1 BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
2 OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
3
RICHARD AND WILMA SALYER,)
4 ) PCB No. 98-156
Petitioners, )
5 ) UST Fund Reimbursement
vs. ) Appeal
6 )
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL )
7 PROTECTION AGENCY, )
)
8 Respondent. )
9
10 The PROCEEDINGS taken before KATHLEEN
11 CROWLEY, the Hearing Officer, stenographically
12 recorded by CARYL L. HARDY, CSR, a notary public
13 within and for the County of Cook and State of
14 Illinois, at the City of Wood Dale Village Hall,
15 404 North Wood Dale Road, 2nd Floor, City Council
16 Chambers, Wood Dale, Illinois, on the 24th day of
17 November, A.D., 1998, scheduled to commence at
18 10:00 o'clock a.m. commencing at 10:02 a.m.
19
20
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
2
1 A P P E A R A N C E S:
2 ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
100 West Randolph Street
3 Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
4 (312) 814-6929
BY: MS. KATHLEEN M. CROWLEY
5
6 MR. RICHARD SALYER and MRS. WILMA SALYER
1701 Westview Avenue
7 Lombard, Illinois 60148
(630) 932-1016
8
Appeared Pro Se;
9
10 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
1021 North Grand Avenue East
11 P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794
12 (217) 782-5544
BY: MR. JOHN J. KIM
13
Appeared on behalf of the Illinois
14 Environmental Protection Agency.
15
ALSO PRESENT:
16
Mr. Brian P. Bauer
17 Mr. Robert A. Mehrens, P.E.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
3
1 I N D E X
2 PAGES
3 Greeting by Hearing Officer . . . . . . . . 4
4 Opening Statement by Mrs. Salyer. . . . . . 7
5
WITNESSES
6
ROBERT A. MEHRENS, P.E.
7
Direct Examination by Mr. Salyer. . . . . . 9
8 Cross Examination by Mr. Kim. . . . . . . . 23
Redirect Examination by Mr. Salyer. . . . . 51
9 Recross Examination by Mr. Kim. . . . . . . 55
10
ROBERT A. MEHRENS, P.E.
11
Direct Examination by Mr. Kim . . . . . . . 69
12 Cross Examination by Mrs. Salyer. . . . . . 89
Redirect Examination by Mr. Kim . . . . . . 93
13
14 Closing Comments by Hearing Officer . . . . 96
15
16
17
E X H I B I T S
18
Marked for
19 Identification
20 Petitioners' Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2 . . . . . 14
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
4
1 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Good morning. This
2 is a hearing being conducted by the Illinois
3 Pollution Control Board, docket PCB 98-156, an
4 underground storage tank reimbursement appeal
5 brought by Richard and Wilma Salyer versus the
6 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. My name
7 is Kathleen Crowley, and I am acting as the board's
8 hearing officer today.
9 The Salyers are acting pro se today. The
10 agency is represented by John Kim. There are no
11 members of the public present at this point.
12 The purpose of the hearing today, as we
13 have explained, is to develop a record for the
14 Pollution Control Board to review in determining
15 whether the Salyers are entitled to the reimbursement
16 from the underground storage tank fund that they
17 were denied by the Illinois Environmental Protection
18 Agency.
19 There were two issues initially in the
20 petition as it was filed July 8th. There was a
21 question of whether paving costs were reimbursable
22 and whether landscape costs were reimbursable.
23 The Illinois EPA filed a motion for
24 summary judgment. That motion was granted in part
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
5
1 by the board on November 19th of this year, and so
2 the sole issue that we are dealing with today is the
3 paving cost issue. The board has held that the
4 landscape costs are not reimbursable.
5 All witnesses will be sworn. As I have
6 explained to Mrs. Salyer when Mr. Kim was out of the
7 room, the order of proceedings is the normal one in
8 board cases. The Petitioner, the Salyers, will make
9 an opening statement if they have one. The EPA may
10 make an opening statement if it has one. Then that
11 would be followed by testimony from the Salyers'
12 witness, testimony from the Illinois EPA's witness,
13 closing remarks, if either side has them. And then
14 before we leave, we will also determine whether
15 written closing remarks will be filed, and we will
16 set a schedule for the same if that's going to be
17 necessary. The statutory decision date is still
18 February 3rd.
19 I think that is really all I have at this
20 point, unless there are any questions or preliminary
21 matters.
22 MR. KIM: No questions.
23 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Okay. I will turn it
24 then over to the Salyers.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
6
1 Do you have any opening remarks you would
2 like to make?
3 MRS. SALYER: Yes.
4 Do I have to be sworn in?
5 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: I would suggest that
6 you be sworn in, yes, just in case anything that you
7 say turns out to be the kind of facts the board
8 feels should be sworn. It will just make things go
9 a little easier if you are. Okay.
10 (The witness was duly sworn.)
11 MR. KIM: Before you begin, I have a question.
12 I haven't done too many matters with pro se
13 litigants, so I'm just a little unclear on
14 something.
15 If Mrs. Salyer makes certain, as you
16 alluded to, factual statements in her testimony --
17 or in her opening statement which the board might
18 take as testimony, would I get an opportunity to
19 cross her or ask her about those questions?
20 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: I would say yes.
21 MR. KIM: Okay.
22 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: If you could give the
23 latitude, though, of saving anything until
24 after --
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
7
1 MR. KIM: Certainly.
2 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: -- the Salyers'
3 witness -- if Mrs. Salyer says anything that her
4 consultant doesn't --
5 MR. KIM: Okay. That's fine.
6 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: -- state, then yes,
7 you are certainly able to ask questions.
8 MR. KIM: Thank you.
9 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Okay. Go ahead.
10 MRS. SALYER: My husband and I are here today
11 representing ourselves because nobody knows the soil
12 vapor extraction system or the property at 551 South
13 York, Elmhurst, Illinois, better than we do.
14 Since 1990 when we found out that the
15 property was contaminated, we have worked at doing
16 whatever was necessary to ensure clean up. We have
17 done soil tests, drilled monitoring wells, and
18 installed a pump and treat system.
19 After years of running that system with
20 less than marginal results, we were offered a ray of
21 hope. A system called a soil vapor extraction
22 system could hopefully give us better results.
23 Since my husband and I are nearing retirement age,
24 anything that hastened the clean up was exciting.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
8
1 The system was approved and has been
2 installed. The first test results are better that
3 we could have ever hoped for. We are here today to
4 determine whether a part of the system, namely the
5 placement of paving over horizontal piping, is a
6 corrective action. We intend to prove that it is.
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Thank you.
8 Mr. Salyer, do you have anything you want
9 to say?
10 MR. SALYER: No, just call our first witness.
11 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We will let Mr. Kim
12 then make any opening remarks he wants to make.
13 MR. KIM: The agency waives its opening
14 remarks.
15 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: All right. Fine.
16 That allows the Salyers to call their witness then,
17 please.
18 MR. SALYER: I would like to call Bob Mehrens.
19 (The witness was duly sworn.)
20
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
9
1 ROBERT A. MEHRENS, P.E.,
2 called as a witness herein, having been first duly
3 sworn, was examined upon oral interrogatories, and
4 testified as follows:
5 DIRECT EXAMINATION
6 BY MR. SALYER:
7 Q Bob, would you state your name?
8 A Robert Mehrens.
9 Q Your education?
10 A I have a bachelor of science degree in
11 civil engineering from Montana State University.
12 Q And are you licensed by the state?
13 A I'm a licensed professional engineer in
14 the state of Illinois, in the state of Wisconsin,
15 and in the state of Connecticut.
16 Q Who do you work for?
17 A I have my own consulting business, RAM
18 Engineering, Limited.
19 Q And approximately how many underground
20 storage tank sites have you worked on?
21 A Approximately 135 sites since RAM
22 Engineering was started in 1989.
23 Q And when did you start working on the site
24 at 551 South York in Elmhurst?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
10
1 A 1990.
2 Q And what type of work was performed at
3 this site?
4 A I have done both soil and groundwater
5 investigations, designed and installed a groundwater
6 pump and treat system. I have done a pilot test for
7 a soil vapor extraction system, designed the soil
8 vapor extraction system, and have installed the soil
9 vapor extraction system.
10 Q What technologies were recommended in the
11 CAP?
12 A The corrective action plan that was
13 submitted in 1997, which was the second plan for the
14 site, was to install a soil vapor extraction system.
15 Q Explain how the soil vapor extraction
16 system works and how it applies to my site.
17 A Well, the soil vapor extraction is -- the
18 concept is actually fairly simple. It just involves
19 pulling vapors through the soil.
20 The application of that concept is a bit
21 more complicated. The way this system is normally
22 installed, a slotted pipe is placed below the
23 surface, either vertical wells or horizontal
24 piping. A blower is attached to the slotted pipe,
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
11
1 and vapors are pulled through the contaminated
2 soils.
3 You are basically addressing three phases
4 of contamination. You are removing the vapors from
5 the soil pore space, you are volatilizing the
6 absorbed contaminants on the soil particles, and you
7 are volatilizing -- if there is free product at the
8 site, you are volatilizing the free product that is
9 on top of the groundwater. All of those vapors are
10 then pulled through the piping and in some cases
11 treated and discharged to the atmosphere.
12 Q Okay. Does this system have to be sealed
13 from the surface in any way?
14 A The whole idea is to pull vapors through
15 the area of contamination, so you install your
16 slotted piping either in that contaminated soil or
17 as close as possible to the contaminated soil
18 with -- the idea is to pull from the area of
19 contamination. Any air that you pull that is not
20 through the area of contamination is counterproductive
21 to the process.
22 So if your piping -- especially if your
23 piping is close to the surface, it's going to pull
24 more air from the surface than it is through the
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
12
1 contaminated soil. Thus, you are not reaching out
2 into the complete area of contamination, and
3 basically you are going to be pulling clean air from
4 the surface and not pulling the contamination
5 through the soil. So it's -- the closer your piping
6 is to the surface, the more important it is to have
7 it sealed from the surface.
8 Q Okay. If you drill a monitoring well or
9 anything along that line, does the EPA require that
10 that be sealed from the surface?
11 A Yes. Any well, whether a monitoring well
12 or a vertical soil extraction well or point or any
13 other type of well, needs to be sealed from the
14 surface. And the EPA does have a requirement that
15 wells are sealed from the surface, and typically on
16 a monitoring well or a vertical vapor extraction
17 well you use concrete to seal that soil.
18 Q Concrete, do they reimburse the cost of
19 that?
20 A It's been my experience that sealing wells
21 from the surface has always been reimbursed, yes.
22 Q What information do you rely on in coming
23 to the conclusion about sealing horizontal piping?
24 A Well, in addition to my experience in
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
13
1 installing these systems, I have read technical
2 documents, two of which I referenced in the
3 corrective action plan that was submitted to the
4 Illinois EPA in 1997.
5 MR. SALYER: I would like to submit these as
6 evidence.
