ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September 18, 2003
IN THE MATTER OF:
PETITION OF CROMWELL-PHOENIX,
INC. FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD
FROM 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218.204(C)
)
)
)
)
)
AS 03-5
(Adjusted Standard - Air)
ERIC E. BOYD, SEYFARTH SHAW, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER; and
CHARLES E. MATOESIAN APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by N.J. Melas):
On May 29, 2003, petitioner Cromwell-Phoenix, Inc. (Cromwell) filed a petition (Pet.)
for an adjusted standard, pursuant to Section 28.1 of the Environmental Protection Act (Act).
415 ILCS 5/28.1 (2002). Cromwell seeks relief from the control requirements for volatile
organic material (VOM) of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.204(c). This rule, also known as the paper
coating rule, limits VOM content to 2.3 pounds per gallon. Cromwell requests the adjusted
standard as Section 218.204(c) pertains to emissions from Cromwell’s corrosion inhibiting (CI)
packaging materials production facility located at 12791 South Ridgeway in Alsip, Cook
County.
Cromwell seeks an adjusted standard from Section 218.204(c) so that it may use CI
solutions with a maximum of 8.3 lbs of VOM per gallon of coating in its web fed and sheet fed
coating and printing lines, without having to install add-on control devices. The Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) recommended grant of the adjusted standard,
subject to conditions, both in its July 16, 2003 Recommendation, as well as at the August 7,
2003 hearing.
Based upon the record before it, the Board finds that Cromwell has provided sufficient
justification for each of the Section 28.1 factors. The Board grants Cromwell an adjusted
standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.204(c), subject to conditions outlined in this order.
ADJUSTED STANDARD PROCEDURE
The Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/1
et seq
.,
amended by
P.A. 93-152, eff.
July 10, 2003) and Board rules provide that a petitioner may request, and the Board may grant,
an environmental standard that is different from the generally applicable standard that would
otherwise apply to the petitioner. This is called an adjusted standard. The general procedures
that govern an adjusted standard proceeding are found at Section 28.1 of the Act and Part 104,
Subpart D of the Board’s procedural rules. 415 ILCS 5/28.1; 35 Ill. Adm. Code 104.400
et al
.
2
The Board rules for the content requirements of the petition and Agency
recommendation are found at Section 104.406 and Section 104.416, respectively. 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 104.406, 104.416.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On May 29, 2003, Cromwell filed this petition with the Board for an adjusted standard
from the paper coating rule. On May 31, 2003, Cromwell published notice of the petition in the
Chicago Tribune
, and filed the certificate of publication with the Board on June 10, 2003.
Cromwell filed a motion for expedited review on July 3, 2003, and a motion for expedited
transcript on July 25, 2003, offering to pay the difference to expedite the transcript. The Agency
filed its recommendation (Rec.) that the Board grant Cromwell’s requested relief on July 16,
2003, subject to certain conditions contained in the Agency’s recommendation.
On August 7, 2003, the Board granted both Cromwell’s motions for expedited review and
for an expedited transcript. Also on August 7, 2003, Hearing Officer Bradley Halloran
conducted a hearing in this matter at the Board offices in Chicago, Cook County. Cromwell
filed a closing brief on August 22, 2003 (Pet. Cl. Br.), and the Agency filed a closing brief on
September 2, 2003 (Ag. Cl. Br.).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The Facility
Cromwell is an Illinois corporation and employs 31 people. Pet at 4. Cromwell’s
facility, 98,000 square feet in size, is located in Alsip, Cook County.
Id
. Cook County is a part
of the Greater Chicagoland Severe-17 Ozone non-attainment area designated under 40 C.F.R.
81.314, pursuant to Section 107 of the Clean Air Act. Pet. at 8; 42 U.S.C. 7407. The facility
was built in 1965, and Cromwell began operations in the building in 2001. Pet. at 4. The
equipment Cromwell uses is approximately 40 years old.
Id
. The Cromwell facility emits
approximately 5 to 6 tons of VOM per year,
1
and has the potential to emit less than 25 tons per
year. Pet. at 7. The hours of operation at the facility are approximately 2,900 hours per year.
Pet. at 7.
The Production Process
Cromwell manufactures CI packaging material at the Alsip production facility. Part of
the manufacturing process involves applying CI solutions containing VOM components to paper
substrates. Cromwell states the VOM emissions from CI solutions are very low by design (less
than 5% of VOM applied) because the VOM components of the CI coating solution are intended
to remain in and be an integral part of the final product.
