CLERK’S OFFICE

BEFORE

THE ILLINOIS

POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

AUG 13 2004

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

STATEOFILLINO,S

Pollution

Controi Board

Complainant,

vs.

COLOR COMMUNICATIONS,

INC.,

an

)

(Air-Enforcement)

Illinois corporation,

Respondent.

To:

Mr. Karl Karg,

Attorney for Respondent

Latham & Watkins

Sears Tower,

Suite 5800

233

5.

Wacker Drive

Chicago,

IL

60606

NOTICE

OF FILING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that we have today, August

13,

2004,

filed with the Office of the Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board an original and nine copies of our Complaint,

a

copy of which

is attached herewith and served upon you.

Failure to file an answer to this complaint within 60 days

may have severe consequences.

Failure to answer will mean that

all allegations in the complaint will be taken as

if admitted for

purposes of this proceeding.

If you have any questions about

this procedure,

you should contact the hearing officer assigned

to this proceeding,

the clerk’s office or an attorney.

NOTIFICATION

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that financing may be available

through the Illinois Environmental facilities financing act

20

ILCS 3515/1

et seq.

to correct the alleged pollution.

Respectfully submitted,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

LISA MADIGAN

Attorney General of the

State of Illinois

BY:

~

~-~jLi

i/L~~.

PAULA BECKER WHEELER

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

188 W. Randolph s~•,

20th

Flr.

Chicago,

IL 60601

(312)

814-1511

THIS 000UNENT

IS PRINTED OH RECYCLED PAPER

---

CLERK’S OFFICE

BEFORE

THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

AUG

132004

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

)

STATE OF

Pollution Control Board

Complainant,

-vs-

COLOR COMMUNICATIONS,

INC.,

an

)

(Enforcement

-

Air)

Illinois corporation,

Respondent.

COMPLAINT

Complainant,

People of the State of Illinois, by LISA

MADIGAN,

Attorney General

of the State of Illinois,

complains of

Respondent,

COLOR COMMUNICATIONS,

INC.,

an Illinois corporation,

as follows:

H

COUNT

I

FAILURE TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE PERMANENT

TOTAL ENCLOSURE AND

r

ACHIEVE REQUIRED

CONTROL EFFICIENCY ON COATING LINE

#3

1.

This Complaint

is brought on behalf of the PEOPLE OF

THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

by LISA

MADIGAN,

Attorney General

of the

State of Illinois,

on her own motion and at the request of the

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

(“Illinois EPA”or

“Agency”) pursuant to Section 31

of the Illinois Environmental

Protection Act,

415 ILCS 5/31

(2002)

(“Act”)

2.

The Illinois EPA is an administrative agency

established in the executive branch of the State government by

---

Section

4 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/4

(2002)

,

and charged,

inter

alia,

•with the duty of enforcing the Act.

3.

At all times relevant to this Complaint,

Respondent,

Color Communications,

Inc.

(“Color Communications”)

was and is

the owner and operator of two manufacturing facilities located at

4000 West Fillmore

(“4000 W.

Fillmore facility”)

and 4242 West

Fillmore

(“4242

W.

Fillmore facility”),

Chicago,

Cook County,

Illinois.

4.

Color Communications

is engaged in the manufacture of

customized color display systems such as color books and cards,

color selection books,

and swatch cards and showroom books for

the automotive, decorative

fabric,

furniture,

paint, paper,

plastic laminate,

textile, wall covering,

and window treatment

industries.

5.

Color Communications’

manufacturing operations generate

air emissions of volatile organic material

(“VOM”)

from process

emission sources and associated air pollution control equipment.

6.

The 4000 W.

Fillmore facility and the 4242

W.

Fillmore

facility are adjacent to one another and are considered to be a

single source of air emissions for the purposes of the Clean Air

Act Permit Program

(“CA7~PP”) administered and enforced by

Illinois EPA.

7.

At all times relevant to this complaint, operation of

the air emission sources and control equipment at the 4000

W.

2

---

Fillmore and 4242 W.

Fillmore facilities was authorized pursuant

to CA~kPPpermit 95090040 issued to Color Communications by

Illinois EPA on November

1,

1999 and revised on June 25,

2001

(“CAAPP permit 95090040”)

.

Its present expiration date is

November 1,

2004.

8.

Color Communications’ CAAPP permit 95090040 establishes

air pollutant emission limits and operational,

recordkeeping,

and

reporting requirements for Color Communications’

regulated

process emission sources and control equipment.

9.

Operations at the 4242 W.

Fillmore facility include

manufacture of latex coatings,

color matching, application of

latex and lacquer coatings onto paper or plastic substrates,

and

applIcation of adhesives onto substrates.

The substrates are

formed into rolls of web that are transported to the 4000 W.

Fillmore facility for further processing.

10.

At all times relevant to this complaint, the 4242 W.

Fillmore facility employed five coating lines and three gas-fired

dryin’g ovens to apply the latex and lacquer coatings to the paper

or plastic substrates.

11.

The coating lines and drying ovens at the 4242

W.

Fillmore facility are regulated air emission sources, and their

operation was and is subject

to the terms and conditions

of CAAPP

permit 95090040,

Section 7.1.

3

---

12.

One of the five coating lines at the 4242

W.

Fillmore

facility,

Coating Line

#3,

is located within an enclosure that is

connected by ductwork to a catalytic oxidizer.

The drying oven

associated with Coating Line #3

is also connected by ductwork to

the catalytic oxidizer.

13.

The catalytic oxidizer is designed to reduce the amount

of VOM emitted to the atmosphere from Coating Line

#3 and its

associated oven by combusting the VOM as

it passes over a bed of

catalyst.

14.

The purpose of the enclosure surrounding Coating Line

#3

is to capture VOM emitted during operation of the line so it

can be ducted to the oxidizer and destroyed instead of being

emitted to the atmosphere

as fugitive emissions.

