A 14
0,

--- --------

Mostardi Platt

c. .c,"!('!'(/xo:-nff.C"!i..4t ---_.

Januury 15. 20 J ()

John ThclTiilult

Clerk

Illinois Pollution ('ontrol Board

I Of) W. Randolph SI.. SIC. I 1-500

Chicago. IL 6060 I

,520 Kensington Road. Sllile 204

Qar. SrilOk, IllrnOis 60523-2139

Phone 630-993·2'i,00

fa< 630·993·901 i

www.mGstardiplatUmv.com

ReceiVED

CLERK'S OFFICE

JAN I 3 2010

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pol/uto" Control Board

Alln: RI0-8 Rulemaking Air: Litho!!n\phie I'rioting .Rules

To whom it Illay concern.

I wish 10 withdrnw Illy recenlly subrnittcd commenls 10 the Illinois I'ollulion Cootrol

Board (IPCB) rcgarding proposed changes 10 the Reasonably Available Control

Technology m!\CTl fiJI' Volatile Organic \-1"leri,,1 Fmissions Standards.

rVly comJllents were h(1Scd on regulations listcd on the Illinois Em'ironmcntal I'rOlcctioll

Agency ( IEPA) website. !\ itcr rcviewing thc WeB docket. including amcnded filings

incorporating the most recent IEI'Aehanges, I bcliCl'll Ihai thc rules. as eUiTclllly written.

nrc not umbiguDus with regurd 10 the Ikatsct Liihogmplric Printing eonlrnl (Ieviee

requirements. Therciore I wi,h 10 wiHldnll\' 111V comll1enls to the IPCB dnicd December

n, 2009.

IrYOll have cll1yqucslions regarding this wilhdrawdl requcsL please fcelli"cc 10 t:onlLlcl

111(' al «J30) 993-2138 or hy e-mail at jml~'I.·n_I1_:I_n_~m.!)ih!filipL.lll~Jl~:£.~lnL Thank YOl!o

.siIl(;('rc : .
A 15
i

Volume 34, Issue 6

February 5, 2010

Pages 1762-2371
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1766

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

1) Heading of the Part: Definitions and General Provisions

2) Code Citation: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 211

3) Section Numbers: Proposed Action:

211.1000 New

211.1745 New

211.1878 New

211.1885 Amend

211.2355 New

211.2356 New

211.2368 New

211.2615 New

211.2830 Amend

211.2855 New

211.2965 New

211.3215 New

211.3305 New

211.3555 New

211.3705 New

211.3707 New

211.4065 Amend

211.5335 New

211.5535 New

211.5585 New

211.5860 New

211.5875 New

211.5885 New

211.6405 New

211.6425 New

211.6535 New

211.7290 Amend

4) Statutory Authority: Implementing Sections 21, 22, 22.01 and 22.9, and authorized by 

Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/21, 22, 22.01, 22.9, 27]

5) A complete description of the subjects and issues involved: The Illinois Environmental 

Protection Agency (Agency) proposed this rulemaking to satisfy Illinois' obligation to 

submit a State Implementation Plan addressing Clean Air Act requirements for sources of 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1767

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

volatile organic material (VOM) emissions in ozone nonattainment areas. The United 

States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued Control Techniques Guidelines 

(CTG) for Group II Consumer and Commercial Product Categories. In the CTG, USEPA 

recommended control measures that it believes constitute reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) for those product categories.

In Part 211, the Agency proposes adding twenty-three new definitions and amending four 

existing definitions for terms employed in proposed amendments to Parts 218 and 219.

For a more detailed description of this rulemaking, see the Board's January 7, 2010, firstnotice opinion and order: 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 (R10-08).

6) Published studies or reports, and sources of underlying data, used to compose this 

rulemaking:

The Agency's regulatory proposal included a Technical Support Document, which stated 

that it relied on sources listed below. Copies of the documents the Illinois EPA relied 

upon are available for review with the Pollution Control Board.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, 

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

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.

Control Techniques Guidelines: Industrial Cleaning Solvents, United States 

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

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States 

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

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1768

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Technical Support Document for Controlling VOM Emissions from Lithographic 

Printing Operations, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Air Quality Planning 

Section, Springfield, IL, October 1994.

Control Techniques Guideline Series: Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Offset Lithographic Printing (DRAFT), United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, 

September 1993.

7) Will this rulemaking replace any emergency rulemakings currently in effect? No

8) Does this rulemaking contain an automatic repeal date? No

9) Does this rulemaking contain incorporations by reference? No

10) Are there any other amendments pending on this Part? Yes

Section Number: Proposed Action: Illinois Register Citation:

211.7150 Amend 33 Ill. Reg. 14275; October 16, 2009

11) Statement of Statewide Policy Objectives: This proposed rule does not create or enlarge 

a State mandate, as defined in Section 3(b) of the State Mandates Act. [30 ILCS 805/3(b) 

(2008)].

12) Time, place and manner in which interested persons may comment on this proposed 

rulemaking: The Board will accept written public comment on this proposal for a period 

of 45 days after the date of this publication. Comments should reference docket R10-08 

and be addressed to:

Clerk's Office

Illinois Pollution Control Board

State of Illinois Center, Suite 11-500

100 W. Randolph St.

Chicago, IL 60601

Address all questions to Tim Fox at 312-814-6085.
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1769

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Interested persons may request copies of the Board's opinion and order by calling the 

Clerk's office at 312-814-3620, or download them from the Board's Web site at 

www.ipcb.state.il.us.

13) Initial regulatory flexibility analysis:

A) Types of small businesses, small municipalities, and not-for-profit corporations 

affected: This rulemaking will impact any small business, small municipality, an 

not-for-profit corporation that falls within one of the Group III Product Categories 

and meets the applicability thresholds specified in the proposed rules.

B) Reporting, bookkeeping or other procedures required for compliance: The 

proposed rules require that the owner or operator of a subject source perform 

emissions monitoring, submit certifications, complete required tests, and maintain 

records and maker reports as required.

C) Types of professional skills necessary for compliance: No professional skills 

beyond those currently required by the existing state and federal air pollution 

control requirements applicable to affected sources will be required.

14) Regulatory Agenda on which this rulemaking was summarized: January 2009

The full text of the Proposed Amendments begins on the next page:
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1770

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE B: AIR POLLUTION

CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

SUBCHAPTER c: EMISSION STANDARDS AND LIMITATIONS

FOR STATIONARY SOURCES

PART 211

DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

SUBPART A: GENERAL PROVISIONS

Section 

211.101 Incorporations by Reference 

211.102 Abbreviations and Conversion Factors 

SUBPART B: DEFINITIONS

Section 

211.121 Other Definitions 

211.122 Definitions (Repealed) 

211.130 Accelacota 

211.150 Accumulator 

211.170 Acid Gases 

211.210 Actual Heat Input 

211.230 Adhesive 

211.240 Adhesion Promoter 

211.250 Aeration 

211.270 Aerosol Can Filling Line 

211.290 Afterburner 

211.310 Air Contaminant 

211.330 Air Dried Coatings 

211.350 Air Oxidation Process 

211.370 Air Pollutant 

211.390 Air Pollution 

211.410 Air Pollution Control Equipment 

211.430 Air Suspension Coater/Dryer 

211.450 Airless Spray 

211.470 Air Assisted Airless Spray 

211.474 Alcohol 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1771

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.479 Allowance 

211.484 Animal 

211.485 Animal Pathological Waste 

211.490 Annual Grain Through-Put 

211.495 Anti-Glare/Safety Coating 

211.510 Application Area 

211.530 Architectural Coating 

211.550 As Applied 

211.560 As-Applied Fountain Solution 

211.570 Asphalt 

211.590 Asphalt Prime Coat 

211.610 Automobile 

211.630 Automobile or Light-Duty Truck Assembly Source or Automobile or Light-Duty 

Truck Manufacturing Plant 

211.650 Automobile or Light-Duty Truck Refinishing 

211.660 Automotive/Transportation Plastic Parts 

211.665 Auxiliary Boiler

211.670 Baked Coatings 

211.680 Bakery Oven 

211.685 Basecoat/Clearcoat System 

211.690 Batch Loading 

211.695 Batch Operation 

211.696 Batch Process Train 

211.710 Bead-Dipping 

211.730 Binders 

211.740 Brakehorsepower (rated-bhp)

211.750 British Thermal Unit 

211.770 Brush or Wipe Coating 

211.790 Bulk Gasoline Plant 

211.810 Bulk Gasoline Terminal 

211.820 Business Machine Plastic Parts 

211.830 Can 

211.850 Can Coating 

211.870 Can Coating Line 

211.890 Capture 

211.910 Capture Device 

211.930 Capture Efficiency 

211.950 Capture System 

211.953 Carbon Adsorber
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1772

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.955 Cement 

211.960 Cement Kiln 

211.970 Certified Investigation 

211.980 Chemical Manufacturing Process Unit 

211.990 Choke Loading 

211.995 Circulating Fluidized Bed Combustor

211.1000 Class II Finish

211.1010 Clean Air Act 

211.1050 Cleaning and Separating Operation 

211.1070 Cleaning Materials 

211.1090 Clear Coating 

211.1110 Clear Topcoat 

211.1120 Clinker 

211.1130 Closed Purge System 

211.1150 Closed Vent System 

211.1170 Coal Refuse 

211.1190 Coating 

211.1210 Coating Applicator 

211.1230 Coating Line 

211.1250 Coating Plant 

211.1270 Coil Coating 

211.1290 Coil Coating Line 

211.1310 Cold Cleaning 

211.1312 Combined Cycle System 

211.1315 Combustion Tuning

211.1316 Combustion Turbine 

211.1320 Commence Commercial Operation 

211.1324 Commence Operation 

211.1328 Common Stack 

211.1330 Complete Combustion 

211.1350 Component 

211.1370 Concrete Curing Compounds 

211.1390 Concentrated Nitric Acid Manufacturing Process 

211.1410 Condensate 

211.1430 Condensible PM-10 

211.1435 Container Glass

211.1465 Continuous Automatic Stoking 

211.1467 Continuous Coater 

211.1470 Continuous Process 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1773

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.1490 Control Device 

211.1510 Control Device Efficiency 

211.1515 Control Period 

211.1520 Conventional Air Spray 

211.1530 Conventional Soybean Crushing Source 

211.1550 Conveyorized Degreasing 

211.1570 Crude Oil 

211.1590 Crude Oil Gathering 

211.1610 Crushing 

211.1630 Custody Transfer 

211.1650 Cutback Asphalt 

211.1670 Daily-Weighted Average VOM Content 

211.1690 Day 

211.1710 Degreaser 

211.1730 Delivery Vessel 

211.1740 Diesel Engine

211.1745 Digital Printing

211.1750 Dip Coating 

211.1770 Distillate Fuel Oil 

211.1780 Distillation Unit 

211.1790 Drum 

211.1810 Dry Cleaning Operation or Dry Cleaning Facility 

211.1830 Dump-Pit Area 

211.1850 Effective Grate Area 

211.1870 Effluent Water Separator 

211.1875 Elastomeric Materials 

211.1878 Electrical Apparatus Component

211.1880 Electromagnetic Interference/Radio Frequency Interference (EMI/RFI) Shielding 

Coatings 

211.1885 Electronic Component 

211.1890 Electrostatic Bell or Disc Spray 

211.1900 Electrostatic Prep Coat 

211.1910 Electrostatic Spray 

211.1920 Emergency or Standby Unit 

211.1930 Emission Rate 

211.1950 Emission Unit 

211.1970 Enamel 

211.1990 Enclose 

211.2010 End Sealing Compound Coat 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1774

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.2030 Enhanced Under-the-Cup Fill 

211.2050 Ethanol Blend Gasoline 

211.2070 Excess Air 

211.2080 Excess Emissions 

211.2090 Excessive Release 

211.2110 Existing Grain-Drying Operation (Repealed) 

211.2130 Existing Grain-Handling Operation (Repealed) 

211.2150 Exterior Base Coat 

211.2170 Exterior End Coat 

211.2190 External Floating Roof 

211.2210 Extreme Performance Coating 

211.2230 Fabric Coating 

211.2250 Fabric Coating Line 

211.2270 Federally Enforceable Limitations and Conditions 

211.2285 Feed Mill 

211.2290 Fermentation Time 

211.2300 Fill 

211.2310 Final Repair Coat 

211.2330 Firebox 

211.2350 Fixed-Roof Tank 

211.2355 Flare

211.2357 Flat Glass

211.2358 Flat Wood Paneling

211.2359 Flat Wood Paneling Coating Line

211.2360 Flexible Coating 

211.2365 Flexible Operation Unit 

211.2368 Flexible Packaging

211.2370 Flexographic Printing 

211.2390 Flexographic Printing Line 

211.2410 Floating Roof 

211.2420 Fossil Fuel 

211.2425 Fossil Fuel-Fired 

211.2430 Fountain Solution 

211.2450 Freeboard Height 

211.2470 Fuel Combustion Emission Unit or Fuel Combustion Emission Source 

211.2490 Fugitive Particulate Matter 

211.2510 Full Operating Flowrate 

211.2530 Gas Service 

211.2550 Gas/Gas Method 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1775

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.2570 Gasoline 

211.2590 Gasoline Dispensing Operation or Gasoline Dispensing Facility 

211.2610 Gel Coat 

211.2615 General Work Surface

211.2620 Generator 

211.2625 Glass Melting Furnace

211.2630 Gloss Reducers 

211.2650 Grain 

211.2670 Grain-Drying Operation 

211.2690 Grain-Handling and Conditioning Operation 

211.2710 Grain-Handling Operation 

211.2730 Green-Tire Spraying 

211.2750 Green Tires 

211.2770 Gross Heating Value 

211.2790 Gross Vehicle Weight Rating 

211.2810 Heated Airless Spray 

211.2815 Heat Input 

211.2820 Heat Input Rate 

211.2830 Heatset 

211.2840 Heatset Web Letterpress Printing Line

211.2850 Heatset Web Offset Lithographic Printing Line 

211.2870 Heavy Liquid 

211.2890 Heavy Metals 

211.2910 Heavy Off-Highway Vehicle Products 

211.2930 Heavy Off-Highway Vehicle Products Coating 

211.2950 Heavy Off-Highway Vehicle Products Coating Line 

211.2965 High Precision Optic

211.2970 High Temperature Aluminum Coating 

211.2990 High Volume Low Pressure (HVLP) Spray 

211.3010 Hood 

211.3030 Hot Well 

211.3050 Housekeeping Practices 

211.3070 Incinerator 

211.3090 Indirect Heat Transfer 

211.3100 Industrial Boiler

211.3110 Ink 

211.3130 In-Process Tank 

211.3150 In-Situ Sampling Systems 

211.3170 Interior Body Spray Coat 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1776

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.3190 Internal-Floating Roof 

211.3210 Internal Transferring Area 

211.3215 Janitorial Cleaning

211.3230 Lacquers 

211.3250 Large Appliance 

211.3270 Large Appliance Coating 

211.3290 Large Appliance Coating Line 

211.3300 Lean-Burn Engine

211.3305 Letterpress Printing Line

211.3310 Light Liquid 

211.3330 Light-Duty Truck 

211.3350 Light Oil 

211.3355 Lime Kiln

211.3370 Liquid/Gas Method 

211.3390 Liquid-Mounted Seal 

211.3410 Liquid Service 

211.3430 Liquids Dripping 

211.3450 Lithographic Printing Line 

211.3470 Load-Out Area 

211.3475 Load Shaving Unit

211.3480 Loading Event 

211.3483 Long Dry Kiln 

211.3485 Long Wet Kiln 

211.3487 Low-NOx Burner 

211.3490 Low Solvent Coating 

211.3500 Lubricating Oil

211.3510 Magnet Wire 

211.3530 Magnet Wire Coating 

211.3550 Magnet Wire Coating Line 

211.3555 Maintenance Cleaning

211.3570 Major Dump Pit 

211.3590 Major Metropolitan Area (MMA) 

211.3610 Major Population Area (MPA) 

211.3620 Manually Operated Equipment 

211.3630 Manufacturing Process 

211.3650 Marine Terminal 

211.3660 Marine Vessel 

211.3670 Material Recovery Section 

211.3690 Maximum Theoretical Emissions 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1777

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.3695 Maximum True Vapor Pressure 

211.3705 Medical Device

211.3707 Medical Device and Pharmaceutical Manufacturing

211.3710 Metal Furniture 

211.3730 Metal Furniture Coating 

211.3750 Metal Furniture Coating Line 

211.3770 Metallic Shoe-Type Seal 

211.3780 Mid-Kiln Firing 

211.3790 Miscellaneous Fabricated Product Manufacturing Process 

211.3810 Miscellaneous Formulation Manufacturing Process 

211.3830 Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products 

211.3850 Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coating 

211.3870 Miscellaneous Metal Parts or Products Coating Line 

211.3890 Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing Process 

211.3910 Mixing Operation 

211.3915 Mobile Equipment 

211.3930 Monitor 

211.3950 Monomer 

211.3960 Motor Vehicles 

211.3965 Motor Vehicle Refinishing 

211.3970 Multiple Package Coating 

211.3980 Nameplate Capacity 

211.3990 New Grain-Drying Operation (Repealed) 

211.4010 New Grain-Handling Operation (Repealed) 

211.4030 No Detectable Volatile Organic Material Emissions 

211.4050 Non-Contact Process Water Cooling Tower 

211.4055 Non-Flexible Coating 

211.4065 Non-Heatset 

211.4067 NOx Trading Program

211.4070 Offset 

211.4090 One Hundred Percent Acid 

211.4110 One-Turn Storage Space 

211.4130 Opacity 

211.4150 Opaque Stains 

211.4170 Open Top Vapor Degreasing 

211.4190 Open-Ended Valve 

211.4210 Operator of a Gasoline Dispensing Operation or Operator of a Gasoline 

Dispensing Facility 

211.4230 Organic Compound 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1778

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.4250 Organic Material and Organic Materials 

211.4260 Organic Solvent 

211.4270 Organic Vapor 

211.4280 Other Glass

211.4290 Oven 

211.4310 Overall Control 

211.4330 Overvarnish 

211.4350 Owner of a Gasoline Dispensing Operation or Owner of a Gasoline Dispensing 

Facility 

211.4370 Owner or Operator 

211.4390 Packaging Rotogravure Printing 

211.4410 Packaging Rotogravure Printing Line 

211.4430 Pail 

211.4450 Paint Manufacturing Source or Paint Manufacturing Plant 

211.4470 Paper Coating 

211.4490 Paper Coating Line 

211.4510 Particulate Matter 

211.4530 Parts Per Million (Volume) or PPM (Vol) 

211.4550 Person 

211.4590 Petroleum 

211.4610 Petroleum Liquid 

211.4630 Petroleum Refinery 

211.4650 Pharmaceutical 

211.4670 Pharmaceutical Coating Operation 

211.4690 Photochemically Reactive Material 

211.4710 Pigmented Coatings 

211.4730 Plant 

211.4740 Plastic Part 

211.4750 Plasticizers 

211.4770 PM-10 

211.4790 Pneumatic Rubber Tire Manufacture 

211.4810 Polybasic Organic Acid Partial Oxidation Manufacturing Process 

211.4830 Polyester Resin Material(s) 

211.4850 Polyester Resin Products Manufacturing Process 

211.4870 Polystyrene Plant 

211.4890 Polystyrene Resin 

211.4910 Portable Grain-Handling Equipment 

211.4930 Portland Cement Manufacturing Process Emission Source 

211.4950 Portland Cement Process or Portland Cement Manufacturing Plant 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1779

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.4960 Potential Electrical Output Capacity 

211.4970 Potential to Emit 

211.4990 Power Driven Fastener Coating 

211.5010 Precoat 

211.5015 Preheater Kiln 

211.5020 Preheater/Precalciner Kiln 

211.5030 Pressure Release 

211.5050 Pressure Tank 

211.5060 Pressure/Vacuum Relief Valve 

211.5061 Pretreatment Wash Primer 

211.5065 Primary Product 

211.5070 Prime Coat 

211.5080 Primer Sealer 

211.5090 Primer Surfacer Coat 

211.5110 Primer Surfacer Operation 

211.5130 Primers 

211.5150 Printing 

211.5170 Printing Line 

211.5185 Process Emission Source 

211.5190 Process Emission Unit 

211.5195 Process Heater

211.5210 Process Unit 

211.5230 Process Unit Shutdown 

211.5245 Process Vent 

211.5250 Process Weight Rate 

211.5270 Production Equipment Exhaust System 

211.5310 Publication Rotogravure Printing Line 

211.5330 Purged Process Fluid 

211.5335 Radiation Effect Coating

211.5340 Rated Heat Input Capacity 

211.5350 Reactor 

211.5370 Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) 

211.5390 Reclamation System 

211.5410 Refiner 

211.5430 Refinery Fuel Gas 

211.5450 Refinery Fuel Gas System 

211.5470 Refinery Unit or Refinery Process Unit 

211.5480 Reflective Argent Coating 

211.5490 Refrigerated Condenser 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1780

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.5500 Regulated Air Pollutant 

211.5510 Reid Vapor Pressure 

211.5530 Repair 

211.5535 Repair Cleaning

211.5550 Repair Coat 

211.5570 Repaired 

211.5580 Repowering 

211.5585 Research and Development Operation

211.5590 Residual Fuel Oil 

211.5600 Resist Coat 

211.5610 Restricted Area 

211.5630 Retail Outlet 

211.5640 Rich-Burn Engine

211.5650 Ringelmann Chart 

211.5670 Roadway 

211.5690 Roll Coater 

211.5710 Roll Coating 

211.5730 Roll Printer 

211.5750 Roll Printing 

211.5770 Rotogravure Printing 

211.5790 Rotogravure Printing Line 

211.5810 Safety Relief Valve 

211.5830 Sandblasting 

211.5850 Sanding Sealers 

211.5860 Scientific Instrument

211.5870 Screening 

211.5875 Screen Printing

211.5880 Screen Printing on Paper

211.5885 Screen Reclamation

211.5890 Sealer 

211.5910 Semi-Transparent Stains 

211.5930 Sensor 

211.5950 Set of Safety Relief Valves 

211.5970 Sheet Basecoat 

211.5980 Sheet-Fed 

211.5990 Shotblasting 

211.6010 Side-Seam Spray Coat 

211.6025 Single Unit Operation 

211.6030 Smoke 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1781

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.6050 Smokeless Flare 

211.6060 Soft Coat 

211.6070 Solvent 

211.6090 Solvent Cleaning 

211.6110 Solvent Recovery System 

211.6130 Source 

211.6140 Specialty Coatings 

211.6145 Specialty Coatings for Motor Vehicles 

211.6150 Specialty High Gloss Catalyzed Coating 

211.6170 Specialty Leather 

211.6190 Specialty Soybean Crushing Source 

211.6210 Splash Loading 

211.6230 Stack 

211.6250 Stain Coating 

211.6270 Standard Conditions 

211.6290 Standard Cubic Foot (scf) 

211.6310 Start-Up 

211.6330 Stationary Emission Source 

211.6350 Stationary Emission Unit 

211.6355 Stationary Gas Turbine 

211.6360 Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine 

211.6370 Stationary Source 

211.6390 Stationary Storage Tank 

211.6400 Stencil Coat 

211.6405 Sterilization Indicating Ink

211.6410 Storage Tank or Storage Vessel 

211.6420 Strippable Spray Booth Coating 

211.6425 Stripping

211.6430 Styrene Devolatilizer Unit 

211.6450 Styrene Recovery Unit 

211.6470 Submerged Loading Pipe 

211.6490 Substrate 

211.6510 Sulfuric Acid Mist 

211.6530 Surface Condenser 

211.6535 Surface Preparation

211.6540 Surface Preparation Materials 

211.6550 Synthetic Organic Chemical or Polymer Manufacturing Plant 

211.6570 Tablet Coating Operation 

211.6580 Texture Coat 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1782

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.6590 Thirty-Day Rolling Average 

211.6610 Three-Piece Can 

211.6620 Three or Four Stage Coating System 

211.6630 Through-the-Valve Fill 

211.6650 Tooling Resin 

211.6670 Topcoat 

211.6690 Topcoat Operation 

211.6695 Topcoat System 

211.6710 Touch-Up 

211.6720 Touch-Up Coating 

211.6730 Transfer Efficiency 

211.6750 Tread End Cementing 

211.6770 True Vapor Pressure 

211.6790 Turnaround 

211.6810 Two-Piece Can 

211.6830 Under-the-Cup Fill 

211.6850 Undertread Cementing 

211.6860 Uniform Finish Blender 

211.6870 Unregulated Safety Relief Valve 

211.6880 Vacuum Metallizing 

211.6890 Vacuum Producing System 

211.6910 Vacuum Service 

211.6930 Valves Not Externally Regulated 

211.6950 Vapor Balance System 

211.6970 Vapor Collection System 

211.6990 Vapor Control System 

211.7010 Vapor-Mounted Primary Seal 

211.7030 Vapor Recovery System 

211.7050 Vapor-Suppressed Polyester Resin 

211.7070 Vinyl Coating 

211.7090 Vinyl Coating Line 

211.7110 Volatile Organic Liquid (VOL) 

211.7130 Volatile Organic Material Content (VOMC) 

211.7150 Volatile Organic Material (VOM) or Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) 

211.7170 Volatile Petroleum Liquid 

211.7190 Wash Coat 

211.7200 Washoff Operations 

211.7210 Wastewater (Oil/Water) Separator 

211.7230 Weak Nitric Acid Manufacturing Process 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1783

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

211.7250 Web 

211.7270 Wholesale Purchase − Consumer 

211.7290 Wood Furniture 

211.7310 Wood Furniture Coating 

211.7330 Wood Furniture Coating Line 

211.7350 Woodworking 

211.7400 Yeast Percentage 

211.APPENDIX A Rule into Section Table 

211.APPENDIX B Section into Rule Table 

AUTHORITY: Implementing Sections 9, 9.1, 9.9 and 10 and authorized by Sections 27 of the 

Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/9, 9.1, 9.9, 10, 27].

SOURCE: Adopted as Chapter 2: Air Pollution, Rule 201: Definitions, R71-23, 4 PCB 191, 

filed and effective April 14, 1972; amended in R74-2 and R75-5, 32 PCB 295, at 3 Ill. Reg. 5, p. 

777, effective February 3, 1979; amended in R78-3 and 4, 35 PCB 75 and 243, at 3 Ill. Reg. 30, 

p. 124, effective July 28, 1979; amended in R80-5, at 7 Ill. Reg. 1244, effective January 21, 

1983; codified at 7 Ill. Reg. 13590; amended in R82-1 (Docket A) at 10 Ill. Reg. 12624, effective 

July 7, 1986; amended in R85-21(A) at 11 Ill. Reg. 11747, effective June 29, 1987; amended in 

R86-34 at 11 Ill. Reg. 12267, effective July 10, 1987; amended in R86-39 at 11 Ill. Reg. 20804, 

effective December 14, 1987; amended in R82-14 and R86-37 at 12 Ill. Reg. 787, effective 

December 24, 1987; amended in R86-18 at 12 Ill. Reg. 7284, effective April 8, 1988; amended 

in R86-10 at 12 Ill. Reg. 7621, effective April 11, 1988; amended in R88-23 at 13 Ill. Reg. 

10862, effective June 27, 1989; amended in R89-8 at 13 Ill. Reg. 17457, effective January 1, 

1990; amended in R89-16(A) at 14 Ill. Reg. 9141, effective May 23, 1990; amended in R88-

30(B) at 15 Ill. Reg. 5223, effective March 28, 1991; amended in R88-14 at 15 Ill. Reg. 7901, 

effective May 14, 1991; amended in R91-10 at 15 Ill. Reg. 15564, effective October 11, 1991; 

amended in R91-6 at 15 Ill. Reg. 15673, effective October 14, 1991; amended in R91-22 at 16

Ill. Reg. 7656, effective May 1, 1992; amended in R91-24 at 16 Ill. Reg. 13526, effective August 

24, 1992; amended in R93-9 at 17 Ill. Reg. 16504, effective September 27, 1993; amended in 

R93-11 at 17 Ill. Reg. 21471, effective December 7, 1993; amended in R93-14 at 18 Ill. Reg. 

1253, effective January 18, 1994; amended in R94-12 at 18 Ill. Reg. 14962, effective September 

21, 1994; amended in R94-14 at 18 Ill. Reg. 15744, effective October 17, 1994; amended in 

R94-15 at 18 Ill. Reg. 16379, effective October 25, 1994; amended in R94-16 at 18 Ill. Reg. 

16929, effective November 15, 1994; amended in R94-21, R94-31 and R94-32 at 19 Ill. Reg. 

6823, effective May 9, 1995; amended in R94-33 at 19 Ill. Reg. 7344, effective May 22, 1995; 

amended in R95-2 at 19 Ill. Reg. 11066, effective July 12, 1995; amended in R95-16 at 19 Ill. 

Reg. 15176, effective October 19, 1995; amended in R96-5 at 20 Ill. Reg. 7590, effective May 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1784

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

22, 1996; amended in R96-16 at 21 Ill. Reg. 2641, effective February 7, 1997; amended in R97-

17 at 21 Ill. Reg. 6489, effective May 16, 1997; amended in R97-24 at 21 Ill. Reg. 7695, 

effective June 9, 1997; amended in R96-17 at 21 Ill. Reg. 7856, effective June 17, 1997; 

amended in R97-31 at 22 Ill. Reg. 3497, effective February 2, 1998; amended in R98-17 at 22 Ill. 

Reg. 11405, effective June 22, 1998; amended in R01-9 at 25 Ill. Reg. 108, effective December 

26, 2000; amended in R01-11 at 25 Ill. Reg. 4582, effective March 15, 2001; amended in R01-17 

at 25 Ill. Reg. 5900, effective April 17, 2001; amended in R05-16 at 29 Ill. Reg. 8181, effective 

May 23, 2005; amended in R05-11 at 29 Ill. Reg. 8892, effective June 13, 2005; amended in 

R04-12/20 at 30 Ill. Reg. 9654, effective May 15, 2006; amended in R07-18 at 31 Ill. Reg. 

14254, effective September 25, 2007; amended in R08-6 at 32 Ill. Reg. 1387, effective January 

16, 2008; amended in R07-19 at 33 Ill. Reg. 11982, effective August 6, 2009; amended in R08-

19 at 33 Ill. Reg. 13326, effective August 31, 2009; amended in R10-7 at 34 Ill. Reg. 1391, 

effective January 11, 2010; amended in R10-8 at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________.

SUBPART B: DEFINITIONS

Section 211.1000 Class II Finish

"Class II Finish" means a finish that meets the specifications of Voluntary Product Standard PS59-73, as approved by the American National Standards Institute.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.1745 Digital Printing

"Digital Printing" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, the transfer of 

electronic files directly from a computer to an electronically driven output device that prints the 

image directly on the selected media (substrate). Printing using home and office equipment is 

excluded from this definition.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.1878 Electrical Apparatus Component

"Electrical Apparatus Component" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 

219.187, an internal component such as wires, windings, stators, rotors, magnets, contacts, 

relays, energizers, and connections in an apparatus that generates or transmits electrical energy,

including, but not limited to, alternators, generators, transformers, electric motors, cables, and 

circuit breakers, except for the actual cabinet in which the components are housed. Electrical 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1785

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

components of graphic arts application equipment and hot-line tools are also included in this 

category.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.1885 Electronic Component

"Electronic Component" means, for the purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.182(f), and 

219.182(f), 218.187, and 219.187, all portions of an electronic assembly, including, but not 

limited to, circuit board assemblies, printed wire assemblies, printed circuit boards, soldered 

joints, ground wires, bus bars, and associated electronic component manufacturing equipment 

such as screens and filters, except for the actual cabinet in which the components are housed.

