A 1
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

ID ..

RWY-

(Rulemaking-Air)

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION )

STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA, )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC )

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR )

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211 )

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Notice ofFiling

£l'IIEcenVEIOi

CLERK'S OFFICE

JUL U92009

STATE OF ILUNO ' Pollution Control 8o~~d

2. Appearances ofDana Vetterhoffer, Assistant Counsel for the Dlinois Environmental

Protection Agency, and John Kim, ChiefLegal Counsel for the Dlinois

Environmental Protection Agency

3. Proposal ofRegulations by Director Douglas P. Scott

4. Certification ofRequired Rule

5. Certification of Origination

6. Agency Analysis ofEconomic and Budgetary Effects

7. Motion for Waiver ofRequirements

8. Statement ofReasons

9. Proposed Amendments to 35m. Adm. Code Parts 211,218, and 219

10. Technical Support Documentfor Controlling VOM Emissionsfrom Lithographic

Printing, Letterpress Printing, Flexible Package Printing, Flat Wood Paneling

Coating. and Industrial Cleaning Operations, Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency. June 2009

II. Documents Relied Upon:

Control Techniques Guidelinesfor Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress

Printing, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality

Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.
Control Techniques Guidelinesfor Flexible Package Printing, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

Control Techniques Guidelines: Industrial Cleaning Solvents, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards,

Rese,arch Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

Control Techniques Guidelinesfor Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

Technical Support Documentfor Controlling VOM Emissionsfrom Lithographic

Printing Operations, illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Air Quality Planning

Section, Springfield, IL, October 1994.

Control Techniques Guideline Series: Control ofVolatile Organic Compound

Emissionsfrom Offset Lithographic Printing (DRAFT), United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle

Park, NC, September 1993.

Control ofvolatile organic compound emissionsfrom industrial solvent cleaning

operations (Proposed), Ohio Administrative Code 3745-21-23 (February 2, 2009).

12. Motion for Expedited Review

13. Certificate ofService

14. Notices of Proposed Amendments

15. Disk in Microsoft WORD containing Agency's Proposed Amendments to Parts 211,

218, and 219, and Notices ofProposed Amendments.

2
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION )

STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA, )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC )

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR )

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211 )

NOTICE

,o/'t

(Rulemaking-Air)

~~c

CLeRI<~!~/~l~

JUL U9 2UU9

STATE 0

POllution c~~rLINOIS rO/Board

To: John Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois 60601-3218

Virginia Yang

Deputy Legal Counsel

Illinois Department ofNatural Resources

One Natural Resources Way

Springfield, IL 62702

Matthew Dunn, Chief

Division ofEnvironmental Enforcement

Office ofthe Attorney General

188 West Randolph, 20th Floor

Chicago, IL 60601

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office ofthe Pollution Control

Board the REGULATORY PROPOSAL entitled "AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE

218, ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION STAl\TDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA, 35 ILL.

ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR THE METRO

EAST AREA, AND 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211," MOTION FOR WAIVER, MOTION FOR

EXPEDITED REVIEW, and APPEARANCES ofthe Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,

a copy ofwhich is herewith served upon you.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By:c?h =- iIdb~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division of Legal Counsel
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION )

STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA, )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC )

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR )

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211 )

APPEARANCE

1° /~ R99<'"

(Rulemaking-Air)

ReceOVElQi

Cl.ERK'S OFFICE

JUL U9 2009

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

The undersigned hereby enters her appearance as an attorney on behalf ofthe Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By: c:z:-x::,,MO,.

Dana Vetterhoffer ~~

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLcgal Counsel

DATED: July 8, 2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

AME1\1J)MENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION )

STANDARDS FOR THE CmCAGO AREA, )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC )

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR )

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211 )

APPEARANCE

o/~ RGk

(Rulemaking-Air)

The undersigned hereby enters his appearance as an attorney on behalf ofthe Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AG Y

BY::~-J~~~::::::::===---_ Jo J. .

Chief Legal Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: July 8, 2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION )

STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA, )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC )

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR )

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211 )

[o/'t

R.8g:'

(Rulemaking-Air)

AeCE;iVED

CLERK'S OFFICE

JUl U 2009

STATE OF ILLINOIS

PollutIon Control Board

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PROPOSAL OF

REGULATIONS

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency moves that the Illinois Pollution Control

Board adopt the attached regulations.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

/

By:.L/1--"C:"--"-7F"'-::':"--'::"-"'-L"""'--'-""- _

DATED: June 29 ,2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

,0 /'~ Rd?'

(Rulemaking-Air)

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION )

STANDARDS FOR THE CmCAGO AREA, )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC )

MATERIAL EMISSION STA..'NDARDS FOR )

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211 )

CERTIFICATION OF REQUIRED RULE

Arec~nVED

CLERK'S OFFICE

JUL U9 20D9

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency certifies in accordance with 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 102.202(h) and 102.500, and 415 ILCS 5128.2(b), that it believes that this proposal for

amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 211, 218, and 219 is a federally required rule under Sections

172(c)(I) and 182(b)(2) ofthe Clean Air Act ("CAA"). 42 U.S.C. §§ 7502(c)(1) and

7511 a(b)(2).

The proposal for amendments is needed to satisfy Illinois' obligation to submit a State

Implementation Plan ("SIP") for sources of volatile organic materials ("VOM") emissions in

areas designated as nonattainment with respect to the ozone National Ambient Air Quality

Standard ("NAAQS"). Section 172(c)(1) ofthe CAA provides that states must include in their

SIPs for nonattainment areas "reasonably available control measures," including "reasonably

available control technology" ("RACT"), for sources of emissions. 42 U.S.C. § 7502(c)(1).

Section 182(b)(2) ofthe CAA provides that, for ozone nonattainment areas, the State must revise

its SIP to include RACT for sources ofVOM emissions covered by a control techniques

guidelin~ ("CTG") issued between November 15, 1990, and the date of attainment. 42 U.S.c. §

7511a(b)(2).
The proposed amendments are intended to establish RACT requirements for Group II

Consumer and Commercial Product categories in response to CTGs issued by the United States

Environmental Protection Agency for such categories, and thereby satisfy the CM requirements

described above.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

BY:~~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: July 8, 2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

. Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

CERTIFICATION OF ORIGINATION

IN THE MATTER OF:

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218,

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION

STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA,

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR

THEMETROEASTAREA,AND

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RJ~ ,,'&

(Rulemaking-Air)

F'Qec

Cl.cFlIi~ ~'X:,a0

JUL a92009

STATED

POllution C~~fLL,'NOIS ro Board

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency certifies in accordance with 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 102.202(i) that this proposal for amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 211, 218, and 219

amends the most recent version ofthe rules as published on the Illinois Pollution Control

Board's website.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By: O)-v·"g 1!dIu~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: July 8,2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
Dlinois Register Citation: _

Agency:

PartfTitle:

Agency Analysis of Economic and

Budgetary Effects of Proposed Rulemaking

Dlinois Pollution Control Board

Definitions and General Provisions (35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 211)

iPllE:C~n~n CLEFlKf~o" F" IE[!J , FICE

JUL U!J 2009

STATE OF

POllution CO~tLlINOIS rol Board

Please attempt to provide as dollar-specific responses as possible and feel free to add any relevant

explanation.

L Anticipated effect on State expenditures and revenues.

(a) Current cost to the agency for this program/activity.

(approximately)

$ 0 per year

(b) If this rulemaking will result in an increase or decrease in cost, specify the fiscal year in

which this change will first occur and the dollar amount ofthe effect.

N/A

(c) Indicate the funding source, including Fund and appropriation lines, for this

program/activity. N/A

(d) If an increase or decrease in the costs of another State agency is anticipated, specify the

fiscal year in which this change will first occur and the estimated dollar amount of the

effect. N/A

(e) Will this rulemaking have any effeet on State revenues or expenditures not already

indicated above? No

2. Economic effect on persons affected by the rulemaking:

(a) Indicate the economic effect and specify the persons affected:

Positive _ Negative __ No effect

Persons affected: Owners and operators of affected lithographic printers, letternress

printers, flcxible package printers, flat wood paneling coaters, and sources using

industrial cleaning solvents.

Dollar amount per person: _0_

Total statewide cost: __0

(b) If an economic effect is predicted, please briefly describe how the effect will occur. N/A
, "

(c) Will the rulemaking have an indirect effect that may result in increased

administrative costs? No Will there be any change in requirements such as filing,

documentation, reporting or completion offorms? No

The proposed changes to Part 211 should have no indirect effect that may result in

increased administrative costs,
Agency:

Agency Analysis of Economic and

Budgetary Effects of Proposed Rulemaking

l11inois Pollution Control Board

Part/Title: Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Chicago Area (35

111. Adm. Code Part 218)

Illinois Register Citation: _

Please attempt to provide as dollar-specific responses as possible and feel free to add any relevant

explanation.

1. Anticipated effect on State expenditures and revenues.

(a) Current cost to the agency for this program/activity. -$50,300 per year

(b) If this rulemaking will result in an increase or decrease in cost, specify the fiscal

year in which this change will first occur and tlie dollar amount ofthe effect.

N/A

(c) Indicate the fimding source, including Fund and appropriation lines, for this

program/activity. N/A

(d) If an increase or decrease in the costs of another State agency is anticipated,

specify the fiscal year in which this change will first occur and the estimated

dollar amount ofthe effect. N/A

(e) Will this rulemaking have any effect on State revenues or expenditures not

already indicated above? No

2. Economic effect on persons affected by the rulemaking:

(a) Indicate the economic effect and ~pecify the persons affected:

Positive _ Negative....1L- No effect __

Persons affected: See list of potentiallv affected sources in TSD.

Dollar amount per person:

Affected lithographic printers: SO-855/ton

Affected letterpress printers: SO-855/ton

Affected flexible package printers: $O-2800/ton

Affected flat wood paneling coaters: SO-2600/ton

Affected industrial cleaning solvent users: Probable cost savings

Total statewide cost:

Affected lithographic printers: S308/day

Affected letterpress printers: S4/day
Affected flexible package printers: $84/day

Affected flat wood paneling coaters: $130/day

Affected industrial cleaning solvent users: Probable cost savings

(bl If an economic effect is predicted, please briefly describe how the effect will

occur. Costs due to control measures for newlv-affected sources, as described

in TSD.

(c) Will the rulemaking have an indirect effect that may result in increased

administrative costs? Will there be any ehange in requirements sueh as

filing, documentation, reporting or completion offorms?

The rulemaking will require a small amount of additional reporting but

should have no more than a negligible indirect effect that may result in

increased administrative costs.
Agency:

Agency Analysis of Economic and

Budgetary Effects of Proposed Rulemaking

TIlinois Pollution Control Board

PartlTitle: Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Metro East Area

(35 ill. Adm. Code Part 219)

TIlinois Register Citation: _

Please attempt to provide as dollar-specific responses as possible and feel free to add any relevant

explanation.

J. Anticipated effect on State expenditures and revenues.

(a) Current cost to the agency for this program/activity. -$5,500 per year

(b) If this rulemaking will result in an increase or decrease in cost, specifY the fiscal

year in which this change will first occur and the dollar amount of the effect.

N/A

(c) Indicate the funding source, including Fund and appropriation lines, for this

program/activity. N/A

(d) If an increase or decrease in the costs of another State agency is anticipated,

specify the fiscal year in which this change will first occur and the estimated

dollar amount of the effect. N/A

(e) Will this rulemaking have any effect on State revenues or expenditures not

already indicated above? No

2. Economic effect on persons affected by the rulemaking:

(a) Indicate the economic effect and specifY the persons affected:

Positive _ Negative No effect __

Persons affected: See list of potentially affected sources in TSD.

Dollar amount per person:

Affected lithographic printers: $0-855/ton

Affected letterpress printers: $0 (no affected sources)

Affected flexible package printers: $0 (no affected sources needing add-on

control modification)

Affected flat wood paneling coaters: $0 (no affected sources)

Affected industrial cleaning solvent users: Probable cost savings

Total statewide cost:

Affected lithographic printers: $6/day
Affected letterpress printers: $0 (no affected sources)

Affected flexible package printers: $0 (no affected sources needing add-on

control modification)

Affected flat wood paneling coaters: $0 (no affected sources)

Affected industrial cleaning solvent users: Probable cost savings

(b) If an economic effect is predicted, please briefly describe how the effect will

occur. Costs due to control measures for newlv-affected sources, as described

in TSD.

(c) Will the rulemaking have an indirect effect that may result in increased

administrative costs? Will there be any change in requirements such as

filing, documentation, reporting or completion offorms?

The rulemaking will require a small amount of additional reporting hut

should have no more than a negligible indirect effect that may result in

increased administrative costs.
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

\0 r'b

M9-

(Rulemaking-Air)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIECEHVE~ CLERK'S OFFICE

JUL U9 2009

STATE OF ILLINOIS

POllution Control Board

MOTION FOR WAIVER OF REOUIREMENTS

IN THE MATTER OF:

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218,

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION

STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA,

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORG.M~IC

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND .

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211

The Proponent~ the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("Illinois EPA"), by its

attorney, and pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.500, 102.110,102.200, and 102.402,

respectfully moves that the Illinois Pollution Control Board ("Board") waive the requirement that

the Dlinois EPA submit the original and nine copies ofthe regulaiory proposal including all

documents relied upon. In support ofits Motion, Illinois EPA states as follows:

1. Section 102.200 ofthe Board's procedural rules requires that the original and nine

copies of each regulatory proposal be filed with the Clerk.

2. Section 27(a) ofthe Environmental Protection Act ("Act') requires that the Illinois

EPA provide information supporting the proposal. 415 ILCS 5/27(a). In doing so, the Illinois

EPA has provided documents which were directly relied upon when drafting the regulatory

proposal. The documents relied upon are as follows:

a. Control Techniques Guidelinesfor Offset Lithographic Printing andLetterpress

Printing, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality

Plarming and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

b. Control Techniques Guidelinesfor Flexible Package Printing, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

1
c. Control Techniques Guidelines: Industrial Cleaning Solvents, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

d. Control Techniques Guidelinesfor Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States

Environmcntal Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

e.. Technical Support Documentfor Controlling VOM Emissionsfrom Lithographic

Printing Operations, nlinois Environmental Protection Agency, Air Quality Planning

Section, Springfield, IL, October 1994.

f. Control Techniques Guideline Series: Control ofVolatile Organic Compound

Emissionsfrom Offset Lithographic Printing (DRAFT), United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle

Park, NC, September 1993.

g. Control ofvolatile organic compound emissionsfrom industrial solvent cleaning

operations (Proposed), Ohio Administrative Code 3745-21-23 (February 2,2009).

3. This entire regulatory proposal consists of over 700 pages. Given the length ofthe

proposal and the resources required to provide nine copies, Illinois EPA requests that the Board

waive the normal copy requirements and allow lllinois EPA to file the original and four complete

copies ofthe documents.

WHEREFORE, the Illinois EPA moves that the Board waive the copy requirement and

allow the lllinois EPA to provide the Board with an original and four copies ofthe proposal and

the documents relied upon in the development ofthe proposal, as listed above.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By:(2)~~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

2
DATED: July 8, 2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544

3
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, )

ORGANIC MATERlAL EMISSION )

STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA, )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC )

MATERlAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR )

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211

/0 ~~ Rd¢'

(Rulemaking-Air)

Aeceg

CLERK'S O~lfaP

JUl U!:J 2009

STATE OF

POllution CO~b~,'NBOIS Oara

STATEMENT OF REASONS

I. INTRODUCTION

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("Illinois EPA") submits this

Statement of Reasons to the lllinois Pollution Control Board ("Board") pursuant to

Sections 27 and 28 ofthe Environmental Protection Act ("Act") (415 ILCS 5/27 and 28)

and 35 TIl. Adm. Code 102.202 in support ofthe attached proposal ofregulations. These

regulations are proposed to control emissions of Volatile Organic Material ("VOM"),

which is effectively the same as volatile organic compounds ("VOC"), from the

following Group II Consumer and Commercial Product Categories: Industrial Cleaning

Solvents, Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, Flexible Packaging Printing Materials,

Lithographic Printing Materials, and Letterpress Printing Materials.

This proposed rulemaking is intended to meet certain obligations ofthe State of

lllinois under the federal Clean Air Act ("CAA"), 42 U.S.c. § 7401 et seq. Specifically,

the rulemaking is intended to satisfy TIlinois' obligation to submit a State Implementation

Plan ("SIP") to address requirements under Sections 172 and 182 ofthe CAA for sources

ofVOM emissions in areas designated as nonattainment with respect to the ozone

National Ambient Air Quality Standard ("NAAQS"): See 42 U.S.C. §§ 7502 and 75lla.

1
Section l72(c)(l) ofthe CAA provides that states must include in their SIPs for

nonattainment areas "reasonably available control measures" ("RACM"), including

"reasonably available control technology" ("RACT"), for sources of emissions. 42 U.S.C.

§ 7502(c)(1). Section 182(b)(2) ofthe CAA provides that, for ozone nonattainment

.: areas, the State must revise its SIP to include RACT for sources ofVOC emissions

covered by a control techniques guideline ("CTG") issued between November 15, 1990,

and the dateofattainment. 42 U.S.C. § 75 1la(b)(2).

Illinois is proposing reasonable and cost effective VOM controls for Group II

Consumer and Commercial Product Categories in response to CTGs issued for such

categories. Included in this proposal are amendments to 35lll. Adm. Code Part 218,

Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Chicago Area; 35 m. Adm.

Code Part 219, Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Metro East

Area; and 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 211, Definitions and General Provisions.

II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

The CAA establishes a comprehensive program for controlling and improving the

nation's air quality via state and federal regulations. The United States Environmental

Protection Agency ("USEPA") is charged with identifying air pollutants that endanger

the public health and welfare and with formulating the NAAQS that specifY the

maximum permissible concentrations ofthose pollutants in the ambient air pursuant to

Sections 108 and 109 ofthe CAA. 42 U.S.C. §§ 7408-7409.

A. 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

Ozone is a gas composed ofthree atoms of oxygen. Ozone occurs both in the

Earth's upper atmosphere and at ground level. VOC is a primary precursor to the

2
formation of ground-level ozone, which is formed when oxides of nitrogen and VOC

react in the atmosphere in the presence ofsunlight. 71 Fed. Reg. 58746 (Oct. 5,2006).

Exposure to sufficient concentrations of ground-level ozone is associated with

agricultural crop loss, damage to forests and ecosystems, and a variety ofhuman health

effects, including acute respiratory symptoms, increased susceptibility to respiratory

infection, and pulmonary inflammation. 71 Fed. Reg. 58746.

On July 18, 1997, USEPA revised the NAAQS for ozone by replacing the I-hour

standard with an 8-hour standard. 62 Fed. Reg. 38856 (July 18, 1997). In Illinois, there

are two areas designated as nonattainment (moderate) for the 8-hour ozone standard: I)

the Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN dc;signated area, which includes Cook, DuPage,

Grundy (partial-Goose Lake and Aux Sable Townships), Kane, Kendall (partial-Oswego

Township), Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties; and 2) the St. Louis, MO-IL designated

area, which includes Jersey, Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair Counties. 40 CFR § 81.314.

B. Consumer and Commercial Prodncts, Group II

Section 183(e) ofthe CAA required that USEPA conduct a study ofthe emissions

ofVOC into the ambient air from consumer and commercial products in order to

determine their potential to contribute to ozone levels which violate the ozone NAAQS

and to establish criteria for regulating emissions ofVOC from those products. 71 Fed.

Reg. 58746. Section I83(e) provides, "[T]he Administrator shall list those categories of

consumer or commercial products that the Administrator determines, based on the study,

account for at least 80 percent ofthe VOC emissions ... from consumer or commercial

products in areas that violate the NAAQS for ozone" and shall divide the categories into

groups. 42 U.SC. § 751Ib(e)(3)(A).

3
Thc CAA requires that USEPA then either regulate VOC emissions from such

categories or issue a CTG in lieu of a national regulation ifthe Administrator determines

that such guidance will be substantially as effective as regulations in reducing emissions

ofVOC which contribute to ozonc levels in ozone nonattainment areas. 42 U.S.C. §

7511b(e)(3)(C). CTGs provide states with recommendations regarding what types of

controls could constitute RACT for VOCs for the applicable source categories. 71 Fed.

Reg. 58745,58747. States must either adopt regulations to implement the

recommendations in the CTG or adopt alternative approaches that constitute RACT,

either ofwhich must be submitted to the USEPA for review and approval as part ofthe

SIP process. 71 Fed. Reg. 58745,58747.

On October 5, 2006, the USEPA issued final CTGs for Group IT Consumer and

Commercial Product Categories in lieu ofnational regulations for the control ofVOC

emissions. The USEPA required that states submit SIP revisions in response to the CTGs

within one year. 71 Fed. Reg. 58745-58753.

Co CAA's RACT Requirements

USEPA designated the Chicago and Metro East areas in Illinois as nonattainment

(moderate) for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, which triggered requirements under the CAA

for adopting regulations that reduce emissions sufficiently to demonstrate attainment of

the standard. Section 172(c)(l) of the CAA provides, in pertinent part:

(c) Nonattainment plan provisions

The plan provisions (including plan items) required to be submitted under this

part shall comply with each ofthe following:

(1) In general

4
Such plan provisions shall provide for the implementation of all

reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as

practicable (including such reductions in emissions from existing

sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a

miillmum, ofreasonably available control technology) and shall

provide for attainment ofthe national primary ambient air quality

standards.

42 U.S.C. § 7502(c)(I). A subset ofRACM is RACT, which is defined as the lowest

emission limitation that a particular source can meet by applying a control technique that

is reasonably. available considering technological and economic feasibility. See 44 Fed.

Reg. 53762 (September 17,1979).

Additionally, Section 182(b) ofthe CAA provides, in pertinent part:

(b) Moderate Areas

Each State in which all or part of a Moderate Area is located shall, with respect to

the Moderate Area, make the submissions described under subsection (a) ofthis

section (relating to Marginal Areas), and shall also submit the revisions to the

applicable implementation plan described under this subsection.

(2) Reasonably available control technology

The State shall submit a revision to the applicable implementation

plan to include provisions to require the implementation of

reasonably available control technology under section 7502(c)(I)

ofthis title with respect to each ofthe following:

(A) Each category ofVOC sources in the area covered by a

CTG document issued by the Administrator between

November 15, 1990, and the date of attainment.

42 U.S.C. § 7511 a(b)(2).

Sections 172 and 182 ofthe CAA establish the requirement for Illinois to submit

VOC regulations constituting RACT for Group II Consumer and Commercial Product

Categories in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate and above. Illinois was

required to submit its SIP revisions by October 5, 2007.

5
III. PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF THE PROPOSAL

This rulemaking proposal has been prepared to satisfy Illinois' obligation to

submit a SIP to address the requirements under Sections 172 and 182 ofthe CAA, as

described above, for sources ofVOC emissions in areas designated as nonattainment with

respect to the ozone NAAQS. See 42 U.S.c. §§ 7502 and 7511a.

Also, Illinois is required to submit these SIP revisions before the USEPA can

redesignate the Chicago and Metro East nonattainment areas as attaining the 1997 ozone

NAAQS, regardless ofwhether the VOC reductions obtained by the SIP revisions are

actually necessary to achieve attainment ofthe NAAQS. Section 107(d)(3)(E) ofthe

CAA providcs that the Administrator may not redesignate a nonattainment area to

attainment unless the State has a fully-approved SIP for the area seeking redesignation

and the State has met all applicable requirements ofSection 110 and Part D (which

includes the requirement that states adopt VOC RACT rules for categories covered by a

CTG). 42 U.S.c. § 7407(d)(3)(E). In a September 17, 1993,guidance document from

Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation ("Shapiro

Memorandum"), the USEPA confinned, "[B]efore EPA can act favorably upon any State

redesignation request, the statutorily-mandated control programs ofsection 110 and part

D (that were due prior to the time ofthe redesignation request) must have been adopted

by the State and approved by EPA into the SIP." (Shapiro Memorandum, p. 2).1

) See also Wall v. USEPA. In Wall, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit vacated the

USEPA's redesignation of a state to attainment, in part because the state failed to promulgate VOCRACT

rules in response to CTGs. The USEPA argued that fully adopted VOC RACT rules were unnecessary

because the state did not need the reductions from such rules to achieve attairunent. The court rejected

USEPA's argument, holding that the CAA unambignously requires that a SIP submitted with respect to a

redesignation request contain fully adopted RACT rules required by Part D. Redesignation absent such

rules was therefore improper. Wall v. USEPA. 265 F.2d 426,433,440-42 (6th Cir. 2001).

6
On July 2, 2007, the Illinois EPA submitted to the USEPA an attainment

demonstration for the Metro East nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

On March 19,2009, the Illinois EPA submitted an attainment dcmonstration for the

Chicago nonattainment area as well. These areas cannot be redesignated to attainment of

the ozone NAAQS, however, unless and until the Illinois EPA submits SIP revisions in

response to the Group II CTGs and the USEPA approves such revisions.

Finally, in March 2008, USEPA strengthened the eight-hour ozone standard. 73

Fed. Reg. 16436 (March 27, 2008). It is likely that the same areas in llIinois that are

currently designated as nonattainment for the present standards will soon be designated as

nonattainment for the revised standard. While attainment ofthe revised standard is not

the purpose ofthis rulemaking, it should be noted that any reduction in YOM emissions .

in the nonattainment areas resulting from these proposed amendments will likely help

Illinois achieve the revised NAAQS.

Generally, lllinois EPA's regulatory proposal aims to implement the

recommendations contained in the CTGs to the extent that such recommendations are

consistent with, and impose stricter requirements than, existing regulations:

Industrial Cleaning Solvents. The proposed regulations apply to cleaning

operations at sources that meet the applicability threshold set forth in the CTG, subject to

several partial and complete exclusions. Per the CTG, the proposed regulations require

that subject sources comply with work practice requirements and with one ofthree

alternative control requirements.

Flat Wood Paneling Coatings. The proposed regulations require that flat wood

paneling coating lines comply with the YOM content limitation specified in the CTG. As

7
an alternative to the YOM content limit, subject lines may comply with a daily weighted

averaging limitation or utilize an add-on control device that meets a specified overall

YOM reduction requirement. The proposed regulations also require that flat wood

paneling coating lines comply with the existing cleaning and storage work practice

requirements for wood furniture, as well as with the work practices set forth in the CTG.

Flexible Packaging Printing Materials. The proposed regulations require that

flexographic and rotogravure printing lines that print flexible packaging, or that print

flexible packaging and non-flexible packaging on the same line, comply with the CTGrecommended YOM content limit. Alternatively, such lines may comply with a weighted

averaging limitation or install and operate a capture and control system that reduces

YOM emissions by specified percentages. The proposed regulations also require that

printing lines that meet the CTG's prescribed applicability threshold comply with work

practice requirements for cleaning materials.

Lithographic Printing Materials. The proposed regulations provide that the

existing requirements regarding fountain solutions and cleaning materials apply to

sources that meet the applicability threshold specified in the CTG, subject to certain

exclusions. Additionally, the proposed regulations require that afterburners or other

approved control devices installed·on heatset web offset lithographic printing lines reduce

YOM emissions by specified percentages or to a maximum afterburner exhaust outlet

concentration.

Letterpress Printing Materials. The proposed regulations require that heatset web

letterpress printing lines that meet the CTG's prescribed applicability threshold install

afterburners or other approved control devices that reduce YOM emissions by specified

8
percentages or to a maximum afterburner exhaust outlet concentration. All letterpress

printing lines that meet the CTG's lower applicability threshold must comply with work

practices for cleaning materials. Such lines must also comply with either a YOM content

limit or YOM composite partial vapor pressure limit for as-used cleaning solutions,

subject to a CTG-recommended exclusion for up to 110 gallons ofcleaning materials per

year.

IV. GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS AND SOURCES AFFECTED

The geographic regions subject to the proposed regulations are the two areas

designated as nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standard: 1) the Chicago-Gary-Lake

County, IL-lN designated area, which includes Cook, DuPage, Grundy (partial-Goose

Lake and Aux Sable Townships), Kane, Kendall (partial-Oswego Township), Lake,

McHenry, and Will Counties; and 2) the S1. Louis, MO-IL designated area, which

includes Jersey, Madison, Monroe, and S1. Clair Counties. 40 CFR § 81.314.

The proposed regulations are generally expected to affect both new and existing

sources that are covered by a Group II CTG, are located in the Chicago or Metro East

nonattainment areas, and meet the applicability criteria specified in the regulations.

