schedule in the permit

was premature, but

could be considered at a later date.

Since the District's meeting with Illinois

EPA, the District has made

significant

efforts to identify treatment options

regarding its nickel and zinc

recommended

by

Illinois

EPA, the District discussed

options for reducing nickel and z

loadings

wi

pretreatment

zinc.

e rous discussions

with the industries during 2008,

ate & Lyle. In

early 2008, the District calculated

new local

its

that would allow it to meet the upcoming effluent

limits for nickel and

These proposed limits were provided

to ADM and Tate & Lyle and

were the basis

Report

and indicate

hardness data the District collected

See

not yet

dified to revise the permi

mon

Also

in January 2008, the District a

am Plant.

om both ADM and

it discharges and the

pretreatment

numbers.

ograms, as

. ADM

ned above, and had been

identified as the primary source of nickel; it was used

as a catalyst in

is zinc discharge to meet

the limit,

n reviewing a better control

and monitoring program that

several of its production processes. AD h

ad begun reviewing treatment technology

that

20

---

would enable it to concentrate

and recover nickel from the wastewater

stream for that

process. ADM's

efforts are continuing, including a recently

completed trial of

electrocoagulation as a nickel removal process.

Unfortunately, it was found that the

process actually increases the nickel

concentrat

used in the rocess.

possibly due

to nickel in the electrode

The District continues

to work with ADM and Tate & Lyle

to meet the nickel and

As discussed further below, during the

December 4, 2008, meeting between

the

2009,

the District submitted its NPDES permit

modification

its NPDES permit to

extend the compliance schedule contained

on April 3, 2009, the District

forwarded

to Illin

Section

the District

attached hereto

as Exhibit H. Therein, Illinois EPA proposed

to

extend

the schedule of compliance for nickel and zinc from

two years to three years.

date of the filing of this Petition,

the modified NPDES permit has not

been issued

Illinois EPA. Also during late 2005, discussions continued

between Illinois EPA, the

M and Illinois EPA, Illinois

EPA recommended that the District

submit an

st. Please see the dis

On May S, 2009,

ADM regarding the best means

to address the District's nickel and

zinc

id not know that achieving compliance

with the nickel

ould be

is NPDES permit, according

to the schedule also contained in the

Ztinuing to operate both facilities

until ADM

21

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

discovered, in mid-2008, that incoming grain was responsible for significant amounts of

provided

the effluent sent to the District. Upon this discovery, the District and ADM

that seeking a variance would also be appropriate in this situation. Because

with available data and a summary of the issue as part of its Third

port. See Exhibit F. In light of this information, Illinois EPA, the

of the complexity of the issues at hand, it has taken time for the District a

coordinate with Illinois EPA and to prepare this Petition. On April 28, 2008, th

ovided a draft of this Petition to Illinois EPA for its review. On May 14, 2009, the

Illinois EPA met to discuss the same.

VI's Efforts to Reduce Its Nickel and Zinc Discharges

s set

tightened nickel

ficant co

ulated from the sampling data, which ADM would be required to comply

with

ADM's Decatur Complex consists of multiple, separate processing plants, which

2008, the District met with ADM and sha

by

July

2009. It was not until this time that ADM first recognized the implications that

Id have on its operations.

a

Corn

n-site

WWTP operated

by

Corn

Plant personnel.

07, the Distract notified

processing plants consist of the

roducts Plant, Cogeneration

ducts, us

cessing Plant, West Soybean Processing Plant, Vitamin E Plant,

t. Each of these unique plants produces

continuous processes, and creates wastewaters

22

---

which generally are reused multiple

times prior to being discharged

to the WWTP. The

WWTP treats approximately

I l MGD through a newer

anaerobic treatment system

followed by aerobic treatment

prior to discharge to the District.

Due

to the high wastewater flow and very low

concentration of nickel and zinc in

t he final e

a ccomplisl

y of

cats an

Is. Through testing,

ADM was able to

eliminate the incoming

raw water as a source. Further, based

on process knowledge,

1

both i

at the only

source of nickel was nickel catalyst (which is used

0

s.

lant), while the zinc was primarily from

cooling tower wa

be on a "soluble" basis. In May, however, the District, after consultation

with Illinois

nformed ADM that

the

limits

would be on a "total" rather than "soluble" basis.

ble portion of nickel and zinc in ADM's

final

y 25 percent and 75 percent, respectively.

This change in

measurement

basis meant much of the sam

leted was inadequate

to

reach

appropriate conclusions and could not be used for

data comparisons with future data

a "total" basis.

oncluded that reductions

in nickel and zinc would need to

be

Thus, in January 2008, ADM began

identifying possible

tals through complex-wide sampling

and a pre

23

---

Second, ADM encountered a problem with its sample

analysis procedures. ADM

became concerned that i d ata was not ma

on investigation, ADM

research

laboratory ("ADM Research") determined that the lab syringe filters

used

in

the

alysis contained zinc themselves,

which was leaching into the filtrate. This issue

took several weeks to identify and confirm the filters as the problem. It then took several

additional weeks to find suitable filters to meet the testing requirements.

Spl

for both nickel and zinc

results.

