9712C2nd.PDF

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

April 16, 1998

IN THE MATTER OF:

TIERED APPROACH TO

CORRECTIVE ACTION

OBJECTIVES: AMENDMENTS

TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 742

)

R97-12(C)

(Rulemaking - Land)

Proposed Rule. Second Notice.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by M. McFawn, J. Yi):

The Board today proposes for second notice amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 742:

Tiered Approach to Corrective Action Objectives, also known as TACO. Specifically, the

amendments include several technical revisions to Appendix A.Table H, Appendix B.Table C,

Appendix B.Table D, and Appendix C.Table I

as well as some nonsubstantive clarifications to

Sections 742.210, 742.310, and 742.900.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On December 3, 1997, in Docket B of this rulemaking, the Site Remediation Advisory

Committee (SRAC) and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency), filed a “Joint

Motion to Correct” (joint motion) Appendix A.Table H entitled “Chemicals Whose Tier 1

Class I Groundwater Remediation Objective Exceeds the 1 in 1,000,000 Cancer Risk

Concentration” (Table H). In their joint motion, the SRAC and the Agency assert that, upon

reviewing the numeric contaminant levels set forth under the 1 in 1,000,000 cancer risk

concentration included within Table H, they determined that those numeric contaminant levels

are based upon a 70 year exposure duration. The SRAC and the Agency maintain that the use

of a 70 year exposure duration as a basis for the Table H levels, rather than a 30 year exposure

duration, was not intended. Finally, the SRAC and the Agency contend that the use of the 70

year exposure duration as a basis for the Table H levels is technically inconsistent with other

aspects of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 742, which are based on a 30 year exposure duration.

At that point in the this rulemaking process, the Board could not correct Table H. See

4 ILCS 5/-40(c),(d) (1994). Accordingly, on December 4, 1997, the Board adopted Docket B

At first notice, the Board also opened Appendix B.Table F and Sections 742.415, 742.510,

742.810, and 742.1015 to make what it perceived were nonsubstantive typographical changes.

However, upon further review of this matter, the Board determined that no such typographical

amendments were necessary. As no other changes were suggested, the Board has not

considered any amendments to the aforementioned appendix and sections. Accordingly, they

are not included within the attached order.

as final and ordered the rules filed with the Secretary of State. See In the Matter of: Tiered

Approach to Corrective Action Objectives: Amendments to Part 742 (December 4, 1997),

R97-12(B). Also, on December 4, 1997, the Board adopted a first notice proposal in this

docket C to consider the merits of the joint motion and also to make some non-substantive

grammatical, typographical, and mechanical changes that were identified after the adoption of

Docket A in this rulemaking. 21 Ill. Reg. 16982 (December 26, 1997). The joint motion

filed in Docket B has been incorporated as public comment 1.

One hearing was held in this matter on January 12, 1998, in Springfield. No additional

public comments were filed with the Board. Dr. Thomas Hornshaw and Tracey Virgin

Hurley, Environmental Toxicologists with the Office of Chemical Safety, testified on behalf of

the Agency. Mark Marszalek testified on behalf of Andrews Environmental Engineering.

Harry Walton, Chairman of the Site Remediation Advisory Committee (SRAC), testified on

behalf of the Illinois State Chamber of Commerce and on retainer to the Illinois Environmental

Regulatory Group (IERG). Whitney Wagner Rosen was present on behalf of the Illinois

Environmental Regulatory Group. The first notice public comment period in this matter ended

on February 9, 1998.

Pursuant to Public Act 90-489, effective January 1, 1998, the Board requested that the

Department of Commerce and Community Affairs (DCCA) conduct an economic impact study

for this proposed rulemaking. DCCA has 30 to 45-days after such request to produce a study

of the economic impact of the proposed rules. On January 26, 1998, DCCA issued a letter

notifying the Board that it would not conduct an economic impact study on this proposed rule

because it lacked the technical and financial resources to conduct any economic studies on

rules pending before the Board during the remainder of fiscal year 1998. On March 17, 1998,

the Board conducted a public hearing in Springfield to entertain any comments regarding the

economic impact of this proposed rulemaking. No public comments were received. The

Board will proceed to second notice in this proposed rulemaking.

ANALYSIS

Section 742.210

Section 742.210 lists the documents incorporated by reference into the Board’s

regulations. At first notice, the Board proposed to make one nonsubstantive typographical

correction in Section 742.210(a) to the SW-846 reference. At hearing, however, Ms. Hurley

testified that in addition to the typographical correction, another revision was necessary to the

SW-846 reference. Ms. Hurley testified that on June 13, 1997, Update III to the SW-846

reference was formally adopted (62 Fed. Reg. 32452 (June 13, 1997). Tr. at 11. Ms. Hurley

noted that the SW-846 reference is a dynamic document that changes when new data and

advances in analytical techniques are incorporated into the manual in the form of new or

revised methods. Tr. at 11. By publishing the announcement in the Federal Register, the

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has made Update III officially part

of the SW-846 reference. Accordingly, the SW-846 incorporation by reference should read as

follows:

“Test Methods for Evaluation Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,”,

USEPA Publication number SW-846 (Third Edition, November 1986Final

Update III, December 1996), as amended by Updates I,and IIA, and III

(Document No. 955-011-00000-1)(contact USEPA, Office of Solid Waste, for

Update IIAIII).

The Board agrees that the aforementioned changes should be made to the SW-846 reference

listed at Section 742.210, and therefore makes the necessary revisions in this Section.

