ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December 14,

1994

IN THE MATTER OF:

)

)

PETITION OF ENVIRITE CORPORATION

)

AS 94-10

FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM

)

(RCRA Delisting)

35

ILL. ADM. CODE 721 SUBPART D:

)

LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES,

)

APPENDIX I

)

STEPHEN F. HEDINGER, OF NOHAN,

ALEWELT, PRILLANAN

& ADANI,

APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ENVIRITE CORPORATION;

JOHN J. KIM APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY;

ROBIN R. LUNN

AND

MICHAEL O’NEIL, OF KECK, MAHIN

& CATE, APPEARED

ON BEHALF OF INTERESTED PERSON PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY.

OPINION

AND

ORDER OF THE

BOARD

(by R. C.

Fleiual):

This matter comes before the Board upon a petition for an

adjusted standard filed by Envirite Corporation

(Envirite)

for

its facility located in Harvey,

Illinois.

Certain wastes at

Envirite’s Harvey facility are currently subject to a site—

specific rule’ found at 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 721. Appendix I.

This

site—specific rule effectuates the delisting2 of fifteen separate

waste residues at the Envirite facility.

Part of the site-

specific rule also establishes protocols for sampling and

verification of the wastes in question.

Envirite herein requests

that these protocols be modified and updated.

The Board’s responsibility in this matter arises from the

Environmental Protection Act

(Act)

(415 ILCS 5/1 et seq.).

The

Board is charged therein to “determine, define and implement the

environmental control standards applicable in the State of

Illinois”

(415 ILCS 5/5(b)),

as well as to “grant

*~*

an adjusted

standard for persons who can justify such an adjustment”

(415

At several places in the petition and various of the

pleadings,

including some of the pleading captions, the existing

site—specific rule is incorrectly characterized as the “existing

adjusted standard” and Envirite’s request is incorrectly

characterized as a petition for a “revised adjusted standard”.

2

“Delisting”

is a term of art that refers to the action of

excluding a waste or treated waste residue from regulation as a

hazardous waste.

---

—2—

ILCS 5/28.1(a)).

More generally, the Board’s responsibility in

this matter is based on the system of checks and balances

integral to Illinois environmental governance: the Board is

charged with the rulemaking and principal adjudicatory functions,

and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency)

is

responsible for administering the Act and the Board’s

regulations.

The Act also provides that “the Agency shall participate in

adjusted

standard

proceedings”.

(415 ILCS 28.1(d) (3).)

In

the instant matter the Agency has been an active participant

throughout,

including at hearing and within post-hearing

coinjuents.

The Agency recommends that an adjusted standard be

issued to Envirite, but with two added provisions not requested

by Envirite.

Based upon the record before it and upon review of the

factors involved in the consideration of adjusted standards,

the

Board finds that Envirite has demonstrated that grant of an

adjusted standard in the instant matter is warranted.

The

adjusted standard accordingly will be granted.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The petition in this matter was filed on May 10,

1994.

Notice of the petition was published in the Harvey-Markham Star

on May 22,

1994.

On July 27,

1994 the Agency filed its response

to the petition (Agency Response).

Hearing was held in Harvey,

Illinois,

on August 26,

1994

before Hearing Officer Allen E. Shoenberger.

On September 26,

1994 Peoria Disposal Company

(Peoria

Disposal) filed post-hearing comments3.

On October 13,

1994

Envirite filed its post-hearing comments and a response to Peoria

Disposal’s comments.

On October 20, l994~the Agency filed its

post—hearing brief and a response to Peoria Disposal’s comments.

Envirite’s reply brief was filed on October 28, l994~.

‘

Any interested person may file post—hearing comments in an

adjusted standard proceeding, as provided at 35

Ill. Adm. Code

106.807.

~ The apparently identical post-hearing brief and response

was again filed on October 24,

1994 with the addition of proof of

service upon attorneys for Peoria Disposal Company.

~ The filing was accompanied by

a motion to file instanter.

The motion was granted by Board order of November

3,

1994.

---

—3—

REGULATORY HISTORY AND FRAMEWORK

The general processes by which wastes are determined to be

hazardous for regulatory purposes may cause some wastes to be

unnecessarily treated as hazardous wastes.

The action of

delisting is intended to rectify such circumstances.

Pursuant to U.S. EPA rules, hazardous wastes are defined in

two basic ways.

