Method 23 -dioxins and furaos. In addition, I have reviewed historical trial bums perfonned by 

other qualified stackt:esUng firms (Midwest Researob, Inc), that were agency approved RCRA 

trial bUrDS, to assess their 3Uitlbility for use, along with BNSR's own testing -.wrlc, to address 

c:ompliaDce with tbe HWC MACI' standards through the dala in lieu of provisions Providod for 

in these regulations. As staled previously, I know of no bwlis to challenge the integrity of these 

actual data either. 

S. 1 have also been wotking on the Com~ve PerfOrmance Test Plans ("CPT") for 

the facility. The foc::us of this worlc is to oomply with existing requltemcots, which necessitate 

CPTs imd testing to be oompleted by Octo bet 14, 2009. Though 1hat dc:adllne Is roughly 

eighteen months away, this is the nonnal lime frame to begin test plan preparation so that the 

actual tests can be ~rformcd on time to meet the regulatory deadlines. This schedule is also 

oonsistent with our praaice for the climts we serve and iB gene:rolly lnlo for the entire industry 

regulated under this rule. 

6. I have reviewed the USEPA Region V's Request for Information dated February 22, 

2008. In essence, Veolia is requested to accomplish thc following actions by July IS, 2008: 

• Prepare and submit three CPT Plans to the USEPA for q.ch of the incinetators at Sauget, 

including the required Colllinuous MoqitOring System Performance Evaluation Test 

(CMSPB'I) Plans for each unit as well; 

• Receive and respond to USEPA 's comments on the CPT Plans (wblch ordinarily takes 

several months, but can tab up to a year or more to receive), 

e Oblain final approval of IMCPTs ftom lhe US!!P A, 

-3-

VES 004701 
• Prepare for the CPT, including mobilizing needi:d teeds and spiking materials, preparing 

and shipping all teSt cqulpinMt, making arrangements with analytical laboratories and . 

perfumting the CMSPBT, 

• Perform three CPTs, each requiring as mueb as a lUll woek to complete, 

• ObWn the test resulta from 'die laboratory, ~aluate these results and prepare eil.d submit 

the test report aod Nodficalion of ComplUmce to ~ USEP A. . . 

7. Vcolia bas asked mo if tho requested testing, by tbe July 15,2008 deadline, is feasible. 

In my opinion, the USEP A's request, in the gi'ml time frame, is neither feuible nOt' approprill!e 

S!ven tbe amount of time needed to not only complete approvable plans, but also to conduct 

testing and submit tho required reports. For a coromeroial facility of this complexity, USEPA's . . 

expected schedule is 1mprcccdented In my experience. My reasoning for this Sllrtement is as 

follows: 

8. The CPT Plans are complex and prior to thorn being conducted, require several 

months to develop in sufficient detail In order for them to be approvable by a regulatory agency. . . 

The first step in preparing the CPT involves collecting sufficient facility related inf~on to 

:fulfi'l the information rcquitemen1s stipulated in the regulation (i.e., 40 CPR§ 6:1.1207). In 

addition, curreot information on wa.!le streams JIWI8ged at each of lbc uoits will need to be 

COQ\Pilcd and swnmarlzed so that wbat each unit treats is well characterized ai1d the feeds tlul.t 

will be used during the CPT will be representative. Sinoc these units treat many waste streams 

that differ both chemically and physically, this compilatiori generally takes acveral weeks by 

itself to complete. Then, from this compilation, detailed piWJS for testing need to be developed 

JO establish the desired feed and ope111ting conditions during the CPT that will then enable VeoUa 

to establish tbe required waste feed and ope:ating parameter limlta (OPLs) required to show 

- 4-

VES 004702 
ongoing compliance with the HWC MA,CT standards. This entails identifying the desired feeds, 

calculating their feed rates, detennining likely emission rates and assisting the facility In 

selecting the &8il'Od operating conditions so that the regulatory requirements for establishing 

each OPL can be established. Due to the complexity of setting each OPL, it will likely be 

necessary to condiiCI testing at more than one feed or operating oondition, all of wbiob needs to 

be worked out in sufficient detail so that each l!lrlt can be opeaattd at these desired conditions for 

. sufficieot time to OODduct the emissions testing. Ooce deta11s ~f the test design liave been 

finalized, dala quality objectives arees••blisbed and the sampling and analysis approaches and 

methods must be finalized. These details are incorporated into e, specific Quality Assurance 

Project Plan ("QAPP"). This pO)'lion of tho CPT Plan has e~tlellslve de(ail deacribing tb8 

sampling and analysis methods and related quality uswanee/quality oontrol ("QA/QC") 

measures thai w!U be followed by the facility, the stack t.esting finn and the analytical 

laboratories involved with tho CPT. Once draft plans haw been written, internal reviews are 

required with ~ility operations staiT and planned subcontJaetors (e.g., specialty analytieal labs) 

to review and finali2t plan details to assure thC tests can be perfonned as writte'n and the results 

will meet da1a quality objectives for tho program. · 

9. TM CPTs for incinerators lfl andN3 will be similar. But the Plan forfl4 will be 

different beeau!c Units 2 and 3 are different technolOgies (Fixed Hearth) from Unit 4 (Rotary 

Kiln), employ IIOIIICwhat dift'ema air pollution control systems, feed diff~t wastes and operate 

undtz di.ffmnt c:onditioos. These differenees nec=itate separa!o and distinct test designs that 

will require specific feed rates, spiking rates, operating conditions and test schedules for each of 

the unit types. In addition, stack sampling ports and access to these ports differ, thus requiring 

-5-

VES 004703 
separate and dis1in« scheduling and sequencing of testiQS activities. Thus, scpa.ra1e CPT Plans 

need to be developed. 

lo. omo ilie Pliiii8 are submrtted; ihCY must go tlii'Ough agency review and approval 

procedure.s. Typic:ally, agency review and approval for one affected sourc:e can easily take a. year 

or more. For that reason, Veolla asked ENSR to begin the CPT process now ln order to meet the 

October2009 dCadfine. The applicable MACTregulatioos (40 C.P.R.§ 63.1207 etseq) provide 

timeftames for submitting such Plans and performing the needed testing. The regulations . 

stipulate that CPT Plans must be submitted at least one year prior to conducting them tp allow . 

for agency review and approval The regulations further !tlpulate a ~ frame ( 40 CPR § 

63.1207(c)(I(A)) of9 months for the agency to notify facilities oftbeir intent to approve or 

disapprove the' CPT Plao. lt bas been my expcrieoce that CPT Plan reviews by regulatory 

agencies follow traditional proceawes starting with an administrative completeness review, 

foUo~ by a tccbnica! review. Bo.th of these reviews are typically lte:ative processes that are 

managed through agency issued Notice of ~flclency letters that require response and additional 

infollllation to be submiUcd. Normally, no matter how complete a facility feels their CPT Plan is 

on submittal, the AgentJy provides input, typic:ally requiring several Plan rcvisiC?JlS before 

approval is given to conduct the actual tasting. HlstoricaUy, agencies have often spent several 

years reviewing trial bums under RCRA due to their complexity and the need for a thorough and 

complete Administrative Record to be on file supporting agency deoislonmaldng. Like the · 

RCRA program, it has been my expetiooce under the HWC MACT CPT Plan review process 

that a&eneies do not expedite their review and approval procedures for the very same reason. In · 

fact, in my experience it is essential for complcic and thorough reviews oflhe Plan(s) to ~ur 

fa: both the agency's sake and to avoid puq Veolia at risk of an unldenliticd problem not 

-6-

VES 004704 
being discovered lllltillt ia too late, putting the entire CPT and the facility's ability to romply 

with an appropriate set of limits in jeopardy. 

I. once ageocy approva1"ts gtitite(l, pet!OfliiiJlg tne actual CP I ieqwm extellitve pre• 

planning, scheduling and logistics actlvltie~~ to OCCUr before they can be oonducted to assure 

pii)Jler execution, typically taking several montits for just one unit Due to the general 

uncertainty in the timing llflhese approvals, fe.cilitios and their stack testing wn1racton do not 

begin this process until approval Is given; Also, given the very nature of these types of 

Programs, only certiun teSting and analytical firms, are truly qualified to oonduct them. Sinoe 

many facilities subjecl.to the HWC MACT regulqtioos are currently in various st&ges of planning 

and performing these programs, availability of trained SI&Ck testing crews, testing equipment and 

laboratory capacity must be p!arulcd several montbJ in advmcc just to secure scbeduling 

rommitments. Also, from a pore logistics pcrs!*live, many prepntory activities must take 

place well in advance of tho actual field pros!1IDl to e.ssurc file CPT is pcrfomed 83 intended. 

For example, testing equlproent must be properly cleaned, packaged for shlpment and shipped to 

tho facility. Glassware cleaning fur stack testing can take up to two weeks to oomplete before it 

e&n even be packaged for shipment to the facility for usc in the test. In additiOD, test methods 

like EPA M 23 for Dioxins and. F\lrans require specific sample train test media to be prepared 

with pnHpil:ed compounds to address progre.m QA/QC requirements. La$1, but not least, 

facilities must accumulate the uccessary feed and spildng materials and oonduct oomprehens!ve 

p-eparations of !heir uoil3 for the test program. such as instrument calibrations titst ~ required 

as part of addressing the CMSPBTrequirements as stipulated ln40 CPR §.63.8{o)(4) and 

1207(bXI). In order to assure adequate availability of testing staff, equipment and laboratory 

capacity to process sunplcs within their sample holding times and make sure that each CPT is 

- 7-

VES 004705 
conducted so lhatit"meets 100% of the performance and quality :requirements, ouly one unit at a 

time is testod. AUemptina 10 Perform simultaneous test programs on multiple units and maintain 

quint)' periol'lJl8D()e, Wlffi IDS1ifficaenl .read tame Is a recape for tllilUte) which IS an unacceptable 

ou!I:Ome for all involved. 

12. Even OJ) an expedited basis and doing one inci.neralor at a time, it wo'!]d reasonably . . 

lllke two months to prepare the CPT Plan. Then, once approval oftbe Ag~ is obtained, it 

would 181cc Q1lll molllh or more to pzepare for and schednlcd the CPT, ~week to cooduct tbe 

testing and another several weeks to get the results of the tests summarized (the regulations allow 

submittal of results up to 90 days after completion of the CPT). 

FURTHER AFFIANl' SA YBTH NOT. 

SWORN AND SUBSCR1BED 

Before me this J!taay 

of Marcla, 2008. 

-8-

VES 004706 
VES 004707 .pdf 
Kellmeyer, Joseph 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Attachments: 

Dear Ms. Newton, 

Greig.Siedor@veoliaes.com 

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 11:25 AM 

Newton.Cheryl@epa.gov Oennis.W~rchol@veollaes.com; Doug.Harris@veoliaes.com; Kellmeyer, Joseph . 

Attached letter 

Newton lttr 031108.DOC 

Thls letter relates to the issues we will be discussing with you and your 

colleagues at our meeting on March 13,2008 at RegionS's offices In 

Chicago. 1 am also sending It to you vla fax (312·353·1661) and UPS. 

Thank you. we loOk forward to a productive meeting on the 13th. 

(See attached file: Newton lttr 031108.DOC) 

Greig R. Sledor 

Chief Legal Officer 

Veolla ES Technical Solutions, LL.C. 

(formerly Onyx Environmental Services, L.L.C.) 

700 East Butterfield Road, Suite 201 

Lombard IL 60148 

630.218·1635 

(fax) 630-684-7013 

greig.siedor@veoliaes.oom 

ww_w,veol!aes.com 

VES 004707 
V\A UPS, email and FAX to 312-353-1661 

March 11, 2008 

Cheryl L. NewtOn 

A- 181 

Acting Director of Air and Radiation Division 

United StateS Environmental Agency, Region V 

77 West Jackson Blvd. 

Cl1icago, lL 60604-3590 

Re: PTeliminary Draft of Title V Permit 

Dear Ms. Newton: 

l am in rw:ipt of the letter from you received on March 3, 2008, which also enclosed a 

preliJninary draft of a Tille V operating permit !or Veolia's Sauget, lllinois' facility witli. a 

rtCJ.Uest for inlorrnal comments by April IS, 2008. We appreciate your letter. VeoUa will 

provide any informal comments it may have to the draft Tille V operating permit under 

separate cover by April 15, 2008. 

The reason I am writing to you today is to correct cenain inaccurate assertions contained 

within your undated cover letter. In that letter, you state: 

[djuring our review of the data used to calculate the OPLs in your 

application, we have identified numerous flaws that compel us to 

conclude that reliance on these Ok'Ls will not ensure Veolia's 

compliance with the applicable requirements in the HWC 

MACT. As you are aware, the Illinois Environmental Protection 

Agency similarly identified problems with the data when it was 

drafting a Tille V operating permit for Veolia under its Clean Air 

Act Permit Prouam. Furthermore, because of the Jack of usable 

data, EPA is unable to calculate OPLs to incorporate into the 

preliminary draft permit. 

(Emphasis added.) 

VES 004708 
I, along with outside counsel Joseph KeUmeyer from Thompson Coburn, was present when 

Veolia discussed the collected data with fllinois Environmental Protection Agency ("!EPA") at a 

meeting In Springfield IL on April21, 2006. Contrary to your assertion, we were never advised 

by IEPA of any "flaws" in the data. Similarly, !EPA never advised that they had an issue with 

regard to the accuracy of the data collected. Rather, the only purporred issue was the lack of 

recent data on Incinerator 3. Historically, Veolia had submitted test plans and schedules before 

conducting uial burns and similar restS on the Veolia incinerators and TEPA and USEPA were 

also present for many of the testS. In addition, pursuant to Veolia's RC RA perm.its and the 

Code of Federal Regulations, data from lncinerator 2 had been used by Veolia since the early 

J990s in lieu of testing Incinerator 3 (and vice versa). Notwithstanding this long-standing 

practice, in response to !EPA's request and in an effort to cooperate with !EPA, Veolia (on a 

very short schedule requested by !EPA) subsequently and at great cost teSted and developed 

actual data from Incinerator 3 during the May-June 2006 time frame. 

Additionally, there were some d~<;CUssions during our meeting with TEPA concerning the 

method of extnapolation from existing data. However, as I am sure you know, extrapolation 

Issues are functionally and fundamentally different than "flaws" and "problems with the data.N 

At the time of the discussions with lEPA as well as today, Veolia continues to believe in the 

integrity and the accuracy of the data it has provided. 

I do not wish to make too much of the inaccurate statement contained in your letter, and we 

are confident that this was inadvertent; however, I do believe it is important to set this part of 

the record straight. I realize USEPA has only relatively recently taken on the role as the lead 

agency involved in evaluating Veolia's Title V application and, unlike myseU, USEPA did not 

have the benefit of being present during Veolia's meeting with TEPA to discuss the data. Veolia 

is edi~ted to the belief that IEPA, USEPA and the public must have an accurate record to rely 

upon. 

Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have relating to this or any other 

matter. 

Very truly yours, 

Greig Siedor 

Chief Legal Officer 

CC: Ms. Julie Armitage, IE.PA·BOA 

Mr. Michael Reid, IEPA·BOA 

MI. Joseph Kellmeyer, Thompson-Coburn 

Mr. Doug Harris, Veolia 

VES 004709 
VES 004710.pdf 
From: Qous.Harfis@veoliaes.com !mailto:Doug.Harris@veollaes.com] 

Sent: Frid;y, March 21, 2008 2:24PM 

To: Ncwtoo.Chervl@epa.gov Cc: Blakley.Pamela@epa.gov; Damico.Genevieve@epa.gov; Woolums.Jane@epa.gov; Haii.Charles@epa.gov; 

Ramatv.Todd@epa.gov; Blough James@epa.gov: Grejg.S!edor@veollaes.com; Kellmeyer, Joseph; 

CDool!ttle@ensr .aecom.com: David .Kiarich@veoliaes.com; Oennjs.Warchol@veollaes.com 

Subject: CPT Schedule for Incinerators 2,3 and 4 

As we discussed during our March 13 meeting. we are forwarding tile testing 

schedule for Incinerators 2, 3 and 4. You'll find attachmentl being the 

Integrated schedule for all three incinerators. Attachments 2, 3 and 4 are 

the Individual schedules tor Incinerators 2, 4 and 3, respectively. Please 

do not hesitate to can with any questiOns or comments. 

(See attached file: CPT Integrated Schedule for 2,3,4_March, 2008.doc)(5ee 

attached file: CPT Schedule for #2_Marth, 2008.doc)(See attached file: CPT 

Schedule tor "4_March, 2008.doc)(See attached flle: CPT Schedule for 

U3_March, 2008.doc) 

/ 

VES 004710 
Iut 

puration 

Develop CPT Plan for Unit 112. 

Submit Unit il2 CPT Plan oo Agency. 

Agency apP<Oves Unitlt2 CPT Plan.' 

Begin pro<:= oo have the Unit12 CPT Plan made 

available to the public for at least 60 clays and 

issue public notice to fll<.ilil)l/public mailing llot 

per 40 CFR §63.1207(e)(2). Unit H2 CPT 

planning, scheduling, and logistiCl activities 

commenced by ENSR and Vcolia. 

Submit CPT Plan for Unit #4. 

Agency approves Unh #4 CPT Plan.' 

Begin process to have tbe Unit #4 CPT Plan made 

available to the public for at leasl 60 days and 

i55ue JlUblic n()!ice to filcilil)l/public mailing list 

per 40 CFR §63.1207(e)(2). Unit 114 CPT 

planning, sch<dulinll. and logistics oaiviries 

commenced by ENSR and Veolla. 

Unit il2 CPT Plan available to public for atleaS160 

days and issue public notice to filcilil)l/publit 

mailing list per40 CFR §63.1207{eX2). 

Commence Unit #2 testing. • 

Complete Unit #2 testing. 

Submit CPT Plan for Unit #3. 

Unit #4 CPT Plan available to public for ;It least 60 

days and issue public notice to focilityfpublic 

mailing list per 40 CFR §63.1207{eX2).' 

