Microsoft Word - R05-20 Hearing transcript 071505

1 BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

3 IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

4 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO )

EXEMPTIONS FROM STATE )

5 PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS ) R05-20

FOR PLASTIC INJECTION ) (Rulemaking - Air)

6 MOLDING OPERATIONS (35 )

ILL. ADM. CODE 201.146) )

7 )

9 Proceedings held on July 15, 2005, at 10:11 a.m., at the

Illinois Pollution Control Board, 1021 North Grand Avenue

10 East, Springfield, Illinois, before John Knittle, Hearing

Officer.

Reported By: Karen Waugh, CSR, RPR

15 CSR License No: 084-003688

16 KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY

11 North 44th Street

17 Belleville, IL 62226

(618) 277-0190

Keefe Reporting Company

1 APPEARANCES

3 Board Members present:

5 Board Member Nicholas J. Melas

Board Member Thomas E. Johnson

Anand Rao, Senior Environmental Scientist

Board Staff Members present:

10 Erin Conley

12 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

BY: Mr. Charles E. Matoesian

13 Assistant Counsel

Division of Legal Counsel

14 1021 North Grand Avenue East

Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276

15 On behalf of the Illinois EPA

17 MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW LLP

BY: Ms. Patricia F. Sharkey

18 71 South Wacker Drive

Chicago, Illinois 60606-4637

19 On behalf of the Chemical Industry

Council of Illinois

Keefe Reporting Company 2

1 INDEX

2 WITNESS PAGE NUMBER

Lisa Frede 13

Lynne Harris 66

Keefe Reporting Company 3

1 EXHIBITS

2 NUMBER MARKED FOR I.D. ENTERED

CICI Group Exhibit No. 6 25 26

CICI Exhibit No. 7 34 34

CICI Exhibit No. 8 36 36

CICI Exhibit No. 9 48 49

CICI Exhibit No. 10 53 55

CICI Exhibit No. 11 56 59

Agency Exhibit No. 1 72 74

Agency Exhibit No. 2 73 74

Keefe Reporting Company 4

1 PROCEEDINGS

2 (July 15, 2005; 10:11 a.m.)

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Let's get started.

4 Good morning and welcome to the Illinois Pollution

5 Control Board. My name is John Knittle, and I am

6 conducting this hearing today in place of Amy Antoniolli,

7 who is the assigned hearing officer in this rulemaking.

8 The Board has captioned this proceeding as In the Matter

9 of: Proposed Amendments to Exemptions From State

10 Permitting Requirements For Plastic Injecting Molding

11 Operations -- I guess Plastic Injection Molding

12 Operations, 35 Illinois Administrative Code 201.146. The

13 Board has docketed this as R05-20.

14 In this proceeding, the proponent, the Chemical

15 Industry Council of Illinois, which we're going to call

16 CICI, is seeking to add an exemption of plastic injection

17 molding operations to the existing list of exemptions

18 from state air permitting requirements in Section 201.146

19 of the Board's air rules. This rulemaking was filed on

20 April 19, 2005, by CICI. The Board accepted the proposal

21 for hearing on May 5. Today is the second hearing. The

22 first hearing was held on July 1 at the Board's offices

23 in Chicago.

24 The purpose of today's hearing is twofold.

Keefe Reporting Company 5

1 First, this rulemaking is subject to Section 27(b) of the

2 Environmental Protection Act. It's 415 ILCS 5/27(b)

3 (2004). Section 27(b) of the Act requires the Board to

4 request the Department of Commerce and Economic

5 Opportunity to conduct an economic impact study on

6 certain proposed rules prior to adoption of those rules.

7 If the DCEO chooses to conduct the impact study, they

8 have 30 to 45 days after such request to produce a study

9 of the economic impact of the proposed rules. The Board

10 then must make the impact study or the explanation for

11 not conducting the impact study available to the public

12 at least 20 days before public hearing on the economic

13 impact.

14 As required by Section 27(b) of the Act, the

15 Board requested by a letter dated May 12, 2005, that DCEO

16 conduct an economic impact study of the rulemaking. They

17 did not respond, and the Board's request with no response

18 has been docketed and available for public viewing. That

19 being said, is there anybody here who has any comments on

20 the economic impact of this rule? As seeing none, we'll

21 just move forward, and that purpose of the hearing is

22 finished.

23 The second purpose is to allow the proponents to

24 testify, allow any members of the public who wish to

Keefe Reporting Company 6

1 testify the opportunity to do so and to ask questions of

2 the proponents. If you would like to testify today and

3 you haven't already, please let me know. Today's

4 proceeding is governed by the Board's procedural rules.

5 All information that is relevant and not repetitious or

6 privileged will be admitted into the record.

7 To my left, your right, is Board Member Nicholas

8 Melas. He is the board member assigned to this matter.

9 We -- Also present from the board is Board Member Tom

10 Johnson right there, and from the technical unit is Anand

11 Rao, and I think we have Erin Conley in the back.

12 We will begin today with the testimony of the

13 CICI witnesses that have prefiled their testimony. They

14 prefiled on July 11. That's Miss Lisa --

15 MS. FREDE: Frede.

16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: -- Frede,

17 Mr. Lynne Harris and Miss Pat Sharkey. We're going to

18 read that testimony, as we talked about earlier, into the

19 record, and then will be available for questions.

20 Don Sutton from the Agency has also prefiled

21 testimony on July 13, 2005. He's present today to answer

22 questions posed to the EPA. Please note that any

23 questions posed by board members or staff are designed to

24 help develop the complete record for the Board's decision

Keefe Reporting Company 7

1 and do not reflect any bias. After that, anyone who

2 else -- who wants to testify regarding the proposal may

3 do so. Like all witnesses, those who wish to testify

4 will be sworn in and may be asked questions about their

5 testimony. We'll conclude today's hearing with a few

6 procedural items that we'll address at the end with the

7 exhibit list and stuff like that.

8 Member Melas, before we begin, would you like to

9 add anything?

10 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Nothing to add, just to

11 welcome everybody here to beautiful Springfield, and

12 we're continuing the hearing that began up a few weeks

13 ago in Chicago.

14 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Thank you,

15 Mr. Melas. I guess we can turn to Miss Sharkey. If you

16 have an opening statement or if you want to just get

17 going, it's up to you.

18 MS. SHARKEY: Thank you very much. Good

19 morning, Mr. Melas, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Rao and Mr. Hearing

20 Officer. We appreciate this opportunity to have -- once

21 again meet with the Board and to -- and the public and to

22 have the Agency present particularly today to offer

23 comments in support of this regulation. I am not going

24 to repeat any kind of opening statement. Miss Frede will

Keefe Reporting Company 8

1 make a brief opening statement and will be our witness

2 today, who she will be offering the comments on behalf of

3 the CICI, and Mr. Lynne Harris, who is from The Society

4 of the Plastics Industry, who was available at -- in

5 Chicago on the 1st, will also -- is also here today and

6 available to answer questions as they may come up.

7 What we would like to do, however, is indicate

8 that we do have another proposed change to the mandatory

9 language that we have proposed. We have previously

10 provided you at the last hearing with an errata sheet

11 number two. That errata sheet made several changes.

12 It deleted the terms compression and transfer molding; it

13 made more explicit the activities that are involved in

14 handling and listed those activities; and it also changed

15 the term granulating to grinding, which we explained was

16 a more generic term.

17 The next -- That was our first errata sheet.

18 Excuse me. The second errata sheet limited the exemption

19 to plastic injection molding equipment with an annual

20 throughput not to exceed 5,000 tons. So we kept all the

21 changes that were made in the prior errata sheet and

22 limited it to -- the scope of the exemption to -- the

23 intent was to limit it to plastic injection molding

24 equipment with an annual throughput not to exceed 5,000

Keefe Reporting Company 9

1 tons, and it also exempted associated mold release agents

2 and mold cleaning agents.

3 The third errata sheet we're going to be

4 providing you with we've discussed with Illinois EPA this

5 morning, and this is a matter of clarifying, and I want

6 to point out that CICI brought it to the attention of

7 IEPA rather than vice versa, so we certainly did not want

8 any misimplication that we were intending that on any

9 individual piece of plastic injection molding equipment

10 could go up to 5,000 tons. Indeed, that would be

11 impossible. So the intention here was that 5,000 tons of

12 resin facility-wide from plastic injection molding

13 equipment.

14 So what we're proposing is language that would

15 read as follows: Plastic injection molding equipment and

16 associated plastic resin loading, unloading, conveying,

17 mixing, storage, grinding, and drying equipment and

18 associated mold release and mold cleaning agents, with an

19 annual throughput not exceeding 5,000 tons of plastic

20 resin in the aggregate from all plastic injection molding

21 equipment at the source, period. With that, we would --

22 I believe that language was acceptable to the Agency.

23 I --

24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Is that correct,

Keefe Reporting Company 10

1 Mr. Matoesian?

2 MR. MATOESIAN: Yes, sir.

3 MS. SHARKEY: And what we would plan to do

4 is give that to you in writing as well, but we thought

5 we'd put on the record where we are right now so that

6 there isn't any confusion about that for this hearing.

7 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: One quick question.

8 Your last word was "source."

9 MS. SHARKEY: Yes.

10 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: By source, did you mean

11 facility?

12 MS. SHARKEY: Yes. Are you more -- I think

13 I would be as comfortable with the term facility if the

14 Agency is.

15 MR. SUTTON: We generally use source.

16 MS. SHARKEY: And that means the entire

17 facility.

18 MR. SUTTON: Right.

19 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Okay. So in your

20 operations, you generally utilize that term to describe

21 the facility.

22 MR. SUTTON: Right. We have drifted off

23 from facility to source because it has some federal legal

24 definition I can't remember, but it's a better term.

Keefe Reporting Company 11

1 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Very well. Thank you.

2 BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: I would just point

3 out that it was -- to me it was extremely clear what you

4 meant at least in the prefiled testimony that was filed

5 on July 11, so --

6 MS. SHARKEY: Thank you.

7 BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: -- for what that's

8 worth.

9 MS. SHARKEY: Yeah. We thought the

10 testimony made it clear, but we wanted to make sure the

11 language reflected that, and when we ourselves took a

12 second look at it, we said, you know, some of the other

13 exemptions made this clearer, so we didn't want any

14 confusion.

