STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

MID-STATES STEEL & WIRE, )

JACKSONVILLE MILL, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 76-1253

)

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIROMENTAL ) REGULATION, STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, G. Steven Pfeiffer, held a public hearing in this case on November 16, 1976, in Jacksonville, Florida.

The following appearances were entered: Gene A. Petersen of the firm DAVIS & MORGAN, Peoria, Illinois, for the Petitioner, Mid-States Steel & Wire, Jacksonville Mill; and J. D. Boone Kuersteiner, Tallahassee, Florida, for the Respondent, Department of Environmental Regulation.

By letter dated June 17, 1976, Mid-States Steel & Wire Division of Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc. ("Petitioner" hereafter) submitted an application to the Department of Environmental Regulation for a variance from the wastewater discharge requirements of the State of Florida. A copy of the application was received in evidence as a part of Hearing Officer's Exhibit 1. In accordance with Florida Statutes 120.57(1)(b)(3), the Department of Environmental Regulation requested that a hearing officer from the Division of Administrative Hearings conduct the hearing (Hearing Officer's Exhibit 1). The final hearing was scheduled by notice dated August 6, 1976, as modified by an amended notice entered October 26, 1976 (Hearing Officer's Exhibits 2 and 4). Notice of the hearing was published in the Florida Times Union (Hearing Officer's Exhibit 3, Petitioner's Exhibit 1).

At the hearing the Petitioner moved to modify certain provisions of the application for variance. The motion was granted, and the application was amended as follows: On page 3 of the application, paragraph G, subparagraph 1, line 2, "1.11 ft 3/sec." is amended to read ".046 ft 3/sec"; on line 4, ".00034 mg/1" is amended to read ".000014 mg/1"; on line 5, "1.2955" is amended to read "1/71,300"; on line 7, ".00010 mg/1" is amended to read ".0000041 mg/1"; on line 9, ".00024 mg/1" is amended to read ".000001 mg/1"; and on page 4, in the last subparagraph of subparagraph 2, ".05034 mg/1" is amended to read ".050014 mg/1". Petitioner also moved to strike subparagraph 5 on page 5 of the request. This motion was also granted.

The Petitioner called the following witnesses: Ronald Richardson, an environmental coordinator employed by the Petitioner; Stephen Schwartz, employed by Keystone Consolidated Industries, the Petitioner's parent corporation, as

manager of environmental engineering; and Phil E. Laney, a chemical engineer employed by the firm Reynolds, Smith, and Hills. The Resoondent called Dr. George J. Horvath, an environmental specialist employed by the Respondent, as its only witness. Members of the public at large were invited to speak at the hearing, but none appeared. Hearing Officer's Exhibits 1-4, Petitioner's Exhibits 1-4, and Respondent's Exhibits 1 and 2 were received into evidence at the hearing. The parties have submitted Proposed Findings of Fact and Proposed Orders.

The parties agree that the variance requested by the Petitioner should be granted. The Proposed Findings of Fact and Proposed Orders submitted by the parties do not differ to any significant extent. The following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Order follows the language proposed by the parties where the parties do not disagree, and resolve the minor disagreements that exist.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Petitioner operates a plant which manufactures wire and wire products located at the foot of Florida Street, Jacksonville, Florida adjacent to the St. Johns River.

   
   

2. Petitioner's manufacturing operations include "pickling" (acid cleaning) of raw materials which generates a spent solution containing sulphuric acid and ferrous sulphate.

   
   

3. Petitioner has requested a variance from Rule 17-3.05(2)(p) of the Florida Administrative Code which specifies a water quality standard of not exceeding .3 mg/1 of iron, which standard, as applied to the Petitioner in this instance, would require that Petitioner's effluent not contain in excess of .3 mg/1.

