CHAIRMAN
G.
Tanner
Girard,
Ph.D.
John Knittle
Department
of
Commerce
and
Economic
Opportunity
620
East
Adams
Street,
S-6
Springfield.
Illinois
62704
FEB
201)9
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS
Pl1tn
Control
Board
Re:
Request
for
Economic
Impact
Study for:
jyf_G_ypecili.:
Water_Quality
Standard
for
Boron
DischartstuEciwauls
River
andv[
Creek:
35
111.
Adim
Code 303.347
(R09-l
1)
Dear
Mr. Knittle:
SPR1NGFIEU
OFFICE
1021
North
Grand
Ave.
East
P.O.
Box
19274
Springfield,
IL
62794-9274
217-524-8500
FAX
217-524-8508
+
C}IICAGO
OFFICE
JaoieR.
Thompson
Center
100
Wes[Randolph
Suite
11-500
Chicago;
IL
60601
31tI4-3620
::
FAX
3.28I4-3669
TYY3i2-8l4-6032
WSJTE
•
vJpbitate.iLps
PPIk
Vnn\,RrfvrflthSADrD
On
February
5,
2009,
the
Board
accepted
a
site
specific
rule
proposal
for
hearing
in
City
of
Galva
Site Spec_Water
QualjyStamian1fi2rBo
Discharges
to
Edwards
River
and
Mud Creek:
35
Iii.
Adrn.
Code
3L0347
(R09
11).
I
am
writing
to
request
that
your
Department
conduct
an
economic
in’oact
study
concerning
this
proposal.
This rulemaking
proposal
(Prop),
filed svdh
cie
Board
by
the
City of
Galva,
seeks
to
establsh
a
3.0
milligram
per liter
m/L)
alternative
boron
standard.
to
the
generafly
applicable
1.0
rntrlL
boron water
quality
standard
:n
35
lU.
Adin.
Code;
302.208(g).
As
explained
hlow.
ite
Boani
has
scheduled
hearing
for
March
3
1,
2009.
Accordingly,
we would
appreciate
your
response
to
this
request
no later
than
March
6,
2009.
Galva’s
proposed
alternative
standard
for
boron
would
anpiv
ceain
segments
of
an
unnamed
tributary
to
the
South
Branch
of
the Edwards
Piver,
e
South
Branch
of
the
Edwards
River,
and
the
Mud
Creek
Run.
Th.sc
smrts
receive
discharges
from
the
two
Sewage
Treatmem
Plant
(STPs)
operated
by
Ih
City.
The
City’s Northeast
SIP discharges
into
the
South
Branch
Edwards
RL\e,
and
its
Southwest
STP discharges
into
Mud
Run
Creek.
Galva’s
proposal
(Prop)
relates
that
it
has
investigated
various
conpiiaacL
options,
including
treatment
of
its
effluent
to
remove
excess
boron
or
oat
tn
alternative
drinking
water
sources
from
neighboring
cities
of
Kewanee
and
Galesburg.
Galva’s
proposal
summarized
its
options
available
to
Galva.
and
thei
associated
upfront
costs, as
follows:
a.
Ion
Exchange
Teatrnent
-
82,016,410
b.
Potable
Water
Ion Exchange
Treatment
-
82.099,784
c.
Potable
Water
Reverse
Osmosi.s
Treatment
-
86,905,955
d.
Drill New
Drinking
Water
Well
-
Initial
search
SI0(},000.
not
inciudir;g
drilling.
ILLINOIS
POLLUTION
CONTROL
Bo±
GOVERNOR
bruar.i
-
R1(
S
OFF
e.
Drinking
Water
from
City of
Kewanee
- Not
possible.
f.
Drinking
Water
from City
of
Galesburg
- $13,600,000.
Prop.
at
23.
Galva
states
that
it is a
rural
comnmnity
without
resources
to deal
with these
costs,
except
by
“record
level”
user
rate
increases.
Id.
Since
1998,
Section
27
(b)
of the Environmental
Protection
Act
has required
the
Board
to:
1)
request
that
the
Department
of
Commerce
and
Economic
Opportunity
(formerly
the
Department
of Commerce
and
Community
Affairs)
conduct
a
study
of
the
economic
impact
of the
proposed
rules.
The
Department
may
within
30
to 45
days
of
such request
produce
a
study
of the
economic
impact
of
the proposed
rules.
At
a
minimum,
the economic
impact
study
shall address
a)
economic,
environmental,
and public
health
benefits
that
may
be
achieved
through
compliance
with
the proposed
rules,
b)
the
effects
of
the
proposed
rules
on
employment
levels,
commercial
productivity,
the economic
growth
of
small
businesses
with
100
or less
employees,
and the
State’s
overall
economy,
and
c)
the
cost
per unit
of pollution
reduced
and
the
variability
of
company
revenues
expected
to
be
used
to implement
the
proposed
rules;
and
(2)
conduct
at least
one
public
hearing
on
the
economic
impact
of those
rules.
At
least
20
days before
the
hearing,
the
Board shall
notify
the
public
of the
hearing
and make
the
economic
impact
study,
or the
Department
of
Commerce and
Economic
Opportunity’s
explanation
for
not producing
an economic
impact
study,
available
to
the
public.
Such
public
hearing
may
be
held
simultaneously
or
as
a part
of any
Board
hearing
considering
such
new
rules.
415
ILCS
5/27(b)
(2006).
There is
no decision
deadline
in this
rulemaking,
but
the Board
intends
to
proceed
expeditiously.
The
Board
has
scheduled
a
hearing
on
this
proposal
for
March
31, 2009,
and
due
to budget
constraints
does not
intend
to hold
another
hearing.
Under
these
circumstances,
the
Board
asks
that
you
respond
to this
request
as soon
as you conveniently
can,
but
in any
event
no
later
than
March
6, 2009;
this
would
allow
the Board
to
give
the
public the
20-day
notice
required
by Section
27(b)
of
the
Act.
If
I,
or my
staff,
can provide
you with
any
additional
information,
please
let
me
know.
Thank
you
in
advance
for your
prompt
response.
Sincerely,
/.
A-’
G.
Tanner
Girard
Acting
Chainan
Pollution
Control
Board
cc:
Warren
Ribley,
DCEO
John
T.
Therriault,
Assistant
Clerk
of the
Board