15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: And you'll be

16 filing a third errata sheet?

17 MS. SHARKEY: Yes, we will. We'll plan to

18 have that to you next week. Okay. With that, I would

19 like to turn to Miss Lisa Frede, who is the regulatory

20 affairs director for the Chemical Industry Council of

21 Illinois, the proponent of this rule. Miss Frede will

22 have brief opening remarks to put the -- this rulemaking

23 in perspective for any members of the public that might

24 be here and will then go on and provide the responses to

Keefe Reporting Company 12

1 the Board that we -- from questions that were raised in

2 the last hearing that CICI provided in its prefiled

3 testimony, and we will basically read that into the

4 record just to put us all in a frame of mind that we've

5 gotten -- that what was filed is all in mind, and at that

6 point what I would like to do is some direct examination

7 of Miss Frede to walk through the photographs that have

8 been provided to the Board. Miss Frede?

9 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Can we swear her

10 in?

11 (Witness sworn.)

12 MS. FREDE: Good morning. My name is Lisa

13 Frede, and I am the director of regulatory affairs for

14 the Chemical Industry Council of Illinois, also known as

15 CICI, a not-for-profit Illinois corporation. CICI is

16 pleased to be the proponent of the rulemaking proposal in

17 this proceeding. CICI is a state-wide trade association

18 representing the chemical industry in Illinois. CICI has

19 offices in Des Plaines and in Springfield, Illinois. We

20 have 198 member companies with over 54,000 employees

21 employed in 745 manufacturing facilities and 975

22 wholesale and distribution facilities in Illinois.

23 The proposal in this proceeding will amend the

24 Board's regulations governing state air pollution control

Keefe Reporting Company 13

1 permits to exempt plastic injection molding operations

2 from the state construction and operating permit

3 procedure. CICI is proposing this amendment to clarify

4 the Board's regulations and achieve efficiencies and cost

5 savings for its plastic injection molding company members

6 in Illinois and for the state permitting program.

7 Here's what this amendment will do. It will

8 appropriately regulate the insignificant level of

9 emissions generated by plastic injection molding

10 operations by treating those operations in the same

11 fashion as other operations with similarly low levels of

12 emission. It will reduce unwarranted permitting costs to

13 plastic injection molding businesses across Illinois. It

14 will also relieve owners and operators of plastic

15 injection molding operations from the risk of enforcement

16 actions based upon differences in interpretation of

17 existing categorical exemptions. Finally, it will allow

18 Illinois EPA to allocate its permitting and enforcement

19 resources to more significant emission sources. Thank

20 you.

21 MS. SHARKEY: With that, then, Miss Frede

22 would like to turn to the responses to the Board that

23 were filed in our prefiled testimony.

24 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Okay.

Keefe Reporting Company 14

1 MS. FREDE: In response to the questions

2 posed at the first hearing in this matter on July 1,

3 2005, CICI has provided certain requested information.

4 CICI witnesses Lynne Harris, Pat Sharkey and I are

5 present today to answer questions regarding these

6 responses.

7 "The Size of Facilities Exempted Under This

8 Proposal." At the July 1, 2005, hearing, the Board asked

9 how many PIM machines may be located at a given PIM

10 facility. CICI has not found any studies or data

11 directly addressing this question. However, CICI can

12 state that its member facilities have between 40 to 70

13 machines.

14 Because the size of the PIM machines varies,

15 resin throughput is better -- is a better indicator of

16 volume of emissions associated with a given facility.

17 CICI member facilities have annual PIM resin

18 throughout -- throughput ranging from 100 tons per year

19 to 3,250 tons per year. Average facility annual PIM

20 resin throughput is approximately 500 tons per year.

21 "The Estimated Volume of PIM Emissions State-wide

22 in Illinois." The Board asked what volume of emissions

23 would be exempt from permitting under this exemption. A

24 broad estimate of the total volume of emissions generated

Keefe Reporting Company 15

1 by PIM processes state-wide can be derived by first

2 multiplying the number of facilities in Illinois by the

3 average volume of resin processed per facility and then

4 multiplying that number by an appropriate emission

5 factor. As indicated in Mr. Harris' testimony, a worst

6 case VOM emission factor is 0.4 pounds per ton of resin

7 processed. If we add that to the worst case emission

8 factor of 0.4 pounds per ton of resin processed for the

9 use of release or cleaning agent as discussed in Section

10 5 below, we arrive at a conservative overall VOM emission

11 factor of 0.8 pounds per ton of resin used.

12 Using the above information and the previous

13 testimony that approximately 500 PIM facilities are

14 located in Illinois, the formula for calculating

15 state-wide VOM emissions associated with PIM is as

16 follows: 500 facilities times 500 tons of resin per year

17 equals 250,000 tons of resin per year. 250,000 tons of

18 resin per year times 0.8 pounds VOM per ton resin equals

19 100 tons VOM per year.

20 CICI believes that 100 tons per year is a

21 reasonable worst case estimate of the total volume of VOM

22 emissions generated state-wide by PIM facilities in

23 Illinois. We note that this equates to 0.2 tons of VOM

24 emissions per facility per year. We further note that

Keefe Reporting Company 16

1 not all of the approximately 500 PIM facilities in

2 Illinois will be exempted from state permitting under the

3 proposal in this rulemaking.

4 In response to the Board's questions regarding

5 the number of PIM facilities that have no other

6 processes, such as coating, SPI did a rough survey of its

7 members and determined that approximately 80 percent of

8 its members in the PIM industry do not perform other

9 processes at their facilities. This indicates that

10 around 20 percent of the approximately 500 Illinois PIM

11 facilities will not be covered by this exemption. Thus,

12 total state-wide emission of VOM covered by this

13 exemption are actually likely to be on the order of 80

14 tons per year.

15 To answer any concern the Board may have that

16 there may be larger volumes of emissions involved, CICI

17 has proposed in its second errata sheet to limit the

18 proposed exemption to PIM facilities with no more than

19 5,000 tons per year of resin processed. If every

20 facility in Illinois processed 5,000 tons of resin per

21 year, an extraordinary assumption, the total VOM

22 emissions subject to this exemption would be

23 approximately 1,000 tons per year. That equates to

24 approximately 2 tons of VOM per year per facility.

Keefe Reporting Company 17

1 "Location of PIM Facilities in Illinois,

2 Attainment Areas and Non-attainment Areas." The Board

3 asked about the location of PIM facilities in the state

4 and whether they were primarily located in attainment or

5 non-attainment areas. To answer this question, CICI

6 reviewed the locations of the Illinois facilities listed

7 in the Plastics News "2005 Survey of North American

8 Injection Molders" at the locations of the CICI member

9 facilities and determined that 14 percent of those PIM

10 facilities are located in attainment areas and the

11 remaining 86 percent are located in non-attainment areas.

12 Of those located in non-attainment areas, all are located

13 in areas which have been designated as moderate

14 non-attainment areas under the new 8-hour ozone standard.

15 "Estimated Emission From Resin Handling

16 Operations: Loading, Unloading, Conveying, Storage,

17 Mixing, Grinding, Drying." As indicated at the July 1

18 hearing, CICI has attempted to find studies and other

19 sources of information on the volume and type of

20 emissions generated by the various activities associated

21 with resin handling operations. We have found no studies

22 directly addressing or quantifying emissions from these

23 activities. This is actually not surprising. As

24 indicated in Mr. Harris' June 16, 2005, prefiled

Keefe Reporting Company 18

1 testimony, emissions from the injection molding process

2 as a whole had not been quantified prior to 1996. This

3 lack of quantified information on emissions may also be

4 explained by the nature of the materials involved and the

5 process. The resin and scrap are hardened plastic

6 materials at ambient and low temperatures. Furthermore,

7 these ancillary activities operate under negative

8 pressure. Thus, emissions from the movement of resin,

9 the drying of the resin and the grinding of the scrap

10 plastic are largely, if not entirely, drawn back into the

11 process.

12 The following information on how and where

13 emissions are formed in this process may assist the Board

14 in understanding that emissions from the ancillary

15 activities are minimal.

16 "VOM and HAP Emissions." VOM and HAP emissions

17 from plastic resin are directly related to temperature.

18 As found in the SPI studies accompanying Mr. Harris'

19 prefiled testimony, emission rates are directly

20 correlatable with the melt temperature of the resin

21 involved. Thermoplastic resins have a melt temperature

22 in the range of 300 degrees Fahrenheit to 600 degrees

23 Fahrenheit. The SPI studies demonstrated that even at

24 the melt temperatures reached in the extruder screw, VOM

Keefe Reporting Company 19

1 and HAP emissions are low. Thus, the brief drying of the

2 resin at far lower temperatures to remove moisture from

3 the pellets can be presumed to generate only a fraction

4 of those emissions. The ancillary resin loading,

5 conveyance and mixing at ambient temperatures can be

6 presumed to be even lower.

7 To a varying degree, all plastic resins take on

8 moisture when they are exposed to relative humidity.

9 Even a minimal amount of moisture in many plastics can

10 negatively affect molding characteristics. Dryers

11 operated at low temperatures are often utilized to remove

12 such moisture from plastic resin prior to the plastic

13 injection molding process. The dryers blow heated

14 ambient air over the plastic resins. The temperatures

15 used for drying plastic resins are generally less than

16 one half of the melting temperature of the plastic resin

17 involved. Although CICI has not been able to find any

18 data on emissions from dryers, emissions of VOM from

19 plastic resin at the relatively low temperatures used in

20 the drying process can be presumed to result in a small

21 percentage of VOM or particulate emissions generated by

22 the overall process.

23 The conclusion that VOM emissions from resin

24 pellets handled at ambient temperatures are minimal is

Keefe Reporting Company 20

1 confirmed by the polyethylene study, which measured

2 emissions of VOC from the hopper area and found that

3 emissions from this area accounted for less than 2

4 percent of the total VOCs measured.

5 "Particulate Matter Emissions." There is an

6 assumption that the movement of resin even at ambient

7 temperatures generates some level of particulate matter,

8 PM. However, CICI has been unable to find any EPA or

9 industry studies of this subject.

10 To provide the Board with some perspective on the

11 level of PM present at a PIM facility, I personally

12 visited one of CICI members' facilities on July 7, 2005.

