REC~iVi!D

CLERK’S OFRCE

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

OCT

15

2003

STATE OF ILUNOIS

Pollution

Control Board

INTERIM PHOSPHORUS EFFLUENT

)

STANDARD, PROPOSED

35

ILL. ADM.

)

R2004-026

CODE 304.123(G-K)

)

Rulemaking—Water

)

NOTICE OF FILING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have filed the attached PRE-FILED TESTIMONY

OF

JOHN R. SHEAFFER.

Albert F. Ettinger (Reg. No. 3125045)

Counsel forEnvironmental Law & Policy

Center, Prairie Rivers Network, and Sierra

Club

DATED:

October

15, 2004

Environmental Law & Policy Center

35 East Wacker Drive,

Suite

1300

Chicago, IL

60601

312-795-3707

---

RE CE

~V ED

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

CLERK’S

OFACE

IN THE MATTER OF:

)

OCT

15

2003

INTERIM PHOSPHORUS EFFLUENT

)

R2OO4~O2óSTATEOF

ILUNO~S

STANDARD, PROPOSE

35 ILL. ADM

)

~

Board

CODE 304.123(G-K)

)

PRE-FILED

TESTIMONY

OF

JOHN R. SHEAFFER

Introduction

Sheaffer

International,

L.L.C.

submits

the

following

Pre-Filed

Testimony of John

R.

Sheaffer for presentation

at the

October 26-27, 2004

hearing scheduled in

the

above-

referenced matter:

Testimony of John

R.

Sheaffer, Ph.D.

My name is

Jack Sheaffer.

I am Chairman ofSheaffer International,

L.L.C. (SIL)

in

Glen

Ellyn,

Illinois

and

serve

as

Chairman

of the

Environmental

Commission

of

DuPage County,

Illinois.

I have a

B.S.

in

Science

from

Millersburg

State

University

(Pennsylvania) and a M.S.

and Ph.D.

from the University of Chicago.

When the Illinois

General Assembly created the LakeMichigan and Adjoining Lands Study Commissjon to

create

a

Bill

of Rights

for

Lake Michigan,

I

served

as

the

Executive Director of the

Commission.

The Bill ofRights provided the framework for the Clean Water Act, which

was enacted by Congress.

The goal ofthe Act is to

eliminate the discharge ofpollutants

into the navigable

waters.

Senator Muskie

stated that

the act

meant

one

simple

thing:

streams

and rivers are no longer a part ofthe sewage treatment process.

In my service as

Science Advisor to the Secretary of the Army, I helped to develop the

1972

Clean Water

Act.

In recognition

of this,

I

received

a

Decoration

for EXCEPTIONAL

CIVILIAN

SERVICE~

by the Secretary ofthe Army.

Also, I served a term on

the Science Advisory

Board

of the

International

Joint Commission.

I

worked with

the Illinois

EPA on

the

formulation

of

the

ILLINOIS

DESIGN

STANDARDS

FOR

SLOW

RATE

LAND

APPLICATION OF

TREATED WASTEWATER, 35111.

Adm Code PART 372 in

1995.

In my

professional

work at

SIL

(and

predecessor firms),

I have

directed the planning,

design,

engineering,

permitting

and

implementation

of

approximately

25

“Sheaffer”

Modular Reclamation and Reuse Systems

in the State ofIllinois

since

1980.

The Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

(IEPA)

issued

“no-discharge” permits

to

construct,

own and

operate each of these Sheaffer

Systems.

The IEPA has renewed

the operating

permits

for all

Sheaffer

Systems

operating

in

conformance with

SIL

design

and

O&M

guideline since 1980.

It is my testimony that the Board should adopt and enforce limitations on the discharge of

Phosphorus (P), Nitrogen (N) and other nutrients contained in sewage effluent that is

discharged into the surface waterways ofthe State ofIllinois.

The alternative available

---

to all concerned entities and localities is to use the no-discharge method that is prescribed

in IEPA’s Land Application ofTreated Wastewater Standards.