Section 742.310

At first notice, the Board on its own motion amended Section 742.310(b)(1)(A) to add

the phrase “within ten feet of” after “[t]he concentration of any contaminant of concern” and

after “the land surface or.” At hearing, the Board questioned the Agency and public whether

it had any opposition to this amendment. Tr. at 18-19. Mr. Hurley responded that the

Agency had no such objection and that it was its intent to include that phrase in this Section for

clarification purposes. Tr. at 19. Accordingly, the Board adopts these amendments for second

notice at Section 742.310(b)(1)(A).

Section 742.805

Since first notice, the Agency has proposed that the Board amend provisions of Section

742.805 to further clarify how similar-acting contaminants are to be evaluated under this rule.

Unfortunately, because Section 742.805 was not opened at first notice on December 4, 1997,

the changes offered by the Agency cannot be adopted under this docket. According to the

Administrative Procedure Act, the Board is restricted to addressing only those sections that

were opened at first notice. 5 ILCS 100/5-40(b), (c) (1994). Because we find the Agency’s

explanation correct, we include the following discussion to assist those using this provision of

Part 742.

First, the Agency proposes that Section 742.805(c) be amended to clarify that the

equation set forth in Section 742.805(c)(1) should be used for evaluating mixtures of similar-

acting noncarcinogenic contaminants of concern. Tr. at 11. Second, the Agency proposes a

similar amendment to Section 742.805(d) to clarify that the provisions of subsection (d) should

be used for evaluating mixtures of similar-acting carcinogenic contaminants of concern.

Third, the Agency proposes another amendment to subsection (d) that specifies how to

assess mixtures of similar-acting carcinogenic contaminants of concern. This amendment

would allow the use of the weighted average procedure set forth in Section 742.805(c)(1) with

some modification to demonstrate that the cumulative risk posed by mixtures of similar-acting

carcinogenic contaminants of concern does not exceed 1 in 10,000. Essentially, the

modification to the weighted average equation under Section 742.805(c)(1) would require the

term CUOxa in the equation to be either Tier 1 or Tier 2 objectives, or for those contaminants

listed in Appendix A.Table H, the 1 in 1,000,000 risk level concentrations.

In response to a Board question regarding the practical effect if these suggested changes

are not made, Ms. Hurley testified that the language as it currently exists in Section 742.810 is

“just a little vague.” Tr. at 17. She noted that, based on several outside requests for

clarification of this Section, absent the proposed clarifications, those using Part 742 may

continue to be confused about how to assess mixtures of similar-acting substances and how to

use Appendix A.Table H. Tr. at 17-18.

Again, the Board shares the Agency’s desire to further clarify the TACO scheme.

However, the Board must decline to make these suggested changes in Section 742.805 due to

rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Board suggests that the

Agency propose this change in a future rulemaking.

Section 742.900

At first notice, the Board on its own motion, proposed that Section 742.900(c) be

amended to make one nonsubstantive, typographical correction. As no one expressed an

objection to this suggested change, the Board finds that this change is warranted.

Appendix A.Table H

Appendix A.Table H (Table H) lists chemicals whose Tier 1 Class I groundwater

remediation objective exceeds the 1 in 1,000,000 cancer risk concentration. The Agency

suggests two corrections be made to Appendix A.Table H.

First, the Agency proposes that the 1 in 1,000,000 cancer risk concentrations be based

upon an exposure duration period of 30 years. Currently, the values listed there are based

upon a 70 year exposure duration. The Agency explained in its prefiled testimony and at

hearing that when it originally calculated the 1 in 1,000,000 cancer risk concentrations in

Table H, using Equation R25 as set forth in Section 742.Appendix C.Table C, it used an

incorrect exposure duration of 70 years instead of an exposure duration of 30 years, as

specified in Section 742.Appendix C.Table D. Tr. at 10 and Prefiled Testimony at 3. The

values in Table H should be based on an exposure duration of 30 years, which is the value

specified in Appendix C.Table D for Equation R25. Tr. at 10. Both the American Society of

Testing Material (ASTM) Guidance and the USEPA’s SSL Guidance specify a residential

exposure duration of 30 years. Finally, the Ms. Hurley testified that the Agency had always

intended to calculate these levels based on a 30 year exposure duration. Tr. at 10.

Second, the Agency proposes that three chemicals, namely, Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate,

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine, and 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol be deleted from Appendix A.Table H.

Tr. at 10. The Agency explained at hearing that after revising the values listed in Table H to

reflect a 30 year exposure period, the Tier 1 Class I groundwater remediation objectives for

the aforementioned chemicals no longer exceed the 1 in 1,000,000 cancer risk concentrations.

Tr. at 10. Consequently, the Agency proposes deleting those chemicals from Table H. Tr. at

10.

Finally, Mark Marszalek testified at hearing that a typographical error should be

corrected in Table H for the constituent: benzopyrene. Tr. at 12. Mr. Marszalek explained

that the value for benzopyrene should be 0.000012 rather than 0.0000012. Tr. at 12. The

Agency agreed with Mr. Marszalek’s suggested change.

The Board agrees with the Agency and Mr. Marszalek that a 30 year residential

exposure duration is consistent with the Agency’s intent, as well as ASTM and USEPA

guidance. Accordingly, the cancer risk concentration values listed are corrected in Table H.

The Board also agrees that that the three aforementioned chemicals should be deleted from

Appendix A.Table H as their Tier 1 Class I groundwater remediation objectives no longer

exceed the 1 in 1,000,000 cancer risk concentration. Finally, the Board agrees with Mr.

Marszalek’s testimony that the value for benzopyrene should be 0.000012 and therefore

corrects the value for this chemical. The attached Board order reflects the foregoing revisions.

Appendix B.Table C

Appendix B.Table C lists pH specific soil remediation objectives for inorganics and

ionizing organics for the soil component of the groundwater ingestion route (Class I

groundwater). The Agency requests that a value for the organic, 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol, be

amended to correct a typographical error. Tr. at 13. No objection has been received

concerning this proposed correction. The Board finds this nonsubstantive change proper and

will correct the typographical error.

