BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

WAUCONDA COMMUNITY UNIT

SCHOOL DISTRICT #118,

Petitioner,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

)

) PCB No.

---

)

(LUST Appeal)

)

NOTICE OF FILING

To:

Dorothy

M. Gunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James

Thompson Center

100

West Randolph Street

Suite 11-500

Chicago,

60601

William

D. Ingersoll

Managing Attorney

III. Environmental Protection Agency

1021 North Grand Ave. East

Springfield, IL 62702

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that we have this day filed with the office

of the Clerk

of the Pollution Control Board the

Petition for Review

a copy of which is enclosed

herewith and hereby served upon you.

December 19, 2007

WAUCONDA COMMUNITY SCHOOL

DISTRICT #118

One

of its Attorneys

John

Hundley

Mandy

Combs

THE SHARP

LAW FIRM, P.C.

P.O. Box 906 - 1115 Harrison

Mt. Vernon,

62864

618-242-0246

Counsel for Petitioner Wauconda Community School District #118

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

WAUCONDA CUSD #118,

Petitioner,

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

)

) PCB No.

)

(LUST Appeal)

)

PETITION FOR REVIEW

Pursuant to

§§

40 and 57.7 of the Environmental Protection Act ("Act"), 415 ILCS

5/40,

5/57.7,

to the Board's regulations on Leaking Underground Storage Tank ("LUST")

decisions,

35 ILL. ADM. CODE 105.400

et seq.,

petitioner Wauconda CUSD #118

("Wauconda") submits this

Petition for Review

of the Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency ("Agency") decision attached hereto

as Exhibit 1 ("Decision") denying approval of

Wauconda's Corrective Action Completion Report (the "Report.

Pursuant to

57.8(1) of the Act, Wauconda further requests the Board to order the

Agency to pay Wauconda's legal costs for seeking payment

in this appeal.

THE AGENCY'S FINAL DECISION

The Decision of which review is sought is contained in Exhibit 1 hereto.

II. SERVICE OF THE AGENCY'S FINAL DECISION

The Decision indicates it was mailed November 14,2007. It was received by

Wauconda

on or about November 16, 2007.

m. GROUNDS FOR ApPEAL

The Agency's conclusion that the Report failed to provide supporting

documentation regarding the soil excavation and soil samples

is erroneous, arbitrary, and

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

capricious.

This is further supported by the reasoning of Wauconda's request for

extension, which a copy

is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

B. The Agency's conclusion that samples from the soil borings were not collected

at the depth of the highest PID readings is erroneous, arbitrary, and capricious. This is

further supported by the reasoning of Wauconda's request for extension, which a copy is

attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

C. The Agency's conclusion that the monitoring wells were not constructed in a

manner that the well screen intersects the groundwater and that the samples from the

wells were not acceptable for delineation purposes

is erroneous, arbitrary, and capricious.

This

is further supported by the reasoning of Wauconda's request for extension, which a

copy

is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

D. The Agency's conclusion that the soil boring log for the physical soil analysis

does not indicate a PID reading was taken at the depth of the soil sample

is erroneous,

arbitrary, and capricious. This is further supported by the reasoning of Wauconda's

request for extension, which a copy is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

E. The Agency's conclusion that the soil samples were collected from beneath the

groundwater table and that the samples are not acceptable for delineating soil

contamination

in the unsaturated zones is erroneous, arbitrary, and capricious. This is

further supported by the reasoning of Wauconda's request for extension, which a copy is

attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

IV.

CONCLUSION.

For all the foregoing reasons, petitioner Wauconda CUSD #118 respectfully submits

that the Decision should be reversed and the Agency ordered to approve the Corrective

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

Action Completion Report and order the Agency to pay Wauconda's attorneys' fees for this

appeal.

December 19, 2007

WAUCONDA CUSD #118

John

T. Hundley

Mandy

L. Combs

THE SHARP LAW FIRM, P.C.

P.O. Box 906 - 1115 Harrison

Mt. Vernon, IL 62864

618-242-0246

Counsel for Petitioner Wauconda CUSD #118

sara\wpdocs\USI - Wauconda\Petition for Review.doc

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

1021 NORTH

GRAND AVENUE EAST, P,O.

