ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
November
20,
1980
DIAMOND DEVELOPMENT CO. and CITY OF ALTAMONT,
Petitioner,
v,
)
PCB 80—147
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Petitioner.
OPINION AND ORDER OF
THE
BOARD
(by J.
Anderson):
This matter comes before the Board on the petition for
variance filed August
11,
1980 and amended September 15,
1980 by
Diamond Development Co.
(Diamond) and the City of Altamont
(City).
Petitioners seek variance from Rule
962(a) of Chapter
3:
Water
Pollution (Chapter 3)
in order to obtain an operating permit for
a City—owned sanitary sewer extension serving two eight—unit
apartment buildings.
On October 20,
1980 the Environmental
Protection Agency recommended that this variance be granted
with conditions.
Hearing was waived, and none has been held.
The City of Altarnont, which is located
in Effingham County,
owns and operates two wastewater treatment plants.
The City’s South
Sewage Treatment Plant was placed on restricted status September
9,
1975.
At that time,
the plant was organically overloaded, receiving
1535 P.E. when its design maximum was 1330.
Agency records reveal
that during much of 1978 and 1979 the plant was also hydraulically
overloaded receiving flows
in excess of its 133,000 gpd design maximum.
Sewage has been bypassed on at least three occasions.
The receiving
stream,
in 1977, was found to be
in a polluted state
(Rec.
1—3).
The two buildings for which variance is sought,
as well
as
the sanitary sewer extension involved, were constructed and occupied
in summer,
1978.
This sanitary sewer extension is tributary to
the restricted South
plant.
The sewer receives a discharge of
approximately 5600 gpd from the buildings’
16 units.
Then—owners
Richard Ackerman and Gerald and John VanAist allegedly failed to
obtain sewer construction and operating permits.
(This matter
is the subject of
a still—pending enforcement action
(PCB 79—231)
against the City and Gerald VanAlst.)
Diamond purchased these buildings on May
1,
1979.
Diamond
states that, at that time,
it believed that all necessary permits
had been obtained,
and that it was further unaware of the City’s
restricted status.
The City states that at the time of construction
2
and
initial
operation
of
the
sewer,
that it had
believed
no
permits
were
necessary
for
connections
of
that
kind.
Thus,
both
petitioners
now
seek
a
permit
for
the
sewer
extension
which
has
been
in
operation
since
1978.
Diamond
alleges that denial of variance would
impose
an
arbitrary
and
unreasonable hardship
both
on
it,
its tenants,
and
on
the
city.
In
support
thereof,
Diamond
states
that
the
apartment
units
were
not
designed
or
equipped
for
any method
of
sewage
disposal
other than the one in use.
Consequently, denial of variance would
render
the apartments uninhabitable, and would therefore Neffectively
waste the considerable
sums...
expended
by
Diamond
thus far in
good
faith and in reasonable reliance upon the representations and
assurances made by seller.
N
Diamond does not present a detailed
accounting of such sums, but does indicate that it has invested
$350,000 including a mortgage of approximately $300,000 that is
held by
the
Farmer’s
Home
Administration (Pet.
4-5).
Thirteen out of the sixteen units are currently occupied, and
are being rented under the FmHA’s Rural Rental Housing Program,
which enables lessees to receive Federal housing subsidy benefits.
It is asserted that there is a real
and
substantial need for
low
income housing in the area, and that denial of variance would
therefore be a hardship on the City,
as well as on the tenants
who would be displaced (Pet 4—6).
The City is in the process of upgrading its treatment plant
and of rehabilitating its sewage collection system with the aid of
grant funds.
The upgraded plant is expected to be operational in
May, 1982.
Diamond
asserts that, in the interim, its discharge will
cause no additional harm to the environment (Pet.
6—7, Ex. F, G).
The Agency recommends grant of variance, subject to conditions
requiring water conservation, and prohibiting further connections
until
restricted
status
has
been
lifted
(Rec.
4).
The Board concludes that variance relief is appropriate here.
The
effect of a grant of variance here is to
cure’
a
connection
which is alleged to have been improperly made in 1978.
The
hydraulic
load
to
the
South
plant
may
in fact be decreased if
conservation
devices
are
required.
Given
the
nature
of
the
housing
at
issue,
it
would
be
an
arbitrary
and
unreasonable
hardship
to
in
effect
disapprove
operation
of
a
sewer
which
was
connected
in
error, an error which neither Diamond nor the tenants committed.
Variance is granted subject to the conditions outlined in the
attached order.
This
Opinion
constitutes
the
Board’ s
findings
of
fact
and
conclusions
of
law
in
this
matter.
ORDER
Petitioners,
Diamond
Development
Co.
and
the
City
of
Altamont,
are
hereby
granted
variance
from
Rule
962 (a)
of
Chapter
3:
Water
Pollution,
subject
to
the
following
conditions:
3
1.
This variance
is granted solely
for connection of the two
eight—unit apartment buildings already serviced by the existing
sewer extension.
No additional
connections may be made.
2.
Within 60 days of the date of this Order, Diamond shall
install,
in each apartment unit, plastic dams
in each water closet
and water saving faucets and shower heads,
if such devices are not
currently in place.
3.
Within 90 days of the date of this Order, Diamond shall
certify its compliance with condition
(2)
above,
to the Agency,
in writing.
4.
The City shall operate and maintain its South Treatment
Plant in such manner as will minimize bypassing of effluent.
5.
Within forty-five days
of the date of this Order, each
Petitioner shall execute and forward to the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency, Division of Water Pollution Control, Variance
Unit,
2200 Churchill Road, Springfield,
Illinois,
62706,
a Certi-
ficate of Acceptance and Agreement to be bound to all terms and
conditions of this variance. This forty—five day period shall be
held in abeyance for any period this matter
is being appealed.
The form of the Certification shall be as follows:
CERTIFICATION
I,
(We),
,
having read
and fully understanding the Order in PCB 80—147w hereby accept that
Order and agree to be bound by all
of its terms and conditions.
PETITIONER __________________________
SIGNED ________________________
TITLE __________________________
DATE ___________________________
IT
IS SO ORDERED.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order were adopted
on the
~
day of/)~-~J)..t_~.~
,
1980 by a vote of
______
Christan L. Moff t??yJClerk
Illinois Pollution’~ControlBoard