   
   

4. Petitioner proposed-to construct a treatment system for its effluent which includes alkaline neutralization with continuous pH control, followed by the addition of an ionic polymer to enhance settling. Following polymer addition, settling and clarification will take place in a clarifier. The overflow from the clarifier will flow to a multimedia granular filter and thence to a pH adjustment station and thence to a continuous flow monitoring and sampling station and finally into the St. Johns River. The sludge that has settled to the bottom of the clarifier will be filtered by a cloth-media filter where it will be further de-watered such that the solids are discharged from the filter as a solid cake. The solid cake will be landfilled by an independent contractor. The above described treatment system represents at least the best practicable means known or available for the adequate control of iron in Petitioner's effluent.

   
   

5. Petitioner is seeking a variance for a period of five years from the date Petitioner's treatment system becomes

   operational.

   
   

6. Petitioner could suffer irreparable damage and harm if the variance were denied because no practicable technology is presently known or available which would reduce the iron in Petitioner's effluent to .3 mg/1.

   
   

7. By using the treatment system proposed, Petitioner can reduce iron in its effluent to 1 mg/1 and can achieve that level of treatment within eleven months after commencement of construction of the treatment system.

8. Since there is no other practicable means presently known or available for the removal of iron from Petitioner's effluent, Petitioner will be unable to reduce iron in its effluent to .3 mg/1 at any time during the presently foreseeable future.

   
   

9. No discernible disadvantages will result to residents or the environment in the affected area by the granting of Petitioner's variance request.

   
   

10. No evidence was presented at the hearing as to a weekly average of concentrations of iron which the Petitioner would be able to meet through its proposed system, and which would be appropriate and enforceable.

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

11. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties to this action, and over the subject matter.

    
    

12. Rule 17-3.05(2)(p) of the Rules of the Department of Environmental Regulation provides that concentrations of iron in effluent discharged into such bodies of water as the St. Johns River shall not exceed 0.30 mg/1. The Petitioner has established that it would not be able to achieve this level of discharge under presently existing technology, and that the best existing technology would permit effluent concentrations not exceeding one (1) mg/1 total iron as a monthly average, and three (3) mg/l total iron as a daily average.

    
    

13. The variance sought by the Petitioner should be granted for a period of five years and eleven months under such terms and conditions as would assure that the Petitioner will adhere to standards achievable under the best presently available technology, and will make use of better practicable treatment techniques if such techniques become available.

RECOMMENDATION

Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, RECOMMENDED:

That Petitioner's request for variance to discharge effluent containing iron from its Jacksonville, Florida plant into the St. Johns River in excess of the State of Florida iron standard specified in Rule 17-3.05(2)(p) of the Rules of the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, be granted subject to the following conditions:

1. The effluent limitations which shall apply during the period of the variance are:

   
   

   1. Iron in Mid-State's effluent is to be composed of ferrous hydroxide, Fe(OH)2, with only a trace of ferric hydroxide, Fe(OH)3.

   2. The iron portion of the effluent is to be mostly in the particulate phase with a small amount of dissolved ferrous hydroxide.

   3. The following effluent concentrations of total iron shall not be exceeded:

      Monthly average: one (1) mg/1 total iron Daily maximum: three(3) mg/1 total iron

      
      

2. The variance is granted for a period of five (5) years and eleven (11) months from the date that an approved construction permit is issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation for the treatment facility. In the event of development of better practicable treatment technology during the period of the variance, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation will provide reasonable notice of the later developed technology and propose a reasonable schedule for implementation of said treatment technology, at which time Mid-States will, subject to its right to obtain review of proposals by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, be obligated to make appropriate improvements in its waste treatment facility, as may be required of the steel wire process industry in Florida.

   
   

3. Mid States shall be required to establish a monitoring program for total iron in its effluent to be approved by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation. Data obtained by such an approved monitoring program shall be submitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation Subdistrict office on a routine basis.

RECOMMENDED this 24th day of January, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida.

G. STEVEN PFEIFFER, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675

COPIES FURNISHED:

Gene Petersen, Esquire

1125 First National Bank Building Peoria, Illinois 61602

J. D. Boone Kuersteiner, Esquire 2562 Executive Center Circle East Montgomery Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Docket for Case No: 76-001253

Orders for Case No: 76-001253