Third, ADM was surprise

ral streams which were

known chemical and processing aids that contained these metals.

arced that soybeans contain approximately 4.1 ppm nickel and

pp

Illinois

EPA approved laboratory to confirm

contains approximately 0.53 ppm nickel and

550,000 bushels of corn and 200,000 bushels of soybeans per

nickel and 25 times more zinc than ADM would be allowed to discharge into

the Decatur Complex comes into the Decatur Complex just through its raw materials.

Other "non-traditional" sources were also identified, such as the 50

percent sodium

co

el, but since the Decatur Complex uses nearly six

s

of sodium

hydroxide

per

month,

the contribution of additional nickel to

the Decatur Complex wastewater system also s

ant.

24

---

While ADM

first

of

2008,

du

ime, it also began evaluating various means to reduce or

lie

identification of nickel and zinc sources during the

t i the

emphasis began trans

sampling and source identification

to identifying and trial

or eli

e metals. Following are discussions of these activities to date for both zinc

and nickel.

1.

Zinc

As referenced above, the chemicals used in the cooling

tower water treatment

program

were initially identi

cc of zinc in the Decatur Complex

otential methods to reduce

learned that the largest source was the

corn and soybeans

doing so. However, ADM learned t

of zinc containing materials has cease

ccessful in

Plant towers continued to show elevated zinc levels even after

the

a higher pH program in August 2008, which reduced the

ount of zinc leaching from the system. Even so, it was well into the fall before all the

cooling water from

the towers was generally below the zinc targets.

As a result of its efforts to date, ADM has reduced its zinc discharges to levels

that

are generally

less

than

its

allocation.

Further,

potential nickel reduction strategies

discussed below should provide some additional redo

going forward. First, the

ever, there are still two

s ability to consistently ac

ct mixes produced in the Decatur Complex during the

25

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

recent sampling are

ones which would be expected to result in lower zinc

concentrations

than other potential product mixes. Thus, as product mixes

change (e.g., production of

more fructose),

the zinc conce ion may again increase. Therefore, additional ongoing

monitoring of the effluent will be necessary to determine the

impact of these process

variations. The second outstanding

ation of metal sulfides i

bic system, which is discussed in more detail later in this

2.

Nickel

ADM readily identified the use

process and i

ickel catalysts in the Corn Plant's

sorbitol

an Processing Plant as significant nickel

contributors.

ADM had looked at nickel

recovery from the sorbitol process by electroplating in 2006

chnical and economic issues. In

March 2008, the Corn Plant hired a nickel consultant to look

specifically at nickel

sorbitol process. He, too, focused primarily on electroplating.

Unfortunately, a number of problems became apparent, including low nic

the need to use ch

which are non-food grade, and the presence of various other cations and anions.

Once

hat electroplating was not a feasible option.

Next, the Corn Plant began investigat

the sorbitol

stream. However, ADM discovered that gluconic acid present in

the process

forms

a

complex with nickel, which

it from coming out of solution. While that problem

could be solved by oxidizing the organ

ozone

and

hydrogen per

prior to the precipitation,

of extreme amounts of

26

---

additional

them

Over half of this waste is routed

directly to the WVVTP and cannot be readily

as

unable to provide any other options.

To learn more about the nickel losses in

the sorbitol process, ADM continued its

testing program throughout

the year. One of the consultants ADM involved

in this

project

identified a potential process change to reduce the nickel

through a combination

of water capture and redirection. A trial

of this option was completed in November 2008

positive results.

ADM has begun making the necessary changes

to implement the

option, w

make it infeasible.

ADM also opened a

dialog with the

Ives considerable

piping installations and modifications.

As noted

previously, the sorbitol process is not the only nickel source

in the Corn

Plant: the incoming corn also contains significant

amounts of nickel and zinc. Testing

s, the resulting starch slurry contains nickel.

aterial for many of the downstream

value-added

products, including various sweeteners.

After

change system. As a resu

treated.

about

50 percent of the nickel to precipitate and 85 percent of the zinc,

sting has shown that raising the

pH of the other half of the waste

Id then be removed from the waste stream. Unfortun

uses approximately 3 million pounds

of 35 percent hydrochloric acid a month in

stream,

it would require millions of pounds of sodium hydroxide (which

also contains

nickel) or some other base to raise

the pH of this waste material to 10 for the precipitation

ecipitation option does not appear to be viable.

27

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

ber 2008, Illinois EPA made two suggestions for further

northern

First, it directed

o a nickel-catalyzed hydrogenation

facility in

linois as a possible source of expertise regarding

nickel removal. AD

contacted them and learned that their nickel removal technique is high pH precipitation.

because of their feedstock, they

do not have a problem with nickel -gluconate

complexing. As a result, their treatment system is not transferable

to

ADM's

processes.

Second, Illinois EPA suggested investigating electrocoagulation,

which ADM had not

done.

Samples were sent to an Oregon company for electrocoagulat

nation. Th

tive for nickel and

iekel was confirmed

t electrode

The Oregon company

explanation for t

ADM's East and

a

bean Process

gnificant po

gnificant nickel

atalyst

ping practices were implemented in the spring of 2008,

has been inconsistent, and ADM continues to investigate handling

However,

Processing Plant continues to work with outside contractors and vendors to identify any

other potent

s.