15.

The ducts

to the oxidizer from the Coating Line #3

enclosure and associated drying oven are equipped with bypass

valves.

These exhaust duct bypass valves primarily serve as

safety devices.

16.

During startup, malfunction,

or other non-routine

operation of Coating Line

#3, the bypass valves are supposed to

be open so that exhaust gases from the line’s enclosure and

associated drying oven are vented directly to the atmosphere to

prevent creation of potentially explosive conditions

in the

oxidizer or its tributary ductwork and emission sources.

4

---

17.

During routine, normal operation of Coating Line #3,

the bypass valves are supposed to be closed so that the VON-

containing exhaust gases from the coating line enclosure and

drying oven are vented to the oxidizer and destroyed.

18.

Operations at the 4000

W.

Fillmore facility include

cutting of the rolls Of web produced at 4242 W. Fillmore into

various shapes and sizes,

two flexographic printing lines, and

three lithographic printing lines.

19.

The flexographic printing lines

at the 4000 W.

Fillmore

facility, are regulated air emission sources and their operation

was and is subject to the terms and conditions of CAAPP permit

95090040,

Section’7.3.

20.

Section 9(a)

of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2002),

provides as follows:

NO person. shall:

(a)

Cause

or

threaten or

allow the discharge or

emission

of

any

contaminant

into

the

environment

in any

State

so

as

to

cause

or

tend

to

cause

air

pollution

in

Illinois,

either

alone

or

in

combination

with

contaminants

from other sources,

or

so

as

to

violate

regulations

or

standards

adopted by

the Boar,d under this Act..

21.

Section 3.115

of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/3.115

(2002),

defines air pollution as follows:

,

I!AIR POLLUTION”

is the presence in the atmosphere

of

one

or

more

contaminants

in

sufficient

quantities and of such characteristics and duration

as to be injurious to human, plant,

or animal

life,

5

---

to

health,

or

to

property,

or

to

unreasonably

interfere with the. enjoyment of life or property.

22.

Section 3.165 of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/3.165

(2002),

defines contaminant

as fol1ows~

“CONTAMINANT”

is

any

solid,

liquid,

or

gaseous

matter,

any

odor,

or

any

form

of

energy,

from

whatever source.

23.

Section 3.315 of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/3.315

(2002),

defines person as follows:

“PERSON”

is

any

individual,

partnership,

co-

partnership,

firm,

company,

limited

liability

company,

corporation,

association,

joint

stock

company,

trust,

estate,

political

subdivision,

state agency,

or any other legal entity,

or their

legal representative,

agent or assigns.

24.

Section 211.7150 of the Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 211.7150,

defines VOM as follows:

“Volatile

organic

material

(VOM)”

or

“volatile

organic

compound

(VOC)”

means

any

compound

of

carbon,

excluding carbon monoxide,

carbon dioxide,.

carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and

ammonium

carbonate,

which

.

participates

in

atmospheric photochemical reactions.

.

25.

Color

Communications

is

a

“person”

as

that

term

is

defined in Section 3.315 of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/3.315(2002).

26.

Color Communications’ Coating Line #3 and its

associated oven are sources of

“VON”

as that term is defined in

35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 211.7150.

27.

VON is a “contaminant” as that term is defined by

Section 3.165

of the Act,

41’S ILCS 5/3.165

(2002)

6

---

28.

Section 211.4490 of the Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 211.4490,

defines a paper coating

line as:

“Paper coating line” means a coating line in which

any protective,

decorative,

or

functional

coating

is applied on,

saturated

into’, or impregnated into

paper,

plastic

film,

or

metallic

foil

to

make

certain

products,

including

but

not

limited

to

adhesive tapes and labels, book covers, post cards,

office

copier paper,

drafting paper

and pressure

sensitive

tapes.

For purposes

of

35

Ill.

Adm.

Code

218

and

219,

a paper’coating

line

includes

saturation or impregnation.

29.

Respondents’

Coating Line #3 and its associated oven

are a “paper coating line”

as that term is defined in 35

Ill.

Adm.

Code 211.4490.

30.

Respondent’s operation .of the facility is subject to

the Act and the rules and regulations promulgated by the Illinois

Pollution Control Board

(“Board”)

and the Illinois EPA.

The

Board’s regulations for air pollution are found in Title 35,

Subtitle

B,

Chapter I of the Illinois Administrative Code

(“Board

Air Pollution Regulations”),

and the Illinois EPA rules and

regulations for air pollution are found in Title 35, Subtitle

B,

Chapter II of the Illinois Administrative Code

(“Illinois EPA Air

Pollution Regulations”)

31.

Section 218.204

of

the’ Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 218.204, provides,

in pertinent

part,

as follows:

‘

‘

7

---

Except

as

provided

in

Sections

218.205

and

218.207

.

.

.

of this Subpart, no owner or operator

of

a

coating

line

shall

apply

at

any

time

any

coating

in

which

the

VON

content

exceeds

the

following

emission

limitations

for the

specified.

coating

.

.

*

*

*

(c)

Paper Coating

lb/gal

2.3

*

*

*

32.

Pursuant to 35

Ill.

Adm. Code 218.204(c),

becaus’e Color

Communications’

Coating Line #3 and associated oven are a “paper

coating line,” Color Communications may not apply a coating on

Coating Line

#3

at any time which has a VON content in excess of

2.3 pounds of -VON, per gallon,

less water

(“lbs VON/gal”),

except

as provided in 35

Ill. Adm.

Code 218.205 and 218.207.

Respondent

has chosen Section 218.207(b) (1)

as its method of compliance with

emission limitations.

33.

Section 218.207(b) (1)

of the Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm. Code 218.207(b) (1),

provides,

as

follows:

(b)

Alternative Add-On Control Methodologies

(1)

The

coating

line

.

is

equipped

with

a

capture

system

and

control

device

that

provides

81.

percent

reduction

.

in

the

overall emissions of VON from the coating

line

and

the

control

device

has

a

90

percent efficiency,

or

...