7 MR. KIM: What is being submitted?
8 MR. SALYER: Instructions on the well.
9 THE WITNESS: They are basically the two
10 documents.
11 MR. KIM: Do you have enough copies for
12 everybody?
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 MR. SALYER: Yes.
15 MR. KIM: Okay. I'm sorry. That's just --
16 this is the book?
17 THE WITNESS: That's the portion of the book.
18 MR. KIM: This is just an excerpt from the
19 book?
20 THE WITNESS: Yes.
21 MR. KIM: Okay. Can I please take a look at
22 the excerpt before we agree on -- I believe there
23 are two documents that are being referred to. One
24 is an article, and one is a book. And I believe
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
14
1 that as far as the book goes, the document that's
2 being offered into evidence is an excerpt from the
3 book, and I would just like to take a look at the
4 excerpt just to make sure -- because we don't have
5 the entire document just to make sure there is not
6 going to be a problem with that.
7 THE WITNESS: I do have the entire document if
8 you would like to look at it.
9 MR. KIM: Well, what I am saying is since the
10 entire document is not being offered into evidence
11 but rather just a portion of it, I would just like
12 to make sure that the portion that is being offered
13 into evidence is not misleading or not -- could not
14 potentially be taken out of context.
15 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: That's fine.
16 Let's go off the record.
17 (Whereupon, a discussion was held off
18 the record.)
19 (Petitioners' Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2
20 marked for identification, 11-24-98.)
21 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We are back on the
22 record after a short discussion.
23 There are two documents which we have
24 discussed off the record that the Salyers will be
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
15
1 seeking to have entered into evidence.
2 The first of these is an article
3 entitled -- and we will mark this Exhibit 1 if you
4 don't mind. Petitioners' Exhibit 1 is an article
5 entitled A Practical Approach to the Design, Operation,
6 and Monitoring of In Situ Soil-Venting Systems by
7 P.C. Johnson, C.C. Stanley, M.W. Kemblowski,
8 D.L. Byers, and J.D. Colthart from the Spring 1990
9 Groundwater Monitoring Report that is pages 159
10 through 178. The Salyers had brought with them a
11 copy that had some excerpts from this. The Illinois
12 EPA had copies of the entire article available, and
13 so that entire article is what we are entering into
14 the record as evidence.
15 Excuse me. That has been moved. There is
16 no objection. We are accepting Exhibit 1 as
17 evidence.
18 The second document is an excerpt from a
19 book entitled Modeling of In Situ Techniques for
20 Treatment of Contaminated Soils, the subheading Soil
21 Vapor Extraction, Sparging, and Bioventing. That is
22 by David J Wilson, Ph.D., published by Technomic
23 Publishing Company.
24 Could I have the year on that, please?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
16
1 THE WITNESS: 1995.
2 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: 1995. Thank you.
3 What we have here is chapter 1 from the
4 book which is pages 1 through 9. This is a book
5 which we have a copy of the original but not for
6 presentation to the board. Mr. Kim has examined
7 that during our recess. Mr. Kim does have an
8 objection.
9 Mr. Kim?
10 MR. KIM: The objection that the EPA has on
11 this document is that it is nine pages taken out of
12 what looks to be an approximately 560-page book, and
13 actually to correct a statement made by the hearing
14 officer, I think, looking in the table of contents,
15 that is not even chapter 1. Chapter 1 is much
16 longer than just the nine pages. That's simply the
17 introduction or the opening pages to chapter 1.
18 There are 11 chapters in the book --
19 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: That's correct.
20 Thank you.
21 MR. KIM: Thank you.
22 There are 11 chapters in the book, seven
23 of which appear to discuss soil vapor extraction to
24 some extent. It's unclear exactly how much.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
17
1 Because we are offering -- because what is
2 being offered is just a tiny fraction of what could
3 be additional information that would be very
4 relevant and possibly conflicting or possibly
5 leading to the nine pages being offered here to be
6 taken out of context, the Illinois EPA feels that
7 the document would not be of any use to the board
8 and would, if anything, potentially cause confusion
9 or misapplied reliance upon that document.
10 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Is there anything you
11 would like to say in response to what Mr. Kim said?
12 MR. SALYER: Yes, but I'm not sure what. Can
13 we go off the record for a minute?
14 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: I will allow it.
15 (Whereupon, a discussion was held off
16 the record.)
17 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We are back on the
18 record.
19 MR. SALYER: We just didn't make copies of the
20 whole book because most of it doesn't pertain to our
21 site, and we just tried to make copies of what
22 pertained to our situation. That's all.
23 MR. KIM: Well, unfortunately, without benefit
24 of the entire book in the -- in evidence, your
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
18
1 representation of what is relevant to your site
2 might not necessarily be what the board or the
3 Illinois EPA would argue would be relevant to the
4 site. So there may be other information within the
5 other 450 some odd pages in that book -- or 550 some
6 odds pages in that book that might be relevant to
7 the case and might, in fact, be something more
8 comprehensive or more substantial other than the
9 first nine pages, which I think are very
10 introductory in nature.
11 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: The question that I
12 would like to ask before I make a ruling is would
13 you be prepared to give us the whole book as an
14 exhibit?
15 THE WITNESS: Certainly.
16 MR. SALYER: Yes.
17 MR. KIM: Well, here again, the problem is we
18 have made efforts to try and find this book, but
19 this is a difficult book to track down. It's my
20 understanding that there are only two libraries in
21 the state that have this book in their collections,
22 both of which are -- one of which is Southern
23 Illinois University in Carbondale, and the other is
24 Southern Illinois University in Edwardsville. I do
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
19
1 not have a copy at this time. I don't know if I can
2 get one. I can certainly try, but again, it would
3 pose, I think, an extreme hardship upon the Illinois
4 EPA to attempt to base any kind of arguments either
5 responsive or assertive in nature without benefit of
6 the entire book.
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Did you have anything
8 you want to say?
9 MR. SALYER: Just a comment. You mean the
10 Illinois EPA does not have a copy of this book?
11 MR. KIM: Not that I'm aware of, no.
12 MR. SALYER: Brian?
13 MR. KIM: I'm sorry.
14 MR. SALYER: I'm sorry.
15 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: That's all right.
16 I am -- since the Salyers are willing to
17 provide us with the entire book, I will take the
18 entire book in as Exhibit Number 2. If we have to
19 make arrangements for copying, I will pledge the
20 board to copy for the use of this proceeding only,
21 and that, I think, is the best I can do. So we will
22 accept as Petitioners' Exhibit 2 the entire volume
23 that we have previously identified and which we will
24 refer to as Modeling of In Situ Techniques. That's
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
20
1 Wilson, 1995.
2 MR. KIM: I think, just for the record then,
3 the agency would make a continuing objection to any
4 references to this document. We will work the best
5 we can off the nine-page excerpt that we have at the
6 hearing, but we would simply pose a continuing
7 objection to any reference or reliance upon that
8 book.
9 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: I appreciate the
10 continuing objection, and that just means that
11 rather than stopping every time something would come
12 up, we just note for the board and the board will be
13 aware of the fact that the agency objects to
14 reliance on this document, that they have not had a
15 chance to look at, and apparently they did not look
16 at it before they made their decision to deny your
17 reimbursement request.
18 Okay. Now, Mr. Salyer, you can go back to
19 questions now that we have got both of these entered
20 into the record.
21 BY MR. SALYER:
22 Q Would a system work if paving wasn't over
23 it?
24 A Well, as I stated before, in my mind, it's
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
21
1 very necessary to seal soil vapor extraction piping
2 from the surface. And looking at the document that
3 was just entered into evidence, Modeling of In Situ
4 Techniques for Treatment of Contaminated Soils,
5 there is an exhibit on page 3 -- this is the
6 introduction to this book which gives examples of
7 typical soil vapor extraction systems.
8 Included on that exhibit -- figure on
9 page 3 is a drawing showing a typical horizontal
10 vapor extraction trenching, and it shows as a
11 portion of that system a surface seal over the
12 trench.
13 There is a second figure in this
14 introduction to the book on page 8. Again, it shows
15 an example of a typical soil vapor extraction
16 system, including the equipment that is normally
17 installed in this type of system, again, a portion
18 of that figure that shows the actual vapor
19 extraction piping. In this case, it's a vertical
20 well. It shows an impermeable surface seal.
21 The second document that was entered into
22 evidence was the article by Mr. P.C. Johnson. This
23 article is very often referred to in discussions of
24 soil vapor extraction systems. It's been used by
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
22
1 the USEPA to develop a computer model or a computer
2 technique for evaluating soil vapor extraction
3 systems, so it came from the groundwater monitoring
4 review, which is a peer-reviewed publication, and
5 it's very well recognized in the industry.
6 On page 171 --
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Again, this is
8 Petitioners' Exhibit 1, page 171. Go ahead.
9 BY THE WITNESS:
10 A On page 171, it talks about the necessity
11 for placing a surface seal over shallow treatment
12 zones. Mr. Johnson describes shallow treatment
13 zones as less than five meters. The piping that we
14 installed the surface seal over at the Salyers' site
15 is four feet, just a little over one meter. So both
16 of these documents point out the necessity for
17 placing a surface seal over vapor extraction piping,
18 especially shallow horizontal vapor extraction
19 type.
20 BY MR. SALYER:
21 Q Have you ever installed a system without
22 sealing the surface?
23 MR. KIM: Objection. When you say system, are
24 you referring to a soil vapor extraction system?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
23
1 MR. SALYER: Yeah, a soil vapor system.
2 BY THE WITNESS:
3 A There is one case where we excavated
4 contaminated soils at a leaking underground storage
5 tank site. A large portion of the sited soils were
6 removed. We felt that it was possible there may
7 have been some soils left that were still
8 contaminated, so when we backfilled the site, we did
9 install some slotted piping with the thought that we
10 could attempt to do soil vapor extraction if that
11 was necessary in the future.
12 We did go back to that site, and we did
13 not seal the surface. You would have had to have
14 sealed probably a quarter acre of the area to seal
15 that particular site. We went back and did a pilot
16 test for a soil vapor extraction system and had very
17 unfavorable results.
18 MR. SALYER: Okay. That's about it for me
19 right now.
20 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Mr. Kim?
21 MR. KIM: Yes. I have some questions.
22 CROSS EXAMINATION
23 BY MR. KIM:
24 Q Mr. Mehrens, in Mrs. Salyer's opening
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
24
1 statement, she commented that the first set of test
2 results from the soil vapor extraction system were
3 better than they had hoped for.
4 What test results was she referring to?
5 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: If you know, and if
6 you don't, please answer that you don't know.
7 BY THE WITNESS:
8 A We have collected groundwater samples from
9 the monitoring well both on and off site since the
10 soil vapor extraction system was started.
11 BY MR. KIM:
12 Q And what have those results shown?
13 A A significant reduction in the contaminants
14 in the groundwater.
15 Q Have those results been submitted to the
16 Illinois EPA?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Do you know what the dates were that those
19 results were submitted?
