1 BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    2
    3
    4 BORDEN CHEMICALS AND PLASTICS
    5 OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
    6 Petitioner,
    7 vs. No. PCB 97-102
    8 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
    9 AGENCY,
    10 Respondent.
    11
    12
    13
    14 Proceedings held on September 11, 1997,
    15 at 9:00 a.m., at the Illinois Pollution Control
    16 Board, 600 South Second Street, Suite 402,
    17 Springfield, Illinois, before the Honorable Deborah
    18 Frank-
    Feinen, Hearing Officer.
    19
    20
    21 Reported by: Darlene M.
    Niemeyer, CSR, RPR
    CSR License No.: 084-003677
    22
    23 KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    11 North 44th Street
    24 Belleville, IL 62226
    (618) 277-0190
    1
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 A P
    P E A R A N C E S
    2
    3 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    BY: Margaret P. Howard, Esq.
    4 Assistant Counsel
    Bureau of Water
    5 Division of Legal Counsel
    2200 Churchill Road
    6 Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
    On behalf of the Illinois EPA.
    7
    SIDLEY & AUSTIN
    8 BY: James F.
    Warchall, Esq.
    One First National Plaza
    9 Chicago, Illinois 60603
    On behalf of Petitioner.
    10
    11
    12
    13
    14
    15
    16
    17
    18
    19
    20
    21
    22
    23
    24
    2
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 I N D E X
    2 WITNESS PAGE NUMBER
    3 Sailesh ( Sal) Jantrania 19
    4 Erika
    Godwin-Saad 27, 32, 36, 37
    5 Sam E. Shelby, Jr. 40, 45
    6
    7 E X H I B I T S
    8 NUMBER MARKED FOR
    I.D. ENTERED
    9 Petitioner Exhibit 1 10 19
    Petitioner Exhibit 2 10 26
    10 Petitioner Exhibit 3 10 39
    Petitioner Exhibit 4 18
    18
    11 Petitioner Exhibit 5 48 54
    12
    13
    14
    15
    16
    17
    18
    19
    20
    21
    22
    23
    24
    3
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 P R O C E
    E D I N G S
    2 (September 11, 1997; 9:00 a.m.)
    3 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Good
    4 morning and welcome to the hearing in Borden
    5 Chemicals and Plastics Operating Limited
    6 Partnership versus the Illinois Environmental
    7 Protection Agency. This is a water variance case,
    8 PCB 97-102. We are here because there has been an
    9 objection from a member of the public requesting a
    10 hearing today.
    11 My name is Deborah
    Feinen. I am the
    12 Hearing Officer in this case here representing the
    13 Pollution Control Board. We are going to go ahead
    14 and let the parties enter their evidence into the
    15 record, and then if the members of the public wish
    16 to enter their name and be sworn in and make a
    17 statement on the record, they can do so at that
    18 time.
    19 Before we begin, are there any
    20 preliminary matters or any questions about how this
    21 is going to work today?
    22 MR. WARCHALL: I have only one question.
    23 There is one person here I don't know.
    24 MS. DAVIDSON: Susan
    Davidson. I work at
    4
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 the Illinois EPA in Compliance Assurance.
    2 MR. WARCHALL: Okay. Hi, Susan.
    3 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Why don't
    4 the parties go ahead and make their appearances on
    5 the record, and anybody who is going to be
    6 testifying today if you want to go ahead and
    7 introduce them to make sure the court reporter has
    8 them.
    9 MR. WARCHALL: I am Jim
    Warchall with
    10 Sidley & Austin representing Borden Chemicals and
    11 Plastics Operating Limited Partnership, which we
    12 will call BCP from now on. With me today is Erika
    13 Godwin-Saad, to my left, with the ADVENT Company,
    14 an environmental consulting firm.
    15 In the corner in the blue jacket is Mr.
    16 Sam Shelby who is also with ADVENT.
    17
    Sal Jantrania, to Erika's left, is with
    18 BCP. He is the Technical Manager of BCP.
    19 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    20 MS. HOWARD: My name is Margaret Howard.
    21 I am an attorney with the Illinois Environmental
    22 Protection Agency.
    23 With me is Steve Vance from our Water
    24 Planning Section, and he would be testifying.
    5
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 This is Susan
    Davidson from our
    2 Compliance Assurance Section. She is here to
    3 observe.
    4 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: All
    5 right. Are there opening statements by the
    6 parties?
    7 MR. WARCHALL: Yes.
    8 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    9 Please continue.
    10 MR. WARCHALL:
    BCP's plant in Illiopolis,
    11 Illinois, is seeking a variance for a period of
    12 five years from the Board's general use water
    13 quality standards for temperature, which are set
    14 forth in 35 Illinois Administrative Code, Section
    15 302.11. As described in our petition, and as we
    16 will discuss today, BCP believes that the Board
    17 should grant the requested variance for three
    18 reasons.
    19
    Exceedances of the temperature standards
    20 result primarily from the need to maintain
    21 conditions in
    BCP's wastewater treatment system
    22 which maximize
    biodegradation of
    organics and
    23 ammonia nitrogen, which are two of the primary
    24 pollutants that the plant needs to control.
    6
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 Secondly, no treatment technology or
    2 process changes are available, at least in the
    3 short term, that would result in compliance with
    4 the temperature standards.
    5 Third, granting the variance will not
    6 have an adverse effect on the available uses of the
    7 receiving stream, which is what we call the unnamed
    8 ditch, which then flows into Long Point
    Slough, and
    9 will not have an adverse effect on the environment
    10 or human health.
    11 BCP believes that refusing to grant the
    12 variance which is requested today, would impose an
    13 arbitrary and unreasonable hardship on BCP, its
    14 employees, and on the local community.
    15 In the petition, BCP asked that the
    16 variance be conditioned on
    BCP's conducting further
    17 evaluation of the impact of the temperature of the
    18 effluent on aquatic life in the receiving waters,
    19 and also
    BCP's investigating technical and economic
    20 feasibility of controlling the temperature of the
    21 effluent. There is a schedule for the work that
    22 BCP would intend to perform under the variance in
    23 Paragraph 48 of the petition.
    24 BCP also asks that the requested variance
    7
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 be conditioned on the company's maintaining the
    2 temperature in its biological reactor under 35
    3 degrees centigrade. That proposal was based on
    4 really two factors. One, BCP does inject steam to
    5 keep the temperature of its biological treatment
    6 system at an appropriate temperature in the winter.
    7 They have pretty much control over that and they
    8 can keep it under 35.
    9 Secondly, BCP believed, based on the
    10 existing temperature data it had, that in the
    11 summer when it doesn't inject steam and the system
    12 is just subject to the heat of the summer, they
    13 still thought that based on normal weather
    14 conditions they could keep the temperature at all
    15 times below 35 degrees.
    16 This summer BCP monitored the temperature
    17 in the biological reactor for a period of two
    18 months in July and August. Basically, during that
    19 two month period the temperature in the final
    20 polishing
    clarifier was between 35 and 36, just a
    21 little bit over 35 on three afternoons. Down in
    22 the serpentine stream, which is the lower part of
    23 the treatment system, on two days the temperature
    24 was a little bit over 35.