The Sheaffer System is

one technology that is proven to be cost-effective as a permitable no-discharge system.

The Sheaffer System is

a reliable method of attaining the desired end of “no adverse

impact” on the waters ofthe State ofIllinois.

Underthe IEPA no-discharge permit terms and conditions, the Sheaffer System:

•

Eliminates

the

discharge of pollutants,

including

nutrients,

into

the

surface

waterways—rivers, streams, lakes—ofthe

State ofIllinois.

•

Beneficially

reuses

(recycles)

the

water

and

the

nutrients

on

the

land

to

nourish

growing

vegetation

on

farms,

golf

courses,

parklands,

forest

preserves, campus landscapes, and open space.

•

Effectively

contains and

eliminates

organic sewage soljds

(sludge)

for up

to

40

years

in

the

reclamation

facilities,

thereby preventing

these

undesirable

pollutants from degrading the environment.

•

Reliably

controls

the

nuisance

of

odors

and,

abates

the

emission

of

air

pollutants from the reclamation facilities.

•

Is cost effective to design, permit,

construct, operate and maintain.

•

Is

suitable

for

use

in

reclaiming

wastewater

generated

from

municipal,

residential, industrial, commercial, recreational and institutional users.

•

Is

affordable

for

application

in

a

wide

range

of

sizes,

from

individual

buildings to entire communities.

•

Protects the quality of our water resources

(drinking water)

and

therefore, the

public health ofthe people ofthe State of Illinois.

The Board’s anti-degradation regulations

that became effective on February 22,

2002

(R

01-013) resulted in the IEPA’s permit

review and issuance process for authorizing a new

or increased discharge ofwastewater into water ofthe state.

Specifically:

•

.

.

The

revised

anti-degradation

regulations

focus

less

on

the

requirements

necessary

to

meet

water

quality

standards

(although

compliance

with

these

standards

is

still necessary)

and more on

what

kind of treatment

system

can be

designed to have the least adverse impact on the receiving water.

Any discharge oftreated wastewater to surface waters

has thepotential to

cause

the quality

o

the receiving water to become degraded.

Therefore,

systems that do

not discharge

should

be

considered and

must be

deemed not feasible

before

a

discharging system can be

considered.

Examples ofnon-discharging systems are

golfcourse,

agriculturql land,

and other types ofspray irrigation, seepagefields,

and

other

types

of

subsurface

discharges.

(Thomas

G.

McSwiggin,

P.E.,

Manager,

Permit

Section,

Division of Water

Pollution

Control,

IEPA, July

18,

2002, emphasis added).

Each

Shèaffer

System

permitted by

the

IEPA is

deemed

to

be

a

no-discharge system.

Therefore, the cost-effective Sheaffer System eliminates

the discharge ofP and N into the

waters

of the

state.

With

this

alternative

available

and

encouraged

by

IEPA,

the

establishment of (stringent) limits on the discharge of P, N and other nutrients in treated

---

effluent into the waters ofthe state should be considered appropriate in

order to

conform

to

the anti-degradation regulation adopted by

the Board.

This was stated clearly in Mr.

McSwiggin’s letter of July

18, 2002:

The

primary

purpose

of the anti-degradation

analysis

is

to

ensure that new

(or

expanded) discharges do not cause degradation in

the water into which discharge

occurs unless

absolutely necessaly...the degradation must be held to

the smallest

amountpractically achievable...

Of course, a Sheaffer System achieves this purpose by eliminating the discharge and by

beneficially recycling the nutrients.

Ifdischarges are shown to be unavoidable, an

effort

needs to

be made to limit the discharges ofP and N, to the degreepractical.

This means

establishing and enforcing (stringent) limits.

It is

argued by some that “little is really known about the variability ofperformance of

natural systems.

The ability ofsuch systems

to

consistently meet stringent TN and TP

effluent limits on a consistent basis in cold climates like Illinois

is

yet unknown.