Appendix B.Table D

Appendix B.Table D lists pH specific soil remediation objectives for inorganics and

ionizing organics for the soil component of the groundwater ingestion route (Class II

groundwater). The Agency requests that the soil remediation objectives for 2,4,6-

Trichlorophenol be changed for the six pH ranges ranging from: 4.5-4.74 to 6.65-6.89. Tr. at

14. Dr. Hornshaw testified that, upon conferring with Mr. Marszalek, he learned that these

changes are necessary to account for how the Agency in the past has derived the equivalent of

a health advisory for Class II groundwater. Tr. at 15. For those chemicals that do not have a

Class II groundwater standard under Part 620, the Class II health advisory is used as a

substitute for the Part 620 standard in determining soil remediation objectives. Exh. 5 at 22.

The Agency has explained how a Class II health advisory for a chemical is determined

more clearly in its testimony under Docket A rules. In determining the Class II health

advisory, the Agency relied on the rationale behind the Part 620 Class II standards,

i.e.,

the

potential for removal of a chemical from groundwater by common drinking water treatment

techniques. Exh. 5 at 22. The Agency noted that the potential for removal of a chemical from

groundwater is determined by comparing the organic carbon partition coefficient (Koc) of that

chemical with that of a benchmark chemical, ethylbenzene. Exh. at 23. If the Koc of a

chemical of interest is greater than that of ethylbenzene, then the chemical is considered to be

removable from groundwater. Further, the Agency noted that if a chemical is removable from

groundwater then the Class II health advisory is five times the Class I health advisory. If the

chemical is not readily removable from groundwater, then the Class II health advisory is the

same as the Class I advisory.

In case of ionizing compounds like 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol, the organic carbon partition

coefficient changes with pH. Tr. at 15. In terms of deciding whether to multiply the Class I

health advisory by five times or by one time depending whether it is or is not mobile in soil,

the Agency stated that there is a break point between pH 6.65 and pH 6.9 that crosses over

that threshold comparison against the organic carbon partition coefficient for ethylbenzene.

Tr. at 15-16. The Agency agreed with Mr. Marszalek that the organic carbon partition

coefficient of 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol changes from lower than that of ethylbenzene to higher

than that of ethylbenzene. Tr. at 16. Therefore, 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol is removable from

groundwater below the breakpoint value, and the correct soil remediation objective is the Class

II health advisory, which is five times the Class I health advisory. The original values on

Table D did not reflect this; they were the Class I health advisory numbers. Consequently, the

Agency recommends correcting the soil remediation objectives for 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol by

multiplying each value at pH ranges lower than the breakpoint value, i.e, 6.9, by five.

The Board agrees that the pH based soil remediation objectives for 2,4,6-

Trichlorohphenol must be corrected to account for the manner in which the Agency has

derived the Class II health advisory. The Board notes that in Appendix C, Table I, the Koc for

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol changes from higher than that of ethylbenzene at pH of 6.8 to lower

than that of ethylbenzene at pH of 6.9

. Therefore, at pH ranges below 6.9, 2,4,6-

Trichlorophenol is considered to be removable from groundwater and its Class II health

advisory is five times the Class I advisory. In light of this, the Board finds that the soil

remediation objectives in Appendix B.Table D for 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol must be corrected at

pH ranges lower than 6.9 by multiplying them by five.

Appendix C.Table I

Appendix C.Table I lists Koc values for ionizing organics as a function of pH. The

Agency requests that four calculations starting with pH 4.5 to pH 4.8 be amended for the

organic, dinoseb. Tr. at 16. Dr. Hornshaw testified at hearing that these suggested

amendments are typographical changes necessary for purposes of clarification. Tr. at 16. The

Board agrees with the Agency and accordingly makes the necessary amendments.

CONCLUSION

The Board today adopts for second notice amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 742. The

amendments include several technical revisions to Appendix A.Table H, Appendix B.Table C,

Appendix B.Table D, and Appendix C.Table I as well as some nonsubstantive clarifications to

Sections 742.210, 742.310, and 742.900.

Koc of 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol is 381 L/kg at pH 6.8 and 338 L/kg at pH 6.9. Koc of

ethylbenzene is 363 L/kg.

The Board notes that Mr. Marszalek and others have identified various minor

typographical and technical discrepancies in Part 742. The Board appreciates these efforts to

thoroughly review and identify additional errors within the TACO framework. Unfortunately,

as previously noted, the Board is constrained from making any amendments in sections not

opened at first notice. The Board, therefore, cannot make any of the additional changes

suggested by Mr. Marszalek at hearing. To the extent that the changes Mr. Marszalek and

others suggest are necessary, the Board encourages Mr. Marszalek, other members of the

regulated community, and the Agency to take the time to compile all additional amendments

and submit a new proposal for rulemaking to the Board at the appropriate time.

