ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April 28, 2005
IN THE MATTER OF: )
)
PETITION OF SCA TISSUE NORTH ) AS 05-04
AMERICA, L.L.C., FOR AN ADJUSTED ) (Adjusted Standard – Air)
STANDARD FROM : 35 Ill. Adm. Code )
218.301 and 218.302( c ) )
HEARING OFFICER ORDER
Attached is a list of questions with exhibits that the Illinois Pollution Control Board’s
technical personnel formulated regarding the above-captioned adjusted standard. The petitioner
is directed to answer the attached questions and pre-file the written responses with the Board on
or before May 12, 2005.
The parties or their legal representatives are directed to participate in a telephonic pre-
hearing conference with the hearing officer on May 11, 2005, at 1:00 p.m. The telephonic pre-
hearing conference must be initiated by the petitioner, but each party is nonetheless responsible
for its own appearance. At the conference, the parties must be prepared to discus the status of
the matter and their readiness for hearing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Bradley P. Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-500
100 West Randolph
Chicago, Illinois 60601
312.814.8917
Questions for SCA Tissue NorthAmerica, L.L.C.
Pertaining to the Petition
To be addressed in Prefiled Testimony or at Hearing on May 17, 2005
(Docket AS
2005-4)
35 IAC 104.406(d)
1.
Is the address on the FESOP
in Pet. Exh.
D
(13101 South Pulaski Rd., Alsip,
IL) the
address ofthe tissue mill?
2.
Would you please identify the downwind area affected?
Is itrural or urban?
3.
Please indicate the number ofemployees at the tissue mill.
4.
The petition on page
12 states, “SCA utilizes low-VOC photochemically reactive
solvents...”
Pet.
Exh. B at
15 states that “The cleaning solvent has a VOC content of50
percent.”
Please indicate what solvents are used to remove the stickies and provide
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for each.
Please provide an MSDS for the cleaning
solvent to show the 50
by weight VOM content.
5.
Pet. at
15 mentions USEPA proposed NESHAP at pulp and paper mills.
Do the VOM
emissions from SCA’s cleaning operations include HAPs?
If so, would
you please
identify what the HAPs are and what percentage they comprise ofthe VOMs?
6.
Please describe how the solvents are stored when not in use.
Are solvent storage
containers vented?
Ifso, could you please indicate the rate ofemissions
from the storage
containers?
7.
How is the solvent application equipment cleaned after use?
8.
How is overspray from the cleaning process handled?
Is overspray captured in a drip
pan, or does it just evaporate?
What percentage ofsolvent used is overspray and what
percentage actually contacts the
wire and/or stickies during the soaking stage?
9.
Pet.
Exh. H states that the wire
solvent cleaning process “emitted fewer than 4 pounds per
hour of volatile organic compounds on a rolling monthly average in 2002,
...“
Please
indicate the quantity (pounds) used during a single cleaning
cycle, the duration ofa
cleaning cycle,
and the frequency ofcleaning cycles.
Pet. Exh. B at
12 states that “wire
cleaning is required once to twice per month but can be required more frequently.
.
.
and
felt cleaning is very infrequent.”
Exh. H “Solvent Trial Results” states that the removal
ofstickies
emitted fewer that
4
lb/hr ofVOCs on a rolling monthly average in 2002.
Please indicate the rate ofVOMs used on a strict hourly basis, during the actual cleaning
operation.
Please compare this result to the 8 lb/hr limit of302.201.
35 IAC 104.406(e)
Pet.
at 16 states, “SCA has also concluded that no cleaning alternatives are available that provide
acceptable cleaning characteristics
and can reduce VOM emissions below 8 pounds per hour or
be nonphotochemically reactive.”
(Pet. at
16.)
SCA states that ithas implemented pollution
prevention changes that have helped to reduce the number ofsolvent cleanings.
Pet. at 22 states,
“...stickies are a substantial barrier to producing the recycled tissue rolls and the solvent cleaning
operations with low VOM materials and controls described herein are the only demonstrated
technology for reducing and/or eliminating that problem.”
