ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September 26, 1991
IN THE MATTER OF:
R90—1
TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS LIST
)
(Rulemaking)
(35 ILL. ADM. CODE 232)
)
PROPOSED RULE. SECOND FIRST NOTICE.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by J. C. Marlin):
Today the Board acts to send the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency’s (“Agency”) Second Amended Proposal of
Regulations, filed December 18, 1990, to Second First Notice
publication in the Illinois Register. The Second Amended
Proposal (“Sec. Am. Prop.”) is modified by. changes agreed to by
the Agency through post-hearing public comments, specifically the
Agency’s Public Comment (“PC”) No. 35 and as decided by the Board
in today’s Opinion and Order. This proposal is required by
Section 9.5 of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (“Act”),
Ill. Rev. Stat. 1990 Supp., ch. 111 1/2, par. 1009.5.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On January 2, 1990, the Board first received the Agency’s
Proposal with Statement of Reasons and accompanying Exhibits for
filing. At the Board meeting of January 11, 1990 the Board
directed the Hearing Officer and the Scientific/Technical Section
to assist the Agency in preparation of a more complete proposal
for refiling with the Board. On April 17, 1990, three months
after that Order, the Agency filed its Amended Proposal with
Amended Statement of Reasons and additional exhibits. On April
26, 1990 the Board sent the proposal to First Notice. The
proposal was published in the Illinois Register on June 8, 1990.
14 Ill. Reg. 8905 (June 8, 1990)
.
The period for adoption of a
final rule following this notice expired June 8, 1991.
Hearings
Following publication of the Amended Proposal, and prior to
receipt of the Second Amended Proposal, the Board held four days
of hearing regarding the proposed rules. The first of these
hearings on the Agency’s Amended Proposal took place on June 25
and 26, 1990 in Springfield, Illinois, at the Municipal Building.
At this hearing the Agency presented testimony and exhibits to
support the proposed regulations, answered pre—filed questions
from interested participants and also answered follow—up
questions by participants.
126—345
2
A second set of hearings occurred in Chicago, Illinois at
the State of Illinois Center on September 6 and 7, 1990. At
these hearings interested participants introduced testimony and
exhibits concerning the Agency’s proposed rules and answered pre-
filed and follow-up questions.
The Agency then amended its proposal for the second time by
filing its Second Amended Proposal of Regulations and Statement
of Reasons (“Sec. Am. Stat.”) on December 18, 1990. In order for
the Board and the affected public to fully consider these amended
regulations a fifth day of hearings was held on March 21, 1991 in
Chicago, Illinois. Following the hearing, the Hearing Officer
allowed public comments to be filed until June 26, 1991.1
Public Comments
During the public comment periods established for these
rules the Board received comments from the following individuals,
groups and organizations:
PC 1
Union Carbide Chemical and Plastics Co., Inc.
PC 2
State Representative Clem Balanoff
PC 3
Secretary of State, Administrative Code Division
PC 4
Waste Management, Inc.
PC 5
Department of Energy and Natural Resources
PC 6
The Alliance for Responsible CFC Policy
PC 7
Dr. William H. Hallenbeck
PC 8
Illinois Steel Group
PC 9
Amax, Inc. and Climax Metals Co.
PC 10
Halogenated Solvents Industry
PC 11
Amax, Inc. and Climax Metals Co.
PC 12
Illinois Steel Group
PC 13
Chemical Industry Council of Illinois
PC 14
Coalition for Consumer Rights
PC 15
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
PC 16
Industry Group
PC 17
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
PC 18
R.R. Donelly and Sons, Co.
PC 19
Herbert C. Bartling
PC 20
Industry Group
PC 21
Chlorobenzene Producers Association
PC 22
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
PC 23
Sierra Club of Illinois
PC 24
Illinois Steel Group, Illinois Environmental
Regulatory Group and Chemical Industry Council
PC 25
Dupont Chemical and Pigments
1The hearing transcript contains consecutive page numbers
for the June 25-26 and September 6-7 set of hearings. These are
referred to as “R.”. The March 21, 1991 hearing restarts at
page number 1. For clarity it is referred to as “2R._”.
126—346
3
PC 26
Carol Wechter
PC 27
Halogenated Solvents Industry
PC 28
Halogenated Solvents Industry
PC 29
Styrene Information and Research Center
PC 30
Chemical Industry Council of Illinois
PC 31
Chlorobenzene Producers Association
PC 32
Illinois Steel Group
PC 33
Illinois Chapter of the Sierra Club
PC 34
Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
PC 35
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
PC 36
Chlorobenzene Producers Association
PC 37
Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
PC 38
Ann Hausen
PC 39
Jeffrey Horvath
PC 40
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
PC 41
Citizens for A Better Environment
DISCUSSION
As stated previously, promulgation of the list of toxic air
contaminants is mandated by Section 9.5 of the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act. In order to facilitate
understanding of the Agency’s proposal, Section 9.5 is reprinted
in its entirety below:
Section 9.5
a. The General Assembly finds that:
1. The public health and welfare may be endangered by
the release of toxic contaminants into the air
which are carcinogenic, teratogenic, mutagenic or
otherwise injurious to humans or the environment.
2. Existing federal programs may not be adequate to
protect the public and the environment from low—
level, chronic exposure to toxic air contaminants.
b. It is the purpose of this Section to establish a State
program to identify and adopt regulations for toxic air
contaminants in Illinois.
c. The Board, pursuant to Title VII, shall promulgate a
list of toxic air contaminants. The list published
under this subsection shall include any air contaminant
which may cause or significantly contribute to an
increase in mortality or an increase in serious
irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness, or
may pose a significant threat to human health or the
environment. The Agency shall propose to the Board for
126—347
4
adoption a list which meets the requirement of this
subsection.
The provisions of subsection (b) of Section 27 of this Act
shall not apply to ruleniakings under this subsection (c).
d. The Board, pursuant to Title VII, shall adopt
regulations establishing a program to control toxic
contaminants released into the air in a manner that
protects the public health and the environment. The
Agency shall propose regulations to the Board for
adoption which meet the requirements of this
subsection.
e. The requirements of this Section shall not apply to the
following:
1. retail dry cleaning operations;
2. retail and noncommercial storage and handling of
motor fuels;
3. combustion processes using only commercial fuel,
including internal combustion engines;
4. incidental or minor sources including laboratory—
scale operations, and such other sources or
categories of sources which are determined by the
Board to be of minor significance.
Ill. Rev. Stat. 1990 Supp.,
Ch. 111 1/2, par. 1009.5
The Agency submitted to the Board a series of proposals to
satisfy the requirements of Section 9.5 of the Act. Under
Section 9.5 it is the Board’s duty to promulgate the list of
toxic air contaminants meeting this requirement. The Second
Amended Proposal of Regulations represents the Agency’s latest
proposal to satisfy these mandates.
The Second Amended Proposal of Regulations cannot be
understood without some knowledge of the structure and content of
its predecessors, the Amended Proposal of Regulations and the
Agency’s original proposal. After submitting its original
proposal the Agency held at least four meetings with concerned
citizens, industry and environmental groups for the purpose of
explaining the proposal and receiving comments. These meetings
took place January 4, 1990 in Rosemont, Illinois; and January 22,
23 and February 26, 1990 in Springfield, Illinois. In addition,
the Agency met with the staffs of the Secretary of State and
Joint Committee on Administrative Rules in order to clarify and
implement the drafting changes requested by the Board. These
meetings led to the Amended Proposal of Regulations filed April
17, 1990. (Amended Statement of Reasons, p.4)
126—348
5
Amended Proposal of Regulations
The Amended Proposal was divided into five Subparts, A
through E. Subpart A contained general provisions including a
description of the program, incorporations by reference and
definitions. Subpart B described the mechanism for determining a
toxic air contaminant. A toxic air contaminant, under the
Amended Proposal, was 1) emitted into the atmosphere in Illinois;
and 2) had a score greater than three according to the Agency’s
toxicity scoring protocol or 3) was classified as a carcinogen
according to the Agency’s classification mechanism. The Agency’s
Amended Proposal required it to propose to the Board for listing
all contaminants meeting these characteristics.
Subpart C of the Amended Proposal provided for specific
procedures to evaluate the characteristics of toxic air
contaminants. The proposal gave the mechanism for calculating
toxicity scores and identified carcinogen references and
corresponding classifications to determine these carcinogens.
Subpart D of that proposal required new emission sources to
identify toxic air contaminants and “potential toxic air
contaminants” (PTACs) that new emission sources emit or will
emit. New emission sources were defined. The Subpart set forth a
procedure to determine and list potential toxic air contaminants.
The Subpart did not require reporting by existing sources, a
change from the Agency’s original proposal.
