ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

PROCEDURAL HISTORY
1. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL: GENERAL PROVISIONS
  1. Section
SUBPART C: PUTRESCIBLE AND CHEMICAL WASTE LANDFILLS

October 4, 2007

IN THE MATTER OF:

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SOLID

WASTE LANDFILL RULES, 35 ILL. ADM.

Proposed Rule. Second Notice.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by A.S. Moore):

Today the Board adopts for second notice a proposal amending its solid waste disposal

regulations and standards for new solid waste landfills.

See

35 Ill. Adm. Code 810, 811. On

July 27, 2006, the Illinois Chapter of the National Solid Wastes Management Association

(NSWMA) initiated this rulemaking by filing with the Board a proposal having the support and

concurrence of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency). The proposal intended

primarily to update the Board’s regulations in order to reflect practical experience gained

through the implementation of those rules and the expanded technical and scientific knowledge

achieved since the Board first adopted these standards in 1990.

See

Development, Operating,

and Reporting Requirements for Non-Hazardous Waste Landfills, R 88-7 (Aug. 17, 1990).

On July 12, 2007, the Board adopted its first-notice opinion and order in this proceeding.

See

31 Ill. Reg. 11107, 11112 (Aug. 3, 2007);

see also

31 Ill. Reg. 13373 (Sept. 21, 2007) (notice

of correction). Substantively, the Board adopted NSWMA’s proposed amendments, including

changes reflected in three

errata

sheets and in a joint post-hearing comment filed by the Agency

and NSWMA. This rule proposed for second notice is substantively unchanged from that first-

notice opinion and order.

In this opinion, the Board first provides the procedural history of this rulemaking. Next,

the Board summarizes its second-notice proposal. The order following this opinion then sets

forth the proposed amendments for second notice.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On July 27, 2006, NSWMA submitted a “Proposal to Amend Certain Pollution Control

Board Regulations Related to Solid Waste Management Facilities” (Prop.). In an order dated

August 17, 2006, the Board accepted the proposal for hearing but directed NSWMA to address

two identified information deficiencies in writing before any scheduled hearing.

In a letter dated November 21, 2006, the Board requested that the Department of

Commerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO) conduct an economic impact study of this

rulemaking proposal.

See

415 ILCS 5/27(b) (2006). On December 8, 2006, the Board received a

response from DCEO stating that, based upon its review of the request and in light of its

continued financial constraints, DCEO had determined not to conduct a study of the economic

impact of the proposal.

On January 16, 2007, NSWMA filed the pre-filed testimony of Thomas A. Hilbert

(Hilbert Test.) and the pre-filed testimony of Terry R. Johnson (Johnson Test.). Also on January

16, 2007, NSWMA filed supplemental information in response to the Board’s August 17, 2006

order and its first

errata

sheet (Errata 1). On January 26, 2007, NSWMA filed its second

errata

sheet (Errata 2). The first hearing in this proceeding took place in Chicago on January 29, 2007

(Tr.1). Four exhibits (Exh. 1-4) were admitted into the record at the first hearing.

On February 14, 2007, the Agency filed the pre-filed testimony of Gwenyth Thompson

(Thompson Test.) and the pre-filed testimony of Christian J. Liebman (Liebman Test.). On

February 15, 2007, NSWMA filed the pre-filed testimony of Thomas A. Hilbert regarding the

economic impact of the proposed amendments (Hilbert Test. 2). On the same date, NSWMA

also filed its third

errata

sheet (Errata 3). The second hearing in this proceeding took place in

Springfield on February 28, 2007 (Tr.2). Four exhibits (Exh. 5-8) were admitted into the record

at the second hearing.

On March 21, 2007, NSWMA filed a comment made jointly with the Agency (PC 1). On

March 23, 2007, the Board received a public comment filed by Kathy Andria on behalf of the

American Bottom Conservancy and the Illinois Sierra Club (PC 2). Also on March 23, 2007, the

Board received a public comment filed by Joyce Blumenshine on behalf of the Heart of Illinois

Group of the Sierra Club (PC 3).

On July 12, 2007, the Board adopted its first-notice opinion and order in this proceeding.

See

31 Ill. Reg. 11107, 11112 (Aug. 3, 2007);

see also

31 Ill. Reg. 13373 (Sept. 21, 2007) (notice

of correction).

On August 7, 2007, the Board received a public comment from William R. Schubert,

Director of Disposal Operations for Waste Management (PC 4). On August 20, 2007, the Board

received public comments from Chris Peters, General Manager of Veolia Environmental

Services’ Orchard Hills Landfill (PC 5); Todd Watermolen, Vice President of Engineering and

Compliance, and Anndelee J. Gregg, Project Hydrogeologist, of Veolia Environmental Services

(PC 6); and James Lewis, General Manager of Veolia Environmental Services’ Zion Landfill

(PC 7). On August 29, 2007, the Board received a public comment from Ron Sendmeyer,

General Manager of Veolia Environmental Services’ Sumner Lnadfill (PC 8). On September 6,

2007, the Board received a public comment from the Agency (PC 9).

DISCUSSION OF SECOND-NOTICE PROPOSAL

Substantive Amendments

This opinion and order proposes substantive changes to the Board’s nonhazardous solid

waste landfill rules. Those proposed changes pertain to issues including leachate monitoring,

hydrogeologic site investigation, groundwater monitoring systems, and groundwater quality

standards. The Board below briefly addresses each of the substantive changes proposed for

second notice.

Leachate Monitoring (Proposed Amendments 4 through 9)

The Board proposes several amendments to the leachate monitoring requirements

applicable to chemical and putrescible waste landfills under Section 811.309. In his testimony,

Christian Liebman of the Agency stated that “[l]eachate monitoring can help determine the

degree to which a landfill poses a threat to the groundwater by ascertaining what types of

contaminants are leaching out of the wastes that have been disposed in the landfill and in what

concentrations.” Liebman Test. at 1. The proposed amendments address leachate monitoring

parameters, monitoring locations, and monitoring frequency.

Leachate Monitoring Parameters (Sections 811.309(g)(1), (g)(2)(G) and (g)(3)(D)).

The proposal requires monitoring leachate from units that dispose of putrescible or chemical

wastes for 202 constituents likely to be found in that leachate. Prop. at 4. This amendment

replaces the current provision that requires leachate monitoring parameters to be chosen on the

basis of a performance standard specified under Section 811.319(a)(2)(B).

Liebman testified that it has been the Agency’s practice since it began permitting landfills

under Parts 810-814 in the early 1990s to require monitoring of leachate for all parameters for

which groundwater must be monitored and in addition for all other parameters that may be found

in the leachate. Liebman Test. at 2;

see

35 Ill. Adm. Code 810-814. Liebman stated that, while

the Agency has required this monitoring by permit, the proposal would codify this practice in the

Board’s rules. Liebman Test. at 2; Tr.1 at 28, 35, 36. The proposal adds to the Board’s rules a

list of 202 constituents for which leachate samples must be tested. Prop. at 3.

NSWMA stated that the Agency derived the list “from its ‘Attachment 1’ to Appendix C

‘Instructions for the Groundwater Protection Evaluation for Putrescible and Chemical Waste

Landfills’ 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.’” Prop. at 4. Mr. Terry Johnson of Waste Management testified that, on the basis of

monitoring leachate in Illinois and similar lists from other states, the proposed list is

“comprehensive.” Tr.1 at 26. The list reflects a review of literature dating back to the early

1990s and is broad enough to include constituents that may be found in municipal solid waste,

industrial waste, and chemical waste landfills.

. at 29-30, 35. Ms. Gwenyth Thompson of the

Agency testified that the proposed list is also based on federal groundwater monitoring

requirements for municipal solid waste landfills.

. at 32, citing 40 C.F.R. 141.40, 40 C.F.R.

258, Appendix 1.

The Board proposes changes to Sections 811.309(g)(2)(G) and (g)(3)(D) that replace the

performance standard with the requirement to monitor for the list of 202 constituents. While

Section 811.309(g)(2)(G) addresses leachate from units accepting putrescible waste, Section

811.309(g)(3)(D) pertains to leachate from only chemical waste units. The Board proposes the

addition of the list of 202 leachate constituents in an Appendix C to Part 811.

In addition, NSWMA states that, at the suggestion of the Agency and with its

concurrence, it proposes to allow the Agency “to require by permit

less

leachate sampling than

might otherwise be required in the regulations as long as compliance with other regulatory

provisions is ensured.” Prop. at 3 (emphasis in original). NSWMA notes that existing rules

provide the Agency authority to require additional testing as necessary to ensure compliance

with Board rules.

see

35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.309(g)(1). NSWMA states that “[t]his

amendment is designed merely to allow the Illinois EPA flexibility to accommodate individual

site conditions.” Prop. at 3. In his testimony, Liebman stated that some landfills on a case-by-

case basis may be able to demonstrate that leachate sampling and testing may not be necessary or

appropriate at their specific site. Tr.1 at 37. In those case, he testified, “we thought we should

have the ability to eliminate those unnecessary parameters.”

The Board finds that proposed changes to the leachate monitoring requirements provide

more specificity to the rules and codify the Agency’s permitting practice under the existing

performance standard. The Board finds the list of 202 constituents developed by the Agency to

be representative of the constituents likely to be found in chemical and putrescible waste landfill

leachate. The Board adopts the proposed changes to Section 811.309(g), and the list of

constituents at Section 811.Appendix C for second notice.

Leachate Monitoring Locations (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.309(g)(4)).

In his testimony,

Christian Liebman of the Agency stated that, “[w]ithin a landfill, leachate quality can vary from

one area to another.” Liebman Test. at 2. Liebman attributed this variation to causes such as

differences in the age of wastes, differences in types of waste disposed, and differences in the

volume of water percolating through the waste.

. at 2-3. Liebman further testified that, if a

leachate monitoring program cannot detect this variability, it “may underestimate the strength of

the leachate from some areas of the landfill. Also, in some cases, constituents contained in the

leachate produced in one area of the landfill may not be detected at all due to dilution by leachate

from other areas.”

. at 3.

The proposal adds a new subsection at Section 811.309(g)(4), which requires a minimum

number of leachate monitoring locations. Prop. at 4. Specifically, the proposal requires “a

minimum number of four leachate monitoring locations and at least one for every 25 acres within

a landfill unit’s waste boundary unless the operator demonstrates, through the permitting process,

that fewer leachate monitoring locations are needed.”

. Liebman stated that this proposal will

ensure either that the landfill can detect leachate variability or that its operator has satisfactorily

demonstrated that circumstances at the site require fewer monitoring locations. Liebman Test. at

see also

Prop. at 4-5.

The Board finds that the proposed provision to require the establishment of a leachate

monitoring network with at least four locations will help in characterizing the leachate produced

by a landfill unit by giving consideration to variation in leachate quality. Furthermore, the Board

believes that the proposed provision allows the Agency flexibility to approve an alternate

monitoring network. Accordingly, the Board adopts the proposed changes for second notice.

Frequency of Leachate Monitoring (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.309(g)(5)).

The Board’s

regulations now require quarterly leachate monitoring at least for the first two years of operation,

followed by semi-annual monitoring. Prop. at 5; 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.309(g)(1). The proposal

adds a new subsection requiring semi-annual leachate monitoring. Prop. at 5. The proposal also

requires sampling from each monitoring location at least once every two years. Liebman Test. at

NSWMA argued that the two years of quarterly monitoring occur at “an early stage in

landfill development and yielded data not necessarily representative of long-term conditions in

the landfill.” Prop. at 5;

see

Tr. at 52, 59. NSWMA further argues that the proposed “[d]ata

collection on a semi-annual basis is sufficient to characterize leachate quality levels.” Prop. at 5.

Liebman concurs that “[t]he proposed frequency is sufficient to adequately characterize

leachate.” Liebman Test. at 4. Liebman also testified that the proposal would treat landfills with

varying numbers of monitoring points more equally. “For example, under the current

regulations, a landfill with four leachate monitoring points must perform four times as much

leachate sampling as a landfill with one point. Under the proposed amendments, two such

landfills would do the same amount of leachate sampling.”

. Mr. Eric Ballenger of Allied

Waste testified that the proposal would not change the frequency of the separate required

groundwater monitoring, which relies on perimeter wells to determine whether there has been a

release from the landfill. Tr.1 at 51. Elaborating on this point, Mr. Tom Hilbert of William

Charles Waste Companies testified that leachate monitoring evaluates what is contained within a

contained landfill system “and not what is potentially in the environment.”

. at 58.

In his testimony, Hilbert also addressed the economic impact of this proposed

amendment. Hilbert testified that, for each facility, “[t]he current estimated annual cost for

leachate monitoring is $7,200.” Hilbert Test. 2 at 3; Tr.2 at 11. If adopted, the proposed

amendment would decrease leachate monitoring costs by $4,700 for each of the 51 active

municipal solid waste landfills in the state and by approximately $240,000 industry-wide. Tr.2

at 12. Hilbert notes that his analysis does not address the economic impact of the proposal either

upon the Agency or local regulatory authorities. Hilbert Test. 2 at 1.

The Board finds that a semi-annual leachate sampling frequency from the beginning of

waste operation at a landfill unit is adequate for characterizing the leachate. The Board agrees

with the proponent and the Agency that the initial quarterly monitoring frequency may not be

representative of long-term landfill conditions. Further, the Board finds that requiring leachate

monitoring at more than one location accounts for any variability in leachate quality. In light of

this, the Board adopts the proposed changes to the leachate sampling frequency at Section

811.309(g)(5) for second notice.

Update References to Groundwater Standard (Proposed Amendment 10) (35 Ill. Adm.

Code 811.315(e)(1)(G)(i))

At first notice, the Board proposed “to replace the reference to ‘public or food processing

water supply standard at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302’ with a reference to the groundwater standards

found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.” Prop. at 5-6. NSWMA claimed that the original landfill rules

included this reference to the public or food processing water supply standards.

. at 6;

see

Development, Operating, and Reporting Requirements for Non-Hazardous Waste Landfills, R

88-7, slip op. at 54 (Aug. 17, 1990). NSWMA argued that, with the subsequent adoption of

groundwater standards (

see

Groundwater Quality Standards (35 Ill. Adm. Code 620), R 89-14(B)

(Nov. 7, 1991)), the public or food processing water supply standards appear no longer to apply

to groundwater. Prop. at 6, citing 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.130 (exemption);

see also

Thompson

Test. at 2. NSWMA further argued that “groundwater at landfills is now regulated under a more

inclusive list of constituents found in the [Part] 620 regulations.” Prop. at 6;

see

35 Ill. Adm.

Code 620.Subpart D.