1
Cromwell reported air emissions of 5.4 tons in 2001 and 6.03 tons in 2002. Pet. Exh. B, par.
27.
3
Cromwell produces CI packaging materials used by the metal industry to keep metal
parts from corroding. Tr. at 7. In order to produce CI packaging materials, Cromwell
impregnates kraft paper using a carrier to transport the CI compounds into the paper where they
are retained. The CI compounds are released to the customer’s wrapped metal parts over a
prolonged period of time. Tr. at 7. The carrier for the solutions is comprised of high molecular
weight VOM and water. The VOMs are corrosion inhibitors themselves and also facilitate the
migration of other corrosion inhibitors present in Cromwell’s end product towards the surface of
the wrapped metal parts over time.
Id
. The VOM also acts as a paper softener and improves
paper-folding qualities. Pet. at 2.
VOM Emissions
Cromwell contends that VOMs are the only emissions of regulated pollutants from the
production of CI packaging materials at the facility. Tr. at 8. Cromwell states the VOM
components of the CI solutions it uses have low vapor pressures, which result in minimal
evaporation. Tr. at 8. The CI compound with the highest VOM content that Cromwell currently
uses contains 8.28 lbs of VOM per gallon. Pet. Cl. Br. Exh. 2, Att. C. Gravimetric test results
demonstrate that the overall VOM emissions are less than 5% of the weight of CI solution
applied. Pet. at 6. The end product is wound onto a cylindrical core immediately after the CI
solutions are applied. This process physically encapsulates the product and impedes
volatilization of VOM components.
Id
.
Interaction With the Agency
The Agency issued Cromwell Violation Notice #A-2001-00265 dated November 20,
2001. Pet. at 1. The notice of violation alleged Cromwell failed to demonstrate compliance with
the reasonably available control technology (RACT) emissions limitations set forth in 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 218.Subpart F.
Id
. After some discussions between the parties, the Agency filed a
notice of intent to pursue legal action on March 19, 2002. Pet. at 2. A coating specialist from
the Agency visited the facility on May 9, 2002, at the request of Cromwell. Cromwell alleges
the parties agreed that Cromwell would file this petition.
Id
. Cromwell submitted a Clean Air
Act Permit Program (CAAPP) application to the Agency on March 29, 2002, to date still under
review by the Agency. Pet. at 2-3. Cromwell states the application will demonstrate that
Cromwell is a minor source.
Id
.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Board agrees with the Agency and Cromwell that the regulation of general
applicability at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.204(c) does not specify a level of justification for an
adjusted standard. Pet. at 4; Rec. at 8. Therefore, pursuant to Section 28.1(c) of the Act, the
burden of proof is on the petitioner to demonstrate that:
1. Factors relating to that petitioner are substantially and significantly
different from the factors relied upon by the Board in adopting the general
regulation applicable to that petitioner;
4
2. The existence of those factors justifies an adjusted standard;
3. 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; and
4. The adjusted standard is consistent with any applicable federal law. 415
ILCS 5/28.1(c) (2002); 35 Ill. Adm. Code 104.426(a).
CURRENT APPLICABLE STANDARDS
The current standard applicable to Cromwell’s paper coating operations are set forth at
35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.204(c). Section 182(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7401
et
seq
. requires individual states with severe ozone non-attainment areas to adopt RACT
regulations applicable to VOM sources within non-attainment areas. Section 218.204(c) of the
Board rules, the paper-coating rule, was promulgated pursuant to Section 182 of the CAA, and
became effective August 16, 1991.
The paper-coating rule requires paper coaters to utilize coating materials containing no
more than 2.3 pounds of VOM per gallon of coating applied. In the alternative, pursuant to
Section 218.207, a source such as a paper-coater may use a capture system and control device
which achieves an 81% reduction in the overall emissions of VOM from the coating line, and a
90% reduction of the captured VOM emissions, or achieve VOM reductions that are equivalent
to the limitations of Section 218.204. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.207.
CROMWELL’S PROPOSED ADJUSTED STANDARD
Cromwell proposes the following adjusted standard for adoption by the Board:
1. The total actual VOM emissions from the Cromwell facility do not exceed 25 tons
per year.
2. The Versil Pak wax laminating coatings continue to meet the applicable VOM
content limitations under 35 IAC Part 218.Subpart F.
