ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March
3,
1994
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
PETITION OF ABBOTT LABORATORIES
)
FOR
AN
ADJUSTED
STANDARD
FROM
)
35
ILL.
ADN.
CODE
218
SUBPART
RR
)
AS
94-5
)
(Adjusted
Standard)
ORDER
OF
THE
BOARD
(By
C .A.
Manning):
On February
14,
1994,
Abbott Laboratories
(Abbott)
filed a
petition
for
adjusted
standard
regarding
its
pharmaceutical
facilities, located in Lake County, Illinois.
Abbott is requesting
an adjusted standard from the 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218 Subpart RR as
it applies to the emissions of Volatile Organic Materials
(VON)
from both
its facilities
located five
(5)
miles
apart
in
Lake
County.
One facility is located in the City of North Chicago and
the other is located in Libertyville Township in an unincorporated
area.
The Board
received the required notice of publication
on
February 25,
1994.’
The Board finds that Abbott’s petition, as presently before
us,
does not yet meet the requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 106
and Section 28.1 of the Act (415 ILCS 5/28.1 (1992).)
Specifically
the petition does not address Section 28.1(c)
of the Act which
requires
a
petitioner
for
an
adjusted
standard
to
provide
information as to why the requested standard will not result in
environmental or health effects substantially and significantly
more adverse than the effects considered by the Board in adopting
the rule of general applicability.
Abbott states that there will
be
no
adverse
environmental
impacts
and
that
the
reasonably
available control
technology
(RACT).
that would
apply
to
their
production of Gibberellin were deemed appropriate and protective of
the environment by the Agency, the U.S. EPA and this Board in R86-
10, as amended by R88-14.
Although the RACT that would applied to
Abbott
if
the
adjusted
standard
is
adopted
has
been
deemed
appropriate for Abbott’s pharmaceutical processes,
this adjusted
standard
is
being
requested
for the
RACT
regulations pertaining to
the
Miscellaneous
Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Processes
(MOCM)
for
the
manufacturing
of
Gibberellin
and
all
other
non-
pharmaceutical chemicals.
Abbott should explain why the RACT that
has
been
deemed
appropriate
for
Pharmaceutical
processes
appropriate
for
MOCH
processes.
Section 28.1 of the Environmental Protection Act
(Act) requires
petitioners to file, within 14 days of the filing the petition for adjusted
standard,
proof of publication of the notice that petitioner has filed with
the Board a petition seeking an adjusted standard.
(415 ILCS 5/28.1(1)
(1992).)
2
In addition,
35 Ill. Adm. Code 106.705 requires the petitioner
to provide certain information in the petition to the Board.
The
Board
finds
that
the
petition
lacks
sufficient
information
concerning the environmental impacts of the adjusted standard as
compared to compliance with the general rule of applicability and
information concerning alternative control methods.
In particular
the petition does not meet the requirements of 35 Ill.
Ada. Code
106.705(e) which requires a description of the efforts which would
be necessary if
the petitioner were to comply with the regulation
f general applicability and all cost associated with the compliance
efforts.
Abbott states the cost would be enormous and that the
costs associated would be needless
and wasteful expenditures
of
funds,
but
never
states
what
those
costs
are
or
any
of
the
compliance
alternatives
evaluated.
Abbott
is also required to
provide
a
description
of
the efforts necessary to
achieve the
proposed adjusted standard and the corresponding costs.
(35 Ill.
Ada. Code 106.705(f).)
Additionally, 35 Ill. Ada. Code 106.705(g)
require Abbott to state the quantitative and qualitative impact on
the environment if petitioner were to comply with the regulation of
general
applicability
as
compared
to
the
quantitative
and
qualitative impact on the environment if the petitioner were to
comply only with the proposed adjusted standard.
As stated above,
Abbott
states
that there
is
no
environmental
impact
and
that
applicable RACT were deemed appropriate.
Abbott should describe
the qualitative and quantitative differences, between manufacturing
gibberellin and other miscellaneous non-pharmaceutical chemicals
under proposed adjusted standard instead of 35 Ill. Ada. Code 218
Subpart RR in terms of
(1) air emissions,
(2) general air quality
impact
(3)
contribution
to
ozone
precursor
inventory
and
VON
inventory in the non—attainment area,
(4)
solid waste generation
(5)
energy
consumption,
and
(6)
other qualitative
impacts.
Such
description should be supported by relevant data.
The Board at this time accepts Abbott’s petition for adjusted
standard relief, but directs petitioner to file an amended petition
on or before April 15,
1994, addressing the above issues.
Failure
to file an amended petition by this date will subject this matter
to dismissal.
Abbott has requested a hearing in this matter and
upon its filing of an amended petition which provides the further
requested information this matter will be set for hearing.
On
February
28,
1994,
the
Agency
filed
a
motion
for
an
extension of time until April 29, 1994, to file its response to the
adjusted standard petition.
The Agency states that the petitioner
does not object to the requested extension of time.
The Board
denies the Agency’s motion as being unnecessary at this time since
the Agency need not respond until thirty
(30) days after the filing
of the amended petition which is the subject of this order.
IT
IS
SO
ORDERED.
3
I, Dorothy N.
Gunn,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board
hereby certify that the above order was adopted on the
______
day of
_______________________
,
1994, by a vote of
~,-0~
Control Board