RECEIVED
BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
CLERKS OFFICE
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
AUG 292005
STATE OF ILLINOIS
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
Pollution Control
Board
)
REVISIONS TO RADIUM WATER
)
r
‘?-m
QUALITY STANDARDS: PROPOSED
)
R04-21
NEW 35 ILL. ADMIN. CODE
§
302.307
)
Rulemaking
-
Water
AND AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADMIN.
)
CODE
§~
302.207 AND 302.525
)
NOTICE OF FILING
To:
See Attached Service List
Please take notice that on August
29, 2005 Water Remediation Technology LLC, by its
undersigned attorneys, filed with the Office of the Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board
an original and ten copies of the attached
MOTION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC
COMMENT,
a copy of which is served upon you.
Dated: August 29, 2005
Respectthtl ubmitted,
By:
/
One of the
eys for Water Remediation
Technology LLC
Jeffrey C. Fort
Letissa Carver Reid
Dana On
Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP
8000 Sears Tower
Chicago, Illinois 60606
(312) 876-8000
THIS FILING IS BEING SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
RECEIVED
LERICS
OrFICE
BEFORE TUE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
STATE
AUG
OF
292005
ILLINOIS
Pollution Controj Board
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
REVISIONS TO RADIUM WATER
)
QUALITY STANDARDS: PROPOSED
)
R04-21
NEW 35 ILL. ADMIN. CODE 302.307
)
Rulemaking
-
Water
AND
AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADMIN.
)
CODE 302.207 AND 302.525
)
MOTION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Water Remediation Technology LLC (“WRT”) by and through its attorneys and pursuant
to
35
Illinois Administrative Code 102.108(d) requests leave to submit an additional
supplemental public comment to the Board in this proceeding. This supplemental comment
responds to information, that was not made available to counsel for WRT until it was filed with
the Joliet Comments on August 15, 2005. WRT requests leave to submit this very concise (two
pages) supplemental public comment to clarify the record and avoid material prejudice..
When the City ofJoliet asked for leave to extend the public comment period, it said it
was because ofthe need for conducting additional water quality sampling. Counsel for WRT
agreed to that requested continuance provided that supplemental information was provided by
August 1, 2005, to permit the informatoin to be considered before WRT submitted its August 15,
2005 public comments. See Attachment A hereto, consisting of an e-mail exchange between
counsel for Joliet and WRT, contemporaneous with the filing of the Joliet motion for more
time.
Counsel for Joliet did provide the water quality information (attached to the WRT
comment as Attachment 1, and also included as part of Joliets Attachment 1), but did not
provide any of the other underlying information which is now presented to the Board. See
11934273W-I
Attachments 2 and 3. Joliet did not disclose that it was going to submit any information other
than the water quality sampling. And it did not submit the MSDGC data on the Lemont plant or
the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal See Exhibit 1 Supplement to Joliefs Comments.
WRTs Supplemental Comments are intended to simplify the issues and to note where
there are remaining issues of disagreement. However, WRT submits that the issues of
disagreement in this record are site-specific to Joliet and not of general applicability relating to
the alternative language suggested by the Agency.
WRT will be materially prejudiced if it is not permitted to respond to the other
information attached to Joliet’s comments and therefore requests that this motion be granted..
August 29, 2005
By:
Jeffrey C. Fort
Letissa Carver Reid
Dana Orr
Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP
8000 Sears Tower
233 5. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
(312) 876-8000
-2-
Respectfull
Technology
ater Remediation
1934873W-I
Attachnent A
8/29/2005
Sent: Monday, May 16: 2005 2:18 PM -
To:
Fort,
Jeffrey C.
Subject: RE: radium
Yes and No. As I explained to you we will code the data so that it is from
POTW
A, etc. so as to not divulge
the name. Putting the data on a map would allow for identification. What we want to do is get data on the
effluent from POIWs. It will no doubt have a scatter.
Original Message
From: Fort, Jeffrey C. mailto:jfort©sonnenschein.com
Sent:
Monday, May 16, 2005 2:10 PM
To: Harsch, Roy M.
Subject: radium
Roy,
I received your motion today. I had two items to clarify, based on our call on Friday:
--as you and I discussed, you will deliver the data to us, on behalf of WRT, by August
1.
-- I am assuming that the “data” delivered would include a map of where the data originated
and other supporting information so as to allow a meaningful review.
Could you confirm by re-turn e-mail? Thanks
Jeff
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected
by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or any
attachment is prohibited. Ifyou have received this e-mail in error,
please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and delete
this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.
SONNENSCHEIN NATH & ROSENTHAL LLP
Visit us on the web at http://www.sonnenschein.com
8/29/2005
BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
REVISIONS TO
RADIUM
WATER
)
QUALITY STANDARDS: PROPOSED
)
R04-21
NEW 35 ILL. ADMIN. CODE 302.307
)
Rulemaking
-
Water
AND
AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADMIN.
)
CODE 302.207 AND 302.525
)
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENTS OF
WATER REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGY LLC CONCERNING SECOND
FIRST NOTICE COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF JOLIET
Water Remediation Technology LLC (“WRT”) by and through its attorneys respectfully
submits these supplemental comments in this proceeding.
1.
WRT supports the alternative regulatory language presented by the Agency at
pages 12-13 of its Second First Notice Comments. We also concur in the concerns raised
relating to the deposition into sediments, and onto farm fields, of highly radioactive particles,
and therefore urge the Board and the Agency to require monitoring ofthose conditions in
wastewater and sludge application permitting conditions.