Subpart E of the Amended Proposal pertained to the listing
and delisting of toxic air contaminants and potential toxic air
contaminants. The proposal required persons to provide
notification to the Agency 90 days prior to submitting a proposal
to the Board to list or delist a toxic air contaminant. The
Agency proposed to update the lists once every two years at a
minimum. Under the Amended Proposal, the Agency determined the
list of potential toxic air contaminants, though any person could
request the Board to list or delist a potential toxic air
contaminant.
Finally, Appendix A to the Amended Proposal contained the
list of toxic air contaminants, 82 in all. Appendix B described
the selection of chronic toxicity studies, determination of
lowest toxic dose scores and conversion of data obtained from
different routes of exposure and species into equivalent value.
Appendix C contained the list of Integrated Risk Information
System (IRIS) Class A, Bl, and B2 carcinogens.
Second Amended Proposal of Regulations
Following the hearings of September 6 and 7, 1990 the
“Industry Group,” composed of the Illinois Environmental
Regulatory Group, the Chemical Industries Council of Illinois and
12 6—349
6
the Illinois Steel Group; the Chlorobenzene Producer’s
Association; and an environmental consortium, including Coalition
for Consumer Rights, the Sierra Club, the Chicago Lung
Association and the Illinois Public Action Council, submitted
public comments expressing their desire that the proposal again
be amended. The Agency met with these and other industrial and
environmental groups on October 2, 1990 and November 5, 1990 to
discuss the suggested changes (Sec. Am. Stat., p. 3). The Agency
concluded that, based upon the testimony and comments provided to
the Agency by these participants, certain amendments would result
in a more effective regulation. In comments sent to the Board
dated November 2, 1990 the Agency requested an opportunity to
incorporate many of the changes suggested by the participants.
The Second Amended Proposal of Regulations, submitted December
18, 1990, was the result.
The Second Amended Proposal of Regulations substantially
changed the Amended Proposal. These changes are discussed
subpart by subpart below. Only the major changes from the
Amended Proposal are reviewed.
Subpart A
This version of the proposal added four documents to the
list of incorporations by reference. These four documents
describe Good Laboratory Practice Standards used in the chronic
toxicity study selection criteria.
The term “potential toxic air contaminant” (“PTAC”) was
deleted from this subpart reflecting the deletion of the concept
from the proposed regulations. See Subpart B, below. The
definition of “toxic air contaminant” was also altered to cure a
conceptualSubpartambiguity.B
2
The Second Amended Proposal eliminated the requirement that
a toxic air contaminant must be emitted into the atmosphere in
Illinois. This change eliminated a “cumbersome potential toxic
air contaminant procedure”. (Sec. Am. Stat., p. 4.) The Agency
also stated that its statutory interpretation of Section 9.5(b)
of the Act did not necessarily mandate such a requirement. The
Board finds these reasons amply supported by the record and
accepts this change.
2The Board believes that these definitions should be
compared to like definitions in the Board and Agency regulations
for consistency. For example the terms LD5O and LCSO appear at
35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.603 and 808.110 in different form.
126—350
7
The deletion of the “emitted in Illinois” requirement
significantly expanded the list of toxic air contaminants found
in Appendix A. Appendix A now lists 266 TACS, an increase of 184
over the number listed in the Amended Proposal.
Subpart C
The Second Amended Proposal modified certain procedures used
to select chronic toxicity studies and also modified the
procedure used to determine carcinogens. (Section 232.310) The
proposal made changes to address the situation where two or more
studies each contain the required information to calculate a
toxicity score, but where the scores are inconsistent. A
procedure is provided to distinguish between laboratory animal
toxicity studies, requiring that studies must be conducted
according to Good Laboratory Practice Standards. (Appendix B)
The Agency stated that this would “assure that reliable,
scientific studies are selected”. (Sec. Am. Stat., p. 6.)
This subpart continues to provide a procedure to classify
contaminants as carcinogens. However, an important change was
made. The section identifies four carcinogen references, and for
each reference those classifications that the Agency has
determined are carcinogens for purposes of Part 232. These are:
1) American Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists (ACGIH): Category Al or A2 carcinogen;
2) United States Department of Health and Human Services,
Public Health Service, National Toxicological Program
(NTP): Human or Anticipated Human Carcinogen;
3) United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Health and Environmental Assessment, Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS): Category A or B1/B2
carcinogen;
4) World Health Organization, International Agency for
Research on Cancer (IARC): Category 1 or 2A/2B
carcinogen.
The Agency changed its protocol (Section 232.320) so that if
a contaminant is identified as a Class C carcinogen by the IRIS
reference, this proposal states that such a classification
overrides an IARC 2B or NTP “Anticipated Human Carcinogen”
listing.3 The changes are discussed further under “Chemical—
Specific Challenges”, pp. 14—17 of this Opinion.
3The Board has made additional changes to Section 232.320,
based on the
record.Id.
126—35 1
8
Subpart D
The elimination of the “emitted in Illinois” requirement
resulted in extensive modification of this Subpart. AsSubpart D
establishes toxic air contaminant identification requirements for
new emission sources, elimination of the PTAC listing procedure
wholly eliminated prior Sections 232.430
-
232.450 from the
proposal.
Subpart E
Because the PTAC concept has been eliminated from the
proposal its listing procedures were removed from Subpart E, the
listing and delisting mechanism. In addition, the Second Amended
Proposal eliminates the requirement that written notice of the
proposal of list or delist TACS be sent to the Agency prior to
its submission to the Board. This change was also urged by
participants.
ADDITIONAL ISSUES
The Board has identified four major additional issues which
were not resolved at hearing or through public comment. These
are:
1. Reporting by Existing Sources;
2. Proposals to List or Delist;
3. Environmental Effects; and
4. Chemical Specific Challenges
Reporting by Existing Sources
At the hearing of September 6-7, 1990 the Sierra Club
reiterated its position that existing sources be required to
report emissions of toxic air contaminants upon at least a one-
time basis. (R.872) The idea was to generate a database for the
Agency to utilize in the construction of the control program.
The group urged that the same mechanisms that are used to
identify chemicals for purposes of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration OSHA, SARA 313 requirement, or as is done
through the Agency’s permitting provisions, be used. This would,
in their view, include trace amounts as well as amounts exceeding
reporting thresholds. (R. 875)
The question resurfaced during the March 1991 hearing. The
Agency, in response to pre-filed questions, stated that the
Second Amended Proposal does not require reporting by existing
sources because such reporting may require the preparation of an
economic impact statement. The Agency stated that it may require
such reporting in the control program while confessing that it
did not have a source for that information presently.
126—35 2
9
As put by Ms. Carlson of the Agency:
In our control program, we may indeed have reporting
requirements for existing sources. This will certainly
have to be the case if our control program is to include
existing sources. But at this time we don’t feel there
is a real need to have the information. (3R.69)
Under the Agency’s proposal then, only new emission sources,
including those that modify existing sources, would be required
to report toxic air contaminants. (3R.79)
Dan Grissom, Chemical Industry Council, testified that the
economic cost of reporting requirements led to an agreement with
the sponsors of the air toxics legislation incorporated in the
bill’s final form. Grissom testified at hearing that he
understood that no reporting requirements for existing sources
were anticipated under this legislation and that “reporting for
existing sources was discussed during the course of the
legislative negotiations on Section 9.5 of the Act” but that
“the parties agreed to exempt this section from an ECIS if the
reporting requirements for existing sources were not included.”
(2R.l41) When questioned about the basis for this statement
Grissoin stated that:
“in the original proposal... the requirements were
included and that a discussion took place with the
director of IEPA and several others concerning that
issue and those reporting requirements were with-
drawn on that basis. (2R.143)
Mr. Grissom admitted that no documentation existed to
support his assertion about the legislative compromise. He
stated that he understood that a member of Citizens for a Better
Environment participated in the compromise on behalf of the
environmental community. This assertion was later disputed by
Kevin Greene of Citizens for a Better Environment (“CBE”) who
disavowed any knowledge or participation in this alleged
agreement. (PC 41) Katherine Hodge of IERG also testified that
she understood the intent behind the exemption to be as Mr.
Grissom explained. (2R.223)
The Board has examined Section 9.5(c) of the Act and
believes that the express language of that section does not
support industry’s contention. The Act simply states that “the
provisions of Subsection (b) of Section 27 of this Act shall not
apply” to a rulemaking to list toxic air contaminants. No
qualification of this exemption is found in this section of the
Act. Any such informal agreement does not bind the Board or
persons who did not participate in its formulation. Further, the
Board does not find such an intent expressed through the language
of the statute.
