1

1 BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF: )

4 )

)

5 PETITION OF ARGONNE NATIONAL ) AS 03-4

LABORATORY FOR AN ADJUSTED )

6 STANDARD FROM 35 ILL. ADM. )

CODE 218.182 )

9 The following is the transcript of a

10 hearing held in the above-entitled matter taken

11 stenographically by MICHELE J. LOSURDO, CSR, a

12 notary public within and for the County of

13 DuPage and State of Illinois, before BRADLEY P.

14 HALLORAN, Hearing Officer, at 414 North

15 Wood Dale Road, Wood Dale, Illinois, on the

16 16th day of September, 2003, A.D., commencing

17 at 10:35 a.m.

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 APPEARANCES:

2 HEARING TAKEN BEFORE:

3 ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

BY: MR. BRADLEY P. HALLORAN

4 100 West Randolph Street

Suite 11-500

5 Chicago, Illinois 60601

(312) 814-8917

ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL

7 BY: MR. WILLIAM D. LUCK

9700 South Cass Avenue

8 Building 201

Argonne, Illinois 60439-4832

9 (630) 252-7300

10 Appeared on behalf of Petitioner;

11 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

BY: MS. RACHEL DOCTORS

12 1021 North Grand Avenue East

P.O. Box 19276

13 Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276

(217) 524-3337

Appeared on behalf of Respondent.

ALSO PRESENT:

Anand Rao and Lisa Liu.

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 I N D E X

2 THE WITNESS: GREGORY BARRETT PAGE

3 Examination

by Mr. Luck............................ 12

5 THE WITNESS: MICHAEL ROGERS PAGE

6 Examination

by Ms. Doctors......................... 38

9 E X H I B I T S

10 MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION

11 Petitioner's Exhibit Number 1.......... 21

IEPA Exhibit Number 1.................. 40

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Good

2 morning. My name is Bradley Halloran. I'm a

3 hearing officer with the Illinois Pollution

4 Control Board and I'm also assigned to this

5 matter and this matter is the petition of

6 Argonne National Laboratory for an adjusted

7 standard from 35 Illinois Administrative Code

8 218.180 documented by the Board of adjusted

9 standard 3-04.

10 Today is Tuesday, September 16th the

11 year 2003. It's approximately 10:35. I note

12 aside from the parties and the witnesses, there

13 do not appear and, in fact, there are not any

14 members of the public present, but we are

15 privileged to have with us Anand Rao and Lisa

16 Liu from the technical unit of the Illinois

17 Pollution Control Board. They may or may not

18 be asking questions later of the witnesses.

19 The hearing was scheduled and noticed

20 pursuant to section 104.400, subpart D of the

21 Board's procedural rules and will be governed

22 in accordance with section 101.600 of the

23 Board's procedural rules. Also note for the

24 record this hearing is intended to develop a

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 record for review by the seven members of the

2 Illinois Pollution Control Board. I will not

3 be making the ultimate decision in this case.

4 That's left to the seven members of the Board.

5 They will review the transcript of this

6 proceeding and the remainder of the record and

7 will render a decision.

8 My job is to ensure an orderly hearing

9 and a clear record and to rule on any

10 evidentiary matters that may arise. After the

11 hearing, the parties may have an opportunity

12 to -- they will have an opportunity to submit

13 posthearing briefs and also we'll hold a public

14 comment period.

15 With that said, Mr. Luck for

16 petitioner, would you like to introduce

17 yourself, please?

18 MR. LUCK: Yes. My name is William

19 Luck. I'm assistant general counsel at Argonne

20 National Laboratory. I'm here representing the

21 University of Chicago. The University of

22 Chicago is the operator of Argonne National

23 Laboratory. The site is run by the United

24 States government. We have a contract to

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 operate the laboratory with the United States

2 Department of Energy. Gloria

3 Wallick (phonetic) who's here this morning is

4 representing the United States Department of

5 Energy in this proceeding.

6 Argonne National Laboratory is seeking

7 an adjusted standard from the cold cleaning

8 rule provisions at 35 Illinois Administrative

9 Code 218.182. For many common garden variety

10 applications, we are able to use compliant

11 solvents that meet the 1 millimeter vapor

12 pressure standard, but there are a number of

13 applications involving research activities and

14 equipment that's used to do research at the

15 laboratory for which it's not possible for the

16 laboratory to use solvents compliant with the

17 1 millimeter vapor pressure standard.

18 There are a couple of regulatory

19 exceptions in the regulation, but those are not

20 feasible for Argonne. Wipe cleaning, which is

21 allowed under the regulations, leaves a residue

22 which interferes with certain research

23 applications and while there is an exception in

24 the regulations for electronic component

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 cleaning, there are pieces of equipment and an

2 associated apparatus that don't meet the

3 definition of electronic component which make

4 that exception unavailable to the laboratory.