Agency approves Unit #3 CPT Plan. • 

Begjn process to have tbe Unit NJ CPT Plan made 

available to the public for at leaS! 60 days and 

issue public notice to fil<ilil)lipublic ma.iling list 

per40 CFR §63.1207(eX2). Unit N3 CPT 

planning, scheduling, and logirtlcs o<rivirtes 

commenced by ENSR and V eolia. 

60Days 

IS Days 

14 Days 

64 Days 

IS Days 

63 Days 

IS Days 

Anticipated 

D!te 1'o Be Comnlcted 1 

May 15,2008 

May 15.2008 

May 30,200& 

May )0, 2008 

July I. 2008 

July IS, 2008 

July 15, 2008 

AugU1t I, 2008 • 

August I, 2008 

August Is. 2008 

September IS, 2008 

September IS, 200& 

September 30, 2008 

Seplernber 30, 2008 

VES 004711 
AnH(Jnated 

Task puratlon Date To Be Camnleted 1 

Unit112 CPT Report submitted to Aieucy.' 60 Days October 14,2008 

Notificalion of Compliance (NOC) for Unit #2 90 Days November 13, 2008 

submitted to Agency. ' 

Finding of ComplianCe ftom AgenCY fur Unit #2. 1 JODays November I J, 2008 

Comm~nce Unit 114 testing. t 

De<;ember I, 2008 

Unit i 3 CPT Plan available to public for at least 60 63 Days December I, 2008 

days and i~ public notice to facility/public 

m!liling liSt per 40 CFR §63.1207(c)(2). 10 

Complete Unit 114 teSting. IS Days December IS, 2008 

Unit #4 CPT Report submitted to Agency. " 60 Days Febroal)' 13, 2009 

NOC for Unit #4 submitted to Agency. 

11 90 Days March \3, 2009 

Finding of Compliance from Agency for Unit H4. " 31 Days March 16, 2009 

Commence Unit §3 testing. " 

April I, 2009 

Complete Unit #'3 teSting. IS Days April IS, 2009 

Unit li3 CPT Report submitted to Agency. ,. 61 Days June IS, 2009 

NOC for l!nit #3 submitted to Ajency. " 90Days July 14, 2009 

Finding of Complisnce from Agency for Unit #3. JODays August\4, 2009 

1 Opportunities may exist in this schedule thot could result in tasks being completed earlier than the 

anticipated date of completion. Conversely, throughout this CPT schedule dUll Vcolia is proposing, 

onlicipated completion dates are based on previous actions being compleled on the given date. If these 

previous actions aro not finished by the listed duo date, it may be necess..-y to extend subsequent 

completion dates. 

1 If approval of the Unit *2 CPT Plan exceeds I) days, the May 30,2008 completion date, and subsequent 

task ccmpletion dates, will be nwioed to ~nee\ this e<tension of the schedule. 

' lfappro''al oftbe Unit li4 CPT Plan exe«ds 14 days. the July U, 2008 completion date, ond 

subsequent tzsk completion dates, may be ~vised to reflect Ibis extension of the schodulc. Due to the 

early submittal of this plan, a delay in A&ency opproval may not affoct the schedule. 

• If a delay in the commencement of the Unit 112 CPT occ\lfS that is beyond the control ofVcolill, the 

Augusol, 2008 date for starting this toiling, and subsequent taSk completion dates, will be revised 

to reflect this extension ofthe schedule. 

VES 004712 
'This process will be repeated if changes In the approved CPT Plan for Unit 114""' made. lfthi.s process 

is repoatod, subsequent task completion dates may be revised to reflect an extCilSion of the sclledule. 

' If approval ofthe Unit r3 CPT Pl•n exceeds IS days, the Seplember 30,200$ completion dale, and 

wbsequent task completion dates, may be revised to reflect dtis extension of the schedule. Due to the 

early subminal of this plan, a delay in Agency approval may notaffecc the schedule. 

1 If Unit U2 test results arc n01 oblained in a timely manner Ot are flawed in some way thai would delay the 

submittal of the CPT rcpon and the NOC, the Oetober 14,2008 and the November 13, 2008 completion 

dates, and subsequent tnsk completion dateS, will be revised to rellect this extetuioo oftbe schedule. 

' If the Finding of Compliance for Unit #2 exceeds 30 days, the November 13. 2008 completion date. and 

subsequent task completion dates, will be revised to reflect this extension of the schedule. 

'Ira delay in thecommencemont of the Unitl/4 CPT OCCW'S that is beyond the conlrol ofVoolia 

(e.g, the Finding ofCcrnpli3nce for Unit #2 has not been received), the December l, 2008 date for 

Slarting this tuting, and subsequent task completion dates, Will be revised to reflect this extension ofthe 

sebedule. 

"This process will be repeated if changes in the appro••ed CPT Plan for Unit #3 are rnade. If this process 

is repoated. subsequent task completion dates may be revised to reflecc an extension of the schedule. 

11 If Unit #4 test results are not obtained in a timely manner or are flawed in somo way !bat would delay 

the submittal of the CPTrepO<t and the NOC. !be February 13.2009 and the March 13,2009 completion 

dates, and subsequent task completion dates, will be revised to reflect this extension of the schedule. 

" If the l'indin& of Compliance for Unit #4 exceeds 31 days, the March 16,2009 completion dlte, and 

subsequent task completion dales, will be revised to rellect this extension of the schedule. 

" I fa delay in the commencement ofthe Unit ill CPT occurs that is beyond the control of Yeolla 

(e.g.. the Finding of Compliance for Unit #4 has not been received), the April I, 2009 date for 

starting this testin¥. and subsequent task completion dales, will be revised to reflect this extension of the 

schedule. 

''If Unit f3 lest results are not obtained in a timely manntf or are flowed ln some way that would delay 

the submittal of the CPT report and the NOC, tho June IS, 2009 and July 14,2009 completion dates, and 

subsequent task completion date. will be revised to reflect this extension of the schedule. 

VES 004713 
VES 004714 
Comprebensjve Performance Testing <CPT) Schedu ~ for VegliR Incinerator #:Z, 

Antisipatcsl 

Date I•, Be Comnlsted 1 

Ia!l> 

J>untlo• 

Develop CPT Plan for Unit 112. 60Days May IS, 2008 

May IS,2008 

Submit Unit 112 CPT Plan to Agency. 

Agency approves Unit 112 CPT Plan. 2 IS Days May30,200S 

Seg\n process to bave the Unit Ill CPT Plan m* 

May30, 2008 

available to the public for at least 60 days and 

Issue public notice to facililylpublic mailing li$1 

per 40 CFR §63.1207(eX2). Unit H2 CPT 

planning, scheduling, 81.\d logistic> activities 

cotnmeneed by ENSR and Voolia. 

Unit H2 CPT Plan available to public fur nt least 60 64 Days AuguSI 1, 2008 

days and issue public notice to C-.cllitylpublic 

mailing list per 40 CFR §63.t207(eX2). 

Cm•mence Unit fi2 testing.' 

AU&\LSt I. 2008 

Complete Unit 112 testing. 15 Days Auaust IS, 200& 

Unit i12 CPT RepOrt submined to Agency.' 600ays 

October 14, 2008 

Notif!C8liun of Compliance (NOC) for Unh H2 90Days Novembe< 13. 2008 

submitted to Agency.' 

Finding of Compliance from Agen<:y for Unit •z.' 300ays November 13, 2008 

1 Oppor1Uilities may exist in this schedule that could I'OSUlt in tasks being completed earlier than the 

anticipated date of completion. Conversely, throughoutthls CPT schedule that Vcolia is proposing, 

anticipated completion dates are based on previous actions being completed on the given date. 1 f these 

previous actions ar~ not finished by the listed due date, it may be necessary to extend sub$cquent 

completion dales. 

' If approval of the Unit H2 CPT Plan exceeds 15 days, the May 30,2008 completion date. and subsequent 

1ASI< completion dates. wiU be revised to reflect this extension nf the scb<dule. 

'If a delay in the commencement of the Unit lil CPT occurs !bat is beyond the eonuol ofVeoliA, the 

August I, 2008 da!e for startin& this testing. and su\loequenttask completion dates, will be revised 

to reflect this extensioo of the sclteclule. 

VES 004715 
' If Unit #2test results •~ not oboained in a timely manner or are flawed in some way that would delay the 

subminal oflheCPT report and the NOC, the October 14,2008 and the November 13,2008 complelion 

dates, and subsequent task compleCiOt> dales, will~ revised to reflect this extenSion oflhe schedule. 

' If the Finding ofCo"'4'lionce for Unit 112 exceeds 30 days, the November 13,2008 completion date, and 

ub~quenttask completion dates, will be rovised to reflect this extension oflhe schedule. 

VES 004716 
Comprehensive Performance T esting CCPTI Schedule 

for Veolla Incinerator #4 

AntiCh!ltt."(} 

IW 

Duretjon 

Datt, To Be Cumpleted ' 

Submit CPT Plan for Unit 114. 

July I, 2008 

Agency approves Uni1114 CPT Plan.' 14 Days July 1 s, 2008 

Begin prooe$S to bave the Unit 114 CPT Plan made 

July IS. 2008 

available to the public for at least 60 days and 

issue publi<: notiee to filcility/public mailing list 

per 40 CFR §63.1207(e)(l). Unit #4 CPT 

phuming. scheduling. and logistic:s activities 

commenced by ENSR and Veolia. 

Unit #4 CPT Plan available to public for at least 60 63 Days September 1 S, 2008 

days and issue public notice to facility/public 

mailing list per 40 CFR §63.1207(eX2).' 

Conunenee Unit #4t<sting. 

9 [)«ember I, 2008 

Complete Unit 114 testing. 

15 Days December 1 S. 2008 

Unit 114 CPT Report submitted to Agency. 

11 60Days Februory 13,2009 

NOC for Unit 114 submitted to Agency. 

11 90 Days March 13,2009 

finding of Compliance from Agenc)' for Unit 114. 

12 31 Days March 16, 2009 

1 Opponunities may exist in this schedule that could result in taSks being completed earlier than the 

anticipated date of completion. Conven;ely, throughout this CPT schedule that Veolia is proposing, 

anticipated completion dates are based on provioll!l octions being completed on the given date. lftheoo 

previous actions are not finished by the listed due date, il may be necessary to extend subsequent 

completion dateS. 

' If approval of the Unit 114 CPT Plan exceeds 14 days, the July 1 S, 2008 completion date, and 

sub<lequrot task completion datos, may be revised to reflect this extension of the ..,hedulo. Duo to the 

early submittal of this plan, a delay in Aaency approval may not affect the schedule. 

'This process .. ill be repeated if cbanges in the approved CPT Plan for Unit 114 are made. If this process 

Is repeated, subsequent task completion d.\tes may be revised to reflect an extensioo of the scl>edule. 

' \fa delay in the commencem<nt ofthe Unit 14 CPT oeeun that is beyond tbe control of Veolla 

(e.g., the Finding of Compliance for Unit 12 has no< been recei"ed), the D<eomber I, 2008 date for 

$!liYiing this testing, and subsequent task completion dates, will be r<:vised to reflect this extension oflhe 

schedule. 

VES 004717 
11 If Unit #<I test results are not obtained In athnely manner or are flawed in $om< way lhat would delay 

me submiaal of the CPT report and the NOC, Ihe FebruBJ)I 13, 2009 and the Marcll 13, 2009 completion 

dates, and subsequent task completion dates, will be revised to reflect this extension ofthe schedule. 

12 If the Finding of Compliance for Unit/14 exceeds 31 days, the March 16,2009 completion dute, and 

subsequent task completion dates, will be revised to refle<:t this extension of the scl>tdule. 

VES 004718 
Comprebensiye Performanec Testing <CPTl Schedule 

for Veolia Inci tor #~ 

Ant!dnated 

:rm DvraUo• Date Tg Bq Comnleted 1 

Subtl'lit CPT Plan for Unit #3. 

Septt'mber IS, 2008 

Ageoey approves Unit #3 CPT Plan.' IS Days September 30, 2008 

Begill process 10 have lhe Unit #3 CPT Plan made 

Seplcmber 30, 2008 

available to lhe public for at least 60 days and 

Issue public notJce to r.citityipubtic mailing lbt 

per 40 CFR §63.1207(e)(2). Unit li3 CPT 

planni!l$. scheduling, and logi>tiCS activities 

commenced by ENSR and V eolia. 

Unit #3 CPT Plan available to public for at \east60 63 Days Ow:mbor I, 2008 

days and issue public notice to facility/public 

mailing list per 40 CFR §63. t2()7(e)(2).

10 

Commence Unit #3 testing. " 

April I, 2009 

Complete Unit #3 testing. 

IS Days April IS, 2009 

Unit #3 CPT Report submitted to Agency. " 61 Pays June 13,2009 

NOC for Unit 113 submitted 10 Agency. 14 90 Oa)'S July 14,2009 

Finding of Compliance ftom Agency for Unit N3. 300ays Au&ustl4, 2009 

1 Opportunities may exist in this schedule lhat could result in taSKs being completed earlier than the 

anricipated date ofcompltiion. Conversely, thrOIIghout this CPT schedule that Veotia is proposing. 

anticipated completion dates are based on previous actions being completed on tho given date. If these 

previous actions are notlinlshed by the listed due dato, it may be necesS8ry to extend subsequent 

completion dates. 

' lfapproval of the Unit #3 CPT Plan exceeds IS days, the SeptemberJO, 2008 completion date, and 

subsequent task completion dates, may be revised to reflect this extension of the schedule. Due to the 

early submittal of this plan, a delay in A&eney awrovat may not affect the schedule. 

10 This pro=s wUI be repeated if chanSOS in the approved CPT Plan fu< Unit N3 arc made. lrthis process 

is rc~ subsequent task completion dates may be revi;ed 10 rcllect an extension of the schedule. 

u If a delay in the commencement of the Unit M3 CPT occutS that is beyond the control ofVeolia 

(e.g, the Fiedin' of Compliance for Unit 114 \lloS not been received), the April I, 2009 date for 

statting this tesllng, and subsequent task completion dates. wiU be revised to Nflect thls extension oflhc 

schedule. 

VES 004719 
" If Unit #3 tes1 results are not obtained in • timely manner or are flawed in some way that would delay 

the submittal of !he CPT report and the NOC. the June 15, 2009 md July 14, 2009 completion dates, and 

subsequent taSk compiMion date, will be revised to reflect this extension of the schedule. 

VES004720 
VES 004721 .pdf 
UNITED STATES BNV%RONXZlftAlo PRO'l'&CTION Ac;DIC:Y 

REGION 5 

IN TIUC MATTD. OFI 

Veolia ES Technical Solutions, LLC 

I Mobile Avenue 

Sauget, Illinois 62201 

.t.'rTUI'l'ION• Douglas Harris, General Manager 

Request to P~~d• :tnfoxmatiou Purau&nt to the Cle&D Air' Aot 

This Request for Informati on revises the Request for 

Information that tne u.s. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

issued on February 22; 2008. EPA is requiring Veolia ES 

Technical Solutions, LLC (Veolia or you) to submit certain 

information about your hazardous waste incine rators at I Mobile 

Avenue, sauge t, Illinois. Appendix B specifies the information 

that you must submit. You must send this information to us 

accordin9 to the schedule in Appendix B. 

we are issuing this information request under section 114lal 

of the Clean Air Ac t (ACt), 42 u.s.c. § 1414la). Section 114(a} 

authorizes .the Administrator of EPA to require the submission of. 

information. The Administrator has delegated this aut hority to 

the Director of the Air and Radiation Division, Region s. 

·. 

veolia owns and operates three hazardous waste incinerators 

at its Sauget, Illinois, facility. We are requesting this 

information to determine whether your emissi on sources are 

complying with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

POllutants from Hazardous Waste Combustors, 40 C.P.R. Part 63, 

SUbp~rt BEE (hereinafter, •the HWC MACT"l and to establish the 

appropriate operating parameter l imits for each incinerator. 

You must send all required information to: 

VES 004721 
Attn: coropliance Tracker, AE-17J 

Air Enforcement and corrpliance Assurance Branch · 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 5 

77 w. Jackson Boulevard, AE-17J 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

With copies to Illinois Environmental Protect:lon Agency: 

Ray Pilapil , Manager Compliance and Enforcement Section Bureau of Air 

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 

1021 North Grand Avenue Bast 

Spr ingfie ld, Illinois 62702 

And 

Mi chael Reed, uni t Manager Clean Air Act Permit Program Bureau of Air 

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 

1021 North Grand Avenue East · Springfield, I l l inois 62702 

You may consider the information confidential that you 

~~it to us. You may assert a claim of business confidentiality 

for any portion of the submitted information under 40 C.P.R. 

Part 2, Subpart B. Appendi.x A specifies the assertion and 

substantiation requirements for business confidentiality claims. 

Veolia must submit all requested information under an 

authorized signature with t he following certi fication: . 

I certify under pena l t y of law that I have examined and am 

familia r wit h the nformation in the enclosed documents, 

including all att a chments . Based. on my inquiry of those 

i ndividual s with pri mary responsibility for obtaini ng the 

information. I certify that the stat ements and information 

a re. to the best of rrry knowledge and belief, true and 

complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties 

for knowingly submitting false statements and information, 

including the possibility of fines or imprisonment pursuant 

to section ll3(c) (2) of the Act, and 18 u.s.c. §§ 1001 and 

. 1341. 

We rMY use any information submitted in res;>onse to this 

request in an admini strative, civil, or criminal enforcement 

2 

VES 004722 
action. 

This request is not subject to the· Paperwork Reduction Ace, 

44 u.s.c. § 350l .et seq., because it seeks collection of 

information from a specific entity as part of an administrative 

action or investigati on. To aid in our electroni c r ecord keeping 

efforts, please provide your response to this request for 

information without staples. Paper clips, binder clips, and 

3-r ing binders are a cceptable. 

Fai lure to comply fullY with this request f or information 

may subject veolia to an enforcement action under section 113 of 

the Act, 42 u.s.c. § 7413 . 

