No. 508

   

    

A Publication of the Illinois Pollution Control Board

    

    

September, 1996

R

R

ulemaking Update

ulemaking Update

ew Utility Waste Landfill

Standards Proposed For

Second Notice, R96-1

The Board adopted alternative

standards for new utility waste

landfills on August 15, 1996. The

new Part 816 standards establish an

alternative means of satisfying the

liner and cap requirements for

certain new landfills. They allow

owners and operators of chemical

waste landfills that accept only flue

gas desulfurization (FGD) sludges

and coal combustion ash from

electric utilities to use these

materials stabilized using the

proprietary, patented Poz-O-Tec

process as liner and cap material.

The rules alternatively allow

monofilling of Poz-O-Tec materi-

als without a liner and cap.

The rules mirror adjusted

standards granted to Conversion

Systems, Inc. in AS 93-4 and AS

93-5, on July 7, 1995. In granting

the adjusted standards, the Board

initiated this rulemaking in the

belief that a rule of general

applicability was a more

appropriate method to allow the

use of the Poz-O-Tec materials.

(See issue 496, Aug., 1995.) The

Board proposed alternative

standards for new utility waste

landfills for first notice publication

in the Illinois Register on

September 21, 1995. Notices of

(Cont’d on p. 2)

b

b

oard update

oard update

rocedural Rules to be

Proposed at October 3rd

Board Meeting

On October 3, 1996 the Board

will be moving an opinion and

order which proposes revised

procedural rules for public

comment. The public comment

period will last from October 3

until December 15, 1996, and will

be followed by hearings on January

16 and 24, 1997 in Springfield and

Chicago respectively.

To obtain a copy of the

procedural rules opinion and order,

please fill out the form on page 23.

oard Welcomes New

Employee to Staff

The Board welcomes Cynthia

Ervin to staff. Ms. Ervin, Board

Chairman Claire Manning’s new

assistant, will be working in the

Board’s

(Cont’d on p. 2)

A

A

PPELLATE Update

PPELLATE Update

ommunity Landfill Corp. v.

Illinois Pollution Control

Board and Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency

, No. 3-96-

0182 slip op. (Third District

August 8, 1996)(unpublished rule

23 order).

This case involved an appeal by

Community Landfill Corporation

(CLC) of a Board order denying

CLC a variance from the signifi-

cant modification permit applica-

tion (SIGMOD) filing deadline

requirement established by the

Agency under 35 Ill. Adm. Code

814.104(c). The Third District set

aside the Board’s decision issued in

Community Landfill Corp. v.

Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency, PCB 95-137, (September

21, 1995) Board Member Meyer

dissenting.

The City of Morris (City) owns

two adjoining parcels used as

landfill sites.

(Cont’d on p.3)

E

NVIRONMENTAL

R

EGISTER

E

NVIRONMENTAL

R

EGISTER

N

N

P

P

B

B

Inside This Issue

Significant Federal Actions

p5

Final Decisions

p17

New Cases

p19

Calendar of Hearings

p20

Water Law Conference

p22

C

C

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

2

b

b

oard staff update

oard staff update

(Cont’d from p.1)

Springfield office.

Ms. Ervin earned a Juris Doctorate at Washington

University School of Law and a Bachelor of Science in

Political Science at Bradley University. She is a

recipient of the American Jurisprudence Award for

Pretrial Practice and Procedure, and is a member of Phi

Alpha Delta Law Fraternity.

Ms. Ervin has substantial clerking experience in the

courts. For four years she served as a staff attorney of

the Fourth District Appellate Court and for two years she

was a clerk with the Illinois Supreme Court. Before

joining the Board’s staff Ms. Ervin was employed in the

Criminal Appeals Division of the Illinois Attorney

General’s Office.

The Chairman, Board, and staff hope that you will

join them in welcoming Ms. Ervin.

R

R

ul

ule

emaking Update

making Update

(Cont’d from p.1)

proposed amendments and rules appeared in the October

31, 1995 Illinois Register, at 19 Ill. Reg. 14260 (Part

816), 14280 (Part 807), and 14286 (Part 811), starting

the 45-day public comment period. (See issue 497, Oct.,

1995.) The Board conducted two hearings on the

proposed rules, on December 18, 1995 in Springfield and

March 8, 1996 in Chicago. The Board proposed the

rules for second notice review by the Joint Committee on

Administrative Rules (JCAR) on June 20, 1996, and

received a certificate of no objection from JCAR dated

July 23, 1996. (See issue 506, July, 1996.) The

amendments were filed with the Secretary of State on

August 15, 1996, and notices of adopted amendments

appeared in the September 6, 1996 issue of the Illinois

Register, at 20 Ill. Reg. 11985 (Part 810) and 12000

(Part 811). The Board delayed filing Part 816 to correct

minor errors in the text.

Direct questions to Chuck Feinen, at 312-814-3473

(Internet address: cfeinen@pcb016r1.state.il.us).

Request copies from Victoria Agyeman, at 312-814-3620

(Internet address: vagyeman@pcb016r1.state.il.us).

Please refer to docket R96-1.

mendments to the Steel and Foundry Industry

Waste Regulations Proposed for First Notice,

R96-3

On August 1, 1996, the Board proposed amendments

to the steel and foundry industry waste landfill regul a-

tions

for First Notice Publication in the Illinois Register. The

proposed amendments, docketed as R96-3, are based on

a petition filed by the Illinois Cast Metals Association on

September 6, 1995 and amended on February 26, 1996.

(See issue 497, Oct., 1995.) At present, the existing

steel and foundry industry waste landfill regulations

prohibit construction of new landfill units within a

regulated recharge area or within 1200 feet of Class I or

Class III groundwater. The Association would have the

Board create an exemption for those facilities that can

demonstrate no potential to impact groundwater.

The Board conducted public hearings on the proposal

on June 24, 1996, in Chicago, and June 26, 1996, in

Edwardsville. Hearings scheduled earlier for November,

1995 did not occur at the request of the petitioner for an

opportunity to amend its petition. Direct questions to the

hearing officer, 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 R96-3.

pdate Amendments to the Air Toxics Regulations

Proposed for First Notice, R96-4

On August 15, 1996, the Board proposed amen d-

ments to the toxic air contaminants regulations for First

Notice publication in the Illinois Register. The proposed

amendments, docketed as R96-4, would add several

substances either designated as federal hazardous air

pollutants (HAPs) pursuant to section 112(b) of the Clean

Air Act (CAA) or designated by USEPA as of concern

under its "Great Waters" program under section 112(m)

of the CAA. The proposal would also require all sources

that meet certain requirements to submit an Illinois toxic

air contaminants (ITAC) source report for calendar year

1996, and it would correct typographical errors in the

existing ITAC list.

The Agency filed its proposal on October 13, 1995 to

update the existing ITAC list at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 232.

The Board issued an order on November 2, 1995 that

accepted the proposal and dismissing older subdockets

R90-1(C), relating to toxic air contaminant reporting

requirements, and R90-1(D), relating to adding styrene

to the list of toxic air contaminants. (See issue 499,

Dec., 1995.) The Board consolidated the subject matter

of the older subdockets into new docket R96-4.

A

A

U

U

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

3

Direct questions to Charles M. Feinen, at 312-814-

3473 (Internet address: cfeinen@pcb016r1.state.il.us).

Request copies of Board orders from Victoria Agyeman,

at 312-814-3620 (Internet address: vagye-

man@pcb016r1.state.il.us). Please refer to docket R96-

4.

A

A

ppellate update

ppellate update

(Cont’d from p.1)

The City operated parcel A until 1980. In 1982 the City

entered into a lease agreement allowing CLC to operate

Parcel B. From 1992 through November of 1994 the

City and CLC were in negotiations for the closure of the

existing landfill and the opening of another site. In

November of 1994, the Morris City Council passed an

ordinance allowing CLC to re-open and expand parcel A

and to close parcel B.

The City and CLC were required by 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 814.104(c) to file their SIGMOD applications by

June 15, 1993 for the two parcels. The June 15, 1993

date was established by the Agency; the City and CLC

were notified twice of the deadline. The SIGMODs

were not filed by June 15, 1993. However, after the

City passed its ordinance in November of 1994, CLC

hired an environmental engineering firm to complete and

file the SIGMODs.

On February 27, 1995, CLC’s engineers met with

representatives from the Agency to discuss technical

aspects of the SIGMOD applications. At that time, the

Agency refused to consider the SIGMOD applications

until any issues arising from CLC’s failure to file by

June 15, 1993 were resolved. One member of the

Agency staff suggested that CLC seek a variance from

the Board.

CLC filed a petition for variance with the Board on

April 26, 1995 and the Agency recommended that the

variance be denied. On September 21, 1995, after

hearing, the Board denied the variance, holding that CLC

had not shown an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship

within the meaning of the Environmental Protection Act

(Act) (415 ILCS 5/1

et. seq

.). More specifically, the

Board refused to grant a retroactive variance because it

found that CLC’s hardship was self-imposed and that the

compliance efforts of CLC did not show good faith or

due diligence, Board Member Meyer dissenting. CLC

filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing “new material

facts” regarding two prior Board decisions which were

cited in the Board’s opinion. The Board denied the

motion with Board Member Meyer dissenting.

CLC in its appeal argued that the facts of this case

were similar to those in Atkinson Landfill Co., Inc. v.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, PCB 94-259

(January 11, 1995) and Envirite Corp. v. Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency, PCB 94-161 (August

11, 1994). These cases had been distinguished by the

Board in its opinion. In both cases, the landfills filed

variance requests asking for extensions of the filing date

for their SIGMOD applications after the filing deadline

had passed. In both cases, the Board granted the

variance.

The court found that the Board’s decision in CLC

was a misapplication of prior Board precedents.

Additionally, it held that the extra time, effort, and

expense which would have been required by both CLC

and the Agency to prepare and evaluate additional

SIGMOD applications if CLC originally filed in June of

1992 and then re-filed after its negotiations were

complete, constituted an arbitrary and unreasonable

hardship. The court also noted CLC’s continuing

compliance with all other applicable state and federal

regulations.

