070908a 

12 importan• •hat Veol ia is a good neighbor and that it 

13 provides bicycle helmets to children, but the bottom line 

14 · is, is the plant safe. 

15 I am here as a neighbor, resident and concerned 

16 individual for my safety and the safety of all the people 

17 in this room and i n the community. unsubstantiated 

18 jnnuendo of what is pumped into air must be dismissed as 

19 fear mongering and nothing else. Professional opinion 

20 with the consequence of lost l icensing by engineers and 

21 ot her competent professionals should carry all · the burden 

22 of proof for compliance. 

23 The bottom line is the veolia plant chooses to not 

24 only to meet the government 's mandated requirements but 

25 to far exceed them. 

0 

69 

1 MS. POPE: At this i~, I'll repeat this 

2 again; if you want to give publ ic comments, you need to 

3 do so at this time. we wil l not be going back to t he 

4 public comment period. would you l i ke to make public 

S comment? 

6 MS. ANDRIA: Yes. 

7 MS. POPE: Come up. State you.r first name, 

8 last name, and spell your last name. 

9 MS. ANDRIA: My name is Kathy Andria, 

10 K-A-T-H-Y, A-N-D-R-I-A. I'm here representing Ame rican 

11 Bottom conservancy and the sierra club. 

12 I appreciate what the previous speaker said; that, 

13 yes, the re is a responsibility on t he part of people to 

14 get to a public hearing, but they have to know about it 

Page 61 

VES004800 
070908a 

15 and EPA has no~ properly informed ~he ci~izenry -- ~he 

16 peopl e who don'~ wo rk fo r Veolia, who don't work for one 

17 of the cities, the taxing districts that get money from 

18 i t. The normal people have not been involved, have not 

19 been informed. As Genevieve said earlier, there was a 

20 public notice put in two newspapers in the l egal section, 

21 I assune. I don't reme~er seeing ~hem, and that was, 

22 essentially, all the not i ce that was sent, other than the 

23 l etters that they sent to people from some meeting years 

24 ago. 

25 we identified -- our two organizations den~ ied 

0 

70 

1 this as an environ~ental-justice issue. That is because 

2 t here is an unburdened -- undue burden on low income and 

3. minori~y people. when ~here is an environmental-j ustice 

4 issue identified, it is incumbent upon us EPA or Illinois 

5 EPA to have enhanced outreach. That's where you go the 

6 ex~ra step to let peopl e know that ~here's a public 

7 hearing and what it's about, what it's for, what t heir 

8 abilities are to comment , how they can learn abou~ it. I 

9 do -- I asked them -- I asked Genevieve to -- for a 

10 written record to be put in libraries so that people 

11 could go and look it over ~ see the issues and read 

12 about i~ because not everyone in this area has access to 

13 a computer. They can't or they can go on l ine, and like 

14 some of the people I know, includi.ng myself, i t's hard to 

15 open up all the PDF files because you don't have enough 

16 memory, and so it is a chore. 

17 In response to •Y request, she did make -- she 

18 denied the request for written. I also asked for a l ist 

Page 62 

VES 004801 
0 

070908a 

19 of the documents so we could tel l what they were, but she 

20 denied that also, but they sent out cos, and she asked me 

21 where I wanted the cos to go, and l sent her a list of 

22 libraries with addresses and the area libraries and 

23 

24 

25 

suggested villages, city clerks, but there was nothing 

that was sent out to tell peopl e, hey , if you go down, 

we're having this publi c hearing. It's about a 

1 hazardous-wast e incinerator. If you want to know more 

2 about it, go to this place,- and this information is 

71 

3 available. EPA has t he ~ney to do that. They have the 

4 obligation to do t hat. They did not do that. 

S From the time of the initial publ ic notice when 1 

6 asked t he question previously to -- to ~ake a formal 

7 comment, her answers to ~ questions were off the record 

8 and they were not transcribed, but she said that 

9 nothing -- thn as far as she knows, there was no 

10 enhanced outreach, and that they hadn't sent press 

11 releases. 

12 Yesterday I sent a ooedia advisory to several of the 

13 local newspapers, and there was something in the papers 

14 and on a website today. us EPA then sent a media 

15 advisory dated today saying the public hearing is 

16 tomorrow. I have no idea if anyone was confused about 

17 it. I was. I had people calling me, saying, what's 

18 going on; we don't underst and this. 

19 Again, enhanced outreach is really important and 

20 environaental-justice issues, and it's important for the 

21 public. I 01ean, the Envi ronmental Protection Agency is 

Page 63 

VES 004802 
n 

o7o9osa: 

22 supposed to be protecting the public, not the companies, 

23 and the company -- I mean, I think -- I want jobs here. 

24 I come from a union family . I respect that we need to 

25 treat our hazardous waste. I respect that al l of the 

72 

1 citi es around here have income from all of this, but 

2 there are laws that have to be -- they have to be 

3 followed, and there 's a fairness issue. In this case, 

4 t here was none. 

5 I'm not -- I 'm a volunteer. I do not get paid to do 

6 this. I have been working in this area for many, many 

7 years. I took a Title v trai ning from Genevieve , I don't 

$ know how many years ago , to learn how better to be a 

9 better citizen, how to read a permit.. I don't have an 

10 engineering background, which Mr. Harris will tell you 

11 that I don't know what I 'm talking about when I say that 

12 they are out of compliance. 

13 well, I did not come up with that on my own. I read 

14 the documents. I read where EPA alleges, EPA files - -

15 issued a finding of violation. Now, I don't think that 

16 they do that just arbitrarily --

17 

18 

MS. POPE: Conclude. 

MS . ANDRIA: -- do that arbitrarily without 

19 just because they want to. I don't think they issue a 

20 notice of violation without having the facts. I believe 

21 that the hi story will show from the fill ngs of the 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Attorney General's office and previous filings 

have not been in compliance. If they were not 

in compliance, there would be in this document 

statement of -- of -- a schedule 

Page 64 

to show the11, 

that they 

able to be 

a 

bring them 

VES 004803 
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 

73 

into compliance. Those are our issues. If they can be 

in compliance, then -- then we can ' t do anything about 

that, if they're in compliance. 

But they should never have located a hazardous waste 

incinerator in the midst of how many hundreds of 

thousands of people; but, anyway, those are my issues. 

We will continue to watch this. Yes, you can have lots 

of peopl e stand up and say what a good guy they are, what 

a good company t hey are. How we ' ve looked at them, we 

have been hired by the~ to say t hat they are, that 

they're doing everyt hing good and there's no problem, but 

why are the agencies, why is the Attorney General's 

office, ·why is us EPA finding t hat they're not in 

compliance . so that -- those are the substance of -- of 

my comnents, and I wouldn't doubt that there are still · 

peopl e walking around trying to find this place, but t 

thi nk I thank you because I have been outspoken on 

this. t have been treated with respect. ~o one has done 

anything, said anything nasty, and I appreciate that 

because t've been at other hearings where that hasn't 

been the case, and t have taken a tour of the facility at 

Doug's invitation and so I do know what it is, and I --

I -- you know, I re~lly wan t this to -- I want all of 

t hese issues and all of these c~panies that are 

located -- the concentration of chemicals that we have 

Page 65 

74 

VES 004804 
0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

l4 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

here in sauget, in cahokia, in Granite City and no matter 

which way the wind blows, we 're breathing in chemicals 

and toxins and our chil dren are suffering for that. 

Thank you. 

MS. POPE: The next speaker will be Doug 

Harris. 

MR. KARRIS: My nilJie is ooug Harris, 

H-A-R-R-I-S. I aM the General Manager of the veolia 

facility in sauget, I l l inois, and I've been the General 

Manager since July of 1999, ~nen veolia became the owner 

and operator of the facility. 

I'd first like to thank the us EPA, along with their 

colleagues from the IEPA, for the hard work in drafting 

this Title v operating permit and their efforts to give 

the people of the Metro East communi ty an opportunity to 

voice thei r views on our facility. 

