ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOAR11
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PRE-FILED TESTIMONY OF NSWMA WITNESS THOMAS A. HILBERT
PROFESSIONAI, EXPERIENCE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PRE-FILED TESTIMONY OF NSWMA WITNESS TERRY R. JOHNSON
TERRY R. JOHNSON, PG, CPG DirectorISenior Hydrogeologist
Professional Registrations
Professional Summary
Professional Affiliations
BEFORE TIIE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND ERRATA SHEET
EXIIIBlT 1
ERRATA SHEET

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOAR11

In the Matter of:

)

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO

SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL: GENERAL PROVISIONS

)

R 07-008

Ill. Adm. Code 810; and,

(Rulemaking

Land)

STANDARDS FOR NEW SOLID WASTE

IANDFILLS

)

LANDFILLS 35 Ill. Adm. Code 8 1 1.

NOTICE OF FILING

'TO: See attached Service

Iist

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on January 16, 2007, I caused to be filed electronically

with the Office of the Clerk of the Pollution Control Board, on behalf of the National Solid

Wastes Management Association the

attached Pre-Filed Testimony of NSWMA Witness Thomas

IJilbert, Pre-Filed 'Testimony of NSWMA Witness Terry R. Johnson, a "Supplemental

Inrormatio~l and Errata Sheet", and a Notice of Filing in the above matter, copies of which are

hereby

served upon you

.7

By:

Sorling,

Northrup, IIanna,

Cullen

Cochran, Ltd.

Charles J. Northrup, of Counsel

Suite 800

Illiilois Building

P.O. Box 5131

Springiield, IL 62705

Telephone:

217.544.1 144

Fax: 217.522.3173

E-Mail: cinorthr~~~~@sorlinelaw.com

(SO5316552 1/16/2007 CIN l3l.l')

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

the Matter of:

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO

SOLID WASTE DISI'OSAI,: GENERAL PROVISIONS

)

R 07

008

35 111. Adm. Code 810; and,

(Rulemaking -Land)

STANDARDS

FOIi NEW SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS

)

LANDFILLS 35 Ill. Adm. Code 8 1 1.

PRE-FILED TESTIMONY OF NSWMA WITNESS THOMAS A. HILBERT

My name is Thomas A. Hilbert and I am the President of the Midwest Chapter of the

National Solid Wastes Management Association.

On behalf of the NSWMA I am pleased to

present a number of proposed amendments to the Board's solid waste rules for consideration by

the Board.

These proposed amendments are specifically set out in the Petition filed by

the

NSWMA and designated by the Board as R07-008. 1 am also pleased to say that these

amendments are supported by the Illinois

E~~vironmental

Protection Agency. The NSWMA

believes that the proposed amendments are a logical step in an ongoing process to update and

enhance the solid waste regulations which

were initially adopted by the Board in 1990 in the

R88-7 rulemaking. These updates are designed to incorporate practical expericncc and other

advances gained by the regulated community and the Illinois EPA over the last

years. The

NSWMA believes the adoption of these proposed amendments will result in better landfill

management and environmental protection.

addition to my general duties as President of the Midwest Chapter of the NSWMA, I

have been extensively involved with the development of this rulemaking going back to

approximately

1999. I am presently the Vice President of Engineering for the William Charles

Waste Companies,

a division of William Charles, Ltd., one of the largest private employers in

(SO531463 I 111512007 CJN CJN)

Printed

Req~cIedPaper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

northern Illinois. I have 14 years of experience in environme~ltal management and hold a B.S.

degree in geophysics from Western Washi~igtoil University and a Masters degree in Science in

the filed of Environmental Engineering from the University of Arizona.

I am a member of the

American Geophysical Society, the American Society of Civil Engineers, and the National

Groundwater Association.

I am a licensed professional Geologist in lllinois as well as an Illinois

certified landfill operator. 1 have attached my resume to this

testimony.

The proposed amendments at issue in this hearing were developed over the preceding 7

years as a continuation of the rule changes that were envisioned 10 years ago during the

development of the

R97-20 rulemaking. It is our intent that the proposed amendments will

provide a benefit to not only the regulated community but also those parties interested in the

administration and enforcement of the

rilles.

The NSWMA believes that the proposed

amendments benefit all parties by focusing on refinements that will reduce burdensome or

unnecessary requirements that provide no environmental benefit yet, add to the cost of either

complying with, or administering, the existing rules.

The proposed amendments reflect input from numerous interested parties as well as the

review and consideration of sources of

inforination such as environlnental monitoring databases

and published literature. This included discussions with the Illinois

EI'A, the US EPA,

enviro~~mental

regulatory bodies in other states, independent experts in the filed of groundwater

statistics, and the experience of Illinois permitted landfill operators. These discussions resulted

in a huge database of

Itnowledge and practical experience that was used to refine the existing

regulatory language. It also served to ensure that support for the proposed

amendments would

include the broadest possible base of interested parties. We are very appreciative that the

lllinois

EPA has joined with us in supporting the proposed amendments and consider its support in this

(SO531463 I 1/15/2007 CJN CJN)

2

Printed

on ilecyciedi'aplier

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

rulemaking to be a clear indication that our efforts to build a consensus around reasonable and

appropriate

ameildrnents were successful.

The primary focus of the proposed amendments is to refine the groundwater monitoring

requirements of the existing 810 and 811 rules. These potential changes were anticipated during

the drafting of the R97-20 rules but were not included in that rulemaking so as to allow those

rules to proceed since they did not

have the same degree of complexity associated with assessing

groundwater characteristics. Now, however, we believe that

we have spent a sufficient amount

of time reviewing data and assessing past experience to have developed a good foundation for

proposing the amendments that we propose today.

The

NSWMA believes that the proposed amendments do not degrade any of the

protections to the environment or public safety inherent in the existing rules. In fact, we feel that

the proposed amendments improve

on those protections by removing or amending requirements

that result in excessive cost or resource demands and offer no coinmensurate environmental

benefit. The members of the

NS WMA are committed to the goal of ensuring that we provide an

essential public service in a

inanllner that is protective of the environment and we are confident

that these proposed amendments are consistent with that goal.

In closing, I would like to

tilank the representatives of the Illinois EPA that worked very

hard with us on drafting these amendments, including Joyce

Munie, Gwenyth Thompson, and

Chris

Liebman. I would also like to thank the Board for its consideration of this rulemaking and

we will make every effort to respond to any questions or concerns that the Board, or any

interested party,

may have about the ~ulernaking.

Thanlc you.

(S0531463.1 1/15/2007 CJN C.h)

Punted

on

Recycled

Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

THOMAS A. HILBERT

191

Stratford Lai~e

Rockford, IL

107

8 151391 -6303

!Jiii~?i:i~~~rl~~.;ici.~rc~~.ii~1i~i.~i~ii1,

PROFESSIONAI, EXPERIENCE

William Charles Waste Companies-

1992-present

Vice President of Engineering for a private municipal solid waste management (MSW) company. Responsibilities

include design and

coi~struction oversight for landfills during develop~nent and c1osu1-e. Ensure coinpliance with

applicable regulatory codes and operational permits

ibr all air, land, and water permits. Assist in the planning and

developmei~t of new busiiless opportunities.

Planning and project

dcvelopmcnt for lai~dlill gas management and energy recovery systems.

Prepare design and bid specifications, coordinate contractors, and regulatory inspections for construction of

new landfills,

environinental control systems, and landfill closures.

Plan and prepare

pennit applications to ensure timely, efficient ,and cost effective compliance with applicable

regillatory codes.

Oversigl~t of environmental monitoring and management systems at operating and closed facilities.

Establish and maintain a good

worltiilg relationship wit11 regulatory agencies and state legislators.

Past president of Illinois chapter of

the National Solid Waste Management Association (NSWMA) 2000-2003

Past president

and member of the executive colnlnittee of the lllillois chapter of the Solid Waste Association of

Nortl~ Ainerica (SWANA) 2003-2004

Served

on a number of legislative and regi~latory rulenlalting comnittees. Current Chairman of the NSWMA

technical

corninittee.

Financial cost review for constrliciion projects and regulatoiy financial assurance requirenients

Ui~iversity of Arizona-

1989-1992

Research assistant

for National Institute of Health funded project sti~dying bacterial transport in aquifer systems.

Provided

dcsign and planning input to multi-discipline research group to establish the study goals and research

methodologies.

Greiner Engineering

1986-1989

Construction Management and Surveying for civil

eilgiileeving pro,jects.

Surveying conbol and construction

~nanagenient for private client land development projects. Construction management and quality assurance ovel-sight

for slate and federal agencies during construction of the Roosevelt Lalte Bridge and related infrastructure.

Northern Geophysical-

1985-1986

Seisinic exploration m the Basin and Range and Roclcy Mountain regions w~th Northern Geophysical, a Canadian

con~pdny, under contract for Exron Corp

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

EDUCATION:

982-1985

Western Washington University, Bellingham. WA

Bachelor of Science Geophysics

9-9

llniversity oTArizor?a, 7'ucson, AZ

Master of Science E~ivironmental Eng.