    8
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 Those temperature measurements were taken
    2 in the afternoon after the sun had heated things
    3 up. On those same days the temperature in the
    4 morning at those monitoring points was quite a bit
    5 lower. I think it was maybe 29, 32 degrees,
    6 something like that. Such that the average for
    7 each of those days was below 35.
    8 Therefore, what Borden would like to do
    9 is to amend its requested variance condition to
    10 state that it will agree to maintain the
    11 temperature in the final
    clarifier at a daily
    12 average of less than or equal to 35 degrees. We
    13 talked to the Agency about that earlier this week,
    14 and Ms. Howard indicated that was agreeable to the
    15 Agency.
    16 As I mentioned before, we have three
    17 witnesses today. Our first witness will be Mr.
    Sal
    18 Jantrania, Borden's Technical Manager. Also, Erika
    19 Godwin-Saad, who is a biologist and aquatic
    20 toxicologist with the ADVENT Group, and Sam Shelby,
    21 who is a Licensed Professional Engineer
    22 specializing in wastewater system treatment and
    23 design.
    24 We have submitted
    prefiled testimony in
    9
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 this matter, which we have copies of today, which
    2 we would like to have entered into the record. We
    3 have two minor corrections to Ms.
    Saad's testimony
    4 and Mr. Shelby's testimony, which we would like to
    5 make on the record. If it is agreeable to the
    6 Hearing Officer, we will have that
    prefiled
    7 testimony entered into the record and our witnesses
    8 will simply provide a summary of that testimony
    9 today.
    10 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: That would
    11 be fine. Are they in the order that you are going
    12 to do it:
    Sal, Erika and Sam?
    13 MR. WARCHALL: That's correct.
    14 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: We will
    15 make
    Sal's testimony Petitioner's Exhibit 1.
    16 MR. WARCHALL: Okay.
    17 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Erika's is
    18 Petitioner Exhibit 2. Sam Shelby's is Petitioner's
    19 Exhibit 3.
    20 MR. WARCHALL: Okay.
    21 (Whereupon said documents were
    22 duly marked for purposes of
    23 identification as Petitioner's
    24 Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 as of this
    10
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 date.)
    2 MR. WARCHALL: After our witnesses
    3 provide summaries of the testimony, I think I have
    4 one additional question for Ms.
    Saad and an
    5 additional exhibit and a few extra questions for
    6 Mr. Shelby, which we would like to do on the
    7 record.
    8 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: That's
    9 fine.
    10 MR. WARCHALL: I guess one final matter
    11 at this point, as an alternative to seeking a
    12 variance from one of the provisions of Section
    13 302.211(e), that's the -- those are the maximum and
    14 absolute temperature standards. We suggested in
    15 our petition that the Board may find that we
    16 don't -- that Borden does not need a variance from
    17 those petitions because they do not apply to a
    18 small stream like the unnamed ditch at Long Point
    19 Slough.
    20 Our argument was based on the fact that
    21 Section 302.211(e) states that it applies to the
    22 quote, main river, unquote. We believe that these
    23 water bodies do not constitute the main river. We
    24 cited in our petition one Board opinion from
    11
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 several years back which seemed to support our
    2 position.
    3 The Agency's variance recommendation,
    4 which supported granting the variance in this case
    5 took the other side of the argument and suggested
    6 that this provision of 302.211(e) does, in fact,
    7 apply to the unnamed ditch at Long Point
    Slough.
    8 We do not have any additional authority or argument
    9 on that today, and we don't see any need to brief
    10 that or do anything else with that at this point,
    11 and simply would ask the Board to decide that issue
    12 on the materials already presented to it.
    13 We would point out, though, that in the
    14 event the Board does not agree with us we would, of
    15 course, desire a variance from the 302.211(e) as
    16 well as the other sections of Section 302.211.
    17 That concludes my statement.
    18 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay, Ms.
    19 Howard.
    20 MS. HOWARD: Good morning. The Agency
    21 has been reviewing this case, and we have been
    22 having meetings with Borden since -- beginning in,
    23 like, January of 1996, and we have reviewed quite a
    24 bit of the data that they have provided to us. We
    12
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 have had some meetings where we have been able to
    2 discuss the type of sampling and testing that we
    3 think would be necessary in order to look at
    4 exactly what is happening in that stream with
    5 respect to the temperatures and the different
    6 affects on the aquatic life.
    7 We have come to an agreement with Borden
    8 that the types of sampling that they are suggesting
    9 would be beneficial. We think that it is something
    10 that needs to be done in order to go on in any
    11 other types of proceedings or in any other
    12 decisions that have to be made with respect to the
    13 facility as to whether or not they are going to
    14 have to make any changes to the procedures or their
    15 processes, whether they are going to have to do
    16 anything to help protect the aquatic life if we
    17 find, in fact, that it is being affected.
    18 So the Agency, in its recommendation, did
    19 make the statement, and we still stand by our
    20 statement, that this should be granted. The
    21 variance should be granted. I did take a look at
    22 the changes that they would like, and what we
    23 were -- in the recommendation on page six, letter
    24 V, it originally stated that during the variance
    13
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 period the temperature in the plant's biological
    2 treatment system shall not exceed 35 degrees
    3 Celsius.
    4 What we would agree with Borden on is to
    5 change that wording so that it would now read
    6 during the variance period the temperature in the
    7 plant's biological treatment system shall not
    8 exceed a daily average of 35 degrees Celsius.
    9 MR. WARCHALL: I would just like to state
    10 that we are monitoring the temperature in a
    11 particular unit called the final polishing
    12 clarifier, which I understand to be the final unit
    13 after biological treatment but before the
    14 serpentine stream. I would simply suggest that we
    15 specify that it is in that final polishing
    16 clarifier that the measurement would be taken.
    17 That is the place we are sampling now in addition
    18 to the serpentine stream.
    19 MR. VANCE: Is there a diagram of the
    20 treatment --
    21 MR. JANTRANIA: There should be one.
    22 MR. WARCHALL: That diagram would be in
    23 Exhibit G to the petition.
    24
    Sal, would you point out where exactly
    14
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 that is.
    2 MR. JANTRANIA: Yes. This is the
    3 polishing
    clarifier, and we are sampling right at
    4 the exit of the polishing
    clarifier.
    5 MR. VANCE: There are no heat sources
    6 from these two?
    7 MR. JANTRANIA: Those are heat sources
    8 but they actually, you know --
    9 MR. VANCE: So really you are sampling
    10 right ahead of the serpentine, right?
    11 MR. JANTRANIA: No, the sampling that we
    12 are doing is at the -- the effluent of the
    13 polishing
    clarifier.
    14 MR. WARCHALL: Right. We are also
    15 sampling -- pursuant to the sampling plan, we are
    16 also sampling those two other streams; isn't that
    17 correct?
    18 MR. JANTRANIA: Yes, this is sampled and
    19 we sample at this point, also.
    20 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. You
    21 have to explain for the record what "this" and
    22 "this" is. You have to give a verbal description
    23 of what it is you are pointing to.
    24 MR. JANTRANIA: Okay. As part of the
    15
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 agreement that we came to with the IEPA some months
    2 ago, the sampling -- the number of sampling
    3 stations that we are sampling, some of those we are
    4 sampling twice a day, five days a week. Some of
    5 them we sample once a day, five days a week.
    6 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. Why
    7 don't we go ahead and get you sworn in since you
    8 are testifying.
