ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

April

4,

1974

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,

)

Home Laundry Division,

Petitioner,

)

PCB 74-24

I

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,)

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

 (by Dr. Odell)

I

On January 18,1974,

 Petitioner filed with this Board

I

a petition for variance to operate its synthetic enamel paint

system in its plant at 5660 West Taylor Street,

 Chicago,

I

Illinois,

 in excess of the applicable standards of Rule 205(f)

of

 the Illinois Air Pollution Regulations

 (Chapter Two) effective

December 31,

 1973.

 Petitioner seeks

 a variance to July

1,

 1974,

to allow it to develop with its suppliers an alternative formula-

tion for an exempt solvents program

 to replace the compliance

program previously approved by the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency

 (Agency)

 which prog~ramcannot be implemented

now due to the lack of supply of exempt solvents for its paint

formulation.

I

Petitioner manufactures washing machines and dryers.

I

Synthetic enamel paint is applied to washing machines and dryers

in a process comprising

a

 prime spray booth, electrostatic spray

booth, reinforcing booth, flash—off tunnel, and bake oven.

On March 12,

 1974,

 a Recommendation was received from the

Agency.

 Petitioner has an operating permit,

 I.D.

No.

 31600AZS,

which was issued by the Agency on August 16,

 1973.

 This permit

expires March 31,

 1974.

“Petitioner submitted

 a plan to bring its operation into

compliance with Rule 205(f)

 along with its application for an

I

operating permit.

 The compliance plan was undertaken to bring

under control photochemical solvent emissions from Petitioner’s

I

paint application process. The plan involved the substitution of

exempt solvents for photochemical solvents. Petitioner has been

I

unable to obtain the exempt solvents, specifically hexyl acetate,

isobutyl acetate, and butyl cellosolve. Because of

 the unavail—

ability of these components, Petitioner continues to use photo—

chemical solvents

 in its process.

uThe emissions of photochemically reactive organic materials

I

I

I

-2—

I

I

from Petitioner’s process are as follows:

I

Calculated

 Allowable

I

Prime booth

 14.3 lbs/hr

 8 lbs/hr

I

Electrostatic booth

 15.3 lbs/hr

 8 lbs/hr

Reinforcing booth

 29.4 lbs/hr

 8 lbs/hr

I

Flash-off tunnel

 41.5 lbs/hr

 8 lbs/hr

Bakeoven

 27.7 lbs/hr

 8 lbs/hr

“Other possible control methods have been considered by

Petitioner and rejected.

 An afterburner for fuel incineration

would require

 600,000 cubic feet of natural gas per day, based

on a 50% recovery.

 It would take from

 18 months to 2 years to

install.

 Carbon absorption would also take an estimated two

years to install and complete and it would be inefficient. Water-

I

based paints and hi-solids paints have not yet been developed to

the point where they meet Petitioner’s needs.

 Petitioner has

I

assigned its technical staff

 to work in coordination with its

suppliers and develop a paint having less than

 20 volumetric

I

percent organic material in accordance with Rule 205(f) (2) (D)

This is envisioned

 as a long—range project.

I

“Petitioner is presently working on the development of an

alternative formula for an exempt solvents program. Petitioner

has started shop trials to develop proper blends of exempt solvents

and exempt paints.

 Petitioner expects

 this program to be com-

I

pleted on or before July 1,

 1974.

“Petitioner is in compliance with Rule 203(a)

 and 203(b)

of

the Illinois Air Pollution Control Regulations.

I

“Petitioner’s facility is located in an area of heavy

I

industry.

 The Agency has received no citizen complaints.

“Petitioner has

 demonstrated that immediate compliance

I

would pose an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship,

 since the

exempt solvents it had planned to use are unavailable.”

Petitioner’s planned control program is more than adequate

I

to achieve compliance with Rule 205(f)

 and the timetable is

reasonable.

 We grant Petitioner’s variance to enable it to

I

develop an alternative paint formulation with exempt solvents.

The Federal Energy Office has established mandatory allocation

of petrochemical feedstocks

 to petrochemical producers

-—

 including

I

solvent manufacturers

—-

 in a quantity equal to 100 percent of the

producer’s current requirements

 (Fed.

 Reg. Vol.

 39, No.

 10, Part ~I,

I

Subpart 2llJ, January 15, 1974).

 Petitioner should utilize such

exempt solvents as they become available.

I

I

I

12—40

I

I

I

I

I

—3—

I

ORDER

I

Petitioner is hereby granted a variance from Rule 205(f)

of Chapter Two, Illinois Air Pollution Regulations,

 for the

period from the date of filing of the Petition in this matter

until July 1,

 1974,

 subject to the following conditions:

1.

 Petitioner shall immediately notify the Agency

if any deviation from the compliance timetable

occurs.

2.

 Petitioner shall submit a progress report on

I

June 1,

 1974,

to:

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

I

Division of Air Pollution Control

I

Control Program Coordinator

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield,

 Illinois 62706

This report shall contain the following information:

I

(a)

 Monthly amounts of exempt and non—exempt

I

solvent formulations used since the

beginning of this variance.

I

(b)

 Status of program to achieve compliance

with Rule 205(f)

 of Chapter

Two

 by July

1,

 1974.

3.

 Petitioner shall utilize as much exempt solvent

formulations as can be furnished by its suppliers.

I

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I

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

Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order was

adopted

 on the 4’~day of

____________,

 1974, by

 a vote of

a~fV)

~4/~

Christan L. Moff~~,Clerk

I

I

I

I

I

12—41

I

I