Finally, the Third District explained that it must

balance the Board’s need to enforce its regulations

against the nominal harm to the environment caused by

CLC’s non-compliance and the likely loss of substantial

revenue to the “innocent people of Morris” if CLC could

not operate the landfill. In balancing the equities, the

court found CLC should be granted the short prospective

variance. However, the court did find that CLC’s lack

of due diligence and unexplained failure to seek the

variance for 22 months after the filing deadline was

troubling and therefore, denied CLC a retroactive

variance.

ilmer Brockman, Jr. And First Midwest

Bank/Illinois As Trustee Under Trust No. 757 v.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and Illinois

Pollution Control Board

, Nos. 3-94-0175 and 3-95-

0207 slip op. (Third District August 23,

1996)(unpublished rule 23 order).

This case involved two appeals by Wilmer Brockman

Jr. (Brockman) of Agency permit denials which were

affirmed by the Board in Wilmer Brockman, Jr. And

First Midwest Bank/Illinois v. Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency, PCB 93-162 ( February 3, 1995) and

PCB 94-207 (February 16, 1995). The appellate court

consolidated the appeals and affirmed the Board.

In 1993 Brockman appealed to the Board an Agency

denial of a permit authorizing the temporary suspension

of waste acceptance. The 177 acre parcel of property

involved had been granted a landfill development permit

in 1975 but had not accepted waste since 1982. In fact,

only the 7 acre Carus Disposal Area was ever issued an

operating permit. The Carus Area operation was closed

in 1982 and the Agency’s records indicated that the

entire landfill was closed at that time.

W

W

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

4

The first temporary suspension permit application

filed by Brockman was on June 15, 1993. This applic a-

tion was deemed incomplete and the Agency noted on the

denial letter that its records showed the facility as being

closed. The Board affirmed the Agency’s denial of the

permit finding that a temporary suspension permit could

not be issued without a closure plan. The appellate court

stayed the appeal pending the outcome of Brockman’s

second application to the Agency for a permit.

On May 31, 1994, Brockman submitted a second

application for a temporary suspension permit. This

second application included a closure plan. The Agency

also denied the second application for a temporary

suspension permit stating, as it had in the first denial,

that a permit for a closed facility was “inappropriate and

unnecessary.” On appeal, the Board affirmed the

Agency. The Board held that the Agency properly

denied the permit because the site was closed. The

Board came to the conclusion that the site was closed

because the only operating permit for the site was for an

area which was closed. Brockman appealed the decision

to the Third District.

While the second appeal was before the Board,

Brockman filed a motion to stay the proceedings until the

Third District ruled upon the initial appeal. Attached to

this motion, Brockman filed a waiver of the Board’s

decision deadline until February 28, 1995. However, the

appellate court stayed the proceedings of the first appeal

before it pending the outcome of the second appeal

pending before the Board and based upon this, the Board

denied Brockman’s motion to stay the proceedings.

Subsequently, Brockman filed a new waiver of the

decision deadline, this time until December 16, 1994.

The Board made its decision on February 16, 1995.

Brockman argued in the appeal that the Board’s

decision was untimely and that the permit should be

granted by operation of law as provided for in section 40

of the Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS

5/40). Brockman contended that the Board’s denial of

the motion for stay was also a denial of the attached

waiver of the decision deadline. Additionally, Brockman

argued that the filing of the second waiver until Dece m-

ber 14, 1994 rescinded the prior waiver which extended

until February 28, 1995.

The court found that the Board’s rules regarding

waivers are “clear and unambiguous” and that Brockman

neither rescinded nor revoked the original waiver

granting the Board until February 28, 1995 to make a

decision. Additionally, the court held that neither the

Board’s denial of the motion to stay nor Brockman’s

filing of a second waiver caused the first waiver to be

withdrawn or rejected. Thus, the court held that the

Board’s decision entered on February 16, 1996 was

timely and did not violate section 40 of the Act.

Brockman next argued that the Board acted beyond its

authority because it relied upon a different rationale than

the Agency when it affirmed the permit denial. The

court found that the Board’s reasoning was “sufficiently

consistent” with that of the Agency in the first appeal

since both the Agency and the Board found that Brock-

man failed to provide sufficient information with the first

application to allow the Agency to issue a permit. In the

second appeal, the Agency denied Brockman because it

was “inappropriate and unnecessary” to issue a permit

for a closed site. The Board affirmed the Agency on

appeal, reasoning that the Agency had properly denied

the application on the basis of the site being closed.

Here again, the court found the Board’s decision relied

on the same fundamental reasoning as the Agency’s

decision. The court also stated, “the Board need not

parrot the precise wording of the IEPA to stay within the

bounds of its statutory authority.”

Brockman then argued that he did not need a current

operating permit because the landfill’s development

permit allowed him to get a temporary suspension permit

without an operating permit being in place. The court

found that this argument was not supported by the

statute. The court held that section 39(c) of the Act

requires a landfill owner to have a current operating

permit prior to the application for, or the issuance of, a

temporary suspension permit. Additionally, since an

operating permit is required for the initial acceptance of

waste, a facility without an operating permit would have

no need for a permit to temporarily suspend waste

acceptance since it could not accept waste without the

operating permit.

The court found that the operating permit for the

Carus Area became invalid when it closed in 1982. The

court also held that the landfill would require siting

approval from an appropriate governing body prior to the

issuance of a new operating permit. Finally, the court

found that the public interest would not be served by

allowing a landfill which had not operated in a decade to

avoid local siting by applying for a temporary suspension

permit.

SG Watts Decision Published

Environmental Register number 506

 

contained an

appellate summary of ESG Watts, Inc., v. The Illinois

Pollution Control Board, and the People of the State of

Illinois, No. 4-95-0642 slip op. __Ill.App.3d__, N.E.

2d.__, __Ill.Dec.__, (Fourth District June 28, 1996)

(unpublished Rule 23 order). On, August 12, 1996, the

Board’s motion to publish was granted by the Fourth

District and the Rule 23 order was withdrawn. The

opinion was refiled as an opinion

nunc pro tunc

.

E

E

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

5

As you may remember, this case was before the

appellate court on an appeal by ESG Watts (Watts) of the

$60,000 penalty imposed by the Board for its failure to

timely pay solid waste fees and failure to timely submit

reports required to be filed by landfill operators by the

Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/1

et.

seq

.) and environmental regulations promulgated under

the Act. In the appeal, Watts admitted to violating the

Act but argued that the penalty was excessive because the

violations caused no environmental harm. Additionally,

Watts argued that the Board improperly considered past

violations when assessing the penalty. The Fourth

District disagreed with Watts and affirmed the Board

opinion and order issued in People v. Watts, PCB 94-127

(May 4, 1995).

S

S

IGNIFICANT FEDERAL ACTIONS

IGNIFICANT FEDERAL ACTIONS

The Board continues its series of reports on recent

federal announcements and actions from the Federal

Register that are of interest to the Board and the regulated

community. Below are highlighted over 60 such

announcements and actions that appeared in August, 1996:

ndustrial Combustion Coordinated Rulemaking

Advisory Committee Formed

On August 2, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 40413), USEPA

announced the formation of the Industrial Combustion

Coordinated Rulemaking Advisory Committee pursuant to

the Federal Advisory Committee Act. USEPA stated that

the Committee's members will include members from

environmental, public health, pollution prevention, and

environmental justice groups; state regulators; affected

sources; combustion, emission control, and monitoring and

testing equipment manufacturers; fuel producers and

suppliers; labor and academic research; and USEPA.

USEPA hopes that through the Committee, it can build a

consensus on a regulatory approach before it proposes

regulations for combustion source emissions.

eeting on Proposed National CAA VOC Emission

Standards for Architectural Coatings

On August 1, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 40161), USEPA

published a notice of a public meeting to discuss the

proposed volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions

standards for architectural coatings. The meeting was

scheduled for August 13, 1996 in Rosemont, Illinois.

USEPA proposed the VOC emissions standards on

June 25, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 32729), as a segment of its

program to limit VOC emissions from consumer and

commercial products for U.S. sale and distribution,

pursuant to section 183(e) of the federal Clean Air Act

(CAA), based on its determination that emissions from

consumer products can contribute to tropospheric ozone

formation. The proposed rule would define an

"architectural coating" as "a coating recommended for

field application to stationary structures and their

appurtenances, to portable buildings, to pavements, or to

curbs" and impose limitations on the VOC content of 55

categories of architectural coatings. It would also impose

product labeling, testing, recordkeeping, and reporting

requirements. As an alternative to compliance with the

VOC limitation, USEPA is considering allowing a product

importer or manufacturer to pay an "exceedance fee" to

keep its product on the market. USEPA estimated that the

rule would nationally reduce VOM emissions from these

products by 106,000 tons per year (tpy), or by 20 percent

of the 530,000 tpy in base year 1990 emissions. USEPA

stated in the proposal that it anticipated timely adoption of

the rules so that they will become effective as to coatings

imported or manufactured for sale or distribution in the

U.S. on and after April 1, 1997.

(See issue 507, Aug.,

1996.)

(Note: On April 2, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 14531), in a

related set of rules under CAA section 183(e), USEPA

proposed VOC emission standards for consumer products.

USEPA estimated that those proposed emission standards

would reduce VOC emissions nationally by 90,000 tons per

year. In proposing those regulations, USEPA noted that

four states presently have regulations governing the VOC

content of some consumer products: California,

Massachusetts, New York, and Texas. Further, 13 states

submitted VOC reductions through a federal consumer

products regulation as part of their 15 percent ROP plans.

Representatives of the consumer products industry

expressed concern over the effect of multiple standards

nationwide. In response, USEPA proposed one rule that

would regulate the VOC content of 24 categories of

consumer products, ranging from air fresheners to

automotive and household cleaners, hairsprays, adhesives,

household pesticides, nail polish removers, and shaving

creams. See issue 504, May, 1996.)

 

upplemental Standards of Ethical Conduct Adopted

for USEPA Personnel

On August 2, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41499), USEPA

adopted supplemental standards of ethical conduct for its

personnel. The standards, issued with the concurrence of

the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), supplement more

I

I

M

M

S

S

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

6

general ethics rules adopted by the OGE for executive

branch employees on August 7, 1992 (57 Fed. Reg.

