BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
RECEIVEDCLERK'S
OFFICE
IN THE MATTER OF :
)
b
MAY 2 9 2007
AS 07-
PETITION
OF CABOT CORPORATION
STATE OF
ILLINOIS
) (Adjusted Standard)
FOR
AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
)
Pollution Control Board
35 Ill . Adm
. Code Part 738, Subpart B
)
NOTICE OF FILING
TO :
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of the
Illinois Pollution Control Board Cabot Corporation's
Appearance of Eric E
. Boyd,
Appearance of Geoffrey B
. Tichenor, Petition for Reissuance of Adjusted Standard, Motion
to Stay Proceedings, Motion For Incorporation of Documents and Motion for Relief from
Filing Requirements
.
DATED
: May 29, 2007
Eric E
. Boyd (6194309)
Geoffrey B
. Tichenor (6284135)
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
131 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Tel
. (312) 460-5000
Fax
: (312) 460-7000
C111
11200342 .1
CABOT CORPORATION
By :
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 11200342 .1
SERVICE LIST
Illinois Pollution Control Board
Attention: Clerk
100 W. Randolph Street
James R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601-3218
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Legal Counsel
Attention: Kyle Nash Davis, Esquire
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62799-9276
Printed on Recycled Paper
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Eric E . Boyd, hereby certify that on May 29, 2007, I caused a copy of Cabot
Corporation's Appearance of Eric E . Boyd, Appearance of Geoffrey B . Tichenor, Petition
for Reissuance of Adjusted Standard, Motion to Stay Proceedings, Motion for
Incorporation of Documents and Motion for Relief from Filing Requirements to be served
upon the parties listed below via First Class U .S. Mail :
Illinois Pollution Control Board
Attention : Clerk
100 W . Randolph Street
James R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601-3218
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Legal Counsel
Attention
: Kyle Nash Davis, Esquire
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P .O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62799-9276
CHI 11200342 .1
Printed on Recycled Paper
I
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD R
E C
E II
V E D 8 OFFICE
MAY 2 9 2007
IN THE MATTER OF :
)
STATE
OControl
AS 07-1p
ILLINOIS
Board
P PETITION OF CABOT CORPORATION
) (Adjusted Standard)
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM )
35 III . Adm . Code Part 738, Subpart B
)
APPEARANCE OF ERIC E . BOYD
I hereby file my appearance in this proceeding, on behalf of Cabot Corporation .
By
: Eric
E. Boyd
r
Eric E. Boyd (6194309)
Geoffrey B
. Tichenor (6284135)
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
131 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Tel . (312) 460-5000
Fax
: (312) 460-7000
DATED : May 29, 2007
CHI 11200199 .1
Printed on Recycled Paper
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF :
PETITION OF CABOT CORPORATION
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
35 Ill
. Adm
. Code Part 738, Subpart B
By:
CHI 11200202.1
AS 07-
(Adjusted Standard)
APPEARANCE OF GEOFFREY B
. TICHENOR
I hereby file my appearance in this proceeding, on behalf of Cabot Corporation .
t/
Eric E. Boyd (6194309)
Geoffrey B . Tichenor (6284135)
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
131 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Tel. (312) 460-5000
Fax
: (312) 460-7000
DATED : May 29, 2007
Printed on Recycled Paper
CLERK
RECEIVED
MAY
2
9
2007
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
RECt*a
CLERK'S OFFICE
\Orr
D
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDPollution
M Z
J ZOO7
OContof
BoaS
IN THE MA I I ER OF :
)
AS 07-
PETITION OF CABOT CORPORATION
) (Adjusted Standard)
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
)
35 111 . Adm
. Code Part 738, Subpart B
)
PETITION FOR REISSUANCE OF ADJUSTED STANDARD
Cabot Corporation ("Cabot"), the Petitioner, through its attorneys, Seyfarth Shaw
LLP, and pursuant to 35 III . Adm
. Code, Part 738, Subpart C and 35 111
. Adm . Code, Part
104, Subpart D, requests that the Illinois Pollution Control Board ("Board") reissue an
adjusted standard from the requirements of 35 111
. Adm
. Code, Part 738, Subpart B
(prohibiting the injection of certain restricted hazardous waste) for underground injection
control ("UIC")
Wells Nos
. 2 and 3 located at its Tuscola, Illinois facility (the "Facility")
.
In support of this Petition, Cabot states as follows
:
I.
BACKGROUND
Facility and Process Description
1 .
The Facility manufactures fumed metal oxides, including fumed silica (SiO
2).
The manufactured products contain unique properties making them important additives in
a diverse variety of products from paints and printing inks to pharmaceuticals and
cosmetics .
2.
The fumed metal oxide manufacturing process involves the hydrolysis of a blend
of chlorosilanes, silicon tetrachloride, methyl trichlorosilane, trichlorosilane, and
aluminum trichloride
. The Facility also operates several other related operations where
fumed metal oxides are treated to produce specific products
.
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 11200235 .2
Page 1 of 8
Nature of The Facility (35 Ill, Adm. Code § 104.406(d))
3 .
The Facility is located approximately three miles west of Tuscola on Route 36 in
Douglas County, Illinois . The Facility occupies approximately 92 acres of land .
4.
In operation since 1958, the Facility currently employs approximately 160 people .
Waste Identification and Characteristics (35111. Adm. Code § 104.406(d))
5 .
The Facility generates a number of waste streams, some of which are disposed of
on-site in UIC wells . A portion of the waste that Cabot disposes in its UIC wells is
restricted waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA") . See 40
CFR Part 148, Subpart B
and 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 738, Subpart B .
6 .
Waste streams injected in the UIC wells include acidic waste water from air
pollution control scrubbers, stack drains, fan drains, other equipment drains and
washdown (D002); unsold by-product HCL (D002) ; surface water drainage, seepage,
multi-source leachate from the leachate collection system, and groundwater and leachate
purged from on-site monitoring wells (F039)
; and spent acetone from the QC laboratory
(F003).
The Facility's UIC Wells (35 Ill. Adm. Code § 104.406(d))
7 .
Presently, Cabot injects hazardous waste into Wells Nos
. 2 and 3 pursuant to an
UIC permit from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("IEPA"), effective
October 18, 2001
. In 1996, Cabot plugged and abandoned Well No . 1, into which Cabot
previously injected restricted waste, in accordance with a closure plan approved by IEPA .
Illinois' Hazardous Waste Injection Restrictions (35 Ill. Adm. Code §§
104.406(a)-(b))
8 .
The Board's regulations specifically prohibit the underground injection of certain
restricted hazardous wastes . See 35 Ill . Adm
. Code Part 738, Subpart B .
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 11200235 .2
Page 2 of 8
9 .
The Board's UIC regulations were adopted pursuant to the "identical-in-
substance" rulemaking mechanism to implement an UIC program for Illinois . The
prohibitions relating to spent solvents (F003), 35 111
. Adm . Code § 738 .110(a), and liquid
corrosive wastes (D002), 35 111. Adm . Code § 738 .116(c)(2), were adopted in R89-2 . 14
111 . Reg . 3089 (March 2, 1990), effective February 20, 1990 . The prohibition relating to
multi-source leachate (F039), 35111
. Adm . Code § 738 .116(c)(1), was adopted in R90-14 .
15 111 . Reg . 11425 (August 9, 1991), effective July 24, 1991 .
Prior Federal and State Hazardous Waste Injection Approval
10.
Cabot previously received federal and state approval to inject hazardous waste
into the Facility's UIC wells . U.S . EPA granted Cabot a "no-migration exemption" for
Well No . 2 pursuant to 40 CFR Part 148, Subpart C on November 6, 1990 . See 55 Fed .
Reg
. 49340 (November 27, 1990). Subsequently, on February 4, 1991, the U .S . EPA
granted an exemption for Well No
. 1 . See 56 Fed . Reg . 5826 (February 13, 1991) . The
Board issued Cabot an Adjusted Standard from the requirements of 35 111 . Adm . Code
Part 738, Subpart B for Wells Nos . I and 2 on February 17, 1994 . See the Board's
February 17, 1994 Order in AS 92-8, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A ("AS 92-
8) .
11 .
In November 1994, U .S . EPA modified the federal exemption to clarify that
Cabot could dispose of leachate and purge water in its UIC wells . See, e.g., 60 Fed . Reg .
58623 (November 28, 1995) . U .S. EPA later authorized Cabot to inject restricted waste
into Well No. 3 . See 61 Fed . Reg . 4996 (February 9, 1996) . On March 7, 1996, the
Board granted both of these modifications to Cabot's Adjusted Standard
. See the Board's
March 7, 1996 Order in AS 96-3, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B ("AS 96-3")
.
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 112002352
Page 3 of 8
II. PETITION FOR REISSUANCE
Description of Proposed Adjusted Standard (lit Adm . Code § 104.40611))
13. Pursuant to 35 Ill . Adm. Code Section 738 .120(e), Cabot seeks reissuance of the
Adjusted Standard granted by the Board under AS 96-3 on March 7, 1996 . Specifically,
Cabot requests that the Board extend the Adjusted Standard through December 31, 2027 .
