BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION
    CONTROL BOARD
    IN THE MATTER
    OF:
    )
    NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS FROM )
    VARIOUS SOURCE CATEGORIES: )
    AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL.
    ADM. CODE )
    PARTS 211 and 217
    )
    R08-19
    (Rulemaking
    - Air)
    NOTICE OF FILING
    TO: Mr. John T. Therriault
    Assistant Clerk
    of the Board
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    100 W. Randolph Street
    Suite 11-500
    Chicago,
    Illinois 60601
    (VIA ELECTRONIC
    MAIL)
    Timothy Fox, Esq.
    Hearing Officer
    Illinois Pollution Control
    100 W. Randolph Street
    Suite 11-500
    Chicago, Illinois 60601
    (VIA U.S. MAIL)
    (SEE PERSONS ON ATTACHED SERVICE
    LIST)
    Board
    PLEASE
    TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of
    the Clerk of
    the Illinois
    Pollution Control Board PRE-FILED QUESTIONS
    FOR THE ILLINOIS
    ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY SUBMITTED
    BY EXXONMOBIL
    OIL CORPORATION, a copy of which
    is herewith served upon you.
    Respectfully submitted,
    Dated: September 16,
    2008
    Katherine
    D. Hodge
    Monica T. Rios
    HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
    3150 Roland Avenue
    Post Office
    Box 5776
    Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
    (217) 523-4900
    By: /s/ Katherine D. Hodge
    Katherine D.
    Hodge
    T HIS FILING SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED
    PAPER
    Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 16, 2008
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I, Katherine D. Hodge, the undersigned, hereby certify that
    I have served the
    attached PRE-FILED QUESTIONS
    FOR THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY SUBMITTED BY EXXONMOBIL OIL CORPORATION
    upon:
    Mr. John T. Therriault
    Assistant Clerk of the Board
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    100 West Randolph Street, Suite
    11-500
    Chicago, Illinois 60601
    via electronic mail on September 16, 2008; and upon:
    Timothy Fox, Esq.
    Hearing Officer
    Illinois
    Pollution Control Board
    100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500
    Chicago, Illinois 60601
    Matthew J. Dunn, Esq.
    Chief, Environmental Bureau North
    Office of the Attorney General
    69 West Washington Street, Suite 1800
    Chicago, Illinois 60602
    Gina Roccaforte, Esq.
    Ms. Dana Vetterhoffer
    Division of Legal Counsel
    Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    1021 North Grand Avenue East
    Post
    Office
    Box 19276
    Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
    Virginia Yang, Esq.
    Deputy Legal Counsel
    Illinois Department of
    Natural Resources
    One Natural Resources
    Way
    Springfield, Illinois 62701-1271
    Sheldon A. Zabel, Esq.
    Kathleen C. Bassi, Esq.
    Stephen J. Bonebrake,
    Esq.
    Schiff
    Hardin, LLP
    6600 Sears Tower
    233 South Wacker Drive
    Chicago, Illinois 60606-6473
    Alec M. Davis, Esq.
    General Counsel
    Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
    215 East Adams Street
    Springfield,
    Illinois 62701
    by depositing said documents in the United States
    Mail, postage prepaid, in
    Springfield,
    Illinois on September 16, 2008.
    /s/ Katherine D. Hodge
    Katherine D. Hodge
    MOB0:027/Fil/R-08-19/NOF-COS -
    Pre-Filed Questions
    Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 16, 2008
    BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    IN THE MATTER OF:
    )
    NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS FROM ) R08-19
    VARIOUS
    SOURCE CATEGORIES:
    ) (Rulemaking - Air)
    AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE )
    PARTS
    211
    AND 217
    )
    PRE-FILED QUESTIONS FOR TH
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    SUBMITTED BY
    EXXONMOBIL OIL CORPORATION
    NOW COMES EXXONMOBIL OIL CORPORATION
    and
    submits
    the
    following Pre-Filed
    Questions
    for the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    ("Illinois
    EPA" or "Agency") for presentation at the hearings scheduled in
    the
    above-referenced
    matter:
    1.
    On page
    4
    of
    its Statement of Reasons, the Agency states that
    in October 2006, the USEPA completed a review
    of the NAAQS for
    particulate matter and, as a result,
    strengthened the
    24-hour
    standard (for
    PM2.5). Is it the intent of the Agency that the emission reductions sought
    under this proposed NOx RACT rule will result in attainment
    of
    the
    strengthened 24-hour standard far PM2,5 in the Chicago area?
    2.
    On pages 7 and 8 of its Statement of Reasons, the Agency
    states
    that States, such as Illinois, with non-attainment areas classified as
    moderate or above for
    the 8-hour ozone NAAQS were required to submit, by
    September 15,
    2006, a
    SIP demonstrating
    that sources specified under the
    Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 16, 2008
    CAA were subject to RACT" requirements. Was
    the required SIP
    submitted by
    the
    Agency to the USEPA by September 15, 2006?
    3.
    If the required SIP was not submi
    y the Agency to the
    USEPA by
    September
    15, 2006, when was it submitted?
    4.
    If the required SIP was not submitted by the Agency to the
    USEPA by September 15, 2006, what are the reasons why it was not
    submitted?
    5.
    Are there SIP
    submittal dates for
    other
    federal
    rules that this
    proposed rule is intended to
    address for
    which
    the
    Agency has not
    made the
    required submittal?
    6.