5 So as a result, Argonne is proposing an

6 adjusted standard to enable it to conduct its

7 activities and I'm going to read from our

8 petition as to what the standard is that we're

9 proposing. The adjusted standard from 35

10 Illinois Administrative Code 218.182 applies to

11 Argonne National Laboratory, a research

12 laboratory located in Aurora Falls Land Forest

13 Preserve in DuPage County, Illinois.

14 The requirements of this adjusted

15 standard shall apply only to cold cleaning

16 involving the preparation of sample materials

17 and associated apparatus used for research and

18 development testing and analysis activities.

19 These activities are subject to the following

20 requirements: One, the research and

21 development related cleaning activities

22 include, but are not limited to, washing and

23 rinsing slides, drying glassware, sample

24 preparation, specimen cleaning, gel

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 stain/destaining, membrane rinsing and the

2 cleaning of small parts and equipment

3 associated with the preparation of sample

4 materials for testing and analysis; two, the

5 requirements of this adjusted standard do not

6 apply when the solvents meeting the vapor

7 pressure limits of 35 Illinois Administrative

8 Code 218.182 can be used without compromising

9 the quality of the equipment being used or the

10 validity of research results.

11 This standard was arrived at after

12 Argonne had consultations with the Illinois

13 Environmental Protection Agency. The two

14 entities worked together in developing the

15 standard. Argonne believes that the factors

16 relating to Argonne are significantly different

17 from the factors replied upon in the adoption

18 of the regulation. More specifically -- I'm

19 sorry. And we also believe that the impact on

20 the environment from the adjusted standard

21 would not be significant particularly when

22 compared to the impacts for same solvents that

23 are used for other routine and research and

24 development activities.

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 It's also the case that the adjusted

2 standard would not be inconsistent with any

3 provision of federal law and all of those three

4 points are expanded upon somewhere in our

5 petition. Mr. Gregory Barrett who's with

6 Argonne's regulatory compliance group has

7 prepared testimony addressing the expected

8 Argonne National Laboratory activities that

9 would be subject to the adjusted standard and

10 the impacts that would be anticipated from

11 those activities and that testimony has been

12 prefiled, but we're also submitting it today

13 and Mr. Barrett is here to take the stand and

14 to answer questions.

15 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Thank you,

16 Mr. Luck.

17 Ms. Doctors of the IEPA, would you like

18 to introduce yourself and opening statement?

19 MS. DOCTORS: Good morning. My name is

20 Rachel Doctors and I am representing the

21 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency in

22 this matter. The Illinois EPA has reviewed

23 Argonne's petition for an adjusted standard

24 from the requirements of cold cleaning

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 degreaser rule act, 35 Illinois Administrative

2 Code 218.182. They requested an adjusted

3 standard for certain activities.

4 The Illinois EPA is recommending that

5 the Board grant the requested relief. As

6 further explained in Mr. Rogers' prefiled

7 testimony and the Agency's recommendation, the

8 Agency believes relief is warranted because

9 this facility has met the required levels

10 pursuant to section 28.1 of the Illinois

11 Environmental Protection Act. The agency

12 believes the petitioner has demonstrated that

13 there are factors that are significantly and

14 substantially different than those relied upon

15 by the Board when it adopted this regulation.

16 Argonne is a research and development

17 laboratory. Certain activities require that

18 surfaces be completely free of residual

19 contamination. Argonne presented information

20 and documentation necessary for the Agency to

21 conclude that there are no technically feasible

22 or economically reasonable alternatives

23 available for compliance with this rule. The

24 Illinois EPA also agrees with the petitioner

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 that the estimated additional 1 ton per year

2 of -- excuse me -- estimated emissions of --

3 the Illinois EPA also agrees with the

4 petitioner that its estimated additional

5 emissions of 1 ton of volatile organic material

6 is minimal, hence, the environmental impact

7 from the adjusted standard will be minimal.

8 The cold cleaning degreasing rules are

9 part of Illinois' rate of SIP, State

10 Implementation Plan, for achieving the one hour

11 ozone national ambient air quality standard in

12 the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. If the

13 Board grants this petition, the result in

14 adjusted standard will be submitted by the

15 Illinois EPA to U.S. EPA as a SIP provision.

16 As a preliminary matter, the Illinois

17 EPA has discussed the proposed adjusted

18 standard with U.S. EPA and they have agreed

19 that this seems appropriate. The Agency

20 requests at this time that Mike Rogers'

21 prefiled testimony be admitted into the record

22 as read. He is also available to answer any

23 additional questions that the Board may have.

24 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Thank you

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 and I'll address that motion and request when

2 Mr. Rogers takes the stand.

3 With that said, Mr. Luck, would you

4 like to call your first and I think only

5 witness to the stand and the court reporter

6 will swear him in, please.