20 A No. The samples were taken in mid-September.
21 Q September of what year?
22 A Of 1998.
23 Q So the samples and any results that would
24 be taken and submitted to the EPA would have
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
25
1 postdated April 10th of 1998?
2 A That's correct.
3 Q Thank you.
4 You stated in your testimony that you have
5 been involved with approximately 135 lost contaminated
6 sites; is that correct?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And when you say you were involved with,
9 does that mean that you were responsible for
10 designing and installing remediation systems at
11 those sites?
12 A Well, some of those sites aren't yet to
13 that point, and there is a portion of those sites
14 that -- a minority of those sites that I did not
15 design the remediation. But the majority of the
16 sites that have gone to remediation, yes, I was
17 involved in that.
18 Q Of all those sites, how many -- I'm sorry.
19 Of all those sites in which you have been
20 responsible for designing and installing remediation
21 systems, how many of those sites employed soil vapor
22 extraction systems?
23 A About 15.
24 Q And of those 15 sites, how many involved
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
26
1 the use of concrete or asphalt as an impermeable
2 surface liner or surface seal?
3 A All except for the one I spoke about where
4 we ran a pilot test and it did not have favorable
5 results. So we have not installed the system.
6 Q And of those 15 sites which you used
7 concrete or asphalt as a surface seal, how many of
8 those have you requested and received reimbursement
9 for from the underground storage tank fund?
10 A I'm not sure.
11 Q Let me put it to you this way.
12 Have any of those sites ever received
13 reimbursement for the cost related to concrete or
14 asphalt for use specifically as a surface seal?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Can you tell me what the site is?
17 A Martin Oil site in Aurora.
18 MR. KIM: Can I take just a moment?
19 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Certainly.
20 (Brief pause.)
21 BY MR. KIM:
22 Q Do you know if that site was the subject
23 of a reimbursement appeal?
24 A No, it was not.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
27
1 Q It was not.
2 Do you know when it was you sought
3 reimbursement for that site, what point in time?
4 A Do you mean what year?
5 Q What year. I'm sorry.
6 A Well, it's an ongoing project. There's
7 probably still reimbursement being requested. But
8 as far as installing the system, it was done in two
9 phases. The second phase was probably 1995, the
10 first phase maybe '94.
11 Q So sometime in either 1995 or 1994, you
12 received reimbursement for concrete costs?
13 A I didn't receive reimbursement. My client
14 did.
15 Q The owner/operator received reimbursement?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Okay. Thank you.
18 Where is that Martin Oil site located?
19 A In Aurora.
20 Q Do you know a street address or location?
21 A 359 West Galena.
22 Q Thank you.
23 I would like to turn your attention to the
24 exhibits that have been offered up. I would like to
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
28
1 turn you first to Exhibit 1.
2 You stated in your testimony that it was
3 necessary to have a surface seal employed in
4 conjunction with a soil vapor extraction system; is
5 that correct?
6 A Yes.
7 Q When you say necessary, does that mean
8 it's optional or that it must be used in your
9 opinion?
10 A Could I refer to the Salyers' site to
11 answer that question?
12 Q No. I'm asking in your opinion, when you
13 say a component of a treatment system is necessary,
14 does that mean it is optional or that it is -- it
15 must be used?
16 MR. SALYER: Can I object to that question?
17 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: What is the grounds
18 for the objection?
19 MR. SALYER: He's referring to everything in
20 general. We are here about my site, what pertains
21 to my site only as far as I'm concerned.
22 MR. KIM: I'm asking the witness about his
23 understanding of the word necessary.
24 MR. SALYER: But you are in general of everything,
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
29
1 and we are not here for that. We are here for my
2 site. Would it be necessary for my site? Then we
3 can answer it.
4 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Mr. Kim -- I'm going
5 to overrule the objection. Mr. Kim can ask
6 questions that go to general expertise. I myself
7 had some difficulty with the form of the question
8 that you posed because I was unsure whether you were
9 referring back to specific testimony about the
10 Salyers' site or what, so if you could please
11 rephrase your question.
12 MR. KIM: I can do that.
13 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Thank you.
14 BY MR. KIM:
15 Q Let me break this up a little bit,
16 Mr. Mehrens.
17 In general, not necessarily talking about
18 the Salyers' site, but just in general, is it
19 necessary to always use an impermeable surface seal
20 when you are employing a soil vapor extraction
21 system?
22 A I believe it is if you expect the system
23 to clean up the site in a reasonable amount of time.
24 Q Well, given the reasonable assumption that
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
30
1 everybody wants to clean up the site in a reasonable
2 amount of time, your statement is it is necessary
3 as -- when I say the word necessary, I'm using the
4 generally understood meaning of that word. It is a
5 requirement, an indispensable component of a system
6 to have an impermeable surface soil when using a
7 soil vapor extraction system regardless of the
8 site-specific characteristics; is that correct?
9 A You could put in a lot more piping and
10 additional equipment, and so it's not absolutely
11 necessary. There are other things you could do such
12 as put in more piping, more equipment, and be able
13 to clean up the site without a surface seal.
14 Q So if your testimony under direct
15 examination was that it is necessary to have -- to
16 use a surface seal when you are implementing a soil
17 vapor extraction system, you would expand that
18 statement to say necessary in the sense that you
19 might be able to alter other components of the
20 system to make that surface seal unnecessary; is
21 that correct?
22 A You might be able to add additional
23 components, not alter.
24 Q So when you say it is necessary, it is not
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
31
1 necessary as in it must be employed with every
2 system? Some systems might be able to be used
3 without a soil -- without a surface seal; is that
4 correct?
5 A Yes. Again, referring back to my previous
6 explanation, yes.
7 Q Okay. I would like you to look to page 171
8 of Petitioners' Exhibit Number 1, and I would like
9 you to read the first sentence of the second full
10 paragraph in the left hand column.
11 A It's starts off "For shallow"?
12 Q No, the next paragraph down.
13 A "Surface seals such as polymer-based liners
14 and asphalt, concrete, or clay caps are sometimes
15 used to control the vapor flow paths.".
16 Q Okay. Could you skip the next sentence
17 and then read the sentence after that?
18 A "For shallow treatment zones (less than
19 five meters), the surface seal will have a
20 significant effect on the vapor flow paths, and
21 seals can be added or removed to achieve the desired
22 vapor flow path."
23 Q Doesn't that first sentence of that
24 paragraph state that surface seals are sometimes
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
32
1 used? It doesn't say that they are necessary or
2 that they must always be used, does it?
3 A It says they are sometimes used to control
4 the vapor flow paths.
5 Q Does it say anywhere in that -- let me
6 change this.
7 Does it say anywhere in this article that
8 a surface seal is a necessary component of a soil
9 vapor extraction system using your terminology?
10 A I would have to read the whole article to
11 tell you if it said that in those exact words.
12 Q I would be willing to give you plenty of
13 time if you would like to do that because I'm pretty
14 confident, Mr. Mehrens, that nowhere in this article
15 does it state that a surface seal is a necessary
16 component of a soil vapor extraction system. In
17 fact, I'm offering that the only statement that's
18 ever made in this article about surface seals is in
19 the two -- the one paragraph that you have just
20 referred to -- or that I have just referred you to
21 and in the figure accompanying that paragraph, and
22 aside from that, there is no other reference made in
23 that article to the use of surface seals. But if
24 you would like, you can read the entire article.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
33
1 A I'm not going to read the entire article,
2 but I will take a couple minutes.
3 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We will go off the
4 record.
5 (Whereupon, a discussion was held off
6 the record.)
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We are back on the
8 record after a short break.
9 MR. KIM: I believe the question that I had
10 posed to Mr. Mehrens before we took a break was if
11 he could find any other reference in Exhibit 1 which
12 stated that -- or any reference in Exhibit 1 which
13 states that a surface seal is a necessary component
14 of a soil vapor extraction system.
15 BY THE WITNESS:
16 A I haven't found the word necessary in my
17 review of this article.
18 I would like to direct your attention to
19 page 170 of the article under the heading choosing
20 well location, spacing passive wells, and surface
21 seals. The first sentence in that section states to
22 be able to successfully locate extraction wells,
23 passive wells, and surface seals, one must have a
24 good understanding of vapor flow behavior.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
34
1 So in my mind, this whole article gives
2 you an understanding of vapor flow behavior and soil
3 vapor extraction systems, and from that, you can
4 deduce when it's necessary to install a surface
5 seal. But I have not found the word -- I have not
6 found a statement in this article stating it is
7 necessary --
8 BY MR. KIM:
9 Q You just stated --
10 A -- to install.
11 Q -- that this article would lead one to be
12 able to deduce when it is necessary to use a surface
13 seal?
14 A Yes, yes.
15 Q So you would agree that use of a surface
16 seal is not always necessary?
17 A Yes.
18 Q And, in fact, the statements in this
19 article that you are relying upon for your statement --
20 or for that conclusion even is the first sentence
21 under the -- on page 170 under the paragraph heading
22 choosing well locations, spacing passive wells, and
23 surface seals and the paragraph that's found on
24 page 171 at the bottom of the left hand column; is
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
35
1 that correct?
2 A Maybe you misunderstood me. I read that
3 sentence to point out that you really need to know
4 the whole concept before you can make that decision.
5 It's not relying on those couple of sentences to
6 make that decision.
7 Q What I am saying is in this article, are
8 those the only comments that you are relying upon
9 when you say that from those statements, you are
10 able to deduce when a surface seal is necessary or
11 not necessary?
12 A No, no.
13 Q You are saying there are other comments in
14 this article that speak to the use of surface seals?
15 A No. I'm saying you need to understand the
16 whole concept to understand the surface seal portion
17 of it.
18 Q Let me rephrase this.
19 In this article, in Exhibit 1, what are
20 the statements found in this article that you are
21 relying upon for your statement that a surface seal
22 is necessary or that this article allows you to make
23 a determination when a surface seal is necessary?
24 A I'm saying the whole article does. I'm
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
36
1 saying you need to understand the concept of vapor
2 flow paths and soil vapor extraction to be able to
3 determine when and where a surface seal should be
4 placed.
5 Q Do you think --
6 A You can't just read a paragraph out of
7 this article and make that decision. You need to
8 understand the whole concept, and this article goes
9 a long way in explaining that to you.
10 Q So for me to just pick a few sentences out
11 of this article is a little bit misleading? I have
12 to take everything in context? Is that what you are
13 saying?
14 A I'm saying, yes, that you need to understand
15 the concept and the system.
16 Q Okay. We will keep that in mind when we
17 get to the other exhibit then.
18 Do you think this article contemplates
19 that a surface seal might not be necessary for a
20 site or that a site might not require a surface
21 seal?
22 A It probably does.
23 Q All right. In this article, it references
24 different types of surface seals that -- or different
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
37
1 types of materials might make up a surface seal; is
2 that correct?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Does this article give any kind of standards
5 or any kind of requirements in terms of how impermeable
6 that particular material has to be?
