CHEMREX,
RECEIVED
CLERK’S OFFICE
BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
)
Petitioner,
V.
)
)
)
)
Respondent.
)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
MAR 25 2004
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control
Board
PCB(LUSTNo.Appeal04-
(~
—
Ninety Day Extension)
MarkA. Bilut
McDermott, Will & Emery
227 West Monroe Street
Chicago, IL 60606-5096
NOTICE
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the office of the Clerk of the Pollution
Control Board a REQUEST FOR NINETY DAY EXTENSION OF APPEAL PERIOD, copies of which
are herewith served upon you.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLiNOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent
Assistant Counsel
Special Assistant Attorney General
Division ofLegal Counsel
1021 North Grand Avenue, East
P.O. Box
19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
217/782-9143 (TDD)
Dated: March 23, 2004
RECEIVED
CLERK S OFFICE
MAR 252004
BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
STATE OF ILLINOIS
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
PoII~tjon
Control
Board
CHEMREX,
)
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
PCBNo.04-
/ ~
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
(LUST Appeal
—
Ninety Day Extension)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
)
REQUEST FOR NINETY DAY EXTENSION
OF APPEAL PERIOD
NOW COMES the Respondent, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois
EPA”), by one of its attorneys, John J. Kim, Assistant Counsel and Special Assistant Attorney
General, and, pursuant to Section 40(a)(1) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (415
ILCS
5/40(a)(1))
and 35 Ill. Adm. Code 105.208, hereby requests that the- Illinois Pollution
Control Board (“Board”) grant an extension ofthe thirty-five
(35)
day period for petitioning for a
hearing to June 24, 2004, or any other date not more than a total of one hundred twenty-five
(125)
days from February 20, 2004, the date of service of the Illinois EPA’s final decision. In
support thereof, the Illinois EPA respectfully states as follows:
1.
On February 17, 2004, the Illinois EPA issued a final decision to the Petitioner.
(Exhibit A)
2.
On March 18, 2004, the Petitioner made a written request to the Illinois EPA for
an extension of time by which to file a petition for review, asking the Illinois EPA join in
tequesting that the Board extend the thirty-five day period for filing a petition to ninety days.
The Petitioner represented that the final decision was received on February 20, 2004. (Exhibit
B)
1
3.
The additional time requested by the parties may eliminate the need for a hearing
in this matter or, in the alternative, allow the parties to identify issues and limit the scope of any
hearing that may be necessary to resolve this matter.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the parties request that the Board, in the
interest of administrafive and judicial economy, grant this request for a ninety-day extension of
the thirty-five day period for petitioning for ahearing.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent
JohnJ.
Assistant Counsel
Special Assistant Attorney General
Division ofLegal Counsel
1021 North Grand Avenue, East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
217/782-9143 (TDD)
Dated: March 23, 2004
This filing submitted on recycled paper.
2
(pi,C~
i•’&t~:’
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1021 NORTH Gi~NoAVENUE EAsr, P.O. Box 19276, SPRINGFIEW, ILLTNOIS 62794-9276, 217-782-3397
JAMES
R. THOMPSON CENTER, 100 WEST RANDOLPH, Sunr 11-300, CHrc~cco,IL 60601, 312-814-6026
ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, GOVERNOR
RENEE CIPRIANO, DIRECTOR
217-782-6762
CERTIFIED MAIL
70112 3150 0000 1255 ~745
FEB17 21104
Chem Rex
RECEIVED
Attention: Scott Shinn
889 Valley Park Drive
FEB 20
2004
Shakopee, Minnesota
55379-1854
CRA, INC
RE:
LPC0310455050-Cook
County
Chicago Heights
-
Chem Rex
415
East
16th Street
LUST Incident 910674
LUST TECHNICAL FILE
Dear Mr. Shinn:
-
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (illinois EPA) has
reviewed the
High Priority
Corrective Action
Plan (plan) submitted
for the above referenced incident. This information,
dated October 17, 2003,
was received by the
Illinois EPA on October 20, 2003. The report
proposes the
information which is summarized in Attachment
1. Citations in this letter
are from
the Environmental Protection Act (Act) and
35 Illinois Administrative Code.
Pursuant
to Section
57.7(c)(4)(D) ofthe Act and 35 Illinois Administrative Code 73
2.405(c),
the
High Priority
Corrective Action Plan is rejected forthe reasons which are explained in
Attachment 2.