7 GREGORY BARRETT,

8 having been first duly sworn, was examined and

9 testified as follows:

10 EXAMINATION

11 by Mr. Luck

12 Q. Can you tell us your name, please?

13 A. My name is Gregory Barrett.

14 Q. And you're employed where?

15 A. I'm employed at Argonne National

16 Laboratory in the environmental compliance

17 group.

18 Q. And can you say just a little bit about

19 what you do in that capacity?

20 A. My primary responsibility in the group

21 is to ensure that the laboratory is in

22 compliance with all federal and state

23 regulations derived from the Clean Air Act.

24 Q. And can you say a little bit about how

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 you may interact with other operating groups

2 within the laboratory?

3 A. My primary responsibility with respect

4 to research and other operating divisions is to

5 ensure that their day-to-day activities and

6 future activities are evaluated to ensure that

7 we will comply with current and future federal

8 and state regulations.

9 Q. So when the regulation came out and was

10 about to become effective, did you have some

11 communication with the other operating

12 divisions within the laboratory at that time?

13 A. Yes, I did. Back in 1997 when we

14 realized what the impact of the cold cleaning

15 rule would have on our operations, we started

16 interacting with research and operations group

17 there to alert them to the potential problems

18 we might have with not being able to use

19 solvents with vapor pressures that would be

20 prohibited by the cold cleaning rule.

21 Q. And can you describe what kind of

22 responses you might have gotten from some of

23 those groups?

24 A. We were successful in some operations.

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 A lot of the routine operations at the

2 laboratory machine shops, automotive

3 maintenance, these operations were already able

4 to use solvents that would comply with the

5 upcoming regulations.

6 Also with some of the research groups,

7 we were able to evaluate their operations and

8 get them to substitute to a solvent that would

9 comply with both the 2 millimeter and

10 1 millimeter vapor pressure limits. However,

11 for some which involved sample preparation also

12 with a number of groups that deal with

13 accelerators, it became apparent that they were

14 not going to be able to find an acceptable

15 substitute that they could use without

16 compromising the research and the equipment

17 that they were using.

18 Q. And it was that information that got

19 back to you that became the basis for this

20 petition; is that correct?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. In the course of putting together the

23 petition, did you go back to these operating

24 groups to try to get some more precise

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 information about their particular needs?

2 A. Yes, I did. I alerted them to the fact

3 that upon receipt from the Illinois EPA of our

4 Title V Clean Air Program permit that we would

5 now not be in compliance with the specific

6 section of that permit which related to cold

7 cleaning and that, as a result, we had to find

8 a remedy to address this situation, so we

9 discussed this at length with divisions that

10 had continued to have problems with the vapor

11 pressure limit of the solvents that they were

12 using and their inability to find an adequate

13 substitute that would meet the regulation.

14 Q. There are two exhibits that are

15 attached to the petition and they're attached

16 to your testimony as well. Can you tell us how

17 those came to be and your role in their coming

18 to be?

19 A. What we did for the two exhibits were

20 to really go across the laboratory division by

21 division to find out where people were using

22 solvents that did not meet the vapor pressure

23 limits specified by the cold cleaning rule and

24 in cases where they were not able to find a

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 substitute that would be considered a compliant

2 solvent, we detailed a list of various

3 buildings and rooms in the divisions where this

4 occurred and also put together an estimated

5 usage by the types of noncompliant solvents

6 that people were expecting to continue to keep

7 using.

8 Q. And is the list of the current

9 activities that would need to use noncompliant

10 solvents, is that a comprehensive list?

11 A. This is pretty comprehensive for all

12 operations that were currently under way at the

13 time we put this together.

14 Q. And while the research and development

15 activities at any given time at the laboratory

16 might be different than a month before or a

17 month later or a year before or a year later,

18 is it your view that this is a representative

19 list and is likely to be representative as time

20 goes on?

21 A. Yes, it is. It asks people to really

22 look at worse case operating scenarios, as best

23 as they could project future operations and try

24 to come up with what they thought was a maximum

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 usage level of the types of solvents that would

2 not be considered in compliance.

3 Q. With respect to the second of the two

4 exhibits that talks about or has the

5 information in it about the quantitative

6 information that's in it, could you speak to

7 that a little bit in how those -- how you

8 obtained those numbers and how the use of

9 different kinds of solvents may be tracked at

10 Argonne National Laboratory?

11 A. Well, Argonne does track chemical usage

12 site-wide, but that is usage for whatever

13 particular reason a person may want to use it,

14 so many of these solvents are used in

15 day-to-day research operations which is

16 considered an insignificant activity and one of

17 the difficulties that we noted was the fact

18 that a researcher may use methanol for research

19 activity and then material from that same

20 container to do some cold cleaning and trying

21 to maintain separate records on that would be

22 very burdensome.

