BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
Complainant,
v.
CITY OF PEKIN,
an Illinois municipal corporation,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PCB No. 07- 47
(Enforcement-Water)
NOTICE OF FILING
To:
Burt
L.
Dancey
Attorney for City
of Pekin
Elliff, Keyser,
Oberle
&
Dancey, P.C.
109 S. Fourth Street
P.O. Box 873
Pekin, IL 61555-0873
Carol Webb, Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19274
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9274
Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James
R.
Thompson Center
100 W. Randolph Street, Ste. 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on this day I filed with the Office ofthe Clerk of the
Illinois Pollution Control Board an original and nine copies
of the Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement, an Agreed Motion for Relief from the Hearing Requirements, Notice
of Filing, and a
Certificate of Service, copies of which are attached herewith and served upon you.
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA
MADIGAN,
Attorney General of the
State
of Illinois
MATTHEW
J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement! Asbestos
Litigation Division
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
DATE: October 22,2009
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
69
W. Washington St., Suite 1800
Chicago, Illinois 60602
312/814-2069
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
Complainant,
v.
CITY OF PEKIN,
an Illinois municipal corporation,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PCB No. 07- 47
(Enforcement-Water)
AGREED
MOTION FOR RELIEF
FROM THE HEARING REQUIREMENT
In support of this Motion, the parties state as follows:
1.
Today, the People of the State of Illinois filed a Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement with the Illinois Pollution Control Board.
2.
Section 31 (c )(2) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act ("Act"), 415 ILCS
5/31 (c )(2) (2008), provides:
Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (1) of this
subsection (c), whenever a complaint has been filed
on behalf of
the Agency or by the People of the State of Illinois, the parties may
file with the Board a stipulation and proposal for settlement
accompanied by a request for relief from the requirement
of a
hearing pursuant to subdivision (1) ...
3.
Complainant and Respondent agree that a formal hearing is not necessary to
conclude this matter and wish to avail themselves
of Section 31 (c )(2) of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/31(c)(2) (2008).
WHEREFORE, Complainant and Respondent request relief from the hearing requirement
pursuant to Section 31 (c )(2) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31 (c )(2) (2008).
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
DATE: October 22, 2009
Respectfully submitted,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney General
of the
State
of Illinois
MATTHEW
J. DUNN, Chief
. Environmental Enforcement! Asbestos
~:gatio~
ANDREW J
I HOLAS
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
69 W. Washington St., Suite
1800
Chicago, Illinois 60602
312/814-2069
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
Complainant,
-vs-
CITY OF PEKIN,
an Illinois municipal corporation,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PCB No. 07-47
(Enforcement - Water)
STIPULATION AND PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
Complainant, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, by LISA MADIGAN, Attorney
General
of the State of Illinois, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("Illinois EPA"),
and CITY OF PEKIN ("Respondent") ("Parties to the Stipulation"), have agreed to the making of
this Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement ("Stipulation") and submit it to the Illinois Pollution
Control Board ("Board") for approval. This stipulation of facts is made and agreed upon for
purposes
of settlement only and as a factual basis for the Board's approval of this Stipulation and
issuance
of relief. None ofthe facts stipulated herein shall be introduced into evidence in any
other proceeding regarding the violations
of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act ("Act"),
415 ILCS 5/1
et seq.
(2006), and the Board's Regulations, alleged in the Complaint except as
otherwise provided herein.
It
is the intent of the parties to this Stipulation that it be a final
adjudication
of this matter.
I.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
A.
Parties to the Stipulation
1.
On December 13, 2006, a Complaint was filed on behalf of the People of the State
of Illinois by Lisa Madigan, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, on her own motion and
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
upon the request of the Illinois EPA, pursuant to Section 31 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/31 (2006),
against the Respondent.
2.
The Illinois EPA is an administrative agency of the State of Illinois, created
pursuant to
Section 4 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/4 (2006).
3.
At all times relevant to the Complaint, the Respondent was and is an Illinois
municipal corporation that is authorized to transact business in the
State of Illinois. At all times
relevant to the Complaint, Respondent owned and operated a wastewater treatment plant
("WWTP") located at 606 South Front Street, Pekin, Tazewell County, Illinois ("site").
4.
The City'S WWTP and Waste Water Operations were run and operated by a
contract operator, United Water. The
WWTP discharges to the Illinois River pursuant to the
National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit No. IL0034495; the current
NPDES permit was reissued on May 4, 2004, and became effective June 1, 2004, the terms and
conditions
of which are incorporated herein by reference.