Level of Justification Necessary to Obtain An Exemption from the Waste
Injection Prohibition (35 111 . Adm. Code § 104.406(c))
14
.
35 Ill. Adm . Code Section 738 .120(a)(1)(A) establishes the level of justification
necessary to obtain a reissuance of an exemption from the prohibition on injection of
prohibited wastes . Section 738 .120(a)(1)(A) requires a demonstration that :
Fluid movement conditions are such that the injected fluids will not
migrate within 10,000 years in either of the following ways :
i) Vertically upward out of the injection zone ; or
ii) Laterally within the injection zone to a point of discharge or interface
with an underground source of drinking water (USDW), as defined in 35
Ill. Adm. Code 730[ .]
Justification for Proposed Adjusted Standard and Supporting Documents (35
III. Adm . Code §§ 104 .406(h),(k))
15 .
To justify its Petition, Cabot relies solely upon the document entitled "2007
Petition for Renewal of Exemption from the Land Disposal Restrictions" filed with U .S.
EPA ("U.S.
EPA Petition") on March 8, 2006 . A copy of the U .S . EPA Petition was
attached as ExhibitC to Cabot's April 12, 2007 Petition for Reissuance of Adjusted
Standard ("April 12, 2007 Petition"), which was assigned to docket AS 07-05 . Cabot has
separately filed a "Motion for Incorporation of Documents" requesting that the Board
incorporate the U .S. EPA Petition as
ExhibitC to the instant Petition. See Cabot's
Motion for Incorporation of Documents, filed herewith .
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 11200235
.2
Page 4 of 8
16.
The U .S
. EPA Petition constitutes Cabot's proposal to extend the Facility's "no-
migration exemption" from the federal hazardous waste injection regulations until
December 31, 2027
. The information contained in the U
.S. EPA Petition satisfies all the
requirements set forth in 35 111 . Adm
. Code Part 738, Subpart C to merit an adjusted
standard under Illinois law
. The following table cross-references the relevant portions of
the U
.S. EPA Petition with each particular requirement of 35 111
. Adm
. Code Part 738,
Subpart C :
Location in the Board's Regulations
Location in the U
.S. EPA Petition
Section 738 .120(a)(1)(A)
Sections 2 .0 et seq.
and 3 .0 et seq.
Section 738 .120(a)(2)
Sections 1
.3 and 4 .0 et seq .
Section 738 .120(b)
Section 2.3 and 3.0
et seq .
Section 738
.120(d)(2)
Section 1 .5.3 through 1
.5.6
Section 738 .121(a)(1-3)
Sections 1 .0 through 4 .0 et seq.
Section 738
.121(a)(4)
See Paragraph 16 below
.
Section 738 .121(a)(5)
Sections 1 .0 through
4 .0 et seq.
Section 738 .121(a)(6)
Section 3 .9
Section 738 .121(b)
Sections 2 .3 through 2
.5; 3 .3 and 3 .5
Section 738
.122(a)(1)
Sections 1 .3, 1
.5
Section 738
.122(a)(2)
Section 1 .5
Section 738
.122(a)(3)
Sections 1
.0 through 4 .0 et seq.
17 .
Cabot provided a quality assurance and control plan ("Plan") to U
.S
. EPA which
addresses all aspects of the federal demonstration
. A copy of the Plan was attached as
Exhibit D
to Cabot's April 12, 2007 Petition
. Cabot has separately filed a "Motion for
Printed on Recycled Paper
C111 11200235 .2
Page 5 of 8
Incorporation of Documents" requesting that the Board incorporate the Plan as Exhibit D
to the instant Petition . See Cabot's Motion for Incorporation of Documents, filed
herewith.
18.
As the Plan likewise addresses all aspects of the state demonstration, Cabot
requests that the Board refer to the Plan to demonstrate Cabot's satisfaction of 35 III .
Adm. Code § 738 .121(a)(4) .
19.
Cabot's U .S . EPA Petition makes the demonstration required by 35 III. Adm .
Code Section 738 .120(a)(1)(A) .
The Petition is Consistent With Federal Law (35111 . Adm. Code § 104.406(i))
20 .
The Illinois state UIC program is identical-in-substance to the federal UIC
program. For that reason, the Illinois UIC program "is intended to be no more (or less)
stringent than the federal program ." (AS 96-3 at 6) (quoting AS 92-8 at 7) .
21 .
Accordingly, if U .S. EPA grants Cabot an extension of its "no-migration
exemption" under federal law, the Board should do the same .
22.
Cabot requests that the Board, the IEPA and the U .S . EPA work together to
minimize procedural redundancies in the reissuance process . Cabot has separately filed a
"Motion to Stay Proceeding" requesting that the Board stay its decision on the Petition
until U .S . EPA acts on Cabot's U .S
. EPA Petition . See Cabot's Motion to Stay
Proceedings, filed herewith.
Inapplicable and Overly Burdensome Information
23.
Certain information discussed in 35 III . Adm . Code Part 104, Subpart D, including
the information required by Section 104 .406, Subparagraphs (e) and
(g),
is inapplicable
and unduly burdensome
. Cabot, therefore, has not submitted such information at this
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 11200235 .2
Page 6 of 8
time
. See 35 Ill . Adm. Code § 104 .406 (providing the petitioner with the option of
withholding inapplicable information) . The Board did not find information Cabot
omitted to be necessary in either AS 92-8 or AS 96-3 . Should additional information
assist the Board to reach a favorable resolution in this proceeding, however, Cabot will
provide the additional requested information at a later date .
Proposed Language for Reissuance ofAdjusted Standard (35 Ill. Adm. Code §
104.406(/))
24.
Cabot proposes that the Board adopt the following language in its Order granting
Cabot's Petition :
Cabot Corporation is hereby granted a reissuance of the adjusted standard
from the requirements of 35 Ill . Adm
. Code Part 738, Subpart B, for the
underground injection control Wells Nos . 2 and 3 at its Tuscola, Illinois
facility. This adjusted standard constitutes an exemption from the
prohibitions of Subpart B such as to allow the underground injection
disposal of wastes classified as acidic water (D002), by-product
hydrochloric (D002), spent acetone (F003) and multi-source leachate
(F039). This adjusted standard is subject to all conditions imposed by
U.S . EPA pursuant to its grant of Cabot's "Petition for Renewal of
Exemption from the Land Disposal Restrictions ."
No Hearing Requested (35 Ill. Adm
. Code § 104.4060))
25 .
Cabot does not request a hearing in this proceeding .
Certification of an Authorized Representative (35 Ill. Adm. Code §
738.122(a)(4))
26 .
The certification of Carl Troike, the Facility's General Manager, is attached as
Exhibit E
and incorporated herein by reference .
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 112002352
Page 7 of 8
CONCLUSION
27.
Cabot Corporation respectfully requests that the Board reissue the Adjusted
Standard granted in AS 96-3 and extend its duration through December 31, 2027 .
DATED : May 29, 2007
Respectfully submitted,
CABOT CORPORATION
By:
Eric E. Boyd (6194309)
Geoffrey B . Tichenor (6284135)
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
131 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Tel
. (312) 460-5000
Fax : (312) 460-7000
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 11200235 .2
Page 8 of 8
One of Its Attorneys
EXHIBIT A
or:
ILLIN_OISFebruary-17t.POLLUTIOH
CONTROL1994
N THE MATTER
PETITION OF CABOT CORPORATION
FOR"AN
:'ADJUSTED STANDARD'FROMf;1
AS{92-8
.,
7s LL: ADx ._CODE~7~8
.SUBPART B
(Adjusted -
Standard)
=x
OPINION AND ORDER OF-THE BOARD (by
. R C. Flemal) :
'•T
his mater is before the Board :on an~amended petition for
adjusted standard filed by Cabot Corporation -;(Cabot)
:: on September
25,;;1992 .'
. Cabot requests, that the Board -grant-an
;exemption from
the . underground injection control '(UIC)
-,disposaV
prohibitions
. in
95 Ill .?Adm
.,,COde 729 .Subpart B for :-certain -
wastes d isposed . a t
Cabot's Tuscola facility
., The United
: States Environmental;*
Protection Agency (USEPA) has
. granted .:an .,exemption,from,the,
parallel federal UIC rules . .5 .•ag~: _ '
-
:The Board's responsibility in this matter arises from the ..
E vironmental Protection Act (Act) ;(415ILCS 5J1 et seq .) . The
Board is
. charged therein to "determine,` define and implement the
environmental control
standards applicable in the . State of
Illinois°,_ (Act at Section 5(b)) .and_to,"grant";.***;an
adjusted ::
standard for persons who,can justify such';an adjustment" .'(Act at.
Section 28
.1(&)) j4Nore ;generally'_thalBoardxc ;;responsibility"in
this matter is based on - the"system,of='chdcks •T and , balances
integral to Illinois environmental governance : the Board
charged with the rulemaking and principal adjudicatory functions
and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) is
responsible for carrying out th3 principal administrative duties
.Based upon the record before it and upon review of the
factors involved in the consideration of Adjusted standards, the,
Board finds that Cabot has demonstrated that_ grant of an adjusted
tandard in the instant matter is warranted .~.The;adjusted
standard accordingly will be granted .'
