ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
    BOARD
    July
    24,
    1980
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    v.
    )
    PCB 78—264
    CITY OF KEWANEE, a Municipal
    )
    Corporation,
    Respondent.
    DOUGLAS
    P. KARP, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON BEHALF
    OF COMPLAINANT.
    SCOTT E. CLEMENS, CITY ATTORNEY OF KEWANEE, APPEARED ON BEHALF
    OF
    RESPONDENT.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE
    BOARD
    (by
    I.
    Goodman):
    On October 13,
    1978 the Illinois Environmental Protection
    Agency
    (Agency) filed
    an enforcement action against the City
    of
    Kewanee.
    On November
    13,
    1978 the Board granted the Agency
    leave
    to file an amended complaint which alleged violation of Sections
    12(a),
    (h), and
    (f)
    of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act
    (Act)
    and Rule 901 of Chapter 3:
    Water Pollution Control Rules
    and Regulations
    (Water Regulations).
    Two hearings were held at
    which representatives of the news media were present.
    At the
    last hearing on May
    13,
    1980 the parties submitted a stipulation
    and proposal for settlement
    (Stipulation) and questions of the
    news media were answered; however,
    no public testimony from
    citizens was offered.
    The Respondent owns and operates
    a sewage treatment plant in
    the City
    of Kewanee, Henry County,
    Illinois which discharges the
    plant’s effluent into the western fork of the Spoon River
    pursuant
    to a NPDES permit.
    The parties stipulate that in
    violation of Respondent’s NPDES permit,
    Sections 12(a),
    (b),
    and
    (f) of the Act and Rule 901 of the Water Regulations the
    Respondent:
    (1) has failed to submit several Discharge Monitoring
    Reports
    (DMR’s),
    (2) has submitted untimely DMR’s,
    (3) has failed
    for extended periods of time to monitor fecal coliform, chlorine
    residual, and heavy metals
    in its effluent,
    and
    (4) has
    exceeded
    effluent limitations
    for BOD5 and total
    suspended solids
    (TSS).

    —2—
    The parties agree that Respondent’s failure to operate and
    maintain the plant properly have contributed to violations, but
    also that the present facilities can not consistently meet BOD
    and PSS effluent standards
    in Respondent’s NPDES permit.
    Alga
    in the lagoon
    (used for tertiary and excess flow treatment) has
    caused BOD
    and TSS concentrations to exceed NPDES permit
    limitation~during the months of March through September,
    1978.
    Furthermore, improvements made to the plant
    in 1972,
    including
    the addition of an effluent and storm water pump station, a
    lagoon, chlorination facilities,
    an aerated grit chamber, and an
    aerobic digester, did not increase the treatment capacity of
    existing secondary facilities or improve the plant’s operational
    flexibility.
    Respondent, currently
    in the Sewer System Evaluation Survey
    stage of a Step
    1 United States Environmental Protection Agency
    (USEPA) Grant Project, has been preparing a Facilities Plan since
    September
    1,
    1977.
    Preliminary reports indicate that serious
    infiltration and inflow problems impair plant operation and
    effluent quality.
    Installation of
    a 48—inch interceptor in 1978
    has increased the flow to the pumping facilities so that flows of
    25 million gallons per day
    (MGD)
    are reached during high flow
    periods.
    Because pumping capacity
    (11.5 MGD)
    is considerably
    less than flow capacity, the plant~sinterceptor and treatment
    units surcharge.
    Activated sludge
    solids, consequently,
    are
    washed out of the aeration and reaeration tanks.
    Re—establishing
    biological growth and returning the system to normal generally
    takes several weeks.
    There are three other problems.
    First, without
    a
    considerable expenditure
    for a chlorine contact tank
    (which may
    not be needed if pending regulation R77—12,
    Docket D is adopted)
    it is impossible to obtain adequate contact time for effective
    chlorination of the secondary settling tank.
    Second,
    the present
    treatment facilities,
    designed before ammonia-nitrogen effluent
    requirements were adopted, cannot meet present stream quality
    standards for that contaminant.
    Third, the city,
    with a priority
    number
    of 842,
    may not be eligible for construction grant funds
    for several years and it has alleged that without grant
    assistance
    it cannot finance improvements necessary to meet
    current effluent and water quality standards.
    The parties have stipulated to terms of settlement which
    direct the city to do the following:
    (1)
    submit a Facilities
    Plan to the Agency by July 1,
    1980,
    (2) fulfill all requirements
    necessary
    to obtain grant funds as expeditiously as possible,
    (3)
    implement upon receipt of grant funds all recommendations
    for the
    Facilities Plan and all other steps necessary to achieve
    compliance with environmental standards as expeditiously as
    possible, and
    (4) comply with an interim plan,
    designed to
    minimize environmental harm, pending grant—funded upgrading of
    the plant.
    The interim plan requires:
    (1) reducing inflow and
    infiltration into the sewer system by removing downspout
    connections and repairing sewer defects,
    (2) routing
    of influent

