# V E S 001880.pd f

# THOMPSO N COBURNLL P
314-552-600 0 F A X314-552-700

0

Marc h4 , 200 9 Josep h M . Kellmeye

r 314-552-616

6 FA X 314-552-716

6 EMAI L jkellmeyei® thompsonoobuin.co

m V I AFEDERA LEXPRES S Attn : Complianc e Tracker , AE-17 J Ai r Enforcemen t

an dComplianc e Assuranc e Branc h U.S
. Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Regio n5 77 Wes t Jackso n Boulevar d Chicago , Illinoi s 6060 4 Ra y Pilapil , Manage r Complianc e an dSystem s Managemen t Sectio n Burea u o f

Ai r Illinoi s Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y 102 1 Nort hGran dAvenu e Springfield , Illinoi s 6270 2

Re : Veoli aE S Technica l Solutions , L.L.C.' s Response s t o th e Unite dState s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency' s Reques t t o Provid e Informatio n Pursuan t t o th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t Date dJanuar y 29,200 9 Dea r Regulator : Thi s fir mrepresent s Veoli aE S Technica l Solutions , L.L.C
. ("Veolia")
. O n Februar y 3 , 2009 , Veoli areceived , vi acertifie dmail , th e Unite dState s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency' s (USEPA's ) Reques t

t o Provid e Informatio n Pursuan t t o th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t date dJanuar y 29 , 200 9 (Infonnatio n Requests)
. Th e provision s o f th e Informatio n Request s requir e Veoli at o respon dwithi n 3 0 day s afte r th e receip t

o f th e Informatio n Requests
. Thus , Veoli ai s require d t o submi t

it s respons e b y Marc h5,2009
. Include dwit hthi s lette r pleas e findVeolia' s writte n respons e wit hsupportin g attachments
. Pleas e not e that , pursuan t t o th e expres s directio n o f th e Informatio n Requests , Veoli aha s provide dth e Illinoi s Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (IEPA ) wit hacop y o f thi s lette r

an d Veolia' s writte n respons e without attachments
. Shoul dIEP Awis ht o hav e acop y o f th e

Chicag o St

. Loui s Souther

n Illinoi s Washington, D.C .

V E S 00188 0Althoug hVeoli aha s attempte dt o full y an dcompletel y answe r th e Informatio n Request s i n goo dfait han dconsisten t wit han y statutor y obligations , it s respons e i s subjec t t o th e followin g genera l objections : 1
. Veoli aobject s t o th e Infonnatio n Request s t o th e exten t tha t an y instructio n o r reques t i s overl y broad , vagu e o r ambiguous , o r

otherwis e no t

i n accordanc e wit happlicabl e law
. 2
. Veoli aobject s t o th e Informatio n Request s t o th e exten t an y instructio n o r reques t i s differen t

i n whol e o r

i n par t fro mhiformatio n Veolia' s competitor s ar e require dt o provid e t o th e Agency
. T o th e exten t suc hdifference s exist , Veoli ai s place da t adisadvantag e tha t violate s it s equa l protectio n an ddu e proces s rights
. 3
. Veoli aobject s t o th e Informatio n Request s t o th e exten t an y instructio n o r reques t arbitraril y an dcapriciousl y request s informatio nwhic hi s irrelevan t o r alread y collecte d albei t i n adifferen t

fashio n o r

usin g adifferen t

method
. 4
. Veoli aobject s t o th e Informatio n Request s an dreserve s it s righ t t o th e exten t an y reques t

seek s informatio n o r material s protecte db y th e attorney-clien t privilege , th e wor k produc t doctrin e o r

an y othe r

applicabl e privileges
. Whil e Veoli asubmit s it s response s subjec t t o th e foregoing genera l objection s an d qualifications , Veoha , nevertheless , ha s attempte dt o respon di n goo dfait ht o th e Informatio n Request s an dha s expende dsignifican t tim e an dresource s i n doin g so . Veoli atrust s USEP Awil l fin dVeoha' s answer s thoroug han dresponsive
. However , i f th e USEP Abelieve s tha t

Veoh aha s misunderstoo dan y questio n o r ha s provide dan y incomplet e o r inaccurat e responses , pleas e contac t th e undersigne ds o tha t I migh t

assis t m y clien t

i n resolvin g tb e Agency' s concern . Veoli areserve s th e righ t t o provid e additiona l informatio n i n th e futur e and/o r

t o amen do r

supplemen t

it s responses . I f

yo u hav e an y question s o r concern s regardin g th e responses , pleas e contac t th e undersigned
. Ver y trul y yours , Thompso n Cobur nLL P

cc : Grei g Siedor , Esq
. Rya nR
. Kemper , Esq
.
Enclosure s

- 2

-

V E S 00188 1VEOLI AE S TECHNICA LSOLUTIONS , LX.C/ S RESPONSE S T O TH EUNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO NAGENCY' S REQUES T T O PROVID E INFORMATIO NPURSUAN T T O TH ECLEA NAI RAC T DATE D JANUAR Y 29 , 200 9 Date : Marc h4 f

200 9 Th e followin g constitute s th e respons e o f Veoli aE S Technica l Solutions , L.L.C
. (Veoli ao r Company ) t o th e Unite dState s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency' s (USEPA's ) Reques t t o Provid e Informatio n Pursuan t t o th e Clea nAi r

Ac t date dJanuar y 29 , 200 9 (Informatio n Requests)
. Thes e response s ar e subjec t t o th e objection s reference di n th e lette r o f Josep hM
. Kellmeye r

o f Thompso n Cobu mLL Pdate dMarc h4 , 2009 , an dprovide dherewith
.
I. Procedural

History Fo r a s lon g a s i t

ha s bee n subjec t

t o th e Clea nAi r

Act , Veoli aha s diligentl y complie dwit hth e Ac t an dit s applicabl e regulations—includin g th e MAC T standard s an dth e Titl e V permittin g program . Thus , abrie f procedura l histor y o f

Veolia' s MAC T complianc e an dparticipatio n i n th e Titl e V proces s i s necessar y t o understan dVeolia' s respons e t o th e USEPA' s Irnbnnatio n Requests
. A. Summary of

Veolia's Efforts to Demonstrate MACT Gompliance at

the Sauget

Facility I nDecembe r

o f 2003 , Veoli asubmitte daComprehensiv e Performanc e Tes t an dContinuou s Monitorin g Syste mPerformanc e Evaluatio nTes t Pla n(200 3 CP T Plan ) t o th e IEP Aan d USEPA
. Th e 200 3 CP T Pla noutline dth e procedure s fo r conductin g CPT s o n Veoha' s thre e incineratio n units—unit s 2 , 3 , an d4
. I n additio n t o settin g fort hth e CP T parameter s fo r complianc e wit hSubpar t EE Estandards , th e 200 3 CP T Pla nstate dVeolia' s reques t t o us e data-in-lie u an dextrapolatio n t o establis hit s Operatin g Paramete r Limit s (OPLs ) a s expressl y allowe dunde r

4 0 C.F.R
. § 1207(c)(2)
. Specifically , th e 200 3 CP T Pla nstate dtha t th e testin g dat adevelope dfo r

incinerato r

2 woul db e use dt o develo p OPL s fo r bot hincinerator s 2 an d3 — sinc e unit s 2 an d3 ar e identica l incinerators—i n lie u o f testin g bot h2 an d3 individualh/
. Th e 200 3 CP T Pla nals o calle dfo r th e us e o f

extrapolatio n t o establis hth e fee drate s fo r waste s containin g lo w volatil e metal s (LVMs) , semi-volatil e metal s (SVMs) , an dmercury . O nJun e 30 , 2004 , Veoli aplace daDocumen t o f Complianc e (200 4 DOC ) i n it s Operatin g Recor destablisliin g it s comphanc e wit h4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE
. Th e 200 4 DO C als o se t fort hinformatio nregardin g th e us e o f data-in-lie u an dextrapolatio n t o establis hth e Sauge t Facility' s OPLs
. Se e Ony x Environmenta l Services , Documen t o f Compliance : Nat' l Emission s Standard s fo r

Hazardou s Ai r

Pollutant s fro mHazardou s Wast e Combustors : 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t EEE , Jun e 30,2004 , attache da s Exhibi t A
. Subsequently , o n Septembe r 28,2005 , Veoli asubmitte daNotificatio no f Comphanc e wit hSubpar t EE E(200 5 NOC ) fo r al l thre e incinerator s utilizin g data-in-lie u fo r previou s tes t

result s o n unit s 2 , 3 an d4 an dextrapolatio n t o establis hOPL s fo r

LVMs , SVMs , an dpercury . See Ony x Environmenta l Services , Notificatio no f

Compliance : Nat' l Emission s Standard s fo r Hazardou s Ai r

Pollutant s from Hazardou s Wast e Combustors : 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE , Sep t

28 , 2005 , attache da t Exhibi t B
. A t thi s point , Veoli aha dno t receive dan y commen t fro meithe r

USEP Ao r

IEP Aregardin g th e 200 3 CP T Plan
. Rather , th e first tim e any . agenc y communicate dwit hVeoli a regardin g th e substantiv e portion s o f th e 200 3 CP T Pla n wa s i n Apri l o f 2006
. I nApri l o f

200 6 Veoh ame t

wit hIEP Aregardin g Veolia' s pendin g Titl e V permi t A t tha t meeting , IEP Astate dtha t Veoh aha dsubmitte dsufficien t informatio n t o documen t MAC T comphanc e fo r

incinerato r

unit s 2 an d4
. However , IEP Afo r th e first tim e state dtha t

i t disagree dwit hVeolia' s us e o f data-in-lie u t o estabhs hlimit s regardin g incineratio n uni t 3
. I n addition , IEP Ainsiste dtha t Veoli aperfor maCP T o n uni t 3 withi non e month
. Thus , i n Jun e o f 2006 , a t

significan t

additiona l expens e du e t o th e shor t tim e perio dallowe dfo r testin g b y IEPA , Veoh aperforme dMAC T complianc e testin g o n uni t 3 individually
. Thi s testm g demonstrate dtha t

th e uni t me t al l apphcabl e MAC T standards , includin g thos e fo r LVMs , SVMs , an dMercury
. See Veoh aE S Technica l Solutions , Evaluatio n o f Metals , Particulat e Matte r an dPCDD/PCD FEmission s fo r Fixe dHeart hIncinerato r Uni t 3 , Jun e 2006 , attache d a s Exhibi t

C
. A s discusse di n mor e detai l below , o n Septembe r 29 , 2006 , USEP Anotifie dVeoli atha t USEP A woul dno w b e th e Agenc y i n charg e o f issuin g Veoha' s long-delaye dTitl e V Permi t A s aresult , USEP Arequire dVeoli at o submi t ane w apphcatio n fo r aTitl e V Permit , includin g informatio n relate dt o Veolia' s comphanc e wit hth e MAC T standards
. Initially , USEP Ase t Septembe r

29 , 200 7 a s th e deadlin e fo r tha t apphcatio n t o b e submitted
. However , i n Apri l o f 200 7 USEP A notifie dVeoli atha t

th e apphcatio n was , i n fact , require dt o b e submitte do n Ma y 2 , 2007
. Veoli atimel y submitte dane w Titl e V Permi t apphcatio n o n Ma y 2 , 2007
. O nFebruar y 22 , 2008 , USEP Aissue dth e first o f aserie s o f

Sectio n 11 4 Informatio n Request s pertainin g t o Veoha' s complianc e wit hth e MAC T standards
. See USEPA , Regio n 5 , Reques t t o Provid e Informatio n Pursuan t t o th e Clea n Ai r

Act , Feb
. 22 , 200 8 (Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Requests) , attache da s Exhibi t D
. Eve nthoug hVeoli aha ddemonstrate d complianc e wit hth e MAC T standard s b y usin g data-in-lie u an dtestin g uni t 3 i n 2006 , th e Februar y 200 8 Infonnatio n Request s directe dVeoli at o submi t ane w CP T Pla n i n 4 5 day s an d conduc t CPT s o n al l thre e incinerator s b y Jury 15,2008
. See Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Appx
. B1T1,113
. Th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Request s specificall y prohibite d Veoh afro mrequestin g t o us e data-in-lie u methodolog y unde r 4 0 C.F.R
. § 63.1207(c)(2)
. Id. App x B12
. Th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Request s als o containe dUSEPA' s firs t comment s t o Veoli a concernin g th e 200 3 CP T Plan—ove r fou r year s afte r

Veoli afirst

submitte dth e Pla n t o th e Agency. 1 Upo nreceip t o f th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Veoh aentere dint o comple x negotiation s wit hth e Agenc y regardin g th e infeasibilit y o f completin g CPT s o n al l thre e incinerator s b y Jur y 15 , 2008
. I nameetin g wit hUSEP Ao n Marc h13,2008 , Veoli apresente dit s concern s regardin g th e extremel y shor t

time perio dtha t

i t wa s give n t o complet e th e condition s o f th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Requests
. A t th e meeting , USEP Aacknowledge dtha t th e schedul e include di n th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Request s wa s unrealisti c i n ligh t o f th e tim e neede dt o plan ,

1 Not e tha t4 0 C.F.R . §63.1207(e)(i)(A ) direct s th e USEP A t o notif y a n emissio

n sourc e o f it s approva

l o r inten tt o den y aCP T Pla

n withi n 9 month

s o f receivin g i t
- 2

-

V E S 00188 3prepare , an dperfor mth e CPTs
. Veoli aagree dt o propos e a n alternative , mor e practical , schedul e an dsubmi t

i t t o th e USEPA
. Veolia' s propose dschedul e state dtha t th e thre e testin g program s woul db e complete dbetwee n Augus t o f 200 8 an dApri l o f

2009
. See Emai l fro m Dou g Harris , Genera l Manager , Veoha' s Sauge t Facihty , t o Chery l Newton , USEP ARegio n5 , Marc h21,200 8 (transmittin g Veolia' s propose dCP T schedules) , attache da s Exhibi t E
. However , thi s alternativ e schedul e di dno t mee t th e USEPA' s need s an dwa s rejected
. Afte r furthe r discussio n an dinvestigatio n b y th e USEPA , Agenc y personne l decide dtha t the y ha dvali dtes t

dat at o develo p OPL s fo r al l thre e incinerator s fo r th e MAC T emissio n standard s fo r particulat e matter , HCL/C12 , dioxins/furans , an dDRE , bu t wante dVeoli at o conduc t performanc e test s t o develo p OPL s fo r mercury , LVMs , an dSVM s prio r t o th e issuanc e o f

th e Titl e V Permi t

i n Septembe r

2008
. Veoli aagai n expresse dconcer n regardin g th e performanc e o f thi s testin g o n thre e incinerator s i n aver y compresse dtime period
. I na n Apri l 25 , 200 8 telephon e conferenc e call , Veoh awa s infonne db y USEP Athat , i n orde r t o addres s th e nee dt o demonstrat e MAC T metal s compliance , Veoli aha dt o choos e eithe r t o complet e th e MAC T metal s testin g a s directe db y th e USEPA , pursuan t t o th e Agency' s ver y tigh t time frame , o r

alternativel y t o choos e on e o f fou r option s addressin g MAC T metal s fo r inclusio ni n th e Titl e V Permi t Th e fou r

option s were : 1 ) ceas e incineratin g an y waste s containin g an y MAC T metals ; 2 ) instal l Continuou s Emissio nMomtorin g System s (CEMS ) fo r metals ; 3 ) accep t

OPL s develope db y USEP A(USEP ALan dt o assis t USEP AAir) ; o r

4 ) settl e previousl y discusse dcomplianc e concern s wit hissu e resolutio n incorporate dint o th e Titl e V Pemii t Durin g th e Apri l 25 , 200 8 telephon e conferenc e call , Veoli astate dtha t thes e fou r option s wer e eithe r

undesirable , a s i n th e cas e o f optio n 1,

- unfeasible , a s i n th e cas e o f optio n 2 ; o r o f grea t concer n du e t o th e unknow n natur e o f th e result s a s i n th e cas e o f option s 3 an d 4
. Althoug hknowin g tha t conductin g performanc e testin g withi nthi s expedite dtime perio d woul db e challengin g an dresul t i n increase dcosts , Veoli achos e t o conduc t th e metal s performanc e testin g instea do f on e o f thes e fou r

options
. Veoh aagree dt o expedit e th e deliver y o f th e metal s performanc e tes t plan s an dUSEP Aagree dt o revie w th e tes t plan s i n tw o weeks
. I nphon e conference s hel do n Ma y 1 2 & 14 , 2008 , th e partie s discusse ddetail s o f th e testin g an dUSEP Aagree dt o reissu e th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Request s suc htha t Veoh awoul d onl y b e require dt o perfor memissio n testin g fo r mercury , LVMs , an dSVMs
. Th e agreemen t

reache db y USEP Aan dVeoh aregardin g ho w Veoli awa s t o demonstrat e MAC T comphanc e wa s embodie di n arevise dSectio n 11 4 Informatio n Reques t issue db y th e Agenc y o nJun e 5,200 8 (th e sam e da y USEP Aissue dVeolia' s draf t Titl e V Permit)
. See USEPA , Regio n5 , Reques t

t o Provid e Informatio n Pursuan t t o th e Clea nAi r

Aa , Jun e 5 , 200 8 (Jun e 200 8 mformatio n Requests) , attache da s Exhibi t F
. Th e Jun e 200 8 Informatio n Request s require dVeoli ato , amon g othe r things : commenc e performanc e testin g fo r LVMs , SVMs , an d mercur y b y n o late r

tha n Augus t

15 , 2008 ; submi t

th e result s i n aNotificatio no f Complianc e (NOC ) b y Septembe r

26 , 2008 ; an dsubmi t a n apphcatio n fo r

significan t

modificatio nt o it s Titl e V permi t

(to includ e th e OPL s fo r LVMs , SVMs , an dmercur y develope db y tiie Metal s Performanc e Testin g i n th e Titl e V Permit ) b y Septembe r 26 , 2008
. Pursuan t

t o th e directive s i n bot hth e Februar y an dJun e 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Veoli a wa s require dt o submi t aperformanc e tes t

pla n fo r

USEP Aapprova l prio r t o testing
. See Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Appx
. B 114 , Jun e 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Appx
. B HI
. - 3