A waste is hazardous either because it exhibits

a hazardous characteristic,

or because it is listed by name or by

the name of the process that produces the waste.

It is in the

latter case that the listing may be over—inclusive.

For example,

U.S. EPA might determine that Process A produces Waste M which

generally has hazardous constituents X,

Y, and Z.

U.S. EPA would

then “list” “wastes from Process A” or “Waste M”.

Waste that met

this description would be hazardous for regulatory purposes,

regardless of whether constituents X,

Y, or

Z are actually

present.

Delisting would be appropriate

if the generator

demonstrated that X,

1, and Z are not actually present in its

waste, and that the waste additionally exhibits no other

characteristics warranting continued management as a hazardous

waste.

Prior to 1990 waste delisting procedures in Illinois were

premised on the theory that U.S. EPA would initially delist

wastes, followed by an essentially ministerial Board action,

in

an identical-in—substance rulemaking,

that would incorporate the

delisting into Illinois law.

The site-specific rule from which

Envirite here requests an adjusted standard was adopted in this

manner.

On March

1,

1990 Illinois was delegated authority by U.S.

EPA to delist wastes directly6.

After reviewing a large amount

of public comment,

including recommendations of U.S.

EPA, the

Board on February 28,

1991 in rulemaking. R90-l77 put into place

procedures under which Illinois waste delistings were henceforth

to proceed.

A fundamental provision of these procedures

is that

waste delistings are to be brought to the Board under the

adjusted standard provisions found at Section 28.1 of the Act and

within the Board’s procedural rules at

35 Ill. Adm. Code

106.Subpart

G8.

6

See 55 Fed. Reg.

7320, March

1,

1990.

~ In the Matter of: RCRA Delistings,

R90-17, adopted rules,

final order, February 28,

1991,

119 PCB 181; effective May 9,

1991.

8

“Delistings which have not been adopted by USEPA may be

proposed to the Board pursuant to a petition for adjusted

standard pursuant to 35 Ill.

Adin.

Code 106.Subpart G.”

(35 Ill.

---

—4—

As part of rulemaking R90—17 the Board also established the

necessary contents of a delisting petition and the level of

justification9 that must be shown for a successful delisting.

These provisions are found at 35 Ill.

Adm.

Code 720.122.

Section

720.122 is identical—in-substance to the federal waste delisting

provisions at 40 CFR 260.22.

The instant petition differs from all previous delisting

actions before the Board in that it does not propose an initial

delisting; the wastes in question have already been delisted

conditional upon their compliance with certain sampling and

analytical protocols.

Rather, the petition proposes a change in

these sampling and analytical protocols.

This difference

notwithstanding, the Board finds that the delisting provisions at

35 Iii. Adm. Code 720.122 are applicable to the instant action.

ENVIRITE FACILITY

The facility at issue

is located in Harvey, Cook County,

Illinois.

The facility, which has been in operation since 1981,

employs 44 people and operates 24 hours per day.

It has been

operating under a RCRA Part B permit since November 1992.

(Pet.

at p.

4.)

Envirite characterizes the activities at the facility

as the application of “the best available treatment and recovery

technologies to the management of industrial wastes”.

(X~.)

The Harvey facility has two process units,

a Liquids

Processing Unit (LPU)

and Solids Processing Unit

(SPU).

Both

units produce

a semi—solid residue.

That residue is the subject

of the instant petition.

The LPU also produces a water effluent

that is discharged in the sanitary sewer system pursuant to

regulations of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of

Greater Chicago.

The water effluent

is not under consideration

in the instant petition.

Adm. Code 720.122(n).)

~ The adjusted standards provisions at Section 28.1 of the

Act provide for two varieties of adjusted standards.

These are

“rule—specific” and “generic” adjusted standards,

provided for

respectively at 28.1(b) and 28.1(c).

In a “rule-specific”

adjusted standard the level of justification necessary for grant

of the adjusted standard is specified within the rule from which

the adjusted standard is requested.

In a “generic” adjusted

standard the showings necessary for granting the adjusted

standard default to those specified within the Act at Section

28.1(c).

Waste delistings are of the “rule—specific” type,

since

the level of justification

is provided for by rule,

in this case

at 35

Iii. Adm. Code 720.122.

---

—5—

The semi-solid process residue from both the LPU and SPU is

retained on-site pending analytical verification.

Thereafter it

is transported off-site for disposal in a permitted land disposal

facility.

No wastes are disposed on-site.