    —3—
    through bypasses to avoid sewer overflows and “washing out” of
    activated solids in the aeration and reaeration tanks,
    (3)
    installing telemetering alarms to detect high water conditions,
    (4)
    increasing,
    training, and managing personnel
    to assure
    adequate maintenance, operation, and surveillance of the system,
    (5)
    employing accurate procedures and equipment for timely
    monitoring,
    (6) repairing,
    cleaning, or replacing present
    equipment,
    (7) acquiring auxiliary equipment and spare parts
    inventories,
    and
    (8) complying with interim effluent standards.
    The interim plan, as noted, calls for the construction of
    bypasses to avoid sewer backups and washouts of activated solids.
    Section 304(b)
    of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
    33
    U.S.C.
    466,
    et
    ~j.,
    provides for the promulgation of effluent
    limitations by the Administrator of the USEPA.
    These effluent
    limitations are contained in USEPA’s regulations governing the
    National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System,
    40 CFR Part 122,
    which regulations prohibit NPDES permits to allow bypasses unless
    certain conditions are met.
    40 CFR §122.60(g)(4)
    in 45 Fed.Reg.
    33354
    effective
    July 18,
    1980.
    The Board has reviewed these
    conditions and has determined that authorizing the Agency
    to
    modify Respondent’s NPDES permit
    to be consistent with the
    interim plan would not encourage an improper permit modification.
    In the future, however, the Board would prefer that the public be
    notified of and given an opportunity to comment on bypass
    incidents of significant duration.
    The Stipulation contains the following effluent limitations:
    30
    rng/l
    on a 30—day average and 45 mg/l as a daily maximum for
    BOD
    and TSS, no limitations for NH
    ,
    and fecal coliform and
    chl~rineresidual limitations of 40~/100ml daily maximum and
    .75
    mg/l on a 30 day average respectively with the exception that no
    limitations are to apply if these two pollutants are discharged
    from a point other than the lagoon.
    The Board finds that these
    limitations are achievable and will minimize environmental damage
    in a reasonable manner until
    a federally—funded construction
    program is completed.
    Finally,
    the parties stipulate that a penalty of $2,000 be
    paid by Respondent
    for violating the provisions discussed herein.
    The Board,
    in considering all the facts and circumstances bearing
    upon the reasonableness of the discharges and monitoring report
    deficiencies,
    finds that the penalty amount of $2,000 is a
    reasonable one in light of the decreased expenses occasioned by
    noncompliance.
    The Board hereby accepts the Stipulation, finding
    it to be a suitable resolution of the case and one which will
    minimize environmental damage until
    final
    compliance with the
    Board’s regulations and the Act
    is achieved.
    The Board has
    fully considered the facts and circumstances involved in §33(c)
    of the Act and in the Board’s Procedural Rule 331(a).
    This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.

    —4—
    ORDER
    It
    is the Order of the Pollution Control Board
    that:
    1.
    The City of Kewanee has violated Sections 12(a),
    (b),
    and
    (f) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act and Rule 901
    of Chapter
    3:
    Water Pollution Control Rules and Regulations.
    2.
    The City of Kewanee shall execute the interim plan set
    forth in Paragraphs 29—34 inclusive of
    the Stipulation and
    Proposal for Settlement (Stipulation),
    filed June
    2,
    1980,
    which
    Stipulation is hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set
    forth herein.
    3.
    The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    is
    authorized to amend NPDES Permit No. 1L0029343
    so that
    it will be
    consistent with the terms of this Order.
    4.
    Within 45 days of this Order, the City of Kewanee shall
    pay by certified check or money order a penalty of $2,000, to be
    sent to:
    Fiscal Services Department
    Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    2200 Churchill Road
    Springfield, Illinois
    62706
    Mr. Dumelle concurs.
    I, Christan L.
    Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, heçeby certify tha
    the above Order was
    adqpted on the
    ~
    day of
    ______________,
    1980 by
    a vote
    of$.-O
    Christan L. Mof~~,Clerk
    Illinois Polluti’&I’Control Board

    Back to top