    9 Would you please swear the witness.
    10 (Whereupon the witness was
    11 sworn by the Notary Public.)
    12 MR. WARCHALL: Did we finish our
    13 discussion?
    14 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: I think
    15 so. Do you want to go ahead and continue with your
    16 opening statement, if you can remember where you
    17 were at.
    18 MS. HOWARD: Yes. Just a second.
    19 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Let's go
    20 off the record for a second.
    21 (Discussion off the record.)
    22 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Back on
    23 the record.
    24 MS. HOWARD: Okay. Thank you. Sorry
    16
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 about that.
    2 Originally, when we had talked about the
    3 change in letter V, the Agency had just anticipated
    4 that it would just add a daily average 35 degrees
    5 Celsius at the end. But now, after looking at it,
    6 we don't have any objection to adding the words in
    7 addition to that in final polishing
    clarifier.
    8 That would be fine. I just wanted to make sure
    9 before I committed our Agency to that.
    10 With respect to the testimony, we did
    11 receive the testimony ahead of time. Our field
    12 people and our technical staff has reviewed it.
    13 Other than a few questions for Ms.
    Saad, we do not
    14 have any objection to it being entered into the
    15 record as read, and unless anything is brought up
    16 today that is something that we are not
    17 anticipating, or the additional witnesses here
    18 bring up a concern or something that we would like
    19 to further explore, at this point the Agency is
    20 still in agreement with Borden for the variance.
    21 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. Mr.
    22 Warchall?
    23 MR. WARCHALL: Yes, I just forgot one
    24 thing. Margaret Howard and I had discussed earlier
    17
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 in the week stipulating as to the admission into
    2 evidence the petition and all of the Exhibits A
    3 through AA.
    4 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    5 MR. WARCHALL: I believe that was our
    6 agreement.
    7 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. The
    8 petition then will be Exhibit 4.
    9 (Whereupon said document was
    10 duly marked for purposes of
    11 identification and admitted
    12 into the record as Petitioner's
    13 Exhibit 4 as of this date.)
    14 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: But I will
    15 not submit an additional copy to the Board since
    16 all of the Board members have copies from when you
    17 filed it.
    18 You are talking about the most recent
    19 amended petition?
    20 MR. WARCHALL: Right. The amended
    21 verified petition.
    22 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: All
    23 right. Then you may continue with your first
    24 witness.
    18
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 MR. WARCHALL: Okay. We call Mr.
    Sal
    2 Jantrania to provide a summary of his testimony.
    3 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: You have
    4 been sworn, so I will go ahead and enter your
    5 Exhibit 1 into the record as though it were read,
    6 but will let you go ahead and do your summary and
    7 then answer any questions.
    8 (Whereupon said document was
    9 admitted into the record as
    10 Petitioner's Exhibit 1 as of
    11 this date.)
    12 S A I L E S H J A N T R A N I A,
    13 having been first duly sworn by the Notary Public,
    14 saith as follows:
    15 MR. JANTRANIA: My name is
    Sailesh
    16 Jantrania. I am the Technical Manager of Borden
    17 Chemicals and Plastics Operating Limited
    18 Partnership's plant in
    Illiopolis, Illinois. I
    19 have submitted
    prefiled testimony in this matter.
    20 I will now present a summary of that testimony. In
    21 that summary I will refer to the plant as BCP.
    22 BCP is seeking a variance from the
    23 Board's general use water quality standards for
    24 temperature. Section 302.211(e) imposes
    19
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 temperature standards of 16 degrees Celsius for
    2 December through March and 32 degrees Celsius for
    3 April through November. These standards may not be
    4 exceeded during more than 1 percent of the hours in
    5 any 12 month period. I will refer to these as the
    6 maximum temperature standards.
    7 Section 302.211(e) also provides that the
    8 summer and winter maximum temperature standards may
    9 not be exceeded by more than 1.7 degrees Celsius at
    10 any time. I will refer to these as the absolute
    11 temperature standards. Section 302.211(d) provides
    12 that the maximum temperature rise above natural
    13 temperatures shall not exceed 2.8 degrees Celsius.
    14 I will refer to this as the temperature rise
    15 standard.
    16 Finally, Section 302.211(b) and (c)
    17 prohibit abnormal temperature changes that may
    18 adversely affect aquatic life unless caused by
    19 natural temperatures and require that normal daily
    20 and seasonal temperature fluctuations which existed
    21 before addition of heat due to other than natural
    22 causes be maintained.
    23 The requested variance would apply to the
    24 effluent discharge from
    BCP's Illiopolis, Illinois
    20
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 plant and the waters receiving that discharge. As
    2 discussed in detail in
    BCP's Verified Amended
    3 Petition for Variance and my written testimony, BCP
    4 believes the Board should grant the requested
    5 variance because the temperature of
    BCP's effluent
    6 results primarily from the need to maintain an
    7 elevated temperature in
    BCP's wastewater treatment
    8 system. No treatment technology or process changes
    9 are available in the short term that would result
    10 in compliance with the temperature standards.
    11 Granting the variance will not have an adverse
    12 effect on the environment, and refusal to grant the
    13 variance would impose an arbitrary and unreasonable
    14 hardship on BCP, its employees, and the local
    15 community.
    16 As described in the written testimony,
    17 the plant treats most of its wastewater through a
    18 treatment train providing primary clarification,
    19 activated sludge treatment, tertiary clarification,
    20 and final polishing in an 800 foot long serpentine
    21 stream. The plant discharges its treated
    22 wastewater through an unnamed ditch which has very
    23 low flow. The unnamed ditch drains into Long Point
    24 Slough about three miles downstream from
    BCP's
    21
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 outfall. Although a variety of aquatic species
    2 inhabit the ditch and the
    Slough, these waters are
    3 of little use for recreational or other purposes
    4 due to their small size and low and variable
    5 flows.
    6
    BCP's need for a variance results
    7 primarily from the necessity of maintaining the
    8 plant's activated sludge wastewater treatment
    9 system at a temperature of approximately 30 degrees
    10 Celsius. Our testimony of our second witness, Mr.
    11 Sam Shelby of the ADVENT Group, Inc., will discuss
    12 the sources of heat at the plant and the plant's
    13 wastewater treatment in more detail.
    14 Although in winter some cooling of the
    15 wastewater occurs before it enters the unnamed
    16 ditch, that cooling is not always sufficient to
    17 assure that water in the ditch does not exceed the
    18 winter maximum temperature standard of 16 degrees
    19 Celsius. In summer, although
    exceedances of the 32
    20 degrees Celsius maximum temperature standard in the
    21 ditch are relatively rare,
    exceedances have been
    22 recorded.
    23 The Verified Petition as well as a new
    24 exhibit appended to my testimony provide all of the
    22
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 relevant temperature data BCP has recorded. The
    2 data set forth in the Verified Petition and the
    3 exhibit appended to my written testimony indicate
    4 the following:
    5 There is often a temperature rise of more
    6 than 2.8 degrees Celsius between Sampling Point A,
    7 upstream of
    BCP's outfall, and Sampling Point C,
    8 downstream of
    BCP's outfall.
    9 Based on historical sampling data the
    10 summer maximum temperature standard was exceeded at
    11 sampling point C on 1 out of 334 sampling events,
    12 and the winter maximum temperature standard was
    13 exceeded at Sampling Point C on 57 out of 238
    14 sampling events.
