BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
1
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
1
R2004-025
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
STANDARD
)
(Rulemaking
-
Water)
35 ILL ADM. CODE 302.206
1
NOTICE OF FILING
TO: See Attached Service List
PLEASE
TAKE NOTICE
that the
Illinois Association of Waste Water Agencies
electronically filed their
Public Comments,
with the Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control, a
copy of which is herewith served upon you.
Respectfully submitted,
s/Roy M. Harsch
Roy
M. Harsch
Counsel for Illinois Association
of Wastewater Agencies
Dated: December 20,2006
Roy
M. Harsch
GARDNER CARTON
&
DOUGLAS LLP
191 N. Wacker Drive
-
Suite 3700
Chicago, Illinois 60606
(312) 569-1441
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
1
1
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
1
R2004-025
DISSOLVED OXYGEN STANDARD
)
(Rulemaking
-
Water)
35 ILL ADM. CODE 302.206
)
PUBLIC COMMENTS
NOW COMES the Illinois Association of Waste Water Agencies ("IAWA") by one of its
attorneys Roy M. Harsch, and pursuant to the Hearing Officer Order submits these PUBLIC
COMMENTS in the above-captioned matter to the Illinois Pollution Control Board ("Board").
These Public Comments are in addition to those comments previously submitted by Dr. James
Garvey.
IAWA contends that the amendment filed on April 19,2004 constitutes a technically
feasible, economically reasonable, and well-supported amendment to the present Dissolved
Oxygen Water Quality Standard found at 35
I11 Adm. Code 302.206 ("DO Rule"). IAWA
requests that the Board adopt the proposed amendment as submitted by IAWA with two
additions. The first is the inclusion of the agreed upon 30-day average of 5.5 milligrams per liter
dissolved oxygen
("5.5 mgll"). The second addition is the inclusion of the narrative language
proposed by the Joint Illinois Department of Natural
Resources/Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency Proposal ("Joint
IDNRIIEPA Proposal").
A.
Background
IAWA filed their proposed amendment to the DO Rule on April 29,2004 due to the
widespread recognition that the original DO Rule adopt by the Board in 1972 was in dire need of
revision, contained serious flaws and was inconsistent with modem recognized science. While
IEPA had acknowledged the need to update the DO Rule, IEPA did not have the resources or
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
was unwilling to commit the necessary resources to this effort. Because of the fundamental
importance of the DO Rule, its basic underline use as a water quality measurement and
component of various water program elements; IAWA after conferring with IEPA, undertook at
its own expense a detailed thorough review of DO Rule. IAWA retained two of the most
qualified field biologists in the State of Illinois to contribute their knowledge and experience.
Dr. Matthew Whiles and Dr. James Garvey were retained to scientifically evaluate the present
DO Rule, the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria Document for Dissolved Oxygen
prepared by the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("USEPA") dated April 1986
("NCD"), the published peer-reviewed research on DO and the current DO monitoring in Illinois.
As a result of their independent work, Doctors Whiles and Garvey prepared a written report
entitled
An Assessment of the National and Illinois Dissolved Oxygen Water Quality Criteria,
.lames
E. Gamey and Matt R. Whiles (April 2004) ("GameylWhiles Report") (Exhibit 1). They
concluded that the current DO Rule was in need of change and that the original recommendation
contained in the NCD was still sound. Accordingly, they proposed a DO Rule that would
establish a DO limit applicable from March
1 through June 30 of a one-day minimum of 5.0 mg/l
and a seven-day mean of 6.0 mg/l to protect early life stages. During the warmer months of July
1 through the end of February they proposed a one-day minimum of 3.5 mg/l and a seven-day
mean minimum of 4.0
mgll. Their recommendation differed slightly from that contained in the
NCD. First, they proposed a more conservative minimum of 3.5 rather than the 3.0 mg/l DO
minimum. Second they did not propose the 30-day average of 5.5
mg/l because they felt it was
not needed.