The East Soybean Processing Plant is single largest contributor of nickel in

M's effluent, and all the nickel

is from

the soybeans

processed.

Sampling

at

the East

28

---

Soybean Processing

Plant has identified four primary

streams containing nickel.

One of

the four

streams, which is also the lowest

flow, contains roughly

half the nickel in the

ast Soybean Processing

is effluent. The East

Soybean Processing Plant is

attempting

to locate a feed or fertilizer

outlet for this wastewater

stream. Further, ADM

Research is assisting the East

Soybean Processing Plant in investigating

any process

nges or unique

nickel removal options

that could be viable for the remaining

three

streams.

Formation

in Anaerobic System

In the spring of 2007, ADM

started up a new anaerobic wastewater

treatment

series with its ex

of the solids and `

ition to improved

owed solids

excess

solids through the

obit

Insoluble

in the sludge. Some o

nto the

aerobic system. This aerobic/anaerobic

sludge is

"wasted" into

the effluent to control the solids in the system. Through

sampling and

the soluble nickel component

this sludge alone, even

is greater than ADM's proposed limit

while the insoluble

rom the sludge could cause the

ded based on the current rate

of

solids "wasting."

iries regarding

the mechanics of metal sulfide formation in

anaerobic systems and has

sought assistance from ADM Research

and CE Betz Company

29

---

to address

this source of metals.

ADM has learned that

the nickel sulfide formation

mechanism cannot be forced

to a higher degree

of precipitation without raising

operating

pH to a

level which would negate

chemical oxygen dema

have gas formation.

ADM continues to investigate various

combin

reduction

options that have

shown the potentia

eneficial

of technologies

and source

help reduce

the nickel and zinc.

part of this ongoing

investigation, capital and operating

costs associated

with each

technology are being developed.

In addition to cost and technical

feasibility, secondary

higher likelihood

of

success also entail significant

costs and have secondary negative environmental

impacts.

s/Process

Changes ADM Has Implemented

or

Determined

Infeasible

In summary,

to date, ADM has either implemented

the following

technologies/process changes or

dete

viable alternatives

to the nickel catalyst used in two

processes.

d product quality

issues, no other catalysts

etermined to be viable.

Nickel - Ion Exchange

Followed

bv

Nickel Electroplating -

d multiple technical issues

during bench-top testing of

samples, along with the fact that non-food

grade chelating resins

would

be necessary. The option was determined

to not be

lly feasible.

Use of non-food grade chelating re

grade IX waste is acceptable,

but would yield far too low

a nickel

concentration to make electroplating feasible.

- Hick pH Precipitation for

Sorbitol Process - Tests

conducted to determine feasibility

of

precipitating

the nickel were

ineffective

due to a gluconate nickel complex

which prevents

precipitation.

3 0

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

ests showed

only moderate precipitation

efficiency due to the already

low

nickel

concentration. Additionally,

significant quantities of

chemicals

would be required, which makes

the technology

infeasible.

Nickel

- Ooeration Changes - ADM modified

the Sorbitol ion

exchange regeneration

rinse sequence to reduce

nickel discharged

to the WWTP.

6.

Zinc

- Cooling Tower Water Treatment Program

- In the summer

of 2008, ADM

implemented an alternative program at

the Corn

d the BioProducts Plant

that does not contain zinc in the

chemicals.

No other facilities at ADM's Decatur

Complex were

- BioProducts Cooling owe r - In

the fall of 2008, ADM

As set

implemented

a higher pH program to

tower.

leachin from the

inc-based

treatment program.

1. The option was

1 removal

at the al

ion in ADM waste streams.

to shut down much of its Decatur Complex. Moreover, the

District cannot cease

lant, which

provides treatment of domestic and industrial

wastewater

for the City of Decatur, the Villages of Forsyth and Mt. Zion,

and for

ur metropolitan area. ADM also cannot

cease operations

at its Decatur Complex wi

The Distri

2009, unt

requesting

tion

of the local economy.

allowed additional

time, i.e., from July 1,

30,

2014,

to continue its study of all possible compli,

31

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

which may

(OR UNRE

proposes

the compliance plan set forth in Section

VI below.

V.

SONABLE HARDSHIP

Prior to reissuance

of the District's NPDES permit in

2007, the District operated

under a series of permits with no effluent

lim

prior NPDES

permit reissuance in 20

andards adopted by the Board.

istrict's discharge concentration

was, and continues to be, well

below that value. The 2007

reissuance incorporated water quality based

limits based on

the new water qual

rrent NPDES permit effluent li

in

Section 302.208(e

uded in the NPDE

permit, would

1

relief During

this time, the District

for nickel or zinc. At the time of the

1, the water quality standard

for both

the general

use water quality

, according to the compliance schedule

and unreasonable hardship

on

below and which are reflected in the District's permit,

have had

Illinois

EPA, in support of its proposed revised standards in

2001 through 2002,

advised the

are o

have problems complying with the new

water quality standards (which included new

water

quality standards for nickel and zinc). Thus, neither the District nor ADM

knew at

that

i

32

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

lemaking

entitled In the Matter of: Water Quality Triennial

Review:

Amendments to 35

. Code 302.105, 302.208(640,

302.504(a),

302.575 d,3309.141(h), and

Proposed 35 Ill. Ad

d zinc).