    15 Based on more recently collected data,
    16 the summer maximum temperature standard was
    17 exceeded at Sampling Location C on 1 out of 18
    18 sampling events.
    19 In the summer, effluent temperature
    20 correlates well with the ambient air temperature.
    21 The temperature of the plant's effluent (Sample
    22 Point B) tends to exceed 32 degrees Celsius after
    23 noon on warm days due to the lack of ambient
    24 cooling.
    23
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 Despite the effluent discharge, sizable
    2 daily variations in the temperature of the ditch
    3 occur. BCP believes that this data shows that the
    4 effluent discharge is not inconsistent with the
    5 requirement of 35 Illinois Administrative Code
    6 302.211(c) that normal daily and seasonal
    7 temperature fluctuations which existed before
    8 addition of heat due to other than natural causes
    9 be maintained.
    10 Additional temperature data are available
    11 from a study of the unnamed ditch and Long Point
    12 Slough conducted by the Academy of Natural Sciences
    13 of Philadelphia in the summer of 1984. These data
    14 indicate that the average temperatures recorded
    15 downstream in the ditch were very similar in the
    16 summers of 1984 and 1996.
    17 The 1984 data also indicated that over
    18 short periods there was substantial natural
    19 variation in water temperature in portions of the
    20 ditch and
    Slough unaffected by
    BCP's discharge.
    21 Moreover, in these portions of the ditch and
    22 Slough, natural heating caused
    exceedances of the
    23 temperature rise standard over short distances. In
    24 fact, in the portions of the ditch and
    Slough
    24
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 affected by
    BCP's discharge, it appears that
    BCP's
    2 wastewater stabilizes the temperature of the ditch
    3 and the
    Slough, preventing rapid temperature
    4 changes of more than 2.8 degrees Celsius except
    5 immediately downstream of
    BCP's outfall.
    6 This concludes my summary. I will be
    7 happy to answer any questions that the Board or the
    8 Illinois EPA may have.
    9 MS. HOWARD: The EPA doesn't have any
    10 questions at this time.
    11 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Mr.
    12 Warchall, do you have anything for your witness?
    13 MR. WARCHALL: No, I don't.
    14 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    15 Thank you.
    16 You may call your next witness.
    17 MR. WARCHALL: All right. I would like
    18 to call Erika
    Godwin-Saad to provide a summary of
    19 her testimony.
    20 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Will you
    21 please swear the witness.
    22 (Whereupon the witness was
    23 sworn by the Notary Public.)
    24 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Now that
    25
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 she has been sworn, her testimony is entered into
    2 the record.
    3 MR. WARCHALL: Okay. Ms.
    Saad, I believe
    4 you had one change, a correction, that you wanted
    5 to make to your
    prefiled testimony?
    6 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: That's correct. On
    7 page 3, the first paragraph, as discussed in the
    8 Verified Petition, a 1989 study of the
    Slough
    9 performed by the Illinois EPA supported similar
    10 conclusions regarding species diversity in the
    11 Slough. It is an extension of that sentence.
    12 MR. WARCHALL: So to the -- on page 3 of
    13 your
    prefiled testimony, the second sentence
    14 starting on that page, you are adding at the end of
    15 that sentence the words "regarding species
    16 diversity in the
    Slough," period?
    17 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: That's right.
    18 MR. WARCHALL: Okay. That was all,
    19 right?
    20 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: Yes.
    21 MR. WARCHALL: All right.
    22 (Whereupon said document was
    23 admitted into the record as
    24 Petitioner's Exhibit 2 as of
    26
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 this date.)
    2 E R I K A G O D W I N - S A
    A D,
    3 having been first duly sworn by the Notary Public,
    4 saith as follows:
    5 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: My name is Erika
    6 Godwin-Saad. I am employed by the ADVENT Group, an
    7 environmental consulting firm, as a project
    8 scientist. I have submitted
    prefiled testimony in
    9 this matter, and I would now present a summary of
    10 that testimony.
    11 BCP asked my advice on whether the
    12 temperature of
    BCP's effluent was likely to have an
    13 adverse impact on fish populations inhabiting the
    14 waters that receive
    BCP's effluent. These
    15 receiving waters are referred to as the unnamed
    16 ditch and Long Point
    Slough.
    17 After reviewing the existing historical
    18 data regarding fish and other aquatic life
    19 inhabiting these waters, as well as scientific
    20 articles regarding the affect of temperature on
    21 fish, I have concluded that the temperature of
    22 BCP's effluent is not having an adverse impact on
    23 fish populations and other aquatic life.
    24 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Ms.
    Saad,
    27
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 can you slow down a little bit for the court
    2 reporter.
    3 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: Sure.
    4 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Thank you.
    5 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: I also believe that
    6 there would be a lower population and diversity of
    7 aquatic life in these waters in the absence of
    8 BCP's discharge. The available field and
    9 laboratory data indicate that the temperature of
    10 BCP's effluent has not had an adverse effect on
    11 fish populations in the receiving waters.
    12 As indicated by Mr.
    Jantrania, the
    13 temperatures of
    BCP's effluent, the unnamed ditch
    14 and Long Point
    Slough, have remained approximately
    15 the same from 1984 to the present. In 1984 a study
    16 conducted by the Academy of Natural Sciences of
    17 Philadelphia concluded that the unnamed ditch
    18 downstream of
    BCP's outfall and Long Point
    Slough
    19 support a variety of aquatic life. In fact, 12
    20 species of fish were collected in the ditch
    21 downstream of
    BCP's outfall and 22 species of fish
    22 were collected in the
    Slough. The 1984 study noted
    23 that the diversity of fish in the unnamed ditch was
    24 within the expected range of diversity that occurs
    28
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 in small streams such as the unnamed ditch, and did
    2 not appear to be a result of Borden operations.
    3 A 1989 study conducted by Illinois EPA
    4 also reported the existence of a variety of fish in
    5 the ditch and
    Slough. Informal observations since
    6 that date by BCP personnel have also confirmed that
    7 fish inhabit the ditch and
    Slough.
    8 In June of 1997 ADVENT personnel
    9 conducted the first phase of an additional fish
    10 survey of the ditch and
    Slough. Based on a
    11 preliminary analysis of data collected in that
    12 survey, the abundance and diversity of the current
    13 fish populations appears comparable to historical
    14 observations. These findings suggest that the fish
    15 population characteristics have remained unchanged
    16 through time and, therefore, also support the
    17 conclusion that
    BCP's effluent temperature is not
    18 having an adverse impact.
    19 In fact, I believe that
    BCP's discharges
    20 minimize the temperature changes that would
    21 otherwise naturally occur in the ditch and,
    22 therefore, in the absence of
    BCP's discharge, the
    23 ditch would likely be largely uninhabitable by fish
    24 and other aquatic life due to winter freezing and
    29
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 the lack of flow in summer.
    2 The scientific literature on the affects
    3 of temperature on fish also support the conclusion
    4 that
    BCP's discharge is not having an adverse
    5 effect on fish populations. Using this laboratory
    6 data in conjunction with the available field data I
    7 was able to draw the following conclusions for the
    8 unnamed ditch and the
    Slough:
    9 When resident warm water fish are
    10 acclimated to a temperature of 15 degrees Celsius
    11 their upper temperature thresholds are, at a
    12 minimum, at least 9 degrees above the 15 degrees
    13 Celsius acclimation temperature. Similarly, when
    14 fish are acclimated to water temperatures of around
    15 30 degrees Celsius the upper lethal temperature
    16 limits for resident fish are all greater than 34
    17 degrees Celsius.