Six days of hearing were held on this proposal. At the initial hearing held on June 29,
2004, IAWA presented three witnesses. Mr. Dennis Streicher described IAWA, the basis for the
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
proposal and why the existing DO Rule was in need of revision. Mr. Michael Callahan
explained the scientific need for a sound DO Rule based in part upon his service on the IEPA
Nutrient Science Advisor Work Group, his intercourse with IEPA and
IEPA's support for a third
party investigation of the present DO Rule. He outlined the IAWA decision process to proceed
with this project, the retention of Doctors Whiles and Garvey and the initial review by both
IAWA and the IEPA of the
GarveyJWhiles Report. Dr. Garvey testified in detail outlining the
work that led up to the preparation of the
GarveyIWhiles Report, the conclusions and
recommendations contained in the Report and why they believed that the proposed DO Rule was
protective of aquatic life during all life stages. Dr. Garvey also testified that he had learned of
additional data during a meeting with
USEPA, IEPA and IAWA on June 18,2004 just prior to
the first hearing. He explained that he would evaluate this data in detail and address it
extensively at the second hearing. Dr. Garvey also responded to intensive questioning regarding
his testimony and the
GarveyJWhiles Report.
As directed by the Hearing Officer prior to the second hearing, IAWA filed Dr. Garvey's
pre-filed testimony along with a July 2004 report entitled "Long Term Dynamics of Oxygen and
Temperature in Illinois, Streams" Dr. James A. Garvey. (Exhibit
9).
At the second hearing held on August 12,2006, Dr. Garvey testified as to his review of
the data set that was identified during the June
18, 2004 meeting. This data formed the basis for
his report found at Exhibit
9. This data was collected by the United States Geological Survey
("USGS") and the IEPA. This data set included data from eight intensively sampled stream
reaches. Dr. Garvey described this data set as "these long-term data are unprecedented. I am
aware of no other similar comprehensive data set for streams of the Midwestern United States."
(August 12,2004
TR. at 14 and 15). Dr. Garvey testified that "application of the proposed
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
standard greatly reduces the number of violations in unimpaired streams, such as Lusk Creek,
while still capturing violations in impaired streams." (August 12, 2004 TR. at 17). He further
testified that "the results of this analysis uphold the conclusions of the Garvey and Whiles
Report" (August 12,
2004 TR. at 16). He also testified that "I found no substantive differences in
temperature among streams across the north-south gradient of the state these data effectively
show that the proposed standard effectively captures oxygenated dynamics that occur in natural
fully functioning Illinois streams." (August 12, 2004
TR. at 19). Dr. Garvey also testified that
he had contacted Mr. Gary Chapman who was the author of
USEPA's NCD. He explained that
Mr. Chapman felt that the NCD recommendations should be adopted and that the timing of the
seasonal switch from early life stage to the warmer months should be left to the local experts.
(See Exhibit 10)
Dr. Garvey also testified to and addressed questions regarding his recommended
DO
Rule and why he believed June 30 was the appropriate date to move from the early life stage
portion of the NCR recommended rule to that portion of the remainder of the year.
The second hearing was also notable in that as a result of an apparent request of the Lt.
Governors Office made through Mr. Mark Miller, Dr. David Thomas of the Illinois Natural
History Survey appeared and presented a letter he had prepared dated July 30, 2004. (See
Exhibit 13). Dr. Thomas had not been involved before and had not participated at that mornings
stakeholder meeting in which Dr. Garvey had presented his July 2004 Report found at Exhibit
9.
(August 12,2004 TR. at 153). Although an apparent participant in Mr. Miller's attempted sucker
punch,
Dr. Thomas did acknowledge in response to a question from Mr. Callahan that "I think
probably for a lot of the water bodies where your waste treatment facilities are on, the standard
probably is too high and can be modified. My only concern is to modify it for the whole state,
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
because I think there will be areas where I would have some concern biologically about some of
the aquatic resources." (August 12,2004
TR. at 1 36).