Pursuant
to Sections 57.7(a)(1) and 57.7(c)(4)(D) of the Act and 35 Illinois Administrative Code
732.405(e)
and
732.503(b), the associated budget is rejected for the reasons which are explained
in Attachment 3.
An underground storage tank system owner or operator
may appeal this decision to the Illinois
Pollution Control Board. Appeal rights are explained in Attachment 4.
Please also be advised that the current remediation objectives for 1MB are outlined in the
September 9, 1997 Illinois EPA letter.
—
4302 North M4in
Sirect,
Rccckiccrd,
Ii (~ 03 — (1) 5) ‘187.77(p)) •
(3K ~‘c•\1’~
—
‘)~
I W. I Icrrkr,rc SI.. 13cr. ‘Iairce~,II. (cOO I 6
— (847) 294-40)0
Ec oirc
— 595 Sc,uIIc sa)e, EIRI~,IL ~o
I 23 — 18171 hO
—
4ty 5),.
1’ecr~a, IL (j
I 4
-. 131)9) (~9).54(,1
oc t’~~~’r)
.
‘i )~ — 7~c’O~
)jpijvpr.~)r
Sr..
)‘p’,crL,, IL (~(~I-) —
S Sc’ut)r
first Strcct. Ch.~uicp.tign.
II. (ci
82))
—
2 I 71 3 )1. 5)10(3
NRIN(~IictI)
—
4501) S. Sis)h
Strcrrl Rd.. 5~crccc~cic’lcL
IL 1,2701,
—
‘1 Mill Strict.
llic~viIt~.I). 1,22 (—1 -—16)8, (4(,—5 .8)
.\1 \I~
c\ — .!
‘P09 W. \4
~
Oil).
79)()
—.
-
Any
questions regarding this letter should be directed to Michael Piggush via phone
(217-782-3101), fax
(217-524-4193),
or e-mail (epa4200@epa.state.il.us).
Sincerely,
7
Michael
4~P
T. Lowder
2,L~—~
Unit Manager
Leaking Underground Storage Tank
Section
Division ofRemediation Management
Bureau
of
Land
Attachments (4):
1.
Summary of Report Proposal.
2.
High Priority Corrective Action Plan Disapproval Reasons.
3.
High Priority Corrective Action Budget Disapproval Reasons.
4.
Appeal Rights.
cc: Conestoga Rovers & Associates
Division File
ATTACHMENT 1
SUMMARY
OF REPORT PROPOSAL
RE:
LPC 0310455050
-
Cook
County
Chicago Heights’~-Chem Rex
415
East
l6thStreet
LUST Incident 910674
LUST
TECHNICAL
FILE
The report
proposes the following information:
1.
The
report
proposes that releases have occurred from the following underground
storage
tank systems:
a.
1-1,000 gallon gasoline underground
storage tank system.
-
b.
24,000 gallon xylene underground storage tank systems.
c.
3-4,000 gallon
mineral spirits underground storage tank
systems.
d.
2-8,000 gallon “Organic 100” underground storage tank systems.
2.
The report proposes that the indicator
contaminants
would be the following: BETX,
l,2,4-TMB & l,3,5-TMB.
3.
The report assumes a Class
I groundwater designation, in accordance with 35
Illinois
Administrative Code 620.210.
4.
The report proposes that the underground storage tank systems were
removed.
5.
The report proposes that 2,438 tons of
contaminated
soil were excavated &
thermally
treated.
6.
The report proposes that 4,183 tons of contaminated soil were excavated & disposed of.