    18 Based on the existing temperature data,
    19 it is clear that the majority of fish in the ditch
    20 and
    Slough would rarely, if ever, encounter water
    21 temperatures at or above their upper thermal limits
    22 as a result of exposure to
    BCP's effluent.
    23 Furthermore, if a fish were to encounter
    24 unfavorable water temperatures, they could
    30
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 behaviorally avoid those waters.
    2 The literature reports that the maximum
    3 weekly average temperatures encountered by resident
    4 warm water fish species in their natural habitats
    5 often exceed 32 degrees Celsius (the Illinois
    6 summer maximum temperature). This information,
    7 coupled with the previously mentioned information,
    8 suggests that the highest temperatures observed in
    9 the ditch would not result in fish mortality. Both
    10 in spring and summer the temperature of the unnamed
    11 ditch downstream of
    BCP's outfall, as well as the
    12 temperature of the effluent itself was generally in
    13 the range of preferred water temperatures for many
    14 of the resident warm water fish.
    15 As temperature falls, the preferred
    16 temperature selected by most warm water fish
    17 species increases relative to their acclimation
    18 temperature. This trend in fish behavior, that is,
    19 selecting temperatures warmer than the acclimation
    20 temperature under decreasing temperature
    21 conditions, is documented in the literature and
    22 provides evidence that elevated water temperatures
    23 in the ditch in the winter are unlikely to have any
    24 significant adverse effects on fish populations.
    31
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 To summarize, based on the temperature
    2 data, historical field observations, a preliminary
    3 analysis of data from a recent stream survey, and
    4 the scientific literature, it appears that for the
    5 extent of habitat available, an appropriate fish
    6 population exists in the unnamed ditch and Long
    7 Point
    Slough, that the fish population
    8 characteristics of the unnamed ditch and
    Slough
    9 have remained unchanged through time, and that the
    10 temperature of
    BCP's effluent is not having an
    11 adverse impact.
    12 This concludes my summary. I will be
    13 happy to answer any questions that the Board or the
    14 Illinois EPA may have.
    15 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: All right.
    16 Ms. Howard?
    17 DIRECT EXAMINATION
    18 BY MS. HOWARD:
    19 Q Ms.
    Saad, in your first paragraph on the
    20 first page of your testimony, you stated that
    21 during the course of your employment you
    22 participated in the evaluation of numerous water
    23 quality standards and criteria.
    24 Could you tell me how many? What do you
    32
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 mean by the word "numerous"?
    2 A Well, with individual chemicals, I have
    3 participated in the evaluation of water quality
    4 criteria derivation, both aquatic life and human
    5 health, for about 15 to 16 different individual
    6 chemicals.
    7 Q These were water quality standards for 15
    8 to 16 of the --
    9 A Under the GLI, yes. That's what I was
    10 trying to say. Yes, under the GLI.
    11 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: You are
    12 talking about the Great Lakes Initiative?
    13 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: Yes, yes. Acronyms.
    14 Q (By Ms. Howard) And were those standards
    15 in any particular states or were they just within
    16 the GLI, within the --
    17 A They were within the State of Illinois
    18 and for the State of Indiana.
    19 Q Other than the GLI, which deals with the
    20 Great Lakes, have you evaluated any other streams
    21 or water bodies in Illinois?
    22 A No, ma'am.
    23 Q So the majority of your experience is
    24 with the water body of Lake Michigan?
    33
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 A Yes.
    2 Q When did you receive your
    B.S. Degree?
    3 A In 1988.
    4 Q And your
    M.S.?
    5 A In 1991.
    6 Q On page 3 of your testimony, I believe in
    7 the -- well, in the first -- not in paragraph five,
    8 but in the end of paragraph four, on the top of
    9 page three, the June 1997, that's the first phase
    10 that you referred to?
    11 A Yes.
    12 Q Okay. Could you tell me, did you
    13 participate in collecting the samples in the field
    14 for that first phase?
    15 A No, I did not.
    16 Q Could you tell me who did collect those
    17 samples?
    18 A Members of the ADVENT Group, and my boss,
    19 Mr. Scott Hall, and two technicians, Ms. Terri
    20 Gajewski, and Mr. Bret
    Rosenberg.
    21 Q Okay. How do you spell the last name of
    22 Terri --
    23 A
    Gajewski, G-A-J-E-W-S-K-I.
    24 Q And the other person?
    34
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 A Bret
    Rosenberg, R-O-S-E-N-B-E-R-G.
    2 Q Okay. Would you happen to know what
    3 their experience is in collecting fish samples in
    4 the field?
    5 A Yes. Scott Hall has been an aquatic
    6 biologist and
    ecotoxicologist for ten plus years.
    7 He is an avid fisherman, and has been employed by
    8 the ADVENT Group about five years.
    9 Q Okay.
    10 A Terri
    Gajewski has been with the ADVENT
    11 Group for approximately four years working as an
    12 aquatic toxicologist and biologist. Bret
    Rosenberg
    13 is a fairly newly hired employee.
    14 Q Okay. Is he a toxicologist, or do you --
    15 A I don't know. He does not work out of
    16 our office. He is, I believe, an environmental
    17 science major.
    18 Q Okay.
    19 A He works out of the
    D.C. office, so I
    20 don't know him very well.
    21 MS. HOWARD: Okay. That's all of the
    22 questions we have.
    23 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. Mr.
    24 Warchall?
    35
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 MR. WARCHALL: Yes, I have some
    2 questions.
    3 CROSS EXAMINATION
    4 BY MR. WARCHALL:
    5 Q Is there anything you recall off the top
    6 of your head at this point about the fish that were
    7 collected in June of 1997?
    8 A Okay. Now, I did not participate in the
    9 June of 1997 study. I did participate in the
    10 September study which occurred in the last couple
    11 of days.
    12 Q Can you tell us anything about that?
    13 A Yes, I personally was at each of the
    14 stations and participated in the fish collections
    15 and did observe the fish species that were
    16 collected at each of these stations as well as the
    17 habitat that is available there. This is
    18 recently. This is the second phase, but we have
    19 just collected the data in the last couple of days.
    20 Q One question I did have for you, Ms.
    21 Saad, is one thing that might not be that clear
    22 from the record is the habitat upstream of the BCP
    23 outfall in what we are calling the unnamed creek or
    24 ditch. Can you just tell us a little bit about
    36
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 that?
    2 A Right. Yes. I did observe station --
    3 the station we have named as Station A1. This
    4 station had a channel width of approximately three
    5 feet and a water width, at the time that we were
    6 there, and this was the last couple of days, of
    7 approximately one foot. The depth of water at the
    8 midpoint of the stream was approximately one inch.
    9 MR. WARCHALL: Okay. Thank you.
    10 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. Ms.
    11 Howard?
    12 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
    13 BY MS. HOWARD:
    14 Q I just want to make sure I have the date
    15 right. What date did you say you were out there?
