BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

RECEIVED

CLERK'S

OFFICE

IN THE

MATTER OF

APR 2 5

2008

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

RCRA DELISTING ADJUSTED STANDARD ) AS 08-

1

PETITION OF PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY) (Adjusted Standard – Land)

)?

(RCRA Delisting)

RCRA DELISTING ADJUSTED STANDARD PETITION

NOW COMES Peoria Disposal Company ("PDC"), by its attorneys, Elias, Meginnes,

Riffle & Seghetti, P.C. and Brown, Hay & Stephens, LLP, pursuant to Section 28.1 of the

Illinois Environmental Protection Act (the "Act"), 415 ILCS 5/28.1, 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 104,

and 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122 (40 CFR 260.22), and petitions the Illinois Pollution Control

Board (the "Board") to grant an adjusted standard to delist the stabilized residue generated by

PDC from the treatment of K061 electric arc furnace dust at PDC's waste stabilization facility in

Peoria County, Illinois.

INTRODUCTION

In 1989, PDC's waste stabilization facility (the "WSF") was approved for operations

under PDC's RCRA Part B Permit, issued by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (the

"IEPA"). The WSF has been in continuous operation since 1989. In 1996, the United States

Environmental Protection Agency (the "USEPA") approved PDC's request to change the WSF

from a waste pile to a containment building unit. The WSF is peunitted and authorized for

storage and treatment of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. The principal treatment activity

currently conducted in the WSF is chemical microencapsulation of RCRA hazardous wastes

utilizing reagents designed to reduce the leachability of inorganic hazardous constituents in

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

---

accordance with the Best Demonstrated Available Technology Standards prescribed by the

USEPA and the IEPA.

The largest volume of listed hazardous waste currently being treated at the WSF is K061

electric arc furnace ("EAF") dust generated by steel mills that produce steel using electric arc

furnaces. At this time, PDC disposes the K061 EAF dust after treatment in its hazardous waste

landfill (the "PDC No. 1 Landfill") in Peoria County, Illinois, which has been operating for over

twenty years pursuant to a RCRA Part B permit issued on November 4, 1987. The PDC No. 1

Landfill was one of the first authorized RCRA facilities in the State of Illinois, and has operated

without any notices of environmental violations for over sixteen years. At the present level of

operation, the PDC No.-1 Landfill will reach capacity in 2009. When the PDC No. 1 Landfill is

full, the WSF will continue operating, but stabilized residue generated by PDC from the

treatment of listed hazardous waste, primarily K061 EAF dust, will have to be transported by

PDC to another Subtitle C landfill for disposal. The transportation to and disposal of these wastes

in a Subtitle C landfill will be very costly.

During the past year, PDC has developed a new proprietary stabilization technology to

treat the K061 EAF dust. PDC has utilized the new proprietary stabilization technology in full-

scale production at the WSF to conduct nine in-plant trials designed to demonstrate that all

applicable criteria for the granting of an adjusted standard to delist K061 EAF dust stabilized

residues can be satisfied by the PDC treatment process. Herein, PDC is petitioning the Board for

an upfront and conditional delisting for the stabilized residue generated by PDC from the

treatment of K061 EAF dust utilizing this new proprietary stabilization technology at the WSF

("EAFDSR").

MIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

2

---

The K061 EAF dust is a listed hazardous waste designated as hazardous waste code

K061, specified by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.132 for "emission control dust/sludge from the

primary production of steel in electric furnaces." The K061 EAF dust must be stabilized to meet

applicable land disposal restrictions ("LDR") treatment standards specified for K061 listed

hazardous wastes by Subpart D of 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 728 prior to land disposal. The residue

that PDC currently generates from the treatment of K061 EAF dust remains classified as a

K061 hazardous waste by virtue of the "derived-from" rule (35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.103(e))

because it is generated from the treatment of a listed hazardous waste. Therefore, at present, the

residue from the treatment of K061 EAF dust must be disposed of in a Subtitle C landfill.

Excepting the PDC No. 1 Landfill, the nearest operating Subtitle C landfill to the WSF is

located in Roachdale, Indiana, nearly 220 miles from the WSF.

Under the proposed Adjusted Standard, the EAFDSR will be excluded from the list of

hazardous wastes contained in Subpart D of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721 and PDC will be able to

transport and dispose of the EAFDSR at a Subtitle D landfill permitted by the IEPA. The K061

EAF dust waste stream will be received from the mills at an approximate average rate of 74,000

tons per year ("tpy") as part of noinial WSF operations, with a maximum of 95,000 tpy. The

EAFDSR generated by the treatment process will be a maximum of 142,500 tpy (or 95,000 cubic

yards per year). PDC intends to transport the delisted EAFDSR to its affiliated Subtitle D landfill

in Tazewell County, Illinois (the "Indian Creek Landfill No. 2"), or to two other Subtitle D

landfills affiliated with PDC in Illinois. If the EAFDSR is delisted, PDC will be able to continue

to provide a cost-effective method of treating EAF dust for steel mills in the Midwest,

particularly ones in Illinois.

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

3

---

PDC's proprietary stabilization technology effectively stabilizes K061 metal

constituents

and removes the hazard of toxicity, for which the K061 EAF dust received its listing.

Representative verification and analytical testing, conducted as part of the full-scale

stabilization process trials, demonstrates that the process renders extractable metals below their

Land Disposal Restriction standards (LDRs) and proposed delisting levels. Although the

EAFDSR contains certain hazardous constituents (i.e., metals listed in Appendix G of 35 Ill.

Adm. Code Part 721), these constituents are essentially rendered immobile, such that the

concentrations of these hazardous constituents are below: 1) the LDRs applicable to K061 EAF

dust, 2) the Characteristic of Toxicity levels established at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.124, and 3)

risk-based levels established by the USEPA's Delisting Risk Assessment Software ("DRAS")

model or other method approved by the USEPA and IEPA to demonstrate that the constituents

of concern are at concentrations that are non-threatening to human health and the environment.

A description of PDC's process and waste management operations at the WSF is set forth in

Section 3 of the "Technical Support Document for the RCRA Delisting Adjusted Standard

Petition for PDC EAF Dust Stabilized Residue" (Attachment 2 hereto) (the "Technical Support

Document"). It is anticipated that the feed materials used, processes and operations of the

treatment process on the K061 EAF dust will not produce waste not covered by this

demonstration.

The duration of the proposed delisting will be multi-year and will continue for as long as

PDC maintains a valid RCRA Part B Pellnit for the WSF. The proposed Adjusted Standard will

require testing of each daily batch of EAFDSR for the metal constituents of concern ("COCs"),

to assure compliance with delisting concentrations. In the event the verification analysis results

exceed the delisting level concentrations, the treated residues will either be 1) allowed to

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

4

---

continue to cure which will provide additional treatment as the chemical reagents complete their

reactions with the waste, followed by another round of verification sampling and analysis, 2) re-

processed through the WSF for additional treatment, followed by another round of verification

sampling and analysis, or 3) managed as a K061 hazardous waste at a properly permitted RCRA

Subtitle C facility. Using this process, the delisted EAFDSR will not be considered to be

generated until verification sampling and analysis demonstrates that it meets the approved

delisting levels. This process provides a virtually fail-safe system to ensure that the qualitative

nature of the EAFDSR disposed of by PDC will never exceed the approved delisting levels.

As stated above, after over twenty years of operations, the PDC No. 1 Landfill is reaching

its permitted disposal capacity. On November 9, 2005, PDC filed an application for local siting

approval for an expansion of the PDC No. 1 Landfill with the County of Peoria,, which

purportedly denied the application. PDC appealed the purported denial to the Board, which

affirmed the alleged decision of the County of Peoria. PDC has appealed the decision of the

Board to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third Judicial District, which appeal is currently

pending.

After PDC's application for local siting approval for an expansion of the PDC No. 1

Landfill was purportedly denied, PDC submitted an application to the IEPA seeking

modification of PDC's RCRA Part B Permit. The modification sought in the application was to

allow the development and operation of a landfill unit known as the PDC No. 1 Residual Waste

Landfill for acceptance of stabilized residue from the WSF. The application sought authorization

to vertically raise Area C of the PDC No. 1 Landfill and to construct a horizontal expansion of

the- PDC No. 1 Landfill. The expansion was designed to provide additional disposal space to be

used solely for PDC's on-site generated stabilized residue from the WSF. On August 30, 2007,

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

5

---

the IEPA denied the modification request because the application did not demonstrate proof of

local siting pursuant to Section 39.2 of the Act. PDC appealed the permit denial to the Board,

which affirmed the decision of the IEPA. PDC has appealed the decision of the Board to the

Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District, which appeal is currently pending.

A.

Standard of General Applicability from Which Adjusted Standard is Sought

(35

Ill.

Adm. Code 104.406(a))

The standard of general applicability from which this Adjusted Standard is sought is the

Illinois regulation classifying the K061 EAF dust as a listed hazardous waste. The K061 EAF

dust is a listed hazardous waste designated as hazardous waste code K061 specified by 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 721.132 for "emission control dust/sludge from the primary production of steel in

electric furnaces." 1

The K061 EAF dust must be stabilized to meet applicable LDR treatment

standards specified for K061 listed hazardous wastes by Subpart D of 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part

7282

prior to land disposal. The resulting EAF dust treatment residue is classified as a K061

hazardous waste by virtue of the "derived-from" rule (35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.103(e)

3

) because it

is generated from the treatment of a listed hazardous waste.

B.

Statutory Basis of Regulation of General Applicability

(35

M.

Adm. Code 104.406(b))

The Illinois hazardous waste regulations, including 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts 720 - 728,

were promulgated to implement the requirements of the federal Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act of 1976 ("RCRA") and the Federal regulations at 40 CFR Parts 260-268.

' 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.132 was initially effective on May 17, 1982, and was most recently

amended effective December 20, 2006.

2

Subpart D of 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 728 was initially effective on November 12, 1987, and was

most recently amended effective December 20, 2006.

3

35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.103(e) was initially effective on November 12, 1987, and was most

recently amended effective December 20, 2006.

THIS FILING IS. ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND I01.302(g).

6

---

Specifically, the K061 hazardous waste classification set forth in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.132(a)

is identical in substance to the federal K061 classification in 40 CFR 261.32(a).

C.

Level of Justification Specified by Regulation of General Applicability

(35

Adm. Code 104.406(c))

35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122 contains the requirements for delisting of a hazardous waste

established in the RCRA regulations at 40 CFR 260.22. The K061 EAF dust is a listed

hazardous waste designated as hazardous waste code K061, specified by 35 Ill. Adm. Code

721.132 for "emission control dust/sludge from the primary production of steel in electric

furnaces." The EAF dust treatment residue that PDC currently generates is classified as K061

hazardous waste by virtue of the "derived from" rule (35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.103(e)) because it

is generated from the treatment of a listed hazardous waste.

Pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(b), a person may petition the Board to exclude

from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.103(a)(2)(B) or (a)(2)(C), a waste that is described in these Sections

and is either a waste listed in Subpart D of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721 or is derived from a waste

listed in that Subpart. This exclusion may only be granted for a particular generating, storage,

treatment, or disposal facility. A person seeking such an exclusion must file a petition meeting

the requirements specified in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(n), and such petition must be found by

the Board to demonstrate the following:

1.

That the waste produced by the particular generating facility does not

meet any of the criteria under which the waste was listed as a hazardous

or acute hazardous waste. (35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(1));

2.