5.
The City'S sewage collection system includes approximately 17 miles of combined
sewers. There are four permitted combined sewer overflows
("CSOS"), the operation of which is
governed by
Special Condition 12 of the NPDES permit and the CSO Exception granted by the
Board on June
5,1986, in PCB No. 85-226. Outfall 001 is for the WWTP, which has a design
maximum flow
of 8.7 million gallons per day ("MGD"), and Outfall 002 is for the excess flow
facilities, which shall not be utilized until the main treatment facility is receiving its maximum
practical flow. The excess flow facilities consist
of a settling basin and a chlorination tank with
capacities
of224,000 and 75,000 gallons, respectively.
6.
The City's permit imposes effluent concentration limitations for fecal coliform,
2
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
which is a "contaminant" as that term is defined in Section 3.165 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/3.165
(2006). The effluent concentration limitation for fecal coliform is a daily maximum of 400 per
100 ml for Outfall 001 during May through October and for Outfall 002 whenever there is any
discharge. Discharge Monitoring Reports
("DMRs") are submitted monthly in accordance with
the permit to report the concentrations
of contaminants in the effluent and any excess flow.
7.
On February 14,2093, the City, by and through its contract operator United
Water, discharged for over 4 hours from
Outfall 002 although the main treatment facility was not
receiving its maximum practical flow. The discharge contained fecal coliform well in excess
of
the regulatory and permit limit of 400 per 100 mI.
8.
During the morning of April 20, 2004, the City, by and through its contract
operator United Water, discharged for over
30 minutes from Outfall 002 although the main
treatment facility was not receiving its maximum practical flow. The excess flow facilities
remained full throughout the day. Beginning at approximately 8
PM on April 20, 2004, and
continuing until 8 AM on April 21,
2004, the City, by and through its contract operator United
Water, discharged from
Outfall 002 although the main treatment facility was not receiving its
maximum practical flow. The discharge contained fecal coliform well in excess
of the regulatory
and permit limit
of 400 per 100 mI. The discharge contained total suspended solid levels shown
by lab analysis to be 42 mg/I.
9.
On February 19,2003, the Illinois EPA inspected the WWTP to evaluate its
compliance with the
NPDES Permit. Among the problems documented during this inspection
were inaccurate flow measurement, inadequate activated sludge .process control, inadequate flood
protection for
Outfall 001, the digester tank, originally installed in 1964, was inoperable due to
3
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
cracks and leaks, and the excess flow facilities lacked any measures to remove sludge from the
settling basin and chlorination tank. Additionally, the City, by and through its contract operator
United Water, had recently deposited grease and sludge into the settling basin from a clean-out
of
the primary clarifier scum wells, which threatened the discharge of such wastes through Outfall
002
in the event of excess flows. V actor pit leachate from sewer cleaning operations was also
being discharged to this settling basin. Review
of the lab records revealed that monitoring was
not being conducted according to the frequency required by the permit and that ammonia was
being reported as a daily maximum instead
of the weekly average required by the permit. Lastly,
the City reported that, by and through its contract operator United Water, it had failed to
investigate south interceptor sanitary sewer overflows and to control slugs
of industrial waste,
especially grease loadings.
10.
On April 27, 2004, the Illinois EPA inspected the WWTP to evaluate its
compliance, with the
NPDES Permit and to investigate recent excess flow discharges. The City,
by and through its contract operator United Water, reported that the failure
of the plugged bar
screen alarm contributed to the April
20 and 21, 2004, plant bypass incident. Moreover, the City,
by and through its contract operator United Water, reported that, due to activated sludge quality
problems, it was unable to provide continuous treatment
of the maximum practical flow. Review
of the lab records revealed that monitoring was not being conducted according to the frequency
required by the permit.
11.
On March 2 and 3, 2005, the Illinois EPA inspected the WWTP. Among the
problems documented during this inspection were a lack
of flow measurement, the presence of
odorous sludge and wastewater in the two contact stabilization donuts and a corresponding
4
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
failure to check the WWTP during or after gate closure, ineffective maintenance of the 002
chorine contact tank, and inadequate flood protection for the 002 basin.
12.
On May 6, 2005, the Illinois EPA inspected the WWTP to evaluate its
compliance with the
NPDES Permit. Generator failure, and related electrical equipment failure,
due to improper use
ofthe stand-by generator were documented during this inspection.