Box 19276,

SPRlNGFIElD, IlliNOIS

62794-9276 - ( 217) 782-3397

JAMES R. THOMPSON CENTER,

100

WEST RANDOLPH, SUITE

11-300,

CHICAGO,

It 60601 - (312) 814-6026

ROD

BLAGOjEVICH, GOVERNOR

DOUGLAS

P. SCOTT,

DIRECTOR

217/782-6762

NOV 1

2007

/d~

Wauconda CUSD #118

Attention:

Bill Harkin

555

North Main Street

Wauconda,

TIL 60084

Re:

LPC #0971855029 -- Lake County

Wauconda

Wauconda CUSD #118

225 Osage Street

Leaking

UST Incident No. 901772

Leaking'USTTechnical File

Dear Mr. Harkin:

The illinois Environmental Protection Agency (lliinois EPA) has reviewed the Corrective Action

Completion Report submitted for the above-referenced

incident. This infonnation, dated August 17, 2007,

was received by the Illinois

EPA on August 21, 2007. Citations in this letter are from 35 illinois

Administrative Code (35 ill. Adm. Code).

Pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 731.166, the Corrective Action Completion Report is rejected for the

following reason(s):

1. The lllinois EPA has no supporting documentation regarding the soil excavation. Please provide all

supporting documentation

regarding the 1,500 cubic yard soil excavation referenced in the report,

including all confirmation samples collected during the excavation. All supporting documentation

regarding

all

activities conducted

remediate the release are required to be submitted prior to the

issuance

of a No Further Remediation letter.

2. Chemical samples from the following soil borings were not collected at the depth ofthe highest PID

readings, therefore these samples are not acceptable for contamination delineation: BHl, BID and

BH3. As Pill levels are not acceptable sample methods for detennining contaminant levels, the

lllinois EPA

requires that samples be collected from area ofthe highest PID for analytical testing.

This

was not conducted.

The following monitoring wells were not constructed in such a manner that the well screen intersects

the groundwater in the monitoring well: MWl, MW2, MW3, MW5 and MW6. The groundwater

samples from these wells are

not acceptable for delineation purposes. Please provide groundwater

sample analyses from monitoring wells that are constructed

in a manner where the well screen

intersects the groundwater table.

The soil boring log provided for the physical soil analysis does not indicate a PID reading was taken

at the depth of the soil sample. In order to determine ifthe physical soil analysis boring was advanced

ROCKFORD -

4302 North Main Street,

RockfOld,

1161103 - (815) 987-7760 a

DES PLAINES -9511

Harrison

St.,

Des Plaines,ll600i6 -(847) 294-4000

ELGIN - 595 South State, Elgin, Il 60123 - (847) 608-3131

PEORIA - 541 5 N. University St., Peoria, IL 61614 - (309) 693-5463

BUREAU Of LAND - PEORIA -7620 N, University St., Peoria, Il61614 - (309) 693-5462 •

CHilMPAIGN- 2125 South First Street, Champaign, IL 61820 -

(2in 278-5800

$PRlNCFIELD

-4500 S. Sixth Street Rd., Springfield, IL 62706 -(217) 786-6892 •

COUINSVILlE - 2009 Mall Street, Collinsville, IL 62234 -(61S) 346-5120

MARION- 2309

Main

St.,

Suite 116, Marion, 1162959 - (618)

993-7200

PRINTED

RECYCLED

PAPER

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

Page 2

in an area not affected by contamination, PID reading are required with this borings as it is required

for all borings.

5. During the review of this document, it is apparent that all soil samples with the exception of

BH11.>.have been

~oUected'from

beneath the groundwater table. This strata is not acceptable for

delineating soil contamination extent

the Unsaturated zones, therefore, all soil samples, with the

exception

ofBHll are not acceptable for confmnation sampling. Please provide the lllinois EPA

with soil sample resultsdelineating the soil contamination extent in the unsaturated zone.

6. Please provide the Illinois EPA with maps showing the surrounding streets and properties.

The Illinois

EPA requires that surrounding property use be notated on the map.

A revised report must be submitted within 90 days ofthe date of this letter to:

illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Bureau

of Land - #24

Leaking UndergrOlllld Storage Tank Section

1021

North Grand Avenue East

Post Office

Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

Please submit all

correspondence in duplicate and include the Re: block shoWn at the beginning ofthis .

letter.