-

V E S 00188 4Th e Febraar y an dJun e 200 8 Informatio n Request s specificall y prohibite dVeoli afro m requestin g t o us e data-in-lieu ; however , th e request s di dallo w Veoh at o reques t t o us e a n extrapolatio n methodolog y t o calculat e th e feedrate s fo r LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury . See Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Appx
. B H3 , Jun e 200 8 Informatio n Requests , App x B t l
. Prio r t o includin g a n extrapolatio n metho di n it s Metal s Performanc e Tes t Plan , Veoli a discusse dextrapolatio n method s wit hMr
. Charli e Hal l a t USEP ARegio n5
. A s aresul t o f thes e discussions , Mr
. Hal l provide dVeoli awit haprotoco l tha t ha dbee n previousl y approve d b y USEP Afo r

us e b y Lubrizo l Corporatio n ( acorporatio n als o regulate db y Regio n5)
. Veoh a incorporate dth e approve dextrapolatio n methodolog y int o th e Metal s Performanc e Tes t Pla n tha t Veoli asubmitte dt o USEP ASee Metal s Performanc e Tes t Plan s fo r

Fixe dHeart h Incinerato r

Numbe r

2 , Fixe dHeart hIncinerato r Numbe r

3 , an dRotar y Kil nIncinerato r Numbe r 4 , attache da s Exhibi t G
. USEP Aapprove dth e genera l parameter s o f th e 200 8 Metal s Perfonnanc e Tes t Pla ni n alette r directe dt o Veoh adate dAugus t 8,2008
. See Lette r

fro mGeorg e Czerniak , Chief , Ai r Enforcemen t

an dComplianc e Assuranc e Branch , USEP ARegio nS, t o Dou g Harris , Genera l Manager , Veoli aSauge t Facility , Aug
. 8 , 2008 , attache da s Exhibi t H
. However , despit e VeoUa' s attempt s t o us e ametho dtha t USEP ARegio n5 ha dpreviousl y approve dfo r us e b y Lubrizol , th e Agenc y state dtha t i t neithe r "approve dno r

disapproved " o f

Veolia' s extrapolatio n metho dbase do n th e Lubrizo l Corporatio nprotocol
. See id. a t 3
. USEP Aagree dthat , unti l suc htim e a s USEP Adi dapprov e a n extrapolatio n method , Veoh awoul doperat e a t afeedrat e n o greate r

tha n th e feedrat e use ddurin g th e testin g t o demonstrat e MAC T compliance
. Veoli aproceede dt o perfor mth e approve dMetal s Performanc e Tes t i n Augus t

an dSeptembe r o f 2008
. USEP ARegio n5 personne l wer e presen t a t eac htest—excep t

th e fina l run 2o n uni t 4 , whic hwa s observe db y IEP Apersonnel—and , t o date , neithe r USEP Ano r

IEP Aha s mad e Veoh aawar e o f

an y problem s tha t

agenc y personne l observe ddurin g an y o f th e 200 8 Metal s Performanc e Test s tha t woul dcal l int o questio n th e validit y o f th e result s o r

Veolia' s complianc e wit hth e MAC T metal s standard
. Th e fina l result s o f th e Metal s Performanc e Tes t showe dtha t

al l thre e incineratio n unit s wer e i n ful l comphanc e wit hth e MAC T standard s fo r LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury . O n Septembe r 16 , 2008 , a t

Veoha' s request , USEP Aissue d anothe r revise dSectio n 11 4 Informatio n Reques t extendin g Veoha' s deadlin e t o submi t th e tes t data , NOC , an dit s apphcatio n fo r significan t

modificatio nfro mSeptembe r 26,2008 , unti l Octobe r 10 , 2008
. See USEPA , Regio n 5 , Reques t t o Provid e Informatio n Pursuan t t o th e Clea nAi r

Act , Septembe r

16 , 200 8 (Septembe r

200 8 Informatio n Requests) , attache da s Exhibi t I
. Th e extensio n provide dVeoli awit hadditiona l tim e t o ad dinformatio n collecte d durin g th e Septembe r

portio n o f

th e Metal s Performanc e Test
. O nOctobe r

10,2008 , pursuan t

t o th e February , June , an dSeptembe r 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Veoli asubmitte daNOC , th e Performanc e Tes t Report s fo r

incinerator s 2 , 3 , an d4 , an da n apphcatio n fo r significan t

modificatio nt o Veoha' s Titl e V (Par t 71 ) Permit
. See Lette r fro mDou g Harris , Genera l Manager , Veoh aSauge t Facihty , t o USEP ARegio n5 Ai r Enforcemen t

an dComplianc e Assuranc e Branch , Oct
. 10,200 8 (attachin g Notificatio no f

2Eac hMetal s Perfonnanc e Tes t conducte do n one o f

Veolia' s incineratio n unit s consiste do f thre e runs . - 4

-

V E S 00188 5Compliance , th e Performanc e Tes t Report s fo r

Incinerator s 2,3 , an d4 , an dVeoha' s applicatio nfo r

significan t

modificatio no f

it s Par t 7 1 Titl e V Permit] , attache da s Exhibi t J
. I n it s apphcatio n fo r

significan t

modification , Veoha , a s require db y th e Agency , submitte drevise d OPL s fo r

LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury . See Septembe r 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Appx
. B14
. I naddition , pursuan t

t o th e USEPA' s February , June , an dSeptembe r 200 8 revise dInformatio n Requests , Veoh aals o requeste dt o us e extrapolatio n method s t o calculat e feedrate s fo r LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury . See Feb
. 200 8 Informatio n Requests , App x B13 , Jun e 200 8 Informatio n Requests , App x B11 ; Sept
. 200 8 Informatio n Requests , App x B11,

- Veoli aApp
. Significan t Modification , Sec
. 2.1(C)(2) , Oct
. 10 , 2008
. A s detaile di n it s apphcation , Veoh abot huse dth e extrapolatio n methodolog y (th e Lubrizo l Corporatio nprotocol ) supplie db y Regio n5 an d lowere dth e extrapolate dmeta l feedrate s base do n historica l dat aa s define di n 4 0 C.F.R
. § 63.1209(n)(2)(ii)(B)(2)
. See Veolia' s Apphcatio nfo r Significan t

Modificatio ninclude di n Exhibi t J
. Veoli ai s continuin g it s discussion s wit hth e Agenc y regardin g it s apphcatio n fo r significan t

modification
. O nOctobe r

14,2008 , jus t

day s afte r

Veoli asubmitte dth e NOC , Performanc e Tes t Report s fro mth e Augus t

an dSeptembe r

Metal s Performanc e Testing , an dit s apphcatio n fo r significan t modification , Veoli aplace di n it s Operatin g Recor dane w DO C (200 8 DOC ) t o establis hit s adherenc e t o th e MAC T permanen t replacemen t

standard s fo r

hazardou s wast e combustors. 3 Importantly , Veoha' s 200 8 DO C contain s OPL s fo r LVMs , SVMs , an dmercur y tha t ar e no t base do n extrapolatio n methodology
. See Veoli aE S Technica l Solutions , L.L.C. , Documen t o f Complianc e (DOC) : Naf l Emissio nStandard s fo r Hazardou s Ai r

Pollutant s fro mHazardou s Wast e Combustors : 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE , Oct
. 14 , 2008 , attache da t Exhibi t K
. Veoli abega n operatin g unde r thes e OPL s o n Octobe r 14,200 8 an dcontinue s t o us e thes e feedrate s i n it s presen t operatio n i n ful l comphanc e wit hth e MAC T standards
.
B. Summary of

Veolia's Title V

Permit Process Regarding the Sauget Faculty O nSeptembe r

7,1995 , Veoh asubmitte daTitl e V apphcatio n t o IEPA
. IEP Adeeme dVeolia' s applicatio nadkunistrativel y complet e i n Octobe r o f 1995
. Nearl y eigh t

year s later , o n Jun e 6 , 2003 , IEP Afinally issue dadraft Titl e V Permi t

Th e pubh c commen t perio do n thi s draf

t permi t ende do n Septembe r

12 , 200 3 an darevise dpermi t wa s sen t

t o USEP Ao n Novembe r 6 , 2003
. USEP Adi dno t issu e an y comment s o n th e revise ddraft
. However , o n Februar y 18 , 2004 , th e Sierr aClu b petitione dth e USEPA / pursuan t

t o Sectio n 505(b)(2 ) o f th e Clea nAi r Ac t an d4 0 C.F.R
. § 70.8(d) , t o objec t t o IEPA' s issuanc e o f th e penni t

(Afte r USEP Adi dno t respon dt o th e petition , th e Sierr aClu b filedsui t agains t th e USEP Aseekin g th e sam e relie f o n Augus t 2,2005
. See Sierra Club, et al. v< Johnson, Cas e No
. 05-C-442 5 (N.D
. Dl
. Aug
. 2 , 2005). ) A s apar t

o f aconsen t

decre e betwee n USEP Aan dth e Sierr aClu b resolvin g th e litigation , o n Februar y 1,2006 , USEP Apartiall y grante dth e petitio n an ddirecte dth e IEP At o

3Veoli awa s require d t o compl y wit h th e MAC T permanen

treplacemen

tstandard

s beginnin

g on Octobe r14 , 2008 . See 4 0 C.F.R . § § 63.120

0 - 63.1221 . * Pursuan

tt o Sectio n 505(b)(2

) o f th e Clea n Ai rAct, apetitione

ri s require d t o provid e notic e t o th e permite e o f challenge

s unde rth e Section . See 4 2 U.S.C . § 7661d(b)(2)

. However

, th e Sierr aClu b faile d t o provid e Veoli aan y notic e o f it s challenge

. - 5

-

V E S 00188 6reasses s certai n aspect s o f th e permit
. Further , USEP Adirecte dIEP At o issu e arevise dpermi t withi n9 0 days
. IEP Afaile dt o issu e arevise dpermi t withi ntha t

tim e frame
. I n Jury o f 200 6 th e Sien aClu b agai n hie dsui t agains t USEP Ai n th e Unite dState s Distric t Cour t fo r th e Norther n Distric t

o f Illinoi s i n a n attemp t t o forc e USEP At o issu e th e Titl e V Permit
. Se e Sierr aClub, et

al. v. Johnson, Cas e No
. 06-C-400 0 (N.D
. 111
. Jury 27 , 2006)
. O nSeptembe r

29,2006 , USEP Anotifie dVeoli atha t USEP Awa s takin g ove r th e Titl e V proces s fro mIEPA
. USEP Ainforme dVeoh atha t i t mus t submi t ane w Tid e V Permi t applicatio nb y Septembe r 29,2007
. However , i n Apri l o f 200 7 USEP Anotifie dVeoh atha t th e apphcatio n was , i n fact , du e b y Ma y 2 , 2007
. Veoh asubmitte dane w apphcatio n o n Ma y 2 , 2007
. Th e apphcatio n wa s deeme dadmimstrativer y complet e o n Jun e 13 , 2007
. USEP Athe n issue dadraft

Titl e V Peimi t

fo r publi c commen t

o n Jun e 5 , 2008
. Notably , thi s draf t Titl e V Permi t di dno t contai n OPL s fo r

LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury , a s thos e number s wer e stil l unde r developmen t

throug hth e Metal s Performanc e Testin g proces s outline dabove
. A pubh c heaiin g wa s hel do n Jul y 8 , 2008
. Thereafter , Veoh asubmitte dwritte n comment s t o issue s presente da t

th e publi c hearing
. O no r abou t Jun e 11,2008 , USEP Aan dth e Sierr aClu b settle dth e Jul y 27 , 200 6 lawsui t wit ha consen t decre e tha t

require dUSEP At o issu e aforma l penni t decisio nb y Septembe r 12 , 2008
. O nSeptembe r

12 , 2008 , USEP Aformall y issue daTitl e V Permi t to Veoli a(Penni t

No
. V-IL

1716300103-08-01)
. Veoha' s final Titl e V Permi t di dno t contai n OPL s fo r

LVMs , SVMs , an d mercury . A s discusse dabove , o n Octobe r 10 , 2008 , Veoh asubmitte dt o USEP AaNO C an da n applicatio nfo r

significan t

modificatio no f

th e Titl e V Permi t

(alon g wit hth e report s fro mth e Metal s Performanc e Testing ) tha t contai n OPL s fo r

LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury . Veoli awa s anridpatin g arespons e t o thes e submittals—an dbelieve di t woul dhav e a n opportunit y t o wor k throug hth e modificatio nproces s wit hUSEPA—whe ni t receive dye t

anothe r Sectio n 11 4 Informatio n Reques t

fromUSEP Adate dJanuar y 29 , 2009
.
C. Tanuarv 29. 2009. Information Requests O nFebruar y 3,2009 , Veoh areceived , vi acertifie dmail, 5 USEPA' s Informatio n Request s date d Januar y 29,200 9 (Informatio n Requests)
. Upo nreceipt , Veoli aacte dswiftl y t o contac t Sara h Marshal l a t

USEP ARegio n5 t o begi n coordinatin g aresponse . Afte r spealdn g wit hMs
. Marshal l an danalyzin g USEPA' s directive s regardin g th e installatio n o f Continuou s Emissio n Monitonn g System s (CEMS ) fo r mercury /

Veoli adetermine dtha t i t woul dnee dadditiona l tim e to accuratel y an dfull y respon dt o th e Agency' s Informatio n Requests
. Thus , Veoha , throug hit s attorne y Jo e Kellmeyer , attempte dt o contac t Sabrin aArgentieri , a n attorne y fo r Regio n5 , o n Tuesday , Februar y 10,2009 , t o reques t a60-da y extensio n o f tim e fo r

Veoh at o

5Proo f Veolia' s receip

tdat e is attache

d heret o a s Exhibi tX . ' The problem

s tha tVeoli aha s encountere

d related t

o USEPA' s deman

d regardin

g th e installatio

n o f CEM S fo rmercur y ar e detaile d fully i n Veolia' s numbere d response

s t o Appendi

x B o f th e Infonnatio

n Requests .respon dt o th e Informatio n Requests. 7 Ms
. Argentier i returne dMr
. Kellmeyer' s cal l o n Wednesday , Februar y 11 , 2009 ; Durin g thi s call , Mr
. Kellmeye r relaye dth e basi s fo r

Veoha' s reques t fo r additiona l time , specifically , Veolia' s nee dt o foll y evaluat e th e availabihty , cost , accuracy , an doveral l performanc e o f CEM S fo r

mercur y prio r

t o mstallin g three system s a t th e Veoli afacihty
. Further , Mr
. Kellmeye r pointe dou t

that , eve n i f

Veoli adi dn o evaluatio n whatsoeve r

an dsimpl y purchase dthre e CEMS , i t woul dtak e longe r

tha n th e 3 0 day s provide d b y th e Informatio n Request s t o receiv e an dinstal l th e equipment
. Ms
. Argentieri , however , apparentl y di dno t

fee l thes e wer e sufficien t reason s t o gran t

a n extensio n o f

tim e an dtherefor e denie dVeolia' s reques t Despit e arbitraril y bein g denie dareasonabl e an djustifiabl e extensio n o f tim e t o respon dt o USEPA' s demands , Veoh aha s endeavore dt o respon dt o th e Informatio n Request s a s full y an d completel y a s practica l withi nth e tim e perio dimpose db y th e Agency
.
JJ . Comphance with the Hazardous Waste Combustor MACT Th e Informatio n Request s provid e tha t USEP Ai s ''requestin g thi s informatio n t o determin e whethe r [Veolia's ] emissio n sourc e i s complyin g wit hth e Hazardou s Wast e Combusto r MACT. " A s a n initia l matter , Veoli ai s i n complianc e wit hth e Hazardou s Wast e Combusto r MAC T and , i n cooperatio n an dconjunctio n wit hth e USEPA , ha s demonstrate dsuc h complianc e throug hextensiv e an deffectiv e Metal s Performanc e Testing , whic hinclude d mercur y testing , a s recentl y a s Augus t an dSeptembe r

o f 2008
. See Metal s Performanc e Tes t Report s fo r

mcineratio n Unit s 2 , 3 , an d4 , include di n Exhibi t ]-, see also 4 0 C.F.R
. § 63.1207 ; §63.1207
. A s discusse dabove , th e MAC T metal s comphanc e testin g tha t Veoli aperforme di n Augus t an d Septembe r

o f 200 8 wa s complete dpursuan t t o USEPA' s February , June , an dSeptembe r 200 8 revise dInformatio n Requests
. See Feb
. 200 8 Informatio n Requests , Appx
. B f 1 , Jun e 200 8 Informatio n Requests , App x B H2 ; Sept
. 200 8 Informatio n Requests , App x B112
. Al l thre e o f Veoha' s incineratio n unit s demonstrate dcomplianc e wit hth e MAC T metal s emission s standard s durin g thes e tests . See Metal s Performanc e Tes t Report s fo r