That there is a reasonable basis to believe that factors (including

additional constituents) other than those for which the waste was listed

could cause the waste to be a hazardous waste, that such factors do not

warrant retaining the waste as a hazardous waste. A Board determination

under the preceding sentence must be made by reliance on, and in a

manner consistent with, "EPA RCRA Delisting Program—Guidance

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

7

---

Manual for the Petitioner," incorporated by reference in Section

720.111(a). (35 111. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(2)); and

3. That a waste

so excluded

is not hazardous waste by operation of Subpart

C of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721, i.e., it is not a hazardous waste by virtue of

exhibiting one of the hazardous characteristics specified in Subpart C. (35

Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(2) and 720.122(b)).

Where the waste

is derived from one or more listed hazardous wastes, the demonstration

must be made with respect

to

the waste mixture as a whole; analysis must be conducted for not

only those constituents for which the listed waste contained in the mixture was listed as

hazardous, but also for factors (including additional constituents) that could cause the waste

mixture to be a hazardous waste. 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(b).

Since the EAF dust is listed with hazard code "T" in Subpart D of 35 Ill. Adm. Code

721, PDC must also demonstrate the following:

1.

The waste meets the following criteria:

A.

It does not contain the constituent or constituents (as defined in Appendix

G of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721) that caused USEPA to list the waste (35 Ill.

Adm. Code 720.122(d)(1)(A)); or

B.

Although containing one or more of the hazardous constituents (as

defined in Appendix G of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721) that caused USEPA

to

list the waste, the waste does not meet the criterion of 35 Ill. Adm. Code

721.111(a)(3) when considering the factors used in 35 Ill. Adm. Code

721.111(a)(3)(A) through (a)(3)(K) under which the waste was listed as

hazardous (35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(d)(1)(B)).

2. That factors (including additional constituents) other than those for which the

waste was listed could cause the waste to be hazardous waste, that such factors

do not warrant retaining the waste as a hazardous waste (35

Ill. Adm. Code

720.122(d)(2)); and

3. That the waste does not exhibit any of the characteristics defined in 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 721.121, 721.122, 721.123, or 721.124, using any applicable methods

prescribed in those sections (35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(d)(3) and

720.122(d)(4)).

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

8

---

The foregoing demonstrations required for all wastes sought to be delisted (in 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 720.122(a) and (b)) and for wastes coded "T" sought to be delisted (in 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 720.122(d)) clearly overlap, and are treated together in the Technical Support Document

and in this Petition. These requirements, and the demonstrations that they have been satisfied,

are described in detail in the Technical Support Document, and are summarized in Section H,

below.

D.

Nature of Petitioner's Activity

(35 III. Adm. Code 104.406(d))

1.

Nature of Activity

As discussed in the introduction above and in greater detail in the Technical Support

Document, PDC accepts and treats K061 EAF dust at the WSF as set forth in its RCRA Part

B

Permit. Currently, the stabilized residue is disposed at the PDC No. 1 Landfill upon receipt of

verification test results demonstrating LDR compliance. This Adjusted Standard will not only

reduce costs, but will also render a hazardous waste non-hazardous by treating its toxicity

through chemical stabilization.

2.

Location of and Area Affected by Petitioner's Activity

Location:

Peoria Disposal Company

4349 W. Southport Road

Peoria, IL 61615

USEPA RCRA ID No. ILD000805812

IEPA RCRA ID No. 1438120003

Affected Area:

See Figure 1 (Topographic Map showing facility location) and Figure 2 (Site Layout)

provided herewith. Also, see discussion found above, regarding three of the landfills in Illinois

to which the delisted waste is likely to be taken.

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

9

---

3.

Number of Employees and Age of the Facility

The WSF currently employs fourteen workers whose duties include operations

management, waste treatment, plant cleaning and maintenance, and administrative compliance.

The WSF also requires the efforts of eleven additional employees who are at least partially

dedicated to the WSF performing waste receiving inspections, equipment maintenance, and

permit compliance and auditing duties. The treatment of EAF dust began at the WSF in 1989

and has been ongoing for the past nineteen years.

4.

Pollution Control Equipment Already in Use

As discussed above, the WSF is permitted as a RCRA containment building and, as

such, must be fully enclosed. The RCRA Part B Peiiiiit requires that the WSF be maintained

under negative pressure to prevent fugitive air emissions. To accomplish this, the WSF is

equipped with two air pollution control devices: a 60,000 cubic feet per minute ("efill")

baghouse dust collector and a 30,000 cfm cartridge dust collector. The 60,000 cfm dust

collector is tasked with air quality maintenance in the general treatment area and, depending on

the activity occurring within the building, its flow can be apportioned in any desired percentage

to three focused pick-up points. The 30,000 cfm dust collector is dedicated wholly to the

easternmost receiving bay (see Section 3 of theTechnical Support Document), which is isolated

from the general plant by separator walls and designed to manage dusty wastes without fugitive

emissions from the building or an adverse impact on air quality in the general treatment area.

5.

Qualitative and Quantitative Description of the Emissions, Discharges or

Releases Currently Generated by Petitioner's Activity

The WSF operates as an area air emissions source under IEPA lifetime Permit No.

143808AAN, which limits emissions from the WSF to a maximum of 33.8 tons per year of

particulate matter and 3.9 tons per year of volatile organic materials. Calculated actual WSF

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

10

---

emissions reported to the IEPA for calendar year 2006 were 7.70 tons of particulate matter and

0.9 tons of volatile organic materials. Emissions for calendar year 2007 are not yet calculated or

reported (due date of May 1, 2008).

Waste water discharges from the WSF are prohibited by the RCRA Part B Permit and

are prevented by facility design. The WSF is constructed with a twelve-inch thick concrete

floor slab as primary containment and a 100-mils thick high-density polyethylene (HDPE) liner

as secondary containment. The WSF manages rain water and wash water from the curbed and

HDPE-lined concrete receiving apron adjacent to the north end of the building by contouring of

the containment slab, and/or via pipes to a master sump located within the building. Wash

water generated within the containment building is likewise directed to the master sump. The

water collected in the master sump is then used as a slurrying agent in the chemical stabilization

process. This water is not used in the process when performing waste treatment to accomplish

delisting.

E.

?

Efforts Necessary to Comply with Regulation of General Applicability

(35 Ill. Adm. Code 104.406(e)

PDC's current treatment and disposal process involves principally on-site disposal of

chemically stabilized residues that remain hazardous. PDC also currently ships some treatment

residues off-site for disposal as non-hazardous waste at its affiliated Subtitle ID Landfill located

in Tazewell County, Illinois. The non-hazardous residues are decharacterized waste (i.e.,

originally D004-D011 waste codes) and delisted residues from PDC's treatment of F006 waste.

Area C at the PDC No. 1 Landfill is currently active and contains all of the remaining capacity

available for disposal. Based on the current rate of receipts, Area C will reach capacity

sometime in 2009.

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

11

---

Because the WSF has been in operation for more than nineteen years and is a well

maintained plant, all fixed assets necessary to receive waste, treat waste, and store treated waste

prior to disposal are in place. Therefore, when considering the cost of the compliance

alternative, while no capital investments would be necessary, the variable operating expenses

would be so adversely impacted that the viability of continued operations is questionable.

Many variable expenses would remain the same, such as labor, laboratory analysis,

utilities, etc. The variable operating costs that would change are the post-treatment

transportation to and disposal at an off-site Subtitle C landfill. Presented below are the affected

variable costs to ship to the nearest Subtitle C landfill for disposal. PDC, through its Brokerage

Services Group, has business relationships with Subtitle C landfills to manage those wastes that

the PDC No. 1 Landfill

is

not equipped to manage or is simply too busy to accommodate.

Therefore, the following cost comparison is based on current market price quotations.

Transportation to and Disposal at nearest Subtitle C landfill:

Expense Item

Cost per Ton

Estimated Cost per Year

Transportation for Disposal

$44.00

$4,884,000

Disposal

$97.76

$10,851,360

Total

$141.76

$15,735,360

Alternatively, the next table presents the same line-item expenses if PDC were granted

the petitioned Adjusted Standard by the Board and could ship delisted residues to a Subtitle D

landfill located in Illinois. These costs are accurate because they are based on experience from

the ongoing shipment by PDC of delisted F006 wastes and decharacterized wastes to an affiliated

Subtitle D landfill located in Tazewell County, Illinois.

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

12

---

Transportation and Disposal for Subtitle D Landfill:

Expense Item

Cost per Ton

Estimated Cost per Year

Transportation for Disposal

$8.86

$983,460

Disposal

$20.00

$2,220,000

Total

$28.86

$3,203,460

The costs presented for both alternatives are based on an average of twenty-two tons per

shipment as would be hauled by semi-truck and aluminum dump trailer combinations, with an

average of 111,000 tons per year shipped.

The cost differential between the two compliance alternatives, $112.90 per ton totaling

$12,531,900 per year, would be an unbearable hardship for PDC that would result in the loss of

most of its K061 accounts (which comprise the majority of the WSF receipts), as well as a

dramatically increased arid perhaps equally unbearable cost burden for its K061-generating

customers in the Midwest, many of which (as discussed above) have no feasible or

economically viable alternative.

F.

?

Proposed Adjusted Standard

(35 III. Adm. Code 104.406(0)

1.

?

Proposed Language

PDC proposes that the Board adopt the following adjusted standard:

The Board hereby grants to Peoria Disposal Company ("PDC") an adjusted standard from

35 Ill. Adm. Code 721 Subpart D subject to the following conditions:

1.

This adjusted standard becomes effective on (effective date here).

• 2. This adjusted standard is provided only for K061 wastes treated using PDC's

mechanical mixer, and only for total annual waste disposal volumes of EAF dust

stabilized residue up to 95,000 cubic yards. PDC's treated K061 residues

generated by the PDC K061 waste stabilization process described in its Petition

filed xxxxx are non-hazardous as defined in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721. The EAF

dust stabilized residues must meet the verification and testing requirements

prescribed in paragraph 3 listed below to ensure that hazardous constituents are

not present in the EAF dust stabilized residues at levels of regulatory concern.

The EAF dust stabilized residues will no longer be subject to regulation under 35

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

13

---

Ill. Adm. Code Parts 722-728 and the permitting standards of 35 Ill. Adm. Code

703. The EAF dust stabilized residues shall be disposed of pursuant to the

Board's non-hazardous landfill regulations found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 810-815,

and disposed of in a lined landfill with leachate collection and all necessary

authorizations to receive the non-hazardous EAF dust stabilized residues. The

landfill used for disposal shall be located in the State of Illinois.

3.

Verification and Testing.

a.

Treatability Testing. PDC shall verify through bench-scale treatability

testing that each K061 waste stream (other than those already represented

in the full-scale, in-plant trials) received by PDC for chemical stabilization

can be treated to meet the delisting levels of paragraph 4 prior to the

operation of full-scale treatment of that waste stream. PDC shall submit a

report of the treatability testing to the Agency within seven days of the

completion of such testing.

b.

Technology Modification Demonstration. With any significant change in

the chemicals used by PDC in its full-scale treatment process, PDC shall

first verify through bench-scale treatability testing that each K061 waste

stream received by PDC for chemical stabilization can be treated to meet

the delisting levels of paragraph 4 using the new chemical treatment

regimen prior to the operation of full-scale treatment using the new

chemical regimen.

c.

