RECEIVED

CLERK’S OFFICE

5 Limit Eassmasters

MAY

252001

~uur.

ii.a..iNOIS

1570

Co. Rd.

700 N.

Toledo,

624680

217-923-3098

Pollution

Control Board

May 22,

2001

To: Ms. Dorothy Gunn, Clerk

11, Pollution Control Board

100 W. Randolph, Suite 11-500

Chicago, ll~ 60601

Dear Ms. Gunn,

I want to thank thelL Pollution Control Board for the opportunity to comment on the illinois

Environmental Protection Agency’s(LEPA) proposed amendment to Title

35,

Subtitle C,

Chapter

Part 301.

After careful review, I believe this

amendment provides inadequate protection for

Illinois’aquatic natural resources, and I strongly oppose it as written.

I amespecially concerned withthe provision in partb ofproposed Section 301.109 that will

allow the

IEPA

and Illinois

Pollution

Control Board to issue provisional variances

with

preconditions formonitoringthe effects ofthe variances on the fish and other aquatic resources or

assurance that an appropriate response and recovery plan is in place. Recent studies conducted at

Newtonand Coffeenlakes provide clear scientificevidence that increasedthermal loading allowed

byprovisional variances cancause significantenvironmentaldamage. Withtheadvanced knowledge

that adverseimpacts to the aquaticecosystemwill most certainlyoccur,provisional variances should

reserved exclusively

for

eases

of extreme

emergency.

In rare

instances where

provisional

variances may be warranted, a standard set ofpreconditions that will insure full accountability by

the petitioner should be mandatory.

I am also concerned that this proposed amendmentfailsto meet theintent ofthe federal Clean

Water

Act.

The federal

Clean

Water Act mandates

that

all

thermal effluent standards “assure

protectionand propagationofa balancedindigenouspopulatinn:ofshellfish, fish, and wildlife in and

on thebody ofwater into which the dischargeis to be made.”The US EPA already has regulations

to allowfor provisional variances in case ofa true emergency. Theseregulations arethe standard by

which other Midwestern states regulate their electric

generating facilities. The IIEPA’sproposed

amendment appears far more lenient toward provisional variances that the EPA guidelines. These

lenient

regulations

will

give

illinois

based

generating

facilities an

unfair

advantage in

the

marketplace, conceivablyallowing themto produceadditional powerforotherregions-ofthecountry

at the expense ofIllinois’ aquatic natural resources.

Illinois’fourlargest powercompanies recentlytestifiedthat there is now-adequate~generating

capacityunder current operating standards to meet any conceivable demandthis summer. This is a

clear indication that the only need for a provisional variancewould be to supply additional power

outside ofthe State ofIllinois. Ifthe Electric Utility Industryin Illinois wants to supply service to

other

regions of the

United States where power

in short

supply,

they need to do so in an

environmentally responsible manner. This means long-term solutions that comply with existing

thermal standards, not with the use ofprovisional variances. Selling power to other regions ofthe

United States at the expense of illinois’aquatic natural resources is unacceptable.

I want to thank the board once again for the opportunity to comment on this very important

issue,

and Iappreciate your consideration ofmy concerns.

Si~erely

5 Limit

Bassmasters

chael E. Black

1570 Co.

Rd. 700

President 5 limit Bassmasters

Toledo,

62468