ILLINOIS

POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

January 10, 1980

IN

THE

MATTER

OF:

)

R78—6

PROCEDURAL

RULES

REVISIONS

(PART

VI:

)

HEARINGS

PURSUANT

TO

SPECIFIC

RULES)

)

OPINION

OF

THE

BOARD

(by

Mr.

Goodman):

This Opinion supports the

Board

Order

entered

in

this

matter December 13, 1979.

On January 18, 1979 the Board proposed revisions to Chap-

ter 1:

Procedural Rules.

The proposed revisions were published

in the Illinois Register on February 12, 1979.

No hearings have

been held.

Five public comments were received.

Rules 601-607 are identical to old Part VI of chapter 1:

Procedural Rules; Rules 611-614 are identical to old Part VI(A)

of chapter 1:

Procedural Rules.

Rules 621—626 are new and

are designed to specify the nanner in which proceedings under

Rule 204(e)(3) of chapter 2:

Air Pollution Control Regulations,

relating to sulfur dioxide emissions are to be held.

On December 14,

1978 the Board made substantial changes

to Rule 204(e).

Rule 204(e)(3) now provides an adjudicative

proceeding through which an owner

or operator of an existing

fuel combustion emission source which is located outside the

Chicago, Peoria and St. Louis (Illinois) Major Metropolitan

Areas may obtain an alternative limitation for sulfur dioxide

emissions.

Rule 204(e)(3)(A) requires that any source owner

or operator

who

seeks this alternative limitation follow the

Board’s Procedural Rules.

This rulemaking establishes appli-

cable procedures regarding Rule 203(e)(3)(A).

The January 18,

1979 proposal was drawn entirely from

proposed Illinois Environi’iental Protection Agency (Agency)

Guidelines which had been submitted as Exhibit 64 in R75—5,

Amendments to Chapter

2, Part II, Sulfur Dioxide Emissions.

Five public comments were received and are discussed below.

Public Comment #1,

from Sherex Chemical Company, made

three recommendations:

(1)

any

model approved for use in the

U.S. EPA “Guidelines on Air Quality Models” should be accepted,

(2) certain meteorological data input restrictions should be

clarified,

and

(3) the Agency’s response

time

should be short-

ened to 45 days.

The first two suggestions have been incorpo—

37—173

---

rated into Rules 622(g)(1)

and’ 622(g) (2), respectively~

The

Board declines the invitation to shorten the response time

allotted to the Agency~

Public Comment

#2,

from

Agency

Technical Advisor Mary

Rehrnann,

suggested alternative amendments which would locate

in these Rules procedures to he used

for determinations under

Rule 410(c)

of Chapter 3:

Water Pollution~

The Board finds

that this proposal

is outside the scope of this rulemaking

and hence has not made the suggested additions~

Public Comment

#3,

from Agency Director Michael Mauzy,

suggested several clarifications which the Board incorporated

into Rules 621(c)(3),

621(c)(5),

622(a),

and 622(b)(3)~

The

Board also adopted the Agency position that the hearing should

he held in the county in which the source is located~

In addi~

tion,

the Agency requested a chance to comment Luther on the

modeling requirements of the Rule,

(See Public Comment

#5,

infra~)

Public Comment #4,

from the U~S~EPA,

Region V1

indicated

that they would not approve studies using the air quality model

“AQSTM”,

This objection has been met by the substantial revi~

sion of Rule 622(g),

part of which dictates that only tJ~S, EPA

approved dispersion models

(or their equivalent)

be used.

Public Comment

#5, fr~mthe Agency,

sets forth the Agency~s

proposed procedures for air quality analyses.

These procedures

are currently in use and allow for subsequent revision,

The

Board has incorporated the procedures into the Rules with one

exception;

the references to new sources

in Agency~proposed

Rules 622(g)(4) and 622(g) (5) have been eliminated since this

procedure

is for existing sources only.

This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclu~~

sions

of law of the Board in this matter,

Mr. Werner dissents.

I, Christan L,

Moffett,

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby certify the above Opinion was adopted on

the

f~t~’

day of

~

1980 by a vote of

3~L,

Christan L, MofLet

Illinois Pollution C~

~rk

o1 Board

37”~174