ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
February 27, 1992
IN THE
MATTER
OF:
)
R91—24
EXEMPTIONS FROM THE
)
(Identical in Substance Rules)
DEFINITION OF VOM
)
PROPOSAL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
PROPOSED OPINION
AND
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by J. Anderson):’
This proceeding updates various provisions of Parts 203,
211,
215,
218, and 219 to reflect the most recent pronouncement
of TJSEPA’s “Recommended Policy on the Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds.”
In effect, this docket completes the amendments
effected in R91—1O, effective October 11,
1991.
In that
proceeding,
the Board amended the Part 211 and 215 rules by our
September 12,
1991 Opinion and Order in response to USEPA addi-
tions to the list of chemicals exempted from the definition of
volatile organic materials
(VOMs)
~2
At 56 Fed. Reg.
11418, March
18,
1991, USEPA added five compounds and four classes of com-
pounds to the list of negligibly photoreactive compounds exempt
from regulation under state implementation plans
(SIPs).
Those
compounds constituted additions to those compounds exempted in
R89—8, effective January
1,
1990.
USEPA simultaneously proposed
codification of the list at 56 Fed. Reg.
11387,
on March 18,
1991.
USEPA has now codified these exemptions effective March
4,
1992.
57
Fed. Reg.
3941
(Feb.
3,
1992).
Unaffected by the R91-l0 rulemaking,
and as discussed in the
Board’s Opinion and Order in that matter, were the definition of
“volatile organic compound” at 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 203.145 and the
definitions of “volatile organic material” at recently-adopted
Sections 218.104 and 219.104.
Part 203 sets forth the rules
applicable to construction and modification of major stationary
sources.
Part 218 governs emissions of volatile organic material
from stationary sources located in the Chicago metropolitan area
(Cook, DuPage,
Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will counties)
.~
Part 219
‘The Board appreciates the contribution of Michael
J. NcCam-
bridge, Board attorney,
in this matter.
2
USEPA
consistently
designates
these
“volatile
organic
compounds”
or
“VOCs.”
Both
designations
refer
to
the
same
matter,
and
all references
in this Opinion
and Order
to
“VON”
refer to what USEPA calls
“VOC.”
Docket
R9l—28
concerns
a
proposed
expansion
of
the
Chicago metropolitan area for the purposes of VON control.
If
adopted,
this
would
expand
the
Chicago
metropolitan
area
to
include Goose Lake and AUX Sable townships
in Grundy County
and
Oswego Township
in Kendall County.
130—45
7
2
governs the emissions of volatile organic material from
stationary sources located in the metropolitan East St. Louis
area (Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair counties).
The Board
reserved this docket during the pendency of R91-10 in order to
complete the amendments to Parts 203,
218, and 219, which were
not affected by that matter.
This proceeding extends the
exemption to include all federally—exempted compounds for all
organic emissions from stationary sources in Illinois.
The~Board adopts this Proposed Opinion and Order pursuant to
the identical-in-substance mandate under Section 9.1(e)
of the
Environmental Protection Act, Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1989,
ch.
111½,
par. 1009.1(e).
Section 9.1(e) provides for quick adoption of
regulations that are “identical in substance” to certain pub-
lished federal policy statements.
It further provides that Title
VII of the Act and Section 5 of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA)
shall not apply.
Because this rulemaking
is not subject to
Section 5 of the APA, it is not subject to first notice or to
second notice review by the Joint Committee on Administrative
Rules
(JCAR).
The primary Federal Register citation to the revision in the
federal policy statement used in this Opinion and Order is as
follows:
57 Fed.
Reg. 3942
February 3,
1992
(amending 40
CFR 51.100(s)
(definition of
“volatile organic compound”),
effective March
3,
1992).
This proceeding is also based on the following Federal Register
citation:
56 Fed. Reg.
11418
March 18,
1991.
The March 18,
1991 revision to USEPA’s “Recommended Policy
on the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds” added five
compounds and four classes of compounds to the list of
negligibly-photochemically-reactive compounds exempted from
regulation as volatile organic compounds.
The February 3,
1992
action codified the existing USEPA policy, by adoption of the 40
CFR 51.100(s) definition of “volatile organic compound.”
USEPA
simultaneously withdrew its recommended policy as moot on
February 3,
19.92.
57 Fed. Reg. 3943
(Feb.
3,
1992).
In the course of codifying its policy, USEPA clarified it.
USEPA added language that excludes
a number of carbon compounds
from the definition.
USEPA clarified the monitoring requirement
for exempted compounds and added specificity to the methods for
testing for those compounds.
HISTORICAL SUMMARY
130—458
3
The Board adopted the original federal Recommended Policy
statements and several subsequent revisions in October,
1989:
R89—8
104 PCB 505, October 18,
1989;
13
Ill.
