J. Philip Novak, Chairman
Board Members:
G. Tanner Girard, Thomas E. Johnson,
Nicholas J. Melas, Andrea S. Moore
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 W. Randolph, Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(312) 814-3620
(312) 814-6032 TDD
Illinois Pollution Control Board
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19274
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9274
(217) 524-8500
Web Site: http://www.ipcb.state.il.us
Letter from the Chairman
As you may know, the Board has recently considered proposed
rules relating to radium and phosphorus in the State’s waters.
At its April 7, 2005 meeting, the Board adopted as a second first-
notice proposal radium standards originally filed by the Illinois
Environmental Agency (IEPA) on January 13, 2004. The Board’s proposal
reflects testimony received during five days of public hearings and in a
substantial number of public comments.
Specifically, the Board’s proposal includes a new general use water
quality standard of 3.75 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) combined radium 226
and 228 in place of the existing general use water quality standard of radium
226 standard of 1 pCi/L. This standard would continue to apply to all
general use waters of the State and to the Lake Michigan Basin. The
proposal also applies a combined radium standard of 30 pCi/L to stream
segments that receive discharge from publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs) receiving wastewater discharge
from public water supplies using groundwater with a high radium concentration as a drinking water source. The 30
pCi/L combined radium 226 and 228 standard will apply only from the point of discharge to the point one mile
downstream from the discharge outfall.
The Board found in its order that this second first-notice proposal will protect all designated uses of the
State’s waters. The Board also found that the proposal will achieve the IEPA’s goal of relieving a regulatory
burden for many existing POTWs. POTWs that receive wastewater from public drinking water supplies using high
radium groundwater as a source of raw potable water will benefit because the Board’s proposed rulemaking
provides a higher combined radium standard for stream segments receiving their discharge. The Board is accepting
public comment on this second first-notice proposal.
Also at its April 7, 2005 meeting, the Board adopted for first notice proposed phosphorus regulations
originally filed by the IEPA on May 14, 2004. The Board has now held two days of public hearings and received a
substantial number of public comments.
The IEPA proposed a phosphorus effluent limit of 1.0 milligram per liter (mg/l) as a monthly average that
would apply to new or expanded discharges from treatment works with a designed average flow over 1.0 million
gallons per day receiving municipal or domestic wastewater, or a total phosphorus effluent load of 25 lbs/day or
more. However, if the source can demonstrate that phosphorus is not the limiting nutrient in the receiving water or
that alternative phosphorus effluent limits are warranted by the aquatic environment in the receiving water, the 1.0
mg/l limit would not apply. The proposal also provides that the new water quality standards are not effective until
approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
The Board’s orders and proposed rules are available through the Clerk’s Office On-Line (COOL) at
www.ipcb.state.il.us. I invite you to take a closer look at those documents. We encourage you to participate in
these proceedings and to assist us in the development of sound environmental policy for the people of Illinois.
Sincerely,
J. Philip Novak
Chairman
Environmental Register – March 2005
1
Inside This Issue:
FEDERAL UPDATE
P. 1
APPELLATE UPDATE
P. 2
RULE UPDATE
P. 6
BOARD ACTIONS
P. 12
NEW CASES
P. 19
BOARD CALENDAR
P. 20
CLASS III GROUNDWATER FINAL LISTING NOTICE P. 21
Federal Update
United States Environmental Protection Agency Adopts Amendments to the Uniform Hazardous Waste
Manifest Regulations Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
On March 4, 2005 (70 Fed. Reg. 10775) the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) adopted new
requirements revising the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest regulations and the manifest and continuation sheet
forms used to track hazardous waste from a generator's site to the site of its disposition.
The revisions standardize the content and appearance of the manifest form and continuation sheet, make the forms
available from a greater number of sources, and adopt new procedures for tracking certain types of waste shipments
with the manifest. The latter types of shipments include hazardous wastes that destination facilities reject, wastes
consisting of residues from non-empty hazardous waste containers, and wastes ente
ring or leaving the United States.
USEPA had included provisions for e-manifests in its original proposal (
See
66 Fed. Reg. 28240, May 22, 2001),
but withdrew those provisions in response to public comments. USEPA stated that it would consider e-manifest
requirements in a separate rulemaking.
This final rule is effective September 6, 2005.
For further information regarding specific aspects of this notice, contact Bryan Groce, Office of Solid Waste,
groce.bryan@epa.gov
Environmental Register – March 2005
2
For further information contact Jeff Smith, Office of Wastewater Management, Office of Water, Environmental
Protection Agency (4203M), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:(202) 564-
0652; fax number: (202) 564-6431; e-mail address: smith.jeff@epa.gov.
United States Environmental Protection Agency Proposes Amendments to the Clean Air Act National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Oil and Gas Activity That Disturbs One to Five Acres
On March 25, 2005 (70 Fed. Reg. 15250) the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) proposed
amendments to exempt permanently from the Clean Air Act (CAA) Title V operating permit program five
categories of nonmajor (area) sources subject to national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP). The five source categories are dry cleaners, halogenated solvent degreasers, chrome electroplaters,
ethylene oxide sterilizers and secondary aluminum smelters.
Consistent with the CAA exemption requirements, USEPA is proposing to make a finding that compliance with
Title V permitting requirements is impracticable, infeasible, or unnecessarily burdensome on the five source
categories. USEPA is proposing to decline making such a finding for a sixth category: area sources subject to the
secondary lead smelter NESHAP.
A previous deferral from permitting for these six categories expired on December 9, 2004, subjecting all such
sources to the title V program unless and until USEPA finalizes an exemption for a category.
Comments must be received on or before May 24, 2005. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No.
OAR-2004-0010, by one of the following methods:
(1) Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
(2) Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, USEPA's
electronic public docket and comment system, is USEPA's preferred method for
receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
(3) E-mail: Send electronic mail (e-mail) to EPA Docket Center at a-and-r-
docket@epamail.epa.gov.
Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0010.
For further information contact Mr. Jeff Herring, Information Transfer and Program Integration Division, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Mail Code C304-04, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-3195; fax number:(919) 541-5509; and e-mail
address: herring.jeff@epa.gov.
Pursuant to Section 9.1(b) of the Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/9.1(b) (2002)), once adopted by
the USEPA, NESHAP rules are applicable and enforceable under the Act without further action by the Board.
Appellate Update
Third District Dismisses Premature Appeal in Midwest Generation EME, LLC v. Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency and Illinois Pollution Control Board, No. 3-04-0945 (March 4, 2005) (PCB 04-185)
In a March 4, 2005 final unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23 (155 Ill.2d R. 23), the Third District
Appellate Court dismissed, for lack of jurisdiction, the appeal captioned Midwest Generation EME, LLC v. Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency and Illinois Pollution Control Board, No. 3-04-0945 (March 4, 2005). The Board
and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) had moved for dismissal, arguing that the appeal was
premature. The Court agreed, dismissing the appeal in a one-paragraph order.
Environmental Register – March 2005
3
The case at issue here is Midwest Generation EME, LLC v. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, PCB 04-185.
This case is a pending trade secret appeal that has not yet been to hearing.
Background on Trade Secrets
By way of background, under Section 7 of the Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/7 (2002)), all files,
records, and data of the Board, IEPA, and the Illinois Department of Natural Resources are open to reasonable
public inspection and copying. However, the Act provides that certain materials may represent “trade secrets,”
“privileged” information, “internal communications of the several agencies,” or “secret manufacturing processes or
confidential data” and, accordingly, be protected from public disclosure.
See
415 ILCS 5/7(a) (2002);
see also
415
ILCS 5/7.1 (2002) (trade secrets). Even so, the Act denies protection from public disclosure for: effluent data
under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program; emission data to the extent
required by the federal Clean Air Act; and the quantity, identity, and generator of substances being placed or to be
placed in landfills or hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities.