(Source: Amended at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.2358 Flat Wood Paneling 

"Flat Wood Paneling" means natural finish hardwood plywood panels, hardwood panels with 

Class II finishes, tileboard, exterior siding, and printed interior panels made of hardwood, 

plywood, or thin particleboard.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.2359 Flat Wood Paneling Coating Line

"Flat Wood Paneling Coating Line" means a coating line in which any protective, decorative, or 

functional coating is applied to flat wood paneling. 

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.2368 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 of these materials. Shrink-wrap 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. Flexible packaging does not include folding cartons, gift wraps, hot stamp foils, wall 

coverings, vinyl products, decorative laminates, floor coverings, or tissue products.
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1786

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.2615 General Work Surface

"General Work Surface" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, an area 

of a medical device or pharmaceutical manufacturing facility where solvent cleaning is 

performed on work surfaces, but for which cleaning specifications are not required to be 

maintained in accordance with criteria and procedures established to meet requirements of the 

United States Food and Drug Administration and/or other applicable regulatory agencies with 

authority over manufacturing operations for medical devices and/or pharmaceuticals. General 

work surfaces shall not include items defined under "Janitorial Cleaning".

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.2830 Heatset

"Heatset" means a class of lithography or letterpress that which requires a heated dryer to 

solidify the printing inks.

(Source: Amended at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.2840 Heatset Web Letterpress Printing Line

"Heatset Web Letterpress Printing Line" means a letterpress printing line in which a continuous 

roll of substrate is fed through the printing press and an oven is used to solidify the printing inks.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.2965 High Precision Optic

"High Precision Optic" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, an 

optical element used in an electro-optical device that is designed to sense, detect, or transmit 

light energy, including specific wavelengths of light energy and changes in light energy levels.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.3215 Janitorial Cleaning
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1787

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

"Janitorial Cleaning" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, the 

cleaning of building or facility components, including, but not limited to, floors, ceilings, walls, 

windows, doors, stairs, bathrooms, furnishings, and exterior surfaces of office equipment, and 

excludes the cleaning of work areas where manufacturing or repair activity is performed. 

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.3305 Letterpress Printing Line

"Letterpress Printing Line" means a web or sheetfed printing line that does not constitute a 

flexographic printing line, in which the image area is raised relative to the non-image area and 

the ink is transferred to the substrate directly from the image surface. 

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.3555 Maintenance Cleaning

"Maintenance Cleaning" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, a 

solvent cleaning operation or activity carried out to ensure that general work areas where 

manufacturing or repair activity is performed remain clean, and to clean tools, machinery, molds, 

forms, jigs, and equipment. This definition does not include the cleaning of coatings, adhesives, 

or ink application equipment.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.3705 Medical Device

"Medical Device" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, an instrument, 

apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent or other similar article, 

including any component or accessory, that meets one or more of the following conditions:

a) it is intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, 

mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease; 

b) it is intended to affect the structure or any function of the body; or

c) it is defined in the National Formulary or the United States Pharmacopeia, or any 

supplement to them.
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1788

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.3707 Medical Device and Pharmaceutical Manufacturing

"Medical Device and Pharmaceutical Manufacturing" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 

218.187 and 219.187, the collection of equipment and activities to prepare, utilize, maintain, and 

repair work areas, in order to accomplish one or more steps in preparing a medical device or 

pharmaceutical for its intended use. Manufacturing is typically, but not always, conducted in 

accordance with criteria and procedures established to meet requirements of the United States 

Food and Drug Administration and/or other applicable regulatory agencies with authority over 

manufacturing operations for global sales of medical devices and/or pharmaceuticals. Work 

areas and equipment shall include all machinery, tools, equipment, rooms, tables, countertops, 

and facilities for maintaining employee health and safety that are subject to such criteria and 

procedures.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.4065 Non-Heatset

"Non-heatset" means a class of lithography or letterpress that which does not require a heated 

dryer to solidify the printing inks. Ultraviolet-cured and electron beam-cured inks are considered 

non-heatset.

(Source: Amended at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.5335 Radiation Effect Coating

"Radiation Effect Coating" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, a 

coating or coating system engineered to interact, through absorption or reflection, with specific 

regions of the electromagnetic energy spectrum, such as the ultraviolet, visible, infrared, or 

microwave regions. Uses include, but are not limited to, lightning strike protection, 

electromagnetic pulse protection, and radar avoidance. Coatings that have been designated 

"classified" by the Department of Defense are not included in this definition.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.5535 Repair Cleaning
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1789

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

"Repair Cleaning" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, a solvent 

cleaning operation or activity carried out during a repair process.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.5585 Research and Development Operation

"Research and Development Operation" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and

219.187, an operation whose purpose is for research and development of new processes and 

products, that is conducted under the close supervision of technically trained personnel, and that 

is not involved in the manufacture of final or intermediate products for commercial purposes, 

except in a de minimis manner. 

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.5860 Scientific Instrument

"Scientific Instrument" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, an 

instrument, including the components, assemblies, and subassemblies used in their manufacture, 

and associated accessories and reagents that are used for the detection, measurement, analysis, 

separation, synthesis, or sequencing of various compounds.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.5875 Screen Printing

"Screen Printing" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, a process in 

which the printing ink passes through a taut screen or fabric to which a refined form of stencil 

has been applied. The stencil openings determine the form and dimensions of the imprint.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.5885 Screen Reclamation

"Screen Reclamation" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, a solvent 

cleaning activity carried out in a screen printing operation in which the screen is completely 

cleaned and the stencil removed for recycling or reuse of the screen for other production runs.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1790

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Section 211.6405 Sterilization Indicating Ink

"Sterilization Indicating Ink" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, an 

ink that changes color to indicate that sterilization has occurred. Such ink is used to monitor the 

sterilization of medical instruments, autoclave efficiency, and the thermal processing of foods for 

prevention of spoilage.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.6425 Stripping

"Stripping" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, the removal of cured 

coatings, cured inks, or cured adhesives. 

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.6535 Surface Preparation

"Surface Preparation" means, for purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, the 

removal of contaminants such as dust, soil, oil, and grease prior to coating, adhesive, or ink 

applications.

(Source: Added at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)

Section 211.7290 Wood Furniture

"Wood furniture" means room furnishings, including cabinets (kitchen, bath and vanity), tables, 

chairs, beds, sofas, shutters, art objects, wood paneling other than flat wood paneling, wood 

flooring and any other coated furnishings made of wood, wood composition or fabricated wood 

materials. 

(Source: Amended at 34 Ill. Reg. ______, effective ____________)
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1791

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

1) Heading of the Part: Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the 

Chicago Area

2) Code Citation: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218

3) Section Numbers: Proposed Action:

218.106 Amend

218.181 Amend

218.187 New

218.204 Amend

218.205 Amend

218.207 Amend

218.210 Amend

218.211 Amend

218.212 Amend

218.217 Amend

218.401 Amend

218.402 Amend

218.403 Amend

218.404 Amend

218.405 Amend

218.406 Repeal

218.407 Amend

218.408 Repeal

218.409 Amend

218.410 Amend

218.411 Amend

218.412 New

218.413 New

218.415 New

218.416 New

218.417 New

4) Statutory authority: Implementing Sections 21, 22, 22.01 and 22.9, and authorized by 

Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/21, 22, 22.01, 22.9, 27]

5) A complete description of the subjects and issues involved: The Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency (Agency) proposed this rulemaking to satisfy Illinois' obligation to 

submit a State Implementation Plan addressing Clean Air Act requirements for sources of 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1792

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

volatile organic material (VOM) emissions in ozone nonattainment areas. The United 

States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued Control Techniques Guidelines 

(CTG) for Group II Consumer and Commercial Product Categories. In the CTG, USEPA 

recommended control measures that it believes constitute reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) for those product categories.

For a more detailed description of this rulemaking, see the Board's January 7, 2010, firstnotice opinion and order: 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. (R10-08)

6) Published studies or reports, and sources of underlying data, used to compose this 

rulemaking: 

The Agency's regulatory proposal included a Technical Support Document, which stated 

that it relied on sources listed below. Copies of the documents the Agency relied upon 

are available for review with the Pollution Control Board.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, 

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

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.

Control Techniques Guidelines: Industrial Cleaning Solvents, United States 

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

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States 

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

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

Technical Support Document for Controlling VOM Emissions from Lithographic 

Printing Operations, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Air Quality Planning 

Section, Springfield, IL, October 1994.

Control Techniques Guideline Series: Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Offset Lithographic Printing (DRAFT), United States Environmental Protection 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1793

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, 

September 1993.

7) Will this rulemaking replace any emergency rulemaking currently in effect? No

8) Does this rulemaking contain an automatic repeal date? No

9) Does this rulemaking contain incorporations by reference? No

10) Are there any other amendments pending on this Part? Yes

Sections Numbers: Proposed Actions: Illinois Register Citation:

218.106 Amended 33 Ill. Reg. 16399; November 20, 2009

218.204 Amended 33 Ill. Reg. 16399; November 20, 2009

218.205 Amended 33 Ill. Reg. 16399; November 20, 2009

218.207 Amended 33 Ill. Reg. 16399; November 20, 2009

218.210 Amended 33 Ill. Reg. 16399; November 20, 2009

218.211 Amended 33 Ill. Reg. 16399; November 20, 2009

218.212 Amended 33 Ill. Reg. 16399; November 20, 2009

218.218 Amended 33 Ill. Reg. 16399; November 20, 2009

11) Statement of Statewide Policy Objectives: This proposed rule does not create or enlarge 

a State mandate, as defined in Section 3(b) of the State Mandates Act [30 ILCS 805/3(b) 

(2008)].

12) Time, Place and Manner in which interested persons may comment on this proposed 

rulemaking: The Board will accept written public comment on this proposal for a period 

of 45 days after the date of this publication. Comments should reference docket R10-08 

and be addressed to:

Clerk's Office

Illinois Pollution Control Board

State of Illinois Center, Suite 11-500

100 W. Randolph St.

Chicago, IL 60601

Address all questions to Tim Fox at 312-814-6085.
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1794

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Interested persons may request copies of the Board's opinion and order by calling the 

Clerk's office at 312-814-3620, or download them from the Board's Web site at 

www.ipcb.state.il.us.

13) Initial regulatory flexibility analysis:

A) Types of small businesses, small municipalities, and not-for-profit corporations 

affected: This rulemaking will impact any small business, small municipality, 

and not-for-profit corporation that falls within one of the Group III Product 

Categories and meets the applicability thresholds specified in the proposed rules.

B) Reporting, bookkeeping or other procedures required for compliance: The 

proposed rules require that the owner or operator of a subject source perform 

emissions monitoring, submit certifications, complete required tests, and maintain 

records and maker reports as required.

C) Types of professional skills necessary for compliance: No professional skills 

beyond those currently required by the existing state and federal air pollution 

control requirements applicable to affected sources will be required.

14) Regulatory Agenda on which this rulemaking was summarized January 2009

The full text of the Proposed Amendments begins on the next page:
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1941

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

1) Heading of the Part: Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Metro 

East Area

2) Code Citation: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 219

3) Section Numbers: Proposed Action:

219.106 Amend

219.181 Amend

219.187 New

219.204 Amend

219.205 Amend

219.207 Amend

219.210 Amend

219.211 Amend

219.212 Amend

219.217 Amend

219.401 Amend

219.402 Amend

219.403 Amend

219.404 Amend

219.405 Amend

219.406 Repeal

219.407 Amend

219.408 Repeal

219.409 Amend

219.410 Amend

219.411 Amend

219.412 New

219.413 New

219.415 New

219.416 New

219.417 New

4) Statutory Authority: Implementing Sections 21, 22, 22.01 and 22.9, and authorized by 

Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/21, 22, 22.01, 22.9, 27]

5) A complete description of the subjects and issues involved: The Illinois Environmental 

Protection Agency (Agency) proposed this rulemaking to satisfy Illinois' obligation to 

submit a State Implementation Plan addressing Clean Air Act requirements for sources of 
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1942

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

volatile organic material (VOM) emissions in ozone nonattainment areas. The United 

States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued Control Techniques Guidelines 

(CTG) for Group II Consumer and Commercial Product Categories. In the CTG, USEPA 

recommended control measures that it believes constitute reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) for those product categories.

For a more detailed description of this rulemaking, see the Board's January 7, 2010, firstnotice opinion and order: 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. (R10-08)

6) Published studies or reports, and sources of underlying data, used to compose this 

rulemaking: The Agency's regulatory proposal included a Technical Support Document, 

which stated that it relied on sources listed below. Copies of the documents the Agency 

relied upon are available for review with the Pollution Control Board.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, 

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

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.

Control Techniques Guidelines: Industrial Cleaning Solvents, United States 

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

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States 

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

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2006.

Technical Support Document for Controlling VOM Emissions from Lithographic 

Printing Operations, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Air Quality Planning 

Section, Springfield, IL, October 1994.

Control Techniques Guideline Series: Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Offset Lithographic Printing (DRAFT), United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, 

September 1993.
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1943

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

7) Will this rulemaking replace any emergency rulemaking currently in effect? No

8) Does this rulemaking contain an automatic repeal date? No

9) Does this rulemaking contain incorporations by reference? No

10) Are there any other rulemaking pending on this Part? Yes

Section Numbers: Proposed Action: Illinois Register Citation

219.106 Amend 33 Ill. Reg. 16460; November 20, 2009

219.204 Amend 33 Ill. Reg. 16460; November 20, 2009

219.205 Amend 33 Ill. Reg. 16460; November 20, 2009

219.207 Amend 33 Ill. Reg. 16460; November 20, 2009

219.210 Amend 33 Ill. Reg. 16460; November 20, 2009

219.211 Amend 33 Ill. Reg. 16460; November 20, 2009

219.212 Amend 33 Ill. Reg. 16460; November 20, 2009

219.218 Add 33 Ill. Reg. 16460; November 20, 2009

11) Statement of Statewide Policy Objectives: This proposed rulemaking does not create or 

enlarge a State mandate, as defined in Section 3(b) of the State Mandates Act [30 ILCS 

805/3(b) (2008)].

12) Time, Place and Manner in which interested persons may comment on this proposed 

rulemaking: The Board will accept written public comment on this proposal for a period 

of 45 days after the date of this publication. Comments should reference docket R10-08 

and be addressed to:

Clerk's Office

Illinois Pollution Control Board

State of Illinois Center, Suite 11-500

100 W. Randolph St.

Chicago, IL 60601

Address all questions to Tim Fox at 312-814-6085.

Interested persons may request copies of the Board's opinion and order by calling the 

Clerk's office at 312-814-3620, or download them from the Board's Web site at 

www.ipcb.state.il.us.
ILLINOIS REGISTER 1944

10

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

13) Initial regulatory flexibility analysis:

A) Types of small businesses, small municipalities, and not-for-profit corporations 

affected: This rulemaking will impact any small business, small municipality, 

and not-for-profit corporation that falls within one of the Group III Product 

Categories and meets the applicability thresholds specified in the proposed rules.

B) Reporting, bookkeeping or other procedures required for compliance: The 

proposed rules require that the owner or operator of a subject source perform 

emissions monitoring, submit certifications, complete required tests, and maintain 

records and maker reports as required.

C) Types of professional skills necessary for compliance: No professional skills 

beyond those currently required by the existing state and federal air pollution 

control requirements applicable to affected sources will be required.

14) Regulatory Agenda on which this rulemaking was summarized: January 2009

The full text of the Proposed Amendments begins on the next page:
A 16
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 17, 2010

* * * * * PC #3 * * * * *

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POI,LUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MAITER 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

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIO-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

NOTICE

To: John Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois 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 FIRST NOTICE COMMENTS OF THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY, a copy ofwhich is herewith served upon you.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By: CZ\e,.rA rt'rd&cit~ Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: February 17,2010

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 17, 2010

* * * * * PC #3 * * * * *

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 211,218, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIO-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

FIRST NOTICE COMMENTS OF THE

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("Illinois EPA"), by its attorney,

respectfully submits its comments in the above rulemaking proceeding regarding first notice,

published on February 5, 2010. (See 34 Ill. Reg. 1766-2086).

The Illinois EPA proposes the following clarifications and corrections to the first notice

version ofthe proposal:

1) In Section 218.187(a)(l), the Illinois EPA recommends inserting the word "at" for

clarification purposes, as set forth below.

Section 218.187 Other Industrial Solvent Cleaning Operations

a) . Applicability. On and after April 1, 201 I:

I) Except as provided in subsection (a)(2) ofthis Section, the requirements of

this Section shall apply to all cleaning operations that use organic

materials &sourees that emit a total of 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibslday) or more of

YOM from cleaning operations at the source, in the absence ofair

pollution control equipment. For purposes ofthis Section, "cleaning

operation" means the process ofcleaning products, product components,

tools, equipment, or general work areas during production, repair,

maintenance, or servicing, including but not limited to spray gun cleaning,

spray booth cleaning, large and small manufactured components cleaning,

parts cleaning, equipment cleaning, line cleaning, floor cleaning, and tank

cleaning, at sources with emission units;
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 17, 2010

* * * * * PC #3 * * * * *

2) In Section 218.205(b)(I), the first notice version of the proposal deletes a slash mark

between "kg" and "I" and inserts an open parenthesis that breaks up the unit ofmeasurement.

The Illinois EPA therefore proposes the following amendment.

b) No owner or operator of a miscellaneous metal parts and products coating line

subject to the limitations of Section 2IS.204U) of this Subpart shall apply coatings

to miscellaneous metal parts or products on the subject coating line unless the

requirements in subsection (b)(I) or (b)(2) ofthis Section are met.

I) For each coating line which applies multiple coatings, all ofwhich are

subject to the same numerical emission limitation within Section

218.204(j) during the same day (e.g., all coatings used on the line are

subject to 0.42 kgLfl (3.5 Ibs/gal)), the daily-weighted average YOM

content shall not exceed the coating YOM content limit corresponding to

the category of coating used, or

3) The first notice version ofthe rule reformats Section 218/219.40] (c)(I), which changes

several internal cross references. The .first notice version, however, does not amend these

references in the appropriate locations. This omission results in references to subsections that no

longer exist (for example, the rule contains references to subsections (c)(I)(C) and (c)(I)(D),

which do not exist pursuant to the first notice format) and references to subsections that no

longer contain the pertinent information (for example, existing references to subsection (c)(I)(B)

should now reference subsection (c)(I)(A)(ii) pursuant to the first notice format). Incorrect

references appear in several fJexographic printing sections/subsections, including Sections

218/219.401 (c)( I), (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), and 218/219.403. To avoid confusion, erroneous

references, and any unintended substantive changes to subsection (c), the Illinois EPA proposes

that the subsection be reformatted consistent with the 111inois EPA's original proposal.

Returning subsection (c) to its original format will resolve the issues set forth above, without

altering any substantive first notice revisions. Alternatively, if the formatting changes set forth

2
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 17, 2010

* * * * * PC #3 * * * * *

in first notice are kept, the Illinois EPA recommends that the internal cross references be

corrected consistent with such changes.

4) In its Motion to Amend Rulemaking Proposal, the Illinois EPA proposed deleting certain

existing language in Section 218/219.404(b)(I)(B) and (d)(I)(D) in response to a request by

industryrepresentatives (See Motion to Amend Rulemaking Proposal, Item Number 6). Such

language still appears in the first notice version ofthe proposal, however. In the event that the

language was mistakenly left in the proposed rule, the Illinois EPA recommends that it be

deleted as follows:

Section 218/219.404(b)(l)(B):

B) Calculations which demonstrate that total maximum theoretical emissions of

YOM from all flexographic and rotogravure printing lines at the source never

exceed 90.7 Mg (100 tons) per calendar year before the application of capture

systems and control devices. Total maximum theoretical emissions ofVOM for a

flexographic or rotogravure printing source is the sum ofmaximum theoretical

emissions ofVOM from each flexographic and rotogravure printing line at the .

source. The following equation shall be used to calculate total maximum

theoretical emissions ofVOM per calendar year before the application of capture

systems and control devices for each flexographic and rotogravure printing line at

the source:

.Ep =AxB+I095(CxDxF}

where:

.Ep = Total maximum theoretical emissions ofVOM from one flexographic or

rotogravure printing line in units ofkglyear (Ibs/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 VOMII (lbs YOM/gal) of coating or ink solids;

B = Total volume ofsolids for all coatings and inks that can potentially be

applied each year on the printing line in units of I/year (gal/year). The

instmment mlElter method by which the owner or operator accurately

3
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 17, 2010

* * * * * PC #3 * * * * *

measured sr 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;

Section 2J8/2J9.404(d)(J)(D):

D) The iAslFlimeAt sr method by which the owner or operator will accurately measure

<*-Calculate the volume, or weight ofsolids, as applicable, of each coating and ink

as applied each day on each printing line.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

BYG»;w Dana Vetterhoffer ~. Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: February 17, 2010

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544

4
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 17, 2010

* * * * * PC #3 * * * * *

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATIER OF:

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 21 1,218, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIO-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, an attorney, state that I have served electronically the attached FIRST

NOTICE COMMENTS OF THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

upon the following person:

John Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois 60601-3218

and electronically to the following persons:

SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST.

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By: 0>,. 11"'- )/d;ftdt~ Dana VetterhoffeT

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLega] Counsel

DATED: February 17,2010

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(2 I7) 782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, February 17, 2010

* * * * * PC #3 * * * * *

Service List RIO-8

Timothy J. Fox

Hearing Officer

lIlinois Pollution Control Board

100 W. Randolph St., Suite 11-500

Chicago, IL 6060 I .

foxt@ipcb.state.il.us

Virginia Yang

Deputy Legal Counsel

llJinois Department ofNatural Resources

One Natural Resources Way

Springfield, IL 62702-i271

virginia.yang@illinois.gov

Matthew Dunn, Chief

Division ofEnvironmental Enforcement

Office ofthe Attorney General

69 W. Washington St., Suite 1800

Chicago, IL 60602

mdunn@atg.state.il.us

Katherine D. Hodge

Monica T. Rios

Hodge Dwyer & Driver

3150 Roland Ave.

P.O. Box 5776

Springfield, IL 62705-5776

khodge@hddattorneys.com

mrios@hddattorneys.com

Alec M. Davis

General Counsel

Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group

215 E. Adams St.

Springfield, IL 62701

adavis@ierg.org
A 17
Mostardi Platt &,~

April 8,2010

~H:CEaVED CLERK'S OFFICe

APR 09 2010

STATE OF IlliNOIS

Pollutmn Control Board

1520 Kensington Road, SUite 204

Oak Brook,llIinois 60523·2139

Phone 630-993-2100

fax 630-993-9017

ww\'v.mostardiplattenv.com

llIinois-Pollution Control Board

John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph Street, Suite 11-500

Chicago, II. 6060I

:'ORIGltv4L

t~ RE: RACT for YOM from Group II Consumer & Commercial Products: Proposed Amendments to

35 IAC 211, 218, and 219

Dear Mr_ Therriault,

As a Chicago area consulting fIrm that provides environmental compliance assistance to several printing

and coating operations within the State ofillinois, we hereby submit the following comments on the

pending amendments to the Parts 211, 218, and 219 (Title 35, IAC) regulations_ We understand that the

rule changes are in the final process ofapproval. We would like our comments to be included as part of

the record, and hope that they are considered prior to taking final actions on the above referenced

regulatory amendments_

In the proposed amendments to parts 218 and 219 there are several locations where the stated compliance

date is listed as May 1,2010. We are not providing specific reference to each occurrence ofthis

compliance date. Rather, this comment applies globally to each OCCurrence. We believe that the timing

for the completion ofthe rule making process will most likely be after the proposed compliance date. We

believe that the Board should consider an alternative compliance date. Considering the length oftime that

has passed since the proposed rule making began, it may have been the intention ofthe Agency to build in

an adequate amount oftime for subject sources to comply with these rule changes. However, it appears

that the rule making process will not be complete by the proposed compliance date for the various

sections ofPart 218 and 219.

The adjusted date ofcompliance should allow time for sources to meet the new rule when it is fmalized.

As the proposed rule amendments stand (TIlinois Register dated February 5, 2010), the sources that are

subject to the various sections in the rule with a compliance date ofMay 1,2010, will have to be in

compliance with the amended Parts 218 and 219 most likely the day that these rule changes become

effective.

Thank you for considering these comments.

Sincerely,

MOSTARDI PLATT ENVIRONMENTAL

rc~';inS? Senior Consultant

Rich Trzupek

Principal Consultant

Lauren Laabs

Principal Consultant
A 18
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, April 26, 2010

* * * * * PC #5 * * * * *

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF:

REASONABLY AVA1LABLE CONTROL

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TO 351L1. ADM. CODE 211,218, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

R10-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

NOTICE

To: John Theniault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, IlIino.is 60601·3218

SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST

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

Board thc COMMENTS OF THE ILLlNOIS ENVJRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, a

copy ofwhich is herewith served upon you.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

BY:~-l~ Dana Vetterhoffer .

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: Apri126,2010

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, April 26, 2010

* * * * * PC #5 * * * * *

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POtLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF:

REASONABLY AvAILABLE CONTROL

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM

GROUP n CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 211, 218, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

R10-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

COMMENTS OF THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("Illinois EPA" or "Agency"), by its

attorney, respectfully submits its comments in the above rulemaking proceeding in response to

comments filed with the Illinois Pollution Control Board ("Board") on April 9, 2010, by

Mostardi PIau Envirorunental ("Mostardi Platt").

In its comments, Mostardi Platt points out that the compliance date set forth in the Illinois

EPA's rulemaking proposal, May 1,2010, will most likely occur before the proposal is adopted

by the Board. The Illinois EPA agrees. Consequently, the Illinois EPA proposes that the

compliance date for the proposed revisions be changed from May 1,2010, to August I, 2010.

As long as second notice begins near the beginning ofMay and ends mid-June, an extension of

the deadline to August I should allow sufficient time for the rule to be finalized. It is important

that the deadline not be extended further, as the ozone season only runs from April through

October.

Such an extension ofthe compliance date should also provide sources enough time to

achieve compliance with the proposed revisions. Potentially affected sources have been on

'notice regarding the Agency's proposal since the rule was initially filed on July 9,2009 (and the

Agency posted a draft ofthe proposed rule on its website on November 5, 2008, almost a year
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, April 26, 2010

* * * * * PC #5 * * * * *

and a half ago). Sources have therefore had adequate opportunity to make any changes

necessary to comply with the Agency's proposal. Indeed, a national printers group has alrcady

been in contact with Agency staff and is preparing information to aid Illinois sources in

complying with this rule.

A short extension ofthe compliance date to August 1,2010, should provide sufficient

time both for the rule to be adopted by the Board, as well as for sources to reach compliance.

Respectfully submitted,

lLLlNOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By: crJ:n;Wtefi£~ Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: April 26, 2010

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217)782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, April 26, 2010

* * * * * PC #5 * * * * *

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 21 I, 218, and 219

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RIO-8

(Rulemaking-Air)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

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

COMMENTS OF THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY upon the

following person:

John Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois 60601-32 I8

and electronically to the following persons:

SEE ATTACHED SERVICE UST.

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

By:C7h.i:lQ,

Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division ofLegal Counsel

DATED: April 26, 2010

1021 N. Grand Ave. East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(217) 782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, April 26, 2010

* * * * * PC #5 * * * * *

Service List R10-8

Timothy J. Fox

Hearing Officer

JIlinois Po.1!ution Control Board

100 W. Randolph SI., 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, lL 62702-1271

virginia.yang@illinois.gov

Matthew Dunn, Chief

Division ofEnvironmental Enforcement

Office ofthe Attorney General

69 W. Washington St., Suite 1800

Chicago, IL 60602

mdunn@atg.state.il.us

Katherine D. Hodge

Monica T. Rios

Hodge Dwyer & Driver

3150 Roland Ave.

P.O. Box 5776

Springfield, IL 62705-5776

khodge@hddattomeys.com

mrios@hddattorneys.com

Alec M. Davis

General Counsel

ll1inois Environmental Regulatory Group

215 E. Adams SI.

Springfield, IL 62701

adavis@ierg.org
A 19
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 6, 2010

IN THE MAITER OF: )

)

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL )

TECHNOLOGY (RACT) FOR VOLATILE )

ORGANIC MATERIAL EMISSIONS FROM )

GROUP II CONSUMER & COMMERCIAL )

PRODUCTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS )

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE211, 218, and 219 )

Proposed Rule. Second Notice.

RIO-08

(Rulemaking - Air)

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by A.S. Moore):

On July 9,2009, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency or Illinois EPA)

filed a proposal under the rulemaking provisions of Sections 27, 28, and 28.2 ofthe

Environmental Protection Act (Act). See 4151LCS 5/27,28,28.2 (2008). On January 7,2010,

the Board adopted its first-notice opinion and order. See 34 Ill. Reg. 1766, 1791, 1941 (Feb. 5,

2010). Generally, the Board proposed air pollution regulations to reduce emissions of volatile

organic material (VOM) from Group II Consumer & Commercial Products in ozone

nonattainment areas classified as moderate and above in order to meet Illinois' obligations under

the Clean Air Act (CAA). Group II products include industrial cleaning solvents, flat wood

paneling coatings, flexible packaging printing materials, lithographic printing materials, and

letterpress printing materials.

In this opinion, the Board first reviews the procedural history ofthis rulemaking before

briefly reviewing federal regulation ofVOM emissions. The Board then summarizes four firstnotice comments. The Board then addresses the issues ofpotentially affected sources, projected

emission reductions, and technical and economic considerations. Next, the Board summarizes its

second-notice proposal on a section-by-section basis. The Board concludes by adopting a

proposal for second-notice review and directs the Clerk to file the proposal with the General

Assembly's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (lCAR). The order following the opinion

then provides the proposed amendments.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On July 9, 2009, the Agency filed a rulemaking proposal to amend Parts 211,218, and

219 ofthe Board's air pollution regulations (Prop. 211, Prop. 2J8, and Prop. 219, respectively).

The Agency filed the proposal under the general rulemaking provisions of Sections 27 and 28 of

the Act. See 415 ILCS 5/27, 28 (2008). Among other documents, a Statement of Reasons (SR)

and a Technical Support Document (TSD) accompanied the proposal. The Agency also filed a

motion for waiver of copy requirements and a motion for expedited review. In an order dated

August 6, 2009, the Board accepted the Agency's proposal for hearing, granted the Agency's

motion for waiver of copy requirements, and denied the Agency's motion for expedited review.
2

In a letter dated August 6, 2009, the Board requcsted that the Department ofCommcrcc

and Economic Opportunity (DCEO) conduct an economic impact study ofthc Agcncy's

rulemaking proposal. See 415 ILCS 5/27(b) (2008). DCEO has not rcspondcd to thc Board's

rcquest.

In an order dated August 12,2009, thc hearing officer scheduled a first hearing to begin

on October 27, 2009, in Edwardsvil]e and a second hearing to begin December 8, 2009, in

Chicago. The order directed participants wishing to pre-file testimony for the first hearing to do

so no later than Scptember 15,2009. The order also directed participants to pre-filc questions

based on pre-filed testimony no later than September 29, 2008. Finally, the order directed

participants whosc pre-filcd testimony elicited pre-filed questions to pre-file written answers to

those questions no later than October 13,2009. The order also provided that pre-filing deadlines

for the second hearing would be set at a later date,

On September ]4,2009, the Agency prc-fiIed the testimony ofMr. David E. Bloomberg

and a motion to amend its rulemaking proposal (Mot. Amend 1), No other participant pre-filed

testimony for the first hearing, and no participant pre-filed questions based on Mr. Bloomberg's

pre-filed testimony, No participant filed a response to the Agency's motion to amend its

rulemaking proposal. In an order datcd October 15,2009, the Board granted the Agency's

motion to amend.

