No. 502

   

    

A Publication of the Illinois Pollution Control Board

    

    

March, 1996

overnor Signs Repeal Of

Retail Rate Law/Abolishes

Subsidy For Waste Incinerators

On March 14, 1996, Governor

Edgar signed HB 1523 into law as

Public Act 89-448. P.A. 89-448,

which took effect the day the Gov-

ernor signed it, abolished the

state’s Retail Rate Law for all

waste incinerators; the Retail Rate

Law remains in place for landfills

that generate and recover methane.

The state’s Retail Rate Law, first

passed in 1987 to assist poorer

communities such as the Village of

Robbins in south suburban Cook

County with economic develop-

ment, required public electric utili-

ties to purchase electricity gener-

ated by waste-to-energy facilities

(incinerators and landfills that re-

cover methane) at the higher rate

of what it cost the waste facilities

to generate the electricity, as op-

posed to the (

Cont’d on p.2

)

BOARD UPDATES PRO

BONO ATTORNEY LIST

The Illinois Pollution Control

Board maintains a list of pro bono

attorneys for individuals that re-

quest such assistance. To be added

to this list, please contact the Clerk

of the Board, Dorothy Gunn, at

(312)814-6931 (internet address

dgunn@pcb016r1.state.il.us).

essage From The Desk Of

The Chairman

As Chairman of the Illinois

Pollution Control Board, I am of-

ten faced with the responsibility of

providing information to the public

on the authority, proceedings and

duties of the Board. One aspect

that groups and individuals often

ask about is the Board’s appellate

record. I am always happy to give

this kind of information as it is a

good indicator of the consistency

and clarity of the Board’s deci-

sions, and I am proud to offer you

the following summary of the Illi-

nois Pollution Control Board’s

appellate record.

(Cont’d on p. 7)

art I 15% ROP Cleanup

Amendments Adopted, R96-2

The Board adopted Part I

cleanup amendments to the 15%

reduction of pollution (ROP) plan

regulations on February 1, 1996.

The amendments changed the 15%

ROP plan to revise the annual

deadline for compliance with the

7.2 pounds per square inch (psi)

Reid vapor pressure (RVP)

requirement for certain gasoline

suppliers from May 1 to June 1.

The Board adopted the 7.2 psi RVP

requirements as a portion of the

Part I 15% ROP rules on

September 15, 1994.

(See issue

486, Sept., 1994.)

The presently-

proposed cleanup amendments

made an emergency rule that

delayed the annual effective date,

of February 23, 1995, in R95-10,

into a permanent rule. The second

change was to correct the

identification

(Cont’d on page 8)

Inside This Issue

For Your Information

p2

Rulemaking Update

p8

Final Actions

p11

New Cases

p12

Calendar of Hearings

p14

NVIRONMENTAL

EGISTER

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

March, 1996

2

(Cont’d)

lower “avoided” rate of what it cost the electric utility to

generate the same amount of electricity. (The federal

PERPA law already requires electric utilities to purchase

electricity from such facilities, but only at the lower

avoided cost.) Under the Retail Rate Law, the utilities

required to purchase this electricity would be held

harmless through a state income tax credit equal to the

difference between the higher and lower rate. The law

then provided that the State be reimbursed by the waste-

to-energy facility for the cost of the tax credit, but only

after all of the facility’s capital costs had been retired.

Estimates of the cost to the state of continuing the

Retail Rate Law had run as high as $4 billion over the

20-year period the state would be required to pay the tax

credit. With this in mind, supporters of the repeal con-

tend the passage of HB 1523 will save the state as much

as $4 billion over the next several years, based on the

large number of facilities proposed to be built in Illinois

in the near future. Incinerators will still be allowed to be

constructed in Illinois, albeit without the benefit of the

state subsidy.

SEPA Approval of Alumax SIP Adjusted

Standard (AS 92-13)

On February 1, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 3575), USEPA

published a direct final rule approving the state imple-

mentation plan (SIP) revision embodied in an adjusted

standard. The Board granted Alumax, Inc. Morris, Illi-

nois hot and cold aluminum rolling facility the adjusted

standard from certain of the volatile organic material

(VOM) emission requirements of the air pollution control

regulations on September 1, 1994, in docket AS 92-13.

The adjusted standard granted the relief from the re-

quirement that Alumax reduce 81 percent of its uncon-

trolled VOM emissions. The adjusted standard replaced

the generally-applicable regulation with lubricant selec-

tion and operating temperature requirements and im-

posed certain monitoring requirements. The SIP ap-

proval becomes effective April 1, 1996 unless withdrawn

prior to that time. The associated notice of proposed

amendments appeared in the same issue of the Register

(61 Fed. Reg. 3631).

AN ON LEADED MOTOR FUEL

On February 2, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 3837),

USEPA amended its fuels and fuel additives regulations

to ban lead as a motor fuel additive, effective January 1,

1996. The regulations now do not allow the introduction

of any fuel with added lead or a lead content of more

than 0.05 grams per gallon. The action also repealed the

former recordkeeping and reporting requirements for

refiners and importers and the requirement that automo-

bile manufacturers place labels near the fill tube and on

the dashboard of cars that says "unleaded fuel only".

USEPA adopted this direct final rule, which becomes

effective March 4, 1996 unless earlier withdrawn, as a

result of the January 1, 1996 ban imposed by the Clean

Air Act, as amended in 1990. The associated notice of

proposed amendments appeared on the same date (61

Fed. Reg. 3894).

(Note: As this issue was prepared for press, USEPA

had withdrawn that aspect of this repeal relating to the

unleaded fuel fill-tube restriction requirement in response

to public comments adverse to its repeal. See 61 Fed.

Reg. 8221 (Mar. 4, 1996).)

XEMPTION OF PERCHLOROETHYLENE

FROM THE DEFIN

ITION OF VOM

On February 7, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 4588), USEPA

exempted perchloroethylene from the 40 CFR 51.100(s)

definition of volatile organic compound (called volatile

organic material or VOM under the Illinois regulations).

USEPA exempted perchloroethylene due to its negligible

photochemical reactivity--i.e., it participates only mini-

mally in the photochemical reactions that form tro-

pospheric ozone. USEPA stated that perchloroethylene is

less reactive than ethane, another, previously exempted

compound. As an exempt compound, states will not be

allowed to apply reductions in perchloroethylene emis-

sions as reductions in ozone precursor emissions under

their ozone state implementation plans (SIPs).

USEPA took the action of exempting perchloroethyl-

ene on a petition filed January 28, 1992 by the Halogen-

ated Solvents Industry Alliance (HSIA). The petition

cited USEPA's October 24, 1983 proposal (48 Fed. Reg.

49097) to exempt perchloroethylene from regulation as

an ozone precursor in technical support of the exem

ption.

In exempting perchloroethylene from the definition of

VOM, USEPA noted that it was listed as a hazardous air

pollutant (HAP) under section 112(b) of the Clean Air

---

March, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

3

Act (CAA), and the USEPA has established national

emission standards for hazardous air pollutants

(NESHAPs) for it for two source categories: perchloro-

ethylene dry cleaning (58 Fed. Reg. 49354, Sept. 22,

1993) and halogenated solvent cleaning (59 Fed. Reg.

61801, December 2, 1994). USEPA stated that it intends

to establish NESHAP limitations for this material for

other source categories.