Règ.
17457,
effective October 27,
1989.
The Board further implemented and adopted federal revisions
to this policy as follows:
R91~—10
September 12,
1991;
15 Ill. Reg.
15564
& 15595,
effective October 11,
1991.
R9l-24
This docket.
The Federal Register issues included in each docket are recited
in that respective Opinion and Order.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The Board invites public comments on the proposed
-~
amendments.
We will receive public comments until at least 45
days after Notices of Proposed Amendments appear in the Illinois
Register on this matter.
Section 7.2 and 9.1(e)
of the Act
provide that this proceeding is not subject to Section
5 of the
Administrative Procedure Act
(Ill. Rev.
Stat.
1989 ch.
127, par.
1005).
Therefore,
it is not subject to First Notice or Second
Notice review by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules.
After the 45 day public comment period has expired,
the Board
will promptly proceed to adopt amendments based on today’s
proposal.
DISCUSSION
At 56 Fed. Reg.
11418, March 18,
1991,
USEPA announced a
change in its “Recommended Policy on the Control of Volatile
Organic Compounds,” adding five halocarbon compounds and four
classes of perfluorocarbon compounds to the list of negligibly
photoreactive compounds exempt from regulation under state
implementation plans.
Those compounds are as follows:
1.
2-chloro-1, 1,1,2—tetrafluoroethane (HCFC—l24)
2.
Pentafluoroethane (HFC-125)
3.
1,1, 2,2—tetrafluoroethane (HFC—134)
4.
1,1,1-trifluoroethane (HFC—143a)
5.
1,l-difluoroethane (HFC-152a)
Those classes of compounds are as follows:
130—459
4
1.
Cyclic,
branched, or linear, completely fluorinated
alkanes.
2.
Cyclic,
branched, or linear, completely fluorinated
ethers with no unsaturations.
3.
Cyclic,
branched,
or linear, completely fluorinated
tertiary amines with no unsaturations.
-
4.
Sulphur—containing perfluorocarbons with no unsatura—
tions and with sulfur bonds only to carbon and fluo-
rine.
Under this policy,
states may not take credit for controlling
these compounds in their ozone state implementation plans
(SIPS).
USEPA simultaneously proposed to amend the federal implementation
plan
(FIP)
for Chicago and to amend 40 CFR 51 to add a general
definition of VON consistent with its policy revision.
57 Fed.
Reg. 3945
(Feb.
3, 1992);56 Fed.
Reg.
11387
(Mar.
18,
1991).
USEPA adopted the new definition of VON effective March
3,
1992.
57 Fed. Reg.
3941
(Feb.
3,
1992).
USEPA withdrew its policy
revision as moot when it finally adopted the new definition of
VON, which,
in effect, codified the revised policy.
.57 Fed. Reg.
3944—45
(Feb.
3,
19920; ~gg 56 Fed. Reg. at 11388
& 11419.
Section 9.1(e)
Mandate
In R9l-10, the Board raised the issue of what impact the
federal adoption of the exemptions as a rule and accompanying
withdrawal of the recommended federal policy would have on its
Section 9.1(e)
mandate.
After a full discussion of this issue,
the Board determined that the Section 9.1(e) mandate would apply
to a codified policy because the heart of the mandate is the
language:
“The Board shall exempt from regulation under the
State Implementation Plan for ozone the volatile organic
compounds which have been determined by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to be exempt from regulation under state
implementation plans for ozone due to negligible photochemical
reactivity.”
Ill. Rev.
Stat.
1989 ch.
111½,
par.
1009.1(e).
The
Board determined that the statutory language relating to “the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency exemptions or deletion of
exemptions published in policy statements on the control of
volatile organic compounds in the Federal Register
.
.
.,“
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1989,
ch.
111½,
par. 1009.1(e),
further authorized us
to employ an “unorthodox,” non—codified source for as basis of
the exemptions.
Opinion and Order of September 12,
1991 in R91-
10 at 5-7.
The Board concluded as follows:
Under this analysis, the clear intent of the
General Assembly is that the Board must adopt the
federal exemptions by identical—in—substance
rulemaking.
The mandate that the Board apply federal
130—460
5
policy statements to this end is further authorization
to base those regulations on their presently—existing
sole source:
federal policy statements.
If USEPA
chooses to employ the more conventional regulatory
approach of codifying the exemptions,
the mandate
remains that the Board must adopt those exemptions by
identical-in—substance procedures.
The Board believes that this is the interpretation
th~twill best implement the intent of the General
Assembly as embodied in Section
9.1(e).
If the Board
errs in its assessment, the General Assembly is free to
further clarify its intent by later legislative
amendment.