PUBI,ICATLONS:

Jcwett, D.J., Hi!bert, T.A., Logan, B.E., Arnold, R.G., Bales, R.C.;

Bacterial

Transport

111 Two Porons Media Systems: Inflttence of Ionic Strength and pH on

Collision Efficiency Estimates", Water Res., Vol. 29, No.

7, pp. 1673-1680, 1995

Logan, B.E.,

Hilbert, T.A, Arnold, R.G.; "Removal ofBaeteria In Laboratory Filters:

Models

and Experiments", Water Res., Vol. 27, Xo. 6, pp. 955-962, 1993

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

In the Matter of:

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO

SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL: GENERAL PROVISIONS

)

R 07-008

Ill. Adm. Codc 810; and,

(Rulemaking

Land)

STANDARDS FOR NEW SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS

LANDFILLS

111. Adnl. Code 81

)

PRE-FILED TESTIMONY OF NSWMA WITNESS TERRY R. JOHNSON

My name is Terry Johnson and I am a Director

Senior I-Iydrogeologist with the

Groundwater Protection Program of Wastes Management, Inc. I have more than

18 years of

experience in the area of environmental hydrogeology and

landfill technologies. 1 currently have

responsibility for the evaluation and characterization of hydrogeologic conditions at

approximately

45 solid waste facilities in the upper Midwcst, i~lcluding the States of Illinois,

Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and the Canadian Provinces of Alberta

and Ontario.

At these facilities

I have been involved in the design, impleincntation, and ongoing evaluation of

environmental monitoring programs. I have also been involved in the development of technical

standards and guidance related to environmental monitoring at solid waste facilities as well as

other landfill issues such as alternate final covers and

leachate recirculation and bioreactor

projects.

I have also developed and conducted training programs for Waste Management

perso~n~el,

private consultants, and regulatory personnel related to environn~ental monitoring. I

have a Bachelor of Science degree in geology from Bemidji State [Jniversity as well as a Master

of Science degree in geology from the

IJniversity of North Dakota. I have attached a current

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

resume that identifies my education, work experience, and various papers, presentations and

awards.

Perhaps more specific to today's proceedings, since approximately 1999,

I have been

substantially involved in discussions with the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency about

the need to review and update certain aspects of Illinois' solid waste regulations.

The proceeding

today represents the culmination of approximately six years of regulation, review, literature

review, data gathering, data analysis, and open discussions with the

lllinois EPA about various

regulations. In that regard,

I do want to ackilowledge other members of the NSWMA who also

participated in this rulemaking process and brought considerable experience and knowledge to

this process including

Tom Hilbert, Eric Ballenger, and Bill Schubert.

I also want to

acknowledge the expertise, as well as investment in time, and substantial work put into this

project by the Illinois EPA, including, but probably not limited to, Gwenyth

?'hompson; Chris

Liebman, and Joyce Munie.

you know, the Illinois EPA supports and concurs with the

proposed amendments, and we truly appreciate all of their work on this proposal.

The purpose of my testimony is simply to explain the rationale for

the proposed

amendments. Much of' this testimony simply follows the rationale outlined in the written

proposal. Hopefully, my written testimony is simply background which

I can expand upon if the

Board or any other interested party has questions in

person at the scheduled hearings.

In brief, and as introduction, the proposed rules are designed primarily as an update of the

Board's existing rules. These updates are designed to incorporate practical experience and other

advances gained by the regulated community and

the Illinois EPA over the last 16 years. The

primary focus of the proposed amendments is to refine the groundwater and leachate monitoring

requirements

of the existing 810 and 81 1 rules. 1 believe that the proposed amendments do not

{S0531154.2

1/15/2007 CJhl

(.'LV

2

Printed

on Recycled

Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

degrade any of the protections to the enviromnent or public safety inherent in the existing rules.

The proposed amendments improve on those protections by removing or amending requirements

that result in excessive cost or resource demands and offer no commensurate environmental

benefit.

Before

I discuss the substantive proposals, I do note that a number of the proposed

amendments are not substantive. These amendments merely make typographical changes or

numbering changes. I will identify these amendments for the record, but I do not intend to offer

any specific testimony about them. Of course, if the Board has questions,

1 can answer those.

Using the numbering system as set out in the July 27, 2006 "Proposal to Amend Certain

Pollution Control Board Regulations Related to Solid Waste

Management Facilities," the non-

substantive proposed amendments are:

proposed amendment number 1 (8 10.10 i (a)(l));

proposed amendment number 2 (81 0.104(a)(l)); proposed amendment number 3 (8 10.104(a)(l));

proposed amendment number 1 1 (8 1 1.3 1 S(e)(l)(G)(ii)); proposed amendment number 13

(8 1 1.3 18(e)(6)(C)); proposed amendment number 14 (8 1 1.3 18(e)(6)(D)); proposed amendment

number

15 (8 1 1.3 18(e)(6)E));

proposed amendment nulnber 17 (8 1 1.3 18(e)(8)); proposed

amendment number 21 (8 1 1.3

19(a)(3)(B)); proposed amendment number 29 (8 1 1.3 19(b)(5)(E));

proposed amendment number 30 (811.319(b)(5)(G)); proposed amendment number 31

(8 1 1.3

19(d)(l)(A)); proposed amendment number 32 (81 1.3 19(d)(3)(A)); proposed amendment

number 38 (8

11.320(d)(3)); proposed amendment number 39 (81 1.320(d)(4)); proposed

amendment number 40 (81

1.320(d)(5)); and proposed amendment number 41 (8 11.320(d)(6)).

Substantively, the proposed amendments in 811.309(g)(S) delete the existing

requirements with respect to the frequency

of leachate monitoring and reference the new

frequency requirements (to be found and discussed at 81

1.309(g)(5)) and codified list of

{SO531454 2 1/15/2007

CJN CJN

P~.mied

on Re~ycled I'aper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

constituents to be sampled for (to be referenced at 81 1.309(g)(2)(G) and 81 1.309(g)(3)(D) and

found at

81 1.Appendix C)

'rile proposed amendments also reference, for the first time, a

default

minimum number of lcachate monitoring locations. Finally. the proposed amendments

allows the Illinois

EPA to require by permit less leacl~ate sampling than might otherwise be

required in the regulations as long as compliance with other regulatory provisions is ensured.

This

a~nendment is designed merely to allow the Illinois EPA flexibility to accommodate

individual site conditions.

The regulations currently allow the Illinois EPA the flexibility to

require

more leachate sampling if it believes it is necessary.

With respect to

811.309(g)(2)(G),

we propose to amend this subsection by referencing

(and requiring) a specific list of

leachate monitoring parameters. This proposed list of leachate

monitoring paranleters consists of 202 constituents likely to be found in leachate. The list is

derived by the Illinois EPA

from its "Attachment

to Appendix C "Instructions for the

Groundwater Protection Evaluation for Putrescible and Chemical Waste Landfills" of

the lllinois

EPA's LPC-PA2 and LPC-PA19 "Instructions for a Significant Modification Demonstrating

Compliance with 35

Ill. Adm. Code, Subtitle G, Pa-t 814, Subpart C." This list of parameters is

the list currently required by permit

but is not required by regulation. This amendment increases

the level of

environmental protection. Including the list will also ensure that it is applicable to all

landfills in Illinois and not just permitted landfills.

With respect to

811.309(g)(3)(D),

this is the same proposed anendment as identified

above at 81

1.309(g)(2)(6).

With respect to

811.309(g)(4),

we propose to add this new subsection to require a certain

minimum number of

leachate monitoring locations.

Currently, the number

or leachate

monitoring locations is determined by the Illinois EPA on a case by case basis. Over the years. it

{SO531454 2 1/15/2007

CJN

CJN

Prrnled

on

Recycled Poper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

has developed that some landfills may have only one leachate monitoring location while others

have dozens. This proposed amendment mandates a minimum number of four

leacl~ate

monitoring locations and at least one for every 25 acres within a landfill units waste boundary

unless the operator demonstrates, through the permitting process, that fewer

leachate monitoring

locations are needed.

13y this amendment a certain amount of uniformity will be established.

Perhaps more importantly, it is recognized that

leachate qualities may differ spatially and

temporally within a given landfill. By requiring a certain

minimum number of leachate

monitoring locations, it is believed that this "spacial variability" of leachate within a landfill can

be detected. The result is not only more information

and iluproved environmental protection, but

more accurate information upon which better regulatory decisions can be made.