10. Are you familiar with the use oflow impact pulpingto keep stickies large so that
mechanical cleaning equipment (such as screens and dissolved air flotation) will operate
more efficiently?
Have you considered low impact pulping as part ofa stickies control
program?
11.
Has SCA evaluated any chemical products to keep small stickies from agglomerating into
larger more troublesome stickies?
12.
Pet. at
12 mentions the use ofa pulp detacifier and wire polymer.
Would you please
describe the role these have in stickies control?
Has SCA evaluated the use ofcationic
wire and felt passivation to keep stickies from accumulating on the felts or wires?
13.
Pet. Exh.
16 contains the results ofthe solvent trial tests.
Would you please explain what
is meant by “Stripped the wire, no effect on stickies.”
14. Besides alternative cleaning solvents,
did SCA consider other approaches for chemically
controlling stickies?
Please address approaches such as fixation of stickies to
fiber in
sheet formation, dispersing stickies using solvent and surfactant blends, polymeric
stabilization, stabilized enzymes, or a combination ofthese?
Besides the alternative
solvent trial tests presented in Pet.
Exh. H, have you evaluated any ofthese other
approaches on a bench or pilot scale?
15.
Is SCA familiar with a new enzyme process given the USEPA’s Presidential Green
Chemistry Challenge Award (2004 Alternative Solvents/Reaction Conditions Award)
known as Optimyze® and manufactured by Buckman Laboratories?
16.
Were any representatives for manufacturers ofstickies control products
contacted and
invited to
SCA’s facility for guidance
on a stickies control strategy and product selection
or otherwise closely involved in the trial tests?
17. Please describe how is the felt cleaned.
Are the same solvents used to clean the felt and
wires?
Would you please indicate how much solvent is used to clean the felt and how
often?
35 IAC 104.406(f)
18.
Would you please discuss the corresponding costs for the process and operational
changes that SCA has implemented to achieve the 93
reduction in VOM emissions?
35 IAC 104.406(g~
18. How much did SCA spend to redesign and change equipment and cleaning operations to
reduce VOM emissions from
182 tpy to
10 tpy?
19. Exh. B, App. E, Page
1
of each ofthe Control Costs Results Summaries, indicates that
costs are based on maximum annual production of90,000 ADTP per year.
The FESOP
in Pet.
Exh. A on page 4 defines ADT as air-dried ton offinishedpaper.
Please describe
how ADTP relates to Machine Dried Tons (MDT) and if there is a conversion forADTP
to MDT.
20. Pet.
at
3
indicates the currentproduction rate is 200 tons per day ofproduct. Would you
please clarify if this air dried tons (ADT) ormachine dried tons (MDT)?
21. The petition at
13 indicates that current production rates approximately doubled from the
1990 rate of 36,900 MDT/year which would be
-~
73,800
MDT/year.
On page
14, the
petition states that the VOM emission rate for the 1997-2000 time frame averaged 0.6 lb
VOM/MDT forthe solvent cleaning operations.
Multiplying (36,900 MDT x 2) x 0.6 lb
VOM/MDT yields 22 tons / year.
However, Exh. B at
15 indicates the total maximum
VOM emissions from solvent cleaning operations are
10 tpy, and the actual rate is closer
to 7 tons per year.
Would you please clarify how the emission rate of0.6 lb VOM/MDT
and the current production rate of200 tons per day yield the VOM emissions of7 to
10
tons per year.
22. Could you describe how other tissue papermills using recycled stock handle stickies
control?
23. Pet.
at 20
states,
“.
.
.there will be no adverse incremental impact on the environment as a
result ofthe Adjusted Standard...”
The IEPA’s recommendation concurs, stating, “the
proposed adjusted standard will not impair compliance with the applicable
ozone
standards...”
(Rec. at 15.)
In a previous similar adjusted standard from 218.301, AS
04-
1
for Crownline Boats,
Inc., the petitioner provided an Ambient Air Quality Impact
Analysis to support its
assertion that Crownline’s impact on ambient air quality is
insignificant.
(AS 04-1, App.
16.)
The instant petition does not provide
an analysis to
show no
adverse incremental impact on ozone.