In addition, I' d like to thank the many speakers 

from our coadunity, our customers, members of the 

education profession, as well as our local goverNIIent 

officials, who've appeared here today to express their 

views and the contribution of our faci lity. 1 was 

especially impressed with the acco~plishments, 

credenti als and qualifications of those people, who speak 

in favor of our facility. 

A wi tness has claimed today that ~e do not deserve a 

75 

1 penoit because of all eged violations committed many years 

2 ago before veolia began operating the facility. It is 

3 profoundly unfair to disparage our reputation on the 

4 basis of alleged violations. Page 66 

VES 004805 
0 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

ll 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

070908a 

Another witness today suggested that the toxic 

release inventory or TRI repo~s show excessive emissions 

of harmful chemicals from our incinerator. These 

accusations are untrue. 

As even a brief exa~ination of the 2006 TRI reports 

for the Metro-East area wi ll show, our incine rator 

emissi ons are several orders of magnitude below that of 

other industries. In fact, veolia emissions are less 

than one tenth of one percent of all the TRl ~issions 

from industry in Madison county and St. clair county. 

That' s one tenth of one percent less t han that. 

A commenter also questioned our lead and parti culate 

emissions. In fact, the emissions of t hese two 

constituents are ext remel y l ow. well below the EPA max 

standards level. 

Another cri ti cized t he risk assessment performed at 

our facility suggesting that it was not based on actual 

emissions. In fact , as explained by t he experts fro11 

Franklin Engineering, the risk assessment was performed 

using worst-case assumptions for the actual emissions 

f ro• our stacks. 

76 

1 And, finally, the us EPA publ ic noti ce has stated 

2 the claim that t he EPA considers us to be out of 

3 compl iance with the Clean Air Act. we strongly disagree 

4 wi t h that claim and have asked for a ~~ee~ing and have a 

5 01eeting scheduled to discuss that wi th them, hoping to 

6 convince them that their initial conclusions are 

7 incorrect. 

Page 67 

VES 004806 
8 

070908a 

As a atter of f act, i n 2000 and 2006, we received a 

9 not ice very simi lar to this. we sat and met a t an 

10 informal meeting with the US EPA and have never received 

11 a violation. we are very confident that · once we sit and 

12 meet w1 th them on the current concern, they wi 11 find the 

13 same and not issue a violation. 

14 our business isn't a glamorous business or an 

15 exciting one, but we're proud of the fact that so ~ny 

16 companies and organizations, which provide, essentially, 

17 guides and service to our CC!IIl'.unity and our nation, ~~~any 

18 of which improve the quality and standard and duration of 

19 all our lives. 

20 we heard today f rom Ms. Isringhausen from washington 

21 University School of Medicine , who spoke about the 

22 expertise and professionalism veolia displays when 

23 handling waste generated during the course of research 

24 and development at one of our top universities i n our 

2S country. It is exciting when you're at least a part of 

0 

77 

1 all the good things that they do at that university. 

2 we heard from a Madison county offici al , who sends 

3 out old, out-of-date, unused prescript ion medicine, which 

4 we have handled for that community. I'm sure we've all 

5 heard the recent news reports of the harm that can be 

6 done with t hese prescription medicines when they're 

7 flushed down the toilets and enter our waten.ays. 

8 These are j ust two examples of how we manage 

9 hazardous industrial waste safely, properly on the behalf 

10 of our customers and our community. such wastes are an 

11 inevitable byproduct of manufacturi ng the ~dicines and 

Page 68 

VES 004807 
070908a 

12 cheGicals and •any thousands of other products used by 

13 Anericans daily . veolia is proud to provide the means by 

14 which our custoMers can assure their wastes are managed 

15 in a responsible, safe manner. 

16 we couldn't do this without the high level of 

17 dedication and professionalism of all our eMPloyees, who 

18 work very hard every day to make this a very safe and 

19 compliant facility, and I'd like to recognize all of them 

20 publically for their efforts and commitment to our 

21 cont inued success. 

22 My family and I have been life-long residents of the 

23 Metro-East area, as I suspect .any people attending this 

24 meeting tonight are. I , therefore, very much appreciate 

25 the testimony from the gentleman from Franklin 

0 

78 

1 Engineering about how the recent risk assessment has 

2 demonstrated that our facility at Veolia iaposes no 

3 threat to hUlllan health or the environment, as well as the 

4 c0111lents fro11 the experts of Schreiber, Yonley, who were 

S asked to peer review t his document for accuracy. 

6 MS. POPE: Conclude. 

7 R. HARRIS: I want to conclude today by 

8 repeating an invitation I've often made . our facility 

9 has an open-door policy to the community. we would be 

10 pleased to give you a tour of ou r plant. You don't need 

11 to make an appointMent. Al l you need t o do is stop by 

12 yti~e. I'~ there most everyday and Noul d enjoy the 

13 opportunity to tour anybody through the faci l i cy. Thank 

14 you for your t ime this evening . 

Page 69 

VES 004808 
0 

070908a 

15 MS. POPE: That concludes our public comment 

16 period. Now, we have about five minutes for a 

17 question-and-answer session. If anybody has any 

18 questi ons at this time, you ~Y ask your questions at 

19 this t ime. Kathy? 

20 

21 (Whereupon, a recess was taken.) 

22 

23 MS . POPE: Any more questions? Questions at 

24 all ? wel l , agai n, just as a reminde r , July 18th is the 

25 deadline for writt en comments. You can go online, send 

1 by mai l, fax, whatever, but that is the deadline for 

2 · written comments. I've enj oyed this. You've been a 

3 wonderful audience, and we wish you good luck on this 

4 issue. Genevieve .• anything to say? 

5 MS . DAMICO: No. Thank you very much for 

6 participating today, and I look forward to al l the 

7 comments t hat will be submitted by July 18th. 

8 MS. POPE: Thank you for coming. 

9 

10 

11 

u 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 Page 70 

79 

VES004809 
070908a 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

0 

80 

l REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION 

2 

3 I, sara e. Tipton, certified shorthand Reporter and 

4 Notary Public, do· hereby certify that the foregoing is a 

5 true and correct transc ript of the Public Hearing held in 

6 my presence in the above-captioned cause, and as sa11e 

7 appears from ~y stenographic notes made during the 

8 progress of said proceedings. 

9 

10 

ll sara E. Tipton, csR 

u 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

Page 7l 

VES 004810 
22 

23 

24 

25 

070908• 

Page 72 

VES 004811 
VES 004812. pdf 
case: 1:06-cv-o400<l"Document #: 54 Filed: 10/08108 Page 1 of 2 PageiD #:238 

UNITED STATES DISTRICf COURT FOR THE 

NORTHERN DlSTRICf OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

Sl ERRA CLUB and the AMERICAN 

BOTTOM CONSERVANCY, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

STEPHEN L. JOHNSON. in his 

official capacity as Administrator, 

United States Environmental Prote<:tion 

Agency, 

Defenda.nt. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 06-4000 

Hon. Wayne R. Andersen 

________________________ ) 

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 

All other requirements of the Settlement Agreement between Plaintiffs Sierra Club and 

American Bottom Conservancy and Defendant Stephen L. Johnson, in his official capacity as 

AdministratOr of the United States Environmental Protection Agency having been fulfilled. the 

Pan.ies hereby stipulate that the above-<:aptioned maner now should be dismissed with orejudjce 

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(aXI)(A}(ii). 