23 So we looked at the total usage which

24 we can track for the solvents that had been

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 identified as ones that would be used for cold

2 cleaning and took a very conservative

3 determination as to how much of that might be

4 used for cold cleaning to come up with our

5 estimated usage number.

6 Q. And can you quantify what that

7 conservative determination would have been?

8 A. We estimated that it would be

9 approximately 1 ton per year.

10 Q. Is it possible to speak to what

11 percentage of the overall usage was estimated

12 to be used for cold cleaning?

13 A. We estimated about one-third of all the

14 total usage of the solvents would be employed

15 for cold cleaning activities.

16 Q. And is that considered to be a

17 conservative estimation?

18 A. I think it's a conservative estimate,

19 yes.

20 Q. When the people were communicating with

21 you about their use of these solvents for cold

22 cleaning activities, did they convey to you

23 some sense of how much might be used at any

24 given time and what kind of containers or

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 apparatus they my use to do the cold cleaning

2 operation?

3 A. Yes, they did. Typically they would be

4 talking in milliliter amounts or perhaps a half

5 a liter or so, but, again, that sense of amount

6 versus gallons and gallons of material.

7 Q. Would this cold cleaning typically --

8 would it ever actually be done in conventional

9 cold cleaning equipment or would it be done in

10 some other kind of apparatus?

11 A. Typically it would not be done in a

12 conventional cold cleaner. A bench top

13 researcher might simply just take beaker, add a

14 few milliliters of a solvent and clean. For

15 some of the other types of apparatus,

16 especially research equipment, their components

17 might be removed from equipment and then

18 cleaned but not as a rule would they be using a

19 typical cold cleaning degreaser system.

20 Q. And I think you already addressed this,

21 but to keep track of a few millimeters used for

22 cold cleaning here and a few milliliters used

23 there, would that be difficult to do and would

24 it seem to make any sense to do that?

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 A. It would be difficult it do because we

2 are dealing with literally hundreds of

3 researchers at the facility and to place the

4 burden upon them to kind of keep track of every

5 type of solvent milliliter by milliliter with

6 respect to how it's being used I think is an

7 unreasonable and unfair burden to place on

8 them.

9 Q. Is that usage comparable to the

10 research and development usage that's already

11 accepted under the Title V permit?

12 A. The solvent usage that is employed

13 under research and development is considered an

14 insignificant activity under our Title V

15 permit, so really the amount that's used for

16 cold cleaning we have categorized as actually a

17 subset of the total amount that's being used.

18 MR. LUCK: I have no furthers

19 questions.

20 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Thanks,

21 Mr. Luck. As agreed on and stipulated to

22 beforehand, the written testimony of

23 Mr. Barrett will be allowed and taken into

24 evidence as if read into the record. I'm going

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 to mark it Petitioner's Exhibit Number 1 and I

2 also understand the court reporter will attach

3 the written testimony of Mr. Barrett to the

4 transcript.

5 With that said, Ms. Doctors, do you

6 have any questions of Mr. Barrett?

7 MS. DOCTORS: No, I do not.

8 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Mr. Rao?

9 MR. RAO: Yes, we do. Thank you, Brad.

10 My name is Anand Rao and I'm with the technical

11 unit and Lisa Liu. I think Brad introduced us

12 earlier also with the technical unit and we

13 have a few clarifying questions, some of them

14 deal with the background information that you

15 had provided in your testimony and the petition

16 which Lisa will go through and then we have

17 some questions on the recordkeeping

18 requirements, so Lisa, do you want to go

19 through?

20 MS. LIU: Good morning, Mr. Barrett.

21 MR. BARRETT: Good morning.

22 MS. LIU: In Exhibit 2 of your prefiled

23 testimony, you list the different divisions

24 with Argonne and their activities on an R and D

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 scale. I was wondering if you could describe

2 how the waste solvents that come from the cold

3 cleaning process are collected, stored and

4 disposed of.

5 MR. BARRETT: They would be handled

6 much the same way as if they were being used

7 for research activity which is if they meet the

8 criteria of a hazardous waste, they are

9 collected and stored at a satellite

10 accumulation area. There are records kept on

11 that they are kept in a closed container as is

12 required by regulations and then would be

13 handled through the waste management division

14 at Argonne for proper disposal.

15 MS. LIU: When you are using very small

16 quantities as you had discussed earlier of a

17 milliliter or two, would they actually pour

18 that waste into a container for disposal or

19 would they simply let it evaporate?

20 MR. BARRETT: Well, I certainly can't

21 speak for every particular operation. The

22 laboratory practice is to treat solvents such

23 as that, as waste, and handle them accordingly,

24 so that is the directive that is given to all

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 operating personnel at the laboratory.

