page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
page 16
page 17
page 18
page 19
page 20
page 21
1. page 1
2. page 2
3. page 3
4. page 4
5. page 5
6. page 6
7. page 7

RECEIVED

CLERK'S OFFICE

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

MAY - 8 2006

AMERICAN BOTTOM CONSERVANCY

)

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

Petitioner

)

V .

)

PCB 06-

I

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

(NPDES Permit Appeal)

AGENCY and UNITED STATES STEEL

)

CORPORATION - GRANITE CITY WORKS

)

Respondents

)

NOTICE OF FILING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on May 4, 2006, I filed with the Office of the

Clerk of the Pollution Control Board the following documents

:

1

.

PETITION FOR REVIEW OF A DECISION BY THE ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

2

.

MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF MAXINE I . LIPELES

3 .

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE .

Copies of the above are being served, via U.S. Mail, on the following Service List

:

Division of Legal Counsel

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

1021 North Grand Avenue East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

United States Steel Corporation - Granite City Works

c/o National Registered Agents, Inc

.

200 West Adams Street

Chicago, IL 60606

Maxine I. Lipeles, Pro Hac Vice

Counsel for Petitioners

interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic

May 4, 2006

Washington University School of Law

One Brookings Drive -Campus Box 1120

St. Louis, MO 63130-4899

(314) 935-5837

THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

2

RECEIVED

OFF

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

MAY - 8 2006

AMERICAN BOTTOM CONSERVANCY

)

 Pollut

on

Control

Board

Petitioner

)

v .

)

PCB 06-

I

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

(NPDES Permit Appeal)

AGENCY and UNITED STATES STEEL

)

CORPORATION

 - GRANITE CITY WORKS

)

Respondents

)

MOTION FORPRO HAC VICEADMISSION OF MAXINE I . LIPELES

Pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 101.400(a)(3), I, Maxine I . Lipeles, respectfully

request that the Illinois Pollution Control Board authorize me to appear pro hac vice in

the above-captioned matter on behalf of petitioner American Bottom Conservancy . The

grounds for this motion are as follows :

1 .

 I am a licensed attorney in the State of Missouri, where I was admitted to

the practice of law in 1982 . My attorney registration number in Missouri is 32529, and I

am in good standing .

2 .

 I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts

.

 I was admitted to practice in Massachusetts in 1980, my registration

number is 301160, and I am on inactive status

.

3

.

 I am a member in good standing of the bars of the following federal

courts: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Oct . 26, 1981); U.S. Court of

Appeals for the First Circuit (June 4, 1982); U.S. District Court for the District of

Massachusetts (July 16, 1981); U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

TUTS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

(Feb. 4, 1983; re-registered January 1, 2003) ; U.S. District Court for the Western District

of Missouri (Oct. 2, 1982; inactive status)

.

4 .

No disciplinary proceedings are pending or have ever been brought against

me .

5

.

I have never been disbarred or subject to disbarment proceedings

.

6 .

 Petitioner

 American Bottom

 Conservancy

is

 represented

 by the

Interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic at Washington University School of Law . I am

the Director of the Clinic .

7 .

 I am familiar with the provisions of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure,

the Illinois Supreme Court Rules, and the Rules of the Illinois Pollution Control Board

and I understand and agree to be bound by them in all proceedings before the Illinois

Pollution Control Board

.

8

.

With the Board's permission, attached is my Entry of Appearance in this

matter.

Wherefore, I, Maxine I. Lipeles, respectfully request permission to appear pro hac

vice on behalf of petitioner American Bottom Conservancy

.

Respectfully submitted,

Maxine I. Lipeles

Director, Interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic

Washington University School of Law

One Brookings Drive - Campus Box 1120

St. Louis, MO 63130-4899

Dated: May 4, 2006

Subscribed and Sworn to before me this	- day of NI&	, 2006

City; State,

VA

IIE(7F YNN t k

O

~

J

NOTARY PUBLIC - NOTARY SEAL

2

CITY OF ST. LOUIS, STATE OF MISSOURI

MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 08128/07

"eCeoVI

ED

BEFORE THE ILLINOISPOLLUTION CONTROL BOAR

MAY - 8 2006

AMERICAN BOTTOM CONSERVANCY

)

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

Petitioner

)

v .

)

PCB 06-

I

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

(NPDES Permit Appeal)

AGENCY and UNITED STATES STEEL

)

CORPORATION

 - GRANITE CITY WORKS

)

Respondents

)

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

I hereby enter my appearance in the above-captioned proceeding, on behalf of petitioner

American Bottom Conservancy .

Respectfully submitted,

Maxine I. Lip~eles, ro Hac Vice

Director, Interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic

Washington University School of Law

One Brookings Drive - Campus Box 1120

St. Louis, MO 63130-4899

Certificate of Service

I, Maxine I. Lipeles, certify that on May 4, 2006, I filed the above MOTION FOR PRO

HAC VICE ADMISSION OF MAXINE I. LIPELES and ENTRY OF APPEARANCE .

An original and 9 copies were filed, on recycled paper, with the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, James R. Thompson Center, 100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500, Chicago, IL

60601, via U.S. Mail, and copies were served via United States Mail to the individuals on

the included service list .

Maxine I. Lipeles

Counsel for Petitioners

lnterdisciplinaryEnvironmental Clinic

May 4, 2006

Division of Legal Counsel

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

1021 North Grand Avenue East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

United States Steel Corporation - Granite City Works

c/o National Registered Agents, Inc.

200 West Adams Street

Chicago, IL 60606

SERVICE LIST

Washington University School of Law

One Brookings Drive - Campus Box 1120

St. Louis, MO 63130-4899

(314) 935-5837

4

RECEIVED

CLERKS OFFICE

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

MAY - 8 2006

AMERICAN BOTTOM CONSERVANCY

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

Petitioner

)

v .

PCB 06-

Ii

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

)

(NPDES PCnnit Appeal)

AGENCY and UNITED STATES STEEL

)

CORPORATION - GRANITE CITY WORKS

)

Respondents

)

PETITION FOR REVIEW OF A DECISION BY THE ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Pursuant to 415 ILCS § 5/40(e)(1) and 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 105, the American

 Bottom Conservancy ("Petitioner" or "ABC") hereby petitions for review of the March

31, 2006 decision of Respondent Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("IEPA") to

grant a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit (Permit No

.

IL0000329) to Respondent United States Steel Corporation

 - Granite City Works

("GCW") to discharge pollutants into Horseshoe Lake

.

In support of this petition, Petitioner states

:

Petitioner

I

.

 American Bottom Conservancy, an Illinois not-for-profit corporation, is a

volunteer, grass-roots organization based in metropolitan East St . Louis .