Dated: October 8. 2008 

GARVEY MCNEIL & MCGILLIVRAY, SC 

s/Davld C. Bender 

David C. Bender 

634 W. Maio Street, SteiOI 

Madison, WI 53703 

Tel. 608.256.1003 

fa.<. 608.256.0933 

VES 004812 
case: l :O&-cv-Q4000 Document #: 54 Filed: 10108/08 Page 2 of 2 PageiD #:239 

Oate4: October 8, 2008 

Counsel for Plainriffs 

RONALD J. TENPAS 

Assistant Attorney General 

Environment & Nanna! Resources Division 

s/Hegther E. Gange 

HEATHER E. GANGE 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Environmental Defense Section 

P.O. Box 23986 

Washington, DC 20026-3986 

Tel. 202.514.4206 

Fax. 202.514.8865 

OPCOUNSEL: 

DAVIDORLIN 

U.S. environmental Protection Agency 

Office of General Counsel 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 

Mail Code 2344A 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

Counsel for Defendant 

2 

VES 004813 
VES 004814.pdf 
I· 

' 

Ul'HTED STAT&S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECIIE>N AGENCY 

REGIONS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

Veoli'a Enviro)ll1lental Services 

#7 Mobile Avenue 

Sauget, !Hinois 62201 

ATTENTION: Doug Harris 

General Manager 

Request to Provide Jnformadon Pursuant to the Clean Air Ast 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is requiring Veolia 

Environmental Services (Veolia or you) to submit certain information about your facility o.t #7 

Mobile Avenue, Sa1.1get; filinois. Appendix B specifies the intbrmation that you must submit. 

You must -send this information according to the schedule in Appendix B. 

We are issuing this information request under section 114(a) of the Clean Air Act (the 

Act), 42 U.S.C. § 7414(a). Section 114(a) authorizes the Administrator of EPA to require the 

submission of infOrmation. The Administrator has delegated this authority to the Director of the 

Air and Radiation Division, Region 5. 

Veolia owns and operates lutzardous waste incinerators at your Sauget, Illinois facility. 

We are requesting this information tb determine whether your emission source is complying with 

the Hazardous Waste Combustor MACT. 

You must send all required information to: 

Attn: Compliance Tmcker, AE-17 J 

Air Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Branch 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 5 

11 West Jackson Boulevard 

Cl\icago, filinois 60604 

VES 004814 
' . 

With a copy of the cover letter to the fllinois Environmental Protection Agency: 

Ray Pilapil; Manager 

Compliance and Systems Management Secfion 

Bureau of Air 

lllinois Environmental Protection Agency 

I 021 North Grand A venue 

Springfield, lllinois 62702 

Under 40 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart B, )'OU may assert a claim ofbosiness confidentiality for 

any portion of the submitted information. You must specify tbe page, paragraph, and sentence 

when identifying the information subject to your claim. Appeniiix A specifies the assertion and 

substantiation requirements for business confidentiality claims. Veolia must submit all requested 

information under an. authorized signature with the following certification: 

I certify under penalty of law that I have examined and am familiar with tho 

.information in the enclosed documents, includitlg all atmcluncnts. Based on my 

inquiry of those individuals with primary responsibility for obtaining the 

infonnation. I certify that the statements and information are, to the best of my 

knowledge and belief, true and complete. I am aware that there are significant 

penalties for knowingly submitting false statements and information, including 

the possibility offines or imprisonment pursuant to section 113(c)(2) of the~ 

and 18 U.S. C.§§ 1001 and 1341. 

We may use any information submitted in response to this request in an administrative, 

civil, or criminal action. 

This request is not. subject to the PapenvorkReduction'Act, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 ~~., 

because it seek.s collection of infonnation from specific individuals or entities as part of an 

administrative action or investigation. To aid in our electronic record keeping efforts, please 

provide your response to this request for information without staples. Paper clips, binder clips, 

and 3·ring binders are acceptable. 

Failure to comply fully with this request for information may subject Vcolia to an 

2 

VES 004815 
enforcement action under section 113 of the Act, 42 U.S. C.§ 7413. 

You should. direct any questions about Ibis request for information to Sarah MarshAll\ at 

(312) 886-6797. 

Date 

3 

~lb<''"~ts-·•~1i1J. Ht41>EI'A(octa,olkrioob)olqP\qpouible....r .. moktM-OICIM!y. 

To doW.,~ EPA.,~ a be:ly.liWww.~."pS.JO"'lc:oca;IWx::fcc~~.).1ml 

VES 004816 
AppendiX A 

Confidential Busi:lless lnformation (CBI) 

Assertion and Substantiation Requirements 

A. Assertion Reqyjrqnents 

You may assert a business contidootiBiity claim covering all or part of the infonnation 

requested in rbe attached letter, as provided in 40 C.P.R. §2.203(b}. To make a confidentiality 

claim, submit rbe requested infonnation mnd Indicate that you are making a claim of 

confidentiality. Any .docwnent over which you make a claim of confidentiality should be 

marked by attachillg a cover Sheet suonped or typed with a legend to indicate rbe intent to claim 

confidentiality. The stamped or typed legend, or other suitable fonn of notice, should employ 

IIU)guage such as "trade secret" or ''proprietary" or ''company confidential" and indicate a dnte if 

any when rbe information should no longer be treated as confidential. Infonnation covered by 

such a claim will be disclosed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

only to the extent pennitted and by means of the procedures set forth by Section ll4{c) of the 

Clean Air Act (the Act), and 40 C.P.R. Part 2. Allegedly confidential portions of otherwise 

noncontidential documents should be clearly identified EPA will construe the failure to furnish 

a confidentiality claim with your response to the attached Jetter as a waiver of ihat claim, and the 

information may be made available to the public without further notice to you. 

Please segregate personnel, medical and similar files from your responses and include 

that information on separate sheet(s) marked as "Personal Privacy Information" given that 

disclosure of such information to the general public may constitute an invasion of privacy. 

B. Substantiation Reauiremen~ 

All confidentiality claims are subjet.~ to EPA verification and must be made in 

accordance with 40 C.F.R. §2.208 which provides in part that you satisfactorily show lhat you 

hove taken r<laSOnable measures to protect the confidentiality of the information and that you 

intend to continue to do so; and that the information is not and has not been reasonably 

obtainable by legitimate means without your consent. 

Pw·suant to 40 C.F.R. Part2, Subpart B, BPA may at any time send you a letter asking 

you to substantiate fully your CBl claim. If you receive such a Jetter, you must provide EPA 

with a response within the number of days set forth in the EPA request letter. Failure to submit 

your comments within that time would be regarded as a waiver of your confidentiality claim or 

claimS, and EPA may release the information. If you receive such a letter, EPA will ask you to 

specifY which portions of the inform&tion you consider confidentiaL You must be 5ptd0c by 

page, paragraph, and sentence wbeo Identifying the Information subjec.t to your claim. 

Any information 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 information that you 

VES 004817 
identify as being subject to CBI, you must answer the following questions, giving as much detail 

&S possible: 

I. For what period ofiime do you request that the information be maintained as 

confidenti-al, e.g., until a certain date, untJ1 the oecurrence of a specified event, or 

permanently? If the occurrence of a specific event will eliminate the need fo( 

confidentiality, please specify that event 

Z. Infonnation submilied to EPA becomes stale over time. Why should the 

infonnation you claim as confidential b~ proUleted for the time period specified in 

your answer to question #I? 

3. What measures have you taken to protect the infonnation claimed as confidential? 

Have you disclosed the information to an yon~ other than a governmental body or 

someone who is bound by an ag(Cement not to disclose the information further? 

If so, why should the information still be considered confidential? 

4. Is the information contained in any publicly available material such as the 

Internet, publicly available databases, promotional publications, annual reports, or 

articles1 .Is there any means by which a member of the public could obtain access 

to the information? Is the infomtation of a kind that you would customarily not 

release to the public? 

S. Has any governmental body made a determination as to the confidentiality of the 

infonnation? If so, please attach a copy of the detennination. 

6. For each category of infonnntion claimed as confidential, exoloin wilh specificjtv 

why release of the information 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, and the causal relationship between 

di~ oSUJe and such harmful effects. How cocld your competito111 make use of 

this information to )'OUC detriment? 

7. Do you assert th.at the infonnation is submitted on a voluntary or a mandutory 

basis? Please explain the reason for your assertion. If you assert that the 

information is voluntarily submitted information, explain whether and why 

disclosure of the intonnalion would tend to lessen. the availability to EPA of 

similar information in the future. 

