RECEIVED
BEFORE TilE
CLEPKS OFFICE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
JUL
142005
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control
Board
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
PETITION OF THE VILLAGE OF
)
AS 05-02
BENSENVILLE FOR AN ADJUSTED
)
(Adjusted
Standard
—
Water)
STANDARD FROM
)
35
ILL. ADM. CODE 620.410
)
REGARDING
CHLORIDE
)
PETITIONER’S RESPONSE TO ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENY’S RECOMENDATION
Petitioner,
Village of Bensenville,
by
and
through
its
attorneys McGuireWoods
LLP,
pursuant to
the Board’s
order of June
16,
2005,
files this Response
to
the Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Agency’s
Recommendation.
The
Order
allows
Petitioner
to
submit a Response
14
days after being served with the Agency’s Recommendation.
This
Response
is
timely
in
that Petitioner was served
with the Recommendation
on
July
12,
2005.
As
an
initial
matter, Petitioner appreciates the Board
facilitating the
filing of its
Second
Amended
Petition
and
further appreciates
the
Agency’s
efforts
to
discuss
and
resolve certain factual issues between the parties.
This has allowed Petitioner to revise its
petition so that
the
Agency
can
agree that
the proposed
relief should
be
granted as
is
reflected in the Agency’s Recommendation. Based on the extensive
information provided
by Petitioner, the Agency’s Recommendation, and
the lack of any contrary material in the
record, the Board should grant this relief.
Although the Agency recommended that the relief should be
granted,
it identified
certain
factual
issues
which
it
specifically
stated
did
not
alter
its
positive
1
recommendation.
Since
these
issues
were
raised
by
the
Agency
however,
Petitioner
addresses them in
order
to
clarify
these
issues
for the Board
and
document that
they
do
not detract in any way from the request for relief.
In Paragraph
5,
the
Agency
states that
it “cannot
corroborate” the
statement on
Page
7 of the
Petition
that
no
other constituent
in
site
groundwater currently
exceeds
Illinois
Class
I
groundwater
standards.
The
statement
noted
by
the
Agency
is
more
accurate if qualified
by
the
phrase
“not attributable to
naturally occurring
conditions,”
which
is
stated in
the sentence
before it
in
the Petition.
Iron and
TDS exceed
Class
I
standards but are attributed to naturally occurring conditions.
In Paragraph 7 the Agency notes that Petitioner bases its
groundwater velocity on
a text rather than
actual
measurements. Petitioner notes
that this text
is recognized as an
authority on
this issue.
In any event, the purpose of discussing
groundwater velocity was
to
identify
and
cost potential
compliance
approaches.
Since
Petitioner sought
to
provide
primarily
an
order
of magnitude
cost
estimate,
testing
to
identify
actual
groundwater
velocities was not performed.
Similarly
in
Paragraph
8,
the
Agency
states
that
it cannot corroborate
the
cost
estimates provided by Petitioner.
Again,
these were
order of magnitude estimates based
on
reasonable
sources of the
sort
typically
relied
on
by
consultants.
These sources are
identified in the Petition and in
Exhibit 6. Petitioner believes that these estimates provide
the
Board
with
a
reasonable
idea of
the
expected
costs
of these
compliance
options
especially
in
light
of the
strong
probability,
discussed
in
the
Petition, that
remedial
or
control
approaches
will not
be
useful
in
addressing
the identified
chloride
problem.
In
2
any event, these estimates are
sufficient to allow the Board to balance those costs
against
the documented lack of any environmental benefit associated with these activities.
Again Petitioner appreciates the opportunity
to
file
its
Second
Amended Petition
and
the
Agency’s
Recommendation that
the
relief
should
be
granted.
In
light
of that
positive
Recommendation,
Petitioner
waives
its
right
to
a
hearing.
If
the
Board
determines
that
it
has
questions
that
require more
formal
discussion,
Petitioner would
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
respond
to
these
questions
either
in
response
to
a
Board
order or at a public hearing.
WHEREFORE,
for the
reasons
stated
in the
Second
Amended Petition
and
the
Agency’s
Recommendation,
Petitioner
respectfully
requests
that
the
Board
grant
this
relief
Date: July
14, 2005
David L.
Rieser
McGuire Woods LLP
77 West Wacker Drive
Suite 4100
Chicago, Ii 60601
312-849-8249
\\REA\27 1861.1
3
RECEIVED
CLERK’S
OFFICE
JUL
~42gg5
BEFORE
THE
STATE OF ILLINOIS
ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
Pollution Control Board
IN
THE MATTER OF:
PETITION OF THE VILLAGE
OF
BENSENVILLE FOR AN
ADJUSTED
STANDARD FROM
35
ILL. ADM.
CODE 620.410
REGARDING CHLORIDE AND LEAD
)
)
)
AS
05-02
)
(Adjusted
Standard
—
Water)
)
)
)
NOTICE OF FILING
To:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Attn:
Melanie Jarvis
Division ofLegal Counsel
1021
North Grand Avenue East
Post Office Box
19276
Springfield, Illinois
62794-9276
Bradley P. Halloran, Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R.
Thompson Center
Suite 11-500,
100 West Randolph
Chicago, Illinois
60601
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE
that today I have
filed with the Office of the Clerk of
the
Pollution
Control
Board
PETITIONER’S
RESPONSE
TO
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY’S
RECOMMENDATION
in
the
above
titled matter.
Copies of these documents are hereby served upon you.
July,
14, 2005
By
VILLAGE OF BENSENVILLE
MCGUIREWOODS
LLP
David
L.
Rieser
77
West Wacker Drive,
Suite 4100
Chicago, Illinois
60601
(312) 849-8100
DATED:
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
PETITION OF
THE VILLAGE OF
BENSENVILLE FOR AN
ADJUSTED
STANDARD FROM
35
ILL. ADM. CODE 620.410
REGARDING CHLORIDE AND LEAD
)
)
)
AS
05-02
)
(Adjusted
Standard
—
Water)
)
)
)
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, David L. Rieser, an attorney, hereby certify that I caused the attached pleadings to be
served upon all parties listed on the attached Notice of Filing via first class U.S. mail
from 77
West Wacker Drive,
Chicago, IL, on July
14, 2005.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP
David
L. Rieser
77
West Wacker Drive, Suite 4100
Chicago, Illinois
60601
(312) 849-8100
L.
Rieser
\\REA\27 1959,1