The first hearing took place as scheduled on October 27, 2009, and thc Board receivcd

the transcript ofthe first heating (Tr.l) on October 29, 2009, During the first hearing, thc

hearing officer admitted into the record one exhibit, the pre-filed testimony ofMr. Bloomberg

(Bloomberg Test.),

In an ordcr dated October 28,2009, the hearing officcr directed participants wishing to

pre-file tcstimony for the second hearing to do so no later than November J7,2009, See Tr.l at

25. The order also directed participants to pre-file questions based upon pre-filcd testimony no

later than December 3, 2009, Id,' No participant pre-filed testimony or questions for thc sccond

hcaring,

On December 7, 2009, the Agency filed a second motion to amend its rulemaking

proposal (Mot. Amend 2),

The second hcaring took place as scheduled on Deccmber 8, 2009, and the Board

received the transcript ofthe second hcaring (Tr.2) on Dccember 11,2009, No participant

offered testimony at the second hearing. See Tr.2 at 7. Regarding the Board's rcquest that

DCEO conduct an cconomic impact study ofthe Agency's proposal, no participant wished to

offer testimony or comment. See Tr.2 at 8, In an order dated December 9, 2009, the hearing

officer set a deadline ofDecember 28,2009, to file post-hearing comments. See 35 IlL Adm,

Codc 102.J08(b).
3

On Decembcr 28, 2009, thc Board received a post-hearing commcnt from Mr. Brucc

Mcerman, Senior Environmental Consultant, Mostardi Platt Environmental (Mostardi Platt) (PC

I). On January 19, 2010, Mr. Mecrman filed a second comment (PC 2), which withdrew his

previous comment.

On January 7, 2010, the Board adopted its first-noticc opinion and order. See 34 Ill.

Adm. Code 1766, 1791, 1941 (Fcb. 5, 20 I0). Among other action, that opinion and order

granted the Agency's second motion to amend the rulemaking proposal.

On February 17,2010, the Agency filed a first-notice commcnt (PC 3). On April 9,

20] 0, the Board received a comment signed by three consultants with Mostardi Platt (PC 4). On

April 26, 2010, the Agency filcd an additional comment (PC 5). On April 30, 2010, the Agency

submitted a supplemental comment (PC 6).

BACKGROUND OF FEDERAL YOM REGULATION

When it filed its rulemaking proposal, the Agency stated that the proposal intended to

satisfy Illinois' obligation undcr the CAA to submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP)

addressing requirements for sources ofVOM emissions in areas designated as nonattainment

with the National Ambicnt Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozonc. SR at I, citing 42 U.S.C.

§§ 7502, 7511 a.

The Agency characterized YOM 1 as "a primary precursor to the formation of groundIcvel ozone," which forms whcn YOM reacts with oxides of nitrogen in the atmosphere in thc

prcscncc ofsunlight. SR at 2-3, citing 71 Fed. Reg. 58746 (Oct. 5, 2006); see TSD at 1-2. In

1997, thc Unitcd States Environmcntal Protection Agency (USEPA) reviscd thc NAAQS for

ozone by instituting an 8-hour standard. Id. at 3, citing 62 Fcd. Rcg. 38856 (July 18, 1997).

Two Illinois arcas, Chicago and St. LouisfMetro East, have been designated as modcrate

nonattainment areas for thc 8-hour ozonc standard 2 SR at 3.

Thcse nonattainment designations trigger CAA requirements "for adopting regulations

that reduce emissions sufficiently to dcmonstrate attainment ofthe standard." Id. at 4, citing 42

U.S.c. § 7502(c)(I); see Bloomberg Test at 3. Specifically, the Agcncy claimed that the CAA

requires Illinois "to submit VOC regulations constituting RACT [reasonably available control

technology] for Group II Consumer and Commercial Product Categories in ozone nonattainment

areas classified as moderate and above." SR at 5, citing 42 U.S.c. §§ 7502(c)(I), 751Ia(b)(2);

see TSD at I. The Agency defined RACT "as the lowest emission limitation that a particular

1 The Agency stated that YOM and volatile organic compounds (VOC) are "effectively the

same" as one another. SR at I.

2 The Chicago nonattainment area includes the following jurisdictions: Cook, DuPagc, 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; see TSD at I. The

St. LouisfMetro East nonattainment arca includes the following Illinois counties: Jersey,

Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair. SR at 3, citing 40 C.F.R. 81.314; see TSD at I.
4

source can meet by applying a control technique that is reasonably available considering

technological and economic feasibility." SR at 5, citing 44 Fed. Reg. 53762 (Sept. 17, 1979); see

TSD at I, Bloomberg Test. at 3. The Agency stated that "Illinois was required to submit its SIP

revisions by October 5, 2007." SR at 5.

The Agency stated that the CAA requires USEPA to "conduct a study ofthe emissions of

VOC 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." SR at 2, citing 71 Fed. Reg. 58746 (Oct.

5,2006). The Agency further stated that the CAA provides that "[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 separate those categories

into groups. SR at 3, citing 42 U.S.c. § 75 II b(e)(3)(A).

The Agency claimed that "[t]he CAA requires that USEPA then either regulate VOC

emissions from such categories or issue a CTG [control techniques guideline] 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 ozone levels in ozone

nonattainment areas." SR at 4, citing 42 U.S.c. § 7511 b(e)(3)(C). The Agency stated that

"CTGs provide states with recommendations regarding what types of controls could constitute

RACT for VOCs for the applicable source categories." SR at 4, citing 71 Fed. Reg. 58745,

58747 (Oct. 5,2006). The Agency claimed that "[s]tates must either adopt regulations to

implement the recommendations in the CTG or adopt alternative approaches that constitute

RACT, either of which must be submitted to the USEPA for review and approval as part ofthe

SIP process." SR at 4, citing 71 Fed. Reg. 58745, 58747 (Oct. 5, 2006).

The Agency stated that, instead of national regulations controlling VOC emissions,

"USEPA issued final CTGs for Group II Consumer and Commercial Product Categories" on

October 5, 2006. SR at 4. The Agency further stated that, in developing the CTGs, "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." TSD at

I. The Agency indicated that "USEPA required that states submit SIP revisions in response to

the CTGs within one year." Id., citing 71 Fed. Reg. 58745-53 (Oct. 5, 2006). Specifically, the

Agency stated that JIlinois must revise its SIP to include RACT for sources ofVOM emissions

covered by a USEPA CTG issued between November 15, 1990 and the date of attainment. SR at

2, citing 42 U.S.c. § 7511a(b)(2); see TSD at 1, Bloomberg Test. at 3.

The Agency stated that "Illinois is required to submit these SIP revisions before the

USEPA can re-designate the Chicago and Metro East nonattainment areas as attaining the 1997

ozone NAAQS, regardless of whether the VOC reductions obtained by the SIP revisions are

actually nccessary to achieve attainment ofthe NAAQS." SR at 6, citing Wall v. USEPA, 265

F.2d 426, 433, 440-42 (6th Cir. 2001); 42 U.S.C. § 7407(d)(3)(E). The Agency noted 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." SR at 7. The Agency further noted

that, on March 19,2009, it submitted an attainment demonstration for the Chicago nonattainment
5

area. ld. The Agency argued that "[t]hese areas cannot be re-designated to attainment ofthe

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." ld. The Agency claimed 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.

The Agency also noted that USEPA recently strengthened the eight-hour ozone standard.

SR at 7, citing 73 Fed. Reg. 16436 (Mar. 27, 2008); see TSD at I. The Agency considered it

"likely" that areas designated as nonattainment for the current standard will be designated

nonattainment for the revised standard. SR at 7. The Agency argued that, "[w]hile attainment of

the revised standard is not the purpose ofthis rulemaking, it should be noted that any reduction

in VOM emissions in the nonattainment areas resulting from these proposed amendments will

likely help Illinois achieve the revised NAAQS." ld.; see TSD at I.

SUMMARY OF FIRST-NOTICE COMMENTS

Agency (PC 3)

On February 17, 20 I0, the Agency filed a first-notice comment addressing four issues.

First, the Agency recommended inserting the word "at" for clarification of proposed Section

218.187(a)(1). PC 3 at 1. Specifically, the Agency proposed that the first sentence ofthat

subsection provide that, "[e]xcept as provided in subsection (a)(2) ofthis Section, the

requirements ofthis Section shall apply to all cleaning operations that use organic materials at

sources that emit a total of6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day) or more ofVOM trom cleaning operations at

the source, in the absence of air pollution control equipment." ld.

The Board notes that its first-notice opinion and order includes this term (Reasonably

Available Control Technology (RACT) for Volatile Organic Material Emissions from Group Jl

Consumer and Commercial Products: Proposed Amendments to 35 m. Adm. Code 21 I, 218,

and 219, RIO-8, slip op. at 77 (Jan. 7,2010», although it is not reflected in first-notice

publication in the Illinois Register (34 III. Reg. 1806 (Feb. 5,2010». Accordingly, the Board

readily concurs with the Agency's recommendation and amends proposed Section 217.187(a)(1)

as suggested. See PC 3 at 1.

Second, the Agency's comment notes that, "[i]n Section 218.205(b)(1), the first notice

version ofthe proposal deletes a slash mark between 'kg' and 'I' and inserts an open parenthesis

that break up the unit of measurement." PC 3 at 2. The Agency specifically proposes the

following amendment for subsection (I):

I) For each coating line which applies multiple coatings, all ofwhich arc

subject to the same numerical emission limitation within Section

218.2040) during the samc day, (e.g, all coating used on the line are

subject to 0.42 kglfl {3.5 Ibs/gal)), the daily-weighted average YOM

content shall not exceed the coating YOM content limit corresponding to

the category of coating used, or ... ld.
6

The Board notes that its first-notice opinion and order is consistent with the Agency's

comment (Reasonably Available Control Technologv (RACT) for Volatile Organic Material

Emissions from Group II Consumer and Commercial Products: Proposed Amendments to 35 III.

Adm. Code 211, 21S, and 219, RI O-S, slip op. at 9S (Jan. 7, 20 I0)), Accordingly, the Board

concurs with the Agency's proposal and amends proposed Section 2IS.205(b)(]) as published

for first notice (34 Ill. Reg. IS31 (Feb. 5, 2010)). See PC 3 at 2,

Third, the Agency notes that "[t]he first notice version ofthe rule reformats Section

2ISI219.401(c), which changes several internal cross references," PC 3 at 2. The Agency

argues that "[t]he first notice version, however, does not amend these references in the

appropriate locations." Jd. The Agency claims that this failure to amend

results in references to subsections that no longer exist (for example, the rules

contains references to subsections (c)(I)(C) and (c)(I)(D), which do not exist

pursuant to the first notice format) and references to subsections that no longer

contain the pertinent information (for example, existing references to subsection

(c)(I)(B) should now reference subsection (c)(I)(A)(ii) pursuantto the first notice

format). Jd.

The Agency also claims that "[i]ncorrect references appear in several flexographic printing

sections/subsections, including Sections 21S/219.401(c)(I), (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), and

2ISI219.403," Id. The Agency suggests that Section 21S/2I9.401(c) follow the format in its

original proposal "[t]o avoid confusion, erroneous references, and any unintended substantive

changes to subsection (c)." Id. In the event that the Board maintains the first-notice reformatting, the Agency "recommends that the internal cross references be corrected consistent

with such changes," Id, at 2-3.

The Board notes that its first-notice opinion and order is consistent with the Agency's

original rulemaking proposal. See Reasonably Available Control Technologv (MCT) for

Volatile Organic Material Emissions from Group Jl Consumer and Commercial Products:

Proposed Amendments to 35111. Adm. Code 21 I, 2]S, and 219, RIO-S, slip op, at 12S-29 (Jan, 7,

20 I0); Prop. 21S at 62-63; Prop. 219 at 61-62. The Board further notes that first-notice

publication reflects a re-formatting of Section 21S/2 I9.40 I(c)(I), 34 llJ. Reg. IS66-67, 2013

(Feb. 5, 2010), Although it notes the Agency's comment on this issue, the Board finds that this

re-formatting clarifies the subsection. Accordingly, the Board in its order below corrects internal

cross references to Section 2181219.40 I(c)(I) so that they are consistent with this re-formatting,

Fourth, the Agency notes that its motion to amend its rulemaking proposal "proposed

deleting certain existing language in Section 2 I8/219.404(b)(I )(B) and (d)(1 )(0) in response to a

request by industry representatives," PC 3 at 3, citing Mot. Amend I at 4-5 ('iI6) (deleting

references to measurement by instruments). The Agency states that "[s]uch language still

appears in the first notice version ofthe proposal, however." PC 3 at 3; see 34111. Reg. 1872-73,

1876, 20 I9-20, 2023 (Feb, 5, 20 I0). The Agency thus recommends a specific amendment to the

key to the equation in proposed Section 2IS/219.404(b)(1 )(B):
7

B Total voh.)me ofsol ids for all coatings and inks that can potentially be applied

each year on the printing Iine in units oflIyear (gal/year). The iAslrul11enl anEi/er

method by which the owner or operator aceurately measureEi er 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. PC 3 at 3-4.

The Agency also recommends a specific amendment to subsection 218/21 9.404(d)( I)(0): "The

iflstrulHenl or method by which the owner or operator will accurately measure or calculate the

volume, or weight ofsolids, as applicable, of each coating and ink as applied each day on each

printing line." PC 3 at 4.

The Board notes that its first-notice opinion and order is consistent with the Agency's

proposed amendments (Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for Volatile Organic

Material Emissions from Group II Consumer and Commercial Products: Proposed Amendments

to 35 III. Adm. Code 21 1. 218, and 219, RIO-8, slip op. at 134, 137,250,252 (Jan. 7, 2010)).

Accordingly, the Board concurs with the Agency's recommendations and amends proposed

Sections 2I8/219.404(b)(1 )(B) and (d)(1 )(0) as published for first notice (34 Ill. Reg. 1873-73,

1876,2019-20,2023 (Feb. 5, 2010)). See PC 3 at 2.

Mostardi Platt Environmental Consultants (PC 4)

On April 9, 2010, the Board received a comment on behalf ofMostardi Platt signed by

three consultants: Timothy Kinsley, Senior Consultant; Rich Trzupek, Principal Consultant; and

Lauren Laabs, Principal Consultant. The comment indicates that Mostardi Platt is "a Chicago

area consulting firm that provides environmental compliance assistance to several printing and

coating operations within the State of Illinois...." PC 4 at 1.

The comment notes that the Agency's proposed amendments to Parts 218 and 219

include a number of provisions establishing a compliance deadline of May I, 2010. PC 4 at 1.

The comment claims that "the sources that are subject to the various sections in the rule with a

compliance date ofMay 1,2010, will have to be in compliance with the amended Parts 218 and

219 most likely the day that these rule changes becomes effective." Id.

Although the comment acknowledges that the Agency may have intended to allow

sufficient time for affected entities to comply with the proposed rules, it suggests that final

adoption ofthe rules cannot take place by the proposed compliance deadline ofMay 1,2010. Id.

The comment claims that "the Board should consider an alternative compliance date." Id.

Although the comment does not specifically propose one, it argues that an "adjusted date of

compliance should allow time for sources to meet the new rule when it is finalized." Id.

Agency (PC 5, PC 6)

On April 26, 2010, the Agency responded to the comment filed on behalfofMostardi

Platt. First, the Agency agrees that its proposed compliance deadline ofMay 1, 20 I0, "will most

likely occur before the proposal is adopted by the Board." PC 5 at I. The Agency then
8

"proposes that the compliance date for the proposed revisions be changed from May 1,2010, to

August 1, 20 I0." ld. The Agency argucs that this 3-month extension "should allow sufficient

time for the rule to be finalized." ld. The Agency further argues that "[i]t is important that the

deadline not be extended further, as the ozone season only runs from April through October." ld.

The Agency also claims that such a 3-month extension should "provide sources enough

timc to achieve compliance with the proposed revisions." PC 5 at 1. The Agency notes that it

first posted a draft of its proposed regulations on its Web site on November 5,2008, nearly 18

months ago. ld. The Agency further notes that "[p]otentially affected sources have been on

notice regarding the Agency's proposal since the rule was initially filed on July 9, 2009...." ld.

The Agency argues that "[s]ources have therefore had adequate opportunity to make any changes

necessary to comply with the Agency's proposal." Jd. at 2. The Agency states that it has already

communicated with a national printers group "preparing information to aid Illinois sources in

complying with this rule." ld.

On April 30, 2010, the Agency submitted to the Board a supplemental comment noting

that the Agency had recommended extending the compliance deadline to August 1, 2010. PC 6

at I; see PC 5 at ]. The Agency stated that, "while May I is the compliance date for the majority

ofthe rule revisions, the compliance date for the industrial cleaning solvent section

(218/219.187) is April I, 2011." PC 6 at 1. The Agency sought to clarify "that the Agency's

comment was only intended to address references to the May I, 201 0, compliance date. In other

words, the Agency is not recommending that the 2011 compliance date for solvents be

shortened." ld. Accordingly, the Board concurs that the compliance deadlines ofMay 1, 2010

should be extended to August I, 2010, while the compliance date for the industrial cleaning

solvent provisions at Section 218/219.187 should remain April 2, 2011.

AFFECTED SOURCES AND PROJECTED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS

The Agency stated that its proposed regulations apply only within the Chicago and Metro

East regions, the state's two areas designated as nonattainment for the eight-hour ozone NAAQS.

SR at 9, citing 40 C.F.R. 81.3 I4. Specifically, the Agency stated that, within those two areas, the

regulations "are generally expected to affect both new and existing sources that are covered by a

Group II CTG" and that meet the proposed applicability criteria. SR at 9. In Appendix B to its

TSD, the Agency listed 136 potentially affected sources itemized by category and then by NAA

within those categories. TSD at 25-28 (Appendix B).

The Board addresses the record with regard to potentially affected sources and projected

emission reductions on a category-by-category basis in the following subsections.

Industrial Cleaning Solvents

The Agency noted USEPA's estimate that 130 sources in Illinois' two nonattainment

areas emit a total of 15 pounds per day (PPD) or more of YOM from cleaning operations at the

source. TSD at 14 ('lf4.4), 20 ('lf6.4); see Prop. 218 at 4 (proposed Section 218.187(a)(I)

addressing applicability). Responding to a question at the first hearing, the Agency indicated

that its proposed regulations apply to "anybody who uses this amount of industrial cleaning
9

solvents" and not only to the operations included in Group II Consumer and Commercial Product

categories. Tr.1 at 10. The Agency argued that, because it does not generally seek specific

information on solvent use and because that use may not be subject to a current permit, "there

was no good way to make an estimale as to who might be affected... " Jd. at I I. Accordingly,

the Agency stated that its "Appendix B does not list specific sources that are potentially affected

by this rulemaking." Jd; see TSD at 25-28 (Appendix B). The Agency stated that it intends to

communicate with small business owners, industry representatives, and DCEO through the

process of considering and implementing these proposed rules. Tr.1 at I I.

The Agency stated that baseline emissions from the 130 sources noted by USEPA are

estimated to be 2293 MG/yr (2528 tpy) of YOM. TSD at 14, 20. The Agency further stated that

this estimate includes "degreasing operations that are already impacted by existing state

regulations and will not gain any further reductions." Jd. The Agency argued that "[i)t 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 NAA that uses cleaning solvent is

potentially affected, depending on the source's usage level." TSD at 20-21; see Tr.1 at 9-11.

The Agency also claimed that potentially affected sources may already be using solutions that

comply with the proposed regulations. !d. at 21. Accordingly, "the Agency believes that the

environment will sec actual YOM emission reductions due to these proposed regulations, but

calculation ofsuch emission reductions cannot be accomplished without detailed information

from every affected source." TSD at 2 I.

Flat Wood Paneling Coatings

The Agency's search ofthe 2005 source inventory maintained by its Bureau of Air

indicated that four sources, all in the Chicago NAA, would become subject to the proposed flat

wood paneling coating regulations. TSD at 21 (§6.5). The Agency stated that "[0)ne ofthese

four sources would appear to fall below the proposed applicability threshold" and that "[t)he

other three total 0.09 TPD of YOM emissions." Jd. The Agency claimed that the CTG projects

YOM emission reductions averaging 60 percent from interior paneling and tileboard

manufacturing. Jd. Stating that the Illinois sources appear to fall within these two categories, the

Agency "estimates a YOM reduction of 0.05 TPD in the Chicago NAA...." Jd

Flexible Packaging Printing Lines

The Agency stressed difficulties in estimating emission reductions in this category. First,

the Agency stated that "the Illinois source database does not generally specify the type of

substrate being used by a flexographic or rotogravure printing operation." TSD at 20 (§6.3).

The Agency further stated that the data also do not "specify the date of original installation ofthe

printing press or the associated control device." Jd. Accordingly, the Agency listed as a

potentially affected source each existing flexographic or rotogravure printing facility in the

Illinois inventory and exceeding the proposed applicability threshold. Jd.; see id. at 27-28

(Appendix B).

The Agency emphasized, however, that "all sources but one using flexographic or

rotogravure printing of any type are already achieving greater control efficiency than required by
10

the proposed regulation." TSD at 20. The Agency stated that the single remaining source "is

required by its perm it to achieve 60 percent control efficiency, but will now need to achieve 65

percent." fd. The Agency claimed that this represcnts a reduction of 0.03 TPO in permitted

emissions, "but a 0.0 I TPO rcduction according to em issions information in the inventory." ld.

The Agency expected negligible emission reductions from proposed new ink limits. TSO

at 20. The Agency stated that, "[w]hile the inventory does not provide information regarding thc

use of compliant inks, it has becn the Agcncy's cxperience that sources printing on flexible

packaging have had difficulty with the use of compliant YOM inks on such substrates." ld. The

Agency reported that "[s]ources cither relied on add-on controls or switched to water-based inks

that should meet the newly proposed requirements as well as the existing ones." !d.

Regarding proposed work practice standards for cleaning materials, the Agency argued

that they "do not lend themselves to a calculation of emission reductions." TSO at 20. Thc

Agency claimed that actual YOM emission reductions will result from requiremcnts such as

"storing of cleaning materials and used shop towels in closed containers, as well as conveying

cleaning materials in closed containers or pipes...." !d. The Agency argued, however, that

"calculation ofsuch emission rcductions cannot be accomplished without detailed infonnation

from every affected source -- both before and after such changes are made." fd.

Lithographic Printing Lines

The Agency first stated that it "does not expect any additional [emission] reductions from

increasing the required control efficiency for heatset web lithographic printers from 90 to 95

percent, becausc that change will not affect existing control devices." TSD at 18 (§6.1). Thc

Agency did expect "some small YOM reductions related to the addition offountain and cleaning

solution requircments for sources with IS PPO or more of emissions." ld. The Agency claimed

that it is difficult to estimate these reductions because it is not possible to idcntify sources that

may be excluded from thc proposed requirements. ld. The Agency elaborated that its source

invcntory "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...." ld.

The Agency's search ofthe 2005 source inventory maintained by its Bureau of Air

indicated that 98 Iithographic printing sources in the Chicago NAA and three in the Metro East

NAA have YOM emission over 15 PPO. TSD at 18. The Agency reported that 66 of the sources

in thc Chicago NAA and all three ofthe sources in the Metro East NAA emit less than 100 PPO

and are potentially affected by thc proposed regulations. ld.

For these potentially affected sources, the Agency estimated potential cmission

reductions attributable to reformulation offountain solutions at between 25% and 90% for

smaller sources. TSD at 19. Because this estimate is based on a 1993 draft CTG, and because

the current CTG refers to steps reducing the YOM content offountain solutions, the Agency

relied on the 25% estimate in calculating reductions. ld. The Agency argued that "[c]Ieaning

solutions can be calculated as a straight 30% reduction, since the regulation requires

reformulation such that they cannot contain more than 70% YOM. " ld. With regard to cleaning

solutions emissions, the Agency claimed that they "make up a lower percentage of emissions
1I

compared to fountain solutions, ranging up to approximately 50% at certain facilities." Jd. The

Agency argued that, "[a]ssuming that almost 50% of non-ink emissions come from cleaning

solutions, which have 30% reduction, it is safe to use a 25% overall emission reduction to cover

all YOM originating from the source." Jd.

The Agency stated that total YOM emissions from the 66 potentially affected sources in

the Chicago NAA equal 1.455 TPD. TSD at 19. Accordingly, a 25% reduction represents 0.36

TPD of YOM. Jd. The Agency further stated that, in the Metro East NAA, a 25% reduction

from total emissions of 0.0295 TPD represents a reduction of 0.007 TPD. Jd.

Letterpress Printing

Because the Agency believed that there are no heatset web letterpress printing operations

in the two NAAs, it expected no emission reductions from add-on controls for this category.

TSD at 19 (§6.2). The Agency's search ofthe 2005 source inventory maintained by its Bureau

ofAir indicated that there are two sources in the Chicago NAA using letterpress printing. Jd.

The Agency stated that "[0]nly one of these sources appears to emit more than 15 PPD from such

operations, with less than 0.02 TPD ofYOM, including emissions from the letterpress as well as

other printing operations." Jd. Thc Agency argued that, "[e]ven if all ofthe emissions originated

from letterpress cleaning solutions, which are to be reduced by 30 percent, thc resulting

reduction would be 0.005 TPD. !d. Accordingly, the Agency expccted only "negligible"

emission reduction from proposed regulations for this category. Jd

TECHNICAL FEASIBILTY AND ECONOMIC REASONABLENESS

Technical Feasibility

Particularly in its Tcchnical Support Document, thc Agency addressed various

approaches to controlling YOM emissions from Group II product categories. See TSD at 7-12

(Technical Feasibility ofControls). The Agency argued that "[a]ffcetcd sources can mcct the

requirements in the proposed amendments through a number of readily available control

techniques." SR at 9. In the subsections below, the Board addresses the record on the issue of

thc tcchnical feasibility ofthose techniqucs.

Industrial Cleaning Solvents

Thc Agency noted the recommendation ofthe CTG that sources emitting more than 15

PPD ofYOM through industrial cleaning comply with various rcquirements. TSD at 10 (§3.4),

citing Control Techniqucs Guidelines: Industrial Cleaning Solvents, Unitcd States

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

2006. The Agency stated that the various cleaning activities "use a multitude of different

solvents with different styles of applications." TSD at 10. The Agency proposed regulations

covering "a wide range of products that remove contaminants from parts, products, tools,

machinery, and other work production areas." Jd. The Agency stressed work practices, solvent

substitution, and controls as the chieftcchniques for reducing YOM emissions in this category.

Jd. at 10-11; SR at 10.
12

Work Practices. The Agency indicated that solvent management practices can reduce

YOM emissions. TSD at 10. The Agency stated that these 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." Jd.; see

Prop. 218 at 9 (proposed Section 218.187(d)), Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section 219.187(d)).

Alternate Control. The Agency stated that add-on controls, equipment modification,

and changing cleaning methods all can reduce YOM emissions. TSD at 11. The Agency further

stated that "[t]he CTG recommends an overall control efficiency of 85 percent rcduction in

emissions of YOM, which is reflected in the proposed rule." Jd.; see Prop. 218 at 8 (proposed

Section 2l8.187(b)(3)), Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section 219.1 87(b)(3)).

Solvent Substitution. The Agency noted that the CTG recommends the use oflow

vapor pressure solvents because "the slower evaporation reduces the amount of YOM released

into the atmosphere." TSD at 1I. The Agency stated that its proposal reflects the recommended

limit of 8 mm Hg at 20 degrees Celsius in place of 50 grams ofYOM per liter of cleaning

material. Jd.; see Prop. 218 at 8 (proposed Section 218.1 87(b)(2)), Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed

Section 219.187(b)(2)).

The Agency claimed that sources can also reduce YOM emissions through the use of

low-YOM or no-YOM solvents. TSD at 10. The Agency noted that "[t]he CTG recommends a

content limit of 50 grams YOM per liter (0.42 Ib/gal) of cleaning material for those industries

that are not already covered, or to be covered, by a CTG." !d, citing Control Techniques

Guidelines: Industrial Cleaning Solvents, United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006. Specifically, the Agency stated

that the CTG proposes to exclude "certain categories from the cleaning regulations, as these

categories already have or will have their own recommended work practices and limitations."

TSD at II. The Agency further stated that

[t]hese 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." Jd., see Prop. 218 at 5-6 (proposed Section

218.187(a)(2)(B)), Prop. 219 at 4-5 (proposed Section 219.1 87(a)(2)(B)).

The Agency also stated that, as a result of discussions with industry, other states, and USEPA, it

proposed to add additional "exemptions and higher YOM content limits for certain specific

cleaning activities." TSD at 10. The Agency suggested that it offers these additional exemptions

for categorics that may not be able easily to meet proposed YOM content limits. Jd. at 11.

These exemptions
13

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 recommendation include cleaning of paper-based gaskcts and clutch

assemblies; cleaning of adhesive application equipment used for thin metal

laminating; touch-up cleaning on circuit boards; cleaning of coating and adhesive

application processes utilized to manufacture transdermal drug delivery product

using less than three gallons per day of ethyl acetate; cleaning of application

equipment used to apply coatings on satellites and radiation effect coatings;

cleaning of application equipment used to apply solvent-borne fluoropolymer

coatings; cleaning of ultraviolet or electron beam adhesive application; and

cleaning of electrical cables. [d. at 11-12; see Prop. 218 at 6-7 (proposed Section

218. I87(a)(2)(C)), Prop. 219 at 5-6 (proposed Section 219.187(a)(2)(C).

Flat Wood Paneling Coating Lines

The Agency stated that the CTG refers to three options for controlling YOM emissions

from flat wood paneling coating operations: material reformulation, add-on controls, or work

practices. TSD at 12 (§3.5); SR at 10.

Material Reformulation. The Agency stated that refonnulation involves replacing highYOM coatings with low-YOM coatings. TSD at 12. Citing the CTG, the Agency argued that

"water-based coatings 'are generally available' and 'can lower [YOM] emissions greatly, and

most coatings operations are capable of converting to waterborne coatings.'" !d., citing Control

Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006. The Agency

further argued that sources can reformulate by using "coatings that emit almost zero YOM and

are cured through the use of ultraviolet light or an electron beam." TSD at 12. The Agency

acknowledged that "[t]he use ofsuch systems are more limited than those for waterbased

coatings, but they are available." ld.

Add-On Controls. The Agency claimed that, when a source uses high-YOM coatings, it

can used add-on controls. TSD at 12. Citing its experience with a range of coating operations,

the Agency agreed with the CTG that "an overall control and capture efficiency 01'90 percent is

a widely-accepted and readily available technique" [d., citing Control Techniques Guidelines

for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006.

Work Practices. The Agency noted that

[t]he 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[VOM] containing coatings,

thinners, cleaning up spills immediately, conveying any coatings, thinners, and
14

cleaning materials in closed containers or pipes, closing mixing vessels which

contain [YOM] coatings and other materials except when specifically in use, and

minimizing emissions of [YOM] during cleaning ofstorage, mixing, and

conveying equipment." TSD at 12, citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat

Wood Paneling Coatings. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office

of Air Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006.

The Agency stated that Illinois has already adopted some ofthese requirements through

regulations for wood furniture coaters. TSD at 12. The Agency further stated that its proposal

will apply those requirements and other specific requirements to flat wood paneling coaters in

order to "minimize unnecessary YOM emissions from such operations." !d.

Flexible Packaging Printing Lines

The Agency stated that YOM emissions from flexible package printing operations stem

largcly from evaporation of inks, coatings, and adhesives, and from the use of cleaning materials.