ORDER

The Board directs the Clerk of the Board to cause the submission of the following

proposal to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules:

TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE G: WASTE DISPOSAL

CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

SUBCHAPTER f: RISK BASED CLEANUP OBJECTIVES

PART 742

TIERED APPROACH TO CORRECTIVE ACTION OBJECTIVES

SUBPART A: INTRODUCTION

Section

742.100

Intent and Purpose

742.105

Applicability

742.110

Overview of Tiered Approach

742.115

Key Elements

742.120

Site Characterization

SUBPART B: GENERAL

Section

742.200

Definitions

742.205

Severability

742.210

Incorporations by Reference

742.215

Determination of Soil Attenuation Capacity

742.220

Determination of Soil Saturation Limit

742.225

Demonstration of Compliance with Remediation Objectives

742.230

Agency Review and Approval

SUBPART C: EXPOSURE ROUTE EVALUATIONS

Section

742.300

Exclusion of Exposure Route

742.305

Contaminant Source and Free Product Determination

742.310

Inhalation Exposure Route

742.315

Soil Ingestion Exposure Route

742.320

Groundwater Ingestion Exposure Route

SUBPART D: DETERMINING AREA BACKGROUND

Section

742.400

Area Background

742.405

Determination of Area Background for Soil

742.410

Determination of Area Background for Groundwater

742.415

Use of Area Background Concentrations

SUBPART E: TIER 1 EVALUATION

Section

742.500

Tier 1 Evaluation Overview

742.505

Tier 1 Soil and Groundwater Remediation Objectives

742.510

Tier 1 Remediation Objectives

SUBPART F: TIER 2 GENERAL EVALUATION

Section

742.600

Tier 2 Evaluation Overview

742.605

Land Use

742.610

Chemical and Site Properties

SUBPART G: TIER 2 SOIL EVALUATION

Section

742.700

Tier 2 Soil Evaluation Overview

742.705

Parameters for Soil Remediation Objective Equations

742.710

SSL Soil Equations

742.715

RBCA Soil Equations

742.720

Chemicals with Cumulative Noncarcinogenic Effects

SUBPART H: TIER 2 GROUNDWATER EVALUATION

Section

742.800

Tier 2 Groundwater Evaluation Overview

742.805

Tier 2 Groundwater Remediation Objectives

742.810

Calculations to Predict Impacts from Remaining Groundwater Contamination

SUBPART I: TIER 3 EVALUATION

Section

742.900

Tier 3 Evaluation Overview

742.905

Modifications of Parameters

742.910

Alternative Models

742.915

Formal Risk Assessments

742.920

Impractical Remediation

742.925

Exposure Routes

742.930

Derivation of Toxicological Data

SUBPART J: INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS

Section

742.1000

Institutional Controls

742.1005

No Further Remediation Letters

742.1010

Restrictive Covenants, Deed Restrictions and Negative Easements

742.1015

Ordinances

742.1020

Highway Authority Agreements

SUBPART K: ENGINEERED BARRIERS

Section

742.1100

Engineered Barriers

742.1105

Engineered Barrier Requirements

APPENDIX A

General

ILLUSTRATION A Developing Soil Remediation Objectives Under the Tiered

Approach

ILLUSTRATION B Developing Groundwater Remediation Objectives Under the

Tiered Approach

Table A

Soil Saturation Limits (Csat) for Chemicals Whose Melting Point is Less

Than 30

Table B

Tolerance Factor (K)

Table C

Coefficients {AN-I+1} for W Test of Normality, for N=2(1)50

Table D

Percentage Points of the W Test for N=3(1)50

Table E

Similar-Acting Noncarcinogenic Chemicals

Table F

Similar-Acting Carcinogenic Chemicals

Table G

Concentrations of Inorganic Chemicals in Background Soils

Table H

Chemicals Whose Tier 1 Class I Groundwater Remediation Objective

Exceeds the 1 in 1,000,000 Cancer Risk Concentration

APPENDIX B

Tier 1 Tables and Illustrations

ILLUSTRATION A Tier 1 Evaluation

Table A

Tier 1 Soil Remediation Objectives for Residential Properties

Table B

Tier 1 Soil Remediation Objectives for Industrial/Commercial Properties

Table C

pH Specific Soil Remediation Objectives for Inorganics and Ionizing

Organics for the Soil Component of the Groundwater Ingestion Route

(Class I Groundwater)

Table D

pH Specific Soil Remediation Objectives for Inorganics and Ionizing

Organics for the Soil Component of the Groundwater Ingestion Route

(Class II Groundwater)

Table E

Tier 1 Groundwater Remediation Objectives for the Groundwater

Component of the Groundwater Ingestion Route

Table F

Values Used to Calculate the Tier 1 Soil Remediation Objectives for the

Soil Component of the Groundwater Ingestion Route

APPENDIX C

Tier 2 Tables and Illustrations

ILLUSTRATION A Tier 2 Evaluation for Soil

ILLUSTRATION B Tier 2 Evaluation for Groundwater

ILLUSTRATION C US Department of Agriculture Soil Texture Classification

Table A

SSL Equations

Table B

SSL Parameters

Table C

RBCA Equations

Table D

RBCA Parameters

Table E

Default Physical and Chemical Parameters

Table F

Methods for Determining Physical Soil Parameters

Table G

Error Function (erf)

Table H

Q/C Values by Source Area

Table I

K[oc] Values for Ionizing Organics as a Function of pH (cm(3)/g or L/kg)

Table J

Values to be Substituted for ks When Evaluating Inorganics as a Function

of pH (cm(3)[water]/g[soil])

Table K

Parameter Estimates for Calculating Water-Filled Soil Porosity (θw)

AUTHORITY: Implementing Sections 22.4, 22.12, Title XVI, and Title XVII and authorized

by Sections 27, 57.14, and 58.5 of the Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/22.4,

22.12, 27, 57.14 and 58.5 and Title XVI and Title XVII].

SOURCE: Adopted in R97-12(A) at 21 Ill. Reg. 7942, effective July 1, 1997, amended in

R97-12(B) at 21 Ill. Reg. 16391, effective December 8, 1997; amended in R97-12(C) at 22

Ill. Reg. ________________, effective ________________________.

NOTE: Capitalization indicates statutory language.