Testing of Treatment Residues for Inorganic Parameters. PDC shall

collect representative grab samples of each treated mixer load of the EAF

dust stabilized residue and composite the grab samples to produce a daily

composite sample. This sample shall be analyzed for TCLP leachate

concentrations for all the constituents listed in paragraph 4 (a) prior to

disposal of the treated batch. If the initial composite sample does not

indicate compliance with the delisting levels, the treated residues will

either be: 1) treated further using additional curing time as the chemical

reagents complete their reactions with the waste, followed by another

round of verification sampling and analysis, 2) re-processed through the

WSF for additional treatment, followed by another round of verification

sampling and analysis, or 3) managed as a K061 hazardous waste at a

properly permitted RCRA Subtitle C facility. All verification analyses

shall be conducted on a composite that effectively represents the entire

batch as did the initial sample. If delisting levels are not achieved within

the maximum storage time allowed PDC by its RCRA Part B Permit, the

entire batch must undergo re-treatment or be managed as a hazardous

waste as required by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 728 and the WSF RCRA Part B

Permit.

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

14

---

d. All analyses shall be performed according to SW-846 methodologies

incorporated by reference in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720. The analytical data

shall be compiled and maintained on site for a minimum of three years.

These data must be furnished upon request and made available for

inspection by any employee or representative of the State of Illinois.

4.

Delisting Levels.

The concentration in TCLP leachate from the EAF dust stabilized residue must

not exceed the values shown below, otherwise such wastes shall be managed and

disposed in accordance with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 703 and 722-728.

Constituent

TCLP Delisting Level (mg/1)

Antimony

0.206

Arsenic

0.0936

Barium

21.0

Beryllium

0.416

Cadmium

0.11

Chromium (Total)

0.6

Lead

0.75

Mercury

0.025

Nickel

11.0

Selenium

0.58

Silver

0.14

Thallium

0.088

Vanadium

3.02

Zinc

4.3

5.

Data Submittal. All data must be submitted to the Manager of the Permit Section,

Bureau of Land, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, 1021 North Grand

Avenue East, P.O. Box 19276, Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276 within the time

period specified. At the IEPA's request, PDC must submit any other analytical

data obtained pursuant to paragraph C within the time period specified by the

IEPA. Failure to submit the required data will be considered a failure to comply

with the adjusted standard adopted herein and subject PDC to an enforcement

action initiated by the IEPA. All data must be accompanied with the following

certification statement:

Under civil and criminal penalty of law for the making or

submission of false or fraudulent statements or representations

(pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Illinois Environmental

Protection Act), I certify that the information contained in or

accompanying this document is true, accurate and complete.

In the event that any of this information is deteimined by the Board

in its sole discretion to be false, inaccurate or incomplete, and upon

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

15

---

conveyance of this fact to Peoria Disposal Company, I recognize

that this exclusion of wastes

will be void as if it never had effect to

the extent directed by the Board and that Peoria Disposal Company

will be liable for any actions taken in contravention of its RCRA

Part B Permit and CERCLA obligations premised upon the Peoria

Disposal Company's reliance on the void exclusion.

(Name of certifying person)

Title of certifying person)

Date

2.

Narrative Discussion of Proposed Adjusted Standard Language

The proposed Adjusted Standard language borrows many of its requirements from PDC's

existing F006 Adjusted Standard

(See

the Order of the Board entered on February 4, 1993, in

Case No. AS 1991-003, provided herewith in Attachment 1 to this Petition;

see also

the Order

and Opinion of the Board entered on March 11, 1993, in Case No. AS 1991-003, also provided

herewith in Attachment 1 to this Petition). This is an appropriate approach because, like the

F006 delisting, the proposed EAFDSR delisting would be a conditional exclusion requiring

testing of each batch prior to managing the treated waste as non-hazardous. Further, PDC

requests that the sampling and analytical requirements applicable to the K061 adjusted standard

parallel those of the F006 adjusted standard because consistency between the two standards will

facilitate personnel training, laboratory communications, and ongoing operational compliance.

The proposed adjusted standard requires that PDC manage all batches of its K061 EAF

dust treatment residue as hazardous waste until testing demonstrates that each "batch" meets the

delisting criteria. PDC defines a "batch" as the quantity of EAF dust treated during one calendar

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

16

---

day. Only when an individual treated batch meets the delisting criteria would PDC be authorized

to manage that batch as non-hazardous waste.

As detailed above, in the event that the initial sample of residues from the treatment of

K061 EAF dust does not meet the delisting criteria, the proposed adjusted standard language

would permit additional treatment through increased reaction time, followed by re-samples

collected and analyzed to demonstrate conformance. While samples of most waste generated by

PDC's current process meet the LDR standards on the initial sample and a similar initial success

rate is anticipated in meeting the delisting levels, reaction times can vary and, therefore,

additional curing time to allow the stabilization chemicals to complete their reactions with the

waste is necessary and appropriate. Additional detail regarding the propriety of and procedures

for providing additional treatment by allowing increased curing time is provided in Section 3.5

of the Technical Support Document.

The proposed adjusted standard would apply only to wastes properly classified as K061

prior to shipment to and treatment at the WSF. The scope of the adjusted standard would further

be limited to those ten K061 generators represented in the full-scale, in-plant trials that are

detailed herein, or those that are qualified in the future through the procedure presented in the

proposed adjusted standard language. It is important to PDC's viability as an ongoing business

enterprise to have flexibility to add additional generators as market conditions change and future

opportunities arise without re-petitioning the Board. The proposed qualifying procedure,

including bench-scale treatability analyses, will ensure that any added K061 wastes will undergo

the appropriate testing necessary to demonstrate that the EAFDSR will be non-hazardous with

respect to the original listing criteria. The proposed language that would provide this authority is

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

17

---

modeled after the counterpart condition authorized by the Board in AS 1991-003 and relevant to

PDC's F006 delisting

Similarly, the proposed adjusted standard language allows conditioned flexibility

regarding the chemical technology employed. The RCRA Part B Permit for the WSF requires

bench-scale treatability testing for each new waste stream. In this Petition, PDC presents

procedures for qualifying any significant change in the chemical treatment regimen and proposes

that those appear in the adjusted standard to dispel any concerns regarding the relative efficacy

of any new chemicals. Prior to the filing of this Petition, extensive conversations have been held

between PDC technical personnel and representatives of the USEPA and IEPA. USEPA

personnel have generally consented to a procedure that would allow for some flexibility and

IEPA suggested that PDC include language in the Petition to founalize this procedure. It is

PDC's experience that the availability of specific chemicals from specific sources is subject to

change over time. Further, even like chemicals from different sources can vary markedly in their

specific chemical make-up. As technologies evolve and improve, and the availability of

chemicals and sources inevitably change, re-petitioning to the Board would not be required under

the proposed adjusted standard language, provided PDC follows the qualifying procedure set

forth therein. The proposed qualifying procedure will ensure that any change in chemicals from

the technology employed in the in-plant trials will result in a treatment regimen that is equally

robust and undergo the testing necessary to demonstrate that the EAFDSR will be non-hazardous

with respect to the original listing criteria.

For the purpose of this condition, significant change would mean the utilization of a

chemical treatment regimen containing different active ingredients. For example, purchasing the

same chemical from a different source would not be a significant change; nor would transitioning

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

18

---

from one lime-based chemical to another. However, changing from a lime-based chemical to a

phosphate-based chemical, for instance, would be a significant change and the proposed

qualification procedure would be required. These are examples only and it should be noted that

under current operations PDC routinely performs some bench-scale testing prior to implementing

even minor changes to ensure that the efficacy of the treatment is not jeopardized, which could

result in expensive and unnecessary re-treatment.

The proposed adjusted standard language requires that the delisted EAFDSR be disposed

in a lined landfill with leachate collection, which is licensed, peimitted, or otherwise authorized

to accept the delisted waste in accordance with all applicable RCRA Subtitle D requirements.

Further, the landfill must be located within the State of Illinois. As detailed in the Technical

Support Document, affiliates of PDC currently own three such landfills that have all necessary

authorizations in place.

The proposed adjusted standard language proposes testing all metals constituents of

concern for each treated batch. The proposed delisting level for each constituent of concern is

the lower of either the maximum allowable concentration as determined through risk-based

assessment, including that based on DRAS modeling and other methods approved by USEPA

personnel, or-the Universal Treatment Standard for that constituent at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 728.148

and Table U of that Part.

If the petitioned Adjusted Standard is granted, PDC will be required to submit a Class 2

Peimit modification request (35 Ill. Adm. Code 703.282) to the IEPA to incorporate the

necessary sampling and analysis changes prior to implementation. As such, no separate

notification to the IEPA Bureau of Land regarding implementation of the adjusted standard is

necessary. The proposed adjusted standard does not include changes that will increase air

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

19

---

emissions from the WSF. Even at the maximum petitioned volume of EAFDSR, emissions from

the WSF would remain well below the limits in the facility's air emissions permit. As such, no

permit modification with or separate notification to the IEPA Bureau of Air regarding

implementation of the adjusted standard is necessary.

3.

Efforts Necessary to Achieve Proposed Standard

The DRAS modeling results and risk analysis presented in Section 6 of the Technical

Support Document demonstrate that the constituents of concern detected in the residues treated

during the full-scale in-plant trials will not pose a risk to human health or the environment.

Based upon the success with the in-plant trials and the proposed adjusted standard language,

PDC has designed a process which establishes the efforts necessary to achieve the proposed

standard. Besides the use of an improved chemical regimen and verification procedure as

described herein, the efforts necessary to achieve the proposed delisting levels are essentially

the same as those required of PDC in its current treatment of K061 EAF dust.

The RCRA Part B Peimit for the WSF requires two grab samples from each batch for

LDR compliance verification, one from the first mixer load and one from the last. The proposed

adjusted standard language requires a grab sample from each mixer load to form a daily

composite sample. Although the existing P006 delisting also requires a grab sample from each

mixer load, PDC typically only treats an F006 batch every one to two weeks. K061 treatment,

however, typically occurs daily: As such, it is likely that the increased sampling frequency will

necessitate the hiring of a field technician to perform sampling duties. Due to the newly

developed chemical treatment regimen, upgrades and modifications were required to be made to

the reagent storage and delivery system to accommodate the storage and blending of one

additional chemical relative to the existing regimen. Those modifications were made prior to

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

20

---

the in-plant trials. No additional efforts are expected to result from the proposed adjusted

standard.

4.

Cost Necessary to Achieve Proposed Standard

The cost of compliance with the proposed Adjusted Standard is estimated to be $110 per

ton of untreated waste, compared to the current cost of $90 per ton of untreated waste. That

increase will result principally due to the higher relative cost of the new chemical treatment

regimen.

G.

Quantitative and Qualitative Environmental Impact of Compliance with

Existing Regulations versus Adjusted Standard

(35 III. Adm. Code 104.406(g))

The quantitative and qualitative impacts have been described in the detailed risk

assessment and data evaluations presented in the Technical Support Document. There should be

no changes in any expected emissions or discharges from the WSF.

H.

Justification of the Proposed Adjusted Standard

(35 III. Adm. Code 104.406(h)

The level of justification as well as other information or requirements necessary for an

adjusted standard as specified by the regulation of general applicability, are provided in Section

C,

supra.

The technical justification for the proposed adjusted standard is provided in the

Technical Support Document. The following is a statement which explains how PDC has

sought to justify, pursuant to the applicable level of justification, the proposed adjusted

standard.