8. Any other issue you deem relevant. 

Please note that emission data provided Wider ~on 114 of the ACI, 42 U.S.C. § 7414, 

is not entitled to confidential treatment under 40 C.f.R. Part 2. "Emission data~ means, with 

2 

VES 004818 
I . . 

reference to any source of emission of any substance into the air. 

Information necessary to determine the idcntity,11illount, frequency, 

concentration, or other characteristics (to the ell tent related to air quality) of any 

emission whiCh 'bas been emitted by the source (or of any pollulllnt resulting from 

any emission by the source), or any combination of the foregoing; 

Information necessary to determine the identity, amount, frequency, 

concentration, or other characteristics (to the extent related to air quality) of the 

emissions wlllch, under an applicable standard or limitation, ibe source was 

authorized to emit (including, to the extent oeccssary: fo.r such purposes, a 

description of'the ntlUU!er and rate of operotion of the sOurce); and 

A general description of the location and/or nature of ,the source to the extent necessary to 

identify the soun:e 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.F.R. §§ 2.301(a)(2)(i)(A), (B) and (C). 

Emission data includes, but is not limited to, service reoo.rds stating the amount of refrigerant 

added to a unit or reclaimed from a unit. 

If you receive a request for a substantiation letter from the EPA, you bear )he bunlen of 

substeotjaring vour oonfi:den!lali!y claim. Conclusory allegations will be given lillie or no weight 

in the determination. In substantiating your CBI claim(s), you must bracket all tell so claimed 

and marie it "CBl." Infonnalion so dcs;gnated will be dlsclqsed by EPA only to the extent 

allowed by, and by mesns of the procedures set forth in, 40 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpan B. If you fail 

to claim the information as confidential, it may be made available to the public without further 

notice to you. 

3 

P""«tioe Ill<-;._._, _..obtl(JI. lklp EPA f1Clotpo!hlioob1 ...... iogp>Ui!ole hondo~ c-acti,.,., 

Tocb to.. .__, tpA•s•DiloM h1qrJ1w-.,.w.q~a.JO"'I.:~<~..Itlzl 

VES 004819 
Appendix B 

Veotia must provi<fe continuous mercury emission data for Incinerators Nos. 2, 3, and 4 

at its plant located at #7 Mobile Avenue, Sauget, lllinois, in accordance with the following 

instructions: 

I . Install and operat.e a total mercury continuous emission monitoring syst~"tnS (CEMS) on 

lneinera!Ors 2, 3, and 4 at its plant locoted at #7 Mobile Avenue, Sauget, fllinois. 

2. The CEMS tef=ced in Paragraph I, above, must be installed and operated in 

accordance with applicable tegUiations (including but not limited to the General 

Provisions of 40 C.F.R. Part 63, Subpart A, 40 C.F.R. § 63.8; 40 C.F.R. Part 60. 

Appendix Band 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix F). 

3. The CEMS must be installed and commence operation on each of the incinerators, as 

refetenced in Paragraph I, above, within 30 days after Veolia's receipt of this Request for 

Information. 

4. The CBMS referenced.in Paragraph I, above, must be installed, evaluated and certified in 

accordance w!th the proposed Perfonnance Specification 12 for total mercury oontinUOI!S 

monitoring systems within 30 days after commencing operation. Veolia must 

continuously o.perate the CBMS and collect mercury emission data starting from the date 

of installation as referenced in Paragraph 3, above. 

S. Veolia must submit the electronic CEMS data collected in accordance with Paragraph 4, 

above, on a monthly basis. This submission must continue for one year, beginning 

immediately after the initial operation of the CBMS, as required by Paragraph 3, above. 

6. Veolia must submit the electronic fcedrate data for lncineruors 2, 3, and 4 for mercury, 

low volatile metals (LVM), semi-volatile metals (SVM), and chlorine commencing 

immediately after the initiaL operation of the CEMS, as required by Paragraph 3, above, 

on a monthly basis: 

7. V eolia must submit a summary of the mercury CEMs data for each month including tile 

date and time the mercury emissions wece above the standard of 130 uwdscm corrected 

to 7% oxygen. Veolia must also provide tbe feedrate for mercury, SVM, LVM, and 

chlorine at the time the mercury emissions were above 130 ugldscm corrected to 7% 

o>tygen. Veolia must submitlhis infonnation and other required information in 

accordance with 

40 C.F.R. § 63.1 0. 

8. Veolia must analyze all waste in accordance with Appendi:< C. Vcolia must submit all 

waste analysis data for mercury, LVM, SVM, and chlorine on a monthly basis in an Xcel 

VES 004820 
compatible spreadSheet. All origilllil waste analysis data must be kept onsite at the 

facility. 

9. V eolia must submit ·the report and CBMS data referenced· in Paragraphs 5 through 8, 

above, to·: 

Attn: Compliance Tracker, AE-17J 

Air Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Branch 

U;s. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region.S 

77 West J aclcson Boulevard 

Chicago, lllinois 60604 

CEMS· Performance and Equipment Evaluation: 

10. Veoliamust evaluate the CEMS performance by conducting calibtation and zero drift 

tests, relative accuracy tests, calibration error l.eSts, and interference response tests in 

accordance with 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix Band proposed Performance Specification 

12. 

II. V eolia may use the following reference methods as part of the monitor evaluation 

testing: 

A. EPA Method 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, or 2D for velocity and volumetric fiow rates; 

B. EPA Method 3 or 3A for gas anal:ysis; 

C. BP A MCthod 4 for stack gas moistute; and 

D. EPA Method 29 or the manual method for multi-metals in 40 C.F.R. Part 266, 

Appendix JX, Section 3.1 for mercury from all incinerators. 

Performagce Specifications to he met: 

12. The Mercury CEMS must meet the perfomtance specifications at 40 C.F.R. Part 60, 

.A,-ppendix Band proposed Performance Specification 12, Secti<5n 4 .. . . . 

2 

VES 004821 
Ap~dixC 

Soeclal Waste AnalYsis Proce!lures 

Veolia shall implement the following special waste analysis procedures for mercury, low 

volatile metals (L VM), semi-volatile metals (SVM), and chlorine: 

(i) Waste acceptance procec!ure. Veolia shall conduct representative sampling of each 

shipment of waste for mercury, L VM, SVM. and chlorine within 24 hours of receipt and 

shall analyze such samples using appropriate quality assurance/quality control procedures 

located in the Region S Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Guidance 

http://www.epa_.gov/reg5rc:a/calqapp.btml and an appropriate test method that are 

consistent with SW-846. 

(ii) On-site waste woce<lure: Veolia shall sample and analyze any waste that was 

accepted prior to the installation of the CEMS for mercury, L VM, SVM, and chlorine 

prior to incineration using appropriate quality assurance/quality control procedures 

located in the Region 5 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Guidance 

http:/!www.epa.gov/reg5rcra/calqapp.html and an appropriate test method that arc 

consistent with SW-846. 

(iii) Batch sampling procedur~. If waste accepted for incineration is hatched, treated, 

blended, mixed, or otherwise altered from its shipped state, Veoll.a shall sample and 

analyze such batched, treated, blended, mixed, or otherwise altered waste for mercury, 

LVM,. SVM, and chlorine prior to incineration using appropriate quality 

asswancdquality control procedurca located in the Region 5 Quality Assurance Project 

Plan (QAPP) Guidance http:/lwww.epa.gov/reg5rera/ealqapp.html and an appropriate test 

method that are consistent with SW-846. 

(iv) Exemptions to the special waste P!llSledures· The following wastes that Veolla 

detennines do not contain mercury, LVM, SVM, and chlorine shall be exempt from the 

Special Wl!llte Procedures set fonh above: 

(l) Packaged chemicals from laboratories, hospitals, household clean sweeps, or 

manufacturing facilities, including scintillation vials packed in accordance with 

Sl)lall Quantiiy Chemical Guidelines·(SQCG's). For packaged chemicals, Vcolia 

shall obtain a pucJ<in·g list for each container from the generator specifying type 

and quantity of chemicals contained within; 

(2) Empty containers as defined in 35 lAC 72 I .I 07(b}; 

(3) Pbannaceutical and commercial produets or chemicals that are offspecification or outdated and ere paclcaged in consumer quantities, are unused or 

banned, and are in their original packaging or ate packaged as specified by 

Veolia; 

VES 004822 
! . 

i 

! 