2 MS. LIU: I know there are several

3 different kinds of laboratory setups there. I

4 was wondering if these cold cleaning activities

5 typically took place under a fume hood?

6 MR. BARRETT: My understanding is that

7 in many cases they do. With respect to some of

8 the larger components, I am not sure whether or

9 not they would use one or not. It might depend

10 upon the volume of solvent that's being used

11 and just the physical difficulties in whether

12 or not a particular component could be used in

13 a hood situation.

14 MS. LIU: Otherwise would it be in a

15 well-ventilated area?

16 MR. BARRETT: Obviously the health and

17 safety concerns would dictate the fact that

18 they would be used in a well-ventilated area

19 particularly if we're talking about a flammable

20 solvent which would be true in most cases with

21 alcohols that would be used.

22 MS. LIU: Exhibit 3 of your prefiled

23 testimony lists the different solvents that you

24 have currently identified that are used for

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 cold cleaning and they include ethanol, hexane,

2 isopropanol, methanol and toluene. I was

3 wondering under the adjusted standard if

4 Argonne would be using any other solvents that

5 might exceed the 1.0 millimeters of mercury

6 limit besides those five that you already

7 identified?

8 MR. BARRETT: Well, these are the ones

9 that we have identified as currently being used

10 and have been using in the past. I don't know

11 that there would be any future operations that

12 would require any additional solvents. Most of

13 these are used in operations that will be

14 ongoing. The sample preparation, cleaning of

15 equipment and accelerator systems do employ the

16 use of alcohols for cleaning, so while I can't

17 say categorically that no other solvent would

18 be used, I don't think there would be a large

19 addition to be made to this list of other type

20 of solvents.

21 MS. LIU: As far as the emissions from

22 the cold cleaning practices whether they occur

23 through the fume hood or just in a

24 well-ventilated area, could you explain how

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 those emissions are exhausted? Do they simply

2 go to the outside?

3 MR. BARRETT: They would eventually go

4 to the outside either through a fume hood being

5 used specifically to vent them off or if it's

6 in just a well-ventilated area they would be

7 obviously exhausted outside for health and

8 safety reasons.

9 MS. LIU: Thank you.

10 MR. RAO: I have a few questions

11 regarding this recordkeeping requirement and

12 how that applied to your cold cleaning process.

13 In your prefiled testimony, you mentioned about

14 how it's difficult to track the usage of these

15 solvents in some of the research activities and

16 I was taking a look at the applicable

17 regulations. The first is can you clarify

18 whether the recordkeeping requirement that

19 applies to the research activities, is it 3511

20 code 218.182 (D) (2), is that the section that

21 applies?

22 MR. BARRETT: I would probably need to

23 take a look at that citation.

24 MR. LUCK: Could I show him, your

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 Honor?

2 MR. RAO: Section 182 (D) has

3 recordkeeping requirements that apply for

4 people selling the solvents and for people

5 using the solvents. I am assuming that you

6 will be subject to the requirement that applies

7 to people that use the solvents?

8 MR. BARRETT: The issue with the

9 recordkeeping with respect to the regulation

10 again is the fact that it is -- the solvents

11 are employed for a number of uses, not only for

12 cold cleaning but for regular research

13 activities, so to try to distinguish when a

14 particular container of solvent was purchased

15 as to whether it would be used for a research

16 activity or for cold cleaning or for both would

17 be very difficult to track on a

18 container-by-container basis.

19 MR. RAO: My question was first for you

20 to clarify which regulation applies to you. If

21 you look at section 182, there are two

22 subsections, (D) (1) and (D) (2). (D) (1)

23 applies to entities that sell these solvents

24 and (D) (2) applies to persons who use these

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 solvents.

2 MR. BARRETT: We would be the users in

3 this case, right.

4 MR. RAO: Now, if you look at the

5 section (D) (2) which applies to you, I didn't

6 see any requirement for tracking of usage in

7 that rule, so I was just looking at your

8 testimony and wanted clarification as to why

9 you think you need to track the usage or is

10 that something that the rule is not very clear

11 about?

12 MR. BARRETT: I looked at it from the

13 standpoint that if a researcher buys a bottle

14 of methanol, he may or may not know at that

15 particular time exactly how that's going to be

16 used so that if we were required at some future

17 time to determine which of those bottles of

18 methanol were used for cold cleaning by date of

19 purchase and name and address of supplier, that

20 might not be information we could easily

21 obtain.

22 MR. RAO: So individual researchers are

23 the ones that buy these solvents or is it

24 Argonne National Lab has some central facility

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 that purchases all these solvents?

2 MR. BARRETT: The researchers generally

3 order these things through a central ordering

4 system, but they do not come from the central

5 repository at the laboratory.

6 MR. RAO: Then can you explain a little

7 bit more about how the -- you did mention that

8 you have some kind of a central tracking

9 system?