126—353
10
Having decided the question of whether legislative intent or
subsequent agreements prevent the Board from requiring reporting
by existing sources, the Board turns to the question of whether
it is desirable. Industry’s concern about reporting requirements
is cost. The Board notes that current permitting regulations
require certain information to be submitted by applicants for
construction and operation permits. A source must identify, as
part of informational requirements for permitting, “the nature,
specific sources and quantities of controlled and uncontrolled
air contaminants. See 35 Ill. Adni. Code 201.152, 201.157. For
purposes’ of these sections, “air contaminants” is defined as “any
solid, liquid or gaseous matter.
. .
capable of being released into
the atmosphere.” 35 Ill. Adm. Code 201.101. Under these
definitions toxic air contaminants would constitute a reportable
“air contaminant” likewise. Similarly, under the new Federal
Clean Air Act Amendments, existing major and area sources which
must obtain permits for defined hazardous air pollutants (HAPS)
must also submit information regarding their emissions of these
contaminants. 42 USC 7412. Reporting by existing sources, then,
is not so much a question of j~as it is a question of when the
requirement is satisfied.
The Board inquired at hearing as to the potential costs of
such a reporting requirement. Industry representatives testified
that reporting would carry associated costs but did not supply
any specifics. Post—hearing public comments from industry groups
did not contain any new information which enlightened the Board.
The Board agrees with the participating environmental groups
that a database of existing emissions would assist the
development of the control program. With this information in
hand, the Agency will be better able to prioritize the control
aspects of the program by identifying the most significant
emitters.
The Board concludes that reporting by existing sources is a
desirable precursor of the control phase. Because toxic air
contaminants, as an “air contaminant”, should be identified in
all permit applications, the Board urges the Agency to review its
current permit application files to see if the information is
currently being reported as required. If it is not, the Agency,
under the current permitting regulations, has the authority to
ensure that it is submitted with applications for modifications
or renewal in the future. The Board requests further comment by
the Agency1 however, regarding the interpretation
and
implementation of these permitting requirements contained in 35
Ill. Adm. Code 201.152 and 201.157. Copies of any forms
associated with these requirements should be provided.
The Board has altered the Agency’s proposed reporting
requirement to include reporting by existing sources at time of
permit renewal. In parallel with the language of existing
126—354
11
regulations, this reporting includes the “nature, specific source
and quantity” of each TAC. In this manner, ~he information on
emissions of toxic air contaminants by exist “~igsources will be
supplied as current permits are renewed over a five year period.
The Board inserts this as an affirmative requirement in these
regulations to ensure that the information will not be omitted in
the future. The Board wishes for participants to comment on
these changes, and upon advisability of giving the Agency
authority, via this rule, for a one—time reporting requirement
for existing emission sources should the Agency find that it
needs such information for development of the control strategy.
The one-time report could be required within a specified period
of time, such as one year. Additionally, the Board requests
comment on the alternative of mandatory reporting by existing
sources within either one year or a specified period less than
five years.
Based upon the above discussion, the Board has altered the
title of Subpart D to include renewal applications by striking
the word “new” prior to the term “emission sources” and by adding
to the text a provision for reporting by existing sources at time
of renewal. The Board has also altered Section 232.100
“Introduction” to alert the reader to this change.
Proposals to List or Delist
Under the Agency’s Second Amended Proposal any person may
propose to list or delist a chemical or compound. (Section
232.500). The basis for listing or delisting however, is the
toxicity scoring protocol of Section 232.200. A question arose
at hearing whether the Agency would perform the scoring protocol
and would submit that information to the record following a
proposal to list or delist by an individual. The concern was
that, absent this, many well-meaning citizens or groups would not
have the technical and scientific support for their proposal.
The Agency testified that it intended to verify independent
toxicity scoring but warned that if it were required to score all
proposals, the process could be abused. (2R. 131—4) The
Agency’s final public comment did not contain any additional
information on this point.
Section 232.500 of the Agency’s Second Amended Proposal
reads:
SUBPART E: LISTING
AND
DELISTING
Section 232.500
Procedures for Listing and Delisting
Toxic Air Contaminants
a) Any person can propose to the Board to list or
delist a toxic air contaminant.
126—355
12
b) The proposal to list a contaminant as a toxic air
contaminant, or to delist a toxic air contaminant,
must include, at a minimum, the following:
1) the contaminant or toxic air contaminant name
and Chemical Abstract Service Number where
applicable;
2) the basis for listing or delisting pursuant
to Section 232.200;
3) a copy of each study or report justifying the
basis of listing; and
c) The Agency will propose an update of the list of
toxic air contaminants to the Board no less
frequently than once every 2 years.
Based upon the testimony at hearings and the public comments
received, the Board finds that changing this section to assure
Agency participation in proposals to list or delist toxic air
contaminants is warranted. Therefore the Board has added new
subsection (c) which reads:
(c) The Agency shall participate in each proposal to
list or delist a toxic air contaminant and must
provide the Board with a recommendation as to
advisability of listing or delisting. Such
recommendation must include a toxicity scoring
pursuant to Section 232.300 and a carcinogen
classification pursuant to Section 232.310.
Should the Agency find this new procedure is abused, the
appropriate motion for relief may be made to the Board. See 35
Ill. Adm. Code 102.260. The Board has relettered prior
subsection (c) to new subsection (d). The Board has removed the
superfluous word “and” from the end of subsection (b) (3) and
corrected the punctuation. Finally, the Board has revised
subsection (c) to make it equally applicable to listing and
delisting.
One further issue arose concerning proposals to list or
delist toxic air contaminants. Some participants felt the
Agency’s scoring protocol was too restrictive and risked omitting
certain chemicals or compounds which, though not otherwise
meeting the protocol, met the legislature’s definition of a toxic
air contaminant (Section 9.5 (c)). (R.650—664) The Agency
believed however, that without its rigorous scoring protocol,
chemicals which were not true TAC5 would be included upon the
list. (PC 35) The Agency, therefore, decided to be under-
inclusive rather than over—inclusive.
12 6—356
13
After review of the record, including all testimony and
public comments, the Board finds that “broadening” the
characteristics for determining a toxic air contaminant found at
Section 232.200 is desirable. This change will have the effect
of providing a “general” or narrative description of what
constitutes a toxic air contaminant, as is found in the enabling
statute. It will complement the numerical scoring and
classification protocols developed by the Agency. The Board
believes that this change is most reflective of the legislature’s
intent and most protective of the public. A greater error, the
Board believes, would be to fail to include a toxic air
contaminant by a restrictive scoring mechanism. Therefore the
Board has altered Section 232.200 to reflect this change. This
change will also allow delisting of a compound that may meet the
numerical or carcinogen criteria. Such compounds may be delisted
upon a suitable demonstration before the B.oard that there are
valid scientific reasons that they should not be listed despite
meeting the criteria of 232.200 (a) or (b). Such is the case
with styrene in the current proposal.
Environmental Effects
The issue of whether the Agency’s proposal should address
the environmental effects of toxic air contaminants, that is, the
effect these contaminants have on plant and animal life, has
existed since the beginning of the adoption process. Section
9.5(c) of the Act states, in pertinent part:
The list published under this subsection
shall include any air contaminants which may
pose a significant threat to human
health or the environment (emphasis added).
Many presubmitted questions reflected the expectation that
environmental effects be addressed in the proposed rules. The
Agency replied to these concerns at the June 25, 1990 hearing by
stating that proven methods of analyzing environmental data are
unavailable but were “the subject of continuing scrutiny by the
Agency”. The Agency also stated that a specific schedule for
prioritizing environmental effects has not been addressed.
(R. 125)
Participants at the September 6, 1990 hearing echoed the
concern that environmental effects must be addressed. David Cox,
an Assistant Professor from the University of Illinois, testified
that Illinois must consider environmental effects in the new air
toxic regulations under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
regardless of what action is taken in the R90-1 proceeding.
(R.475) Professor David Schaeffer, an ecosystem health
specialist from the University of Illinois, disputed the Agency’s
contention that environmental effects methodologies did not
126—35 7
14
exist. He spoke at length about methodologies for assessing the
effects of chemicals on ecosys.tems. (R.536 —592).
The frustration of some of the environmental groups
participating led to filing an “alternate proposal” (PC 23) which
defined a toxic air contaminant as a “substance which is
presently or in the future determined to be an atmospheric hazard
or to threaten avian, aquatic, agricultural, or terrestrial
biota”. Several groups responded in subsequent comments that
this proposal would considerably expand the scope of the proposal
in both the number of contaminants and the reporting involved.
At the hearing of March 21, 1991 the Sierra Club and the
Illinois Coalition for Consumer Rights allowed that they would
“quiet their opposition to the Agency’s proposal” in order to
allow it to proceed. (2R.99) However, the Sierra Club, in post-
hearing comments, urged the Board to amend the proposal to
require the Agency to include environmental effects and suggested
that the current rule be amended during the control rule
development process (PC 33).