Appendix B to the TSD lists the sources potentially affected by the proposed regulations.

V. TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY AND ECONOMIC REASONABLENESS

The technology for controlling YOM emissions from Group II product categories

is both technically feasible and economically reasonable. Affected sources can meet the

requirements in the proposed amendments through a number ofreadily available control

techniques.

9
Control techniques for reducing YOM emissions from industrial cleaning solvents

include work practices, material reformulation or substitution (namely, the use oflowYOM cleaning solvents, no-YOM solvents, or low vapor pressure solvents), and add-on

controls or modifying equipment. Similarly, material reformulation, add-on controls, and

work practices for coatings and cleaning materials are available YOM reduction

techniques for flat wood paneling coating lines. See Technical Support Document.

YOM control approaches for flexible packaging printing lines include material

reformulation, add-on controls such as thermal oxidizers, catalytic oxidizers, and carbon

adsorbers, and work practices for cleaning materials. For lithographic printing lines,

control options include add-on controls for heatset web offset lithographic printing lines,

such as thermal afterburners, catalytic afterburners, and condenser filter systems, fountain

solution reformulation (such as the use of alcohol substitutes), process modifications for

fountain solutions, and material reformulation or substitution for cleaning solutions.

Control approaches for letterpresses are similar to those available for lithographic

printing lines (although letterpresses do not utilize fountain solutions). Technical Support

Document.

In the Technical Support Document, the Illinois EPA explains in detail that the

above control approaches are economically feasible, particularly as many ofthe

techniques are already widely used by the affected industries.

VI. COMMUNICATION WITH INTERESTED PARTIES

The Illinois EPA engaged in extensive outreach on this proposal. On November

5,2008, the Illinois EPA posted a draft ofthe proposed rule and copies ofthe pertinent

CTGs on its website for public comment. The Illinois EPA subsequently engaged in

10
numerous conference calls and exchanged correspondence with representatives of

affected sources regarding the proposal.

Illinois EPA received several comments on the draft rule, and this proposal

incorporates many ofthe concerns and suggestions set forth in those comments. Such

comments can generally be categorized into the following areas: appropriate applicability

thresholds and exclusions, methods of calculating applicability thresholds, appropriate

control requirements, simplification ofrecordkeeping and reporting requirements, and

revisions to proposed definitions. These regulations are being proposed after the

interested parties have had an opportunity to review the proposal and discuss any issues

with the Illinois EPA.

VII. SYNOPSIS OF TESTIMONY

The Illinois EPA plans to call David Bloomberg, Compliance Unit Manager,

Compliance Section, Bureau ofAir, 11linois EPA, as a witness at hearing, Mr.

Bloomberg will testify regarding the proposed amendments and will answer questions,

Written testimony will be submitted prior to hearing in accordance with the Board's

procedural rules'.

VIII. THE ILLINOIS EPA'S PROPOSAL

The following is a Section-by-Section summary ofthe Illinois EPA's proposal.

35 Ill. Adm. Code 211

Subpart B: Definitions

The Illinois EPA proposes amending current definitions in, and adding new

definitions to, Part 211.

Section 211.1000 Class II Finish

11
The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for Class IT finish. This definition

is necessary for Subpart F.

Section 211.1745 Digital Printing

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for digital printing. This definition

is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.1878 Electrical Apparatus Component

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for electrical apparatus component.

This definition is necessary for Section 2181219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.1885 Electronic Component

The Illinois EPA proposes amending the definition of electronic component by

extending the application of the definition to Section 218/219.187 and by adding an

exception to the definition. These revisions are necessary for Section 218/219.187 of

Subpart E.

Section 211.2355 Flat Wood Paneling

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for flat wood paneling. This

definition is necessary for Subpart F.

Section 211.2356 Flat Wood Paneling Coating Line

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for flat wood paneling coating line.

This definition is necessary for Subpart F.

Section 211.2368 Flexible Packaging

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for flexible packaging. This

definition is necessary for Subpart H.

Section 211.2615 General Work Surface

12
The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for general work surface. This

definition is necessary for Section 2181219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.2830 Heatsct

The Illinois EPA proposes amending the definition of "heatset" to include

letterpress printing lines. This revision is necessary for Subpart H.

Section 211.2855 Heatset Web Letterpress Printing Line

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for heatset web letterpress printing

line. This definition is necessary for Subpart H.

Section 211.2965 High Precision Optic

The illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for high precision optic. This

definition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.3215 Janitorial Cleaning

The illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for janitorial cleaning. This

defmition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.3305 Letterpress Printing Line

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for letterpress printing line. This

definition is necessary for Subpart H.

Section 211.3555 Maintenance Cleaning

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for maintenance cleaning. This

defmition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 ofSubpart E.

Section 211.3705 Medical Device

.The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for medical device. This definition

is necessary for Section 2181219.187 of Subpart E.

13
Section 211.3707 Medical Device and Pharmaceutical Manufacturing

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definitiou for medical device and

pharmaceutical manufacturing.. This definition is necessary for Section 2I8/219.187 of

Subpart E.

Section 211.4065 Non-Heatset

The Illinois EPA proposes amending the definition of "non-heatset" to include

letterpress printing lines. This revision is necessary for Subpart H.

Section 211.5335 Radiation Effect Coating

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for radiation effect coating. This

definition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.5535 Repair Cleaning

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for repair cleaning. This definition

is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.5585 Research and Development Operation

The illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for research and development

operation. This definition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 ofSubpart E.

Section 211.5860 Scientific Instrument

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a defmition for scientific instrument. This

definition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.5875 Screen Printing

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for screen printing. This definition

is necessary for Section 218/219.187 ofSubpart E.

Section 211.5885 Screen Reclamation

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for screen reclamation. This

14
definition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.6405 Sterilization Indicating Ink

Thc Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for sterilization indicating ink.

This definition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.6425 Stripping

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for stripping. This definition is

necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.6535 Surface Preparation

The illinois EPA proposes adding a definition for surface preparation. This

definition is necessary for Section 218/219.187 of Subpart E.

Section 211.7290 Wood Furniture

The Illinois EPA proposes amending the definition of "wood furniture" by

excluding flat wood paneling from such definition. This revision is necessary for Subpart

F.

35 III. Adm. Code 2181219

Subpart A: General Provisions

Section 218/219.106 Compliance Dates

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a new subsection (e) to Section 218.106 and a

new subsection (c) to Section 219.106, which establish May 1, 2010, as the compliance

date for sources subject to the flat wood paneling emission limits.

Subpart E: Solvent Cleaning

Section 2181219.181 Solvent Cleaning in General

15
The Illinois EPA proposes changing the title ofthis Section to "Solvent Cleaning

Degreasing Operations." The Illinois EPA also proposes amending this Section to

specifY that Sections 2181219.182 through 218/219.184 and Section 218/219.186 are

applicable to cold cleaning, open top vapor, and conveyorized degreasing operations.

Section 218/219.187 Other Industrial Solvent Cleaning Operations

The Illinois EPA proposes adding Section 218/219.187. Subsection (a) provides

that the requirements in Section 218/219.187 apply to all cleaning operations which use

organic materials at sourccs that emit 6.8 kg/day (IS Ibs/day) Or more ofVOM from

cleaning operations at the source, in the absence of air pollution control equipment.

Subsection (a)(2), however, exempts numerous types of cleaning operations from some

or all ofthe limitations in Section 218/219.187. Subsection (a) also defines "cleaning

operations."

Subsection (b) provides that no source subject to Section 218/219.187 shall

perform subject cleaning operations unless the source complies with the applicable YOM

content limitation, uses cleaning materials with a composite vapor pressure ofno more

than 8.0 mmHg measured at 20 degrees Celsius, or installs and operates an emissions

control system that reduces YOM emissions from the subject cleaning operation by at

least 85 percent overall.

Subsection (c) provides that sources shall demonstrate compliance with this

Section by using the applicable test methods and proc·edures in Section 218/219.187(g)

and by complying with all applicable recordkeeping and reporting requirements in

Section 218/219.187(e).

16
Subsection (d) provides that, for each subject cleaning operation, subject sources

shall cover open containers, minimize air circulation around the cleaning operation,

properly dispose of used solvent and shop towels, and utilize equipment practices that

milllmlZe emISsIOns.

Subsection (e) establishes recordkeeping and reporting requirements for sources

subject to or exempt from the limitations ofthis Section. Subsection (e)(l) provides that,

by May 1, 2010, sources exempt from the limitations of Section 218/219.187 because of

the criteria in Section 218/219.187(a)(I) shall submit a certification to the Illinois EPA

that includes a <)eclaration that the source is exempt, as well as calculations which

demonstrate that combined emissions ofVOM from cleaning operations at the source

never equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day). Such sources shall notify the minois EPA

of any records that show that the combined emissions ofVOM from cleaning operations

at the source ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day).

Subsection (e)(2) provides that, by May 1,2010, all sources subject to Section

2181219.187 shall submit a certification to the Illinois EPA that includes I) a declaration

that all subject cleaning operations are in compliance with the requirements ofthis

Section; 2) identification ofeach subject cleaning operation and each YOM-containing

cleaning solution used in such operation; 3) the limitation with which each subject

cleaning operation will comply, and if complying with the emissions control system

requirement, what type of emissions control system will be used; 4) initial documentation

that each subject cleaning operation will comply with the applicable limitation; 5)

identification ofthe method that will be used to demonstrate continuing compliance with

the applicable limitations; 6) a description ofthe practices and procedures that the source

17
will follow to ensure compliance with the limitations of Section 218/219.187(d); and 7) a

description of each cleaning operation exempt pursuant to Section 218/219.187(a)(2), if

any, and a listing ofthe emission unites) on which the exempt cleaning operation is

performed.

Subsection (e)(3) provides additional recordkeeping and reporting provisions for

sources complying with the YOM content limitations in subsection (b)(l) ofSection

2181219.187.

Subsection (e)(4) provides additional recordkeeping and reporting provisions for

sources complying with the YOM composite partial vapor pressure limitations in

subsection (b)(2) ofSection 218/219.187

Subsection (c)(5) provides additional recordkeeping and reporting provisions for

sources complying with the emissions control system requirements in subsection (b)(3) of

Section 218/219.187.

Subsection (e)(6) provides that all sources subject to the requirements of

subsections (b) and (d) ofthis Section shall notify the Illinois EPA of any violation of

such subsections by providing a description ofthe violation and copies ofrecords

documenting the violation to the illinois EPA within 30 days following the occurrence of

the violation.

Subsection (e)(7) provides that all records required by subsection (e) shall be

retained by the source for three years and shall be made available to the Illinois EPA

upon request.

Subsection (f) establishes monitoring requirements for emissions control systems

if such systems are used to demonstrate compliance.

18
Subsection (g) establishes requirements regarding testing to demonstrate

compliance with Section 218/219.187.

Subpart F: Coating Operations

Section 218/219.204 Emission Limitations

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (c) to provide that the paper

coating limitation shall not apply to any owner or operator of a paper coating line on

which lithographic or letterpress printing is performed ifthe paper coating line complies

with the applicable emissions limitations in Subpart H ofthis Part.

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsection (p) to Section 218.204 and

subsection (0) to Section 219.204, which restrict the VOM content offlat wood paneling

coatings to 0.25 kg VOMII coatings or 0.35 kg VOMII solids or less.

Section 218/219.205 Daily-Weighted Average Limitations

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (a) ofthis Section to include flat

wood paneling coating lines in the daily-weighted averaging alternative.

Section 218/219.207 Alternative Emission Limitations

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (a) ofthis Section, adding

subsection (I) to Section 218.207, and adding subsection (k) to Section 219.207 to include

flat wood paneling coating lines in the alternative emissions limitations option. The

proposed subsections provide that a flat wood paneling coating line may utilize a capture

system and control device ifsuch system provides at least 90 percent reduction in the

overall emissions ofVOM from the coating line or tlle owner or operator ofthe flat wood

paneling coating line complies with all requirements set forth in subsection (b)(2) ofthis

Section.

19
The lllinois EPA also proposes amending Section 218.207(h)(1) to correct the

formatting of an equation.

Section 218/219.210 Compliance Schedule

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsection (g), which provides that, on and

after a date consistent with Section 218/219.106, sources subject to the flat wood

paneling coating emission limitations shall comply with the applicable provisions in

SubpartF.

Section 218/219.211 Recordkeeping and Reporting

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsections (c) and (d) to provide that, for

flat wood paneling coating lines, YOM content infoffilation shall be maintained and/or

reported in terms ofweight ofVOM per volume of coatings or solids, as applicable, as

applied each day on each coating line. The illinois EPA also proposes correcting a

spelling error in Section 2l8.2II(c)(3)(A).

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (e) to provide that flat wood

paneling coating lines complying pursuant to Section 218/219.207 shall comply with the

recordkeeping and reporting requirements set forth in subsection (e).

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsection (g), which establishes recordkeeping

and reporting requirements for flat wood paneling coating lines subject to the work

practice requirements set forth in Section 218/219.217.

Finally, the Illinois EPA proposes adding a space and deleting a space in Section

218.211(b)(I).

Section 218/219.212 Cross-Line Averaging to Establish Compliance for Coating

Lines

20
The Illinois EPA proposes amending this Section to provide that the cross-line

averaging alternative is not available to flat wood paneling coating lines.

Section 218/219.217 Wood Furniture Coating Work Practice Standards

The Illinois EPA proposes changing the title ofthis Section to "Wood Furniture

Coating and Flat Wood Paneling Coating Work Practice Standards." The Illinois EPA

also proposes amending this Section to provide that flat wood paneling coating lines are

subject to the existing cleaning and storage work practice requirements in this Section.

The Illinois EPA proposes adding additional cleaning and storage requirements for flat

wood paneling coating lines as well; specifically, the Illinois EPA proposes requiring that

such coating lines minimize spills ofVOM containing coatings, thinners, and cleaning

materials, minimize emissions ofVOM during cleaning activities, and keep mixing

vessels which contain YOM coatings and other materials closed except when specifically

in use.

Subpart H: Printing and Publishing

Section 218/219.401 Flexographic and Rotogravure Printing

The Illinois EPA proposes amending this Section to separate requirements that are

applicable prior to the new compliance date from those applicable after the new

compliance date.

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (a) to provide that, on and after

May 1, 2010, owners and operators offlexographic or rotogravure printing lines that do

not print flexible packaging and that are complying with subsection (a) shall comply with

the existing YOM content limitations. Owners and operators offlexographic or

rotogravure printing lines that print flexible packaging or that print flexible packaging

21
and non-flexible packaging on the same line shall restrict the YOM content of coatings

and inks to .8 kg VOM/kg solids applied or.l6 kg VOM/kg materials applied Or less.

The Illinois EPA proposes amending Scction 21 81219.401 (b) to provide that, on

and after May I, 2010, owners and operators offlexographic or rotogravure printing lines

that do not print flexible packaging and that are complying with subsection (b) shall

comply with the existing weighted averaging requirements. Owners and operators of

flexographic or rotogravure printing lines that print flexible packaging, or that print

flexible packaging and non-flexible packaging on the same line, and that are complying

with subsection (b) shall not apply coatings or inks on the subject printing line unless the

weighted average, by weight, YOM content of all coatings and inks as applied each day

on the subject printing line does not exceed the YOM limitations specified in

amendments to subsection (a) ofthis Section. The Illinois EPA proposes inserting

equations for calculating the weighted average YOM content for such lines. 2

The lllinois EPA also proposes amending Section 218.401(b)(l)(A) to correct a

typographical error in the existing equation, and Section 219.401(b) to correct spacing

errors in the existing equations.

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (c) to provide that, on and after

May 1, 201 0, the owner or operator of a flexographic or rotogravure printing line that

does not print flexible packaging and that is complying with subsection (c) shall equip the

printing line with a capture system and control device that complies with the existing

control efficiency requirements. The owner or operator ofa flexographic or rotogravure

printing line that prints flexible packaging shall equip the printing line with a capture

system and control device that provides an overall rcduction in YOM emissions of 65·80

2 For ease ofreading, however, the equations are not underlined in the text ofthe proposed rule.

22
percent, depending On the dates that the printing line and control system were first

constructed at the subject source. The owner or operator of a flexographic or rotogravure

printing line that prints flexible packaging and non-flexible packaging on the same line

shall comply with the overall control efficiency requirements set forth in either

subsection (c)(I)(D) or subsection (c)(3) ofthis Section, whichever is more stringent.

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (c)(6) to specify the printing lines

that are required to perform testing pursuant to this subsection.

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsection (d), which provides that VOMcontaining cleaning materials associated with flexographic or rotogravure printing lines

that print flexible packaging or print flexible packaging and non-flexible packaging on

the same line shall be kept, stored, and disposed ofin closed containers, and conveyed

from one location to another in closed containers or pipes.

Section 218/219.402 Applicability

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsection (b), which provides that the

limitations of Section 218/219.401(d) apply to all flexographic and rotogravure printing

lines that print flexible packaging or print flexible packaging and non-flexible packaging

on the same line at sources where the combined emissions ofVOM from all flexographic

and rotogravure printing lines total 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day) or more, in the absence of air

pollution control equipment.

Section 218/219.403 Compliance Schedule

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsections (e), (f), and (g), which establish

May I, 2010, as the compliance date for the requirements set forth in the proposed

amendments.

23
Section 218/219.404 Recordkeeping and Reporting

The Illinois EPA proposes amending this Section to reference recordkeeping and

reporting compliance dates for printing lines subject to the limitations in the proposed

amendments to Section 218/219.401.

The Illinois EPA also proposes amending subsections (c) and (d) to clarify that

the owner or operator of a printing line subject to the requirements in Section

218/219.401 (a)(2)(B) or (b)(3) shall certify in accordance with subsection (c)(l) Or

(d)(1), as applicable, even ifthe owner or operator ofsuch line submitted a certification

prior to January 1,2010.

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (e) to provide that.ifthe owner or

operator of a printing line is not required to perform testing of a capture system and

control device pursuant to Section 218/219.401(c)(6), the owner or operator shall subm.it

a certification to the Agency that includes specified information. The Illinois EPA also

proposes amending this subsection to provide that, by May 1, 2010, owners or operators

ofprinting lines subject to Section 218/219.401(c)(3) or (c)(4) shall submit to the Illinois

EPA records documenting the dates each subject printing line and control device were

constructed at the subject source.

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsections (f), (g), and (h). Subsection (f)

establishes recordkeeping and reporting requirements for any owner or operator of a

flexographic or rotogravure printing line that prints flexible packaging or prints flexible

packaging and non-flexible packaging on the same line and which is exempt from the

limitations of Section 218/219.401(d) because ofthe criteria in Section 218/219.402(b).

Subsection (g) establishes recordkeeping and reporting requirements for any owner or

24
operator of a printing line subject to the limitations ofSection 218/219.401 (d).

Subsection (h) provides that all records required by subsections (f) and (g) shall be

retained for three years and shall be made available to the Agency upon request.

Section 2181219.405 Lithographic Printing: Applicabilitv

The Illinois EPA proposes amending this Section to separate requirements that are

applicable prior to the new compliance date from those applicable after the new

compliance date. The Illinois EPA also proposes deleting requirements that were only

applicable until March 15, 1996, and reformatting/renumbering the remaining

subsections accordingly.

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a new subsection (c) to provide that, on and

after May 1, 2010, the requirements in Sections 218/219.407(a)(I)(B) through (a)(I)(E)

and 218/219.407(b) and an applicable provisions in Sections 218/219.408 through

218/219.411 ofthis Subpart shan apply to an owners or operators ofheatset web offset

lithographic printing tine(s) ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all lithographic

printing Ene(s) at the source (including solvents used for cleanup operations associated

with the lithographic printing line(s)) ever exceed 45.5 kg/day (100 lbs/day), before the

application of capture systems and control devices. On and after May 1,2010, Sections

218/219.407(a)(l)(A), 218/219.407(a)(2) through (a)(5), and all applicable provisions in

Sections 218/219.408 through 218/219.411, shall apply to all owners or operators of

lithographic printing lines at sources where the combined emissions ofVOM from an

lithographic printing lines at the source (including solvents used for cleanup operations

associated with the lithographic printing lines) ever total 6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day) or more.

Finany, subsection (c) provides that, at sources where the combined emissions ofVOM

25
from all lithographic printing line(s) at the source equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day)

but do not exceed 45.5 kg/day (100 lbs/day), before the application ofcapture systems

and control devices, certain specified exclusions apply unless the owner or operator ofthe

source certifies that the source will not make use of any such exclusions.

Section 218/219.406 Provisions Applving to Reatset Web Offset Lithographic

Printing Prior to March 15,1996

The TIlinois EPA proposes repealing this Section, as it contains requirements that

.were applicable prior to March IS, 1996.

Section 2181219.407 Emission Limitations and Control Requirements for

Lithographic Printing Lines On and Mter March 15, 1996

The TIlinois EPA proposes amending this Section by deleting references to the

previous compliance date ofMarch IS, 1996, and separating requirements that are

applicable prior to the new compliance date from those applicable after the new

compliance date. The Illinois EPA also proposes changing the YOM content limitations

for fountain solutions from "by volume" to "by weight," as USEPA has informed the

lllinois EPA that this is the appropriate way to measure the limit.

The lllinois EPA proposes amending subsections (a)(I)(C) and (b) to provide that,

on and after May 1,20I0, owners or operators ofsubject heatset web offset lithographic

printing lines shall install and operate an afterburner or other approved control device so

that YOM emissions from the press dryer exhaust are reduced by 90-95 percent, by

weight, depending on the date that the afterburner or other control device was first

constructed at the subject source, or to a maximum afterburner exhaust outlet

concentration of20 ppmv (as carbon).

26
The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (a)(1 )(D) to delete references to

monitoring requirements already set forth in Section 218/219.410.

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (a)(4) to provide that, on and

after May I, 2010, owners or operators ofsources that meet the applicability criteria in

Section 218/219.405(c)(3) and do not certify pursuant to Section 218!219.411(g)(I)(B)

that the source will not make use of any ofthe exclusions in Section 218/219.405(c)(3)

shall not cause or allow the use of a cleaning solution on any lithographic printing line

unless the YOM content ofthe as-used cleaning solution is less than or equal to 70

percent, by weight, or shall satisfy the alternative YOM composite partial vapor pressure

limitation.

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (a)(5) to specify that the storage

and disposal requirements for cleaning materials apply except when such materials are

specifically in use.

Section 218/219.408 Compliance Schedule for Lithographic Printing On and After

March 15, 1996

The Illinois EPA proposes repealing this Section, as the pertinent compliance

dates are set forth in Section 218/219.405.

Section 218/219.409 Testing for Lithographic Printing On and After March 15,

1996

The Illinois EPA proposes deleting a reference to the previous compliance date of

March IS, 1996, in the title to this Section.

Section 218/219.411 Recordkeeping and Reporting for Lithographic Printing

The Illinois EPA proposes amending this Section by deleting references to the

previous compliance date ofMareh IS, 1996, and clarifying the requirements that apply

27
to sources prior to the new compliance date and those that apply on and after the new

compliance date. The Illinois EPA also proposes inserting into this Section the equation

fOT calculating maximum theoretic emissions ofVOM, which was previously contained

in Section 2181219.406.

The Illinois EPA proposes adding a new subsection (b), which contains

recordkeeping and reporting provisions for printing lines that are exempt on and after

.May I, 2010, and relettering the remaining subsections accordingly. Subsection (b)(l)

governs lithographic printing lines exempt pursuant to Section 2l8/2l9.405(c)(2). Along

with standard recordkeeping and reporting requirements, the Illinois EPA proposes an

emission a<ljustrnent factor to be used when determining VOM emissions from inks used

On lithographic printing line(s) at the source, as well as an emission adjustment factor to

be used when calculating emissions from used shop towels ifthe YOM composite vapor

pressure of each associated cleaning solution is less than 10 mmHg measured at 20"C

(68°F) and the shop towels are kept iil closed containers.

The Illinois EPA proposes that, as an alternative to the YOM emission

calculations set forth in subsection (b)(l)(B), a source may determine that it emits below

6.8 kg/day (15lbs/day) ofVOM ifit complies with material use limitations during each

calendar month. The Illinois EPA proposes that the material use alternative only be

available to sources with only one type oflithographic printing operation (e.g., a source

with only heatset web offset lithographic printing operations). If a source exceeds the

material use limitation in any given month, the source shall complete emissions

calculations pursuant to subsection (b)(I)(B) within 15 days ofthe end ofthat month. If

28
a source exceeds the material use limitations for six consecutive months, the source is no

longer eligible for the material use alternative.

Subsection (b)(2) governs heatset web offset lithographic printing lines exempt

pursuant to Section 2IS/2l9.405(c)(l) but not exempt pursuant to Section

2IS/219.405(c)(2). Along with standard recordkeeping and reporting requirements, the

Illinois EPA proposes an emission adjustment factor to be used when determining YOM

emissions from inks used on lithographic printing line(s) at the source, and an emission

adjustment factor to be used when calculating emissions from used shop towels ifthe

YOM composite vapor pressure of each associated cleaning solution is less than 10

mmHg measured at 20°C (6SoF) and the shop towels are kept in closed containers.

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (c) to provide that the

recordkeeping requirements in subsections (c)(l) or (c)(2) do not apply to sources

utilizing the material use limitation alternative. The lllinois EPA also proposes deleting

subsection (c)(3).

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (d) to provide that sources

complying with the add-on control device requirement shall include in their initial

certification to the Illinois EPA the date that the device was first constructed at the

subject source. The Illinois EPA also proposes amending subsection (d) to change the

frequency that owners or operators of heatset web offset lithographic printing lines

complying with the add-on control device requirements are required to check the air flow

direction or air pressure ofthe dryer and press room from once a day to once per calendar

month.

29
The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (e)(l)(C) to provide that a source

subject to fountain solution YOM content limitations shall include in its initial

certification a statement that the fountain solution will comply with the YOM content

limitations in Section 218/219.407(a)(l)(A), (a)(2), or (a)(3), as applicable. The Illinois

EPA proposes amending subsection (e)(2)(C) to provide that the weight of each

component used in a fountain solution batch shall be recorded by sources, if applicable.

The Illinois EPA also proposes deleting subsection (e)(4).

The Illinois EPA proposes amending subsection (£)(1) to specify that lithographic

printing line cleaning operations that are excluded pursuant to Section

218/219.405(c)(3)(C) are not required to submit a certification pursuant to subsection (£).

The Illinois EPA also proposes deleting subsections (£)(1 )(A), (£)(l)(C), and (£)(4), and

amending the relettered subsection (£)(l)(A) to provide that a source subject to the

cleaning requirements in Section 2181219.407 shall include in its initial certification a

statement that the cleaning solution will comply with the limitations in Section

218/219.407(a)(4).

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsection (g), which sets forth the

recordkeeping and reporting requirements for owners or operators oflithographic printing

line(s) subject to one or more ofthe exclusions set forth in Section 218/219.405(c)(3).

Such owners or operators shall submit an initial certification to the Illinois EPA, collect

and record specified information for each subject printing line, notify the Agency ifthe

printing line ever becomes ineligible for the exclusions set forth in Section

218/219.405(c)(3), and, ifchanging between opting out ofsuch exclusions and utilization

30
ofthe exclusions, submit an additional certification, infonning the Illinois EPA ofthe

change.

The Illinois EPA proposes adding subsection (i), which sets forth emission

adjustment factors that may be used when calculating YOM emissions from heatset web

offset lithographic printing operations for purposes other than the applicability thresholds

in Section 218/219.405.

Section 2J 8/2J9.412 Letterpress Printing Lines: Applicability

The Illinois EPA proposes adding this Section, which addresses the applicability

ofthe proposed letterpress printing regulations. Subsection (a) ofthis Section provides

that the limitations in Sections 218/219.413 through 218/219.416 apply to all owners or

operators ofheatset web letterpress printing lines ifsuch lines (including solvents used

for cleanup operations associated with such lines) at the source have a potential to emit

22.7 Mg (25 tons) or more ofVOM per year. Subsection (a) also provides that Sections

218/219.413 through 218/219.416 apply to all owners or operators ofletterpress printing

lines at sources where the combined emissions ofVOM from all letterpress printing lines

at the source (including solvents used for cleanup operations associated with the

letterpress printing lines) ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day), in the absence of

air pollution control equipment.

Subsection (b) provides that the requirements of Section 218/219.413(a)(2) shall

not apply to up to 416.3 liters (110 gallons) per year of cleaning materials used on

letterpress printing lines at a subject source.

31
Subsection (c) provides that, on and after May 1, 2010, the recordkeeping and

reporting requirements in Section 218/219.417 shall apply to all owners or operators of

letterpress printing line(s).