811.309(g)(5),

we propose to add this new subsection to require leachate monitoring

semi-annually. Currently, once four quarters of

leachate data is collected, leachate sampling is

conducted

on a semi-annual basis. The amount of data collected under the current regulatory

scheme is extensive but has not been demonstrated to result in any grcater understanding of

leachate conditions at any given landfill. Under the proposed amendments, while 4 quarters of

data during initial sampling is eliminated, relevant data are continued to be collected on

appropriate (semi-annual) basis as the existing rule provides. This initial quarterly data

collection period occurs at generally an early stage in landfill development and yielded data not

necessarily

reprcsentative of long-term conditions in the landfill. Data collection on a semi-

annual basis is sufficient to characterize

leachate quality trends. This does serve to slightly

lessen the economic cost on landfill operators, but such cost savings are not at the expense of

environmental protection. In fact, considerable

leachate data continues to be collected as

described above.

lS0531454.2 1/15/2007 CJN CJN

Pnnted on l?rcycied Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

811.Appendix C,

we propose to amend 811.Appendix C by referencing (and

establishing) a specific list of

leachate monitoring parameters. This proposed list of leachate

monitoring parameters consists of 202 constituents likely to be found in leachate. The list is

derived by the Illinois EPA from its "Attachment

1" to Appendix C "Instructions for the

Groundwater Protection Evaluation for Putrescible

and Chemical Waste La~~dfills"

of the Illinois

EPA's LPC-PA2 and LPC-PA19 "Instructions for a Significant Modification Demonstrating

Compliance with 35

Ill. Adm. Code Subtitle G, Part 814, Subpart C." This list of parameters is

the list currently required by permit and including it in the regulations will simply codify the list.

Including the list will also increase the level of environmental protection and ensure that it is

applicable to all landfills in

Illil~ois.

811.315(e)(l)(G)(i),

we propose to replace the reference to "public or food processing

water supply standard at 35

I11.Adm. Code 302" with a reference to the groundwater standards

found at 35

II1.Adin. Code 620. The reference to the public or food processing water supply

standards was included in the original

1188-7 Rulemalcing adopted in 1990. With the adoption of

the Illinois groundwater rules standards, however, the reference to the public or food processing

water supply standards is no longer the most appropriate standard. Groundwater at landfills is

now regulated under a more inclusive list of constituents found in the 620 regulations. Here too,

as with many

of

these proposed amendments, technical compliance has become unreasonable

with the Board's adoption of a

more appropriate standard. 111 addition, the degree of

environmental protection remains the sane.

With respect to

811.318(e)(6)(E),

we propose to delete this requirement at this location

and replace it at a new

Section 8 1 1.3 18(e)(7).

As is noted below, this new proposed Sectioll is

(SO5314542

i/lj/2007 CJh'

CJiV

Printed on Recycled Poper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

designed to better reflect current landfill operations and equipment advances, improve data

collection and reliability. and thereby improve the existing level of environmental protection.

With respect to

811.318(e)(7), we propose to amend this Section by requiring well depth

information to be

talten on an annual basis for wells without dedicated pumps. For wells with

dedicated pumps, the measurement frequency shall be

5 years (or less if the pump is serviced).

Since the adoption of the current regulations, a significant

anlount of scientific literature has

been developed that points to the superior quality of samples collected using dedicated

sampling

pumps used in groundwater wells. Removing these points to take well depth measurements

negates these benefits and can introduce biases in the resultant data. These pumps, which over

the years have become the

industly standard, allow sample collection that is more representative

of aquifer conditions by

~ninimizing turbidity, and minimizing the potential for cross-

contamination. The current Illinois regulations that require removal of dedicated pumps to check

well depth eliminates these significant benefits. The proposed amendment is therefore justified

as a

means to collect more accurate data that, in turn, results in better regulatory decisions and

greater protection of

the cnvironment.

Next, at

811.319(a)(2)(A)(ii), we propose to delete the existing provision

1.3 19(a)(2)(A)(ii) and replace it with a new subsection (ii) identified below. The existing

provision, referencing a

number of potential indicator contaminants is proposed to be replaced

with a minimum list of specific constituents (see discussion below).

811.319(a)(2)(A)(ii), we propose to add a specific list of indicator contaminants in

lieu of the existing standard.

i.70531454.2 1/15/2007

CIN C,IN

Printed

Rec),cled

Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

Monitoring in Illinois and in accordance with the Federal regulations occurs routinely

under what is known as the detection monitoring program. In this program it is desired to have a

streamlined monitoring list that is tailored to indicate whether or not a potential release

froin the

facility has occurred. Our experience (Petitioner and Illinois EPA) in monitoring landfills over

the past

15 plus years has provided valuable knowledge concerning which parameters are

effective in this regard.

The second component of landfill monitoring is referred to as

assessment monitoring which is to be initiated once the detection monitoring program indicates

that a potential release

from the facility has occurred. In the assessment monitoring program

more extensive monitoring is conducted.

The proposed amendments add a specific list of indicator parameters to the detection

monitoring program. This list has been selected to represent the most effective indicators of a

potential

leachate release plus some parameters that provide important information about

conditions in the groundwater. Current Illinois practice requires quarterly monitoring for

dissolved ammonia, arsenic, boron, cadmium, chloride, iron, lead, manganese, nitrate, sulfate,

total dissolved solids, zinc and total cyanide and phenols.

The proposed new monitoring list

ii~cludcs dissolved ammonia, dissolved arsenic,

dissolvcd boron, dissolved cadmium, dissolved chloride, dissolved chromium, total cyanide,

dissolved lead, dissolved

inagnesiun, dissolved mercury, dissolved nitrate, dissolved sulfate,

total dissolved solids,

and dissolved zinc. In addition, any facility accepting more than 50% by

volunle of non-municipal waste would also be required to monitor for additional parameters

based upon their

leachate a~d

waste content. Parameters added to this quarterly sampling list

include dissolved magnesium, dissolved

mercury and dissolved chromium. Parameters removed

from the quarterly sampling list include dissolved iron and manganese. In general terms, the

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

proposed list of constituents to be sampled for tend to be less subject to natural interferences,

and/or exist at a better concentration contrast between leachate and background groundwater,

which make them effective and reliable detection monitoring parameters.

In addition to the quarterly monitoring,

current practice in Illinois has included annual

monitoring for a list of total metals. Total simply means metal analyses conduced on samples of

groundwater that have not been

flltered to remove suspended sediments. Consequently, these

sediments often compromise the sample results as the suspended sediments often contain metals,

which bias the

rcsults.

Under this proposal, a number of total metals currently monitored on an annual basis will

be removed from the detection monitoring

program in favor of the overall changes to the

detection monitoring program. The total metals to be removed are: antimony, barium, beryllium,

cobalt, copper, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and vanadium. In general, these constituents

are not effective monitoring parameters for one of

more of the following reasons, 1) as discussed

above they are often naturally occurring in the suspended sediment of the groundwater

sample;

2) they may not be present in leachate from a facility, or if present are at an insufficient

concentration contrast between background groundwater and

3) they are typically not mobile in

groundwater meaning they do not migrate significantly. For the above reasons,

most other state

programs

have eliminated the monitoring ofmany of these parameters. As such, the removal of

these total

metals from the detection nlonitoring program will not have a deleterious effect on

groundwater monitoring programs in Illinois. In fact, it is believed that by focusing on those

inorganic parameters and

VOC's shown to be reliable indicators of a release (as proposed),

detection monitoring will he improved. Finally, it must he noted that monitoring for these

specific total

metals is included in the assessment monitoring program.

/SO5314542 1/15/2UO7

CJAJ CJN

Printed

on

Recycled Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

By t'ocusing on parameters most indicative of a potential landfill release, the monitoring

program improves, in that it is effective and more efficient, resulting in better use of the limited

resources of both facility operators and regulatory personnel. The changes in parameters noted

above will improve detection monitoring

and thus improve environmental protection as well.

811.319(a)(3)(A)(i),

we propose to add a specific list of organic chemicals that must

be monitored on a semi-annual basis. Currently, organic monitoring is performed once every

year. 'This proposed amendment will increase that

frequency to semi-annually. The list of

paralueters essentially incorporates the federal 40 CFR 258.Appendix 1 organics in addition to

the 40

CFR 141.40 organics. The list includes volatile organic compounds as well as phenols

and oil and grease. An exhaustive

multi year examination of leachate data collected from

landfills in Illinois was conducted to verify whether or not this list of organics constitutes the

bulk of organic parameters in

leachate. The analysis confirmed that VOCs and phenols comprise

the vast majority of

the mass of organic coinpounds in leachate. In addition to being the most

prevalent organic compounds in leachate,

VOC's are also the most mobile and detectable of the

organic constituents. The list does eliminate certain, less mobile, semi-volatile,

pesticidelherbicides, and PCBs. The elimination of these parameters from this list does not

reduce the degree of environmental protection for two reasons:

1) VOC's and phenols comprise

the vast majority of organic

con~pounds present in leachate and were found to be present at

higher concentrations than any other organic compound class in leachate, and 2) the organics that

are

eliminated from this list are included in the assessment monitoring program. Conversely, by

doubling the frequency of the most commonly detected anthropogcnic and mobile constituents,

the level of environmental protection afforded by the ground water monitoring program is

greatly improved.

