ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
May 26, 1977
WILLIAM GILMAN,
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 77-35
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr.
Zeitiin):
The original Petition for Variance in this matter was filed on
February
1,
1977,
seeking relief
from the requirements of Rule 962
of Chapter
3: Water Pollution, delineating the standards of issuance
for non-NPDES Permits under sub-part B, Part
9 of Chapter
3,
(Rule
951 et seq.)
Variance was sought to allow the construction of a
sewer extension to serve a planned 10—lot subdivision
(the “Gilman
Addition to the City of Wenona”) which would be tributary
to the
City of Wenona sewage treatment plant.
In an Interim Order entered February
3,
1977,
the Board found
Mr. Gilman’s Petition inadequate and ordered that additional infor-
mation be filed.
That information was filed
in an Amended Petition
received March 11,
1977.
The Recommendation of the Environmental
Protection Agency
(Agency) was received on April
25,
1977.
No
hearing was held
in this matter.
Petitioner wishes
to construct a 5—acre subdivision of 10
lots
on land purchased for $25,000
in September,
1976.
The subdivision
would be served by a 576—foot sewer extension which,
it is estimated,
will carry 4800 gallons per day, including 8.2 pounds BOD and 9.6
pounds Suspended Solids.
The estimated population of the subdivision
will be
48 persons.
The subdivision would be serviced by the City
of Wenona, which currently has a combined storm and sanitary sewer
system which outlets to
a pumping station adjacent to Petitioner’s
land.
Petitioner alleges that the only alternative use for the land
in question is farming, which because of the size of the parcel,
could only realize a net income of approximately $500 per year.
A Permit for the sewer extension was requested from the Agency
on December
1,
1976.
That Permit application was denied by the Agency
because the City of Wenona’s sewage treatment plant cannot meet the
applicable standards of
4 mg/l BOD and
5 mg/i SS for discharges
to
Sandy Creek, tributary to the Illinois River.
Although the sewage
treatment plant has
a design population equivalent
(PE) capacity of
1,500 and has a current loading of only approximately 1000-1100 PE,
the existing two-stage waste stabilization type treatment plant
cannot meet applicable
standards.
25
—
583
The City has refused
to accept Step
II and Step III grants for
improvement of the sewage treatment plant.
Because the City refused
the construction grants, and because it cannot meet its
50 mg/i and
100 mg/l NPDES permit limitations for BUD and
SS,
respectively, the
Agency refused
the Petitioner’s application to construct the sewer
extension in issue.*
The Petitioner alleges, and the Agency does not contest,
that
Wenona was not on Restricted Status prior to December
1,
1976.
Nor
does
the Agency contest Petitionerrs allegations that an Agency
representative informed Petitioner that a Permit could be obtained
notwithstanding the City’s refusal to accept Step
II and Step III
funding.
Petitioner alleges that his commitment to purchase and
develop the land in question was made based on such assurance.
The Agency’s Recommendation reiterates essentially the same
facts
as are alleged by the Petitioner and recommends
that the Petition
be granted.
The Agency feels, apparently, that Petitioner should
not be penalized under these circumstances for the City of Wenona’s
failure
to meet applicable standards.
In addition,
the Agency alleges
that the addition of
48 PE to the existing plant would not result
in any additional degradation of the receiving waterway.
The City
has sufficient additional capacity to treat the additional
load and
still meet existing effluent levels.
Although we feel that any additional
load added
to an already
substandard sewage treatment p1an~
must
exacerbate an existing
violation,
we nonetheless agree with the Agency that the additional
load
to be generated by Petitioner’s subdivision will not generate
such environmental damage as would outweigh the hardship to Peti-
tioner
if the Variance is not granted.
Weighing these factors, we agree that the potential hardship
to Petitioner outweighs the potential adverse impact on the environ-
ment if the Variance were not granted.
Likewise we agree with the
Agency that the alternative
-
the installation of individual septic
fields for each of the lots
in question
-
would pose
a potentially
greater
~idverse
impact
upon
the
envjronment.
We
shall
therefore
grant
the
requested
variance,
but
shall
condition
it
upon
a
requirement
that
no
more
than
the
requested
number
of
residences
be
connected
to
the
proposed sewer extension.
Under
the
circumstances,
we
do
not
feel
that
additional
conditions
are necessary.
This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the Board in this matter.
*Although failure
to meet NPDES standards
is not pertinent to our
decision here, Wenona’s refusal to accept grant funding is signifi-
cant,
inasmuch as that action deprives the City of any relief under
Rule 409 of Chapter
3,
(‘‘delays in upgrading”).
25
—
584
ORDER
IT
IS THE ORDER OF THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD that Petitioner
William Gilman be granted a Variance from Rule 962 of Chapter
3:
Water Pollution,
to allow the construction of
a sewer extension
tributary
to the City of Wenona sewage treatment plant
to serve a
10-lot subdivision known as the “Gilman Addition to the City of
Wenona.”
Said Variance shall be conditioned upon the following:
1.
Petitioner shall connect no more than
10
individual residences
to said sewer extension.
2.
Petitioner shall, within thirty
(30)
days of
the date of this Order,
execute and forward to the
Environmen.tal Protection Agency, Control Program Coordi-
nator,
2200 Churchill Road, Springfield,
Illinois 62706,
a Certificate of Acceptance
in the following form:
I,
(We), __________________________,
having
read the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board
in case No. PCB 77—35, understand and accept said Order,
realizing that such acceptance renders all terms and
conditions thereto binding and enforceable.
SIGNED
TITLE
DATE
Mr. James Young dissented.
I, Christan
L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were
adopted on the
~
day of
_________,
1977,
by a vote of
A.J1./
Christan L. MoffettJ,A9’~erk
Illinois Pollution ~4rol
Board
25
—
585