ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
January 8,
1976
NORTH SHORE SANITARY DISTRICT,
)
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 75—301
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Goodman):
This matter comes before the Board upon petition for
variance by North Shore SanitaryDistrict (NSSD), filed July
30, 1975. In its petition and subsequent amendment, NSSD
requests that it be granted~variance from a sewer ban im-
posed by the Board in PCB 70-7, 12, 13., and 14, said var-
iance to be a further extention of that granted in PCB 71-
343 and subsequently amended in 72—451, 73—502, and 74—344.
The variance is requested for NSSD’s Waukegan treatment
plant. In the aforementioned prior variances, NSSD has been
granted permission to issue sewer permits totalling 13,333
population equivalents (P.E.), of which approximately 700
remain unissued at this time. In its petition, NSSD re-
quests an additional 5,000 P.E. be granted to their Waukegan
plant, or in the alternative that consideration be given to
terminating the sewer ban In connection with the Waukegan
Plant.
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency)
filed a recommendation on September 24, 1975, proposing that
variance be limited to the extension of the existing var-
iance and its approximately 700 unused P.E. The Agency,
based upon information provided by NSSD, feels that the
Waukegan plant is in a .state of hydraulic overload and that
the operational resultsfailed to consistantly maintain
standards required by the NPDES permit granted to the Waukegan
Plant and previous Board orders.
A hearing was held in this matter on Novemb~r 19, 1975,
at which NSSD presented testimony and exhibits in support
of its position that the information upon which the Agency
had based their recommendation was in error. The evidence
presented by NSSD indicated that the. flow meter utilized to
present total flow information to the Agency was deterior-
ating and had given inaccurate .flow rates for some months.
In addition, itwas indicated that a new analyst had been
hired in April of 1975 and that erroneous data, due to
19—
589
(2)
incorrect analyzing procedures by this new chemist, had been
presented to the Agency. Petitioner’s Exhibit No. 1 in-
cluded a re-evaluation of the allegedly erroneous data
alleging that the NSSD had not experienced the serious
hydraulic overloading as had been previously indicated and
that their effluent was within the applicable limits.
The Agency, in its brief, reiterated their original
contention that the NSSD was hydraulically overloaded and
did not meet the applicable effluent standards. The brief
also indicated that the NSSD had presented reasonable ex-
planations of the factors which may have given rise to
erroneous results. The Agency is concerned that there now
exists no accurate data upon. which to make a reasonable
evaluation. The Agency is, however, willing to re-evaluate
the situation upon receipt of current reliable data.
There appears. to be two issues of fact presented by the
parties in their briefs.. First, the issue of whether the
Waukegan Sanitary Treatment Plant is hydraulically overloaded.
MUch argument was presented by both sides concerning whether
the various recirculation flows should be subtracted from
the reported plant flows. The Board, based upon the testi-
mony and record, finds that these flows are so small as to
not materially effect the load status on the plant and,
therefore, will not be considered in the Board’s determina-
tion of this question. The Board finds the apparent dis-
crepancy between the influent and effluent meter readings to
be of far greater importance. The arguments by NSSD on the
subject suggest that the use of potentially unreliable
effluent meter readings may have unduly prejudiced the
Agency’ s recommendation.
The second issue of fact presented concerns the actual
pollutant concentrations in Waukegan Sanitary Treatment
Plant’s effluent. The Agency argues that Waukegan is not
fulfilling its requirements based upon the information
presented by NSSD from their records and. from grab samples
taken by the Agency. NSSD now claims .that the information
it provided the Agency concerning effluent concentrations
was in error due to the new chemist hired in April, 1975,
and considers the grab samples, taken by the Agency, to
have no weight due to their instantaneous nature. The
Board agrees that a single grab-type sample carries little
weight in a sanitary treatment plant process and agrees that
there may have been some erroneous data used by the Agency
in their recommendation.
19—
590
(3)
The Board, however, finds the Agency’s reluctance to
consider short term revised data to be reasonable, at least
in so far
.as
the possible lifting of the entire sewer ban at
the Waukegan plant. The Board finds that there is not,
at this time, sufficient evidence in the record to indicate
that the 1ffting of the ban on the Waukegan plant would
not result in harm to the environment. On the other hand,
the hardship. imposed on the people of the district who are
presently paying for services they cannot receive from NSSD,
due to the ban, is certainly a heavy burden.
The Board finds that the evidence in this case supports
the grant of a limited variance to the Waukegan plant. The
fact that the new, substantially completed, installations at
Waukeqan will be totally completed by November, 1976, carries
great weight in this decision. The Board will, therefore,
grant variance of an additional 1500 P..E. from January 1,
1976, until December 31, 1976. The 1500 P.E. is the Board’s
best estimation of the minimum extra sewer .capacity required
by the district for 1976, based upon the record herein. In
addition, at the end of April, 1976, NSSD will present a
summary of their effluent results for the previous 12 months
to the Board and the Agency. The Agency, after review of
this data,.will present its recommendation to the Board
with regard to:
1. The possible increase of the 1500 P.E. to 5000 P.E.
for the time remaining on the variance; and
2. The possibility of lifting the sewer ban at Waukegan,
taking into account the progress made toward completion of
the new facility.
The Board retains jurisdiction in this matter for the
purpose of this review.
This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the Board in this matter.
ORDER
It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:
1. Variance be and is, hereby, granted from January 1,
1976 through December 31, 1976, for the NSSD to connect not
more than 1500 Population Equivalents to Waukegan’s Sewage
Treatment Plant.
19—591
(4)
2. On or before April 15, 1976, NSSD shall submit to
the Board and the Agency a summary of the data they have
collected in the past 12 months concerning NSSD’s effluent
concentrations and effluent flows.
3. On or before May 15, 1976, the Agency shall submit
its recommendation to the Board based upon the information
received under paragraph 2 above concerning:
a) The expansion of the total additional population
equivalents from 1500 to 5000; and
b) The possiblity. of removing the sewer ban on
the Waukegan Sanitaty Treatment plant.
4. NSSD shall submit status reports concerning the
construction at the Waukegan Plant including but not limited
to timetables for completion and resulting plant capacity
to the Board and the Agency on or before March 1, 1976 and
September 1, 1976.
5. All applicable conditions of PCB 73—502 shall
remain in full force
and
effect.
6. The Board retains jurisdiction in this matter for
the purposes stated herein.
Mr.
Young
abstains.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board, hereby ce,j~tify the above Opinion and Order
were adopted on the
______________
day of
_____________
1975 by a vote of ~
~
Illinois Pollution trol Board
19—592