I 

! 

(4) Aeros.ol cans, lecture bottles or gas cylinders; 

(5) Controlled substances regulated by the Federel Government; and 

(6) Explosive, poison inhalation hazard (PlH), or odiferous material, such as 

mercaptan, which present sampling, attd analytical safety haurds. 

Veolia shall review any container labels, mateti!ll safety data sheets, drum inventories, 

packing lists, and any other relevant data or information provided by the generator to 

detennine whether mercury, LVM, SVM, or chlorine is preSent in eny waste listed above 

that may be exempt. Only those wastes listed above that Veolia determines in writing 

contain no men:ury, L VM, SVM, or chlorine based on s.uch revi-ew are exempt from the 

Special Waste Procedures set forth above. Veolia's written determination of exemption 

from the Special Waste Procedures shall describe the information reviewed and the basis 

for the determination that no mercury, L VM, SVM, and chlorine are present. Any waste 

listed above for whic!Hherc is insufficient information to allow Veolia to make a 

reasonable determination that mercury, L VM, SVM and chlorine is not present is not be 

exempt. 

2 

VES 004823 
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING 

!, ~etty Willi Bills, certify tliatl sent o Request to Provide Information Pursuant to the 

Clean Air Act by·Gertified Mail, Ret\lm Receipt Requested, to: 

Doug Harris 

General Manager 

Onyx Environmental Savices 

tr7 Mobile Aveoutl" 

Sauget, Dlinois 6220 I 

I also certify thaj I sent a oopy of the Request tO Provide Information Pursuant to the Clean 

Air Act by First Class Mail. to·: 

Ray Pilapil, Manager 

Compliance and Systelils Management Section 

Bureau of Air 

Illinois Envirorunental Protection Agency 

1021 North Grand Avenue 

Springfield, Illinois 62702 

Administrative 

.~~ Program Assistant 

AECAS{LU!N) 

Certified Mail Receipt Number: ?o-c I tJ3Lo OOtJ/p 0/(0/16~ 

VES 004824 
VES 004825.pdf 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 5 

IN THE MATTF.R OF: 

Veolia Environmental Services 

#7 Mobile Avenue 

Sauget, Illinois 62201 

ATTENTION: Doug Harris 

General Manager 

Request to Provide Information Pursuant to the Clean Air Aft 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is requiring Veolia 

Environmental Services (Veolia or you) to submit certain infonnation about your facil)ty at #7 

Mobile Avenue, Sauget, Illinois. Appendix B specifies the information that you must submit. 

You must send this infonnation according to the schedule in Appendix B. 

We are issuing this information request under section 114(a) of the Clean Air Act (the 

Act), 42 U.S.C. § 7414(a). Section 114(a) authorizes the Administ:rator off.l'A to require the 

submission of information. The Administrator has delegated this amhority to the Director of the 

Air and Radiation Division, Region 5. 

Veolia owns and operates hazardous wnste incinerators at your Sauget, Illinois facility. 

We are requesting this intonnation to detem1ine whether your emission source is complying with 

the Hazardous Waste Combustor MACT. 

You must send all required information to: 

Attn: Compliance Tracker, AE-17J 

Air Entorcement and Compliance As.'>Urance Branch 

U.S. EnvLTOnmental ProteCtion Agency 

Region 5 

77 West Jackson Boulevard 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

VES 004825 
With copies to the lllinOi$ Environmental Protection Agency (!EPA): 

Ray Pilapil, Manager 

Compliance and Systems Management Section 

Bureau of Air 

Illinois Envirorunental Pr01ection Agency 

l 021 Nonh Grand Avenue 

Springfield. Illinois 62702 

Under 40 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart B, you may assert a claim of business confidentiality for 

any portion of the ~b nlid information. You must specify the page, paragraph, and sentence 

when identifying the information subject to your claim. Appendix A specifies tbe assertion and 

substantiation requirements for busincii$ confidentiality claims. Veolia must submit all requested 

infonnation under an authorized signalln-e with tl•e following certification: 

1 ce11ify under penalty of law that l have examined and am familiar with Lhe 

infonnation in the enclosed documents, including all anachments. Based on my 

inquiry ofthose individuals with primary 1-esponsibility for obtahting the 

information, I certify that the statements and information are, to the best of my 

knowledge and belief, true nnd complete. I am aware that there are significant 

~nalties for knowingly submitting false statements and information, including 

the possibility of fines or imprisonment pursuant to section 113(c)(2) of the Act, 

and 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 1341. 

We may use any information submitted in response to this request in an administrative, 

civil, or criminal action. 

This request is not subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 ~ ~-· 

because it seeks collection of information from SP.ccitic individuals or entities as part of an 

administrative action or investigation. To aid in our electronic record keeping efibrts, please 

provide your respnnse to this request for information without Staples. J'a~r clips, binder clips, 

and J-ring binders ere 3CCeptable. 

Failure to comply fully with this request for information may subject Veolia to un 

2 

VES 004826 
enforcement action under section 113 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 74 !3. 

You should direct any questions about this request for inlonnation to Shannon Downey at 

(3 12) 353-2151 or Charles Hall at (312) 353-3443. 

Date ~ Air and Radiation Division 

3 

l¥otcctin! Lho: ~;lwiron•l'll.'tl1 t!l ..: >:!JO' s i.'S(l tli!S ti . nctp €PA figb\ JM>Il\niooby n-pot1inc Jll)s:;ibh: hannff.llt..•twi«WlllltCI'lltl! acd~ily. 

T<1 ~o so. visit EPA ·.s \1'tbt-i(c Ol hup1/www.o.:p1L ov 'llpli mc lcumpJaintsli ~:o'< ,l: J 

VES 004827 
App•ndix A 

Confidential Business lufonnation (CBI) 

Assertion and Substantiation Requirements 

A. Assertion Requirements 

You may assert a business confidentiality claim covering all or pan of the information 

r..:quested io the attached lener, as provided in 40 C.F.R. §2.203(b). To make a confidentiality 

chum, submit the reqt!eSied information and indicate that you are making a claim of 

confidentiality. Any docwnent over which you make a claim of confidentiality should bll 

marlted by attaching a cover sheet stamped or typed with a legend to indicate the inrent to claim 

confidentiality. The stamped or typed legend, or other suitable form of notice, should employ 

language such as "trade secret~ or ~proprietary" or "company confidential" and indicate 11 date if 

any when the infonnation should no longer be treated as confidential. Information covered by 

such a claim will be disclosed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

only to the extent pennitted and by means of the procedures set forth by Section t 14(c) of the 

Cle11n Air Act (the Act), and 40 C.F.R. Part 2. Allegedly confidential portions of otherwise 

noncontidential documents should be clearly identified. EPA will construe the failure to fum ish 

a conlidentiality claim with your response to the attached letter as a waiver of that claim, and the 

iuformatiou may be made available to the public without further notice to you. 

Please segregate personnel, medico! and similar files from your responses and include 

that information on separate sheet(s) marked as ·'Personal Privacy Information" given thot 

disclosure of such infonnarion to the general public may constitute an invasion of privacy. 

B. Substantiation Reouirements 

AU confidentiality claims are subject to EPA verification and must be made in 

a~-eordance with 40 C.f'.R. §2.208 which provides in part that you satisfactorily show that you 

htiVC taken reasonable measures tO proteCt thE: COnfidentiality of ihe information and thD.t you 

intend to continue to do so: and that the ioibnnation is not and has not been reasonably 

obtainable by legitimate means without your consent. 

Pursulll\t to 40 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpnrt B. EPA may at any time send you a teller asking 

you to substantiate fully your CBI claim. lf you re<:eive such a lener, you must provide EPA 

with a response within the number of dnys set forth in the EPA request letter. Failure to submit 

your comments within that time would be regarded as a v.oaiver of your confidemiality claim or 

claims, and EPA may release the information. If you receive such a letter, EPA will osk you to 

specify which portions of the infonnalion you consider confidential. You must be specific by 

page, paragraph, and sentence when ldcnrifying the information subject to your claim. 