Elaborating on this issue, Ms. Thompson testified that this proposed amendment

incorporates a list of parameters from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620, “not the

standards

associated with

those parameters.” Thompson Test. at 1-2 (emphasis in original). Ms. Thompson further

testified that “[l]andfills subject to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811

have their own standards

.”

. at 2

(emphasis in original). Ms. Thompson stated that the Agency has not and will not apply the

public or food processing water supply standards to landfills and that the Agency does not apply

groundwater quality standards to landfills.

Ms. Thompson compared the parameters listed in the public or food processing water

supply standards at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302 with the parameters listed in the groundwater

standards at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620. Ms. Thompson testified that “there are 11 more inorganic

parameters and standards in [Part] 620 than there are in [Part] 302. In addition, there are 40

more organic parameters and standards in [Part] 620 than there are in [Part] 302.” Thompson

Test. at 2. On the basis of this comparison, Ms. Thompson stated that, “by virtue of having more

parameters, [Part] 620 is more comprehensive for these rules than [Part] 302.”

Ms. Thompson also compared the standards for the 22 parameters that are listed at both

Part 302 and Part 620. For 13 of those parameters, the standards in Part 620 were either as

conservative or more protective than the standards in Part 302. Thompson Test. at 2. With

regard to remaining nine parameters, Ms. Thompson restated her previous testimony that the

Class I groundwater standards “have been developed specifically to protect human health and the

environment in potable water supplies.”

see

35 Ill Adm. Code 620.410. However, Ms.

Thompson stated that these standards are moot with regard to this proposed regulation because it

would only use the list of parameters in Part 620 and not the water quality standards provided

there. Thompson Test. at 2-3.

Ms. Thompson testified that landfills regulated under 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 811 are

subject to the Applicable Groundwater Quality Standard (AGQS). Thompson Test. at 3. Ms.

Thompson defined the AGQS as the ambient concentration determined by a statistical analysis of

the existing groundwater quality. She further stated that the AGQS applies “at the edge of the

zone of attenuation or compliance boundary (100 feet from the edge of the waste or the property

boundary, if closer).”

. Ms. Thompson clarified that, if natural background concentrations are

lower that those allowed by any standard, then the landfill must meet the lower concentration.

Ms .Thompson elaborated that, “within the zone of attenuation (the area between the

waste and the 100-foot compliance boundary), Class IV groundwater applies.” Thompson Test.

at 3, citing 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.240(a) (referring to Parts 811 and 814). The Class IV

groundwater quality standards allow for Maximum Allowable Predicted Concentrations

(MAPC), which operators are required to develop “using a contaminant transport model as an

early warning mechanism.” Thompson Test. at 3. Ms. Thompson testified that “MAPCs apply

at wells located midway between the waste boundary and compliance boundary. If an MAPC is

exceeded 50 feet from the waste boundary, the AGQS may potentially be exceeded at the

compliance boundary.”

Id.

at 3-4. This exceedence would then trigger an assessment designed

to prevent an exceedence of the AGQS at the compliance boundary.

. at 4. Ms. Thompson

further testified that, “outside the landfill zone of attenuation, the applicable groundwater quality

standard is the standard as defined by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.”

The Board replaces the reference to ‘public or food processing water supply standard at

35 Ill. Adm. Code 302’ with a reference to the groundwater standards found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code

620 at Section 811.315(e)(1)(G)(i) for second notice. The Board notes that this amendment

replaces the list of constituents under public or food processing water supply standards with a

more comprehensive list of constituents under the Board’s groundwater standards. The Board

believes that it is appropriate to use the constituents from groundwater standards, since the list of

constituents in Section 811.315(e)(1)(G) is intended to characterize the groundwater under a

landfill unit.

Groundwater Monitoring System (Proposed Amendments 12 and 16) (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.318(e)(6), (e)(7)

The Board proposes changes to the groundwater monitoring system requirements

concerning the measurement of well depth. Specifically, the Board proposes to delete the

requirement with regard to measuring the depth of wells at Section 811.318(e)(6)(B) and to

replace it with a new subsection (e)(7). Prop. at 6. This new subsection requires an operator to

measure the depth of groundwater monitoring wells that do not contain dedicated pumps on an

annual basis. Prop. at 7. The proposed new subsection also requires that, at groundwater

monitoring wells containing dedicated pumps, the operator must measure the depth of the well

every five years or when the pump is serviced.

Mr. Johnson stated that “the purpose of this well-depth measurement was to measure

whether or not there’s been siltation occurring at the monitoring wells.” Tr.1 at 68. Johnson

further testified that monitoring procedures used when the Board adopted the original regulations

often used a bailer, which introduced turbidity into the well.

. Johnson further testified that

these procedures risked cross-contamination.

. at 66-69. NSWMA argued that dedicated

pumps have since become the industry standard. Prop. at 7. Johnson testified that these

dedicated sampling pumps are made of Teflon and are certified to be free of organics and other

contaminants. Tr.1 at 68-89. Johnson further stated that these pumps are enclosed within a steel

or PVC well.

. at 70. NSWMA argued that “a significant amount of scientific literature has

commented on the superior qualities of dedicated pumps used in groundwater wells.”

Johnson stated, however, that regularly removing these dedicated pumps for well depth

measurements negates these qualities.

See

Johnson Test. at 7.

In his testimony, Hilbert addressed the economic impact of this proposed amendment.

Hilbert testified that, for wells with dedicated pumps, eliminating the requirement to measure

well depth at each sampling event will reduce the labor involved in collecting samples at each

well. Hilbert Test.2 at 4. Hilbert stated, however, that “[i]t is not a tangible cost that can be

easily quantified.”

. Hilbert further stated that it also difficult to measure the benefit of the

reduced risk of cross-contamination in dedicated pumps.

. Although Hilbert acknowledged

that dedicated pumps are more expensive to install and maintain, NSWMA believes that this

proposed amendment provides “ a modest positive economic effect by reducing the frequency of

total well depth measurements.”

The Board finds that the proposed revisions to measurement of well depth reflect the

advancement of sampling technology since the adoption of the landfill regulations. As noted by

NSWMA, the use of dedicated pumps has become the industry standard. The Board agrees that

requiring the pumps to be removed to measure the well depth at every sampling event negates

their intended purpose. The Board adopts the proposed amendments to Section 811.318(e)(6)

and (e)(7) for second notice.

Groundwater Monitoring (Proposed Amendments 18-20, 22-28)

The Board proposes several changes to the groundwater monitoring requirements, These

proposed changes are addressed by proposed amendments 18-20 and 22-28, which are discussed

below.

Criteria for Monitoring Constituents (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(a)(2)(A)(ii)).

The

Board proposes to delete the reference to a list of constituents for which the Board has adopted a

public or food processing water supply standard or a groundwater standard at subsection

(a)(2)(A)(ii) and to replace it with a minimum list of 14 specific indicator constituents. Prop. at

8. NSWMA stated that the constituents on the proposed list effectively indicate a release of

leachate because they “tend to be mobile, and/or exist at better concentration contrast between

leachate and background groundwater, which make them effective and reliable detection

monitoring parameters.” Prop. at 8;

see also

Johnson Test. at 9.

NSWMA stated that, although current Agency practice now requires monitoring for

dissolved iron and manganese, the proposed list does not require that those two constituents be

sampled and monitored. Prop. at 8. Mr. Johnson stated that NSWMA proposed to remove these

constituents from the quarterly sampling list because they occur naturally in groundwater both

upgradient and downgradient from landfills, “even at facilities that have not yet begun to accept

waste.” Tr.1 at 77. Mr. Johnson further stated that dissolved iron and manganese are therefore

“not very effective detection monitoring parameters” and that the proposal lists more effective

and more conservative parameters.

. at 77, 79.

The proposal removes from the detection monitoring program a number of total metals

now monitored on an annual basis. Prop. at 8;

see

Johnson Test. at 9. Mr. Johnson stated that

these samples of these metal compounds are not filtered to remove sediments. Tr.1 at 80.

Consequently, Mr. Johnson stated that “these sediments often compromise the sample results as

the suspended sediments often contain metals, which bias the results.” Johnson Test. at 9.

NSWMA claimed that, because these metals are not mobile in groundwater, occur naturally in

the suspended sediment of a sample, or are present in leachate at concentrations insufficient to

contrast with groundwater, they are not effective for monitoring mobility or indicating

groundwater problems. Prop. at 8; Johnson Test. at 9.

Ms. Thompson emphasized that, although the proposal deletes total metal monitoring

from detection monitoring, the proposal retains it for assessment monitoring. Thompson Test. at

4. Ms. Thompson testified that, although federal regulations require total metal monitoring for

detection monitoring, those regulations allow a state to propose an alternative monitoring list and

demonstrate to USEPA that it is an adequate substitute.

., citing 40 C.F.R. 258.Appendix I.

The Agency sought and received USEPA’s approval for removing a number of parameters from

Illinois’ detection monitoring program. Thompson Test. at 4, 7-13.

Ms. Thompson further testified that the Agency requires new landfills to develop

background concentrations for a number of parameters, including most of those on the

assessment monitoring list. Thompson Test. at 4. Ms. Thompson emphasized that those

background concentrations “are available for comparison, should assessment monitoring be

required in the future.”

. Ms. Thompson further noted that Board regulations require

establishing a background concentration at locations unaffected by the landfill “for any

parameter that is detected in groundwater during assessment monitoring.”

. at 4-5, citing 35

Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(b)(5)(C).

In his testimony, Mr. Hilbert addressed the economic impact of this proposed

amendment. He noted that the proposal does not require quarterly monitoring of two parameters,

total organic carbon and phenols, for which testing is more expensive. Tr.2 at 13. Mr. Hilbert

estimated that the proposal would result in annual cost savings of $2,800 per facility and

$143,000 industry-wide.

. at 13-14.

NSWMA explained the rationale for the 50% threshold in its proposed new subsection

(iv). Mr. William Schubert of Waste Management stated that NSWMA and the Agency, after

examining landfills with various percentages of non–municipal solid waste, judged that the

leachate characteristics of landfills would not substantially change unless more than 50% of their

waste volume is non-municipal solid waste. Tr.1 at 72-73.

The Board finds that proposed changes to provisions for choosing monitoring

constituents at Section 811.319(a)(2)(A) reflect the Agency’s permitting practice and add clarity

to the rules by including a specific list of indicator constituents. The Board agrees that including

the monitoring of certain metals in the assessment monitoring is appropriate given that the metals

are not very mobile in groundwater and are naturally occurring. The Board adopts the proposed

changes for second notice.

Organic Constituents Monitoring (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(a)(3)(A)(i)).

The Board

proposes three changes to the requirements for organic chemicals monitoring. First, the Board

proposes to add a specific list of organic chemicals for which groundwater must be monitored.

Prop. at 8-9. The list of constituents proposed at Section 811.319(a)(3)(A)(i) is derived from

federal regulations and includes volatile organic compounds (VOCs), phenols, and oil and

grease.

. at 9, citing 40 C.F.R. 141.40, 40 C.F.R. 258.Appendix I. In his testimony, Mr.

Johnson referred to an exhaustive multi-year study of leachate data from Illinois landfills, which

“confirmed that VOCs and phenols comprise the vast majority of the mass of organic compounds

in leachate.” Johnson Test. at 10. The proposed list eliminates specific less mobile, semi-

volatile, pesticide/herbicides and PCBs. Prop. at 9. However, NSWMA argued that “elimination

of these parameters from this list would not significantly reduce the degree of environmental

protection in that nearly all detections of the listed organic compounds are represented on the

proposed list.”

. Furthermore, Mr. Johnson testified that “the organics that are eliminated

from this list are included in the assessment monitoring program.” Johnson Test. at 10.

Second, the Board proposes to revise an existing cross-reference in Section

811.319(a)(3)(C) to Section 811.319(a)(1)(A) to refer instead to Section 811.319(a)(3)(A), which

requires groundwater monitoring for specified organic parameters. Prop. at 9. The Board notes

that both NSWMA and the Agency “believe that this revision merely corrects a typographical

error and makes the intent of the regulations clear.”

Third, the Board increases the frequency of monitoring for the specified organic

parameters from annual to semi-annual for municipal solid waste landfill units. Prop. at 9.

NSWMA states that “[t]his increase in sampling frequency serves to enhance the collection of

relevant data.”

. In his testimony, Mr. Hilbert addressed the economic impact of this proposed

amendment. He first notes that the list of constituents does eliminate monitoring for certain

organic constituents and for the total value of specific inorganic constituents. Hilbert Test. 2 at

6. Mr. Hilbert then estimates that the proposed amendment would reduce costs by $10,000 for

each facility and by $510,000 industry-wide.

. at 6-7.

Again, the Board finds that the proposal to include a list of organic constituents adds

specificity to the rules and places emphasis on contaminants found in nonhazardous landfill

leachate. Further, the increase in monitoring frequency for municipal solid waste landfill make

the board rules consistent with the federal requirements under 40 C.F.R. Part 258. The Board

adopts the proposed changes to organic chemicals monitoring for second notice.

Confirmation Monitoring (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(a)(4)(A)(i)).

The Board

proposes several changes to the provisions for confirming monitored increases. First, the

proposal amends subsection (a)(4)(A)(i), which now requires implementation of confirmation

procedures when any monitored constituent shows a progressive increase over four consecutive

monitoring events. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(a)(4)(A)(i). The proposal provides that

confirmation monitoring is required only when monitoring for any inorganic constituent

increases over eight consecutive monitoring events. Prop. at 9-10. This proposal intends to

“provide greater assurance based upon statistical reliability that any identified progressive

increases are due to actual contamination rather than chance.”

. at 10. NSWMA argued that

the current language of the regulation results in frequent false positive results.

. In his

testimony, Mr. Johnson stated that the probability of a false positive under the current regulations

is “just about 100 percent[,] near certainty.” Tr.1 at 102;

see generally

Exh. 4 (Statistical

Guidelines for Use of Consecutive Increases in Groundwater Monitoring Programs). NSWMA

argued that its proposal “reduce[s] the chance of false positives to approximately 5%, which is

consistent with current US EPA guidance and best practices.” Prop. at 10;

see

Tr.1 at 99, 101.

In his testimony, Mr. Hilbert addressed the economic impact of this proposed

amendment. He stated that reducing the number of false positive monitoring results “will reduce

the amount of confirmation sample events and the potential for unnecessarily triggering an

assessment monitoring requirement.” Hilbert Test. 2 at 7. Mr. Hilbert stated that, although the

proposed amendment will reduce assessment monitoring, “[t]he actual economic effect of this

specific proposed change is difficult to quantify.”