13.
From February 28,2003 through March 31, 2003, the City failed to have a
certified Class I operator to supervise the operation
of the WWTP.
B.
Allegations of Non-Compliance
Complainant and the Illinois EPA contend that the Respondent has violated the following
provisions
of the Act and Board Regulations:
Count I:
Count II:
The City has caused or allowed the discharge of
contaminants into waters of the State in violation of the
terms or conditions
of its NPDES permit and has thereby
violated Section 12(f)
of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/12(f) (2006).
By discharging contaminants into waters of the State in violation of
the terms or conditions of its NPDES permit, the City has thereby
violated Sections
304.l41(a) and 309.l02(a) of the Board's Water
Pollution Regulations, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 304.141(a), 309.l02(a).
By discharging contaminants into waters of the State so as to
violate regulations or standards adopted by the
Pollution Control
Board under this Act, the City has thereby violated Section I2(a)
of
the Act, 415 ILCS 5112(a) (2006).
By discharging contaminants into waters of the State so as to tend
to cause water pollution, the City has thereby violated Section
I2(a)
of the Act, 415 ILCS 5112(a) (2006).
By failing to ensure that all treatment works and
associated facilities shall be constructed and
operated as to minimize violations
of applicable
standards during such contingencies as flooding,
5
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
adverse weather, power failure, equipment failure,
or maintenance, the City has violated
Section
306.102
of the Board's Water Pollution Regulations,
35 Ill. Adm. Code 306.102 and Section 12(a) ofthe
Act, 415 ILCS 5112(a) (2006).
By failing to comply with the monitoring, sampling, recording and
reporting requirements set forth in its
NPDES permit, the City has
violated
Section 305.102(b) of the Board's Water Pollution
Regulations, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 305.102(b) and Section 12(f) of the
Act, 415
ILCS 5112(f) (2006).
By allowing bypasses and overflows of untreated wastewater to
occur, the City has violated
Section 306.1 02 of the Board's Water
Pollution Regulations, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 306.102 and Section
12(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5112(a) (2006).
Count III:
By failing to have a certified Class I operator to
supervise the operation
of the WWTP, the City has
violated
Section 312.1 01 of the Board's Water
Pollution Regulations, 35 Ill. Adm. Code 312.101
and
Section 12(a) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5112(a)
(2006).
Additional Violations
Subsequent to the start of this enforcement action, the Illinois EPA issued two additional
Violation Notices to the Respondent.
1.
Violation Notice W -2005-00286: NPDES Permit Schedule Violations and
Effluent Violations.
2.
Violation Notice M-2006-02024: Overflow Violations, Systems Reliability
Violations, and Reporting Violations.
These violations and the necessary compliance measures to address these violations are
covered by this Stipulation.
C.
Admission of Violations
The Respondent admits to the violations alleged in the Complaint filed in this matter and
6
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
referenced within Section I.B. herein.
D.
Compliance Activities to Date
The Respondent has taken the following measures to ensure compliance:
1.
Added additional monitoring equipment at each CSO point;
2.
Maximized storage capacity at WWTF #2 and the State Street lift station;
3.
Updated its sewer system telemetry and WWTF #1 monitoring equipment to
provide adequate automated control;
4.
Completed repairs to Generator #1;
5.
Upgraded the chlorination system capacity as required;
6.
Installed influent flow measurement and event recording as needed at treatment
plant #2;
7.
Begun increasing its spare parts inventory to be completed by January 1, 2010;
8.
Developed an operations manual for each treatment plant; and
9.
Provided adequate manpower for optimum operation and maintenance for both
treatment plants and the collection systems.
II. APPLICABILITY
This Stipulation shall apply to and be binding upon the Parties to the Stipulation, and any
officer, director, agent, or employee
of the Respondent, as well as any successors or assigns of
the Respondent. The Respondent shall not raise as a defense to any enforcement action taken
pursuant to this Stipulation the failure
of any of its officers, directors, agents, employees or
successors or assigns to take such action as shall be required to comply with the provisions
of
this Stipulation. This Stipulation may be used against the Respondent in any subsequent
7
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
enforcement action or permit proceeding as proof of a past adjudication of violation of the Act
and the Board Regulations for all violations alleged in the Complaint in this matter, for purposes
of Sections 39 and 42 of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/39 and 42 (2006).