USEPA established its "Recommended Policy on the

Control of Volatile Organic Compounds" on July 8, 1977

(42 Fed. Reg. 3513). USEPA amended the policy to add

additional exempted compounds on June 4, 1979 (44

Fed. Reg. 32042), May 16, 1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 32424),

July 22, 1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 48941), January 18, 1989 (54

Fed. Reg. 1988), and March 18, 1991 (56 Fed. Reg.

11418). USEPA codified the policy in a definition of

"volatile organic compound" at 40 CFR 51.100(s) on

February 3, 1992, and subsequently amended the defini-

tion to exempt additional compounds on October 5, 1994

(59 Fed. Reg. 50693), June 16, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg.

31633), and Febr

uary 7, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 4588).

(Note: The update period in which this action falls is

January 1 through June 30, 1996. Normally, the Board

will not initiate identical-in-substance action until after

the end of the update period, in late August or early Sep-

tember, 1996, unless unusual action is taken in response

to a public request.)

TRATOSPHERIC OZONE: SIGNIFICANT

NEW ALTERNATIVES PO

LICY (SNAP)

On February 8, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 4736), USEPA

expanded the list of acceptable substitutes for ozone-

depleting substances under its Significant New Alterna-

tives Policy (SNAP) program and clarified amendments

it made on June 13, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 31092). The

amendments are embodied in a table that will not appear

in the Code of Federal Regulations. USEPA established

procedural rules for the SNAP program on March 18,

1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 13044) and published previous no-

tices on August 26, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 44240), January

13, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 3318), and July 28, 1995 (60 Fed.

Reg. 38729). USEPA adopted a rule that restricts the use

of certain substitutes on June 13, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg.

31092) and proposed amendment of those rules on Octo-

ber 2, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 51383).

Under the SNAP program, adopted under section 612

of the Clean Air Act, this listing indicates the acceptable

and unacceptable substitutes and conditions on substitu-

tion for ozone-depleting substances in particular uses.

USEPA evaluates risks to human health and the envi-

ronment in assembling the listings. USEPA does not

believe that rulemaking procedures and codification is

necessary to implement its acceptable substitutes deci-

sions. The most recent listing includes only new deter-

minations; it does not include previously-determined

substitutes.

RGANIC EMISSIONS FROM HAZARDOUS

WASTE TANKS, CONTAINERS, AND SUR-

FACE IMPOUNDMENTS: SUBPART CC RULES

On February 9, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 4903), USEPA

adopted technical amendments to the 40 CFR 264, Sub-

part CC and 265, Subpart CC standards for emission of

organic material from hazardous waste tanks, containers,

and surface impoundments, also called the "Subpart CC

rules". USEPA explained that the amendments clarified

the regulatory text of the rules, corrected typographical

and grammatical errors, and clarified segments of the

preamble discussion in the Federal Register.

USEPA originally adopted the Subpart CC rules on

December 6, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 62896), to become ef-

fective June 6, 1995. Confronted with criticism of the

rules, USEPA stayed the compliance deadline for certain

interim actions in the rules for six months on May 19,

1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 26828), until December 6, 1995. On

September 29, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 50426), USEPA in-

definitely stayed the Subpart CC regulations as they

would apply to organic peroxide manufacturing proc-

esses. Again, on November 13, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg.

56952), USEPA further delayed the interim compliance

deadlines of the Subpart CC rules by another six months,

until June 6, 1996. USEPA did not affect the December

8, 1997 deadline for ultimate compliance with the or-

ganic material emission requirements of the rules in ei-

ther of the six month stays.

USEPA invited comments on the rules on August 14,

1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 41870), and stated in adopting the

corrective and clarifying amendments that it will com-

plete its evaluation of the comments received early this

year. USEPA will publish a notice in the Federal Regis-

ter that explains if and how it will amend the Subpart CC

rules in response to the comments received. As things

presently stand, however, the federal Subpart CC rules

will become effective for all entities (excluding tanks,

containers, and surface impoundments containing or-

ganic peroxide manufacturing waste) on June 6, 1996,

with all entities required to install emission controls by

December 8, 1997.

(Note: The Board adopted the initial Subpart CC

rules and the first stay (until December, 1995) on June 1

and 16, 1995, in docket R95-4/R95-6. The Board pro-

posed amendments on February 1, 1996 in docket R95-20

that would incorporate the September 29, 1995 indefinite

organic peroxide stay and the second six-month stay of

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

March, 1996

4

May 19, 1995. In incorporating the stays and in antici-

pation of federal changes, the Board added notes to the

rules that indicated its intent that the Illinois regulations

have no more effect than their federal cou

nterpart.

(Note: The update period in which this action falls is

January 1 through June 30, 1996. Normally, the Board

will not initiate identical-in-substance action until after

the end of the update period, in late August or early Sep-

tember, 1996, unless unusual action is taken in response

to a public request.)

EDERAL WATERSHED EFFLUENTS TRAD-

ING POLICY

On February 9, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 4994), USEPA

published its Effluent Trading in Watersheds Policy

Statement. This statement responded to the March, 1995

presidential "Reinventing Environmental Regulation".

That report identified a policy of trading in effluent

within watersheds as one of the top 25 priority actions.

In response, the nonbinding policy statement explains

several types of effluent trading and outlines how USEPA

will encourage trading. USEPA stated that a source must

remain in compliance with technology-based standards to

take advantage of effluent trading. It anticipates that

most trades will be based on watershed analysis, such as

total maximum daily loads. Sources within the water-

shed would be able to barter or trade excess pollutant

reductions with other sources. An equivalent or better

reduction would have to result from the trade. The types

of trading that USEPA foresees are intra-plant trading,

pretreatment trading, point source trading, and nonpoint

source trading. USEPA outlined 17 areas where it has

experimented with effluent trading. These included the

Fox River in Wisconsin, where point source trading oc-

curred for BOD and nutrients, and intraplant trading for

BOD, TSS, zinc, and lead in the steel industry. The

trading also included wetlands trading in Arkansas and

Maryland.

IC LDR EXEMPTION FOR CABOT CORP

.

On February 9, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 4996),

USEPA granted a reissuance to the Cabot Corp.

Tuscola Cab-O-Sil Division of an exemption from the

underground injection control (UIC) land disposal re-

strictions (LDRs). The exemption allows the continued

use of well numbers 1 and 2 and the addition of well

number 3 to inject restricted wastes. The decision to re-

issue the exemption was based on the demonstration to a

reasonable degree of certainty that no migration of waste

would occur from the injection zone within 10,000 years.

The injected wastes include D002 hydrochloric acid and

wastewaters contaminated with hydrochloric acid; a F039

leachate contaminated with 1,1-dichloroethylene, 1,2

dichloroethylene, methylene chloride, phenol, tetra-

chloroethylene, and trichloroethylene; and spent acetone.

Conditions imposed on the exemption include a 400 gal-

lon per minute monthly average injection rate, restriction

of the contaminant levels in the injected wastes, and re-

striction as to the injected strata and injection depths.

(Note: AS 96-3, presently pending before the Board

pertains to this relief from the corresponding state UIC

regulations. Cabot previously obtained an adjusted stan-

dard pertaining to its well numbers 1 and 2 on February

17, 1994 in docket AS 92-8.)