However, the Board believes that by
proceeding with this rulemaking despite USEPA’s
prospective change
in approach, we will achieve the
benefits for Illinois industry that the General
Assembly desires, and we will attain greater consis-
tency with the federal scheme for ozone control.
Therefore, the Board is adopting the proposed
-
amendments without regard to the possibility that USEPA
will likely moot the federal policy statement upon
which it is based.
The possibility exists that the
Board will face the prospect of basing future
amendments on federal rules, rather than on the policy
statements referred to in Section 9.1(e).
The Board.
will address that issue when it arises.
Opinion and Order of September 12,
1991 in R9l-10 at 7-
8.
The intervening codification of the recommended federal
policy now confronts the Board with this issue.
Without further
elaboration of the reasons set forth in R9l-lO, the Board hereby
determines that Section 9.1(e) mandates that we adopt the revised
policy on negligibly—reactive compounds based on the codified
USEPA exemptions from its definition of “volatile organic
compound”
(the same as “volatile organic material”
in the
Illinois Part 211,
215,
218, and 219 regulations)
at 40 CFR
51.100(s).
This is despite the USEPA withdrawal of its
recommended policy as a result of the adoption of this definition
as a regulation.
Parts Affected
In R91-10, the Board discussed the Agency observation that
amendment of the Section 211.122 definition of VON did not affect
the corresponding definitions of “volatile organic compound,” at
Section 203.145, and “volatile organic material,” at Sections
130—461
6
218.104 and 219.104.~ Since Parts 218 and 219 became effective
after the publication of the Notice of Proposed Amendments for
R91-10, the Board could not include amendment of those Parts
in
that docket without causing significant delay.
In fact,
the
Agency advocated delay in that docket until USEPA adopted the
proposed 40 CFR 51.100(s) definition.
The Board concluded that
this did not warrant delay in the R91-10 proceeding.
~
Opinion and Order of September 12,
1991 in R91-10 at 8—10.
Rather, we reserved this docket to accomplish the amendment of
Parts
20,3,
218,
and 219 to reflect the revised federal
recommended policy.
USEPA has now codified its policy on negligibly-reactive
compounds.
Therefore, the Board proceeds to harmonize the
definitions of VON appearing at Parts 203, 211,
218, and 219.
Further,
TJSEPA effected some minor clarifications of its
recommended policy in the Federal Register preamble accompanying
the adoption and in the text of the new definition of “volatile
organic compound.”
The clarifications relate to exclusions of
certain inorganic carbon compounds
(i.e., the inclusion of only
“organic” carbon compounds),
the monitoring requirement,
and
state and federal authority to require monitoring.
These.
clarifications warrant re—examination of the R91—l0-amended
Section 211.122 definition and Section 215.109 monitoring
requirement.
Federal Clarification of “Organic”
At 40 CFR 52.741(a),
USEPA has a definition of “organic
material.”
This definition excludes certain carbon compounds
that are not organic.
On February 3,
1992, USEPA excluded
certain of these compounds from the definition of “volatile
organic compound” with the following language:
“any compound of
carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid,
metallic carbides and carbonates, and ammoniuin carbonate.”
40
CFR 51.100(s),
as added at 57 Fed. Reg.
3945
(Feb.
3,
1992)
(effective March
3,
1992).
This added language is identical to the Illinois definition
of “organic compound,” and essentially similar to parallel
language in the definitions of “organic material,” as presently
codified at 35
Ill. Adm. Code 211.122, 218.104,
and 219.104.
The
“
As
previously
noted,
Part
203
sets
forth
the
rules
applicable
to construction and modification of major stationary
sources;
Part
218
governs
emissions
of
organic
material
from
stationary sources located in the Chicago metropolitan area (Cook,
DuPage,
Kane,
Lake,
McHenry
and
Will
counties);
and
Part
219
governs the emissions of organic material from stationary sources
located in the metropolitan East St. Louis area
(Madison, Monroe,
and St. Clair counties).
130—462
7
definitions of “volatile organic material,” also at these
Sections, depend on the definition of “organic compound” in such
a way that there
is no need for the Board to add language to•
further clarify any of these three definitions.
The Section
203.145 definition of “volatile organic compound”
includes, inter
alia, exclusion of “carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic
acid, metal carbides, -metal carbonates,
(and
ammonium carbonate
..“
Therefore,
no revision of this Section is required by
this federal clarification.
The Fed~eralMonitoring Requirement
The codification of the USEPA policy in the definition of
“volatile organic compound” at 40 CFR 51.100(s) raises issues
related to the monitoring requirement.
In adopting R91-10, the
Board embodied its best understanding of the previously-
enunciated USEPA policy relating to the occasional need to
monitor for negligibly—reactive compounds.