TSD at 9 (§3.3). The Agency argued that these emissions can be controlled through material

reformulation, add-on controls, and work practices. ld. at 9-10; see SR at 10.

Material Reformulation. This control substitutes high-YOM inks, coatings, and

adhesives with low-YOM versions ofthose materials. TSD at 9. Citing the CTG, the Agency

argued that "such reformulation 'has been achieved by any facilities in the packaging

rotogravure and flexographic printing industries.'" ld., citing Control Techniques Guidelines for

Flexible Package Printing, United State Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, September 2006. The Agency acknowledged that "[w]hether a

particular facility is able to use such reformulated material depends upon their specific activities,

including the substrate(s) being used." TSD at 9.

Add-On Controls. The Agency stated that all flexible packaging printers can use add-on

controls. TSD at 9. The Agency argued that "[t]he most common control devices used by these

sources are thermal oxidizers, catalytic oxidizers, and carbon adsorbers, with adsorbers probably

being the least-used ofthe three." ld. The Agency agreed with the CTG that "[t]oday, these

control devices can achieve at least 95 percent control device efficiency." ld., citing Control

Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing. United State Environmental Protection

Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006.

The Agency also described capture systems, which collect air containing YOM "so it

may be destroyed or reclaimed by the control device... ." TSD at 9. The Agency noted that,

"[w]hile new presses may be able to obtain as high as 100 percent capture if designed properly,

older presses were not necessarily constructed with emissions capture in mind." ld. The Agency

proposed a tiered approach to capture efficiency based on the construction date ofthe printing

line and the control device. !d.; see Prop. 218 at 63-64 (proposed Section 21 8.401 (c)(3)), Prop.

219. at 62 (proposed Section 219.401(c)(3)).

Work Practices. The Agency noted that the CTG "recommends work practice

requirements as the best means to control emissions from cleaning operations at flexible package
15

printing sources." TSD at 10. The Agency listed some ofthese practices: "keeping solvent

containers closed except when filling, draining or conducting cleaning operations, kceping used

shop towels in closed containers, and conveying cleaning materials from one location to another

in closed containers or pipes." lei., citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package

Printing. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and

Standards, September 2006.

Lithographic Printing Lines

The Agency addressed three options for regulating YOM emissions from lithographic

printing lines: add-on controls, fountain solution reformulation and process modification, and

material reformulation or substitution for cleaning solutions. TSD at 7-8 (§3.1); see SR at 10.

Add-On Controls. The Agency stated that add-on controls apply only to heatset web

offset lithographic printing and not to non-heatset or sheet-fed lithographic printing. TSD at 7.

The Agency further stated that these add-on controls fall into two broad categories: combustion

control devices "designed to destroy YOMs in the vent strcam prior to atmospheric discharge"

and recovery devices that "limit YOM emissions by recovering material for reuse." lei. The

Agency indicated that heatset web offset lithographic printers use three add-on controls: thermal

afterburners, catalytic afterburners, and condenser filter systems. /d. The Agency's experience

led it to conclude "that the field is dominated by thermal and catalytic afterburners, which can

often achieve 98 percent or greater YOM removal." lei. The Agency also reported that condenser

filter systems have been designed specifically for heatset wcb offset printers with efficiency as

high as 97 percent removal. lei.

Fountain Solution Reformulation and Process Modifications. The Agency argued

that "[a] significant portion of YOM emissions from lithographic printing can be ascribed to

evaporation from fountain solutions." TSD at 8. The Agency stated that substitutes reduce or

replace alcohol in fountain solutions. lei. The Agency further stated that the substitutes have

lower volatility and reduce emissions. lei.

The Agency characterized process modifications as "changes in operational methods or

equipment resulting in improved YOM controL" TSD at 8. The Agency named cooling fountain

solution to minimize evaporation as one process modification that reduces YOM emissions. lei.

The Agency claimed that the use ofrefrigerated circulators to cool fountain solution "has been

shown to reduce consumption ofalcohol in the solution by as much as 44 percent." /d.

Although process modification may involve retrofitting or rcplacing existing equipment, the

Agency "does not expect retrofitting or replacement to be an issue with this rulemaking." lei.

Material Reformulation or Substitution for Cleaning Solutions. The Agency

described two reformulations to reduce YOM emissions from cleaning solutions. First, sources

can use solutions containing a smaller amount of YOM. TSD at 8. Current Illinois regulations

now limit these solutions to no more than 30 percent YOM by weight. lei.; see 35 III. Adm. Code

218.407(a)(4)(A)(i); 35111. Adm. Code 219.407(a)(4)(A)(i). The Agency reported that, "[w]hile

no problems with this limit have been reported to Agency personnel in 1Ilinois, there have

apparently been complaints on a national level." TSD at 8. The Agency noted that "the CTG
16

now recommends limiting such solutions to 70 percent YOM." ld., citing Control Techniques

Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing. United States

Environmental Protection Agcncy, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, September

2006. The Agency proposed to apply "this higher lim it for sources between 15 and 100 pounds

per day (PPD), with the previous limit remaining in effect for larger sources," TSD at 8; see

Prop. 218 at 88 (proposed Section 218.407(a)(4)(A)); Prop. 219 at 87 (proposed Section

219.407(a)(4)(A)).

Second, the Agency reported that sources can rely on cleaning solution with a low vapor

pressure, TSD at 8. Citing the CTG, the Agency stated that "[c]leaning solutions with [YOM]

composite vapor pressure less than I0 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) at 20°C have been used

successfully by many printers for blanket washing and other cleaning activities. Id., citing

Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, United

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

September 2006. The Agency further stated that, before I1Iinois adopted its previous

lithographic printing rules, USEPA determined that the use ofsuch materials results in emission

reductions comparable "to using cleaning materials that contain less than 30 weight percent

YOM." TSD at 8, Because the Agency believes that sources now use these materials without

difficulty, it proposed not to amend the limit but to apply it to smaller sources. Id.; see Prop. 218

at 79 (proposed Section 218.405(c)(3)(C); Prop. 219 at 78 (proposed Section 219.405(c)(3)(C).

Letterpress Printing

The Agency stated that the sources of YOM emissions ITom letterpress printing are

similar to those for lithographic printing, except "that letterpress operations do not use a fountain

solution." TSD at 9; SR at 10, The Agency further stated that "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," particularly

with regard to cleaning solutions. TSD at 9.

Having argued that "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." TSD at 9; see Prop. 218 at 115 (proposed Section 218.413(a)(2)), Prop. 219 at

115-16 (proposed Section 219.413(a)(2)). The Agency indicated on the basis of communication

with industry representatives "that Illinois does not currently contain any heatset web letterpress

operations in either the Chicago or Metro-East NAA...." TSD at 9. The Agency argued,

however, that "the regulation is necessary and technically feasible should a new such operation

locate in one ofthe NAAs." Id.

Economic Reasonableness

In its Technical Support Document, the Agency addressed the economic reasonableness

of various approaches to controlling YOM emissions from Group II product categories. See

TSD at 13-15. The Agency argued that the control techniques dcscribed above "are

economically reasonable, particularly as many ofthe techniques are already widely used by the
17

affected industries." SR at 10. In the subsections below, the Board addresses the record on the

issue of the economic reasonableness ofthose techniques.

Industrial Cleaning Solvents

The Agency cited USEPA's estimate that the proposed regulation would affect 130

Illinois sources with basel inc YOM emissions of2528 tons per year. TSD at 14 (§4.4) (referring

to 2002 National Emissions Inventory database). The Agency also noted USEPA's

determination that "the cost effectiveness of meeting the 50 grams of YOM per liter of cleaning

material limit for a parts cleaner at $1664/ton based on a study provided by the California Bay

Area Air Quality Management District." TSD at 14. The Agency indicated that sources

switching from high-YOM content solvents to low-YOM content solvents may realize savings of

$1325/ton because ofIower disposal costs. !d.

Flat Wood Paneling Coating Lines

The Agency noted that USEPA relied upon data from the South Coast Air Quality

Management District ofCalifornia to estimate cost effectiveness "of between $1,900 and $2,600

per ton of YOM reduced (in 2005 dollars)." TSD at 14 (§4.5). The Agency also cited the CTG

to indicate that Illinois sources subject to the proposed rule could incur costs to make their

coatings compliant. Id. at 14-15, citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling

Coatings, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, September 2006. The Agency concluded that "the only significant cost is expected to

be reformulation ofcoatings." TSD at 15.

Flexible Packaging Printing Lines

The Agency cited the CTG to claim that "[m]any facilities located in ozone

nonattainment areas are already meeting the control levels being recommended in this CTG"

TSD at ]4 (§4.3), citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing, United

States Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards,

September 2006. The Agcncy argued that

this proposal does not expand the number ofsources that will be subject to the ink

or control device portions ofthe 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 of inks 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. TSD at

14.

The Agency cited the CTG to state that sources installing add-on control devices will face costs

that vary based on operating factors. Id. The Agency cited the CTG to estimate 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 of between $1,300 and $2,800 per ton
18

ofVOM removed." [d., citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing,

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

September 2006. The Agency argued that factors including more operating hours would lower

the cost per ton ofVOM removed. TSO at 14.

Addressing the cleaning provisions ofits proposal, the Agency expected "minimal" costs

for sources becoming subject to those regulations. TSO at 14. The Agency argued that "some

sources may see an overall costs savings as less cleaning solution is necessary." !d.

Lithographic Printing Lines

The Agency argued that "[t]he 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." TSO at ] 3 (§4.1).

Although the Agency acknowledged that new sources will be subject to a higher control

efficiency, it expects new control devices to achieve that efficiency. [d. The Agency argued that

"no additional cost is expected for this reason either." [d.

The Agency stated that its proposal could result in costs for newly-regulated sources

emitting between] 5 and 100 pounds per day ofVOM. TSO at 13. The Agency reported that

"USEPA estimated the cost for cleaning material reformulation at $855 per ton ofVOM

removed (in 2005 dollars)." [d., citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic

Printing and Letterpress Printing, Unites States Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir

Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006.

The Agency noted that USEPA projects a costs savings with fountain solutions because

ofreduced alcohol use. TSO at 13. The Agency indicated that, although USEPA has not

specifically estimated the amount ofthese savings, it noted that "the TSO for the Illinois

lithographic printing rule in 1994 put this savings at $920 per ton." [d. The Agency explained

that, "while alcohol substitutes are more expensive, the cost is reduced because they are used in

lower quantities." [d., citing Technical Support Document for Controlling YOM Emissions from

Lithographic Printing Operations, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, October 1994.

Letterpress Printing

The Agency cited the CTG to state that,

[b]ecause 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 heatset inks and

control of [YOM] from cleaning materials apply equally to the letterpress printing

industry. TSO at 13 ('\14.2), citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset

lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, United States Environmental
19

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

2006.

The Agency acknowledged that, because III inois does not now regulate heatset web letterpress

printing operations, "the reasoning behind the zero cost estimate for heatset web lithographic

. printing" does not apply to letterpress printing. TSD at 13. The Agency noted the CTG's

estimate of $2,0 I 0 per ton of VOM removed in 2005 dollars as the cost-effectiveness for this

category. Id. However, the Agency emphasized that there are not now any heatset web

letterpress operations in either ofthe Illinois NAAs. Id.

Summary and Findings

Although the Board in a letter dated August 6, 2009, requested that DCEO conduct an

economic impact study on the Agency's amended rulemaking proposal (see 415 ILCS 5/27(b)(I)

(2008)), the Board received no response to that request. At the second hearing, the Board

received no testimony or comment regarding the absence of any response to the request. See Tr.2

at 8-9.

In his pre-filed testimony on behalf ofthe Agency, Mr. Bloomberg states that "[t]he

Agency agrees with USEPA that all ofthe proposed changes are technically feasible and

economically reasonable." Bloomberg Test. at 8. No participant has offered evidence or

arguments rebutting this position. Having reviewed the record on the issues offeasibility and

reasonableness, the Board finds as it did in adopting its proposal for first notice that the proposed

regulations are both technically feasible and economically reasonable.

SUMMARY OF BOARD'S SECOND-NOTICE PROPOSAL

Part 211

In its original proposal, the Agency sought to amend four definitions in and add 23 new

definitions to the existing Part 211, Definitions and General Provisions. SR at I 1-15; see Prop.

2] ]; see generally 35 III. Adm. Code 211. For second notice, the Board summarizes each ofits

proposed amendments and additions separately in following subsections.

Section 211.1000: Class II Finish

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Class II Finish" necessitated by amendments

to Subpart F of Parts 218 and 219. SR at 11-12; see Prop. 218 at 17-57, Prop. 219 at 17-55. The

proposed definition provides in its entirety that "'Class II Finish' means a finish that meets the

specifications of Voluntary Product Standard PS-59-73, as approved by the American National

Standards Institute." Prop. 21 I at 13.

Section 211.1745: Digital Printing

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Digital Printing" necessitated by amendments

to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 12; see Prop. 218 at 4-1 7, Prop. 219 at 4-17. The
20

proposed definition provides in its entirety that'" Digital Printing' means, for purposes of 35 III.

Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, the transfer of electronic files directly from a computer to an

electronically driven output device that prints the image directly on the selected media

(substrate). Printing using home and office equipment is excluded from this definition." Prop.

211 at 13.

Section 211.1878: Electrical Apparatus Component

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Electrical Apparatus Component"

necessitated by amendments to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 12; see Prop. 218 at 4-17,

Prop. 219 at 4-17. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that

'Electrical Apparatus Component' means, for purposes of35 Ill. Adm. Code

218.187 and 219.187, an internal component such as wires, windings, stators,

rotors, magnets, contacts, relays, energizers, and connections in an apparatus that

generates or transmits electrical energy including, but not limited to, alternators,

generators, transformers, electric motors, cables, and circuit breakers, except for

the actual cabinet in which the components are housed. Electrical components of

graphic arts application equipment and hot-line tools are also included in this

category. Prop. 211 at 13-14.

Section 211.1885: Electronic Component

Section 211.1885 ofthe Board's air pollution regulations now provides that "'Electronic

Component' means, for the purposes of 35 III. Adm. Code 218.182(f) and 219.182(f), all

portions of an electronic assembly, including, but not limited to, circuit board assemblies, printed

wire assemblies, printed circuit boards, soldered joints, ground wires, bus bars, and associated

electronic component manufacturing equipment such as screens and filters." 35 Ill. Adm. Code

211.1885. Proposed amendments to Sections 218.187 and 219.187 necessitate revision ofthis

language. SR at 12; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-17. The Board proposes to extend

application ofthe definition to Sections 218.187 and 219.187 and to add an exception for

cabinets housing components. SR at 12. Specifically, the revised definition provides that

'Electronic Component' means, for the purposes of35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.182(f),

2 I9. I82(f), 2 I8.187, and 219.187, all portions of an electronic assembly,

including, but not limited to, circuit board assemblies, printed wire assemblies,

printed circuit boards, soldered joints, ground wires, bus bars, and associated

electronic component manufacturing equipment such as screens and fi Iters, except

for the actual cabinet in which the components are housed. See Prop. 211 at 14.

Section 211.2355: Flat Wood Paneling

The Board proposes to add a definition of"Flat Wood Paneling" necessitated by

amendments to Subpart F of Parts 218 and 219. SR at 12; see Prop. 218 at 17-57, Prop. 219 at

17-55. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that "'Flat Wood Paneling' means natural

finish hardwood plywood panels, hardwood panels with Class 11 finishes, tileboard, exterior
21

siding, and printed interior panels made of hardwood, plywood, or thin particleboard." Prop. 2] I

at 14.

Section 211.2356: Flat Wood Paneling Coating Line

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Flat Wood Paneling Coating Line"

necessitated by amendments to Subpart F of Parts 218 and 219. SR at 12; see Prop. 218 at 17-

57, Prop. 219 at 17-55. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that '''Flat Wood

Paneling Coating Line' means a coating line in which any protective, decorative, or functional

coating is applied to flat wood paneling." Prop. 211 at 14.

Section 211.2368: Flexible Packaging

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Flexible Packaging" necessitated by

amendments to Subpart H of Parts 218 and 219. SR at 12; see Prop. 218 at 57-129, Prop. 219 at

55-130. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that

'Flexible Packaging' means any package or part of a package, the shape ofwhich

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. Shrink-wrap

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.

Flexible packaging does not include folding cartons, gift wraps, hot stamp foils,

wall coverings, vinyl products, decorative laminates, floor coverings, or tissue

products. Prop. 211 at 14.

Section 211.2615: General Work Surface

The Board proposes to add a definition of "General Work Surface" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 12-13; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 2] 9 at

4-] 7. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that

'Genera] Work Surface' means, for purposes of35 III. Adm. Code 218. J87 and

219.187, an area ofa medical device or pharmaceutical manufacturing facility

where solvent cleaning is performed on work surfaces, but for which cleaning

specifications are not required to be maintained in accordance with criteria and

procedures established to meet requirements ofthe United States Food and Drug

Administration and/or other applicable regulatory agencies with authority over

manufacturing operations for medical devices and/or phamlaceuticals. General

work surfaces shall not include items defined under 'Janitorial Cleaning.' Prop.

2]] at 14-15.

Section 211.2830: Hcatset
22

Section 211 ,2830 ofthe Board's air pollution regulations now provides that "'Heatset'

means a class oflithography which requires a heated dryer to solidify the printing inks." 35 Ill.

Adm, Code 211.2830, Proposed amendments to Subpart H of Parts 218 and 2I 9 necessitate

revision ofthis language. SR at 13; see Prop. 2] 8 at 57-129, Prop. 219 at 55-130, The Board

proposes to amend the definition "to include letterpress printing lines," SR at 13. The revised

definition provides in its entirety that "'Heatset' means a class of lithography or letterpress which

requires a heated dryer to solidify the printing inks," Prop, 21 I at 15.

Section 211.2855: Heatset Web Letterpress Printing Line

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Heatset Web Letterpress Printing Line"

necessitated by amendments to Subpart H of Parts 218 and 219. SR at 13; see Prop, 218 at 57-

129, Prop, 219 at 55-130. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that "'Heatset Web

Letterpress Printing Line' means a letterpress printing line in which a continuous roll ofsubstrate

is fed through the printing press and an oven is used to soliditY the printing inks," Prop. 21 I at

15.

Section 211.2965: High Precision Optic

The Board proposes to add a definition of "High Precision Optic" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 218, I87 and 219,187, SR at 13; see Prop, 21 8 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-

17. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that "'High Precision Optic' means, for

purposes of35 III. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, an optical element used in an electro-optical

device that is designed to sense, detect, or transmit light energy, including specific wavelengths

oflight energy and changes in light energy levels." Prop. 211 at 15.

Section 211.3215: Janitorial Cleaning

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Janitorial Cleaning" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 218,187 and 219, 187, SR at 13; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-

17, The proposed definition provides in its entirety that '''Janitorial Cleaning' means, for

purposes of 35 III. Adm. Code 218,187 and 2I9, 187, the cleaning of building or facility

components, including, but not limited to, floors, ceilings, walls, windows, doors, stairs,

bathrooms, furnishings, and exterior surfaces of office equipment, and excludes the cleaning of

work areas where manufacturing or repair activity is performed." Prop. 211 at 15.

Section 211.3305: Letterpress Printing Line

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Letterpress Printing Line," necessitated by

amendments to Subpart H of Parts 218 and 2 I 9. SR at 13; see Prop. 218 at 57-129, Prop. 219 at

55-130. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that '''Letterpress Printing Line' means

a web or sheetfed printing line that does not constitute a flexographie printing line, in which the

image area is raised relative to the non-image area and the ink is transferred to the substrate

directly from the image surface," Prop. 2 I 1 at 16,

Section 211.3555: Maintenance Cleaning
23

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Maintenance Cleaning" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 13; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-

] 7. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that

'Maintenance Cleaning' means, for purposes of35 111. Adm. Code 218. J87 and

219.187, a solvent cleaning operation or activity carried out to ensure that general

work areas where manufacturing or repair activity is performed remains clean,

and to clean tools, machinery, molds, forms, jigs, and equipment. This definition

does not include the cleaning of coatings, adhesives, or ink application

equipment.' Prop. 211 at ]6.

Section 211.3705: Medical Device

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Medical Device" necessitated by amendments

to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 13; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-17. The

proposed definition provides in its entirety that

'Medical Device' means, for purposes of35 III. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187,

an instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro

reagent or other similar article, including any component or accessory, that meets

one or more ofthe following conditions

(a) it is intended for use in the diagnosis ofdisease or other conditions,

or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease;

(b) it is intended to affect the structure or any function ofthe body; or

(c) it is defined in the National Fonnulary or the United States

Pharmacopeia, or any supplement to them. Prop. 211 at 16.

Section 211.3707: Medical Device and Pharmaceutical Manufacturing

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Medical Device and Pharmaceutical

Manufacturing" necessitated by amendments to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at ]4; see

Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 2] 9 at 4-17. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that

'Medical Device and Pharmaceutical Manufacturing' means, for purposes of35

111. Adm. Code 2 J8.187 and 219.187, the collection of equipment and activities to

prepare, utilize, maintain, and repair work areas, in order to accomplish one or

more steps in preparing a medical device or pharmaceutical for its intended use.

Manufacturing is typically, but not always, conducted in accordance with criteria

and procedures established to meet requirements ofthe United States Food and

Drug Administration and/or other applicable regulatory agencies with authority

over manufacturing operations for global sales of medical devices and/or

pharmaceuticals. Work areas and equipment shall include all machinery, tools,
24

equipment, rooms, tables, countertops, and facilities for maintaining employee

health and safety that are subject to such criteria and procedures. Prop. 2JI at 16-

17

Section 211.4065: Non-Hcatset

Section 211.4065 ofthe Board's air pollution regulations now provides that '''Nonheatset' means a class of lithography which does not require a heated dryer to solidify the

printing inks. Ultraviolet-cured and electron beam-cured inks are considered non-heatset." 35

111. Adm. Code 2] 1.4065. Amendments to Subpart H of Parts 218 and 219 necessitate revision

ofthis language. SR at 14; see Prop. 218 at 57-129, Prop. 219 at 55-130. Specifically, the Board

proposes to revise this definition "to include letterpress printing lines." SR at 14. The revised

definition provides in its entirety that '''Non-heatset' means a class of lithography or letterpress

which does not require a heated dryer to solidify the printing inks. Ultraviolet-cured and electron

beam-cured inks are considered non-heatset." Prop. 211 at 17.

Section 211.5335: Radiation Effect Coating

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Radiation Effect Coating" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 218.187 and 2] 9.1 87. SR at 14; see Prop. 2 J8 at 4-I7, Prop. 219 at 4-

17. Thc proposed dcfinition provides in its entirety that

'Radiation Effect Coating' means, for purposes of 35 111. Adm. Code 218.187 and

219.187, a coating or coating system engineered to interact, through absorption or

reflection, with specific regions ofthe electromagnetic energy spectrum, such as

the ultraviolet, visible, infrared, or microwave regions. Uses include, but are not

limited to, lightning strike prevention, electromagnetic pulse protection, and radar

avoidance. Coatings that have been designated 'classified' by the Department of

Defense are not included in this definition. Prop. 211 at 17.

Section 211.5535: Repair Cleaning

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Repair Cleaning" necessitated by amendments

to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 14; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-17. The

proposed definition provides in its entirety that "'Repair Cleaning' means, for purposes of35 Ill.

Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, a solvent cleaning operation or activity carried out during a

repair process." Prop. 21 I at 17.

Section 211.5585: Research and Development Operation

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Research and Development Operation"

necessitated by amendments to Sections 218.187 and 2] 9. 187. SR at 14; see Prop. 218 at 4-17,

Prop. 219 at 4-17. The proposed definition provides in its entircty that

'Research and Development Operation' means, for purposes of 35 111. Adm. Code

218.187 and 219.187, an operation whose purpose is for research and
25

development of new processes and products, that is conducted under the close

supervision oftechnically trained personnel, and is not involved in the

manufacture offinal or intermediate products for commercial purposes, except in

a de minimlls manner. Prop. 211 at 17.

Section 211.5860: Scientific Instrument

The Board proposes to add a de.finition of "Scientific Instrument" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 21 8.187 and 219.1 87. SR at 14; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-

17. The proposcd definition provides in its entirety that '" Scientific Instrument' means, for

purposes of 35 III. Adm. Code 218.1 87 and 219.187, an instrument, including the components,

assemblies, and subassemblies used in their manufacture, and associated accessories and

reagents that is used for the detection, measurement, analysis, separation, synthesis, or

sequencing of various compounds." Prop. 211 at 18.

Section 211.5875: Screen Printing

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Screen Printing" necessitated by amendments

to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 14; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-17. The

proposed definition provides in its entirety that '''Screen Printing' means, for purposes of35 Ill.

Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, a process in which the printing ink passes through a taught

[sic] screen or fabric to which a refined form ofstencil has been applied. The stencil openings

determine the form and dimensions ofthe imprint." Prop. 2I I at 18.

Section 211.5885: Screen Reclamation

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Screen Reclamation" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 218.1 87 and 219.187. SR at 14-15; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at

4-17. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that '''Screen Reclamation' means, for

purposes of35 III. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.1 87, a solvent cleaning activity carried out in a

screen printing operation where the screen is completely cleaned and the stencil removed for

recycling or reuse ofthe screen for other production runs." Prop. 211 at 18.

Section 211.6405: Sterilization Indicating Ink

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Sterilization Indicating Ink" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 15; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-

17. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that "'Sterilization Indicating Ink' means, for

purposes of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218. I 87 and 219.187, an ink that changes color to indicate that

sterilization has occurred. Such ink is used to monitor the sterilization ofmedical instruments,

autoclave efficiency, and the thermal processing offoods for prevention ofspoilage." Prop. 211

at 18.

Section 211 ,6425: Stripping
26

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Stripping" neccssitated by amendments to

Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 15; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-17. The proposed

definition provides in its entirety that "'Stripping' means, for purposes of35 Ill. Adm. Code

218.187 and 219.187, the removal of cured coatings, cured inks, or cured adhesives." Prop. 211

at 18.

Section 211.6535: Surface Preparation

The Board proposes to add a definition of "Surface Preparation" necessitated by

amendments to Sections 218.187 and 219.187. SR at 15; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-

17. The proposed definition provides in its entirety that "'Surface Preparation' means, for

purposes of35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.187 and 219.187, the removal of contaminants such as dust,

soil, oil, and grease prior to coating, adhesive, or ink applications." Prop. 211 at 18-19.

Section 211.7290: Wood Preparation

Section 211.7290 ofthe Board's air pollution regulations now provides that '''Wood

furniture' means room furnishings including cabinets (kitchen, bath and vanity), tables, chairs,

beds, sofas, shutters, art objects, wood paneling, wood flooring and any other coated furnishings

made ofwood, wood composition or fabricated wood materials." 35 Ill. Adm. Code 211.7920.

Proposed amendments to Subpart F of Parts 218 and 219 necessitate revision ofthis language.

SR at 15; see Prop. 218 at 17-57, Prop. 219 at 17-55. The Board proposes to revise the definition

by excluding flat wood paneling from it. SR at IS. The revised definition provides in its entirety

that '''Wood furniture' means room furnishings including cabinets (kitchen, bath, and vanity),

tables, chairs, beds, sofas, shutters, art objects, wood paneling other that flat wood paneling,

wood flooring, and any other coated furnishings made ofwood, wood composition, or fabricated

wood materials." Prop. 21 I at 19.

Part 218IPart 219

Subpart A: General Provisions

Existing Sections 218.1 06 and 219.106 establish general compliance dates for sources

subject to Parts 218 and 219. See 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.106, 219.106. The Agency proposed

"adding a new subsection (e) to Section 218.106 and a new subsection (c) to Section 219.106...

." SR at 15; see Prop. 218 at 4, Prop. 219 at3. The original proposal established "May 1, 2010,

as the compliance date for sources subject to the flat wood paneling emission limits." SR at IS.

On the basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred in extending this

deadline to August 1,2010.

Subpart E: Solvent Cleaning

Introduction. Existing Subpart E of both Parts 218 and 219 addresses YOM emissions

from solvent cleaning operations. See 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.1 81-186, 219.181 -186. The

Agency stated that industrial cleaning solvents include a number of products "used to clean dirt,

soil, oil, and grease as well as remove adhesives, paints, and inks." TSD at 5 (§2.4); see
27

Bloomberg Test. at 6. The Agency further stated that "VOM emissions occur during the

cleaning process while wiping, flushing, brushing, and from the storage and disposal of used

solvents and rags." TSO at 6.

The Agency noted that USEPA has conducted studies ofVOM emissions focusing on six

industries: "automotive, electrical equipment, magnetic tape, furniture, packaging, and

photographic supplies." TSO at 6. The Agency claimed that these studies revealed nine major

categories in which cleaning processes result in YOM emissions: "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." Id.

The Agency argued that the first four account for a majority ofVOM emissions from these

categories and that spray gun cleaning alone accounts for 50 percent. Id. The Agency stated that

the CTG nonetheless "recommends coverage of a wide range of cleaning activities" and that its

proposal reflected that recommendation. Id. The Agency emphasized, however, that the

proposal does not cover "[g]eneral cleaning of offices, bathrooms, and other janitorial type

services." Id.

Current Regulations. The Agency stated that "Illinois has current regulations for cold

cleaning degreasing, open top vapor degreasing, and conveyorized degreasing operations as well

as some limitations and work practices on cleaning solvent uses in existing rules, e.g.,

regulations regarding autobody refinishing, wood furniture coating, and lithographic printing."

TSO at 17 (§5.4).

Summary of Proposed Amendments to Subpart E. The Agency stated that its

proposal follows the CTG by establishing an "applicability threshold of 15 pounds per day of

YOM emissions and in most ofthe required YOM limits." Bloomberg Test. at 6; see TSO at 17.

The Agency further stated that affected sources must follow work practice standards regarding

solvent use and either comply with a limit on the YOM content ofcleaning solution, "usc a low

vapor pressure cleaning solution, or utilize an emissions control system that provides 85 percent

overall control of YOM emissions from cleaning activities." TSO at 17; see SR at 7, Bloomberg

Test at 6-7, Tr.1 at J1-14 (addressing YOM content limit); see generally Prop. 218 at 5-17, Prop.

219 at 3-17.

The Board below summarizes proposed amendments to Subpart E on a section-by-section

basis.

Section 218/219.181: Solvent Cleaning in General. The Board first proposes to amend

the titles ofthese two sections to "Solvent Cleaning Oegreasing Operations." SR at 15-16; see

Prop. 218 at 4, Prop. 219 at 3-4. The Board also proposes to amend these two sections "to

specify that Sections 218/219.182 through 218/219.184 and Section 218/219.186 are appl icable

to cold cleaning, open top vapor, and conveyorized degreasing operations." SR at 16.

Section 218/219.187: Other Industrial Solvent Cleaning Operations. The Board

proposes to add a new Section 218/219.187. SR at 16; see Prop. 218 at 4-17, Prop. 219 at 4-17.

Below, the Board separately summarizes the subsections comprising it.
28

Subsection (ll). The Board's proposed subsection (a)(I) establishes the section's

applicability by providing that, on and after April 1,2011, "the requirements in Section

218/2 I9.187 apply to all cleaning operations which use organic materials at sources that emit 6.8

kg/day (15 Ibs/day) or more of YOM from cleaning operations at the source." SR at 16; see

Prop. 218 at 4, Prop. 219 at 4. ]n addition, the subsection defines "cleaning operations" for the

purposes ofthis Section as

the process of cleaning products, product components, tools, equipment, or

general work areas during production, repair, maintenance, or servicing, including

but not limited to spray gun cleaning, spray booth cleaning, large and small

manufactured components cleaning, parts cleaning, equipment cleaning, line

cleaning, floor cleaning, and tanks cleaning, at sources with emission units. Prop.