Over a year transpired before the third hearing was held after many stakeholder meetings
were conducted. It was explained at the start of the third hearing that IAWA was of the belief
that the stakeholder approach may have been on the verge of breaking down. It was
IAWA's
understanding based upon statements made by representatives of IEPA and IDNR that they were
working to prepare a joint position and submit it to the Board in response to the IAWA proposal.
Dr. Thomas's decision to proceed to file his pre-filed testimony prior to the third hearing had the
effect of effectively stopping the stakeholder process in its tracks. IAWA was concerned that a
year long effort to seek to eliminate or at least minimize points of differences had been wasted.
'This decision by Dr. Thomas to file his pre-filed testimony coupled with the blindside delivered
by the Lt. Governor office in the second hearing were very serious developments which had the
effect of essentially negating the efforts that had been made by IEPA, IDNR, IAWA the
environmental group representatives and other stakeholders throughout the intervening year. Mr.
Toby Frevert presented a statement on the record which essentially recounted the stakeholder
efforts and repeated his previously stated positions that "the current
DO standard is overly
simplistic, outdated and not serving the state well." Mr. Frevert's statement is contained in
Exhibit 14. Mr. Frevert's, citing significance of the DO standard, asked the Board for additional
time to allow IEPA to resolve or reduce points of contention among the stakeholders. After the
conclusion of Mr. Frevert's testimony, Mr. Stan Yonkauski, counsel for
IDNR, was sworn in and
he also testified as to the progress that had been made throughout the stakeholder process and
further supported Mr. Frevert's request for more time. Mr. Yonkauski then presented a motion to
withdraw Dr. Thomas testimony. After considerable discussions the motion was subsequently
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
granted by the Hearing Officer on the basis that the "pre-field testimony Dr. Thomas does not
represent
DNR's position anymore."
Following this and with the assurance that IEPA would report back during a status
conference of the progress made to date, the hearing proceeded. Mr. Streicher testified about the
efforts to resolve the differences throughout the stakeholder process and Dr. Garvey presented
his pre-filed testimony with all nine of the attachments which set forth in Exhibit
16. Dr. Garvey
explained that he had reviewed data obtained from Mr.
Ranken and further work from Mr. Yoder
of Ohio EPA. He concluded that this Ohio data and analysis basically supported IAWA's
proposal. He cautioned about the ability to draw conclusions from certain of the data presented
in the
Ranken report.
Finally, Dr. Garvey testified and addressed questions concerning the early life stage cut
off of June 30 and the impact of fish that continue to spawn after that date. In essence, Dr.
Garvey testified that either the species have sufficient spawning earlier in the year to assure
continued annual recruitment or they are adapted to lower
DO levels which naturally occur after
June 30.
A fourth hearing was held on April 25, 2006.
This hearing was held to allow the DNR
and IEPA to present the Joint DNRIIEPA Proposal and supporting information. Exhibits 20, 21
and 23. As presented the Joint DNRIIEPA Proposal differs in three respects from that of the
IAWA Proposal with the agreed upon inclusion of the 30-day limit. First, they proposed the cut
off date of July 30 for the earlier life stage rather than the June 30 date contained in the IAWA
Proposal. Second, they proposed a second tier of enhanced waters "for those systems supporting
species believed to associate with higher ambient dissolved oxygen concentrations." (Emphasis
added) (April 25,2006 TR. at 24). For these enhanced waters the Joint
DNRIIEPA Proposal
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
would have the Board adopt a 4.0 mg/l daily minimum, 6.25 mgll daily mean value averaged
over seven days, and a 30-day 6.0
mgll daily mean. (April 25,2006 TR at 26). The third change
was the proposal of a narrative provision designed to ensure sufficient
DO to prevent offensive
conditions and a recognition that quiescent and isolated sections of general use waters, including
wetlands, slough backwaters and lakes and reservoirs reservations below the thermocline; shall
be maintained at sufficient dissolved oxygen level to support their natural ecological functions
and resident community (April 25,2006
TR. at 25).