In its final public comment, the Agency conceded on the
point. It stated:
“Section 9.5 of the
. . .
Act requires the
listing and control of the contaminants which
‘may pose a significant threat to
. . .
the
environment’. The relative paucity of
toxicological data pertaining to
environmental harm has impeded the
development of such criteria. However, the
Agency hereby commits to proposed to the
Board, within 12 to 18 months, environmental
criteria for selecting TAC5, and the
identification of these TAC5 with those
criteria.
In light of this commitment, the Agency
opposes creation of interim environmental
criteria or list. Such interim measures
would drain Agency resources, and may result
in the selection of TAC5 based upon
incomplete or inaccurate data.”
The Board accepts the Agency’s commitment to propose to the
Board environmental criteria within 12 to 18 months. To assist
the Agency in speeding this process, the Board intends to open a
subdocket, Docket B, in this rulemaking. The subdocket will then
be held open in anticipation of the Agency’s filing. Any person
may submit suggestions for inclusion in a list of said
contaminants along with supporting data for inclusion in the
126—358
15
record as a public comment. Copies of these public comments must
be filed with the Agency.
Chemical Specific Challenges
Over the course of this proceeding, the Board has heard
several challenges to the listing of individual chemicals. The
major challenges have been to the listing of molybdenum trioxide,
ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (“EGBE”; a/k/a 2-butoxyethanol),
para—dichlorobenzene (“PDCB”), styrene, and ammonia.
Based on the testimony and exhibits presented by the
challenging parties (PC 11 and R. 593—612 and 412—471), the
Agency re-calculated the Toxicity Score for molybdenum trioxide
and EGBE and, based on these revised scores, recommended in PC 17
that these two chemicals be removed from the Toxic Air
Contaminants (TAC) List appearing in Section 232.Appendix A. The
Second Amended Proposal reflects this recommendation; neither
chemical is proposed to be listed. The Board concurs with the
removal of these chemicals from the TAC list.
Both IERG and the Agency have proposed to reduce the
Toxicity Score for ammonia from “6” to “3” based on a re-
evaluation of the study used to score chronic toxicity (PC 37 and
40, respectively). The Board acknowledges this revision in
scoring but notes that with a Toxicity Score of “3”, ammonia will
remain listed. At this time, the Toxicity Score of each TAC is
not part of the proposed rule, so there is no need to amend the
proposal. The Board solicits comments on the advisability of
including the toxicity score and whether or not the TAC is a
carcinogen in the listing.
The remaining challenged chemicals, styrene and PDCB, were
listed as TACs by the Agency by virtue of their carcinogen
classification pursuant to Section 232.320.
The Chlorobenzene Producers Association (CPA) testified to
remove PDCB from the TAC list because of a conflict of scores
among the IARC reference and USEPA. IARC lists PDCB as a 2B
(probable human) carcinogen, while USEPA, in a final rule,
classified it as a C (possible human) carcinogen. CPA argued
that USEPA considers all evidence when evaluating the
carcinogenicity of a compound and weighs that evidence to
determine the most appropriate classification relative to human
health. Specific evaluation of human health concerns is beyond
the scope of IARC’s work. Thus, CPA argued, classification by
USEPA should be given more weight if a conflict exists among the
references listed in Section 232.320. The Agency accepted this
concept in testimony at the March 21, 1991 hearing but wanted
only those chemicals listed as C carcinogens on the USEPA IRIS
database (as opposed to other documents published by USEPA) to be
exempted in this manner. (2R.40-48) CPA countered that final
126—359
16
JSEPA rules published by the Administrator were of more weight
than IRIS because USEPA had a legal obligation to publish final
ruleinakings while they are under no obligation to keep IRIS
current. The Agency acknowledged that a final rule would be an
acceptable source for a USEPA carcinogen only if the rule
identified the carcinogen classification as being specific to the
inhalation route. (PC 35)
CPA asserts that USEPA’s general practice is to hold
carcinogen classifications valid for all routes of exposure
unless otherwise noted in a final rule (PC 36 at 5) and that,
absent evidence to the contrary, USEPA assumes that a substance
that is carcinogenic by one route is carcinogenic by all routes
(j~ at 9). CPA also cites USEPA’s Guidelines for Carcinogen
Risk Assessment, 51 Fed. Reg. 33992 (September 24, 1986) as
requiring USEPA to take into account all types of human exposure
in conducting a cancer risk assessment.
(~~)
The final rule
classifying PDCB as a Category C carcinogen and regulating PDCB
as a drinking water contaminant reviewed all studies where PDCB
was tested for carcinogenicity, regardless of exposure route.
This final rule, CPA argues, does not specify that PDCB’s
Category C classification is route—specific.
~
at 6)
The Agency did not propose to list only those chemicals that
are classified as carcinogens by inhalation exposure. Rather,
the Agency has listed any chemical which is classified as
probable or known human carcinogens without regard to exposure
route. In so doing, the Agency appears to be aligned with
USEPA’s general practice, as described by CPA, that a carcinogen
classification is valid for all routes of exposure. The Board
fails to see the difference in reasoning between listing a
probable or known carcinogen as a toxic air contaminant without
regard to route of exposure and choosing to delist a compound
where the evidence of human carcinogenicity is questioned by
USEPA.
Therefore, based on the discussion above, the Board makes
the following revisions to Section 232.320——Carcinogen
Classification:
Section 232.320
Carcinogen Classification
~ For purposes of this Part, the Agency will consider a
contaminant to be a carcinogen if it is classified in
the following manner de3cribed in the following table:
126—3 60
17
ACGIH
Cate~ry Al Carcinogen or
Category A2 Carcinogen
IARC
Category 1 Carcinogen or
Category 2A/2B Carcinogen
IRIS
Category A Carcinogen or
Car~r~1~
~1
/B2 Carc~nr~rfen
NTP
Human Carcinogen or
Anticipated Human
Carcinogcn
fl
A Category Al or A2 Carcinogen by AGCIH; or
21
A Category 1 or 2A/2B Carcinogen by IARC; or
fl
A “Human Carcinogen” or “Anticipated Human
Carcinogen” by NTP; or
4j. A Category A or Bl/B2 Carcinogen by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in
IRIS or a Final Rule issued in a Federal Register
notice by the USEPA as of the effective date of
this regulation.
b) If a contaminant is under con3idcration by reason of
being listed identified as an IARC 2B or NTP
“Anticipated Human Carcinogen” and that contaminant is
also identified as a C e~arcinogenby the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in the IRIS
reference or a Final Rule issued in a Federal Register
notice by the USEPA as of the effective date of this
regulation, then the Agency will not consider that
contaminant to be a carcinogen for the purposes of this
Part.
c) The references ACGIH, IARC, and NTP are incorporated by
reference in Section 232.110. The reference IRIS is
the United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Integrated Risk Information System. The categories
A,
Bl, and B2 carcinogens of IRIS as of December 31, 1989,
are listed in Appendix C.
In applying this revised language to the case of PDCB, the
Board finds that PDCB does not meet the criteria for either
toxicity scoring or carcinogen classification, and has thus
removed PDCB from the Section 232.Appendix A.
12 6—36 1
18
The case of styrene is somewhat different. The Styrene
Information and Research Center (SIRC) contended that styrene
should not have been listed as a 2B carcinogen by IARC. To
question this determination is certainly well beyond the Board’s
or Agency’s authority. SIRC further sought to use the exemption
proposed by CPA for USEPA C carcinogens but only in anticipation
that styrene would be given a C, D, or E classification by USEPA.
The Agency correctly observes that to base a TAC listing on
speculation that USEPA ~y classify styrene as a C carcinogen is
unacceptable. The Board does, however, have the authority to
review testimony and exhibits placed into the record by SIRC and
to evaluate their merit, independent of the Toxicity Scoring or
Carcinogen Classification procedures proposed by the Agency.
In testimony before the Board (R.840-842) and in PC 29, SIRC
cited a final Department of Labor Occupational Health and Safety
Administration (OSHA) Final Rule on Air Contaminants (54 Fed.
Reg. 2332; January 19, 1988) that determined that “the current
evidence on styrene’s carcinogenicity does not support its
classification in the final rule as a carcinogen.” In this
rulemaking, OSHA set new standards for 428 substances, including
styrene, that “substantially reduce a significant risk of
material health impairment among American workers.” The Board
believes that OSHA’s finding is significant, in part because it
was focussed on inhalation exposure of humans. The Board,
therefore, proposes to grant SIRC’s request to delist styrene ~
this time, noting that should styrene be listed in the future as
a probable human carcinogen by USEPA, it will be re-proposed as a
Toxic Air Contaminant.
SIRC also addressed a limited number of comments to the
listing of styrene oxide, an intermediate of styrene.