Would you please provide an ozone
impact analysis using an appropriate methodology such as the USEPA Method,
“VOC/NOx Point Source Screening Tables” by Richard D. Scheffe, September 1988.
(See attached.)
24.
If SCA were to experience a growth in production, could you please comment on how such
growth would
affect the VOM emissions on an annual basis in comparison to the data
provided for the 2000 production year?
By estimating a larger figure to
represent potential
increased VOM emissions
5
to
10 years in the future, how would the ozone increment
change?
~—
VOC/Nox
POINT
SOU~C~
SCREENING
TABLES
by
Richard
D..
Sch.ff.
.r
~
:‘.~~‘
S*pte~.ber,
i.~B8
tlnit.d
States Envircn~enta3.
Prctection
A~eñcy
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning.
and
Standards
Technical
Support
Division
•
Source
Receptor
Analysis
branch
~O
SCREZNINc~TABLES
The
int.rpretation
or
definition
of
a
“rural”
or
“urb~’
area
within
the
framework
of
this
techniqu.
is
intended
tO
be
rather broad and
flexible.
The rational, for having
rural
~
urban
tables stems
from
the need
to
account
for
th.
coupled
effect of point source
emission.
and background
chemistry
on
ozone
formation.
Eackground
chemistry
in th. context of
this
procedure
refers
to
a
characterization
of
the
ambient
atmospj.~erj~0
chemistry
into
which a point
source
.mits.
Th. underlying mo~.eJ.
runs
used
to
develop the
rural
table
(Table
2.)
vere
performed
with spatially invariant background chemistry representative o~
“clean”
continental
T~.S.
areas.
Xodel
runs
used
to
develop
the
urban
table
(Table
2)
were based
on background
chemistry
incorporating
daily
temporal
fluctuations
of
NOx
and
hydrocarbons
associated
with a typical
urban
atmosphere (refer
to
Appendix
A
for
details regarding
background
chemistry).
Background
chemistry
is an
importan~
factor in estimating ozone formation;
however,’
characterization of
background
chemistry
is
perhaps
the
most
difficult
aspect
of
reactive
plume
modeling
because
of
data
scarcity and
the level
of
resources
required
to
measure
or model
(temporally
and
spatially) the components
necessary
to
characterize the ambient atmospheric
along the
trajectory of a
point source
plume.
•
‘.
•
Recognizing
the
conflicting
needs
of using
simple
characterizations of background
chemistries and
applyingthis
screening technique
in situations
where
sources
ar. located in
or
impact on
areas’which
can
not
be
simply’
categorized,
tiie
,foilowing
steps
should
be
used
to
choose
an
appropriate table:
(1)
If
the source
location
and
downwind
impact
area
can be
described as
rural and
where
ozone
exceedences
have
never been
reported, choose the
rural
area table.
(2)~Ifthe source
location
anddown*ind
impact
area ar.
of
urban
character,
choose.
the urban area
table.
(3) If an
urban
based
sourc.
potentially can impact a downwind
rural
area,
or
a
rural
based, source can potentially
impact
a
downwind
urban
area., use
the
highest
value
obtained
from
applying
both
tables.
.
‘
.
,
Th,VOC point
source screening tables
(Tables 1
End
2)
provide ozone
increments
ai
a
function of )~XOC(nonmetharie
-
organic
carbon)
mass
emIssions rates and
NXOC/NOx
emissions
ratios.
.
To
determine an ozone
impact
the user is rEquired
to
apply
best estimates
of
maximum
daily X2(OC
emissions
rate,
and
estimated aru~ualmass emission.. rates
of
)~MOC and
Wox
which are
used
t.o determine WNOC/NOx ratio for ascribing
the
applicable
•
column
in Table 1 or 2.
Th.
reasons
for basing application on
•
‘daily maximum N~(OC
emissions
rates
are
(1) to avoid
3
,,,.•.,u.nder.stimates resulting
from
discontinuous operations and
(2:
•
the underlying modeling simulations
are
based
on
single
d~y
episodes.