AACAGROUNW_ •
Cabot operates a inorganic chemical manufacturing facility
(SIC Code 2819) located in Tuscola, Illinois . The facility . ;
occupies approximately loo acres and employs 184 persons . ;,
The facility manufactures silicon dioxide (SiO,), marketed
under the trademark Cab-o-Sil . The production process consists
of the hydrolysis/oxidation of a chlorosilane_feed .stock to
produce SiO2 and hydrochloric acid,(HC1)':'
I
EXHIBIT
Several hazardous waste streams are generated at the Tuscola
facility
. The majority are disposed of in one of two UIC wells
(Well No
. i and Well No . 2) located at the facility . . The waste
streams injected in the UIC wells include acidic waste water from
air pollution control scrubbers,',stack
.drains,=',fan drains, other
quipment drains, and wash downs - (D002) ; 'plus unsalable by-
product HCl (also D002) ; spent acetone from . the QC laboratory
(FO03)
; and surface water drainage,_seepage,,,_leachate, and
groundwater (F039) . -
_
The two UIC wells are permitted by.,the
Agency .
Wastes with hazardous waste numbers D002, F003, and F039 are
explicitly prohibited' from underground injection unless an
exemption has been granted
. Cabot disposes of these wastes via
underground injection based in the exemption granted under
federal law .
The injection zone at the Cabot site includes the upper part
of the Franconia Formation, all of the Potosi and Eminence
Dolomites and the Gunter Sandstone, and the lower part of the
between
Oneota
immediately
Dolomite
4,442
overlying
and
between
4,124
confining
feetthe
depths
. The
zone
confining
of
is
5,400
the
and
Shakopeezone
4,442
is
.Dolomiteseparatedfeet
. The
from the lowermost source of underground drinking water at a
depth of 2,750 feet by sequences of permeable and less permeable
sedimentary rocks which provide additional protection from fluid
Regmigration
. 49340
into
(November
underground
27, 1990)sources
.)
of drinking water
. (55 Fed .
PROCEDURAL, HISTORY
Cabot has sought and obtained "no-migration exemptions" from
etVSEPA
USEPA
seq,was
pursuant
for
submitted
the
to
same
the
in
wastes
exemption
April
here
1989procedures
at
. On
issueAugust
.
found
Cabot's
24,
at
1990
petition
40 CPR
USEPA148to.20
published
No
February
34739issued
. 2,
.
a
published
On
notice
4,
at
November
1991
58 Fedto
at
USEPA
grant
6,
.
55
Reg1990
Fedgranted
.
the
5826
.
USEPA
Regexemptions
the
(February
. 49340
granted
exemption
(November
published
13,
the
1991)for
exemption
Well
27,
at
.
55
1990)
Nofor
Fed
. 1,and
.
WellRegon
.
On August 3, 1992 Cabot filed a petition with the Board
seeking to effectuate the exemption in State law
. The Board
t
The prohibition against waste F003 occurs at Section
738 .110 of the Board's regulations and at the parallel 40 CFR
148 .10 of USEPA regulations
; the prohibitions against wastes D002
respectivelyand
£039 occur
.
at section 748
.116 and 40 CFR 148 .16,
under-docket
initially docketed
R92-16
the
However,
petition
by
as
orders
a site-specific
of August 13,--1992-therulenaking
`:
Board 'closed docket R92-16 and redocketed the matter as the -=r-
,instant
proceeding, AS 92-8 . In redocketing this matter ;~as an
adjusted standard, the board observed
:
neither the Board nor USEPA rule provides tore
regulatory action on a "no-migration axemption" .'=' .USEPA_-
has
W&
taken regulatory action . Rather, . it has
actions
published
which
Federal
appear
Register
to be similar
notices
to
of
adjustednon-regulatory
•
standards
. The UIC actions are not rules, and will not :
appear in the CFR .
Section 13(c) of the Act requires the Board •to
adopt rules which are "identical in substance" to :.-
federal regulations . In this case, there are no
.
regulations
.
r • -
471,
(In reAugust
: Petition
13, 1992)of
Cabot Corporation, R92-i6, 135 PCB
In its August 13, 1992 order opening Docket AS 92-8 the
On
Board
September
also directed
24, 1992
Cabot
Cabot
to
responded
file certain
by filing
additionalthe
amended
information
.
petition here before the board .
On December 1, 1992 the Agency tiled its response to Cabot's
amended
consisting
in response
petitionof
to
the
Cabot's
.
agency
The Agency
request
record
response
for
of
federal
its
is
participation
accompanied
exemption
.
before
by exhibits
USEPA
.
- The Agency argues first that Cabot's petition before the
Board should be dismissed for lack of State authority to grant
V
the
the
requested
alternative
exemption
that the
(see
adjusted
following)standard
. The
be
Agency
grantedargues
.
in
record
desired
By
possible,
to
order
move
of
the
and
November
instant
accordingly
4,
matter
1993
allowed
the
to decision
Board
Cabot
observed
and
on the
the
that
freshestAgencyit
!,-
opportunity
filings have
to
been
bring
madeany
.
matters up-to-date . No additional
ADJUSTED STANDARD PROCEDURE
The Act at Section 28 .1 provides that a petitioner may
request, and the board may impose, an environmental standard that
=the
=is
from
applicability
:
consequence
(a)
the
applicable
standard
. such
of
that
the
solely-a
operationwould
standard
to
otherwise
the
is
petitioner,
ofcalled
a ruleapply
an
ofto
and
adjusted
generalthe
(b)
petitioner
differentstandard
.
as
.
State Reg91 tion
Section 738
.120
Section 738 .121
Section 738
.122
Section
Section
738738
.123.124
The general procedures thatt govern an adjusted standard
proceeding are found at Section 28
.1 of the Act and within the
Board's procedural rules at 35 111 . Adm . Code Part 106
.
The procedures via which an adjusted standard from the UIC
required
prohibitions
for a
may
petitioner
be sought,
to
and
qualify
the level
for a
of
UIC
justificationadjusted
standard
was
are set
adopted
out
in
at
Board
35 111docket
. Adm .
R92-2,
Code 738UIC .Subpart
UPDATE,
C .-='-738January
.Subpart
25, 1990,C
effective
identical-in-substance
February 20, 1990to
the
. The
federal738
.Subpart
..Ulc exemption
C regulations
proceduresare,.'
;
.
738 .8ubpart C has the following Organisation
A
i
PART 738
''
SectionSUBPART
HAZARDOUS
C
: PETITION
HASTE INJECTION
STANDARDS
RESTRICTIONSAND
PROCEDURES
738 .120
Petitions to Allow Injection of a Prohibited Waste
738 .121
Required Information to Support Petitions
738
.122
submission, Review and Approval or Denial of
Petitions
738 .123
Review of Adjusted Standards
,738
.124
Termination of Adjusted Standards- .
Each of the Part 738 sections is identical-in-substance to
the federal UIC exemption provisions, with the correspondence as
follows :
Federal Requlation
hUTHORITI
A threshold issue ra
.aed by the Agency is whether the Board
has authority to grant exemptions from UIC land disposal -
prohibitions
. The Agency contends that this authority, unless
explicitly delegated to the State as part of a primacy
delegation,
the
to the
instant
provisions
is
case
vested
the
of Part
state
solely
738,'
has
in
never
and
the
accordingly
Administrator
sought primacy
the
of
Agencywith
USEPArespect
. In
contends that the State has never been given the authority to
grant exemptions from land disposal prohibitions
. on this basis
the Agency recommends that the Board dismiss the instant docket
.
-
40 CFR 148 .20
(1988)
40404040 CFRCFRCFRCFR
148148148148
.23.22.21.24
(1988)(1988)(1988)(1988)
The Board is unable to agree with the Agency;W
The
administrator-of USEPA has explicit authority to grant exemptions
from the federal UIC law
. But the law at issue here is State '
lav: %
,
in State law the authority to grant exemptions
:`is vested . in---
the;
Board .-.'This
authority resides
in
the board pursuant toil
wt?'
regulations adopted under Sections 13(c) and 22
.4 (a)"of .the_ Act,`-
which,-among other matters, mandate that the Board adopt
-
regulations implementing a
$tate UIC progran. The_Agency has
presented nothing in the Act, nor in any precedent ;' that in
any--
way' suggests invalidity of the State reguIations, absent
;USEPA`s
;delegation of primacy
.