    16 A We were sampling September 9th and
    17 September 10th.
    18 Q Of?
    19 A Of this month, of 1997.
    20 MR. WARCHALL: After that data is
    21 analyzed it will, of course, be part of the report
    22 which, I believe, BCP has committed to the Agency
    23 to submit in October, I believe.
    24 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: That's correct.
    37
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 MS. HOWARD: Okay. Just one other quick
    2 question.
    3 Q (By Ms. Howard) So when you have made
    4 your conclusions in this report, I am assuming that
    5 it is based on reviewing the data that was
    6 collected by the three individuals --
    7 A That's correct.
    8 Q -- that you talked to?
    9 A That's correct.
    10 MS. HOWARD: Okay. That's all.
    11 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    12 Anything further?
    13 MR. WARCHALL: No.
    14 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. Can
    15 we go off the record for a second.
    16 (Discussion off the record.)
    17 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Back on
    18 the record.
    19 You may call your next witness.
    20 MR. WARCHALL: Okay. I would like to
    21 call Mr. Sam Shelby to provide us with a summary of
    22 his testimony.
    23 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    24 Would you swear in the witness.
    38
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 (Whereupon the witness was
    2 sworn by the Notary Public.)
    3 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Mr.
    4 Shelby, your written testimony has been admitted
    5 into the record now as read, so you may do your
    6 summary.
    7 MR. SHELBY: Okay. I have a change.
    8 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    9 MR. WARCHALL: Oh, I forgot.
    10 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    11 That is fine.
    12 MR. SHELBY: In the submitted or
    prefiled
    13 testimony, the change is on page four in the
    14 paragraph under
    wastestream number two. The fifth
    15 line, please delete the two words, "tertiary
    16 clarifier" and replace them with, "serpentine
    17 stream," such that that sentence now reads, the
    18 effluent from this unit enters the serpentine
    19 stream.
    20 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: All right.
    21 Then it is entered into the record with that
    22 change.
    23 (Whereupon said document was
    24 admitted into the record as
    39
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 Petitioner's Exhibit 3 as of
    2 this date.)
    3 MR. SHELBY: Okay. Shall I read my
    4 summary?
    5 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Yes,
    6 please do.
    7 S A M E. S H E L B Y, JR.,
    8 having been first duly sworn by the Notary Public,
    9 saith as follows:
    10 MR. SHELBY: My name is Sam Shelby. I am
    11 a principal of the ADVENT Group, and a Licensed
    12 Professional Engineer in the State of Illinois. I
    13 have submitted
    prefiled testimony in this matter.
    14 I will now present a summary of that testimony.
    15 BCP retained ADVENT to provide it certain
    16 technical advice in connection with this variance
    17 proceeding. I was asked to advise BCP regarding
    18 improvements that might be made to the plant's
    19 wastewater treatment system and/or operating
    20 practices that could reduce the temperature of the
    21 plant's effluent such that it would not contribute
    22 to the
    exceedances of the Board's general use water
    23 quality standards for temperature.
    24 As described in my written testimony, the
    40
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 BCP plant has three primary
    wastestreams.
    2 Wastestream number one, which is treated using a
    3 biological treatment system, is the primary source
    4 of the elevated temperature of the plant's
    5 wastewater. The biological treatment system is
    6 maintained at a temperature of between 28 and 32
    7 degrees Celsius to achieve optimum nitrification,
    8 that is, reduction in ammonia concentrations. I
    9 have found that nitrification rates can decrease at
    10 temperatures above 35 degrees Celsius, and that a
    11 practical optimum operating temperature is around
    12 30 degrees Celsius.
    13 Although nitrification at somewhat lower
    14 temperatures is possible, this would require a
    15 substantial increase in the residence time and,
    16 therefore, a major physical increase in the
    17 physical size of the wastewater treatment system.
    18 The system is maintained at between 28 and 32
    19 degrees Celsius by injecting steam into the
    20 aeration basins between the months of November and
    21 March. The plant's other
    wastestreams,
    22 wastestreams numbers one and two, are lesser
    23 contributors of heat to the
    BCP's final effluent.
    24 At
    BCP's request, I have performed a
    41
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 preliminary investigation of the technical and
    2 economic feasibility of achieving consistent
    3 compliance with the maximum temperature standards
    4 and the temperature rise standard. The following
    5 technical options were considered for compliance
    6 with both of these standards:
    7 A, aeration of the serpentine stream; B,
    8 installation of cooling towers; C, installation of
    9 a water
    chiller with a heat exchanger system; D,
    10 installation of a cooling pond; E, replacing the
    11 wastewater treatment plant with a larger system
    12 that could achieve equivalent organic and ammonia
    13 nitrogen removal at a lower temperature; and F,
    14 cooling
    wastewaters that are not provided
    15 biological treatment prior to combining with the
    16 biologically-treated
    wastewaters.
    17 All of the above-referenced options would
    18 require a significant period of time for
    19 feasibility analysis, design and construction.
    20 Feasibility analysis would need to consider and
    21 address several difficult technical issues. My
    22 written testimony details several of these issues
    23 that need to be addressed for each option, which
    24 include the following:
    42
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 Difficulty in placing aerators to enhance
    2 cooling in the final polishing unit, called the
    3 serpentine stream, due to its narrow width and
    4 depth.
    5 Potential for
    exceedance of the plant's
    6 12 milligrams per liter monthly average and 12
    7 milligrams per liter daily maximum total suspended
    8 solids limits due to
    resuspension of settled
    9 solids.
    10 Ability to achieve effluent temperature
    11 below the winter maximum temperature standard
    12 during relatively warm periods in the winter.
    13
    Algal growth potentially leading to the
    14 exceedance of effluent total suspended solids
    15 limitations.
    16 Land availability for cooling towers and
    17 similar units.
    18 Water quality concerns resulting from
    19 chemical control of
    algal or slime growth in
    20 cooling towers or similar units.
    21 The use of chlorine for
    algal or slime
    22 control resulting in the need for
    dechlorination
    23 and the potential for formation of chlorinated
    24 organics.
    43
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 Capital and operating costs.
    2 In addition, as detailed in my testimony,
    3 consistent compliance with the temperature rise
    4 standard appears to pose difficulties that may be
    5 more formidable than those posed by compliance with
    6 the maximum and absolute temperature standards. It
    7 may not, in fact, be possible to achieve compliance
    8 with the temperature rise standard consistently
    9 throughout the year.
    10 When the upstream flow in the unnamed
    11 ditch is a small fraction of the effluent flow, the
    12 ditch would violate the temperature rise standard
    13 unless the effluent temperature was controlled to
    14 within approximately 2.8 degrees Celsius of the
    15 upstream temperature. As discussed in my
    16 testimony, this may be virtually impossible to do
    17 in both the summer and winter, due to the large
    18 fluctuations in the temperature and flow of the
    19 stream upstream of the
    outfall and the large
    20 variations in the amount of cooling that would be
    21 required at different times of the year.
    22 Although there may be significant
    23 technical and economic obstacles to consistent
    24 compliance with the maximum temperature and
    44
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 temperature rise standards, BCP is committed to
    2 performing a comprehensive investigation of the
    3 options for compliance with these standards. That
    4 investigation includes: Additional in-plant
    5 monitoring of wastewater temperature consistent
    6 with the work plan that is now attached to the
    7 Verified Petition as Exhibit AA, and a detailed
    8 evaluation of compliance options. Paragraph 48 of
    9 the Verified Petition sets forth a schedule for the
    10 work BCP will undertake.
