1 BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

4 IN THE MATTER OF: ) R02-10

5 AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL )RULEMAKING - AIR

6 PERMITTING PROVISIONS FOR )

7 PORTABLE EMISSIONS UNITS )

8 AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. )

9 CODE PART 201. )

13 The following is a transcript of

14 proceedings from the hearing held in the

15 above-entitled matter, taken stenographically by

16 ROSEMARIE LAMANTIA, CSR, a notary public within

17 and for the County of Cook and State of

18 Illinois, before STACY L. MEYERS, Hearing

19 Officer, at 100 West Randolph Street, Suite

20 11-500, Chicago, Illinois, on the 9th day of

21 April, 2002, A.D., scheduled to commence at the

22 hour of 10:30 a.m.

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 A P P E A R A N C E S:

2 HEARING TAKEN BEFORE:

3 ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

4 100 West Randolph Street

5 Chicago, Illinois 60601

6 (312) 814-7011

7 BY: MS. STACY L. MEYERS, HEARING OFFICER

9 ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD MEMBERS

10 PRESENT:

11 Mr. Samuel Lawton, Jr.

12 Mr. Anad Rao

13 Ms. Alysa Liu

14 MEMBERS OF THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY AS WELL AS OTHER INTERESTED ENTITIES AND

15 AUDIENCE MEMBERS WERE PRESENT AT THE HEARING,

BUT NOT LISTED ON THIS APPEARANCE PAGE.

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: Good morning.

2 This hearing is being conducted by the

3 Illinois Pollution Control Board.

4 My name is Stacy Meyers. I'm the

5 hearing officer in this proceeding, which is

6 entitled, in the matter of, amendments to

7 general permitting provisions for portable

8 emissions units, amendments to 35 Illinois

9 Administrative Code 201, Docket Number R02-10.

10 I would like to introduce you to

11 members of the board that are here this morning.

12 To my immediate left is the board

13 member assigned to this matter. His name is Mr.

14 Samuel T. Lawton, Junior.

15 MR. LAWTON: Good morning.

16 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: To the left

17 of me sitting on the side of the room is Ms.

18 Alysa Liu. She is an environmental scientist

19 with the board.

20 And sitting next to her, also to my

21 left, is Mr. Anand Rao and he is also an

22 environmental scientist with the board. We have

23 both of them here with us this morning.

24 For the record, today's date is April

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 9th, 2002, and it is approximately 10:30 in the

2 morning. This is the second and last of two

3 presently scheduled hearings for the receipt of

4 testimony and questions concerning the Illinois

5 Environmental Protection Agency's November 30th,

6 2001, proposal to amend the regulations

7 concerning existing portable emissions units.

8 The proposal seeks to exempt certain

9 owners and operators of smaller units from

10 having to obtain new construction and operating

11 permits required by Section 39 of the

12 Environmental Protection Act whenever they

13 change the site of their portable emissions

14 units. Copies of the agency's proposal are

15 located on the table in front of me.

16 The board accepted this matter for

17 hearing on December 6, 2001, has not yet issued

18 the first notice opinion and order.

19 The first hearing on this rulemaking

20 was held on March 20th, 2002, in Springfield,

21 Illinois, where the Illinois Environmental

22 Protection Agency presented testimony about the

23 proposed regulations.

24 In response to the questions by the

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 board, the agency filed an addendum to testimony

2 by Harish Desai on April 4, 2002. You may view

3 the transcript of the March 20th, 2002, hearing

4 on our Website. The address for this is

5 http://www.ipcb.state.Il.us.

6 At this hearing, we welcome discussion

7 required by Section 27B of the act about an

8 economic impact study of the proposed

9 rulemaking.

10 On March 7, 2002, the board mailed a

11 request to the Department of Commerce and

12 Community Affairs known as DECA to perform an

13 economic impact study on the proposed

14 rulemaking. As of today's date, we have not

15 received a study from DECA. We do not

16 anticipate receiving one from DECA in this

17 matter.