Any information not specifically identified e.s subject to a confidentiality claim may be disclosed 

to the requestor without further notice to you. For each item or class of information that you 

VES 004828 
identitY as being subject to CBI. you mu.'t nnswer the following question.s, giving as much detail 

as possible: 

I. For what period of time do you request that the information be maintained as 

confidential, e.g., until a certain date, until the occurrence of a specified event, or 

permanently? lfthe occurrence of a specific event will eliminate the need for 

confidentiality, please specify that event. 

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

information you claim as confidential be protected for the time period specilled in 

your answer to question Ill? 

3. What measures have you taken to protect the information claimed as confidential? 

Have you disclosed rhe information to anyone other than a governmental body or 

someone who is bound by un agr.:cment not to disclose the information further? 

If so, why should the infonnation still be considered contidential? 

4. Is the infonnation contained in any publicly available 1naterial such as the 

Internet, publicly available databases, promotional publications, annual reports, or 

articles? Is there any means by which a member of the public could obtain acce.ss 

to the information? .Is tJ1e information of a kind that you would customarily not 

release to the public? 

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

infom1ation? If so. please attach a copy of the determination. 

6. For each category of information claimed as confidential, exnlllin with specificity 

why release of the infom~ation is likely to cause substantial harm to your 

competitive position. F.xplain the specific nature of those harmful effects, why 

they should be viewed as substantial, and the causal relationship between 

disclosure and such harmful effects. How could your competitors make use of 

this information to your detriment? 

7. Do you assert that the information is submitted on a voluntary o1· a mandatory 

basis? ea.~e explain !he reason tor your assertion. If you assen that the 

infotmation is voluntarily submitted infonnation, explain whether and why 

disclosure of the inlbnnation wonld tend to lessen the availability to EPA of 

similar intbnnation in the future. 

8. Any other issue you deem relevant. 

Please rulte that emission data provided under Section 114 of the Act. 42 U.S.C. § 7414, 

is not entitled to confidential tsealrnent under 40 C.F.R. Part 2. "Emission doro'' means, with 

rcfen:nce lo any source of emission of nny substance in1o the air2 

VES 004829 
Information necessary to detetmine the identity, amount, frequency, 

concentration, or other characteristics (to the extent related to air quality) of any 

emission which has been emitted by the source (or of any pollutant resulting frnm 

any emission by the source), or any combination of the foregoing; 

Information necessary to detennine the identity, amount, frequency, 

concentration, or other characteristics (to the extent related to air quality) of the 

emissions which, under an applicable standard or limilation, the source was 

authorized to emit (including, to the extent neeessary for such purposes, a 

description of the manocr 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 

identify the source and to distinguish it from other sources {including, to the extem 

necessary for such purposes. a description of the device, installation, or operation 

constituting the source). 

40 C.F.R. §§ 2.301(aX2)(i)(A), (B) and (C). 

Emission data includes, but is not limited to, service records stating the amount of refrigerant 

ndded to a unit or reclaimed from a unit. 

If you receive a request for a substantiation letter tiom the EPA. vou bear the byrde<\.Qf 

J>Ubstantiating your confideotialitv clajm. Conclusory allegations will be given little or no weight 

in the determination. In substantiating your CBI claim(s), you must bracket all text so claimed 

und mark it "CBI.u Information so designated will be disclosed by EPA only to the extent 

allowed by, and by meaP.s of the procedures set forth in, 40 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart B. If you tail 

to claim the information as confidential, it may be made available to the public without further 

notice to you. 

3 

l'f101«1t'Jltlhe ~ "f'U)'ODC's ~~ICY· lktp E'A riJl'tpallauo:~~b)· ~' paS$ibk Ntmfulftl.~lii1Qi<¥it)>. 

ro do SQ..\ isil EPA's ~t ~itt c i!.U:p:ll\\""'""·\~!.~'k~~ICdo.'OtJlll:!in.GII'IIoikc ~~lint 

VES 004830 
Veolia Environmental Services must submit the following information requested for its Sauget, 

Illinois facility, pursuant to Section 11 4 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the ACT), 42 U.S.C. 

Section 7414, within twenty (20) calend11r days from receipt of this letter: 

I . Provide the !-minute average mercury fcedrates (pounds/minute) for Incinerators 2, 3, and 4 

in an Excel compatible format from. July I, 2004, to present. 

2. Provide the ealculated 12-hour rolling average mercury feedrates (pounds/minute) for 

Incinerators 2, 3, and 4 in an Excel compatible format from July I, 2004, to present. Provide a 

det~led description of how the 12-hour rolling averages were calculated including all 

assumptioll5. 

3. l'rovide all signed laboratory analytical repons where mercury, metals, moisture content 

and/or percent solids was determined for the container solids and bulk solids that were 

iucinerated during the August and September 2008 stack tests on Incinerators 2, 3 and 4 for low 

volatile metals, semi volatile metals, and mercury, including but not limited to all Ma.~xam 

Analytics, Inc. and PSC Republic Environmental Systems, LLC data. Include th~ analytical 

methods used and all intbnnation about any subcontractors used to analyze the samples. 

4. Provide all chemist bench notes and calculations for the laboratory analysis performed in 

question 3. 

5. Provide all Chain of Custody repons for the samples analyzed in question 3 above. 

6. Provide all appropriate quality control ~pons for the analysis performed in question 3. 

7. Provide a copy of each laboratory's Standard Operation Procedure {SOP) for all the analy,es 

performed in question 3. 

8. Provide a signed certified narrative clearly describing a) calculations used to detennine "wet 

weight" (a.k.a. "as ~eceived") results, b) directives given to consultantS and/or laboratories to 

analyze or re-analyze samples, c) sample handling from sample collection Utrough analysis, d) 

any and all quality control/quality assurance issues related to collection, handling and analysis of 

sM1ples, and e) sample preparation procedures Jbr lillering liquid samples betbre digestion tor 

mercury and met-als analysis. Include all chemist bench notes and all quality control reports. 

VES 004831 
CERIIF!CAT!! OF MAILING 

I. Betty Williams, certify that I sent a Request to Provide lnfonnation Pumumt to the 

Clean Air Act by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to: 

Doug Harris 

General Manager 

Onyx Enviroronental Services 

!17 Mobile A venue 

Sauget, lllinois 6220 I 

I also certify that l seni a copy of the Request to Provide lnfonnation Pursuant to the Clean 

Air Act by First Class Mail to: 

Ray Pilapil, Manager 

Compliance and Systems Management Section 

Bureau of Air 

Illinois Envirorunental Protection Agency 

!021 North Orand Avenue 

Springfield, Illinois 62702 

ik - on the ,Jf day of~ 2009. 

~.fi:M&w-a / Bett)IW'lillms 

Administrative Program Assistant 

AECAS(ILIIN Section) 

Certified Mail ReceiptNwnber. 1(; 0 I 0 3 2 0 0 (JOt. 0 I f{& oj2E' 

VES 004832 
VES 004833.pdf 
' ' ; 

·' 

THOMPSON COBURN LLP 

July 6, 2009 

VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS 

A.un: Compliance Tracker, A£-171 

AJr. Enforoement and Compliance Assurance BnuJch 

U.S. Environmental ProteCtion Agency 

Region 5 

77 West Jackson Boulevard 

Chicago, ll!inois 60604 

Ray Pilapil, Manager 

Compliance and Systems Management Section 

Bureau of Air 

Illinois Environmental Prote':tion Agency 

1021 Nonh Grand Avenue 

Springficld,lllino~ 62702 

One US Bank Pl.ua 

St. Louis, Mi.saour163101 

314·552~ 

fAX 814-55'1.·7000 

www.thompsoncob\tm.com 

(O<!eph M. Kdlmeyu 

314-552·6166 

FAX 314·55:1.-7166 

EMAIL j~meyez@ 

lhompsoncoOutn.com 

Re: Veoli8 E$ Technical Solutions, L.L.C.'s RtSpOnse tO Appendix B of USE.PA's Request to 

Provide Information Pursuant tO the Clean Air Att Dated May 29, 2009 

Dear RegulatOr. 