13 I can attest that it was exceedingly clean with no dust

14 or film on the floor or the equipment, including the

15 grinder or granulator, which is presumed to be the piece

16 of equipment most likely to produce PM. I can also state

17 that none of the employees in the workplace wear

18 respiratory protection, indicating the indoor particle

19 levels meet OSHA standards without such protection. One

20 of the primary reasons that PM is so low in these

21 facilities is that product specifications require that

22 foreign material not enter the process. Another reason

23 is that injection molding and associated resin and scrap

24 handling are almost entirely enclosed operations which

Keefe Reporting Company 21

1 take place under negative pressure.

2 With our prefiled testimony we have provided

3 photographs taken during my visit which we hope will

4 provide the Board with a better understanding of the PIM

5 equipment and process. Briefly, the resin is brought to

6 the machine in a cardboard Gaylord box and fed via vacuum

7 hose into the dryer and the hopper. The screw extruder

8 and the mold are entirely enclosed processes. When the

9 mold opens, the product drops to an open conveyor belt,

10 which can be seen to have little or no dust on it. I can

11 testify that the plastic product and plastic scrap

12 leaving the mold are extremely clean.

13 These scrap plastic runners and sprues are

14 removed from the mold by way of a robotic arm, which

15 drops the scrap into the grinder or granulator. As can

16 be seen from the photographs, the grinder area has little

17 or no dust. Again, this is because the grinder operates

18 under negative pressure and both the scrap plastic and

19 the associated dust are drawn into the grinder. Closing

20 the loop, the granulated plastic, while somewhat dusty,

21 is fed directly from the grinder back to the hopper and

22 then reused in the process. This takes place by way of

23 vacuum hose. Thus, the granulated plastic is never

24 exposed to ambient air.

Keefe Reporting Company 22

1 Given the fact that these processes are so clean,

2 there is little likelihood that PIM machines would be

3 vented outside the workplace. CICI's survey of its

4 member facilities indicates that none of these facilities

5 vent PIM machines outside the workplace, thus there is

6 little likelihood of PIM emissions entering the outside

7 environment. To the extent that a PIM facility has

8 emissions of concern within the workplace, they are

9 subject to OSHA standards and are not regulated under the

10 Environmental Protection Act or air pollution control

11 permits issued under the Board's rules.

12 "Mold Release Agents and Cleaning Agents." Mold

13 release agent and/or mold cleaner are sometimes used in

14 the plastic injection molding process. Mold release

15 agent leaves a very thin layer of a non-stick substance

16 on the surface of the mold to help the parts fall from

17 the mold as it opens at the end of the cycle. Mold

18 cleaner is used to remove built-up residue from the mold

19 surface. Some CICI member facilities have designed their

20 molds to avoid the use of mold release altogether but

21 still use mold cleaner.

22 Historically, the volatile organic matter content

23 of aerosol mold release agents and mold cleaning products

24 was in excess of 90 percent. However, mold release

Keefe Reporting Company 23

1 agents and mold cleaning products are now available in

2 water-based formulation and in formulations that utilize

3 non-photochemically reactive chemicals as carrier

4 solvents.

5 Both mold release agent and mold cleaner are

6 generally used in 12- to 16-ounce aerosol cans. Based on

7 data collected from CICI member facilities, VOM emissions

8 from mold release agent and/or mold cleaner range from

9 less than 0.1 pounds per ton of resin processed up to 0.4

10 pounds per ton of resin processed. The combined usage of

11 the mold release agents and mold cleaner at a PIM

12 facility can be conversely estimated -- conservatively

13 estimated to generate 0.4 pounds of VOM per ton of resin

14 processed.

15 In general, facilities try to design molds to

16 minimize the use of mold release agents and mold cleaner

17 because it is very inefficient to stop the PIM machine

18 periodically to apply either release agent or cleaner to

19 the mold. Well-designed molds require only a minimal

20 amount of either substance. When possible, facilities

21 try to apply mold release agent or mold cleaner only at

22 the beginning of the production shift.

23 "Definitions of Compression Molding and Transfer

24 Molding." In response to a question from the Board, CICI

Keefe Reporting Company 24

1 has provided in their prefiled testimony definitions of

2 these processes from The Society of the Plastics

3 Industry, Inc. -- SPI -- Web site at

4 www.plasticsindustry.org. As stated in the first

5 hearing, CICI is no longer proposing that compression or

6 transfer molding be included in the proposed exemption

7 and does not plan to provide additional testimony

8 regarding these processes.

9 Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any

10 questions that you may have.

11 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Thank you. Miss

12 Sharkey?

13 MS. SHARKEY: Yes. Mr. Hearing Officer, at

14 this time we would like to move into evidence as

15 Exhibit -- CICI Exhibit 6, I believe --

16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That's correct.

17 MS. SHARKEY: -- the prefiled testimony of

18 the CICI from which Miss Frede was just reading and also

19 the second errata sheet that was filed together with that

20 on July 15, and I just want to show that to Counsel that

21 what we're talking about is that document. With your

22 permission --

23 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Do you want those

24 as one exhibit?

Keefe Reporting Company 25

1 MS. SHARKEY: Or as a group exhibit if you

2 prefer.

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That's fine.

4 Let's do a group exhibit, but it can be Exhibit No. 6.

5 MS. SHARKEY: Okay.

6 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Any objection,

7 Mr. Matoesian?

8 MR. MATOESIAN: No.

9 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That will be

10 admitted.

11 MS. SHARKEY: I will provide a copy to the

12 court reporter and also provide a copy to you, sir.

13 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Thank you very

14 much.

15 MS. SHARKEY: To be clear, the second errata

16 sheet in Group Exhibit 6 is the errata sheet we filed on

17 the 15th. We will be filing a third errata sheet as

18 discussed earlier.

19 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Understood.

20 MS. SHARKEY: At this point, what I would

21 like to do is walk through the photographs that are

22 provided in that Exhibit 6, which I would suppose be --

23 we can just refer to as the photographs 1 through 9 in

24 Group Exhibit 6.

Keefe Reporting Company 26

1 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Are they -- Yeah,

2 they're numbered in there?

3 MS. SHARKEY: They are numbered in there.

4 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That's fine.

5 MS. SHARKEY: Okay. We also, by the way,

6 have color photocopies of this if any member does not

7 have -- if you're like us, you have the black and

8 white --

9 BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: I didn't even copy

10 them because I don't have a color printer, but I'll --

11 MS. SHARKEY: We do have another copy of it

12 right over here.

13 BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Thank you.

14 MS. SHARKEY: Does anybody else need a copy

15 of that? We would like to -- We did file these comments

16 and the photographs electronically, and I believe they

17 are available in color -- I hope they're available in

18 color for the Board to review, because we have found that

19 the graininess in the black and white makes some of it a

20 little hard to see, so we have an extra copy of the color

21 ones which we can provide for the record and which we may

22 in the course of this ask Miss Frede to look at and

23 provide you with a colored copy.

24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Perhaps when

Keefe Reporting Company 27

1 you're done you could provide that for our official

2 exhibit.

3 MS. SHARKEY: Okay.

4 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Yeah, and it is in

5 color on the Web site.

6 MS. SHARKEY: Very good. Okay.

7 EXAMINATION OF LISA FREDE

8 BY MS. SHARKEY:

9 Q. Miss Frede, in your prefiled responses to

10 the Board's questions, you indicated that you visited a

11 CICI member's plastic injection molding facility on July

12 7. What I'd like to do is ask you some questions about

13 your observations at that facility. Could you first

14 explain to the Board what your purpose was in visiting

15 that facility?

16 A. The purpose of my visit was to provide the

17 Board with some more information on the PIM operations,

18 to basically observe the PIM machines in operation and to

19 get some photographs to present to the Board, so it was

20 to see a firsthand level of what particulate emissions

21 were present around the machines, the overall processes,

22 basically.

23 Q. Okay. And did you observe any of the

24 plastic injection molding machines in operation?

Keefe Reporting Company 28

1 A. I did.

2 Q. Okay. Approximately how many machines were

3 located at the plant you visited?

4 A. There were approximately 60 PIM machines at

5 the facility that I visited.

6 Q. Do you know if this plant was typical of the

7 CICI member plant plastic injection molding facilities?

8 A. This is actually one of the larger CICI

9 member plants.

10 Q. Okay. Otherwise, in terms of its

11 production, was it typical of those facilities?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Looking at the pictures that were attached

14 to the prefiled responses, are you familiar with those?

15 A. I am. I've reviewed them.

16 Q. Okay. Were you present when those photos

17 were taken?

18 A. I was.

19 Q. Okay. Do you believe they're an accurate

20 depiction of what you observed?

21 A. They were.

22 Q. Very good. Turning, then, to photo number

23 1, I wonder if you would describe for the Board in your

24 own words what those photo -- that photo shows.

Keefe Reporting Company 29

1 A. Okay. This is a typical -- what I appear to

2 be a typical PIM machine. Towards the left-hand side of

3 the photograph you will see the material dryer and the

4 dryer's controls sitting below it. Towards the center of

5 the picture is the grinder, and this is the area where

6 the runner and the sprue will be deposited for regrind

7 back into the process. On the top of the machine above

8 the middle of the two main boxes where you see the

9 Plexiglas is the robotic arm, and that grabs the runner

10 and sprue from the mold area, which then will deposit

11 that which I'll note as scrap back into the grinder.

12 Just below that robotic arm in that center section is

13 basically where the mold and the extruder screw come

14 together in the processes, and then in the last box on

15 the right-hand side, through the Plexiglas you can then

16 see the press, which is basically -- you see where it

17 says 120-ton press is where the two molds -- it's the

18 clamping force of the two molds together.

19 MS. SHARKEY: What we might recommend is if

20 the board members have available Mr. Harris' testimony

21 from -- which was Exhibit 3 in this proceeding, there is

22 a diagram of Exhibit 1 in Mr. Harris' testimony. That is

23 a schematic of the process which focuses on the extruder

24 screw, the hopper and the die head, and you'll recall we

Keefe Reporting Company 30

1 have another exhibit that basically shows the mold at the

2 end of it.

3 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) The piece of equipment

4 shown in that Exhibit 1 to Mr. Harris' testimony, Miss

5 Frede, is that -- could you describe for us where that --

6 what's shown in this schematic, the portions of the

7 equipment that are shown in this schematic, where they're

8 located in that -- in photograph 1?