(Pet.

at p.

5.)

The Harvey facility is totally enclosed,

including storage

and treatment tanks.

(Pet. at p.

5.)

Incompatible wastes are

segregated in different areas of the plant.

EXISTING RULE

The site—specific rule at issue was generated in response to

a petition to the Board filed by Envirite in 1987.

Envirite had

observed that certain of its treated waste residues had been

granted delisting under federal law by the U.S.

EPA10.

Envirite

accordingly petitioned the Board to adopt the same provisions

into State law.

The Board granted Envirite’s petition, and on

June 30,

1988” promulgated the requested delisting at 35 Ill.

Aditi. Code 721.Appendix

I.

The Envirite-related portion of

Appendix I occurs within Tables A and B of Appendix

I,

as

follows:

Section 721.Appendix

I

Wastes Excluded under Section

720.120 and 720.122

Table A

Wastes Excluded From Non-Specific Sources

Facility

Waste Description

Address

Envirite

Dewatered wastewater sludges

(EPA Hazardous

Corp.,

Waste No.

F006) generated from electroplating

Harvey,

operations; spent cyanide plating solutions

Illinois

(EPA Hazardous Waste No.

F007) generated from

electroplating operations; plating bath

residues from the bottom of plating baths

(EPA Hazardous Waste No.

F008) generated from

electroplating operations where cyanides are

used in the process; spent stripping and

cleaning bath solutions (EPA Hazardous Waste

No. F009) generated from electroplating

operations where cyanides are used in the

process;

spent cyanide solutions from salt

bath pot cleaning

(EPA Hazardous Waste No.

‘°

See report of U.S. EPA action at 51 Fed. Reg. 41323.

“

In the Matter of: Petition of Envirite Corporation, R87—

30, Adopted rule,

final order, June 30,

1988,

90 PCB 665;

effective July 12,

1988.

A typographical error in the text of

June 30 was corrected in identical-in-substance docket R91-12, by

Board order of December 19,

1991.

---

—6—

FOil) generated from metal heat treating

operations; quenching wastewater treatment

sludges

(EPA Hazardous Waste No.

F012)

generated from metal heat treating where

cyanides are used in the process; wastewater

treatment sludges

(EPA Hazardous Waste No.

F019) generated from the chemical conversion

coating of aluminum after November 14,

1986.

To ensure that hazardous constituents are not

present in the waste at levels of regulatory

concern, the facility must implement

a

contingency testing program for the

petitioned wastes.

This testing program must

meet the following conditions for the

exclusions to be valid:

1)

Each batch of treatment residue must be

representatively sampled and tested

using the EP Toxicity test for arsenic,

barium,

cadmium, chromium,

lead,

selenium, silver, mercury, and nickel.

If the extract concentrations for

chromium,

lead,

arsenic, and silver

exceed 0.315 ppm; barium levels exceed

6.3 ppm; cadmium and selenium exceed

0.063 ppm; mercury exceeds 0.0126 ppm;

or nickel levels exceed 2.205 ppm, the

waste must be re—treated or managed and

disposed as a hazardous waste under 35

Ill.

Adm. Code 722 to 725 and the

permitting standards of

35 Ill.

Adni.

Code 702,

703,

and 705.

2)

Each batch of treatment residue must be

tested for reactive and leachable

cyanide.

If the reactive cyanide levels

exceed 250 ppm or leachable cyanide

levels

(using the EP Toxicity test

without acetic acid adjustment)

exceed

1.26 ppm, the waste must be retreated or

managed and disposed as a hazardous

waste under 35

Ill. Adm. Code 722 to 725

and the permitting standards of 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 702, 703, and 705.

3)

Each batch of waste must be tested for

the total content of specific organic

toxicants.

If the total content of

anthracene exceeds 76.8 ppm, 1,2—

diphenyl hydrazine exceeds 0.001 ppm,

methylene chloride exceeds 8.18 ppm,

methyl ethyl ketone exceeds 326 ppm, n-

nitrosodiphenylamine exceeds 11.9 ppm,

---

—7—

phenol exceeds 1,566 ppm,

tetrachloroethylene exceeds

0.188 ppm,

or trichioroethylene exceeds 0.592 ppm,

the waste must be managed and disposed

as a hazardous waste under 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 722 to 725 and the permitting

standards of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 702, 703,

and 705.