*

*

*

8

---

34.

Pursuant to 35

Ill. Adm. ‘Code 218.207(b) (1),

as an

alternative to applying only compliant coatings on Coating Line

#3

in accordance with Section 218.204(c), Respondent may operate

a capture and control system at all times that Coating Line #3

is

in operation.

35.

To meet the requirements of 35

Ill. Adm.

Code

218.207(b) (1)

on Coating Line #3, Color Communications must

provide a capture system and control device that reduces the VON

emitted by the coating line by at least

81

overall, and the

control device must have an efficiency of at least

90

(i.e.,

it

must destroy at least 90

of the VOM exhausted to it by the

capture system)

.

‘

36.

On March Gthãnd March 8th,

2002,

Illinois EPA

personnel conducted inspections of Color’Communications’ air

emission sources

to determine compliance status.

37.

On March

6,

2002,

four large doors

in the coating line

enclosure providing access to the co’ating line equipment were

propped open with stacks of paint containers.

38.

Based On the accumulation of dust on the paint

containers,

it appeared that they had been in place propping open

the doors to the Coating Line

#3 enclosure for an extended period

of

time.

39.

At the same time,

a window in the Coating Line #3

9

---

enclosure had been removed, leaving a large rectangular opening

in the enclosure’s wall.

40.

Also on March

6,

2002,

an unused duct leading to the

oxidizer inlet line had collapsed and become detached from the

inlet

line,

leaving an opening in the inlet line.

41.

Furthermore,

on March

6,

2002,

the’bypass valve

in the

duct between the Coating Line

#3 enclosure and the catalytic

oxidizer was fixed in the “open” position,

which caused VOM

emissions to ven,t directly to the atmosphere without control by

the oxidizer when Coating Line

#3 was in operation,

thereby

evidencing

0

control efficiency for the PTE.

42.

At the Illinois EPA’s request, Color Communications’

personnel started up Coating Line #3 and attempted to close the

bypass valve,

but they were unable to close it on March

6,

2002.

-

43.

After discovering that the Coating Line #3 bypass valve

was open and could not be closed,

the Illinois EPA personnel

reviewed the oxidizer’s operating temperature records.

44.

Throughout the day on March 6th,

2002,

the oxidizer’s

inlet temperature remained steady between 598°Fand 601°F, and

its outlet temperature remained steady at 645°F.

45.

.

The lack of operating temperature fluctuation indicated

that no VON was being cornbusted by the oxidizer, because when an

emission source like Coating Line #3

is properly controlled by a

catalytic oxidizer,

the inlet and outlet temperatures.will

10

---

fluctuate

as the coating line

is started

ai-id stopped and as the

concentration of VON varies in the exhaust gases entering the

oxidizer from the coating line enclosure, again evidencing no

reduction in the VON and little to no efficiency from the control

device.

46.

Color Communications was able to repair the Coating

Line

#3 bypass valve on March 7th,

2002,

and Illinois EPA

personnel returned to the plant on the following day, March 8th,

2002.

47.

On March

8th,

2002,

the oxidizer’s operating

temperature records showed that,

after Color Communications

repaired the bypass valve,

the oxidizer’s inlet temperature

varied between 600°Fand 625°F’‘and its outlet temperature varied

between 690°Fand 735°F.

48.

The wider fluctuation of the oxidizer’s inlet and

outlet temperatures and the higher maximum inlet and outlet

temperatures observed after the bypass valve was repaired on

March

7,

2002 indicated that the Coating Line #3 enclosure was

now venting to the oxidizer, and as a result the VON contained in

the exhaust gases was being combusted by the oxidizer rather than

being bypassed to the atmosphere without control.

49.

On March 8th,

2002,

Illinois EPA personnel reviewed the

oxidizer temperature records going back to

1994.

11

---

50.

Based on the March

8,

2002 review,

the oxidizer

operating temperature records for the period,

1994 through July

1996 documented temperature fluctuations and temperature ranges

indicative of proper operation of the bypass valves and the

oxidizer,

resulting in the proper combustion of the VON emissions

from the Coating Line #3 enclosure and associated oven in the

oxidizer.

51.

On March

8,

2002,

the oxidizer temperature records for

the period December 1996

through, March

7,

2002,

the date Color

Communications repaired the bypass valve,

documented a lack of

temperature fluctuation and relatively low temperature ranges,

indicating that VON emissions from the Coating Line #3 enclosure

was being bypassed directly to the atmosphere instead of being

combusted in the oxidizer.

The records from August of 1996

through November of 1996 were unavailable.

52.

On March

8,

2002,

the oxidizer operating temperature

records for the period December 1996 through March

7,

2,002,

indicated that the oxidizer was not being properly operated and

was not controlling the VON emissions from Coating Line #3.

S3.

The initial compliance demonstration establishing that

Coating Line #3 was provided with a permanent total enclosure

(“PTE”)

was made with:

the four large doors

to the enclosure

closed;

a window in place

in the enclosure window opening; both

12

-

.

‘

.‘

---

exhaust duct bypass valves closed; and no holes in the oxidizer

inlet line due to a collapsed duct.

54.

However, during the Illinois EPA inspection conducted

on March

6,

2002,

the inspector observed that the four large

doors

to the enclosure were propped open with cans of paint;, the

window had been removed, leaving an uncovered opening in the

enclosure; the one bypass valve was stuck in the open position;

and there was a hole in the oxidizer inlet line due to a

collapsed duct.

55.

Color Communications’

failure to maintain the Coating

Line #3 PTE in the condition it was, in at ‘the time of the initial

compliance test resulted

in’ the enclosure no longer being either

“permanent” or “total”, and negated the enclosure’s effectiveness

in capturing ?he

VON emitted from Coating Line #3 so it could be

ducted to and destroyed by the oxidizer.