35006). The new USEPA rules address ethical issues

unique to USEPA. They prohibit certain outside financial

interests, including outside employment, and require prior

approval of certain types of outside employment. The new

rules withdrew superseded segments of the prior USEPA

standards of conduct, replacing them with cross-references

to the OGE rules.

pproval of Illinois RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous

Waste Program (R92-1, R92-10, R93-4 & R93-16)

On August 5, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 40520), USEPA

adopted an immediate final rule that approves major

segments of the Illinois Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C hazardous waste

regulations. The approval, effective October 4, 1996,

unless earlier withdrawn, approves the Illinois counterparts

to various federal program amendments adopted by

USEPA between August, 1991 and May, 1993. The

Board adopted the relevant amendments to the Illinois

Regulations between July 1, 1992 and June 30, 1993. This

includes Board docket numbers R92-1, R92-10, R93-4,

and R93-16. Among the subject matters covered are the

land disposal unit leak detection system requirements, the

used and waste oil regulations, the land disposal

restrictions for newly listed wastes, the coke by-product

and chlorinated toluenes production waste hazardous waste

listings, the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure

(TCLP), and corrective action management unit (CAMU)

rules.

(Note: The sets of state regulations remaining

outstanding with regard to USEPA review are R94-7,

adopted by the Board on June 23, 1994; R94-17, adopted

October 20, 1994; R95-6, adopted on June 1 & 15, 1995;

and R95-20, adopted on June 20, 1996.)

 

PCRA Meeting on Addition of Industry Groups

Subject to Reporting

On August 5, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 40637), USEPA

published notice of a public meeting on a proposal to add

industry groups to those subject to the Emergency Planning

and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) reporting

requirements. The meeting, scheduled for August 19,

1996 in Chicago, Illinois, was intended to allow dialog on

the basis for USEPA's contemplated action. USEPA is

considering adding seven industry groups to those subject

to reporting: metal mining, coal mining, electric utilities,

commercial hazardous waste treatment, wholesale

chemicals and allied products, wholesale petroleum bulk

stations, and solvent recovery services. This is the third

scheduled meeting on the USEPA proposal.

USEPA proposed the addition of seven industry groups

to the reporting requirements under section 313 of the

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act

of 1986 (EPCRA) and section 6607 of the Pollution

Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA) on June 27, 1996 (61 Fed.

Reg. 33587). On the same date (61 Fed. Reg. 33619),

USEPA announced the first two public meetings on its

proposal, on August 7, 1996 in San Francisco and August

14, 1996 in Washington, DC

(See issue Aug., 1996.)

 

eetings on Implementation of FIFRA Worker

Protection Standards

On August 5, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 40638), USEPA

announced public meetings to solicit information on the

implementation of its Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and

Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) worker protection standards.

The meetings were scheduled for August 7, 1996, in

Portageville, Missouri, and August 21, 1996, in Tipton,

Indiana. USEPA seeks input based on the initial

experiences from workers, growers, and others on the first

year of implementation of its pesticide worker safety rules.

USEPA adopted those rules on August 21, 1992, with

certain requirements becoming effective on April 21, 1993

and the rest on April 15, 1994. The rules include various

requirements relating to access to sites of pesticide

application, worker training, and reporting.

roposed Federal Energy Code for Commercial and

Multi-Family High Rise Residential Buildings

On August 6, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 40881), the

Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy proposed an energy code for new

commercial and multi-family high rise residential

buildings. The proposed rules would apply to federally-

funded buildings pursuant to the Energy Conservation and

Production Act. They would alter the present January 30,

1989 federal interim standards to conform with the

voluntary building energy codes in the areas of lighting,

ventilation, motors, building envelopes, fenestration rating

procedures, and heating and cooling equipment testing

procedures. Among the many statutory mandates for

development of the rules, the DOE must consult with

USEPA and others on potential radon and other indoor air

pollutant problems with buildings. The proposed code

would set standards for a wide array of buildings and uses,

including for laboratories, dormitories, offices, retail,

storage, athletics, and places of worship. DOE stated that

a future rulemaking would address residential single- and

multi-family buildings.

A

A

E

E

M

M

P

P

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

7

ehicle Inspection and Maintenance/On-Board

Vehicle Diagnostics Requirements Amended

On August 6, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 40939), USEPA

amended the Clean Air Act (CAA) vehicle inspection and

maintenance (VIM) requirements. The amendments will

require checks of the on-board vehicle diagnostic (OBD)

check systems of all vehicles so equipped as part of the

basic and enhanced VIM procedures. The amendments

are effective on October 7, 1996, and it will require states

implementing VIM programs to update those programs to

include the diagnostics checks. The diagnostic checks will

be required of VIM inspections performed after January 1,

1998, but vehicles whose systems do not pass the OBD test

will not automatically fail the emissions test until after

December 31, 1999.

(Note: The Board adopted the present basic VIM

program R85-25, in 1986, and the enhanced program in

dockets R94-19 and R94-20, in 1994. See above item

regarding federal approval of the Illinois program.)

 

uidelines Adopted for Evaluating Environmental

Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation

On August 7, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41006), the Federal

Communications Commission (FCC) adopted guidelines

for evaluating the environmental effects of radiofrequency

(RF) radiation from regulated (licensed and unlicensed)

transmitters under the National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969 (NEPA). The guidelines impose maximum

permissible exposure (MPE) limits for electric and

magnetic field strength and power density for transmitters

that operate in the range of 300 kilohertz (kHz) (3

×

10

5

cycles per second (cps)) to 100 gigahertz (GHz) (1

×

10

11

cps). They are based on a 1986 report of the National

Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,

entitled "Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for

Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,” and on 1992

guidelines of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic

Engineers, Inc. that were adopted by the American

National Standards Institute (ANSI).

The FCC stated that NEPA requires the evaluation of

the environmental effects of RF radiation. It said that the

new guidelines reflect newer scientific studies of the

biological effects of this radiation. The FCC believed that

the guidelines will ensure adequate protection of the

exposed public and workers. Covered by the rules are

various types of transmitters, including mobile cellular

telephones, citizens band radios, FM radio transmitters,

and wireless control radios. The regulations include study,

recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. In deriving

the new guidelines, the FCC considered the comments of

USEPA and the Food and Drug Administration on various

issues.

eeting on Whole Effluent Toxicity Implementation

On August 7, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41149), USEPA

announced a meeting on whole effluent toxicity

implementation issues. The meeting was scheduled for

September 24 through 26 in Washington, DC. USEPA

stated that it is considering amendments to the whole

effluent toxicity testing and monitoring program, used as

part of the NPDES permit program, based on issues raised

in the last few years of experience in implementing the

program. USEPA broadly broke those issues into four

main categories: water quality and standards, exposure

assumption, permitting, and compliance and enforcement

issues.

raft Cleaner Technologies Substitutes Assessment

of Lithographic Blanket Washes Available

On August 7, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41155), USEPA

announced the a draft cleaner technologies substitutes

assessment of lithographic blanket washes. USEPA

worked together with the lithographic printing industry to

evaluate 37 different blanket wash systems and produce the

draft report as part of its Design for Environment

Lithography Project. The intent is to provide information

to aid lithographic printers in making informed decisions

about the blanket wash products they use.

olicitation for Computational Science and

Environmental Education Cooperative Agreements

Program

On August 7, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41237), USEPA

solicited preproposals for the Computational Science and

Environmental Education (EarthVision) Cooperative

Agreements Program for fiscal year 1996. USEPA stated

that $1 million in funds is available for the program for FY

1996 and $3 million through FY 1998. The object is to

study computational models for real-world environmental

systems that are either too large or too small for laboratory

replication and testing. Institutes of higher learning, public

agencies, and not-for-profit organizations may be eligible

for grants under the program, as authorized under the

Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Solid Waste Disposal

Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, or National Environmental

Policy Act.

AA SIP Approval for Illinois Volatile Organic

Liquid Storage Operations Rules

On August 8, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41338), USEPA

adopted a direct final rule granting Clean Air Act (CAA)

state implementation plan (SIP) approval to Illinois

regulations pertaining to volatile organic material (VOL)

V

V

G

G

M

M

D

D

S

S

C

C

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

8

storage operations in the metropolitan Chicago and East St.

Louis areas. USEPA stated that the rules are intended, in

part, to satisfy the non-Control Technology Guideline

control requirements of the CAA, because USEPA has not

developed a CTG for the VOL storage source category.

The SIP approval is effective on October 7, 1996 unless

earlier withdrawn as a result of significant adverse

comments. The associated notice of proposed rule

appeared in the same issue of the

Federal Register

(61

Fed. Reg. 41372).

The Board adopted the approved rules as Part III

reduction of pollution (ROP) amendments on October 20,

1994, under docket number R94-16.

(See issue 488, Nov.,

1994.)

The Part III ROP amendments made the standards

of Parts 218 and 219, Subpart B, "Organic Emissions from

Storage and Loading Operations,” and Subpart V, "Total

Resource Effectiveness" (TRE), more stringent. The Part

III rules added the federal Alternative Control Technology

(ACT) recommended controls for VOLs and volatile

petroleum liquids (VPLs). It was anticipated that the TRE

amendments would reduce VOM emissions by 4.05 tpd in

the metropolitan Chicago area by 1996 and by an

additional 1.58 tpd by 1999. The VOL/VPL amendments

were expected to reduce the VOM emissions by 2.18 tpd

in the Chicago area. No reductions were anticipated in the

Metro-East area. The Part III 15% ROP amendments

were filed with the Secretary of State and became effective

on November 15, 1994.

aSalle County Redesignated to Attainment for

Particulate Matter

On August 8, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41342), USEPA

adopted a direct final rule that redesignated the Oglesby

area in LaSalle County as attainment for particulate matter.

Portions of LaSalle County were formerly designated as

moderate nonattainment when USEPA adopted a standard

for particulate matter with a nominal aerodynamic

diameter of 10 microns or less (PM

10

) under the Clean Air

Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). That portion of

LaSalle County, the Lake Calumet area of Cook County,

and portions of the Granite City area of Madison County

were the three PM

10

nonattainment areas of Illinois. The

redesignation is effective on October 7, 1996 unless earlier

withdrawn as a result of significant adverse comments.

The accompanying notice of proposed rule appeared in the

same issue of the

Federal Register

(61 Fed. Reg. 41372).

USEPA approved the PM

10

state implementation plan

(SIP) for LaSalle County on October 21, 1993 (58 Fed.

Reg. 54291). Among the many requirements to gain

redesignation of the area to attainment, federal law

required Illinois to demonstrate that control measures in

the area SIP would maintain the area in an attainment

status. The national ambient air quality standard

(NAAQS) for PM

10

is 50 micrograms per cubic meter of

air (

μ

g/m), annual arithmetic mean, with no more than one

expected annual exceedance per year. USEPA noted that

there has been no exceedance of the PM

10

NAAQS in the

Oglesby area since 1990.

inal Report on Formaldehyde Exposure Testing

Pilot Study Available

On August 8, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41411), USEPA

announced the availability of a final report on a pilot study

of testing indoor air emissions of formaldehyde gas from

urea-formaldehyde pressed wood building materials.