Next, the Board proposes to increase the time allowed for verifying an observed increase

in the concentration of a constituent under Section 811.319(a)(4)(B)(i) from 45 days of the initial

“observation” to 90 days of the initial “sampling event.”. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(a)(4)(B)(i).

NSWMA argued that “[t]his 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.” Prop. at 10. In his testimony, Mr. Johnson

stated that verification may require two weeks to sample monitoring wells, followed by three

weeks to perform analytical work on those samples, followed by additional time to review and

validate those analyses, followed by a ten-day period for data quality review. Tr.1 at 105. Mr.

Johnson also testified that, if the data quality review raises any issues, then additional time is

required for correction or re-submission of the results.

NSWMA stated that the Agency concurs with its proposal to allow 90 days to verify

observed increases in the concentration of constituents. Prop. at 10. In addition to allowing the

operator adequate time for sampling, analysis, and quality control, NSWMA argued that a 90-

day period “also allows verification sampling to potentially be conducted during the next routine

quarterly sampling event, thus maximizing an operator’s efficiency.”

. Mr. Schubert provided

two reasons for the 90-day period, as opposed to a shorter duration. First, he stated that

laboratory review and data quality review typically cannot be performed within 45 days.

. at

110. Second, he stated that operators generally monitor groundwater with low permeability that

does not travel a significant distance in a 45-day period.

. at 110-11. He suggested that

successive samples effectively test the same water, compromising the independence of the data

and masking any changes over time.

The proposal also amends language regarding the point at which that 90-day verification

period begins. The subsection now requires verification sampling with 45 days of “the initial

observation.” 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(a)(4)(B)(i). NSWMA stated that amending the start of

the verification process to the “’initial sampling event’ is designed merely to clarify the starting

point.” Prop. at 10.

In his testimony, Mr. Hilbert addressed the economic impact of this proposed

amendment. He stated that “[t]he actual economic effect of the proposed change will vary

significantly from site to site and is not directly quantifiable.” Hilbert Test. 2 at 8. As a basis for

a rough estimate, however, he stated that “[a] typical facility may be required to perform

verification sampling on at least one parameter in 50% of the wells for every quarterly sampling

event.”

. Based on assumed costs of this sampling, he estimated that the proposed amendment

would result in annual savings of $10,000 for each facility and annual savings of $510,000

industry-wide.

In addition to the changes above, the Board proposes changes to the confirmation

procedures pertaining to actions to be undertaken by an operator upon confirmation of an

increase. NSWMA stated that, if there is a confirmed increase in the concentration of a

constituent, “[c]urrent 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.” Prop.

at 10; Tr.2 at 26;

see

35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(a)(4)(B)(iii). The operator files this notification

with the Agency “within ten days of the determination.” 35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.319(a)(4)(B)(iii). In his testimony, Mr. Hilbert stated that this language doesn’t “require the

Agency to review that explanation and actually agree with it.” Tr.1 at 113;

see

35 Ill. Adm.

Code 811.319(a)(4)(B)(iii). The Board proposes three amendments to this subsection.

The Board proposes that the required notification of any confirmed increase in the

concentration of a constituent under Section 811.319(a)(4)(B)(iii) “must demonstrate a source

other than the facility” to the Agency within 180 days of the original sampling event. PC 1 at 2.

For permitted facilities, the amendment requires the notification to be filed for review as a

significant permit modification. NSWMA stated that the proposed 180-day period provides time

for re-sampling and “allows the operator sufficient time to adequately investigate the increase.”

Prop. at 10-11; Tr.2 at 27-28. The American Bottom Conservancy and Illinois Sierra Club

agreed that this alternate source demonstration “be submitted to the Agency in all cases so that

the public is informed that there is contamination and can evaluate and comment on the report

and the probable source.” PC 2 at 1.

NSWMA stated that the proposed amendment requiring operators of permitted facilities

to file notification of confirmed increase as a significant permit modification provides the

Agency “with an appropriate procedural mechanism to review, comment, and ultimately approve

(or disapprove) the submittal[,] thereby ensuring a quality review and administrative finality.”

Prop. at 11, Tr.2 at 27-29. Mr. Hilbert characterized the review of a proposed significant permit

modification as “a much more rigorous process.” Tr.1 at 114. Mr. Hilbert suggested that this

process would prevent repeated notifications that are not reviewed by the Agency and that may

simply attribute confirmed increases to causes other than those related to the landfill.

In a proposed new subsection 811.319(a)(4)(B)(iv), the Board also proposes that, if the

landfill operator cannot demonstrate that the confirmed increase is attributable to an alternate

source, then the operator is required to perform assessment monitoring.

see

35 Ill. Adm.

Code 811.319(b). In a proposed new subsection 811.319(a)(4)(B)(v), the Board also proposes

that, if the Agency denies the operator’s alternative source demonstration, then the operator

within 30 days must begin sampling for specified constituents and “submit an assessment

monitoring plan as a significant permit modification, both within 30 days of the dated

notification of Agency denial.” PC 1 at 3, citing 35 Ill. Adm. Code 813.105 (denial), 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 811.319(b)(5) (assessment monitoring constituents). The proposed new subsection

specifically requires that “[t]he operator must sample the well or wells that exhibited the

confirmed increase.” PC 1 at 3.

The Board notes that the proposed extension of the deadline for verification of any

monitored increase, and the determination of the source of any confirmed increase provide

sufficient time for an operator to implement the confirmation procedures. The Board agrees that

additional time would be required for obtaining representative samples and for laboratory and

data quality reviews. The Board finds that the record supports the proposed changes to the

confirmation procedures under Section 811.319(a)(4) and adopts the proposed changes for

second notice.

Assessment Monitoring Plan (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(b)(2)).

The Board proposes

four changes to the assessment monitoring provisions. The first change pertains to filing the

assessment monitoring plan under Section 811.319(b)(2), which now provides that “[t]he

operator of the facility for which assessment monitoring is required shall file the plans for an

assessment monitoring program with the Agency.” 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.319(b)(2). Facilities

permitted by the Agency must file those plans as a significant permit modification.

Id.

The

regulations also set deadlines for the implementation of assessment monitoring plans.

Id.

The Board proposes to amend this subsection to provide that an operator required to

submit a plan for assessment monitoring must do so within 180 days of the original sampling

event. Prop. at 11. NSWMA noted that the regulations do not now provide a deadline for

submitting an assessment monitoring plan.

Id.

Second, with regard to implementation, the current rule provides only that “the

assessment monitoring program must be implemented within 90 days of the monitored increase

confirmation at unpermitted facilities and within 90 days of Illinois EPA approval of the

significant permit modification at permitted facilities.” Prop. at 11. The Board proposes to

require implementation within 180 days of the original sampling event for unpermitted facilities

and within 45 days of Agency approval of the program for permitted facilities.

. By tying

implementation at unpermitted facilities to the original sampling event, the proposed amendment

establishes a more definite deadline for implementation of assessment monitoring plans.

Tr.1 at 120-21. The proposal also establishes a faster 45-day implementation time for permitted

facilities.

Third, the Board proposes minor clarifications to monitoring of additional constituents at

subsection 811.319(b)(5)(A). Prop. at 11. First, it amends a cross-reference to refer to

subsection (b)(1) instead of (b)(1)(A).

. This proposed amendment “simply corrects a

typographical error and broadens the reference to include (b)(1)(A), (B), and (C).”

. Second,

the proposal replace the word “shall” with “must.”

. Third, the proposal adds a reference to

constituents listed at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.410 in order to provide additional constituents that

must be monitored to assess groundwater contamination.

see

35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.410.

This subsection now requires monitoring for constituents listed at 40 C.F.R. 258.Appendix II,

which is incorporated by reference at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 810.104. NSWMA claimed that

“[t]hese additional constituents serve to increase environmental protection.” Prop. at 11.

Finally, the Board proposes to amend subsection 811.319(b)(5)(D) by requiring that any

constituents on the expanded assessment monitoring list created by the proposed amendment to

include constituents listed at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.410 “that are detected in the initial sampling

must be monitored for on a semi-annual basis.” Prop. at 12. The Board also “proposes that the

expanded monitoring list be monitored on an annual basis.”

. In his testimony, Mr. Johnson

stated that these requirements are “the same as the US EPA’s standards for assessment

monitoring.” Tr.1 at 136. Mr. Johnson also argued that “[t]he degree of environmental

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

for, while focusing on those constituents of concern that have been identified.” Johnson Test. at

14-15.

In his testimony, Mr. Hilbert addressed the economic impact of this proposed

amendment. He stated that, although the proposal may provide some economic benefit, “it is not

easily quantifiable since the actual list of constituents to be monitored will vary from facility to

facility. Therefore no quantifiable economic impact of the proposed change is identified.”

Hilbert Test. 2 at 8.

The Board finds that the record supports the proposed changes to the assessment

monitoring provisions under Section 811.319(b). By specifying deadlines for submission and

implementation of the assessment monitoring plan, the proposal removes any ambiguity in terms

of proceeding from detection monitoring to assessment monitoring. Additionally, the inclusion

of constituents listed in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.410 makes the Board rules consistent with the

federal regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 258. The Board adopts the proposed changes for second

notice.

Groundwater Quality Standards (Proposed Amendment 33-37 and 42-49) (35 Ill. Adm.

Code 811.320)

The Board proposes a number of changes to the groundwater quality standard provisions

under Section 811.320. These changes include NSWMA’s Proposed Amendments 33-37 and

42-49. The proposed changes replace references to public water supply standards with

groundwater standards, clarify the establishment of background concentrations, and update

statistical analysis procedures. The Board’s proposed changes are discussed below.

References to Groundwater Standards.

The Board proposes to replace the reference to

public or food processing water supply standard at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302 with a reference to the

groundwater standards found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620 at Sections 811.320(a)(3)(B), (b)(2), and

(b)(4). Prop. at 13. NSWMA claimed that the original landfill rules included this reference to

the public or food processing water supply standards.

see

Development, Operating, and

Reporting Requirements for Non-Hazardous Waste Landfills, R 88-7, slip op. at 54 (Aug. 17,

1990). NSWMA argued that, with the subsequent adoption of groundwater standards (

see

Groundwater Quality Standards (35 Ill. Adm. Code 620), R 89-14(B) (Nov. 7, 1991)), the public

or food processing water supply standards appear no longer to apply to groundwater. Prop. at

13, citing 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.130 (exemption);

see also

Thompson Test. at 2. NSWMA

further argued that “groundwater at landfills is now regulated under a more inclusive list of

constituents found in the [Part] 620 regulations.” Prop. at 13;

see

35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.Subpart

D. NSWMA noted that “[t]his proposed amendment mirrors the proposed amendment at [35 Ill.

Adm. Code] 811.315(e)(1)(G)(i), discussed in proposed amendment 10 above. Prop. at 13.

Establishment of Groundwater Background Concentration (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.320(d)(1)).

The Board proposes to divide the existing subsection 811.320(d)(1) regarding

establishment of background concentrations into 3 separate subsections. Prop. at 14. In addition

to the organizational changes, the proposal makes three substantive changes to the provisions for

establishing background concentrations. First, the proposal at Section 811.320(d)(1) allows the

Agency to review more than one year’s worth of quarterly sampling data.

. NSWMA argued

that “[a]llowing, but not requiring, more than one year of quarterly sampling is justified by the

simple principle that more data provide an improved statistical basis for comparisons.”

Id.

NSWMA and the Agency indicated that the Agency could by permit require additional sampling.

See

Tr.1 at 146-47. Generally, NSWMA argued that “[t]he more accurate data generated by the

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

negative results.” Prop. at 14.

Second, also at Section 811.320(d)(1), the proposal allows the Agency “to consider non-

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

nevertheless representative of consecutive data” in terms of any seasonal or temporal variation.

Prop. at 14;

see

Tr.1 at 145. NSWMA argued that both of “these proposed amendments reflect

current US EPA guidance as well as current literature and industry practice.” Prop. at 14.

NSWMA further argues that that they “are designed to allow more appropriate and accurate

characterization of site background conditions.”

In his testimony, Mr. Hilbert addressed the economic impact of this proposed

amendment. He stated that “[t]he proposed language of this section as well as the proposed

changes in other sections of this rulemaking are designed to reduce unnecessary assessment

monitoring triggered by an excessively high false positive rate during statistical review of

groundwater monitoring data.” Hilbert Test. 2 at 10. Mr. Hilbert further stated that, because

actual assessment costs depend on what actually requires the development of an assessment

monitoring plan, his analysis simply estimates the cost of preparing the plan and does not reflect

variable costs such as installation of additional wells.

. Because he anticipated that the

proposed amendments will reduce the number of assessments by 50%, Mr. Hilbert projected that

costs will decrease by $25,000 at each facility and by $1,275,000 industry-wide.

The third amendment proposed for Section 811.320(d)(2) pertains to adjustment of

background concentrations. NSWMA states that “[t]he existing rule provides that adjustments to

background concentrations can be made if changes in the background concentrations are

‘statistically significant.’” Prop. at 14;

see

35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.320(d)(1). The Board

proposes to add language clarifying that the changes must also “be due either to a natural

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

landfill or landfill activities.” Prop. at 14.

The Board also proposes that these adjustments be made no more often than every two

years during the facility’s operation and that they are subject to the Agency’s approval as a

significant modification. Prop. at 14; Tr.1 at 154

Mr. Schubert stated that this element of the

proposal results from discussions and compromise between NSWMA and the Agency. Tr.1 at

152. Mr. Schubert stated that the proposal does not allow these adjustments more frequently in

order to avoid the risk of placing a heavy administrative burden upon the Agency. Tr.1 at 152-

53.

In addition, the proposed amendment also provides that, with the Agency’s approval to

do so, facilities may use non-consecutive data to seek adjustment to background concentrations.

Prop. at 14. Finally, the Board also proposes to prohibit any adjustment to a background

concentration until two years after the effective date of this proposed amendment, unless that

adjustment is specifically required by the Agency.

In his testimony, Mr. Hilbert addressed the economic impact of this proposed

amendment. He stated that a number of proposed amendments intend “to reduce unnecessary

assessment monitoring triggered by an excessively high false positive rate during statistical

review of groundwater monitoring data. Hilbert Test. 2 at 10. Mr. Hilbert further stated that,

because actual assessment costs vary as a result of the findings that trigger the development of an

assessment monitoring plan, his analysis simply estimates the cost of preparing the plan and does

not reflect variable costs.