SUBPART B: GENERAL

Section 742.210

Incorporations by Reference

The Board incorporates the following material by reference:

ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials, 1916 Race Street,

Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 299-5400

ASTM D 2974-87, Standard Test Methods for Moisture, Ash and

Organic Matter of Peat and Other Organic Soils, approved May 29,

1987 (reapproved 1995).

ASTM D 2488-93, Standard Practice for Description and Identification

of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), approved September 15, 1993.

ASTM D 1556-90, Standard Test Method for Density and Unit Weight

of Soil in Place by the Sand-Cone Method, approved June 29, 1990.

ASTM D 2167-94, Standard Test Method for Density and Unit Weight

of Soil in Place by the Rubber Balloon Method, approved March 15,

1994.

ASTM D 2922-91, Standard Test Methods for Density of Soil and Soil-

Aggregate in Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth), approved

December 23, 1991.

ASTM D 2937-94, Standard Test Method for Density of Soil in Place by

the Drive-Cylinder Method, approved June 15, 1994.

ASTM D 854-92, Standard Test Method for Specific Gravity of Soils,

approved November 15, 1992.

ASTM D 2216-92, Standard Method for Laboratory Determination of

Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock, approved June 15, 1992.

ASTM D 4959-89, Standard Test Method for Determination of Water

(Moisture) Content of Soil by Direct Heating Method, approved June

30, 1989 (reapproved 1994).

ASTM D 4643-93, Standard Test Method for Determination of Water

(Moisture) Content of Soil by the Microwave Oven Method, approved

July 15, 1993.

ASTM D 5084-90, Standard Test Method for Measurement of Hydraulic

Conductivity of Saturated Porous Materials Using a Flexible Wall

Permeameter, approved June 29, 1990.

ASTM D 422-63, Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of

Soils, approved November 21, 1963 (reapproved 1990).

ASTM D 1140-92, Standard Test Method for Amount of Material in

Soils Finer than the No. 200 (75

μm)

Sieve, approved November 15,

1992.

ASTM D 3017-88, Standard Test Method for Water Content of Soil and

Rock in Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth), approved May 27,

1988.

ASTM D 4525-90, Standard Test Method for Permeability of Rocks by

Flowing Air, approved May 25, 1990.

ASTM D 2487-93, Standard Test Method for Classification of Soils for

Engineering Purposes, approved September 15, 1993.

ASTM E 1527-93, Standard Practice for Environmental Site

Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process, approved

March 15, 1993. Vol. 11.04.

ASTM E 1739-95, Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action

Applied at Petroleum Release Sites, approved September 10, 1995.

Barnes, Donald G. and Dourson, Michael. (1988). Reference Dose (RfD):

Description and Use in Health Risk Assessments. Regulatory Toxicology and

Pharmacology. 8, 471-486.

GPO. Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, DC 20401, (202) 783-3238.

USEPA Guidelines for Carcinogenic Risk Assessment, 51 Fed. Reg.

33992-34003 (September 24, 1986).

"Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical

Methods

, USEPA Publication number SW-846 (Third Edition,

November 1986Final Update III, December 1996), as amended by

Updates I, and IIA, and III (Document No. 955-001-00000-1)(contact

USEPA, Office of Solid Waste, for Update IIAIII).

"Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in Drinking

Water", EPA Publication No. EPA/600/4-88/039 (December 1988

(Revised July 1991)).

"Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in Drinking

Water, Supplement II", EPA Publication No. EPA/600/R-92/129

(August 1992).

"Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in Drinking

Water, Supplement III", EPA Publication No. EPA/600/R-95/131

(August 1995).

IRIS. Integrated Risk Information System, National Center for Environmental

Assessment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 West Martin Luther

King Drive, MS-190, Cincinnati, OH 45268. (513) 569-7254.

"Reference Dose (RfD): Description and Use in Health Risk

Assessments", Background Document 1A (March 15, 1993).

"EPA Approach for Assessing the Risks Associated with Chronic

Exposures to Carcinogens", Background Document 2 (January 17,

1992).

Nelson, D.W., and L.E. Sommers. 1982. Total carbon, organic carbon, and

organic matter. In: A.L. Page (ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2.

Chemical and Microbiological Properties. 2nd Edition, pp. 539-579, American

Society of Agronomy. Madison, WI.

NTIS. National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road,

Springfield, VA 22161, (703) 487-4600.

"Dermal Exposure Assessment: Principles and Applications", EPA

Publication No. EPA/600/8-91/011B (January 1992).

"Exposure Factors Handbook", EPA Publication No. EPA/600/8-89/043

(July 1989).

"Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Vol. I; Human Health

Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Standard Default Exposure

Factors", OSWER Directive 9285.6-03 (March 1991).

“Rapid Assessment of Exposure to Particulate Emissions from Surface

Contamination Sites,” EPA Publication No. EPA/600/8-85/002

(February 1985), PB 85-192219.

"Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I; Human Health

Evaluation Manual (Part A)", Interim Final, EPA Publication No.

EPA/540/1-89/002 (December 1989).

"Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I; Human Health

Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance, Dermal Risk Assessment

Interim Guidance", Draft (August 18, 1992).

"Soil Screening Guidance: Technical Background Document", EPA

Publication No. EPA/540/R-95/128, PB96-963502 (May 1996).

"Soil Screening Guidance: User's Guide", EPA Publication No.

EPA/540/R-96/018, PB96-963505 (April 1996).

"Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual", EPA Publication No.

EPA/540/1-88/001 (April 1988).

RCRA Facility Investigation Guidance, Interim Final, developed by USEPA

(EPA 530/SW-89-031), 4 volumes (May 1989).

CFR (Code of Federal Regulations). Available from the Superintendent of

Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 (202)

783-3238:

40 CFR 761.120 (1993).

This Section incorporates no later editions or amendments.