USEPA stated that it would submit the report for peer

review in September, 1996 after seeking public comments.

Urea-formaldehyde pressed wood products include

particleboard, hardwood plywood, and medium-density

fiberboard used in such products as doors, cabinets, and

furniture. USEPA stated that indoor emissions of urea-

formaldehyde gas emitted from these products can cause

eye, nose, and respiratory irritation. USEPA published

the need for testing under the Toxic Substances Control

Act (TSCA), in its Master Testing List on December 23,

1992 (57 Fed. Reg. 61240), to better characterize formal-

dehyde levels in housing and determine whether there is a

need for further regulation. USEPA held a public meeting

in 1993 to discuss its prospective testing protocol. After

the National Particleboard Association submitted an

alternative testing regime, USEPA adapted that regime for

the pilot study.

egulations Amended for Facilities Transferring Oil

or Hazardous Materials in Bulk

On August 8, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41451), the U.S.

Department of Transportation Coast Guard amended its

regulations governing facilities that transfer oil or

hazardous materials in bulk. The Coast Guard stated that

the amendments, effective February 5, 1977, were

intended to update and clarify the present rules, in order to

provide greater safety and environmental protection.

Among the amendments are the codification of the impact

a 1994 memorandum of agreement in which offshore

facilities became under the jurisdiction of the Department

of Interior, the addition and modification of definitions,

and modifications to the facility operations and

management requirements.

oint USEPA/Chemical Manufacturers Association

Survey to Enhance Compliance

On August 9, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41605), USEPA

announced that it was submitting an information collection

request to the Office of Management and Budget for

review and approval. USEPA explained that it is working

together with the Chemical Manufacturers Association

L

L

F

F

R

R

J

J

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

9

(CMA) on the Root Cause Analysis Project to analyze past

compliance information of CMA member companies that

voluntarily decide to participate. The information to be

reviewed will consist of civil and judicial enforcement

actions pending during fiscal years 1990 through 1995.

The survey portion of the project will seek information

from the participants on the causes for their

noncompliance, their actions to achieve compliance, and

any suggestions they may have for pollution prevention

opportunities to improve compliance. The object is to

identify fundamental causes of noncompliance and

common features or trends among the causes and develop

recommendations for innovative compliance management

and pollution prevention, to help facilities achieve and

maintain compliance.

ominations Sought for National Advisory Council

for Environmental Policy and Technology

On August 9, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41606), USEPA

requested nominations for vacancies on the National

Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and

Technology. The Council is concentrating on studying

incentives for promotion of a community-based approach

to environmental protection (CBEP), to assess the

suitability of USEPA's information systems to supporting

CBEP, and to identify criteria for gauging USEPA's

efforts at regulatory reinvention. Projects include the

Common Sense Initiative, Performance Partnerships, the

XL projects, and CBEP.

eeting of the Industrial Non-Hazardous Waste

Policy Dialogue Committee

On August 9, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41608), USEPA

announced a meeting of the Industrial Non-Hazardous

Waste Policy Dialogue Committee. The meeting was

scheduled for September 11 and 12, 1996, in Arlington,

Virginia. The committee is charged with aiding USEPA in

the development of guidance for the management of non-

hazardous industrial waste in land-based disposal units.

This is waste that is neither hazardous, under Subtitle C of

the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976

(RCRA), nor municipal solid waste, under RCRA Subtitle

D. USEPA estimated that 7.6 billion tons of this material

is generated annually in the U.S. and disposed of on site in

landfills, surface impoundments, waste piles, and land

application units. USEPA stated that this material includes

materials that could become regulated as RCRA Subtitle C

waste at some future time, and it presents a broad rage of

risk to human health and the environment. The topics of

discussion will include risk management, liner system

designs, groundwater monitoring, facility location, waste

minimization, and public participation.

nterpretive Policy Released on Reapplication

Requirements for Municipal Separate Stormwater

Sewer Systems

On August 9, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41697), USEPA

issued an interpretive policy memorandum on permit

reapplication requirements for separate municipal

stormwater sewer systems (MS4s). Under the policy,

effective May 17, 1996, USEPA stated that permit writers

and applicants had discretion to customize the reapplication

requirements on a case-by-case basis. USEPA said that

the fourth year annual report would constitute the principal

reapplication document. USEPA will not require use of

the entire part 1 and 2 process of the initial permit. Under

1990 amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA),

municipalities with populations greater than 100,000 were

required to have permits for their MS4s. Many MS4

permits are due to expire, and reissuance of permits will

be necessary for those systems.

etal Products and Machinery Industry Phase II

Survey Submitted to OMB for Approval

On August 12, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41786), USEPA

announced that it had submitted an information collection

request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and approval. The ICR is the "1996

Metal Products and Machinery Industry Phase II Survey"

(MP&M Phase II survey). USEPA stated that it will seek

through the ICR the technical and economic information

necessary to develop effluent limitations and guidelines for

MP&M Phase II activities. These include operations at

sites that manufacture, maintain, or repair metal products

and machinery in certain industry categories. USEPA

estimated that the cost of this ICR would be about $3.5

million nationally. USEPA plans the concurrent use of

both short-form and more comprehensive long-form

survey instruments.

pdated Guideline on Air Quality Models Published

On August 12, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41837), USEPA

published an updated "Guideline on Air Quality Models.”

USEPA originally codified the guideline as 40 CFR 51,

appendix W in July, 1993. It has now reformatted it to

comport with the

Code of Federal Regulations

requirements. USEPA further used the opportunity to

update and correct segments of the text and references to it

in segments of parts 51 and 52.

N

N

M

M

I

I

M

M

U

U

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

10

ompliance Assurance Monitoring Under

Consideration for CAA Enhanced Monitoring and

Compliance Certification Requirements

On August 13, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 41991), USEPA

announced that it has compliance assurance monitoring

(CAM) under consideration for use in the Clean Air Act

(CAA) Titles V and VII enhanced monitoring and

compliance certification requirements. USEPA has made

a revised version of the CAM approach available for

comment and has scheduled a public hearing for

September 10, 1996, in Research Triangle Park, North

Carolina, to obtain public comment on the approach.

USEPA proposed Title V enhanced monitoring and

compliance certification requirements on October 22, 1993

(58 Fed. Reg. 54648). It sought comment on the CAM

approach on September 13, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 48679),

posting a draft CAM rule for comment. USEPA presently

intends to adopt the Title V enhanced monitoring and

compliance certification requirements by July, 1997, using

the revised CAM approach. USEPA stated that it has

combined the Title V and Title VII enhanced monitoring

and periodic reporting requirements into the revised CAM

approach so that there would be a single, integrated set of

requirements.

roposed Non-Listing as Hazardous Waste of 14

Waste Solvents per

Environmental Defense Fund v.

Browner

On August 14, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42317), USEPA

proposed not to list 14 used solvent-related wastes as

RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste. The proposed

determination relates to spent solvents, distillation bottoms

from the recovery of the solvents, and spent mixtures of

them. The 14 solvents are cumene, phenol, isophorone,

acetonitrile, furfural, epichlorohydrin, methyl chloride,

ethylene dibromide, benzyl chloride, p-dichlorobenzene,

2-methoxyethanol, 2-methoxyethanol acetate, 2-ethoxy-

ethanol acetate, and cyclohexanol. In proposing not to

regulate the wastes as listed hazardous waste, USEPA

noted that most of the wastes are already regulated under

Subtitle C as hazardous waste by virtue of their exhibiting

a characteristic of hazardous waste or being mixed with

wastes that are themselves listed as hazardous. Further, in

proposing not to regulate the wastes as listed wastes,

USEPA was not required to propose amendment of the

reportable quantities set forth under the Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act

(CERCLA) regulations.

USEPA proposed the non-listings as a result of a

settlement of the litigation in

Environmental Defense Fund

v. Browner

, No. 89-0598 (D.D.C.) The December 9,

1994 consent decree required USEPA to propose whether

or not to regulate these wastes as listed hazardous wastes

from non-specific sources by July 31, 1996 and take final

action by May 31, 1997. The consent decree further

required USEPA to undertake study of seven additional

solvent wastes and issue a final report on their use,

toxicity, and waste management by August 30, 1996.

Those seven additional solvents are diethylamine, aniline,

ethylene oxide, allyl chloride, 1,4-dioxane, 1,1-dichloro-

ethylene, and bromoform. USEPA stated that although the

consent decree did not require evaluation of the seven

additional wastes, it could decide to list them in a future

rulemaking.

omment Invited on Intended Hydrogeomorphic

Approach for Assessing Wetland Functions

On August 16, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42593), the

Department of Defense, Army Corps of Engineers

voluntarily set forth its intent and invited comment on its

prospective strategy in developing the Hydrogeomorphic

Approach for Assessing Wetland Functions (HGM

Approach). To implement the Clinton Administration's

Wetlands Plan, the National Interagency Implementation

Team is developing the HGM Approach to evaluate

wetlands permit applications submitted under section 404

of the Clean Water Act. The Implementation Team

includes Corps of Engineers, USEPA, the Natural

Resource Conservation Service, the Federal Highways

Administration, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Corps stated that the HGM Approach will increase the

accuracy of wetland function assessments, allow for

reproducibility in results, and reduce the time required for

assessments.

The Army Corps stated that the HGM Approach is

based on three fundamental factors that influence how

wetlands function: position in the landscape (geomorphic

setting), water source (hydrology), and the flow and

fluctuation of water in the wetland (hydrodynamics). It

would classify wetlands based on their function, define

functions that each class of wetlands performs, and

establish the range of functioning of each wetland.

Regional assessment models would be developed based on

the functional profile that describes the physical,

biological, and chemical characteristics of regional wetland

subclasses.