. Because he anticipated that the proposed amendments will reduce

the number of assessments by 50%, Mr. Hilbert projected that costs will decrease by $25,000 at

each facility and by $1,275,000 industry-wide.

The Board finds that the proposed changes to the provisions for establishing background

concentrations clarifies the existing rules by requiring consecutive quarterly data and also

providing flexibility to the Agency to consider non-consecutive data under specified

circumstances. Further, the Board agrees that adjustments to background concentrations should

be limited only to circumstances in which changes are due to natural temporal or spatial

variability or an off-site source not associated with the landfill activities. Finally, the Board

notes that the organizational changes make the rules easier to read. Accordingly, the Board

adopts the proposed changes for second notice.

Statistical Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Data (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.320(e)(1).

Current Board rules provide that “[s]tatistical tests shall be used to analyze

groundwater monitoring data.” 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.320(e)(1). The Board proposes to delete

existing references to specific “normal theory statistical tests” and “nonparametric statistical

tests” at Sections 811.320(e)(4) and (e)(5). Prop. at 15;

see

35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.320 (e)(4),

(e)(5). The Board also proposes to delete a cross-reference to specific statistical tests in Sections

811.320(e)(1), (e)(3), (e)(3)(A), (B), and (C). The Board proposes that subsections

811.320(e)(1), (e)(3), and (e)(3)(C) refer instead to “an alternative procedure in accordance with

[amended] subsection (e)(4).” NSWMA stated that the proposal intends “to eliminate references

to inappropriate tests while allowing the use of more appropriate tests consistent with US EPA

guidance and practice.” Prop. at 15;

see

Tr.1 at 156, 160-61. NSWMA claimed that this

proposal would allow facilities to focus on the statistical test that performs best in revealing

potential problems. Tr.1 at 158-59. NSWMA claimed that this proposed amendment will have

no substantive effect on the regulatory scheme or on human health and the environment. Prop. at

15-16.

Next, the Board proposes to amend Subsection 811.320(e)(3) to make the practical

quantification limit (PQL) the appropriate level of detection when reporting monitoring data.

Prop. at 16. NSWMA stated that the PQL is “the lowest limit at which the analytical result can

be quantified.”

. NSWMA stated that USEPA recognizes the PQL as more appropriate than

the method detection limit (MDL) to which this subsection now refers.

see

35 Ill. Adm.

Code 811.320(e)(3). The Board also proposes language providing that any established PQL may

not in any case exceed any level established by the Board as a groundwater quality standard

under the Illinois Groundwater Protection Act. Prop. at 16;

see

415 ILCS 55/1

et seq

. (2006).

The Board also proposes to replace a reference to MDL with a reference to PQL at Section

811.320(e)(3)(A). Prop. at 16.

Regarding the analysis of data below the level of detection at Section 811.320(e)(3)(B),

the Board proposes to delete a reference to ‘data transformations’ in order to conform with the

proposed changes to the level of detection. Prop. at 16. Further, the Board notes that the

proposed changes to this subsection allow the use of Aitchison’s adjustment in addition to the

existing provision allowing the use of Cohen’s adjustment in analyzing groundwater data.

see

35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.320(e)(3)(B). Mr. Schubert stated that, for non-normal data,

Aitchison’s adjustment provides an alterative method of calculating the standard deviations for

use in standard equations. Tr.1 at 163. Ms. Thompson elaborated that it is used as a statistical

adjustment allowing normal distribution of data sets when non-detects are between 15% and

50%.

. at 163-64; Thompson Test. at 5. NSWMA characterized Aitcheson’s adjustment as

“widely accepted” and “standard.” Prop. at 16.

As discussed above, the Board proposes to delete much of existing section 811.320(e)(4)

which identifies specific normal theory statistical tests. Prop. at 17. NSWMA argued that

revised subsection (e)(3) adequately identifies appropriate statistical procedures without

requiring inappropriate methods.

See id

. Further, the Board proposes to delete references to

specific nonparametric statistical tests at subsection (e)(5), which includes the Mann Whitney U

test and the Kruskal Wallis test. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.320(e)(5). NSWMA claimed that this

element of the proposal “is designed simply to clarify that the use of non-specified statistical

tests may be allowed by the Illinois EPA where appropriate.” Prop. at 17. The Board also notes

that its proposal renumbers this subsection as (e)(4).

Finally, the Board proposes to incorporate the use of tests meeting the requirements of 35

Ill. Adm. Code 724.197(i) into proposed subsection (e)(4). Prop. at 18.

The Board finds that the record supports these changes to the statistical analysis

provisions. The Board notes that, while the proposed changes discontinue the use of certain

inappropriate statistical tests for analyzing groundwater data, the rules still require an operator to

use only those tests that meet the requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 724.197(i). The Board’s

hazardous waste regulations at Section 724.197(i) set forth detailed performance standards for

statistical tests used for analyzing groundwater monitoring data. The Board also agrees that the

reference to MDL must be replaced with PQL to be consistent with the federal solid waste

landfill rules. Accordingly, the Board adopts the proposed amendments for second notice.

Non-Substantive Amendments

In its pre-filed testimony, NSWMA characterized seventeen of its proposed amendments

to the Board’s solid waste rules as “not substantive” and as making merely “typographical

changes or numbering changes.” Johnson Test. at 3. Following the numbering of proposed

amendments established by NSWMA in its original proposal, the Board below briefly addresses

each of those seventeen proposed amendments.

Proposed Amendment 1: Incorporation by Reference (35 Ill. Adm. Code 810.104(a)(1))

NSWMA stated that it agreed with an Agency request to include in the Board’s rules “an

incorporation by reference of federal regulation 40 C.F.R. 258.Appendix I (2006).” Prop. at 2-3.

MSWMA further stated that subsequent amendments refer to this federal authority.

at 3. At

the first hearing, NSWMA indicated that it still regarded this proposal as non-substantive (Tr.1 at

11, 16), and no participant disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board

included this language in its first-notice opinion and order and below adopts the proposed

amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 2: Incorporation by Reference (35 Ill. Adm. Code 810.104(a)(1))

NSWMA stated that it agrees with an Agency request “to update the incorporation by

reference of 40 C.F.R. 258.Appendix II (1997)” (Prop. at 3) in order to reflect the current 2006

version of that federal authority. NSWMA stated that, “[w]hile some modification has been

made between the 1997 and current (2006) version of Appendix II, no substantive changes have

been made.”

. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its characterization of this

proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 16), and no participant disputed that characterization.

See id

In its first-notice opinion, the Board noted that its regulations incorporate by reference

“Appendix II to 40 C.F.R. 258 (2005), as corrected at 70 Fed. Reg. 44150 (August 1, 2005) (List

of Hazardous and Organic Constituents).” 35 Ill. Adm. Code 810.104(a)(1). Also in that

opinion, the Board stated that, because the participants clearly intended to update this

incorporation by reference with the 2006 material, it would strike the reference to the 2005

material and adopt the amendment as proposed by NSWMA. Although the Board invited

comment as to what, if any, further amendment the participants might propose, no public

comment addressed this issue. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed amendment

for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 3: Incorporation by Reference (35 Ill. Adm. Code 810.104(a)(6))

NSWMA stated that it agrees with an Agency request to amend this subsection “solely to

update the incorporation by reference of ‘Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,

Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA Publication SW-846’ to include Updates II, IIA, IIB, III, IIIA,

and IIIB which have been adopted up through June, 2005.” Prop. at 3. At the first hearing,

NSWMA did not change its characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 16-

17), and no participant disputed that characterization.

See id

. at 17.

In its first-notice opinion, the Board noted that its regulations incorporate by reference

this material and seven specific dated updates. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 810.104(a)(6). The Board’s

first-notice order did not amend this subsection (a)(6), but the Board invited public comment as

to what, if any, amendment the participants might offer. No comment addressed this issue.

Accordingly, the Board’s order below proposes no amendment to this subsection.

Proposed Amendment 11: Hydrogeologic Site Investigations (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.315(e)(1)(G)(ii))

In its first-notice opinion, the Board noted that this subsection includes a cross-reference

to a definition at Section 811.319(a)(4) of the Board’s rules.

See

35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.315(e)(1)(G)(ii). NSWMA stated that, with the Agency’s concurrence, it “proposes to add

‘(A)’ to the cited reference simply to provide a more precise reference.” Prop. at 6. At the first

hearing, NSWMA did not change its characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 66-67), and no participant disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board

below adopts the proposed amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 13: Design, Construction, and Operation of Groundwater

Monitoring Systems (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.318(e)(6)(C))

NSWMA stated that, with the Agency’s concurrence, it proposed only to renumber this

subsection in order to account for substantive changes in its preceding parts and to restore a

proper sequence. Prop. at 6. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its characterization of

this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 67-68), and no participant disputed that

characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed amendment for

second notice.

Proposed Amendment 14: Design, Construction, and Operation of Groundwater

Monitoring Systems (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.318(e)(6)(D))

NSWMA stated that, with the Agency’s concurrence, it proposed only to renumber this

subsection in order to account for substantive changes in its preceding parts and to restore a

proper sequence. Prop. at 6. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its characterization of

this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 67-68), and no participant disputed that

characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed amendment for

second notice.

Proposed Amendment 15: Design, Construction, and Operation of Groundwater

Monitoring Systems (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.318(e)(6)(E))

NSWMA stated that, with the Agency’s concurrence, it proposed only to renumber this

subsection in order to account for substantive changes in its preceding parts and to restore a

proper sequence. Prop. at 7. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its characterization of

this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 67-68), and no participant disputed that

characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed amendment for

second notice.

Proposed Amendment 17: Design, Construction, and Operation of Groundwater

Monitoring Systems (35 Ill. Adm. Code 811.318(e)(7))

NSWMA stated that, with the Agency’s concurrence, it proposed only to renumber this

subsection in order to account for substantive changes in its preceding parts and to restore a

proper sequence. Prop. at 7. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its characterization of

this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 67-68), and no participant disputed that

characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed amendment for

second notice.

Proposed Amendment 21: Groundwater Monitoring Programs (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.319(a)(3)(B))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposed to revise a cross-

reference to Section 811.319(a)(1)(A) to refer to Section 811.319(a)(3), which requires

monitoring of organic parameters. Prop. at 9. NSWMA stated that both it and the Agency

“believe that this revision merely corrects a typographical error and makes the intent of the

regulations clear.”

. NSWMA further stated that “[t]here is no substantive change to the

regulations by this proposed amendment.”

. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its

characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 92-93), and no participant

disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed

amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 29: Groundwater Monitoring Programs (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.319(b)(5)(E))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposed to amend this

subsection by adding to the list of constituents to be monitored during an assessment program

those constituents listed at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.410. Prop. at 12. NSWMA stated that the

proposed change conforms this subsection to previous proposed amendments and does not make

any substantive change to the regulations.

. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its

characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 139-40), and no participant

disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed

amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 30: Groundwater Monitoring Programs (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.319(b)(5)(G))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposed to amend this

subsection by adding to the list of constituents to be monitored during an assessment program

those constituents listed at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.410. Prop. at 12. NSWMA stated that the

proposed change conforms this subsection to previous proposed amendments and does not make

any substantive change to the regulations.

. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its

characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 139-40), and no participant

disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed

amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 31: Groundwater Monitoring Programs (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.319(d)(1)(A))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposed only to correct a

capitalization error in this subsection. Prop. at 12. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change

its characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 139-40), and no participant

disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed

amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 32: Groundwater Monitoring Programs (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.319(d)(3)(A))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposes only to correct a

typographical error by adding the omitted word “assessment” in order to conform this subsection

to related provisions.” Prop. at 13. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not change its

characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 139-40), and no participant

disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the proposed

amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 38: Groundwater Quality Standards (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.320(d)(3))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposed only to renumber

existing language within this subsection in order to reflect additions proposed in its preceding

parts and to maintain a proper sequence. Prop. at 15. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not

change its characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 155), and no

participant disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the

proposed amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 39: Groundwater Quality Standards (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.320(d)(4))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposed only to renumber

existing language within this subsection in order to reflect additions proposed in its preceding

parts and to maintain a proper sequence. Prop. at 15. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not

change its characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 155), and no

participant disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the

proposed amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 40: Groundwater Quality Standards (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.320(d)(5))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposed only to renumber

existing language within this subsection in order to reflect additions proposed in its preceding

parts and to maintain a proper sequence. Prop. at 15. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not

change its characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 155), and no

participant disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the

proposed amendment for second notice.

Proposed Amendment 41: Groundwater Quality Standards (35 Ill. Adm. Code

811.320(d)(6))

NSWMA stated that, with the concurrence of the Agency, it proposed only to renumber

existing language within this subsection in order to reflect additions proposed in its preceding

parts and to maintain a proper sequence. Prop. at 15. At the first hearing, NSWMA did not

change its characterization of this proposal as non-substantive (

see

Tr.1 at 155), and no

participant disputed that characterization.

See id

. Accordingly, the Board below adopts the

proposed amendment for second notice.

TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY AND ECONOMIC REASONABLENESS

The Board received no testimony or comments regarding the DCEO’s decision not to

perform an economic impact study on this rulemaking.

See

Tr.2 at 38. In his testimony, Mr.

Hilbert on behalf of NSWMA estimated that the proposal would result in annual cost savings of

$52,500 for each facility subject to the rules and annual cost savings of $2,678,000 industry-

wide. Hilbert Test 2 at 12; Tr.2 at 15-16 (clarification).

As it did in its first-notice opinion and order, the Board finds the proposed amendments

technically feasible and economically reasonable. The Board also finds that the proposed

exemptions will not negatively impact the environment.

CONCLUSION

The Board proposes for second notice amendments to the solid waste landfill regulations

in Parts 810 and 811 (35 Ill. Adm. Code 810, 811). These proposed amendments are

substantively unchanged from those proposed in the Board’s first-notice opinion and order dated

July 12, 2007. The Board proposes these amendments in order to make the regulations more

closely reflect practical experience implementing the current landfill rules and expanded

technical and scientific knowledge achieved since the Board first adopted these standards in

1990.

ORDER

The Board directs the Clerk to file the following proposed amendments with the Joint

Committee on Administrative Rules for second-notice review. Proposed additions to Parts 810

and 811 are underlined, and proposed deletions appear stricken.

TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE G: WASTE DISPOSAL

CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

SUBCHAPTER i: SOLID WASTE AND SPECIAL WASTE HAULING

PART 810

SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL: GENERAL PROVISIONS

Section

810.101

Scope and Applicability

Incorporations by Reference

810.105

Electronic Reporting

AUTHORITY: Implementing Sections 7.2, 21, 21.1, 22, 22.17, and 22.40 and authorized by

Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/7.2, 21, 21.1, 22, 22.17, 22.40, and

27].

SOURCE: Adopted in R88-7 at 14 Ill. Reg. 15838, effective September 18, 1990; amended in

R93-10 at 18 Ill. Reg. 1268, effective January 13, 1994; amended in R90-26 at 18 Ill. Reg.

12457, effective August 1, 1994; amended in R95-9 at 19 Ill. Reg. 14427, effective September

29, 1995; amended in R96-1 at 20 Ill. Reg. 11985, effective August 15, 1996; amended in R97-

20 at 21 Ill. Reg. 15825, effective November 25, 1997; amended in R04-5/R04-15 at 28 Ill. Reg.

9090, effective June 18, 2004; amended in R05-1 at 29 Ill. Reg. 5028, effective March 22, 2005;

amended in R06-5/R06-6/R06-7 at 30 Ill. Reg. 4130, effective February 23, 2006; amended in

R06-16/R06-17/R06-18 at 31 Ill. Reg. 1425, effective December 20, 2006; amended in R07-8 at

31 Ill. Reg. ____________, effective _______________.

Section 810.104

Incorporations by Reference

The Board incorporates the following material by reference:

Code of Federal Regulations:

40 CFR 3.2, as added at 70 Fed. Reg. 59848 (Oct. 13, 2005) (How

Does This Part Provide for Electronic Reporting?), referenced in

Section 810.105.

40 CFR 3.3, as added at 70 Fed. Reg. 59848 (Oct. 13, 2005) (What

Definitions Are Applicable to This Part?), referenced in Section

810.105.

40 CFR 3.10, as added at 70 Fed. Reg. 59848 (Oct. 13, 2005)

(What Are the Requirements for Electronic Reporting to EPA?),

referenced in Section 810.105.

40 CFR 3.2000, as added at 70 Fed. Reg. 59848 (Oct. 13, 2005)

(What Are the Requirements Authorized State, Tribe, and Local

Programs’ Reporting Systems Must Meet?), referenced in Section

810.105.

40 CFR 141.40 (2005) (Monitoring Requirements for Unregulated

Contaminants).

Appendix II to 40 CFR 258 (2005), as corrected at 70 Fed. Reg.

44150 (August 1, 2005) (List of Hazardous and Organic

Constituents).

40 CFR 258.Appendix I (2006).

40 CFR 258.Appendix II (2006

American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, 1211 Avenue of the

Americas, New York NY 10036:

Auditing Standards--Current Text, August 1, 1990 Edition.

ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials, 1976 Race Street,

Philadelphia PA 19103 215-299-5585:

Method D2234-76, “Test Method for Collection of Gross Samples

of Coal,” approved 1976.

Method D3987-85, “Standard Test Method for Shake Extraction of

Solid Waste with Water,” approved 1985.

GASB. Government Accounting Standards Board, 401 Merritt 7, P.O.

Box 5116, Norwalk CT 06856-5116:

Statement 18.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Publication Department, 2803 52nd Ave.,

Hyattville, Maryland 20781, 301-394-0081:

Engineering Manual 1110-2-1906 Appendix VII, Falling-Head

Permeability Cylinder (1986).

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, Ph: 202-783-

3238:

“Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical

Methods,” USEPA publication number EPA-530/SW-846 (Third

Edition, 1986; Revision 6, January 2005), as amended by Update I

(July 1992), II (September 1994), IIA (August 1993), IIB (January

1995), III (December 1996), IIIA (April 1998), and IIIB

(November 2004) (document number 955-001-00000-1).

This incorporation includes no later amendments or editions.

(Source: Amended at 31 Ill. Reg. _________, effective _____________)

TITLE 35: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE G: WASTE DISPOSAL

CHAPTER I: POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

SUBCHAPTER i: SOLID WASTE AND SPECIAL WASTE HAULING

PART 811

STANDARDS FOR NEW SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS

SUBPART A: GENERAL STANDARDS FOR ALL LANDFILLS

Section

811.101

Scope and Applicability

811.102

Location Standards

811.103

Surface Water Drainage

Closure and Written Closure Plan

811.111

Postclosure Maintenance

811.112

Recordkeeping Requirements for MSWLF Units

811.113

Electronic Reporting

SUBPART B: INERT WASTE LANDFILLS

Section

811.201

Scope and Applicability

811.202

Determination of Contaminated Leachate

Final Slope and Stabilization

SUBPART C: PUTRESCIBLE AND CHEMICAL WASTE LANDFILLS

Section

811.301

Scope and Applicability

Foundation and Mass Stability Analysis

811.305

Foundation Construction

811.306

Liner Systems

811.307

Leachate Drainage System

811.308

Leachate Collection System

811.309

Leachate Treatment and Disposal System

811.310

Landfill Gas Monitoring

811.311

Landfill Gas Management System

811.312

Landfill Gas Processing and Disposal System

Hydrogeological Hydrogeologic Site Investigations

811.316

Plugging and Sealing of Drill Holes

811.317

Groundwater Impact Assessment

811.318

Design, Construction, and Operation of Groundwater Monitoring Systems

811.319

Groundwater Monitoring Programs

811.320

Groundwater Quality Standards

811.321

Waste Placement

811.322

Final Slope and Stabilization

811.323

Load Checking Program

811.324

Corrective Action Measures for MSWLF Units

811.325

Selection of remedy for MSWLF Units

811.326

Implementation of the corrective action program at MSWLF Units

SUBPART D: MANAGEMENT OF SPECIAL WASTES AT LANDFILLS

Section

811.401

Scope and Applicability

811.402

Notice to Generators and Transporters

811.403

Special Waste Manifests

811.404

Identification Record

811.405

Recordkeeping Requirements

811.406

Procedures for Excluding Regulated Hazardous Wastes

SUBPART E: CONSTRUCTION QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS

Section

811.501

Scope and Applicability

811.502

Duties and Qualifications of Key Personnel

811.503

Inspection Activities

811.504

Sampling Requirements

811.505

Documentation

811.506

Foundations and Subbases

811.507

Compacted Earth Liners

811.508

Geomembranes

811.509

Leachate Collection Systems

SUBPART G: FINANCIAL ASSURANCE

Section

811.700

Scope, Applicability and Definitions

811.701

Upgrading Financial Assurance

811.702

Release of Financial Institution

811.703

Application of Proceeds and Appeals

811.704

Closure and Postclosure Care Cost Estimates

811.705

Revision of Cost Estimate

811.706

Mechanisms for Financial Assurance

811.707

Use of Multiple Financial Mechanisms

811.708

Use of a Financial Mechanism for Multiple Sites

811.709

Trust Fund for Unrelated Sites

811.710

Trust Fund

811.711

Surety Bond Guaranteeing Payment

811.712

Surety Bond Guaranteeing Performance

Self-Insurance for Non-commercial Sites

811.716

Local Government Financial Test

811.717

Local Government Guarantee

811.718

Discounting

811.719

Corporate Financial Test

811.720

Corporate Guarantee

811.APPENDIX A

Financial Assurance Forms

Illustration ILLUSTRATION A

Trust Agreement

Illustration ILLUSTRATION B

Certificate of Acknowledgment

Illustration ILLUSTRATION C

Forfeiture Bond

Illustration ILLUSTRATION D

Performance Bond

Illustration ILLUSTRATION E

Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit

Illustration

ILLUSTRATION F

Certificate of Insurance for Closure and/or

Postclosure Care

Illustration

ILLUSTRATION G

Operator’s Bond Without Surety

Illustration

ILLUSTRATION H

Operator’s Bond With Parent Surety

Illustration ILLUSTRATION I

Letter from Chief Financial Officer

811.Appendix

APPENDIX B

Section-by-Section correlation between the Standards of the

RCRA Subtitle D MSWLF regulations and the Board’s nonhazardous

waste landfill regulations.

811.APPENDIX C

List of Leachate Monitoring Parameters

AUTHORITY: Implementing Sections 7.2, 21, 21.1, 22, 22.17, and 22.40 and authorized by

Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Act [415 ILCS 5/7.2, 21, 21.1, 22, 22.17, 22.40, and

27].

SOURCE: Adopted in R88-7 at 14 Ill. Reg. 15861, effective September 18, 1990; amended in

R92-19 at 17 Ill. Reg. 12413, effective July 19, 1993; amended in R93-10 at 18 Ill. Reg. 1308,

effective January 13, 1994; expedited correction at 18 Ill. Reg. 7504, effective July 19, 1993;

amended in R90-26 at 18 Ill. Reg. 12481, effective August 1, 1994; amended in R95-13 at 19 Ill.

Reg. 12257, effective August 15, 1995; amended in R96-1 at 20 Ill. Reg. 12000, effective

August 15, 1996; amended in R97-20 at 21 Ill. Reg.15831, effective November 25, 1997;

amended in R98-9 at 22 Ill. Reg.11491, effective June 23, 1998; amended in R99-1 at 23 Ill.

Reg. 2794, effective February 17, 1999; amended in R98-29 at 23 Ill. Reg.6880, effective July 1,

1999; amended in R04-5/R04-15 at 28 Ill. Reg. 9107, effective June 18, 2004; amended in R05-1

at 29 Ill. Reg. 5044, effective March 22, 2005; amended in R06-5/R06-6/R06-7 at 30 Ill. Reg.

4136, effective February 23, 2006; amended in R06-16/R06-17/R06-18 at 31 Ill. Reg. 1435,

effective December 20, 2006; amended in R07-8 at 31 Ill. Reg. ____________, effective

_______________.

SUBPART C: PUTRESCIBLE AND CHEMICAL WASTE LANDFILLS

Section 811.309

Leachate Treatment and Disposal Systems

Leachate shall be allowed to flow freely from the drainage and collection system.

The operator is responsible for the operation of a leachate management system

designed to handle all leachate as it drains from the collection system. The

leachate management system shall consist of any combination of storage,

treatment, pretreatment, and disposal options designed and constructed in

compliance with the requirements of this Section.

The leachate management system shall consist of any combination of multiple

treatment and storage structures, to allow the management and disposal of

leachate during routine maintenance and repairs.

Standards for Onsite Treatment and Pretreatment

All onsite treatment or pretreatment systems shall be considered part of

the facility.

The onsite treatment or pretreatment system shall be designed in

accordance with the expected characteristics of the leachate. The design

may include modifications to the system necessary to accommodate

changing leachate characteristics.

The onsite treatment or pretreatment system shall be designed to function

for the entire design period.

All of the facility's unit operations, tanks, ponds, lagoons and basins shall

be designed and constructed with liners or containment structures to

control seepage to groundwater.

All treated effluent discharged to waters of the State shall meet the

requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309.

The treatment system shall be operated by an operator certified under the

requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 312.

Standards for Leachate Storage Systems

Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d)(6) of this Section, the

leachate storage facility must be able to store a minimum of at least five

days' worth of accumulated leachate at the maximum generation rate used

in designing the leachate drainage system in accordance with Section

811.307. The minimum storage capacity may be built up over time and in

stages, so long as the capacity for five consecutive days of accumulated

leachate is available at any time during the design period of the facility.

All leachate storage tanks shall be equipped with secondary containment

systems equivalent to the protection provided by a clay liner 0.61 meter (2

feet thick) having a permeability no greater than 10

-7

centimeters per

second.

Leachate storage systems shall be fabricated from material compatible

with the leachate expected to be generated and resistant to temperature

extremes.

The leachate storage system shall not cause or contribute to a malodor.

The leachate drainage and collection system shall not be used for the

purpose of storing leachate.

A facility may have less than five days' worth of storage capacity for

accumulated leachate as required by subsection (d)(1) of this Section, if

the owner or operator of the facility demonstrates that multiple treatment,

storage and disposal options in the facility's approved leachate

management system developed in accordance with subsection (b) of this

Section will achieve equivalent performance. Such options shall consist

of not less than one day's worth of storage capacity for accumulated

leachate plus at least two alternative means of managing accumulated

leachate through treatment or disposal, or both treatment and disposal,

each of which means is capable of treating or disposing of all leachate

generated at the maximum generation rate on a daily basis.

Standards for Discharge to an Offsite Treatment Works

Leachate may be discharged to an offsite treatment works that meets the

following requirements:

All discharges of effluent from the treatment works shall meet the

requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 309.

The treatment systems shall be operated by an operator certified

under the requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 312.

No more than 50 percent of the average daily influent flow can be

attributable to leachate from the solid waste disposal facility.

Otherwise, the treatment works shall be considered a part of the

solid waste disposal facility.

The operator is responsible for securing permission from the offsite

treatment works for authority to discharge to the treatment works.

All discharges to a treatment works shall meet the requirements of 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 310.

Pumps, meters, valves and monitoring stations that control and monitor

the flow of leachate from the unit and which are under the control of the

operator shall be considered part of the facility and shall be accessible to

the operator at all times.

Leachate shall be allowed to flow into the sewage system at all times;

however, if access to the treatment works is restricted or anticipated to be

restricted for longer than five days, then an alternative leachate

management system shall be constructed in accordance with subsection

(c).

Where leachate is not directly discharged into a sewerage

sewage system,

the operator shall provide storage capacity sufficient to transfer all

leachate to an offsite treatment works. The storage system shall meet the

requirements of subsection (d).

Standards for Leachate Recycling Systems

Leachate recycling systems may be utilized only at permitted waste

disposal units that meet the following requirements:

The unit must have a liner designed, constructed and maintained to

meet the minimum standards of Section 811.306.

The unit must have a leachate collection system in place and

operating in accordance with Section 811.307.

A gas management system, equipped with a mechanical device

such as a compressor to withdraw gas, must be implemented to

control odors and prevent migration of methane in accordance with

Section 811.311.

The topography must be such that any accidental leachate runoff

can be controlled by ditches, berms or other equivalent control

means.

Leachate shall not be recycled during precipitation events or in volumes

large enough to cause runoff or surface seeps.

The amount of leachate added to the unit shall not exceed the ability of the

waste and cover soils to transmit leachate flow downward. All other

leachate shall be considered excess leachate, and a leachate management

system capable of disposing of all excess leachate must be available.

The leachate storage and distribution system shall be designed to avoid

exposure of leachate to air unless aeration or functionally equivalent

devices are utilized.

The distribution system shall be designed to allow leachate to be evenly

distributed beneath the surface over the recycle area.