7 A No, it does not.
8 Q In fact, this article simply states
9 different types of materials that might commonly be
10 used as a surface seal due to their generally
11 impervious nature to -- as you said surface air; is
12 that correct?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Okay.
15 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: And what page were
16 you referring to again, please?
17 MR. KIM: I'm sorry. That was on page 171.
18 BY THE WITNESS:
19 A Could I expand on that answer?
20 You said impervious to surface air? Was
21 that your question?
22 BY MR. KIM:
23 Q I think I inartfully said something like
24 impervious to surface air, yes.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
38
1 A I mean, it's drawing that surface air that
2 is important.
3 Q Preventing the drawing of surface air by
4 the soil vapor extraction system?
5 A Right. We are not just talking about
6 surface air permeating. We are actually pulling the
7 air.
8 Q Right. Agreed. Thank you.
9 Okay. Let's move to Petitioners' Exhibit 2.
10 Let's first review the comment that you made that
11 it's misleading or incorrect to take a few sentences
12 out of a --
13 MR. KIM: Just a moment.
14 (Brief pause.)
15 BY MR. KIM:
16 Q You stated that it's misleading for me to
17 take just a few sentences out of the article which
18 is Petitioners' Exhibit Number 1 and try and place
19 any kind of significance upon those statements, and
20 you stated earlier that you have to take the entire
21 article in context; is that correct?
22 A I don't remember using the word misleading.
23 I was answering your specific question. But I don't
24 remember using the word misleading.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
39
1 Q Let's go back to Petitioners' Exhibit
2 Number 1 then.
3 Is it incorrect for me to look just to
4 those two reference points that I was talking about
5 for me to draw conclusions about surface seals and
6 what that article says about surface seals?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Why is that?
9 A Because you need to understand the concept,
10 which this article explains.
11 Q And how do I understand the concept that
12 this article explains?
13 A By reading the entire --
14 Q The entire article?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Now let's go to Petitioners' Exhibit
17 Number 2. You referenced in Petitioners' Exhibit
18 Number 2 certain information found within the first
19 nine pages of that book; is that correct?
20 A Yes.
21 Q So here, again, in order for us to really
22 understand the statements that are made in these
23 first nine pages, it's necessary for us to read the
24 entire 563 pages before we get an understanding of
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
40
1 what this book is trying to tell us; is that correct?
2 A No, but it would be necessary for you to
3 read a good portion of it, but much of that book
4 would not be pertinent.
5 Q How much of the book would not be
6 necessary?
7 A Well, first of all, there are chapters
8 that don't talk about soil vapor extraction.
9 Q Okay.
10 A But then again, much of the book talks
11 about modeling, which is beyond what we are talking
12 about here today.
13 Q Does Petitioners' Exhibit Number 1 refer
14 to modeling -- I'm sorry -- Petitioners' Exhibit
15 Number -- that's right, Number 1, the article.
16 Does the article refer to modeling or to
17 any other aspects of soil vapor extraction systems
18 that we are not talking about today?
19 A I don't believe it refers to modeling, or
20 if it does, it's just in passing or -- but it's
21 not -- that's not the purpose of the article.
22 Q Does the article --
23 A The purpose of the book -- the purpose of
24 the book is to give an in-depth discussion of
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
41
1 modeling. That is not at all part of the article.
2 Q What I am saying is this. Let's just go
3 with the seven out of the 11 chapters that I
4 described that have -- in Exhibit Number 2 that make
5 some reference to soil vapor extraction in the
6 chapter headings.
7 Is it necessary to read all those chapters
8 before we can take the references you made in the
9 first nine pages in context?
10 A I don't believe so, no. I mean --
11 Q And you are saying that because you think
12 there is information in those seven chapters which
13 does not relate to the necessity for a surface seal?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Are there portions of this article in
16 Petitioners' Exhibit Number 1 which do not relate to
17 a surface seal -- to a discussion about surface
18 seals?
19 A There may be some portions. I'm sure
20 there are some sentences or paragraphs in there that
21 probably you wouldn't consider in discussing surface
22 seals.
23 Q So what you are saying is I don't
24 necessarily need to read the entire article, do I?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
42
1 A No. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying
2 that there are -- certainly there are some sentences
3 in here or even paragraphs that don't -- would
4 probably not come up in the discussion of a surface
5 seal but to understand the necessity of it, I
6 believe to read this whole article is a way for you
7 to do that.
8 Q But you are saying that I don't need to
9 read the seven chapters in your Exhibit Number 2 to
10 get an understanding of it?
11 A No, no. That happens much more expansive
12 than this article is. Much of it has nothing to do
13 with that concept.
14 Q All right. Let's flip to the statements
15 that you made within those first nine pages.
16 On page 3 of Exhibit Number 2 is found
17 figure 1.2; is that correct?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And specifically, there are four different
20 design options which are listed in that figure; is
21 that correct?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Looking to option (b), can you describe
24 what that option depicts?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
43
1 A Well, it's entitled trench. It's showing
2 horizontal vapor extraction piping.
3 Q Is this a cross-section of what you would
4 see if you were to essentially look down the length
5 of the horizontal piping?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Is that trench cross-section similar to
8 the installation and design of the system that's
9 employed at the Salyers' site?
10 A It's not a good cross-section of the
11 portion of the piping that we placed the asphalt
12 surface seal over because there is no clay above the
13 horizontal piping at the Salyers' site that we
14 placed asphalt and concrete surface seal over.
15 Because there was a limited space, that piping is
16 only four feet deep. It is a good cross-section of
17 the piping we placed behind the station at the
18 Salyers' site where this horizontal vapor extraction
19 piping was ten feet deep, and we were able to put
20 eight feet of clay as a seal above the piping.
21 Q Okay. Let's look to page 8 of that
22 exhibit. That is figure 1.3; is that correct?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Did you state in your direct testimony
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
44
1 that the presence of an impermeable surface seal on
2 this figure demonstrates this reference source's
3 position that a surface seal is a necessary
4 component of a soil vapor extraction system?
5 A I believe I said that this figure showed a
6 typical system and included on the figure an
7 impermeable surface seal.
8 Q Are there components of this system that
9 are not employed at the Salyers' site?
10 A We do not have a muffler. We do not have
11 a water cooled heat exchanger. And the submersible
12 pump -- there is a groundwater pump at the Salyers'
13 site, but it's not tied into the system the way this
14 is shown.
15 Q So it's safe to say that there is some
16 design differences between what is shown in
17 figure 1.3 of this exhibit and the system that you
18 installed at the Salyers' site; is that correct?
19 A Yes, as I stated. There are -- I pointed
20 out the things that are not included at the Salyers'
21 site.
22 Q And the fact that you don't have those
23 components that are shown in figure 1.3 at the
24 Salyers' site, does that mean that your system is
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
45
1 inconsistent with the general principles that you
2 are relying upon when you refer to Exhibit Number 2?
3 A No, if I understand your question right.
4 Q Okay. Do you not understand my question?
5 A Could you state it again?
6 Q Sure.
7 A Okay. This is Exhibit 2, right?
8 Q This is Exhibit Number 2, that's correct.
9 There are differences, are there not,
10 between figure 1.3 and the system that was installed
11 at the Salyers' site?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And do you think those differences in
14 design diminish or detract from the reliance that
15 you're placing upon this exhibit for the principles
16 that you are describing for us today?
17 A No.
18 Q Okay. Would you turn to page 9 of that
19 exhibit, please?
20 In the middle paragraph of that page, the
21 paragraph that begins after the system is turned on,
22 could you read the second to last sentence in that
23 paragraph?
24 A Impermeable plastic caps are occasionally
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
46
1 used to reduce the volumes of soil in which air
2 flows -- excuse me -- in which airflow is
3 excessively sluggish or wastefully fast.
4 MR. KIM: I just need a moment here.
5 (Brief pause.)
6 BY MR. KIM:
7 Q I could be mistaken, Mr. Mehrens. I might
8 have drawn your attention to the wrong section, but
9 when this article uses the term impermeable plastic
10 caps, is that the same when we are talking about
11 impermeable surface seals? When they say a cap, are
12 they referring to essentially a seal?
13 A I believe they are.
14 Q Okay. Actually, bearing that in mind,
15 let's turn away from page 9. Could we look instead
16 to page -- the bottom of page 4? The very last
17 paragraph there -- actually, the very last sentence
18 of that paragraph -- there are only three words that
19 are on this page, and then you have to skip over two
20 pages of tables, but could you read that sentence
21 that begins with those two words that begins on the
22 bottom of page 4?
23 A An SVE system consists of; number one,
24 vacuum extraction wells; two, inlet or injection
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
47
1 wells possibly; three, piping headers; four, vacuum
2 pumps or blowers; five, vacuum gauges and flow
3 meters; six, sampling ports; seven, an air water
4 separator usually; eight, a VOC control system
5 usually; and nine, impermeable caps possibly.
6 Q The reference made to what an SVE system
7 consists of, as you just read, states that
8 impermeable caps, or as we were referring to earlier
9 impermeable surface seals, might possibly be used
10 with an SVE system; is that correct?
11 A That's what it says.
12 Q It does not say that impermeable caps are
13 necessary components of an SVE system, does it?
14 A No, it does not.
15 Q You said that there was -- you said that
16 there was another site that you used that you
17 installed a pilot system at, and this was over a
18 fairly large area, I think you said, and you
19 installed the slotted pipes more as an option so
20 that if down the line you wanted to actually operate
21 an SVE system, the piping would be in place; is that
22 right? I might have misunderstood.
23 A That's right. We did. I should say we
24 didn't install a pilot system, but we did do a pilot
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
48
1 test on that piping, but that's generally correct.
2 Q And you said you did not seal the surface
3 at that location; is that correct?
4 A That's correct.
5 Q And you said part of the reason was it was
6 too big; it covered approximately a quarter acre?
7 A Right, because we didn't get to the point
8 where we were actually going to run the system
9 there, so that's correct. We didn't seal that whole
10 site without getting to the point to actually
11 operate a soil vapor extraction system there.
12 Q The fact that it was about a quarter acre
13 and the fact that you did not seal the surface, even
14 to perform the pilot the test, why didn't you seal
15 the surface?
16 A It was just an economic decision to do the
17 test. We did the test in the winter and hopefully --
18 hoping that the soil was frozen enough to seal the
19 piping --
20 Q So one of the considerations -- I'm
21 sorry.
22 A -- but we didn't -- so we didn't go and
23 pave that whole site or place a liner over that
24 whole site just to do the test.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
49
1 Q So as you said, one of the considerations
2 that you did take there was the economies or the
3 cost involved in installing a surface seal of that
4 size at that site; is that correct?
5 A To conduct a pilot test.
6 Q And I meant to ask you this when we were
7 still on Petitioners' Exhibit Number 2. I'm sorry.