4)

A grab sample must be collected from

each batch to form one monthly composite

sample which must be tested using gas

chromatography, mass spectronietry

analysis for the compounds listed in

No.3 above as well as the remaining

organics on the Priority Pollutant List

(incorporated by reference,

see 40 CFR

423 App. A

(1983)

(as adopted at 47 Fed.

Reg. 52,309

(Nov.

19,

1982)), not

including later amendments.

5)

The data from conditions 1-4 must be

kept on file at the facility for

inspection purposes and must be

compiled, summarized, and submitted to

the Administrator of USEPA by certified

mail semi-annually.

The USEPA will

review this information and if needed

will propose to modify or withdraw the

exclusion.

Should USEPA propose to

modify or withdraw the exclusion,

Envirite shall promptly provide notice

thereof to the Board.

The decision to

conditionally exclude the treatment

residue generated from the wastewater

treatment systems at Envirite’s Harvey,

Illinois facility applies only to the

wastewater and solids treatment systems

as they presently exist as described in

the delisting petition submitted to the

USEPA.

The exclusion does not apply to

the proposed process additions described

in the petition submitted to USEPA as

recovery including crystallization,

electrolytic metals recovery,

evaporative recovery, and ion exchange.

Table B

Wastes Excluded From Specific Sources

Facility

Waste Description

Address

Envirite

Spent pickle liquor

(EPA Hazardous Waste No.

Corp.,

Waste No.

1(062) generated from steel

---

—8—

Harvey,

finishing operations of facilities within the

Illinois

iron and steel industry

(SIC Codes 331 and

332); wastewater treatment sludge

(EPA

Hazardous Waste No.

K002) generated from the

production of chrome yellow and orange

pigments; wastewater treatment sludge (EPA

Hazardous Waste No. K003) generated from the

production of molybdate orange pigments;

wastewater treatment sludge

(EPA Hazardous

Waste No.

K004) generated from the production

of zinc yellow pigments; wastewater treatment

sludge

(EPA Hazardous Waste No. K005)

generated from the production of chrome green

pigments; wastewater treatment sludge (EPA

Hazardous Waste No.

K006) generated from the

production of chrome oxide green pigments

(anhydrous and hydrated); wastewater

treatment sludge (EPA Hazardous Waste No.

KOO7) generated from the production of iron

blue pigments; oven residues

(EPA Hazardous

Waste No. K008)

generated from the production

of chrome oxide green pigments after November

14,

1986.

To ensure that hazardous

constituents are not present in the waste at

levels of regulatory concern, the facility

must implement a contingency testing program

for the petitioned wastes.

This testing

program must meet the following conditions

for the exclusions to be valid:

1)

Each batch of treatment residue must be

representatively sampled and tested

using the EP Toxicity test for arsenic,

barium, cadmium,

chromium,

lead,

selenium, silver, mercury, and nickel.

If the extract concentrations for

chromium,

lead,

arsenic, and silver

exceed 0.315 ppm; barium levels exceed

6.3 ppm; cadmium and selenium exceed

0.063 ppm; mercury exceeds 0.0126 ppm;

or nickel levels exceed 2.205 ppm, the

waste must be re—treated or managed and

disposed as

a hazardous waste under 35

Ill.

Adm. Code 722 to 725 and the

permitting standards of 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 702,

703, and 705.

2)

Each batch of treatment residue must be

tested for reactive and leachable

cyanide.

If the reactive cyanide levels

exceed 250 ppm; or leachable cyanide

levels

(using the EP Toxicity test

without acetic acid adjustment)

exceed

---

—9—

1.26 ppm, the waste must be retreated or

managed and disposed as hazardous waste

under 35

Ill. Adm. Code 722 to 725 and

the permitting standards of 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 702,

703, and 705.

3)

Each batch of waste must be tested for

the total content of specific organic

toxicants.

If the total content of

anthracene exceeds 76.8 ppm, 1,2—

diphenyl hydrazine exceeds 0.001 ppm,

methylene chloride exceeds 8.18 ppm,

methyl ethyl ketone exceeds 326 ppm, n-

nitrosodiphenylamine exceeds 11.9 ppm,

phenol exceeds 1,566 ppm,

tetrachloroethylene exceeds 0.188 ppm,

or trichloroethylene exceeds 0.592 ppm,

the waste must be managed and disposed

as

a hazardous waste under 35 Ill.

Adni.

Code 722 to 725 and the permitting

standards of

35

Ill. Adm. Code 702,

703,

and 705.