ORRECTIONS AND TECHNICAL AMEND-

MENTS TO INDUSTRIAL STORMWATER

GENERAL NPDES PERMIT; EXTENSION OF

TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF INTENT

On February 9, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 5248), USEPA

published corrections and technical amendments to the

"Final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

(NPDES) Storm Water Multi-Sector General Permit for

Industrial Activities" (MSGP) that appeared in the Sep-

tember 29, 1995 Federal Register (60 Fed. Reg. 50804).

In publishing the corrections and technical corrections,

USEPA extended the time for existing facilities to decide

to seek coverage under the MSGP or the general baseline

permit (57 Fed. Reg. 41236, Sept. 9, 1992) and file a

Notice of Intent (NOI) until March 29, 1996. Facilities

seeking coverage under the MSGP must develop and

implement stormwater pollution prevention plans

(SWPPPs) by September 25, 1996. Facilities seeking

coverage under the baseline general permit remain un-

changed, so that these facilities need to implement their

SWPPPs prior to the deadline for the NOI.

The September 29, 1995 MSGP governs stormwater

discharges associated with industrial activity, including

discharges through large and medium municipal separate

stormwater sewer systems. Included in the permit are

discharges from a myriad of industrial facilities in 29

categories. Included in the general permit are effluent

limitations, permit conditions, and compliance options

for each of the categories.

USEPA established its definition of "storm water dis-

charge associated with industrial activity" on November

16, 1990 (55 Fed. Reg. 47990), along with permit appli-

cation requirements for such discharges. USEPA al-

lowed three permit options: individual permit applica-

tions, participation in a group permit application (the

MSGP), or coverage under a general permit. The MSGP

applications were due in separate segments, with the Part

1 application due on September 30, 1991 and Part 2 due

on October 1, 1992. The general permit issued was the

---

March, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

5

result of the 1,200 group Part 1 permit applications re-

ceived to cover 60,000 facilities. The permit covers

sources in states that are not fully authorized to issue

NPDES permits. It does not apply to sources in Illinois,

since Illinois is NPDES-authorized. However, USEPA

encourages the authorized states to use the general permit

if they have the authority to do so.

USEPA estimated that nationwide there are about

100,000 facilities that discharge stormwater associated

with industrial activity. Due to the administrative burden

of permitting these facilities, USEPA is pursuing a tiered

approach. Under Tier I, baseline permitting, USEPA

will issue one or more general permits to cover the ma-

jority of the discharges. Under Tier II, watershed per-

mitting, USEPA will target watersheds adversely im-

pacted by the discharges and issue the necessary general

permits on a watershed-specific basis. USEPA will issue

industry-specific general permits under Tier III, industry-

specific permitting. Finally, Tier IV, facility-specific

permitting, will target specific facilities for permitting.

USEPA issued the general permit in implementing Tier

I.

XEMPTION OF CHICAGO OZONE NON-

ATTAINMENT AREA FROM NOx TRANS-

PORTATION CONFORMITY REQUIR

EMENTS

On February 12, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 5291), USEPA

adopted an exemption for the Chicago ozone nonattain-

ment area from the nitrogen oxides (NOx) transportation

conformity requirements. As a result of this exemption,

Illinois will not need to demonstrate that transportation

projects in the Chicago Metropolitan area will result in

lowered ozone levels.

Under section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii) of the Clean Air Act

(CAA), a state must make a demonstration of the con-

formity with the applicable ozone and/or carbon monox-

ide SIP for each transportation plan and transportation

improvement program (TIP) in a nonattainment area.

The state may not build the project unless implementa-

tion of the TIP will result in lowered vehicle emissions

than those in the 1990 base-line inventory. Section

182(b)(1) requires the state to submit plans for annual

reductions in volatile organic compound (VOC) and NOx

emissions in the nonattainment areas. However, §

182(b)(1) further provides that the requirement does not

apply to NOx emissions in areas for which USEPA de-

termines that further reductions in NOx emissions would

not contribute to ozone attainment.

Illinois submitted a request for a NOx exemption un-

der § 182(b)(1) on June 20, 1995. The request was based

on the urban airshed model conducted from the Lake

Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS). Under that study, pro-

jected ozone levels for NOx emissions controls only were

higher than those for VOC-only control or NOx and

VOC control scenario projections. The study further

indicated that peak ozone concentrations were lowest

with VOC-only controls (i.e., no NOx controls). Based

on the study submitted, USEPA concluded that NOx

controls would exacerbate the Chicago area's ozone

problems. Therefore, USEPA granted the SIP revision

for the transportation conformity waiver request. USEPA

stated that the modeling indicates that NOx controls are

necessary for rural Illinois areas, but not for the Chicago

area, and would not likely be applied to ground-level

NOx sources.

USEPA stated that the continued approval of the ex-

emption is contingent on the results of ongoing model-

ing, including an attainment demonstration and plan for

the Chicago area. The attainment plan will supersede the

initial modeling results as the basis for the waiver. If the

plan relies on mobile source emissions controls to

achieve compliance, USEPA will reconsider the NOx

exemption; if Illinois does not use mobile source controls,

the exemption will continue.

(Note: On January 26, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 2428)

USEPA granted a Clean Air Act (CAA) § 182(f) exemp-

tion from the reasonably available control technology

(RACT), new source review (NSR), vehicle inspection

and maintenance (I/M), and conformity requirements for

nitrogen oxides (NOx). The covered area includes por-

tions of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin that

bound Lake Michigan. Generally, the NOx requirements

apply in ozone nonattainment areas. The NSR, RACT,

I/M, and conformity requirements apply to major station-

ary sources of NOx in these areas. See issue 501, Feb.,

1996.)

IP APPROVAL OF PART IV 15% ROP PLAN

(R94-21)

On February 13, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 5511), in a direct

final rule, USEPA approved the Part IV 15 percent rate

of progress plan (15% ROP) amendments adopted by the

Board on April 20, 1995 and submitted to USEPA by the

Agency on May 5 and 26, 1995. The Agency had sub-

mitted its Part IV proposal to the Board, docketed as

R94-21, on September 12, 1994. The Board conducted

hearings on the proposal in Chicago on November 4 and

December 2 and 16, 1994. The state implementation

plan (SIP) revision approval will go into effect on April

15, 1996 unless expressly withdrawn before that time.

The associated notice of proposed amendments appeared

in the same issue of the Federal Register (61 Fed. Reg.

5526).

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

March, 1996

6

The estimated reduction in volatile organic material

(VOM) emissions through the Part IV amendments is

estimated at 10.16 tons per day (tpd) in the Chicago area

and 0.39 tpd in the metropolitan East St. Louis area.

They will go into effect on March 15, 1996. The Part IV

15% ROP regulations lower the allowable VOM content

of coatings for several categories of surface coaters: the

can, paper, coil, fabric, vinyl, metal furniture, baked

large appliance, and miscellaneous parts and products

coating categories. The Part IV regulations also impose

reductions in VOM emissions from sources in the auto-

motive/transportation and business machine plastic parts

coating categories that exceed specified emissions levels.

The regulations further make the VOM emissions limits

applicable to wood furniture coating operations at a low-

ered threshold. The Part IV regulations also require

specified controls on synthetic organic chemical manu-

facturing industry (SOCMI) distillation and reactor proc-

esses and on bakery industry ovens. Finally, the amend-

ments make a number of minor amendments and correc-

tions to the regulations, largely in response to comments

submitted by USEPA and affected entities.