10 MR. BARRETT: Yes. What happens with

11 the central tracking system is that when a

12 bottle of any type of laboratory chemical comes

13 in, it receives a bar code and through that bar

14 code, we are able to track it in terms of who

15 ordered it, where it's located and if that

16 material is ever transferred from one division

17 to another, then that is -- that change is

18 effected through the chemical management

19 system, so everything is done through bar

20 coding.

21 MR. RAO: So does the central tracking

22 system keep track of the volume or the amount

23 of solvent that Argonne has purchased or

24 obtained?

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 MR. BARRETT: It will keep track of the

2 original amount that comes in with respect to

3 what was ordered, the size of the container and

4 who ordered it and where it will be used.

5 MR. RAO: Is that information in some

6 way -- could that be used as an alternative to

7 section 182 (D) (2) as a way of tracking the

8 amount of solvents that are being used at the

9 facility itself?

10 MR. BARRETT: Well, again, as we

11 mentioned, we can track total usage of the

12 solvent, but that's going to include usages

13 other than cold cleaning. It will be all the

14 usages of that material regardless of what it

15 is.

16 MR. RAO: Is that information required

17 as a part for your Clean Air Act permit or is

18 that information required in the permit to be

19 submitted to the Agency?

20 MR. BARRETT: No, it isn't.

21 MR. RAO: It's not?

22 MR. BARRETT: No.

23 MR. RAO: Do you think that information

24 could be made available to the Agency as a part

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 of this adjusted standard like including a

2 condition in that says the total usage of

3 solvent is tracked and if the Agency wishes to

4 see it, it could be made available to the

5 Agency?

6 MR. BARRETT: I think total usage

7 numbers could be made available if it was

8 necessary.

9 MR. RAO: I'd like to direct the

10 question to the Agency, is that okay or should

11 I wait?

12 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: The Agency

13 witness?

14 MR. RAO: Yeah, either Ms. Doctors

15 or --

16 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Well, he's

17 going to be -- he could step up and be sworn

18 under oath because Ms. Doctors was going to

19 introduce him next.

20 MR. RAO: I thought since we were

21 asking these questions.

22 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Well, we

23 could swear Mr. Rogers in now and you could ask

24 him.

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 (Witness duly sworn.)

2 MR. RAO: As I was asking Mr. Barrett,

3 I just wanted to get your opinion as to whether

4 the Agency -- would it help the Agency to have

5 that kind of information about the total

6 solvent usage?

7 MS. DOCTORS: Could we go off the

8 record for just one second?

9 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Sure. We'll

10 take a five-minute break.

11 (Recess taken.)

12 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: We're back

13 on the record. Mr. Rao I think was asking a

14 question of Mr. Rogers.

15 MS. DOCTORS: Mr. Rao, would you like

16 to clarify your question?

17 MR. RAO: Yes, I was asking Mr. Barrett

18 about how to keep track of the solvents that

19 comes in to Argonne in terms of where they get

20 it from, the day of purchase and type of

21 solvent and basically based on Mr. Barrett's

22 explanation about how it's difficult to track

23 the use of solvents for individual research

24 applications, I was wondering if they would be

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 able to keep track of the total usage of the

2 solvents and make that information available to

3 the Agency as part of an extended condition and

4 I just wanted to get Mr. Rogers' opinion as to

5 whether that kind of information is useful to

6 the Agency if we want to make it a part of the

7 adjusted standard.

8 MR. ROGERS: That information we do not

9 require of any other entity subject to the cold

10 cleaning rule. If total gallonage purchase was

11 made available, we still wouldn't know exactly

12 what was used for cold cleaning because as we

13 understand it, it's used in both research

14 activity and cold cleaning so we would be

15 getting a total amount which, again, we do not

16 require of anybody else. It might give us a

17 picture of what Argonne is doing, but it

18 doesn't really help us with any compliance

19 activity towards Argonne in this situation.

20 MR. RAO: Thank you.

21 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Thank you,

22 Mr. Rao.

23 Ms. Liu?

24 MS. LIU: Along those lines, would it

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 help if for some reason Argonne were to expand

2 its cold cleaning operations and research

3 applications such that they're actually using

4 more than the 1 ton per year that they're

5 presenting here today for the Agency to perhaps

6 re-evaluate the environmental impact in terms

7 of SIP?

8 MS. DOCTORS: Can I speak on the

9 record? I'd like to indicate that Argonne I

10 believe is or would be subject to the ERMS

11 program because they're in the Chicago ozone

12 nonattainment area. If there's a dramatic

13 change in the types of operations in activities

14 at that facility, they would be subject to a

15 host of regulations that are designed to keep

16 the area in attainment or help the area make

17 progress to the one-hour ozone nonattainment

18 standard and later on beginning next year or

19 the year after the eight-hour ozone NOx. So I

20 don't -- I hope that's responsive. Mr. Rogers

21 has something he would like to add.