P~.intrd on i?evcied Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

We propose two changes at 811.319(a)(3)(C). First, the proposal revises the existing

reference to Section

81 1.319(a)(l)(A) to a reference to the section requiring monitoring of

organic parameters at

811.319(a)(3). The Petitioner and the Illinois EPA believe that this

revision merely corrects a typographical error and

malces the intent of the regulations clear.

There is no substantive change to the regulations by this proposed amendment. This is

the same

proposed amendment as referenced in "Proposed Amendment

21."

Second, the proposed

amendment

i~lcreases the frequency of the referenced sampling from annual to semi-annual.

This increase in sampling frequency serves to enhance the collection of relevant data. While the

cost of such sampling does increase, the degree of environmental protection is also increased.

With respect to

811.319(a)(4)(A)(i), we propose two changes to this subsection.

Currently, the subsection requires that confirmation monitoring shall be instituted where any

constituent monitored shows a progressive increase over four monitoring events. The proposed

amendments provide that confirmation monitoring shall be instituted only where

any inorganic

constituent monitored shows a progressive increase over eight, rather than four, consecutive

monitoring events.

These proposed amendments are designed to provide greater assurance

based upon statistical reliability that any identified progressive increases are

due to an actual

change in groundwater concentrations rather than by chance alone. Under the current four

consecutive

evcnt rule, frequent false positives (i.e., indication that a given parameter is outside

of its normal range when in fact it is not) are identified. Eight consecutive monitoring events

reduce

the chance of false positives to approximately 5% consistei~t with current US EPA

guidance. This results in

improved assessment of the data, which ultimately results in better

regulatory and operational decisions. It should be noted that in addition to this test a facility is

still required to perform the requisite statistical tests on these same data. Thus. the false positive

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

rate of this test is additive to the overall facility false positive rate. The degree of environmental

protection remains at its high level and is not affected by this proposed amendment.

With respect to

811.319(a)(4)(B)(i),

the proposed amendment allows adequate time to

verify observed constituent concentration increases and to clarify

the start time for that

verification. Currently, the subsection provides that an operator shall verify observed increases

within

45 days of the initial observation of an increase. This 45 day window in which to sample

and verify an increase is difficult to satisfy while following all the requisite data quality

assurance and quality control procedures consistent with US EPA guidance and best practices.

Allowing a

90 day verification process allows adequate time for an operator to sample, analyze

and complete the requisite data quality assurance and quality control procedures. The

90 day

verification process also allows verification sampling to potentially be conducted during the next

routine quarterly sampling event, thus maximizing the efficiency of the detection

lnonitoring

program. Amending the initiation of the verification process from the currently required "initial

observation" to the proposed "initial sampling event" is designed merely to clarify the starting

point for the

90 day verification process. Neither of these proposed amendments alters the

purpose, effect, or degree of environmental protection reflected in the rule. In fact,

complctioll

of important quality control functions insures more reliable data are collected at the site and used

to populate statistical control programs and data management

programs which results in

improved environmental protection and a better basis for regulatory decisions.

811.319(a)(4)(B)(iii),

we propose to anlend this subsection by requiring an operator

that has confirmed

a11 increase in the concentration of a constituent to submit its determination as

to the source of the increase within

180 days of the original sanpling event. In addition, this

submittal must be in the form of a "significant permit modification." This proposed amendment

{SO531454

2 1/15/2007

ChVCJ.4:

Prtnred

on

Recycled Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

establishes a much more rigorous procedure than is now in place and is therefore more protective

of the

cnvironment. Currerlt practice is for an operator to submit a letter to the Illinois EPA

discussing the confirmed increase and the operator's determination as to the source of the

increase.

tinder the proposed amendmcnt, the 180 day time frame from the original sampling

event accounts for the 90 day

resample date and allows the operator sufficient time to adequately

investigate the cause of the increase. In addition, the requirement that the notification be

submitted as a significant modification permit submittal provides the Illinois EPA with

appropriate procedural mechanism to review, comment, and ultimately approve (or disapprove)

the submittal thereby ensuring a quality review and administrative finality.

With respect to

811.319(b)(2),

we propose to amend this subsection by requiring an

operator that is required to submit an assessment monitoring program plan to submit such plans

within 180 days of the original sampling event. The proposed amendment also requires

ilnplementation of the assessment lnonitoring program within that same 180 days from the

original sampling event for unperlnitted facilities and 45 days after Illinois EPA approval of the

program for permitted facilities. This proposed amendment establishes a much more specific

timeline for action. Currently, no specific time frame is required for submittal of the assessment

monitoring program plans for either permitted or unpermitted facilities. Rather, the only time

frame

in the current rule is that the assessment monitoring program must be implemented within

90 days of monitored increase confirmation at unpermitted facilities and within 90 days of

Illinois EPA approval of the significant permit modification submittal at permitted facilities.

amending the rule as proposed (tied to the original sampling event) a much more definite

ilnplementation time is established for unpermitted facilities to implement the assessment

monitoring program. Likewise, the proposed amendment establishes a faster implementation

P~vnted

Recycled

1'aper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

tilne for permitted facilities as well reducing the time for implementation of the assessment

monitoring program from 90 to 45 days.

Both proposed amendments result in more expeditious

response to confirmed monitored increases which in

turn enhances environmental protection.

811.319(b)(5)(A), we propose to amend this subsection by making certain minor

clarifications. First, a reference to subsection

(b)(l)(A) is amended by deleting the reference to

"(A)".

This amendment, retaining the reference to (b)(l) simply corrects a typographical error

and broadens the reference to include

(b)(l)(A), (B), and (C).

Second, the word "shall" has

been replaced with "must." Third, the subsection is

mended to include a reference to additional

constituents (in addition to

thosc constituents currently referenced at 40 CFR 258.Appendix 11)

that must be tested for by referencing 35 I11.Adm. Code 620.410. These additional constituents

serve to

increase environmental protection.

811.319(b)(5)(1)), we propose to amend this subsection by clarifying that the

expanded list of constituents to be monitored for

must be monitored on an annual basis, and that

any constituents detected under the expanded monitoring list must be monitored on a semi-

annual basis.

The first proposed amendment simply changes the term

"shall" to "must." This

amendment is being proposed at the suggestion of the Illinois EPA to reflect the Pollution

Control Board's current usage. The second

arnend!nent provides that any constituents on the

expanded monitoring list (40 CFR

258.Appendix 11 and 35 I11.Adn1. Code 620.410) that arc

detected in the initial sampling must be monitored for on a semi-annual basis.

The third

amendment proposes that the expanded monitoring list be monitored on an annual basis. These

changes are designed to generate

more accurate information. The degree of e~?vironmental

protection is increased in light of the expanded mandatory list of constituents to be monitored

/SO531454 2 1/15/2007CIN CJN

Printed

on

Recycled Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

for, while focusing on thosc constituents of concern that have been identified.

The proposed

amendment retains testing on a comprehensive basis annually.

With respect to

811.320(a)(3)(B),

we propose to replace the reference to "public or food

processing water supply standard at 35

I11.Adm. Code 302" with a reference to the groundwater

standards found at 35

1ll.Adm. Code 620. The reference to the public or food processing water

supply standards was included in the original

R88-7 Rulemaking adopted in 1990.

Subsequently, with the adoption of the Illinois groundwater rules, the 620 standard with respect

to groundwater has been adopted. The reference to the public or food processing standard is no

longer practically or legally the most appropriate standard. Legally it appears that the public or

food processing

watcr supply standards is inapplicable to groundwater. See 35 111.Adm. Code

620.130.

f'ractically, as well, groundwater at landfills is regulated under a more inclusive list of

constituents found in the 620 regulations. This proposed

an~endment mirrors the proposed

amendment at 81 1.3

15(e)(l)(G)(i).

With respect to

811.320(b)(2),

we propose to replace the reference to 35 I11.Adm. Code

302.301, 304

and 305 (which are "public or food processing water supply standards) with ihe

newer groundwater quality standards at 620.410, 420,430

and 440. This proposed amendment is

designed merely to update the regulations and bring them more in line with current practice.

Referencing the groundwater standards appears to be consistent with the exemptions of 35

1ll.Adm.. Code 620.130 limiting the applicability of public or food processing water supply

standards to groundwater. Referencing

the groundwater quality standards is also more inclusive

than the public or food processing water supply standards and thus these proposed amendments

are more protective of the environment.

Printed on Recycled

Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

Next, at

811.320(b)(4),

we propose to replace the reference to 35 I1l.Adm. Code 302.301;

304 and 305 (which are "public or food processing water supply standards) with the newer

groundwater quality standards at 620.410, 420, 430 and 440. This proposed amendment is

designed merely to update the regulations and bring

them more in line with current practice.

Referencing

the groundwater standards appears to be consistent with the exemptions of 35

1ll.Adm. Code 620.130 limiting the applicability oS public or food processing water supply

standards to groundwater. Referencing the groundwater quality standards is also more inclusive

than the public or food processing water supply standards and thus these proposed amendments

are more protective

of the environment.