Incineratio n Unit s 2,3 , an d4 , include di n Exhibi t J
. Further , agenc y personne l observe deac htes t and , t o date , hav e no t mad e Veoh aawar e o f an y deviation s fro mmetho dquaht y assuranc e procedures. 8 Veoli asubmitte daNO C t o USEP Ao n Octobe r 10 , 2008 , alon g wit hth e result s o f performanc e tests , verifyin g Veolia' s complianc e wit hth e MAC T standards
. Moreover , o n Octobe r 14 , 2008 , Veoh aplace dane w DO C i n it s Operatin g Recor dsettin g fort hVeolia' s complianc e wit h th e ne w MAC T standard s fo r hazardou s wast e combustors
. Notably , thi s DO C doe s no t us e a n extrapolatio n methodolog y t o detennin e Veoha' s OPL s fo r LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury, - rather , th e feedrat e limit s include di n th e 200 8 DO C ar e base dsolel y o n th e Augus t an dSeptembe r Metal s Performanc e Testing , whic hwa s bot happrove dan dwitnesse db y USEPA
. See Veoh a

7Du e t o th e illegibl e signatur

e on th e Informatio

n Requests

, Veoli ainitiall y contacte

d Ja n Woolums, anothe rattorne y a tRegio n 5 . M s Woolum

s informe d Veoliatha

tMs . Argentier

i wa s th e appropriat

e contac t

8See supra Par

tI A
- 7

-

V E S 00188 8E S Technica l Solutions , L.L.C. , Documen t o f Comphanc e (DOC) : Nat/ 1 Emissio nStandard s fo r Hazardou s Ai r

Pollutant s fro mHazardou s Wast e Combustors : 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE , Oct
. 14 , 2008 , attache da t Exhibi t K
.
17 1 Veolia's Responses to Appendix B Th e Informatio n Request s provid e tha t Appendi x 5 "specifie s th e informatio n tha t [Veoha ] mus t submit..
. [an dtha t

Veoha ] mus t

sen dthi s infonnatio n accordin g t o th e schedul e i n Appendi x B. " The Introductory Paragraph of Appendix

B states as follows: Veoha must

provide continuous mercury emission data for Incinerators Nos. 2, 3, and 4 at its plant located at # 7 Mobile Avenue, Sauget, Illinois, in accordance with the following instructions: Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : A s outline dabove , Veoli aha s complete dMAC T metal s testing , includin g test s fo r mercury , o n al l thre e o f it s incinerator s i n Augus t an dSeptembe r

o f 2008
. Veoh acomplete dthi s testin g a t th e behes t

o f an di n cooperatio n wit hUSEPA
. Al l thre e incinerator s demonstrate dcomphanc e wit hth e MAC T standard s an dth e result s o f thes e test s hav e bee n submitte dt o IEP Aan dUSEP At o documen t suc hcomplianc e and , amon g othe r things , t o defin e a12-hou r rollin g averag e feedrat e limi t fo r mercur y pursuan t

t o 4 0 C.F.R
. § 63.1209(1)(1)
. See Lette r fro mDou g Harris , Genera l Manager , Veoli aSauge t Facihty , to USEP ARegio n 5 Ai r

Enforcemen t

an dComplianc e Assuranc e Branch , Oc t 10,200 8 (attachin g Notificatio no f

Comphance , th e Performanc e Tes t Report s fo r

Incinerator s 2 , 3 , an d4 , an d Veolia' s apphcatio n fo r significan t

modificatio no f

it s Par t 7 1 Titl e V Permit) , attache da s Exhibi t J
. Th e MAC T metal s testin g tha t Veoli acomplete di n Augus t an dSeptembe r

o f 200 8 wa s th e resul t o f aserie s o f

comple x negotiation s betwee n USEP Aan dVeoli aafte r USEP Aissue dth e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Requests
. Th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Request s required , amon g othe r

conditions , Veoh ato submi t CP T Plan s fo r

al l thre e incinerator s withi n4 5 day s o f receip t o f th e mformatio n Request s an dto conduc t comprehensiv e performanc e test s o n eac hincinerato r

n o late r tha n Jul y 15,2008
. I n ameetin g wit hUSEP Ao n Marc h13 , 2008 , Veoli apresente dit s concern s regardin g th e extremel y shor t tim e perio dtha t

wa s give n t o complet e th e condition s o f th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Requests
. Th e USEP A acknowledge dtha t

th e schedul e i n th e lette r wa s overl y aggressiv e an dno t realistic
. I t

require s man y months , i f

no t u p t o ayear , to : obtai n th e service s o f a n independen t

compan y t o develo p an dsubmi t

CP T Plans ; allo w th e USEP Atim e t o revie w an dcommen t o n th e plans ; resolv e USEP Acomment s o n tes t pla n conten t

an dtestin g protoco l an dsubmi t thes e revision s fo r furthe r review ; procur e an dprepar e chemical s necessar y fo r performanc e testing,

- selec t an d segregate appropriat e liqui dan dsoh dwast e feeds,

- schedul e th e independen t compan y t o perfor mth e stac k

samplin g wit henoug hlea dtim e fo r preparatio n o f

samplin g equipment , personne l scheduling , an dmobilization ; an dto perfor mth e testing , obtai n analytica l results , perfor mtes t

calculations , an dproduc e ates t report—an dtha t

i s jus t fo r asingl e incinerator
. Veoha' s propose dschedul e state dtha t th e thre e testin g program s woul db e complete dbetwee n Augus t o f 200 8 an dApri l o f

2009
. See Emai l fro mDou g Harris , Genera l Manager , Veoha' s

- 8

-

V E S 00188 9Sauge t Facility , t o Chery l Newton , USEP ARegio n5 , Marc h21,200 8 (attachin g Veolia' s propose dCP T schedules) , attache da t Exhibi t E
. However , thi s alternativ e schedul e di dno t mee t th e USEPA' s need s an dwa s rejected
. Afte r furthe r discussio n an dinvestigatio n b y th e USEPA , Agenc y personne l decide dtha t the y ha dvali dtes t

dat at o develo p OPL s fo r al l thre e incinerator s fo r th e MAC T emissio n standard s fo r particulatematter , HCL/C12 , dioxins/furans , an dDRE , bu t wante dVeoh at o conduc t performanc e test s t o develo p OPL s fo r mercury , LVMs , an dSVM s prio r t o th e issuanc e o f

th e Titl e V Permi t

i n Septembe r

2008
. Veoh aagai n expresse dconcer n regarding th e performanc e o f thi s testin g o n thre e incinerator s i n aver y compresse dtim e period
. I na n Apri l 25,200 8 telephon e conferenc e call , Veoli awa s informe db y USEP Athat , i n orde r t o addres s th e nee dt o demonstrat e MAC T metal s compliance , Veoh aha dt o choos e eithe r t o complet e th e MAC T metal s testin g a s directe db y th e USEPA , pursuan t t o th e Agency' s ver y tigh t tim e frame , o r

dternatrvel y t o choos e on e o f fou r option s addressin g MAC T metal s fo r inclusio ni n th e Titl e V Permit
. Th e fou r option s were : 1 ) ceas e incineratin g an y waste s containin g an y MAC T metals,

- 2 ) instal l metal s CEMS ; 3 ) accep t OPL s develope db y USEP A (USEP ALan dt o assis t USEP AAir) ; o r

4 ) settl e previousl y discusse dcomplianc e concern s wit h issu e resolutio n incorporate dint o th e Titl e V Permi t Durin g th e Apri l 25 , 200 8 telephon e conferenc e call , Veoli astate dtha t thes e fou r

option s wer e eithe r

undesirable , a s i n th e cas e o f optio n 1 ; unfeasible , a s i n th e cas e o f optio n 2 ; o r

o f grea t concer n du e t o th e unknow n natur e o f th e result s a s i n th e cas e o f option s 3 an d4
. Althoug hknowin g tha t conductin g performanc e testing withi nthi s expedite dtim e perio dwoul db e challengin g an dresul t i n increase dcosts , Veoli achos e t o conduc t th e metal s performanc e testin g instea do f on e o f thes e fou r options
. Veoli aagree dt o expedit e th e deliver y o f th e metal s performanc e tes t plan s an d USEP Aagree dt o revie w th e tes t plan s i n tw o weeks
. I n phon e conference s hel do n Ma y 1 2 & 14,2008 , th e partie s discusse ddetail s o f th e testing an dUSEP Aagree dt o reissu e th e Februar y 200 8 Informatio n Request s suc htha t Veoli awoul donl y b e require dt o perfor memissio n testin g fo r

mercury , LVMs , an dSVM s o n al l thre e incinerators
. Thi s agreemen t reache db y USEP Aan dVeoli awa s embodie di n th e Jun e 200 8 Informatio n Requests
. Veoli aconducte dth e agree dupo n testing i n Augus t an dSeptembe r

o f 2008
. Tes t

result s demonstratin g complianc e wit hth e MAC T Emissio nStandard s wer e submitte do n Octobe r 10 , 200 8 pe r

th e revise dinformatio nrequest . I nligh t th e agreemen t

reache dbetwee n Veoh aan dUSEPA , whic hVeoli afull y an dfaithfull y execute db y performin g metal s performanc e testin g tha t demonstrate dcomphanc e wit hth e MAC T standards , Veoli ai s a t alos s a s t o wh y th e Compan y ha s no w receive dademan dfro m USEP Atha t

require s Veoli at o instal l mercur y CEM S o n it s thre e incinerators
. T o b e clear , Veoh aan dUSEP Aagree dtha t Veoli awoul dno t

b e require dto , an dnee dnot , instal l mercur y CEM S i f

Veoli asuccessfull y performe dth e metal s performanc e testin g a s se t fort hi n th e Jun e 200 8 mformatio n Requests
. Veoli afulfille dit s en do f th e bargai n a t

grea t labo r an dexpense . I nth e absenc e o f

an y informatio nshowin g wh y th e dat agenerate ddurin g th e Metal s Performanc e Testin g i s insufficient , inaccurate , o r unreliable , USEP Ashoul dstan db y it s agreemen t

reache dwit hVeoh aregardin g ho w Veoli ama y demonstrat e complianc e wit hth e

- 9

-

V E S 00189 0MAC T standards
. T o d o otherwise , a s USEP Aha s chose n t o d o i n thes e Informatio n Requests , i s arbitrary , capricious , an dlack s arationa l basis. 9 Instruction Bl

states as follows: 1
. Install

and operate a total

mercury continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) on Incinerators 2, 3, and 4 at its.plant located at # 7 Mobile Avenue, Sauget, Illinois. Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : Despit e alimite dtim e perio di n whic ht o complet e sufficien t

du e diligence , Veoli aha s endeavored , t o th e bes t o f it s ability , t o evaluat e th e availabihty , accuracy , an doveral l perfonnanc e o f mercur y CEM S fo r

applicatio n t o it s Sauge t facihty
. Base do n it s findings , Veoli adoe s no t believ e tha t

ther e i s a n accurate , reliable , an davailabl e CEM S fo r

mercur y tha t

ca n b e implemente da t th e Sauge t

Facihty
. I n addition , i n ligh t o f thi s unreliability , an dth e lac k o f a n apphcabl e cahbratio n standar dfo r mercury , Veoh apersonne l canno t certif y th e accurac y o f

an y monitorin g dat aproduce db y CEM S technolog y a s require d b y USEPA
. I nrecen t

telephon e conversations , Veoli aaske dUSEP Afo r arecommendatio n regardin g a CEM S fo r

mercur y tha t

ha s aprove n trac k

recor do f

accurac y a t

ahazardou s wast e incinerator ; however , USEP Aha s refuse dt o giv e Veoli aan y guidanc e a s t o th e apphcatio n o f aparticula r CEM S technology
. I na n attemp t

t o compl y wit hth e Agency' s demands , Veoli aha s sough t ou t expert s wh o hav e previousl y deal t

wit hCEM S technolog y a s i t relate s t o mercur y emissions
. Thes e expert s hav e conclude dtha t

th e currentl y availabl e CEM S technolog y a s i t applie s t o mercur y monitorin g i s unreliabl e fo r

apphcatio n t o commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerators
. See generally document s include di n Exhibit s L&M
. Specifically , on e o f th e emission s testin g expert s contacte db y Veoh arelate dtha t hi s company , URS , ha dabandone dth e us e o f CEM S a t

a hazardou s wast e incinerato r projec t i n Orego n becaus e th e technolog y wa s "no t reliabl e no r [wa s it ] abl e t o mee t

th e demand s o f

varyin g concentratio n o f mercur y i n th e stac k

gases. " See Lette r fro mMichae l Fuchs , Projec t Manager , URS , t o Josep hKellmeyer , Attorney , Thompso n Cobum , Februar y 13,2009 , attache da s Exhibi t L
. Also , o n tha t

sam e project , UR S refuse dt o guarante e 95 % dat aavailabiht y fro maCEM S fo r mercury , eve n wit hredundan t system s i n place , du e t o th e unreliabilit y o f th e CEM S technology
. See id. I naddition , Veoha' s primar y supplie r o f analyti c equipmen t

doe s no t

eve n offe r

mercur y CEM S technolog y becaus e i t

believe s tha t

th e curren t

technolog y i s unreliable
. Thi s supplier , EcoChe mAnalytics , offere dth e foflowing explanatio n a s t o wh y i t i s no t offerin g mercur y

9Furthermore

, i f USEPA' s intentio

n ha s alway s bee n t o require Veoliato instal l mercur y CEM S technology

, USEP A shoul d hav e mad e Veoh aawar e i n Apri l o

f 200 8 tha tth e Agenc y wa s goin g t o require die installatio

n o f CEM S technolog

y formetal

s befor e Veoli aincurre d hundred

s o f thousand

s o f dollar s i n cost s an d spen thundred

s o f hour s o f staf f tim e completin

g th e Metal s Performanc

e Test.

- 10

-CEMS s at thi s time : "Ou r

experienc e foun dtha t w e coul dmonito r

su<xessfuu y i n certai n application s an dfai l miserabl y i n other s .. . [w] e ha dunit s a t severa l locations , includin g EP A an dha dvaryin g degree s o f success ; however , th e knowledg e an davailabiht y o f mercur y technique s i s stil l lacking. " See Lette r fro mBo b Peters , Projec t Manager , EcoChe mAnalytics , t o Dav e Klarich , Veoh aEnvironmenta l Services , Februar y 12,2009 , attache da s Exhibi t M
. Moreover , eve n i f

mercur y CEM S technolog y wa s accurat e an dreliabl e fo r apphcatio n t o th e Sauge t Faculty , whic hi t

i s not , th e CEM S unit s coul dno t b e obtaine dan db e mad e operationa l withi nth e tim e perio dallotte db y th e Informatio n Requests
. Rather , base do n th e researc h an dexperienc e o f

th e expert s Veoh aconsulted , an dconversation s wit hVeolia' s ow n suppliers , Veoli abelieve s i t

woul dtak e betwee n 1 6 t o 2 0 week s (afte r contrac t negotiations ) t o obtai n th e CEM S an dupward s o f 9 t o 1 2 month s t o mak e the mfull y operational
. See Lette r fro m Michae l Fuchs , Projec t Manager , URS , to Josep hKellmeyer , Attorney , Thompso n Cobum , Februar y 13 , 2009 , include di n Exhibi t L ; see also Veolia' s Respons e to Instructio n B3
. Anothe r aspec t o f Veoha' s analysi s i s th e overal l cos t o f implementin g a n inaccurat e an d unverihabl e monitorin g system . Base do n Veolia' s interna l calculation s an destimate s fro m outsid e suppliers , aconservativ e estimat e o f cost s associate dwit hth e engineering , purchase , installation , certification , an doperatio n o f CEM S fo r

mercur y o n th e thre e incinerator s a t th e Sauge t Facilit y woul db e i n exces s o f $ 1 millio nto $ 2 million
. Veoli ai s awar e tha t

CEM S technolog y ha s bee n apphe dto commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerator s i n Europ e an di s currentl y bein g apphe dto th e electri c utilit y industr y i n th e Unite dStates
. However , afte r diligen t inquiry , Veoli adi dno t discove r

an y successfu l mercui y CEM S implementatio n effort s o n an y commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerator s i n th e Unite d States. 1 0Moreover , th e CEM S technolog y employe dt o th e electri c utilit y industr y an d Europea n commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerator s i s no t apphcabl e to, an dsignificantl y differen t than , th e CEM S technolog y tha t USEP Aha s directe dVeoli ato instal L Th e CEM S technolog y utilize db y th e electri c utilit y industr y canno t b e utilize da t

th e Sauge t Faciht y becaus e th e wel l estabhshe dcalibratio n rang e o f th e CEM S syste muse do n coal-fire d powe r plant s is : (1 ) a n orde r o f magnitud e les s tha n th e 13 0 jig/dsc mconcentratio n standar d Veoh ai s require dto mee t unde r th e 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t

63 , Subpar t

EEE ; an d(2) i s tw o order s o f magnitud e les s tha n th e mercur y measuremen t rang e specifie di n Draf t Perfonnanc e Specificatio n1 2 (Draft PS12) , whic hUSEP Aha s directe dVeoh ato compl y wit hunde r Instructio n B 4 o f

thes e Informatio n Requests
. See Veolia' s Respons e t o Instructio n B4
. Further , Veoh ai s awar e o f n o rehabl e gaseou s elementa l mercur y cahbratio n standard s tha t ca n b e use dt o quantify mercur y concentration s a t level s abov e 4 0 /ig/dscm
. I n additio n to dramati c difference s i n th e mercur y concentrations , th e emission s variabuity , effluen t conditions ,

1 0Veoli ais awar e tha tth e El i Lilly Compan

y facilit y locate d i n Tippecanoe

, Indiana , ha s installe d an d currentl y operate s CEM S technolog

y o n it s captiv e incinerator

. However

, th e CEM S technolog

y employe d b y El i Lilly is significantl y differen

t[tha n th e technolog

y USEP A i s directin g Veoliat

o install . The El i Lilly CEM S i

s amult i metal s CEM S tha

tha s direc tcalibratio

n forcertai

n MAC T metals—bu

t doe s no thav e adirec tcalibratio

n fo rmercury

, Lilly' s CEMS s use

s a n inferre d cahbratio

n metho d fo r mercur y tha tcanno tb e use d fo rdirec tdemonstratio

n o f complianc

e unde r4 0 C.F.R . Par

t63, Subpar

t EEE . -11

-

V E S 00189 2chemica l matrix , an dth e relativ e concentration s o f elementa l an doxidize dmercui y a t a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r suc ha s th e Sauge t