3. The web fed and sheet fed CI coating and printing lines use only corrosion
inhibiting solutions whose as-applied VOM contents do not exceed 8.3 lbs VOM
per gallon, less water.
4. Cromwell shall operate in full compliance with all other applicable provisions of
35 IAC Part 218.Subpart F.
5. Cromwell shall continue to investigate viable reduced VOM content coatings and,
where practicable, shall substitute such coatings as long as such substitution does
not result in a net increase in VOM emissions. An annual report summarizing the
5
activities and results of these investigatory efforts will be prepared by
Cromwell and submitted to the IEPA.
6. Cromwell shall operate in full compliance with the Clean Air Act.
7. Cromwell shall continue to report all annual emissions to the Agency. Pet. at 12-
13.
AGENCY’S RECOMMENDED ADJUSTED STANDARD
The Agency recommends that the Board grant Cromwell’s petition subject to the
following eight conditions:
1. The total actual VOM emissions from the entire Cromwell Alsip facility shall not
exceed 25 tons per year
2. The Versil Pak wax laminating coatings shall continue to meet the applicable
VOM content limitations under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.Subpart F.
3. The web fed and sheet fed CI coating and printing lines shall use only CI
solutions which, as-applied, do not exceed 8.3 lbs. VOM per gallon, less water.
4. Cromwell shall operate in full compliance with all other applicable provisions of
35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 218, including but not limited to, Subpart F.
5. Cromwell shall continue to investigate CI coatings with a reduced VOM content
and, where practicable, shall substitute current coatings with lower VOM content
as long as such substitution does not result in a net increase in VOM emissions.
An annual report summarizing the activities and results of these investigatory
efforts shall be prepared by Cromwell and submitted to the Agency’s Bureau of
Air, Compliance and Enforcement Section.
6. The relief granted in this proceeding shall be limited to the equipment and
emission sources at the Cromwell Alsip facility as of July 14, 2003, and which
were identified in the CAAPP application as filed on March 29, 2002.
7. Cromwell shall operate in full compliance with the Clean Air Act, Illinois
Environmental Protection Act and other applicable regulations not otherwise
discussed herein.
8. Cromwell shall continue to report all annual emissions to the Agency
commensurate with the requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 254. Rec. at 5-6.
EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE AND ALTERNATIVES
6
If the Board does not grant the requested relief, Cromwell states it will have to
either reformulate its CI solutions to reduce VOM content or apply add-on controls to reduce
VOM emissions. Pet. at 8. Cromwell has investigated several alternatives as follows.
Reformulation
Cromwell has attempted to reformulate a CI solution to reduce VOM content. Tr. at 9.
Cromwell considered three options: (1) increasing the amount of water; (2) increasing the
amount of solids; and (3) replacing current VOM carrier with higher molecular weight materials.
Cromwell asserted that each approach was unsuccessful, resulting in unacceptable product
quality or increased VOM emissions. Pet. CL. Br. Exh. 1.
Cromwell has calculated that the use of a reformulated compliant solution would result in
VOM emissions approximately 7.8 times greater than those associated with the current
formulations. Pet. Exh. B at par. 24. As a result, Cromwell’s emissions would increase from
approximately 6 to 39 tons of VOM per year.
Id
. Cromwell believes this result is
counterproductive to the goal of reducing VOM emissions. Pet. at 7.
Cromwell explained that the first option--increasing the water--caused the paper to
wrinkle and the cut sheets to curl, making it difficult to provide a good wrap of metal parts. Tr.
at 10; Pet. CL. Br. Exh. 1. Adding water also required using heat to dry the product, which
increased VOM emissions. Pet. Cl. Br. Exh. 1. Cromwell stated that the second approach--
increasing the amount of solids-- resulted in a powdery bloom on the surface of the coated paper
or resulted in a suspension that could not be used for coating. Pet. Cl. Br. at 1. Finally,
Cromwell reported that the third approach-- replacing the VOM carrier resulted in solutions that
were difficult to mix, difficult to dry, and that gave the paper an oily look and stiffer feel. Pet.
Cl. Br. Exh. 1.
Add-On Control Device
Cromwell also investigated installation of add-on control devices. Pet. at 12. Cromwell
hired a consultant, ERM, Inc., to perform a reasonably available control technology analysis
(RACT). Pet. Exh. A. ERM Inc. determined that the technically feasible options were oxidation
and a combination adsorption/oxidation system.