 ABC is

committed to helping low-income communities protect their environment against water,

air, and land pollution. It works with concerned citizens to address environmental impacts

affecting Illinois citizens. ABC submitted comments on the draft permit at issue in this

THIS HII TG IS SIIRMIITEl) ON RECYCLED

PAPER

proceeding .

2 .

American Bottom Conservancy members use Horseshoe Lake State Park

for fishing, hunting, bird watching, and nature study. ABC members are concerned that

the discharge by United States Steel Corporation - Granite City Works of water pollution

into Horseshoe Lake impairs their ability to enjoy those activities. American Bottom

Conservancy members are adversely affected by pollution discharged into Horseshoe

Lake, and American Bottom Conservancy brings this appeal on behalf of its members

.

Respondents

3

.

 Respondent Illinois Environmental Protection Agency is an agency of the

State of Illinois, established pursuant to Section 4 of the Environmental Protection Act,

415 ILCS 5/1, and responsible for administering the National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System permit program in the State of Illinois

.

4 .

Respondent United States Steel Corporation - Granite City Works

operates a steelmaking facility at 20`h and State Streets in Granite City, Illinois .

Horseshoe Lake and Horseshoe Lake State Park

5 .

 The United States Steel Corporation - Granite City Works facility

discharges an average of 16 million gallons per day (mgd) of wastewater containing

various water pollutants into Horseshoe Lake. Maximum average monthly discharge is

21 mgd and maximum daily discharge is 25 mgd

.

6.

 Horseshoe Lake is a general use water under 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 303.201

of the state and, therefore, subject to water quality standards set forth at 35 111 . Adm .

Code § 302 Subpart B

. .

2

7 .

A significant portion of Horseshoe Lake is located within Horseshoe Lake

State Park. (Exhibit A)

Members of the public use Horseshoe Lake and Horseshoe Lake State

Park for recreational activities including fishing, hunting, boating, bird watching, hiking

and nature walks, camping, and picnicking .

9 .

 A portion of Horseshoe Lake State Park is a designated Waterfowl

Management Area managed by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources

.

The

Waterfowl Management Area provides nesting sites and habitat for more than 300

species of birds, many of which are migratory. (Exhibit B)

10 .

 Since 1998, the State of Illinois has listed Horseshoe Lake under section

303(d) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1313(d), for violating applicable water

quality standards. According to the 2004 version of the list - the most recent version to

receive approval from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) -

Horseshoe Lake is impaired, or not meeting water quality standards, for phosphorus, pH,

total suspended solids (TSS), heptachlor, polychlorinated biphenols (PCBs), zinc, excess

algal growth, and the presence of non-native aquatic life

.

11

.

United States Steel Corporation - Granite City Works discharges several

of the pollutants for which Horseshoe Lake is water quality impaired, including total

suspended solids, zinc, and pollutants contributing to high pH and excess algal growth

.

Statement of Issues Raised

12 .

On December 19, 2004, IEPA gave notice that it had made a tentative

decision to issue a renewal NPDES permit (Permit No . 11,0000329) governing the

discharge by United States Steel Corporation - Granite City Works of pollutants into

Horseshoe Lake .

13 .

On January 18, 2005, ABC submitted written comments to IEPA

regarding the draft permit. (Exhibit C)

14 .

 ABC's January 18, 2005 comment letter was also submitted on behalf of

Health and Environmental Justice-St. Louis, Neighborhood Law Office, the Sierra Club,

and the Webster Groves Nature Study Society .

15

.

In its January 18, 2005 comment letter, ABC and each of the above-named

organizations requested that IEPA hold a public hearing regarding the draft permit .

16 .

 After ABC engaged the Interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic to assist it

with legal and technical support, and determining that IEPA had not yet decided on

permit issuance, ABC (through the Clinic) sent a follow-up letter to IEPA on October 3,

2005. (Exhibit D)

17 .

 After communicating further with IEPA's permit writing staff and

determining that no decision had yet been made regarding the draft permit, ABC, through

the Clinic, sent supplemental technical comments to IEPA on December 9, 2005 . (Exhibit

E)

18 .

In each of its written comment letters, ABC requested that a public

hearing be held .

19 .

By letter dated March 7, 2006, ABC reiterated to IEPA its request that a

public hearing be held regarding the draft permit. (Exhibit F)

20.

In its comments, ABC raised legal and scientific issues regarding flaws in

the draft permit and in IEPA's consideration of the draft permit, including the following

:

4

a. ABC as well as other interested parties requested a public hearing

during the public comment period .

 Collectively the several

organizations that requested a public hearing represent a variety of

interests . At least one of the organizations - Sierra Club - is a large

membership organization representing thousands of people . Moreover,

the permit authorizes the discharge of harmful pollutants into a lake

that abuts a state park and is already exceeding applicable water

quality standards. Under the circumstances, there exists a significant

degree of public interest sufficient to trigger a public hearing,

particularly in light of the regulations' instruction that "instances of

doubt shall be resolved in favor of holding the hearing ." 35 Ill. Adm .

Code § 309.115(a)(1)

.

b. IEPA improperly calculated monthly effluent load limits. IEPA

calculated monthly load limits using daily maximum flow, rather than

using highest monthly average flow as is required. As a result, IEPA

set monthly effluent limits at levels that are illegally high .

c. IEPA made a gross error in setting the permit's concentration-

based effluent limits for cyanide. Although the IEPA permit writer

correctly calculated cyanide limits, the permit apparently and

inexplicably "rounded up" to allow GCW to discharge nearly twice as

much cyanide into Horseshoe Lake as the permit writer calculated

.

Therefore, the permit limit is excessive, and is not sufficient to protect

water quality .

5

d.

 Despite GCW's history of noncompliance with cyanide limits,

EPA failed to include a compliance schedule as required by 35 Ill .

Adm., Code § 309.148

.

e. A special effluent limit granted to GCW by IEPA for ammonia for

the month of March is improper and contrary to the regulation 35 Ill

.

Adm. Code § 302.212(e) .

f.

 IEPA unlawfully failed to include effluent limits for sulfate, total

phosphorus, and fecal coliform - pollutants that are present in GCW's

effluent and for which the state has effluent limits and/or water quality

standards .

g. IEPA unlawfully failed to require GCW to monitor its effluent for

naphthalene, benzo(a)pyrene and tetrachloroethylene at Outfall 001 .

Although these pollutants are monitored at internal locations

("outfalls" A01 and B01), they must also be monitored where GCW

discharges into Horseshoe Lake (outfall 001) .

21

.

On March 8, 2006, IEPA purported to issue the final permit for GCW

.

(Exhibit G) However, IEPA did not issue a Response to Comments at that time, contrary

to the requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 124.17 .

22 .