SOURCE: Amended at 22 Ill. Reg. ______________, effective, _______________________.

SUBPART C: EXPOSURE ROUTE EVALUATIONS

Section 742.310

Inhalation Exposure Route

The inhalation exposure route may be excluded from consideration if:

The requirements of Sections 742.300 and 742.305 are met; and

An institutional control, in accordance with Subpart J, is in place that meets the

following requirements:

Either:

The concentration of any contaminant of concern within ten feet

of the land surface or within ten feet of any man-made pathway

shall not exceed the Tier 1 remediation objective under Subpart E

for the inhalation exposure route; or

An engineered barrier, as set forth in Subpart K and approved by

the Agency, is in place; and

Requires safety precautions for the construction worker if the Tier 1

construction worker remediation objectives are exceeded.

SOURCE: Amended at 22 Ill. Reg. ______________, effective, _______________________.

SUBPART I: TIER 3 EVALULATION

Section 742.900

Tier 3 Evaluation Overview

Tier 3 sets forth a flexible framework to develop remediation objectives outside

of the requirements of Tiers 1 and 2. Although Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations

are not prerequisites to conduct Tier 3 evaluations, data from Tier 1 and Tier 2

can assist in developing remediation objectives under a Tier 3 evaluation.

The levels of detail required to adequately characterize a site depends on the

particular use of Tier 3. Tier 3 can require additional investigative efforts

beyond those described in Tier 2 to characterize the physical setting of the site.

However, in situations where remedial efforts have simply reached a physical

obstruction additional investigation may not be necessary for a Tier 3 submittal.

Situations that can be considered for a Tier 3 evaluation include, but are not

limited to:

Modification of parameters not allowed under Tier 2;

Use of models different from those used in Tier 2;

Use of additional site data to improve or confirm predictions of exposed

receptors to contaminants of concern;

Analysis of site-specific risks using formal risk assessment, probabilistic

data analysis, and sophisticated fate and transport models (e.g.,

requesting a target hazard quotient greater than 1 or a target cancer risk

greater than 1 in 1,000,000);

Requests for site-specific remediation objectives because an assessment

indicates further remediation is not practical;

Incomplete human exposure pathway(s) not excluded under Subpart C;

Use of toxicological-specific information not available from the sources

listed in Tier 2:

Land uses which are substantially different from the assumed residential

or industrial/commercial property uses of a site (e.g., as

site will be used

for recreation in the future and cannot be evaluated in Tiers 1 or 2); and

Requests for site-specific remediation objectives which exceed Tier 1

groundwater remediation objectives so long as the following is

demonstrated:

TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL, THE EXCEEDENCE OF

THE GROUNDWATER QUALITY STANDARD HAS BEEN

MINIMIZED AND BENEFICIAL USE APPROPRIATE TO

THE GROUNDWATER THAT WAS IMPACTED HAS BEEN

RETURNED; AND

ANY THREAT TO HUMAN HEALTH OR THE

ENVIRONMENT HAS BEEN MINIMIZED. (Section

58.5(D)(4)(A) of the Act)

For requests of a target cancer risk ranging between 1 in 1,000,000 and 1 in

10,000 at the point of human exposure or a target hazard quotient greater than 1

at the point of human exposure, the requirements of Section 742.915 shall be

followed. Requests for a target cancer risk exceeding 1 in 10,000 at the point

of human exposure are not allowed.

Requests for approval of a Tier 3 evaluation must be submitted to the Agency

for review under the specific program under which remediation is performed.

When reviewing a submittal under Tier 3, the Agency shall consider

WHETHER THE INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS REACHED

ARE SUPPORTED BY THE INFORMATION GATHERED. (Section

58.7(e)(1) of the Act). The Agency shall approve a Tier 3 evaluation if the

person submits the information required under this Part and establishes through

such information that public health is protected and that specified risks to human

health and the environment have been minimized.

SOURCE: Amended at 22 Ill. Reg. ______________, effective, _______________________.

Section

Section 742.APPENDIX

742.APPENDIX A:

A: GeneralGeneral

TABLE

TABLE H:H: Chemicals

Chemicals Whose

Whose Tier

Tier 1 1 Class

Class I I Groundwater

Groundwater Remediation

Remediation ObjectiveObjective

Exceeds

Exceeds the

the 1 1 in

in 1,000,000

1,000,000 Cancer

Cancer Risk

Risk ConcentrationConcentration..

Class I Groundwater

1 in 1,000,000 Cancer

Remediation Objective

Risk Concentration

ADL

Chemical

(mg/l)

Aldrin

0.00004

0.0000025

0.00004

Benzo(a)pyrene

0.0002

0.0000512

0.00023

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether

0.01

0.0000377

0.01

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

0.006

0.00361

0.0027

Carbon Tetrachloride

0.005

0.000366

0.00003

Chlordane

0.002

0.0000366

0.00014

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene

0.0003

0.00000512

0.0003

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

0.0002

0.0000361

0.0002

1,2-Dibromoethane

0.00005

0.000000410

0.00005

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine

0.02

0.0000819

0.02

1,2-Dichloroethane

0.005

0.000494

0.00003

Dieldrin

0.00002

0.00000253

0.00002

Heptachlor

0.0004

0.00000819

0.00003

Heptachlor epoxide

0.0002

0.00000494

0.00032

Hexachlorobenzene

0.00006

0.0000253

0.00006

alpha-HCH

0.00003

0.00000614

0.00003

Tetrachloroethylene

0.005

0.000716

0.00001

Toxaphene

0.003

0.0000377

0.00086

Vinyl chloride

0.002

0.00001545

0.00006

Ionizable Organics

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine

0.01

0.00717

0.01

Nitrosodi-n-propylamine

0.01

0.00000512

0.01

Pentachlorophenol

0.001

0.000371

0.001

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

0.0064

0.00377

0.0064

Inorganics

Arsenic

0.05

0.0000257

0.001

Beryllium

0.004

0.00000832

0.004

SOURCE: Amended at 22 Ill. Reg. ____________, effective _______________________.