    If so, what are those other federal rules,
    and what
    are
    the
    reasons that the required submittals were not made?
    7. On page 8 of its Statement of Reasons, the Agency states that
    its regulatory
    proposal aims to achieve NOx reductions in Illinois from a
    number of
    source categories,
    while
    providing reasonable flexibility for the
    affected sources. In addition,
    proposed
    Section 217.152 requires
    affected
    sources to comply with the emission limitations to be established
    by
    the
    proposed rule by May 1, 2010. Please identify and specifically define the
    "flexibility"
    in the proposed rule at would enable an affected source
    to meet
    the May 1, 2010 compliance date?
    8.
    Again, the Agency's proposal provides, in Subsection
    217.152(a),
    that compliance with the requirements of Subparts D, E, F, G, H,
    and M is required beginning
    May 1, 2010. Is it true that, if the required SIP
    Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 16, 2008
    had been submitted by the Agency to the
    USEPA
    by September 15, 2006,
    EPA
    would
    have allowed up to 30 months for compliance to be achieved
    by the start of the first ozone season after the required SIP submission date?
    9. When does
    the Agency anticipate submitting the rules proposed
    here as a SIP revision to USEPA?
    10. In light of the
    anticipated
    date
    for
    submittal of this
    SIP
    revision,
    and the proposed compliance date of
    May
    1, 2010, how
    many months would
    be allowed for compliance to be achieved by affected
    sources?
    11. How does the Agency expect an affected source to
    meet
    this
    compliance
    date of May
    1, 2010,
    especially if the affected source must install
    control
    equipment to meet the proposed emission limitations?
    12. Has the
    Agency
    planned
    for any expedited preconstruction
    permitting efforts for
    affected sources that may require construction permits to
    install control equipment to meet the proposed emission limitations?
    13. Has the Agency considered whether
    the
    delay
    in submitting a
    regulatory proposal
    to the Board, which also results in delay of submittal
    of
    the
    SIP revision, and still maintaining the May 1, 2010 compliance date, will
    result in undue hardship for affected sources
    that must plan, design, purchase,
    construct, and test
    the specialized control equipment according to strict
    OSHA and industry standards?
    14. If so, what factors were
    considered
    by
    the Agency and what
    rationale was used to maintain the May 1, 2010 compliance
    date?
    Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 16, 2008
    15. Did the Agency consider the complexities involved for affected
    sources in
    meeting the May 1,
    2010
    -compliance date?
    16. Has the Agency considered extending the compliance date
    beyond
    May
    1,
    2010?
    17. Did the Agency consider, in proposing
    a
    compliance date
    of
    May 1, 2010,
    that
    certain industrial sectors have planned maintenance cycles
    of 3 to 5 years (or more)?
    18. Has the Agency considered and calculated the economic
    impact to Illinois and the region of an unplanned shutdown for industrial
    sectors
    that have such planned maintenance cycles?
    19. If so, what has the Agency determined to be the economic
    impact of the potential inability of affected
    sources to attain compliance
    in
    the
    amount
    of time
    anticipated to
    be available
    under the
    proposal?
    20. Have any affected sources told the Agency that they cannot
    meet the May 1, 2010 compliance date without an unplanned shutdown?
    21. If so, has the Agency considered alternative options for such
    affected sources
    that are unable to meet the compliance date?
    22.
    Has the Agency determined, even with unplanned shutdowns,
    whether it is
    technically
    feasible
    for all affected sources to meet the May 1,
    20101 compliance
    date?
    23. In proposed Section 217.158,
    the
    h as
    proposed that
    an
    owner or operator of certain affected emissions
    units may demonstrate
    compliance with an applicable requirement through an emissions averaging
    Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 16, 2008
    plan. However, Subsection 2'17.15$(x)(1)( of the proposal allows the
    inclusion in
    the averaging
    plan of emission units
    that commenced operation
    on or before
    January
    1, 2002 (as
    well as those emis n
    units
    that
    commenced operation after January 1, 2002 if they were replacements for
    emission units
    that
    commenced operation on or
    before January
    1,
    2002).
    How did the Agen set the January 1, 2002 date as a cutoff for new
    emission units allowed to be covered by an emission averaging plan?
    24. What factors did the Agency consider in establishing the
    January 1,
    2002 date?
    25. Did the Agency consider allowing
    emission units that
    commenced operation after January
    1,
    2002,
    to be included in the averaging
    plan?
    26. Is it true that certain NSPS, non-attainment NSR and PSD
    regulations may require NOx
    emission control measures that are equal to or
    more stringent
    than the
    proposed
    emission limitations here?
    27. Is it true that certain
    affected
    sources
    may have installed,
    pursuant to such NSPS, non-attainment
    NSR and PSD regulations, NOx
    control measures that are equal to or more stringent than
    the
    proposed
    emission limitations here?
    Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 16, 2008
    28.
    What
    factors.d d the Agency
    `consider in excluding .emission.
    units
    that.
    commenced operation
    after-Janu4ry 1, 2002, from inclusion'in the
    emissions averaging
    plan?
    B y:
    D ated:
    September 16; 2008
    Raymond G. Hinske
    Joliet Refinery SH&E
    Manager
    ExxonMobil Oil Corporation
    Post Office Box 874
    Joliet, Illinois 60434
    (815) 521-7442
    Respectfully submitted,
    EXXONMOBIL OIL CORPORATION
    Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 16, 2008

    Back to top