See
415 ILCS 5/7(b)-(d) (2002).
In Midwest’s appeal, trade secret status is at issue. The Act defines “trade secret” as follows:
[T]he whole or any portion or phase of any scientific or technical information,
design, process (including a manufacturing process), procedure, formula or
improvement, or business plan which is secret in that it has not been published
or disseminated or otherwise become a matter of general public knowledge, and
which has competitive value. A trade secret is presumed to be secret when the
owner thereof takes reasonable measures to prevent it from becoming available
to persons other than those selected by the owner to have access thereto for
limited purposes. 415 ILCS 5/3.48 (2002).
The Board has established procedures for identifying and protecting articles that constitute trade secrets or other
non-disclosable information.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 130. “Article” means “any object, material, device or
substance, or whole or partial copy thereof, including any writing, record, document, recording, drawing, sample,
specimen, prototype, model, photograph, culture, microorganism, blueprint or map.” 415 ILCS 5/7.1 (2002).
The owner of an article seeking trade secret protection for the article must claim that the article represents a trade
secret when the owner submits the article to the State agency.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.200(a). The State agency
must consider the claimed information as a trade secret and protect it from disclosure in accordance with Part 130
procedures unless and until the State agency makes a final determination denying the trade secret request and all
appeal times have expired without that final determination being overturned.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.200(d),
130.210.
The owner of the article may submit a “Statement of Justification” for trade secret protection (
see
35 Ill. Adm. Code
130.203) to the State agency at the time the owner submits the article, or at a later time, but in no event later than the
time limit of Section 130.202.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.200(c). Section 130.202 requires the owner to submit the
Statement of Justification within ten working days of the State agency’s request (
see
35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.202(a)),
which request may be triggered by a FOIA request for the claimed information (
see
35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.201(b)).
The State agency may extend the time period an additional ten working days if timely requested by the owner.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.202(b). The State agency must determine whether the article represents a trade secret within
45 days after receiving a complete Statement of Justification, but the owner may waive out this decision deadline.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 130.206.
Midwest’s Petition for Review
The information at issue in this case relates to Midwest’s six coal-fired power stations, all of which are in Illinois.
In its April 19, 2004 petition for review, Midwest stated that it submitted information to IEPA on November 6,
2003, claiming trade secret protection for the information. Pet. at 1-2. The company explained that it provided the
submittal in response to an information request that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
Environmental Register – March 2005
4
made pursuant to Section 114 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7414). Midwest stated that, as required by
USEPA’s Section 114 request, the company sent a copy of its response to IEPA.
Id
.
IEPA denied trade secret protection for what Midwest described as two types of information: (1) “information
Midwest [] compiled concerning capital projects at each of its coal-fired electric generating units”; and (2)
“information identifying the monthly and annual net generation, the monthly coal heat content, and the monthly net
heat rate for each of its coal-fired units.” Pet. at 2. Midwest argued that IEPA erred in determining the company
failed to demonstrate that the information claimed to be trade secret had not become a matter of general public
knowledge, had competitive value, and did not constitute emission data exempt from protection.
Id
. at 2-5,
Attachment 1.
In a May 6, 2004 order, the Board accepted for hearing Midwest’s petition for review. The Board also directed that,
as Midwest requested, any hearings would be held
in camera
to avoid disclosing to the public the information
claimed to be trade secret. On May 20, 2004, IEPA filed the administrative record of its trade secret determination,
which consists of approximately 2,700 pages, in two volumes: Volume I is redacted so as not to disclose claimed
trade secret information; Volume II contains the unredacted documents claimed to contain trade secrets.
The Board issued an interim order on November 4, 2004. Among other things, the Board denied a motion by
Midwest to partially reconsider the following passage of the Board's May 6, 2004 order: “Hearings will be based
exclusively on the record before IEPA at the time it issued its trade secret determination.
See
35Ill. Adm. Code
105.214(a).” Midwest instead asked the Board to review IEPA's trade secret determination
de novo
,
i.e.
, to consider
new evidence and not just the evidence in the record before IEPA at the time of IEPA's trade secret determination.
Additionally, in its November 4, 2004 order, the Board remanded the matter to IEPA for the limited purpose of
having IEPA state, in a supplemental determination, the reasoning for its denial of trade secret protection. The
Board retained jurisdiction of the trade secret appeal.
Midwest sought review by the Third District Appellate Court of the Board's November 4, 2004 decision. In the
motion to dismiss granted by the court, the Board argued that the appeal was premature and that because Midwest
sought review of a non-final Board order, the court lacked jurisdiction. Among other things, the Board noted that
Midwest did not ask the Board to certify these questions for interlocutory appeal in accordance with the Board's
procedural rule at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.908, citing Illinois Supreme Court Rule 308 (155 Ill.2d R. 308).
Third District Appellate Court Agrees to Publish its Decision Affirming Board Order Vacating Grant of
Local Siting Approval for Landfill Expansion in Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. v. Illinois Pollution
Control Board, County of Kankakee, County Board of Kankakee, City of Kankakee, Merlin Karlock, Keith
Runyon, and Michael Watson, No. 3-03-0924 (February 4, 2005)
(PCB 03-125, PCB 03-133, PCB 03-134,
PCB 03-135 (cons.))
In a March 23, 2005 order, the Third District Appellate Court granted the motion of the Board for publication of the
Court’s February 4, 2005 final unpublished 10-page order under Supreme Court Rule 23 (155 Ill.2d R. 23); the
Third District Appellate Court affirmed the Board's decision to vacate the Kankakee County Board's grant of siting
approval for a landfill expansion in Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. v. Illinois Pollution Control Board, County
of Kankakee, County Board of Kankakee, City of Kankakee, Merlin Karlock, Keith Runyon, and Michael Watson,
No. 3-03-0924 (February 4, 2005). The court’s published 10-page opinion can now serve as helpful precedent in
resolving future cases.
The court’s February 2005 ruling was summarized in detail last month. See
Environmental Register
No. 608
(February 2005) at pp. 3-7. The opinion, which is virtually identical to the unpublished order it replaces, will not be
summarized again in detail here.
In brief, the Board vacated the County Board's decision on jurisdictional grounds. The Board found the County
lacked jurisdiction over the siting application because Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. (WMII) failed to notify a
nearby landowner, Brenda Keller, of its siting application in accordance with Section 39.2(b) of the Act (415 ILCS
5/39.2(b) (2002)). Section 39.2(b) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/39.2(b) (2002)) has three distinct elements. First,
property owners listed on the authentic tax records must be served notice. Second, property owners who own
Environmental Register – March 2005
5
property within 250 feet of the lot line of the proposed facility must be notified. Third, service on those property
owners must be made using certified mail return receipt or personal service.
The Board moved to publish the court's decision primarily because it was the first appellate court to apply to Section
39.2 (b) of the Act the Illinois Supreme Court’s holding in People
ex rel.
v. $30,700 U.S. Currency
et al.
, 199 Ill. 2d
142. 766 N.E.2d 1084 (2002) ($30,700 U.S. Currency). Under $30,700 U.S. Currency, service is deemed complete
once the notice is placed in the mail. In other words, under Section 39.2(b) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/39.2(b) (2002)),
an applicant can effect service by mailing the pre-filing notice to property owners certified mail return receipt and
the service is proper upon mailing. The Board found the Supreme Court’s decision in $30,700 U.S. Currency
effectively overruled the appellate court’s decision in Ogle County Board v. PCB, 272 Ill. App. 3d 184, 649 N.E.2d
545 (2nd Dist 1995) (Ogle County) (finding that actual receipt of notice by the landowner, and not just mailing of it
by the applicant, was required to effectuate service under Section 39.2 (b) of the Act).
The court agreed with the Board's application of $30,700 US Currency to the facts at hand, summarizing the
Supreme Court holding as being that
Jurisdiction is not premised on the recipient's actions, once the letter is received,
but on the form of sending of the letter; jurisdiction will exist as long as the
letter is sent by the prescribed method."
Id.,
slip op. at 8.