Daily and intermediate cover shall be permeable to the extent necessary to

prevent the accumulation of water and formation of perched watertables

and gas buildup; alternatively cover shall be removed prior to additional

waste placement.

Daily and intermediate cover shall slope away from the perimeter of the

site to minimize surface discharges.

Leachate Monitoring

Representative samples of leachate shall be collected from each

established leachate monitoring location and tested in accordance with

subsection (g)(5) and tested for the parameters referenced in subsections

(g)(2)(G) and (g)(3)(D) at a frequency of once per quarter until such time

as samples have been obtained and tested for at least eight quarters. If for

any reason insufficient leachate is obtained to yield a sample for testing

during a given quarterly monitoring attempt, such attempt shall not count

toward the eight quarters’ leachate monitoring requirement. Thereafter,

the frequency of testing shall be changed to semi-annual for any

monitored constituent while the leachate management system is in

operation. However, the. The Agency may, by permit condition, require

additional, or allow less, leachate sampling and testing as necessary to

ensure compliance with this Section and Sections 811.312, 811.317, and

811.319.

Discharges of leachate from units that dispose of putrescible wastes shall

be tested for the following constituents prior to treatment or pretreatment:

Five day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5);

Chemical oxygen demand;

Total Suspended Solids;

Total Iron;

pH;

Any other constituents listed in the operator's National Pollution

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge permit,

pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304, or required by a publicly

owned treatment works, pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 310; and

All of the indicator constituents chosen in accordance with Section

811.319(a)(2)(B) and used by the operator for groundwater

monitoring the monitoring parameters listed in Section

811.Appendix C, unless an alternate monitoring list has been

approved by the Agency.

Discharges of leachate from units which dispose only chemical wastes

shall be monitored for constituents determined by the characteristics of the

chemical waste to be disposed of in the unit. They shall include, as a

minimum:

pH;

Total Dissolved Solids;

Any other constituents listed in the operator's NPDES discharge

permit, pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304, or required by a

publicly owned treatment works, pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code

310; and

All of the indicator constituents chosen in accordance with Section

811.319(a)(2)(B) and used by the operator for groundwater

monitoring the monitoring parameters listed in Section

811.Appendix C, unless an alternate monitoring list has been

approved by the Agency.

A network of leachate monitoring locations shall be established, capable

of characterizing the leachate produced by the unit. Unless an alternate

network has been approved by the Agency, the network of leachate

monitoring locations shall include:

At least four leachate monitoring locations; and

At least one leachate monitoring location for every 25 acres within

the unit’s waste boundaries.

Leachate monitoring shall be performed at least once every six months

and each established leachate monitoring location shall be monitored at

least once every two years.

Time of Operation of the Leachate Management System

The operator shall collect and dispose of leachate for a minimum of five

years after closure and thereafter until treatment is no longer necessary.

Treatment is no longer necessary if the leachate constituents do not exceed

the wastewater effluent standards in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.124, 304.125,

304.126 and do not contain a BOD

[5]

concentration greater than 30 mg/L

for six consecutive months.

Leachate collection at a MSWLF unit shall be continued for a minimum

period of 30 years after closure, except as otherwise provided by

subsections (h)(4) and (h)(5), below.

The Agency may reduce the leachate collection period at a MSWLF unit

upon a demonstration by the owner or operator that the reduced period is

sufficient to protect human health and environment.

The owner or operator of a MSWLF unit shall petition the Board for an

adjusted standard in accordance with Section 811.303, if the owner or

operator seeks a reduction of the postclosure care monitoring period for all

of the following requirements:

Inspection and maintenance (Section 811.111);

ii)

Leachate collection (Section 811.309);

iii)

Gas monitoring (Section 811.130); and

iv)

Groundwater monitoring (Section 811.319).

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (h) is derived from 40 CFR 258.61 (1992).

(Source: Amended at 31 Ill. Reg. _________, effective _______________)

Section 811.315 Hydrogeologic Site Investigations

Purpose

The operator shall conduct a hydrogeologic investigation to develop

hydrogeologic information for the following uses:

Provide information to perform a groundwater impact assessment; and

Provide information to establish a groundwater monitoring system.

General Requirements

The investigation shall be conducted in a minimum of three phases prior to

submission of any application to the Agency for a permit to develop and

operate a landfill facility.

The study area shall consist of the entire area occupied by the facility and

any adjacent related areas, if necessary for the purposes of the

hydrogeological investigation set forth in subsection (a).

All borings shall be sampled continuously at all recognizable points of

geologic variation, except that where continuous sampling is impossible or

where non-continuous sampling can provide equivalent information,

samples shall be obtained at intervals no greater than 1.52 meters (five

feet) in homogeneous strata.

Minimum Requirements For

for a Phase I Investigation

The operator shall conduct a Phase I Investigation to develop the

following information:

Climatic aspects of the study area;

The regional and study area geologic setting, including a

description of the geomorphology and stratigraphy of the area;

The regional groundwater regime including water table depths and

aquifer characteristics; and

Information for the purpose of designing a Phase II Hydrogeologic

Investigation.

Specific Requirements

The regional hydrogeologic setting of the unit shall be established

by using material available from all possible sources, including,

but not limited to, the Illinois Scientific Surveys, the Agency, other

State and Federal organizations, water well drilling logs, and

previous investigations.

A minimum of one continuously sampled boring shall be drilled on

the site, as close as feasible to the geographic center, to determine

if the available regional hydrogeologic setting information is

accurate and to characterize the site-specific hydrogeology to the

extent specified by this phase of the investigation. The boring

shall extend at least 15.2 meters (50 feet) below the bottom of the

uppermost aquifer or through the full depth of the confining layer

below the uppermost aquifer, or to bedrock, if the bedrock is below

the upper most aquifer, whichever elevation is higher. The

locations of any additional borings, required under this subsection,

may be chosen by the investigator, but shall be sampled

continuously.

Minimum Requirements For A for a Phase II Investigation

Information to be developed

Using the information developed in the Phase I survey, a Phase II study

shall be conducted to collect the site-specific information listed below as

needed to augment data collected during the Phase I investigation and to

prepare for the Phase III investigation:

Structural characteristics and distribution of underlying strata

including bedrock;

Chemical and physical properties including, but not limited to,

lithology, mineralogy, and hydraulic characterisitics

characteristics

of underlying strata including those below the uppermost aquifer;

Soil characterisitics

characteristics, including soil types,

distribution, geochemical and geophysical characteristics;

The hydraulic conductivities of the uppermost aquifer and all strata

above it;

The vertical extent of the uppermost aquifer;

The direction and rate of groundwater flow.

Specific Requirements

One boring shall be located as close as feasible to the

topographical high point, and another shall be located as close as

feasible to the topographical low point of the study area.

At least one boring shall be at or near each corner of the site.

Where the property is irregularly shaped the borings shall be

located near the boundary in a pattern and spacing necessary to

obtain data over the entire study area.

Additional borings may be located at intermediate points at

locations and spacings necessary to establish the continuity of the

stratigraphic units.

Piezometers and groundwater monitoring wells shall be established

to determine the direction and flow characteristics of the

groundwater in all strata and extending down to the bottom of the

uppermost aquifer. Groundwater samples taken from such

monitoring wells shall be used to develop preliminary information

needed for establishing background concentrations in accordance

with subsection (e)(1)(G).

Other methods may be utilized to confirm or accumulate additional

information. Such methods may be used only as a supplement to,

not in lieu of, site-specific boring information. Other methods

include, but are not limited to, geophysical well logs, geophysical

surveys, aerial photography, age dating, and test pits.

Minimum Standards For

A for a Phase III Investigation

Using the information developed during the Phase I and Phase II

Investigations, the operator shall conduct a Phase III Investigation. This

investigation shall be conducted to collect or augment the site-specific

information needed to carry out the following:

Verification and reconcilation

reconciliation of the information

collected in the Phase I and II investigations;

Characterization of potential pathways for contaminant migration;

Correlation of stratigraphic units between borings;

Continuity of petrographic features including, but not limited to,

sorting, grain size distribution, cementation and hydraulic

conductivity;

Identification of zones of potentially high hydraulic conductivity;

Identification of the confining layer, if present;

Concentrations of chemical constituents present in the groundwater

below the unit, down to the bottom of the uppermost aquifer, using

a broad range of chemical analysis and detection procedures such

as, gas chromatographic and mass spectrometric scanning.

However, additional measurements and procedures shall be carried

out to establish background concentrations, in accordance with

Section 811.320(d), for:

Any constituent for which there is a public or food

processing water supply standard at 35 Ill. Adm. Code

302620 established by the Board and which is expected to

appear in the leachate; and

ii)

Any other constituent for which there is no Board-

established standard, but which is expected to appear in the

leachate at concentrations above PQL, as defined in Section

811.319(a)(4)(A) for that constituent;

Characterization of the seasonal and temporal, naturally and

artifically artificially induced, variations in groundwater quality

and groundwater flow; and

Identification of unusual or unpredicted geologic features,

including: fault zones, fracture traces, facies changes, solution

channels, buried stream deposits, cross cutting structures and other

geologic features that may affect the ability of the operator to

monitor the groundwater or predict the impact of the disposal

facility on groundwater.

In addition to the specific requirements applicable to phase

Phase I and II

investigations, the operator shall collect information needed to meet the

minimum standards of a phase

Phase III investigation by using methods

that may include, but not limited to excavation of test pits, additional

borings located at intermediate points between boreholes placed during

phase Phase I and II investigations, placement of piezometers and

monitoring wells, and institution of procedures for sampling and analysis.

The operator may conduct the hydrogeologic investigation in any number of

alternative ways provided that the necessary information is collected in a

systematic sequence consisting of at least three phases that is equal to or superior

to the investigation procedures of this Section.

(Source: Amended at 31 Ill. Reg. _________, effective _______________)

Section 811.318

Design, Construction, and Operation of Groundwater

Monitoring Systems

All potential sources of discharges to groundwater within the facility, including,

but not limited to, all waste disposal units and the leachate management system,

shall be identified and studied through a network of monitoring wells operated

during the active life of the unit and for the time after closure specified in

accordance with Section 811.319. Monitoring wells designed and constructed as

part of the monitoring network shall be maintained along with records that

include, but are not limited to, exact well location, well size, type of well, the

design and construction practice used in its installation and well and screen

depths.

Standards for the Location of Monitoring Points

A network of monitoring points shall be established at sufficient locations

downgradient with respect to groundwater flow and not excluding the

downward direction, to detect any discharge of contaminants from any

part of a potential source of discharge.

Monitoring wells shall be located in stratigraphic horizons that could serve

as contaminant migration pathways.

Monitoring wells shall be established as close to the potential source of

discharge as possible without interfering with the waste disposal

operations, and within half the distance from the edge of the potential

source of discharge to the edge of the zone of attenuation downgradient,

with respect to groundwater flow, from the source.

The network of monitoring points of several potential sources of discharge

within a single facility may be combined into a single monitoring network,

provided that discharges from any part of all potential sources can be

detected.

A minimum of at least one monitoring well shall be established at the edge

of the zone of attenuation and shall be located downgradient with respect

to groundwater flow and not excluding the downward direction, from the

unit. Such well or wells shall be used to monitor any statistically

significant increase in the concentration of any constituent, in accordance

with Section 811.320(e) and shall be used for determining compliance

with an applicable groundwater quality standard of Section 811.320. An

observed statistically significant increase above the applicable

groundwater quality standards of Section 811.320 in a well located at or

beyond the compliance boundary shall constitute a violation.

Maximum Allowable Predicted Concentrations

The operator shall use the same calculation methods, data, and assumptions as

used in the groundwater impact assessment to predict the concentration over time

and space of all constituents chosen to be monitored in accordance with Section

811.319 at all monitoring points. The predicted values shall be used to establish

the maximum allowable predicted concentrations (MAPC) at each monitoring

point. The MAPCs calculated in this subsection shall be applicable within the

zone of attenuation.

Standards for Monitoring Well Design and Construction

All monitoring wells shall be cased in a manner that maintains the

integrity of the bore hole. The casing material shall be inert so as not to

affect the water sample. Casing requiring solvent-cement type couplings

shall not be used.

Wells shall be screened to allow sampling only at the desired interval.

Annular space between the borehole wall and well screen section shall be

packed with gravel sized to avoid clogging by the material in the zone

being monitored. The slot size of the screen shall be designed to minimize

clogging. Screens shall be fabricated from material expected to be inert

with respect to the constituents of the groundwater to be sampled.

Annular space above the well screen section shall be sealed with a

relatively impermeable, expandable material such as a cement/bentonite

grout, which does not react with or in any way affect the sample, in order

to prevent contamination of samples and groundwater and avoid

interconnections. The seal shall extend to the highest known seasonal

groundwater level.

The annular space shall be back-filled with expanding cement grout from

an elevation below the frost line and mounded above the surface and

sloped away from the casing so as to divert surface water away.

The annular space between the upper and lower seals and in the

unsaturated zone may be back-filled with uncontaminated cuttings.

All wells shall be covered with vented caps and equipped with devices to

protect against tampering and damage.

All wells shall be developed to allow free entry of water, minimize

turbidity of the sample, and minimize clogging.

The transmissivity of the zone surrounding all well screens shall be

established by field testing techniques.

Other sampling methods and well construction techniques may be utilized

if they provide equal or superior performance to the requirements of this

subsection.

Standards for Sample Collection and Analysis

The groundwater monitoring program shall include consistent sampling

and analysis procedures to assure that monitoring results can be relied

upon to provide data representative of groundwater quality in the zone

being monitored.

The operator shall utilize procedures and techniques to insure that

collected samples are representative of the zone being monitored and that

prevent cross contamination of samples from other monitoring wells or

from other samples. At least 95 percent of a collected sample shall consist

of groundwater from the zone being monitored.

The operator shall establish a quality assurance program that provides

quantitative detection limits and the degree of error for analysis of each

chemical constituent.

The operator shall establish a sample preservation and shipment procedure

that maintains the reliability of the sample collected for analysis.

The operator shall institute a chain of custody procedure to prevent

tampering and contamination of the collected samples prior to completion

of analysis.

At a minimum, the operator shall sample the following parameters at all

wells at the time of sample collection and immediately before filtering and

preserving samples for shipment:

The elevation of the water table;

The depth of the well below ground;

CB)

pH;

DC)

The temperature of the sample; and

ED)

Specific Conductance.

The operator must measure the depth of the well below ground on an

annual basis, at wells that do not contain dedicated pumps. The operator

must measure the depth of the well below ground every 5 years, or

whenever the pump is pulled, in wells with dedicated pumps.