18 We are open to testimony and

19 discussion both at this hearing as well in

20 public comments submitted to the board.

21 Both of the hearings in this matter

22 will be governed by the board's procedural rules

23 for regulatory proceedings. This means that I

24 will admit all information that is relevant and

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 not repetitious or privileged in accordance with

2 35 Illinois Administrative Code, 102.282. All

3 witnesses will be sworn and subject to

4 cross-examination.

5 For more information on this proposed

6 regulation, please feel free to take a copy of

7 the hearing officer's order dated September 7,

8 2000, in the front of the room. You may also

9 review information regarding this proceeding on

10 our Website. Again, our address is

11 www.ipcb.state.il.us.

12 We'll accept pre first noticed

13 comments on this proposed rulemaking until 30

14 days after the April 9, 2002, hearing.

15 Public comments are welcomed past this

16 May 9, 2002, deadline until the record closes 45

17 days after the first notice is published in the

18 Illinois Register, however, the board will only

19 consider comments filed by the May 9, 2002, date

20 in their first notice opinion and order. Anyone

21 may file public comments with the clerk of the

22 board. You must simultaneously deliver your

23 comments to all persons on the service list and

24 include an attached notice sheet, proof of

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 service and a copy of the current service list.

2 You should contact the clerk's office to make

3 sure you have an updated service list.

4 The usual order of regulatory hearings

5 is that the proponent of the proposed regulation

6 presents testimony concerning its proposal.

7 The Illinois Environmental Protection

8 Agency, who is the proponent of this proposed

9 regulation, presented its main testimony on the

10 proposed rulemaking at our first hearing on

11 March 20, 2002.

12 The agency pre filed its testimony

13 with the board on November 30, 2001, as a part

14 of its proposal.

15 As a reminder, the proposal, including

16 the pre filed testimony, is available on the

17 table in the front of the room.

18 Although, the agency provided its main

19 testimony at the March 20th, 2002, hearing it

20 will give a very brief overview of the

21 rulemaking today as well as a short discussion

22 concerning an amended time frame in the proposed

23 regulation.

24 After hearing from any witnesses

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 presented by the agency, we'll be accepting

2 questions about its proposal and at that time

3 attending board member Mr. Lawton, Junior, as

4 well as Ms. Liu will be asking questions of the

5 proponent.

6 Once the proponent has answered any

7 questions for the agency, the board usually

8 hears testimony from persons who have pre filed

9 testimony with the board, as no one but the

10 agency has done so, you will hear testimony from

11 people in the order that they have signed up

12 today. I will call people in the order that

13 they've registered to testify. I would like the

14 record to reflect that we do not have any

15 members from the public in the audience as of

16 this time today.

17 At this time, I would like to give Mr.

18 Samuel Lawton, Junior, the opportunity to make

19 any additional remarks.

20 MR. LAWTON: I have nothing additional

21 to say except, again, to welcome you, and

22 comment on the absence of an audience, which is

23 disappointing, but maybe that's a good sign.

24 Thank you.

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: I would now

2 like to introduce Ms. Rachel Doctors from the

3 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to

4 present a few opening remarks from the

5 proponent.

6 Once she has presented a very quick

7 review of the proposed rulemaking and

8 importantly a summary of the agency's response

9 to the board inquiries from the March 20, 2002,

10 hearing, we'll open up questions to the agency's

11 witness.

12 MS. DOCTORS: Good morning. My name

13 is Rachel Doctors. I'm representing the

14 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency in this

15 proposal for portable emissions units.

16 The proposal enables owners and

17 operators of these very small units that move,

18 that change locations more often than once a

19 year to streamline the permitting process. They

20 must obtain a lifetime operating permit and with

21 special conditions for portable emissions units.

22 As discussed at the earlier hearing, they must

23 be mounted on a chassis or skid. They can't be

24 thermal desorption or incinerator systems, must

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 emit less than 25 tons per year.

