ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

September 20, 2001

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

PETITION OF RHODIA, INC., AND THORN

CREEK BASIN SANITARY DISTRICT FOR

AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM 35 ILL.

ADM. CODE 302.208 AND 304.105

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

 

 

AS 01-9

(Adjusted Standard – Water)

ORDER OF THE BOARD (by N.J. Melas):

On April 30, 2001, petitioners Rhodia, Inc. (Rhodia) and Thorn Creek Basin Sanitary

District (TCBSD) filed a petition for an adjusted standard from Board regulations at 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 302.208 and 304.105. Rhodia is seeking to expand its silica plant in Chicago Heights,

Cook County, Illinois and consequently increase its discharges of total dissolved solids (TDS)

and sulfates to the TCBSD treatment plant. The TCBSD treatment plant discharges to Thorn

Creek.

On July 26, 2001, the Board issued an order requesting additional information from

petitioners regarding their operations. On August 27, 2001, petitioners filed an amended petition

and an accompanying response to the July 26 order. The Board addresses four issues in this

order related to the amended petition: a trade secret determination, joinder of a necessary party,

filing defects, and an extension of time for the Agency to file its recommendation.

TRADE SECRET DETERMINATION

As part of the August 27 amended petition, Rhodia filed a one-page article with an

accompanying claim letter seeking trade secret protection for the article. Rhodia included a

statement of justification. Petitioners also filed a waiver of the decision deadline pursuant to 35

Ill. Adm. Code 130.204.

The Board has reviewed Rhodia’s trade secret claim and the statement of justification

pursuant to the Board’s Procedures for Identifying Articles that Represent Trade Secrets.

See

35

Ill. Adm. Code 130.200

et seq

. We have not received a request for the claimed information nor

have we received an objection to the claim.

The Board finds that the statement of justification is sufficient according to the

requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.203. The Board also finds that the article in question is a

trade secret because it meets the standards specified at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.208(a) and (b).

Our determination herein may be reviewed pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.214. The

Board will protect the article subject to Subpart C of Part 130 of the Board’s procedural

regulations until the Board receives official notification of a final order by a reviewing body that

reverses the Board’s determination and that is not subject to further appeal.

---

 

2

There is no statutory or regulatory deadline for decisions in adjusted standard

cases and, as a result, the Board strikes petitioners’ waiver of decision as unnecessary.

Rhodia also requested that the article be protected as non-disclosable. As the Board has

determined that the article is a trade secret, Rhodia’s request to protect the article as non-

disclosable is moot.

JOINDER OF ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS

In the July 26, 2001 order, the Board asked petitioners to provide the following

information:

The Board previously granted an adjusted standard from its TDS water quality

standard and set a standard of 2,100 mg/L for parts of Deer Creek and Thorn

Creek. The part of Thorn Creek at issue there stretched from the confluence with

Deer Creek to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Station,

corresponding closely to “Reach 2” in the instant petition.

See

 

In re

Petition of

NutraSweet Company and Consumers Illinois Water Company, AS 89-3

(Feb. 28, 1991). Petitioners are requesting a TDS water quality standard of 2,620

mg/L in Reach 2 of Thorn Creek. Petitioners must address the impact that

Rhodia’s increased discharge would have on the ability of the petitioners in AS

89-3 to meet obligations under AS 89-3.

See

35 Ill. Adm. Code 104.406(a).

The Board notes for the record that the NutraSweet facility in University Park, Illinois is

now owned by Takasago Corporation (U.S.A.) and is now known as the Takasago facility. The

Takasago facility sends its effluent to the Consumers Illinois Water Company (CIWC) before it

is discharged into Deer Creek.

See

 

In re

Takasago Corporation (U.S.A.), AS 00-4 (Apr. 20,

2000).

Petitioners responded that their “request for relief will have no impact whatsoever” on

the relief that NutraSweet (now Takasago) received in AS 89-3. Amended petition at 22-23.

Petitioners seem to assume that Takasago will be subject to a TDS water quality standard of

2,620 mg/L if the Board grants the relief requested herein as opposed to the TDS water quality

standard of 2,100 mg/L that the Board granted in AS 89-3.

Section 101.403 of the Board’s procedural regulations addresses joinder of parties. It

provides, in pertinent part:

a) The Board, on its own motion or the motion of any party, may add a

person as a party to any adjudicatory proceeding if:

***

2) The person who is not already a party to the proceeding has an

interest that the Board’s order may affect.

---

 

3

 

The Board notes that it did not grant the

adjusted standard that Takasago sought in

docket AS 00-4. The relief that it sought had already been granted to CIWC and NutraSweet in

docket AS 89-3 and the relief granted in docket AS 89-3 applies to the Takasago facility due to

its relationship with CIWC.

See

 

In re

Takasago Corporation (U.S.A.), AS 00-4 (Apr. 20,

2000), slip op. at 5. Nevertheless, the Board finds that the relief that it may provide to Rhodia

and TCBSD in Reach 2 may affect the Takasago facility and CIWC.

 

The Board, on its own motion, adds Takasago Corporation (U.S.A.) and CIWC as

respondents to this proceeding. As such, they are entitled to receive all documents filed by the

other parties in this matter under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.304, except, of course, the article

protected by the trade secret determination.

  

FILING DEFECTS

 

In filing the amended petition, petitioners neglected to file a notice of filing and proof of

service. See 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.304. In order for the Board to accept the amended petition,

petitioners must file the amended petition with the proper notice of filing and proof of service

within 10 days. Petitioners need only send one copy of the properly-filed amended petition to

the Board including proof of service of the amended petition on all parties: the Agency,

Takasago, and CIWC.

AGENCY RECOMMENDATION

The Board will again extend the deadline for receipt of the Agency’s recommendation in

this matter. The Agency’s recommendation must be filed no later than November 30, 2001.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the above

order was adopted on September 20, 2001, by a vote of 6-0.

 

Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board