Representatives of IDNR and IEPA testified that they had developed a list of species they
believed to be associated with higher dissolved oxygen based on extrapolations of the
Ranken
work and based on their own experience. They then looked at the historical data base to
determine if these organisms were present in a given stream reach. If they were, the stream
reach was assigned to the list of segments for which they are proposing enhanced water
classification which is found at Exhibit 21.
Based on earlier requests by IAWA, for the data to support the enhanced water segment
listings, proper identification of these segments in comparison of the segments the point source
discharges and the list of impaired waters,
DNR and IEPA provided Exhibit 22 and Exhibit 24.
After extensive back and forth regarding the data issue, both IEPA and DNR agreed to work with
Dr. Garvey to assist IAWA in being able to identify the basis for their enhanced water segment
proposal. It is extremely interesting that the transmittal letter to Dennis Streicher transmitting a
CD of DO results found at Exhibit 22 attempts to in essence refute the earlier data collection
effort
by USGS as well as the 2005 data which was collected because 2005 was an extreme
drought year.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
In response to questions Joel Cross explained that they essentially used the Ranken
listing, and any species listed above rock bass for DO sensitively was assigned to the enhanced
list. (April 25,2006 TR. at 91 and 92). Mr. Cross admitted in response to questions that they did
not evaluate their list
of enhanced stream segments against any actual DO data, temperature data,
or habitat data (April 25, 2006
TR. at 92). Not surprising the enhanced water list includes
segments that are presently on the
303(d) list as impaired for DO (April 25,2006 TR. at 98).
'They had no idea how many of the proposed enhanced water segments had actually had
dissolved oxygen measurements taken (Id.) (April 25,2006 TR. at 101)
The fifth and sixth days of hearings were held on November 22
&
23,2006. Prior to this
hearing on May 19, 2006 DNR submitted a compact disk with information concerning Exhibit
24, segments that IEPA had identified in the 2006 assessment data base as aquatic life impaired
(including segments where low dissolved oxygen is identified as a potential cause of
impairment) and the NPDES discharge points and associated data. After responding to pre-filed
questions submitted by the Environmental Groups,
IDNR and IEPA proceeded to address several
questions
concerning the pre-filed testimony of Dr. Garvey. In response to this line of
questioning
IEPA responded to a follow up question that both IEPA and IDNR had conducted
dissolved oxygen sampling during the summer of 2006. They also said that despite IAWA
having asked for the data they had declined to provide it. (November 2,2006 TR. At 41).
Mr. Streicher presented his pre-filed testimony See Exhibit 32. Mr. Streicher presented
an extensive summary of the stakeholder process that transpired since IAWA retained Dr.
Garvey and Dr. Whiles to work on this project. He included a summary of the various hearings
and stakeholder meetings that have occurred between these hearing. Mr Streicher also pointed
out that the Joint
DNRIIEPA Proposal was not the result of stakeholder discussions (November
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
2, 2006 TR. at 67). Mr. Streicher explained the opposition by IAWA to the Joint DNRIIEPA
Proposal with respect to the July 30 cutoff of the early life stages and the entire enhanced waters
approach. Mr. Streicher also testified concerning IAWA efforts to move the State to develop of
Tiered Use Water Quality Standards (November 2,2006 TR. at 69 and
70). He explained that
IAWA had formed a committee. It had retained a consultant and had at least one meeting with
stakeholders, including IDNR,
USEPA, IEPA, the regulated community, and the environmental
groups. Mr. Streicher explained that he felt the proposed enhanced waters was inconsistent with
the appropriate means for establishing use-based water quality standards.
Mr. Streicher also explained the effort that had been discussed at the April 25, 2006
hearing, in which certain IAWA members agreed to gather continuous dissolved oxygen data.
Mr. Streicher explained the efforts undertaken by Fox Metro Water Reclamation District, City of
Naperville, Greater Peoria Sanitary District, Village of Plainfield, Rock River Water
Reclamation District, Danville Sanitary District and the
Wheaton Sanitary District, and the
preparation of Exhibits 33 and 34 (November 2, 2006 TR. at
74-75). Dr. Garvey then presented
his
pre-filed testimony, found at Exhibit 35, and additional testimony based upon 2006 data from
Fox Metro Water Reclamation District and the
Wheaton Sanitary District (see Exhibit 36). Dr.