The Respondent shall notify each contractor to be retained to perform work required in
this Stipulation
of each of the requirements of this Stipulation relevant to the activities to be
performed by that contractor, including all relevant work schedules and reporting deadlines, and
shall provide a copy
of this Stipulation to each contractor already retained no later than thirty
(30) calendar days after the date of entry of this Stipulation. In addition, the Respondent shall
provide copies
of all schedules for implementation of the provisions of this Stipulation to the
prime vendor(s) supplying the control technology systems and other equipment required by this
Stipulation.
No change in ownership, corporate status or operator
of the facility shall in any way alter
the responsibilities
of the Respondent under this Stipulation. In the event that the Respondent
proposes to sell or transfer any real property or operations subject to this Stipulation, the
Respondent shall notify the Complainant and the Illinois
EPA thirty (30) calendar days prior to
the conveyance
of title, ownership or other interest, including a leasehold interest in the facility
or a portion thereof. The Respondent 'shall make as a condition
of any such sale or transfer, that
the purchaser or successor provide to Respondent site access and all cooperation necessary for
Respondent to perform to completion any compliance obligation(s) required by this Stipulation.
The Respondent shall provide a copy
of this Stipulation to any such successor in interest and the
Respondent shall continue to be bound by and remain liable for performance
of all obligations
under this Stipulation. In appropriate circumstances, however, the Respondent and a proposed
8
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
purchaser or operator ofthe facility may jointly request, and the Complainant and the Illinois
EP
A, in their discretion, may consider modification of this Stipulation to obligate the proposed,
purchaser or operator to carry out future requirements
ofthis Stipulation in place of, or in
addition to, the Respondent. This provision does not relieve the Respondent from compliance
with any regulatory requirement regarding notice and transfer
of applicable facility permits.
III. IMPACT
ON THE PUBLIC RESULTING FROM ALLEGED NON-COMPLIANCE
Section 33(c)
of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/33(c) (2006), provides as follows:
In making its orders and determinations, the Board shall take into
consideration all the facts and circumstances bearing upon the
reasonableness
of the emissions, discharges, or deposits involved
including, but not limited to:
1.
the character and degree of injury to, or interference with
the protection
of the health, general welfare and physical
property
of the people;
2.
the social and economic value of the pollution source;
3.
the suitability or unsuitability of the pollution source to the area in
which it is located, including the question
of priority of location in
the area involved;
4.
the technical practicability and economic reasonableness of
reducing or eliminating the emissions, discharges or deposits
resulting from such pollution source; and
5.
any subsequent compliance.
In response to these factors, the Parties to the Stipulation state the following:
1.
Complainant contends that the injury to, or interference with, the protection of the
health, general welfare, and physical property
of the People would be characterized as failure to
comply with requirements meant to protect water quality in the State.
2.
The parties agree that Respondent's facility is of social and economic benefit.
9
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
3.
Respondent's facility is suitably located at 606 South Front Street, Pekin, Illinois.
4.
The parties agree that complying with the Act and regulations is technically
practicable and economically reasonable.
5.
The alleged violations occurred while the City's operation was being run by
United Water, its contract operator. Respondent implemented measures subsequent to the
alleged violations that are the subject of the Complaint in this matter and has agreed to the
compliance schedule in this Stipulation
in order to operate in compliance with the Act.
IV. CONSIDERATION OF SECTION 42(b) FACTORS
Section 42(h) of the Act, 415 ILCS 5/42(h) (2006), provides as follows:
In determining the appropriate civil penalty to be imposed under
... this
Section, the Board is authorized to consider any matters
of record in
mitigation or aggravation
of penalty, including but not limited to the
following factors:
1.
the duration and gravity of the violation;
2.
the presence or absence of due diligence on the part of the
respondent in attempting to comply with requirements
of this Act
and regulations thereunder or to secure relief therefrom as provided
by this Act;
3.
any economic benefits accrued by the respondent because of delay
in compliance with requirements, in which case the economic
benefits shall be determined by the lowest cost alternative for
achieving compliance;
4.
the amount of monetary penalty which will serve to deter further
violations by the respondent and to otherwise aid in enhancing
voluntary compliance with this Act by the respondent and other
persons similarly subject to the Act;
5.
the number, proximity in time, and gravity of previously
adjudicated violations
of this Act by the respondent;
6.
whether the respondent voluntarily self-disclosed, in accordance
10
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
with subsection I of this Section, the non-compliance to the
Agency; and
7.
whether the respondent has agreed to undertake a "supplemental
environmental project," which means an environmentally
beneficial project that a respondent agrees to undertake in
settlement
of an enforcement action brought under this Act, but
which the respondent is not otherwise legally required to perform.
