ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
~‘4ay9, 1974
DEERE &
COMPANY,
)
Petitioner,
vs.
)
PCB 73—538
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Henss)
Deere & Company requests variance from Rule 205(f) of the
Illinois Air Pollution Control Regulations for a period of one
year in order to use nonexempt solvents in its painting operations
in the event supplies of exempt solvents become unavailable.
Petitioner manufactures farm machinery at its John Deere Plow
and Planter Works (Moline, Illinois) and its John Deere East
Moline Works (East Moline, Illinois). Deere intends to bring
emissions from its painting operations into compliance with
Rule 205(f) by substituting nonphotochemically reactive solvents
for photochemically reactive solvents. However, it is anticipated
that the nonreactive solvents will he in short supply for at least
one year.
Painting operations at the two facilities include spraying,
flowcoating and dipping. The East Moline Works uses 1,372
gallons/day and the Plow and Planter Works uses 1582 gallons/day
of exempt solvents. Petitioner did not indicate the quantity of
solvent emissions being discharged from the two facilities. The
Environmental Protection Agency represented Deere~s emissions
as follows:
Calculable
Allowable
East Moline Works (30
Sources)
540 lbs ./hr.
240 lbs./hr.
Plow and Planter Works
(21 Sources)
640 lbs./hr.
168 lbs./hr.
Petitioner submitted letters from its suppliers which indicate
that there are shortages of Glycol Ether, Ketones, certain Esters
and other components of exempt solvents. None of the suppliers
12—245
—2—
would guarantee de1ive~y
of the.
solvents required by Deere.
It is stated that such shortages could extend for at least
one year. Petitioner wishes to use any exempt solvents it
can purchase in a tight
market hut
substitute nonexernpt
solvents when the exempt solvents are unavailable. Deere
alleges that the use
of nonexempt
solvents is the only alter-
native
to the discontinuance of operations. Discontinuance of
operations would cause a loss of employment and product vitally
needed for food production.
Local air quality measurements show that the Quad City &rea,
in which the
Deere plants are located,
is in compliance with the
National Secondary Air Quality Standard for Photochemical
Oxidants of which hydrocarbons are precursors. The data was
collected during a time when nonexempt solvents were used and
therefore Petitioner contends that its use of nonexempt solvents
“should have no additional impact on the public from that already
measured,”
The Agency recommends the grant of
this variance but only
until September 1, 1974 subject to a set of strict conditions.
We find that
many of
the conditions are acceptable but the term
of the variance should be for a full year.
Deere agreed to some of the conditions the
Agency
recommended
but contends that several of the EPA suggestions
are excessive,
repetitive and unwarranted. For instance, the Agency asks that
Deere test “all other, and new, exempt materials”. Deere~s
response that it should not be required to test every new experi-
mental material, particularly when the company cannot obtain
quantities of such material, is in accord with our thinking.
Deere also expressed strong disagreement with innuendo
contained in paragraph 10 of the Agency Recommendation. There
the Agency had said:
“While air quality nonitoring by the Quad City Air
Pollution Control Agency in Rock Island shows local
air quality to comply with the National Secondary
Air Quality Standards for photochemical oxidants,
the Agency must reserve its judgment on this data.
The measurement procedures were not acceptable to
the Agency, the equipment used was not in accord with
Federal specifications, and there is a
potential
conflict of interest, especially as to the Director
of the QCARAPCA, wh~~A a retirsd John Dee~eer~ploy~”.
Responding to this allegation, Deere states that the Quad
City Area Regional Air Pollution Control Agency was under the
direction of Marshall Monarch (now manager of the Air Pollution
Standards Division of the Illinois EPP~) at the time the monitoring
—
3-~
equipment was selected and installed. During Mr. Monarch~s
term as Director, the photochemical oxidant readings also
indicated compliance with National Secondary Standards.
Further, Petitioner
states “that including NO2 corrections
in
the data calculations (the EPA has orally indicated that
failure to do so is improper) would result in lower values
for nhotochemical oxidants” and “in any event, Petitioner
knows of no data to contradict that of the QCARAPCA”.
We find that the record does not support the innuendo
which was
contained in paragraph 10 of the Agency Recommendation.
Petitioner has presented adequate proof and the Agency
agrees that a variance is needed. We shall grant the variance
subject to Deer&s continued effort to utilize as much exempt
solvent as it can obtain.
ORDER
It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that Deere &
Company he granted a variance from Rule 205(f) of the Illinois
l\ir Pollution Control Regulations for its John Deere Plow and
Planter Works in Moline and the John Deere East Moline Works in
East Moline, Illinois until May 9, 1975 for the purpose of
using photochemicallv reactive solvents when supplies of non—
photochemically reactive solvents are unavailable. This variance
is subject to the following conditions:
1. The Petitioner shall submit to the Agency the
following information on exempt~solvents and
paints for each facility within thirty
(30) days:
A) The amount purchased during 1973 and to
date.
B)
Inventory at 1973 year end.
C) Usual inventory and maximum inventory capability.
2. Petitioner shall submit to the Agency quarterly
status reports stating the amount of photochemically
reactive materials emitted from each facility. The
first report shall be submitted on or before
July 15, 1974.
3. Petitioner shall continue to seek alternative
supplies of exempt materials and shall report
such efforts in its quarterly status report.
4. Petitioner shall purchase nonexempt materials for
each facility only when their specific exempt
counterparts are unavailable. Consistent with
the needs of both facilities Petitioner shall
12
—
247
—4—
purchase photochemically reactive materials in
such minimum quantities as will allow a rapid
changeover to nonphotochemically reactive
materials when those materials become available.
5. Petitioner shall maintain a continuing effort to
explore alternative methods of hydrocarbon emission
control.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order was adopted
this G~’\ day of
_________,
1974 by a vote of ~ to 0
i.~
12—248