ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

September

8,

1988

ROADMASTER CORPORATION,

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 87—136

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

BARBARA

B. COLLINS, OF MORSE,

GIGANTI AND APPLETON, APPEARED ON

BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

MS. BOBELLA GLATZ APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by M. Nardulli):

This matter comes before the Board from

a Petition for

Variance filed on behalf

of Roadmaster Corporation

(hereinafter

“Roadmaster”)

of Olney,

Richland County.

The original petition

was filed on September

17,

1987.

The petition was amended on

April

8,

1988 to request

that the request

for variance be

extended

from December

31,

1990

to December

31,

1992.

The

petition was further amended on July 22,

1988,

to include,

as an

alternate compliance

plan,

a request

for site specific relief.

The Petition for Site Specific Relief was filed on July 19,

1988.

Roadmaster

is seeking variance from the Emission

Limitation for Manufacturing Plants

in

35 Il1~Adm.

Code

215.204(j)(3).

The requested period for variance

is until

December

31,

1992.

The Agency filed

a Recommendation to deny on

January

20,

1988.

A public hearing was held on April

14,

1988

in Olney.

No

members of the public were present.

Post hearing briefs were

submitted by the Respondent

on May 17,

1988 and by the Petitioner

on July

29,

1988.

Based on the record,

the Board finds that Roadmaster

fails

to justify its request

for variance based

on its Compliance Plan

that would require

it to search for compliance coating.

This

compliance plan fails

to develop

a timetable

for compliance, does

not address the issue of environmental

impact of the actual and

allowable emissions

and fails

to supply meaningful information on

the cost

of compliance that would allow the Board

to make

a

determination of hardship.

The Board

is hesitant

to grant

a

92—51

---

—2—

variance without stronger assurances that Roadmaster will

be

in

compliance with Section 215.204 after

the variance has

terminated.

However,

the Board appreciates

the

fact that the Petitioner

is

in

a highly competitive

industry and

is

a major employer

in

Richland County.

The Board also recognizes

the fact that

Roadmaster’s Olney plant

is located

in an attainment area for

ozone and that the VOM released from the plant appears to have

a

very minor harmful environmental

impact.

Further,

the Board

feels

that the Petitioner may be able to get relief from the

requirements

of Section 215.204 by using

the internal offset rule

from Section 215.207

to achieve compliance.

In order

to allow

the Petitioner time to pursue alternative means

of compliance,

the Board will allow

a curtailed period of variance subject

to

conditions.

BACKGROUND

Roadmaster

is

a manufacturer of fitness equipment, bicycles,

tricycles and wagons.

Roadmaster

currently employs over

600

employees

in

a 720,000 square foot plant,

located

in Olney,

Richiand County.

The operation includes metal fabrication,

plastic molding, plating, painting and warehousing.

Painting

is

performed on five coating lines with the three electrostatic

paint lines

being

in compliance

(R.

31).

The variance

is

requested for two flowcoating application lines.

Roadmaster uses

the flow coating process for several white and black component

parts,

such as wagon undercarriage assemblies,

tricycle wheels

and bicycle stabilizer arms.

The 1986 usage

of white flow coat

was 3458 gallons.

The 1986 usage of black flow coat was 1896

gallons.

The two flow coating processes release volatile organic

material

(hereinafter “VOM”)

into exhaust outlets which are

vented through

the roof of the facility.

The white flow coats

possesses

a VOM content

of

3.9 pounds per gallon.

The black flow

coat possesses

a VOM content of 4.8 pounds per gallon.

A maximum

of 3.5 pounds per gallon of VOM

is allowed under Section

2l5.205(j)(2) which regulates emission limitations

for air dried

coatings for metal products

in manufacturing plants.

In

1986,

Roadmaster emitted approximately 92,000 pounds

of VOM from the

Olney plant.

The State of Illinois was required

to have an approvable

ozone State Implementation Plant

(SIP)

by December

31,

1987.

35

Ill.

Adm. Code 215.204(j)

has not yet been approved by the United

States Environmental Protection Agency as part

of the SIP

to

attain and maintain primary and secondary air quality standards

under

the Clean Air Act

(42 U.S.C.

Section 7401 et seq).

If

the

recommended variance

is granted by the Board subsequent

to

approval

of 215.204(j),

a SIP revision will

be necessary for the

state to be

in compliance.

92—52

---

—3—

Richland County

is considered attainment for all criteria

pollutants.