304.120

and 309.157, R02-11, Illinois EPA, in part, proposed

to amend the Board's

water quality standards for nickel

and zinc as part of its "triennial water quality standards

review." Illinois

EPA Statement of Reasons, In the Matter of. Water Quality

Triennial

o 35 111. Adm. Code 302.105, 3 02.2

08(e

0 9.141(h); and Proposed 35 1. Adm. Code 30.1.267, 301.313,

301.413,

.267301.313, 301.413,

3 0 2 .504

3

04.120 and 309.157, R02-11 (November 7, 2001). Illinois

water quality sta

protective

of aquatic life.

c to

reflect

the values that were considered

only the dissolved fraction

of metals is toxic to aquatic life, Illinois EPA proposed

Id. During the January 29, 2002

91

d ischargers

that

would

have problems com

(which included new water quality standards for nic

the Matter

302.105, 302.208(e)-(2),

,302.504(a),

302.575(

04.120

Second, the District

Illinois EPA re

The District

not

aware of any

sed the

dards

. Code

41(h), and Proposed 35 Ill. Adm.

02-11 at 99-100 (January 29,

tings and numerous discussions

33

I llinois EPA on

October 30,

2007,

to

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

a

situation regar

ickel

and zinc

During that

meeting,

Illinois EPA advised the District that

a

request

to extend the compliance

schedule in the permit

was premature, but could be considered at

a later date.

the District and AD

llinois

dition,

on December

4, 2008. During that meeting,

Illinois EPA also recommended

that the District submit an application to modify its

o extend the compliance schedule contained

therein.

modification request application to

inois

EPA on January 12, 2009, a copy of which is attached hereto

as Exhibit 1. The

ed supplemental information

to Illinois EPA on April 3, 2009. See

Exhibit

J. On May S, 2009, Illinois EPA posted for public notice

on

its website

a draft

posed

for nickel and zinc from two years to three years.

As of the date of the

issued by Illinois EPA. While the Distri

ified

it

has not been

fficient time for a ruling on this request

for variance.

ween Illinois EPA, the District

nce w

according to the schedule also contained in

the p

ible while continuing

to operate both facilities until ADM discovered, in mid-

2008, that incoming grain was responsible for significant amounts of nickel in the

effluent sent to t

Upon

this

discovery, the

District

and ADM provided Illinois

34

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

ilable

data and a summary of the issue

as part of the District's Third Interim

Report.

See Exhibit F. In light of this information,

Illinois EPA, the District

and ADM

agreed that se

riance

would also be appropriate in

this situation. Because of the

complexity of

the issues at hand, it has taken time

for the D

coordi

with Illinois EPA and to prepare

this Petition. On April 28, 2008,

the District provided a

draft of this Petit

Illinois EPA for its review.

4n May 14, 2009, the District, AD

and

Illinois EPA met to discuss the same.

Further, the District

and

ve spe

to determine the source of the nickel

and zinc discharges, and

estigating methods to decrease

and/or treat those discharge amounts.

The Distr

arts, but they need more

time than is provided by the

the

current NPDES permit (and even more than

the

time.

The cost to

the Distric

s, thus creating an unreasonable

har

100

cubic feet of wastewater discharged, applicabl

1,

commercial and industrial users. The estimated

capital cost alone of

$100,000,000 for reverse osmosis

treatment at the District would result in an additional

et or a 69

operating costs or brine disposal.

The cost to ADM

of the District

hardship on ADM. Whi

in the proposed

modified NPDES permit). Therefore,

the Distri

increase in user charge

without considering

of time and

to comply also imposes

an unreasonable

ues to evaluate

a combination of treatment

35

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

schemes (including

rerouting a steam condensate,

ion exchange, evaporation

and sale as

izer, ultra-filter/reverse

osmosis and

of filtered

material to landfill),

not

yet been able to identify a treatment

plan that is both technically feasible

and

economically reasonable. In

any case, however, design, p

d

start-up would take a minimum of two years

and would entail very large

operating costs. Again, ADM

also cannot cease operations

at its Decatur

Complex without serious

disruption of the local economy.

When discussing arbitrary or unreason

cases, the Boar

Board to dete

cliate compliance

lied

upon the following caselaw:

(415

ILLS 5/35(a)) (11

r egulations designe

any variance is to

be gra

135

111. App. 3d 343,481 N

ions water

variance

petitioner has presented adequate

proo

petitioner to show that

its claimed

nterest in attaining compliance with

owbrook Motel v. IPCB,

a showing can the claimed

hardship rise to the le

unreasonable hardship.

and"s regulations and compliance is

ritual

individual polluter. (Monsanto

Co. v. IPCB, 67

Accordingly, except

is required, as a condition

to

o a plan which is reasonably calculated to

e.

Station v.

. 97-131

at 4-5 (As Corrected June 23, 1997); see also

City of Moline v.

9 (December 19,

1996).

