ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April
9,
1976
IN THE MATTER OF
)
AMENDMENTS
TO
AIR
POLLUTION
)
R75-4
EPISODE
REGULATIONS
INTERIM OPINION OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Goodman):
On March
21,
1975,
the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(Agency)
filed proposed amendments to Chapter
2, Part II, Rule 205(f)
(2) (c), and Part IV.
The proposed amendments to Part IV were modi-
fied on May 19,
1975 and December 15,
1975.
On August
14,
1975,
the
proposals were remanded by Order of
the Pollution Control Board
(Board)
for further study and resubmittal.
Six hearings were held and sixty-
three exhibits received into evidence.
The Board published the Agency
proposals
in the ~Environmenta1
Register~ volumes #100 and #115,
respectively.
The amendments to Part IV represent a change
in Episode philo-
sophy as that philosophy concerns photochemical oxidants.
Professor
Currie,
in the Opinion accompanying the promulgation of the previous
Episode regulations,
stated Episode philosophy as it was generally
accepted at that time:
“Episode”
is a commonly accepted euphemism for an extraordinary
buildup of air
pollutants
as a result of stagnant weather.
When
there is little wind and little vertical mixing,
often because
of the presence of a layer of warm air above the cool,
emissions
that cause relatively little harm under normal weather condi-
tions can become extremely dangerous.
Such instances have been
thoroughly documented over the past forty years; among them
are the 1948 tragedy in Donora, Pennsylvania, and the 1952
London disaster that is said to have claimed 4000 lives.
Illinois has had episodes that serve as grim reminders
that disaster could strike at any time.
The well—publicized
episode of November,
1969 in Chicago
is one example.
It would be folly to ignore these warning signs and to
rely for protection solely on the ~radual
process of reducing
emissions on a regular basis.
Moreover,
it may be far less
costly,
after reducing regular emissions to a level far below
The Board expresses its appreciation to Mr. Joel D. Arnold and
Ms.
Donna 0. Farley, Administrative Assistants to the Board,
for
their work in this proceeding.
21—169
—2—
those now encountered
in our large metropolitan areas,
to
avoid remaining pollution peaks due to abnormal weather condi-
tions by invoking extraordinary episode controls than to insist
on controlling for the worst day every day.
In re Air
Pollution Episode Revisions,
P70-7 at
1
(December
9,
1970)
Although the Episode Regulations were amended on August
15,
1972,
the Episode philosophy remained the same.
See In the Matter of
Proposed Amendments
to Episode Regulation,
R72-6.
Since the promul-
gation of the current regulations, massive research on ozone and
photochemical oxidants has been completed and more projects are
currently underway.
It has become apparent that ozone and photo—
chemical oxidants are sui generis.
Medical Effects
A major question addressed by the proposed amendments
is
the
effect of ozone on the health of the population and at what level
certain strategies should be implemented with the object of reducing
this ozone concentration.
Ozone has been determined to be
a serious
pollutant,
indeed Dr. Bertram W. Carnow
(Director of the Environ-
mental Health Resource Center of the Institute For Environmental
Quality and Medical Director of the Chicaqo Lung Association)
,
states
that “ozone
is certainly the most serious
of all pollutants”
(P.106)
Photochemical oxidants affect the human mucus linings and lung tissue
cause chromosomal breaks,
are occulrir irritants and cause red blood
cell fragility as well
as enzyme mo3ifications
(Ex.
53)
During the hearings on the proposed amendments
to the episode
regulations, medical testimony was received from Dr. Carnow,
Dr.
Edward
J.
Calabrese
(Assistant l’rofessor of Environmental Medicine
at the University
o1
Illinois Medical School
and
Assistant
Director
of Environmental Health Resource Center of IEQ)
,
Dr. Kent
K. Knock
(Illinois EPA Toxicologist),
R.A. Wadden,
PhD.
(University of
Illinois Medical Center)
and J.W. Masterson
(Chief Statistician,
Chicago Board of Health).
The witnesses and their supporting exhibits stressed the
importance of the fact that most research in the area involved
healthy,
low risk, members of the population.