218 at 4, Prop. 219 at 4.

Proposed subsection (a)(2) "exempts numerous types of cleaning operations from some

or all ofthe limitations in Section 218/2]9.187." SR at 16; see Prop. 218 at 4-7, Prop. 219 at 4-

6; see also TSD at I]-]2 (Exclusions). The Agency's first motion to amend stated that USEPA

has notified the Agency that it "may exempt digital printing from the control requirements set

forth in Section 218/219.187 ofits proposal." Mot. Amend I at 1-2 (~2). The Board granted the

motion and includes digital printing in the list of exclusions in Section 21 8/219.1 87(a)(2)(C).

Subsection (bl. Proposed subsection (b) provides that no owner or operator of a source

subject to this section shall perform subject cleaning operations unless the source complies with

one of three requirements. SR at 16. First, the source may comply with the applicable YOM

content limit. Id; see Prop. 218 at 7-8 (proposed Section 218.187(b)(1 )), Prop. 219 at 7-8

(proposed Section 219.] 87(b)(l). In its second motion to amend, the Agency responded "to a

recent request for clarification from an industry representative...." Mot. Amend 2 at 1-2 (~3).

Specifically, the Agency proposed to amend this subsection to provide that the YOM content

limitations "apply to as-used cleaning solution, excluding water and other compounds exempted

from the definition ofVOM." Id. at 1-2. The Agency stated that "[t]his proposed amendment is

consistent with the Illinois EPA's original intent and with existing YOM regulations." Id. at 2.

The Board granted the motion and has included this language in subsection (b).

Second, the source may comply by using "cleaning materials with a composite vapor

pressure of no more than 8.00 mmHg measured at 20 degrees Celsius." SR at 16; see Prop. 218

at 8 (proposed Section 218.1 87(b)(2)), Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section 219.187(b)(2)). Third,

the source can comply by installing and operating an afterburner or carbon adsorber "that

reduces YOM emissions from the subject cleaning operation by at least 85 percent overall." SR

at 16; see Prop. 218 at 8 (proposed Section 218.187(b)(3)), Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section

21 9. I87(b)(3). The Board also proposes that

[t]he owner or operator may use an emissions control system other than an

afterburner or carbon adsorber ifsuch device reduces YOM emissions from the

subject cleaning operation by at least 85 percent overall, the owner or operator

submits a plan to the Agency detailing appropriate monitoring devices, test

methods, recordkeeping requirements, and operating parameters for such control
29

device, and such plan is approved by the Agency and USEPA within federally

enforceable permit conditions. Prop. 218 at 8 (proposed Section 218.187(b)(3)),

Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section 219.187(b)(3).

Subsection (c). The Board proposes that the owner or operator of a subject source "shall

demonstrate compl iance with this Section by using the applicable test methods and procedures in

Section 218/219.187(g) and by complying with all applicable recordkeeping and reporting

requirements in Section 219.187(e)." SR at 16; see Prop. 218 at 8 (proposed Section 218.187(c),

Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section 219.187(c); see also infra at 31 (summarizing subsection g);

infra at 29-31 (summarizing subsection (e).

Subsection (dl. The Board proposes that the owner or operator of a subject source must

comply with various operating requirements for each subject cleaning operation. SR at 17. First,

the Board proposes to require that they "[clover open containers and properly cover and store

applicators used to apply cleaning solvents." Prop. 218 at 9 (proposed Section 218.187(d)(l));

Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section 2l9.187(d)(l); see SR at 17. Second, the Board proposes that

they "[m]inimize air circulation around the cleaning operation." Prop. 218 at 9 (proposed

Section 218.187(d)(2)); Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section 219.1 87(d)(2); see SR at 17. Third, the

Board seeks to require that an owner or operator "[d]ispose of all used cleaning solutions,

cleaning towels, and applicators used to apply cleaning solvents in closed containers" Prop. 218

at 9 (proposed Section 218.1 87(d)(3)); Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section 219.187(d)(3); see SR at

17. Finally, the Board also proposes that they "[u]tilize equipment practices that minimize

emissions." Prop. 218 at 9 (proposed Section 21 8. I87(d)(4)); Prop. 219 at 8 (proposed Section

219.187(d)(4); see SR at 17.

Subsection (el. The Board proposes various recordkeeping and reporting requirements

for the owner or operator of various sources. In subsection (e)(I), the Board proposes that,

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

because ofthe criteria in Scction 21 8/219.1 87(a)(I) shall submit a certification to

the Illinois EPA that includes a declaration that the source is exempt, as well as

calculations which demonstrate that combined emissions of YOM from cleaning

operations at the source never equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day). SR at 17;

see Prop. 218 at 9 (proposed Section 218.197(e)(1 )), Prop. 219 at 9 (proposed

Section 219.187(e)(1).

On the basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred in extending this May

1. 2010 deadline to August 1,2010.

The proposal also requires that "[s]uch sources shall notify the Illinois EPA of any

rccords that show that the combined emissions of YOM from cleaning operations at the source

ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day)." SR at 17; see Prop. 218 at 9 (proposed Section

2l8.197(e)(1 )), Prop. 219 at 9 (proposed Section 219.187(e)(1). Originally, the Agency sought

to require that "[s]uch notification shall include calculations showing the daily emissions of

YOM from cleaning operations at the source for the day(s) in which emissions equaled or

exceeded 6.8 kg/day (15 lbs/day)." Prop. 218 at 9, Prop. 219 at 9. In its first motion to amend,
30

the Agency responded to comment from industry representatives by proposing to remove this

requirement that a source provide calculations showing an exccedanee. Mot. Amend I at 2 ('13).

The Board granted the motion, and subsection (e)(I) reflects this amendment.

In proposed subsection (e)(2), the Board proposes to require subject sources to submit a

certification "[b]y April 1, 2011, or upon initial start-up ofthe source, whichever is later. ..."

Prop. 218 at 10 (proposed Section 218.187(e)(2)(A)), Prop. 219 at 9-10 (proposed Section

219. 187(e)(2)(A)); but see SR at 17 (indicating deadline ofMay 1,2010). The original proposal

required that the certification include

I) a declaration that all subject cleaning operations arc in compliance with the

requirements ofthis Section; 2) identification of each 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 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 perfonned. SR at 17-18; see Prop. 218 at 9-10

(proposed Section 21 8.1 87(e)(2)), Prop. 219 at 9-10 (proposed Section

219.187(e)(2)).

In its first motion to amend, the Agency responded to comment from industry representatives by

proposing to delete "the requirement that a subject source certify the limitation with which each

subject cleaning operation will comply." Mot. Amend 1 at 2-3 (~4); see Prop. 218 at 10

(proposed Section 218.1 87(e)(2)(A)(iii), Prop. 219 at 10 (proposed Section 21 9. I87(e)(2)(A)(iii);

see also TLI at 18-19. The Board granted the motion, and subsection (e)(2)(A)(3) reflects the

amendment.

In proposed subsection (e)(2)(B), the Board proposes that subject sources, "[a]t least 30

days before changing the method of compliance between subsection (b)(I), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of

this Section, notify the Agency in writing ofsuch change." Prop. 218 at 10 (proposed Section

218. J87(e)(2)(B), Prop. 219 at 10 (proposed Section 219.187(e)(2)(B). In its first motion to

amend, the Agency responded to comment from industry representatives by proposing to delete

"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." Mot.

Amend 1 at 2-3 (~4). The Board granted the motion, and the subsection reflects this amendment.

In subsection (e)(3), the Board proposes recordkeeping provisions for sources complying

with the YOM content limitations under subsection (b)(l). SR at 18; see Prop. 218 atll-12

(proposed Section 218.1 87(e)(3)), Prop. 219 at 10-12 (proposed Section 219.1 87(e)(3)). In

subsection (e)(4), the Board proposes recordkeeping "provisions for sources complying with the
31

YOM composite partial vapor pressure limitations in subsection (b)(2)...." SR at 18; see Prop.

218 at 12 (proposed Section 218.1 87(e)(4)), Prop. 219 at 12 (proposed Section 21 9.1 87(e)(4)).

In subsection (e)(5), the Board proposes rccordkeeping "provisions for sources complying with

the emissions control system requirements in subsection (b)(3)...." SR at 18; see Prop. 218 at

12-14 (proposcd Section 21 8.1 87(e)(5)), Prop. 219 at 12-14 (proposed Section 219.1 87(e)(5)).

In subsection (e)(6), the Board proposes that

[a)1I sources subject to the requirements ofsubsection (b) [Material and Control

Requirements) and (d) [Operating Requirements) ofthis Section shall notify the

Agency of any violation ofsubsections (b) or (d) by providing a description ofthe

violation and copies of records documenting such violation to the Agency within

30 days following the occurrence ofthe violation. Prop. 218 at 14 (proposed

Section 21 8.1 87(e)(6)), Prop. 219 at 14 (proposed Section 219.187(e)(6)); see SR

at 18.

In subsection (e)(7), the Board proposes that "[a)1I records required by this subsection (e)

shall be retained by the source for at least three years and shall be made available to the Agency

upon request." Prop. 218 at 14 (proposed Section 218.1 87(e)(7)), Prop. 219 at 14 (proposed

Section 219.1 87(e)(7)); see SR at 18.

Subsectioll (0. In subsection (f), the Board proposes to establish monitoring

requirements applicable to sources demonstrating compliance with emissions control systems.

SR at 18. Subsection (f)(I) establishes requirements applicable to sources employing an

afterburner or carbon adsorber to demonstrate compliance. Prop. 218 at 14 (proposed Section

21 8.1 87(f)(l )), Prop. 219 at 14 (proposed Section 21 9.187(f)(1 )). Subsection (f)(2) addresses

emissions control systems other an afterburner or carbon adsorber. Prop. 218 at 15 (proposed

Section 217.187(f)(2)), Prop. 219 at 14 (proposed Section 219.1 87(f)(2)).

Subsectioll (gl. In subsection (g), the Board proposes to establish "requirements

regarding testing to demonstrate compliance with Section 218/219.187." SR at 19; see Prop. 218

at 15-17 (proposcd Section 218.187(g)), Prop. 219 at 15-17 (proposed Section 219.187(g)). In

its first motion to amend, the Agency proposed to amend this subsection "by clarifying when

testing pursuant to such Section shall be performed." Mot. Amend I at 3-4 (~5). The Board

granted the motion, and subsection (g)( I) and (g)(2) reflect the amendment.

Subpart F: Coating Operations

Existing Subparts F addresses YOM emissions from various coating operations. See 35

III. Adm. Code 218.204-217, 219.204-217. For these two subparts, the Board proposes a number

of amendments, which largely address emissions fTom flat wood paneling coating operations.

See Prop. 218 at 17-57, Prop. 219 at ]7-55.

Introduction. The Agency cited the CTG to statc that "[f)lat wood paneling products are

used in construction and can be classified as three main product types: decorative interior

panels, exterior siding, and tileboard." TSD at 6 (§2.5), citing Control Techniques Guidelines
32

for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir

Quality Planning and Standard, September 2006. The Agency stated that "[d]ecorative interior

panels are often embossed and usually grooved, having more decorative coating requirements

than many other products." TSD at 6. For these panels, the Agency indicated that "[s]ubstrates

include hardwood, plywood, medium density fiberboard, and particle board." !d.

With regard to exterior siding, the Agency stated that it "may be coated at the production

facility or on-site." TSD at 6. The Agency indicated that on-site coating "is not subject to this

proposed regulation." Id. The Agency further stated that, in addition to siding, "[e]xterior trim

is also generally manufactured at the same production facility and coated with the same

coatings." In the classification, the Agency listed substrates including solid wood, hardboard,

and waferboard. !d. With regard to tileboard, the Agency indicated that it "is used on highmoisture areas such as kitchens and bathrooms, and is considered a premium interior wall

paneling." TSD at 6. The Agency stated that "[t]ileboard meets the specifications for Class I

hardboard according to the American National Standards Institute." Id.

The Agency stated that producers coat flat wood paneling in order "to provide protection

from the environment, modify the surface, and present a desired appearance." TSD at 6. The

Agency cited the CTG to state that

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 surfaces include fillers, sealers,

'groove' coats, primers, stains, basecoats, inks and topcoats. TSD at 6, citing

Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standard,

September 2006.

Addressing methods and techniques, the Agency cited the CTG to state that coating line

processes typically begin "with mechanical alterations ofthe substrate (filing of holes, cutting of

grooves, sanding, etc.)...." TSD at 7, citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood

Paneling Coatings, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality

Planning and Standard, September 2006. Following this step,

[m]ost coatings are applied by direct 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 ofthe application of one or more coatings followed by a heated

oven to cure the coatings. TSD at 6-7, citing Control Techniques Guidelines for

Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, United States Environmental Protection Agency,

Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standard, September 2006.
33

The Agency stated that, during these operations, "YOM emissions occur primarily during the

coating process as the coatings dry and cure, but also as coatings are applied, and during mixture

before application." TSD at 7.

Current Regulations. The Agency stated that "[t]here are currently no specific Illinois

regulations covering flat wood paneling coating operations." TSD at 17 (§5.5), Bloomberg Test.

at 7. The Agency argued that these operations would be addressed by regulations applicable to

"Other Emission Units" (35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.980-988, 219.980-988) and possibly by

regulations applicable to wood furniture coating (see 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.204(1), 219.204(1»,

"depending on whether the operations fell into the definition related to that process." TSO at 17;

see Bloomberg Test. at 7,

Summary of Proposed Amendments to Subpart F. The Agency stated that its

proposed amendments to Subpart F "will add coating YOM requirements and work practice

requirements for both coatings and associated cleaning operations." TSO at 17; see Prop. 218 at

17-57, Prop. 219 at 17-55, SR at 7-8. Although the Agency noted the option of employing addon emission controls, it added that "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." TSO at 18. The Agency claimed that "[t]he work practice requirements

include several that are already required for wood furniture coaters, which have been

accomplished without any problems known to the Agency." Id.; see Bloomberg Test. at 7. The

Agency characterized as "common sense" such requirements as "minimizing spills of YOMcontaining materials, minimizing YOM emissions during cleaning, and closing mixing vessels

except when they are in use." Id.

The Board below summarizes on a section-by-section basis each of the proposed

amendments to Subpart F.

Section 218/219.204: Emission Limitations. Existing Section 218/219.204 establishes

emission limitations based upon YOM content for various categories of coating lines. 35111.

Adm. Code 218.204,219.204. The Board below separately summarizes the proposed

amendments to these provisions. See Prop. 218 at 17-27, Prop. 219 at 17-26.

Subsection (cl. Existing subsection (c), which provides emission limitations applicable

to paper coating lines, includes a note stating in pertinent part that "[t]he paper coating limitation

shall not apply to any owner or operator of any paper coating line on which flexographic or

rotogravure printing is performed ifthe paper coating line complies with the emissions limitation

in Section 218.401 ofthis Part." 35111. Adm. Code 218.204(c), 219.204(c). The Board proposes

to amend this subsection by providing that the limitation also "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."

SR at 19; see 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.401-411, 219.401-411 (Subparts H), Prop. 2] 8 at 19, Prop.

219 at ]9.

Subsection (01/(01 The Board proposes to add a new subsection (p) to Section 218.204

and a new subsection (0) to Section 219.204, both of "which restrict the YOM content offlat
34

wood paneling coatings to 0.25 kg YOM/I coatings or 0.35 kg YOMII solids or less. SR at 19;

see Prop. 218at27, Prop. 219at26.

Section 218/219.205: Dailv-Weighted Average Limitations. Existing Section

2] 8/2] 9.205 contains provisions for daily-weighted average limitations on YOM content. 35 JII.

Adm. Code 218.105,219.105. The Board proposes to amend subsection (a) "to include flat

wood paneling coating lines in the daily-weighted averaging alternative." SR at 19; see Prop.

218 at 28, Prop. 219 at 26-27.

Section 218/219.207: Alternativc Emission Limitations. Existing Section 218/219.207

contains provisions for alternative emission limitations. 35 III. Adm. Code 218.107,219.107.

The Board below separately summarizes proposed amendments to these provisions. See Prop.

218 at 33-37, Prop. 219 at 31-36.

Subsection (al. The Board proposes to amend this subsection to include flat wood

paneling coating lines as a source category eligible for the alternative emission limitations

option. SR at 19; see Prop. 2]8 at 33, Prop. 219 at 31-32.

Subsection (h). The Board proposes to amend Section 218.207(h)(I) in order to correct

the formatting of an equation pertaining to emissions from can coating lines. SR at 20; see Prop.

218at36.

Subsection m. (kl. The Board proposes to add a subsection (I) to Section 218.207 and a

subsection (k) to Section 219.207 in order to include flat wood paneling coating lines in the

alternative emissions limitations option. SR at 19; see Prop. 218 at 37, Prop. 219 at 35-36.

These 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 ofYOM from the coating line or the owner or operator ofthe flat wood paneling

coating line complies with all requirements set forth in subsection (b)(2) ofthis Section." SR at

19; see Prop. 218 at 37, Prop. 219 at 35-36.

Section 218/219.210: Compliance Schedule. Section 218/219.210 establishes

compliance schedules applicable to various coating lines. 35 III. Adm. Code 218.210, 219.210.

The Board proposes to amend these sections by adding a subsection (g) providing that, on and

after a date consistent with Section 218/219.206, sources subject to the flat wood paneling

coating emission limitations shall comply with the applicable provisions in Subpart F." SR at

20; see Prop. 218 at 39, Prop. 219 at 37.

Section 218.211/219.211: RecordkcCDin!! and Reporting. Existing Section

218/219.211 contains various recordkeeping and reporting requirements. 35 111. Adm. Code

218.11 J, 219.111. The Board below separately summarizes proposed amendments to these

provisions. See Prop. 218 at 39-50, Prop. 219 at 37-48.

Subsections (c). (dl. The Board proposes to amend these subsections "to provide that,

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

reported in terms of weight of YOM per volume of coatings or solids, as applicable, as applied
35

each day on each coating line." SR at 20; see Prop. 218 at 42-46, Prop. 219 at 40-44. The Board

also proposes to correct a spelling error in Section 218.211 (c)(3)(A). SR at 20; see Prop. 218 at

43.

Subsection (el. The Board proposes to amend this subsection "to provide that flat wood

paneling coating lines complying pursuant to Section 218/219.207 [Alternative Emissions

Limitations] shall comply with the recordkeeping and reporting requirements set forth in

subsection (e)." SR at 20; see Prop. 218 at 46-47, Prop. 219 at 44-45.

Subsection (gl. The Board proposes to add a new subsection (g) establishing

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

work practice requirements set forth in Section 218/219.217." SR at 20; see Prop. 218 at 49-50,

Prop. 219 at 48.

Section 218.2121219.212: Cross-Line Averaging to Establish Compliance for

Coating Lines. Existing Section 218/2 I9.212 contains provision for averaging across specified

coating lines in order to establish compliance. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.212, 219.212. The Board

proposes to amend subsection (a) "to provide that the cross-line averaging alternative is not

available to flat wood paneling coating lines." SR at 21; see Prop. 218 at 50-54, Prop. 219 at 48-

53.

Section 218.217/219.217: Wood Furniture Coating Work Practice Standards.

Existing Section 218/2 I9.217 establishes various work practice standards for wood furniture

coating operations. 35 III. Adm. Code 218.217, 219.217. The Board first proposes to change the

title ofthis Section to "Wood Furniture Coating and Flat Wood Paneling Coating Work Practice

Standards." SR at 21; see Prop. 218 at 54, Prop. 219 at 53. The Board below separately

summarizes proposed amendments to the provisions ofthese sections. See Prop. 218 at 54-57,

Prop. 219 at 53-55

Subsection rcl. In this re-designated subsection, the Board proposes an amendment

providing that "the flat wood paneling coating lines are subject to the existing cleaning and work

practice requirements in this Section." SR at 21; see Prop. 218 at 55-56, Prop. 219 at 54.

Subsection (dl. The Board proposes a new subsection "adding additional cleaning and

storage requirements for flat wood paneling coating lines... " SR at 21; see Prop. 218 at 56,

Prop. 219 at 54-55. Specifically, the Board proposes to require "that such coating lines minimize

spills ofVOM containing coatings, thinners, and cleaners, minimize emissions of YOM during

cleaning activities, and keep mixing vessels which contain YOM coatings and other materials

closed except when specifically in use." SR at 21; see Prop. 218 at 56, Prop. 219 at 54.

Subpart H: Printing and Publishing

Existing Subpart H of Parts 218 and 219 addresses YOM emissions from various printing

and publishing sources. See 35 111. Adm. Code 21 8.401-4 II, 219.401-4 11. For this subpart, the

Board proposes a number of amendments and the addition of new subsections addressing
36

lctterpress printing lines. See Prop. 218 at 57-129, Prop. 219 at 55-130. The Board separately

addresses thcse amcndments and additions in the following subsections of this opinion.

Flexographic and Rotogravure Printing.

lnlroduclio/l. The Agency stated that "[f]lexible packaging mcans any package or part of

a package, the shape of which can be readily changed." TSD at 4. The Agency further stated

that this packaging "includes, but is not limited to, bags, pouches, lincrs, and wraps utilizing

paper, plastic, film, aluminum foil, metalized or coated paper or film, or any combination of

these materials." Id. The Agency also indicated that "[s]hrink-wraplabels or wrappers (but not

self-adhesive labels) printed on or in-line with a flexiblc packaging printing press are also

considercd to be flexible packaging." Id. Thc Agency stated, however, that the following items

are not flexible packaging: "cartons, gift wraps, hot stamp foils, wall coverings, vinyl products,

decorativc laminates, floor coverings, or tissuc products." ld. at 5.

The Agency characterized rotogravure printing as using "an image etched or engraved

into a plate or cylinder." TSD at 5. The Agency stated that "[i]nks, coatings, and adhesives may

be applied to a substrate through the rotogravure process." Id. The Agency described

flexographic printing as the use of "an image raised above the level ofthe printing plate, with the

image carrier made ofrubber or other flexible material." Id. The Agency distinguished the two

in part by stating that "[f]lexographic printing is better suited to short production runs, in contrast

to rotogravure printing, which is more useful for long runs." !d. The Agency claimed that

"YOM emissions for both types of printing originate from the drying of inks as well as solvents

used to clean presses and other components." Id.

The Agency citcd the CTG to state that "the use of waterbased inks is increasing." TSD

at 5, citing Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Packaging Printing, United States

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

2006. Howcver, the Agency also noted that "[m]any facilities use hundreds ofdifferent 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." TSD at 5,

citing Control Techniques Guidclines for Flexible Packaging Printing, United States

Environmcntal Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Scptember

2006.

The Agency thus stated that "most YOM control for flexible package printing is achieved

through the use of add-on control devices." TSD at 5. The Agency indicated that most ofthc

YOM emitted through these processes "is captured through evaporation in a dryer, along with

hoods and other collection devices for solvent that evaporates elsewhere in the printing process."

ld. The Agency claimed that "[0]lder presses frequently do not allow for the same level of

capture as newer installations do." Id. However, the Agency cited the CTG to claim that

"'[t]here have been significant improvements in capture cfficiency offlexographic presses and

rotogravure presses' sincc USEPA's most recent review ofthose operations." Id., citing Control

Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Packaging Printing, United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006. The Agency further

cited the CTG to state that, "[s]ince J990, many vendors have guaranteed capture efficiency of
37

85 to 90 perccnt without use of a permanent total enclosure." TSD at 5, citing Control

Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Packaging Printing, United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Septembcr 2006. The Agency argued

that control devices can now attain control efficiencies of at least 95 percent." TSD at 5, citing

Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Packaging Printing, United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006.

Current Regullltions. The Agency stated that Illinois regulations currently "cover all

flexographic, packaging rotogravure, and publication rotogravure printing." TSD at 4, 17 (§§2.3,

5.3). The Agency further stated that these different printing operations have identical YOM

content limits on ink but differ in their add-on control requirements: "flexographic printers are

required to get 60 percent overall YOM reduction, packaging rotogravure are required to get 65

percent overall reductions, and publication rotogravure must achieve 75 percent overall

reduction." ld.; see 35 III. Adm. Code 21 8.401 (a)(1), (c)(4), 219.40J(a)(I), (c)(4).

Summllry ofProposedAmendmentsAddressing Flexogmphic lind Rotogravure

Priming. The Agency stated that its proposal "separates out flexible packaging printing from the

existing flexographic and rotogravure regulations" TSD at 17; see id. at 4, Bloomberg Test. at

5; see generally Prop. 218 at 57-76, Prop. 219 at 55-75. The Agency argued that "any

flexographic or rotogravure operation that is not printing on flexible packaging will not see a

change to the applicable regulations." ld. The Agency indicated, however, that "[s)ources that

print on flexible packaging will need to meet either a tightened ink YOM content or add-on

control requirement." ld.; see SR at 8. The Agency stated that the required efficiency ofthe

add-on control "will depend on both the date of construction, at the source, ofthe press and the

control device." TSD at J7; see Bloomberg Test. at 6. The Agency claimed that these factors

reflect "that presses and control devices already installed at the souree might not have been

designed to obtain capture and control effieiencies as high as are currently obtainable" TSD at

17. The Agency thus suggested that sources should not need to upgrade existing control devices.

Tr.1 at 15-16.

The Agency stated that "[t)he proposcd regulations also require that printing lines that

meet the CTG's prescribed applicability threshold comply with work practice requirements for

cleaning materials." TSD at 5; see Bloomberg Test. at 6. The Agency further stated that these

practices include "keeping solvent containers closed except when filling, draining or condueting

cleaning operations, keeping used shop towels in closed containers, and conveying cleaning

materials from one location to another in closed containers or pipes." TSD at 17, citing Control

Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Packaging Printing, United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, September 2006. The Agency stressed

that "the applicability level for such work practices in 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." Bloomberg Test. at 6.

Section 218.4011219.401: Flexogmphic and Rotogravure Printing. Existing Section

218/219.401 addresses YOM emissions from flexographic and rotogravure printing. 35111.

Adm. Code 218.401, 219.401. The Board proposes to amend this provision "to separate the

requirements that are applieable prior to the new compliance date from those applicable after the
38

new compl iance date. SR at 21. Below, the Board summarizes those proposed amendments on a

subsection-by-subsection basis.

Subsection (a). The Board proposes to amend this subsection to require that, "on and

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

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

existing YOM regulations" SR at 21; see Prop. 218 at 57, Prop. 219 at 55-56. On the basis of

first-notice commcnts, however, the Board has concurred in extending this deadline to August I,

2010. The Board also proposes that "[0]wners and operators offlexographic and rotogravure

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

packaging on the same line shall restrict the YOM content of coatings and inks to .8 kg YOM/kg

solids applied or .16 kg YOM/kg materials applied or less." SR at 21-22; see Prop. 218 at 57-58,

Prop. 219 at 56.

Subsection (b). The Board proposes to amend this subsection to require that, "on and

after May], 2010, owners and operators offlexographie and rotogravure printing lines that do

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

existing weighted averaging requirements." SR at 22; see Prop. 218 at 58-62, Prop. 219 at 56-

61. On the basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred in extending this

deadline to August 1, 2010. The Board also seeks to require that

[0)wners and operators offlexographic and 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 the amendments to subsection

(a) ofthis Section. SR at 22; see Prop. 218 at 58-62, Prop. 219 at 56-61.

The Board also proposes specific "equations for calculating the weighted average YOM content

for such lines." SR at 22; see Prop. 218 at 58-62, Prop. 219 at 56-61. Finally, the Board

proposes a number of non-substantive corrections to the existing language. See SR at 22 (noting

typographical and spacing errors).

Subsectioll (c). The Board proposes to amend this subsection to require that, "on and

after May I, 2010, 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." SR at 22; see Prop. 218 at 62-65, Prop. 2]9 at 61-64. On the basis offirst-notice

comments, however, the Board has concurred in extending this deadline to August I, 20 IO. The

Board seeks also to amend this provision by requiring that "[t)hc owner or operator of a

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 reduction in YOM

emissions of 65-80 percent, depending on the dates that the printing line and control system were

first constructed at the subject source." SR at 22-23; see Prop. 218 at 62-65, Prop. 219 at 61-64.

The Board also proposes to require that "[t)he owner or operator of a flexographic or rotogravure
39

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 [proposed] subsection

(c)(I)(D) or [proposed] subsection (c)(3) ofthis Section, whichever is more stringent." SR at 23,

see Prop. 218 at 62-65, Prop. 219 at 61-64.

The Board also proposes to amend subsection (c)(6) "to specify the printing lines that are

required to perform testing pursuant to this subsection." SR at 23; see Prop. 218 at 64-65, Prop.

219 at 63-64.

Subsectioll (d). The Board seeks to add a new subsection (d). The Board proposes "that

YOM-containing 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." SR at 23; see Prop. 218 at 65, Prop. 219 at 64.

Sectioll 218.4021219.402: ApplicabiliD'. Existing Section 218/219.402 addresses

applicability of various requirements to flexographic and rotogravure printing lines. 35 III. Adm.

Code 218.402, 219.402. The Board proposes to add this section a subsection (b) providing that

the limitations of Section 218/2 I9.40 I(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 of YOM 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.

SR at 23; see Prop. 2] 8 at 66, Prop. 2] 9 at 65.

Sectioll 218.4031219.403: Compliallce Schedule. Existing Section 2] 8/219.403

establishes a compliance schedule for owners and operators of various flexographic and

rotogravure printing lines. 35 III. Adm. Code 218.403, 219.403. The Board proposes to add

subsections (e), (t), and (g) to "establish May I, 2010, as the compliance date for the

requirements set forth in the proposed amendments." SR at 23; see Prop. 218 at 67-68, Prop.

219 at 66. On the basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred in extending

this deadline to August 1,2010.

Sectioll 218.404/219.404: Recordkeepillg alld Reportillg. Existing Section 218/219.404

addresses recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to various printing lines. 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 218.404,219.404. The Board below separately addresses those amendments on a

subsection-by-subsection basis.

Subsectioll (b). The Board proposes to amend the subsection to refer to "recordkeeping

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

amendments to Section 218/219.40 I." SR at 24; see Prop. 218 at 68-70, Prop. 219 at 67-69. In

its first motion to amend, the Agency responded to a request from industry representatives by

proposing to amend subsection (b)(l )(B) "by deleting references to instruments by which

owner[s] or operators may calculate the volume or weight of coatings and inks as applied each

day on subject coating lines, as such instrumcntation is not currently available to sources." Mot.
40

Amend I at 4-5 (~6); see Tr.1 at 19-20. The Board granted the motion, and the amendment is

reflected in the subsection.

Subsectiolls (ci, (d). The Board proposes to amend subsections (c) and (d) "to clarify

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

218/219.40 I(a)(2)(B)or (b)(3) shall certify in accordance with subsection (c)( I) or (d)(I), as

applicable, even ifthe owner or operator ofsuch line subm itted a certification prior to January I,

2010." SR at 24; see Prop. 218 at 70-73, Prop. 219 at 69-72. In its first motion to amend, the

Agency responded to a request from industry representatives by proposing to amend subsection

(d)(l)(D) "by deleting references to instruments by which owner[s] 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" Mot. Amend I at 4-5 (~6); see Tr.1 at 19-

20. The Board granted the motion, and the amendment is reflected in the subsection.

Subsectioll (e). The Board proposes to amend 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 218/219/40 I(c)(6), the owner or operator shall submit a

certification to the Agency that includes specified information" listed in proposed subsection

(e)(l)(B). SR at 24; see Prop. 218 at 73-74, Prop. 219 at 72-73.