9 A. Actually, it's a little hard to see, but the

10 mold area, the -- would be towards the right-hand of the

11 photograph contained in this box.

12 Q. Contained in the box that appears to have a

13 window on it?

14 A. Yes, the --

15 Q. That is the arrow pointing 120-ton press?

16 A. Correct.

17 Q. The mold is in that enclosed box?

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. Okay.

20 A. It then will move per this photograph

21 towards the left into the second box that is shown, where

22 it will then meet with the extruder screw that comes from

23 the left into that joint section there.

24 Q. Okay. So what -- you can't see very well

Keefe Reporting Company 31

1 the extruder screw; is that correct?

2 A. Correct.

3 Q. It would be basically behind that grinder

4 and --

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. -- dryer area.

7 A. Correct.

8 MS. SHARKEY: Just to -- We wanted to help

9 the Board put in perspective what you're looking at

10 there.

11 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: I can see it.

12 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Okay. Miss Frede, did you

13 measure the dimensions of the plastic injection molding

14 machine that -- what we've just discussed, the mold and

15 the extruder screw?

16 A. Yes. This machine shown in picture 1 is

17 approximately fourteen feet in length and four feet in

18 width.

19 Q. Okay.

20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That's the entire

21 machine or just the part that's labeled 120-ton press?

22 MS. FREDE: That would be the entire

23 machine.

24 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Would that go all the way

Keefe Reporting Company 32

1 to the end of the extruder screw?

2 A. It does.

3 Q. So it's the extruder screw and the enclosed

4 mold.

5 A. Correct.

6 MR. RAO: Miss Frede, just for the record,

7 can you just explain what sprue means?

8 MS. FREDE: Sure.

9 MS. SHARKEY: Sprue?

10 MR. RAO: Sprue.

11 MS. FREDE: Sprue? Can I show the Board?

12 MS. SHARKEY: We can offer into evidence if

13 this would be of assistance at this point -- we did plan

14 to offer it later.

15 MR. RAO: Yeah. Yesterday we figured out

16 what this was, but we thought in the process of reading

17 the record --

18 MS. FREDE: Just to make sure.

19 MR. RAO: Yeah.

20 MS. FREDE: This portion right here, this

21 little tab on the runner, is the sprue.

22 MR. RAO: Okay.

23 MS. SHARKEY: If you'd let the record show

24 that Miss Frede is holding what we are going to offer as

Keefe Reporting Company 33

1 CICI Exhibit 7 by a small --

2 MS. FREDE: Cylindrical tab.

3 MS. SHARKEY: -- cylindrical tab at the top

4 of this piece of plastic that's called a runner, and it

5 is that little tab that the robotic arm actually --

6 MS. FREDE: Grasps.

7 MS. SHARKEY: -- picks up and holds; is that

8 correct?

9 MS. FREDE: Correct.

10 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That's the sprue.

11 MS. SHARKEY: That's the sprue.

12 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Any objection to

13 that, Mr. Matoesian, as Exhibit 7?

14 MR. MATOESIAN: No objection.

15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We'll admit that.

16 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: The robotic arm --

17 MS. FREDE: Comes up, and I'll show that to

18 you further.

19 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: I'm going to

20 docket that as sprue and associated plastic.

21 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Would that entire piece

22 be considered the scrap?

23 MS. FREDE: Yes.

24 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Because the actual

Keefe Reporting Company 34

1 mold -- the product that you're making is not that.

2 MS. FREDE: Correct.

3 MS. SHARKEY: And we'll clarify that for you

4 further.

5 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) And that piece would be

6 referred to -- the larger portion would be referred to as

7 a runner, would it not?

8 A. Correct.

9 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: But you reuse that.

10 MS. FREDE: Yes, sir.

11 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Okay. Turning, then, to

12 photo number 2, Miss Frede, would you describe what we're

13 looking at in photo number 2?

14 A. This is the so-called beginning of the

15 machine process. This large box you're seeing in the

16 photograph is what's referred to as a Gaylord. It's

17 approximately 36 inches by 36 inches. It is lined with

18 plastic. Inside this box is the actual resin material

19 that is used in the process of plastic injection molding.

20 Q. Okay. Did you have an opportunity to

21 observe that box?

22 A. I did.

23 Q. Okay. What was inside?

24 A. This wonderful resin.

Keefe Reporting Company 35

1 Q. I'm showing you what we have -- or would

2 like to mark as CICI Exhibit No. --

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: 8.

4 Q. -- 8 in this proceeding, and could you

5 identify for us what that is?

6 A. This is the plastic resin that's used in the

7 process at this machine in this picture.

8 Q. Okay. And is the material similar to the

9 pellets that you observed in the Gaylord shown in this

10 picture?

11 A. Yes. I was actually witness to them

12 removing these pellets from the Gaylord.

13 MS. SHARKEY: And at this time we'd like to

14 offer this resin into evidence as CICI Exhibit 8.

15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Mr. Matoesian?

16 MR. MATOESIAN: No objection.

17 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That'll be

18 admitted.

19 MS. SHARKEY: You can put a sticker on it.

20 It might be better on that.

21 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Yeah, I'll sticker

22 it later. Thank you.

23 MR. RAO: So depending on the color of the

24 product, the resin color changes, correct?

Keefe Reporting Company 36

1 MS. FREDE: Yes.

2 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: That's a good question.

3 For example, I presume this bottle cap is a typical

4 product that's made in a plastic injection molding

5 machine?

6 MR. HARRIS: Yes.

7 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: And there is -- it's

8 primarily white, but there's a little bit of blue on it.

9 Do you use different colored resins or is this done

10 during the process, applied during the process?

11 MS. SHARKEY: Can I -- Mr. Harris was sworn

12 in in the prior hearing and I was sworn in as well. Is

13 that --

14 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Yeah, but let's

15 swear you all in again just to make certain. Can you

16 swear --

17 MS. SHARKEY: He may be the best person to

18 answer that question.

19 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: -- Mr. Harris in

20 again, and Miss Sharkey as well if you're going to --

21 (Witnesses sworn.)

22 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: And you answered

23 one question before we swore you in, and that was whether

24 that bottle cap that Mr. Melas is holding up is a typical

Keefe Reporting Company 37

1 product, and you indicated yes.

2 MR. HARRIS: Yes, typical.

3 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: This may be getting

4 into a little excessive detail, I don't know, but this

5 has got color on it. Do you use -- Is it made in the

6 manufacturing process, they use two different colored

7 resins, or is this painted afterwards?

8 MS. SHARKEY: Mr. Melas, could we examine

9 that? Because there are processes that would print and

10 there are processes that would actually have embedded

11 color resin.

12 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Because last -- at the

13 last hearing I happened to have a water bottle with a

14 blue cap. I presume that was made with blue resin,

15 correct, Mr. Harris?

16 MR. HARRIS: Yes. This is actually printed

17 on.

18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: But for a solid

19 blue color, Mr. Melas is asking, that would have been

20 made as a result of blue resin, correct?

21 MR. HARRIS: Correct.

22 MS. SHARKEY: For example, if we're looking

23 at this bottle top on top of Mr. Rao's Ice Mountain, that

24 would be a -- would be done with blue resin; is that

Keefe Reporting Company 38

1 correct, Mr. Harris?

2 MR. HARRIS: Yes, and Miss Frede will show

3 you in the subsequent pictures how some of the process

4 works.

5 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Great. Okay.

6 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Okay. In taking a look at

7 photo number 2 again, is the material that -- excuse me.

8 Strike that. Is -- Did you notice any dust in or around

9 this Gaylord?

10 A. I did not.

11 Q. Okay. Anything on the plastic liner?

12 A. Did not notice any dust.

13 Q. Any dust at all on the floor or in the area?

14 A. Did not notice any.

15 Q. All right. Did you see anybody sweeping or

16 mopping?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Cleaning around you?

19 A. Did not.

20 Q. Okay. Did any -- Did you observe any other

21 Gaylords in the facility?

22 A. I did.

23 Q. Did you find any of them had any greater

24 quantity of dust or dirt than what you observed here?

Keefe Reporting Company 39

1 A. I did not notice any.

2 Q. Okay. With that, we'd like to turn to photo

3 number 3. Miss Frede, would you explain what you -- we

4 are looking at in photo number 3?

5 A. This is a side view. As you can see on the

6 left-hand side of the picture, that is the Gaylord that

7 you just reviewed in page 2, picture 2. You will see a

8 hose exiting out of the box. This is a vacuum hose that

9 is installed towards the bottom of the box to suck the

10 resin into the hopper. The lid is ajar because this is

11 working under negative pressure, so you don't want to

12 collapse the cardboard on top of the resin during the

13 process. This is a completely contained system. The

14 vacuum hose will then feed the resin into the hopper from

15 this point.

16 Q. Okay. Thank you very much. Did you observe

17 any conveyance of resin in the PIM facility you visited

18 other than by vacuum hoses of this type?

19 A. I did not.

20 Q. Looking at photo number 4, could you

21 describe what we're looking at in photo number 4?

22 A. This is a dryer unit in the center of the

23 picture. What you're seeing is a cylindrical piece of

24 equipment. The cylindrical portion is the actual dryer.

Keefe Reporting Company 40

1 What you'll notice to the left of that are the supply and

2 return hoses that are bringing the warmed ambient air

3 into the dryer.

4 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: You want to hold

5 on just a second?

6 MS. FREDE: Sure.

7 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: You've lost your

8 counsel. Let's go off the record until Miss Sharkey

9 comes back.

10 (Brief recess taken.)

11 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Let's go back on,

12 then, and you can continue your testimony.

13 A. You'll notice to the left of the drying

14 unit, the dryer, those are the supply and return hoses

15 that blow the warmed ambient air into the dryer. That is

16 to take any humidity off of the product depending on the

17 product used, whatever your resin product is. In front

18 of that unit you will see two hoses. One is coming from

19 the Gaylord with the resin coming into the product. The

20 other's coming from the regrinder. These are completely

21 contained coming in this unit, also under negative

22 pressure. To the bottom right-hand view of the picture

23 you'll see two dials there, and that's the actual control

24 to create the negative suction for the hoses.

Keefe Reporting Company 41

1 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Okay. And is -- this

2 portion of the operation, then is it fair to say it's

3 entirely enclosed?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Did you see any dust or -- on the machines

6 themselves, on the hoses, on the floor, anywhere in this

7 area?