4)

A grab sample must be collected from

each batch to form one monthly composite

sample which must be tested using gas

chromatography, mass spectrometry

analysis for the compounds listed in No.

3 above as well as the remaining

organics on the Priority Pollutant List

(incorporated by reference, see 40 CFR

423 App. A

(1983)

(as adopted at 47 Fed.

Reg. 52,309

(Nov.

19,

1982)), not

including later amendments).

5)

The data from conditions

1-4 must be

kept on file at the facility for

inspection purposes and must be

compiled,

summarized,

and submitted to

the USEPA Administrator by certified

mail semi-annually.

The USEPA will

review this information and if needed

will propose to modify or withdraw the

exclusion.

Should USEPA propose to

modify or withdraw the exclusion,

Envirite shall promptly provide notice

thereof to the Board.

The decision to

conditionally exclude the treatment

residue generated from the wastewater

treatment systems at Envirite’s Harvey,

Illinois facility applies only to the

wastewater and solids treatment systems

as they presently exist as described in

---

—10—

the delisting petition submitted to the

USEPA.

The exclusion does not apply to

the proposed process additions described

in the petition submitted to USEPA as

recovery,

including crystallization,

electrolytic metals recovery,

evaporative recovery, and ion exchange.

CONTENT OF PROPOSED ADJUSTED STANDARD

In its main provisions, the instant proposed adjusted

standard is identical to the existing site-specific rule.

In

particular,

the delisting would apply to treatment residues from

wastes in the same fifteen waste codes’2 identified in the site—

specific rule.

Moreover, Envirite would continue to be required

to test and verify that all treatment residues do not contain

hazardous constituents at levels of regulatory concern.

These

main provisions are spelled out at Section 2’~of the proposed

adjusted standard.

All of the differences between the proposed adjusted

standard and the existing site—specific rule are in the

particulars.

These are:

1.

The amount of treatment residues allowed for disposal

has been increased from 50,000 tons per year to 200,000

tons per year in Section

2.

The increased disposal

limit reflects the expected future generation rate of

treatment residue.

Envirite notes that updating the

adjusted standard using higher generation rates will

result in more stringent concentration limits.

2.

The delisting levels of all the parameters listed at

Sections 4(a) and 4(c) have been revised to reflect

changes made since 1988

in federal human health

standards, particularly the Safe Drinking Water Act’s

12

The waste codes in question are wastes F006 to F009, which

are each wastes from electroplating operations; wastes FOil,

F012, and F0l9, which are wastes from metal treating operations;

wastes K002 to K008, which are each wastewater treatment sludges

from the production of pigments; and waste K062, which is spent

pickle liquor from steel finishing operations.

The basis for the

listing of each of the fifteen wastes is the possible presence in

the untreated wastes of one or more of cadmium, hexavalent

chromium, nickel,

lead, and cyanide.

(Petition at Section 4.)

~ The sections identifications here noted are those used in

today’s order

(see following Order).

---

—11—

maximum contaminant levels

(MCLS) upon which delisting

levels are based.

3.

Derivation of the delisting levels from the MCL5 at

Section 4(a)

is accomplished through the U.S. EPA’s

Composite Model for Landfills

(CML), rather than the

obsolete Vertical and Horizontal Spread

(VHS)

transport

model.

4.

Replacement is made of the defunct EP toxicity test

with the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

(TCLP)

at Sections 3 and 4.

5.

Delisting levels for organic constituents are expressed

as TCLP concentrations rather than as total mass in

Section 4(c).

Envirite notes that this change is

consistent with the application of delisting standards

at both, the federal and the state levels.

6.

Some parameters from the list of organic and inorganic

constituents for which daily monitoring is now

conducted are deleted based on the record of their

absence or low observed concentration (below delisting

levels) over the years in which the site—specific

protocols have been followed.

Specifically, Envirite

notes that the revision of monitoring parameters are

supported by an extensive statistical evaluation of all

delisting analytical data obtained over a twelve month

period.

The parameters which have been deleted from

the monitoring list include arsenic,

silver,

barium,

mercury, reactive cyanide, anthracene,

1,2—diphenyl

hydrazine, methyl ethyl ketone, n-nitrosodiphenylamine

and phenol.

The parameters listed at Sections 4(a)

and

4(c)

reflect the revised list of constituents.

IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT

Envirite opines the following regarding the environmental

impact of a grant of the requested relief:

Allowance of the proposed adjusted standard will

have no qualitative or quantitative impact on the

environment.

Envirite is currently in compliance with

the rules of general applicability, and allowance of

the adjusted standard would permit Envirite to utilize

additional methods, process and standards to achieve

the same results which are currently achieved

——

the

delisting of the relevant hazardous waste codes.

No

environmental cross—media will be impacted; none of the

new methods, processes or standards requested by

Envirite will result in any new or additional air or

---

—12—

water impacts,

or land impacts not already addressed in

the adjusted standard petition.

(Pet.

at p 6-7.)

The Agency agrees that the proposed adjusted standard would

have no qualitative or quantitative impact on the environment.

(Agency Response at p.

4.)

ENVIRITE’S

AND

THE AGENCY’S VIEW OF THE SCOPE OF RELIEF

Envirite and the Agency are in agreement that modifications

of the existing site—specific rule are warranted and that an

adjusted standard should be granted.

Moreover, Envirite and the

Agency are in agreement on all of the specific provisions

requested by Envirite.

Nevertheless, the Agency believes that Envirite’s proposal

“could be improved upon”.

(Tr. at

10.)

The Agency contends

that, while “it is beneficial to have a delisting that allows for

the potential of changes in permitted wastestreams over time”

(Agency Response at p.

5), Envirite’s proposal “stops

short of

that goal”

~

Accordingly, the Agency has requested that the Board

consider granting Envirite an adjusted standard that contains two

additional provisions,

both of which are expansions of the relief

requested by Envirite.

(Tr. at

8.)

The Agency believes that

these provisions could lessen the likelihood of the adjusted

standard having to be revisited in the future,

and thereby “avoid

taking the time of the Agency,

of Envirite and of the Board” and

avoid “having

to.,

again, go through a regulatory process”

(Tr. at

9).

Specifically,

the Agency suggests that at Section 4(c)

of

the proposed adjusted standard there be added a provision that

would allow Envirite to add or delete specific organic

constituents from the batch testing protocols depending upon the

history of those constituents in prior analyses.

(Agency

Response at p.

5-6.)

Additionally, the Agency suggests that the

adjusted standard allow Envirite to conduct pretreatment of

wastes with any additional processes for which Envirite can make

an effectiveness demonstration.

(Agency Response at p.

6—7.)

Envirite’s position is that it would rather not have the

additional relief proposed by the Agency.

Envirite believes that

either of the Agency’s suggested additions might result in a

delisting that is less stringent than allowable under federal

law, and hence be

in violation of 35

Ill.

Adin.

Code 720.122(q)’4

‘~

“The Board may not grant any waste

delisting

petition

which would render the Illinois RCRA program any less stringent

than if the decision were made by USEPA.”

---

—13—

and of the General Assembly’s findings in the Environmental

Protection Act at 415 ILCS 5/20(a)(6)’5.

(Envirite Reply at p.

3,

6.)

Envirite’s concern is that provisions providing for

“unilateral” decisions on the part of the treater may be rejected

by the U.S.

EPA.

Moreover, Envirite believes that it has no need for any

additional relief.

Envirite believes that its experience has

allowed it to completely represent the variability in the

wastestreams it processes,

and hence that any additional

flexibility in testing or pretreatment is unnecessary.

(Envirite

Reply at

p.

4.)

COMMENT OF PEORIA DISPOSAL

Peoria Disposal has filed a comment in which it recommends

several modifications to the adjusted standard proposed by

Envirite.

Like Envirite, Peoria Disposal operates a facility for

the treatment of hazardous wastes.

Peoria Disposal also holds a

delisting adjusted standard granted by the Board on February 4,

199316.

Envirite appeared as an interested person in the

proceeding which led to Peoria Disposal’s adjusted standard.

The Board has reviewed Peoria Disposal’s suggested changes.

The Board is not persuaded that the suggested changes are

necessary or advantageous.

DISCUSSION

The Board believes that Envirite has demonstrated that grant

of an adjusted standard for delisting of the wastestreams at

issue is warranted.

An adjusted standard accordingly will be

granted.

As regards the additional provisions recommended by the

Agency, the Board declines to included these in today’s grant.

The Board does not itself here reach the conclusion that these

provisions would cause the adjusted standard to be less stringent

that provided for under federal law.

However, the Board is

concerned that such a finding by U.S. EPA might jeopardize the

whole of Envirite’s adjusted standard.