Subsection (d) provides that, if a letterpress printing line at a source is or becomes

subject to one or more ofthe limitations in Section 218/219.413, the letterpress printing

lines at the source are always subject to the applicable provisions of Subpart H.

Section 218/219.413 Emission Limitations and Control Requirements for

Letterpress Printing Lines

The Illinois EPA proposes adding this Section. Subsection (a) provides that

heatset web letterpress printing lines that meet the applicability requirements ofSection

218/219.412(a)(l) shall maintain the air pressure in the dryer lower than the air pressure

ofthe press rpom and install and operate an afterburner that reduces YOM emissions by

90-95 percent, by weight, depending on the date that the afterburner was first constructed

at the subject source, or to a maximum afterburner exhaust outlet concentration of20

ppmv (as carbon). Such printing lines shall also equip the afterburner with applicable

monitoring equipment and operate the afterburner at all times when the printing line is in

operation, except as provided in Section 218/219.107.

subseciion (a) further provides that no owner or operator ofsubject letterpress

printing lines shall use cleaning solutions on such lines unless the YOM content ofthe asused cleaning solution is less than or equal to 70 percent, by weight, or the YOM

composite partial vapor pressure ofthe as-used cleaning solution is less than 10 mmHg at

20 degrees Celsius. Cleaning materials must be kept, stored, and disposed ofin closed

containers, except when specifically in use.

32
Subsection (b) provides that heatsel web letterpress printing lines may use a

control device other than an afterburner ifthe control device meets the YOM emission

reduction requirements in subsection (a) and is approved by the Illinois EPA and USEPA

as federally enforceable permit conditions.

Section 218/219.415 Testing for Letterpress Printing Lines

The Illinois EPA proposes adding this Section, which sets forth the testing

requirements that apply to owners or operators ofletterpress printing lines subject to

Section 218/219.413. Subsection (a) provides that testing to demonstrate compliance

with 218/219.413 shall be conducted at the expense ofthe owner or operator within 90

days of a request by the Illinois EPA, and the owner or operator shall notify the Illinois

EPA 30 days in advance ofconducting such testing.

Subsection (b) describes the methods and procedures in Section 218f219.105(d)

and (f) that shall be used for testing to demonstrate compliance with the add-on control

device requirements of Section 218/219.413(a)(I)(B) and (b)(I).

Subsection (c) provides that testing to demonstrate compliance with the YOM

content limitations in Section 21 8/219.413(a)(2)(A) and to determine the YOM content of

cleaning solvents, cleaning solutions, and inks shall be conducted using the applicable

test methods and procedures in Section 218/219.105(a). The manufacturer's

specifications for YOM content for cleaning solvents and inks may be used ifsuch

specifications are based on results oftests conducted in accordance with Section

218/219.105(a).

33
Subsection (d) provides that testing to demonstrate compliance with Section

21 8/2 I9.413(b) shall be conducted as set forth in the owner or opcrator's plan approved

by the Illinois EPA and USEPA as federally enforceable permit conditions.

Subsection (e) provides that testing to determine the YOM composite partial

vapor pressure of cleaning solvents, cleaning solvent cOncentrates, and as-used cleaning

solutions shall be conducted in accordance with the applicable methods and procedures

specified in Section 218/219.110,

Section 218/219.416 Monitoring Requirements for Letterpress Printing Lines

The Illinois EPA proposes adding this Section. Subscction (a) provides that, if an

afterburner is used to demonstrate compliance, the owner or operator of a heatset web

letterpress printing line shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate temperature

monitoring devices with an accuracy of 3° C or 5° F on the afterburner in accordance with

Section 218/219.1 05(d)(2) and in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.

Monitoring shall be performed at all times when the afterburner is operating. Such

owners or operators shall also install, calibrate, operate, and maintain in accordance with

manufacturer's specifications a continuous recorder on the temperature monitoring

devices with at least the same accuracy as the temperature monitor.

Subsection (b) provides that if a control device other than an afterburner is used to

demonstrate compliance, the owner or operator of a heatset web letterpress printing line

shall install, maintain, calibrate, and operate such monitoring equipment as set forth in

the owner or operator's plan approved by the Illinois EPA and USEPA pursuant to

Section 218/219.413(b).

34
Subsection (c) sets forth the monitoring requirements for owners or operators of

letterpress printing lines relying on the YOM content ofthe cleaning solution to comply

with Section 218/219.4I3(a)(2)(A), or relying on the vapor pressure ofthe cleaning

solution to comply with Section 218/219.413(a)(2)(B).

Section 218/219.417 Rccordkeeping and Reporting for Letterpress Printing Lines

The Illinois EPA proposes adding this Section. Subsection (a) provides that the

owner or operator of a heatset web letterpress printing line exempt from any of the

limitations of Section 218/219.413 because ofthe criteria in Section 218/219.412(a)(1)

shall submit a certification to the Illinois EPA that includes a declaration that the source

is exempt and calculations that demonstrate that the source's total potential to emit VOM

does not equal or exceed 25 tons per year.

Subsection (b) provides that the owner or operator of a letterpress printing line

exempt from any ofthe limitations of Section 218/219.413 because ofthe criteria in

Section 218/219.412(a)(2) shall submit a certification to the Illinois EPA that includes a

declaration that the source is exempt, calculations that demonstrate that combined

emissions ofYOM from all letterpress printing lines at the source never equal or exceed

6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day), and a description and the results of all tests used to determine the

YOM content ofinks and cleaning solvents. Such sources shall also notify the Agency if

the combined emissions ofVOM from all letterpress printing lines at the source ever

equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day).

Subsection (b) further provides that, as an alternative to the YOM emission

calculations set forth in subsection (b)(l)(B), a source may determine that it emits below

6.8 kg/day (151bs/day) ofVOM ifit complies with material usc limitations during each

35
calendar month. The material use alternative shall only be available to sources with only

one type ofletterpress printing operation (e.g., a source with only heatset web letterpress

printing operations). If a source exceeds the material use limitation in any givcn month,

the source shall complete emissions calculations pursuant to subsection (b)(I)(B) within

15 days ofthe end ofthat month. Ifa source exceeds the material use limitations for six

consccutive months, the source is no longer eligible for the material use alternative.

Subsection (c) provides that, unless utilizing the material use altcrnative, the

owner or operator of a lettcrpress printing line subject to the requirements in subsection

(a) or (b) ofthis Section shall collect and record either thc specified standard

recordkeeping information or the specified purchase and inventory recordkeeping

inforrnation.

Subsection (d) provides that the owner or operator ofaheatsetweb letterpress

printing line subject to Section 218f219.413(a)(I)(B) or (b)(1) ofthis Subpart shall

submit a certification to the illinois EPA that includes identification of each heatset web

letterpress printing line at the source, a declaration that each such line is in compliance

with Section 218/219.413(a)(I) or (b), the type of afterburner or other approved control

device being ~sed and the date that such device was first constructed at the subject

source, the control requirements with which the printing line is complying, the results of

all tests and calculations necessary to demonstrate compliance, and a declaration that the

required monitoring equipment has been properly installed and calibrated. The owner or

operator shall also collect and record specified information for each heatset web

letterpress printing line and notify the Illinois EPA of any violation of Section

218/219.413(a)(I)(B) or (b)(l).

36
operator shall also collect and record specified infonnation for each heatset web

letterpress printing line and notify the Illinois EPA of any violation of Section

218/219.413(a)(1)(B) or (b)(1).

Subsection (d) further provides that iftesting of an afterburner or other approved

control device is conducted pursuant to Section 218/219.415(b), the owner or operator

shall submit a copy of all test results to the Illinois EPA, as well as a certification that

includes a declaration that all necessary tests and calculations have been perfonned, a

statement whether the printing line is in compliance with Section 218/2l9.413(a)(1 )(B) or

(b)(I), and the operating parameters of the afterburner or other approved control device

during testing. If changing its method ofcompliance between subsections (a)(1)(B) and

(b) of Section 218/219.413, the owner or operator must certify compliance for the new

method of compliance and perfonn all tests and calculations necessary to demonstrate

compliance with such method.

Subsection (e) establishes recordkeeping and reporting requirements for

letterpress printing line cleaning operations. Subsection (e) provides that the owner or

operator of a letterpress printing line shall certify to the Illinois EPA that an cleaning

solutions, other than those excluded pursuant to Section 2l8.4l2(b), and the handling of

all cleaning materials will be in compliance with Section 2l8/2l9.413(a)(2)(A) or

(a)(2)(B) and (a)(3). The certification shall also include specified infonnation regarding

the cleaning operations ofthe subject printing line. The owner or operator shall collect

and record specified infonnation for each solution used on each letterpress printing line

and notify the lllinois EPA of any violation ofSection 218/219.413.

37
16. Redesignation is therefore necessary to foreclose the risk that a future violation of

the 1997 standard will implicate reclassification and, in turn, heightened control measures.

17. Further, the USEPA's future transition policy between the 1997 standard and the

revised standard will most likely impose additional obligations upon areas that are still

designated as nonattainment for the 1997 standard at the time final designations for the revised

standard are made. (See, e.g., 40 C.F.R. § 51.905(a)(l), which sets forth added requirements for

areas that were nonattainment for the I-hour ozone NAAQS at the time nonattainment

designations for the 1997 standard were finalized).

18. Any complications that arise in connection with the future transition policy, such as

legal challenges,-could potentially affect such NAAs as well. Illinois, for example, was attaining

the I-hour ozone standard but had not yet been formally redesignated at the time the USEPA

finalized nonattainment designations for the 1997 standard. Consequently, Illinois was subject to

the USEPA's I-hour/8-hour transition policies, and is still dealing with the ramifications of

several lawsuits that arose challenging, among other things, the transition portions ofUSEPA's

8-hour implementation rules. (See, e.g., South Coast Air Quality Mgt. Dist. v. Environmental

Protection Agency, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006)). (One such ramification, for instance, is the

continued possibility that the major source threshold for the Chicago NAA will be lowered from

100 tons per year (the threshold for moderate areas under the 8-hour standard) to 25 tons per year

(the threshold for severe areas under the I-hour standard)).

19. While the details ofUSEPA's transition policy, and whether such policy will likely

result in litigation, is uncertain, a timely redesignation to attainment (i.e., redesignation prior to

the date the USEPA finalizes nonattainment designations for the revised standard) would render

the above contingencies moot.

4
20. Redesignation is needed to ensure that Illinois avoids needless additional hurdles and

reaps the benefits ofthe air quality planning efforts that led to attainment ofthe 1997 standard.

21. In light ofthe foregoing, it is necessary to expedite review in this matter.

22. As required by 35 Ill. Adm. Code Section 101.512, this Motion is accompanied by an

Affirmation attesting that the facts cited herein are true.

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, the Illinois EPA respectfully requests that

the Board grant this Motion and expedite review in this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

BY:~I/~~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: July 8, 2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544

5
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

AME:t\TJ)MENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION )

STAi'IDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA, )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC )

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR )

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND )

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211

AFFIRMATION

R09-

(Rulemaking-Air)

I, Dana Vetterhoffer, under oath, hereby state and affirm that I am an Assistant Counsel

for the Illinois EPA and that the facts cited in the foregoing Motion for Expedited Review are

true and correct to the best of my information and belief.

~WIJn~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

S~§glBED ~D SWORN TO BEFORE ME

this ~'day of~,2009

Notary

3~~~ Public ~~~0~~~~~~~>'~~V~<~~~~~Y~_ i: OFFICIAL SEAL :(

;: BRENDA BOEHNER ± ::: NOTARY PUBUC, STATE OF ILUNOIS :i:

i: MY COMMISSION gxPIRES 11 ,a-2009 ...~·:.·:· ...... ~:··"'i'.p4'.:.+ ...*<lo...~9~OOOo!o.,.q,,.;..

6
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

IN THE MATTER OF:

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218,

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION

STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA,

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 219, ORGANIC

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR

THE METRO EAST AREA, AND

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

10 Jb

(Rulemaking-Air)

RE'cegVEO

CLERK'S OFFICE

JUl U92009

STATe OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Soard

I, the undersigned, an attorney, state that I have served the attached REGULATORY

PROPOSAL entitled "AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 218, ORGANIC

MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR THE CHICAGO AREA, 35 ILL. ADM. CODE

219, ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR THE METRO EAST AREA,

AND 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211," MOTION FOR WAIVER, MOTION FOR EXPEDITED

REVIEW, and APPEARANCES ofthe Illinois Environmental Protection Agency upon the

person to whom it is directed, by mailing it by first-class mail from Springfield, llIinois, with

sufficient postage affixed, to the following persons:

John Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois 60601-3218

Virginia Yang

Deputy Legal Counsel

Illinois Department of Natural Resources

One Natural Resources Way

Springfield, IL 62702

Matthew Dunn, Chief

Division ofEnvironmental Enforcement

Office ofthe Attorney General

188 West Randolph, 20th Floor

Chicago, IL 60601

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

BY:~o,~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel
TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT

FOR

CONTROLLING YOM EMISSIONS

FROM

LITHOGRAPIDC PRINTING, LETTERPRESS PRINTING, FLEXIBLE

PACKAGE PRINTING, FLAT WOOD PANELING COATING, AND

INDUSTRIAL CLEANING OPERATIONS

DIVISION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL

BUREAU OF AIR

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

SPRINGFIELD, IL 62702

APRIL 2009
1.0 INTRODUCTION

Section 172 ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that state implementation plans

(SJPs) for nonattainment areas, such as the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis

nonattainment areas (NAAs) in Illinois, must include requirements for

"reasonably available control technology" (RACT) as it applies to emissions

sources. I The Chicago NAA currently includes the entire counties of Cook,

DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will, as well as Aux Sable and Goose Lake

Townships in Grundy County, and Oswego Township in Kendall county.

Madison, Monroe, St. Clair, and Jersey counties are part ofthe ozone NAA in the

St. LouislMetro-East geographic location.

In March 2008, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)

strengthened the eight-hour ozone standard. It is likely that the same areas in

Illinois that are currently designated as nonattainment for the present standards

will soon be designated as nonattainment for this revised standard. Reducing

YOM emissions in these areas will likely help Illinois achieve the newly revised

NAAQS as well as satisfy CAA obligations.

USEPA is expected to finalize the nonattainment designations in 2010, initiating a

new cyele ofplanning and regulatory development. Obviously, such planning has

not occurred yet, so it is not possible to identify specific emission reduction

measures needed to attain these standards. However, YOM emission reductions

will improve ozone air quality, which will help to meet the new standards and

should help to address any future requirements to implement RACT for the new

standards.

Section 182(b)(2)(A) ofthe CAA further requires that SIPs be revised to include

RACT for volatile organic material (VOM) emissions sources that are covered by

a control techniques guideline (CTG) document issued by USEPA after

November 15, 1990, and before the area's date of attainment.

The USEPA defines RACT as "the lowest emission limitation that a particular

source is capable ofmeeting by the application ofcontrol technology that is

reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility." (44 FR

53761, September 17, 1979.) In developing the CTGs for the categories covered

by this Technical Support Document (TSD), USEPA evaluated the sources of

YOM emissions from the applicable industries, the available control possibilities

to address the associated emissions, and the cost ofsuch control measures.

Emissions ofVOM result from various points in the processes covered by this

TSD. These YOM emissions react with other pollutants in the atmosphere, such

as oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO), to form ozone. Ozone

formation is most active during the summer months because the chemical

reactions involved rely on direct sunlight and high ambient temperatuf(:'s. Ozone

1
is a powerful oxidant, and as such reacts readily with a wide range ofsubstances.

In hwnans, ozone irritates the respiratory system and reduces lung function.

Laboratory studies suggest that it may damage lung and other tissue. There is

concern that this damage can impair breathing and reduce immunity to disease for

people in good health, and the effect may be more severe for people with preexisting respiratory diseases. Ozone oxidation can also impair plant tissue and

reduce the yield ofsome crops, as well as damage materials such as rubber

products.

This TSD presents the rationale, docwnentation, and methodology relied upon to

technically justify the Illinois EPA's proposed regulatory changes to control YOM

emissions from the categories known collectively as the Consumer and

Commercial Products, Group II, which includes lithographic printing, letterpress

printing, flexible packaging printing, flat wood paneling coating, and industrial

cleaning solvents.

To assist in evaluating the potential for implementing new emission standards for

Illinois sources, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois EPA)

reviewed and evaluated the USEPA CTGs, as well as other available information,

including regulations in other states and those already existing within Illinois. In

addition, Illinois EPA staffheJd conversations with staff from USEPA and other

states, as well as with representatives from various industry groups. Based on this

information, the illinois EPA determined the applicability thresholds for

applieation of controls and is recommending appropriate control measures. This

TSD is based on the aforementioned documents and addresses the technological

feasibility and economic reasonableness ofimplementing new standards for

lithographic printing, letterpress printing, flexible package printing, flat wood

paneling coating, and industrial cleaning processes.

2.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND SOURCES OF EMISSIONS

2.1 Lithographic Printing

Offset lithographic printing has a broad range of applications, including books,

magazines, periodicals, labels and wrappers, catalogs and direetories, financial

and legal docwnents, business forms, advertising materials, newspapers,

newspaper inserts, eharts and maps, calendars, tiekets and eoupons, greeting

cards, and stamps.

None ofthe above applications are exclusive to offset printing; other modes of

printing in the graphic arts industry can produce items such as those mentioned

above. However, the newspaper industry uses offset lithography predominantly,

with over 70 percent of all newspapers in the United States printed by this

method.

2
Lithography is a planographic method of printing; that is, the printing and

nonprinting areas are essentially in the same plane on the surface of a thin metal

"lithographic" plate. The distinction between the areas is maintained chemically;

when the lithographic plate is made, the image area is rendered water repellent,

and the nonimage area is rendered water receptive.

In offset lithographic printing, ink is transferred from the lithographic plate to a

rubber-covered "intennediate," or "blanket," cylinder and then to the substrate.

Transfer ofthe ink from the lithographic plate to the blanket cylinder, rather than

directly to the substrate, is the offset characteristic of this type ofprinting.

A printing press is made up of a number of printing units. Printing units are

available that print both sides ofthe substrate at the same time (a process known

as perfecting), as well as only one side (known as nonperfecting).

Offset lithographic printing is also characterized by the form in which the material

to be printed on - the substrate - is fed to the press. In sheet-fed printing,

individual sheets ofpaper or other substrate are fed to the press. In web printing,

continuous rolls of paper are fed to the press and the paper is cut to size after it is

printed.

Lithographic inks are composed ofpigments, vehicles, binders, and other

additives. The pigments provide the desired eolor and are composed of organic

and inorganic materials. Lithographic inks may be heatset, where heat is required

to set the ink, or non-heatset, where the inks are set by absorption into the

substrate by oxidation or other methods not requiring added heat. Heatset inks

may contain up to 45 percent VOMs. Non-heatset inks have higher boiling points

than heatset inks and are less pasty. They usual1y contain less than 35 perecnt

VOMs. Most non-heatset inks used in sheet-fed printing .are below 25 percent

YOM.

A fountain solution is applied to the lithographic plate to render the nonimage

areas unreceptive to ink. Since printing inks are oil-based and oil is repelled by

water, the fountain solution is water-based. The fountain solution contains small

quantities of gum arabic or synthetic resins, acids, and buffer salts to maintain the

pH ofthe solution, and a wetting agent or "dampening aid" to enhance the

spreadability ofthe fountain solution across the print plate. The role ofthe

dampening aid is to reduce the surface tension of water as well as increase

viscosity.

Isopropyl alcohol (IFA), a YOM, had been used as the primary dampening aid

since the 1950s. Ethanol and normal propyl alcohol have also been used in this

capacity. Before the 1980s, concentration of alcohol in the fountain solution

could range from 0 to 35 percent or higher, with most presses using between 15

and 20 percent. However, in more recent years, printers have significantly reduced

3
fountain solution alcohol contents and often replaced alcohol completely with

other dampening aids. Indeed, current I11inois rules for heatset web presses in the

NAAs require that subject sources use no more than 1.6 percent alcohol, or 3

percent ifthe fountain solution is refrigerated; fountain solutions using only

alcohol substitutes may use up to 5 percent YOM. Non-heatset web presses cannot

use any alcohol and are subject to the same 5 percent YOM limit. Sheet-fed

presses are limited to 5 percent YOM content or 8.5 percent ifthe fountain

solution is refrigerated.

Cleaning solutions are used to remove excess printing inks, oils, and paper

components from press equipment. The solutions are petroleum-based solvents,

often mixed with detergent and/or water. The cleaning compound may be a single

solvent, such as kerosene, or a combination ofsolvents. Cleaning solutions are

used to wash the blankets, the rollers, the outside ofthe presses, and to remove

excess ink residue between color changes. Some cleaning is done automatically,

while other cleaning is done manually.

2.2 Letterpress Printing

Letterpress printing involves the use of a reverse-imaged raised surface that is

inked and then pressed against a substrate to transfer the image. Letterpress

operations make up a very small percentage ofthe printing industry compared to

other types of printing (lithographic, flexographic, rotogravure). Indeed, according

to information from the I11inois EPA's source inventory, no letterpress printing

facility could be found in the Metro-East NAA, with very few ofthese facilities

found even in the Chicago NAA.

Letterpress inks and lithographic inks are very similar, and letterpress operations

also may be accomplished through sheet-fed and web presses. Thus, ink emission

sources are similar to those described above for lithographic printing.

Letterpress operations do not use fountain solutions, but the cleaning solutions are

once again similar to those used in lithographic printing operations.

2.3 Flexible Package Printing

The existing regulations found in Sections 218/219.401-404 currently cover all

rotogravure and flexographic printing. The modifications being proposed in this

rulemaking cover both types of printing, but only as they apply to flexible

packaging. Flexible packaging means any package or part of a package, the shape

of which can be readily changed. Flexible packaging includes, but is not limited

to, bags, pouches, liners, and wraps utilizing paper, plastic, film, aluminum foil,

metalized or coated paper or film, or any combination ofthese materials. Shrinkwrap labels or wrappers (but not self-adhesive labels) printed on or in-line with a

flexible packaging printing press are also considered to be flexible packaging.

4
Flexible packaging does not include folding cartons, gift wraps, hot stamp foils,

wall coverings, vinyl products, decorative laminates, floor coverings, or tissue

products.

Rotogravure printing uses an image etched or engraved into a plate or cylinder.

Inks, coatings, and adhesives may be applied to a substrate through the

rotogravure process.

Flexographic printing has an image raised above the level ofthe printing plate,

with the image carrier made ofrubber or other flexible material. Flexographie

printing is better suited to short production runs, in contrast to rotogravure

printing, which is more useful for long runs.

YOM emissions for both types ofprinting originate from the drying ofinks as

well as solvents used to clean presses and other components.

According to the CTG for Flexible Package Printing, the use ofwaterbased inks is

increasing. However, USEPA also noted, "Many facilities use hundreds of

different inks to print various custom colors required by their packaging

customers. Low [YOM] inks, coatings, and adhesives may not be available to

meet all ofthe performance requirements.")

As such, most YOM control for flexible package printing is achieved through the

use of add-on control devices. In these processes, most ofthe solvent is captured

through evaporation in a dryer, along with hoods and other collection devices for

solvent that evaporates elsewhere in the printing process. Older presses frequently

do not allow for the same level of capture as newer installations do, but the CTG

notes, "There have been significant improvements in capture efficiency of

flexographic presses and rotogravure presses" since the last time USEPA

reviewed those types ofoperations. It continues, "Since 1990, many vendors have

guaranteed capture efficiency of 85 to 90 percent without use of a permanent total

enclosure." Control devices, which destroy or recover the captured solvents, "can

achieve at least 95 percent control," according to USEPA,)

USEPA's recommended approach to reducing YOM emissions from flexible

package printing cleaning materials focuses on work practices, "such as keeping

solvent containers closed except when filling, draining or conducting cleaning

operations, keeping used shop towels in closed containers, and conveying cleaning

materials from one location to another in closed containers or pipes.")

2.4 Industrial Cleaning Solvents

The industrial cleaning solvents category encompasses many products and

cleaning styles that are used to clean dirt, soil, oil, and grease as well as remove

.adhesives, paints, and inks. Studies done by USEPA on six focus industries

5
(automotive, electrical equipment, magnetic tape, furniture, packaging, and

photographic supplies) identified nine main areas where emissions ofVOM

occurred during cleaning processes. These nine cleaning categories are spray gun

cleaning, spray booth cleaning, large manufactured components cleaning, parts

cleaning, equipment cleaning, line cleaning, floor cleaning, tank cleaning, and

small manufactured components cleaning. The majority ofVOM emissions were

released during the first four types of operations, especially the spray gun

cleaning, which made up 50 percent of emissions by itself. However, it should be

noted that while the CTG focused on these specific areas, it recommends coverage

of a wide range of cleaning activities and the proposed industrial cleaning

regulation follows that recommendation.

YOM emissions occur during the cleaning process while wiping, flushing,

brushing, and from the storage and disposal of used solvents and rags. General

cleaning of offices, bathrooms, and other janitorial type services are not covered

by this proposed regulation.

2.5 Flat Wood Paneling Coating

According to the CTG for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, "Flat wood paneling

products are used in construction and can be classified as three main product

types: decorative interior panels, exterior siding, and tileboard." 5

Decorative interior panels are often embossed and usually grooved, having more

decorative coating requirements than many other products. Substrates include

hardwood, plywood,. medium density fiberboard, and particle board.

Exterior siding may be coated at the production facility or on-site (the latter is not

subject to this proposed regulation). Exterior trim is also generally manufactured

at the same production facility and coated with the same coatings. Substrates

include solid wood, hardboard, and waferboard.

Tileboard is used in high-moisture areas such as kitchens and bathrooms, and is

considered a premium interior wall paneling. Tileboard meets the specifications

for Class I hardboard according to the American National Standards Institute.

Flat wood paneling products are coated to provide protection from the

environment, modify the surface, and present a desired appearance.

According to the CTG for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, "A typical flat wood

coating facility applies stains and varnishes to natural plywood panels used for

wall coverings. Other plants print wood grain patterns on particle board panels

that were first undercoated with an opaque coating to mask the original surface.

Coatings applied to flat wood paneling include fillers, sealers, 'groove' coats,

primers, stains, basecoats, inks and topcoats. Most coatings are applied by direct

6
roll coating. Filler is usually applied by reverse roll coating. The offset

rotogravure process is used where the coating and printing operation requires

precision printing techniques. Other coating methods include spray techniques,

brush coating and curtain coating. A typical flat wood paneling coating line

includes a succession of coating operations. Each individual operation consists of

the application of one or more coatings followed by a heated oven to cure the

coatings. A typical production line begins with mechanical alterations of the

substrate (filling ofholes, cutting of grooves, sanding, etc.), followed by the

coating operations, and packaging/stacking for shipment.,,5

YOM emissions occur primarily during the coating process as the coatings dry

and cure, but also as coatings are applied, and during mixing before application.

3.0 TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY OF CONTROLS

CTGs for each ofthese categories were published by the USEPA in September

2006. Each ofthe CTGs contain information about add-on controls, process

modifications, work practices, and material reformulation and substitution that

can be used to accomplish the necessary emission reductions. The Illinois EPA

depended on the CTGs, as well as discussions with other states and industry, in

developing and implementing thc proposed regulations.

3.1 Lithographic Printing

Add-On Controls

Add-on control devices are applicable only to heatset web offset lithographic

printing, not non-heatset or sheet-fed lithographic printing, and can be grouped

into two broad categories: combustion control devices (destructive) and recovery

devices (nondestructive). Combustion control devices are designed to destroy

VOMs in the vent strcam prior to atmospheric discharge; recovery devices limit

YOM emissions by recovering material for reusc.

The heatset web offset lithographic printing industry employs three basic add-on

control devices: (1) thermal afterburners, (2) catalytic afterburners, and (3)

condenser filter systems. The experience ofthe Illinois EPA indicates that the

field is dominated by thermal and catalytic afterburners, which can often achieve

98 percent or greater YOM removal.

The condenser filter systems currently in use have been designed specifically for

the heatset web offset printing industry. Condenser filter systems can achieve as

high as 97 percent YOM removal efficiency, with 90 percent being easily

achievable for older systems.

7
Fountain Solution Reformulation and Process Modifications

A significant portion of YOM emissions from lithographic printing can be

ascribed to evaporation from fountain solutions. Alcohol substitutes have been in

use for over 20 years to replace or minimize the amount of alcohol used in a

fountain solution. These substitutes have lower volatility than alcohol and thus

reduce emissions.