The Army Corps explained that the goal is to develop

sufficient assessment models to address 80 percent of the

Section 404 permit workload requiring wetland function

assessments over the next two years. It stated that the

development of about 25 to 30 regional subclass models

will be necessary. The Corps stated that the model will

focus primarily on wetlands function, rather than on

wetlands value. Through the Army Corps, the

Implementation Team sought comment and public

participation. The development of the HGM Approach

will occur in two phases: Phase A, development by an

C

C

P

P

C

C

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

11

interdisciplinary team of wetlands experts, and Phase B,

application by the Army Corps to wetland permits

evaluation.

raft Technical Guidance Document Available on

Biological Criteria for Streams and Small Rivers

On August 16, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42610), USEPA

announced the availability of a draft guidance document:

"Biological Criteria: Technical Guidance for Streams and

Small Rivers.” USEPA stated that the document is for use

with another, entitled "Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for

Use in Streams and Rivers: Benthic Macro-invertebrates

and Fish,” released in 1989. The purpose is to aid states

in developing biological water quality criteria for stream

and small river surveys, adding biological integrity

measurements to the physical and chemical measurements

already in practice. USEPA stated that this biological

guidance document is the first of its sort; future guidance

documents will address, in approximate order of their

prospective appearance, the biological quality of lakes and

reservoirs, estuarine and coastal marine waters, rivers,

wetlands, and, possibly, coral reefs.

inal Oxyfuels Information Needs Report Available

On August 16, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42611), USEPA

announced the availability of a final report, entitled

"Oxyfuels Information Needs.” The report, prepared

through the cooperative efforts of USEPA's offices of

Research and Development; Air and Radiation, and

Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, highlights

the types of information needed to enhance scientific

understanding of the risks and benefits of the use of

oxygenated fuels and reformulated gasoline (collectively

"oxyfuels") relative to those of conventional gasoline.

USEPA stated that in addition to providing background

information and outlining a general framework for

comparative risk assessments of fuels, the report

summarizes available information, focuses on work

presently underway or planned, and highlights currently

unfilled data needs. USEPA intends to use the report in

prioritizing its future efforts.

SCA Testing Data Received on Two Commodity

Chemicals

On August 16, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42611), USEPA

announced that it had received testing data required under

the Toxic Substances Control Act relating to commodity

chemicals:

tert

-amyl methyl ether (TAME) and methyl

isobutyl ketone (MIBK). The American Petroleum

Institute (API) submitted two reports on TAME, which is

under consideration for use as a gasoline additive:

"CHO/HGPRT Mutation Assay" and "Chromosome

Aberrations in Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) Cells.”

The Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA) Ketones

Panel submitted a report on MIBK, a common solvent:

"Methyl Isobutyl Ketone: A Thirteen-Week Schedule-

Controlled Operant Behavior Study in the Rat.”

ost-Rebuilt Particulate Emissions Rates for Urban

Buses Published

On August 16, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42763), USEPA

published a listing of the post-rebuilt particulate matter

(PM) emissions rates from urban bus engines for

equipment certified prior to July, 1996. The published PM

emission levels, together with those published on

September 2, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 45626) relating to

equipment certified prior to July, 1994, is for use by fleet

operators in calculating their fleet emissions levels for

years 1998 and later.

Under section 219(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), on

April 21, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg. 21359), USEPA established

emission standards or control technology requirements for

certain 1993 and earlier model year buses whose engines

are rebuilt or replaced. Under the regulations, fleet

owners may select compliance options 1 or 2. Option 1

establishes PM emission standards for each rebuilt or

replaced engine. Option 2 is a fleet averaging program for

each vehicle with a rebuilt or replaced engine that sets

forth average PM emission targets for the operator's fleet.

USEPA explained that no equipment had been certified

as of July 1, 1996 as meeting the 0.10 grams of PM per

British horsepower-hour standard for less than the life-

cycle cost requirement of $7,940 (1992 dollars). Four

manufacturers' equipment had received six certifications

by that date as meeting the 25 percent reduction

requirement for less than the life-cycle cost requirement of

$2000 (1992 dollars). The published PM emission rates

are for that equipment for use by fleet operators under the

Option 2 averaging regime.

evised Interim Guidance for Performance

Partnership Grant Program Published

On August 19, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42887), USEPA

published revised interim guidance for its Performance

Partnership Grant (PPG) program for state environmental

programs. Under the PPG program, USEPA seeks to give

the states more flexibility in addressing their highest

environmental priorities, improve environmental

performance, and strengthen their relationships with

USEPA. It allows states to combine funds from two or

more of the eligible grant programs into a single PPG

within the eligibilities of those individual programs, thus

allowing multi-media programs. USEPA originally

published interim guidance for the PPG program in

D

D

F

F

T

T

P

P

R

R

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

12

December, 1995. The new revised interim guidance

clarifies that original document and further reflects an

intervening grant of Congressional authorization for the

PPG program.

ew Petition for a No-Migration Exemption for DOE

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico

On August 19, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42899), USEPA

published notice that it had received a petition from the

Department of Energy (DOE) for a no-migration

exemption from the Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act (RCRA) Subtitle C hazardous waste land disposal

restrictions (LDRs). The exemption sought would be for

the land disposal of hazardous waste at the DOE Waste

Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) repository in New Mexico.

USEPA noted that the WIPP will engage in the above- and

below-ground storage and disposal of hazardous waste,

and that USEPA will render its determination whether the

WIPP meets the radiation protection standards together

with its determination on the no-migration exemption

sought. USEPA further noted that legislation presently

pending in Congress would exempt the WIPP from the

RCRA LDRs, mooting the petition.

raft Canada-US Strategy for the Virtual

Elimination of Persistent Toxic Substances in the

Great Lakes Available, Comment Sought

On August 19, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 42902), USEPA

announced the availability of a "Draft Canada-United

States Strategy for the Virtual Elimination of Persistent

Toxic Substances in the Great Lakes" and sought public

comment on the draft. Adopted pursuant to the Great

Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978 between the U.S.

and Canada, as amended by a 1987 protocol, the Strategy

seeks the virtual elimination of the discharge of persistent

toxic substances into the Great Lakes, particularly those

that bioaccumulate. It provides a framework for pursuing

such elimination. The virtual elimination of persistent

toxic substances will be sought by a combination of

voluntary, regulatory, and incentive-based means, with a

primary emphasis on voluntary means. The primary focus

is on the Great Lakes Basin, but a larger geographic area

will address atmospheric deposition of pollutants into the

Basin. USEPA held public meetings during development

of the Draft Strategy in 1993 through 1995.

ensus of Environmental Goods and Services

On August 20, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 43041), the

Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census published

a notice that it is conducting a survey of environmental

products and services for 1995. The Bureau stated that the

purpose of the survey would be to measure the

environmental industry and to use the survey results as a

tool to promote international trade in environmental goods.

The data sought from a selected sample of providers of

environmental goods and services will include employment

and wages in environmental businesses, the shipments of

goods and receipts for environmental services, and the

value of exports of environmental goods and services. The

Bureau earlier announced its intent to conduct the survey

on June 17, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 30592). (See memo of

July 23, 1996.)

roposed CERCLA Settlement for Automatic

Industrial Plating, Inc. Site in Schaumburg

On August 20, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 43056), USEPA

published notice of a proposed administrative settlement

under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) pertaining to

the Automatic Industrial Plating, Inc. site in Schaumburg,

Illinois. Under the proposed settlement, Wolfgang and

Mary Damsch would pay $3,000 for response costs

incurred by USEPA at the site.

inal Environmental Impact Study Available for the

St. Clair County Corridor Transit Improvements

Project

On August 23, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 43544), USEPA

announced that it had received a final environmental

impact statement (EIS) for the St. Clair County Corridor

transit improvements project. Earlier, on June 7, 1996 (61

Fed. Reg. 29094), USEPA had announced the availability

of a draft supplement to an economic impact study relating

to the St. Clair County Corridor transit improvements

Metrolink extension project from East St. Louis to the

Mid-America Airport in St. Clair County.

ettlement Proposed in

Chemical Manufacturers

Association v. EPA

; Proposed Clarifying

Amendments to the NESHAP for SOCMI and Other

Processes Subject to the Negotiated Rulemaking for

Equipment Leaks

On August 26, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 43698), USEPA

proposed corrective amendments to the national emission

standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) on April

22, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 19402) applicable to the synthetic

organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI) and

other processes subject to the negotiated rulemaking for

equipment leaks. USEPA adopted the NESHAP on April

22 and June 6, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 19402 and 29196),

referred to as the hazardous organic NESHAP or HON.

Suits challenging the rules were filed in

Chemical

Manufacturers Association v. EPA

, nos. 94-1463 and 94-

N

N

D

D

C

C

P

P

F

F

S

S

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

13

1465 (D.C. Cir.), raising more than 75 technical issues on

the structure and applicability of the rules. USEPA

proposed the corrective and clarifying amendments to

address all the issues raised in that litigation. On August

23, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 43544), USEPA announced the

proposed settlement of the

Chemical Manufacturers

Association

litigation. Pursuant to that settlement, USEPA

intends to adopt the corrective and clarifying amendments

by December 31, 1996 and allow applications for

extensions of the April, 1997 compliance deadline of up to

four months. An extended compliance deadline of April

22, 1999 is included in the proposed amendments with

regard to process wastewater, maintenance wastewater,

heat exchangers, and certain in-process equipment.

olicy Released on Interim Approach Water Quality-

Based Effluent Limitations for Stormwater Permits

On August 26, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 43761), USEPA

issued notice of a policy that outlines an interim approach

for incorporating water quality-based effluent limitations

into NPDES stormwater permits. USEPA intends to use

the interim approach to reduce the threat of wet-weather

flows to stream water quality, aid the states in solving wet-

weather flow-related problems, and reduce the burden of

the Phase I stormwater permit program. The policy

employs best management practices (BMPs) in initial

permits and contemplates expanded or enhanced BMPs for

subsequent permits. The policy will not affect existing

permits or technology-based standards. Although the

policy applies only to USEPA, USEPA encouraged states

to adopt similar policies. The policy may be amended in

the future as a result of dialog between USEPA and the

Urban Wet Weather Flows Federal Advisory Committee.

mergency Revision of Phase III Land Disposal

Restrictions Treatment Standards for Listed

Carbamate Wastes

On August 26, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 43923), USEPA

adopted an immediate final rule that incorporated

emergency amendments into the Phase III land disposal

restrictions (LDRS) treatment standards for listed

hazardous wastes from carbamate pesticide production.

USEPA adopted the Phase III LDRs on April 8, 1996 (61

Fed. Reg. 15565), among other things instituting the

treatment standards for carbamate wastes. (See memo of

May 9, 1996.) USEPA adopted the emergency

amendments because it became aware that laboratory

standard samples (used to calibrate instruments) do not

exist for many of the carbamates involved in the original

Phase III rule. This meant that treatment facilities could

not certify that the treated waste met the best demonstrated

available technology (BDAT)-based treatment standards.