78)

In addition to the requirements of subsections (e)(1) through (e)(6), the

following requirements shall apply to MSWLF units:

Each time groundwater is sampled, an owner or operator of a

MSWLF unit shall:

Measure the groundwater elevations in each well

immediately prior to purging; and

ii)

Determine the rate and direction of ground-water flow.

An owner or operator shall measure groundwater elevations in wells which

monitor the same waste management area within a period of time short enough to

avoid temporal variations in groundwater flow which could preclude accurate

determination of groundwater flow rate and direction.

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (e)(7) is derived from 40 CFR 258.53(d) (1992).

(Source: Amended at 31 Ill. Reg. _________, effective _____________)

Section 811.319

Groundwater Monitoring Programs

Detection Monitoring Program

Any use of the term maximum allowable predicted concentration in this Section is

a reference to Section 811.318(c). The operator shall implement a detection

monitoring program in accordance with the following requirements:

Monitoring Schedule and Frequency

The monitoring period shall begin as soon as waste is placed into

the unit of a new landfill or within one year of the effective date of

this Part for an existing landfill. Monitoring shall continue for a

minimum period of fifteen years after closure, or in the case of

MSWLF units, a minimum period of 30 years after closure, except

as otherwise provided by subsection (a)(1)(C) of this Section. The

operator shall sample all monitoring points for all potential sources

of contamination on a quarterly basis except as specified in

subsection (a)(3), for a period of five years from the date of

issuance of the initial permit for significant modification under 35

Ill. Adm. Code 814.104 or a permit for a new unit pursuant to 35

Ill. Adm. Code 813.104. After the initial five-year period, the

sampling frequency for each monitoring point shall be reduced to a

semi-annual basis, provided the operator has submitted the

certification described in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 813.304(b).

Alternatively, after the initial five-year period, the Agency shall

allow sampling on a semi-annual basis where the operator

demonstrates that monitoring effectiveness has not been

compromised, that sufficient quarterly data has been collected to

characterize groundwater, and that leachate from the monitored

unit does not constitute a threat to groundwater. For the purposes

of this Section, the source shall be considered a threat to

groundwater if the results of the monitoring indicate either that the

concentrations of any of the constituents monitored within the zone

of attenuation is above the maximum allowable predicted

concentration for that constituent or, for existing landfills, subject

to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 814, Subpart D, that the concentration of any

constituent has exceeded the applicable standard at the compliance

boundary as defined in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 814.402(b)(3).

Beginning fifteen years after closure of the unit, or five years after

all other potential sources of discharge no longer constitute a threat

to groundwater, as defined in subsection (a)(1)(A), the monitoring

frequency may change on a well by well basis to an annual

schedule if either of the following conditions exist. However,

monitoring shall return to a quarterly schedule at any well where a

statistically significant increase is determined to have occurred in

accordance with Section 811.320(e), in the concentration of any

constituent with respect to the previous sample.

All constituents monitored within the zone of attenuation

have returned to a concentration less than or equal to ten

percent of the maximum allowable predicted concentration;

ii)

All constituents monitored within the zone of attenuation

are less than or equal to their maximum allowable predicted

concentration for eight consecutive quarters.

Monitoring shall be continued for a minimum period of: thirty 30

years after closure at MSWLF units, except as otherwise provided

by subsections (a)(1)(D) and (a)(1)(E), below; five years after

closure at landfills, other than MSWLF units, which are used

exclusively for disposing waste generated at the site; or fifteen 15

years after closure at all other landfills regulated under this Part.

Monitoring, beyond the minimum period, may be discontinued

under the following conditions:

No statistically significant increase is detected in the

concentration of any constituent above that measured and

recorded during the immediately preceding scheduled

sampling for three consecutive years, after changing to an

annual monitoring frequency; or

ii)

Immediately after contaminated leachate is no longer

generated by the unit.

The Agency may reduce the groundwater monitoring period at a

MSWLF unit upon a demonstration by the owner or operator that

the reduced period is sufficient to protect human health and

environment.

An owner or operator of a MSWLF unit shall petition the Board

for an adjusted standard in accordance with Section 811.303, if the

owner or operator seeks a reduction of the postclosure care

monitoring period for all of the following requirements:

Inspection and maintenance (Section 811.111);

ii)

Leachate collection (Section 811.309);

iii)

Gas monitoring (Section 811.310); and

iv)

Groundwater monitoring (Section 811.319).

BOARD NOTE: Changes to subsections (a)(1)(A) and (a)(1)(C), and subsections

(a)(1)(D) and (a)(1)(E) are derived from 40 CFR 258.61 (1992).

Criteria for Choosing Constituents to be Monitored

The operator shall monitor each well for constituents that will

provide a means for detecting groundwater contamination.

Constituents shall be chosen for monitoring if they meet the

following requirements:

The constituent appears in, or is expected to be in, the

leachate; and

ii)

Is contained within the following list of constituents:

Ammonia – Nitrogen (dissolved)

Magnesium (dissolved)

Mercury (dissolved)

Nitrate (dissolved)

Sulfate (dissolved)

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)

Zinc (dissolved)

ii)

The Board has established for the constituent a public or

food processing water supply standard, at 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 302, the Board has established a groundwater quality

standard under the Illinois Groundwater Protection Act

[415 ILCS 55], or the constituent may otherwise cause or

contribute to groundwater contamination.

iii)

This is the minimum list for MSWLFs.

iv)

Any facility accepting more than 50% by volume non-

municipal waste must determine additional indicator

parameters based upon leachate characteristic and waste

content.

One or more indicator constituents, representative of the transport

processes of constituents in the leachate, may be chosen for

monitoring in place of the constituents it represents. The use of

such indicator constituents must be included in an Agency

approved permit.

Organic Chemicals Monitoring

The operator shall monitor each existing well that is being used as a part

of the monitoring well network at the facility within one year of the

effective date of this Part, and monitor each new well within the three

months of its establishment. The monitoring required by this subsection

(a)(3) shall be for a broad range of organic chemical contaminants in

accordance with the procedures described below:

The analysis shall be at least as comprehensive and sensitive as the

tests for;

The

the 51 organic chemicals in drinking water described at

40 CFR 141.40 (1988) and 40 CFR 258.Appendix I (2006),

incorporated by reference at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 810.104;

and:

ii)

Any other organic chemical for which a groundwater

quality standard or criterion has been adopted pursuant to

Section 14.4 of the Act or Section 8 of the Illinois

Groundwater Protection Act.

Bromoform; Tribromomethane

Chloroform; Trichloromethane

o-Chlorotoluene

p-Chlorotoluene

Dibromochloromethane

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene

Dichlorodifluoromethane

1,1-Dichloroethane

1,2-Dichloroethane

1,1-Dichloroethylene

cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene

trans-1,2-Dicloroethylene

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene

Ethylbenzene

Hexachlorobutadiene

2-Hexanone; Methyl butyl ketone

Isopropylbenzene

p-Isopropyltoluene

Methyl bromide; Bromomethane

Methyl chloride; Chloromethane

Methylene bromide; Dibromomethane

Dichloromethane

Methyl ethyl ketone

Methyl iodide; Iodomethane

4-Methyl-2-pentanone

Naphthalene

Oil and Grease (hexane soluble)

n-Propylbenzene

Styrene

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

1,2,4-Trichlorbenzene

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

Trichloroethylene

Trichlorofluoromethane

1,2,3-Trichloropropane

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

Vinyl acetate

Vinyl chloride

Xylenes

At least once every two years, the operator shall monitor each well

in accordance with subsection (a)(13)(A).

The operator of a MSWLF unit shall monitor each well in

accordance with subsection (a)(l3)(A)

on an a semi-annual basis.

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (a)(3)(C) is derived from 40 CFR

258.54(b) (1992).

Confirmation of Monitored Increase

The confirmation procedures of this subsection shall be used only

if the concentrations of the constituents monitored can be

measured at or above the practical quantitation limit (PQL). The

PQL is defined as the lowest concentration that can be reliably

measured within specified limits of precision and accuracy, under

routine laboratory operating conditions. The operator shall

institute the confirmation procedures of subsection (a)(4)(B) after

notifying the Agency in writing, within ten days, of observed

increases:

The concentration of any inorganic

constituent monitored

in accordance with subsection

subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2)

shows a progressive increase over four eight consecutive

monitoring events;

ii)

The concentration of any constituent exceeds the maximum

allowable predicted concentration at an established

monitoring point within the zone of attenuation;

iii)

The concentration of any constituent monitored in

accordance with subsection (a)(3) exceeds the preceding

measured concentration at any established monitoring

point; and

iv)

The concentration of any constituent monitored at or

beyond the zone of attenuation exceeds the applicable

groundwater quality standards of Section 811.320.

The confirmation procedures shall include the following:

The operator shall verify any observed increase by taking

additional samples within 45

90 days of after the initial

observation sampling 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 and. The notification must demonstrate

a source other than the facility state the source of the

confirmed increase and provide the rationale used in such a

determination within ten days of the determination. The

notification must be submitted to the Agency no later than

180 days after the original sampling event. If the facility is

permitted by the Agency, the notification must be filed for

review as a significant permit modification pursuant to 35

Ill. Adm. Code 813.Subpart B.

iv)

If an alternative source demonstration described in

subsections (a)(4)(B)(ii) and (iii) of this Section cannot be

made, assessment monitoring is required in accordance

with subsection (b) of this Section.

If an alternative source demonstration, submitted to the

Agency as an application, is denied pursuant to 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 813.105, the operator must commence

sampling for the constituents listed in subsection (b)(5) of

this Section, and submit an assessment monitoring plan as a

significant permit modification, both within 30 days after

the dated notification of Agency denial. The operator must

sample the well or wells that exhibited the confirmed

increase.

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

provide 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:

The assessment monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with this

subsection to collect information to assess the nature and extent of

groundwater contamination. The owner or operator of a MSWLF unit

shall comply with the additional requirements prescribed in subsection

(b)(5). The 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:

More frequent sampling of the wells in which the observation

occurred;

More frequent sampling of any surrounding wells; and

The placement of additional monitoring wells to determine the

source and extent of the contamination.

The Except as provided for in subsections (a)(4)(B)(iii) and (v) of this

Section, 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 pursuant to 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 813.Subpart B within 180 days after the original sampling

event. The assessment monitoring program shall be implemented within

90 180 days of after confirmation of any monitored increase the original

sampling event in accordance with subsection (a)(4) or, in the case of

permitted facilities, within 90 45 days of after Agency approval.

If the analysis of the assessment monitoring data shows that the

concentration of one or more constituents, monitored at or beyond the

zone of attenuation is above the applicable groundwater quality standards

of Section 811.320 and is attributable to the solid waste disposal facility,

then the operator shall determine the nature and extent of the groundwater

contamination including an assessment of the potential impact on the

groundwater should waste continue to be accepted at the facility and shall

implement the remedial action in accordance with subsection (d).

If the analysis of the assessment monitoring data shows that the

concentration of one or more constituents is attributable to the solid waste

disposal facility and exceeds the maximum allowable predicted

concentration within the zone of attenuation, then the operator shall

conduct a groundwater impact assessment in accordance with the

requirements of subsection (c).

In addition to the requirements of subsection (b)(1), to collect information

to assess the nature and extent of groundwater contamination, the

following requirements are applicable to MSWLF units:

The monitoring of additional constituents pursuant to subsection

(b)(l)(A) shall

must include, at a minimum (except as otherwise

provided in subsection (b)(5)(E) of this Section), the constituents

listed in 40 CFR 258.Appendix II, incorporated by reference at 35

Ill. Adm. Code 810.104. and constituents from 35 Ill. Adm. Code

620.410.

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (b)(5)(A) is derived from 40 CFR 258.55(b)

(1992).

Within 14 days of after obtaining the results of sampling required

under subsection (b)(5)(A), the owner or operator shall:

Place a notice in the operating record identifying the

constituents that have been detected; and

ii)

Notify the Agency that such a notice has been placed in the

operating record.

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (b)(5)(B) is derived from 40 CFR

258.55(d)(l) (1992).

The owner or operator shall establish background concentrations

for any constituents detected pursuant to subsection (b)(5)(A) in

accordance with Section 811.320(e).

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (b)(5)(C) is derived from 40 CFR

258.55(d)(3) (1992).

Within 90 days of after the initial monitoring in accordance with

subsection (b)(5)(A), the owner or operator shall must monitor for

the detected constituents listed in 40 CFR 258.Appendix II and 35

Ill. Adm. Code 620.410 on a semiannual basis during the

assessment monitoring. The operator must monitor all the

constituents listed in 40 CFR 258.Appendix II and 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 620.410 on an annual basis during assessment monitoring.

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (b)(5)(D) is derived from 40 CFR

258.55(d)(2) (1992).

The owner or operator may request the Agency to delete any of the

40 CFR 258.Appendix II and 35 Ill. Adm. Code 620.410

constituents by demonstrating to the Agency that the deleted

constituents are not reasonably expected to be in or derived from

the waste contained in the leachate.

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (b)(5)(E) is derived from 40 CFR 258.55(b)

(1992).

Within 14 days of after finding an exceedance above the applicable

groundwater quality standards in accordance with subsection

(b)(3), the owner or operator shall:

Place a notice in the operating record that identifies the

constituents monitored under subsection (b)(1)(D) that have

exceeded the groundwater quality standard;

ii)

Notify the Agency and the appropriate officials of the local

municipality or county within whose boundaries the site is

located that such a notice has been placed in the operating

record; and

iii)

Notify all persons who own land or reside on land that

directly overlies any part of the plume of contamination if

contaminants have migrated off-site.

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (b)(5)(F) is derived from 40 CFR

258.55(g)(1)(i) through (iii) (1992).

If the concentrations of all 40 CFR 258.Appendix II and 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 620.410 constituents are shown to be at or below

background values, using the statistical procedures in Section

811.320(e), for two consecutive sampling events, the owner or

operator shall notify the Agency of this finding and may stop

monitoring the 40 CFR 258.Appendix II and 35 Ill. Adm. Code

620.410 constituents.

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (b)(5)(G) is derived from 40 CFR

258.55(e) (1992).

Assessment of Potential Groundwater Impact. An operator required to conduct a

groundwater impact assessment in accordance with subsection (b)(4) shall assess

the potential impacts outside the zone of attenuation that may result from

confirmed increases above the maximum allowable predicted concentration

within the zone of attenuation, attributable to the facility, in order to determine if

there is need for remedial action. In addition to the requirements of Section

811.317, the following shall apply:

The operator shall utilize any new information developed since the initial

assessment and information from the detection and assessment monitoring

programs and such information may be used for the recalibration of the

GCT model; and

The operator shall submit the groundwater impact assessment and any

proposed remedial action plans determined necessary pursuant to

subsection (d) to the Agency within 180 days of after the start of the

assessment monitoring program.