By letter dated March 24, 2006, IEPA responded to ABC's January 18,

2005 comment letter. (Exhibit H)

23 .

On March 31, 2006, IEPA re-issued the final permit . (Exhibit I)

24.

By letter to counsel for ABC dated April 5, 2006, IEPA admitted its error

in initially issuing the permit without the Response to Comments

.

 [EPA stated:--'To

6

remedy this departure from applicable procedures, we reissued the permit on March 31,

2006. All comments on the record were issued prior to that date and the official date of

issuance for permit #IL0000329 for purposes of establishing the 35-day third party appeal

timeframe is March 31, 2006." (Exhibit J)

25

.

By letter dated April 10, 2006, IEPA responded to the December 9, 2005

comments submitted by ABC, through the Clinic. (Exhibit K)

26

.

The final permit did not remedy the flaws discussed above that were raised

by ABC in its written comments

.

27 .

 Public Hearing: The issuance of the permit, initially on March 8, 2006

and finally on March 31, 2006, without conducting a public hearing, tacitly denied

ABC's multiple requests for a public hearing. In its response to ABC's January 18, 2005

comment letter, IEPA did not offer any direct explanation for this denial . (Exhibit H)

28. IEPA's response to ABC's January 18, 2005 letter states: "The agency

regrets that you were unable to attend a scheduled meeting on the above mentioned issues

on March 14, 2006." (Exhibit H) This was a belated and disingenuous effort to re-

characterize the nature of the offered meeting, and to imply that the offer of a meeting

satisfied IEPA's duty to hold a public hearing in this case

.

29. The meeting proposed by IEPA for March 14, 2006 in no way satisfied

IEPA's duty to conduct a public hearing in this case . First, IEPA invited ABC to meet to

discuss "environmental justice issues," making no mention of the GCW permit . (Exhibit

h). Second, IEPA issued no public notice regarding the meeting . Third, IEPA scheduled

the meeting to occur in Springfield, Illinois, a location nearly 100 miles away from

Granite City and therefore inaccessible to many of the local residents with concerns about

7

the permit. Finally, ]EPA suggested that the meeting occur on March 14, 2006, a time

after IEPA first issued the NPDES permit, making it impossible for IEPA to have applied

any comments made during the meeting to its consideration of the draft NPDES permit

.

30 .

 Improper Flow Calculations (Permit Condition 1) : IEPA erroneously

calculated the permit's 30-day average load limits for CBOD 5 , total suspended solids,

iron (total), lead (total), zinc (total), cyanide (total), cyanide (available by OlA 1677),

phenol, fluoride, and ammonia-nitrogen discharged from outfall 001 . IEPA calculated

those limits using GCW's highest maximum daily flow (25 mgd), rather than its highest

monthly average flow (21 mgd). (Exhibits M, pp. 25-26, 28-32, 34, and 0) An internal

IEPA memo and the GCW permit application both identify 21 mgd as the highest

monthly average flow. U.S. EPA's Permit Writers Manual specifies that "the average

monthly limit is the highest allowable value for the average of daily discharges obtained

over a calendar month." (Exhibit N p. 112)

31

.

 By improperly using the 25 mgd for calculating GCW's 30-day average

load limits, IEPA is allowing GCW to discharge at its maximum single-day rate every

single day of the month. This plainly violates established EPA guidance

.

32 .

 IEPA's response to ABC's December 9, 2005 comment letter (Exhibit K,

p. 2) acknowledged, without explanation, that [EPA used daily maximum flow to

calculate average and maximum load limits. However, daily maximum flow may not be

used to calculate a monthly average, as it inappropriately inflates the monthly load limit .

33 .

 Gross Error in Calculating Cyanide Limit (Permit Condition

 1)) : The

permit's 30-day average concentration limit for cyanide (available by O1A 1677) is

erroneous and excessive. IEPA properly set out to calculate concentration-based effluent

8

limits for cyanide with reference to the applicable water quality standard . The permit

writer's notes (Exhibit M, p . 30) and two internal memoranda (Exhibit 0, p . 1, and

Exhibit P) all identify 0.0052 mg/L limit as the correct 30-day average limit for cyanide

in order to protect the water quality standard . In transferring the cyanide limit from the

permit writer's notes and two internal memoranda to the actual permit, however, IEPA

nearly doubled the cyanide limit - from 0.0052 mg/L (internal IEPA documents) to 0.01

mg/L (permit limit) - without any explanation or documentation . Thus, 0.0052 mg/L is

the correct standard; IEPA's apparent rounding up to 0.01 mg/L is arbitrary and

capricious .

34 .

 IEPA's response to ABC's December 9, 2005 comment letter (Exhibit K,

p. 2) states that a "significant figures issue" was the reason for the apparent rounding up

of the cyanide limit. However, there is utterly no support for the suggestion that it was

somehow necessary for IEPA to round up the cyanide limit from 0.0052 mg/L to 0.01

mg/L. The cyanide limit of 0.0052 mg/L calculated by IEPA personnel is well above the

detection limit for cyanide. Available monitoring methods have detection limits low

enough (1 ppb or less (Exhibit Q)) that rounding up for monitoring purposes cannot

support the near-doubling of the cyanide limit

.

35

.

 In order to ensure that the GCW discharge does not cause or contribute to

violations of the water quality standard, 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 302.208(e), the limits

calculated by the permit writer and reflected also in two IEPA memoranda must be

placed in the permit . The current permit limit is excessive, unlawful, and without support .

36

.

Lack of Compliance Plan for Cyanide Discharge Violations (Special

Conditions): GCW chronically violates its cyanide limits. (Exhibit R) NPDES permits

9

must contain compliance schedules for any discharge that is not in compliance with

applicable water quality standards. 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 309.148. Thus, IEPA improperly

issued the GCW permit without including a compliance schedule to bring GCW's

cyanide discharge into compliance with applicable standards

.

37

.

 IEPA claims in its response to ABC's December 9, 2005 comment letter

(Exhibit K, p. 2) that a compliance schedule is not needed for cyanide because of

"unreliable sample data due to previous test methods used to analyze the samples ."

However, there is no evidence that IEPA made a determination that the violations were a

result of faulty sample data. Thus, there is no justification in the record for IEPA's

failure to include a compliance schedule under Special Conditions for GCW's cyanide

violations

.

38 .

 Unlawful Special Limit for Ammonia Discharge in March (Permit

Condition 1) : In setting effluent limits for ammonia, the permit sets separate limits for

:

Spring/Fall; Summer; Winter; and March. The 30-day average load and concentration

limits for ammonia are higher for March than for Spring/Fall . There is no lawful basis

for creating a separate, more lenient, standard for March than for other months in the

Spring/Fall period

.

39 .