USEPA approved the SIP revision although the rules

included an exemption for touchup and repair coatings,

stating that this type of exemption is acceptable under its

VOM policy. USEPA concluded that the Part IV 15%

ROP rules included all necessary test methods and re-

cordkeeping and reporting requirements to constitute an

enforceable SIP.

ONCONFORMING IMPORTED VEHICLES

REQUIRED TO COMPLY

On February 14, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 5840), USEPA

amended its vehicle emission regulations. Under section

203(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act prohibits the importation

of vehicles not covered by a certificate of conformity,

except under USEPA regulations. 40 CFR 85, subpart P

includes rules for importation of such nonconforming

vehicles. USEPA proposed amendments to those rules

on March 24, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 13912) to respond to

new information about nonconforming vehicle imports

and to changes in the 40 CFR 86 vehicle certification

standards. Other proposed amendments were directed at

clarifying the importation rules and reflecting current

policies. The segment of those amendments that USEPA

actually adopted require nonconforming light-duty vehi-

cles and light-duty trucks to meet the vehicle emission

standards applicable in the year they were manufactured.

USEPA stated that it adopted this segment of the pro-

posed amendments to avoid detrimental effects on inde-

pendent commercial importers.

OXIC SUBSTANCES REPORTING FOR 28

NEW COMPOUNDS

On February 28, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 7421), USEPA

adopted amendments to the Toxic Substances Control

Act (TSCA) reporting requirements that add 28 new

chemical compounds. The 28 compounds are alkyl phe-

nols and alkyl phenol ethoxyates added to the TSCA

Section 4(e) Priority List, as recommended in the Inter-

agency Testing Committee's (ITC's) 37th Report to

USEPA. USEPA added the compounds to two reporting

rules: the TSCA Section 8(a) Preliminary Assessment

Information Rule (PAIR) and the Section 8(d) Health and

Safety Data Reporting Rule. Manufacturers, importers,

and processors of the affected compounds must now re-

port certain production, use, and exposure-related infor-

mation on the chemicals. USEPA estimated that 17

firms at 14 sites are affected by these amendments and

that the annual costs of compliance would be $94,343 for

the government and $84,954 for the 17 firms. An ac-

companying amendment to the TSCA Section 8(d) re-

porting rule will require submission of ecological data on

a previously-added alkyl phenol.

RAFT CANCER DOSE - RESPONSE AS-

SESSMENT FOR PCBs AVAILABLE

On February 28, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 7517), USEPA

announced the availability of a draft study, "PCBs Cancer

Dose-Response Assessment and Assessment and Appli-

cation to Environmental Mixtures, External Review Draft

(EPA/600/p-96/001A)", prepared by the National Center

for Environmental Assessment (NCEA). USEPA stated

that the external draft is available for review purposes

only, and it does not reflect current USEPA policy be-

cause it has not yet undergone peer review. USEPA

made the document available due to the level of public

interest. USEPA intends to convene a peer-review panel

in Spring, 1996 to review the report, with the final report

anticipated by Septe

mber 1, 1996.

OMPLIANCE DEADLINES EXTENDED FOR

TWO NESHAPs

On February 29, 1996, in two separate direct

final rulemakings (61 Fed. Reg. 7716 & 7718), USEPA

extended compliance deadlines for two national emis-

sions standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPs).

In the first action, USEPA extended the April 22, 1996

deadline for implementation plan submittal for the syn-

thetic organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI)

NESHAP until December 31, 1996. USEPA stated that it

extended the deadline for that rule originally adopted

April 10, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 18021) in anticipation of

---

March, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

7

further revision. Additional amendments clarified the

documentation requirements. A notice of proposed

amendments appeared in the same issue of the Federal

Register (61 Fed. Reg. 7761).

In the second action, USEPA extended the compli-

ance deadline for the leak provisions of the December 14,

1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 64303) gasoline distribution NE-

SHAP from December 14, 1995 to December 15, 1997.

Covered facilities are given until December 16, 1996 or

until one year from when they first become subject to the

NESHAP to notify USEPA of their regulatory status un-

der the NESHAP. USEPA had proposed delay in the

compliance deadline on December 8, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg.

62991). (See issue 501, Feb., 1996.)

EFRIGERANT RECYCLING AND PURITY

REQUIREMENTS

On February 29, 1996, USEPA undertook two sepa-

rate actions relating to recycled refrigerant quality stan-

dards. In a direct final rule (61 Fed. Reg. 7724), USEPA

extended the effectiveness of the refrigerant purity re-

quirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 608 re-

frigerant recycling regulations. The recycled refrigerant

quality standards are part of the May 14, 1993 (58 Fed.

Reg. 28660) program for recycling and recovery of

ozone-depleting refrigerants. The extended regulations

set forth quality standards for the sale of used refrigerant.

Formerly scheduled to expire on March 18, 1996, the

effectiveness of the standards was extended until Decem-

ber 31, 1996. A notice of proposed amendments ap-

peared in the same issue of the Federal Register (61 Fed.

Reg. 7762).

USEPA extended the rules in response to requests

from the air-conditioning and refrigeration industry out

of their concern over possible contamination of the stock

of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) and hydrochlorofluorocar-

bon (HCFC) available. The production of these chemi-

cals is banned under the CAA and 40 CFR 82 out of con-

cern over their potential to deplete stratospheric ozone, so

replacement of these compounds in commerce is depend-

ent on recycled material. (See issue 495, June, 1995.)

USEPA stated that it is in the process of developing

newer, more flexible standards, but it will not be able to

complete that proceeding prior to the former March 18,

1996 expiration date.

The second action (61 Fed. Reg. 7857) was the

proposal of those more flexible quality standards.

USEPA described the proposed amendments as intended

to offer more flexibility where refrigerant is transferred,

to institute a third-party certification program for

reclaimers and laboratories, to amend the technician

certification recordkeeping requirements, and to clarify

aspects of the sales restriction. Among associated

proposed amendments USEPA would also revise the

testing requirements for recycling and recovery

equipment, clarify the distinction between "major" and

"minor" equipment repairs, provide greater flexibility to

refrigeration equipment technicians, and streamline

various existing requirements of the program.

(Cont’d from p.1)

OARD ANNOUNCES IMPROVEMENT

IN APPELLATE RECORD

Statistically, the Board's record has vastly im-

proved over the years. In FY92, seventeen (17) cases

were appealed and 62% of the Board's decisions were

either affirmed, affirmed in part or dismissed. In FY93,

seventeen (17) cases were again appealed and 88% of the

Board's decisions were upheld in higher courts. The per-

centage rates fell slightly in FY94 when eighteen (18)

cases were appealed and 83% of the cases were upheld.

In FY95, the percentage rate increased when 100% of the

Board's decisions were upheld by higher courts in 11

decisions.

BOARD AFFIRMATION RATES (FY92-95)

The Board takes great pride in the improvements

made over the last several years. While striving to

achieve comprehensibly written decisions for both the

parties and the higher level courts, the Board's ultimate

goal is to arrive at fair, balanced, and legally correct de-

cisions. While the Illinois Attorney General represents

the Board on appeal, the Board works closely with the

Assistant Attorney General in preparing each case prior

to oral argument in the appellate court. The Board is

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

March, 1996

8

careful in its deliberations since a party always has the

option to appeal a Board decision in the a

ppellate court.

Over the last couple of years, the Board has been af-

firmed in a wide variety of controversial and noteworthy

cases. Most recently, in Discovery Group South, Ltd. v.