For this reason, USEPA suspended the treatment standards

for one year, allowing the use of any methodology that

achieves the constituent concentration levels or using any

of the alternative treatment technology specified in the

Phase III rule. USEPA also suspended the treatment

requirement for ignitable, reactive, and corrosive

characteristic waste in which carbamate waste constituents

are expected as underlying hazardous constituents.

USEPA anticipates that the capacity will exist by the end

of the year for commercial laboratories to perform the

required analyses.

(Note: This action technically falls within the nominal

timeframe of the RCRA Subtitle C docket for the period

July 1 through December 31, 1996, which is as yet

unassigned. It is possible, however, that the Board may

include this action in the reserved RCRA Subtitle C update

docket, R97-5, for the period January 1 through June 30,

1996, since it directly affects federal amendments of April

8, 1996 amendments that are included in that docket.)

 

AA RACT Control Technology Guideline Available

for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations

On August 27, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 44050), USEPA

announced that the Clean Air Act (CAA) reasonably

available control technology (RACT) control technology

guideline (CTG) is available for shipbuilding and ship

repair surface coating operations. The CTG, in

conjunction with the previously-published alternative

control techniques (ACT) for these operations, is intended

to aid states in implementing RACT for control of volatile

organic material (VOM) emissions for the purposes of

implementing the national ambient air quality standards

(NAAQS) for ozone. Under federal law, the states are to

assure that sources implement the RACT contained in the

CTG no later than August 27, 1998.

USEPA stated that VOM emissions from shipbuilding

and ship repair surface coating operations include xylene,

toluene, ethyl benzene, isopropyl alcohol, butyl alcohol,

ethyl alcohol, methanol, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl

isobutyl ketone, ethylene glycol, and glycol ethers. It

estimated that employing the best available control

measures (BACM) of the CTG will reduce VOM

emissions from these sources by 1,370 tons per year from

the 35 major source shipyards nationally, at an annual cost

of $1.1 million. Those costs are over and above the $2.0

million cost for implementing the national emission

standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) adopted

for this category on December 15, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg.

64330). USEPA said that the CTG relies on the use of

low-volatility coatings as the only feasible means of

reducing VOM emissions from these sources.

P

P

E

E

C

C

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

14

inal Report Available on Air Quality Criteria for

Ozone and Photochemical Oxidants

On August 27, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 44057), USEPA

announced the release of a final report from the Office of

Research and Development, entitled "Air Quality Criteria

for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants.” This

document evaluates the latest scientific information on the

effects of ozone and related photochemical oxidants on

human health and the environment. This information will

be used by USEPA as a basis for its decisions relating to

the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for

ozone.

Note:

I have a copy of the executive summary of this

report that I can provide upon request. USEPA published

an advance notice of its intent to propose decisions by

November 29, 1996 whether to retain or revise the

NAAQS for ozone. The November 29 date for proposal

of USEPA's determinations derived from a judicial order

in

American Lung Association v. Browner

, 884 F. Supp.

345 (D. Ariz. 1994). That order, relating to PM only,

imposed a June 28, 1997 deadline for adoption of any final

USEPA decision. (See memo of July 23, 1996.)

inal Unified Toxic Substances and Pesticides Testing

Guidelines Available

On August 28, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 44308), USEPA

announced the creation of a unified library for test

guidelines and the release of two final testing guidelines:

"Series 830--Product Properties Test Guidelines" and

"Series 860--Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines.” The

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances

(OPPT) is engaged in a long-term project of harmonizing

test guidelines among OPPT, the Office of Pesticide

Programs, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation

and Development. The methods will be for use for the

purposes of testing under 40 CFR 158 and 795 through

799. They will ultimately be published in ten series:

Series 810--Product Performance Test Guidelines

Series 830--Product Properties Test Guidelines

Series 835--Fate, Transport and Transformation

Test Guidelines

Series 840--Spray Drift Test Guidelines

Series 850--Ecological Effects Test Guidelines

Series 860--Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines

Series 870--Health Effects Test Guidelines

Series 875--Occupational and Residential

Exposure Test Guidelines

Series 880--Biochemicals Test Guidelines

Series 885--Microbial Pesticide Test Guidelines

USEPA previously made the final series 875, 880, and 885

testing guidelines available to the public (61 Fed. Reg.

8279, Mar. 4, 1996).

ead-Based Paint Identification and Abatement

Activities Requirements Adopted

On August 29, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 45777), USEPA

adopted regulations pertaining to the training and

certification of personnel conducting lead-based paint

activities in target housing and child-occupied facilities.

USEPA stated that the regulations are intended to assure

proper training and certification of persons engaged in

lead-based paint identification and abatement, that training

programs for these workers provide adequate instruction

and are accredited, and that the work is conducted reliably,

effectively, and safely. USEPA also adopted regulations

providing for authorization of state programs to administer

and enforce the substantive rules.

USEPA noted that states may apply for program

authorization as early as October 28, 1996. USEPA will

itself begin implementing the substantive rules in non-

authorized states before August 31, 1998, which is also the

first date when training programs may first apply for

accreditation. Effective August 30, 1999, no person may

engage in lead-based paint activities in a USEPA-

administered state without certification, and all activities

must be performed according to the federal standards.

Persons in those states may apply to USEPA for

certification after March 1, 1999.

pdated California On-Board Vehicle Diagnostic

Requirements Adopted

On August 30, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 45898), USEPA

adopted amendments to its on-board vehicle (OBD) system

regulations to allow amended California OBD II

requirements to satisfy the federal requirements. USEPA

initially allowed compliance using the California OBD II

requirements on February 19, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg. 9468).

The State of California revised its OBD II requirements in

1995, and the present amendments update the federal

requirements to allow those state revisions. The only

exception is that USEPA will not require compliance with

the anti-tampering provisions of the California rules.

iscellaneous Federal Meetings

Meeting of: Common Sense Initiative Council Automobile

Manufacturing Sector Subcommittee

Date and Location: August 20, 1996 in Washington, D.C.

Announced purpose: To discuss how the teams or

subcommittee should manage projects forward, including

those having implications outside the auto sector. The

CSIC-AMS has formed three project teams--Regulatory

Initiatives, Alternative Sector Regulatory

System/Community Technical Assistance, and Life Cycle

Management/Supplier

F

F

F

F

L

L

U

U

M

M

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

15

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 40415, August 2, 1996

Meeting of: Effluent Guidelines Task Force

Date and Location: September 17, 1996 in Washington,

D.C.

Announced purpose: The task force advises USEPA on

the long-term strategy for the effluent guidelines program

and provides recommendations on expediting the

development of effluent guidelines.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 42609, August 16, 1996

Meeting of: National Advisory Council for Environmental

Policy and Technology, Community-Based Environmental

Protection Committee

Date and Location: September 10 and 11, 1996, Seattle,

Washington

Announced purpose: To discuss planned recommendations

to USEPA. The Committee was formed to advise USEPA

on opportunities for harmonizing environmental policy,

economic activity, and ecosystem management.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 42901, August 19, 1996

Meeting of: USEPA, Office of Pesticide Programs

Date and Location: August 21, 1996, Tipton, Indiana

Announced purpose: To solicit information from the

interested public on their experience in the first year of

implementation of USEPA's pesticide worker protection

standards. This is one of a series of meetings being held

around the country on this matter. USEPA seeks input

based on the initial experiences from workers, growers,

and others on the first year of implementation of its

pesticide worker safety rules. USEPA adopted those rules

on August 21, 1992, with certain requirements becoming

effective on April 21, 1993 and the rest on April 15, 1994.

The rules include various requirements relating to access to

sites of pesticide application, worker training, and

reporting. (See memo of Aug. 15, 1996)(see article p. 6)

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 42901, August 19, 1996

Meeting of: Office of Air Quality Planning and Strategy;

Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, NSR Reform

Subcommittee

Date and Location: Public hearing rescheduled to

September 16, 1996 and Advisory Committee meeting on

September 17, 1996, in Research Triangle Park, North

Carolina

Announced purpose: On the proposed new source review

(NSR) reform rulemaking (61 Fed. Reg. 38249, July 23,

1996), which would amend the procedures and

requirements for review of implementation plans relating

to NSR programs. (See memo of July 23, 1996.)

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43030, August 20, 1996

Meeting of: National Advisory Council for Environmental

Policy and Technology, Environmental Information,

Economics and Technology Committee, Environmental

Statistics Subcommittee

Date and Location: September 10 and 11, 1996, in

Washington, D.C.

Announced purpose: To discuss and offer critical advice

on initiatives of the USEPA Office of Strategic Planning

and Environmental Data. The Subcommittee was formed

to provide recommendations and advice to USEPA relating

to statistical products and activities and to explore

informational gaps from the perspective of users of these

data products.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43055, August 20, 1996

Meeting of: Environmental Laboratory Board

Date and Location: September 5, 1996, Washington,

D.C. (teleconference)

Announced purpose: To discuss options for laboratory

performance evaluation samples. On July 18, 1996 (61

Fed. Reg. 37464), USEPA announced an earlier August

27, 1996 meeting and announced that it is presently

reevaluating its role in laboratory performance evaluations.

USEPA has three laboratory performance evaluation

programs: water supply, water pollution, and Discharge

Monitoring Report (DMR) quality assurance. USEPA

stated that it has eight other options under consideration,

each discussed in the draft report, "Externalization of

EPA's Water Laboratory Performance Evaluation

Programs.”

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43055, August 20, 1996

Meeting of: Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board

Date and Location: October 9 and 10, 1996, in Arlington,

Virginia

Announced purpose: To hear updates on the Yucca

Mountain exploration and testing program and viability

assessment and repository advanced conceptual design,

with an emphasis on the effects of different thermal loads

on underground geology and hydrology. To review

USEPA's proposed standards for release of radionuclides

from the proposed repository.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43095, August 20, 1996

Meeting of: Science Advisory Board, Integrated Risk

Project, Risk Reduction Options Subcommittee

Date and Location: September 11 and 12, 1996, in

Washington, D.C.

Announced purpose: To review the strategic directions

and approach to research of the National Risk Management

Research Laboratory. To continue work begun at the

June, 1996 meetings, at which the Subcommittee heard

presentations on options for risk reduction. To note

consultation with USEPA, Office of Solid Waste on the

process for a surface impoundment study under the Land

Disposal Program Flexibility Act of 1996, which mandated

that USEPA complete a study within five years of the

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

16

environmental and human health effects of managing

decharacterized wastes in wastewater treatment system

surface impoundments or in Class I non-hazardous

injection wells. (See memo of August 15, 1996 re

announcement at 61 Fed. Reg. 38684, July 25, 1996.)

