ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

June

13, 1985

CITY OF WEST CHICAGO,

Petitioner,

v,

)

PCB 85—2

ILLINOIS EN~JIRONMFNTAL

PROTECTION

~GENCY~~

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by B. Forcade):

This matter

comes

to the Board on

a January

4,

1985,

Petition

for Variance and February 19,

1985, Amended Petition for

Variance,

filed by the City of West Chicago (“West Chicago”).

West Chicago seeks

a variance for discharges

into the West Branch

of the DuPage

River

to cover

a period

of construction during

which

it will be

improving its existing treatment facilities.

Specifically, West Chicago seeks a variance from a prior

Board

Order

in PCB 77-115 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

v.

City of West Chicago, January 19, 1978,

and from the following

Board regulations:

35

Ill, Adm. Code

302.203

Water quality standard

—

tree from

unnatural sludge

302.208

Water quality standards for

chemical

constituents

304.105

Effluents shall not cause water

quality violations

304.106

Effluents shall not contain

offensive discharges

304.120

Effluent limitations

for

deoxygenating wastes

304.121

Effluent limitation:

400

fecal

coliform/100 ml

West Chicago has

riot requested

a specific ending date for

the variance, but has included

a compliance plan which calls for

the new facilities

to be operational by March 31,

1986.

On April

19,

1985,

the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

(“Agency”)

filed a recommendation that variance be granted for Outfall No.

002,

for

a maximum of

15 months,

for certain effluent and water

quality limitations only during periods of excessive flow, and

only if certain interim effluent limitations are met.

No

objections

were

received;

no hearing was held.

On ~4ay28,

1985,

West Chicago filed

a copy of the Stipulation and Proposal

for

Settlement ~

PCB 77~~~•1l5~

84-249

---

—2—

West Chicago’s sewage treatment plant

is

located at the

northeast corner of the intersection of Highway Routes 38 and

59.

It

is bounded

by

two highways,

the west branch of the DuPage

River

and

a forest preserves

In the 1960~sWest Chicago constructed

a four—acre lagoon,

partially aerated by submerged diffusers,

to treat the excess

flow from the community during

storm events.

In 1977, West

Chicago constructed

an additional

lagoon

to provide detention

time for chlorine disinfection of

the lagoon effluent.

At the

same time,

the excess flow lagoon was cleaned

of sludge deposits

and deepened.

1981, West Chicago started

a program of growing

hyacinths

Ofl

th?;

Lagoon

to remove organics and ammonia,

This

experiment lastec

two

years

and though

it had partial success,

the program was abandoned because

it took the plants until August

or September to become effective,

and

they had to be removed

in

October after

the first frost killed

the plants.

In 1983,

seven

(7)

floating aerators were installed

in the lagoon to create an

“oxygen seal”

on the lagoon to reduce odors

and provide partial

treatment.

In addition

to the above, West Chicago has implemented

programs that included sewer replacement,

joint sealing and storm

sewer construction.

West Chicago

is presently under construction

on

a new treatment plant that will handle

all dry weather

flow

and some wet weather

flow.

The plant

is scheduled for completion

in November 1986.

West Chicago has completed planning and design

on a program to rehabilitate the existing sanitary sewer system

and construct relief sewers and excess flow facilities.

The

construction related

to these projects

is scheduled

for

completion

in November, 1986.

West Chicago has applied

for and received from the Agency

a

permit

to install new excess flow facilities,

including

two first

flush storage tanks, one excess

flow clarifier,

a lift station,

chemical feed equipment

arid flow measurement and sampling

equipment.

(The p?rmit was made contingent on the Board’s grant

of this variance.)

West Chicago asserts,

and the Agency agrees,

that

it does not have room on

its plant grounds

to construct

these facilities unless

it

partially fills

in lagoon #4,

its

largest lagoon.

West Chicago and the Agency assert that the

decrease

in capacity of lagoon #4 and the construction activities

will unavoidably result

in degradation of the wastewater

that

is

treated

in West Chicago~sexisting excess flow facilities

(Rec.,

West Chicago believes that as the

lagoon is only an

occasional use facility,

i.e., only during storm events,

the

impact of

a lower quality effluent on the

receiving stream should

be insignificant, especially as

the discharge would

occur only

when the river has cons:Lderaole

flow.