Therefore,
the results
of the research may not adequately reflect the danger to that portion
of the population in the high risk categories.
High risk categories
would
include young people,
those carrying on heavy physical
activity,
people with asthma,
chronic bronchitis, emphysema,
heart
disease,
smokers,
glucose-6—phosphate dehydrogenase
(G-6 PD)
defi-
dent
persons,
and persons with dietary deficiencies with respect to
vitamins C and E, protein, and selenium
(Ex.
53)
Human exposure to 0,5 ppm of ozone
for three hours per day,
six
days a week for twelve weeks,
resulted
in
a decrease
in lung capacity
for as long as six weeks after exposure.
Two hour exposure to 0.37
ppm resulted in a significant decrease in lung capacity for over 90
of the people tested
(Ex.
7 and 53).
In a study of Los Angeles student nurses,
daily eye discomfort
increased as daily maximum photochemical oxidant levels exceeded 0.15
to 0.19 ppm.
Cough and chest discomfort remained relatively constant
until 0,30
to 0.39
ppm,
at which time the rates of both symptoms in-
creased markedly.
Headache without fever began a slight but constant
increase at levels of
0,1 to 0.14 ppm and marked acceleration oc-
curred at
0.30 to 039
ppm.
(Ex.
25)
The American Conference
of Governmental Industrial Hygienists
concluded that ozone
is a “highly injurious and lethal gas at rela-
tively low concentration
(a few ppm)
and at short exposure periods
(a few hOurs).”
At lower concentrations, ozone may “initiate,
accelerate or exacerbate respiratory tract disease of bacterial
origin.”
Although there
is no manifest injury at concentrations
of 0.1 ppm, this
level may result in premature aging similar
to con-
tinued exposure to ionizing radiation
(Ex.
21).
The Board notes
that the Threshold Limit Value
(TLV)
for ozone
is 0.1 ppm based upon
an eight—hour exposure,
five days per week.
In
a
study of athletic performance
in the Los Angeles area,
an
analysis was made of the correlation between poor performance and
levels of
several pollutants.
Direct correlation was found with
oxidant levels one hour before the race
(Ex.
21)
It has been shown that ozone affects red blood corpuscles and
the release of oxygen from hemoglobin
(Ex.
53)
,
and that it also
results
in chromosome breakage
in man
(Ex.
53, P.116,
1415)
It has also been shown that ozone and sulfur dioxide act syner-
gistically.
Using maximal expiratory flow rate
(MEFR)
at
50
vital
capacity as an index,
it was found that,
at 0.37 ppm ozone, a two hour
period was needed to show
a significant effect of MEFR.
However, when
0.37 ppm SO2 was also present, only
30 minutes passed before substan-
tially similar effects occurred.
(Exs.
25,
53, and R.150)
.
In
addition,
as mentioned previously,
persons with
a G-6 PD deficiency
would have an acute hemolytic response;
i.e., red blood cells are
destroyed resulting in hemolytic anemia, when exposed to 0.3 or 0.4
ppm ozone for not more than
3 hours.
It is
significant that thirteen
percent of the black population
in Cook County or 240,000 persons
in
the Chicago Area have this deficiency
(R.l55—6)
Dr. Carnow testified that, according to the National Academy of
Science,
there is no threshhold below which everyone can be protected
(P.1420).
In addition,
there is some evidence that ozone
is
a
21—171
—4—
co—carcinogen.
Ozone inactivates an enzyme called benzopyrene hy-
droxylase, which destroys benzopyrene,
a known carcinogen
(R.1446)
The Board
notes that there is a need for more epidemiological
in—
vestigations of ozone’s health effects on exposed populations.
From
the foregoing review of the record,
the Board must conclude that ozone
is an extremely dangerous pollutant, not only at high concentrations
(that
is, above 0.37
ppm)
but also
at lower levels where
symptoms
are less pronounced.
Ozone Formation
Ozone
(03)
is the product of the photolysis of NO2
in the air.
a reversible reaction NO2
is photolyzed by ultraviolet light from
the sun to form NO and
0;
the 0 then reacts with 02 to form 03.