The Board observed
that there were certain circumstances under which USEPA stated
that monitoring might be required as a precondition to a
compound’s exemption.
However, we noted that Senn Park Nursing
Center v. Miller,
118 Ill. App.
3d- 504,
455 N.E.2d 153
(1st Dist.
1983), aff’d 104 Ill.
2d 169, 470 N.E.2d 1069
(1984), would
require codification of any authority to require any such
monitoring.
In conclusion, we codified the USEPA—enumerated
circumstances that would necessitate monitoring:
(Where
direct quantification of volatile organic material emis-
sions is not possible due to any of the following circumstances
which make it necessary to quantify the exempt compound emissions
in order to quantify volatile organic material emissions:
a)
VOM5 and exempted compounds are mixed together in the
same emissions;
b)
There are a large number of exempted compounds in the
same emissions;
or
C)
The chemical composition of the exempted compounds in
the emissions is not known.
35 Ill. Adm. Code 215.109; see R91-10 Opinion and Order
of September 12,
1991 at 15—16.
In the codified policy, USEPA authorizes the states to
require monitoring for the exempted compounds.
Whether or not
Illinois reserves the authority to require monitoring, USEPA
reserves the right to require such monitoring that demonstrates
the amount of exempt compounds in a source’s emissions.
USEPA
states as follows in the new definition of VON:
(2)
For purposes of determining compliance with
130—463
8
emissions limits,
VON
will be measured by the
test methods in the approved State implementation
plan
(SIP)
or 40 CFR part 60, appendix A,
as
applicable.
Where such a method also measures
compounds with negligible photochemical
reactivity, these negligibly-reactive compounds
may be excluded as
(VOM
if the-amount of such
compounds is accurately quantified, and such
exclusion is approved by the
(state.
(3)’
As a precondition to excluding these compounds as
VOM
or at any time thereafter, the (state) may
require an owner or operator to provide monitoring
or testing methods and results demonstrating, to
the satisfaction of the state,
the amount of
negligibly—reactive compounds in the source’s
emissions.
(4)
For purposes of Federal enforcement for
a specific
source, the US)EPA
shall use the test methods
specified in the applicable EPA-approved SIP,
in a
permit issued pursuant to a program approved or
promulgated under title V of the (federal Clean
Air) Act,
or under 40 CFR part 51, subpart
I or
appendix 5, or under 40 CFR parts 52 or 60.
The
(USEPA
shall not be bound by any State
determination as to appropriate methods for
testing or monitoring negligibly-reactive
compounds if such determination is not reflected
in any of the above provisions.
,rnus, the purpose of the monitoring is to quantify VOMs,
as the
Board perceived in R91-10.
Further, although USEPA is leaving to
state discretion whether the state requires the source to monitor
or whether the state itself monitors, USEPA will require the
monitoring as needed to quantify VON5.
~
57
Fed.
Reg.
3944
(Feb.
3,
1992).
As to analytic methodology for analyses, the present
Illinois definition of VOM refers to the methods incorporated by
reference at 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 215.105.~ That Section includes
numerous references——among them is 40 CFR 60.
If part of an
approved SIP, the methods would satisfy the first segment of new
40 CFR 51.100(s)(2).
Further,
since Section 215.105 refers to 40
CFR 60 it includes,
40
CFR
part 60, appendix A.
It thus includes
~ The Sections 218.104 and 219.1.04 definitions of VON provide:
“For purposes of determining compliance with emission limits, VOC
will be measured by the approved test methods.
.
.
.“
35 Ill. Adm.
Code
218.104
&
219.104
(definitions
of
“volatile
organic
material”).
130—464
9
the source in the second segment of section 51.100(5) (2).
We
believe that no amendment is necessary to either Section 211.122
(definition of VOM)
or Section 215.105 incorporations by
reference)
on this basis.
For these reasons, the Board believes that we accurately
assessed the scope of the federal policy on September 12,
1991
in
R91—10.
No amendment to any Section is necessary based on
further federal elaboration of its policy.
However, one option
open to~theBoard is to simply delete the circumstances
enumerated as subsections
(a) through
(c).
The
Board invites
public comment as to whether the existing regulatory language
adequately embodies USEPA’s codified policy and intent.
In
addition-to the amendments to Sections 203.145,
218.104, and
219.104, the Board will open the monitoring provision at 35
Ill.
Adin.
Code 215.109 by proposing a minor amendment.
This will
allow subsequent amendment if public comments indicate the need
to do so.
The minor amendment that the Board proposes
is to add--a
Board Note to Section 215.109 that will direct the attention of
the regulated community to the federal definition at 40 CFR
51.100(s) (2) through
(s)(4).