    11 This concludes my summary. I will be
    12 happy to answer any questions that the Board or the
    13 Illinois EPA may have.
    14 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Ms.
    15 Howard?
    16 MS. HOWARD: I don't have any questions.
    17 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Mr.
    18 Warchall?
    19 MR. WARCHALL: Yes, I have a few
    20 additional questions for Mr. Shelby.
    21 DIRECT EXAMINATION
    22 BY MR. WARCHALL:
    23 Q Mr. Shelby, I would like to show you
    24 Paragraph 48 of the Petition, which I believe has
    45
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 been marked as Exhibit 1.
    2 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: It is
    3 Exhibit 4.
    4 MR. WARCHALL: It is Exhibit 4. I am
    5 sorry.
    6 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: That's
    7 okay. We did it backwards. What page? I am
    8 sorry.
    9 MR. WARCHALL: This is on page 39.
    10 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    11 Thank you.
    12 Q (By Mr.
    Warchall) Referring to item
    13 number two, which reads description is completion
    14 of in-plant
    wastestream temperature monitoring,
    15 could you tell us a bit about that work and the
    16 purpose of that work?
    17 A Yes. The purpose of this work is to
    18 conduct temperature monitoring on four
    wastestreams
    19 in the Borden plant for approximately one year,
    20 beginning a few months ago, in June of 1997, and
    21 continuing until June of 1998. The purpose of this
    22 work is to fully characterize the temperature and
    23 temperature variations of these in-plant
    24 wastestreams to allow us to fully develop and
    46
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 evaluate compliance options.
    2 Q Okay. Then referring you to item three,
    3 then, that basically provides two months, then,
    4 after that data has been compiled to further
    5 evaluate the compliance options that have been set
    6 forth and described, both in your testimony and in
    7 the petition?
    8 A Yes, it does.
    9 Q Okay. I would like to call your
    10 attention to number five, item number five, which
    11 is identification of adverse environmental
    12 impacts. Can you just give us an idea of maybe an
    13 example of what sort of adverse environmental
    14 impacts we have to look at?
    15 A Yes. Potential adverse environmental
    16 impacts might be
    resuspension of suspended solids
    17 or some other activity that would cause effluent,
    18 suspended solids or some other parameter to
    19 increase. Another example might be the use of
    20 chemicals to control algae or slime in the cooling
    21 unit that would enter the environment and be a
    22 concern.
    23 Q Okay. The remainder of this schedule,
    24 which continues over on to page 40 of the Petition,
    47
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 describes a schedule for evaluation of technical
    2 feasibility and environmental impact, capital and
    3 operating costs, design,
    etcetera, with basically
    4 the schedule going out to about October of the year
    5 2000. Do you think this is a reasonable schedule
    6 for the work that BCP has undertaken?
    7 A Yes, I do.
    8 MR. WARCHALL: I would like to provide
    9 you a document which I would mark as --
    10 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: It will be
    11 Petitioner's Exhibit 5.
    12 (Whereupon said document was
    13 duly marked for purposes of
    14 identification as Petitioner's
    15 Exhibit 5 as of this date.)
    16 MR. WARCHALL: I think Ms. Howard has
    17 one.
    18 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    19 Thank you.
    20 Q (By Mr.
    Warchall) Mr. Shelby, can you --
    21 this document is, I believe, a 15 page document,
    22 and it consists of several tables and diagrams.
    23 Can you describe, very briefly, what this packet of
    24 materials is and who prepared it?
    48
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 A Yes. This was a -- it is a summary of
    2 figures and tables, diagrams and charts, that was
    3 prepared by members of the ADVENT Group under my
    4 direction and signature for submission to Borden
    5 regarding preliminary temperature control options
    6 that were developed regarding preliminary design
    7 sizing and preliminary costing on these options.
    8 Q And this is called preliminary because, I
    9 take it, the result of the temperature monitoring
    10 may result in revisions of these estimates or
    11 changes?
    12 A That's right. That's right.
    13 Q Okay. Referring to the first page, which
    14 is entitled Table 1, preliminary order of magnitude
    15 cost estimate survey, these options here, one
    16 through eight, are these the options which are
    17 identified in the petition?
    18 A Yes, they are. There is one option here,
    19 option six, that is not identified in the petition,
    20 but the others are.
    21 Q Okay. Why isn't number six identified in
    22 the petition?
    23 A Well, option six is an option involving
    24 flow augmentation of the effluent using
    49
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 groundwater, cool groundwater to blend with the
    2 treated effluent, such that the combined effluent
    3 would then comply with temperature standards. We
    4 felt that would not be very palatable to the Agency
    5 and, therefore, did not include that in the
    6 petition.
    7 Q Most of the options have cost figures
    8 attached to them. Option one, instead of a cost
    9 figure it says not feasible. Can you tell us why
    10 that was not feasible?
    11 A Yes. This option involves installing
    12 aerators in the serpentine stream to enhance
    13 cooling. However, the installation of aerators
    14 would prevent the settling of suspended solids and
    15 thereby cause a potential violation of the
    16 plant's -- or
    exceedance of the plant's limits on
    17 suspended solids. Therefore, we felt this was not
    18 a feasible control option for temperature.
    19 Q Okay. Option number 7, entitled
    20 utilities stream cooling, is also labeled as not
    21 feasible?
    22 A Yes, this option would involve cooling or
    23 involves cooling of the other utility
    wastestreams
    24 such that when they would combine with the
    50
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 biologically-treated wastewater the effluent would
    2 achieve compliance. However, our evaluation
    3 indicated that it would be necessary to cool these
    4 other utility
    wastestreams to below the freezing
    5 point at certain times to achieve compliance which,
    6 of course, is not feasible.
    7 Q Okay. Then, finally, on Table 1, can you
    8 tell us about option number eight, which is control
    9 of temperature increases?
    10 A Yes. This is an option or indicated as
    11 an option of additional controls that would be
    12 required to achieve compliance with the temperature
    13 rise standard, and would be in addition to any of
    14 the other options which deal only with compliance
    15 with maximum temperature standards.
    16 Q Okay. So if -- so based on these
    17 preliminary numbers, if BCP was to go with option
    18 number three, which is 1.67 million, then they
    19 would also have to use option eight for another 1.1
    20 million? You add those two numbers together?
    21 A That's correct.
    22 Q Does Table 1 include operating costs?
    23 A No, it does not. These are only the
    24 capital costs or installation costs.
    51
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 Q Okay. Quickly, now, I don't want to
    2 spend too much time on this, but I would just like
    3 to refer to it. I apologize that it may be a
    4 little tricky here. I want to refer to Tables 2,
    5 3, 5, 7 and 9, all of which appear to be breakdowns
    6 of the cost estimates for the various options. Is
    7 that what these are here?
    8 A Yes, they are.
    9 Q And are operating costs reflected on
    10 these exhibits?
    11 A Yes, they are. They are at the bottom of
    12 each of the respective tables.
    13 Q Okay. Those seem pretty straight
    14 forward. I do, though, want to ask a couple
    15 questions about some of the exhibits which are a
    16 little less straight forward.
    17 A Okay.
    18 Q If you could turn to Table 4, and just
    19 briefly describe what Table 4 is?