Section 742.APPENDIX B:

Tier 1 Tables and Illustrations

Section 742.Table C:

pH Specific Soil Remediation Objectives for Inorganics and Ionizing Organics for the Soil

Component of the Groundwater Ingestion Route (Class I Groundwater)

Chemical (totals)

(mg/kg)

pH 4.5 to

4.74

pH 4.75

to 5.24

pH 5.25

to 5.74

pH 5.75

to 6.24

pH 6.25

to 6.64

pH 6.65

to 6.89

pH 6.9

to 7.24

pH 7.25

to 7.74

pH 7.75

to 8.0

Inorganics

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

260

490

850

1,200

1,500

1,600

1,700

1,800

2,100

Beryllium

1.1

2.1

3.4

6.6

140

1,000

8,000

Cadmium

1.0

1.7

2.7

3.7

5.2

7.5

430

Chromium (+6)

Copper

330

580

2,100

11,000

59,000

130,000

200,000

330,000

Cyanide

Mercury

0.01

0.01`

0.03

0.15

0.89

2.1

3.3

6.4

8.0

Nickel

100

130

180

700

3,800

Selenium

8.8

6.3

5.2

4.5

3.3

2.4

Silver

0.24

0.33

0.62

1.5

4.4

8.5

110

Chemical (totals)

(mg/kg)

pH 4.5 to

4.74

pH 4.75

to 5.24

pH 5.25

to 5.74

pH 5.75

to 6.24

pH 6.25

to 6.64

pH 6.65

to 6.89

pH 6.9

to 7.24

pH 7.25

to 7.74

pH 7.75

to 8.0

Thallium

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.0

3.4

3.8

Vanadium

980

Zinc

1,000

1,800

2,600

3,600

5,100

6,200

7,500

16,000

53,000

Organics

Benzoic Acid

440

420

410

400

2-Chlorophenol

4.0

3.9

3.6

3.1

2,4-Dichlorophenol

1.0

0.86

0.69

Dinoseb

8.4

4.5

1.9

0.82

0.43

0.34

0.31

0.27

0.25

Pentachlorophenol

0.54

0.32

0.15

0.07

0.04

0.03

0.02

2,4,5-TP (Silvex)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

400

390

370

320

270

230

130

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

0.37

0.36

0.34

0.269

0.20

0.15

0.13

0.09

0.07

SOURCE: Amended at 22 Ill. Reg. ________, effective _____________________.

Section 742.APPENDIX B

Tier I Tables and Illustrations

Section 742.Table D:

pH Specific Soil Remediation Objectives for Inorganics and Ionizing Organics for the Soil

Component of the Groundwater Ingestion Route (Class II Groundwater)

Chemical (totals)

(mg/kg)

pH 4.5 to

4.74

pH 4.75

to 5.24

pH 5.25

to 5.74

pH 5.75

to 6.24

pH 6.25

to 6.64

pH 6.65

to 6.89

pH 6.9

to 7.24

pH 7.25

to 7.74

pH 7.75

to 8.0

Inorganics

Antimony

Arsenic

100

110

120

Barium

260

490

850

1,200

1,500

1,600

1,700

1,800

2,100

Beryllium

140

260

420

820

2,800

7,900

17,000

130,000

1,000,000

Cadmium

110

590

4,300

Chromium (+6)

No Data

Copper

330

580

2,100

11,000

59,000

130,000

200,000

330,000

Cyanide

120

Mercury

0.05

0.06

0.14

0.75

4.4

Nickel

400

730

1,100

1,500

2,000

2,600

3,500

14,000

76,000

Selenium

8.8

6.3

5.2

4.5

3.3

2.4

Thallium

Zinc

2,000

3,600

5,200

7,200

10,000

12,000

15,000

32,000

110,000

Chemical (totals)

(mg/kg)

pH 4.5 to

4.74

pH 4.75

to 5.24

pH 5.25

to 5.74

pH 5.75

to 6.24

pH 6.25

to 6.64

pH 6.65

to 6.89

pH 6.9

to 7.24

pH 7.25

to 7.74

pH 7.75

to 8.0

Organics

Benzoic Acid

440

420

410

400

2-Chlorophenol

3.6

3.1

2,4-Dichlorophenol

1.0

0.86

0.69

Dinoseb

8.2

4.3

3.4

3.1

2.7

2.5

Pentachlorophenol

2.7

1.6

0.75

0.33

0.18

0.15

0.12

0.11

0.10

2,4,5-TP (Silvex)

130

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

2,000

1,900

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

640

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

0.37

1.9

0.36

1.8

0.34

1.7

0.26

1.4

0.20

1.0

0.15

0.77

0.13

0.09

0.07

SOURCE: Amended at 22 Ill. Reg. ___________, effective, _________________________.

