~ED

~D~j~~))

FEB28

2005

~AI’A

STATE OF

ILLINOIS

1~c~

Pollution Control B~,g~çJ

WAZTE

MANAGEMENT

WASTE

AGEMEPJT

Midwest Group

720 E. Butterfield Road

February 25,

2005

Lombard, IL 60148

(630)

572-8800

(630)

916-8182

Fax

M. McCambridge, Hearing Officer

Illinois Pollution Control Board

100 W.

Randolph Street

Suite 11-500

Chicago,

IL

60601

RE:

R05-1, Proposed

Rulemaking for RCRA Subtitle D Update, USEPA Regulations

-

(January 1, 2004,

through June 30, 2004)

Dear Hearing Officer McCambridge:

Thank you

for the opportunity to comment on R05-1,

the

identical-in-substance rulemaking

to update the

municipal

solid

waste

landfill

(MSWLF)

regulations

to

incorporate

the federal

regulations for temporary

research, development,

and demonstration

(RD&D) permits.

Waste

Management of

Illinois,

Inc.

(WMI)

supports this

rulemaking for

RD&D

permits

that will

allow for

exceptions

to limited

landfill

requirements for the

use of

innovative

technologies

at

landfills.

The

Board

has

specifically

requested

comments

on

two

issues:

(1)

rendering

the

decision

to

allow

alternative

practices

that the

Agency could

allow in

RD&D

permits

as

an

adjusted

standard

determination

and

(2)

providing

the mechanism of

an enforcement

action

for

Board

termination

of operations

under the

RD&D

permit is appropriate in the event the objectives of the permit are not achieved.

WMI

is submitting comments only on

the adjusted standard determination.

We believe that the

regulatory

amendment, as

proposed, does not provide any additional capability than what is already provided

in the

current system.

Under the current

system,

if a facility would

want to accept

liquid

wastes

or

install

an

alternate final

cover design, the facility would

need to

apply for an

adjusted

standard from

the

IPCB.

If

successful, the

facility would need to apply for a permit from the

IEPA, under the authority of the adjusted

standard.

Under

the

new

proposal,

the

facility

would

follow

the

identical

procedure.

Therefore,

for

purposes

of streamlining

and

eliminating

redundancy from

regulatory procedures, we

could

not support

the

IPCB proposal.

The

intent of the

USEPA rule

is to provide

a simple permitting mechanism for these

alternate technologies.

The current proposal does not do this.

Other

states

have

already

begun

accepting

applications

for

these

alternate

technologies

under

their

existing or modified

regulations.

We

would

support regulatory amendments

in

Illinois that

would

make

this possible, consistent with

other states

and, what we believe, is the USEPA’s intent.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide our comments.

Sincerely,

~

William

R. Schubert, P.E.

Director

—

Environmental Engineering