During

1986,

there were

no measured exceedances of

the ozone standard at the nearest ambient air monitoring station

for ozone at Effingham which

is approximately forty miles

away.

However,

the highest reading during 1986 was 0.117 ppm which

is

below the standard of 0.12 but relatively close

to the standard.

PETITIONER’S COMPLIANCE PLAN

In the petition for variance filed with the Board on

September

17,

1987 and amended on April

8,

1988 and July 22,

1988,

Roadmaster indicates

that its ability

to comply with the

requirements

of Section 215.204(j)

is dependent on the ability

of

the paint manufacturers

to formulate

a waterborne coating

that

would be compatible with

the present coating operation and would

be cost efficient.

The Petitioner proposes

to undertake

a

detailed study

to examine the possibility of using

internal

offset

to reach compliance

if

no compliance coating

is found

to

meet its needs by December

21,

1991.

Roadmaster amended

its

petition on July 22, 1988

to

include an alternative compliance

plan

——

to seek

a site specific rule by adding

a new subparagraph

to Rule 215.206

to read as

follows:

“(d)

Notwithstanding

the limitations of

Section 2l5.204(j)(3),

the Roadmaster

Corporation, Olney, Illinois,

shall not

cause or permit the emission of volatile

organic material from its existing black

and white flowcoating operations

to

exceed

a weekly average of

5.9 lb./gal.”

The Petition for Site Specific Relief was•.filed on Ju.ly

19,

1988 and

is being considered by the Board as case R88—19.

Roadmaster’s compliance date of December

31,

1992 has been

proposed by the Petitioner without

a coinciding plan

to come into

compliance by that date.

Petitioner has no guarantee that

a

compliance coating can be found

by that date.

No measures

to

further reduce emissions during

the variance period were

proposed, although the Petitioner maintains

that the continued

use of high solid spray coatings will allow

it

to generate

a

significantly lower

total amount of VOM

in 1988 than in

1987.

HARDSHIP AND ENVIRONMENTAL

In

its petition for variance, Roadmaster

states

that,

at the

present

time, compliance with Section 215.204(j)

cannot be

achieved on the two flow coat lines because

of the failure

of

waterborne coatings and the lack

of

a reasonable

alternative.

In

92—53

---

—4—

its recommendation,

the Agency argues that inadequate cost

information has been given

to determine

if

a hardship exists but

goes on

to state

that using

the limited cost information

available,

insufficient hardship has been shown.

At hearing,

the Petitioner emphasized that

it

is

in

a highly

competitive industry and has only recently been able

to bring

the

company back

to marginal profitability

(R.

15).

They also note

that its major domestic competition,

the Huffy Corporation plant

located

in Ohio, has

a complete exemption from the “Ohio Coating

Rules”

(R.

53).

Roadmaster argues that failure

to grant this

requested variance would put them at

a competitive disadvantage

and doing so would result

in an arbitrary or unreasonable

hardship.

Contrasting with the issue

of hardship

is the issue of

environmental impact.

The materials emitted from Roadmaster have

a slight solvent odor.

However,

no odor complaints have been

recorded.

Additionally, Richland County

is considered an

attainment area for ozone.

The nearest ambient air monitoring

station

is located

in Effingham which

is

forty miles southwest of

Olney.

During

1986,

the highest ozone readings at this

monitoring station was 0.117

ppm.

The standard for ozone

is

0.12

ppm.

Granting of

the requested variance will adversely affect

the air quality of Richland County and the surrounding region.

However, the region will still be an attainment area for ozone

and the harmful environmental impact,

due

to transport

to non—

attainment areas,

would seem to be minor.

AGENCY RECOMMENDATION

In

its variance recommendation of January 20,

1988,

the

Agency contends that the Petitioner has not provided

the Board

with sufficient information with regard

to its chosen compliance

plan,

alternatives investigated

or the costs involved

to enable

the Agency

to recommend grant consistent with the requirements

of

the Clean Air Act.

The Agency questions whether

the Petitioner’s

chosen method of compliance

is feasible.

It also states that the

Petitioner cannot support

its claim of hardship without providing

more complete economic data.

For these reasons,

the Agency recommends denial

of the

variance.

However, Agency’s recommendation suggests that

if the

Board should decide

to grant

the variance, such variance should

be subject

to

the following conditions:

1.

That the variance period end on

December

31,

1988.

2.