In
ordinary circumstances the NO will act as
a scavenger, picking up the
extra atom of oxygen from ozone to form N02 and
02.
However,
the
presence of hydrocarbons causes the reversible action to become un-
balanced and NO
is converted into NO2 faster than NO2
is dissociated
into NO and 0.
This results in
a build up of ozone
in the atmosphere
arid at the same time reduces the amount of NO available
to scavenge
the ozone by reacting with it
(Exs.
6,
22,
52)
.
The diagram and chart
on the following page illustrate the photolysis
cycle.
Dr. Kent Knock,
the Agency’s Toxic Substance Specialist,
supported the ozone formation theory as described above.
In additior
he stressed the importance
of the ratios of hydrocarbons
to nitrogen
oxides in ozone production
(P.440—41)
.
Another factor
in ozone pro-
duction
is hydrocarbon reactivity
as measured by the speed with which
they react photochemically.
There
is some evidence that less reactive
organics may, due to their slower reaction rates, contribute
to ele-
vated ozone levels over wider areas and for longer periods of time
than highly reactive organics
(P.441).
Sulfur compounds may also con-
tribute to ozone formation
(R.442)
The presence of high concentrations of ozone seems
to follow
a
diurnal cycle.
Ozone concentrations increase
in the presence of
sunlight to a mid-day peak then decrease
in the evening.
The de-
crease apparently results
from the cessation of ozone formation at
night accompanied by the continued scavenging effect of NO together
with surface contact
(R.444,
Ex.
22).
Other factors found to be
associated with high ozone concentrations are high temperatures
and
low wind speed
(Exs.
6,
28).
Quon and Wadden in Oxidants
in the Urban Atmosphere analyze
the ratio of hydrocarbons to nitrogen oxides and their effect on
ambient ozone
(Ex.
6)
.
They conclude that low ozone concentrations
will occur at very high or very low precursor ratios.
Altering
these ratios through emission control of one pollutant may increase
or decrease ozone levels.
This may be the cause of the phenomenon
known as the “weekend effect.”
Often ozone increases during the
weekend due to the change in the precursor ratio between hydrocarbons
—4a—
PHOTO C
EM
ICA I
c
13Y-PEIODUCIS
Figure
1.
Photochemical
production of
oxidants.
TABLE
1,
SIMPLIFiED
SUMM/\RY
OF
CHEMICAL
REACTIONS
FOR PRODUCTION
OF OXIDANTS
O
DXUJA~ION
OF
UHGANIC
COMPOUJIJS ro
FORM
PEFIOXY
RADICALS
02
CH3CH
CH2+ 0lI.—~,~CH3CH2-O-O+
112C0
PROPYLENE
PEROXY
RADICAL
FORMALDEHYDE
O
ALDEIIYDES+ 02+
SUNLIGHT--ADDITIONAL
PEr.OXY
RADICALS
o
PEROXY
RADICALS CONVERT
NO
TO
NO2
CH3CII2-O.O~+
NO
-s-N02+
CH3
CH2-0
tH3CU2-0+ 02-*-H02+
CH3HCD ACETA1.~DEH~DE
H02+ NO
-~-NO2
011
UP TO FOUR CONVERSIONS FOR EACH
CA~1BON
ATOM
G
OZONE
FORMING
IIEACTI
ON
N02i-02
~NO+O3
ULTRA-VIOLET
O
OZONE SCAVENGING
REACTION
NO+
03—”-N02+
02
•
VI~OTOCUEMICM. ?-I~RO0UCTS
~1MED
ALDEIIYDES, PAN, AEROSOLS,
NITRIC ACID.
11202, 011,
CO2
21
—
172A
—5—
and nitrogen oxides which results
in reducing the relative amount of
NO available to scavenge ozone
(Exs.
28,
52).
In the past,
ozone control strategies have often been based
upon reactivity scales which rank individual hydrocarbons on the
basis of the celerity with which they react photochemically.
The
premise was that if the more reactive materials were controlled
or replaced by less reactive materials,
ozone concentrations would
be reduced.
Quon and Wadden feel that this is
still a viable control
technique
(Ex.