36

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

Therefore, as

set forth above, requiring the District

to

1

S

p ermit effluent limits

for nickel and zinc, which

are based upon the general

use water

ndards formulae provided

for in Section 302.208(e), according

to the

compliance schedule

contained in the current NPDES

permit (or in the proposed

modified NPDES permit), would impose

an arbitrary and unreasonable

hardship on the

on A

for the discuss

VI. COME

potentially on the local economy.

Please see Section V11 below

on regarding the environmental

impact of the variance sought

herein.

LIANCE

PLAN AND SUGGESTED

CONDITIONS

using the following plan

to achieve compliance with nickel

and zinc permit limits by the

end of the requested five-year variance

term, and suggests

111. Admin. Code §

111. Admin.

Code § 304.105 as those sections

1, 2014.

tinue plant

for nickel and zinc, along

with

monitoring

upstream and

downstream of the discharge in the Sangamon

River. Cu

ing for nickel and zinc are performed

twice monthly.

Downstream monitoring has

recently been modified to include four

2007. The Distric

the current

ation

tly acquired an

ing expanded

37

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

4.

Industrial monitoring for nickel

and zinc, currently performed

rly at ADM

and Tate & Lyle and semi-annually

at other

ial users that could

discharge nickel and zinc, has

been

increased

to twice monthly at ADM

and Tate & Lyle.

The District will continue

refinement of pretreatment local

limits

for nickel and zinc necessary

to meet its permit limits, and

will

continue work with ADM and Tate

& Lyle on options for

achieving

compliance with local limits. Ongoing verification

monitoring will be

conducted to confirm that cooling tower

treatment program

ill be undertaking several parallel paths to review

The

District will remain

regarding their

ongoing wo

vings could be

control options and will continue

to meet with ADM

least semiannually and exchange information,

and meet more

frequently as needed.

ill explore the possible

development of stream flow-

based compliance options. As noted above, the District's

discharge does not result

in exceedences of the water quality

standard except very low flow

conditions in the Sangamon River.

A flow-based permit limit would not avoid

the capital cost of

tailed for nickel

treatment, for example, but

flows.

The District will conti

information and bossi

my operated when

,essary zinc reductions.

act

with ADM personnel

ith identifying nickel sources

and

has done some

ible options including

a Water Effect Ratio

calculation and application of a Biotic Ligand

Model. Exploration

of other possibilities such as a site-specific water quality standard

will continue.

Over the course of the first two years

of

the

variance, the District

additional technologies and

compliance strategies. The

gies ultimately used for compliance

may be closely tied to

the compliance strategy to ensure the most practical solution is

d. That is,

technologies will be evaluated based on

rategies involving

both individual process streams

flows. Thus, even if the treatment

of an

ars economically reasonable, if it will not be

to achieve

overall compliance, expenditures on such

38

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

treatment could be

wasted if ADM were required to provide

treatment of the effluent flows.

Thus, neither the District nor

ADM will be in a position to properly evaluate

the cost-

ness

of an overall compliance strategy

have

been evaluated individually.

The following

schedule is a general guide to the key tasks

that

must be completed to determine

the compliance strategy to be

Board should note

that the technologi

forth

below for evaluation are all of the technologies

of which the

ntly aware. Both the District and

will continue to explore

the potential for other technologies and

developments in technologies already evaluated

throughout the

first three

years o -

costs, reliability, and pilot testing as

ADM

will complete technical and economic

feasibility reviews for

the following control

technologies. The reviews will include

determination of technical feasibility, capital and

itation process.

duimmine feasibility and

cunfma i:ý:sults.

chemical company

prietary Precipitation Proces

1- Chemical Precipitation Process

Carbamates or

Organic Sulfides -

begun evaluation of these chemic

provided by GE Betz Company.

further evaluate. Concurrently,

confidentiality agreements and contracts to

low concentration precipitation

Work is underway to complete

experts for

metals

have identified chemi

Exchange Resin -

s of

resins

from the

itable

2009-2010

39

---

from a quality perspective. Initial tests

indicated

there is suitable capacity to

provide effective nickel reductions.

The

difference between use of spent ion

exchange resin and the ion exchange process

ined to be infeasible is

that the spent resin would not

be

regenerated

which saves significant chemical and energy

costs.

1 and Zinc SQybean Process Stream

for sale of this product as

isms. The purpose

additive. Installation is dependent on

funding

and procurement of customers.

Zinc - BioProducts Process

Stream

Alternative

- ADM is revi

equipment

to thicken a

for use as

and operating

costs are prohibitive

iosis

-

ADM

a

i()n

o

osmosis. Review has

concluded that the technology will work to

reduce both nickel and zinc. However,

he volume of wastewater to be

treated. Continued evaluation of this option

will occur in

combination with other

1

options,

led

concerning a device which breaks

Discussions are

haracteristics of the

its carryover and thus

40

---

el an

to the District.

1

contacted by

a company which has

the

potential to purchase

all of ADM's sludge.

Testing

of the sludge is scheduled

at the

company's

site. This would

bring AD

into zinc compliance

and close the gap

on

nickel

compliance.

ii.