 The water quality standard for ammonia is designed to protect aquatic life,

and requires lower concentrations in warmer months, when "early life stages" are present,

than in colder months, when they are absent . "The Early Life Stage Present period occurs

from March through October." 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 302.212(e). Beyond that, spring and

fall are differentiated from summer because of higher temperatures during summer . 35

Ill. Adm. Code § 302 .212(b)(2)(A), 302.212(d)-(e) and Board Note .

10

40 .

 The IEPA permit writer's notes give no separate calculations for the

month of March, and acknowledge that the spring season includes the month of March

.

IEPA's response to ABC's December 9, 2005 comment letter also acknowledges that,

"with changes adopted in 2002, it [March] is now a spring month." (Exhibit K, p . 5)

IEPA's response indicates that the agency decided to exempt GCW from the Spring/Fall

limit for ammonia for the month of March, based apparently upon GCW's request for

such treatment and for the allowance of "mixing." No documentation is offered to justify

either IEPA's authority to depart from the requirements of the regulations, or the

appropriateness of doing so in this case . To the contrary, internal IEPA documents do

not allow for mixing zones at any time during the calendar year [this needs to be

clarified] . (Exhibits 0 and P)

41

.

 The permit may not set higher effluent limits for ammonia discharges

during March than during the rest of the Spring/Fall season . Thus, March should have the

same concentration limit, 2.8 mg/L, as the rest of the Spring/Fall period . IEPA is without

authority to grant GCW the higher 4.0 mg/I, concentration limit (or the higher load limit

derived therefrom)

.

42 .

 Permit Fails to Include Effluent Limits for Some Regulated Pollutants

(Permit Condition 1): Based on its NPDES permit application of October, 17, 2002

(Exhibit S), GCW discharges sulfate, fecal coliform, and total phosphorus . Illinois has

established effluent limits and/or state water quality standards for these pollutants

.

Therefore, GCW's permit should include limits for these compounds under Condition I

of the permit

.

1

1

43 .

In its response to ABC's December 9, 2005 comment letter, IEPA states

that these pollutants do not warrant limits because the effluent concentrations for these

compounds are too low .

 (Exhibit K, p. 1) However, IEPA performed no "reasonable

potential" calculations to support make this conclusion

.

 35 Ill. Admin. Code §

309.141(h). For sulfate, only one sample is available . A single sample maximum is not

adequate to determine reasonable potential . Therefore, a sulfate limit should be included

.in the permit for at least one permit cycle. For phosphorus, an effluent standard of 1 .0

milligrams per liter (mg/1) is established in 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 304.123. Again, only

one sample is available

.

 Give the clear regulatory requirement and the listing of

Horseshoe Lake as impaired for excess algae (for

which

phosphorus is a contributor), the

permit should contain a phosphorus limit of 1 .0 mg/I .

 A limit is required for fecal

coliform per 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 302.209. Horseshoe Lake meets the definition of a

protected water since it is part of a state park . 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 302.209(2) specifies

that protected waters "flow through or adjacent to parks or residential areas ."

44 .

 Lack of Discharge Limits for Toxic Pollutants (Permit Condition 1) :

The permit does not include monitoring at outfall 001 for naphthalene, benzo(a)pyrene

and tetrachloroethylene .

 These compounds are monitored only at internal locations

(outfalls A01 and B01), but not where the wastewater is discharged into Horseshoe Lake

(outfall 001). While there is no objection to monitoring at internal outfalls, it cannot

replace the need for effluent limits and monitoring requirements at the point where

pollutants are discharged to Horseshoe Lake (in this case, Outfall 001)

.

45 .

Conclusion: By issuing this permit without first holding a public hearing,

IEPA violated 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 309.115(a). By improperly calculating effluent limits,

12

and granting exemptions not authorized by law, IEPA is allowing United States Steel

-

Granite City Works to discharge pollutants in violation of applicable water quality

standards and effluent limitations, 35 Ill . Adm. Code §§ 302.208, 302.212(b) and (c),

304.105, 309.141(d), 309.142, and 309.143. By failing to require adequate monitoring of

certain pollutants, IEPA also violated 35 Ill . Adm. Code § 309.146 .

46 .

 ABC and its members will be affected adversely when pollutants

discharged under the permit cause or contribute to pollution of Horseshoe Lake as a result

of IEPA's failure to require protective effluent limits and monitoring

.

WHEREFORE, the American Bottom Conservancy respectfully requests that the

Pollution Control Board set aside the NPDES permit (No . 1L0000329) issued to the

United States Steel Corporation - Granite City Works on March 31, 2006 as not

sufficiently protective of the environment and not in accord with law, and direct the IEPA

to hold a public hearing and reconsider the permit in order to establish conditions and

limits necessary to protect Illinois waters, assure protection of Illinois water quality

standards, and comply with Illinois law and regulations and the federal Clean Water Act,

33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq. Specifically, the American Bottom Conservancy requests that

the permit be amended to include the following

:

1. monthly load limits for CBOD 5 , total suspended solids, iron (total), lead (total),

zinc (total), cyanide (total), cyanide (available by O1A 1677); phenol, fluoride, and

ammonia-nitrogen calculated using the highest average monthly flow (21 mgd)

;

2. a 30-day average concentration limit for cyanide (available by OIA 1677) of

0.0052 mg/I ;

3. an appropriate compliance schedule for cyanide

;

1 3

4. no separate ammonia limits for the month of March;

5. effluent limits and monitoring requirements for sulfate, total phosphorus, and

fecal coliform; and

6. effluent limits and monitoring requirements for naphthalene, benzo(a)pyrene

and tetrachloroethylene at outfall 001 .

Respectfully submitted

-/

V,a,-r,	

~

 Maxine I. Lipeles, P o Hac Vice

 Counsel for Petitioner

American Bottom Conservancy

Interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic

Washington University School of Law

One Brookings Drive - Campus Box 1120

St. Louis, MO 63130-4899

(314) 935-5837 (telephone)

(314) 935-5171 (fax)

milipele@wulaw.wustl.edu

May 4, 2006

Certificate of Service

I, Maxine I. Lipeles, certify that on May 4, 2006, I filed the above PETITION FOR

REVIEW OF A DECISION BY THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY. An original and 9 copies were filed, on recycled paper, with the Illinois

Pollution Control Board, James R. Thompson Center, 100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500,

Chicago, IL 60601, via U.S. Mail, and copies were served via United States Mail to the

individuals on the included service list

.

6-

4

Maxine I. Lipeles,

Hac Vice

Counsel for Petitioners

Interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic

Washington University School of Law

One Brookings Drive - Campus Box 1120

St. Louis, MO 63130-4899

14

Division of Legal Counsel

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

1021 North Grand Avenue East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

United States Steel Corporation- Granite City Works

c/o National Registered Agents, Inc

.