6).
Recent studies conclude that past reactivity
classification has been incomplete
and, at times, erroneous
(Exs.
10,
52).
Transport of atmospheric oxidants
is also becoming recog-
nized as a critical factor
in ozone distribution
(Ex.
52).
The emerg-
ing theory
is that all hydrocarbons react photochemically;
the
less reactive hydrocarbons affecting ozone concentrations farther
downwind from the emission source
(Ex.
52, P.441).
Transport
During the past few years
it has become apparent that the
photochemical oxidant problem is not limited to the urbanized areas
of the country.
Ozone levels
in rural areas have been measured at
levels equal to or greater than urban areas
(Ex.
18,
28,
52,
60)
Sources
of rural ozone include:
(1)
downward transport from
the stratosphere;
(2)
generation
from hydrocarbons emitted by vege-
tation;
(3) man—made
(anthropogenic)
emissions from urban areas
transported to rural areas
(Ex.
52)
The U.S. EPA classify the first two sources as
“natural” sources.
These natural sources may contribute up to 0.05 ppm to rural ozone
levels
(Ex.
52)
.
Levels above 0.05
in rural areas have some anthro-
pogenic contribution.
Recent Illinois data show that transport
together with natural emission sources may result in levels exceeding
0.15 ppm.
(Ex.
60,
61).
Agency testimony stated that Illinois could
exceed 0.07 ppm even on days when industry and mobile sources had
completely ceased emissions
(P.1510).
The U.S.
EPA,
in its latest publication with reference to control
of pI’iotochemical oxidants, made the following assessment of the trans-
port-formation problem:
Oxidants can be formed over long time periods
during stagnant conditions in high pressure
systems or during transport of oxidants and
21
—173
—6—
precursors.
This
implies
that
the
long-term
behavior of oxidants and precursors
is
an im-
portant contributor to oxidant concentrations.
It also implies that less reactive organic
compounds..
.
can contribute to observed oxidant
levels... .The studies
indicate that man-made
emissions of hydrocarbons are.,.the predominant
source of the highest
levels of oxidant.
(Ex.
52)
L.G. Polgar and R.J. Londergan,
in an Article entitled “Ozone
Formation and Transport” came to the following conclusion:
Local contributions
to ground level ozone,
at least out
to 30 km, appear to be definitely
a minOrity.
.
.
component
of net ambient ozone...
Liocal,
or even small-regional
scale strategies may not prove to be as successful
in
reducing ambient ozone as had been thought
(Ex.
28).
We conclude that in the summer there exists an “ocean of ozone”
which often blankets large areas of the country.
This blanket, at
least in concentrations below
.15 ppm,
does not seem to react to
episode emission control
strategies
in local areas
(P.1306—08, 1317,
1497,
Exs.
28,
52,
60).
Control Strategies
In the past,
episode strategies have been based upon the
premise that reduction of emissions would result
in immediately
measurable reduction of pollution levels.
Ozone,
however, does
not react in the same manner as most pollutants.
As we have dis-
cussed above,
high ozone concentrations may blanket parts of the
State, without regard to local influences.
(See also P.C. March
16,
1976,
Memo to Board Members from D.O,
Farley
Re:
APCA Ozone
Specialty Conference.)
Unlike other controlled air pollutants,
ozone
is formed in the
air,
and is not emitted
from a
source.
It cannot be traced to speci-
fic sources due to the involvement of numerous precursors and to the
strong influence of meteorology on its distribution.
The following
variables influence the capability of controlling short-term episodes
at high ozone concentrations:
1.
Prediction of the occurrence or reoccurrence of high
ozone levels.
There
is general concensus that initial
high ozone occurrence
cannot be predicted.
Given high
ozone on one day,
however,
the Agency believes
it can pre-
dict its reoccurrence on the following day.
This
is based
on monitoring the meteorological conditions over an area,
21 —174
—7—
in which ozone levels are accumulating
(P.684—744,
806-875)
2.
Identification of the sources of hydrocarbon and NO~emissions
which are the precursors of high ozone
in an area.
This in-
volves determining what fraction of the ozone or precursors
are transported into the area with incoming air masses.