8 A. I did not.

9 MS. SHARKEY: Are there any questions?

10 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Yeah. In looking at

11 this, then --

12 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Is that picture

13 number 4?

14 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Picture number 4.

15 You're actually bringing together material -- let's say

16 virgin material from the Gaylord and material that's been

17 regrinded, mixing them together, and they go on into the

18 process.

19 MS. FREDE: Correct.

20 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: And they're both under

21 negative pressure, I presume.

22 MS. FREDE: Correct.

23 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Okay.

24 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Looking at photo number 5,

Keefe Reporting Company 42

1 then, Miss Frede, would you please explain what we're

2 looking at in that photo?

3 A. Yes, I'd be happy to. The hose you see

4 coming from the bottom left corner of the picture up,

5 that is the supply hose coming from the Gaylord. The

6 hose dead center would be coming from the grinder. Those

7 are going into the autoloader, and you'll see a bag

8 directly to the right of that. That is collecting any of

9 the particulate matter, similar to what you would see as

10 a vacuum bag. However, this is more of a canvas

11 material, a tighter weave. Just below those hoses and

12 bag is the actual hopper that we've described at the last

13 hearing. This machine does not have a dryer on it in

14 this photograph. Some machines require dryers, some do

15 not. Again, it depends on the material, the resin being

16 used.

17 Q. Miss Frede, taking a look at picture number

18 5 in color -- I have a color copy that I'm showing you --

19 is it clearer on there?

20 A. It is.

21 MS. SHARKEY: All right. We will be

22 providing the Board with a full set of hard copy color

23 copies to take a look at after Miss Frede finishes her

24 testimony.

Keefe Reporting Company 43

1 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That would be very

2 helpful.

3 MS. SHARKEY: I apologize that we don't have

4 multiple copies right now.

5 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Not a problem.

6 MR. RAO: In this picture number 5, you have

7 a hose coming directly from the Gaylord. Is that

8 material ground material or is it just --

9 MS. FREDE: If you'll refer back to picture

10 number 2, I believe it is -- yes, 2 -- I'm sorry. Pardon

11 me. 3. This is the same machine that these pictures are

12 taken from. The hose you see in picture number 3 is the

13 same hose that's being fed into picture number 5.

14 MR. RAO: Okay. So it's not going through

15 the grinder.

16 MS. FREDE: The Gaylord material is separate

17 from the grinding material.

18 MR. RAO: Okay.

19 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Because the two are

20 mixed after.

21 MR. RAO: Yeah. The two are mixed -- Okay.

22 This is where they're mixed, right?

23 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Yeah.

24 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Miss Frede, is this going

Keefe Reporting Company 44

1 through a dryer? Is there any dryer involved in this

2 particular plastic --

3 A. It is not.

4 Q. Okay. Is that typical that in some

5 instances it may not go through a dryer?

6 A. That could happen. It depends on the raw

7 material, the resin that is going through. Some product

8 requires a dryer, some does not.

9 Q. Okay. Did you observe any dust on this

10 equipment?

11 A. I did not.

12 Q. Okay. If there are no more questions on

13 that, we'll turn to number 6. Could you describe what

14 you're looking at in photo number 6, please?

15 A. This is the front side of photograph number

16 1. This is the front of the machine. What you will see

17 here on the left side of the photograph is where the

18 molding process is. The second -- Dead center of the

19 photograph you'll see a second contained box with a

20 Plexiglas front with a control panel in the front. That

21 sits just above the conveyor belt. This is where the

22 extruder screw and the molds come together.

23 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Can we see the

24 extruder screw now? Is that on the left or is that still

Keefe Reporting Company 45

1 on the right?

2 MS. FREDE: Yes, that would be to the left

3 of the photograph. It's a long rectangular box.

4 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That's what we

5 identified before as that long box sticking out of the

6 side of the --

7 MS. FREDE: Correct. That was hidden by the

8 dryer. I'm sorry. That was hidden by the grinder in the

9 first one.

10 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Looking at photo number 6,

11 can you explain to us what we see below -- where exactly

12 the mold is in -- behind the Plexiglas and what's

13 occurring below that mold?

14 A. The mold is -- I'm sorry. Can you repeat

15 that again?

16 Q. Yeah. Taking a look at photograph number 6,

17 there's two -- what appears to be two boxes --

18 A. Uh-huh.

19 Q. -- with two Plexiglas windows, and there's

20 one of them that has printed above it Van Dorn. Is the

21 mold inside that particular box?

22 A. It is in this photograph.

23 Q. Okay. And what's directly below that?

24 A. That would be the conveyor belt where the

Keefe Reporting Company 46

1 end product is then being deposited into the collection

2 pan below.

3 MS. SHARKEY: Okay. So this photograph is

4 offered as an overview again of this side of this piece

5 of equipment.

6 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Thank you.

7 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) In turning now to page

8 number 7, photo number 7 --

9 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Before we go to 7, when

10 the product comes out, is it still fairly warm?

11 MS. FREDE: The product that I had

12 personally touched, no, it was not.

13 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: So it's warmed by --

14 when it gets to the extruder, and by the time it actually

15 gets to the mold, I suppose it transfers a lot of its

16 energy to the surface of the mold, and when it comes out

17 it's lost a lot of its energy so it's cooler.

18 MS. FREDE: Right. Did you want to --

19 MS. SHARKEY: I think Miss Frede can speak

20 from her own observation but Mr. Harris can explain a

21 little bit more the temperature.

22 MR. HARRIS: I didn't see this machine, but

23 generally some of the molds actually have cold water

24 jackets to cool them down even further.

Keefe Reporting Company 47

1 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Even further. Okay.

2 MS. SHARKEY: But the -- Mr. Harris is

3 prepared to any address any questions you may have about

4 the temperature in the mold and the temperature in the

5 dryer as well, and --

6 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Good.

7 MS. SHARKEY: Which is lower, is it not,

8 Mr. Harris?

9 MR. HARRIS: Yes.

10 MS. SHARKEY: Okay.

11 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Now photo 7.

12 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Yeah. Moving to number 7,

13 Miss Frede, what are we looking at here?

14 A. This is the front view of the previous

15 photograph in 6. This shows you the two molds coming

16 together above in the top portion of the picture, then it

17 also shows you the conveyor belt directly below those

18 mold presses.

19 Q. Okay. I am showing you what we have -- are

20 going to label as CICI Exhibit No. 9, and can you

21 identify what these are?

22 A. These are products coming out of the

23 picture.

24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Picture number 7,

Keefe Reporting Company 48

1 right?

2 A. Picture number 7, yes. This is the end

3 product, the actual plastic that -- the actual form that

4 came out of the mold.

5 Q. Okay. So those are the same little white

6 pieces that we're seeing on the conveyor belt in this

7 photograph?

8 A. Correct.

9 MS. SHARKEY: Okay. Mr. Matoesian, would

10 you like to take a look? Would you like to keep one?

11 MR. MATOESIAN: What exactly are these?

12 MS. SHARKEY: Widgets.

13 MR. MATOESIAN: Widgets.

14 MS. SHARKEY: We have a bag of these that we

15 would like to offer into evidence, and I believe we --

16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We're on to No. 9.

17 MS. SHARKEY: CICI Exhibit No. 9.

18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Mr. Matoesian, any

19 objection to the widgets?

20 MR. MATOESIAN: No.

21 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Those will be

22 admitted.

23 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) So this is in fact the end

24 product of the process.

Keefe Reporting Company 49

1 A. This is for this machine, yes.

2 Q. Okay. And I'm going to show you a color

3 photograph of that. Again, this is the color photograph

4 of number 7. Would you agree that it's clearer in this

5 photograph?

6 A. Oh, most definitely.

7 Q. And you can actually see the mold up above?

8 A. Yes, you can.

9 Q. Okay. And what color is the conveyor belt?

10 A. It's a dark blue.

11 Q. Okay. Did you see any dust on that conveyor

12 belt at all?

13 A. I did not.

14 Q. Do you have an opinion about the cleanliness

15 of the product that -- the widget that we just offered

16 into evidence?

17 A. It actually was very clean as it came off

18 the conveyor belt. The end product did not have any --

19 you know, any extra particulate matter on it that I could

20 tell.

21 Q. Okay. Very good. And it looks very much --

22 in other words, it looked the same as the --

23 A. Exactly.

24 Q. -- widget that the Hearing Officer is

Keefe Reporting Company 50

1 holding in his hand.

2 A. Correct.

3 Q. Thank you. Okay. Is -- I'm sorry. If we

4 could stay for one more moment with photo number 7, we've

5 talked about the other portions of the process involving

6 vacuum hoses and being completely enclosed where the

7 resin is involved. Is this particular -- In the picture

8 we're looking at, are there any openings here in the

9 process?

10 A. There are. The opening below -- underneath

11 the machine -- Between the machine and the conveyor belt

12 is open, thus the mold opens and the product drops

13 directly into the conveyor belt.

14 Q. Okay. Very good. So if in fact there were

15 a release of the emissions, that this would be the point

16 at which you would see them? Perhaps you're not

17 comfortable answering that.

18 A. Yeah, I'm uncomfortable --

19 Q. Thank you. We'll ask that question for

20 Mr. -- save that question for Mr. Harris. Okay. Moving,

21 then, to Exhibit -- excuse me -- photo number 8, could

22 you explain what we're looking at in that photo?

23 A. This is a photo of the grinder and of the

24 robotic arm, and as you can see in the picture, it's --

Keefe Reporting Company 51

1 more clear in the -- in color is the actual runner and

2 sprue on -- in the palm of the robotic arm there. It's

3 being dumped into the grinder. What you'll see is

4 basically a funnel that goes -- the runner and sprue will

5 be dropped into. It then goes down to where you see the

6 word Nelmar. That is where the grinding is taking place.

7 Q. Did you observe any dust on the grinder

8 here?

9 A. I did not.

10 Q. Not -- And that funnel part, did you observe

11 any dust above it as the runner and sprue were being

12 dropped in and around?

13 A. I did not.

14 Q. Okay. Is this open at the top?

15 A. It is.

16 Q. So this is another location in which there

17 is an opening at the top of the grinder at the top of

18 that hopper.

19 A. Correct.

20 Q. And how -- is a single -- it appears in this

21 photograph that a single runner is dropped into this

22 grinder at a time; is that correct?