22 MR. ROGERS: I think it would be

23 helpful if Argonne kept track of how much

24 activity takes place with the use of -- just

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 projected use of noncompliance solvent in the

2 event that research activities would double or

3 triple in the future and if the current

4 estimate of 1 ton per year would be subject to

5 an increase over the course of time just due to

6 increased activity if they had some kind of

7 information available for inspectors to look at

8 during IEPA inspections, that would give us a

9 handle on if we're still within the framework

10 of the adjusted standard we're discussing now.

11 MR. RAO: So along those lines, how do

12 you envision this working in terms of how would

13 Argonne inform the Agency if their usage of the

14 solvents goes like doubles or goes beyond

15 1 ton, do you want to have a condition in the

16 adjusted standard that says that if the usage

17 increases above 1 ton, there needs to be notice

18 sent to the Agency or limited to 1 ton?

19 MS. DOCTORS: If we're going to start

20 putting limits, I'm going to need to speak with

21 Mr. Luck.

22 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: We'll go off

23 the record.

24 (Recess taken.)

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: We're back

2 on the record after about an eight-minute break

3 and I think Mr. Rao was, again, asking

4 Mr. Rogers a question. Do you remember the

5 question?

6 MR. RAO: Basically I wanted to know

7 what the Agency's position about including a

8 condition in the adjusted standard which

9 requires notification to the Agency if Argonne

10 goes beyond 1 ton.

11 MR. ROGERS: During our discussions

12 with Argonne National Labs on the preparation

13 of this adjusted standard, we had several

14 questions similar to that about setting a cap

15 on a high end or some kind of a notification

16 process if emissions or usage would increase

17 and we were informed similar to Mr. Barrett's

18 testimony that the difficulties in tracking the

19 usage of noncompliant cold cleaning solvents

20 because of their interrelationship with the

21 bench testing kind of came to the point where

22 there would be no real way of finding out the

23 amount of increase of those noncompliant

24 solvent usage. Even though total solvent usage

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 might increase, it could be under a compliant

2 situation or bench testing within the bench

3 testing and cold cleaning at the bench were so

4 intermixed that it would be difficult to

5 understand that.

6 MR. RAO: So if Argonne's cold cleaning

7 usage doubles or triples, is there any way the

8 Agency will find out about it?

9 MR. ROGERS: I am not sure what our

10 field inspectors look at when they come to the

11 facility to inspect, but there would be no

12 condition on our permits that I'm aware of that

13 would limit their purchasing of solvents for

14 compliant usage or for lab testing purposes

15 and, again, with that difficulty in determining

16 what is noncompliant cold cleaning usage, it

17 would be difficult for us to say that there

18 would be a problem.

19 MR. RAO: As a part of this State

20 Implementation Plan when this rule was adopted,

21 was there a specific kind of volatile organic

22 material that the Agency had estimated that

23 would be reduced in the Chicago nonattainment

24 area as a part of, you know, implementation of

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 this rule?

2 MR. ROGERS: Yes. Before the

3 implementation of the rule, the Agency

4 estimated there were about 33 tons per day of

5 volatile organic material emission that

6 occurred each summer day. Through Phase 1 of

7 the rule, we estimated approximate 11.3 tons

8 per day reduction when we went down to the

9 2 millimeter mercury limit and then when we

10 went down to the 1 millimeter mercury limit in

11 March 2001, there was another roughly 11.3 tons

12 per day emission reduction.

13 MR. RAO: So in terms of Argonne

14 doubling or tripling its usage, it won't have a

15 significant effect on what was counted by the

16 Agency on a nonattainment daily basis about the

17 reductions that you had estimated?

18 MR. ROGERS: Based on a 1 ton per

19 day -- excuse me -- 1 ton per year increase in

20 VOM emissions that Argonne estimates

21 conservatively could occur through the use of

22 noncompliant solvents compared to the 660 tons

23 per day that are emitted in the Chicago area,

24 an increase of even from 1 ton per year to

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 2 tons per year would be relatively

2 insignificant and we do not believe it would

3 affect air quality.

4 MR. RAO: Thank you.

5 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Ms. Liu, any

6 further questions?

7 MS. LIU: No, thank you.

8 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Any

9 redirect, Mr. Luck, so to speak of Mr. Barrett?

10 MR. LUCK: I don't believe so, no.

11 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: You may step

12 down. Thank you, Mr. Barrett.

13 Mr. Rogers, you could take the stand

14 and I reminded you you are under oath and this

15 document will give a little foundation

16 regarding your written testimony.