The court observed that WMII had cited no authority in support of its contention that the statute is satisfied by
actual or constructive notice, despite its specifications as to acceptable service methods, and that posting or regular
mail service would do. The court remarked that even if Brenda Keller had actual notice, "[n]otice would not have
been achieved by the statutorily-required means and proof of actual notice would not overcome that failure of
compliance."
Ibid
.
Prior to the entry of the order publishing the Third District’s February 4 decision, WMII had filed a petition for
leave to appeal the Third District decision in the Illinois Supreme Court. The petition is still no before the Illinois
Supreme Court.
Fifth District Appellate Court
Grants
Voluntary Dismissal of Appeal and Cross-Appeal in County of Saline
v. Saline County Landfill, Inc. et al., No 5-04-0295 (March 31 and April 4, 2005)
The Fifth District Appellate Court granted the motion of the County of Saline to dismiss its appeal, as well as the
motion of Saline County Landfill to dismiss its cross-appeal in County of Saline v. Saline County Landfill, Inc.,
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and Illinois Pollution Control Board et al., No 5-04-0295 (March 31 and
April 4, 2005). Consequently, the Court also cancelled oral argument in the matter, scheduled for April 6, 2005.
These orders are unpublished under Supreme Court Rule 23 (155 Ill.2d R. 23). Dismissal of the appeals leaves
undisturbed an important Board ruling interpreting Section 39.2(f) of the Environmental Protection Act (Act)(415
ILCS 5/39.2(f) (2002)).
The Board decision on appeal was a May 6, 2004 order in a permit appeal captioned Saline County Landfill, Inc. v.
IEPA and County of Saline (Intervenor), PCB 04-117 (May 6, 2004). On January 8, 2004, Saline County Landfill,
Inc. (SCLI) filed a petition for review of a determination by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) to
deny a permit for expansion of the landfill located in Harrisburg, Saline County. The IEPA denied the permit
because the IEPA determined that SCLI did not provide proof pursuant to 39(c) of the Environmental Protection
Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/39(c) (2002) that SCLI had local siting approval for the expansion of the landfill pursuant to
Section 39.2 of the Act (415 ILCS 5/39.2 (2002)). On February 19, 2004, the Board granted a motion by Saline
County
to intervene in this proceeding in support of the permit denial. The Board found that the IEPA
determination was incorrect. The Board remanded the matter to the IEPA, directing the IEPA to issue the requested
permit.
The issue in this case was whether or not SCLI’s 1996 local siting approval for the expansion of the landfill
continued to be valid. The resolution of that issue required a reading of Section 39.2(f) of the Act (415 ILCS
5/39.2(f) (2002)) which provides in part that:
Environmental Register – March 2005
6
approval shall expire at the end of 3 calendar years from the date upon which it
was granted, and unless within that period the applicant has made application to
the [IEPA] for a permit to develop the site. 415 ILCS 5/39.2(f) (2002).
The plain language of Section 39.2(f) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/39.2(f) (2002)) states that local siting expires
unless
an application is made to the IEAP for development of the site within three years of local siting approval. All
parties agreed that SCLI did apply for a permit within three years but that the permit was denied.
See
Saline County
Landfill, Inc. v. IEPA and County of Saline (Intervenor), PCB 2002-108 ( May 16, 2002). Thus, under the plain
language of the statute, a permit application for development of the site was filed within three years of siting
approval.
The crux of the Board’s holding was:
The statutory language is silent regarding time limitations if the [IEPA] denies a
permit. This is the point where the parties disagree. The [IEPA] and Saline
County argue here, that the statutory language means that the local siting
approval has expired because the instant application was filed after the three
years. SCLI argues that, having timely filed a permit application and diligently
sought a permit, the 1996 siting has not expired.
The Board is persuaded that the local siting approval has not expired. The
statutory language includes other scenarios for when siting expires besides the
three-year time limitation. The statute is silent regarding an [IEPA] permit
denial. Clearly, the legislature understood that not all permits are granted.
Thus, the Board finds that, the legislature’s failure to include a scenario wherein
the [IEPA] denies a permit, indicates the legislature did not intend for a denial
of a permit to have any affect on the three-year time limitation. As long as an
application to develop the site is filed within three years of local siting approval,
whether or not that permit is granted, the Board finds that the requirements of
Section 39.2(f) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/39.2(f) (2002)) are met and local siting
does not expire. Saline County Landfill, Inc. v. IEPA and County of Saline
(Intervenor), PCB 04-117 (May 6, 2004), slip op. at 16
Rule Update
Board Adopts Final Opinion and Order in
RCRA Subtitle C Update, USEPA Amendments (January 1, 2004
through June 30, 2004 and October 25, 2004) (R05-02)
On March 3, 2005, the Board adopted a final opinion and order in RCRA Subtitle C Update, USEPA Amendments
(January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2004 and October 25, 2004) (R05-02). The rulemaking adopts amendments to
the Illinois regulations that are “identical in substance” to hazardous waste regulations adopted by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The USEPA rules implement Subtitle C of the federal Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA Subtitle C) (42 U.S.C. §§ 6921
et seq
. (2002)). The Board made
only minor, nonsubstantive changes to the proposal that was published in the January 3, 2005 issue of the
Illinois
Register
at 28 Ill. Reg. 132, 154, 207, and 232. The Board will hold the amendments for 30 days to give the United
States Environmental Protection Agency time to review the final amendments before filing them with the Secretary
of State.
The substantive amendments adopted in this update dealt with the USEPA actions of April 22, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg.
21737), April 26, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 22602), and October 25, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 62217).
The USEPA action of April 22, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 21737) applies only to members of the National Environmental
Performance Track Program. The amendments relax existing requirements for members of that program. The
amendments extend from 90 days to 180 days the time during which a generator of hazardous waste may
Environmental Register – March 2005
7
accumulate hazardous waste on-site. If the generator accumulates hazardous waste on-site for longer than the
allowable accumulation time, its facility is designated a hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facility.
The amendments impose various waste and facility management requirements, advanced notice, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements on the generator as conditions to the extended accumulation time.
On October 25, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 62217), USEPA adopted corrections to the April 22, 2004 amendments. The
original rule did not impose the facility and waste management standards of Subparts C, D, AA, BB, and CC on the
management of the accumulating hazardous waste. These requirements pertain to preparedness and prevention,
contingency planning and emergency procedures, and air emissions from process vents; equipment leaks; and tanks,
surface impoundments, and containers. USEPA stated that it had inadvertently omitted the references to these
requirements from the final amendments.
The USEPA action of April 26, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 22602) was primarily an action under Section 112 of the federal
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412 (2003)), which requires USEPA to establish national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPs) for new and existing major sources. The NESHAPs are to reflect the
maximum degree of reduction in hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions achievable (MACT). The MACT
standard requires all major sources to achieve the HAP emissions reductions already achieved by the best-operated
sources. Only one segment of the new NESHAP pertains to hazardous waste: the management of captured purge
materials from coating equipment. The management of these materials may be subject to the hazardous waste
standards for equipment leaks in Subparts BB of Parts 264 and 265 of the federal standards for hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (equivalent to Subparts BB and CC of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 724 and 725).
The amendments very clearly exempt from regulation under Subparts BB of Parts 264 and 265 those purged
coatings and solvents from surface coating operations that are subject to the NESHAP applicable to surface coating
of automobiles and light-duty trucks.
Copies of the Board’s opinion and order in R05-02 may be obtained by calling Dorothy Gunn at 312-814-3620, or
by downloading copies from the Board’s Web site at www.ipcb.state.il.us.
For additional information contact Michael J. McCambridge at 312-814-6924; e-mail address
mccambm@ipcb.state.il.us
Board Adopts Proposal for Public Comment in Definition of VOM Update, USEPA Amendments (July 1,
2004 through December 31, 2004) (R05-16)
On March 3, 2005, the Board adopted a proposal for public comment in Definition of VOM Update, USEPA
Amendments (July 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004) (R05-16). This rulemaking proposes amendments to
update the definition of “volatile organic material” (VOM) in the Board’s air pollution regulations (35 Ill. Adm.