Ifyou have any questions or need further assistance, please contact Carol Hawbaker at 217/782-5713.

Harry A. Chappel, P.E.

Unit Manager

Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section

Division

ofRemediation Management

Bureau

ofLand

HAC:CLH

United Science Industries

BOLFile

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

p.Q.

Box 360

6295 East IL Highway 15

Woodlawn.

IL 62898

tf 800.372.8740

P 618.241.8000

91 7108 2133 3931

937D_~_~.~_~

f618.735.2907

---------- ------_._----_

•.....•

_-_._--_._._

.._-

----

___________________ www.unitedscience.com --

.. ; .....•

November 27, 2007

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Attn: William Ingersoll

Division of Legal Counsel

1021 North Grand Avenue

Springfield,

62794~9276

Re:

LPC #. 0971855029 - Lake County

Wauconda/Wauconda CUSD #.IlS

225 Osage Street

LUST Incident No.

90lm

Dear Mr. Ingersoll:

.zJ

~'MAILED

L§:.JDEC 0 3 2007

United Science Industries, Inc. (USI), on behalf of our client, Wauconda CUSD #.1l8, is

hereby requesting a

90~day

extension to the

35~day

appeal period in regard to the IEPA

correspondence dated November

14, 2007 which rejected the Corrective Action

Completion Report. A copy of the correspondence is attached The reason

for the appeal

extension is to provide the additional time necessary for the Agency and Wauconda

CUSD

#118 to negotiate a settlement resulting from the rejection as defined on

Attachment A, Section 2 of the decisions.

Wauconda CUSD

#118 is considering an appeal of this decision on the following basis:

1) The Illinois EPA has no supporting documentation regarding the soil excavation. Please provide

all supporting documentation regarding the 1,500 cubic yard soil excavation referenced in the

report, including all confirmation samples collected during the excavation. All supporting

documentation regarding all activities conducted to remediate the release are required to be

submitted prior to the issuance ofa No Further Remediation letter.

This information was obtained from the Agency FOIA. The soil excavation was

performed by previous consultant Acacia Environmental Services. United Science

Industries, Inc. (USr) does not have excavation confinnation samples. USI

was

under the impression this issue was resolved since the Agency approved a "plan"

1991 for corrective action and reimbursed corrective action costs in 1993. The owner

has been contacted again

to find out

any data or information is available.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

Wauconda CUSD #118

Incident

# 90i 772

Page 2 of 3 .

. 2)Chcmical samples from the following soil borings were not collected at the depth of the highest

PID readings, therefore these samples are not acceptable for contamination delineation: BHl,

BH2, and

BH3.

As PID levels are not acceptable sample methods for determining contaminant

levels, the Illinois EPA requires that samples be collected from area of the highest PID for

analytical testing. This was not conducted.

PID readings are used for soil screening in the field, they are an estimate of potential

contamination and

readings within a few ppm are essentially the same. The low level

readings can be interpreted as "'dean" soil and standard Agency approved protocol

allowed for soil samples at the water table to insure no migration

to groundwater

had occurred. The PID readings forBHI,

BH2, and BH3 range from 2 - 5 ppm at

all

depths. These low levels indicate "clean" samples as indicated by the soil analysis;

therefore the sample was collected

above the groundwater.table because the soil

column was screened as potentially meeting objectives and essentially the same

contaminant levels, if any. A sample was collected above the water table because the

soil was "clean" throughout and as common practice, a sample was obtained above or

at the top of the groundwater table. This was the standard engineering practice at

the time

in November 2005 and the samples should be acceptable based on previous

Agency approved practices.

3) The following monitoring wells were not constructed in such a manner that the well screen

intersects the groundwater in monitoring well: MWl,

MW2,

MW3, MW5 and MW6. The

groundwater samples from these wells are not acceptable for delineation purposes. Please

provide groundwater sample analyses from monitoring wells that are construCted in a manner

whererhe well screen intersects thegroundwater table.

Referencing soil boring logs, the groundwater is noted at a depth of approximately 13

to 14 feet within a sandy layer beneath a number of day layers which confine this

aquifer.. Monitoring well completion reports indicate the well screens were set a

depth of 20 feet for

MW~1,

MW~2, MW~3,

and

MW~5.