56.

From December of 1996 or a date better known to the

Respondent,

until March

7,

2002,

Color Communications failed to

maintain Coating Line #3 so that the capture and control device

reduced VON emissions by 81

and achieved a 90

efficiency

condition,

in violation of Section 218.207(b)

(1)

of the Board’s

Air Pollution Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 218.207(b) (1),

S7.

By violating Sections 218.207(b)

(‘1),

3S

Ill. Adm. Code

218.207(b) (1),

Color Communications also violated Section

9(a)

of

the Act,

415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2002).

13

---

WHEREFORE,

Complainant,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully requests that the Board enter an order against

Respondent,

COLOR COMMUNICATIONS

INC.,

on this Count

I:

1.

Authorizing a hearing in this matter at which time the

Respondent will be required to answer the allegations herein;

2.

Finding that Respondent has violated Section 9(a)

of

the Act,

41S ILCS 5/9(a) (2002)

and Section 218.207(b) (1)

of the

Board’s Air Pollution Regulations,

35

Ill.

Adm.

Code

218.207(b) (1);

3.

Ordering Respondent to cease and desist from any

further violations of Section

9(a)’ of’ the Act,

415 ILCS

5/9(a) (2002) and Section 218.207(b)

(1)

of the Board’s Air

Pollution Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm. Code 218.207(b) (1);

4.

Assessing a civil penalty of $50,000.00 against

Respondent for each violation of the Act and pertinent Board

regulations, with an additional penalty of $10,000.00 per day for

each day that the violations

continued;

5.

Taxing all costs in this action,

including expert

witness, consultant and attorneys fees, against Respondent; and

6.

Granting such other relief as the Board deems

appropriate and just.

14

‘

---

COUNT II

FAILURE TO REPORT NONCOMPLIANCE

ON COATING LINE

#3

1

-

56.

Complainant realleges and incorporates herein by

reference paragraphs

1 through S6 of Count

I as paragraphs

1

through’56 of this Count

II.

57.

Section 218.211(e) (3) (A)

of the Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 218.211(e) (3) (A), provides as

follows:

(e)

Any

owner

‘or

operator

of

a

coating line

subject to the limitations of Section 218.207

of

‘

this

Subpart.. .shall

comply

with

the

following:

*

*

*

(3)

On

and

after

a

date.-

consistent

with

Section 218.106

of. this

‘Part,

the owner

or

operator

of

a

subject

coating

line

shall notify the Agency in the following

instances:

(A)

Any

record

showing

violation

of

Section

218.207

of

this

Subpart

shall be reported by sending a copy

of such record to the Agency within

30 days following the occurrence of

the violation.

58.

Color Communications failed to’notify Illinois EPA of

any violations of the control requirements of Section

218.207(b) (1)

within 30 days following the occurrence of such

violation,

thereby violating 218.211(e) (3) (A)

of the Board’s Air

Pollution Regulations,

3S

Ill. Adm.

Code 218.211(e) (3) (A).

15

---

59.

By violating Section 218.211(e) (3) (A), Respondent also

violated Section 9(a)

of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2002).

WHEREFORE,

Complainant,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully requests that the Board enter an order against

Respondent,

COLOR COMMUNICATIONS

INC.,

o~ithis Count

II:

1.

Authorizing a hearing in this matter at which time the

Respondent will’ be required ~o answer the allegations herein;

2.

Finding that Respondent has violated Section 9(a)

of

the Act,

415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2002)

and Section 218.211(e) (3) (A)

of

the Board’s Air Pollution Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code

218.211(e) (3) (A);

3.

Ordering Respondent to cease and desist from any

further violations

of. Section 9(a)

of the Act,

415 ILCS

5/9(a) (2002) and Section 218.211(e)

(3) (A)

of the Board’s Air

Pollution Regulations,

3S

Ill. Adm.

Code 218.211(e) (3) (A);

4.

Assessing a civil penalty of $S0,000.00 against

Respondent for each violation of the Act and pertinent Board

regulations, with an additional penalty of $10,000.00 per day for

each day that the violations

continued;

5.

Taxing all costs

in this action,

including expert

witness, consultant and attorneys fees,

against Respondent; and

6.

Granting such other relief as the Board deems

appropriate and just.

16

---

COUNT III

FAILURE TO PROVIDE AN ERMS ACCOUNT

OFFICER AND CERTIFY ERMS

SUBMITTALS

1

-

30.

Complainant realleges and incorporates herein by

reference paragraphs

1 through 30,

of Count

I as paragraphs

1

through 30 of this Count

III.

31.

Section 205.110 of the Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 205.110, provides as follows:

Section 20S.llO

Purpose

The

purpose

of

‘

this

Part

is

to

implement

the

Emissions Reduction Market System (ERMS) regulatory

program

consistent

with

the

assurances

that

are

specified

in .Section

9.8

of

the

Environmental

Protection

Act

41S

ILCS

5/9.8

.

The

ERMS

is

designed,

as

further

specified

in

thIs

Part,

‘

to

achieve the following:

.

(a)

Implement

innovative

and

cost-effective

strategies to attain the national ambient air

quality standard (NAAQS)

for ozone and to meet

the requirements

of the Clean Air Act;

(b)

Increase flexibility for participating sources

and

lessen

the

economic

impacts

associated

with implementation of the Clean Air Act;

(c)

Take into account the findings of the national

ozone transport assessment coordinated by the

Environmental

Council

of

States

with

participation

by

the

United

States

Environmental

Protection

Agency

and

by

the

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium;

and

(d)

Assure

that

sources

subject

to

the

ERMS

regulatory’ program

will

not

be

required

to

reduce

emissions

to

an

extent

that

exceeds

their

proportionate

share

of

the

total

17

---

emissions reductions required of all emission

sources, including mobile and area sources.

32.