8 I'm getting these numbers confused.
9 Petitioners' Exhibit Number 2, which is
10 the Wilson book, do you know if in those nine pages
11 that you have offered as your exhibit or that you
12 referred to if there is any reference as to -- what
13 I asked you about before, standards or requirements
14 that you should use in determining how an
15 impermeable surface seal or cap should be?
16 A No, there is not.
17 Q Do you know if there is any kind of
18 reference to that -- to those sort of standards or
19 those requirements in the book itself, the entire
20 book?
21 A I don't believe there is, but I'm not
22 positive.
23 Q Let me ask you this.
24 When you were designing this system and
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
50
1 you were feeling that there was a need for an
2 impermeable surface seal, were you looking to this
3 book for any kind of standards or any kind of
4 requirements as to how impermeable that seal would
5 need to be when you designed your system?
6 A No, I did not.
7 MR. KIM: Can I have just a minute?
8 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Sure.
9 MR. KIM: I just want to make sure I have
10 exhausted my questions.
11 (Brief pause.)
12 MR. KIM: I have a few other questions that I
13 would like to ask, but they might be slightly
14 outside the scope of the direct, so I would -- I
15 could ask him simply -- I could simply recall him as
16 a direct witness when the state presents its case.
17 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: I think that would be
18 a better idea.
19 MR. KIM: That's fine. I have no further
20 questions at this time.
21 MRS. SALYER: Do we get to cross examine
22 Mr. Mehrens again, or can we --
23 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: You can -- anything
24 that he has answered in response to Mr. Kim's
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
51
1 questions you can ask him about that, but you can't
2 go wider than that.
3 MRS. SALYER: I understand that.
4 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
5 BY MR. SALYER:
6 Q Mr. Kim was beating around the bush about
7 everybody --
8 MR. KIM: Objection.
9 MR. SALYER: Okay.
10 BY MR. SALYER:
11 Q He was asking you questions about the seal
12 and this and that. Let's get to 551 South York.
13 The four-foot down, 30-foot long section
14 that we put in that is in pea gravel around the
15 tanks, was that necessary to have a seal on in your
16 opinion?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Will you explain to them why the piping is
19 only four foot down?
20 A Because the area we are addressing in that
21 section of the site is the underground storage tank
22 backfill material -- I should say the main area we
23 were addressing -- as opposed to behind the station
24 where the area we were addressing was a layer of
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
52
1 sand ten feet below the surface.
2 Q Okay. If we did not put a seal over that
3 piping, four foot down, 30-foot long, would we have
4 accomplished much of anything on drawing
5 contaminants out that are below the piping and
6 further out than where the piping is?
7 A In my opinion, you would pull some
8 contaminated vapors with that piping without a
9 surface seal, but it would -- not having the surface
10 seal would have greatly limited the area from which
11 you would pull the contamination.
12 Q And since the state EPA wants this done, I
13 think, it was within five years or six years --
14 A I don't remember the time limit. I know
15 there was.
16 Q If we wouldn't have put the seals on,
17 would we have gotten the job done in that amount of
18 time in your opinion?
19 A I don't believe you would have got it done
20 in near the amount of time that you will with the
21 surface seal --
22 Q Okay.
23 A -- if even, in fact, it would work. I
24 mean, you may -- without a surface seal, you may
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
53
1 have to install additional pipe.
2 Q Okay. When designing a system for any
3 area, any project, do you read the book and follow
4 the guidelines, or do you use -- how would you say
5 it -- some common sense that this isn't going to
6 work here; I have got to do it this way here or
7 something like that?
8 A Well, I definitely rely on my experience
9 in previous systems I have been involved with in
10 addition to reviewing technical documents.
11 MR. SALYER: Okay. I think that's about it.
12 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Thank you. There are
13 just a couple questions before --
14 MR. KIM: I think they may have --
15 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: I'm sorry?
16 Do you have anything else?
17 MR. SALYER: No.
18 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: If I might ask a
19 question again. As hearing officer, my job is to
20 put together a record that's as complete and easy
21 for the board to work with as possible.
22 I have here a copy of the agency's
23 administrative record that was filed shortly after
24 your petition was filed. Could you point out to us
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
54
1 a diagram of the site that shows exactly what we
2 have been talking about? Can you pinpoint it for
3 us? I don't know if this is the best. Go off the
4 record while you take a look.
5 MR. KIM: I'm going to suggest that maybe page 31
6 of the record, which is figure 6 --
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: That was what I had
8 open also.
9 THE WITNESS: That's a very good depiction of
10 the piping that's been installed. I mean, it doesn't,
11 of course, give you details on the equipment, but
12 that is a good depiction of where the piping has
13 been installed.
14 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Okay. We were
15 earlier looking at Exhibit 2, figure -- excuse me --
16 the figure 1.3 on page 8 that did have piping, and
17 you, in response to what Mr. Kim was asking you,
18 indicated some things that were not in the system
19 that we're dealing with here.
20 Do you recall that?
21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
22 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Would you -- it would
23 be easiest, I think, if there is no -- all right.
24 Back up.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
55
1 Is there in the administrative record an
2 equivalent diagram to what I see on page 8 of
3 Exhibit 2 that does show what the components of the
4 system are?
5 THE WITNESS: Figure 7 on page 33 shows the
6 equipment.
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Fine.
8 THE WITNESS: Figure 8 on 34 is a schematic of
9 the equipment.
10 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Great. Fine. I just
11 wanted to have this pinpointed so that if the board
12 wanted to compare them that it was easy for them to
13 find it. So thank you.
14 MR. KIM: I just have a few questions on
15 recross.
16 RECROSS EXAMINATION
17 BY MR. KIM:
18 Q Mr. Mehrens, you decided that at this
19 site, at the Salyers' site, it was necessary to have
20 a seal; is that correct?
21 A Yes, I did.
22 Q How impermeable did that seal have to be,
23 to what standard?
24 A If you are asking me if I did any
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
56
1 calculations on the impermeability of the seal, I
2 did not. I relied on my experience of installing
3 seals in the past.
4 Q Would you say that the eight feet of clay
5 was comparable to the concrete and asphalt that you
6 placed at the other portion of the site?
7 A I would say that they are both good seals.
8 Q Would seven feet of clay have been
9 sufficient?
10 A Probably.
11 Q Would six feet?
12 A Probably.
13 Q Would five feet?
14 A You are probably pushing it.
15 Q Why would five feet of clay not be
16 sufficiently impermeable?
17 A Well, if you were to put five feet of clay
18 and do a very good job of compaction and a good seal
19 with the sidewalls of the trench, maybe it would,
20 but the thinner you get, the more likelihood that
21 there is going to be -- that you are not going to
22 get a good seal.
23 Q Have you ever tried to use a one-foot clay
24 liner or one-foot clay cap?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
57
1 A No.
2 Q Why?
3 A Again, because I think in constructing
4 that, there is a very good chance that you would not
5 get a good seal just because of the difficulties in
6 constructing it.
7 Q What types of difficulties?
8 A Just the practical things of getting a
9 good compaction seal with the sidewalls and the
10 trench making sure there is no rocks in your clay,
11 all of the things that you run into out in the field
12 actually constructing such a --
13 Q Have you ever tried to install a one-foot
14 clay liner?
15 A No, I haven't.
16 Q Have you ever used a polymer-based liner
17 as a surface seal?
18 A No, I have not.
19 Q Why did you choose concrete and asphalt?
20 A It seemed to me to be the most economical
21 way of doing it at that situation.
22 Q Would a polymer-based liner have been less
23 expensive than concrete and asphalt?
24 A I'm not sure. I didn't come up with an
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
58
1 estimate for the cost of doing that, but it would --
2 I would say it would be comparable, if not more. I
3 don't know.
4 Q You don't know, though?
5 A Not for certain.
6 Q So there are some types of surface seal
7 materials that these articles reference as being
8 possible candidates for usage that you did not
9 research; is that correct?
10 A That I did not come up with an estimate of
11 the cost for, that's correct.
12 Q Let's say you had -- let me ask you this.
13 Could this site operate as a surface
14 station if you used a clay cap there instead of a
15 concrete or asphalt cap?
16 A I don't know why not.
17 Q Could it operate as a surface station if
18 you installed a polymer-based liner instead of
19 concrete or asphalt?
20 A I don't -- I don't know why it wouldn't.
21 Q Is this -- looking to figure 6 of page 31
22 of the administrative record, does the -- looking at
23 that schematic of the site, does the area of the
24 piping that's north and northwest of the service
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
59
1 station building extend into the parts of the site
2 where there is automobile or truck traffic?
3 A Yes.
4 Q If you installed a polymer-based liner as
5 a cap and you had truck traffic at the site, would
6 that impact the integrity of the liner?
7 A It could depending on how you did it.
8 Q So it might not?
9 A It might not.
10 Q Do you know if it would be possible to
11 operate a service station without concrete and
12 without asphalt at all portions where an automobile
13 might be traveling over?
14 A I don't know why you need concrete at a
15 service station or asphalt.
16 Q Okay. You also said in your redirect that
17 the piping that you -- that's on the north and
18 northeast portion of the -- north and northeast of
19 the building, that it was addressing the underground
20 storage tank backfill area, and then you said that's
21 the main area that it was intended to address.
22 What were the other areas that it was
23 intended to address?
24 A Well, there are contaminated soils outside
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
60
1 the backfill in that area also.
2 Q Okay. And so it was also intended to
3 address those contaminated soils as well?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Does the site geology that you described
6 in your corrective action plan such that there is a
7 medium stiff clay below the surface areas to a depth
8 of approximately ten feet?
9 A That's a general description of the
10 geology that -- the corrective action plan does not
11 go into detail on geology of the sites. The
12 previous document the EPA has does.
13 Q Okay. But on page 13 of the administrative
14 record, which is page 5 of the corrective action
15 plan, on the third paragraph there, there is a
16 statement, is there not, that says generally there's
17 a medium stiff clay below the surface materials to a
18 depth of approximately ten feet?
19 A That's correct.
20 Q And what does the backfill material consist
21 of?
22 A Pardon me?
23 Q What does the backfill material consist
24 of?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
61
1 A It's sand.
2 Q All right. If you look on page 21 and 22
3 of the administrative record -- I'm sorry -- page 29
4 and 30 of the administrative record, that's 21 and
5 22 of the corrective action plan, the last paragraph
6 on page 29 of the record continuing over to the top
7 paragraph on page 30 of the administrative record,
8 does that paragraph describe the site geology and
9 address -- and describe the type of soil that's
10 going to be addressed by the soil vapor extraction
11 system?
12 A It's a general description of the geology,
13 yes. As far as the soil being addressed by the
14 system, yeah, it is -- does discuss that also.
15 Q What does it say?
16 A The whole paragraph?
17 Q No, just the portion that addresses the
18 soil is to be addressed by the soil vapor extraction
19 system.
20 A There is a sentence that reads the soils
21 to be addressed by this vapor extraction system are
22 uniform fine to medium sand.