Process modifications are changes in operational methods or equipment resulting

in improved YOM control. Such modifications may involve retrofitting existing

equipment or replacing older equipment with new technology to accommodate the

process change. However, the Illinois EPA does not expect retrofitting or

replacement to be an issue with this rulemaking.

Cooling a fountain solution is one process modification that reduces YOM

emissions from the fountain solution by minimizing evaporation. Refrigerated

circulators can cool the fountain solution to a temperature that usually ranges

between 55 and 60°F. Refrigeration has been shown to reduce consumption of

alcohol in the solution by as much as 44 percent.

Material Reformulation or Substitution for Cleaning Solutions

As with fountain solutions, cleaning solutions can also be a significant source of

YOM emissions from the overall lithographic printing process. To reduce these

emissions, cleaning solutions may be reformulated in one oftwo ways. Solutions

containing a smaller amount ofYOM may be used. The current lllinois rule limits

such solutions to no more than 30 percent YOM. While no problems with this

limit have been reported to Agency personnel in Illinois, there have apparently

been complaints on a national level. As such, the CTG now recommends limiting

such solutions to 70 percent YOM2 The Illinois EPA's proposed regulation

contains this higher limit for sources between 15 and JOO pounds per day (PPD),

with the previous limit remaining in effect for larger sources.

In addition, an alternative to low-YOM cleaning materials are solutions with a

low vapor pressure. The CTG notes, "Cleaning materials with [YOM] composite

vapor pressure less than 10 millimeters ofmercury (mm Hg) at 20°C have been

used successfully by many printers for blanket washing and other cleaning

activities.,,2 It was determined by USEPA prior to Illinois' promulgation ofthe

previous lithographic printing rule that the use of cleaning materials with a YOM

composite vapor pressure less than 10 mm Hg at 20°C would result in a

comparable emission reduction to using cleaning materials that contain less than

30 weight percent YOM. Once again, the Agency believes that currently-subject

sources are using materials that meet this limit without problems. As such, this

limit is not being changed; it will just apply to smaller sources as well.

8
3.2 Letterpress Printing

Letterpress emission sources are similar to those for lithographic printing, with the

exception that letterpress operations do not use a fountain solution. In addition,

letterpress printing presses are often operated at the same source as lithographic

printing and many ofthe control options for letterpress printing are the same as

the control options for lithographic printing as well. This is especially true in

tenns of cleaning solutions, though. Because letterpress operations have never

been specifically regulated in Illinois before, the Agency is proposing to use the

70 percent YOM content limit for all subject letterpress units. It is the Agency's

belief, supported by conversations with industry representatives, that I1Iinois does

not currently contain any heatset web letterpress operations in either the Chicago

or Metro-East NAA, but the regulation is necessary and technically feasible

should a new such operation locate into one ofthe NAAs.

3.3 Flexible Packaging Printing

Similar to the types of printing discussed above, the two main sources ofVOM

emissions from flexible package printing are the evaporation ofinks, coatings,

and adhesives, as well as the use of cleaning materials. These YOM emissions

may be controlled by material reformulation or, especially in the case ofink

emissions, through the use of add-on controls.

Material Reformulation

This approach, similar to that described above, focuses on the substitution oflowYOM inks, coatings, and adhesives. According to the eTG, such refonnulation

"has been achieved by many facilities in the packaging rotogravure and

flexographic printing industries.,,3 Whether a particular facility is able to use such

reformulated materials depends upon their specific activities, including the

substrate(s) being used.

Add-On Controls

Add-on controls, however, may be used by all such printers. The most common

control devices used by these sources are thennal oxidizers, catalytic oxidizers,

and carbon adsorbers, with adsorbers probably being the least-used ofthe three.

As the CTG notes, "Today, these control devices can achieve at least 95 percent

control device efficiency.,,3

Capture systems have evolved over the years. These systems collect the VOMcontaining air so it may be destroyed or reclaimed by the control device described

above. While new presses may be able to obtain as high as 100 percent capture if

designed properly, older presses were not necessarily constructed with emissions

9
capture in mind. As such, the Agency is proposing a tiered approach to capture

and control in this rulemaking.

Work Practicesfor Cleaning Materials

The CTG recommends work practice requirements as the best means to control

emissions from cleaning operations at flexible package printing sources. In

particular, the document says these practices should include "keeping solvent

containers closed except when filling, draining or conducting cleaning operations,

keeping used shop towels in closed containers, and conveying cleaning materials

from one location to another in closed containers or pipes." 3

3.4 Industrial Cleaning Solvents

The industrial cleaning solvents proposed regulation covers a wide range of

products that remove contaminants from parts, products, tools, machinery, and

other work production areas. The nine main cleaning categories mentioned in

Section 2.4, above, use a multitude of different solvents with different styles of

applications. YOM emission reductions can be attained by work practices, solvent

substitution, and controls.

The CTG recommends that sources exceeding 15 lbsfday ofVOM emissions from

the cleaning category must comply with the following requirements.4 The

proposed regulation follows this suggestion.

Work Practices

Reductions can be obtained through solvent management practices. General work

practices include keeping solvent containers and used applicators covered;

properly storing and disposing ofspent solvents and used cleaning rags;

minimizing air circulation around all cleaning operations; and implementing

equipment practices that reduce emissions, e.g., leak detection and repair

practices.

VOM Content Limits

Solvent substitution to a low-YOM or no-YOM solvent can also reduce

emissions. The CTG recommends a content limit of 50 grams YOM per liter

(0.42 lbfgal) of cleaning material for those industries that are not already covered,

or to be covered, by a CTG, as listed in Section 218.187(a)(2)(B).4 However,

discussions with industry, other states, and USEPA led to the addition of a

number of exemptions and higher YOM content limits for certain specific

cleaning activities.

10
Higher limits have been considered for categories that may not be able to easily

meet this limit, based on recommendations from industry as well as from other

states. These higher limits are outlined within the rule.

Alternate Vapor Pressure Limit

Low vapor pressure solvents are also recommended since the slower evaporation

reduces the amount ofVOM released into the atmosphere. The CTG recommends

that a limit of8 mm Hg at 20 degrees Celsius be allowed in place ofthe 50 gram

YOM per liter of cleaning material, and the proposed regulation follows this

recommendation.

Alternate Control

Emissions can also be reduced by add-on controls, modifying equipment, or

changing the method of cleaning. The CTG recommends an overall control

efficiency of 85 percent reduction in emissions of YOM, which is reflected in the

proposed rule.

Exclusions

As noted above, the CTG suggests excluding certain categories from the cleaning

regulations, as these categories already have or will have their own recommended

work practices and limitations. These categories include coating operations for

aerospace, wood furniture, flat wood paneling, large appliance, metal furniture,

plastic parts, paper film and foil, miscellaneous metal parts, auto and light-duty

truck assembly, and shipbuilding and repair; flexible packaging printing materials;

lithographic printing materials; letterpress printing materials; fiberglass boat

manufacturing materials; and miscellaneous industrial adhesives.

Other categories with specific exemptions have also been suggested by the CTG

as well as by discussions with industry groups. These include electrical and

electronic components; precision optics; numismatic dies; stripping of cured inks,

coatings, and adhesives; cleaning ofresin, coating, ink, and adhesive mixing,

molding, and application equipment; research and development laboratories;

medical device or pharmaceutical manufacturing; and performance or quality

assurance testing of coatings, inks, or adhesives.

Further exclusion recommendations include cleaning of paper-based gaskets and

clutch assemblies; cleaning of adhesive application cquipment used for thin metal

laminating; touch-up cleaning on circuit boards; cleaning ofcoating and adhesive

application processes utilized to manufacture transdermal drug delivery product

using less than three gallons per day of ethyl acetate; cleaning ofapplication

equipment used to apply coatings on satellites and radiation effect coatings;

cleaning of application equipment used to apply solvent-borne fluoropolymer

11
coatings; cleaning of ultraviolet or electron beam adhesive application; and

cleaning of electrical cables.

3.5 Flat Wood Paneling Coatings

Flat wood paneling coating, like other forms ofindustrial coating, provides two

options for controlling YOM emissions: reformulation or add-on controls.

Material Reformulation

Reformulation would entail sources changing from high-YOM coatings to lowYOM materials. According to the CTG, low-YOM, water-based coatings "are

generally available" and "can lower [YOM] emissions greatly, and most coatings

operations are capable of converting to waterborne coatings."s

Another option for reformulation is the use of coatings that emit almost zero

YOM and are cured through the use of ultraviolet light or an electron beam. The

use ofsuch systems are more limited than those for waterbased coatings, but they

are available.

Add-On Controls

Add-on controls for flat wood paneling coating can be used when the source

needs, or chooses, to use high-YOM coatings. The CTG notes, "Currently, an

overall control and capture efficiency of 90 percent is a widely-accepted and

readily available technique."s llIinois EPA agrees, based on its experience with a

variety of coating operations.

Work Practicesfor Coatings and Cleaning Materials

The CTG recommends specific work practice requirements for flat wood paneling

coating operations: "storing all [YOM] coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials

in close containers, minimizing spills of[YOM] containing coatings, thinners,

cleaning up spills immediately, conveying any coatings, thinners, and cleaning

materials in closed containers or pipes, closing mixing vessels which contain

[YOM] coatings and other materials except when specifically in usc, and

minimizing emissions of [YOM] during cleaning ofstorage, mixing, and

conveying equipment."s

Some ofthese requirements are already in place within Illinois regulations for

wood furniture coaters. Under the Agency's proposal, these will apply to flat

wood paneling coaters as well, and other specific requirements listed above will

apply as well. These will minimize unnecessary YOM emissions from such

operations.

12
4.0 ECONOMIC REASONABLENESS

4.1 Lithographic Printing

The largest cost factor for lithographic printing - add-on control devices - is

applicable to heatset web lithographic operations only. Since the Agency's

proposal does not increase the number ofsources for which this requirement is

applicable, there is no foreseen additional cost due to add-on controls for existing

sources. New sources will need to achieve a higher control efficiency, but since

new add-on control devices would already be expected to achieve that efficiency,

no additional cost is expected for this reason either.

Fountain solution and cleaning solution reformulation costs could occur for

newly-regulated sources between 15 and 100 PPD of emissions under this

proposal. USEPA estimated the cost for cleaning material reformulation at $855

per ton ofYOM removed (in 2005 dollars)?

For fountain solutions, USEPA actually estimated a cost savings due to a

reduction in the use of alcohol. While they did not provide a specific value for the

savings, the TSD for the Illinois lithographic printing rule in 1994 put this savings

at $920 per ton (while alcohol substitutes are more expensive, the cost is reduced

because they are used in lower quantities)6

4.2 Letterpress Printing

As previously noted, letterpress printing shares a great deal in common with

lithographic printing when it comes to emissions and the applicable controls. As

the CTG notes, "Because ofthe similarities between offset lithographic printing

and letterpress printing in terms ofthe nature ofthe processes at issue, the sources

of [YOM] emissions and available control approaches, it is reasonable to assume

that the cost-effectiveness estimates ... for control of [YOM] from hcatset inks

and control of[YOM] from cleaning materials apply equally to the letterpress

printing industry.,,2

The difference is that there is not currently a regulation for heatset web letterpress

printing operations in Illinois. As such, the reasoning behind the zero cost

estimate for heatset web lithographic printing cannot be used for letterpress

operations. Thus, referring to the eTG, USEPA's cost estimate is $2,010 per ton

ofVOM removed (in 2005 dollars). However, as noted earlier, the Agency

believes that the Illinois NAAs do not currently contain any heatset web

letterpress operations.

13
4.3 Flexible Packaging Printing

According to thc CTG, "Many facilities located in ozone nonattainrnent areas are

already meeting the control levels being recommended in this CTG.,,3 Indeed, this

proposal does not expand the number ofsources that will be subject to the ink or

control device portions of the flexible packaging rotogravure and flexographic

printing regulations. It is expected that those sources currently able to use

compliant inks and coatings will similarly be able to make use ofinks and

coatings meeting the new compliance limit, while those using add-on control

devices will continue to do so as well. As such, the Illinois EPA expects that there

will not be any additional add-on control costs for subject facilities.

In the case of any sources not already meeting the proposed standards and needing

to put on an add-on control device, the CTG says, "The costs ... will vary

depending on the flow rate, hourly solvent use rate, and operating hours." USEPA

made reasonable estimates to determine the cost effectiveness, and determined

that "a press exhausting approximately 5,800 cubic feet per minute, operating

2000 hours per year, and achieving 70 percent capture efficiency" would have a

cost ofbetween $1,300 and $2,800 per ton ofVOM removed.3A source with a

larger press, 1llgher solvent use rate, more operating hours, or better capture

efficiency would have an even lower cost per ton ofVOM removed.

Costs associated with additional sources becoming subject to the clcaning

provisions ofthis proposed regulation are expected to be minimal. Indeed, some

sources may see an overall cost savings as less cleaning solution is necessary.

4.4 Industrial Cleaning Solvents

USEPA estimated that there would be 130 sources in Illinois NAAs that would be

impacted by this regulation, with a total of2293 Mglyr (2528 tons/yr) of baseline

YOM emissions per year by using the 2002 Nation Emissions Inventory database.

USEPA then determined the cost effectiveness ofmeeting the 50 grams of YOM

per liter of cleaning material limit fon parts cleaner at $1664/ton based on a

study provided by the California Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

Costs associated with switching from 1llgh-YOM content solvents to low-YOM

content or aqueous solvents may show an actual cost savings of$ I460IMg

($1325/ton) when taking in consideration the reduction of disposal costs,

according to the CTG.

4.5 Flat Wood Paneling Coatings

USEPA based their cost estimate on information obtained from the South Coast

Air Quality Management District in California, arriving at a cost ofbetween

$1,900 and $2,600 per ton ofVOM reduced (in 2005 dollars). According to the

14
CTG, for any sources subject to this rule in Illinois, costs "could be incurred to

make changes to their coatings in order to meet" the new regulation.5 Thus, the

only significant cost is expected to be reformulation of coatings.

5.0 EXISTING AND PROPOSED STANDARDS

5.1 Lithographic Printing

Currently, Illinois has regulations covering all types oflithographic printing in the

NAAs, with an applicability level of 100 PPD (calculated monthly). In addition,

there is a secondary applicability level of 100 tons per year ofmaximum

theoretical emissions for heatset web lithographic printing, which was carried over

from the previous rule. The Agency is proposing removing the 1DO-ton limit, as it

is no longer necessary and USEPA has agreed that removing it will not cause a

backsliding concern.

This new proposal does not reduce the applicability threshold for add-on control

devices used by heatset presses. Thus, no new lithographic printing units will need

to add controls. However, new control devices on heatset web lithographic presses

will need to meet a 95 percent control efficiency instead ofthe current 90 percent

limit. The Agency believes that control devices in existence today can meet the 95

percent limit, but at the request ofprinting industry representatives, the Agency

has agreed to not ask existing sources to meet the higher control efficiency.

The proposal does provide a new applicability threshold of 15 PPD for fountain

solution and cleaning solution requirements for all lithographic printing

operations. The requirements are the same as are already present in the lllinois

regulations, other than a correction to the fountain solution limits that changes

their measurement from "by volume" to "by weight." USEPA has informed

Illinois EPA that the limit should be weight-based, and the change will slightly

loosen the standard for sources, if anything. The Illinois EPA has not encountered

any sources with problems complying with the fountain solution, cleaning

solution, recordkeeping, reporting, or material handling portions ofthe existing

rule, and no such issues are expected when lowering the applicability threshold.

Sources between 15 and 100 PPD will be able to take advantage ofseveral new

exclusions pertaining to fountain and cleaning solutions. Sheet-fed presses that

print substrates no larger than 11 inches by 17 inches and any lithographic press

with a fountain solution reservoir ofno larger than one gallon are not required to

comply with the fountain solution requirements. As described above, all sources

in this group will also need to meet only a 70 percent YOM content limit in

cleaning solutions rather than the 30 percent limit that is applicable to sources

over 100 PPD. All such sources will also be able to use up to 110 gallons of

cleaning solution per year that do not meet either the YOM content or vapor

IS
pressure requirements. These exclusions will ease any potential burden on the

smallest sources affected by this rule.

Sources which fall below one ofthe applicability limits, and are thus exempt from

one or more control requirements, must certifY this exemption to Dlinois EPA

through calculations showing that their emissions will not exceed the applicable

YOM threshold. These calculations must include all YOM emissions, including

inks, fountain solution, and cleaning solvents, and are determined on a monthly

basis.

It should be noted that the current regulation recognizes that the substrate retains

some ofthe YOM present in the ink, and thus a retention factor of 0.95 is used

when calculating emissions from non-heatset inks, and a factor of 0.20 is used

when calculating emissions from heatset inks. In addition, it contains a factor

recognizing that YOM remains on solvent-laden rags that are stored and disposed

ofproperly. These factors continue to be allowed for determination of

applicability. In addition, this proposal adds emission adjustment factors to be

used in other situations when not determining applicability (such as Annual

Emissions Reports and permit limits). These factors take into account carryover of

YOM from automatic blanket wash and fountain solutions into thc dryer and

control device. All ofthese factors may be found in the CTG2

Because ofthe new exclusions that apply only between 15 and 100 PPD, even

.subject sources in this group must continue to calculate emissions to ensure they

do not exceed the 100 PPD threshold and lose the exclusions. Sources may opt out

ofthe exclusions ifthey do not wish to make use ofthem, and thus would not

need to calculate emissions in this fashion.

5.2 Letterpress Printing

There are currently no specific Dlinois regulations covering letterpress printing

operations; any such operations would therefore be covered by Subpart TT,

Section 218/219.30 I, or paper coating regulations. The new proposal addresses

both heatset and non-heatset letterpress operations.

This proposal would require that heatset letterpress printers use an add-on control

device ifthey meet the applicability requirement of 25 TPY PTE plantwide.

However, as noted earlier, the Agency believes there are no such operations in

Dlinois NAAs.

All letterpress printing operations of 15 PPD or more will be also required to

abide by cleaning material limitations equivalent to those described above for

lithographic sources between 15 and 100 PPD. That is, cleaning solutions will be

required to contain no more than 70 percent YOM or have a maximum composite

partial vapor pressure ofJess than 10 mm Hg.

16
5.3 Flexible Packaging Printing

Currently, Illinois rules cover all f1exographic, packaging rotogravure, and

publication rotogravure printing. All ink limits for these different types of printing

are identical, with the only difference found in the add-on control requirementsf1exographic printers are required to get 60 percent overall YOM reduction,

packaging rotogravure are required to get 65 percent overall reduction, and

publication rotogravure must achieve 75 percent overall reduction.

The new proposal separates out flexible package printing from the existing

f1exographic and rotogravure regulations. Thus, any f1exographic or rotogravure

operation that is not printing on flexible packaging will not see a change to the

applicable regulations.

Sources that print on flexible packaging will need to meet either a tightened ink

YOM content or add-on control requirement. The required control efficiency will

depend on both the date of construction, at the source, ofthe press and the control

device. This recognizes that presses and control devices already installed at the

source might not have been designed to obtain capture and control efficiencies as

high as are currently obtainable.

5.4 Industrial Cleaning Solvents

lllinois has current regulations for cold cleaning degreasing, open top vapor

degreasing, and conveyorized degreasing operations as well as some limitations

and work practiccs on cleaning solvent uses in existing rules, e.g., regulations

. regarding autobody refinishing, wood furniture coating, and lithographic printing.

This new rule sets limitations based on an applicability of 15 Ibs/day of actual

YOM emissions from cleaning operations. Once applicable, the source will need

to follow the work practice standards discussed in Section 3.4, above, and either

comply with a YOM content limitation ofthe cleaning solutions, use a low vapor

pressure cleaning solution, or utilize an emissions control system that provides 85

percent overall control of YOM emissions from cleaning activities.

5.5 . Flat Wood Paneling Coatings

There are currently no specific Illinois regulations covering flat wood paneling

coating operations; any such operations would therefore be covered by Subpart

TT, Section 218/219.301, or potentially wood furniture coating, depending on

whether the operations fell into the defmition related to that process.

The new proposal will add coating YOM requirements and work practice

requirements for both coatings and associated cleaning operations. As with other

coating categories, there is also an option available to use add-on control instead

17
of compliant coatings; however, the flat wood paneling coating category will

require an overall control of90 percent rather than the 81 percent overall control

required for existing coating categories.

The work practice requirements include several that are already required for wood

furniture coaters, which have been accomplished without any problems known to

the Agency. In addition, other common sense requirements are being added,

including minimizing spills ofVOM-containing materials, minimizing YOM

emissions during cleaning, and closing mixing vessels except when they are in

use.

6.0 AFFECTED SOURCES AND EMISSION REDUCTIONS

6.1 Lithographic Printing

The Agency does not expect any additional reductions from increasing the

required control efficiency for heatset web lithographic printers from 90 to 95

percent, because that change will not affect existing control devices.

However, there will be some small YOM reductions related to the addition of

fountain and cleaning solution requirements for sources with 15 PPD or more of

emissions. It is difficult to estimate such reductions because the TIlinois source

inventory does not track information such as the number of gallons of cleaning

solution used, the size ofsheet-fed presses, or the fountain solution reservoir

volume - as such, sources that may be excluded from requirements are not

identifiable.

The Agency found a total of98 lithographic printing sources in the Chicago NAA

and three in the Metro-East NAA that have lithographic printing emissions over

15 PPD, according to the Bureau ofAir's 2005 source inventory (modified for

sources that have shut down since that timel.

In the Chicago NAA, 66 ofthe sources are below 100 PPD, and thus are

potentially impacted by this mlemaking (two more are over 99 PPD and are

assumed to be already complying with the existing lithographic printing

regulations). In the Metro-East NAA, all three sources are below 100 PPD. The

Agency is conservatively judging that all ofthe sources listed may be impacted,

but it is likely that some ofthem are already considered subject, as the daily

emission rate in the inventory is an average estimate, while sources may have

exceeded 100 PPD at some previous point. The Agency has tried to account for

sources that are already controlled, as the 100 PPD applicability limit applies to

uncontrolled emissions. (See Appendix B for the list ofthese potentially affected

sources.)

18
For the sources that apparently would be affected by this proposed regulation, the

Illinois EPA reviewed its inventory in an attempt to estimatc potential emission

reductions from fountain solution reformulation. The .recent lithographic printing

CTG does not contain enough specific information to usefully estimate such

reductions, but refers back to the 1993 draft CTG on this source category.' Using

the information and model plants therein, Illinois EPA determined that fountain

solution emission reductions would be estimated at between 25% and 90% for

smaller sources. As this draft CTG is 16 years old and the new CTG indicates that

steps have bcen taken to reduce YOM content in fountain solutions, the Dlinois

EPA nsed the 25% figure in calculating reductions.

Cleaning solutions can be calculated as a straight 30% reduction, since the

regulation requires reformulation such that they cannot contain more than 70%

YOM.

As notcd above, the lllinois EPA inventory does not necessarily specifY, for each

source, which emissions result from cleaning and which are from fountain

solutions. However, using the model plants from the 1993 draft CTG as a guidc, it

appears that cleaning solntion emissions at smaller plants make up a lower

percentage of emissions compared to fountmn solutions, ranging up to

approximately 50% at certain facilities. Assuming that almost 50% ofnon-ink

emissions come from clcaning solutions, which have 30% reduction, it is safe to

use a 25% overall emission reduction to cover all YOM originating from the

source.

The total YOM emissions from the 66 Chicago NAA sources are 1.455 tons per

day. Thus, a 25% overall reduction equates to 0.36 tons per day ofVOM. The

total YOM emissions from the thTee Metro-East NAA sources is 0.0295 tons pcr

day. A 25% overall reduction would provide 0.007 tons per day.

6.2 Letterpress Printing

As noted earlier, the Agency does not believe there are currently any heatset web

letterpress printing operations in the NAAs. As such, no emissions reductions are

expected from add-on controls for this category.

According to a search ofthe Bureau of Air's 2005 source inventory, there are two

sources in the Chicago NAA, and none in the Metro-East NAA, making use of

letterpress printing (see Appendix B). Only one ofthese sources appears to emit

more than 15 PPD from such operations, with less than 0.02 TPD ofVOM,

including emissions from the letterpress as well as other printing operations. Even

if all ofthe emissions originated from letterpress cleaning solutions, which are to

be reduced by 30 percent, the resulting reduction would be 0.005 TPD. As such,

the Illinois EPA expects negligible emission reductions overall from the

implementation ofthis regulation.

19
6.3 Flexible Packaging Printing

It is difficult to estimate emission reductions for the flexible packaging printing

category, as the Illinois source database does not generally specify the type of

substrate being used by a flexographic or rotogravure printing operation, nor does

it specify the date of original installation ofthe printing press or the associated

control device. As such, all existing flexographic and rotogravure printing

facilities identified as such in the Illinois inventory and exceeding the proposed

applicability threshold are listed in Appendix B as potentially affected sources.

However, the lllinois inventory indicates that all sources but one using

flexographic or rotogravure printing of any type are already achieving greater

control efficiency than required by the proposed regulation. The remaining source

(identified with an asterisk in Appendix B) is required by its permit to achieve 60

percent control efficiency, but will now need to achieve 65 percent. This change

would equate to a 0.03 TPD reduction according to its permitted emissions, but a

0.01 TPD reduction according to emissions information in the inventory.

While the inventory does not provide information regarding the use of compliant

inks, it has been the Agency's experience that sources printing on flexible

packaging have had difficulty with the use of compliant YOM inks on such

substrates. Sources either relied on add-on controls or switched to waterbased inks

that should meet the newly proposed requirements as well as the existing ones. As

such, negligible emission reductions are expected from the new ink limits.

The cleaning materials work practice standards being proposed do not lend

themselves to a calculation of emission reductions. The Agency believes that the

environment will see actual YOM emission reductions due to the storing of

cleaning materials and used shop towels in closed containers, as well as conveying

cleaning materials in closed containers or pipes, but calculation ofsuch emission

reductions cannot be accomplished without detailed information from every

affected source - both before and after such changes are made.

6.4 Industrial Cleaning Solvents

USEPA estimated that there are 130 sources in the impacted areas that have

emissions over 15 PPD in Illinois. These sources are estimated to have baseline

emissions of2293 Mg/yr (2528 TPY) ofVOM as mentioned previously and

.include degreasing operations that are already impacted by existing state

regulations that will not gain any further reductions.

It is not reasonably practicable to estimate emission reductions for the other

impacted sources under the industrial clean-up solvent rule, as any source in either

20
NAAs that uses cleaning solvents is potentially affected, depending upon the

source's usage level. Further, many different types ofsources throughout the

NAAs may use different types of cleaning solutions and may already be using

compliant solutions. For these reasons, Appendix B docs not list specific sources

that are potentially impacted by this rulemaking.

As discussed above, the Agency believes that the environment will see actual

YOM emission reductions due to these proposed regulations, but calculation of

such emission reductions cannot be accomplished without detailed information

from every affected source. •

6.5 Flat Wood Paneling Coatings

A search ofthe Bureau of Air's 2005 source inventory indicated fOUT sources that

will likely be subject to the proposed flat wood paneling coating regulation in the

Chicago NAA, and none in the Metro-East NAA. One of these four sources would

appear to fall below the proposed applicability threshold. The other three total

0.09 TPD ofVOM emissions. According to the CTG, YOM emissions were

reduced an average of 60 percent for interior paneling and tileboard

manufacturing. This description seems to fit the Illinois NAA sources best. As

such, Illinois EPA estimates a YOM reduction of 0.05 TPD in the Chicago NAA

and no reductions in the Metro-East NAA.

7.0 OTHER STATES' STANDARDS

7.1 Lithographic Printing

Appendix B ofthe CTG for Lithographic and Letterpress Printing contains a list

ofstate standards for lithographic printing across the country. Rather than

reproduce the entire list here, the reader is referred to that list.2 A key point to note

is that all states with ozone NAAs will need to implement the same Group IT

CTGs as illinois is implementing with this rulemaking.

7.2 Letterpress Printing

Appendix C ofthe CTG for Lithographic and Letterpress Printing contains a list

ofstate standards for letterpress printing across the country. Rather than reproduce

the entire list here, the reader is referred to that list.2 A key point to note is that all

states with ozone NAAs will need to implement the same Group IT CTGs as

Illinois is implementing with this rulemaking.

7.3 Flexible Packaging Printing

Section V ofthe CTG for Flexible Package Printing contains a list ofstate

standards for flexible package printing across the country. Rather than reproduce

21
the entire list here, the reader is referred to that list.3 A key point to note is that all

states with ozone NAAs will need to implement the same Group II CTGs as

lllinois is implementing with this rulemaking.