Facult y wil l b e vastl y differen t tha n a t acoal-fire dpowe r

plant
. Thes e difference s ar e likel y t o impos e ne w technica l challenge s an d problem s tha t

hav e no t

bee n encountere di n th e evaluation s o f mercur y CEM S a t

coal-fire d powe r plants
. Likewise , Veoh ai s no t awar e o f

an y CEM S technolog y currentl y utilize do n aEuropea n commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r tha t ca n mee t

USEP Aperformanc e standards
. See Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n12 ; Performanc e Specificatio n12A , 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 60 , Appx
. B
. Th e instrument s use di n Europea n countrie s t o confor mt o CE N(Comit e Europee n d e Normalisation ; Europea n Committe e o n Standardization ) regulation s fo r monitorin g emission s fro mincinerators : 1 ) ar e no t require d(no r

demonstrated ) t o utiliz e ga s calibratio n standard s t o verify performanc e o n adail y basi s a s require db y 4 0 C.F.R
. § 60.13(d ) o r 4 0 C.F.R
. § 63.8(c) ; an d2 ) ar e no t

subjec t t o relativ e accurac y tes t requirement s a s prescribe db y USEP A regulations
. See, e.g., 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 60 , Appx
. B ; Draf t

Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 (requirin g us e o f NIS T traceabl e cahbratio n standard s fo r bot helementa l mercur y an doxidize dmercur y cahbratio n test s o f

initia l certificatio nan dongoin g quaht y assurance)
. Therefore , Veoh abelieve s tha t th e mercur y CEM S technolog y i s no t ademonstrate d comphanc e momtorin g technolog y fo r commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerators
. Rather , th e bes t metho dfo r

Veoh aan dothe r

hazardou s wast e incinerator s t o accuratel y demonstrat e complianc e wit hth e MAC T metal s standard s i s throug hperfonnanc e testin g an dth e developmen t

o f OPLs
. Thi s i s supporte dbot hb y th e stringen t an ddetaile dCP TMAC T metal s requirement s o f 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t

63 , Subpar t

EE Ean dUSEP ARegio n5' s ow n representation s t o Veoli aregardin g th e us e o f OPL s ove r

CEM S technology
. Specifically , i n a n Apri l 16,200 8 memorandu mdirecte dt o Veolia , whic hwa s approve db y Sectio n Chie f Willia m MacDowell , Regio n 5 state dth e folbwin g regardin g th e us e o f CEM S fo r

MAC T metals : Althoug hcontinuou s emissio n monitor s (CEM ) fo r dioxin/furan , mercury , PM , SVM/LVM , an dHC1/C1 2 d o exist , th e HW C MAC T doe s no t requir e them
. EP Aha s no t

promulgate daperformanc e specificatio nfo r HC1/C1 2 CEMS
. A D R ECE M i s technicall y possible , bu t th e cas e enginee r

doe s no t

kno w o f

an y faciht y tha t

use s one . Unti l EP Arequire s aCE M fo r eac hstandard , w e wil l hav e t o rel y upo n OPL s a s surrogate s fo r them
. I n orde r

fo r OPL s t o assur e complianc e reliably , th e owne r o r operato r

mus t establis hOPL s fro mCP T operatin g dat ao n th e sam e incinerator , unde r know n tes t

operatin g conditions
. Memorandu mfro mCharle s Hall , Environmenta l Engineer , USEP ARegio n5 , t o Veoha , throug hWillia mMacDowell , Chie f o f MN/O H Ai r

Enforcemen t

an dComphanc e Assuranc e Section , USEP ARegio n5,1 1 (Apri l 16 , 2008) , attache da s Exhibi t N (footnot e omitted ) (emphasi s added)
. A s discusse dabove , an di n accordanc e wit hth e agreemen t reache dwit h USEPA , Veoh aconducte dperformanc e testin g i n Augus t an dSeptembe r

o f 200 8 an duse dth e result s fro mtha t

testin g t o develo p OPLs
. withou t extrapolation , tha t

Veoh ai s currentl y operatin g unde r

i n ful l comphanc e wit hth e MAC T metal s standards
. See Veoli aE S Technica l Solutions , L.L.C. , Documen t o f Complianc e pOC) : Nat' l Emissio nStandard s fo r Hazardou s A i r Pollutant s fro mHazardou s Wast e Combustors : 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE , Oct
. 14 , 2008 , attache da t

Exhibi t K
-12

-However , i n adepartur e fro mthi s accepte dan dtechnologically-prove n approach , USEP Ai s no w demandin g tha t

Veoh ainstal l mercur y CEM S a t th e Sauge t

Faciht y tha t

woul dcertainl y produc e flawe ddat atha t Veoli acanno t

us e t o demonstrat e comphanc e wit hth e MAC T metal s standard s an dwhic hVeoli acanno t certify a s "tru e an dcomplete " a s require db y thes e Infonnatio n Requests
. Moreover , suc hflawe ddat awoul dundoubtedl y mislea dUSEP Aan dth e pubh c regardin g Veolia' s mercur y emissions
. Thus , Veoh abelieve s tha t Instructio n 6 1 an dthes e Informatio n Request s a s awhol e ar e arbitrary , capriciou s an dlac k arational e basi s becaus e the y ar e 1 ) technicall y flawed , 2 ) contradictory , 3 ) incomplete , 4 ) no t withi nth e limit s o f

achievabilit y give n th e feasibl e reac ho f curren t technology , an d5 ) ar e contrar y t o th e accepte dan dtechnologically-prove n method s fo r demonstratin g MAC T metal s complianc e se t fort hb y 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EE Ean d previousl y se t

fort hb y USEP ARegio n5
.
Instruction B2 states as follows: 2
. The CEMS

referenced

in Paragraph 1, above, must be installed

and operated in accordance with applicable regulations (including but not limited to the General Provisions of

40C.F.R Part

63, Subpart

A 40C.P.R. § 63.8,40C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix B and 40C.F.R. Part

60, Appendix

F). Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : Base do n Veolia' s findings , ther e i s no t a n accurate , reliable , an davailabl e mercui y CEM S fo r us e a t th e Sauge t

Faciht y becaus e ther e i s n o rehabl e calibratio ntechnolog y fo r mercur y CEM S an dn o suc hteclmolog y ha s bee n apphe dt o a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r a t th e concentratio n leve l requiredb y Instructio n B 7 o f thes e Informatio n Requests
. Moreover , Veoli abelieve s tha t th e inheren t

inaccurac y an dunreliabilit y o f th e CEM S technolog y currentl y availabl e mak e i t unlikel y tha t

an y suc hsyste mcoul db e operate di n comphanc e wit hal l aspect s o f 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t

6 3 an d4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 60
. See also Veolia' s Respons e t o Instructio n B1
. I naddition , Instructio n B 2 i s a n unreasonabl e reques t becaus e th e regulation s i n 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

A o r (redundantly ) i n 4 0 C.F.R
. § 63. 8 ar e no t apphcable
. Specifically , § 63.8(a)(2 ) state s tha t

th e requirement s o f

thi s par t

appl y upo n promulgatio n o f performanc e specification s fo r CEM S a s specifie di n th e relevan t standar do r

otherwis e b y th e Adrninistrator
. However , 4 0 C.F. RPar t

6 0 Appendi x B doe s no t contai n a n apphcabl e Performanc e Specificatio nfo r a mercur y CEM S installe do n ahazardou s wast e mcinerator. 1 1 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t

6 0 Appendi x Fwa s develope dfo r S0 2an dNO xCEM S tha t wer e require d equipmen t

fo r direc t complianc e monitorm g a t electri c utilitie s an dothe r Par t 6 0 monitorin g

1 1 Th e regulation

s d o contai n Perfonnanc

e Specification-12

A (PS12-A) ; however

, thi s performanc

e specificatio

n wa s designe d foran d applie s t o mercui y CEM S installe

d on fossil fuel-fire

d boilers. See 4

0 C.F.R . Par

t60 , Appendi

x B . FS-12

A is inapplicabl

e t o a4 0 CF RPar

t6 3 Subpar tEE E Sourc e havin g a n mercui y emissio

n standar

d o f 13 0 ^g/dsc m correcte

d t o 7 % oxygen

. -13

-applications
. Thi s standar dcanno t b e apphe dt o amercur y CEM S subjec t t o th e Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 (o r 12- Afo r

tha t matter ) becaus e o f

th e grossl y incompatibl e spa n requirement s an dinapplicabl e Q Aacceptanc e criteria
. Appendi x F , Procedur e 1 contain s th e Quaht y Assuranc e procedure s fo r CEM S tha t

ar e prescribe db y regulatio n fo r direc t complianc e monitoring
. Thes e procedure s appl y t o Par t 6 0 sourc e categorie s suc ha s Subpar t Da , Subpar t

Db , Subpar t

Ea , etc . The y d o no t

appl y t o CEM S require db y an y othe r Par t 6 0 regulation s wher e monitor s ar e no t th e direc t

comphanc e method , suc ha s Subpar t D
. Further , th e Q Aprocedure s fo r CEM S containe di n Appendi x F , Procedur e 1 ar e specificall y supersede db y th e Q Aregulation s fo r hazardou s wast e combustor s containe di n 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE , Appendi x § 1.1
. See 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t EEE , Appendi x § 1. 1 ("Thes e requirement s supersed e thos e foun di n par t 60 , Appendi x F , o f thi s chapte r

.. . Appendi x Fdoe s no t appl y t o hazardou s wast e burnin g devices.")
. Therefore , Veoli ai s unclea r

a s t o wh y Appendi x Fi s reference di n Instructio n B2
. On e exampl e o f

ho w Appendi x F , Procedur e 1 i s no t apphcabl e t o amercur y CEM S installe do n ahazardou s wast e incinerato r i s tha t Appendi x Fspecifie s cylinde r ga s audi t

level s fo r

pollutan t analyzer s a s 20-30 % o f spa n an d50-60 % o f

span . Thes e requirement s i n conjunctio n wit hth e Draf t PS1 2 requiremen t

t o se t th e spa n a s 2 0 time s th e emissio n limi t produce s absur dan d unachievabl e audi t

level s fo r

amercur y CEMS
. Eve ni f thi s proble mwa s resolve db y usin g a mor e reasonabl e spa n leve l (suc ha s tha t containe di n PS.-12A) , th e specification s fo r th e cylinde r ga s audi t

level s ar e inconsisten t wit hth e level s require dfo r th e cahbratio n erro r

tes t i n th e initia l certificatio no f th e CEMS
. Moreover , amajo r

proble m(certainl y on e tha t woul drequir e amanufacture r t o thin k

abou t "specia l design " fo r

thi s apphcation ) lie s i n th e fac t tha t contemporar y CEM S manufacturer s hav e gon e t o substantia l length s t o ensur e tha t th e capabilitie s an ddesign s o f thei r elementa l H g hea dspac e calibrator s ar e operate dunde r specifi c condition s fo r 4 0 ue/dsc man dlowe r concentratio n levels
. Combination s o f certai n instrumenta l condition s consisten t wit hdesig n fo r particula r

span s hav e bee n manufacture d(suc ha s thos e require db y previou s regulation s i n th e electrica l powe r

generatin g sector)
. Thes e desig n constramt s ar e no t modifie deasily , woul d likel y b e considere d"Research " design s (thu s uncertifiable ) b y th e manufacturer , an dcanno t accommodat e an y o f

cahbratio n level s demande db y th e USEP Ai n thes e Infonnatio n Requests
. Thus , i n sum , Veoh abelieve s tha t Instructio n B 2 i s arbitrary , capricious , an dlack s arational e basi s becaus e 1 ) th e regulator y citation s provide db y USEP Ad o no t contai n aPerfonnanc e Specificatio ntha t

ca n b e applie dt o acommercia l hazardou s wast e incinerator ; 2 ) th e require d spa n o f an y suc hmercur y monitorin g syste mwoul db e grossl y incompatibl e wit hth e Q A procedure s containe di n 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 60 , Appendi x F ; an d3 ) th e commerciall y availabl e mercur y CEM S d o no t provid e areliabl e cahbratio n technolog y abov e 4 0 gg/dscm
.

-14

-Instruction B3 states as follows: 3
. The CEMS

must be installed

and commence operation on each ofthe incinerators, as referenced in Paragraph 1, above, within 30days after Veolia's receipt of this Request

for Information. Respons e /

Infonnatio n Provided : Base do n Veolia' s findings , ther e i s no t a n accurate , reliable , an davailabl e mercui y CEM S fo r us e a t th e Sauge t

Faciht y becaus e ther e i s n o rehabl e cahbratio n technolog y fo r mercur y CEM S an dn o suc htechnolog y ha s bee n apphe dt o a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r a t th e concentratio n leve l require db y Instructio n B 7 o f thes e Infonnatio n Requests
. See Veoha' s Respons e t o Instructio n B l an dB2
. Eve ni f a n accurat e an dreliabl e CEM S fo r mercur y becam e availabl e immediately , Veoh aha s determine d tha t suc hasyste mcoul dno t b e feasibl y installe dan dbecom e operationa l withi n3 0 days
. Thus , Veoli abeheve s tha t th e 30-da y perio dprovide db y USEP Ai n thes e Informatio n Request s fo r design , selection , purchase , manufacture , an dinstallatio n o f thre e mercur y CEMSs , an d acquisitio nan dconfiguratio n o f aDat aAcquisitio nSyste m(DAS ) i s unreasonable , unachievable , an dcontrar y t o goo dpractice
. I t als o i s contrar y t o USEPA' s ow n guidance, 1 1 an dinconsisten t

wit hth e tim e perio dallowe dfo r implementin g CEM S program s i n numerou s othe r regulations
. Th e 3 0 da y tim e perio di s no t achievabl e fo r

an y singl e CEM S apphcation , muc hles s thre e separat e mercur y monitorin g systems . Veolia' s inquirie s t o mercur y CEM S manufacturer s an d supplier s indicat e tha t aminimu mo f

16-2 0 week s (afte r

contrac t negotiation s hav e bee n complete dan dafina l agreemen t ha s bee n reached) 1 3 i s neede dt o instal l acomplete dCEM S i n a n appropriat e envhonmenta l shelter
. I n addition , thi s 16-2 0 wee k timefram e woul db e apphcabl e t o onl y thos e facihtie s tha t hav e aclearl y define dscop e an dprope r technica l specification s availabl e t o them—whic hi s no t th e cas e here , a s th e Informatio n Request s hav e lef t Veoh awithou t

aproperl y define dscop e o r achievabl e technica l specifications
. Moreover , USEPA' s ow n guidanc e material s se t fort hadetaile d1 0 ste p proces s fo r implementin g aCEM S progra mtha t ca n tak e month s t o complete
. See Cente r fo r Environmenta l Researc hInformation , USEPA , EPA Handbook: Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems for Non-Criteria Pollutants, Ch
. 6 , 80-103 ; an dAppx
. F , 149-15 7 (Apri l 1997) , attache da s Exhibi t O
. Thi s guidanc e explain s tha t th e proces s mus t

b e performe dver y carefull y an ddeliberatel y an dcaution s th e use r t o perfor mth e entir e proces s t o achiev e

nCente rforEnvironmenta

l Researc h Infonnation

, USEPA , EPA Handbook: Continuous Emission Monitonng Systems forNon-Criteria Pollutants, EPA/625/R-97/00 1 (Apri l 1997) , include d i n Exhibi

tO .
1 3Contrac

tnegotiation

s depen d upon man

y technica

l factor s tha tmus tb e discusse

d betwee n th e supplie ran d th e facility. Thes

e factor s includ e analyze rspan , calibratio

n requirements

, calibratio

n materials , dat aaveragin

g time , monito rcertificatio

n requirements

, monito rdat aavailabiht

y requirements, dat

asubstitutio

n requirements

, dat asyste m requirements

, apphcabl

e certificatio

n tes t method , an d others . Thes e factor s hav e no tbee n adequatel

y addresse

d by th e Informatio

n Requests ; therefore , Veoli abelieve s itis no ti n apositio

n t o eve n begi n th e plannin

g proces s regarding CEM S installation.