Code 211.7150). The update is needed to ensure that Illinois’ regulations reflect the United States Environmental
Protection Agency’s (USEPA) most recent exemption of chemical compounds from regulation as ozone precursors.
The Board sent the proposal to the Secretary of State’s Index Department for publication in the March 4, 2005 issue
of the
Illinois Register
at 29 Ill. Reg. 4323.
Section 9.1(e) of the Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/9.1(e) (2002)) mandates this rulemaking.
That statutory provision requires the Board to exclude from the definition of VOM those compounds determined by
USEPA to be exempt from regulation under the state implementation plans for ozone “due to negligible
photochemical reactivity.” 415 ILCS 5/9.1(e) (2002). In addition, Section 9.1(e) of the Act requires the Board to
conduct this rulemaking pursuant to the provisions of Section 7.2(b) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/7.2(b) (2002)) for
adopting rules that are “identical in substance” to the federal requirements.
Section 9.1(e) also provides that Title VII of the Act and Section 5-35 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
(5 ILCS 100/5-35 (2002)) do not apply to this type of rulemaking. However, as provided in Section 9.1(e) of the
Act, the Board, before adopting final rule amendments, will provide notice of this rulemaking proposal in the
Illinois Register
, hold one public hearing on the proposal as required by the federal Clean Air Act (33 U.S.C. §
7410(a) (2003)), and allow for public comment.
Environmental Register – March 2005
8
The amendments proposed in this rulemaking address two USEPA amendments to the federal definition of “volatile
organic compound” (VOC), which is the same as VOM as used in the Illinois regulations. First, on November 29,
2004, USEPA added four compounds to the list of chemical species that are exempt from the federal definition of
VOC and, accordingly, are exempt from regulation for control of ozone precursors. Second, also on November 29,
2004, USEPA excluded an additional compound from the VOC definition, for purposes of emissions limitations and
VOC content requirements, but retained the compound as VOC for purposes of recordkeeping, emissions reporting,
photochemical dispersion modeling, and inventory requirements.
The Board’s proposal seeks to incorporate these federal amendments into the Illinois regulatory definition of VOM
at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 211.7150, with only minor differences from the federal rule text.
Copies of the Board’s opinion and order in R05-16 may be obtained by calling Dorothy Gunn at 312-814-3620, or
by downloading copies from the Board’s Web site at www.ipcb.state.il.us.
As required by the federal Clean Air Act (33 U.S.C. § 7410(a) (2003)), the Board has also scheduled a public
hearing in this rulemaking:
10:00 am, Tuesday, April 12, 2005,
James R. Thompson Center,
Illinois Pollution Control Board Hearing Room 11-512,
100 West Randolph Street, Chicago, IL 60601
For additional information contact the hearing officer, Richard McGill, at 312-814-6983; e-mail address
mcgillr@ipcb.state.il.us
Board Adopts Second First Notice Proposal in Proposed New and Updated Rules for Measurement and
Numerical Sound Emissions Standards, Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 901 and 910; March 2004
Proposal Formally Withdrawn (R03-09)
On March 17, 2005, the Board adopted a second first notice opinion and order in Proposed New and Updated Rules
for Measurement and Numerical Sound Emissions Standards, Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 901 and 910 (R03-
09). This supersedes the July 2003 first notice opinion and order in this rulemaking; the Board withdrew the prior
first notice proposal on March 4, 2004 in response to public comments after finding that additional hearings were
necessary to develop a complete record and to address Sections of the rules that were not included in the initial
proposal. The Notice of Withdrawal (published at 27 Ill. Reg. 11908) concerns the superseded first notice proposal
(published at 27 Ill. Reg. 11908
(July 25, 2003)).
The Board’s March 2005 first notice proposal was received by the Secretary of State’s Index Department and will
be published in the April 15, 2005 issue of the
Illinois Register
.
The Board itself opened this rulemaking to update Parts 901 and 910 of its noise regulations found in 35 Ill. Adm.
Code Subtitle H. As no one had proposed updates to the Board since 1987, many of the sound measurement
definitions and techniques in the existing rules do not reflect present scientific standards. The Board also found that
some of the existing site-specific needed review.
The proposed changes to Part 901 replace the existing 1965 Standard Land Use Coding Manual (SLUCM) codes
with the Land-Based Classification Standards (LBCS) codes, a consistent model for classifying land uses based on a
multi-dimensional land use classification model based land classification. The proposed changes to Section 901.104
clarify that the impulsive sound standards are based on 1-hour A-weighted equivalent sound levels. The Board also
proposes to revise the numeric standards to bring highly impulsive noise standards into conformity with the
standards set forth in Sections 901.102 and 901.103 in terms of the effective community response.
This proposal includes the revision of outdated numerical sound emission standards for property line noise sources
found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts 901.
Environmental Register – March 2005
9
The Board received comments from four companies that are subject to site-specific noise regulations: Moline
Forge, Scot Forge, Vaughan and Bushnell Manufacturing Company, and Intermet Decatur Foundry. Moline Forge
was the only company that did not seek any changes to the regulations. In response to comments filed by the other
companies the Board is proposing amendments to the site-specific regulations to more accurately reflect the
companies’ current operating conditions.
The proposed new Part 910 sets forth the measurement procedures for enforcing the Board’s noise standards in
Parts 900 and 901. These procedures are essentially based upon the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s
noise measurement protocols at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 951. In addition to the measurement techniques, the proposal
contains general requirements and specific instrument requirements. The proposed Appendix A includes tables
(obtained from extensive measurements) that can be used to determine the long-term background ambient noise
levels in instances where direct measurements cannot be made.
As the Board held three hearings concerning the July 2003 first notice proposal, the Board does not presently expect
to hold hearings on the March 2005 proposal during the second first notice period.
Copies of the Board’s opinion and order in R03-9 may be obtained by calling Dorothy Gunn at 312-814-3620, or by
downloading copies from the Board’s Web site at www.ipcb.state.il.us.
For additional information contact the hearing officer, Marie Tipsord, at 312-814-4925; e-mail address
tipsorm@ipcb.state.il.us.
Board Adopts Final Opinion and Order in RCRA Subtitle D (Municipal Solid Waste Landfill) Update,
USEPA Amendments (January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2004) (R05-1)
On March 17, 2005, the Board adopted a final opinion and order in RCRA Subtitle D (Municipal Solid Waste
Landfill) Update, USEPA Amendments (January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2004) (R05-1). The rulemaking adopted
amendments to the Illinois regulations that are “identical-in-substance” to municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF)
regulations adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). These USEPA rules
implement Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C §§ 6941-6949, (RCRA
Subtitle D). This docket includes federal MSWLF amendments that USEPA adopted in the period January 1, 2004
through June 30, 2004. The final amendments were filed with the Secretary of State’s Index Department and will
be published in the April 8, 2005 issue of the
Illinois Register
.
In brief summary, this rulemaking adopted amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 810, 811, and 813. These rules are
identical in substance to the one USEPA rulemaking during the update period: a March 22, 2004 amendment (69
Fed. Reg. 13242) to allow states to grant temporary research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) permits.
Specifically, the RD&D permits would allow exceptions to very limited landfill requirements to allow the use of
innovative technologies at landfills. In response to public comments, the Board adopted amendments which allow
the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to issue RD&D permits without first having the landfill operator
receive and adjusted standard from the Board.
