ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

August

4,

1977

AMERICAN CAN COMPANY,

)

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 77—144

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

AGENCY,

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr. Goodman):

On May 27, 1977, American Can Company submitted a petition for

variance from certain portions of the Board~sOrder in PCB 73-515.

The Agency submitted its recommendation on August

1,

1977.

American

Can waived the right to a hearing on its petition, and no hearing

has been held.

American Can operates a plant at 6017 South Western Avenue in

Chicago for the production of containers.

The facility has eight

coater-ovens and nine litho-varnish units.

in PCB 73-515,

which was

an odor nuisance enforcement action,

the Board ordered American Can

to up—date the 17 afterburners used on their ovens and/or convert the

material used in the manufacturing process

to non—photochemically

reactive material such as water—based material.

In PCB 75—311,

American Can was granted

a variance from the prior Board Order for

three of the coater—ovens and three of the varnish units.

All of

the remaining units had been converted to the use of water-based

varnishes or coatings.

American Can now seeks

an extension of the

variance granted in PCB 75-311,

American Can alleges and the Agency agrees

that the plant is

presently in full compliance with Rule

205,

The units are now

utilizing either non—photocheinically reactive coatings or water-base

coatings.

As

to the odor nuisance aspect of Rule 205(f),

both the

company and the Agency indicate that no odor complaints have been

received within the past year.

---

The

pureDse

a

o~c~i~a

t3caru )rder req~i~tn~

conversion to

water—based inter

i~

to e~imate the odor

~san-~e affecting

the

surrounding area

~a~er,

bised upon the ~n~or~nation submitted

by

American Can a~d

hi c

~

the present r~at~r,there

is no

indication that

d

i

odo

~

~

a~exist~.

s~ering the

allegations that

~e

-

pa~

~aullcop~~:~ ‘;~thRule 205(f)

and that no odor compi~

t

~~

been recei

~,

the Board

is unable

to

find that Aracrican C~ ha~d~Iorn~Lrated~he reed for a variance.

Accordingly,

the Boaid

~eth

3~sr~is~e~

the petitIon for variance

without prejudice~

This Opinion co~

te~tth ii~oicyoo: fst and conclusions

of law of the Board an ~

i~

~a-ter

It is the Order of

cc Po~iut~oc~tro1 Board that the petition

for

variance filed here~.be ~nd

is

m

by disrrissed without preju-,

dice,

I,

Christan L~~Iof~tt,

bii

Illinois Pollution Control

Board,

hereby certify

~h~t

I

a thve (ninlor and Grder were adopted

on

theda~

1977 by a vote of

£~

Illinois Pollution

.rol Board