The Board also proposes to add a new subsection (e)(4) providing that, "by May 1,2010,

owners or operators of printing lines subject to Section 218/219.40 I(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." SR at 24; see Prop. 218 at 75, Prop. 219 at 74. On the

basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred in extending this deadline to

August 1,2010.

Subsectioll (f). The Board also proposes to add a new subsection (f) to establish

"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 nonflexible packaging on the same line and which is exempt from the limitations of Section

218/219.401(d) because ofthe criteria in Section 21 8/21 9.402(b)." SR at 24; see Prop. 218 at

75-76, Prop. 219 at 74-75. In its first motion to amend, the Agency responds to comment from

industry reprcsentatives by proposing to remove from subsection (f)(2) "the requirement that a

source include in its notification to the Illinois EPA calculations showing an exceedance ofthe

applicability threshold." Mot. Amend I at 5-6 (~7). The Board granted the motion, and the

amendment is reflected in the subsection.

Subsectiofl (g). The Board also proposes to add a new subsection (g) to establish

"recordkceping and reporting requircments for any owner or operator of a printing line subject to

the limitations of Section 218/219.401 (d)," which addresses YOM-containing cleaning materials.

SR at 24-25; see Prop. 218 at 76, Prop. 219 at 75.

Subsectiofl (11). The Board also proposes to add a new subsection (h) providing in its

entirety that "[a] 11 records required by subsections (f) and (g) shall be retained for at least three
41

years and shall be made available to the Agency upon rcquest." Prop. 218 at 76, Prop. 219 at 75;

see SR at 25.

Lithographic Printing.

Introduction. The Agency stated that "[I]ithography is a planographic method of

printing; that is, the printing and nonprinting areas are essentially in the same plane on the

surface ofa thin 'lithographic' plate." TSD at 3. The Agency further stated that the two areas

are distinguished chemically by rendering the image area water repellent and the nonimage arca

watcr receptive." Id.

The Agency described the category of offset lithographic printing: "ink is transferred

from the lithographic plate to a rubber-covered 'intermediate' or 'blanket' cylinder and then to

the substrate." TSD at 3. The Agency stated that this "[t]ransfer ofthe ink from the lithographic

plate to the blanket cylinder, rather than directly to the substrate, is the offset characteristic of

this type of printing." Id.

The Agency stated that offset lithographic printing itself can be categorized by the

manner in which the substrate is fed to the press. TSD at 3. The Agency indicated that, "[i]n

sheet-fed printing, individual sheets of paper 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." Id.

The Agency stated that pigments, vehicles, binders, and other additives comprise

lithographic inks. TSD at 3. The Agency further stated that pigments include both organic and

inorganic materials. Id. The Agency indicated that "[I]ithographic 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." Id. The Agency claimed that

"[h]eatset inks may contain up to 45 percent YaMs." Id. The Agency also listed the

characteristics of non-heatset inks: higher boiling points, less pastiness, and usually less than 35

percent YOM content. Id. The Agency also stated that "[mlost non-heatset inks used in sheetfed printing are below 25 percent YOM." Id.

The Agency stated that printing operations apply a fountain solution to a lithographic

plate to render nonimage areas unreceptive to ink. TSD at 3. Thc Agency further stated that,

"[s]ince printing inks are oil-based and oil is repelled by water, the fountain solution is waterbased." Id. The Agency indicated that these fountain solutions also contain "small quantities of

gum arabic or synthetic resins, acids, and buffer slats to maintain the pH ofthe solution, and a

wetting agent or 'dampening aid' to enhance the spreadability ofthe fountain solution across the

print plate" Id. The Agency stated that the dampening aid reduces the surface tension ofwater

and increases viscosity. Id.

The Agcncy stated that, since the 1950s, isopropyl alcohol, a YOM, "has been used as the

primary dampening aid." TSD at 3. The Agency further stated that "[e]thanol and normal

propyl alcohol have also been used in this capacity." Id. The Agency indicated that, "[b]efore

the 1980s, concentration of alcohol in the fountain solution could range from 0 to 35 percent or
42

higher, with most presses using between 15 and 20 percent." ld. The Agency argued that

printers have since reduced the alcohol content of fountain solution and have "often replaced

alcohol completely with othcr dampening aids." ld. at 4.

The Agency stated that printers use cleaning solutions "to remove excess printing inks,

oils, and paper components from press equipment" and also "to wash the blankets, the rollers, the

outside ofthe presses, and to remove excess ink residue between color changes." TSO at 4. The

Agency further stated that these "solutions are petroleum-based solvents, often mixed with

detergent and/or water." ld. The Agency indicated that "[t]he cleaning compound may be a

single solvent, such as kerosene, or a combination ofsolvents." Jd..

Current Regulations. The Agency stated that Illinois now "has regulations covering all

types of lithographic printing in the NAAs, with an applicability level of I 00 PPO (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." TSO at IS.

Regarding fountain solution, the Agency stated that current regulations applicable to

heatset web presses in the two NAAs "require that subject sources use no more than 1.6 percent

alcohol, or 3 percent ifthe fountain solution is refrigerated." TSO at 4; see 35 III. Adm. Code

218.407(a)(I)(A)(i), (ii); 219.407(a)(I)(A)(i), (ii). The Agency further stated that "fountain

solution using only alcohol substitutes may use up to 5 percent YOM." TSO at 4; see 35 111.

Adm. Code 218.407(a)(I)(A)(iii), 219.407(a)(I)(A)(iii). The Agency also stated that "[n]onheatset web presses cannot use any alcohol and are subject to the same 5 percent YOM limit."

TSO at 4; see 35 III. Adm. Code 218.407(a)(2), 219.407(a)(2). Finally, "[s]heet-fed presses are

limited to 5 percent YOM content or 8.5 percent ifthe solution is refrigerated." TSO at 4; see 35

III. Adm. Code 218.407(a)(3), 219.407(a)(3).

Summary ofProposedAmendments Addressing Lithographic Printing. The Agency

stated that its "proposal does not reduce the applicability threshold for add-on control devices

used by heatset presses." TSO at IS. The Agency thus argued that "no new lithographic printing

units will need to add controls." ld.; see SR at 8. The Agency indicated, however, that "new

control devices on heatset web lithographic presses will need to meet a 95 percent control

efficiency instead ofthe current 90 percent limit." TSO at 15; see Bloomberg Test. at 3. The

Agency expressed the belief that "control devices in existence today can meet the 95 percent

limit, but at the request of printing industry representatives, the Agency has agreed not to ask

existing sources to meet the higher control efficiency." TSO at 15; see Tr.l at 14-15.

The Agency stated that its proposal establishes "a new applicability threshold of IS PPO

for fountain solution and cleaning solution requirements for all lithographic printing operations."

TSO at 15; see Bloomberg Test. at 3. The Agency further stated that "[t]he requirements are the

same as are already present in the Illinois regulations, other than a correction to the fountain

solution limits that changes their measurement from 'by volume' to 'by weight.''' TSO at 15.

The Agency emphasized that "sources between 15 and 100 PPO will be able to take

advantage ofseveral new exclusions pertaining to fountain and cleaning solutions." TSO at IS.
43

The Ageney stated that "[s]heet-fed presses that print substrates no larger than 11 inehes by 17

inches and any lithographic press with a fountain solution reservoir of no larger than one gallon

are not required to comply with the fountain solution requirements." Id.; see Bloomberg Test. at

4. The Agency further stated that "sourees in this [15 to 100 PPD] 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." TSD at 15. Finally, the Agency also stated that "[a]II sueh

sources will also be able to use up to 100 gallons of cleaning solution per year that do not meet

either the YOM content or vapor pressure requirements." Jd. at 15-16.

The Agency stated that, "[b]ecause 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." TSD at 16. The Agency further

stated that "[s]ources may opt out ofthe exclusions ifthey do not wish to make use ofthem, and

thus would not need to calculate emissions in this fashion." Jd.; see Bloomberg Test. at 4.

The Agency stated that "[s]ources which fall below one ofthe applicability limits, and

are thus exempt from one or more control requirements, must eertify this exemption to the

Illinois EPA through ealculations showing that their emissions will not exceed the applicable

YOM threshold." TSD at 16. The Ageney further stated that "[t]hese ealculations must include

all YOM emissions, including inks, fountain solution, and cleaning solvents, and are determined

on a monthly basis." Id.

The Agency emphasized that current regulations recognize "that the substrate retains

some ofthe YOM present in the ink, and thus a retention factor of 0.95 is used when ealeulating

emissions from non-heatset inks, and a factor of 0.20 is used when calculating emissions from

heatset inks." TSD at 16; see Bloomberg Test. at 4. The Agency noted that current regulations

also contain "a faetor recognizing that YOM remains on solvent-laden rags that are stored and

disposed of properly" TSD at 16; see Bloomberg Test. at 4. The Ageney stated that "[t]hese

factors continue to be allowed for determination of applicability." TSD at J6. The Agency also

noted that its "proposal adds emission adjustment factors to be used in other situations when not

determining applieability (such as Annual Emissions Reports and permit limits)." Id. The

Ageney claimed that "[t]hese factors take into account carryover ofVOM from automatie

blanket wash and fountain solutions into the dryer and control device." Id., citing Control

Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, United States

Environmental Protection Ageney, Offiee ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, September

2006; see Bloomberg Test. at 5.

Section 218.405/119.405: Lithographic Printing: Applicability. Existing Section

218/219.405 addresses applieability of various provisions to lithographic printing operations. 35

III. Adm. Code 218.405, 219.405. The Board below separately addresses those amendments on a

sUbsection-by-subsection basis.

Subsections (a), (bi. The Board first proposes "to separate requirements that are

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

date." SR at 25; see Prop. 218 at 76-79, Prop. 219 at 75-78. On the basis offirst-notice

eomments, the Board has coneurred in extending this compliance date to August 1,2010. The
44

Board also seeks to delete the current subsection (a), which establishes "requirements that were

only applicable until March 15, 1996, and refonnatting/renumbering the remaining subsections

accordingly." SR at 25; see Prop. 218 at 76-79, Prop. 219 at 75-78. .

Subsection (c). The Board proposes to add a new subsection (c)(I) providing that, on

and after May I, 2010,

the requirements in Section 21 8/21 9.407(a)( 1)(B) through (a)(I )(E) and

218/219.407(b) and all appl icable provisions in Sections 218/219.408 through

218/219.411 ofthis Subpart shall apply to all owners or operators of heatset 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), before the application of capture systems and control

devices. SR at 25; see Prop. 218 at 78, Prop. 219 at 77.

On the basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred in extending this

deadline to August 1, 2010. The Board proposes in new subsection (c)(2) that, on and after May

1,2010,

Sections 21 8/2 I9.407(a)(1 )(A), 218/219.407(a)(2) through (a)(5), and all

applicable provision sin Sections 218/219.408 through 218/219.4 I 1, shall apply to

all owners and operators oflithographic printing lines at sources where the

combined emissions of YOM from all lithographic printing lines at the source

(including solvents use for cleanup operations associated with the lithographic

printing lines) cver total 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day) or more. SR at 25; see Prop. 218

at 78, Prop. 219 at 77.

Again, on the basis offirst-notice comments, the Board has concurred in extending this deadline

to August 1,20IO.

Finally, the Board proposes in new subsection (c)(3) that,

at sources where the combined emissions of YOM from all lithographic printing

line(s) at the source equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day) but do not exceed

45.5 kg/day (100 Ibs/day), before the application of capture 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. SR at

25-26; see Prop. 218 at 78-79, Prop. 219 at 77-78.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency proposed to correct cross-references in Sections

218/219.405(c)(1 ) and (c)(2) to Section 218/219.408, which the Agency seeks to repeal. Mot.

Amend I at 6-7 (18); see Prop. 218 at 89, Prop. 219 at 88-89. The Agency states that the crossreferences had been "inadvertently left in the rule." Mot. Amend 1 at 6. The Board granted the

motion, and the subsection reflects the amendments.
45

Sectioll 218.406/219.406: Provisiolls Applvillg to Heatset Web Offset LitllOgraphic

Prilltillg Prior to March 15.1996. The Board proposes to repeal this section, "as it contains

requirements that were applicable prior to March 15, 1996." SR at 26; see Prop. 2 I8 at 79-86,

Prop. 219 at 78-85.

Sectioll 218.407/219.407: Emissioll Limitatiolls lIml COlltrol Requiremellts (or

Lithographic Prilltillg Lilies 011 alldAfter March 15, 1996. Existing Section 218/219.407

establishes various requirements applicable to lithographic printing lines on and after March 15,

1996. 35 III. Adm. Code 218.407,219.407. The Board first proposes to amend this section "by

deleting references to the previous compliance dale ofMarch 15, 1996, and separating

requirements that are applicable prior to the new compliance date from those applicable after the

new compliance date." SR at 26; see Prop. 218 at 86-89, Prop. 219 at 85-88. The Board also

proposes to change "the YOM content limitations for fountain solutions fTom 'by volume' to 'by

weight,' as USEPA has informed that Illinois EPA that this is the appropriate way to measure the

limit." SR at 26; see Prop. 218 at 86-89, Prop. 219 at 85-88.

Subsectioll (a). The Board specifically proposes to amend subsection (a)(1 )(C) to

provide that

on and after May 1, 2010, owners or operators ofsubject heatset web offset

lithographic printing lines shall install and operate an afterburner ... so that YOM

emissions from the press dryer exhaust are reduced 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). SR at 26; see Prop. 218 at 87, Prop. 219 at 86.

On the basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred in extending this

deadline to August 1,2010. The Board also proposes to amend subsection (a)(1 )(D) in order "to

delete references to monitoring requirements already set forth in Section 218/219.410." SR at

26; see Prop. 218 at 87, Prop. 219 at 86.

In addition, the Board seeks to amend subsection (a)(4) to provide that,

on and after May I, 2010, owners or operators ofsources that meet the

applicability criteria in Section 21 8/2 I9.405(c)(3) and do not certify pursuant to

Section 2181219.4 JJ(g)(1 )(B) that the source will not make use of any ofthe

exclusions in Section 2 I8/219.405(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. SR at

27; see Prop. 218 at 88, Prop. 219 at 87.

On the basis offirstcnotice comments, the Board has concurred in extending this deadline to

August 1, 2010.
46

The Board also proposes to amend subsection (a)(5) in order "to specify that the storage

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

spccifically in use." SR at 27; see Prop. 218 at 88, Prop. 219 at 87

Subsection (b). The Board specifically proposes to amend subsection (b) to provide that

on and after May 1, 2010, 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). SR at 26; see

Prop. 218 at 88, Prop. 219 at 87-88.

On the basis offirst-notice comments, the Board has concurred in extending this deadline to

August 1,2010.

Section 218.408/219.408: Compliance Schedule (or Lithof!raohic Printing On and

After March 15,1996. The Board proposes to repeal this section in its entirety, "as the pertinent

compliance dates are set forth in Section 218/219.405." SR at 27; see Prop. 218 at 89, Prop. 219

at 88-89; see also Prop. 218 at 76-79, Prop. 219 at 75-78 (proposed Section 218/219.405).

Section 218.4091219.409: Testing (or Lithographic Prilltillg On lind After March 15,

1996. Existing Section 218/219.409 addresses testing for lithographic printers. 35 llI. Adm.

Code 218.409, 219.409. The Agency originally proposed to revise this section by "deleting a

reference to the previous compliance date ofMarch 15, 1996 in the title...." SR at 27; see

Prop. 218 at 89, Prop. 219 at 89.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency also proposed amending subsections (a) and (c)

in order to clarify "when testing pursuant to such Section shall be performed" Mot. Amend I at

7-8 (19). In the same motion, the Agency also proposed to amend subsection (c) "by correcting

an internal cross-reference." Jd. The Board granted the motion, and the subsection reflects the

amendments.

Section 218.410/219.410: Monitoring Requirements (or Lithographic Prillting. The

Agency's original rulemaking proposal did not seek to amend Section 218/219.410, which

addresses monitoring requirements for lithographic printers. See SR at 27, Prop. 218 at 91, Prop.

219 at 91; see also 35111. Adm. Code 218.410, 219.410. In its first motion to amend, the Agency

responded to a comment from industry representatives by noting "several incorrect internal

cross-references within the current Section 218/219.410." Mot. Amend J at 8 (110).

Accordingly, the Agency "proposes amending subsections (b)(J), (b)(2), (e)(J)(B), and (e)(2) to

correct the cross-references." Jd. at 8-14. The Board granted the motion, included Section

218.410/219.410 in its first-notice opinion and order, and corrected the cross-references

identified by the Agency.
47

Section 218.411/219.411: RecordkeepinR and Reporting (or Lithographic Printing.

Existing Section 218/219All addresses recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicablc to

lithographic printers. See 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.411, 2190411. Generally, the Board proposes to

amend "this Section by deleting references to the previous compliance date ofMarch 15, 1996,

and clarifying the requiremcnts that apply to sources prior to the new compliancc date and those

that apply on and aftcr the new compliance date" SR at 27-28; see Prop. 218 at 92-114, Prop.

219 at 91-114. On the basis offirst-notice comments, the Board has concurred in extending the

compliance date to August 1, 2010.

Subsection (a). Existing subsection (a) addresses lithographic printing lines exempt from

the limitations of Section 218/2190407 on the basis of criteria in Section 218/2) 90405. See 35 III.

Adm. Code 218.4II(a), 219AII(a). The Board proposes to add to this subsection "the equation

for calculating maximum theoretic emissions of YOM, which was previously contained in

Section 218/219.406." SR at 28; see Prop. 218 at 93-95, Prop. 219 at 92-94. In its first motion

to amend, the Agency proposes to amend the key to that equation "by deleting refcrence to

instruments by which owners or operators may calculate the volume ofinks as applicd each day

on subject printing lines, as such instrumentation is not currently availablc to sources." Mot.

Amend I at 14-15 ('\111). The Board granted the motion, and the subsection reflects the

amendment.

Subsection (b). The Board proposes "adding a new subsection (b), which contains

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

201 O... " SR at 28. On the basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred

in extending this date to August I, 2010. Proposed subsection (b)(l) specifically addresses

printing lines exempt under Section 218.405(c)(2). In addition to standard recordkeeping and

reporting rcquirements, thc Board in that provision

proposes an emission adjustment factor to be used when determining YOM

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 towcls 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 in closed containers. SR at 28; see Prop. 218 at 95-100, Prop. 219 at 94-100.

At the request ofindustry representatives, the Agency also proposed in subsection (b)(l)(C) an

alternative to the YOM emissions calculations in subsection (b)(J)(B): "a source may determine

that it emits bclow 6.8 kg/day (l5Ibs/day) of YOM ifit complies with material use limitations

during each month." SR at 28, Tr.1 at 21; see Prop. 218 at 97, Prop. 219 at 96-97. The Agency

sought to provide that this material use alternative is limited to sources with only a single type of

lithographic printing operation. SR at 28; see Prop. 218 at 97, Prop. 219 at 96. The Agency

proposcd that, "[i]f a source exceeds the material use limitation in any given month, the source

shall complete emissions calculations pursuant to subsection (b)(l)(B) within J5 days ofthe end

ofthat month." SR at 28; see Prop. 218 at 97, Prop. 219 at 96. The Agency further proposed

that a source exceeding the limitations for six consecutive months is no longer eligible to rely on

the alternative. SR at 28-29; see Prop. 218 at 97, Prop. 219 at 96-97.
48

In its first motion to amend, the Agency noted that "USEPA prcviously recommended

that material use thresholds for such lines be conservativcly based on the pound pcr day

applicability threshold." Mot. Amend I at I5 (~12). The Agency stated that "USEPA has now

determined that a 90 percent emission equivalency level is acceptable for both lithographic and

letterpress printing operations." Jd. The Agcncy sought to amend subsection (b)(I)(C)(i) and

(b)(I )(C)(ii) of its proposal to reflect that subsequent USEPA determination. Jd. at 15-16.

Also in its first motion to amend, the Agency respondcd to a comment by industry

rcprcscntatives by proposing to amend subsection (b)(I )(E). Mot. Amend I at 16 (~13).

Specifically, the Agency sought to remove "the requirement that a source include in its

notification to the Illinois EPA calculations showing an cxceedance ofthe applicability

thrcshold." Jd at 16-17. Responding to a question at the first hearing, the Agency clarified that,

when a source reports an exceedance under this provisions, "they do not have to tell us how

much they exceeded it by." Tr. I at 22. The Agency emphasized that this requirement intends

chicfly to detennine whether a source is subject to the rule and not to determine the precise

amount of an exceedance. See id. at 22-23. The Board granted the Agency's motion, and the

subsection reflects the amendments.

The Board also proposes a new subsection (b)(2) addressing "heatset web offset

lithographic printing lines exempt pursuant to Section 218/219.405(c)(I) but not exempt

pursuant to Section 21812 I9.405(c)(2). SR at 29; see Prop. 218 at 98-100, Prop. 219 at 98- I00.

In addition to standard recordkeeping and reporting requirements, the Board in that provision

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 (68°P) and the shop towels are kept in

closed containers." SR at 29; see Prop. 218 at 98-100, Prop. 219 at 98-100.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency responded to a comment by industry representatives by

proposing to amend subsection (b)(2)(D). Mot. Amend 1 at I5-17 (~14). Specifically, the

Agency seeks to remove "the requirement that a source include in its notification to the Illinois

EPA calculations showing an exceedances ofthe applicability threshold." Jd.; see Tr.! at 22.

The Board granted the motion, and the subsection reflects the amendment.

Subsection (c). The Board proposes to redesignate the existing subsection (a)(2) as

subection (c). Prop. 218 at 100-02, Prop. 2I9 at 100-02; see 35 III. Adm. Code 218.4]] (a)(2),

219.411 (a)(2). Thc Board amends this provision "to provide that the rccordkeeping requirements

in subsections (c)(I) or (c)(2) do not apply to sources utilizing the material use limitations

alternative. SR at 29; see Prop. 218 at 100-02, Prop. 219 at 100-02. The Board also proposes to

delete subsection (c)(3). SR at 29; see Prop. 218 at 102, Prop. 219 at ]02.

Subsection (d). Existing subsection (b) establishes requirements applicable to heatset

web offset lithographic printing line(s) subject to Section 218/219.407(a)(I )(C) or (b)(1). See 35

III. Adm. Code 218.411(b), 219.41 1(b). In the re-designated subsection (d), the Board adds a
49

requirement "that sources complying with the add-on control device requirements shall include

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

subject source." SR at 29; see Prop. 218 at J02-04, Prop. 219 at 102-04. The Board also

proposes to amend subsection (d)(3)(0) "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." SR at 29; see Prop. 218 at 104, Prop. 2 I9 at

104.

Subsection (e). Existing subsection (c) establishes requirements applicable to

lithographic printing lines subject to Sections 218/219.407(a)(I )(A), (a)(2), or (a)(3). See 35 111.

Adm. Code 218.411 (c), 2 I9.411 (c). In the re-designated subsection (e), the Board "proposes

amending subsection (e)(I)(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 2181219.407(a)(I)(A), (a)(2), or (a)(3), as

applicable." SR at 30; see Prop. 218 at 105, Prop. 219 at 104. The Board also proposes to

amend subsection (e)(2)(C) "to provide that the weight of each component used in a fountain

solution batch shall be recorded by sources, ifapplicable." SR at 30; see Prop. 218 at 106, Prop.

219 at 106. In addition, the Board "proposes deleting subsection (e)(4)." SR at 30; see Prop.

218 at 107, Prop. 219 at 107.

Subsectioll (f). Existing subsection (d) establishes requirements for lithographic printing

lines subject to Section 218/2 I9.407. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.4 JI(d), 219.411 (d). In the redesignated subsection (f)(l), the Board proposes an amendment "to specify that lithographic

printing line cleaning operations that are excluded pursuant to Section 2 I8/2 I9.405(c)(3)(C) are

not required to submit a certification pursuant to subsection (I)." SR at 30; see Prop. 218 at 108,

Prop. 219 at 107-08. In addition, the Board "proposes deleting subsection (f)( I)(A), (1)( I)(C),

and (f)(4), and amending the re-Iettered subsection (f)(I)(A) to provide that a source subject to

the cleaning requirements in Section 218/219.407 shall include in its initial certification a

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

2] 8/2 I9.407(a)(4)." SR at 30; see Prop. 218 at 108-10; Prop. 219 at 108-10.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency responded to a request from industry

representatives. Mot. Amend I at 17-18 (~15). The Agency proposed amending subsections

(f)(2)(B) and (f)(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." !d. at 18-I9. The Board granted the motion, and the subsection reflects the

amendment.

Subsectioll (g). The Board proposes to add a new subsection (g). The Board seeks to

establish "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)."

SR at 30; see Prop. 218 at 111-12, Prop. 2 I9 at 110-12. Specifically, the Board proposes that

[s]uch owners or operators shall submit an initial certification to the Illinois EPA,

collect and record specified information for cach subject printing line, notify the
50

Agency ifthe printing line ever becomes ineligible for the exclusions set forth in

Section 218/219.405(c)(3), and, if changing between opting out ofsuch

exclusions and utilization of the exclusions, submit an additional certification,

informing the lIlinois EPA of the change. SR at 30-31; see Prop. 218 at 111-12,

Prop. 219 at 110-12.

In responding to a question at the first hearing, the Agency indicated that, as a source, "you

would not have to report the information under [subsection) (g)(2)(A) if you did state that you

would not be using the exclusion." Tr.1 at 16-18.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency responded to a request from industry

representatives by proposing to amend subsection (g)(2)(A)(ii) "to correct a grammar mistake."

Mot Amend 1 at 20 (~16). Also in the first motion to amend, the Agency responded to an

industry comment by proposing to amend subsection (g)(2)(B) "by removing the requirement

that a source include in its notification to llIinois EPA calculations showing an exceedances of

the applicability threshold." Id. at 20-21 (~17). The Board granted the motion, and the

subsection reflects the amendments.

Subsectioll (i). The Board also proposes to add a subsection (i). The Board seeks to

establish "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." SR at 31; see Prop. 218 at 112-14, Prop. 219 at 112-14.

Letterpress Printing.

Illtroductioll. The Agency stated that "[I)etterpress printing involves the use of a

reverse-imaged raised surface that is inked and then pressed against a substrate to transfer the

image." TSD at 4 (§2.2). The Agency further stated that, compared with lithographic,

flexographic, and rotogravure printing, "[I)etterpress operation make up a vcry small percentage

ofthe printing industry." Id. Based on its source inventory, the Agency indicated that "no

Ictterpress printing facility could be found in the Metro-East NAA, with very few ofthese

facilities found even in the Chicago NAA." Id.

In testimony on bchalfofthe Agency, Mr. Bloomberg indicated that "the State is still

required to promulgate the CTG regulations for this category." Bloomberg Test. at 5. He further

stated that "lctterpress printing presses are often operated at the same source as lithographic

printing[,) and many ofthc control options for lettcrpress printing are thc same as the control

options for lithographic printing as well. This is especially true in tenns of cleaning solutions.

As such, the proposed rule would adopt most ofthe RACT recommendations of the CTG." Id.

The Agency stated that letterpress and lithographic printing operations use inks that are

"very similar" and may both be accomplished through sheet-fed and web presses. TSD at 4.

The Agency thus argued that "ink emission sources are similar" to those of lithographic printing.

Id. The Agency filrther argued that, although "[I)etterpress operations do not use fountain

solutions," they use cleaning solutions similar to those used in lithographic printing operations."

TSD at 4; see Bloomberg Test. at5.
51

Currellt Regulatiolls. The Ageney stated that "[t]here are no speeifie Illinois regulations

covering letterpress printing operations; any such operations would therefore be covered by

Subpart IT, Section 218/219.301, or paper coating regulations. TSO at 16 (§5.2); see 35 III.

Adm. Code 218.204(e), 218.301,218.980-988, 219.204(e), 219.301,219.980-988.

Summary ofProposedAmelldmellts Addressillg Letterpress Prilltillg. The Agency

stated that its proposal addresses "both heatset and non-heatset letterpress operations." TSO at

16; see Prop. 218 at 114-129, Prop. 219 at 114-30. The Agency further stated that the proposal

"would require that heatset letterpress printers use an add-on control device if they meet the

applicability requirements of25 TPY PTE plantwide." TSO at 16; see SR at 8-9. The Agency

believed that no operation in either ofthe two NAAs would be subject to this requirement. TSO

at 16.

The Agency further stated that "[a]lIletterpress printing operations of 15 PPO or more

will be also required to abide by cleaning material Iimitations equivalent to those" applicable to

lithographic printing sources emitting between 15 and 100 PPO. TSO at 16; see SR at 9.

Specifically, such sources would be required to use cleaning solutions containing no more than

70 percent YOM or having a maximum composite partial vapor pressure or less than 10 mm Hg.

TSO at 16. In his testimony on behalfofthe Agency, Mr. Bloomberg stated that, because

letterpress printing operations have never specifically been regulated in Illinois, this 70 percent

content limit represents no loosening of existing standards. Bloomberg Test. at 5.

SectioIl218.412/219.412: Letterpress PrintillgLilles: Applicability. The Board

proposes a new Section 218/219.412 addressing the applicability ofthe proposed letterpress

printing provisions. SR at 31; see Prop. 218 at 114, Prop. 219 at 114. Below, the Board

summarizes those proposed additions on a subsection-by-subseetion basis.

Subsection (aj. The Board proposes a new subsection (a)(I) providing "that the

limitations in Section 218/219.413 through 218/219.416 apply to all owners of operators of

heatset 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 of

YOM per year." SR at 31; see Prop. 218 at 114, Prop. 219 at 114. The Board also proposes a

new subsection (a)(2) providing that "Sections 218/219.413 through 218/219.416 apply to all

owners or operators of letterpress printing lines at sources where the combined emissions of

YOM 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." SR at 31; see Prop. 218 at 114,

Prop. 219 at 114.

Subsectioll (b). The Board proposes a new subsection (b) providing "that the

requirements of Section 218/21 9.413(a)(2) shall not apply to up to 416.3 liters (100 gallons) per

year of cleaning materials used on letterpress printing lines at a subject source." SR at 31; see

Prop. 218 at 114, Prop. 219 at 114.
52

Subsection (c). The Board proposes a new subsection (c) providing that, "on and after

May 1, 2010, the record keeping and reporting requirements in Section 218/219.417 shall apply

to all owners or operators ofletterpress printing Iine(s)." SR at 32; see Prop. 218 at 114, Prop.

219 at 114. On the basis offirst-notice comments, however, the Board has concurred in

extending this deadline to August 1,2010.

Subsection (d). The Board proposes a new subsection (d) providing that, "if a letterpress

printing line at a source is or becomcs subject to one or more ofthe limitations in Section

218/219.413, the letterpress printing lines at the source are always subject to the provisions of

Subpart H." SR at 32; see Prop. 218 at 114, Prop. 219 at 114.

Section 218.4131219.413: Emission Limitations and Control Requirements (or

Letterpress Printing Lines. The Board proposes to add a new Section 218/219.4 I3 establishing

various requirements for letterpress printing lines. SR at 32; see Prop. 2I8 at I 15-16, Prop. 219

at 115-16.

Subsection (a). The Board proposes a new subsection (a)(I) providing in part that

heatset web letterpress printing lines that meet the applicability requirements of

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

the air pressure ofthe press room and install and operate an afterburner that

reduces YOM emissions by 90-95 percent, depending on the date that the

afterburner was first constructed at the subject source, or to a maximum

afterburner exhaust outlet concentration of20 mmpv (as carbon). SR at 32; see

Prop. 218 at 115, Prop. 219 at 115.

In addition, the Board proposes to require that "[s]uch 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." SR at 32; see Prop.

218 at 115, Prop. 219 at 115.