Garvey explained his involvement since initially being retained by IAWA and his participation at
every hearing and all of the stakeholder meetings (November 2,2006 TR. at
89). Dr. Garvey
summarized his prior testimony, and again stated
-
based upon his review of the growing
statewide
DO data, as well new studies
-
that the IAWA original proposal remains appropriate,
including evidence which is "mounting that
the majority of reproduction of aquatic organisms in
Illinois either occurs before July
1
-
See CSOBOTH 2006 thesis, SIUC; Exhibit
1 . . .
or late-
spawning organisms have early life stages that are tolerant to low dissolved oxygen
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
concentrations; for example, freshwater mussels" (November 2,2006 TR. at 91). Dr. Garvey
criticized the Joint
IDNRJIEPA enhanced water proposal, based solely on associations between
aquatic organisms and average oxygen concentrations, as ignoring "other potential causal factors
such as habitat quality, gradient, and temperature" (November 2,2006
TR. at 92). Dr. Garvey
then presented extensive testimony regarding his analysis of all of the data sets that had been
provided to him, both by IEPA and IDNR, as well as the recent data set collected by IAWA
members. Dr. Garvey testified that the many of the enhanced water segments "likely violate
both the
IDNRJIEPA, and perhaps the IAWA proposed standards, even though enhanced oxygen
taxa are present in streams" (November 2,2006
TR. at 93). Dr. Garvey explained that, based on
his analysis of the grab dissolved oxygen data collected from 1994 through 2003 which are said
to fully meet their aquatic use designations, the 2004
and 2005 semi-continuous data logging
probes in streams that have been identified for the enhanced segments, that, based on this review,
the median dissolved oxygen concentration declines through during June through August to a
benchmark level below
5 mgll during summer months. He further testified that the grab samples
were usually taken during the day. Turning to the continuous data, the DO levels
in the
enhanced segments more frequently decline below
5 mgll, and even occasionally below the
3.5 mgll value, during the night-through-dawn period (November 2,2006 TR. at 95). Dr.
Garvey also noted that 20% of the observations exceed the proposed DO minimum of
5 mgll for
the month of July, even though these segments contain oxygen-sensing species
(Id.).
Dr. Garvey
also responded to the attempts by IEPA to try to limit the use of the grab data and the 2005
results of the continuous sampling. In Dr.
Garvey's opinion, "the extreme drought conditions in
the enhanced streams likely provided the worst-case scenario, and thereby insight into what acute
minimum should be to support a diverse aquatic assemblage. The proposed minimum standard
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
of 3.5 mgll was rarely exceeded in these streams, and likely is near the extreme lower limit"
(November 2,2006
TR. at 97). Dr. Garvey had also compared the proposed IAWA seven day
minimum average as it would apply in July at 4.0 mgll to the proposed Joint DNRIIEPA seven
day minimum average as it would apply in August and found the IAWA standard yielding more
potential violations indicating its greater sensitivity to low DO conditions during the July
transitional month. (November 2,2006 TR. at 101 and 15 1-1
54). In conclusion, Dr. Garvey
testified that based upon his review of all of the DO data sets, including that assembled by the
IAWA
members, in his opinion, a dissolved oxygen "threshold" does exist and that it occurs
during the summer when concentrations are less than or equal to
3 mg/l as stated in the NCD and
the Garvey-Whiles Report. If a stream remains consistently above this level,
i.e.,
never violates
a
3.5 mg/l minimum
-
oxygen is no longer limiting for life, and some other factors then limits
organisms, probably habitat. All of the stream data and the literature
-
see Dr. David's research
-
supports this view" (November 2,2006 TR. at 102). In summary, in response to a question as
to whether he believed there was any scientific basis to support the Joint
DNRIIEPA Proposal,
Dr. Garvey stated that the enhanced tier criteria was not supportable, because of his belief that
you need to have strong laboratory-derived physiological-based data associated with oxygen
tolerances in fish and other aquatic organisms, as well as incorporating the effects of flow
(November 2,2006
TR. at 119-120). Dr. Garvey then responded to a number of questions.