    20 A Table 4 is a table that -- a printout of
    21 a spread sheet that was performed to evaluate
    22 thermal balance on -- this is option four on a
    23 cooling pond system to help us evaluate the
    24 technical feasibility of this option and help us
    52
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 achieve preliminary sizing, information which, of
    2 course, we use in our preliminary cost analysis.
    3 Q Okay. Could you also then describe Table
    4 6?
    5 A Well, again, it is a similar table, a
    6 spread sheet on thermal balance calculations on
    7 option five. Again, it is used to do additional
    8 sizing calculations which were used for additional
    9 costing evaluations.
    10 Q Okay. Then Table 8, if you would just,
    11 again, briefly describe it?
    12 A Yes, this is a similar table or spread
    13 sheet for option six, the flow augmentation option.
    14 Q Okay. Then Table 11 -- I am sorry.
    15 Table 10.
    16 A Yes, this is, again, a similar table
    17 showing the thermal or heat balance results for
    18 option seven involving utility water cooling.
    19 Q Okay. Can we turn to Table 11? Again,
    20 would you just briefly describe this one?
    21 A This is a summary of the technical and
    22 economic advantages and disadvantages of all of the
    23 options. Also included are concerns -- other water
    24 quality concerns of each of the options where
    53
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 applicable.
    2 Q Okay. And, finally, I would refer you to
    3 the last four pages, which are figures one through
    4 four, and if you could just tell us what those are?
    5 A Yes, these are schematic diagrams of each
    6 of the options.
    7 MR. WARCHALL: Okay. I don't think I
    8 have any more questions for Mr. Shelby.
    9 I would move for the admission of Exhibit
    10 5 into evidence.
    11 MS. HOWARD: I don't have an objection to
    12 its admission. But as a point of clarification,
    13 after reviewing all of the information, as Mr.
    14 Shelby had testified, this is a preliminary
    15 analysis of the options, the applicable costs of
    16 those options, and then especially, for example, on
    17 Table 11, where it lists the advantages and
    18 disadvantages, and it also takes into consideration
    19 Borden's concerns with respect to those advantages
    20 and the disadvantages.
    21 We would consider this exhibit
    admissable
    22 or we don't object to its admission for the
    23 purposes of this variance, but depending on what
    24 the sampling shows and other considerations that
    54
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 would be taken after we conclude the variance
    2 period, the Agency certainly may not agree with all
    3 of these conclusions and the costs and stuff, but
    4 as long as that is taken into consideration, we
    5 have no objection.
    6 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    7 Well, then Exhibit 5 is then admitted into
    8 evidence.
    9 (Whereupon said document was
    10 admitted into the record as
    11 Petitioner's Exhibit 5 as of
    12 this date.)
    13 MR. WARCHALL: I would ask if we could
    14 have a short break.
    15 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Sure.
    16 Let's go off the record.
    17 (Whereupon a short recess was
    18 taken.)
    19 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Back on
    20 the record.
    21 MR. WARCHALL: The Petitioner has nothing
    22 further.
    23 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. How
    24 about the Agency?
    55
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 MS. HOWARD: The Agency doesn't have
    2 anything in terms of witnesses. We have gotten the
    3 information we need through cross-examination.
    4 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. How
    5 about the members of the public? Do either of you
    6 wish to make a statement on the record?
    7 MS. SHOWALTER: I don't care to have it
    8 on the record. My only statement is that I --
    9 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    10 Hang on just a second. If you don't want it on the
    11 record, we have to the tell the reporter to stop.
    12 MS. SHOWALTER: Okay.
    13 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. Off
    14 the record.
    15 (Discussion off the record.)
    16 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Back on
    17 the record.
    18 I would just like to note, for the
    19 record, that we do have members of the public
    20 present, and we had a discussion off the record
    21 just kind of explaining the permitting process and
    22 how the sampling is done.
    23 Is there anything else? Do you have
    24 closing statements or do either of you feel that
    56
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 you need a briefing schedule?
    2 MR. WARCHALL: We do not.
    3 MS. HOWARD: We don't think a briefing
    4 schedule is necessary. I don't have any closing
    5 statements.
    6 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay. Do
    7 our members of the public wish to file anything in
    8 writing? Do you believe that you will want to file
    9 anything in writing?
    10 MS. SHOWALTER: I would like -- the only
    11 thing I would like would be to -- some way to let
    12 me know how it comes out eventually.
    13 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    14 What we can do is I can make sure I have your
    15 address, and the Board will send you a copy of its
    16 opinion and order.
    17 MS. SHOWALTER: Okay.
    18 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Are you
    19 Ms.
    Showalter?
    20 MS. SHOWALTER: Yes.
    21 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: You should
    22 be on their list already as an objector so you
    23 should get a copy of that. I will check into
    24 that.
    57
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 MS. SHOWALTER: Okay. Thank you.
    2 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: Could we go off the
    3 record? I would like to make a statement to the
    4 public.
    5 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    6 Sure. That is fine. Just a second.
    7 MS. GODWIN-SAAD: Okay.
    8 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Why don't
    9 we go ahead and close the hearing at this time.
    10 MS. HOWARD: Could I just ask -- I am
    11 sorry. Have you received -- you should have
    12 received the Agency's submission.
    13 MS. SHOWALTER: Yes, I did. Thank you.
    14 MS. HOWARD: Okay. I just wanted to make
    15 sure.
    16 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: I found
    17 all the witnesses credible. That will be part of
    18 my written post hearing report including the
    19 exhibit list. There will be no briefing schedule,
    20 so this case will go to the Board and ready to
    21 write as soon as the transcript is in.
    22 Is there anything further?
    23 MR. WARCHALL: I don't think so.
    24 MS. HOWARD: No.
    58
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 HEARING OFFICER FRANK-FEINEN: Okay.
    2 Then the hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
    3 MR. WARCHALL: Thank you.
    4 MS. HOWARD: Thank you.
    5 (Petitioner's Exhibits 1
    6 through 5 retained by Hearing
    7 Officer Frank-
    Feinen.)
    8
    9
    10
    11
    12
    13
    14
    15
    16
    17
    18
    19
    20
    21
    22
    23
    24
    59
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    1 STATE OF ILLINOIS )
    ) SS
    2 COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY)
    3
    4 C E R T I F I C A T E
    5 I, DARLENE M. NIEMEYER, a Notary Public
    6 in and for the County of Montgomery, State of
    7 Illinois, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing 59
    8 pages comprise a true, complete and correct
    9 transcript of the proceedings held on the 11th of
    10 September
    A.D., 1997, at 600 South Second Street,
    11 Springfield, Illinois, in the case of Borden
    12 Chemicals and Plastics Operating Limited
    13 Partnership v. Illinois Environmental Protection
    14 Agency, in proceedings held before the Honorable
    15 Deborah Frank-
    Feinen, Hearing Officer, and recorded
    16 in machine shorthand by me.
    17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my
    18 hand and affixed my
    Notarial Seal this 22nd day of
    19 September
    A.D., 1997.
    20
    21
    Notary Public and
    22 Certified Shorthand Reporter and
    Registered Professional Reporter
    23
    CSR License No. 084-003677
    24 My Commission Expires: 03-02-99
    60
    KEEFE REPORTING COMPANY
    Belleville, Illinois

    Back to top