ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    May 29, 1974
    ARVEY
    CORPORATION,
    LAMCOTE
    DIVISION,
    )
    Petitioner,
    vs.
    )
    PCB 74-110
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    )
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Seaman):
    This is
    a Petition for a Variance brought by the Arvey Corporation,
    Lamcote Division, hereinafter (Petitioner)
    and filed with the
    Environmental Protection Agency, hereinafter (Agency) on March
    26, 1974.
    Petitioner operates a facility
    in Chicago which
    is engaged in,
    among other things, plastic laminating of paper, copper and aluminum
    foil, plastic
    impregnation of wire mesh with photochemically reactive
    organic solvent containing adhesives and materials which
    are batch
    mixed
    at the facility and the combining of plastic films
    for the
    numerical control
    tapes
    industry,
    Petitioner~soperation includes eight
    coater/laminating machines.
    Petitioner is seeking a one year variance from Rule 205(f)
    of the Air Pollution Control
    Regulations
    in order to continue emitting
    photochemically reactive hydrocarbons in excess of the prescribed
    standard.
    Petitioner states
    in
    its operating permit application
    that the
    combined maximum emission rate of photochemically reactive hydrocarbons
    from the eight coater/larninating machines
    is 650.5
    lbs/hr.
    Rule 205(f)
    limits
    the emission of photochemicaily reactive hydrocarbons to 8 lbs/hr
    per source.
    .
    Petitioner submitted a compliance plan to the Agency
    in the
    Spring of 1973.
    Said plan stated that Rule 205(f) would be complied
    with by
    December 31,
    1973 by switching to exempt solvents.
    Petitioner
    has attempted to make the switch, but now finds
    that it
    is not possible
    to obtain a sufficient quantity of exempt solvents.
    Petitioner now
    plans
    to achieve compliance
    as soon as
    it
    ~s possible to obtain exempt solvents.
    In the meantime, Petitioner
    12
    —
    453
    —2—
    states that it will use Toluene only when it
    is
    unable to obtain
    methyl
    ethyl
    ketone or isopropal alcohol,
    and that it will not use
    Toluene for general purpose cleaning or for formulation
    in non-essential
    commercial
    products.
    Petitioner’s facility is
    located in
    an industrial
    area.
    The Agency
    has received no complaints from anyone living or working in the vicinity
    of the plant regarding the granting of
    a variance, or the excessive
    emissions.
    The Agency
    is
    in agreement with Petitioner that denial
    of the variance
    would cause
    a hardship and is
    aware of the current nationwide shortage
    of non-photochemically reactive solvents and notes that Petitioner
    is
    not unique
    in
    its inability to obtain such solvents.
    The Agency also
    believes that due to the current shortage of natural
    gas, thermal
    incineration
    is not, at this time,
    a viable means
    by which Petitioner may achieve
    compliance with Rule 205(f).
    The Agency recommends that Petitioner be granted
    a variance from
    Rule 205 (f)
    for a period
    of one
    year,
    subject
    to certain conditions.
    This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of
    law of the Board.
    IT
    IS THE ORDER of
    the
    Pollution Control Board that Petitioner be
    granted
    a variance from the provisions
    of
    Ru~e
    205(f) of the Air Pollution
    Regulations
    for a period
    of
    one year from
    the
    date of this Order, subject
    to
    the
    following conditions:
    a.
    Commencing
    45
    days
    after the date of this Order,
    Petitioner
    ~hal
    submit monthly progress reports
    to
    the Agency detailing:
    total
    amount of solvents used during the month;
    2.
    nature
    and
    amount of non-exempt solvents used;
    3.
    nature
    and
    amount of exempt solvents used;
    4.
    nature
    and
    amount
    of
    exempt solvents purchased
    (indicating
    the
    supplier);
    5.
    nature and amount of non-exempt solvents purchased
    (indicating the supplier);
    6.
    nature and amount of solvents
    in inventory at the
    beginning of each month.
    Said reports shall
    be submitted to:
    Environmental Protection Agency
    Division of
    Air
    Pollution
    Control
    Control
    Program Coordinator
    2200 Churchill
    Road
    Springfield, Illinois
    62706
    12 -~4~
    —3—
    b.
    Petitioner shall
    utilize as much exempt solvent formulations
    as
    can be furnished by its suppliers.
    c.
    Within
    one hundred and eighty days of the date of this Order,
    Petitioner shall
    submit
    a revised compliance plan to
    the Agency. This
    plan may:
    1)
    Achieve compliance at the expiration of the
    Variance by replacement of photochemically reactive solvents
    with non—reactive solvents demonstrated to be readily available;
    or
    2)
    Achieve compliance at the expiration of the Variance
    by qualification under the Alternative Standard of Rule 2O5(f)(l);
    or
    3)
    Achieve compliance by May 30,
    1975 under the provisions
    of Rule 2O5(f)(2)(D).
    I,
    Christan
    L.
    Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board,
    certify that the above Opinion
    and Order was adopted on
    this
    ~
    day of
    ,
    1974 by a vote of
    .~—
    YT~..
    .. ...
    12
    —455

    Back to top