In particular,
this Board Note will
direct attention to federal paragraph
(s) (4) and 57 Fed.
Reg.
3944
(Feb.
3,
1992),
in which USEPA makes it clear that it
remains not bound by state determinations as to monitoring for
negligibly—reactive compounds.
Amendments to Section 203.145
The Section 203.145 definition of “volatile organic
compound” applies only within Part 203.
The Board adopted it
March 10,
1988 in R85—10, effective March 22,
1988.
The words
“volatile organic compound” appear in Sections 203.206(b)
(“major
stationary source”), 203.207(b)
(“major modification of a
source”), 203.209(e)
(significant emissions determination),
203.303(d) (3) and
(e)
(baseline emissions offsets
determinations), and 203.306
(analysis of alternative sites,
processes,
controls, etc.).
This definition is identical to the
Part 211 definition of “volatile organic material” with three
major exceptions:
1.
The Section 203.145 definition includes within its own
terms both the compounds exempted from the Section
211.122 definitions of “organic material”
(as not
“organic”)
and “volatile organic material”
(as
negligibly-reactive),
2.
The Section 203.145 definition does not refer to
analytical procedures for quantification of volatile
species
(rather,
this provision refers to volatility);
and
130—465
-
10
3.
Section 203.145 does not include several negligibly
reactive compounds exempted from the Section 211.122
definition in R89—8
(October 18,
1989)
and R9l-10
(September 12,
1991):
from R89—8:
chiorodifluoroethane (HCFC—142b)
dichlorofluoroethane
(HCFC-14ib)
dichlorotrifluoroethane (HCFC-12 3)
tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a)
from R91—1O:
2—chloro—l, 1,1,2—tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124)
1, l-difluoroethane
(HFC-152a)
pentafluoroethane (HFC-l25)
1,1, 2,2—tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134)
1,1, 1—trifluoroethane (HFC—143a)
The following classes of compounds:
cyclic, branched,
or linear, completely
fluorinated alkanes;
cyclic, branched,
or linear, completely
fluorinated ethers with no
unsaturations;
cyclic,
branched,
or linear, completely
fluorinated tertiary amines with no
unsaturations;
sulphur—containing perfluorocarbons with
no unsaturations and with sulfur bonds
only to carbon and fluorine.
The differences based on the unitary structure of Section
203.145 are immaterial.
The fact that the definition of
“volatile organic compound” does not refer to a separate
definition of “organic compound” does not affect its meaning.
This structural difference does not affect the size of the
regulated community or the activities that fall within the
Board’s regulations.
The differences based on references to analytical methods
are not major,
but they could potentially cause some entity to
fall under the purview of Part 203 that is not subject to
regulation under Part 215 or vice versa.
Section 203.145 defines
the objects of interest as “present in the atmosphere
in a
gaseous state.”
Section 211.122 defines those objects for the
purposes of Part 215)
as “participat(ing
in atmospheric
photochemical reactions.”
The purpose of the Section 203.145
definition
is permitting entities subject to regulation under
Part 215.
To the extent there a species that are “present in the
atmosphere in a gaseous state”
or “participat(ing
in atmospheric
photochemical reactions” but not both,
there is a potential gap
130—466
11
between the permit requLrement and the emissions limitations.
It is interesting to note the extent of the changes made by
USEPA in adopting its section 51.100(s) definition of “volatile
organic compound.”
USEPA simultaneously amended its sections
51.165(a) (1) (xix),
51.166(b) (29),
and.part 51, appendix S
(II)(A)
lists of volatile organic compound exclusions to take the form of
a definition of “volatile organic compound,” which states that
the meaning of this term is given at section 51.100(s).
40 CFR
51.165 sets forth the federal permit requirements.
Section
51.166 sets forth the prevention of significant deterioration
requirements.
Appendix S
is a clarification of the USEPA offset
policy.
These are all subjects within the scope of Part 203 of
the Illinois rules.
In adopting the definition of VON, USEPA
stated that it intended only to codify existing policy and not to
effect any substantive change.
See 57 Fed. Reg. 3943
(Feb.
3,
1992).
Therefore,
USEPA now employs the same definition of
“volatile organic compound” for all purposes——for both permitting
and for setting emissions limitations, and it is their apparent
intent that this was always so.
-
The differences in the Section 203.145 and 211.122
definitions relating to exempted compounds are the primary focus
of this docket.
The Section 203.145 definition includes all
compounds exempted under the federal recommended policy as of the
date of its adoption (March 10,
1988).
USEPA has since twice
updated that policy
(at 54 Fed.
Reg.
1987, January
18,
1989,
and
at 56 Fed. Reg.
11418, March 18,
1991).