Remedial Action. The owner or operator of a MSWLF unit shall conduct

corrective action in accordance with Sections 811.324, 811.325, and 811.326. The

owner or operator of a landfill facility, other than a MSWLF unit, shall conduct

remedial action in accordance with this subsection.

The operator shall submit plans for the remedial action to the Agency.

Such plans and all supporting information including data collected during

the assessment monitoring shall be submitted within 90 days of after

determination of either of the following:

theThe

groundwater impact assessment, performed in accordance

with subsection (c), indicates that remedial action is needed; or

Any confirmed increase above the applicable groundwater quality

standards of Section 811.320 is determined to be attributable to the

solid waste disposal facility in accordance with subsection (b).

If the facility has been issued a permit by the Agency, then the operator

shall submit this information as an application for significant modification

to the permit;

The operator shall implement the plan for remedial action program within

90 days of

after the following:

Completion of the groundwater impact assessment that requires

remedial action;

Establishing that a violation of an applicable groundwater quality

standard of Section 811.320 is attributable to the solid waste

disposal facility in accordance with subsection (b)(3); or

Agency approval of the remedial action plan, where the facility has

been permitted by the Agency.

The remedial action program shall consist of one or a combination of one

of more of the following solutions:

Retrofit additional groundwater protective measures within the

unit;

Construct an additional hydraulic barrier, such as a cutoff wall or

slurry wall system

Pump and treat the contaminated groundwater; or

Any other equivalent technique which will prevent further

contamination of groundwater.

Termination of the Remedial Action Program

The remedial action program shall continue in accordance with the

plan until monitoring shows that the concentrations of all

monitored constituents are below the maximum allowable

predicted concentration within the zone of attenuation, below the

applicable groundwater quality standards of Section 811.320 at or

beyond the zone of attenuation, over a period of four consecutive

quarters no longer exist.

The operator shall submit to the Agency all information collected

under subsection (d)(5)(A). If the facility is permitted then the

operator shall submit this information as a significant modification

of the permit.

(Source: Amended at 31 Ill. Reg. ____________, effective _______________)

Section 811.320

Groundwater Quality Standards

Applicable Groundwater Quality Standards

Groundwater quality shall be maintained at each constituent’s background

concentration, at or beyond the zone of attenuation. The applicable

groundwater quality standard established for any constituent shall be:

The background concentration; or

The Board established standard adjusted by the Board in

accordance with the justification procedure of subsection (b).

Any statistically significant increase above an applicable groundwater

quality standard established pursuant to subsection (a) that is attributable

to the facility and which occurs at or beyond the zone of attenuation

within 100 years after closure of the last unit accepting waste within such

a facility shall constitute a violation.

For the purposes of this Part:

“Background concentration” means that concentration of a

constituent that is established as the background in accordance

with subsection (d); and

“Board established standard” is the concentration of a constituent

adopted by the Board as a standard for public and food processing

water supplies under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302 or as a groundwater

quality standard adopted by the Board pursuant to Section 14.4 of

the Act or Section 8 of the Illinois Groundwater Protection Act,

whichever is lower.

Justification for Adjusted Groundwater Quality Standards

An operator may petition the Board for an adjusted groundwater quality

standard in accordance with the procedures specified in Section 28.1 of the

Act and 35 Ill. Adm. Code 106.410 through 106.416104.400.Subpart D.

For groundwater which contains naturally occurring constituents which

meet the applicable requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.301, 302.304,

and 302.305,620.410, 620.420, 620.430, or 620.440 the Board will specify

adjusted groundwater quality standards no greater than those of 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 302.301, 302.304, and 302.305,620.410, 620.420, 620.430 or

620.440, respectively, upon a demonstration by the operator that:

The change in standards will not interfere with, or become

injurious to, any present or potential beneficial uses for such water;

The change in standards is necessary for economic or social

development, by providing information including, but not limited

to, the impacts of the standards on the regional economy, social

disbenefits such as loss of jobs or closing of landfills, and

economic analysis contrasting the health and environmental

benefits with costs likely to be incurred in meeting the standards. ;

and

All technically feasible and economically reasonable methods are

being used to prevent the degradation of the groundwater quality.

Notwithstanding subsection (b)(2), in no case shall the Board specify

adjusted groundwater quality standards for a MSWLF unit greater than the

following levels set forth below:

Chromium (hexavalent)

0.05

2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid

l,l,l-Trichloromethane

0.2

Trichloroethylene

0.005

2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy acetic acid 0.01

Vinyl Chloride

0.002

For groundwater which contains naturally occurring constituents which do

not meet the standards of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.301, 302.304, and

302.305,620.410, 620.420, 620.430 or 620.440, the Board will specify

adjusted groundwater quality standards, upon a demonstration by the

operator that:

The groundwater does not presently serve as a source of drinking

water;

The change in standards will not interfere with, or become

injurious to, any present or potential beneficial uses for such

waters;

The change in standards is necessary for economic or social

development, by providing information including, but not limited

to, the impacts of the standards on the regional economy, social

disbenefits such as loss of jobs or closing of landfills, and

economic analysis contrasting the health and environmental

benefits with costs likely to be incurred in meeting the standards;

and

The groundwater cannot presently, and will not in the future, serve

as a source of drinking water because:

It is impossible to remove water in usable quantities;

ii)

The groundwater is situated at a depth or location such that

recovery of water for drinking purposes is not

technologically feasible or economically reasonable;

iii)

The groundwater is so contaminated that it would be

economically or technologically impractical to render that

water fit for human consumption;

iv)

The total dissolved solids content of the groundwater is

more than 3,000 mg/l and that water will not be used to

serve a public water supply system; or

The total dissolved solids content of the groundwater

exceeds 10,000 mg/l.

Determination of the Zone of Attenuation

The zone of attenuation, within which concentrations of constituents in

leachate discharged from the unit may exceed the applicable groundwater

quality standard of this Section, is a volume bounded by a vertical plane at

the property boundary or 100 feet from the edge of the unit, whichever is

less, extending from the ground surface to the bottom of the uppermost

aquifer and excluding the volume occupied by the waste.

Zones of attenuation shall not extend to the annual high water mark of

navigable surface waters.

Overlapping zones of attenuation from units within a single facility may

be combined into a single zone for the purposes of establishing a

monitoring network.

Establishment of Background Concentrations

The initial monitoring to determine background concentrations shall

commence during the hydrogeological assessment required by Section

811.315. The background concentrations for those parameters identified

in Sections 811.315(e)(1)(G) and 811.319(a)(2) and (a)(3) shall be

established based on consecutive

quarterly sampling of wells for a

minimum of one year, monitored in accordance with the requirements of

subsections (d)(2), (d)(3) and (d)(4), which may be adjusted during the

operation of a facility. Non-consecutive data may be considered by the

Agency, if only one data point from a quarterly event is missing, and it can

be demonstrated that the remaining data set is representative of

consecutive data in terms of any seasonal or temporal variation. Statistical

tests and procedures shall be employed, in accordance with subsection (e),

depending on the number, type and frequency of samples collected from

the wells, to establish the background concentrations.

Adjustments to the background concentrations shall be made only if

changes in the concentrations of constituents observed in

upgradientbackground wells over time are determined, in accordance with

subsection (e), to be statistically significant.

, and due to natural temporal

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

landfill or the landfill activities. Such adjustments may be conducted no

more frequently than once every two years during the operation of a

facility and modified subject to approval by the Agency. Non-consecutive

data may be used for an adjustment upon Agency approval. Adjustments

to the background concentration shall not be initiated prior to 2 years after

final rule unless required by the Agency.

Background concentrations determined in accordance with this subsection

shall be used for the purposes of establishing groundwater quality

standards, in accordance with subsection (a). The operator shall prepare a

list of the background concentrations established in accordance with this

subsection. The operator shall maintain such a list at the facility, shall

submit a copy of the list to the Agency for establishing standards in

accordance with subsection (a), and shall provide updates to the list within

ten days of any change to the list.

24)

A network of monitoring wells shall be established upgradient from the

unit, with respect to groundwater flow, in accordance with the following

standards, in order to determine the background concentrations of

constituents in the groundwater:

The wells shall be located at such a distance that discharges of

contaminants from the unit will not be detectable;

The wells shall be sampled at the same frequency as other

monitoring points to provide continuous background concentration

data, throughout the monitoring period; and

The wells shall be located at several depths to provide data on the

spatial variability.

35)

A determination of background concentrations may include the sampling

of wells that are not hydraulically upgradient of the waste unit where:

Hydrogeologic conditions do not allow the owner or operator to

determine what wells are hydraulically upgradient of the waste;

and

Sampling at other wells will provide an indication of background

concentrations that is representative of that which would have been

provided by upgradient wells.

46)

If background concentrations cannot be determined on site, then

alternative background concentrations may be determined from actual

monitoring data from the aquifer of concern, which includes, but is not

limited to, data from another landfill site that overlies the same aquifer.

Statistical Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Data

Statistical tests shall be used to analyze groundwater monitoring data.

One or more of the normal theory statistical tests listed in subsection (e)(4)

shall be chosen first for analyzing the data set or transformations of the

data set. Where such normal theory tests are demonstrated to be

inappropriate, tests listed in subsection (e)(5) or a test in accordance with

subsection (e)(64) shall be used. Any statistical test chosen from

subsections (e)(4) or (e)(5), theThe level of significance (Type I error

level) shall be no less than 0.01, for individual well comparisons, and no

less than 0.05, for multiple well comparisons. The statistical analysis shall

include, but not be limited to, the accounting of data below the detection

limit of the analytical method used, the establishment of background

concentrations and the determination of whether statistically significant

changes have occurred in:

The concentration of any chemical constituent with respect to the

background concentration or maximum allowable predicted

concentration; and

The established background concentration of any chemical

constituents over time.

The statistical test or tests used shall be based upon the sampling and

collection protocol of Sections 811.318 and 811.319.

Monitored data that are below the level of detection shall be reported as

not detected (ND). The level of detection for each constituent shall be the

minimumpractical quantitation limit (PQL), and shall be the lowest

concentration of that constituent which can be measured and reported with

99 percent confidence that the true value is greater than zero, which is

defined as the method detection limit (MDL) that is protective of human

health and the environment, and can be achieved within specified limits of

precision and accuracy during routine laboratory operating conditions. In

no case, shall the PQL be established above the level that the Board has

established for a groundwater quality standard under the Illinois

Groundwater Protection Act [415 ILCS 55]. The following procedures

shall be used to analyze such data, unless an alternative procedure in

accordance with subsection (e)(64),

is shown to be applicable:

Where the percentage of nondetects in the data base used is less

than 15 percent, the operator shall replace NDs with the MDLPQL

divided by two, then proceed with the use of one or more of the

Normal Theory statistical tests listed in subsection (e)(4)

;

Where the percentage of nondetects in the data base or data

transformations used is between 15 and 50 percent, and the data

are normally distributed, the operator shall use Cohen’s or

Aitchison’s adjustment to the sample mean and standard deviation,

followed by one or more of the tests listed in subsection (e)(4)(C).

However, where data are not normally distributed, the operator

shall use an applicable nonparametric test from subsection (e)(5);

an applicable statistical procedure;

Where the percentage of nondetects in the database used is above

50 percent, then the owner or operator shall use the test of

proportions listed in an alternative procedure in accordance with

subsection (e)(4).

Normal theory statistical tests:

Student t-test including, but not limited to, Cochran’s

Approximation to the Behren-Fisher (CABF) t-test and Averaged

Replicate (AR) t-test.

Parametric analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by one or

more of the multiple comparison procedures including, but not

limited to, Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD), Student

Mewman-Kuel procedure, Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test and

Tukey’s W procedure.

Control Charts, Prediction Intervals and Tolerance Intervals, for

which the type I error levels shall be specified by the Agency in

accordance with the requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 724.197(i).

Nonparametric statistical tests shall include: Mann-Whitney U-test,

Kruskal-Wallis test, a nonparametric analysis of variance

(ANOVA) for multiple comparisons or the Wilcoxon Rank Sum

test.

Any or any other statistical test based on the distribution of the

sampling data may be used, if it is demonstrated to meet the

requirements of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 724.197(i).

BOARD NOTE: Subsection (b)(3) is derived from 40 CFR 258.40 Table 1.

(1992).

(Source: Amended at 31 Ill. Reg. ___________, effective ____________)

Appendix C List of Leachate Monitoring Parameters

Elevation Leachate Surface

Bottom of Well Elevation

Leachate Level from Measuring Point

Bacteria (Fecal Coliform)

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD

)

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

1,1-Dichloroethane

1,1-Dichloroethylene

1,1-Dichloropropene

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

1,2,3-Trichloropropane

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane

1,2-Dichloroethane

1,2-Dichloropropane

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

1,3-Dichloropropane

1,3-Dichloropropene

1,4-Dichloro-2-Butene

1-Propanol

2,2-Dichloropropane

2,4,5-tp (Silvex)

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

2,4-Dichlorophenol

2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (2,4-D)

2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether

2-Chloronaphthalene

2-Chlorophenol

2-Hexanone

2-Propanol (Isopropyl Alcohol)

3,3-Dichlorobenzidine

4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether

4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether

Benzo (b) Fluoranthene

Benzo (ghi) Perylene

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 (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate

Bis(Chloromethyl) Ether

Butyl Benzyl Phthalate

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

Chromium (hexavalent)

Chromium (total)

Chrysene

Cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene

Dibenzo (a,h) Anthracene

Dibromochloromethane

Dibromomethane

Dichlorodifluormethane

Ethylene Dibromide (EDB)

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

Hexachloroethane

Ideno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene

Oil. Hexane Soluble (or Equivalent)

Polychlorinated Biphenyls

Temperature of Leachate Sample (ºF)

Tert-Butylbenzene

Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dixoins

Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/l

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) mg/l

Toxaphene

Trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene

Trans-1,3-Dichlorpropene

Trichloroethylene

Trichlorofluoromethane

n-Nitrosodimethylamine

n-Nitrosodiphenylamine

n-Nitrosodipropylamine

Note: All parameters shall be determined from unfiltered samples.

(Source: Added at 31 Ill. Reg. ___________, effective ____________)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I, John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that

the Board adopted the above opinion and order on October 4, 2007, by a vote of 4-0.

___________________________________

John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board