23 Q Is there any other statement in the
24 corrective action plan that you are aware of that
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
62
1 elaborates or describes other types of soils that
2 the soil vapor extraction system is intended to
3 address, or is this statement that you just read a
4 definitive statement?
5 A It's not a definitive statement in the
6 fact that it doesn't talk about the backfill
7 material. I'm not sure if this -- in the corrective
8 action plan, it talks about the backfill material.
9 I mean, that's -- that paragraph is -- was placed in
10 the plan to -- as a discussion on whether or not
11 soil vapor extraction is applicable to this site.
12 Q Doesn't that sentence say that the types
13 of soils to be addressed by the soil vapor extraction
14 system at the Salyers' site are a uniform fine to
15 medium sand?
16 A Yes, it does.
17 Q Does that statement also state that there
18 are other types of soils that will be addressed by
19 the soil vapor extraction system?
20 A No. It doesn't say that there are other
21 types of soils.
22 Q But there are other soils that exist at
23 the site; is that correct?
24 A There are other soils, yes.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
63
1 Q For example, the medium stiff clay that I
2 read earlier -- from an earlier portion of the
3 corrective action plan?
4 A Yes, but the sentence states that the
5 soils to be addressed by the system are uniform. It
6 doesn't mean that there is not additional soils at
7 the site.
8 Q So this vapor extraction system was not
9 intended to address all those soils; is that
10 correct?
11 A It was not designed to address the
12 non-contaminated clay, no. It was addressed -- it
13 was designed to address the contaminated sand and
14 the tank backfill material.
15 Q Is there any contaminated clay at the
16 site? You say the non-contaminated clay, so I'm
17 asking, is there any contaminated clay at the site?
18 A I'm sure there is a small amount of clay,
19 that clay-sand interface, that's contaminated.
20 Q But this was not intended to address any
21 soil-clay interface; is that correct?
22 A No. Hopefully it will address that, but I
23 mean, the main contaminating is the sand.
24 Q But this corrective action plan does not
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
64
1 state that anything other than uniform fine to
2 medium sand will be addressed by the vapor
3 extraction system, does it?
4 A No, it doesn't discuss the clay, just
5 above the sand.
6 Q It only says that the sand will be
7 addressed; is that correct?
8 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: You have made your
9 record, Mr. Kim.
10 MR. KIM: I'm just trying to make that clear.
11 Okay.
12 BY MR. KIM:
13 Q So again, going back to the statement that
14 you made on redirect where you said the main area to
15 be addressed by the piping was the underground
16 storage tank backfill area, what were the other
17 areas that were intended to be addressed?
18 A Well, again, there is contaminated sand in
19 that area that is not backfill material.
20 Q So backfill material and contaminated sand
21 are the only materials intended to be addressed by
22 the vapor extraction system?
23 A The only soils?
24 Q The only soils. I'm sorry.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
65
1 Is that correct?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Okay.
4 A Although, again, I should say if there is
5 indeed contaminated clay just above the sand, I'm
6 hopeful that that also will be addressed.
7 Q But your corrective action plan doesn't
8 note that, does it?
9 A It doesn't talk of that, no.
10 Q When you were -- you said that -- you were
11 asked that if you did not use a seal what types of
12 results would you accomplish, and you stated that
13 some contaminants would be pulled out but with some
14 diminished results; is that correct?
15 A Yes.
16 Q So when you designed the system, did you
17 take into account that you were going to use a
18 surface seal?
19 A Yes.
20 Q And that would have impacted the radius of
21 influence, design characteristics of the system; is
22 that correct?
23 A That's correct.
24 Q Is there any mention in the corrective
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
66
1 action plan of the use of a surface seal as part of
2 the design criteria or that a surface seal would
3 impact the radius of influence?
4 A No.
5 Q The last question that I wanted to
6 follow-up on was that you were asked -- there was a
7 statement made that the state wants the site cleaned
8 up in a certain amount of time and that -- but for
9 the use of this surface seal, would it not be
10 possible to accomplish the clean up in that time. I
11 would just like to correct that.
12 Did the state impose a time requirement on
13 when this site has to be cleaned up by?
14 A I believe they have.
15 Q Or is that something that's found in the
16 application?
17 A The application?
18 Q When did the state make a statement that
19 the site had to be cleaned up in X number of years?
20 A That may be a question better asked the
21 state, but...
22 Q Well, I'm asking you because you made the
23 statement that the state did impose that upon you.
24 What's your basis for that statement?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
67
1 A I believe in a -- there is a suit which
2 the Attorney General has filed in which, I believe,
3 in the proposed consent order there is a time limit.
4 Q Is that suit resolved?
5 A No.
6 Q Okay. Do you know of any statutory or
7 regulatory requirement outside of that pending
8 litigation that imposes a time period upon you for
9 clean up of the site?
10 A No.
11 MR. KIM: Okay. I don't have anything further
12 on recross.
13 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Thank you. Did you
14 have any additional documents or whatever that you
15 wanted to present?
16 MR. SALYER: No.
17 MRS. SALYER: I don't think so.
18 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: You can still make
19 closing remarks after Mr. Kim is done, if you care
20 to.
21 MR. KIM: I believe they may have another
22 witness, though.
23 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Were you going to
24 call Mr. Bauer? Go ahead then.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
68
1 MRS. SALYER: No. We were just going to cross
2 examine him when you --
3 MR. KIM: So you are not calling him as a
4 witness?
5 MRS. SALYER: No.
6 MR. KIM: Okay. I'm sorry. I misunderstood
7 that.
8 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: So you are resting
9 your case at this point?
10 MRS. SALYER: Right, yes.
11 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Fine. Thank you.
12 You were going to call who first,
13 Mr. Kim?
14 MR. KIM: While we have Mr. Mehrens so
15 conveniently located, I just had a few questions I
16 would like to ask him.
17 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Okay. Let's go off
18 the record for a minute.
19 (Whereupon, a discussion was held off
20 the record.)
21 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We are back on the
22 record after a short break. The Illinois EPA will
23 begin questions for Mr. Mehrens who is now speaking
24 as the agency's direct witness.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
69
1 MR. KIM: Thank you.
2 ROBERT A. MEHRENS, P.E.,
3 called as an adverse witness herein, having been
4 first duly sworn, was examined upon oral
5 interrogatories, and testified as follows:
6 DIRECT EXAMINATION
7 BY MR. KIM:
8 Q Mr. Mehrens, aside from the corrective
9 action plan, what documentation did you submit to
10 the agency that contained a description or a
11 discussion of the soil vapor extraction system?
12 A I believe that was the only document that
13 had a discussion of the soil vapor extraction system
14 other than I did have a letter that I submitted with
15 the -- when the reimbursement request was made that
16 spoke of the surface seal.
17 Q But that letter -- did that letter predate
18 or postdate the approval letter that the EPA sent
19 concerning approval of the corrective action plan?
20 In other words, did that -- did that second
21 reference you made, did that come before or after
22 the EPA approved the corrective action plan with
23 conditions?
24 A After.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
70
1 Q Okay. What -- can you point to any
2 description in the corrective action plan that
3 states where a -- that contains a statement that
4 surface seal will be used at the site with a surface
5 seal as necessary at the site?
6 A No. The corrective action plan does not
7 state that a surface seal would be used at the site.
8 Q Following the submittal of the corrective
9 action plan, did the Illinois EPA, as I said before
10 or referenced before, issue an approval of that
11 corrective action plan?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And I think that's found on page 60 of the
14 administrative record. If you look at that document,
15 is that the approval letter that was sent in
16 response to the corrective action plan we are
17 talking about today?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Is there information in that approval
20 letter that suggests to you that the EPA was
21 confused about any kind of design aspects or
22 installation aspects of the soil vapor extraction
23 system?
24 A No. The EPA never asked me for any
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
71
1 additional details other than what was submitted in
2 the corrective action plan even though the
3 corrective action plan didn't list every single
4 component of the system.
5 Q Did the approval letter that was sent on
6 August 15th of 1997 place certain conditions on the
7 approval of the corrective action plan?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And are those conditions listed in parts 1
10 through 7 of the approval letter?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Can you tell me which portions of those
13 conditions have been satisfied -- or which portions
14 of those conditions were satisfied as of April 10th
15 of 1998?
16 A I don't believe I should answer that
17 question being that there is another case involving
18 this site, and that has nothing to do with the
19 question before the board here today.
20 Q Well, I think that's nonresponsive. I'm
21 going to ask the hearing officer to direct you to
22 answer that question.
23 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We will ask you to
24 respond in that how is that relevant to the -- how
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
72
1 is your question relevant to the issue we have
2 before us today?
3 MR. KIM: Because in the response filed to the
4 motion for summary judgment, there was a statement
5 or a characterization that the EPA; one, did not
6 apparently understand all aspects of the soil vapor
7 extraction system; and two, led the Petitioner to
8 believe that we did understand all aspects of the
9 soil vapor extraction system.
10 The EPA's only statement on this matter
11 was the August 15th, 1997, approval letter. There
12 are some conditions which are tied to that approval
13 letter. Those conditions could have allowed the
14 Petitioner to more fully inform or educate the EPA
15 on what they felt we did not understand.
16 Specifically, there is a provision,
17 condition number 7, that states that a revised
18 corrective action plan was to be submitted to the
19 EPA within a certain period of time if there was any
20 kind of belief on the part of Petitioner that the
21 EPA did not understand what that soil vapor
22 extraction system was intended to -- how that was
23 intended to be designed or installed. Then
24 certainly they could have so informed us or so
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
73
1 corrected us in the revised corrective action plan.
2 And I'm simply asking if they have satisfied any of
3 these conditions and acted upon what they feel was
4 the EPA's misunderstanding of this system.
5 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: With that explanation,
6 is there any response you care to give, or do you --
7 THE WITNESS: My response is that I never --
8 MR. KIM: I object. I don't think the witness
9 is really intended -- allowed to make a response to
10 a question like that.
11 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: I appreciate what you
12 said.
13 I ask you if you have any response to the
14 question that he asked you, or do you stand on your
15 refusal to answer the question based --
16 THE WITNESS: I stand by my refusal to answer
17 the question based on ongoing litigation.
18 BY MR. KIM:
19 Q Are you the subject of that ongoing
20 litigation, Mr. Mehrens?
21 A No.
22 Q So why is it that you feel you can't
23 answer that question?
24 A Because I don't understand that -- how
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
74
1 it's applicable to this question before the board
2 today --
3 Q Do you think the EPA misunderstood --
4 A -- and I represent the Salyers in that
5 litigation.
6 Q Not as an attorney, though; is that
7 correct?
8 A No, not as an attorney.
9 Q Do you think the EPA misunderstood the
10 soil vapor extraction system that was described in
11 your corrective action plan?
12 A No.
13 Q You do not?
14 A No.
15 Q Do you think the EPA, based upon what you
16 have in your corrective action plan, understood how
17 the system was to be designed, installed, and
18 operated?
19 A Yes. They gave me approval to install it
20 with this letter.