The
fl~fOC emissions rates in
Tables
1
and
2
are
given
on
an
annual
basis;
consequently th.
user
must
project daily
maximum
to
annual
emissions
rates,
as
illustrated
in
the example
application given
below.
One
purpose
of
this
technique
is
to
provide a simple,
non—resource
intensive
tool;
therefore,
annual
)Q(OC/NOx
emissions ratios are used because
consideration
of daily
fluctuations
would
requirE
a
screening
application
applied
to
each
day.
-
Parameters
describing
background
chemistry, episodic
meteorology,
and
source
emissions speciation affect actual
ozone
impact
produced
by
a
point
source.
However,
as a
screening
zethcdoloçy
the
application should
be
simple,
robust
and
yield
conservative
(high ozone)
values.
Thus,
only NHOC
and
NOx
emissions rates are required as
input
to Tables
1
and
2.
Rural
Example
plication
A manufacturing company intends to construct a facility
in
an
isolated
rural
location
where ozone exceedances have
never
been observed.
The
pollution
control
agency
requires
that
the
company
submit’
an
analysis showing
that operation of
the
proposed
facility
will
not
result
in
an ozàne
increment
greater
than
X
ppm
in
order
to
permit
operation.
The estimated
daily maximum
)~MOC
emissions rate is
9000
lbs/day.
The annual
estimated emissions
rates
for NNOC
and
NOx
are
1000 tons/yr
and
80 tons/yr,
respectively.
The company’s itrategy is
to
provide a scrEening
analysis using the
rural
area table
to
prove future
compliance.
If
the screening result exce.ds
X.ppm,
the
company will initiate’
a detailed
modeling
ana2ysia
requiring characterization of source
emissions speciation, ambient
chemistry,
and
episodic
mateorology.
.
-
Screening
Estimate:
3.
—
Determine
which
.column
of
TablE
(1) is.applicable:
The
)~OC/N0x
ratio
is based
on annual
estimates;
thus,
1000/80
—
12.5
and
middle
column
values
are
applied.
2
—
Calculate annual
NXOC
‘emissions
rates
in
tons/yr
from
maximum
daily
rate:
‘
-
(9000
lbs/day) (2.
ton/2000
lbs)(365days/yr).—
1643
tons/yr
3
—
Interpolate linearly between
1500
tons/yr
and
2000 tons/yr
(to produce
an interpolated
column
2
ozone increment:
4
l643—1~oo)(3.84_3.o5)/(2ooo_3.5ooj+
3.04
—
3.27
pphm
3.27pphm(J~ppm/bc pphm)
—
~.0327 ~
If
0.0327
ppm
ii below the criterion
value
(X
ppm), no
further
modeling
analysis
is
required
and
operation
may
be
permitted.
Otherwise,
the
company will
precede
with
an
additional
case-
specific
modeling
analysis.
-
5
*
_-~f
11
~
-4
I.
•
-a
•
C)
~-J
Ui
(a)
fs~)
~
(1
(I)
(D
-~
~C)U1C)JU
(,j
...a
V
C)
(DO
C)
QQ
CD
1)1CC)
D
~J
(71
-C)
—~
,
C)
C)
C)
CD
0
C)
C)
(DC
C)
D
(Ji
CD
1
‘-~(1)
o:z,
_____________
-
_____________
V
-1
El
•
‘
V
C)
~
‘
~J
.~
(~J
P.)
P.3i-’I-
C
C)
C)
CD
P.)
CD
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C).
(DL’,
CD
F~)
03
C)
0)
.~
~-J
~
a..-
0
-~
-~
.~
El
m
•
•
C)
-4
UO
•
‘
(.71
~
•
V
~
00
o
(7iF~)
~
I
I
(~
C~
~ncD
o
.—~
-.--
•
t~
c
-~
c
~
c~
-~
4*
•-~
i-~
~
C)
C)
~
r\)Q71(,jLJr\),-4.-
~
x.~-..
x-
o.n
_a.
•
.
.
.