In response to these factors, the Parties to the Stipulation state as follows:
1.
The bulk of the violations stemmed from improper operation and maintenance
procedures while the operation was being operated and maintained by United Water, the City's
contract operator; however, needed equipment upgrades also played a significant role. Most
of
the problems with the WWTP and sewer system were long-standing. The fecal coliform
excursions were significant.
2.
The Illinois EPA notified the City of numerous violations in 2000 but the City did
not rectify many
of them, resulting in violation notices in 2003 and 2004. Since enforcement
action was taken, the City has begun to address and resolve the violations.
3.
A portion ofthe economic benefit of non-compliance can be attributed to the cost
for the required chlorination upgrade needed to control fecal coliform excursions. This portion
of the economic benefit of noncompliance was approximately $980.00. However, a total
economic benefit would take into account cost estimates for the WWTF upgrade, as well as other
technical measures for which the
State has not been given cost information.
4.
Complainant and the Illinois EPA have determined, based upon the specific facts
of this matter, that a penalty of Fourteen Thousand, Four Hundred and Eighty-Three Dollars
($14,483.00) will serve to deter further violations and aid in future voluntary compliance with the
Act and Board regulations.
11
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
5.
To Complainant's and the Illinois EPA's knowledge, Respondent has no
previously adjudicated violations
of the Act.
6.
Self-disclosure is not at issue in this matter.
7.
The settlement of this matter does not include an supplemental environmental
project.
V. TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
A.
Penalty Payment
1.
The Respondent shall pay a civil penalty in the sum of Fourteen Thousand Four
Hundred and Eighty-Three Dollars
($14,483.00) within thirty (30) days from the date the Board
adopts and accepts this Stipulation.
B.
Stipulated Penalties, Interest and Default
1.
If the Respondent fails to complete any activity or fails to comply with any
response or reporting requirement by the date specified in this Stipulation, the Respondent shall
provide notice to the Complainant and the Illinois
EPA of each failure to comply with this
Stipulation and shall pay stipulated penalties in the amount
of $100.00 per day until that
compliance is achieved. The Complainant may make a demand for stipulated penalties upon the
Respondent for its noncompliance with this Stipulation. However, failure by the Complainant to
make this demand shall not relieve the Respondent
of the obligation to pay stipulated penalties.
All stipulated penalties shall be payable within thirty
(30) calendar days of the date the
Respondent knows or should have known
of its noncompliance with any provision of this
Stipulation.
2.
If the Respondent fails to make any payment required by this Stipulation on or
12
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
before the date upon which the payment is due, the Respondent shall be in default and the
remaining unpaid balance
of the penalty, plus any accrued interest, shall be due and owing
immediately. In the event
of default, the Complainant shall be entitled to reasonable costs of
collection, including reasonable attorney's fees.
3.
Pursuant to Section 42(g) of the Act, interest shall accrue on any penalty amount
owed by the Respondent not paid within the time prescribed herein. Interest on unpaid penalties
shall begin to accrue from the date such are due and continue to accrue to the date fully payment
is received. Where partial payment is made on any penalty amount that is due, such partial
payment shall be first applied to any interest on unpaid penalties then owing.
C.
Payment Procedures
All payments required by this Stipulation shall be made by certified check or money order
payable to the Illinois EPA for deposit into the Environmental Protection Trust Fund ("EPTF").
Payments shall be sent by first class mail and delivered to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Services
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield,
IL 62794-9276
The name, case number
~nd
the Respondent's federal tax identification number shall appear on
the face
of the certified check or money order. A copy of the certified check or money order and
any transmittal letter shall be sent to:
Environmental Bureau
Illinois Attorney General's
Office
500 South Second Street
Springfield, IL 62706
13
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
D.
Future Compliance
1.
The City agrees to complete the following:
•
SHORT TERM COMPLIANCE ITEMS
These operation and maintenance items shall be implemented within six (6)
months from the date the Board adopts and accepts this Stipulation.
1.
Additional monitoring equipment is needed at each CSO point on the sewer
system to determine when any outfall is nearing discharge.
2.