7.4 Industrial Cleaning Solvents

The CTG for Industrial Cleaning Solvents contains some information on other

state standards throughout the document. 4 Besides those rules, ofparticular note

are regulations in California - South Coast, Bay Area, and San Joaquin Valleyas well as Wisconsin and a proposed regulation in Ohio, from which TIlinois

obtained most ofits proposed limits for activities that have a limit different from

the basic one suggested in the CTG. .

Appendix A contains a table (originally provided by Ohio and modified to include

proposed Illinois limits) that is a comparison ofIllinois' proposed limits with the

above areas' limits.

7.5 Flat Wood Paneling Coatings

Section V and Appendix B of the CTG for Flat Wood Paneling Coating contains

information on state standards for these operations across the country. Rather than

reproduce the entire list here, the reader is referred to that list.s A key point to note

is that all states with ozone NAAs will need to implement the same Group II

CTGs as Illinois is implementing with this rulemaking.

8.0 SUMMARY

The regulations proposed in this rulemaking, covering the CTGs from Group II of

USEPA's Consumer and Commercial Products category, add new requirements or

tighten existing requirements for lithographic printing, letterpress printing,

flexible packaging printing, flat wood paneling coating, and industrial cleaning

solvents. The Agency believes that all the proposed changes are technically

feasible and economically reasonable. Incorporating these additions and

modifications to existing Illinois regulations is required by the CAA and USEPA;

specifically, Section 182(b)(2)(A) ofthe CAA requires that SIPs must be revised

to include RACT for VOM emissions sources that are covered by a CTG issued

by USEPA after November 15, 1990, and before the area's date of attainment.

The illinois EPA made mUltiple rounds of outreach efforts in relation to this

proposed rulemaking. The first was accomplished electronically, with the second

involving follow-up calls from the Agency to sources that had submitted

comments as well as detailed discussions between the Agency and industry group

representatives. In addition, the Agency has had frequent discussions with USEPA

personnel in both the regioI!al office and headquarters, and has gathered

information from other states. After this extensive effort, the Agency has proposed

22
this rulemaking, which incorporates the requirements ofthe CTGs and USEPA

plus comments from industry.

While the Agency recognizes that it is difficult to quantify specific emission

reductions that will be achieved through these rule modifications, the environment

will see a real reductio~ ofVOM emissions. As previously noted, USEPA

strengthened the eight-hour ozone standard last year. It is likely that the same

areas in Illinois that are currently designated as nonattainment for the present

standards will soon be designated as nonattainment for this revised standard.

Any reduction in YOM emissions in the NAAs will help Illinois to achieve the

newly revised NAAQS as well as satisfy CAA obligations.

23
Appendix A: Comparison o[Proposed Illinois Industrial Cleaning Solvent

Limits to Those in Other States

~,~,

:(a)". ":p;ro"ducf ¢1eanj.ngdui"irig·~

. manufa6iUrlng l:proceSs;Qf

" "siJrf'.l-ccpf~ii~tirin1'or: :.',"

·coating. adhesive,'.:or,.irik'",·

.a'· ]i~ti~n:':.. .' ~": .

.'(c) 'Cleanirig:ofink'applkation

ui "men!: ..' " . ' ..

{i) ·G~neral .

(ii) Flexographic and

.'Rotogravure,'printing'

.:th~i does not-ptint;

Jlexibie, atka "Ii .

.(iii) Screen pri~tirig

._(iv) Ultraviolet ink and .

electron beam ink

application e<iuipment.'·

exce t screen rintin

_.:t•. .-to

"..';.

24
Appendix B: Potentially Affected Sources

Lithographic Printing Sources

Chicago Nonattainment Area:

BOA ID Number

0310l2AGH

031015AAR

0310l5ACC

03 10I8AAK

031030ACU

031030ACW

031030ADM

031051ABM

03105lADK

031063AHP

031063AHU

031096AAD

031096ANR

031120AAF

031123ABZ

031123ACD

031126AAZ

031186AGD

031201ADU

031201AEG

03120lAEQ

031288AJJ

031297ABT

031440AFJ

031440ALJ

031440ALO

03 1440ALR

031440AMW

031600AWL

·031600BGU

03l600BKC

031600CAG

031600CHZ

031600FAN

031600FOV

031600GBC

031600GFC

031600GHF

03l600GHI

03l600GJN

03l600GQV

03l82lABB

Source Name

Nuart

Sleepeck Printing Co

Douglas Press Inc

The Buhl Press Inc

Kelvyn Press Inc

H&W Graphics Inc

Rapid Impressions Inc

Unique Printers & Lithographers

Royal Continental Box Co

Chromatech Printing Inc

Des Plaines Printing LLC

TIN Inc DBA Temple-Inland

TukaizLLC

Cadore-Miller Printing Inc

Darwill

Creative Automation

Liberty Suburban Chicago Newspaper

MeadWestvaco Consumer Packaging Group LLC

Iohnson & QUlllInC

Ed Garvey & Co

SKi\![ Ventures LLC

Great Lakes Graphics

Calumet Carton Co

Bruce Offset Co I Pearson I Inc

Elk Grove Graphics

Quality Color Graphics Inc

Premier Card Solutions LLC

Impact Printers & Lithographers

Lakeside Lithography LLC

Color Communications Inc

Goes Lithographing Co Inc

Chicago Press Corp

Cardinal Colorprint Printing

Chicago Tribune Co

Seven Worldwide Inc

Newsweb Corp

Melar Litho Inc

American Thiessen LLC

Palmer Printing Inc

Enteron Group LLC

Diemand Printing Co

Ideal Box Co

25
BOA JD Number

043005ALJ

043005AMK

043005AMS

043020ABI

043020ACM

043030ADL

043030AEG

043030AEL

043065ACG

043120AAR

043452AAW

089010ACG

089020ABH

089407AAO

089438AFT

089483ACC

089483ACM

089800ABV

097l90ACR

097I90AFK

1110l5ACP

197025AAM

197080AAN

19749IAAD

Source Name

Advantage Printing Inc

Lakewood Printing Inc

ABS Graphics Inc

Tempo Graphics Inc

Flint lnk North America Corp

Johnson Printers

Diamond Web Printing Inc

Jet Lithocolor Inc

Dow Jones & Co Inc

Madden Communication

Vis-a-Graphics

Tegrant Alloyd Brands Inc

Carlith Printing Co

Voris Communications Co Inc d/b/a Kclmscott Press

Hagg Press Inc

InterCo Print LLC

Perfect Plastic Printing Corp

Freedom Imaging Systems Ine

Nosca Inc

Lake County Press Inc

Corporate Express

Joliet Pattern Works Inc

Fox Valley Publications

Vision Integrated Graphics LLC

Metro-East Nonattainment Area:

BOA JD Number

ll9055AAZ

119819AAA

133025AAK

Source Name

Dow Jones and Co Inc

Highland Supply Corp

Mar Graphics

Letterpress Printing Sources

Chicago Nonattainment Area:

BOA ID Number

03l288ABA

lllOl5ADP

Source Name

Federal-Mogul Corp

Stephen Fossler Company

26
Flexible Packaging Printing Sources

Chicago Nonattainment Area:

BOA ID Numbcr

031003ACU

031009AAS

031012ACA

031012AFM

031012AGJ

031015AAM

031027AAS

031045AGl

031063ADM

031063AFT

031063AHT

031096AMM

031096AOB

031 186AFK

031440AHX

031489AAU

031497AAM

031600ACL

031600AIL

031600BGU

031600BTT

031600CKM

031600DNZ'

031600GEl

031600GFH

031600GlB

031600GLJ

031820AAl

043005AJS

043005ALB

043020AAC

043020ACH

043020ACJ

043035ACX

043462AAA

043806AAN

089010ACC

089055AAK

089407AAZ

089438ADW

089438AFL

089438AGQ

089483ABV

089483ACY

Source Name

Duro Bag Mfg Co

Webcr Marking Systems Inc

Packaging Corp ofiL d/b/a Acorn Corrugated Box Co

International Paper Co

International Paper Co

Alcan Packaging Food & Tobacco Inc

Smurfit-Stone Container Corp

CFC Intemational Inc

International Paper Co

Deluxe Manufacturing Operations Inc

Pamco Printed Tape & Label Co

Formel Industries Inc

Prairie State Group

Wagner Zip Change

Clear-Lam Packaging Inc

Paddock Printing Center

Bio-Industries

Bagcraft Packaging LLC

Solo Cup Operating Corporation

Color Communications Inc

General Packaging Products

MeadWestvaco Packaging Systems LLC

Bio Star Films LLC

Cenveo

TIN Inc d/b/a Temple - Inland

American Labelmark Co

General Packaging Products Inc

Bluegrass Flexihle Packaging Co LLC

RoUprint Packaging Produc1s Inc

Quality Bags Inc

Graphic Packaging International Inc

Meyercord Revenue Co

Packaging Personified Inc

Bema Poly Tech d/b/a Bema Film Sys Inc

Genesis Packaging & Design

Pro-pak Industries Inc

Pechiney Plastic Packaging Inc

International Paper

Covalence Specialty Materials Corp

Printpack Inc

Multifilm Packaging Corp.'

TIN Inc DBA Elgin Corrugated Box

Dopaco Inc

Moore Wallace North America Inc

27
BOA ill Number

097035ABE

097080AAY

097084AAI

097115ABC

097Il5ACJ

0971 25AAY

097190ACR

097418AAL

097803AAB

097809ABG

lllOlOAAT

111035AAP

111065AAR

111803AAF

Source Name

NOSCD Inc

. Colbert Packaging Corp

VoneD Products Inc

Arncor Flexibles Healthcare Inc

Parade Packaging

Stone Container Corp

NoscD Inc

Fisher Container Corp

cn Industries Corp

Kraftseal Corp

AMPAC Flexicon LLC

HS Crocker Co Inc

Divers.pack LLC

Catty Corp

Metro-East Nonattainment Area:

BOA ill Number

119040ATD

119055AAL

11 98 19AAA

Source Name

Gateway Packaging Inc

Highland Supply Corp

HigWand Supply Corp

Flat Wood Paneling Coating Sources

Chicago Nonattainment Area:

BOA ill Number

031600AFA

03 I600FZW

031600GGJ

197815AAH

Source Name

William Yuenger Manufacturing Co

Interior Crafts Inc

FCI Inc

Illinois Flush Door Ine

28
REFERENCES

1. The Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq.).

2. Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and

Letterpress Printing, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office

ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC,

September 2006.

3. Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing. United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

4. Control Techniques Guidelines: Industrial Cleaning Solvents, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

5. Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United

States Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

6. Technical Support Document for Controlling YOM Emissions from

Lithographic Printing Operations, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency;

Air Quality Planning Section, Springfield, IL, October 1994.

7. Control Techniques Guideline Series: Control of Volatile Organic Compound

Emissions from Offset Lithographic Printing (DRAFT), United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1993.

29
A 2
. /.

fl"irc:CICOVE~ CLERK'S OFFICE

AUG 062009

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

August 6, 2009

Warren Ribley, Director

.. Department ofCommerce and Economic Opportunity

620 East Adams Street, S-6

Springfield, Illinois 62704

Cr.:-"'.'EFG,()!(

~,'.~')d K g1ag':)j(~"iC:;-1

Re: Request for Economic Impact Study for: Reasonably Available Control

Technology IRACT) for Volatilc Organic Material Emissions from Group n

Consumer & Commercial Products: Proposed Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 211, 218, and 219, (RI0-08)

Dear Director Ribley:

Since 1998, Section 27(b) ofthe Enviromnental Protection Act has required

· the Board to:

1) request that the Department ofCormnerce and Economic Opportunity

(formerly the Department ofCormnerce and Community Affairs) conduct a

study ofthe economic impact ofthe proposed rules. The Department may

within 30 to 45 days ofsuch request produce a study ofthe economic impact

ofthe proposed rules. At a minimum, the economic impact study shall

address a) economic, environmental, and public health benefits that may be

achieved through compliance with the proposed rules, b) the effects ofthe

proposed rules on employment levels, commercial productivity, the economic

growth ofsmall businesses with 100 or less employees, and the State's

overall economy, and c) the cost per unit ofpollution reduced and the

variability of company revenues expected to be used to implement the

proposed rules; and

On August 6, 2009, the Board accepted for hearing a proposal in Reasonably

· Available Control Technology IRACT) for Volatile Organic Material Emissions

· from Group II Consumer & Commercial Products: Proposed Amendments to 35 Ill.

; Adm. Code 211, 218, and 219, (R09-2l). This rulemaking was filed with the Board

, on July 9, 2009, by the Illinois Enviromnental Protection Agency. Generally, the

Wfn!'TGHELlJ OFFiCE' Agency proposes to adopt air pollution regulations to control emissions ofvolatile

02 j x,;n;, (;r~;,,; P.v". c'" : organic material for Group II Consumer & Commercial Products in ozone

: FO. Bo;; 1'12;·'1· : nonattaimnent areas classified as moderate and above. Group II products include

Si~;;;'~1~~:iiiL .industrial cleaning solvents, flat wood paneling coatings, flexible packaging printing

2i7·524:xifYJ : materials, lithographic printing materials, and letterpress printing materials. I write

FAX 217·52"·.ii5(" : to request that your Department conduct an economic impact study concerning this

, proposal.

1,,~~ri[~AS9:?~FrC£ .

~aIP~'tI<.· Tho·~1j;·~on Ccm~r I· .. '. Wil We,LRiildclph· .>

I' . ·Sl.lit~i,l~:;oo .. ·· . 1 Chica~'Q!)i '60f,o'J";' ,:,'1 . ;"'j'2"Xg:j' i.36~}() ':-~:,,;',<:,~,,: "', .A::...·;'f· ,- .~", . ,',',- : ;

FAX J1R,814'3669

1\~~~i;;'~j'M t ")"~' 01 - .. ~_

',':~
(2) conduct at least one public hearing on the economic impact ofthose

rules. At least 20 days before the hearing, the Board shall notifY the public of

the hearing and make the economic impact study, or the Dej:Jlutment of

Commerce and Economic Opportunity's explanation for not producing an

economic impact study, available to the public. Such public hearing may be

held simultaneously or as a part ofany Board hearing considering such new

rules. 415 ILCS 5/27(b) (2008).

The Board is in the process ofscheduling a hearing in this rulemaking.

Although there is no decision deadline in this rulemaking, the Board intends to

proceed promptly with this rulemaking, and asks that you respond to this request as

soon as you conveniently can. IfI, or my staff, can provide you with any additional

information, please let me know.

Thank you in advance for your prompt response.

Sincerely,

G. Tanner Girard

Acting Chairman

Pollution Control Board

ee: John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk ofthe Board
A 3
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

August 6, 2009

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

REASONABLY AVAlLABLE CONTROL )

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATLE )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM)

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL )

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS )

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 21 I, 218, and 219 )

ORDER OF THE BOARD (by A.S. Moore):

RIO-08

(Rulemaking - Air)

On July 9,2009, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency or Illinois EPA)

filed a proposal under the general rulemaking provisions of Sections 27, 28, and 28.2 ofthe

Environmental Protection Act (Act). See415 ILCS 5/27, 28, 28.2 (2008). Generally, the

Agency proposes to adopt air pollution regulations to control emissions of volatile organic

material (VOM) I for Group II Consumer & Commercial Products in ozone nonattainment areas

classified as moderate and above. Group II products include industrial cleaning solvents, flat

wood paneling coatings, flexible packaging printing materials, lithographic printing materials,

and letterpress printing materials. Accompanying the Agency's proposal were a motion for

waiver of copy requirements (Mot. Waive) and a motion for expedited review (Mot. Expedite).

The Board today accepts the Agency's proposal for hearing and grants the Agency's

request for waiver of copy requirements but denies the Agency's motion for expedited review.

The Board also directs the hearing officer to expeditiously schedule and proceed to hearing in

this matter.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL

The Agency characterizes YOM as "a primary precursor to the formation of ground-level

ozone." Statement at 2-3. In 1997, USEPA revised the National Ambient Air Quality Standard

(NAAQS) for ozone by instituting an 8-hour standard. ld. at 3, citing 62 Fed. Reg. 38856 (July

18, 1997). Two Illinois areas, Chicago and St. LouislMetro East, have been designated as

moderate nonattaimnent areas for the 8-hour ozone standard. 2 Statement at 3.

l The Agency states that YOM and volatile organic compounds (VOC) are "effectively the

same" as one another. Statement at I.

2 The Chicago nonat1ainment area includes the following jurisdictions: Cook, DuPage, Kane,

Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties, Goose Lake and Aux Sable Townships in Grundy County,

and Oswego Township in Kendall County. Statement at 3, citing 40 C.F.R. 81.314. The St.

LouislMctro East nonattaimnent includes the following llIinois counties: Jersey, Madison,

Monroe, and St. Clair. Statement at 3, citing 40 C.F.R. 81.314.
2

The Agency states that its proposal intends to satisfy Il1inois' obligation under the Clean

Air Act (CAA) to submit a State Implementation Plan addressing YOM emissions in areas

designated as nonattainment for the NAAQS for ozone. Statement at I, 6, citing 42 U.S.c. §§

7502, 7511a. Specifically, the Agency states that Illinois must revise its SIP to include

reasonably available control tcchnology (RACT) for sources of YOM emissions covered by a

USEPA control technology guideline (CTG). Statement at 2, citing 42 U.S.c. § 751Ia(b)(2).

The Agency reports that, on October 5, 2006, USEPA issued final CTGs for Group II Consumer

and Commercial Products. Statement at 4. USEPA required submission of SIP revisions

responding to the CTGs within one year. !d. at 4, 5, citing 71 Fed. Reg. 58745-53.

In addition, the Agency states that "Il1inois is required to submit these SIP revisions

before the USEPA can redesignate the Chicago and Metro East nonattainment area as attaining

the 1997 ozone NAAQS, regardless of whether the VOC reductions obtained by the SIP

revisions are actually necessary to achieve attainment ofthe NAAQS." Statement at 6. The

Agency notes that, on July, 2, 2007, it "submitted to the USEPA an attainment demonstration for

the Metro East nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS." ld. at 7. The Agency

further notes that, on March 19, 2009, it submitted an attainment demonstration for the Chicago

nonattainment area. ld. The Agency argues that "[t]hese areas cannot be redesignated to

attainment of the ozone NAAQS, however, unless and until the Il1inois EPA submits SIP

revisions in response to the Group II CTGs and the USEPA approves such revisions." !d. The

Agency claims that its proposal seeks "to implement the recommendations contained in the

CTGs to the extent that such recommendations are consistent with, and impose stricter

requirements than, existing regulations." ld.

TheAgency also notes that USEPA recently strengthened the ozone standard. Statement

at 7, citing 73 Fed. Reg. 16436 (Mar. 27,2008). The Agency considers it "likely" that areas

designated as nonattainment for the current standards will be designated nonattainment for the

revised standards as well, with the exception ofJersey County. Statement at 7; Mot. Expedite at

3. The Agency argues that "[w]hile attainment ofthe revised standard is not the purpose ofthis

rulemaking, it should be noted that any reduction in YOM emissions in the nonattainment areas

resulting from these proposed amendments wil1likely help Il1inois achieve the revised NAAQS."

ld.

MOTION FOR WAIVER OF REOUIREMENTS

The Agency notes that the Board's procedural rules require filing the original and nine

copies ofits regulatory proposal with the Board's Clerk. Mot. Waive at I, citing 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 102.200. The Agency further notes that that Act requires it also to file information

supporting its proposal. Mot. Waive at I, citing 415 ILCS 5/27(a) (2008). The Agency states

that it has supplied with Board with seven documents on which it directly relied in drafting the

proposed regulations. Mot. Waive at 1-2. Because its entire proposal consists ofmore than 700

pages, the Agency "requests that the Board waive the normal copy requirements and allow

Il1inois EPA to file the original and four copies" ofits proposal and the documents relied upon in

the development of the proposal. !d. at 2.

MOTION FOR EXPEDITED REVIEW
3

The Agency states that it has submitted demonstrations that the Chicago and St.

Louis/Metro East nonattainment areas now attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Mot.

Expedite at 2. The Agency argues that USEPA cannot redesignate those areas as attaining that

standard "unless and until the Illinois EPA submits SIP revisions in response to Group II CTGs

and the USEPA approves such revisions." !d.

Also as noted above, USEPA has strengthened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Mot. Expedite

at 3, citing 73 Fed. Reg. 16436 (Mar. 27, 2008). The Agency states that, in March of2009, it

"recommended to the USEPA that the same areas in Illinois that are currently designated as

nonattainment for the 1997 standard be designated as nonattainment for the revised standards as

well, with the exception ofJersey County." Mot. Expedite at 3. The Agency further states that

USEPA is expected make nonattainment designations by March of201O, at which time "USEPA

will issue guidance for states transitioning fTOm the 1997 standard to the revised standard." !d.

The Agency argues that, if either ofthe two ofthe two nonattainment areas violate the

1997 ozone standard before it is fo'rmally redesignated as attaining that standard, then "it is

possible that such area would be 'bumped up' from its current 'moderate' nonattainment

classification to a 'serious' or higher classification." Mot. Expedite at 3, citing 42 U.S.C. §

751Ia(c). The Agency states that "[a]reas designated as 'serious' are subject to more stringent

requirements, including a lower major source threshold, enhanced monitoring requirements, and

a stricter emission offset ratio." Mot. Expedite at 3, citing 42 U.S.c. § 7511a. The Agency

further states that a violation ofthe 1997 standard occurring after redesignation would not result

in reclassification. Mot. Expedite at 3. Instead, "[t]he area in which the violation occurred

would merely be required to implement targeted control measures pursuant to contingency

provisions contained in the area's maintenance plan." lei., citing 42 U.S.c. § 7505a. The

Agency claims that "[r]edesignation is therefore necessary to foreclose the risk that a future

violation ofthe 1997 standard will implicate reclassification and, in turn, heightened control

measures." Mot. Expedite at 4.

The Agency further argues that transition from the 1997 ozone standard to the revised

standard "will most likely impose additional obligations upon areas that are still designated as

nonattainment for the 1997 standard at the time final designations for the revised standard are

made." Mot. Expedite at 4, citing 40 C.F.R. 51.905(a)(I). The Agency claims that, although the

USEPA's transition policy and the risk of complications such as legal challenges resulting from

that policy are uncertain, an expeditious redesignation would relieve Illinois ofhaving to comply

with such a policy and contend with its consequences. See Mot. Expedite at 4-5. Consequently,

the Agency requests that the Board grant its motion for expedited review. !d. at 5.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

First, the Board finds that the rulemaking proposal meets the content requirements of 35

Ill. Adm. Code 102. The Board accepts this proposal for hearing and directs the assigned

hearing officer to proceed to hearing under the rulemaking provisions ofthe Act and the Board's

procedural rules. 415 ILCS 5/27, 28, 28.2 (2008); 35 Ill. Adm. Code 102.
4

Next, the Board grants the Agency's motion for waiver of requirements and allows the

Agency to file an original and four complete copies of its proposal and the documents upon

which it directly relied in drafting the proposal.

Finally, turning to the Agency's motion for expedited review, the Board notes that

Section 101.512 of its procedural rules addresses requests ofthis nature See 35 Ill. Adm. Code

101.512. Such requests must include, among other elements, "a complete statement ofthe facts

and reasons for the request." 35 Ill. Adm. Code 10 1.512(a). In acting on a motion for expedited

review, the Board considers, at a minimum, "all statutory requirements and whether or not

material prejudice will result from the motion being granted or denied." 35111. Adm. Code

I01.512(b). In addition, the Board will only grant a motion for expedited review consistent with

available resources. See 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.512(e).

As a matter of its various resources and decision deadlines, the Board cannot expedite

consideration of every case or rulemaking proposal. In denying a recent motion for expedited

review filed by the City ofGalva, the Board stated that its "limited resources in light ofits

current and future decision deadlines render the granting of a motion for expedited review

unlikely in all but the most dire circumstances." In the Matter of: City of Galva Site-Specific

Water Ouality Standard for Boron Discharges to Edwards River and Mud Creek: 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 303.447 and 303.448, R9-ll, slip op. at 3 (Feb. 5,2009) (denying motion for expedited

review); see also In the Matter of: Ameren Ash Pond Closure Rules (Hutsonville Power

Station): Proposed 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 840.101 through 840.144, R09-21, slip op. at 9-10

(June 18,2009) (same); In the Matter of: Petition ofWestwood Lands, Inc. for an Adjusted

Standard from Portion 005 Ill. Adm. Code 807.104 and 810.103 or, in the Alternative, a

Finding ofInapplicability, AS 09-3, slip op. at 10 (May 21,2009) (same).

As noted above, expedited review is granted consistent with the Board's decision

deadlines and available resources. See 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.512(c). The Board currently has a

number rulemaking dockets requiring immediate attention, as well as pressing cases of other

types. As a result of attrition, the Board has fewer staff than it has had in many years. These

circumstances have not meaningfully changed since the Board denied the City of Galva's motion

for expedited review. These limited resources, particularly in light of current and future decision

deadlines, continue to make it unlikely that the Board will grant a motion for expedited review in

all but the most dire circumstances.

The Board did recently grant two Agency motions to expedite consideration of proposed

rules in which the Agency described the risk of USEPA sanctions in the event that the State

failed to remedy deficiencies in the SIP for ozone attainment. In each ofthese two rulemaking

proceedings, the Board found that the USEPA implementation deadline of September 24, 2009,

and the risk offederal sanctions, including those related to new source offsets and highway

funding, constituted "dire circumstances." Section 27 Proposed Rules for Nitrogen Oxide (NO,)

Emissions From Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines and Turbines:

Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts 211 and 217, R07-19, slip op. at 4 (Apr. 2, 2009); In the

Matter of: Nitrogen Oxides Emissions from Various Source Categories, Amendments to 35 III.

Adm. Code Parts 211 and 217, R08-19, slip op. at 4 (Apr. 2, 2009).
5

The Board does not discount the Agency's arguments regarding rcdesignation ofthe

nonattainment areas. However, these arguments do not necessarily constitute "material

prejudice" sufficient to allow the Board to grant the Agency's motion. Accordingly, the motion

to expedite is denied. However, the Board commits to reaching a prompt decision in this matter

as soon as the record is complete and directs its hearing officer to take any necessary steps to

avoid delay in scheduling the required hearings and completing the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

. I, John 1'. Therriault, Assistant Clerk ofthe Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that

the Board adopted the above opinion and order on August 6,2009, by a vote of 5-0.

John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board
A 4
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

August 12, 2009

INTHEMAITEROF: )

)

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL )

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATLE )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM )

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL )

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS )

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211,218, AND 219 )

RIO-8

(Rulemaking - Air)

REceiVED

CLERK'S OFFICE

AUG 122009

STATE OF fWNOIS

Pollution Control Board

NOTICE OF HEARINGS

DATES, TIMES, AND LOCATIONS:

FIRST HEARING: TUESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2009

9:00AM

Madison County Administration Building

County Board Room #203

157 N. Main St.

Edwardsville, illinois

AND, IF BUSINESS REMAINS AT THE END OF THE HEARING ON THAT DAY,

CONTINUING ON WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2009, BEGINNING AT 9:00 AM

AT THE SAME LOCATION.

SECOND HEARING: TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2009

9:00AM

James R. Thompson Center

Room 9-039

100 W. Randolph St.

Chicago, illinois

AND, IF BUSINESS REMAINS AT THE END OF THE HEARING ON THAT DAY,

CONTINUING ON WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2009, BEGINNING AT 9:00 AM

AT THE SAME LOCATION.

PURPOSE OF HEARINGS:

AITENDING BOARD MEMBER:

HEARING OFFICER:

Merit and Economic

Andrea S. Moore

Timothy J. Fox

In eompliam:e with tilt: AIn::ricum widl DisubiJilie-s Acl and nU,cr applic::lolc- f;;:drml and State laws, tllt: hC<lnng \\~lJ be acct'Ssiblt' to ilHJi\"k"hrJl~ ,~ilh

dis,,'binl-i['S. PCI'S(1I1S requiring auxiliary :lids 311d services should ,;'u1H:I" John Thttriall!l, A:>siz:t:lntCk-rk ()t'the Board. at 100 West R"nd",!ph Sf.,

Suite 11-:.'01), Chicago. Illinois 60601. at tclqlhonc lIumber 312!81-t..:()931. fa.... nUlllb?r 312i814<H169. or TOD number 312·'814...60.\2, ri~'(' days prior

to th~ hC3ring.,
2

HEARING OFFICER ORDER

On July 9, 2009, the Board received a rulemaking proposal from the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency (Agency). Generally, the Agency proposes to adopt air

pollution regulations to control emissions ofvolatile organic material (VOM)l for Group II

Consumer & Commercial Products in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate and

above. Group II products include industiial cleaning solvents, flat wood paneling coatings,

flexible packaging printing materials, lithographic printing materials, and letterpress printing

materials. In an order dated August 6, 2009, the Board accepted the proposal for hearing and

directed the hearing officer to take any necessary steps to avoid delay in scheduling the required

hearings and completing the record.