1.

The EAFDSR does not meet the criteria for which K061 was listed as

hazardous. (35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(1) and 720.122(d)(1)(B))

35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(1) requires that in a delisting petition, "[t]he petitioner

demonstrates that the waste produced by a particular generating facility does not meet any of the

criteria under which the waste was listed as a hazardous or acute hazardous waste...." 35 Ill.

MIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

21

---

Adm. Code 720.122(d)(1)(B) provides that, if a waste contains "one or more of the hazardous

constituents (as defined in Appendix G of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721) that caused USEPA to list the

waste, the waste does not meet the criterion of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.111(a)(3) when

considering the factors used in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.111(a)(3)(A) through (a)(3)(K) under

which the waste was listed as hazardous...."

In accordance with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(1) and 720.122(d)(1)(B), PDC has

demonstrated that the EAFDSR does not meet the criteria for which the EAF dust was listed as

hazardous. The EAF dust is considered "emission control dust/sludge from the primary

production of steel in electric furnaces" covered under the K061 listing. K061 is listed with the

hazard code "T" which indicates that it was listed as a hazardous waste based upon "toxicity".

For a "T" waste, PDC must either demonstrate that the waste does not contain the hazardous

constituents that caused USEPA to list the waste as hazardous, or, although containing one or

more of those constituents, it does not meet the listing criteria when considering the listing

factors in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.111(a)(3)(A) through (K), under which the waste was listed as

hazardous.

Pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721, Appendix G, the hazardous constituents that form the

basis for listing K061 as a hazardous waste are hexavalent chromium, lead and cadmium. While

the EAFDSR does contain hexavalent chromium, lead and cadmium, PDC has demonstrated

that "the waste does not meet the criterion of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.111(a)(3) when considering

the factors used in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.111(a)(3)(A) through (a)(3)(K) under which the waste

was listed as hazardous...," as required by 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(d)(1)(B). PDC has

provided a comprehensive database of sample data from this demonstration, including test

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

22

---

results for total chromium (including hexavalent), lead and cadmium, which foini the basis for

which K061 was listed as a hazardous waste under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.132 (40 CFR 261).

For those constituents that were detected, PDC, as a first step, modeled the risk posed by

the leachate using the DRAS model specified in the "EPA RCRA Delisting Program--Guidance

Manual for the Petitioner," incorporated by reference in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.111(a). The

DRAS model takes into account the factors used in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.111(a)(3)(A) through

(a)(3)(K), including the concentration of each constituent in the waste, health-based standards

and the volume of waste that may be released in a plausible worst case scenario. In its most

recent delisting opinion, the Board confiii

ied that the DRAS is the preferred model to be used

in a delisting petition pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122.

See Petition of BP Products North

America, Inc. for RCRA Waste Delisting Under 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122, AS 07- 1 (Feb. 15,

2007 Opinion and Order p. 8).

DRAS results for chromium, lead and cadmium, as well as all other identified COCs, are

discussed in Section 6 and Appendix H-1 of the Technical Support Document attached herewith

as Attachment 2.

Therefore, PDC has demonstrated compliance with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(1) and

720.122(d)(1)(B).

2. Based on the criteria specified in the "EPA RCRA Delisting Program-

Guidance Manual for the Petitioner," incorporated by reference in Section

720.111(a), there is a reasonable basis to believe that, while factors

(including additional constituents) other than those for which K061 was

listed could cause the waste to be a hazardous waste, such factors do not

warrant retaining the EAFDSR as a hazardous waste. (35 Ill Adm. Code

720.122(a)(2) and 720.122(d)(2))

Pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(2), if "[t]he Board determines that there is a

reasonable basis to believe that factors (including additional constituents) other than those for

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

23

---

which the [residues from the treatment of EAF dust] was listed could cause the waste to be a

hazardous waste" then PDC is required to demonstrate "that such factors do not warrant

retaining the waste as a hazardous waste." This demonstration "must be made by reliance on,

and in a manner consistent with, 'EPA RCRA Delisting Program - Guidance Manual for the

Petitioner,' incorporated by reference in Section 720.111(a)." (35 Ill. Adm. Code

720.122(a)(2)). Similarly, 735 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(d)(2) requires a demonstration that if the

Board has "a reasonable basis to believe that factors (including additional constituents) other

than those for which the waste was listed could cause the waste to be hazardous waste, that such

factors do not warrant retaining the waste as a hazardous waste."

As is described above, K061 was listed as a hazardous waste because of its hazardous

constituents of hexavalent chromium, lead and cadmium. Using the "EPA RCRA Delisting

Program - Guidance Manual for the Petitioner," PDC determined that there are additional

constituents of concern in the residues from the treatment of EAF dust, namely, the "COCs"

described above and in the Technical Support Document. However, PDC has demonstrated that

these COCs "do not warrant retaining the waste as a hazardous waste" "by reliance on, and in a

manner consistent with, 'EPA RCRA Delisting Program - Guidance Manual for the Petitioner,'

incorporated by reference in Section 720.111(a)." (735 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(d)(2) and

720.122(a)(2), respectively).

For the COCs other than chromium, lead and cadmium, PDC still, as a first step,

modeled the risk posed by the leachate using the DRAS model specified in the "EPA RCRA

Delisting Program--Guidance Manual for the Petitioner," incorporated by reference in 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 720.111(a). As is discussed at length above and in the Technical Support Document,

the DRAS model takes into account the factors used in 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.111(a)(3)(A)

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND I01.302(g).

24

---

through (a)(3)(K). As above, DRAS results for all the COCs, including chromium, lead and

cadmium, are discussed and presented in Section 6 and Appendix H-1 of the Technical Support

Document (Attachment 2 hereto).

Therefore, PDC has demonstrated compliance with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(2) and

720.122(d)(2).

3. The EAFDSR is not hazardous waste by operation of Subpart C of 35 III.

Adm. Code 721, i.e., the EAFDSR is not a hazardous waste by virtue of

exhibiting any of the hazardous characteristics specified in Subpart C.

(35 III. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(2), 720.122(b), 720.122(d)(3) and

720.122(d)(4))

35 III. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(2), 720.122(b) and 720.122(d)(4) all provide that a waste

that meets the tests posed in sections 1 and 2, above, "still may be a hazardous waste by

operation of Subpart C of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721." 35 III. Adm. Code 720.122(d)(3) is more

specific, providing that "[t]he petitioner must demonstrate that the waste does not exhibit any of

the characteristics, defined in

•

35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.121, 721.122, 721.123, or 721.124, using

any applicable methods prescribed in those Sections." (The four sections listed are, in fact, the

totality of Subpart C of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721).

The fourth section in Subpart C of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721, Section 721.124, describes the

characteristic of toxicity. As is discussed above, PDC has demonstrated that the EAFDSR does

not exhibit the characteristic of toxicity.

The first, second and third sections in Subpart C of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721 describe the

characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity and reactivity. (35 Ill. Adm. Code721.121, 721.122

and 721.123, respectively). Based on knowledge of the process generating the EAF dust and

PDC's knowledge of the chemicals used to treat the waste, the EAFDSR has been determined not

to exhibit the hazardous characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, or reactivity.

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

25

---

Specifically, the EAFDSR is not a liquid so it is excluded from the definition for ignitable

and corrosive wastes. Regarding the characteristic of reactivity, PDC presently routinely

analyzes a sample collected from each load of EAF dust received at the WSF for reactivity, and

the characteristic of reactivity has never been observed. Further, the EAFDSR has no reactive

components, and so cannot react violently with water or spontaneously ignite. Therefore, the

EAFDSR is not a hazardous waste by virtue of exhibiting one of the characteristics of

ignitability, corrosivity, and reactivity. Please see Section 4 of the Technical Support Document.

In accordance with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a)(2), 720.122(b), 720.122(d)(3) and

720.122(d)(4), PDC has demonstrated that the EAFDSR is not a hazardous waste by virtue of

exhibiting any of the characteristics, defined in Subpart C of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721. (35 Ill.

Adm. Code 721.121, 721.122, 721.123, and 721.124).

4.

There were more than four samples used in the analysis herein, taken over

a proper period of time. (35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(h))

PDC has demonstrated in this Petition and in the Technical Support Document

(Attachment 2 hereto) that twelve (12) representative demonstration samples were analyzed,

taken over a period of time sufficient to represent the variability and uniformity of the waste,

satisfying 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(h).

5.

The EAFDSR will be managed in Illinois. (35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(p))

PDC has demonstrated in this Petition and in the Technical Support Document

(Attachment 2 hereto) a showing that the waste at issue, the EAFDSR, will be generated and

managed in Illinois, satisfying 35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(p).

6.

The Adjusted Standard, if granted, would not render the Illinois RCRA

program less stringent than if the decision were made by USEPA. (35 Ill.

Adm. Code 720.122(q))

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

26

---

PDC has demonstrated in this Petition and in the Technical Support Document

(Attachment 2 hereto), that the Adjusted Standard, if granted, will not render the Illinois RCRA

program less stringent than if the decision were made by USEPA, satisfying 35 Ill. Adm. Code

720.122(q).

I.

Consistency with Federal Law (35 III. Adm. Code 104.406(i))

Federal law provides the regulatory framework for delisting this or any other hazardous

waste. The proposed Adjusted Standard meets the requirements prescribed in 35 Ill. Adm. Code

720.122, which are identical in substance to the requirements for delisting a hazardous waste

prescribed in 40 CFR 260.122. The Board may grant a delisting petition in accordance with the

requirements of 35 Adm. Code 720.122 (40 CFR 260.22). There are no additional

procedural requirements imposed by federal law. Therefore, the Board may grant the proposed

adjusted standard consistent with federal law.

J.

Waiver of Hearing (35 III. Adm. Code 104.406(j))

PDC hereby waives hearing on this Petition.

K.

Supporting Documents (35 Ill. Adm. Code 104.406(k))

The figures attached herewith support this Petition, as do the other attachments hereto.

The Order of the Board and the "Order and Opinion" of the Board entered on February 4, 1993,

and March 11, 1993, respectively, in Case No. AS 1991-003, are provided herewith as

Attachment 1. The Technical Support Document is provided herewith as Attachment 2.

CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, PDC requests that the Board grant an Adjusted Standard pursuant to

Section 28.1 of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, 415 ILCS 5/28.1, delisting the

EAFDSR generated at the WSF in Peoria, Illinois, consistent with the conditions in the Adjusted

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

27

---

One of atorneys

By:

Standard proposed in this Petition and described in the Technical Support Document, or such

other reasonable terms and conditions as the Board deems appropriate to provide the relief

requested.

Dated: April 24, 2008

Respectfully submitted,

PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY,

Petitioner

Claire A. Manning, Esq.

BROWN, HAY & STEPHENS, LLP

205 S. Fifth Street

Suite 700

Springfield, Illinois 62701

Telephone: (217) 544-8491

Facsimile: (217) 544-9609

Email:

cmanning@bhslaw.com

908-0056.3

Brian J. Meginnes, Esq.

Janaki Nair, Esq.

ELIAS, MEGINNES, RIFFLE & SEGHETTI,

P.C.

416 Main Street, Suite 1400

Peoria, Illinois 61602

Telephone: (309) 637-6000

Facsimile: (309) 637-8514

Emails:

bmeginnes@emrslaw. corn

jnair@emrslaw.com

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

28

---

CERTIFICATION STATEMENT

I certify, under penalty of law, that I have personally examined and am familiar with the

information submitted in this Petition and all attachments (including, without limitation, the

Technical Support Document), and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately

responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the submitted information is true,

accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false

information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.

