ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December 20,

1984

ALL-STEEL,

 INC.,

Petitioner,

PCB 83—239

ILLINOIS

 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

/~GENCY,

Respondent.

MESSRS.

 SCHAEFER AND JEFF

MASI,

 NON-ATTORNEYS, APPEARED

ON BEHALF

PETITIONER; AND

PETER

 ORLINSKY,

 ESQ0, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

 (by J. Marlin):

This

 matter

 is before the Board upon the December 29,

1983

petition by All—Steel,

 Inc.

 (All—Steel) for a

six month variance

extension from 35

çQd~E~

215.204(g)

 (Old Rule 205(n)

(1)(G)

 of Chapter

2)

 for its facility located in

Montgomery,

Illinois.

 In response to a Board Order dated January 12,

 1984,

All—Steel fLied

 amended petition on February 15,

 1984.

The

Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency (Agency) filed its

recommendation on March

 29, 1984.

 Hearing was held in Aurora,

Illinois

 on June

11,

 1984.

 There was

no citizen testimony at

the hearing and the Board has received

no public

comment

 in this

matter.

All-Steel owns and

operates a metal office furniture manu-

facturing facility which

includes six paint spray booths and

three paint dip

tanks which apply surface coatings to its pro-

ducts0

 All—Steel utilizes in

excess of 100 types and colors

of industrial finishes which are subject to the limitations of

Section 215.204(g), which requires

compliance by December 31,

1982.

 previous one year variance

was granted by the Board

to All—Steel until December 31, 1983

 (51 PCB 129, February 10,

1983; PCB 82-110).

 it is the intention of All—Steel to achieve

compliance with the Regulations

with the use of high solids,

low VOC coatings by July 1,

 1984.

 This compliance plan is as-

sociated only with

the

 spray booths since All—Steel’s dip tanks

were apparently in compliance by the December 31,

 1982 deadline.

All-Steel’s original

compliance plan (instituted in January,

1980) contemplated total compliance by the

deadline, but unfore-

seen problems necessitated additional time

in which to achieve

compliance.

 A1l~Stee1alleges that

by July 1,

 1984 it will

r~1

2

finish the equipment modification to allow for the application

of

 remaining reformulated coatings.

 Petitioner’s specific time

schedule for compliance is as follows:

January,

 1984:

 Begin final installation of heaters

February,

 1984:

 Begin final installation of pumps

March,

 1984:

 Begin high solids tinting system

April, 1984:

 Complete installation of heaters

and pumps

May,

 1984:

 Complete tinting system

June,

 1984:

 Complete de-bugging

The Agency states that the additional six month time period

requested by All-Steel

 to complete conversion of its system

ts

 reasonable.

 In addition,

 the Agency mentions that All-

Steel has spent over $1 million complying

with the regulations

(Ag.

 Rec.

 at 2).

 As of December 1983,

 approximately 90

of

Petitioner’s coatings had been successfully reformulated.

~~1onthtyVOC emissions decreased from

83,760.3 pounds in

January,

1983

 to 15,704 pounds in December,

 1983.

 The Board

notes the problem associated with reformulation of coatings

 where customer approval tests and equipment modification

is

necessary.

All—Steel’s facility is located

 in an industrial area

with the nearest residence approximately one mile distant.

The Agency has received no complaints concerning this petition.

The Agency believes that the extension requested

in

the

instant petition will not cause any increased health effects

and that compliance with its episode plan by All-Steel will

result in

 a reduction of emissions during any period of high

ozone concentration.

 All-Steel’s facility is located in an

area which

is

classified as nonattainment for ozone.

 In 1982,

the 0.12 ppm federal ambient air quality standard was not

ex-

ceeded at the nearest monitor in Glen Ellyn.

 In 1983

 it was

exceeded twice

 (Ag. Rec. at

4).

The Agency recommendz. grant of

 the variance since All—Steel

has been diligently

 seekinL; a

means to reduce its

VOC

emissions.

Additionally,

 its episode action plan provides sufficient safe-

guards during periods of high ozone concentrations and the pro-

posed period

of non-compliance

is

only six months.

 The alternative

to the variance

extension would be the costly installation of

thermal incineration controls which the Board finds would impose

 an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship on All-Steel.

 The Agency

believes that the variance,

 if granted, must be submitted to

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a revision to the

State Implementation Plan and states its intention to

 so proceed.

The Agency therefore recommends a grant of variance subject to

certain conditions.

3

When the Board initially adopted the VOC emission

limitations

in 1979,

 it recognized that the regulations would be technology

forcing and anticipated the use of the variance procedure for

re1ief~ if necessary.

 By manifestations at hearing,

 it appears

All-Steel

 is now in compliance.

 It intended to be in compliance

by July

 1, l984~ The Board

notes that All-Steel should have

timely filed its petition ninety days before the expiration

of the last variance.

 Although All-Steel has not timely filed

its petition, given its efforts at compliance

 in conjunction

with the minimal adverse environmental impact, the Board will

grant a retroactive variance subject to certain conditions.

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings

of

 fact and

conclusions of

 law in this matter.

ORDER

1.

 All—Steel,

 Inc.

 is hereby granted variance from

35

~l.

~

 215.204(g)

 subject to the conditions below.

2.

 This variance covers the period from January

 1, 1984

until July

1,

 1984.

3.

 Within forty-five days of the date of this Order,

All-Steel,

 Inc.

 shall execute and forward

 to the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency,

 2200 Churchill Road, Spring-

field,

 illinois

 62706,

 a Certificate of Acceptance and Agree-

ment to be bound to all terms and conditions of this Order.

This forty-five day period shall be

held

 in abeyance for any

period this matter is being appealed.

 The form of the certi-

fication shEll be as follows:

CERTIFICATE

I,

 (We),

 having read the

Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board in PCB 83-239,

dated

 1984 understand and accept the said

conditions thereto binding and enforceable.

Petitioner

By;

 Authorized Agent

Title

Date

81-338

4

IT IS SO ORDERED~

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 LQL~r,~.I.z~A/

 1984 by a vote of

•~~L

.)L~-~

Dorothy

 M. ~unn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board