The Board sees no merits

15

“The

General Assembly finds..

.that

it would be

inappropriate for the State of Illinois to adopt a hazardous

waste management program that is less stringent than or conflicts

with federal law.”

16

In the matter of: Petition of Peoria Disposal Company for

an Adiusted Standard from 35

Ill.

AdTa.

Code 72l.Subpart

B, AS 91—

3.

---

—14--

in imposing this risk upon Envirite, particularly in view of

Envirite’s view that the provisions would provide relief that

Envirite would have no occasion to invoke.

Except for some minor changes, today’s order uses the same

form and language as proposed by Envirite.

The changes include

expression at Section 2 of the limitation on the annual

generation rate of treatment residue in units of total mass

(200,000 tons per year) rather than total volume (200,000 cubic

yards per year).

The Board observes that the treatment residue

generation rates presented and defended in Envirite’s petition

are presented as total mass

(tons)

(e.g., Petition at sections

3,

7,

and 8).

It is accordingly appropriate that this be the unit

used in the language of the adjusted standard.

Additionally, the Board has made clarifying language changes

to the verification and testing requirements at Section 3(b),

3(c),

and 3(d) of the adjusted standard.

These changes clarify

that sampling and analysis of treatment residues for verification

purposes must be performed on daily composite samples.

The Board

notes that these changes are consistent with the delisting

verification sampling procedures contained in Envirite’s petition

at Section

5.

CONCLUSION

Based upon its consideration of the record presented in this

action, the Board finds that Envirite has provided justification

necessary for an adjusted standard to be granted with conditions.

This opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and

conclusions of law in this matter.

ORDER

The Board hereby grants to Envirite Corporation an adjusted

standard from 35

Ill. Adm. Code 721 Subpart D for Envirite’s

Harvey,

Illinois,

facility.

This adjusted standard is granted

subject to the following conditions:

1.

This adjusted standard is effective on the date of this

order.

It supersedes the site-specific rule adopted by the

Board by order of June 30,

1988 and found at 35

Ill. Adm.

Code 721. Appendix I.

2.

This adjusted standard is provided for the following waste

codes:

F006

FOil

K003

K007

F007

F012

K004

K008

F008

F0l9

K005

K062

---

—15—

F009

K002

K006

This adjusted standard is provided for disposal volumes

of treatment residues up to 200,000 tons per year.

Envirite

Corporation’s treated residues are non—hazardous as defined

in 35 Ill.

Adni.

Code 721, provided that the treatment

residues meet the verification and testing requirements

prescribed in paragraphs

3 and 4 listed below to ensure that

hazardous constituents are not present

in the treatment

residues at levels of regulatory concern.

The treatment

residues will no longer be subject to regulation under 35

Ill. Adm. Code Parts 722-728 and the permitting standards of

35 Ill. Adm. Code 703.

Such wastes shall be disposed of

pursuant to the Board’s non-hazardous landfill regulations

found at 35 Ill.

Adni.

Code 810-815..

3.

Verification and Testing.

a)

Treatability Testing.

Envirite shall verify

through bench-scale treatability testing that each

waste stream received can be treated to meet the

delisting levels of paragraph

4

prior to the

operation of full—scale treatment of that waste

stream.

b)

Testing of Treatment Residues for Inorganic Parameters.

Envirite shall collect a representative grab sample of

each treated batch and composite these samples together

daily.

These composite samples shall be analyzed for

TCLP leachate concentrations for all the constituents

listed in paragraphs 4(a) prior to disposal of the

treated batch.

c)

Testing of Treatment Residues for Cyanide.

Envirite

shall collect a representative grab sample of each

treated batch and composite these samples together

daily.

These composite samples shall be analyzed for

leachable cyanide concentrations as described in

paragraph 4(b).

d)

Testing of Treatment Residues for Organic Parameters.

Envirite shall collect a representative grab sample of

each treated batch and composite these samples together

daily.

These composite samples shall be analyzed for

TCLP leachate concentrations for the organic

constituents listed in paragraph 4(c).

e)

Additional Testing.

Envirite shall collect a

representative grab sample from each batch composite

sample of treatment residue and prepare a monthly

composite sample.

This monthly composite sample shall

be analyzed for the TCLP leachate concentrations for

all the constituents listed at 40 C.F.R. Part 423

---

—16—

Appendix A

(1991)

except those numbered 089-113,

116,

118—119,

i22,

125—125 and 129.