.
a
a
•
•
•
•
a
•.
a
~
—1
1.0.-i
(11
f\3
03
CD
.~
~O
-~
C
(Il
.~
.t~
C)
V
A
C
(71
,
UI~
‘-—N)
~
-
El
•
.•
.
a
•
.
•,.
•
a
•
•
f
c-f’——’
~‘
~-~.~t.J~JtdI4
~-
.~t\3~-~
o~
mm
I.
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency
IEPA/BOA/02-O15
Bureau
of
Air
1021 North
Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box
19276
Springfield,
IL
62794—9276
Illinois
Annual
Air
Quality
Report
Illinois Environmental
Protection
Agency
Bureau
of Air
sj~
.~/4’V~-p~~
~
August 2002
2001
Table B2
2001
OZONE
NUMBER OF DAYS
HIGHEST SAMPLES
GREATER
(parts per million)
VALID
THAN
1-HOUR
8-HOUR
STATION
ADDRESS
APR-OCT
0.12 PPM
1ST
2ND
3RD
(~)
1ST
2ND
3RD
4TH
65
BURLINGTON
-
KEOKUK
INTERSTATE (IA
-
IL)
PEORIA COUNTY
Peoria
Huriburt
&
MacArthur
211
Peoiia
Heights
508
E• Glen
o
0.077
0.077
O•076
0.075
0.072
o
0.093
0.084
0•083
0.083
0.084
0.072
0.069
0.068
0.080
0•080
0.080
66 EAST
CENTRAL
ILLINOIS INTRASTATE
CHAMPAiGN
COUNTY
Champaign
McLEAN COUNTY
606
E. Grove
211
0
0.081
0.080
0.079
0.078
0.074
0.073
0.073
0.073
Main &
Gregory
0
0.093
0.085
0.083
0.082
0.085
0.079
0.074
0.072
67 METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INTERSTATE
(IL
-
iN)
COUNTY
Calumet
City
Chicago
-
Jardine
Chicago
-
SE Police
Chicago
-
SWFP
Chicago
-
Taft
Chicago
-
Truman
Chicago
-
University
Cicero
Des Plaines
Evanston
Lemont
Northbrook
4500W. 123rd
St•
1703 State St.
1000
E.
Ohio
-
103rd
&
Luella
3300
E
Cheltenham
6545
W.
Huribut
1145W. Wilson
5720 S.
Ellis
1830 S. 51st Ave•
1375 5th
St.
531
Lincoln
729
Houston
750 Dundee Rd.
212
211
212
214
214
206
212
214
214
214
206
211
211
DuPAGE
COUNTY
Lisle
Morton
Arboretum
211
0
0.099
0.095
0.089
0.089
0.078
0.071
0.071
0.071
WILL
COUNTY
1441
Lake St•
Golf & Jackson
Camp Logan
1st St. & Three Oaks
Braidwood
South Lockport
36400 S.
Essex Rd•
2021
Lawrence
208
0
0.111
0.098
0.096
0.089
0.085
0.080
0.080
0.078
208
0
0.109
0.094
0.093
0.089
0.086
0.078
0.078
0.076
Primary 1-Hour Standard 0.12 ppm; 8-Hour Standard 0.08 ppm
214
Normal
212
(
0
0
0.091
0082
0.089
0•081
O•088
0.079
0.088
—
0.079
0.081
0077
0.079
0.073
0.078
0.072
0.077
0.071
0
0.106
0.106
0.105
0.100
0086
O•085
0.082
0.081
0
0.087
0.084
0.081
0.081
0.074
0.074
0.072
0.071
0
0.107
0.104
0.102
0.100
0.098
0.091
0.089
0.087
0
0.101
0.101
0.094
0.094
0.084
0.084
0.083
0.078
0
0.105
0.097
0.094
0.090
0.083
0.080
0.080
0.079
0
0.089
0.089
0.087
0.085
0.079
0•078
0.076
0.076
0
0.080
0.079
0.077
0.077
0.074
0.070
0.069
0.067
0
0.099
0.086
0.086
0.085
0.079
0.076
0.075
0075
0
0.122
0.108
0•103
0.100
0.103
0.090
0.086
0.086
0
0.090
0.090
0.082
0.082
0.077
0.071
0.070
0.068
0
0.100
0.100
0.096
0.091
0.090
0.087
0.083
0.082
665 Dundee
KANE
COUNTY
Elgin
LAKE
COUNTY
Libertyville
-
Waukegan
Zion
McHENRY COUNTY
Cary
214
,
0
0.101
0.087
0.086
0.086
0.086
0.082
0.081
0.080
210
0
0.108
0.097
0.095
0.089
0.087
0.080
0•079
0.078
213
0
0.105
0.105
0.101
O•099
0.095
0.091
0.084
0.082
214
0
0.103
0.099
0.097
0.096
0.088
0.087
0.084
0.083
211
0
0.100
0.098
O•098
O•093
0.089
0.088
0.086
0.084
49
IEPA/BOA/03-O 15
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency
Bureau ofAir
1021
North
Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
September2003
Illinois Annual
Air Quality Report
I
..__~
.