(R.837-838) The IARC reference classifies styrene oxide as a
Class 2B carcinogen, evidently because of its mutagenicity. SIRC
disputes this classification, noting that USEPA does not consider
methanol a carcinogen simply because it is metabolized to the
known carcinogen formaldehyde. (Id.) Given these limited
comments and the absence of additional data, like that of the
OSHA rulemaking for styrene, the Board denies the SIRC request to
delist styrene oxide.
ORDER
The following rules are hereby submitted for First Notice
publication. The Board directs the Clerk of the Board to submit
these rules to the Secretary of State for publication in the
Illinois Register.
126—362
19
TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SUBTITLE B: AIR POLLUTION
CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
SUBCHAPTER f: TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS
PART 232
TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS
SUBPART A: GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section
232.100 Introduction
232.110 Incorporations by Reference
232.120 Definitions
232.130 Applicability
SUBPART B: DETERMINATION OF A TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANT
Section
232.200 Characteristics for Determining a Toxic Air Contaminant
232.210 Listing of a Toxic Air Contaminant
SUBPART C: PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATING CHARACTERISTICS
OF A TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANT
Section
232.300 Purpose
232.310 Procedures for Determining the Toxicity Score
232.320 Carcinogen Classification
SUBPART D: IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR EMISSION SOURCES
Section
232.400 Purpose
232.410 Identification Requirements
SUBPART E: LISTING AND DELISTING
Section
232.500 Procedures for Listing and Delisting Toxic Air
Contaminants
APPENDIX A: List of Toxic Air Contaminants
APPENDIX B: Additional Procedures for Calculating the Chronic
Toxicity Score
APPENDIX C: Categories A, Bi, and B2 Carcinogens of the
Reference United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment, Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS), as of December 31, 1989
126—363
20
AUTHORITY: Implementing Section 9.5 and authorized by Section 27
of the Environmental Protection Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch.
111 1/2, pars. 1009.5 and 1027).
SOURCE: Adopted in R90—l at
Ill. Reg.
,
effective
SUBPART A: GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 232.100
Introduction
This Part establishes a program to identify toxic air
contaminants. It includes a list of toxic air contaminants, the
procedures to determine a toxic air contaminant, the procedures
to amend the list, and identification requirements for new and
existing emission sources.
Section 232.110
Incorporations by Reference
a) The following materials are incorporated by reference:
American Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists (ACGIH). Threshold Limit Values and
Biological Exposure Indices for 1989—9 0 (1989).
Document can be obtained from: 6500 Glenway Avenue,
Building D—7, Cincinnati, Ohio 45211—4438.
Good Laboratory Practice Standards, 21 CFR 58 (1990).
Good Laboratory Practice Standards, 40 CFR 160 (1989).
Good Laboratory Practice Standards, 40 CFR 792 (1990).
Organization for Economic Co—operation and Development
(OECD). OECD Guidelines For Testing of Chemicals,
Appendix: Good Laboratory Practice c(8l)30(Final)
(November, 1989). Document can be obtained from: OECD
Publications and Information Centre, 2001 L Street,
N.W., Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20036—4095.
United States Department of Health and Human Services,
Public Health Service, National Toxicological Program
(NTP). Fifth Annual Report on Carcinogens (1989).
Document can be obtained from: National Technical
Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia 22161.
World Health Organization, International Agency for
Research on Cancer (IARC). Monographs on the
Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, Overall
Evaluations of Carcinogenicity: An Updating of IARC
Monographs Volumes 1 to 42, Supplement 7 (1987).
126—3 64
21
Document can be obtained from: WHO Publications Centre
USA, 49 Sheridan Avenue, Albany, New York 12210.
b) This Section incorporates no future editions or
amendments.
Section 232.120
Definitions
The definitions of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 201.102, 211.122 and 215.104
apply to this Part, as well as the definitions contained in this
Section. Where a definition contained in this Section is more
specific than those found in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 201.102, 211.122
and 215.104, it must take precedence in application of this Part.
“Adverse health effect” means a health injury or
disease that may be produced by exposure to a
contaminant. This includes any decrement in the
function of an organ or organ system or any subclinical
organ lesion that is likely to lead to a decrement in
an organ or organ system function.
“Critical gestation days” means the days during which
the formation and differentiation of organs, and organ
systems occurs during embryonic development.
“Emits” or “Emission” or “Emitted” means any non-
accidental release into the atmosphere from an emission
source or air pollution control equipment, or fugitive
emissions defined according to 35 Ill. Adm. Code
203.124.
“LCSO” means the concentration in air of a contaminant
that kills, or is estimated to kill, 50 per cent of a
population of laboratory animals where the exposure is
brief (8 hours or less) and where the route of exposure
is inhalation.
“LDSO” means the dose of a contaminant that kills, or
is estimated to kill, 50 percent of a population of
laboratory animals where the route of exposure is
ingestion.
“Lowest observed adverse effect level” means the lowest
experimentally determined dose at which a statistically
or biologically significant indication of the toxic
effect of concern is observed.
“New emission source” means an emission source or air
pollution control equipment for which a construction
permit is required by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 201 after (the
effective date of these rules); or an emission source
or air pollution control equipment for which an
126—365
22
operating permit is required by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 201,
where the owner or operator failed to apply for a
construction permit and applies for the first operating
permit.
“No observed effect” means the condition where no
adverse health effect has been detected.
“Toxic air contaminant” means a contaminant identified
pursuant to Section 232.200 and listed in Appendix A.
Section 232.130
Applicability
The requirements of this Part do not apply to the
following:
a) RETAIL DRY CLEANING OPERATIONS;
b) RETAIL AND NONCOMMERCIAL STORAGE AND HANDLING OF MOTOR
FUELS;
c) COMBUSTION PROCESSES USING ONLY COMMERCIAL FUEL,
INCLUDING INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES; AND
d) INCIDENTAL OR MINOR SOURCES INCLUDING
LABORATORY-SCALE
OPERATIONS, AND SUCH OTHER SOURCES OR CATEGORIES OF
SOURCES WHICH ARE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD TO BE OF
MINOR SIGNIFICANCE. (Section 9.5(e) of the Act)
SUBPART B: DETERMINATION OF A TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANT
Section 232.200
Characteristics for Determining a Toxic Air
Contaminant
A TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANT IS A CONTAMINANT WHICH the Board finds
MAY CAUSE OR SIGNIFICANTLY CONTRIBUTE TO AN INCREASE IN MORTALITY
OR AN INCREASE IN SERIOUS IRREVERSIBLE OR INCAPACITATING
REVERSIBLE ILLNESS, OR MAY POSE A SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO HUMAN
HEALTH OR THE ENVIRONMENT. (Section 9.5(c) of the Act)
Unless shown by evidence to not meet the above definition,
contaminants which meet the following criteria are presumed to be
toxic air contaminants:
a) The contaminant has a Toxicity Score of 3 or greater
using the procedures for determining the Toxicity Score
described in Section 232.310, or
b) The contaminant is classified as a carcinogen according
to Section 232.320.
126—366
23
Section 232.210
Listing of a Toxic Air Contaminant
The Agency will propose to the Board for lis~ng any contaminant
which has been determined by the Agency to meet the
characteristics identified in Section 232.200. The contaminants
found by the Board to be toxic air contaminants are listed in
Appendix A.
SUBPART C: PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATING
CHARACTERISTICS OF A TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANT
Section 232.300
Purpose
This Subpart identifies the procedures used to evaluate the
characteristics of a toxic air contaminant. The Agency will use
these procedures in proposing to list or delist toxic air
contaminants in Appendix A.
Section 232.310
Procedures for Determining the Toxicity
Score
The Toxicity Score is the sum of the Acute Lethality Score and
the Chronic Toxicity Score.
The Acute Lethality
Score is a
number which indicates a contaminant’s potential
to cause death.
The Chronic Toxicity Score is a number which indicates
a
contaminant’s potential to cause adverse health effects after
chronic exposure.
a)
Procedure for Determining the Acute Lethality Score
1)
The Acute Lethality Score is derived from
toxicological studies using laboratory rats. One
of two routes of exposure is used: inhalation or
ingestion. Values derived from inhalation are
used in preference to values derived from
ingestion.
2)
The Acute Lethality Score is derived from the
following table:
Inhalation Concentration (LC5O)
Acute
Lethality
Score
Less than: 500 mg/cu. m
3
500—4,999 mg/cu.
ni
2
5,000—50,000 mg/cu. m
1
Greater than: 50,000 mg/cu. m
0
or, if the above data are not available:
12 6—36 7
24
Ingestion Dose (LD5O)
Acute Lethality
Score
Less than: 50 mg/kg
3
50—499 mg/kg
2
500—5,000 mg/kg
1
Greater than: 5,000 mg/kg
0
b) Procedure for Determining the Chronic Toxicity Score
The Chronic Toxicity Score is the product of the Lowest
TOxic Dose Score and the Severity of Effects Score.