-15

-success . On e referenc e cite db y USEP Astate s tha t th e typica l proces s require s 4 0 weeks
. Id. a t 8 0 (citin g J.G
. Passmor e an dS.L
. Brodmerkle , A Systematic Approach to tbe Selection and Installation of

Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (1991 ) (pape r presente da t

Power

Ge n199 7 Conferenc e i n Tampa , Florida))
. Further , recen t

experienc e b y electri c utilitie s i n attemptin g t o implemen t mercui y CEM S program s ha s clearl y demonstrate dtha t months—no t

weeks—an dperhap s year s ar e require dt o properl y instal l an dstart-u p th e mercur y CEM S technology
. I n addition , th e tim e t o instal l suc haprogra ma t

Veoh awoul dundoubtedl y b e longer , a s th e electrica l utilit y apphcatio n i s relativel y wel l understoo di n compariso n t o th e unteste dapphcatio n o f mercur y CEM S technolog y t o acommercia l hazardou s wast e incinerator
. Wit hregar dt o continuousl y operatin g an dmaintainin g thre e mercur y CEMS , asubstantia l perio do f

time wil l b e require dfo r Veoli apersonne l t o becom e familia r wit hdilutio nextractiv e CEMS , th e comple x H g samplin g system s wit hinertia l filters , an dth e H g converter s an dothe r device s specifi c t o mercur y monitoring
. Additionally , Veoh apersonne l wil l b e require dt o lear n th e elementa l H g calibrator s an dhumidificatio nsystems , th e specific s o f th e H g analyzer s mcmdin g software , an dalso , th e HgCL Zcahbratio n equipmen t whic hi s muc hdifferen t tha n tha t use dfo r

elementa l cahbration
. Needles s t o say , asignifican t amoun t o f trainin g an d outsid e suppor t

wil l b e necessary . Therefore , base do n thes e personne l concerns , conductin g an y mercur y CEM S certificatio ntest s prio r t o athoroug hequipmen t shakedow n an dsite

specifi c evaluatio n an dtrainin g o f Veoli apersonne l wil l b e apointles s wast e o f resource s an d time
. Finally , histor y ha s shown , throug hnumerou s regulator y program s unde r Part s 60 , 6 3 an d75 , tha t th e comple x natur e o f CEM S ca n deman du p t o 9 month s t o design , select , purchase , manufacture , instal l an dconduc t performanc e testing , an dthi s i s fo r di e mos t

matur e technologie s tha t

monito r

th e mos t

"familiar " compounds—i.e. , traditiona l criteri apollutant s suc ha s S0 2an dNO r

Muc hmor e time woul db e necessar y t o perfor mthes e action s a t Veoh a fo r installatio n o f

amercur y CEMS
. Thus , i n sum , Veoli abeheve s tha t Instructio n B 3 i s arbitrary , capricious , an dlack s arational e basi s becaus e 1 ) i t

i s inconsisten t

wit hUSEP Aguidanc e regardin g th e implementatio n o f CEM S programs ; 2 ) implementin g thre e CEMS s i n th e thirt y da y perio dprovide db y USEP Ai s unreasonable , unachievable , an dcontrar y t o goo dpractice,

- 3 ) histor y an dUSEP Aexperienc e ha s show n tha t

prope r installatio n an doperatio n o f CEM S wil l tak e month s i f no t years ; an d4 ) thirt y day s i s i n a n insufficien t perio do f

time fo r t o trai n Veoli ao n th e saf e us e an doperatio n o f th e CEM S technology
.

-16

-Instruction B4 states as foUows: 4
. The CEMS

referenced

in Paragraph 1, above, must be installed, evaluated and certified in accordance with the proposed Performance Specification 12 for total mercuiy continuous monitoring systems vrithin 30days after commencing operation. Veoha must continuously operate the CEMS and collect mercury emission data starting from the date of installation as referenced in Paragraph 3, above. Respons e /

Infonnatio n Provided : Base do n Veolia' s findings , ther e i s no t a n accurate , rehable , an davailabl e mercur y CEM S fo r us e a t th e Sauge t

faciht y becaus e ther e i s n o reliabl e cahbratio n technolog y fo r mercur y CEM S an dn o suc htechnolog y ha s bee n apphe dt o a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r a t th e concentratio n leve l require db y Instructio n B 7 o f thes e Informatio n Requests
. See also Veolia' s Respons e t o Instructio n Bl , B2 , an dB3
. Furthermore , Instructio n B 4 lack s acredibl e basis
. USEP Aha s neve r officiall y promulgate d Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 an dha s neve r subjecte dth e specificatio nt o notic e an d commen t

rulemakin g procedures
. Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 wa s propose di n 1997 , an da s such , i s completel y outdate dwit hrespec t t o rapidl y evolvin g mercur y CEM S technolog y an di s woefull y inadequat e a s compare dt o mor e contemporar y monitorin g requirement s suc h a s thos e i n th e vacate dCAM RPar t 7 5 Appendi x Aan dAppendi x B (las t update di n Januar y o f 2008)
. Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 contain s numerou s technica l error s (a s wel l a s careles s typographica l error s duphcate di n othe r "draft " performanc e specifications ) an di s inappropriat e fo r mercur y monitorin g applications
. A s a n initia l matter , Draf t PS1 2 contain s arequiremen t t o measur e bot hvapo r an dparticulat e boun dmercur y eve n thoug hparticl e boun dmercur y measuremen t

i s no t performe db y contemporar y mercur y CEMS
. Som e additiona l Draf t P S 1 2 deficiencie s ar e highlighte dbelow
. ( Acop y o f Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 i s attache da s Exhibi t P. )

• Th e procedur e outline di n Draf t PS1 2 fo r

conductin g interferenc e test s i s nearl y impossibl e t o complet e an dfraugh t wit hpotentia l errors ; suc hdefect s ar e evidence db y USEPA' s abandonmen t o f th e Draf t

P S 1 2 interferenc e tes t procedure s i n subsequen t performanc e specifications
.

• Draf t

P S 1 2 contain s arequiremen t i n Sectio n 2. 4 tha t

th e CEM S spa n valu e b e "twent y times' ' th e emissio n leve l ( aleve l o f 260 0 jug/dsc mfo r

th e Veoh aapphcation) , whic h woul drende r

essentiall y al l measuremen t dat at o aleve l les s tha n 5 % o f th e measuremen t

rang e an dwoul dcreat e unachievabl e drif t an dcahbratio n erro r specifications
.

• I n Sectio n 4.8 , Draf t PS1 2 require s th e us e o f Nationa l Institute s o f Standard s an d Technolog y (NIST ) traceabl e mercur y calibratio nstandard s fo r bot helementa l an d oxidize dmercur y tha t are no t ye t availabl e becaus e suc htraceabilit y protocol s ar e stil l unde r development
.

-17

-• Draf t P S 1 2 require s asourc e t o perfor melementa l mercur y calibratio ntest s fo r initia l certification s at

level s 300 % greate r

tha n th e highes t

NIS T elementa l mercur y measurement .

• Draf t

P S 1 2 mandate s th e us e o f NIS T traceabl e standard s fo r oxidize dmercur y whic h d o no t exis t a t an y concentratio n level
.

• Sectio n 6. 0 o f

Draf t PS1 2 provide s tha t

th e cahbratio n o f

th e CEM S ca n b e achieve db y usin g "standar dsolutions , filters , etc . tha t challeng e th e pollutan t analyze r

par t o f th e CEM S
.. . bu t

whic hd o no t

challeng e th e entir e CEMS , includin g th e samphn g interface. " However , suc hmethod s ar e no t NIS T traceabl e an dd o no t provid e assurance s o f

prope r calibratio nan dperformanc e o f adilutio nextractiv e CEM S (whic h ar e th e onl y viabl e mercur y CEM S a t thi s time)
.

• Sectio n 7. 1 o f

Draf t PS1 2 provide s tha t

relativ e accurac y test s b e performe d"i n suc ha wa y tha t the y wil l yiel dresult s representativ e o f emission s fro mth e source. " Th e Sectio nals o require s tha t th e relativ e accurac y test s provid e "[a ] measur e o f relativ e accurac y a t

asingl e leve l tha t

i s detectabl e b y bot hth e CEM S an d[th e Referenc e Method 1 4 ]. " However , thes e requirement s ar e impractica l becaus e the y ar e 1 ) beyon d th e contro l o f

th e sourc e operato r

wh o canno t

necessaril y predic t

o r contro l emissio n level s o r spike s an dothe r

transients,

- 2 ] ma y b e mutuall y exclusive ; an d3 ) ma y no t b e satisfie db y th e CEM S du e t o varyin g emissio n concentration s o r othe r factors
. Furthermore , "detectable " i s insufhcient ; emissio n concentration s shoul db e severa l time s th e detectio n limi t t o b e reliabl y quantifie db y eithe r th e CEM S o r

th e Referenc e Method
.

• Th e commerciall y availabl e mercur y CEM S provid e result s o n awe t basis
. However , Sectio n1 1 o f

Draf t P S 1 2 require s asourc e t o repor t emission s i n unit s of/ig/m 3 dr y basis , correcte dt o 20°C , an d7 % 02 , withou t an y mentio n o f

th e acceptabl e procedure s fo r convertin g thos e measurement s t o wet-basi s mercur y concentratio n measurement s an dwithou t

excludin g th e accurac y o f th e moistur e correction s fro mth e relativ e accurac y performanc e evaluatio n o f th e CEMS
. Base do n Veolia' s mquir y o f expert s familia r

wit hth e CEM S technology , ther e ar e n o mercur y CEM S installe do n an y U.S
. o r Europea n faciht y tha t ca n b e demonstrate dt o compl y wit h Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n12
. Finally , Veoh ai s awar e o f th e promulgate dPerformanc e Specificatio n12- A (effectiv e dat e o f Jul y 18,2005 ) fo r

fossil-fue l fire dboilers
. See 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 60 , Appx
. B
. However , thi s Performanc e Specificatio nals o doe s no t appl y t o th e Veoli aapphcatio n fo r man y o f

th e reason s hste dabove
. Fo r

example , PS12 A ha s aspa n requiremen t o f tw o times th e 13 0 ^g/dsc m

1 4Sectio n 7. 4 o f Draf tPerformanc

e Specificatio

n 1 2 provide s that , unles s otherwis

e specified

, Metho d 3B , o rit s approve

d alternative

, is th e referenc

e metho d fordiluen

t(O J concentration ; an

d th e manua l metho d fo rmulti-metal

s i n 4 0 C.F.R . par

t266, Appendi

x IX, Sectio

n 3.1 , o rit s approve

d alternativ

e is th e referenc

e metho d fo rmercury

. However

, a s note d belo w i n Veolia' s Respons

e t o Instructio

n Bil , 4 0 C.F.R . par

t266 , Appendi

x DC , Sectio n 3.1 , doe

s no texis ti n th e Federa l Regulations

. -18

-concentratio n standar dVeoli ai s require dt o mee t unde r th e 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t

63 , Subpar t

EEE
. I t als o contain s arequiremen t tha t dictate s tha t

emission s source s mus t us e th e NIS T traceabl e cahbratio n standards
. However , Veoli ai s awar e o f n o NIS T standar dtha t woul d appl y t o th e spa n requirement s o f eithe r Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 o r Performanc e Specificatio n12A
. Thus , i n sum , Veoli abeheve s tha t Instructio n B 4 i s arbitrary , capricious , an dlack s arational e basi s becaus e ther e ar e n o mercur y CEM S tha t ca n mee t

th e requirement s o f

eithe r Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 o r Performanc e Specificatio n12A
.
Instruction B5states as follows: 5
. Veolia must

submit tbe 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 ofthe CEMS, as required by Paragraph 3, above. Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : Base do n Veolia' s findings, ther e i s no t a n accurate , reliable , an davailabl e mercui y CEM S fo r us e a t th e Sauge t

faciht y becaus e ther e i s n o rehabl e calibratio ntechnolog y fo r mercur y CEM S an dn o suc htechnolog y ha s bee n apphe dt o a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r a t th e concentratio n leve l require db y Instructio n B 7 o f thes e Informatio n Requests
. See also Veoha' s Respons e t o Instructio n Bl , B2 , B3 , an dB4
. Veoli abeheve s tha t

i t i s impossibl e t o collec t dat ai n accordanc e wit hInstructio n B 4 usin g Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 fo r th e reason s state di n Veoha' s Respons e t o Instructio n B4
. Veoli aals o beheve s i t

i s impossibl e t o conduc t th e ongoin g quaht y assuranc e a s require db y Paragrap h3 , Appendi x F , Procedur e 1 fo r th e quarterl y cylinde r ga s audit s becaus e th e audi t leve l specification s containe di n Appendi x Far e unachievabl e and , a s discusse dabove , NIS T traceabl e cahbratio n standard s ar e no t available
. Further , USEP Aha s faile dt o clarif y wha t th e referenc e "electroni c CEM S data " mean s i n Instructio n B 5 whic hi s ambiguou s an dundefined
. USEP Aha s als o faile dt o defin e wha t particula r

averagin g perio dwoul db e use di n an y suc helectroni c submissions
. Veoh aals o question s th e one-yea r tim e perio dan drequest s furthe r explanatio n a s t o ho w th e Agenc y determine dthi s allotmen t o f time
. Moreover , USEP Aha s faile dto defin e wha t responsibihties , i f

any , Veoh awil l hav e afte r th e expiratio n o f

th e on e yea r

perio dan dwha t

wil l becom e o f

th e monitorin g equipmen t afte r th e Compan y ha s expende di n exces s o f $ 1 millio n to $ 2 milho nto purchase , install , an dattemp t certification
. Thus , i n sum , Veoli abeheve s tha t Instructio n B 5 i s arbitrary , capricious , an dlack s arational e basi s becaus e 1 ] i t

i s impossibl e to collec t dat ai n accordanc e wit hPerformanc e Specificatio n 12 ; 2 ) i t i s impossibl e to conduc t th e ongoin g quaht y assuranc e a s require db y Paragrap h3 , Appendi x F , Procedur e 1 ; an d3 ) USEP Aha s faile dto defin e wha t responsibihties , i f

any , Veoli a wil l hav e foUowin g th e expiratio n o f th e on e yea r

perio dprovide di n Instructio n B5 , afte r Veoli a

-19

-ha s expende di n exces s o f $ 1 millio nt o $ 2 millio nt o purchase , install , an dattemp t certification
.
Instruction B6

states as follows: 6. Veolia must

submit tbe electronic feed

rate data for

Incinerators 2, 3, and 4 for mercury, low volatile metals (LVM), semi-volatile metals (SVM), and chlorine commencing immediately after the initial

operation ofthe CEMS, as required by Paragraph 3, above, on a monthly basis. Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : Base do n Veolia' s findings , ther e i s no t a n accurate , rehable , an davailabl e mercui y CEM S fo r us e a t th e Sauge t

faciht y becaus e ther e i s n o rehabl e cahbratio n technolog y fo r mercur y CEM S an dn o suc htechnolog y ha s bee n apphe dt o a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r a t th e concentratio n leve l require db y Instructio n B 7 o f thes e Informatio n Requests
. See also Veolia' s Respons e t o Instructio n Bl , B2 , B3 , B4 , an d B5
. A s discusse dabove , th e MAC T metal s complianc e testin g tha t Veoli aperforme di n Augus t an d Septembe r

o f 200 8 wa s complete dpursuan t t o USEPA' s February , June , an dSeptembe r 200 8 revise dInformatio n Request s an dth e agreemen t reache dwit hUSEP Ai n Ma y o f 2008
. See Feb
. 200 8 Infonnatio n Requests , App x B HI , Jun e 200 8 Informatio n Requests , App x B H2 ; Sept
. 200 8 Informatio n Requests , App x B H2
. Al l thre e o f Veolia' s incineratio n unit s demonstrate dcomphanc e wit hth e MAC T standard s durin g thes e tests . Veoli asubmitte da N O C t o USEP Aan dIEP Ao n Octobe r 10 , 2008 , alon g wit hth e result s o f perfonnanc e tests , verifyin g Veoha' s comphanc e wit hth e MAC T standard s an dsettin g fort hth e electroni c fee d rat e dat afo r

Incinerator s 2,3 , an d4 fo r mercury , LVMs , an dSVM s i n Octobe r o f 2008
. See Lette r fro mDou g Harris , Genera l Manager , Veoli aSauge t Facihty , t o USEP ARegio n5 Ai r Enforcemen t

an dComplianc e Assuranc e Branch , Oct
. 10,200 8 (attachin g Notificatio no f Compliance , th e Performanc e Tes t Report s fo r

Incinerator s 2,3 , an d4 , an dVeolia' s apphcatio n fo r

significan t

modificatio no f

it s Par t 7 1 Titl e V Permit) , attache da s Exhibi t J
. Durin g th e Augus t

an dSeptembe r

200 8 Metal s Performanc e Tests , metal s wer e spike dint o th e incinerato r

a t aknow n feedrat e an dth e stac k concentration s an demission s wer e collecte dan d recorde dusin g USEP AMethod s 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 an d29
. See 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 60 , Appx
. A
. Durin g th e tests , feedrate s wer e correlate dwit hstac k testin g result s t o affir mtha t th e metal s dat a submitte di n th e 200 5 NO C (thos e referre dt o a s "i n he u of ) wer e vahd
. Thus , dat afro mth e 200 8 Metal s Performanc e Test s confirme dtha t th e OPL s previousl y submitte di n 200 5 NO C wer e accurate . Veoh abeheve s tha t

th e result s o f

it s Metal s Performanc e Test s ar e vah dbecaus e al l Q Acriteri a o f th e method s wer e met , th e fiel dtestin g o r laborator y analyse s wer e conducte dproperly , an d th e fieldtestin g wa s witnesse db y USEP Arepresentatives
. Further , USEP Aha s no t brough t t o Veoha' s attentio n an y finding s o f noncomplianc e o r

an y reaso n t o believ e tha t Veoha' s result s ar e invalid
. Thus , i n sum , Veoli abeheve s tha t Instructio n B 6 i s arbitrary, , capricious , an dlack s arational e basi s becaus e 1 ) Veoli aconducte dth e 200 8 metal s performanc e testm g i n goo dfait han d -20

-pursuan t t o a nagreemen t

reache dwit hUSEPA ; 2 ) th e certifie dresult s o f th e 200 8 metal s performanc e testin g showe dcomplianc e wit hMAC T standards ; an d3 } suc hresult s confir m Veoha' s prio r

submission s regardin g MAC T metal s compliance
.
Instruction B7

states as follows: 7. Veolia mast

submit a summary of

the mercury CEMs data for each month including the date and time the mercury emissions were above the standard of 130. ug/dscm corrected

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

the time the mercury emissions were above 130ug/dscm corrected

to 7%oxygen. Veolia must submit this information and other required mformation in accordance with 40C.F.R. § 63.10. Respons e /