You should direct any questions about this request for 

in formation to Charles Hall at (312} 353-3443 . 

rector 

and Radiation Division 

3 

VES 004723 
Appen4lx A 

Confidential BUaineaa Znfoxwation (CBZ) 

Aaaertion and SUbatantiation Requi r-.ota 

A. Assertion Requirements 

You may assert a business confidentiality claim covering all 

or part of the information requested in the atta ched l ett er, as 

provided in 40 C.F.R. § 2.203(b). To make a confidentiality 

c l aim, submit the requested i nformation and indicate that you are 

making a claim of confidenti ality. Any document over which you 

make a claim of conf identiality should be marked by attaching a 

cover sheet stamped or typed wi th a l egend to indicate the intent 

to claim confi dentiality. The stamped or typed l egend, or other 

suitable form of notice, should employ l anguage such as •trade 

s ecr et• or •pr oprietary• or •company confidential" and indicate a 

date if any when the i nformation should no longer be treated a s 

confidential. Information covered by such a claim will be 

disclosed by the EPA only to the extent permitted and by means of 

the procedures set forth by Section 114 (c) of the Clean Air Act 

(the Act), and 40 C.F.R. Part 2. Allegedly confidenti al porti ons 

of ot herwise nonconfidential documents shoul d be clearly 

identified. EPA will construe the failure to f urni sh a 

confidentiality claim with your response to t he a ttached letter 

as a wa i ver of that claim, and the information may be made 

available to the public without further notic e t o you. 

Please segregate personnel, medical and similar files from 

your responses and include that information on separate sheet(s) 

narked as "Per sonal Privacy Informati on• given that disclosure of 

such informati on t o the general public may constitute an invasion 

of privacy. 

B. Substantia tion Requirements 

All confidenti ality claims are subject to EPA ve rification 

and must be made in a ccordance with 40 C.F.R. § 2. 208 which 

provides in part t hat you satisfactori ly show tha t you have taken 

reasonable measures t o protect the co fi~entia ity of the 

information and that you intend to continue t o do so; and t hat 

the i nformation i s not and has not been reasonably obtainable by 

legitimate means without your consent. 

Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Pa rt 2, Subpart B, EPA. may a t any time 

send you a letter asking you to substantiate fully your CBI 

claim. If you receive such a l e tter , you must provide BPA with a 

response withi n the number of days set forth in the EPA request 

letter. Fail ure to submit your comments within that t ime woul d 

be regarded as a waiver of your confidentia lity c lai m or c l a i ms, and EPA may r e lease the informat i on. If you rece i ve such a 

VES 004724 
letter, EPA will ask you to specify which portions of the 

information you consider confidential. Y-ou auat be apeoifio by 

page, paragraph, and aantanoa when ident~fying tha 1nfo~tion 

auhjeot to your claia. Any informacion not specifically 

identified as subject to a confidentiality claim may be disclosed 

to the requestor without further notice to you. For each item or 

class of i nformation that you identify as being subject to CBI, 

you must answer the following questions, g i ving as much detail as 

possible: · 

1. For what period of time do you request that the information 

be mai ntained as confidential, e.g., until a certain date, 

until the occurrence of a specifi ed event, or permanently? 

If the occurrence of a specific event will eliminate the 

need for confidentia lity, please specify that event. 

2. Information submitted to EPA becomes stale over time. Why 

should the information you cla i m as confi dential be 

protec ted f or the time pe,riod specified in your answer to 

que stion tl? 

3. What measure s have you taken to protect the information 

claimed as confidential? Have you disclosed the information 

to anyone other than a governmental body or someone who is 

bound by an agreement not to disclose the inf ormation 

further? If so, why should the information still be 

considered confidential? 

4 . Is the information contained in any publicly available 

materi al such as the Internet, publ icly available databases, 

promotional publications , annual reports', or articles? Is 

there any me ans by whi ch a member of the public could obtain 

access to the information? ls the information of a kind 

tha t you would customarily not release to the public? 

5. Has any governmental body made a determination as to the 

confidentiality of the information? If so, please attach a 

copy .of the determination. 

6 . For each category of information claimed as conf~dential, 

explain with specificity why r elease. of the inforrr~tion is 

likely to cause substantial harm to your competitive 

position. Explain the specific nature of those harmful 

effects, why they should be viewed as substantial, ond the 

causal relationship between disclosure and such harmful 

effects. How coul d your compet itors make use of thi s 

information to your detriment? 

7. Do you assert that the information is submitted on a 

2 

VES 004725 
v~luntary or a mandatory basis? Please explain the reason 

for your .,saertion. If you assert that t he information is 

voluntaril y 'submitted i nformat ion, explain whether and why 

di sclosure of t he i nformation would tend to lessen the 

availability eo EPA of similar information in the futur e. 

8. Any other issue you deem relevant. 

Please note that emission data provided under Section 114 ·of 

the Act, 42 u.s.c . § 7414, is not entitled to confidentia l 

treatment under 40 C.P.R. Part 2 . "Emission data• meane, 

with reference to any source of emissi on of any substance 

into the air -

Information necessary to determine the i dentity, amount, 

frequency, concentra tion, or other characteristics (to the 

extent r e lated to air quality) of any emission which has 

been emitted by the sour ce (or of any poll utant result i ng 

from any emissi on by the sour ce), or any .combination of the 

foregoing; 

Information necessary to determine the identity, amount, 

frequency, conc entration, or other characteristics (to the 

ext ent related to air quality) of the emissions which, under 

an applicabl e standard or limitation, the source was· authorized to emit (including, t o the extent necessary for 

such purposes, a description of the manner and rate of 

operation of the source); and 

. A general description of the location and/ or nature of the 

source to the extent necessary to i dentify t he source and to 

distinguish it from other sources (including, to the extent 

necessary for such purposes, a description of the device. 

installation, or operation constituting the source) . 

40 C. P.R. § 2.30l(a) (2) (i) (A), (8) and (C). 

Emission data includes, but is not limited to, servic e records 

sta ting the amount of refriger ant added to a unit or reclaimed 

from a unit. 

If you receive a request for a substantiation lett er f rom 

the EPA, you bear the burden of substantiating your 

confidentiality c laim. Conclusory all egations will be given 

little or no weight in the det ermination. In substantiating your 

CBI claim(s) , you must bracket all t ext so claimed and mark i t 

'CBI . " · Information so designated wil l be disc losed by EPA only 

to the extent allowed by, and by means of the procedures set 

forth in, 40 C.P.R. Part 2, Subpart B. If you fail t o cla im the 

3 

VES 004726 
informat ion as ·confidential, it may be made. available to the 

pwol1 c without f urther notice to you. 

4 

VES 004727 
Al'PBNDIX B 

Veolia must submit the following information regarding 

Incinerator 2, Incinerator 3, and Incinera tor 4 l ocated at 

7 Mobile Avenue, Sauget, Illinois in accordanc e with the 

foregoing request for information made pursuant to Section 114(a) 

of the Clean Air Act , 42 o.s.c . § 7414 (a). 

1. The February 22 , 2008, Section 114 Reque st required Veolia 

to submit to EPA a plan to conduct a comprehensive 

performance test on each of i t s three hazardous waste 

incinerators. The requirements pertaining to the test pla n 

content and options (It ems *2, t3 , *' · and. i6l remain in 

effect. 

2. No l a ter than August 15, 2008, Veo1ia must commence a 

performance test for low volatile me tals ars enic, beryllium, 

and chromium (LVM); semi volatile metals cadmium and lead 

(SVM); and mercury for each ha zardous wa ste incinerator at 

its Sauget, IllinOis facility. veolia must co.nduct three 

test runs of Reference Method 29 in 40 C.F.R. 60, Appendix A 

on each incinerator. The minimum sample vol ume for mercury 

shall be 1.7 cubic meters. Veolia must complet e the 

performance test on each incinerator within 15 days of 

cormnencement . 

). No later than 10 days befor e Veolia commence s t he 

performance tests for each incinerator, Veolia shall notify 

EPA and Illinois EPA o f t he s cheduled start date. 

4. veol ia must collect suffici ent data to establ i s h all mercury, 

LVM, and SVM operating par ameter limits (OPLs) set forth in 

40 C.P.R. §§ 63.1209(1) through (n) of t ho HWC MACT. EPA 

believes that the following OPLs set forth in 40 C.P.R. 

§ 63 . 1209(11 through (n ) apply t o each incinerator: 

a . Incinerator 12 

63.1209 HAP' OPL 

(1) ( 1 ) (i) Mer cury Maximum Mercury Feed Rate 

(o) (1) SVM, LVM Maximum Pabric Pilte r Inlet Temperature 

(n) (2) (iil SVM Maximum SVM Peed Rat e 

( 0) (2) (ii) LVM Maximum Total LVM Feed Rate 

(o) (21 (vi) LVM Maximum Pumpable LVM Peed Rate 

( 0) (3)' SVM, LVM Representative and reliable indicator 

(m) (i) (iv) o f PM control device performance 

(n ) ( 41 SVM, LVM Maximum HC1/Cl2 Peed Rate 

1 RAP • hazardous air pollutant. 

VES 004728 
63.1209 OPL 

(n) (5) SVM, LVM Maximum Flue Gas Flow Rate 

b . Incinerat or t 3 

63 .1209 HAP OPL 

(1) (1) (i) Mercury Maximum Mercucy Feed Rate 

(nl (1) SVM, LVM Maximum Fabri c Filter Inlet Temperature 

(n) (2) (ii) SVM Maximum SVM Feed Rate 

(n) (2) (ii) LVM Maximum Total LVM Fe ed Rate 

(n) (2) (vi) LVM Maximum l e LVM Feed Ra te 

(n) (3). SVM, LVM Repre sentative a nd r e liable indicator 

(m) (1) (iv) of PM control device £er formance 

(n) (4) SVM. LVM Maximum HCl/Cl2 Feed ·Rat e 

(n) (5) SVM, LVM Maximum Flue Gas Flow Rate 

c . Incinerator i 4 

63 .1209 HAP OPL 

(1) (1) (i) Mercury Maximum Mercury Feed Rate 

( 1)(3) . 

(.k) (5). Mercury, Repre senta tive and r eliable indicator 

(m) (1) Civ). SVM, LVM of PM control device performance 

(nl (3) 

(1)(3) ' Mercury Minimum carbon injection r ate (.k) (6) (i) 

(1) (3}. Mercury Minimum carrier f l ui d (gas or liquid) 

(k) (6) (ii) f low r ate or pressur e drop_ 

(1)(3) . Specify and use the brand (i.e . ' 

(k) (6) (iii) Mercury manufa ctur er ) and t ype of carbon used 

(A) during the mercury parformance test 

(n) ( 1) SVM, LVM Ma.ximum Fabr ic Filte r Inlet Temperature 

(n}(2}(ii} SVM Maximum SVM Feed Rate 

(n} (2) Cii) LVM Maximum Total LVM Peed Rate 

(n) (2) (vi) LVM Maximum Puaq;>able LVM Feed Rate 

(n) ( 4) SVM, LVM Maximum HCl/Cl2 Feed Ra te 

(n) (5) SVM, LVM Maximum Flue Gas Flow Rate 

Veolia is responsible for identifying any additiona l 

applicable mercury, LVM, and SVM OPLs . · 

~. During the per formance t ests on each i ncinerat or. Veolia 

sha ll collect composi te samples of a ll waste streams that it 

feeds t o t he incinera tor. Veoli a sha ll analyze the 

composite samples for mercury, arsenic, beryll ium, chromium, 

cadmium, lead, a sh, and total chl ori ne . 

6. During the performanc e teats on ea c h i ncinerator, Veolia 

2 

VES 004729 
must feed normal (or higher) l evels of ash and chlorine 

during the performance t ests, 

7. During the performance tests on each i ncinera tor, Veolia 

must conduct the SVM and LVM performance tests when the PM 

control device undergoes its normal (or more frequent) 

cleaning cycle . Veolia must record the times and durations 

of the cleaning cycles during the performance teat and 

include the cleaning cycle data in the teat report . 

8. Because Veolia must establish limits for the applicable 

operating parameters specified in § 63.1209(1-n) based on 

operations ~uring the performance tests, Veolia may conduct 

testing under two or more operating modes to provide 

opera ting flexibility. 

9 . No later than September 26, 2008, Veolia .must submit the 

me rcury, SVM, and LVM portion of its Notification of 

Coa-q;>liance (NOC) . The NOC must document coa-q;>liance with the 

emission standards and continuous monitoring system (CMS) 

requirements, and identify the mercury, SVM, and LVM OPLs 

under 40 C.F .R. § 63.1209. The NOC shall include : 

a. 'l'he methods that were used to determine col'l\)liance; 

b. The results of any performance tests, CMS performance 

evaluations, and/or other monitoring procedures or 

methods that were conducted; 

c. The methods that will be used for determining 

continuing compliance, including a description of 

monitoring and reporting requirements and test methods; 

d. The type and quantity of hazardous air pollutantll 

emitted by the source (or surrogate pollutants if 

specified in the r elevant standard), reported in units 

and averaging times and in accordance with the test 

methods specified in the relevant standard; and 

e. A statement by the owner or operator of the a ffected 

existing, new, or reconstructed source as to whether 

the source r£s complied with the relevant standard or 

other requirements: 

10. Upon postmark of the~~. you must comply with all operating 

requirements specified in the NOC in lieu of the limits 

specified in the DOC required under S 63.12ll(c). 

11. No later than September 26, 2008, Veolia must submit a 

report for the performance tests. The test report must 

3 

VES 004730 
include the following information : 

a. the raw s ampling and analysis data; 

b. the anal yses of samples; 

c . an eJ<.ample of each calculation performed; and 

d. the 1-minute averages for each operating parameter. 

12. No later than september 26, 2008, veolia must submit to EP!\ 

an application for a significant modification to the Part 71 

permit to incorporate the OPLs identified pursuant to 

paragraph 9, above. 

13. Provided that the results of these performance tests result 

in data that meet quality assurance objectives such that the 

results demonstrate compliance with the applicable 

standards, are sufficient to establish the applicable OPLs 

under 40 C.P .R. § 63.1209, and meet all requirements of 40 

q.F.R. § 63.1207 for conducting comprehensive performance 

tests (CPT), these performance tests will serve as the 

mercury, SVM, and LVM portion of the c.FT required between · october 14 , 2008, the compliance date for the standards set 

forth in 40 c .F.R. § 63.1219(a) and (c), and october 14 , 2009, the date by which veolia is otherwise required to 

conduct a CPT on each incinerator. 

VES 004731 
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING 

I, Lor etta Shaffer, certify that I sent a Request to Provide 

Information Pursuant t o the Clean Air Act by Certified Mail, 

Return Receipt Requested, to: 

oouglas Harris, General Manager 

Veolia ·ES Technical Solutions. LLC 

7 Mobile Avenue 

sauget, Illinois 62201 

I also certify that I sent a copy of the Request to Provide 

rnformation Pursuant to the Clean Air Act by First Class Mail to: 

Ray Pilapil , Manager compliance and Enforcement Section Bureau of Air 

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 

1021 North Grand Avenue East 

Springfield, Il linois 62702 

And 

Michael Reed, Unit Manager Clean Air Act Permit Program Bureau of Air 

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 

1021 No~~ Grand Avenue Bast 

Springfield, Illinois 62702 

on the 5 ~ day of J~.loU:1..1!.:>~LS-I'---- 2008 

retta Shaffer, 

AECAS (MN-OH) 

Certified Mail Receipt Number: JQO/ Q;.?.Q a~ ·r'W'l !61/'1 

VES 004732 
ste.ndard bCC ' S: 

other bee' s : 

c reation Pate: 

Filename: 

Legend: 

Official File Copy w/"enclosure(s) 

Section Reading Pile w/o enclosure{s) 

Branch Reading Pile w/o enclosure{a) 

J. Woolums, C~l4J 

June 4, 2008 

C:\EPAWORK\WasteCombuscion\hazwaste\Sources\ 

veolia\ll4LetterRev.dOc 

ARD:ABCAB:AECAS(HN/OH) :c.hall 

VES 004733 
VES 004734.pdf 
: 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 5 

JUN 12 ZOOS 

CERTJiilED MAJL 

n WEST JACKSON BOUlEVARD 

CHICAGO, ll 60604-3590 

REA.V TO lltE AnamoH Of';: 

AE-17J 

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

Doug Harris 

General Manager 

Yeolia Bnviroumcotal Services 

17 Mobile Avenue 

Sauget, Dlinois 62201 

Dear Mr. Harris: 

This is to advise you that the U.S. Environmental ProteCtion A~ency has determined that 

Veolia Environmental Services' facility at 117 Mobile Avenue, Sauget. illinois is in violation of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). We are today issuing you a Finding ofViolation (FOV) for these 

violations. 

The Act requiTes the development of standards for emissions of Hazardous Air Polluwrts 

(HAP) to protect the public bealtb and welfare. EPA has promuig;lled Maximum Achievable 

Control Tecbnology (MACf) standards set forth to address HAP emissions from various SO\UCc 

categories. As discussed more fully in the enclosed FOV, Veolia is in violation of the MACT 

standards that regulate HAP emissions from Hazanloas Waste Combustors. 

Section 113 of the Act gives us several enforcement options to te$0lve these violations. 

The options include issuing an administrative compliance order, is.suing an administrative 

peoalty order, bringing a judicilll civil action, and liringing a judicial criminal action. 

We are offering you the opportunity to request a oonfercnce with us about the violations 

alleged in the FOV. This confcreoce will give you an opportunity to present information on the 

specific findings of violation, any efforts you have taken to comply, and the steps you will take 

to prevent 1\atwe violationr. Please plan for your facility's technical and management persomtel 

to tske part in lhesc discussions. You may have an attorney represent you at this conference. 

