ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April
6,
1989
CITY OF CHARLESTON,
)
(Coles County,
1L0021644)
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 89—62
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER
OF THE BOARD (by
3. Marlin):
This matter comes before the Board upon
a Recommendation
filed
by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(“Agency”)
on April
6,
1989 recommending that the Board grant
a 45—day
provisional variance
to the City of Charleston
(“Charleston”).
Charleston requests this variance to allow
it
to discharge from
its excess storm water lagoons while
a siphon pipe
is being
installed
in the lagoons and thereby exceed
its effluent
limitations
for
five day biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD)
and
total suspended solids (TSS).
Charleston’s wastewater treatment facilities
(WWTP) consist
of
a main pump station, aerated grit chamber, primary clarifiers,
activated sludge aeration basins,
secondary clarifiers,
tertiary
sand filters, effluent chlorination,
flow measurement,
anaerobic
digeste~s, excess stoLm~1ater lagoons,
and sludge handling
facilities.
The WWTP, which has a design average flow of 4.0
million gallons
per day,
discharges
its effluents
into Cassell
Creek which
then empties
into Riley Creek,
then into Kickapoo
Creek, which empties
into the Embarras River.
Charleston’s NPDES
permit requires
it
to meet effluent
limitations of
10 mg/i
(monthly average)
for Bod and
12 mg/i
(monthly average) for TSS
(both concentration limits).
According
to the Agency,
Charleston’s wastewater
treatment
plant has been experiencing
a problem with filamentous bacteria
for the past several months.
The filamentous bacteria has
resulted
in settling problems with
the clarifiers at the
facility, which
reduces the hydraulic capability of the treatment
plant.
With
this
reduction
in capability,
partial
flows have
been
diLected
to
StOLTflW~~teL
holding
lagoons.
These
lagoons a~e
designed
to hold additional
flows until such time
as capacity
is
available
at the facility.
When capacity
is available,
the
wastewater- held
in
the lagoons can be bled back
for- complete
treatment.
The lagoons are designed
only for bleed—back
capabilities,
not for discharging.
98—97
—2—
The Agency further explains that through
the use of sodium
hypochloride,
the filamentous bacteria problem began to improve
on April
3,
1989.
However,
in the process of getting
this
problem resolved,
the stormwater
lagoons were nearly filled
to
their capacity.
On April
2—3,
1989, Charleston received
approximately
21/2n
of
rain.
This heavy rain resulted
in the
lagoons filling
to the top and overflowing.
As the structual
stability of
the lagoons was at question at
this point, flows
to
the lagoon were stopped,
resulting
in
a discharge at
an emergency
manhole.
Charleston
is installing
a siphon pipe
in the lagoons
to
allow drawdown.
Once the siphon
is functional,
flows beyond the
capacity of
the treatment plant can again be routed
to the
lagoons.
The Agency states that
this will result in no more
discharge from the emergency manhold and that the discharge of
the excess flows will
at this point receive
at least primary
treatmenL
in the
lagoons prior
to discharge.
The Agency
maintains
that once the filamentous bacteria problem
is totally
resolved and the lagoons have the capacity to again receive
stormwater flows
only,
this treatment scheme will
no longer
be
necessary.
The Agency states that denial of the variance would result
in an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship for
the following
reasons:
Petitioner has been dealing with
an
ongoing problem caused by filamentous
bacteria.
A denial
of this variance
could result in Petitioner
increasing
flows
to the plant beyond
its ability to
meet effluent standards and pro.long
a
problem that
is currently being
resolved.
By allowing this variance,
Petitioner can continue to
resolve the
filamentous bacteria problem and return
the plant
to
its normal mode
of
operation.
(Agency Rec.
at
3).
The Agency further states that
it
believes that due
to the high flow of
the receiving stream,
Cassell
creek,
at this time and the remaining treatment provided
by Charleston,
that the environmental impact will be minimal.
The Agency also states that
it does not believe
that there will
be any adverse impacts on any downstream public water supplies.
The nearest downstream public water supply
is the City
of
Newton.
This
supply
is
about
40—45
miles downstream
i.om
Charleston’s
discharge.
According
to the Agency,
no adverse
impact should occur-
to this supply.
Finally,
the Agency states
that
it
is not aware
of any federal regulations which would
preclude the granting of
this variance.
The Agency recommends,
therefore,
that Charleston
be granted
a provisional variance,
98—98
—3—
subject to certain conditions.
The Board having received notification from the Agency that
compliance on
a short
term basis with
the effluent limitations
imposed by 35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 304.120 and 304.141(a)
(as
they
relate to BOD and TSS), would impose an arbitrary or unreasonable
hardship upon Charleston,
and the Board concurring
in that
notification, will grant Charleston’s provisional variance,
subject
to the conditions suggested by the Agency.
This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
conclusions
of law
in this matter.
ORDER
1.
The City of Charleston
is hereby granted provisional
variance from
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 304.120 and 304.141(a),
as they
relate to BOD and TSS,
subject
to the following conditions:
a.
This variance shall commence April
3,
1989
and shall terminate May 18,
1989
or when
the treatment plant returns
to
its normal
mode of operation with capacity available
for stormwater
flows, whichever occurs
first.
b.
During
the period
of this variance, the
effluent discharged by
the mixture
of the
excess lagoons and the treatment plant
shall
be limited
to 30 mg/i monthly
average
for both BOD and Tss.
c.
Charleston shall notify the Agency’s
Champaign Regional Office by telephone
within twenty—four
(24) hours when the
plant returns
to
its normal mode
of
operation.
Written confirmation
shall
be
submitted within
5 days
to the following
address:
Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency
2125 South
Fir-st Street
Champaign,
Illinois
61820
Attn:
Steve
Baldwin
and
Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency
Division of Water Pollution Control
98—99
—4—
Compliance Assurance Section
2200 Churchill Road
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
Illinois 62794—9276
Attn:
Pat Lindsey
d.
During this provisional variance,
Charleston shall operate
its wastewater
treatment facility so as
to produce
the
best effluent practicable.
Additionally,
Charleston
shall
return all
influent flow
through the treatment plant
for complete
treatment as soon
as possible.
e.
During
this provisional variance,
Charleston
shall monitor
the effluent
for
the parameters
as listed
in their NPDES
Permit IL002l644 from the point
of where
the lagoon discharge
and plant effluent
converge and mix prior
to discharge.
2.
Charleston shall, within ten (10)
days of the date of
this Order,
execute
a Certificate of Acceptance and Agreement
agreeing
to he bound
to the terms
and conditions of the variance
and sent
to the Springfield address above.
This variance shall
be void
if Petitioner
fails
to execute
and forward
the certificate within forty—five day period.
The
forty—five 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), City of Charleston,
having read the Order
of
the
Illinois Pollution Control Board,
in PCB 89—62, dated April
6,
1989,
understand
and accept the said Order,
realizing that such
acceptance
renders all terms and conditions thereto binding and
enfor ceahie.
Petitioner
By:
Authotized Agent
Title
Date
98—100
—5—
Section
41 of the Environmental Protection Act,
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1987,
ch.
1111/2,
par.
1041, provides for appeal
of final
Orders of
the Board within
35 days.
The Rules of the Supreme
Court
of Illinois establish filing requirements.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Dorothy M Gunn, Clerk
of
the Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
hereby certify, that the above Opinion and Order was
adopted
on the
_____________
day of _________________________
1989,
by a vote of
7—i’
.
Illino
Pol
ion Control Board
98—101