7.
The report proposes that additional site assessment activities were performed on August
26, 2002
—~
August 27, 2002, as follows:
a.
The report proposes that 8 soil borings (soil borings SB-35
—~
SB-42) were
performed.
b.
The report proposes that 2 soil samples were obtained from each soil boring.
c.
The
report
proposes that the soil samples were analyzed for the following: BETX,
1,2,4-TMB & 1,3,5-1MB.
d.
The report proposes that groundwater samples were obtained frommonitoring
wells MW-4S & MW-8L
e.
The report proposes that the groundwater samples were analyzed for the
following: I3ETX, l,2,4-TMB & 1,3,5-TMB.
8.
The report requests approval of a High
Priority
Corrective Action Plan, as follows:
a.
The report proposes that 1,300 cubic yards of contaminated soil would be
excavated & disposed of. Th&report proposes that contaminated soil would
remain in place beneath the railroad tracks.
b.
The report proposes that 25 soil samples would be obtained from the sidewalls of
the excavation area. The
report
proposes that no soil samples would be obtained
from the floor of the excavation
area,
since the excavation area would extend to
bedrock.
c.
The report proposes that the soil samples would be analyzed for the following:
BETX, 1,2,4-TMB & l,3,5-TMB.
d.
The report proposes that the excavation area would be backfihled.
e.
The report proposes that groundwater samples would be obtained fromthe
existing monitoring wells for 2
annual
sampling periods. The report proposes that
the purpose of the groundwater monitoring would be to evaluate if the
groundwater contamination plume is stable or shrinking.
f.
The report proposes that the
groundwater samples would be analyzed for the
following: BETX, 1,2,4-TMB & 1,3,5-1MB.
9.
The report requests approval of a High Priority
Corrective Action Budget, for an
amount
of $175,057.50.
A1TACHMENT 2
HIGH
PRIORITY CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN DISAPPROVAL REASONS
RE:
LPC 0310455050
-
Cook
County
Chicago Heights
-
Chem Rex
415
East
16th Street
LUST
Incident 910674
LUST
TECHNICAL
FILE
The Illinois
EPA does not approve ofthe High
Priority Corrective Action Plan,
for the following
reasons:
The proposal to leave soil contamination in place would require (at a minimum)
institutional controls in the form of Environmental Land Use Controls (from the affected
property owners). The proposal to leave groundwater contamination in place (either
existing or modelled) would require (at a minimum) either institutional controls in the
form of
Environmental
Land
Use Controls (from the affected property owners) or a
groundwater ordinance (from the unit of local government). The report does not address
the issue of whether or not such institutional controls would be potentially obtainable.
2.
With regard to soil boring SB-35 (which
was
performed on August 27, 2002), there were
no soil samples obtained from the depth of the highest PID measurement.
3.
With regard to soil borings SB-37
—‘
SB-39 & SB-42 (which were performed on August
27, 2002), it is not clear how the maximum depth of the soil borings was
determined.
L
4.
Plan diagrams must be provided which illustrate the failowing information (as
applicable):
a.
Property boundaries.
b.
Parcel boundaries.
c.
Underground storage tank systems.
d.
Underground utilities.
e.
Potable water supply wells.
f.
Potable water supply well setback zones.
g.
Soil boring locations.
h.
Monitoring well locations.
i.
Excavation areas.
.j.
Soil sample locations.
k.
Groundwater contours.
1.
Contaminant
plumes.
m. Modelling dimensions.
n.
Areas
of proposed engineered barriers.
o.
Areas
of proposed institutional controls.
p.
Excavation
and/or site assessment impediments.
Plan diagrams must be drawn to scale & oriented north.
The
report
does not demonstrate compliance
with
these requirements, for the following
reasons:
a.
The
plan diagrams
do not illustrate the formerexcavation area.
b.
Figures
4 & 8 of
the report do not illustrate the locations ofsoil borings SB-35
SB-42 (which were performed on August 27, 2002).
c.