Section 205.130 of the Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 205.130, provides,

in pertinent

part,

as follows:

Section 205.130

Definitions

Unless

otherwise

specified within

this

Part,

the

definitions for the terms used in this

Part shall

be the

same as those found in Section 39.5 of the

Act

415

ILCS 5/39.5

and in 35

Ill. Adm.

Code 211.

“Account officer”

means

a natural

person who has

been

approved

by

the

Agency,

as

specified

in

Section 20S.620

of this Part,

and

is subsequently

responsible for one or more Transaction Accounts to

which he or she

is designated.

*

*

*

“Allotment

Trading

Unit

(ATU)”

means

a

tradable

unit that represents

200 lbs of VON emissions

and

is a limited authorization to emit 200 lbs of VON

emissions during the seasonal allotment period.

*

*

*

“Baseline emissions” means a participating source’s

VOM

emissions

for

the

seasonal

allotment

period

based on historical operations ‘as determined under

Subpart

C of.this

Part.

Baseline’emissions

shall

be

the

basis

of

the

allotment

for

each

participating source.

*

*

*

“Chicago ozone nonattainment area”

means the area

composed of Cook,

DuPage,

Kane,

Lake, NcHenry,

and

Will Counties and Aux Sable Township and Goose Lake

TOwnship

in Grundy County and Oswego Township

in

Kendall County.

*

*

*

18

---

“Participating

source”

means

a

source

operating

prior to May 1,

1999,

located in the Chicago ozone

nonattainment

area,

that

is

required

to obtain a

CAAPP permit and has baseline emissions of at least

10 tons,

as specified in Section 205.320(a)

of this

Part,

or seasonal emissions

of at least 10 tons in

any seasonal allotment period beginning in 1999.

*

*

*

“Transaction Account”

means an account

authorized

by

the

Agency

or

its

designee

that

allows

an

account officer to buy or sell ATU5.

33.

Section 205.620(a)

of the Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 20S.620, provides as follows:

Section 205.620

Account Officer

(a)

Each participating source, new participating

soUrce or general participant must have at

least one account officer designated for each

of its Transaction Accounts.

The account

officer(s)

shall be the only person(s)

authorized to make ATU transactions involving

such designated Transaction Account.

At

least one account officer must certify each

official document that pertains to a

designated Transaction Account or associated

market transactions.

Account officers may be

employees or contractors. of participating

sources, new participating sources or general

participants.

No participating source,

new

participating source or general participant

may engage in ATU transactions

if

it does not

have an account officer approved’ by the

Agency.

Each account officer shall satisfy

all of the following:

(1)

Be at least

18 years of age;

(2)

Be an American citizen or a legal alien;

(3)

Have not been convicted of or had a

final judgment entered against him or

her in any State or federal court

for. a

violation of State or federal air

19

---

pollution laws.or regulations,

or for

fraud;

(4)

Be scheduled to attend the next

scheduled training program or has

already completed the program; and

(5)

Certify to the following statement as a

part of the relevant Transaction Account

application:

I certify that

I satisfy all of the

requirements for an account officer.

I

am aware that

I may be disqualified from

acting as an account officer in the

State of Illinois, pursuant to 35

Ill.

Adm.

Code

205,

if any information

submitted in this application is

determined to be false or misleading.

34.

Pursuant to Section 205.110, the purpose of the

Emissions Reduction Market System

(“ERMS”)

is to ,provide

a means

by which regulated ‘sources can meet applicable emission

limitations through a market-based trading system,

thus ensuring

that these emission limitations are applied in as flexible and

economically rational a manner as possible.

35.

‘Respondent’s facilities at 4000 W. Fillmore and 4242

W.

Fillmore are located within Cook County,

Illinois,

so they are

also located within the “Chicago ozone nonattainment area”

as

that term is defined in Section 20S.130 of 3S

Ill. Adm.

Code.

36.

The Respondent

is

a “participating source”

as this term

is defined in Section 205.130

of 35 Ill. Adm.

Code.

37.

Because Color Communications is a participating source,

it

is subject to the ERNS program requirements,

and as stated in

20

---

Section 205.620(a),

3S

Ill. Adm. Code 205.620(a),

it is required

to designate an “account officer”

as this term is defined in

Section 205.130 of 35

Ill. Adm.

Code.

38.

On February 27,

2002,

Illinois EPA personnel conducted

a review of compliance records related to Respondent’s compliance

with the requirements of the ERMS program.

39.

From at least

2001,

or

a time better known

t’o the

Respondent,

until at least March of 2002,

Respondent did not have

a designated account officer who met the requirements of Section

20S.620(a)

,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 20S.620(a)

40..

Furthermore, Respondent’s 2001 ERMS submittals were not

certified by a

properly trained,

Illinois EPA approved account

officer as required by Section 205.620(a),

35

Ill. Adm.

Code

205.620 (‘a).

41.

Respondent’s failure

to provide a properly trained,

Illinois EPA approved account officer and to properly certify its

2001 ERMS submittal violated Section 205.620(a)of the Board’,s Air

Pollution Regulations,

3S

Ill. Adm.

Code 205.620 (a).

42.

By violating Section 20S.620(a),

Color Communications

also violated Section 9(a)

of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/9(a)

(2002).

WHEREFORE,

Complainant,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully requests that the Board enter an order against

Respondent,

COLOR COMMUNICATIONS

INC.,

on this Count

IV:

21

---

1.

Authorizing a hearing in this matter at which time the

Respondent will be required to answer the allegations herein;

2.

Finding that Respondent has violated Section 9(a)

of

the Act, 415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2002)

and Section 205.620(a)

of the

Board’s Air Pollution Regulations,

35 Ill. Adm.

Code 205.620(a);

3.

Ordering Respondent to cease and desist from any

further violations of Section

9(a)

of the Act,

415 ILCS

5/9(a) (2002) and Section 20S.620(a)

of

the’ Board’s Air Pollution

Regulations,

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 205.620(a);

4.