Pollution Control Board, (1st Dist. Aug. 28, 1995), No.

1-93-1438, the Appellate Court affirmed the Board's de-

cision in a citizens' noise enforcement case which in-

volved the World Music Theatre in Tinley Park. The

court held that the Board's decision was not against the

manifest weight of the evidence. The court further af-

firmed the Board stating that the remedy imposed by the

Board was not arbitrary and capricious, was within the

Board's authority and was not a violation of freedom of

speech or equal protection. The Appellate Court also up-

held the Board in Freedom Oil Co. v. Pollution Control

Board, No. 4-94-0786 (4th Dist. Sept. 21, 1995), where

the court found that a Board decision made by telephone

conference was permissible under the Open Meetings

Act. The court also found the Board had authority to

reconsider the penalty assessed on its own motion to cor-

rect a clerical oversight though the penalty may have

been raised as a result of that reconsideration.

In Turlek v. Pollution Control Board, (1st Dist. July

26, 1995), No. 1-94-2829, the Appellate Court affirmed

the Board's decision denying the petitioner's motions to

reconsider the decision approving the site. The court did

not require that the record before the Board be identical

to the record considered by the village in a siting request.

Also, in Southwest Energy Corp. v. Illinois, (4th Dist.

Sept. 7, 1995), No. 4-94-0759, the Appellate Court af-

firmed that the Board correctly determined that a trip to

the site of a pollution control facility was a denial of fun-

damental fairness since opponents to the site were not

given the same opportunity to take the same tour to the

site as the local governing body. The Board also made a

finding that extensive contact existed between the hear-

ing officer and the siting applicant thereby causing a de-

nial of fundamental fairness. In City of Wheaton v. Pol-

lution Control Board, (1st Dist. Dec. 8, 1995), No. 2-95-

0338, the Board granted summary judgment in favor of

the Office of the State Fire Marshall when the OSFM

barred the City of Wheaton from receiving funds from

the UST Fund. The reasoning was that Wheaton re-

moved the underground storage tank from the ground

prior to being registered and the Board found this rea-

soning plausible to grant summary judgment. The Ap-

pellate Court affirmed the Board.

In 1994, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed the Ap-

pellate Court's decision and affirmed the Board in Envir-

ite Corp. v. Pollution Control Board, 239 Ill.App. 3d

1004 (3d Dist. 1994), finding the Board's interpretation

of 39(b) of the Act correct. The Court held in this citi-

zen's land enforcement complaint that the generator for

the purposes of authorization for deposit at a facility ap-

plies to the initial generator as well as the last waste

treater.

Regarding rules and regulations, the Illinois Supreme

Court affirmed the Board's Water Toxics rules in Granite

City Division of National Steel Co. v. Pollution Control

Board, 221 Ill.App. 3d 68 (5th Dist. 1993), finding that

the rules were not unconstitutionally vague. The Court

found that the Board had properly considered the techni-

cal feasibility and economic reasonableness of the rules.

Overall, the Board has aimed to be legally concise

and consistent with all opinions and orders. Before an

order is issued by the Board, an order will go through a

period of critique and commentary. When an order is

finally moved at the Board meeting, it has been clearly

crafted and honed to direct the parties as to the next step

or finality. Together, all members and staff of the Pollu-

tion Control Board work to achieve consistency and clar-

ity. This motive continues today and into the future.

  

(Cont’d from p.1)

number for the Clark Oil terminal in the metropolitan

East St. Louis area, which is subject to the marine vessel

loading rules. The marine vessel loading regulations

were involved in the Part II 15% ROP proceeding, which

the Board adopted on October 20, 1994, under docket

number R94-15. (See issue 487, Oct., 1994.)

The Board initially accepted and proposed the Part I

15% ROP cleanup proposal pursuant to the "fast-track"

rulemaking provisions of Section 28.5 of the

Environmental Protection Act (Act) on September 7,

1995. However, after closer scrutiny of the proposal, on

September 21, 1995, the Board corrected this and

accepted and proposed the amendments as a Section 27

general rulemaking. (See issue 497, Oct., 1995.) A First

Notice Notice of Proposed Amendments appeared in the

October 31, 1995 issue of the Illinois Register. The

Board proposed the Part I cleanup amendments for

Second Notice review by the Joint Committee on

Administrative Rules (JCAR) on December 7, 1995, and

the Second Notice period ended on January 23, 1996,

when JCAR voted No Objection to the proposed

amendments. The Board held two hearings on the Part I

---

March, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

9

cleanup proposal on October 25, 1995, in Springfield,

and October 26, 1995, in Edwardsville. (See issue 500,

Jan., 1996.)

The Board adopted the 15% ROP regulations in seven

parts, as submitted by the Agency, between September

15, 1994 and May 4, 1995. The aggregate of the seven

parts are intended to reduce emissions of ozone-forming

volatile organic compounds in the Chicago and

metropolitan East St. Louis areas, as required by federal

law. The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

(CAAA) require a reduction in ozone precursor

emissions in areas that are nonattainment for ozone.

(See issue 495, June-July, 1995.) The Agency has thus

far filed two corrections proposals, 15% ROP Clean-Up

Part I, R96-2, and 15% ROP Clean-Up Part II, R96-13.

(See issue 500, Jan., 1996.)

Direct questions to Audrey Lozuk-Lawless, at 312-

814-6923 (Internet address: alozukla@pcb016r1.state.il.

us). Request copies from Victoria Agyeman, at 312-814-

3620 (Internet address: vagyeman@pcb016r1.state.il.

us). Please refer to docket R96-2.

ITE-SPECIFIC CYANIDE RULE ADOPTED

FOR MWRDGC, R95-14

On February 1, 1996, the Board adopted a site-

specific rule that regulates the maximum allowable

cyanide content of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation

District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC) John E. Egan

and James C. Kirie treatment plant effluents. Associated

amendments included changes to reflect the change in

the District's name to MWRDGC, which formerly

appeared in the water pollution control regulations as the

Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago. The

new weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide standard of 10

micrograms per liter (mg/l) applies to both plants instead

of their respective existing permitted limitations of 5.2

and 5.0 mg/l, which were based on the existing state-

wide general use water quality standards.

The MWRDGC posited four basic justifications for

the site-specific rule in its April 28, 1995 petition. It first

asserted that the indigenous species used to calculate the

state-wide water quality standards are not relevant to the

streams receiving its effluents. MWRDGC stated second

that the use of WAD cyanide is not directly associated

with water toxicity. Third, the MWRDGC maintained

that chlorine interferes with the WAD cyanide test.

Finally, MWRDGC contended that the present regulatory

limits are at or below the limit of detection for WAD

cyanide.

The Board proposed the amendments on August 24,

1995 for First Notice publication in the Illinois Register.

A Notice of Proposed amendments appeared in the

September 8, 1995 issue of the Register. On December

7, 1995, the Board proposed the site-specific rule for

Second Notice review by the Joint Committee on

Administrative Rules (JCAR), and the Second Notice

review period ended on January 23, 1996, when JCAR

voted No Objection to the proposed rule.

Direct questions to Audrey Lozuk-Lawless, at 312-

814-6923 (Internet address: alozukla@pcb016r1.state.il.

us). Request copies of the Board's opinion and order

from Victoria Agyeman, at 312-814-3620 (Internet

address: vagyeman@pcb016r1.state.il.us). Please refer

to docket R95-14.