2 That is probably enough summary.

3 There were two inquiries at the

4 previous hearing.

5 One concerned Section 201170B5. In

6 that section we had required the owner or

7 operator to notify the agency by certified mail

8 prior to moving the unit but had not included a

9 time frame in which that notice was to be

10 provided.

11 In discussions with the agency

12 personnel we have offered an amendment that the

13 notification must be received at least three

14 days prior to moving the unit and have included

15 that in an addendum to testimony by Harish Desai

16 submitted to the board.

17 Another issue that was raised was

18 whether this should have included a reference to

19 Section 201144 and Subsections B, C or D of

20 Section 170. And the agency does not believe

21 such an amendment is necessary. Section 201144

22 requires owners or operators of existing

23 emissions units to obtain an operating permit

24 prior to operation of such unit. The term

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 existing emission unit is a defined term in

2 Section 201142. It is an emission unit that was

3 constructed or modified prior to April 14, 1972,

4 hence, if any owner or operator of an emission

5 unit subject to Section 201141 applies for a

6 portable emissions unit permit for that unit,

7 the application would instead be reviewed under

8 Sections 201142 and 201143 because the unit

9 would be subject to newer emission rules as a

10 result of going to be moved.

11 The term existing emissions unit

12 becomes subject to the new emissions unit

13 pursuant to these sections by virtue of its

14 change in location.

15 And that concludes the agency's

16 response to the board's questions at the March

17 20th hearing.

18 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: Thank you.

19 We will now proceed with questions

20 from the agency. I believe Mr. Lawton has a few

21 questions for the proponent.

22 MR. LAWTON: My question primarily

23 relates to the notice of provision of your

24 amendment and that's set forth in what is

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 numbered paragraph 5 on page 2, at least five

2 days prior to moving the emissions unit.

3 MS. DOCTORS: Three.

4 MR. LAWTON: Did I say two?

5 At least three days prior.

6 MS. DOCTORS: Yes.

7 MR. LAWTON: My question then is, are

8 these three business days or three calendar

9 days?

10 MR. DESAI: That will be three

11 calendar days.

12 MR. LAWTON: That's the mailing. Is

13 that -- let me see what it says, at least three

14 days prior to moving the owner shall notify by

15 certified mail.

16 Well, is that the date of the postmark

17 now or is that the date of the receipt?

18 MR. DESAI: We have considered, we

19 talked about if -- whether it is postmarked or

20 the day we receive, we believe it should be the

21 date when they -- it is postmarked.

22 MR. LAWTON: Well, perhaps you may

23 want to consider amplifying that a little bit so

24 that there is no question. We run into that

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 with some frequency in our own rules and perhaps

2 a little more explanation would be adequate.

3 Now, this is just a comment with

4 regard to -- this proposal seems somewhat more

5 stringent than the more accommodating approach

6 the agency was promoting at the hearing. The

7 original proposal simply stated the agency shall

8 be notified before the unit is moved, even if

9 that notification comes in just hours before the

10 move, since the agency mentioned that the owner

11 or operators of the unit might need to move at a

12 moment's notice, it seems the additional three

13 days might be somewhat cumbersome. I don't know

14 if you want to comment on that.

15 MR. DESAI: Yes.

16 There are a few instances in the past

17 that an operator would come and wait to get the

18 permit, they would wait out in the lobby so they

19 can get the permit, but those kind of --

20 particularly impossible for an agency to do that

21 and three days seems to be a fairly reasonable

22 time for them to get the contract and perform

23 the work that they're required to do. All they

24 have to do is send the notification on that.

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 Did I answer your question?

2 MR. LAWTON: All right. Has there

3 been any thought to allowing alternative means

4 of notification such as faxes or e-mail, hand

5 delivery or phone call?

6 MR. DESAI: We talked about that also,

7 that they might send by e-mail or by phone call.