Signed by authorized representative:

Signature:

Name:

Ron L. Edwards

Title:

Vice President

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

29

---

Exhibit 1

---

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

February 4, 1993

In the matter of:

Petition of Peoria Disposal

?AS 91-3

Company for Adjusted Standard ) (RCRA Delisting)

from 35 Iii. Adm. Code 721

?

)

Subpart D.?

)

ORDER OF THE BOARD (by J. Anderson):

This Order grants an adjusted standard to Peoria Disposal

Company (PDC). This action is taken in light of the Board's

January 21, 1993 grant

of

the January 14, 1993 joint motion

(joint motion) for expedited decision of Peoria Disposal Company

and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency). The

Board's time and resource constraints have resulted in a delay in

perfecting the supporting opinion. The Board intends to adopt

the supporting opinion at its February 25, 1993 Board meeting.

ORDER

The Board hereby grants to Peoria Disposal Company (PDC) an

adjusted standard from 35 Ill. Adm Code 721 Subpart D subject to

the following conditions:

1.

This adjusted standard becomes effective on February 4,

1993.

2.

This adjusted standard is provided only for F006 wastes

treated using PDC's mechanical mixer, and only for total

annual waste disposal volumes of F006 treatment residues up

to 50,000 cubic yards. Peoria Disposal Company's treated

F006 residues generated by. the PDC F006 waste stabilization

process described in their amended petition filed March 2,

1992 are non-hazardous as defined in 35 Iii. Adm. Code 721.

The treatment residues must meet the verification and

testing requirements prescribed in paragraph 3 listed below

to ensure that hazardous constituents are not present in the

treatment residues at levels of regulatory concern. The

treatment residues will no longer be subject to regulation

under 35 Ill. Adm. Code. Parts 722-728 and the permitting

standards of 35 I11. Adm. Code 703.

Such wastes shall be

disposed of pursuant to the Board's non-hazardous landfill

regulations found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 810-815.

3.

Verification and Testing.

a)?

Treatability Testing. PDC shall verify through bench-

scale treatability testing that each waste stream

received by PDC for chemical stabilization can be

treated to meet the delisting levels of paragraph 4

0139-0121

---

2

prior to the operation of full-scale treatment of that

waste stream. PDC shall submit a report of the

treatability testing to the Agency within 7 days of the

completion of such testing.

b)

Testing of Treatment Residues for Inorganic Parameters.

PDC shall collect representative grab samples of each

treated batch of the F006 treatment residue and

composite the grab samples to produce a daily composite

sample. This sample shall be analyzed for TCLP

leachate concentrations for all the constituents listed

in paragraphs 4(a) and 4(b) prior to disposal of the

treated batch.

c)

Testing of Treatment Residues for Organic Parameters.

PDC shall collect a representative grab sample of each

treated batch of the F006 treatment residue daily and

this sample shall be analyzed for TCLP leachate

concentrations for all the constituents listed in

paragraph 4(c).

d)

Additional testing. PDC shall collect a representative

grab sample from each daily grab sample of F006

treatment residue each month and prepare a monthly

composite sample. This monthly sample shall be

analyzed for the TCLP leachate concentrations for all

the constituents listed at 40 C.F.R. Part 423 Appendix

A (1991) except those numbered 089-113, 116 and 129.

Any compound which is found to be below detection

limits for six months of continuous monthly testing

shall be deleted from the monthly testing parameter

list and shall instead be tested semi-annually. If the

compound is detected in the semi-annual tests, it will

again be tested monthly for six months as described

above.

All analyses shall be performed according to SW-846

methodologies incorporated by reference in 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 720.111. The analytical data shall be

compiled and maintained on site for a minimum of three

years. These data must be furnished upon request and

made available for inspection by any employee or

representative of the State of Illinois.

4.

?

Delisting Levels.

a)?

Metals. The metal concentration in TCLP leachate from the

F006 treatment residue must not exceed the values shown

below, otherwise such wastes shall be managed and disposed in

accordance with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 703 and 722-728.

0139-0122

---

3

Parameter

Delisting Level

(mg/1)

Cadmium

0.066

Chromium

1.9

Lead

0.29

Nickel

0.32

Silver

0.072

b)

Cyanide. Total leachable cyanide in distilled water

extractions from F006 treatment residue must not exceed 3.8

mg/kg, otherwise such wastes shall be managed and disposed in

accordance with 35 Ill. Adm Code 703 and 722-728.

c)

Organic Parameters. The organic constituent concentration in

TCLP leachate from the F006 treatment residue will be

compared with the delisting levels shown

below. If the

delisting levels for a batch are exceeded, a second composite

sample of the same batch shall be prepared and analyzed

within five days of the observed exceedance. If a second

subsequent exceedance occurs, the batch shall be managed and

disposed of in accordance with 35 Ill. Adm. Code 703 and 722-

728.

Parameter

?

Delisting

Level

(mg/1)

Acetone

76

Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

0.057

Chloroform

0.114

Ethylbenzene

13.3

Naphthalene

1.9

N-nitrosodiphenylamine

0.133

Styrene

1.9

Total xylenes

190

5.

?

Data Submittal. All data must be submitted to the

Manager of the Permit Section, Division of Land Pollution

Control, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, 2200

Churchill Road, P.O. Box 19276, Springfield, Illinois 62794-

9276 within the time period specified. At the Agency's

request, PDC must submit any other analytical data obtained

pursuant to paragraph C within the time period specified by

the Agency. Failure to submit the required data will be

considered a failure to comply with the adjusted standard

adopted herein and subject PDC to an enforcement action

initiated by the Agency. All data must be accompanied with

the following certification statement:

Under civil and criminal penalty of law for the making

or submission of false or fraudulent statements or

representations (pursuant to the applicable provisions

0139-012.3

---

4

of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act), I

certify that the information contained in or

accompanying this document is true, accurate and

complete.

In the event that any of this information is determined

by the Board in its sole discretion to be false,

inaccurate or incomplete, and upon conveyance of this

fact to Peoria Disposal Company, I recognize that this

exclusion of wastes will be void as if it never had

effect to the extent directed by the Board and that

Peoria Disposal Company will be liable for any actions

taken in contravention of the company's RCRA and CERCLA

obligations premised upon the company's reliance on the

void exclusion.

(Name of certifying person)

(Title of certifying person)

Date

Section 41 of the Environmental Protection Act (Ill. Rev.

Stat. 1991, ch. 111 1/2, par. 1041) provides for the appeal of

final orders of the Board within 35 days. The Rules of the

Supreme Court of Illinois establish filing requirements. (But see

also 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101.246, Motion for Reconsideration, and

Castenada v. Illinois Human Rights Commission (1989), 132 I11.2d

304, 547 N.E.2d 437.)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, do hereby certify that the above order was adopted

on the

day of ?

–7t-A-(--t_e_c,

?

, 1993, by a vote of

6

-

"

( ?

.

Dorothy M.

?

n, Clerk

Illinois Po ution Control Board

0139-0124

---

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

March 11, 1993

IN THE MATTER OF:

?

)

AS 91-3

PETITION OF PEORIA DISPOSAL CO. )

?(RCRA Delisting)

FOR AN ADJUSTED STANDARD FROM )

?

(Adjusted Standard)

35?

Adm. Code 721.Subpart D)

ROBIN R. LUNN AND MICHAEL O'NEIL OF KECK, MAHIN & CATE APPEARED

ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER, PEORIA DISPOSAL CO.

WILLIAM INGERSOLL AND MARK GURNIK OF THE DIVISION OF LEGAL

COUNSEL APPEARED ON BEHALF OF CO-PETITIONER ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.

FRED C. PRILLAMAN AND STEPHEN F. HEDINGER OF MOHAN, ALEWELT,

PRILLAMAN & ADAMI APPEARED ON BEHALF OF INTERESTED PERSON

ENVIRITE CORP.

OPINION OF THE BOARD (by J. Anderson):

This matter is before the Board on the April 9, 1991

petition of Peoria Disposal Co. (PDC) for an adjusted standard.

The petition seeks an adjusted standard from 35

?

Adm. Code

721.Subpart D. The petition essentially seeks a hazardous waste

delisting for certain listed hazardous wastes generated by PDC at

its Peoria County facility. This opinion supports the Board's

order of February 4, 1993 granting an adjusted standard on a

joint motion for expedited decision, as explained below.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Peoria Disposal Co. (PDC) filed its initial petition on

April 9, 1991. A Board Order dated April 25, 1991 cited certain

deficiencies in the petition. PDC filed its certificate of

publication on April 29, 1991, and a response to the Board order

on May 15 and June 6, 1991. A Board order dated July 11, 1991

requested additional information. PDC filed a status report on

January 29, 1992, and the Agency filed one on February 3, 1992,

in response to a hearing officer order of January 9, 1992. PDC

filed an amended petition on March 2, 1992, in response to a

hearing officer order dated February 10, 1992. The Board

accepted the amended petition on March 11, 1992. PDC filed a

second amended petition for adjusted standard on May 29, 1992,

with the Agency as co-petitioner, which the Board accepted by its

order of June 4, 1992. PDC again amended its prayer for relief

in its post-hearing brief filed August 18, 1992.

The Board received a request for a public hearing from Mr.

Stephen Rone, of East Peoria, on May 13, 1991. Envirite Corp.

(Envirite), a competitor of PDC, filed an appearance and a motion

0140-0105

---

2

to intervene on August 19 and September 3, 1991. PDC filed in

opposition to intervention on August 23. The hearing officer

denied intervention on September 11, 1991, but granted Envirite

leave to participate at hearing as an interested person. On

March 9, 1992, Envirite requested a public hearing.

The Board held a public hearing in Peoria on June 29, 1992.

PDC, the Agency, and Envirite participated. Envirite filed a

motion for extension of time to file its post-hearing brief on

July 27 and its brief on August 3, 1992. PDC filed a motion for

extension to file on August 4 and its post-hearing brief on

August 18, 1992. The Board hereby grants both motions for

extension of time and accepts both briefs.

PDC and the Agency filed a joint motion for expedited

decision on January 14, 1993. Envirite responded on January 26.

The Board granted the motion on January 21, 1993, and we granted

the requested adjusted standard, with conditions, on February 4.

This opinion supports the Board's order of February 4, 1993.

During the course of this proceeding, the Board docketed

three public comments. The first public comment (PC 1), dated

July 29, 1991, was from Stephen B. Smith, Vice President,

Envirite. A letter, dated July 16, 1992 and given public comment.

number 3 (PC

3),

was a copy of correspondence sent by Stephen

Smith to Robert Kayser, Chief, Delisting Section, USEPA. Public

comment number 2 (PC 2), dated July 27, 1992, was from Robert

Kayser to the hearing officer.

The petition filed in April, 1991 originally sought an

adjusted standard as to K061 and F006 wastes treated by PDC. The

petition of March, 1992, the amended petition of May, 1992, and

the amendment requested in the August, 1992 post-hearing brief

each sought an adjusted standard as to F006 wastes. PDC has

stated that it will seek relief as to K061 wastes at a later time

and in a separate proceeding. (March 2, 1992 Amended Petition as

2.) The Board will therefore consider those portions of the

record pertaining to F006 wastes.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

PDC owns and operates a permitted hazardous waste treatment

facility in a 7200 square foot building located on a 2-acre site

near Peoria. It receives about 30,000 cubic yards (yd 3 ) of F006

wastes into this Waste Stabilization Facility each year. This

waste is sent from about 20 to 30 different platers, anodizers,

chemical etching and milling, and circuit-board manufacturers.