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43240, August 21, 1996

Meeting of: Science Advisory Board, Environmental

Engineering Committee

Date and Location: September 25 through 27, 1996, in

Cincinnati, Ohio

Announced purpose: To receive report of the Superfund

Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Subcommittee

on the technical aspects of implementing the SITE

program.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43240, August 21, 1996

Meeting of: Sanitary Sewer Overflows Advisory

Subcommittee

Date and Location: September 9 and 10, 1996, in

Alexandria, Virginia

Announced purpose: To discuss approaches and key issues

involved in an overall sanitary sewer overflow (SSO)

strategy.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43545, August 23, 1996

Meeting of: Science Advisory Board, Executive

Committee

Date and Location: September 17 and 18, 1996

Announced purpose: To receive updates from committees

and subcommittees, on topics including forecasting future

water issues, biocriteria for lakes and streams, and a

model for cumulative human exposure to toxicants.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43545, August 23, 1996

Meeting of: Science Advisory Board, Ecological

Processes and Effects Committee

Date and Location: September 19 and 20, 1996

Announced purpose: To review and approve

subcommittee reports, including a draft report from the

Structural Marsh Subcommittee on the current science

underlying structural marsh management, and to review

USEPA's proposed guidelines for ecological risk

assessment, which USEPA intends to print in a September

issue of the

Federal Register

.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43545, August 23, 1996

Meeting of: USEPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and

Toxics, Chemical Control Division

Date and Location: September 12, 1996, Washington,

D.C.

Announced purpose: To implement the regulatory

reinvention process as it relates to the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) section 8(d) reporting process by

seeking prospective ways to amend the reporting

requirements to ease the burden of compliance while

maintaining or enhancing human health and the

environment.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43546, August 23, 1996

Meeting of: National Advisory Council for Environmental

Policy and Technology, Reinvention Criteria Committee

Date and Location: September 10, 1996

Announced purpose: To obtain perspectives from the

public on criteria USEPA can use to measure the success

and progress of reinvention projects and to identify criteria

for promoting self-certification.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 43760, August 26, 1996

Meeting of: National Advisory Committee for Acute

Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances

Date and Location: September 17 through 19, 1996, in

Washington, D.C.

Announced purpose: To address the acute toxicology and

acute exposure guideline levels (AEGLs) for ammonia,

methyl mercaptan, hydrogen fluoride, and cyanogen

chloride, and the development of AEGLs for hydrogen

cyanide, 1,2-dichloroethylene, arsine, dimethyldichloro-

silane, and nitric acid.

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 44307, August 28, 1996

Meeting of: Risk Assessment Forum

Date and Location: September 10 and 11, 1996, in

Bethesda, Maryland

Announced purpose: This workshop will focus on the use

of the benchmark dose approach in cancer and noncancer

risk assessments and discuss general principles as they will

be discussed in the draft guidance under development,

entitled "Benchmark Dose Technical Guidance

Document.”

Notice citation: 61 Fed. Reg. 44308, August 28, 1996

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

17

F

F

inal Decisions 8/1/96

inal Decisions 8/1/96

94-240

International Union, United Automobile,

Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of

America and UAW Local 974 and Citizens For a Better

Environment v. Caterpillar, Inc., EPA, Party-in-Interest

- The Board found that this Peoria County respondent

had violated Sections 12(a), 21(e) and 21(f)(1) of the

Environmental Protection Act and certain RCRA Subtitle

C hazardous waste regulations, but the Board found that

the respondent had properly managed the excavated soil

containing hazardous waste pursuant to the RCRA

interim status closure requirements. The Board held that

no civil penalty or any other remedy was appropriate

based on the facts of this case.

95-117

Kean Brothers, Inc. v. EPA - The Board granted

voluntary withdrawal of this petition for a variance from

the air pollution control regulatory requirements for

installation and operation of Stage II gasoline vapor

recovery equipment at this Cook County facility.

96-52

Raleigh Realty Corporation v. EPA - The Board

granted voluntary withdrawal of this underground storage

tank fund reimbursement determination appeal involving

a Cook County facility.

96-102

Kathe’s Auto Service Center v. EPA - The

Board summary judgment and affirmed the Agency's

denial of this Cook County petitioner’s request for

reimbursement in this underground storage tank fund

reimbursement determination appeal because the tank and

contaminated soil removal was early action.

96-169

People of the State of Illinois. v. Kerr-McGee

Refining Corporation - The Board accepted a stipulation

and settlement agreement in this water enforcement

action against a Greene County facility, ordered the

respondent to pay a civil penalty of $35,000.00, and

ordered it to cease and desist from further violation.

97-24

  

Grace Container Products

v. EPA

- Upon receipt of

an Agency recommendation, the Board granted this Cook

County facility a 45-day provisional variance, with

conditions, from certain of the volatile organic material

emissions provisions of the air pollution control

regulations that are applicable to miscellaneous

formulation manufacturing processes in the Chicago

metropolitan area.

AC 96-53

EPA v. Elmer Meints - The Board entered a

default order, finding that this Livingston County

respondent had violated Sections 21(p)(1) and 21(p)(3) of

the Act and ordering it to pay a civil penalty of

$1,000.00.

AS 96-11

In the Matter: of: Chemetco, Inc. petition for

an Adjusted Standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part

720.131(a), (C) - The Board found that the petitioner had

not timely filed a certificate of publication and dismissed

this petition filed on behalf of a Madison County facility

for a solid waste determination (adjusted standard) pursu-

ant to the RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste regulations.

F

F

inal Decisions 8/15/96

inal Decisions 8/15/96

94-388

Amoco Oil Company v. EPA - The Board

granted voluntary withdrawal of this underground storage

tank appeal involving a DuPage County facility.

96-92

Amoco Oil Company v. EPA - The Board

voluntarily dismissed this underground storage tank

reimbursement determination appeal involving a DuPage

County facility.

96-158

Frederick Cooper Lamps, Inc. v. EPA - The

Board granted summary judgment and affirmed the

Agency's denial of a permit for the construction and

operation of a Cook County clear lacquer applicator and

curing oven, determining that the activity would be

subject to the metal furniture coating requirements of the

air pollution control regulations applicable in the Chicago

metropolitan area.

96-182

A.F. Moore & Associates v. EPA - The Board

reversed the denial of the Corrective Action Completion

in this underground storage tank appeal involving a Cook

County facility.

96-195

City of Prospect Heights v. EPA - The Board

denied an extension of a prior variance. granted March

28, 1991 in docket PCB 91-224, from the restricted

status and standards of issuance provisions of the public

water supplies regulations, as they relate to the combined

radium content of the drinking water provided by this

Cook County facility, because most recent composite

samples of the water demonstrated compliance with the

radium standard.

96-218

Mobil Oil Corporation v. EPA - The Board

granted this Will County facility an extension of a prior

variance, granted March 3, 1994 in docket in PCB 93-

151, from certain of the ammonia nitrogen effluent

requirements of the water pollution control regulations,

subject to conditions, as they apply to this Will County

facility’s wastewater discharges to the Des Plaines River.

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

18

96-227

Raytheon Aircraft Services v. EPA - Having

previously granted a request for an extension of time to

file, the Board dismissed this reserved docket because no

underground storage tank fund reimbursement

determination appeal was timely filed on behalf of this

Cook County facility.

96-228

Graham Oldsmobile v. EPA - Having previously

granted a request for an extension of time to file, the

Board dismissed this reserved docket because no

underground storage tank fund reimbursement

determination appeal was timely filed on behalf of this

Will County facility.

96-231

The U.S. Department of Energy and the

University of Chicago

v. EPA

- - Having previously

granted a request for an extension of time to file, the

Board dismissed this reserved docket because no

underground storage tank appeal was timely filed on

behalf of this DuPage County facility.

96-236

Shell Oil Products Company v. EPA - The Board

dismissed docket because the Cook County facility had

failed to timely file an amended petition for a variance

from certain of the risk-based soil remediation

requirements of the land pollution control (underground

storage tank) regulations, as instructed in a Board order

dated June 6, 1996.

96-241

Shell Oil Products Company v. EPA - Having

previously granted a request for an extension of time to

file, the Board dismissed this reserved docket because no

underground storage tank appeal was timely filed on

behalf of this Will County facility.

96-257

People of the State of Illinois v. Rockford

Blacktop Construction Company - The Board accepted a

stipulation and settlement agreement in this water

enforcement action against a Winnebago County

respondent, ordered the respondent to pay a civil penalty

of $8,500.00, and ordered it to cease and desist from

further violation.

96-267

  

People of the State of Illinois v Atlas Dismantling

Corporation, and Cary Corners Partnership

  

- The Board

accepted a stipulation and settlement agreement in this

water enforcement action against McHenry County

respondents, ordered the respondents to pay a total civil

penalty of $6,700.00, and ordered them to cease and

desist from further violation.

97-32

  

Village of Ashland

v. EPA

- Upon receipt of an

Agency recommendation, the Board granted this Cass

County facility a 45-day provisional variance from

certain total suspended solids, biochemical oxygen

demand, and ammonia nitrogen effluent requirements of

the water pollution control regulations, subject to

conditions.

AC 96-54

EPA v. Finger Refuse Service, Inc. - The

Board entered a default order, finding that this Lee

County respondent had violated Section 21(p)(1) of the

Act and ordering it to pay a civil penalty of $500.00.

AS 96-9

In the Matter of: Petition of Commonwealth Edison

Company for an Adjusted Standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts

811, 814 - The Board granted this Will County facility an adjusted

standard, with conditions, from certain leachate collection,

monitoring well location, groundwater monitoring, final cover,

zone of attenuation, and other requirements of the solid waste

disposal (non-hazardous solid waste landfill) regulations.

R96-1

In the Matter of: Proposed Alternative Standards for Coal

Combustion Power Generating Facilities Waste Landfills; 35 Ill.

Adm. Code Part 816

-

See Rulemaking Update.

R96-1

In the Matter of: Proposed Alternative Standards for Coal

Combustion Power Generating Facilities Waste Landfills; 35 Ill.

Adm. Code Part 816 -

The Board adopted alternative

standards for new utility waste landfills that establish an

alternative means of satisfying the liner and cap requir e-

ments for certain new landfills by allowing owners and

operators of landfills that accept only flue gas desulfur i-

zation (FGD) sludges and coal combustion ash from

electric utilities to use stabilized materials as liner and

cap material or to monofill the stabilized materials

without a liner and cap.