VES 004734 
2 

The EPA contact in this matter Is Sarah Marshall. You may call her at (312) 886-6797 to 

request a conference. You should Jllllke the request within I 0 calendar days followin,g receipt of 

Ibis letter. We should bold any conference within 30 calendar days following receipt of this 

letter. · 

Enclosure 

Sincerely, 

Cheryl L. Newton 

ACting Director 

Air and Radiation Divi5ion 

cc: Ray l'ilapil, Manager Compliance and Systems Management Section 

Ulinois EnvitOIIlllental Protection Agency 

VES 004735 
. United Stotes Eovlroomcotol l'rotectioo Agency 

~THE MATTER OF: 

t.reolia Environmental Services 

fJNDING OF VlOLATION 

gsJ>uisuanllo \EJ'A-5-08-19-IL 

}he Clean Air Af:;t, 

~2 u.s.c. §§ 7403 d seq. 

liJNDlNG OF VIOLATION 

Veolia Environmental Services (you or Vcolia) owns and operates three hazardous waste 

incinerators at 7 Mobile Avenue, Sauget, Dlinois (facility). The incinetaton are identified a.s 

Incinerator Nos. 2, 3, aru14. 

Tho U.S. Environmental PrOteetioa AgoriJY is seudiug you this Finding ofViolation (FOV) to 

notify you that we have foUDd lllat Veoliz is violating Se<:lioo 112 of !he Clean Ali Acr. and its 

iinptemeoting regnla!ions for Natiollal Emission Standmds fOr Hazm1ous Ali Pollutants liom 

HazardOUS WI!M CombustOrS at 40 C.P.R. Part 63, Subpart EBB. 

National Emission Standards for Haurdoua Air Pollutants from Hazardous Waste 

Combvsrors 

I. On September 30, 1999, U.S. BPA promulgated the National Emission SWldards for 

Hazardous Ali Pollutants from Hazardous Waste Combustors (a.WC NBSH.AP) at 40 

C.F.R. Part 63, Subpart EBB (64 Fed. Reg. 53038). 

2. In July 2001, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated lhe HWC NESHAP. Cement 

Recyclillg Coal. v. EPA, 347 U.S. App. 'D.C. 127,255 F.3d 855, 857 (D.C. Cir. 2001). 

The Court stayed the vacatUT until U.S. EPA could promulgate interim standards· 

3. On FebruarY 13,2002, U.S. EPA promulgated the HWCNESHAP interim $lllndardS 

at 40 C.F.R Part 63, Subpart BEE (67 Fed. Reg. 6792). 

VES 004736 
2 

Regulatory Requirements for HWC NESHAP 

4. The following HWC NBSHAP requirements are relevant to this FOV: 

a. 40 C.P.R. §63.1203(a)(2) prohibits a source from emitting mercury in excess 

of 130 micrograms per dry &tandard cubic meter (ug/dscm) for all hazardous 

waste incinentors. 

b. 40CF.R. § 63.1207(bXl} requifes that m owner or operator ora Hazardous 

Was.e Combustor conduct a Comprehensive Perfoanmce Test to, in part, 

dmlOD.Strale compliance with the HWC NBSHAP emission standards and 

establish operating parameter llmil$. 

c. 40 C.F.R. § 63.1207(1) requires a source to submit a Compliance Performance 

Test Plan. 

d. 40 C.F.R. § 63.1207(f)(l)(x) states that if a sowce wants to request to 

extrapolate metal feed rate limits frQm the Compliance Perfonnance Test 

levels, it must include tbc following in the Compliance Performance Test 

Plan: 

i. . A description of the extrapolation methodology and rationale for how 

the awroach ensures COIIlPiiance with the emissions &Wldards; 

ii. Documentation of the historical range of normal (i.e., other than 

during compliance testing) metals feed rates for each fe~am; and 

iii. Documentatioo that the level of spiking ROOmrnended during the 

performance test wiD m.U sampling and analysis Unp=irion and 

inaccuracy to the e.xteot that lhe extrapOlated feed rate limits 

adequately assure compliance wilh the emission standards. 

Expboatlon of Violatioa 

S. From at least January 2005 through March 2006, ¥eolia's mercury emissions 

exceeded 130 micrograms per dry standard cubic meter at Incinerator Nos. 2, 3, md 4 

in violation of 40 C.P.R. §63.1203(aX2). 

6. From at least December 30,2003 lhrough lhc present, Vcolia bas used and continues 

to use as surrogstes for mercury emission standards operating parameter limits lhat it 

derive<! funD an extraQOiation melhodology for which it did not aoorooriatelv..=uest 

approval in its eou®iance Performance Test Plan. iD VlOlallon or 40 I;J'.I{. 

§ 63.l207(f)( 1 xxr 

VES 004737 
3 

Envlroameatal Impact ofVlolatloa• 

7. Ha7.aJ:doUS Air Pollutant (HAP) standaxds may cause serious health effects inolodU:ig 

birth defects and cancer. HAPs may also cause harmful environmental and ecological 

effects. 

ActingDi=r 

Air and Radiation Division 

VES 004738 
4 

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING 

I, Betty Williams, certify that! sent a Notice and Finding of Violation. No. EP A-5-08-19-

lL, by Certified Mail, Retutn Receipt Requested, to: 

Doog.Hal:ris 

General Manage< 

V eolia Euvironmental Serviees 

#7 Mobile Avenue 

Sauget, lllinois 62201 

I also certify that I sent copies of \he Finding of Violation and Notice of Violation by lUst 

class mail w: 

Ray Pilapil, Manager Compliance and Systems Manageu~ent Section 

nlinois Bnvironmelltal Protection Agency 

1021 North Grand Avenue 

Springfield, Dlinois 62702 

on tbis ~yof ~ 2008 

VES 004739 
VES 004740.pdf 
070908a 

1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

PUBLIC HEARING and COMM£NT PERIOD 

CO/KERNING EPA'S PROPOSAL OF A ORAFT OPERATING 

8 

PERMIT FOR VEOLIA EHVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 

9 

10 HELD ON: Jul y 8, 2008 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 REPORTER: sara E. Tipton, CSR 

ILLINOIS NO: 084-003397 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

2l 

RIVER BEND REPORTING 

CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS 

22 

P.O . BOX 577 

GODFREY, lL 62035 

23 

618-466-8558 

24 

25 

0 

2 

Page 1 

VES 004740 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

u 

12 

13 

l4 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

2l 

22 

23 

24 

070908a MS. POPE: we're going to get ready to start 

the public hearing. Hello again, everybody. MY name is 

Janet Pope, and I'm a community Involve~ent coordinator 

for the US environmental Protection Agency. Tonight 1 

will be serving as your hearing officer for tonight's 

public hearing. we have two other people from t he US 

Envirorwenul protection Agency here tonight. we have 

Genevieve oanri co, who is an Envi ro~~~>enta l Engi neer with 

the us EPA. we al so have charlie Hall, who is an 

envi ron~~~ental engineer also. everybody is with the us 

EPA, and we're out of chicago, Illinois. 

we are here tonight to share information, to listen 

to your questions and comments regarding EPA'S proposal 

of a draft-operating permit for the veolia environmental 

services 10cated in sauget, Illinois. 

Tonight's hearing wn l have three parts. The first 

part Genevi eve oamico will provide an overview of the 

draft permit. second. we will take your connonts for the 

record, public connents for the record; and, third, if 

ti ooe a 11 ows, we wi 11 have an i nfoi'JI3l question-and-answer 

period. 

Now, when you came in, there was a sign-in sheet in 

25 

the back. 1 hope everybody signed in. what that does is 

revises our mailing list, and if there's any infor~tion 

coming up regarding the site, you'll get the information. 

3 

1 so sign in if you want to get information regarding the 

2 site. 

3 with the excepti on of the i nforma 1 

4 question-and-answer period, everything .rill QO on record. 

Page 2 

VES 004741 
0 

5 

6 

·7 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

we have a court epo~er to my right. she'll be 

recording this meeting in its entirety with the exception 

of the informal question-and-answer period. 

All persons wishing to speak tonight, when you 

signed in, I hope you checked the oo vou Plan to Make 

comments, there is a yes-or-no box. If you want to make 

formal comments, check the yes box. okay. And then we 

did have people call in previously and sign in and make 

an appointment, too, so those people will be called 

first, and the people that signed jn today, you'll be 

fil led in in the slots that we have vacant. 

okay. Now, Genevieve I'll have her come up, and 

she'll give an overview on the draft-operating permit. 

MS . DAMICO: Good afternoon, everybody. A . . 

quick overview of the action that we' re talking today. 

The veol i a Environmental Techni~al services from sauget, 

Illinois, is a treatment, storage and disposal facility, 

which accepts offsite waste for further disposal through 

incineration. containers and bulk shipments of hazardous 

and solid wastes are received, analyzed and transferred 

to temporary storage facilities, processed and 

4 

1 incinerated in one of three combustion units. 

2 veolia is located in an area that is attaining all 

3 of the national ambient air-quality standards except for 

4 both the eight-hour ozone and particulate matter less 

5 than 2.5 micrograms standard. 

6 veolia requires a Title v permit because it is a 

7 major source of hazardous air-pollutant emissions subj ect 

Page 3 

VES 004742 
0 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

12 

13 

14 

15 • 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

070908a 

to requirements under section 112 of the clean Air Act 

for boi l ers and hazardous waste cOMbustors. 

Title v of the clean Air Act requires, in part, that 

all major sources subject to st andards under section 112 

oP.erate in accordance with a permit. MOst Title v 

operating permits are issued by state or local permitting 

authorities. EPA is issuing this permit because in 

response to a petition f rom the sierra club and the 

American Bottom conservancy, EPA objected to the permit 

proposed to be issued by the Illinois EPA. 

under Titl e V; when EPA objects to the proposed 

permit, the state permitting ·authority has the 

opportunity to address EPA's concerns, but if EPA ' S 

concerns are not addressed in a t·imely fashion, then EPA 

becomes responsible for issuing or denying the permit. 

25 

In this case, Illinois EPA did not respond to EPA's 

concerns in a t imely manner, and on september 29th, 2006, 

EPA announced its intent to issue or deny veolia a 

s 

1 federal Title v permit. veolia submitted its application 

2 to EPA on May 2nd, 2007. EPA deemed the application 

3 administratively compl ete on June 13th, 2007. 

4 Pursuant to a proposed settlement agreement between 

5 EPA and the sierra club and the Amerlcan Bottom 

6 conservancy, EPA intends to co~plete the public comment 

7 process by July 18th, 2008, and issue or deny a final 

8 . permit by september 12th, 2008. 

9 concurrently with this permitting process, EPA has 

10 alleged that veolia is in nonco~liance with the clean 

11 Air Act. NOthing in this permit will shield veolia from 

Page 4 

VES004743 
0 

070908a 

12 any enforcement action related to past or ongo1ng 

13 violations that we have alleged. 

14 EPA has included a compliance schedule in the draft 

15 pe rmit that requires veolia to test all three combustors, 

16 to develop operati ng parameter limi ts for emissions of 

17 ~ercury , low-volatile metals and semi -volatile metals as 

18 required by the hazardous waste combustion MACT. The 

19 draft permit requires that veolia submit the results of 

20 this testing and revi sed operating parameter limits by 

21 september 26, 2008. 

22 If veol ia finds -- or I 'm sorry -- if EPA finds the 

23 revised operating parameter limits acceptable, EPA will 

24 reopen the permit to propose incorporating the operating 

25 parameter limits developed from the required performance 

1 test into the f1nal permit and solicit public comment on 

2 the incorporation of the operating parameter limits into 

3 the permit. In addition, the permit may be reopened at a 

4 future time to incorporate additional applicable 

5 requirements or compliance schedul es. 

6 MS. POPE: EPA'S public participation 

7 regulations require EPA to publish a public notice in the 

8 local newspaper. The public notice appeared in the East 

9 st. Louis Monitor and the Belleville News Democrat, both 

10 published on June 5th . In addition, information was 

11 mailed to those who attended Illinois EPA public hearing 

12 for veolia and the hear1ng for veolia's nei ghbor, 

13 solutia. 

Now, ~<e'll begi n our public co1111ent period. I will 

Page S 

14 

VES 004744 
0 

070908a 

15 call t he speakers in the order -- not on the sign-up 

16 sheet but on the sign-up sheet mixed in wi th t he calls 

17 that we already had. when your name is cal l ed, please 

18 state your naMe; then spell your last name for the court 

19 reporter. If you have wri tten co~ments but do not wish 

20 to speak t oni ght, please give them to me before you l eave 

21 tonight. so that everyone vmo wishes to speak has a 

22 chance to do so, limi t your comments to five minutes . If 

23 you cannot finish , I will ask you to pl ease conclude. At 

24 five minutes I wil l ask you to please conclude your 

25 conment s. At t hat time you will wrap up in the next 

7 

1 ~inute . okay. Five mi nutes I 'll ask you to conclude. 

2 vou have a mi nute to finish. okay. At the si x-.,inute 

3 i nterval I will ask you to render the floor to the next 

4 speaker. okay. All right. After everyone has gotten a 

5 chance to speak, you may return and finish your coe4ents, 

6 or you can subMit your remaining comments on paper. 

7 Now, we will begin our publi c co~nt period. 

8 Remember, if you have written c~ents , give them to me 

9 before you leave today. If not, we 'll start with our 

10 first speaker, and I have a cordless here so I can run 

11 around and get you. Livi Isringhausen . 

12 MS. tSRINGHAUSEN: Good afternoon. I 'm L i vi 

13 Isringhaus en, I·S-R·I·N-G·H-A·U·S·E·N. I'M the 

14 nviro~ental compliance Manager at Washington University 

15 in st. Louis school of Medicine. washington university 

school of Medicine is rated as one of the top five 

~edical schools in the nation by us News and world 

16 

17 

18 Report. we have a hundred and sixteen year history of 

Page 6 

ves o04745 
070908a 

19 research and education. one of the best things that 

20 c~es out of the university is our research. we receive 

21 grants and contracts in excess of 460 million dollars In 

22 research effort for medicine alone. 

23 so~e notable things that have come out of our 

24 research are that we have done extensive research and 

25 development in looking for a cure for Alzhei•er's 

0 

8 

1 disease. we helped pioneer the use of insulin in the 

2 treatment of diabetes. we proposed the practice of 

3 taking aspirin to prevent heart attacks. we developed a 

4 cure for Hepatitis 8, if it was diagnosed early. we 

5 found a surgical cure for arterial fibrillation and 

6 helped pioneer cochlear implant surgery. 

7 As a result of all this re.search, there are people 

8 like myself that work behind the scenes. MY department's 

9 responsibilities include the disposal of t he byproducts 

10 of this research. washington university has chosen to 

ll partner with veolia Environmental Technical services to 

12 acco~ ish the proper and safe disposal of these 

13 byproducts. 

14 veolia provides us outstanding service in disposing 

15 of our common materials and anything unusual that may be 

16 a result of the research. Their knowledge and expertise 

17 is invaluable when you come across the many array of 

18 byproducts that we generate at the university. Having 

19 veolia's incineration complex l ocated here in the 

20 St. Louis/Metro area allows for us, ftany other industries 

21 and institutions to reduce our carbon footprint by 

Page 7 

VES 004746 
070908a 

22 minimizing fuel for transport. 

23 In conclusion, veolia has become an i ntegral part of 

24 washington universitY school of Medicine' s research by 

25 providing us many services. 

0 

9 

1 

MS. POPE: Next speaker, Dee Reed. Next 

2 speaker I'• going to say Dee Reed is not in attendance 

3 right now. Put that on the record. GeOrge R. 

4 schi1linger. 

s 

MR. SCHILLINGER: My n~e is George 

6 Schillinger, s-c-H-t-L-L-1-N-G-E·R. I'm the executive 

7 Director of the American Bottoms Treatment Plant in 

8 sauget, Illinois. AJnerican Bottoms is-- we operate two 

9 plants, physical chemical waste water plant owned by the 

10 vi llage of sauget and the regional plant , the American 

11 Bottoms plant, which services: East st. Louis, cahokia, 

l2 Alorton, centreville and a little part of Stookey 

13 T~Nnship, hence, the village of sauget. 

14 American sottOIIIS is i1111ediately east of the veolia 

15 site and just west of the center ethanol site on Highway 

16 3. You've probably seen it by now. 

17 A little bit on ~Y background. I have a master of 

18 science degree in environmental sanitation engineering. 

19 t've done additional course work recently working towards 

20 a doctorate. Don't have. 1 teach the capsule and design 

21 engi neering class for the environaental engineering 

22 program for the students at washington university. Since 

23 coll ege, I've worked exclusively in the environmental 

24 field. I'll a registered professional enginee r in 

25 Illinois. 1'~ a reserve officer in the us Public Health 

Page 8 

VES 004747 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

0 

070908a 

10 

service with the equivalent rank of a Navy commander. 

I'm a board certified environmental engineer. 

Regarding veolia, as I said, they are our next-door 

neighbor. I've toured their facilities on several 

occasions and daily have an opportunity to observe the 

operation of this plant. It's always neat, clean , wellmaintained, odor free, and there are no visible signs of 

ai r emissions. The facility is secure. 

Fr~ the water standpoint or waste-water standpoint, 

which we enforce on, t hey are in perfect compliance with 

our pretreatment program over the years. MY compliance 

staff works wi t h veoli a staff and consider them well -

qual ified , very qualified and c~~itted to ope rating in 

compliance with all environmental regulations and 

stal:utes. 

veolia is also an active parl:icipant in the 

communil:Y· I'm aware that they provide educational tours 

to local school children and between a -- jointly wi th 

Ameri can Bottoi!IS and veolia, we partici pate in providing 

educational programs to the interns in the Illinois 

Governor's Enviro~•ental corps. This has been a very 

successful program t o try to train and to encourage 

col lege students to enter this fi eld. 

As a knowl edgeable and professional environnaental 

engi neer , I'l!l aware of the nature of t he work at veol1a 

11 

Page 9 

VES 004748 
0 

l 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

12 

13. 

14 

1S 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

2 3 

24 

25 

070908a and their faci lities and the procedures fo r controlling 

air emissions and the necessary nature of this work . I 

am personally quite comfortable occupyi ng an office 

within five hundred feet of t hei r f acili t ies and have 

done so for the past twenty-three years . 