The

District will complete

the following tasks

on a

parallel

track to ADM's technology

reviews. The

outcome of these

tasks may impact the

feas

the various options

being considered and will

be

valuable in reviewing the

ultimate feasibility of

various control

combinations.

dischargers

eatment limi

discharge

numbers, and

inc - Sludge -

ADM has been

luble/insoluble

ratio of

SlU

how much

of the

the pretreatment limits

should be expressed

as total or soluble limits.

1 strategies based

on one or

more of the feasible

technologies. Develop flow

1 options, pros and cons,

and operating costs.

division managers.

41

---

10.

The District proposes the following time schedule for achieving

compliance

with

permit limits for

nickel

and

zinc:

January

1,

2010

Submit an interim report to Illinois

EPA describing

progress on eacl

the elements

of

the

compliance plan

above.

July 1, 2010

Submit interim

report,

as

above.

nterim report, as

above.

January 1, 2011

rt, as above.

January

1, 2012

im

report, as above.

Submit a final compliance plan to

Illinois

EPA containing nickel and

ontrols, treatment technologies,

proposed

site-specific water

qua

standards that will achieve

compliance with permit limits.

proposed pe

January

1, 2013

-

Submit interim report, as above.

July 1, 2013

January

1, 2014

July 1, 2014

merim report, as above.

Achieve compliance with nickel

it limits.

g the requested variance would not change any existing environmental or

pact of the District's discharge to the Sangamon River as it has existed

The

District

is not requesting that it be allowed to increa

of nickel and zinc into the Sangamon River.

Instead,

the

District

is as

42

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

allowed

to continue its existing

discharges of these parameters

while it investigates

and

identifies compliance

options.

The

overall

researchers from

of the discharge

on water quality

has been studied

by

ern Illinois University from 1998

to the present. These

biological

slightly improved

water quality

conditions downstream

of

as compared

to upstream, based

on calculations

of the

studies continue

to docum

the District's discharge poin

Macroinvertebrate

Biotic

i

D istrict discharges

Integrity.

The segment of

for pollutants

other than

nickel and zinc; however,

based on the fish community

metrics, there

Fischer and C. Pede

angamon

River segment in the last

20 years. See R.

ois University, Biotic

Assessment of Water Quality

Receiving

Effluent from the

Sanitary District of

attached hereto

a

o R.

Fischer and C. Pede

( July 2008) ,

11 and upstream flows. In the absence

of very dry weather,

the

water quality

standard is regularly achieved

as demonstrated by downstrea

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

environmental impact in recent

water variance

cases, the Board

has relied upon

the following caselaw:

ding to grant

or deny a variance petition,

the Board is required

to balance the petitioner's

hardship in complying with Board

regulations

against

the impact that the requested

variance will have on

the

environment.

See Monsanto Co. v. PCB,

67111. 2d 276, 292, 367

N.E.2d

684, 691 (1977).

Petitioner must establish that

the hardship it would face

from denial of its variance request

would outweigh any

injury to the public

or the environment

from granting the relief,

and "[o]nly if the hardship

outweighs the injury

does the evidence rise to

the level of an arbitrary

or

unreasonable hardship."

Marathon Oil Co. v. EPA, 242111.

App. 3d 200,

206, 610 N.E.

2d 789, 793 (5th Dist. 1993).

See Citgo Petroleum Corporation

and PDV Midwest Refin

CB

2008); see also,

Therefore, as set forth

above, gra

ct of the D strict'

the

July 1, 2014. The District,

however, does not expect

the Board to make its decision in

this matter before the

herefore, the District is see

retroactive variance.

However, if Illinois EPA issues

the modified

rmit

with

the extended compliance date, the District

will seek a variance that will,

begin on July 1,

2010, and end on July 1, 2014.

If that is the case, the District

would not need the

variance

to apply retroactively.

. Illinois EPA,

io

pril

21, 2005).

of

change

44

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

The Board has previously considered numerous

requests for retroactive va

and has stated

the

following

w

11 not apply retroactive starting dates for variances

where the

. . The Board has also provided retroactive

procedural delay that was not the petitioner's fault or was the

fusion over federal

regulations....

Another reason for not applying a retroactive

starting date is if the

petitioner's hardship is self-imposed as a result of the

petitioner's

inactivity or faulty decision-making.... The Board may grant a

retroactive

variance if the petitioner has diligently sought relief and has

made a good faith

effort

toward

achieving compliance with Board

tioner has filed late and the delay was the petitioner's fault....

of Canton v. Illinois EPA, PCB 02-42 (April 4, 2002). (Citations omitted.)

In this

ict a

l ance

jet's

faulty decision-making. In fact, since

even

it,

the

Distric

ith the nickel and zinc effluent li

arch of 2007, and continued through November 2007. The District

discovered, however, that the nickel and zinc limit issues were much more complex than

gnificant amounts of time and resources

ing to determine the source of the nickel and zinc discharges, and investiga

methods to decrease those discharge amounts. Th

more

fully evaluate the issues and find

adequate

solutions.

