ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April 21, 1983
MOORE
AMERICAN
GRAPHICS,
INC.
)
)
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB
83—1
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent,
MSSRS. AL MOORE, ~TR.,ROBERT J.
HAKES AND WALTER
NEWTON
APPEARED
ON BEHALF OF MOORE AMERICAN GRAPHICS.
MR. DUDLEY ROBINSON APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE PRINTING INDUSTRY
OF ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION.
MR. PETER
E. ORLINSKY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ILLINOIS ENVIRON-
MENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by J.D.
Dumelle):
This matter comes before the Board upon a January
3,
1983
petition for variance filed by Moore American Graphics,
Inc.
(Moore).
Moore requests a one year variance from Rule 205(n)(1)(C)
of Chapter
2: Air Pollution, to allow
it to
delay compliance with
the emission limitation for volatile organic compounds
(VOCs)
discharged from its paper coating lines.
On February 14,
1983,
the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(Agency) filed
a
recommendation that variance be granted, subject to certain
conditions.
Hearing was held on March
2,
1983 at which no
evidence was presented.
Moore owns and operates a facility in Bridgeview which coats
and laminates paper book and magazine covers.
Included in its
facility are four coating machines
and three
laminating machines
which are the subject of the present variance request.
The
machines in question have associated drying ovens which are
vented directly to the atmosphere.
Moore’s facility is
1.ocated
in an industrial area, and the nearest residences are located
nearly one-half mile to the south.
The Agency has received
no complaints concerning the facility’s operation, nor has
anyone objected to the variance.
The area has been designated
as non—attainment for ozone, although during 1981 the 0.12 ppm
standard for ozone was exceeded only once.
The closest monitoring
station is about four miles to the northeast.
52-75
—2—
The coatings
utilized by Moore contain VOCs which
are
emitted during production.
Rule 205(j)
of Chapter
2 requires
that paper coating operations
must be
in compliance
with Rule
205(n)(1)(C)
of Chapter
2 by
December 31, 1982.
That
rule
limits VOC emissions
to
0.35 kg/l
(2,9 lb/gal).
VOCs contribute
to the formation of ozone, high
levels
of which can have
adverse health effects on the elderly and
persons with
respiratory and cardiac problems.
The Agency
believes,
however, that the extension of the compliance
deadline
sought by
Moore should not cause any increased health effects.
Any potential
for adverse effects should also be reduced
by
requiring Moore
to comply with its episode action plan
which
mandates a
reduction of emissions during periods
of high
ozone
concentration.
In 1982, Moore
utilized an estimated 29,380
gallons
of laminating adhesive
with an average
VOC
content
of 4.7 lb/gal
and an estimated
22,350 gallons of coating material
with an
average
VOC content of 4.3 lb/gal.
Thus,
in 1982, VOC
emissions
from the laminating
and coating machines were 117,11
tons.
If Rule 205(n)(1)(C)
of Chapter 2 had been in effect
in 1982,
Moore’s VOC emissions
would
have been limited to
75.02 tons.
Moore alleges that
it has been unable to
meet the compliance
date since a
customer—acceptable, water-based
coating or adhesive
has yet to be developed.
Since 1979,
Moore has
been working with
its suppliers to
develop acceptable substitute adhesives
and
coatings.
It has
also explored the possibility of
installing
thermal incineration,
catalytic incineration, electronic
and
charcoal
filtration,
and solvent recovery.
To date, none of
the
solutions
has proven satisfactory because the substitute
coatings
and adhesives
have not conformed to customer specifications
and
the cost of
installing and operating control equipment has
been
determined
to be prohibitive.
Incineration would entail
a capital
cost of at
least $35,000 and operating costs would be
$35,000 to
$40,000 per year.
In the
immediate future Moore plans to pursue solvent
recovery techniques
and to hold full one day tests on
water-
based materials
at least once every two weeks,
It feels
that
this route is the
best plan for achieving compliance,
but each
supplier contacted
to date has reported that it is still
in the
experimentation stage
and that low—solvent technology
is in its
infancy.