AS the executive director of the AAerican Bottoms, I 

believe our employees and contractors are not expOsed to 

any risk due to the veolia's operation. I'd like to 

point out that about fifty percent of the AMerican 

Bottoms customers, which is in the East st. Louis, 

Alorton, centreville, cahokia area are below -- have 

income levels below the pOVerty line. You know, many 

people would argue that this is an environmental trust 

decision and -- and it is. And it's this way, these are 

necessary services. In the past three years, American 

Bottoms has had to raise its rates to al l of our 

customers, including these impov -- and those people 

below the pOverty line , from Sl.74 per thousand gallons 

of water discharge to $4.95, and that ' s come about 

because of the loss of twO aajor i ndustries, Elementis in 

East st. Louis that s hut down and went to china and Big 

River zinc in sauget. And that's just a substantial 

burden 

~\S. POPE: conclude. 

\. SCHILLINGER: 1 have one more minute. 

12 

1 That's transferred to the people who l i ve in this 

2 community. 

3 I know 1' ll finish up with saying veo li a ha.s been an 

4 exce)lent neighbor, and I have no fear of working right Page 10 

VES 004749 
0 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

next door to it. Thank you. 

Ms: POPE: Next speaker, craig Doolittle. 

MR. DOOLITTLE: GOOd afternoon. MY name is 

craig Doolittle, o-o-o-L-1-T-T-L-E, and I have been asked 

to speak today on behalf of tHe veoli a ES Technical 

services in sauget in regard to the issuance of their 

Title v permit. 

First my background. I am a licensed professional 

·engineer with over thirtY years of experience in the 

environmental fiel d. I have worked in the hazardouswaste areas since 1980 when the EPA first pr011111lgated the 

federal hazardous waste regulations under the Resource 

conservation and Recovery Act. 

In 1983, I started working in the hazardous-waste 

combustion area. First as a permit engineer for a l arge 

rotary kiln combustion faci l ity in region five and then 

as the operations manager for that facility where I was 

responsible for day.-to-day operations and compliance. 

In the early '90's I took a national- level position 

worki ng with EPA and other stakeholders on the 

development of more recent combustion regulations under 

l3 

1 the clean Air Act, the hazardous waste combustion MACT 

2 regs, and for the last ten years I worked for ENSR, 

3 E-N-S-R, an environmental engineering and consulting firm 

4 where I have designed, written and managed dozens of 

5 performance tests under what is known as the Hazardous 

6 waste combustion MACT Regulations and assisted clients 

7 comply with the other provisions of those regulations as 

Page 11 

VES 004750 
070908a 

8 well. 

9 By way of background for ENSR, ENSR is a 2000 

10 employee global environmental health and safety 

11 engineering firm with an air-quality practice here i n the 

12 us with over a hundred full-time air professionals. I 

13 currently manage EHSR'S air source testing department and 

14 thei r colllbustion services practice. In addition to stack 

15 testing, ENSR provides: Peraitting, auditing, dispersi on 

l~ modeling, risk assessment and proce.ss engi neering 

17 services to clients with co~ustion facilities 

18 nationwide. over the years, we have worked at a number 

19 of faci l ities here at EPA Region v, and we continue to do 

20 so today . 

21 since 2001, I have helped design and manage ten 

22 different performance test programs to assist veolia with 

23 their efforts to develop sound compliance and operational 

24 strategies to cOMPlY with the HWC MACT regulations. In 

25 addition, our source testing departlllent has been 

0 

14 

1 performing the annual relative accuracy testing for the 

2 facility's stack-analyzer systems for the last several 

3 years as well. our source testing staff are all OSHA 

4 ·HAZWOPER trained and generally have experience levels 

5 ranging from 10 to 35 years of experience in source 

6 testing, itself. They are thoroughly familiar with all 

7 EPA promulgated test methods. many of EPA'S test methods · 

8 and the alternative methods that are published on EPA'S 

9 test method si t e. ENSR has been in the source-testi ng 

10 business for over three decades, and the quality of our 

ll work must be able to be val idated through our own 

Page 12 

VES 004751 
070908a 

12 internal quality assurance, quality-control systems, 

13 through EPA method specific QA/QC requirements, by 

14 independent regulatory agency review and often by third15 party reviewers. our work must be performed to the 

16 highest standards. 

17 In addition, as a professional engineer, I am also 

18 held to a high standard, so when I sign sy name t o a test 

19 report, I lllUSt have confidence that that work product is 

20 of high quality. The work we have done for veolia is no 

21 exception. we have performed all work in accordance with 

22 EPA methods, usi ng properlY calibrated equip10ent, all 

23 test results were reviewed for accuracy and to assure 

24 that they met the required para~eters for valid testing 

25 and the lab results were also reviewed to make sure that 

0 

15 

1 all QA/QC metrics were met as well. veolia has made a 

2 significant c01111i tcent to understand the performance of 

3 their uni ts at sauget. and I am fully confident that the 

4 test results show their compliance with the applicable 

5 ~c MACT standards. 

6 Finally, in my experience having worked with many 

7 different facilities over the years, the sauget facility 

8 represents one of the top performers in the industry. 

9 Thank you very much. 

10 MS. POPE: The next speaker will be Rich 

11 sauget , Junior. 

12 MR. SAUGET: Hel)o ~ name is Rich sauget. 

13 Junior, ~-u T. My resume starts as a resident of 

14 ~he vil lage of sauget. I'm also the president of the 

Page 13 

VES 004752 
0 

070908a 

1S Board of Trus~ees for the village of sauget. I'm also 

16 ~he President of t he school District Board, school 

17 oistrict 187 , whi ch serves: cahokia, sauget , Alorton 

18 parts of Alorton -- and centreville. And I ' m also the 

19 chai rman of the work Enforce~nt Investment Board, whi ch 

20 is t he five county ar~ of st. clai r county that looks 

21 over all work-force issues in this area. And that's 

22 where I'm going to basically start my discussion. 

23 

2~ 

2S 

The area that we -- that we're in right now in the 

village of sauget is part of, you knaw, a regional area, 

and the greater area of southwestern Illi nois is doi"9 

16 

1 quite well in certain aspects, but the area that sauget 

2 isn't necessarily doing so well we have high 

3 unemployment. we have quite a few people that are under 

4 the pOverty line, and we have, although a cluster of 

S i ndustry within ~ village, as well as my neighbors in 

6 cahokia and East St . Louis and centreville, that have had 

7 some tough tiMes but are still striving to do well. 

8 with veo1 i a and the amount of j.obs that they provide 

9 and the community partner that they have shown the~selves 

10 t o be is very vital to our economic future for the -- as 

11 far as the village is concerned but also for the peopl e 

12 that live in that village. 

13 And so we 've -- like I said, we've had a few bumps 

14 in the roads with a couple of businesses that have had 

lS some struggles, but we have survived by working together, 

16 and with our industrial conmunitY and with American 

17 Bottoms, we've been able to forge through it. so to be 

18 able t o have the opportunit Y to keep those jobs in the 

Page 14 

VES 004753 
070908a 

19 area is vital. 

20 From the school board st andpoint, we have an ever21 shrinking economic base, which is based upon the property 

22 assessment. we've had a couple bu~ps there, too. A few 

23 businesses have left. we have an ever-declining 

24 assess~t. In working with veolia, they have, I would 

2S say, done their part in the bargain , as far as keep their 

0 

17 

1 assess~e ts where they need to. They've always been 

2 willing to work with the village and the county to make 

3 sure that they' re always up to date and to make sure t hat 

4 they're paying t heir fair sha re. They also are working 

S with the school district, as far as working with the 

6 chil dren , helping w1th labs, keeping equipment up to date 

7 or wo rking with that equipment and working in the -- in 

8 the labs to ~ke sure that they're up to snuff. 

9 They are also working with Archview Econa.ic 

10 Development corporation, whi ch is a corporation that is 

ll ~de of its me~ers, which are industrial folks, business 

12 folks i n the -- basically the Alort on -- basically, the 

13 school dist rict, centreville Township, and veolia has 

14 been a ·founding membe r. They've worked very, very 

15 cl osely with the school district for t he career day, 

16 which brings in four to five hundred juniors and seniors 

17 every· year working at GCS stadium to allow the youth of 

18 our community to know what opportunities they have in 

19 their area, pl aces tha~ they drive by that they, you 

20 know, twO years ago they had no idea it was even a place 

21 where you could get a job. 

Page 15 

VES 004754 
22 

23 the school district. And, finally, talking about the 

24 Vi llage of sauget, it is a very delicately-balanced 

25 co~ni y, as far as its industrial, heavy industrial in 

070908a 

so I see the -- veolia as a very good partner with 

18 

1 part, as well as light industrial in others. If any of 

2 those parties, you know, leave the table, it aakes things 

3 difficult. 

S still trying to gr~• our declining base, which has seen 

6 some tough times. At one time we were a very small 

7 community with a very strong tax base; that is not the 

8 case anymore, no matter what people ftBY say. we are not 

9 vmat we once were, but veolia is keeping us where we are 

10 and giving us the opportunities where we have a little 

we have a nice mix with our Al!erican sottOMs. we're 

11 new growth . l2 we're working toward greener type energy. we opened 

13 a green corridor along ~oute 3, and the new ethanol plant 

14 and some of the things that veolia is doing is alloorlng 

15 us to have that opportunity. !n working with veolia, 

16 x've been very, very satisfied with t heir openness, as 

17 far as their books, to be able to ftlke sure that they are 

18 keeping their negotiat·ions fair, as far as assessment . 

. 19 I drive by their facility on a weekly basis, if not 

20 daily, and I think that they keep it up. I have toured 

21 the facility Many, Many times. I'm very, very 

22 comfortable with th~ in our community, and I know in 

23 talking with our residents within my cO!dunity they see 

24 thell as '!- partner --

25 MS. pOPE: conclude. Page 16 

VES 004755 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

2S 

0 

070908a 

19 

MR. SAUGET: -- not as a foe or an adversary 

bu~ , like I said, we're very, very comfo~able having 

~h~ in our community. Let me check my notes. I touched 

on our green cord dor and the growth of the vi 11 age ha.s 

been successful here in the last three or four years, and 

I think veolia is a very strong part of that. There's 

been some revitali zations and taking over some brown 

fields and putting them back into -- back into our tax 

base. 

we are hoping that veolia can continue to thrive and 

join in wi1:h the rebirth that the village has had to be 

able to use some of their excess property, hopefully, 

which was actually given to the -- to veolia in its early 

stages from the village at one time . so it's been a long 

partnership, and we hope to continue that partnership. 

Thank you. 

MS . POPE: Did oee Reed ever show up? 

MS • 0-'MI CO: NO • 

MS. POPE: we have a space here at this time if 

anybody -- did anybody else sign up to make comments that 

is here now? 

MS . DAmCO: Robert Schreiber. 

MR. SCHREIBER: S·C-H·R-E-I· B-E·R. My name is 

sob Schreiber. I'm president of Schreiber, vonley 

Associates. It's an office located in st. Louis county, 

20 

Page 17 

VES 004756 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

s 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

2l 

22 

070908a Missouri. Schreiber, vonley Associates has been retained 

by veoli a to comment on its us EPA draft Title v permit 

and to ensure it meets all the requirements outlined in 

the federal and state laws. we are specialists in 

combustion of hazardous wast e and have worked on Nany 

air-hazardous waste permits through the united states. 

I 'm also a professional engineer in Illinois and Missouri 

and 34 other states throughout the nation. 

A 11-ctle bit of my background, I have a BS in 

chemical engineering f rom the universi ty of Missouri i n 

Columbia in 1972 . Af"ter that, I worked with the Illinois 

EPA in the Air PerNitting section from 1972 through '74. 

1 have a long history in air permits. I then moved to 

the Missouri Department of ~atural Resources where I was 

an inspecti on engi neer in 1974, and then I moved up to 

where I was di rector of the state's Air Program in 1978 

and held tha-c position unti l 1980. In 1980, I was the 

Director of Progra.ms for the State of ~lissou i, and I did 

that from 1980 to 1985, so I covered both ai r and 

hazardous waste during that time period. 

23 

In 1985, I left state government and formed 

Schreiber, vonley and Associates and continue to do 

environmental engineering. As a personal note, I 'm a 

native of Granite city, Illinois, so I have some 

fami l iarity with this area. My father was raised i n East 

24 

25 

21 

l St. Louis, and my grandparents lived there until the 

2 early ' 70's before they passed away. 

3 The reason I bring that up I do remember back in the 

4 'SO's and '60's going to visit them from Granite City to 

Page 18 

VES 004757 
0 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15. 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

East st. Louis, Illinois. and sometimes going on to 

cahoki a, Illinois. And during that trip, you ·~uld pass 

the coke oven where it was black . You would pass a steel 

mi ll where it was red. You ~~uld pass a big hundred acre 

open burning dump where the current speedway currently 

lies where you had to turn your lights on during t he day 

just to be able t o see down the road. You then went past 

a packing plant that had a rendering plant t hat really 

smelled very good and then you -- in East St. Louis. 

If you decided to go fron East St. Louis to cahokia 

and went through sauget, it had a high density of 

chemical plants that also had very strong odors. During 

that time period, you very seldom saw a bl ue sky. It 

just did not exist. And the air was so thick you could 

cut it vlith a knife; and, quite frankly, the situation 

has ;~proved t reMendously since that time period. 

Back in about 1980. Trade waste Incineration was 

started to do hazardous-waste incineration. Prior to 

that, there real ly wasn't anyplace for hazardous waste to 

go, other than the open burn or put into a landfill. And 

even though East st. Louis does not currentl y meet the 

22 

l current air-quality standards, t he situation has improved 

2 tremendously here since the 'SO's and '60's up until now, 

3 and a large part of th~t is due to activities that have 

4 been done with the clean Air Act passage, the work that's 

S been done by the US EPA and also the work that's been 

6 done by the Illino's EPA and in taking on a lot of the 

7 pollution activities that have occurred in the earlier 

Page 19 

VES 004758 
070908a 

8 time periods. My staff and l have reviewed the 178 page 

9 permit to confirm that all the state and federal 

10 requirements have been met. 

11 The Title v per~it application is supposed to be a 

12 one stop shop docUMent that, basically, ties all of the 

13 past instruction permits, all of the current l l1inois 

14 regulations and a11 of the current operating permits that 

15 they have to abide by and all of the standards so that 

16 the facility knows what they have to comply with, the 

17 agency knows what it has to comply with and the citizens 

18 can review that and also determine what the applicable 

19 regulations are. 

20 The application and draft permit includes limits for 

21 the three incinerators there for such things as visible 

22 emissions, which you can see coming from the stack where 

23 they have a continuous monitor on it. sulfur dioxide , 

24 carbon monoxide, which they also have a cont inuous 

25 monitor for. A continuous monitor is something like 

0 

23 

1 having your spee~eter that is tied to a recorder that 

2 the police can come i n and check what you've been doing 

3 for the previous times you've documented. They also have 

4 to check for organic emissions or vocs. That's got a 

5 continuous monitor for it. Also , other pollutants that 

6 are regulated such as nitrogen oxide , other hazardous 

7 pollutions, hydrogen chloride, and then they also have to 

8 show that the incinerator can destroy a 1l the waste they 

9 put into i t with a very high degree of destruction. 

10 They have operating permit li~its and what those 

11 01ean is that they have a permit after they do a stack 

Page 20 

VES 004759 
070908a 

12 test t hat 

13 MS. POPE: conclude. 

14 MR. SCHREIBER: They have tO go through and 

15 demonstrate how they comply with all t hose particular 

16 limits. The draft permit for veol ia's facility contain 

17 the operating constraints and the required t!Jlission 

18 controls to achieve the minimization of emissions f rOM 

19 the hazardous-waste coMbustors and all associated 

20 activities. The draft permit contains provisions to 

21 deMOnstrate and docwoent veolia's compliance wi th the 

22 permit limits. 

23 I t is my personal belief the us EPA has done a very 

24 thorough job in writing this permit. It meets both tho 

25 i ntent and requirements of the MACT standards, the Title 

0 

24 

1 v peraritt ing requirements, and the clean Air Act outlined 

2 by congress in 1990. Thank you very .uch. 

3 MS. POPE: Dr. Jed Deets. 

4 DR. DEETS: GOod afternoon. I'm Jed oeets and 

5 I thank you for the opportunitY to speak today on behalf 

6 of veolia and their Title v Air Permit. A little bit of 

1 .,y background. I have a bachelor of mathematics f rom 

8 SIU, a master's degree in leadership from the university 

9 of Hawaii and a doctorate degree of education from SIU 

10 Edwardsville. 

11 I served as a high school and middl e school teacher 

12 for seven years, a principal for twO years, an elementary 

13 superintendent for twO years and the regional 

14 superintendent of st. clair county for nine years, 

Page 21 

VES 004760 
070908a 

lS regional superintendent of schools in st. clair county 

16 for five years. 

17 And then the reason why I'm here today I had the 

18 privilege of·serving as the cahokia unit school 

19 superintendent for years 2000 tO 2005 for five years, and 

20 it was during my tenure -- i n fact, MY old boss is here, 

21 future speaker, former mayor of Cahokia, who hired De in 

22 that position. But it was during that tenure as cahokia 

23 superintendent that 1 had the opportunity to work wi t h 

24 veolia and Mr. ooug Harris. 

2S I think back to MY very first Chamber of CQOderce 

0 

25 

l Meeting when the busi nesses were invited to meet the new 

2 superintendent, and everyone came up to give me t hei r 

3 business cards and wanted to tell me what a valuable 

4 educational partner they wanted to be, and I carefully 

S filed all those ca~ds away knowing fr~ •Y vast 

6 experience, that when businesses tell you they want to be 

7 an educational partner, they really don''t want to be a 

8 partner. They want -- they want you to do good thi ngs in 

9 thei r community, and they want to hel p out, but I kept 

10 tha t card, and it wasn't a ~nth or two l ater, the next 

11 chamber meeting, or maybe It was even at a Kiwanis 

12 meeting, Mr. Harris came up and said , or. oeets, we want 

13 to be a business part ner, an educat ional partner, what 

14 can we do to help your schools. 