F006 waste is, by definition, wastewater treatment sludge from

electroplating operations.

(See 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.131(a).)

PDC has operated this facility since August, 1988.

0140-0106

---

mnwmo4mv

;4::::0$$$$$$4. '''WF:A',4*:**:,..%:>AkkWxWg%.AWW

3

PDC treats the F006 wastes it receives at this facility with

proprietary reagents in order to stabilize them so that they do

not leach their hazardous constituents into the environment. It

has historically then landfilled the wastes in a hazardous waste

landfill that it owns and operates. The incremental increased

costs to PDC's customers is about $65.00 per ton for disposal of

the treated residue as a hazardous waste over what it would cost

to dispose of this waste as a non-hazardous waste in an

industrial landfill. This added cost and the desire to preserve

its RCRA-permitted landfill capacity are the reasons PDC has

sought to delist the treated residues pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm.

Code 720.122 and 106.Subpart G.

PDC has established procedures for screening incoming wastes

before accepting them and for verifying that treatment has indeed

stabilized the wastes received. PDC has each prospective

customer submit certain information about its waste and waste-

generation. This includes a material safety data sheet; the

results of treatability studies from PDC Laboratories, Inc.; and

a certification (or analytical results) indicating that no

pesticides or herbicides, PCBs, or dioxins are used in the

production of the wastes, and that they do not appear in the

wastes. After waste treatment and curing, PDC tests each treated

batch of the wastes to assure that stabilization has in fact

occurred. These tests for selected contaminants involve using

the same RCRA TCLP procedure of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.124 that

PDC uses to test the effectiveness of its treatability testing.

If the treated waste residue is still hazardous, PDC either

retreats the waste for further stabilization or disposes of the

waste as hazardous waste in its RCRA-permitted landfill.

The adjusted standard granted with conditions by the Board

on February 4, 1993 allows PDC to dispose of stabilized waste in

its industrial landfill. The stabilized waste that meets the

delisting conditions is no longer considered a hazardous waste.

PDC asserts that its compliance alternatives to an adjusted

standard are limited. It asserts that the F006 waste cannot be

recycled, reused, or treated to render it nonhazardous. The only

alternative to the adjusted standard is the continued disposal of

this waste in a RCRA-permitted facility. Additionally, PDC and

the Agency assert by the joint motion for expedited decision of

January 14, 1993 that the decision in

Envirite Corp. v. 'EPA (3d

Dist. Jan. 8, 1993) (No. 3-92-0202), that each of PDC's customers

must individually have separate Section 39(h) authorization for

landfill disposal of hazardous wastes,' threatens to cause it to

0140-0107

---

W

W

Ita

W

it

tnIntliag.

"ROM

AA*

4

stop receiving the F006 wastes for RCRA-permitted disposal, which

would leave PDC with a cessation of operations as the only

alternative for compliance unless the Board granted the adjusted

standard.

THE ADJUSTED STANDARD

The adjusted standard granted on February 4, 1993, effective

as of that date, renders non-hazardous up to 50,000 tons of F006

waste treated by PDC using a mechanical mixer. The treated

residues must meet certain verification and testing requirements

to qualify. Those wastes that do qualify are subject to the non-

hazardous solid waste disposal regulations of 35 I11. Adm. Code

810 through 815, rather than the Illinois RCRA regulations of 35

Ill. Adm. Code 703

and

722 through 728.

The verification and testing condition requires PDC to

perform certain tests, both before and after waste treatment.

PDC must perform bench-scale treatability testing before

accepting wastes for production-scale treatment. PDC must

perform tests on the treated residue to verify treatment using

the methods of SW-846 for certain specified inorganic and organic

parameters on daily- and monthly-composited samples. PDC must

periodically submit the results of the treatability tests and

other information requested by the Agency together with a

certification, and it must maintain its records of those tests

open for state inspection for a minimum of three years.

PDC must test a daily composite sample composed of grab

samples from each batch of the treated residue for certain TCLP

inorganic parameters (cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel, and

silver) and for total distilled-water-leachable cyanide before

disposal. If the treatment residue exceeds any of the levels set

0140-0108

---

takt

••■••,:‘.

?

g.".$$SC14

tr.;

c:

;:;.,,.:?:::•;.gffEr

.:..41.

5

for TCLP inorganics or total leachable cyanide

2

, PDC must manage

the treated residue as a RCRA hazardous waste.

PDC must also daily test a representative grab sample of

each treated batch for certain TCLP organic parameters (acetone,

his-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, chloroform, ethylbenzene,

naphthalene, N-nitrosodiphenylamine, styrene, and total xylenes).

If the initial daily test for a specific treated batch for

or?

ganics exceeds an of the levels

.

set for TCLP organics

04

••:,..• :,•,::$

•

?

• 0,.....:••

:.,....:,.....,„,

?

s..,....,••• ..0.•

?

, ‘,..„

?...

?

4u.a,,„....0....•

?• .......„... ?

... .: V . - ..?

.,:4?

:xu,

:„b$' .'"

?-

t

4%4

?

ls•2' .

.47

‘.0'

'

5 <%,?

zs,w, - 4

-

?.,.

., .:'i'..$

•

t?

55..„.

fie?

Yr1;".'W

. '..;., VM

? .

?' ?.."

'

?..4.:?:.'?

:'.:,

?

••: ...,.

....$:...s..v<: :.,

,A4•, ::. , ,*

I:1°44"?

ODAd

th

at

composi e

n

refers o combining grab samples

rom more an one treated batch. (See PC 2 at 2-3 (USEPA

comment).) This is not the Board's intent. Rather, we intend to

allow PDC to composite grab samples from a single treated batch

in order to allow it to assure that the confirmation sample taken

is indeed representative of the treated batch.

In addition to the daily analyses, PDC must perform a more

complete monthly analysis. PDC must take a grab sample from each

daily sample and composite them for a single monthly TCLP test

for all the 126 priority pollutants listed at 35 Ill. Adm. Code

423, App. A except the pesticides, PCBs, asbestos, and 2,3,7,8-

TCDD (dioxin). PDC may reduce the testing frequency to semi-

annually for any constituent found to be below the detection

limit for six consecutive months. PDC must continue or resume

monthly testing for any constituent that appears above the

detection limit in any sample.

The adjusted standard granted is substantively very similar

to that requested in the May 29, 1992 second amended petition,

further amended by PDC's post-hearing brief. The post-hearing

brief added the limitation to the use only of a mechanical mixer,

thereby dispensing with the original request to allow mixing in a

concrete-lined pit by a backhoe. The adjusted standard granted

differs, however, in that the failure of a single repeat daily

0 1 14

0 - 1 0 9

---

6

sample for TCLP organics triggers the need to manage the treated

residue as a RCRA hazardous waste, and the second amended

petition and the post-hearing brief requests that the failure of

a second repeat sample (i.e., the failure of a third sample)

triggers the need to manage the residue as hazardous. The post-

hearing amendments more would clearly require a third failure

REGULATORY STANDARD FOR RELIEF

35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122 (derived from 40 CFR 260.22)

provides for delisting of hazardous wastes. Subsection (a)

provides for delisting of Part 721, Subpart D (40 CFR 261,

Subpart D) listed wastes from a particular facility if the

generator demonstrates that the waste exhibits none of the

criteria for which it was listed, and the Board determines that

no additional factors warrant retaining the waste as hazardous.

Subsection (b) provides for rendering inapplicable the "mixtures

and derived-from" provisions of 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.103-

(a)(2)(B) and (a)(2)(C) (40 CFR 261.3(a)(2)(ii) and (a)(2)(iii)),

which basically maintain that any mixture containing a Subpart D

listed waste and any material derived from a Subpart D listed

waste are hazardous wastes.

Since PDC treats the F006 wastes from multiple generating

sources to produce a waste deemed a F006 hazardous waste by the

"mixtures and derived-from rule", it appears that pursuit of

either alternative of subsections (a) and (b) might have resulted

in rendering the RCRA regulations inapplicable to the PDC-treated

residue. PDC nowhere explicitly states that it approaches the

Board under either subsection (a) or subsection (b). However,

since PDC nowhere mentions either Section 721.103(a)(2) nor full

characteristic testing pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.Subpart

C, and the thrust of the petition is aimed at demonstrating that

the treated residue no longer exhibits either the characteristic

for which F006 was listed or any other characteristic warranting

continued management as a hazardous waste, the Board infers that

PDC submitted its petition pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code

720.122(a).

Under subsection (a), PDC is viewed as the waste generator.

For a grant of an adjusted standard delisting its waste, PDC must

demonstrate that the F006 waste it generates does not exhibit the

toxicity characteristic (cadmium, hexavalent chromium, nickel, or

cyanide) for which USEPA listed F006 wastes, and the Board must

determine that there is no reasonable basis other than that for

which F006 was listed that warrants retaining the treated F006

residue as RCRA hazardous.

(See

35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(a) and

(d), 721.11

,

1(a)(3), 721.131, and 721.Appendix G.) Additionally,

PDC must demonstrate that the waste will be generated or managed

in Illinois (35 Ill. Adm. Code 720.122(p)), and the Board will

not grant the delisting if it would render the state RCRA program

0140-0110

---

7

less stringent than the federal program. (35 Ill. Adm. Code

720.122(q).)

DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RAISED

Envirite, PDC's competitor, by its participation throughout

this proceeding, and USEPA by PC 2, raised a few issues relating

to the requested adjusted standard. This resulted in the

imposition of the second-failure trigger for dealing with the

treated waste as hazardous based on the organic parameters.

Several other arguments did not result in substantive amendment

of the requested adjusted standard.

The easiest issue to dispose of is that relating to whether

the waste will be generated or managed in Illinois. The facts

indicate the PDC will both generate and manage the waste at its

facility near Peoria. Neither Envirite nor USEPA challenged the

petition on this basis. Therefore, the Board finds that the

waste is both generated and managed in Illinois, as required by

Section 721.122(p).

Before beginning the discussion of the issues, the Board

wishes to take note of the Agency's joining as co-petitioner

after discussion with the PDC and careful examination of details

of the petition and supporting documents (see, e.g.. Tr. 97-103,

re sampling protocol, and 110-11, re analytical procedures).

While ideally such scrutiny and the Agency's decision to join as

a co-petitioner would take place before PDC initially filed its

petition, the procedure used nevertheless provides welcome

assistance to the review process. (See In re Petition of

Keystone Steel and Wire Co. for Hazardous Waste Delistina, No. AS

91-1, (Feb. 6, 1992) at 9-10.)

Additionally, USEPA submitted comments on the proposed

adjusted standard. (PC 2.) It is worthy of note that USEPA

commented that PDC submitted ample data with its petition, with

the reservation that it would have sought groundwater monitoring

data. (PC 2 at 1.) USEPA did not comment adversely to the Board

granting the requested adjusted standard. Rather, USEPA noted a

small number of conditions it would impose. For example, USEPA

would require more infomation before allowing use of backhoe

mixing, USEPA would require PDC to manage batches of waste as

hazardous until shown to meet the delisting criteria, and USEPA

would add analyses for additional organic contaminants to the

testing conditions. (PC 2 at 2-3.) We discuss these issues

topically below.