The Board also proposes a new subsection (a)(2) providing that "no owner or operator of

subject letterpress printing lines shall use cleaning solutions on such lines unless the YOM

content ofthe as-used cleaning solution is less than or equal to 70 percent, by weight, or the

YOM composite vapor pressure ofthe as-used cleaning solution is less than 10 mmHg at 20

degrees Celsius." SR at 32; see Prop. 218 at 115-16, Prop. 219 at 115-16.

In proposed subsection (a)(3), the Board seeks to require that "[c]leaning materials must

be kept, stored, and disposed of in closed containers, except when specifically in use." SR at 32;

see Prop. 218 at 116, Prop. 219 at 116.

Subsection (b). The Board proposes a new subsection (b) providing "that heatset web

letterpress printing lines may use a control device other than an afterburner ifthe control device

meets the YOM emissions reduction requirements in subsection (a) and is approved by the

Illinois EPA and USEPA as federally enforceable permit conditions." SR at 33; see Prop. 218 at

116, Prop. 219 at 116.
53

Section 218.415/219.415: Testing (or Letterpress Printing Lines. The Board proposes

to add a new section addressing testing requirements applicable to letterpress printing lines

subject to Section 218/219.413. SR at 33-34; see Prop. 218 at I] 6-] 9, Prop. 219 at 116-19.

Subsection (a). In proposed subsection (a), the Board seeks to require "that testing to

demonstrate compliance with [Section] 218/219.4] 3 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 1I1inois EPA 30 days in advance of conducting such testing." SR at 33; see Prop.

218 at 116, Prop. 219 at 116. In its first motion to amend, the Agency responds to a request by

industry representatives by seeking to amend this subsection to clarify when testing must be

performed. Mot. Amend I at 21 (~18). The Board granted the motion, and the subsection

reflects the amendment.

Subsection (b). In subsection (b), the Board proposes to describe "the methods and

procedures in Section 218/219.1 05(d) and (t) 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)." SR at 33; see Prop. 218 at 117-18, Prop. 219 at 117-18.

Subsection (c). The Board proposes a new subsection (c) providing "that testing to

demonstrate compliance with the YOM content limitations in Section 218/219.413(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)." SR at

33; see Prop. 218 at 118, Prop. 219 at 1J8. The Board also seeks to provide in subsection (c)(2)

that "[t]he 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

218/2] 9.105(a)." SR at 33; see Prop. 218 at 118, Prop. 219 at 118.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency responds to a request by industry representatives

by seeking to amend this subsection to clarify when testing must be performed. Mot. Amend I

at 21 (~18). The Board granted the motion, and the subsection reflects the amendment.

Subsection (d). The Board proposes a new subsection (d) providing "that testing to

demonstrate compliance with Section 218/219.413(b) shall be conducted as set forth in the

owner or operator's plan approved by the lIlinois EPA and USEPA as federally enforceable

pennit conditions." SR at 34; see Prop. 218 at 118, Prop. 219 at 118.

Subsection (e). The Board proposes a new subsection (e) providing "that testing to

detennine 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." SR at 34; see Prop. 218

at 118-19, Prop. 219 at 118-19.

Section 218.416/219.416: Monitoring Requirements (or Letterpress Printing Lines.

The Board proposes to add a new section addressing monitoring of emissions from letterpress

printing lines. See SR at 34, Prop. 218 at 119-20, Prop. 219 at 119-20.
54

Subsectioll (a). The Board proposes a new subsection (a) providing "that, ifan

afterburner is used to demonstrate compl iance, the owner or operator of a heatset web letterpress

printing line shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate temperature monitoring devices with

an accuracy 0[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." SR at 34; see Prop. 218 at 119, Prop. 219

at 119. The Board also seeks to require in proposed new subsection (a)(1) that monitoring must

be "performed at all times when the afterburner is operating...." Prop. 218 at 119, Prop. 219 at

1]9; see SR at 34. In subsection (a)(2), the Board proposes to require that "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." SR at 34; see Prop. 218 at 119, Prop. 219 at 119.

Subsectioll (b). The Board proposes a new subsection (b) providing "that if a control

device other than an afterburner is used to demonstrate compliance, the owner or operator of a

hcatsct 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)" SR at 34; see Prop. 218 at 119, Prop. 219 at 119.

Subsectioll (c). The Board proposes a new subsection (c) setting "forth the monitoring

requirements for owners or operators ofJetterpress printing lines relying on the YOM content of

the cleaning solution to comply with Section 2181219.413(a)(2)(A), or relying on the vapor

pressure ofthe cleaning solution to comply with Section 21 8/21 9(a)(2)(B)." SR at 35; see Prop.

218 at 119-20, Prop. 219 at 119-20.

Sectioll 218.417/219.417: Recordkeepillg alld Reportillg (or Letterpress Prilltillg

Lilles. The Board proposes to add a new section addressing record keeping and reporting for

letterpress printing lines. SR at 35; see Prop. 218 at 120-29, Prop. 219 at 120-30.

Subsectioll (a). The Board proposes a new subsection (a) providing

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

any ofthe 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 YOM does not equal or exceed 25 tons per year.

SR at 35; see Prop. 218 at Il9, Prop. 219 at 120.

Subsectioll (b). The Board proposes a new subsection (b) providing

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 of YOM from all letterpress printing lines at the source never equal or

exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day), and a description and the results of all tests used
55

to determine the YOM content ofinks and cleaning solvents. SR at 35; see Prop.

218 at 120-23, Prop. 219 at 120-23.

In its proposed subsection (b)(1 )(D), the Board seeks to provide that, "as an alternative to

the YOM emission calculations set forth in subsection (b)( I)(B), a source may determine that it

emits below 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day) ofVOM ifit complies with material use limitations during

each calendar month." SR at 35-36; see Prop. 218 at 122, Prop. 219 at 122. The Board proposes

language limiting the availability ofthis alternative to sources with only a single type of

letterpress printing operations. SR at 35-36; see Prop. 218 at 122, Prop. 219 at 122. The Board

also proposes to require that, "[i]f a source exceeds the material use limitation in any given

month, the source shall complete emissions calculations pursuant to subsection (b)(1 )(B) within

15 days ofthe end ofthat month." SR at 36; see Prop. 218 at 122, Prop. 219 at 122. The Board

also proposes that any source exceeding the limitation for six consecutive months is no longer

eligible to rely upon the material use alternative. SR at 36; see Prop. 218 at 122, Prop. 219 at

122.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency proposed to change the material use thresholds

for letterpress printing lines. Mot. Amend 1 at 22 (~19). The Agency states that "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 emissions equivalency level is acceptable for both lithographic

and letterpress printing operations." Jd. Accordingly, the Agency seeks to amend proposed

subsections (b)(1)(D)(i) and (b)(1)(D)(ii) to reflect this 90 percent equivalency. Jd. The Board

granted the motion, and the subsection reflects the amendment.

In proposed subsection (b)(2), the Board seeks to require that subject sources shall notify

the Agency ifthe combined emissions ofVOM from all letterpress printing lines at the source

ever equal or exceed 6.8 kg/day (15 Ibs/day)." SR at 35; see Prop. 218 at 123, Prop_ 219 at 123.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency proposed to amend subsection (b)(2) "by removing the

requirement that a source include in its notification to the lllinois EPA calculations showing an

exceedance ofthe applicability threshold." Mot. Amend 1 at 22-23 (~20). The Board granted

the motion, and the subsection reflects the amendment.

Subsection (c). The Board proposes a new subsection (c) providing "that, unless

utilizing the material use alternative, the owner or operator of a letterpress printing line subject to

the requirements in subsection (a) or (b) ofthis Section shall collect and record either the

specified standard recordkeeping information or the specified purchase and inventory

recordkeeping information." SR at 36; see Prop. 218 at 123-24, Prop. 219 at 123-25.

Subsection (d). The Board proposes a new subsection (d)(1) providing

that the owner or operator of a heatset web letterpress printing line subject to

Section 218/219.413(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)(1) or (b), the type of afterburner or other approved control
56

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

source, the control requirements with which the printing Iine is complying, the

results of all tests and calculations necessary to demonstrate compliance, and a

declaration that thc rcquired monitoring equipment has been properly installed

and calibrated. SR at 36; see Prop. 218 at 125-27, Prop. 219 at 125-27.

Proposed subsection (d)(2) seeks to require that,

if the testing of an afterburner or other approved control device is conducted

pursuant to Section218/219.415(b), the owner or operator shall submit a copy of

all test results to Illinois EPA, as well as a certification that includes a declaration

that all necessary tests and calculations have been performed, a statement whether

the printing line is in compliance with Section 21 8/21 9.41 3(a)(I)(B) or (b)(I), and

the operating parameters ofthe afterburner or other approved control device

during testing. SR at 37; see Prop. 218 at 125-26, Prop. 219 at 126.

The subsection also proposes that an owner or operator changing its method of compliance "must

certify compliance for the new method of compliance and perform all tests and calculations

necessary to demonstrate compliance with such method." SR at 37; see Prop. 218 at 126-27,

Prop. 219 at 127.

Subsection (d)(3) also proposcs to require that an owner or operator "collect and record

specified information for each heatset web letterpress printing line and notify the Illinois EPA of

any violation of Section 2181219.413(a)(I)(B) or (b)(I)." SR at 36; see Prop. 218 at 125-27,

Prop. 219 at 125-27.

Subsectioll (e). The Board proposes a new subsection (e) establishing various

recordkeeping and reporting requirements. See SR at 37, Prop. 218 at 127-29, Prop. 219 at 127-

30. The proposed provision "provides that the owner or operator of a letterpress printing line

shall certify to the Illinois EPA that all cleaning solutions, other than those excluded pursuant to

Section 218.412(b), and the handling of all cleaning materials will be in compliance with Section

218/219.4 I3(a)(2)(A) or (a)(2)(B) and (a)(3)." SR at 37; see Prop. 218 at 127, Prop. 219 at 127.

The proposed certification must also include specific information regarding cleaning operations

at the subject printing line. SR at 37; see Prop. 218 at 127, Prop. 219 at 127. In addition, "[t]he

owner or operator shall collect and record specified information for each solution used on each

letterpress printing line and notify the Illinois EPA of any violation of Section 218/219.413." SR

at 37; see Prop. 218 at 127-29, Prop. 219 at 127-30.

In its first motion to amend, the Agency responded to comment by industry

representatives by proposing to amend subsections 218/219(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." Mot.

Amend I at 23-25 (~21). The Board granted the motion, and the subsection reflects the

amendment.
57

Subsection (J). The Board proposes a new subsection (f) providing "that the owner or

operator of a printing line shall maintain all records required by this Section for a minimum

period ofthree years and shall make all records available to the Agency upon request." SR at 38;

see Prop. 218 at 129, Prop. 219 at 130.

CONCLUSION

The Board proposes for second notice rcview amendments to its regulations governing

VOM emissions in Parts 211, 218, and 219 (35 III. Adm. Code 211, 218, 219). Substantivcly,

the Board is adopting the Agency's amended proposal and incorporating comments received

during first notice, as described above in this opinion.

ORnER

The Board directs the Clerk to file the following proposed amendments with lCAR for

second-notice review. Proposed additions are underlined, and proposed deletions appear

stricken.

TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE B: AIR POLLUTION

CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

SUBCHAPTER c: EMISSION STANDARDS AND LIMITATIONS FOR

STATIONARY SOURCES

PART 211

DEFINlTlONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

SUBPART A: GENERAL PROVISIONS

Section

211.101

211.102

Section

211.121

211.I22

211.BO

211.150

211.170

211.210

211.230

211.240

211.250

Incorporations by Refcrence

Abbreviations and Convcrsion Factors

SUBPART B: DEFINlTlONS

Other Definitions

Definitions (Repealed)

Accelacota

Accumulator

Acid Gases

Actual Heat Input

Adhesive

Adhesion Promoter

Aeration
A 20
JOINT COMMITTEE ONADMINISTRATIVERULES

ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

CO-CHAIR:

SEN. MAGGIE CROTTY

CO-CHAIR:

REP. ANGELO "SKIP' SAVIANO

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:

VICKI THOMAS

700 STRAITON BUILDING

SPRINGFIELD, ILUNOIS 62706

217/785-2254

MEMORANDUM

SEN. J. BRADLEY BURZYNSKI

SEN. RANDALL HULTGREN

SEN. MAHlE HUNTER

SEN. DAN RUTHERFORD

SEN. IRA SILVERSTEIN

REP. JOHN FRITCHEY

REP. LOU LANG

REP. DAVID MILLER

REP. DONALD MOFFITI

REP. ROSEMARY MUlliGAN

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

RE:

Tanner Girard, Chainnan

Pollution Control Board

Vicki Thomas

Executive Director

5/18/1 0

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

34 Ill. Reg. 1766 - 2/5/1 0

The Office of the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules has accepted the Second Notice for

the above-referenced rulemaking. The Second Notice period began on'31DWO' and ends no later

than 7/1/10, unless extended pursuant to Section 5-40 ofthe IAPA.

This rulernaking is scheduled to be considered by JCAR at its 6/15/10 meeting, currently

scheduled for 11:00 a.m., Room 16-503, James R. Thompson Center, Chicago, IL. Staffwill be

contacting you if they have questions concerning this rulemaking and will advise you of any

change in time or location ofthe Committee meeting.

Please contact us if youhave any questions regarding the JCAR review procedure.

VT:DC:nn

cc: Tim Fox

Adm. Code Div.
JOINT COMMITTEE ONADMINISTRATIVE RULES

ILUNOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

CO-CHAIR:

SEN. MAGGIE CROTTY

CO-CHAIR:

REP. ANGELO ·SKIP" SAVIANO

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:

VICKI THOMAS

SEN. J. BRADLEY BURZYNSKI

SEN. RANDALL HULTGREN

SEN. MATIIE HUNTER

SEN. DAN RUTHERFORD

SEN. IRA SILVERSTEIN

REP: JOHN FRITCHEY

REP. LOU LANG

REP, DAVID MILLER

REP. DONALD MOFFITT

REP. AOSEMARY MUlUGAN

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

700 STAATION BUILDING

SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 62706

217n85-2254

MEMORANDUM

Tanner Girard, Chainnan

Pollution Control Board

Vicki Thomas

Executive Director

5/18/10

RECEIVED

CLERK'S OFFICE

MAY 20 2010

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

RE: Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Chicago Area (35

Ill. Adm. Code 218)

34 Ill. Reg. 1791 - 2/5/10

The Office ofthe Joint Committee on Administrative Rules has accepted the Second Notice for

the above-referenced rulemaking. The Second Notice period began on 5/18/1 0 and ends no later

than 7/1110, unless extended pursuant to Section 5-40 ofthe IAPA.

This rulemaking is scheduled to be considered by JCAR at its 6/15/1 0 meeting, currently

scheduled for 11:00 a.m., Room 16-503, James R. Thompson Center, Chicago, IL. Staff will be

contacting you if they have questions concerning this rulemaking and will advise you of any

change in time or location ofthe Committee meeting.

Please contact us if you have any questions regarding the JCAR review procedure.

VT:DC:nn

cc: Tim Fox

Adm. Code Div.
JOINT COMMITTEE ONADMINISTRATIVE RULES

ILUNOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

CO·CHAIR:

REP, ANGELO ·SKIP" SAVIANO

CO-CHAIR:

SEN. MAGGIE CROlTY

EXEcunVE DIRECTOR:

VICKlmOMAS

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

700 STRAITON BUILDING

SPRINGFIELD,ILUNOIS6270G

217"85-2254

MEMORANDUM

Tanner Girard, Chairman

Pollution Control Board

Vicki Thomas

Executive Director

5/18110

SEN. J. BRADLEY BURZYNSKI

SEN. RANDALL HULTGREN

SEN, MAITrE HUNTER

SEN. DAN RUTHERFORD

SEN. IRA SILVERSTEIN

AEP, JOHN FRJTCHEY

REP, lOU LANG

REP. DAVID MILLER

REP. DONALD MOFFrrr

REP. ROSEMARY MULLIGAN

RECEBVED

CLERl.<'S OFFICE

MAY·20201O

STATE OF lLUNOIS

Pollution control Bo8Id

RE: Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Metro East Area (35

m. Adm. Code 219)

34111. Reg. 1941- 215110

The Office of the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules has accepted the Second Notice for

the above-referenced rulemaking. The Second Notice period began on 5/18/10 and ends no later

than 7/1/10, unless extended pursuant to Section 5-40 ofthe 1APA.

This rulemaking is scheduled to be considered by JCAR at its 6/15/10 meeting, currently

scheduled for 11:00 a.m., Room 16-503, James R. Thompson Center, Chicago, 11. Staff will be

contacting you if they have questions concerning this rulemaking and will advise you of any

change in time or location ofthe Committee meeting.

Please contact us if you have any questions regarding the JCAR review procedure.

VT:DC:rm

cc: Tim Fox

Adm. Code Div.
A 21
Flexible Packaging Association

June 4, 2010

Tim Fox, Attorney Assistant to Member Moore

Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

Illinois Pollution Control Board

700 Stratton Building

Springfield, IL 62706

foxt@ipcb.state.il.us

Ms. Vicki Thomas, Executive Director

Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

Illinois General Assembly

700 Stratton Building

Springfield, Illinois 62706

jcar@ilga.gov

REcelVED

CLERK'S OFFIce

JUN 0'2010

STATE OF tWNO

Pollution ContrOl

Re: In the Matter of: Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for Volatile

Organic Matter Emissions from Group II Consumer & Commercial Products:

Proposed Amendments to ILL. Adm. Code 211, 218 and 219.

R10-8 (Rulemaking - Air)

Dear Mr. Fox and Ms. Thomas,

Introduction - The Flexible Packaging Association (FPA) appreciates the opportunity to

file comments on !PCB's Proposed Rulemaking concerning proposed amendments to

VOM-RACT requirements for Group II Conswner & Commercial Products

manufacturers. FPA's comments pertain specifically to proposed testing requirements

applicable to owners or operators offlexographic or rotogravure printing lines that print

flexible packaging and use a capture system and control device to meet emission

limitations. FPA offers some alternative language to be considered in these comments.

FPA was established in 1950 and is a national trade association comprised of

manufacturers and suppliers offlexible packaging. The industry's members are

converters that produce packaging for food, healthcare, and industrial products using

paper, film, foil, or any combination ofthese materials and include manufacturers in

Illinois that would be subject to this rule iffinalized. Examples offlexible packaging

include rollstock, bags, pouches, labels, liners, wraps, and tamper-evident packaging for

food and medicine. Flexible packaging, a $25.6 billion iridustry, employs approximately

!!i.

-..--.. ~" .. source ~:reduction _............~. ItsIcwaslelntlxlrn:sr~'

97J Corporate Boulevard. Suite 403 • Limhicum. Maryland 21090

phone: 410.694.0800. fax: 410.694.0900. e~mail:fpa@jlexpackorg.web: wwwflexpackorg
80,000 people in the United States and is now the second largest segment ofthe U.S.

packaging market estimated at $135 billion.

In FPA's review ofthe agency's file on the proposed rulemaking, we recognized that the

proposal closely followed US EPA guidance per document EPA 453/R-06-006 "Control

Techniques Guideline for Flexible Package Printing" dated September 2006. FPA

supported US EPA's use ofthe CTG for guidance on RACT requirements and largely

supported the 2006 CTG as drafted. The Association and its member companies were

actively involved in the CTG development and acted as a technical resource to EPA

officials throughout the development ofthe eTG guidance particularly with regard to

operational complexities offlexible packaging processes, pollution control equipment,

cost infonnation and insights regarding the operations ofthe industry, its capabilities and

limitations.

THE IPCB PROPOSAL - Notwithstanding the proposed rules reliance on the CTG, the

proposed condition that concerns FPA relates to a condition that does not come from the

CTG. Specifically FPA is concerned with the requirement under Part 218.401(c)(6)

relating to capture system and control device requirements. Condition (c)(6) ofthis

subsection states:

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

218.40I(c)(3) shall perform testing in compliance with this subsection (c)(6),

even if the owner or operator already performed such testing prior to August

1,2010, unless the following conditions are met. Nothing in this subsection

(c)(6), however, shall limit the Agency's ability to require that the owner or

operator perfonn testing pursuant to Section 201.282:

A) On or after May I, 2000, the owner or operator ofthe subject printing line

perfonned all testing necessary to demonstrate compliance with Section

218.401(c)(J)(B):

B) Such testing also demonstrated an overall control efficiency equal to or

greater than the applicable control efficiency requirements in Section

218.401(c)(3):

C) The owner or operator submitted the results ofsuch tests to the Agency,

and the tests were not rejected by the Agency;

D) The same capture and control device subject to the tests referenced in

subsection (c)(6)(A) ofthis Section is still being used by the subject

printing line; and

E) The owner or operator complies with all recordkeeping and reporting

requirements in Section 218.404(e)(J)(B);

While it is not totally clear ifthe intent ofthe condition was to include both capture and

control device efficiency testing, it can certainly be inferred that both are included. FPA

does support periodic retesting for control device efficiency (e.g. oxidizer destruction

efficiency testing); however, FPA objects to retesting of capture system efficiency

without cause. Although the CTG was silent as to testing requirements, US EPA

2
guidance on its position regarding the need for recurrent testing was fully defined in the

"Technical Support Document (TSD) for Title V Permitting of Printing Facilities" issued

January 2005 and revised June 2007. http://www.epa.govlttnchiellmkb/documentsITSD.pdf.

With respect to Control Device Efficiency Testing, Section 5.5.1 ofthe TSD states:

5.5.1.2. As long as a printer does not change operations in a way that could

affect control device efficiency. It is likely that the ongoing

parameter monitoring, together with good operating, maintenance,

and QAlQC procedures will generate data in the operating range(s)

that assure compliance with applicable requirements. Therefore,

we believe that periodic retesting for control device efficiency -

typically once per title V permit term may be sufficient, but this

would depend on the applicable requirement at issue.

With respect to Ongoing Capture Efficiency Testing, Section 5.5.3 ofthe TSD states:

5.5.3.1.

5.5.3.2.

Permanent Total Enclosure

Provided that the conditions ofM204 are shown by ongoing

monitoring to coritinue to be met, the capture efficiency ofa

permanent total enclosure is assumed to be 100 percent (see M204

at 40 CFR 51, appendix M).

Other than Permanent Total Enclosure

For capture systems that are not permanent total enclosures, as

long as the operating parameters continue to be maintained in

appropriate ranges, and as long as physical changes to the air

distribution system do not occur, we would expect any new capture

efficiency testing would show similar results to the initial testing.

Accordingly, we suggest that you consider reserving retesting for

capture efficiency for those instances where operating parameters

indicate that a fundamental change has taken place in the operation

or design ofthe equipment, unless more frequent retesting is

required under an applicable requirement. A fundamental change

may include any ofthe following;

o Adding print stations to a press;

• Increasing or decreasing the volumetric flow rate from

the dryer (e.g. by changing the size ofpress fans/motors

or removal or de-rating of dryers); or

o Changing the static duct pressure.

3
The proposed rule does offer an exception to the testing requirement under subsection

(c)(6)(A), if a source had performed an applicable test on or after May 1,2000. FPA is

uncertain ofthe rationale for this date, which appears to be arbitrarily selected at 10 years

prior to the originally proposed effective date ofthe rule. If1PCB were to establish a

sunset date for applicability of prior test, FPA would suggest the date ofissuance ofthe

US EPA policy memorandum from J. Seitz (EPA, I995e) and the "Guidelines for

Determining Capture Efficiency" (EMC GD-035) (EPA, 19951), which include

recommended procedures for capture testing. The documents represent EPA's last

significant change to capture testing recommendations.

In addition, it would appear that the rule, if adopted, would require any mandated

testing/retesting and certification be completed by August I, 2010. Where additional

testing is needed, we do not think it would be feasible to accomplish the testing by

August 1,2010 and receive the testing report back from a stack-testing consultant in

order to make the necessary certification. To address this issue, we have proposed in the

attached "FPA Proposed Changes" a 120 day period in which such testing and

certification could be reasonably completed.

COSTS OF TESTING - Aside from the technical relevancy considerations ofretesting,

capture efficiency testing is very costly and highly disruptive to facility operations. Thus

it should be reserved only for those instances where baseline data is required or where the

base capture design has been changed. These costs were not identified or examined in

IPCB's Technical Support Document identifying projected costs for the proposed rule.

Data is readily available on the substantial costs of conducting these tests. EPA's

Method 204 Temporary Total Enclosure (TTE) capture test protocol costs would range

$100,000 to $250,000 to perform at a moderate sized site with multiple presses. One

member company, performing TTE testing on three flexographic presses at a single site,

experienced $135,000 in direct and indirect cost for the week long testing exercise.

Another company performing TTE testing on two laminating/coating machines

experienced (in 1998 dollars) direct costs of$68,500jor each machine. In this respect,

IPCB should note that even an average size facility would have four (4)-to- seven (7)

process lines subject to this rule, including presses, coaters and laminators. Therefore,

the cumulative costs oftesting under the proposed rule will be SUBSTANTIAL.

In addition to the expense associated with repeat capture testing, the disruption to

manufacturing during week-long testing also is significant. Not only must the presses

involved be taken out of production, but significant additional disruption is caused by

designing and constructing a temporary enclosure around a press to enable it to be tested.

Additional disruption ofmanufacturing at that machine and nearby equipment is caused

by removing the enclosure. The cumulative costs ofthe actual testing and the disruption

ofmanufacturing makes capture testing one ofthe most disruptive requirements ever

placed on the converting industry.

4
While one might need to incur such cost and disruption to the manufacturing process to

establish a capture efficiency baseline, it is not justified only for the sake ofre-testing to

verify a static process.

In summary, excluding presses with PTEs, the capture system is intrinsic to the drying

mechanism for the press and therefore capture efficiency is inherently a design function

of printing and coating equipment. Capture efficiency, as a practical matter, does not

change unless the base design of the capture system is changed. Aqy adverse impacts on

the dryingmechanism would be visible in the print quality (e.g. blowout in the between

color stations would result in drying ofplates and poor print).

Given the need to properly maintain production equipment, the fact that capture

efficiency is inherent to design, and the fact that design does not change over time unless

affirmatively modified by the converter, FPA recommends that IPCB amend the testing

provisions in the proposed rule and delete the requirement for retesting capture

efficiency. FPA recommends that IPCB redraft the provision to follow the

recommendations ofUS EPA as outlined in the "Technical Support Document for Title V

Permitting of Printing Facilities (EPA. 2007 June)(. Retesting should be reserved for

those instances where a fundamental change has taken place in the equipment's capture

design or where parametric monitoring indicates that the capture characteristics ofthe

equipment has fundamentally changed.

Attached is FPA's suggested changes to IPCB's Proposed Amendment to Section

21 8.401 (c)(6). Our proposed changes are underlined. FPA appreciates this opportunity

to comment and would be happy to provide additional information and resources to assist

IPCB on this and related issues. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 410/694-0823 or

RSinghal@flexpack.org if our members or FPA can be of assistance.

Sincerely,

fU-s~

Ram K Singhal

Vice President

Technology & Environmental Strategy

Flexible Packaging Association

Cc: John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph Street, Suite 11-500

Chicago, IL 60601

5
ATTACHMENT: FPA'S PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO Section 218.401 (c)(6):

(All changes proposed by FPA are underlined below.)

Section 218.401 Flexographic and Rotogravure Printing

c) Capture system and control device requirements

6) The car;lture system and control device are operated at all times

when the subject printing line is in operation. The owner or operator shall

demonstrate compliance with this subsection by using the applicable

capture system and control device test methods and procedures specified

in Section 218.105(c) through Section 218.105(f) of this Part and by

complying with the recordkeeping and reporting requirements specified in

Section 218.404(e) of this Part. The owner or operator of a printing line

subject to th~ requirements in Section 218.401 (c)(2) or 218.401(c)(1)(B) of

this Section that performed all testing necessary to demonstrate

compliance with Section 218.401 (c)(1)(B) prior to August 1, 2010, is not

required to retest pursuant to this subsection (c)(6). Within 120 days of

the effective date of this rule, the owner or operator of a printing line

subject to the requirements in Section 218.401 (c)(3) shall perform testing

in compliance with this subsection (c)(6), even if the owner or operator

already performed such testing prior to August 1,2010, except as

provided below;

A) Retesting of destruction efficiency shall not be required provided:

i) On or after May 1, 2000, the owner or operator of the subject

printing line performed destruction efficiency testing of the

affected control device using the applicable test methods

and procedures specified in Section 218.105(d) through

Section 218.1 05(f) of this Part;

ii) The owner or operator submitted the results of such tests to

the Agency, and the tests were not rejected by the Agency;

and

iii) The owner or operator complies with all recordkeeping and

reporting requirements in Section 218.404(e)(1)(B);

B) Retesting of capture efficiency for a printing line using a permanent

total enclosure to capture emissions shall not be required provided:

i) The owner or operator has made a demonstration that the

capture system meets the definition of a permanent total

enclosure as demonstrated through use of US EPA Method

204;

ii) Monitoring of the enclosure demonstrates that operating

parameters continue to be maintained in appropriate ranges;

and
iii) The owner or operator complies with all recordkeeping and

reporting requirements in Section 218.404(e)(1)(B).

C) Retesting of capture efficiency for a printing line using a capture

system other than a permanent total enclosure to capture

emissions shall not be required provided:

i) The owner or operator of the subject printing line performed

capture efficiency testing of the affected printing line using

the applicable test methods and procedures specified in

Section 218.105(c) of this Part;

ii) The owner or operator submitted the results of such tests to

the Agency, and the tests were not rejected by the Agency;

iii) Operating parameters continue to be maintained in

appropriate ranges;

iv) No physical changes were made to the printing line that

could affect the efficiency of the capture system (e.g.

addition of print stations, increasing or decreasing the

volumetric flow rate from the dryers or changing the static

pressure in the exhaust duct); and

v) The owner or operator complies with all recordkeeping and

reporting requirements in Section 218.404(e)(1)(B);

Nothing in this subsection (cH6), however. shall limit the Agency's ability to

require that the owner or operator perform testing pursuant to Section 201.282:
A 22
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

1021 North Grand Avenue East, P.O. Box 19276, Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276 • (217) 782-2829

James R. Thompson Center, 100 West Randolph, Suite 11-300, Chicago, IL 60601 • (312) 814·6026

PAT QUINN, GOVERNOR

June 10,2010

Vicki Thomas, Executive Director

.Toint Committee on Administrative Rules

Illinois General Assembly

700 Stratton Building

Springfield, IL 62706

DOUGLAS P. SCOTT, D,RECTOR

Subject:

Ms, Thomas:

Comments regarding R20l0-008. In the Matter ofReasonably Available

Control Teclmology (RACT) for Volatile Organic Material Emissions

from Group II Consumer & Commercial Products: Proposed

Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm, Code 211, 218, and 219

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency' ("Illinois EPA" or "Agency")

submits these comments regarding rulemaking proposal R20l 0-008 in response to

comments submitted to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (".TCAR") and the

Illinois Pollution Control Board ("Board") on June 4, 2010, by the Flexible Packaging

Association ("FPA"). In its comments, the FPA recommends changing the compliance

date for testing required in Section 2l8/2l9.401(c)(6) ofthe rulemaking proposal from

August 1, 2010, to a date "[wJithin 120 days ofthe effective date of this rule." The FPA

also recommends extensive and significant changes to the testing requirements set forth

in such Section.

While the Agency acknowledges that, due to the length ofthe rulemaking process,

sources may need additional time to comply with the rule's testing requirements, and

therefore has no objection to changing the required testing compliance date as

recommended by the FPA, the Agency strongly opposes all other changes requested by

the FPA.