21 Q Do you think that approval was based upon
22 the information found within the corrective action
23 plan?
24 A Yes.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
75
1 Q Do you think that information was found or
2 was based upon anything outside of the information
3 found in the corrective action plan?
4 A I assumed it was based on their knowledge
5 of soil vapor extraction.
6 Q What knowledge would that be?
7 A I assumed the person that reviewed this
8 plan understood what was involved in soil vapor
9 extraction systems.
10 Q Are there certain --
11 A And I assumed that if he did not
12 understand what was involved in this particular
13 system, he would have asked me questions.
14 Q For example, through conditions in the
15 approval letter; is that correct?
16 A I saw no conditions in this approval
17 letter that related to installing the vapor
18 extraction system.
19 Q That's what I'm saying. So since we
20 didn't have any conditions which asked us -- but is
21 what -- sorry.
22 Are you saying that since we did not place
23 any conditions in the August 15th, 1997, approval
24 letter that asked for further details about the soil
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
76
1 vapor extraction system that we were -- that we
2 understood how the system would be designed and how
3 it would be installed?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Did you state during earlier testimony
6 that in some types of applications of a soil vapor
7 extraction system an impermeable surface seal is not
8 necessary?
9 A Yes.
10 Q What information should the EPA have been
11 using to determine that an optional component of a
12 soil vapor extraction system would, in fact, be
13 utilized at a site when there is no specific mention
14 of that in the only information that was submitted
15 on that extraction system to the EPA?
16 A The EPA has a much larger file than was
17 presented here as the administrative record that
18 they could -- would have given them information
19 about this specific site.
20 Q But I have asked you earlier, was there
21 any information aside from the corrective action
22 plan which described the soil vapor extraction
23 system?
24 A No, but it described the site, and you
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
77
1 need to know the conditions of the site to
2 understand what is necessary for that particular
3 soil vapor extraction system.
4 Q Did your information in the corrective
5 action plan reference those other materials?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Where?
8 A On page 9 of the administrative record,
9 second paragraph refers to previous submittals to
10 the agency including a subsurface investigation
11 report, a phase II investigation report, and an
12 off-site investigation report, all of which were
13 previously submitted to the agency.
14 Q Does Petitioners' Exhibit Number 1, which
15 is the article on the groundwater monitoring review
16 publication, I believe, state that surface seals are
17 used to control vapor blow paths?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Is it a fair statement to make that
20 surface seals are an optional element of a soil
21 vapor extraction system which would be used to
22 control vapor flow paths?
23 A Yes. I believe -- I mean, one concept
24 they are trying to point out --
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
78
1 Q I'm sorry. Can you not answer that as a
2 yes or no?
3 A Yes. The answer is yes.
4 Q Is it also a fair statement to make that
5 as part of the design criteria for a soil vapor
6 extraction system you might not employ a surface
7 seal?
8 A Yes, depending on the site.
9 Q I'm sorry?
10 A Depending on the site.
11 Q This article states -- Petitioners'
12 Exhibit Number 1 states that surface seals are used
13 to -- are sometimes used to control vapor flow
14 paths. How does that -- and you also stated, I
15 think, earlier that a surface seal is used to
16 prevent the system from drawing surface air?
17 A That's correct.
18 Q Can you just explain for me how -- when
19 the statement is made that vapor flow paths could be
20 controlled how that interacts with the prevention of
21 surface air from being drawn by the system just
22 sort -- I know the two concepts are related, but if
23 you could just sort of maybe link the two together,
24 it might be helpful for the board and for us.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
79
1 A On page 171 of the article, there is a
2 figure that gives you a good explanation or gives
3 you the concept.
4 Q Is that figure 12 of Petitioners' Exhibit
5 Number 1?
6 A Yes, effect of surface seal on vapor flow
7 path. Part (a) of that figure shows extraction
8 piping which is, in this case, a vertical well.
9 Without a surface seal, it shows vapor flow paths
10 emanating from the surface directly down to the
11 slotted portion of the pipe. Part (b) of that
12 figure shows an impermeable seal over a portion of
13 the site but not across the whole area. And again,
14 the flow paths are from the surface where the
15 impermeable seal does not exist down to the
16 extraction piping.
17 So the concept they are trying to show
18 here -- one of the concepts is that you could put a
19 seal on only a portion of the site if you wanted to
20 draw air from the surface through the contaminated
21 soil to the piping as opposed to part (a) of the
22 figure where the air is drawn straight from the
23 surface basically bypassing the contaminated soil.
24 Q Okay.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
80
1 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Excuse me. Was it
2 your testimony that in figure 12(b) the design is to
3 bypass contaminated soil?
4 THE WITNESS: No. In 12(a), without a surface
5 seal, you could be bypassing the contaminated soil.
6 12(b), the reason you would design a system that way
7 was to draw the vapors through the contaminants.
8 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Okay. I'm sorry. I
9 just misunderstood.
10 THE WITNESS: I would like to add that the
11 reason you would do something as depicted in 12(b)
12 is if -- the one reason was if you had less
13 permeable soil. If you were trying to pull vapors
14 through clay, you may install a system like 12(b).
15 You want to have some air from the surface because
16 you have limited air in the subsurface. That's not
17 the case at the Salyers' site.
18 BY MR. KIM:
19 Q When you are saying 12(b), doesn't 12(b)
20 depict the use of a seal?
21 A Yes, but the seal is not over the whole
22 site. That seal is just above the extraction
23 piping.
24 Q Oh, I see what you are saying. Okay.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
81
1 A So that what they are trying to do is pull
2 some surface air.
3 Q Right. My misunderstanding in looking at
4 (a) and (b) was that (a) was simply if no portion of
5 the affected area was being -- was used with the
6 surface seal and (b) was the entire affected area,
7 but you are saying that, in fact, (b) shows -- it
8 just shows how you can control the flow paths?
9 A That's correct.
10 Q I understand now. Thank you.
11 Did you take these types of control
12 considerations into account when you designed the
13 soil vapor extraction system?
14 A Yes. At the Salyers' site, I did not want
15 to be pulling any air from the surface because the
16 soils I was addressing were permeable.
17 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: I'm sorry. Because
18 the --
19 THE WITNESS: Because the soils that were being
20 addressed were permeable and also because the pilot
21 test showed that it indeed worked well without
22 pulling air from the surface.
23 BY MR. KIM:
24 Q Was this soil vapor extraction system ever
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
82
1 intended to -- ever intended to operate in the
2 portions of the site that contained medium stiff
3 clay?
4 A No.
5 Q So if -- you are saying that if this
6 system were designed without a surface seal -- set
7 aside the material that would be used, but if it
8 were designed without a surface seal, that would
9 negatively impact the desired performance of the
10 soil vapor extraction system?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Are there portions of the piping -- let's
13 look to page 31 of the administrative record.
14 Again, this figure, I think you stated earlier,
15 depicts the location of the piping used for the
16 vapor extraction system?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Okay. What portion of this piping was
19 used in conjunction with the concrete and asphalt
20 cap?
21 A The piping that is northwest of the
22 building, the four-inch slotted pipe four feet below
23 grade.
24 Q And the slotted pipe is obviously
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
83
1 indicated by the hatched line?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Or hyphened line, dashed line, whatever it
4 is.
5 What does the solid line depict?
6 A That connects the slotted pipe to the
7 equipment.
8 Q Is that slotted -- or is the solid line,
9 the four-inch piping -- the four-inch PVC pipe,
10 located in any soils that were intended to be
11 addressed by the soil vapor extraction system?
12 A No, no.
13 Q Is that in the medium stiff clay that was
14 described in the other portion of the corrective
15 action plan?
16 A Well, actually, there is some old backfill
17 material in that portion of the site.
18 Q Okay. What portion of the two sets of
19 pipes here -- if you can describe this based on this
20 schematic -- were covered by concrete and what
21 portions were covered by asphalt? Can you make that
22 kind of delineation on this map, on this figure?
23 A Not really. I mean, most of it is
24 asphalt. There is some concrete -- well, if I --
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
84
1 it's probably near the end of the solid pipe, and at
2 the start of the slotted pipe there is some
3 concrete.
4 Q You said earlier that the -- you said just
5 now that the four-inch PVC pipe was not intended to
6 be addressed by the system; is that right?
7 A Yes.
8 Q I apologize. My train of thought is just
9 leaving the station left and right here.
10 Actually, I think that's all I have on
11 that.
12 I'm sorry. The question I was going to
13 ask you was when I asked you about where the
14 concrete and asphalt would have begun and ended, is
15 it -- using this map, can you roughly tell me where
16 the contaminated soils that were intended to be
17 addressed would end and where the other soils that
18 were not intended to be addressed would have begun
19 using that -- the pipeline there?
20 A It's difficult on that drawing. I don't
21 believe there is a better drawing in this plan,
22 though. In previous submittals to the agency, I
23 think there was a better depiction of where the
24 contaminated soils are, but the area of the
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
85
1 underground tanks that is contaminated extends below
2 the station into the area where the piping is east
3 of the station. The southwest portion of the
4 property we have not found contamination, and the
5 north -- very northeast corner of the property we
6 have not found contamination.
7 Q Okay. Do you know what the radius of
8 influence was supposed to be designed as?
9 A Thirty feet. That was from the pilot
10 test.
11 Q Is that what you intended -- is that what
12 you designed the system to be used for, the piping
13 that's north and northwest of the building here?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Okay. Can you just explain for me -- if
16 we are talking about a radius of influence, where
17 would you measure -- I mean, are we talking about
18 literally like a circle with a 30-foot radius, that
19 type of thing?
20 A Well, it wouldn't be a circle because we
21 have horizontal piping. If you had a vertical well,
22 it would be a circle, but it would be 30 feet in
23 every direction from the slotted pipe.
24 Q So essentially oval going around the
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
86
1 horizontal pipe that's slotted; is that right?
2 A Kind of an oval, yeah.
3 Q Well, if you were --
4 A It would have straight sides 30 feet long,
5 and then it would be semicircle on each end with a
6 radius of 30 feet.
7 Q In other words, each point along that
8 horizontal line could be a center point of a circle,
9 and I think if you drew those out with your handy
10 dandy spirograph, you would get something that would
11 look like an oval, like you said, a semicircle on
12 one end, semicircle at the other end, and a straight
13 line in between?
14 A That's correct.
15 Q But at some point at the end of the
16 slotted pipe and where the four-inch PVC pipe begins,
17 the contaminated soils conclude and uncontaminated
18 soils not intended to be addressed by way of
19 treatment would begin?
20 A At some point. I mean, it's definitely
21 not right where the slotted pipe ends.
22 Q Somewhere towards --
23 A At some point towards the equipment
24 building the contamination ends.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
87
1 Q Okay. So I think you said earlier -- I
2 could be mistaken, but I think you said earlier that
3 the four-inch PVC pipe was located in uncontaminated
4 soil. Is that not right?
5 A That's right. There is -- there is some
6 contaminated soils below that pipe.