The Board followed suit
by amending the Section 211.122 definition of “volatile organic
material”
in R89—8, October 18,
1989 (effective October 27,
1989), and R9l-10, September 12,
1991 (effective October 11,
1991).
However, the Board did not amend the Section 203.145
definition at those times.
Rather, the Board reserved this
docket for that purpose.
Today, we propose amendments to 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 203.145 that will have the effect of exempting all
compounds from regulation under Part 203 that are also exempted
from regulation under Part 215
(and Parts 218 and 219).
Since Part 203 sets forth the permitting requirements for
activities regulated under Part 215
(for which Section 211.122
provides the operative definition of “volatile organic
material”),
the Board believes that the Section 203.145
definition of “volatile organic compound” should have the same
meaning that “volatile organic material” has for the purposes of
Part 215.
We believe that this is presently the case,
but
identical meaning is best accomplished through the same
definitional language.
The most efficient way to accomplish this
is to place the definitional language in one location and refer
to it from all other locations.
This has the combined effects of
more closely tracking the federal definition of “volatile organic
compound” and exempting all negligibly—reactive compounds from
state regulation as VONs.
This also facilitates future
130—46 7
12
amendments and minimizes the possibility of future oversight and
the resulting discrepancies.
For these reasons, the board proposes to amend Section
203.145 so that “volatile organic compound,” for the purposes of
Part 203, means “volatile organic material,” as that term is
defined at Section 211.122.
The Board does not take the
additional step at this time of proposing the substitution of
“volatile organic material” for “volatile organic compound” where
that term appears at Sections 203.206(b),
203.207(b),
203.209(e),
203.303(d) (3) and
(e), and 203.306.
The Board invites public
comment as to whether this approach and the chosen language
adequately embodies USEPA’s codified policy and intent.
Amendments to Section 211.122
The Board proposes amendment of the Section 211.122
definition of “volatile organic material” to indicate the source
of the exempted compounds.
The Board adds a Board Note to this
provision to reference the federal 40 CFR 51.100(s) definition of
“volatile organic compound” and 57 Fed. Reg. 3941
(Feb.
3,
1992),
at which USEPA adopted
it.
The Note also references 35 Iii.
Adin.
Code 215.109, the monitoring requirement.
The Board invites
public comment on this approach to the codified USEPA policy and
intent.
Amendments to 215.109
The Board proposes amendment of Section 215.109 to indicate
the source of the monitoring requirement for negligibly—reactive,
exempted compounds.
The Board adds a Board Note to this
provision to reference 56 Fed. Reg.
11418
(Mar.
18,
1991), when
USEPA introduced the concept of such monitoring, and the federal
40 CFR 51.100(s)
definition of “volatile organic compound” and
57
Fed. Reg. 3941
(Feb.
3,
1992), at which USEPA adopted it.
The
Note also references 35 Ill..Adm.
Code 211.122, the definition of
“volatile organic material.”
The
Board invites public comment
on
this approach to the codified USEPA policy and intent.
Amendments to Sections 218.104 and 219.104
As outlined above, Part 218 sets forth the rules applicable
to emissions of volatile organic materials in the greater Chicago
metropolitan area,
and Part 219 sets forth the rules applicable
for those emissions in the East St. Louis metropolitan area.
Each Part became effective on August 16,
1991 (by Board orders of
July 25,
1991,
in R91—7 for the Chicago area and R91-8 for the
130—468
13
East
St.. Louis area).6
Section 218.104 sets forth the definition
of VOM for Part 218,
and Section 219.104 sets forth the
definition for Part 219.
Both definitions use identical
language, with the exception of some language in Section 218.104
relating to the 3M Bedford Park facility, and both are
essentially similar to the Section 211.122 definition of VOM
prior to .the prior VON update, R91-10.
The language at Section
218.104 relating to the 3M facility exempts the classes of
compounds exempted from the Section 211.122 definition in R91-10.
The lan~uagein both Sections 218.104 and 219.104 relating to the
treatment of the exempted compounds adds nothing to the language
already at Section 211.122.
For reasons similar to those recited for the Section 203.145
amendments above, the Board believes that references at 35 Ill.
Adm.
Code 218.104 and 219.104 to the definition of VON at Section
211.122
is the preferred method of updating these definitions.
This method assures not only that the present Part 215 exemptions
become Parts 218 and 219 exemptions,
it assures harmony in
meaning of the same term for all areas of the state.
-
It also
minimizes the likelihood of future disparity through subsequent
updates.
Therefore,
we propose amendment of Sections 218.104 and
219.104 so that “volatile organic material,” for the purposes of
Parts 218 and 219, means “volatile organic material,”
as that
term is defined at Section 211.122.