At the sixth day of hearing on November 3,2006, Ms. Cindy
Skrukrud testified on behalf
of the Illinois Chapter of the Sierra Club. She testified that they also support the Joint
DNRIIEPA Proposal (November 3,2006 TR. at 257). She further testified that they support the
agency's narrative proposal (November 3,2006 TR. at 258).
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
B.
Issues for Decision By Board
As aptly described by Mr. Streicher, the testimony presented at six days of hearing in
this record, and the numerous stakeholder meetings that have occurred, have resulted in
essentially two competing rule-making proposals before the Board. The first is that of the
original IAWA proposal, and the second, the Joint
DNRIIEPA Proposal. As previously stated,
IAWA is in complete agreement with the inclusion of a
5.5
mgll30-day mean minimum value.
IAWA is also in complete agreement with the proposed narrative rule set forth in the Joint
Proposal. Therefore, there exists three issues of controversy in this record. The one that IAWA
believes is the most easy to deal with is the proposal by Mr. Murphy to have a minimum
6.5 mgll
dissolved oxygen water quality standard during the cold-weather months be adopted as supported
by Sierra Club. IAWA believes that the record simply does not support this proposal as being
necessary. It is inconsistent with the
NCD, and representatives of the Metropolitan Water
Reclamation District of Greater Chicago have clearly shown that adoption of this proposal is
unwarranted.
The two issues where there is a substantial disagreement between IAWA and the other
participants is the inclusion of July in the early life stage period and the entire enhanced water
proposal. There is absolutely no evidence to refute the analysis of all of the existing data set that
has been provided by Dr. Garvey to the effect that July is a warm-weather month, and the
existing data shows that the dissolved oxygen water quality values in July decline to below
6
mgll and 5.0 mgll. It is true that certain species continue to reproduce during the months of June
and July, with some species reproducing throughout the year. As explained by Dr. Garvey, these
species either have substantial reproduction which occurs during the cooler weather months to
ensure natural recruitment, or the species have adapted to the naturally occurring lower levels of
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
dissolved oxygen that occur during periods of warmer summer weather. The IAWA proposal is
more stringent for the summer months than that contained in the NCD. The author of the NCD
believes that local experts should be consulted as to the appropriate cut-off date. Anyone who
has listened to or has read the testimony of Dr. Garvey
in this proceeding, including his reluctant
recitation of his credentials, will have to admit that Dr.
Garvey is that recognized expert, who has
participated throughout the entirety of this proceeding. His testimony should be controlling. The
Board should not adopt the end-of-July cutoff, as it will simply be ensuring that a dissolved
oxygen water quality standard will be unattainable, similar to the present unattainability of the
present
DO rule.
With respect to the proposed enhanced waters proposal, the record clearly does not
support its adoption by the Board. It is based solely upon an extrapolation of the dissolved
oxygen sensitivity contained in the
Ranken and work which admittedly has serious faults. This
simplistic approach to look simply at these dissolved oxygen sensitivity values, without
accounting for any other factors, is scientifically flawed. IEPA and IDNR have admitted that
they made no attempt to evaluate existing dissolved oxygen data, temperature data, or habitat
data in establishing the proposed enhanced DO segments. Their testimony is essentially all over
the map. They have testified that, in some instances, they averaged the cold water values
contained
in the NCD with the warm water values, and in some instances, essentially adopted the
cold water numbers. Again, Dr.
Garvey's careful evaluation and detailed testimony and reports
concerning his evaluation of all of the available data sets clearly show that many of the enhanced
segments do not comply with the proposed dissolved oxygen values that
DNR and IEPA would
have the Board adopt.
In fact it is so telling that IEPA has attempted to refute the very data they
have collected and supplied to Dr.