These

systems are subject to the whims ofnature and noncompliance may be a significant

problem.” Illinois

Association ofWastewater Agencies, April

14, 2003.J

The Sheaffer System and the IEPA permitting process prove such statements to be

uninformed and inaccurate.

In fact, extensive data is readily available on the Sheaffer

Systems, including performance, health effects and

costs—all parts ofthe method to

determine the feasibility of any treatment process.

It should be pointed out that any

comprehensive analysis ‘of the “technical feasibility and cost to meet nutrient standards in

the state ofIllinois”, should have considered and utilized this readily available data on

no-discharge reuse systems such as the Sheaffer System.

Therefore, I question the

effectiveness and credibility ofthe report prepared by Consoer Townsend Envirodyne

Engineers because it did not do this.

The

goals ofthe State and ofthe Nation call for the move to technology that eliminates

the discharge of nutrients into navigable waters.

The Clean Water Act declares, “It is the

National goal that the discharge ofpollutants into the navigable waters be eliminated by

1985.”

The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits seek to

eliminate discharges, not accommodate them.

Therefore,

I believe the report’s

documentation offeasible ways to meet nutrient standards in the state of Illinois has

injudiciously limited its focus to treatment processes that fundamentally go against the

goals ofthe

State and ofthe Nation.

The population in Illinois

is estimated to be

12,600,620.

At a usage of 100 gallons per

day (gpd) per person, the domestic wastewater flow would be 1,260,062,000 gpd.

Ifall

ofthis water was reclaimed and reused, 367,805 acres couldbe supplied with water and

nutrients.

Since there are 27,700,000 acres offarmland in Illinois,

only 0.013

ofthe

farmland couldbe irrigated.

The 367,805 acres would have the potential to sequester

about 110,341,500 tons ofcarbon annually.

(The equivalent amount ofcarbon

discharged by 89,700,000 automobiles).

Corporations are paying as much as $10.00 per

---

ton ofcarbon sequestered.

Thus, there is a potential benefit of$1,103,415,000 per year

from this segment ofthe wastewater reclamation and reuse technology.

A single program

has the potential to simultaneously improve both water quality, air quality and enhance

land quality.

As a result, I support discharge limits

on total phosphorus

and total nitrogen in the state

of Illinois.

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Albert F. Ettinger, certify that on October 12, 2004, I filed the attached PRE-FILED

TESTIMONY OF JOHN R.

SHEAFFER. An original and 9 copies was filed, on recycled paper,

with the illinois Pollution Control Board,

James R. Thompson Center,

100 West Randolph, Suite

11-500, Chicago, IL

60601, and copies were served via United States Mail to

those individuals

on the included service list.

Albert F. Ettinger (Reg. No. 3125045)

Counsel for Environmental Law & Policy

Center, Prairie Rivers Network, and Sierra

Club

DATED:

October

15,

2004

Environmental Law & Policy Center

35 East Wacker Drive, Suite

1300

Chicago, IL

60601

312-795-3707

---

SERVICE LIST

Sanjay K.

Sofat, Assistant Counsel

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

1021

N. Grand Avenue East

P0 Box

19276

Springfield, IL 62794

Roy M. Harsch

Gardner Carton & Douglas

191

N. Wacker Drive, Suite 3700

Chicago, IL 60606

Matthew J. Dunn, Chief

Office ofthe Attorney General

100 W. Randolph,

11th

Floor

Chicago, IL 60601

Robert A. Messina, General Counsel

Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group

3150 Roland Avenue

Springfield, IL 62703

John McMahon

Wilkie & McMahon

8 EastMain Street

Champaign, IL 61820

Jonathan Furr

Department of Natural Resources

One Natural Resources Way

Springfield, IL 62702

Richard Lanyon

MWRDGC

-

100 E. Erie

Chicago, IL 60611

David Horn, Asst. Prof., Biology

Aurora University

347 Gladstone Avenue

Aurora, IL 60506

Darin Boyer

City of Plano

-

17 E. Main Street

-

Plano,

IL

60545