REPLY TO:
NORTHRUI: HANNG
CULLEN &COCHRAN, LTD.
ATIORNNS
AT
LAW
March 21,2007
Ms. Dorothy Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 W. Randolph, Suite 1 100
Chicago,
11, 60601
Mr. Tim Fox
Hearing
Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100
W. Randolph, Suite 11-500
Chicago,
IL 60601
Re:
Public Comment
PCB
NO. R-07-008
Dear Ms. Gunn and Hearing Officer Fox:
The National Solid Wastes Management Agency ("NSWMA") is pleased
to present this
Joint Comment
of it and the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency. This joint comment is in response to questions posed
by Board Member Moore and the Board's Senior Environmental Scientist,
Anand Rao, at the February 28, 2007 Hearing concerning the clarity of the
sequence of events following the confirmation of a monitored increase in
certain constituents. This joint comment proposes certain new language in
an effort to address the Board's concerns and clarify
the proper
sequencing of events following confirmation of a monitored increase.
The proposed language is designed to clearly identify the sequence of
possible actions after an observed increase in
landfill parameters has been
confirmed.
Once an
observcd increase has been confirmed by the
operator, the Illinois
EPA must be notified. (See 8 1 1.3 19(a)(4)(B)(i)).
The operator then has 180 days from the original sampling event to either:
submit a notification to the Illinois
EPA with an "alternate source
demonstration" showing that the landfill is not the source of the observed
increase (81 1.3
19(a)(4)(B)(ii)and (iii)); or submit plans for an assessment
monitoring program (81
1.319(b)(2). Both submittals must be in the form
of a significant modification permit application. In the event an operator
submits
an "alternate source demonstration" that is denied by the Agency,
Stfitc
800
ltli~~nia
Ruilding
607 East
,<dams Street
P.O. Ron:
5131
Springfield,
IL 62705
Surfe301
401 S W Water Strccl
Peona, IL 61602
Cllarles J.
Northrup
Attorncy at Law
~inorthi~n~siii.Ii~~~k~~~.com
R. Gerald Barris
Stephen A. 'Tagge
Michael A. Myers
C. Clark Germann
Gary A.
Brown
Frederick B. Hoffmann
William R. Enlow
Michazl C, Conneliy
John A. Kaueraof
James M. Morpheu'
Stephen 1. Bochenck
David
A. Rolf
Peggy
J Ryan
Mark
K. Cullen
Thomas li. Wilson
Todd M.
Turner
R, 1.ee Allen
Charles J. Northrnp
.lames D. Broadway
E.
Lachary
Dinardo
Ja~nes G. IFahey
Lisa I-larms llarlzier
Elizabelh A. Urba~~ce
Michael G. Norstman Jr.
Jennifcr M. Aschei
Lisa A. Petrilli
Emily B. I~atliauer
Brian D. Jones
Of Counsel:
William
S. lldnley
William B. Bates
Mark
H. Fcigusun
Retired:
Charlcs H. Northrup
Philin E. Ilanna
Sorling, Catron and Hardin
1944.1975
(SO5387723 312112007 C.R4 BLF)
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 21, 2007
* * * * * PC #1 * * * * *
SORI.NG, N~KTHRUI',
HANNA,
CULLEN
&
COCPIRAN,
Li'r~.
MARCH 21,2007
PAGE
2
the operator must coinmence sampling and subinit plans for an assessment monitoring program
within
30 days of the denial. (81 1.3 19(a)(4)(B)(v)).
The actual language that both the NSWMA and the Agency have agreed to is as follows (current
proposed amendments to the rule are identified by strikeouts and underlines,
the newly proposed
additional language is highlighted in
Bold):
811319
@)
(4) (B):
B)
The confirmation procedures shall include the following:
i)
The operator shall verify any observed increase by
taking additional samples within
45
a
days
d
the
. ..
samvling event and ensure that
the samples and sampling protocol used
will detect
any statistically significant increase in the
concentration of the suspect constituent in
accordance with Section
811.320(e), so as to
confirm the observed increase. The operator shall
notify the Agency of any confirmed increase before
the end of the next business day following the
confirmation.
ii)
The operator shall determine the source of any
confirmed increase, which may include, but shall
not be limited to, natural phenomena,
sampling or
analysis errors, or an
offsite source.
iii)
The operator shall notify the Agency in writing of
any confirmed increase
a&.
