ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

November 26,

1975

CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY,

INC.,

Metals Division,

Petitioner,

V.

)

PCB 75—200

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

Mr. Harvey

M. Sheldon, Plunkett,

Nisen, Elliott & Meier,

appeared on behalf of the Petitioner;

Mr. Peter E.

Orlinsky, appeared on behalf of the Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr. Goodman):

This matter comes before the Pollution Control Board

(Board)

upon the May 13,

1975,

petition of Continental Can

Company,

Inc.

(Can)

for variance from Rule 205(f)

of the Air

Regulations for Plant No.

51, located at 3815 South Ashland

Avenue,

Chicago, Cook County, Illinois.

An Interim Opinion

was issued May 15,

1975,

requesting additional information

pertaining to ambient air quality.

The Environmental Pro-

tection Agency filed its recommendation August 28,

1975.

A

hearing was held October 17,

1975 at which time a “Stipula-

tion for an Agreed Order” was presented to the Board.

Can seeks variance from Rule 205(f)

for its three

coater lines and three

litho press lines at Plant No.

51

until October 17,

1975.

Petitioner manufactures

46 million

cans per year on the lines

in question.

These cans include

pear-shaped ham cans,

oblong luncheon meat cans,

rectangular

luncheon meat cans,

and fruit and coffee

cans.

Petitioner

consumes 38,000 gallons of lacquers,

14,000 gallons of

coatings,

4,000 gallons of size coatings,

and 14,000 gallons

of varnishes.

As these are food cans,

each coating, var-

nish, or lacquer and their combinations must be FDA approved.

Each coating

(in the generic sense)

is manufactured to

customer order and the final composition will include vari-

ous release agents,

toners, and pastes along with the coat-

ings.

These coatings contain organic materials and chemical

compounds,

e.g., acrylics,

aklyds, vinyls, phenolics and

epoxys.

As explained in the companion opinion issued today,

PCB 75-199, which is herewith incorporated by reference as

though fully set forth herein, Petitioner had planned to

19—320

---

—2—

achieve compliance by reducing organic material used to 20

per cent or less of total volume by May

30,

1975 as per-

mitted by Rule 205(f) (2) (D).

This was not possible and in order to comply, Peti-

tioner has installed an 8,000 CFM catalytic fume incinerator

unit and heat exchanger in two coater lines.

As of October

17,

1975,

the remaining coater lines and three litho press

lines have been converted to the use of exempt materials.

The Board does not question Petitioner’s good faith in

this matter.

Five months is not an excessive amount of time

in which to achieve compliance.

However,

as stated more

fully in PCB 75-199, Petitioner has not met its burden of

proof with re~gardto the effects upon ambient air quality

which the grant of the variance would have.

Therefore,

the

Board must deny Petitioner’s variance from Rule 205(f)

for

Plant No.

51.

This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and

conclusions of law of the Board in this matter.

Mr. Young will submit

a Concurring Opinion.

ORDER

It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that

Continental Can Company Inc.’s petition for variance from

Rule 205(f)

for Plant No.

51 be and is, hereby, denied

without prejudice.

I,

Christan

L.

Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby ceriify the above Opinion and Order

were adopted on the

~(I”~

day of

1975 by

a vote of

____________

Illinois Pollution

trol Board

19—