200 West Adams Street

Chicago, IL 60606

SERVICE LIST

1 5

Expiration Date: March 31, 2011

Name and Address of Permittee

United States Steel Corporation

Granite City Works

20th and State Streets

Granite City, Illinois 62040

Discharge Number and Name :

001

Treated Process Wastewater

A01

Coke By-Products Wastewater

B01

Cold Rolling Mill Wastewater

Cot

Landfill Leachate Wastewater

NPDES Permit No. IL0000329

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Division of Water Pollution Control

1021 North Grand Avenue East

Post Office Box 19276

Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276

NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM

Reissued (NPDES) Permit

Issue Date : March 31, 2006

Effective Date: April 1, 2006

Facility Name and Address:

United States Steel Corporation

Granite City Works

20th and State Streets

Granite City, Illinois 62040

Receiving Waters :

Horseshoe Lake

Alan Keller, P.E .

Manager, Permit Section

Division of Water Pollution Control

SAK:BMB:04090101 .bah

In compliance with the provisions of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, Title 35 of III . Adm. Code, Subtitle C and/or Subtitle D, Chapter

1, and the Clean Water Act (CWA), the above-named permittee is hereby authorized to discharge at the above location to the above-named

receiving stream in accordance with the standard conditions and attachments herein

Permittee is not authorized to discharge after the above expiration date . In order to receive authorization to discharge beyond the

expiration date, the permittee shall submit the proper application as required by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) not

later than 180 days prior to the expiration date

EXHIBIT I

Page 2

NPDES Permit No. IL0000329

Effluent Limitations and Monitoring

1 . From the effective date of this permit until the expiration date, the effluent of the following discharge(s) shall be monitored and limitec

at all times as follows

Outfall(s): 001 Treated Process Wastewater

'For Ammonia as Nitrogen, Spring/Fall is April-May and September-October. Summer is June-August. Winter is November-February.

Weekly average limits will apply. For Spring/Fall, weekly average limit is 7 .0 mg/L (1460 lb/day). Summer weekly average limit is 5.5 mg/L

(1147lb/day). March weekly average limit is 10 mg/L (2085 lb/day) . No weekly average limit for Winter

"See Special Condition 10

See Special Condition 1

See Special Condition 2

Total Suspended Solids

Cyanide (available by

NPDES Permit No. IL0000329

Effluent Limitations and Monitorinq

- From the effective date of this permit until the expiration date, the effluent of the following discharge(s) shall be monitored and limited

at all times as follows

Outfall(s): A01, B01, C01

LOAD LIMITS lbs/day

CONCENTRATION

DAF (DMF) LIMITS mq/l

Outfall A01- Coke By-Products Wastewater

Flow (MGD)

See Special Condition 1 Continuous

Measure

Total Suspended Solids

- Cold Rolling Mill Wastewater

Flow (MGD)

See Special Condition 1

Outfall: C01 - Landfill Leachate Wastewater

Flow (MGD)

See Special Condition 1

Continuous

Measure

Page 4

NPDES Permit No. IL0000329

Soeciai Conditions

SPECIAL CONDITION 1

Flow shall be reported as a daily maximum and a monthly average, and shall be reported on the monthly

Discharge Monitoring Report Form .

SPECIAL CONDITION 2

The pH shall be in the range 6 .0 to 9.0. The monthly minimum and monthly maximum values shall be reported

on the DMR form

,$PECIAL CONDITION 3.

If an applicable effluent standard or limitation is promulgated under Sections 301(b)(2)(C) and

(D), 304(b)(2),

and 307(aX2) of the Clean Water Act and that effluent standard or limitation is more stringent than any effluent limitation in the permit or

controls a pollutant not limited in the NPDES Permit, the Agency shall revise or modify the permit in accordance with the more stringent

standard or prohibition and shall so notify the permittee

SPECIAL CONDITION 4

. The use

operation of this facility shall be by or under the supervision of a Certified Class K operator

SPECIAL CONDITION 5L. For purposes of this permit, load limits for Phenol (4AAP) have been based on actual plant discharges, and load

limits for Ammonia (as N) have been based on water quality standards, and are included in accordance with

301(g) variance of the Clean

Water Act approved by the USEPA . Any changes to these load limits can only be made following Public Notice and opportunity for hearing

SPECIAL CONDITION¢. The permittee may show that an apparent noncompliance of load limits for zinc is not a violation by applying

background credits

for

intake waters and by submission of calculations as defined below

The load calculations for comparison to Zinc load limits shall be made as follows :

M=(C,-C) xFx8.34

Where :

M = Outfall 001 load limit (lbs/day)

C, = Outfall 001 effluent concentration (mg/I)

C, = Intake water concentration (mg/1)

F = Outfall 001 effluent flow (MGD)

Concentrations limits for outfall 001 are absolute and no background credit shall be allowed

SPECIAL CONDITION 7. The permittee shall record monitoring results on Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms using one such form

for each discharge each month. Semi-annual monitoring results shall be submitted with the DMR forms for the months of June and

December, and shall be submitted to the IEPA no later than July 15 and January 15 unless otherwise specified by the Agency, to the

following address

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Bureau of Water

Division of Water Pollution Control

Compliance Assurance Section, Mail Code #19

1021 North Grand Avenue East

Post Office Box 19276

Springfield, Illinois 62794-19276

SPECIAL CONDITION 8

The Permittee shall be required to conduct an effluent toxicity evaluation prior to the renewal of this permit

Elements of the toxicity evaluation should include but not be limited to the following

Aquatic Toxicity Screening

Acute Toxicity - The initial acute toxicity testing should be run on at least three trophic levels of aquatic species (fish, invertebrates

and plants) which represent the aquatic community for the receiving stream . Suggested species include the Fathead Minnow

and Ceriodaphnia. All tests should be done in accordance with 'Measuring Acute Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine

A .

Page 5

NPDES Permit No. IL0000329

Special Conditions

Organisms (Fourth Edition)", (USEPA/600-4-90/027) and "Environmental Effects Tests Guidelines" (USEPA/560-6-821002) . The

IEPA specifications and guidelines for these tests, given in "Effluent Biomonitoring and Toxicity Assessment

- Aquatic Life

Concerns,". must also be met .

Testing shall be conducted on fish over a 96-hour period while invertebrates should be tested over a 48-hour period . Test should be

performed on 100% effluent.

B .

Samolna Frequency

The test referenced above shall be performed during the final year of this permit . Upon completion, test results may be submitted with the

facility renewal application.

SPECIAL CONDITION 9 .