More specifically, the USEPA RD&D permits action of March 22, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 13242) allows the use of
innovative technology and practices at municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs). USEPA adopted a new
provision at 40 C.F.R. 258.4 allowing the states to grant a “variance” from very specific generally applicable
requirements:
1) 40 C.F.R. 258.26(a)(1), requiring the control of run-on to the active portion
of the landfill from the peak discharge of a 25-year storm event (corresponding
with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.103(b)(1) and (b)(2) of the Board’s regulations);
2) 40 C.F.R. 258.28(a), prohibiting the placement of bulk or non-containerized
liquid waste in a landfill except under very limited circumstances
(corresponding with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.107(m)(1)); and
Environmental Register – March 2005
10
3) 40 C.F.R. 258.60(a)(1), (a)(2), and (b)(1), requiring the use of a final cover
system that minimizes erosion and infiltration into a landfill, which includes
specific requirements pertaining to such criteria as permeability, thickness of
each layer, and the ability of the cover material to sustain native plant growth
(corresponding with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.314(a) through (c)).
Bioreactor Landfills Now Allowed Through Temporary Research, Development, and Demonstration Permits
The purpose of the federal amendments is to allow the operation of bioreactor landfills, which operate much
differently from conventional landfills. A conventional landfill is designed to lessen the potential for groundwater
contamination by minimizing the infiltration of rainwater, restricting the placement of liquid wastes in the landfill,
and minimizing the hydraulic head on the bottom liner to minimize percolation of contaminated leachate into the
ground. As USEPA explains in the preamble discussion of the federal amendments, a bioreactor landfill takes a
different approach in order to more rapidly stabilize the landfill:
Bioreactor
means a MSW landfill or portion of a MSW landfill where any
liquid other than leachate (leachate includes landfill gas condensate) is added in
a controlled fashion into the waste mass (often in combination with recirculating
leachate) to reach a minimum average moisture content of at least 40 percent by
weight to accelerate or enhance the anaerobic (without oxygen) biodegradation
of the waste. 69 Fed. Reg. 13242, 13246 (Mar. 22, 2004) (quoting the
definition of “bioreactor” in the national emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAPs) rule in Subpart AAAA of 40 C.F.R. 63 (2003)).
The generally-applicable federal landfill management requirements act as restrictions on the ability to operate a
bioreactor landfill. The operation of a bioreactor landfill requires the reintroduction of contaminated liquid to the
waste in the landfill, which is not allowed under the requirements of 40 C.F.R. 258.26(a)(1), 258.28(a), and
258.60(a)(1), (a)(2), and (b)(1) (corresponding with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.103(b)(1) and (b)(2), 811.107(m)(1),
and 811.314(a) through (c) of the Illinois regulations). The RD&D permit rule would allow relief from these rules
to permit the experimental operation of a bioreactor landfill.
Under the new federal provision, certain limitations apply to the availability of an RD&D permit. To obtain an
RD&D permit that allows alternative practices to the generally applicable run-on control system requirements
and/or the prohibition against placement of bulk or non-containerized liquids, the applicant must design and
construct the landfill’s leachate collection system so as to maintain less than a 30-centimeter (cm) leachate depth on
the bottom liner of the landfill. To obtain an RD&D permit that allows the use of alternative practices to the
generally applicable final cover requirements, the owner or operator must demonstrate that infiltration of liquid
through the alternative cover will not cause contamination of groundwater or surface water or cause the leachate
depth on the liner to exceed 30 cm. In issuing an RD&D permit the IEPA must include whatever terms and
conditions are necessary “to assure protection of human health and the environment.”
See
40 C.F.R. 258.4(c)
(2004).
Copies of the Board’s opinion and order in R05-06 may be obtained by calling Dorothy Gunn at 312-814-3620, or
by downloading copies from the Board’s Web site at www.ipcb.state.il.us.
For additional information contact Michael J. McCambridge at 312-814-6924; e-mail address
mccambm@ipcb.state.il.us
Environmental Register – March 2005
11
Board Adopts Joint Illinois Environmental Protection Agency/ Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
Proposal for Hearing in Proposed Amendments to Exemptions from State Permitting Requirements (35 Ill.
Adm. Code 201.146) (R05-19)
On March 17, 2005, the Board adopted a proposal for hearing in Proposed Amendments to Exemptions from State
Permitting Requirements (35 Ill. Adm. Code 210.146) (R05-19). The proposal was filed jointly by the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) and the Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group (IERG) on February 22,
2005. The proposal seeks to add four categories to the existing list of exemptions from state air permit requirements
in Section 201.146. According to the proponents, the purpose of the proposal is to eliminate permitting delays for
minor projects having little environmental or regulatory impact:
1. Owners or operators replacing or adding air pollution control equipment at existing units-- proposed subsection
(hhh). The proposed exemption would only apply to existing units, which are permitted and have operated in
compliance for the past year. The new pollution control equipment must maintain or improve air pollution control
over the prior levels of target pollutants, and not result in a net increase in emissions of any collateral pollutant.
This exemption would not apply if the installation or operation of the new or replacement pollution controls would
trigger or change applicability of different regulatory requirements. Finally, required monitoring equipment must be
carried over to the replacement control device and must incorporate current technology.
2. “De minimis” projects at sources with federally enforceable state operating permits (FESOP) limiting their
potential to emit pollutants-- proposed subsection (iii). The proponents claim that there can be some projects at
FESOP sources that do not fit under any of the existing listed exemptions under Section 201.146 and that are still
insignificant from a permitting standpoint. Under this “de minimis” permitting second exemption, permits would be
unnecessary for projects at truly minor FESOP sources with a low potential to emit any regulated air pollutant
absent air pollution equipment from the new or modified unit that have no outstanding compliance or enforcement
issues. However, raw materials and fuels that cause or contribute to emissions must not contain a hazardous air
pollutant equal to or greater than 0.01 percent by weight. Also, this exemption is not available to a source that must
meet New Source Performance Standards and New Source Review requirements under the Clean Air Act.
3. New units or modifications to existing units at minor sources without FESOPs--section (jjj). This third
exemption, like the second in subsection (iii), would be limited to sources with the same low potential to emit any
regulated air pollutant absent air pollution equipment from the new or modified unit that have no outstanding
compliance or enforcement issues. But, the exemption would also be available for minor sources that have a
slightly greater potential to emit, so long as the facility notifies the IEPA of its intent to construct or install a new
emissions unit or modification. Only after notifications can the facility begin construction, installation, or
modification. This provision, state the IEPA and IERG, would require permitting if the additional emissions from
the project could change the sources’ status with respect to its potential to emit. This exemption is also not
available to a source that must meet New Source Performance Standards and New Source Review requirements
under the Clean Air Act.
4. Insignificant activities-- proposed subsection (kkk). The proposal would create a list of permit exempt
insignificant activities similar to those for CAAPP sources.
See
35 Ill. Adm. Code 201.210 through 210.211.
Instead of applying for a permit, owners or operators would only notify the Agency when they add insignificant
activities. Facilities must still comply with otherwise applicable emission standards or other regulatory
requirements.
In its March 17, 2004 order, the Board also scheduled two public hearings on the proposal:
10:00 am, Tuesday, April 12, 2005,
James R. Thompson Center,
Illinois Pollution Control Board Hearing Room 11-512,
100 West Randolph Street, Chicago, IL 60601; and
10:00 am on Tuesday, June 14, 2005,
Illinois Pollution Control Board Hearing Room,
1021 North Grand Avenue East, North Entrance,
Springfield, IL 62794.
Environmental Register – March 2005
12
The order also sets requirements and deadlines for service and filing of pre-filed testimony.
Copies of the Board’s opinion and order in R05-19 may be obtained by calling Dorothy Gunn at 312-814-3620, or
by downloading copies from the Board’s Web site at www.ipcb.state.il.us.
For additional information contact the hearing officer, Amy Antoniolli, at 312-814-3665; e-mail address
antonioa@ipcb.state.il.us.
Board Actions
March 3, 2005
Springfield, Illinois
Rulemakings
R05-2 In the Matter of: RCRA Subtitle C Update, USEPA Amendments (January 1,
2004 through June 30, 2004 and October 25, 2004) – The Board adopted a final
opinion and order in this “identical-in-substance” rulemaking amending the
Board’s hazardous waste regulations.