This firm represents Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C. (''Veolia"). On June 3, 2009, Veo!ia 

received, via certified mail, the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) 

Request tO Provide Information Pursuant tO the Clean Air Act dated May 29, 2009 

(Information Requests). The provisions of the Information Requests require Veolia tO respond 

within 20 calendar days after the receipt of the information Requests. On June 8, 2009, Veolia 

General Manager Doug Harris contacted Shannon Downey of USEPA 'Region 5 via telephone 

to request an extension of 30 calendar days tO compile the necessary information and draft a 

response to the information Requests. Subsequent tO this initial telephone conversation, Ms. 

Downey telephoned Mr. Harris and notified him that USE.PA had granted Veolia 14 additional 

days tO respond tO the information Requests. Thus, pursuant tO this 14-<lay extension tO the 

20 calendar days initi>llly provided in the information Requests, Veolia ~ required tO submit itS 

response by July 7, 2009. 

Included with this letter please find Veolla's written response with supporting atuchments. 

Please note that, pursuant to the express direction of the Information Requests, Veolia has 

Chicago St. Louis Southern Dlinois Washington, D.C. 

VES 004833 
pr ovided the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency {!EPA) with a copy of this letter and 

V eolia's written response with attachments. 

Although Veolia has attempted to fully and completely answer the Information Requests in 

good faith and consistent with any statutory obl.ig;ltions, its response is subject 10 the following 

general objections: 

1. Veolia objects to the Information Requests 10 the extent that any instruction or 

request is overly broad, vague or ambiguous, or otherwise not in accordance with applicable 

law. 

2. Veolia objects to the lnfonnat!on Requests to the exttnt any instrUCtion or 

sequest is different in whole or in part hom information Veolla's competitors are required to 

provide to the Agency. To the extent such differences exist, Veolia is placed at a disadvantage 

that violateS its equal prorection and due process rights. 

3. Veolia objects to the Information Requests to the extent any instruction or 

request arbitrarily and capriciously requests information which is irrelevant or already collected 

albeit in a different fashion or using a different method. 

4. Veolia objects to the Information Requests and reserves its right to withhold 

inJonnatlon to the extent any request seeks information or materials proteCted by the attorney· 

client privilege, the work product doctrine or any other applicable privileges. 

While Veolia submits its responses subject to the foregoing general objections and 

qualifications, Veolia, nevertheless, has attempted to respond in good faith to the Information 

Requests and bas expended signJilcant time and resources in doing so. 

Veolia trusts USEPA will find Veolia's answers thorough and responsive. However, if the 

USE.PA believes that Veolia bas misunderstood any question or has provided any incomplete or 

inaccurate responses, please contact the undersigned so that I might assist my client in 

resoMng the Agency's concern. Veolia reserves the rigbt to provide additional i.olonnation in 

the future and/or to amend or supplement its responses. If you have any questions or concerns 

reprding the responses, please contact the undersigned. 

Very truly yours, 

Thompson Coburn LLP 

~}A.--r/1 

cc: Greig Siedor, Esq. 

Ryan R. Kemper, Esq. 

Eoclosures 

·2· 

VES004834 
Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C.'s Response to Appendix B 

of USEPA's Request to Provide Information Pursuant 

To the Clean Air Act Dated May 29, 2009 

The following is the response of Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C. ("Veolla"), 

to the best 'of its knowledge, to the above referenced lnfonnation Requests . 

These responses are subject to the objections referenced in the letter of Joseph 

M. Kallmeyer of Thompson Coburn LLP dated Juty 6, 2009, which is included 

herewith. In addition, Veolia herein incorporates by reference Veolia's March 4, 

2009, ' Responses to the United States Environmental Protection Agency's 

Request to Provide lnfonnation Pursuant to the Clean Air Act Dated January 29, 

2009' to the extent those responses provide infonnation-specifically infoonation 

concerning Veolia's compliance with the Hazardous Waste Combustor MACTthat is appficable and relevant to the USEPA's requests below. 

Agency Request: 

1. Provide the 1-minute average mercury feed rates (pounds/minute) for 

Incinerators 2, 3, and 4 in an Excel compatible fonnat from July 1, 2004, to 

present. 

Voolla's Response: 

Attachment 1 Includes one (1) CD containing fifty-nine (59) Excel 

files. Each file contains 1 month of data for Units 2, 3 and 4 of oneminute mercury feed rates in pounds/minute. 

Agency Request: 

2. Provide the calculated 12-hour rolling average mercury feed rates 

(pounds/minute) for Incinerators 2, 3, and 4 in an Excel compatible fonnat 

from July 1, 2004, to present. Provide a detailed description of how the 

12-hour rolling averages were calculated including all assumptions. 

Veolla's Response: 

Attachment 1 includes one (1) CD (the same disc provided in 

response to Request 1) containing flftyo(llne (59) Excel flies. Each 

flle contains 1 month of data for Units 2, 3 and 4 of 12-hour rolling 

av~e mercury feed rates In pounds/minute. 

The 12-hour rolling average mercury feed rate values presented on 

the CO In pounds/minute, were calculated by summing 720 oneI of7 

VES 004835 
i 

; 

..J 

minute mercury feed values and dividing by 720. This calculation 

was performed for each sequential minute of operation beginning In 

July of 2004 to present. An updatlld rolling average value for each 

minute is detllrmlned by using the calculation defined above. 

Agency Request: 

3. Provide all signed laboratory analytical reports where mercury, metals, 

moisture content and/or percent solids was determined for the container 

solids and bulk solids that were incinerated during the August and 

September 2008 stack tests on Incinerators 2, 3, and 4 for low volatile 

metals, semi-volatile metals. and mercury, including, but not limited to all 

Maxxam Analytlcs. Inc. and PSC Republic Environmental Systems, LLC 

data. Include the analytical methods used and all information about any 

subcontractors used to analyze the samples. 

Veolla's Response: 

Attachment 2 contains all signed laboratory analytical reports from 

Maxxam Analytlcs, Inc. ("Maxxam") and PSC Republic Environmental 

Systems ("PSC") where mercury, metals, mQisture contant and/or 

percent solids were detllrmlned for the container soli chi and bulk 

solids from the August and September 2008 stack tasta on 

Incinerators 2, 3 and 4. A .. o Included in this Attachment Is the 

listing of the methods used. These arv Identified on the Analytical 

Reports from Maxxam and PSC. 

The only subcontractor that was used for Sample analysis waa PSC. 

They were contracted by Maxxam. 

Agency Request: 

4. Provide all chemist bench notes and calculations for the laboratory 

analysis performed In question 3. 

Veolia's Response: 

Attachment 3 contains all chemist bench notes and calculations for 

analysis performed by PSC. However, as of the date of this 

submittal, Veolla has not received the bench notes and calculations 

from Maxx.am. Veolia has been working with ENSR1 since receiving 

the Information Requests to obtain these documents from Maxxam. 

ENSR has been In contact with Maxxam and has received other 

1 ENSR Corpo..ation is now a part of AECOM, Inc. 

2of7 

VES 004836 
documentation for this submittal In a timely manner. It is Veolls's 

understanding from ENSR that the delay at Maxxam is due to the 

relevant documents being stored at an off-site storage facility and 

due to the laboratory manager at Maxxam being out of the office for a 

portion of the time period that Veolla was given to respond to theae 

lnfonnation Requests. When Veolia raceives these documents from 

Maxxam via ENSR, they will be promptly forwarded to USEPA. 

Should USEPA have any questions concerning the bench notes prior 

to Veolia's supplementing Its reaponse to these lnfonnatlon 

Requests with the Maxxam materials, please contact Joe Kallmeyer 

at 1~52~166. 

