ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March 7, 1974
    AIRWAY PRODUCTS CORPORATION,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 73—554
    )
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    Respondent.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Henss)
    Petitioner operates a plant in Schiller Park, Illinois for
    the manufacture of grocery store shelves, tables and check—out
    counters. Painting equipment at the plant consists of two
    Rahnsberg electrostatic disc paint spray booths, a flowcoater and
    two bake ovens. Petitioner is seeking a one year variance from
    Rule 205(f) of the Rules and Regulations Governing the Control
    of Air Pollution, in order to continue its painting operations
    until photochemically nonreactive solvents become available.
    Photochemically reactive hydrocarbon emissions from Petitioner’s
    electrostatic disc spray booths and bake ovens are in excess of
    the eight pounds/hour allowed under Rule 205(f)
    .
    The painting
    operations emit up to 67 lbs./hr. of noiiexempt solvents.
    Petitioner plans to come into compliance by changing over
    to photochemically nonreactive solvents but has not been able to
    obtain this type of solvent because of the shortage of raw materials
    used by Petitioner’s suppliers. Petitioner has investigated
    incineration as a control technique but has found that the natural
    gas needed to fire the afterburner is unavailable. Therefore,
    Petitioner does not propose the installation of any control equipment.
    The Company states that if it were required to comply with
    Rule 205(f) at this time it would be forced to a complete plant
    shutdown jeopardizing the employment of 200 people and resulting
    in a complete loss of the plant production. The Company states
    that if a variance is granted it will maintain close contact with
    suppliers and will immediately implement the compliance program
    as soon as the photochemically nonreactive paints and solvents become
    available.
    11 —495
    The Agency has rejected Petitionerts application for an
    o~eratingpermit because of the lack of a suitable compliance
    plan. However, the Agency now recommends a grant of this
    variance subject to certain conditions.
    One of the conditions suggested by the EPA is that Petitioner
    he required to use as much exempt solvent as can be furnished by
    its suppliers. This will undoubtedly cause problems of double
    inventory and storage problems. Petitioner stores its solvents
    in three underground storage tanks of 1000 gallon capacity. The
    underground tanks would have to be depleted of nonexempt solvents
    before the exempt solvents could be stored because the two types
    of solvent could not he mixed. If exempt solvents become
    available periodically the Company will apparently have to make
    p~ovision~forseparate storage of these solvents. The Company
    states that it will work out these problems, if the exempt solvents
    become available, in order to satisfy the Rules~
    According to the EPA, citizens living in the area of the
    plant were contacted and they had no complaints concerning the
    Airway Pro~ucts facility.
    We believe from the evidence that the variance should be
    granted but that Petitioner should modify its Compliance Plan to
    give more definite assurance that the plant operations will come
    within the provisions of the Rule. The Compliance Plan shall be
    filed within the term of this variance and shall contain a more
    definite program for meeting the Standard through one of the
    alternatives available to the Company.
    ORDER
    It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that Petitioner
    be granted a variance from Rule 205(f) of the Illinois Air
    Pollution Control Regulations from December 31, 1973 to and
    including December 31, 1974, subject to the following conditions:
    a. Petitioner shall utilize as much exempt solvent
    formulations as can be furnished by its suppliers.
    b. Petitioner shall submit monthly progress reports
    to the Agency indicating its efforts to obtain
    exempt solvents and detailing progress made toward
    achieving a compliance program pursuant to
    paragraph c of this Order. The progress report
    11 —496
    shall be submitted to: Illinois Environmental
    Protection Agency, Division of Air Pollution
    Control, Control Program Coordinator, 2200
    Churchill Road, Springfield, Illinois 62706.
    c. With~in9 months after this Board Order
    Petitioner shall submit to the Environmental
    Protection Agency a modified Compliance Plan
    detailing the manner in which Petitioner will
    come into compliance at the conclusion of the
    variance or under the provisions of Rule 205(f)
    (1) (D)
    I,
    Christan
    L.
    Moffett, Clerk
    of
    the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereb~certify the above Opipion and Order was adopted
    this
    ________
    ____
    day of
    ~
    1974 by a vote
    of
    Christan L. Moffett7~1~k
    Illinois Pollution C~rol Board

    Back to top