8 We definitely decided not to go by the

9 phone call because depends upon who they call,

10 if they can understand properly or not and there

11 are certain requirements in the notification

12 they're required to give us the amount of

13 emissions they're likely to have, the proper

14 address of where they're going to be located and

15 the phone call will definitely mess up the

16 situation.

17 E-mail, we thought about that also.

18 We have the staff for 55 people in the permit

19 section, whom are they going to send the e-mail

20 to? And it may go to the -- totally agency has

21 about pretty close to 13, 1400 employees,

22 1,000-ish in Springfield. So we don't want to

23 have the notice going to the wrong hand, by

24 putting name on.

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 There are so many of the e-mail

2 addresses also existing on the Website. So we

3 also rule out e-mail.

4 We thought about fax, by faxing it.

5 Then we're required to specify the phone number

6 and that phone number may change, get the new

7 fax machine or something of that nature so we

8 decided to rule out that also.

9 And they can, of course, definitely

10 send it by Federal Express. That will be

11 acceptable but that also is one kind of mailing.

12 MR. LAWTON: You might want to

13 consider allowing registered mail.

14 MR. DESAI: Sorry?

15 MR. LAWTON: You may want to consider

16 allowing registered mail. Registered mail is

17 more stringent than certified mail and some

18 entities use that as a matter of course. That

19 is only by way of suggestion. We're not making

20 any --

21 MR. DESAI: We also talked about that

22 and my personal experience with the registered

23 mail, one time I sent -- apparently, Springfield

24 area does have some problem. I sent registered

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 mail to my daughter and it took almost 22 days

2 before she got it. And we went to the post

3 office to file for a complaint and they says

4 until after 21 days past then only time that is

5 after that they will consider a complaint, not

6 before that. And apparently Rachel also had a

7 very similar experience with the registered

8 mail, so we ruled out registered mail because we

9 can't accept that kind of -- certified mail it

10 comes pretty fast.

11 MR. LAWTON: All right. Then you've

12 considered it.

13 MR. DESAI: Okay.

14 MR. LAWTON: I don't have anything

15 further.

16 MS. LIU: Off the record.

17 (Off the record.)

18 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: If you could

19 swear them in.

20 (Whereupon, the witness were

21 previously sworn.)

22 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: If the record

23 could reflect that both witnesses, Ms. Rachel

24 Doctors and Mr. Desai, have been sworn in and

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 have sworn that the testimony that they have

2 given as well as the testimony that they will

3 give is accurate and true.

4 Are there any other questions for the

5 witnesses?

6 MR. RAO: I had a follow question to

7 what Member Lawton was asking. I was just

8 curious as to, you know, what the agency will do

9 with this notification, what are the

10 implications of getting this notification from a

11 unit that's planning on moving?

12 MR. DESAI: Yes. A notice requires

13 them to submit certain information, the address,

14 where they're going to be located at, amount of

15 emissions they're likely to have, and at the

16 present time the way that it stands a fee will

17 be charged for each location, that notification

18 will be -- once it is received will be sent to

19 the emission inventory people that will update

20 that emission inventory for the new location

21 because the new location will be emitting amount

22 of emissions and by doing that they will also

23 then verify where the source is going to be

24 located at the same location where there is a

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 lifetime source or nothing else is existing and

2 it is not going to be at the location where that

3 device or office is located.

4 MR. RAO: Will there be a situation

5 where they then suggest this information then,

6 you know, the agency gets this information and

7 looks at it and reviews it and decides maybe

8 this emissions unit should not be moving into

9 the particular site?

10 MR. DESAI: That is exactly the

11 intent, correct, is to find out where it is

12 going to be located, located at the site of

13 Title IV or not, is it going to be located at

14 the federally enforced -- to a source who has a

15 federally enforceable state already permitting.

16 MR. RAO: So, it is critical that they

17 get this notification prior to the move?

18 MR. DESAI: That is definitely the

19 requirement, yes. It is critical to an extent

20 that if they don't get that notification prior

21 to the -- prior to moving, then they will be

22 considered as operating without construction and

23 operating permit.