23 A. That is correct.

24 Q. And how often is that -- does that occur in

Keefe Reporting Company 52

1 this process?

2 A. From what I witnessed, it was approximately

3 once every ten seconds.

4 Q. Okay. And you didn't see a puff of dust or

5 anything above that grinder --

6 A. I did not.

7 Q. -- as this was dropped in.

8 A. I did not.

9 Q. Okay. At this point, if we would turn to

10 Exhibit -- photo number 9, please, could you explain what

11 we're looking at in that photo?

12 A. This is the bottom half of the dryer --

13 excuse me -- bottom half of the grinder that we just

14 viewed in photograph number 8. What you are seeing here,

15 again, towards the top part of the picture you can see

16 the N written on the machine. That is the grinder area.

17 As you look below you'll see a hose and what appears to

18 be a drawer. That is where the grinder -- excuse me --

19 the regrind is located. The hose is then -- The regrind

20 is then fed through the hose and back up to the hopper.

21 Q. Okay. I am showing you what has been

22 offered as -- what I'd like to offer as CICI Exhibit

23 No. 10, I believe. Could you identify what that material

24 is?

Keefe Reporting Company 53

1 A. This is the regrind that was taken out of

2 the drawer in photograph number 9.

3 Q. And why was that regrind taken out of the

4 drawer?

5 A. Because the whole system works under

6 negative pressure under a vacuum, so the only way to get

7 into the system is to open the drawer up to retrieve that

8 material.

9 Q. Was this drawer opened solely to provide you

10 with a sample of the regrind?

11 A. It was.

12 Q. Would otherwise that regrind have otherwise

13 been exposed to the air in any other way?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Okay. So it would have been exiting the

16 system -- it would have been created in the grinder; is

17 that correct?

18 A. It would have been created in the grinder

19 and then via gravity comes down to the lower portion of

20 the drawers and then fed back via negative pressure.

21 Q. So you requested a sample and the plant

22 personnel offered you -- opened the drawer --

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. -- and offered you the sample?

Keefe Reporting Company 54

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Okay. And that is in fact how it looked

3 when it came out of the machine?

4 A. That's exactly how it looked.

5 MS. SHARKEY: Okay. We'd like to offer this

6 as regrind -- a small bag of regrind as CICI Exhibit --

7 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: 10.

8 Mr. Matoesian?

9 MS. SHARKEY: You want a sample?

10 MR. MATOESIAN: No, that's all right. No

11 objection.

12 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: It's admitted.

13 (Off the record.)

14 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Okay. How would you

15 describe the level of dust on this product, on the

16 regrind? Was it dustier than the resin itself?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Okay. But did you see any dust in the area

19 around the grinder at all?

20 A. I did not.

21 Q. Okay. Nothing on the floor or the equipment

22 in that area?

23 A. Nothing.

24 Q. I'm sorry if this is repetitive, but again,

Keefe Reporting Company 55

1 where does the hose at the bottom of this lead? Where is

2 it taking that regrind material?

3 A. The hose will take this regrind back into

4 the hopper or dryer, depending on the machine.

5 MS. SHARKEY: Okay. While that finishes the

6 photographs that we were -- had provided in prefiled

7 testimony and I think closes the loop on how this

8 operation works, there is one other piece of equipment

9 that we realized we had not provided you with a photo of,

10 so we wanted to provide you with a photo that we've

11 marked as -- that we'll have to mark as another exhibit,

12 I guess, and I have some extra copies for others.

13 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: This is Exhibit

14 No. 11?

15 MS. SHARKEY: Yes, and I can give you a

16 color one right now.

17 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Oh, sure.

18 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) Miss Frede, taking a look

19 as what we have marked as Exhibit 11, could you explain

20 to the Board what we're looking at, in particular what we

21 wanted to show with that piece -- that photograph?

22 A. What you will see is the colorant mixing

23 equipment in this photograph directly below what is

24 labeled as the material hopper. To the right of that

Keefe Reporting Company 56

1 hopper you will see a material dryer. From my

2 understanding of the facility I was at and the questions

3 that were given to me by the facility plant employees,

4 the colorant is in a resin form. It is not in a liquid

5 form. They are -- The colored resin and the resin coming

6 from the Gaylord are mixed at the hopper. That allows

7 for a better quality of color mixing in the product.

8 Q. And again, did you see any dust at all

9 around this area?

10 A. I did not.

11 Q. Okay. And that's a completely enclosed

12 process, the mixing?

13 A. It is.

14 Q. The material from the mixer goes where?

15 Does it go directly into the extruder screw?

16 A. It does.

17 MS. SHARKEY: Are there any questions about

18 the photographs? That basically completes our review of

19 the photographs.

20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Just one second,

21 please. No, we're fine on that. And you want to offer

22 this as Exhibit 11?

23 MS. SHARKEY: Yes.

24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Mr. Matoesian, any

Keefe Reporting Company 57

1 objections?

2 MR. MATOESIAN: No objection.

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That'll be

4 admitted as Exhibit 11.

5 MS. SHARKEY: Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me.

6 Did I hand you the wrong --

7 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: This is a color --

8 MS. SHARKEY: I apologize. I had the wrong

9 photograph here.

10 MR. RAO: The black and white are the right

11 one.

12 MS. SHARKEY: This is the correct one.

13 Excuse me. Do you want to take another minute and take a

14 look at that, make sure there are no questions?

15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Mr. Melas?

16 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Let me take a look at

17 that.

18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: How would you

19 describe that, just so we -- a photograph of what,

20 exactly?

21 MS. SHARKEY: It's a photograph of the

22 mixer.

23 MR. RAO: Color mixer.

24 MS. SHARKEY: Color mixer.

Keefe Reporting Company 58

1 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Color mixer.

2 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: And you said the

3 colored material is liquid.

4 MS. FREDE: No, it is not liquid. It is

5 resin, from my understanding.

6 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Oh, it's also resin.

7 MS. SHARKEY: When you say resin, do you

8 mean a bead or a pellet?

9 MS. FREDE: Yes.

10 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Yeah. Okay.

11 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: And,

12 Mr. Matoesian, you don't have any objection to this

13 picture either, correct?

14 MR. MATOESIAN: No.

15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: This will be

16 admitted as Exhibit 11.

17 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Exhibit No. 11.

18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We have no

19 questions. Mr. Matoesian, do you have any questions on

20 any of those photographs?

21 MR. MATOESIAN: No, I don't.

22 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Miss Sharkey, do

23 you have any other witnesses you'd like to present?

24 MS. SHARKEY: Well, what I'd like to do is

Keefe Reporting Company 59

1 just briefly walk through with Miss Frede a few more

2 questions --

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Sure.

4 MS. SHARKEY: -- that don't pertain to --

5 pertain to her observations and other work she's done in

6 relation to our prefiled testimony.

7 Q. (By Ms. Sharkey) In walking through the

8 plant, what was your -- did you see anybody wearing masks

9 or other type of respiratory protection?

10 A. I did not.

11 Q. Okay. Can you give the Board your overall

12 impression of the cleanliness of the equipment and the

13 work area you observed?

14 A. I can. Previous to coming to CICI, I was a

15 health inspector for the County of Will in the state of

16 Illinois and had visited several other facilities

17 throughout the state that require a basis of cleanliness.

18 I have been into a microchip production facility, which

19 requires them to have HEPA filters and be very clean.

20 I've also been into restaurants which are required to be

21 clean, and I can literally say that this is -- facility

22 was cleaner than most restaurants I've ever been in, and

23 it was equated to what you would have for a microchip

24 production facility. It was extremely clean.

Keefe Reporting Company 60

1 Q. Okay. Did you observe any venting from

2 these machines to the outside?

3 A. I did not.

4 Q. Did you inquire with your CICI plastic

5 injection molding member facilities whether or not any of

6 them vent to the outside?

7 A. I did do a brief survey of my facility

8 members, and it was expressed to me by each one of them

9 that they do not vent the machines to the outside.

10 Q. Okay. In the prefiled testimony there's a

11 discussion of mold release agents and mold cleaners.

12 Have you inquired with your plastic injection molding

13 member facilities whether or not any of them use mold

14 release agents or mold cleaners?

15 A. I did do a survey of my members. Some of

16 them do use usually one or the other, but they do not use

17 both. My understanding is there's a difference in usage

18 between the two products.

19 Q. Okay. And can you explain -- have you in

20 conversations with your members learned anything about

21 how they apply this material?

22 A. From what I -- From my understanding of the

23 conversation that I've had, the whole conceptual idea of

24 the mold cleaner is just that. It's to keep the molds

Keefe Reporting Company 61

1 clean. You do not want any foreign material in your end

2 product. The product needs to keep its quality, and thus

3 the cleaner allows for the molds to remain clean so you

4 do not have any residue left over in them.

5 Q. Okay. And a mold -- that's a mold cleaner

6 and a mold cleaner agent?

7 A. A mold cleaner. A mold release agent is

8 literally that. It is to get the mold to release -- to

9 get the product to release from the mold. Unfortunately,

10 this -- usage of this product requires the machine to be

11 stopped to be sprayed on the molds, so you're slowing

12 down your production of the actual product.

13 Q. Okay. And how many -- in the prefiled

14 testimony there was an indication that it was used once

15 every shift. Is that reflective of what your members

16 told you?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. As a standard --

19 A. Standard operating procedure, yes.

20 Q. Okay. And that it depends on the particular

21 mold whether you're going to use a mold release agent,

22 whether a mold release agent is needed?

23 A. Correct.

24 Q. All right. And how is it -- in what kind of

Keefe Reporting Company 62

1 container is the mold release agent generally used?

2 A. They're in spray cans, approximately 12- to

3 16-ounce spray cans.

4 Q. Okay. And -- excuse me. Do you know if the

5 facility that you visited used a mold release agent or a

6 mold release cleaner?

7 A. They did use a mold release cleaner.

8 Q. Okay. And did they use it only one time a

9 shift?

10 A. I did not witness the usage of it, but from

11 my understanding, talking to the plant, they use it once

12 a shift.

13 Q. Do CICI members use any kind of water-based

14 or nonreactive cleaners or mold release agents?

15 A. I did not get a precise number on that

16 feedback for the water-based, so I cannot assume they do

17 or they do not.