From
there,
the location of the sources of precursor emissions
(both local and transported)
must be identified,
in order
to
apply episode controls to those emissions.
Dispersion
analyses presently available for source identification are
crude methods
(P.684—744,
1322)
3.
Im~plernentationof an emission control strategy,
to reduce
emissions from the identified sources.
The Agency strategy
is to reduce hydrocarbon and NO~emissions from stationary
and vehicular sources.
The effectiveness of the strategy
will depend on the validity of emission inventories being
used to estimate reductions,
the strength of source action
plans, and the effectiveness of vehicular controls (R.lOlO-
1041,
1083—1100,
Exs.
23,
27,
44)
4.
The resulting effect of emission reduction on ambient
levels of ozone.
Control will be most effective
if
a
large fraction of local ambient ozone is obtained from
local emissions.
This would be most likely
to occur when
a stagnant high pressure system is over an area, with
pollutants accumulating
in it and little transport taking
place.
The effectiveness may also depend on the resulting
ratio of hydrocarbons to NO~ in the air,
and on the change
in mix of hydrocarbons
in terms of their reactivities.
It
is conceivable that emission reduction actions could be
followed by unchanged or even increased ozone concentrations.
All of the meteorological,
chemical,
and control variables
must interact effectively to yield an ozone reduction
(P.684—744,
764—801).
The Agency’s control strategies
as expressed
in their original
episode proposal in this proceeding were based upon the orthodox
episode strategy;
i.e.,
a reduction in emission at point X will
result in
a lowering of pollutant levels at that same place
(Ex.
1).
This strategy was based upon
a ozone monitoring system of ten opera-
tional ozone monitors
(P.30).
By the end of the 1975 ozone season,
the Agency had twenty—four ozone monitors in operation throughout
the state
(P.1251).
After analyzing the data from these monitors
the Agency shifted its control strategy emphasis
(Ex.
47)
.
The
Agency discovered that ozone control actions
at levels below
0.15
ppm are very likely to be meaningless due to the ozone blanket con-
taining concentrations
in excess of
0.1 ppm
(P.1306-7,
1319).
The
21
—
175
—8—
Agency stated that the complexity of the ozone cycle would make
strong emission reductions
in both the mobile and stationary source
areas of doubtful efficacy
at levels before 0.15
to 0.2 ppm
(P.1319).
Therefore,
the Agency proposes that strong emission control
strategies be moved to the Red Alert levels of 0.3 ppm
(Ex.
47).
At levels below the Red Alert,
the Agency contends that it is
hopeless to reduce the concentrations throughout the state through
episode strategies
(R.1508).
This theory
is supported by the Federal
experience
(Ex.
52)
At levels below
0.3 ppm,
the proposed control
strategies are
nearly
100
nondisruptive
(P.1373).
The Agency believes that the
best episode plan of action at these levels
is to notify persons who
are highly susceptible and to advise those persons of possible health
precautions which they can take to protect themselves
from ozone ex-
posure
(P.1306-7,
1508)
.
The Board believes that these conclusions
are well founded and that for photochemical oxidant episodes such a
shift in episode strategy
is mandatory.
The proposed strategies
above the level of 0,3 ppm would allow
the Agency
to control emissions not only in areas experiencing ele-
vated levels but also in those areas contributing to the elevated
levels due to transport
(P.1312
see proposed Rule 402(f)).
While controls below 0.3 ppm are generally voluntary
(except
for prohibition of incineration and open burning)
,
above that level,
controls become mandatory,
The
mandatory actions include strong
mobile as well as stationary source control.
The Board believes that the only effective method for controlling
ozone episodes is a constant emission reduction strategy.
(P.1506,
Ex.
6,
26,
28,
52).
The oxidant problem is not a local problem and
will not respond to local remedies,
What
is needed is
a regional or
perhaps nation-wide precursor reduction program.
The Board will adopt the Agency’s December
15,
1975 proposal
for amendment to the Episode Regulations as these amendments relate
to photochemical oxidants,
except for certain minor changes.