2
Id
. ERM, Inc.’s analysis determined the least
expensive control option, consisting of a carbon adsorber concentrated with a thermal oxidizer,
would have an annual cost of approximately $25,000 per ton of VOM controlled (corresponding
to a total annual cost of $375,000; Pet. at 12). Pet. Exh. A at 8. Additional costs associated with
2
Adsorption is a process where gaseous or liquid compounds adhere to the surface of solid
adsorbent particles that are highly porous and have very large surface to volume ratios. Pet. Exh.
A at 3. For example, activated carbon is a common and effective adsorbent used to remove
gaseous volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from industrial exhaust streams.
Id
. Oxidation
converts gaseous VOCs to carbon dioxide, water and other various products of combustion. Pet.
Exh. A at 5.
7
compliance demonstration testing would amount to $40,000 to $50,000. Pet. at 12; Pet.
Exh. A at 9. Cromwell asserted that ERM, Inc.’s RACT analysis found the cost of installing
add-on oxidation or adsorption/oxidation controls was not economically reasonable. Pet. at 12.
The Agency agreed with this assertion. Rec. at 5.
SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT FACTORS
Cromwell asserted that its operations are unique in Illinois and that the applicable paper-
coating rules did not contemplate the methods Cromwell uses to produce CI packaging materials
at the Alsip facility. Pet at 8, 17. Unlike conventional coating operations where VOM solvents
are used as carriers of pigments or other solids and where coaters intend the VOM solvents to
evaporate, Cromwell intended the VOM in its CI solutions to remain in the CI packaging
products. Pet. at 8-9. For example, conventional coating operations typically drive off 96% or
more of the applied solvent, while Cromwell’s product
retains
more than 95% of the CI
solutions applied. Pet. at 10. Cromwell contended that it has investigated compliance
alternatives, including experiments with reformulated CI coatings and the installation of add-on
controls, but that none of the options proved economically reasonable or technically feasible.
Pet. at 17.
IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
Cromwell contended that its requested adjusted standard will not adversely impact the
environment or human health. Pet. at 17. The Cromwell facility emits approximately five to six
tons of VOM per year, less than five tons of which comes from the CI production operations.
Pet. at 14. The Agency agreed with Cromwell that the five or six tons of VOM it emits annually
is a small contributor to the overall emissions in the Chicago nonattainment area. Ag. Cl. Br. at
3. With point source emissions totaling 112.09 tons per day (based on an average summer
weekday) in the Chicago nonattainment area, Cromwell’s emissions are a very small percentage
of that total. Ag. Cl. Br. at 3.
Cromwell stated it is a minor source and the only CI material manufacturing facility
located in Illinois. Pet. at 4, 7. Cromwell contended, and the Agency agreed, that typical VOM
reduction techniques would lead to greater overall VOM emissions from the production methods
Cromwell employs at the Alsip facility. Ag. Rec. at 6-7.
Cromwell has entered into merger negotiations with another company and increased
production and COM emissions may occur. Cromwell has no estimate of post-merger emissions,
but Cromwell asserted it will not become a major source of emissions (
i.e.
having potential
emissions greater than 25 tons per year). Pet. Cl. Br. Exh. At 1.
CONSISTENCY WITH FEDERAL LAW
Cromwell contended that the relief it requests is consistent with federal law because no
federal RACT standards are applicable to Cromwell’s specific operations as a manufacturer of
CI materials. Pet. at 18.
8
DISCUSSION
In summary, Cromwell seeks a change in the paper-coating rule for the amount of VOM
per gallon in the coating materials it uses to produce CI packaging products from 2.3 to 8.3
pounds of VOM per gallon without the use of add-on controls. To achieve this relief, Cromwell
requests an adjusted standard from Section 218.204(c). The Agency recommends that the Board
grant Cromwell the requested relief subject to certain conditions. If granted, the adjusted
standard would apply only to the coating materials Cromwell uses to manufacture CI packaging
products at its Alsip facility.
The Board finds that Cromwell’s request for relief from the paper-coating rule meets the
statutory “fundamentally different” factors of section 28.1(c) of the Act. Cromwell has
demonstrated that: (1) factors relating to it are substantially and significantly different from the
factors relied upon by the Board in adopting the general regulation; (2) the existence of these
factors justifies an adjusted standard; (3) the requested standard will not cause substantially or
significantly more adverse environmental or health effects than the effects considered by the
Board in adopting the rule of general applicability; and (4) the adjusted standard is consistent
with applicable federal laws. 415 ILCS 5/28.1(c) (2002).