811.320(d)(l),

we propose to revise existing section 311.320(d) related to the

establishment of background concentrations into 3 separate subsections. The substantive

revisions contained in proposed subsections

(d)(l) and (d)(2) are designed to allow more

appropriate and accurate characterization of site background conditions consistent with

US EPA

guidance and current practice. This is accomplished by allowing the Illinois EPA to review more

than one years worth of quarterly sampling data and, given the potential for a greater number

sampling events, by allowing non-consecutive data in certain circumstances. Allowing, but not

requiring, more

than one year of quarterly sampling is justified by the simple principle that more

data provides an improved statistical basis for comparisons. The statistical

limits generated by

the additional data will, in the long run, reduce the frequency of both false positive and false

negative decisions. In addition, the proposed amendment will allow the Illinois EI'A to consider

non-consecutive data as long as only one quarterly sampling is absent and that the remaining

data is nevertheless representative of consecutive data. In providing the opportunity to

~mdertake

more accurate statistical comparisons (i.e. a resultant inlprovement in both the false positive and

Pnnfed on Recycled Perper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

false negative rate), the ability of the program to detect real groundwater changes is improved.

Thus, the

amendment provides a higher level of environmental protection. In addition, these

proposed

amendlnents reflect current US EPA guidance as well as current literature and industry

practice.

811.320(dj(2),

we propose to amend the existing rule by clarifying when adjustments

to background concentrations can be made.

The existing rule provides that adjustments to

background concentrations can be

madc if changes in the background concentrations are

"statistically significant." The proposed amendments simply clarifies that in addition to being

"statistically significant," the changes

must be due to cither a natural temporal or spatial

variability or otherwise due to an off-site source not associated with the landfill or landfill

activities. This ensures that no adjustments are made that

might be related to landfill operations,

thus improving

environmental protection. The proposal also provides that such changes :nay

only be made once every two years. The proposed amendment also references the availability of

using non-consecutive date to adjust background

co~~centrations

as long as the Illinois EPA

approves. Finally, the proposed

revisioil prohibits any adjustment under this subsection until two

years after this amendment becomes final unless specifically required by the Illinois EPA.

811.320(e)(l),

we propose to delete existing references to specific "normal theory

statistical tests" and

"nonparametric statistical tests" set out in the regulations.

This proposed

anlendmcnt is designed to eliminate references to inappropriate tests while allowing the use of

more appropriate tests

consistcnt with US EPA guidance and practice. The proposed amendment

will not alter the regulatory scheme or impact protection to human health and the environment.

811.320(~)(3),

we propose to amend this subsection to recognize that the practical

quantification limit

("PQL") is the appropriate "level of detection" when reporting monitoring

{SO531454 2 1/15/2007

ChV

CJAJ

Prinied on Recycled P~ipei

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

data. References to the "method detection limit" are proposed to be replaced with the use of the

"practical quantification limit' ("PQL") as the recognized "level of detection." This codifies the

present monitoring approach of reporting data to the PQL. The PQL is recognized as the lowest

limit at which the analytical result can he quantified. The

U.S. EPA recognizes thc limits of

using

the method detection limit and has provided that I'QL's are much inore appropriate. 11 also

provides consistency

with existing regulation 81 1.319(a)(4)(A). This proposed amendment is

therefore designed to reflect the state of current thought and sound

and practical practice in

analyzing groundwater monitoring data. To ensure that the use of

PQL's remain protective of

human health and the environment, the proposed amendment also provides that any established

PQL shall not in any case be higher than any level established by the Board as a groundwater

yuality standard under the Illinois Groundwater Protection Act.

811.320(e)(3)(A),

we propose to amend this subsection to reflect the changes

proposed above in Section 81

1.320(e)(3) by deleting the reference to MDL's and substituting the

PQL.

The proposed amendment also deletes a

reference to the use of certain statistical tests

identified at section

811.320(~)(4). As noted below, the reference to the specific statistical tests

identified at section 8

11.320(e)(4) are proposed to be deleted and replaced by allowing additional

types of statistical tests that can be

demonstrated to meet current regulatory requirements and

which are approved by the Illinois

EPA. This proposed amendment is designed to allow more a

wider range of statistical tests

that may be more suitable for individual site conditions while still

achieving

the saine, if not enhanced, data for operator and regulatory review.

With respect to

811.320(e)(3)(B),

we propose to amend this subsection by deleting the

reference to "data transformations," thus

making this subsection consistent with its companion

section 8

11.320(e)(3)(A) and the usage of particular tests. The proposed amendment also allows

/S0531154.2 1/15/2007 CJN CJN

Prinrcd on

Recycled

Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

the use of "Atchison's adjustment" as well as the existing Cohcn's adjustment in analyzing

groundwater data. This amendment merely adds

an additional adjustment method (Atchison's)

that

has become a standard in the industry. It is currently widely accepted. Finally, the reference

to the specific statistical tests identified at section 81

1.320(~)(4) are proposed to be deleted

allowing additional types of statistical tests that can be demonstrated to meet current regulatory

requirements and which are approved by the Illinois EPA. This proposed amendment is

designed to allow a wider range of statistical tests that result in more accurate statistical

comparisons

ibr individual site conditions, thus improving the ability of the program to protect

human health and the environment.

With respect to

811.320(~)(3)(C),

we propose to amend this subsection by deleting the

reference to the "test of proportions."

As noted above, the specific statistical tests currently

referenced are to be deleted, thus allowing additional types of statistical tests that can be

demonstrated to meet or exceed current regulatory requirements

and which are approved by the

Illinois PA. This proposed amendment is designed to allow more a wider range of statistical

tests that may be more suitable for individual site conditions while still achieving the same, if not

enhanced, data for operator and regulatory review.

With respect to

811.320(e)(4),

we propose to delete the majority of existing section

1.320(e)(4) which identifies specific normal theory statistical tests.

Reviscd subsection

81 1.320 (e)(l) and 8 11.320 (e)(3) provide adequate direction to statistical procedures for nonnal

or transformed data sets without specifying, what in some cases are, inappropriate test methods.

This proposed amendment is designed simply to allow the use of more appropriate tests. The

proposed amendment will not alter the regulatory scheme or impact protection to human health

and

the environment.

Prblred on Recycled Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

At 811.320(e)(5), we propose to delete portions of the section that referenced specific

statistical methods

and reference the use of any such tests that meet the requirements of

I11.Adm. Code 724.197(i). This subsection is renumbered as 81 1.320(e)(4). The use of statistical

tests meeting the requirements of

I11.Adm. Code 724.197(i) is currently allowed. This

proposed amendment is designed

siinply to clarify that the use of non-specified statistical tests

may be allowed by the Illinois

EI'A where appropriate. The proposed amendment will not alter

the regulatory

schenle or impact protection to human health and the environment.

811.320(e)(6), we propose to delete existing subsection 81 1.320(e)(6) which allows

the use of statistical tests that meet the requirements of 35

I11.Adrn. Code 724.197(i). Reference

to the use of tests meeting

1ll.Adm. Code 724.197(i) has been incorporated into new

subsection 81

1.320(e)(4). The proposed amendment will not alter the regulatory scheme or

impact protection to human health and the environment.

In closing,

I would again like to thanlt the Illinois EPA for working with the NSWMA on

these proposed amendments. I would also

like to thank the Board for its consideration of this

rulemaking and urge the Board to adopt these reasonable

and appropriate amendments.

Thank you.

/SO5314542 1/15/2007 CJN CJN

Printed

on Ileiycied

Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

TERRY R. JOHNSON, PG, CPG

DirectorISenior Hydrogeologist

Master of Science, Geology, University of North Daltota, Grand Forks, North

Daliota, 1990.

Bachelor of Science, Geology, Bcniidji State University

Bemidji, Minnesota, 1987.

Professional Registrations

Professional Geologist, Wisconsin

892

Professional Geologist,

Minnesota

30582

Certified Professional Geologist

9855

Prdessioilal Geologist, Ontario

0965

Professional Summary

Mr. Johnson, has 18 ycars of experience in the area of environmental l~ydrogeology and

landfill

teclInologies. Hc has experience in the design, set-up, performance and management

eilvironinental monitoring programs for over 40 solid waste facilities in tlic Midwest and

Canada. In addition, he is a member of

WMS's Bioreactor Prograin and a Co-leader of

WMS's Alternate Final Cover Initiative. Mr. Johnson has worked on the design, operation

and,monitoring of ~nultiple leachate recirculation/bioreactor projects in the Midwest. In his

capacity as a Leader of

WMI's Alternate Final Cover Program, Mr. Johnson is responsible

for company policy, regulatory interaction, applied research as well as project

iinplemeiitation and ma~lageinent.

Mr. Johnson is experienced in the development of teclinical standards and guidance related

to environmental

monitornlg, bioreactor landfills and alternate final cover systcms.

Mr. Johnson has

worked with regulatory leaders on the development of new regulations and

guidance

governing solid waste environmental moi~itoring, alternate final covers and

bioreactors in over

8 states and Canadian Provinces.