Figure 10 of the report does not illustrate the locations of the proposed soil
samples which would be obtained from the excavationarea.
5.
A Laboratory Certification Form must be provided for all sample analyses:
The report does not demonstratecompliance with these requirements, for the following
reasons:
a.
The report does not contain a Laboratory Certification Form for the soil &
groundwater samples which were obtained on August 26, 2002 —p August 27,
2002.
ATTACHMENT 3
HIGH
PRIORITY CORRECTIVE
ACTION BUDGET DISAPPROVAL REASONS
RE:
LPC 0310455050- Cook
County
Chicago Heights
-
Chem Rex
415
East 16th Street
LUST Incident 910674
LUST TECHNICAL
FILE
The Illinois EPA does not approve ofthe High Priority Corrective Action Budget, for the
following
reasons:
The Illinois EPA
cannotapprove
of a budget without a corresponding Illinois EPA
approved technical plan. The Illinois EPA
has
not approved of the High
Priority
Corrective Action Plan, for the reasons which were previously explained iiiAttachment 2.
2.
In accordance with 35 Illinois Administrative Code 732.606(hh), all Costs must be
reasonable.
The report does not demonstrate compliance with these requirements, for the following
reasons:
a.
The proposed cost for the Project Coordinator ($1 15.00 per hour) (Section (G) of
the budget) is not reasonable. The Illinois EPA does not reimburse in excess of
$65.00 per hour for this
type
of activity.
b.
The proposed cost for the Project Manager
($145.00
per hour) (Section (G) of the
budget) is not reasonable. The Illinois EPA does not reimburse in excess of
$99.00 per hour for this type ofactivity.
c.
The proposed cost for the Chemist ($95.00 per hour) (Section (G) of the budget)
is not reasonable. The Illinois EPA does not reimburse in excess of $87.00 per
hour for this type of activity.
d.
The proposed cost for the Health & Safety Manager
($95.00
per hour) (Section
(G) of the budget) is not reasonable. The Illinois EPA does not reimburse in
excess of $87.00 per hour for this type of activity.
e.
The proposed
cost for drafting ($66.00
per
hour) (Section (G) of the budget) is not
reasonable. The Illinois EPA does not reimburse
in excess of$60.00
per
hour for
this type
of
activity.
f.
The proposed cost for word processing
($50.00
per hour) (Section (0) ofthe
• budget) is not reasonable. The Illinois EPA does not reimburse in excess of
$45.00 per hour for this
type
of activity.
g.
The proposed cost for the Associate
($145.00
per hour) (Section (G) of the
• budget) is not reasonable. The Illinois EPA does not reimburse in excess of
$130.00 per hour for this
type
of
activity.
h.
The proposed
cost
for the Prinbipal
($150.00
per hour) (Section (G) of the budget)
is not reasonable. The Illinois EPA does not reimburse in excess of $130.00 per
hour for this type of activity.
i.
The proposed overall cost for soil excavation, transportation, disposal &
backfihling ($86.73 per cubic yard) (Section (1) of the budget) is not reasonable.
The Illinois EPA does not reimburse in excess of $77.00
per
cubic yard.
j.
The Illinois EPA does not feel that the proposed cost for office supplies related to
report preparation
($
1,800.00) (Section (1) of the budget) is reasonable.
3.
In accordance
with
35 Illinois Administrative Code 732.606(v), indirect
costs
may not be
charged as direct
costs.
The report does not demonstrate compliance with these requirements, for the following
reasons:
a.
The proposed cost for office supplies related to groundwater sampling ($100.00)
(Section (I) of the budget) is a direct cost charged as an indirect cost.
b.
The proposed cost for personal protective equipment related to soil remediation
($500.00) (Section (1) of the budget) is a direct cost charged as an indirect cost.
c.
The proposed cost for office supplies related to soil sampling ($300.00) (Section
(I) of the budget) is a direct cost charged as an indirect cost.
4.