15 so now that he's asked ~Ice , I began to probe and 

16 say, wttat is it t hat you can do to help cahokia school 

17 District, and he l isted off four or five things, and one 

18 of them he mentioned that was very timely was the 

Page 22 

VES 004761 
070908a 

19 disposal of haza:dous waste because the state of Illinois 

20 has very strict guidelines for schools on the 

2l ident.ificati on of toxic waste and disposal of that . And 

22 we were struggling as a school district on how we were 

23 going to dispOse of that. And he, Mr . Harris, said no 

24 problem; we'll have staff members come out and work with 

25 your science teachers and other teachers, and within two 

0 

26 

1 weeks all of our toxic waste had been disposed of in a 

2 legal manner. That was very helpful to the school 

3 distri ct. 

4 other activities that I can think of that were 

S helpful that veolia provided to the school district 

6 i ncluded at least four or five times a year at the 

7 elementary level, middle-school level and high-school 

8 level we asked for career-education speakers to speak to 

9 our studenu about future oppOrtunities in the business 

10 world . veolia was always very cooperative about sending 

11 speakers out. 

12 It won't be a surprise to you all of our 

13 extracurricular activities-- we're constantly asking the 

14 area businesses for donations to support our activities. 

15 veolia was one of the most generous sponsors of all those 

16 activities, and I can think of a -- t can remember one 

17 Christmas when they .donated hundreds of pairs of gloves 

18 and stocking caps to our needy families and, once again, 

19 a good educational partner. 

20 Perhaps, the IIIOSt important contribution ca.110 in the 

2l form of the Archview Economic Development corporation 

Page 23 

VES 004762 
070908a 

22 that Mayor s·auget talked about previously. During my 

23 first year in the office, myself and Mr. sauget talked 

24 about what can we do to promote economic development and 

2S education within the cahokia school boundaries, and t he 

0 

27 

1 idea -- well , the fi rst step was to invite several of the 

2 business leaders of the communitY, and Mr . Harris was 

3 quick to respond and accept that invi tation. 

4 I know Mayor Reed was there as well. I think other 

S ~yors were included . I think the mayor of cahokia at 

6 the time was there, and t he mayor of oupo also came, but 

7 from that meeting we started the idea of Archview 

8 Economic oevelopment wi th the Mutual goals of promoting 

9 education and businesses withtn the cahokia school 

10 boundaries, and that was four or five years ago, and 1 

11 know that it's been extremely effective to date and --

12 MS. POPE: conclude. 

13 ~. DEETS: -- one of the things, as a schoOl 

14 superintendent, that we ask businesses to do, was to 

15 provide educational opportunity. for high-school graduates 

16 because high-school graduates need to know that there's a 

17 connection from their schooling to work. And every year 

18 Mr. Harris would call the high school and say, we have 

19 opportunities for these two to five jobs; will you send 

20 us some of your best high-school graduates so that we can 

21 employ the~ in our area, and I can tell you during my 

22 tenure at cahokia that veoli a was one of the most 

23 valuable busi ness partners, c~nity members we have, 

24 and because of all t heir support for the school distri ct , 

25 I'm here to speak on behalf of their Title v Air Penait. 

Page 24 

VES 004763 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

zo 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

0 

070908a 

28 

Thank you. 

•~· POPE: Next is Brad ). Harriman. 

~1R . HARRIMAN: Present. GoOd afternoon. MY 

name is Brad Harrilllan. I'm the Regional superintendent 

of schools for st. clair county. And I don't want to be 

redundant in soae of the things that Jed touched upon. 

I'll tell you a little bit about .,yself first. I've 

been a life-long resident of St. clair county. I've been 

in education in this county for t hirty years. Starti ng 

my thirtieth year now. I've served as a teacher, a 

coach, adMinistrator in both private and public schools. 

I've served the last two years as regional 

superintendent. I was elect ed to the position in 

November of 'o6. Mine is an elected posi tion that really 

seeks to serve all of the ci tizens and the school 

districts of st. clai r county. 

our office is, basi cally, a compliance ar• of the 

State Board of Education . Not every school district --

there's over nine hundred i n the state of Illinois. Not 

every school district can contact the State Board of 

Education directly so they seek servi ces t hrough the 

regional office. Anything from compliance of school 

policies and school codes to laws governing attendance, 

discipline, thi ngs like that. 

I've only come to know Doug Harris in the last two 

Page 25 

29 

VES 004764 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

070908a 

years since I •ook •he position as regional 

superintendent. He introduced himself -- actually, it 

was Jed that introduced Doug and I, and Doug right away 

wanted to offer his services personally and any services 

that his company could offer the school districts of st. 

clair county. 

so 1 didn ' t really know what veolia did at the time, 

but Doug informed me of not only what they do but who 

they employ so I'm here more to speak about -- about the 

character. 1 don' t know much on the industry side of 

this thing, but I can say that ooug Harris has never 

turned me down . He's a friend to education i n st. clair 

county. 

I've had to make a call -- I had to make a very 

difficult call to him. In my coaching days you get 

pretty close to a lot of young men and women, and I had a 

young man who had really fallen on hard times, and he was 

homeless. His marriage had fallen apart. His life had 

fallen apart . He was really struggling and he needed --

he needed somebody to help him get on the right track. 

so one of the phone calls that I made was to Mr. Harris 

about employment opportunity for the young man , and he 's 

worked very well vnth me in trying to get this guy back 

on the right track. 

25 

so when it comes to character, I have a lot of 

30 

1 respect, and I hold him in very high regard. I have 

2 toured the facility. AS I said, I don't know much about 

3 the industry, but I've toured the faci lity, and ooug has 

4 informed me about the service that his company does 

Page 26 

VES 004765 
D 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

u 

u 

l3 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

provide. I do know that his company is a vital part of 

st . Clair county. 1 feel t hat e~ployment at veo11a gives 

people an opportunity to earn a decent livi ng wage and 

become productive taxpayers, and I certainly appreciate 

that. so not only am I he re to speak for veolia and for 

Mr. Harris, but I 'm also here to thank him . Thank you. 

MS. POPE: oid we have another speaker, &en? 

MS. ~reo: Dee Reed is in attendance. 

MS. POPE: oee Reed. 

MS. REED: Thank you very much. MY name is oee 

Reed, and I ~ here today to speak on behalf of veolia 

for the permit. I am speaking today as a cahokia 

resident. I'm a life-long resident of cahokia. I was 

born in 1953 so you can do the math. ~ fifty-five 

years old, but 1 come here because I am a for~er mayor of 

the vil lage of cahokia. I served as the mayor fro~ 2001 

tO 2003. 

Prior t o that, 1 worked at the cahokia public 

Library District for twenty-four years. so in rxry 

capacity as library employee, I was also a school board 

Member for cahokia unit school District. It was there 

31 

1 that 1 first heard about Trade waste Incineration, and 

2 some of you ~y or ~ay not know that veolia has had a 

3 number of names over the years. AS Trade waste 

4 Incineration, I just knew that they were doi ng some 

5 things w;th t he school, but it was only when I got to the 

6 Mayor's office, that t truly l earned about what onyx 

7 Env ron~ental then did when I was called upon by Mr. ooug 

' 

Page 27 

VES 004766 
070908a 

8 Harris to come and do a tour of the plant. 

9 well, obviously, when you're a new mayor, everyone 

10 calls on you to do tours of places. Not. ooug was 

11 probably the only one that kept pursuing me and saying , I 

12 really want you to come out here and see the plant and 

13 see exactly what we're doing here, and 1 did tour the 

14 plant. 1 not only felt very comfortable that everything 

lS was being done to the lett er of the law, but I saw the 

16 employees, and I became very f~iliar with a lot of the 

17 emp 1 oyees. 

18 I'm smiling at Gale olden right now. Gale not only 

19 would call the office on numerous occasions asking what 

20 they could do for the village of cahokia, what could we 

21 do for the schools and for the village, itself, and they 

22 were always there for any kind of Kiwanis, any kind of 

23 Rotary, any kind of tournament, any ki nd of event. 

24 Always interested in halping children of cahokia and the 

25 families of cahokia and I saw it over and over again. 

0 

32 

1 I do want to say the main thing I wanted to say 

2 today is in the ~~~Ayor's office you hear a lot from people 

3 from all levels. You hear from corporat e leaders. You 

4 hear from education leaders . vou hear from normal 

5 people. Normal people, you like that? 

6 But what I want to say is you hear a lot of things; 

7 that in living in cahokia near sauget wher e there's a 

8 tremendous amount of i ndustry, you hear a lot about 

9 green --and I don't ..ean green issues. NOW, today I 

10 mean little green peopl e, l ike what happened way back 

11 years ago, and I'm going to be real honest. I lived on 

Page 28 

VES 004767 
0 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Edwards street. 

they di~d young. 

070908a 

I played in oead creek. MY parents, 

They di ed at fifty-two and fifty-seven. 

why they died, you know, ~edical issues. I don't know 

that we can blame any one t hing, but back then I want to 

say that people did things that, perhaps, you wouldn't 

even think about doing today. 

Today our IEPA , our different govern~ental 

regulations, we just -- we are living in such a good 

worl d right now because we have people like ooug Karris 

and Gal e olden and George smith and all the people that 

work at veolia. 1 still live in cahokia. I want to live 

in cahokia, but r want you to remember one thing that 

ooug Harris -- he probably won't even reme~ber he told me 

this. But when we did t hat tour of t he plant , he sai d to 

33 

1 me, you know, we our based here in sauget, Illinois. but 

2 there are only twO hundred residents that live in sauget. 

3 we truly think of cahokia as our conmunit y, and I want to 

4 do anything we can to help the vi llage of cahokia. 

5 That's the ki nd of person ooug Harris is. That's the 

6 kind of leadership that he l eads veolia Environmental 

7 with, and I speak out very strongly for veolia. I speak 

8 out very strongly for ooug Harris, and I appreciate the 

9 opportunity to address this group today. Thank you . 

10 MS. POPE: Are there any other speakers signed 

11 up at this point? NO one? Just ~s a reminder -- just as 

l2 a r~inder , the deadl i ne for all written comments are due 

13 July 18th. The deadl i ne for all written cOMfients. If 

14 you have written comments, they're due by July 18th. 

Page 29 

VES 004768 
ll 

070908a 

15 okay. vou can also go on l ine ~d submi t comments, 

16 and we have that web address on the back of the agenda. 

17 So you 111ay go on line and submit c()fMients·, and, agai n, 

18 the deadline. is July 18th. xs there anyone who would 

19 like to give comments at this time? At t his time then 

20 we' l l begin our question-and-answer period. I'll have 

21 Genevieve and charles Hall to come up front. 

22 

23 

24 

25 

(whereupon, a recess was taken.) 

·MS. POPE: At this time our public hearing will 

34 

1 continue. speaker Robert J. Mccormick can come on up. 

~~ . MCCORMICK: Thank you very much. Again, my 2 

3 nrune is Rob McCor111ick . 1 ~ the founder and president of 

4 Franklin Engineering Group. Franklin Engineering is a 

5 professional services cOIIPany located in the Nashville, 

6 Tennessee, area that specializes in applications 

7 involving hazardous-waste conbustion and air-pollution 

8 controls associated with that. 

9 1 and my colleague, Dennis Knisley, are here today 

10 to speak about t he particular project that we performed 

11 for veolia tha t we think has relevance to this 

12 proceedi ng. This project involved ~~~an health risk 

13 assess11ent for the faci1 ity. 

1~ 

oennis is going to get into details of that. I'd 

15 like to start by jun giving a bit of inuoductory 

16 infor~~~ation on our company, the tYPe of service we 

17 perform and a linle background information on the risk18 assess~nt process for those of you who may not be 

Page 30 

VES 004769 
070908a 

19 fami liar with it. 

20 FirS't of all, 111Yself, I'lll a chemical engineer. &y 

21 way of education, I have a bachelor of science degree 

22 f rom washington universitY here in st. Louis. Received 

23 that in 1977. so I have thirty years experience. Almost 

24 all of it is related to hazardous waste coMbustion and 

25 air-pollution control of those types of sources. 

0 

35 

1 MY experience includes design incinerators, 

2 operation of incinerators. I once worked for a cOMpany 

3 simi lar 'to, or in 'the same business. as veol ia. I also 

4 have some experience in environmental permitting and 

5 perfornance 'testing of these types of faciliti es. My 

6 company, Franklin Engineering, specializes i n the sa~e 

7 areas. In the last ten years, we've worked for about 

8 forty incineration facilities nationwide that hold 

9 boilers or other type of industrial furnaces that burn 

10 hazardous waste. 

11 MOst of these are chemical manufacturers are 

12 disposing of a product t hat 'they or was'te 'they generated 

13 . i nhouse. so111e of them are us Government facilities for 

14 explosive waste. some of them are commercial 

15 i ncinerati on facilities such as veolia. 

16 our services range from design and construction, 

17 modifica~ion of inci neration facilities to preparation of 

18 environmental-permit documents, performance-test plans 

19 and a 1 so risk assessments. And t hat's what I'm here 

20 specifically t o talk about today. 

21 For those of you wno are not familiar with risk 

Page 31 

VES 004770 
070908a 

22 assessments, it is one of two ways in which the emissions 

23 performance of hazardous-waste incinerators is assessed 

24 and regulated. Fi rst way that these e~issions are 

25 regulated is through emission standards, which are 

0 

36 

1 generally concentration based or percent removal based. 

2 HaZardous-waste incinerator emissions were first 

3 regulated in this fashion about-- well, in the early 

4 1980s through the Resource conservation Recovery Act or 

5 RCRA , as we refer to it in the industry. These e~i ssions 

6 are now regulated under the clean Air Act MACT standards, 

7 which are also concentration-based standards. That 

8 acronym MACT stands for maximum achievable control 

9 technology. 

10 As 1 sai d before, t hese are concentrati on-based 

11 emission standards. The particular pollutants that are 

12 regulated ar~< dioxi n and furans, total hydrocarbons, 

13 carbon wonoxide, particulate matter, HCL and chlorine gas 

14 and various "'etals including mercury. There is also a 

15 percent removal base standard for What are called 

16 ·principal hazardous organic constituents in waste fed. 

17 compliance with all these emission standards must be 

18 demonstrated through performance testi ng under what we 

19 called· worst-case conditions . Tha• is mi nimu~ combustion 

20 t emperature , MaXiM~ waste-feed rates, maximum 

21 •eta1s a~d-chlorine feed rates, maximum gas-flow rates, 

22 et cetera. 

23 For example, t he current MACT standard for 

24 particulate matter emissions is .015 grains per dry 

25 standard cubic foot. I~ order to pass the performance Page 32 

VES 004771 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

u 

12 

13 

14 

lS 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

0 

070908a 

37 

test, the incinerator must be able to demonstrate 

particulate concentrations in the stack gas less than the 

standard under worst-case operating conditions. 

All hazardous-waste incinerators, including veolia, 

are required to meet these ~CT standards. In addition 

to the concentration-based standards, some incinerators 

have been asked to perform human health risk assessments 

under the auspices of the RCRA omnibus authority. 

This human risk assessment is a complex pr·ocess that 

i nvolves characterization of stack emissions, airdispersion modeling, behavior of deposited pollutants in 

soil and water, and estimated uptake of constituents by 

animal and plant l ife. 

The ultimate goal is to estimate potential exposure 

by human beings through a variety of pathways i ncluding 

direct i nhalation and ingestion. we 've been involved in 

a nu~ber of these project s. At this point I'm going to 

turn it over to Dennis Knisl ey to talk about the details 

of the project we performed for veolia. Thank you very 

much for your attention. 

MS. POPE: This \$ oennis R. Knisley. 

MR . KNISLEY: Good af ternoon . I 'm a registered 

professional engineer in the State of Tennessee, and 1 

currently serve as vice President of Operations for t he 

Franklin Engineering Group, Incorporated . 1 have a 

38 

Page 33 

VES 004772 
0 

l 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

070908a Master's of s~ience degree in h~ical engi neering and 

have spent the l ast twenty-three years i n various 

positions related to chemical process and application of 

environment regulations nnd industrial sour~es. 

us EPA Region 5 performed a Risk screening t hat 

included a number of simplifying ass~~pt ons for the 

veolia incineration facility dated March 22, 2004. aased 

on the results of the risk screeni ng, us EPA e~omMended 

annual eaission limits for mercury, cadmium and chronium 

that resulted in certain short-terll emission limits that 

were more stringent than the HWC MACT standards. 

The HWC MACT standards fo r the other 11etals were 

determined protective of human health and environment 

based on those results. In April 2004, Franklin 

Engi neering undertook the project to conduct a more 

detail ed site specific risk assessment in accordance with 

the guideli nes published in the 1998 HHRAP Guidance 

oocu~ent for Hazardous waste combustion Faci li ties. This 

was a peer-review draft. That was the prevalent risk 

assessment methodology in use at the i~e. Risk 

assessment report was submitud in september 2004. The 

document was revi ewed by t he us EPA Region 5 and Illinois 

~3 EPA. 

A revised risk assess~ent report was submitted in 

october of the next year, 2005. The f i nal HHRAP gui dance 

24 

25 

39 

l document was also issued by us EPA i n september of 2005, 

2 and several of t he clarifying procedures in that document 

3 were used to prepare the october 2005 report. 

4 Additionally, ther~ were a number of site-specific ~age 34 

VES 004773 
0 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

u 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

clarifications and modifications related to airdispersing modeling, risk modeling and other iteNs that 

were utilized to construct the october 2005 report. 

The result of the risk assessment , whi ch is where 

I'll spend the rest of my tiMe talking are expressed in 

inc remental carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic effects frOM 

incinerator emissions on individuals t hat live within the 

ri sk-assessaent a rea. 

The risk-assessment protocol accounts for inhalati on 

pathways, as well as other pathways, including the 

potential food-chai n routes of exposure . The benchmark 

for evaluat ing the carcinogeni c effects recommended by us 

EPA is the individual risk associated with exposure to 

potenti al carcinogens released from a single facility 

shoul d not exceed l in 100,000. conduct of the veolia 

risk assessment for carcinogenic effects included 

evaluation of adult and child resident pathways, as well 

as adult and child recreat ional fisher pathways. 