1) Procedure for Determining the Lowest Toxic Dose Score
The Lowest Toxic Dose Score is a number based upon
the lowest dose of a contaminant that causes an
observable adverse health effect. The Lowest
Toxic Dose Score is derived from the following
table:
Dose
Lowest Toxic Dose Score
Less than: 5 mg/kg/day
1
5-50 mg/kg/day
2/3
Greater than: 50 mg/kg/day
1/3
2) Procedure for Determining the Severity of Effects
Score
The Severity of Effects Score is a number based upon
the category of organ(s) affected and the level of
effect upon the organ(s).
A) Organ Categories
There are three categories of organs or organ
systems which are identified as follows:
Category
Description
i) Category I Category I includes: organs, the
impairment or loss of which is
fatal or usually cannot be
compensated for by the body;
gonads, the loss of which
prevents the transmission of
genetic material; and, adverse
reproductive outcome including
stillbirth, miscarriage, or
reduced litter size (animal
studies). The Category I organs
are: Lungs, Heart, Brain, Spinal
126—368
25
Cord, Kidneys, Liver, Bone
Marrow, and Gonads.
ii) Category II Category II includes: organs, the
impairment or loss of which may
be fatal, but which can be
compensated for by drug or
replacement therapy; adverse
effect on an immune function
which may be life threatening;
changes in the composition or
function of blood constituents
which may be life threatening;
and, certain fetotoxic effects
including premature birth,
reduced birth weight, and reduced
morphometric parameters. The
Category II organs are: Adrenals,
Thyroids, Parathyroids,
Pituitary, Pancreas, Esophagus,
Stomach, Small Intestine, Large
Intestine, Lymph Nodes, Thymus,
Trachea.
iii) Category III Category III includes: organs,
the impairment or loss of which
is not life threatening but may
result in functional or emotional
handicaps; adverse effect on an
immune function which is not life
threatening; changes in the
composition or function of blood
which are not life threatening
but may result in functional
handicaps. Category III organs
include, but are not limited to:
Oviducts, Epididymides, Uterus,
Prostrate, Seminal Vesicles,
Ductus Deferens, Penis, Vagina,
Eyes, Bone, Nose, Peripheral
Nerves, Muscles, Urinary Bladder,
Blood Vessels, Ears, Gallbladder,
Larynx, Mammary Glands,Salivary
Glands, Skin, Spleen, Tongue,
Teeth, Ureter, Urethra, Pharynx.
B)
Levels of Effect
There are four
levels of effect: Serious
Irreversible
(“SI”); Serious Reversible (“SR”);
Non—serious
Irreversible (“NI”); and Non—serious
Reversible (“NR”).
126—369
26
i) A serious effect is an incapacitating
condition or a condition which significantly
contributes to an increase in mortality.
ii) ~ non—serious effect is a non—incapacitating
condition or a condition which is unlikely to
contribute to an increase in mortality.
iii) An irreversible effect is one that is
permanent or would require medical treatment
to correct.
iv) A reversible effect is a temporary effect.
C) Table of Severity of Effects Scores
The Severity of Effects Score for any level of
effect observed in an organ belonging to a
specified organ category is derived from the
following table:
Organ Category
I
II III
SI
6
5
4
Levelof
SR
5 4
3
Effect
NI
4
3
2
NR
3
2
1
No Observed
0 0
0
Effect
D) When a study identifies an adverse health effect
on multiple organs within the same category at the
lowest observed adverse effect level, the Severity
of Effects Score is increased by a value of 1. In
no event can the Severity of Effects Score be
greater than 6.
3) Additional procedures for calculating the Chronic
Toxicity Score are described in Appendix B.
Section 232.320 Carcinogen Classification
a) For purposes of this Part, the Agency will consider a
contaminant to be a carcinogen if it is classified in the
following manner:
1) A Category Al or A2 Carcinogen by AGCIH; or
2) A Category 1 or 2A/2B Carcinogen by IARC; or
126—3 70
27
3) A “Human Carcinogen” or “Anticipated Human Carcinogen”
by NTP; or
4) A Category A or B1/B2 Carcinogen by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in IRIS or a
Final Rule issued in a Federal Register notice by the
USEPA as of the effective date of this regulation.
b) If a contaminant is identified as an IARC 2B or NTP
“Anticipated Human Carcinogen,” and that contaminant is
also identified as a C Carcinogen by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in the IRIS
reference or a Final Rule issued in a Federal Register
notice by the USEPA as of the effective date of this
regulation, then the Agency will not consider that
contaminant to be a carcinogen for the purposes of this
Part.
c) The references ACGIH, IARC, and NTP are incorporated by
reference in Section 232.110. The reference IRIS is the
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Health and Environmental Assessment, Integrated Risk
Information System. The categories A, Bl, and. B2
carcinogens of IRIS as of December 31, 1989, are listed in
Appendix C.
SUBPART D: IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR EMISSION SOURCES
Section 232.400 Purpose
This Subpart establishes toxic air contaminant identification
requirements for new emission sources and for existing sources at
time of permit renewal.
Section 232.410 Identification Requirements
Owners or operators of 1) new emission sources or 2) existing
sources shall identify with each new permit application or
renewal application for that emission source, by name and
Chemical Abstract Service Number where applicable, the nature,
specific source and quantity of each toxic air contaminant
identified in Appendix A, which is or will be emitted by the
source.
SUBPART E: LISTING AND DELISTING
Section 232.500 Procedures for Listing and Delisting Toxic
Air Contaminants
a) Any person can propose to the Board to list or delist a
toxic air contaminant.
126—37 1
28
b) The proposal to list a contaminant as a toxic air
contaminant, or to delist a toxic air contaminant, must
include, at a minimum, the following:
1) The contaminant or toxic air contaminant name and
Chemical Abstract Service Number where applicable;
2) The basis for listing or delisting pursuant to Section
232.200;
3) A copy of each study or report used to justify the
proposal.
c) The Agency shall participate in each proposal to list or
delist a toxic air contaminant and must provide the Board
with a recommendation as to advisability of listing or
delisting. Such recommendation must include a toxicity
scoring pursuant to Section 232.300 and a carcinogen
classification pursuant to Section 232.310.
d) The Agency will propose an update of the list of toxic air
contaminants to the Board no less frequently than once
every 2 years.