He has

expericnce designing and i~nplelncnting environmental rcnlediation systems for

groundwater and other

media. He has also perfonned numerous landfill gaslgroundwater

invcsti~ations.

Mr. Jolli~son's other experience includes landfill emissionslmethane

oxidation, la~~dfill

hydraulics and unsaturated flow dynaillics in landfill cover systcms

Term

R.

Johnson

Page 1

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

Professional Experience

DirectorlSenior Hydrogeologist, Groundwater Protection Program (1996 to

Present), Waste

Management Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Mr.

Johnson is responsible for the evaluation and characterization of hydrogeologic

conditions at various solid waste facilities within his geographic area of

responsibility. tie is also involved in

the design, i~nplementation and on-going

evaluatioii of eilvironmental monitoring programs at these facilities. Mr. Johnson's

current geographic area of coverage includes approximately

45 landfills located in

the upper mid-west (Illinois,

Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota and Wisconsin) and

two Canadian provinces (Alberta and Ontario). He has developed and conducted

training programs regarding various aspects of environmental monitoring for WMI

staff, environmental consultants

and regulatory personnel. Mr. Johnson also provides

technical oversight and assistance to staff within Waste

Mai~agement and various

outside consultants.

In addition, Mr. Johnson also works with

rcgulatory oficials regarding thc revision

of existing regulations or development of new regulations and

guidance pertaining to

environmental monitoring at solid waste facilities. He

has worked in this capacity

with the states of Illinois, Minnesota, and the Canadian Province of Alberta.

Proiect

ManagerlHvdrogeologist (1990 to 1996), B.

A,.,

Liesch Associatcs, Inc.,

Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Project

Mai~agerlHydrogeologist on environmental projects ranging fioin

underground storage tank sites to landfill and industrial sites with a project base

comprised primarily of landfill projects. Responsibilities as a Project Manager

iilclude regulatory interaction, project QPJQC, staffing, project administration and

cost

colitrol in additiocl to technical duties. Other duties involved developing work

plans and performing data analysis, data interpretation and report preparation as well

as oversight of these functions.

Involved in a broad array of environmental projects as a project hydrogeologist.

Tliesc projects include remedial

investigationlfeasibility studies, hydrogeologic

evaluations, site investigations,

remediation projects and water supply projects.

Responsible for performing major aspects of hydrogeologic evaluation, ranging

fiom

site characterization to corrective action studies. Duties also included performing

groundwater flow and contaminant

modeling ill varying hydrogeologic settings to

develop and assess groundwater

reinediation systems. Responsible for remedial

alternative selection and conceptual design.

Other general responsibilities include

Environinental Assessinent Worksheet

(EAW)lEnvironmental Impact Statenlent (EIS) preparation, litigation support

services and serving as technical advisor on projects. Performed

peerlregulatory

Terry R. Johnson

?age

lanuary12.2007

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

review of EAWIEIS process andor RIIFS programs at solid waste facilities and

other project

sitcs. Additional rcspollsibilities included marlteting environmental

services.

Project tlanager

(1988 to 1990), North Dakota Mining and Mineral Rcso~~rces

Researcli Institute, University ofNorth Daltota, Grand Forlts, North Dakota.

Managed an environmental research project into the hydrogeologic effects of fly ash

utilization in concrete. Responsible for

performing all duties associated with this

project including equipment and contractor procurement, investigation design and

implementation.

Designed and installed comnprehensive monitoring networlts in the

saturated and

unsat~~rated zones for monitoring fly ash utilization materials.

Performed data acquisition, management

and analysis.

Responsible for data

interpretation and report preparation.

Proiect Hvdrogeolo~ist

(1989 to 1990), Energy and Eilvironmcntal Research

Center, Grand Forks, North Dakota.

Provided contract hydrogeologic consulting services regarding coal ash disposal in

mine spoil settings.

Professional Affiliations

Minnesota Ground Water Association

Association of Ground Water Scientists and Engineers

National Solid

Wastc Management Association

Sigma

Gamnina Epsilon, National Honorary Society in the Earth Sciences

Spruce Ridge

Leachate Recirculation Pilot Project Design and Operational Summary

Tcrry R. Johnson P.G., Presentation at RAMISWANA Fall Conference

Minneapolis Minnesota,

Septembcr 27,2006.

An Evapotranspiration Final Cover Case Study,

Humid Climate Location, Central

D~sposal Landfill, Lake Mills, Iowa, Presented at 81h Intercontinental Landfill

Research

Symposiuim, Gallivare, Sweden, June 2006.

Alternate Final Cover Opportunities

Technical and Regulatory Considerations,

Terry

R. Johnson, P.G., Presentation and Proceedings at the 17'" Annual Engineering

Soc~ety of DetroitIMichigan Waste Industry Association Emerging Technologies in

Sohd Waste Conference, East Lansing, Michigan, April 4,2006.

Terry R. lohnson

Page

lanuaryl2,2007

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

Landfill Operations in the Public

Private Sectors: A Marketmg and Operations

Perspective. Guest

Speaker and Panelist

Iowa Recycling Association and Iowa

Society of Solid Waste Operations, 2005 Fall Conference, October 19,2005.

Spruce Ridge Resource Management Facility,

Leachate Recirculation Pilot Project

Overview and Bioreactor

Applicat~on Summary, Presentor and Panelist at Minnesota

Poll~~tion

Control Agency, St. Pat11 Minnesota, August 3,2005.

Case Histories from Waste

Managenlent's Alternative Final Cover Program, Teny

R. Johnson, P.G., and Leonard Butler, P.E., Paper and Presentation at the 10'"

Annual SWANA Landfill Symposium, Boulder Colorado, June 2005.

Landfill Lcachate Quality

Trends and Comnparisons: Implications for Solid Waste

Plam~ing, Teny Johnson, P.G., James Cetrullo and Jim Aitken, P.G., Presented at the

Minnesota

An-, Water and Waste Conference, Minneapolis, Minnesota, February

2005.

Landfill

Lincr Performance: Lessons Learncd from Leak Detection Lysimeters,

Presented at the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's

2004 Air, Water and Waste

Conference, Bloomington, Minnesota. February 26,2001.

Sfcrinvcry to Water Quulify:

Innovations in Groundwater Collection and Treatment,

Co-authored

with John Rice, Dan Erni and Joel Schittone, Presented with John Rice

at National Solid Waste Management Association

WasteTech Annual Conference,

Coral Springs,

Florida, February 25,2002.

The Selection of Effective Groundwater Monitoring Parameters, Presented at the

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

2001 Waste Conference, Minneapolis,

Minnesota.

Fcbruary 21,2001.

Effective Groundwater Monitoring in Clay Tills

An Oxymoron, presented at the

Midwest Groundwater Conference, Sioux Falls, South

Daltota, October 1992.

High-Volume Fly Ash Utilization and the Hydrogeological

Effccts at a North

Dakota Power Generating Facility, 1991. Energy and

Environnlental Research

Center, Grand Forks, North

Dakota.

The Envn-onniental Effects of Fly Ash lltilization in Concrete at Coal Creelc Station,

Underwood, North Dakota, presented at the North Dakota Environ~nental Health

Conference, November 1989.

Envirofil Groundwater Treatment System, Macomb, Illinois, Rccipient of The

Achievement Award from the Wisconsin Association of Consulting Engineers, 2000

Engineering Excellence Awards Competition

Terry R.

lahnson

page 4

lanuaw 12,2001

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

BEFORE TIIE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

the Matter of:

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO

)

SO1,ID WASTE DISPOSAL: GENERAL PROVISIONS

)

008

35 Ill. Adm. Code

810;

and,

)

(Rulemaking

Land)

STANDARDS FOR NEW SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS

)

LANDFILLS 35 Ill. Adm. Code

81 1.

)

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND ERRATA SHEET

NOW COMES Proponent, the National Solid Wastes Management

Associatiorl

Midwest Region ("NSWMA") by and through its attorneys, SNHCC, CJN, of counsel, and

pursuant to, in part, the Illinois Pollution Control Board's August

17, 2006

Order, hereby

provides

certain requested supplemental information as well as an Errata Sheet with respect to a

portion of the proposed rule amendments

On July

27, 2006,

the NSWMA filed its "Proposal to Amend Certain Pollution

Control Board Regulations Related to Solid Waste Management Facilities." These proposed

amcildinents related to certain requirements at 35 I11.Adm. Code

810

and

81 1.

On August

17,

2006,

the Board accepted the Proposal for hearing hut identified two informational deficiencies

with the Proposal. The first deficiency related to providing a

more detailed outline of anticipated

lestiinony from the NSWMA. 'The second deficiency related to the identification of any

published studies or

research reporls intended to bc relied upon by the NSWMA

With rcspect to anticipated testimony, the NSWMA intends to present two

witnesses

at the first public hearing. The first witness will be Mr. Thomas 1lilbel-t who is the

President

or the NSWMA-Midwest Region. Mr. Hilbcrt has previously participated in Board

rulemakings concerning solid waste issues and has

beell actively involved in thc current

(SO531580 I 1/16/2007CJN CJN)

Prrnted on Recycled Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

proposal.