CRA UPDATE PROPOSED FOR PUBLIC

COMMENT; REASON FOR DELAY ORDER

ADOPTED, R95-20

On February 1, 1996, the Board proposed identical-

in-substance amendments to the Illinois RCRA Subtitle C

hazardous waste regulations. The amendments

correspond with USEPA revisions to the federal

hazardous waste program made during the period

January 1 through June 30, 1995. Ten principal federal

actions that occurred in this period were included in the

docket. One principal set of amendments (three actions)

were the February 9, 1995 establishment of hazardous

waste listings (K156 through K161) for six carbamate

production wastes, including April 17 and May 12, 1995

corrections to the carbamate listings. Another was a

major set of federal regulations that arose on May 11,

1995, when USEPA established a new body of

regulations to govern certain high-volume hazardous

wastes that are being collected for recycling or disposal.

June 13, 1995 amendments of delisted the treated

residues of certain listed hazardous waste generated by

Conversion Systems, Inc. (CSI) in Sterling, Illinois. On

June 29, 1995, USEPA deleted a vast number of rules

that were obsolete, redundant, or outdated. Other

amendments included the January 13 and April 4, 1995

amendments to testing procedures; the February 3, 1995

USEPA response to public inquiries in the wake of the

Supreme Court's decision in City of Chicago v.

Environmental Defense Fund, Inc., 114 S. Ct. 1588

(1994); and the February 7, 1995 announcement that

USEPA had studied cement kiln dust and determined not

to subject this material to complete Subtitle C regulation.

The Board deviated from the normal update January 1

through June 30, 1995 timeframe of R95-20 in a few

actions. The Board included in three sets of amendments

made by USEPA on July 7, September 29, and November

13, 1995 relating to the Subpart CC organic material

emissions regulations. One of the added federal actions

made corrections to the rules adopted by the Board on

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

March, 1996

10

June 1 and 16, 1995, under consolidated docket number

R95-4/R95-6, and two of the actions stayed the effective

date of the Subpart CC organic material emission rules

for tanks, containers, and surface impoundments.

Further, the Board did not include two sets of

amendments that did occur in the January 1 through June

30, 1995 update period because it had already taken

action on the amendments in the R95-4/R95-6 docket.

These were the federal amendments of January 3, 1995,

which corrected errors and clarified language in the

universal treatment standards adopted on September 19,

1994 as the Phase II LDRs, and of May 19, 1995, which

earlier stayed the 40 CFR 264, subpart CC and 265,

subpart CC (Subpart CC) regulations.

The Board had received a request from the regulated

community that it proceed to promptly adopt some of the

RCRA Subtitle C amendments relating to land disposal

of hazardous waste. The UIC amendments are

proceeding under docket number R95-4; the RCRA

Subtitle C amendments bear the docket number R95-6.

The Board proposed all the necessary amendments to

update the Illinois RCRA Subtitle C program to include

the federal amendments described. The Board further

included a number of corrective and conforming

amendments to both programs.

The public comment period began on February 16,

1996, when Notices of Proposed Amendments appeared

in the Illinois Register. The public comment period will

end after 45 days, on April 1, 1996. After the public

comment period ends, the Board will be free to adopt

amendments based on the proposal. The identical-in-

substance provisions of the Act provide that the

Administrative Procedure Act requirements for First

Notice and Second Notice review by the Joint Committee

on Administrative Rules do not apply to this proceeding.

Direct questions to Michael J. McCambridge, at 312-

814-6924 (Internet: mmccambr@pcb016r1.state.il.us).

Request copies of the proposed amendments from

Victoria Agyeman, at 312-814-6920 (Internet:

vageyman@pcb016r1.state.il.us). Please refer to

consolidated docket R95-20.

ESERVED IDENTICAL-IN-SUBSTANCE

DOCKETS DISMISSED, R96-6, R96-8 &

R96-11

On February 15, 1996, the Board dismissed three

reserved identical-in-substance dockets because no

amendments were warranted in any of them. The three

dockets were for the routine update period of July 1

through December 31, 1995. The Board dismissed the

R96-6 docket reserved for amendments to the definition

of volatile organic material (VOM) because USEPA did

not amend its corresponding definition of volatile organic

compound during the period. The Board similarly

dismissed the underground injection control (UIC)

docket, R96-8, because USEPA did not amend its UIC

regulations. Finally, the Board dismissed the R96-11

underground storage tank (UST) update docket because

the only amendments during the period, those of

September 7, 1995, related to the lender liability aspects

of the financial responsibility rules, an area outside the

scope of the Board's UST identical-in-substance mandate.

The Board had reserved the three dockets, along with

four others, at its meeting of December 20, 1995, for the

routine identical-in-substance updates to various

programs. (See issue 500, Jan., 1996.) The four

remaining reserved dockets that are still open, and their

associated regulatory programs, are as follows:

R96-7 Drinking water (SDWA) update

R96-9 Municipal solid waste landfill (RCRA Subtitle

D) update

R96-10

Hazardous waste (RCRA Subtitle C)

update

R96-12

Wastewater pretreatment update

The remaining update dockets would include all

federal amendments to the programs that occurred in the

period July 1 through December 31, 1995. The Board is

presently aware of amendments to the federal hazardous

waste regulations during the period that will require

amendments under docket R96-10. Amendments

relating to or impacting the federal drinking water,

municipal solid waste landfill, and wastewater

pretreatment regulations are presently under study to

determine if amendments are necessary under dockets

R96-7, R96-9, and R96-12. If indeed amendment of the

Illinois regulations is required by a federal action, the

Board will propose those amendments under the reserved

docket number at some future time. If no amendments

are required, the Board will dismiss the reserved docket.

Direct questions to Michael J. McCambridge, at 312

814-6924 (Internet: mmccambr@pcb016r1.state.il.us).

Please refer to the appropriate docket number.

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

11

2/1/96

93-179

IBP, Inc. v. IEPA - The Board found that the

Agency had erred in imposing a certain effluent

limitation for sulfate on this Rock Island County

Facility and remanded the matter to the Agency with

instructions to issue an NPDES permit incorporating the

permittee's recorded sulfate level. Member J. Yi

concurred; Chairman C.A. Manning and Member M.

McFawn dissented.

94-393

Peoria School District #150-Hines School v.

IEPA - The Board granted voluntary withdrawal of this

underground storage tank fund reimbursement

determination appeal involving a Peoria County facility.

95-47

People of the State of Illinois v. W.O.W. Truck

Lines, Inc. - Having previously granted summary

judgment and found that the St. Clair County

respondent had violated the Act and Board regulations,

the Board imposed a civil penalty of $10,000 and

attorneys fees of $840 against the respondent in this

special waste hauling enforcement action.

95-154

Central Illinois Public Service Company v.

IEPA - The Board granted voluntary dismissal of this

land permit appeal involving a Jasper County facility.

96-39

Consolidated Distilled Products, Inc. (Union

Liquor Company) v. Office of the State Fire Marshal -

Having previously ordered the filing of an amended

petition and receiving none, the Board dismissed this

underground storage tank fund reimbursement

determination appeal filed on behalf of a Cook County

facility.

96-40

Interstate Pollution Control, Inc. v. IEPA - The

Board granted voluntary dismissal of this land permit

appeal involving a Winnebago County facility.