Gawey for his review. Also damning is that IDNR and IEPA
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
collected data during the summer of 2006, and despite being asked to share it with IAWA,
declined to do so. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that this 2006 data, like all of the
other data that has been provided to date, does not support the Joint
DNRIIEPA Proposal.
IAWA is firmly committed to the process of establishing appropriate tiered-use aquatic
water quality standards. It has put its own resources to work to start this process, given the
d
apparent reluctance or inability of either IEPk
$
or DNR to address this issue. IAWA welcomes
the existing involvement of IEPA and DNR in this process, and looks forward to their continuing
involvement along with that of the
U.S. EPA and the various stakeholders. The enhanced water
approach should be deferred to a scientifically based tiered-use proposal, relying upon the
guidance from
U.S. EPA for developing tiered-use water quality standards. The record simply
before the Board in this proceeding does not support the need for the enhanced water dissolved
oxygen water quality standards, or the basis for the actual designations set forth in Exhibit 21,
the stream segments for enhanced dissolved oxygen protection as set forth in Exhibit 21.
C.
Potential Middle Ground or Compromise
IAWA while it truly believes that the record does not support the Boards adoption of the
Joint
IDNRIIEPA proposal, IAWA does recognize the potential need for compromise. The Joint
IDNRIIEPA Proposal really has two parts. The first is a request to adopt a second tier dissolved
oxygen water quality standard for a category of Illinois Waters referred to as the Enhanced
Waters in this proposal. The second is the actual regulatory identification of stream segment as
being included as subject to this standard.
If the Board believes that there is any merit in the proposed enhanced dissolved oxygen
water quality proposal submitted in the Joint
IDNRIIEPA Proposal, IAWA would suggest that
the Board enact this as the appropriate dissolved oxygen water quality standard for Enhanced
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
Waters. IAWA would ask that the Board not adopt the list of enhanced water segments until
such time as either IEPA or
DNR have come forth and presented the scientific technical basis to
support the inclusion of a segment or segments as being in need of enhanced protection.
IAWA
would be hopeful that this process could be streamlined consistent with U.S. EPA's guidance for
adopting tiered use water quality standards.
IAWA
has repeatedly stated throughout this
proceeding that it has no objection to the establishment of more restrictive dissolved water
quality standards, where such water quality standards are deserving to be enacted. The adoption
of the enhanced water DO standard could proceed independently of the regulatory process of
deciding which water segments to include as subject to this standard.
Respectfully submitted,
By:
s/Roy M. Harsch
One of its attorneys
Roy
M. Harsch
Gardner Carton
&
Douglas LLP
19 1 North Wacker Drive
Suite 3700
Chicago,
IL 60606-1 598
(312) 569-1441
(3
12) 569-3441 FAX
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing
Notice of Filing
-
Public
Comments
were filed electronically and first class mail with the Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board and served upon the parties to whom said Notice is directed by electronic mail and first class mail,
postage prepaid,
by depositing in the U.S. Mail at 191 N. Wacker Drive
-
Suite 3700, Chicago, IL 60606
on Wednesday, December 20,2006.
s/Rov M. Harsch
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
service List R2004-025
Fred L. Hubbard
16 West Madison
P.O. Box 12
Danville, IL 6 1834-00 12
Bernard Sawyer
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
600 1 W. Pershing Rd.
Cicero,
IL 60650-41 12
Claire A. Manning
Brown, Hay
&
Stephens
700 First National Bank Building
205 South Fifth Street
P.O. Box 2459
Springfield, IL 62701
Deborah J. Williams
Stefanie
N. Diers, Assistant Counsel
Illinois EPA
102 1 North Grand Avenue
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
IL 62794-9276
Dorothy
M. Gunn
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 W. Randolph Street
-
Suite 1 1-500
Chicago,
TL 60601
Frederick D. Keady
Vermilion Coal
1979 Johns Drive
Glenview, IL 60025
James
T. Harrington
Ross
&
Hardies
150 North Michigan Avenue
-
Suite 2500
Chicago, IL 60601 -7567
John
Donahue
City of Geneva
22 South First Street
Geneva, IL 601 34-2203
Alex Messina
Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
3 1 5 0 Roland Avenue
Springfield, IL 62703
Charles
W. Wesselhoft
Ross
&
Hardies
150 North Michigan Avenue
-
Suite 2500
Chicago,
1L 60601 -7567
Connie L.