'
Cabot has sought and received exemption
.under federal • law-
;from the Administrator of USEPA
. To receive exemption under ._
Lexemption
;State law Cabot
from the
must,
Boardaccordingly
.
and as it now .-seekdoes,
}regarding
.:;
: The Board
authority,
notes
it
thatdistinguishes
in arriving
the
at this
issue
conclusionof
authority from
he issues of conflict and relative stringency that might arise
5
_fromactivity
Cabot
prohibited
holding an
under
exemption
State lawunder
. The
federal
conflict/stringencylaw
for the same
j
a 4A.
issues go to the merits of Cabot's request for exemption from the
State UIC regulations, to which the ovard next turns .
nERITS
;under
The
board
elements
regulations
of justification
are the same
required
as those
for
required
an exemptionfor
_federal exemption . Cabot accordingly stands on its petition as
°presented to USEPA as demonstration of the merits of its petition
"before the Board
.
'USEPA
The
review
Agency
of Cabot's
observes
federal
that it
petitionactively .
participated
(See, e .g .,
in
Exhibitsthe
;1=32
to Agency's Response .) The Agency observes that it was
;assisted
and Illinois
in its
State
review
Water
by
Survey,
the Illinois
and that
State
it conducted
Geological
anSurvey
ga extensive technical review and submitted numerous comments to
i •U
that,
SEPA
although
regarding
it
the
initially
Cabot petitionconsidered
. The
Cabot's
Agency
federal
further
petitionobserves
to.,contain
"deficiencies or inconsistencies" (Agency Response
at
" js8),
Cabot ultimately addressed and satisfied all of the
~ `Agency's concerns . The Agency accordingly concludes that it has
'
.nonew comments to present to the Board in the instant
proceeding .
(Iil
.
at 19 .)
=
.The demonstration that must be made to gain the "no-
migration exemption" here requested is found at Section
738
.120(a)(1)(A) . A showing Is required that :
USEPA has further found :
Fluid movement conditions are suchh that, the injected
fluids_, will not
. migrate,vithin 10,000 year
Vertically upward out of the injection zone, ;,o
I
Laterally within,the injection'
;zone' . to a point of :
discharge or interface with an Underground Source
:;
of Drinking Water (USDW)
:as .defined ;in :35,I1l .%'"
Adm
. .Code ;730
In proposing to'grant the exemptions requested by Cabot,"-
USEPA summarized the elements that entered-in to,_ its decision to
.
move forward on Cabot's petition
y;,
PF n
The draft ' decision to approve - Cabot's petition for
continued injection
was reached after a careful
consideration of the factors involved in an
environmentally protective injection operation . These
factors include the type of waste injected, well
construction, well operation, proof of mechanical
integrity of the wells, properties of the injection and
confining zones, including their ability to receive and
confine the waste, a detailed search for any abandoned
,boreholen which may serve as a conduit for upward waste
migration, and comprehensive modeling of the existing
waste plume and further growth and movement of the
plume, both vertically and laterally, for the next
10,000 years . (55 Fed . Reg . 34741 (August 24, 1990) .)
In granting the federal exemption for injection into Well
No . 21, USEPA found :
USEPA personnel reviewed all data pertaining to the
petition including but not limited to well
construction, regional and local geology, seismic
activity, penetrations of the confining zone, and the
mathematical models submitted by Cabot to demonstrate
that no migration from the injection zone would occur
.
The USEPA has determined that the geological setting at
the site as well as the construction and operation of
Well No . 2 are adequate to prevent fluid migration out
of the injection zone within 10,000 years, as required
under 40 CFR Part 148 . (55 Fed . Reg . 49340 (November
27, 1990) .)
1 USEPA's findings with regard to Well No . 1, which were
presented at a later date, were substantively the same
. See 58
Fed . Req . 5826 (February 13, 1991) .
As
required by 40~ CFR part 148, Cabot hasrdemonstrated
.to
reasonable degree of certain ty :that
:there'will - be
migration of hazardous constituents
: fro*:the.;injection- zone
;
for as long as the waste._
remains hazardous . '=This final > .'- .
decision allows the continued underground injection by Cabot
C1-
ot
:
specif It restricted hazardous
:vastes~including :~~
i-
hydrochloric acid and wastewaters contaminated with
.
hydrochloric acid which are hazardous . because > they
.are--.
'corrosive (i .e ., pH-as
less .than :or:equal;to;;2 .0 .hence its
. -
waste code of D002 under 40 CFR,'.261)'a
:multisource leachate
.(Code F039) contaminated with small amounts of
1
.1-- - '
dichloroethylene, 1 .2-dichloroethylene
I
,' methylene . chloride,
'phenol, tetrachloroethylene, and trichloroethylene from
A -.
closed waste storage impoundment and low concentrationsof
residual spent acetone (Code F003) rinsed from laboratory
glassware cleaned with solvent into 'a Class I hazardous
waste i czti_n veil specifically identified as Well No
. 2
at the Tuscola facility
. This decision-constitutes a final
USEPA action for which there is no administrative appeal .
(55 Fed . Reg . 49340 (November 27, - 1990) . and 58 Fed . Reg .
5826 (February 13,_
. 1991) .)
J&
The Board has also reviewed the justification provided by . ;:
Cabot to USEPA, and finds that Cabot has made all the
demonstrations required pursuant to the identical-in-substance
regulations at 35 111 . Adm . Code 738 .Subpart C . : ;-:
As an additional matter, the Board observes that programs,
such as the State VIC program, that are intended to be identical-
in-substance" with federal programs-are, by,their nature,' :
.
,
intended to be no more (or less) stringent than`the corresponding
., .:
federal program . The Board finds that withholding the exemption- :
that Cabot here seeks would cause a more stringent State law to
apply to Cabot, in contradistinction to the stringency principle .
In sum, the Board finds that Cabot has demonstrated that
grant of adjusted standard is warranted . The Board further finds
that the conditions imposed by USEPA on the- similar federal
exemption are necessary limitations on the grant of this adjusted
standard . Accordingly, the adjusted standard will be granted
subject to those conditions' .
The Board notes that the leac)ate concentrationn limits
specified in today's order
(condition 2) are the same as those
specified in Cabot's federal exemption . These concentration
.limits are derived from health-based levels using a conservative
"final to initial" concentration ratio of 0 .003 . USEPA notes
that the concentration ratio of 0 .003 provides . 10 times the -_
dilution sufficient to increase the pH of the waste from 0 .5 to
2
.0 and more than enough to reduce the concentration of all
-
hazardous constituents to nonhazardous levels . (55 Fed . Reg .
t
n
(3)
(4)
(5)
IT IS SO ORDERED .
injection must occur only, into
and Eminence Dolomites and
; the
34743 (August 24, 1990) and Exh . 4 at
8-4 .)
I
r 4,.
The monthly average in action
400
gallons ; per . minute
`(2)
The concentrations-.of
the constituents included in
..the-
injected leachate may not,- .
exceed the following values :,'
Cabot Corporation' is hereby,granted`an adjusted standard
:.,
from the requirements, of, I11 Adm
.~::COde
;,73B .Subpart B for.,th
underground injection control Wells Nos
.l and ;2,at?its Tuscola
Illinois,`facility ~;This:adjusted';standard
constitutes an
' ,Y.
emption'from'.the
prohibitions" of
; Subpart B such a s to allow
:t
derground injection disposal of wastes classified as 'acidic
water (D002) ..
by-product hydrochloric'acid,(D002), spent acetone
(F003), 'and multi-source'`-leachate>
;(FO39) .1
'"The adjusted standard
i subject :to
.the`following ;conditiona
I
the Franconia, Potosi, :
Gunter Sandstone ;
the Franconia, Potosi,
and the Gunter
and 5,400 feet in
4,442 and 5,400 feet .
!
The injection zonee consists` of
Eminence, and Oneota Dolomites
Sandstone, found between 4,441
Cabot's Well No . 1 and between
Cabot's Wall No . 2 ; ;,and}"
Cabot shall be in full compliance with all conditions,
of its permits and other conditions relating to the : ,
exemption found
. in:_35 111 . Adm . Code 738 .123 and
738 .124 .
-
n
t
Section 41 of the EnvironmentalProtection Act (415 ILCS' ,
5/41 (1992)) provides for the appeal of final Board orders within
35 days of the date of service of this order
. The Rules of the
:
Supreme Court of Illinois establish filing requirements . (See'"
also 35 ill .Adm
.Code 101 .246 "Motions for Reconsideration" .) ;.,
Acetone . .
't.-47,000 mg/L
Tetrachloroethylen
1 .66 mg/L
Nethylene Chloride
59 .0 . mg/L ,.. .
Trichloroethylene
1 .66 mg/L '.
1,2 Dichloroethylene
.33
mg/L
1,1 Dichloroethylene
2 .33 mg/L
Phenol
12,000 J : : mg/L :;.
EXHIBIT B
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 7, 1996
INTHE MATTER OF:
)
CABOT CORPORATION PETITION
)
AS 96-3
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
)
(Adjusted Standard-UIC)
35 ILL. ADM . CODE PART 738,
)
SUBPART B
)
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by R.C. Flemal):
This matter comes before the Board upon a Petition for Modification and Reissuance of
Adjusted Standard filed by Cabot Corporation (Cabot) . The purpose is to conform the
exemption Cabot currently holds under Illinois underground injection control (UIC) law with
exemptions granted to Cabot under federal UIC law .