Samples taken in compliance with the effluent monitoring requirements for internal outfall A01 shall be taken

at a point representative of the discharge of Coke By-Products Wastewater, but prior to mixing with any other wastewater sources

Samples taken in compliance with the effluent monitoring requirements for internal outfall B01 shall be taken at a point representative of

the discharge of Cold Rolling Mill wastewater, but prior to mixing with any other wastewater sources . Samples taken in compliance with

the effluent monitoring requirements for internal outfall C01 shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge of Landfill Leachate

Wastewater, but prior to mixing with any other wastewater sources. Samples taken in compliance with the effluent monitoring requirements

for outfall 001 shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge, but before entering the receiving water

SPECIAL CONDITION 10,

Samples for Cyanide (available by CIA 1677) and Cyanide (total) shall consist of a series of grab samples

collected over any 24-hour consecutive period, stored using methods consistent with 40 CFR 136, and combined biter the collection of

the last grab sample . The combined sample shall be analyzed using methods consistent with 40 CFR 136, within 24 hours of the initial

sample collection .

Started Cendlww

.flntlnrs

Act ereet the let Enignmentet Protection Act Ch 111 1/2 Ii. Pet_ Slat- Sec IOOt-

1062 w Anrnded

Seemly mien The Nk iia Emkanwnlel Protection Agency,

peed ma.n tile Nkseis Pol LionC

.101 Soerd.

W.I.

Act Iform.ny refried to

IM Federal W.I. Poidion Control Act men.

ti L 92.500, is .merWd. 33 US.C. 1251 a east .

IWOl9 Notions Ptdutsnt Oiachrpe Fini action SyslenJ eases h atin.W pognm fly

leti.l

modlyihp, l.vpkp rdreiaiAY terminating. no.ilrkp end Wittily, pry,end

bpfi

v and bnlateng preve.vlwd reghwements, under Sectn. 301. Q2,318 ad 405

d hChin War M.

OWAmaw h Unite Sbr Em'voaswn W Protection Agency

Ady Medsrge men IM dlaprge 0 . polluter n essies d during a tartar day a sm

24Lae period that nasarwbiy repreten4 h oelender stay 1. plapOeee of umpire. For

oreIc

with snwadone .rpresad in t/nib of matt. IM

"ally

discharge" Y celoWte as

the lots mesa 01 this plubm diecheped over the

ay.

Fa poirtents wd, lnWean .

stewed in other eyes of mawrrn nit. me "say disdlarpe" b cakuiele a the

aw.p a

rM1

.ass of to pdiulrw over to ay.

etsele.esDay D/actrarp LANtstion Ideas m.akmrml mans the hpheal slower deify

deny dnahetge. over C calendar month. e&kWeeed as the sores of N defy

ilrgea Heats dtakV a ededr mdnm divide by h ant of ally diehr1w

..nineOulrlp ht niondt

Aerpa Weeny D/teierge Lbeltsan (7 ay averegel mum the high fit eoweble

seep efd&iydeehrppow

•e

MW.rwW,cMCwteain .tallof .Ld.MdacMIges

degdree during a celender week divided by the number ofdeW d.cMge. mauced dwiq

PMwk.

y at ..Pout

. Practiced BMPt mae schedule of ealbee r

ruMbidon. of

Pla{ob.miteannce

e,aeothrmnpennntpadeeebpmrentareducethe

Paid o/ war. of se Slow, ewe also Include

Net

npt esqukrMnb, operethso

psse a.t end pndices 0 control pivot she repft, eplege a hake, eldge orwest.

dd.td ordnMpe Irons caw messes abregt

Allied meets 4 ample Of V dfbd whip used td mit . p 4 beta compete.app .

tylfin.fe nwrn an kdldAW.

."We of at tea t00 miles coeecte et

fndomly-

atpcYd an ow i prod tot eaoeedq 16 mbwbs .

Apller Campoelte Sesple none a lombkwtion of a best

sampleesq

." of at lent

W asigLtws. mlected at periods inbvab during the opeetinp hours of a /airy ow a 24.

asespeNod

t~rGewpoYbSimpleewe. a corhbinetion of al lest 3 sample apuols Of 81 least Im

St. colectedst periodic Inteevalt dicing the operets,g hoses of s feclity Ova' so S-hour

vvmaanel Conpplte See Alit mess a combnelion of srnpls elqurs of et Matt

Stets ollected .t pripkc nteveh such that either the time inteva between each

.tiMr h vekrne of eahesgnol b.popotNnel To adMr IMwarn

sew

et, IM fins of

Mnls

Of this IoW stra.m flow

tint. to cosection of the p.vlous eliguot

a '

Duty, to cpply The pem'itee must comply wits, .2 condtions of this permit

Any quit norcomplence constitutes a violation of the Act end's pondt for

rdrcement steps. permit bnniAliam revocean end rWtuence, modaean

for

derel of e permit Iwnwel eppscetion. The pemiH+e what co npty with

ddNnt

dentate or p05.'''on5 seebtishad taster Section 2071&1 of the Clean

Were Act la Tonic poiut.nte within the dme provide, h the rgulefeone Via,

establish those standards a ego inan e even t the pettish has not yet basis

modMd to incaporele the r"*.t .

Duty b reapply. if t ho Dennitlee wishes to cont

."ectivity1

.9"eby this

pert aftr the epketion orb o1 this pmlit

Who

pnnltee mat app 1. end

obbin &pew permit If the perMttes submits .

pops

epplcetbn of required by

cho Agency no let. thin 160 dsyt prior to IM siviratio, date .

fee permit shall

conlmre

m10 face end effect cod the lin

.l Agency decision on th application

has been north.

Nee to hell r reduce ectlvity nt a ddonee . It sheb not be a defense for

prmite t en glotvenwnl action

the. i t would hey- been necessary N heft a

adtwe IM p.rrnine ectiviv n ear m msintelv compserce coils IM captios

ad this pay,y ;L

Dub la mlllotil The prml.ee that lake en n.gneble lops to minimize p

which Ms e,.esonabe kkekhood

a Wanly effec14q Item.' health or the enviorvnenl.

reaper

operaiee. end m

s The p.,rvllp shat at a1 limbs pop"

operate end met. tam .1 leaf end n

al tratmnt and control tend

rotated epp.ewc-oral which are maletm,

"le by the permtle 10 eNey.

en.iupe cost the pondli"M of IN, prmit. Props Cpnlgn and meinlaynte

.aide dlaam pelwmrca. edquate b,ndi,g, edeguete operator edatkn and

sips end edeNwle lebwary end pocets controls. including eppopdale

guilty

. ..pence pweuras This povieion rquine IM opaelon

hick-p, p

..AA,

fecitie.. a erode e.t.ms only when necaeery b achieve

coropfsebce with the Ctndtinna of me permit

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

101

Per.Nl actbM. This permit

b mollified.revokod end reissue. a lsrm;MIM

.bor_uuseby Ira Agency pvwent b 40 CFA 122,62 The

filing of a rgpet rev the

.prnittw la e pemit modsution mouton ad reiaeuenoe, or

f.rrrnkwtion. or e

notift lion of pleated ds.e.pst or ekcipeled noncomp once, does rot slay any

grant cpndbprt

III

Psaperty rights, This poop does not convey tiny property tight, of any son . Or

any at privilege.