Tonsor
Illinois EPA
102 1 North Grand Avenue
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794-9276
Dennis L. Duffield
City of Joliet
Department of Public Works and Utilities
92 1 E. Washington Street
Joliet,
IL 6043 1
Erika K. Powers
Barnes
&
Thornburg
1 N. Wacker
-
Suite 4400
Chicago,
IL 60606
James L. Daugherty
Thonl Creek Basin Sanitary District
700 West End Avenue
Chicago Heights, IL 6041 1
Joel J. Sternstein
Office of the Attorney General
188 West Randolph Street
-
2oth Floor
Chicago,
IL 60601
Stanley Yonkauski
Illinois Department of Natural Resources
One Natural Resources Way
Springfield,
IL 62702- 127 1
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
Katherine D. Hodge
Hodge Dwyer Zeman
3 150 Roland Avenue
P.O. Box 5776
Springfield, IL 62705-5776
Lisa Frede
Chemical Industry Council of Illinois
2250 E. Devon Avenue
-
Suite 239
Des Plaines, IL 6001 8-4509
Matthew
J. Dunn
Office of the Attorney General
188 West Randolph
-
2oth Floor
Chicago,
1L 60601
Mike
Callahan
Bloomington Normal Water Reclamation Dist.
PO Box 3307
Bloomington, IL 61 702-3307
Richard
McGill
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 W. Randolph Street
-
Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
Stephanie
N. Diers
IEP
A
1 02 1 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
IL 62794-9276
Susan
M. Franzetti
10 South
LaSalle Street
-
Suite 3600
Chicago, IL 60603
!
Vicky McKinley
Evanston Environment Board
233 Grey Avenue
Evanston, IL 60202
Larry Cox
Downers Grove Sanitary District
271 0 Curtiss Street
Downers Grove, IL 605 15
Margaret P. Howard
2601 South Fifth Street
Springfield, IL 62703
Michael G. Rosenberg, Esq.
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
100 East Erie Street
Chicago, IL 6061
1
Richard Lanyon
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
100 East Erie Street
Chicago, IL 6061 1
Sanjay K. Sofat
Illinois EPA
102 1 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
IL 62794-9276
Sue Schultz
Illinois American Water Company
300 North Water Works Drive
P.O. Box 24040
Belleville, IL 62223-9040
Tom Muth
Fox Metro Water Reclamation District
682 State Route 3 1
Oswego, IL 60543
W.C. Blanton
Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin LLP
2300 Main Street
-
Suite 1000
Kansas City, MO 641 08
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *
Edward Hammer
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
WQ-165
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604
Todd Main
Director of Policy and Planning
Friends of the Chicago River
407 S.
Dearborn
-
Suite 1580
Chicago,
IL 60605
N. LaDonner Driver
Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
3 1 5 0 Roland Avenue
Springfield, IL 62703
Marc Miller, Senior Policy Advisor
Michael
J. Fischer, Policy Advisor
Office of Lt. Governor Pat
Quinn
Room
2
14 State House
Springfield, IL 62706
('13011
12489938 1
Albert Ettinger
Senior Staff Attorney
Environmental
&
Law Policy Center
35
E. Wacker
-
Suite 1300
Chicago, IL 60601
Irwin Polls
Ecological Monitoring and Assessment
3206 Maple Leaf Drive
Glenview,
IL 60025
Tracy Elzemeyer
General Counsel
American Water Company
727 Craig Road
St. Louis,
MO 63141
Dr. Thomas J. Murphy
2325
N. Clifton Street
Chicago, IL 60614
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, DECEMBER 20, 2006
* * * * * PC 102 * * * * *