The requested modifications consist of clarification that leachate and purge water may
be disposed in Cabot's UIC wells, in conformity with a similar finding of the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued in November 1994 ; and that injection of
restricted waste may take place in Cabot's new UIC Well #3, in conformity with a finding of
USEPA issued in January 1996 .
The Board's responsibility in this matter arises from the Environmental Protection Act
(Act) (415 ILCS 5/1 et seq .). The Board is charged therein to "determine, define and
implement the environmental control standards applicable in the State of Illinois" (Act at
Section
5(b))
and to "grant . . . an adjusted standard for persons who can justify such an
adjustment" (Act at Section 28.1(a)) . More generally, the Board's responsibility in this matter
is based on the system of checks and balances integral to Illinois environmental governance :
the Board is charged with the rulemaking and principal adjudicatory functions, and the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) is responsible for carrying out the principal
administrative duties .
The Act also provides that 'the Agency shall participate in [adjusted standard]
proceedings" . (415 ILCS 28.l(d)(3) .) On February 15, 1996 the Agency filed a
recommendation that the instant requested adjusted standard be granted . The recommendation
was accompanied by a motion to file instanter_ The motion is hereby granted .
Based upon the record before it and upon review of the factors involved in the
consideration of adjusted standards, the Board finds that Cabot has demonstrated that grant of
an adjusted standard in the instant matter is warranted . The adjusted standard accordingly will
be granted subject to conditions set out by USEPA on a similar federal exemption.
EXHIBIT
B
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Cabot has previously been granted an exemption
from the general prohibition against
underground injection of lestucted waste
. That exemption was initially granted by USEPA in
1990 upon petition from Cabot with support of the Agency', and subsequently issued by the
Board in docket AS 92-82. The exemption.was then, as now, based on the "no-migration"
provisions found under both federal and Illinois law .
In late 1994 Cabot sought clarification of its federal UIC exemption from USEPA such
as to make explicit that certain leachate and purgee water could be disposed in the UIC wells
.
On November 4, 1994 USEPA,entered this clarification into Cabot's federal exemption .
(Petition Exh
. D.)
Cabot did not at that time request that the Board also introduce the
clarification into State law .
In August 1995 Cabot made a second request regarding . its federal exemption,
specifically requesting that the exemption allow disposal in a new UIC well, known as Well
#3. This request was proposed to be granted by USEPA by publication on November 28,
1995 at 60 Fed . Reg . 58623
et seq. In addition, a public notice, pursuant to 40 CFR 124 .10,
was published in the local papers on December 5, 1995, and a public hearing was tentatively
set for January 1996; USEPA subsequently canceled the hearing "due to lack of public interest
in the decision" (Supp
. Exh . at 3). The USEPA has now reissued the exemption 3, including
exemption for Well #3, with an
effective date of January 22, 1996.
Simultaneously with filing of its federal request regarding Well #3, Cabot filed the
instant matter with the Board
. The initial filing occurred on August 17, 1995 ; the petition was
filed under the old docket number, AS 92-8 . By order of September 7, 1995 the Board found
that Cabot's petition was sufficiently different from the adjusted standard granted in AS 92-8
to require opening a new docket_ The Board also found the petition insufficient and required
that Cabot submit additional material to meet the requirements of Section 106 .705 of the
Board's procedural rules . (35 111
. Adm . Code 106.705.)
Cabot filed an amended petition curing the insufficiency on October 19, 1995 . Among
the additions made to the peitition was requested language for the adjusted standard .
I
See 55 Fed . Reg . 49340 (November 27, 1990) and 56 Fed . Reg . 5826 (February 13, 1991) .
2
In
the Matter of- Petition of Cabot
Corporation
for an Adjusted
Standard from
35 Ill
Adm.
Code
. 738.SubpIi,B. AS 92-8, February 17, 1994 .
3 USEPA's Notice of Reissuance is in the record of this matter
as an attachment to Cabot's
filing of January 23, 1996, and is identified as Supplemental Exhibit cited as "Supp_ Exh.".
Cabot has waived hearing in this matter .
. No other person has requested a hearing, and
accordingly none has been held
.
Cabot has requested expedited consideration by the Board
. By order of January 18,
1996 the Board granted this request consistent with the Board resources and the need to
complete the record in
this matter.
NATURE OF THE
FACHIFY AND DISCHARGE
The facility at issue is located at Tuscola, Illinois
. Itt occupies approximately 100 acres
and is located three miles west of Tuscola on Route 36
. Cabot employs 184 people at the
facility which has been in operation since 1958 . The facility is an inorganic chemical
manufacturing plant which manufactures fumed silicon dioxide (or
fumed silica, SiO2)
marketed under the registered trademark of Cab-O-Sil®
. Silicon dioxide is used as an additive
in many products.
The production process involves the hydrolysis/oxidation of a chlorosilane feedstock to
produce SiO2
and hydrochloric acid (HCI) . (Pet. at
2 .)' The chlorosrlane feedstocks include
silicon tetrachloride (SiCI,), methyl trichlorosilane (CH
3SiCI2),
and trichlorosilane (HSiCI 2) .
(Id.)
The central reaction in the manufacturing process is
combination of silicon tetrachloride
with oxygen and hydrogen to produce both fumed silica and hydrogen chloride vapor
.
(USEPA Notice of Intent to Reissue Exemption, 60 FR 58623, 58624
.) Separation results in
fumed silica, product hydrochloric acid, and wastewaters contaminated with hydrochloric acid
;
the latter requires disposal
. Cabot usually injects this waste, along with rainwater runoff and
seepage into its UIC wells
. (60 FR 58624 .)
Other hazardous waste streams are also generated at the facility, of which many are
injected into its UIC wells . (Pet_ at 2
.) Those waste streams injected into the UICs include
acidic wastewater from air pollution control scrubbers, stack drains, fan drains, other
equipment drains and washdown (1)002)
; surface water drainage, seepage, leachate,
monitoring well purge water and groundwater (F039)
; spent acetone from the QC laboratory
(P003)
; and unsalable by-product HCl (D002) . (1d.)
The facility has three UIC wells which
have been issued UIC permits from the Agency
.
Wells #1 and #2 have been used pursuant to the existing federal/state exemption to inject
hazardous waste . UIC Well #3
. has not been used to inject hazardous waste
.
However, Cabot
intends to replace Well #1 with Well #3 once Well #3 is authorized
; at that time Cabot will
plug and abandon Well #1 . (Id.)
4
Cabot's August 17 petition will be cited as "Pet, at " ;
the Agency's recommendation will
be cited as "Agency at
UIC ADJUSTED STANDARD PROCEDURE
The Illinois Environmental Protection Act at Section 28 .1 (415 ILCS 5/28 .1 (1994))
provides that a
petitioner may request, and the Board may impose, an environmental standard
that is
different from the standard that would otherwise apply
to
the petitioner as the
consequence of the operation of
a rule of general applicability . Such a standard is called an
adjusted standard. The general procedures that govern an adjusted standard proceeding are
found at Section 28
.1 of the Act and within the Board's procedural rules at 35 Ill. Adm . Code
Part 106.
Cabot seeks an adjusted standard from the requirements set forth at 35111
. Adm . Code
Part 738, Subpart B which prohibit the underground injection of certain restricted hazardous
wastes . The procedures via which
an adjusted standard from the UIC prohibitions may be
sought, and the level of justification required for a petitioner to qualify for a UIC adjusted
standard, are set out at 35 Ill
. Adm . Code 738.Subpart C. 738 .Subpart C has the following
organization :
PART 738
HAZARDOUS WAS 1It INJECTION RESTRICTIONS
SUBPART C: PETITION STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES
Section
738.120
Petitions to Allow Injection of Prohibited Waste
738.121
Required Information to Support Petitions
738.122
Submission, Review and Approval or Denial of Petitions
738.123
Review of Adjusted Standards
738.124
Termination of Approved Petition
Each of the Part 738 sections is identical-in-substance with the federal UIC exemption
provisions, with the correspondence as follows :
Section 738.120(a) specifies:
Any person seeking an exemption from a prohibition under Subpart B for the
injection of a restricted hazardous waste into an injection well or wells shall submit
State Regulation
Federal Regulation
Section 738.120
40 CFR 148 .20 (1988)
Section 738 .121
40 CFR 148 .21 (1988)
Section 738 .122
40 CFR 148 .22 (1988)
Section 738 .123
40 CFR 148_23 (1988)
Section 738 .124
40 CFR 148 .24 (1988)
a petition for an adjusted standard to the Board, pursuant to 35 111 . Adm . Code
106.Subpart G, demonstrating that, to a reasonable degree of certainty, there will
be no migration of hazardous constituents from the injection zone for as long as the
waste remains hazardous .
The demonstration that must be made to gain the 'no-migration exemption' here
requested is found at Section 738 .120(a)(IXA) . A showing is required that
Fluid' movement conditions are such that the injected fluids will not migrate
within 10,000 years:
Vertically upward out of the injection zone ; or
laterally within the injection zone to a point of discharge or interface
with an Underground Source of Drinking Water (USDW) as defined in
35 Ill. Adm . Code 730
.
