ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
October
20,
1988
M&D FLEXOGRAPHIC PRINTERS,
INC..,
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
PCB 87—182
)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent.
MR..
THOMAS M. GILLER, OF GESSLER, FLYNN, LASWELL, FLEISCHMANN,
HUGHES
& SOCOL, LTD., APPEARED ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER;
MR.. JOSEPH R.
PODLEWSKI,
JR.., APPEARED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT..
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by
R..C..
Flemal):
This matter comes before
the Board upon
a request
for
variance filed on November
25,
1987 by M&D Flexographic Printers,
Inc.
(“M&D”)..
M&D requests variance from 35
Ill..
Adrn. Code
215.245(a)
until June
30,
1989
to allow time to achieve
compliance with the substantive requirements of
the Board’s
regulations governing emissions
from flexographic printing
operations
-
35
Ill..
Adm.. Code 215.245 was recently adopted pursuant
to
the Board’s final order in R85—2l, Docket B (In the Matter of:
Proposed Amendments
to
35
Ill.
Adm.. Code 215:
Flexographic and
Rotogravure Printing, October
29, 1987).
It provides
in
pertinent part that flexographic printing operations which are
located
in non—attainment counties and which have aggregate
uncontrolled emissions of volatile organic material (“VOM”)
greater than 100 tons per year comply with rules regarding
Flexographic and Rotogravure Printing,
as specified at 35 Ill.
Adm.. Code
215 Subpart
P,
by December
31,
1987..
Prior
to the
addition of Section 215.245 M&D was exempt from the requirements
of Subpart P.
Because M&D filed
the instant variance petition
within twenty days of the effective date
of Section 2l5..245,
application of the rule is stayed as
to M&D pending a decision on
the variance petition pursuant
to Ill.
Rev.
Stat..
ch. 111—1/2
par. 1038(b).
On February 19,
1988
the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency
(“Agency”)
filed
a recommendation that the requested
relief be granted subject
to certain conditions.
Hearing
was
originally noticed
for July
7,
1988, and subsequently renoticed
and held on August 30,
1988;
no members of the public attended..
93—185
—2--
At hearing the parties stipulated
that they agree on all
substantive issues in this matter save the termination date of
the variance
(R.
at
53)..
On September
29, 1988
the Agency filed
an Amended Variance Recommendation wherein
it revised its
recommended termination date to coincide with
that requested by
M&D.
As such,
there are currently no outstanding issues of
disagreement between the parties..
Based on the record before
it,
the Board
finds that M&D
would
incur an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship if the
requested relief were to be denied.
Accordingly,
the variance
will be granted, subject
to conditions.
BACKGROUND
M&D operates
a specialized job shop,
located at 3600 W. 83rd
Place
in Chicago, which provides custom printing services
for the
food processing and packaging industries.
Printing at M&D
is
done using
three
f-lexographic presses,
a six—color Carrero press
and two four—color Condes preSses..
A fourth flexographic press
is located at the plant but is presently out of service.
The printing
inks used by M&D are solvent—based, and contain
compounds classified as volatile organic material
(“VOM”)
under
the Board’s regulations governing air emissions..
The VOM
emissions from M&D’s operations are currently uncontrolled and
vent directly
to the atmosphere..
Total VOM emissions for the year 1987 were approximately 140
tons
(R. at 19).
Half of the total VOM emissions are estimated
to be due
to operation of the Carrero press
(Agency Rec. at par.
11)..
COMPLIANCE PLAN
M&D intends
to achieve compliance with Section 215, Subpart
P,
by moving the Carrero press from its Chicago plant and
relocating to
a
new plant which M&D
is opening
in Kankakee
County; Kankakee County
is an ozone attainment county.
Removal
of
the press will cause emissions at the Chicago plant
to fall
below 100 tons per year
(R..
at
27)..
At that emissions rate,
M&D’s Chicago plant will
be exempt from the substantive
requirements of Section 215, Subpart P.
M&D requests until June 30,
1989 to complete its compliance
program based on the time necessary to construct and make the
Kankakee facility functional..
The Agency agrees with
the
reasonableness of this timeframe
(Agency Amended Rec. at
2).
93—186
—3--
HARDSHIP AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The Agency summarizes
the matter
of
hardship as follows:
The Agency agrees with M&D that immediate
compliance with the requirements of Section 215,
Subpart P
is simply not feasible and creates
an
unreasonable hardship for M&D.
Water—based or high
solids inks satisfying customer requirements are
simply not available, and M&D cannot realistically
install VOM control equipment by December 31,
1987.
Indeed,
the IEPA has stated as
a matter of
record
in
the rule—making proceeding which led to adoption of
Section 215.245 that “expeditious installation” of
control equipment at affected facilities would take
one year from the date that regulation was enacted..
The Agency does not expect M&D to be able to do in
two months
(November and December of 1987) what
it
reasonably expects will take one year.