5-0
R, Land
R05-16 In the Matter of: Definition of VOM Update, USEPA Amendments (July 1,
2004 through December 31, 2004) – The Board adopted a proposal for public
comment in this “identical-in-substance” rulemaking to amend the Board’s
volatile organic material regulations.
5-0
R, Air
Adjusted Standards
AS 05-4 In the Matter of: Petition of SCA Tissue North America, L.L.C. for an Adjusted
Standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.301 and 218.302(C) – The Board granted
petitioner’s motion to incorporate the record from
In re
Petition of SCA Tissue of
North American, L.L. C. for an Adjusted Standard from 35 Ill. Adm. Code
218.301 and 218.302(c), AS 05-1 into this proceeding and accepted this matter
for hearing.
5-0
Air
Administrative Citations
AC 05-43 County of Macon, Illinois v. David Beck – The Board found that this Macon
County respondent violated Sections 21(p)(1) and (p)(7) of the Act (415 ILCS
5/21(p)(1), (p)(7) (2002)), and ordered respondent to pay a civil penalty of
$3,000.
5-0
AC 05-46 IEPA v. Lawrence Krueger – The Board found that this Cook County
respondent violated Sections 21(p)(1) and (p)(3) of the Act (415 ILCS
5/21(p)(1), (p)(3) (2002)), and ordered respondent to pay a civil penalty of
$3,000.
5-0
Environmental Register – March 2005
13
AC 05-49 IEPA v. Landers’ Children Family, L.L.C. and Ray Landers – The Board
granted complainant’s motion to dismiss the administrative citation for lack of
timely service.
5-0
AC 05-52 IEPA v. Robert Daniel Spears – The Board accepted for hearing this petition
for review of an administrative citation against this Cass County respondent.
5-0
AC 05-54 IEPA v. Ray Logsdon Estate, Logsdon Sand and Gravel and M.K. O’Hara
Construction, Inc. – The Board accepted for hearing a petition for review on
behalf of M.K. O’Hara Construction, Inc. in this administrative citation
against these Cass County respondents. The Board directed respondent M.K.
O’Hara Construction, Inc. to file an amended petition for review accompanied
by an attorney’s appearance within 30 days from the date of this order, or the
Board will dismiss this petition.
5-0
Decisions
PCB 04-50 People of the State of Illinois v. MacMurray College – In this air enforcement
action concerning a Morgan County facility, the Board granted relief from the
hearing requirement of Section 31(c)(1) of the Environmental Protection Act
(415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2002)), accepted a stipulation and settlement agreement,
and ordered the respondent to implement and complete a supplemental
environmental project (SEP) in lieu of paying a civil penalty and to cease and
desist from further violations. Under the SEP, respondent agrees to collect used
computers and computer monitors from the community, donate the usable
equipment to charitable organizations for use or resale, and dispose of the non-
usable equipment in an environmentally acceptable manner.
5-0
A-E
PCB 04-94 People of the State of Illinois v. Hauck Homes, Inc. d/b/a Rock River Estates
Mobile Home Park – In this water enforcement action concerning a Lee County
facility, the Board granted relief from the hearing requirement of Section
31(c)(1) of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2002)),
accepted a stipulation and settlement agreement, and ordered the respondent to
pay a total civil penalty of $12,000 and to cease and desist from further
violations.
5-0
W-E
PCB 05-8 People of the State of Illinois v. Village of Capron – In this public water supply
enforcement action concerning a Boone County facility, the Board granted relief
from the hearing requirement of Section 31(c)(1) of the Environmental
Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2002)), accepted a stipulation and
settlement agreement, and ordered the respondent to pay a total civil penalty of
$1,000 and to cease and desist from further violations.
5-0
PWS-E
PCB 05-78 People of the State of Illinois v. Ralph Stone, Mayor of the Village of Gorham –
In this air enforcement action concerning a Jackson County facility, the Board
granted relief from the hearing requirement of Section 31(c)(1) of the
Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2002)), accepted a
stipulation and settlement agreement, and ordered the respondent to pay a total
5-0
A-E
Environmental Register – March 2005
14
civil penalty of $500 and to cease and desist from further violations.
PCB 05-92 People of the State of Illinois v. Specialty Promotions, Inc. d/b/a Specialty
Printing Company – In this air enforcement action concerning a Cook County
facility, the Board granted relief from the hearing requirement of Section
31(c)(1) of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2002)),
accepted a stipulation and settlement agreement, and ordered the respondent to
pay a total civil penalty of $75,000 and to cease and desist from further
violations.
5-0
A-E
PCB 05-96 People of the State of Illinois v. Village of North City, Lawrence A. Lipe &
Associates, Inc., Altman-Charter Company, and Furlong Excavating, Inc. – In
this public water supply enforcement action concerning a Boone County facility,
the Board granted relief from the hearing requirement of Section 31(c)(1) of the
Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/31(c)(1) (2002)), accepted three
stipulation and settlement agreements as to Lawrence A. Lipe & Associates, Inc.,
Furlong Excavating, Inc. and Altman-Charter Company. Lawrence A. Lipe &
Associates, Inc. was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $5,000. Furlong
Excavating, Inc. was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $500 and to perform a
supplemental environmental project by donation of $2,000 to the Benton School
District Greening Program. Altman-Charter Company was ordered to pay a civil
penalty of $2,000. The respondents also were ordered to cease and desist from
further violations. This case remains open as to the sole remaining respondent,
the Village of North City.
5-0
PWS-E
Motions and Other Matters
PCB 04-1
PCB 04-3
(Cons.)
SCI Illinois Services, Inc. v. IEPA – The Board granted petitioner’s motion for
voluntary dismissal of these consolidated underground storage tank appeals
involving a Cook County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 04-138 People of the State of Illinois v. Pinnacle Corporation d/b/a Town & Country
Homes – The Board granted complainant’s motion for leave to amend complaint
and accepted the first amended complaint. Upon receipt of a proposed
stipulation and settlement agreement and an agreed motion to request relief from
the hearing requirement in this water enforcement action involving a Lake
County facility, the Board ordered publication of the required newspaper notice.
5-0
W-E
PCB 04-178 People of the State of Illinois v. Ned Mandich d/b/a H.B.M. Electrochemical –
Upon receipt of a proposed stipulation and settlement agreement and an agreed
motion to request relief from the hearing requirement in this air enforcement
action involving a Cook County facility, the Board ordered publication of the
required newspaper notice.
5-0
A-E
PCB 05-29 Mather Investment Properties, L.L.C. v. Illinois State Trapshooters Association,
Inc. – The Board granted the parties’ agreed motion for an additional 90 days in
which to file an answer, now due on or before May 17, 2005.
5-0
Citizens
L-E
Environmental Register – March 2005
15
PCB 05-32 People of the State of Illinois v. GTC, International – The Board granted
complainant’s motions to deem facts admitted and for summary judgment on all
ten counts of the complaint. The Board directed the parties to hearing on the
issue of remedy.
5-0
A-E
PCB 05-102 Village of Crainville v. IEPA – Having previously granted a request for a 90-day
extension, the Board dismissed this matter because no underground storage tank
appeal was filed on behalf of this Williamson County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 05-108 William Breuer v. IEPA – The Board accepted for hearing this underground
storage tank appeal involving a Washington County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 05-155 Midwest Petroleum Company v. IEPA – The Board accepted for hearing this
underground storage tank appeal involving a St. Clair County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 05-156 Vision Properties Blue Island, L.L.C. v. IEPA – The Board granted this request
for a 90-day extension of time to file an underground storage tank appeal on
behalf of this Cook County facility.
5-0
P-A, RCRA
90-Day Ext.
PCB 05-158 Wilson Sporting Goods v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day
extension of time to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this
Cook County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
90-Day
Ext.
March 17, 2005
Chicago, Illinois
Rulemakings
R03-9 In the Matter of: Proposed New and Updated Rules for Measurement and
Numerical Sound Emissions Standards Amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 901
and 910 – The Board adopted a first notice opinion and order proposing to
amend the Board’s noise regulations.