Cromwell bases its justification for the requested relief on the lack of an economically
reasonable or technically feasible alternative. The Board finds that the two alternatives that
Cromwell investigated, reformulating the CI solution or add-on control devices, are not
technically feasible or economically reasonable. Additionally, VOM emissions data show that
Cromwell’s emissions will not cause negative health and environmental effects.
The Board finds no inconsistency between granting Cromwell’s requested relief and
federal law. Finally, the Board finds that the paper coating rule at Section 218.204(c) did not
anticipate the process of applying CI solutions to kraft paper that Cromwell employs.
The Agency’s recommend adjusted standard language differs slightly from the language
Cromwell proposed. Specifically, the Agency’s proposed language limits Cromwell’s relief to
the equipment and emission sources at the Cromwell Alsip facility as of July 14, 2003, and that
were identified in Cromwell’s CAAPP application as filed on March 29, 2002. The Agency also
included clarification that reporting of emissions will be “commensurate with” 35 Ill. Adm. Code
Part 254.
In granting this adjusted standard, the Board is adopting conditions similar, but not
identical in wording, to those suggested by the parties. As the Agency recommended, the Board
has tightened up the description of the covered equipment and clarified reporting requirements.
The balance of the changes are non-substantive, and intended to bring this order into conformity
with the Board’s usual drafting style in this type of cases.
CONCLUSION
9
The Board grants Cromwell’s requested relief from the paper coating rule at 218.204(c)
at its facility in Alsip, Cook County, as proposed by Cromwell and modified by the Agency. As
is usual, the relief is effective as of the date of this order.
This opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.
ORDER
1. Pursuant to Section 28.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, the Board grants
Cromwell-Phoenix, Inc. (Cromwell) an adjusted standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code
218.204(c) effective September 18, 2003. The adjusted standard applies to the
equipment and emission sources at Cromwell’s facility located at 12701 South
Ridgeway, Alsip, Cook County existing as of July 14, 2003 as identified in the
Clean Air Act Permit Program permit application Cromwell filed March 20, 2003.
2. The 2.3 pounds of volatile organic material (VOM) per gallon of coating applied
limitation of Section 218.204(c) does not apply. Instead, Cromwell is subject to
the following:
A) The total actual VOM emissions from the entire Cromwell Alsip facility
must not exceed 25 tons per year;
B) The Versil Pak wax laminating coatings must continue to meet the
applicable VOM content limitations under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218. Subpart
F;
C) The web fed and sheet fed corrosion inhibiting (CI) coating and printing
lines must use only CI solutions which, as-applied, do not exceed 8.3 lbs
VOM per gallon, less water;
D) Cromwell must operate in full compliance with all other applicable
provisions of 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 218, including but not limited to,
Subpart F;
E) Cromwell must continue to investigate CI coatings with a reduced VOM
content. Where practicable, Cromwell must substitute current coatings
with lower VOM content coatings as long as such substitution does not
result in a net increase in VOM emissions. Beginning on October 1, 2004,
Cromwell must prepare and submit each year an annual report
summarizing the activities and results of these investigatory efforts. The
annual report must be submitted to the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency (Agency) Bureau of Air, Compliance and Enforcement Section;
F) Cromwell must operate in full compliance with the Clean Air Act, Illinois
Environmental Protection Act and any other applicable regulation; and
10
G)
Cromwell must continue
to report all annual emissions the Agency in
accordance with the requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 254.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Section 41(a) of the Environmental Protection Act provides that final Board orders may
be appealed directly to the Illinois Appellate Court within 35 days after the Board serves the
order. 415 ILCS 5/41(a) (2002);
see also
35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.300(d)(2), 101.906, 102.706.
Illinois Supreme Court Rule 335 establishes filing requirements that apply when the Illinois
Appellate Court, by statute, directly reviews administrative orders. 172 Ill. 2d R. 335. The
Board’s procedural rules provide that motions for the Board to reconsider or modify its final
orders may be filed with the Board within 35 days after the order is received. 35 Ill. Adm. Code
101.520;
see also
35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.902, 102.700, 102.702.
I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the Board
adopted the above opinion and order on September 18, 2003, by a vote of 5-0.
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