USEPA'S MODIFICATIONS OF EXEMPTION
Cabot's instant request is for two modifications of the existing State exemption . These
are (1) that there be explicit identification that multi-source leachate from Cabot's leachate
collection system or purged from on-site monitoring wells (purge water) is among the wastes
for which underground injection may occur, and (2) that Well #3 be explicitly identified as a
well within
which underground injection may occur. Both modifications have already been
granted by USEPA with respect to federal law .
The multi-source leachates at issue are classified as RCRA F039 wastes_
The original
USEPA exemption did specifically identify F039 waste as one of the wastes for which
exemption was granted ; so did the Board's February 1994 grant of adjusted standard .
However, the content of Cabot's specific multi-source leachates did not correspond fully with
the chemical constituents listed in the original federal exemption :
To rectify this situation, Cabot in August 1994 requested that USEPA modify the
exemption . Cabot supplied USEPA with the full additional list of constituents . (Petition Exh .
C .) On November 4, 1994 USEPA issued Cabot a modification of the exemption that added
the new constituents in question to the list of exempted wastes for Wells #1 and #2 . (Petition
Exh . D .) USEPA found that Cabot's original no-migration demonstration remained valid even
considering the disposal of the leachate and purge water
. (Id.; Pet . at 4 .)
Cabot's argument to USEPA regarding the use of Well
#3 was made on the same basis
as
the original grant of exemption for Wells #1 and #2 . That is, Cabot argued, and USEPA
agreed, that use of Well #3 presented a no-migration hazard . In awarding the exemption for
Well # 3, USEPA noted:
6
Asrequired by 40 CPR part 148 ; Cabothas demonstrated, to
a
reasonable
degree of certainty, that there will be
no
migration of hazardous constituents
from the injection zone for as long as the waste remains hazardous
. This final
decision allows the initiation of underground injection by Cabot of specific
restricted hazardous wastes, including hydrochloric acid and wastewaters
contaminated with hydrochloric acid which are hazardous becana
they are
corrosive (Waste Code D002), a multi-source leachate (Waste Code F039)
contaminated with small amounts of 1 .1-dichloroethylene, 1.2-dichlotoethylene,
methylene chloride, phenol, tetrachloroethylene, and trichloroethylene from a
closed waste storage impoundment, and low concentrations of residual, spent
acetone (Waste Code F003) rinsed from laboratory glassware cleaned with
solvent, into a Class I hazardous waste injection well, specifically identified as
Well No. 3, at the Tuscola facility. This reissuance also incorporates
conclusions based on geological data gathered during construction of that well
and contained in the petition for reissuance dated August 16, 1995, into the
Administrative Record of the decision to grant Cabot Corporation an exemption
from the Land Disposal Restrictions . This decision constitutes a final USEPA
action for which there is no administrative appeal
.
(Supp . Exh_ at 3 .)
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
In its granting the original UIC exemption to Cabot in AS 92-8, the Board placed
weight both on the quality of USEPA's technical review and on the need to keep Illinois'
identical-in-substance environmental programs in conformity with the corresponding federal
programs . The Board today again gives weight to both of these considerations.
As regards the technical merits of the Cabot's request, the Board observes that
awarding of any exemption for underground injection of wastes requires a substantial
demonstration on the part of an applicant . These are detailed in the Board's order in AS 92-8,
and will not be repeated in full here.
As regards the identical-in-substance nature of today's adjusted standard request, the
Board observes, as it did in AS 92-8, that because the Illinois UIC program is identical-in-
substance with the federal UIC program, it is intended to be no more (or less) stringent than
the federal program . (AS 92-8 at p
. 7 .) The Board today finds, also as it did in AS 92-8
(Id.),
that State denial of the exemption granted Cabot under federal law would cause a more
stringent State law to apply to Cabot.
In sum, the Board finds that Cabot has demonstrated that grant of an adjusted standard
is warranted. The Board has also reviewed the justification provided by Cabot to USEPA, and
finds that Cabot has made all the demonstrations required pursuant to the identical-in-substance
regulations at 35 Ill. Adm_ Code 738.Subpart
C.
The Board further finds that the conditions imposed by USEPA on the similar federal
exemption are necessary limitations on the grant of this adjusted standard
. Accordingly, the
adjusted standard will be granted subject too those conditions
. These include addition to the
Board's February 1994 grant of adjusted standard language that reflects the USEPA
modifications of November 4, 1994 regarding limits on F039 waste and of January 22, 1996
regarding use of Well #3
.
This opinion constitutes the Board's findings of fact and conclusions of law in this
matter.
ORDER
Cabot Corporation is hereby granted an adjusted standard from the requirements of 35
111 . Adm. Code 738, Subpart B, for the underground injection control Wells #1, #2, and #3 at
its Tuscola, Illinois, facility
. This adjusted standard constitutes an exemption from the
prohibitions of Subpart B such as to allow the underground injection disposal of wastes
classified as acidic water (D002), by-product hydrochloric (D002), spent acetone (F003) and
multi-source leachate (F039)
. This adjusted standard is subject to the following conditions
:
a)
b)
The monthly average injection rate must not exceed 400 gallons per minute
;
The concentrations of the constituents included in the injected leachate will not
exceed the following values
:
Acetone
47,000.00 mg/L
Tetrachloroethylene
1 .66 mg/L
Methylene chloride
59.0 mg/L
Trichloroethylene
1 .66 mg/L
1,2 Dichloroethylene
1,1 Dichloroethylene
.33 mg/L
2.33 mg/L
Phenol
12,000.00 mg/L
1,1 Dichloroethane
1,2 Dichloroethane
.33 mg/L
1.66 mg/L
Trans 1,2 Dichloroethane
33.33 mg/L
Cis 1,2 Dichloroethane
23.33 mg/L
1,1,1 Trichloroethane
66.66 mg/L
1,1,2 Trichloroethane
1 .66 mg/L
Vinyl Chloride
Chloroethane
.66 mg/L
3.33 mg/L
Chloroform
Ethylbeaaene
.33 mg/L
233 .33 mg/L
Xylene (Total)
3333 .33 mg/L
c
Direct injection shall occur only into the Franconia, Potosi, and Eminence
Dolomites and the Gunter Sandstone;
d)
The injection zone consists of the Franconia, Potosi, Eminence and Oneota
Dolomites and the Gunter Sandstone, found between 4,421 and 5,400 feet in
Cabot's Well #1,
between 4,442 and 5,400 feet in Cabot's Well 92, and
between 4,452 and 5,400 feet in Cabot's Well #3
; and
e)
Cabot must be in full compliance with all
conditions of its permits and other
conditions
738.124.
relating to the exemption found in 35 Ill
. Adm . Code 738
.123 and
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Section 41 of the Environmental Protection Act, 415 ILCS 5/41 (1994), provides for
appeal of final orders of the Board within 35 days
. The Rules of the Supreme Court of Illinois
establish
Reconsiderationfiling
requirements.)
. (See also 35 111. Adm . Code 101
.246, Motions for
the
1996,
above
by
I,
a
Dorothy
opinion
vote ofMand
.
7-0
Gunn,
order
Clerk
,
was
of
adopted
the Illinois
on thePollution
`r~'
Control
day ofBoard,
,
~
hereby
~-
~
c4
>
certify that
Dorothy M . unn, Clerk
Illinois Pol
on Control Board
8
Toluene
333.33 mg/L
1,1,1,2 Tetrachloroethane
.33 mg/L
1,1,2,2 Tettachloroethane
.33 mg/L
Cyanide (Total)
66.66
mg/L
Barium
666.66
mg/L
Cadmium
1 .66 mg/L
Chromium
33.33 mg/L
EXHIBIT C
See
Cabot Corporation's Motion for
Incorporation of Documents,
filed herewith
EXHIBIT D
See
Cabot Corporation's Motion for
Incorporation of Documents,
filed herewith
EXHIBIT E
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF :
)
AS 07-
PETITION OF CABOT CORPORATION
) (Adjusted Standard)
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
)
35 111 . Admin . Code Part 738, Subpart B
)
CERTIFICATION OF PETITION FOR REISSUANCE
OF ADJUSTED STANDARD
1, Carl Troike Facility General Manager
Name
Title
I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am
familiar with the information submitted in this Petition and all attached
documents, and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately
responsible for obtaining this information, I believe that submitted
information is true, accurate and complete . I am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment .
Signature
S-,~ 9- 0-
CHI 11200176 .1
Date
EXHIBIT
I F-
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD RECEIVED
CLERK'S OFFICE
MAY 2 9 2007
IN THE MATTER OF :
)
STATE OF ILLINOIS
AS 07-
Pollution Control Board
PETITION OF CABOT CORPORATION
)
(Adjuste Standard)
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
)
35 111
. Adm. Code Part 738, Subpart B
)
MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS ON CABOT CORPORATION'S PETITION FOR
REISSUANCE OF ADJUSTED STANDARD
Cabot Corporation ("Cabot"), through its attorneys, Seyfarth Shaw LLP, and pursuant to
35 Ill. Admin . Code §§ 101
.500 and 100
.514, moves to stay proceedings on its May 29, 2007
Petition for Reissuance of Adjusted Standard ("May 29, 2007 Petition")
. In support of this
motion, Cabot states
:
I .