7 Q That were intended to be addressed?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Is there a --
10 A But it doesn't end. I mean, the solid
11 pipe doesn't end exactly where the contamination
12 ends.
13 Q Is there -- in this area of the site, is
14 there deviation from the soil characteristics that
15 were described earlier in the corrective action plan
16 where it says that there is stiff clay to a depth
17 of, I think, approximately ten feet?
18 A Yeah. As I previously stated, there is
19 some backfill material in that area where that
20 four-inch solid pipe is. There is also the backfill
21 material around the tanks which, of course, is not
22 the medium to stiff clay. And north of that slotted
23 pipe, there is more sand than there is in the
24 majority of the site and less clay.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
88
1 Q And just to clarify something, the
2 corrective action plan states that the system was
3 intended to address those uniform fine to medium
4 sands that are found at the site, and you are saying
5 that's not necessarily the same thing as the
6 backfill material?
7 A The backfill material also is sand.
8 Q Okay.
9 A But I think when I made that estimate, I
10 was talking about the native sand.
11 Q Okay. As opposed to the backfill sand?
12 A Right.
13 Q And the native sand would be found, as you
14 stated, intermixed with the otherwise medium stiff
15 clay?
16 A No. It's below the clay.
17 Q It's below the clay?
18 A Yeah.
19 Q Okay. And there is native soil below the
20 clay that is contaminated that extends from the
21 location of those three tanks to underneath the
22 surface building; is that right?
23 A Yes.
24 MR. KIM: Okay. I don't think I have anything
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
89
1 further.
2 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Did you have any
3 questions that you wanted to ask to clarify what he
4 was just into?
5 MRS. SALYER: Yes. I just have a couple of
6 things. Can I ask this time?
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Whoever.
8 CROSS EXAMINATION
9 BY MRS. SALYER:
10 Q Do the soils at 551 South York not vary as
11 you go around the property? If you took a soil
12 sample, would you come up with something different
13 at each location, or is it a consistent material
14 there?
15 A The depth of the clay isn't consistent
16 across the whole site.
17 MR. KIM: I'm sorry. Is or is not?
18 THE WITNESS: Is not.
19 BY THE WITNESS:
20 A The reason or -- one of the reasons the
21 piping was placed behind the building was because
22 there is -- the clay is not as deep, and we were
23 able to put piping above the groundwater but below
24 the clay. The clay is a little bit thicker west of
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
90
1 the building.
2 BY MRS. SALYER:
3 Q Was the house at 112 East Vallette that's
4 pictured on diagram 31 not at one time located at
5 551 South York?
6 MR. KIM: Objection. That's outside the scope
7 of direct.
8 MRS. SALYER: Okay.
9 BY MRS. SALYER:
10 Q The water flow at 551 South York goes from
11 which location to what location?
12 A It goes from northwest to southeast.
13 Q So if it goes from northwest to southeast,
14 having the four-foot -- the pipe -- the four-inch
15 piping four foot below, the contaminants are
16 naturally moving in that direction anyway because
17 there are contaminants as far out as 30 feet from
18 the end of the piping, isn't there?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Okay. And it's naturally moving towards
21 the piping?
22 A Towards the other piping, correct.
23 Q Right. So the piping -- the piping will
24 pick it up -- pick up the vapors?
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
91
1 A As they move to the southeast, the piping
2 that is east of the building would pick up those
3 vapors.
4 Q Okay. But the piping from -- by the tanks
5 will not pick up any of that? It will just pick up
6 the contaminants around the tank?
7 A It will pick up the contaminants within
8 that radius.
9 Q The 30-foot radius?
10 A Correct.
11 Q Would that 30-foot radius be compromised
12 if there was no surface seal?
13 A Yes, definitely.
14 Q And are not asphalt and concrete two of
15 the seals that are recommended by USEPA?
16 MR. KIM: Objection. There has been no
17 foundation laid as to any information from the
18 USEPA.
19 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Can you rephrase
20 that?
21 MRS. SALYER: Did we bring the book? Do we
22 have the book from USEPA with us today?
23 THE WITNESS: We do have the book.
24 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: The problem is what
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
92
1 he was asking didn't get into that, so...
2 MRS. SALYER: Okay. All right. I understand.
3 Okay. I'm not an attorney, so just -- okay.
4 BY MRS. SALYER:
5 Q But asphalt and concrete are recommended
6 surface seals?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Okay. And so as not to compromise the
9 system as it was designed and adapted and modified
10 to this particular site, we used a seal that was --
11 that is readily used by people who are installing a
12 soil vapor extraction system?
13 A That's correct.
14 MRS. SALYER: Okay. I think that's all.
15 MR. KIM: Can we go off the record for a
16 moment?
17 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Yes.
18 (Whereupon, a recess was taken.)
19 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We are going to go
20 back on the record.
21 We had some discussion about the question
22 that the witness declined to answer relative to the
23 EPA's CAP approval letter and its conditions.
24 Mr. Kim, please go ahead and ask the
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
93
1 question that you were going to ask in lieu of that
2 unanswered question.
3 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
4 BY MR. KIM:
5 Q Mr. Mehrens, what I wanted to know was
6 aside from the information found within the
7 corrective action plan and aside from the statements
8 made in the cover letter to the reimbursement
9 request, was any other information submitted to the
10 EPA before April 10th, 1998 -- which is the decision
11 of the reimbursement application that's at issue
12 here, was any information submitted before that date
13 which would have described or elaborated upon the
14 soil vapor extraction system or which would have
15 described or elaborated upon any kind of results
16 which had been generated by that system?
17 A No. The system hadn't been started until
18 after that April date, so I don't believe I submitted
19 anything else between those two submittals.
20 Q And do you know what? I think you might
21 have, but I want to bring this to your attention
22 because I think this is the only other document.
23 If you look at page 102 of the administrative
24 record, that's a letter that's dated January 20th of
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
94
1 1998 which I think was sent to -- after the CAP --
2 after the corrective action plan was sent in, after
3 the corrective action plan approval letter was sent
4 in, and I think after the reimbursement request was
5 sent in as well, but this letter was before we made
6 our decision on the reimbursement request, so this
7 might also in some fashion address the soil vapor
8 extraction system.
9 But aside from this letter then, is there
10 anything else that you can think of?
11 A Not that I can think. I mean, this letter
12 was an update of the installation. Your -- no. I
13 don't remember that there were any other submittals
14 that discussed the system, no.
15 MR. KIM: That's all I have.
16 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Thank you.
17 MR. KIM: I have no further questions of
18 Mr. Mehrens.
19 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Thank you.
20 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
21 MR. KIM: I don't have any other witnesses.
22 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: You are not calling
23 Mr. Bauer?
24 MR. KIM: Mr. Bauer made a trip for nothing.
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
95
1 MRS. SALYER: Can we call Mr. Bauer?
2 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: No.
3 MRS. SALYER: We were told that Mr. Bauer was
4 going to be called.
5 MR. SALYER: We were going to cross examine
6 him.
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Well, you can't cross
8 examine if he isn't called as a witness.
9 MR. SALYER: But they said they were going to
10 call him.
11 MRS. SALYER: Now we find out when we're here
12 that he's not going to be called.
13 MR. KIM: We are not required to call him as a
14 witness. We are required to tell you who we may
15 call as a witness so you are not surprised by
16 anybody we would bring to the hearing.
17 MRS. SALYER: It's a bigger surprise that he's
18 not going to testify.
19 MR. KIM: I don't know what to tell you other
20 than Mr. Bauer -- we have made the decision that we
21 don't have any further information we need to elicit
22 for our case, and we don't have any need to call
23 Mr. Bauer as a witness.
24 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: We did ask you if you
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
96
1 were going to call Mr. Bauer before you finished
2 your case, and you did say no. So since Mr. Kim is
3 not going to call Mr. Bauer, there is nothing that
4 you can ask Mr. Bauer about.
5 MRS. SALYER: Okay.
6 MR. SALYER: Okay.
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: So the next thing
8 that we have to decide is whether you want to make
9 closing statements on the record or whether you
10 don't want to, and then the next point after that
11 would be whether you want to file written closing
12 statements.
13 MR. KIM: Can we go off the record again?
14 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Yes. We may go off
15 the record.
16 (Whereupon, a discussion was held off
17 the record.)
18 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Back on the record.
19 Both the Petitioner and the Respondent are
20 waiving putting closing arguments on the record
21 today. We have determined that the February 3rd
22 decision date is firm as the board's first February
23 meeting is February 4th. That would mean that the
24 board's decision then would be due at its second
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
97
1 January meeting, which is January 21st.
2 Based on the desire of the board in all
3 cases to have all documents in its hands at least 30
4 days prior to the scheduled decision date, we have
5 agreed upon a briefing schedule based on the board's
6 receipt of the transcript on December 7th.
7 The Salyers' written closing comments are
8 due in the board's hands December 14th, and the
9 EPA's written closing comments are due in the
10 board's hands December 21st. I am authorizing
11 faxing of both of those briefs, of course to be
12 followed up by hard copy. I have also stated that I
13 will make a request that the clerk's office expedite
14 putting the transcript on to the board's Internet
15 site.
16 Obviously, if there is any slippage in
17 this schedule, we have problems, so I am definitely
18 requesting that everyone adhere to this schedule.
19 I find that there -- I'm required to make
20 this statement about credibility in all cases.
21 I find that there is no question of
22 credibility with the sole witness that was presented
23 today. I will be issuing a closing report that puts
24 that in writing and notes which exhibits were
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
98
1 admitted. If that doesn't go out tomorrow, it would
2 go out the Monday after Thanksgiving.
3 I don't think that there are any outstanding
4 matters.
5 Mr. Kim, am I forgetting any?
6 MR. KIM: None that I am aware of.
7 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: Mrs. Salyer,
8 Mr. Salyer, anything else?
9 (No audible response.)
10 HEARING OFFICER CROWLEY: There doesn't appear
11 to be anything else, so we will adjourn the hearing.
12 Thank you all very much and have a happy
13 Thanksgiving.
14 MR. KIM: Thank you.
15 MRS. SALYER: Thank you.
16 (Which were all the proceedings had
17 at the hearing of the above-entitled
18 cause on November 24, 1998.)
19
20
21
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292
99
1 STATE OF ILLINOIS )
) SS.
2 COUNTY OF COOK )
3
4 I, CARYL L. HARDY, a Certified Shorthand
5 Reporter doing business in the County of Cook and
6 State of Illinois, do hereby certify that I reported
7 in machine shorthand the proceedings at the hearing
8 of the above-entitled cause.
9 I further certify that the foregoing is a
10 true and correct transcript of said proceedings as
11 appears from the stenographic notes so taken and
12 transcribed by me.
13
14
15
16
17 CSR No. 084-003896
18
19 Subscribed to and sworn to
before me this _____ day
20 of ________________, 1998.
21 ___________________________
Notary Public
22
23
24
L.A. REPORTING (312) 419-9292