The notification must
demonstrate a source other than the facility
sMe
P
and provide
the rationale used in
such a determination, W&k
7
The notification shall
be submitted to
thc Agency no later than 180 days
of the original sampling event. If the facility is
permitted by the
Apencv, the notification shall be
filed for review as a significant permit modification
pursuant to 35
111. Adm. Code 813. Subpart B.
iv)
If an alternate source demonstration described
in
(ii) and (iii) of this subsection, cannot be made,
assessment monitoring is
rewired in accordance
with
35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(b).
(805387723 312112007
CIN BLF)
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 21, 2007
* * * * * PC #1 * * * * *
SORLING.
NOKTIIRUP,
I3ANNA, CUI
I
EN
&
COCHRAN,
I,ID
MARCH 2 1,2007
PACL 3
vf
If an alternate source demonstration, submitted
to the Agency as an
ap~lication, is denied
pursuant to 35 111. Adm. Code 813.105,
the
operator must commence sampling for the
constituents listed under 35
111. Adm. Code
811.319(b)(5),
and
submit an assessment
monitoring plan as a significant permit
modification, both within 30 days of the dated
notification of Agency denial. The operator must
sam~le the well or wells that exhibited the
confirmed increase.
b)
Assessment Monitoring
The operator shall begin an assessment monitoring program in order to
confirm that the solid waste disposal facility is the source of the
contamination and to wrovide information needed to
carry out a
groundwater impact assessment in accordance with subsection (c). The
assessment monitoring
~.
program shall be conducted in accordance with the
following requirements:
1)
The assessment monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with
this subsection to collect information to assess the nature
and
extent of groundwater contanination. The owner or operator of a
MSWLF unit shall comply with the additional requirements
prescribed in subsection
(b)(5). Thc assessment monitoring shall
consist of monitoring of additional constituents that might indicate
the source and extent of contamination. In addition, assessment
monitoring may
include any other investigative techniques that
will assist in determining the source, nature and extent of the
contamination, which may consist of, but need not be limited to:
A)
More frequent sampling of the wells in which the
observation occurred;
B)
More frequent sampling of any surrounding wells; and
C)
The placement of additional monitoriilg wells to determine
the source and extent of the contamination.
2)
The Except as arovided for in 81 1.319(a)(4)(B)(iii)
and (vf.
the
operator of the facility for which assessment monitoring is required
shall file the plans for an assessment monitoring program with the
Agency. If the facility is permitted by the Agency, then the plans
shall be filed for review as a significant permit modification
jS0538772.3 3/21/2007 CIN B1.F)
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 21, 2007
* * * * * PC #1 * * * * *
SOI<LIN(;, NORTIIRUP, HANNA,
CULL.IN
&
COCFIKAN,
LT11
MAI~CH
2 1,2007
PAGE
4
pursuant to 35 111. Adm. Code 813 Subpart B within 180 days of
the original
samoline event. The assessment monitoring program
shall be implemented within
98
180
days of
the original
samoling event in accordance with
s~rbsection (a)(4) or, in the case of permitted facilities, within
98
45
days of agency approval.
As noted above, this language is submitted as a
Joint Comment.
Neither the NSWMA nor the
Agency object to the Board's unilateral revision of the proposed amendments lo conform to this
new language.
Very truly yours,
NATIONAL SOLID WASTES
MANAGEMENT AGENCY
IL1,INOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
. .
By:
"".'
2
r-
7
By:
Charles
J. Northmp
,I
i/'
/SO5387723 3/21/2007 CJN BLF)
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 21, 2007
* * * * * PC #1 * * * * *