.
CLE~
I
AIR
,~
2002
Governor Rod R. Blagojevich
Director Renee Cipriano
sh~’.
r/it~/
2S—p~ ~
2~V27~Q~~
Table B2
2002
OZoNE
NUMBER OF D
_____
HIGHEST
SAMPLES
GREATER THAN
(parts per million)
1-HOUR
8-HOUR
STA11ON
ADDRESS
0.12
PPM
0.08 PPM
1ST
2ND
3RD
(‘~)
1ST
2ND
3RD
4Th
65
BURLINGTON
-
KEOKUKINTERSTATE (IA
-
IL)
PEORIA COUN1Y
Huriburt
&
MacArthur
508 E. Glen
66 EAST
CENTRAL
ILLINOIS
INTRASTATE
CHAMPAIGN COUNTY
McLEAN COUNTY
o
o
0.094
0.093
0.092
0.089
0.083
0.082
0
5
0.104
0.102
0.100
0.095
0.093
0.092
0
1
0.092
0.091
0.088
0.087
0.090
0.083
Normal
Main & Gregory
0
8
0.095
0.092
0.091
0.090
0.088
0.086
0.085
0.085
DuPAGE COUNTY
Usle
Morton Arboretum
0
3
0.114
0.104
0.103
0.102
0.091
0.087
0.086
0.084
KANE COUNTY
Elgin
665
Dundee
0
3
0.103
0.099
0.095
0.093
0.090
0.087
0.086
0.082
LAKE COUNTY
McHENRY COUNTY
Cary
1st St. & Three Oaks
0
6
0.110
0.102
0.099
0.098
0.093
0.091
0.091
0.090
WILL COUNTY
Braidwood
South
Lockport
36400 S. Essex Rd.
2021
Lawrence
o
6
0.105
0.099
0.094
0
7
0.107
0.104
0.097
0.094
0.095
0.088
0.096
0.094
0.088
0.087
0.087
0.087
0.086
Primary
1-Hour
Standard
0.12 ppm;
8-Hour Standard 0.08 ppm
Peoria
Peoria
Heights
Champaign
606
E. Grove
0.082
0.081
0.091
0.084
0.083
0.082
(
67
METROPOLITAN
CIIICAGO
INTERSTATE
(IL
-
IN)
COOK COUNTY
Atsip
4500W. 123rd
St.