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

19

N

N

ew Cases 8/1/96

ew Cases 8/1/96

96-250

White & Brewer Trucking v. EPA

- Having previously

granted a request for an extension of time to file, and having

received a timely-filed petition, the Board accepted this land permit

appeal involving a Montgomery County facility for hearing.

97-17

  

Irma L. Lopez, Jose Martinez, Joel R. Garay and

Jose Gonzalez v. Celotex Corporation, Allied-Signal,

Inc., and the EPA -

The

Board held this citizen's

RCRA

Subtitle C

enforcement action against a

Cook

County

facility for a frivolous and duplicitous determination

.

97-18

  

Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. v. EPA -

The Board

accepted this request for an extension of time to file and reserved

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

of this Coles County facility.

97-19

  

Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. v. EPA

The Board

accepted this request for an extension of time to file and reserved

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

of this Madison County facility.

97-20

  

People of the State of Illinois v. Bentronics

Corporation

- The Board received this water enforcement action

against a DuPage County facility for hearing.

97-21

  

DeKalb Sanitary District v. EPA

- The Board held

this petition filed on behalf of a DeKalb County facility for a

variance during a period of treatment plant maintenance and

repairs from certain effluent biochemical oxygen demand and total

suspended solids requirements of the water pollution control

regulations for the Agency recommendation.

97-22

  

NPK Storage, Inc. v. EPA

The Board accepted this

request for an extension of time to file and reserved this docket for

any underground storage tank appeal that may be filed on behalf of

Macon County facility.

97-23

  

The City of Lockport v. EPA

- The Board accepted

this NPDES permit appeal involving a Montgomery County

facility for hearing.

97-24

  

Grace Container Products

v. EPA -

See Final

Actions

AC 97-5

Vermilion County v. Lowell Null and M & N

Pallet, Inc. (Hoopeston/M & N Pallet) - The Board

received an administrative citation against Vermilion

County respondents.

N

N

ew Cases 8/15/96

ew Cases 8/15/96

96-247

Macon County Landfill #2 & #3 v. EPA

-

Having

previously granted a request for an extension of time to

file, and having received a timely-filed

land permit appeal

involving this Macon County facility

, the

Board accepted the

petition for hearing.

97-25

  

Grimms Pharmacy v. EPA -

Having received a request

for an extension of time to file, the Board reserved this docket for

any underground storage tank appeal that may be filed on behalf of

this Kane County facility.

97-26

  

People of the State of Illinois v. Central Illinois

Public Service Company

- The Board received this water

enforcement action against a Crawford County facility for hearing.

97-27

  

Glenbard Wastewater Authority v. EPA

- The Board

held this petition filed on behalf of a DuPage County facility for an

extension of a variance, previously granted on April 20, 1995 in

docket PCB 95-49, from certain of the total suspended solids

effluent requirements of the water pollution control regulations for

the Agency recommendation.

97-28

Village of Lynwood v. Cook County Board of

Commissioners and J.T. Einodes Company - The Board

accepted this pollution control facility (landfill) siting

appeal involving a proposed Cook County facility for

hearing.

96-29

Citizens Opposed to Additional Landfills and

Harvey C. Pitt v. Greater Egypt Regional Environmental

Complex a/k/a Gere Properties, Inc., and the Perry

County Board of Commissioners - The Board accepted

this pollution control facility (landfill) siting appeal

involving a proposed Perry County facility for hearing.

97-30

  

People of the State of Illinois v. Shell Oil

Company

- The Board accepted this air enforcement action

involving a Madison County facility for hearing.

97-31

  

People of the State of Illinois v. Johnnie Mae

Hendricks

- The Board received this land enforcement action

against a Macoupin County facility for hearing.

97-32

  

Village of Ashland

v. EPA -

See Final Actions

AC 97-6

Will County v. Trust #72-22960 - The Board

received an administrative citation against this Will

County respondent.

AS 97-1

In the Matter: of: American River Transportation

Company petition for an Adjusted Standard from 35 Ill. Adm.

Code Parts 809. 201, 809.301, 809.302 and 809.501

- The Board

acknowledged receipt of this petition for a adjusted standard from

certain requirements on behalf of a LaSalle County facility and

held it pending receipt of publication.

AS 97-2

In the Matter: of:

Chemetco, Inc. petition for an

Adjusted Standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 720.131(a), (C)

-

The Board acknowledged receipt of this petition for a adjusted

standard from certain requirements on behalf of a Madison County

facility and held it pending receipt of publication.

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

20

C

C

ALENDAR OF HEARINGS

ALENDAR OF HEARINGS

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

without notice. Confirmation of hearing dates and times is available by calling the Clerk of the Board at 312- 814-6931.

Date & Time

Case # & Type

Case Name and Location

18-Sep-96

10:30 A.M.

PCB 96-151

L-E, Citizens

Keith F. Boyer v. Felecia Harris, a/k/a Felecia Dawkins, and Chicagoland

Mortgage Corporation--James R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-500, 100 West

Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois

19-Sep-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 96-021

A-E

People of the State of Illinois v. Diamond Plating Company--Madison County

Administration Building, 157 North Main Street, Edwardsville, Illinois

19-Sep-96

09:00 A.M.

PCB 96-221

P-A, Air

Hydrosol, Inc. v. IEPA--James R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-630, 100 West

Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois

20-Sep-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 96-184

A-V

J.M. Sweeney Co. v. IPEA--Lake Zurich Village Hall, Lower Conference

Room, 70 East Main Street, Lake Zurich, Illinois

26-Sep-96

10:30 A.M.

PCB 96-254

A-V

Marathon Oil Company v. IEPA--Crawford County Courthouse, Grand Jury

Room, Court Street, Robinson, Illinois

27-Sep-96

11:00 A.M.

AC 95-026

AC

IEPA v. Orville Bartels and Frank Blair (Chanderville/Bartels) IEPA Docket No.

181-95-AC--City Building, behind the County Building, West side of square,

Virginia, Illinois

2-Oct-96

09:30 A.M.

PCB 97-029

L-S-R, Third Party

Citizens Opposed to Additional Landfills and Harvey C. Pitt individually and as a

member of Citizens Opposed to Additional Landfills v. Greater Egypt Regional

Environmental Complex, a/k/a Gere Properties, Inc., and the Perry County

Board of Commissions--DuQuoin City Hall, 28 South Washington Street,

DuQuoin, Illinois

08-Oct-96

10:30 A.M.

PCB 96-058

UST-FRD

Effingham tire Center v. IEPA--Effingham County Office building, County

Boardroom, 101 North Fourth Street, Effingham, Illinois

11-Oct-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 96-110

N-E, Citizens

Sara Scarpino and Margaret Scarpino v. Henry Pratt Company--Old Kane

County Courthouse, Courtroom 110, 100 South Third Street, Geneva, Illinois

25-Oct-96

10:00 A.M.

R96-18

PWS, Rule

Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Subtitle F (Parts 601 through 620)--Old Kane

County Courthouse, 100 South Third Street, Room 110, Geneva, Illinois

29-Oct-96

10:00 A.M.

PCB 96-107

A, W & L-E

People of the State of Illinois v. ESG Watts, Inc.--County Building, County

Board Room, 1504 Third Avenue, Rock Island, Illinois

30-Oct-96

10:00 A.M.

R96-18

PWS, Rule

Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Subtitle F (Parts 601 through 620)--Old Kane

County Courthouse, 100 South Third Street, Room 110, Geneva, Illinois

For an explanation of abbreviations used above see the Calendar Code on the following page.

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

21

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

PWS-V

Public Water Supply Variance

R

Regulatory Proceeding

RCRA

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

proceeding (hazardous waste only)

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

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

September, 1996

22

Illinois Water Law:

Challenges and Opportunities

October 23, 1996

GENERAL INFORMATION:

Location:

The Water Law Conference will be held at Jumer's Chateau, 1601 Jumer Drive, Bloomington, Illinois. On the

preceding day, at the same facility, the Illinois section of the American Water Resources Association will hold its biennial

conference.

Lodging:

For persons wishing to attend both meetings, and for those arriving early for the Water Law Conference,

sleeping accommodations are available at the rate of $69.00 plus tax (single) or $78.00 plus tax (double). Room reserva-

tions should made by contacting Jumer's at (309)662-2020 by October 1, 1996.

Registration Fee

:

•

Water Law Conference only: $60.00

•

Illinois Section, AWRA Conference only: $60.00

•

Registration for both conferences: $100.00

TO REGISTER:

Fill out the following form and return it to:

Water Conferences

Water Resources Center

Institute for Environmental Studies

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

1101 W. Peabody Drive

Urbana, IL 61801

Phone: 217-333-0536

Fax: 217-244-8583

Please Check the appropriate box:

?

Water Law Conference, October 23, 1996, $60.00

?

Illinois Section, AWRA Conference, October 22, 1996, $60.00

?

Both conferences, $100.00

Name: __________________________________________________________

Organization: _____________________________________________________

Address: ________________________________________________________

City, State, Zip: ___________________________________________________

Please include check payable to University of Illinois/Water Resources Center.

---

September, 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTER No. 508

23

ILLINOIS WATER LAW: PROGRAM SCHEDULE:

8:00 am -- Registration and Continental Breakfast

9:00 am -- Welcome

9:30 am -- Water Law I: Survey of Eastern Water Law

10:30 am -- Refreshment Break

10:45 am -- Water Law II: Analysis of Illinois Water

Law

11:45 am -- Focus Session I: Surface Withdrawals and

Instream Flows

12:30 pm -- Lunch

1:45 pm -- Focus Session II: Groundwater Withdrawals

2:30 pm -- Focus Session III: Access and Recreation

Uses

3:15 pm -- Refreshment Break

3:30 pm -- Concurrent Sessions A

•

Water Rights

•

Drought Management

4:15 pm -- Concurrent Sessions B

•

Climate Change

•

State/Local Authority and Coordination

5:00 pm -- Conference Closing

B

oard Procedural Rules

To receive a copy of the Board’s proposed Procedural Rules Revisions please fill out and mail this form to the Board

Chicago office, or call (312)814-3620, or send the information via email to: dbrown@pcb016R1.state.il.us

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please send one copy of the Illinois Pollution Control Board’s proposed Procedural Rules Revisions to:

Name:

_______________________________________________________________

Organization:

_______________________________________________________________

Address:

_______________________________________________________________

City, State, Zip:

_______________________________________________________________