The first contested issue relates to whether PDC has

demonstrated that its treated F006 residue is stable over time.

Envirite contended that PDC's analytical results

(see

March 2,

1992 Amended Petition at app. E, tables 33-51) indicate increased

metals mobility with time, and a rapid drop in pH with time

0140-01Il

---

8

indicates that this trend will continue. Envirite cites the need

to continue the testing to follow up on such a trend and cites

USEPA method 1320 in support of this contention. (See Ex. 1 at

1-2 and App. B; Envirite post-hearing brief at 5 and 12-13.)

PDC responds that it properly applied the appropriate

testing for the proper duration. PDC responds that it employed

the TCLP (USEPA method 1311) procedure of 35 Iii. Adm. Code

721.124 and 40 CFR App. II to perform the tests. It argues that

this TCLP test has supplanted the former EP toxicity test to

which the multiple extraction procedure (MEP) of method 1320

applies, and the TCLP procedure is far more aggressive than the

EP former toxic-MEP procedure because of the selection of acids

and the repeated agitation of samples. PDC questioned the

relevance of the aggressive TCLP procedure to the realities

encountered by the waste disposed of in a landfill. (PDC post-

hearing brief at 14-16; Tr. 117-21.)

USEPA did not question the trend in the analytical results.

Rather, USEPA stated generally that "PDC appears to have provided

an extensive set of analytical data to support its petition (PC 2

at 1), and "In general, the testing conditions included in the

proposed delisting are consistent with the format that USEPA has

used in past delistings." (PC 2 at 2.) However, we note that

this is not an issue specifically raised in PC 3, the letter of

July 16, 1992 that Envirite sent to USEPA.

Initially, the Board agrees with PDC's assertion that there

are no fixed criteria for evaluating the MEP results using the

TCLP procedure. In examining the results tabulated by PDC in the

March 2, 1992 amended petition that also provide initial TCLP

results (app. E, tables 33 through 48), we do not

see

any

distinct trend or correlation between the slight drop in pH in

subsequent days' testing (about 1 pH lower on day nine than at

the start of testing) and the appearance of metals in the TCLP

leachate. Of sixteen samples, only two that would have passed

the TCLP test subsequently showed elevated metals concentrations

at levels of regulatory concern, two showed elevated metals

concentrations in the initial TCLP that diminished below levels

of regulatory concern in subsequent days, and one showed an

elevated metal concentration in the initial TCLP as well as in

later tests. The Board does not see a distinct or significant

trend in these data, as argued by Envirite.

Envirite next argues that some of the testing results

contained in the petition indicate that some of the treated PDC

residue contains hazardous constituents at levels above those of

01140-0112

---

regulatory concern.

4

PDC does not dispute this assertion. USEPA

expresses concern that PDC manage no treated waste residue as

non-hazardous until it is shown to meet the delisting criteria.

(PC 2 at 2-3.)

The Board agrees that PDC failed to show that 13 of 18

samples of treated residue met the delisting criteria.

5

The

Board also agrees that PDC should handle no batch of treated F006

waste as non-hazardous until testing shows that the batch meets

the delisting criteria. However, this is no basis to deny a

delisting. The adjusted standard granted requires PDC to manage

all treated F006 batches as RCRA hazardous waste until testing

demonstrates that each batch meets the delisting criteria. When

an individual treated batch is shown to meet the delisting

criteria, PDC is free to dispose of that batch as a non-hazardous

solid waste. This is despite whether the waste passes the test

nearly immediately after treatment or PDC allows an extended cure

time before it meets the delisting criteria. (See Tr. 181-83.)

Envirite next cites laboratory quality control deficiencies

and sampling deficiencies in the PDC petition. After review of

the petition and transcript, the Board agrees with USEPA. PDC

has "provided an extensive set of analytical data to support its

petition." (PC 2 at 1.) Further, as stated above, that PDC

sampled over a limited time from random or selected receipts of

waste is immaterial because this adjusted standard does not

delist the waste stream. Rather, the adjusted standard granted

applies only to those treated batches that meet the delisting

criteria.

Another issue raised by Envirite, and noted by USEPA,

relates to a lack of groundwater monitoring data in the petition.

(Envirite post-hearing brief at 5; PC 2 at 1.) While the Board

agrees that the provision of such data would have been useful

under certain circumstances, those circumstances do not exist

here. Although the permitted PDC RCRA hazardous waste landfill

includes treated F006 residue in the fill, the record indicates

4

PDC employed USEPA's composite model for landfills (EPACML)

in conjunction with the Agency to determine the levels of

regulatory concern at the compliance point based on the

hypothetical disposal of 50,000 tons of treated residue per year.

(See March 2, 1992 Second Amended Petition at tab 2, pp. 3-5; Tr.

93-95.)

3

Two failed for cadmium, one for chromium, one for lead, one

for nickel, three for acetone alone and one for acetone and ethyl

benzene (although acetone appeared in all blanks), one for

naphthalene, one for N-nitrosodiphenylamine and styrene and one for

N-nitrosodiphenylamine alone, and one for bis-(2-ethylhexyl)-

phthalate.

0140-0113

---

10

that this is in conjunction with other wastes. (Tr. 122-23.)

Groundwater monitoring data would have included information

relevant to the co-disposed wastes, and not wholly relevant to

the treated F006 residues.

The final issue raised by Envirite, and noted by USEPA,

relates to the adequacy of PDC's monitoring and verification

program. (See Envirite post-hearing brief at 5-6; PC 2 at 2-4.)

The Board believes that the adjusted standard granted adequately

addresses these concerns.

We bear two things in mind in examining the testing and

verification plan. These are the standard for issuance of a

waste delisting and the fact that the Agency or PDC can petition

the Board for modification of the adjusted standard if future

information indicates that this is necessary.

The standard for delisting, cited above, is that the waste

must show none of the criteria for which USEPA originally listed

it, and there must be no other basis for determining that the

petitioner should continue to manage the waste as hazardous. As

noted, USEPA listed F006 waste as a "T" (toxicity) waste due to

its cadmium, chromium, nickel, and cyanide content. (See 35

Adm. Code 721.App. G; 40 CFR 261, App. VII.) PDC must test each

lot of treated waste for each of these contaminants. Further,

partially in response to the Agency's suggestion (see Tr. 97-

98.), PDC selected additional contaminants and tested its wastes

for those, then selected the treatment parameters based on the

results obtained.

The petition indicates that PDC tested its treated residues

for a host of contaminants not included in the delisting

criteria, and its untreated F006 wastes for a few more.

(See

March 2, 1992 Amended Petition at app. E, tables 21-32.) This

indicates that PDC did not include all the hazardous constituents

or TCLP parameters (see 35 Ill. Adm. Code 721.124 or 721.App. H;

40 CFR 261.24 or 261, App. VII) tested in the delisting criteria

because either these did not appear at levels of concern, when

considering a dilution and attenuation factor (DAF) of 19 (e.g.,

mercury, selenium, chlorobenzene, trichloroethylene, tetrachloro-

ethylene), or because there was no reason to suspect that the

wastes would contain the contaminants (pesticides, PCBs, and

dioxin).

Finally, PDC must periodically test its treated residues for

all the 126 priority pollutants (except the pesticides, PCBs, and

dioxin) and submit those results as required by the Agency. The

broader list of

contaminants

includes the two of concern to

USEPA: trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene. (PC 2 at 3.)

The Board is not unmindful that if the Agency later finds cause

for concern because these constituents appear at levels of

significance, it can then deal with the situation by filing an

0 14 0 - 1

1 4

---

11

appropriate petition for modification of the adjusted standard

before the Board. The record includes nothing specific to

indicate that the Board should add contaminants to either the

delisting criteria or the periodic testing regime.

CONCLUSION

The Board examined the petition to determine its

completeness in light of the factors of 35 Ill. Adm. Code

720.122(i). We have considered the arguments opposed to a grant

of an adjusted standard and the public comments received. After

review of the petition and the record, the Board has determined

to grant the adjusted standard delisting PDC's treated F006

,residues that meet the delisting criteria proposed by PDC and the

Agency. The petition supports the delisting criteria proposed by

PDC and the Agency. It adequately describes the PDC process for

treating F006 waste and the methods and procedures PDC will use

to accept and treat this waste and assure that the treated

residue meets the delisting criteria. Further, the petition set

forth an ongoing regime of testing that will have the effect of

either confirming PDC's delisting criteria, procedures, and

process, or it will ultimately highlight any inadequacies to the

Agency and PDC.

In granting this adjusted standard, the Board has made one

substantive change in the adjusted standard as proposed by

limiting the number of retests PDC may perform if any particular

batch fails to meet the delisting criteria. We believe that PDC

should be allowed to retest a failed batch, since sampling or

analytical errors could occur. Further, additional curing time

could result in a more stable waste residue. However, we believe

also that PDC must either re-treat the waste or dispose of it as

a

RCRA hazardous waste if the second sample confirms the first.

In addition to this single substantive change, the Board has

made a handful of minor stylistic revisions to the proposed

language. None of these warrant individual discussion.

In short, PDC has met its burden under 35 Ill. Adm. Code

720.122 of showing that the adjusted standard granted assures 1)

that PDC's treated F006 waste residue that meets the delisting

criteria do not exhibit the characteristic for which USEPA listed

F006 waste, and 2) that there is no other basis for retaining the

waste as RCRA hazardous.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

0140-0115

---

/

12

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board,

,

dohereby certify that the above opinion was adopted on

the

//

C

A2

day of ?

-,-)--14./c.„(_44-,/,

1993, by a vote of

?

6 ?

.

Dorothy M. Gu

?

Clerk

Illinois Pol ion Control Board

0140-0116

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARkeceivED

CLERK'S OFFICE

APR 252008

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

PETITION OF PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY ) (Adjusted Standard – Land)

(RCRA Delisting)

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of this Court and all parties of record:

Please enter our appearance as counsel of record in this case for the following:

PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY

Dated: April 24, 2008.

Respectfully submitted,

ELIAS, MEGINNES, RIFFLE & SEGHETTI, P.C.

IN THE MATTER OF

RCRA DELISTING ADJUSTED STANDARD

AS

08-

ID

Claire A. Manning, Esq.

BROWN, HAY & STEPHENS,

LLP

205 S. Fifth Street

Suite 700

Springfield, Illinois 62701

Telephone: (217) 544-8491

Facsimile: (217) 544-9609

Email: cmanning@bhslaw.com

908-0288

Brian J. Meginnes, Esq.

Janaki Nair, Esq.

ELIAS, MEGINNES, RIFFLE & SEGHETTI,

P.C.

416 Main Street, Suite 1400

Peoria, Illinois 61602

Telephone: (309) 637-6000

Facsimile: (309) 637-8514

Emails: bmeginnes@emrslaw.com

jnair@emrslaw.com

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

RECEIVED

CLERKS OFFICE

APR'

2

5'

2008

IN THE MATTER OF

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

PETITION

RCRA DELISTING

OF PEORIA

ADJUSTED

DISPOSAL

STANDARD

COMPANY )

)

(Adjusted

AS 08-

Standard

10

– Land)

)

(RCRA Delisting)

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of this Court and all parties of record:

Please enter our appearance as counsel of record in this case for the following:

PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY

Dated: April /1, , 2008.

Respectfully submitted,

BROWN, HAY & STEPHENS, LLP

ie4r4w4/

Claire A. Manning,. Esq.