The
Board will dismiss that portion of the Agency’s proposal which relate
to pollutants other than photochemical oxidants due to the lack of
evidence in the record to support those changes.
The Board will
also adopt those
internal procedural
amendments proposed by the
Agency.
The following
is
a rule by rule explanation of the major amend-
ments to the Episode Regulations:
Rule
401:
The Preamble has been deleted,
The definitions
21
—
176
—9—
pertinent to Part IV have taken the Preamble’s place, ex-
cluding those definitions previously defined in Parts
I and
II of Chapter
2.
Minor definitional changes have been made
for clarity.
Definitions of the terms “Episode,”
“Fleet
Vehicle,”
“Indirect Source,” “Low Sulfur Fuel,” and “Parking
Lots,” have been added.
Rule 402(a):
This rule
is new and clarifies the role of
the Agency as the sole authority for declaration of episode
stages and
is intended to prevent the issuance of conflicting
emergency orders.
Rule 402(b):
This rule
is substantially the same
as old
Rule
404,
Rule 402(c):
This rule presents the basic sources of
meteorological information which the Agency may rely upon.
It
is
a non—exclusive list and is intended to provide the
Agency with needed flexibility.
In the case of ozone Episodes,
the following minimal guidelines will be used by the Agency in
addition to those which may be developed as more research
is
undertaken:
1)
No significant air mass change for the
next twenty-four hours;
2)
Forecast a maximum temperature equal to or ex-
ceeding 58°F.;
3)
Forecast sky conditions for 1100 hours local
time of 0.8 cloud coverage or less;
4)
Surface winds southerly less than 20 MPH.
If
not southerly,
less than 15
MPH
(P.1202, 1927).
The Board feels that the language contained in this
Rule must be “general”
as the state of the art changes
from month to month.
Rule 402 (d):
The purpose of this Rule is to provide the
Agency with added flexibility in that all emission infor-
mation sources may be consulted in determining expected
contaminant emissions.
Rule 402(e):
These Rules are substantially the same as
old Rule
405.
As the Board believes these matters to be
of regional or national concern,
it is
in the State’s best
21 —177
—10—
interest to follow Federal guidelines rather than initiating
its own.
402(e)(2)
requires that sampling instruments be
checked for accuracy before their data are utilized.
Rule 402(f):
This Rule provides the procedures
to be
followed in determining which areas will be subject to
Watch, Advisory, Alert, or Emergency declarations.
Note
that this Rule allows the Agency to initiate Episode
actions
in those areas contributing
to an Episode occur-
rence in another area.
Rule 402 (g):
This Rule provides that those persons who
fail to comply with the lawful orders of the Agency during
an Episode will be subject to the penalties enumerated
in
the Act.
Rule 402(h):
This Rule limits the Agency’s sealing powers
to those provided by the Act.
Rule
403:
Rules 403(a),(b),(c)
and
(d)
are substantially
the same as old Rules
411(b) (1), (2)
,
(3)
and
(4).
Rule
403(e)
is new and requires local agencies to file with the
Agency Episode operation plans describing procedures
local
agencies intend to implement in their routine and Episode
operations.
Rule
404:
This Rule replaces old Rule
410.
Its purpose
is to require plans from significant air contaminant
emission sources.
Rule 404(a):
This Rule requires the submission of plans
~~igned
to reduce the emission of contaminants during
Episodes, on forms to be provided by the Agency, within
180 days of Part IV’s effective date.
Note that Rule
404(c) (2) may require the submission of a plan within
30
days of notification.
Rule
404 (b):
This Rule lists those facilities which are
required to file action plans with the State.
Note that
nuclear power stations are exempted by subsection
(1)
.
Sub-
section
(2) exempts those fuel combustion emission sources
which are not required, by Part I of this Chapter, to obtain
a permit.
Subsection
(5) exempts those parking lots
in major
metropolitan areas exceeding 200 spaces which predominantly
serve residences, medical facilities,
transportation termi-
nals, grocery stores and pharmacies,
and employee lots.
21 —178
—11—
Similarly,
subsection
(6) exempts
fleet vehicles used
for delivery of grocery, pharmaceutical and medical pro-
ducts.