The gate on the north sanitary interceptor will close when anyone CSO is nearing
discharge. Diversion
of flow into the old wastewater treatment facility #2
(UWWTF #2"), for storage, will then begin.
3.
The wastewater treatment facility # 1 (UWWTF # 1 ") inlet gate will be adjusted to
control influent flow so that at least 8.7 million gallons per day design maximum
flow is always receiving full treatment.
4.
The storage capacity available for sewer system flows at both WWTF #2 and the
State Street Lift Station will be used to the fullest extent possible by ensuring that
the State Street Lift Station storage tank is also brought
on line during high flows.
Monitoring equipment shall be provided within sixty
(60) days of entry of this
order to determine when flows begin entering this tank to determine
if influent
weir adjustments are needed.
5.
There shall be no CSOs allowed by the Respondent until the following has
occurred:
•
The Respondent has fully utilized all flow storage facilities
at WWTF # 1 and WWTF #2 and the State Street storage
tank; and
•
The full treatment capacity at WWTF # 1 has been utilized
with at least a design maximum flow
of 8.7 million gallons
per day
(UMGD") receiving continuous treatment.
6.
Entry of sanitary flow into WWFT #1 from the three sanitary interceptors is to be
a priority. Continued monitoring will occur to ensure compliance, modifications
will be made as needed.
7.
The present sewer system telemetry, and the WWTF #1 monitoring equipment,
14
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
shall provide the level of automated control needed for this interim plan.
8.
Ensure proper operation of all sewer system and WWTF #2 flow control gates and
structures so that maximum possible flow is transported to the # 1 plant prior to
CSO.
9.
Maintain records of any dates, times and corresponding flows when the WWTF
# 1 inlet gate is closed to restrict flow into full treatment.
10.
Ensure both WWTFs always receive optimum operation and maintenance
(UO&M") and process control so that complete and continuous treatment of design
maximum flow
(UDMF") can occur at all times when such flows are received.
11.
Ensure adequate influent flow control and splitting ahead of the two WWTF #1
mechanical screens to ensure efficient and reliable operation of both screens
during higher flows.
12.
If final effluent compliance cannot be maintained, provide for sludge removal
from the primary clarifiers during 2nd and 3rd shifts. This will require additional
manpower - at least 2 operators on duty and/or a sludge holding tank (designed to
control odors). Any sludge holding tank construction must be in accordance with
the Illinois Recommended Standards for
Sewage Works (lRSSW) and an Agency
construction permit obtained.
13.
Upgrade the aeration system if that at least 1.5 to 2 ppm of dissolved oxygen
cannot be maintained in the activated sludge process aeration tanks and aerobic
digester. Any blower upgrade needs to be in accordance with
IRSSW and an
Agency construction permit obtained. As part
of this work, additional air
diffusers will need to be provided in the digester.
14.
All mixed liquor suspended solids (UMLSS") process control testing needs to be
performed gravimetrically unless it can be demonstrated the present probe gives
accurate readings. Comparison gravimetric testing will be performed twice
weekly for six months. Also, probe calibration samples will be performed at the
frequency recommended by the probe manufacturer and split with the commercial
laboratory utilized by the City.
15.
Investigate the cause, and eliminate to the extent possible, the north and south
plant clarifier sludge tube plugging problems.
16.
Scum and floating debris on the surface of the north and south plant clarifiers
shall be discharged into the aerobic digester rather than returned to the aeration
tanks.
15
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
17.
Final clarifier effluent shall be collected and returned to secondary treatment
whenever weirs are washed. This will be accomplished by ceasing effluent
discharge during weir cleaning, capturing all wash water in the chlorine contact
tank and completely pumping the contact tank contents to the head
of the WWTF
at a rate that exceeds the effluent flow.
18.
All 3 chlorine contact tanks shall be completely cleaned with all sludge removed
at least every 4 - 6 weeks. This shall be done when final clarifier weirs are
washed as described above.
19.
Supernatant from the anaerobic digesters and sludge lagoons shall be handled in a
manner that does not upset the activated sludge process or degrade final effluent
quality. These waste streams shall continue to be discharged directly to the
aerobic digester.
20.
Continue with the current year-round comprehensive sludge management plan
including removal
of lagoon sludge at least twice per year. The sludge lagoon
shall be completely cleaned out annually and then cleaned as needed during the
year so freeboard is maintained at a minimum
of two (2) feet.