All four of these scenarios resulud in increment al 

cancer ri sk less than the be.nchmark of 1 in 100,000. 

Add itionally, there's a benchmark for evaluati ng the 

40 

l non-carcinogenic heal th effects, and those are a hazard 

2 quotient of 1.0 . ~ever, for the purposes of evaluating 

3 non- carcinogenic health effects from a single 

4 incineration facility, us EPA suggested that the 

5 calculated hazard quot ient should be less then 0.25, 

6 which is four ti.es lower. consistent with the 

7 evaluation of the carcinog~nic risk, the non-carcinogenic 

Page 35 

VES 004774 
070908a 

8 risk was re-evaluated in four distinct pathways, adult 

9 and child resident and adult and child recreational 

10 fi sher. 

11 segregated hazard indices based on the target organs 

12 were developed to evaluate t he non-carcinogenic effects. 

13 The results presented in the october 2005 Risk ·Assessment 

14 Report indicate that for each combination of constituent 

15 and pathway evaluated the hazard quotient was less than 

16 the benchmark of 0.25. Therefore, enissions evaluated 

17 are not likely to impose adverse effects related to 

18 non-carcinogenic hazard . 

19 To summarize the discussion of potential health 

20 effects associated with emissions from the veolia 

21 facility, based on the conservative evaluation described 

22 in the october 2005 Risk Assessment Report, the potential 

23 health effects, both carci nogenic and non-carcinogenic, 

24 are below the benchmarks established by us EPA. 

25 Therefore, the HWC MACT standards proposed in the 

0 

41 

1 Ti t le v permit should be protective of human health and 

2 environment. Let me conclude with a practical 

3 c~parison. I drove from Nashville, Tennessee, today to 

4 address this meeting. Based on information from the 

5 National Traffic -.- National Highway Traffic safety 

6 Association, in 2006, there was an 860 i n 100,000 chance 

7 of being injured in a car accident. our risk-assessroent 

8 results indicat e that there is less than a 1 in 100,000 

9 chance that after thirtY years there will be any 

10 carcinogenic effects based on the conservative estimate 

11 of emissions from the veoHa facility. Thank you for 

Page 36 

VES 004775 
070908a 

12 your a~tention. 

13 

MS . POPE: Is Karen vonley here? co~ on, Miss 

14 vonley . To remind you, there is no drinking or eating in 

15 'this room. 

16 MS. YOHLEY: Good afternoon. MY name is Karen 

17 vonley, v-o-N-L-E-Y. I'M a chemical engineer and a 

18 licensed professional engineer, and I was asked to speak 

19 by veolia this afternoon on behalf of the veolia's risk 

20 assessment, as spoken by the last couple of speakers. 

21 I'm a principal engineer with Schreiber, vonley and 

22 ASsociates in west county in st. Louis. we're an 

23 environmental engineering firm, and as part of ~y 

24 responsibilities with our Hrm, I've been involved for 

25 over the last twenty years with hazardous waste 

0 

42 

1 combustion facili ties, with the pe~itting and study of 

2 the eaissions of those facilities. 

3 so my experience has i ncluded, for example, applying 

4 the clean Air Act regulations and the Resource 

5 conservation ~ecovery Act regulations, worki ng on permit 

6 applications and permit conditions for the hazardous 

7 waste-combustion facilities, analyzi ng emissions, testi ng 

8 results and coordinating and studying the results of 

9 ~ulti-pathway risk assessment that, again, that Franklin 

10 Engineering speake rs were talking about. And that is 

11 used as a component of the permitting process. 

12 I've been involved with risk-assessment topics for 

13 hazardous-waste coobustion facilities in EPA's Regions 4, 

14 5, 6 and 7, and those include faciliti.es in the states 

Page 37 

VES 004776 
070908a 

15 of: Arkansas. Missouri. Kansas, Indiana, Tennessee, 

16 ~i ssissippi, south ca rolina and Texas. so I have been 

17 involved with a lot of what's been going on in the united 

18 States to see the kind of examples of the studies that 

19 have been done. 

20 so due to my experience in this area, I was asked by 

21 veolia to provi de a peer review of the approach and the 

22 result of the risk assess~nt that was prepared for the 

23 veol ia incinerators by Franklin Engineering. My c~nts 

24 are based on both our company's involvement in the Title 

25 v permitting process that Bob Schreiber spoke about and 

a 

43 

1 t hat is the subject of this meeting and our review of the 

2 risk assessment and the resul t. 

3 A little bi t of a repeat, but I wanted to speak a 

4 moment again about the purpose of the risk assessment and 

5 the permitting process. As also said, the incinerating 

6 en~issions are regulated in the Title v by the hazardous7 waste combustion, which is KWC, MACT regulations and 

$ those specified emissions i~its for dioxin, ~tals , 

9 carbon ~noxide, THC and HCL/c2, and those standards were 

10 established by EPA over Many years through evaluating the 

11 aximu -achievable controls of these types of facilities 

12 and then also verifying that these t:ypes of e~ni ssions 

13 were protective through a risk-assess~nt process on a 

14 national basis. 

15 once the standards were established, they were 

16 applied to all the hazardous-waste combusti on faci l ities 

17 such as veolia. The Resource conservation Recovery Act 

18 or RCRA permitting process is where the risk assessMent 

Page 38 

VES 004777 
0709Q8a 

19 results are actually reviewed and applied. That's a 

20 separate and additional permitting process from the Title 

21 IV, and the RCRA permitting process includes t~e 

22 requirement for EPA to address protectiveness of t he 

23 human health and the health of the environment on the 

24 site-specific basis for each permit . 

25 so the risk-assessment tool can be used and is used 

0 

44 

1 to document the facility e111issions are protected both on 

2 a short and long-term basis. veolia has prepared a risk 

3 assessment, as described by Franklin Engineering, to 

4 document that the MACT emissions standards that are in 

5 the Title v ~re protected. Therefore, although it's part 

6 of a separate permitting process, the result can also 

7 provide soroe assurance to the clean Air Ac.t permitting 

8 process. 

9 FroM NY review. 1 found that the approach that's 

10 used in the risk assessment for veolia is based on EPA's 

11 guidance and 111ethods that are currently being used across 

12 the industry for permin1ng. The EPA 11ethods, as alr·eady 

13 i ndicated, are based on very cQRVlex methods and 

14 guidance. The process allows for a combination of both 

15 site specific and default assumptions for the modeling 

16 parameters. 

17 I found that the veo1ia r1sk assessment follows the 

18 guidance and MOdeling approaches as used across the 

19 nation and different infornation also that's available by 

20 EPA for risk assessment, and it does both the default and 

21 site-specifi c assumpti ons. 

Page 39 

VES 004778 
070908a 

22 As typical, many worst-case assumptions are used in 

23 the risk assessment, and, for example, i n this one, one, 

24 that the use of highest -maximuM emissions is used, as 

25 apposed to the actual eMissions that are seen over the 

45 

1 course of the thirty-year period that it studied. 

2 Also, the point of maximum impact that's determined 

3 from the air-dispersion modeling is used instead of. where 

4 people would, actually, reside and have activity. so 

5 both of those would act to significantly overstate any 

6 potenti al maximum emission impact . 

7 Therefore, that' s -- all these conservative 

8 assumptions are what helped render the risk assessments 

9 to be conservative in nature. In veolia' s case vmere the 

10 site-specific assumptions have been used, the faciliW 

11 gathered data to document the appropriateness and 

12 representative of the information. 

13 The result of the risk-assessment study that I have 

14 reviewed for Veolia document that any potential cancer or 

15 non-cancer risk to human health from facility emissions 

16 i s lower than the acceptable threshold established by EPA 

17 as was also mentioned by Frankli n. The hazard quotient 

18 for non-cancer effect and t hen any carcinogenic effects 

19 is one in a hundred thousand, and the facility is below 

20 those benchmarks. 

21 Therefore, in conclusion and based on my knowledge 

22 of the veolia i ncineration facility and hazardous-waste 

23 combustion permitting, I believe that veol ia's risk 

24 assessment is both representative of the approaches used 

25 across the industry, and that the MACT emission l imits 

Page 40 

VES 004779 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

u 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21· 

22 

23 

24 

25 

0 

070908a 

46 

that are in the Title IV pe~mit are expected to be 

protective of human health. Thank you. 

MS . POPE: Leah oettmers. What's the name of 

the first speaker? 

MS. OAI'UCO: State Representative Reitz . 

~~ POPE: state Representative Reitz. 

~~. REITZ: I'm state Representative oan Reitz. 

I serVe as state representative for the ll6th District, 

which includes sauget and veolia technical soluti a plant. 

I'd like to start by thanking the US EPA and thank 

you for the hearing and working with the Illinois EPA on 

the regulators to assure that the company operates good 

and proper permits to safely operate in my district. 

The veolia plant and similar comp.anies I think play 

an impOrtant rol e in cleaning up our environment and 

providing a safe place for disposal of hazardous waste. 

I've had several opportunities to visit the facility. 

I'm extremely impressed by how professional and 

conscientious the workers are when I've been on the tour. 

I'm also aware of the outreach program this plant 

has with the community, and they work with the local high 

school and posting career days, and they have been a good 

employer and put ting some of the youth to work as they 

graduate from high school .. They've also established a 

great working relationship with the emergency planning 

47 

Page 41 

VES 004780 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

u 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

n 

23 

24 

25 

070908a c~ittee and the village of sauget. 

veolia is an integral part of the economy in sauget 

and in my district and provides over two hundred jobs 

through the region . we app;eciate the invest ment they 

make and the valuable service they provide . There's a 

need t hroughout our country to expand these types of 

facilities. To meet the de~ands, more products are 

classified as hazardous waste. Hazardous waste in an 

effort to provide a safer and cleaner environment for our 

citi zens. 

speaking with local el ected officials, I'~ aware of 

the hope that future expansion for the veolia cOftpany 

will be in the sauget area. This potential expansion 

would be wel come by our region, and I would offer my 

assistance in any project that provides any type of 

economic developQCnt . 

I'd like to thank you, once again, for your work and 

the EPA to guarantee that we have a safe place to dispose 

of hazardous waste, and that we have adequate protection 

fro• the dangers that i~roper disposal would have on our 

area. Thank you. 

MS. POPE: Leah? 

MS. DAMICO: Leah is still not in attendance, 

but Darryl elbe is here. 

MS. POPE: Darryl Elbe . oarryl Elbe, would 

48 

1 you, please, state your full name, and spell your last 

2 nare. 

3 

MR. ELSE: My n~e is Darryl Elbe, E-L-8-E. I 

4 am retired Emergency Manage~ent Agency Director for St. 

Page 42 

VES 004781 
070908a 

5 clair county. Retired in 2006 . . served about 

6 sixteen years and I just wanted to say this about 

7 well, Trade waste and then onyx and now veolia. That in 

8 my years of being emergency Management Director, we never 

9 once had to respond to a spill or a release down there. 

10 They've been very good. They've been good to work 

l1 with ~nile 1 was there. They're still good to work with. 

12 They've -- we've had the opportunity to form a haz.at 

13 team, hazardous -aterial t eam, in St. clair county. They 

14 were a very intricate part. 

15 A gentleman by the name of steve ~uthy (phoneti c) 

16 provided us space to hold our meetings with all the 

17 people when we first formed the hazmat teaM. They were 

18 great to work with and I'm sure as a member-- I still 

19 serve on the st. clair special Emergency services on 

20 their board, which is the hazmat teaOI here in St. Clair 

21 county, and I look forward to working with the people 

22 fran veolia, and 1 thank you for your ti~e. 

23 

MR. FEHER: GOOd afternoon. MY naJ!Ie is oon 

24 Feher, retired fire chief from Fairview Fire oepart..ent, 

25 Fairview Heights, Illinois. I was county fire chief, 

0 

49 

1 association president for a period of so01ething over 

2 fifteen years. After fifteen 1 stopped counting. Also, 

3 the LEPC chair for the county, local emergency planning 

4 committee chairman for st. clair county and that was well 

5 over fifteen years. 

6 I was appointed to that position by then county 

7 Board chairman, John 8aricevic, and carried on since then 

Page 43 

VES 004782 
070908a 

8 under the current. Mr. Elbe pretty much took some of the 

9 thunder away fro~ what I was going to say in that we had 

10 a very active , and we do have a very active, LEPC 

11 committee. 

12 The need for response capabilitY because we don't 

13 see a lot of incidents within the site or co~ino from the 

14 industries that are h~ based here in the county as much 

15 as we do by rail and by truck, and it's the ability to 

16 have a response capab1lity throughout the county was very 

17 i ._,ortant . 

18 And the industries soae ten years ago worked with us 

19 very closely to help establish that organization. veolia 

20 was very much a part of that. It wasn't called that at 

21 the t ime. It was onyx, and we had Mentioned Steve Luthy, 

22 and steve played a very notable part in that. we used 

23 t heir facility for probably about a six-month period with 

24 attorneys out of spri ngfield, from the Attorney General's 

25 office, Illinois EPA, State's AUorney here in St. clair 

0 

so 

1 county and a couple of attorneys, and also the attorneys 

2 from various industries helped structure an organization 

3 used in response. 

4 veolia, we used their facility . Ran up their phone 

5 bills and all that sort of stuff, and even today the 

6 organization exists primarily through donations and 

7 stuff, and they did play an integral part. 

8 As LEPC chair, t monitored the industries, who have 

9 had hazardous ~terials and stuff within the county , are 

10 required by law, by federal statute to report to us, and 

11 I monitor that reporting. They've been faithful about 

page 44 

VES 004783 
070908a 

12 their reporting to us and "·hat they do have so that we 

13 can share that with the fire depart ments and especially 

1.4 the hazmat team, which serves the enti re county. 

15 They' ve done an excellent job. I've worked with 

16 Mr . Luthy very closely during the formation and got to 

17 understand their facets of things and especially t he 

18 safety. Took me through some of their safety plans 

19 through their faci lity a nurr.ber of times to show s0111e of 

20 t he safeguards and st uff in t heir facility. Look forward 

21 to ••orking wi th them even more and, I guess, that's about 

22 all I've got to say at this point i n time. Thank you. 

23 MS . POPE: Are there any more speakers? IS 

24 there anyone that would like to ke public comments? Is 

25 there anyone who has a quest ion that they need answered? 

0 

51 

1 coul d you c011e to the podi um, please? This is carrie 

2 vonley? 

3 

MS. O~ERS: NO, I'll Leah Oettmers. I do 

4 apologize for my tardiness. upon review of the permit 

5 applications subotitted by veo11a, 1 have determined that 

6 this project is consistent with the Fi nal Preferred sol id 

7 waste Management Plan for Madison county. 

8 Veolia's operation of their incinerator and 

9 recl amation department has been beneficial to Madison 

10 county and its residents by disposing of waste such as, 

11 unused medi cal waste , l atex/oi l based paints, and other 

12 household hazardous ~at als. Wi~hout the much-needed 

13 incinerator, only one of three in the country, residents 

14 and departments of Madison county would inevi~ab y be 

Page 45 

VES 004784 
070908a 

15 storing tons of waste in their homes and warehouses, 

16 possibly in violation of federal, state and local solid17 waste ordinances. 

18 In october of 2007, veolia provided their services 

19 and incinerators to dispose of 300 pounds of unused 

20 medical waste from 2,000 homes in Madison county pro 

21 bono. They have disposed of waste properl y in 

22 partnership with the folloorlng organizations: Madison 

23 County sheriff, Southern IllinoiS Law Enforcement 

24 commission, SlU-E school of Pharmacy, 1o1adison county 

25 Board office, Madison county Recycling, Madison County 

0 

52 

1 Planning and Development, and other numerous municipal 

2 departments or law enforceMent. 

3 Since 2002, veolia has also partnered with IEPA and 

4 Madison county Recycling to fuel blend/reclai m latex and 

5 oil-based pai nts frOM the public, averaging almost 20,000 

6 gallons a year. 

7 In conclusion, the operations of veoli a are secure, 

8 effi cient, and well-maintained. All aspects of safety 

9 are top priority for emP,loyees, as well as the 

10 surrounding areas and envi ronment. As solid waste 

ll coordinator for Madison county, it is my professional 

12 opinion that veolia would be considered for the permit 

13 for the benefit of Madison County and its residents. 

14 Thank you. 

15 

MS. POPE: Anyone e 1 se have a cOII'IIIent at this 

16 ti~? would you, please, state your n~e. and spell your 

17 last name . 

18 MS. LOGAN-S~ITH: I'~ Kathleen Logan-Smith. Page 46 

VES 004785 
070908a 

19 I'M the executi ve director of the Missouri coalition For 

20 Environment. we inhale across the river and breathe the 

21 air occasional ly from your side. And I just wanted to 

22 encourage the EPA to peny this perMit today. This 

23 facility's history does not suggest that it-- i t needs 

24 to remain in operation, as it has been operating. 

25 The -- whi le whatever is in the analysis, the risk 

0 

S3 

1 analysis and whatever is in the permits might be 

2 protective, what's genuinely protective or not protective 

3 is how it actually operates on the ground and what's 

4 coming out of the stack, what's actuall y in the air that 

S we breathe . 

6 And one of the things that also we need to think 

7 aPout is this facility is not alone . There are a number 

8 · of facilities in the area ttiat are adding to the burden 

9 that we breathe, and so cumul ative impact is something 

10 that needs to be considered in conmunities that are low 

11 i ncome and minori t y communities that have already more 

l2 than their share of environmental hazards that they have 

13 to deal with. 

14 Particulate Matter out of the facility is of 

15 particular concern for t hose of us in the non-attainment 

16 area looking for, you know, ever more research that comes 

17 out that shows fine particulate matters leads to heart 

18 di se.ase and a .number of health prob 1 ems and causes 

19 numerous deaths across the region. 