The Board will conduct two hearings in order to allow the proponent and any other

interested participants the opportunity to present testimony on the merits and economic impact of

the rulemaking proposal. At hearing, all persons who testify will be sWorn in and subject to

questioning. The Board will also receive any testimony on any economic impact study (EclS)

conducted by the Department ofCommerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO) on the proposed

rules or on DCEO's decision not to perform an EelS.

In setting hearing dates, the Board has considered and accommodated its general

workload and hearings now scheduled. As indicated above in the notice of hearings, the first

hearing will begin on Tuesday, October 27, 2009, and, ifbusiness remains at the end ofthe

hearing on that day, will continue on Wednesday, October 28, 2009. The second hearing will

begin Tuesday, December 8, 2009, and, if business remains at the end ofthe hearing on that day,

will continue on Wednesday, December 9, 2009.

Pre-Filing Deadlines

Participants who intend to testify at hearing are urged to pre-file their testimony and

directed to serve pre-filed testimony on the hearing officer and all persons on the Service List.

Before filing pre-filed testimony or any other document with the Clerk, please check with the

hearing officer or the Board's Clerk to obtain the most recent version ofthe Service List.

Participants who wish to testify at the first hearing are directed to pre-file all oftheir

testimony and any related exhibits no later than Tuesday, September 15,2009. To expedite the

first hearing, participants are directed to pre-file questions based upon pre-filed testimony no

later than Tuesday, September 29,2009. Participants whose pre-filed testimony elicits pre-filed

questions are directed to pre-file written answers to those questions no later than Tuesday,

October 13, 2009.

Although Section 27 ofthe Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/27 (2008» does

not limit the first hearing to the testimony ofthe proponent, the hearing officer presently intends

J The Agency states that YOM and volatile organic compounds (VOe) are "effectively the

same" as one another. Statement at I.
3

to allow the Agency as proponent to present the testimony of all ofits witnesses before hearing

the testimony of other participants who have pre-filed testimony. Nonetheless, any person

wishing to testifY at the first hearing should pre-file testimony by Tuesday, September 15,2008.

Pre-filing deadlines for the second hearing will be determined at a later date.

The "mailbox rule" at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.300(b)(2) does not apply to the filing of any

ofthis pre-filed testimony, pre-filed questions, or pre-filed answers, and the Board's Clerk must

rec.eive these documents before the close ofbusiness on the specified dates. Although pre-filed

testimony, pre-filed questions, and pre-filed answers may be filed electronically through the

Clerk's Office On-Line (COOL) from the Board's Web site at www.ipcb.state.il.us. all electronic

or approved fax filings must be received by the Clerk's Office no later than 4:30 PM on the day

ofthe applicable deadline. Any questions about electronic filing through COOL should be

directed to the Clerk's Office at (312) 814-3629.

Order of Hearings

As indicated above, the hearing scheduled to begin on October 27,2009, will begin with

the Agency's presentation ofits case as the proponent. All pre-filed testimony will be entered

into the record as ifread. See 35 Ill. Adm. Code 102.424(f). For the first hearing, a brief

summary oftestimony will be allowed if a witness wishes to provide one before responding to

questions. Witnesses will then address pre-filed questions. The hearing officer intends to allow

any participant to ask follow-up questions and, after addressing pre-filed questions, to allow

participants who have not pre-filed questions to ask them.

After the Agency has addressed all questions from other participants, and iftime permits

before the conclusion ofthe first hearing, other participants who have pre-filed testimony may

testifY and address pre-filed questions. Participants who do not pre-file testimony will be

allowed to testifY as time permits after the conclusion ofpre-filed testimony and questions based

upon it. Consequently, any person wishing to testifY at either ofthe two hearings is urged to prefile testimony in order to ensure that they have an opportunity to testifY.

The hearing scheduled to begin December 8, 2009, will begin with participants who prefiled testimony for the first hearing and were not able to testifY at that time. Participants who

pre-filed testimony for the second hearing will then present that testimony.

Any participant who wishes to offer a public coIilment at either hearing will be allowed

to do so iftime permits at the close ofpre-filed testimony and questions based upon it. The

Board's procedural rules also include an opportunity to file post-hearing comments. See 35 ill.

Adm. Code 102.108(b). The rules also provide that "[t]he Board will accept written comments

from any person concerning the proposed regulations during the first notice period." 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 102.604.

Service and Notice Lists
4

The Service List for this rulemaking is the list ofpersons who wish to participate actively

in this proceeding and receive not only the Board's opinions and orders but also other filings

such as pre-filed testimony.

The Notice List includes participants who wish to receive only the Board's opinions and

orders and hearing officer orders. The Board begins this rulemaking proceeding by including in

the Notice List each ofthe 136 potentially affected manufacturers listed in Appendix B to the

Agency's Technical Support Document.

While the Board will mail a copy ofthe Board's August 6, 2009, order and this hearing

officer order to each ofthose entities, the Board will mail copies of any subsequent opinions and

orders only to those who specifically indicate that they wish to remain on the Notice List for this

proceeding. Any entity wishing to remain on the Notice List must provide the information

requested in the form attached to this order as Attachment A to the Board by Friday, September

4, 2009. In order to clarifY the record in this proceeding, Attachment B to this order contains the

names and addresses of all ofthe entities listed by the Agency in its Appendix B and to which

the Board has mailed this first hearing officer order.

Note that interested persons may now request electronic notice offilings by providing an

e-mail address through COOL under this docket number RI0-8. This electronic notice generates

an electronic mail notification that a document has been filed with the Board in this docket,

including document that are not typically provided to persons on the Notice List. In addition,

COOL provides links to documents filed with the Board. Those documents can be viewed,

downloaded, and printed free of charge as soon as they are posted to the Board's Web site. For

more information about the option of electronic notice or COOL, please consult either the

Board's Web site at www.ipcb.state.il.usorJohnTherriault.theBoard·sAssistantClerk.at (312)

814-3629.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Timothy J. Fox

Hearing Officer

Illinois Pollution Control Board

100 W. Randolph St., Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois 60601

312-814-6085

foxt@ipcb.state.il.us
5

ATTACHMENT A

To Hearing Officer Order of August 12,2009

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for Volatile Organic Material Emissions

from Group II Consumer & Commercial Products: Proposed Amendments to 35 TIl. Adm. Code

211, 218, and 219: (RI0-8)

I wish to remain on the Notice List in the Pollution Control Board rulemaking proceeding listed

above:

Name

Organization or Company

Address

City, State, Zip

PLEASE SUPPLY THIS INFORMATION BY FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 4,2009 TO:

LynnPatras

E-mail:

patrasl@ipcb.state.il.us

Fax:

312-814-3669

Mail:

100 W. Randolph St., Suite 11-500

James R. Thompson Center

Chicago, illinois 60601
6

ATTACHMENTB

To Hearing Officer Order ofAugust 12, 2009

Reasonably Available Control Technology fRACT) for Volatile Organic Material Emissions

from Group II Consumer & Commercial Products: Proposed Amendments to 35 TIl. Adm. Code

211, 218, and 219: (RIO-8)

Nuart

Sleepeck Printing Co

Douglas Press Inc

The Buh! Press Inc

Kelvyn Press Inc

H&W Graphics Inc

Rapid Impressions Inc

Unique Printers & Lithographers

Royal Continental Box Co

Cbromatech Printing Inc

Des Plaines Printing LLC

TIN Inc DBA Temple-Inland

Tukaiz LLC

Cadore-Miller Printing Inc

Darwill

Creative Automation

Liberty Suburban Chicago Newspaper

MeadWestvaco Consumer Packaging Group LLC

Johnson & Quin Inc

Ed Garvey & Co

SKM Ventures LLC

Great Lakes Graphics

Calumet Carton Co

Bruce Offset Co I Pearson I Inc

Elk Grove Graphics

Quality Color Graphics Inc

Premier Card Solutions LLC

Impact Printers & Lithographers

Lakeside Lithography LLC

Color Communications Inc

Goes Lithographing Co Inc

Chicago Press COlp

Cardinal Colorprint Printing

Chicago Tnbune Co

Seven Worldwide Inc

Newsweb Corp

Melar Litho Inc

American Thiessen LLC

Palmer Printing Inc

Enteron Group LLC

Diemand Printing Co

Ideal Box Co

6247 W 74th St

815 25th Ave

2810 Madison St

5656 McDennott

2910 S 18th Ave

2649 Gardner Rd

2206 Parkes Drive

5500 W 31st St

1301 S47thAve

16 Mary St

1000 Executive Dr

11600 W Grand Ave

2917 Latoria Ln

9901 S 78th Ave

11900 W Roosevelt Rd

220 Fencl Ln

7545 Santa Fe Dr

1950 N Ruby St

7460 N Lehigh Ave

5990 W Toughy

5990 W Touhy Ave

5555 W Howard St

16920 Statc St

1099 GrcenleafAve

1200 Chase Ave

1855 GreenleafAve

1800 GreenleafAve

1401 BnunmelAve

1600 S Laflin St

4000 W Fillmore St

42 W 61st St

1112 N HornanAve

2532 W Irving Park Rd

777 W Chicago Ave

225 W Superior

1645 W Fullerton Ave

2544 W Diversey

2357 N Milwaukee

739 S Clark St

5565 N Lynch St

4237 W 42nd PI

4800 S Austin

Bedford Park IL

Bellwood IL

Bellwood IL

Berkeley IL

Broadview IL

Broadview IL

Broadview IL

Cicero IL

Cicero UL

Des Plaines IL

Des Plaines IL

Northlake IL

Franklin Park .IL

Hickory Hills IL

Hillside IL

Hillside IL

Hodgkins IL

Melrose Park IL

Niles IL

Niles IL

Niles IL

Skokie IL

South Holland IL

Elk Grove Village IL

Elk Grove Village IL

Elk Grove Village IL

Elk Grove Village IL

Elk Grove Village IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chic.ago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Chicago IL

Forest View IL

60499

60104

60104

60163

60153

60155

60155

60804

60804-1598

60016-3407

60018

60164

60131

60457

60162-2070

60162

60525

60160-1110

60714

60714-4610

60712

60077

60473

60007

60007

60007

60007

60007

60608-2123

60624-3916

60621-3941

60651

60618-3716

60610

60610

60614

60647

60647

60605

60630

60632

60402
7

Advantage Printing Inc 1385 Jeffrey Dr Addison IL 60101

Lakewood Printing Inc 85 S Fairbank Addison IL 60101

ABS Graphics Inc 901 S Rohling Rd Addison IL 60101

Tempo Graphics Inc 455 E North Ave Carol Stream IL 60188

Flint Ink North America Corp 530 Tower Blvd Carol Stream IL 60188

Johnson Printers 2659 Wisconsin Ave Downers Grove IL 60515

Diamond Web Printing Inc 2820 Hitchcock Downers Grove IL 60515

Jet Lithocolor Inc 1500 Centre Circle Downers Grove IL 60515-1081

Dow Jones & Co Inc 340 Shwnan Blvd Naperville IL 60566

Madden Communication 90 I Mittel Dr Wood Dale IL 60191

Vis-o-Graphics 9 S 050 Joliet Rd Willowbrook IL 60527-5637

Tegrant Alloyd Brands Inc 1500 Paramount Pkwy Batavia IL 60510

Carlith Printing Co 250 Carpenter Blvd Carpentersville IL 60110

Voris Communications Co Inc d/b/a Kehnscott Press 1665 Mallette Rd Aurora IL 60505

Hagg Press Inc 1165 Jansen Farm Ct Elgin IL 60123

InterCo Print LLC 2531 DuKane Dr St Charles IL 60174

Perfect Plastic Printing Corp 345 KautzRd St Charles IL 60174

Freedom Imaging Systems Inc 780 McClure Rd Aurora IL 60504

651 S Martin Luther

Nosco Inc King Jr Ave Wankegan IL 60085

Lake County Press Inc 98 Noll St Waukegan IL 60085

Corporate Express 176 W Terra Cotta Ave Crystal Lake IL 60014

Joliet Pattern Works Inc 508 Pasadena Ave Crest Hill IL 60435

Fox Valley Publications 3101 Route 30 Plainfield IL 60544

Vision Integrated Graphics LLC 8301 W 183 Rd St Tinley Park IL 60487-6225

Dow Jones & Co Inc 915 Hemlock Highland IL 62249

Highland Supply Corp 12344 State Route 143 Highland IL 62249

Mar Graphics 523 SMeyer Valmeyer IL 62295

7450 N McCormick

Federal-Mogul Corp Blvd Skokie IL 60076-8103

Stephen Foss1er Company 439 S Dartmoor Dr Crystal Lake IL 60014

Duro Bag Mfg Co 12245 S Central Ave Alsip IL 60803

Weber Marking Systems Inc 711 W Algonquin Rd Arlington Heights IL 60005-4520

Packaging Corp oflL d/b/a Acorn Corrugated Box Co 5133 W 65th St Bedford Park IL 60638

International Paper Co 7333 S Lockwood Ave Bedford Park IL 60638

International Paper Co 5300 W 73rd Sl Bedford Park IL 60638

A1can Packaging Food & Tobacco Inc 5303 St Charles Rd Bellwood IL 60104-1089

Srnurfit-Slone Container Corp 7601 S 78th Ave Bridgeview IL 60455-1200

CFC International Inc 500 State St Chicago Heights IL 60411

International Paper Co 100 E Oakton St Des Plaines IL 60018-1966

Deluxe Manufacturing Operations Inc 1600 E Touby Ave Des Plaines IL 60018

Pamco Printed Tape & Label Co 2200 S WolfRd Des Plaines IL 60018

Formel Industries Inc 2355 N 25th Ave Franklin Park IL 60131

Prairie State Group 11100 W Addison Ave Franklin Park IL 60131

Wagner Zip Change 3100 Hirsch Melrose Park IL 60160

Dear-Lam Packaging Inc 1950 Pratt Blvd Elk Grove Village IL 60007-5993

Paddock Printing Center 1000 W Albion Ave Schaumburg IL 60193

Bio-Industries 540 Allendale Dr Wheeling IL 60090-2639

Bagcraft Packaging LLC 3900 W 43rd Sl Chicago IL 60632

Solo Cup Operating Corporation 7575 S Kostner Ave Chicago IL 60652

Color Communications Inc 4000 W Fillmore St Chicago IL 60624-3916
8

General Packaging Products 1700 S Canal St Chicago IL 60616

MeadWestvaco Packaging Systems LLC 9540 S Dorchester Ave Chicago IL 60628

Bio Star Films LLC 4848 S Hoyne Ave Chicago IL 60609-4097

Cenveo 3001 N RockweIl St Chicago IL 60618

TIN Inc d/b/a Temple - Inland 2555 S Leavitt St Chicago IL 60608

American Labelmark Co 5724 N Pulaski Rd Chicago IL 60646-6797

General Packaging Products Inc 730 I Hamlin Ave Chicago IL 60629

Bluegrass Flexible Packaging Co LLC 1228 E Tower Rd Schaumburg IL 60173-4386

ROIlprint Packaging Products Inc 320 Stewart Ave Addison IL 60101·3310

Quality Bags Inc 575 S Vista Ave Addison IL 60101

Graphic Packaging International Inc 400ENAve Carol Stream IL 60188

Meyercord Revenue Co 475 Village Dr Carol Stream IL 60188

Packaging Personified Inc 246 Kehoe Blvd Carol Stream IL 60188

Bema Poly Tech d/b/a Bema Film Sys Inc 744 N Oaklawn Ave Elmhurst IL 60126

Genesis Packaging & Design 20W345 IOlst St Lemont IL 60439

Pro-pak Industries Inc 1099 Atlantic Dr Unit I West Chicago IL 60185

Pechiney Plastic Packaging Inc 475 N KirkRd Batavia IL 60510

International Paper 100I KneIl St Montgomery IL 60538

Covalence Specialty Materials Corp 921 Industrial Dr Aurora IL 60506

Printpack Inc 1400 Abbott Dr Elgin IL 60123-1823

Multifilm Packaging Corp_' 1040 N McLean Blvd Elgin IL 60123

TIN Inc DBA Elgin Corrugated Box 824 Raymond St Elgin IL 60120

Dopaco Inc 315 KirkRd St Charles IL 60174-3429

Moore WaIlace North America Inc 3626 Stem Ave St Charles IL 60174

Nosco Inc 2199 Delany Rd Gurnee IL 60031

Colbert Packaging Corp 28355 N Bradley Rd Lake Forest IL 60045

Vonco Products Inc 201 Park Ave Lake Villa IL 60046

Amcor Flexibles Healthcare Inc 1919 S Butterfield Rd Mundelein IL 60060-9735

Parade Packaging 262 S Shadle Ave Mundelein IL 60060

Stone Container Corp 1900 Foss Park Ave North Chicago IL 60064

651 S Martin Luther

Nosco Inc KingJr Ave Waukegan IL 60085

Fisher Container Corp 1111 Busch Pkwy Buffalo Grove IL 60089

en Industries Corp 22160 N Pepper Rd Barrington IL 60010

Kraftseal Corp 13970 W Polo Trail Dr Lake Forest IL 60045

AMPAC Flexicon LLC 165 Chicago St Cary IL 60013

HS Crocker Co Inc 12100 SrnithDr Huntley IL 60142-9618

Diversapack LLC 201 N Prospect St Marengo IL 60152

Catty Corp 6111 White Oaks Rd Harvard IL 60033

Gateway Packaging Inc 20 Central Industrial Dr Grartite City IL 62040

Highland Supply Corp 1111 6th St Highland IL 62249

Highland Supply Corp 12344 State Route 143 Highland IL 62249

William Yuenger Manufacturing Co 5215 S Keeler Chicago IL 60632

Interior Crafts Inc 2513 W Cullerton Chicago IL 60608

FCI Inc 1750N Lawndale Ave Chicago IL 60647

Illinois Flush Door Inc 14325 S Vandyke Rd Plainfield IL 60544
A 5
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF:

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGANlC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211, 218, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIO-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

NOTICE

To: John Therriault, Assistant Clerk .

Illino.is Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois 60601-3218

SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office ofthe Pollution Control

Board the TESTIMONY OF DAVID BLOOMBERG and MOTION TO AMEND

RULEMAKJNG PROPOSAL ofthe lIIinois Environmental Protection Agency, copies ofwhich

are herewith served upon you.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By:Cz):;u,o

Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: September 14, 2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF:

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGA.1"llC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM

GROUP IT CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211,218, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIO-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

TESTIMONY OF DAVID BLOOMBERG

My name is David E. Bloomberg. I am employed by the JIlinois Environmental Protection

Agency ("Illinois EPA" or "Agency") as the Compliance Unit Manager in the Compliance

Section within the Division ofAir PoIlution Control. I have been at the Agency in this capacity

for over five years, and was previously an Environmental Protection Engineer in the Air Quality

Planning Section for twelve and a half years.

My academic credentials include a Bachelor ofScience degree in ceramic engineering from the

University ofIllinois at Champaign-Urbana, as weIl as completion ofall graduate coursework

required for a Master's degree in the same area ofstudy. I have also completed numerous

environmental courses over the years and provided training on air pollution compliance issues to

industry personnel and environmental consultants.

Among my duties, I wrote the technical support document ("TSD") and co-wrote the regulatory

language for this rulemaking proposal, and did likewise for previous rulemakings involving

lithographic printing and several coating categories. I have also been the Agency's main contact

for interpretations and questions involving these rules and other regulations covering printing

I
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

and coating for over 14 years. In that role and as part ofmy Compliance Unit Manager

responsibilities, {have also participated in both adjusted standard and enforcement hearings

involving sources engaged in the printing offlexible packaging. In addition, I have been

involved in designing, writing, implementing, and enforcing a wide variety of air pollution

regulations, including those for mercury, NOx trading, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, and the

Emissions Reduction Market System.

My duties as the Compliance Unit Manager involve supervision ofthe Bureau ofAir staffwho

review documents submitted by sources, such as exceedance, semi-annual, and annual

compliance reports, as well as those who review emissions tests, and I sign off on all such

reviews before they are finalized. In addition, I participate in decisions regarding enforcement of

the Board's air pollution regulations and oversee the process ofsending out Violation Notices

and related activities.

I am here today to provide testimony and to answer questions pertaining to the Group II Yolatile

Organic Materials ("YOM") Control Techniques Guidelines ("CIGs") regulations that the

Agency has proposed. A more extensive discussion ofthese proposed modifications can be

found in the ISD and Statement ofReasons, but I will summarize them briefly again here.

These proposals address the same categories as those covered by the United States

Environmental Protection Agency ("USEPA") in what is known collectively as the Consumer

and Commercial Products, Group II, which includes lithographic printing, letterpress printing,

flexible packaging printing, flat wood paneling coating, and industrial cleaning solvents.

2
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

Section 172 ofthe Clean Air Act ("CAA") requires that state implementation plans ("SIPs") for

nonattainment areas, such as the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis nonattainment areas

(''NAAs'') in Illinois, must include requirements for "reasonably available control technology"

(''RACT'') as it applies to emissions sources. Section I82(b)(2)(A) ofthe CAA further requires

that SIPs be revised to include RACT for yOM emissions sources that are covered by a CTG

document issued by USEPA after November 15, 1990, and before the area's date of attainment.

The USEPA defines RACT as "the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable

ofmeeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering

technological and economic feasibility." In developing the CTGs for the categories covered by

this rulemaking, USEPA evaluated the sources ofVOM emissions from the applicable industries,

the available control possibilities to address the associated emissions, and the cost ofsuch

control measures. lllinois EPA based much ofits proposal on these CTGs and on USEPA

research.

Lithographic Printing

Proposed changes to the lithographic printing regulations involve modifications to control

requirements for heatset web offset lithographic printers as well as changes to fountain solution

and cleaning solution limitations for all subject units. In addition, the requirements for cleaning

solutions and fountain solutions are being extended to sources with lower emissions. All ofthese

3
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

changes have been determined to be RAeT by USEPA, and Illinois EPA's experience with

control devices on lithographic printing sources correlates with that determination.

In order to reduce the burden on smaller sources, and as a result of discussions with industry

representatives, exclusions to the cleaning solution and fountain solution requirements have been

included in this proposal. Sources may make use ofsuch exclusions ifthey fall into the listed

categories. Specifically, the exclusions apply to sources that emit between 15 and 100 pounds per

day ofVOM and include sheet-fed presses that print substrates no larger than II inches by 17

inches and any lithographic press with a fountain solution reservoir ofno larger than one gallon.

In addition, all sources in this emission range will be able to use up to 110 gallons ofcleaning

solution per year that do not meet either the YOM content or vapor pressure requirements.

Sources may choose to opt out ofthese exclusions ifthey do not wish to make use ofthem, and

thus would not need to keep the records required ofthose utilizing the exclusions. In addition,

discussions with industry led the Agency to propose a new method ofcalculating applicability

based on material use, which may be easier for some sources.

Another change to the lithographic printing regulation that aids sources is the specification of

YOM retention factors. The existing regulation recognizes that the substrate retains some ofthe

YOM present in the ink, and thus a retention factor of 0.95 is used when calculating emissions

from non-heatset inks, while a factor of 0.20 is used when calculating emissions from heatset

inks. The proposed modification contains a factor recognizing that YOM also remains on

solvent-laden rags that are stored and disposed ofproperly. These factors continue to be allowed

for determination of applicability. In addition, this proposal adds emission adjustment factors to

4
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

be used in other situations when not determining applicability (such as for Annual Emissions

Reports and permit limits). These factors take into account carryover ofVOM from automatic

blanket wash and fountain solutions into the dryer and control device.

Letterpress Printing

. While there are very few letterpress operations in Illinois NAAs, and apparently no heatset

letterpress units, the State is still required to promulgate the CTG regulations for this category.

Letterpress emission sources are similar to those for lithographic printing, with the exception that

letterpress operations do not use a fountain solution. In addition, letterpress printing presses are

often operated at the same source as lithographic printing and many ofthe control options for

letterpress printing are the same as the control options for lithographic printing as well. This is

especially true in terms of cleaning solutions. As such, the proposed rule would adopt most ofthe

RACT recommendations ofthe CTG. It should be noted that, unlike for larger lithographic

printing sources, the Agency is proposing to use the cleaning solution 70 percent YOM content

limit for all subject letterpress units, as letterpress operations have never been specifically

regulated in Illinois before and thus there are no concerns about loosening existing standards.

Flexible Packaging Printing

The modifications being proposed for flexible package printing appear in the sections that

currently cover all rotogravure and flexographic printing; however, these modifications only

apply to this specific subcategory ofprinting operations.

5
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

The proposedchanges focus on reducing YOM emissions from inks and cleaning operations, Ink

emissions must be reduced either through a lower YOM content or by a control device, where

the percentage reduction required of an add-on control varies depending on when the press and

control were constructed at the site, The approach to reducing YOM emissions from cleaning

materials focuses on work practices, and thus there is no specific numeric limit that applies;

however, the applicability level for such work practices is much lower, at 15 pounds per day, as

compared to the applicability thresholds of25 tons per year potential to emit or 100 tons per year

maximum theoretical emissions for the remainder ofthe rule.

Industrial Cleaning Solvents

Thc industrial cleaning solvents category encompasses many products and cleaning styles that

are used to clean dirt, soil, oil, and grease, as well as remove adhesives, paints, and inks. The

proposed rule thus covers a wide range ofcleaning activities. The proposal follows USEPA's

CTG in the applicability threshold of 15 pounds per day ofYOM emissions and in most ofthe

required YOM limits. The CTG recommends a content limit of 50 grams YOM per liter (0.42

lb/gal) ofcleaning material for those industries that are not already covered, and are not to be

covered, by a CTG. However, there are some cases where the Illinois EPA has received USEPA

permission to use higher limits - or indeed to exempt the type of operation entirely - in response

to industry representatives' comments regarding issues specific to certain categories of cleaning.

In addition, there is an alternate vapor pressure limit of 8 nun Hg at 20 degrees Celsius that may

be used in place ofthe 50 gram limit. Furthermore, cleaning solvent emissions can also be

6
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

reduced by add-on controls, modifying equipment, or changing the method of cleaning such that

an overall control efficiency of 85 percent reduction in emissions of cleaning solvent YOM is

achieved.

. In addition to the limits discussed above, all subject sources must make use of certain work

practices to reduce emissions. General work practices include keeping solvent containers and . .

used applicators covered; properly storing and disposing ofspent solvents and used cleaning

rags; minimizing air circulation around all cleaning operations; and implementing equipment

practices that reduce emissions, e.g., leak detection and repair practices.

Flat Wood Paneling Coating

The category offlat wood paneling coating has not been previously covered in Illinois'

regulations (though some products that will now be defined as flat wood paneling may have been

previously covered under the wood furniture coating regulations). As with most coating

categories, the two main options for compliance are the use oflower-yOM coatings or add-on

controls. Illinois EPA is using the YOM content limits and control efficiencies that USEPA

determined in the CTG to be RACT.

In addition, work practices related to cleaning operations will apply to this category. Some of

these requirements are already in place within the existing regulations for wood furniture coaters.

Under the Agency's proposal, these will apply to flat wood paneling coaters as well, as will

several other specific requirements.

7
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

Conclusions

The Agency believes these proposed changes to be largely non-controversial, as they stem from

USEPA's determination ofRACT that applies to these categories ofsources nationwide. The

Agency agrees with USEPA that all the proposed changes are technically feasible and

economically reasonable. Furthermore, as noted earlier, incorporating these additions and

modifications to existing Illinois regulations is required by the CAA and USEPA; specifically,

Section 182(b)(2)(A) ofthe CAA requires that Illinois revise its SIP to include RACT for YOM

emissions sources that are covered by a Group II CTG.