The purpose of this Rule is
to require action
plans from all significant air contaminant emission sources.
The fact that
a source
is not required to file an action
plan does not relieve
it of its duty to conform to those
actions required by Part IV.
Rule 404 (c)
:
This Rule requires facilities filing action
plans to inform the Agency of any operational changes which
might affect action plans.
The Agency may require action
plans to be revised.
Subsection
(2) allows the Agency to
request an action plan within
30 days of notification.
Sub-
section
(1)
enumerates those Agencies
to which action plans
are to be submitted on the basis of geographical
area.
Rule 404 (d):
This Rule specifies the minimal contents of
action plans including significant air contaminant source
locations,
emission reduction plans and expected effective-
ness thereof for each episode
level.
Subsection
(2)
requires
stockpiling of low sulfur fuel for certain facilities.
Sub-
sections
(3)
and
(4) are related to plans for parking lots and
fleet vehicles.
Subsection
(5) requires that plans include
methods by which compliance with the emission reduction action
tables will be achieved.
Rule 404(e):
This Rule merely restates old Rule 4l0(f),(h)
and
(i).
Rule
405:
This Rule describes the criteria for declaring the
episode stages.
Rule 405(a):
This
is a chart which sets the levels and
averaging time for each episode stage.
The only changes
which have been made are found in the ozone criteria.
We
have deleted the watch level and replaced it with an “advisory”
at
.07 ppm based upon a two—hour average.
The purpose of an
advisory
is to alert those portions of the population which
are considered
to be high risk.
An ozone advisory does not
initiate that portion of watch procedures requiring
24 hour
surveillance of monitors.
It does require the Agency to
issue
a warning to the high risk group described previously
in this Opinion.
Although the Agency contended that setting
the level
at .07 ppm would result
in
a blase attitude on the
part of the news media and those affected, the Board believes
that the health consequences are significant enough to retain
this level.
The Board believes that those persons
in the high
21
—
179
—12--
risk
category
must
he
warned.
As
the
Agency
has
provided
no
evidence
to
show
that
this
group
would
ignore
repeated
warn-
ings,
the
0.07
ppm
standard
is
retained.
The Yellow Alert level has been set at 0.17 ppm based upon
a one—hour average.
The level
is derived from medical evidence
presented
to the Board,
Its purpose
is threefold:
1)
To warn
those portions of the population which, although not in the
high risk category, may be affected at these
levels.
As most
of the research shows adverse effects at levels of 0.2
ppm and above for young healthy adults, the 0.17 ppm level
is
to warn those portions of the population which may not be
young or healthy but at the same time are not within the high
risk category.
(2) The Yellow Alert places the Agency on 24
hour alert and initiates voluntary and required actions.
(3)
The Yellow Alert will announce to those facilities having
action plans that they must begin consideration of the implemen-
tation of those plans.
The Red Alert level
is 0.30 ppm on a one—hour average.
While this level
is also based upon health,
in that the entire
population
is adversely affected,
it is also the level at which
emission reductions will affect ozone formation.
The Emergency level has been lowered to 0.50 ppm on a one—
hour average to conform to Federal guidelines and prevent the
occurrence of
0.6,
the significant harm level.
Rule 405(b):
This Rule states the criteria for declaring
a Watch or,
in the case of ozone,
an Advisory.
The criteria
are based upon meteorological factors.
Note the improved
language reflecting ozone’s peculiar diurnal cycle through-
out Rule
405,
Rules 405(c) Cd) and
(e):
These Rules state the criteria
~
declaring yellow, red and emergency episode stages,
respectively.
Each requires that the previous episode stage
has been in effect for a specified time period,
i.e.,
4 hours
each for Yellow and Red Alerts,
12 hours for Emergency.
In
addition the alert level for that episode stage must have
been equaled or exceeded and meteorological
forecasts indicate
that no substantial improvements
in conditions will occur
in
the next
12 hours.
The Red Alert or Emergency episode stage
may also be declared even though its contaminant level has
not been equalled or exceeded if the previous alert level has
been equalled or exceeded for the preceding
24 hour period
and all other requirements have been met.