Agency Request 

5. Provide al Chain of Custody reports for the samples analyzed In question 

3 above. 

Voolla's Response: 

Attachment 4 contains all Chain of Custody reports from PSC and 

Maxxam. 

Agency Request: 

6. Provide all appropriate quality control reports for the analysis performed in 

question 3. 

Veolia's Response: 

Attachment 5 contains all appropriate quality control reports for the 

analysis completed for mercury, metals, moisture content, and/or 

percent solids by PSC and Maxxam. 

Agency Request 

7. Provide a copy of each laboratory's Standard Operation Prooedure (SOP) 

for all the analyses performed in question 3. 

3 of7 

VES 004837 
Veolia's Response: 

Attachment 6 contains all of PSC and Maxxam's Standard Operation 

Procedures for the mercury, metals, moisture content, and/or 

percent solids analysis that was performed by each. 

Agency Request: 

8. Provide a signed oertified narrative clearly describing a) calculations used 

to determine "wet weight" (a.k.a. 'as reoeived") results, b) directives given 

to consultants and/or laboratories to analyze or re-analyze samples, c) 

sample handling from sample collection through analysis, d) any and all 

quality controVquality assurance issues related to collection, handling and 

analysis of samples, and e) sample preparation prooedures for fil1ering 

liquid samples before digestion for mercury and metals analysis. Include 

all chemist bench notes and all quality control reports. 

Veolla's Response: 

During the months of February and March of 2008, Veolia was Involved In 

complex negotiations ragardlng the timetable for conducting CPT'a for Ita 

three Incinerators in Sauget, Illinois. 

In an April 26, 2008 telephone conference call, Veolla was informed by 

USEPA that, in order to address the need to demonstrate MACT metals 

compliance, Veolla had to choose either to complete the MACT metals 

testing as directed by the USEPA, pursuant to the Agency's very tight time 

frame, or alternatively to choose one of four options addressing MACT 

metals for Inclusion in the Title V Permit. The four options -re: 1) cease 

incinerating any wastes containing any MACT metals; 2) install Continuous 

Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS) for metals; 3) accept OPLs 

developed by USEPA (USEPA Land to assist USEPA Air); or 4) settle 

previously discussed compliance concerns with issue resolution 

Incorporated into the Title V Permit. During the April 25, 2008 telephone 

conference call, Veolla stated that these four options were either 

undesirable, as In the case of option 1; unfeasible, as In the case of option 

2; or of g~eat concern due to the unknown nature of the results as in the 

case of options 3 and 4. Although knowing that conducting performance 

testing wltliln this expedited time period would be challenging and result in 

increased costs, Veolla chose to conduct the metals performance testing 

Instead of one of these four options. 

Veolla's sample collection practice-for at least the last decade-when 

conducting emission testing has been to use Veolia personnel to collect 

and send samples for offslte laboratory analysis. During the negotiating 

4of7 

VES 004838 
sessions of February and March 2008, whether real or perceived, Veolia 

sensed a· lack of confidence from the USEPA Land Group In Veolla's ability 

to handle this activity. In an effort to alleviate this concern, Veolia 

contrac..,-d ENSR to handle the sample gathering and analysis. Veol!a also 

instructed ENSR to comply with the USEPA Land Group's request to take 

split samf)les of the feeda. This was done under the observation of USEPA 

Land per5o.nnel and according to their sample splitting protocol. Since the 

effort was put forth during testing to split and collect samples for the 

USEPA Region 5 Land Group, It may be of value for the Agency to review 

the Agency's own moisture and metal concentration data, compare those 

results to the results obtained by Maxxam and PSC, and share auch results 

with Vaolia in order to facilitate cloaura of this issue. 

During all of Veolia's emission testing for at least a decade prior to the 

August and September 2008 CPT's, all samples were collected, packaged 

and sent out to the lab by Veolla personnel to be analyzed on a "wet 

weight" (a.k.a. "as-received") basis. After receiving the results from the 

laboratory, Veolla then used those results to determine feedrates. 

As mentioned above, during the expedited August and September 2008 

metals testing, ENSR collected and .. nt samples to Maxxam and PSC for 

analysis. However, It is Veolla's understanding that no clear directive was 

given to the laboratories bY ENSR to analyze and report thla Information on 

either a "wet weighf' (a.k.a. "as-received") basis or a "dry welghf' beals. 

As a result, the laboratory dried, analyzed, and reported the metals 

concentration to ENSR on a dried basi8. ENSR then forwarded those 

results to. Veolla personnel who used those concentrationa to determine 

metals feedrates as had been done In the past 

Due to the aggressive testing schedule placed on Veolla by US EPA Region 

5 during the February and March 2008 negotiations, Veolia was unable to 

perform its customary internal QA/QC audit prior to the CPT reports being 

submitted to the Agency on October 10, 2008. 

However, shortly after Veolla'a October 10, 2008 submittal to the Agency, 

Veolla's Internal QA/QC process determined that the metals concentrations 

were not reported on a "wet weight" (a.k.a. "as-received") basis. Upon 

learning this, Veolia immediately contacted ENSR and directed them to 

obtain revised information from the laboratories. Veolia then performed 

new feedrate calculations using the revised Information and recorded the 

results in its Document of Compliance. Further, Veolia promptly notified 

USEPA R!!gion 5 personnel of the new calculations and the reasons for the 

new calculations. 

8a) ''Wet weight" (a.k.a. "as-received") metals concentrations of the solid 

waste samples were calculated using the reported "dry" concentrations of 

the metals and the moisture determinations of the samples. Units 2 and 3 

5 of7 

VES 004839 
... . . 

I· 

' 

moisture values were determined by Maxxam upon request by Veolia 

through ENSR. Unit 4 moisture values were from the PSC analyses of the 

samples. The "as-received" concentrations were calculated by the 

following formula: · 

("wet weight" (a.k.a. "as-received") metal concentration)= 

(reported "dry" metal concentration) x ((100- %H20) /100). 

Bb) Veolla secured the services of ENSR to collect the waste samples 

during the testing program and to have the samples analyzed for mercury, 

LVM, SVM, chlorides, heating value, and ash content After the test reports 

were submitted, It was determined that the metals concentrations of the 

solid waste samples were not reported on a "wet weight" (a.k.a. "asreceived") basis. Veolla then requested that ENSR have moisture 

determinations performed on remaining solid waste samples. There were 

only solid waste samples remaining from the Unit 2 and Unit 3 test 

programs. Maxxam replicated their drying procedure on these samples, as 

was done prior to the original metals analyses, and reported these results 

to ENSR. 

Be) Altho.ugh Veolia has historically collected, containerized, and shipped 

samples fo third party laboratories for analysis from MACT test programs, 

Veolia secured the services of ENSR to perform this activity for this test 

program. ENSR managed and conducted all ac~ities related to composite 

sample collection, labeling and documentation of the sample containere, 

and packing and shipping the samples after completion of the three teat 

rune on each incinerator. The samples were shipped via FedEx to Maxxam 

for analysis. Maxxam shipped portions of the samples to PSC for heating 

value and ash content analyses. 

8d) To the best of Veolia's knowledge, there were no quality control/quality 

assurance issues related to ENSR's collection and handling of the 

samples. This activity was performed at the site by ENSR and no iaaues 

were identified in their test reports. Quality control/quality assurance 

issues related to the analysis of the samples are identified in the attached 

third-party laboratory report documents. 

Be) According to information received from ENSR, liquid samples are not 

filtered before digestion for mercury and metals analysis. Therefore, there 

would be.JIO chemist bench notes or quality control reports. 

6 of7 

VES 004840 
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION 

CERTIFICATION STATEMENT 

I certify under penalty of law lhat I have examined and am familiar 

with the information in the enclosed documents, including all 

attachments. Based on my inquiry of those individuals with primary 

responsibility for obtaining the information, I certify that the 

statements and information are, to the best of my 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 

1 1J(o71•• ""· ood 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 ood 134\. 

' .•• ~!L-<1 t/r./,g;t 

~Pr;e/4r-ri> 

7 of7 

VES 004841