0
8
0.115
0.108
0.106
0.097
0.096
0.094
0.094
umetCity
1703 State St.
0
0
0.094
0.091
0.090
0.088
0.079
0.078
0.076
0.074
Chicago-Jardine
I000E.Ohio
1
4
0.127
0.113
0.103
0.103
0.112
0.098
0.097
0.085
Chicago
-
SEPoIice
103rd & Luella
0
3
0.102
0.100
0.100
0.097
0.091
0.090
‘0.088
0.084
Chicago-SWFP
3300ECheltenham
0
13
0.121
0.118
0.109
0.108
0.106
0.103
0.100
0.096
Chicago-Taft
6545W.Hurlbut
0
9
0.109
0.104
0.104
0.103
0.097
0.094
0.093
0.092
Chicago
-
University
5720 S. Ellis
0
4
0.101
0.096
0.095
0.094
0.093
0.090
0.087
0.085
Cicero
1830 S. 51st Ave.
0
3
0.104
0.100
0.097
0.096
0.087
0.086
0.086
0.054
Des Plaines
9511W. Hartison
0
9
0.115
0.111
0.108
0.107
0.094
0.094
0.093
0.093
Evanston
531
Lincoln
0
8
0.122
0.114
0.111
0.100
0.105
0.095
0.092
0.091
Lemont
729 Houston
0
3
0.110
0.101
0.097
0.094
0.096
0.091
0.087
0.081
Northbrook
7500undeeRd.
0
5
0.111
0.103
0.099
0.098
0.096
0.090
0.088
0.087
Libertyville
1441
Lake St
0
5
0.112
0.104
0.101
0.101
0.091
0.091
0.090
0.087
Waukegan
Golf& Jackson
1
7
0.125
0.121
0.115
0.110
0.106
0.105
0.100
0.090
Zion
CampLogan
3
9
0.136
0.126
0.125
0;117
0.116
0.113
0.112
0.100
53
fflinois
Environmental
ProtectionAgency
Bureau of
Air
August 2004
1021
North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
illinois
62794-9276
IEPA/BOA/04-019
Illinois
Annual
Air Quality
Report
2003
Governor Rod R. Blagojevich
Director Renee Cipriano
~
~
///~/~
~
~
Table B2
2003
OZONIE
NUMBEROF DAYS
HIGHEST
SAMPLES
GREATER THAN
(parts
per
million)
1-HOUR
8-HOUR
STA11ON
ADDRESS
0.12 PPM
0.08 PPM
1ST
2ND
3RD
f~~)
1ST
2ND
3RD
4TH
65
BURLiNGTON
-
KEOKUK iNTERSTATE
(IA
-
IL)
PEORIA COUN1Y
Peoria
Huriburt & MacArthur
0
0
0.085
0.079
0.076
0.076
0.072
0.071
0.070
0.068
Peoria
Heights
508 E. Glen
0
0
0.091
0.090
0.090
0.083
0.079
0.078
0.078
0.076
66
EAST
CENTRAL
ILLINOIS
INTRASTATE
CHAMPAIGN COUNTY
Champaign
606
E.
Grove
0
0
0.084
0.081
0.081
0.080
0.078
0.077
0.075
0.075
McLEAN COUNTY
Normal
Main & Gregory
0
0
0.085
0.082
0.082
0.082
0.078
0.075
0.075
0.074
67 METROPOLiTAN CHICAGO 1I~TERSTATE(IL
-
IN)
_CQ9K
COUNTY
/
AIsip
4500W. 123rd St.
