ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    October 30, 1980
    CITY OF KNOXVILLE,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 80—47
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
    )
    AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    MR.
    RON HENSON, BARASH
    & STOERZBACH, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF
    PETITIONER.
    MS.
    HEIDI
    E.
    HANSON, ATTORNEY, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by
    I. Goodman):
    On March
    24, 1980 the City of Knoxville (Knoxville)
    filed
    this petition before the Board requesting a variance
    to allow
    connection of a proposed restaurant facility to its sanitary
    sewer
    system.
    Additional
    facts were presented to the Board
    in
    a
    subsequent amendment to the petition,
    a hearing was held on
    July 17,
    1980,
    and the Board has received considerable public
    comment.
    Knoxville requests a variance from Rule 962(a)
    of Chapter 3
    of the Board’s Water Pollution Control
    Regulations to allow the
    aforementioned connection notwithstanding the fact that the
    Knoxville Sewage Treatment Plant has been placed on restricted
    status by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    (Agency)
    due to hydraulic overloading.
    The proposed restaurant would have
    150 seats and would discharge an estimated sanitary flow of 7,500
    gallons per day.
    The Agency recommends denial of the variance
    due to the existence of restricted status,
    the absence of a
    showing of arbitrary or unreasonable hardship, and the fact that
    the Knoxville sewer system presently surcharges into the
    basements of certain citizens during wet weather.
    In a variance case the Board must consider the hardship
    imposed upon the petitioner by the particular rule or regulation
    in question and must balance
    this
    hardship against the potential
    harm to the environment should the variance request be granted.
    In this case, Knoxville spent a considerable amount of time
    presenting evidence concerning whether or not the restricted
    status had been correctly imposed upon its treatment plant by
    —2—
    the Agency.
    The issue of whether or not Knoxville’s plant has
    been correctly placed on restricted status cannot,
    however, be
    placed before the Board in a variance petition, although the
    Board will consider that fact as
    it pertains to Petitioner’s
    hardship and to harm to the environment.
    The hardship claimed by Knoxville is the possible loss of
    tax revenue and employment should the variance be denied and
    should the owners of M and R Oil Company (the proposed restaurant
    facility operators)
    subsequently decide to abandon their proposed
    restaurant.
    Knoxville alleges a severe unemployment situation in
    the city and points out that the proposed restaurant may employ
    as many as
    50 people.
    In addition, a number of citizens and two
    state representatives have voiced support of the proposed
    restaurant.
    The Agency argues that the hardship experienced by the city
    is precisely that which an imposition of restricted status is
    designed to accomplish,
    ~
    an impetus for improvement.
    The
    Agency presented evidence from
    Knoxville homeowners, who
    generally testified to problems with sewer backups during wet
    weather and the pumping of raw sewage out of manholes and into
    ditches to relieve the surcharge condition.
    In addition, the
    Agency presented evidence that 731 citizens of Knoxville signed
    a petition requesting that no more connections be allowed
    to the sewer system until the sewer problems in Knoxville had
    been corrected.
    The Board
    finds that Knoxville has failed to prove that an
    arbitrary or unreasonable hardship would occur should their
    variance petition be denied.
    The potential
    loss of revenue and
    jobs to Knoxville is not sufficient
    to counterbalance the
    addition of further burdens to an existing surcharging
    sewer
    system and a hydraulically overloaded sewage treatment plant.
    This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and
    conclusions of law of the Board in this matter.
    ORDER
    The variance request of the City of Knoxville for relief
    from Rule 962(a) of Chapter
    3,
    the Board’s Water Pollution
    Control Regulations,
    is hereby denied.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I,
    Christan
    L.
    Moffett,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, hereby certify that t~eabove Opinion and Order
    wer~adopted on the
    ‘.3c~
    day of
    ~
    1980 by a vote
    of~S-t~
    __
    I
    v~
    ~
    Christan L. Mofte~l~,Clerk
    Illinois Pollutià~’ControlBoard

    Back to top