The lIlinois EPA's Rulemaking Proposal

The IJlinois EPA began development of this rulemaking in early 2008 in response

to Control Techniques Guidelines ("CTGs") issued by the United States Envirolll1Jental

Protection Agency ("USEPA") concerning reasonably available control technology for

volatile organic materials. Prior to filing the proposal with the Board, the Agency

engaged in extensive outreach efforts with stakeholders. On November 5, 2008, the

IJlinois EPA posted a draft ofthe proposed rule and copies ofthe pertinent CTGs on.its

website for public comment. The IJlinois EPA subsequently engaged in numerous

conference calls and exchanged correspondence with representatives of affected sources

Rockford. 430:! N. Maln 51., Rockford, IL (,110J. (815) 987-7760

Elgin. 595 S. Slale, Elgin. II 60123 • /847) 608-3131

Bureau of land -,Pe-oria. 7620 N. University St.. Peoria, IL 61614_ (309) 693·5462

Collinsville. -2009 Mall Street. Collinsville, Il 62234. (618) 346-5120

Des Plajm:~.'9511 W. Hiuri.on St., Des Plairle~, IL 60016. (847) 294-4000

Ptooria. 5415 N. UniverSity St, Peoria, IL 61614. (309)693·5463

Ch<lmpaign. 2125 S. First 51., Champaign, IL 61820. (217) 27R·5800

Marion. 2309 W. M<lin St., Suite 116, Marion, IL 62959. (618) 993-7200

PrmlccI nn R~q'<.:1e;d P;lpe'l
regarding the proposal, including both Ram Singhal ofthe FPA and Brian Galley, an

employee of an affected source whose recent correspondence with Mr. Singhal appears to

have resulted in FPA's Clm-ent comments.

The draft proposal that the Illinois EPA sent to stakeholders for outreach,

comments, and discussion prior to submitting the proposal to the Board required that all

subject flexible package printing sources complying with the mle via capture and control

devices retest the efficiency ofsuch devices. Retesting is necessary, as the proposal

includes new and potentially stricter efficiency requirements, as set forth in the CTG.

During the Agency's outreach efforts, however, the Agency received comments from

flexible package printing representatives, who requested that retesting not be required if

testing had already been completed that demonstrated compliance with the new

efficiency requirements. In response to such comments, the Illinois EPA amended its

proposal to provide that, as long as a source performed pertinent testing within the

previous ten years, such testing demonstrated compliance with the new efficiency

requirements, and the same capture and control system subject to the prior tests is still

being used by the printing line (among other requirements), the source was not required

to retest.

The Agency sent Ram Singhal ofthe FPA a copy ofsuch revisions on April 30,

2009, requested' that he circulate the changes to the FPA's member sources, and provided

an opportunity for such sources, or the FPA acting on behalf ofsuch sources, to provide

additional comments. Such language was also part ofthe proposal the Agency filed with

the Board on July 9,2009.

The Agency never received any feedback from the flexible packaging industry

regarding this testing revision. No one from the industry participated in the public

hearings that subsequently took place on October 27, 2009, and December 8, 2009, nor

did anyone from the industry submit comments to the Board during the first notice

period. Additionally, the Agency was not served with a copy ofthe comments the FPA

recently filed with the Board and JCAR; rather, the Agency located such comments on

the Board's website. This was the first notice the Agency received regarding issues with

the proposed language - during second notice, over a year after the Agency sent a draft to

the FPA and almost a year after the Agency filed the proposed mlemaking.

The FPA's Proposed ChanQes

The FPA's proposed changes are unwarranted and incomplete. From a technical

perspective, the FPA has made a few claims regarding testing, but has avoided the

Board's rulemaking process, which would have required them to provide the necessary

information in support ofthese claims.

Ten Year Deadlinefor Prior Tests

Despite the claim made in Mr. Singhal's comments to .TCAR, the ten-year period

for prior testing was not "arbitrarily selected," but was actually chosen due to the very
USEPA "Technical Support Document (TSD) for Title V Pennitting ofPrinting

Facilities" quoted by Mr. Singhal. Notably, the TSD states, and Mr. Singhal quoted in his

comments, "we believe that periodic retesting for control device efficiency - typically

once per title V pern1it tenn may be sufficient... " A Title V pern1it tenn is five years.

However, in light ofthe negotiations and discussions that took place with industry prior

to the filing of this proposed rulemaking, the Agency set the requirement at ten yearstwice the length oftime suggested by USEPA.

It should also be noted that ten years is as much as five times the length oftime in

other USEPA requirements, such as those found in National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for various source categories. For example, a very

quick search found such requirements for gasoline distribution bulk tenninals, bulk

plants, and pipeline facilities (testing required ifsuch was not done within the past five

years - see 40 CFR §63.11092); reciprocating internal combustion engines (testing

required ifsuch was not done within the past two years - see 40 CFR §63.6610); and

stationary combustion turbines (testing required ifsuch was not done within the past two

years - see 40 CFR §63.5991).

Capture Devices

The FPA made several statements claiming that capture efficiency likely would

not change and thus a previously-tested facility should not need to re-test, even after ten

years or more. In doing so, Mr. Singhal quoted the USEPA TSD discussed above, which

states, "As long as a printer does not change operations in a way that could affect control

device efficiency. It is likely that the ongoing parameter monitoring, together with good

operating, maintenance, and QAIQC procedures will generate data in the operating

range(s) that assurc compliancc with applicable requirements." (Emphasis added.)

This may be true, but the emphasized portions ofthese statements cannot be taken

for granted. The Agency's capture and control testing expert, Kevin Mattison, has

extensive experience in attending and reviewing such testing. In his experience, he has

noted that many enclosures are not operated in the same manner ten years after their

original testing was done. Over time, there is a turnover of plant personnel and often the

current personnel are not operating the capture system in the same manner in which it

was tested ten years (or more) prior.

One recent example ofthis was seen in a USEPA inspection of a coating line that

has a pennanent total enclosure ("PTE"). There was a large door in the PTE that needed

to be closed in order to enclose the area; however, the current operators were unaware of

this need and operated routinely with the door open. In other cases, Mr. Mattison himself

has encountered capture systems that needed patching due to poor maintenance, an issue

that would never have been discovered or repaired without testing.

The intent oftesting is two-fold. First, it ensures the system complies with the

requirements ofthe applicable regulations. Second, it ensures that the current owners and
operators are operating the systems in the proper manner. That is why such testing is

necessary under this proposed regulation.

Additionally, even ifthe FPA had provided sufficient technical support justifying

a change to the sunset date, the date suggested by the FPA is incorrect. The FPA 's

comments state, "If IPCB were to establish a sunset date for applicability of prior test,

FPA would suggest the date of issuance ofthe US EPA policy memorandum fromJ.

Seitz (EPA, 1995e) and the 'Guidelines for Determining Capture Efficiency' (EMC GD035)(EPA, 1995f), which include recommended procedures for capture testing. The

documents represent EPA's last significant change to capture testing recommendations."

The FPA's final sentence, and thus their conclusion, is simply wrong. USEPA Reference

Method 204 for capture efficiency testing, discussed in the USEPA policy memorandum,

was not fully promulgated until the effective date ofJune l6, 1997, when it appeared in

the Federal Register (62 Fed. Reg. 32500). While the Agency maintains that the date

already present in the ru1emaking proposal should remain in the rule for the reasons

discussed elsewhere in this response, under no circumstance should such date be made

earlier than the effective date listed above. It should also be noted that the FPA's

suggested date appears nowhere in the FPA's proposed rule changes.

The Agency would have been happy to discuss all ofthis with the FPA had the

FPA contacted Agency personnel with its concerns.

Incomplete Proposed Revisions

Another outcome resulting from the FPA's failure to contact the Agency is the

incomplete nature ofthe changes they have suggested. From a technical standpoint, the

changes are unacceptable because they do not require that testing previously done by a

source actually demonstrated compliance with the new limits contained within the

proposed rule. The ruJemaking proposal recommends efficiency requirements ranging

from 65% to 80%, depending on the dates the subject printing line, capture system, and

control device were first constructed at the subject source. The efficiency requirements

in the current regulations, on the other hand, only range from 60% to 75%, depending on

the type of printing line being controlled. Some sources may therefore be subject to a

more stringent limitation under the CTG's recommendations. Thus, if the FPA changes

were incorporated, a source that showed compliance with the previous limits under the

old rule would not have to demonstrate compliance with the new limits to which they are

subj ect.

In addition, in suggesting these changes, the FPA apparently failed to check the

rest ofthe rule to determine what cross-references would need to be altered.

Furthennore, the FPA failed to indicate what regulatory language would need to be

deleted, instead only indicating the language they would like to see added. The overall

effect of making these changes is therefore unclear - an issue that could have been

appropriately addressed during the Board's rulemaking process.
Timing ofFPA's Comments

As set forth above, the FPA's comments are untimely, The rulemaking process

exists for a reason: to provide aU interested parties sufficient opportunity to review the

proposed rule, present evidence in support of, or in opposition to, the proposal, express

concerns, ask questions, etc. The post-filing rulemaking process in this case has taken

approximately a year, with extensive Agency outreach occurring prior to that. At no time

during that year did the FPA participate in the rulemaking or apprise the Illinois EPA or

Board ofits concerns with the language at issue. Consequently, neither the Agency nor

any other party with an interest in the rulemaking has had an opportunity to question the

FPA regarding the bases ofits proposed revisions, request additional information, or

otherwise discuss the changes with the FPA. This occurred despite the fact that the FPA

- Mr. Singhal in particular - was specifically contacted multiple times by the Agency to

ensure that the FPA and members of the FPA did not have any comments about the

proposal before it was submitted to the Board.

The Agency recognizes that unanticipated issues occasionally arise late in the

course of a rulemaking. For example, the Agency recently learned ofthe necessity of an

extension of the compliance date for the testing requirements set forth in Section

218/219.401 (c)(6) due to the amount oftime it took to complete this rulemaking. On the

other hand, when an issue can be anticipated, and is in fact clearly evident at the

inception of a ruJemaking, such issue should be addressed before the eleventh hour. It

does not serve the purposes ofthe rulemaking process or the parties who actuaUy choose

to participate in such process to tolerate unjustified delay. The FPA had ample notice of

the Agency's proposed testing requirements, and yet did not choose to express its

concerns at any time during the past year. Its untimely comments, which recommend

substantive and technically unsupported changes to the rulemaking proposal, should

therefore be disregarded.

Sincerely,

i/~J/;~ ~~IVL#7r

Dana Vetterhoffer

Assistant Counsel

Division of Legal Counsel
A 23
CO-CHAIR:

SEN. MAGGIE CROTTY

CO-CHAIR:

REP. ANGELO 'SKIP' SAVIANO

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:

VICKI THOMAS

JOINT COMMITTEE ONADMINISTRATIVE RULES

ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

SEN. J. BRADLEY BURZYNSKI

SEN, RANDALL HULTGREN

SEN. MATTIE HUNTER

SEN. DAN RUTHERFORD

SEN. IRA SILVERSTEIN

REP. JOHN FRITCHEY

REP. LOU LANG

REP, DAVID MILLER

REP. DONALD MOFFITI

REP ROSEMARY MULLIGAN

Tanner Girard, Chairman

Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 W. Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, lllinois 6060I

Dear Chairman Girard:

700 STRAITON BUILDING

S?RINGFIELO,llliNOIS 62706

217f785-2254

June 15,2010

f \C) /Cb

RECEIVED

CLERK'S OFFICe

JUN 23 2010

STATE OF ILUNDIS

Pollution Control Board

This is to notifY you that JCAR considered the following proposed rulemakings at its 6/15/10

meeting:

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

34 111. Reg. 1766 - 2/5/10

Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Chicago Area (35 Ill. Adm.

Code 218)

34 Ill. Reg. 1791 - 2/5/10

Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Metro East Area (35 111.

Adm. Code 219)

34 Ill. Reg. 1941 - 2/511 0

If your agency has agreed to any substantive modifications during its discussions with JCAR,

they are described in the "Agreements" attached to the certification. Based on these agreements,

as well as the other responses you have provided the Committee during the review of these

rulemakings, JCAR has determined that No Objection will be issued. Enclosed you will find

formal certification ofthis action.

These rulemakings may now be adopted upon filing with the Office ofthe Secretary ofState.

Please note that the fact that the Committee has not objected to these rulemakings does not

necessarily constitute approval, expressed or implied, ofthe substance ofthe rulemakings.
Thank you for the cooperation your agency has shown during our review ofthese issues.

Sincerely,

:J/J~ aJ(

Senator Maggie Crotty

Co-Chairman

SMC:RBH:DC:rrn

cc: Tim Fox

Ene.

Representative Angelo "Skip" Saviano

Co-Chairman
CO-CHAIR:

SEN. t.".AGGIE CROTTY

CO-cHAIR;

REP. ANGELO ·SKlp· SAVIANO

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:

VICKI THOMAS

JOINT COMMiTTEE ONADMINISTRATIVE RULES

ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

700 STRAnON BUILDING

SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 52706

2171785-225~

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATNE RULES

CERTIFICATION OF NO OBJECTION

TO PROPOSED RULEMAKING

SEN. J. BRADLEY BURZYNSKI

SEN. RANDALL HULTGREN

SEN. MAITrE HUNTER

SEN. DAN RUTHERFORD

SEN. IRA SILVERSTEIN

REP JOHN FAITGHEY

REP: LOU LANG

REP: DAVID MILLER

REP. DONALD MOFFITI

REP. ROSEMARY MULLIGAN

RECEIVED

CLERK'S OFFICE

JUN '23 2010

STATE OF IlliNOIS

Pollution Control Board

This is to certifY that the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, at its 6/15/10 meeting,

considered Definitions and General Provisions (35 Ill. Adm. Code 21 I), proposed by the

Pollution Control Board and published in the 2/5/10 issue of the Illinois Register. After

consideration, and based upon the agreements, if any, for modification of the rulemaking made

by the agency and attached to this document, the Committee determined that no Objection will be

issued to the above-mentioned rulemaking.

June 15,2010

Vicki Thomas

Executive Director

Attachments: None
Agency:

Rulemaking:

Changes:

SECOND NOTICE CHANGES

Pollution Control Board

Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Chicago

Area (35 Ill. Adm. Code 218; 34 111. Reg. 1791)

1. In line 438, change the subsection label to (t).

2. In line 634, delete the period.

3. In lines 837 and 863, delete the period.

4. In line 958, change "Sections" to "subsections", strike "218.204" 4 times and strike "and".

5. In line 959, delete "218.204" and after "(ill" add "ofthis Section,".

6. In lines 1033 and 1054, strike "218.204".

7. In line 1060, strike "above".

8. In line 1076, strike ", below".

9. In line I 145, delete "or".

1O. In line 1158, strike the 3

rd closing parenthesis.

II. In line 1160, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

12. In line 1167, after the closing parenthesis add a comma.

13. In the table after line 1184, in the 4th and 5th where statements, strike "which" and add

IIthattt •

14. In the table after line 1193, in the 4'h, 6th, and 7th where statements, strike "which" and

add "that".

15. In line 1205, strike the comma and add a semicolon.
16. In line 1212, after the closing parenthesis add a comma.

17. In line 1226, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

18. In line 1233, after the closing parenthesis add a comma.

19. In line 1246, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

20. In line 1301, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

21. In line 1337, strike "or" and change "ill" to "(m)".

22. In line 1346, strike "or" and after "(1)" add "or (m)".

23. In line 1355, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

24. In line 1377, strike "above".

25. In line 1385, strike the 2nd "218.204" and before "and" add "ofthis Subpart".

26. In lines 1393, 1401, 1409-1410 and 1417, strike the brackets and add parentheses.

27. In the table after line 1436:

in the 4th and 5th where statements, strike "which" and add "that".

in the 5th where statement, 4th line, after the closing parenthesis add a semicolon.

28. In line 1478, change the subsection label to (m).

29. In line 1495, strike "or" and change "(g}" to "ill".

30. In lines 1535 and 1538, strike the 2nd and 3m "218.204".

31. In line 1542, change the subsection label to an (h).

32. In line 1661, strike "which" and add "that".

33. In line 1667, delete "and".

34. In line 1672, strike "and".

35. In line 1675, strike "218.204".
36. In line 1679, strike the period and add "; and".

37. In line 1681, change the subsection label to (F).

38. In line 1708, delete "and".

39. In line 1714, strike "and".

40. In line 1720, strike the period and add "; and".

41. In line 1722, change the subsection label to (G).

42. In line 1738, strike "below".

43. In line 1779, strike "218.204".

44. In lines 1784-1796, change the subsection labels to (G) through (1).

45. In line 1824, strike "218.204".

46. In lines 1829 and 1833, change the subsection labels to (F) and (G).

47. In line 1857, strike "or" and change "ill" to "fm}".

48. In lines 1955 and 1978-1979, strike "kg (lbs) per I (gal)" and add "kgll (1bslgal)".

49. In line 1998, strike "of' and add "after".

50. In line 2020, change the subsection label to (h).

51. In line 2028, delete the 2nd "218.217".

52. In line 2042, strike "or" and delete "Section".

53. Inline2043,delete"218.204".

54. In the table after line 2107, in the 4th and 5th where statements, strike "which" and add

"that".

55. In the table after line 2125, in the 4th, 6

th and 7'h where statements, strike "which" and add

"that't.
56. In the table after line 2135:

in the 7th where statement, strike "and".

in the 8th and 9'h where statements, strike "which" and add "that".

57. In line 2176, delete "218.204".

58. In line 2272, change the header to "Weighted Averaging Alternative".

59. In the table after line 2294, in the 1st and 4th where statements, strike "which" and add

"that",

60. In line 2312, delete the 2nd "subsection".

61. In line 2353, change the header to "Capture System and Control Device Requirements".

62. In line 2427, delete the 2nd "subsection",

63. Change line 2444 to "subject to the requirements in subsection (c)(I)(B) or (c)(2)".

64. In lines 2446, 2448, 2457 and 2461, change "Section 218.401" to "subsection".

65. In lines 2515 and 2517, strike "Sections" and add "Section",

66. In line 2535, change "schedules seheSllle" to "schedule or schedules" and add a comma

after "(c)".

67. In line 2770, strike the 3'" "218.401 ".

68. In line 2936, after "subsection" add "(b)(I)(A)",

69. In line 2967, delete the 2nd "218.407",

70. In lines 2987 and 2988, delete the 2nd and 3'" "218.407".

71, In line 3260, strike "exhaust(s)" and add "exhausts",

72. In line 3261, after "follows" add a colon.

73. In lines 3388, 3395 and 3400, strike "Appendix" and add "appendix".

74, In line 3473, strike the period.
75. In line 3541, strike "For" and add "for".

76. In line 3600, capitalize "units".

77. In line 3659, strike "TPY" and add "tons/yr".

78. In line 3689, change the header to "Exempt Units on and after August 1.2010".

79. In line 3691, change the header to "Lithographic Printing Lines Exempt pursuant to

Section 218.405(c)(2).".

80. In lines 3706 and 3830, change "Part" to "Subpart".

8I. In line 3929, strike "Section 2I8.4I I" and add "subsection" and delete "218.411 ".

82. In line 3930, delete "218.411" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

83. In line 3960, strike "Section 218.411 " and add "subsection" and delete "218.411".

84. In line 3961, delete "218.411" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

85. In line 3971, change "lines" to "line".

86. In line 4012, strike "is" and add "are".

87. In line 4016, strike "is" and add "are" twice.

88. In line 4060, strike "(b)" and add "@".

89. In line 4068, after "Subpart" strike the comma.

90. In line 4098, strike "Section" and add "subsection".

91. In line 4099, strike "218.411" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

92. In line 4163, strike "Sections" and add "Section".

93. In line 4177, strike the semicolon and add a period.

94. In line 4220, strike "Section" and add "subsection".

95. In line 4221, strike "218.411" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

96. In line 4258, strike "which" and add "that".
97. In line 4362, change "Section" to "subsection".

98. In line 4363, delete "218.41 I" and change "Subpart" to "Section".

99. In line 4395-4396, change the header to "Provisions for Calculation ofEmissions from

Heatset Web Offset Lithographic Printing Operations.".

100. In line 4411, before "The" add an (A) subsection label.

101. In line 4420, before "For" add a (B) subsection label.

102. In line 4433, before "The" add an (A) subsection label.

103. In the table after line 4440, in the 2nd where statement after "wash" add a semicolon.

104. In line 4442, before "For" add a (B) subsection label.

105. In lines 4568, 4575 and 4580, change "Appendix" to lower case.

106. In line 4651, change the header to "Afterburners for Heatset Web Letterpress Printing

Lines.".

107. In line 4666, change the header to "Other Control Devices for Heatset Web Letterpress

Printing Lines.".

108. In line 4673, change the header to "Cleaning Solution".

I09. In line 4824, change "subsection" to "subsections".

110. In line 4849, change "Section 218.417" to "subsection" and change "Subpart" to

IlSection".

III. In line 4876, change "Section 218.417" to "subsection" and change "Subpart;" to

IlSection.'r.

112. In lines 4922 and 4923, change "12" to "are".

lB. In line 4983, change "Section" to "subsection".

114. In line 4984, delete "218.417" and change "Subpart" to "Section".

6/1110
CO-GHAIR:

SEN. MAGGIE CROTTY

CO-CHAIR:

REP: ANGELO "SKIP' SAVIANO

EXeCUTIVE DIRECTOR:

ViCKI THOMAS

JOINT COMMITTEE ONADMINISTRATIVE.RULES

ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

.....

700 STRATTON BUILDING

SPRINGFIELD. ILLINOIS 62706

217n85·2254

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

CERTIFICATION OF NO OBJECTION

TO PROPOSED RULEMAKING

SEN. J. BRADLEY BURZYNSKI

SEN. RANDALL HULTGREN

SEN. MATIIE_HUNTER

SEN. DAN RUTHERFOAD

SEN. IRA SILVERSTEIN

REP. JOHN FRITCHEY

REP. LOU LANG

REP. DAVID MIlleR

REP. DONALD MOFFITI

REP. ROSEMARV MULLIGAN

RECEiveD

CLERK'S OFFICE

JUN '23 2010

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

This is to certify that the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, at its 6/15/1 0 meeting,

considered Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Chicago Area (35 Ill.

Adm. Code 2I8), proposed by the Pollution Control Board and published in the 2/5/10 issue of

the Illinois Register. After consideration, and based upon the agreements, if any, for

modification of the rulemaking made by the agency and attached to this document, the

Committee determined that no Objection will be issued to the above-mentioned rulemaking.

June 15, 2010

Attachments: Agreements

-Jl.A,~ ,},.~_.._ Vicki Thomas

Executive Director
Agency:

Rulemaking:

Changes:

SECOND NOTICE CHANGES

Pollution Control Board

Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Metro East

Area (35 Ill. Adm. Code 219; 34 Ill. Reg. 1941)

1. In line 381, strike "below".

2. In line 386, after "Section" add a comma.

3. In line 394, change the subsection label to (d).

4. In line 585, delete the period.

5. In lines 788 and 814, delete the period.

6. In line 909, change "Sections" to "subsections" and strike "219.204" 4 times.

7. In line 910, delete "219.204" and after "(Q)" add "ofthis Section".

8. After line 979, in subsection (j)(6), strike "219.204".

9. After line 980, in subsection (k)(4), strike "above".

10. In line 996, strike ", below".

II. In line 1003, strike "Section 219.204" and add "subsection" and strike "Subpart" and add

"Section".

12. In line 1006, strike "Section" and add "subsections".

13. In line 1007, strike "219.204" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

14. In line I056, delete "or".

15. In line 1069, after the closing parenthesis add "}".

16. In line 1071, strike the comma and add a semicolon.
17. In line 1078, after the closing parenthesis, add a comma.

18. In the table after line 1095, in the 4th and 5th where statements, strike "which" and add

"that".

19. In the table after line 1104, in the 4th, 6th, and 7th where statements, strike "which" and

add "that".

20. In line 1116, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

21. In line 1123, after the closing parenthesis, add a comma.

22. In line 1135, after the closing parenthesis, add "}".

23. In line 1137, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

24. In line 1144, after the closing parenthesis add a comma.

25. In line 1155, after the closing parenthesis, add "}".

26. In line 1157, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

27. In lines 1175 and 1193, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

28. In line 1229, change "ill" to "ill".

29. In line 1238, strike "or" and after "(k)" add "Q[..Ql".

30. In line 1247, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

31. In line 1269, strike "above".

32. In line 1277, strike "Part" and add "Subpart".

33. In line 1285, after the closing parenthesis, add "}".

34. In the table after line 1320:

in the 4th and 5

th where statements, strike "which" and add "that".

in the 5

th where statement, after the closing parenthesis add a semicolon.

35. In line 1362, change the subsection label to (I).
36. In line 1379, strike "or" and change "(g}" to "fh}".

37. In line 1409, strike "Sections" and add "Section".

38. In lines 1419 and 1422, strike the 2nd and 3n1 "219.204".

39. In line 1426, change the subsection label to an (h).

40. In the table after line 1466, in the 6th and 7th where statements, strike "which" and add

"that".

41. In line 1545, strike "which" and add "that".

42. In line 1551, delete "and".

43. In line 1556, strike "and".

44. In line 1559, strike "219.204".

45. In line 1563, strike the period and add "; and".

46. In line 1565, change the subsection label to (F).

47. In line 1592, delete "and".

48. In line 1598, strike "and".

49. In line 1604, strike the period and add "; and".

50. In line 1606, change the subsection label to (G).

51. In line 1621, strike "below".

52. In line 1662, strike "219.204".

53. In lines 1667-1679, change the subsection labels to (G) through (1).

54. In line 1707, strike "219.204".

55. In lines 1712 and 1716, change the subsection labels to (F) and (G).

56. In line 1739, strike "or".
57. In line 1740, after "(k)" add "..i!!..ill".

58. In lines 1838 and 1861-1862, strike "kg (Ibs) per I (gal) "and add "kg/I Clbs/gall".

59. In line 1881, strike "of" and add "after".

60. In line I903, change the subsection label to (h).

61. In line 1911, change "Sections" to "Section" and delete the 2

nd "219.217".

62. In the table after line 1990, in the 4'h and 5th where statements, strike "which" and add

"that".

63. In line 1998, strike "subsection" and add "Section".

64. In the table after line 2008, in the 4'\ 6th , and 7th where statements, strike "which" and

add "that".

65. In the table after line 2018, in the 8

th and 9th where statements, strike "which" and add

"that",

66. In line 2059, delete "219.204".

67. In line 2155, change the header to "Weighted Averaging Alternative".

68. In the table after line 2177, in the 1

st and 4th where statements, strike "which" and add

lIthatrl.

69. In line 2I95, delete the 2nd "subsection".

70. In line 2236, delete the period.

71. In line 2265 and 2268, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

72. In line 227 I, strike"and" .

73. In lines 2327-2328, change "(c)m or (c)(I)(B)" to "(c)(I)(B) or (c)(2)".

74. In line 2310, delete the 2nd "subsection".

75. In line 2318, strike the comma and add a semicolon.

76. In lines 2327, 2329, 2331-2332,2341 and 2345, change "Section 219.401" to

"subsectionll•
77. In lines 2388 and 2392, change "line(s)" to "lines".

78. In lines 2396 and 2398, strike "Sections" and add "Section".

79. In line 24I7, change "schedules S6Red\lle" to "schedule or schedules".

80. In line 2650, strike the 3'd "219.401".

81. In line 2816, after "subsection" add "(b)(])(A)".

82. In line 2847, delete the 2nd "219.407".

83. In lines 2867 and 2868, delete the 2nd and 3rd "219.407".

84. In line 3141, strike "exhaust(s)" and add "exhausts".

85. In lines 3270, 3277 and 3282, strike "Appendix" and add "appendix".

86. In line 3355, strike the period.

87. In line 3373, strike "line(s)" and add "lines".

88. In line 3423, strike "For" and add "for".

89. In line 3481, capitalize "units".

90. In line 3529, strike "line(s)" and add "lines".

91. In line 3540, strike "TPY" and add "tons/yr".

92. In line 3570, change the header to "Exempt Units on and after August I, 2010".

93. In line 3572, change the header to "Lithographic Printing Lines Exempt pursuant to

Section 219.405(c)(2).".

94. In lines 3587 and 3711, change "Part" to "Subpart".

95. In line 3803, strike "Section 219.411" and add "subsection" and delete "219.411 ".

96. In line 3804, delete "219.411" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

97. In line 3835, strike "Section 219.411" and add "subsection" and delete "219.411 ".
98. In line 3836, delete "219.411" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

99. In line 3846, change "Iine(s)" to "line".

100. In line 3887, strike "is" and add "are".

101. In line 3891, strike "is" and add ",!!IT" twice.

102. In line 3935, strike "(b)" and add "@".

103. In line 3943, after "Subpart" strike the comma.

104. In line 3973, strike "Section" and add "subsection".

105. In line 3974, strike "219.411" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

106. In line 4038, strike "Sections" and add "Section".

107. In line 4052, strike the semicolon and add a period.

108. In line 4095, strike "Section" and add "subsection".

109. In line 4096, strike "219.411" and strike "Subpart" and add "Section".

110. In line 4133, strike "which" and add "that".

111. In line 4237, change "Section" to "subsection".

112. In line 4238, delete "219.411" and change "Subpart" to "Section".

113. In line 4270-4271, change the header to "Provisions for Calculation of Emissions from

Heatset Web Offset Lithographic Printing Operations.".

114. In line 4286, before "The" add an (A) subsection label.

115. In line 4295, before "For" add a (B) subsection label.

116. In line 4308, before "The" add an (A) subsection label.

117. In line 4317, before "For" add a (B) subsection label.

118. In lines 4443, 4450 and 4455, change "Appendix" to lower case.

119. In line 4526, change the header to "Afterburners for Heatset Web Lettemress Printing
Lines.".

120. In line 4541, change the header to "Other Control Devices for Heatset Web Lettemress

Printing Lines.",

121. In line 4548, change the header to "Cleaning Solution".

122. In line 4701, change the semicolon to a period.

123. In line 4703, change "subsection" to "subsections",

124. In lines 4728 and 4755, change "Section 219.417" to "subsection" and change "Subpart"

to "Sectionll•

125. In line 4755, change the semicolon to a period.

126. In lines 4801 and 4802, change "~" to "are".

127. In line 4862, change "Section" to "subsection".

128. In line 4863, delete "219.417" and change "SUbpart" to "Section".

5127110
JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATlVE RULES

ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

CO-CHAIR:

SEN. MAGGIE CROTTY'

CO-CHAlR:

REP. ANGElO ·SKIP· SAVIANO

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR;

VICKI THOMAS

SEN. J. BRADLEY BURZYNSKI

SEN. RANDALL HULTGREN

SEN. MATTIE HUNTER

SEN. DAN AU1HERFOAD

SEN. IRA SILVERSTEIN

REp. JOHN FRITCHEY

REP. LOU LANG

REP. DAVID MILLER

REP DONALD MQFFITI

REP. ROSEMARY MULUGAN

CERTIFICATION OF NO OBJECTION

TO PROPOSED RULEMAKING

700 STRATTON BUILDING

SPRINGFlaD, ILUNDIS 62706

217((85-2254

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

FtECEUVED

CLERK'S OFFICE

JUN'232010

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

This is to certify that the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, at its 6/1 5/1 0 meeting,

considered Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations for the Metro East Area (35 111.

Adm. Code 219), proposed by the Pollution Control Board and published in the 2/5/1 0 issue of

the Illinois Register. After consideration, and based upon the agreements, if any, for

modification of the rulemaking made by the agency and attached to this document, the

Committee determined that no Objection will be issued to the above-mentioned rulemaking.

June 15,2010

Attachments: Agreements

A

f :JJ.i1,'k4lK

Vicki Thomas

Executive Director