20 The other item of concern in our region and to me 

21 personal ly is lead because there is no safe level of 

Page 47 

VES 004786 
070908a 

22 exposure ~o lead, and l ead is one of t he items that is 

23 emitted from the f acility. so the - - 11hen you look at 

24 what comes out of t he facility and what is added to i n 

25 the region, we need to be cautious and careful about 

54 

1 whether a faci l ity that has an operating history l ike 

2 this one does deserves another permit, and then if we 

3 decide to permit such a facility, we need to make sure 

4 that it has the compliance schedul es in it to maintain 

S compliance and the ~nitoring in it to al low us to make 

6 sure it's happening the way that it should and the 

7 enforcement from IEPA that makes sur e that it actually 

8 delivers on t he promises that are made in that permit 

9 because it's not the equations that are going to protect 

10 your children, and it's not the fonuulas and the modeling 

11 that are going to protect us. It's what ' s, actually, 

12 coming out of the stacks at any given moment. It's hol1 

13 well things are handl ed there and whether people are 

14 whether the operation is -- is exceeding minimum 

15 standards. so we'll submit more detailed comments by 

16 writing. 

17 MS. POPE: Any more public comments? Do we 

18 have any questions that we can answer at this time? 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

MS . ANDRIA: Come on up, Kathy. 

(Whereupon, a recess was taken.) 

MS. POPE: Again, remember the deadline for 

24 written comments are July 18th. At this time we 'll be 

25 taking -- maybe we're going to take just a couple Page 48 

VES 004787 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

2l 

22 

23 

24 

25 

0 

070908a 

minutes, just a break, maybe five, just to get some 

water. Thank you for coming, and we ' ll start again at 

ten after. 

(Whereupon, a recess was taken.) 

55 

MS. POPE: we will now reconvene. we will now 

reconvene for our five o'clock publ ic; hearing. Good 

evening, everybody. MY name is Janet Pope, and I am a 

co~unity Involvement coordinator with the us 

Environmental Protection Agency . Tonight I will serve as 

your hearing officer. we have ~vo other peopl e from the 

us environnental Protection Agency with me. we have 

Genevieve Damico, who is an Environmental Enginee r, and 

charlie Hall , ~~o is also an Envi ronmental engineer wi th 

the US EPA. 

Tonight we are to share infonoation, listen to your 

questions and cOdments concerning EPA's proposal of a 

draft-operating permit for veolia Environmental services 

located in sauget, Illinois. 

I hope when you cat~~e i n, you signed in. what that 

does is puts you on our mailing list, and i f there's any 

i nfo rmation coming up regarding the site, we'll IIAil that 

t o you. 

Tonight's hearing vrlll be three parts. First, 

56 

Page 49 

VES 004788 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

Genevieve Damico will provide an overview of the draft 

permi·t. second, we will take your coments for the 

record; and, third, if time allows, we will have an 

informal question-and-answer period . 

Now, with the exception of the informal 

question-and-answe r sessi on, a court reporter to my right 

wi ll be •aking a transcript of the entire period with the 

exception 'of the question-and-answer session, a.nd that 

transcript will be on fil e in our administrative record. 

vou can also call Genevieve if you want a copy of this. 

All persons wishing to speak tonight, when you 

signed in, I hope you checked the oo You Plan to Make 

c~ments, there is a yes box, and now Genevieve oamico 

will give an overview of the draft pennit . 

MS . DAMICO: Good evening; the veoli a 

Envi roruoental Technical services from sauget, Illinois, 

is a treatment, storage and disposal facility, whi ch 

accepts offsite waste for further dispos al through 

incineration. containers and bulk shipments of hazardous 

and solid wastes are received, analyzed and transferred 

to tenporary st orage facilities, processed and 

incinerated in one of three combustion units. 

veo11a is located in an area that is attaining all 

of the national ambient ai r~uali ty standards except for 

the eight-hour ozone and particulate matter less than 2. 5 

57 

1 microgr&Ns standard. 

2 veolia requires a Title v pemi t because it is a 

3 r.ajor source of hazardous air poll utants subject t o 

4 requi r.,..ents under section 112 of the cl ean Air Act for 

Page SO 

VES 004789 
0 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

boilers and hazardous-waste combustors. 

Title v of the Clean Air ACt requires, i n part, t hat 

all major sources subject to standards under section 112 

operate in accordance with a permit. MOst Titl e V 

ope rati ng permits are issued by state or local permitt ing 

authorities. EPA is issuing this permi t because in 

response to a peti tion from the sierra club and the 

American BortOlD conservancy, EPA objected to the per11h 

proposed to be issued by t he Illi nois EPA. 

under Ti tl e v, when EPA objects to the proposed 

permit, the state operating -- permitting authority has 

the opportuni ty to address EPA' S concerns, but if EPA's 

concerns are not addressed in a timely fashion , then EPA 

becomes responsi ble for issuing or denying the permit. 

In this case , Il linois EPA did not respond to EPA' s 

concerns i n a timely manner, and on september 29th, 2006, 

EPA announced its intent t o issue or deny veolia a 

federal Title v penait. veolia submitted its permit 

application to EPA on May 2nd, 2007 . EPA deemed the 

appl ication admi nistratively complete on June 13th, 2007 . 

Pursuant to a proposed se~tlement agree~nt between 

58 

1 EPA and the sierra club and t he AMerican Bottom 

2 conservancy, EPA intends to co~~l te t he public comment 

3 process by July 18th, 2008, and issue or deny a fin31 

4 per11i t by september 1.2th, 2008. 

5 concurrently wi th t his permitting process, EPA has 

6 alleged that veoli a is in nonconpl iance with the clean 

7 Air Act. Nothing in this permit will shield veolia from 

Page 51 

VES 004790 
070908a 

8 any enforcement action related to past or ongoing 

9 viol ations that we have alleged. 

10 EPA has i ncluded a compli ance schedule in the draft 

11 permi t that requires veolia to test all three combustors, 

12 to develop operating parameter limits for emissions of 

13 mercury, low-volatile netals and semi-volatile metals as 

14 required by the hazardous waste combustion MACT. The 

15 draft permit requires t hat veolia su~it the results of 

16 tlti s testing and revised operating paraJneter limits by 

17 september 26, 2008. 

18 If EPA finds the revi sed operating parameter limits 

19 acceptable, EPA wi ll reopen the permit to propose 

20 incorporating the operating para~eter limits developed 

21 from the required performance test into the final permit 

22 and solicit public comments on the incorporation of the 

23 operating parameter limi ts into the permit. In addition, 

24 the permit may be reopened at a future time to 

25 incorporate additi onal applicable requirements or 

0 

59 

l compliance schedules. 

2 

MS. POPE: EPA public participation regul ations 

3 require EPA to publish a publ ic notice in the local 

4 newspaper. The public notice appeared in the East St. 

5 Louis Monitor and the Belleville News oemocrat, both 

6 published on June Sth. In addition, infora1ation was 

7 mailed to those who attended I l linois EPA public hearing 

8 for veolia and the hearing for veolia's neighbor, 

9 solutia. Now, we'll begin our public comment period. 

10 I'll call the speakers that have called and si gned up 

11 first, and then I 'll call the speakers who have signed up Page 52 

VES 004791 
070908a 

12 in the back after that. 

13 when you come up, please, say your full name, and 

14 spell your last name for our court reporter. If you have 

15 written comments and you don't want to speak, would you, 

16 please, ~ke sure either myself, Genevieve or charlie get 

17 those comments before you l eave. 

18 so that everyone who wishes to speak has a chance to 

19 do so, please, limit your comments to five minutes. At 

20 the fi ve-mi nute period I will ask you to conclude. You 

21 will have an extra mi nute to conclude withyour comments 

22 at that ti~ . If you don't have enough time at that 

23 time, you can either write and submit written comments of 

24 your remaining comments or either you can come back up 

25 once the floor is clear. You can come back up and finish 

0 

60 

1 your comments. okay. Remember, when you come up to 

2 repeat your name, spel l your last name for the court 

3 reporter, and we'll begin this comment period at this 

4 t ime. 

5 The first person that I'm going to call is Herb 

6 simmons. 

7 1<\R. SUIMONS: Good evening. My name is Herb 

8 simmons, s-I-M-M-0-N-S. First of al l, I 'd · like to thank 

9 the EPA for hol ding this hearing here, bringing the 

10 information to light to the publ ic. I've been the mayor 

11 of East carondelet for the past twenty-four years, and I 

12 have a good percentage of my residents have been employed 

13 by Veolia, and over t he last couple weeks I've had the 

14 opportunity to talk with some of those employees and 

Page 53 

VES 004792 
0 

070908a 

15 their families t o find out anything I could about the 

16 company, either positive or negative, and I haven ' t been 

17 able to fi nd any negatives. 

18 The people that I've t alked to have assured me 

19 it's a good company to work for. Everybody is happy. 

20 Everything for people who have been there for 14, 15 , 

21 even as high as 20 years that's been employed there. I 

22 also wear another hat. I've been in t he EMS business for 

23 38 years, and, to my knowledge, in all these years and 

24 t he years that veo 1 i a. has been in operation, I have no 

25 knowl edge of any type of problems, any disasters or 

61 

1 anythi ng taking place that we would have been responding 

2 to. 

3 so I'm here just on behal f of the village of East 

4 carondelet and the people that veolia employs there, and 

5 I would ask that the permit that they are applying for be 

6 gi~ n great consideration. There' s too many people out 

7 of work now. I don't need any other people i n my 

8 community without a job . Thank you very much. 

9 

10. 

MS . POPE: The next speaker is sharece Johnson. 

MS. 'JOHNSON: Good afternoon . My name is 

11 sharece Johnson , J-O-H-N-S-0-N. I am the corporate 

12 Marketing communications Supervisor, for Kenneth Hall 

13 Regional Hospit al. A couple years back we held a 

14 celebration in honor of National safety Month, which is 

15 in June, where we give a safety festival to the residents 

16 of t he community. About 300 people came, and at that 

17 ti e veolia was nice enough to be one of our corporate 

18 citizens, and they sponsor ed the event. About 300 people Page 54 

VES 004793 
070908a 

19 came to the event. · we were able to raffle off over 30 

20 bicycle helmets, a young girl bike, a young boy bike and 

21 a teen bicycl e. we also had free food and free raffle 

22 items for everyone who attended, and we are very, very 

23 appreciative of veolia's support on that date. Thank 

24 you . 

25 MS . POPE: Is Rhonda sauget? 

0 

62 

1 MS . SAUGET: Yes. Thank you very much and good 

2 evening. My name is Rhonda Sauget, and I aM the ·. 3 executive Director of Archview Economic Development 

4 Corporation. Archview Eco~ic Development Corporation 

5 is a 511C3 organization created about seven years ago 

6 with the mission of networking resources to help build a 

7 strong fiber for the communities we serve. we represent 

8 over 60 businesses, education and health care 

9 organizations in cahokia, centreville, Alorton, sauget, 

10 oupo, East carondelet area. Archview's mission is to 

11 provide a strong social, educational and business 

U i.nfrastructure for the underserved communities with some 

·13 of these cOfllllunities listing among the poorest 

14 communities in the nation by household income. 

15 Doug Harris, plant manager of veolia, formerly onyx, 

16 was a founding member and financial contributor to our 

17 organization. Since it's creation, Doug Harris currently 

18 serves on our board, and veolia is a strong supporter of 

19 the community activities that we sponsor. His commitment 

20 has clearly de~onstrated veolia and his tireless 

21 dedicat ion to improving our communities and enhancing the 

Page 55 

VES 004794 
070908a 

22 things that we do in the underserved areas. 

23 veolia's corporate social responsibility goes far 

24 beyond what other companies in our area have done over 

25 the years. For exampl e, veol ia has parti cipated and 

0 

63 

1 · cont ributed signif icantly to many Archview activities, 

2 including our career day. At our career day we have over 

3 400 underserved students from oupo and cahokia school 

4 districts, juniors and seniors that have come for the 

5 past four years. Those students learn about why it's 

6 important to stay in school, why it's important to 

7 graduat e and make gbod grades. career day also teaches 

8 our students about job opportunities in the communities 

9 so our kids can have the hope of staying in our community 

10 and having a good, wonderful life with their family, and 

11 certai nl y the future of our area can build on that. 

12 veolia has also participated in the oupo centennial 

13 100th Year celebration. This cel ebration helped the area 

14 and the village of oupo really take pride in their 

15 communi tY, and this is also one of our underserved areas. 

16 As mentioned just a few minutes ago, Veolia sponsored the 

17 Kenneth Hall Regional safety oay event buying bicycles, 

18 helmets and sponsoring many· safety activities for the 

19 children of east st. Louis, and that was a very important 

20 event, and it was wonderful for our kids. 

21 our communi ty needs the jobs that veolia brings to 

22 our residents. we need community support that veol ia 

23 brings to many of our organizational activities. In 

.24 short, we need and want veolia in ou"r community. we 

25 applaud veolia for its outstanding community support Page 56 

ves oo4795 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

0 

070908a 

64 

throughout the years, and we strongly support veolia's US 

EPA ~rmit application . Thank you very much. 

~15. POPE: Are there any other speakers signed 

up in the back, Charli e? 

MR. HALL: No . 

MS. POPE: Is there anybody that would like to 

give a publ ic comment at this ti•e7 Is there anybody who 

has a question that they need answered at this time? 

okay. Well, t he deadline for written comments are 

July 18th. You can submit them in writing. You can 

submit them online, but everything is due by July 18th. 

The public hearing we're still going. I 'm just talking, 

but I encourage everybody, who wants to ~ent, to 

co~ent, whether i t is oral , in wri t ing, fax , on line, I 

encourage everybody to comment. AnY comments? Any 

ques~ions? sure, cOMe on up , Ka~hy . 

MS. ANORIA: I'll ask from here. 

(whereupon, a recess was taken.) 

MS. POPE: okay. we'll continue with our 

public hearing. And I'll just st ate this; that if you 

have not signed up for a slot on the public comment 

sheet, this is your l ast chance to do so. After we 

finish this publ i c comment period, we will not go back to 

65 

Page 57 

VES 004796 
0 

l 

2 

3 

4 

s 

6 

1 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

u 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

l 

070908a 

the public comment period. we will not go back. we will 

do the public comMent period at this t ime. We will end 

with our question-and-answer section. we will not go 

back to the public comment period. so if you wish to 

~ake a publ ic comMent, please sign up at this time. 

IS Frank Bergman here? Our first speaker, Frank 

Bergman. 

MR. BERGMAN: I'll keep this brief and to the 

point, but 1'• glad I had the opportunity to come here 

today to address everyone t hat's here and speak about my 

relationship -- our relationship to the vill age of 

cahoki a's relationship-- I'm t he mayor of the village of 

cahokia -- with veolia and for~ ly onyx. 

when I f irst took over as mayor, I think what we 

asked for from all of our companies, businesses, 

corporations that work there is that they work with us, 

keep us informed, and veolia being just a little bit 

outside does cross into our community. so we have had a 

very good relationship in that they make their business 

open to all of our other busi nesses. We open it up so 

people can see what it is that they do. They coomunicate 

with people with what it is that they do, and they nform 

everybody what they're doing so that we know and that way 

can prepare for anything that migh t be presented to us, 

any situation that could come up. 

66 

As corporations go, they are probably one of the , if 

2 not the, 110st cooperative of any in the area. They do 

3 that very well. They open their doors to us, and we 

4 appreciate that very much. on the econ~ic side of that, 

Page 58 

VES 004797 
0 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

not only many of the people that I grew up with are now 

enploye~s of veolia -- am 1 saying that correctly? Just 

wanted to make sure that's correct. But there's also 

just a huge impact from them on the economic front from 

all of our other businesses there from buying goods and 

services from local vendors to the restaurants to the 

peopl e that live there -- that live there and pay 

property taxes and participate in our c~n1ty. so they 

are very good partners on that front as well. 

From the coomun1ty standpoint of helping with our 

children, the re's any number of things from helping with 

community baskets in the winterti me for the senior 

citizens, people who are unable to afford food, various 

items that they contribute to, as well as to the youth 

activities and the community, and there's many of them 

· instead of just one or two. 

so they help with everything from all sorts of 

activities. so for our comunity, for us, veolia ha.s 

been very good to work with and work for us and our 

community. Unlike nany other businesses, they have been 

very open and welcoming to anyone to come down and visit 

67 

1 and see their site and to keep us informed. some 

2 corporations tend not to do that. They have had an open3 door policy with us. They've had an open-door policy 

4 with our fir~ depart,.ent, our police department, our 

5 administration and al l of our l ocal businesses. 

6 we do not always get that opportunity to work with 

7 corporations that way. so from that perspective, veol i a 

Page S9 

VES 004798 
0 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

12 

l3 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a has been very proactive in suppor~ing our community and 

also informing our communiw of any dangers or any 

questions that we may need to get resolved. They are, as 

I said, the most proactive in the region that I'm aware 

of, as far as making people informed about what it is 

that ~hey do and how they do it. 

So I'm here to support them and their permitting 

process. 1 believe they have a safe and efficient 

operation that makes the region stronger for them being 

here. so, with that, I think that's all I have to say, 

and I'd like to thank everybody for lett ing me have the 

t ime to talk this evening. 

MS . POPE: Next speaker will be George Paddock. 

MR. PADDOCK: I came here initially to observe, 

but I think I've been called to speak. Again, George 

Paddock, P-A-o-o-o-c-K. Arguing over the sign size and 

where i t's posted is trivial . If you ' re coming to inform 

or to be i nformed, you have some responsibilities, one of 

68 

1 them is to find your way to t he meeting. I have t aught 

2 classes t o ~he underprivileged and have taught and made 

3 the privileged experience the trials and ibula~ions of 

4 the poor. And I have realized we all have 

5 responsibilities, and some of them are to make it to 

6 i mportant hearings such as this. 

7 Regarding this hearing, whether the economic impact 

8 is good or bad is not the bottom line here. whether we 

9 end jobs is not t he bottom line . The bottom line is, is 

10 it safe? The city and state speakers missed the point, 

11 some of them. Jobs are no~ the point. Yes, it is 

Page 60 

VES 004799