Assessing a civil penalty of $50,000.00 against

Respondent for each violation of the Act and pertinent Board

regulations, with an additional penalty of $10,000.00 per day for

each day that the violations

continued;

5.

Taxing’ all costs in this action,

including expert

witness, consultant and attorneys

fees,

against Respondent; and

6.

Granting such other relief

as the Board deems

appropriate and just.

COUNT IV

VIOLATIONS

OF THE CAAPP PERMIT RELATING TO THE FLEXOGRAPHIC

PRINTING LINES

1

-

26.

Complainant realleges and incorporates herein by

reference paragraphs

1 through 19, and paragraphs

20 through 27

of Count

I as paragraphs

1 through 26 of this Count

IV.

27.

Section 39.S(6) (a)

of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/39.5(6) (a)

(2002)

,

provides in pertinent part as follows:

22

‘

---

It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any

terms

or conditions of

a permit

issued under this

Section,

to

operate

any CAAPP

source

except

in

compliance with a permit issued by the Agency unde~

this

Section

or

to

violate

any

other

applicable

requirements.

28.

Condition 7.3.6 of CAAPP permit 95090040 issued to

Color Communications effective November

1,

1999 and revised

effective June 25,

2001,

provides as follows:

7.3.6

Emission Limitations

Total

combined emissions

and operation of

the flexographic

printing lines

#4

and

#5

shall not exceed the following limits:

VON

VON

Usage

Content

Emissions

Material

(gal/mo) (gal/yr)

(lb/gal)

(lb/mo) (T/yr)

Inks

.

.

50

300

2.25

:

112.5

0.34

Cleanup Solutions

(Partial VON)

50

300

0.68

.

40.0

0.12

Cleanup Solvents

50

300

7.61

380.8

1.14

Total:

1.60

The

above

limitations

were

established

in

Construction Permit 97120039, pursuant to 35’

IAC Part 203.

These limits ensure that the

construction and/or modification addressed

in the

aforementioned

Construction

Permit

does not

constitute

a new major

source or

major modification pursuant

to

Title

I

of

the CElean Air

Act

,

specifically 35 IAC

Part

203

T1

-

Compliance

with

annual

limits

shall

be determined

from a running

total of

12 months of data.

23

---

29.

On Feb~uary27,

2002,

Illinois EPA personnel conducted

a review of compliance records related to Color Communications’

flexographic printing lines located at 4000

W.

Fillmore.

30.

The compliance records showed that most of the inks

used by Color Communications on the flexographic printing lines

have had a VON content

in excess of 2.25 lbs VON/gal.

31.

By using inks with a VON content in excess of 2.25 lbs

VOM/gal on the flexographic lines, Respondent violated Condition

7.3.6 of CAP~PPpermit 9S090040, which establishes 2.25

lb VOM/gal

as the maximum permissible VON content for inks used on these

lines.

32.

Condition 7.3.10(b)

of CAAPP permit 95090040 issued to

Color Communications,

effective November 1,

1999 and revised

effective June 25, 2001, provides as follows:

7.3.10

Reporting Requirements

The

Permittee

shall

promptly

notify

the

Illinois

EPA,

Compliance

Section

of

noncompliance with applicable

requirements

as

follows

pursuant

to

Section

39.S(7)

(f) (ii)

of the Act.:

*

*

*

b.

The Permittee

shall notify the

Illinois

EPA

in writing

if the production and or

emission

limitations

contained

in

Conditibn

7.3.6 are exceeded,

within

30

days

after

the

event

occurs.

Such

notification shall include a copy of all

records

of such event.

24

‘

-

-

---

33.

Respondent did not report

at any time to the Illinois

EPA the use of inks with a VON content

in excess of 2.25 lbs

VON/gal

on the flexographic lines.

34.

By failing to report the use’ of these noncompliant inks

to the Illinois EPA,

Respondent violated Condition 7.3.10(b)

of

.CAAPP permit 95090040.

35.

By violating Conditions

7.’3.6 and 7.3.10(b)

of CAAPP

permit 95090040,

Respondent also violated Section 39.5(6) (a)

of

the Act,

415 ILCS S/39.S(6) (a) (2002), which prohibits operation

of a CA~PPsource in violation of ‘any terms or conditions of a

CA~PPpermit.

WHEREFORE,

Complainant,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully requests that the Board enter an order against

Respondent,

COLOR COMMUNICATIONS

INC.,

on this Count

IV:

1.

Authorizing a hearing in this matter at whidh time the

Respondent will be required to answer the allegations herein;

2.

Finding that Respondent violated Section 39.S(6) (a)

of

the Act,

415 ILCS s/39.s(6) (a) (2002)

and Conditions 7.3.6 and

7.3.10(b)

of CA~PPpermit 95090040 issued to Color

Communications,

effective November

1,

1999,

and revised,

effective June 25,2001;

3.

Ordering Respondent

to cease and desist from any

further violations

of Section 39.5(6) (a)

of the Act,

41’S

ILCS

S/39.s(6) (a) (2002)

and Conditions

7.3.6 and 7.3.10(b)

of CAAPP

25

---

permit 95090040 issued to Color Communications1

effective

November

1,

1999,

and revised, effective June 25,

2001;

4.

Assessing a civil penalty of $50,000.00 against

Respondent for each violation of the Act and pertinent Board

regulations,

with an additional penalty of $10,000.00 per day for

each day that the violations

continued;

5.

Taxing all Costs in this action,

including expert

witness, consultant and attorneys

fees,

agai’nst Respondent;

and

6.

Granting such other relief as the Board, deems

appropriate and just.

COUNT V

VIOLATIONS

OF THE CAAPP PERMIT RELATING TO COATING

LINE

#3,

REPORTING’, AND THE ERMS

ACCOUNT

OFFICER

1

-

65.