Finally,

the District

has had

several meetings and

numerous

discussions with

ois EPA regarding the best means to address the situation regarding the District's

45

---

nickel and zinc

limits. The District met with Illinois EPA

on October 30, 2007, to

apprise

Illinois EPA. of the situation regarding

the nickel and zinc limits. During that

meeting, Illinois EPA advised

the District that a request to extend the pe

schedule was

pre

ompliance

be considered at a later

date. In addition, the District

met with Illinois EPA on December

4, 2008. During that meeting, Illinois

so

recommended

that the District submit an application

to m

d the compliance schedule

contained therein. The District submitted its

permit modification

request application to Illinois EPA on

January 12, 2009.

so submitted supplemental information

to Illinois EPA on

years to three

years. As of the date

roposed to extend the schedule

of compliance for nickel and zinc from two

odified NPDES permit for

the

District.

See Exhibit

, 2009, Illinois EPA posted for public notice

on

this Pet

late 2008, discussions continued between Illinois

best means to address the District's nickel

and zinc issues. The

iance with the nickel limit in the

ossible while continuing

to operate both facilities until

permit, according to the schedule also contained

in the permit, would

2008,

that incoming grain was responsible fo

ficant

amounts o

d, in mid-

District and ADM provided Illinois

ilable

data and a summary of the issue as part of its Thi

ibit F. In light of this information, Illinois

EPA, the District and ADM agreed

46

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

Id

also be appropriate

in this situation. Because of the

complexity

of the issues at hand, it has taken time for the District

and ADM to coordinate

with Illinois

using a significant portion of its resources

on the distribution of the federal stimulus

funds, and as a result, has not been able to commit as many resources

as needed for this

project. On April 28, 2408, the District

provided a draft of this Petition to Illinois EPA

view. On May 14, 2009, the District, ADM and Illinois EPA

met to discuss the

same.

should grant the District a partially retroactive variance in

this matter.

ix.

d to prepare this Petition. In

addition, Illinois EPA has recently been

is resnonsible for

that

immediate

compliance

415

/35(a). The

however, only to the

with applicable federal law. See 415 ILCS 5/

of the Board rules states the following

with regard to

consistency with

ces from the Board's water

(b) All petitions

for variances from Title III of the Act, from 35 Ill.

ubtitle

C, Ch. I "Water Pollution", or fro

pollution related requirements of any other Title of the Act

or

Chapter of the Board's regulations, must indicate whether the

47

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

-d may grant the relic

ant to Section 208 of the

CWA (33 USC 1288).

35 111. Admin. Code § 104.208(b).

The

Board

a number of cases, pursuant

take such action. See e.

L.L.C. v. 111

scent with

the Clean

USEPA effluent guidelines and

lations, or any area-wide waste

treatment management plan approved

by the Administrator of

standards, any other feder

(CWA) (33

iously granted variances from State water

est Refining,

05-85 (April 21, 2005) (which granted

a variance from the

Board's general use

and secondary contact water

solids, 35 111.

i Code §§ 302.208(8) and 302.407); Citgo Petroleum

Corporation

linois v. Illinoi

06-137 (September 7, 2006) (which granted a variance from the Board's

i icral use water quality standard for

dissolved oxygen,

ation,

the instant vari

law.

Pursuant to 35 111. Adm

X1.

ition.

of this Pet

ct waives its right to a

ict and ADM are filing affidav

ltaneously

herewith.

Please see the

Affidavit

of

Timothy

48

ids in

authority and discretion,

consistent with federal law, to

no app

§ 302.206).

that preclude

iance is consistent wi

which is filed on

---

behalf of the District,

and the Affidavit of Mahlon Kaloupek,

which is filed on behalf of

X1T.

CONCLUSION

This Petition satisfies the requirements

of

Part

104 of the Board rules, in

describes the regulations from which the

variance is sought; descri

nature

of the

s activity that is the subject of the proposed variance;

describes why compliance

with the regulations cannot be achieved by the

compliance date; describes the efforts that

would

be

necessary

for the District to a

mediate compliance

with the

ibes why immediate compliance with

the regulation would impose an

arbitrary or unreasonable

hards

describes the condit

includes a detailed description of a compliance plan;

oses a beginning and ending date for

law; includes affidavits

veri

In

summary, the District i

allow it more time to continue its eva

ion

of adequate

solutions

regarding

its nickel and zinc discharges. The District's variance request stems

ickel and zinc water quality standards,

anticipated to adversely impact

any Illinois dischargers.

However, when the Distric

effluent limi s for nickel an

of the da

ermit was renewed, Illinois EPA imposed

new

et the more stringent

standards.

ains the water within Lake Decatur for

the City

a hearing in this matter,

ing the Board to grant it a five-year variance to

of Decatur's water supply, during dry weather, there

are times when there may be no

49

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

discharge

downstream to the Sangamon River into

which the District discharges. As

a

result, the District could not be granted

a mixing zone, and the District's

effluent limits

directly reflect the

water qu

Even so, given that the only intentional

uses of nickel and zinc at ADM, one

of

most significant industrial users (and a significant

contributor to nickel and

zinc loading),

were as zinc-containing cooling

tower treatment chemicals and nickel

catalysts, the D trict

and AD

substitutes

for those chemicals. 0

while ADM's

use of zinc has been eliminated,

ADM has been unable to find a substitute for

kel catalyst, and it has had limite

through operational and housekeeping

measures.