That

if,

at any time during this

variance period, Petitioner

is

informed by paint manufacturers that

92—54

---

—5—

a coating material

for

the white

flowcoater cannot be formulated,

Roadmaster be required

to proceed

with an alternate compliance strategy

during

the term of the variance

and

be required

to implement this

strategy by June 30,

1989.

DECISION

The Board motes with

that the petition for variance for

the

length

of time requested

is deficient

in a number of areas.

The

Petitioner has failed

to show arbitrary or unreasonable hardship

and has failed to ensure that they will be

in compliance at the

end

of the variance period.

The required information

not

included

in the petition

is vital

for the Board

to determine the

impact

the variance would have,

as well

as

to ensure

the Board

that the compliance target date will

be met.

Without this

information the Board

is hesitant

to grant

a variance.

However,

the Board

feels that Petitioner has not fully

pursued

all of

its alternatives

for compliance.

There appears

to

be

a possibility that the Olney plant may be

in compliance with

the requirements of Section 215.207.

However, Roadmaster has not

fully investigated the possibility of using internal offsets to

come

into compliance.

At hearing, George Nebel, President of

Roadmaster, testified

that the problem associated with using

internal offsets at the plant were due

to the variety of colored

paints used,

the number

of changeovers per

line per day and the

number

of applications per

line

(R.

31).

In

its compliance plan,

Roadmaster stated that it would further investigate internal

offsets

if a compliance coating was not found

in the next two

years.

The Board

feels

that the Petitioners should promptly

investigate

internal offsets

to determine

if

it is

in compliance

with 215.207 or

to determine if

it would be possible

to come into

compliance through a combination of

internal offsets and

a lower

VOM coating.

The Board

is persuaded that the Petitioner would suffer

an

arbitrary or unreasonable hardship

if short

term relief

is not

granted and that the environmental impact of

the granting

of

relief will be minor.

The Board will grant

a one—year variance

to allow the Petitioner additional time

to come into compliance.

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of

fact and

conclusions

of law

in this matter.

92—55

---

—6—

ORDER

Petitioner,

Roadmaster Corporation,

is hereby granted

variance from 35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 215.204(j) until September 30,

1989 subject

to the following conditions:

1.

Roadmaster Corporation’s Olney Plant

shall not emit volatile organic

material

from its white flow coat

application line greater than the

present 3.9 pounds

per gallon of

coating.

The black flow coat

application

line shall

not emit

volatile organic matter greater

than

the present

4.8 pounds per gallon.

2.

Roadmaster will conduct,

or

authorize,

a study

to examine the

possibility of using internal offset

to reach compliance.

This study

shall be concluded by May

31,

1989

and the results shall

be reported

to:

Air Pollution Control Division

Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield,

IL

62794

3.

Roadmaster

shall continue

to search

for compliance coatings and shall

submit quarterly progress reports

during the variance period,detaLling

its progress

in coming into

compliance,

to the Agency at the

address

in condition

(2) above.

4.

If at any time during this variance

period,

Roadmaster

is informed by

paint manufacturers that

a coating

material

for

the white flowcoater

cannot be formulated, Roadmaster be

required

to proceed with an alternate

compliance strategy during the term

of

the variance and

be required

to

initiate this strategy by June 30,

1989.

5.

Within 45 days of

the date of this

Order, Petitioner shall execute and

92—56

---

—7—

forward

to the Agency at the address

in condition

(2) above,

a

Certification of Acceptance and

Agreement

to be bound

to

all terms

and conditions of this variance.

The

45—day period shall be held

in

abeyance during any period that this

matter

is being appealed.

If the

Petitioner

fails to execute and

forward this agreement within 45

days,

the variance shall be void.

The form of said Certification shall

be as follows:

CERTIFICATION

I,

(We),

having read the Order

of

the Illinois Pollution Control Board,

in

PCB 87—136,

dated September

8,

1988,

understand and accept the

said Order,

realizing that such acceptance renders all

terms and

conditions thereto binding and enforceable.

Petitioner

By:

Authorized Agent

Title

Date

Section 41

of the Environmental Protection Act,

Ill.

Rev.

Stat.

1985 ch.

ll2~/2par.

1041, provides for appeal of final

Orders

of the Board within 35 days.

The Rules of the Supreme

Court

of Illinois establish filing requirements.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

B. Forcade dissented.

92—57

---

—8—

I,

Dorothy M. Gunn,

Clerk

of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board,

hereby certify that the above 0p

ion and Order was

adopted on the

____________

day of

___________________,

1988,

by

avoteof

_________.

Dorothy

M. ~unn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

92—58