18 Q. Have they given you any information about

19 what -- any kinds of issues or problems there may be with

20 the water-based or nonreactive?

21 A. The water-based nonreactives tend to be more

22 expensive and they do not necessarily perform as well as

23 the current mold release agents and mold cleaners.

24 MS. SHARKEY: Okay. I have no more

Keefe Reporting Company 63

1 questions.

2 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Any questions of

3 Miss Frede?

4 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Yes, just one. The

5 aerosol cans, do you have any idea what the propellent

6 is?

7 MS. FREDE: I would not -- I'm not an expert

8 to say on that.

9 MS. SHARKEY: Can we have a moment?

10 (Off the record.)

11 MS. SHARKEY: Sorry for the delay. Mr. --

12 Maybe we can get an answer to this by asking Mr. Harris.

13 Mr. Harris, are you aware of what the propellents

14 are and whether or not they're similar to what one would

15 find in any other aerosol type of can?

16 MR. HARRIS: From what I understand, they're

17 about the same as you would from any aerosol can.

18 MS. SHARKEY: Would some of those be

19 ozone-depleting types of chlorofluorocarbons?

20 MR. HARRIS: It would run the gamut from

21 that to carbon dioxide or propane.

22 MS. SHARKEY: Does that answer your

23 question, Mr. Melas?

24 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: It couldn't be the

Keefe Reporting Company 64

1 chlorofluorocarbons. They've been prohibited. I don't

2 think anybody manufactures them.

3 MR. HARRIS: Oh. I mean, in the past it's

4 been -- in answer to the question, it's any kind of

5 propellant that's been used in the past. These days it's

6 the same kind of propellants that you would use in bug

7 spray or --

8 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Okay.

9 MR. RAO: And just as a follow-up, this mold

10 cleaner or release agents, they are manually applied to

11 the molds?

12 MR. HARRIS: They're sprayed.

13 MR. RAO: Yeah. They're sprayed. There's

14 no automatic mechanism built into the machines?

15 MR. HARRIS: (Shakes head back and forth.)

16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Anything further?

17 Miss Sharkey, do you have any further --

18 MS. SHARKEY: We don't have any further

19 questions at this point or points I'd like to make.

20 We're -- We might want to clarify a point on -- Could you

21 give me one moment to think about whether or not we want

22 to ask Mr. Harris a question?

23 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Sure. Let's go

24 off the record while they do that and then you guys can

Keefe Reporting Company 65

1 ready yourselves.

2 (Off the record.)

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Miss Sharkey, do

4 you have any further questions or any further testimony

5 you'd like to provide?

6 MS. SHARKEY: Yeah. We thought that in

7 order to answer the question that was raised earlier

8 about temperatures that we'd indicated that Mr. Harris

9 would be the best person to answer those questions, so I

10 think maybe a few -- I can ask a few questions of

11 Mr. Harris to try to just give the Board some more

12 perspective on the temperatures involved with these --

13 with the product at the point that that mold is opening

14 and also with the dryer.

15 EXAMINATION OF LYNNE HARRIS

16 BY MS. SHARKEY:

17 Q. Mr. Harris, referring to your prefiled

18 testimony, which is Exhibit 3 in this proceeding, would

19 you -- could you give us -- is there anything in that

20 that provides perspective on the kinds of temperatures

21 that are reached when the plastic is melted in the screw

22 extruder?

23 A. In terms of emissions?

24 Q. Yeah, the temperatures that are in the

Keefe Reporting Company 66

1 emissions. Are they -- They're shown on Exhibit 9 --

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. -- in your prefiled testimony, are they not?

4 A. Right.

5 Q. Okay. Could you give us an overview of what

6 the range of those temperatures are for the melting of

7 the plastic?

8 A. They range from about 325 to 600 degrees

9 Fahrenheit.

10 Q. Okay. That's in Exhibit 9 to Exhibit 3.

11 And when -- in your studies and the SPI studies that have

12 measured the emissions from the extruder die, it's

13 material that has been heated to those temperatures, is

14 it not?

15 A. Yes, that's correct.

16 Q. Okay. And looking at the -- also in your

17 prefiled testimony, the -- what is Exhibit 5 in the

18 Harris Group Exhibit 3, which is an SPI study entitled

19 "Development of Emission Factors For Polyethylene

20 Processing," turning to page 579 of that study, that

21 technical paper, there are some graphs labeled.

22 Particularly focusing on the one labeled as figure 6,

23 what do we see in terms of temperature in the -- in terms

24 of emissions at various temperatures? What is depicted

Keefe Reporting Company 67

1 in that graph?

2 A. What you see there is that the highest

3 temperature is the melt temperature of 600 degrees going

4 down to 300 degrees, the decrease in the amount of

5 emissions that are coming off, and what you would assume

6 from this is that as you get lower than 300 degrees that

7 you're essentially down to almost zero, so even at lower

8 temperatures, cooling temperatures, you would expect

9 virtually no emissions.

10 Q. Okay. And then turning to the -- excuse me.

11 So is it fair to say that at ambient temperatures even on

12 a relatively hot day in the midwest that the emissions

13 for -- from any of these materials, such as the resin and

14 the regrind and the plastics and such, that the types of

15 VOM emissions that we would be seeing from those products

16 would be low?

17 A. Assuming that your temperatures in the

18 midwest don't get higher than 300 degrees Fahrenheit,

19 yes.

20 Q. And then looking -- the other place, of

21 course, in this process where there is some heat involved

22 is in the dryer itself, and looking at the table that was

23 provided in the prefiled testimony on behalf of CICI,

24 which was filed on July 15 and which we've now admitted

Keefe Reporting Company 68

1 into evidence, I believe, as Exhibit 6 here --

2 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Correct.

3 Q. -- one of the attachments to that prefiled

4 testimony is an excerpt from the "Modern Plastics

5 Handbook" by Charles -- editor in chief Charles Harper.

6 Showing you on page 2 of what was provided, it's labeled

7 as table 5.1, "Suggested Drying Conditions For Generic

8 Resins." Could you help us take a look at this and show

9 us where the temperatures -- typical temperatures for

10 drying are that are shown there?

11 A. The next to last table where it says T

12 drying degrees centigrade, it has a whole list of drying

13 temperatures for different types of resins. What you see

14 there is the temperatures are -- if you convert that to

15 degrees Fahrenheit, about double, it would still be less

16 than the 300 degrees that was shown on the chart.

17 Q. Okay. So would you anticipate that the

18 emissions from the -- coming from the dryer would be a

19 very small fraction of the emissions you were seeing at

20 the die head in those SPI studies?

21 A. Yes, I would.

22 Q. And the temperatures in the mold chamber

23 itself, we don't have any documentation on that in your

24 materials, I don't believe, but are those temperatures in

Keefe Reporting Company 69

1 fact quite a bit lower --

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. -- in the mold chamber?

4 A. Much lower in the mold chambers.

5 Q. Do you have any idea what those temperatures

6 would be in a range, just a general approximate range?

7 A. As I mentioned earlier, some of them are

8 water cooled, so you would expect them to be probably --

9 I couldn't give you an exact number, but it would be much

10 lower than what the melt temperature of the extrudate

11 would be when it's coming out.

12 MS. SHARKEY: Okay. That's all the

13 questions that we have. Do you have any other questions

14 of Mr. Harris?

15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Nope, nothing --

16 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: No more.

17 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: -- further. Thank

18 you very much, Mr. Harris, Miss Sharkey. Mr. Matoesian,

19 I believe you have the testimony of Don Sutton you would

20 like to present?

21 MR. MATOESIAN: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Hearing

22 Officer. Charles Matoesian appearing for the Illinois

23 Environmental Protection Agency. I'll just state that

24 with me today I have Mr. Don Sutton, manager of the

Keefe Reporting Company 70

1 permit section, the Bureau of Air; Mr. Bob Bernoteit,

2 who's manager of the state permit and FESOP units in the

3 Bureau of Air; Annet Godiksen, another attorney, from the

4 Bureau of Air; and Mr. David Bloomberg, who's the manager

5 of the compliance unit in the Bureau of Air. Mr. Sutton

6 will be presenting the testimony today and the other

7 agency staff are available to answer any questions you

8 may have.

9 Mr. Sutton will -- We prefiled testimony from

10 Mr. Sutton, which he will now go over. I would also like

11 to say we appreciate CICI's effort -- continuing efforts

12 to modify its definition of their exemption so as to both

13 tighten it and to find the scope of the exemption, and

14 therefore, we believe that this exemption as modified

15 going forward should be a reasonable, acceptable addition

16 to the list of exemptions found at 35 Illinois

17 Administrative Code, Section 201.146. And with that, I

18 will turn it over to Mr. Sutton.

19 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Before I start,

20 you did note that you had a correction you wanted to make

21 on the testimony?

22 MR. MATOESIAN: I'm sorry. Correct.

23 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: You wanted to have

24 a correction made on his prefiled testimony, you said,

Keefe Reporting Company 71

1 and did you still intend to offer that as of --

2 MR. MATOESIAN: Yes, after he states that.

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. Can we

4 swear him in, then, please, Karen?

5 (Witness sworn.)

6 MR. SUTTON: Yes, I would prefer just

7 entering this and not actually reading it. I don't read

8 as well as Lisa does. So the only correction I would

9 like to make is in -- basically in the opening line. I'm

10 not the manager of the manager. I'm just the manager, so

11 if you would delete one of the managers, that'll be fine.

12 Other than that, I would like to enter the testimony as

13 prefiled.

14 MR. MATOESIAN: Could you give me a second?

15 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Sure.

16 (Off the record.)

17 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Mr. Matoesian,

18 you're offering that as read?

19 MR. MATOESIAN: Yeah, with the correction.

20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That will be the

21 Agency Exhibit 1.

22 MR. MATOESIAN: Exhibit 1, along with the --

23 our correction to the transcript of the July 1, 2005,

24 hearing.

Keefe Reporting Company 72

1 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Oh, that's

2 correct.

3 MR. MATOESIAN: Which we prefiled as well.

4 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Right. Let's take

5 those separately and we can make that Agency 2, but

6 first, as to the prefiled testimony with the correction

7 noted by Mr. Sutton, Miss Sharkey, do you have any

8 objection to that?

9 MS. SHARKEY: No. I just -- I do wonder if

10 there's an extra copy, though, of Mr. Sutton's testimony

11 here today.