Cabot filed the May 29, 2007 Petition seeking reissuance of its adjusted standard from
the Illinois state underground injection control
("UIC") regulations for Wells Nos
. 2 and 3 at its
Tuscola, Illinois facility ("Facility") .
2 .
The Board previously granted Cabot an adjusted standard from the Illinois state UIC
regulations on February 17, 1994 under Docket AS 92-8 (hereafter "Board's February 17, 1994
Order") .
3.
Subsequently, on March 7, 1996, the Board accepted Cabot's petition to modify and
reissue the adjusted standard under Docket AS 96-3 (hereafter "Board's March 7, 1996 Order)
.
4.
On March 8, 2006, Cabot filed its "2007 Petition for Renewal of Exemption from the
Land Disposal Restrictions" with U
.S . EPA ("U.S
. EPA Petition")
. The U .S. EPA Petition
constitutes Cabot's effort to obtain reissuance of the Facility's "no-migration exemption" from
the federal hazardous waste disposal injection regulations (set forth at 40 C
.F.R. Part 148)
Printed on Recycled Paper
CHI 11200203
.1
through December 31, 2027
.
5 . The U
.S. EPA Petition demonstrates that the continued injection of waste into Wells Nos
.
2 and 3 will be protective of human health and the environment for as long as the waste remains
hazardous
.
6.
The Illinois state UIC regulations are identical-in-substance to their federal counterparts
;
thus, the justification for reissuance under the state and federal UIC regulations is the same
.
7.
In AS 92-8, the Board determined that denying the proposed adjusted standard where
U.S . EPA had found that Cabot made all requisite demonstrations under the federal UIC
regulations "would cause a more stringent State law to apply to Cabot, in contradistinction to the
stringency principle
." (Board's February 17, 1994 Order at 7)
.
8 .
Likewise, in AS 96-3, the Board found that "the State denial of the exemption granted
Cabot under federal law would cause a more stringent law to apply to Cabot
." (Board's March
7, 1996 Order at 6)
.
9
.
Consequently, staying the Board's decision on the Petition until U
.S . EPA iakes action on
the U
.S . EPA Petition will assist the Board in making the appropriate determination and ensure
that the Board does not apply more stringent law to Cabot than is warranted under the
circumstances .
10.
The Board's consideration of Cabot's Petition is not a decision deadline proceeding
requiring waiver of any decision deadline
.
11 .
Based on its communication with U
.S . EPA representatives, Cabot expects that U.S
. EPA
will review the U
.S . EPA Petition and publish final notice of its determination in the Federal
Register no later than September 30, 2007
.
Printed on Recycled Paper
2
CHI 11200203 .1
WHEREFORE, Cabot Corporation respectfully requests that, with the exception of
proceedings related to Cabot's "Motion for Incorporation of Documents" and "Motion for Relief
from Filing Requirements," the Board stay all proceedings on the May 29, 2007 Petition
(including, but not limited to, the date by which the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
must file its recommendation pursuant to 35 111 . Admin. Code § 104 .416) until U .S. EPA reaches
a decision on Cabot's 2007 Petition for Renewal of Exemption from the Land Disposal
Restrictions .
DATED : May 29, 2007
Eric E. Boyd (6194309)
Geoffrey B . Tichenor (6284135)
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
131 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Tel . (312) 460-5000
Fax: (312) 460-7000
C111 11200203 .1
Respectfully submitted,
CABOT CORPORATION
By:
Printed on Recycled Paper
3
One of Its Attorneys
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
RECEIVED
CLERK'S OFFICE
MAY 2 9 2007
STATE OF ILLINOIS
IN THE MATTER OF :
)
Pollution Control Board
AS 07-
PETITION OF CABOT CORPORATION
)
(Adjusted Standard)
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
)
35 Ill . Adm
. Code Part 738, Subpart B
)
MOTION FOR INCORPORATION OF DOCUMENTS
The Petitioner, Cabot Corporation ("Cabot"), through its attorneys, Seyfarth Shaw
LLP, and pursuant to 35 Ill
. Admin
. Code § 101 .306(a), moves to have the Board
incorporate certain documents from a prior docket that are authentic, credible, and
relevant to this proceeding
. In support of this motion, Cabot states as follows
:
1 .
On April 12, 2007, Cabot filed a Petition for Reissuance of Adjusted Standard
("April 12, 2007 Petition") from 35 Ill
. Admin Code, Part 738, Subpart B for
underground injection control ("UIC")
Wells Nos
. 2 and 3 at its Tuscola, Illinois facility
("Facility")
. The Board assigned the April 12, 2007 Petition to docket AS 07-05
.
2.
On April 27, 2007, Cabot filed an "Unopposed Motion to File Certificate of
Publication" ("Motion") seeking leave to file the Certificate of Publication of its April 12,
2007 Petition in The Tuscola Review, a weekly newspaper, as required by 35 Ill
. Admin .
Code § 140.408(a)
.
3 .
In an order dated May 17, 2007, the Board observed that Cabot failed to publish
notice of the April 12, 2007 Petition within fourteen days of its filing
. Consequently, as
the fourteen-day publication requirement is jurisdictional, the Board denied Cabot's
Motion, dismissed the April 12, 2007 Petition, and closed docket number AS 07-05
.
4 .
Through its May 17, 2007 order, the Board invited Cabot to "refile the petition,
Printed on Recycled Paper
C111 11235293 . 1
publish notice of filing, and provide documentation certifying that notice of filing was
published within 14 days of the petition's filing date ."
5 .
Cabot refiled its Petition for Reissuance of Adjusted Standard today, Tuesday,
May 29, 2007 ("May 29, 2007 Petition") .
6.
Any person may request that the Board incorporate into a proceeding materials
from the record of another Board docket provided such materials are "authentic, credible,
and relevant to the proceeding ." 35 111 . Admin. Code § 101 .306(a) .
7.
In support of its May 29, 2007 Petition, Cabot wishes to rely solely upon the
document entitled "2007 Petition for Renewal of Exemption from the Land Disposal
Restrictions" it filed with U .S. EPA (the "U.S. EPA Petition") on March 8, 2006 and the
Quality Assurance Quality Control Plan ("Plan") it filed with the U .S. EPA Petition .
8.
Cabot previously submitted one copy of the U .S . EPA Petition and the Plan to the
Board as Exhibit C and Exhibit D to its April 12, 2007 Petition .
9.
The U.S . EPA Petition and Plan are authentic, credible and relevant to the May
29, 2007 Petition .
10 .
Accordingly, Cabot requests that the Board incorporate Exhibit C and Exhibit D
from Cabot's April 12, 2007 Petition in docket AS 07-05 as Exhibit C and Exhibit D to
Cabot's May 29, 2007 Petition.
CHI 11235293 .1
Printed on Recycled Paper
WHEREFORE, Cabot Corporation respectfully requests that the Board
incorporate ExhibitC and Exhibit D
from Cabot's April 12, 2007 Petition in docket AS
07-05 as
ExhibitC
and ExhibitD to Cabot's May 29, 2007 Petition.
DATED : May 29, 2007
Respectfully submitted,
CABOT CORPORATION
Eric E. Boyd (6194309)
Geoffrey B
. Tichenor (6284135)
SFYFARTH SHAW LLP
131 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Tel. (312) 460-5000
Fax : (312) 460-7000
C111 11235293 . 1
By:
C
One of
0
Its Attorneys
C,
Printed on Recycled Paper
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
RECEIVED
CLERK'S
OFFICE
MAY 2 9 2007
IN THE MATTER OF :
)
AS 07-
STATE OF
ILLINOIS
PETITION OF CABOT CORPORATION
) (Adjusted Standard)
Pollution Control Board
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM )
35 111 . Adm . Code Part 738, Subpart B
)
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM FILING REQUIREMENTS
Cabot Corporation ("Cabot"), through its attorneys, Seyfarth Shaw LLP, and
pursuant to 35 Ill . Admin. Code § 101
.500, moves for relief from the filing requirements
of 35 111 . Admin Code § 101 .302(h). In support of this motion, Cabot states as follows
:
I .
On May 29, 2007, Cabot filed a Petition for Reissuance of Adjusted Standard
("May 29, 2007 Petition") from 35 III
. Admin Code, Part 738, Subpart B for underground
injection control ("UIC") Wells Nos. 2 and 3 at its Tuscola, Illinois facility ("Facility") .
2.
The Board previously granted Cabot an adjusted standard from the requirements
of 35 III. Admin Code Part 738, Subpart B on February 17, 1994 under Docket AS 92-8
.
3 .
Subsequently, on March 7, 1996, the Board accepted Cabot's petition to modify
and reissue the adjusted standard under Docket AS 96-3 .
4.