Section 742.APPENDIX C:

Tier 2 Tables and Illustrations

Section 742.TABLE I:

Values for Ionizing Organics as a Function of pH (cm

/g or L/kg)

Benzoic Acid

2-Chloro-

phenol

2,4-

Dichloro-

phenol

Pentachloro-

phenol

2,4,5-

Trichloro-

phenol

2,4,6-

Trichloro-

phenol

Dinoseb

2,3,5-TP

(Silvex)

4.5

1.07E+01

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

1.34E+04

2.37E+03

1.06E+03

3.00E+034

1.28E+04

4.6

9.16E+00

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

1.24E+04

2.37E+03

1.05E+03

2.71E+034

1.13E+04

4.7

7.79E+00

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

1.13E+04

2.37E+03

1.05E+03

2.41E+034

1.01E+04

4.8

6.58E+00

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

1.02E+04

2.37E+03

1.05E+03

2.12E+034

9.16E+03

4.9

5.54E+00

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

9.05E+03

2.37E+03

1.04E+03

1.85E+04

8.40E+03

5.0

4.64E+00

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

7.96E+03

2.36E+03

1.03E+03

1.59E+04

7.76E+03

5.1

3.88E+00

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

6.93E+03

2.36E+03

1.02E+03

1.36E+04

7.30E+03

5.2

3.25E+00

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

5.97E+03

2.35E+03

1.01E+03

1.15E+04

6.91E+03

5.3

2.72E+00

3.98E+02

1.59E+02

5.10E+03

2.34E+03

9.99E+02

9.66E+03

6.60E+03

5.4

2.29E+00

3.98E+02

1.58E+02

4.32E+03

2.33E+03

9.82E+02

8.10E+03

6.36E+03

5.5

1.94E+00

3.97E+02

1.58E+02

3.65E+03

2.32E+03

9.62E+02

6.77E+03

6.16E+03

5.6

1.65E+00

3.97E+02

1.58E+02

3.07E+03

2.31E+03

9.38E+02

5.65E+03

6.00E+03

5.7

1.42E+00

3.97E+02

1.58E+02

2.58E+03

2.29E+03

9.10E+02

4.73E+03

5.88E+03

5.8

1.24E+00

3.97E+02

1.58E+02

2.18E+03

2.27E+03

8.77E+02

3.97E+03

5.78E+03

5.9

1.09E+00

3.97E+02

1.57E+02

1.84E+03

2.24E+03

8.39E+02

3.35E+03

5.70E+03

Benzoic Acid

2-Chloro-

phenol

2,4-

Dichloro-

phenol

Pentachloro-

phenol

2,4,5-

Trichloro-

phenol

2,4,6-

Trichloro-

phenol

Dinoseb

2,3,5-TP

(Silvex)

6.0

9.69E-01

3.96E+02

1.57E+02

1.56E+03

2.21E+03

7.96E+02

2.84E+03

5.64E+03

6.1

8.75E-01

3.96E+02

1.57E+02

1.33E+03

2.17E+03

7.48E+02

2.43E+03

5.59E+03

6.2

7.99E-01

3.96E+02

1.56E+02

1.15E+03

2.12E+03

6.97E+02

2.10E+03

5.55E+03

6.3

7.36E-01

3.95E+02

1.55E+02

9.98E+02

2.06E+03

6.44E+02

1.83E+03

5.52E+03

6.4

6.89E-01

3.94E+02

1.54E+02

8.77E+02

1.99E+03

5.89E+02

1.62E+03

5.50E+03

6.5

6.51E-01

3.93E+02

1.53E+02

7.81E+02

1.91E+03

5.33E+02

1.45E+03

5.48E+03

6.6

6.20E-01

3.92E+02

1.52E+02

7.03E+02

1.82E+03

4.80E+02

1.32E+03

5.46E+03

6.7

5.95E-01

3.90E+02

1.50E+02

6.40E+02

1.71E+03

4.29E+02

1.21E+03

5.45E+03

6.8

5.76E-01

3.88E+02

1.47E+02

5.92E+02

1.60E+03

3.81E+02

1.12E+03

5.44E+03

6.9

5.60E-01

3.86E+02

1.45E+02

5.52E+02

1.47E+03

3.38E+02

1.05E+03

5.43E+03

7.0

5.47E-01

3.83E+02

1.41E+02

5.21E+02

1.34E+03

3.00E+02

9.96E+02

5.43E+03

7.1

5.38E-01

3.79E+02

1.38E+02

4.96E+02

1.21E+03

2.67E+02

9.52E+02

5.42E+03

7.2

5.32E-01

3.75E+02

1.33E+02

4.76E+02

1.07E+03

2.39E+02

9.18E+02

5.42E+03

7.3

5.25E-01

3.69E+02

1.28E+02

4.61E+02

9.43E+02

2.15E+02

8.90E+02

5.42E+03

7.4

5.19E-01

3.62E+02

1.21E+02

4.47E+02

8.19E+02

1.95E+02

8.68E+02

5.41E+03

7.5

5.16E-01

3.54E+02

1.14E+02

4.37E+02

7.03E+02

1.78E+02

8.50E+02

5.41E+03

7.6

5.13E-01

3.44E+02

1.07E+02

4.29E+02

5.99E+02

1.64E+02

8.36E+02

5.41E+03

Benzoic Acid

2-Chloro-

phenol

2,4-

Dichloro-

phenol

Pentachloro-

phenol

2,4,5-

Trichloro-

phenol

2,4,6-

Trichloro-

phenol

Dinoseb

2,3,5-TP

(Silvex)

7.7

5.09E-01

3.33E+02

9.84E+01

4.23E+02

5.07E+02

1.53E+02

8.25E+02

5.41E+03

7.8

5.06E-01

3.19E+02

8.97E+01

4.18E+02

4.26E+02

1.44E+02

8.17E+02

5.41E+03

7.9

5.06E-01

3.04E+02

8.07E+01

4.14E+02

3.57E+02

1.37E+02

8.10E+02

5.41E+03

8.0

5.06E-01

2.86E+02

7.17E+01

4.10E+02

2.98E+02

1.31E+02

8.04E+02

5.41E+03

SOURCE: Amended at 22 Ill. Reg. ___________, effective ___________________________.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

the above opinion and order was adopted on the 16th day of April 1998, by a vote of 7-0.

Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board