The Illinois EPA engaged in multiple rounds of outreach efforts in relation to this proposed

rulemaking. The first was accomplished electronically, with the second involving follow-up calls

from the Agency to sources that had submitted comments as well as extensive, detailed

discussions between the Agency and industry group representatives. Such communication

resulted in the Agency making numerous changes to the proposed rule between the original draft

sent out for comments and the [mal proposal submitted to the Board, with almost all such

changes being in response to industry concerns. In addition, thc Agency has had frequent

discussions with USEPA personnel in both the regional office and headquarters, and has

gathered information from other states. Even after the Agency submitted its proposal to the

Board, communication with these parties continued, resulting in the Motion to Amend

Rulemaking Proposal that is being submitted along with this prefiJed testimony. In responding to

8
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

industry, the Agency has been as agreeable as possible to recommendations while still adhering

to USEPA requirements and maintaining the integrity ofthe rules.

9
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF:

REASONABLYAVA~ABLECONTROL

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211, 218, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIO-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKING PROPOSAL

The Proponent, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("Illinois EPA"), by its

attorney, and pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.500 and 102.402, moves that the D1inois

Pollution Control Board ("Board") amend Parts 218 and 219 oftms rulemaking proposal. In

support ofits Motion, the l1Iinois EPA states as follows:

I. On July 9, 2009, the Illinois EPA filed a proposal with the Board to amend 35 Ill. Adm.

Code Parts 211, 218, and 219 to control the emissions of volatile organic materials ("VOM")

from Group II Consumer and Commercial Product categories. The proposal implements

reasonably available control technology for such categories in response to control techniques

guidelines issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (''USEPA''). The

Illinois EPA proposes the following amendments to its proposal.

Industrial Cleaning Solvents

2. The USEPA recently informed the Illinois EPA that the Illinois EPA may exempt digital

printing from the control requirements set forth in Section 218/219.187 ofits proposal. The

Illinois EPA therefore recommends amending Section 218/219.1 87(a) by adding digital printing

to the list ofexclusions, and Section 218/219.1 87(b) by removing digital printing from the YOM

content limitations.

I
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

Section 218/219, 187(a)(2)(C)(xv) and (xvi):

C) The following cleaning operations shall be exempt from the requirements

ofsubsections (b), (c), (f), and (g) ofthis Section:

xv) Cleaning ofnumismatic dies~,

(xvi) Cleaning operations associated with digital printing,

Section 218/219, 187(b)(1)(C)(ii) and (iii):

C) Cleaning ofink application equipment:

ii) Screen printing aHa a:gital jlriHtiHg

iii) Ultraviolet ink and electron beam

.ink application equipment, except

screen printing aBE! E!igital printing

0,50 4,2

0,65 5.4

3, In response to a comment by industry representatives, the Illinois EPA proposes

amending Section 218/219. I87(e)(1 )(B) by removing the requirement that a source include in its

notification to the Illinois EPA calculations showing an exceedance ofthe applicability

threshold..

Section 218/219.187(e)(1)(B):

B) Notify the Agency of any record that shows that the combined emissions

ofVOM from cleaning operations at the source ever equal or exceed 6,8

kg/day (15 Ibslday), in the absence of air pollution control equipment,

within 30 days after the event occurs~. 811M Betifieatiell sIlail illslll!le

sale"latieHs sbewing tbe eail)' emi5sisBS efVOM frelll eleallillg

ejleffltieBs at tbe semee fer tba 1'16)'(5) ill "Alieb ellliss;sllS aEl"aled er

exeeeaed 8.8 k/iday (15 IlJslaa)~;

4. In response to a request by industry representatives, the lllinois EPA proposes amending

Section 218/2 I9.187(e)(2) by deleting the requirement that a subject source certify the limitation

with which each subject cleaning operation will comply, The Illinois EPA also proposes

2
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

deleting the requirement that a source notify the Illinois EPA at least 30 days in advance of

changing its method of compliance between the YOM content limitation and vapor pressure

limitation.

Section 218/219. 187(eJ(2J(AJ(iii):

A) By Aprill, 2011, or upon initial start-up ofthe source, whichever is later,

submit a certification to the Agency that includes:

iii) The limilatiea wilfi wilich eBel! sl>bjeet cleaning operBlioa will

60Hljlly (i.e., t!lo emissions eontrel system reEJ:uireffieHt, VOM

soslest limitatios, or ya!"or jlressure limitatios), ana illf complying

with the emissions control system requirement, what type of

emissions control system will be used;

Section 218/219. 187(eJ(2J(B):

B) At least 30 calendar days before changing the method of compliance

between subsections (b)(l) or, (b)(2), and subsection (b)(3) ofthis Section,

notify the Agency in writing ofsuch change. Such notification shall

include a demonstration ofcompliance with the newly applicable

subsection;

5. The Illinois EPA proposes amending Section 21 8/219.1 87(g) by clarifying when testing

pursuant to sueh Section shall be perfonned.

Section 218.187(g)(1) and (2):

g) Testing Requirements.

I) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the requirements ofthis

Section shall be conducted by the owner or operator within 90 days

after a request by the Agency, or as otherwise specified in this

Section. Such testing shall be conducted at the expense ofthe

owner or operator and the owner or operator shall notify the

Agency in writing 30 days in advance of conducting such testing to

.allow the Agency to be present during such testing;

2) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the YOM content

limitations in Section 2I8.1 87(b)(l) ofthis Subpart, and to

determine the YOM content of cleaning solvents and cleaning

3
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

solutions, shall be conducted Hj38fl T8EjHest eftlle AgeRey, as

follows:

Section 219. 187(g)(J) and (2):

g) Testing Requirements.

I) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this

Section shall be conducted by the owner or operator within 90 days

after a request by the Agency, or as otherwise specified in this

Section. Such testing shall be conducted at the expense ofthe

owner or operator and the owner or operator shall notify the

Agency in writing 30 days in advance of conducting such testing to

allow the Agency to be present during such testing;

2) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the YOM content

limitations in Section 219.187(b)(1) ofthis Subpart, and to

determine the YOM content ofcleaning solvents and cleaning

solutions, shall be conducted ulleil reEjllest eftlle Ageiley, as

follows:

Flexible Packaging Prin ting

6. In response to a request by industry representatives, the Ulinois EPA proposes amending

Section 2181219.404(b)(I)(B) and (d)(1 )(0) by deleting references to instruments by which .

owner or operators may calculate the volume or weight of coatings and inks as applied each day

on subject coating lines, as such instrumentation is not currently available to sources.

Section 218/219. 404(b)(1)(B):

B) Calculations which demonstrate that total maximum theoretical emissions

ofVOM from all flexographic and rotogravure printing lines at the source

never exceed 90.7 Mg (100 tons) per calendar year before the application

ofcapture systems and control devices. Total maximum theoretical

emissions of YOM for a flexographic or rotogravure printing source is the

sum ofmaximum theoretical emissions of YOM from each flexographic

and rotogravure printing line at the source. The following equation shall

be used to calculate total maximum theoretical emissions ofYOM per

calendar year before the application ofcapture systems and control

devices for each flexographic and rotogravure printing line at the source:

Ep =A x B + 1095 (Cx D x F)

4
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

where:

Ep = Total maximwn theoretical emissions ofVOM from one

flexographic or rotogravure printing line in units ofkg/year

(lbs/year);

A = Weight ofVOM per volume ofsolids ofthe coating or ink with the

highest YOM content as applied each year on the printing line .in

units of kg VOM/I (lbs VOM/gal) of coating or ink solids;

B= Total volwne ofsolids for all coatings and inks that can potentially

be applied each year on the printing line in units of l/year

(gaVyear). The instrument andlElF method by which the owner or

operator accurately mea5IHB8 ElF calculated the volume of each

coating and ink as applied and the amount that can potentially be

applied each year on the printing line shall be described in the

certification to the Agency;

C = Weight ofVOM per volume ofmaterial for the cleanup material or

solvent with the highest YOM content as used each year on the

printing line in units of kg/1 (lbs YOM/gal) ofsuch material;

D = The greatest volume ofcleanup material or solvent used in any 8-

hour period and

F = The highest fraction ofcleanup material or solvent which·is not

recycled or recovered for offsite disposal during any 8-hour period.

Section 218/219.404(d)(l)(D):

D) The inslmlfleHt ElF method by which the owner or operator will accurately

mBa5lHe OF calculate the volume, or weight ofsolids, as applicable, of

each coating and ink as applied each day on each printing line.

7. In response to a comment by industry representatives, the Illinois EPA recommends

amending Section 218!2l9.404(t)(2} by removing the requirement that a source include in its

notification to the Illinois EPA calculations showing an exceedance ofthe applicability

threshold.

Section 218/219.404(f)(2):

2) Notify the Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all

flexographic and rotogravure printing lines (including inks and solvents

5
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

used for cleanup operations associated with the flexographic and

rotogravure lines) at the source ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15

Ibs/day), in the absence of air pollution control equipment, within 30 days

after the event occurs. Sush nelifisatieR shall iHehl!le salsulatieRs

shewiBg Ihe eaily emissieAs efVOM [rem all flexographie aHe

retegra'AlFe priRtiAg liBes at the seUfse fer the sayEs) iR '""hish emissieHs

e!l1Jalee ef el(SeeSee e.8 I[l¥eay (15 las/eay).

Lithographic Printing

8. The Illinois EPA proposes amending Section 218/219.405(c) by deleting references to

Section 218/219.408 that were inadvertently left in the rule, as the Illinois EPA is proposing to

repeal Section 218/219.408.

Section 218.405(c):

c) On and after May I, 2010:

I) The requirements in Sections 218.407(a)(I)(B) through (a)(I)(E)

and 218.407(b) and all applicable provisions in Sections 218.40528

through 218.411 ofthis Subpart shall apply to all owners or

operators of heatset web offset lithographic printing line(s), iftbe

combined emissions ofVOM from all lithographic printing line(s)

at the source (including solvents used for cleanup operations

associated with the lithographic printing line(s» ever exceed 45.5

kg/day (100 Ibs/day), calculated in accordance with Section

218.411(b)(2)(B), before the'application of capture systems and

control dcvices;

2) The requirements in Sections 218.407(a)(I)(A) and 218.407(a)(2)

through (a)(5) and all applicable provisions in Sections 218.4028

through 218.411 ofthis Subpart shall apply to all owners or

operators oflithographic printing line(s) ifthe combined emissions

ofVOM from all lithographic printing \ine(s) at the source

(including solvents used for cleanup operations associated with the

lithographic printing line(s» ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (IS

Ibs/day), calculated in accordance with Section 218.411 (b)(I)(B),

before the application of capture systems and control devices;

Section 219.405(c):

c) On and after May 1,2010:

6
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

1) The requirements in Sections 219.407(a)(1 )(B) through (a)(I )(E)

and 219.407(b) and all applicable provisions in Sections 219.4028

through 219.411 ofthis Subpart shall apply to all owners or

operators ofheatset web offset lithographic printing line(s), ifthe

combined emissions ofVOM from all lithographic printing line(s)

at the source (including solvents used for cleanup operations

associated with the lithographic printing line(s) ever exceed 45.5

kg/day (100 Ibs/day), calculated in accordance with Section

219.411 (b)(2)(B), before the application of capture systems and

control devices;

2) The requirements in Sections 219.407(a)(I)(A) and 219.407(a)(2)

through (a)(5) and all applicable provisions in Sections 219.4028

through 219.411 ofthis Subpart shall apply to all owners or

operators oflithographic printing line(s) ifthe combined emissions

ofVOM from all lithographic printing Jine(s) at the source

(including solvents used for cleanup operations associated with the

lithographic printing line(s» ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15

Ibs/day), calculated in accordance with Section 219.41 I(b)(I)(B),

before the application of capture systems and control devices;

9. The Illinois EPAproposes amending Section 218/219.409(a) and (c) by clarifying when

testing pursuant to such Section shall be performed. The Illinois EPA also proposes amending

subsection (c) by correcting an internal cross-reference.

Section 218.409(a) and (c):

a) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the requirements ofSection

218.407 ofthis SUbpart shall be conducted by the owner or operator

within 90 days after a request by the Agency. or as otherwise specified in

this Subpart. Such testing shall be conducted at the expense ofthe owner

or operator and the owner or operator shall notify the Agency in writing

30 days in advance of conducting such testing to allow the Agency to be

present during such testing.

c) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the YOM content limitations in

Section 218.407(a)(I)(A), (a)(2), (a)(3) and (a)(4)(A) oftlris Subpart, and

to determine the YOM content offountain solutions, fountain solution

additives, cleaning solvents, cleaning solutions, and inks (pursuant to the

requirements of Section 218.411 (a)(1 )(B), (b)(l)(B). or (b)(2)(B) ofthis

Subpart, as applicable), shall be conducted upon request oflbe Agency,..N

as otherwise specified in this Subpart, as follows:

7
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

Section 219.409(a) and (c):

a) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the requirements ofSection

219.407 ofthis Subpart shall be conducted by the owner or operator

within 90 days after a request by the Agency, or as otherwise specified in

this Subpart. Such testing shall be conducted at the expense ofthe owner

or operator and the owner or operator shall notify the Agency in writing

30 days in advance of conducting such testing to allow the Agency to be

present during such testing.

c) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the YOM content limitations in

Section 219.407(a)(I)(A), (a)(2), (a)(3) and (a)(4)(A) ofthis Subpart,and

to determine the YOM content offountain solutions, fountain solution

additives, cleaning solvents, cleaning solutions, and inks (pursuant to the

requirements of Section 219.41 I(a)(1 )(B), (b)(l)(B), or (b)(2)(B) ofthis

Subpart, as applicable), shall be conducted upon request ofthe Agency, ill

as otherwise specified in this Subpart, as follows:

10. The Illinois EPA proposes adding, and amending, Section 218/219.410 to the rulemaking

proposal. In response to a comment from industry representatives, the Illinois EPA has

discovered several incorrect internal cross-references within the current Section 218/219.410.

The Illinois EPA therefore proposes amending subsections (b)(l), (b)(2), (e)(I)(B), and (e)(2) to

correct the cross-references. As 218/219.410 is an existing section, only the IIlinois EPA's

proposed amendments are underlined below.

Section 218.410 Monitoring Requirements for Lithographic Printing

a) Fountain Solution Temperature.

I)' . The owner or operator of any lithographic printing line(s) relying on the

temperature ofthe fountain solution to demonstrate compliance shall

install, maintain, and continuously operate a temperature monitor ofthe

fountain solution in the reservoir or fountain tray, as applicable.

2) The temperature monitor must be capable ofreading with an accuracy of

1°C or 2°C, and must be attached to an automatic, continuous recording

device such as a strip chart, recorder, or computer, with at least the same

accuracy, that is installed, calibrated and maintained in accordance with

8
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

the manufacturer's specifications. Ifthe automatic, continuous recording

device malfunctions, the owner or operator shall record the temperature of

the fountain solution at least once every two operating hours. The

automatic, continuous recording device shall be repaired or replaced as

soon as practicable.

b) Fountain Solution YOM Content. The owner or operator of any lithographic

. printing line(s) subjectto Section 218.407(a)(I)(A), (a)(2) or (a)(3) ofthis

Subpart shall:

1) For a fountain solution to which YOM is not added automatically:

A) Maintain records ofthe YOM content ofthe fountain solution in

accordance with Section 2l8.411~)(2)(C); or

B) Take a sample ofthe as-applied fountain solution from the fountain

tray or reservoir, as applicable, each time a fresh batch offountain

solution is prepared or each time YOM is added to an existing

batch offountain solution in the fountain tray or reservoir, and

shall determine compliance with the YOM content limitation ofthe

as-applied fountain solution by using one ofthe following options:

i) With a refractometer or hydrometer with a visual, analog,

or digital readout and with an accuracy of 0.5 percent. The

refractometer or hydrometer must be calibrated with a

standard solution for the type ofVOM used in the fountain

solution, in accordance with manufacturer's specifications,

against measurements performed to determine compliance.

The refractometer or hydrometer must be corrected for

temperature at least once per 8-hour shift or once per batch

offountain solution prepared or modified, whichever is

longer; or

ii) With a conductivity meter ifit is demonstrated that a

refractometer and hydrometer cannot distinguish between

compliant and noncompliant fountain solution for the type

and amount ofVOM in the fountain solution. A source

may use a conductivity meter ifit demonstrates that both

hydrometers and refractometers fail to provide significantly

different measurements for standard solutions containing

95 percent, 100 percent and 105 percent ofthe applicable

YOM content limit. The conductivity meter reading for the

fountain solution must be referenced to the conductivity of

the incoming water. A standard solution shall be used to

calibrate the conductivity meter for the type of YOM uscd

9
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

in the fountain solution, in accordance with manufacturer's

specificalions;

2) For fountain solutions to which YOM is added at the source with

automatic feed equipment, determine the YOM contcnt ofthe as-applied

fountain solution based on the setting ofthe automatic feed equipment

which makes additions ofVOM up to a pre-set level. Records must be

retained ofthe YOM content of the fountain solution in accordance with

Section 218.411~)(2)(D) ofthis Subpart. The equipment used to make

automatic additions must be installed, calibrated, operated and maintained

in accordance with manufacturer's specifications.

c) Afterburners For Heatset Web Offset Lithographic Printing Line(s).

If an afterburner is used to demonstrate compliance, the owner or operator of a

heatset web offset lithographic printing line subject to Section 218.407(a)(1)(C)

ofthis Subpart shall:

1) Install, calibrate, maintain, and oPerate temperature monitoring device(s)

with an accuracy of 3° C or 5° F on the afterburner in accordance with

Section 218.105(d)(2) ofthis Part and in accordance with the

manufacturer's specifications. Monitoring shall be performed at all times

when the afterburner is operating; and

2) Install, calibrate, operate and maintain, in accordance with manufacturer's

specifications, a continuous recorder on the temperature monitoring

device(s), such as a strip chart, recorder or computer, with at least the

same accuracy as the temperature monitor.

d) Other Control Devices for Heatset Web Offset Lithographic Printing Line(s). Ifa

control device other than an afterburner is used to demonstrate compliance, the

owner or operator of a heatset web offset lithographic printing line subject to this

Subpart shall install, maintain, calibrate and operate such monitoring equipment

as set forth in the owner or operator's plan approved by the Agency and USEPA

pursuant to Section 218.407(b) ofthis Subpart.

e) Cleaning Solution.

I) The owner or operator of any lithographic printing line relying on the

YOM content ofthe cleaning solution to comply with Section

218.407(a)(4)(A) ofthis Subpart must:

A) For cleaning solutions that are prepared at the source with

equipment that automatically mixes cleaning solvent and water (or

othernon-VOM):

10
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

i) Install, operate, maintain, and calibrate the automatic feed

equipment in accordance with manufacturer's specifications

to regulate the volume of each ofthe cleaning solvent and

water (or other non-YOM), as mixed; and

ii) Pre-set the automatic feed equipment so that the

consumption rates ofthe cleaning solvent and water (or

other non-YOM), as applied, comply with Section

218.407(a)(4)(A) ofthis Subpart;

B) For cleaning solutions that are not prepared at the source with

automatic feed equipment, keep records ofthe usage of cleaning

solvent and water (or other non-YOM) as set forth in Scction

218.411 (fd)(2) ofthis Subpart.

2) The owner or operator of any lithographic printing line relying on the

vapor pressure ofthe cleaning solution to comply with Section

218.407(a)(4)(B) ofthis Subpart must keep records for such cleaning

solutions used on any such line(s) as set forth in Section 218.41 J(fd)(2)(C)

ofthis Subpart.

(Source: Amended at _ Ill. Reg. __, effective~

Section 219.410 Monitoring Requirements for Lithographic Printing

a) Fountain Solution Temperature.

I) The owner or operator of any lithographic printing line(s) relying on thc

temperature ofthe fountain solution to demonstrate compliance shall

install, maintain, and continuously operate a temperature monitor ofthe

fountain solution in the reservoir or fountain tray, as applicable.

2) The temperature monitor must be capable ofreading with an accuracy of

1°C or 2°F and must be attached to an automatic, continuous rccording

dcvice such as a strip chart, recorder, or computer, with at least the same

accuracy, that is installed, calibrated and maintained in accordance with

the manufacturer's specifications. Ifthe automatic, continuous recording

device malfunctions, the owner or operator shall record the temperature of

the fountain solution at least once every two operating hours. The

automatic, continuous recording device shall be repaired or replaced as

soon as practicable.

b) Fountain Solution YOM Content. The owner or operator of any lithographic

printing line(s) subject to Section 219.407(a)(I)(A), (a)(2) or (a)(3) ofthis

Subpart shall:

11
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

I) For a fountain solution to which YOM is not added automatically:

A) Maintain records ofthe YOM content ofthe fountain solution in

accordance with Section 219.41 1(§6)(2)(C); or

B) Take a sample ofthe as-applied fountain solution from the fountain

tray orreservoir, as applicable, each time a fresh batch offountain

solution is prepared or each time YOM is added to an existing

batch offountain solution in the fountain tray or reservoir, and

shall determine compliance with the YOM content limitation ofthe

as-applied fountain solution by using one ofthe following options:

i) With a refractometer or hydrometer with a visual, analog,

or digital readout and with an accuracy of 0.5 percent. The

refractometer or hydrometer must be calibrated with a .

standard solution for the type ofYOM uscd in the fountain

solution, in accordance with manufacturer's specifications,

against measurements performed to determine compliance.

The refractometer or hydrometer must be corrected for

temperature at least once per 8-hour shift or once per batch

offountain solution prepared or modified, whichever is

longer; or

ii) With a conductivity meter ifit is demonstrated that a

refractometer and hydrometer cannotdistinguish between

compliant and noncompliant fountain solution for the type

and amount ofVOM in the fountain solution. A source

may use a conductivity meter ifit demonstrates that both

hydrometers and refractometers fail to provide significantly

different measurements for standard solutions containing

95 percent, 100 percent and 105 percent ofthe applicable

YOM content limit. The conductivity meter reading for the

fountain solution must be referenced to the conductivity of

the incoming water. A standard solution shall be used to

calibrate the conductivity meter for the type ofVOM used

in the fountain solution, in accordance with manufacturer's

specifications;

2) For fountain solutions to which YOM is added at the source with

automatic feed equipment, determine the YOM content ofthe as-applied

fountain solution based on the setting ofthe automatic feed equipment

which makes additions of YOM up to a pre-set level. Records must be

retained ofthe YOM content ofthe fountain solution in accordance with

Section 219.41 I(§6)(2)(D) ofthis Subpart. The equipment used to make

automatic additions must be installed, calibrated, operated and maintained

in accordance with manufacturer's specifications.

12
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

c) Afterburners For Heatset Web Offset Lithographic Printing Line(s).

If an afterburner is used to demonstrate compliance, the owner or operator of a

heatset web offset lithographic printing line subject to Section 219.407(a)(1 )(C)

ofthis Subpart shall:

I) Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate temperature monitoring device(s)

with an accuracy of 3°C or 5°F on the afterburner in accordance with

Section 219. 105(d)(2) ofthis Part and in accordance with the

manufacturer's specifications. Monitoring shall be performed at all times

when the afterburner is operating; and

2) Install, calibrate, operate and maintain, in accordance with manufacturer's

specifications, a continuous recorder on the temperature monitoring

device(s), such as a strip chart, recorder or computer, with at least the

same accuracy as the temperature monitor.

d) Other Control Devices for Heatset Web Offset Lithographic Printing Line(s). If a

control device other than an afterburner is used to demonstrate compliance, the

owner or operator of a heatset web offset lithographic printing linc subject to this

Subpart shall install, maintain, calibrate and operate such monitoring equipment

as set forth in the owner or operator's plan approved by the Agency and USEPA

pursuant to Section 2l9.407(b) oftbis Subpart. .

e) Cleaning Solution.

I) The owner or operator of any lithographic printing line relying on the

YOM content ofthe cleaning solution to comply with Section

219.407(a)(4)(A) ofthis Subpart must:

A) For cleaning solutions that are prepared at the source with

equipment that automatically mixes cleaning solvent and water (or

other non-YOM):

i) Install, operate, maintain, and calibrate the automatic feed

equipment in accordance with manufacturer's specifications

to regulate the volume of each ofthe cleaning solvent and

water (or other non-YOM), as mixed; and

ii) Pre-set the automatic feed equipment so that the

consumption rates ofthe cleaning solvent arid water (or

other non-YOM), as applied, comply with Section

219.407(a)(4)(A) ofthis Subpart;

13
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

B) For cleaning solutions that are not prepared at the source with

automatic feed equipment, keep records ofthe usage ofcleaning

solvent and water (or other non-VOM) as set forth in Section

219.411 ([tI)(2) ofthis Subpart.

2) The owner or operator of any lithographic printing line relying on the

vapor pressure of the cleaning solution to comply with Section

219.407(a)(4)(B) ofthis Subpart must keep records for such cleaning

solutions used on any such line(s) as set forth in Secdon 219.41 1([tI)(2)(C)

ofthis Subpart.

(Source: Amended at _ Ill. Reg. __' effective----.J

II. The Illinois EPA recommends amending Section 218/219.4II(a)(l)(C) by deleting

references to instruments by which owners or operators may calculate the volume ofinks as

applied each day on subject printing lines, as such instrumentation is not currently available to

sources.

Section 218/2]9. 411(a)(1)(C):

C) Either a declaration that the source, through federally enforceable permit

conditions, has limited its maximum theoretical emissions ofVOM from

ali heatset web offset lithographic printing lines (including solvents used

for cleanup operations associated with heatset web offset printing lines) at

the source to no more than 90.7 Mg (100 tons) per calendar year before

the application of capture systems and control devices or calculations

which demonstrate that the source's total maximum theoretical emissions

ofVOM do not exceed 90.7 Mg/yr (100 TPY). Total maximum

theoretical emissions ofVOM for a heatset web offset lithographic

printing source is the sum ofmaximum theoretical emissions ofVOM

from each heatset web offsellithographic printing line at the source. The

following equation shall be used to calculate total maximum theoretical

emissions ofVOM per calendar year in the absence of air pollution control

equipment for each heatsel web offset lithographic printing line at the

source:

Ep = (R x A x B) +(C x D) + 1095 (F x G x H)

Where:

Ep = Total maximum theoretical emissions ofVOM from one heatset

web offset printing line in units ofkg/yr (Ib/yr);

14
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

A = Weight ofVOM per volume ofsolids ofink with the highest YOM

content as applied each year on the printing line in units ofkg/I

(lb/gal) ofsolids;

B = Total volume ofsolids for all inks that can potentially be applied

each year on the printing line in units of lIyr (gal/yr). The

instrument ar method by which the owner or operator accurately

measlifes ar calculated the volume ofeach ink as applied and the

amount that can potentially be applied each year on the printing

line shall be described in tbe certification to the Agcncy;

C = Weight ofVOM per volume offountain solution with the highest

YOM content as applied each year on the printing line in units of

kg/I (lb/gal);

D = The total volume offountain solution that can potentially be used

each year on the printing line in units of Jlyr (gallyr). The

instrument andler method by which the owner or operator

accurately measurea af calculated the volume of each fountain

solution used and the amount that can potentially be used each year

on the printing line shall be described in the certification to the

Agency;

12. The Illinois EPA proposes amending Section 21 8/2 I9.411(b) by changing the material

use thresholds for lithographic printing lines. USEPA previously recommended that material use

thresholds for such lines be conservatively based on 50 percent ofthe pound per day

applicability threshold. USEPA has now determined that a 90 percent emission equivalency

level is acceptable for both lithographic and letterpress printing operations. The following

amendments reflect the 90 percent equivalency level for lithographic printing lines.

Section 218/219.41l(b)(1)(C)(i) and (b)(l)(C)(ii):

C) As an alternative to the calculations in subsection (b)(I)(B), above, a

statement that the source uses less than the amount ofmaterial specified in

subsections (b)(1)(C)(i) or (ii), below, as applicable, during each calendar

month. A source may determine that it emits below 6.8 kg/day (15

lbs/day) of VOM based upon compliance with such material use

limitations. Ifthe source exceeds this amount ofmaterial use in a given

calendar month, the ov"ner or operator must, within 15 days ofthe end of

that month, complete the emissions calculations ofsubsection (b)(I)(B) to

determine daily emissions for applicability purposes. lfthe source ever

15
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

exceeds this amount of material use for six consecutive calendar months, it

is no longer eligible to use this subsection as an alternative to the

calculations in subsection (b)(1 )(B). If a source has both heatset web offset

and either nonheatset web offset or sheetfed lithographic printing

operations, or has all three types ofprinting operations, the owner or

operator may not make use ofthis alternative and must use the

calculations in subsection (b)(I)(B).

i) The sum of all sheetfed and nonheatset web offset lithographic

printing operations at the source: 242,3~ liters ({L4M gallons)

of cleaning solvent and fountain solution additives, combined; or

ii) The sum of all heatset web offset lithographic printing operations

at the source: 204.1+H4 kg (4500.w lbs) ofink, cleaning solvent,

and fountain solution additives, combined.