21—180
-13-
Rule 405(f):
This Rule provides the Agency with authority
to terminate Episode stages.
Rule
406:
This Rule sets forth those parties
to be notified
in the event of an episode stage and the contents of the
notification.
Rule 407(a):
This Rule describes actions to be taken
at
the Watch or Advisory Stage.
Note that in the case of an
ozone Advisory,
the Agency need not gear up until the Yellow
Alert level
is reached.
Rule 407(b):
This Rule describes the actions to be taken
at
the Yellow, Red and Emergency stages.
This would
include the
implementation of approved action plans and those actions set
forth in the “Required Emission Reduction”
charts.
Chart
2
does not change actions from those required in the present
Rules;
it merely combines them into one chart.
Exhibits
27
and
44 present estimated ozone precursor emission reductions
based upon the actions enumerated
in Chart
I at the Red Alert
stage.
The total reduction for organics would be approxi-
mately 60.
The total reduction in nitrogen oxides would be
approximately 32.
Note that mobile sources account for 50
of the organic emissions.
Chapter
2, Part
II, Rule 205(f) (2) (c) deletes the exception to
the eight pound per hour rule during
a watch, alert or emer-
gency stage.
Emergency Regulation
On March 15,
1976,
the Agency filed a motion with the Board
seeking the enactment of these amendments under the emergency pro-
visions of the Environmental Protection Act.
Chapter 111
1/2 section
1027(b)
of the Illinois Revised Statutes
(1975)
states that before
adoption of any regulations or amendments to existing regulations,
the Board must conduct economic impact hearings.
That same section
provides an exception to the economic impact hearing procedure where
a severe public health emergency
is involved:
When the Board finds that a severe public health
emergency is involved in relation to any proposed
regulation,
the Board may provide that such regu-
lation shall take effect without delay and permit
the Board
to proceed with the required hearings and
studies while the regulation continues in effect.
21—181
—14—
The
Board
holds
that
a severe public health emergency
is in-
volved in relation to the proposed episode regulations.
The ozone
season begins in May,
and to wait until economic impact hearings
are held would result
in delaying promulgation of these regulations
until the 1977 ozone season.
Therefore the proposed amendments to
the Episode Regulations shall take effect without delay, and the
Board will proceed with economic impact hearings and studies while
the regulations continue in effect.
Section 1028 of Chapter
111 1/2 of the Illinois Revised
Statutes
(1975)
provides:
No rule or regulation,
or amendment or repeal there-
of, shall become effective until a certified copy
thereof has been filed with the Secretary of State,
and
thereafter
as provided
in “An Act concerning adrninistra—
tive rules,” approved June
14,
1951 as amended.
Section 266 of “An Act concerning administrative rules”
(Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1975, Chapter 127 §266)
states:
266.
Certified copies of new rules
to be filed with
Secretary of State—Effective date of rules
§4.
A
certified copy of every rule adopted by an agency
subsequent to the effective date hereof shall be filed
with the Secretary of State and no such rule shall
become effective less than ten days after the copy
thereof has been
so filed, except that,
in
case of
emergency,
a rule may become effective immediately
upon such filing
if accompanied by a certificate
executed by the director,
chairman or officer
in
charge of the agency stating the specific reasons
for the emergency.
The proposed regulations will be filed with the Secretary of
State in the manner prescribed by Section
266
so as to become effec-
tive immediately upon said filing.
In promulgating
these regulations,
the Board
is of the opinion
that a necessary corollary to them is effective continuous emission
control of ozone precursors.
The Board therefore strongly urges
that the Agency,
the Institute and the U.S. EPA quickly review their
current continuous control philosphy.
This would include
a redefi--
nition of reactivity and a close scrutinization of current precur-
sor emission limitations.
Mr. Jacob D. Dumelle concurs and will file a Concurring Opinion.
—15—
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board hereby certify the above Interim Opinion was adopted on the
9th day of April,
1976 by a vote of
5-0.
Christan
L.
Moff
,
Clerk
Illinois
Pollutio
ontrol
Board
21
—
1R~