Mr. Hilbert has

been in the solid waste industry for many years in lllinois. His

testiinony will relate to the regulatory context of the proposed amendments and their

development. He will also

be available to answer questions Srom the Board and other interested

parties on

thcse subjects as well as the substance of the proposed amendments.

The NSWMA will also present the testimony of Terry Johnson. Mr. Johnson has more

than 18 years

of experience with solid waste facilities, parlicularly in the areas of environmental

hydrogeology and

landiill technologies.

Mr. Johnson was substantially involved in the

development of' the proposed

ainendments. His testimony will relate primarily to the scope,

purpose, and effect of proposed amendments

themsclves. lie will also be available to answer

questions from the Board and other interested

pavties on these subjects.

Depending on the naturc of any questions or concerns of the Board, additional witness

may be called upon to present testimony at the second public hearing to be held in Springfield.

If such witnesses are

necessary, it is the intent of the NSWMA to pre-file testimony as may be

necessary.

With respect to the identification of any published study or report used in the

development of the rule, a

number of articles and studies were reviewed. Copies can be obtained

from the original source, any number of reference libraries, or the NSWMA can

provide copies

on request. Articles used include:

Aitchison, J. 1955, 011 the distribution oS a positive random variable having a

discrete probability mass at the origin:

Journal of American Statistical

Association, v.

50, pp, 901-908.

Christcnsen, T.H., Kjeldsen, P

Albrechtsen, II.J., Heron, Gonu, Nielsen, P.II.,

Bjerg, P.L., and Holm, P.E., 1994, Attenuation of Landfill Leachate Pollutai~ts in

Aquifers, Critical Reviews in

Ei~viroilmental Science and Technology, 24(2): 119-

202.

(SO531580

111612007CIN CJNJ

Printed

oii

Rec),cied

Pqer

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

Clark, T.P.. and Piskin R., 1977, Chemical Quality and Indicator Parameters for

Monitoring Landfill

Leachate in Illinois, Environmental Geology v. 1 pp. 329-

339.

Cravy, T.D.,

McIsaac, P., and Gibbons, R.D., 1990, Evaluation of organic

indicator parameters using an Appendix

VIIIIX Database: presented at Wastc

Tech '90,1,andfill Technology: Back to Basics. San Francisco, CA.

Gibbons, R., 1994, Statistical Methods for Groundwater Monitoring. New

Yorlc:

John Wiley and Sons.

Gibbons, R. et

al., 1999, Statistical Comparison of Leachate from hazardous,

Codisposal, and Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Groundwater Monitoring and

Remediation, Fall 1999, pp. 57-72.

Heidlauf, D.T. and Bartlett, T.R., 1993, Effects of monitoring well purge and

sample techniques on the concentration of metal analytes in uniiltered

groundwater san~ples: Proceedings of the NGWA Outdoor Aet~on Conference,

Las Vegas,

NV, May 1993, pp. 437-450.

USEPA; 1977, Solid Waste Monitoring Guidance. To be completed

IJSEPA, 1988, Summary of Data on Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Leachate

Characteristics. To be completed

USEPA, Federal Register, 1991, Code of Federal Regulations (CFII) Parts 257

and 258: Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria; Final Rule.

USEPA, 1992, Addendum to interim final guidance document

Statistical

analysis of ground-water monitoring data at RCRA facilities.

USEPA, 1998, Characterization of municipal solid waste in the United States:

1997

IJpdate, Report No. EPA 530-R-98-007. Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA,

Office of Solid Waste.

USEPA, 2000, Geosynthetic Research Institute, University of Illinois and

Geosyntec Consultants, Assessment

and Recommendations for Optimal

Performance of Waste Containment Systems, Grant number CR-821448-01-0.

Pastor,

E. F. and Frick, D. R., 1992 "Considerations in Selecting Indicator

Parameters for the Statistical Evaluation of Ground-Water Quality," Current

Practices in Ground Water and Vadose Zone Investigations, ASTM STP 11 18,

David M. Nielsen and Martin

N. Sara, Eds., American Society for Testing and

Materials, Philadelphia.

(SO5315801 111612007 CJN CJN)

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

Plumb, R.H., 1991 The Occurrence of Appendix IX Organic Constituents in

Disposal Site Ground Water, Groundwater Monitoring

Revicw, Spring 1991, pp.

157-164.

Plumb, R.H., 1987, A comparison of groundwater monitoring data from

CERCLA and RCRA sites. Groundwater Monitoring Review, v. 8 pp. 94-100.

Puls, R.W., Clark, D.A.,

Bledsoe, B., Powell, R.M.. and Paul, C.J., 1992 Metals in

groundwater: Sampling Artifacts and Reproducibility,

tlazardous Waster and

Hazardous Materials, v. 9, No. 2,

pp. 149-162.

I'uls. R.W.. and Powell. R.M.. 1992. Acauisition of Representative Groundwater

Quality Samples for Metals, Groundwater Monitoring

Rcview Suminer 92, pp.

167-176.

Allen, H.E., Perdue, E.M., and Brown,

D., 1993. Metals in Groundwater. Boca

Raton, Florida: Lewis Publishers.

Baker, J.A. "Leachate Characteristics of

Leachate Iiecirculation and Bioreactor

Landfills", Presentation at

USEPA's 2"bnrrual Bioreactor Workshop, Feb. 2003.

Bagchi, A,, 1987. Natural attenuation mechanisms of landfill leachate and effects

of various factors on the mechanisms. Waste

Management

Research 5, 453-

464.

Barlaz, M.A., et al, "A Critical Evaluation of Factors Required to Terminate Post-

Closure Monitoring and Performance of Solid Waste Landfills", Environmental

Science and Technology,

2002,36,3457.

Bubb, J.M., and Lester, J.N., 1991. The impact of heavy metals on lowland rivers

and

the implications for man and the environment. The Science of the Total

Environment 100,207-233.

Cartwight, K. and Griffin, R.A., Gilkeson, R.H. 1987.

Migration of landfill

leachate through glacial tills. Ground Water 25, 294-305.

Christensen, T. H., et al. 2001, Biogeochemistry of Landfill Leachate Plumes.

Applied Geochemistry, Vol. 16, No. 7,

pp. 659-718(60) Elsevier Science, Pub.

Davis,

J.A., et al. 1993.

Influence of Redox Environment and Aqueous

Speciation on Metal Transport in Groundwater: Preliminary Results of Trace

Injection Studies, in: Metals in Groundwater, Allen,

II.E., et al. editors.

Lewis

Publishers.

Dragun,

J., 1988. The Soil Chemistry of Hazardous Materials. Hazardous

materials Control research institute, Silver Springs, Maryland.

(SO531580 I 1/16/2007

CJN

CJN)

Praqred or?

Recycled

Poper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

Gibbons, R.D., and Sara M., 1994.

Statistical comparison of Metal

Concentrations in Filtered and unfiltered Ground-water Samples.

In: Ground

Water Sampling-A

Workshop Summary.

EPN600lR-941205

Ham. R.K.

Booker, T.J. (1982) "Decomposition of solid Waste in Test

Lysimeters. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 108, pp. 1147-1 170.

Hounslow, A.W., 1995. Water Quality Data, Analysis and Interpretation. Lewis

Publishers.

Kjeldsen, P.,

Barlaz, M.A., Rooker, A.P., Baun, A. Ledin, A. Chistensen; T.H.,

2002, "Present

and Long-Tenn Composition of MSW Landfill Leachate: A

Review, Environmental Science and Technology,

32(4); 297-336.

McLean, J.E. and Bledsoe, B.E., 1992.

Behavior of metals in soils. Ground

Water Issues,

USEPA, EPAl540lS-921018.

Puls, R.W. and Barcelona, M.J., 1989. Filtration of Ground Water Samples for

Metals Analysis. Hazardous Waste

Hazardous Materials, Vol 6, No. 4. 385-

393.

RUST

E&I, 1995. Leachate Characterization Study.

Suthersan,

S.S., 1997. Remediation Engineering. Boca Raton, Florida: Lewis

Publishers.

4.