17 MICHAEL D. ROGERS,

18 having been first duly sworn, was examined and

19 testified as follows:

20 EXAMINATION

21 by Ms. Doctors

22 Q. Mike, can you state your name and your

23 position with Illinois Environmental Protection

24 Agency?

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 A. My name is Michael Rogers. I am in the

2 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency's

3 Bureau of Air.

4 Q. What is your position?

5 A. I am an environmental specialist.

6 Q. Were you involved in the development of

7 the cold cleaning decreasing rule?

8 A. Yes, I was.

9 Q. In what capacity?

10 A. I was the technical representative from

11 the air quality planning section that

12 researched the rule and worked with our

13 attorneys to develop the language of the rule

14 amending the old cold cleaning rule to include

15 use of vapor pressure requirements.

16 Q. And have you been involved in

17 discussions with Argonne Labs and the

18 recommendation of the Agency in this matter?

19 A. Yes, I have.

20 Q. Did you prepare this testimony?

21 A. Yes, I did.

22 Q. I'd like to ask that Mike Rogers'

23 prefiled testimony be admitted as if read.

24 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: That is

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 allowed. As Mr. Barrett's testimony was

2 allowed and admitted into evidence, Mr. Rogers

3 written testimony will be allowed and admitted

4 into evidence as well as if read into the

5 record. My understanding is that the court

6 reporter will also attach the written testimony

7 of Mr. Rogers to the transcript itself and I'm

8 also marking it as IEPA Exhibit Number 1.

9 Thank you.

10 BY MS. DOCTORS:

11 Q. Let me just ask one other question.

12 Have you been involved in the preparation of

13 the rate of progress plans and SIP submittals

14 for the Illinois Environmental Protection

15 Agency?

16 A. Yes, I have.

17 Q. Specifically this was submitted -- the

18 cold cleaning degreasing rule was submitted as

19 part of the 9 percent rate of progress plan?

20 A. That is correct.

21 MS. DOCTORS: I have no further

22 questions.

23 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Thank you,

24 Ms. Doctors.

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 Mr. Rao, Ms. Liu?

2 MR. RAO: I don't have any. Mr. Rogers

3 has already answered questions.

4 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: You may step

5 down. Thank you. We'll go off the record for

6 a split second.

7 (Discussion had off the record.)

8 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: We're back

9 on the record. We were talking a little bit

10 about posthearing briefing schedules and as of

11 now, it's the intention of the parties not to

12 file a posthearing brief. However, I'm going

13 to set a public comment period for Friday,

14 October 10th and that's when the record closes.

15 By my calculation, the transcript

16 should be ready by Friday, September 26th;

17 however, if public comment is filed, then the

18 parties may or may not revisit their

19 posthearing briefing schedule or they may be

20 allowed to file a response, but until that

21 happens, we're not going to address it and

22 we'll leave it at that.

23 So I guess with no other further

24 comments or issues -- Ms. Doctors?

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 MS. DOCTORS: Could I go off the record

2 for one second? I made a misstatement. I'd

3 like to correct it on the record.

4 (Discussion had off the record.)

5 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: We're back

6 on the record. Ms. Doctors would like to add

7 something further in this proceeding.

8 MS. DOCTORS: I'd just like to ask

9 Mr. Barrett a question. Is Argonne Labs an

10 ERMS source for VOM?

11 MR. BARRETT: No, it is not.

12 MS. DOCTORS: What are its VOM

13 emissions?

14 MR. BARRETT: Our permitted emissions

15 under Title V are a little over 18 tons per

16 year. Our actual emissions tend to be

17 somewhere around 1 to 2 tons per year.

18 MS. DOCTORS: Thank you. That's my one

19 question.

20 HEARING OFFICER HALLORAN: Thank you,

21 Ms. Doctors.

22 Before I forget, I'm supposed to make a

23 credibility determination and based on my

24 judgment and observation and legal experience,

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 I find that there are no issues of credibility

2 with the witnesses that have testified here

3 today.

4 With that said, I want to thank you all

5 for your professionalism and civility

6 throughout and have a safe trip home to

7 Argonne, Illinois and Springfield, Illinois.

8 Thanks.

9 (End of proceeding.)

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292

1 STATE OF ILLINOIS )

) SS:

2 COUNTY OF DUPAGE )

4 I, Michele J. Losurdo, Certified

5 Shorthand Reporter of the State of Illinois, do

6 hereby certify that I reported in shorthand the

7 proceedings had at the taking of said hearing,

8 and that the foregoing is a true, complete, and

9 accurate transcript of the proceedings at said

10 hearing as appears from my stenographic notes

11 so taken and transcribed under my personal

12 direction and signed this _______ day of

13 _________________, 2003.

17 Notary Public, DuPage County, Illinois

CSR No. 084-004285

18 Expiration Date: May 31, 2005.

21 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO

before me this __________ day

22 of ______________, A.D., 2003.

23 ______________________________

Notary Public

L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292