<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
OcCUpiers, and peaceable people,<br>
<br>
Here's a call to demonstrate on a local environmental issue. If
you're willing to take part, and/or willing to help plan, make
signs, etc., please lemme know.<br>
<br>
On Tuesday evening, May 13th, at the Hilton Garden Inn in Champaign,
the US EPA will hold a public hearing on the question of whether
they should grant "sole-source aquifer" protection to the Mahomet
Aquifer. More on that below. [*]<br>
<br>
<br>
We should be <b>out on the sidewalks</b> to greet them - to show
the Environmental Protection Agency that yes, we do want them to
protect the aquifer that provides drinking water for much of central
Illinois, including Champaign-Urbana! And, we should take part in
the hearing too.<br>
<br>
Rough schedule -<br>
<br>
We'd gather around 5:30-5:45, carrying signs, outside the Hilton
Garden Inn - near Kirby and State in Champaign.<br>
<br>
At 6:30, inside the hotel, the EPA will hold an informational
session about the sole-source process and the Mahomet aquifer.
That'd probably mark the end of the demonstration part, I'm thinking
- we'd either go inside to hear what they have to say, or take off.
But we can talk about this.<br>
<br>
At 7:30 will be the formal EPA public hearing. Hope some of us
will decide to stay and speak to the issue.<br>
<br>
[*] Sole source aquifer?<br>
The USEPA can designate an aquifer as "sole source" if it's the
primary source of drinking water for the population living above it,
and there'd be no feasible replacement for it - which certainly
seems to be true for the Mahomet Aquifer. A consortium of cities
and counties, including Champaign and Urbana, has applied to the EPA
to give the Mahomet Aquifer this status. It would have some legal
consequences, though not everything we might want:<br>
<ul>
<li>It <i>would</i> entail special review of any future
Federally-supported project that might affect the aquifer (and
this could include some surprises, such as animal feedlots,
which sometimes do get Federal funding).</li>
<li>It <i>wouldn't</i> directly require such a review of our
current big worry, the proposal to store toxic PCBs in the
Clinton landfill, which overlies the aquifer - that is, we could
succeed on Sole Source but still lose on having PCBs in the
landfill. However, those PCBs aren't currently permitted to be
disposed of in Clinton - the USEPA is considering that question
too, in a separate process.<br>
</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>