West Chicago intends

to

continue

to

pro’i:ide

the

best

possible

treatment

during

construction.

They

estimate

that

the

average

effluent

quality

from

the

lagoon

~i1l

be

degraded

to

about

50

mg/l

BOD

and

50

mg/l

84-250

---

—3--

SS

(Pet.,

p.

5).

The Agency routinely analyzes water samples

from 6.5 miles upstream and 3.5 miles downstream of West

Chicago’s outfall,

These

samp:Les show the West Branch of the

DuPage River

in the area to be of average quality.

The ratio of

West Chicago’s effluent

to receiving stream flow is greater

than

one

to one but less than five to one.

The Agency has been unable

to quantify the

impact of the variance

or determine

if

it would

degrade water

quality.

The Agency agrees that

if

variance

is

denied West Chicago will experience hardship in that

it will

be

unable

to construct its excess flow facilities

and as a result

will be unable

to improve the ultimate quality of

its effluent.

After evaluating

the unquant~:Eiedbut temporary degradation of

the

effluent against the unquantified but permanent

improvement,

the Agency recommends that the Board grant

a variance from

certain provisions

to allow construction to proceed

(Rec.,

pp.

4—

5).

The Board finds that denial

of variance would constitute

an

arbitrary and unreasonable hardship,

and that due

to the minimal

nature of any environmental harm that might be expected to occur

this variance should he granted.

However,

the Board

finds that

West Chicago’s variance request

is overly broad and that

limitations and conditions requested by the Agency should be

imposed

(except

for language relating

to chlorine residual, which

are not required by Board regulations).

The only outfall mentioned by West Chicago

is Outfall 002

(Pet.,

p.

3).

The Agency requests that variance be restricted

to

this outfall as

it

is the only one affected

by the lagoon

improvements which

are the subject of this proceeding.

The Board

will restrict the variance

to Outfall

002.

The Agency requests

that variance be granted only to cover

those periods when flow

exceeds the design maximum flow of

the treatment plant,

The

Board will impose

this condition,

Further,

the Agency requests

that the Board impose interim effluent conditions that reflect

West Chicago’s best estimate

of anticipated effluent quality

(50

mg/l

of BOD and 50

mg,’~.l of suspended solids as monthly averages).

As these seem to be appropriate and workable conditions

to

protect

the environment, the Board will

impose them.

West Chicago has

request:ed variance from 35 Ill.

Adrn. Code

302.208, which

sets water quality standards for over 20 chemical

constituents.

The Agency asserts that West Chicago has failed to

establish that these materials are present

in the lagoon

discharges and has failed

to establish that facility improvements

would

increase their concentration in the discharges.

The Board

finds that since

the only reference

to these parameters is

in the

request

for relief, West Chicago has failed

to establish that

relief

is necessary and will deny the variance

for these

parameters.

The Agency has requested that relief from enforcement of

water quality standards against West Chicago be limited

to only

those circumstances where West Chicago

is

in compliance with

the

64-251

---

—4—

interim effluent limitations

imposed

in this variance.

The Board

will impose that condition.

flowever,

in any proceeding brought

to

enforce

the

terms

and conditions of this variance,

the Board

will evaluate the facts

and circumstances,

as well

as whether

compliance was technically possible.

Another major aspect of this proceeding

is from what

obligations must West Chicago seek relief

in order

to construct

the facility improvements.

At the present time, West Chicago

is

subject

to the Board’s regulations governing effluent, a Board

Order iss~:~in

the prior enforcement case EPA v. West Chicago,

PCB

77—li~

January

19,

1978,

~nd a Consent Decree entered

in

City

of

~

Chie~

v,Doulas

Costle,

et

al.,

77

C

1615

(U.S.

Dist. Ct~~T~D.Iii,).

West Chicago and

the Agency have

indicated

~at

for

relief to be meaningful,

a modification of the

Consent De~::eemust

be obtained and that West Chicago intends to

pursue such relief

:Lf

the Board grants

a variance.

Consequently,

the Board need only address the existing regulations

and the

prior

Board Order.

In

1977,

the Agency filed

an enforcement action charging,

inter

alia,

that West Chicago’s sewage treatment plant violated

various

regulations regarding effluent quality and caused

violations

of various water quality standards.