5-0
R, Noise
R05-1 In the Matter of: RCRA Subtitle D (Municipal Solid Waste Landfill) Update,
USEPA Amendments (January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2004) – The Board
adopted a final opinion and order in this “identical-in-substance” rulemaking
amending the Board’s municipal solid waste landfill regulations.
5-0
R, Land
R05-19 In the Matter of: Proposed Amendments to Exemptions from State Permitting
Requirements (35 Ill. Adm. Code 201.146) – The Board accepted for hearing the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and Illinois Environmental Regulatory
5-0
R, Air
Environmental Register – March 2005
16
Group February 22, 2005 proposal to amend the Board’s air regulations.
Adjusted Standards
AS 05-2 In the Matter of: Petition of the Village of Bensenville for an Adjusted Standard
from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620-410 Regarding Chloride and Lead – The Board
accepted for hearing petitioner’s amended petition and granted the motion to file
reduced copied of the amended petition.
5-0
PWS
AS 05-3 In the Matter of: Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. for RCRA Waste Delisting
Under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122 for Solid Treatment Residual from CID
Recycling and Disposal Facility Biological Liquid Treatment Center – The Board
dismissed this petition for an adjusted standard for petitioner’s failure provide
proof of service on the Illinois Environmental protection Agency, a statement in
the petition indicating whether the petitioner requests or waives hearing, and to
timely publish notice of the filing of the petition by advertisement in a newspaper
of general circulation in the area likely to be affected, as required by Section 28.1
of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/28.1(d)(1) (2002)).
5-0
Land
AS 05-5 In the Matter of: Petition of Ford Motor Company for an Adjusted Standard
from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.586 – The Board accepted for hearing this request
for adjusted standard on behalf of this Cook County petitioner.
5-0
Air
Administrative Citations
AC 05-47 IEPA v. Stacy Hess – The Board accepted for hearing respondent’s amended
petition for review of an administrative citation against this Tazewell County
respondent.
5-0
AC 05-48 County of Jackson v. Southern Illinois Regional Landfill, Inc., Doug Ticer, and
George Browning – The Board found that these Jackson County respondents
violated Sections 21(o)(5) and (o)(12) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/21(o)(5), (o)(12)
(2002)), and ordered respondents to pay a civil penalty of $1,000.
5-0
AC 05-50 IEPA v. Knox County Landfill Committee and Greg Ingle – The Board found
that these Jackson County respondents violated Sections 21(o)(5) of the Act (415
ILCS 5/21(o)(5) (2002)), and ordered respondents to pay a civil penalty of $500.
5-0
AC 05-51 County of Sangamon v. Patrick O’Keefe – The Board accepted for hearing this
petition for review of an administrative citation against this Sangamon County
respondent.
5-0
Decisions
PCB 03-101 People of the State of Illinois v. Werner, Co. – In this air enforcement action
concerning a Cook County facility, the Board granted relief from the hearing
requirement of Section 31(c)(1) of the Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS
5/31(c)(1) (2002)), accepted a stipulation and settlement agreement, and ordered
the respondent to pay a total civil penalty of $32,000, to operate and maintain all
equipment and systems relating to a Supplemental Environmental Project at its
Franklin Park facility, and to cease and desist from further violations.
5-0
A-E
Environmental Register – March 2005
17
Motions and Other Matters
PCB 93-17 Phibro-Tech f/k/a Southern Chemical Company v. IEPA – The Board granted
petitioner’s motion for voluntary dismissal of this permit appeal involving a
McHenry County facility.
5-0
P-A, RCRA
PCB 04-68 Martin Oil Marketing, Ltd. v. IEPA – The Board granted petitioner’s motion for
voluntary dismissal of this underground storage tank appeal involving a Cook
County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 04-93 Martin Oil Marketing, Ltd. V. IEPA – The Board granted petitioner’s motion for
voluntary dismissal of this underground storage tank appeal involving a McLean
County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 04-128 WEWS, L.P. (the Boye Needle Facility) v. IEPA – The Board granted
petitioner’s motion for voluntary dismissal of this underground storage tank
appeal involving a Cook County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 04-190
Johnson Oil Company v. IEPA – The Board granted petitioner’s motion for
voluntary dismissal of this underground storage tank appeal involving a
Champaign County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 04-207
PCB 97-193
People of the State of Illinois v. Community Landfill Company, Inc. and People
of the State of Illinois v. Edward Pruim an individual, and Robert Pruim, an
individual – The Board granted complainant’s motion to strike the second
affirmative defense.
5-0
W-E
PCB 05-48 Illinois Ayers Oil Company v. IEPA – The Board denied petitioner’s motion for
reconsideration of the Board’s January 6, 2005 order, dismissing the petition as
untimely filed.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 05-60 People of the State of Illinois v. Youssi Real Estate and Development, Inc. –
Upon receipt of a proposed stipulation and settlement agreement and an agreed
motion to request relief from the hearing requirement in this air enforcement
action involving a Boone County facility, the Board ordered publication of the
required newspaper notice.
5-0
W-E
PCB 05-96 People of the State of Illinois v. Village of North City, Lawrence A. Lipe &
Associates, Inc., Altman-Charter Company, and Furlong Excavating, Inc. – Upon
receipt of a proposed stipulation and settlement agreement and an agreed motion
to request relief from the hearing requirement in this public water supply
enforcement action involving a Franklin County facility, the Board ordered
publication of the required newspaper notice as to Village of North City. The
Board also granted complainant’s motion for modification of the Board’s March
3, 2005 order regarding the Altman-Charter Company proposed stipulation and
settlement agreement. The modified order requires respondent to pay a civil
5-0
PWS-E
Environmental Register – March 2005
18
penalty of $500 and to perform a supplemental environmental project by
donation of $2,000 to the Benton School District Greening Program.
PCB 05-100 Estate of Irene Steinheimer v. IEPA – Having previously granted a request for a
90-day extension, the Board dismissed this matter because no underground
storage tank appeal was filed on behalf of this Morgan County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
PCB 05-159 Fruendt Crop Services, Inc. (Property Identification Number 11-26-03-300-010)
v. IEPA – Upon receipt of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s
recommendation, the Board found and certified that specified facilities of
Fruendt Crop Services, Inc. located in Kankakee County are pollution control
facilities for the purpose of preferential tax treatment under the Property Tax
Code (35 ILCS 200/11-10 (2002)).
5-0
T-C
Land
PCB 05-160 Precision Pork, L.L.C. (Property Identification Number 12-14-29-200-003) v.
IEPA – Upon receipt of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s
recommendation, the Board found and certified that specified facilities of
Precision Pork, L.L.C. located in Lee County are pollution control facilities for
the purpose of preferential tax treatment under the Property Tax Code (35 ILCS
200/11-10 (2002)).
5-0
T-C
Land
PCB 05-161 Crest Automotive v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day
extension of time to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this
Cook County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
90-Day Ext.
PCB 05-162 Ye Olde Glass Shoppe v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day
extension of time to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this
Clark County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
90-Day Ext.
PCB 05-163 People of the State of Illinois v. Pekin Paperboard Company, L.P. – The Board
accepted for hearing this water enforcement action involving a site located in
Tazewell County.
5-0
W-E
PCB 05-164 Rohm and Haas Company v. IEPA – The Board accepted for hearing this permit
appeal involving a Kankakee County facility.
5-0
P-A, Air
PCB 05-165 Century Chevy v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day extension
of time to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this McLean
County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
90-Day
Ext.
PCB 05-166 Clinton County Oil Company, Inc. v. IEPA - The Board granted this request for a
90-day extension of time to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf of
5-0
Environmental Register – March 2005
19
this Madison County facility.
UST Appeal
90-Day
Ext.
PCB 05-167 Clinton County Oil Company, Inc. v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for
a 90-day extension of time to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf
of this Madison County facility.