21.
Complete repairs
to the generator #1, including connection to the transfer switch.
Ensure that future loads are within the generator design capacity.
22.
Upgrade the chlorination system capacity, as required, so that adequate chlorine is
available to disinfect both
001 and 002 at all times. This work shall be done per
the
IRSSW and an Agency construction permit obtained.
23.
Provide a sharp-crested weir for effluent flow measurement at the
FBOP chlorine
contact tank.
24.
Provide complete draining and cleaning
of the 002 settling and chlorination basins
after each use; but
if there are consecutive events, provide complete draining and
cleaning within 24 hours
of the last event during normal river stages.
25.
Provide for complete draining and cleaning
of the #2 treatment plant wastewater
storage tanks at least twice a year. A bottom drain and flushing system shall be
installed
if these tanks receive continued use under the long-term control plan for
CSO control or any future upgrading to overall treatment facilities.
26.
Provide complete draining and cleaning
of the State Street storage basin after each
use.
27.
Discontinue any use
of the lagoon at WWTF #2 unless the lagoon has been sealed
to prevent leakage.
16
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
28.
Influent flow measurement/event recording is needed at treatment plant #2.
29.
Continue with work to provide a spare parts inventory for both treatment plants by
January
1,2010.
30.
Develop an operations manual for each treatment plant.
31.
Ensure adequate manpower and provide optimum operation and maintenance for
both treatment plants and the collection system at all times.
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
The program shall be implemented within 1 year of entry of this order, or as otherwise
required by the
USEP A.
•
The City shall develop a formal pretreatment program for approval by USEP A.
An application for a pretreatment program shall be submitted to
USEP A by
December 31,
2009.
LONG TERM COMPLIANCE ITEMS
Long Term Control Program (ilL TCP") for CSO Control
The City shall develop and implement a L
TCP for CSO control. The L TCP must
be implemented in a manner that ensures there are no effluent or water quality
violations associated with
CSO's, and the conditions of PCB 85-226 are met. This
includes all
US EPA and IEP A elements required for L TCP development,
including those listed in the
IEPA letters dated September 25, 2008 and December
15,2008 (See Exhibits A and B attached).
TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADING
•
The City submitted a proposed L TCP to the Illinois EPA on July 24, 2009 which is
presently under review by the Illinois
EPA.
•
An approvable facilities plan shall be submitted to the Illinois EPA within sixty
(60) days of L TCP approval.
•
Plans and permit application for a treatment plant upgrade shall be submitted to the
Illinois
EPA within sixty (60) days of Illinois EPA approval of the facilities plan.
•
The Respondent shall have a new upgraded WWTP, fully online, within either
17
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
three (3) years of the issuance ofthe construction permit for the new WWTP or
June
30, 2015, whichever occurs first.
•
The City shall continue with plans for upgrading both treatment plants. This work
will basically consist
of a new #1 plant that meets the IRSSW requirements and
includes adequate flood protection and backup power, abandonment of the present
sludge lagoons, installation
of modem sludge digestion and dewatering facilities
and intended future use
of the plant #2 lagoon. The L TCP and WWTF upgrade
shall be coordinated to insure adequate WWTF capacity for treatment
of flows
following
CSO improvements.
WWTF LOADING
•
The City shall not accept any WWTF loading that the plant cannot handle, both
prior to and subsequent to the treatment plant upgrade.
2.
In addition to any other authorities, the Illinois EPA, its employees and
representatives, and the Attorney General, her employees and representatives, shall have the right
of entry into and upon the Respondent's facility which is the subject of this Stipulation, at all
reasonable times for the purposes
of conducting inspections and evaluating compliance status. In
conducting such inspections, the Illinois EPA, its employees and representatives, and the Attorney
General, her employees and representatives, may take photographs, samples, and collect
information, as they deem necessary.
3.
This Stipulation in no way affects the responsibilities of the Respondent to comply
with any other federal, state or local laws or regulations, including but not limited to the Act and
the Board Regulations.
4.
The Respondent shall cease and desist from future violations of the Act and Board
Regulations that were the subject matter
of the Complaint and included in Section
I. B.
above.
E.
Release from Liability
In consideration of the Respondent's payment of the $14,483.00 penalty, completion of all
18
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
activities required hereunder, and upon the Board's approval ofthis Stipulation, the Complainant
releases, waives and discharges the Respondent from any further liability or penalties for
violations
of the Act and Board Regulations that were the subject matter of the Complaint herein.