Complainant realleges and incorporates herein by

reference paragraphs

1 through 56 of Count

I,

paragraph 58 of

Count

II, paragraphs

32,

33,

39, and 40 of Count

III,

and

paragraphs

27 through 30 of Count

IV as paragraphs

1 through 65

of this Count

V.

66.

Condition 7.1.3(c)

of CAAPP permit 95090040 issued to

Color Communications effective November

1,

1999,

and revised,

effective June 2S,

2001,

provides,

as follows:

7.1.3

Applicability Provisions’ and Applicable

Regulations

*

*

*

26

---

c.

Affected

coating

lines

Nos.

2

and

3

are

subject

to

35

IAC 218.207(b)

(1)

which requires

that the

coating

line

be equipped with a capture system and

control

device

that

provides

81

reduction in the overall emissions

of

VON and the control device is at least

90

efficient.

67.

Conditions 7.1.5(b),

.(c)

and

(e)

of C~PP permit

95090040 provide as follows:

7.1.S

Operational and Production Limits

and Work

Practices

*

*

*

b.

The

permanent

total

enclosure

and

afterburner

control

system

shall

be

operated

in

a

manner

consistent

to

sic

.

good

air

pollution

control

practices

and

operating

requirements

established in 3S IAC 218,, Appendix B,

Procedure

T

“Criteria

for

and

Verification

of

a

Permanent

or

Temporary Total Enclosure”.

c.

The

Permittee

shall,

in

accordance

with

manufacturer(s)

and/or vendor(s)

recommendations,

perform

periodic

maintenance of the catalytic oxidizer

such

that

sic

oxidizer

be

kept

in

proper working condition and not cause

violation

.

of

the

Environmental

Protection

Act

or

regulations

promulgated therein.

*

*

*

e.

This permit

is issued based on the

affective coating lines #2 and #3 with

an afterburner not being allowed to

operate

during

malfunction

or

breakdow,n

of

an

afterburner

because

the Permittee did not submit the proof

to

the

Illinois

EPA

that

such

27

---

continued

operation

is

necessary

to

prevent

injury

to

persons

or

severe

damage

to

equipment,

or

that

such

continued

operation

is

required

to

provide

essential

services,

pursuant

to 35 IAC 201.262.

68.

Condition 7.1.6(f)

of CAAPP permit 95090040 provides as

follows:

7.1.6

Emission Limitations

In

addition

to

Condition

5.2.2

and

the

‘source

wide

emission

limitations

in

Condition 5.5.1,

the affected coating lines

are subject to the following:

*

*

f.

Emissions

and

operation

of

Coating

Line #3 shall not exceed the following

limits:

Average VON

Lacquer Coating

Content

VON Emissions

(gal/mo) (gal/yr)

(lbs VON per gal)

(T/mo)

(T/yr)

2S,000

161,180

4.82

0.6

3.9

Latex Coating

(gal/mo) (gal/yr)

Less Water

30,000

40,200

1.99

(Less Water)

0.30

0.4

With Water

95,240

127,620

Totals:

0.90

4.3

The above limitations were established

in

Construction

Permit

00080079,

pursuant

to

35

IAC

Part

203.

The

above

limitations

are

being

established in this permit pursuant to

28

‘

---

Title

I

of

the Clean

Air

Act,

specifically

3S

IAC

Part

203,

Major

Stationary

Sources

Construction

and’

Modification.

These

limits

ensure

that

‘

the

construction

and/or

modification

addressed

i’n

the

aforementioned

‘

Construction

Permit

does not constitute a new major source

or

major

modification

pursuant

to

Title

I

of

the

CA7~, specifically

3S

IAC Part 203

Ti

69.

Respondent operated the Coating Line

#3 enclosure with.

the four large doors

to the enclosure propped’ open with cans of

paint; with the window removed, leaving an uncovered opening in

the enclosure; with the bypass valve stuck in the open position;

and/or with a hOle in the oxidizer inlet line due to a collapsed

duct,

all of which negated the enclosure’s required effectiveness

in capturing the VON emitted from Coating Line

#3. The records of

the Respondent indicated that these conditions had existed for at

le’ast the months of February and early March of 2002,

and

possibly occurring and continuing from as early as

1996.

70.

Respondent’s operation of its facility under such

conditions violated its CAAPP permit 95090040,

Condition

7.1.3(c),

which requires compliance with 35111.

Adm.

Code

218.207(b) (1)’ and Conditions

7.1.5(b),

(c) and

(e), which require

that the PTE be operated in a manner consistent with good air

pollution control

practices. and the operational requirements

established in 35

Ill. Adm~ Code 218, Appendix B,

Procedure

T,

29

---

that periodic maintenance be performed and that coating line #3

should not. be used during equipment breakdowns.

71.

In February and March of 2002,

and possibly from as

early as

1996, by operating Coating Line #3 with the PTE

compromised and,

in particular.,

with the enclosure exhaust duct

bypass valve in the open,

bypassing position,

Respondent exceeded

its monthly VON emission limits of 0.6 tons VON per month for

lacquer coatings and 0.90 tons VOM per month overall.

72.

By exceeding its VON per month for lacquer coatings and

its VON per month overall, Respondent violated Condition 7.1.6(f)

of CA~PPpermit 9S090040.

73.

Condition 7.1.10(a)

of CAP~PPpermit 95090040 provides

as follows:

7.1.10

Reporting Requirements

The Permittee

shall promptly notify the

Illinois EPA, Compliance Section of

noncompliance with’ applicable requirements

as

follows pursuant to Section 39.5(7) (f) (ii)

of

the Act:

Pursuant to 35 IAC 218.211(e) (3),

the Permitte’e

shall notify the Illinois EPA in the following

instances:

a.

Any record showing violation of 35

IAC

218.207 and Condition 7.1.3(b) within 30

days of such

‘an occurrence; and

.

.

*

*

30

---

74.