Infonnatio n Provided : Base do nVeolia' s findings , ther e i s no t a naccurate , reliable , an davailabl e mercur y CEM S fo r us e a t th e Sauge t

faciht y becaus e ther e i s n o reliabl e calibratio ntechnolog y fo r mercur y CEM S an dn o suc htechnolog y ha s bee n apphe dt o a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r a t th e concentratio n leve l require db y Instructio n B 7 o f thes e Informatio n Requests
. See also Veolia' s Respons e t o Instructio n B l throug hB6
. Moreover , Instructio n B 7 lack s an y referenc e t o averagin g perio dfo r dat areductio n an d reporting
. A CEM S attemptin g complianc e wit han y emissio n standar dmus t includ e bot ha numerica l limi t

an da nassociate daveragin g period
. Finally , th e commerciall y availabl e CEM S tha t USEP Ai s forcin g Veoli at o conside r unde r thes e Informatio n Request s provide s we t basi s measurements ; however , unde r 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t

63 , Subpar t EEE , complianc e determination s ar e base do ndry
. basi s measurements . Thus , Instructio n B 7 i s vagu e an dunclea r becaus e USEP Aha s no t provide dan y infonnatio n a s t o ho w thi s conversio n woul db e made.
. Thus , i nsum , Veoli abeheve s tha t Instructio n B 7 i s arbitrary , capricious , an dlack s arational e basi s becaus e 1 ) i t

lack s an y referenc e t o a naveragin g perio dfo r dat areductio n an dreportin g an d2 } i t doe s no t

provid e an y infonnatio n concernin g th e necessar y conversio n o f we t basi s measurement s t o th e dr y basi s measurement s require db y th e MAC T standard
.
Instruction B8states as follows: 8
. Veolia must

analyze all

waste in accordance with Appendix C. Veolia must submit all waste analysis data for mercury, LVM, SVM, and chlorine on a monthly basis in an Xcel compatible spreadsheet. All original waste analysis data must

be kept onsite at

the facility. Respons e /

Infonnatio n Provided : Veoli aobject s t o thi s Instruction/Informatio n Reques t o n th e ground s tha t

i t i s overl y broad , onerous , burdensome , an dlack s an y regulator y o r safet y basis
. Moreover , man y i f no t al l o f th e issue s containe di nAppendi x C ar e addressed , o r shoul db e addressed , i nth e RCR APar t B permi t

proces s tha t

Veoli aha s bee n involve di nsinc e -21

-1 997
. Se e Veolia' s Respons e t o Appendi x C fo r asummar y o f

Veolia' s RCR APar t

B Proces s Regardin g th e Sauge t

Facility
. Further , th e procedure s require db y Appendi x C ar e no t consisten t

wit hth e requirement s fo r mercur y analysi s tha t

are include di nth e RCR APar t B Permit s fo r

othe r hazardou s wast e incinerator s i nUSEP ARegio n5
. Fo r example , th e RCR APar t B Permit s issue dt o Heritage

WTI , Inc
. an dRos s Environmenta l Services , Inc
. merel y stat e tha t th e facihtie s ar e t o follo w th e procedure s detaile di nthei r Wast e Analysi s Pla n(WAP)
. Th e requirement s fo r mercur y analysi s foun di nAppendi x C are fa r mor e onerou s tha n th e procedure s outline di nWAP s fo r eithe r Heritage-WT I o r

Ross
. Thus , Veoh abeheve s tha t i t i s bein g unfairl y single dou t fo r mor e burdensom e regulatio n tha n it s direc t competitor s an dtha t

USEP Adoe s no t

hav e a rationa l basi s fo r

treatin g Veoli adifferentl y unde r th e law
. I naddition , a s discusse dfull y i nVeoha' s respons e t o Appendi x C below , Veoh acurrentl y ha s protocol s i nplac e t o identify an danalyz e incomin g waste s tha t ma y contai n mercury . See Veolia' s Respons e t o Appendi x C
.
Instruction B9states as follows: 9. Veolia must

submit the report

and CEMS data referenced

in Paragraphs 5 through 8, above, to: Attn: Compliance Tracker, AE-17J At Enforcement

and Compliance Assurance Branch U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency Region 5 77 West Jackson Boulevard Chicago, Illinois 60604 Respons e /

Infonnatio n Provided : Se e Veolia' s Response s t o Instruction s B l throug hB8
.
Instructions BIO &)B11 state as follows: CEM S Performanc e an dEquipmen t Evaluation : 10
. Veolia must

evaluate the CEMS

performance by conducting calibration and zero drift tests, relative accuracy tests, calibration error tests, and

interference response tests in accordance with 40C.P.R. Part 60, Appendix

B and proposed Performance Specification 12. 1 1 . Veoha 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 flow rates; B. EPA Method

3 or 3A for gas analysis; -22-C
. . EPA Method 4 for stack gas moisture; and D. EPA Method

29or the manual

method for multi-metals in 40C.F.R. Part 266, Appendix

DC, Section 3.1 for

mercury from all

incinerators. Respons e /

Infonnatio n Provided : Base do n Veolia' s findings , ther e i s no t a n accurate , rehable , an davailabl e mercui y CEM S fo r us e a t th e Sauge t

faciht y becaus e ther e i s n o reliabl e cahbratio n technolog y fo r mercur y CEM S an dn o suc htechnolog y ha s bee n apphe dt o a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r a t th e concentratio n leve l require db y Instructio n B 7 o f thes e Informatio n Requests
. See also Veolia' s Respons e t o Instructio n B l throug hB7
. Instruction s BI O an dB l 1 ar e areiteratio n (wit hadditiona l detail ) o f th e sam e requiremen t i n Instructio n B 4 sinc e th e recite dtest s ar e th e performanc e tes t requirement s o f

Draf t P S 12
. Al l o f Veolia' s previou s response s a s t o Instructio n B 4 ar e apphcabl e here , bu t th e followin g i s provide da s afurthe r

exampl e o f

th e deficiencie s associate dwit hDraf t PS12
. Unde r Draf t P S 12 , hig hleve l cahbratio n mus t b e performe da t

80%-120 % o f

th e standar d whic hwoul drequir e NIS T traceabl e standard s a t level s betwee n 10 4 ug/m 3 an d15 6 ug/m 3
. M i dleve l cahbratio n mus t b e performe da t

40%-60 % o f

th e standar dwhic hwoul drequir e NIS T traceabl e standard s at level s betwee n 5 2 ug/m 3 an d7 8 ug/m 3
. A s note dabove , NIS T traceabl e standard s ar e no t availabl e a t

thes e levels
. Veoli abeheve s th e Agenc y cite d4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 6 0 Appendi x B i n erro r becaus e ther e ar e n o separat e requirement s i n 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 6 0 Appendi x B regardin g th e draft standard s o f

Draf t P S 1 2 o r an y o f th e directive s presente db y Instruction s B1 0 o r B l 1
. Veoh arequest s clarificatio nfro mth e Agenc y regardin g thi s citation
. Likewise , althoug hVeoli aha s locate dth e reference s t o "4 0 CF RPar t 266 , Appendi x LX , Sectio n 3.1 " i n Sectio n 7. 4 o f

Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n12 , thi s citatio n doe s no t exis t i n th e Federa l Regulations
. Veoli aobject s t o USEPA' s attemp t t o forc e Veoli at o compl y wit ha regulator y standar dtha t doe s no t

exis t an dagai n request s clarificatio nfro mth e Agenc y regardin g thi s citation
. Th e calibratio n drif t

test s an dcahbratio n erro r test s i n th e mercur y Perfonnanc e Specification s requir e gaseou s cahbratio n standard s a t level s tha t

NIS T ha s no t

eve r measure dan dfo r

whic h traceabl e cahbratio n material s d o no t exis t fo r elementa l mercury . Thes e test s als o requh e us e o f NIS T traceabl e oxidize dH g calibratio nstandard s tha t d o no t exist
. Further , Par t

6 0 regulation s almos t alway s requir e tha t

CEM S relativ e accurac y test s (o r relativ e accurac y tes t

audits , Le. , RATAs ) b e performe di n unit s o f th e standard
. Th e Draf t PS1 2 definitio no f

"2. 5 Relativ e Accuracy " specificall y mention s comparison s i n unit s o f "pollutan t

concentration " an dSectio n 1 1 require s reportin g emission s i n unit s o f ng/m.3 dr y basis , correcte dt o 20°C , an d7 % 0 2 . Therefore , Veoli ai s unclea r wh y ther e i s mentio n o f variou s flo w rat e measuremen t method s i n Instructio n 1 1 A
.

-23

-Typically , tes t method s hav e eithe r

anumerica l identifie r o r anothe r mean s t o identify the m fo r th e purpos e o f

the huse ; however , th e Agenc y ha s faile dt o se t fort hsuc ha n identifie r fo r Veoh at o us e i n thi s case . Thus , i n sum , Veoli abeheve s tha t Instruction s BI O an dB l 1 ar e arbitrary , capricious , an dlac k arational e basi s becaus e 1 ) ther e ar e n o mercur y CEM S tha t ca n mee t

th e requhement s o f eithe r Draf t Performanc e Specificatio n1 2 o r Performanc e Specificatio n12A ; 2 ) th e commerciall y availabl e mercur y CEM S d o no t provid e areliabl e cahbratio n technology ; 3 ) ther e i s n o "4 0 CF RPar t

266 , Appendi x LX , Sectio n 3.1 " include di n th e Federa l Regulations ; an d4 ) Instructio n B l 1 contain s reference s t o volumetri c flowrates whic har e no t consisten t

wit hth e measure s use di n 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE
.
Instructions B12 states as follows: Performanc e Specification s t o b e met ; 12
. The Mercury CEMS must meet the performance specifications at 40C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix

Band proposed

Performance Specification 12, Section 4. Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : Base do n Veolia' s findings , ther e i s no t a n accurate , rehable , an davailabl e mercur y CEM S fo r us e a t th e Sauge t

faciht y becaus e ther e i s n o reliabl e calibratio ntechnolog y fo r mercur y CEM S an dn o suc htechnolog y ha s bee n apphe dt o a commercia l hazardou s wast e incinerato r a t th e concentratio n leve l requhe db y Instructio n B 7 o f thes e Informatio n Requests
. See also Veoha' s Respons e t o Instructio n B l throug hB7 , BI O &.B11
. A s discusse dabove , ther e ar e n o separat e requhement s i n 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 6 0 Appendi x B regardin g th e draft

standard s o f

Draf t PS1 2 o r an y o f th e Instruction s include di n Appendi x B o f thes e Informatio n Requests
. Moreover , a s reiterate dsevera l time s i n Veoha' s Response s t o Instruction s B l throug hB7 , BI O an dB l 1 , commerciall y availabl e mercur y CEM S d o no t provid e arehabl e cahbratio n technolog y base do n an y know n performanc e standards , mcludin g bot hDraf t PS1 2 an dPS12A
.
IV. Veolia's Responses to Appendix C Rnmmnrv of

Veolia's RCRA Part

B Process Regarding fhe Sauxet Facility A s a n initia l matter , Veoli aha s previousl y submitte dforma l comment s t o man y i f no t al l o f th e issue s containe di n Appendi x C durin g th e RCR APar t B permi t

proces s tha t

Veoli aha s bee n undergoin g sinc e 1997
. Specifically , Veoh asubmitte dcomment s o n th e mos t recen t draft RCR APar t

B permi t

o n Septembe r

12 , 2008
. A s detaile dbelow , Veoh aha s diligentl y bee n seekin g arenewa l t o it s RCR APar t B Permi t

sinc e Novembe r

o f 1997— aperio do f

ove r 1 1 years . Therefore , Veoli abeheve s tha t USEPA' s inclusio no f Appendi x C i n thes e Informatio n Request s i s a n inappropriat e attemp t t o circumven t

th e RCR APar t

B Permi t

proces s an d therefor e depriv e Veoli ao f it s du e proces s right s provide db y th e permittin g process .

-24

-Abrie f summar y o f

Veolia' s RCR APar t

B Permi t

proces s regarding th e Sauge t Faciht y i s provide dbelow
. O nNovembe r

6, 1997 , Veoli asubmitte da n applicatio n t o IEP At o rene w it s existin g RCR A Par t B Permit
. EEP Adeeme dVeolia' s apphcatio n adrrunistrativet y complet e o n Apri l 17 , 1998
. Veolia' s RCR APar t

B Permi t

expire do n Ma y 5,1998
. Approximatel y five year s later , IEP A finally issue dadraf

t RCR APar t

B Permi t

fo r pubh c comment . I n 2002/2003 , USEP A conducte daRCR ARis k Scree n a s par t

o f it s revie w o f

th e draft

permit
. Upo ncompletio n o f th e Ris k Screen , USEP Aadvise dVeoli atha t Veolia' s emission s di dno t pos e an y risks. Apubh c meetin g regardin g th e Par t B Permi t

wa s hel do n Jul y 22 , 2003
. A t tha t meeting , a commente r

suggeste dtha t

mercur y emission s fro mVeoh ama y pos e aris k t o th e fisherie s i n are alake s tha t

resident s allegedl y us e a s afoo dsource. 1 5 Afte r th e pubh c meeting , USEP A undertoo k

aRis k Assessmen t

focusin g o n Veolia' s metal s emissions
. Th e USEP ARis k Assessmen t

ultimatel y recommende dtha t Veoli ab e subjecte dt o stricte r emission s hmitation s fo r mercury , cadmiu man dchronuum ; however , th e Agenc y onl y reache dthi s conclusio nafte r makin g man y unsupporte dassumptions , including , amon g others , tha t Veoh aoperate dwit h maximu mmetal s emission s 24-hours-a-day , 7-days-a-week , whic hi t doe s not , an d determining , base do n littl e evidence , tha t subsistenc e fishing i s conducte da t lake s i n Fran k Holte nStat e Par k

( astat e par k

an dgol f cours e locate dapproximatel y thre e mile s t o th e Wes t o f th e Sauge t

Facihty)
. Veoli asubmitte dit s comment s o n th e draft permi t o n Septembe r

17 , 2003
. I n2005 , i n orde r

t o addres s concern s regarding th e recommendation s include di n USEPA' s Ris k Assessment , Veoh acontracte dwit hFrankli nEngineerin g Grou p (Frankh n Engineering ) t o perfor masecond , independent , Ris k Assessmen t

regardin g metal s emissions
. Frankli n Engineerin g utilize dUSEPA' s Huma n Healt hRis k Assessmen t

Protoco l fo r

Hazardou s Wast e Combustio nFacihties 1 6t o determin e tha t Veoha' s lo w leve l o f

metal s emission s di dno t pos e a risk t o th e wate r

bodie s i n Fran k

Holte nStat e Park
. I n Novembe r o f 2005 , Veoh asubmitte d th e result s o f

thi s Ris k

Assessmen t

t o th e USEPA
. USEP Aindicate dt o Veoli atha t i t woul d revie w an dcommen t

o n th e result s o f

th e Ris k

Assessmen t

conducte db y Frankh n Engineerin g withi nfou r

t o si x weeks,

- however , a s o f th e dat e o f

thes e responses—ove r thre e year s later — USEP Aha s no t

responde dt o Veolia' s submission
. Finally , o n Jul y 24 , 2008 , ove r te n year s afte r Veoli asubmitte dit s origina l apphcatio n fo r renewa l o f

it s RCR APar t

B Permit , IEP A issue dasecon ddraf

t permi t fo r pubh c comment , Veoli asubmitte dit s comment s o n th e draft Permi t o n Septembe r

12,200 8 an di s currentl y awaitin g furthe r actio n b y th e agencies
.