In support of its Petition, Cabot wishes to rely solely upon the document entitled
"2007 Petition for Renewal of Exemption from the Land Disposal Restrictions" it filed
with U
.S. EPA (the "U.S
. EPA Petition") on March 8, 2006 and the Quality Assurance
Quality Control Plan ("Plan") it filed with the U .S . EPA Petition . The U .S
. EPA Petition
seeks to extend the Facility's no-migration exemption from the federal hazardous waste
disposal injection regulations (set forth at 40 C
.F.R. Part 148) until December 31, 2027
.
5 .
Through the U .S
. EPA Petition, Cabot demonstrates that continued injection of
Printed on Recycled Paper
C111 11200141 .2
waste into Wells Nos . 2 and 3 will be protective of human health and the environment for
as long as the waste remains hazardous
.
6.
The U .S . EPA Petition and the Plan, however, are voluminous and consist of five
binders of information, much of which includes over-sized documents and color
illustrations
.
7.
In AS 92-8 and AS 96-3, the Board granted Cabot leave to file one copy of the
petition Cabot filed with U .S. EPA. See Board's August 13, 1992 Order in AS 92-8
(attached as ExhibitA) and Board's November 2, 1995 Order in AS 96-3 (attached
Exhibit B) .
8 .
Cabot previously submitted one copy of the U .S . EPA Petition and the Plan to the
Board as Exhibit C and
Exhibit D to its April 12, 2007 Petition for Reissuance of
Adjusted Standard (docket AS 07-05) ("April 12, 2007 Petition") .
9.
In support of its April 12, 2007 Petition, Cabot also provided one copy of the U .S.
EPA Petition and the Plan to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("Agency"),
in accordance with 35 111 . Admin
. Code § 104 .402.
10.
Cabot has separately filed a "Motion for the Incorporation of Documents"
requesting that the Board incorporate ExhibitC and Exhibit D from its April 12, 2007
Petition in docket AS 07-05 as ExhibitC and Exhibit D to its May 29, 2007 Petition .
11 .
Presuming that the Board agrees to incorporate ExhibitC and Exhibit D
as
requested, Cabot hereby seeks relief from the Board's requirements (1) that all filings
include a signed original and nine duplicate copies (35 Ill . Admin. Code § 101
.302(h)) ;
and (2) that the petition for an adjusted standard proceeding be served upon the Agency
(35 Ill. Admin. Code § 104
.402) .
Printed on Recycled Paper
C111 112001412
WHEREFORE, Cabot Corporation respectfully requests that the Board :
(1) grant it relief from the requirement to file nine (9) duplicate copies of the U .S .
EPA Petition and the Plan, which were previously submitted to the Board with
Cabot's April 12, 2007 Petition ; and
(2) grant it relief from serving another copy of the U .S . EPA Petition and the Plan
upon the Agency .
DATED: May 29, 2007
Respectfully submitted,
CABOT CORPORATION
Eric E. Boyd (6194309)
Geoffrey B . Tichenor (6284135)
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
131 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Tel . (312) 460-5000
Fax : (312) 460-7000
CHI 11200141 .2
By
: C
One
of Its Attorneys
I
Printed on Recycled Paper
EXHIBIT A
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
August 13, 1992
IN THE MATTER OF :
)
PETITION OF CABOT
)
AS 92-8
'CORPORATION FOR. AN ADJUSTED )
STANDARD
FROM 35 ILL . ADM .
(Adjusted Standard)
)
CODE
738 .SUBPART B
(Also see R92-16)
)
ORDER OF THE BOARD (by j . Anderson) :
On August-3, 1992, Cabot Corporation (Cabot), requested a
Adm.
site-specific
federal
injection
Code
UIC
738control
rules.Subpart
"no
.
(UIC)
migration
Cabot
B
.
land
USEPA
asks
exemption"
disposal
that
has granted
the
prohibitions
from
Board
an
the
either
exemption
undergroundin
grant35from
Ill-
a
the
State exemption by way of adopting a site-specific identical in
alternatively,
substance rule pursuant
by granting
to Section
an adjusted
13(c)
standard
Of the Act,
pursuantor, .to
Section 28 .1 of the Act . The Board initially docketed the
order,
petition
this same
this
as
daymatter
a
.
regulatory
For
will
the reasons
proceed
petition,
set
as an
R92-16,
forth
adjusted
in
which
that
standardwas
dismissaldismissed
.
40 CFR 148 and 35 Iii . Adm . Code 738 prohibit the disposal
establishesof
certain hazardous
-a procedure
waste
for
in
obtaining
UIC wellsa .
"no
40
migration
CFR 148 .20
exemption"et
seq .
from
in substance
the prohibition
rules in
on
R89-2injection
. 35 Ill
. The
. AdmBoard
. Code
adopted
738.120
identicalet
seq .
provides for the use of "adjusted standards" pursuant to Section
28
.1 of the Act for granting "exemptions" at the State level .
This matter concerns two UIC wells owned by Cab-O-Sil
Division,
County . These
Cabot
are
Corporation,
described as
located
Wells
at
NoTuscola,
. 1 and 2in
.
Douglas
34739,
USEPA
August
proposed
24, 1990exemptions
. USEPA published
for these
a
wells
notice
at
of
55
exemptionFed
. Reg .
Well
for Well
No .
No1
at
. 2
56
at
Fed55 .
FedReg.
.
Reg5826,
. 49340,
February
November
13, 199127, .
1990, and for
The Board accepts the petition as an adjusted standard
petition, but asks for more information . Will Cabot clarify the
USEPA
least
exemption
three respects?
language,
First,
which
although
appears
the
to
discussion
be ambiguous
in
in
theat
USEPA
which may
notice
be injected
of proposed
pursuant
exemption
to the
identifies
exemptions,
the wastestreamsthe
exemptions
themselves are not specific . Second, although the USEPA
exemptions are conditioned on concentrations found in "Table 8-6
the
in the
material
petition
before
document",
the Boardthat . Third,
Table is
the
not
exemption
reproduced
for
in
Well
any
Noof.
0135-0403
EXHIBIT
A
done
testing
1 is
in
specifically
1991,
been done?subject
conditioned
to approval
on testing
by USEPA,
which
Region
was to
V .
have
Has
beenthis
Admshould
voluminous
nearly
.
In
Code
specifically
identical
addition,
106petition
.Subpart
to
the
address
the
filed
petition
G
USEPA
and
with
the
738petition
generally
USEPA.Subpart
information
. The
contentsB,
references
amended
the
requested
latter
. The
petitionthein
petitionerof
35
which
111is
.
which
is
the
granted
appropriate
needs
leave
to be
portions
to
filed
give
with
summary
of the
the
USEPA
Clerkresponses,
petition,
.
with
only
references
one copy
toof
Within 45 days after the date of this order, Cabot is
directed
curing
accompanied
to dismissalthe
to
above
file
by
. We
the
an
deficiencies,
note
filing
amended
that
feethe
petition
.
or
amended
this
for
petition
petition
adjusted
will
must
standard,be
besubject
IT IS SO ORDERED .
Boar/
.'-dayI,
,
hereby
Dorothy
of
certif
M . Gunn,
that
Clerk
the above
of the
order
Illinois
was adopted
Pollution
on
Controlthe
,'1/
, 1992, by a vote of 7 - ,O
2
Dorothy M . ; qunn, Clerk
Illinois Pf1lution
Control Board
Of35-0404
EXHIBIT B
.ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
November 2, 1995
IN THE MATTER OF
:
)
CABOT CORPORATION PETITION
)
AS 96-3
FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM
)
(Adjusted Standard - UIC)
35 ILL . ADM . CODE 738 .SUBPART B
)
ORDER OF THE BOARD (by
R.C
. Flemal) :
Filing
This
Requirements
matter is before
of 35 Illthe .
Board
Adm . Code
on a
106Motion
.708
for
and 101Relief
.106,From
filed by Cabot Corporation (Cabot) on October 19, 1995 . Cabot
desires to incorporate into the instant record materials from an
earlier docket, AS 92-8 . Pursuant to the Board's procedural
rules
to file
at
four
35 111copies
. Admof . Code
such
106materials.708 and
.
101
.106, Cabot is required
Cabot
The
intends
only
to
document
rely is
from
a document
the AS 92-8
submitted
proceeding
to the
upon
Unitedwhich
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) requesting an
to
consists
exemption
file one
of
from
copy
four
the
in
binders
land
the
disposal
AS
of
92-8
informationproceeding_prohibition
. Cabot
. This
was
documentonly
required
Board
In
will
light
waive
of
it's
the length
requirement
of the
that
document
Cabot
in
file
question,
four copiesthe .
However,
of the USEPA
the Board
petitiondoes
.
require Cabot to file at least one copy
for Stay
The Board
until
will
the petition
not rule
is
on
completeCabot's .
August 17, 1995 Motion
IT IS SO ORDERED
.
Board,
9-''tdayI,
hereby
Dorothy
of certify
M . Gunn,
that
Clerk
the above
of
1995,
theIllinois
order
by a
was
vote
Pollution
adopted
of
7`0
on
Controlthe
.
EXHIBIT
B