The Board invites public
comment as to whether this approach and the chosen language
adequately embodies USEPA’s codified policy and intent.
ORDER
The Board hereby proposes the following amendments to its
definitions of “volatile organic compound,” at 35 Ill.
Adin.
Code
203.145, and “volatile organic material,” at 35
Ill. Adm. Code
211.122,
218.104, and 219.104, and to the Section governing the
monitoring for negligibly—reactive compounds,
35
Ill.
Adm. Code
215. 109.
-
Section 203.145
Volatile Organic Compound
“Volatile Organic Compound” means any chemical compound of
1.x.uuIl,
£~i~ULJt~U
L.U
01
p~Ii~
in
LIie
atmosptnL-L
.Lfl
U
~tatc,
including
compounds which arc
liquids at standard
condition3, but
ethanc,
carbon m
cxcluding the following compoundo:
mcthanc,
onoxidc, carbon dioxidc, carbonic acid,
mctal
i~i~’t~1o~~1
6
As also noted, this
is less than 30 days before the Board
Order that adopted the R91-lO amendments to the definition of VON.
Therefore, Parts 218 and 219 could not have become a part of that
proceeding.
-
130—469
14
fluoroethano
(Freon 113), trichlorofluoromcthanc
(CFC-11), di-
ohlorodifluoromcthanc
(CFC-12), ohlorodifluoromcthanc (CFC-22)
,
trifluoromothane (FC-23), triohlorotrifluoroothanc (CFC-113), di-
chlorotctrafluorocthanc (CFC-114), ohloro~cntafluorocthanc(CFC-
115).
Ctanaara conaitions mcans a tcmperaturc of 70 F and a
pressure of 14.7 pounds per
square inch absolute (psia).”volatile
organic material,” as that term is defined at 35 Ill.
Adm. Code
211. 122.
(Source:
Amended at 17 Ill. Reg.
,
effective
)
Section 211.122
Definitions
“Volatile Organic Materia.l”:
Any organic compound which participates in
atmospheric photochemical reactions unless
specifically exempted from this definition.
For
purposes of determining compliance with emission
limits, volatile organic material shall be
measured by the reference test methods
incorporated by reference in 35 Ill. Adm. Code
215.105.
Where such a method also inadvertently
measures compounds with negligible photochemical
reactivity,
an owner or operator may exclude these
negligibly reactive compounds.
For purposes of, this definition,
the following
organic compounds have been determined to have
negligible photochemical reactivity and are not
volatile organic materials:
Chlorodifluoroethane
(HCFC-l42b)
Chlorodifluoromethane
(CFC-22)
Chloropentafluoroethane
(CFC-1l5)
Dichlorodifluoromethane
(CFC-l2)
Dichlorofluoroethane
(HCFC-l4lb)
Dichlorotetrafluoroethane
(CFC-114)
Dichiorotrifluoroethane
(HCFC-123)
Ethane
Methane
Dichloromethane
(Methylene chloride)
Tetrafluoroethane
(HFC-134a)
Trichloroethane
(Methyl chloroform)
Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11)
Trichlorotri’fluoroethane
(CFC-113)
Trifluoromethane
(FC-23)
Board Note:
Derived from 40 CFR 51.100(s)
(definition of “volatile organic compound”),
130—470
15
as added at 57 Fed. Req.
3941
(Feb.
3,
1992).
See also 35
Ill. Adm. Code 215.109,
a
provision which permits the A~encvto require
monitoring for these compounds under certain
circumstances.
(Source:
Amended at 17
Ill. Reg.
effective
,
)
Section 215.109
Monitoring for Negligibly-Reactive Compounds
Any provision of 35
Ill. Adm. Code 211 notwithstanding, the
Agency may require monitoring for any of the compounds listed at
35 Ill.
Adm. Code 211.122 as exempted from the definition of
“volatile organic material,” as a precondition to such exemption
where direct quantification of volatile organic material emis-
sions is not possible due to any of the following circumstances
which make it necessary to quantify the exempt compound em-issions
in order to quantify volatile organic material emissions:
a)
VOMs and exempted compounds are mixed together in the
same emissions;
b)
There are
a large number of exempted compounds in the
same emissions~or
c)
The chemical composition of the exempted compounds in
the emissions is not known.
Board Note:
Derived from the USEPA “Recommended Policy
on the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds,” as
amended at
56 Fed. Req.
11418, March 18,
1991,
and
subsequently codified as 40 CFR 51.100(s),
as added at
57 Fed. Reg. 3941
(Feb.
3,
1992).
See also 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 211.122 for the basic definition of “volatile
organic material.”
USEPA is not bound by any state
determination as to monitoring.
40 CFR 51.100(s) (4).
(Source:
Amended at 17
Ill. Reg.