0
1
0.097
0.090
0.088
0.084
0.090
0.080
0.078
0.077
—
Chicago
-
JardThe
1000 E. Ohio
0
1
0.098
0.087
0.085
0.085
0.086
0.078
0.075
0.075
Chicago
-
SE PoIic~
103rd & LuelIa
0
0
0.080
0.079
0.078
0.076
0.073
0.073
0.072
0.069
Chicago
-
SWFP
3300 E Chellenham
0
2
0.095
0.095
0.093
0.091
0.087
0.086
0.080
0.080
Chicago
-
Taft
6545W. Hurlbut
0
0
0.093
0.090
0.088
0.087
0.084
0.078
0.077
0.077
Chicago
-
University
5720 S. Ellis
0
0
0.083
0.082
0.079
0.075
0.072
0.069
0.069
0.067
Cicero
1830 S. 5lstAve.
0
0
0.086
0.081
0.081
0.080
0.075
0.072
0.071
0.070
Des
Plaines
9511 W. Hariison
0
1
0.092
0.088
0.085
0.083
0.085
0.075
0.074
0.073
Evanston
531
Lincoln
0
2
0.117
0.096
0.091
0.090
0.091
0.089
0.082
0.082
Lemont
729 Houston
0
1
0.109
0.096
0.088
0.080
0.099
0.080
0.076
0.075
Northbrook
750 Dundee Rd.
0
0
0.095
0.091
0.090
0.089
0.084
0.083
0.081
0.080
DuPAGE
COUNTY
Lisle
Morton Arboretum
0
0
0.090
0.084
0.076
0.074
0.083
0.069
0.067
0.066
KANE COUNTY
Elgin
665 Dundee
0
0
0.094
0.091
0.082
0.081
0.078
0.077
0.077
0.076
LAKE
COUNTY
Waukegan
Golf & Jackson
0
0
0.094
0.093
0.090
0.084
0.081
0.081
0.076
0.074
Zion
Camp
Logan
0
0
0.094
0.094
0:093
0.091
0.084
0.082
0.079
0.078
McHENRY COUNTY
Cary
1st St & Three Oaks
0
0
0.093
0.087
0.085
0.084
0.084
0.080
0.080
0.079
WILL COUNTY
Braidwood
36400 S. Essex Rd.
0
1
0.095
0.093
0.087
0.085
0.085
0.079
0.075
0.073
South Lockport
2021
Lawrence
0
1
0.104
0.101
0.087
0.083
0.093
0.080
0.079
0.077
Primary 1-Hour Standard 0.12 ppm;
8-Hour Standard 0.08 ppm
—
49
Table A4
2003
SITE
DIRECTORY
Crr~’
NAME
CWVNER/
PJRS
CODE
ADDRESS
OPERATOR
UTM COORD.
(1cm)
EQUIPMENT
65
BURLINGTON
-
KEOKUKIINTERSTATE
(IA
-
IL)
PEORIA
COUN1Y
Peoria
Fire Station #8
II.
EPA
N.
4507.113
NAMS
-
SO2, 03
(1430024)
MacArthur & Huriburt
E
279.709
SPMS
-
WSAND
Peoria
Commerdal Building
II. EPA
N.
4508.534
SLAMS
-
CO
(1430036)
1005
N. University
E
279.194
Peoria
City Office Building
IL EPA
N.
4508.197
NAMS
-
(1430037)
613 N.E. Jefferson
E
281 .675
SLAMS
-
Pb, PM25
SPIvIS
-
TSP
Peoria Heights
Peoria Heights H.S.
II. EPA
N.
4513.476
NAMS
-
03
(1431001)
508
E. GlenAve.
E
281.660
TAZEWELL COLJN1Y
Pekin
Fire Station #3
II. EPA
N.
4492.693
NAMS
-
SO2
(1790004)
272
Derby
E
275.291
66
EAST
CENTRAL
ILLINOIS
INTRASTATE
CHAMPAIGN COUNTY
Bondville
SWS Climate Station
Ill. EPA(SWS
N.
4434.201
SLAMS
-
(0191001)
Twp.
Rd. 500 E.
E
382.959
Champaign
BookerT. Washington Elem.
Sch.
III.
EPA
N.
4442.017
SLAMS
-
03, PM25
(0190004)
606
E. Grove
E
395.248
McLEAN COUNTY
Normal
University
H.S.
Ill.
EPA
N.
4486.625
SLAMS
-
FM25
(1132003)
Main & Gregory
E
330.925
Normal
ISU Physical Plant
Ill.
EPA
N.
4486.886
SLAMS —03
(1132003)
Main & Gregory
E
330.771
67
METROPOLITAN
CHICAGO
INTERSTATE (IL
-
IN)
COOK
COUNTY
/
A~sip
VillageGarage
CookCountyDEC
N.
4613.287
SLAMS-03,Pb,PM10
(0310001)
4500W.
123rd
St.
E
439.015
SPfv1S-TSP,~.ASNVD,PM25t’
Bedford Park
APC Laboratory
Cook County DEC
N.
4624.760
SLAMS- SO2
(0311018)
7800W. 65th St.
E
432.241
SPMS-WSNVD
Blue
Island
Eisenhower H.S.
Cook
County
DEC
N.
4612.286
NAMS
-
FM~tj
(0312001)
12700 Sacramento
E
442.003
SLAMS
-
s02d,
PM25
36