The release set forth above does not extend to any matters other than those expressly specified in
Complainant's Complaint filed on December
13,2006 and included in Section
I.
B. above. The
Complainant reserves, and this Stipulation is without prejudice to, all rights
of the State of Illinois
against the Respondent with respect to all other matters, including but not limited to, the
following:
a.
criminal liability;
b.
liability for future violation of state, federal, local, and common laws
andlor
regulations;
c.
liability for natural resources damage arising out of the alleged violations; and
d.
liability or claims based on the Respondent's failure to satisfy the requirements of
this Stipulation.
Nothing in this Stipulation is intended as a waiver, discharge, release, or covenant
not to
sue for any claim or cause
of action, administrative or judicial, civil or criminal, past or future, in
law or in equity, which the State
of Illinois or the Illinois EPA may have against any person, as
defined by Section 3.315
of the Act, 415 ILCS
5/3.315,
or entity other than the Respondent.
F.
Correspondence, Reports and Other Documents
Any and all correspondence, reports and any other documents required under this
Stipulation, except for penalty payments, shall be submitted as follows:
19
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
As to the Complainant
Andrew
1. Nicholas
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Bureau
69
W. Washington Street
Suite 1800
Chicago, Illinois 60602
As to the Illinois EPA
Charles
W. Gunnarson
Assistant Counsel
Illinois EPA
1021 North Grand Avenue East
p.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794-9276
James Kammueller
Division
of Water Pollution Control
Illinois EPA
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
As to the Respondent
Dennis Kief
City Manager, City
of Pekin
111 S. Capital Street
Pekin, IL 61554
Burt Dancey
City Attorney
P.O. Box 873
Pekin,
IL 61555
G.
Enforcement and Modification of Stipulation
1.
Upon the entry of the Board's Order approving and accepting this Stipulation, that
Order is a binding and enforceable order of the Board and may be enforced as such through any
20
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
and all available means.
2.
The Parties to the Stipulation may, by mutual written consent, agree to extend any
compliance dates or modify the terms
of this Stipulation. A request for any modification shall be
made in writing and submitted to the contact persons identified in Section V.F. Any such request
shall be made by separate document, and shall not be submitted within any other report or
submittal required by this Stipulation. Any such agreed modification shall be in writing, signed
by authorized representatives
of the Parties of the Stipulation.
H.
Execution of Stipulation
The undersigned representatives for the Parties to the Stipulation certify that they are fully
authorized by the party whom they represent to enter into the terms and conditions
of this
Stipulation and to legally bind them to
it.
21
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
WHEREFORE, the Parties to the Stipulation request that the Board adopt and accept the
foregoing Stipulation and
Proposal for Settlement as written.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
LISA
MADIGAN,
Attorney General
State of Illinois,
MATTHEW
J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement!
Asbestos Litigation Division
BY: __________ _
THOMAS DAVIS, Chief
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
DA
TE:-----,I,--'
_()
/_I.....;;;.SI......;~_()_j
.......
.
__
CITY OF PEKIN
BY:
_________ __
(Signature)
Name:
----------------
(Print)
Title:
-----------
DATE:
-----------
22
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
DOUGLAS P. SCOTT, Director
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
WHEREFORE, the Parties to the Stipulation request that the Board adopt and accept the
foregoing Stipulation and Proposal for Settlement as written.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
LISA MADIGAN,
Attorney General
State oflllinois,
MAITHEW J. DUNN, Chief
Environmental Enforcement!
Asbestos Litigation Division
By: __________________ __
DATE:
THOMAS DAVIS, Chief
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
------------------
(Signa e)
Name:
Rusf~
L.
Dunn
(print
Title:
YYl
a¥et'
DATE:
()eftYI)'er
/3)
W?J7
22
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
DOUGLAS P. SCOIT, Director
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
By: __________________ __
JOHN J.KIM
Chief Legal Counsel
DATE:
________________ __
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, ANDREW J. NICHOLAS, an Assistant Attorney General, do certify that I caused to be
served on this
2ih day of October, 2009, the foregoing Notice of Filing, Stipulation and Proposal
for Settlement, and Agreed Motion for Relief from the Hearing Requirement, upon the persons
listed on said Notice by placing same in an envelope bearing sufficient postage with the United
States Postal Service located at 100 West Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois.
~s
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 22, 2009