96-49

Archer Daniels Midland Company v. IEPA -

The Board granted voluntary withdrawal of this land

permit appeal involving a Macon County facility.

96-85

The County of Kane, Illinois and Waste

Management of Illinois, Inc. v. IEPA - The Board

granted summary judgment and affirmed the Agency's

denial of a permit for significant modification, finding

that local siting approval was a necessary prerequisite to

issuance of a permit for expansion of this Kane County

pollution control facility (landfill). Member M.

McFawn concurred.

96-109

Hickman, Williams & Company of Kentucky

v. IEPA - Having previously granted a request for a 90-

day extension, the Board dismissed this docket because

no air permit appeal was timely filed on behalf of this

Cook County facility.

96-113

Hickman, Williams & Company of Kentucky

v. IEPA - The Board granted this Lake County facility a

variance from the standards of issuance and restricted

status provisions of the public water supplies

regulations, subject to conditions, as they would

otherwise relate to radium content of drinking water.

96-121

AT & T Communications, Inc. v. IEPA -

Having previously granted a request for a 90-day

extension, the Board dismissed this docket because no

underground storage tank fund reimbursement

determination appeal was timely filed on behalf of this

DuPage County facility.

96-167

Versar, Inc. v. IEPA - Upon receipt of an

Agency recommendation, the Board granted a thirty day

provisional variance from the ninety day limitation on

the accumulation of hazardous waste at this Cook

County facility.

96-168

Caterpillar, Inc. v. IEPA - Upon receipt of an

Agency recommendation, the Board granted a thirty day

provisional variance from the ninety day limitation on

the accumulation of hazardous waste at this Peoria

County facility.

AC 96-29

County of Will v. James Mallette - The Board

entered a default order, finding that this Will County

respondent had violated Section 21(p)(1) of the Act and

ordering him to pay a civil penalty of $500.00.

AC 96-30

IEPA v. Richard Vaughn d/b/a Richard’s Tire

Hauling - The Board entered a default order, finding

that this Williamson County respondent had violated

Section 21(p)(1) of the Act and ordering him to pay a

civil penalty of $500.00.

R95-14

In the Matter of: Petition of the Metropolitan

Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago for Site-

Specific Water Quality Regulation for Cyanide

(Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 303 and 304)-

See

Rulemaking Update

.

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

March, 1996

12

R96-2

In the Matter of: 15% ROP PLAN: Clean-Up

Part I - Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 219.585(a)

and 219.Appendix E -

See Rulemaking Update

.

Member J. Theodore Meyer dissented.

2/15/96

95-54

The City of Metropolis v. IEPA

- The Board granted

voluntary dismissal of this land permit appeal involving a Massac

County facility.

95-124

People of the State of Illinois v. Lebanon Chemical

Corporation - The Board accepted a stipulation and settlement

agreement in this air enforcement action involving a Vermilion

County facility, ordered the respondent to pay a civil penalty of

$10,500.00, and ordered it to cease and desist from further

violation.

96-60

Concerned Citizens of Williamson County, Paul Crain

and Rose Rowell v. Bill Kibler Development Corporation a/k/a

Kibler Development Corporation, and Williamson County Board

of Commissioners - The Board affirmed the grant of local siting

approval for this proposed Williamson County pollution control

facility (landfill), finding that the manifest weight of the evidence

supported the decision and that the local proceedings were

conducted in a fundamentally fair manner.

96-153

People of the State of Illinois v. MP Melrose Park

Associates, LTD - The Board accepted a stipulation and settlement

agreement in this water and UST enforcement action against a

Cook County facility, ordered the respondent to pay a civil penalty

of $20,000.00, and ordered it to cease and desist from further

violation.

AC 96-32

County of Vermillion v. Illinois Landfill, Inc.

- The

Board entered a default order, finding that this Vermilion County

respondent had violated Sections 21(o)(5) and 21(o)(12) of the Act

and ordering it to pay a civil penalty of $1,000.00.

R96-6

In the Matter of: Definition of VOM Update, U.S. IEPA

Regulations (July 1, 1995, through December 31, 1995)

-

See

Rulemaking Update.

R96-8

In the Matter of: UIC Update, U.S. IEPA Regulations

(July 1, 1995, through December 31, 1995)

-

See Rulemaking

Update.

R96-11

In the Matter of: UST Update, U.S. IEPA Regulations

(July 1, 1995, through December 31, 1995)

-

See Rulemaking

Update.

2/1/96

96-99

The Belleville Development, L.P. v. IEPA -

The Board accepted an amended petition for a NPDES

permit appeal from this St. Clair County facility for

hearing.

96-151

Keith F. Boyer v. Felecia Harris, a/k/a Felecia

Dawkins, and Chicagoland Mortgage Corporation - The

Board found that this citizen's land enforcement action

against a Cook County facility was neither frivolous nor

duplicitous and accepted it for hearing.

96-160

People of the State of Illinois v. Bobak Sausage

Company - The Board received this air enforcement

action against a Cook County facility for hearing.

96-161

City of Geneva v. IEPA - The Board held this

petition for a variance from the standards of issuance

and restricted status provisions of the public water

supplies regulations, as they relate to radium content of

drinking water, filed on behalf of a Kane County facility

for an Agency recommendation.

96-162

Oscar Mayer Foods Corporation/Kraft Foods,

Inc. v. IEPA - The Board ordered the filing of an

amended petition in this underground storage tank fund

reimbursement determination appeal involving a Cook

County facility. (Consolidated with PCB 96-166.)

96-163

Land and Lakes/Wheeling v. IEPA - The Board

held this request for 90-day extension of time to file a

permit appeal involving a Lake County facility for an

Agency recommendation.

96-164

CGE Ford Heights, L.L.C. v. IEPA - The

Board accepted this tax certification appeal filed on

behalf of a Cook County facility for hearing.

96-165

Borg Warner Automotive Automatic

Transmission Systems Corporation v. IEPA - The Board

accepted this underground storage tank fund

reimbursement determination appeal involving a Cook

County facility for hearing.

96-166

Oscar Mayer Foods Corporation/Kraft Foods,

Inc. (427 West Scott Street, LUST Incident #940516) v.

IEPA - The Board ordered the filing of an amended

petition in this underground storage tank fund

reimbursement determination appeal involving a Cook

County facility. (Consolidated with PCB 96-162.)

96-167

Versar, Inc. v. IEPA -

See Final Actions.

---

March, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

13

96-168

Caterpillar, Inc. v. IEPA -

See Final Actions.

96-169

People of the State of Illinois v. Kerr-McGee

Refining Corporation - The Board received this

underground storage tank enforcement action against a

Cook County facility for hearing

AC

 

96-34

Montgomery County v. Envotech-Illinois,

Inc. - The Board received an administrative citation

against a Montgomery County respondent.

AC

 

96-35

County of LaSalle v. CSX Transportation,

Inc. - The Board received an administrative citation

against a LaSalle County respondent.

2/15/96

86-2

Petition of the City of LaSalle for Exception to the

Combined Sewer Overflow Regulations

- The Board granted

reconsideration, vacated its order of December 20, 1995 denying a

permanent extension of the November 3, 1994 temporary

exception from the prohibition against discharge of combined

sewer overflows granted this LaSalle County petitioner, and

accepted a second amended petition for hearing.