MW~4

and

MW~6

boring

logs revealed groundwater

at a depth of 10 feet and 8 feet respectively. Wells were

set at a depth of

15 feet. In all instances the 10 foot screen intersects the top the ofthe

groundwater table and allows for fluctuations

groundwater depth. Therefore, the

monitoring well screens intersected the top of the groundwater table

when they

were installed Typically, monitoring wells set beneath or

in a day type soil are in a

confined aquifer; therefore,

it is conunon for groundwater to rise up into the well due

to hydrostatic pressure.

So, when the technician returned to the site to sample the

wells the groundwater level

the well was approximately

8~9

feet bgs. This is

referred to

as the potentiometric surface and is not the actual depth to groundwater.

These samples should be acceptable and such samples were accepted by

the Agency

on other project.

4) The

soil

boring log provided for the physical soil analysis does not indicate a PID reading was

taken at the depth of the soil sample. In order to determine if the physical soil analysis boring

was advanced in an area not affected by contamination, PID reading are required with this

borings as it

requiredfor all borings.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

E.CERTfFiED

FIRST Cl.".SS

Wauconda CUSD #118

Incident

901772

Page 3 of 3

The PID readings shown in the soil boring log for ST

1 was zero. The sample from

1 was collected for physical soil analysis and not chemical atIalysis. The PID is

technically not applicable. Physical analysis soil samples are collected

in a steel

Shelby tube which is

an intact sample and cannot be screened Soil sampling above

the Shelby tube was screened and did not indicate contamination'based on PID

readings, no odor or stain was noted. USI typically collects physical soil samples in

non~contaminated

areas. Technically, the physical parameters are not affected by the

presence of contamination nor do regulations indicate this as a requirement. This is

the first time the Agency has made an issue of this.

5) During the review of this document,

it is

apparent that all soil samples with the exception of

BHll

have been collected from beneath the groundwater table. This strata is not acceptable for

delineating soil contamination extent in the unsaturated zones, therefore, all soil samples, with

the exception of

BHll

are not acceptable for confirmation sampling; Please provide the Illinois

EPA with soil sample results delineating the soil contamination extent in the unsaturated zone.

As indicated above, the groundwater depth in the soil and the monitoring wells is

different due to hydrostatic pressure which "pushes" the groundwater

up into the

open monitoring well. Based

on soil boring logs, the soil samples were collected just

above the water table. This is the first time soil sample depths have been contested

by the Agency

in this type of scenario. Please refer to the soil boring logs. The issue

of hydrostatic pressure and potentiometric surface is an issue on some other projects

and has

to be explained

For the above reasons, a 90 day extension to appeal is requested

Wauconda CUSD

#118 appreciates your time and consideration in this matter.

you

have any questions or comments concerning the above, please contact me at

(618)

241~

8027.

Sincerely,

ITED SCIENCE INDUSTRIES, INC.

oseph

M. Kelly

Professional Engineer

Attachments

i::

.2 tn

Package ID: 9 1 7", 0 8 21333931 93700424

(\) .Destination ZIP Cooe: 62 7 9 4

E.2

RecIpient: -------_______ PSP' Account #: 41 4 70:3

§~

Address: ---------____

!;%rial#: 2344202. I

~UL.L

===========__:C::.:EC

.3 2007

2-J

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned attorney at law, hereby certify that I caused copies of the

foregoing

document to be served by placement in the United States Post Office

Mail Box

at 14

& Main Streets in Mt. Vernon, Illinois, before 6:00 p.m. this

date, in sealed envelopes with proper first-class postage affixed, addressed to:

Dorothy

M. Gunn, Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James

Thompson Center

100

West Randolph Street

Suite 11-500

Chicago, IL 60601

December 19, 2007

William

D. Ingersoll

Managing Attorney

III. Environmental Protection Agency

1021 North Grand Ave. East

Springfield, IL 62702

John

1. Hundley

Mandy L. Combs

THE SHARP LAW FIRM, P.C.

P.O. Box 906 - 1115 Harrison

Mt. Vernon, IL 62864

618-242-0246

Counsel for Petitioner Wauconda Community Unit School District #118

sara\wpdocs\USI-Wauconda\Notice.doc

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, December 19, 2007

* * * * * PCB 2008-039 * * * * *