More importantly, howeve

ially believed that the limits could be met

by

finding

come into

its Decatur Complex

through the corn and soybeans it processes, such that the

presence

zinc is not limited to a few wastewater streams, thereby

greatly increasing

and zinc in its discharge and to investigate compliance

options, the District could

not de

onstruct and commence operation of any adequate

liance

schedule set forth in its NPDES

1

lso could not design, permit,

operation of any adequate treatment

system in accordance with

the compliance schedule.

r ,

a nd the existing aquatic life will not be adversely

impacted

through the granting of this variance since the amount

of nickel and zinc to be discharged

50

---

would not increase

beyond historical levels.

This variance is necessary

for the District to

continue its evaluation

and investigation of compliance

options.

tioner, the Sanitary

District of Decatur, respectfully

requests

that the

Board grant a variance from the

water quality standards for

nickel and zinc, as set

forth in Section 302.208(e),

and from the

through

Section 304.105. In additio

ould otherwise

be imposed

t of Decatur

respectfully

requests the Board to order

the Illinois EPA, pursuant

to Section 309.184, to modify the

ecatur's NPDES cons

Petition.

stmt

with the variance requested

in this

By:

_/s/Katherine

D. I-Iodge

One of Its Attorneys

C . I1url;ins

3150 Roland

A%

Id,

Post Office Box 57'76

IT R

s 1D0D:001[Fil/Petition for Variance-

nickel and z

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL BOARD

SANH ARY DISTRICT OF

)

Df-CATLR,

)

Petitioner,

)

v.

)

PC13

_

_

1

(Variance

-- Water)

If

H

N OI

S FNVIRONMENTAL

PRur rCTIO N AGENCY.

Respondent.

}

AFFIDAVIT OF MAHLON

1KALOUPEK

I. Mahlon

Kaloupek, being first duly sworn on

oath, depose and state

as

follows:

I .

I

am currently employed as the Plant Advisor

at Archer Daniels Midland

Company ("ADM") in Decatur. Illinois.

a position which I have held

since !Flay 2001.

Prior to my employment

as Plant Advisor, I held the follow ing

positions at ADM:

Production Support

Chemist from July 1974 to July 1475:

Assistant Quality

Control

I.aboratory

Manager from July 1975 to

March 1977: and Plant Technical

Superintendent

from 'March 19%7 tea play 2001.

1 receivLA a Bachelor

of Science in Chemistry

from Coe

College in Cedar Rapids.

Iowa.

I

p

articipated i

n the preparation o f

t

he Petition

fir V ariance

dated

June 15.

2 009, to the extent

it discusses A DNI.

3 .

1 have read the

Petition fir Variance

dated June 15, 2009,

and based upon

my

personal

knowledge

and belief. the

facts stated therein with regard

to ADM are

true

and correct.

FURTHER

AFFIANI

SAYETH RIOT.

1111\

Subscribed and sworn

to before tic

this

,`

day

of Jyne. 2009.,

I

'it)()!? F)(!1 1 di :flid,ttH

orMahlon Keroupek

+ ++++"

....

a "t ++++++++*+

+ "OFFICIAL SEAL" +

Mahlon Kaloupek

+

DAWN M L AZELL-J

ACKSON

+

+

NOTARY

PUBLIC,

STATE

OF ILLINOIS +

+ MY cobvissic; EXPIRES 08.22.2010

+

+ t+ý+++.

,.* t4+*+.*"+++

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

SANITA

OF

DECATUR,

)

)

Petitioner,

)

P

CB

(Variance - Water)

OIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

)

MOTHY R. KLUGE

1, Timothy R. Kluge, being first duly sworn on oath, depose and state as follows:

1 .

I am currently emp

o f Decatur ("District") in Dec

Prior to July 2007,1 was employed by the Illino

tary Distric

July

2007.

ental Protection Agency for

ars, where I held various positions, including Field Opera

trial Permit Unit Manager and field engineer, all within the

S cience in Chemical

n-Urbana and a Masters of Science

I participated in

the

pre

it discusses the D

3.

1 have read the Petit

I llinois University at

my personal knowledge and belief, the facts stated therein with regard to the District are

true and correct.

Subscribed and sworn to before me

+++++++++++++++++++....

this 15th day of June, 2009.

+

"OFFICIAL

SEAL"

+

+

MARLA

K DURST

+++++++i

+

+

MY

NOTARY

COMMISSION

Puguc,

++

++++

EXPIRES

STATE

++++++++f.

OF

4713.2411

auNOls

+

+

+

SL)0D:001/Fil/Affidavit of Tim Kluge

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *

---

I, Katherin

attached ENTRY

SCE OF LAUREN C. LURKINS, PETIT

TE OF SERVICE

Hodge, the undersigned, hereby

certify that I have served the

attached exhibits, AFFIDAVIT

OF

MAHLON

Assistant

Clerk of the Board

ois Pollution Control Board

Chicago, Illinois

0

reet,

Suite 11-500

ail on June 15, 2009; and upon:

ronmental Protection Agency

J 1'R V (1F

LOUPEK and AFFIDAVIT

OF

S DCJD:001/Fil/N0F-C0S - Petiti

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, June 15, 2009

* * * * * PCB 2009-125 * * * * *