24 MR. RAO: Okay. Because did I

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 understand correctly when you said earlier that

2 when the owner or operator of an emissions unit

3 is planning on moving and when they send you

4 something by certified mail, should it reach the

5 agency three days prior to the move or is it

6 okay if it's postmarked three days?

7 MR. DESAI: At the present time, we're

8 proposing based on postmarked three days prior

9 to moving.

10 MR. RAO: So, what if the notification

11 doesn't reach you for like 10 days or so, I

12 mean, after the unit has moved, will that be a

13 problem?

14 MS. DOCTORS: No, because we

15 addressed this at our first hearing, while if we

16 get -- when it comes in it will be reviewed,

17 whenever it reaches us, but because of how our

18 permitting system works and how this works this

19 is just a notification. It's not a permit

20 application where we can reject. If the

21 notification shows that they will be moving to

22 an inappropriate site or doing something that

23 isn't in conformance with the regulations, then

24 it -- whether we receive the notification prior

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 to the move or after the move it still goes to

2 our compliance unit for an inquiry. So, it

3 would go through our steps rather than us

4 calling them on the phone and saying, no, you

5 can't move because there isn't -- once they

6 notify us, they can move, there is no further

7 action by the agency.

8 MR. RAO: Okay.

9 MR. DESAI: I can further add on that

10 one.

11 Let's say we received the

12 notification, it's postmarked correctly and it

13 is still one week or maybe two weeks later, then

14 we determine -- we find out that the source has

15 moved to a location which just happens to be

16 that of Title IV, then, obviously, subject for

17 enforcement action does not -- operating without

18 a permit and also being for the Title 5.

19 MR. RAO: Thank you for the

20 clarification.

21 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: Does the

22 board have any further questions for the

23 proponent at this time?

24 MR. LAWTON: I have none.

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: At this time

2 I would like to take a 20 minute recess to allow

3 any late comers time to join us and contribute

4 anything that they may have at this time. It is

5 by my watch 5 minutes to 11:00 o'clock a.m.

6 We'll reconvene at 11:15 a.m.

7 Thank you.

8 (Off the record.)

9 HEARING OFFICER MEYERS: All right.

10 We're now back on the record after a 20 minute

11 break. It is 11:15 a.m. and we have no further

12 members of the public, actually, no members of

13 the public at all in the audience with us today.

14 Are there any further questions, last

15 minute questions for the agency? Since there

16 are no further questions for the agency and we

17 have no further matters here to discuss, I

18 believe that we can close up the hearing.

19 As a final reminder the transcript

20 will be available on line, on the board's

21 Website or you can feel free to ask the court

22 reporter with us here today for a copy of the

23 transcript as well.

24 As a note on the order, we did open up

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 for discussion any questions regarding the

2 economic impact and DECA, however, we have

3 received no comments here today on that issue.

4 And we welcome any comments in this regard

5 during our public comment period, which, once

6 again, for pre first notice will end May 9th,

7 2002. We do welcome public comments after that

8 date, however, they will not be considered for

9 our first notice of in that order.

10 If there is nothing further, I end

11 this hearing.

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292

1 STATE OF ILLINOIS )

)SS:

2 COUNTY OF DU PAGE )

3 I, ROSEMARIE LA MANTIA, being first

4 duly sworn, on oath says that she is a court

5 reporter doing business in the City of Chicago;

6 that she reported in shorthand the proceedings

7 given at the taking of said hearing, and that

8 the foregoing is a true and correct transcript

9 of her shorthand notes so taken as aforesaid,

10 and contains all the proceedings given at said

11 hearing.

13 ------------------------------

14 ROSEMARIE LA MANTIA, CSR

License No. 84 - 2661

16 Subscribed and sworn to before me

this day of , 2002.

------------------------------------

18 Notary Public

L.A. REPORTING, 312-419-9292