M&D itself
asserts that if add—on controls were to be pursued as
a compliance option, control equipment could not be
installed and operating for
at least nine months
(Pet. at 7).
M&D’s only existing compliance option in the
absence of variance relief
is to reduce its VON
emissions
to less than 100 tons yearly by curtailing
production..
This would,
in all likelihood,
force
the
layoff of one—third of M&D’s
employees..
It would
also “jeopardize” M&D’s customer base.
Agency Rec..
at par.
24—25..
Contrasting with hardship is the matter
of environmental
impact..
The ozone monitors nearest to M&D’s facility are located
at 84th and Kedvai.e and at 103rd and Louella, both
in Chicago..
No ozone excursions were recorded
at these monitors during
1986,
but during 1987 one was recorded at the 84th and Kedvale monitor
and two were recorded at the 103rd and Louella monitor
(Agency
Rec.
at par.
17).
Nevertheless, given the large number of VON
sources
in the Chicago area and the multiple excursions beyond
the ozone standard throughout
the Chicago area during both 1987
and 1988,
it
is difficult
to quantify M&D’S contribution
to this
environmental problem..
However, M&D’s compliance program,
if
successful, will significantly reduce the amount of VON emitted
by its facility.
The parties contend that the requested
relief can be granted
consistent with the federal Clean Air Act
(42
U..S..C.A..
par..
7401
et
seq..,
1983),
and that the variance should be approvable as
part of the Illinois State Implementation
Plan..
93—187
—4--
CONCLUSION
In view of
the hardship here demonstrated,
as well
as the
projected environmental impact during
the term of this proposed
variance, the Board finds
that adequate proof has been presented
that immediate compliance with the requirements of 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 215.245(a) would impose an arbitrary or unreasonable
hardship upon Petitioner..
Accordingly, the relief will be
granted with conditions consistent with the Illinois
Environmental Protection
Act..
This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
conclusions of law in this matter.
ORDER
Petitioner, M&D Flexographic Printers,
Inc..,
is hereby
granted variance from 35 Ill.
Adm.. Code 215.245(a)
for
its
facility located at 3600
w..
83rd Place, Chicago, Illinois,
subject
to the following conditions:
1)
Variance begins on January
1,
1988 and expires on June
30,
1989,
or when compliance with 35
Ill..
Adm.. Code
215.245
is
achieved, whichever occurs first.
2)
During the term of this variance, Petitioner shall
submit quarterly written reports
to the Agency detailing
all progress made in achieving compliance with 35
Ill..
Adm. Code 215, Subpart P at its plant located at 3600 W.
83rd Place, Chicago.
The first quarterly report shall
be due thirty
(30) days from the date
of this Order..
The quarterly reports shall include quarterly VON
emission data from each printing press..
The first
quarterly report shall also include copies
of material
data sheets showing the composition
(in terms of
percentage of solid,
solvent, and water)
of all inks
used during
the flexographic printing process..
The
reports shall be submitted
to the Agency at the
following addresses:
(a)
Manager, Permit Section
Division of Air Pollution Control
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
1340 N. Ninth Street
Springfield, Illinois
62702
(b)
Manager,
Field Operations Section
Division of Air Pollution Control
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
1701 S. First Avenue, Suite 600
Maywood, Illinois
60153
93—138
—5—
3)
During
the period of the variance VON emissions from
flexographic printing operations shall not increase more
than 20,
on an annual basis, above 1987 levels.
4)
Within 45 days of the date of this Order,
Petitioner
shall execute and forward
to Joseph
R. Podlewski, Jr.,
Enforcement Attorney, Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency, 1701
S.. First Avenue, Suite 600, Maywood,
Illinois 60153,
a Certification of Acceptance and
Agreement to be bound to all terms and conditions of
this variance.
The 45—day period shall be held in
abeyance during any period that this matter
is being
appealed..
Failure
to execute and forward the
Certificate within 45 days renders this variance void
and of no force and effect as a shield against
enforcement of rules from which variance was granted.
The form of said Certification shall be as follows:
CERTIFICATION
I
(We),
,
hereby
accept and agree to be bound by all terms and conditions of the
Order
of the Pollution Control Board
in PCB 87—182, October
20,
1988.
Petitioner
Authorized Agent
Title
Date
Section 41 of the Environmental Protection Act, Ill. Rev.
Stat.
1987 ch.
1111/2 par.
1041, provides for appeal of final
Orders
of the Board within 35 days.
The Rules of the Supreme
Court
of Illinois establish filing requirements..
IT
IS SO ORDERED.
93—189
—6—
I, Dorothy M. Gunn,
Clerk
of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order was
adopted on the
~
day of
~C-~Z2--~-t..i
,
1988, by
a
vote of
7—0
Dorothy M(/Gunn, Clerk
Illinois pollution Control Board
93—190