5-0
UST Appeal
90-Day
Ext.
New Cases
March 3, 2005 Board Meeting
05-156
Vision Properties Blue Island, L.L.C. v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day extension of
time to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this Cook County facility.
05-157
Grand Pier Center L.L.C. and American International Specialty Lines Insurance Co. as subrogee of Grand
Pier Center L.L.C. v. River East L.L.C., Chicago Dock and Canal Trust, Chicago Dock and Canal Company, and
Kerr-McGee Chemical L.L.C. – The Board held for a later duplicative/frivolous determination this citizens’ land
enforcement action involving a Cook County facility.
05-158
Wilson Sporting Goods v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day extension of time to file an
underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this Cook County facility.
AS 05-005
In the Matter of: Petition of SCA Tissue North America, L.L.C. for an Adjusted Standard from 35 Ill.
Adm. Code 218.301 and 218.302(C) – Pending receipt of the certificate of publication, the Board held this Cook
County facility’s petition for an adjusted standard from the Board’s volatile organic material emission standards and
limitations for the Chicago area.
R05-019
In the Matter of: Proposed Amendments to Exemp
tions from State Permitting Requirements (35 Ill. Adm.
Code 201.146) – No action taken.
March 17, 2005 Board Meeting
05-159
Fruendt Crop Services, Inc. (Property Identification Number 11-26-03-300-010) v. IEPA – Upon receipt of
the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s recommendation, the Board found and certified that specified
facilities of Fruendt Crop Services, Inc. located in Kankakee County are pollution control facilities for the purpose
of preferential tax treatment under the Property Tax Code (35 ILCS 200/11-10 (2002)).
05-160
Precision Pork, L.L.C. (Property Identification Number 12-14-29-200-003) v. IEPA – Upon receipt of the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s recommendation, the Board found and certified that specified facilities
of Precision Pork, L.L.C. located in Lee County are pollution control facilities for the purpose of preferential tax
treatment under the Property Tax Code (35 ILCS 200/11-10 (2002)).
05-161
Crest Automotive v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day extension of time to file an
underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this Cook County facility.
05-162
Ye Olde Glass Shoppe v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day extension of time to file an
underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this Clark County facility.
05-163
People of the State of Illinois v. Pekin Paperboard Company, L.P. – The Board accepted for hearing this
water enforcement action involving a site located in Tazewell County.
Environmental Register – March 2005
20
05-164
Rohm and Haas Company v. IEPA – The Board accepted for hearing this permit appeal involving a
Kankakee County facility.
05-165
Century Chevy v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day extension of time to file an
underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this McLean County facility.
05-166
Clinton County Oil Company, Inc. v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day extension of time
to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this Madison County facility.
05-167
Clinton County Oil Company, Inc. v. IEPA – The Board granted this request for a 90-day extension of time
to file an underground storage tank appeal on behalf of this Madison County facility.
AC 05-057
IEPA v. Leonard Harris – The Board accepted an administrative citation against this Boone County
respondent.
AC 05-058
IEPA v. Knox County Landfill Committee – The Board accepted an administrative citation against this
Knox County respondent.
AC 05-059
IEPA v. Dale and Carol Hartley – The Board accepted an administrative citation against these Edgar
County respondents.
Calendar
4/5/05
10:00 AM
R05-9
In the Matter of: Setback Zone for City
of Marquette Heights Community Water
Supply, New 35 Ill. Adm. Code 618
James R. Thompson Center
Room 2-025
100 W. Randolph Street
Chicago
4/6/05
9:00 AM
PCB 04-186
Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. v.
County Board of Kankakee County,
Illinois
County Administration Building
County Board Room – 4th Floor
189 East Court Street
Kankakee
4/7/05
9:00 AM
PCB 04-186
Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. v.
County Board of Kankakee County,
Illinois
County Administration Building
County Board Room – 4th Floor
189 East Court Street
Kankakee
4/7/05
11:00 AM
Illinois Pollution Control Board Meeting
Videoconference
Chicago/Springfield
James R. Thompson Center
Hearing Room 11-512
100 W. Randolph Street
Chicago
And
1021 N. Grand Avenue East
Oliver Holmes Conference
Room 2012 N
Springfield
4/8/05
9:00 am
PCB 04-186
Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. v.
County Board of Kankakee County,
Illinois
County Administration Building
County Board Room – 4th Floor
189 East Court Street
Kankakee
4/15/05
10:00 AM
PCB 05-155
Midwest Petroleum Company v. IEPA
Belleville City Hall Council
Chambers
101 S. Illinois Street
Belleville
Environmental Register – March 2005
21
4/21/05
11:00 AM
Illinois Pollution Control Board Meeting
James R. Thompson Center
Hearing Room 9-040
100 W. Randolph Street
Chicago
4/28/05
10:30 AM
AC 04-77
IEPA v. Frank Bencie
Benton City Hall Council
Chambers
500 W. Main Street
Benton
5/5/05
11:00 AM
Illinois Pollution Control Board Meeting
Illinois Pollution Control Board
Board Room
1021 N. Grand Avenue East
Springfield
5/10/05
9:00 AM
PCB 04-12
Teresa L. Shepro, as Trustee of the
Justice W. Shepro Trust, and Teresa L.
Shepro and Frank Wiemerslage, as
beneficiaries under Trust No. 898 of the
Chicago Trust Company v. Newby Oil
Company, David E. Tripp and Janice L.
Tripp
City Hall Annex Council
Chambers
128 E. Railroad
Sandwich
5/19/05
11:00 AM
Illinois Pollution Control Board Meeting
James R. Thompson Center
Hearing Room 9-040
100 W. Randolph Street
Chicago
Boone Creek Class III Special Resource Groundwater Listing
Notice
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois EPA) requests listing Boone Creek Fen, which is a dedicated
nature preserve (DNP), and the area that contributes groundwater to the DNP, as Class III: Special Resource
Groundwater. Boone Creek Fen is located in central McHenry County, Illinois, approximately three miles east of
the City of Woodstock. The DNP is a 88.15-acre tract located in the McHenry Quadrangle, Township 44 North,
Range 7 East of the Third Principal Meridian, Sections 1, 2, 11, and 12. There are four privately owned nature
areas within the DNP: Boone Creek Fen, Spring Hollow, Lee Miglin Savanna, and Amberin Ash Ridge. The area
contributing groundwater to, and including the DNP, is an irregularly shaped 5.04 square mile (3,225.6 acre) tract of
land. The recharge area is located to the south and west of the DNP.
Under the authority of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.230, Class III: Special Resource Groundwater can be established for:
groundwater that is demonstrably unique (e.g. irreplaceable sources of groundwater) and suitable for application of
a water quality standard more stringent than the otherwise applicable water quality standard specified; groundwater
that is vital for a particularly sensitive ecological system; or groundwater contributing to a DNP that has been listed
by the Illinois EPA. The Illinois EPA is required to review a written request to list DNPs, and upon confirmation of
the technical adequacy, publish the listing of the DNP(s) in the Environmental Register for a 45-day public
comment period. Within 60 days after the close of the comment period, the Illinois EPA is required to publish a
final listing in the Environmental Register.
The Groundwater Section of the Bureau of Water, at the Illinois EPA has completed the review required according
to the criteria specified in Subsection 620.230(b)(1), and finds the petition to be technically adequate. In addition,
the 45-day public comment period has ended, and no comments were received.
------------------------------------------------CUT HERE------------------------------------------------
Environmental Register Comment Card
The Illinois Pollution Control Board is an independent five-member board
that adopts environmental control standards, rules on enforcement actions,
and other environmental disputes for the State of Illinois.
The
Environmental Register
is published monthly by the Board, and
contains
updates on rulemakings, descriptions of final decisions, the Board’s hearing
calendar, and other environmental law information.
------------------------------------------------CUT HERE------------------------------------------------
Illinois Pollution Control Board
Environmental Register Coordinator
1021 N. Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19274
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9274