By:

Claire A. Manning, Esq.

BROWN, HAY & SIEMENS,

LLP

205 S. Fifth Street

Suite 700

Springfield, Illinois 62701

Telephone: (217) 544-8491

Facsimile: (217) 544-9609

Email: cmanning@bhslaw.corn

908-0289

Brian J. Meginnes, Esq.

Janaki Nair, Esq.

ELIAS, MEGINNES, RIFFLE & SEGHETTI,

P.C.

416 Main Street, Suite 1400

Peoria, Illinois 61602

Telephone: (309) 637-6000

Facsimile: (309) 637-8514

Emails: bmeginnes@emrslaw.com

jnair@emrslaw.com

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD R e

c

ovE

D

CLERKS OFFICE

IN THE MATTER OF

?

APR 2 5 2008

Pollution

STATE OF

Control

ILLINOIS

Board

PETITION OF PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY ) (Adjusted Standard – Land)

(RCRA Delisting)

MOTION TO FILE REDUCED NUMBER OF COPIES

NOW COMES Peoria Disposal Company ("PDC"), by its attorneys, Elias, Meginnes,

Riffle & Seghetti, P.C. and Brown, Hay & Stephens, LLP, and moves the Illinois Pollution

Control Board (the "Board") to allow the filing of a reduced number of copies (to four copies

plus the original) of the Technical Support Document attached as Attachment 2 to the RCRA

Delisting Adjusted Standard Petition filed in the above-captioned matter, further stating as

follows:

1.

Board regulations require that for any document filed with the Board, the filing

party must file an original plus nine copies. 35 Ill. Adm. Code §101.302(h).

2.

Contemporaneously herewith, PDC is filing an original plus nine copies of its

RCRA Delisting Adjusted Standard Petition (the "Petition") with all attachments thereto, other

than the Technical Support Document, which is Attachment 2 to the Petition.

3.

The Technical Support Document (not including Appendix N thereto which is

discussed below) consists of two (2) large three-ring binders, or approximately eight (8) inches

of paper, per copy. For this reason, PDC is requesting that it be permitted to file an original and

four (4) copies of the Technical Support Document, rather than an original and nine copies. PDC

RCRA DELISTING ADJUSTED STANDARD

?

AS 08-

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

---

has filed an original and four (4) copies of the Technical Support Document contemporaneously

herewith.

4. In addition, Appendix N to the Technical Support Document, containing

Laboratory Raw Data, consists of two (2) "Banker's Boxes" of paper (or one (1) "Banker's Box"

if double-sided). For this reason, PDC is requesting that it be permitted to file an original and

one (1) hard copy of Appendix N with the Technical Support Document. Copies of the

Technical Support Document not filed with a hard copy of Appendix N will include, instead, a

CD containing Appendix N. PDC has filed an original and one (1) hard copy of Appendix N and

has otherwise filed CDs of Appendix N pursuant to this Motion, contemporaneously herewith.

WHEREFORE, PDC respectfully requests that the Board permit PDC to file an original

and four (4) copies of the Technical Support Document, instanter, and permit PDC to file an

original and one (1) hard copy of Appendix N, given the size of the documents, and grant PDC

such other and further relief as is deemed appropriate under the circumstances.

Dated: April 24, 2008

Respectfully submitted,

PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY,

Petitioner

Claire A. Manning, Esq.

BROWN, HAY & STEPHENS,

LLP

205 S. Fifth Street

Suite 700

Springfield, Illinois 62701

Telephone: (217) 544-8491

Facsimile: (217) 544-9609

Email: cmanning@bhslaw.com

908-0157

Brian J. Meginnes, Esq.

Janaki Nair, Esq.

ELIAS, MEGINNES, RIFFLE & SEGHETTI, P.C.

416 Main Street, Suite 1400

Peoria, Illinois 61602

Telephone: (309) 637-6000

Facsimile: (309) 637-8514

Emails: bmeginnes@emrslaw.com

jnair@emrslaw.corn

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

2

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOASFE

CLERK'S

E

OFFICE

1 VE D

APR 2 5 2008

STATE OFILLINOIS

)

Pollution Control Board

RCRA DELISTING ADJUSTED STANDARD ) AS 08-

/0

PETITION OF PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY)

(Adjusted Standard – Land)

)

(RCRA Delisting)

MOTION FOR EXPEDITED REVIEW

NOW COMES Peoria Disposal Company ("PDC"), by its attorneys, Elias, Meginnes,

Riffle & Seghetti, P.C. and Brown, Hay & Stephens, LLP, and pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code

§101.512, requests that the Illinois Pollution Control Board (the "Board") expedite its review

and determination of the RCRA Delisting Adjusted Standard Petition filed in the above-

captioned matter, further stating as follows:

1.

As is set forth in the RCRA Delisting Adjusted Standard Petition (the "Petition"),

filed contemporaneously herewith, PDC is seeking delisting of stabilized residue generated by

PDC at its Waste Stabilization Facility (the "WSF") from the treatment of electric arc furnace

dust ("EAF dust"), pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

2.

At present, the stabilized residue sought to be delisted is disposed of in PDC's on-

site Subtitle C landfill, the PDC No. 1 Landfill. With the exception of the PDC No. 1 Landfill,

the Subtitle C landfill accepting waste nearest the WSF is in Roachdale, Indiana, approximately

220 miles from the WSF.

3.

The PDC No. 1 Landfill is nearing capacity, and is predicted to be completely full

in 2009. At such time, if the stabilized residue from treatment of EAF dust at the WSF is not

IN THE MATTER OF

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

---

delisted, PDC will be required to transport such stabilized residue hundreds of miles for disposal

at a Subtitle C landfill.

In the alternative, if the stabilized residue is delisted, PDC will be able to

transport the stabilized residue to a Subtitle D landfill in Illinois (most likely the Indian Creek

Landfill #2, located in Tazewell County, Illinois, as set forth in the Petition).

5.

The additional transportation costs identified herein would be onerous for PDC's

customers, and would place PDC at a competitive disadvantage.

6.

Attached herewith as Exhibit A is the affidavit of PDC's Vice President, Ron L.

Edwards, attesting to the truth of the facts cited herein, submitted pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code

§101.512(a).

WHEREFORE, PDC respectfully requests that the Board expedite its review and

determination of the Petition, and grant PDC such other and further relief as is deemed

appropriate under the circumstances.

Dated: April 16, 2008

Respectfully submitted,

PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY,

Petitioner

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

2

---

Claire A. Maiming, Esq.

BROWN, HAY & STEPHENS,

LLP

205 S. Fifth Street

Suite 700

Springfield, Illinois 62701

Telephone: (217) 544-8491

Facsimile: (217) 544-9609

Email:

cmanning@bhslaw.com

908-0158

Brian J. Meginnes, Esq.

Janaki Nair, Esq.

ELIAS, MEGINNES, RIFFLE & SEGHETTI,

P.C.

416 Main Street, Suite 1400

Peoria, Illinois 61602

Telephone: (309) 637-6000

Facsimile: (309) 637-8514

Emails:

bmeginnes@emrslaw.com

j nair@emrslaw. corn

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

3

---

EXHIBIT

A

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF

RCRA DELISTING ADJUSTED STANDARD )

AS

08-

PETITION OF PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY) (Adjusted Standard – Land)

)

(RCRA Delisting)

AFFIDAVIT

In Support of Motion for Expedited Review

STATE OF ILLINOIS

SS.

COUNTY OF PEORIA

Ron L. Edwards, having been first been duly sworn upon his oath, deposes and states as

follows:

1.

My name is Ron L. Edwards. I am an adult and I am competent to testify to the

matters set forth herein.

2.

I am Vice President of Peoria Disposal Company ("PDC").

3.

In my role as Vice President of PDC, I have had occasion to review the facts cited

in the Motion for Expedited Review, to be filed in the above-captioned matter.

4.

The facts cited in the Motion for Expedited Review are within my knowledge and

operational control as Vice President of PDC.

5.

The facts cited in the Motion for Expedited Review, to be filed in the above-

captioned matter, are true and correct to the best of my knowledge as Vice President of PDC.

6.

If called upon to testify in this matter, I could competently testify to the facts

stated herein.

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

---

Ron L. Edwards

Vice President, Peoria Disposal Company

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT.

Subscribed and sworn to before me

this 16th day of April, 2008.

-dA.LLo-o,

Notary Public

Lirno

908-0158

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

2

---

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,

Fiec

CLER

K

-

Piveo

S

OFFIC

E

Air??

2 5

2008

Pollution

_STATE OF

Control

ILLI

NOIS

Board

RCRA DELISTING ADJUSTED STANDARD )

PETITION OF PEORIA DISPOSAL COMPANY )

AS 08- I

(Adjusted Standard – Land)

(RCRA Delisting)

AFFIDAVIT OF FILING BY HAND DELIVERY and

SERVICE BY U.S. MAIL, FIRST CLASS

The undersigned attorney hereby certifies that she has caused to be filed and served the

following documents in the above-captioned matter in accordance with the Illinois

Environmental Protection Act and regulations, by causing the original and nine copies of each

document (except as otherwise noted) to be delivered by hand to the Clerk of the Illinois

Pollution Control Board on the 25th day of April, 2008, with a check in the amount of $75.00 to

pay the filing fee:

a)

RCRA Delisting Adjusted Standard Petition (the "Petition") of Peoria Disposal

Company ("PDC");

b)

an original and copies of Attachment 2 to the Petition, titled "Technical Support

Document," of which the original and one copy include a complete Appendix N in

hard copy, and five copies include Appendix N on CD (all copies of Appendices B

and F are redacted, pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code § 130.404(d));

d)

Entry of Appearance of Elias, Meginnes, Riffle & Seghetti, P.C.;

e)

Entry of Appearance of Brown, Hay & Stephens, LLP;

f)

Motion to File Reduced Number of Copies;

g)

Motion for Expedited Review; and

h) This Affidavit of Filing and Service.

One copy of each of the foregoing documents was served by placing same in the U.S.

Mail, First Class postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

1

IN THE MATTER OF

---

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20460

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5

77 West Jackson Boulevard

Chicago, IL 60604

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Division of Legal Counsel

1021 North Grand Avenue East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield, IL 62794-9276

(All copies of the Technical Support Document served on the above-listed parties include

redacted Appendices B and F, and include Appendix N on CD).

Subscribed and sworn to before me

this 22nd day of April, 2008

NOTARY

JES

P

OFFICIAL

UBLIC

SICA

-

M

S

RO

SEAL

CKEY

Notary Public

MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:06/2//11

TATE OF ILLINOIS

Claire A. Manning, Esq.

BROWN, HAY & STEPHENS,

LLP

205 S. Fifth Street

Suite 700

Springfield, Illinois 62701

Telephone: (217) 544-8491

Facsimile: (217) 544-9609

Email: cmanning@bhslaw.com

908-0196

Brian J. Meginnes, Esq.

Janaki Nair, Esq.

ELIAS, MEGINNES, RIFFLE & SEGHETTI,

P.C.

416 Main Street, Suite 1400

Peoria, Illinois 61602

Telephone: (309) 637-6000

Facsimile: (309) 637-8514

Emails: bmeginnes@emrslaw.corn

jnair@emrslaw.corn

THIS FILING IS ON RECYCLED PAPER AS REQUIRED BY 35 ILL. ADM. CODE 101.202 AND 101.302(g).

2