(6)

Duty w provide Informtioet The prmitlee Shut furnish toe IM Agency within a

rv»neWt tine, easy intonation with the Agency may request to alerm'vw

- wMIMr ups saints

for

modifying revoking sod Wesukp, a lerminating this

pernK a to determine conplsnce with h permit TM prmitles then ao

fuller to the Agency. upon request, copies of mords "Ooored to be kept by

INS

Per-lit .

(SI

, l.npectbe find entry . The perinitee shell abw, an sutlsotite

fepetenfetiw

the

Agency- upon the presentation of cndentele end other docuiwnb as may b

rsgulre by Ww. to;

4.1

Enter pon the pemdles" parolee. when a rgWete facility a activity is

locate a conducted. or

whim

made must b kept under the conditwn%

of shit peryttit

He" all. . . Io end copy,

-1

.sonable finial. eny recadt that muss b

kept under 1M condtons of this prmtt

;

Ill

lospd .1 reesoneble fimee eny

chum . .

puipmenl (includi g mnawmy

•

nd.

.vol egbmanl. palkes.

or operetions regulated

rqu.e

urge this prmI: end

•

Sample or monitor a reasonable time, fur the purpose of assuring prove

compiance, a el of erwise euVodte by the Act ea aitbatsnc . .

premtre at oft bastion

(101 ManIIOrIng a d fep4sd..

•

Senyles and muktagn.ib see" for the pupae of noMWks, boa be

retain scads of .l moNbdp lofonatioht including

calibration fast mkstenence recede, and M original

tip cbert

recaatpe for Conasetek MoNaskvp bevlimerhtstont copies of .1 reports

required by this pemit. end records of N dots used to coffspleft this

ap0&.dors for ti . permit fore period list beet ] gun been The

orb

that permt nwauwMnt 'spoil

application. The prod my be

.-tested by regentof the Agency at any time .

Aecorda of monitoring Information shell kselude;

(1I

The ate, eastpee. and tins- of sampling or meesearynb ;

(21

The indieidwlfs)

twits,Worm"

the sampling a mtsurewn s .

(0)

The ate( eplysee tar, Performe

;

(4)

The kdisidudW who performed the . nN.ee;

(5)

The anelyecef techniques or methods used; enp

(6)

The results of such .Mtyaes

•

Mo&ton rep must b conducte according

. unless of er test procedures I1ew boas specified

i n this pennt. Whaleno

feel

poeed a under 40 CFI Pert 126 hat been

eppOved

the perm"

mot submit to she Agenyp teal meted for

•

ppovel. The pemhttee shall celibate end prfpm maintenance

poceds sa on cimatakq and enelylcel knbswpnblion .1 litteN

le to

eMnm accuracy Of mestaerMnts .

1111 Slgnepy rqukeenent N ppkcehons, capons a intention subNne to 1M

Agency sail be signed end ceeUhed

•

Apolketbn N panic applicaba shelf be sine as foaw . :

111

Fp a eapretloe; bye prlnepf esestha officer of at least the

level of vie president or a pass m

p.rtmeashlp Or sole poprletonhlp : by a genera prow or

meeicbellty, Sule, Feast a of er public piny. by

err a pi opat etecutive officer or renkmg -rte ether

to)

Report .. Atreport; requite by pennies . or omen kslpn action npsetbd by

the Agency

hai b signed y a person ascribe in p.regrep

W a by e'

d* authorise repeeentetivv of met prson . A peon

e duly audaiae

rpresenlative only t :

Ill The euhoruelion at made s writing by a person describe ih

pr.pnp W; end

121

The authorilalian specifies ei1Ml-an

kUividuef

e position

responsible for the peen operation

the fecity, from which the

"l"a" p9+nates such a e pent mange, auperih.anden . Oe

prson of equivalent re.pnaibi.y; and

171

The write q,h

cm'

is submitted to the Agency.

b mecew .

•

o fte,em indivlduad posn.n h. rasponabnry Id IM

overat operation of IM IaeHry .

•

w aulhoneation satisfying the

npwementI of 1b1 muss be submitted to the Agency prior to or tagetter

with anynportl . :rfonnation, or application. few signed b an author zed

rpre.nativ.

1121 Reporting tpvYermorn .

(al

Plannedchang .. The permIt ., that give notice to the Agency at soon

as possole of any planned physical alterations Or editions to the

peinllled faciity

Mfkipaed etoneompllanee, The ynowwrie. shit Give advent. notice to

the Agency of any planned CMN-1N In- perMttad lecliry or activity

which may result in noncompliance with prmh rpm cement..

Co.rpllenee ecMdule.. Reports of compliance or noncompksnce will, or

pig pogms report. on, fnlerhn and final re uinnvnl . conlakrd in any

consonance schedua of INS permit half b submitted no beta then 14

days following each schedule date .

•

MMforlrg rep l .. Monitoring n.uhs shas be reported at the intervals

specified eteeMVn in IN . permit

(1)

Monitoring

"layoffs mss b reported on a Discharge Monitoring

Report Moon

IM permitea monitors any pollutant more frequpdy than

required by ma prmit using "at procedures approved under 40

CPR 136 a as specifiedin th permit the results of this mdNoring

shag b Included M Iha calculation and reporting of IM data

submitted It give

13) Celculetions for ad limitations which locos e averaging of

measurements that utilize an arithmetic moon unle .

. otherwise

specified by IM Agency in IM permit .

•

Twmw.lour hour reporting Th. permute. shall

.Poll any

noncorpMnce which may endsrger health or the environment. Any

in tensi tie s, shat be provide, way within 24 hour frown the time the

pemMexe become. awe. of the cictanstancee. Awntn submission sMN

also be pbv rid within 6 days of they firm the gaming becomes aware of

the cicwnManoa The written submission shat contain a description of

the mncompisnce and hecaun; the period of nomomplerge . I ncludig

effect data. slid time: and d

and

noneonp6ance has not been connected.

the anticipated tie, d

empected to continue; ad step taken I Marshall

to reduce. elirninMS ad prevent reoccurrene of ma; noncompliance. The

following shall be included et Nor mtion which mutt b reported within

24 how. :

11)

Arty unanticipated by". . which emceed. any effluent lmltelon i n

the path it:

121

Violation of

a maxi tun daily discharge limitation for any of IM

potuunls feud by the Agency in the permit to b reported within

24 Agtwa ;

Agency my waive the written report on s ca.-try-care basis it re,

oral report has been received within 24 hours .