Subsequent to the filing of the Proposal, the Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency identified what it believed was an error in the list of

leachate nlonitoring parameters set

out in new

"81 1.Appendix C" According to the Illinois EPA, certain monitoring parameters

were inadvertently

left off the list. Those parameters included: Arsenic (total); Barium (total);

Cadnlium (total) mgll; Iron (total); Ammonia Nitrogen

N; Bacteria (fecal coliform);

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD); 4-Nitrophenol; Acenaphthene; Acetone; Alachlor;

Aldicarb; Aldrin; Alpha-RHC; Aluminum; Anthracene; Antimony; Atrazine; Benzene;

Benzo(a)Anthracene;

Benzo(a)Pyrene;

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene;

Benzo(ghi)Perylcne;

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene; Beryllium (total); Beta-BHC; Bicarbonate; Bis (2-Chloro-1-Methylethyl)

Ether; Bis (2-Chloroethoxy) Methane; Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether; Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Ether; Bis

(S0531580.l 1/16/2007 CJN CJN)

P~.inled

Recycled

Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

(2-Ethylhexyl)

Phthalate;

Ris

(Chloro~nethyl) Ether; Boron;

Bromochloromcthane;

Bromodichloromethane; Bromofom; Rromomcthane; Bromoform; Bromomethane; Butanol;

Butyl Renzyl Phthalate; Calcium

mgll; and Carbofuran. The NSWMA supports the inclusion oi

thcsc additional parameters and therefore proposes that the Board consider the list of leachate

~noniloring parameters as corrected as if originally included in the initial Proposal. The revised

list of

leachate monitoring parameters is attached to this filing as an Errata Sheet (See Exhibit 1)

Respectfully submitted,

NATIONAL SOLID WASTES MANAGEMENT

ASSOCIATION

By:

Sorling, Northrup, Hanna,

Cullen

Cochran, Ltd.

Charles J. Northrup, of Counsel

Suite 800 Illinois Building

P.O. Box 5131

Springfield,

IL 62705

Telephone: 217.544.1 144

Fax:

217.522.3173

E-Mail: cinorthru~@sorlinglaw.com

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

EXIIIBlT 1

ERRATA SHEET

Elevation Leachate Surface

Bottoln of Well Elevation

Leaciiate Lcvel from Measuring Point

Arsenic (total)

Bariu~ii (total)

Cadmium (total)

mgll

Iron (total)

Ammonia Nitrogen

Bacteria (Fecal Colifom)

Biocheniical Oxygen De~nand(BODs)

1,1, I ,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1,1 -Trichloroethane

1,1,2,2-'retrachloroelhane 

1 ,I ,2-Trichloroell1a11e

1 ,I -Dichlouoellrane

1.1 -Dichloroethylene

I. 1 -Dicl~Ioropropene

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

1,2,3-Trichloropropane

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzenc

1,2,4-Trimethylbelizene

1,2-Dihron~o-3-Cliloropropane 

1,2-Dichlorocthane

1.2-Dichloropropane

1,3,5-Trirnethylbenzene

1,3-Dicliloropropa~ie

1,3-Dichloropropene

1,4-Dichloro-2-Butene

I -Propano1

2,2-Dichloropropane

2,4,5-tp (Silvex)

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

2,4-Dichlorophenol

2,4-Dicl~loroplienoxyacetic 

Acid (2,4-D)

2,4-Dimethylphenol

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

2,4-Dinitrophenol

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether

2-Chlororiaphthalei~e

2-Chlorophenol

2-I-fexanone

2-Propanol (Isopropyl Alcohol)

3,3-Dichlorobeiizidine

4,4-DDD

4,4-DDE

4,4-DDT

4,6-Dinitro-0-Cresol

4-Broi~iopheriyl Pllenyl Ether

4-Chlorophenyl Plienyl Ether

4-Methyl-2-Pe11ta11one

4-Nitrophenol

Aceilaphthene

Acetone

Alachlor

Aldicarb

Aldrin

Alpha

BI4C

Alumilium

Anlhracene

Antimony

Aira~ine

Benzene

Bcnzo (a) Antl~racene

Benzo (a) Yyrene

BCIIZO (b) Fluoranthene

Benzo (glli) Perylene

Benzo (I<) Fluoranthene

Beryllium (total)

Beta

BI-IC

Bicarbonale

Bis

(2-Cllloro-1-Methylethyl) Ethei

Bis (2-Chloroethoxy) Methane

Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether

Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate

Bis(CliIorotuetl~y1)Ether

Boron

Bronlobenzene

Brorilocl~lorometl~mc

Bromodichloromethane

Bromofo~m

Bromomethane

Pi-inled

<oil

Recycled l'nper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

Butanol

Butyl Bel~zyl Phthalate

Calcium i11gIl

Carbofuran

Carbon Disulfidc,

Carbon Tetrachloride

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

Chlovcianc

Chloride mg/l

Chlorobenzene

Chloroethane

Chloroforn~

Cliloroinethane

Chi-omium (hexavalei~l)

Chron~ium (lolal)

Chrysene

Cis-l,2-Dicl3loroet11ylene 

Coball (lolal)

Copper (lotal)

Cyanide

DDT

Delta

BHC

Di-N-Butyl Phthalate

Di-N-Octyl I'hihalate

Dibeilzo (a,h) Anthracetle

Dibro~nochloroi~~ctl~ane

Di broino~nctl~itl~e

Dichlorodifluoimetha~~e

Dieldrin

Dietl~yl Phihalaie

Diiuethyl Phlllalate

Endosulfan 1

Eiidosulfaii II

Endosulfan Sulfate

Endsilt

Endrin Aldehyde

Ethyl Acetate

Ethylbenzene

Ethythyicne Dibromide (EDB)

Fluorai~tlie~ic

Fluoreile

Fluoride

Heptachlor Epoxide

I-leptachlor

Hexachlorobe~~ze~le

Hexacl~lorobutadiene

(50531

5')3,!

/1(>/2007 

CSN BLF)

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

tlexaclilorocyclopeii~

iene

Hexachloroethaile

Ideno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene

loiiomethane

Isopropy ibei~~ene

Lead (total)

Lindane

Magiiesi urn (total)

Manganese (total)

Mermry (total)

Methoxychlor

Methyl Chloritie

Methyl Ethyl Icetone

Metliylene Bromide

Methylene Chloride

Naphthalene

Nickel (total)

Nitrate-Nitrogen

Nitrobenzene

Oil, Hexane Soluble (or Equivalent)

Parathion

Pentachiorophenol

Phenanthrene

Phenols

Phosphorous

Polychlorinated Biphenyls

Potassium

Pyrene

Sele~liurn

~ilve; (total)

Specific

Conductai~ce

Sodium

Styrene

Sulfate

Teinperat~~re

of Leachate Sample ("F)

Tert-Butylbcnzene

Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dixoins

Tetrachloroetliylene

Tell-ahydrof~il-an

Thallium

Tin

Toluene

Total Orgaiiic Carbon (TOC)

Total Suspended Solids (TDS)

ii~gll

Toxaphene

Trans-l,2-Dichloroetliylene 

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

'Trans-] ,3-Dichlorpi-opene

Trichloroetliylene

Trichlorofluoromctk~ne

Vinyl Acetate

Vinyl Chloride

Xylene

Zinc (total)

nl-Dichlorobei~zene

m-Xyleile

n-Butylbenzene

11-Nitrosodimetliyla~i~ine

11-Nitrosodiphe~~ylamine 

11-Nitrosodipropyla~~~ine

n-Propylhenzene

o-Cl~louololuene

o-Dichlorobcnzene

o-Nitrophenol

o-Xylene

p-Chlorotoluene

p-Cresol

p-Dichlorohenzene

p-Isopropyltoluene

p-Nitrophenol

p-Xylene

sec-Butylbenzene

Note.

All parameters shall be deteimlned from ~nlfiltered sanlples.

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007

SERVICE LIST

Electronically filed with:

Ms. Dorothy M. Gunn

Pollutio~l Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

100 West Randolph St., Suite 11-500

Chicago,

1L 60601

And the following served by U.S. Mail:

Mr. Matt Dunn

Ms. Kim Geving

Environmental Bureau Chief

Assistant Counsel

Office

oC the Attorney General

lllinois Environmental Protection Agency

188

West Randolph, 20'' F1.

1021 North Grand Ave. E.

Chicago, IL 60601

P. 0. Box 19276

Springfield,

IL 62794-9276

Ms. Brenda Carter, Project Manager

Ms. Claire

H. Eberle, Deputy Director

lllinois Environmental Regulatory Group

Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

3 150 Roland Ave.

Wm. G. Stratton Office Bldg., Room 700

Springfield,

1L 62703

Springfield, IL 62706-4700

Mr. Roger Huebner, Gen. Counsel

Ms. Linda Dirkscn Brand

Illinois Municipal League

Advocacy Specialist

500 E. Capitol

Dept. of

Commerce

Econo~uic

P.O. Box 5180

Opportunity

Springfield, IL 62705

620 East

Adarns St., Fifth F1.

Springfield, IL 62701

Mr. William Richardson

Mr. Jack Darin

Chief Legal Counsel

Sierra Club

Ill. Dept. of Natural Resources

200

N. Michigan, #SO5

One Natural Resources Way

Chicago, IL 60601

Springfield, IL 62702-1 271

Mr.

Willianl Schubert

Waste Management, Inc

720 Butterfield Rd.

Lombard,

IL 60565

(SO5316552 111612007 WN BLF)

Mr. Tim Fox, Hearing Officer

James R.

Thompson Center

100 W. Randolph

Suite 11-500

Chicago,

1L 60601

2

Printed

Recycled

Paper

ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, JANUARY 16, 2007