A Stipulation

and

Proposal

for Settlement was entered

in that case which

in

paragraphs A and D affected

the operations and discharges from

lagoon #4.

To the extent the aeration and chlorination

requirements of paragraph A,

and the effluent limitations

of

paragraph D are

in conflict with today~sOrder,

the Board will

grant

a variance from the prior Order.

West Chicago has stated construction

~jil

be completed

in

November,

1986

(Ama Pet.,

p.

4), but provided a compliance

schedule showing completion of construction and operational

status

for

the sewers,

treatment

plant

and excess flow facilities

by December 30,

1985,

December

27,

:L98s, and March 31,

1986,

respectively (Pet.,

p.,

4),

The Agency has recommended

the

variance

be effective only during

the period

of construction,

but

in no event

later than 15 months from the date of this Order

(i.e.,

until

September

1,

1986),

The Board will grant variance

from the beginning of construction

of

the excess flow facility

until

90 days after

conStruction

is completed,

but

in no event

beyond November

1,

1985.

This Opinion constitutes

the Board’s

findings of facts and

conclusions of

law in this matter4

ORDER

The City of West Chicago

:Ls hereby granted

variance from

conditions A and D of the Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement

adopted

In

PCB 77—115, and

from 35

111,

Adm, Code

3o4.:Lo6,

304.120 and

104,121

and

from 35

ii:L, Mm.

Code 304.105 as

it

applies

to

302., 203,

subject

to the following conditions:

64-252

---

—5—

a)

This variance shall begin on commencement of

construction of improvements to the excess flow

facilities

and shall continue until

90 days after that

construction is completed,

but in

no event beyond

November

1,

1986.

b)

This variance

shall

be contingent upon either

1)

the

amendment of the Consent Decree

in City of West Chicago

v. Douglas Costle et

al.

77

C 1615

(N,D.

Ill)

as

proposed ~n paragraph

(a)

of West Chicago’s January 7,

1985,

~•..

ition for Variance”

or

2)

the approval by

tJSEPA

o~

permit

modification

issued

to reflect the

provisie

of

the

Board

order.

c)

This variance is applicable only

to the effluent from

Outfall

002,

(as described

in NPDES Permit 1L0023469)

and shall only be applicable during periods when the

plant exceeds

its Design Maximum Flow.

d)

West Chicago’s effluent from Outfall

002 shall not

exceed:

BOD 50 mg/i

as

a monthly average

TSS

50 mg/I as a monthly average

e)

West Chicago shall notify

the Agency

in writing within

five

(5)

days of the commencement of filling operations

in lagoon #4 and shall also report quarterly, with the

first report due July 1,

1985, on the progress of the

construction of the excess flow facilities.

Tho~~reports shall be sent to:

Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency

Division of Water Pollution Control

Compliance Assurance Section

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield,

IL 62702

Attention:

James

Frost

A copy of

these reports shall also be sent to:

:tilino:is Environmental Protection Agency

Division of Water Pollution Control

Field Operations Section

The Intercontinental Center

Suite 600

1701

First Avenue

Maywood,

IL

50153

Attention~

Theodore

Denning

f)

Within

days of

t:he date

of

this

Order,

the

City

of

West

Ch1~::

~o

shall

execute

a

Certification

of

Acceptance

64-253

---

—6—

and Agreement to be bound

to all terms and conditions of

this

variance.

Said

Certification

shall

be

submitted

to

the

Agency

at

2200

Churchill

Road,

Springfield,

Illinois

62706.

The 45 day period

shall

be

held

in

abeyance

during

any

period

that

this

matter

is

being

appealed.

The

form

of

said

Certification

shall

be

as

follows:

CERTIFICATION

I,

(We)

,

hereby

accept

and

aq~ee

to

be

bound

by

all

terms

and

conditions

of

the

Order

of

the ~oliution Control Board

in

PCB

85—2,

June

13,

1985.

Petitioner

Authorized

Agent

Title

Date

IT

IS SO ORDERED

I, Dorothy

M,

Gurin, Clerk of

the Illinois Pollution Control

Board

hereby

certify

that

the

above

Opinion

and

Order

was

adopted

on

the

,1J~

day of ________________________,

1985,

by

a

vote

of

7—0

.

4.

Dorothy M. hnn,

Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board