13, In response to a comment by industry representatives, the Illinois EPA proposes

amending Section 218/219.41 I(b)(I)(E) by removing the requirement that a source include in its

notification to the lilinois EPA calculations showing an exceedance ofthe applicability

threshold.

Section 218.411(b)(l)(E):

E) For sources complying with subsection (b)(l)(B) ofthis Section, notify the

Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all

lithographic printing lines (including inks, fountain solutions, and solvents

used for cleanup operations associated with the lithographic printing lines)

at the source ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day), before the use

ofcapture systems and control devices, within 30 days after the event

occurs. Slleh Hetificatien shall ineiliae ealclllatiens )lllTSliaHl Ie Sestien

218.411 (ll)(1)(B) shewiBg !he aaily emissieBs eP/OM /Fern all

litRegFaphic l'lRl1lil1g lines at the sellfGe fer IRe mel1!h in ",,'!lich ernissieHs

equaled eT el!eeedeEl e.8 kWEla,' (I j lllsfday). Ifsuch emissions ofVOM

at the source equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day) but do not exceed

45.5 kg/day (100 Ibs/day), the source shall comply with the requirements

in subsection (b)(2) ofthis Section.

Section 219.411(b)(1)(E):

E) For sources complying with subsection (b)(I)(B) ofthis Section, notify the

Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all

lithographic printing lines (including inks, fountain solutions, and solvents

used for cleanup operations associated with the lithographic printing lines)

16
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

at the source ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15Ibs/day), before the use

of capture systems and control devices, within 30 days after the event

occurs. SUSfl notiHsatiofi sRaH insluEle ealsulatiofls Ilursuant to SestioR

219.411(1J)(I)(B) sRowifig tlJe Elaily emissions ofVOM ffom all

litRogfapRie IlAfilifig hifles al tlJe sOllrse for!fle mOHtlJ iH wRieR emissiolls

equaleEi or el(SeeEleEi e.8 k!Vday (15 Ills,lElay). Ifsuch emissions ofVOM

at the source equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15Ibs/day) but do not exceed

45.5 kg/day (100 lbs/day), the source shall comply with the requirements

in subsection (b)(2) ofthis Section.

14. In response to a comment by industry representatives, the Illinois EPA proposes

amending Section 21 8/219.411 (b)(2)(D) by removing the requirement that a source include in its

notification to the Illinois EPA calculations showing an exceedance ofthe applicability

threshold.

Section 218.411(b)(2)(D):

D) Notify the Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all

lithographic printing lines (including inks, fountain solutions, and solvents

used for cleanup operations associated with the lithographic printing lines)

at the source ever exceed 45.5 kg/day (100 lbs/day), before the use of

capture systems and control devices, within 30 days after the event occurs.

Sllsh Hotifieatioll s1tall illslllEis salsldalioHs llursuaRllo Seslioo

218.411(1J)(2)(B) sflswiflg!fle Elaily efflissiollS ofVOM ffoffl all

litlJograllRis printillg lines at tRe SOllree fer!fle mOlltlJ in wRieR emissioHs

sl(eeeEled 4551(WEl8J' (199 Ills,4iay).

Section 219.411(b)(2)(D):

D) Notify the Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all

lithographic printing lines (including inks, fountain solutions, and solvents

used for cleanup operations associated with the lithographic printing lines)

at the source ever exceed 45.5 kg/day (100 Ibslday), before the use of

capture systems and control devices, within 30 days after the event occurs.

Sllsh Hotifisation shall illehlEle salsulatioHs Ilursuant to Sestion

219.411 (1l)(2)(B) sItowing the Elaily emissions ofVOM from all

lithogrollrusllrinting lifles at the souree fer tile montl! in whieR emissiofls

eJ[eeeEleEi 45.5 kWEloy (I 99 Ills/Elay).

15. In response to a request by industry representatives, the Illinois EPA proposes amending

Section 2181219.411 (t)(2)(B) and (t)(2)(C) by specifying that, for cleaning solutions used as17
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

purchased, sources may use manufacturer's specifications to determine VOM content and YOM

composite partial vapor pressure.

Section 218. 411 (j)(2)(B)(v), (j)(2)(C)(iii), and (j)(2)(C)(v):

B) For each batch of cleaning solution for which the owner or operator relies

on the YOM content to demonstrate compliance with Section

2l8.407(a)(4)(A) ofthis Subpart, and which is not prepared at the source

with automatic equipment:

v) The YOM content ofthe as-used cleaning solution, with

supporting calculations. For cleaning solutions that are used as

purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for YOM content may

be used ifsuch manufacturer's specifications are based on results .

oftests ofthe YOM content conducted in accordance with methods

specified in Section 218.IOS(a) ofthis Part;

C) For each batch of cleaning solution for which the owner or operator relies

on the vapor pressure ofthe cleaning solution to demonstrate compliance

with Section 218.407(a)(4)(B) ofthis Subpart:

iii) The molecular weight, density, and YOM composite partial vapor

pressure of each cleaning solvent, as determined in accordance

with Section 218.409(e) ofthis Subpart. For cleaning solutions

that are used as purchased, thc manufacturer's specifications for

YOM composite partial vapor pressure may be used ifsuch

manufacturer's specifications are based on results oftests

conducted in accordance with methods specified in Sections

218.10S(a) and 218.110 ofthis Part;

iv) The total amount of each cleaning solvent used to prepare the asused cleaning solution; and

v) The YOM composite partial vapor pressure of each as-used

cleaning solution, as determined in accordance with Section

218.409(e) ofthis Subpart. For cleaning solutions that are used as

purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for YOM composite

partial vapor pressure may be used jfsuch manufacturer's

specifications are based on results oftests conducted in accordance

with methods specified in Sections 218.10S(a) and 218.1 JO ofthis

Part;

18
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

Section 219.411(j)(2)(B)(v), (j)(2)(C)(iii), and (j)(2)(C)(v):

B) For each batch of cleaning solution for which the owner or operator relies

on the VOM content to demonstrate compliance with Section

219.407(a)(4)(A) ofthis Subpart, and which is not prepared at the source

with automatic equipment:

v) The YOM content ofthe as-used cleaning solution, with

supporting calculations. For cleaning solutions that are used as

purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for YOM content may

be used ifsuch manufacturer's specifications are based on results

oftests ofthe YOM content conducted in accordance with methods

specified in Section 219.105(a) ofthis Part;

C) For each batch ofcleaning solution for which the owner or operator relies

on the vapor pressure ofthe cleaning solution to demonstrate compliance

with Section 219.407(a)(4)(B) ofthis Subpart:

iii) The molecular weight, density, and YOM composite partial vapor

pressure ofeach cleaning solvent, as determined in accordance

with Section 219.409(e) ofthis Subpart. For cleaning solutions

that are used as purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for

YOM composite partial vapor pressure may be used ifsuch

manufacturer's specifications are based on results oftests

conducted in accordance with methods specified in Sections

219.1 051a) and 219.110 ofthis Part;

iv) The total amount of each cleaning solvent used to prepare the asused cleaning solution; and

v) The YOM composite partial vapor pressure of each as-used

cleaning solution, as determined in accordance with Section

219.409(e) ofthis Subpart. For cleaning solutions that are used as

purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for YOM composite

partial vapor pressure may be used ifsuch manufacturer's

specifications are based on results oftests conducted in accordance

with methods specified in Sections 219.105Ia) and 219.110 ofthis

Part;

19
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk'.s Office, September 14, 2009

16. In response to a request by industry representatives, the Illinois EPA proposes amending .

Section 21 8/2 I9.411 (g)(2)(A) to correct a grammar mistake.

Section 218/219411(g)(2)(A)(ii):

ii) The amount of cleaning materials used on lithographic printing lines at the

source that does not comply with the cleaning material limitations in

Section 218.407(a)(4) ofthis Subpart.

17. In response to a comment by industry representatives, the Illinois EPA proposes

amending Section 218/219.411 (g)(2)(B) by removing the requirement that a source include in its

notification to the Illinois EPA calculations showing an cxceedance ofthe applicability

threshold.

Section 218,41l(g)(2)(B):

B) Notify the Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all

lithographic printing lines (including inks, fountain solutions, and solvents

used for cleanup operations associated with the lithographic printing lines) .

at the source ever exceed 45.5 kg/day (100 lbs/day), before the use of

capture systems and control devices, within 30 days after the event occurs.

SlIell netifieatieR shall ineluee ealsulatiens PllfsuaRtte Seetien

218.411 EB)(2)(B) s!lewiRg the eaily emissions ef\laM ffem all

litllegraphie pARting lines at tile SOIff6e for tile mentl! in ",lIliell emissieRs

lllteeeeee 45.5 lE~ay (lGG Iss/eay).

Section 219.411 (g)(2)(B):

B) Notify the Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all

lithographic printing lines (including inks, fountain solutions, and solvents

used for cleanup operations associated with the lithographic printing lines)

at the source ever exceed 45.5 kg/day (100 lbs/day), before the use of

capture systems and control devices, within 30 days after the event occurs.

S\loll Retifieation shall inel\lee ealsuletiens pUFSuaRtte Seetien

219.4IIEB)(2)(B) showing 1110 eaily emissioRS ef\lOM ffem all

litllegrapmspriHting lines at tho sellfee for tile meRth iR wmell emissioRS

eJweeeee 45.5 kg/eay (I GG Issl6ay).

20

\

,
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

Letterpress Printing:

18. In response to a request by industry representatives, the Illinois EPA proposes amending

Section 2181219.415(a) and (c) by clarifying when testing pursuant to such Section shall be

performed.

Section 218.415(a) and (c):

a) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Section

218.413 ofthis Subpart shall be conducted by the owner or operator

within 90 days after a request by the Agcncy, or as otherwise specified in

this Subpart. Such testing shall be conducted at the expense ofthe owner

or operator, and the owner or operator shall notifY the Agency in writing

30 days in advance of conducting such testing to allow the Agency to be

present during such testing.

c) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the VOM content limitations in

Section 218.413(a)(2)(A) ofthis Subpart, and to determine the VOM

content of cleaning solvents, cleaning SOlutions, and inks (pursuant to the

requirements ofSection 218.417(b)(1)(B) ofthis Subpart), shall be

conducted upon request ofthe Agency, or as otherwise specified in this

Subpart. as follows:

Section 219.415(a) and (c):

a) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the requirements ofSection

219.413 ofthis Subpart shall be conducted by the owner or operator

within 90 days after a request by the Agency, or as otherwise specified in

this Subpart. Such testing shall be conducted at the expense ofthe owner

or operator, and the owner or operator shall notify the Agency in writing

30 days in advance ofconducting such testing to allow the Agency to be

present during such testing.

...........................................................

c) Testing to demonstrate compliance with the YOM contenllimitations in

Section 219.413(a)(2)(A) ofthis Subpart, and to determine the YOM

content of cleaning solvents, cleaning solutions, and inks (pursuant to the

requirements ofSection 219.417(b)(I)(B) ofthis Subpart), shall be

conducted upon request ofthe Agency, or as otherwise specified in this

Subpart. as follows:

21
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

. 19. The Illinois EPA proposes amending Section 2181219.417(b)(1) by changing the material

use thresholds for letterpress printing lines. USEPA previously recommended that material use

thresholds for lithographic printing lines be conservatively based on 50 percent ofthe pound per

day applicability threshold. USEPA has now determined that a 90 percent emission equivalency

level is acceptable for both lithographic and letterpress printing operations. The following

amendments reflect the 90 percent equivalency level for letterpress printing lines.

Section 218/219.417(b)(l)(D)(l) and (b)(J)(D)(il):

D) As an alternative to the calculations in subsection (b)(l)(B), above, a

statement that the source uses less than the amount ofmaterial specified in

subsections (b)(I)(D)(i) or (b)(l)(D)(ii), below, as applicable, during each

calendar month. A source may determine that it emits below 6.8 kg/day

(15 Ibs/day) of YOM based upon compliance with such material use

limitations. lfthe source exceeds this amount ofmaterial use in a given

calendar month, the owner or operator must, within IS days ofthe end of

that month, complete the emissions calculations ofsubsection (b)(l)(B) to

determine daily emissions for applicability purposes. If the source ever

exceeds this amount ofmaterial use for six consecutive calendar months, it

is no longer eligible to use this subsection as an alternative to the

calculations in subsection (b)(1)(B). Ifa source has both hcatset web and

either nonheatset web or sheetfed letterpress printing operations, or has all

three types ofprinting operations, the owner or operator may not make use

ofthis alternative and must use the calculations in subsection (b)(l)(B).

i) The sum of all sheetfed and nonheatset web letterpress printing

operations at the source: 242.3HH liters (~ gallons) of

cleaning solvent; or

ii) The sum ofall heatset web letterpress printing operations at the

source: 204.1++;l.,4 kg (45~ Ibs) ofink and cleaning solvent.

20. In response to a comment by industry representatives, the J1Iinois EPA proposes

amending Section 218/2 I 9.4 17(b)(2) by removing the requirement that a source include in its

notification to the JIlinois EPA calculations showing an exceedance ofthe applicability

threshold.

Section 218.417(b)(2):

22
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

2) For sources complying with subsection (b)(I)(B) ofthis Section, notify the

Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all letterpress

printing lines (including inks and solvents used for cleanup operations

associated with the letterpress printing lines) at the source ever equal or

exceed 6.8 kg/day (I5Ibs/day), in the absence of air pollution control

equipment, within 30 days after the event occurs. 8uea Iletifieatiell saall

illeluee ealeulaRslls pursuant ts 8eetisIl21 g.417(bj(1 )(E) slls.....illg tile

eaiJy emissislls sf',10M Hsm allletteFJlress jlHlltillglilles at the sSlIree fur

tlls mSlltll ill whieh emissislls eEjualee sr eJ£eeeeee e.g kglea,' (I §

IbsltJayj.

Section 219.417(b)(2):

2) . For sources complying with subsection (b)(l)(B) ofthis Section, notify the

Agency in writing ifthe combined emissions of YOM from all letterpress

printing.Jines (including inks and solvents used for cleanup operations

associated with the letterpress printing lines) at the source ever equal or

exceed 6.8 kg/day (I5 Ibslday), in the absence of air pollution control

equipment, within 30 days after the event occnrs. 811ea Hetifieatisll shall

illeluee ealeulatiells pUFSllant te 8eetieIl219.417(b)(I)(Ej saewillg tile

dail,' emissi8lls sfVOM lfsFIl allletteFJlress jlRlltillg lilles at tile sellree fer

the mSlltfl ill wl1ieh emissisHS eqllalee sr eJ£ceeeee e.g kl:1E1ay (15

lbs/Elay).

21. In response to a comment by industry representatives, the illinois EPA proposes

amending Section 2l8/2l9.4l7(e)(2)(B) and (e)(2)(C) by specifying that, for cleaning solutions

used as-purchased, sources may use manufacturer's specifications to determine YOM content

and YOM composite partial vapor pressure.

Section 218.417(e)(2)(B)(v), (e)(2)(C)(iii), and (e)(2)(C)(v):

B) For each batch of cleaning solution for which the owner or operator relies

on the YOM content to demonstrate compliance with Section

2l8.413(a)(2)(A) ofthis Subpart, and which is not prepared at the source

with automatic equipment:

v) The YOM content ofthe as-used cleaning solution, with

supporting calculations. For cleaning solutions that are used as

purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for YOM content may

be used ifsuch manufacturer's specifications are based on results

23
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

oftests ofthe YOM content conducted in accordance with methods

specified in Section 218.1 OSla) ofthis Part;

C) For each batch of cleaning solution for which the owner or operator relies

on the vapor pressure ofthe cleaning solution to demonstrate compliance

with Section 218.413(a)(2)(B) ofthis Subpart:

iii) The molecular weight, density, and YOM composite partial vapor

pressure of each cleaning solvent, as determined in accordance

with Section 218.41S(e) ofthis Subpart. For cleaning solutions

that are used as purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for

YOM composite partial vapor pressure may be used ifsuch

manufacturer's specifications are based on results oftests

conducted in accordance with methods specified in Sections

218.10Sla) and 218.110 ofthis Part;

iv) The total amount ofeach cleaning solvent used to prepare the asused cleaning solution; and

v) The YOM composite partial vapor pressure ofeach as-used

cleaning solution, as determined in accordance with Section

218.41S(e) ofthis Subpart. For cleaning solutions that are used as

purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for YOM composite

partial vapor pressure may be used ifsuch manufacturer's

specifications are based on results oftests conducted in accordance

with methods specified in Sections 218.1 OSla) and 218.110 ofthis

Part;

Section 2J9.4J7(e)(2)(B)(v). (e)(2)(C)(iii). and (e)(2)(C)(v):

B) For each batch ofcleaning solution for which the owner or operator relies

on the YOM content to demonstrate compliance with Section

219.413(a)(2)(A) ofthis Subpart, and which is not prepared at the source

with automatic equipment:

v) The YOM content ofthe as-used cleaning solution, with

supporting calculations. For cleaning solutions that are used as

purchased. the manufacturer's specifications for YOM content may

be used ifsuch manufacturer's specifications are based on rcsults

oftests ofthe YOM content conducted in accordance with methods

specified in Section 219.1 OSla) ofthis Part;

24
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

C) For each batch ofcleaning solution for which the owner or operator relies

on the vapor pressure ofthe cleaning solution to demonstrate compliance

with Section 219.4I3(a)(2)(B) ofthis Subpart:

iii) The molecular weight, density, and YOM composite partial vapor

pressure of each cleaning solvent, as determined in accordance

with Section 219.4l5(e) ofthis Subpart. For cleaning solutions

that are used as purchased, the manufacturer's specifications for

YOM composite partial vapor pressure may be used ifsuch

manufacturer's specifications are based on results oftests

conducted in accordance with methods specified in Sections

219.105(a) and 219.110 ofthis Part;

iv) The total amount of each cleaning solvent used to prepare the asused cleaning solution; and

v) The YOM composite partial vapor pressure of each as-used

cleaning solution, as determined in accordance with Section

219.415(e) ofthis Subpart. For cleaning solutions that are used as

purchased. the manufacturer's specifications for YOM composite

partial vapor pressure may be used ifsuch manufacturer's

specifications' are based on results oftests conducted in accordance

with methods specified in Sections 219.105(a) and 219.110 ofthis

Part;

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, the lllinois EPA moves that the Board

amend Parts 218 and 219 as set forth herein.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By: On 04 "{d;/dJ~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: September 14,2009

1021 N, Grand Ave, East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, 1L 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544

25
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF:

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211, 21S, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIO-S

(Rulemaking-Air)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, an attorney, state that I have served electronically the attached

TESTIMONTY OF DAVID BLOOMBERG and MOTION TO AMEND RULEMAKlNG

PROPOSAL upon the following person:

John Therriault, Assistant Clerk

1llinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois 60601-3218

and electronically to the following persons:

SEE AUACHED SERVICE LIST.

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By: c:zn M?- ikJJrr~~ . Dana VetterhoffuT

Assistant Counsel

Division of Legal Counsel

DATED: September 14, 2009

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 14, 2009

Service List RI 0-8

Timothy J. Fox

Hearing Officer

Illinois Pollution Control Board

100 W. Randolph St., Suite 11-500

Chicago, IL 6060 I

foxt@ipcb.state.il.us

Virginia Yang

Deputy Legal Counsel

Illinois Department ofNatural Resources

One Natural Resources Way

Springfield, IL 62702-1271

virginia.yang@illinois.gov

Matthew Dwm, Chief

Division ofEnvironmental Enforcement

Office ofthe Attorney General

69 W. Washington St., Suite 1800

Chicago, 1L 60602

mdunn@atg.state.il.us
A 6
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

October 15, 2009

IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL )

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATLE )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISIONS FROM )

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL )

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS )

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211,218, and 219 )

ORDER OF THE BOARD (by A.S. Moore):

RIO-08

(Rulemaking - Air)

On July 9, 2009, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) filed a proposal

under the general rulemaking provisions of Sections 27, 28, and 28.2 of the Environmental

Protection Act. See 415 ILCS 5/27, 28, 28.2 (2008). Among other materials, a Statement of

Reasons (SR) accompanied the proposal.

Generally, the Agency proposes to adopt air pollution regulations to control emissions of

volatile organic material (VOM) for Group II Consumer & Commercial Products in ozone

nonattainment areas classified as moderate and above. Two Illinois areas, Chicago and St.

Louis/Metro East, have been designated as moderate nonattainment areas for the 8-hour ozone

standard. The Chicago nonattainment area includes the following jurisdictions: Cook, DuPage,

Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties, Goose Lake and Aux Sable Townships in Grundy

County, and Oswego Township in Kendall County. SR at 3, citing 40 C.F.R. 81.314. The St.

Louis/Metro East nonattainment includes the following Illinois counties: Jersey, Madison,

Monroe, and St. Clair. SR at 3, citing 40 C.F.R. 81.314. Group II products include industrial

cleaning solvents, flat wood panelin'g coatings, flexible packaging printing materials,

lithographic printing materials, and letterpress printing materials. SR at 1,7-9.

On September 14,2009, the Agency filed a motion to amend its rulemaking proposal

(Mot.). The Agency proposes 20 amendments to the proposal, many ofthem stemming from a

request or comment by industry representatives. E.g., Mot. at 4-5 (proposing to amend existing

Sections 218.404 and 219.404). The Agency requests that the Board amend Parts 218 and 219 as

set forth in its motion. Mot. at 1,25; see 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218,219.

Section 101.500(d) ofthe Board's procedural rules provides in pertinent part that,

"[w]ithin 14 days after service of a motion, a party may file a response to the motion. Ifno

response is filed, the party will be deemed to have waived objection to the granting ofthe

motion, but the waiver of objection does not bind the Board or the hearing officer in its

disposition ofthe motion." 35111. Adm. Code 101.500(d). The Board has received no response

to the Agency's motion to amend. Based on its review ofthe substance ofthe Agency's motion,

and in the absence of any response it, the Board grants the motion to amend the proposal.
2

The first hearing in this proceeding will take place as scheduled beginning on Tuesday,

Octobcr 27, 2009, in Edwardsville.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I, John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk ofthc lllinois Pollution Control Board, certify that

the Board adopted the above opinion and order on October 15, 2009, by a vote of 5-0.

John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk

lllinois Pollution Control Board
A 7
( 1

2

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

Keefe Reporting Company

1

RECORD OF HEARING

October 27, 2009

Reported by Holly A. McCullough,

C.S.R., C.C.R., R.P.R.

"'~CIE: CLERK'S l~/~l~

a~T2 92009

STArE RIO- 8 POI/ution gF ILLINOIS

(Rulemaking - ~P~Board

IN THE MATTER OF:

REASONABLY AVAILABLE

CONTROL TECHNOLOGY

(RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGANIC MATERIAL

EMISSIONS FROM GROUP II

CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL.

ADM. CODE 211, 218 and

219.

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

(._., 11

\ 12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

..

I

\
( 1

2

3

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF:

APPEARANCES:

BOARD MEMBERS:

Timothy J. Fox, Hearing Officer

Andrea S. Moore

Anand Rao

Shundar Lin

For Illinois Environmental Protection Agency:

Dana Vetterhoffer

1021 North Grand Avenue East

(

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

REASONABLY AVAILABLE

CONTROL TECHNOLOGY

(RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGANIC MATERIAL

EMISSIONS FROM GROUP II

CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED

AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL.

ADM. CODE 211, 218 and

219.

R10-8

(Rulemaking - Air)

(

P. O. Box 19276

16 Springfield, IL 62794-9276

17 And David Bloomberg

18 INDEX OF EXHIBITS:

19 Exhibit No. 1 -- Page 7

20 (Exhibit No. 7 was marked for identification and

retained by Mr. Fox.)

21

22

23

24

Keefe Reporting Company

2
( 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

BE IT KNOWN that a record was made on October 27,

2009, at the Madison County Administration Building,

before Holly A. McCullough, an Illinois Certified

Shorthand Reporter, a Missouri Certified Court

Reporter, a Registered Professional Reporter and a

Notary Public. Also, it is stipulated and agreed that

this record may be taken in stenotype by Holly A.

McCullough and thereafter transcribed into

typewriting.

* * * * *

MR. FOX: Good morning and welcome to this

Illinois Pollution Control Board hearing. My name is

Tim Fox, and I'm the hearing officer for this

ru1emaking proceeding, which is entitled "In the

Matter of Reasonably Available Control Technology

(RACT) For Volatile Organic Material Emissions From

Group II Consumer and Commercial Products: Proposed

Amendments to 35 Illinois Administrative Code Parts

211, 218 and 219."

Also present from the Board are on my immediate

left Board Member Andrea S. Moore, M-O-O-R-E, the lead

Board Member for this rulemaking, and also present on

my right is Anand Rao of the Board's technical staff.

Keefe Reporting Company

3
A 8
REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

October 28, 2009

IN THE MATTER OF:

GROUP IT CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 21 1,218, AND 219

RlECE6VED

CLERK'S OFFiCe

OCT 2B2009

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

ORIGINAL

RIO-8

(Rulemaking - Air)

)

)

)

)

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM )

)

)

)

HEARING OFFICER ORDER

On July 9, 2009, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) filed a proposal

to adopt air pollution regulations controlling emission of volatile organic material from Group IT

Consumer & Commercial Products in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate and

above. Group IT products include industrial cleaning solvents, flat wood paneling coatings,

flexible packaging printing materials, lithographic printing materials, and letterpress printing

materials. In an order dated August 6, 2009, the Board among other actions accepted the

proposal for hearing.

In an order dated August 12,2009, the hearing officer scheduled two hearings, the first

beginning October 27,2009, in Edwardsville, and the second beginning December 8, 2009, in

Chicago. The order also set deadlines to pre-file testimony, questions, and answers for the first

hearing. The order also specifically provided that "[p]re-filing deadlines for the second hearing

will be determined at a later date."

The frrst hearing took place as scheduled on October 27,2009, and the Board expects to

receive the transcript ofthat hearing by Friday, November 6, 2009. During the first hearing, the

hearing officer set deadlines to pre-file testimony and questions for the second hearing.

Pre-Filing Deadlines

Participants who intend to testify at the second hearing are urged to pre-file their

testimony. Participants pre-filing testimony and any related exhibits are directed to do so no

later than Tuesday, November 17; 2009. To expedite the second hearing, participants are

directed to pre-file questions based upon pre-filed testimony no later than Thursday, December

3,2009.

The "mailbox rule" at 35 III. Adm. Code 101.300(b)(2) does not apply to the filing of any

ofpre-filed testimony or pre-filed questions, and the Board's Clerk must receive these

documents before the close ofbusiness on the specified dates. Although pre-filed testimony and

pre-filed questions may be filed electronically through the Clerk's Office On-Line (COOL) from

the Board's Web site at www.ipcb.state.il.us, all electronic or approved fax filings must be

received by the Clerk's Office no later than 4:30 PM on the day ofthe applicable deadline. Any
2

questions about electronic filing through COOL should be directed to the Clerk's Office at (312)

814-3629.

Participants are directed to serve pre-filed testimony and pre-filed questions on the

hearing officer and all persons on the Service List. Before filing pre-filed testimony or pre-filed

questions or any other document with the Clerk, please check with the hearing officer or the

Clerk to obtain the most recent version ofthe Service List.

Order of Second Hearing

The hearing officer intends to begin the second hearing with pre-filed testimony. All prefiled testimony will be entered into the record as ifread. See 35 III. Adm. Code 102.424(f). A

briefsummary oftestimony will be allowed if a witness wishes to provide one before responding

to questions. Witnesses will then address any pre-filed questions. The hearing officer intends to

allow any participant to ask follow-up questions and, after addressing pre-filed questions, to

allow participants who have not pre-filed questions to ask them.

Participants who do not pre-file testimony will be allowed to testifY as time permits after

the conclusion ofpre-filed testimony and questions based upon it. Consequently, any persons

wishing to testifY are urged to pre-file testimony in order to ensure that they have an opportunity

to testify.

Any participant who wishes to offer a public comment at the second hearing will be

allowed to do so iftime permits at the close oftestimony and questions based upon it. The

Board's procedural rules also include an opportunity to file post-hearing comments. See 35 III.

Adm. Code 102.108(b). The rules also provide that "[t]he Board will accept written comments

from any person concerning the proposed regulations during the first notice period." 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 102.604.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Timothy

~~g~- J. Fox

Hearing Officer

Illinois Pollution Control Board

100 W. Randolph St., Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois 6060I

312-814-6085

foxt@ipcb.state.il.us