Section 232.APPENDIX A:
List of Toxic Air Contaminants
Chemical Abstract
Chemical Name
Service Number
Acetaldhyde
75-07—0
Acetamide
60—35—5
Acetonitrile
75—05—8
Acetophenone
98-86-2
Acrolein
107—02—8
Acrylamide
79-06-1
Acrylic acid
79-10—7
Acrylonitrile
107-13—1
Aldrin
309—00—2
Allyl chloride
107—05-1
2-Aminoanthraquinone
117-79-3
4—Aminoazobenzene
60-09-3
o-Aminoazotoluene
93-56-3
4-Aminobiphenyl
92-67-1
l-Amino-2-methylanthraquinone
82-28-0
Amitrole
61—82—5
Ammonia
7664—41—7
Aniline
62—53—3
o—Anisidine
90-04—0
o-Anisidine hydrochloride
134-29-2
Antimony
7440-36-0
Arsenic
7440—38—2
Asbestos (friable)
1332—21—4
126—372
29
Azobenzene
103—33—3
Benz (a) anthracene
5 6—55—3
Benzene
71—43—2
Benzidine
92—87—5
Benzo(a)pyrene
50—32—8
Benzo(b) fluoranthene
205—99-2
Benzo(j) fluoranthene
205—82-3
Benzo(k) 1 luoranthene
207—08-9
Benzotrichloride
98—07—7
Benzyl chloride
100—44-7
Benzyl violet
1694-09-3
Beryllium
7440—41—7
Beryllium oxide
1304—56—9
Biphenyl
92—52—4
Boron trifluoride
7637—07-2
Bromoform
75—25—2
1,3—Butadiene
106—99—0
Butyl benzyl phthalate
85-68-7
beta-Butyrolacetone
3068—88-0
C.I. Basic Red 9 monohydrochloride
569—61-9
Cadmium
7440—43—9
Cadmium oxide
1306—19-0
Caprolactam
105—60—2
Carbaryl
63—25—2
Carbofuran
1563—66—2
Carbon black
1333—86—4
Carbon disulfide
75—15—0
Carbon tetrachloride
56—23—5
Carbosulfan
55285—14—8
Chloramben
133—90—4
Chlordane
57—74—9
Chlorinated dibenzodioxins
Chlorinated dibenzofurans
——
Chiorendic acid
115—28—6
Alpha-Chlorinated toluenes
--
Chlorinated paraffins (Cl2, 60 chlorine)
108171—26—2
Chlorine
7782—50—5
Chloroacetic acid
79-11-8
Chlorobenzene
108—90—7
Chloroform
67—66-3
Chloromethyl methyl ether
107-30-2
4-Chloro-2-methylpropene
563-47-3
4-Chloro-o-phenylenediamine
95-83—0
p-Chloro-o-toluidine
95—69—2
Chloroprene
126—99-8
Chromium
7440-47-3
Chromium VI
18540-29-9
Chrysene
218—01—9
Coal tar (pitch) volatiles
65996—93—2
Cobalt
7440—48—4
Coke Oven Emissions
Copper
7440—50—8
126—3 73
p-Cresidine
120—71-8
Creosote (Coal)
8001—58—9
Cresol (mixed isomers)
1319—77—3
Cyanazine
21725—46—2
Cyclohexanone
108-94-1
DDD
72—54—8
DDE
72—55—9
DDT
50—29—3
2,4—Diaminoanisole
615—05—4
2,4—Diaminoanisole sulfate
39156—41—7
4,4 ‘-Diaminodiphenyl ether
101—80-4
2, 4—Diaminotoluene
95—80—7
Dibenzo(a,h)acridine
226—36—8
Dibenzo(a,j)acridine
224-42-0
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
53-70—3
Dibenzo(a,e)pyrene
192—65—4
Dibenzo(a,h)pyrene
189—64—0
Dibenzo(a, i) pyrene
189—55—9
Dibenzo(a,l)pyrene
191—30—0
Dibutyl phthalate
84-74-2
1, 2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane
9 6-12-8
1,2-Dibrornoethane Ethylene dibromide
106-93-4
3
,
3 ‘—Dichlorobenzidine
9 1—94—1
3,3 ‘—Dichlorobenzidine dihydrochioride
612—83-9
Dichloroethyl ether
111—44-4
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
2,4-D
94—75—7
1
,
2—Dichloropropane
78-87-5
1, 3—Dichloropropylene
542—75-6
Dichlorvos
62-73-7
Dieldrin
60—57—1
Diepoxybutane
1464-53—5
1, 2—Diethylhydrazine
1615—80—1
Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
117—81—7
Diethyl sulfate
64—67—5
Diglycidyl resorcinol ether
101-90-6
3, 3 ‘-Dirnethoxybenzidine
119—90-4
Dimethyl acetamide
127-19-5
4—Dimethy’laminoazobenzene
60—11-7
3,3 ‘—Dimethylbenzidine o—Tolidine
119—93—7
Dimethylcarbamoyl chloride
79-44-7
Dimethyl formamide
68—12-2
1, l-Dimethylhydrazine
57—14-7
1, 2—Dimethylhydrazine
54 0—73-8
Dimethyl sulfate
77—78—1
Dinitrocresol
534—52—1
2,4-Dinitrophenol
51—28—5
2
,
4—Dinitrotoluene
12 1—14—2
1, 4—Dioxane
123—91—1
1, 2—Diphenylhydrazine
122—66—7
Disulfoton
298—04—4
Endothall
145—73—3
Epichlorohydrin
106-89-8
126—3 74
31
2-Ethoxyethanol
110-80-5
Ethyl acrylate
140-88—5
Ethylene dichloride
107-06-2
Ethylene oxide
75-21-8
Ethylene thiourea
96-45-7
Etridiazole
2593—15—9
FMC—67825
95465—99—9
Fluorine
7782—41—4
Folpet
133—07—3
Formaldehyde
50-00-0
Furmecyclox
60568-05-0
Heptachlor
76-44-8
Heptachlor epoxide
1024—57—3
Hexachlorobenzene
118-74-1
Hexachloro-l, 3-butadiene
87-68-3
Hexachiorocyclopentadiene
77-47-4
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-diox~n
19408-74—3
Hexachloroethane
67-72-1
Hexamethylphosphorarnide
680-31-9
Hydrazine
302—01—2
Hydrazine sulfate
10034—93—2
Hydrogen cyanide
74-90-8
Indeno(l, 2,3—cd) pyrene
193—39—5
Isophorone diisocyanate
4098—71—9
Lead
7439—92—1
Lindane (alpha)
319—84—6
Lindane (beta)
319—85—7
Lindane (gamma)
58—89—9
Lindane (mixed isomers)
608—73—1
Linuron
330-55-2
Malathion
121—75—5
Manganese
7439—96—5
Mercury
7439-97-6
2-Methoxyethanol
109—86-4
2-Methoxyethaflol acetate
110-49—6
5—Methylchrysene
3697—24—3
4,4 ‘—Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)
101-14—4
Methylenebis (phenylisocyanate)
10 1-68—8
4,4’ -Methylenebis(N,N’ -dimethyl) benzenamine
101-61-1
Methylene chloride
75-09—2
4, 4 ‘—Methylenedianiline
101—77—9
4,4 ‘-Methylenedianiline dihydrochloride
13552—44—8
Methyl hydrazine
60-34-4
Methyl iodide
74-88-4
Methyl mercaptan
74-93-1
N-Methyl-N’ -nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine
70-25-7
Metolachlor
51218-45-2
Michler’s Ketone
90-94—8
Mirex
2385—85—5
Monoethanolamine
141—43—5
beta-Naphthylamide
91-59-8
Nickel
7440—02—0
126—3 75
32
Nitric acid
7697—37—2
Nitrilotriacetic acid
139—13-9
Nitrobenzene
98—95—3
5—Nitro-o—anisidine
99—59—2
2—Nitropropane
79—46—9
N-Nitroso-n-butyl-N-(3-carboxypropyl) amine
38252-74-3
N-Nitroso-n-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl) amine
38 17-11-6
N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine
924-16-3
N-Nitrosodiethanolamine
1116-54—7
N—Nitrosodiethylamine
55-18-5
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
62-75-9
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
86-30-6
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine
621-64-7
N-Nitroso—N—ethylurea
759—73—9
3- (N—Nitrosomethylamino) propionitrile
60153—49—3
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
10595—95—6
N—Nitroso—N-methylurea
684—93-5
N-Nitrosomethylvinylamine
4549-40-0
N-Nitrosomorpholine
59-89-2
N—Nitrosonornicotine
16543—55—8
N—Nitrosopiperidine
100—75—4
N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
930-55-2
N—Nitrososarcosine
13256—22—9
Nitrofen
1836-75—5
Pentachloronitrobenzene
82—68—8
Pentachlorophenol
87—86-5
Peracetic acid
79-21-0
Phenol
108—95—2
Phenylhydrazine
100-63-0
Phorate
298-02—2
Phosphorus
7723—14—0
Phosphorus oxychloride
10025-87-3
Phosphorus pentachloride
10026-13-8
Polybrominated biphenyls
--
Polychlorinated biphenyls
1336-36-3
Potassium bromate
7758—01—2
Propane sultone
1120-71-4
beta—Propiolactone
57—57-8
Propyleneimine
75—55—8
Propylene oxide
75—56—9
Pyrene
129—00-0
Quinoline
92—22—5
Selenium
7782—49—2
Sodium borate
1303—96-4
Styrene oxide
96—09—3
Sulfallate
95—06-7
Sulfuric acid
7664—93—9
Terbufos
13071—79—9
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachioroethane
79—34—3
Tetrachloroethylene
127—18-4
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p—dioxin
1746-01-6
4,4’—Thiodianiline
139—65—1
126—3 76
33
Thiophenol
108—98—5
Thiourea
62—56—6
Thorium dioxide
1314—20-1
Toluene
108—88—3
Toluene—2
,
4—diisocyanate
584—84—9
Toluene-2, 6—diisocyanate
91—~)8-7
o-Toluidine
95—53-4
o—Toluidine hydrochloride
636-21-5
p-Toluidine
106-49-0
Toxaphene
8001-35-2
1,2, 4—Trichlorobenzene
120-82—1
Trichloroethylene
79-01-6
2,4, 6-Trichlorophenol
88—06-2
Trimethyl benzene
25551-13—7
1,2,4—Trimethyl benzene
95—63-6
2
,
4, 6-Trinitrotoluene
118—96—7
Tris (2, 3-dibromopropyl) phosphate
126-72-7
Trypan blue
72-57-1
Urethane Ethyl carbamate
51-79-6
Vinyl bromide
593-60-2
Vinyl chloride
75-01-4
Vinylidene chloride
75-35-4
Antimony compounds
Includes any unique chemical
substance that contains antimony
as part of that chemical’s infrastructure
Arsenic compounds
Includes any unique chemical
substance that contains
arsenic as part of that chemical’s
infrastructure
Beryllium compounds
Includes any unique chemical
substance that contains
beryllium as part of that
chemicals infrastructure
Cadmium compounds
Includes any unique chemical substance
that contains cadmium as part of that
chemical ‘s infrastructure
Chromium compounds
Includes any unique chemical substance
that contains chromium as part of that
chemical ‘s infrastructure
Cobalt compounds
Includes any unique chemical substance
126—377
34
that contains cobalt as part of that
chemical ‘s infrastructure
Cyanide compounds
x(pos) CN(neg) where X
=
H(pos) or
any other group where a formal dissociation
Lead compoundscan
be made. For example, KCN or Ca(CN)2
Includes any unique chemical substance
that contains lead as part of that
chemical ‘s infrastructure
Manganese compounds
Includes any unique chemical substance
that contains manganese as part of that
chemical ‘s infrastructure
Mercury compounds
Includes any unique chemical substance
that contains mercury as part of that
chemical
‘
s infrastructure
Nickel compounds
Includes any unique chemical substance
that contains nickel as part of that
chemical ‘s infrastructure
Section 232.APPENDIX B
Additional Procedures for
Calculating the Chronic Toxicity
Score
a) Procedures to be used in selecting chronic toxicity
studies.