1 5Thi s statemen

ti s include d i n th e transcribe

d comment

s fro m th e Jur y 22, 200

3 publi c meeting

. See IEP A PublicMeetin

g o n Draf tCAP Pan d RCR A Permit s fo rOny

x Environmenta

l Services

, Sauget , include d Exhibi tY .

uFranklin Engineerin

g utilize d th e 199 8 Pee rRevie w Draf tversio n o f th e HHRA P(EPA530-D-98-001) durin g th e initia l stage s o f th e riskassessmen

tan d the n finalize d it s evaluatio

n usin g th e Final HHRA P (EPA520-R-05-006), whic h USEP A publishe

d i n Septembe

ro f 2005. -25

-The Introductory Paragraph of Appendix

B states as follows: Special Waste Analysis Procedures Veolia shall

hnplement

the following special waste analysis procedures for mercury, low volatile metals (LVM), semi-volatile metals (SVM), and chlorine: Respons e /

Infonnatio n Provided : Veoli acurrentl y review s al l mcomin g wast e fo r th e presenc e o f

mercury , lead , cadmium , chromium , beryllium , an darseni c pursuan t t o Veolia' s Standar dDivisio nPractic e (SDP ) "Determinatio n o f Metal s an dAs hValues " protocol
. A cop y o f Veolia' s SD Pi s attache da s Exhibi t Q
. Veoha' s revie w o f

mcomin g waste s fo r

th e presenc e o f

mercury , LVMs , SVMs , an dchlorin e begin s fa r

i n advanc e o f

th e actua l receip t

o f th e materia l fo r

incineration
. Ever y generato r tha t intend s o n submittin g wast e t o Veoh amus t first complet e aWastestrea mInformatio n Profil e (Wast e Profile). 1 7 See Exampl e Wastestrea mInformatio n Profil e attache da s Exhibi t R
. Generator s ar e require db y la w t o completel y an daccuratel y fill ou t th e Wast e Profil e an d specificall y t o provid e wast e codes , informatio n o n th e physica l characteristic s o f th e waste , th e percentag e o f

halogen s (e.g
. chlorine ) include di n th e waste , acomplet e listin g o f th e chemica l constituent s (che mcomp ) o f th e waste , an dprovid e an y analyti c data , Materia l Safet y Dat a Sheet s (MSDSs) , o r

additiona l informatio n tha t th e generato r

ma y have
. Veoli aemploy s tw o ful l tim e Approval s Coordinators , eac hwit hove r 15 year s o f

experience , t o revie w eac h generator' s Wast e Profile
. Th e Approval s Coordinator s ar e veste dwit hth e powe r t o approv e acceptanc e o f

th e waste , den y it , o r

see k additiona l informatio n dhectl y fro mth e generator . Th e Coonhnator s revie w th e Wast e Profile s fo r completeness , consistenc y wit hVeolia' s permits , safety consideration s fo r proces s employees , an dfo r complianc e wit hVeolia' s metal s pohc y a s provide di n th e SDP
. Pursuan t t o SD PSectio n 7.1.2 , th e Approval s Coordinator s wil l requir e analyti c testin g o f waste s wher e th e Coordinator s hav e reaso n t o suspec t tha t awast e ma y contai n MAC Tmetal s and , Veoli aha s no t receive danalyti c dat afro macertifie d independen t

laborator y o r

doe s no t

hav e specifi c dat ao r

othe r information—e.g. , aMSDS — fro mth e generato r

tha t woul dallo w Veoli at o calculat e th e concentratio n o f MAC Tmetal s i n a waste . See Veolia' s SD Pattache da t Exhibi t Q
. Veoha' s Coordinator s bas e thes e decision s on , amon g othe r

things , th e presenc e o f federa l wast e code s tha t indicat e th e likel y presenc e o f MAC Tmetals , th e chemica l compositio n o f th e waste , an dth e proces s tha t generate dth e waste . Fo r

example , i n certai n situations , Veoh aApproval s Coordinator s wil l loo k int o whethe r agenerato r

ma y us e mercur y i n it s manufacturin g proces s o r hav e mercur y a t

it s facihty,

- i n thes e instances , th e Coordinator s woul dthe n require analyti c testin g regardles s o f whethe r ther e wa s an y indicatio n o f mercur y o n th e Wast e Profile
. Moreover , th e Coordinator s revie w th e Wast e Profile s an dan y additiona l informatio n provide db y th e generato r fo r indication s o f

th e presenc e o f

mercur y o r

othe r MAC Tmetal s a t

an y level
. Veolia' s Approval s Coordinator s ar e conservativ e i n determinin g whe n t o requir e analyti c testin g an dconsistentl y e n o n th e sid e o f cautio n whe n dealin g wit han y waste s tha t hav e th e

1 7 Generator s o f

packagedlaborator

y waste s provid e inventory sheet s that lis t simila r informatio nas require db y th e WastestreamInfonnatio n Profil e form
. -26

-potentia l t o contai n mercury . Thi s i s th e bes t practic e fo r

ensurin g th e safet y o f Veoha' s employee s an densurin g Veoha' s complianc e wit hth e MAC T standards
. Moreover , Veoli aals o ha s apecuniar y interes t i n full y investigatin g mcomin g waste s fo r MAC Tmetal s a s Veoli a impose s asignifican t

surcharg e o n generator s tha t shi p materia l containin g metals
. I f a n Approval s Coordinato r determine s tha t

awast e i s no t

suspecte do f

containin g MAC T metals , an dth e wast e meet s al l othe r requirements , i t

i s approve dfo r

shipmen t

t o th e Sauge t Facihty
. Conversely , i f awast e i s considere dsuspect , an dth e amoun t o f MAC Tmetal s presen t canno t b e determine dfro minformatio nprovide db y th e generator , o r b y additiona l clarificatio n fro mth e generator , th e Coordinator s wil l contac t th e generato r

an das k

fo r asampl e t o b e sen t t o th e Veoh ala b fo r

analysis
. Th e Approval s Coordinator s the n us e th e result s o f th e laborator y analysi s t o determin e whethe r t o approv e o r

den y th e wast e fo r

incineration
. Afte r awast e i s approved , th e Approval s Coordinator s generat e aLaborator y Analysi s Repor t (La b Report ) tha t

dictate s th e following , amon g othe r things : 1 ) th e typ e o f samphn g tha t

mus t b e performe do n th e wast e whe n i t reache s th e facihty ; 2 ) handlin g instruction s fo r th e waste; 1 8 and ; 3 ) th e specifi c laborator y analyse s tha t mus t b e performe do n th e waste . See TW I Laborator y Analysi s Report , attache da s Exhibi t S. 1 ' Whe nawast e arrive s a t th e Sauge t

Facihty , receivin g personne l evaluat e th e wast e a s directe d b y Veoha' s Samplin g Report
. See Veoli aSamphn g Report , attache da s Exhibi t T
. Th e Samplin g Repor t

i s generate dbase do n th e Approval s Coordinators ' instruction s o n th e La b Repor t Th e Samplin g Repor t an dth e Wast e Profil e direct s th e natur e an dtyp e o f samplin g tha t mus t b e complete dpursuan t t o Sectio n 5. 1 o f

Veolia' s WA Pan dth e SD Pregardin g metals
. See Wast e Analysi s Pla nfo r Trad e Wast e Incineration , attache da s Exhibi t U
. Th e receivm g personne l als o fill ou t aPhysica l Descriptio nWorkshee t See Veoh aPhysica l Descriptio nWorksheet , attache da s Exhibi t V
. Thi s workshee t

i s use dt o verif y th e physica l characteristic s o f

th e wast e a s delivere dt o th e Faciht y agains t th e descriptio n i n th e Wast e Profile
. Importantly , al l wast e fo r whic hasampl e i s require di s sample dupo n arriva l a t th e Sauge t Facihty
. I t

i s Veolia' s goa l t o perfor mthi s initia l samplin g withi non e t o tw o day s o f receivin g th e wast e a t

th e Sauge t

Facihty
. Afte r th e receivin g personne l tak e th e requiredsamples , th e collection s ar e sen t t o Veolia' s laborator y fo r

analysis
. Al l wast e i s store dpursuan t t o Veoha' s RCR Apermi t whil e th e sample s ar e analyzed
. Onc e th e laborator y ha s analyze dth e samples , th e result s ar e include d o nth e La b Report
. Th e Lab Manage r (o r designee ) the n evaluate s th e dat aand , i f th e dat a conform s t o th e informatio nprovide di n th e Wast e Profile , corifirm s th e approva l o f th e wast e fo r incineration
. Th e laborator y result s ar e als o use dto determin e th e feedrate s fo r certai n materials
.

1 8Othe rhandlin

g instruction

s com e fro m th e Proces s Hazar d Analysi

s Enginee

ran d ar e include d i n th e Samplin g Report , include d i n Exhibi

tT .
1 9A simila

rform , a"La

b Pac kDecisio n WIRR, " i s generate

d fo rpackage

d laborator

y wastes . A n exampl

e o f aLa b Pac kDecision WIR

Ri s include

d i n Exhibi

tZ . -27

-However , Veoli aensure s tha t al l analytica l result s regardin g MAC Tmetal s testin g ar e submitte dt o th e Laborator y Manage r (or designee) , o r

t o th e Approval s Coordinators , fo r furthe r evaluation
. I f

th e Laborator y Manage r (o r designee ) and/o r

aApproval s Coordinato r determine s tha t

th e amoun t

o f MAC Tmetal s foun di n th e materia l i s acceptabl e an d consisten t

wit hWast e Profile—o r i f th e materia l i s foun dno t t o contai n MAC Tmetals—th e Laborator y Manage r

(o r designee ) and/o r

aApproval s Coordinato r wil l submi t

th e dat at o Veolia' s Proces s Planner. 2 0Th e Proces s Planne r the n assign s processin g instruction s t o th e wast e prio r

t o it s incineration
. Whe n mercur y i s present , th e Proces s Planne r wil l consul t

wit h Veolia' s MAC T Implementatio n Manager , prio r t o assignin g th e processin g instructions
. I f th e Laborator y Manage r determine s tha t

th e MAC Tmetal s analysi s yielde dadiscrepanc y i n th e amoun t

o f metal s disclose db y agenerato r o n th e Wast e Profile , o r obtaine di n th e preapprova l analysis , Veoh awil l the n contac t th e generato r

an dattemp t

t o resolv e th e discrepancy
. Afte r

th e discrepanc y resolutio n proces s ha s reache dit s conclusion , i f th e wast e i s foun dt o b e acceptable , Veoh awil l no t us e an y analytica l result s provide db y th e generator ; rather , Veoh aalway s use s it s ow n analytica l result s t o determin e th e acceptabilit y an d appropriat e feedrate s fo r materia l containin g MAC Tmetals
. Moreover , i f

asuspec t

materia l i s analyze dan dfoun dt o contai n n o mercury—o r contain s level s o f mercur y belo w th e detectio n limit—Veoli aalway s use s th e detectio n limi t a s th e basi s fo r th e feedrate
. Thus , ever y tim e Veoli arun s a n analytica l tes t fo r mercur y o n amaterial , tha t tes t generate s anumbe r

fo r mercury—i.e. , th e detectio n limit—tha t "counts " fo r

th e purpose s o f Veolia' s permit , eve n i f tha t materia l contain s n o mercur y whatsoever
. I nsum , Veoli adoe s no t incinerat e wast e containin g MAC T metal s o r wast e suspecte do f containin g MAC Tmetal s withou t first evaluatin g th e wast e t o determin e whethe r i t i s acceptabl e unde r

apphcabl e regulation s an dVeoha' s permit s and , i f suc hwast e i s acceptable , t o determin e th e appropriat e feedrat e fo r tha t material
. Thus , Veoli abeheve s tha t th e provision s o f

Appendi x C ar e arbitrary , capricious , an dlac k a rationa l basi s becaus e the y ar e unnecessar y i n ligh t o f th e effectiv e an dteste dsafeguard s an d protocol s Veoh aalread y ha s i n plac e fo r reviewin g an danalyzin g incomin g waste s fo r th e presenc e o f

MAC T metals
.

Analyti c dat afo r

bul k load s i s entere dint o th e Wast e Trackin g Syste mb y laborator y personnel
. -28

-Special Waste Analysis Procedure (i) states as follows: (i) Waste acceptance procedure. Veolia shall conduct representative samphng of each shipment

of waste for

mercury, LVM, SVM, and chlorine within 24 hours of receipt and shall analyze such samples using appropriate quality assurance/quahty control procedures located

in the Region 5Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Guidance http:frwvm.epa.gov/reg5rcra/ca/qapp.htrnl and

an appropriate test

method that are consistent with SW-846. Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : Veoli aobject s t o thi s Procedure/Iriformatio n Reques t o n th e ground s tha t

i t i s overl y broad , onerous , burdensome , an dlack s an y regulator y o r safet y basis
. Specifically , Veoh ai s unsur e a s t o whethe r thi s procedur e require s Veoli at o jus t sample wast e shipment s fo r

mercury , LVMs , SVMs , an dchlorin e withi n2 4 hour s o f receipt,

- o r

sample aad analyze wast e shipment s fo r mercury , LVMs , SVMs , an dchlorin e withi n2 4 hour s o f receipt,

- o r

analyze wast e shipment s fo r mercury , LVMs , SVMs , an dchlorin e withi n2 4 hour s o f conductin g sampling. Samphn g eac hwast e shipmen t withi n2 4 hour s o f

arriva l i s bot hunnecessar y and , i n man y cases , impractical. 1 1 A s discusse dabove , Veoli adoe s no t incinerat e wast e withou t firs t performin g aj l necessar y samphn g an danalyses ; therefore , requirin g tha t suc hsamphn g an d analyse s occu r

withi n2 4 hour s woul dno t promot e comphanc e wit henvhonmenta l regulations
. I naddition , Veoh abeheve s tha t th e impositio no f

suc harequiremen t

coul dactuall y negativel y impac t environmenta l comphanc e an dplan t safet y b y arbitraril y placin g a n additiona l trackin g an dworkloa dburde n o n faciht y personnel
. Veoh aals o beheve s tha t a24-hou r

samphn g requiremen t

woul ddangerousl y forc e receivin g an danalytica l personne l t o focu s o n meetin g th e arbitrar y 24-hou r

deadlin e instea do f

focusin g solel y o n th e substantiv e portion s o f thei r work
. Moreover , samplin g shipment s withi n2 4 hour s i s no t alway s practical
. Fo r example , i f

a shipmen t

o f wast e arrive s befor e o r afte r it s schedule ddat e du e t o transportatio n issue s o r weather-relate dproblems , th e faciht y ma y no t b e abl e t o unload , sample , an danalyz e th e wast e withi n2 4 hours
. I hthes e instances , th e traile r remain s on-sit e i n th e truc k stagin g are aan di s inspecte ddail y unti l th e loa dca n b e unloade dan dsampled
. Onc e i t i s unloaded , th e wast e remain s i n secur e permitte dstorag e an di s no t cleare dfo r

incineratio n unti l al l samplin g an d analyse s ar e complete
. Further , i n wmtertime , drum s o f wast e sometime s arriv e completel y frozen
. I t i s bot hunsafe an dimpractica l t o requir e Veoli at o perfor msamphn g an danalysi s withi n2 4 hour s whe n thi s occurs .

uPursuan

tt o 4 0 C.F.R . § 268

, Veoli ais allowe

d t o stor e wast e a tit s facilit y fo ru p t o on e yea rprio rt o processin g it. During this tim

e wast e i s store d i n apermitte

d storag e buildin g {permitte

d pursuan

tt o 4 0 C.F.R . § 264

) tha tis inspecte

d daily . The buildin

g als o contain

s secondar

y containmen

tan d fir e protectio n an d alar m systems

. -29

-Finally , i t i s alread y Veolia' s goal , whe n practical , t o perfor mth e necessar y samplin g pe r it s W A Pan dSD Pwithi non e t o tw o day s o f awast e arrivin g a t

th e Sauge t

Facihty
. Special Waste Analysis Procedure (h) states as follows: (ii) On-site waste procedure: Veolia shall sample and

analyze any waste mat was accepted prior to the installation ofthe CEMS for mercury, LVM, SVM, and chlorine prior to incineration using appropriate quahty assurance/quality control procedures located in the Region 5Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Guidance http.VAvww.epa.gov/reg5rcra/cWqcappJitrnl and an appropriate test

method that are consistent with SW-846. Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : Veoli aobject s t o thi s Procedure/Informatio n Reques t o n th e ground s tha t

i t i s overl y broad , onerous , burdensome , an dlack s an y regulator y o r safet y basis
. A s discusse di n detai l above , Veoha' s wast e acceptanc e practic e ensure s tha t al l wast e currentl y awaitin g incineratio n a t th e Sauge t

faciht y ha s alread y bee n reviewe dan danalyze dfo r th e presenc e o f

mercury , lead , cadmium , chromium , beryllium , an darseni c pursuan t t o Veoha' s SD Pregardin g MAC T metal s an dWAP
. See Veolia' s Respons e t o Specia l Wast e Analysi s Procedur e (i)
. Special Waste Analysis Procedure (Hi) states as follows: (iii) Batch sampling procedure. If waste accepted

for incineration is hatched, treated, blended, mixed, or

otherwise altered

from its shipped

state, Veoha shaU

sample and analyze such batched, treated, blended, mixed, or otherwise altered

waste for

mercury, LVM, SVM, and

chlorine prior

to incineration using appropriate quahty assurance/quaUty control procedures located

in the Region 5Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Gwdance http://www.epa.gov/reg5rcra/ca/qapp.htrnl and

an appropriate test method that are consistent

with SW-846. Respons e /

Infonnatio n Provided : Veoli aobject s t o thi s Procedure/Informatio n Reques t o n th e ground s tha t

i t i s overl y broad , onerous , burdensome , an dlack s an y regulator y o r safet y basis
. Thi s Specia l Wast e Analysi s Procedur e i s duplicativ e t o samphn g activitie s Veoli aahead y ha s i nplace
. See Sectio n 7. 3 o f See Veoha' s Standar dDivisio nPractic e (SDP ) ''Determinatio n o f Metal s an dAs hValues " protoco l attache da s Exhibi t Q
. I f Veoh awer e t o implemen t thi s Specia l Wast e Analysi s Procedure , wast e receive dfo r processin g a s adecan t o r aconsolidatio n woul db e analyze dn o les s tha n thre e time s betwee n th e arriva l o f th e wast e a t

th e faciht y an d th e tim e i t

i s incinerated
. Veoh abeheve s i t i s unnecessar y an dimprecis e t o physicall y reanalyz e wast e afte r

batchin g ha s bee n performed
. Rather , Veoli abeheve s tha t th e mor e accurat e practic e i s t o analyz e th e mos t concentrate dwast e (a t receipt ) an dthe n mathematicall y calculat e th e presenc e o f mercur y (an dothe r

substances ) a s tha t

concentrate d wast e i s blende dand/o r adde dt o othe r

material s i n atan k

o r drum
. Thi s practic e prevent s th e -30

-erroneou s result s tha t sometim e occu r

a s aresul t

o f physicall y reanalyzin g dilute dsample s fro mbatche s an dblends
. Special Waste Analysis Procedure (iv) states as follows: (iv) Exemptions to the special waste procedures. The foUowing wastes that Veoha determines do not

contain mercury, LVM, SVM, and chlorine shall

be exempt

from the Special Waste Procedures set forth above: (1) Packaged

chemicals from laboratories, hospitals, household clean sweeps, or manufacturing facihties, including scintillation vials packed in accordance with Small Quantity Chemical

Guidelines (SQCG's). For packaged

chemicals, Veolia shall obtain a packing list

for each container

from the generator

specifying type and

quantity of chemicals contained

within; (2) Empty containers as definedm 35IAC 721.107(b); (3) Pharmaceutical

and commercial

products or

chemicals that

are off-specification or outdated and are packaged

in consumer

quantities, are unused or banned, and

are in their original packaging or

are packaged

as specified

by Veoha; (4) Aemsol

caw, lecture botdes or gas cyhnders; (5) Controlled

substances regulated

by the Federal

Government; and (6) Explosive, poison inhalation hazard (PIH), or

odiferous material, such as mercaptan, which present sampling, and

analytical

safety hazards. Veoha shall

review any container

labels, material

safety data sheets, drum inventories, packing lists, and

any other

relevant data or information provided

by the generator

to determine whether

mercury, LVM, SVM, or chlorine is present

in any waste listed

above that may be exempt. Only those wastes listed above that

Veoha determines in writing contain no mercury, LVM, SVM, or chlorine based

on such review are exempt from the Special Waste Procedures set forth above. Veoha's written determination of exemption from the Special