12 MR. MATOESIAN: I can --

13 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: You can have mine.

14 MS. SHARKEY: I apologize. I did print it

15 out yesterday but seem to have left it in Chicago.

16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: I have one.

17 MR. MATOESIAN: I only brought one copy with

18 me.

19 MR. SUTTON: Here's one.

20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Yeah, you can have

21 mine.

22 MS. SHARKEY: I will return it to you.

23 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: No, that's fine.

24 It's a faxed copy.

Keefe Reporting Company 73

1 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: It's okay, Miss

2 Sharkey.

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: So do you want to

4 take a moment to look that over before we --

5 MS. SHARKEY: No. I did -- Thank you very

6 much. I did read it. I just wanted -- if we're going to

7 be talking about it wanted to have a copy in front of me.

8 Thank you.

9 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: So no objection to

10 the admission of that as Exhibit 1?

11 MS. SHARKEY: No objection. Thank you.

12 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: That's admitted.

13 And you wanted to also admit --

14 MR. MATOESIAN: A correction to the

15 transcript.

16 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: -- corrections,

17 which has been docketed as a public comment, but it's in

18 escence the IEPA's first correction of the transcript of

19 the hearing held on July 1.

20 MR. MATOESIAN: Yes.

21 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Any objection to

22 that, Miss Sharkey?

23 MS. SHARKEY: No objection.

24 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We'll admit that

Keefe Reporting Company 74

1 as Exhibit -- Agency Exhibit No. 2. Anybody have any

2 questions of Mr. Sutton? I see none.

3 MS. SHARKEY: The only comment we would like

4 to make is that we note that at the end of Mr. Sutton's

5 testimony he indicates that there -- he does not

6 agree that the -- that the Agency does not agree that

7 this process qualifies for the extrusion exemption, and I

8 simply wanted to reiterate CICI's position that we

9 recognize there's a difference of opinion and that is

10 really not -- it's the subject for another proceeding in

11 front of the Board, and that this proceeding is an

12 agreement to make -- to create -- to not create but to

13 devise a very clear exemption so that there isn't any

14 ambiguity in the future going forward with how -- with

15 whether or not these particular pieces of equipment are

16 exempt, but we just want to make it clear there is a

17 difference of opinion, but not one that we believe needs

18 to be resolved in this proceeding.

19 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Okay. That being

20 said, let's go off the record for just one minute. No,

21 we're still on the record.

22 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Mr. Sutton, I see that

23 in this testimony you've already referred to the concern

24 that I had. It's -- You answer that on the second page,

Keefe Reporting Company 75

1 I believe, on your economic reasonableness and technical

2 feasibility, third page, in your second paragraph there,

3 that you would have -- it's about the cumulative effect

4 of exempting a large number of sources of pollution even

5 though each individual piece of equipment and each

6 individual facility is really emitting a minimal amount

7 of VOM, and you address that in this, and maybe you can

8 expand on that a little bit, because that is really the

9 major question in my own mind.

10 MR. SUTTON: Well, there's basically I would

11 say two parts to the answer to that question. One, these

12 are state regulations, and we cannot supersede or replace

13 federal regulation, and federal regulations are triggered

14 on a source's potential to emit whatever comes from that

15 particular source, whether it's permitted by us or not,

16 so if in fact there's enough emission units at that

17 source, however small, and they add up quantitatively to

18 something that would trigger a federal requirement, they

19 are by law required to get a federal permit, so we're not

20 doing anything to delude that or take that obligation

21 away.

22 Having said that, we also understand there are

23 emission sources out there that are so small from a state

24 enforcement standpoint, it doesn't make sense to go after

Keefe Reporting Company 76

1 them and regulate them, especially in light of there's

2 not any underlying regulation. Primarily what you end up

3 with is a permit in name only, so you're basically giving

4 a license to operate without bringing about any

5 particular regulatory overview other than reporting

6 annual emissions and paying me a fee. So to that end we

7 agree that there is a point in time where it does not

8 make sense to pursue small sources, keeping in mind it

9 does not shield them from federal regulatory oversight.

10 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Okay. Thank you.

11 MS. SHARKEY: Mr. Melas, if I might just

12 elaborate on that point of the overall emissions, because

13 I know you expressed concern on that at the last hearing

14 as well. In the CICI's prefiled testimony, what we did

15 was try to provide you with an overview from the

16 perspective of an average facility, what we believe is

17 the average. We actually think it's quite a conservative

18 number, because there's a number of conservative

19 assumptions built into that, but it comes out with

20 something on the order of 100 tons of emissions

21 state-wide from all of these 500 facilities, so you're

22 talking about a -- an impact that I think when you

23 consider the number of facilities that have to go through

24 permitting of being very small.

Keefe Reporting Company 77

1 Recognizing that, you know, an exemption's out

2 there and you never know how things can change, we

3 reached an agreement with Illinois EPA and in part in

4 response to your concerns to limit the -- to put a limit

5 on it, and thus we have that 5,000 tons of resin limit

6 that actually ends up giving us -- it's going

7 to remain -- no matter how big any of these units might

8 get, with some very outrageous assumptions, you still

9 would be under 1,000 tons state-wide from 500 emission

10 sources out there averaging 2 tons per source, so very --

11 the whole facility, meaning whole facility, far below the

12 de minimus cutoff level that the Board is considering in

13 the 05-19 proceeding where that 0.44 tons would apply to

14 any individual piece of equipment. So we hope we've

15 addressed any concern that this is somehow creating a

16 very large exemption for a large amount of emissions in

17 the state.

18 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Thank you.

19 BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: And your -- in your

20 prefiled testimony, your estimate was that the total

21 state-wide was 100 tons per year, and that is the

22 reasonable worst case, that estimate, as you phrased it

23 in that.

24 MS. SHARKEY: Yes.

Keefe Reporting Company 78

1 BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: And you agree with

2 that, Mr. Sutton?

3 MR. SUTTON: Yes, I do.

4 BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: And it's also true

5 there are single facilities located in this state that

6 produce a volume of VOM emissions in excess of 100 tons

7 by themselves.

8 MR. SUTTON: Yes, that's true.

9 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Okay.

10 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Nothing further.

11 Let's go off the record, please.

12 (Off the record.)

13 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: We are back on the

14 record. Mr. Melas has a question.

15 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Miss Frede, is Corn

16 Products International a member of your association?

17 MS. FREDE: Yes.

18 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Okay. This may be

19 superfluous, but in the interest of full disclosure, I

20 think I ought to at least mention it. In my previous

21 life, about 50 some years ago when I worked for the

22 University of Chicago, I did some consulting work,

23 management training, for Corn Products and thought I

24 would just mention it. Not that it's significant enough,

Keefe Reporting Company 79

1 but just -- might be a little overkill, but I thought I

2 at least had to mention it for the record.

3 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Full disclosure is

4 always important.

5 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Full disclosure.

6 MS. SHARKEY: Could I ask a follow-up

7 question? Mr. Melas, are you aware of -- do you know

8 whether they have any plastic injection molding

9 processes?

10 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: I never saw any in my

11 experience with the company, and I visited a number of

12 their plants.

13 MS. SHARKEY: Miss Frede, do you know if

14 they have any?

15 BOARD MEMBER MELAS: Probably not.

16 MS. FREDE: I don't believe they do.

17 MS. SHARKEY: You don't believe they do?

18 MS. FREDE: I do not believe they do.

19 MS. SHARKEY: Okay. Thank you.

20 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: I also want to

21 note that I do not see any members of the public present

22 here today. If they were here, they of course would be

23 able to ask questions and provide a statement if they so

24 chose.

Keefe Reporting Company 80

1 We have discussed off the record, and the Board

2 will accept public comments on this proposal until August

3 8. Of course after we adopt these rules for first notice

4 there's going to be an additional 45 days for public

5 comment.

6 Today's hearing concludes the hearings scheduled

7 by the Board in this matter, but any party may request an

8 additional hearing pursuant to Section 102.412(b) of the

9 Board's procedure rules. We expect to have today's

10 transcript ready by July 22, and soon thereafter we will

11 post it on our Web site, which is www.ipcb.state.il.us.

12 Transcripts as well as the Agency's proposal, all board

13 orders throughout this proceeding will be viewable and

14 downloadable on the Board's Web site. Alternatively, you

15 can order a copy of the transcript from the clerk of the

16 board at 75 cents per page.

17 Anybody can file a public comment to this

18 proceeding with the clerk of the board, but please note

19 that when filing a public comment you must serve all the

20 people on the service list with a copy of the public

21 comment, and we of course would be willing to provide

22 copies of the current service and notice list if

23 necessary. If there's nothing further, I wish to thank

24 all of you for your comments today.

Keefe Reporting Company 81

1 MR. MATOESIAN: Just one thing.

2 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Yes, Mr.

3 Matoesian?

4 MR. MATOESIAN: I believe you said it was

5 the Agency's proposal?

6 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: Did I really?

7 MR. MATOESIAN: Yeah, and it's not actually

8 the Agency's proposal.

9 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: It is not. It is

10 CICI's proposal. Thank you for that correction. And if

11 there's nothing further, thank you all, and this hearing

12 is adjourned.

13 (Off the record.)

14 HEARING OFFICER KNITTLE: I have just one

15 further clarification. I stated that anybody can file a

16 public comment, and they can, but when filing a public

17 comment, they have to serve all the people on the service

18 list with the public comment. That is not true. We will

19 of course accept public comment from members of the

20 public and they do not have to serve, but they will be

21 available on the Board's Web site for viewing. Thanks

22 again.

23 (Hearing adjourned.)

Keefe Reporting Company 82

1 STATE OF ILLINOIS)

) SS

2 COUNTY OF ST. CLAIR )

4 I, KAREN WAUGH, a Notary Public and Certified

5 Shorthand Reporter in and for the County of St. Clair,

6 State of Illinois, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I was present

7 at the Illinois Pollution Control Board, Springfield,

8 Illinois, on July 15, 2005, and did record the aforesaid

9 Hearing; that same was taken down in shorthand by me and

10 afterwards transcribed, and that the above and foregoing

11 is a true and correct transcript of said Hearing.

12 IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand

13 and affixed my Notarial Seal this 19th day of July, 2005.

16 __________________________

17 Notary Public--CSR

18 #084-003688

Keefe Reporting Company 83