However,
Moore alleges,
and the Agency agrees,
that it
should be able to
attain compliance by December 31,
1983.
Based upon these
facts, the Board finds that
Moore has been
diligently attempting
to comply with the VOC
limitation and that
it intends to continue
to
do
so,
It is
unlikely that Moore’s
discharges would
cause or contribute to a violation
of the ozone
standard since its
episode action plan
should provide sufficient
safeguards during
periods of high ozone
concentration.
Further,
52-76
—3—
non-compliance is requested for only eight months,
It would be
unreasonable for the Board to impose substantial costs upon Moore
to attain immediate compliance when there is a substantial
probablilty of new technology being developed during the variance
period which would allow compliance to be attained at a much
lower cost.
The Board will condition this variance upon the use of
coating materials which have a
VOC
content
less than or equal
to
the presently used materials.
A preferable technique would be
to impose a limitation upon the total emissions of VOC5 as well.
Unfortunately, the information presented
in the record is
insufficient to establish such
a limitation,
The only figures
given are for 1982 emission levels,
No indication is given as
to potential, or even expected,
levels, despite the fact that
an increase in production
(as may be expected
in a period of
economic recovery) will result in increased emissions.
In the
future, such petitions should include historical monthly emission
levels (for the last five years, especially during the ozone
season of May to October,
if possible), projections of emission
levels during the period of variance,
and potential emissions
based upon production capacity.
However, the Board finds that denial of the requested
variance would cause an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship upon
Moore and concludes that variance should be granted subject to
the conditions recommended by the Agency, which were not objected
to by Moore in addition to a condition requiring Moore to pursue
complaince alternatives in the manner it has indicated it would
proceed.
This Opinion constitutes
the
~oard~s findings of fact and
conclusions
of
law in this matter,
ORDER
Moore
American Graphics is hereby granted a variance from
Rule
205(n)(1)(C)
of Chapter 2:
Air Pollution, until December 31,
1983,
subject
to
the following conditions:
1.
Moore shall pursue solvent recovery techniques,
shall
hold full one day tests on water based materials at
least once every two weeks and shall make a good faith
effort to achieve compliance with Rule 205(n)(1)(C) as
expeditiously as possible,
2.
On or before May 20,
1983, and every third month
thereafter, Moore shall submit written reports to the
Agency detailing all progress made in achieving
compliance with Rule 205(n)(1)(C) of Chapter
2.
Said
reports shall include information on the quantity and
VOC content of all coatings utilized during the
reporting period,
a description of the status of the
reformulation program, and any other information which
may reasonably be requested by the Agency.
The reports
shall be sent to the following addresses:
—4—
Environmental Protection Agency,
Division of Air Pollution Control,
Control Programs Coordinator,
2200 Churchill Road,
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
Environmental Protection Agency,
Divison of Air Pollution Control,
Region 1
Field Operations Section
1701 South First Avenue
Maywood, Illinois
60153
3.
On or before May 20,
1983, Moore shall apply to the
Agency for all requisite operating permits pursuant to
Rule 103(b)(6)(A)
of Chapter 2.
4.
Within 45 days of the date of this Order, Moore
shall execute
a Certification o~Acceptance and Agreement
to be bound to all terms and conditions of the variance.
Said Certification shall be submitted to the Agency at
2200 Churchill Road, Springfield, Illinois
62706.
The
45—day period shall be held in abeyance during any
period that this matter is being appealed.
The form of
said Certification shall be as follows:
CERTIFICATION
I,
(We)
hereby accepts and agrees to be bound by all terms and conditions
of the Order of the Pollution Control Board in PCB 83—1,
dated
April 21,
1983.
Petitioner
Authorized Agent
Title
Date
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Christan
L. Moffett,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board,
hereby certify that the above Opinion.
d Order
was adopted on the ___________________day of
____________________
1983 by a vote of
g—~
Christan L. Moff4~*.~~)
Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
52-78