2.
New information on water quality and radon monitoring is presented by Joliet in
its Comments filed August 15. Included in Exhibit 1 Supplement is a letter dated August 3, 2005
from the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago concerning radium levels
at the Lemont Water Reclamation Plant and in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal. That
August 3 letter confirms that the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal water quality is below the
proposed 3.75 pCi/L standard for combined radium 226 and 228.’
The reported concentrations for the Lemont Water Reclamation plant influent and effluent are generally
consistent with “Community A” as submitted by Joliet, an assumption WRT made in submitting its comments. The
IEPA has indicated that an annual average for the water quality standard would be an appropriate application of this
1193I27I\V-4
3.
The comments submitted by the City ofJoliet make various assertions about the
habitat for riparian mammals and the costs of the WRT processes. WRT objects to the inclusion
of this material at this late date. The former issue was the subject of the October hearings in this
matter and the information presented is based on a 1984 study ofmuskrats. There is no reason
that information could not have been presented earlier. With respect to the cost information, that
information is focused on specific assumptions for Joliet, and indeed includes many assumptions
that WRT would challenge.2 But regardless of these contingencies and the number of
assumptions that the engineer made in the letter report to make the WRT process more costly,
the WRT process clearly saves some communities millions of dollars. See Hearing Ex. 5.
4.
Some have asked the Board not to adopt any change to the existing water quality
standard, or to adopt the IEMA standard for discharges ofradionuclides.3 Those same parties do
not, however, ask to be regulated by any other requirements ofIEMA. WRT is the only vendor
which has submitted its treatment technology to licensing and regulation by the IEMA
--
including the worker disclosure, monitoring and safety rules, and the rule that radionuclide solids
cannot be discharged down a POTW sewer.
$~
Hearing Ex. 17.
criteria, and one that is acceptable to U.S. EPA. That position is consistent with the averaging methods used in
Table I to the WRT Comment.
2
See ~ Joliet Comments, Tab 3, p.3 (fmal sentence); see also page 2, para 1. (Treatment for iron is needed for
shallow wells, which is then used to assume added costs for iron removal for all wells, deep and shallow.) The letter
report does confirm WRT’s testimony that a retrofit can be made and suggests it mayneed to be made to prevent
highly radioactive particles from being discharged into the sanitary sewers and ending up in the POTW sludge.
Interestingly, the cost of that retrofit is far less than the costs Joliet asserted as required for landfilling the POTW
sludge in its comments dated November 24, 2004 in this proceeding.
Preventing highly radioactive particles from being sewered also meets, respectively, the rules of the JEMA for its
licensees to prevent radionuclide solids from being disposed in sanitary sewers, and the guidance from U.S. EPA to
prevent radionuclide solids from being land applied. Recall also that the levels of radionuclides in POTW sludges
may exceed the average levels of radioactivity of the uranium tailings which, wthen spread on what became the
Reed-Kepler Park in West Chicago, had to be removed in a Superfund removal action. ~p~WRT comments, filed
August 15, at 16, lb 7.
-2-
Il93~27l\V-4
THEREFORE, we recommend the Board adopt the Agency’s proposed language for
3.75 pCi/L total radium as an annual average. We also again suggest the Board recognize the
sludge disposal issue, and either insert a comment into this rule, or initiate inquiry hearings on
the potential problems ofradionuclide solids being mixed with sanitary sewage and the resulting
sludge.
August 29, 2005
Respectfully ubmitted,
By:
________
One of the Ab~(tqjneysfor Water Remediation
Technology LLC
Jeffrey C. Fort
Letissa Carver Reid
Dana On
Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP
8000 Sears Tower
Chicago, Illinois 60606
(312) 876-8000
-3-
1193 I271\V-4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned, an attorney, certifies that he/she has served upon the individuals listed
on the attached Service List true and correct copies of
MOTION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL
PUBLIC COMMENT
by First Class Mail, postage prepaid, on August 29, 2005.
SERVICE LIST
Richard Lanyon
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
100 E. Erie Street
Chicago, IL 60611
Deborah J. Williams
Stefanie N. Diers
IEPA
1021 N. Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794-9276
Roy M. Harsch
Sasha M. Engle
Gardner Carton & Douglas
191 N. Wacker Drive
Suite 3700
Chicago, IL 60606-1698
Claire A. Manning
Brown, Hay & Stephens LLP
700 First Mercantile Bank Building
205 S. Fifth Street
P.O. Box 2459
Springfield, IL 62705-2459
Albert F. Ettinger
Environmental Law and Policy Center
35 E. Wackcr Drive
Suite 1300
Chicago, IL 60601
Matthew J. Dunn
RoseMarie Cazeau
Office of the Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
188 W. Randolph,
20th
Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
R04-21
Wilkie & McMahon
I B. Main Street
#214
Champaign, IL 61820-3615
Dorothy M. Gunn
Amy Antoniolli
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100W. Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
Dennis L. Duffield
City of Joliet, Department of Public Works
and Utilities
921 B. Washington Street
Joliet, IL 60431
William Richardson
Illinois Department of Natural Resources
One Natural Resources Way
Springfield, IL 62702-1271
Lisa Frede
CICI
2250 B. Devon Avenue, Suite 239
Des Plaines, IL 60018
William D. Seith
Total Environmental Solutions
631 B. Butterfield Road
Suite 315
Lombard, IL 60148
Abdul Khalique
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
of Greater Chicago
6001 W. Pershing Road
Cicero, IL 60804
John McMahon