,
effective
)
Section 218.104
Definitions
The following terms are defined for the purpose of this Part.
“Volatile organic material (VON)
or volatile organic
compound
(VOC)” means ~ny organic compound which
participates in atmospheric photochcmical reactions.
130—471
16
This includes any organic compound other than the
following compounds:
methane,
ethanc, methyl
chloroform
(1, 1, 1-trichlorocthanc), CFC-113
(trichlorotrifluoroethanc), mcthylcnc chloride
(dichloromcthanc), CFC-11
(trichlorofluoromcthanc),
CFC-12
(dichlorodifluoromcthanc),
CFC-22
-
(chlorodifluoromcthanc),
FC-23
(trifluoromcthanc),
CFC-114 (dichlorotctrafluorocthanc), CFC-115
(chloropcntafluorocthanc), HCFC-123
(diohlorotrifluorocthanc), HFC-134a
(tctrafluorocthanc), HCFC-141b (dichlorofluorocthanc)
and HCFC-142b (chlorodifluoroethanc).
These compounds
have been determined to have negligible photoohemical
-
rcactivity.”volatile organic material,” as that term is
defined at
35
Ill. Adm. Code 211.122.
In addition,
for the 3M Bedford Park facility in
Cook County, the following compounds shall not be
considered as volatile organic material or
volatile organic compounas
(and arc,
therefore,
to
be treated as water
for. the purpose of calculating
thc “less water” part of the coating or ink
composition)
for a period of time not .to exceed
oric
vc~nraftr~r
thc~
dritr~ U~EPA
riotr~i
nfl
3M’~
petit~..,
of this rule,
which
4?
..,
...~
classified as exempt compounds:
(1)
cyclic,
branched, or linear, completely fluorinated
alkancs,
~
r~w~lic,branched,
or
1inr~r~r.
~
-i- iiir~
tr’r~I
r~fhr’r~
wifh
--
unsaturati~...~,~3) cyclic, branched,
or lii.e~,
completely fluorinated tertiary aminco with no
unsaturations,
and
(4)
sulfur containing
pcrfluorocarbons with no unsaturations and with
sulfur bonds only to carbon and fluorine.
rwriel4r~r,
~
nf
t~hr~
elate of promulgation
thcsc comno’~”~
For purposes of determining compliance with
~ission
limits, VOC will be nicasur-”~
approved test methods.
Where such a
me
inadvertently measures cgmpnundn
photoohemical reactivity,
an owncr or opcru-cor
may
cxcludc these negligibly reactive compounds when
determining aompliance with an emissions standard.
(Source:
Amended at 17 Ill. Reg.
)
Section 219.104
Definitions
The following terms are defined for the purpose of this Part.
130—472
~~mp1ct2~~’
by th~.
thod aL.~.,
J-.-
~1igiblc
,
effective
17
“Volatile organic material
(VON)
or volatile organic
compound (VOC)” means any organic compound which
participates In atmospheric photochemical reactions.
This includes any organic compound other than the
follow~ingcompounds!
methane, ethanc, methyl
eh~.oroform(1,1,1-trichlorocthanc), CFC-113
(trichlorotrifluorocthanc), mcthylcnc chloride
-(dichloromcthanc), Crc-li (trichlorofluoromcthanc),
CFC 12
(dichlorodifluoromcthanc),
CFC-22
(chlorodifluoromcthanc), FC-23
(trifluoromcthanc),
CFC 114 (dichlorotetrafluorocthanc), CFC-1l5
~chloropentafluorocthanc), HCFC-123
(dichlorotrifluorocthanc), HFC-134a
(tctrafluoroethanc), HCFC-141b (dichlorofluorocthzine)
and HCFC-l42b (chlorodifluorocthanc).
These compounds
have been determined to have negligible photochemical
rcactivity.”volatile organic material,” as that term is
defined at
35 Ill.
Adm. Code 211.122.
For purposes of determining compliance with
emission limits,, VOC will bcmca3urcd by
the
approved
LC~t~
~d~rn-rtcntl~.r
mcthou~.
measures
i’w~re
~w~ii
a
compounds
~
mcthou
ui~o
ncglig4hlr’
2
photochemical reactivity,
an
owner
opcra..ui
.~
exclude these negligibly reactive compounds when
determining compliance with an cmissions standard.
(Source:
Amended at 17 Ill. Reg.
,
effective
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Dorothy N. Gunn,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
do hereby certify that the
bove Propos~1Opinionand
Order was adopted on the
‘
day of
~
1992, by a vote of
________.
/2tAr~7~
77l,/~L~-i~
t—torothy M.~nn, Clerk
.
Illinois Pe(lution Control Board
130—473