96-154

Village of Oswego. v. IEPA

- The Board accepted a

petition filed on behalf of a Kendall County facility for a variance

from the restricted status and standards for issuance requirements

of the public water supply regulations, as they relate to the

combined radium content of the petitioner's drinking water, and set

it for hearing after receiving several letters objecting to any grant of

a variance.

96-163

Land and Lakes/Wheeling v. IEPA

- The Board, having

received a notice of 90-day extension of time to file a permit appeal

pursuant to P.A. 88-690, reserved this docket for any land permit

appeal that may be filed on behalf of this Lake County facility.

96-170

People of the State of Illinois v. Robinette Demolition,

Inc., - The Board received this air enforcement action against a

DuPage County facility for hearing.

96-171

Exel Sales, Inc. v. IEPA - The Board accepted this

underground storage tank fund reimbursement determination

appeal involving a Winnebago County facility for hearing.

96-172

Envotech-Illinois, Inc. v. IEPA

- Having received a

notice of 90-day extension of time to file, the Board reserved this

docket for any land permit appeal that may be filed on behalf of

this Montgomery County facility.

96-173

Coal City Citgo v. IEPA - The Board held this

underground storage tank reimbursement determination appeal

involving a Grundy County facility.

96-174

The Knapheide Mfg. Co. v. IEPA

- The Board held this

petition for air variance involving a Adams County facility.

96-175

Caterpillar, Inc. v. IEPA - Having received a notice of

90-day extension of time to file, the Board reserved this docket for

any land permit appeal that may be filed on behalf of this Peoria

County facility.

96-176

Steve’s Mobil Service v. IEPA

- The Board accepted this

underground storage tank fund reimbursement determination

appeal involving a Morgan County facility for hearing.

96-177

Royer Oil Company, Inc. v. IEPA

- The Board accepted

this underground storage tank fund reimbursement determination

appeal involving a Bond County facility for hearing.

96-178

Alexander/Franklin Community Unit School District #1

v. IEPA - The Board accepted this underground storage tank fund

reimbursement determination appeal involving a Morgan County

facility for hearing.

96-179

Gilbert and Lenda Marshall v. Danny Ligenfelter,

individually and as President of Central Illinois Dirt Riders

Association - The Board held this citizen's noise and air

enforcement action against a Fulton County facility for a frivolous

and duplicitous determination.

AC 96-36

IEPA v. Charlie Fyffe - The Board accepted an

administrative citation against a Wabash County respondent.

AC 96-37

IEPA v. Midwest Excavating

- The Board accepted an

administrative citation against a Franklin County respondent.

AC 96-38

IEPA v. Joseph C. Smith and Laverne A. Smith

- The

Board received an administrative citation against these Jersey

County respondents.

AS 96-7

In the Matter of: Petition of the City of Belleville,

Illinois for an Adjusted Standard From 35 Ill. Adm. Code

306.305(b) - Finding enumerated deficiencies in the petition, the

Board ordered the filing of an amended petition on behalf of this

St. Clair County wastewater treatment facility for an adjusted

standard from the water pollution control regulation restrictions on

combined sewer overflows.

AS 96-8

In the Matter of: Petition of Central Illinois Light

Company (Duck Creek Station) for an Adjusted Standard From 35

Ill. Adm. Code 302.208 and 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.205

- The

Board held this petition filed on behalf of a Fulton County facility

for an adjusted standard from the boron effluent requirements and

the prohibition against violating a water quality standard of water

pollution control regulations, as they would apply to segments of

Duck Creek and the Illinois River.

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

March, 1996

14

All hearings held by the Board are open to the public. Times and locations are subject to cancellation and resched-

uling without notice. Confirmation of hearing dates and times is available from the Clerk of the Board at 312- 814-

6931.

20-Mar-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 94-027

A-V

Marathon Oil Company v. IEPA

--Crawford County Courthouse, Grand Jury

Room, Court Street, Robinson, Illinois

20-Mar-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 95-150

A-V

Marathon Oil Company v. IEPA

--Crawford County Courthouse, Grand Jury

Room, Court Street, Robinson, Illinois

21-Mar-96

10:00 A.M.

R96-013

R, Air

In the Matter of: 15% ROP Plan: Clean-Up Part II: Amendments to 35 Ill.

Adm. Code parts 218 and 219

--James R. Thompson Center

, 100 West

Randolph, Suite 9-025

, Chicago, Illinois

25-Mar-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 95-155

A-V

General Business Forms, Inc. v. IEPA

--James R. Thompson Center

, Suite 11-

500, 100 West Randolph Street

, Chicago, Illinois

25-Mar-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 96-064

UST-Appeal

City of Auburn v. IEPA

--Illinois Pollution Control Board

, Suite 402, 600 South

Second Street, Springfield, Illinois

25-Mar-96

09:30 A.M.

PCB 96-154

PWS-V

Village of Oswego v. IEPA

--Oswego Village Hall, Council Meeting Room

, 113

Main Street, Oswego, Illinois

28-Mar-96

09:30 A.M.

PCB 96-086

P-A, Land

BFI Modern Landfill #1 & #2 v. IEPA

--Regional State Headquarters Complex

,

IDOT Conference Room, 1100 E. Port Plaza Drive

, Collinsville, Illinois

11-Apr-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 96-125

P-A, Air

Color Communications, Inc. v. IEPA

--James R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-

500, 100 West Randolph Street

, Chicago, Illinois

26-Apr-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 96-068

A-E, Citizens

Donetta Gott, Lyndell Chaplin, Gary Wells, Earnest L. Ellison and Maxine

Ellison v. M'Orr Pork, Inc

.--Pike County Courthouse

, 204 East Adams,

Pittsfield, Illinois

Calendar Code

3d P

Third Party Action

A-C

Administrative Citation

A-E

Air Enforcement

A-S

Adjusted Standard

A-V

Air Variance

CSO

Combined Sewer Overflow Exception

GW

Groundwater

HW Delist

RCRA Hazardous Waste Delisting

L-E

Land Enforcement

L-S-R

Landfill Siting Review

L-V

Land Variance

MW

Medical Waste (Biological Materials)

N-E

Noise Enforcement

N-V

Noise Variance

P-A

Permit Appeal

PWS-E

Public Water Supply Enforcement

---

March, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 502

15

PWS-V

Public Water Supply Variance

R

Regulatory Proceeding proceeding

(hazardous waste only)

RCRA

Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act

S0

2

S0

2

Alternative Standards (35 ILL.

ADM. CODE 302.211(f)))

SWH-E

Special Waste Hauling Enforcement

SWH-V

Special Waste Hauling Variance

T

Thermal Demonstration Rule

T-C

Tax Certifications

T-S

Trade Secrets

UST-Appeal

Underground Storage Tank Corrective

Action Appeal

UST-E

Underground Storage Tank Enforcement

UST-FRD

Underground Storage Tank Fund Reim-

bursement Determination

W-E

Water Enforcement

W-V

Water Variance

WWS

Water-Well Setback Exception

---

March, 1996

16

The following are regularly scheduled meetings of the Illinois Pollution Control Board

.

Remainder of FY 96 (Through June 30, 1996)

March 7

March 21

April 4

April 18

May 2

May 16

June 6

June 20

First Half of FY 97 (Through December 31, 1996)

July 18

August 1

August 15

September 5

September 19

October 3

October 17

November 7

November 21

December 5

December 19

The meetings are generally held at the following location and time:

James R. Thompson Center

100 W. Randolph St.

Room 9-040

Chicago, IL 60601

10:30 a.m.