1) Chronic toxicity studies in which all of the items in
subsection (a) (1) (A) of this appendix are identified
or measured with adequate specificity to use the
equations in subsection (b) of this appendix are to be
given first preference.
A) Study items to be identified or measured:
i) Test species;
ii) Contaminant dose;
iii) Duration of exposure must be at least 21
days, except for developmental studies in
animals, in which case the duration of
126—3 78
35
exposure must be during critical gestation
days;
iv) Route of exposure; and
v) Effect of exposure.
B) In the event that two or more studies are
available in which the items in subsection
(a) (1) (A) are deemed to have been identified or
measured, but which give inconsistent results, the
study must be selected by the following
procedures:
i) In the event that two or more studies are
laboratory animal toxicity studies, the study
that is conducted in accordance with or
consistent with Good Laboratory Practice
Standards must be used. Good Laboratory
Practice Standards are incorporated by
referenced in Section 232.110.
ii) In the event that the application of the
procedure in subsection (i) fails to result
in the selection of one study, then the study
that results in the highest Chronic Toxicity
Score must be used.
2) Studies that identify or measure all of the items in
subsection (a) (1) (A) of this appendix except for the
contaminant dose, must be’ given second preference.
A) For a second preference study, the Lowest Toxic
Dose Score for a given species and a given route
of exposure must be determined according to the
following table:
Species
Route of
Lowest Toxic
Exposure
Dose Score
Human
Inhalation
1
Human
Non-inhalation
2/3
Non-human
Inhalation
2/3
Non-human
Non-inhalation
1/3
B) In the event that two or more second preference
studies are available, the study that results in
the highest Chronic Toxicity Score must be used.
3) A contaminant for which there are insufficient data in
the study to identify the elements of either a first
126—3 79
36
or second preference study, must be determined to have
no data and be assigned a Chronic Toxicity Score of 0.
b) The following general equation must be used to obtain the
dose in units of milligram per kilogram per day for the
oral, gavage and inhalation routes of exposure: Dose
=
(I) (C) (TCF)/UF
1) For the routes of exposure listed below, use the
following:
TCF=Time Correction Factor of 1, unless the exposure
was intermittent, in which case the fraction of
time during which exposure occurred is used (e.g.,
5 days/week
=
5/7
=
0.71).
UF= Uncertainty Factor of 10, used only when data are
for exposure periods less than 90 days. In the
case of fetotoxicity and teratogenicity studies,
an Uncertainty Factor of 1 must be used.
2) Where the exposure is oral use the following:
A) Oral Exposure via Food:
1= Food Intake in kilogram of food ingested per
kilogram of body weight per day (kg/kg-d)
(refer to Chart 1 for standard values);
C= Contaminant Concentration in food in units of
milligram per kilogram (mg/kg); or
B) Oral Exposure via Water:
1= Water Intake in liter of water ingested per
kilogram of body weight per day (L/kg-d)
(refer to Chart 1 for standard values);
C= Contaminant Concentration in water in units
of milligram per liter (mg/L);
3) Where the exposure is via gavage use the following:
The product (I X C) in the above equation must be
replaced by Gavage Dose (GD) in units of milligram of
contaminant ingested per kilogram of body weight per
day (mg/kg-d); or
4) Where the exposure is via inhalation use the
following:
126—380
37
1= Air intake in cubic meter of air inhaled per
kilogram of body weight per day (cu.m3/kg-d)
measured as the product of Ventilation Rate (VR)
(refer to Chart 1 for standard values) and
Inhalation retention factor (RF) (assumed to be
0.5 for this procedure);
C= Contaminant Concentration in air in units of
milligram per cubic meter (mg/cu.m).
Chart 1
Summary of Physiological Parameters
Species
Water Intake
L/kg/day
Food Intake
kg/kg/day
Ventilation
cu
.
rn/kg/day
Cat
Dog
Guinea Pig
Human
Monkey
Mouse
Rabbit
Rat
0.100
0.025
0.075
0.029
0.14
0.25
0.065
0.10
0. 050
0.025
0.040
0.025
0.07
0.15
0.030
0. 050
0.46
0.31
0
.
58
0.26
0.32
1.44
0.46
0.66
Section 232.APPENDIX C:
Categories A, Bl, and B2
carcinogens of the reference
United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of
Health and Environmental
Assessment, Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS), as of
December 31, 1989
Chemical Name
CAS Number
Category
Aceta ldehyde
Acrylamide
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Aniline
Arsenic
Azobenzene
Benzene
Benz idine
Benzo (a) pyrene
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Bis (chloroethyl) ether
000075—07—0
000079—06—1
000107—13—1
0003 09—00—2
000062—53—3
007440—38—2
000103—33 —3
000071—43—2
000092—87—5
000050—32—8
000100—44—7
007440—41—7
000117—81—7
000111—44—4
B2
B2
Bl
B2
B2
A
B2
A
A
B2
B2
B2
B2
B2
126—38 1
38
Bis(chloromethyl) ether
000542—88-1
A
l,3—Butadiene
000106—99—0
B2
Cadmium
007440—43—9
B?
Carbon Tetrachloride
000056-23-5
B2
Chlordane
000057-74—9
B2
Chloroform
000067—66—3
B2
Chloromethyl Methyl Ether
000107-30-2
A
Chromium(VI)
18540—29—9
A
Coke Oven Emissions
008007—45—2
A
Creosote
008001—58—9
Bl
DDD
000072—54—8
B2
DDE
000072—55—9
B2
DDT
000050—29—3
B2
l,2—Dichloroethane
000107—06—2
B2
1, 3—Dichloropropene
00054 2—75—6
B2
Dichlorovos
000062—73—7
B2
Dieldrin
000060—57—1
B2
Dimethyl Sulfate
000077—78—1
B2
l,4—Dioxane
000123—91—1
B2
1, 2-Diphenylhydrazine
000122—66—7
B2
Epichlorohydrin
000106—89—8
B2
Ethylene Dibromide
000106—93—4
132
Folpet
000133—07—3
B2
Formaldehyde
000050—00—0
B?
Furmecyclox
060568—05-0
B2
Heptachlor
000076—44—8
B2
Heptachlor Epoxide
001024—57—3
B2
Hexachlorocyclohexane,
000608—73—1
B2
technical
alpha—Hexachlorocyclohexane
000319—84—6
B2
Hexachlorodibenzo—p—dioxin
019408—74—3
B2
Hydrazine, Hydrazine Sulfate
B2
(mixture)
Lead and Compounds
B2
(Inorganic)
4,4’ —MethyLenebis (N, N’—
000101—61—1
B2
dimethyl) benzenamine
N—Nitroso-N-methylethylarnine 010595—95—6
132
N—Nitroso-di—n-butylamine
000924—16-3
B2
N-Nitrosodi-N-propylarnine
000621—64-7
B2
N—Nitrosodiethanolamine
001116—54—7
132
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
000055—18—5
132
N—Nitrosodimethylamine
000062—75—9
B2
N—Nitrosodiphenylamine
000086—30-6
132
N—Nitrosopyrrolidine
000930—55—2
B2
Nickel Carbonyl
013463—39—3
132
Nickel Refinery Dust
007440—02—0
A
Nickel Subsulfide
012035—72—2
A
Polychiorinated Biphenyls
001336-36—3
132
Toxaphene
008001—35—2
B2
126—382
39
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Board Members J.D. Dumelle and B.S. Forcade concurred.
I, Dorothy N. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify~,h~the above Opinio/and Order was
adopted on the
______________
day of ___________________________
1991 by a vote of
7
0
.
IllinoisDorothy
M.Poj~itionG)~x1~,ClerkControl
).
Board
126—383