It is not clear how the proposed number of groundwater samples (42) (Section (F)(3) of
the budget)
was
determined. Obtaining groundwater samples fromthe 19 existing
monitoring wells for 2 annual sampling periods would result in a total of 38 groundwater
samples.
5.
It is not clear how the proposed quantity of backfill material (1,700 cubic yards) (Section
(I) of the budget) was determined. The report proposes that 1,300 cubic yards of
contaminated soil would be excavated & disposed of.
ATTACHMENT 4
APPEAL RIGHTS
An underground storage tank
system
owner
or operator may appeal
this
fmal decision to the
Illinois Pollution
Control Board
pursuant to Sections 40
and
57.7(c)(4)(D)
ofthe Act by filing a
petition fora hearing within
35
days after the date of issuance of the final decision. However, the
35 day period may be extended for a
period oftime not to exceed
90 days by
written
notice from
the
owner
or operator
and
the
Illinois EPA within the initial 35 day appeal period.
If
the owner
or operator wishes to receive a 90 day extension, a
writtenrequest
that includes a statement of
the date the final decision
was
received, aIon~with a copy of
this
decision, must be sent to the
Illinois EPA as soon as possible.
For information regarding the filing of an appeal, please contact:
Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
State of Illinois Center
100 West Randolph
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
312-814-3620
For information regarding the filing of an extension, please contact:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Legal Counsel
1021 North Grand Avenue East
Post Office Box 19276
Springfield, illinois 62794-9276
217-782-5544
APartnei~shipIncluding
Boston
Professional Corporations
Chicago
227 West Monroe Street
Dusseldorf
312-372-2000Chicago,
IL 60606-5096
MiamiLondonLos
Angeles
Facsimile 312-984-7700
Munich
www.mwe.com
New York
Orange County
Mark Bilut
San
Silicon
Diego
valley
Attorney at Law
Washington, D.C.
mbilut@mwe.com
MCDERMOTT,
WILL
&
EMERY
312-984-7670
March 18, 2004
VIA FACSIMILE AND MAIL
John J. Kim, Esq.
Special Assistant Attorney General
Division of Legal Counsel
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
1021 North Grand Avenue
East
P.O.Box 19276
-
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
Re: LPC 0310455050
-
Cook County
Chicago Heights
-
ChemRex
415
East
16th Street
LUST Incident 910674
Dear Mr. Kim:
We are writing in response to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s (“IEPA”)
February 17, 2004 final decision regarding ChemRex Inc.’s Revised Groundwater and Off-Site
Soil Investigation Report and Corrective Action Plan. ChemRex received IEPA’s final decision
on February 20, 2004. A copy of IEPA’s final decision is enclosed with this letter. Pursuant to 35
I.A.C. Section 105.406, we are requesting a 90 day extension of the 35 day period for petitioning
for a hearing
before the Pollution Control Board.
Call me
at 312-984-7670
if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Mark
27
A.
,~-QJ~
Bilut
Enclosures
cc:
Mark A. McClendon, Esq. (via fax w/ end.)
Todd R. Wiener, Esq.
CH199 4257419-1.023988.0017
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, th~undersigned attorney at law, hereby certify that on March 23, 2004, I served true
and correct copies of a REQUEST FOR NINETY DAY EXTENSION OF APPEAL PERIOD,
by placing
true and
correct copies
in properly sealed and addressed envelopes and by depositing
said sealed envelopes in a U.S. mail drop box located within Springfield, Illinois, with sufficient
First Class Mail postage affixed thereto, upon the following named persons:
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
MarkA. Bilut
Illinois Pollution Control Board
McDermott,
Will & Emery
James
R. Thompson Center
227 West Monroe Street
100 West Randolph Street
Chicago, IL
60606-5096
Suite 11-500
Chidago, IL 60601
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY.
~
Assistant Counsel
Special Assistant Attorney General
Division of Legal Counsel
1021 North Grand Avenue, East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
217/782-9143 (TDD)