Respondent failed to notify the Illinois EPA of the

records showing violations of

35

Ill. Adm. Code 218.207 and

Condition 7.1.3(b) within 30 days of such an occurrence.

75.

By.failing to make such notifications, Respondent

violated Section 7.1.10(a)

of CAAPP permit 95090040.

76.

Condition 8.6.1 of CAP~PPpermit 9S090040 provides as

follows:

8.6.1

Monitoring Reports

A report summarizing required monitoring as

specified in the conditions

of this permit

shall

be

submitted

to

the ‘Air

Compliance

Section of the Illinois EPA every six months

as follows

Section

39.5(7) (f) of the Act:

Monitoring Period

“

Report Due Date

January

-

June

September

1

July

-

December

March

1

All such reports shall be certified in

accordance with Condition 9.9.

77.

Condition 9.8 of CAAPP permit 95090040 provides as

follows:

‘

9’. 8

Requirements for Compliance Certification

Pursuant to Section 39.5(7)’(p) (v)

of the Act,

the

Permittee shall submit compliance certifications

annually or more frequently as

specified in the

applicable requirement or by permit condition.

a.

The certification shall

include the

identification of each term or condition of

the permit that

is the basis of the

certification; the compliance status; whether

31

---

complianc,e was continuous or intermittent;

the method(s) used for determining the

compliance status of the source, both

currently and over the reporting period

consistent with the conditions of this

permit.

b.

All compliance certifications must be

submitted to USEPA region 5 in Chicago as

well as to the Illinois EPA.

c.

All compliance reports required to be

submitted shall

include’ a certification in

accordance with Condition 9.9.

78.

Color Communications failed to timely submit semi-

annual monitoring reports for the following reporting periods:

July

-

December

1999

January

-

June

2000

July

-

December

2000

‘

‘

January

-

June

2001

July

-

December

2001.

79.

Color Communications failed to submit annual compliance

certifications for the reporting years

1999,

2000,

and 2001

identifying the noncompliance occurring with respect to Coating

Line #3, and the flexographic printing lines.

80.

By failing to submit its semi-annual monitoring

reports, ‘and complete and accurate annual compliance

certifications,

Respondent violated Conditions 8.6.1 and 9.8 of

CAAPP permit 9500040.

.

81.

Condition 6.4 of CA~PPpermit.95090040 issued to Color

Communications effective November

1,

1999 and revised effective

June

25, 2001 provides as follows:

32

---

6.4

Narket Transaction

c.

The

source

shall

have

at

least

one

account

officer

designated

for

its

Transaction Account,

pursuant

to

35

IAC

20S.620(a).

82.

From at least 2001,

or a time better known to the

Respondent, until at

least March of 2002, Respondent did not have

a designated account officer who met the requirements of Section

205.620(a),

35

Ill. Adm.

Code 20S.620(a), pursuant to its CAAPP

permit Condition 6.4(c).

83.

By failing to designate at least one account officer

for its Transaction Account,

Respondent violated Condition 6.4(c)

of CAAPP permit 95090040’.

84.

By

violating Conditions 7.1.3(c),

7.-’-l.S(b), (c), (e),

7.1.6(f),

7.1.10(a),

8.6.1,

9.8 and 6.4(c)

of CAAPP permit

95090040,

Respondent also violated Section 39.5(6) (a)

of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/39.5(6) (a)

(2002), which prohibits operation of a

CAAPP source in violation of any terms or conditions

of. a CAAPP

permit.

‘

‘

WHEREFORE,

Complainant,. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

respectfully requests that the Board enter an order against

Respondent,

COLOR COMMUNICATIONS

INC.,

on this Count V:

1.

Authorizing a hearing in this matter at which time the

Respondent will be required to answer the allegations herein;

2.

Finding that Respondent has violated Section 39.5(6) (a)

of the Act,

415 ILCS 5/39.5(6) (a) (2002), and Conditions 7.1.3(c),

33

---

.7.1.5(b),

‘(c)

,

(e)

,

7.1.6(f),

7.1.10(a),

8.6.1,

9.8

and

6.4(c)

of

CAP~PPpermit

95090040

issued

to

Color

Communications,

effective

November

1,

1999,

and

revised,

effective

June

25,

2001;

3.

Ordering Respondent to cease and desist from any

further violations of Section 39.5(6) (a)

of the Act, 415 ILCS

5/39.5 (6) (a) (2002)

,

and Conditions

7.1.3 (c)

,

7.1.5(b)

,

(c)

,

(e)

7.1.6(f),

7.1.10(a),

8.6.1,

9.8and,6.4(c)

of CA7~PPpermit

9S090040;

4.

Assessing a civil penalty of

$50,000.00

against

Respondent for each violation of the Act and pertinent Board

regulations,

with an additional penalty of $10,000.00 per day for

each day that the violations continued;

5.

Taxing all costs

in this action,

including expert

witness, consultant and attorneys fees,

against Respondent; and

6.

Granting such other relief as the Board deems

appropriate and just.

34

---

PEOPLE

OF

THE

STATE

OF

ILLINOIS

LISA

MADI’GAN,

Attorney General of the

State of Illinois

MATTHEW J. DUNN,

Chief

Environmental Enforcement/Asbestos

,,L~.~igationDivi~pn

By:

-

RO

~~RI

E~C.A.ZEAU,

C~-~~

Environmental Bureau

Assistant Attorney General

Of Counsel:

PAULA BECKER WHEELER

‘

Assistant Attorney General

Environmental Bureau

188 West Randolph Street,

20th Floor

Chicago,

IL

60601

(312)-

814-1511

35

---

CERTIFICATE

OF

SERVICE

I,

PAULA

BECKER

WHEELER,

an attorney,

do certify that~I

caused

to be served this 13th day of August,

2004,

the foregoing

Complaint and Notice of Filing upon the person listed on said

Notice, by Certified Mail.

7LL~

~

PAULA BECKER WHEELER