ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March
    3,
    1994
    IN THE MATTER OF:
    )
    )
    PETITION OF HYDROSOL,
    INC
    )
    AS 94-6
    FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
    )
    (Adjusted Standard)
    35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218 SUBPART DD
    )
    )
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by 3. Theodore Meyer):
    On February 14,
    1994, Hydrosol,
    Inc.
    (Hydrosol)
    filed a
    petition for adjusted standard for its facility, located in
    Bridgeview, Cook County,
    Illinois.
    Hydrosol asks the Board to
    interpret 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.686(a) (2) (B).
    That section
    regulates the emission of volatile organic materials (VON) from
    Hydrosol’s aerosol can filling process.
    Depending on the
    interpretation by the Board, Hydrosol alternatively requests an
    adjusted standard from that section.
    The Board received the
    required notice of publication on February 25,
    1994.’
    The Board finds that the petition does not meet the
    requirements of Section 28.1 of the Environmental Protection Act
    (Act)
    (415 ILCS 5/28.1 (1992)), and 35 Ill. Adm. Code 106.
    Specifically, the petition does not adequately address
    Section 28.1(c) (3)
    of the Act, which requires a petitioner for an
    adjusted standard to prove that the requested standard will not
    result in environmental or health effects substantially and
    significantly more adverse than the effects considered by the
    Board in adopting the rule of general applicability.
    The
    petition also does not meet the requirements of 35 Ill.
    Adiu. Code
    106.705(g), which requires a petitioner to state the quantitative
    and qualitative impact of the petitioner’s activity on the
    environment if the petitioner were to comply with the regulation
    of general applicability, as compared to the quantitative and
    qualitative impact on the environment if the petitioner were to
    comply only with the proposed adjusted standard.
    Hydrosol simply
    states that all of its emissions are controlled, so that the.-
    proposed adjusted standard is as protective of the environment
    and human health as the underlying rule.
    The petition contains
    no qualitative or quantitative information, including such
    information as the type of controls currently used and the amount
    of VOM emissions.
    Hydrosol is also directed to describe the
    impacts of complying with Section 218.686(a) (2) (B), as opposed to
    1
    Section 28.1 of the Environmental Protection Act
    requires petitioners to file, within 14 days of the filing of a
    petition for adjusted standard, proof that public notice of the
    filing of the petition was published.
    (415 ILCS 5/28.1(1)
    (1992).)
    2
    the impacts of the requested adjusted standard.
    Additionally, the petition does not adequately address
    Section 106.705(e)
    of the Board’s procedural rules.
    (35 Ill.
    Adm. Code 106.705(e).)
    That subsection requires a description of
    compliance alternatives and costs of those alternatives.
    The
    petition does not contain any explanation of Hydrosol’s statement
    that there are no compliance options available except being
    forced out of the market,
    including information on rejected
    compliance alternatives.
    The petition should also contain
    information on the costs of compliance, which would apparently be
    the costs of Hydrosol’s closure.
    The Board further notes that the proposed language submitted
    by Hydrosol includes the provision that the adjusted standard
    would become effective upon filing with the Secretary of State.
    The Board points out that adjusted standard proceedings are not
    rulemaking proceedings, and that adjusted standards are not filed
    with the Secretary of State.
    The Board accepts Hydrosol’s petition for adjusted standard
    relief, but directs Hydrosol to file an amended petition
    addressing the identified deficiencies no later than April 15,
    1994.
    Failure to file an amended petition by that date will
    subject this matter to dismissal.
    Hydrosol has requested a
    hearing in this matter.
    Upon the filing of a sufficient amended
    petition, this matter will be set for hearing.
    There are also two motions before the Board.
    On February
    16,
    1994, Hydrosol filed a motion to substitute exhibits.
    Hydrosol seeks to substitute an original of Exhibit 5 for a
    facsimile copy of Exhibit
    5.
    That motion is granted.
    On
    February 28,
    1994, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    (Agency)
    filed a motion for extension of time, seeking until
    April 29,
    1994 to file its response to Hydrosol’s petition.
    The
    Board denies the Agency’s motion as unnecessary at this time,
    since the Agency need not respond until thirty days after the
    filing of the amended petition.
    The Board asks the Agency,
    -as
    part of its response, to specifically address Hydrosol’s
    contentions on the proper interpretation of Section
    218.686(a) (2) (B), including citation to any information in the
    record of R93-14 which addresses the issue.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    3
    I, Dorothy N. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board
    hereby certify that the above order was adopted on the
    ______
    day of
    _____________,
    1994, by a vote of
    ~
    Illinois
    Control Board

    Back to top