Waste Procedures shall describe the information reviewed and the basis for the determination that no mercury, LVM, SVM and chlorine are present. Any waste listed above for

which there is insufficient information to allow Veoha to make a reasonable determination that mercury, LVM, SVM

and chlorine is not

present is not be exempt. Respons e /

Informatio n Provided : Veoh abeheve s tha t thi s Specia l Wast e Analysi s Procedur e i s unnecessaril y duplicativ e o f th e pre-acceptanc e revie w proces s tha t Veoh aalread y ha s i n place
. A s discusse dabove , Veoli aemploy s tw o ful l tim e Approval s Coordinators , eac hwit hove r 15 year s o f experience , t o revie w eac hgenerator' s Wast e Profile , whic hma y mclud e containe r labels , materia l safet y dat asheets , dru minventories , an dpackin g hsts
. Th e Approval s -31

-Coordinator s are veste dwit hth e powe r t o approv e acceptanc e o f th e waste , den y it , o r

see k additiona l informatio ndirectl y fro mth e generator . Th e Coordinator s revie w th e Wast e Profile s fo r completeness , consistenc y wit hVeolia' s permits , safet y consideration s fo r proces s employees , an dfo r complianc e wit hVeoha' s metal s pohc y a s provide di nth e SDP
. Pursuan t t o SD PSectio n 7.1.2 , th e Approval s Coordinator s wil l requir e analyti c testin g o f waste s wher e th e Coordinator s hav e reaso n t o suspec t tha t awast e ma y contai n MAC Tmetal s an dVeoli aha s no t receive danalyti c dat afro macertifie d independen t

laborator y o r

doe s no t

hav e specifi c dat ao r

othe r information—e.g. , aMSDS — fro mth e generato r

tha t woul dallo w Veoh at o calculat e th e concentratio n o f MAC Tmetal s i n a waste . See Veoha' s SD Pattache da t Exhibi t Q
. Veoha' s Coordinator s bas e thes e decision s on , amon g othe r

things , th e presenc e o f federa l wast e code s tha t indicat e th e likel y presenc e o f MAC Tmetals , th e chemica l compositio n o f th e waste , an dth e proces s tha t generate dth e waste . Moreover , th e Coordinator s revie w th e Wast e Profile s an dan y additiona l informatio nprovide d b y th e generato r

fo r indication s o f

th e presenc e o f

mercur y o r

othe r MAC Tmetal s a t

an y leve l Veolia' s Approval s Coordinator s ar e conservativ e i n deteroiiningwhe n t o requh e analyti c testin g an dconsistentl y er r o n th e sid e o f

cautio n whe n dealin g wit han y waste s tha t hav e th e potentia l t o contai n mercury . Thi s i s th e bes t practic e fo r

ensurin g th e safet y o f Veoha' s employee s an densurin g Veolia' s complianc e wit hth e MAC T standards
. Moreover , Veoh aals o ha s apecuniar y interes t i n full y investigatin g incomin g waste s fo r MAC Tmetal s a s Veoli a impose s asignifican t

surcharg e o n generator s tha t shi p materia l containin g metals
.
V
. Conclusion A. Appendix

B as applied

t o Veolia is Arbitrary. Capricious, and Lacks a Rational

Basis 1. Veolia is in compliance with the MACT standards Veoli ai s i n ful l complianc e wit hth e MAC Tstandard s fo r hazardou s wast e combustor s a s se t fort hi n 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE
. USEP Apersonne l hav e acknowledge dtha t th e MAC T standard s d o no t

requh e CEM S an dthat , unti l USEP Arequire s th e installatio n o f CEMS , complianc e wit hth e MAC T standard s mus t b e demonstrate dthroug hperformanc e testing. Veoli aprove dsuc hcomplianc e throug hextensiv e an deffective , state-of-the-ar t Metal s Perfonnanc e Testin g conducte di n Augus t an dSeptembe r

o f 200 8 i n accordanc e wit hal l method s an dprotocol s estabhshe db y USEPA
. Veoh aconducte dsuc htest s pursuan t t o th e Ma y 200 8 agreemen t

i t reache dwit hUSEPA
. Moreover , USEP Aapprove dVeolia' s Metal s Performanc e Testin g Pla nan dUSERMEP Apersonne l observe dal l twelv e tes t run s tha t

Veoli a conducte do n incineratio n unit s 2,3 , an d4
. Veoh asubsequentl y submitte dal l o f th e tes t report s fro mthes e metal s test s alon g wit ha n extensiv e NOC—tha t di dno t includ e extrapolate dmeta l feedrates
. I nshort , Veoh astand s behin dit s 200 8 Metal s Performanc e Testmg
. Th e dat aproduce db y thes e tests ar e accurate , complete , an ddemonstrat e Veoha' s comphanc e wit hth e MAC T standards—^includin g thos e for LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury . A t n o time ha s USEPA , eithe r durin g th e actua l metal s performanc e tests , o r i n th e four

plu s month s sinc e Veoli asubmitte d -32

-th e tes t reports , eve r

mad e Veoh aawar e o f an y incident s o f

noncomphanc e o r

deviation s fro m quaht y assuranc e criteri aregardin g th e tests . I n fact , th e progres s mad e betwee n USEP A Regio n5 permittin g personne l an dVeoh aregardin g th e developmen t o f feedrat e extrapolation s woul dsugges t

tha t USEP Aha s conclude dtha t th e result s fromth e metal s performanc e testin g ar e vahd
. Moreover , i n th e forma l writte n comment s USEP Aha s provide dt o Veoli aregardin g th e metal s performanc e testing , th e Agenc y sough t onl y additiona l clarifyin g informatio nan d se t fort hn o criticism s regardin g th e validit y o f th e result s derive dfromth e testing
. See Lette r fromChery l L
. Newton , Actin g Director , A han dRadiatio n Division , USEP ARegio n5 , t o Dou g Harris , Genera l Manage r Veolia' s Sauge t

Facihty , Nov
. 21,2008 , attache da s Exhibi t W
. USEP Adirecte dVeoli at o complet e th e Metal s Performanc e Testin g s o tha t th e Agenc y coul d us e th e dat agenerate db y th e test s t o formulat e MAC T metal s OPL s i n Veoha' s pendin g Titl e V Permit— aTitl e V Permi t tha t wa s pendin g fo r

1 3 years . Thi s situatio n require dtha t th e test s b e performe dat

grea t expens e i n a n extremel y shor t perio do f

time— atime perio dtha t eve n Regio n5' s perrmttin g personne l acknowledge dwa s short
. Yet , despit e thes e conditions , Veoli aachieve dhig hquaht y result s an ddemonstrate dcomphanc e wit hth e MAC T standards
. 2, There is n o accurate, reliable, and available mercury CEMS for use at the Sauget

Facility Th e CEM S mercur y technolog y tha t thes e Informatio n Request s requh e Veoh at o instal l an d operat e i s unreliabl e an dwil l no t produc e accurat e data
. Th e commerciall y availabl e mercur y CEM S d o no t

provid e arehabl e calibratio ntechnolog y tha t ca n mee t

th e emission s limi t include di n thes e Infonnatio n Requests
. Moreover , USEP Aha s faile dt o provid e clea r instruction s fo r

th e installatio n an doperatio n o f amercur y CEM S a s th e regulator y standard s cite db y USEP Athroughou t Appendi x B d o no t

contai n performanc e specification s tha t are apphcabl e t o hazardou s wast e combustor s regulate dunde r 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t

63 , Subpar t

EEE
. I n addition , th e CEM S mercur y technolog y requhe db y USEP Acanno t mee t th e Quaht y Assuranc e procedure s containe di n 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 60 , Appendi x F ; and , i t i s unreasonabl e fo r USEP At o attemp t

t o forc e Veoli at o operat e amercur y CEM S pursuan t t o a n unpromulgated , archaic , an dfault y performanc e specification—Draft P S 12
. Veoli ai s awar e o f n o mercur y CEM S tha t

ca n mee t

th e requirement s o f

eithe r Draf t PS1 2 o r PS12-A
. Importantly , th e inheren t inaccurac y an dunrehabiht y o f mercur y CEM S als o mak e i t impossibl e fo r

Veoh at o compl y wit hth e certificatio nstatemen t include dwit hthes e Informatio n Requests
. Specifically , du e t o th e inaccurac y o f th e mercur y CEM S technology , Veolia' s Plan t

Manage r

coul dno t

certify tha t

dat agathere dwit haCEM S an dsubmitte dt o USEP Apursuan t

t o Instruction s 5,6 , an d7 woul db e "tru e an dcomplete " a s requhe db y thes e Informatio n Requests
. Further , th e Informatio n Request s ar e unclea r an dincomplet e t o th e exten t tha t Veoli awoul d no t b e abl e t o operat e amercur y CEM S a s contemplate db y th e USEPA
. Fo r example , th e emission s limitatio npresente db y thes e Informatio n Request s lack s an y referenc e t o th e apphcabl e averagin g perio dan dUSEP Adoe s no t provid e an y informatio nconcernin g ho w th e dat afromth e mercur y CEM S (whic hproduce s we t basi s measurements ) ca n b e converte dt o th e dr y basi s measurement s require db y 4 0 C.F.R
. Par t 63 , Subpar t

EEE
.

-33

-

V E S 00191 4Finally , th e 3 0 da y perio dtha t USEP Aha s impose do n Veoh at o instal l an dbegi n operatio n o f th e mercur y CEM S technolog y i s unreasonable , unachievable , an dcontrar y t o USEPA' s ow n guidanc e material s fo r th e installatio n o f

CEMS
. I nligh t o f thes e facts , Veoli abelieve s th e requirement s an dprovision s o f Appendi x B ar e arbitrary , capricious , an dlac k rationa l basis
. 3
. USEPA is improperly using these Information Requests to modify Veoha's Title VPermit O nSeptembe r

12, 2008—thirtee n year s afte r Veoh asubmitte dit s first apphcation—USEP A formall y issue dVeoh aaTitl e V permit
. Jus t unde r on e mont hlater , o n Octobe r 10 , 2008 , Veoha , pursuan t

t o USEPA' s request , submitte da n apphcatio n fo r significan t

modificatio nt o it s Titl e V permi t

pursuan t

t o 4 0 C.F.R
. § 71.7(e)
. Unde r 4 0 C.F.R
. § 71.7(e)(3)(h) , application s fo r

significan t

modificatio n"shal l mee t a hrequirement s o f

thi s part , includin g thos e fo r

applications , pubh c participation , revie w b y affecte dStates , an drevie w b y EPA..
. a s the y appl y to permi t

issuanc e an dpermi t

renewal." 4 0 C.F.R
. § 71.7(e)(3)(h)
. Moreover , Sectio n71.7(e)(3)(h ) provide s tha t USEP Asha hdesig n an dimplemen t arevie w proces s fo r application s fo r

significan t

modificatio ntha t

wil l lea dto apermi t

decisio n withi n 9 months
. See id. Therefore , pursuan t to th e regulator y framework , Veolia' s apphcatio n fo r significan t modificatio ni s subjec t to pubh c notic e an dcommen t procedure s an daproces s tha t anticipate s month s o f

revie w time
. Importantly , unde r th e significan t

modificatio nregulations , Veoli a ma y als o avai l itsel f

o f th e adniinistrativ e revie w process , includin g a n appea l o f th e Agency' s decisio nregardin g th e apphcatio n fo r significan t

modificatio nto th e Environmenta l Appeal s Boar dan deventuall y judicia l review
. See 4 0 C.F.R
. §71.11
. Conversely , thes e Informatio n Requests , issue dunde r Sectio n 11 4 o f

th e Clea n A hAct , d o no t provid e fo r

pubh c participation , d o no t contemplat e month s o f revie w time, d o no t

provid e a n avenu e fo r

direc t adniinistrativ e revie w o r judicia l review , an dpotentiall y subjec t Veoh ato significan t

monetar y penaltie s fo r eac hda y o f

noncomphance
. Simpl y put , th e underlyin g issue s i n Veolia' s applicatio n fo r significan t

modificatio no f

it s Titl e V permit—i.e. , operatin g hmit s regainin g th e incineratio n o f wast e containin g LVMs , SVMs , an dmercury—ar e identica l to th e underlyin g issue s addresse db y thes e Informatio n Request s an dUSEPA' s deman dtha t Veoli ainstal l mercur y CEMS
. Thus , Veoh ai s left

to conclud e tha t

thes e Informatio n Request s represent a n impermissibl e attemp t b y USEP Ato circumven t th e significan t

modificatio nproces s an darbitraril y an d capriciousl y depriv e Veoli ao f it s du e proces s right s provide db y 4 0 C.F.R
. § 71. 7 an d§71 .11 . B. Appendix

C as apphed

to Veoha is Arbitrary. Capricious, and Lacks a Rational

Basis 1
. Veoha currently reviews and analyzes mcoming wastes forthe presence of

MACT metals Veoli aalread y review s a hmcomin g wast e fo r th e presenc e o f

LVMs , SVMs , mercur y an d chlorine
. Veolia' s pre-acceptanc e procedures , Standar dDivisio nPractic e protocol , an dWast e

-34

-Analysi s Plan , combin e t o for masyste mtha t effectivel y determine s th e presenc e o f MAC T metal s i n al l mcomin g waste . Requirin g Veoh at o sampl e and/o r analyz e al l mcomin g wast e withi n2 4 hour s o f receip t i s unnecessary , impractical , an dshift s th e focu s awa y fromth e mor e importan t substantiv e analysi s tha t

Veoh apersonne l ar e requhe dt o perfor mwhe n wast e arrive s a t th e facihty
. I n som e cases , arbitraril y requirin g samphn g withi n24-hour s wil l pos e athrea t t o huma n healt h an dth e environmen t

a s wel l a s threate n th e safet y o f faciht y personnel
. Moreover , forcin g th e physica l testing o f batche s an dblend s i s unnecessar y an dimprecise
. Unde r Veolia' s SD Pprotocol , suc hanalysi s i s performe dwit hmuc hgreate r accurac y an dsafet y throug hmathematica l calculations
. Thus , th e provision s o f Appendi x C ar e arbitrary , capricious , an dlac k arationa l basi s becaus e the y ar e unnecessar y i n ligh t o f th e effectiv e an dtestedsafeguard s an dprotocol s Veoh aalread y ha s i n plac e fo r

reviewin g an danalyzin g incomin g waste s fo r th e presenc e o f

MAC T metals
. 2
. USEPA is using these Information Requests improperly circumvent Veolia's ongoing RCRA Part

B permit

process Veoli afirst

apphe dfo r

renewa l o f

it s RCR APar t

B permi t

i n Novembe r

o f 1 997
. T o date , ove r 1 1 year s later , Veoli astil l ha s no t receive dane w permit
. However , th e RCR APar t B permi t proces s i s continuin g an dVeoli asubmitte dit s comment s t o th e mos t recen t draft permi t o n Septembe r

12 , 2008
. Th e Specia l Wast e Analysi s Procedure s include di n Appendi x C o f thes e Informatio n Request s ar e th e sam e as , o r closel y relate dto , issue s tha t Veoh aha s previousl y commente do n durin g th e length y RCR APar t B permi t

process . Therefore , Veoh abeheve s tha t USEPA' s inclusio no f Appendi x C i n thes e Informatio n Requests , whic har e issue dunde r Sectio n11 4 o f

th e Clea nA hAct , i s inappropriate
. Th e issue s presente db y Appendi x C shoul d b e addresse di n th e RCR APar t B permi t

proces s wher e th e regulator y framework allow s Veoli a t o wor k wit hth e Agenc y t o achiev e acomprehensiv e an dfai r permit
. T o impos e th e requirement s o f

Appendi x C o n Veoli avi athes e Informatio n Requests—wher e Veoli aface s significan t

monetar y penaltie s fo r eac hda y o f

noncompliance—i s a n arbitrar y an dcapriciou s deprivatio n o f

Veolia' s du e proces s rights unde r th e RCR APar t

B permi t

process . C
. Veolia's Reservation ofRizhts and Request To Meet Veoli areserve s it s righ t t o provid e additiona l informatio ni n th e futur e and/o r t o amen do r supplemen t

it s Respons e t o thes e Informatio n Request s i n a n effor t t o maintai n a n ope n dialogu e wit hUSEP Aregardin g th e issue s containe dherein
. I n addition , t o facilitat e thi s continue ddialogue , Veoh arequest s ameetin g wit hUSEP ARegio n5 a t it s earlies t

convenienc e t o discus s th e Informatio n Request s an dVeoha' s Responses
.

-35

-

## REQUES T FO RINFORMATIO N CERTIFICATIO N STATEMEN T
I certify unde r

penalt y o f

la w tha t

I hav e examine dan da mfamilia r wit hth e informatio ni nth e encbse ddocuments , includin g al l attachments
. Base do nm y inquir y o f

thos e mdividual s wit hprimai y responsibiht y fo r obtainin g th e information , I certif

y tha t th e statement s an dinformatio nare , t o th e bes t o f m y knowledg e an dbehef, tru e an dcomplete
. I a mawar e tha t ther e ar e significan t penaltie s fo r

knowingl y submittin g fals e statement s an dinformation , includin g th e possibilit y o f

fine s o x imprisonmen t pursuan t

t o sectio n113(c)(2 ) o f th e Act , an d1 8 U.S.C
. § § 100 1 an d1341
.

V E S 00191 7