(1)

of", noncompliance . The permitt. shall typed sty instances of

m.onplianos not reposed tinder paragraphs (121(c),

(d) . o let, 81 IN

tam mOOn.,g reports Ira Wbmided. The reports shall contain IM

i formaton Fated in paragraph

(1 2)(.1

•

Ofher, infermafbn Whore the permnlee "comes aware that it faded to

submit awry relevant fails in a permit application or submitted Incorrect

inlormalkn it

•

permit appYaelion or In any report to the Agency. it shat

promptly submit such tact. of inlcasher

(13) Trpeser of permit.. A permit may be automatically transferred b a how

pamftfee if :

ten

The aveni permillw notifies the

. Agony at West 30 days in spleens of

1e, proposed transfer date:

71. note l ckdes a written agreement between In. essling'ad new

pamilsees c.nemirdng a spedlk date fur transfer of permit re.COn ;blity,

covapa and liability between IN cd.enl and new permitleet; end

The Agency does hot ntily IM ensl.n1 ppmillee and the pop-sodmw

pernAmw of Bt totem to modify d revoke and reinw IM permit . i t this

notice n rot .cawed, Ilw transfer i Mattes on IM dole

p*.NKJP in gives

agreemnt

1141 N merrulaclurirg, conmwm;A mining, and sdvculnursl dischsrom must notify

IM Agent, as soon es hey knw or have or". to bows-

.-W

That soy 7awity hen n

cord w

.mI -,

which wood recoil 'n IM

dischem of wry so.ic pasulern v..nn.vesdor Sworn 307 of taw Clean

Water Act wlvch n not km;ld

111

0- 11 It.,

foa.iNvIi. -41 -read

IN highest 41 th tolbwng notibcatmr weft

f li

One hundred micrograms set min,

VIM u Ai :

OimbppMnalendId2-methy-4.6.diNUVphenot and one mlllgram

Pay liter II mg/6 for antimdM

Pive (51 times the maslmwn conenmtion v.tue resonant tar that

pollutant in IN NPDES Permit mitisfieeilach : or

That level established b the Agency so 1N . permit,

(4)

Thai they have beacon or aspect t begin to use or menufecwe

•

intermedate or final product or byproduct may tosk poenfanl which we,

not repented in the NPDES permit ppecatiolc

115) Ae Pu

ty Owned Treatment woks IPOTW .) -t provide adequate notice to

One Agency of the following :

(a)

Any now iboduction of completion, into dot P07W from

indirect

discharge, which would b subject 1 . Sections 301 or 306 of the Clean

WOW Act d d were directly disengaging thaw pollutant, and

101

My substantial chanoe in the volume

on Wrecter of polutpls being

Noodueed into etsl PO1W by a source indoducw pollutants into IN

P01W al the time of leant. of my News,

Pot purpnn o1 IN. pe,egreph edegnte notice snag lokde inlmnetion

on 61 IM gloomily end ouemiry of effluent intoduc .d into tl. POTW, and

any anticipated impact .1 IN change on the emptily arOuaaty of of luent

go, be discharged er. IM P01W.

(1 e1 n the permit

b.ued to

. pA6dy owned c publicly regbeled treatment works

the peptise sate require arty xdulufal war el aueh W Imenl work . b eornpry

with federal requfrenrenta coKmnirg,

'111

Use charges purwrenl 16 Section 204U of the Clean Went Act and

appicebe regulation appeerYg

In 40 CPR 35 :

121

Took pollutant effluent standards and pretreatment standards punuent to

Section 307 of 1e, Cbn Water Act; and

(31

Inspection, monitoring and angry pursuant to Section 308 of the Clean

Water Act.

(171 8 an applicable staldsd or limitation Is promulgated under Section 301101(2)([1

and 0), 3040)121, or 307 W 12) and that eMwnt standard or lm taton

et i gent then any edkeent limbelbn in the permit or controls a poIlrYM rot

imited

In the permit IM yermt slat be

promptly, modified or revoked, ad

reissued to conform to that edtrent stended or linltatfor,

118) Any authorization to comtuct Issued to the pemJtw pursuant to 35 1 Adm

Code 309.154

he hereby incorporated by Marence n . condition of this permit

(191 The permidee that not make is, lab statement rep.aenfatun a catiffe., n in

all elple elion, record. report planto ogiw document sub fitted to the Agency or

give USEPA. Or requied to be "Instead under In, permit .

(201 The Clean Water Act provides that any parson who vtNStee a ~, condition

inplam,nteg Sections 301

. 302.306. 307, 309, 316. Or 405 0

1e,

, Clean We,.

Act h subject to a civil penalty not to alrceed StO.000 No day of loh violation

Arty per.on we, willfully or negligently voteW emit canditheing Implementing

Sections 301. 302, 306. 307. or 308 of the Clean Water Act

abject tee five

of not less then 52,500, nor more than $25,000 pr day of violation or by

irp eonn+nt for not more than on era. or both

(21) They Clean WalorAct

Teesside. IN, an, person we, Wsifies, temp, ., wIth, or

knowingly renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to b

maintained under permit thalf upon conviction b punished by a fin of not more

thin $10,000 per violation, ar by im pdsomunt la not more than 6 menthe per

vfotabrt or by both .

(221 The Clean Waer Act provides shot am, arson way, knwirgry makes any fats.

statement fap.Nntelion or cera icaton in

.ny

record or other docu mn

submitted

Is required

b naintairsd under this permit

has. including

momstohty Import-

or repom of comp&ene or non-compliance shat, upon

conviction b punished by i One of not man then S 10.000 pr riots ion or by

itpi.orwl.nt for not non the, 6 months per violation, or by posh

(23) Colected screening skates. sludges

. and other soith shall be disposed Olin .uch

a manna me to prevent envy of those ..,ass la runoff from IN wesh) into

waters of the St.,.. The pop., mitt' tattoo far such disposal sNlI be obtained

from ma Agency and

is icorpctated e part formal by reference

(24) W case of co.dlicl Mover,, muse tfended condilonsad any olner condition(]

included "n this permit the olhe codil ;p,tl hat Isoverrt

(251 The parasites sate comply will, in addition to IM mequkamenls of IN permit M

applicable povison. 0135 I. Adm Code . Subtitle C. Subtitle D, Subtitle E, end et

applicable Older, of IM Board

126) The car-Ion. of this pa.mll m seventie

s ad it am provision Of des N rris Of

fed sM.o.horI nl any -provision of

mar permit x held invalid IM twneklrg

povison of this permit opal conliwe i- toot lore. and effect

goo. 12-1-tial