Any compound which is

found to be below detection limits for six months of

continuous monthly testing shall be deleted from the

monthly testing parameter list and shall instead be

tested semi-annually.

If the compound is detected in

the semi-annual tests,

it will again be tested monthly

for six months as described above.

f)

All analyses shall be performed according to Third

Edition SW-846 methodologies incorporated by reference

in 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 720.111.

The analytical data

shall be compiled and maintained on-site for a minimum

of three years.

These data must be furnished upon

request and made available for inspection by any

representative of the State of Illinois.

4.

Delisting Levels.

a)

The metal concentration

in TCLP leachate from the

treatment residue must not exceed the concentrations

shown below.

These delisting limits are the lower of:

i.)

the RCPA BDAT Land Disposal Restriction limits for

F006 treatment residues or,

ii.) the health-based-levels listed in the U.S. EPA

MANUAL,

“Petitions to Delist Hazardous Wastes

-

A

Guidance Manual,

Second Edition”, multiplied by a

dilution/attenuation factor

(DAF)

of

13.

Otherwise,

such wastes shall be managed and disposed in

accordance with 35

Ill. Adm. Code 703 and 722-728.

The

parameters to be analyzed and the delisting limits are

as follows:

Parameter

Delisting Level

(mg/i)

Cadmium

0.065

Chromium

1.3

Lead

0.195

Nickel

0.32

Selenium

0.13

b)

Cyanide.

Total

leachate cyanide

in distilled water

extractions from the treatment of all listed wastes

must not exceed 2.6 mg/i,

otherwise such wastes shall

be managed and disposed in accordance with 35 111. Adm.

Code 703 and 722—278.

c)

Organic Parameters.

For all residues produced from the

treatment of listed wastes, the concentration in TCLP

leachate of the organic compounds shown below must not

exceed the health-based—levels listed in the U.S. EPA

---

—17—

manual,

“Petitions to Delist Hazardous Wastes

—

A

Guidance Manual,

Second Edition”, multiplied by a

dilution/attenuation factor

(DAF)

of

13.

If the

delisting levels for a batch are exceeded,

a second

composite sample of the same batch shall be prepared

and analyzed within five days of the observed

exceedence.

If a second subsequent exceedence occurs,

the batch shall be managed and disposed of in

accordance with 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 703 and 722—729.

The

parameters to be analyzed and the currently effective

delisting limits are as follows:

Parameter

Delisting Level

(mg/i)

Methylene

0.065

Tetrachloroethylene

0.065

Trichloroethylene

0.065

5.

Data Submittal.

All data must be submitted to the Manager

of the Permit Section, Division of Land Pollution Control,

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,

2200 Churchill

Road,

P.O. Box 19276,

Springfield, Illinois 62794—9276

within the time period specified.

Failure to submit the

required data will be considered a failure to comply with

the adjusted standard adopted herein and subject Envirite to

an enforcement action initiated by the Agency.

All data

must be accompanied with the following certification

statement:

Under civil and criminal penalty of law for

the making or submission of false or

fraudulent statements or presentations

(pursuant to the applicable provisions of the

Illinois Environmental Protection Act),

I

certify that the information contained in or

accompanying this document is true,

accurate

and complete.

In the event that any of this information is

determined by the Board in its sole

discretion to be false;

inaccurate or

incomplete,

and upon conveyance of this fact

to Envirite Corporation,

I recognize that

this exclusion of wastes will be void as if

it never had effect to the extent directed by

the Board and that Envirite Corporation will

be liable for any actions taken in

contravention of the company’s

RCRA

and

CERCLA

obligations premised upon the

company’s reliance on the void exclusion.

(Name of certifying person)

---

—18—

(Title of certifying person)

(Date)

Section 41 of the Environmental Protection Act

(415 ILCS

5/41

(1992)) provides for the appeal of final Board orders within

35 days of the date of service of this order.

The Rules of the

Supreme Court of Illinois establish filing requirements.

(See

also 35 111.Adm.Code 101.246 “Motions for Reconsideration”.)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I, Dorothy M. Gunn,

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certifythat the above,~pinionand order was

adopted on the

/-‘~-~

day of

____________________,

1994, by

avoteof

__________

/1~

~-t

~

~

_//~,

~

~Dorothy

N.

Gui~t1,

Clerk

Illinois Poll~4tionControl Board